THE
FORMING A CONTINUATION OF THE WORK ENTITLED
"THE PARLIAMENTARY HISTORY OF ENGLAND,
FROM THE EARLIEST PERIOD TO THE YEAR 1803."
PUBLISHED UNDER THE SUPERINTENDENCE OF
T. C. HANSARD.
New Series;
COMMENCING WITH THE ACCESSION OF GEORGE IV.
VOL. XVI.
COMPRISING THE PERIOD
FROM
THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1826,
TO
THE TWENTY-SECOND DAY OF MARCH, 1827.
LONDON:
Printed by C. C. Hansard at the Pater-noster-Now Press,
FOR BALDWIN, CRADOCK, AND JOY; J. BOOKER; LONGMAN, REES, ORME, AND CO.;
J. M. RICHARDSON; PARBURY, ALLEN, AND CO.; J. HATCHARD AND SON;
J. RIDGWAY; E. JEFFERY AND SON; J. RODWELL; R. H. EVANS; BUDD AND CALKIN; J. BOOTH; AND T. C. HANSARD.
1827.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
NEW SERIES.
I. DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS.
II. DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.
III. KING'S SPEECHES.
IV. KING'S MESSAGES.
V. PETITIONS.
VI. PARLIAMENTARY PAPERS.
VII. LISTS.
I. DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS.
Page
1826 Nov. 14. Meeting of the New Parliament
1
1826 Nov. 21. The King's Speech on Opening the Session
9
Address on the King's Speech at the Opening of the Session
11
1826 Nov. 28. Corn Laws
145
Roman Catholic Emancipation
146
1826 Nov. 29. Corn Laws
164
1826 Dec. 4. Corn Laws
220
1826 Dec. 8. Emigration of the Poor to the British Colonies
317
1826 Dec. 11. Indemnity Bill—Oats Importation
330
1826 Dec. 12. King's Message respecting Portugal
336
1826 Feb. 8. Corn Laws
404
Roman Catholic Emancipation
405
1826 Feb. 12. Death of the Duke of York—Address of Condolence to his Majesty
413
1826 Feb. 14. Roman Catholic Emancipation
456
1826 Feb. 16. Grant to the Duke and Duchess of Clarence
516
1826 Feb. 21. Corn Laws
599
Roman Catholic Emancipation
600
1826 Feb. 22. Corn Laws
624
1826 Feb. 23. Roman Catholic Emancipation
646
1826 Feb. 27. Game Laws
680
1826 Mar. 5. Roman Catholic Emancipation—Irish Vestries
820
1826 Mar. 8. Roman Catholic Emancipation
1013
Corn Laws New Scale of Duties
1020
1826 Mar. 9. Roman Catholic Emancipation
1082
1826 Mar. 13. Corn Laws New Weights and Measures
1154
1826 Mar. 16. Roman Catholic Emancipation
1218
1826 Mar. 20. Navigation Laws State of the Ministry
1280
Roman Catholic Emancipation
1281
Game Laws
1286
1826 Mar. 22. Corn and Wool Trade
1293
II. DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.
1826 Nov. 14. Meeting of the New Parliament
1
Choice of a Speaker
2
1826 Nov. 15. The Speaker approved of by his Majesty
8
1826 Nov. 21. Address on the King's Speech at the Opening of the Session
26
1826 Nov. 22. Roman Catholic Emancipation
95
Corn Laws
97
Bribery at Elections
99
Dr. Southey's Return for Downton
111
Address on the King's Speech at the Opening of the Session
111
1826 Nov. 24. King's Answer to the Address
115
Return for the Borough of Tregony
115
Com Importation Acts—Order in Council
126
Chairman of Committees of the House—Mr. Brogden
137
1826 Nov. 27. Poor Laws and Emigration—Petition of Mr. Gourlay
142
Corn Laws
143
1826 Nov. 28. Arigna Mining Company—Petition of Roger Flattery
147
Resolutions relative to Committees on Private Bills
152
1826 Nov. 29. Deism—Oaths in Courts of Justice—Petition of Robert Taylor
171
Tregony Borough Election
178
1826 Nov. 30. Army Commissions
184
Joint Stock Companies—Arigna Mining Company—Case of Mr. Brogden
196
Foreign Goods imported into the United Kingdom in 1824 and 1826
200
1826 Dec. 1. Arigna Mining Company—Case of Mr. Brogden
207
Currency and the Corn Laws
208
Customs and Excise Informations
216
1826 Dec. 4. Athlone Election
221
Private Bills Committees
224
1826 Dec. 5. Distress of Weavers in Scotland—Emigration of the Poor
227
Joint Stock Companies—Uncertainty of the Law—Petition of Thomas Parkin
232
Joint Stock Companies—Arigna Mining Company—Case of Mr. Brogden,
243
1826 Dec. 6. Roman Catholic Emancipation—Excommunication by Catholic Priests
284
Exportation of Machinery
291
1826 Dec. 7. Emigration of the Poor
298
Cape of Good Hope—Conduct of Lord Charles Somerset
303
Arigna Mining Company—Case of Mr. Brogden
313
1826 Dec. 8. Cape of Good Hope—Conduct of Lord Charles Somerset
320
Case of Colonel Bradley
321
Arigna Mining Company—Case of Mr. Brogden
330
1826 Dec. 11. King's Message respecting Portugal
334
1826 Dec. 12. Address on the King's Message respecting Portugal
350
1826 Dec. 13. Corn Laws—Adjournment of the House
398
Stamp Duties on Newspapers and Pamphlets
400
1827 Feb. 8. Roman Catholic Emancipation—General Petition of the Roman Catholics of Ireland
407
1827 Feb. 9. Roman Catholic Emancipation
411
Corn Laws—Petition of the Starving Weavers of Blackburn
412
1827 Feb. 12. Roman Catholic Emancipation
417
Death of the Duke of York—Address of Condolence to his Majesty
425
Navy Estimates
434
1827 Feb. 13. Corn Laws
449
Navy Estimates—Impressment of Seamen
450
1827 Feb. 14. Colonel Bradley's Case
460
Writ of Right Dower
471
1827 Feb. 15. King's Message for a further Provision for the Duke and Duchess of Clarence
475
Emigration from the United Kingdom
475
Committees of Appeals on Private Bills
513
1827 Feb. 16. Grant to the Duke and Duchess of Clarence
517
Expenditure and Income of the Country
541
Ordnance Estimates
559
1827 Feb. 19. Grant to the Duke and Duchess of Clarence
565
Army Estimates
570
1827 Feb. 20. Canada Clergy Reserves
586
Private Bill Committees
590
Army Estimates
591
1827 Feb. 21. Corn Laws
601
Slave Trade at the Mauritius
605
Northampton Election—Conduct of the Corporation
606
1827 Feb. 22. Corn Laws—Equalization of Contracts
630
Criminal Laws—Bills for the Consolidation of
632
1827 Feb. 26. Grant to the Duke and Duchess of Clarence—Petition from Manchester against
650
Double Land Tax—Petition of the Earl of Shrewsbury and other Roman Catholics
651
Emigration Committee
653
Bribery at Elections
654
1827 Feb. 26. Mutiny Bill—Flogging in the Army
679
1827 Feb. 27. Administration of Justice in the Court of Chancery
692
1827 Mar. 1. Corn Laws
758
1827 Mar. 2. Roman Catholic Emancipation
787
Roman Catholic Emancipation—Petition of the Roman Catholic Bishops of Ireland
792
Petition of the Roman Catholics of Great Britain
816
Grant to the Duke and Duchess of Clarence
818
1827 Mar. 5. Sir Francis Burdett's Motion respecting the Claims of the Roman Catholics
825
1827 Mar. 6. Sir Francis Burdett's Motion respecting the Claims of the Roman Catholics—Adjourned Debate
899
1827 Mar. 8. Corn Laws
1033
1827 Mar. 9. Poor Laws in Ireland
1086
Corn Laws
1091
1827 Mar. 12. Mutiny Bill—Corporal Punishments in the Army
1123
Corn Laws
1144
1827 Mar. 13. Criminal Laws Consolidation Bills
1165
Roman Catholic Emancipation—State of Ireland
1168
Athlone Election—Forged Petition
1165
Jamaica—Attack on the Wesleyan Missionary Meeting-House
1166
Court of Chancery—Bankrupt Fees
1173
Exchequer Prosecutions under the Customs Laws
1178
Galway Election—Charge against the Marquis of Clanricarde
1184
1827 Mar. 14. Hackney Coaches and Cabriolets
1186
1827 Mar. 15. County Elections—Mode of taking the Poll
1187
Leicester Election—Conduct of the Corporation
1198
1827 Mar. 16. Grant to the Duke and Duchess of Clarence
1236
Stipendiary Magistracy in Ireland
1247
1827 Mar. 19. Supply of Water to the Metropolis
1258
Roman Catholic Emancipation
1258
Education of the Poor in Ireland
1259
Shipping Interest—Navigation Laws
1266
Com Laws
1271
1827 Mar. 22. Galway County Election—Breach of Privilege—Assault of a Witness
1305
Penryn Election—Case of John Stanbury
1311
Shipping Interest—Navigation Laws
1312
Mutiny at Barrackpore
1313
Grant to the Duke and Duchess of Clarence
1340
Salmon Fisheries Bill
1342
III. KING'S SPEECHES.
1826 Nov. 21. KING'S SPEECH on Opening the Session
9
IV. KING'S MESSAGES.
1826 Dec. 11. KING'S MESSAGE respecting Portugal
334
1827 Feb. 18. KING'S MESSAGE for a further Provision for the Duke and Duchess of Clarence
475
V. PETITIONS.
1827 Nov. 27. PETITION of Mr. Gourlay on the Poor Laws, and on Emigration
142
1827 Nov. 28. PETITION of Mr. Roger Flattery, respecting the Arigna Mining Company
148
1827 Nov. 29. PETITION of Robert Taylor, respecting Oaths in Courts of Justice
176
1827 Dec. 4. PETITION from Athlone, respecting the Right of Freedom of Election for that Borough
221
1827 Dec. 5. PETITION of Thomas Parkin, respecting Joint Stock Companies, and the Uncertainty of the Law
233
1827 Feb. 8. PETITION (General), of the Roman Catholics of Ireland
407
1827 Feb. 9. PETITION of the Starving Weavers of Blackburn, respecting the, Corn Laws
412
1827 Mar. 2. PETITION of the Roman Catholic Bishops of Ireland, for a Repeal of the Laws which aggrieve the Catholics
799
PETITION of the Roman Catholics of Great Britain, for Relief from Civil Disabilities
816
1827 Mar. 19. PETITION from Athlone, respecting a forged Petition to the House
1165
VI. PARLIAMENTARY PAPERS.
1826 Nov. 28. Resolutions relative to Committees on Private Bills
154
1827 Mar. 22. Convention between his Majesty and the Infanta Regent of Portugal, for providing for the Maintenance of a Corps of British Troops, sent to Portugal, Dec. 1826, signed at Brighthelmstone, Jan. 19, 1827
1302
VII. LISTS.
1827 Nov. 21. LIST of the Minority, in the House Commons, on Mr. Hume's Amendment to the Address on the King's Speech
94
1827 Feb. 16. LIST of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on the Grant to the Duke and Duchess of Clarence
540
1827 Feb. 20. LIST of the Minority, on the Army Estimates
599
1827 Mar. 6. LIST of the Majority, and also of the Minority, on Sir Francis Burdett's Motion, for taking into consideration the Civil Disabilities of the Roman Catholics
1009
1827 Mar. 9. LIST of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on the Corn Resolutions
1122
1827 Mar. 12. LIST of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on the Corn Resolutions
1153
1827 Mar. 15. LIST of the Minority, on the Conduct of the Corporation of Leicester, with regard to the recent Election
1217
1827 Mar. 16. LIST of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on the Grant to the Duke and Duchess of Clarence
1247
1827 Mar. 22. LIST of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on Mr. Hume's Motion respecting the Mutiny at Barrackpore
1340
PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES.
During the
of the
of the United Kingdom of
and
appointed to meet at Westminster the
th of November,
in the Seventh Year of the Reign of His Majesty King
1826–1827.
1
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Tuesday, November 14, 1826.
MEETING OF THE NEW PARLIAMENT.]
This being the day appointed for the meeting of the New Parliament, several Peers assembled at two o'clock. Soon after that hour, lord chancellor Eldon, the duke of Wellington, the earl of Westmorland, the earl of Liverpool, and the earl of Harrowby took their seats in front of the Throne, as his Majesty's Commissioners. The Lord Chancellor then directed the Deputy Usher of the Black Rod to proceed to the Commons and summon that House to attend at their Lordships' bar forthwith. The Deputy Usher proceeded accordingly to the House of Commons, and soon after returned, accompanied by the clerks of that House and a considerable number of the members. The Lord Chancellor stated to the Commons, that his Majesty had been pleased to issue a Commission under the great seal, appointing certain lords therein named to open the Parliament; which Commission the clerk would then read.—The Commission having accordingly been read, the Lord Chancellor said, that in obedience to his Majesty's commands, he had to inform the Lords and Gentlemen then in attendance, that as soon as a sufficient number of members of both Houses should be sworn, his Majesty would declare the causes which had induced him to call the parliament together. In the mean time it was his Majesty's pleasure, that the Gentlemen of the House of Commons should
2
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, November 14, 1826.
CHOICE OF A SPEAKER.]
The members being returned from the House of Peers,
Mr. Sturges Bourne
rose and said, that it now devolved on the House to proceed to the discharge of a most important duty, namely the election of a member to fill in the ensuing parliament, one of the most honourable, and at the same time one of the most arduous offices, that could be conferred upon an individual in this country—that of Speaker of the House of Commons. Happily, the House had not, upon the present occasion, to encounter the difficulty of selecting from their body any untried member, who might inadequately discharge the duties of that high and arduous office. They possessed a member whom they had already elected to fill the office of their Speaker in three successive parliaments, and the experience of those successive parliaments had abundantly confirmed the wisdom of their
3
4
Mr. Portman,
in rising to second the motion, said, he was sensible that the feeling of the House was so entirely with the right hon. gentleman who had just been proposed to fill the office of Speaker, that it was unnecessary for him to occupy much of the attention of the House, or to add any thing to the eulogium which had been so justly pronounced by the right hon. mover. He was aware, indeed, that it had been the usage both for the mover and seconder, on these occasions, to make some observations on the nature, and the important duties, of the office. It would ill become him, however, to address any observations of that kind to members who had long sat in that House; and members who had now, for the first time, taken their seats in it, must, as English gentlemen, be so well acquainted with the arduous nature of the office of Speaker, and with
5
Mr. Manners Sutton
rose and said, that he felt his inability to express, as he ought, the thanks which he owed to his right hon. friend who proposed, and to his hon. friend, the member for Dorsetshire, who seconded, the motion; still less could he hope to be able to express the obligation and the gratitude which he owed to that House, for the cordial manner in which they had received it. To be elevated to that Chair, had been the first object of his ambition, and as long as his health and
6
The motion having been unanimously carried, amidst the cheers of the House, the right hon. gentleman was conducted to the Chair, by the mover and seconder, where, standing on the upper step,
The Speaker
said;—I beg most respectfully to express my acknowledgments to the House for this renewal of their countenance. They shall find me diligent, zealous, and impartial in the discharge of the duties which have devolved upon me. I have not the arrogance to presume, that, unassisted, I am equal to the task; but I implore of the House to correct me when I am wrong, to support me when I am right; and I pledge myself to make every exertion my powers can command to merit the renewal of that sanction and protection which, for three parliaments I have had the good fortune to obtain.
Mr. Wynn,
in rising to move the adjournment of the House, said, he could not forbear expressing his congratulations, both to his right hon. friend who had just taken the Chair, and to the House. He congratulated the right hon. gentleman on having received the highest reward
7
Sir Joseph Yorke
congratulated the House on the selection they had made, and would only express his hope, that every man who took office in the House, might enter upon it with as much integrity as the right hon. gentleman in the Chair.
The House then adjourned.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Wednesday, November 15, 1826.
The Lords Commissioners having taken their seat on the wool-sack, the deputy usher of the Black Rod was sent to the House of Commons to desire their attendance. Shortly after,
The Speaker,
followed by a considerable number of members, presented himself at their lordships' bar. The right hon. gentleman then said, that he was commanded by his Majesty's faithful Commons, to inform their lordships that in obedience to his Majesty's commands, they had in the exercise of their ancient and undoubted privilege proceeded to elect a Speaker, and their choice had fallen upon him. For his own part, he could only say, that he was fully aware of the great importance of the situation to which he had been appointed, and was also aware of his many imperfections. If, however, his Majesty should be pleased to disapprove of the choice made by his most faithful Commons, there would be little difficulty in selecting some other person more competent than he was, to fill so arduous and dignified a situation.
The Lord Chancellor,
in reply to this address, said, that his Majesty was fully
8
The Speaker
then said;—My lords, with all gratitude and respect, I submit to his Majesty's royal pleasure. It therefore becomes my duty, in the name of the Commons of the united kingdom, to claim, by humble petition, all the ancient rights and privileges granted to that branch of the constitution, more especially, freedom of arrest for themselves and their servants; freedom in debate; and freedom of access to his Majesty, on all requisite occasions; and also, that a favourable interpretation may be given to all their proceedings. If any involuntary error should occur on their part, I hope that to me, and not to his majesty's faithful Commons, the blame may be imputed.
The Lord Chancellor.
—I am commanded by his Majesty to declare his readiness to confirm to his faithful Commons all the rights and privileges that have ever been granted to the Commons by any of his Majesty's royal predecessors; and I am also commanded to inform you, that his Majesty will at all times put the most favourable construction on all the words and actions of his faithful Commons.
The Speaker and the other members of the House of Commons then bowed, and retired.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, November 15, 1826.
The Speaker
having taken the chair on his return from the House of Peers, said; I have to state to the House, that this House has been in the House of Peers, where the lords, authorized by his Majesty's commission, signified his Majesty's royal approbation and confirmation of me, as the Speaker of this House. I proceeded to lay claim, by humble petition, to all their undoubted rights and privileges, especially those of freedom from arrest for themselves, their servants, and estates; free access to his Majesty when occasion should require, and that all their proceedings should receive the most favourable construction. The lords, authorized by his Majesty's commission, signified his
9
The Speaker himself then took and subscribed the usual oaths and declarations; and was followed by numerous other members.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Tuesday, November 21, 1826.
THE KING'S SPEECH ON OPENING THE SESSION.]
This day his Majesty came in state to the House of Peers, and being seated on the Throne, the gentleman usher of the black rod was directed to summon the Commons to attend. The Speaker immediately presented himself at the bar, attended by a great number of members. His Majesty then delivered the following Speech to both Houses:
"My Lords and Gentlemen,
"I have called you together at this time for the special purpose of communicating to you the measure which 1 judged it necessary to take, in the month of September, for the admission into the ports of the United Kingdom of certain sorts of foreign grain not then admissible by law.
"I have directed a copy of the Order in Council issued on that occasion to be laid before you, and I confidently trust that you will sec sufficient reason for giving
10
"I have great satisfaction in being able to inform you, that the hopes entertained at the close of the last session of parliament, respecting the termination of the war in the Burmese territories, have been fulfilled, and that a peace has been concluded in that quarter highly honourable to the British arms, and to the councils of l the British government in India.
"I continue to receive from all foreign powers assurances of their earnest desire to cultivate the relations of peace and friendly understanding with me.
"I am exerting myself with unremitting anxiety, either singly or in conjunction with my allies, as well to arrest the progress of existing hostilities as to prevent the interruption of peace in different parts of the world.
"Gentlemen of the House of Commons,
"I have directed the Estimates for the ensuing year to be prepared, and they will, in due time, be laid before you.
"I will take care that they shall be formed with as much attention to economy, as the exigencies of the public service will permit.
"The distress which has pervaded the commercial and manufacturing classes of my subjects, during the last twelve months, has affected some important branches of the Revenue; but I have the satisfaction of informing you, that there has been no such diminution in the internal consumption of the country, as to excite any apprehensions that the great sources of our wealth and prosperity have been impaired.
"My Lords and Gentlemen,
"I have deeply sympathised with the sufferings which have been, for some time past, so severely felt in the manufacturing districts of this country; and I have contemplated with great satisfaction the exemplary patience with which those sufferings have been generally borne.
"The depression under which the trade and manufactures of the country have
11
His Majesty then retired, and the Commons returned to their House.
ADDRESS ON THE KING'S SPEECH
His Majesty's Speech to both Houses having been read by the Lord Chancellor, and also by the reading clerk at the table,
Earl Cornwallis
rose, and spoke as follows:—My lords, in rising to move an Address of Thanks, I trust I shall meet with that kind indulgence which others, standing in my place, have invariably experienced. For the communication respecting the admission of some descriptions of foreign grain, before the time allowed by law, there can, I should hope, be no objection to thank his Majesty; as it will be no bar to future discussion, when the Order in Council shall be laid upon your table. In looking to the East Indies, the termination of the Burmese war affords ample scope for congratulation; as I trust that our vast possessions in that quarter will no longer be exposed to inroads of a similar description. In turning to the continent, it is highly gratifying to be told of the friendly disposition existing there towards this country; which I attribute, in a great measure, to the wise policy which his Majesty's ministers pursued respecting the war between France and Spain. There were two parties—the one the ever faithful supporters of existing abuses; the other, the no less dangerous abettors of revolutionary movements, who were anxious to enlist this country under their banners. Each was telling his Majesty's ministers what tone they should hold, and what position they should take up; but they wisely chose their own position, and that upon neutral ground. The late war will, I trust, be a pretty good lesson to the present, and to all future ministers not hastily to embark their country in a continental conflict; and it is most satisfactory to be told, that his Majesty, in
12
13
Lord Colville
rose, and spoke as follows:—My lords, in presenting myself to your lordships, for the purpose of seconding the motion which has been made by the noble earl, for an Address of thanks to his Majesty. I cannot but feel how much I shall require that kind and patient indulgence, which you are always disposed to shew to those who, like myself, are little in the habit of addressing you, and who, consequently, must rise under some degree of embarrassment. If I had thought, my lords, that the task I have undertaken was one which required the powers of eloquence to support it, I should have been—as I certainly ought to have been—the last person in your lordships' House to have undertaken it; but such is not my opinion, and I therefore trust, that the motion of the noble earl will not suffer by not having had a more able supporter. Under the present circumstances of the country, I think, my lords, our gratitude is due to his Majesty for having called his parliament together. In regard to the first topic to which the Address alludes—I mean the special purpose for which parliament has been assembled at this time—I trust there can be no difference of opinion, and that your lordships will approve of the conduct pursued by the ministers of the Crown—first, in recommending, on their own responsibility, a measure which I think I may safely assert that circumstances, up to the present hour, have proved the necessity of; and, secondly, in their having had recourse, as speedily as possible, to parliament for that sanction to the measure, which the constitution requires it should have, and to which, in my opinion, it is so justly entitled. I am aware, my lords, that in the measure alluded to, there has neces-
14
15
Lord King
rose to assure their lordships, that he had no objection either to the Address proposed by the noble earl, or to the Speech which his Majesty had delivered
16
vox et prœterea nihil
17
18
19
20
21
The Amendment was put and negatived. On the question upon the original Address being put,
The Earl of Lauderdale
rose, not to object to the Address, but to say a few words on the subject of the Order in Council, alluded to in his Majesty's Speech. He should not have troubled their lordships, had it not been from what fell from the noble seconder. His Majesty's Speech, in reference to the Order of the Council, said, that it should be laid on their lordships' table; and when it was laid on the table was the proper time, according to usage, to take it into consideration. When that took place, the noble earl opposite would probably move an Address to his Majesty. [The earl of Liverpool expressed his dissent.] If the noble earl did not, it was competent for any other noble lord to do so; and when that time came, he should be ready to give his opinion upon the subject. He wished, in consequence of the noble seconder having thought proper prematurely, to praise that Order in Council, to guard himself from being supposed to approve of it. He should be ready to state his opinion when the proper time came; but it was not yet before their lordships, and could not with propriety be discussed.
The Duke of Buckingham
said, that, agreeing, as he did, with the Address, he wished to state, in a very few words, the grounds upon which he gave his assent to it, and the limits within which he confined his approbation of it. He could not approve of the policy or propriety of painting in deeper colours than neces-
22
23
24
The Earl of Darnley
said, he did not rise to enter into any discussion of the merits of the Order in Council, for he agreed that that question could only be properly discussed when it came regularly before their lordships; but as the subject had been incidentally mentioned, he should not do justice to his own feelings, if he did not say, that, taking into consideration the time at which the Order was issued, the aspect of the crops in Ireland, and the effect which a deficient harvest was likely to have on the population in that country, his Majesty's ministers were perfectly justified in the measure they had adopted. He would go further, and say, that they were not only perfectly justified in adopting that measure, but that they would have deserved reprobation if they had not adopted it The calamity anticipated had, by the bounty of Providence, been averted; but ministers were not the less entitled to the approbation of the country, for mitigating the expected evil. For his own part, he heartily approved and commended the measure.
Lord Clifden
said, that ministers were perfectly justified in issuing the Order in Council, though, by a fortunate dispensation of Providence, the rains, which had fallen in August, had averted the expected calamity. The failure of the potatoe crops in Ireland would have made the price of oats and barley enormous. No rents could possibly have been paid under such circumstances; the farmers must have eaten their rents, for they could not be 4 expected to starve, in order to pay their landlords. Ministers had his hearty thanks for the provident and judicious measure they had adopted to mitigate a calamity which the bounty of Providence had happily averted.
The Earl of Liverpool
said, he did not rise for the purpose of entering into the discussion of any of the topics which the noble lord opposite had introduced into his amendment. The Address had, indeed, been framed in such a way as to render any observations on the topics introduced by the noble lord unnecessary, and many of those topics were of such an
25
26
The Address was then agreed to
nemdiss
The Earl of Liverpool
moved, that the noble earl who had so long acted as Chairman of their committees, with so much honour to himself, and benefit to the country, should continue to take the Chair in all committees of that House.
The Lord Chancellor
said, the House fully appreciated the services of the noble earl, and no' man was more sensible than himself of the able manner in which he had discharged the duties of the office.
The Earl of Shaftesbury
expressed his high sense of the approbation which his endeavours to discharge faithfully the duties of the office had received from their lordships, and relied upon the indulgence and assistance of the House to enable him to deserve a continuance of that approbation.
The motion was agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, November 21, 1826.
ADDRESS ON THE KING'S SPEECH AT
The Speaker
The Hon. T. Liddell
said, that, in performing the task which had been allotted him, of moving the thanks of that House to his Majesty, for his Majesty's most gracious Speech from the Throne, he could not deny that he felt a considerable degree of difficulty. If the task of addressing that House for the first time was,
27
28
29
30
31
Mr. George Winn
(member for Maldon), in rising to second the Address, said, that he did so with feelings of great anxiety and of great pleasure also. The anxiety that he felt was relieved by the gratification it afforded him, that the first words which he had an opportunity of uttering in that House were in the expression of sentiments of loyalty towards the sovereign, and of thanks to him on the occasion of the exercise of one of the most important branches of the royal prerogative. In this feeling of loyalty he was satisfied that all who heard him cordially participated. They had that day had an opportunity of witnessing the parental regard the sovereign had manifested for the preservation of the rights and liberties of the
32
33
34
35
Mr. Brougham
said, it had often fallen Jo his lot, on occasions of this kind, to
36
37
flat
38
39
40
41
42
Mr. Secretary Canning
said—I am really, Sir, somewhat at a loss to know what the hon. and learned gentleman requires, when he speaks of the barrenness, of information in the Speech from the
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
Mr. Brougham,
in explanation, denied that he had any wish to see the estimates reduced below what the exigencies of the public service would permit.
Mr. Hume
reprobated the indisposition constantly exhibited, on the part of his Majesty's government, to diminish the naval, military and civil establishments of the country. Even where they had expressed any intention to do so, their acts had not corresponded with their declarations. If the hon. seconder of the Ad-
50
l
51
52
l
l
53
l
54
l
l
55
56
l
s
l.
l.
57
58
59
"That we rejoice with his Majesty in the happy understanding that subsists between his Majesty and Foreign Powers, and confide in the continuance of a peace which it promises for many years to be the interest both of the Sovereigns and the Nations to maintain: and we the more rejoice in this state of the public affairs, because it takes away all ground and pretext for maintaining a large standing army,
60
"That we should ill discharge the duty we owe to his Majesty, if we did not direct his most serious attention to the present condition of his faithful people, which we are bound to represent as one of grievous suffering and privation, unequalled, perhaps, in this country; and as inconsistent with its peace as with its happiness and prosperity.
"That the situation of the country, with an embarrassed trade, a greatly declining-revenue, and an enormous debt, does not warrant the longer continuance of the expense at present incurred in the support of the pensions, sinecures, and the different establishments of his Majesty's government.
"That we most respectfully represent to his Majesty, that an excessive taxation, disproportionate to the reduced value of property, and to the diminished return for the capital employed in the land, in manufactures, and in commerce, is a principle cause of the existing distresses; and in order to relieve his Majesty's loyal peaceable and suffering people, his faithful Commons will proceed immediately to the examination and revision of every establishment at home and abroad, from the highest to the lowest, with the view of effecting the largest possible reductions consistent with the security of the commonwealth:
"To assure his Majesty that we fully appreciate the progress made by the late parliament in removing restrictions on trade and commerce; but we, at the same time, deeply lament that his Majesty has not been advised to call our immediate attention to the repeal of those injurious laws, which prevent a free trade in corn, so essentially necessary to the sustenance and comfort, of the people, and to the prosperity of the state; and to assure his Majesty, that we will proceed without the least delay to the consideration of that most important subject:
"To congratulate his Majesty on the progress made in the last parliament, in the revision of the civil and criminal laws, and to assure his Majesty, that this House will assiduously direct their attention to the further correction of the severity of the criminal laws, and to the revision of a system, in which a great degree of uncertainty exists, as to men's rights, and under which justice can only be obtained at an
61
"To express to his Majesty the necessity of our taking into early consideration the constitution of this House, with a view of rendering it what it ought to be—the real representative of the people, instead of its being, as at present, to a considerable extent, the representative of partial; interests, and of a comparatively small number of individuals:
"To express to his Majesty our regret, that his Majesty has not been advised to recommend the state of Ireland to the consideration of this House; and to assure his Majesty that of all the subjects of our deepest interest, there is none we have more at heart than the oppressed and alarming condition of the Irish nation: excluded from their rights as British subjects, for no other crime than an adherence to the worship of their fathers, their feelings are excited and exasperated; and, while the majority of the people are stigmatized and degraded for their religion, the nation enjoys neither mutual confidence nor domestic quiet; and must continue in a state of disaffection, discord, and anarchy, until their grievances are redressed:
"That your faithful Commons further regard with the most serious apprehension, the continuance of a policy which tends to produce in the Irish people a feeling of alienation from the English government, inconsistent with that unity of interest which should subsist in an united kingdom; and this House will, therefore, take into immediate consideration the best means for speedily redressing their grievances, as the only effectual mode of conciliating their affections, and inseparably cementing the union of the two countries:
"To thank his Majesty for having been graciously pleased to call Parliament together at this early period; that with these important labours and duties in contemplation, we may have time to make the requisite inquiries into all the estimates before the usual time of voting the supplies of the year."
Mr. Marshall,
member for Yorkshire, rose to second the amendment. He observed, that he had no ambition to trespass on the indulgence of the House, by going into all the topics introduced into the amendment moved by the hon. member for Aberdeen, but he begged to call the attention of the House to the
62
Mr. Maberly
expressed his regret at finding, by the King's Speech, that ministers had not advised his Majesty to recommend any inquiry into, or remedy for, the distresses which were, upon all hands admitted to exist in the country. It had, indeed, been stated by the right hon. secretary, that it was the intention of ministers to propose a permanent law with respect to the introduction of corn, which law would, at a future period, be brought under discussion. But he would ask the House, whether, after this meeting, they ought to separate without giving the
63
64
l
l.
s
s
65
s
s
l
s
l
l
l
Mr. Alexander Dawson,
member for Louth, said, that though he fully agreed with many of the points contained in the gracious Speech which the House had that day heard delivered from the throne, he was, as an Irish member, obliged to deplore the omission of one subject which he conceived ought to have been mentioned in it, and that was the present state of Ireland. He fully agreed in all that had been said by the hon. mover and seconder of the Address, respecting the sympathy which his Majesty felt for the distresses of the people of England; but, at the same time that he did this, he could not but regret that the sympathy of his Majesty had not been extended to his people in Ireland. He conceived that it was the bounden
66
67
68
69
70
Mr. Western
said, that, with all the respect which he felt for his hon. friend, the member for Aberdeen, it was impossible for him to come at once to a sweeping condemnation of the whole system of Corn-laws, on which the country had so long acted. He trusted that, whenever the House entered upon the discussion of those laws, it would do so with calmness and temperance; for upon no subject was it more necessary that they should set an example of calmness and temperance to the public. He conceived his hon. friend to be egregiously mistaken in supposing that the higher classes of the country, and more especially the landholders, were anxious to shift the burthens of taxation from their own shoulders to those of their poorer fellow-subjects. In entertaining such a supposition, his hon. friend had been led astray by prejudices which he must be permitted to call illiberal. For his own part, he could not help wishing that it had been convenient for the House to go forthwith into the discussion of the Corn-laws; and therefore he agreed with that part of the amendment which deprecated the postponement of that important question. He was likewise of opinion, that the House ought to give to the public a more formal pledge than usual, that it would enter without delay into the retrenchment of all unnecessary expenditure; but he would not go the length of his hon. friend in reducing our establish-
71
72
Mr. Alderman Waithman
said, he would only trouble the House with a few observations; but it did appear to him, that there was a total omission in the Speech from the throne of every subject which it ought to have contained. He contended that the distress of the country at the present time was as great as that which it had suffered at the worst period of the war, and argued therefrom, that it was particularly necessary to enter into an immediate consideration of the corn question. He believed it would not be denied, that during the war the value of land had risen in value full one-half, if not two-thirds; that every species of commodity had risen in a similar manner; and that the great inconvenience and distress which had been felt during its continuance, arose from the price of labour not keeping pace with the price of commodities. Now he would ask, whether it was reasonable, that, when there was a reduction in every article except that of food, when ministers were reducing the five per cents to four per cents, and playing other tricks with the currency, the House should uphold laws, which had no other object than to keep up the price of land and of the productions of the land? He contended, that the present system of Corn-laws, upheld the land full forty per cent, and thereby created distress, and its general concomitant, dissatisfaction, throughout the country, for who could endure with patience that his own property should be depreciated in order to uphold that of the landholder? He maintained, that ministers ought to have taken notice of the spirit of gambling and speculation which prevailed during the last year, and which had filled the Gazette with more bankruptcies than any other cause. The bubbles in 1720 had often been referred to, as forming a parallel to those which had recently exploded; but he contended, that the parallel was by no means a just one, as there had been a loss upon one scheme alone in the last year, which was more than equal to all the losses put together, upon all the schemes which were devised in 1720. No measures, however, had been taken to punish the fraudulent projectors of these ruinous
73
Mr. Brogden
rose, but, from the buz
74
75
76
Mr. Alderman Waithman
said, it was impossible for him to sit silently under such gross personalities.
The Speaker
dared to say, that the offensive words were not intended, but had escaped from the hon. member in the heat of discussion.
Mr. Brogden
begged pardon of the Speaker and of the House, if he had inadvertently been guilty of a breach of order. But he must say, that he saw it reported in a public newspaper, as part of the speech of the hon. alderman, that he had pocketed thousands of pounds, without any inquiry or investigation. He did not impute this observation to the hon. alderman. It might have been an exaggeration; but, as he had seen the statement, he thought that he was bound to repel it. The greatest prejudice had been excited against him through the medium of the public papers; and, therefore, he called
77
78
79
Mr. Alderman Waithman
begged to assure the hon. member, that the words attributed to him were not used, neither did he mean to allude particularly to those transactions to which the hon. member had referred. He only meant to say, that various transactions had taken place with respect to different companies with which the hon. member was connected, that, in his opinion, called for the animadversion of that House; and, if he could vindicate himself from them, no man would rejoice more sincerely than he would do. He had known the hon. member, though not intimately, for several years; and in making those observations he certainly was not actuated by any thing like personal hostility towards him.
Mr. Brogden
said, he was conscious that the words which he quoted from the papers were not true. They were, however, attributed to the worthy alderman, and he therefore felt it necessary to notice them.
Sir Joseph Yorke
said, he believed that such a debate had never before arisen on the question of voting an Address in answer to a King's Speech. As, however, he had been alluded to by the hon. member, he felt it necessary to say a word in explanation. When he heard, on a former evening, the right hon. the Speaker described as possessing all the cardinal virtues,—as having, in fact, as many virtues as there were points of the compass—surely it was not strange for him to express a wish, that the other officers of the House should manifest equal purity and integrity. The plain charge brought against the hon. gentleman was this—that he, as a director of the Arigna Company, purchased from a man, named Flattery (a very flattering name) certain mines, full of iron and coal—with which valuable commodities Ireland was to be supplied—for the sum of 10,000
l.
l.
l
80
l
Mr. Brogden
admitted, that certain members of the company did act as the gallant officer had stated. Undoubtedly, an agreement was entered into that 25,000
l
l
l
l
81
l.
Mr. Fergusson,
member for Kircud-bright, wished to bring the House back to the real question in debate. In his opinion, the Address, which was so ably and eloquently moved and seconded, was not objectionable; and that ground was, he thought, sufficient to enable them to say that they agreed to it. When the topics adverted to in it were unobjectionable, he would not oppose it on account of certain omissions; especially after the assurance of the right hon. Secretary of State, that the question of the Corn-laws would be deliberately considered, and that the still more important question, which involved the happiness and prosperity of Ireland, and also of England, would receive the same serious attention. He would now shortly state why he must withhold his assent from the amendment of the hon. member for Aberdeen, to whom the country was greatly indebted. He withheld that assent, because the amendment involved a great many topics which he was not prepared—neither could the House be prepared—to discuss at so short a notice. They could not pledge themselves on the moment to come to a decision on five of the most important questions that were over submitted to a British parliament. These subjects were, that the taxes should be reduced; that the expenditure should be lessened; that the Corn-laws should be abolished; that Catholic emancipation should be granted; and that there should be a contraction of sinecures and pensions. When, at the proper time, those questions came regularly before the House, he should not be deterred, by any consequences, from avowing his opinion, and voting according to the dictates of his judgment; but it was impossible for him to entertain them now. With respect to one of those subjects, with
82
Sir Robert Wilson
said, that he hoped the question relating to the Corn-laws would be considered by the House, not as it affected particular interests, but with a view to the general welfare of the empire; and he was also anxious that the earliest opportunity possible should be taken of discussing and setting it at rest, as the deferring it would only contribute to keep alive animosities which unfortunately existed between two parties in the country, who fancied that their interests respecting it were diametrically opposed to each other. He had great pleasure in expressing his approbation of the speech which had been delivered by the hon. gentleman who had moved the Address. It gave the most undoubted proof of his ability and his liberal sentiments, and was at once an honour to his heart and his head. That hon. gentleman had divided the subject into four distinct topics; and, as he himself conceived that those topics were the most important which could at present be offered for the consideration of the House, he would follow that example. With regard to the first—the indemnity to be granted to ministers for their admission of foreign oats—it was a matter which could admit of no discussion, as it was not possible that two opinions could be entertained respecting the propriety of a measure so evidently beneficial, and, indeed, so absolutely necessary for the
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
Mr. Henry Grattan,
member for Dublin, said, that he should betray the duty which he owed to his sovereign, to his country, and to the solemn oath of fidelity which he had taken at that table, if he were to remain silent on the present occasion. He had been most anxious to find reason to agree with the Address; but he was sorry to say that he could find no such reason. He could not agree to it; and yet, if ministers had introduced into it one single sentence, which ought to have been there, they would have had many additional votes in their favour. When the House considered the communications which they had from Ireland, it was doubly their duty to take care that all mention of that country should not be excluded from the Address. A certain confidential public functionary, who had lately arrived from Ireland, and who must be well acquainted with the situation of that country, had stated, that the great evil of Ireland, and especially of Dublin, was poverty—a poverty which might be banished, if the people of Ireland were put into such a situation, that they could enjoy the benefit of British enterprise, British industry, and British capital; but that they could not enjoy without the adoption of such measures as would ensure conciliation and peace between the two countries. All this would be effected, if only one single measure were adopted. He had that day seen the crown on the king's head, and he thought that Ireland was the brightest gem of the diadem, and that the brightest measure the sovereign could adopt would be Catholic emancipation. At present government was forced to keep a large army in Ireland; and such was the situation of that country, that the inhabitants could not sit down in safety by their own fire sides; and yet, while the ministers required from them allegiance to the king, they would not, in return, afford them defence and security. He had documents in his hands, which showed that in the speeches from the throne, in the sessions of 1822, 1823, 1824, 1825, and 1826, Ireland had been prominently mentioned: and yet, although mentioned at the close of the last parliament, the subject was altogether omitted in the present royal Speech. The ministers had asked indemnity for having permitted the importation of corn. Why did they not ask for indemnity for not having given peace to Ireland? For his part he could not easily bring him-
90
91
Mr. Winn,
in explanation, said, that whatever measures would tend to promote the interests of Ireland, and of the noble race of men by whom that fine country was peopled, would always receive his cordial support, if he were convinced that those measures could be carried into execution with safety to the church and state.
Mr. Moore,
member for Dublin, was of opinion, that the diversity of sentiments which had been expressed in the course of the debate, had arisen from the absence of several topics from the King's Speech, which, in the judgment of different members, ought to have been introduced into it. He himself thought, that the state of Ireland had been sufficiently adverted to, in the present stage of parliamentary proceedings. On that subject he had never had but one opinion, and that was, that
92
Sir Joseph Yorke
regretted that the
93
Mr. Richard Martin
was sorry that the condition of the Catholics of Ireland had not been mentioned in the Speech from the throne. If his hon. friend, the member for Dublin, would propose the amendment to which he had alluded, he would give it his cordial support.
Mr. Calcraft
said, that though he agreed with the hon. member for Aberdeen in the opinion which he had expressed, with respect to many of the topics alluded to in his amendment, yet he could not, without an opportunity for more ample discussion, give his support to that amendment. No one had expressed the slightest objection to the Address which had been moved, but the hon. member proposed to tack to it an amendment, coupled with a speech, full of the most important considerations, and the House was called upon, in a new parliament, many of the members, probably, never having had an opportunity of considering many of the topics which had been brought before them, to vote for this amendment, which he really believed was longer than the long speech by which it was introduced. For his own part, he generally voted against ministers on all questions of economy, such as the retrenchment of
94
Sir R. Fergusson
would vote for the amendment, because, as he conceived, it did not pledge the House to any opinion with respect to the topics introduced into it, but merely to take them into consideration.
The House then divided: For Mr. Hume's amendment 24. For the original address 107. Majority 83.
List of the Minority
Birch, J.
Cradock, col.
Burdett, sir F.
Davies, col.
Clive, E. B.
Dawson, A.
95
Fergusson, sir R.
Thomson, J. P.
Grattan, J.
Warburton, H.
Harvey, D. W.
Williams, J.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Wilson, sir R.
Maberly, J.
Winnington, sir E.
Marshall, J.
Wood, J.
Marshall, W.
Wyvill, M.
Monck, J. B.
TELLERS.
Philips, G.
Hume, J.
Philips, G. R.
Wood, M.
Robarts, A. W.
Mr. Henry Grattan
then moved, that the following words be added to the Address:—"That this House desires to express to his Majesty their deep regret at the present state of Ireland, and to assure his Majesty of their determination to direct their attention towards that subject, with a view to the redress of the grievances under which his Majesty's subjects there labour:—That this House will apply their most serious attention to the investigation of the estimates which may be laid before them; and will take the most effectual measures for reducing the expenditure of the country in all its branches, civil and military, to the lowest scale consistent with the good government and the honour of the nation."
On the question, that these words be added to the Address, the House divided: Ayes 58. Noes 135. The original Address was then put and agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, November 22, 1826.
ROMAN CATHOLIC CLAIMS.]
Sir John Brydges
presented a petition from the parish of Wootton, in Kent, against any further concessions to the Roman Catholics, and for putting down the new Roman Catholic Association. He said, that he could not remain quite silent upon a subject of such vital importance, lest he should incur the charge of supineness in a cause he was most desirous to advocate. He concurred in the prayer of the petition, and cordially rejoiced that the parish of Wootton was thus early in the field to express its opposition to popery, and its determination to uphold unimpaired our Protestant constitution; for he was firmly convinced that if the legislature did not promptly interpose its authority, and quickly make use of the power it possessed effectually to suppress the existing popish faction, and at once to shut the door against farther concession to the Roman Catholics, it must be expected, that that portion of the benches of that assembly,
96
97
Ordered to lie on the table.
CORN-LAWS.]
Sir T. Lethbridge
presented a petition from the inhabitants of Abdick, Bulstone, and Ilminster, in Somerset, praying that the House would not permit any alteration in the Corn-laws, without the fullest investigation. He had in his possession many petitions on this subject, but from what had been said last night by the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, who had intimated the intention of government to bring the subject before the House shortly after the adjournment, he should, for the present, withhold them. For the same reason, and as the right hon. gentleman had said, that he would not be drawn into any discussion at present, he would for bear from making any of the observations which forced themselves upon his mind at this moment. He did not ask his Majesty's government to state what was their intention on any part of it; but feeling the importance of the subject, he could not help insisting upon the necessity of obtaining all the information that could be come at respecting the operation of the Corn-laws as they at present existed. If any inconvenience had been experienced, which he very much doubted, because the laws which existed had not been put into execution, it could only be satisfactorily ascertained by means of the inquiry to which he now alluded. He wished the whole system of the laws on this subject to be put on a different footing; but what he was most desirous to impress on his Majesty's government was, the necessity of procuring full and complete information, before any new enactment should be resolved upon. It was not for him to suggest to ministers the course that they ought to pursue; but, as far as his own opinion went, he was decidedly in favour of the appointment of a committee, without which he thought the question could not be fairly and usefully re-agitated and re-discussed. When this question had last
98
Lord Althorp
said, he had heard the announcement made last night by his Majesty's ministers, that they would not at present enter upon this subject, with considerable regret. If they were aware of the agitation which the notion of any alteration in the Corn-laws had occasioned, not only in the agricultural, but in the manufacturing, interests of the country, he was sure they would not have formed any such resolution. He thought it was too much for ministers to call parliament together in November, and tell them then that they had a plan to propose, but which they did not intend to bring forward until February. He was aware that it might be inconvenient to them to disclose that plan at present; but, however inconvenient it might be, their duty left them no alternative but to do so. It was inconvenient to him, and he had no doubt it was equally so to many other members, to be in town at this season; but being here, he should think he failed in his duty if he neglected to press upon
99
Ordered to lie on the table.
BRIBERY AT ELECTIONS.]
Lord Althorp
rose, in pursuance of the notice he had given, to move for the renewal of the resolutions passed on the 26th of May last, relating to bribery and corruption in returning members to serve in parliament. But it might be necessary for him, before he did so, to explain to the House, for the information of those members who were not in parliament when these resolutions were adopted, the nature of the measure which he meant to submit to their notice. If his noble friend (lord John Russell) who first introduced them, were a member of this parliament, he should have left the task of bringing them forward to him, but his noble friend not having at present a seat, he felt it to be his duty to propose them. In all the discussions which had taken place on this subject, it had been constantly stated by its opponents that their opposition was founded upon hostility to any sweeping measure which went to change the constituted body, but that whenever an instance of gross bribery or corruption was made out against any particular borough, the place ought to be disfranchised, and that they were ready to act upon that principle as often as such a case should be brought forward. Yet, notwithstanding such a declaration, it was quite notorious that many boroughs, wherein gross and open corruption was practised, were not as yet disfranchised. Hence the necessity for the introduction of those resolutions which were proposed, by his noble friend, at the close of the last session of parliament, and which he had now the honour to call upon the House to sanction by its vote. Very few cases of corruption, comparatively speaking, had been brought before the House, although every one seemed to agree in the necessity of putting a stop to a system which was admitted, on all hands,
100
101
"1. That whenever a petition shall be presented to this House, after the expiration of the time allowed for presenting petitions against the validity of the return of any member of this House, by any person or persons, affirming that at any time within eighteen calendar months previous to presenting the said petition, general bribery or corruption has been practised, for the purpose of procuring the election or return of any member or members to serve in parliament for any borough, cinque port, or place, and it shall appear to this House that such petition contains allegations sufficiently specific to require further investigation, this House will appoint a day and hour for taking the said petition into consideration, so that the space of twenty days shall intervene between the day on which the said petition shall have been presented, and the day appointed by this House for taking the same into consideration; and notice of
102
"2. That at the hour appointed by this House for taking such petition into consideration, this House will proceed to appoint a select committee to inquire into the truth of the matters contained in the said petition, and report the result of their inquiry to this House; and such select committee shall consist of thirteen members, to be chosen by lot, according to the directions, provisions, rules, and regulations, and subject to the exemptions for choosing forty-nine members by lot, contained in the various acts to regulate the trials of controverted elections, or returns of members to serve in parliament, so far as they are applicable thereto, and of two other members to be appointed by this House, out of the members then present in this House; and the thirteen members so chosen by lot, together with the two members to be so appointed by this House, shall be a select committee, and shall inquire into and try the matter of such petition, and shall report their opinion thereof, together with the evidence given before them, to this House.
"3. That this House will not appoint such select committee so long as any trial is pending before a select committee of this House to try the validity of the return, or so long as a day is named in the orders of this House for appointing a select committee to try the validity of the return, for the borough, cinque port, or place to which the petition refers."
On the first resolution being put from the Chair,
Mr. Wynn
said, that he certainly did not mean to differ on general principles from the noble lord who had just sat down, although, he should feel it his duty to object to the mode in which he proposed to carry his resolutions into effect. He agreed with the noble lord in conceiving it to be the bounden duty of the House to inquire into every case where gross bribery and corruption were said to have been
103
104
105
Mr. Batley,
member for Beverley, said, that he quite agreed with what had fallen from the right hon. gentleman, and conceived that the statute law afforded a sufficient provision against bribery and corruption in the election of members of parliament, without having recourse to the resolutions proposed by the noble lord.
Colonel Davies
said, he was quite certain that the right hon. gentleman would not; so soon have put forth his strength against the resolutions which the House had adopted at the close of the last session, if he were not certain of being supported by the strong phalanx which was about him. In his opinion, it would have been much better for the right hon. gentleman to have displayed his ingenuity in correcting the faults of those resolutions than to have exercised it in attempting to get rid of them altogether. If ever there was a time which called for interference of the House to correct the abuses with which the business of elections was conducted, it was the present; for after the experience which every person had had of the late elections, it was evident how little terror the resolutions of the House inspired. There never were so many cases of gross and flagrant corruption, against the recurrence of which it was the duty of the House to take all practicable precautions. The charity of the last speaker towards the persons to be affected by these resolutions was most suspicious. It would
106
107
Mr. Secretary Peel
observed, that the House was called upon to affirm or to reject resolutions, which went to create a new offence and a new mode of trial. The end might, be a very proper one; but it would, he conceived, be infinitely better that this new jurisdiction should be sanctioned by a bill, rather than by a resolution of the House of Commons. Such a mode of proceeding would admit of consideration and discussion in the different stages, whereby errors might be corrected and improvements introduced. But the House was called upon by the noble lord to adopt at once resolutions on a subject of infinite importance. Did not the noble lord think it a serious matter, that a committee of the House should be empowered to administer an oath? Was it not a serious matter that a common informer might keep in his pocket, for seventeen months and twenty-eight days, a petition affecting the interest of individuals and of corporate bodies; that, at the end of seventeen months he might, if he pleased, prefer his charge against a corporation, or an individual to the House, without expense to himself, and without one word being inserted in the resolutions as to a penalty in case of vexatious or malicious charges? He was surprised to hear the hon. member, who spoke last, assert, that there had been more gross bribery during the last election than at any former period; and this in the face of the resolutions. The fact proved, then, the insufficiency of the resolutions; although the hon. member considered it as a sufficient reason for adopting them. He was not contending against the principle of the noble lord. He repeated what he had slated last session, that this measure should be introduced by bill, and that the nature and the extent of this now jurisdiction should be carefully determined. The House should have the opportunity of ma-
108
Mr. Scarlett
doubted whether the resolutions of the noble lord would meet all the objects he had in view, and felt that there was some weight in the arguments urged on the other side of the House; though the right hon. gentleman who spoke last had taken rather a partial view of the question. It had been urged by an hon. member, that the existing laws were sufficient for punishing bribery, provided they were properly executed. The resolutions of the House enabled them to do it, if they were exerted. The right hon. gentleman had dwelt upon the long period during which a common informer might keep a petition in his pocket; but it was in the discretion of the House, if such a case occurred, to deal with it in a proper manner, and reject the petition altogether. Another argument of the right hon. gentleman was just, and showed the infirmity of the resolutions; namely, that the party petitioning incurred no peril. He thought that this was a serious defect, and that it could not be remedied by a resolution of the House. This House could not inflict a penalty: it could not even inflict costs upon the party. This power did not belong to a separate branch of the legislature. Moreover, if the defect were attempted to be supplied by a bill, was the House sure that the other House would pass it? This House might adopt it; but this House depended in some measure, for the pure exercise of its functions, upon the other House, and might propose for that object
109
Mr. Pallmer,
member for Surrey, said, that the importance of the question and a sense of duty impelled him to offer a few observations to the House. He was the more induced to do so, because, with reference to the subject involved in the resolutions; namely, the purity of election, hon. gentlemen must be, so soon after the general election, strongly impressed with the necessity of some measure, to enforce the principle contained in them. His gratitude, as an independent member of parliament, was due to the noble lord who brought forward the propositions, as well as to the noble lord with whom they originated, because he was proud to see the aristocracy of the country advocating the rights and privileges of the people. But, much as he felt indebted to those noble
110
Lord Althorp
said, that if the present resolutions were to be embodied in a bill, there was not the slightest chance of its passing the other House. The only hope of adopting the present rules was by a resolution of the House. The most material objection which had been urged against the resolutions, was founded upon the power which it gave of presenting petitions without expense. This was the unavoidable consequence of founding the measure upon resolutions, and not upon a bill. But he did not think, that, practically, any such effects would result as were suggested, and if they did occur, it would be easy to find a remedy for such a practical evil. However, as it seemed to be the general wish of the House that the resolutions, in their present state, should be withdrawn, he would, with the consent of the House, withdraw them.
The motion was then withdrawn.
111
DR. SOUTHEY'S RETURN FOR DOWNTON.]
The Speaker
"Keswick, 15th November, 1826.
"Sir;—Having, while I was on the continent, been, without my knowledge, elected a burgess to serve in the present parliament for the borough of Down ton, it has become my duty to take the earliest opportunity of requesting you to inform the honourable House, that I am not qualified to take a seat therein, inasmuch as I am not possessed of such an estate as is required by the act passed in the 9th year of queen Anne. I am, Sir, with all due respect, &c. ROBERT SOUTHEY."
ADDRESS ON THE KING'S SPEECH AT
The Address on the King's Speech was reported to the House. On its being read a second time,
Mr. Western
rose for the purpose of submitting an amendment, by way of addition to the Address. This he felt to be necessary, not that he was hostile to any part of the Address, but that he was desirous to fill up an omission on a question most important to the country. The Address adverted to the distressed situation of the manufacturing districts, but it omitted to state, in any particular manner, the condition of the agriculturists, who, he would say, though not as depressed as the manufacturers, were still labouring under severe pressure, arising from the burthens to which they were subject. It became the more necessary to advert to the situation of the agriculturists, because the omission of that subject from the royal Speech went to confirm an opinion too prevalent in the country, that the agriculturists were in prosperity, and that they were flourishing, at the expense of the manufacturers. This opinion he knew prevailed among the manufacturing classes, and it had even been stated in that House by an hon. alderman. It was necessary that such an opinion should not go forth as sanctioned by that House, and therefore he felt bound, publicly, to deny its justice. The farmers, he could state, were in distress, and their condition generally declining. They were scarcely able to struggle against the burthens by which they were oppressed.
112
s
s
l
l
s
113
"Your Majesty's faithful Commons feel it their duty to represent to your Majesty, and at the same time to express their deep regret, that the agricultural classes, though not suffering in the degree they did a few years ago, particularly in the year 1822, are yet in a state of severe pressure of distress, from the heavy burthens to which they are exposed. They will endeavour to trace the causes which have led to the dreadful alternations of prosperity and adversity which all the industrious classes have experienced since the termination of the war in the year 1815, and they trust they shall discover the means of restoring the agriculture, commerce, and manufactures, of the country to the same condition of progressive improvement, in which they were steadily advancing antecedent to that period."
Mr. Leycester
seconded the amendment. He could not but regret that the subject of the Corn-laws had not formed a part of the Speech from the Throne; the more particularly on account of the; strange delusion which filled the public mind on that subject. That it was a delusion to suppose that the distress was owing to the Corn-laws would be proved by the fact, that under those laws, and; even at higher prices than the present, the manufacturers, masters and journey-men, had prospered to a degree thereto-fore unexampled. He contended, that the distress arose from the impolitic conduct of government in tampering with the currency, from the great issue of small notes, and from the fact of ministers never allowing the country to enjoy the benefit of a real sinking fund. He maintained that it was another delusion to suppose that the repeal of the Corn-laws would produce cheap
114
s
l
115
Sir J. Sebright
opposed the amendment; not because he was indifferent to the interests of the landlords, but because he was convinced that the introduction of the subject at the present moment was extremely ill-timed. He could not agree that it was a fault in the Speech from the throne to have omitted the several topics yesterday alluded to. On the contrary he thought those omissions formed its great merit.
Mr. Western
said, that he would not take the sense of the House on the amendment; but he wished it to be put, as he was anxious to have it placed on record.
The amendment was then put, and negatived; after which, the original address was agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, November 24, 1826.
KING'S ANSWER TO THE ADDRESS.]
The Speaker
reported his Majesty's Answer to the Address, as follows:
"Gentlemen of the House of Commons; —I thank you for this loyal and dutiful Address. I rely with confidence on your affectionate support; and you may depend upon my continued exertions to uphold the honour and interests of the nation, to cultivate the blessings of peace abroad, and to promote, at home, the welfare of all classes of my subjects."
BOROUGH OF TREGONY.]
Mr. Abercromby
said, that, as the subject of his present motion was intimately connected with the privileges of that House, it would, of course, take precedence of every other. He would commence by requesting the clerk to read the return to the Crown-office relative to the borough of Tregony.
Mr. Abercromby
then proceeded to observe, that the simple reading of that entry might be almost sufficient to establish beyond contradiction, that there had been no double return for the borough in question, and that the entry in the book ought to be forthwith rectified, by order of
116
117
118
119
Mr. Wynn
assured the hon. and learned member that he should not have thought himself at all disorderly in interrupting him before he had concluded his speech, had he been aware that his motion would have taken the shape which he had eventually given it. The hon. and learned member commenced by telling them, that he had a motion to submit on a matter connected with their privileges; but, in fact, he had concluded with a proposition which was against law, and against the usage of that House. The details with which the learned gentleman had favoured them, would have been perfectly in place, before an election committee, legally constituted for the investigation of the alleged irregularity; but when addressed to that House, which had no power to entertain the subject, they were useless to all purpose, but to prejudge the question. What was the substance of the motion? That that House should of its own authority, order a return to be taken off the file. If the learned member could persuade the House to such a course, the next thing he must do, would be to bring in a bill to repeal all the acts relating to elections passed by that House since the commencement of legislation on the subject. If the House were to controvert a return made to it, in the manner now proposed, it would lead to the greatest inconveniences. For if, under any pretence, they were once to arrogate to themselves such a power, there would be always plenty of cases, with circumstances of a special and peculiar nature, to demand their interference. It was the established practice of the House, in cases of this kind,' to refer the matter in the first instance, to a committee of privileges. That was the course pursued in the case of Pomfret, in the time of James the 1st. In that case it was decided, that the proper course to be pursued was, to refer mat-
120
121
Mr. Lockhart
was not disposed to concur fully with the hon. and learned mover, although he certainly had not heard anything from the right hon. gentleman to affect his statement. He thought the House ought to exercise its utmost vigilance to guard against fictitious returns. Suppose, for instance, that in some of the boroughs or popular places of England, where persons voted by scot and lot, some person on the part of the scot and lot voters assumed to officiate as the returning officer, and that his return was forwarded to the sheriff, and accompanied the writ to the clerk of the Crown's office; great difficulty might arise from setting aside such a return. He, therefore, thought it necessary to adopt some measure to provide against the inconvenience that might arise from undue returns in such a case, or in a case similar to the present. When it was considered what expense arose from prosecuting petitions in cases of controverted elections, every precaution should be taken to prevent fictitious returns. He would support a motion that went to effect such an object.
122
Mr. Brougham
differed entirely from the right hon. gentleman in the observation, that an acquiescence in the present motion would infringe upon the Grenville act. The right hon. gentleman was not more disposed than he himself was, to bestow hearty commendation upon that act, than which no one more wise or virtuous had ever been framed by that or any other assembly. For what was the object of that act? It was to make a voluntary surrender, on the part of this branch of the legislature, of a jurisdiction which it found itself not capable of wisely and impartially exercising. So far, therefore, as the Grenville act went to take from that House, in its collective capacity, the right of determining upon cases of controverted elections, and to refer such cases to a more satisfactory tribunal, it had his approval. But this provision for a competent tribunal to decide upon such cases, did not go to take away from parliament the right and power of self-defence and protection, in the event of circumstances totally unconnected with those under which that act was originally passed. Did his hon. and learned friend propose, that that act should, in this particular case, be infringed on, or did he propose that inquiry and examination should be abandoned, where investigation could be attended with advantage? No such thing. There was here no necessity for such inquiry; for the decision was to be formed on an inspection of the returns themselves. They were both before them. It was unnecessary to examine into the details of the election; for there were documents before the House which, without reference to such details, would enable them to come to a decision. Here were two returns. In one, the indenture was annexed to the writ by the sheriff; in the other, it was not. In the one all the necessary forms were complied with; in the other, they were not. The question for the House to determine was, which of these returns the House should adopt? Witnesses were not necessary. They had the evidence of their own senses to regulate them in the course most proper to pursue. The case of the election of Liskeard had been adverted to; but, in his opinion, the cases were by no means analogous. Even in that case he had the high constitutional authority of Mr. Pitt to support him in the opinion, that that case did not fall within the Grenville act, and that the
123
toto cælo
Mr. Huskisson
said, that nothing was further from his intention than to take any part in this discussion, nor was he aware of its nature until he had entered the
124
Mr. Abercromby
wished to explain that nothing could be taken as a return to the king's writ, except the return made by the sheriff to the Crown-office, and by the officer of the Crown to the House. There was the book on the table, stating that one return was annexed to the precept, and annexed by the sheriff to the writ; and also stating, that the other return was not annexed to the precept or to the writ, as well as that it was not regularly received, in point of time. From the manner in which the entry was made no further evidence was necessary for the House to decide the question.
Mr. Wynn
said, he had never contended that any return should be received by the House, except such as had been made through the sheriff; nor did he think the
125
Mr. Horace Twiss
thought the House ought to decide from the documents before them. If they went out of those documents, they would travel out of the record.
Mr. Carter
thought the House had no power to alter the return made by the sheriff, except it was decided by a competent tribunal that he had acted corruptly or illegally. He thought, therefore, that the book on their table was quite sufficient to decide the case. The second return, it was clear, was never mentioned as a return by the sheriff himself.
Mr. D. Gilbert
thought the whole question was, whether the second return could be called a legal return. In his opinion, it was no return at all, though he did not think that any blame was attributable to the sheriff.
Mr. Secretary Canning
said, he must make a confession, and take to himself whatever shame attached to it; namely, that he was ignorant of the course which ought to be pursued in this case, and if called on to vote, he must oppose the motion; because, in his present state of information on the subject, he was unwilling to assent to a vote which would decide it all at once and for ever. He was not prepared to go the whole length with the hon. and learned gentleman in saying that want of annexation to the writ constituted a nullity. If that were so, undoubtedly the learned gentleman's case would be a very strong one. However, as it would be better to decide by precedents, and as this would decide future cases, he would suggest the propriety of adjourning the question for further discussion, when they would come better prepared to give it that attention which its importance required. He had at first thought that it would be better to call the clerk of the Crown to the bar, to give explanation, if necessary; but on consideration, bethought, that might be deciding the case at one side. He would move, that the debate be adjourned to Wednesday, and that the clerk of the Crown be ordered to be in attendance.— Agreed to.
CORN IMPORTATION ACTS—ORDER IN COUNCIL.]
The House having resolved itself into a committee on the Corn Impor-
126
Mr. Huskisson
addressed the committee. He began by observing, that as the Orders in Council for the opening of the ports for the admission of oats, oatmeal, peas, beans, and rye, which had just been referred to the committee, was issued, not only without the authority of law, but in direct contravention of existing statutes, and as his Majesty had called parliament together at this time chiefly for the purpose of having that order submitted for their consideration, he thus took the earliest opportunity of submitting to the House the grounds on which his Majesty had been advised to issue that order. This was a duty which ministers owed to parliament, to the country, and to themselves; and if it should be the pleasure of the legislature to grant them the indemnity for which they sued, so far from its becoming a dangerous precedent, it would rather tend to strengthen and confirm the precise bounds by which the different authorities in the state were limited. They owed it also to themselves to seek the indemnity of parliament, as they would otherwise be subject to certain legal consequences for having so advised the Crown; and they likewise owed it to those subordinate officers who acted under their orders in opening the ports. The date of the Order in Council was the 1st of September. At that time most of the members of parliament were resident in the country, and had opportunities, in their several districts, of observing the state of the harvest. That circumstance would render it the less necessary for him to go into any lengthened statement, on the present occasion; and he was certain the recollection of those members would bear him out in the assertion, that never was there a period when the reports from the different parts of the country so entirely concurred as to the harvest, and he hoped that those reports would be sufficient to justify ministers in the course they had pursued. With respect to the state of the crops at that time, he would say first, that wheat, taken as a whole, was deficient in quantity and quality; and the quality of course affected the value of the quantity. Barley, on the whole, would not make more than about two thirds of an average crop. Oats were generally deficient, and beans and peas much more so; and such had been the appearance of those crops in the ground, that in the month of
127
s
d
s
d
s
d
s
d
s
d
s
s
d
128
129
s
s
s
d
s
s
130
d
s
s
s
s
"1. That all persons concerned in issuing, or advising the issue, or acting in execution of, an Order of Council of the 1st day of February, 1826, for allowing the importation of certain sorts of foreign corn, shall be indemnified.
131
"2. That the importation of foreign oats, oatmeal, rye, pease, and beans, be permitted for a time to be limited, on payment of the duties hereinafter mentioned: that is to say, for every quarter of oats 2
s
s
d
s
d
Sir E. Knatchbull
said, that in looking at the situation in which the country was placed at the period alluded to, his Majesty's ministers were perfectly justified in the course they had adopted. This was his own opinion, and it was also the opinion of many gentlemen with whom he concurred in the general view of the Corn-laws. But, in saying this, he begged not to be understood as meaning to retract any thing he had formerly said with respect to that question. His sentiments remained unaltered on that subject; but he thought the case now before the committee formed no part of that general question. He was ready to admit, that a sufficient case had been made out for the measure adopted by ministers. In expressing that, he believed that he only spoke the feelings of the landed interest. He would go further, and say, that he only spoke their sentiments in declaring, that all the country gentlemen were greatly indebted to ministers for that which they had done. He made this observation, because it was asserted, most unjustly, that the landed interest were the only persons who differed from public opinion upon this most important subject. He knew it was a principle generally admitted among persons concerned in commerce, that, after any unusual depression, they were at liberty to seek for a remuneration of their losses in advanced prices. That was, as he understood, a general principle in trade and manufactures, and it was not at all unfair. But it was not applicable, at all times, to the agricultural interest. That interest had been as depressed as any class in the kingdom, and no good could result from exciting jealousy between them and the manufacturers. The best remedy for the evils of the country was to look them fairly in the face, and not to enter into any recrimination between the different classes of society. When the great question came under consideration, he hoped the House would not be told that landlords were oppressive, and
132
Mr. Whitmore
did not rise to oppose the measure now under consideration. He believed it was the only course ministers could have pursued. But it was most desirable, without now attempting to enter on the merits of the great question of the Corn-laws, that an early settlement of it should take place. He could not help pointing out to the House the strange nature of the law by which the corn trade was to have been regulated. They were now deliberating upon the third instance of its infraction within the last three years. Could a heavier censure fall upon any law than that simple fact? They passed a law which suffered repeated infractions from the executive government: they were suddenly convened to consider of the infraction, and they all felt satisfied that the breach of the law was the only safe conduct which government could adopt. The year before last they adopted resolutions in direct contradiction to this law: they did the same last year: and now they were assembled to pass an act of indemnity to ministers for breaking through it. He put it to the House, if such a law ought any longer to disgrace the Statute-book. He was prepared to show, at the proper time, that it was not only in hostility to the general prosperity of the country, but that it acted most injuriously on that interest for whose benefit it had been enacted. He concurred with the hon. baronet in hoping, that no recrimination or angry feelings would be allowed to mix themselves up with the consideration of this question. It was one of vast importance to all interests, affecting, as it did, not only the prosperity of the agricultural, but the manufacturing and trading classes. It was likewise a question of great difficulty, which it became all to approach with calmness; and he trusted, the passions and interests of individuals would not be mixed up in a matter so intimately affecting the universal safety and well-being of the state. With respect to the recent act of ministers, it
133
Colonel Wood
wished the hon. gentleman had followed the example of the hon. baronet who preceded him, and refrained from any animadversion on the Corn-law. As he had made many allusions to it on different 6ccaskms, it would have been well if the hon. gentleman had taken the trouble to ascertain what that law was. Among the various publications which had appeared upon it, he had perused one which had been put forth by the hon. gentleman. In that pamphlet he found it asserted, that the principle of the law of 1815 was, to cut off all intercourse, as to the trade in grain, with foreign countries; that the trade in corn was rendered, by that law, the exception, and not the rule; and that the object of it was, to screw up the prices at home to an unnatural elevation. Now, so far was the trade in corn made the rule of the law in 1815—so far was it from being made the exception, that it was established, that when the averages were at 63
s
s
s
s
d
134
s
s
s
s
Mr. Warburton,
member for Bridport, expressed a hope, that the intimation thrown out by the Foreign Secretary of State would be rigidly adhered to, and that any measure relative to an alteration of the Corn-laws would be brought forward in that House without any previous intimation elsewhere; so that every member would come equally unprepared and equally unprejudiced to the discussion of this important subject.
Colonel Torrens
, member for Ipswich, said, he was aware it was irregular to allude to any discussion which had taken place in that House on a previous occa-
135
Mr. Western
said, he considered that ministers were justified in the course they had pursued, and that, seeing the temper and feeling of the House, he would not at present enter into the general question of the Corn-laws.
Mr. Wodehouse
concurred with the last speaker in approving of the conduct of ministers. It was his intention to have gone more at large into the general question of the Corn-laws, but, observing the temper and disposition of the House on the subject, he forbore doing so for the present.
136
Mr. Calcraft
thought that ministers could not have acted otherwise than they had done. He would not anticipate the general discussion. He was one of those, who felt great inconvenience at the postponement of the question; yet he could discover many good reasons for that postponement. He approved, therefore, of the determination of government to promulgate nothing until after the holydays. He advised every member to use his best endeavours to allay animosities, and abstain from any observations, until the opportunity should arrive for a full and conclusive discussion of the subject.
Mr. Benett
deprecated the appointment of any more committees to examine into the operation of the Corn-laws. He conceived such a step to be utterly needless, after the mass of information which had been collected on the subject.
Mr. Alderman Waithman
observed, that all the interests of the country were so closely connected, that any measure which tended to uphold one of them exclusively, was certain, in the long run, to be injurious to that very interest. In avowing himself friendly to some alteration in the Corn-laws, he did not consider himself to be seeking the advantage of his own constituents at the expense of any other class of the community. He fully agreed with an hon. gentleman who once represented the city of London, that he was not so much sent to parliament to guard the interests of the city, as to guard those of the country at large, and, indeed, he might say, of posterity. In conclusion, he would not compliment ministers on the policy which they had pursued with regard to this question, for he thought that if they had any feeling, they must be nauseated with the compliments they had received already. However, this much he would say, that they would have been highly criminal if they had abstained from acting as they had done.
Mr. Hume
asserted, that, both in the House and out of it, there was a unanimous opinion, that the question of the Corn-laws ought to undergo immediate discussion. Such being the case, the conduct of ministers appeared very extraordinary. There were hundreds of petitions to be presented from the manufacturing districts against those laws; and no gentleman would perform his duty in presenting them, if he did not state fully the nature of their contents. Discussion
137
CHAIRMAN OF COMMITTEES OF THE HOUSE—MR. BROGDEN.]
On the order of the day for the House resolving itself into a committee of supply,
Mr. Brogden
addressed the House. He said, that he had now had the honour of filling the important and honourable situation of Chairman of the Committees of the House for nearly two whole parliaments; and he was not conscious of having done any act, during that period, which was either dishonourable in itself or derogatory from the situation which he filled in that House and in society at large. Within the few last months, however, he had been assailed by public and private calumnies, the most unjustifiable and unfounded. He had rebutted those calumnies as far as was in his power; but they were still circulated to his disadvantage, in consequence of the prejudices which had been excited against him. He was happy, however, in having it in his power to say, that from those who knew him best, he had received, not blame, but thanks; he had met, not with accusation, but applause; whilst, on the other hand, he was sorry to say, that among the public at large his character had been torn from him by anonymous publications of the most scandalous and virulent description. He would venture to affirm, that there was no gentleman on either side of the House, let his politics be what they might, who had investigated the merits of his case, and possessed sufficient knowledge of it to decide on the accusations which had been preferred against him. In such a condition, though he felt himself perfectly guiltless, he could not think of presenting himself as a candidate for the office which he had filled in the two last parliaments, until he had removed the
138
Mr. Secretary Canning
said, he was sure that only one impression could have been generated in the House by the address which the hon. gentleman had delivered— an address which was as creditable to that hon. gentleman's sense of what was due to himself, as it was consonant to the honour of the House, and to the feelings of those whose duty it was to suggest a fit person to fill the chair of the committees. For his own part, he felt that the House, although it might avail itself of the hon. member's determination to withdraw himself at present from the chair, which he had filled with so much credit to himself and advantage to the public business— and he could assure it, that he did not intend to propose the hon. gentleman for its chairman, after what he had just said,— he felt, he repeated, that the House, if the hon. gentleman came out of the inquiry which he had challenged, free from moral taint, would be sorry to make any arrangement which would preclude him from again filling that situation. At the same time, he must observe, that if it had been possible—if it had been either respectful to the House, or kind to the individual— to press him against his own disclaimer, he should have been reluctant to place the hon. member at present in the chair, because he felt that a thousand opportunities
139
pro tempore
Mr. Alderman Waithman
said, he felt himself in as painful a situation—indeed he might say, in a more painful situation —than he had ever before felt in addressing a public assembly. He wished it to be distinctly understood by the House, that he did not come forward as the accuser of the hon. gentleman. With regard to the transactions which he had brought before it, and which the hon. member had acknowledged to be fraudulent, the hon. member said that he knew nothing. He gave the hon. member credit for that assertion; and he now informed the House, that it was not upon that ground alone that he opposed the re-elec-
140
141
The House having gone into the committee, Mr. Secretary Canning named sir
142
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, November 27, 1826.
POOR LAWS AND EMIGRATION—PETITION OF MR. GOURLAY.]
Mr. Hume
presented the following petition:—
"To the Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, in Parliament assembled, the Petition of Robert Gourlay,
"Humbly showeth, That your petitioner, while travelling through England, in the year 1800, became acquainted with Mr. Arthur Young, secretary to the Board of Agriculture, and was prevailed on by him to visit certain counties, examine and report concerning the condition of the labouring poor; that he then saw that substantial benefits were required to better their condition, and thenceforth made the subject his leading pursuit.
"That, in the year 1809, your petitioner removed from Scotland, and rented a farm in Wiltshire, chiefly to ascertain more correctly how the system of the poor-laws could be reformed; and by the year 1817 had nearly satisfied himself, when he had occasion to go abroad to Canada, where his views of such reform were expanded, and became clear, by connecting this with a grand system of emigration.
"That, ever since then, your petitioner has been overwhelmed with misfortune, but never for a moment has he relinquished J the great object of his life; and now feels confident that, by simple means, and within twenty years, the poor-laws of England may become a dead letter, and all need for such in Ireland be done away.
"Having had petitions presented to the House of Commons every session of last parliament, on the subjects of Poor-law, Reform, and Emigration, your petitioner now intreats that a select committee may
143
Ordered to lie on the table.
CORN LAWS.]
Mr. Hume
said, he held in his hand a petition from the incorporation of guildry of the city of Brechin, praying for a speedy revision of the Corn-laws. The petition stated, that the admission by ministers of foreign grain, was a measure of prudence and necessity, and the petitioners were unanimous in their expression of that opinion. The concluding part of the petition prayed the House not to adopt half measures with regard to the Corn-laws, but so to deal with them as to remove the necessity of ministers having again to claim an indemnity from parliament for effecting a public good. The hon. member then claimed the indulgence of the House while he referred to a report in a daily paper, tending, as he said, to injure him in the eyes of the country. He was well aware of the malice and inveterate rancour pursued towards him by some individuals connected with the public press, who gave publication to a series of calumnies that seriously affected his character. He hoped, however, that the time was not far distant when the imputations under which he laboured would be satisfactorily cleared up, by a full explanation of the circumstances which had given rise to them. The hon. member then said, in alluding to the report in question, that at the close of his observations respecting the corn question, a few nights ago, when he called upon ministers not to postpone the consideration of that important measure, as the peace of the country and the interest of the people at large would not admit of delay, it was asserted that he was coughed down. Had such been the case, it would certainly not have been the first time that the House had signified a wish that he should not say more; but he begged to state, that his meaning on the occasion alluded to was only partly given, and to say that he experienced in that House such treatment was only adding to the calumnies with which he was constantly assailed. He had too much confidence in the indulgence of the House, and the favour of the Speaker, to suppose that such treatment would have been pursued
144
Mr. Hurst
said, he could assure the House that the landed interest did not by any means feel the alarm on the subject of the Corn-laws which was attributed to them. He for one had a full confidence in the wisdom of the House, and was satisfied that it would not proceed to legislate on such a subject without maturely weighing the interests of all parties concerned. It was desirable that it should be soon disposed of, as landlords at present were embarrassed upon what terms to let their lands.
Ordered to lie on the table.
145
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Tuesday, November 28, 1826.
CORN-LAWS.]
Lord King
said, he had several petitions to present on the subject of the Corn-laws; and he was very sorry, on that occasion, that he could not follow the recommendation of the noble and learned earl on the woolsack, who had stated it to be more conformable to parliamentary usage to present petitions without any comment. If it were his wish to perpetuate all kinds of abuses, he certainly would follow the prudent example which the noble and learned lord had set; but his object being the direct contrary, he should take the liberty of now making a few observations. The first petition which he should present, was one from the weavers of Carlisle, which he had selected on account of its importance and the sufferings which the petitioners had endured. Those sufferings would be an ample excuse for the language which they had used. It was, indeed, most extraordinary that so large a number of the king's subjects should put their names to a petition containing these words; namely—"that thousands, and probably hundreds of thousands, frequently addressed each other, coolly inquiring whether it was not as well to die on the scaffold as of hunger?" Excuse for this was alone to be found in the extremity of their sufferings. He had inquired of gentlemen capable of giving the best information on the subject, and he found that the petitioners had given but too true a picture of their sufferings. Nothing but great suffering could have induced such language, and the petition might, therefore, be regarded as displaying the feelings of the people. The petitioners prayed for the abolition of the Corn-laws; and, as drowning men catch at straws, they prayed besides for an appropriation of that property called church property, to the payment of the national debt, and also for a reform in parliament. The petition was worded with all proper expressions of humility to their lordships.
The Earl of Lauderdale
supposed this to be a petition for the repeal of the Corn-laws; but he now found that it was one for the confiscation of church property, and for reform in parliament.
Lord King
said, the petition was for the abolition of the Corn-laws, though it suggested other measures in addition to that
146
The Earl of Lauderdale
wished to observe, that he never remembered to have seen the House in the situation in which it appeared to be placed at present. To be sure the noble earl on the woolsack and another noble earl opposite (Westmorland) were in the House; but these were not the usual persons of whom answers to any questions which their lordships might have to put were expected. He should much wish to have the opportunity of seeing another noble earl (Liverpool) in his place, as he had a motion to submit to the House, which he wished to make when the noble earl was present, and he knew that other noble lords were equally desirous of seeing the noble earl in the House.
The Earl of Westmorland
believed it was the usual practice for noble lords to give notice of any motion of importance which they might intend to bring forward. He was confident that, if his noble friend were made acquainted with the wish of any of their lordships to see him in his place, he would not fail to attend.
CATHOLIC EMANCIFATION.]
Earl Spencer
presented a petition from the county of Mayo, praying for Catholic Emancipation. The noble earl said, he entirely concurred in the object which the petition had in view. Ever since the Union of the two kingdoms, which was now upwards of a quarter of a century, he had never altered his opinion on the subject of the Catholic claims. On the contrary, every year tended more and more to add to the conviction he entertained, that neither the interests of strict justice, nor of sound policy could be duly regarded, until those claims were conceded. In fact, without concession there could be no hope of peace or security for the empire, and he felt persuaded that continued resistance to those claims must ultimately be attended by some tremendous disaster. He trusted, however, that when the question should again be brought forward, the result would be different from that which
147
Ordered to lie on the table.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, November 28, 1826.
ARIGNA MINING COMPANY—PETITION
Mr. Alderman Waithman
said, he had a petition to present to the House, which was of great importance to the public, and involved also the honour and independence of the House. The petition was from Mr. Roger Flattery, of Dublin, who was formerly a civil engineer in the employment of government, and whose name must be familiar to many gentlemen present, as connected with the Arigna Mining Company. The petitioner complained of a variety of grievances which he suffered in consequence of his connexion with that mischievous and ruinous undertaking. It appeared that Mr. Flattery had sold his interest in the Arigna mines to the undertakers of that scheme, for the sum of 10,000
l
l
148
The Speaker
wished to ask the hon. alderman whether the petition implicated any member of that House by name.
Mr. Alderman Waithman
replied, that it did not. It merely prayed for an inquiry into the conduct of the persons connected with a certain company.
The petition, which ran as follows, was then brought up and read:—
"To the Right Honourable and Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of great Britain and Ireland, in Parliament assembled. The humble Petition of Roger Flattery of the city of Dublin, Civil Engineer, formerly in the employ of his Majesty's government,
"Showeth,—that your petitioner having read in ' The Times,' and other newspapers, reports of the proceedings in your honourable House on Tuesday last, the 22nd November instant, when mention of your petitioner was made by name, and the conduct and character of one or more of the members of your honourable House were, in the opinion of your petitioner, justly called in question, your petitioner humbly hopes that your honourable House will be pleased to accept a short detail of facts at the hands of your petitioner, whereby the conduct of certain members of your honourable House may be investigated, and justice rewarded.
"Your petitioner finds that the fact of a certain sum of money, 15,000
l
149
'In the matter of the Arigna Iron and Coal Company.
'Roger Flattery, of the city of Dublin, civil engineer, formerly in the employ of his Majestys government, maketh oath and saith, that having certain mineral: properties, situated in the counties of Roscommon and Leitrim, suitable for the manufacture of Iron, in aid of the works on which this deponent wanted a loan of money, this deponent came over to London in May, 1824, and shortly afterwards made the acquaintance of sir W. Congreve, bart.; this deponent was introduced by sir W. Congreve to John Schneider, esq., a respectable merchant of the city of London, and this deponent had for some time reason to believe that a sum of money sufficient for his necessities would be advanced to him by that gentleman, but about that period there existed so strong a bias in favour of Joint-stock associations, that this deponent was induced to listen to the representations of sir W. Congreve and others to some plans for forming a Joint-stock company, in aid of this deponents iron works. While the plans for forming a company were maturing, it was understood that this deponent should have a temporary advance of 3,000
l
150
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
151
"Your petitioner humbly prays the attentive consideration of your honourable House to his peculiar case; for, in consequence of the delusions practised, neither royalty nor product has ever been paid to your petitioner, notwithstanding the large sums of money taken from the pockets of the public, and the works are in a perishable state.
"Your petitioner now humbly throws himself on your honourable House praying that the conduct of those members of your honourable House who have been engaged in the affairs of the Arigna Iron and Coal company may be investigated, for your petitioner has suffered great losses by the peculations committed, and will be obliged to file bills in the court of chancery, in Dublin, for the recovery of his property. And your petitioner, as in duty bound, will ever pray."
Mr. Wynn
said, it was contrary to all rule that the House could entertain this petition. Besides other obvious objections to its being received, the petition referred to certain debates which had taken place in that House, and hon. gentlemen must be aware that such a proceeding was highly irregular.
The Speaker
was of opinion, that the petition was one which the House could not with propriety entertain. In the first place, if the petitioner complained of the conduct of certain hon. members by name, it was but just and reasonable that those members should have had due notice of the charge against them. If, in the second place, the petitioner made a general complaint, how was it possible to say which of the 658 members were meant to be accused? The petition, moreover, referred to certain unauthorized reports of the proceedings of the House, which could only find their way to the public by a breach of privilege. An affidavit was also referred to by the petitioner; but, could the House depart so far from its established usage as to admit affidavits in one shape and not in another? Under all the circumstances, he was of opinion that the petition was one that could not be received by the House, and he therefore recommended the hon. alderman to withdraw it, and, if he pleased, to bring it forward in an amended form.
Mr. Alderman Waithman
said, that seeing the disinclination of the House to entertain this petition, he felt it to be his duty to yield to the suggestion of the
152
The petition was then withdrawn.
RESOLUTIONS RELATIVE TO COMMITTEES
Mr. Littleton
rose for the purpose of submitting to the House certain Resolutions on the subject of Committees on Private Bills. They were, he observed, the same as those which he had submitted in the last session of the last parliament. It was not his intention, at present, to propose that they should form part of the standing orders of the House; but merely that they should continue in force during the present session, by way of experiment. If, at the end of that time, they should be found to have answered the object in view, it would be for the House afterwards to decide whether they should be enrolled amongst its general standing orders. As there were many members in this parliament who, he supposed, were not acquainted with the reasons which had urged the introduction of those resolutions in the last session, he would briefly state, that it had in that session been found necessary to provide some remedy for what was admitted to be an evil in the mode of carrying private bills through the committees. Complaints had been unsparingly made against the conduct of many members; and it was alleged, that very many of them had voted on committees where their own interests were concerned. He was aware that most of such complaints rested on very weak foundations; that they were frequently made by parties who had been foiled in the prosecution of improper projects; and sometimes were urged by professional men, who felt their character at stake by the course they had advised in the prosecution of those measures. Still, however, it could not be denied, that there were some instances in which members, either by the influence of personal interest, or by other causes, had suffered themselves to be warped from the straight line of their duty. This undoubtedly was an evil, and an evil for which it was necessary that some remedy should be provided. A private bill, it should be recollected, called for the suspension of some general law in a case alleged and presumed to be
153
154
"1. That the present distribution of Counties in the several Lists, for the purpose of forming Committees on Petitions for Private Bills, and on Private Bills prepared under the direction of the Speaker some years ago, has, from the great inequality of the numbers of members contained in such lists respectively, and from other causes, been found not to answer the object for which it was framed.
"2. That, with a view more nearly to equalize members, and to correct too strong a prevalence of local interests on committees on petitions for private bills, it is expedient that a new distribution of counties should be made, containing in each list, as nearly as may be, one hundred and twenty members; one half only, or thereabouts, to be taken from the county immediately connected with the object of the bill, and the adjoining counties; and the other half from other more distact counties of Great Britain and Ireland; and that the members serving for such counties, and the places within such counties, should constitute the committee on each bill.
"3. That Mr. Speaker be requested to direct a new distribution of counties to be prepared in such manner as shall be approved of by him, conformably to the principle of the foregoing resolution.
"4. That every committee on a private bill be required to report to the House the bill referred to it, with the evidence and minutes of the proceedings.
"5. That a committee be appointed, to be called 'The Committee of Appeals upon Private Bills,' which committee shall consist of all the knights of the shire, all the members for cities, and such other members as may be named therein; so that the whole number appointed to serve upon such committee shall amount to two hundred at least.
"6. That where any party interested in
155
"7. That whenever a petition shall be referred to such select committee, complaining of any vote of a committee upon a private bill, the House shall fix a day whereon to ballot for a select committee, to which such petition shall be referred, upon which day, at a quarter past four o'clock, or as near thereto as the question: which may be then before the House will permit, the Speaker shall order the doors of the House to be locked, and the names of the members composing the committee of appeals upon private bills being written upon separate pieces of paper, and put into the glass, the clerk shall draw therefrom the names, until seven members of such committee who shall be then present, and who shall not have voted in the committee upon the private bill to which the petition refers, or shall not be excused by the House, shall have answered to their names; which seven members shall be the select committee to whom such petition shall be referred, and such select committee shall meet for business the following day at 11 o'clock, and continue to sit, dc die in diem, until they shall have reported upon the same; and that only one counsel or agent shall be heard in support of the petition of any one party.
"8. That no member of such select committee shall absent himself therefrom during its sitting, without the permission of the House.
"9. That the party or parties complaining shall, previously to the balloting for such select committee, deposit with the
156
l
Mr. Yates Peel
rose to second the resolutions, and observed, that great thanks were due to the hon. gentleman who had introduced them. If any member who was not in the last parliament had any scruple in voting for them, he could assure him that any change in the mode of constituting committees on private bills must be a change for the better. It might be said, that it would be improper to prevent members from coming in to vote in a private committee in which they had not heard the previous proceedings, seeing that they were allowed to do so in the House on important questions. He did not mean to justify one course by citing the other, but there was this difference between the two cases. In the committee they voted on evidence; while, in the House, they voted on argument. He could easily conceive that a man might not like to sit out a long argument, or what was worse, along speech without any argument at all; but he could not conceive the propriety of a member coming in and voting on the conclusive-ness or inconclusiveness of evidence which he had not heard. Recollecting what had taken place in former committees, he was convinced that the course now pointed out would be a great saving of time and expense to parties connected with private bills, and he hoped the House would consent to it as an experiment. If it succeeded, the resolutions could be made part of the standing orders. If it failed, they would not be in a worse situation than they were at present.
Colonel Davies
admitted that great inconvenience arose from the former course with respect to private bills, but the one now proposed would, he thought, be much worse, and therefore he would give it all the opposition in his power. First, with respect to the hundred and twenty members to be on a committee, he thought it would be extremely difficult to obtain that number, unless they resorted to the former objectionable course of having members named on different committees sitting at the same time. Last session, there were thirty committees on private bills sitting at the same time. How could such a number be provided for in the mode proposed? The hon. mover seemed to think that it would be extremely difficult to get a select committee oft each
157
l
Mr. Maberly
admitted that some remedy was necessary, but could not concur in that now proposed. He thought it would be absurd to prevent members from doing that in a committee; namely, voting on subjects which they had not heard discussed, which was ever permitted to them in the House.
Lord Althorp
observed, that it was agreed on all hands that the present system required amendment, and the question was what course ought they to adopt. It was said, that the better way to proceed would be by a select committee on each private bill. That, he admitted, would be an improvement on the present mode, but he thought it would be extremely difficult to procure as many select committees as the number of private bills would require. It was said that they had no difficulty in procuring election committees. That might be the fact; but those committees were not often required. If their appointment was to run through a whole parliament as frequently as committees on private bills, it would, he thought, be a matter of some difficulty to procure the attendance of members. As to the nomination of sixty members from the counties adjoining that with which the object of
158
l
Mr. Alderman Waithman
said, that as it was admitted that the present system of private committees was extremely defective, he thought the hon. member who had endeavoured to introduce some amendment was entitled to thanks, and he, for one, thanked him, though at the same time he did not think the remedy pointed out was such as the case required. Indeed, he did not see how the House, without passing a censure on itself, could sanction resolutions founded on alleged corruption in committees of its own members. He knew that in speaking of any thing which passed in the present parliament, he must be particularly guarded. He should be careful, therefore, of what he said of the living, but a much greater latitude was allowed him with respect to the dead. And, speaking of the late parliament, he would complain, and that loudly, of the conduct of some members of it, for their very unjust and partial conduct in a committee or a private bill. A petition had been presented from the corporation of London against the Equitable Loan bill, and it was referred to the committee on that bill; and though the preamble of that bill asserted that it would be a public benefit, and though the petitioners offered to prove that it would be greatly injurious to the trade of London, and had prayed to be heard by themselves or their agents, the committee at first decided that they ought, not to be heard; and on the singular ground, that the petitioners had no interest in opposing the bill. How different was such conduct from that pursued
159
160
l
l
l
161
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that, though he was by no means so satisfied as the hon. gentleman opposite seemed to be, of the gross misconduct of the committees on private bills, still it was his intention to vote in favour of the resolutions of his hon. friend, as a precautionary experiment, for the present session, against any misconduct that might by possibility arise. He did not believe the committees on private bills to be that mass of corruption which some members asserted them to be. There might have been some cases, in which members who had not been present at the evidence, had entered the committee-room, and overwhelmed the voices of those who had been present; but he had not heard of any instance of gross injustice in their disposal of private property. The worthy alderman had said, that as the last parliament was dead he had a right to abuse it; but, though that parliament was dead, the members who composed it were living, and he, as one of them, must beg leave to vindicate its conduct. What the present parliament might turn out, he could not tell; but with the benefit of the worthy alderman's bright example, he had no doubt but that it would be much better than that of which he had spoken with so much reprobation. Though he he could not agree in every point with the proposed resolutions, he must repeat that he was not unwilling to adopt them as a precautionary experiment for the present session. His reason for so doing was not founded so much on the misconduct of the committees on private bills, as upon the standing orders themselves. He disapproved of the method of referring private bills to the consideration of a committee formed of the members of that county to which the bill applied, and the adjoining counties, because the number of persons on such a committee varied very greatly. In the case of the county of Derby, the number of members for that and the adjoining counties, to whom private bills might be referred, was 80. In the county of Warwick the number was 87; in that of Leicester 69; and in that of Staffordshire 66; and he
162
l
Mr. W. Smith
said, that though he had
163
Mr. G. Bankes
suggested the propriety of giving a power to wave that part of the resolutions which rendered it necessary to deposit 500
l
Mr. Wynn
said, there was no analogy between election committees and committees on private bills; for the questions submitted to the first were mixed questions of law and fact, while those submitted to the latter were questions of policy and expediency. He did not believe that any such extent of evil as was now pretended had arisen from the misconduct of private committees; and he was of opinion, that they were oftener prejudiced against advantageous bills than biassed in favour of improper bills by unworthy motives. It had been suggested, that the nomination of the committees by ballot would often exclude from them useful local knowledge. He was himself' of that opinion, and would have great difficulty in believing that fifteen gentle- men of Hampshire could legislate easily on the local interests of Northumberland. He conceived that great advantage would arise from acceding to the resolutions. ' At present it was prudent to bring them in experimentally. If, upon trial, they ' should be found beneficial, they might be made standing orders of the House. The injury done by committees on private bills was not, in his opinion, great, but the scandal of them was extreme; for supposing the committees to come to a right decision, still, if it were seen that numbers, who had not previously attended, flocked in to give their vote, it never could give satisfaction to the parties defeated by it, and thus became detrimental to the dignity and character of the House.
The first eight resolutions were then agreed to. On the ninth being put,
Mr. G. Lamb
said, he much doubted the propriety of this resolution, and hoped the hon. gentleman would postpone it until it could be more maturely considered. He understood on a former evening, that one of the great objections urged against the resolutions of his noble friend (lord Althorp) relative to bribery at elections,
164
Mr. Wynn
looked upon the proposition embraced by the resolution, as similar to a case of arbitration, where the parties contending agreed to abide by any order or award which might be decided on by those to whom the matter in dispute was referred.
The resolution was withdrawn.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Wednesday, November 29, 1826.
CORN LAWS.]
Lord King
said, he had some more petitions to present on a subject on which some persons thought that the less was said the better, but on which, in his opinion, the more was said the better. They were given to understand that no alteration was to take place in the Corn-laws till after the holidays, but they were told, at the same time, that some alteration was decided upon, though God only knew what it was to be. It appeared that his majesty's ministers had a good deal of difficulty in settling with their friends on the subject, and no small share in settling with their colleagues. One fact seemed certain; namely, that in whatever should be done, nothing but the minimum of improvement was likely to be adopted. Various reports were in circulation, some of which had reached his ears. One report was, that when the price of corn was at 55
s
s
165
The Earl of Liverpool
said, that before he adverted to what had fallen from the noble lord, he wished to offer a few words respecting what had passed in the House yesterday. He had come down to the House on several occasions since the commencement of the session, but found that their lordships had adjourned before five o'clock. Now he did not object to this, for he thought that public business ought to commence at four instead of five o'clock. With respect to the subject matter of the petition, he did not mean to be, on the present occasion, drawn into a discussion relative to the Corn-laws, by any thing that had been said by the noble lord. He could assure the noble lord, however, that he was greatly mistaken in supposing that his majesty's government had not come to a decision on this subject. In that respect there was nothing whatever to prevent him from bringing forward the question at present, but he felt that he should not be dealing fairly with its merits, or with the feeling of the country in doing so, when a full attendance was not to be expected. The object for which parliament had assembled at so early a period, was only to confirm those measures which his majesty's ministers had adopted in September, on their own responsibility, and to grant them the necessary indemnity. He would not be led into any explanation of the measure which it was intended, in due time, to submit to their lordships; feeling, as he did, that any premature statement might cause a great deal of mischief, by giving rise to much misapprehension. He pledged himself, however, to call their lordships' attention to the
166
The Earl of Lauderdale
said, he did not at all object to the line which the noble earl had prescribed to himself, nor did he mean to urge any proposition against it, though he wished that the noble earl had found it convenient to state the nature of the measure. He trusted, however, that when it was brought forward, sufficient time would be allowed the country to consider its merits. The agriculturists, in their numerous petitions, expressed their sentiments on what they thought fitting for themselves, and in consonance with the interests of the community at large. In petitions respecting the Corn-laws, they did not wish to see the topics of parliamentary reform, or of church property introduced.
The Earl of Liverpool
said, he was so anxious that a speedy decision should be come to on this question, that he would not, as he had already stated, wait till a measure should be brought forward elsewhere. He was most desirous to take the first convenient opportunity of stating to their lordships the views which his majesty's ministers entertained with regard to it. One general feeling pervaded this country on the subject, and when the question was once mooted, it was of the utmost importance that the decision should not be long delayed. It was very natural that the decision, if kept in suspense, must greatly operate on individual interests. There was nothing which he more desired, than that when the question should be brought forward, a due regard should be had to all the great interests of the country.
The Marquis of Salisbury
said, it had been assumed that an alteration in the Corn-laws was necessary, but, in his opinion, no case was made out to establish the necessity.
Lord Clifden
wished that the corn question could have now been gone into. The noble earl had stated many reasons for not bringing the subject forward immediately; but delay was a great evil, for until this question should be settled, no man in the country could tell what his situation was. At the same time, he admitted the
167
Lord Carbery
approved of the arrangement proposed by the noble earl at the head of the Treasury. He was confident that when the subject came to be discussed, the agricultural interest would be found to wish well to every other interest in the country. The manufacturers believed that their present distress was owing to the high price of corn, but in that he was convinced they were mistaken. The present price of bread was not much beyond what it ought to be.
The Earl of Liverpool
wished to make a single observation in reply to what had fallen from the noble lord who spoke last but one. He was convinced that a little reflection would satisfy the noble lord, that there would be much difficulty and inconvenience in bringing forward a measure of this kind at the present moment. The noble lord must be aware of the time it would take to carry such a measure through both houses of parliament, and how impracticable it would be to accomplish that object before the recess. But there was another consideration: nothing was or could be so inconvenient as bringing the measure forward at this season of the year, or at any time, unless their lordships were sure that they could go quite through with it. Considering the magnitude of the question, their lordships must be convinced that it would be impossible to come to a decision before the recess. At the same time, he assured their lordships that no person was more deeply impressed than he was with the necessity of bringing the question forward at the earliest possible period.
The Marquis of Lansdown
said, he had been intrusted with some petitions which he would have that night brought down with him, had he been aware that any
168
169
The Earl of Lauderdale
agreed with his noble friend, in opinion, as to the advantage of a permanent arrangement; but he confessed that his hopes of accomplishing that object were not very sanguine. The present system, when first adopted, was intended to be a permanent one. He had joined his efforts with the noble earl opposite in 1815, in preparing those regulations which were to form a permanent system for a time of peace; and the noble earl then stated, that the system was to be such. He did not concur in those regulations with the view of obtaining high prices. On the contrary, he believed, in his conscience, that if the regulations had been acted on, they would have caused low prices, and, he was still of opinion, that the system was calculated to have that effect. His noble friend, in the observations he had just made, had taken into consideration the interests of the manufacturer on the one hand, and of the land-owner on the other; thus setting
170
The Marquis of Lansdown
was sure his noble friend had misunderstood him, when he supposed that he had spoken of any difference or collision of interests between the commercial and agricultural classes. He certainly had alluded to the existence of a hostile feeling which prevailed; but the whole tenor of what he had said went to show that no such feeling ought to exist, and that if such a feeling were acted upon, it would be ruinous to both. In this question, there was, in fact, only one interest to be considered, namely, that of the country at large. In that interest, the manufacturer and the agriculturist were united; the landed interest giving activity to commerce by consuming manufactures, and the manufacturer in return consuming the produce of the agriculturist. In expressing this opinion, he was sure their lordships would not understand him to be representing those interests in a state of hostility. The more the question was investigated, the more it would appear that, strictly speaking, there was but one interest to be consulted.
Lord King
fully agreed in opinion with, the noble marquis, that there was but one interest on this question, but that different views were taken of that interest. One party took a large view; another a narrow and confined one. Some wished for high prices immediately, others wished for those prices which would be best upon the long run. Now, he was one of those who thought that the best prices on the long run were low prices—very near those of the continent of Europe. If prices here were much above those of the continent, nothing could prevent manufacturers from emigrating. If, as the noble earl near him had said, it was the object of
171
Ordered to lie on the table.
HOUSE OF COMMONS,
Wednesday, November 29, 1826.
DEISM—OATHS IN COURTS OF JUSTICE—
Sir. Hume
said, he had an important petition to present, in which the rights of a British subject, and the cause of civil and religious liberty, were deeply concerned. The right of which the petitioner complained he was deprived, was that enjoyment of religious freedom which it was consistent with the spirit and practice of the British constitution that every British subject should possess. The petitioner was Mr. Robert Taylor, who had been canonically ordained a clergyman of the established church. He was also a Bachelor of Arts of St. John's College, Cambridge. He stated in his petition, that after the most mature consideration, he could not give a conscientious credence to the doctrines of Christianity. That this was the result of a conscientious conviction on the part of the petitioner, was shewn by his having resigned a cure, which he held in a parish in Suffolk, in consequence of his sincere disbelief in the tenets of the established church. The petitioner further stated, that he arrived at that state of mind that he could conscientiously declare himself a Deist. He declared, that in various instances those who were of the same faith with him had experienced hardship and injury from being deprived of protection in courts of law, on account of the profession of Deism. This was the more a subject of just complaint, as under the act of Toleration they were entitled to protection, unless their mode of faith was opposed to morality, or was inimical to the interests of the state. The petitioner set forth an example of the hardship experienced by persons professing Deism, in the instance of a shopman of Mr. Carlile, who was prevented from prosecuting in a court of justice, in consequence of his adherence to the tenets of Deism—and because he
172
Mr. Serjeant Onslow
said, he felt con-
173
Mr. Hume
here intimated, that the petitioner did believe in a future state.
Mr. Serjeant Onslow
continued. If the petitioner did not believe in a future state, what assurance had the country, that any form of oath would be binding upon him? If such a person presented himself to seek redress before a magistrate, and refused to comply with the form prescribed by the law of England, the magistrate must tell him, "then, Sir, I have no power to administer any other form of oath than that which the law points out." Such must be the reply in all similar cases. No magistrate could, and he hoped that no magistrate ever would, deviate from a rule that was founded in sound and constitutional principles.
Mr. Bailey
said, that as a member of
174
in limine
Sir E. Carrington
expressed his horror that any gentleman, educated in a Christian country, could be found to entertain the doctrine stated in the petition, and to claim a right to be sworn in courts of justice upon the Works of Nature. The fact was, that the case of the petitioner was not the case of Deism. He was sorry to say, it was nothing short of Atheism; for it attempted to set up the works of nature, in contradistinction to the works of the Deity. He had often, in the course, of his life, administered oaths to the Persian worshippers of fire, and to other idolaters in the East, who did not believe in Christianity, and he had done it by that form which they held binding; but certainly, nothing should induce him to administer an oath to a Deist, on what the petitioner was pleased to call the "works of nature."
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, he rose for the purpose of bringing back the attention of the House to the real question before them; from which it appeared to him that they were in some degree departing. There were two questions arising out of this petition. The first was, whether it was proper to accede to the prayer of the petition; the second, whether it was proper to receive the petition. With respect to the first question, he certainly
175
Mr. W. Smith
observed, that the remarks which had fallen from the right hon. Secretary afforded another proof o that prudence and moderation for which he had so much distinguished himself. He regretted that the right hon. gentleman had not, by speaking earlier in the discussion, set the example of those excellent qualities to the two honourable members who had spoken on his side. One of those hon. gentlemen wag, as yet, but a very young member, and no doubt, when he had more experience in that House, he would learn to discuss subjects with a little more temper. With respect to the other hon. member, he thought, that if he had practised as a judge in this country, as long as he had done abroad, he would have made a distinction between receiving a petition and complying with its request. He was sorry to find hon. members confounding the opinions of an Atheist with those of a Deist. He knew not that an Atheist could give any sanction to an oath; but he believed that a Deist could, and he had no hesitation in asserting, that the interests of justice were much more likely to suffer from the oath of a man who swore on the gospels, which he
176
Mr. Hume
expressed a wish that the petition should be read, in order to set the learned serjeant right as to the petitioner's belief.
The Petition was then brought up and read, as follows:—
"To the Honourable the Commons of Great Britain and Ireland assembled, the Petition of Robert Taylor, of Carey-street, Lincoln's-Inn, Clerk,
"Humbly showeth,
"That your petitioner has been ordained a Clergyman of the Established Church, is a Bachelor of Arts of St. John's College, Cambridge, and is a Member of the College of Surgeons.
"That your petitioner is Chaplain of a society called "The Universal Benevolent Society," which is in the habit of meeting every Tuesday evening, for the purpose of investigating the evidences of the Christian religion.
"That your petitioner has determined, after a most laborious investigation and philosophical research, that he cannot give credence to the Christian faith, and has seceded from it solely from motives of honour, conscience, and conviction, and not from obstinacy, singularity, or prejudice.
"That your petitioner is in the habit of performing Divine Service before the said society, upon every Sunday, upon the principles of Deism.
"That your petitioner has ascertained that he cannot give evidence in any Court, touching any matter, suit, or cause, depending therein, in consequence of his not believing in revelation, although your petitioner has carefully investigated its evidences, but cannot believe in its truth.
"That your petitioner considers, under the Act of Toleration, he is entitled to profess what religion he pleases, and publicly to propagate it, unless such religion be opposed to public morality and the welfare of the State.
"That your petitioner believes in the existence of a future state, and instils such belief into the minds of his hearers. That a short time ago a shopman of Mr. Carlile's was robbed of his watch, but was unable to prosecute the offender, in consequence of his adherence to the tenets of Deism,
177
"That your petitioner considers the law, as it now stands, is injurious to the fair and equal administration of justice, and is at variance with the interests of the State, inasmuch as it allows persons guilty of atrocious crimes to escape with impunity, and deprives your petitioner and others of justice.
"That your petitioner will consider an oath sworn on the Works of Nature as binding on his conscience, as one sworn by the Christian on the New Testament, the Jew on the Bible, or the Mahomedan on the Alcoran.
"Your petitioner, therefore, humbly prays, that your Honourable House will be pleased to decree, that persons professing Deistical principles be sworn in courts of justice, as all persons professing Christianity, Judaism, and Mahomedanism; and that the degree of credit due to such shall, in all cases, be left to the consideration of the judge, jury, magistrate, or whatever tribunal by which such case shall be tried. And your petitioner, as in duty bound, shall ever pray."
Mr. Hume
observed, that the petition itself was a complete answer to the learned serjeant. With respect to the argument of the hon. gentleman under the gallery, against allowing a Deist to take an oath, he would ask that hon. gentleman what was a Jew, but a Deist? According to the hon. gentleman's principle, a Jew ought not to be allowed to be sworn. The argument of the hon. gentleman, therefore, was directed against the existing statutes. As to the hon. baronet, it really appeared to be very strange, that a gentleman who had for such a length of time, in Ceylon, been administering oaths to men who did not believe in the Christian revelation, should now say, that he would not believe a Deist on his oath. With respect to the introduction of any future measure on this subject, he did not intend to bring in any, but he confessed it was his opinion that some such measure ought to be introduced. He desired to see religious scruples respected by the House and the law of the land put on a liberal footing, in that respect. At one period England set an example of liberality to the world, and he hoped that the time was not far distant when she would again resume the lead, and not be as she was unhappily at present, rather following than guiding the spirit of the age.
178
TREGONY BOROUGH ELECTION.]
On the motion of Mr. Abercromby, the order of the day was read for resuming the adjourned debate, on the motion made on the 24th instant, "That the Indenture by which James Adam Gordon and James Mackillop, esquires, were returned to serve for the borough of Tregony be taken off the file,"
Mr. Stuart Wortley
said, that he held the present question to be of such serious consequence, that he could not allow it to pass without offering a few words to the consideration of the House. The present occasion brought to his memory the words of a once distinguished member of that House, Mr. Grenville, who had declared, that he looked upon every case of contested election, brought before the House of Commons, as a case of the utmost importance, in which the property and birth right of every subject of the realm were at stake, and in which it, therefore, behoved the House to act with the greatest caution. If he entertained this feeling upon all cases of election, he entertained it more strongly than ever in this particular instance, where the House was going to pass a judgment which would form a precedent in one of the most important parts of its jurisdiction. He was, therefore, much obliged to the hon. and learned gentleman who had brought the subject before the notice of the House, for the manner in which he had done so. At the time when the hon. and learned gentleman first brought it forward, he thought his argument particularly clear and convincing. In the interval which had elapsed between that time and the present, he had taken great pains to inform his mind upon the subject; and, though he still hoped that the House would assent to the proposition which the hon. and learned member had made to it, he did not think that there was so clear a case as to make it necessary to take proceedings against any other parties. The hon. gentleman then proceeded to review the points in which he considered the last return to be informal, and cited a great many cases on the subject, which
179
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, he could not offer his opinion upon this important subject without first expressing the great pleasure which he felt in finding that a subject so dry and tedious had attracted the attention of the hon. gentleman who had just sat down. The talent and industry, of which the hon. gentleman had just given the House so striking a specimen, would, he had no doubt, be productive of great advantage to their discussions whenever the hon. gentleman should apply himself to a subject which admitted at once of research and display. He did not regret the time which the House had taken to come to a decision on this question; because it was one of great importance, and therefore, required mature deliberation. When it was first presented to their notice, he thought that the latter return could not be considered a valid return; and the consideration which he had since given to it, had satisfied him of the correctness of that opinion, and of the propriety of ordering that the indenture containing it should be taken off the file. He contended, that to follow any other course would be to furnish a precedent fraught with danger. The House was aware that in all election returns, a great responsibility was imposed on the sheriffs of counties. They were required to use their best discretion; the House being ready to give them every indulgence in cases where they used it honestly but erroneously, and to punish them whenever they used it partially and improperly. Now, the sure way for a sheriff to escape from a responsibility to which he ought to be liable was, to send up, besides the regular return annexed to the writ, another paper, not annexed to it, received from some other person than the regular returning officer, and then to leave the House to decide which of the returns was the proper return. He maintained, that the sheriff was bound, in all cases, to make either a single return or a double return to the writ, and no other. He was not prepared to say whether the sheriff might not make two returns annexed to the writ. It was, fortunately unnecessary to decide that question in this particular case, as the sheriff had declined to do so: and such being the case, he thought that the House was
180
181
Mr. Abercromby
said, that if he were permitted to make one or two observations at this stage of the debate, they would, in all probability, save the time of the House from being unnecessarily wasted. The right hon. Secretary had rested the case on its proper grounds. The sheriff had a right to receive, or to reject, both returns made to him; but then he must annex them both to the writ, and must not venture upon any middle course. He had no difficulty in agreeing to the proposition of the right hon. gentleman; but he must say this on his own behalf, that the peculiar advantage of the course which he had suggested was, that, it did not strike at the Grenville act, but was content with the evidence upon the table, which was in its very nature conclusive. If it should be the pleasure of the House to call in the clerk of the Crown to produce the original returns, and if that measure, on their being found to agree with the entries in the book, should be followed up by another motion, acceding substantially to that which he had himself brought forward, he could have no objection to urge against such a mode of proceeding.
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that if the original documents and the entries agreed, he should certainly follow up his present motion by another for taking off the file the second indenture.
Mr. Wynn
said, he was anxious to explain how far he went along with the hon. and learned gentleman, and how far he differed from him on this important question. He put out of the way all observations on the manner of executing the return—on its being executed by the deputy mayor, and on its being executed by a different person from that to whom the precept was directed, because, if there was any validity in those observations, they ought to be received in the shape of a petition. The hon. gentleman who had done himself so much credit that evening by the research which he had displayed on the present abstract question, had adverted to a resolution of the House in which it was stated, that the House would look to the substance, and not to the form, of a return. Now, he would say at once, that, in the present instance, he did not think it necessary that the return should be annexed to the writ. It was true that the statute required that the returns for counties should be attached to the writ, but it said nothing of a similar nature with
182
183
Mr. Peel
observed, that his intention in calling in the clerk of the Crown, was to demand from him the original returns, and not to ask him any question. The conduct of that officer had not been impugned, and therefore did not require any explanation. He should merely ask him if the returns he produced were the original returns, and he would then leave the House to exercise its own discretion.
Mr. Abercromby
perfectly agreed with the right hon. Secretary as to the course to be pursued when the clerk of the Crown was called in. He was happy, for the sake of individuals sitting in that House, as well as for the sheriff and the clerk of the Crown, that the House had come to a clear and decided expression of opinion on this question. He had no reason to complain of the conduct of Mr. Wilbraham, the deputy clerk of the Crown, and, under all the circumstances, as he saw no necessity for proceeding further, he would, with the permission of the House, withdraw his motion.
184
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, November 30, 1826.
ARMY COMMISSIONS.]
Mr. Hume
rose, pursuant to notice, to bring before the attention of the House a subject of considerable importance, in moving for returns of all officers who have been permitted to sell their full-pay, half-pay, and brevet commissions, since the last return in March; also a return of the money received and paid for the same. It would be necessary for him to recall the attention of the House to the steps taken by a noble lord (Castlereagh), now no more, in the year 1817, exertions in which the House anxiously co-operated, to establish a distinction between the effective and non-effective military establishments, and to provide means for the support of non-effective establishments, in such a manner as might relieve the country from maintaining them as a heavy and permanent burthen. In 1817, as appeared from an abstract of the amount of half-pay, superannuated allowances, civil and military, the amount chargeable to the army was 2,800,000
l
185
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
186
l
l
l
l
l
187
188
l
189
190
Lord Palmerston
said, that although he did not intend to object to the motion of the hon. member, he would remind the House of the peculiar circumstances which led to the regulation of 1825. The object of it was not so much to save money to the public as to give a scope for promotion in the army. The only expense which it could occasion was the contingent expense of substituting new lives for old ones, in some few isolated cases. The hon. member had objected to the largeness of the half-pay list; but he ought to have recollected, that a large half-pay list was the I necessary consequence of the large establishments which the country had been obliged to maintain during the long and arduous struggle in which it had been engaged. There were but two modes of diminishing that list; namely, the death of the individuals placed upon it, or their appointment to full-pay. Now the House must be aware, that among the retired
191
192
193
Mr. Calcraft
said, that he rose for the purpose of saying a word as to the manner in which the patronage of the army was exercised by the present commander-in-chief. He thought it right, as a member of opposition, to say, that he could bear testimony to the fair and impartial manner in which his royal highness, the duke of York, administered the patronage of the army. He could speak of it, not only with regard to his own family, but also with regard to the families of other opposition members with whom he was acquainted. It was impossible for any individual to dispose more impartially of patronage than his royal highness. If the manner in which the patronage of the army was disposed of were compared with the manner in which the patronage of the navy was disposed of, the comparison would be highly advantageous to the duke of York. He felt it to be his duty to make this statement, because he differed widely in general politics from his royal highness,
194
Sir R. Fergusson
concurred in every thing which had fallen from his hon. friend, respecting the impartiality with which his royal highness the duke of York administered the patronage of the army. The place which he had occupied for many years on the opposition benches, and which he expected he should retain as long as he had a seat in parliament, had never made any difference in the attention which his royal highness had thought fit to bestow on himself and the different members of his family who were in the army. If his political opinions had produced any effect on the royal duke's mind, he believed that it was to pay greater attention to him than he would, perhaps, have bestowed on a political adherent.
Sir C. Cole
said, he should not have troubled the House with any observations, had it not been for the attack which had been made on those who distributed the patronage of the navy. He conceived such attack to be most unfounded, and could bear testimony to the impartiality with which promotion was dispensed amongst the deserving officers of that service.
General Gascoyne
defended the recent regulations. He contended, that there were not officers on the half-pay list sufficient to fill up the different situations of daily necessity. The half-pay list ought not to be considered as a matter of economy, so much as a matter of utility. Instead of placing officers from it upon the full-pay, it would often be more advantageous to the service to place officers upon it from the full-pay. There was, in one regiment, an ensign who was sixty-one years of age, and several officers who were not much younger. He defended the propriety of the regulation made re-
195
The motion was then agreed to.
Mr. Hume
, in proposing his next resolution, commented on the statement made by the gallant member for Liverpool; namely, that there was in the British army an ensign of sixty-one years of age. He would ask the gallant general how long that individual had served? Was it twenty, thirty, or forty years? Let it be which it might, the fact of his remaining an ensign after so long a period of service, was one of the greatest reproaches that could be uttered against the management of the army. He had never accused the duke of York of partiality in administering the patronage of the army. On the contrary, he had admitted that it was fairly exercised, and had said that it was not to the man, but to the system that he objected. All he had done was, to object to his having the power of bestowing patronage, and in such a channel as increased the half-pay list, which the House had shown an anxiety to reduce. Could it be right that the country should have the same half-pay list in the tenth year of peace that we had in 1816. With regard to the comparative abuse of patronage in the two services, he would say, that the abuse in the navy was to that in the army in the ratio of ten to one. He could prove that mere boys at school had been placed in command of ships, when the officers whom they commanded were lieutenants. That was a species of abuse which cried aloud for correction. The hon. member then moved for "a return of all Officer who have purchased the
196
JOINT-STOCK COMPANIES—CASE OF
Mr. Brogden
rose, and addressed the House with a degree of agitation which rendered him almost inaudible. He begged to call the respectful attention of the House to a few observations. The House was aware that an hon. alderman, whom he now saw in his place, had threatened to bring his conduct, in respect to a certain company, of which he had been a director, under its consideration. He was placed in a peculiarly unfortunate situation, in not knowing, first of all, what charges were to be preferred against him, and next, at what time they were to be brought forward. He had applied on the subject to the hon. alderman, who had told him, that he did not yet know what course he should feel it expedient to pursue. He therefore thought it right to inform the House once again, that he was most anxious that an inquiry should be instituted into his conduct, not only with regard to the Arigna Mining Company, but with regard to every other company with which he had been connected.
Mr. Alderman Waithman
Said, that he had now made up his mind as to the course which he should pursue. That course was, to submit a motion to the House on the subject of Joint-stock companies generally, and without reference to the conduct of any individual in particular. In case it should be carried, he had made up his mind to inquire into the origin and progress of the Arigna Company; into the conduct of the directors of that company; and, indeed, into the conduct of the directors of all other companies. He now gave distinct notice, that, immediately after the recess, he would bring these Joint-stock companies under the notice of the House. It was not from any wish to consult his own convenience that he postponed his motion till after the holidays; but he had had com-
197
The Speaker
asked the hon. alderman, whether he wished to have his intended motion entered in the book of notices.
Mr. Maberly
said, that if he understood rightly what the worthy alderman had said, when he first brought this subject under the notice of parliament, he declared his intention of bringing a specific charge of misconduct against the hon. member who had formerly filled the situation of chairman of their committees. Now, however, that the hon. member had declined to sit in that chair, so long as any charges were hanging over his head unrefuted, the worthy alderman shifted his ground, and said, that instead of bringing a specific motion against any individual member, he would bring forward a general motion against a large number of members who had also misconducted themselves. If there were any foundation for charges so materially affecting the honour of the House, he would ask the worthy alderman, why he did not bring them forward immediately? Were such calumnies against the House collectively, and its members individually, to go abroad for months uncontradicted and uhrefuted? Justice demanded that the worthy alderman should forthwith produce his charges against the directors of what he was pleased to call these fraudulent companies. The House ought not to forget, that many of those companies, fraudulent and ruinous as they were now termed, had been sanctioned by its approbation; that where a charter had not been obtained for them, it had given them leave to sue and be sued by their secretaries; and that it had also distinctly declared, that after having given them such power, it would not be responsible for the use to which the managers of the company might put it. He conceived that the insinuations which the
198
Mr. Brogden
said, it was undoubtedly out of order for him to address the House again; but he trusted to its indulgence, whilst he said a few words upon a point which so materially affected his character. He was surprised that the worthy alderman had so misunderstood the communication which had passed between them. The worthy alderman had told him, that on Monday last he would inform him of the course which he intended to pursue. He then stated, that he did not intend to bring forward his threatened motion, which would be of a general nature, until after the recess. "I told him," continued Mr. Brogden, "that such a proceeding was cruel to myself and unjust to the House; that his first motion was personal
199
Mr. Alderman Waithman
said, that he was now placed in a similar situation to that in which he had been placed the first time he had the honour of a seat in parliament. He had then brought forward a complaint against the constitution and management of the Court for the relief of Insolvent Debtors; and, in consequence of his exertions, that Court, as then constituted, was knocked up. He recollected, however, that after he had brought forward that complaint, the prosecution of it was taken out of his hands, and committed to the care of a select committee. He wished that some gentleman would now propose to do that which had been done to him on the former occasion, and would institute, by means of a committee, the inquiry which he had pointed out. He thought he had been very unfairly used on this question. He took it up, not on private, but on general grounds. [Cries
200
FOREIGN GOODS IMPORTED INTO THE
Sir Henry Parnell
rose for the purpose of moving for returns of the quantities of Foreign Goods imported into the United Kingdom in the years 1824 and 1826. The object of his motion was, to ascertain what had been the effect of the act that was passed in 1825, for altering the law in respect to the importation of foreign productions. It was commonly supposed that this act had established a free trade; but nothing could be more erroneous than such a supposition. The speech with which the President of the Board of Trade introduced that act had led to this opinion; but the act corresponded very little with the principles laid down in that speech; for the new duties were all kept so high,
201
ad valorem
l
s
d
l
s
s
d
d
l
s
d
l
s
l
s
s
d
l
l
s
l
202
203
Mr. Warburton
, in rising to second the motion, said, he was convinced, that the more a person was acquainted with the details of the importation of foreign articles into this country, the more he would be convinced that the system of free trade had been very imperfectly carried into effect. In the article of foreign timber, with which he was better acquainted than with some of the imported articles, he knew that the duty imposed was not only very heavy, but was very inconveniently levied. The price of good timber in the Baltic was about 18
s
s
204
205
Mr. Huskisson
said, that as he did not feel the least wish to object to the account for which the hon. baronet had called, and as he did not think this a fit occasion to enter into the subject of the importation duties, he should make but a few observations on the question. He was of opinion, that the great principles which regulated, or which ought to regulate, the commercial policy of this and of other countries, required a more solemn consideration than could be given to them at the present moment; and believing this, he hoped he should stand excused to the House for saying, that it seemed to him the fitter
206
207
Mr. Alderman Thompson
thought, that the country was highly indebted to the right hon. gentleman for the liberal course which he had hitherto pursued. He wished to know what was the object of the present motion; for, if it was to obtain a select committee, to whom was to be referred the question of the importation duties; he should certainly oppose the appointment of any such committee, until after the question of the Corn-laws had been finally settled. Until that question was decided, he was convinced the trade of this country could only be partially affected by other measures.
Colonel Torrens
protested against the principle, that British manufacturers wanted any protection. All they required was, that their energies should not be oppressed and destroyed by enormous and unnecessary duties. We could not export our agricultural produce in return for importations of foreign manufactures, since that produce was nearly 50 per cent, dearer than any other in the world. We must, therefore, either export our manufactures, or pay money for goods imported. If there was a free trade to-morrow, our manufacturers might meet all the world; and their knowledge and skill, their capital and their machinery, would give them a decided advantage. But, then, the Corn-laws destroyed these means of superiority; and, until the question of those laws was settled, the prosperity of England stood but on a foundation of sand. He should not detain the House further, as he had merely risen to enter his protest against the supposition, that, of themselves, the British manufacturers required any protection against foreign competition.
The motion was then agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, December 1, 1826.
ARIGNA MINING COMPANY.]
Mr. Alderman Waithman
said, that in consequence of what had passed in the House last evening, he was induced to give notice, that on Tuesday next, he would submit a motion, for an inquiry into the formation
208
Mr. Brogden
said, he felt personally obliged at the announcement of an early day for bringing forward a motion, in which his character was so deeply concerned. He felt the same confidence that he had before expressed, as to his coming out of the inquiry with an unsullied reputation. He had seen in a report of the proceedings of the House of last evening, in which it was stated, that it was intimated to the worthy alderman by him, that he wished the subject should not be brought forward, until after the holidays. He now called upon the worthy alderman to do him the justice to say, that he had never concurred in such an understanding.
Mr. Alderman Waithman
said, that in stating that there had been a wish expressed, that the subject should not be brought forward until after the holidays, he certainly did not allude to the hon. member but to a right hon. gentleman over the way. It was by no means with a view to his own convenience, that he had suggested the postponement. It was to meet the wishes of others: but, perceiving that a disposition to accommodate was sometimes productive of greater inconvenience than the adherence to an original plan, he was determined to exercise his own discretion, and bring the subject before the House on Tuesday.
CURRENCY AND THE CORN-LAWS.]
On the order of the day for going into a committee of supply,
Lord Folkestone
took the opportunity, seeing the President of the Board of Control in his place, of asking whether it was the intention of ministers to introduce any measure respecting the Currency, in consequence of what had taken place in the Committee on the Small Note Bill in the last session of the last parliament?
Mr. Huskisson
said, that he was not at that moment prepared to reply to the question of the noble lord,
Lord Folkestone
said, he thought the
209
210
211
212
l
Mr. Huskisson
observed, that the noble lord had discovered more in the answer which he had returned to the noble lord's question, than that answer really implied. The noble lord had asked him, whether it was intended to renew the committee of last session on the Small Notes bill, or to take any steps with regard to the report which had been presented by that committee. His answer was, that he was not prepared to inform the noble lord whether or not it was intended by government to propose either the renewal of the committee, or the adoption of any proceedings founded on their report. From that answer the noble lord chose to infer prematurely that no steps whatever would actually be taken. He again stated, that his majesty's government had not had an opportunity of considering if it was necessary or not to renew the committee in question; and, therefore, he was not prepared to say whether they would do so, or whether they would take any steps on the report already presented. The noble lord expressed his surprise, that when a report had been presented in a former session, on a subject involving questions of the greatest public interest, his majesty's government ten days after the meeting of parliament on a special occasion, and at an unusual period, declined any proceeding on that subject until after the recess.
213
214
Mr. E. D. Davenport
maintained, that the first subject that ought to be considered, was the best mode of placing the currency on a more stable footing; and that with regard to the price of corn, or of any other commodity, it was useless to discuss it, while one of the principal elements of that price remained unfixed.
215
Colonel Torrens
expressed his satisfaction at the postponement of the consideration of the corn question. The appearance of things indicated the probability of a scarcity; and, if so, by the spring, the evil of protracting the existence of the present laws on the subject would be too manifest to be denied by any one.
Mr. Benett
objected to the postponement, and observed, that ministers were bound to state to the House the course which they intended to propose on the corn question. As long as this was unknown, the country would be kept in a state of suspense, highly injurious to all parties. No man was safe in entering into any transaction connected with the purchase or sale of land, while he was ignorant of what might be the future proceeding on that question. He therefore regretted the delay, and for the very same reasons on which the gallant colonel had founded the expression of a contrary sentiment. It was said, that every day would show more and more the impolicy of those laws. He expected that various meetings would be held in different parts of the country, some to obtain their repeal and others to obtain protection for the landed interest. At those meetings he anticipated that violent and intemperate language would be used by both parties, and more particularly by that party which sought to alter the present system. That this would be the natural effect of postponing the discussion, no man of any reflection would venture to deny. Various meetings had been held at different places; and he must particularly mention the one held in the Common-hall of London, in which the landlords had been branded with the name of monopolists, and other
216
The House then went into the committee.
CUSTOMS AND EXCISE INFORMATIONS.]
Mr. D. W. Harvey
said, that the two motions which he intended to bring forward that evening, were so connected with each other, that he would take the opportunity of making at once all the remarks with which he deemed it necessary to introduce them. One of the motions was only the revival of a motion, which he had himself introduced in 1820, and which he had intended to have followed up by another motion, had not his right to sit in parliament been cut away by a decision which convinced him that the conclusions drawn by election committees were not always infallible. Since the year 1820, no notice had been taken of the subject to which he had called the attention of the House, though it was one of great importance, and referred to abuses, which were deeply rooted in the system of the law as at present administered, and which operated injuriously on the individuals who were made the victims of them. There could not be found a more decided proof of the advantages arising out of the interference of parliament, than that afforded by the results of his motion. It appeared that from the year 1816 down to the year 1819, both inclusive, being a period of four years, previous to any notice being taken of the number of prosecutions instituted under the customs and excise laws, the average number of informations filed each year was 700; whilst during the year in which attention was called to the subject, and during the year immediately following, the average number did not exceed 250. From such a statement of facts, he in-
217
l
l
l
218
Mr. Hume
seconded the motion. He
219
Mr. Lockhart
thought, that if the judge who tried the information, were to certify that there was no cause for filing it, the Crown should pay the defendant his costs. If such certificates were given by the judges, they would bring before the notice of the public the conduct of those who had the power of filing the informations. The reason why so little business was transacted in the court of Exchequer was, that an attorney could not practise there in his own name, but was obliged to practise in the name of one of the side clerks. He received, therefore, only half fees; and that was the reason why he went in preference to the court, of King's-bench, where he received whole fees. He thought it would be of great advantage to the public to get rid of these side clerks altogether. He supposed they had a vested interest in their situations, and that therefore the House must indemnify them for the loss they would sustain by the abolition of their offices. When they were got rid of, the court might be thrown open, and so be made to relieve the other courts from the pressure now thrown upon them. He was anxious that some attention should be paid to the internal arrangements of this court.; for some years ago, several mal-practices were detected among its officers, and that he had himself brought forward a motion on the subject. It was
220
Mr. Spence
said, that the hon. member's motion called only for a return of the number of causes set down for trial, which was not in itself sufficient. The House ought to be informed how long the court was occupied in hearing interlocutory motions. He thought, therefore, that a more extensive motion was necessary. He could assure the House that the judges of the court of Exchequer were anxious that that court should be made an efficient court, and that they would willingly lend their assistance to any measure which would prevent it from being branded as a receptacle for sinecurists, by giving it an active and extensive jurisdiction.
The two motions were then agreed to.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Monday, December 4, 1826.
CORN LAWS.]
Lord King
said, he had a petition to present to their lordships against a grievous and scandalous monopoly; namely, the Corn-laws. It had pleased some of the landed monopolists to deceive themselves (he did not think that they would deceive any body else), and to state, that their own wish was to have cheap corn. He had very little hopes that they would effect their object, nor did he think that they would carry their other point; namely, to make a permanent settlement, until they did that which was just and right. They might make a new law, and he had very little doubt that they would make a new law; but, until they repealed the existing monopoly, they never could effect a permanent settlement. The petition which he held in his hand came from Association No. 1, he did not know how many more there were, of a society of the manufacturers and inhabitants of Char-field, in the county of Gloucester, called the Anti-bread-tax Society. The petitioners stated, that they could see no reason why the landed interest should have the special privilege of exempting themselves from taxes; but the petitioners added, that if the landowners should exempt themselves from paying all taxes, it
221
d
l
l
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, December 4, 1826.
ATHLONE ELECTION.]
The Speaker
said, he hoped the House would permit him to draw its attention to the petition which had been received last week from the borough of Athlone. On Saturday last, he had told the House that such a petition had been presented, and had requested its assistance in deciding whether it came within the restrictions which were requisite to constitute it an election petition. The restrictions, as the House well knew, rendered it necessary that the petitioners should be persons who claimed to be either candidates or voters. Now, this petition did not describe the petitioners, directly or indirectly, as persons who claimed to be either candidates or voters. A question might be raised upon it; namely, had the petitioners a right to vote? which question they wished to raise by their petition. If the House should be of opinion, that their petition was an election petition, they had nothing to do but to leave it to the usual course of such petitions; but if they should be of a contrary opinion, the House ought to have the petition entered as read, and then some member could move to discharge the order made upon it, and treat it as a mere ordinary petition.
222
223
Mr. Wynn
said, that he had before stated the rule of the House, and the law of the country on all cases, like the present. Such petitions by law could only be received from those who were candidates at the election, or from those who claimed a right to vote for them. That was the rule of parliament, and indeed the law of the land, until the time of the Grenville act. The right of petitioning was thrown open by that act to all persons. Considerable inconvenience, however, being found to arise from the practice, the former rule was revived. In all points relating to the reception of petitions, it was the duty of the House to lean to the side of the petitioners; but, in cases like the present, the words of the act were imperative, and the House was bound to abide by them. There was one point to which he wished to call the attention of the House; and that was, that any decision to which they might that night come was not final, and that the election committee to which it might be referred would have the power of deciding whether it came under the head of an election petition or not. He needed only to refer to the decision in the Nottingham case; where, in the middle of the trial, it was discovered that the petitioners who had described themselves as freeholders of the town and county of Nottingham were not such, and therefore were not entitled to vote for the election of members for the said borough. If the House were to send to an election committee the present petition, not being such as an election committee could take cognizance of, it would be making a heavy infliction on both parties, owing to the expenses which they would have to incur in bringing their witnesses to England. He mentioned that circumstance, in order to show that the course which it ought to follow was chalked out by the act of parliament, and that there was nothing in the particular features of the case to induce it to transgress that course. Now, from the petition itself, it did not appear that the petitioners were electors. They did not say that they themselves bad a right to vote—all that
224
Mr. Goulburn
contended, that it was evident, from a former petition presented by the individuals whose names were subscribed to this petition, that they did not claim a right to vote at the last election. He therefore thought that the order made on the petition ought to be discharged.
Mr. Hume
thought it only fair that time should be allowed to the petitioners to amend their petition.
The order was then discharged; and Mr. Wynn gave notice, that he would tomorrow move for an extension of time, in order that the petitioners might have an opportunity to amend their petition, by stating in what capacity they came before the House.
PRIVATE BILLS COMMITTEES.]
Mr. Littleton
rose to move the resolution, directing that any individual who appealed from the decision of a committee on a private bill, should, in the first instance, deposit the sum of 500
l
225
"That the party or parties complaining, or their agents, shall, previously to the balloting for such select committee, deposit with the clerk of the fees the sum of 500
l
Mr. G. Bankes
observed, that a great part of the argument against the resolutions of the noble member for Northamptonshire (lord Althorp), with respect to bribery at elections, on a former evening, turned on the right of the House to award costs; and he could not easily divide the two cases. In his opinion, the final decision with respect to costs should not be left with the committee; and therefore he thought it would be right, supposing the House to be favourable to the resolution, that these words, "unless the House should otherwise direct," or words to that purport, should be added. By this alteration an opportunity would be given to the House to remedy any wrong, or to rectify any error, in the adjudication of costs, which might be committed by the select committee. He was aware that this ultimate appeal to the House might occasionally take up a considerable portion of their time; but it appeared to him, that the interests of justice required such a course.
Sir T. Acland
said, he would not, as some gentlemen had done, condemn
in toto
226
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that, on the whole, he thought great benefit would result, if the House laid down some specific rule, in accordance with which an appeal might be made against the decision of a committee, instead of leaving the matter in so indefinite a shape as the present resolution did. The resolutions, generally, went to purify the constitution of committees; and therefore appeals were likely to be less numerous than they otherwise would be. But he hoped, if it appeared that injustice had been done to an individual, that he would not be debarred from redress because he could not put down 500
l
l
Mr. Calcraft
felt the proposition for a deposit of 500
l
l
227
l
l
Mr. G. Lamb
said, his doubts as to the legality of calling on appellants to put down 500
l
Mr. Littleton
was of opinion, that a deposit ought to be required generally, leaving it to the House to depart from that practice in any particular case, if they thought fit. If, however, the House would consent to adjourn the debate to a future day, he would in the interim reconsider his resolution, and endeavour to make such alterations as would obviate the objections which were made to it in its present shape.
The debate was accordingly adjourned to the 15th of February.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, December 5, 1826.
DISTRESS OF WEAVERS IN SCOTLAND
Lord A. Hamilton
presented a petition from the Weavers of Glasgow, and of the county of Lanark, representing their extreme distress, and praying for relief. The noble lord observed, that it was exceedingly painful to him to read the description of the state of destitution, hopelessness, and helplessness under which the weavers of the county which he had the honour to represent were suffering; knowing, as he did, how accurately that description conformed to the melancholy facts of the case. Many
228
229
230
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that the noble lord, in bringing forward the petition, had expressed himself in a manner which reflected the highest honour upon his feelings, and which was most creditable to him as the representative of the district in which the distress existed. He could assure the noble lord, that he participated fully in his sympathy for the sufferings of the petitioners. There was no part of the empire, in which distress had been deeply and for any length of time experienced, where the people had evinced a more laudable conduct than in the part of Scotland from which this petition proceeded. Their sufferings had been borne without leading them to deviate from the most exemplary conduct, or to forfeit their high character, although the sufferers were in a very humble sphere of life. It was not possible for more patience and forbearance to be evinced, than had been manifested by these unfortunate people; and he gave this opinion, from having had frequent opportunities of ascertaining their sufferings and of observing their conduct. He well knew how imperfect were sources of private information in cases like the present; but, since the last session, a single week had not passed without his having been in constant communication with the committee now sitting in the country upon the subject. That committee had devoted its attention to the subject, in the most exemplary manner. It had used its most zealous exertions to mitigate the sufferings in that part of Scotland. The noble lord's proposal was, to present a petition, praying for a grant of public money; and he had very properly observed, that the consent of the Crown was necessary to the reception of such a petition by the House. He hoped that the House would not be disposed to enforce its regulation strictly in this particular case. Although the petitioners did in effect pray for a grant of public money, they rather called the attention of the House to a public measure, for which a grant of public money was necessary. He was not quite sure whether this was not a public petition, or that the consent of the Crown was necessary. Were such a consent essential, he should be very unwilling to refuse it. At the same time, he felt peculiarly anxious, that
231
232
JOINT STOCK COMPANIES—UNCERTAINTY OF THE LAW—PETITION OF THOMAS PARKIN.]
Mr. D. W. Harvey
said, he rose to present a petition upon a subject of all others the most open to confusion; he meant the uncertainty of the law. The petition was very appropriate to the present occasion, as it had some reference to the Joint-stock companies, the subject of which was about to be brought before the House. The petitioner stated, that he had been employed as the secretary of one of the most solid and substantial Joint-stock companies; namely, the National Stone Way Company. Having performed his duty, the petitioner could not get his salary paid, and he therefore attached some property or funds of the company in the hands of the City bankers. The banker having refused to pay this money, the case had been brought before the City court, and the recorder of London had nonsuited the petitioner, on the ground that a company existed, of which the money attached was a part of the property, and ought to have been attached as the property of the National Stone Way Company. The petitioner, therefore, brought an action against the bankers, in the court of King's-bench, when he was defeated on just the reverse grounds namely, that the company was,
233
"To the Right Honourable the Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, in Parliament assembled: the humble Petition of Thomas Parkin, of No. 14, Poultry, Secretary to the National Stone Way Company.
pro tempore
l
s
ad interim
234
235
l
s
l
s
s
236
l
l
s
l
l
l
s
237
l
s
s
l
l
l
s
s
l
l
s
238
239
s
l
s
240
s
s
241
l
s
l
s
l
l
l
s
242
l
243
Ordered to lie on the table.
JOINT STOCK COMPANIES—ARIGNA
Mr. Alderman Waithman
said, he laboured under considerable difficulty in bringing forward the motion, of which he had given notice for that evening. If he had to bring forward a motion upon which honourable gentlemen present could feel no observations personal to themselves, he should feel no such difficulty; but he felt it impossible to enter upon this subject without making allusions and remarks which must not only be felt by honourable members themselves, but also create a considerable sensation in the minds of their friends. He wished it, however, to be understood, in the outset, that in the observations which he should feel it his duty to make, it was not his intention to confine himself to one individual, or any number of individuals. And here he begged to set himself right in the opinion of the House, with respect, to an hon. gentleman opposite, as he felt that he had not been fairly dealt with in being called upon to come forward with a specific charge against that hon. gentleman (Mr. Brogden). Indeed, he felt that, upon a subject of such magnitude, it would be invidious to bring a direct charge against any particular member of that House. The only reason why he alluded more especially to the hon. gentleman was, because he had, for some time, held an important office in the appointment of that House, and because he was again to be proposed to fill it. Feeling this, and
244
l
245
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
s
s
l
l
246
l
l
l
l
l
l
247
l
l
l
l
248
l
s
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
249
250
l
l
l
l
251
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
252
*
*
253
254
l
l
l
255
Mr. Brogden
, with much earnestness of manner, begged leave to second the motion.
The Speaker
, after having put the question, said, that the name of sir William Congreve having been mentioned, as being concerned in certain Joint Stock companies, he wished to state, that he had received a letter from sir William, inclosing medical certificates of his inability to attend the House in his place this day, on account of ill health.
Mr. Secretary
Canning assured the hon. alderman, that if he announced his intention of moving an amendment to the motion before the House, it was not with any desire to obstruct the object which that proposition had in view, but rather to place it upon a more practicable footing than it stood at present. The hon. alderman had observed, but a few minutes since, to some friends who were suggesting something to him, "that he would be
256
257
Mr. Alderman Waithman
said, he had no such design in the motion he had submitted to the House.
Mr. Canning
repeated, that at some future time he should not resist inquiry into the origin and management of other companies, if a case at all like that against the Arigna Company could be established, in the first instance. Now, enough had passed in the matter of that company, to lead the House to a grave suspicion that there had been in the conduct of that company matter for inquiry. The allegations against it had been distinct. They had been urged with strong and decided epithets, by those who supported the accusation; and, on the part of the defence, there had been an admission of such conduct as it was necessary that the House should examine into. By the course which he took, he did not mean to prejudge the question as to any case; but he was bound to say that, with respect to the other companies which the hon. alderman had mentioned, he did not think that he had made out any such case as against the Arigna company; or a sufficient case, indeed, to institute inquiry. But, whatever was done must be done by specific motions; because he was quite sure that, by going into the general inquiry, the hon. alderman would only merge his own object in a mass of impracticable details. For himself, he was perfectly ready to go into an inquiry upon the distinct charge against the Arigna company now; and afterwards he should be just as willing to receive another charge against any other company, as to which the same degree of conviction in his mind, that there had been mismanagement, should arise. But he could not consent to some of the propositions which had been relied on, in bringing forward this motion. He could not assent to the hon. gentleman's opinion, that this country was injured at home, and its character prejudiced in foreign countries, by these Joint-stock companies. He could not but say that he thought some of our Joint-stock companies conferred honour, as well as advantage, on the country. Some of our best and noblest institutions owed their origin to, and were supported by, Joint-stock associations. He had only to instance the Bank and East India Company.
258
Mr. Brogden
rose. He said he was sure he might with confidence throw himself upon the indulgence of the House upon this, to him, most trying and momentous occasion. He had long had the honour of a seat in that assembly, and had long been honoured with its favour and confidence. Seldom, however, it. was, that he had occasion to intrude himself upon its notice, and never before now was he culled upon to defend his character and his honour, from a most serious charge, and that under circumstances the most difficult to meet and rebut. It was the weight of prejudice which had been created against him, made the struggle in which he was involved most unfair. He complained of the un-candid, and he had almost said, the most unfeeling manner, in which this subject had been brought forward by the hon. alderman; from which it was evident, that the design was, to make him the chief actor in the late schemes; to hold him out as the ostensible contriver, or main supporter of almost all of them; and to throw a burthen on his shoulders, which no man could bear, or could be expected to bear. He repeated, that he rejoiced at the prospect of this inquiry;
259
260
in limine
261
l
l
l
262
Mr. Alderman Waithman
disowned any sweeping censures on all Joint-stock companies. In what he had said he had excepted all those which, though of great and unquestionable usefulness, were of too great a magnitude to fall within the compass of individual capital. he also, excepted from all censure, those persons who had merely lent their names to such companies, from an opinion that by so doing they were promoting the interests of the public.
Mr. Fergusson
dissented from the motion of the worthy alderman, and approved of the amendment, because it appeared to him to be the most practical mode of obtaining the desired object; namely, that of enabling the hon. member who had just sat down to retrieve his character. He could not, however, agree with the right hon. Secretary, that this was the worst case that could have been selected. There were many of them which, from the published statements, for he was not in the country at the period when these schemes were in progress, appeared to him infinitely worse, and more iniquitous in their conduct, than that with which the hon. mem-
263
Mr. Hobhouse
said, he could not but think the House and the country greatly indebted to the hon. alderman, for his industry and public spirit, in exposing the practices of these Joint-stock companies, and on making them the subject of fair and impartial inquiry. The House and the public were especially indebted to him for the statement that night. Thanks were also due to his majesty's ministers for the manner in which they had that night conducted themselves; and his only objection to them, with reference to this subject, was, that they had not taken up the matter, and done something in it at an earlier period. Still he thought, that the House and the public were obliged to them for the candour which they had displayed. The right hon. President of the Board of Trade had remarked, that he had, a considerable time ago, made a declaration against these Joint-stock companies, and pointed out the mischievous results to which they must lead. But, in reality, this declaration had been productive of little good; and he was convinced, that nothing short of a legislative enactment would put a stop to these abuses, and prevent their recurrence in future. Without a strong measure of that description, similar frauds would always prevail. He had, himself, in 1825, warned the House and the country of the mischievous nature of a number of these Joint-stock companies, and had endeavoured to impress upon the minds of members, and upon the public, the per-
264
Mr. Attwood
observed, that the hon. alderman had brought a great many sweeping charges against Joint-stock companies. But Joint-stock companies might be good; and therefore vague, general, and sweeping accusations against them did not deserve much attention. The injustice of denouncing such companies by wholesale had been sufficiently exposed by the right hon. Secretary. Certainly, in a country like this, he was not a little surprised to hear these united efforts of enterprising men branded as they had been; and he was equally surprised at the attempt to extort from these general denunciations a charge against any particular individual. He had listened with great attention to the speech of the worthy alderman, but had listened in vain for any precise or definite accusation. It contained abundance of vague charges, but few or no facts; and even these resting on proof by no means sufficient to impeach any man's
265
l
266
l
267
268
269
Sir Alexander Grant
said, he rose to address the House, only in consequence of the allusion which the hon. gentleman who had just resumed his seat, had thought proper to make with respect to him. Ungrateful as he knew such explanations to be to the House at large, and disagreeable as they necessarily were to the member who had to offer them, he could not permit the occasion to pass without trespassing for a moment upon the attention of the House. The hon. gentleman had taken the pains to draw a distinction between those Joint-stock companies, which, being formed on a large scale, were calculated to be advantageous to the empire at large, and those of an inferior magnitude, which had been denounced as less entitled to public patronage and support. That, however, was not the question before the House. It was of much wider extent; but, narrowed as it was by the amendment of the right hon. Secretary, and after the personal allusion of the hon. member who had last spoken, he felt himself justified in addressing them. It was true that he was a director of a Joint-stock company for a few weeks. But as no list of that company had been advertized, he did not imagine that there was any member of that House, except those who were in the same situation as himself, who knew any thing about it [a laugh]. He was not aware, indeed he had not the slightest suspicion., that the general knowledge of the hon. member, extending as it did to every thing of the kind, could have produced that particular example. He would briefly state the circumstances under which he had become connected with this Joint-stock association. In the spring of 1825 it was proposed to him to join his name as a director of this company with
270
l
l
271
l
l
Mr. Attwood
said, in explanation, that nothing was further from his intention, in the allusion he had made, than to have
272
Mr. John Smith
said, that as specific allusion had been made to the share he had had in some of these companies, he was bound to afford the best explanation which he could on this occasion. He admitted that for a number of years, he had been engaged in several Joint-stock companies, fire-offices, and insurance-offices, for example, and he could add, that while so acting he had never felt any thing but pride and satisfaction, nor had he ever taken a part in a single company, of which, in any sense, he ought to feed in the least degree ashamed. The worthy alderman who had introduced this subject—and he gave him full credit for purity of intention—had certainly indulged himself in unjust and unfair reflections of a sweeping nature. [A cry of "no."] He must reply "yes," for the worthy alderman had dealt out his imputations against all the members of parliament who had been, in any way, connected with Joint-stock companies. That among these speculations, there had been many which were formed upon false principles he readily admitted; but there were others of a very different description. With one in which he was engaged, the Real del Monte Association, he could assure the worthy alderman, that the directors, so far from feeling any indisposition towards inquiry, courted it, and he should be afforded every assistance for that purpose. It had been hardly formed, when the shares rose to a very great premium; a circumstance which he could assure the House had given the directors at the time the greatest concern; and he, as the chairman, was the instrument of publishing a notice, with the view of correcting any exorbitant expectations, which specified that the whole plan was an experiment, and only such; and this was done at the instant, to guard the public against too sanguine expectations of the result. He could also assure the House of a fact which was also commu-
273
274
275
Mr. Huskisson
said, that as an allusion had been made to him, it became his turn to explain what had been his conduct during the prevalence of the occurrences which were so much alluded to. The hon. member was, however, under some mistake or misapprehension, when he insinuated that he had had the least connexion with any of these speculations. He could assure him, that neither directly nor indirectly had he had the least share, or interest, in any company which had been formed in the years 1824, 1825, and 1826. He had, indeed, an interest in one of the oldest insurance companies in the country, but it had remained of the same amount during the last twenty years. It was not, however, because he held a particular situation under the government, that he felt himself disqualified from applying his private property to such beneficial purposes as fairly presented themselves to his view; but the fact was, that he had never thought of embarking in these speculations, and, with the exception of some inconsiderable shares in two canals, one of them near his country residence, and the other locally connected with his interests in another point of view, he had never been in any way engaged in these companies. If the hon. member alluded to the company formed to promote the growth of silk in Ireland, he would explain, in a few words, all the connexion he had had with it. When the parties who had projected that company came to the Board of Trade, he had specifically stated to them, that though he thought it a desirable experiment, and wished it to have a fair trial, and though, under other circumstances, he might have felt disposed to take an interest in it, yet, considering the situation he held, as President of the Board of Trade, he could not expose himself to the misapprehension that would be likely to arise from his so doing. When the parties applied to him, as President of the Board of Trade, to know what number of shares would be taken, he informed them that there must have been some miscon-
276
277
278
Colonel Davies
said, that having been connected with one of those companies whose origin and conduct were now the subject of debate, he meant the Equitable-loan company, of which he had been a director, he hoped he might be allowed to offer a few observations, with reference to what had fallen from the hon. alderman regarding that company, and those with whom he had the honour to act. The hon. alderman had said, that every individual connected with the Equitable-loan company had carried on a base traffic in the shares. If this accusation were meant to apply to him, he must take leave to tell the hon. alderman, that it was false. The hon. alderman had added, that the company had been got up for fraudulent objects, and that all those connected with it must have known, and did know, that such was its character. If this imputation were levelled at him, he must assert that it was, in like manner, false and unfounded. He had become connected with the company, because he considered it of a beneficial character; but he had never trafficked in shares; and every engagement that he had entered into, in reference to it, he had fulfilled.
Mr. Hudson Gurney
said, he did not rise to oppose the right hon. gentleman's amendment, as he must imagine he had well weighed its bearings and its consequences, and adopted the course he had token as least objectionable in a choice of difficulties; still he could not but think it of most questionable precedent. The Arigna company was a very limited and strictly private association. The only parliamentary inquiries into transactions, supposed to be fraudulent, of which he was aware, were in the cases of the Charitable Corporation, and the South Sea. Both of these were public bodies. The South Sea founded on an arrangement of the Public Debt. The ministers of the Crown were parties supposed to be implicated; though the Directors were
279
bonâ fide
Mr. G. Robinson
said, he thought the worthy alderman who had brought forward the present motion must now see that the great extent of it would defeat the object which he had in view. He could not think that the worthy alderman, living as he had lived in this great city, and taking an active part in its affairs, could mean to include under one sentence of reprobation, all the Joint-stock companies which had been formed in this country. He had reprobated, and in his opinion justly reprobated, those ephemeral bubble companies, which differed as much from the companies which the right hon. President of the Board of Trade had eulogized, as light from darkness. He
280
Sir C. Forbes
said, he thought the worthy alderman entitled to approbation, for having had the spirit and the fortitude to say in that House what was universally said out of the House. At the same time, he could not but express his warmest admiration of the manner in which the right hon. Secretary for Foreign Affairs had received the motion. He rose principally for the purpose of making an observation upon one of those Joint-stock companies which had been eulogized by the hon. member for Midhurst, in terms which certainly did not meet with his concurrence. It might be supposed, from the manner in which the hon. member had spoken of the Australian company, that it had been founded upon principles more liberal than those of any other company. Now, he begged leave to ask, whether this company was not founded upon a monopoly? He had received information on this subject, from undeniable authority, and he was enabled to state, that a monopoly had been granted to the
281
l
s
l
Mr. John Smith
regretted that he was obliged to trouble the House with a few observations in consequence of what had fallen from the hon. baronet. The hon. baronet had certainly adopted a singular mode of making an attack against the Australian company. His information, he said, was confidential, and yet he had scrupled not to bring it forward, attacking all those who had had any concern with that company. He said that the whole thing was a job; but, in talking of the allotment of acres and other things, he did not appear to understand, that one of the principal objects of the Australian company was to raise a species of fine wool, which could not be procured elsewhere. With respect to the observation, that the affairs of the company had been placed in the hands of a particular family, he could only say that the hon. baronet was quite mistaken. The commissioners abroad had little or no power; for the fact was, that the whole business of the company was managed at home, and there was no part of its concerns that did not. reflect the highest credit on the king's government. A most humane and successful endeavour had been made by the agent of the Australian company, to conciliate the original
282
Mr. Wilmot Horton
said, that as the hon. baronet had affirmed, that he spoke from undeniable authority when he stated, that the Australian company had originated in sonic sinister consideration, on the strength of which it was patronised by the government, he felt it necessary to rise in his place to inform the hon. baronet that he was misled, and that, whatever might be the source of his information, he would do well to distrust it in future. The company had been sanctioned on mature consideration, and the conviction that nothing could be more beneficial to the interests of the population of New South Wales. The hon. baronet had talked of a monopoly. But how could it be called a monopoly to grant one million of acres to a company, where twenty more millions of acres lay? It was proper to observe, in reference to the observations of the hon. baronet, that although this company, as well as the Canadian, and the Van Die-men's Land company, was formed under the auspices of the colonial department, yet not a single share in any of these companies was possessed by any individual connected with that department.
Mr. Hart Davis
said, that if there was any association or company in this country, that promised greater advantages to the colony, and to the mother country, than another, that company was the Australian. It was formed upon public principles, and acted upon public principles. The directors, who were only twenty-four in number, held more than half the shares. He, as a director, had never sold a share, although they bore a high premium; and he believed he might say the same of the other directors.
Mr. Taylor
also defended the Australian company, and said, he was convinced the hon. baronet, must have been deceived by his informant.
Mr. Alderman Waithman
observed, that it was not his intention, after the kindness with which the House had fa-
283
284
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, December 6, 1826.
ROMAN CATHOLICS—EXCOMMUNICATION BY CATHOLIC PRIESTS.]
Mr. Moore
said, he held in his hand a petition from Mr. Emanuel Hutchinson Orpen, of Dublin, on a most important subject. The petitioner complained of the power exer-
285
Mr. Spring Rice
did not rise to oppose the bringing up of the petition. On the contrary, it was his opinion that every man was entitled to complain to that House of any grievances under which he laboured. He rejoiced, therefore, that Mr. Orpen had come to that House; and he trusted, that if petitions from other individuals of a different nature should come to the House hereafter, the hon. member would be disposed to receive them with equal readiness. The hon. gentleman had stated what was known to all; namely, that the Roman Catholic priesthood possessed the power of excommunication. The question was, whether or not that power had been carried beyond its proper exercise. That was a question which would be tried upon the evidence of witnesses on oath;
286
Mr. James Grattan
said, he could not hear the allegations of the petition without declaring in his conscience, that he did not believe that the power possessed by the Catholic priesthood had been exercised to the extent alleged. He knew it was utterly impossible to disconnect the subjects of religion and politics in Ireland; but he believed that the opposite party was liable to a similar imputation. If the Roman Catholic priesthood exercised their influence with the Catholic laity, for political purposes, there could be little doubt that our own clergy exercised their influence for similar objects. He regretted that the hon. member should have indulged in a tirade against the Catholics, on grounds which, in his opinion, were wholly untenable.
Colonel Torrens
observed, that the hon. member who had presented the petition had uttered one sentiment, which he would never hear in silence. That sentiment was, that the Catholics could give no security which would render it safe to make any further concession to them. What security was required? If the legislature gave them political power, would not their love of that power induce them to retain it by their conduct? If the sentiment of the hon. member were largely acted upon, it would tend directly to the dismemberment of the empire.
l.
287
Mr. Spring Rice
put it to the hon. member, whether any good could arise from printing and circulating such a petition. It might produce much heat and irritation; and he trusted, therefore, that the hon. member would withdraw his motion.
Mr. Moore
maintained, that the statements in the petition were incontrovertible. He wished them to be fairly placed before every hon. gentleman. He was not conscious of having pronounced the tirade which one hon. gentleman had imputed to him. He had merely asserted that which was as notorious as the sun at noon-day, that the Roman Catholic priesthood possessed the power described in the petition. He did not blame them for exercising that power. They had a spiritual duty to perform, and he gave them credit for performing it conscientiously. But that was the very state of things he complained of. The performance of such a supposed duty was calculated to occasion extensive mischief. He was surprised at the warmth with which the hon. colonel had made almost reproachful observations on what he had stated respecting securities; and he was satisfied that what he had advanced on that subject could not be controverted. If it were established that the Catholics could not give any securities for the proper exercise of whatever civil rights might be conceded to them, that he presumed, would immediately determine the question. The necessity of securities had been maintained by all our wisest and greatest statesmen. He repeated his opinion that, situated as the Catholics were, a further concession of political power to them was dangerous to the state.
Mr. S. Rice
observed, that many of the burnings and massacres adverted to in the petition were as unconnected with religious considerations, as if they had taken place in this country. The petitioner charged the Roman Catholic clergy with the most enormous vices; and prayed for the establishment of a new code of laws against them. The House had the authority of the Attorney-general for Ireland, that the clergy had not contributed to the excesses which had taken place in that country. What ground, therefore, could there be for the allegations of the petitioner? He deprecated the revival of old animosities
288
Mr. Goulburn
thought the hon. gentleman who had just spoken, had taken a tone far beyond what the nature of the cast required. Every one was aware that petitions were frequently presented, stating ' the opinions of individuals. In the propriety of which opinions, it was by no means necessary that the House should concur, before they allowed the petitions to be printed. Undoubtedly, he concurred with the hon. gentleman in thinking, that it would be much better, if the statements, on both sides, were calmly and dispassionately made and that all parties would consult their true interest by such conduct. But, to select one petition for reprehension, on this ground, while petitions, equally objectionable, on the other side, were allowed to pass without observation, would not be much to the credit of those by whom it was done, nor make a very favourable impression on the public mind of the justice of their cause.
Mr. Abercromby
said, that the right hon. gentleman had mistaken his hon. friend, who had merely urged the good sense and good feeling, under the circumstances of the case, of not giving circulation to the allegations of the petition, by ordering it to be printed. His hon. friend's first statement was, that the petition referred to a subject which was about to undergo the investigation of committees, before whom witnesses would be examined upon oath. That being the case, and the matter being one with which the House at large could be but very little acquainted, it was surely not too much to ask the House to withhold printing a petition, not from a body, but from an individual, containing statements calculated to make a
289
Mr. Secretary Peel
would not say a word
290
Mr. Moore
observed, that he conceived he should not have performed his duty if he had refused to present the petition, and indeed, with the exception of the single sentence which had been animadverted upon by the right hon. gentleman, it appeared to him to be unobjectionable. It was far from his wish to be instrumental in placing any statement on the records of the House which might have the effect of creating any unfair prejudice on the minds of any of its members when this most important question should be brought under their consideration. He would not there
291
The motion was accordingly withdrawn,
EXPORTATION OF MACHINERY.]
Mr. Hume
presented a petition from the Machine Makers of Manchester, praying for an alteration of the law prohibiting the Exportation of Machinery. The hon. member said, that the petition involved a principle of very great importance to this country. He recollected hearing the right hon. gentleman at the head of the Board of Trade say, that he hoped the day would soon arrive when the word "prohibition" would be expunged from our commercial system. He perfectly agreed with the right hon. gentleman in the sentiment, and he appealed to him whether it was right to continue a system of prohibitions with respect to machinery, when he was endeavouring to abolish that system with regard to every other article of industry? The object of the petitioners was to obtain a repeal of the law which prohibited them from exporting the produce of their ingenuity and labour to the markets that would afford them the best remuneration or reward. This object, at all times just, was rendered infinitely more necessary now that the markets at home did not afford a demand for their industry. The petitioners declared themselves to be totally out of work, and in a state of absolute starvation; the British manufactures affording them no employment, and the foreign markets being shut against them, by the prohibitory system persevered in by ministers. Every man was now allowed to export the produce of his industry to where he could find a purchaser, except the unfortunate maker of machines. The consequence of this was, that the machinists of England were in a state of destitution, whilst their sufferings were increased by a knowledge that it was in the power of ministers, by opening their trade, to relieve their distresses. Those who opposed the exportation of machinery were like those who had opposed the opening of every other trade, in order to augment their individual gains, and to secure to themselves a monopoly. He might illustrate the truth of this by referring to many trades, but particularly to the silk trade. The persons engaged in that trade had done every thing in their power to persuade the country and the government, that removing the prohibi
292
Mr. Huskisson
appealed to the hon. member, whether a question of such vast importance could with propriety be discussed at a period when thousands of manufacturers were either out of employ, or but partially employed? He assured the hon. member, that if a bill were to be introduced, which had for its object the abolition of every restriction upon the exportation of machinery, it would be pro
293
Mr. Littleton
protested against the sweeping doctrines laid down by the hon. member for Aberdeen. As a representative of a large manufacturing county, he
294
Colonel Torrens
said, that, although he agreed in principle with those who looked upon free trade as a great advantage, he was far from going along with them to the extent to which they proposed to carry it. He thought that the principle of free trade must be ever limited by another principle; namely, the policy of each country reserving to itself the sole benefit of those exclusive advantages, which, cither from nature or by acquisition, it might enjoy.
295
Sir H. Parnell
did not conceive that any mischief could arise to any branch of our trade or commerce, by the exportation of machinery of whatever description. The use of that machinery would enable other countries to increase their wealth, and we should ultimately derive a proportionate benefit from such increase. It appeared to him unjust to withhold this liberty from the manufacturers of machines. They formed a large class of the community; and he could not see why their interests should be sacrificed to those of other manufacturers, the produce of whose industry was exported.
Mr. Baring
said, he thought that it would conduce to the economy of the time of the House, if hon. members would avoid making long speeches upon presenting petitions, and reserve themselves until the specific questions to which such petitions related came property under their
296
Mr. Warburton
was of opinion, that the discussion of such an important subject as this ought not to be confined to one field-day, but that it ought to be frequently brought under the consideration of the House. The speech of the hon. member for Ipswich rested entirely on the assumption that this country possessed a monopoly of the more ingenious machinery, and therefore ought to enforce
297
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that when the hon. member for Aberdeen, in the last parliament, had expressed his determination to introduce a measure for the repeal of the present law, he had urged him to postpone it, because he thought it was due to the feelings of the manufacturers not to make so great an alteration at that particular time; and, in his opinion, the present was as little suited for such an experiment. They had been told that it was quite absurd to continue this law, and to prohibit the exportation of machinery, because drawings of the different machines were to be found in the Scotch Encyclopædia. But, since the year 1821, when that Encyclopædia was published, many improvements had been made in those machines. [Mr. Warburton, "Then they are secrets."] Then, if they were secrets, why should not the country profit by them as much as possible? This was a question which ought not to be hastily taken up. They had already had some experience of the ill effects attending a precipitate decision on long-established laws. When the hon. gentleman brought forward the repeal of the combination laws, he laid down some broad general principles, which sounded very well. He called on the House to put the master and the journeyman upon the same footing; and
298
Mr. Bright
observed, that the effect of particular systems of law was frequently over-rated, their real operation being ascertained correctly, as soon as they were repealed. Such had been the case with the combination laws; and, as soon as the statutes forbidding the exportation of machinery should be abrogated, it might be found that they had materially contributed to the protection of the manufacturer. He trusted that, in the present session, the true principles of political economy would be better understood, and that no sudden change in the existing law would be attempted.
Ordered to lie on the table, and be printed.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, December 7, 1826.
EMIGRATION.]
Mr. W. Horton
presented petitions from Glasgow and Calton, in favour of Emigration, as a measure necessary for the relief of the distressed manufacturers.
Mr. Hume
hoped that ministers would be prepared to introduce some measure on the subject, as it was one in which thousands and tens of thousands were interested.
Mr. Wilmot Horton
said, he was on the point of rising to give notice, that on the 15th of February, he would move to renew the committee on emigration, which had sat during the last session. He assured the hon. member, that it would not at all forward his object to force a decision on the subject at the present moment. The individuals who desired to emigrate could not be removed at this season of the year with any advantage to themselves. The
299
Mr. Abercromby
contended, that government ought to come forward with some specific plan for the relief of the thousands of artisans who were now starving in different parts of the country.
Mr. J. Grattan
agreed with his learned friend, that some more explicit declaration was wanted from government. He did not entertain any great hopes of advantage from the renewal of the committee which had sat last session. Indeed, the opinion of that committee, as far as it could be collected from their report, was adverse to emigration.
Mr. W. Horton
dissented from the assertion, that the report of the committee held out no hopes of advantage from emigration. He knew not what better evidence could have been collected than that which was collected by the committee, to throw light upon this important subject. He hoped that the next committee would be able to propose some temporary measure, which would in no way interfere with any permanent measure which it might ultimately think proper to adopt.
Sir James Graham
said, it was evident, from the correspondence into which ministers had entered with the editor of the "Glasgow Free Press," that they were favourably inclined to the system of emigration. He was sorry to find that they were ready to see thousands of their fellow countrymen seeking to be exiled from their native land. The system of emigration was contrary to the spirit of our laws, and opposed to many of our most ancient regulations, he admitted, that it was necessary to do something to relieve the distresses under which so many of our artisans were at present sinking. He was sorry to inform the House, that since the petition from Carlisle had been presented, he had received accounts, stating that their distress was increasing daily. He could state to the House, that the hand-weavers did not at present receive more than 5
s.
300
Mr. Warburton
wished to be informed how, under the present system of our Corn-laws, the corn grown in the colonies was to be sent to England to pay the quit-rent, which was to re-imburse the government for the expenses it might incur in carrying emigrants to the place of their destination.
Mr. Secretary Peel
deprecated the continuance of the present discussion. It was of great importance that hon. gentlemen should keep their minds open to information on this subject, and that they should not pledge themselves to opinions now, which might, by possibility, fetter their judgments hereafter. There were many points connected with the subject of emigration, into which it would be incumbent on the House to examine before it came to any determination. They must consider; first, how far emigration would be available to meet the distress which now prevailed in this country on account of the population being greater than the demand for labour; and secondly, how far the encouragement of emigration would affect the interests of the colonies. It might be impossible to incur the expense of relieving the distress of the country by emigration, and when it was recollected, that an expense of 20
l.
301
Mr. Maberly
trusted that ministers would take the advice which had been tendered to them by the hon. baronet, and
302
Mr. Benett
contended, that it would be better to put the waste lands of England into cultivation, than to send our population abroad to engage in similar employment. The waste lands of England, would long since have been cultivated, had it not been for the embargo of tithes and taxation which was laid upon them. He thought it extraordinary that, at a time when we had eleven millions of acres ready for cultivation, we should send our population at the expense of 20
l.
Mr. W. Horton
said, that if the hon. member would allow him, he would propose him as one of the committee; and he had little doubt, but he would soon be con-
303
Ordered to lie on the table.
CAPE OF GOOD HOPE—CONDUCT OF
Mr. Hume
rose for the purpose of calling the attention of the House to a subject, into which justice to the complaints of the colony, and to the character of the individual who was accused as the author of those complaints, required that it should institute an immediate inquiry. Many members of the House might not, perhaps, understand the course which had been adopted with regard to the Cape of Good Hope. In the year 1822, in consequence of the reports which had reached England respecting the misgovernment of that colony, the House had presented an address to his majesty, requesting him to appoint a commission to inquire into the state of that colony, as far as regarded its revenue, its institutions, and the conduct of its governor. On a motion which he had made last session, the instructions sent to the gentlemen who formed the commission were laid upon the table. He was not going, on the present occasion, to question in any respect the propriety of those instructions, though he could not help remarking, that three years and a half had elapsed without the House receiving any information as to the labour of the commissioners, except in one solitary case, into which it appeared that they had instituted some inquiry Neither was he going to complain of the conduct of the commissioners, though from statements which had been forwarded, and in some degree authenticated, to him, he was inclined to question the propriety of their conduct. He was anxious, that the hon. Secretary opposite would state how the House stood with regard to the inquiry into the conduct of the noble lord who had come home from his government in order to meet it. There were various circumstances which rendered an inquiry into the conduct of the governor of u distant colony a matter of considerable difficulty. There was an imperative necessity for investigation. At present, they had nothing but
ex-parte
304
Mr. Wilmot Horton
said, that the course taken by the hon. gentleman was so very
305
306
Mr. Hume
said, he would now submit a motion to the House, which would enable him to point out the extraordinary conduct of the hon. gentleman on this occasion. The hon. gentleman had asked him, if he would proceed with the case of Mr. Bishop Burnett? Now, he had nothing to do with that case. He did not present the petition of that individual. It
307
308
Mr. Ord
said, he felt it to be his duty to vindicate, as far as his abilities would allow him, the conduct of the commissioners of inquiry. He possessed no materials that would enable him to enter into a laboured defence of those gentlemen; but he must say, that the hon. member had just as little ground for making an attack on them. Nearly connected as he was, in relationship, with one of those commissioners, Mr. Biggs, any thing he might say in his favour might be attributed to partiality. He should, therefore, only state, that Mr. Biggs was as incapable of being actuated by any unworthy motive as the hon. gentleman himself. That gentleman had been employed, for many years, in important public situations, and he was admitted to have discharged the
309
General Grosvenor
was surprised at the manner in which the hon. member for Aberdeen had disclaimed the petition of Mr. Bishop Burnett. It was true that he did not present that petition; but then he spoke upon it with a warmth, and in terms, which were not called for at the time. As for the story itself, which he might fairly describe as "Bishop Burnett's History of his own Times," he thought it ought to be disposed of first.
Mr. Wilmot Horton
said, that as the hon. member for Aberdeen appeared to have misunderstood him, it would be necessary for him to repeat a few of the observations which he had submitted to the House. That hon. member was totally mistaken if he supposed that it was his wish to get rid of this investigation with the half-mangled case, as he termed it, of Bishop Burnett. He had merely mentioned to the House the very great expense which had been imposed on the country in collecting materials for coming to a decision on this case, and he would now pledge himself, that if gentlemen would take the trouble to wade through the report on their table, they would find ample and conclusive evidence to enable them to come to a determination on this case, and it did appear to him to be a most cruel and unjust mode of proceeding that, after the charges which had been
310
311
Mr. Hume
observed, that he only asked for the correspondence relating to the special cases which had been referred to the commissioners.
Mr. Wilmot Horton
continued. He could not accede to this indefinite demand. If the hon. member would state a specific case—if he would pledge his character that he had examined into it, and that he thought it required the attention of the House—he would then either consent to produce the papers, or assign such reasons for withholding them as he thought would satisfy the House. But it would be a most inconvenient mode of proceeding in this particular case, and set a very bad precedent, to accumulate and huddle together a host of fresh charges, whilst they threw aside and abandoned those which had been preferred in the first instance, and on which a report had been already made. The hon. member was likewise mistaken as to the reason why a pension had been granted to colonel Bird. It had been granted him for many years
312
Mr. Hume
asked, to what particular motion the hon. gentleman objected.
Mr. Wilmot Horton
replied, that he should resist, in the first place, the production of colonel Bird's examination.
Mr. Hume
said, that as the report of the commissioners containing it was about to be laid upon the table, he would withdraw that motion. He hoped, however, that the hon. gentleman would consent to lay upon the table the correspondence respecting the special cases against lord C. Somerset. It was idle to call upon a member to bring forward a special case, when the very means of investigating it were denied. Justice could not be done without the production of the correspondence on the particular charges.
Mr. Wilmot Horton
contended, that there was not the slightest ground for the presumption that ministers meant to impede the course of justice by refusing the papers. The charges against lord C. Somerset at present were sweeping and general. Let them be made particular; and, if sufficient arguments could be
313
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that if the House should resolve itself into a court to enter upon the consideration of every individual case, although no imputation had been cast on the report of the commissioners, it was impossible to say what papers they might be called upon to print. He would put it to the hon. member, whether it would be at all consistent with that economy of the public money which he so much advocated, to adopt this course. But it would be in the highest degree unjust to the commissioners, whom he believed to be most impartial and able men; for it would assume, that they had conducted themselves with partiality and injustice, and would consequently lower them in the estimation of the public, and embarrass them in the exercise of their functions. His hon. friend had very fairly offered, if the hon. member would take upon himself to bring forward any specific charge, cither to produce the papers relating to it, or to assign a satisfactory reason for refusing them.
Mr. Hume
said, he must admit that the proposition which had been made by the hon. gentleman was a very reasonable one; and if he had understood at first that this would have been conceded to, he would not have pressed his motion, which he would now withdraw.
ARIGNA MINING COMPANY.]
Mr. R. Martin
said, that he had a motion to make relating to a petition which had been referred to a select committee of the House against the directors of the Arigna Mining Company. An hon. friend of his (Mr. Brogden) had been one of the directors of this company, and as such, along with the other directors, had been charged by the petitioners with purchasing property for 10,000
l.
l.
314
Mr. Wynn
said, that if the names were printed in this instance, impartial justice required that they should be omitted in no others. At present the expense of putting petitions into type was sufficiently heavy; and if the signatures were appended, the votes would soon be as voluminous as the statutes at large. He recommended the hon. gentleman to withdraw his motion, which was now unnecessary, as the House had appointed a committee to investigate the charges against the hon. member. If it turned out that there was no foundation for the accusation, those who had brought it forward would, of course, meet with merited disgrace.
Mr. Alderman Waithman
termed the advice given by the right hon. gentleman lenient towards the hon. mover, but argued, that it would degrade the character and dignity of the House, to allow the motion to be withdrawn. If he had attended to one branch of history more than another, it was that which related to the constitutional principles of parliament and the country, and he would venture to say, that since the Revolution, a more atrocious attack had never been made upon the rights and liberties of the subject. This was the first time he had heard, that the value of what was stated in a petition depended upon the number of the signatures, or even upon the characters of the parties. To require their publication was most improperly to obstruct the right of petitioning, and to encroach upon one of our dearest privileges. The hon. gentleman then adverted to the expulsion of sir John Trevor, in 1695, in consequence of the circulation of a pamphlet in the lobby, by one Crosfield, which complained of a gross misapplication of the public money, and quoted the Parliamentary History of the time upon the subject. The investigation went on, and one thing came out after another, until
315
*
Mr. Wynn
rose to order. The hon. I alderman, he said, seemed to misunderstand the question before the House, which was merely whether certain names should or should not be printed. There had been no attempt made to throw obstruction in the way of inquiry. In fact, the House had already determined, that an inquiry should take place.
Mr. Alderman Waithman
maintained, that he was perfectly in order. He meant to conclude with moving an amendment. An attempt had been made to obstruct the right of petitioning. It was wished that the names of certain persons who had brought a serious charge against a member of that House should be published, in order to let the world know how few they were in number, and also how much they were wanting in respectability. It mattered not whether a petition was signed by one person or by one hundred, so that the facts contained in it were correct. It was an attempt to obstruct the right of petitioning, to propose to hold up petitioners to ridicule, or to expose them in any way. The hon. member had stated, that the petitioners were not persons of respectability. With respect to the privilege of petitioning, the poorest, man stood upon the same footing as the richest. Previous to the revolution it was asserted, that all attempts to obstruct petitioning were illegal. The obstructing of petitioning was declared to be illegal in the bill of rights. If members were allowed to cast reflections on the characters of petitioners, and to hold them up to public contempt, the doors of the House would be barred against petitions. In 1680, the House of Commons resolved, "That it was, and ever had been, the undoubted right of the subject to petition parliament for the redress of grievances." In pursuance of this resolution, sir F. Withins and sir George Jeffreys were expelled the House, for throwing obstructions in the way of petitioning. Another objection had been made to one of the petitioners, Mr. William Clarke; namely, that he had been running about the streets, collecting information relative to this Joint-stock company. So much the better. He was, on that account, the more likely
*
316
Mr. R. Martin
said, that he would not have been very anxious to press his motion, if the hon. alderman had named the other three petitioners, as he had named Mr. Clarke; for walls had cars, and if the hon. alderman had done so, they would be known all over London to-morrow morning. He denied that his object was to hold up the petitioners to ridicule. His object was, to show the public, that out of a thousand persons interested, only four had petitioned against his hon. friend. There was nothing in this which went to impugn the right of petitioning. He asked, why the petition had been printed without the names of the petitioners? It was wrong—it was monstrously wrong — to print that petition without the names of the petitioners, so long before the investigation could be gone into. It had been said, that if the charges were unfounded, his hon. friend would have an opportunity of clearing himself. So he would. But when? Why, in two months from this time; and during the whole of that time these allegations were hanging over him; so that his hon. friend was punished before he was tried. The process was, to punish him first and hear him afterwards; which was exactly the same as hanging a
317
The motion was negatived.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, December 8, 1826.
EMIGRATION.]
The Marquis of Lansdown
said, he had two petitions to submit to their lordships, which came from a part of the country with which he was not connected, but which related to a subject that, from the unhappy situation of the petitioners, was calculated to attract the serious attention of their lordships. It was, however, his duty to state, that, the petitions were of such a nature that they could not be laid on the table without approbation being previously given to them by the king's government, as the petitioners prayed for pecuniary assistance to transport themselves to the British colonies in North America, or to some other part of the world, in which they might find means of maintaining themselves by their labour, instead of remaining in a country in which they could not obtain subsistence. It was an affecting circumstance, and one which could not fail to recommend the petition to the consideration of their lordships, that they came from persons who were not desirous of leaving their native land from any love of change, or any spirit of discontent, but solely from the unhappy circumstances into which the manufacturing districts had recently fallen, and
318
319
Earl Bathurst
said, that as the consent of the Crown was necessary, before the petition could be laid on the table, he rose for the purpose of giving that consent; but in doing so, he wished to be understood, that the government pledged itself to nothing on the subject. That consent was given purely for the purpose of enabling the petitioners to express their sentiments to their lordships. Those petitioners were labouring under a degree of distress which it was impossible to think of without sympathy; and they had borne their sufferings with patience. He wished he could add that the distress was confined to the district whence the petitions came. Unhappily, it was very general. He believed, however, that there was scarcely ever a period, in which sufferings had been endured with such forbearance and obedience to the laws. At the same time he must observe, that he believed there never was a time when the public had stept forward so readily to relieve those sufferings by liberal pecuniary assistance, and in forming committees to manage and distribute the aid raised by subscription. It must also be added, that there never was a time in which so few instances were known, of persons ready to aggravate the distress, by using inflammatory language, and exciting the suffering multitude to acts of violence. All this was not only very creditable to the country, but also to the sufferers, who were entitled to every regard, for their unshaken loyalty and obedience to the laws of their country. With respect to the particular case of the petitioners, they prayed for pecuniary assistance to forward themselves to a settlement in those possessions which belonged to the Crown in North America. Their lordships were aware that, these possessions consisted of
320
Ordered to lie on the table.
HOUSE OF COMMONS,
Friday, December 8, 1826.
CAPE OF GOOD HOPE—CONDUCT OF
Mr. Brougham
said, he had been informed, that in the discussion which had taken place last night respecting the Cape of Good Hope, a question had arisen as to the course which he intended to pursue with regard to a petition which he had formerly presented, complaining of the misconduct of the governor of that colony. That petition he had presented two sessions ago, on behalf of Mr. Bishop Burnett; and he understood it was now said, that the report of the commissioners had dealt with the subject matter of that petition, and completely exhausted it. He had not read that report with any great attention;
321
CASE OF COLONEL BRADLEY.]
Mr. Hume
said, that in making his present motion he must necessarily bring under the consideration of the House a case of gross and flagrant military oppression. The facts on which his motion rested were well known to the House, as he had on more than one occasion presented them distinctly to its notice. He would, how
322
323
Lord Palmerston
said, he should feel it to be his duty to object to the production of the documents, not because the despatches which were called for did not exist—for he had seen them himself—not because he had any doubt as to the genuineness of the commission or letter of service, for it had been admitted as evidence in a court of justice, but because no parliamentary grounds had been laid for their production. The merits of the case had been, so often discussed, in the last
324
325
l.
Mr. Hume
said, that he very much doubted the existence of the letter of service. It was first brought to light in 1819, and he could produce a letter from lieut.-colonel Arthur, proving that he had no such commission at that time. If he had had such a commission, why did he not produce it when he was three times specifically asked to do so? The reason
326
Lord Palmerston
begged to remind the House, that the hon. member and himself were at issue as to a fact. The hon. member had said, that the commission had no existence in 1814. He replied that it had. It was matter of proof, and had been placed on record; and when the hon. member said that the commission did not exist, he denied a fact which had been proved by the oaths of most honourable and virtuous witnesses. If that were proved in a court of justice, it became a matter of fact. The hon. member could not, by any ingenuity, "rail the seal from off the bond." That commission had been produced; and if it was asserted, no matter by whom, that it was a fabricated document, then he must say, that such an assertion was a base, scandalous, infamous calumny, which he felt himself bound to repel, on the part of those affected by it, with all that contempt and disdain that it merited. Not a greater falsehood could be conceived. The commission was granted by general Fuller in 1814; and it was not true, that, in colonel Arthur's letter of 1818, no mention was made of it. He read, last year, a letter from colonel Arthur, in which he alluded to that commission; and he there adduced his holding such commission, as a reason for his exercising the authority he had previously possessed. He, therefore, would repeat, that there could not be a greater falsehood, let it come from whom it might, than to assert, either that no such commission was in existence, or that, if it were in existence, it was fabricated for some base, sinister, and miserable, purpose.
Colonel Torrens
vindicated the officers of the army from the aspersion; which had been cast upon them.
327
Sir H. Hardinge
said, it was impossible for any military man to sit silent under such an imputation as had been cast on the whole army by the hon. member. If they remained silent, then, indeed, they might deserve to be considered as slaves. Fortunately, however, observations of this nature, coming from the hon. member, were perfectly harmless. Colonel Arthur, under the circumstances stated by his noble friend, had an undoubted claim to the situation of commandant; and if lieut.-colonel Bradley had entertained any doubt on the subject, he ought to have waited until his reference to England, with respect to the assumption of colonel Arthur, had been answered. But lieut,-colonel Bradley said, "no, I will at once depose you, and take this authority on myself." This was unquestionably a disobedience of discipline, that could not be palliated. He, at the same time, admitted, that col. Arthur had acted with less leniency than he ought to have done; because he kept lieut.-colonel Bradley too long under arrest; and a court of law, in consequence of that circumstance, had most properly given a verdict in favour of the complaining party. This had, however, nothing to do with the main question. Half-pay officers on the staff, under the circumstances stated by his noble friend, had a right to exercise the same authority which colonel Arthur had assumed.
Mr. Hume
rose and said, he would rest the whole business on this question — "Did colonel Arthur, when he placed lieut.-colonel Bradley under arrest, possess any authority from general Fuller, which justified him in adopting that measure?" [Lord Palmerston, "Yes."] He wished to know whether the noble lord would admit the letters of colonel Arthur, in which he allowed that he did not possess such a power, to be received as a proof that the statement on this point was not false. Would he allow those letters to be received in contradiction to the charge of falsehood? Colonel Bradley did not, as had been asserted, act precipitately. For three successive months he demanded to know what commission colonel Arthur heldy and from whence it had been received; but he could procure no satisfaction. He now asked, what authority general Fuller had to supersede the king's commission, which was in the hands of colonel Bradley?
Lord Palmerston,
— I have already stated
328
Mr. Hume
did not speak of a commission in existence now, but of a commission in existence at the time when the arrest took place.
Sir H. Hardinge
said, he was astonished that the hon. member should, after the luminous explanation of his noble friend, after his unequivocal statement, that such a commission did exist, reiterate his question. It was little less than doubting the veracity of the noble lord.
Mr. Hume
was of opinion that the noble lord's answer was evasive. It did not directly meet his question, which related to a commission not of the present day, but issued some years ago.
Lord Palmerston
said, it was impossible for him to be answerable for the extreme obtuseness of understanding possessed by the hon. member. He would venture to say that no other man in the House entertained any doubts as to the clearness of the explanation which he had given. He had stated not only on the present occasion, but in the last session, that there was such a commission; but, beyond that, he had then read the paper which he now held in his hand; namely, a letter from colonel Arthur, of the date of 1820, in which he quoted this disputed commission, as his reason for exercising the authority which he had assumed in 1814. The commission was in existence in 1814, as appeared from that letter; and if the hon. gentleman's intellects were so deeply obtuse, as to require these numerous repetitions and explanations—repetitions and explanations more numerous even than those in which the hon. gentleman was in the habit of indulging—if it were necessary by these means to soak into his understanding, as it were, the comprehension of the most simple fact, he must leave the hon. gentleman to that impenetrable darkness which dwelt within the interior of his brain, and leave his statements to the judgment of other gentlemen whom he had the honour of addressing. It was a matter of indifference to him whether the hon. gentleman understood him or not. He addressed himself to the House of Commons, not to the hon. member for Aberdeen [hear, hear].
Mr. Hume
said, he had been long enough a member of that House to know, that an angry tone was not an answer, An at
329
Sir H. Hardinge
observed, that those who threw stones first, had no right to complain if stones were flung at them in return. The hon. member had used an expression towards the army at large, to which he had deemed it his duty to reply; but he had not come down to the House for the purpose of speaking on this question; nor was he aware that it would come under discussion. Certainly it was
330
Mr. Hume.
—If individuals in the king's service are to be deprived of their situations without the decision of a courtmartial or inquiry of any kind, then, I say, that under such circumstances, every officer in the army is a slave. That was my observation.
Sir H. Hardinge.
—The "ifs" of the hon. member render his statements very harmless.
The motion was negatived.
ARIGNA MINING COMPANY.]
Mr. R. Martin
said, he had intended to move, that an addition should be made to the members of the select committee appointed to investigate the proceedings of the Directors of the Arigna Mining Company; but he had abandoned that intention as his hon. friend (Mr. Brogden) had expressed himself perfectly satisfied with the committee as it stood.
Mr. Brogden
said, he certainly had expressed a wish, when he read the list of the committee, that some alteration should be made in it. He had wished that some persons more conversant in the business of the city should be placed on it. He now, however, desired no alteration. He felt himself perfectly safe in the hands of those to whom the investigation had been intrusted.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Monday, December 11, 1826.
INDEMNITY BILL—OATS IMPORTATION.]
Earl Bathurst,
in rising to move the third reading of the bill for granting an indemnity for the admission of Foreign Grain, stated, that in the absence of his noble friend, whose continued indisposition prevented him from attending to his duties in that House, it became his business to state to their lordships the reasons which induced ministers to advise his majesty to issue an Order in Council, permitting the
331
s.
332
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.,
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
The Earl of Lauderdale
was desirous
333
s.
334
s.
s.
s.
The bill was read a third time and passed.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, December 11, 1826.
KING'S MESSAGE RESPECTING PORTUGAL.]
Mr. Secretary
Canning presented, at the bar, the following Message from his Majesty, which was read by the Speaker:
"GEORGE R.
"His Majesty acquaints the House of Commons, that his Majesty has received an earnest application from the Princess Regent of Portugal, claiming, in virtue of the ancient obligations of alliance and amity subsisting between his Majesty and the Crown of Portugal, his Majesty's aid against an hostile aggression from Spain.
335
"His Majesty has exerted himself, for some time past, in conjunction with his Majesty's ally the King of France, to prevent such an aggression; and repeated assurances have been given by the Court of Madrid, of the determination of his Catholic Majesty neither to commit, nor to allow to be committed, from his Catholic Majesty's territory, any aggression against Portugal.
"But his Majesty has learnt with deep concern, that, notwithstanding these assurances, hostile inroads into the territory of Portugal have been concerted in Spain, and have been executed under the eyes of Spanish authorities, by Portuguese regiments, which had deserted into Spain, and which the Spanish government had repeatedly and solemnly engaged to disarm and to disperse.
"His Majesty leaves no effort unexhausted to awaken the Spanish government to the dangerous consequences of this apparent connivance.
"His Majesty makes this communication to the House of Commons, with the full and entire confidence, that his faithful Commons will afford to his Majesty their cordial concurrence and support, in maintaining the faith of treaties, and in securing against foreign hostility, the safety and independence of the kingdom of Portugal, the oldest ally of Great Britain.
" G. R."
After the Message had been read,
Mr. Secretary Canning
rose, but in consequence of indisposition, he spoke in tones so feeble, that his words were very indistinctly heard. He said, that in pursuance of the custom usually observed on occasions of this kind, he should now give notice that he would to-morrow move an Address to his Majesty, thanking him for the communication which he had made to the House, and affording him the strongest assurances of the cordial support and co-operation of his faithful Commons. It would be contrary to the practice hitherto followed, for him to enter at present into any statement of the reasons which had induced his majesty to make to the House the communication they had just heard, and besides it would be unfair to the House itself, as it was totally unprepared for such a discussion. He would therefore confine himself to moving, that his Majesty's Message be taken into consideration to-morrow.
Sir Robert Wilson
observed, that when
336
Mr. Canning
said, it was out of the power of his majesty's ministers to make any earlier communication to the House with regard to the inroad of the Portuguese refugees, as the official despatches had arrived only on Friday night last.
The motion was agreed to.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Tuesday, December 12, 1826.
KING'S MESSAGE RESPECTING PORTUGAL.]
On the order of the day being read, for taking into consideration his Majesty's Message,
Earl Bathurst
rose, he began by observing, that in proposing to move an humble Address to his Majesty, he thought it necessary to state to their lordships the grounds of the royal Message which he yesterday had the honour of bringing down to the House. As in doing this, he should have to enter into some detailed explanations, he could not sufficiently regret that this duty should be in the absence, from indisposition, of his noble friend the earl of Liverpool, imposed upon him; but fortunately, he was surrounded by colleagues, who would correct any inadvertency or mistake into which he might fall, and who were ready and able to supply any of his omissions. Their lordships were aware that sir Charles Stuart, who had gone on a mission to the court of Brazil, had proceeded from Rio de Janeiro to Lisbon, with instructions from the emperor of Brazil, relative to the settlement of the government of Portugal, after the death of his father. Sir Charles
337
338
339
340
341
342
343
Lord Holland
trusted their lordships
344
345
346
347
The Duke of Wellington
said, he did not rise to offer any explanation why the British government had not at an earlier period taken the course now proposed; for that he felt to be altogether unnecessary. On the contrary, it was earnestly desired to put off to the latest moment at which negotiation could be available, that which their lordships had heard this day proposed. On this part of the question it was not necessary for him to dwell, but he hoped it would be permitted to him, who had had for several years the direction of the resources of this country against the common enemy in the Peninsula, to state his opinion, that the perfidious acts of aggression on Portugal ought rather to be attributed to the servants of the Spanish government, than to that government itself. They ought, in his opinion, to be looked upon as the acts of the captains-general of provinces, and even of the ministers of the king of Spain, than as ordered or advised by his Catholic majesty. But to whomsoever they might be attributed, he fully concurred in the measures intended to repress them. It was impossible for him to see two armies on both sides of the Douro and the Guadiana making preparations for invasion, and actually violating the territory of Portugal, and not believe that those armaments were brought together with the connivance and concurrence of the authorities of the countries in which they were formed. Their aggressions, he thought, made out a
casus fœederis,
casus fœderis
348
The Marquis of Lansdown
said, he rose for the purpose of expressing his opinion, that it was most desirable for the interests of this country, and, he would add, for the interests of the whole world, that the measures proposed to be adopted by his majesty should have the cordial and unanimous approbation of their lordships. He was the more anxious to deliver his opinion, because he wished it to be understood, that it was not from indifference, that he had not addressed their lordships at an earlier period. When it had become notorious by the promulgation of the despatch which had been alluded to by the noble earl, that the territory of our ancient ally had been invaded, under circumstances which obviously showed that it had been done with the participation of Spain, he could assure their lordships, that it had not been until after the most anxious deliberation, that he had resolved to abstain from asking for such an explanation from his majesty's ministers as this most unwarrantable aggression seemed to call for. The resolution to which he had come was founded on a belief, which the proceedings of this day justified, that there would not be wanting on the part of the government, either a disposition to watch, or an inclination to act. He agreed with the noble duke, that it was a fair cause of commendation to his majesty's ministers that they had endeavoured to avert the calamities of war, as long as they could do so with any hope of success. He had no doubt that they would persevere with earnestness in the same spirit to check the progress of the invasion which had actually taken place, and which, under the circumstances described by the noble duke, left no doubt that Spain was involved in the design, that had prompted that invasion. He would not inquire whether it had been actually committed by the authority of the monarch, who appeared to profess one thing while he did another, or by means of that faction to which the noble duke had alluded: for this was clear, that it ought to be stopped at once, with as little hesitation by his majesty's ministers, as, he trusted, this House would display in expressing their approbation of the measures the government should adopt. Any apparent hesitation on our part,
349
casus fœederis
350
The Address was agreed to,
nem. diss.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, December 12, 1826.
ADDRESS ON THE KING'S MESSAGE, RESPECTING PORTUGAL.]
Mr. Secretary
Canning moved the order of the day, for taking into consideration His Majesty's Message. The Message having been read,
Mr. Secretary
Canning rose and addressed the House as follows:
*
Mr. Speaker;
in proposing to the House of Commons to acknowledge, by an humble and dutiful Address, his Majesty's most gracious Message, and to reply to it in terms which will be, in effect, an echo of the sentiments, and a fulfilment of the anticipations of that Message, I feel that, however confident I may be in the justice, and however clear as to the policy of the measures therein announced, it becomes me as a British minister, recommending to parliament any step which may approximate this country
*
351
352
353
354
355
356
357
casus fœderis
358
casus fœderis
359
casus fœderis
360
361
locus pœnitentiœ
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
—" Celsâ sedet Æolus arce,
Sceptra tenens; mollitque animos et temperat iras;
Ni faciat, maria ac terras cælumquc profundum
Quippe ferant rapidi secum, verrantque per auras."
369
Sir Robert Wilson
said, he thought that his majesty as a British king reigning over a free people, must have experienced feelings of pride and satisfaction, when he caused the message before them to be delivered to both Houses. For his own part, when he gave notice of a motion on this subject the other evening, he had not been induced to do so from any desire that it should be the ground of an accusation against ministers, but because he could no longer behold with patience the many acts of treachery and oppression exercised against Portugal. He rejoiced most sincerely at hearing from ministers, that it was their determination to pat a stop to those aggressions. He had been fearful, that assistance would not be afforded to Portugal, until the Spaniards, assisted by Portuguese traitors, had reached the seat of government in that kingdom, overthrown the constitution, and expelled every worthy man from the country. He was alarmed lest we should again
370
371
Mr. Hume
begged to be allowed to state briefly the grounds upon which he claimed the attention of the House. His hon. and gallant friend had treated this question in a way from which he materially dissented, and he should think himself wanting in his duty, if he did not express his dissent; but, in so doing, he begged to be understood as appreciating to as full an extent as any man, the effect of the unanimous approbation with which the speech of the right hon. gentleman was received, and that he was not unconscious of the embarrassment in which he was placed by venturing to oppose to that unanimity perhaps his isolated opinion. The first observations which he should make upon the statement which the House had just heard, was, that the right hon. gentleman seemed to have taken only one view of the question; namely, the relation in which this country was placed with respect to Portugal by treaty. Now, to the actual fact of this relation, he could not object, because he was assured that treaties were in existence by which it was established; but he thought that such treaties were to be deprecated, and it would not be amiss to discuss the question, whether or not in sound political expediency and discretion, we were to be bound by them. What was the situation in which this country was now placed? Was it not that, by the right hon. gentleman's interpretation, we were, upon every occasion of emergency in which Portugal might be placed, to give her our aid and protection, although it was morally certain, that from our relative conditions, we could never expect to receive any assistance from her? He felt that it was too late in the day now to inquire why or wherefore those treaties were made; because that they were made was certain, and it was certain also that they had been proclaimed in the face of Europe, in 1815, and that we were, so far as these treaties were binding, called upon to assist our oldest ally, Portugal, in her
372
casus fœderis
373
374
375
376
Mr. Wood,
member for Preston, seconded the amendment. He said, he thought it was not fair to bring forward a question of such great importance at a time when so many members had left town. He was also of opinion, that the House would be acting with indecent and ruinous precipitation, if they allowed themselves to be hurried into a war merely by the dazzling and brilliant speech of the right hon. gentleman. He did not wish to prejudge the question of war or peace, but he seconded the amendment, in order to give the House further time to deliberate. If the House should agree to the address proposed by the right hon. gentleman, and a war should ensue, they must be prepared to support the imposition of a very high property-tax, and the re-enactment of the Bank Restriction Act; two measures which he would never consent to, so long as he had a scat in that House. There was also a third measure which the House must be prepared to agree to, but which he would rather accord as a boon than a right. He meant Catholic Emancipation. In the event of a war, emancipation would be demanded not as a favour, but a right. If he never gave another vote in that House, he should rejoice at having stood up to express his sentiments on the present occasion. He would not make a long speech, because he could do no more than reiterate what he had already said. He was desirous of keeping faith with foreign nations, but he could not forget that we owed good faith to ourselves. Self preservation was the first law of nature. Thousands of Englishmen were at this moment wanting bread. Should the House resolve to commence a war under such circumstances, what
377
Mr. Baring
said, he was not one of those who wished the country to rush into a war; on the contrary, he had listened to the statement of the right hon. Secretary with a strong desire to find such a proceeding unnecessary—to discover some means of evasion—but it appeared to him, that the case made out by the right hon. Secretary was so strong and so decisive, that without making some such excuse as the meanest and most contemptible nation in the world might be inclined to frame, this country could not avoid taking the attitude which it was proposed she should take. He put it to the greatest lover of peace in that House, whether an exhibition of pusillanimity was the way to secure respect and peace. Did an individual ever suppress insult or aggression by the reputation of pusillanimity? It was in vain to talk to the House about a property-tax, and a Bank restriction act. The only question for the House to consider was this—" Is the faith of England engaged to afford protection to Portugal?" Neither the hon. member who had moved, nor the hon. member who had seconded the amendment, had uttered one word which could induce the most credulous to hesitate for one moment to decide that question in the affirmative. The hon. member for Aberdeen had said, that our treaties with Portugal were imprudent. Upon the whole, he thought so too; but with the nature of those treaties the House, at the present moment, had nothing to do. The question was, did they exist? Could any man, possessing a spark of honour, say that this was the moment to discuss the prudence of those treaties? Now that we were called upon to execute our agreement with Portugal, would it be honourable to say that we thought the treaties imprudent? Whatever might be the distress which existed in the country, he was sure that the case made out by the right hon. Secretary could not be fairly stated, without meeting with the unanimous concurrence of his high-minded, though suffering countrymen. If the situation of the country were such as to render it impossible for us to go to war, it would be the more manly course to say so at once, and not to quibble about the
378
379
380
Mr. Bankes
said, he doubted very much the proposition of the hon. member for Callington, that the contest into which the country was about to rush, would not prove expensive. He was strongly inclined to consider that which had recently taken place rather as an act of internal commotion connected with Portugal, than as any measure proceeding from external powers in hostility to our ally. He thought that we ought at least to be perfectly sure that war was indispensable before we rushed into it; and, though it would be impossible for him to vote, for, the amendment, that was a fact of which all the eloquence of the right hon. Secretary had not convinced him.
Mr. Brougham
said, he should have left the question before the House precisely as it stood upon the statement of the right hon. Secretary, if it had not been that, after the part which (he now reflected with pleasure) he had taken on the subject of Spanish affairs two years back, it was impossible for him to give a silent vote upon the question now under discussion: but,
381
382
l.
383
384
385
casus fœderis
386
387
388
389
390
Mr. Bright
dissented from the proposition, that a
casus fœderis
casus fœderis
Mr. Secretary
Canning said:—I rise, Sir, for the purpose of making a few observations, not so much in answer to any general arguments, as in reply to two or three particular objections which have been urged against the Address which I
391
casus fœderis
392
locus pœnitentia
393
394
395
396
397
398
I believe, Sir, there is no other subject upon which I need enter into defence or explanation. The support which the Address has received from all parties in the House, has been such as would make it both unseemly and ungrateful in me to trespass unnecessarily upon their patience. In conclusion, Sir, I shall only once more declare, that the object of the Address, which I propose to you, is not war: —its object is, to take the last chance of peace. If you do not go forth, on this occasion to the aid of Portugal, Portugal will be trampled down, to your, irretrievable disgrace: — and then will come war in the train of national degradation. If, under circumstances like these, you wait till Spain has matured her secret machinations into open hostility, you will in a little while have the sort of war required by the pacificators;—and who shall say where that war will end?
The amendment was negatived, there appearing only three or four members in favour of it. The original Address was then put and agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, December 13, 1826.
CORN-LAWS—ADJOURNMENT OF THE HOUSE.]
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that, in pursuance of the notice of adjournment, which was given last night by his right lion, friend (Mr. Canning), who was prevented from attending this day, owing to the fatigue which had sprung from his great exertions when last in his place, he rose to move that the House at its rising do adjourn to the 8th of February next. He could not refrain from availing himself of the present opportunity, to express his entire conviction, that the
399
Mr. John Williams
concurred with the right hon. gentleman, that the House and the government had come to a sound decision as to the course to be pursued respecting Portugal. He, however, certainly thought the period of the adjournment too long. The situation of the country must at all times determine the circumstances of the case, and it was his misfortune to differ from almost all the members of the House, as to the conduct they had pursued that session. When it was borne in mind, that nothing whatever had been done
400
NEWSPAPERS AND PAMPHLETS—
Mr. Hume
said, that had there been a sufficient attendance, it was his intention to have called the attention of the House to some subjects of considerable importance connected with the revenue; such as the duty on newspapers, advertisements, pamphlets, insurances, &c. He considered the duty on newspapers, not only a great public injury, but a loss to the revenue. He was confident, that he should be able at a proper season to show, that great and most desirable advantages would arise from a reduction of those duties. He was satisfied that if government would take off twopence-halfpenny from the duty, the revenue would be benefitted by the increase, which would be thus occasioned in the circulation of newspapers. He was warranted in anticipating this effect by a reference to the duties levied on newspapers in other countries. In the United States of America, where there was no duty, or but a very small one, there were no less than five hundred and ninety-eight newspapers in constant circulation; while, according to the last returns, made in 1821, the whole number of newspapers in circulation
401
Mr. Brougham
seconded the motion, and hoped that his hon. friend would persevere in his praise-worthy exertions. The hon. member had with great constancy and assiduity devoted his time and energies to many subjects of importance and utility, but amongst all the measures on which he had exercised his zeal and his abilities, hardly any was, in his opinion, of greater interest, in all its bearings, and of more general advantage, than the present. The measure to which his lion, friend had called the attention of the House was one of importance, whether it was considered in reference to the advantageous effects which it was calculated to produce upon the revenue, or with relation to the still more enlarged benefit, of which it would be the source, by the diffusion of information amongst the people. He did not, however, mean, by what he now said, to commit himself as to the course which he should feel it his duty to adopt, when such an inquiry should be entered into. The subject was one which demanded much deliberate examination. From the impression which was at present predominant in his mind, he should feel disposed to draw a distinction between the daily and weekly newspapers. The revenue might afford to make an experiment in the one case, which it might not be able to do in the instance of the daily publications. The weekly newspapers might, he conceived, be rendered most valuable channels for the dissemination of science and intelligence
402
403
404
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that the subject which the lion, and learned gentleman had thought proper to introduce without any notice, was too important to be considered now. He should therefore decline to give any specific answer to the hon. and learned gentleman at present. If, however, upon a due consideration of the subject, it should be found to be one deserving of that inquiry which was so strongly urged, he should be willing to attend to the suggestions thrown out by the hon. and learned gentleman.
The motion was agreed to. After which the House adjourned to the 8th day of February.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Thursday, February 8, 1827.
CORN LAWS.]
The Earl of Liverpool
gave notice, that he would, if nothing in the interim should happen to make it necessary to put off the motion to a further day, on Monday se'nnight, bring under the consideration of their lordships the subject of the Corn-laws.
The Earl of Lauderdale
wished to know the nature of the proposition intended to be brought forward, and he would tell the noble earl his reason for so wishing. When the people of this country were about to express their opinion on the subject of any alteration in the Corn-laws, it was recommended to them, by the friends of ministers, to refrain from any expression of disapprobation until such time as the proposition which ministers intended to submit to parliament should be made known. Now, he thought that, after the propositions were made, not only the two Houses, but the public ought to have time to examine, and express their opinion upon them. If they had not time for this, they would be entrapped into a measure which, he would say, was one of the most important, both politically and economically, ever agitated.
The Earl of Liverpool
said, he felt the importance of the subject as much as the noble earl did, and should never think of
405
The Earl of Lauderdale
said, he wished that the country should have sufficient time to express its opinion; The noble lord must see that what he had stated did not meet his Objection, because he had prefaced his observations by saying, that the adherents of ministers had recommended that no expression of public feeling should take place, and told the people to wait until ministers should bring forward their proposition, and then there would be time enough to give their opinion. This proceeding put him in mind of an anecdote told by his father-in-law. As he was stepping into his carriage, his coachman came up to him, and said, "As I know, Sir, that you like to be consulted, I think it right to inform you that I was married yesterday." Now, the two Houses of parliament were to give their decision on the noble lord's proposition first, and the country was to be consulted on the subject afterwards. What he wished distinctly to know was, whether the noble earl intended to allow sufficient time for the public at large to express an opinion.
The Earl of Liverpool
really did not know what the noble lord's calculation of sufficient time might be. All he could say was, that after he had submitted his proposition to their lordships, he should allow a reasonable time to intervene before he called upon them for their decision upon it.
CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION.]
Viscount Clifden
, in rising to present the first one of a great many petitions which he had to present from the Catholics of Ireland, felt himself bound to address a few observations to their lordships. He begged in particular to call their lordships' attention to the great alteration which had taken place in the circumstances of the Catholics within these two years. Since the question was formerly before their lordships, they had roused themselves, and become sensible of their strength. In one week, the Catholics of Waterford had defeated and disgraced the most opulent Protestant family in all Ireland. There were two other families more opulent; but they did not reside in Ireland, and were rather English than Irish. The members of this family were gentlemen of unblemished character, but distinguished
406
407
l.
l.
Ordered to lie on the table.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, February 8, 1827.
CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION— GENERAL PETITION OF THE CATHOLICS OF IRELAND.]
Sir F. Burdett
then rose to present the general petition of the Catholics of Ireland. This duty, he said, he was anxious to lose not a moment in performing, but he would not avail himself of that opportunity to make any preliminary remarks with reference- to the general question. He would content himself, therefore, with shortly expressing his regret at the absence of the right lion. Secretary for Foreign Affairs. Had that right hon. gentleman been present, he should have been happy to have consulted with him as to the future steps to be taken, in furtherance of the important measure prayed for by the petitioners. He was sorry, he repeated, for the right hon. gentleman's absence, both on account of its
408
The Petition was then brought up and read; setting forth,
"That the following is the case of the Petitioners: they are deprived of all participation whatsoever in the framing or amending of the laws by which their properties are regulated, and on which the security of their lives and characters depend; they are deprived of almost all share in the administration of the laws by which their properties are regulated, and on which the security of their lives and characters depend: they are totally deprived of all participation in the highest and most important functions in the administration of those laws: they are excluded from the office of sheriff, an office the importance of which in rendering the administration of justice impartial or unjust, pure or corrupt, the cause of blessings or the source of misery, cannot be exaggerated, and can scarcely be adequately described; they are totally excluded from all municipal offices in all the corporate towns and cities in Ireland; they are stigmatized by being excluded from the councils of their sovereign; and they are degraded in their native land, not only by the practical exclusion from many, and in truth nearly all, other offices, but much more so by the haughty and insolent superiority which is naturally excited in the minds of the unjustly-favoured few over the equally unjustly-excluded many: that the alarm created in the minds of the self-interested portion of the ascendancy in that country, lest their unjust monopoly should be destroyed by the humanity and wisdom of the legislature, has a natural tendency to produce, and is daily producing, an envenomed spirit of hostility, towards the Petitioners, threatening them even from the lips of those who ought to preach charity and
409
410
411
Ordered to lie on the table and to be printed.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, February 9, 1827.
CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION.]
The Hon. William Hare
rose to present a petition from the Roman Catholics of Listowell, in the county of Kerry, praying for a removal of those civil disabilities under which persons of their religious persuasion laboured. The hon. gentleman said, he had himself witnessed the many evils which resulted from the system of exclusion which was acted on towards his Roman Catholic fellow-subjects. All the disunion, ill-feeling, and animosity, public and private, which prevailed in Ireland, might be traced to that source, nor could he conceive how permanent tranquillity could be secured in that country, so long as such a penal code was suffered to exist. It was a matter of infinite moment to conciliate the feelings of the people of Ireland, and by that means to restore peace, order, and unanimity; and he was convinced, that nothing could effect that most desirable object but complete and unqualified emancipation. Such a measure might be said to carry its own security along with it, since it was calculated to excite the warm gratitude, and to draw forth the friendly and affectionate feelings, of the millions for whose benefit it was intended. He was as ardently attached to the constitution as any man could be. He gloried in it as the proudest boast of the country; and if granting a participation in all its immunities to his Roman Catholic fellow-subjects was likely, in the slightest degree, to impair the constitution, he would oppose any further concession. But he denied the assertion. Such a measure would strengthen, instead of weakening it; and he could not see how it was incompatible with its safety, to admit those who bore their full share of the taxes and burthens of the state to
412
Ordered to lie on the table.
CORN LAWS — PETITION OF THE
Mr. Hume
said, he rose to present a petition, which was certainly couched in very strong language; but the letter by which it was accompanied expressed a hope, that the House would not cavil at strong language, when it came from men who were in a starving condition. The petitioners described themselves as "The (Starving Weavers of Blackburn and its neighbourhood;" and the petition set forth;
s.
s.
413
Ordered to lie on the table and to be printed.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Monday, February 12, 1827.
DEATH OF THE DUKE OF YORK— ADDRESS OF CONDOLENCE TO HIS MAJESTY.]
The Earl of Liverpool
rose to move an Address of Condolence to his Majesty on the Death of his royal highness the Duke of York. He was sensible that the general feeling of regret was so much in accordance with his own, that it might be thought even intrusive in him to say any thing in proposing the motion which he intended to submit to the House. But he confessed that he felt it as a melancholy duty—a duty imposed upon him by recollections both pleasing and painful— that in proposing the address which he should submit to the House, he should make a few observations, in which he meant humbly to bear testimony to the merits of that illustrious individual now no more, who had been the first subject of this realm, and who stood in the situation of heir presumptive to the British Throne. They had likewise many and strong inducements to approach the throne on this occasion with their sentiments, and to state to his majesty their feelings of regret. No man, at all acquainted with his majesty, could doubt the feelings of affection which he entertained to every part of his family. But with respect to his late royal highness the Duke of York, there was this
414
415
416
The Address was agreed to
nem. diss,
417
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, February 12, 1827.
CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION.]
Mr. Villiers Stuart
said:—I rise for the purpose of presenting petitions from sundry bodies of Irish Catholics. The first, on the part of the Catholic bishop and clergy of the diocese of Waterford, and the rest from various parishes in that county, praying to be emancipated from the political disabilities to which they are now subjected. I should not venture to accompany the presentation of these memorials with any remarks at length, if it had not been the wish of many of my constituents, whose names are attached to them, that I should press the consideration of this question upon the House, in as strong a manner as possible. I cannot help feeling that I, who am a very young member of society and of this House, should offer some apology in rising to address it on a subject of such vast importance as that contained in the prayer of the petitions I now hold in my hand; but the very importance of the question, connected as it intimately is with the well-being, bound up as it is with the dearest interests, of those whom I have the honour to represent, will, I trust and believe, be accepted as no trivial excuse for my coming forward on this occasion.— Sir, I have not the presumption to request attention to my own opinions, merely as those of the individual who has the honour to address the House. I am aware, that, if what I say shall be considered to have any claim at all upon its consideration, it must arise from the sanction of those who have deputed me to speak their prayers, and from the circumstance of those prayers being offered up by the petitioners, in common with nearly the entire nation to which they belong; and, Sir, in making this assertion, I would not wish to be understood as putting forward any exaggerated statement of facts. In Water-ford, with which I am more particularly connected, Catholics are to Protestants as twenty-three to one; in the province of Minister, of which that county forms a part, the proportion is still more favourable to them; and in the two provinces of Leinster and Connaught, it is, perhaps, scarcely less so; and these calculations, founded as they are upon a census taken with the closest investigation and most accurate research, bear me out in the assertion, that nothing less than the prayers
418
419
420
421
de facto,
422
423
424
425
Ordered to lie on the table.
DEATH OF THE DUKE OF YORK— ADDRESS OF CONDOLENCE TO HIS MAJESTY.]
Mr. Secretary Peel
rose, and said:—Sir, in the period which has elapsed between the separation and reassembling of this House, the country has sustained the loss, by death, of the first prince of the blood; a prince whom the probable course of human events would, at some future period, have placed on the throne of these realms. Under such circumstances, at any time, and without reference to personal qualities or extraneous considerations, this House would have been induced, in unison with the general feelings of the country—to have presented an Address to the Throne, expressive of their respectful sympathy with the feelings of his majesty. The House would, under any circumstances, I say, have been induced to adopt that course, from the feelings which must necessarily arise in the bosoms of subjects of an ancient and limited monarchy, from those feelings that spring from the deep-felt conviction, that there is no other form of government better suited to the genius and habits of the people of this country, or better cal-
426
427
428
429
430
431
432
433
Mr. Brougham,
feeling the deepest sympathy with those who most deplored the decease of his royal highness, the late commander-in-chief, assured the; right hon. gentleman, that the language he had employed on this occasion, made it not only perfectly easy, but extremely grateful for him to concur in the proposed Address. In now rising to express his own entire concurrence in the language of the right hon. Secretary, he should abstain from all comment, further than to add that he considered it to have been no small praise to his royal highness, and one that might with perfect truth be applied to his memory, to have, for so long a period of time, enjoyed the disposal of the immense patronage of the army, without ever allowing political considerations— by which, he would be understood to mean, such as were more commonly termed party considerations—to interfere with the disposal of that patronage. And he would add another just eulogium, that his royal highness had shown himself quite incapable of allowing mere personal feelings—feelings of asperity towards any particular individuals for example—to cast any shade across the path of his public duty; and, surely, the best testimony which the country could have of the sincerity and honesty of those strong-political opinions which his royal highness confessed himself to entertain on certain questions—and, on some subjects, he might be almost tempted to call them prejudices—the best test that his royal highness at least hold them honestly and conscientiously, was this, that he cherished them as much as possible, free from all admixture of asperity towards those whose notions were opposed to his own on such matters.
Sir Robert Wilson
regretted that the right hon. gentleman, in proposing this
434
The Address was agreed to
nem. con.
NAVY ESTIMATES.]
On the order of the day for going into a committee of supply, and for referring the Navy Estimates to the said committee,
Mr. Hume
said, that before the Speaker left the chair, he wished, seeing the right hon. the chancellor of the Exchequer in his place, to ask him whether this was not a proper occasion for the right hon. gentleman to state what was his intention with respect to the expenditure for the year, he thought that, before the House was called upon to vote on this subject, they ought not only to know what was proposed as the amount of expenditure, but also the income of the past year, that they might judge of the scale on which the estimates should be formed, with a view to the means that the revenue of the country possessed of discharging its debts. He wished to know whether the expedition to Portugal had added to the amount of the estimates, and he wished also to impress upon the House the necessity of their considering that, in the present distressed state of the country, no increase should be sanctioned, and that they ought
435
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that any answer which he could make to the inquiries of the hon. member must of necessity be unsatisfactory, unless it could be accompanied with a full explanation, and a discussion of all the points involved in it. As he was not prepared to enter upon such an explanation and discussion at that moment, he could only pursue the course which he had adopted in antecedent years, and generally approved of by the House, whatever objections might have been made to it by individuals. He must also remark, that he thought, at the present moment, the state of the navy was an object of so great importance, that no obstacle ought to be placed in the way of the vote; and for this reason, even if he were prepared to enter on the discussion which the hon. member seemed to invite, he should decline doing so. At no distant period he should be in a situation to make the fullest statement on this subject, and he trusted the House would not think that it was from any unwillingness on his part to meet the discussion, that he now declined to let it interfere with the present vote, but because he thought that nothing should stop the course of so important a branch of the national strength as the navy.
Colonel Davies
said, that shortly after the meeting of parliament, he had given notice of a motion to refer all the estimates to a committee above stairs. It might be expected that he should, therefore, object to the present vote; but he begged to state his opinion, that every thing ought to be done to support the government of the country in the manly line of conduct they had adopted, and that he would be
436
Sir J. Yorke
said, that the hon. member for Aberdeen might be assured that the Board of Admiralty, as well as the other departments of the state, had fully inquired what were the exigencies of the state and what its expenditure, before they prepared their estimates, and that they had shaped them as low as was consistent with the honour and safety of the country.
Mr. Maberly
thought his hon. friend, the member for Aberdeen, had done no more than his duty. He had no doubt that ministers knew what was the state of the revenue; but that was not enough for the House. They had a right to the information which his hon. friend asked for, and ought not to take any thing for granted. Before the House consented to vote away the public money, they should have an account laid on the table of the means from which that money was to be derived.
Mr. Hume
said, he would not now prevent the Speaker's leaving the chair, but should take the earliest opportunity of as certaining the sense of the House on this subject.
Mr. Calcraft
thought there was a great deal in the hon. member for Aberdeen's objection, but considering the state of the country, he could not consent that any obstacle should be put in the way of the vote for the navy estimates. He was glad to hear that the establishment was not to be cut down, and that government had paused before they put into execution their intention of reducing it. Even if our foreign relations had been less urgent than they were, he should be against any reduction. Every body knew how much depended on the navy, and that when the country was involved in war, notwithstanding the reliance which we placed on the army, it was the navy that must fight us through. The praises which had been so justly bestowed on the duke of York, reminded him that the system of regularity and fairness of promotion in the army, which had been put in practice by him, was one of the most honourable parts of his character. He wished to recommend to those who had the direction of the navy,
437
Sir George Cockburn
assured the hon. member, that there was the strongest desire in the admiralty, to do every thing in their power to forward promotion in the navy. Some years ago it had been thought to go on too rapidly; but he was glad to see a more liberal feeling springing up, and was confident that nothing would be wanting on the part of government to give it a beneficial effect.
The House having resolved itself into the committee,
Sir George Clerk
said, that in calling the attention of the House to the navy estimates, he meant to confine himself to the differences between those of the present and of the past year. The difference in the total amount was not more than 10,000
l.
l.
438
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
Mr. Hume
said, that it was high time to confine this vote within due limits. It was given as a reason that no reduction had taken place in the number of men this year, that our expedition to Portugal had interfered to prevent such reduction. But if we were to right the wrongs of other countries at the expense of our own, the number of men which the committee were now called upon to vote, would in a short time be insufficient for the purpose. The House ought to pause a little, and consider whether an expense of six millions per annum was not too much to pay to support Portugal and preserve the faith of treaties. At the same time that he deprecated the system of keeping up expensive war establishments in time of peace, he was ready to avow, that he would rather preserve the whole of our naval force, expensive as it was, than keep up half our present military establishment. If this country had not a redundant military force, ministers would never have ventured on the rash step which they lately thought proper to take. A superabundant army tended to encourage a nation to go to war. Where was the necessity for our keeping up an undiminished navy,
439
Mr. Maberly,
having voted with ministers for sending troops to Portugal, could not with consistency vote against the resolution now proposed. He thought that the present was no time to talk of reductions in the army or navy; and he felt the necessity of upholding those establishments the more, when he reflected on the threats which America had thought proper to promulgate in the late speech of her President. It was right that England should have it in her power to show that she had an efficient army and navy at her disposal, and that neither was in a crippled state. Our internal difficulties had, no doubt, given rise to and encouraged those threats; but he hoped that those difficulties would soon subside; and he felt that the surest mode of allaying them and preventing their recurrence would be, to reduce the heavy taxation under which the country was groaning.
Sir J. Yorke
said, that the hon. member for Aberdeen and himself were friendly to the same measures, and only differed in their means of adopting them. The hon. member wanted to cut down our naval establishment; but he could not agree with him in thinking that by husbanding our resources now, we could employ them to a better purpose when occasion required. On the contrary, he was firmly of opinion, that our best means of giving any country that might oppose us a black eye, was to show our capability to inflict it. Let the House look at what America was in 1783, and what she is in 1827; and then the question would naturally occur, whether it would be wise or safe to reduce a single frigate—whether it would be politic to cut off a single little finger from the body of the state.
440
Mr. Hume
said, he should be sorry the idea should be entertained that he wished to cripple the resources of the country; at the same time he could not but observe, in reply to the gallant admiral, that the readiness to give a black eye often led to mischief. When a man had a sword at his command, it was natural for him to get into a quarrel; whereas, if he were without the means of doing mischief, it was more than probable that no quarrel
441
The resolution was agreed to. On the resolution, "That 955,500
l.
l.
s.
Mr. Hume
expressed a hope that the impressment of seamen would be discontinued. As soon as it was known that an armament was to be fitted out for Portugal, all the men engaged in the merchant service were filled with alarm in the several ports of England. They concealed themselves, and would on no account appear. At some future day he would bring the subject more fully before the House; and he trusted that, as some improvements had been introduced for the comfort of the seamen, impressment, which made the naval service so unpopular, would be abolished, and some inducement held out to men to enter voluntarily into the service. He also wished to see the ignominious infliction of flogging in the navy done away with.
Sir G. Cockburn
said, that the subject had engaged the frequent and serious attention of the Admiralty; and, although he might not quite concur in the opinions of the hon. member, he would say, that if impressment could not be altogether abolished, it ought to be avoided and discouraged as far as was consistent with the efficiency of the naval service. He would not now enter into the question, but he would express his dissent from the opinion of the hon. gentleman, that the naval service was unpopular. The contrary was satisfactorily proved on the late occasion of sending troops to Portugal.
Sir J. Yorke
thought the gallant officer exercised more anxiety, and was more nervous on the subject, than was altogether necessary. There was no question that required more to be thoroughly probed
442
Sir G. Cockburn
said, that so far from being unwilling to discuss the subject, he had expressed his readiness to do so whenever the hon. member for Aberdeen thought proper to bring it forward.
Mr. Sykes
expressed a hope that some measure would be adopted that would do away with impressment in the navy. He should be rejoiced to see this foul blot removed from the high character of our naval service. Remedies had been suggested for the admitted evil. In a work written by captain Maryat, an officer of great experience, some valuable remarks were to be met with, which went to show that this great evil might be altogether abolished. He could not conceive a greater hardship than that a man in the merchant-service, on his return to his family, after having been six or seven years at sea, was liable to be seized on his coming into port, almost within the very view and grasp of his family and friends. Whenever the hon. gentleman should bring forward the question, it should have his sincere support.
Sir George Clerk
observed, that in time of peace it was unnecessary to resort to impressment, but when any great national emergency arose, requiring decision and celerity, he knew of no other mode of supplying the wants of the navy; but if the hon. member for Aberdeen was prepared with any measure on the subject, it should meet with every attention from the Board at which he had the honour to sit.
Sir E. Owen
said, he had frequently and anxiously examined this subject; and the more he examined it, the more he was satisfied that impressment at all times, and under all emergencies, could not, with safety to the naval service, be altogether
443
444
Mr. Hume
said, that on former occasions when the question of excessive punishment in the navy had been under discussion, he had particularized cases of its occurrence. There was one case of a vessel having a complement of a hundred and twelve men, out of whom eighty-six had been flogged in the course of a twelve month. Would the gallant officer deny that such abuses had existed? They might be diminished; bat it was most desirable to prevent the possibility of their occurrence. On the occasion to which he alluded, he had not confined himself to one or two cases, but had adverted to a number, proceeding, not on vague, or private information, as the gallant officer supposed, but on the sentences of courts martial. It was not his habit to make any statement in parliament which was not founded on substantial evidence. In some instances he had withheld the names of the officers from considerations of delicacy. One officer, in particular, who had become sensible of his error, had been re-employed; and it would have been cruel to name him.
The resolution was agreed, to. On the resolution, "That 624,000
l.
l.
s.
Mr. Hume,
adverting to the item for erecting a corn-mill for the victualling department at Deptford, said, he should be glad to know for what reason government, instead of obtaining flour for the navy at that cheaper rate which competition would naturally occasion, had determined to prepare it themselves, at what must be a considerably increased expense?
Sir G. Clerk
observed, that if the article manufactured proved to be of a better quality than that which could be obtained by contract, a slight difference in the price ought to be no object; but the fact was, that at the mills at Portsmouth and Plymouth, the flour was produced cheaper and better than it could be obtained by contract. The adulteration of flour intended for the use of the navy had been carried to so great an extent, that it
445
Mr. Hume
wished to know whether the fraudulent factors alluded to had been prosecuted. Had the payment of the penalties been enforced?
Sir G. Clerk
replied, that the punishment was the non-fulfilment of the contract. All the flour discovered to be adulterated had been thrown on the hands of the contractors. About six thousand sacks had been so detected, and so returned. But it was hardly possible, with the utmost vigilance, to discover every deteriorated sack; and it was probable, therefore, that a great portion of adulterated or inferior flour had been introduced into the consumption of the navy.
Mr. Hume
could not help thinking that if the Navy Board had given publicity to the frauds, and enforced the penalties, they would have been enabled to obtain good flour in other quarters.
The resolution was agreed to. On the resolution, "That 560,000
l.
Mr. Hume
said, he thought that this and the next item, which was chiefly for timber, and which, added to the present, amounted to 1,500,000
l.
446
Sir G. Clerk
said, that government were by no means inattentive to the progress which other nations were making in the construction of particular kinds of vessels. When they saw any such vessels built, care was taken that we should have similar vessels to meet them in case of necessity.
Sir J. Yorke
did not think it necessary that we should continue to build very large vessels, or that we ought, in that respect, to imitate the Americans, who were constructing vessels of such a size that it would require a crew of Patagonian chaps of some eight feet and a half high to navigate them. It had often fallen to his lot to differ from his gallant friend, but he did so most widely on the subject of the experiment made of cutting down a seventy-four, and making it a kind of vessel which he hardly knew how to describe. The upper deck was cut down. The officers were obliged to go down a deck lower, and the men still lower; and in this state, without her proper complement of men, she was sent on a broiling hot station, where the thermometer was generally at ninety-six. This change was made at an enormous expense, all of which came out of the 1,500,000
l.
Sir G. Cockburn
said, that the subject on which the gallant admiral seemed so much at a loss for information was very easily explained. It was necessary to have a proper class of frigates to meet those of other nations. It was well known, that one of our frigates was captured in the late war by a frigate of the enemy; but it was not then generally known, that
447
448
The resolution was agreed to. On the resolution, "That 881,000
l.
Mr. Hume
said, that with all deference to the hon. member for Wareham, who had told the House, that promotion went on too slowly on the navy, he thought there was too much promotion in our naval service; that it went on much too rapidly; and that it was getting beyond the means of the country to support. The dead weight, instead of decreasing, as it annually ought to do, was increasing under the present system, and seemed likely to continue for ever. He contended that the House ought either to prevent promotion from being granted to more than a certain number of officers, or determine not to give it except to those who had been twelve or fifteen years in the service. Such a change would prevent young men of title and family from being promoted over the head of their seniors, without seeing any thing of actual service.
Sir G. Cockburn
contended that, from the opinion of the hon. member for Wareham, who thought that promotion went on too slowly, and from that of the hon. member for Aberdeen, who thought it went on too quickly in the navy, it was only fair to presume, that the Admiralty, in steering a steady middle course between the two, was acting with wisdom and moderation. He owned, however, that the Admiralty were more inclined to adopt the view of the hon. member for Wareham, than that of the hon. member for Aberdeen. The captains now at the head of the list had been twenty-six or twenty-seven years in the service; and, supposing they were thirty years old when they attained the rank of captain, they must now be nearly sixty years old. Now, without wishing to detract from their just claims, he thought it only right to keep feeding the service with young officers. In the promotions of the last year, thirty officers had been made captains, who passed their examinations as lieutenants twelve years since. He thought that the House would not
449
Sir John Wrottesley
thought, that the system of promotion, which was conducted in the navy upon principles unknown in every other department of the state, was liable to great objection. In the army, no new commission could issue until a vacancy occurred. So in the civil departments of the country, no clerk could be promoted until there was a higher situation vacant in his office. But, in the navy, promotions could be made to any extent, as, in point of fact, though not exactly in point of form, a man might be made captain without having any ship to command. Indeed, a lord of the Admiralty had no limitation, except his conscience, to his power of taxing the country, by promoting inferior officers.
Mr. Hume
said, as promotion was asserted to be necessary to keep the navy in order, he supposed it would be equally necessary for the marine service; and yet, in one year, he saw two hundred and ninety-four promotions in the navy, and only thirteen in the marines. From 1810 to 1826 there had been only seventy-six promotions in the whole marine service.
The resolution was agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, February 13, 1827.
CORN-LAWS.]
Sir E. Knatchbull,
in presenting a Petition against any alteration in the Corn-Laws, took occasion to ask the right hon. Secretary opposite in what mode government intended to proceed, in bringing forward the question. He expressed his deep regret that the consideration of it had been so long postponed; for, if the right hon. Secretary for Foreign Affairs was too unwell to bring it forward speedily, it might have been done by the President of the Board of Trade. The subject was of the greatest importance, and the public mind was intensely interested in it. If the matter should, how-. ever, be brought forward at the time announced, he wished to be informed what was the course which the government meant to adopt? Did they intend to proceed by bill? or was it their intention to refer the matter to a committee of the whole House?
450
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that although he must decline giving any answer as to the nature of the measure which government intended to submit to the House, he had no objection to say that the course of proceeding which it was at present intended to adopt was, to move resolutions in a committee of the whole House, which resolutions would contain the plan in detail. If these resolutions should be agreed to, then the intention was, that they should be printed for the use of the members, and be re-committed on a future day, that gentlemen might have an opportunity of giving this important subject the fullest possible consideration.
NAVY ESTIMATES—IMPRESSMENT OF
Sir G. Clerk
brought up the report of the committee of supply on the Navy Estimates. On the resolutions being read,
Sir John Newport
said, he was desirous of adding his voice to those which had already been raised in that House against the present system of impressing seamen. He should never be convinced that, in this country, there was not a power to call a sufficient number of men into service whenever it might be necessary, without the exercise of that which he considered absolute tyranny. It had been shown, again and again, in that House and in numerous publications, that such means did exist; and he believed in his conscience, that until the tyrannous system to which he objected should be done away, it would operate as a drawback upon the desire which men would otherwise evince to enter the service. The consequence was, that they would be driven to other countries; and the experience of the late war with America had shown the mischievous consequences of having the enemy's ships manned and fought by British seamen. He hoped the subject would engage the serious attention of those who had the care of the British navy. The expense which it might occasion was of no consequence. He should never cease to bear testimony to this abominable hardship; and he wished that, as his voice had been raised in the earliest part of his parliamentary life against this system, so his latest effort—which could not be far distant—might be directed to rescue the men who were properly called the bulwarks of their country, from the tyranny to which they were exposed.
451
Mr. Warburton
was of opinion, that it the question were put to the merchants and ship-owners, whether the system of impressment were injurious or otherwise, they would, one and all, protest against it, The shipping interest was materially affected by it; for what could be a greater hardship on the part of the owners, than that the men who worked their vessels should be taken out of them, after perhaps a long and hazardous voyage, on their arrival in the chops of the Channel? The whole system of impressment was degrading to the country, and destructive of that free spirit for which British seamen were distinguished. He was sure that the people of Great Britain would sooner submit to additional taxation, if no other means could be found by which the system of naval impressments might be abolished.
Sir George Clerk
contended, that the view which hon. members seemed to take of the system of impressment was founded on erroneous reasoning. It was only in cases of peculiaremergency that this mode of raising men for the service was resorted to. A sufficient supply of seamen could always be had, without having recourse to the system complained of; but the House should bear in mind, before it insisted too strongly on its abolition, that there were circumstances in which it might be necessary to require a fleet to be manned with extraordinary despatch; which could only be accomplished by resorting to impressment. The hon. member had talked of the hardship of taking men from merchant ships on their arrival in the Channel; but, would not the merchants have much more cause of complaint, if government had not provided the means of defending their shipping from the enemy? It was to be hoped that the system of impressment would be so modified, as to strip it of its grievances; and that the liberality which the country had displayed in bestowing pensions on those sailors who had served their country would have the effect of making the service less irksome. He thought it wrong, however, to insist too strongly on putting an end to impressment altogether, particularly when it was considered that the salvation of the country might depend on the celerity with which we could command a navy.
Mr. Lombe
conceived that there must be something wrong in the system pursued by our navy, otherwise the sailors
452
Sir G. Clerk
replied, that the greater part of the packets alluded to were hired vessels, the crews of which were not under military law. The removal had taken place in consequence of the great length of time which the vessels were detained at New York. Their men had not deserted into the American navy, but had been induced by high wages—a dollar a day—to work at unloading the ships in the harbour.
Mr. Hume
wished to state the result of the inquiries which he had made on the subject. It was generally admitted, that the service of the navy was less laborious, and that the men had less labour, better food, better regulations, and more advantages, than in the merchant service. They stated, that it was not the inferiority of the wages to the wages in the merchant service of which they complained, for that was compensated by pensions. Thousands of seamen had been examined, and they one and all declared, that their aversion to the service arose from the discipline to which they were subjected. That such discipline was unnecessary had been proved in various cases. In the Bulwark of 74 there had not been a single corporal punishment inflicted for eighteen months. The seamen were dissatisfied that a commander had it in his power to order the infliction of a summary punishment which degraded the individual for ever, and that there was no redress. To impressment they did not object on an emergency. But they objected to being torn from their families by impressment, and then kept in the service for life. Whenever the urgency of the public service required it the seamen had no objection to take their turn; but they wished for the establishment of some regulation to prevent their being detained after the emergency had ceased to exist. One great objection to impressment was the expense which it occasioned in tenders, &c.; for the moment a sailor was pressed, he became a prisoner, under a guard, and was divested of all the rights of an Englishman. He was satisfied that the number of desertions which took place during the late war, in consequence of the dis-
453
Sir Byam Martin
utterly denied that the naval service was unpopular. As a
454
Sir J. Newport
:— That, then, is an additional argument against the necessity of impressment.
Sir C. Forbes
said, he had heard, that such was the desire of the men engaged in the shipping of the East India company to enter into his majesty's service, that the court of directors had made application to the Admiralty to prevent it. He was one of the last men who would stand up for unnecessary punishments at sea or on shore. He had known some instances of excessive punishment on board ship, which he would not particularize; because, happily, there was an end to such tyrannical proceedings. It was due to lord Exmouth to say that he had introduced regulations on the East India station, which had since been adopted in the whole navy. It was now no uncommon thing for a man of war to make a long voyage, without the occurrence of a single punishment. Had such a circumstance ever taken place on board an Indiaman? If punishments were complained of on board men of war, how much more objectionable must they be on board merchant-ships. But in some cases they were absolutely necessary. If the punishments on board men of war, and the punishments on board merchant-ships were compared, the latter would be found to be the more excessive. The condition and treatment of the sailor on board of a king's ship had of late years been considerably improved; and his majesty's service was now looked to by seamen as most desirable. With regard to impressment the judicious application of a bounty would always ensure a supply of volunteers for the navy, without resorting to a measure which was generally condemned. Bounties were given to induce soldiers to enter the service; and why should they not also be offered as an inducement to man our fleets? Much as
455
Mr. Alderman
Wood urged the necessity of introducing some regulations respecting impressment, and adverted to various regulations on the subject, which had been adopted by the Corporation of London during the war.
Sir E. Owen
contended, that no men were punished on board ship who did not misbehave themselves, and that sailors were never put in irons except in cases of gross misconduct. Gentlemen, in debating upon this subject, argued upon exceptions just as if they were rules. Whenever the infliction of severe punishment came to the knowledge of the Admiralty, investigation was ordered into the circumstances which had occasioned it, and if they were not deemed adequate, the officer ordering the infliction was visited with severe reprehension. He denied that the punishment inflicted in the navy degraded the character of the men. Sailors often admitted the justice of the sentence, after it had been carried into execution. Not only the offence, but the previous character of every man was considered, when he was brought up to the gangway. He would venture to say, that when offences committed at sea were to be punished, the captain being the only indifferent person on board, was the person best qualified to judge of the degree of punishment which ought to be meted out. The offences ordinarily committed by sailors were cither against their officers or against each other. If, then, the offenders were to be tried cither by their officers or by their comrades, they must be tried by the very parties whom their misconduct injured. As a proof of the evil consequences likely to arise from placing the punishment in the hands of the officers, he stated that whilst he was captain, he had felt himself called upon, in almost every case where a man had been tried by court-martial, to diminish the punishment which it inflicted, by full three parts. Much had been said of impressment; but he was convinced that no pecuniary reward would be found an adequate substitute in case of emergency. It
456
Mr. Fyler
contended, that impressment was not only contrary to the spirit of the British constitution, but a disgrace and opprobrium to the British nation. The resolutions were agreed to.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Wednesday, February 14, 1827.
CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION.]
The Marquis of Lansdown
, on rising to present the petitions of which he had on a former evening given notice, said, he had thought it right, from the respect due to their lordships, as well as to the petitioners, to give notice of his intention to present them that day; but he did not, therefore, mean to go into any discussion of the general question relative to the Catholics. He felt it, however, to be his duty towards the petitioners to state, with respect to the first petition—similar petitions to which had frequently been under their lordships' consideration, and which was the petition of the Roman Catholics of Ireland—as well as with respect to the second petition, which was then, for the first time, presented to their lordships, and was from the Roman Catholic Bishops of Ireland—that he had read them both very carefully, and he could assure their lordships that there was not one expression in them disrespectful to their lordships; he would say, not only not one disrespectful expression, but not one expression which any noble lord, the most hostile to the petitioners' claims, could construe into disrespect to their lordships. He was sure their lordships would never find it disrespectful in any class of his majesty's subjects, to come forward, and state explicitly and plainly the claims they might have, on account of services already rendered, or of services they were disposed
457
458
459
On the petition being read, it was withdrawn, on account of an informality; the signatures being on a detached sheet of paper.
The Marquis of Lansdown
then gave notice, that on the 8th of March, he would submit to their lordships a proposition founded on the petitions he had presented. It was probable that before that day the subject would be discussed in another place. But, whatever might be the result of the discussion which might take place elsewhere, he would move the resolution of which he had given notice. He was the more anxious so to do, because the responsibility of not bringing the question forward during the last session", attached more to himself than to any other individual.
The Earl of Winchelsea
rose, not to reply to the arguments of the noble marquis, but for the purpose of expressing his own sentiments. He sincerely trusted that, before their lordships admitted the Roman Catholics to a full participation of civil rights, and thereby opened to them a road to high situations of political trust—before their lordships attempted to repeal the test act, and to separate the church from the state, they would carefully consider the grounds on which, by the wisdom of their ancestors, such disabilities had been imposed. He felt no small gratification, that when the question of the Catholic claims should again be brought forward, it would appear in a very striking and new point of view, with respect to the reformation which had been begun in Ireland, and which he trusted would proceed. He sincerely hoped that their lordships would direct their attention to the political power which the Roman Catholic priests had lately exorcised over their flocks—a power which had created a just alarm. He also sincerely trusted, that their lordships would never abandon that constitution under which that House and all the institutions of the country existed, from any subserviency to public clamour, or any views of political expediency.
Lord Clifdan
could not say how the reformation to which the noble lord had alluded might be going on; but he sincerely hoped, that all the Catholics might become Protestants, and he thought that the most likely menus of accomplishing that object was to do away with those
460
HOUSE OF COMMONS,
Wednesday, February 14, 1827.
COLONEL BRADLEY'S CASE.]
Mr. Hume
, said, that he had, on a former occa-
461
Lord Palmerston
said, that the hon. member had twice before brought the case of colonel Bradley's dismissal from the service under the consideration of the House. On both occasions, he (lord P.) had stated to the House the grounds on which the military advisers of the Crown had recommended his majesty to dismiss colonel Bradley. The facts of the case were these: colonel Bradley had taken upon himself to question the military command exercised by major Arthur, at Honduras, and not content with submitting his doubts to the authorities competent to solve them, he had chosen to solve them himself, and by his own act deposed major Arthur. This was considered to be an act of mutiny, which it was quite impossible could be passed over. The military advisers of the Crown had founded their opinion of the propriety of removing colonel Bradley from the service, not on the representations of major Arthur alone, but also upon colonel Bradley's own representations, contained in his letters to the commander-in-chief. Colonel Bradley, however, not contented with the decision to which the advisers of the Crown had come, carried the case into a court of justice. He had rested his case there, on the ground that he had been illegally confined by major Arthur, inasmuch as he possessed no competent military authority to confine him. It would be perceived, that the case, in the court of law, did not rest on the same grounds as those which influenced the military advisers of the Crown; for the propriety of colonel Bradley's conduct
462
l.
463
Mr. Hume
denied that he had fallen into any such error and confusion as the noble lord had stated. This was a case of the utmost importance in a general point of view, and was, therefore, of much more consequence than if it applied to colonel Bradley alone, although one could not but be sorry that a deserving individual should have been so used. There were three or four questions connected with this subject, which deserved the serious consideration of this House. The first was, whether the Crown really possessed the prerogative which it claimed of dismissing officers of the army in this summary and arbitrary manner. The second was, whether his majesty had, under any act of parliament, the power, by himself or his officers, to grant commission of that nature; and if they were granted, whether those who received them were not still subject to the articles of war? The military commission, from general fuller to major Arthur, was the one produced in the court of King's-bench; and the court certainly had held, that it was a sufficient authority to colonel Arthur for acting in the manner he had done. He did not deny the existence of this commission. What he said was, that a person receiving such a commission was still bound, by the articles of war, to exercise it according to the rank and seniority which he held in the army, and that he was still subject to his superior officers. This was a case provided for by a section of the articles of war, and this was a point which was required to be established by one of the papers now called for. This was quite, distinct from the question, whether the commission itself had been granted by general Fuller. In giving a commission, it was impossible that he should have the power of giving a commission contrary to the king's commission, which colonel Bradley had in his pocket, and which required him to act according to his rank and seniority. When general Fuller granted the commission to major Arthur, he could only grant it to be exercised subject to the articles of war, and the question was, whether general Fuller's commission was to be considered as paramount to that of his majesty? It had
464
465
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that it had at last become necessary that this question should be brought to some termination. Since it had been before the House, it had changed its shape so materially, that he would in the first place, briefly call the attention of the House to the different groundson which the case had been argued. Originally, it was represented by the hon. gentleman, that the whole question was, whether any commission existed that justified colonel Arthur in assuming the military command of Honduras. His noble friend asserted, in the most positive manner, that there was a commission of that nature in existence. The hon. gentleman expressed a strong suspicion, that the commission, if any existed, must have been a fabrication. This statement was certainly one of those which approached the extreme limit of debate. To the positive assertion of n. nobleman holding the responsible office of Secretary of War, he felt that he could not but give implicit confidence. The fact, however, was soon placed beyond all doubt. The commission itself was produced; and it then further appeared, that it was signed by general Fuller in 1814, and had the effect of
466
467
Mr. Bernal
stated that, in his opinion, the principal point was one which the right hon. gentleman had overlooked; namely, whether general Fuller had legal authority to grant the commission in question to any officer. It would be seen; by reference to the report of the trial, that the judges did not sufficiently advert to that point. The judges alluded slightly to some evidence that there had been a recognition of a local kind, as to some authority possessed by general Fuller to grant a commission of this nature. But surely it was too much that, in 1825, any uncertainty at all should exist as to so material a point. The judges shrunk from the question, instead of entering into it boldly and manfully. It was their duty, he conceived, to state expressly, whether the Crown had authority, by martial law, or by the ordinary Statutes of the land, to delegate to its commanders abroad, the power of granting commissions, like that given by general Fuller to colonel Arthur. He also thought that it was equally the duty of the right hon. gentleman to elicit from legal authority, the fact, whether such a power was possessed by the Crown. This, he trusted, was not too much to expect in 1827. On the face of the report of the trial, the point had evidently been blinked. Besides, the words of the commission in this case did not give authority to colonel Arthur to command the regular forces. The case of colonel Bradley was altogether one of great hardship, and he would take the liberty of advising' the right hon. gentleman to represent it in the highest quarter, as one well deserving of redress.
Sir H. Hardinge
said, he had not the slightest doubt as to the point adverted to by the hon. gentleman. It was a great absurdity, surely, to argue, that, if any military officer commanding in chief, in
468
pro tempore
469
Mr. Hume
made some observations which were not distinctly audible, and was interrupted by
Lord Palmerston
, who wished to inquire whether the hon. member, in stating, that assertions had been made in that House which were not founded in fact, meant the observation to apply personally to him.
Mr. Hume
said, that what he meant to convoy was, that assertions having been made in that House which were not founded in fact, he had rather rely on authenticated documents than on any such assertions.
470
Lord Palmerston
repeated his inquiry, whether the hon. member's allusion was meant to apply personally to him.
Mr. Hume
said, he did not conceive that the noble lord was entitled to any courtesy from him; inasmuch as the noble lord had, on a former occasion, said he did not conceive himself bound to answer any question put by him, although he was ready to satisfy the House. The noble lord had no right, therefore, to expect any courtesy from him, after having on that occasion so notedly declined acting as a gentleman. [Cries of "Order, order."]
The Speaker
said, it was the duty of the person who occupied the situation in which the House had done him the honour to place him, to take care that whatever irregularity hon. members might be betrayed into in the warmth of debate, should be rectified, and that any expressions which might be disrespectful to the House, and painful to 'the feelings of individual members, should be explained and retracted. He had understood the hon. member to say, that all he intended to convey by his observation was, that authenticated instruments laid before the House were better evidence than any assertion that could be made in that House, inasmuch as those assertions might be founded upon the particular construction put upon these documents, or the particular inference drawn from them by the persons who made the assertion. If such were the meaning of the hon. gentleman, no imputation was cast upon any individual in that House; and all that could be inferred from the hon. member's observation was, that different persons might form different judgments of the same document. Such an explanation must, he was sure, be satisfactory to the noble lord, although it was evident that the noble lord did not, in the first instance, put the same construction upon the hon. member's meaning as he (the Speaker) had done. With respect to the last observation of the hon. member, he was quite sure that the hon. member must himself feel that it was highly disorderly; and he was satisfied that the hon. member could not have deliberately intended to make it.
Mr. Hume
said, he had been a long time in the House, and had endeavoured never to use language which might he unbecoming in him, or irregular as to the forms of the House. It had often been
471
The motions were then negatived.
WRITS OF RIGHT—DOWER.]
Mr. Shadwell
rose, pursuant to notice, to move for leave to bring in a bill relative to the landed interest of the country, and to what he conceived to be a grievous imposition on their property. The object of the proposed bill was particularly as to the duration of time within which Writs of Right, or real actions, as they were called might be brought, after the period by which the ordinary remedies were limited had ceased. A principal ingredient in the comfortable enjoyment of real property was a secure and unassailable title; but the effect of a writ of right being practically to hold that enjoyment in jeopardy for a great number of years, it was found necessary, at a very early period of our history, to abridge the period within which this writ could be sued out. The first act of the legislature in which they were mentioned was the statute of Morton, made in 1236, in which it was enacted, that, no such writs should be brought for causes which had occurred since the reign of Henry 2nd, that was since the year 1185. In the revolution of time, this period of forty-six years was extended, and, by the first statute of Westminster, made in the first year of Edward 1st, that was in 1275, it was re-enacted, that no writ of right should be brought where the cause of action had arisen since the reign of Richard 1st, or 1199, thus making the period of limitation seventy-six years. The law then remained unaltered until the 32nd Henry 8th, when, in 1540, it
472
473
primâ facie
Mr. Lockhart
thought the landed interest were much indebted to the learned member, for the measure which he proposed to introduce. He could have wished that the learned member had proposed some remedy for the evil arising from outstanding terms, which created great difficulty in the perfecting of titles. At present, persons were frequently obliged to consume years in finding out the next of kin, in order to take out letters of limited administration, at a most enormous expense. There was another evil which called for a remedy. A bill in chancery was held to be notice to all the world; and if a bill in
474
Mr. D. W. Harvey
, after some observations upon the practice of conveyances, and the facility with which they entertained any objections to a title when they might be made to form grounds of proceedings in a court of equity, expressed his surprise and regret that the learned gentleman had not moved for the appointment of a committee to investigate the state of the laws with respect to real property, rather than, by proposing a partial and unequal remedy, to disappoint the expectations formed by the public upon any thing which might emanate from a man of the learned gentleman's character and legal reputation. If, however, the learned gentleman did not move for that committee, he would himself, at an early period, propose that the whole of the laws relating to real property be subjected to the revision of a committee of the House.
Mr. Hume
expressed his conviction of the necessity of such a committee, and condemned any measure which did not put some bar to the claims of the clergy for tithes. Some of these claims were carried back four hundred and fifty years; and unless a general system of reform was introduced, they would patch without relieving those difficulties which deteriorated the value of land to the extent of four or five years' purchase. The learned gentleman's bill seemed, indeed, to be but a patch, and he agreed with the hon. member, that it would disappoint the hopes of the public.
Mr. Shadwell
, in reply, declared himself willing to lend the benefit of any little experience which he might possess, to any measure which the House might adopt towards a reformation of the law of real property; but he thought they ought not to reject the remedy of one grievance, because they could not obtain their wishes with regard to all. Men differed with respect
475
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, February 15, 1827.
KING'S MESSAGE FOR A FURTHER
The Chancellor of the Exchequer presented the following Message from his Majesty:—
"GEORGE R.
"His Majesty being desirous of making such further provision for the support and maintenance of the duke and duchess of Clarence as may be suitable to the present situation of their royal highnesses, relies on the affection of His faithful Commons, that they will make such provision therein as the circumstances of the case may appear to require. G. R."
Ordered to be referred to a committee of the whole House to morrow.
EMIGRATION FROM THE UNITED
Mr. Wilmot Horton
rose, in pursuance of a notice which he had given last session, to move for the renewal of the Emigration Committee. He said he was anxious to stale in the outset, that whatever details he might now think it proper to enter into relative to the proceedings of the late committee, he did so merely as the chairman of that committee, and not as presuming to say any thing to the House of a definite nature relative to the intentions of government upon the subject. Perhaps it would be a convenient mode for him to inform the House of the circumstances which led to the appointment of that committee. In the year 1823, it was determined to try the experiment of sending a few individuals from the southern parts of Ireland to the province of Upper Canada—not from any expectation that the small emigration which then took place could produce any sensible effect upon the superabundant population of the south of Ireland, but merely for the sake of having before them the effect of an experiment tried upon a small scale, before they ventured upon a plan of emigration upon a large one. In the committee on
476
477
l
l
478
479
480
481
482
l
483
l
l
l
l
l
s
l
l
l
l
484
l
l
l
l
l
l
s
485
486
487
488
s
d
l
s
d
489
l
490
Mr. James Grattan
objected to the motion, as calculated to lead the people of Great Britain, and especially those of Ireland, astray. Emigration was the hobby, if he might so call it, of the hon. gentleman opposite; but it had been proved by experience, that emigration, upon any extended scale, would not do; and, in the mean time, hopes were excited among the distressed people. They imagined that a plan was in preparation for their removal, and that money was going to be granted for their aid; while the hon. gentleman went on, from session to session, appointing his committee, discussing projects which the country had no means of realizing, and describing scenes of comfort and amelioration which, by no probability could come to pass. By the calculation of colonel Cockburn, the military experiment made in 1816 had cost the country, for each settler, at the rate of 20
l
l
l
491
Mr. Lombe
rose to second the amendment. He said, that if the hon. gentleman opposite would come down to that House with a fair and honest scheme of colonization, he should have his cordial support; but this was a mere delusion. As to Ireland, there was but one course to be pursued—Catholic emancipation must be granted. It was said that the present distresses of that country were owing to want of employment, and that there was no capital to furnish that employment. But why was there no capital? Because of the disturbances which existed there; and which would prevent any capitalist in his senses from risking his property in that country. Remove the disabilities under which the Catholics laboured, and these disturbances would no longer exist. He was sure he spoke the sentiments of every honest Irishman when he said, that if these disabilities were removed, the people of Ireland would become good and peaceful subjects; and the English capitalist might then settle there in perfect security. This would certainly be the result. He trusted that the great question of Catholic emancipation would pass that House in a few days; and if it did not, he hoped he should live to see the day when the people of Ireland would come in a body to the doors of that House, and
492
Colonel Torrens
said, that having given great consideration to the subject of emigration, and believing emigration, as a general measure, to be capable of conferring the most extensive benefits upon this empire, he naturally felt desirous to reply to some of the observations which had been that night urged, upon his side of the House, on the present question. Instead of deprecating emigration, as some hon. gentlemen had clone, and in no very measured terms, he was convinced that all those who had reasoned this great question, upon sound and intelligent principles, must perceive that it was calculated to work almost unlimited advantage to Great Britain, and that for the evils of that country which had just been touched upon, it offered the only efficient remedy. The hon. member for Wexford had told the House that, for want of employment in their native country, the poor labourers of Ireland were compelled to ship themselves hither; that on arriving here, they discovered a redundancy of hands offering for agricultural labour, and were, therefore, obliged to return back to Ireland, where, of necessity, they fell into the most abject state of pauperism and want. Now, could any fact prove more strongly than this, that, if it was possible to obviate this hard necessity, these people ought not to be bandied backwards and forwards, between the two countries, like miserable shuttlecocks, abandoned to their own wretchedness? Another hon. member was of opinion, that British capitalists and British farmers should settle among them, and endeavour to give employment to the unfortunate population of that country. But that hon. gentleman ought to know, that in Ireland there was already a great redundancy of that population employed in agricultural labour; that in point of fact, twice the number of agricultural labourers which were employed in England, failed in Ireland to raise the same amount of produce.
493
494
495
Mr. Bright
considered that this was a practical question, and had been dealt with too theoretically. He had, no doubt, that emigration, on a large scale, would be of great benefit to the country; but he thought that the measures pursued by government, with respect to emigration to British America, were not those which ought to have been pursued. The hon. Secretary had, in effect, given the House to understand, that his schemes of emigration had perfectly succeeded. He had intimated, that the experiment of 1823 had had every success; but in this point he entirely disagreed with him. The hon. gentleman had talked about some strange multiplication of property in the case of one hundred and twenty persons settled in Upper Canada, who had taken out only 20
l
l
496
l
497
Mr. Brownlow
, though somewhat disappointed with the statements that had been that evening made by the lion. Secretary near him, felt considerably gratified that, hitherto, whatever objections had been taken to the measure recommended by that hon. gentleman, applied only to the details, and not to the principle of the measure. That principle was left entirely untouched; namely, the relief of the not merely excessive, but vastly superabundant, population of Ireland. This superabundance was general, and not confined to the mountains and waste lands only, which the hon. member for Wicklow recommended that they should be employed to cultivate instead of being conveyed to eat bread and to earn money in America. But, in the former case, where was the bread to be had, or the money to be found to support these poor people during their employment? The gravamen of this case was, that thousands and hundreds of thousands, nay, he might say, two-thirds of the people of Ireland, were unemployed. The hon. member for Bristol had objected, that the hon. Secretary's measure was not the right one. Now, he would admit that the details of the measure were very important, and might involve the inexpediency of the whole measure itself, and it would be very well to consider them, when they should have been brought before the House. But after all that had been said on this subject, it was a little too hard for the House to be trying details which had not yet come under their notice. The hon. Secretary was not now calling on the House to approve or support any specific plan; nor did he mean, as an hon. member seemed to apprehend, to kill Irish emigrants with salt pork, boiled beef and plum-pudding. All that the hon. Secretary had said, in effect, was—"Our experiment of 1823 succeeded to a certain degree. Give me a committee, and let us prepare a plan of emigration, such as, upon all considerations, shall appear most likely to be successful." For his part, he (Mr. Brownlow) was much obliged to the hon. Secretary for having brought forward the question. In the first place, that fact alone savoured of doing something for Ireland. He could not help thinking, that, though a flood of light had lately poured, in upon
498
499
d
d
d
d
d
d
500
a priori,
501
Mr. Baring
observed, that whoever had listened to the able speech of the hon. Secretary opposite must be aware, that it was not proposed to do any thing specific in this matter, without its coming under the consideration of the House. Whatever the fancies, then, that any particular gentleman might have, there was no reason to fear that they would be carried into effect without the consent of the House.
502
503
504
505
Mr. W. Horton
observed, that the restrictions to which the hon. member alluded were removed.
Mr. Baring
in continuation observed, that if something like a bounty were given to captains of ships conveying emigrants, it might operate as a stimulus to their exertions to promote the comfort and convenience of those whom they conveyed. Some suitable preparations should also be made to provide for the reception of the emigrants on arriving at their destination. Care should be taken that they should be sent with all convenient facility to whatever settlement they were intended for, otherwise a great deal of inconvenience might arise. In Quebec, for instance, which contained a limited population, the introduction of a large number of emigrants might create a serious injury. The means of conveying persons up the country were of late considerably improved, and some method could most likely be adopted, by which emigrants could be removed tip the country without inconveniencing the residents. Preparations should also be made for the reception of the emigrants when they arrived at their final destination. Without some precautions of the nature he suggested, considerable confusion and inconvenience would, in all likelihood, occur. The Cape of Good Hope, and the new Spanish colonies afforded facilities for emigration, if the same precautions were observed there that he had just suggested. The hon. gentleman concluded by observing, that the country was very much indebted to the zeal and talents displayed by the hon. Secretary for the colonies in bringing forward the present motion.
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, he felt anxious, in consequence of the personal reference which the hon. gentleman had made to him, to explain his views and feelings with respect to the important subject now
506
507
508
509
Mr. Hume
contended, that to employ 20,000,000
l
510
l
l
l
l
511
Mr. Wilmot Horton
, in reply, said, that honourable members who had come down to that House, and attacked his plans, had evidently not read the printed report, upon which his measures were founded. Before he answered the attack made upon him by the hon. member for Bristol, he begged leave to notice an observation made by the hon. member who had just sat down, who had contrasted his opinion with those of his right hon. friend, the Secretary of State for the Home Department. He did not see that there was any difference of opinion between him and his right hon. friend. He might, individually, entertain opinions in detail, different from those of his right hon. friend, but, upon the general policy of emigration, he agreed with his right hon. friend, that it would be highly advantageous to the country and to the emigrants, and that the best means of securing the greatest benefit, advantage, and comfort, for them, could be ascertained only in a committee. He begged to remind the hon. members who were opposed to his plans, that there was a tribunal without, as welt as within, the walls of that House, and by that tribunal, the tribunal of public opinion, he had no objection to have his plans, and his arguments in support of them, as well as the arguments of the hon. member, judged. As the hon. member for Aberdeen had spoken of "sound principles," he would state to the House something which had passed between him and that hon. member. That hon. member had told him, upon a former occasion, that his plans were contrary to "sound principles;" and, in support of his statement, he had quoted the authority of a well-known writer on Political Economy, Mr. M'Culloch. Now, would the hon. member give him credit in future for sound principles, when he told him that he had drawn up thirty questions upon this subject with care and attention; that they had been submitted one by one to Mr. M'Culloch, and that Mr. M'Culloch had answered them in a manner perfectly accordant to the view which he (Mr. Horton) had taken of them in that House?
512
l
513
The Amendment was negatived without a division. After which the original motion was agreed to, and a Committee appointed.
COMMITTEES OF APPEALS ON PRIVATE
Mr. Littleton
said, that the machinery of the resolutions which he had
514
515
l
l
Mr. G. Bankes
was anxious that the question, which was of considerable importance, should be postponed to another night, in order that it might be properly discussed. In his opinion, the objections which were raised against the resolution which called on parties to enter into recognizances, applied with equal strength to the present proposition. If a man was poor, he could not enter honestly into a bond for 500
l
l
516
l
l
Mr. Alderman Waithman
observed, that the expenses incidental to getting private bills through the House were enormous; and, instead of increasing them, some means ought to be devised for reducing them. He was of opinion that the debate ought to be adjourned.
Mr. Littleton
said, that the House could not be considered to be taken by surprise, as the measure had already been discussed twice. He understood also, that it had been agreed to in its present shape, by those gentlemen who, on the former occasions, objected to its adoption. He was anxious that the measure should be speedily disposed of, as he understood there were several reports ready to be brought up, and that in one of them an appeal was to occur. As the resolution did not possibly impose any grievance, but merely specified the mode in which a favour was to be granted, he was determined to take the sense of the House on the question.
Mr. Batley
agreed with the hon. member for Corfe Castle in thinking the measure impolitic. It might also have the additional inconvenience of bringing the privileges of the House in contact with a court of law.
Mr. S. Bourne
thought that all scruples on legal points might be silenced, when it was recollected, that the resolution was drawn up by the Attorney-general. Unless this resolution was carried, the other measure of the hon. member would be incomplete.
The House divided: For the Resolution 32. For the Adjournment 10.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, February 16, 1827.
GRANT TO THE DUKE AND DUCHESS
On the order of the day for taking his Majesty's Message into consideration,
517
The Earl of Liverpool
said, he did not feel it necessary to trespass on their lordships with many observations in reference to the Address which he was about to propose; for, after the melancholy event that had recently taken place, and the situation in which the illustrious duke stood in consequence of it, he thought there could be no objection to a reasonable provision being made for him, under such circumstances. He knew that the measure must originate elsewhere; still he wished that their lordships should be informed of the nature of the proposition which was to be brought forward. By the death of the duke of York, a sum of 3,000
l
l
l
l
The motion was agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, February 16, 1827.
GRANT TO THE DUKE AND DUCHESS
The House having resolved itself into a Committee on the King's Message for a Provision for the Puke and Duchess of Clarence, and the said Message having been read,
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
rose, and addressed the Committee as follows:— Sir; whenever parliament has been called upon on former occasions, to consider what provision ought to be made for the due maintenance of the station and dignity of different members of the royal family, the consideration of the degree of proximity which any individual of that family might have to the throne, has always been one of the most important
518
elements of that consideration. In the case of his late royal highness the duke of York, that principle was acted upon, even before he came to be so near the throne as he was at the time of his decease; for, during the life of his late majesty, indeed during the life of the princess Charlotte of Wales, the allowance he enjoyed from parliament was greater, in consequence of his proximity to the throne, than that which was assigned to the younger branches of the royal family. It will, perhaps, be as well for me here to state, what the income assigned to the duke and duchess of York, under these circumstances, amounted to. In the first place, his late royal highness derived 26,000
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.:
l.
l.
l.
l.
519
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
520
l.;
l.
l.,
l.,
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
521
1. "That His Majesty be enabled to grant a yearly sum of money out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, not exceeding in the whole the sum of 3,000
l.,
2. "That His Majesty be enabled to grant a yearly sum of money out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, not exceeding in the whole the sum of 6,000
l.
Lord Althorp
regretted deeply that his majesty should have been advised to send down a message like the present to the House. If it could be shown, that in consequence of his change of situation, his royal highness the duke of Clarence would really be put to additional expenses, no doubt it was fit that he should be enabled to meet them; but, although he fully concurred with the chancellor of the Exchequer, that the personal virtues of the illustrious individuals concerned in questions of this description ought to form no feature in the deliberation of the
522
Mr. Hume
reminded the House, in the first place, that the duchess of Clarence had already 6,000
l.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that that grant was only applicable in case of the duke's death.
Mr. Hume
.—Well, the money, at all events, had been granted; but he would not go into that. Could the House, he would only ask, satisfy itself that it was doing its duty in the present state of the country, in voting a grant of 9,000
l.
523
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.,
524
525
l.
l.
l.
526
l.
l.
527
Colonel Wood
expressed his regret, that the noble lord and the hon. gentleman should have opposed this motion, which he had hoped would have passed unanimously. He could not by any means see what injustice was done the country, by placing the heir presumptive upon the footing of his predecessor. Nothing was, he knew, more unpleasant than to provoke individual comparisons; yet it was almost unavoidable upon such an occasion as this. He would then say, that either the income granted to the late duke of York, thirty years ago, was most extravagant, or there could not be any impropriety in the present claim? Why was 39,000
l.
l.
528
Mr. Curwen
regretted that this question had been brought forward, for nothing could be more painful to him than to give the vote which his sense of duty called upon him to give. If the country was able to afford this grant, he had no individual objection to it; but when he knew that, from one end of it to the other, the cry of distress was general, he could not, without a violation of duty, hesitate to oppose it, and he was ready to do so at once, for he required no postponement to make up his mind upon it. The circumstances of the country imperatively called for economy, and the refusal of this grant would, he hoped, be the prelude of their performing similar acts of justice to their constituents.
Mr. Monck
concurred with his hon. friend, in his expression of pain at being obliged to oppose this motion. He had not heard a single argument from the chancellor of the Exchequer in favour of it. It was in vain to refer to the addition made to the incomes of the royal family in 1806; for that addition was expressly called for, on account of the rise in the price of all the necessaries of life. The act of 1806, therefore, furnished no precedent for such a claim as this. Were the royal family alone to have a reserved interest in the fluctuations of the price of provisions, and were the people never to have a similar chance in their favour? Willing as he was to support the due splendor and dignity of the royal family,
529
Mr. Brougham
expressed his regret at being obliged to concur in the view taken of this question by his noble friend, and the other hon. friends who had preceded him. No man could be more willing than he was, to lend his humble assistance to every measure which was calculated to support, on a just and splendid scale, the state and dignity of the royal family; and if any case of exigency could be made out to justify the present claim, he should have no hesitation to assent to it. But, had ministers attempted to press a case of exigency? No. The question rested plainly on this simple statement—that the melancholy event of the demise of the duke of York had imposed upon the duke of Clarence, as a consequence, the necessity of incurring a greater expenditure, in maintaining his rank, than he had been previously called upon to incur. Where was the proof of this necessity? Where had it been shown, that his royal highness had any estate or dignity necessarily to support as heir presumptive, which he had not equally to maintain in the lifetime of his brother? If it could be shown that his royal highness's present income was insufficient for his proper and becoming scale of living, and that it was fit and reasonable it should be increased now that he had become heir presumptive, then the case would be different; but the chancellor of the Exchequer had made out no such case: he had not even attempted to state it: his claim was therefore groundless, and must he considered as untenable. He had said, indeed, that on former occasions of settling the income of the royal family, regard had been had by parliament to the consideration, whether or not the prince of the blood was in the immediate succession to the throne. That assertion was incorrect; for no such distinction had been marked out on the occasions alluded to. Certainly, none had been taken in 1806, when the 6,000
l.
530
531
l.
l.
532
Mr. Secretary Peel
admitted, that, there was no subject so unpleasant as one like this, which referred to circumstances somewhat of a personal nature, and particularly when they applied to the condition of the royal family. When he was called upon to justify the proposed grant, he felt the difficulty, if not the impossibility, of demonstrating that 9,000
l.
l.
533
l.
534
à fortiori
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
535
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.,
536
Mr. Abercromby
said, that, in his opinion, this proposition ought to be considered on public grounds. The plain and simple question was this: The duke and duchess of Clarence had an income of about 30,000
l.
l.
537
538
Mr. Calcraft
observed, that it had been agreed by every gentleman, who had spoken on the subject, that this was a very painful topic. If, however, it had been so painful to every one who had addressed the committee, it was doubly so to himself, because in that discussion, he must reluctantly differ from those with whom he generally agreed. He should, therefore, proceed to state shortly the grounds upon which he concurred in the motion of the chancellor of the Exchequer. And, in the first place, he must declare that he dissented from his hon. and learned friends upon that point, which was a point of opinion only; namely, that a prince of the blood can change his situation from that of a younger branch of the royal family, to that of heir presumptive to the throne, without being involved in a great additional expenditure. He was clearly of opinion that he could not. Into the details of that increased expenditure, he would not now attempt to enter; but, if he conscientiously thought that such increased expense would be incurred by the illustrious person in question, he should not be an honest man, if he did not vote accordingly. But he did think so, and, therefore, he should, most unquestionably, concur in this vote. He had another reason for doing so. He could not dismiss all consideration of precedent on this occasion. He could not but remember, that when the late duke of York, whose death was so universally deplored, stood in the same situation as the duke of Clarence stood in now, he had an infinitely larger income than his royal highness would possess, even with the addition of the grant now in question. Nor could he forget, that the late princess Charlotte—who did not stand at the time in the same near relation to the Crown, but was merely daughter of the regent, with, undoubtedly, the probability of succession to the Throne in her favour—had an income allotted her of 50,000
l.
539
l.
Mr. Fergusson
said, he had not the honour of being known to many members of that House, but he believed, that such hon. gentlemen as did know him, would admit that he was the last person who would be likely to court favour or propitiate power, by giving his acquiescence to any measure that he did not think himself conscientiously bound to support. He felt himself, therefore, bound to declare, that he must vote for the present grant, because he was convinced that the situation of his royal highness was materially changed, and that he could no longer remain in his present state of retirement. The simple question was, whether they
540
Mr. John Martin
said, that the two hon. members who had last addressed the House, appeared to be quite certain that instead of this being an unpopular motion, it would meet with the unqualified approbation of the country. Now, if this were really the case, he should propose that his majesty should send another Letter to the bishops, and direct them to endeavour to raise this 9,000
l.
Mr. George Robinson
, although he usually voted with ministers, yet felt himself bound, under the present circumstances of the country, to give his negative to the proposed grant. It was not, in his opinion, one of those exigencies which called upon them to make such a sacrifice; and without entrenching in any manner upon the respect duo to the royal family, he thought the House ought not to impose any additional burthen upon the people.
Mr. Hume
said, that several hon. members had asked why he had not negatived the grant, instead of proposing that the discussion of it should be put off. He had adopted the latter course, because he had hoped that if ministers had time for consideration they would withdraw their proposition, and that to have negatived the grant would have appeared something like a reproach to the Crown. The hon. member was proceeding to make some further observations, when he was interrupted by loud cries of "Question." Upon which the House divided—For Mr. Hume's Amendment 65, Against it 167. Majority for the Grant 102.
List of the Minority.
Abercromby, hon. J
Bernal, R.
Baring, W. B.
Birch, J.
541
Brougham, H.
Marshall, W.
Brougham, J.
Monck, J. B.
Carter, S.
Morpeth, visc.
Clements, Lord
Old, W.
Clive, E. B.
Ponsonby, hon. W. S.
Curwen, J. C.
Poyntz, W. S.
Ducane, P.
Protheroe, Ed.
Duncannon, Visc.
Ramsden, J. C.
Duncombe, T.
Robinson, G.
Dundas, hon. G.
Robarts, A.
Easthope, J.
Rumbold, C.
Fazakerley, N.
Sebright, sir J. S.
Fergusson, sir R.
Sefton, earl of
Fortescue, hon. G.
Sharp, R.
Graham, sir J.
Smith, W.
Harvey, D. W.
Stewart, J. (Beverley)
Howick, visct.
Stuart, Villiers
Hume, J.
Sykes, D.
Hutchinson, C. H.
Thomson, C.
Kennedy, F.
Tufton, hon. H.
King, hon. R.
Waithman, Ald.
Labouchere, H.
Warburton, H.
Lennard, T. B.
Western, C. C.
Lester, B. L.
Wilbraham, C.
Leycester, R.
Wilson, sir R.
Lombe, E.
Winnington, sir T.
Maberly, J.
Wood, J. (Preston)
Macdonald, sir J.
Wood, J. (Grimsby)
Marjoribanks, S.
Wrottesley, sir J.
Martin, J.
TELLER.
Marshall, J.
Althorp, visc.
EXPENDITURE AND INCOME OF THE
On the order of the day for going into a Committee of Supply on the Ordnance Estimates,
Mr. Maberly
rose to oppose the Speaker's leaving the chair. He was, he said, induced to do so, principally for the same reason that he had slated on a former evening, when the Navy Estimates were brought before the House; namely, an unwillingness to concur in voting any Estimates, until the House should be put in possession of what were the probable resources of the country, from which these Estimates were to be supplied. The receipts and expenditure should be laid before the House, and an opportunity should be afforded of comparing them with the amount of the estimated receipt and expenditure contained in the statements of the chancellor of the Exchequer. If this amount was laid before the House, he apprehended there would be found a great defalcation, from the expectation of reduced expenditure, which the right hon. gentleman had, from time to time, held out to the House and the country. With a view of ascertaining what comparison the real expenditure and income of 1826 bore to the estimated one of the chancellor of the Exchequer, he had moved for an
542
l.,
l.
l.
l.
Nett income paid into the Exchequer
£54,894,989
10
3
Nett expenditure
53,885,541
2
2¾
Surplus of income over expenditure
1,009,448
8
0¼
l.
l.
l.
l.
543
l.
l.
l.
l.,
Expenditure from the Chancellor's Statement.
For the Interest and management of the Public Debt.
£27,117,186
The Army
7,747,000
Navy
6,135,000
Expenditure according to the Printed Account.
For the Interest and Management of the Public Debt.
£27,245,750
The Army
8,297,360
Navy
6,540,634
544
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
545
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, it was impossible for him to answer all the points upon which the hon. member had touched, because he could not give the House satisfactory information upon them, without stating at full length those particulars which he proposed to submit at no distant period. He had no hesitation in saying, that he was not now in a situation to state, with the requisite accuracy, what he conceived to be the condition of the revenue for the present year. Since he had had the honour of filling the situation in which he was now placed he had endeavoured to bring forward the financial state of the country at as early a period of the session as possible. He hoped shortly to bring it forward; but, at present, he owned he was not in a situation to do so. When he should bring it forward, he hoped to furnish a full and satisfactory explanation upon all the matters referred to by the hon. gentleman. But because he was not at that moment prepared to enter into the extensive subject, was that, he would ask, a fair reason, why a shilling should not be voted for the support of a single sailor, a single soldier, or a single artillery-man? After the House had voted their approbation of the
546
l.
l.;
l.
l,
547
l.
l.
548
l.
l.
549
l.
550
l.;
l.
l.
l.:
551
l.
l.;
l.;
l.
l.;
l.
l.
l.
l.;
l.
l.;
552
l.
l
Mr. Hume
admitted, that the right hon. gentleman had satisfactorily explained he
553
l.;
l.;
l.
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.;
l.;
l.
554
l.
l.
l.
l.
bonâ fide
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
555
556
557
Mr. Baring
said, that if in ordinary times there had been such a defalcation in the revenue as appealed during the present year, he should have undoubtedly been of opinion, that it would be necessary for the House either to agree to the amendment of the hon. member for Aberdeen, or else to go into the committee and vote the estimates with the strictest investigation into them item by item. Judging from the general conduct of the House, he deemed himself justified in saying, that it was too inattentive to the condition of the national finances. No state that had any pretensions to freedom displayed such inattention as we did to the comparative amount of our expenditure and our means. The French minister was obliged to make a minute statement of the resources of his nation before he ventured to detail to the Chambers his plan for raising the supplies of the year; and the minister of the king of the Netherlands had absolutely had his budget thrown back upon his hands, because he had not accompanied it with a sufficient explanation of the national finances. As a general principle, he would say, that it was the duty of the House not to repose a blind confidence in ministers, but to look narrowly into the estimates which they presented to it. He recollected that in 1816, the House, after voting the estimates, found that they were greater than the situation of the country justified. It addressed the Crown in consequence, and said that the estimates were not satisfactory. Amended estimates were accordingly returned to it, in which considerable reductions were made, and those estimates were subsequently approved. Now, if the estimates of the present year had been presented to the House in circumstances similar to those of 1816, he should have said that the House would not perform its duty without adopting a similar course to that which it then pursued. Considering, however, the political demonstration which the government had recently felt itself called upon to make in Portugal, and the support which the House had given to the government on being informed of it, he was afraid that any hesitation in voting the supplies would be productive of bad effect, not only in a financial, but also in a political point of view; and he should therefore prefer going into the estimates at present, to postponing the discussion of them till the period proposed by the hon. member for Aberdeen.
558
l.
l.
559
l.,
l.
l.,
l.,
The amendment was then negatived without a division.
ORDNACE ESTIMATES,]
The House
560
Sir H. Hardinge
said, that in presenting the Ordnance Estimates to the committee, it would not be necessary for him to detain them with many observations, inasmuch as the estimates were considerably lower than they had been last year. The reductions which had been made, had not been made without great difficulty; and it would only be misleading the committee if he were to hold out to it any hope that those reductions would be permanent. The Ordnance Estimates for the present year were only 970,894
l.;
l.;
l.
l.:
l.;
l.
l.,
l.,
l.,
l.:
l.;
l.
561
l.;
l.
l.;
l.;
l.
l.
l.;
l.;
l.
l.
562
l.
l.;
l.
l.,
l.
l.,
l.
563
l.
l.
l.
l.
Mr. Hume
observed, that, looking to the whole of the estimate, there was not such a saving to the country as they had a right to expect. At the conclusion of the former peace, 18,000
l.
l.
l.
Sir H. Hardinge
admitted, that if such a union could be made, a saving would unquestionably be effected by it. But the thing was perfectly impossible; and for this reason—the military stores, arms, &c. were kept at the Tower, and must remain there. The finance committee, it was true, mentioned the dépôt at Woolwich as sufficient; but, he was prepared to contend, that it would be necessary, under all circumstances, to keep a large quantity of stores at the Tower. If they could remove the office of the Clerk of the Ordnance to Pall-Mall, there would also be a saving; but the rooms at Pall-Mall were already filled with clerks; and therefore, if an alteration were made, a new building must be erected. Thus in the very outset, a considerable expense would be incurred.
Mr. Baring
alluded to a rumour which he had heard of certain works that were going on in Lower Canada, and also of an
564
Sir H. Hardinge
answered, that it was necessary to form a proper dépôt in Lower Canada, where, at present, there was not a place in which they could keep a canister of powder in safety. With respect to the second point, no intention existed to form such a line of defence as the hon. member had alluded to. In the course of the year 182.5, a commission which had been sent to that country recommended that, at certain points, works should be raised; but the defence of so extensive a frontier as had been mentioned was not contemplated. There were, undoubtedly, parts of that territory which required additional defence. With respect to Halifax, for instance, it was recommended, that quarters should be provided for a body of troops, and a proper building erected for the reception of a quantity of stores. These measures appeared to be necessary; because, if an enemy turned the sea-batteries, as the place was at present situated, the town must fall into his power. Besides, as Canada was locked up during a certain period of the year, it was proper that stores should be collected in places of safety. In Upper Canada, it was intended to erect a small work on the same model, of which an estimate would be furnished. It was not intended as a
point d'appui,
Mr. Hume
observed, that the items on account of Canada amounted to no less a sum than 51,475
l.
565
Sir H. Hardinge
said, that Canada, being an integral part of the British dominions, was as much entitled to protection as any other portion of the empire.
Mr. Hume
said Canada was but a colony, and stood in a very different situation from Ireland or Scotland.
After some further conversation, the several resolutions were agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, February 19, 1827.
GRANTS TO THE DUKE AND DUCHESS
The Resolutions of the committee of the whole House on the King's Message were brought up. On the motion, "That the Resolutions be now read a second time,"
The Marquis of Tavistock
said, that he should not discharge the duty which he owed to his constituents, or consult the real interest of the Crown itself, if he did not oppose the present motion. He would not go so far as to say, that this grant of 9,000
l.
The House divided: For the Resolutions 173, Against them 57. Majority 116. The Chancellor of the Exchequer then moved, "That a Bill be brought in upon the said Resolutions."
Mr. Hume
rose, and was proceeding to address the House, when he was inter-
566
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
567
l.
l.
Mr. Maurice Fitzgerald
said, he anticipated for the vote he was about to give the same severe chastisement from the hon. member for Aberdeen, which he had that night, and on a former evening, given to those who had brought forward the proposition now before the House. That hon. gentleman had characterized it in very unmeasured terms: he had charged it with profligacy, extortion, and insult. He had gone so far, even, as to declare it injurious to the shipping and manufacturing interests. Now, for his own part, he must say, that a more exaggerated statement he had never heard, nor had he ever listened to a more unnecessary display of vehement oratory. For the resolution itself, taking it independently of all exaggeration and colouring, it did strike him as being a very fair and natural proposition to be made on the part of his majesty's government, from the first moment that his royal highness succeeded to the station which he at present occupied. It had been asked, in what consisted the difference of station which his royal highness had so experienced? But he believed, that the common sense of every man in that House must instantly supply the answer to such a question; and he, for one, required no official reply upon the master. His royal highness now
568
l.
l.
l.
569
Mr. Ridley Colborne
deplored the present opposition to the grant, and declared that, whatever might have been the opinion of the honourable members at first, such continued and obstinate resistance would make the offer of the money come as ungraciously from the House, as its acceptance must be rendered painful to the illustrious individual for whom it was intended.
Lord Leveson Gower
did not think it necessary to trouble the House with any explanation of his reasons for supporting the grant after the question had been so fairly and ably stated by the knight of Kerry. In every expression which had fallen from that right hon. gentleman he most fully concurred; but he wished to say a few words upon the line of argument taken by the hon. member for Aberdeen. That hon. member had endeavoured to take the course which he thought best calculated to enlist upon his side the passions of the people, and to make the grant of any sum to the duke of Clarence a matter of obloquy in the eyes of a great portion of the distressed. There was, however, no period at which the hon. member might not be able to find the same reasons for opposing any, even a necessary, matter of public expenditure; and if it might be objected to such an argument, that the present grant was an unnecessary piece of expenditure, then he would answer, that the very same would be said of the most necessary. The same argument might be applied in the same manner to even the accumulation of large private fortunes; but he conceived that such appeals to the passions instead of the reasons of men were not to be justified upon any sound principles of policy.
Mr. Hume's Amendment was negatived, and leave was then given to bring in the bill,
570
ARMY ESTIMATES.]
The House having resolved itself into a Committee of Supply, to which the Army Estimates were referred,
Lord Palmerston
said, that the estimates of the present year differed very little, either in the number of men or the amount of the expenditure, from those of last year; but, as there were some variations in the details, it might be necessary for him to explain them shortly to the House. The total number of men in the estimate of last year was eighty-six thousand, seven hundred and sixty-four. The number of the present year was eighty-six thousand, eight hundred and three, making an increase of thirty-nine men, for the service of the present year. The charge for the last year was 6,602,135
l.
l.
l.
s.
l.,
l.,
l.
s.
d.
l.
s.
d.
l.
l.
s.
d.
l.
s.
d.
l.
s.
d.
l.
l.,
l.
s.
d.
l.
s.
d.
l.
571
l.
s.
d.
l.
l.
l.
s.
l.
l.
s.
d.
l.
l.
s.
d.
l.,
l.,
l.
l.
Colonel Davies
said, that considering the importance of the question under discussion, he regretted that the tone in which the noble lord had spoken, and the noise made by hon. gentlemen in leaving the House, had rendered it hardly possible for him to hear what the noble lord had said. He would confess, that it was with no little surprise that he viewed the conduct of those gentlemen by whom he was generally surrounded. When the question before the House merely concerned a common job, such as the unnecessary appointment of a junior lord of the Admiralty, which
572
l.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
573
l.
l.
l.
Lord Palmerston
said, that the gallant member was mistaken with respect to the number of recruits. Of the fifteen thousand men, four thousand were to supply an additional force, and the number intended to answer the wear and casualties of the service was only eleven thousand. Taking deaths, desertions, and discharges, into consideration, it would be by no means more than would probably be wanted. With reference to the system of recruiting, as far as his experience wont, he could positively assert that the present system was eminently adapted to ensure the efficiency of the service. In the first place, by the present system of recruiting, there was no longer a multitude of officers that used to be detached from their regiments, wasting their time, to the loss and disadvantage of the public. Instead of nine hundred officers so detached by the old practice, there were now not even one hundred. By the present system, no regiment could detach more than one officer at a time, and no officer so detached could be absent from his regiment more than two years. The absent officer was not allowed to have under his command a single man belonging to his own regiment; so that the regiment was left efficient and complete.
574
575
Mr. Hume
said, he would leave it to the comprehension of military men, how regiments of six hundred men could be more efficient than regiments of eight hundred. From what he heard, a very different account could be given of this subject. Leaving such paradoxes, he would ask, was it economical to have fifty field officers, two hundred and four captains, four hundred and eight subalterns and staff officers employed recruiting? Ministers were in the habit of talking of the preference of one system over another; they compared them in their different points, and vaunted of the superiority of recent plans. The only point which they never took into consideration was, what appeared to him to be the most essential to consider; namely, the expense. Improvements, however obvious, might be acquired at too great a cost. By the present practice, the War Department left a staff at home, with a few companies, to recruit; and, as far as he could learn, the expense of the system was well deserving of attention. So far from being economical, it was most extravagant.
The question being then put upon the resolution, "That eighty-seven thousand three hundred and fifty-nine men be provided for the Military Service in the present year,"
Mr. Hume
said, that he, for one, objected in the strongest manner to the great amount of the army. He objected to it in a constitutional sense; he objected to it in point of expense; and because he did not think it necessary to the exigencies of the country. He knew that he was not solitary in entertaining these objections. As the House had pledged itself to support the expedition to Portugal, to put matters to rights there, he did not mean, at the present moment, to do more than to protest against the number of our forces. He would, however, beg leave to state to the House, that when parliament had recently petitioned the Crown to reduce the public establishments, the answer from the Crown was, that all possible economy should be observed, with a view to recruit the finances and to pay off a portion of the public debt. To this ministers had made the Crown pledge itself to the country. Now, it was curious to see whether ministers had so far regarded the honour of the Crown as to act up to this pledge. When that public promise was given to the country, the
576
l.
l.
l.
577
l.
l.;
l.;
l.;
l.;
l.
l.,
l.
l.;
l.;
l.
l.
l.
Mr. V. Fitzgerald
denied the assertion of the gallant colonel opposite, that the expenditure of the Army, Navy, Ordnance, and Miscellaneous estimates was between four and five millions more in the last year than in the year 1822. Instead of
578
l.
Mr. Hume
wished to know the precise sums.
Mr. V. Fitzgerald
stated, that the amount of the Army, Navy, Ordnance, and Miscellaneous services in 1822 was 16,680,000
l.,
l.;
l.
Mr. Hume
observed, that he held in his hand a paper, in which a different account was given of the matter. It was signed J. C. Henries, and gave an account of the revenue and expenditure of the year ending 1st January, 1827; by which it appeared that the expenditure for the Army, Navy, Ordnance, and Miscellaneous services, was 19,344,187
l.
Mr. Herries
begged to say, that, though the papers were perfectly correct, yet the conclusions drawn from them by the hon. member were totally incorrect. He thought that such a deduction as that made by the hon. member would not have been again brought forward, after the explanation which his right hon. friend, the chancellor of the Exchequer, had given the other night upon the subject. He had made a clear distinction between the annual estimates voted by parliament for the Army, Navy, Ordnance, &c., and the sums actually expended within any particular period. It was well known, that, at the end of the year 1825, there was a severe pressure on the country; and that, in consequence, there were heavy demands for money on the Treasury for the payment of Exchequer bills. Under those circumstances, the issues had not been made for the Army and Navy, and the current payments were delayed, so that thus the demands, which were payable in December, 1825, were postponed, in order that the Exchequer, at such a crisis, might be kept as full as possible. The consequence was, that many payments which properly belonged to "1825 fell within the year 1826, indicating a large apparent expenditure in that year. Had matters gone on in the usual way, the postponement might have gone on to a certain extent, so as not to increase the apparent amount of the payments; but an armament became necessary; and it was well known, that when troops were sent abroad it was usual to pay them in advance. Thus an operation of an opposite nature took place; and,
579
Colonel Davies
observed, that there ought to be some explanatory appendix to the papers, to show what the fact was, and to prevent the occurrence of errors.
Mr. Maberly
observed, that if he understood the hon. Secretary rightly, the balance-sheet, from which his hon. friend had read, was only a cash account, showing the receipts and payments that had taken place at the Exchequer; and that it ought not to be dealt with as an accurate account of the expenditure, because it might contain under the head of disbursements larger sums than parliament had voted for the year. But how did the chancellor of the Exchequer make his annual statements but from this balance-sheet? In fact, any other account was delusive, because this was the cash account. They all knew what difficulty there had been to procure the introduction of this balance-sheet. Even now the balance-sheet was not what it ought to be. In some respects it was unintelligible. It purported to be an account of the receipt and expenditure at the Exchequer; whereas it contained a number of details respecting the funded and unfunded debt. These were things which ought to be separated. If government advanced a large sum, only a part of which was repaid, that merely made a difference in our debt, and had nothing to do with the receipt and expenditure. On examining this balance-sheet it appeared, that, instead of a balance in our favour of 1,700,000
l.,
l.
580
The resolution was agreed to. On the resolution, "That 111,655
l.
Mr. Hume
observed, that on reading the items of this branch of expenditure, and comparing them with those of former years, it appeared to him that every thing was not going on right. Among other charges, there was the sum of 20,000
l.
Lord Pulmerston
said, that when the hon. gentleman compared the expense of this branch of service with its expense in former years, it would be well if he would also look at its increased efficiency, and at the superior despatch and accuracy with which the business to which it related was performed. A great part of the expense was not optional, but resulted from the increased demands made by parliament for information on military subjects. Nevertheless, considerable reduction had taken place. In 1814, the annual charge for the Public Departments was 253,000
l.;
l.
581
l.
l.
l.
582
Mr. Hume
thought, notwithstanding the explanation given by the noble lord, that the charge of Deputy-secretary to the country was extravagant. There was a retiring salary of 1,800
l.
l.,
l.,
l.
Lord Palmerston
said, that the resignation of that gentleman was certainly a spontaneous one on his part. He had made the application to him (lord P.), and, in consideration of his merits and services, he had no hesitation in favourably recommending that application to the Lords of the Treasury. It was true that Mr. Merry had not been half a century in the particular situation from which he retired; but it was due to that gentleman to say, that on the retirement from the office of Mr. Moore in 1809, Mr. Merry sustained, and sustained voluntarily, a loss of 800
l.
Mr. Hume
was astonished, after it had been admitted that Mr. Merry had entered when not of age, and had not served the full time, that he should have been allowed to retire on the full pension. Instead of any-serious attempt being made to reduce our establishments, there appeared to be a desire to increase them. Since 1822, the civil establishment particularly had gone
583
l.;
l.
Mr. Herries
contended, that the act referred to by his noble friend fully authorised that exercise of discretion in special cases, which had been exercised in the case of Mr. Merry. He could assure the House that matters regarding retired allowances were not lightly disposed of at the Treasury. The certificates were examined, and the claims were investigated, with the utmost strictness.
Mr. Hume
understood that twenty-two clerks had been reduced in the establishment of the noble lord last year. He wished to know whether any new appointments of clerks had taken place since that reduction.
Lord Palmerston answered—none.
The resolution was agreed to.
On the resolution, "That 13,229
l.
Mr. Hume
observed, that, from the Estimates it appeared, that there was a charge for two hundred and sixteen cadets. He wished to know how many of these cadets had been appointed to commissions?
Lord Palmerston
replied, that sixteen cadets had been appointed without purchase, and twenty-two by purchase.
Mr. Hume,
then it appears, that the country is saddled with a charge of 13,229
l.
Sir H. Hardinge
said, that the number of military students was more than threefold the number who obtained situations from the college. The fact was, that those who were appointed from the college underwent a very severe examination, as a test of superior qualification. Those who did not obtain situations from the college, had all the facility which their family connexion and resources might give them to obtain commissions, and the service was benefited by the advantages of the education which they received at the college.
Sir Alexander Hope
said, that the benefits arising from the Military College were not confined to the mere annual appoint-
584
Mr. Hume
admitted that the officers of the army ought to be well educated, but not at the expense of the public. The charge for the staff of the college was no less than 6,000
l.;
l.
in formâ pauperis
585
l.
Lord Palmerston
produced a return of the number of students admitted into the Military College, since its first establishment in 1802. The total number was two thousand nine hundred and twenty-eight; of which one thousand three hundred and twenty had received commissions in the king's service, and one hundred and twenty in that of the East India company. The complete defence furnished by his gallant friend rendered it needless for him to say another word regarding the public utility of the establishment.
Mr. Monck
observed, that the only question was, whether the education of these boys ought to be paid for out of the taxes. Ought the people to be taxed for the purpose of teaching those who would be quite as well, if not better, taught at the expense of their friends and relations? Let the examination, before appointment, still continue as severe as it ought to be, parents would be very glad to qualify their sons for it, in the expectation of the reward of a cadetship. Why was it necessary for the country to educate its officers any more than its physicians, its lawyers, or its divines?
Sir A. Hope
said, he thought the cadets ought to be educated at the public expense, because the public called upon the parents and friends of those young men to devote them to the service of the country; and because those young men, abandoning the comforts of a private life, or lucrative professions, were bound, by the pledge of their parents, to undergo the hardships of the military profession, and to brave the horrors of various climates.
Sir E. Carrington,
in answer to the latter part of the speech of the hon. member for Reading, observed, that, by the munificence of prelates, of statesmen, and of princes, the means of adequate education had, from the most remote periods of our history, been supplied to the professions of law, physic, and divinity. No such provision had been made for military education, until this establishment was created, and by that institution a chasm had been honourably and most properly filled up.
Mr. Hume
said, that no man could conscientiously say, that 6,000
l.
586
l.
l.
The Committee divided: For the amendment 29; against it 107. After some further conversation, the several resolutions were agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, February 20, 1827.
CANADA CLERGY RESERVES.]
Mr. Wilmot Horton
moved for leave to bring in a bill to authorise the Sale of Clergy Reserves in Upper and Lower Canada. The object of the measure was, he said, to enable the corporative of the clergy in Canada to dispose, by private contract, of the lands reserved for the clergy in 1791; with respect to which it was originally arranged that they were to be disposed of to the Canada Company. By alienating a part of the provision appropriated to the clergy by the Canada act of 1791, the value of the remaining portion would be improved, and the country relieved from the expense annually voted for the supply of the Protestant Clergy in that part of the world.
Mr. Stanley
supported the motion. The short acquaintance he had recently had with the provinces of Canada enabled him to state, that whatever might be the differences of political and party feeling in that country—and there was no place where party feeling ran higher—no person entertained a difference of opinion as to the pernicious tendency of the Clergy Reserves. When Mr. Pitt brought forward the Canada bill in 1791, he distinctly specified, that the arrangement then made must be subject to such modifications as might afterwards be deemed expedient. The experience of thirty-five years had demonstrated not only the inconvenience, but the absolute mischief, which resulted from that arrangement. The appropriation of Clergy Reserves in Canada had operated as a serious obstacle to agricultural improvement. The making of roads, an object of so much importance to the colony, was checked by this arrangement for, as every man was obliged to make roads through his own estate, where these reserves occurred, the progress of road-making was either arrested, or the burthen
587
Mr. Hume
expressed his satisfaction at the measure proposed by the hon. Secretary. Nothing tended more to check the progress of improvement in Canada, than the allotment of land to the clergy. He should be glad to know the details of the new arrangement made between his majesty's government and the Canada company. He trusted also, that these reserved lands would be disposed of by some public mode of purchase, so as to enable the proprietors of the adjoining lands to become purchasers. By these means, improvements in the cultivation of land, and in the making of roads, would be more rapidly carried on.
Mr. W. Horton
observed, that measures would be taken to make it imperative on the clergy td co-operate in the making of roads, and in carrying other improvements into effect. The lands in question were the properly of the church of England, as secured to that church by the Canada act of 1791.
Mr. Baring
said, he entertained strong objections to the appropriation of land in Canada specifically to the church of England; not because he objected to the church of England, for he was as zealous a member of that church as any gentleman in that House, but because he was anxious that the House should not sow the seeds of that very dissention which we now so lamentably deplored in Ireland. If we could contrive some means to make all the people of Canada church of England men, he should have no objection to such an expedient; but if the fact were, that the church of England had taken but slight root in Canada, and that the mass of Protestant Christians in that country were of different persuasions, by appropriating money and land to the church of England in Canada, we should be laying a foundation for future dissention, and for the separation of the colony from the mother country. The Attorney-general for Upper Canada had been examined on the subject of these church Reserves; and, in answer to a question, as to how many members of the legislative assembly in Upper Canada were church of England men, his answer was "two, he being one of the two." Now, he did not know of how many members the legislative assembly consisted; but it could scarcely be a number of which two formed, any considerable portion. He
588
Mr. W. Horton
observed, in explanation, that whether the distribution of lands to which the hon. member alluded, was right or wrong, it Was done under the express authority of, and in obedience to, the provisions of the Canada Act, and could not, therefore now be called in question. All they proposed to do at present was, to dispose of a certain portion of those lands, in order that they might render the remainder more productive. With respect to what had fallen from an hon. member upon the subject of the expense of emigration, he begged to observe, that there were many parishes in England most willing to pay half the expense of the removal of their paupers in that way, without any hope of being repaid.
Mr. Warburton
thought, that in these times, it would have been better to make appropriations of land for the diffusion of education, rather than for the support of the church. The act of parliament reserved one-seventh part of the lands for the maintenance of the established church; but he wished to know whether it was not the intention of government to dispose of the produce of some of those lands, to educate the poor emigrants they were about to convey to Canada. It was not too late to revise the act; and he would most earnestly recommend them to do so, as well as to adopt some measures with respect to the importation of Canada corn. He would remind them of the expressions used by a great philosopher, a great political economist, and the founder of a great empire, the celebrated Dr. Franklin, in his interviews with a noble lord. That great man, in speaking of the colonists, observed, "That if they were to sow and to reap, and yet not be allowed to ship, the sooner the government of this country sent out transports to bring the people home again,
589
Mr. Stanley
begged to observe, that in giving his unqualified approbation to the measure proposed, he must be understood as being perfectly aware of the nature of the property allotted to the church, and of being as sensible as any man of the monstrous absurdity of attempting to support what was called the established church, but which, in fact, never would be established. The present sale he understood to be for the improvement of the remainder of the lands given to the church; and as such it had his approval. It left, too, the question respecting the propriety of such grant precisely where it was; for the act of 1791, under the authority of which it was made, remained just as open to revision or amendment after that sale as it was before.
Mr. Waithman
condemned, in strong terms, the plan of giving lands in the colonies to any company whatever. He feared that, in such cases, the property was only turned to the purpose of enriching a few individuals, while the mass of those who were seduced by their promises and representations became the victims of their credulity. He had known a great many instances of that kind, and actually seen a person who had made his way back to England from Colombia, after being defrauded of money he had paid for land, and been disappointed in all the prospects held out to him. Many of the unfortunate settlers sent out by companies were, in fact, scattered over the country, instead of being settled down in the places which were promised to them.
Mr. W. Horton
complained of the kind of declamation used by the hon. alderman upon the subject. Nothing could be more absurd than to say all companies were unworthy, because the members of one had been guilty of deceit.
Mr. Dawson
, (of Louth), condemned the whole project, as useless and impolitic. They now proposed to sell one part of the land for the improvement of the other;
590
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
PRIVATE BILL COMMITTEES.]
Mr. B. Cooper
rose to propose the resolution of which he had given notice, respecting Private Committees. The adoption of this resolution he thought necessary to give effect to the excellent regulations prepared by the hon. member for Staffordshire, to whom the House and the country were much indebted for having taken up the subject. To render those regulations more complete, the privilege of voting on Private Committees should not be allowed to every member of the House. The consequence of such a privilege was, that members who did not attend the committee, and therefore knew nothing of what passed in it, were induced by the solicitation of friends to go and vote at the termination of the inquiry. Such a proceeding was manifestly unjust and mischievous, and ought not to be allowed to continue. It also happened, that some members who had a great deal of local information upon the particular subject of inquiry, were often omitted in the appointment of the original committee; but it was not, however, his intention to deprive a committee of the advantage of their assistance. He would only restrict them to the necessity of a special application to the House, to allow their names to be added to the committee.
591
Mr. Mundy
seconded the motion. The greatest inconvenience and mischief had, he said, arisen from members voting on private bills who had not attended to the details in the committee. He had himself on one occasion been requested to vote on a private bill, respecting which he knew nothing whatever. He refused to do so, and had expressed what he could not consider an improper indignation at such a request having been made to him. It was, in his opinion, an insult to a member, to ask him to vote under such circumstances.
The resolution was agreed to.
ARMY ESTIMATES.]
The resolutions of the committee to which the Army Estimates were referred being brought up,
Mr. Hume
said, that seeing the chancellor of the Exchequer in his place, he wished to ask him whether the estimates, as they stood, were meant to include all the expenses of the expedition to Portugal, or whether he intended to propose some addition at a future opportunity? He thought it was time for the right hon. gentleman to be looking about for the ways and means with which he was to pay the estimates.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, it was impossible for him at that moment to say whether he should propose to the House that the additional expenses incurred by the expedition to Portugal should be defrayed by an addition to the army extraordinaries, or by means of a separate vote. In whatever shape it might be presented, he did not think it would be so formidable as the hon. member seemed to fancy.
On the first resolution being read,
Mr. Warburton
wished to know whether all the expense of the Portuguese expedition would be defrayed by this country, or any part by Portugal; and if so, what part?
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that this government was not to pay the expense of the subsistence and the charges for barracks of the troops in Portugal; which were to be defrayed by the government of that country.
On the resolution for a grant to the Royal Military Colleges,
592
Mr. Hume
objected to the great expense incurred in the education of young men for the army at the Military Colleges, which bore no proportion to the number of cadets. In the last year only thirty-eight cadets, who had been educated at the Military Colleges had entered the army, and he believed that for some years there had not been more than ten young men at Woolwich.
Mr. Secretary Peel
thought it was necessary that officers should be educated in such a manner as would qualify them for entering the service. The hon. member was mistaken in supposing that only thirty-eight cadets had been educated; for in time of peace two hundred, and in war four hundred, were educated at these colleges.
Mr. Maberly
admitted that our officers ought to be properly educated for the service; but thought that that education should be at the charge of their friends. He was persuaded that, if the subject were referred to a committee above-stairs, a saving of ten thousand a-year might be effected.
Mr. D. W. Harvey
thought it would be very advantageous to refer, not only this particular subject, but the whole of the estimate for the Army, Navy, and Ordnance, to the consideration of a committee, by whom they might be minutely discussed, with a view to public economy. Such a mode of proceeding would also have the effect of doing away with much desultory conversation.
Mr. Secretary Peel
observed, that that was precisely what had been done in 1817, when a committee above-stairs had fixed the scale by which this part of our expenditure ought to be regulated.
Mr. D. W. Harvey
thought it would be serviceable to the country, if such a committee was appointed every seven years.
Mr. Alderman Waithman
complained that there was no symptom of retrenchment manifested in the army. The country could not go on with a military establishment of 87,000 men. The navy was never more efficient; and on it the safety of the country mainly depended. It was on the principle that retrenchment ought to take place, that he had opposed the grant to the royal duke the other night; not on account of the sum proposed to be granted, but because he conceived it an outrage, that such a proposition
593
Mr. Lombe
remonstrated against the enormous expenses of the country, and particularly against the estimates for the land forces.
Mr. Monck
maintained that the estimates ought to be referred to a committee, The situation of the country had so materially changed within the last ten years, that it was necessary to revise the report of the committee of 1817. With respect to the particular vote before the House, he fully agreed with his hon. friend, that the whole effect of this very large expenditure was the education of thirty-eight young gentlemen.
On the grant being proposed, of 36,272
l.
Mr. Hume
said, that he had opposed this vote several years ago, and the time that had since elapsed had more and more convinced him of the necessity of adopting some salutary measure of reform, not only in this particular vote, but with regard to others. He objected to this grant, because he was opposed to the system of sinecures; and he meant to show that, with a few exceptions, the vote which the House was now called upon to pass was principally made up of pensions and sinecures. He would show that in this estimate of 36,272
l.
594
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
595
l.
l.,
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
Sir A. Hope
rose to oppose the amendment of the hon. gentleman, who had not proved that the situations of which he spoke were sinecures. With respect to the governor of Berwick, he had been sixty-two years in the service, and the lieutenant-governor forty-nine years, making a total of one hundred and eleven years passed in the service of their country. There was no class of officers, he won id venture to affirm, who deserved more from their country than those persons who were appointed governors of garrisons. It
596
Mr. Maberly
said, that he had advised his hon. friend long ago, not to press his objections against these estimates, as such subjects could only be examined with effect in a committee. His hon. friend, however, had followed his own course: and, perhaps, after all, he did right in. keeping the subject so constantly before the public. It had, no doubt, the effect of putting a wholesome check to the expenditure of the country. The noble Secretary had admitted, that the committee appointed in 1817 had effected some good. But such a committee, if periodical, would be much more useful. He gave his hon. friend credit for his exertions, and thought that he had, in some degree, checked the prepress of expenditure. But he was of opinion, that these were subjects which could only be effectually treated by a committee; and, for his own part, if he were a member of such a committee, he would entirely concur with the gallant officer, that the services of the army deserved to be recompensed. He agreed, however, with his hon. friend, that the subject of sinecures ought not to be overlooked, and hoped that he would press the appointment of a committee.
Lord Palmerston
said, that the question was not one of detail, but of principle, and was therefore a proper one to be discussed by the House. These garrison appointments might be divided into two classes: those given to inferior officers, to which duties were attached; and those given to higher officers as a reward for
597
598
Mr. Baring
said, that his hon. friend the member for Montrose; might possibly diminish his influence in the House by the manner in which he objected to every vote. It was, however, unquestionable, that his vigilance had been an insuperable obstacle to many objectionable practices and designs. It was quite impossible that the government could proceed in their present course, unless the people were called upon for the augmentation of taxes, or the finances were to be ruined. One of these two things must occur. The whole system of expenditure ought to be referred to a Committee of the House. The estimates were of a nature which, under the present state of its finances, the country could not supply. Government might say that such a scale of expenditure was necessary to uphold the honour and dignity of the country; but it was impossible for the people to meet that scale. The difference between those who had to spend and those who had to pay, was immense. It was not for government to say, that this garrison was useful, or that this establishment was essential. The question was, could the country afford it? He thought that the present estimate had been most satisfactorily accounted for by the gallant officer who had recently addressed the House, with whom he agreed in thinking that there were many meritorious officers who would gladly accept of a government of small value as a reward of their services, who would feel ill treated by the offer of a pension to the same amount. If, as had been stated, any abuses had crept in, in bestowing these appointments, the best way to expose them was, by giving them publicity. He was sorry to be obliged to oppose the amendment of the hon. member for Aberdeen.
Mr. Hume
said, he would meet the wishes of his friends, by withdrawing his motion.
Mr. Rickford
moved as an Amendment,
599
l.,
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that allusion having been made to governors who were not military men, he wished it to be understood, that the government of the Isle of Wight had never been considered a military appointment, that officer discharging the ordinary duties of a lord-lieutenant. The father of the earl of Malmesbury had been for a long time employed in diplomatic situations—a sort of office in which it was well known the individuals seldom made fortunes. He had received the reward of a pension and a peerage from his royal master, with the reversion of a part of that pension to his son. That portion of the pension the present lord Malmesbury had resigned for the government of the Isle of Wight, an office which would cease at his lordship's death, as it had in fact been abolished by the act of 1817.
Mr. W. Smith
supported the amendment, thinking that by putting an end to one of these sinecures, he should accelerate the extinction of abuses so often and so justly complained of.
The House divided: for Mr. Rickford's amendment 15; for the original resolution 45. The other resolutions were then put, and agreed to.
List of the Minority.
Baring, Alex.
Smith, W.
Dawson, A.
Thompson, C. B.
Easthope, J.
Wood, John
Harvey, D. W.
Wood, Ald.
Lennard, B.
Waithman, Ald.
Lombe, E.
Warburton, H.
Maberly, J.
TELLERS.
Monck, J. B.
Hume, J.
Pendarves, E. W.
Rickford, W.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Wednesday, February 21, 1827.
CORN LAWS.]
Lord Holland
presented a petition, praying for an alteration of the Corn Laws. He wished it to be understood, that he gave no opinion whatever on the subject. He entirely agreed with the noble marquis, that nothing was more erroneous than to consider this as a conflict between different interests. They had all necessarily one interest, and all found their security in the prosperity of each other.
600
Lord King
presented a petition, praying for the repeal of the Corn Laws, from certain persons in Gloucestershire, calling themselves members of the Anti-Bread-Tax Association, No. 2. His noble friend near him had just stated, that this was not a contest of interests. He admitted that it ought not to be such a contest; but he was afraid it was a contest between principles that would lead to prosperity and a course of policy that had been too long pursued, and would be, he was afraid, still longer persevered in. The plan that was forthcoming had been too long in concocting to be very beneficial. He expected to see no self-denying ordinance issue from that House. The plan would be something that would not very much displease the landed interest. It would not be what the people prayed for. He would contend, however, that until that which was just and right was done, this question would not be suffered to rest.
Lord Teynham
thought it was beneath their lordships' dignity to receive a petition from a society calling itself the Anti-Bread-Tax Association. He hoped the noble lord would withdraw it.
Lord King
presented the petition as the petition of the persons who signed it, though it was indorsed Anti-Bread-Tax Petition.
The Earl of Lauderdale
said, that when he saw that the indorsements of the petitions were all "Anti-bread Tax Petitions," and understood that there were several, all drawn up in the same words; and when he recollected the speeches of his noble friend, he was at no loss to conjecture who was the author of these petitions.
Lord King
replied, that whoever might be the author, he was not. The petitions must, however, give his noble friend considerable pleasure, as they must convince him, that other persons could make as great mistakes in matters of political economy as he had made himself.
The Lord Chancellor
did not know whether the noble lord had drawn up the petitions, or had only indorsed them for their lordships' acceptance; but there was nothing in the indorsement which should prevent their lordships from receiving the petition as the petition of the persons who signed it.
Ordered to lie on the table.
CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION.]
The Earl
601
presented a petition from a barony in Tipperary, signed by thirteen magistrates, and most of the respectable inhabitants, against granting any further concessions to the Catholics. The noble earl, in presenting the petition, complained of the influence exerted by the Catholic priests over their flocks. The people, he said, were indifferent to the subject of Catholic emancipation. There would be many more petitions, such as that which he now presented, if the people did not live under apprehension for their safety. He had known instances where individuals were prevented from speaking out by their fears.
Viscount Clifden
wished to say a word about the Catholic priests. He had heard from an assistant barrister, who was in the county of Waterford at the time of the election, that there was no ground of complaint against the Catholic priests. They had exerted their interest in favour of their own party. And why not? Did not the Protestant clergy interfere at Reading and in Surrey; and was it to be tolerated in them, and treated as a crime in the Catholics? As to the Protestants being ready to petition against the catholics if they dared, it was his firm conviction, that the vast majority of the Protestant landed proprietors of Ireland were in favour of Catholic emancipation, from a conviction that their security depended on its being carried. The Catholics had suffered from many abuses; and it was not surprising that they should be exasperated. He begged their lordships to reflect seriously on the state of Ireland, and ask themselves how all these things could end? For himself, he would express his conviction, that until the question was settled in favour of the Catholics, there would be neither peace nor tranquillity in that country.
Ordered to lie on the table.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, February 21, 1827.
CORN LAWS.]
Lord Milton
presented sundry petitions from Yorkshire, praying for an alteration in the Corn-laws. To the petition from Leeds—one of the wealthiest and most intelligent manufacturing towns in the country—he wished particularly to call the attention of the House. Undoubtedly, the prosperity of the country depended, in a great degree, upon the
602
Sir E. Knatchbull
expressed his satisfaction at the temperate tone in which the noble lord had introduced the present subject, and he trusted that, when the discussion of the Corn-laws took place, it would be characterized by similar moderation. There was one expression of the noble lord, however, to which he could
603
Mr. Duncombe
said, he had been asked to support the cause of the petitioners; but he never could consent to advocate measures, which, in his opinion, involved the ruin of the landed interest. If his majesty's government should propose an alteration of these laws, by which the interests of the landowners would be properly protected, he would give the alteration his support; but if the interests of that class should not be sufficiently attended to, he certainly would not countenance the change.
Mr. Whitmore
expressed his pleasure at hearing the noble lord state so plainly and so temperately the objects of difference between the parties interested in the corn question. The moderation so strongly exhibited upon that occasion, would go a great way to quiet the fears of the agriculturists, and to satisfy them that the violent changes which they apprehended were not desired by those who called for a modification of the Corn-laws.
Mr. Marshall
said, that the persons who suffered most from the operation of the Corn-laws had borne their distresses for a long time with great patience; and that they now entertained strong hopes of being relieved from the miseries incidental to the continuance of the present system of restriction—hopes which he earnestly trusted would not be disappointed.
Mr. Phillips
said, that the great evil arising from the prohibitions of the importation of grain was, that it prevented manufactures from being carried out of the country, in return for the grain that might be brought in. There could not be a greater mistake than to suppose that the introduction of foreign grain would be injurious to the agriculturist: seeing that no change could take place in the commerce of the country that would give it fresh activity, and contribute to the prosperity of the manufacturing classes, without proving beneficial to the holders and occupiers of land.
Sir T. Lethbridge
could, not allow the
604
605
SLAVE TRADE AT THE MAURITIUS.]
Mr. F. Buxton
, in rising to move for the Committee of which he had given notice, said, that as the subject had been already discussed in all its details, and as he did not anticipate any opposition, he would content himself with merely moving "That a Select Committee be appointed, to inquire whether the Slave Trade has existed at the Mauritius and its dependencies, to what extent, and the causes thereof."
Mr. W. Horton
begged the hon. gentleman not to press the appointment of such a committee in the absence of his right hon. friend, the Secretary for Foreign Affairs. There were many things connected with the subject which would render it very desirable that his right hon. friend should be present.
Mr. F. Buxton
expressed his surprise, that, after that right hon. Secretary had, nearly nine months ago, declared his opinion in favour of inquiry, and declared that, after the charges he had heard, a parliamentary inquiry ought to take place, there should be any opposition, or hesitation in consenting to the appointment of a committee. As he had had no opportunity, however, of any immediate correspondence with that right hon. gentleman, he would consent to postpone his motion for the present, upon the consideration of the hon. Secretary consenting to reply to two, or even one, question. He was convinced, in the first place, that if there was any inten-
606
Mr. W. Horton
replied, that he was not prepared to give a perfectly satisfactory explanation of the matters referred to by the hon. member, in the absence of his right hon. friend. He was not, however, aware that it was the intention of government to send out a commission to the Mauritius; and, as to a committee at home upon the subject, it was not, in his opinion, by any means likely to be productive of beneficial results.
Mr. Buxton
then withdrew his motion.
NORTHAMPTON ELECTION—CONDUCT
Major Maberly
, in rising to bring forward the motion of which he had given notice, relative to the petition from Northampton, complaining of the conduct of the Corporation of that borough, felt himself placed in circumstances of no ordinary difficulty. Under no circumstances, indeed, did a public accuser find himself in a very grateful position; but, upon the present occasion, he felt all the usual unpleasantness of such an office, with the addition of no slight embarrassment, arising from considerations that personally affected himself; for, in this case, while he knew, on the one hand,
607
l
608
l
609
610
611
prima facie
The Clerk having read the said Petitions,
The Attorney-General
(sir Charles Wetherell) rose to express his dissent from the hon. gentleman's premises, although, if he did not feel himself obliged to do so, he should perfectly agree with him in his conclusion. He perfectly agreed with him, that if the conduct of the corporation of North-
612
l
613
l
l
l
614
Mr. Spring Rice
, after apologizing for his presumption in rising after the very clear and able statement of his hon. friend who had brought this subject under the consideration of the House, said he was desirous to show the hon. and learned gentleman opposite, that he had fallen into an inadvertent error. In the first place, he wished to disembarrass the subject of a great portion of the legal subtleties by which it had been surrounded. It was a question which involved considerations of a much larger and more important nature, than the hon. and learned gentleman seemed to imagine. If it were merely a complaint from the town of Northampton that the corporation had, for their own benefit, or for any undue purpose, misapplied their funds, it might be a question, whether the House ought to agree to a motion for inquiry. He for one might be disposed, in such a case, to acquiesce in the doctrine laid down by the hon. and learned gentleman, that, if the petitioners had a clear legal remedy, the House ought not to exert its authority on the subject. But, what was the actual complaint? In the older and better times of parliament, if it had been alleged that a corporate body had misapplied their funds, for the purpose of procuring the return of a member to that House, he doubted whether an attorney-general would have refused an inquiry on legal grounds, or have told the complainants to go to a court of equity, in order to ascertain, not if the money of the corporation had gone to A or B, but if it had been applied to influence the
615
l
The Attorney General
, across the table, —No.
Mr. Spring Rice
:—Then the learned gentleman's proposition amounted to nothing. Suppose proceedings were com-
616
Sir George Robinson
rose, merely for the purpose of supporting the motion of his hon. friend and colleague. He did not consider this a fit case for a court of law. It ought to be taken up on constitutional principles, and decided in that House. He would only further state, that the returning officer belonged to that body who had supplied the money; and this of itself implied such a partiality, that the election could not have taken place under him with fairness.
Mr. Hudson Gurney
said, that the hon. member for Limerick had so entirely demolished the speech of the attorney-general, that he would not trouble the House at any length. This was not a case of nice legal distinctions, as to the cognizance of what court the offence ought to be submitted. It was a question of mere plain common sense. If the petition before the House stated the truth, the corporation had committed an open and enormous malversation on the funds of the community of Northampton, for which they were trustees, in the misapplication of the common property to purposes which brought them distinctly and clearly before the House.—He was one who thought the system of open corporations, under which the inhabitants of large places elected their own magistrates, the very best that could
617
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, he much regretted that before he came down to the House, it had not been in his power to make himself more perfectly acquainted with the circumstances of this particular case. He had only been fortunate enough to hear the last two speeches, and to read in the votes of the House one of the petitions referred to. He could very sincerely assure the House, that, in coming to a vote upon this subject, he would solely exercise his own judgment, and decide, without reference, in the slightest degree, to any party considerations. He had reason to regret further, that in the course of what he understood his hon. and learned friend near him to have said, some observations should have escaped, calculated to excite prejudice, and interfere with an impartial decision. Agreeing, as he did in the main, with what had fallen from his hon. and learned friend, he the more regretted being under the necessity of making this exception. It was an exception, however, which he owed to candour, and a sense of justice. For himself, he
618
619
l
620
l
l
l
a laugh.
621
Lord Althorp
said, that the present complaint was one which affected the rights and privileges of the House, and as such it was their duty to inquire into the circumstances out of which it arose. He concurred with the right, hon. Secretary, that it was desirable that the House should acquire a knowledge of facts, before any distinct measure was adopted. If it should turn out upon investigation that the facts, as stated in the last petition, were true, some act of legislative interposition would
622
Mr. Abercromby
considered this to be a question on which it was desirable that the House should act upon some clear, definite, and ascertained principle. The right hon. Secretary seemed to have fallen into a misconception, and to have attached the whole importance to the question— whether or not the money had been diverted from charitable purposes. But, the real and single point with which the House had to deal, was the fact as alleged, that 1,000
l
l
Mr. Alderman Waithman
denied that the corporation, to which he had the honour to belong, had ever made an improper application of the charitable funds intrusted to their care. It had happened to him that he had been obliged to differ with the corporation of London as to the
623
Mr. Secretary Peel
disclaimed the intention of casting any imputation upon the corporation of London. He had had an opportunity, for several years, of observing the conduct of that body, and had never known a single act to have been done by it, upon which that House, or he, or any other individual, could found a reasonable complaint. He had only referred to the corporation of London incidentally, in answer to the argument of the gallant officer, and the purport of his observation in reference to it, was merely, that if the proposition of the minority being bound by the majority were tenable, the act of the corporation which he had instanced, could not, on that principle, be vindicated.
Lord John Russell
expressed his surprise at the unwillingness of the right hon. gentleman to refer the question in the manner proposed. The practice complained of might prove in the highest degree detrimental. The question certainly was not, whether the candidate, supported by a corporation, were a ministerial, or an opposition candidate, but whether a corporation was to be suffered to set one party in a town against another. If the habit of supporting the candidates of particular parties prevailed, elections in this country would soon become even more corrupt than they had been, and the general opinion of a city would be overborne by the contribution of immense sums to support the person who might happen for the time to be the favourite of the corporation. It might be said, that the funds appropriated to these purposes did not form a portion of the funds designed for charitable objects. But how could this fact be ascertained? Who could say what particular portion of the funds of a corporation had been applied to a specific purpose? If this was a legal application of the funds, he should be, on that account, even more anxious for a committee; for in, that case some measure would, be
624
Mr. Secretary Peel.—
I am sorry that my argument has been so completely misunderstood. What I say is this, if any corporation has applied charitable funds to election purposes, I cannot conceive a more reprehensible application of such funds. If a corporation has applied funds over which they have an entire and undisputed control, to election purposes, I do not say that I approve of such an application; all I ask of this House is, not this night to vote such an application a breach of its privileges. I have such doubts of the propriety of such an application of corporation funds, that if any corporation were to ask my opinion as to their right so to apply the general funds of the corporation, my advice would be—" Don't do any thing of the kind." And I further say, that if such an application of corporation funds shall be decided not to be illegal, my objections to it are so strong, that in my opinion, a legislative remedy should be resorted to, to prevent the recurrence of a similar application.
Major Maberly
begged leave to withdraw his original motion, and to substitute the following:—" That a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into any payment, or engagement to pay Election expenses, by the corporation of Northampton, at the late Election."—The motion was agreed to, and a committee appointed.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Thursday, February 22, 1827.
CORN LAWS.]
Earl Bathurst
rose, and desired, that the order for summoning their lordships on Monday, which had been made on the motion of the earl of Liverpool, should be read. His lordship then said, that, although it was necessary, from the nature of the measure which would be proposed, that the proceedings relative to the Corn-laws should begin in another place, yet his noble friend had given notice, in consideration of the great importance of the question, and what he considered due to his own high station, that he should take an early opportunity of explaining in detail, the nature of the resolutions which were to be submitted to the other House; and he had fixed Monday for that purpose. His noble friend had hoped that he might be able, by his explanations, to arrest that conflict be-
625
The Earl of Lauderdale
did not rise to make any objection to the course just proposed by the noble, earl. He could not,
626
Lord King
observed, that the noble earl opposite had been pleased to allude to the conflict of interests which he said had been most unjustifiably augmented; but, if it had been augmented, it had been done by the most unjustifiable delays to which this question had been subjected. It was to be brought forward one session; it was then postponed to the next. It was to come on this year; it was then put off to another, and then came the dissolution of parliament. After what had been stated by the noble earl, he looked on the question with despondency, and almost despair, particularly as they were deprived of the assistance of that noble lord, whom he regarded as the most sincere in wishing to get rid of the Corn-laws. He had hoped, that before this time their lordships would have seen the necessity of agreeing to such a measure as would content the people. He was afraid that the plan would only be an alteration, and scarcely an improvement. He had now to present a petition from Blackburn. It came from a place at which the people were suffering the deepest distress. Their sufferings were, indeed, so great, that they were distinguished in the midst of general distress. He should not be dealing fairly by their lordships if he did not state, that the petition contained many hard things against parliament, and particularly against that
627
Earl Stanhope
said, that, although he was never disposed unnecessarily to reject the petitions of the people, and wished to open the door of parliament to them as widely as possible, yet he held it to be inconsistent with the duty which their lordships owed to themselves, to receive any petitions which, like the one then offered to their lordships, was couched in the most offensive language, and contained the most false statements. The Petitioners said, "that the legislature had, for their own aggrandisement, ruined and degraded the working classes." He knew not that the legislature had ever done so; but he would say, that if they were to adopt any measure which went to alter the Corn-laws, without a full inquiry, not into a part of the question, but into the whole of it—any measure which went to lessen the supply of food—then he would say that their lordships were doing what might ruin not only the working classes, but all classes of the empire. He put it to their lordships, whether they would receive the petition, and allow themselves to be insulted.
Lord King
was indifferent whether their lordships received the petition or not. It had been read; but he had told their lordships before it was read, that it came from one of the most suffering parts of this deeply-suffering country; and it was for their lordships to decide, whether they would or not make some allowance for the hasty expressions of people in such a state.
Earl Stanhope
admitted the distress of the petitioners, but contended, that it did not arise from measures adopted by parliament. Their lordships could not give these people higher wages, nor find them additional employment. He must, once for all, enter his protest against the opinion expressed in that and other petitions, that the Corn-laws had anything to do with low wages. The assertions of the petitioners were contradicted by facts. Not longer ago than last session, a measure was adopted, having for its object to lower the price of corn.
The Earl of Limerick
deprecated the inflammatory language which had been frequently used on this subject, which had, he thought, unjustifiably augmented the conflict between the opposite interests of the country. He thought that
628
The petition was rejected.
Lord King
then presented, what he called, a quiet, meek, humble, petition, not containing one word which could offend their lordships. It was from the Incorporated Trades of Saint Andrews. In presenting it, he wished to tell the noble lord who spoke last, that he meant to use the same language he always had used, until their lordships did what was right and just.
The Marquis of Lansdown
presented a petition from the town of Liverpool. He thought it due to the petitioners, as well as to their lordships, to have the petition read. He begged leave, at the same time, to express his satisfaction at learning, by what fell from the noble Secretary of State, that the great misfortune which had befallen his noble friend at the head of the government — a misfortune which deeply affected the public, and for which no man felt more than himself—would not occasion the postponement of the great public question beyond Monday next. He thought it most important that the question should be decided as soon as possible; because, while it was unsettled, no contracts could be entered into between landlords and tenants.
Lord Redesdale
said, that a great mistake pervaded all the reasoning of this and of most of the petitions on this subject. The petitioners all seemed to think that the manufacture of other commodities and of corn were precisely the same; whereas they depended on very different principles. The manufacture of other commodities depended altogether on man. The growth of corn depended on the seasons. In one season there was an abundant crop, in another a scarcity; while the expense of cultivation was the same in both years. It was impossible that the corn could be sold for the same price in both years. This was a decree of Heaven, and could not be altered. Corn could not be sold at the same price in a number of successive years; if the prayers of the petitioners were complied with, and their complaints redressed, it would desolate the country. The Corn-laws of the reign of Charles 2nd were founded on the peculiar principle which distinguished the produc-
629
630
Ordered to lie on the table.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, February 22, 1827.
CORN LAWS — EQUALIZATION OF
Mr. J. Maxwell
presented a petition from the productive classes of Renfrew, praying for Reform, a free trade in Corn, and an Equalization of Contracts.
631
Mr. E. Davenport
took occasion to complain of the conduct of Ministers, with respect to the question of the currency. He had already given a vague notice on the subject; and he believed that, in consequence of this threat, ministers had been induced to put off the consideration of the Corn question from the day for which they had originally given notice. He would now take the opportunity of saying, that he would redeem the pledge which he had given, and take a speedy opportunity of formally bringing the subject under the consideration of the House.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that if the hon. member had not concluded by giving this general notice, he should scarcely have been able to comprehend exactly what he was at. But, if he supposed that government had been induced to postpone the Corn question on account of any thing he might have said in that House, or what any one might have said any where else, he could only undertake to give to such an assertion a peremptory denial.
Mr. Maberly
complained of the manner in which ministers had acted with respect to the currency question. They first tampered with the currency of England without inquiry. Without inquiry they created
632
Lord Folkestone
charged ministers with supineness in having so long neglected the vital question of the currency. Their conduct gave rise to the inference, that they had altered their opinions upon the subject; for they had failed to carry into effect the principles which they set out with avowing. There was a tampering already going on with the currency; and, under such circumstances, the question could never be said to be settled.
Ordered to lie on the table.
CRIMINAL LAWS—BILLS FOR THE
Mr. Secretary Peel
rose to bring forward his promised motion. He had now, he said, agreeably to that motion, to apply to the House for leave to bring in four bills, having for their object the simplification and consolidation of the statutes relating to the Criminal Laws. The first of those bills was intended to consolidate and amend the laws relating to theft, and the various offences connected therewith. The second was to amend the law relating to another class of offence against the subject, namely, a wilful and malicious injury of property. The third bill for which he should move, would be to consolidate and amend the laws relating to remedies against the hundred. And the fourth bill which he should submit to the notice of the House, would have the effect of repealing such statutes as would be superseded by the three first bills, in order not to encumber the Statute-book, by the introduction of separate acts of parliament for the attainment of that object. By this means, the three bills which he had already named would not be impeded in their operation, by clauses and enactments contrary to their spirit. He had entered last session so fully into the policy and necessity of amending the criminal statutes, that he was not sure whether it was at all necessary to enforce the reasoning which he then used, or to trouble the House with a repetition of his views, notwithstanding some of the members whom he had now the honour to address were not in parlia-
633
634
maximum
635
636
637
l
l
638
639
640
l
l
l
l
641
l
642
Lord Althorp
returned thanks to the right hon. Secretary, for the great progress which he had already made in amending the criminal code of the country. He agreed with the right hon. gentleman, that it was necessary to proceed cautiously in the task which he had undertaken, inasmuch as nothing was more dangerous than inconsiderate legislation upon matters of a criminal nature. He admitted, that the increasing amount of county rates for some years past was a subject worthy the serious consideration of every gentleman who stood in the situation which he filled as a county member. The reason why the expenses of prosecutions at the quarter sessions was less than those at the assizes was, because the first underwent the revision of the magistrates who had to pay them. He trusted that the right hon. gentleman would consider whether some measure might not be devised to assimilate the scale of expenses at the assizes to that used at the quarter sessions. He was fully convinced that the laws relative to malicious injury to property required amendment; inasmuch as they had filled our gaols with criminals for comparatively trifling and insignificant offences. He also thought that the laws relative to poaching had been recently applied to many cases which were not intended to be affected by them. In conclusion, he intreated the right hon. gentleman to accept his tribute of applause for the benefit which he
643
Sir George Chetwynd
said, that having for many years been in the habit of superintending the administration of the laws as a magistrate, he could but express his gratitude to the right hon. gentleman, not only for the improvements which he had already introduced, but for those which he was about to introduce into our criminal jurisprudence.
Mr. Hobhouse
said, that the present was one of those occasions in which it was the duty of all those who felt strongly, to attempt to give utterance to the feelings under which they laboured. In all the admirable address which the House had just heard from the lips of the right hon. Secretary there was only one part to which he was inclined to make any exception, and that was the part in which the right hon. gentleman had told them, that it was possible that by pursuing a different course from that which he had followed, a more splendid fame might have been acquired. Upon that point alone, he begged leave to express his dissent. The right hon. gentleman was mistaken. A more slpendid fame than that which he had already earned could not be acquired, and the right hon. gentleman must have seen the earnest of that fame, which he would enjoy to the latest posterity, in the applauses which he had already received from men of all parties in the country— applauses which stamped on his exertions a reputation, which no future act of the right hon. gentleman would be able to destroy [cheers]. The right hon. gentleman had to deal with a subject which many great and good men, who had gone before him, had attempted, but in vain, to remedy. Those who preceded the right hon. gentleman had, however, only the will. Fortunately for himself, and fortunately for his country, the right hon. gentleman had likewise the power and, with the power and the will combined, it was impossible that he should not, if he lived, see the best results emanate out of his exertions. If one of the persons to whom he alluded— if one of those great minds, who had formed plans for the good of mankind—if the man who once represented his constituents in that House, and held the seat which he now so unworthily held—if sir Samuel Romilly, who had so often regretted the state of the criminal law, and breathed
644
645
Mr. Sykes
objected to the power given by certain bills to convict offenders by summary process before one magistrate. As a magistrate he did not like the responsibility thus thrown upon him; and, as a man, he would prefer that the conviction should take place before two magistrates. In all attempts to improve the criminal justice of the country, attention should be paid to the county rates, which were now increasing, in all parts of the country, to an alarming extent. Indeed, in one place with which he was acquainted, the county rates were greater in amount than the poor-rates were thirty years ago. In conclusion, he applauded the right hon. Secretary for proceeding, step by step, in his attempts to amend the Criminal jurisprudence of his country.
Mr. Cripps
said, that it was unnecessary for him to offer more than one word on the excellence of the measures which had been proposed by the right hon. Secretary. The improvements which he had already made in our criminal law were above all praise; as were also those which he had now suggested. In reply to the observations of the hon. member for Hull, on the impropriety of giving one magistrate a summary power of conviction, he observed, that it was necessary that one magistrate should have that power, as there were many parts of the country in which it would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to get two magistrates. The increase in the county rates was occasioned by two causes very dissimilar—the increase of crime, of road-making and bridge-making throughout the country. He was extremely glad that the subject had attracted the notice of the right hon. Secretary.
646
Mr. Batley
returned his thanks to the right hon. gentleman for the admirable speech which he had that evening delivered. He was quite convinced that the comprehensive plans disclosed in that speech would have the effect of diminishing the amount of capital punishment. He would not trouble the House further than by saying, that the right hon. gentleman had achieved for himself a permanent fame, and that his exertions were calculated to produce the most salutary results on the morals of society.
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, he should be guilty of great injustice to the House, if he did not briefly express the gratitude which he felt for the general support which his proposed measures had received. It was most gratifying to him to observe a complete oblivion of all party and personal feeling, when the object before the House was an endeavour to effect a great public benefit. Such a support was the most honourable testimony that could be borne to the utility of his efforts, and the uprightness of his intentions. He would not, on the present occasion, make any observations on the subject which had been alluded to by an hon. gentleman opposite; he meant the melancholy increase of crime. He had, however, caused comparative tables to be drawn up, and he was sorry to observe, but he owed it to justice to declare, that the comparison of the present with former periods was not satisfactory. Perhaps, however, the overgrown amount of the population might be adduced as one of the reasons which produced that unfavourable result. That, however, this subject had not escaped his attention, and that he meant to endeavour to apply some remedy for the evil, must be obvious to the hon. gentleman, as he had given notice of a motion for an inquiry into the state of the police within ten miles of the metropolis. When that motion came forward, the whole question could be discussed.
Leave was given to bring in the several bills.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, February 23, 1827.
CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION.]
Viscount Lorton
rose to present a petition from the Protestant Inhabitants of the county of Sligo, against granting any further concessions to the Catholics; and in present-
647
648
649
Lord King
said, that the noble and learned lord on the woolsack, who, at the commencement of the session, had recommended that long speeches should not be made on presenting petitions, must make an exception in favour of the noble viscount opposite, whose sentiments on this question were so congenial with his own. The noble viscount told their lordships, that the Protestants of Ireland were an oppressed and proscribed people. The best answer which could be given to the speech of the noble lord, was to be found in a petition which he intended to present. He would read a sentence from it, and, in doing so, was stating the case of the oppressed, not of the law-makers and powerful. The passage was this—"That your petitioners most humbly beg to state, that their unprotected situation and condition marks them out to perpetual notice and hostility; that they are the objects of the reproaches of the evil-disposed, who strive to heap wrong upon wrong, and injury upon injury, in order to render them odious in the eyes of the legislature." The complaints made against the Catholics reminded him of the fable of the wolf and the lamb. The lamb was tried and found guilty by wolf-law;
650
The Lord Chancellor
admitted that he had, on a former occasion, when presenting a petition, taken an opportunity to express his opinion, that it was more consistent with the usage of parliament, that noble lords should not make the presenting of petitions an occasion for entering-into a debate. The noble baron had not chosen to follow this advice; though he had always thrown his words back in his teeth. When the noble lord talked of wolves and lambs, it was not difficult for their lordships to decide whether the petitions he usually presented came from the wolves or the lambs. While he was on, his legs, he would take that opportunity of stating, that for twenty-five years he had given the subject to which the petitions related his most serious consideration, in order to come to a right conclusion. He would not then enter into it, but reserve the full expression of his opinion for the day when the question should be debated; but he would declare, that in his conscience he thought, though he did not say that other noble lords might not conscientiously think differently, that to grant the Catholics any further concessions would be to betray the civil and religious liberties of this country.
Ordered to lie on the table.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, February 26, 1827.
GRANT TO THE DUKE AND DUCHESS OF CLARENCE.—PETITION FROM MANCHESTER AGAINST.]
Mr. Hume
said, he held in his hand a petition, which had been agreed to at a numerous meeting of the inhabitants of Manchester. The petitioners stated, that they had endured great privations and distresses, from the fall in the rate of wages, and that they had endured them with patience and forbearance; but they could not behold with indifference such a disregard of the condition of the suffering working classes as was manifested in the proposal to give the duke of Clarence an addition of 9,000
l
651
Mr. John Wood
said, he was perfectly satisfied, that, if greater time had been allowed, the table would have been crowded with petitions from all parts of the kingdom against the grant. He implored the House to recollect, that, although the people, thus placed in the extremity of distress, were quiet, they were not indifferent to a vote which seemed to be a mockery of their situation. They were not so absurd as to suppose that any relief could be given them by abstaining from that grant. They did not suppose that their sufferings could be aggravated by the giving away of a sum of 9,000
l
Ordered to lie on the table.
DOUBLE LAND TAX—PETITION OF
Mr. Abercromby
652
653
l
The Attorney-General
said, that the bill of 1794 was intended to allow all persons, who chose, to exonerate themselves from the land-tax, within a certain time; and those persons who had not taken advantage of that permission within that certain time were now precluded from any relief. He would admit, however, that upon general principles, the petitioners ought to be relieved; although there was an utter incapability to grant that relief to those who had availed themselves of the terms of the act of parliament.
Mr. Secretary Peel
, although he continued to think as he always had thought, that it would be impolitic to grant any further political concessions to the Roman Catholics, yet his opinions upon that subject could not prevent his giving his hearty concurrence to any measure which would have the effect of relieving them from what there could be no question was a direct heavy burthen imposed upon their religious belief.
Ordered to lie on the table.
EMIGRATION COMMITTEE.]
Mr. Wilmot Horton
brought up a Report from the Emigration Committee; and in moving that it should lie on the table, he said he thought it right to inform the House of the circumstances under which the Committee had deemed it expedient to present
654
Ordered to be printed.
BRIBERY AT ELECTIONS.]
On the motion of lord Althorp, the order of the day was read for resuming the adjourned debate on the motion made on the 13th instant—"That a Select Committee be appointed, to whom all Petitions which shall be presented to this House, after the expiration of the time allowed for presenting Petitions against the validity of the Return of any Member of this House, by any person or persons affirming that general Bribery or Corruption has been practised in any Borough, Cinque Port, or place, for the purpose of procuring the Election or Return of any Member or Members to serve in Parliament for such Borough, Cinque Port, or place, shall be referred, and that they report their opinion thereon to the House,"
Lord Althorp
said, that it now became his duty to state to the House his views on the subject. If he had addressed the House upon the day on which he originally moved this resolution, he should not have thought himself called upon to enter into any discussion to show the necessity of establishing some measure like that which he had proposed. But what had since occurred had convinced him of the expediency of detailing the grounds of his proposition. It was a notorious fact, that in many boroughs in this kingdom, there was a general practice of bribery at the election of members to serve in that House. It was a notorious fact, that in some of those boroughs, the voters received five, ten, twenty, thirty, or fifty pounds a head for their votes. It could not be denied, that the prevalence of this practice was a disgrace to the House of Commons and to the country; and he felt,
655
656
657
prima facie
Mr. Leslie Foster
said, there could not be any doubt as to the importance of the subject, or the necessity of preventing a practice so disgraceful and unconstitutional, as that of which the noble lord complained. Respecting the means by which the end was to be accomplished, there might be a great difference of opinion. He must say, after hearing the proposition of the noble lord, that never since he had known any thing of parliament, had he heard a measure which should be received with greater caution than that before the House; because, out of regard to the
658
659
ex parte
ex parte
660
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes
Lord John Russell
said, that as far as he was able, he would endeavour to give an answer to the objections which had been urged by the hon. gentleman to his noble friend's proposition. The hon. gentleman had expressed his surprise at that proposition, and had declared it to be his opinion, that no further proceeding on the subject was necessary, seeing that the existing remedies against bribery and corruption were amply sufficient. In contradiction to that opinion, he would only beg the House to observe what passed at every general election. Was it not a notorious fact, that in numerous places the returns were regulated exclusively by the greater or less amount of money which the candidates bestowed on the electors? At one of the most recent
661
662
663
664
Mr. R. Palmer
said, that in the county which he had the honour to represent, there was an instance afforded of the total inefficacy of the law, as it now stood, to check the most flagrant bribery and corruption, with all their train of perjury and demoralizing effects upon the people. He had received a letter, which fully detailed the manner in which the bribery was carried on, in a certain borough of that county. As soon as the time had expired, during which the existing law against such corrupt practices was in efficacy, an individual, well known by the name of "the Miller," went round to each elector, and left him a certain token of the sound judgment and propriety with which he had given his vote. The Miller gave the honest elector a token of 20
l
665
Mr. Wynn
said, that if the evil existed, it was no proof that the existing law was insufficient to check the abuse. He was convinced, that the defect was not in the law, but in the want of persons to carry the law properly into execution. The penalties already established were, he thought, sufficiently heavy. If they were not, they ought to be increased. If a penalty of 500
l
l
666
667
Sir John Newport
said, he considered some alteration absolutely necessary, to put an end to a system, which it was idle to say did not exist to a very alarming extent, notwithstanding the provisions of the Grenville act. Fourteen years ago he had himself unsuccessfully brought, forward a plan, in which he proposed that, in addition to the oath which members were obliged to take at the table of the House, an oath should be administered, by which they declared that neither they, nor any person on their behalf, had given any money, or promise of money, place, pension, or emolument, to any person or persons who had been instrumental in returning the said members to parliament. If the House were really in earnest, they would follow up that measure. It was idle to talk of other remedies, while the one to which he referred was neglected. Where was the utility of calling upon poor electors to take the oath against bribery, unless the elected were put to a similar test? The bill which he introduced, however, had been cut up by hon. and right hon. members, until at last it became a perfect nonentity. If the proposition of his noble friend should be rejected, he himself would bring in a bill founded on similar principles.
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that the right hon. baronet had certainly brought forward no very powerful argument in support of the resolution of his noble friend, because, though he decided upon giving it his aid, he had also declared that he
668
669
670
671
l
prima facie
Mr. R. Martin
said:—In conformity with the vote I gave when the conduct of the borough of Grampound was under consideration, and in consequence of the pledge I then gave, I feel myself bound to give the proposition of the noble lord some degree of support. If I have no other alternative, I will vote for the noble lord's resolution, not because I hold it free from objection, but because it is the
672
673
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said:—If the hon. member for Galway is entitled to accuse ministers of ingratitude after a service of forty years, I do not think the noble mover has much reason to be thankful for the sort of support which his proposition has just received. I apprehend he will be inclined to reject a vote given upon such grounds, and under such circumstances. Regarding the transactions during the election for Galway, I know nothing: but I hope the House will do the noble marquis, who is the object of attack, the justice to suspend its judgment. When I mention that the hon. gentleman who has stated his own case against the noble marquis is himself petitioned against by the very individual with regard to whom this corruption is alleged to have taken place, the House will perceive, that it would be most unfair to arrive at any premature decision. Let it be recollected, too, that that petition charges the hon. member for Galway with almost every offence of which it is possible for a candidate to be guilty.
Lord Milton
said, that the object of his noble friend's motion, so far from being prejudicial to any party, fairly engaged in an election struggle, would have a very different effect. The object appeared to him to be that of putting the committee in possession of certain information; and it would then be for them to decide whether that information was or was not of sufficient importance to call for the interposition of the House. So far the committee, with reference to the House, were placed precisely in the situation of a grand jury,
674
Mr. W. Wynn
said, he did not approve of the form of the resolution then before the House, and he had therefore drawn up another, which, perhaps, he should be allowed to read. In making the present proposition, he was sure the noble lord would feel that he was not actuated by any wish to stifle an effort which had for its object the prevention of corrupt practices; but he feared, if the proposition then before the House was agreed to, that it would give rise to a great many vexatious complaints. He therefore thought that a resolution to the following effect would meet the object of the noble lord, and would steer clear of the difficulties with which the noble lord's proposition was connected:—"That all persons who will question any future return of members to serve in parliament, upon any allegation of bribery or corruption, and who shall in their petition specifically allege any payment of money, or other reward, to have been made by any member, or on his account, or with his privity, since the time of such return, in pursuance or in furtherance of such bribery or corruption, may question the same at any time within twenty-eight days after the date of such payment, or if this House be not sitting at the expiration of the said twenty-eight days, then, within fourteen days after the day when the House shall next meet."
Lord Milton
said, that the proposition of the right hon. gentleman did not go the length of his noble friend's resolution. But, while he admitted that he did not like the resolution of the right hon. gen-
675
Lord J. Russell
urged the propriety of passing a general resolution, declaratory of the determination of the House to put an end to bribery and corruption.
Lord Milton
asked whether, under the resolution of the right hon. gentleman, general corruption might be proved in a borough, or whether it would only go to vacate the seat of a particular member?
Mr. W. Wynn
said, the only question was, whether the cases referred to by the noble lord's resolution, did, or did not, come within the scope of the present law. If they did not, then, he contended, that his resolution fully supplied the deficiency.
Mr. Abercromby
approved of the suggestion of the President of the Board of Control, but contended, that the difference between the two sides of the House really amounted to nothing. All gentlemen seemed unanimous in favour of the proposition of his noble friend. No man disputed, that the case stated by the hon. member for Berkshire ought to be investigated at any period of a parliament. Now, under the Grenville act, it could not be done after the lapse of a certain time; so that the House had only two modes of proceeding—either the appointment of a committee, to which the particular complaint might be referred, or the examination of witnesses at the bar. All knew that the latter course was most inconvenient, by delaying the public business of the session. The whole difference, therefore, was simply this—would the House, on an early day of the session, appoint a committee for the investigation of matters of this kind, or would it wait until the particular case occurred requiring investigation? If the former course were taken, no favour could be shewn. If the latter, it was liable to the imputation of partiality.
Mr. Baring
thought, that the proposition of the noble lord would open the door to vague inquiry, while the resolution of the right hon. gentleman was open to another objection. He had for many years voted in minorities; and, if a charge of bribery were brought against a member of the opposition side of the House, in times when party feeling ran high, he feared he would have but a bad chance of a fair inquiry.
Mr. R. Palmer
observed, that the reso-
676
Lord Althorp
felt called upon to state, that there was a considerable difference between his own resolution and the suggestion of the right hon. gentleman. His own proposition was intended to have the effect of facilitating the disfranchisement of corrupt boroughs, while the amendment of the right hon. gentleman would by no means go to that extent. In many cases before election committees, only enough was proved to unseat the particular member, and there the inquiry stopped, without pursuing the investigation, to ascertain whether it would be fit to disfranchise the borough for bribery and corruption. He did not include counties, because his object was, not to attack the seats of members, but to purify boroughs; and he knew of no means of disfranchising counties. Although he preferred his own resolution, he considered that the change proposed by the right hon. gentleman would be a great improvement of the present election law of the House. Under the circumstances, he would not trouble the House to divide, but could not consent to withdraw his resolution.
Lord Althorp
said, he was willing to support the resolution, because he felt considerable anxiety for any beneficial alteration of the law on this point.
Lord Milton
agreed, that, as far as the resolution went, it tended to remove corruption in boroughs. But he must take leave to observe, that the scope and object of the resolution of his noble friend was different from that of the right hon. gentleman's proposition. His noble friend wished to get rid of the corruption of the elective body, but the right hon. gentleman opposed himself to the person elected. This, he allowed, was a good object but it was different from that which his noble friend had in view.
Mr. Secretary Peel
concurred in the opinion of the noble lord, that the scope and object of the resolution now before the House was different from that of the
677
Mr. Abercromby
viewed the great question as being, whether a general committee should be appointed, or a committee on each particular case. He was not inclined to attach all the importance to the present resolution, which, on the first blush, some gentlemen might think it deserved. Many petitions were presented under the bribery act; but they all must be aware, that though bribery was mentioned as one of the points on which those petitions were founded, that charge was rarely touched upon. They were not, therefore, he conceived, likely to benefit much from the present resolution. From that of his noble friend he believed much good would have arisen, as it referred to a class of cases quite different from those which the present resolution was intended to meet.
Mr. Hobhouse
expressed himself in favour of the resolution, and trusted that all opposition to it would be withdrawn. At the same time, he should not be acting fairly, if he led the House to suppose that he expected any great benefit from it. He did not think that any material good would be effected by this or any other temporary expedient. At the same time, it would be extremely wrong, when an opportunity occurred, even of attempting good, not to accelerate it as far as he possibly could.
Lord Milton
thought the resolution carried with it rather the appearance of a wish to do something, than contained within itself the prospect of any substantial benefit.
Mr. G. Lamb
said, it would appear, from the wording of the resolution, that no benefit could be derived from it until the next session of parliament, because
678
Lord J. Russell
thought, that the resolution was a considerable improvement of the law. He wished to know whether the right hon. gentleman meant to introduce any general remedy for general corruption.
Mr. Wynn
said, that he wished by this resolution to keep both the electors and the elected pure. The person seeking for a seat, if solicited, would answer, "I cannot bribe you, even though you wish it; because, long after the election is over, if any well-founded impropriety is complained of, I am certain to lose my seat." He would thus render it imperative on candidates not to transgress the law.
Lord Milton
had two objections to the resolution. The first was to the word "future;" the other was, that the corrupt promise mentioned in it only referred to the payment of money: whereas a candidate might bribe a voter by promising him a place in the Customs, or some other situation, and not offend against the resolution.
Mr. R. Martin
contended that the word "county" ought to be introduced into the resolution.
Mr. Wynn
reminded the hon. member, that the resolution included all returns whatsoever, as well for counties as for boroughs.
Lord Milton
said, that he had two amendments to propose: the first was, that the word "future" should be left out of the resolution; the other, that after the word "money," the words "or gift of place, emolument," be inserted.
Mr. Ferguson
observed, that, as the question did not appear to be clearly understood, it would be better to adjourn the debate upon it.
Lord Milton's
first amendment, as to the omission of the word "future," was then put and negatived. The noble lord's second amendment, as to the insertion of the words "or gift of place, emolument," being put,
Mr. Scarlett
observed, that, as there
679
The debate was accordingly adjourned till Friday.
MUTINY BILL—FLOGGING IN THE
The House having gone into a committee on this bill,
Mr. Hume
proposed, as a clause to be added to the bill, that it should be unlawful to inflict corporal punishment, by stripes or lashes, upon any soldier or noncommissioned officer.
Sir J. Sebright
opposed the clause, convinced, as he was, that the power to inflict corporal punishment ought not to be discontinued in the army.
Mr. Hobhouse
supported the clause.
Lord Barnard
was averse to the infliction of corporal punishments; but, from an experience of eleven years in the army, he felt bound to declare, that, in his opinion, it would be unsafe to try the experiment suggested.
Mr. Bernal
wished a committee to be appointed, for the purpose of inquiring into the practicability of dispensing with the infliction of corporal punishment in the army.
Sir H. Vivian
trusted, if a committee were appointed, that it would be a committee of practical men, and expressed his opinion of the necessity of corporal punishment to maintain a proper degree of discipline among our troops.
Mr. R. Gordon
said, that these punishments were admitted by their advocates to be evils, though they contended that they were necessary evils. He should be glad to see the necessity removed, and some better system substituted for the present defective one.
Mr. R. Martin
denied that the infliction of flogging in the army was not a revolting cruelty.
Lord Palmerston
defended the system of corporal punishment in the army, and contended that, from the classes from amongst which the British army was composed, it was impossible to preserve discipline but by some coercive measures. He denied that any abuses of the power could be proved.
General Duff
said, that it was as easy to chain the north wind as to manage British soldiers without the aid of corporal
680
Mr. G. Lamb
declared himself a convert to the opinion of the hon. member for Aberdeen, not from the arguments used on his side of the House, but from those urged by the gallant officers who opposed the abolition of flogging. Nobody could persuade him, that the tying a man up to the halberds, and flogging him in the presence of his fellows, was not a degradation.
Colonel Wood
contended, that this punishment was indispensable in the militia.
Mr. W. Smith
said, that as he had used his best endeavours to save criminals from this degrading punishment, he could never give his consent to have it inflicted on British soldiers.
The committee divided: for the clause 16; against it 57: majority 41.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Tuesday, February 27, 1827.
GAME LAWS.]
Lord Wharncliffe
having presented a petition from the magistrates of Bury St. Edmund's, praying for a revision of the Game Laws, observed, that in pursuance of the notice he had given, it now became his duty to call the attention of their lordships to this subject. His lordship proceeded to state the grounds on which he thought the present Game-laws ought to be altered. He trusted that his motives would not be mistaken, nor the object he had in view over-rated. Their lordships had doubtless heard of those desperate conflicts which frequently took place in consequence of the attempts of poachers to obtain possession of game, and must wish to do away with such a state of things. Unfortunately, there must now be many persons in the country who had become habituated to this system of depredation and plunder; for it had been carried on for a great number of years. So long as the persons who had been brought up in such habits existed, it could not be expected that poaching would entirely cease; but he hoped and believed, that a change in the present laws—a change which would go along with the common sense and feelings of the people, and which would induce them to say, "this is right,"—would greatly tend to remedy the
681
682
ferœ natureœ
cujus est solum, ejus est usque ad cœlum, atque ad inferos
l.
l.
l
l
683
l
l
l
684
685
l.
l
686
687
The Earl of Malmesbury
did not rise to object to the first reading of the bill which his noble friend had just brought in, but to return thanks for the clear statement he had made upon so important a subject as the Game-laws. He wished, however, to make a few observations. In the first place, he did not attach so much importance to doing away with the qualifications, as he did to the provision for making game property. The great increase of the crime of poaching had been ascribed to the operation of the Game-laws. So it had often been stated, but the truth was, that
688
689
The Earl of Hardwicke
said, he could not agree with the noble lord who spoke last, that the great increase of poaching arose out of the distressed state of the country, and not out of the laws. He thought the country was highly indebted to the noble lord opposite for the great pains which he had taken upon this subject; which was certainly one which deserved the serious consideration of the whole legislature. It was notorious that the gaols of the country were filled with persons accused of the crime of poaching; and it would be a happy circumstance, if any device could be found to give a check to the growing increase of that, and of other crimes. He trusted that, whatever the result might be, the noble lord would proceed with his measure, that their lordships might at least have the opportunity of fully considering the subject. Nothing could be more absurd than that an alderman of the city of London should not be able to purchase a pheasant as well as a turkey. He would allow him to purchase all kinds of game.
Lord Teynham
adverted to the great demoralization of the peasantry which had taken place, and thought that no time ought to be lost in entering upon a thorough investigation of the subject. The peasantry of the present day were not the peasantry of our ancestors, "their country's pride," but a degenerated peasantry. Taxation had reduced that portion of the population of this country to such a state, as existed in no other part of the world. He himself would move for the appointment of a committee to examine into the condition of the labouring classes, if no other of their lordships thought proper to do so.
The Earl of Carnarvon
thought that the best thanks of the House and the country were due to the noble lord for bringing this important subject under their consideration. A bill had, not long ago, been brought up from the other House on the same subject, which was in some respects attended with difficulties, and their lordships had thought proper to reject it. In the bills now to be brought forward he trusted that
690
691
Lord Clifden
said, that there was one part of the question which the noble lord had entirely omitted to mention in bringing forward his laudable propositions; but he supposed the great difficulty of touching upon so delicate a subject must have occasioned the omission. He alluded to the use of spring-guns. Two years ago, a noble lord had carried a bill through that House, which had for its object the putting an end to their use; but it was lost in the other House. It was a disgrace to the country that they were ever allowed to be set. Every paper related the accidents which they occasioned, and the mischief was, that the guilty seldom suffered by them. Their lordships were aware that no man would buy a fowl if he knew it to have been stolen, but no one was ashamed to buy game; and he believed that the highest personage in the state had bought game to a considerable amount. Every man thought he had a right to buy game.
The Marquis of Lansdown
said, he had no wish to detain the House by going into the details of the bill which had just been offered to their lordships' consideration, as noble lords would be better prepared to give their opinions upon the subject on the second reading of the bill; but, in rising to say a few words, he wished to convey the most cordial expressions of his respect and gratitude to the noble lord for bringing the subject under the consideration of the House, in a manner which must secure for it an ample and full discussion. Greatly as the offences against the Game-laws had directly increased, a very imperfect estimate would be formed of the consequences of those offences, unless their indirect effects were taken into consideration; they being the first step towards other crimes of all descriptions, and of a more heinous nature. The offences against the Game-laws undoubtedly led, especially in the agricultural districts, to the commission of a variety of other and more desperate crimes; and it would be taking a very narrow view of the subject to suppose that the consequences were confined to the increase of the single crime of poaching. He therefore, intended to have on their lordships' table, by the time these bills should be read a second time, a return of commitments for crimes in general, which might have the effect of throwing much light on this subject. He agreed that the increase of crime had been owing to other causes besides the Game-laws; and the
692
The bills were then read a first time.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, February 27, 1827.
ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE IN THE
Mr. M. A. Taylor
, being called upon by the Speaker to make his motion on the subject of separating the jurisdiction in all matters of Bankruptcy in the High Court of Chancery, said, that, as his right hon. and learned friend, the Master of the Rolls, intended on that night to submit to the House his bill for the improvement of the Administration of Justice in the Court of Chancery, he thought it due as well to his right hon. and learned friend, as to the convenience of the House, to withdraw his motion, until they should be in possession of the measures which were intended to be carried into effect by that bill. He hoped, however, that in thus withdrawing his motion, he should not ultimately lose any thing, as he reserved to himself the power of bringing the subject under their consideration at a future opportunity, as well as to make any observation in the course of that night, which he might think necessary to a proper elucidation of the subject. No exertion, he begged to assure the House, had been wanting on his part, to have those evils and abuses of the Court of Chancery, under which the suitors of that court had so long writhed, fully and fairly examined, and he trusted the time was now arrived when they would be effectually redressed.
The Master of the Rolls
(sir John Copley) then rose, and addressed the House to the follow purport:—
693
694
695
696
697
698
699
700
701
702
703
704
705
l.
l.
l.
706
707
708
Mr. M. A. Taylor
trusted the House would give him credit for having no other object in view than the public good, when he cautioned it, and particularly such members of it as had not been many years in parliament, against the measure now brought forward, and urged them to look at it with the greatest suspicion. That measure he looked upon as a mere expedient; and he thought that, while it seemed to offer some relief, its real tendency was to keep back the only effectual relief. His right hon. and learned friend, the Master of the Rolls, had very judiciously made out what appeared to be a plain and fair case, and had carefully avoided, as far as was possible, any allusion to what had been done, or attempted to be done, in that House, respecting the court of Chancery, in the course of the last twenty years. He could not agree with the view taken by his right hon. and learned friend. He knew that the repeated applications which had been made to the House were the cause of procuring at length the commission, of which he should say a few words by and by. The lord Chancellor, after refusing and neglecting, for so many years, to do anything towards the redress of the grievances which were every where complained of, could no longer prevent the appointment of the commission, which had made the famous report that had been so often alluded to by his right hon. and learned friend. He was inclined to believe that the commission had never intended to do much; and the little they had intended to do they had been frightened out of. It was impossible that any man possessing the acute mind of his right hon. and learned friend could fail to see the difficulties he
709
710
711
712
713
714
l
715
l
716
Mr. D. W. Harvey
said, it was not his intention to address the House at any length upon the important subject which was now under discussion. He did not mean to reply to the arguments of the right hon. and learned gentleman who opened the debate, and to combat the opinions which he had expressed. But as the right hon. and learned gentleman had called upon the learned and unlearned part of the House to give their sanction to his measures, if they agreed in their propriety, or to oppose them if they disapproved, he felt himself bound to accept the challenge, and to withhold his support to the motion of the right hon. and learned gentleman. In the outset of the right hon. gentleman's remarks, he had
717
s
d
l.
l.
l.
718
l.
s
l.
l.
l
l.
719
l
l.
720
721
l.
l.
l.
722
Mr. George Bankes
assured the House, that the lord Chancellor, instead of having 15
l.
l.
l
s
l.
l.
l.
l.
723
Mr. John Smith
said, that he rose with considerable reluctance upon a question of this nature, as it might be readily imagined that a man of his pursuits in life was not qualified to enter into a discussion upon it. It did so happen, however, that he had turned his mind to the subject, and had devoted considerable time and attention to it.—In 1818, when he was chairman of a committee appointed to inquire into the Bankrupt-laws, Mr. Cullen, a commissioner of bankrupts, and a gentleman of great abilities and learning, had stated that "the Commissioners of Bankrupts were the worst constituted court of Judges to be found in the land: that they were divided into lists, who were separated from, and had no communication with, each other: that there was no uniformity in their decisions, no guide by which they could act upon any fixed principle; so that one list was constantly in the habit of acting in direct opposition to another: that every question brought before them was argued upon first principles: and that in their decisions they were all supreme." The hon. member, after making some observations on the way in which commissioners of bankrupts were paid, said, he had no wish to deprive the commissioners of all their emoluments, but he had a strong wish to see a code of law formed with regard to bankruptcy, on which the country could depend with as much certainty as it could on its law with regard to any other subject. Instead of seventy commissioners let there be six;—let them receive a handsome remuneration for the services they may have to perform, and then private individuals would know what they were about, when they had any thing to do with matters of bankruptcy. He alluded to some recent decisions of the commissioners, which had created great surprise in the commercial world; and said, that such was the uncertainty prevailing in all questions of bankruptcy, that creditors daily acceded to the most
724
Mr. Brougham
rose. He commenced his address in so low a tone of voice as to be almost inaudible in the gallery. He said, he could not behold without deep regret the probable termination of this discussion, without any part being taken in it, either by any member of the legal profession, or by any member of the commission, whose recommendations had given rise to it; for, independently of the topics which
725
726
727
728
729
730
731
732
733
734
735
l.
l.
736
l.
l.
l
737
738
"PROSPERO: You'd be King of the Island, sirrah?
STEPHANO: I should have been a sore one then."
739
740
741
742
743
744
745
The Attorney-General
said, he would not occupy much of the time of the House, at that late hour, but felt himself called upon to offer a few observations, in answer to the remarks of his hon. and learned friend who had just sat down. As a member of the Chancery commission, he felt himself put upon his trial, and it was natural he should wait until he knew the nature of the accusation, previously to answering it. The four hon. gentlemen who had spoken on the other side of the House, had none of them raised any objection to the propriety of the one hundred and eighty-eight propositions of the commissioners, which it was the object of his right hon. and learned friend to carry into effect, by adopting a legislative measure, founded upon them. The hon. and learned member would not think that he intended any disrespect, if, while he allowed the admiration he felt, and the entertainment which he, in common with the House, must have derived from his speech, he took the liberty of remarking, that nearly the whole of that speech had no connexion with the subject before the House. Were the one hundred and eighty-eight propositions which the commissioners, after two years' labour, had prepared, fit or unfit to be carried into effect? Of the four hon. gentlemen who had spoken, none had questioned their propriety. They had all adopted different lines of argument, widely diverging from the topic actually before the House. The hon. member for Durham admitted the great merits of the lord Chancellor, and among other good qualities, gave him credit for his urbanity. The hon. member for Colchester came to the conclusion, not that the Chancellor did too little business, but that he had more to perform than it was in the power of human faculties to accomplish. Much of this pressure was attributable to the existing state of the bankrupt laws; but this was not the fault of the lord Chancellor. It was not his intention to dispute the propriety of improving the system of our bankrupt laws, but they formed no part of the present question; which was, whether or not the propositions of the Chancery commission ought to be carried into effect? He would solicit their attention to one or two points of his hon. and learned friend's speech. His hon. and learned friend represented all the in-
746
747
de die in diem
748
Mr. Secretary Peel
hoped, though the hour was late, and the House in a very exhausted state, that they would not think he was preferring, after the speech of the hon. and learned gentleman opposite, an unreasonable claim to their attention and indulgence, by detaining them by a few brief observations. There was no man, under any circumstances, more incapable than he was of entering into a discussion of the merits of the one hundred and eighty-eight propositions of the commissioners! though, if he had had leisure, he should have paid them great attention. But he would fairly own that his other avocations had occupied him so much,
749
750
Mr. Brougham
interrupted the right hon. Secretary, by stating, that he was authorized by the constitution of that House, to make what observations he thought fit, with reference to a minister of the Crown, notwithstanding that he was, of necessity, absent.
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, he did not deny the hon. and learned gentleman's right to make the attack; he only wished to remind the House, that it had been made on the lord Chancellor in his absence, in a place where he had no right to come, and which made it the duty of those who entertained for him feelings of respect, to vindicate him from an attack, which he had a right to say could not have been expected on such a motion
751
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
752
753
754
755
756
gravamen
757
Mr. Brougham
, in explanation, begged to observe, that in speaking of the private fortune of the lord Chancellor as being a million and a half, he did not intend to describe it as amounting to that sum, but merely as being, according to common rumour, very large.
Mr. Peel
said, that his earnestness on the subject proceeded from a desire to guard against the probability of such report going abroad among the people at the present moment, as that the lord Chancellor had amassed an immense fortune by bankruptcies; such an assertion being calculated to make an impression which might be extremely prejudicial.
Mr. Brougham
said, he had made inquiries as to the income of the noble and learned lord, and had found that it never exceeded 18,000
l
Mr. Abercromby
said, he would not at that late hour detain the House by many observations; but he could not allow the argument which had been pressed so strongly by the right hon. gentleman upon the subject of the Chancellor's resignation, to pass without a slight explanation. The right hon. gentleman seemed to think that the motion of his learned friend the late member for Lincoln (Mr. Williams) contained propositions so degrading, that it was impossible for the lord Chancellor to hold his place for an instant, if the House had consented to adopt it. Now, the motion of the year 1811, which the House had actually adopted, was in every respect the same; the motion of the hon. member for Durham in 1811, was for a committee to inquire into the means of expediting the decision of cases in the court of Chancery. The motion of the hon. and learned member for Lincoln, was for a committee to inquire into the causes of the delays and expense of that court. He believed it would puzzle the conveyancers with whom the right hon. gentleman
758
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, he was sure the learned gentleman must recollect, that the speech of the learned member for Lincoln was mixed up of grave charges, and ridicule; and that the notion of the motion for a commission was taken from the complexion of his speech.
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, March 1, 1827.
CORN LAWS.]
Mr. Secretary Canning
moved, that the House should resolve itself into a committee to consider of the Acts of 55 Geo. 3, c. 26, and 6 Geo. 4, c. 65, relative to the Trade in Corn.
Sir E. Knatchbull
said, he had no objection to the House resolving itself into a committee; but he begged that such assent on his part might not be understood as pledging him, with respect to any ulterior measures which might be proposed for their adoption.
Mr. Secretary Canning
said, that of course it was impossible that the hon. baronet, by assenting to the motion, could; be so pledged. He was aware, that the more regular course would have been, to have given notice of this motion yesterday; but that had been rendered impossible, in consequence of there being no House.
The House having resolved itself into the said committee,
Mr. Secretary Canning
addressed the Committee to the following effect:—
759
760
761
762
s
s
s
s
763
s
s
s
s
s
764
s
765
s
s
s
d.
766
d
d
d
d
s
s
s
s
s
s
767
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
d
s
d
s
d
s
768
s
d
s
d
s
d
s
s
s
s
s
769
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
770
771
772
The following Resolutions were then put:—
"That it is the opinion of this committee, that any sort of corn, grain, meal, and flour, which may now, by law, be imported into the United Kingdom, should at all times be admissible for home use, upon payment of the duties following, viz.— If imported from any foreign country:—
WHEAT, VIZ.—"Whenever the average, price of wheat made up and published in manner required by law, shall be 60
s
s
l
773
s
s
s
"Whenever such price shall be at or above 70
s
s
"Whenever such price shall be under 60
s
s
l
s
s
s
BARLEY.—"Whenever the average price of bailey made up and published in manner required by law, shall be 30
s
s
s
s
s
d.
s
"Whenever such price shall be at or above 37
s
s
"Whenever such price shall be under 30
s
s
s
d
s
s
d.
OATS.—"Whenever the average price of oats made up and published in manner required by law shall be 21
s
s
s
s
s
s
"Whenever such price shall be at or above 28
s
s
"Whenever such price shall be under 21
s
s
s
s
s
RYE, PEAS, AND BEANS.—"Whenever the average price of rye, or of peas, or of beans, made up and published in manner required by law, shall be 35
s
s
s
s
774
s
d
s
"Whenever such price shall be at or above 45
s
s
"Whenever such price shall be under 35
s
s
s
d
s
s
d.
WHEAT, MEAL AND FLOUR.—"For every barrel, being 1961b., a duty equal in amount to the duty payable on five bushels of wheat.
OATMEAL.—"For every quantity of 2521b. a duty equal in amount to the duty payable on a quarter of oats.
MAIZE OR INDIAN CORN, BUCKWHEAT, BEER OR BIGG.—"For every quarter, a duty equal in amount to the duty payable on a quarter of barley.
"If the produce of, and imported from any British possession in North America or elsewhere, out of Europe:—
WHEAT.—"For every quarter, 5
s
s
"Whenever such price shall be at or above 65
s
d.
BARLEY.—"For every quarter, 2
s
d
s
"Whenever such price shall be at or above 33
s
d
OATS.—"For every quarter, 2
s
s
"Whenever such price shall be at or above 24
s
d
RYE, BEANS, AND PEAS.—"For every quarter, 3
s
s
"Whenever such price shall be at or above 40
s
d
WHEAT, MEAL AND FLOUR.—"For every barrel, being 1961b., a duty equal in amount to the duty payable on five bushels of wheat.
775
OATMEAL.—"For every quantity of 2521b. a duty equal in amount to the duty payable on a quarter of oats.
MAIZE OR INDIAN CORN, BUCKWHEAT, BEER OR BIGG.—"For every quarter, a duty equal in amount to the duty payable on a quarter of barley.
"That it is the opinion of this Committee, that all the said duties shall be regulated and determined, from week to week, by the average prices of corn, made up in manner required by law; which prices shall, at the several ports of the United Kingdom, determine the several rates of the said duties, for and during the week next after the receipt of the proper certificates of such average prices at such ports respectively."
Mr. Western
said, he could not help giving the right hon. Secretary credit for the mode in which he had opened these resolutions, as it was well calculated to afford the House the means of exercising upon them a fair consideration. For his own part, he hoped to be able to lay aside, to a certain extent, his preconceived opinions and established notions upon this subject, and to come to the propositions which had been laid upon the table in the fairest and most deliberate manner. He hoped that time would be afforded the House and the country to consider the novel system which was now proposed. He trusted that the House would well consider the probable danger of interfering with a system which had worked so well for so many years. This measure was in direct violation of the act of 1814, which was founded upon the act of Charles 2nd; the principle of which act had been the admiration of ages. He wished to God that the House had never abandoned the principles on which it had acted with so much success up to the year 1773. Even in 1815, when, owing to the hostility with America, there was no importation of corn, the country was in a better state than when we were at peace with all the world. In 1812, one hundred thousand quarters of corn had been imported; in 1813 we quarrelled with America; and, in 1814, an embargo was laid upon their ports; and, although there was a large proportion of foreign wheat and flour, not one grain entered the British ports. He could not help thinking that the new scale of duties proposed by the right hon. gentleman would, in the end, be more injurious to the landed interest, and more
776
s
s
s
s
Mr. Ferguson
said, that as the law of 1815 had been tried and had failed, his majesty's ministers should be careful how
777
Sir John Newport
entirely agreed in the observations of the hon. member who spoke last. On the part of Ireland, he objected to the proposed regulation with respect to flour. It seemed to him to be conferring a premium on the poorer classes abroad, at the expense of our poor at home. This was an erroneous principle, and, on the part of Ireland, he protested against it. He hoped, however, that in the further discussion of these resolutions this point would be seen in its true light.
Mr. Bankes
said, he rose to ask a question of the right hon. gentleman. What effect did the right hon. gentleman suppose his resolutions would have on the price of grain? Did he think 53
s
Mr. Secretary Canning
said, he had already stated, that his majesty's ministers were of opinion, that 60
s
Sir J, Wrottesley
concurred in the general view of the subject which the right hon. gentleman had taken; but he was obliged to differ with him as far as regarded part of its details. He deprecated the scale of duties proposed for barley and oats, and said that, in this respect, the suggestions of the right hon. gentleman were highly questionable.
Mr. C. Grant
wished to correct a mistake into which the hon. member for Essex had fallen. It was stated, that his right hon. friend had said, that corn at
778
s
s
s
s
d
Mr. Whitmore
said, he approved to a certain extent of the measures proposed by the right hon. gentleman, yet he denied that they were of that important nature which the country had a right to expect. He was far from thinking that they would give that satisfaction which the right hon. gentleman anticipated, or that the agricultural and manufacturing interests would flourish under their operation. He thought the duty of 20
s
s
s
779
Sir E. Knatchbull
said, he entertained a very different opinion from that of the hon. gentleman who had just sat down. This was a most important question. It was whether the House should legislate on the principle of prohibition, or admit corn on paying a certain duty; and he thought himself bound to state (for he had given the subject the most mature consideration) that he was in favour of prohibition in preference to duty. That was his deliberate and confirmed opinion; and he took the opportunity of stating it distinctly to the House. There was one observation made by the right hon. gentleman, which, he confessed, had filled his mind with the greatest surprise and distrust. He had stated, that in bringing forward these propositions he had endeavoured to cast the balance in favour of free trade— ["No, no," from Mr. Canning.] He "was certain the right hon. gentleman said, that the balance of principle, would be in favour of free trade, and the balance in price in favour of agriculture. If the principle of the proposed bill tended to abrogate the Corn-laws—and he was well assured that it would be the first step to the attainment of that object—he cautioned the House how it proceeded to legislate on such a dangerous measure.
Mr. Canning
wished to say a few words in explanation. The hon. baronet had misapprehended his meaning to a certain extent. He was partly right, and partly wrong. He had not said that he wished to cast the balance in favour of free trade, but merely in favour of trade. The meaning which he attached to that expression might have been ascertained from what he had said on the first topic. It was clear that he, and those with whom he acted, could not entertain the intentions attributed to them by the hon. baronet; because, according to the very principle of those propositions, they had abandoned that measure, by admitting the necessity of a protecting duty.
Lord Althorp
was of opinion, that the propositions of the right hon. Secretary, so far from being likely to produce mischievous results, would be the means of causing a great improvement in the country, both with respect to its trade and agriculture. He spoke as the representative of an agricultural county, and he felt that it was his duty to protect the interests of his constituents; but he could not perceive that, by supporting the reso
780
Alderman Thompson
approved of the proposed resolutions, although he thought that the price fixed for wheat was too high.
Sir T. Lethbridge
wished to say three or four words on the question before the committee. Now that he had heard the: proposition of the right hon. gentleman, he was free to say, that, though it did not come, with the disadvantages, and in the questionable shape which he had expected, was not quite to his mind; yet, after the dire anticipations and gloomy reports which had reached his ears, there was something of consolation in it for the agricultural interest. He declared himself opposed to the views which had just been disclosed to the committee by the hon. alderman who represented the city of London. The hon. alderman thought that the sum in the scale of prices for the importation of wheat was too high. Now, he, on the contrary, thought that it was too low; and for this reason—that the present measure was an experiment made upon the whole corn trade of the country, and it was impossible to foresee what would be the result of it. As he was one who had always stood up in parliament, not only for the protection, but also for the encouragement of agriculture, he should have liked to have seen the prices fixed at a lower rate whilst the experiment was making. As the committee was not called upon to discuss the proposition at present, he would give his best attention to it, in order that he might fully understand it in all its various bearings and ramifications. At the same time he should consider him-
781
Mr. Canning
replied, that the averages at present were taken weekly. Instead, however, of taking an average from the average prices of several weeks, he intended that each week's average should regulate the duties for the week ensuing.
Sir J. Sebright
said, he had devoted much of his time to the consideration of the Corn-laws, and he now gave it as his opinion, that the present proposition was better calculated than any which had preceded it for the purposes it was intended to accomplish. He would not discuss at present the details of this measure, but would content himself with giving his hearty concurrence to the principle on which it was founded.
Mr. Curwen
asked, whether the improvement in taking the averages was to be extended to Ireland?
Mr. Canning
said, that there was no intention to alter the existing mode of taking the averages: but there was an intention of so regulating the striking of them, as to prevent the frauds which were at present practised under them. He had no intention of getting rid of the system entirely, as it answered the purpose of obtaining an approximation to the real price of corn throughout the country. He thought that the evils of the present system would be diminished by shortening the period in which the averages were struck.
Mr. Alderman Wood
observed, that, as the hon. member for Somersetshire expressed himself almost satisfied with the proposition then before the committee, it behoved the members for populous cities I to view it with something like a feeling of alarm.
Mr. Portman
implored the House not to come to a hasty conclusion upon this most important of all important subjects, His object in rising at present was to im
782
s
s
Mr. Canning
replied, that the quarter was now reckoned by the Winchester measure, and no alteration was intended in that respect.
Colonel Wood
said, that as some gentlemen had stated the scale of duties to be too high, whilst others contended that it was too low, it might, perchance, turn out, that ministers had acted very wisely in fixing on a medium between the two parties. At the same time, he must say, it appeared to him, that if agriculture was to be supported by protection, and not by prohibition, the scale of prices was too low. He implored the committee to recollect, that the farmers were at present in a very critical situation; and that if it now took a wrong step, it might create such a depression in every species of agricultural produce, as would produce the greatest distress. He believed that the safest mode of proceeding was by prohibition, and not by protection.
Lord Milton
rose to express his appro
783
Mr. Brougham
said, that in rising to address the committee on the present occasion, he had no intention to anticipate the full debate, which he allowed would come on more appropriately at another season. He trusted, however, that the debate would come on at such a period as would enable those who were obliged to leave town for the assizes to take a part in it. He did not speak of those members whoso professional avocations called them out of town, but he alluded to those gentlemen connected with the landed interest, who must be withdrawn on the same occasion. Although that period was now fast approaching, and the propositions had been now submitted for the first time, and although it was desirable that the amplest time should be afforded for consideration and discussion, still, as the minds of all men had long been directed to the principle of this great question, and all the imaginable details of every proposition had received the fullest investigation; and as the propositions before the House, although not in detail, had, in principle, been well considered; and although the proposed period was not very long, yet he considered it fully adequate to the fullest consideration, under the present circumstances. With respect to the proposition itself, he differed from some of the hon. gentlemen who had gone before him; and,
784
s
s
s
s
s
785
s
s
s
s
s
s
Sir Francis Burdett
said, he was sorry that this very important question, with which the public mind had been so much agitated, had been so long deferred. He did not, on that occasion, mean to trespass for many minutes on the attention of the House; but, at the same time, he felt that he should not acquit himself towards his constituents, and towards the public generally, if he did not state his opinion with respect to the principle on which the resolutions now introduced were founded; and which would be discussed more at large on a future occasion. His opinion was not completely in unison with that of any gentleman who had delivered his sentiments on the subject; because his views extended, perhaps, further than theirs. He, however, coincided entirely in almost the whole of what had fallen from the noble lord below him (lord Althorp). He was a decided advocate of free trade in every respect; although, in making that declaration, he knew that he must en-
786
787
The House then resumed, the chairman reported progress, and asked leave to sit again.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, March 2, 1827.
CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION.]
Mr. G. Dawson
said, he had the honour of being intrusted with sundry petitions against the Roman Catholic claims, signed by numbers of the most wealthy and respectable Protestants of Ireland. The duty of presenting those petitions he fulfilled most willingly and cheerfully. The opinions which he had so often expressed on the subject of those claims remained unaltered; or, he might rather say, had acquired strength. The first petition to which he would call the attention of the House was signed by upwards of twenty two thousand of the resident Protestants in the county of Derry. He was anxious
788
789
Mr. James Grattan
said, he rose to answer the inflammatory, or what would be called in Ireland the seditious, speech of the hon. member for Londonderry. That hon. member had taken upon himself to state that of the county of Wicklow which was not the fact; namely, that the feelings of the people of property there were inimical to further concessions to the Roman Catholics. This was not the fact, neither was it the fact that the yeomanry represented the proprietary of that county. There might be good reasons why the Protestant yeomanry were unfriendly to the Catholic claims, seeing that in the rebellion of 1798, they had imbibed notions that the Catholics were pursuing objects incompatible with their safety; but those were prejudices which they would soon relinquish, if their feelings were not inflamed by such speeches as the House had heard that night. He distinctly denied that the majority of the Protestant proprietary of Wicklow was unfriendly to the Catholics. He was himself no admirer of the Catholic Association, because he thought, however great their wrongs, that their zeal was sometimes intemperate. Many things were said and done by the Association, which had better be left alone; but still he hoped that that body would persevere in the pursuit of their lawful and laudable purposes, not by intemperance, but by moderation and firmness. The hon. member had stated, that the Protestants were the oppressed party in Ireland. He called upon the hon. member to name any instance in which Protestants had been oppressed.
790
Lord Normanby
said, that although he was not immediately connected with Ireland, he nevertheless felt a strong interest in every thing which concerned that country. Being a warm friend to the important question which was shortly to be discussed, he could not help thinking that the speech of the hon. member for Derry, furnished the strongest argument why the present state of things should no longer continue in Ireland. For when that hon. member, who himself formed a part of his majesty's government, stated that an attempt had been made by that government to put down the Catholic Association, which still existed, and when he stated, and no doubt truly, that a Protestant could not sleep safely in his bed in Ireland, he would ask him, whether he could conscientiously vote for the continuance of a system so insufficient and so mischievous?
Mr. G. Moore
supported the petition.
Mr. Proby
said, he had lived amongst the Protestants of property, in the county of Wicklow, and he was enabled to say that their opinions were not adverse to the Roman Catholics.
Mr. Brownlow
said, he would take that opportunity of stating, that he had received a letter from the colleague of the hon. member for Derry, stating that he was preparing to send him a petition, signed by 3,000 persons in the county of Londonderry, in favour of Catholic Emancipation. The letter begged of him to present the petition, and, as he presumed it was now upon its way to him, he thought this was not an unseasonable moment for stating, that such a document was in existence. He hoped to receive it before the discussion upon the question came on.
Sir George Hill
asked, whether the petition alluded to was from the Roman Catholics or the Protestant inhabitants of Londonderry?
Mr. Brownlow
replied, that it had merely been stated to him, that the petition was signed by 3,000 persons.
791
Sir George Hill
. —I venture to say there are not two Protestant names to it.
Mr. Dawson
now presented several petitions from the county of Wicklow; and, amongst others, one purporting to be the petition of the county. In introducing them, he said that such was the feeling of the petitioners, that they had expressed their determination to resist any further concessions being made to the Roman Catholics.
Sir John Newport
requested that the passage to which the hon. member alluded might be read.
Mr. Dawson
interfered, and said, that the passage which he had quoted in his speech was to be found in another petition from a parish in Wicklow. The words were, that the petitioners "deprecated the proceedings which were now taking, by misrepresentation, to carry a measure called Catholic Emancipation, or rather Catholic domination in Ireland.
Sir John Newport
said, that this was another instance in which statements had been made which were not borne out by facts. The hon. member for Derry had stated, that the petitioners were determined to resist any attempts made by the Catholics to obtain a restitution of their rights; but, upon reference to the petition, no such sentiment was to be found. Much had been said of the intemperance of the Catholic Association, but he was sure there never was there a member of that body who exceeded in violence of language or temper the speech which the hon. member had made to the apprentice boys of Derry. If he (sir J. Newport) were to make such a speech to a Catholic assembly in the south of Ireland as the hon. member for Deny made to a protestant meeting, he would be charged with a design of exciting civil war in Ireland.
Mr. Dawson
said, he entertained a very great respect for the right hon. baronet, as all were bound to do who had observed the right hon. baronet's public life, but still he thought it too much of the right hon. baronet to presume upon that respect, and charge him with making seditious speeches to his constituents in Ireland, and in his place in that House.
Mr. Henry Grattan
asked whether the Wicklow petition was the emanation of a county meeting?
Mr. Dawson
said, he could not say. It
792
Mr. Henry Grattan
said, that though he did not represent the county of Wicklow, he possessed property enough in it to know that this petition was not agreed to at a county meeting. He should have a petition shortly to present, which would speak the real sentiments of that county. It was not to be wondered at, that a spirit of hostility to the Catholic claims prevailed in Ireland, when such pains were taken to keep it alive.
Ordered to lie on the table.
CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION—PETITION OF THE ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOPS OF IRELAND.]
Sir William Plunkett
rose, in consequence of the notice which he had last night given, to present the petition of the Roman Catholic Bishops of Ireland, praying for a repeal of the disabilities which affected their body. He was, he said, particularly anxious to call the attention of the House to this petition, because of the important information which it conveyed, the great respectability of the persons from whom it came, and who were entitled to every consideration from that House. It was not only the high station and character of these petitioners which gave them that consideration, but the opportunities which they had of possessing an intimate knowledge of the situation of the people, of whose views and wants they were the most competent judges. They stated, that they felt the greatest reluctance in coming forward in any manner to participate in the consideration of a merely political question; but they added, that they should be wanting in duty, both to the government and to the people, if they abstained from communicating their sentiments at the present crisis. They stated, that they should be wanting in their solemn duty, if they did not, at this alarming moment, raise their warning voice against the continuance of disabilities which prevented them from discharging their proper functions for the people. They pointed out the deep sense of degradation under which the Catholics laboured, and the galling superiority evinced by their Protestant brethren, in many instances not so meekly as it were to be wished it should be evinced. The petitioners did, in the most solemn and deliberate manner, refute
793
The Hon. George Agar Ellis
rose and said;—It is certainly not my intention, upon the present occasion, to trouble the House with any general arguments in favour of Catholic emancipation; being well aware, that a fitter occasion will occur, if I am inclined so to do, in a few days, when the question will be fairly before the House. I only wish to call the attention of the House, for a few moments, to one point alluded to in the petition just presented by the right hon. gentleman, from the Roman Catholic prelates of Ireland; namely, that which referred to the danger of any longer withholding from the Catholics the concession of their claims. Upon this subject, I am, I own, most anxious to take this earliest opportunity of imploring the House and the country, to weigh well the consequences of the decision to which they may come next week; and to believe that the question never came before them so fraught with vitally important considerations as it does at the present moment. I feel that as an individual member of par-
794
795
Sir George Hill
said, that with the objections which he entertained to these claims, it was impossible for him to refrain from one or two observations, in opposition to the panegyric which had been passed on the Roman Catholic clergy. It was notorious in Ireland, and it ought to be quite as notorious in this country, that the whole body of the Roman Catholic clergy had identified themselves with the Catholic Association; that it had joined them in all their schemes and projects; and that the demagogues and agitators of the public peace by whom that association had been established, were upheld and encouraged by them. He would ask the House to look over the petition, and see if the name of Dr. Doyle was attached to it? Was the name of that individual attached to it who was so well known in Ireland by the initials I. K. L.? He did not mean to dispute with his majesty's Attorney-general for Ireland the cause of the peace of that country; but he would ask where the Roman Catholic clergy were from 1819 to 1823, when the western and southern parts of Ireland were in a state little short of rebellion? Did they put down those disturbances? No. They were put down by a two-fold number of troops. He had attended the trials in the south of Ireland for a conspiracy; and it was proved upon those trials that seventeen counties had sent delegates to a meeting, the object of which was to separate the two countries; but he had never discovered that the Roman Catholic clergy had used any means to prevent such meeting, or to divert the people from the object which they had in view.
Mr. H. Maxwell
said, that he also found it impossible to agree in the panegyric which had been passed upon the Roman Catholic clergy of Ireland. What had been their conduct during the last general election? He was prepared to prove, that, so far from confining themselves to their religious duties, they had been wholly occupied in political matters. Relative to their conduct upon this occasion, he had many facts, supported by affidavit, which, if he were to relate the whole of them, would astonish the House. It was well known, that their agents went through the country sowing the seeds of dissention between tenant and landlord, by making
796
797
Mr. Maurice Fitzgerald
said, that an expression of his right hon. friend the Attorney-general for Ireland; namely, that the peace and tranquillity of Ireland were mainly attributable to the Roman Catholic clergy, had brought up several hon. gentlemen, who had endeavoured to invalidate this position. The House must certainly have perceived that it was a matter of mystery that persons connected with the government should come forward with such conflicting and contradictory statements. He would endeavour to explain that mystery. The two hon. members, the one for Derry and the other for Cavan, had given the House a very fair display of the spirit which prevailed in the north of Ireland; namely, hostility to the priesthood. He did not mean to impute any thing improper to either of those hon. members, but with this hint the House would readily see why, in the counties of Derry and Cavan, Catholics could not be less or more than men, and why it was unreasonable to expect any thing from them but a corresponding hostility. The right hon. baronet had uttered expressions, by which he imputed almost treason to the Catholic prelates of Ireland. But how had he supported his assertion? He had contented himself with merely denouncing an individual, Dr. Doyle. The case of the hon. member who followed him, about the freeholder with one eye, appeared to him to be a case calculated rather to come before an election committee under the Grenville act, than for any other purpose that he was aware of. The sum of that hon. member's objections to the Catholic priesthood of Ireland was, that they interfered with the election. Now, it appeared to him to be very unreasonable that Catholic priests should be refused an interference, which was constantly exercised by the Protestant clergy. If it was improper in the one, by what argument was it attempted to be shown that it was proper in the other? Was it meant to be contended, that an act was bad when com-
798
Mr. Wilmot Horton
said, he had no wish to prolong this debate, but he besought the House to look to the terms of the petition before them. The Catholic clergy, by whom it was signed, made a full and candid avowal of their opinions: they stated also, that those opinions (and of this fact the House would judge) were perfectly compatible with the safety of the country, and that therefore they ought to be freed from the political disabilities under which they had hitherto laboured. He was convinced that justice to the petitioners required that those opinions should be examined, and, if they could bear the investigation to which they were to be subjected, there could be no reason for hesitating to accept that solemn sanction of an oath which they offered. He was desirous that the discussion, which was somewhat discursive, should be continued
799
800
801
802
803
Mr. George Dawson
said, that although he had no wish unnecessarily to lengthen the discussion, he was induced to make a few observations, in consequence of the importance which the Attorney-general for Ireland had conferred upon the petition by having it read at length. There could be no question that it would form an important feature in the debate which was fixed for Monday, and he was therefore desirous that its tendency and merits should be fully understood. The petitioners stated, that the surety which they offered for their good intentions ought to be received; but never yet had any means been discovered, by which the allegiance of the Roman Catholic priesthood could be bound. There were numerous instances on record, in which the Roman Catholic clergy had proffered an oath to confirm the allegiance which they professed, and had
804
incubus
805
Lord F. L. Gower
said, that the hon. gentleman who had just spoken appealed to history in support of his opinions. But there were two ways of appealing to history. The one was to swallow down every imputation made, without taking the trouble of examining it; the other was by a free investigation of facts, and that in the spirit of Christian charity. When any of the members for Ireland mentioned the penal laws, and, on the part of their constituents, called for the repeal of them, they were answered, that there were no such laws in existence. Either all these laws should be abrogated, or those that were repealed should be again re-enacted. But, was there any man now who would dare to propose the re-enactment of those laws? Was it fair to suppose that education and the light of truth had flashed on the minds of Protestants only, and that not one single ray had penetrated the obscure bosom of a Catholic? He did not stand up there as the advocate either of the rev. Patrick Corr or of Dr. Doyle. They might have their faults, as all men had. It was not to be denied that great and tremendous power devolved on the Catholic clergy. But, under what system and code of laws did they possess that power? The hon. member for Cavan had told the House that it was their duty to encourage the conversion of the Catholics in Ireland —that conversion was the only remedy for the evils of that country. He applauded the suggestion of the hon. member; but it was not a new one. In the time of Charles the Second, the same suggestion was made by lord Tyrconnel to lord Bellasis, when Charles sought to reduce Ireland to subjection. Lord Tyrconnel told him, that the only remedy was to convert all the people of Ireland to the Catholic faith; on which lord Bellasis observed to Charles, that lord Tyrconnel was fool and madman enough to risk the loss of ten kingdoms for the sake of converting one soul.
Sir William Plunkett
said, that after the speech of the noble lord he would have been well contented that the subject should drop, but it was impossible for him to let
806
807
bellum plusquam civile
808
809
Mr. L. Foster
said, he was desirous of offering a few observations respecting the
810
811
Mr. James Grattan
thought that the principle of fair play should be extended to both sides. The letter of J. K. L. might be unwise and inflammatory, but he thought it had been matched in violence by a speech which was lately delivered in Ireland by the noble lord whose motives bad been advocated by the hon. gentleman who last addressed the House. The hon. member read an extract from a newspaper of a speech purporting to be delivered by lord Farnham, at a bible meeting in Ireland. The first sentence of the extract was to this effect—that notwithstanding all the efforts that had lately been made in Ireland to spread the light of the gospel over that benighted land, so strongly had bigotry and superstition taken root, owing to the control of the priests, that those efforts were likely to prove unavailing. The hon. gentleman said that the noble lord imputed to the Catholics a desire to subvert the established religion. The speech of the noble lord had been printed in London. If it was falsely ascribed to him, let him deny it; but let us not impute censure to others, unless we were free from blame ourselves. Would to God that Ireland was all Protestant; then parties would not be arrayed against each other as at present they were. Let them not seek to widen the differences that already unhappily existed by calumniating each other in all the bitterness of party spirit. Unworthy motives had been ascribed to the Catholic clergy; but he, knew so many instances of a contrary nature, that he never would consent to stigmatize them as a corrupt and intriguing body. In the parish where he resided he knew a Catholic priest who for thirty years, had officiated with so much benefit to his flock, and so much credit to himself, that when he died he was lamented by persons of every religious persuasion. He knew also another priest whose loss was so deeply felt in the parish where he died, that several Protestant gentlemen had proposed that a subscription should be entered into, for the purpose of erecting a monument to his memory.
Sir G. Hill
observed, that as the petitioners had identified themselves with the
812
Mr. F. Lewis
said, that the situation which the petitioners held in the country was one of the first importance; and he had no doubt but that the power which they possessed was used for good purposes. It was a power, however, which was greater than it ought to be; because it was estranged from the law of the land. Would to God that the causes of animosity in Ireland were removed for ever, and that the distinction of sect was no longer in existence ! Those who were excluded from the benefits of equal laws imagined that they were suffering for the sake of their religion; and they looked to that religion, instead of looking to the government of the country for aid and succour. He wished that the power held by the Catholic priesthood could be looked upon with more confidence; and that the Catholics could place more reliance on their Protestant fellow subjects. The Catholics, indeed, looked to that House with a strong degree of hope. They looked also with confidence to the individual at the head of his majesty's government in Ireland, who, they believed, would right their wrongs if he could; It was said, that the Roman Catholic bishops had identified themselves with the Catholic Association; but he denied that they had done so. He looked upon the association with no very favourable eyes; but its origin and existence could be traced to the peculiar situation of Ireland. The association was the necessary consequence of the state in which the Catholics were placed. It was idle to think of crushing the only medium through which the Catholics of Ireland could be heard. They must have an organ to give expression to their wrongs. The members of the association acted always upon the system of obtaining a hearing for their cause. He believed them to be in earnest in wishing for Catholic emancipation, although the contrary had been urged by their enemies. He believed that the association acted on a mistaken feeling, with regard to the means which they took to effect their object. They appeared to be in total error as to the nature of the English people, in supposing that, by threats, they could frighten them into concession. It was not by menaces or intimidation that the people of this country were to be gained over. He denied that the Roman Catholic bishops had ever identified them-
813
Sir George Hill
said, he did not mean to infer that the Catholic bishops had identified themselves with the association. It was notorious, however, that the priesthood generally, though perhaps not any of the petitioners, were guilty of meddling with matters out of their province.
Mr. Van Homrigh,
member for Drogheda, defended the Catholic bishop, Dr. Curtis, from the charge of improperly interfering in matters of state. There could not be a more loyal man than Dr. Curtis; who, in fact, owed his appointment to the good opinion of the duke of Wellington. The hon. gentleman proceeded further to observe, that at a dinner lately given by a distinguished nobleman at which Dr. Curtis was present, the memory of his royal highness the duke of York being proposed, Dr. Curtis made an eloquent speech, in, which he eulogized the virtues of the deceased prince, and lamented the language made use of, against his royal highness, by certain members of the association.
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that before he came down to the House, he had formed a resolution not to express any opinion on the subject now under discussion. He should, therefore, cautiously abstain from offering any remarks at present on a question that was appointed for discussion on an early day. If, however, he carefully abstained from entering upon topics that would soon be discussed, he hoped no one would suppose that, on that account, he felt
814
l.
815
Lord Nugent
presented the petition of the Roman Catholics of Great Britain, praying to be relieved from the legal disabilities under which they laboured at present. In presenting it, the noble lord stated, that upon several previous occasions he had presented to the House petitions from that portion of his majesty's subjects which had now intrusted him again with the duty of representing their case to Parliament, and as they had no new grievance to complain of, they had not introduced any new matter into' the substance of their petition. That petition was signed by twenty-three thousand persons, and might, had it been deemed necessary, have been still more numerously signed. He did not, however, press it on the consideration of the House, so much on account of the numbers who had signed it, as on account of the injustice under which they suffered. If, instead of being the petition of the Catholic aristocracy and proprietary of the country, the petition had been the petition of but one individual, and that, individual of the obscurest description, he should have felt it to be his duty to call the attention of parliament to the singular grievances under which he described himself to labour. The petitioners, however, deserved the regard of the House, on account of their being distinguished by their rank, their properly, their learning, and their unwearied and unimpeached loyalty. They said, that the restrictions were imposed upon them originally under false pretences and for false objects, and were now continued under pretences and for objects equally false. They desired the House to consider the question of emancipation, not as an Irish but as a British question; and requested him to stale to it, that they had put forth two declarations, which were appended to their petition; one containing an explanation of the manner in which they paid allegiance to the king, and another containing an explanation of their religious tenets, as
816
817
818
Ordered to lie on the table.
GRANT TO THE DUKE AND DUCHESS OF CLARENCE.]
On the order of the day for the second reading of the Duke: and Duchess of Clarence's Annuity Bill,
Sir R. Heron
observed, that the duke
819
Mr. E. Davenport
seconded the motion. When the distress which prevailed in the manufacturing towns was considered, ministers came, he thought, with a very bad grace to propose a grant of this nature. There was one contingency not provided for by the bill. Suppose his majesty should contract another matrimonial alliance [a laugh]. What then was to become of this 9,000
l
Mr. Wells
said, he could not conscientiously approve of any addition to the salary of the duke of Clarence.
Mr. Alderman Waithman
said, he would not object to a liberal allowance to every branch of the royal family. Notwithstanding the distress felt throughout the country, he would not now oppose a grant for that purpose; but he looked upon the present proposition as one of the most ill-timed measures that was ever submitted to parliament. The very day it was introduced, the House had heard from the right hon. gentleman a most gloomy description of the condition of the people. In his magisterial capacity, upwards of eighty persons had been summoned before him for non-payment of church and poor rates, which could not be enforced against more than ten. He was astonished that the right hon. gentleman should have courage to make the proposition on the very evening when a committee of emigration was moved for, to provide means for sending the industrious but distressed people out of the country.
Mr. Monck
described the various sources of the duke's income, and contended that his royal highness had already a sufficiency to support his dignity. The additional allowance was most unseemly in the present state of public distress.
Mr. Hume
wished to ask the right hon. gentleman how, as an honest man, he; could propose such a vote, when he must know that as a financier, he was bank
820
l.
The House divided: For the Second Reading 128: For the Amendment 39.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Monday, March 5, 1827.
CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION—IRISH VESTRIES.]
Lord King
said, he had a petition intrusted to him by the Catholics of Ireland; and, as it related to the state in which they were placed with respect to the church of Ireland, he had been unwilling to present it before he saw an Irish prelate in the House. The petition complained of the exactions which were practised on the property of the Catholics at the will and pleasure of Protestants, for Protestant purposes, and with very little check given to them by those who had the power to control such proceedings. The petition stated the grievances the Catholic suffered from being obliged to pay sums of money, levied by vestries, where Protestants voted away the money, nine-teen-twentieths of which were paid by Catholics; Catholics being excluded by law from voting at vestries on a great many occasions. The petition stated, that the church of Ireland was the richest primeval Christian church in the world; the people the poorest and most wretched in any country. The number that professed the faith of the Established Church was comparatively the smallest in any country in the world which was burthened with an established church. The petition went on to state the injustice of persons being allowed to tax others, while the classes who paid the money had no control whatsoever over them. He was aware of an act being passed professing to be for the relief of the Roman Catholics, as assessed by Protestant vestries. That act, however, so far from being a relief, was an aggravation of the evil. Whether this was true or not he could not say; but that was the opinion of those who stated that they were aggrieved. Certainly, Catholics were, in a great many cases, excluded from being present at vestries. It was true that they had a right of appeal; but, coupled with a condition which few Catholics, he was afraid,
821
l.
l.,
l.
l.,
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
s.
d.
l.,
822
l.
l.
l.
s.
d.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
s.
l.
l.
l.
l.
s.
l.
l.
l.,
l.
823
l.
The Bishop of Chester
observed, that many of the things complained of by the petitioners, if they were objectionable, might equally be made a subject of complaint in England. He certainly did not feel himself called upon to defend the particular acts referred to, or to support Protestants in making exactions on Roman Catholics. It must be allowed, that it appeared hard in principle, that so large a majority of persons as that described in the petition, should possess no countervailing power to protect their interests. If they had no such protection already, he had no hesitation in saying that some alteration was necessary. With regard to vestry jobs, he confessed that, from his own experience in England, he must say that they were more frequent than, for the interest of the church, they ought to be. He had taken the pains to look through the ponderous volume, to which the noble lord had referred, and he must express his opinion, that, considering the vast number of returns, the instances of abuse appeared to be extremely few. There were one or two points in the noble lord's speech which he should take the liberty of adverting to. As to the remark made on the sum of 50
l.
l,
824
l.
l.
l.
l.
Lord Clifden
observed, that when the churches of Ireland were, in the reign of Henry 8th, and his successor, Elizabeth,
825
The Earl of Limerick
in reply to the observations that the funds of the cathedrals ought to pay the expenses of their repairs, said, that in Ireland the cathedrals were, in many instances, parish churches, and that, therefore, the charges for repairing them fell on the parish.
Lord King
, having been appealed to by the right reverend prelate, on the subject of the charge for the expense of morning service, must say, that 50
l.
l.
Lord Strangford
, without intending to follow the noble lord through his items, said, it happened to be in his power to answer him on one point. He was in Ireland last Easter twelvemonth. He then went to the church of St. Thomas, Dublin, to the morning service, when so far from there being only two old women present, there were, at seven o'clock in the morning, four hundred persons in the church, and afterwards that number was increased to eight hundred communicants. This being the fact, what became of the assertion of the necessity of paying two old women to attend the morning service? And what became of the supposed enormity of the charge of 28
l.
Ordered to lie on the table.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, March 5, 1827.
ROMAN CATHOLIC CLAIMS.]
After numerous Petitions had been presented, both for and against the Claims of the Roman Catholics,
Sir Francis Burdett
rose, to bring forward the motion of which he had given notice. In bringing this great question before the House, he felt, he trusted, a
826
827
828
atrox prœliis, discors seditionibus;
829
830
831
832
Mr. Secretary Peel
observed, across the table, that the stipulations of the treaty did not refer to the Catholics generally; but only to those who were resident in Limerick, or any other garrison then in the possession of the Irish.
Sir Francis Burdett
continued. He said, he entertained a very different opinion of the interpretation of that treaty. Odd, indeed, would it be, if those who held out longest in arms, and therefore, did the greatest extent of mischief to the ruling powers, should yet be considered to be the most entitled to peculiar grace and favour. It was, however, quite impossible upon any fair principle, indeed it was monstrous, to suppose that this treaty solely related to the garrison of Limerick; for what said the ninth article of that treaty?—"The oath to be administered to such Roman Catholics as submit to their majesties' government shall be the oath aforesaid, and no other." The oath referred to was the oath of allegiance, "and no other;" and the article comprehended all submitting Catholics generally. But how had faith been kept with them, when it was by the agency of new oaths, and nothing else, that they had been kept ever since from the enjoyment of their proper privileges. As far as the articles of Limerick went, the case was, he thought, conclusive: faith was pledged, and faith had been broken. But even in the right
833
834
835
836
837
838
839
840
841
842
843
844
"Curandum in primis, ne magna injuria fiat
Fortibus ac miseris—"
fortes ac miseri,
845
846
847
"I am further commanded to state, that the testimonies of dutiful and affectionate attachment which his Majesty has received from all classes and descriptions of his Irish subjects, have made the deepest impression on his mind, and that he looks forward to the period when he shall revisit them with the strongest feelings of satisfaction. His Majesty trusts that, in the mean time, not only the spirit of loyal union, which now so generally exists, will remain unabated, and unimpaired, but that every cause of irritation will be avoided and discountenanced, mutual forbearance and goodwill observed and encouraged, and a security be thus afforded for the continuance of that concord amongst themselves, which is not less essential to his Majesty's happiness than to their own, and which it has been the chief object of his Majesty, during his residence in this country, to cherish and promote. His Majesty well knows the generosity and warmth of heart which distinguish the character of his faithful people in Ireland; and he leaves them with a heart full of affection towards them, and with a confident and gratifying persuasion, that this parting admonition and injunction of their Sovereign will not be given in vain."
848
849
"Hic locust est, partes ubi se via findit in ambas:
Dextera, quæ Ditis magni sub mœnia tendit;
Hâc iter Elysium nobis; et læva malorum
Exercet pœnas, et ad impia Tartara mittit."
Lord Morpeth
said, that, in rising to second this resolution, he was extremely happy to observe, that much of the difficulty which he must necessarily feel on such an occasion was removed by the able and excellent address which had been delivered by the hon. mover. He had, in anticipation, made use of every argument which the supporters of the Catholic claims could adduce, to show that emancipation was a measure equally demanded by policy and by justice. The hon. baronet had supported his view of the question with such powerful reasoning, with such forcible and eloquent illustration, that it would be worse than useless for him to dwell on topics which had been so ably handled, or to dilate on conclusions which had been rendered clear and obvious to all. The measure which it was the object of the hon. baronet's motion to
850
851
852
853
854
Mr. George Dawson
said, that, while he differed entirely from the sentiments expressed by the noble lord who had just sat down, he could not avoid congratulating the House upon the acquisition of eloquence and talent which it had obtained in the person of that noble member. He rejoiced that the subject of Catholic disability was now before the House; and, whether the result of that question should be favourable or unfavourable, he hoped the effect would be, to tranquillize the country. If favourable, he trusted the Roman Catholics would learn moderation, and, if unfavour-
855
856
857
858
859
860
861
"We, your lordship's tenantry of the barony of Gaultier, in the county of
862
This address, which was signed by five hundred and ten individuals, was not got up by any agent of lord Waterford: it was the spontaneous effusion of his tenantry, and he himself did not even know of it until the deputation waited upon him with it. Could it be believed, that in a few short months after the presentation of this address, the greater part of those who signed it should have voted against lord
863
"John Corcoran, of Newtown, maketh oath, and saith, that on Sunday, the 4th day of December, as he was attending divine worship at the chapel of Grange, he then and there heard the rev. Michael Tobin, parish priest, preach from the altar in the following words:—'That there were people in the parish leading the congregation to the devil, and to their own damnation, by inducing them to vote against their religion. That they were following Orangemen, and that he would not hesitate to name lord George Beresford as the Orangeman, and the strongest pillar supporting hell; that, for his part, he, the said rev. Michael Tobin, would neither now or ever give them confession, or extreme unction, or any sacrament of the church, but they might die like dogs, and go to hell, and there look to Curraghmore for assistance.'
"Patrick Magrath maketh oath, and saith, that in the month of December, 1825, a station of confession was held at Deny, in the parish of Modeligo, and that he the said Patrick Magrath was refused confession by the rev. Father Whelon, parish priest of the said parish, in consequence of his being one of the avowed supporters of lord George Beresford, whom he called a devil and an Orangeman; Patrick Magrath further swears, that in the month of April, 1826, he was dangerously ill, and having sent for a priest to Dungarvon, on his inquiring who the person was, for whom his attendance was required, a message was sent to him by the priest, informing him that if he turned to God, and to Mr. Stuart, and themselves, and leave lord George Beresford, he would get the benefit of the priest, but on no other conditions.
"William Moore maketh oath, and saith, that on the 22d of January, 1826,
864
"Maurice Owens maketh oath, and saith, that on Sunday, the 4th day of December, 1825, he was present at the chapel of Grange, and that he heard the rev. Michael Tobin make use of the following words from the altar:—' That the parishioners were led to the devil in hell by an old pirate, that they ought to take better care of their souls than to join any Orangemen, that lord George Beresford was at the head of the Orangemen, and the enemy of their religion, and that he, the said Michael Tobin, would see them die like dogs without confession, or the rites of the church and going to hell, unless they voted for Mr. Stuart, and support their religion.'
"Patrick Owens maketh oath, and saith, that on Sunday, the 29th of January, 1826, at the chapel of Grange, he heard the rev. Pierce Sexton declare, that he would not give confession, nor extreme unction, nor any sacrament of the church, to any persons that would go against their religion, by voting for lord George Beresford, that this was the time to make resistance, and that all who did not, should be allowed to die like dogs, that they may go to Curraghmore to look for help, and get them out of hell. He, deponent, further saith, that he heard the same language on several other Sundays from the rev. Michael Tobin.
"Michael Nugent maketh oath, and saith, that on Sunday, the 5th day of March, he attended divine service at the chapel of Knockbray, and that he there heard a priest, whose name he believes to be O'Mara, publicly declare from the altar, in the face of a numerous congregation, that if any man there would vote
865
"John Fitzpatrick maketh oath, and saith, that on Sunday 12th of March, he attended mass at the chapel of Modeligo, and that he heard the rev. Patrick Whelon express himself from the altar in the following words:—'That any of the parishioners who would vote for lord George Beresford, should never get confession, nor any rite of the church from him, that he never would attend any of them on their death-bed, and that if there was a second devil it was lord George Beresford.'
"Patrick Shea maketh oath, and saith, that on Sunday, March 12th, he heard the rev. Thomas Kearney, in the chapel of Aglish say:—'That there was a respectable farmer in the parish, who was drawing the whole parish to hell, by supporting lord George Beresford, who was the head of the Orangemen, and the enemy of their religion.' He further saith, that the whole sermon was upon the election, and that the rev. Thomas Kearney said, he would expose them from the altar before the whole parish, and would not give any one of them the rites of the church.
"James Kiely maketh oath, and saith, that on Sunday, the 11th of June, in the chapel of Ordmore, where he went to hear mass, that father Michael Tobin addressed the congregation in Irish after mass, and charged them not to vote for lord George Beresford, because he was an Orangeman and would cut their throats. He declared that no person voting for lord George Beresford should get confession, nor extreme unction when dying, and that no person should either buy from or sell to him that should so vote. James Kiely further states, that since his return home from the election, he had occasion to purchase potatoes for the use of his family, and that having applied to Edmund Hannigan, in the parish of Ardmore, he, the said Hannigan, refused to sell them to him, stating that his reason for not selling them was, that he had received express directions from the priest not to do so, because he, James Kiely, had voted for lord George Beresford.
"Maurice Morrissy deposes on oath,
866
"Cornelius O'Daly states, on oath, that on Sunday, the 9th day of April, he heard the rev. Mr. Welsh address the congregation in the chapel of Aglish, in Irish, from the altar, in the following manner: 'That the agents of lord George Beresford wanted to send them to the devil, but that if he could prevent them, he would. He said, that if any of them who were there assembled should vote for lord George Beresford, he would punish them as a priest; that they must all know that he, and every priest in the county, had orders from the bishop to caution the people against voting for lord George Beresford, and that, for his part, he would expel every one from the church who would vote for the enemy of their religion; that if they did, they would go to the devil, and that he would stick to them as a priest until he got them clear to the devil.'
"Thomas Welsh deposeth, on oath, that he heard the rev. Mr. Buck say, that he had laid a curse on all those freeholders who had gone down in the morning to Waterford, on the 21st of June, to vote for lord George Beresford, that he had laid a curse on them, and their cattle, and corn, and every thing belonging to them, and to their generation after them; and that he forbid any one to speak or have dealings with such persons.
"John Toole deposeth on oath, and saith, that about the middle of the month of March, having been appointed to a situation in the Excise, which required the production of a certificate of his baptism, he applied to the rev. Father Marum, parish priest of the place where he was baptized, for such certificate, that the rev.
867
s.,
It was useless to fatigue the House with further affidavits of this kind, having as he trusted, read quite sufficient, to acquaint them with facts of such a revolting nature. One of those which he held in his hand, stated circumstances of the most horrible kind, in reference to sixteen priests of the diocese of Waterford, with their bishop at their head. It was by such means that they had succeeded, as they would continue to succeed, in every similar effort. He had read the affidavits referring to their conduct, because he was sure the House was not prepared for a thorough investigation of the question, without a knowledge of the conduct of the Roman Catholic priests, and of the manner in which they used their influence and their power. He had also been induced to refer to the conduct of those persons, because of a horrible calumny pronounced, the other night, against the Protestant clergy of this country; namely, that the Roman Catholic clergy had only done that which the Protestant clergy of this country did, and that the latter were not more justified in interfering in elections than the former. The law might give the Catholic priests the right to vote and to interfere; but the law did not give them the power to delude, to menace, and to harass the minds of such of their flocks as did not vote in the way directed. The hon. gentleman concluded by expressing his opinion, that the Roman
868
Mr. Spring Rice
said, he would not trouble the House long, still there were some points of his hon. friend's speech to which be felt it necessary to offer a short reply. On previous discussions of this question, he had refrained from more than shortly pointing out the reasonableness of the Catholic claims, and giving his vote; but the line of argument followed by his hon. friend, induced him to depart from the course which he had hitherto followed. The hon. baronet and the noble lord near him, had called on the opponents of the measure which they recommended, to suggest some other measure calculated to give peace to the country. With that call his hon. friend had not complied. His hon. friend agreed with the hon. baronet, that the state of Ireland was one not only of suffering, but of danger; but, according to the arguments of his hon. friend, they were not only not to relieve, but to suppress and subdue. But, if the opponents of the Catholics should have the will to adopt this latter alternative, had they the means of executing it; or did they think that the Irish nation would submit to it? From some expression which fell from his hon. friend opposite, one would have thought that he had formerly been friendly to the Catholic claims, but had altered his views, in consequence of the practices of the Roman Catholic clergy, which he had stated to the House. Against the return of Mr. Stuart, not one but two or three petitions had been presented; and if the facts stated in those petitions were true, there could be no doubt that the return for Waterford must be set aside. But the petitioners had shrunk from examination, [hear, hear]—no; they had not shrunk from examination, but they had shrunk from the cross-examination, of the committee, and had put those affidavits into the hands of the hon. member for Derry; who, forgetting all his kind feelings towards the Roman Catholics and the Roman Catholic priests particularly, had come to the conclusion, that the Roman Catholic priests had done every thing laid to their charge in those affidavits; and the hon. member, acting upon that conclusion, had come down to the House, and called upon
869
870
871
872
873
Mr. Villiers Stuart
said, it was not his intention to detain the House by going at length into the discussion of the general merits of the Catholic question. He was aware that it had been already so often and so ably treated by men far more competent than he could pretend to be, that it would be a waste of time for him to go over the various grounds on which it rested. But to-night there were features—features of a modern character—to which he felt himself entitled to allude, and to request the consideration of the House—features which had been pointed out and criticised by the enemies of Catholic emancipation, as affording grave reasons for opposition, but on which he, on the contrary, would rely as grounds for concession. He referred to the conduct of the freeholders, and to the interference of the Catholic clergy, at the late general election in Ireland. He would first speak of the body of men which he had mentioned last in order—men, whose unostentatious piety, and zealous discharge of their professional duties, were unsurpassed by the clergy of any other persuasion, but who unhappily, had been the objects of as much groundless aspersion and unmerited obloquy as, he would venture to say, party spirit, even in Ireland, had ever bespattered the victims of its malice. God forbid that his motives, in defending the Catholic clergy should for a moment be misunderstood; God forbid it should be supposed that he was about to vindicate the interference of churchmen in temporal affairs: So much the contrary, that he protested he knew no language strong enough to express his condemnation of such a practice; but owing its origin to the crabbed and crooked policy of the very men who were foremost to cry out against it, it excited in him no surprise, but some regret, that the
874
875
"Was ever
voter
Was ever
voter
876
Mr. George Bankes
rose and said:—
877
878
879
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
888
Mr. Brownlow
said, he felt that it was perfectly idle, on his part, to attempt to add any thing to the unanswerable arguments that had been adduced by the hon. baronet, the member for Westminster, in support of the claims of the Catholics. But he could not avoid joining his prayers and entreaties to those of the hon. baronet, for the success of this great question. The hon. gentleman who had preceded him, had travelled over every land on the face of the globe, in search of materials for his speech. There was no country, he believed, the hon. gentleman had not mentioned, except unfortunate Ireland, which was the subject of the present discussion. This was a case of such absorbing interest and all-engrossing importance, that he hoped hon. members had come in a serious mood, with a patient temper, and with minds stripped of preconceived opinions, prepared to listen attentively to the evidence given by the Irish members, and finally, go to the division with all that awful sense of responsibility which it became men to feel, who were about to bring in a verdict which would be to Ireland that of national life or death. He had heard that unseemly language had been used on this subject out of doors. He would not say that it had found its way into their debates. But he had heard, that some of the opponents of the Catholic question had declared their determination "to die in the last ditch, to show a good fight in defence of their cause, and if necessary, to nail the colours to the mast, and go down with the ship." Now, he asked, had any man of common sense on the other side of the question, who was disposed to speak the truth, whether, if they succeeded by a few miserable majorities, in defeating the Catholics, they could believe the system they were upholding would be safe or permanent? Any man who would answer that question in the affirmative, must be very little versed in the history
889
890
891
892
Mr. Cust
said, that the present was the seventh or eighth Session in which he had given his opinion on this important subject, and that opinion, he must say, remained unaltered by any thing which he had seen or heard since he voted on its first discussion. One of the great grounds on which the question had been brought forward was, that it would bring about a change for the better in the condition of Ireland. No man was more anxious for such a change than he was. A change was necessary; for in fact it was almost impossible that Ireland could remain as she was; but then emancipation was not the means by which so desirable a change could be effected. The only hope for Ireland was the success of the reformation in that country. It was asked, could they control six millions of people? He did not mean to say that they could; but he thought the argument founded on numbers was not conclusive. Those who rested the expediency of conceding emancipation on numbers, reminded him of the general who, being surrounded by enemies, collected round him a quantity of combustible materials, and threatened that, if hard pressed, he would set fire to the train, and he and his opponents should all go to the devil together. He was of
893
l.
894
Mr. George Moore
, member for Dublin, said, it was impossible that a new member of that House should not feel great difficulty in rising to oppose claims, which had been advanced and supported with so much ability and eloquence. It was impossible that such a member, when he was called upon to redress a nation's wrongs, to vindicate a nation's honour, and restore a nation's rights, should not have great difficulty to encounter in opposing such an appeal, from the enthusiasm which such topics were naturally calculated to excite. He was satisfied, however, that the view which he took of this question, and which those who concurred with him in opinion took of it, was not only consistent with civil and religious liberty, but indispensably necessary, with a view to the integrity and stability of the constitution. This was not a question of national injury or oppression, but a question of relative constitutional rights. It was a question to be considered not with reference to the feelings of any particular class of his majesty's subjects, but with reference to the security of the whole kingdom. The question was now brought forward under circumstances materially different from those under which it had been submitted to the House on all former occasions. In all former discussions, the most moderate and the most zealous advocates of the claims of the Catholics had concurred in accompanying their propositions with some security or other, which they deemed sufficient to guard the Protestant church and the Protestant establishments. From the total silence of the hon. baronet, and of the noble lord who seconded the motion, he was induced to think that the idea of security was altogether abandoned; and he was confirmed in that opinion, when he referred to the language of the petition which the hon. baronet had himself introduced to the House. In that petition, the Roman Catholic petitioners emphati-
895
896
897
898
Mr. R. Martin
rose amidst loud and repeated cries to adjourn. He denied that the Catholic priesthood had exerted their influence improperly in the late elections in Ireland. It was true that the Catholic clergy and the Catholic leaders used their influence to secure the return of those who were friendly to their cause; but such influence, he contended, was perfectly natural. He confessed, for his own part, that he was indebted for his return to the influence of the Catholic clergy, and to Mr. O'Connell's assistance he was also deeply indebted [a laugh.] He would repeat that he was proud of such aid, and to his dying day he should raise his grateful voice in defence of that gentleman and the Catholic clergy; for it was to them he was indebted for the privilege which he now enjoyed, of raising his voice in their behalf. Aye, the Catholic interest sent him to parliament in opposition to the influence of that government in whose service he had grown grey, and to whom he had given his vote for forty years.
899
Sir J. Newport
moved the adjournment of the debate owing to the lateness of the hour, and the improbability of the question being decided without, at least, another night's discussion.
The debate was thereupon adjourned till to morrow.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, March 6, 1827.
ROMAN CATHOLIC CLAIMS—ADJOURNED DEBATE.]
On the order of the day being read for resuming the Adjourned Debate on the motion made yesterday, by Sir Francis Burdett,
"That this House is deeply impressed with the necessity of taking into immediate consideration the Laws imposing Civil Disabilities on His Majesty's Roman Catholic Subjects, with a view to their relief,"
Sir John Newport
said, that after he had so frequently received that indulgence of the House which was now extended to him, he was quite sensible that he should not be justified in abusing that indulgence, for too long a period. He now rose for the purpose of expressing those opinions which he had entertained for years before he had entered parliament, and during the whole time that he had been a member of that House, now nearly
900
901
902
Mr. Hart Davis
said, he thought that the Roman Catholics of Great Britain enjoyed at that moment as much toleration as was consistent with the civil liberties of the country. He felt that, representing a large population, he should not do his duty to his constituents, if he did not express his own opinion and theirs on this important subject. It appeared that the House had now been for more than twenty years discussing, in various shapes, the proposition before them. It had formerly been introduced as a bill; and now it was placed in the form of a proposition, that the House should go into a committee, or something like a committee, for the purpose of inquiring what could be done for the Roman Catholics. This might be a mode well enough calculated to catch a stray vote, but he thought it was not the proper one in which to discuss this ques-
903
Lord Eliot
said, that when this question had been last before the House, his opinion had been, that to make any further concessions to the Roman Catholics would
904
905
The Master of the Rolls
then rose. He said, that he gave the noble lord, who had just sat down, the fullest credit for the manliness of conduct which he had displayed on this occasion. Connected as this question was with the vital interests of the empire, it was worthy of the most serious and mature consideration. If, after having given it that consideration, any gentleman felt that he ought to change the opinions he had previously held, nothing could be more manly or more honourable, than to make an avowal of that change fairly and openly in the face of the country. In the present instance, he thought the manner in which it had been made was as creditable to the noble lord, as the avowal itself. For himself, as the representative of a highly distinguished and numerous body of constituents, who had considered maturely and felt deeply, even intensely, on this subject, he trusted that he might be permitted to state to the House his opinions respecting the proposition now before it.
906
907
908
909
910
veto
911
912
913
914
915
ultimatum
916
917
918
919
920
921
922
923
924
925
926
927
928
Sir William Plunkett
rose, and was received by the House with much cheering. He began by observing, that it might be considered presumptuous in him to offer himself to the attention of the House, immediately after the very able address of his right hon. and learned friend; but the subject was one in which he felt so deep an interest, that he trusted he should be excused if he ventured to offer his humble suggestions, in answer to the statements of his right hon. and learned friend. Before he offered a word in reply to what had fallen from him, he begged to assure his right hon. friend, that no man had a higher respect than he had for his great talents and acquirements, and he hoped he would give him credit for an anxious wish to avoid, in the remarks he was about to offer to the House, any thing which might have even the appearance of giving a false or exaggerated colouring to any of the arguments which he had used. It was his desire, and his intention, to meet his right hon. friend fairly in argument, and in what he should state he hoped his right hon. friend would give him credit for that intention.
929
930
931
932
933
934
935
936
937
938
939
"Forasmuch as the Queen's Majesty is otherwise assured of the faith and loyalty of the temporal Lords of her high Court of Parliament, therefore this act shall not extend to compel any temporal peer of or above the degree of baron of this realm, to take or pronounce the oath aforesaid, or to incur any penalty limited in this act, for not taking or refusing the same."
940
"Whereas certain penalties and disabilities have been imposed on persons in communion with the See of Rome and their children, and certain principles have been imputed to them which they are willing to disclaim;" and then proceeds to provide for them the following oath and declaration:—'1st, I solemnly declare that I do profess the Roman Catholic religion.' 2nd, 'I promise and swear that I will be faithful, and bear true allegiance to his Majesty.'"
941
"That the proclamation of 1763 had been found, upon experience, to be inapplicable to the state and circumstances of the said province, the inhabitants whereof amounted to above sixty-five thousand persons, professing the religion of the church of Rome, and enjoying an established form of constitution and system of laws, by which their persons and properties had been protected, governed, and ordered, for a long series of years, from the first settlement of the said province." It therefore withdraws the proclamation, and enacts, "that for the more perfect security and case of the minds of the inhabitants of the said province, his majesty's subjects professing the religion of the church of Rome, in the said province of Quebec, may have, hold, and enjoy, the free exercise of the religion of the church of Rome, subject to the king's supremacy, declared by the act of the 1st of Elizabeth, and that the clergy of the said religion may hold, receive, and enjoy, their accustomed dues and rights, with respect to such persons only as shall profess the Roman Catholic religion;" and for this purpose it enacts, "that no person professing the religion of the church of Rome, within the said province, shall be required to take the oath required by the 1st of Elizabeth, but shall take the oath thereby provided:" namely, the oath of allegiance as taken by the Roman Catholics here, "and thereupon shall enjoy all their customs, usages, and civil rights, consistently with their allegiance to his Majesty, and their subjection to the Crown and Parliament of Great Britain."
"I voted last session, if a particular vote could be distinguished, in unanimity, for an establishment of the church of England conjointly with the establishment which was made some years before by act of parliament, of the Roman Catholic, in the French conquered country of Canada.
942
943
944
945
de facto;
de facto
946
947
"Hine exaudiri gemitus, iræque leonum
Vincla recusantum."
948
l
949
950
951
952
953
954
955
956
957
Mr. Secretary Peel
rose. If he were, he said, to consult merely his own personal convenience, it would incline him to assent to the proposition of the hon. baronet, for what prospect of personal ad-
958
"All the inhabitants or residents of Limerick, or any other garrison now in the possession of the Irish, and all officers and soldiers now in arms under any commission of king James, or those authorised by him to grant the same, in the several counties of Limerick, Clare, Kerry, Cork, and Mayo, or any of them; and all the commissioned officers in their majesties' quarters that belong to the Irish regiments now in being, that are treated with, and who are not prisoners of war, or have
959
960
961
962
963
not
964
965
966
967
968
969
970
971
972
973
974
975
976
977
978
979
980
981
Mr. Brougham
, on his rising, was unable to proceed for a few moments, owing to the passage of several members through the crowded House after the speech of Mr. Peel. The hon. and learned gentleman observed, as the Speaker called to order, that the time of the night, and the state of the atmosphere, were certainly unfavourable for a speech. There were cooler spots in the neighbourhood, and without going far, to which gentlemen might retire. He could assure hon. members that he was only giving that advice which he should be glad to follow himself, under similar circumstances. The hon. and learned member then proceeded:—At so late an hour of the night, and after the able arguments which had been used, both on that and on the preceding evening, by so many noble and hon. gentlemen about him, he could expect only to weaken, rather than strengthen, the impression which those arguments had made, if he were to go deeply, or at any length, into the question; and more especially, after the address which had just been heard from his right hon. and learned friend, the Attorney-general for Ireland; and in which that right hon. and learned gentleman had appeared almost to exceed himself—an address in which wit and eloquence had seemed for a while to strive for the mastery, until conciliatory wisdom stepped in to bear the palm away from both;—after such an address as this, and rising, as he did, at the latter end of a long and anxious controversy, he felt that, he could add little, very little, to that which had already been slated; and that he should best discharge his duty to The House, and to the cause which he desired to serve, by confining that which he had to offer within the narrowest, possible limits.
982
983
984
985
986
987
988
989
990
data
991
992
Mr. Goulburn
said, that his opinion upon this great question remained unchanged. When the hon. and learned gentleman opposite had stated, that the Catholics had been promised a recognition of their rights, his attention was roused; but, what was his surprise when the hon. and learned gentleman read, from the journal of that House, an extract of a Speech of his late majesty's, in which he pretended to have found that promise? Now, not only could he not see any such promise in the extract which had been read, but he was perfectly at a loss to conceive by what means the hon. and learned gentleman had elicited any such meaning from the passage, and arrived at any such interpretation of it. When he considered the phrase, that "they should be admitted to the blessings of the British constitution," he was still more at a loss. The hon. and learned gentleman had told the House that it meant "sitting in parliament." But, could he find no other blessings? If hon. gentlemen would consider for a moment the time at which that Speech was made, the real meaning of it could not be mistaken. In the preceding year martial law had been in force in Ireland; and then, after the Union, the king came down, and said, that the people of that country should be admitted to the blessings of the British constitution. When this fact was recollected, it was easy to see that it was to the repeal of this law, and the restoration of the ordinary tribunals of this country, that the expression, holding out a promise of the extension of the blessings of the constitution was applicable. He had never attempted to conceal from himself the state of Ireland; but he differed totally from those hon. gentlemen who fondly imagine that Catholic emancipation
993
Mr. Secretary Canning
rose, and said:—After, Sir, the length to which this debate has been protracted, the House has a sufficient security, both in my discretion and in my weariness, that I shall not trespass at any length upon its patience; although I should have felt it both disrespectful to the House, and unbecoming in myself, if I went to a division upon this question, without stating the grounds on which I give my vote. In doing so, I hope it will not be considered inexpedient, if I recall the attention of the House, to what seems very frequently to have been unattended to in the course of this debute—I mean the real nature of the question which is before us. The hon. baronet, who has brought this question forward, has introduced it with a prodigality of argument, in which he was most fully justified. He has treated the resolution, as if the whole question was to be argued before the
994
995
996
997
usque ad nauseam
998
hisce auribus
999
1000
"Sir, we have had the honour of receiving from Mr. Planta, a letter directed to his Majesty's law officers, stating that his holiness the Pope had forwarded a communication to his Majesty, announcing his elevation to the Papal Throne, and that this communication has been accompanied by a complimentary letter from Cardinal Gonsalvi to his Majesty's principal Secretary for Foreign Affairs; and, further, a question having arisen in that right hon. gentleman's mind, whether, in the event of his noticing or replying to these communications, he would be, in the opinion of his Majesty's law officers, according to the existing law of the land, liable to a premunire; we are of opinion, that under the act of 5th Elizabeth, chap. i. sec. 12, any one allowing or admitting the jurisdiction of the See of Rome in this realm, is subject, for the first offence, to a premunire; and as, in the present case, the Pope claims to exercise authority over the Roman Catholic church in these countries, we are of opinion that an answer to the letters referred to might be interpreted as a sanction of these claims to authority, and, consequently, that the party so communicating might render himself liable to the penalty of premunire.
(Signed) "R. GIFFORD.
J. S. COPLEY."
The Master of the Rolls
.—That is not my opinion.
Mr. Secretary Canning
.—No; it is not the right hon. gentleman, but Burns' Justice, which is my present authority, [a laugh]. Such were some of the penal-
1001
The Master of the Rolls
.—I consider that the opinion referred to was contained in a private letter—[Cries of "order, order; chair, chair!"]—and I doubt whether the right hon. Secretary has more than a copy, the original being in my possession.
Mr. Secretary Canning
.—Sir, I do not exactly understand this interruption. It is, in my opinion, most extraordinary. I assert, that this is a public document, on the production of which depends the judgment to be pronounced, as to whether or not I have properly executed my public duty as a minister of the Crown. With this view I called for the opinion of his majesty's law officers, and received it, not in a non-official, but in an official way; and that being the case, I have a right to refer to it [cheers]. Perhaps, Sir, I might not have referred to the matter, had it not been for the extraordinary language made
1002
1003
1004
1005
1006
1007
1008
Sir Charles Forbes
rose amidst loud cries of "question." After several minutes had elapsed the hon. baronet said, his object in rising was to explain the reason why he had voted against the Catholic question two years ago. He had then
1009
Sir Francis Burdett
said, he would not add one word to what had been so ably and eloquently urged, by the right hon. Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs. He was quite willing to adopt the alteration just suggested by the hon. baronet.
List of the Majority, and Minority
MAJORITY.
A'Court, E. H.
Calvert, John
Alcock, T.
Campbell, John
Alexander, H.
Campbell, A.
Antrobus, G.
Carmarthen, marq. of
Arbuthnot, hon. H.
Capel, John
Archdall, M.
Cartwright, W.
Ashburnham, hon. P.
Chandos, marquis of
Astley, sir J.
Chaplin, T.
Ashurst, W. H.
Clinton, C. F.
Astell, W.
Clive, visct.
Ashley, lord
Clive, hon. R.
Attwood, M.
Clive, H.
Baker, E.
Cooke, sir H.
Bankes, G.
Cotterell, sir J.
Bankes, H.
Cole, sir C.
Barclay, C.
Collett, E. J.
Barne, M.
Cooper, E. S.
Bastard, E. P.
Cooper, T.
Bastard, T.
Cooper, R. B.
Batley, C.
Cooper, hon. W. A.
Beckett, sir J.
Copley, sir J. S.
Bell, M.
Corry, visct.
Benson, R.
Corbett, Panton
Beresford, sir J. P.
Cuffe, James
Beresford, M.
Curtis, E. J.
Blackburne, J.
Curzon, hon. R.
Blair, J.
Cust, hon. P.
Blandford, marquis of
Cust, hon. Wm.
Bonham, H.
Duff, hon. A.
Borradaile, R.
Dalrymple, A. J.
Bond, John
Davidson, D.
Bright, H.
Davis, Hart
Brogden, J.
Dawkins, H.
Brudenell, lord
Dawson, G. R.
Brydges, sir J.
Domville, sir C.
Buck, L. W.
Dottin, A.
Burrell, sir C.
Dowdeswell, J. E.
Buxton, John
Dugdale, D. S.
Byron, Thos.
Duncombe, hon. W.
Belfast, earl of
Dundas, hon. H.
Bradshaw, James
Dundas, John
Chaplin, C.
Downes, lord
1010
Dick, Quintin
Lascelles, hon. W.
Eden, hon. R.
Legge, hon. E.
Ennismore, lord
Macnaghten, E. A.
Estcourt, T.
Macqucen, T.
Evans, H.
Magennis, R.
Egerton, W.
Maitland, E. F.
Fane, J. T.
Malcolm, N.
Fane, hon. H. S.
Mandeville, visct.
Fane, John
Manners, lord C.
Farquhar, J.
Manners, lord R.
Fellowes, W. H.
Martin, sir T.
Fetherstone, sir G.
Maxwell, Waring
Fleming, John
Maxwell, H.
Foley, E. T.
Meynell, H.
Foley, John
Moore, G.
Forrester, hon. G.
Morgan, sir C.
Foster, J. L.
Morgan, J. G.
Fyler, T.
Mundy, F.
Gascoyne, J.
Mundy, G.
Gooch, sir T.
Musgrave, sir P.
Gordon, hon. W.
Maxwell, sir W.
Gordon, John
Newborough, lord
Goulburn, rt. hon. H.
Nicholl, rt. hon. sir J.
Graham, marquis of
Nightingal, sir M.
Grant, sir A. C.
Northcote, H.
Greville, hon. sir C.
Norton, G.
Gilbert, D.
O'Neil, hon. A.
Graham, G. E.
Onslow, A.
Graves, lord
Owen, sir E.
Gye, F.
Owen, sir J.
Halse, J.
Owen, Hugh
Hancock, R.
Pallmer, C. N.
Hart, G. B.
Palmer, Rt.
Hastings, sir C.
Paget, lord W.
Heathcote, sir W.
Palk, sir L.
Herries, J. C.
Peachey, W.
Hill, sir G.
Pearse, John
Hill, sir R.
Peel, rt. hon. R.
Hodgson, F.
Peel, J.
Hodson, J. A.
Peel, W.
Holmes, W.
Peel, L.
Hotham, lord
Pellew, hon. P.
Houldsworth, T.
Pennant, G.
Jones, J.
Pitt, J.
Irving, J.
Pollen, sir J.
Jenkinson, hon. C.
Powell, W.
Kekewich, S. T.
Powell, Alex.
Kemp, T.
Price, Richard
King, hon. R.
Prendergast, M.
King, hon. H.
Pelham, J. C.
Knatchbull, sir E.
Phillips, Rd.
King, sir J.
Raine, J.
Langston, James
Rice, G. T.
Legh, T.
Rickford, W.
Legh Keck, G. A.
Roberts, W.
Lenox, lord G.
Rochford, G.
Lethbridge, sir T.
Rogers, E.
Lindsay, C.
Rose, sir G.
Lott, H.
Rose, G.
Lowther, visct.
Ross, C.
Lowther, hon. H.
Ryder, rt. hon. Rd.
Lowther, sir J.
Sanderson, A.
Lowther, J. H.
St. Paul, sir H.
Lucy, G.
Scott, hon. W.
Lushington, S. R.
Scott, H.
Lushington, col.
Shadwell, L.
Luttrell, J. F.
Shelley, sir J.
Lygon, hon. H.
Sibthorpe, C.
1011
Smith, A.
Walker, Josh.
Smith, C.
Wallace, rt. hon. T.
Smith, S.
Walpole, hon. J.
Smith, T. A.
Walrond, B.
Smythe, sir G.
Ward, W.
Somerset, lord G.
Webbe, Ed.
Somerset, lord E.
Wells, J.
Somerset, lord F.
Wetherell, sir C.
Sotheron, F.
Whitmore, T.
Spence, G.
Wigram, W.
Spottiswoode, A.
Wilbraham, Bootle
Stafford, lord
Williams, R.
Strathaven, lord
Willoughby, Henry
Strutt, J.
Wilson, J.
Stuart, Wm.
Wilson, Rd.
Stephenson, R.
Winn, hon. G.
Seymour, Henry
Worcester, marq. of
Starkie, Le Gendre
Wyndham, W.
Thynne, lord J.
Wynne, Owen
Tallemache, hon. F.
Wilks, J.
Taylor, G. W.
Wemyss, James.
Thompson, G. L.
PAIRED OFF.
Thomson, alderman
Burrell, Walter
Tindal, N.
Bradshaw, J. H.
Tomline, W.
Campbell, A.
Townshend, hon. J. R.
Davenport, D.
Townshend, lord Jas.
Dundas, rt. hon. W.
Trench, F.
Harvey, sir E.
Tullamore, lord
Hope, hon. sir A.
Tyrwhitt, Tho.
Hope, sir W.
Tyrwhitt, Wm.
Leake, W.
Tudway, J. P.
Manning, W.
Ure, M.
Noel, sir G.
Uxbridge, earl of
O'Neill, col.
Vaughan, sir R.
Seymour, H.
Vivyan, lord Rd.
Vivian, sir H.
MINORITY.
Abercromby, hon. J.
Burdett, sir F.
Acland, sir T.
Butler-Clarke, hon. C.
Alexander, J.
Buxton, T. F.
Althorp, visc.
Byng, G.
Anson, sir G.
Boyd, Walter
Anson, hon. G.
Bruce, lord
Arbuthnot, rt. hon. C.
Buller, J.
Archdeckne, A.
Brown, James
Baillie, John
Calcraft, John
Balfour, J.
Calthorpe, hon. F.
Baring, A.
Calthorpe, hon. A.
Baring, F.
Calvert, N.
Baring, sir T.
Calvert, C.
Baring, W. B.
Campbell, Walter
Barclay, D.
Canning, right. hon. G.
Barnard, visc.
Carew, R. S.
Beaumont, T.
Carrington, sir E.
Bective, earl of
Carter, John
Bentinck, lord W.
Castlereagh, visc.
Bernard, T.
Caulfield, hon. H.
Bingham, lord
Cavendish, lord G.
Binning, lord
Cavendish, Henry
Birch, J.
Cavendish, C.
Bourne, rt. hon. W. S.
Cholmondeley, lord H.
Brecknock, earl of
Chichester, Arthur
Brougham, Henry
Clements, visc.
Brougham, J.
Clarke, sir G.
Brownlow, C.
Clifton, visc.
Bruen, W.
Clive, Henry
1012
Colbourne, N. R.
Hill, lord A.
Coke, T. W.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Cocks, James
Honywood, W. P.
Colthurst, sir N.
Howard, hon. F. G.
Coote, sir C.
Howard, Henry
Courtenay, T. P.
Howick, visct.
Cradock, S.
Hume, J.
Croker, J. W.
Hurst, R.
Crompton, S.
Hutchinson, J. H.
Davenport, E.
Hutchinson, John
Dawson, A.
Hay, lord John
Dawson, J. H. M.
Hughes, W. L.
Denison, W. J.
Ingleby, sir W.
Denison, J. E.
Innes, sir H.
Doherty, John
Jephson, C. O.
Douglas, W. R. K.
Jermyn, earl of
Du Cane, Peter
Jolliffe, Hilton
Duncombe, T. S.
Knight, R.
Dundas, hon. G.
Kennedy, T. F.
Dundas, hon. sir R.
King, hon. R. (Cork)
Dundas, hon. T.
Knox, hon. Thomas
Dundas, C.
Labouchere, H.
Drummond, Home
Lamb, hon. G.
Easthope, John
Lascelles, hon. W.
East, sir E.
Latouche, R.
Ebrington, visc.
Lawley, F.
Ellis, hon. G. A.
Lennard, T. B.
Ellison, Cuthbert
Lester, B. L.
Ennismere, visc.
Lewis, T. F.
Eliot, lord
Leycester, R.
Fazakerley, N.
Liddell, hon. H.
Fergusson, sir R. C.
Littleton, E.
Ferguson, R. C.
Lloyd, T.
Fitzgerald, rt. hon. M.
Lockhart, W. E.
Fitzgerald, rt. hon. V.
Lombe, E.
Fitzgerald, lord W.
Lumley, J. S.
Fitzgerald, John
Lushington, Dr.
Fitzgibbon, hon. R.
Maberly, John
Fitzroy, lord C.
Maberly, W. L.
Folkestone, visc.
Macdonald, sir J.
Forbes, lord
Mackenzie, sir J. W.
Forbes, sir C.
Mackintosh, sir J.
Fortescue, hon. G.
Maitland, visc.
Frankland, R.
Maitland, hon. A.
Fremantle, rt. hon. W.
Marjoribanks, S.
Ffrench, Arthur
Marshall, John
Farquhar, sir R.
Marshall, W.
Forbes, John
Martin, J.
Garties, lord
Martin, R.
Gordon, R.
Maule, hon. W.
Gower, lord F. L.
Marryatt, J.
Graham, G. E.
Milbank, M.
Grant, right hon. C.
Mildmay, P. St. John
Grant, R.
Milton, visc.
Grattan, H.
Monck, J. B.
Grattan, J.
Morland, S. B.
Grosvenor, hon. R.
Morpeth, visc.
Grosvenor, T.
Mount Charles, earl of
Gurney, Hudson
Newport, rt. hon. sir J.
Guest, Josiah
Normanby, visc.
Guise, sir W.
Nugent, lord
Hare, hon. W.
Nugent, sir G.
Hardinge, sir H.
O'Hara, J.
Hawkins, sir C.
O'Brien, Lucius
Heathcote, G. J.
Ord, W.
Heneage, G. F.
Oxmantown, lord
Heron, sir R.
Palmerston, visc.
1013
Parnell, sir H.
Thompson, P. Beilly
Pendarvis, E.
Tierney, right hon. G.
Phillimore, J.
Tomes, John
Philips, G.
Tufton, hon. H.
Philips, G. R.
Tunno, E.
Phipps, hon. E.
Twiss, Horace
Plunkett, right hon. sir W. C.
Tollemache, F.
Valletort, visc.
Ponsonby, hon. W. S.
Vernon, hon. G.
Ponsonby, hon. G.
Villiers, T. Hyde
Ponsonby, hon. F.
Van Homrigh, P.
Portman, E.
Waithman, ald.
Power, R.
Wall, C. Baring
Powlett, hon. W.
Warburton, Henry
Poyntz, W. S.
Warrender, sir G.
Price, R.
Westenra, hon. H.
Pringle, sir W.
Whitbread, S. C.
Prittie, hon. F.
Whitbread, W. H.
Proby, hon. G.
White, H.
Protheroe, E.
White, J.
Ramsden, J. C.
Whitmore, T.
Rancliffe, lord
Wilmot-Horton, R.
Robarts, A. W.
Wilson, sir R.
Robinson, right hon. F.
Winnington, sir T.
Robinson, sir G.
Wodehouse, E.
Robinson, G. R.
Wood, M.
Rowley, sir W.
Wood, J.
Rumbold, C.
Wood, C.
Russell, lord G. W.
Wynne, sir W. W.
Russell, lord John
Wynne, C. W. W.
Russell, lord W.
Wyvill, M.
Russell, G. R.
Wrightson, W. B.
Sandon, visc.
TELLERS.
Scarlett, James
Dancannon, visc.
Sebright, sir John
Rice, T. S.
Sefton, earl of
PAIRED OFF.
Smith, J.
Cockburn, sir G.
Smith, W.
Curwen, J. C.
Smith, hon. R.
Gladstone, J.
Somerville, sir M.
Hamilton, lord A.
Stanley, lord
Heathcote, sir G.
Stanley, hon. E.
Heathcote, R. E.
Stuart, H. Villiers
Huskisson, rt. hon. W.
Stuart, lord J.
Lindsay, hon. Hugh
Stewart, J. (Beverley)
Maxwell, John
Stuart-Wortley, hon. J.
Montgomery, sir J.
Sykes, D.
Prendergast, M. G.
Sinclair, hon. J.
Phipps, general
Tavistock, marquis of
Smith, G.
Taylor, M. A.
Western, C.
Tennyson, C.
Wrottesley, sir John
Thompson, C.
Wilkins, Walter
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Thursday, March 8, 1827.
CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION.]
Lord King
said, he had several petitions to present to their lordships from a small portion of that oppressed class of people, who, in the last petition he had laid upon the table of that House, described themselves as the most poor and wretched people in Europe—he meant the Roman Catholics of Ireland. The first petition was a most loyal one. It contained as strong expressions of
1014
Lord Lorton
did not wish to oppose the petition being received, but he was anxious to make a few observations upon it. That petition might be the means of bringing him as a criminal before their lordships' bar; and their lordships would understand what he meant, when he read to them a speech made in another place [cries of "Order"]. He did not allude to any hon. member of the House of Commons, but to a member of the Irish Roman Catholic parliament. The speech of that person was in Ins hand, and with their lordships' permission he would read a part of it. It was as follows:—"Mr. O'Connell rose to speak against the unconstitutional conduct of lord Lorton, which ought to be represented to parliament, in interfering with people in the right of petitioning. It was in the year 1688, that king James was hurled from his throne for interfering with the people in the exercise of that right, which was the very essence of the British constitution. If such interference was thought sufficient by the people of England to cashier a monarch, what ought to be done towards lord Lorton, the petty tyrant of a village, for the same conduct?" Their lordships had just now heard a specimen of the proceedings of the Irish parliament, which would be truly laughable, were it not for the effect such language and such denunciations must have on the minds of a deluded people. The natural inference to be drawn from such language was, that the person proscribed was a tyrant, and hostile to the just rights of the people. The whole charge originated from a conversation he had held with two or three hundred of his tenants, upon the subject of that petition. He had recommended them not to interfere in any way with the petition which some individuals in the town wished to get up, as there was a general petition about to proceed from the whole county, which was to be presented by the duke of Buckingham. After some conversation, and without any threat being used, he parted with the persons assembled with a kindly feeling, and with the understanding that they would not attend the meeting where the petition in question was to be proposed. The
1015
Lord Ellenborough
observed, that parliament had tried to put down that association, but had utterly failed; and would, so long as it left in existence the cause which produced that association; but he must say, that if the noble lord did not wish to give any consequence to the speeches of the men who attended that meeting, he should have adopted a better course; than answering in the House of Lords the charges of a set of persons who met in a room in Dublin.
Lord Lorton
said, it was very easy for noble lords who had never been in Ireland to get up and exhort others to retrain from
1016
Lord Ellenborough
said, that the noble viscount was mistaken in supposing that he was a stranger to Ireland. He had visited that country several times, and had been there for seven or eight months. He had also been present at the meeting of the very convention alluded to by the noble viscount, and had heard a debate upon the important subject of education, in which the principal speakers took a part, and he had never heard any thing more despicable than those speeches, nor ever saw persons more contemptible than those speakers in the whole course of his life.
Lord Lorton
said, he would not occupy their lordships' time any longer; for if he were to speak all night long, he was sure he would not be able to convince that noble lord.
Lord Redesdale
was convinced, that if the association was allowed to exist much longer, it would bring on a civil war in Ireland.
The Lord Chancellor
said, he certainly would have wished to have observed the promise he had given on a former occasion, not to trouble them with his sentiments with respect to any thing referring to this question, until the subject should be brought regularly before the House, and he hoped and trusted that, the notice of motion which had been given by a noble marquis would not be abandoned, in order that the House might fairly meet the question, and come to some decision upon it. He should, therefore, not have troubled himself now with making any observations, had not his noble friend (lord King)—if he would allow him to call him by that
1017
The Marquis of Lansdown
, after the allusion which had been made to the notice of a motion which stood for to-morrow sennight, thought it his duty to state, that he had not intended to open his mouth on the subject, until he gave their lordships notice to-morrow night, with respect to his intention of bringing forward his motion or not, after what had occurred elsewhere. But, whether he should still avail himself of the right to bring forward his motion—and in the exercise of that right he should pursue that course which appeared to him most desirable for the attainment of the great end he had in view; whether he should still bring forward his motion, or whether he should not, he
1018
The Earl of Clancarty
expressed his sorrow, that the bill for putting down the Catholic Association had ever been introduced into parliament. It was an injudicious measure. The common law of the country was sufficient of itself for the purpose; and it was the duty of the law officers of the Crown to put that law into effect. The learned lord on the woolsack did not seem to place much reliance upon those publications, in which an account was given of the most extraordinary proceeding which had taken place in the Catholic Association. He must say, that he differed entirely from him. He felt convinced, that as much passed in that meeting as ever met the eye of the public. With respect to the conduct of the law officers of the Crown, that he thought required some explanation. He should be very sorry to be connected with those who stood in the character of law officers in Ireland, because they appeared to act with considerable negligence, in what he should conceive to be the public business of the country.
Lord King
wished to state, that there was not one objectionable word in the petition.
The Earl of Kingston
said, he was satisfied that the petition expressed the sentiments of the town from which it proceeded; but he believed that three well-known individuals had done more harm to the cause of the Catholics than anything else.
Lord Clifden
did not rise to defend the disgraceful language which their lordships had but lately heard. The use of such language had done great injury to the cause of Catholic emancipation. Noble lords talked about putting down the Association. At the time when the duke of Richmond went over to Ireland, they had tried to put down the convention of Catholics. Prosecutions were instituted; torrents of abuse ensued. Some of the prosecutions failed, and others were successful. But what was the upshot? The Catholics still continued to meet; and they always would meet; for it was impossible to crush millions. He extremely regretted the rejection of a measure, in another place, intended for the peace of Ireland. The Apostolic party in France and Spain would receive, with transports of joy the news of the failure of that measure,
1019
The Earl of Mountcashel
rose to deprecate the assertions which had been made by the noble viscount who had just sat down, and which only echoed the sentiments of the demagogues of the Catholic Association. It was such language that gave those orators courage. It was repeated from the north to the south, and from the west to the east, and the people took fire at it. He asked their lordships, whether such language was not likely to increase the dissatisfaction which already existed? He could not sit quietly and listen to such observations; especially when they came from one who was, he must speak plainly, an absentee from his country. The demagogues in Ireland would make use of them for their own advantage. They would say, "it is impossible to put down the Catholics; it is impossible to resist the expression of sentiments uttered by millions of men." It was very easy to mention numbers. Now, taking the population of Ireland to be seven millions, which he believed to be the utmost, there were out of that number one million two hundred thousand members of the Church of England and Dissenters; and, in addition to that, there were eight hundred thousand Presbyterians, making altogether two millions. There would, of course, remain five millions of Catholics, being a proportion of five to one, or of two Roman Catholics and a half to one Protestant. That was not such a mighty dis-
1020
The Marquis of Lansdown
said, that a clear proof at least of the perfect impotence of the Catholic Association appeared in the fact, that they had been unable to effect the irobjects of closing the lips of the noble lord who had last spoken. For himself, he was very glad that they had failed in any such endeavour; and should always be happy to hear the opinions of the noble lord upon the political prospects both of this country and Ireland, provided that he and his friends were allowed the opportunity of refuting them.
Ordered to lie on the table.
CORN LAWS—NEW SCALE OF DUTIES.]
The Earl of Lauderdale
rose, pursuant to notice, to move for a select committee, to inquire into the terms and prices, subject to which foreign grain, independent of duty, could at present be imported into England. He had been in doubt, the noble lord said, when he had first heard the course intimated, upon which ministers were about to proceed in their inquiry into the system of the Corn-laws, whether it would be better for him to move, as he was now about to do, for the appointment of a committee, or to come down to the House at once, with resolutions upon the subject. Under that uncertainty, he had made up his mind, as the House was, at last, so near being made acquainted with the mysterious secret of what was to be done with respect to the Corn-laws, to wait to see what the actual plan was, before he took any step in opposition to it; and certainly, if any proposition more than another could have made the motion with which he was about to conclude absolutely necessary, it was the proposition into which the long-concealed and curious policy of the noble lords opposite had at length resolved itself. The plan proposed was not merely of a character such as had never before been adopted in this country, but such, he would venture to say, as never had been heard of before in any community endowed with common reason: it was a plan to levy a duty upon a commodity to
1021
s
s
s
s
1022
1023
s
s
l
s
s
s
s
1024
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
1025
s
s
s
s.
s
s
1026
ad valorem
1027
1028
s
s
1029
Earl Bathurst
said, he felt himself called upon, in the first instance, to allude to an observation, which he was sure must have escaped the noble earl in the hurry of speaking, and which he would himself regret having given utterance to. The observation to which he alluded was, to the effect, that the propositions lately submitted to parliament, on the subject of the corn trade, had been forced upon his unfortunate colleague the earl of Liverpool, whilst he was lying on a bed of sickness. He was at a loss to conceive what ground the noble earl had for such an assertion. Could the noble earl—could any individual in that House—have forgotten, that before Christmas his noble colleague gave notice, that certain measures on the subject of the Corn-laws would be submitted to parliament by government immediately after the recess. Again, could it be forgotten, that his noble colleague, after the recess, gave notice that he would himself bring forward those measures in that House, although they would, at the same time, be submitted to the other House of Parliament—an unusual course of proceeding, but one which his noble colleague adopted for the express purpose of showing that he took a deep interest in the measure—that it was the result of mature reflection, and that upon it he would stake his political character. Such being the case, he was sure the noble earl would, upon, consideration, regret that he had made the assertion, that the measures in question had been forced upon his noble colleague whilst he was on a bed of sickness—an assertion for which he must be permitted to say there was not the slightest foundation. [The Earl of Lauderdale observed, across the table, that he had not stated the case so strongly as the noble earl put it]—Having said thus much, he would shortly advert to the subject before the House. The noble earl, in the course of his speech,
1030
s
s
1031
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
d
s
s.
d
s
1032
The Earl of Rosslyn
said, that persons would be induced to suppose, from the manner in which the noble earl who had just addressed their lordships had spoken of the existing corn laws, they had been framed by individuals whom he held in little consideration, whilst, in fact, they were the work of himself and of his colleagues, and all the objections which he now urged against them had formerly been disregarded when forced upon his attention. With respect to the new system proposed by ministers, he was of opinion that it would produce a ruinous effect upon agriculture.
The Earl of Lauderdale
denied, that he had asserted, that the new measure respecting the corn trade had been forced upon lord Liverpool whilst he was on a bed of sickness. All that he had done was to contrast the conduct of certain persons in one situation, and in another; and he left the House to draw what inference it pleased. That the noble earl had drawn the inference which he had stated was not his fault. If, however, he had rashly committed himself, he had nothing to do but to print his speech, according to a high example, and to leave out the objectionable passages.
Lord Redesdale
expressed his objection to the measure now in progress for altering the existing laws.
The Earl of Roseberry
approved of the motion which had been submitted by his noble friend, although, if its object had been a more extended inquiry, he would have opposed it; because he thought the question, which was of vital importance, ought to be brought to a speedy settlement one way or another. If the new measures should be adopted, some alteration would, he thought, be necessary in the prices of barley and oats contained in the schedule on their lordships' table; otherwise the greatest distress would be occasioned in that part of the kingdom with which he was connected, and, if he was rightly informed, in Ireland also. If the prices in the schedule with respect to barley were not modified, the result would be destructive to agriculture in the counties of Norfolk and Suffolk.
1033
Lord Baxley
was desirous of contradicting the notion, that the new measures with regard to corn had been forced upon the noble earl at the head of the Treasury. He could take upon himself to declare, that it had been the perfect intention of that noble earl to propose the measures himself, and that they were founded on his own personal observation, and drawn up with great deliberation. At the same time, their lordships must be aware, that as the members of government were in constant communication with each other, it was almost impossible to state positively with whom any particular idea originated. He thought it was premature to discuss the subject at present, as it was possible the measure might come up from the other House in a very different shape from that in which it at present stood. When, however, that measure should come properly before their lordships, he thought he should be able to satisfy them, that it was much more consonant with the wisdom and practice of their ancestors than the existing law.
The motion was then agreed to, and a committee appointed.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, March 8, 1827.
CORN LAWS.]
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
moved the order of the day, for the House to resolve itself into a Committee on the Corn Trade Acts. On the motion, that the Speaker do leave the chair,
Lord Clive
rose, and addressed the House to the following effect:—For a period of nearly twenty years he had had the honour of giving his general support to the measures introduced by some of the members of his majesty's present government; but, of all the occasions upon which he had ever felt it his duty to dissent from them, he remembered none more important than that upon which the House was now called to go into a committee. He should take the liberty, at the very commencement of the address which he proposed to deliver to the House, to read to them, with their permission, a Resolution, which would, in the shortest and clearest manner, express to them the sentiments he entertained on the subject. This was a course of proceeding, he was fully aware, somewhat different from that usually pursued by hon. gentlemen, who were accustomed to propound their Reso-
1034
"That it is necessary to give protection to the growers of British corn against the importation of corn the produce of countries not cultivated by British subjects, nor liable to the payment of the same taxes, on a principle similar to that established by the law of 1822, until grain shall have reached, in this country, the price of—(a price hereafter to be deter mined), in order to enable the British agriculturist to make his accustomed payments, and discharge his government and local taxes; to give to the consumer the prospect of a moderate price of grain during a number of years; and to Ireland and the Canadas a preference in respect of importation."
1035
s
s
s
s
s
1036
1037
1038
l
1039
1040
"But even in peace the habitual dependence on foreign supply is dangerous. We place the subsistence of our own population not only at the mercy of foreign powers, but also on their being able to spare as much corn as we may want to buy. Suppose, as it frequently happens, the harvest in the same year to be a short one, not only in this country, but in the foreign countries from which we are fed—what follows? The habitually exporting country, France for instance, stops the export of its corn, and feeds its people without any great pressure. The habitually importing country, England, which, even in a good season, has hitherto depended on the aid of foreign corn, deprived of that aid, in a year of scarcity, is driven to distress bordering upon famine. There is, therefore, no effectual security, either in peace or war, against the frequent return of scarcity approaching to starvation (such as of late years we have so frequently experienced), but in our maintaining ourselves habitually independent of foreign supply. Let the bread we eat be the produce of corn grown among ourselves, and, for one, I care not how cheap it is; the cheaper the better. It is cheap now, and I rejoice at it, because it is altogether owing- to a sufficiency of corn of our own growth. But, in order to insure a continuance of that cheapness and that sufficiency, we must insure to our own growers that protection against foreign import which has produced these blessings, and by which alone they can be permanently maintained."
"During upwards of one hundred years, up to the year 1765, the import of foreign corn was restrained by very high duties. What was the stale of the country during those one hundred years? That in ordinary seasons our own growth supplied a stock of corn fully ample for our own consumption; that in abundant seasons we had some to spare, which we exported; that in bad seasons we felt no want, and were under no apprehension; that the price of corn seldom varied more than a few shillings per quarter; that we had no years of inordinate grain to the farmer, and of starvation to the consumer; that prices, instead of rising from year to year,
1041
Sir Edward Knatchbull
commenced with an expression of the great reluctance that he felt in opposing any measure coming from those with whom he generally concurred in opinion, and with whom he was in the habit of acting. It gave him real pain to express his dissent from the plan now brought forward, which the right hon. Secretary for Foreign Affairs told the House was the plan of the noble lord at the head of the government; but which he could not have believed, if he had not received the assurance of the right hon. gentleman that it was so. He owned he was surprised at the measure coming from such a source. He said this with great respect for the noble earl, of whose services the country, by an afflicting dispensation of Providence, was now unfortunately deprived. To that noble earl he was desirous of paying the tribute of his approbation, for his long, and eminent, and laborious services, and of his admiration for his many eminent virtues. Before he pro-
1042
1043
1044
1045
1046
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, he thought that the place which he filled as a minister of the Crown, and the situation in which he stood with respect to the question of the Corn-laws, made it incumbent upon him to reply to some of the observations which he had heard, both from the noble lord behind him and the hon. baronet who had just sat down, whose direct appeal to his opinion rendered that reply the more necessary, because he felt that it was his lot to have been the original proposer of a plan, founded on the question of the Corn-laws, though different from that which was now about to be considered. He owed it to his own character, and to the honour of those in conjunction with whom he acted, to express his cordial and unequivocal concurrence in the wisdom and policy of the proposed resolutions which he had now the great and peculiar satisfaction to support. He had no false delicacy to plead, for he confessed he felt no shame to admit, that his opinion with respect to this question was different now from what it had been. Where, then, was the justice of charging him with acting inconsistently, because he now, from conviction, supported a different view of the question from that which he had formerly entertained? At the time to which the hon. baronet had referred, he held a different situation in his majesty's government to that which he had now the honour to fill. At that time he was not one of his majesty's advisers, as he was now, and therefore he was so far released from the responsibility of his acts. Besides, he remembered distinctly to have said, when he proposed the measure, that it was not merely a choice of difficulties, but a choice of evils. He matured and prepared that measure it was true; but if he now supported a plan which, on further consideration, he conceived to be more efficient and beneficial, where, he would ask, was the mighty inconsistency with which the hon. baronet thought proper to accuse him? No man, he contended, was fit to be a minister of the Crown who was not prepared, upon questions of this nature, involving not any individual or particular interests, but the welfare of the country at large, to adopt that plan which reason, experience, and conviction pointed out to be the best. Without reference, therefore, to the part which he had formerly taken, he now most cordially joined his right hon. col-
1047
1048
s
s
s
1049
in toto
1050
1051
1052
1053
1054
s
s
1055
1056
Mr. Western
said, that the measures respecting the currency introduced in 1822, tended to increase the circulation of the country, and as a necessary consequence, it raised the price of corn. The price continued to rise in the years 1823, 1824, and 1825; so much so, that in February in that year the chancellor of the Exchequer came down to that House, and made his prosperity speech, in which he described every branch of our trade and commerce as in the most flourishing condition. Yet, during that prosperous state of the country, corn was at 68
s
1057
s
s
s
1058
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
d
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
d
s
s
d
s
d
1059
s
s
Sir Thomas Gooch
said, that this was a subject of which he most deeply felt the importance. Although the representative of a great agricultural county, he would not consider this question with reference to the exclusive interests of his constituents, but on enlarged principles, such as became the representative—not of a body of agriculturists merely, but of the nation at large; and in that character he would take upon him to say, that if ever there was a question in which the happiness and the comfort, the interest and the prosperity of the whole empire were involved, this was the question. Such being the case the House was bound to enter into the consideration of it with the utmost vigilance and caution. If there were any hon. members, with whom he was in the habit of voting upon roost occasions, who were disposed to censure the proceedings
1060
s
s
s
s
s
1061
s
1062
s
s
s
s
s
Mr. Ward
, member for London, said that he looked in vain for those material improvements which the House had been led to expect from the projected alteration in a system, the existence of which he certainly much regretted. A noble lord,
1063
1064
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, he should not have addressed the House upon the present occasion had it not been for the personal observations which had been made with regard to himself by his hon. friend, the member for Kent. His hon. friend had paid him a compliment which he valued as he ought; but he was afraid that he could not accept it upon the terms on which his hon. friend had offered it. His hon. friend had expressed a wish that the same caution which he (Mr. Peel) had displayed in the alterations which he had introduced into the criminal jurisprudence of the country, had been displayed in the alterations which had been introduced into our commercial policy, and last of all into the Corn-laws. But, he would remind his hon. friend, that there was a very wide difference in the principles upon which alterations in jurisprudence, and alterations in commercial policy, were made. Our criminal jurisprudence, for instance, was not affected by external circumstances, and alterations in it could therefore be made as well in one year as in another. It was not so with regard to measures affecting commerce and corn; for a transition from war to peace, an apprehension of famine, and various other circumstances, which it was easy to imagine, might render it necessary to make very important alterations in our system without any delay. Be that, however, as it might, he would still say, that if any blame were due to the administration for precipitation in altering the commercial policy and the Corn-laws of the country, he was ready to take his
1065
s
s
1066
l
1067
1068
s
s
s
1069
s
s
Lord Clive signified his willingness not to press the House to a division. On the question of the Speaker's leaving the chair,
Sir T. Lethbridge
expressed himself decidedly adverse to the resolutions. He believed that, even now, doubts existed amongst his majesty's ministers, with respect to the efficacy of this measure. For his own part, he was convinced that the plan now proposed was not founded in good policy, and that it would afford no protection whatever to the landed interest. The measure had been most precipitately introduced. Many points connected with it remained to be considered; and up to this moment, sufficient inquiry had not been set on foot. If he were correct in his view of the case he thought the House ought immediately to adopt means by which a more extensive consideration of the subject might be effected. In fact, a committee of that House ought to be immediately appointed to make inquiries, similar to those which were about to be instituted elsewhere. Having this strong impression on his mind, he called on the House to adopt the suggestion which he threw out, before they permitted the Speaker to leave the chair. In 1822, he had himself proposed to the House a permanent duty and open ports; but he was now convinced, that neither that proposition, nor the proposition now submitted to their
1070
s
s
Sir J. Newport
protested against the recommendation of the hon. baronet, He could not consent to go on a voyage of discovery indefinite as to its object, and which might be interminable in its continuance. He was favourable to the proposed resolutions, because he wished the law to be placed on such a basis, that the agricultural community might know, with, some degree of certainty, on what ground they were to build their calculations.
The House having resolved itself into the committee,
Mr. C. Grant
said, he should decline entering into the general question at the present moment, but would reserve to himself, the right of making such observations as he might think necessary, in the course of the discussion. He should now move the first resolution: viz.
"That it is the opinion of this committee, that any sort of corn, grain meal, and flour, which may now, by law, be imported into the United Kingdom, should, at all times, be admissible for home use, upon payment of the duties following, viz.—If imported from any foreign country—
"WHEAT.—Whenever the average price of wheat, made up and published, in manner required by law, shall be sixty shillings, and under sixty-one shillings the quarter, the duty shall be for every quarter 1
l
s
l
s
The resolution having been put from the chair,
1071
Mr. Bankes
said, he thought that the proper time to move an amendment. It was his wish to raise the average price from 60
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
Mr. Charles Barclay
expressed his satisfaction at the circumstance of the Mouse having come to a bettor understanding on this important subject than they had heretofore done, and that they
1072
s
s
s
Lord Althorp
observed, that the amendment was merely a difference of 2
s
Mr. Ferguson
thought it was impossible that this debate should terminate without taking a more general turn than that of a discussion upon the difference between 60
s
s
s
s
1073
Mr. Secretary Canning
said, he rose rather to call the attention of the committee to a particular point or two in the debate, than to offer them any observations upon the general question; which there would be many opportunities of discussing, in the future stages of the bill. The discussion that evening had begun upon the principle of the question; but by some means or other, they had now got into a discussion upon the alteration of the medium price from 60
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
1074
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
Colonel Wood
objected to take the averages in the way the right hon. gentleman had proposed; and if the discussion was adjourned until to-morrow, he wished that one thing besides the amount of the medium price should be noticed. It had been said, that the calculation was made upon the Winchester bushel. Now, he believed, he was correct in asserting, that by law the Winchester bushel had ceased to exist within the two last years. All the people in the country had been put to great expense and trouble in obtaining the imperial bushel; and he thought that the introduction of the Winchester bushel, as a standard of calculation would bi-productive of great confusion. He therefore, thought, that the imperial measure should be adopted as the standard of calculation, and in conjunction with that stand-aid, the sum of 64
s
1075
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
wished to say a word or two in explanation of the supposed difficulties of the two measures. It was undoubtedly true, that the bill for the regulation of weights and measures had produced—as every attempt to effect improvement in the laws or customs of a country would at first do—great expense and trouble, and some confusion, and at first sight it might appear to do so in the calculations upon the medium price, as applied to the standard measure of corn. But, if he was not mistaken, there was an express provision in the act passed for altering the measures, that though persons were compelled to buy and sell by the imperial measure, the calculation of the inspector and his return were to be made upon the standard of the Winchester bushel. There would not, therefore, be any practical difficulty, nor confusion arising from this mode of calculation.
Mr. Calcraft
thought, that great confusion had been produced by these different standards of measurement, and that the act ought to be repealed. Though the counties had been called on to provide themselves with the new measures, he did not; believe there was any enactment which compelled them to use these new measures in preference to the old ones. He was ready to try the experiment now proposed upon wheat, in order to satisfy the country that every tiling had been done to enable them to obtain food in the cheapest way. But he would not at present consent to make the same experiment with regard to barley; nor would he do any thing that would interfere with the present improved system of husbandry; as such an interference would affect not merely corn, but meat.
Mr. Davies Gilbert
said, he had recommended the Winchester measure; but as the imperial measure was now established by law he thought they ought to use it in preference to the other. He would not himself move that the imperial measure should be taken as the standard of calculation, but he would second any member who would make such a motion, as he thought it necessary to preserve that uniformity which the law had established, If the imperial measure was taken as the standard of calculation, he believed that 62
s
Mr. Brougham
said, he would not go into the question at large, or into the di-
1076
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
1077
s
1078
1079
s
1080
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
1081
1082
Mr. Secretary Canning
rose merely to offer a few words of consolation to the hon. and learned gentleman, for his apprehension of a change of policy elsewhere upon this measure. He could venture to assure the hon. and learned gentleman, not of his own knowledge certainly, but from the information of others, which he thought was equally as good, that the appointment of the committee to which he alluded elsewhere, was not a sudden concession, but an old understanding admitted by the noble earl who had the charge of this question, on this express understanding, however, that the committee was not to be protracted, so as to interfere with the legislative provisions of the contemplated bill. In fact, there existed a perfect understanding, that the main progress of the measure was not thereby to be impeded.
The committee divided: For the amendment 160; for the original Resolution 229; majority 69. The chairman then reported progress, and asked leave to sit again.
HOUSE, OF LORDS.
Friday, March 9. 1827
ROMAN CATHOLIC CLAIMS.]
After sundry petitions had been presented in favour of the Claims of the Roman Catholics,
The Marquis of Lansdown
rose for the purpose of making a motion, which might be considered as a motion upon a motion, concerning the Catholic Claims, under which he thought he should be justified—both with respect to what was due to his own feelings, and to his own honour, as well as to the honour and feelings of many other noble lords, with whom he had thought right to communicate upon the subject—if he trespassed for a few moments upon their lordships' indulgence. At the time that he gave the notice, which stood in the order book for the 15th instant, it was with the deliberate intention to offer to their lordships' considera-
1083
1084
1085
The Earl of Winchelsea
sincerely regretted that the noble marquis had abandoned his intention of bringing before their lordships the consideration of that great political question, the claims of the Roman Catholics; because he felt convinced, that
1086
The order was accordingly discharged.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, March 9, 1827.
POOR LAWS IN IRELAND.]
Sir N. Colthurst
said, he had some Petitions to present, to which he must beg to call the attention of the House. In the month of August, very considerable distress prevailed among the labouring classes in the city of Cork, and a public meeting was held for the purpose of devising some measure for their relief. It was numerously and respectably attended; and, after a subscription had been entered into for the immediate relief of the distress, a long and animated discussion arose as to the best means of preventing a recurrence of it. The result of that discussion was the adoption of the Petition which he now presented, praying the House to consider the expediency of introducing into Ireland a modified system of Poor-laws. This decision of the meeting, however, was so far from giving general satisfaction, that it created very considerable alarm among the inhabitants of Cork, and meetings were held in all the parishes, at which petitions were adopted, praying the House not to sanction the introduction of the Poor-laws, should such a measure be proposed. These petitions he begged also to present to the House. From the best opinion he could form of the subject, the introduction of the Poor-laws into Ireland would be a most dangerous experiment; and, under all the circumstances of that country, unsuited to it.
Mr. H. Grattan
expressed himself strongly in favour of a modified system of Poor-laws.
Mr. Monck
supported the prayer of the Petition. He thought this as much an English as an Irish question. The county of Berks, during the last year, paid no less than 1,000
l.
1087
Sir John Newport
said, he was convinced, that the application of the poor-laws to Ireland would be attended with greater evils to that country, and produce greater want and misery than that which it at present suffered. In the district where he resided, there was not, for the space of eleven miles, a single individual to whom the duties attendant upon the administration of any part of a system of poor-laws could with safety be confided. Even in those parts where the country might be more thickly peopled, and the persons fit for the offices more numerous, he feared that they were not sufficiently so to prevent a system of jobbing which must be extremely pernicious in. a country so poor.
1088
Mr. G. Dawson
said, that whenever the poor-laws were mentioned in that House, he could not omit any opportunity of raising his voice against the introduction of them into Ireland. The right hon. baronet had justly represented the state of society in Ireland, and the consequence which would result from introducing the poor-laws into that country. Whatever sums were raised by county assessments, parish-rates were levied upon the occupying tenants, and to suppose, therefore, that absentees would be affected by it was a perfect delusion. Such great landholders as the duke of Devonshire and lord Fitzwilliam, would not pay a sixpence. It would all fall upon their tenants; and thus it would happen, that not the aged and infirm, but the idle and vicious, would be enabled to live on the earnings of the industrious.
Mr. Maurice Fitzgerald
said, that as he had given notice of a motion connected with this subject, he would not trouble the House with any observations now. He must, however, say, that the hon. member for Reading had advanced some of the most extraordinary propositions that he had ever heard. He was much obliged to his hon. friend for having told the House; that, on the principles of the
1089
Mr. H. Grattan
said, that the poverty of Ireland not only was and had been very great, but that its poverty had cost this country no inconsiderable sum. The hon. member then adverted to the subscriptions which had been raised in this country, in 1822, in order to relieve the distresses which then prevailed in Ireland. In the city of Dublin, at this present moment, not only poverty but disease reigned every where. The hon. member then read, from a report of the state of the poor in Dublin, an account of the number of destitute in different parishes, and declared, that in many; a great part of the population was supported by the contributions received from benevolent individuals, who were encouraged to give their bounty on the application of the residents of the parishes, going round from house to house. Want, disease, and misery, went hand in hand in that unfortunate city; and, unless something was done speedily by the government, a state of things must ensue, which it was painful to contemplate. Something ought to be done, and done shortly; for, although the hon. member for Derry might contend that the poor-laws were inapplicable to Ireland, yet, when the question was between life and death, extraordinary remedies must be their only resort.
General Gascoyne,
as one of the representatives of Liverpool, felt himself called upon to protest against the system of passing vagrants to Ireland by that port. Upwards of one third of all the rates collected in that town were expended upon the passing of Irish to their own country. He must either beg the hon. member for Wicklow to persevere in the motion of which he had given notice, or call upon the House himself to adopt some measure, which might relieve his constituents from the annually increasing burthen thus imposed upon them. The people of Ireland had very good reason for giving encouragement to the emigration of Irish la-
1090
Sir H. Parnell
contended, that no relief, such as that suggested by the hon. member for Dublin, could prove effectual; until there was a greater security for property in Ireland, and until the rate of wages was increased by the employment of capital. As long as the Irish peasant could not find labour at home, or labour at so low a rate of wages as to be insufficient for his support, he would leave his country whenever an opportunity presented itself.
Colonel Trench,
while he deplored the state to which Ireland was reduced, could not consent to emigration as a remedy for its evils. He was convinced that if the plan of emigration was put into effect, to the extent proposed by those who embraced it, its effect would be to carry away from Ireland all its best labourers, all those who possessed industry, skill, or a small capital; and that instead of leaving that country in a condition to become better, it would deprive it of all the elements of prosperity.
Mr. J. Maxwell
complained of the inundation of Irish into Scotland, where they could neither be relieved nor supported.
Mr. Van Homrigh
described the condition of the part of Ireland which he represented as most deplorable, as there were more than five thousand paupers in Drogheda and its vicinity.
Mr. James Grattan
said, he had heard some hon. members, and among them the member for Derry, say, that the poor-laws must make the state of Ireland infinitely worse than it was. Now, the hon. member for Drogheda had just stated, that there were five thousand paupers in one district, and he would ask what state could be worse than that? What alteration could place them in a state more deplorable? He knew that, but for the exertions of a Mendicity Society, supported by voluntary contribution, in the city of
1091
Ordered to lie on the table.
CORN LAWS.]
The House having, on the motion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, again resolved itself into a Committee of the whole House, to consider further of the Corn Trade Acts,
Mr. W. Whitmore
rose to submit the Resolution to the Committee, which he deemed necessary, in consequence of the Resolutions submitted on a former night, by the right hon. Secretary for Foreign Affairs, not being, in his opinion, such as to afford satisfaction, or to meet the exigences of the country. He implored the indulgence of the House whilst he called their attention to this most important question—important to all classes of the country—to some a question of life or death, and one on which he hoped the fullest and most deliberate discussion would take place, before any measure was hurried through the House and hastily adopted. In what he was about to offer, he would regard the subject with a view to the general interests of the whole country; satisfied that he would thereby act in a manner most conducive to that interest—the agricultural interest—with which he was himself connected, and which would be most affected by the measure now before the House. Having thus claimed the indulgence of the House whilst he addressed them on this most important, as well as most intricate and difficult subject, he would, without further preface, proceed shortly to lay before the House his views upon it. Before he proceeded, however, to state his opinions as to the effect of the principle of prohibition, he would admit that the measure introduced by the right hon. Secretary was an improvement, but yet a slight improvement, on the former system. There were
1092
1093
s.
1094
s.
s.
s.
s.
d.
1095
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
1096
l.
s.,
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s.
s,
1097
s.
1098
s.
s.
s.
s.
1099
s.
s.
s.,
s.
s.
s.
s.
1100
1101
s.
s.
l.
The original resolution, which made the same amount of duty apply to a price of 60
s.,
Mr. C. Grant
said, it would not be necessary for him to occupy the attention of the committee at any length. He did not feel called upon to follow his hon. friend into the detail through which he had gone, as only a small part of his arguments had reference to the question immediately before them. In the general principles, for which his hon. friend had contended, he fully concurred; but the question was, how far those principles applied to the measure before the committee? In the first place, his hon. friend had said, that the effect of the present system, as well as of the proposed resolutions, would be that of creating a fluctuation of prices. The right hon. gentleman then proceeded to defend the new mode of striking the averages weekly instead of quarterly, on the ground that it would be less open to fraud and combination than the old mode. He could see no reason why the hon. member for Bridgenorth should fix upon 50
s.
s.
s.
s.
Sir Henry Parnell
said, that having some years ago taken a leading part in proposing a measure on this subject to the House, he was anxious to state his opinion upon it; and more particularly so, in consequence of his name being mentioned in the letter, quoted last night by a noble lord, of the President of the Board of Trade; He was one of those who had to avow that he had, in some respect, changed his opinion; but this was a subject which,
1102
1103
1104
s.
1105
s.
s.
s.
Mr. Liddell
expressed the great interest
1106
Colonel Maberly
said, he was anxious, from his connection with a manufacturing district, to make a few observations on this important question; more especially as he feared he should be one of those, who, in the principles which he should feel it his duty to put forth that night, might be compelled to differ from the great majority of the House. He would, in the first place, beg to remark, that his hon. friend opposite appeared to him to have fallen into a mistake, in stating that the hon. member for Bridgenorth had kidnapped his proposition from the right hon. Secretary opposite. It appeared to him that the kidnapping had been directly the other way; for it was well known to every hon. gentleman who sat in that House, that for two years his hon. friend had continued to urge propositions analogous to that now proposed by his majesty's ministers. His hon. friend's propositions had been founded on the system of a duty varying in an inverse ratio, and, although its details might not have been exactly similar to those of the present measure, it fully corresponded in principle. Therefore, if there was any fault to be imputed for the taking up of measures which were sanctioned by expediency, the blame should attach to the right hon. gentleman opposite, and not to his hon. friend. He had risen mainly for the purpose of stating the grounds of his
1107
1108
Lord Milton
said, that, although he thought the system now proposed did not go far enough, it nevertheless seemed to him a great improvement upon the one from which government were about to depart. He was afraid that few members of the House would agree with him, and with his hon. friend, to the full extent of the principles upon which they were inclined to act; but, for himself he should say, that he agreed fully with every thing which his hon. friend, the member for Bridgnorth, had said about a remunerating price. He wished the committee to consider what was the state of the country, if the principles which had been laid down by his hon. friend were true. A further advance in prosperity, and an increase in the numbers of its population, would produce, as an almost necessary consequence, an advance in the price of food; and in proportion as the price of food rose, the greater would be the necessity of having recourse to sterile soils for the production of corn; and consequently the greater would be the expense of feeding the population. If that population was industrious, and by industry was adding to the general wealth of the country, it was most desirous that they should be fed at the cheapest rate. It was said, by the opponents of the present measure, that if the price of corn was reduced, the strength of the landed interest would be reduced in the same proportion. He begged to say that he respected the landed interest—.
1109
s.
l.
1110
l.
Sir T. Gooch
said, he did not think the advance of 4
s.
1111
Mr. George Robinson
said, he represented a large portion of the manufacturing population, and he therefore felt interested in the question. He could not fail to observe, that while much had been said as to the payments made by the landed interest, very little had been observed upon the capabilities or the outlays of the manufacturing classes. The landed interest might, perhaps, be said to constitute the strength of the country; but there were others whose interests ought not to be neglected. To these classes he feared the measure now proposed by government would be very unsatisfactory. When he looked to the effect of the proposed Resolutions on the Corn-laws, he must say, that the last quarter from which he expected any opposition was the landed interest; because, those who framed the resolutions seemed to have well considered the interests of the landed gentlemen; and, if there was any disappointment, he thought it would come from the manufacturing classes. To those classes he did not expect any
1112
s.
s.
Mr. G. Philips
was surprised that those who affected to consider themselves as the representatives of the landed interest, should object to the system proposed by the right hon. gentleman, which actually seemed to him one that amounted to the system that they desired; namely, the system of prohibition. Under that proposition they were to receive a protection amounting to 33
l.
s.
d.
1113
Lord Clive
said, he wished as much as any man, that corn should be at a low price, and the cheaper the better, provided it was of British growth.
Mr. Alderman Waithman
said, that the body of individuals whom he represented were at all times entitled to much attention from the House, although their interests might not be exactly the same as those of the hon. gentlemen who had already addressed the House [cries of "Question"]. He saw how hopeless any effort on his part must be in the present temper of the House; but he should, nevertheless, endeavour to discharge with fidelity the duty he owed to his constituents. All they wanted was, to be put upon the same footing as the landed interest; and it had been repeatedly said, when it answered any purpose, that the
1114
1115
s.
s.
d.>
s.
d.
s.
s.
s.
1116
s.
s.
s.
s.
1117
s.
Mr. Baring
said, that this was a question in which every gentleman who spoke on the subject had some particular interest.—It was impossible it could be otherwise. At the same time, he was confident that the House would decide equitably and honourably. The worthy alderman had said that the landed interest paid nothing towards the taxes. Surely he had forgot that the manufacturers had had the same extraordinary protection as the agriculturists, and that, during almost the whole of the war, the ports were open. The noble
1118
Lord George Cavendish
gave great credit to the hon. member for Bridgenorth, for the manner in which he had introduced his amendment; for this was a subject of vital importance, and thanks were due to any man who afforded the House and the country, and ministers themselves, materials for sifting the matter to the bottom, and examining the question in all its bearings. He confessed, that from the wise and liberal spirit which ministers had displayed on several occasions, he was disposed to place much confidence in them. A great clamour, it was well known, had arisen on this subject, both among manufacturers and agriculturists. But, considering that ministers seemed disposed to deal impartially and justly with all parties, and that they had had much greater opportunities of investigating the real state of the question than others could have had, he trusted that the measure would pass upon the terms which they had suggested. He need not trouble the House with any further remarks except this—that the subject of the commerce in wool was one of the greatest importance, and one which ought to receive the speediest and most mature consideration. Without some additional provisions and regulations, made with reference to this matter, the late law, with respect to weights and measures, might lead to a great deal of confusion.
Lord Howick
also gave great credit to the hon. member for Bridgenorth. But he could not agree with him, nor with the worthy alderman, that the landlords had been repaid by the high prices of grain for their peculiar burthens; for this, among
1119
Sir F. Burdett
said, that he found he differed so much from many hon. members, that perhaps the committee would excuse him if he trespassed longer on their attention than would otherwise be necessary. He could not, however, avoid premising that there was one unfortunate and prevalent error on this subject; namely, a general impression that there was a contention of interests in the state between agriculture and manufactures. A worthy alderman had in some degree lent his countenance to this error. The worthy alderman had accused the landed gentlemen of being a peculiarly grasping avaricious class of persons. However, justice ought to be done to the worthy alderman, for, in another part of his speech, he had said, that the landed gentlemen were amongst the most liberal in the country. In such opinion he cordially agreed with the worthy alderman. He repeated, what he had on a former occasion declared; namely, that there was no class of men in this country (and if not in this country, not in the world), more liberal, or more considerate, in all their dealings than the country gentlemen of England—the class to which he had the honour to belong. The hon. alderman seemed to think it an absurd position to say, that if every man in the country had a guinea in his pocket to-morrow, no man would be the better for it. Nevertheless, such was clearly the fact; because, as every man would remain in the same relative position, no man would be able to command more of the conveniences and comforts of life. When the House considered, that the landed interest was that out of which every other interest sprung—that without a productive agriculture there could be no large body of merchants and manufacturers—no great quantity of goods sold or manufactured—no traders exchanging produce between the two bodies; that, in fact, all commerce grew out of the prosperity of agriculture, they must be convinced, that the interests of both were one and the same, and that all depended on the welfare of the landed interest. If that was impoverished, all the
1120
1121
1122
Mr. W. Duncombe
concurred in the principle of the resolutions, proposed by the right hon. Secretary.
Mr. Alderman Atkins
also stated his approbation of the measures of government.
The Committee divided on the Amendment: Ayes 50; Noes 335; Majority against the Amendment 285.
List of the
Abercromby, hon. J.
Fergusson, sir R.
Batley, C. H.
Folkestone, lord
Beaumont, T. W.
Fortescue, hon. G.
Bernal, R.
Graham, sir J.
Birch, J.
Guest, J.
Bright, H.
Hobhouse, J. C.
Calvert, C.
Howick, lord
Cradock, col.
Hume, J.
Crompton, S.
Knight, R.
Davies, col.
Lombe, E.
1123
Lumley, F.
Rancliffe, lord
Lushington, Dr.
Robarts, A. W.
Marshall, J.
Robinson, sir G.
Marshall, W.
Rumbold, C.
Maberly, J.
Sykes, D.
Maberly, col.
Taylor, M. A.
Milton, lord
Thompson, alderman
Monck, J. B.
Waithman alderman
Morpeth, lord
Warburton, H.
Nugent, lord
Wood, alderman
Ord, W.
Wood, J.
Philips, G.
Wilson, sir R.
Philips, G. R.
Wyvill, M.
Ponsonby, hon. J.
TELLER.
Poulett, T. C.
Ramsden, J. C.
Whitmore, W. W.
The chairman reported progress, and asked leave to sit again.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, March 12, 1827.
MUTINY BILL—CORPORAL PUNISHMENT.]
On the order of the day for the third reading of this bill,
Mr. Leycester
observed, that, after three nights' consultation with his pillow, he had hoped the noble Secretary at War would have come down with the announcement, that he had abandoned the barbarous clause in this bill, for the infliction of Corporal Punishment. That barbarous practice showed to what loathsome habits the human mind might bring itself—how even the natural feelings might be chained under the influence of custom. If this practice were now to be commenced, the man who should propose it would meet with universal reprobation: and why was that which was too bad to be begun, not too bad to be continued? This cruel code was justified, upon the principle of necessity; but where was the paramount, the over-ruling, necessity for the practice of flogging? It was proved not to be necessary, by the diminution of the practice in the British army, by its non-existence in the continental armies, and in our own volunteer corps, which were not made of the most pliable materials. But he would not trust professional men with the decision upon the moral expediency of professional rules. He would rather refer to the tribunal of common sense, by which tribunal, he was sure the practice would be pronounced a curse to him who suffered, a torment to him who inflicted, unworthy of oar gallant army, and a stain upon the character of Great Britain. At all events, a tribunal ought to give the benefit of
1124
Mr. J. Smith
said, that he should make a few observations, in consequence of facts, which had come to his knowledge, and which added to the distrust he had always entertained of the efficacy of corporal punishment. Indeed, he much doubted, whether punishment inflicted on the body ever caused the reform of persons addicted to, crime; and his opinion had been confirmed, by the circumstances which he should state. In the month of September last, he happened to be detained three weeks in a garrison town in France; and, during that period, he had an opportunity of examining minutely and accurately, the way in which five thousand five hundred French soldiers were kept in order, and he would assert, that their discipline and conduct were in no respect inferior, and in some things, probably, superior, to our own. No French soldier ever was subjected to a blow: it was considered a dishonour, to both the party who gave, and him who suffered, such an indignity; and, without noticing what some persons thought of the necessity of recourse being had to such a mode of punishment, he, was of opinion, that there was no sentiment which it was more desirable to impress upon, a soldier, than the principle, that a blow was a disgrace. The punishments inflicted in the French army were: confinement, hard labour, and privation; and it was unquestionable, that punishments like those could not have the effect of making a man a worse soldier than before, while the infliction of corporal punishment was almost certain to do so. In support of that fact, the hon. member stated a conversation which he, had had with a respectable and intelligent individual, the governor of a prison, respecting, the result of those corporal punishment inflicted every five or six weeks after the sessions; and it appeared, that the greater, part of those who suffered those punishments, came again into his custody, with in
1125
Lord Nugent
agreed with his hon. friend in the view he had taken of the system of flogging, and was sure that, if a proposition for its adoption were now before the House for the first time, it would not be agreed to. The only difference at present between the advocates and the opponents of the system was, whether a course equally beneficial could be substituted for that now in operation. He had heard of a correspondence which had passed about eleven or twelve years ago, between the lieutenant-governor of Gibraltar and the deputy inspector of hospitals there, and the consequence was, that from that period flogging had been disused in that garrison.
1126
Mr. Hobhouse
said, he had the other night expressed a wish to see a clause in the bill, making it necessary that the persons composing a court-martial should be unanimous previous to its passing any sentence. The noble Secretary at War had objected, that any factious subaltern might then, in order to acquire popularity, prevent any corporal punishment from being inflicted in the regiment. He did not know how it could be reconciled, that one out of five on a court-martial, should not prevent a sentence, seeing that twelve men were required to be unanimous in our courts, before the slightest punishment could be inflicted. The improvement he proposed was only a palliative; and, perhaps, it would not be wise to attempt a reform in what was radically bad. He had attentively listened to what had fallen from the gallant officers in the army on this subject; but, the only reason they gave for defending it, that he could discover, was that it ought to be continued because it had existed. But this, he thought, was bad reasoning, and not such as should induce the House to continue such a degradation on our brave defenders. He had heard an officer say, that in this regiment some of the men were brought out so frequently to be flogged, that they were known by the name of the flogging-blocks; and this circumstance demonstrated that, so far from flogging making them better soldiers or men, no good could be derived from it; and as no benefit resulted from the revolting custom, it ought to be abolished as being a national disgrace, and as placing our army in its discipline and honour second to that of France. He was glad to find the question brought before the House whenever an occasion presented itself; but he would rather that some regular motion had been made respecting it; and he hoped that no session would be suffered to pass away, without some effort being made to relieve the soldier from this abominable punishment.
Sir John Sebright
said, he was ready to take his share of the unpopularity which might be attached to supporting the practice complained of. He had been in the army in the early part of his life, and from his knowledge of the military service, it was his opinion that the system ought to be upheld. He was fully impressed with the belief, that the excellent discipline that now prevailed in the army was in a great measure to be attributed to the
1127
Sir A. Hope
wished much, that a regular motion had been brought forward for the discussion of this question, as these desultory conversations unsettled men's minds, and prevented them from coming to a proper conclusion. It had been well remarked by the lion, baronet who spoke last, that in the system which was now acted upon, corporal punishment contributed to the happiness of the soldiers. If it were to be considered as a question of feeling, it certainly was one more particularly so to officers of the army, than to visionary philanthropists, who had no opportunity of judging of the necessity which might exist for it. He would say, that if, in the paternal government of the army, and what was properly called, the family trial of a court-martial, where he who passed the sentence did so upon oath, and where the commanding officer, who had the power of mercy to alter that sentence, found himself obliged to inflict this punishment, no one could imagine, that such a punishment would be wantonly inflicted.
Colonel Trench
said, that one point in the present discussion appeared to have been untouched by the hon. members who had addressed the House. They seemed totally to have lost sight of the fact, that much flogging existed independent of what took place in the army; and yet a thought of complaining against it to the legislature never entered the head of any man. What distinction, he would ask,
1128
Mr. Wynn
inquired, what question was before the House.
The Speaker
replied, that it was the third reading of the Mutiny bill.
Mr. Wynn
observed, that it would then be more regular to let the question before the House be disposed of, and then such a clause as hon. members seemed to wish might be brought under consideration.
The bill was then read a third time.
Mr. Leycester
in proposing a clause to-prevent corporal punishment in the army, said, that whether or not a discussion on the present shameful system produced agitation in the minds of the soldiers, he cared not. He should always raise his voice against flogging soldiers. The clause which he proposed was intended as an experiment; and if it was found on trial not to be beneficial, it would be easy hereafter to get rid of it. It had been observed by a right hon. gentleman on the other side of the House, on a former night, that "where there was a will there was a way." Now, he begged to use the same expression in reference to the abolishing of flogging; and he really conceived it high time that something should be done with a view of obtaining what appeared to him so highly desirable.
Mr. Warburton
would ask, what the Turk said to produce submission? "Use the bastinado," was the reply. And what said the colonial cultivator? That the lash could not be dispensed with—as if the circumstance of a man being born with a dark instead of a white skin could prevent his cultivating the soil in the same manner as the European did. The hon. member for Hertfordshire had uttered, language in reference to the subject of flaggellation, which he never expected to have heard from him. He never imagined.
1129
Mr. Hume
said, it was in vain to expect that military men would put an end to flagellation. Would the slave-trade have ever been abolished if the interests of those engaged in it had been listened to? It was hopeless to anticipate that any great reform in the laws would proceed from lawyers; so likewise was it hopeless to expect that officers would abolish corporal punishment. He was anxious to have the trial made by way of experiment, whether or not corporal punishment could not be entirely abolished.—With respect to England, it was an experiment; but in America, and in the greater part of Europe, it was no experiment, seeing that flogging the soldier had been done away some years. It was said that the discipline of the army required that odious punishment. The king of Wirtemberg had abolished corporal punishment in his army, and substituted in its stead solitary confinement. Flogging in the navy, he was sorry to observe, was quite as much encouraged as in the army. Having alluded to America, as an instance of a country that had abolished that digraceful mode of punishment, he would, with the permission of the House, refer to an act of Congress, passed in 1812, in which the laws that permitted flogging were repealed. The hon. member then read an extract from the Act to that effect. The noble Secretary at War had himself admitted, a few nights back, that corporal punishment in the British army would have been dispensed with if possible. The late duke of York, who carried the army to the extent of improvement which it now held, was no friend to corporal punishment; for in regiments where flogging was carried to a vast extent, he stopped promotion. The power of flogging ought to be taken from individuals by that House. There were regiments in which, from one year to another, a corporal punishment did not take place; and he would take leave to ask, if insubordination prevailed in consequence? But it was urged, that circumstances might arise in which, unless the power of flogging was permitted,
1130
Mr. Leycester
then brought up the clause to this effect:—"That it shall not be lawful, after the passing of this Act, to enforce Corporal Punishment on any Soldier, by the sentence of any Court-martial, within the United Kingdom."
Colonel Davies
said, that from his knowledge of military affairs, he should certainly oppose the adoption of the clause just submitted for the consideration of the House; being convinced that for the preservation of the discipline of the army, it was essential to have recourse to corporal punishment. If soldiers knew that it was abolished, much evil would follow. Much had been said about the government of foreign armies; and it was insisted that they were not subject to corporal punishment. If they had not flogging, soldiers who, in our army, were subject to that mode of punishment, were, in other countries subject to death for the same offence. In such a case, if a soldier had his choice, would he not prefer receiving the lash to being deprived of life? In conclusion, the gallant officer said, that he perfectly concurred in what had fallen from his hon. friend the member for Hertfordshire.
1131
Sir Robert Wilson
was surprised that it should have been said by any hon. member, that the happiness of the soldier was connected with the maintenance of the present system, as far as it regarded corporal punishment. He could not conceive it possible that any British soldier could have a mind so constituted—his feelings so much at variance with the opinions of nearly all mankind—as to approve of that degrading system of punishment. Every soldier on the continent hailed with delight the abolition of that wretched system, by which man was degraded to the level of the brute—as an act of justice rendered the army by the respective sovereigns. Neither could he coincide with what had been remarked respecting the punishment which boys underwent at schools, as compared with that of flogging soldiers. The two cases were not similar. Nevertheless, he suspected, that when the boy assumed the gown, he would object to such a punishment being inflicted. The gallant officer had observed, that under the present system, as the army was constituted, it was necessary to have recourse to corporal punishment; soldiers being too frequently reckless of character. But wherefore was this so? The fault was in the system. It prevented men of character from entering the army as private soldiers. That very morning he had seen a publication which was written by a common soldier—but, by the way, although the work was written by one in that humble station, it evinced no common mind. The writer spoke of the necessity of officers correcting and preventing the irregularities of the soldiers, not by modes of terror, but by assiduous attention to them—by pointing out the evils which would result from a vicious course. "If this plan were followed," observed the writer, "then the necessity of corporal punishment would be prevented." An instance never occurred within his experience, in which a soldier who had suffered that degrading punishment became a better man; but, on the contrary, the man thus treated was always worse for the punishment, and in many instances became a thorough reprobate. When he had the command of a Lusitanian corps—a description of men, that at one time did not possess any very extraordinary character for discipline—in this corps, however, during the time he had the honour of commanding it, not a single instance of
1132
The Judge Advocate (sir John Beckett)
, in defending the principles of the bill, contended that, even according to the observations which had fallen from hon. mem-
1133
Dr. Lushington
rose to deny that the doctrines promulgated by the right hon. gentleman were in conformity with the principles of the constitution, or had ever been recognized by the laws and usages by which the army was governed; and he was perfectly astonished to find a tight hon. gentleman, holding a high confidential and responsible office under the Crown, stand up in that House, not to uphold this practice by alleging in its justification the dictates of that imperious and absolute necessity, with a view to the maintenance of discipline in the army, which could alone palliate the continuance of this abominable punishment, but daring to argue in its defence, that our ancestors had handed to us an army, under the power and dominion of the Crown—upon which the Crown had the power to inflict punishment, according to its pleasure, its will, or its discretion; and to inflict that punishment not only by corporal punishment, but, if the doctrines of the right hon. gentleman were correct, by degradation, and even by death itself.
The Judge Advocate
disclaimed having made any assertion which could be thus construed. But he repeated, that the power of the Crown to impose corporal punishment for insubordination, or any neglect of duty or discipline, had been conferred, by a clause introduced in the
1134
Dr. Lushington
asked, what the right hon. gentleman meant by the common-law, or by established usage, if it was not what had been handed down to us by our ancestors, from time immemorial? How did he mean to support the argument that the Crown had the power to dispose of the army as it pleased, by the common-law of the land? Did the right hon. gentleman mean to rely upon the act of Charles 2nd? If he did, his answer was, that there was no common-law, and no established usage, of the nature contended for by the right hon. gentleman, but that a special enactment had been made upon the subject; very different from the purport alleged by the right hon. gentleman; which enactment, however, had long since been abrogated, and was no longer in force. He denied that any such common-law, as stated by the right hon. gentleman, existed in the army, and God forbid that it ever should! The law was, that the army should be governed by the same principles' of legislation, as those to which persons in civil capacities were subject. Now, if any attempt were made to innovate upon—in any way to alter or modify—the laws subsisting for the government of persons inc civil capacities, it was necessary to produce an authority by act of parliament. He would remind the right hon. gentleman of what was said by lord chief justice Mansfield, at the time of the riots, when it was proposed to make use of a military force in a way which was inconsistent with the law. The lord chief justice asked for the authority for such a proceeding. It was stated, that the commander-in-chief had given orders for the military to advance. His reply was, "Then, if they do, I will try the men for murder; I will not suffer any person, in whatever station or authority, to control the laws, framed for the government of the military as well as others, and I will not suffer them to be altered, except by a special legislative enactment." All that appertained to the government of the army rested upon the Mutiny act solely; and any punishment not sanctioned by that act, was a direct violation of the law, for which the author
1135
minimum
Minimum
1136
Lord Palmerston
said, that the hon. and learned gentleman had, in his opinion, wasted a vast deal of very respectable and constitutional indignation, which he might better have reserved for some occasion, on which it would be more necessary or useful; for greater misrepresentation he had never heard, than the hon. and learned gentleman had made of the speech and statements of his right hon. friend. The hon. and learned gentleman had, no doubt, misunderstood his right hon. friend; but he would submit to the House, whether the arguments of his right hon. friend bore such a construction, or merited such animadversions, as those applied to them by the hon. and learned gentleman. Any person coining into that House would, from the statements of the hon. and learn-
1137
1138
1139
Mr. Sykes
said, that the power claimed for the Crown was not conferred either by the statute or common-law; and he read a portion of the preamble of the Mutiny act in support of his argument. With respect to the question now before the House, he entertained but one opinion; namely, that it was a barbarous remedy, equally unfavourable to the liberty as well as to the discipline of the army. It had the effect of making the mind as well as the
1140
Sir H. Hardinge
rose amid cries of "question." He said, he would not dwell long on the subject now before the House. One hon. member had stated, that military officers were not to be considered authority upon this topic, any more than law officers were to be taken as authority on matters of law: he would, therefore, produce a document which emanated from: persons, who at all events, deserved, and, doubtless, had, the confidence of the House, with reference to it. On the subject of corporal punishment he would read an extract of a report of the governors of the General Penitentiary, made on the 7th of bruary, 1827. The persons by whom that report was signed, was, he felt assured, the last to be suspected of inhumanity, or of a desire to inflict unnecessary punishment. The extract was as follows:—"That solitary confinement appeared to have very little effect, either upon the men or the boys, and certainly did contribute to injure the health; it was, therefore, the opinion
1141
1142
1143
Sir A. Hope
said, that every soldier in the army of every country in the world, with the solitary exception of that of Great Britain, was subjected to arbitrary punishment. But the British soldier, ever since the passing of the Bill of Rights, could only be punished after undergoing a trial by his peers: his safety and his security were, therefore, guarded by the law. Now, it was impossible that any free-man could be in a better state. Before the passing of this bill, if the hon. members would refer to the articles of war, they would find that there were forty-three cases for which punishment of death were awarded, one of torture, and one of mutilation. The two latter, and nearly the whole of the former, had been done away, by substituting a system of flogging in their stead. There were two reasons why this system should not be abolished; first, that of mercy to the soldier; and second, to subdue the unruly passions of men, with a view to preserve the peace of the country, and the good order of society. It was the duty of those hon. members who wished this system to be done away with, to propose in its place one that would produce those necessary ends.
Sir H. Vivian
declared, that the British officers were most anxious to do away with the system of flogging, if any system, which could answer an equally good purpose, could be substituted in its stead. He assured the House, that the speeches of some hon. members had had the effect of causing that punishment which they sought to abolish; for his own part, he could state, that when he commanded a thousand men, he found, all of a sudden, that a great degree of murmuring had suddenly spread among them. He then sent for the oldest of his Serjeants, who told him, that the men were induced to believe that sir Francis Burdett had done away with corporal punishment; and he was actually obliged to make an example of one man, to restore order in his regiment. It was only the power that British officers wanted; they were not disposed to use that power, until every other means had failed. Let any hon. member show by what other
1144
The clause was negatived, and the bill passed.
CORN LAWS.]
The order of the day was read, for the House again resolving itself into a Committee to consider further of the Corn Trade Acts, On the question, that the Speaker do leave the chair,
Mr. Denison
hoped the House would indulge him, while he offered a few observations on the question about to be considered in the committee. It had rarely fallen to his lot to agree with ministers in their measures; but he fell great pleasure in stating his concurrence in the resolutions submitted by them to the House, respecting the Corn-laws, and, particularly, as, in so doing, he knew he acted in conformity with the wishes of his constituents. As far as respected wheat, 60
s
s
Mr. Curteis
concurred with the hon. member in his objections to the use of different measures, in selling and taking the averages. He regretted the effects
1145
Mr. J. Wood
said, that the resolutions on the table of the House had produced, not only disappointment, but the greatest terror, alarm, and dismay, among the manufacturing interests, who had been led to expect, that on the meeting of parliament some measure would be devised, with reference to corn, which would be advantageous to them; and now they saw their hopes blasted by the measure that had been brought forward. He condemned not only the average price proposed, as being too high, but the alteration in the mode of taking the averages, the effect of which would be to turn the Corn Exchange into a stock exchange, or gambling house. It was reported out of doors, that ministers intended to give way on the subject of oats and barley, and suffer themselves to be bullied by the landed interests. In so doing, they would prove themselves unworthy of the warm support they had received in that House.
Mr. Cripps
was quite convinced that the price of corn fixed by the resolutions could not be injurious to the manufacturing interests. He was, on the other hand, equally convinced, that the great landowners must give way a little, and reduce their rents. It was said, that the poor lands would all be thrown out of cultivation, if the resolutions were carried. How could it be otherwise. He had lately crossed the Cotswold hills, the soil of which was very poor; and he was sure that an extent of seventy or eighty miles would, in that direction, be thrown out of cultivation, from the inability of the farmers to pay the present rents, and compete with the altered state of the market. It was easy for gentlemen to say that those lands ought never to have been cultivated; but did hon. gentlemen recollect the reason why they were thrown into cultivation? namely, the demand created by the shutting of foreign ports against us. The hon. member illustrated the absurdity of the
1146
Mr. Charles Grant
said, that for a number of years, barley was averaged at one half of the price of wheat, and oats at one third. That was their calculated relative value, until the year 1822, when the committee then appointed, suggested an increase in the relative value, but not to any great extent. Since the resolutions now before the committee had been introduced, many remarks, made in that House and out of doors, suggested the necessity of inquiring into the most satisfactory mode of fixing the relative value of wheat, barley, and oats; and it was found, that to take the averages of a number of years, would be the best. The average prices of these grains had therefore been taken since the year 1821.
Mr. Calcraft
thought the agricultural interest ought to be protected to that extent which would insure production, and not let the people depend for food upon foreign supplies. He was astonished to hear hon. members object to the ministers for having, in compliance with the wishes expressed in that House and out of doors, modified the original resolutions. The right hon. gentleman, the vice president of the Board of Trade had not come up to his standard; but, the measure submitted was, as far as it went, so fair and unobjectionable, that he should support it.
Mr. Curwen
said, if called upon to state his sentiments upon oath, as to what he thought the proportions of duty and price
1147
Mr. Wodehouse
said, it was his intention to move two resolutions. The first was, that a certain proportion of the duties to be hereafter levied on the several species of grain to be imported into this country, shall be paid on entry at the Board of Customs, such proportion to be determined with reference to the ports from which the grain is exported, and also with reference to the shipments. The second resolution had reference, to oats, and oats alone. It was known, that vessels were capable of carrying a larger freight of oats than of any other grain. The vessel, indeed, might be loaded to the hatches with oats, very conveniently; while a similar freight of wheat would sink the ship. His second proposition, therefore, was, that as in vessels: of equal size, a greater quantity of oats, than of other grain might be conveyed, and as the cultivation of oats was a matter of the deepest interest, not only to Scotland and Ireland, but to several ports of England, it should be required of the Board of Customs to form some arrangement for limiting the importation of foreign oats, seeing that, such an arrangement must have been observed in the importation of oats from Canada, and seeing that such an arrangement was acted upon in, the introduction of five hundred thousand quarters, which the government was enabled to suffer to be imported last year.
Mr. Ferguson
was happy to see that ministers had given way to the sentiments expressed upon this question, both in that Mouse and out of doors; but he could not think; as one hon. member had said, that they had been "bullied" into it. He should be sorry to see the Treasury bench filled by any men, who would be bullied out of any measure, which they thought would be fox the interest of the country; and he did not think that bench was now filled, by men who would be likely; so to act [hear, hear]. He approved of the measure submitted by the vice president of the Board of Trade; but he did not think that that measure went far enough, with respect to oats.
Mr. Secretary Peel
took the liberty of
1148
Mr. Portman
supported the measure, and observed, that the landed interest, by conceding that 60
s.
s
s
s
Mr. Whitmore
declared, it to be his opinion, that the law arising out of the alterations as to the duty on barley would create more suffering in the country than the law of 1822. He saw no grounds for changing the proportions between barley and wheat. He deprecated the passing of so severe a law. If it was passed it could not be long before the eyes of the people would be opened to all the evils of such a system.
Lord Althorp
said, he could not agree in sentiment with the hon. member Formerly, foreign corn could not be; admitted until the price at home was 80
s
s
s
s
Mr. Alderman Wood
declared his intention of dividing the House on the: original propositions, relative, to barley.
1149
Sir J. Newport
hoped the House would put their
veto
Mr. Hobhouse
expressed his trust, that the friends of ministers would stand true to them on this occasion, when, they saw them compelled to alter their original resolutions, by a few ingenious hints, not coming from the people, but from persons more powerful than the people. He denied that any vulgar attacks had been made in that House against the landed interest; but the people had a right to complain, and would not be put down by clamour. All they, wanted was fair play. The House ought to hear the voice of the people, and their representatives. This was not an occasion, on which the right hon. gentlemen opposite should, to use an old phrase, "turn their backs, on themselves." This was, however, the first time they had refused to hear the people. He was the last man in that House to throw firebrands among the people; but he hoped it would not be considered too much if he said, that when any question was propounded in which the people expressed a decided voice, the House was doing itself harm, by not listening to what their representatives had to say. Whether what they advanced was good or bad, he should say, "hear, at least, before you strike." The government had now changed its mind, without any reasons which did not exist before. All he could say to such vacillating conduct was, that it clearly showed that the government was not worth two-pence. It was not only known and seen in that House, but the country began to see it. He did not, perhaps, express what he thought upon the subject so well as he ought to do; but he was in constant communication with the people, and could vouch for their sentiments; and all those with whom he bad conversed were of opinion, that it was impossible that so wretched and disjointed a government could go on. He would venture to say, that had it not been for the gentlemen who
1150
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, he thought the hon. gentleman had been diverted, by his indignation against his majesty's government, from the real question before them; which was, whether the proposed rate at which barley was to be imported, did or did not, afford an unreasonable protection to the home-grower of barley? Had he been a stranger entering that House while the hon. gentleman was speaking, he should have imagined that his majesty's ministers, had been guilty of a great dereliction of duty, and had abandoned the principles on which they had professed at starting to be governed; and he should have been much surprised to have been told, that the whole trade arose from the their proposing to grant a little more protection to barley than they had at first intendeds Was it to be supposed, that the government could not submit a proposition to the House, without depriving themselves of every power to modify that proposition?
1151
1152
s
s
s
d
s
General Gascoyne
complained of the awkward situation in which this vacillating conduct of ministers placed members, who had written down to their constituents, that the question was settled upon a certain basis, and had now to contradict their former report. He should vote for the original proposition.
Mr. W. Ward
said, he should vote against this new proposition. When the original resolution was laid on the table he had voted for it, as he took it to be a peace-offering from ministers to the people; and he was averse from stirring up animosities between the two interests. But he would not, on any pretence, suffer an encroachment on the original proposal, as it would lead to consequences not foreseen. This increase upon barley would affect wheat and every other grain; as it would induce the farmer to cultivate a greater quantity of one grain than he otherwise would do.
Sir T. Lethbridge
said, that with respect to what had been said concerning the price at which barley and oats were to be admitted, it was certainly understood, that that was a point reserved for discussion; and he would undertake to say, that although ministers had found themselves strong enough to carry the wheat proposi-
1153
Mr. Monck
said, he should certainly give his support to the original proposition of ministers. He denied that the change was owing to any suggestion from the people. It had been conceded to the threats held out to ministers in different parts of the country, by those who ought to be the natural protectors of the people, but who would make themselves their masters. He objected to this increase of duty, because it was upon an article already too highly taxed, and which formed the principal beverage of the poor.
The Committee divided: for the Amendment 215; for the original Proposition 38; majority in favour of the Amendment 177.
List of the Minority
Baring, F.
Martin, John
Batley, H.
Milton, lord
Bernal, R.
Monck, J. B.
Birch, J.
Philips, G.
Bright, H.
Ramsden, J. C.
Buxton, T. F.
Rancliffe, lord
Calvert, C.
Robinson, G.
Cradock, col.
Stanley, lord
Ebrington, lord
Thompson, ald.
Fergusson, sir R.
Waithman, ald.
Fortescue, hon. G.
Warburton, H.
Fyler, T. B.
Ward, W.
Gascoyne, gen.
Wood, John
Hobhouse, J. C
Whitmore, W. W.
Hodson, F.
Wilson, sir R.
Howick, lord
Wrighten, W. B.
Hume, J.
Wyvill, M.
Lumley, J. S.
Lushington, Dr.
TELLER.
Marshall, W.
Wood, ald.
The remaining Resolutions, relative to the duties on barley, were then severally put from the Chair, and carried without a
1154
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Tuesday, March 13, 1827.
CORN LAWS—NEW WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.]
The Earl of Malmesbury
presented a Petition from Banbury, against the Bill for regulating the Weights and Measures. The Petitioners stated that they were great sufferers by that Bill, as the Corn averages were made up by the Winchester bushel, and their property sold according to the Imperial measure; causing thereby a loss to the farmer of three per cent.
The Earl of Lauderdale
said, he could not allow the opportunity to pass without calling to their lordships' recollection, the circumstances under which the act to regulate weights and measures passed. The first year it was sent up to that House, their lordships examined a number of individuals connected with the wine trade, who all agreed that no confusion or chicanery arose from the employment of the measures in use, while the preamble of the bill stated, that great inconvenience and numerous frauds were the consequence of their use. It had proved to be a most abortive law. It was merely an alteration of phraseology. Their lordships might pass a law to make him speak accurate English, and not allow him to put in one word of Scotch, but they could not succeed in effecting their object; and they would not succeed in altering the name, by which merchants, in common conversation, called such and such a quantity. The only part of the community that he had thought any alteration in the measures likely to be advantageous to, was the makers of weights and measures; but, instead of being benefitted, they had been ruined by it; for they had calculated that when the law would be in force, every county town would be obliged to buy new weights and measures. It was a most absurd act, which repealed two hundred and fifty compulsory acts, under the vain, expectation of effecting, by an optional act, what two hundred and fifty compulsory acts had failed to accomplish. It was a stain on the prudence and wisdom of the legislature, and a disgrace to the community at large.
Ordered to lie on the table.
1155
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, March 13, 1827.
CRIMINAL LAWS CONSOLIDATION BILLS.]
Mr. Secretary Peel
rose, and addressed the House to the following effect:—
1156
1157
1158
animus furandi
1159
l
l
l
l
l
1160
pro formâ
1161
Sir J. Newport
expressed his surprise that the bills introduced by the right hon. Secretary, which were found so beneficial for England, had not been extended to Ireland. He thought the whole United Kingdom ought to have the benefit of the improvements made in the law; but unfortunately, whenever any good measure was devised for England, it was not for years after extended to Ireland.
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that there were circumstances of difference in the law of the two countries, which rendered it impracticable for him at present to include Ireland in the bills introduced by him. He understood, however, that bills, embracing the principle of his bills, were in preparation by his right hon. friend, the Secretary for Ireland. He was here desirous of supplying an omission. It was to make a public acknowledgment of the great services he had received from Mr. Hobhouse the under-secretary, who had afforded him most important and valuable assistance. He had a similar acknowledgment to make for the valuable assistance afforded him by Mr. Gregson, a gentleman universally esteemed by the profession of which he was an ornament. Indeed, he had found a disposition to assist him, in clearing the law of its obscurities and perplexities, from the judges down to the humblest practitioner, which reflected great credit on all classes of the legal profession.
Mr. A. Dawson
approved highly of the bills of the right hon. Secretary. They reflected great honour on him. His services might be compared with those which were rendered under the reign of Justitian, in the formation of a criminal code by the eminent lawyers, and statesmen of his time. The gentlemen who assisted the right hon. Secretary were also entitled to great praise; but he could not forbear thinking, that the right hon. gentleman might easily find three or four Irish gentlemen equally competent and equally ready to afford their gratuitous services in introducing these bills into Ireland, or in preparing similar bills for that country. He was at a loss to know what reason there was to prevent the extension of them
1162
Mr. Secretary Peel
assured the hon. member that there was no disposition on his part to withhold these bills from Ireland; but he thought it would be well to try the effect of them in England, and if they worked well, then to extend them to Ireland. As far as the jury bill had been tried, it had produced the most satisfactory effects. The bills were drawn up with particular reference to the law in this country; and, if he was required now to include Ireland, he must forego the intention of passing these bills this session. He understood that a bill for consolidating the law relating to Larceny in Ireland was in a forward state of preparation.
Mr. Spring Rice
said, he was glad to see the reform of the criminal law in the hands of the right hon. Secretary, who had the disposition as well as the power to carry his intentions into effect. The reform in which he was engaged, was one approved of and recommended by himself and by gentlemen on his side of the House, but they had not the means, as the right hon. Secretary had, to act upon their recommendation. He wished to see English principles and English law introduced into Ireland, and did not think there should be one set of rules for the Irish and another for the English magistracy. He would recommend his right hon. friend (sir J. Newport), who first called the attention of government to this subject, to move for the appointment of a committee, to inquire into the state of criminal law in Ireland, to ascertain what statutes were unrepealed, which contained enactments not to be found in any of the three or four bills introduced by the right hon. Secretary; and to simplify the criminal law in Ireland, by making it as conformable to the provisions of these bills as was possible.
Mr. Shadwell
said, that the course taken by the right hon. gentleman was pursuant to the practice which had been heretofore adopted; and was the only proper course. A law might be perfect for England, but, at the same time, owing
1163
The four bills were then read a first and second time, and committed.
CATHOLIC EMANCIPATION—STATE OF IRELAND.]
Mr. Portman
presented a Petition from Blandford Forum, against any further concessions to the Roman Catholics. The hon. gentleman observed, that it could not be necessary for him to say that he differed from the petitioners. It was to him a matter of concern that he could not agree on this important subject with a large body of his constituents, for whom he entertained the greatest respect. Without pretending to go again into the general question, he would merely say, that he quite concurred with the great writer who had said, that "when gentleness and harshness gambled for a kingdom, gentleness was sure to be the winner." He was desirous to put a question to the right hon. Secretary for the Home Department on a subject of no common importance. It might appear presumptuous in him; but, as an English country gentleman, as a representative of the people, called upon to raise taxes for the purpose of supporting a system which the hon. member for Londonderry had characterised to be such, that in his opinion Ireland was in a state which could not possibly last, he felt it to be his duty to ask the right hon. gentleman, if he had any measure in contemplation to propose to that House, calculated to ameliorate the condition of Ireland; which condition had been described by every hon. member acquainted with that unhappy country, as the most miserable that it was possible to conceive? He addressed the right hon. gentleman, because he believed that he was the organ of that part of his majesty's government which corresponded more especially with the executive government of Ireland. He hoped it would not be supposed that, because he differed from the right hon. gentleman on one great question, he could entertain towards him any hostile feeling, which would induce him to make any inquiry of an embarrassing nature: but it was in the discharge of an imperative duty that he now asked him whether he had in con-
1164
Mr. Secretary Peel
, in answer to the hon. gentleman, begged leave first to state, that although his hon. friend, who represented a populous and prosperous county in Ireland, was connected with him in his official duties, as well as allied to him in private life, yet that these did not make him responsible for what his hon. friend had said in that House; nor must it be supposed that he took all his hon. friend's statements for granted. He begged that his own opinions might be judged of by his own speeches. When the hon. gentleman asked him, whether he had any specific measure in contemplation for ameliorating the state of Ireland, and removing the evils under which that country laboured, he thought the hon. gentleman's own good sense must have induced him to anticipate the answer which he would receive to his question. He certainly had not in contemplation, at the present moment, any specific plan by which he hoped to be able to remove the evils in Ireland. Respecting the nature and extent of those evils he had recently taken an opportunity of stating his sentiments; and he did not think it necessary to repeat them. He trusted it would not be supposed that, in the opinion which he had given on the occasion alluded to, he was not actuated by the warmest feeling for the welfare and prosperity of that country. His opinion might be erroneous; but it was dictated by the most sincere anxiety for the happiness of the country to which it related. In the last and in the preceding session of parliament, the state and condition of Ireland had undergone the fullest investigation before a committee of that House, he had attended throughout the whole of those inquiries, and had listened with the greatest interest to all that had taken place. Some of the evils pointed out by those committees had been remedied; to others he should be most willing, if possible, to apply a cure. If he had any measure to propose, such as that which the hon. gentleman described, the hon. gentleman would have no right to call upon him to disclose its nature. He would of course, in that case give full notice of his intention, in order that the subject might be deliberately considered. If he had any such plan, no better mode could be devised of defeating it, than by making a pre-
1165
Lord Ebrington
, in presenting a petition from certain parishes in the county of Waterford, in favour of Catholic emancipation, took that opportunity of stating, that, although the greater part of the individuals signing the petition were in the lower walks of life, they were nevertheless perfectly sensible of the importance of their claims. From his own personal knowledge, he was quite certain that the question was viewed in Ireland with the deepest anxiety. He could not forbear expressing a hope, that those who had taken upon themselves the responsibility of the rejection of that great measure, would come forward with some proposition for the purpose of allaying those irritated feelings which existed before the measure was thrown out, and which he feared now existed in a still stronger degree, and which could not fail of being exceedingly injurious. With every degree of deference to the opinions of those who differed from him on the question, he could not help believing, that, unless something were done, and speedily done, for Ireland, much evil would follow. It had been admitted, even by those who were averse to the claims of the Catholics, that things could not long continue in the state they were.
Ordered to lie on the table.
ATHLONE ELECTION—FORGED PETITION.]
Mr. Handcock
presented a Petition from certain inhabitants of the town of Athlone; setting forth,
"That the petitioners have learned with surprise, that a Petition has been got up, and presented to the House, in November last, by a person of the name of Flanagan, to which the petitioners' names were affixed, the purport of which Petition was to disturb Richard Handcock, esq. in his return as member to serve in parliament for the borough of Athlone; the petitioners beg leave to state to the House, they never signed said Petition, nor did they authorize any person so to do: they also beg leave to inform the House, that their names, so affixed to said Petition, are forgeries, as may appear by the annexed affidavits, and that petitioners are not freemen of the borough of Athlone, nor
1166
Ordered to lie on the table, and be printed.
JAMAICA—ATTACK ON THE WESLEYAN MISSIONARY MEETING-HOUSE.]
Dr. Lushington
said, that he rose to bring before the House a subject intimately connected with the character and welfare of one of our principal West-India colonies. He would call the attention of parliament and the country to an act of lawless violence and indecent outrage, perpetrated in violation of every respectable feeling, and instigated by a clergyman of the Church of England, against an individual as helpless as he was unoffending. The act to which he alluded, bad as it was, had been accompanied by circumstances of brutal violence, which required no comment, and defied exaggeration. The subject he had undertaken to bring forward was, in his opinion, of no small importance to those who had been accustomed to the discussion of such subjects in this House; and it would excite no small surprise, when it was considered, that it had occurred after the recorded wish of parliament, that it would take every measure in their power to maintain religious freedom, and an observance of the laws in the West Indies. Throughout the island of Jamaica, it had been a long-established custom, that the slave population should be indulged with an annual relaxation from their toils at Christmas; upon which occasion the militia regiments of the island were called out upon service. This latter practice had, for many years, fallen into disuse; but recently it had been renewed; and, for the last two years, the regiments of militia had been stationed on guard, during the period of Christmas. On last Christmas day, in the parish of St. Ann's, Jamaica, the militia were called out to keep watch and guard over the slave population, and protect the
1167
1168
1169
Mel in ore, verba lactis
Fel in corde, fraus in factis
1170
1171
Mr. Wilmot Horton
begged shortly to offer a few observations upon the motion; and, in doing so, he assured the House, that no despatches had been received in his department, in which mention was made of the outrages alluded to; and he would further state, that, had he received notice of the commission of any such outrage, he would have felt it his duty to have brought it under the consideration of the House. As matters at present stood, he thought it would be most advisable for the hon. and learned member to wait until such information had been received as would enable his majesty's government to interfere with, and direct the local authorities. With respect to the rev. Mr. Brydges, he should, if the statements were true, strongly condemn his conduct; but it was too much to suppose that the whole colony were actuated by such sentiments. It might or it might not be true that, sermons, such as those alluded to, had been preached by that gentleman; but they were bound to wait until they had ascertained the fact. In the mean time, it was not too much to say, it was highly improbable that such sermons had been preached from the pulpit, for such purposes. The hon. gentleman here read an extract
1172
Mr. F. Buxton
said, that, without entering into the general question before the House, he thought he could show, that it was not only possible, but probable, that the rev. Mr. Brydges had been guilty of the conduct imputed to him. That rev. gentleman had been made rector of St. Ann's, and chaplain to the bishop, after the period to which he was about to allude. The honourable member was proceeding to show that the rev. Mr. Brydges had been guilty of gross mis-statements, in an answer to a pamphlet published by Mr. Wilberforce, in which he stated, that he had baptised such find such numbers of negroes, in different districts, when—
Mr. Wynn
rose to order. He would put it to the House whether they ought to go at once into the inquiry proposed by the hon. member? The motion before the House was for papers relative to a certain outrage which had been committed in Jamaica; that outrage, it was said, had been fomented by the rev. Mr. Brydges, and, when his hon. friend made no objection to the motion, up rose the hon. member for Weymouth, and stated, that he could show that the rev. Mr. Brydges might have been guilty of the alleged outrage, because he could prove that that rev. gentleman had been guilty of falsehood in other instances. He was not there to say whether the answer to Mr. Wilberforce was founded in truth or falsehood, but he felt that that was not an inquiry into which they ought to enter at present.
Mr. F. Buxton
said, that if the right hon. gentleman had allowed him to go a little further, he would have found it un-
1173
The motion was agreed to.
COURT OF CHANCERY—BANKRUPT FEES.]
Mr. D. W. Harvey,
in bringing forward his motion on this subject, referred to the statement which he had made on a former night; namely, that the fees which the lord Chancellor received on account of his jurisdiction in bankruptcy amounted to 20,000
l
l
l
l
l
1174
The Attorney-General
said, that the hon. member had not merely repeated his former assertion, that the lord Chancellor received 20,000
l
l
l
l
1175
Mr. Serjeant Onslow
culogized the great talents and unimpeachable integrity of the present lord Chancellor. He likewise defended the Commissioners of Bankrupts from the attacks which had been recently made upon them, and contended, that, so far from their being either incompetent from youth, or stultified by age, they were some of the most able and distinguished members of the profession.
Mr. George Bunkes
wished to know, whether the motion referred to the amount of fees received by the Chancellor alone, or to the amount of fees received both by him and the subordinate officers of the court?
Mr. D. W. Harvey
said, that if the hon. member would refer to the last of his motions, he would find in it an answer to the question which he had just asked. His belief was, that five-sixths of the fees included in his motion were received, not by the subordinate officers, but by the head of the Court, of Chancery. The returns, however, for which he moved would, if granted, settle that question beyond all future power of discussion. He again contended, that the fees of the lord Chancellor, in bankruptcies, were not 3,000
l
l
l
s
l
s
1176
l
s
l
l
s
d
The motion was agreed to.
The Attorney-General
said, that if the object of the hon. member had been to elicit truth, he would have consented with readiness to the suggestion which he had made to him. If the returns had been ordered in the manner in which he proposed, it would have completed the returns made in 1811, on the emoluments of the lord Chancellor, up to the present time. Out of the 2
l
s
l
l
l
Mr. Batley
took the same view of the matter as the Attorney-general, and could not but express his surprise at the mis-statements which were abroad respecting the lord Chancellor's income. He knew it was the opinion of commercial men, that some alteration should be made in the administration of bankrupt cases; but for himself he was quite satisfied that things ought to remain in their present state.
Mr. Baring
concurred with the original motion, and trusted, that by the returns thus called for, the House would be able to know exactly the amount of fees received by the lord Chancellor, and to ascertain who were the grantees spoken of by the Attorney-general, as having been appointed under lord chancellor Thurlow, and who, from his statement, appeared to be deriving large emoluments from a system which he could not but designate as most disgraceful. When he recollected
1177
fiat
l
l
1178
The motion was agreed to.
EXCHEQUER PROSECUTIONS UNDER THE CUSTOMS LAWS.]
Mr. D. W. Harvey,
in bringing forward his motion upon this subject, disclaimed any wish to impute improper motives to any person. His sole object had been, since he possessed a seat in that House, to discover and point out abuses of every description; and among those which required the notice and animadversion of parliament, none appeared to him greater than those which were connected with Excise prosecutions, which were so great in their extent, and so oppressive in their nature, that we might well wonder at their existence in a free country. He should first take the prosecutions that had been commenced upon the Customs'-law, as they were fewer and less oppressive than the others; and yet so great, that they called loudly for parliamentary interference. He did not mean to impeach the honesty of lawyers; but he did mean to say, that even they would not be free from suspicion, when prosecutions were carried on apparently with no advantage to the public; certainly, with great injury to the persons against whom they were directed; and when, on each of these, the prosecuting law officer received a fee. From a paper which he held in his hand, if appeared that seven hundred and nineteen prosecutions had been commenced from the year 1820 to 1826 inclusive, to recover penalties to the amount of 580,136
l
l
l
l
l
l
s
1179
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
expressed himself not at all unwilling to afford the hon. member every information which he could reasonably desire on this subject. But it was really too much to expect, that the hon. gentleman should be allowed to bring before the House, as a specimen of the whole matter, some twenty cases, such as he chose to select out of two or three hundred. He had no objection to such a motion generally; but this mode of selection would not bring the matter fairly before the House. He would therefore recommend to the hon.
1180
l
l
l
l
l
Mr. Burrell
said, that there were frequently great hardships in these prosecutions in the Exchequer. The supposed smuggler, for instance, committed the crime on the coast. The Attorney-general filed an information, and it was understood that it was to be tried in the county of Sussex. It turned out, however, that the trial was to be in London. The defendant all this while did not know what witnesses were to be produced against him; nor could he be prepared with them so well as he might be if the trial had taken place in the county where the offence had been committed. Whatever the man might be, this was a harsh proceeding; whether smuggler or not, he ought to have fair play. He did not mean to speak invidiously, but he was informed, that, on the preventive service, there were persons of no very good character, and that on the information of such persons, smugglers had
1181
The Attorney-General
denied that any injustice had been done in the cases of those persons who had been alluded to by the hon. member. In fact, it was the opinion of the best-informed persons in Sussex, that smuggling offences ought not to be tried by juries of that county; and he had heard the same observation made with respect to Kent. The strength of local prejudice, it was assorted, strongly militated in those places against the course of justice. Those who wished to have the law ameliorated had made every inquiry on the subject; and they were universally met by this answer—"Do not try cases of this nature in the places where the transactions were alleged to have taken place, but let the inquiry go on elsewhere." It was made a matter of strong complaint, that cases which occurred in other counties were tried in Middlesex: but let those who so complained examine the matter, and point out where any real hardship lay? The most ordinary seaman knew perfectly well, that if he offended against the law he would be tried at Westminster. The phrase, that the man so erring would be "Exchequered," was perfectly known and understood. He, therefore, contended, that no harm was done, when the parties who erred were well acquainted with the fact, that their trial would take place in the court of Exchequer. He never knew any individual to come forward and say, when put upon his trial, that he had reason to complain, because he expected to have been tried elsewhere. The hon. mover expressed a great anxiety to convince the House, that, in introducing this motion, he had nothing but the interests of justice in view. It was extraordinary that he should, while thus declaring his own purity of intention, have been so unsparing of his calumnies on others. It had been asserted, that no improvement had been effected with respect to the administration of those laws. Now, it would not be difficult to prove, that a very material improvement, with respect to the administration of the revenue laws, had taken place. Formerly, every case relating to the revenue laws was tried in the court of Exchequer. This was undoubtedly attended with great expense. Many of these cases were now
1182
l
l
Mr. Bernal
observed, that the measures which had been taken to support the revenue laws had greatly encouraged the race of informers. The Attorney-general must be well acquainted with the fact, that many instances of hardship and oppression had occurred under the system. A fair question arose; namely, what benefit had been derived from a multitude of prosecutions under these laws? Now, it appeared, that in 1825–6, the sum lost by the Crown, or rather by the country, in consequence of these prosecutions, was upwards of 490
l
l
l
l
1183
Mr. Wynn
expressed his surprise at the line of argument adopted by the hon. gentleman. Were actions of the kind to which he had referred to be supported, or decried, only in proportion as they brought money into the public coffers? Were they, because, from various circumstances, they might sometimes fail, to be therefore considered unwise and improper? Because money was not likely to accrue from these prosecutions, was that a reason why individuals who transgressed the law should not be punished, and made examples of? Supposing 490
l
Mr. Maberly
said, he considered the answer of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, as to the imputations against the solicitor of the Customs, complete and triumphant. He trusted, that the right hon. gentleman, seeing how the new and very commendable arrangement respecting the allowance of the solicitor to the Customs had been received by the House, would be induced to place the Excise upon the same footing.
Mr. J. Smith
was of opinion, that the officers employed by government were sometimes very remiss in the performance of their duties, with a view, as it appeared to him, of benefitting by the irregularities which their own negligence permitted. He recollected being in the town of Hastings some time since, when, at mid-day, the town was absolutely blockaded, and a cargo of smuggled goods introduced.
Mr. Herries
said, it was very unjust to make charges against the persons alluded to, as if they were the instigators of the very offences to which they were employed to put an end. He thought that there was not the slightest ground for the accusation that had been made against them. Instead of bringing up cases for trial here, they were anxious to have them settled before the magistrates of the county where they occurred. Much had been said about the profits made by the solicitor of the Customs; but, in the course of two years, he had given up 11,000
l
1184
Sir J. Newport
said, that nothing could be worse than the administration of the Excise laws in Ireland. Year after year, some alteration of the existing system had been promised: but the hope was still deferred.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that the government were very anxious to carry into effect the recommendations of the revenue committee. Some of them had been attended to; but others could not be effected without a specific act of parliament.
Mr. Curteis
bore testimony to the great leniency with which Excise prosecutions had, in many cases within his knowledge, been conducted.
Mr. C. Thompson
contended, that it was impossible to put an end to smuggling, while the system of prohibitory duties held out such premiums to the smuggler.
Sir C. Burrell
advised, that the discretion lodged in the solicitor of Excise should be controlled; for he believed, that so long as it remained in his power to bring actions at his pleasure, oppressive proceedings would take place.
Mr. D. W. Harvey
complained, that he had been attacked in an unbecoming manner by the chancellor of the Exchequer. He would not, however, be deterred from doing his duty, by any chastisement which the right hon. gentleman, in his official dignity, might think proper to inflict upon him.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
observed, that the hon. gentleman appeared to be sore under the chastisement of which he complained. The hon. gentleman had, on his part, made a severe attack upon officers whose conduct had not deserved it. In repelling that attack, he was not aware that he had offended against any of the hon. gentleman's notions of what he was pleased to term his official dignity.
The motion was then agreed to.
GALWAY ELECTION—CHARGE AGAINST THE MARQUIS OF CLANRICARDE.]
Mr. Chichester
suggested to the hon. member for Galway, the propriety of postponing the motion of which he had given notice for Thursday, until after the decision of the committee on the merits of the Galway Election Petition.
Mr. R. Martin
said, his motion had nothing to do with the Election petition. If he had made good his charges against the marquis of Clanricarde at the bar of
1185
Mr. Chichester
begged to observe, that in recommending the hon. member to postpone his motion, he had acted entirely on his own discretion; and was not at all sure that his noble friend would approve of the course he had taken. He was perfectly satisfied that his noble friend would be fully able to meet any charge the hon. member might prefer against him.
Mr. Wynn
strongly recommended the hon. member for Galway to withdraw his notice. The terms of the notice of motion were, "that it be referred to a committee, to inquire into the unconstitutional conduct of the marquis of Clanricarde, at the late election for Galway, he being then Undersecretary of State for Foreign Affairs." Now, how would it be possible to enter into such a discussion, without entering into the merits of the Election petition? Such a discussion could not but have the effect of biassing the minds of the members of the committee. He trusted, therefore, that the hon. member would postpone his motion, until after the decision of the committee. There was no precedent of a discussion involving the merits of an Election petition, pending the investigations of a committee.
Mr. R. Martin
recommended the right hon. President of the Board of Control to look over the precedents, and he was sure he would find that there was no reason whatever for resisting the discussion on Thursday. He maintained that the discussion would not have the effect of prejudicing the minds of the committee. He pledged himself to prove, that the marquis of Clanricarde went into the county of Galway [order, order!].
Mr. Hobhouse
recommended the hon. member to withdraw his notice, for the
1186
Mr. Lyttleton
concurred in the recommendation. The ballot for the Galway Election committee would take place on Tuesday, and the bringing forward of such a motion as that of which the hon. member had given notice for Thursday, would be a most unconstitutional and improper proceeding, which the House ought to discourage.
The Speaker
said, it was of course competent to any member to fix the day on which he would bring forward any motion; but if the subject-matter of the hon. member's motion comprised anything which could be inquired into by the Election, committee, the motion could not be entertained by the House, still less could the House enter into any discussion of it. The hon. member knew best what the precise nature of his motion was; but it would be necessary for him to satisfy the House, that it did not involve any subject which could be inquired into by the Election committee.
Mr. R. Martin
declared himself willing, at all times, to bow with deference to the Chair; but, as the subject of his motion could not, by any possibility, be inquired into by the committee, he must decline complying with the hon. member's request.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Wednesday, March 14, 1827.
HACKNEY-COACHES AND CABRIOLETS.]
Mr. Hume
rose to move for a return of the number of Hackney-coach and Cabriolet Licences granted to the present period. The hon. member complained of the monopoly which was practised under the present system of granting licences, which he contended were reserved for the favourites of the hackney-coach commissioners, to the complete exclusion of industrious and deserving men. An instance, he said, was known of one person, a wine-merchant, who was the owner of eighteen or twenty cabriolets, each of which he was in the habit of letting out for 24
s
s
1187
l
l
Mr. Maberly
concurred in the view which his hon. friend had taken of the subject. He regretted that the chancellor of the Exchequer was not present, as he was convinced that a saving of at least 10,000
l
The motion was agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, March 15, 1827.
COUNTY ELECTIONS—MODE OF TAKING THE POLL.]
Lord Althorp
rose, in pursuance of notice, to move for the appointment of a select committee to consider the mode of taking the Poll at County Elections. The subject was one of great importance. The enormous expense frequently attendant on county elections was a grievance which required the intervention of the legislature. It appeared to him, that the best time for bringing forward a question of this kind, tending to produce a material alteration in the law of elections, must beat as early a period as possible after the meeting of a new parliament; because, among other reasons, opportunities would be thereby given, before the occurrence of a general election, to try, by experiment, the merits of the alteration. Not only was the expense frequently attendant on a county election a great grievance, but no
1188
1189
l
1190
Mr. Batley
, from the hinder ministerial benches supported the noble lord's pro-
1191
Mr. W. Smith
said, he concurred in the observation made by the hon. member, and fully agreed with him that the evil which the noble lord's proposition was intended to meet, existed as forcibly in city and borough elections as in elections for counties. He thought, however, that the abuse, as far as it related to cities or to boroughs, was capable of being altered much more easily than by the method proposed. The poll, he thought, was kept open much longer than was necessary, and by closing it at a proper period, and by some few regulations with respect to out-voters, the evil complained of would be got rid of in city and borough elections. He had the honour to represent a populous city, the voters of which amounted to not less than four thousand; yet the poll was always over, to every intent and purpose of ascertaining the election, in one day. This was effected without difficulty, by means of arrangements which were made a considerable time ago, and upon which no man whatever attempted to infringe. The election always commenced at nine in the morning, and by seven or eight that same day it was decided. Knowing, by experience, that this could be done with the utmost simplicity, and that when once established, the advantage was acknowledged to be so great, that all parties concurred in it to the extent that no man wished to oppose it, he did not see why the same arrangement could not be made in other cities. If the principle could be applied to county elections, he trusted that the committee for, which the noble lord had moved, would be able to devise some means to check the evil complained of.
Colonel Maberly
said, that the hon. member for Norwich had stated, that he represented a city containing four thousand voters, and that, nevertheless, the poll was always concluded in one day. Now he was in the unfortunate situation of representing a town in which there were not half that number of voters, and he never recollected an election in which the poll was concluded in less than eight or nine days; and, in one instance, it had been kept open for fourteen. Every gentleman who represented a popular borough would be obliged to the noble lord if he would make his motion include boroughs as well as counties.
1192
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, it was by no means his wish to oppose his noble friend's proposition; and he did not think that an insuperable objection existed to assimilating elections for boroughs to those for counties. He did not feel any great anxiety to effect the change for which the noble lord and many honourable members appeared so desirous; but he was not prepared to state any objection to the measure before the House. He was against taking the poll in different parts of a county at the same time. He thought it was of great advantage that the candidates at an election should be badgered a certain number of days by the electors. Now, if the poll were to be taken in different places at the same time, the candidate would be deprived of the opportunity of answering the questions of the freeholders in those parts where he could not be personally present, and such an arrangement would tend to separate the candidate from that intercourse which ought to subsist between him and his constituents. It was most desirable that his intercourse should be preserved; and, although it might, perhaps, in some instances, occasion perplexities to the candidate, yet that inconvenience was amply repaid by the honour of the seat, if he obtained it, or if he failed, by the glory of having honourably contested it. He should not like to see the candidate removed from the liability to answer the questions of his constituents. However, he had no objection to the appointment of a committee.
Lord Milton
said, that those gentlemen who wished to engraft upon the measure any further inquiries into borough elections, would not attain their object, but rather defeat the beneficial proposition before the House. He had always observed, that when questions were brought before, that House, unconnected with borough elections, gentlemen were particularly desirous to confine them to the single object proposed. With reference to what had fallen from the chancellor of the Exchequer, he entirely agreed with him about badgering candidates. It had a very desirable effect; but he was by no means certain that the benefit would be lost by the noble lord's proposition of taking votes at different places at the same time. In the county which he represented, it was the practice of the candidates to visit the great towns, and there show themselves before the electors. He should be sorry
1193
Sir J. Wrottesley
said, that there were two points of extreme importance. The first, the time during which the poll was to be taken; and the other, whether the poll should be adjourned from one district to another, or be proceeded with in various hundreds, at the same time. He thought if the measure should be found practicable at all (which, however, he doubted), it would be better that the poll should be taken first in one hundred, and that the sheriff should then proceed to others, leaving proper persons to take the votes which might come in after his departure. But it would also be material to determine where the poll was to be taken first, as the
1194
Mr. Dickinson
supported the motion; which he thought would be productive of much good. He considered the Treating act a subject of great importance, to which it would be right to direct the attention of the committee.
Mr. Wynn
said, he felt much indebted to the noble lord, for the attempt he was making to remedy an evil, the existence of which had been pretty generally experienced: and thought the principle of the measure, and the effort towards removing an existing difficulty, highly deserving the support of the House. It was with a view to further the proposed measure, and not for the purpose of interposing any obstacle in the way of its future adoption, that he should take the liberty to advert to some details, the particulars of which had been alluded to, in the course of the discussion. Allusion had been made to the present state of what was termed the Treating act; and it was said, that the provisions of that statute were deserving the attention of the House. Now, he did not mean to deny that the act might be well worthy of consideration; but he thought this was not the time for entering into a discussion on that subject; the rather, as it might be impossible to enter into it without interfering, more or less, with various of the Irish county elections, which were, or might hereafter become, subjects of inquiry before a committee. They should not say what was, or what was not, the sense of the Treating act, or enter into a consideration of the alterations in it, which might, perhaps, subsequently appear to be necessary, until the cases which came before the House, under the provisions of the existing law, had been first decided. He approved of the noble lord's intention, to confine the inquiries of the committee, in the first instance, to the best mode of taking county polls, because he had invariably remarked, that intrusting too many subjects to one committee, was the surest way to defeat all. Prior to the act of 1784, the law of election was very different from what it now was. That act had been passed in consequence of the Westminster election having been spun out to forty days; and, under its provi-
1195
Sir T. Lethbridge
thought the House and the country under considerable obligations, to the noble lord, for the manner in which he had brought forward his proposition. He, as the House well knew, had been pretty well badgered, but did not shrink from it. He did not think the badgering would be got rid of by the proposition of the noble lord. There would still be the nomination, on which occasion, the freeholders would have an opportunity of examining the candidates. The proposition of the noble lord went to open a wider door for more numerous
1196
Lord Nugent
was glad that his noble friend had confined his attention, and limited the object which he sought to accomplish, to an improvement in the conduct of county elections. Such a course was the more desirable, as it afforded a greater chance of success to his noble friend, who, no doubt, would have enough to do to carry his proposed measure into effect. If any attempt was made to extend the system to city elections, with a view to limiting the expense, the proposal would be met
in limine
Lord Lowther
said, he had had his share of contested elections. He thought, if the noble lord's proposition was calculated to diminish expense in one way it would have the effect of increasing it in another. When the poll was taken at different places, barristers and agents must be employed by the candidates at each; so that what might be saved in one way, would be lost in another. His right hon. friend had made some remarks relative to the land-tax, in which he could not concur with him; seeing that all his experience on the subject led him to conclude, that proofs relative to the redemption of the land-tax were easily produced.
Sir W. W. Wynn
was of opinion, that the difficulties at present attendant on a legal proof of the redemption of the land-tax were such as to prevent numbers of qualified voters from coming to the poll.
1197
Mr. C. N. Pallmer
congratulated the House upon the auspicious spirit which had manifested itself in this first session of a new parliament. Many beneficial measures had been originated, and the one now under consideration he looked upon as tending to promote most usefully the unrestricted exercise of the elective franchise. He entirely concurred with the right hon. gentleman, that nothing could be more unsatisfactory than the present system of the land-tax; and he hoped that something would be done for its amendment. It was highly desirable that the expense of elections should be diminished, and that the elector should be able to give his vote unbiassed, and free from the influence of any pecuniary consideration. The expenses of contested elections, as they were at present conducted, were calculated for no other propose than that of giving to wealth alone a preponderance, which was by no means desirable.
Lord Althorp
said, he felt bound to acknowledge the kind manner in which his proposition had been received by the House. It had been his object not to overload his plan with an attempt to comprehend within its provisions, any regulation relative to cities or boroughs. Indeed, the details of it were, for the most part, inapplicable to such places. His system would not apply to the out-voters in cities. His object was, to throw the counties open to a greater number of candidates, by diminishing the expense consequent upon congregating voters together in one place, during a protracted poll. The effect of the present mode of conducting elections was, to prevent many persons from standing, who would otherwise become candidates. Every day, the redemption of the land-tax was becoming a criterion less to be relied on at elections. A registration of voters would be desirable; not such as that adopted in Ireland, where the electors were allowed to register their own votes, but some mode similar to that by which the lists of persons qualified to serve as jurors were made out in this country. The increased expense likely to be occasioned by the employment of additional agents, would not be so great as some hon. members seemed to suppose; certainly not great enough to counterbalance the saving in other respects. It was well known that agents were at present employed in the various places where voters resided, for the purpose of canvassing them for the
1198
The motion was agreed to, and a committee appointed.
LEICESTER ELECTION—CONDUCT OF THE CORPORATION.]
Mr. Sykes
, in rising to bring forward the motion of which he had given notice, begged to disclaim all feelings of hostility either towards the sitting members for Leicester, or towards the individual members of the Corporation of that Borough. His only object was to call the attention of the House to a subject of considerable importance, as it regarded the freedom of election. The charges which he intended that night to bring forward were already in the hands of the two members for the borough, who were not, therefore, taken by surprise on this occasion. These charges, too, were stated upon no idle rumour, but had been well ascertained, and were now ready to be substantiated by several respectable persons in the borough. The charges were, first, that the Corporation had made an undue exercise of the power they possessed—if, indeed, they possessed any such power—of creating honorary freemen, to such an extent as to overpower the voice of the other freemen of the borough. They were charged also with having misapplied the funds of the Corporation for election purposes, in having improperly taken those funds and devoted them to the payment of those fees which were due on the admission of honorary freemen, and which: they had discharged on the admission of those freemen who were considered to be in their interest. They were further charged—and if the House granted him a Committee he had no doubt he should be able to make out the charge—that the Corporation had borne a very large proportion of the expenses of the election. They were besides charged with having resorted to a compulsory mode of polling; making the electors poll in such a manner as to be most favourable to their own interests. There were several modes of poll-
1199
1200
1201
l
1202
1203
1204
1205
Mr. Wynn
said, he came to the consideration of this question with a mind perfectly unbiassed, not having heard one word of the circumstances, except what he had read in the petition, therefore not knowing how far they were denied; but he must say he was not at all inclined to adopt the course pointed out by the motion of the hon. member, because he thought, that, even taking the facts stated in the petition to be proved, nothing illegal had been done by the Corporation of Leicester. He did not wish to give any opinion as to whether or not the mode of polling was regular; because, if it were not the regular mode, that would be a sufficient ground for a petition to be referred to an election committee. If the city officer had persevered in his refusal to admit freemen to vote for Mr. Denman, upon the ground that he had not been proposed three days before, that would be a question upon which an election committee would decide; and he had no doubt that if that refusal had been persevered in, the committee would say, "Here is a candidate who comes forward in the usual way, and the legal voters who tended their votes for him have been rejected, and therefore, this election is void." He could not see any one illegal act charged against the Corporation; but, taking for granted that the acts were illegal, the question was one for an election committee, or it might be made the subject of an application to
1206
1207
s
1208
Sir C. A. Hastings
said, he had hoped that the hon. member would, upon reading the petition, have withdrawn the motion made upon such slight grounds as those stated in the petition, which contained imputations upon as honest, as respectable, and as independent a body of electors, as any in the kingdom. The petitioners did not go so far as to say that they would prove, or even endeavour to prove, any of their charges; but they merely said that they suspected this, that they believed that, and that they apprehended the other. If the House, upon allegations of suspicion and belief, were to call upon a respectable body to answer charges, they would be opening a door which would lead to much mischief and inconvenience; because any private individual, having a pique against a corporation, might bring them before that House, at a considerable expense, to answer charges which had no other foundation than his suspicion and belief. If the corporation of Leicester, in supporting a member entertaining principles similar to their own, had been guilty of a crime, they had been guilty of a crime of which every corporation in England had, at one time or another, been guilty. Another charge was, that the corporation had assisted the candidates with funds, to defray the expenses of the election. Now, he thought that he should have been one of the first persons made acquainted with that circumstance; but he must say, that it had never been stated to him, that any funds had been voted for that purpose. He admitted that, before the commence-
1209
Mr. Otway
Cave admitted that there was an agreement between the committees of the several candidates to pay the expenses of the out-voters. Of the learned gentleman who had acted as assessor at that election, and who was suspected of having acted in a partial manner, he must say, that so anxious was that gentleman to avoid all appearance of partiality, that, in one or two instances, his decisions were against the party whom he was supposed to favour. He denied that the corporation had gone to hedges and highways to select honorary freemen. Those gentlemen were as respectable as any other voters of the borough.
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, he could not suffer the House to come to a vote upon this motion, without expressing his earnest wish that the House would, by their vote, mark this course of proceeding with the signal reprobation that it deserved. If that House were to listen to motions of the kind, they would be preparing the way to
1210
1211
1212
Sir F. Burdett
said, he thought that his hon. friend, the member for Hull, had not been fairly dealt by. When he saw right hon. gentlemen having recourse to gross exaggerations—to palpable misrepresentations—attributing what had never been said, and what never could have been believed to have been said, it was quite evident that it was the last resource of those who felt that there was more in the case than they were able, in any other way, to answer. Every body who heard the right hon. gentleman—nay, the right hon. gentleman himself—well knew that; the hon. member for Hull had never quoted-
1213
1214
au fait
1215
Mr. V. Fitzgerald
contended, that his right hon. friend was justified in his allusion to Peregrine Pickle and Roderick Random, by the fact, that in that portion of Smollett's History which had been referred to upon this occasion, the author had shown more of the novel writer and the political pamphleteer, than of the liberal and impartial narrator of events.
Lord Milton
said, the question was, whether the act of the Corporation in creating such a number of additional voters, was or was not illegal. No one had said that, under ordinary circumstances, the Corporation of Leicester had not a right to make freemen. But the case became very different, when the proposition for creating additional voters was hawked all over the country. It appeared that 2,000 letters had been issued to various individuals, and that eight hundred persons were in consequence placed in the situation of electors. This being the case, the hon. member for Hull surely had a right to bring the business forward, for the purpose of investigation. But the right hon. gentleman had, with a great deal of solemnity, called on the House to make a stand, and to support the Corporation. He hoped that the House would do no such thing; especially as a complaint which had been recently made against another corporation, for improper practices in the course of an election, had not been thus dismissed, but had been referred to a committee for consideration. With the labours of that committee they had not yet been made acquainted; but he expected that they would be soon laid on their table. The present was, in his opinion, a gross abuse of legal rights, by the members of this Corporation. It was clear that vast numbers of persons having no connection with the town of Leicester had been created freemen; and it was the duty of that House to inquire, whether they were so created for the purpose of influencing the election in a particular way. He contended, that the House had a right to interfere, to prevent, in future,
1216
Mr. Legh-Keck
said, he was himself a freeman of Leicester, and he could safely aver, that a more respectable body of electors could not be found in the kingdom. The funds of that Corporation were strictly applied to the purposes for which they were originally intended. There was not a corporate body in England, who watched over the charitable and other funds placed under their care, with more unremitting attention. As to the formation of additional freemen, it could not have been done for the purpose of influencing the election. That would have been a needless precaution; because the resident freemen would, over and over again, have secured the return of the favourite candidate, without any adventitious aid.
Mr. Spring Rice
supported the motion.
Mr. Goulburn
contended, that the present case bore no analogy to that of Northampton, inasmuch as no misapplication of corporate funds was charged against the Corporation of Leicester. As to the remission of fees to the eight hundred freemen, it could not have been made with a view to influence the election, as the freedom was conferred on them in 1822, and the election took place four years after. The absence of any illegality in the mode of taking the poll was proved by the fact, that counsel, who had been consulted on the policy of petitioning against the return, under the Grenville act, declared that there were not sufficient grounds to support such a charge.
Lord Rancliffe
said, that as the corporation of Nottingham had been alluded to in the course of the discussion, he was bound to admit that the practice complained of had prevailed there to some extent. He, however, disapproved of it, and would as willingly support a motion for inquiry into the conduct of that corporation, as into that of Leicester.
Mr. Hudson Gurney
supported the motion. He said, that the matter loudly called for the intervention of the House. This infamous system of overpowering the
bonâ fide
1217
Sir F. Burdett
was about to read a passage from the petition, in order to prove the incorrectness of the statement made on the other side of the House; namely, that the petition did not allege that the Corporation money had been misapplied, when
The Speaker
informed him, that it was not competent to him to do so, he having already addressed the House.
Lord Howick
, therefore, read the passage, which declared, that the Corporation had borrowed money to carry on the election, and that the lenders were to be indemnified out of the Corporation funds.
Mr. C. N. Pallmer
was of opinion that the freemen in question had been made in contemplation of the election, and that their votes were improperly used in it. On that ground he should support the motion.
The House divided:—For the motion 68: Against it 92; Majority 24.
List of the Minority
Althorp, lord
Kennedy, T. K.
Baring, F
Lester, B.
Baring, J.
Lombe, E.
Bringham, J.
Maberly, J.
Barrett, S. B.
Maberly, col.
Brownlow, C.
Martin, John
Burdett, sir F.
Marshall, John
Buxton, T. F.
Monck, J. B.
Colborne, R.
Milton, lord
Clive, E. B.
Morpeth, lord
Campbell, W. F.
Nugent, lord
Cradock, col.
Ord, W.
Dundas, hon. T.
Pallmer, C. N.
Dundas, sir R.
Pendarvis, E. W.
Ebrington, lord
Prothero, E.
Easthope, J.
Powlett, hon. W. J.
Folkestone, lord
Ponsonby, hon. F.
Forbes, sir C.
Price, Robert
Forbes, J.
Russell, lord W.
Fazakerly, J. N.
Rancliffe, lord
Cordon, R.
Robinson, George
Graham, sir J.
Rumbold, C.
Gurney, Hudson
Sefton, Earl of
Guest, J. J.
Stanley, hon. E. G.
Heneage, G. F.
Smith, W.
Heron, sir R.
Tomes, John
Hobhouse, J. C.
Thompson, C. P.
Howard, H.
Tennyson, C.
Howick, lord
Waithman, ald.
Hume, J.
Warburton, H.
Ingleby, sir W.
White, col.
Jermyn, lord
Wood, C.
1218
Wood, ald.
ELLERS.
Wrightson, W. B.
Sykes, D.
Whitmore, W. W.
Rice, T. S.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, March 16, 1827.
ROMAN CATHOLIC CLAIMS.]
The Marquis of Londonderry
rose to present two petitions from the counties of Londonderry and Monaghan, in favour of the Roman Catholic claims. He said, he should not detain their lordships at present, as he had before endeavoured humbly, but honestly, to state the conviction on his mind, that the great and important question of the Roman Catholic claims was intimately connected with the happiness, welfare, and he might add, the social order of Ireland. He thought it would be bad taste to press the question forward, not only from what he had already said upon the subject, but more especially because an enlightened statesman had thought it most wise to withdraw the motion of which he had given notice. He was not in his place when that incomparable speech was delivered; in every part of which he most cordially and sincerely concurred. He thought he had acted most wisely in not pressing forward a discussion, which could only excite irritation. The question would, of necessity be resumed; and he must hope that the Roman Catholics would bear their present disappointment with patience and resignation; and if he could conceive that they would have recourse to force or rebellion in order to obtain from parliament their claims, and not to persuasion or argument, he hoped, as an honest Irish soldier, he should be in the van-guard of those who opposed such proceedings. He had hoped that those noble lords who did not join with him and his friends in their opinions upon the question, would come forward with some measure calculated to reconcile the country to the disappointment, and to allay the feelings of irritation which now prevailed. That was his wish; and when he found that no measure was coming forward, he felt deeply grieved. Nevertheless, he would advise the Roman Catholics to hope that by patience and resignation they would arrive at the great object of their wishes; and that the justice and magnanimity of a British king and a British senate would
1219
The Earl of Winchilsea
said, he had purposely refrained from making any observations on the sentiments contained in the numerous petitions which he had presented to their lordships against Roman Catholic emancipation; because he thought that a more desirable opportunity would be afforded him for such observations, when the noble marquis had redeemed the pledge he had given to the House, of bringing this great political question of the Catholic claims under the consideration of the House. Finding, however, that that intention had been abandoned, he could not, in justice to his own feelings, or to those persons who had signed the petitions which he had presented, allow the question to be withdrawn from the House, only to be brought forward on a more favourable opportunity, without stating his own views upon the subject. He must own, however, that he regretted that that motion had been abandoned; because he was convinced, that the oftener the subject was discussed, the more it would be found that it was impossible to open the constitution to individuals professing the tenets of the Catholic church, without endangering the principles upon which that constitution was founded. If, however, such discussion would have been attended with the same bitterness of feeling which had characterized the debate upon the subject in another place—if any noble lord had been prompted to follow that example, and forgetting what was due to his own private and public character, should deal in bitter invectives against those who were united with him in political power—he felt, if such should be the conduct that would be pursued, that it would leave, as it had done, in the breast of every friend of uncompromising principles, an impression which would never be effaced, and would tend, as it had tended, to unite that party more firmly than any thing that could be said. It was a matter of sincere regret to him, therefore, that the noble marquis had thought proper to withdraw his motion; and on that occasion he should freely have stated the grounds upon which he objected to granting the claims of the Catholics. He now begged leave, therefore, to state the grounds upon which he thought that it was impossible to admit the Catholics to legislate for a Protestant country, without
1220
1221
1222
Earl Spencer
did not rise to enter into a discussion with the noble lord who had just sat down, on all the various topics upon which he had touched. The noble lord had finished his speech by presenting
1223
The Bishop of Norwich
said, he had several petitions to present to their lordships, coming from different quarters, and containing different opinions. He had divided these petitions into three classes. The first class contained petitions from the Roman Catholics of Ireland; they consisted of five, and deserved attention on account of the respectability of the petitioners. The first petition came from the Roman Catholic bishop and clergy of the united dioceses of Waterford and Lismore. The others were from Tuam and other places in Ireland. These petitions were signed by immense numbers of Roman Catholics, and they all united in praying most earnestly for the repeal of those penal statutes which still remained laws, which were, as it appeared to him, the misfortune and disgrace, and would be the ruin of this empire at no distant period, if the wrongs of millions remained much longer unredressed. The second class of petitions came from clergymen of the Church of England. These petitions were signed by many very learned and excellent men, who
1224
The Lord Chancellor
said, he must object to the petition, which was stated to come from the bishop of Waterford. In the discharge of his duty, he could not receive any petition coming from the bishop of Waterford, unless it was the Protestant bishop.
Lord Clifden
stated, that his majesty, when he was in Ireland, had received all the Irish bishops in full robes.
The Lord Chancellor
said, that made no difference. He had a positive duty to perform, and he must object to any petition being received coming from the Catholic bishop of Waterford.
Lord Clifden
stated, that there had been an especial presentation of Catholic bishops to his majesty while in Ireland.
The Marquis of Lansdown
felt persuaded, that the noble and learned lord on the woolsack would have no objection to re-
1225
The Lord Chancellor
said, he never would oppose the reception of petitions written in a style which the House could recognise. There could be no doubt that the parties in question were bishops, nor did he doubt their respectability. But what he could not allow was, that the person from whom this petition came, should be recognised a Catholic bishop of Waterford. He might be designated as Catholic bishop in Ireland, but not as Catholic bishop of Waterford, for the law knew nothing of such a designation.
The Bishop of Norwich
said, there was no difficulty on his part to withdraw his petition.—The petition was accordingly withdrawn.
The Earl of Darnley
said, he could not help lamenting that his noble friend (the earl of Winchilsea) should, on his first political appearance, have shown so much zeal and energy in what he could not but consider a bad cause. He called it a bad cause, because he was perfectly convinced, that if his noble friend, and those who thought with him, continued to oppose successfully the just claims of the Catholics, they would succeed in convulsing this great empire to its centre. He could not but regret the strong language which had been used with respect to a man of transcendant genius, who had long advocated this great cause with distinguished ability, and who, he trusted, would continue to advocate it until it should be finally successful. But he would not refer to living authorities; it should be recollected, that Fox, Pitt, Burke, and Grattan, who had never agreed upon any other question, concurred in supporting the measure which his noble friend opposite so warmly deprecated. The ill-omened rejection of this measure was undoubtedly calculated to induce the people of Ireland to consider the country to which she was united, rather
1226
1227
The Duke of Buckingham
said, he held in his hand several petitions praying for Catholic Emancipation. The first was from the Roman Catholic inhabitants of the county of Roscommon. He did not mean, in introducing this petition, to follow the example of the noble lord (Winchilsea) by discussing the whole question of the Catholic claims. There were many reasons why a collateral debate of this kind was not one in which the great question of Catholic Emancipation could be conveniently discussed. It was utterly impossible, in a debate like this, to settle this great—he
1228
1229
The Bishop of Chester
said, he could not forbear noticing an expression of the noble duke who had just sat down, which seemed to call for some animadversion from the representatives of the Protestant Church. The noble duke had stated, that the noble earl who presented the petition from the county of Kent, had imputed to the Roman Catholic priests as a crime, the exercise of their spiritual functions. The noble duke had entirely mistaken the meaning of the noble earl. The noble earl had not imputed to the Roman Catholic priests the exercise of their spiritual functions as a crime; but he had argued, that the tremendous influence of the Catholic priesthood was a very powerful reason why the legislature should not intrust power to so many millions who were subjected to it. The noble earl did not say that they were not at liberty to use the legitimate influence which would follow the faithful discharge of their high and sacred functions; but he argued against
1230
1231
The Earl of Darnley
said, the learned prelate bad noticed an observation of his, for the purpose of misrepresenting it. He put it to the House, whether he had said any thing of which a good Protestant need be ashamed. He had stated, that he should be extremely glad to see the whole population of Ireland converted to the Protestant faith, but he was not so sanguine as some others were on this subject; and he maintained, that if there were a prospect of their conversion, it would furnish an additional argument for Catholic: Emancipation, inasmuch as a persecuted sect was less likely to be converted, than one admitted to equal civil rights and privileges.
The Bishop of Chester
maintained that the noble earl had treated the attempt to convert the Catholics of Ireland as a visionary scheme.
Viscount Clifden
was of opinion, that the Protestant religion had never had fair play in Ireland He had no doubt that if there had been no penal laws, the whole population would have been Protestants before now. The gentry, to prevent the loss of their property, had been compelled to abjure the Catholic faith; but the people at large were, by the cruelty of those laws, bound to the Catholic priesthood.
The Earl of Roden
presented petitions against any further concessions to the Roman Catholics, from 22,000 Protestants of the county of Londonderry, and the county of Tyrone. The noble lord said: —When I consider the importance of the subject on which these petitions are addressed to your lordships, I feel myself compelled to declare, in a few words, my opinion on the present condition of that country from which they proceed; but first, I must express my regret, that on this
1232
1233
1234
The Bishop of Norwich,
in explanation, justified his applying the word persecution to the conduct observed towards the Roman Catholics. He was taught in early life, by abler men than now lived, that every penalty, every restriction, every disadvantage, every inconvenience imposed upon an individual on account of his religious opinion, was persecution. That being the case, he thought that the noble earl need not complain, if he said the Irish were the most persecuted men on the face of the earth [hear].
The Earl of Carnarvon,
in allusion to what had fallen from a noble earl, with reference to a comparison between the state of the Irish Catholics, and that of the Greeks under the Turks, observed, that when the present state of the Roman Catholic population of Ireland was referred to as an argument against conceding to them their claims, he did say that noble lords might as well apply that argument to the Greeks as to them; namely, that because a long system of oppression had reduced them to a state of degradation, therefore they were not entitled to be relieved from that oppression. He was satisfied, that the Roman Catholics, under the rule of Protestant ascendancy,
1235
Viscount Clifden
said, that if he were to go into the question, he could show that great changes had taken place in the Roman Catholic religion. It had been said, that, if emancipation was granted, the Roman Catholics would not be satisfied. He was quite certain that they would be satisfied—they must be satisfied.
Lord Mountcashel
regretted that noble lords treated the question as a matter rather of policy than religion; and expressed his conviction, that the spirit of the Roman Catholic religion remained unchanged to this day. In support of this opinion, he quoted passages from the decrees of several Roman Catholic councils. The doctrines inculcated by these councils
1236
Ordered to lie on the table.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, March 16, 1827.
GRANT TO THE DUKE AND DUCHESS
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
moved the order of the day for the House resolving itself into a committee on the Duke and Duchess of Clarence's Annuity bill.
Mr. J. Martin
said, he would avail himself of the present opportunity to put a question to the right non. gentleman, and which, he trusted, he would have no objection to answer. The feelings of the country were more acutely alive to the grants to the royal family, than ministers seemed to be aware of. It might be in the recollection of the House, that, in the year 1825, a bill had been introduced, granting an additional allowance of 6000
l.
l.
1237
l.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, he was extremely happy, in the prospect of having the vote of the hon. member; as he had given him to understand, that, according to the answer which he received to his question, he should be influenced in voting upon the grant to be brought forward that evening. The hon. member doubtless expected, that, in point of fact, his royal highness the duke of Cumberland had been in the receipt of the 6,000
l.
Mr. J. Martin
said, it was most singular that ministers should intrude such an objectionable measure upon the public, if the sequel proved that even the royal duke did not conceive the grant necessary, and had consequently neglected to receive it.
l.
l.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that the charge had been made in the account, as his royal highness might have demanded it, and might have complied with the prescribed conditions; but his majesty had not thought fit that the young prince should be brought into this country, and consequently the money had not been paid.
Mr. Hume
said, that if the government accounts and statements were made up properly, such misconceptions could not take place; members would not be misled into such errors; and all such questions
1238
l.
l.
l.
l.
l.
Mr. Maberly
said, he was anxious to offer a few words on this subject, as an erroneous opinion had gone abroad, as to the part which he had taken in a former discussion. He entirely approved of the vote; and he thought that, in a country which adoped the monarchical principle, an adequate provision should be made for the illustrious individual who stood next in presumptive succession to the throne. The late heir presumptive, had got involved
1239
Mr. Tennyson
regretted extremely that, upon every occasion when an increase of income became necessary for a branch of the royal family, these discussions should be provoked. It was inexpedient that the individuals of that family should thus be exposed in detail to the reflections cast upon them in the public journals, and in parliament, as persons who were inconsiderately and continually drawing upon the impoverished resources of the country. But, it was unjust as well as inexpedient. The royal family were brought to this country under circumstances of peculiar interest to the liberties and happiness of the people, and were thrown upon its liberality for a fit provision, he thought, therefore, it was its duty, as well as its interest, to establish some fixed scale by which that provision might be regulated, so that each member of the family should be enabled duly to occupy the station he was called upon to fill, and not be left to the alternative of encountering all the calumnies which these applications generated,—or of remaining exposed to the continual taxes upon his benevolence which his station brought upon him, with insufficient means.
1240
l.
l.
l.
l.
1241
l.
l.
1242
Mr. Pendarvis,
member for Cornwall, said, that, as he was not present on the last occasion when this subject was before the House, he would take the present opportunity of opposing the vote, as a most indecent, a most wasteful, and a most profligate expenditure of the public money. The House should recollect, that when the sums now paid to the several members of the royal family were voted, the state of our paper currency had rendered them much less in real, than they were in nominal, amount; but now that the currency was restored to a proper standard, those sums were much beyond, in actual value, what would have been voted if the state of the currency had been the same as it was at this day. He thought, therefore, that, if any alteration were made in the grants, it should be that of decrease rather than increase. He wished that royalty should be surrounded with proper splendor; but, at a period when our manufacturers were in a state of distress, and
1243
Mr. W. Smith
said, that an hon. member had expressed his belief, that his royal highness would secure to himself the respect and affection of the country from his mode of expending such grants. This sentiment, however, involved a most enormous mistake. He not only thought it would have been more consistent with good taste not to have brought forward this motion, but he very much lamented that any such sentiment should ever have been uttered. He lamented that any minister should endeavour to infuse into any branch of the royal family an opinion that he would not derive a much greater share of the respect and affection of the people of England, by refusing such a grant, than from any mode of expending it whatever. The virtue that secured respect to princes was a consideration for the distresses of the people. It was true that the 9,000
l.
1244
Mr. Leycester
acknowledged that the distress in the manufacturing districts was great; and if he thought the present grant would take one farthing more from the pockets of the manufacturing population, he would oppose it. But he feared no such result. From whence were the 9,000
l.
Mr. Monck
thought, that if his hon. friend had proved any thing, he had proved too much; since, if the grant of 9,000
l.
l.
1245
Mr. Calcraft
thought the grant was to be defended, both on the precedents of the duke of York and the princess Charlotte. In the latter instance, the House not only granted 60,000
l.
l.
Sir W. Plunkett
said, he should only think it necessary to trouble the House with a single sentence, in consequence of an observation which had fallen from an hon. member opposite, respecting an opinion of his, given in the year 1818. It was his intention to support this grant; and in doing so, he did not think he was forfeiting his claims to consistency. Indeed, he should adopt the opinion which that hon. member had been pleased to attribute to him, and should claim the benefit of it in requiring that hon. member, as he avowed his concurrence with it, to manifest that concurrence in the plainest manner, by supporting the present grant. He thought now, as he had thought in 1818, that the question ought not to be
1246
Sir T. Acland
said, that he too came under the animadversions from which the last speaker had vindicated himself. In 1818, he had voted as that right hon. gentleman had done. He thought, however, that there was a wide distinction between the present and the former circumstances of the royal duke. He was now next heir to the throne; and no economy could be more false or illiberal than that which would go to circumscribe his income.
Mr. Beaumont
did not condemn the grant, so much as the breathless haste with which it had been submitted to parliament, and the want of sympathy with the distresses of the people, which it glaringly betrayed. There was no wish on his side of the House to drive the people to despair and madness; but the best mode of doing so would be for parliament to convince them that it had no sympathy whatever with their distress.
Mr. Alderman Wood
contended, that the expense of this grant would, like the general expenses of the country, fall most heavily upon the lower classes. He was proceeding to detail his reasons for that opinion, when he was assailed by loud cries of "question." He made a short pause, and then turning round to one of the vociferators, said, "Sir, you shall have the question whenever you like, but it must not be till I please. You shall not put me down. I will not be placed in the situation in which an honourable colleague of mine has been placed by the intolerant spirit of the landed faction. I have never interrupted the House, nor given intentional pain to any man in it; and I would ask, whether it is either fair, or just, or parliamentary, that I should be thus assailed in the performance of what I consider my duty?" The hon. alderman concluded by observing, that he should
1247
Mr. Alderman C. Smith
denied that, those who drank gin and beer in the manner described by his brother alderman, would feel the effects of this grant in any way whatsoever. He gave it his warmest support.
Sir R. Heron
observed, that the hon. member for Devonshire had exhibited considerable warmth in denouncing what he was pleased to call false economy; but that hon. baronet had never come forward with any definition of what he considered true economy. He recollected the manner in which the hon. baronet generally voted on all questions of retrenchment, and he would, therefore, be obliged if he would point out to the House the true economy for which he would allow it a vote. His hon. friend, the member for Wareham, had pointed to the grant made to the princess Charlotte and prince Leopold on their marriage, as a precedent which the House ought to follow on the present occasion. Now, it appeared to him at the time when that grant was made, that both the House and the country were in a very extravagant humour. The House had as yet exhibited no symptom of repentance; but the people, he believed, were in a different temper. Let the opinion of the people on that point be what it might, they considered the grant now proposed to be as unnecessary and as extravagant a grant as was ever submitted to parliament; and under that consideration he should certainly vote against it.
The House divided on the question, That the Speaker do now leave the chair: Ayes 90. Noes 15. Majority 84. The House then went into the committee.
List of the Minority.
Beaumont, T.
Rancliffe, lord
Folkestone, lord
Smith, W.
Gordon, R.
Warburton, H.
Harvey, D. W.
Walrond, B.
Martin, John
Wood, ald.
Monck, J. B.
Waithman, ald.
Pendarvis, E. W.
TELLERS.
Pryce, P.
Heron, sir R.
Robarts, A. W.
Hume, Joseph
STIPENDIARY MAGISTRACY IN IRELAND.]
Mr. Villiers Stuart
called the
1248
1249
1250
l.
Mr. Goulburn
said, that after the manner in which the hon. member had arraigned the conduct of the Irish government in the particular instance alluded to, and after the efforts, not only of the hon. gentleman's argument, but of his humour— which latter he could assure the hon. member he took in perfect good part—after all this he felt himself called upon to advert more particularly to the circumstances of the case, with a view to explain to the House, and vindicate from the aspersions which had been cast upon it, the course which the Irish government had, in this
1251
1252
1253
1254
1255
l.
l.
l.
Mr. Carew
complained of the imputation cast upon the impartiality of the Waterford magistrates by the right hon. Secretary.
Mr. Goulburn
said, he had cast no such imputation. What he had said was, that the people might naturally conclude that the magistrates would not be impartial,
1256
Mr. Carew
thought it an awkward circumstance, that the appointment should have taken place so near the time of election; as if it had been intended for the furtherance of an election purpose.
Mr. H. Grattan
considered the appointment of stipendiary magistrates and police highly unconstitutional. They might be necessary; but it was only because his majesty's ministers did not keep Ireland in the state in which she ought to be kept. If Ireland were tranquil, there would be no necessity for such appointments; but Ireland could never be tranquil under the present system. The expense of the police in that country was very considerable; and the individuals who composed it, might be almost considered as amenable to no law, for they were not punishable under the provisions of the Mutiny bill; indeed, he understood that their only punishment was dismissal. It was necessary for gentlemen on this side of the water to look to the system in Ireland, lest the evil should approach their own shore. He held in his hand, the private and public instructions given to the constabulary police in Ireland; and it would be only necessary for him to read one or two of them, to put the House in possession of their extraordinary nature. [The hon. member here read one of the public and general, and one of the private orders given to the police. The public order stated, that the police were not to converse on the roads, lest they might be overheard, and the nature of their duty discovered; that they must not divulge the countersign; that two patrols were to walk in advance of the party, lest any mistake should occur; and that, on the approach of any person, they were to demand the countersign. The private order stated, that the police should observe the habits of the people in the neighbourhood and the business and characters of persons newly arriving in the neighbourhood; that great circumspection and secresy should be observed; that they should take notes of every thing that was done in the neighbourhood; and, if they proved themselves to be trustworthy, they should be declared fit for the service.] Such was the system of espionage earned on in Ireland—a system to which the people of England would never submit. It was part of the old system of government in Ireland—
1257
Sir George Hill
was surprised to hear the hon. member for Waterford, designate as unconstitutional, an act done by the lord-lieutenant, under the authority of an act of parliament. He wished to express his decided opinion, that, considering the then disturbed state of the county of Waterford, the lord-lieutenant would, if he had not acted as he had done, have been guilty of a monstrous dereliction of duty.
Mr. Van Homrigh
said, that, although the annual salary of the Stipendiary magistrate was 700
l.,
l.
Mr. V. Stuart,
in reply, said, that in making this motion, he intended nothing offensive towards the lord-lieutenant or the right hon. Secretary for Ireland; from both of whom he had received great kindness and courtesy, whenever he had had occasion to make any communications to them; but he thought that he should not have done his duty if he had not made this motion. He had heard nothing from the other side to induce him to alter his opinion that the appointment was unconstitutional and uncalled for. He was ready to admit, that a trifling disturbance had taken place at Kilmacthomas; and that, during the affray, a stone was thrown into his carriage; but he did not think it a disturbance of such a nature as to re-
1258
l
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Monday, March 19, 1827.
SUPPLY OF WATER TO THE METROPOLIS.]
Sir Francis Burdett
gave notice, that, shortly after the Easter recess, it was his intention to bring forward a motion regarding the present state of the Water Companies of the Metropolis.
ROMAN CATHOLIC CLAIMS.]
Mr. Abercromby
presented a petition from the Catholics of Abbeyside, in favour of Catholic Emancipation. The hon. member took that opportunity of expressing his regret at the resolution which the House had lately come to on this subject. The news of that vote had created the greatest dismay in Ireland, and had altogether disheartened the friends to the tranquillity of that- unhappy country; because it precluded them from any longer holding out the hope that the period would ever arrive when the British parliament would consent to do justice to the ill-treated population of Ireland. This unhappy event had occurred at a peculiarly unfortunate time; when Ireland was in a state of the greatest distress; when the little employment which her poor had ever had was considerably diminished; when the horrors of famine stared a large part of the population in the face; when the events of the late election had not only, as had been stated in that House, broken the connexion between landlord and tenant in Ireland, but had shaken the, connexion between the two countries to the very centre. At such a moment, to divest the friends of England of power, and to place that power in the hands of those who cherished no attachment to us, was most alarming. By their late decision, the English parliament had caused the question of the Union to be re-opened, and re-discussed, under circumstances of the most unfavourable nature. What the result might be it was impossible to foresee. For himself, he owned, that he should rejoice if even the present session of parliament were to pass without the
1259
EDUCATION OF THE POOR IN IRELAND.]
Mr. James Grattan
entreated the attention of the House for a few moments, while he stated the substance of a Petition with which he had been intrusted, from the Roman Catholic Bishops of Ireland, on the subject of Education in that country. The Petition set forth, that the Roman Catholic population of Ireland had not the benefit of the annual grants made by parliament, and that a system of proselytism was carried on by means of these grants. It was a delusion to vote money to Protestant societies for the education of the Catholic poor of Ireland, since it was not fairly applied to any such purpose. If the real object was the improvement of the moral and intellectual condition of the lower orders in the sister kingdom, it would be far better not to place the sums devoted to such an undertaking in the hands of Protestant societies, but under the management of a board, or under the superintendence of the existing commissioners upon education, they being accountable to parliament for the expenditure. Such a course would give general satisfaction. He did not mean to contend that any sum, great or small, should be placed under the control of the Roman Catholics only, for the education of their poor, but societies which only promoted ill blood, jealousy, and animosity, ought to be got rid of as soon as possible. He begged to call the attention of the House to the progress made in the work of education in the last twenty years. In 1806, a commission had been appointed to make inquiries on the subject of education, from which thirteen reports had proceeded. It was understood, that there was to be no religious interference, and the commissioners went through the charter schools, and many others of private foundation. The hon. gentleman complained that these commissioners had not bestowed any animadversions upon the mode in which the charter schools were conducted; but, on the contrary, had recommended their continuance. The whole sum granted during the last ninety years was 1,600,000
l
l
1260
l
l
l
l
Mr. Hume
said, that the petition was of the highest importance, recollecting the repeated discussions, during the last ten years, upon education in Ireland. After the House had so liberally granted money for the education of the poor of that country, it was quite preposterous that it should be placed in the hands of individuals, to be applied, not to the instruction of the children of the poor Catholics, but to that of the comparatively rich Protestants. It was impossible to force education on the lower orders of Ireland; especially when the money for that purpose was placed in the hands of individuals, who, the Catholic clergy believed, had views of proselytism. Suspicions of this kind had been entertained for some years, and they were now most materially fortified. It was worse than a waste of the public money, to vote it for a good pur-
1261
l
Mr. H. Grattan
said, he was in possession of letters establishing the fact, that there existed a fixed determination, to neglect no means of converting the rising generation to Protestantism. He felt a strong conviction on this point from what had been said elsewhere regarding a new glorious Reformation. If England and Ireland were to go on together—and he hoped the unfortunate measures of ministers would not render it doubtful—the English people and the English cabinet must make up their minds to allow the great body of the Irish people to remain Catholics. Never had a greater imposition been practised upon credulity than to pretend that this new reformation had a chance of being successful. If persevered in, it must end in disunion and calamity. Nothing could be more alarming than the late accounts from Ireland. Letters from Dublin represented, that a sort of religious crusade had already commenced; and that, while in the churches the most vehement abuse was heard of the Roman Catholic faith, the Roman Catholic priests retaliated in their chapels by attacks equally violent upon the Protestant tenets.
1262
Mr. J. Smith
begged to state it as his opinion, that, if a true reformation of the Roman Catholics was to be effected in the hasty manner pretended by many, all history was a lie, and all deductions from it utterly without foundation. The last four or five hundred years afforded no precedent to show that vehement abuse, and measures of severity, had gained a single sincere proselyte. Conciliation and kindness might do much; but the course now pursued must proceed in discord, and, perhaps, end in actual violence. No man would go further than himself to promote education; but not in the way now adopted by the dominant party in Ireland. The question would come properly before the House when the annual vote for the Kildare-street Society was introduced; but he could not help stating, that some of the reports upon the table contained instances of the most shocking barbarity; and that not a single shilling ought to have been granted, until measures were taken to put a period to such enormities. He heartily concurred in the object of the petition; and he hoped that the good sense of the right hon. Secretary for Ireland would induce him to discourage a course so impolitic and offensive.
Mr. Secretary Peel
thought he could satisfy the hon. member who spoke last, that after the manifestation of opinion, in which he had not shrunk from declaring his acquiescence, the course pursued by the Irish government was the only one that could have been taken. They selected certain aggravated cases pointed out in the reports, and the law officers of the Crown were directed to prosecute: the cases were sent to a jury in the ordinary manner, but the jury had declined to convict. The Irish government had done its duty; for, although it was apprehended that such might be the result, it was thought right that no means of obtaining punishment should be omitted. As to education generally, he had stated his opinions fully upon the subject, when he was in Ireland. At that period, a proposal had been made to him on the subject, by several persons, to whom he had at once declared, that it was extremely desirable, in his opinion, to diffuse the benefits of education as generally throughout Ireland as possible, without exciting any alarm or jealousy, upon the grounds of religion. In consequence of this proposal, and of the views which he had expressed upon the subject,
1263
Mr. Abercromby
said, that nothing could be more desirable than the practical application of those principles which the right hon. gentleman had stated. The: wish that Protestant and Roman Catholic children should be educated under the; same establishment, without any reference to the speculative religious opinions of their respective churches, was most excellent, was most wise and benevolent. He spoke from extensive experience when he declared, that the most serious changes had taken place in Ireland, in consequence of the increased spirit of conflicting parties, and which rendered those sound, virtuous, and rational principles wholly inapplicable to that country, divided and wretched as she was. It was education alone that could raise Ireland from her low and helpless condition, and enable her to assume her rank among nations. The Catholic children would, of course, be
1264
Sir John Newport
said, that whenever the estimates for the Kildare-street Society were brought forward, he would oppose this grant, with a hope of directing its better application.
Sir W. Plunkett
said, he did not wish to prolong a discussion which would be more properly considered by the House, when the estimates, or the report of the committee of inquiry, were brought forward. He was, however, induced to offer a few remarks, in consequence of what had fallen from his learned friend the member for Calne. He perfectly concurred in what, indeed, no man could dissent from; namely, that it was most desirable to establish throughout Ireland a system of common education. The principle was equally true, that, having a system of common education, it should rest upon some religious basis; for any system of education, which was not founded upon such a basis, was always dangerous. The desideratum, therefore, was a common religious instruction, which each party might receive, without danger or offence to the peculiarities of their faith. Such a plan of proceeding had been seriously sought after by various persons. They had endeavoured to put aside all sources of religious jealousies and disputes: so that every class might frequent the schools for one common and general benefit. This had been recommended by gentlemen of conscience and of the most liberal feelings. But his hon. and learned friend had stated, that the hopes held out of carrying this system into effect had proved delusive. He could not, however, by any means agree with him, or go the length of saying that the project had failed. It was necessary to state, that a system had been formed of general religious instruction, to be delivered to the pupils in common and without distinction. The plan would necessarily exclude all but those fundamental and general principles nearly common to all sects. It was meant to contain extracts from the Bible, including so much of the sacred volume as to constitute an epitome, in which nothing essential should be omitted. He believed
1265
Mr. Secretary Peel
merely wished to say, that he thought the subject of so much importance, that he wished no misunderstanding to go forth, to the effect of creating an impression that any part of the system was to make proselytes. Upon this subject he had only to refer to a Report of the commission appointed for this special purpose—in consequence of an address of that House. In this commission were to be found the names of Mr. Frankland Lewis, Mr. Grant, Mr. Leslie Foster, Mr. Blake, and other gentlemen of intelligence and honour, who embraced either side of the question. The commissioners had entered into the system of the Kildare-street Society referred to in the present debate. The question had been proposed to the commission, Whether the system or practice of the Kildare-street Society was or was not, to make converts of the Roman Catholics to Protestantism? The commissioners had reported that "No fact has come to our knowledge to lead us to doubt their own repeated disclaimers of having any such intention." Mr. Donelan had declared, that if any such design had been entertained by the Society, he would not have acted as the inspector of the schools, and that he had performed that duty, because he was convinced that the association had no intention of pursuing any system of proselytism. They had even protected Roman Catholic children as far as was consistent with their laws. The schoolmaster and mistress of the Society's Model School at Dublin were Roman Catholics. The charges
1266
Mr. Spring Rice
said, he thought that the Society was, from its principles, utterly disqualified to undertake the care of the education of children in Ireland. He made this assertion with sincerity; but at the same time with much reluctance. The hon. member for Waterford had declared his intention of moving, that the subject of education in Ireland should be referred to a select committee. He trusted that the House would then indulge him with a patient hearing; for he was convinced that there were no means of acquiring any moral influence over the people of Ireland, but by establishments of public education. By the present system, boys in early life would be told, when they associated at school, that no difference existed between them, on account of their religious opinions; but when they arrived at the age when the passions were strong, they would be told, that a great difference did exist, and that those who were Catholics must go on one side as a disqualified, proscribed race. A system of divided education was certainly a great evil; but it was the necessary consequence of a divided people, and of divided institutions.
Colonel Trench
trusted that the Kildare-street Society were not lending themselves to any system of proselytism. He believed that the mistaken zeal of those benevolent persons who endeavoured to make proselytes was the great impediment to the diffusion of education, upon which mainly depended the welfare of the country. The Roman Catholic priests, who were favourably disposed to public instruction, had often been controlled by their bishops; and those bishops had been guided by orders from the pope.
Ordered to lie on the table.
SHIPPING INTEREST — NAVIGATION
1267
Mr. Baring,
on rising to present a Petition from the Ship-owners of the City of London, observed, that the subject of this Petition—the changes that had lately been made in the Navigation Laws of this country—was one of vital importance to the nation, as there was great reason to fear that if, by any accident or false legislation, this country suffered other nations in this respect to get the start of her, it would be exceedingly difficult, if not altogether impossible, to regain her position. He took that opportunity, therefore, of asking the vice-president of the Board of Trade, whether it was the intention of government to grant a committee of inquiry upon this subject? He felt himself perfectly unprejudiced; as he acknowledged that he had been one of those who had called for the alterations, respecting which he had since seen some reason to change his mind. He entirely concurred in a sentiment delivered by his right hon. friend, in the very eloquent speech with which he had introduced the bills on this subject, that in carrying into effect experiments founded on untried theories, the best and wisest men might be led into mistakes. The hon. gentleman then proceeded to express his conviction, that some inquiry was necessary into the state of distress which prevailed among those engaged in the shipping trade, for the purpose of ascertaining whether that distress really proceeded from the measures which had been adopted, or whether it was not the consequence of that general stagnation of trade which had, more or less, affected all the other branches of national industry. If it could be really proved before a committee, that the present state of the shipping trade resulted from the measures which had been adopted by his majesty's government, and that if those measures were persisted in, the distress must go on increasing, then it was obvious, that, unless they turned back from the course which they had been pursuing, it would be impossible for this country to compete with foreigners, cither in the shipping or carrying trade. After several other observations, which were delivered in too low a tone to reach the gallery, the hon. gentleman concluded by expressing his conviction, that it had been proved beyond contradiction, that ships built in Great Britain cost just as much again as those built in Germany; in short, that every thing necessary to send a ship to sea, cost double
1268
Mr. C. Grant
begged not to be supposed to assent to the propositions of the hon. member, if he abstained from following him through the various subjects he had touched upon. All he rose to say was, that his right hon. friend, the President of the Board of Trade, was exceedingly anxious to take the earliest opportunity which his health would allow of, to bring the subject under the consideration of the House. He begged, at the same time, not to be understood as pledging his right hon. friend to adopt any particular course. He was not authorised to make any declaration on that subject by his right hon. friend. He merely begged to be understood as declaring, that he would take the earliest opportunity of putting the House in possession of the views of his majesty's government upon the whole question connected with the Shipping interest of the country.
General Gascoyne,
after having postponed his motion so frequently, in order to have the opportunity of hearing the sentiments of his right hon. colleague (Mr. Huskisson) upon the great question which it involved, felt strong reluctance to bring it forward in his absence. As he understood, however, that his right hon. colleague
1269
Mr. Alderman Thompson
was willing to admit, that great distress prevailed among the ship-owners; but he very much doubted whether it was in the power of parliament to afford them any relief. It was his opinion, that the alteration in the Navigation Laws, which was said to be the cause of all their distress, had not injured the ship-owners to any thing like the extent which was supposed. That distress, he feared, was but a part of the system of overtrading, which had, more or less, affected all the interests of the country. It was a matter well worth the attention of the House, that the shipping had not fallen off in number of vessels or extent of tonnage, since the alterations which were now decried as the sole cause of all their misfortunes. The shipping interest, like every other, had been affected by the late spirit of overtrading; and, although he entertained serious doubts whether any remedy could be applied by that House, he had no objection to an inquiry before a committee.
Mr. Peel
deprecated discussion at the present moment, and hoped that members would abstain from making any precipitate pledges, as to the course which they would take.
Mr. Baring
said, of this he was convinced, that the shipping interest could not remain in its present state. Either something less should have been done, or something more should now be done. He did not know what would become of the country, if we did not maintain our commercial superiority.
Mr. Warburton
said, he had observed no indications of that division of opinion in the cabinet, which the hon. member for Callington stated to exist, with respect to the liberal system of commercial policy lately adopted by government. On the contrary, he had observed—and it had given him much satisfaction—that all the members of government had concurred in stating their determination to continue to act upon the liberal principles which they had avowed. He thought it right to say
1270
Sir T. Lethbridge
said, it might be the wish of ministers, but he doubted their ability, to follow up the liberal system in all its bearings. It was with some surprise that he had listened to the observations of the hon. member for Callington that night, because he recollected that, three years ago, on presenting a petition to that House, the hon. member had called upon government to carry into execution those very principles which he now so strongly objected to [hear, hear]. For himself, he entertained the same opinion which he at that time expressed; namely, that it was impossible for this highly-taxed country to follow up the system of free trade. The distress of the ship-owners arose from this circumstance—that the protection which they formerly enjoyed against the competition of foreign shipping had been withdrawn. Nobody could desire more than himself to see the President of the Board of Trade in the House again; but he thought the question was one which ought not to be postponed on account of the absence of any individual. He trusted that the hon. general would not postpone his motion beyond next week; for he knew well the anxiety which was felt on the subject, and the vital interests which were at stake.
Sir E. Knatchbull
said, that if the motion were postponed to the 1st of May, the appointment of a committee at that period would be useless, so far as regarded the present session.
Mr. Baring
said, that the question of time was of great importance, and for that reason he was desirous of learning from the vice-president of the Board of Trade, whether ministers intended to oppose the appointment of a committee. If ministers were resolved not to grant a committee, it did not much matter when the motion was made; but if the contrary was the case, it ought to be brought forward immediately. He recommended ministers to turn the matter in their minds, and to state their decision, not that night, but to-morrow or the next day. If that decision should be in favour of the appointment of a committee, it might be immediately nominated, and the subject could then be calmly and dispassionately investigated.
General Gascoyne
observed, that if
1271
Mr. Sykes
thought that the motion should not be postponed to so late a period.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that without pledging himself as to any particular course which the government might think it advisable to adopt, when the motion should be submitted, he hedged to state, on the part of himself and his right hon. friends, that their wish was that the gallant general should take exactly that course which he considered most convenient to himself, to the petitioners, and to all the parties interested. If the gallant officer should fix upon a time when his right hon. friend, the President of the Board of Trade, should, from ill health, be unable to attend, he undertook to say, on the part of those about him, that, they would, though deprived of the assistance of their right hon. colleague, endeavour to give the best explanation in their power of the views of government upon the subject.
General Gascoyne
said, that after what had fallen from the right hon. gentleman, he would postpone his motion to the 29th instant.
CORN LAWS.]
The House again resolved itself into a Committee, to consider further of the Corn Trade Acts. On the resolution being put, "That whenever the average price of Rye, or of Peas, or of Beans, made up and published in manner required by law, shall be 35s., and under 36
s
s
s
s
d
s
s
s
s
s
s
d
s
s
d
Sir John Brydges
said, he was anxious to say a few words, and they should be a few words only, not having hitherto had an opportunity to express his opinion upon the subject under discussion. But before
1272
1273
Mr. Gipps
said, he did not think that the averages had been preserved in respect to rye, as compared with wheat. They were, in the present instance, too low, and he would move, as an amendment, that 40
s
s
Mr. Western
complained, that the proportion formerly observed between wheat and other grains had, in this instance, been departed from. The usual proportion of price was two thirds; but they had lowered the price of rye to 35
s
s
s
d
s
s
Mr. C. Grant
said, that in rye, peas, and beans, as in oats and barley, the averages of the last six years had been resorted to, with a view to regulate the price, and the result was what had been laid before the Committee.
Mr. Wodehouse
said, that the resolution proposed left the farmers without any remedy, in the event of a losing crop. Now, the fact was, that every crop of the last year, except that of wheat, had been a losing crop. He would support the amendment.
1274
Sir E. Knatchbull
thought, that the whole calculation of ministers had been upon erroneous principles. The average taken had been that of the last six years: now the fact was, that during the whole of the last six years, the agriculturists, instead of making a profit, had been growing to a loss. The course of ministers ought to have been, not to consider the average, but to ascertain what was a fair remunerating price.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
said, that the question, though it lay in a narrow compass, was an important one; but the course of the hon. gentlemen connected with the landed interest placed government in rather an unfair situation. When it had been proposed to rely upon the average of the last six years, in the case of the oats and barley, the hon. gentlemen were quite agreed; because that gave them a better rate than under the old rule they would have obtained: but now, upon the rye and peas, when the weapon cut a little the other way, they wanted to turn about, and said, "Let us calculate upon the old principle." Now it was at least fair that the course pursued should be uniform; and certainly, that taken was one by which the landed gentlemen did not suffer.
Mr. Calcraft
contended, that every case should stand upon its own merits, and that it mattered little what was the average price of the last six years, if that price afforded no remuneration to the farmer. Now he contended, that it was the duty of the House to enable the grower to sell his corn at the lowest possible rate. The circumstances of the country were such as to call for as cheap a supply of corn as it was possible to obtain. But how was it possible to have cheap corn from the farmer, if his rye and his beans were a continually losing crop? Let the farmer have something like profit on those two articles, and then he could afford to give the corn on more moderate terms.
Mr. G. Robinson
trusted, that it was not the intention of ministers to give way upon this point, as they had done in the case of oats and barley. The landed gentlemen should recollect, that there were other interests to protect besides their own.
Mr. Cripps
said, that the agriculturists and manufacturers hung together, and it was impossible to depress either, without injury to both. The manufacturers had never been worse off than, when corn was
1275
Mr. Whitmore
hoped that the committee would not be led away by the supposition that, the alteration proposed was of a trivial nature. He trusted that ministers would persevere in the original resolution.
Sir T. Lethbridge
contended, that there ought to be an alteration in favour of the home-grower, and that the resolution, as it now stood, could not be agreed to without injuring the agricultural interest. A great deal had been said about the conduct of landed gentlemen; but he begged the House to recollect, that they were there upon their defence, and that they would not do their duty if they did not watch every item of the resolutions.
Colonel Wood
said, that the importation of peas and beans was not worth talking about. He put it to the hon. member who had proposed the amendment, whether it was worth while dividing the committee upon it.
Sir T. Gooch
denied that the quantity of peas and beans grown in England was trifling. Two thirds of the land in England were capable of producing that crop, which was generally sown as a preparation for a wheat crop, and it was called by farmers the "golden crop;" but if the political economists were to carry their point, that crop must be henceforth called the "copper crop." He gave his hearty concurrence to the amendment.
The committee divided: For the amendment 102. For the original resolution 150. Majority 48. The resolution respecting wheat, meal and flour, viz., "for every barrel being 196lb., a duty equal in amount to the duty payable on five bushels of wheat," was then put;
Sir J. Newport
proposed as an amendment, that the following words should be added to the resolution, "and also a duty not fluctuating of 4
s
1276
Mr. Frankland Lewis
called the attention of the committee to the scarcity which prevailed in 1801, and hoped that they would not adopt any system, but one that would work in all seasons—in seasons of plenty as well as scarcity. If they did, it would certainly break down. Millers, from the very nature of things, possessed a monopoly. He knew it to be a fact, that during the great scarcity in this country, when the quartern loaf was at 22½
d
d
Mr. Irving
said, that considering that the manufacture of flour was of great importance, that a large capital was employed in that manufacture in this country, and that it was a staple manufacture in the sister kingdom, it behoved the committee to take care how they interfered with that trade by permitting the importation of foreign flour. He gave his unqualified support to the amendment.
Mr. Spring Rice
thought the amendment proposed by his right hon. friend was fair and reasonable. If the importation of foreign flour were sanctioned, upon payment of the duty stated in the original resolution, the consequence would be that the difference between the freight of wheat when imported raw, and when manufactured into flour, would reduce the protection price of wheat from 60
s
s
d
1277
Mr. C. Grant
felt great reluctance in opposing the amendment of his right hon. friend; but he thought the subject had not been rightly understood by the committee. For a long period, the duty on wheat and on flour had been unequal; the disproportion had always been in favour of foreign flour. The resolution went to enact the same duty on flour as on the wheat which would produce it. The resolution said, that 196lb. of flour should correspond with five bushels of wheat. Strictly speaking, from eight bushels of wheat, 336lb. of flour ought to be produced; but the resolution assumed that eight bushels of wheat yielded only 313lb. of flour: the five bushels of wheat were assumed as equal to 196 lb. of flour, when in fact they were equal to 210 lb. By the existing law, when wheat paid a duty of 20
s
s
d
s
1278
s
s
s
s
s
l
s
d
l
s
l
s
d
d
Sir J. Newport
asked why, if the right hon. member's reasoning were correct, a prohibitory duty had been laid on the importation of American flour into the British West-India Islands?
Mr. Whitmore
objected to the amendment, on the ground that it did not apply to any particular price. He was sure if an additional duty of 4
s
Mr. Moore
said, that the milling inter-
1279
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, that when a proposition was made the other night for increasing the protection on bailey and oats, he assented to it, because he thought that the question had not been fairly considered; but, as he now thought that there were no grounds for the amendment of the right hon. baronet, he would support the proposition of government, no matter in how small a majority he might be left. His right hon. friend had stated, that the present bill would place the duty on wheat and flour on an equal footing, and that previously it had been most unequal; the duty on wheat being 12
s
s
d
s
The committee divided: For the Amendment 116. For the original Resolution 152; Majority 36. The rest of the resolutions were, after some conversation, agreed to.
1280
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Tuesday, March 20, 1827.
NAVIGATION" LAWS—STATE OF THE
The Marquis of Londonderry
presented a Petition from the Master Ship-carpenters, Hope, Sail, and Mast makers of Sunderland, in the county of Durham, against any alteration in the Navigation Laws. He stated, that those laws under which the shipping interest had been protected were now to be put aside; and he certainly wished to know where the changes in the fundamental principles of the constitution were to end. Those fundamental principles had been changed in many very serious and important points. When untoward fate took away a much lamented statesman, a beloved relation of his, the councils of this country, both at home and abroad, were directed on principles of perfect security, through all parts of our establishments. Both as regarded foreign and internal policy, the Navigation act of Charles 2nd had been infringed upon, step by step, and he did not know to what extent, these new experiments might go. It, therefore, became the duty of persons connected with the shipping interest, and also of those who were connected with landed property, to see if any stop was likely to be put to these new experiments. Me hoped the time was not far distant when he should know who was at the head of his majesty's government, and see upon what principles it was to be conducted. At present, there was a schism in the government which he should be glad to see healed. It was a melancholy circumstance, that at the time when an illustrious individual had been prevented, by the decree of Providence, from attending to his duties in parliament (which no man could lament more than he did), to think that, by the decree of the same Providence, those individuals who ought to be at their post answering for all those principles, were equally unable to attend. He hoped that the illness of the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and of the President of the Board of Trade, would not be of long duration; and that the country would soon have a government to which it could look up with confidence. Unless something was soon done with respect to the state of his majesty's government, he should feel it to be his humble duty, possessed as he was of inferior abilities, to ask a distinct question upon the subject.
1281
ROMAN CATHOLIC CLAIMS.
The Duke of Devonshire
presented a Petition from the Roman Catholics of Dungarvon, praying for the removal of the disabilities under which they laboured. He was desirous of shortly expressing to their lordships the deep regret he felt, that the consideration of the Catholic claims had been rejected, by a decision come to in another place. From principle, and from justice, he had invariably felt a strong conviction of the expediency of complying with the prayer of the Roman Catholics; and, if any thing could have added to the weight of that conviction, it would have been the events of the past year, which had established beyond all doubt, that the Catholics feel as one man on this great question. Instances of intemperance, and even of violence, produced by the determination not to consider the claims of the Catholics, showed the propriety and necessity of looking to the cause which produced them. That cause was Catholic exclusion, or a denial of those constitutional rights, of which, in his opinion, no man ought to be deprived, unless for reasons far more strong than those which had ever been urged in support of the exclusion of the Catholics. The restriction which existed opposed itself not only to the improvement of Ireland, but kept up a feverish excitement which produced animosity and destroyed all the charities of social life; and there was no alternative but for the Catholics to obtain their just rights, the granting which he urged, not for the sake of the Catholics, only but also of the Protestants of the South and the West. He addressed their lordships as one who had been exposed to the sneers of those to whose cause he had been attached; but, conscious of the sincerity of his own views, he had disregarded their attacks. He had not, however, abandoned their cause; on the contrary, he desired more than ever to see justice done to them, and whatever means he had in his power should always be exerted for that object. While he made that declaration, he also wished to express the regret he felt at the determination which had been shown, not even to consider the claims of the Catholics; which determination was likely to weaken the efforts of those who might have been disposed to follow an even and temperate course; who might have been powerful in conciliating the respective parties that were in collision. It had pleased those who had power elsewhere, to
1282
The Lord Chancellor
said, he could not permit the observation, that the disinclination of the legislature to take into consideration the claims of the Roman Catholics was a thing to be lamented, to pass unnoticed; and he would call to their lordships' recollection the history of a few past years. The first motion which was proposed by the friends to Roman Catholic emancipation, was a motion to take the petitions of the Roman Catholics into consideration. The objection made to that proposition was by persons, who, he would venture to say, were as much attached to the constitution, and as favourable to civil and religious liberty, as any who had ever entered that House. The objection turned upon this point—that a motion of so general a nature had no other tendency but to raise, in the minds of the Protestant subjects of his majesty, apprehensions with respect to their safe enjoyment of civil and religious liberty, and which might therefore create great uneasiness, when perhaps there was no occasion, and on the other hand give hopes to the Roman Catholics, which no Protestant legislature, and no Protestant king at the head of it, ought to encourage. Such motions had been made year after year, and repeatedly rejected; and at last a motion was brought forward for the purpose of carrying- into execution, not the general consideration of the subject, but of some specific measure. This bill had also been rejected repeatedly; and the motion made this session, to take into consideration the state of the Catholics, was a motion which came to the same proposition which had been often before parliament, when, after all the attention given to the subject, it had been considered to be a measure which parliament ought not to adopt. He had taken the liberty to state these circumstances, because he thought it necessary, when a motion had been made, to take into consideration the state of the Catholics, to refer back to the frequent attempts which had been made for effecting that purpose. With respect to what ought to be the particular measure brought forward, he could only say on that subject, that whenever
1283
The Marquis of Lansdown
said, he had no intention of offering any observations on the petition which his noble friend had presented, had it not been for the unexpected remarks which had just fallen from the noble and learned lord. But after those remarks, directed as they were to the form of the motion to which he had intended to have endeavoured to induce their lordships to agree, had it not beau for circumstances over which he had no control, he felt himself bound to say a few words; without entering at that moment into the merits of that motion, and without attempting any vindication of the form which the motion had assumed in another place. He should not, therefore, now state the grounds upon which he should have called upon their lordships to consider the claims of the Roman Catholics before they adopted any specific measure on the subject; but the circumstance, that time after time, specific measures had been brought forward, which had been, under the influence of the noble and learned lord, repeatedly rejected, formed a reason for introducing a measure of a general nature. And, what more natural or more parliamentary course—what course more directly applied to the arguments used by the noble and learned lord—than when their lordships had been induced to reject, nay, to treat with contempt, every suggestion which the wisest and most able men had offered for security, after specific motions had been brought forward, which had been disapproved of by the noble and learned lord, and rejected by parliament, and after the increasing dis-
1284
1285
The Lord Chancellor
observed, that if the noble marquis meant to state, that the decisions of that House were made under the influence of the person whom he called the "noble and learned lord," applying to himself, he could only say, God forbid that that should be the fact! His own confident opinion was, that their lordships' decisions were those of a Protestant House of parliament in a Protestant empire, paying only a proper attention to the honest declarations of the opinion of one of the members of that House; for he was too well acquainted with his own imperfections and defects—and he said that, as a man approaching to his grave—to suppose that their lordships had thought proper to adopt his opinion on a matter of such great importance. He only wished so to conduct himself, that the subjects of a Protestant king and a Protestant parliament might be convinced that he went to the grave without having lessened the security which the country had for the enjoyment of civil and religious liberty. He did not presume to state or to think that the sentiments of the humble individual, convinced of his imperfections, who now stood before their lordships, could have such influence as to direct their decisions; and he thought that the noble marquis, who stated that he had influence, paid no compliment to their lordships. With respect to security for a Protestant country and for a Protestant church, he had long made up his mind, that their lordships must do either of these two things—they must grant what was asked without any securities at all, or they must have much better security than those which had hitherto been offered. Such security was the most weak and ineffective that could possibly be offered to parliament. He could assure the noble marquis, that he should be ever foremost to express the respect which he felt was due to him; but he thought he had a right to expect that that noble lord would have given him credit for perfect conviction of the justice of the part he had acted, with
1286
GAME LAWS.]
Lord Wharncliffe
rose to move the order of the day on the subject of the Game Laws Amendment Bill. He should not detain their lordships at any length, in moving for the second reading of the bill, because he had already called their lordships' attention to the subject. He would rather wait to see what arguments would be adduced against the measure, and take an opportunity afterwards of endeavouring to answer them; but he was anxious, before the House proceeded to the discussion, to entreat of their lordships not to be drawn into a discussion on any of the clauses. What he wished to know was, whether their lordships would agree to the principle upon which the bill was formed. That principle was a very simple one: it merely went the length of saying, that every man should have power to do what he pleased on his own land: that no person should be allowed to trespass on another man's grounds, and it proposed to legalize the disposal of game. Those were the principles to which he wished to draw their lordships' attention. After a consideration of the subject for many years, he could submit that principle to their lordships with a perfect conviction, that, as far as respected their amusements or their privileges, it would effect no change, and could only be beneficial in restoring the law to the standard of common sense.
The Earl of Falmouth
, in rising to oppose the second reading of the bill, observed, that if he understood the proposed measure rightly, it was founded on three grounds. The first with a view to alter the present qualification for killing game; the second, to enable small proprietors of
1287
1288
The Earl of Rosebery,
after detailing the evils and inconvenience of the present Game Laws, concluded by declaring his intention to vote for the second reading of the bill.
The Earl of Hardwicke
also expressed his opinion in favour of the proposed alteration.
The Marquis of Salisbury
said, he was not opposed to the sale of game under proper regulations, but objected to the general innovations which the proposed bill would introduce. There was, he contended, no sufficient means of detecting or punishing poachers or trespassers; and he could not, therefore, consent to a repeal of all the present laws on the subject, without enacting some protection in return.
Lord Redesdale
objected to the proposed alterations, as interfering with the right of property in such a way as would produce actions on actions without end. Every one at all acquainted with the way in which property was in this country divided into small parcels, must be aware of the difficulties attendant on such a measure. Proprietors of land not wider than the table between their lordships, would bring actions for trespass, and the whole country would be involved in unceasing litigation. He was quite certain that the game was mostly stolen by the gamekeepers themselves; and hence, "according to the old maxim, that two of a trade can never agree," arose the contests betwixt them and the other poachers; the gamekeepers contending not so much for the preservation of the game for their employers, as for their own monopoly in the stealth of it. As to the existing qualifications, he was of opinion that their removal would tend to prevent poaching. He had always observed, that when a farmer obtained the privilege of shooting, he was invariably found to be a most active enemy to the poachers. Under this impression, he would vote for the second reading of the bill; but would suggest the omission of the first part of it, and make it a bill merely
1289
The Marquis of Bute
hoped that no objection would be made to the second reading of the bill. He thought that the new rights given by this bill would be found much more advantageous to the great landed proprietors as well as to the country at large, than the privileges which they at present enjoyed. The existing laws against poaching were most unjust and oppressive in their operation. If a man was convicted of stealing poultry, or potatoes, or other property of that description, he was punished by, perhaps, a month's imprisonment; but if he was convicted of stealing game, he was sentenced to imprisonment for three times that period. Since the complaints against the principles of these laws were so general and so notorious, he trusted that their lordships would show their compliance with the public feeling on this subject, by voting in favour of the bill.
The Earl of Westmorland
rose to oppose the principle of this measure. He was surprised that his noble friend could give his sanction to it by voting for the second reading. If he thought that it was calculated in the slightest degree to prevent poaching, or its consequences to those misguided men who were engaged in poaching, or was likely to produce advantages to any class of mankind, he would most cheerfully give it his support. But in his opinion, the only effect it could possibly have was to increase the grounds of every one of those complaints which existed against the present system. The noble lord who introduced the bill, had acted very fairly; for he held out no expectation that it would put an end to the existing grievances; nor was it in the power of law to put an end to them, unless it were a law of such severity as to merit their lordships' reprobation. He contended, that this was an aristocratical act, calculated to promote the privileges of the great landed proprietors, to the injury of every man of moderate fortune in the country; and therefore it should meet with his opposition. What advantage was it to a man of small property to be subject the moment he stepped off it, to be taken before a magistrate? Was it this that was to put an end to all quarrels? A hunter might go after a hare into another man's ground, but a shooter might not: it was true the hunter must have started
1290
Lord Ellenborough
was convinced, that the time would soon come; when their lordships would be obliged to prevent, by legislative enactment, the numerous crimes which grew out of the present system of our Game-laws. With respect to the bill before the House, he thought that the noble lord who introduced it had been most unfortunate in the hands in which he had placed it to be manufactured. Without touching any of its clauses or provisions, he could engage to strike out between six and seven hundred words which were perfectly useless. In another place, a most useful operation was at that moment going on; namely, the consolidating and abridging the criminal laws, and drawing them up in simple and straightforward language. Now, it was most desirable that the present bill should be couched in language that was intelligible to poachers and country magistrates—the two classes of individuals who most required to understand it. One of its objects was to make game property; yet, in no part of it was the word "property" to be found. Another object was, to prevent poaching by punishment; but no where was the punishment intended set forth. In one place it was provided, that a body collegiate was entitled to younger game, and the eggs thereof; but how great must be the despair of that collegiate body, when they turned over a leaf, and found, that if any member of it was a lord of a manor, he must not break the shell of the egg. In short, the bill was full of ab-
1291
Lord King
observed, that the House was actuated by a great many fears at that moment. There was, first, the fear of being late for dinner; there was, then, the fear of a free trade in game. Some noble lords apprehended a millennium of poachers: There was a strong attraction between the mouth of an alderman and the wing of a pheasant; but the difficulty was to find a safe conductor. He recommended the House to follow the example of some parts of Germany on this subject. The elector of Hesse, who was only known iii this country as a soldier-seller, was also a strict contractor in game and wild pigs. As we had imported whiskers, and tight uniforms, and other good things from the Germans, might we not also adopt their notions on this subject? In France, numerous laws had been enacted to preserve the game. One was a very curious restriction, which was intended to prevent persons from manuring bishops' land with night-soil, for fear of injuring the flavour of the game. He believed there was not much difference between the reverend bench there and here. Arthur Young, who was a great agriculturist, inferred a strong similarity between a pheasant and a prince of the blood; because they were both fed at the public expense. Now, he thought the observation equally applied to the bishops: the only difference was, that the one was supported on the nett produce, and the other on the gross produce of the country. It had been said, that this embraced a question of morality; if so, it was strange that the right reverend prelates were so indifferent to it; for, although the benches opposite had been shortly before filled, there now re-
1292
The Lord Chancellor
referred to some of the observations of his noble and learned friend (lord Redesdale), and said that he must be considered better authority on this subject than his noble friend, because he had never, he believed, had a gun in his hand in his life, whilst he (the lord Chancellor) had never one out of his, whenever he could have one in it. One of the greatest delights he enjoyed in the autumn was afforded by his dogs, whom he could not help contrasting with those learned friends who entertained him, but not quite as delightfully, for the remaining ten months of the year. He was particularly pleased at observing how well his dogs knew how to mind their points, and when to stop—which was more than he could say for his learned friends at the bar [a laugh]. He considered it rather unfair in a noble lord to object to the clauses of a bill, instead of speaking to its principle. Perhaps it would be more advisable for that noble lord himself to set to work, and endeavour to manage it differently. He wished to be understood not to be pledged to a particular line of conduct, even should he vote against the bill in its presented form. There were some clauses in the bill which could not stand as they were, and which were too bad for correction. There would, he was convinced, be game enough in the country for every gentleman, provided they would keep on good terms with the farmers. In consequence of the good feeling existing between himself and his farmers, and from his having no gamekeeper, he, at least, had never been in want of game. A noble lord near him would recollect a circumstance which occurred at Lancaster when they were on the circuit together. An individual who, for the present purpose, he would designate as A. B., had been constantly tried for stealing salmon out of a river, and as often as he was brought up for this offence, so often did all the judges declare it as their opinion, that the salmon in the river were
bona, vacantia,
1293
bona vacantia
Lord Wharncliffe
shortly replied. He had not, he said, by this bill taken away any old rights, and he had created no new ones, except that of allowing every one to kill game on his own land; and that he believed to be a right which every one ought to exercise. It had been erroneously stated, that, by the law of Scotland, no person could kill game on his own land without a qualification; there were many decisions upon this point, which put beyond a doubt the right of every body in this particular. By the law of Scotland, qualifications were only necessary upon another person's land. A noble baron opposite had descanted upon the many absurdities contained in the bill; but when it came before a committee, he should endeavour to convince that noble baron, that he had talked many more absurdities than he had ever accused him of writing. He bogged their, lordships to believe that he was not so fond of his own child as to regret its loss, simply because it was his; and if any other and better measure were submitted to their lordships, he would cheerfully relinquish his. At the same time, he was convinced that many years could not pass over with the present absurd, oppressive, and unjust laws in force.
The House divided: Contents 38; Not-Contents 17: Majority 21.
HOUSE OF LORDS.
Thursday, March 22, 1827.
CORN AND WOOL TRADE.]
The Earl of Malmesbury
rose to move for some returns with respect to the Importation of
1294
d
d
d
d
d
1295
s
l
l
l
l
1296
d
1297
Lord Bexley
said, that the noble lord appeared to him to be greatly deceived in one respect. The noble lord seemed to argue upon this question as if it was one which was founded on a new principle, and as if the encouragement of the importation of foreign wool was a novel system in this country. In the time of our ancestors that encouragement had been curried to a much greater extent than it was at present; we were only returning, therefore, to the system that formerly prevailed. The present system he believed would be found much more advantageous to the growers of wool, than that which existed immediately previous to it; and he must bring to the recollection of the noble lord, that the change took place in consequence of applications and petitions on the subject from the wool-growers themselves, who were allowed by it to export their long wool. The manufacturers, he believed, had nothing to fear from the exportation of wool. England was still by far the best market for wool, and not only kept at home its own produce, but attracted to its market a large proportion of the produce of other countries.
The Duke of Richmond
felt himself bound to say a few words on this subject, upon which he had presented a number of petitions from the county of Sussex. As to the observation that had been made, that wool had been left on the hands of the grower, from the permission to import for the good of the manufacturers, he could only say, that that was one of the experiments of the free-trade gentlemen. It had, however, failed; and now they attempted to put a gloss over it. He hoped and trusted that the noble earl who had moved for these returns, would call the attention of the House to this important subject. He could not believe that it was beneficial to this country to allow a foreign grower to send us his produce. He thought it would be best for this country to go back to its former system.
1298
Lord King
stated, that the noble mover had made out what he thought a very strong case against free trade. He had expected to have heard the noble lord (Bexley)—if he was a friend to the general interests of the country, and a real friend to free trade—observe, that though there might have been some distress among the agriculturists, there had been great distress among the manufacturers; and that a higher duty, preventing the importation of wool, would not have diminished the distress of the agriculturists, but would have added greatly to the distress of the manufacturers. It had been stated, that some of the wool remained on the hands of the growers. Perhaps that might be the case; but then the noble lord on the ministerial bench might have asked, whether the importation of wool continued? seeing that, if it did, it was because the wool was worked up. He had expected the noble lord, if he was a friend to the general interests of the country, to have made use of those arguments. If ministers did not defend the manufacturers, their interest would assuredly be neglected.
The Earl of Darnley
was for giving protection both to the growers of corn and wool. The growers of wool laboured under grievous hardships. They had two years of their stock on hand. Now, such a state of things ought not to exist. It was a gross injustice to that class of the community, and no adequate advantage to the manufacturers.
The Marquis of Salisbury
said, he had not intended to trouble their lordships with any observations on the subject, if a noble baron had not attempted to set in opposition the agricultural and manufacturing interests, by stating, that the one was sacrificed for the sake of the other. ["No," from lord King.] If the noble lord thought that the two interests were connected, he was sorry he had mistaken him. With respect to the question before their lordships, he must say, that when the farmers had two years produce in hand, and were unable to sell, except at a ruinous price, and when the foreigner was pouring his produce into this country, and taking nothing in return but money—he must say, that if such a state of things was prosperous to the country, then was the present period most prosperous.
The Duke of Buckingham
said, he should go to a different part of the question; namely, the proposed alteration in
1299
The Earl of Westmorland
said, he did not intend to trouble their lordships with arguments on the question before the House, but simply to reply to the noble duke as to the intention of his noble friend, whose absence he deeply regretted. His noble friend certainly had intended to submit resolutions to their lordships on the subject of the Corn-laws; but he had not, he believed, made up his mind in what way he could do it, so as to conform to the practice of the House. Their lord-
1300
Lord Ellenborough
said, that such a course would be equally irregular on the part of any other noble lord, as on the part of the noble earl who was absent. The noble lord had stated, that the House acquiesced in the suggestion not to discuss this question. The House, however, were obliged to acquiesce; seeing that no other noble lord opposite could have made an explanation on the subject.
Lord Redesdale
observed, that when their lordships came to the consideration of the Corn-laws, they must view the subject as connected with a great many circumstances. The profits of the farmer had been lowered by the importation of wool, and by the depressed price of tallow, on account of importation. Importation had had the same effect on hides and skins, and cheese; and it was hardly worth the farmer's while to continue their dairies. He agreed with the noble duke, that the House ought to have an opportunity afforded it, of declaring its opinion on the com question; and if no other noble lord would undertake the task, he should himself submit a motion on the subject to their lordships. The resolutions printed in the votes of the House of Commons appeared to be of this description—that they fixed a maximum on the price of corn. Did any writer on political economy, or any person who had thought upon the subject, dream of such a plan? The experience of past ages in this country proved, that to fix a maximum on any commodity was injurious to the production of that commodity. In the reign of Edward 2nd, a maximum was imposed on every thing; which law lasted about a year, when the cry of the country became so strong as to cause its repeal. If the effect of a maximum on other things was mischievous, it was still more impolitic when applied to corn; the maximum of which was now fixed at 60
s
1301
The Earl of Malmesbury
said, he was happy to hear that the learned lord intended to submit some resolutions to that House on the subject. He was perfectly ready to meet his majesty's government in any modification of the Corn-laws; but he thought it would be a great advantage that the sentiments of their lordships should be well known, previous to the
1302
Lord Ellenborough
was also glad to hear that the noble and learned lord proposed to submit some resolutions on the subject to the House.
Lord Bexley
said, that if the noble and learned lord's propositions were carried into effect, they would exclude all foreign commerce entirely.
The motion for the returns was then agreed to.
HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, March 22, 1827.
CONVENTION WITH PORTUGAL.]
Mr. Secretary Peel
, in the absence of Mr. Secretary Canning, presented, by command of his Majesty, the following
CONVENTION between his Majesty and her Royal Highness the Infanta Regent of Portugal, for providing for the maintenance of a Corps of British Troops, sent to Portugal, Dec. 1826; signed at Brighthelmstone, Jan. 19, 1827.
"In the name of the Most Holy and Undivided Trinity.
"Her Royal Highness the Infanta Regent of Portugal having, in consequence of aggressions committed against the Portuguese territory, claimed the fulfilment, by his Majesty the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, of the ancient treaties of alliance and friendship which subsist between the two Crowns; and his Britannic Majesty having thereupon resolved to send, and having actually sent, a body of troops to Portugal, the two High Contracting Parties think it necessary to agree upon certain arrangements for the maintenance of the said troops, during their stay in Portugal, and have named as their plenipotentiaries for that purpose, viz;—
"His Majesty, the King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, the right hon. George Canning, a member of his said Majesty's most hon. Privy Council, a member of Parliament, and his said Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs:—And her Royal Highness the Infanta Regent of Portugal, the most illustrious and most excellent lord, Don Pedro de Souza e Holstein, marquis of Palmella, a peer of the Kingdom of Portugal, Grand Cross of the Order of Christ, knight of the Order of the Golden
1303
Art. 1. "Her Royal Highness the Infanta Regent of Portugal, anxious that the body of troops which has been so promptly sent to her Royal Highness's aid by his Britannic Majesty, should be treated with the hospitality becoming the relations of the two allied nations, engages to provide the necessary barracks and quarters, and buildings for hospitals, and for stores and magazines, and the necessary rations of provisions and forage, for the officers, non-commissioned officers, and soldiers, and for the horses and cattle of the British Auxiliary Army, according to the regulations of the British service.
2. "The provisions and forage above specified are to be delivered to the British Commissariat, at a distance not greater than six Portuguese leagues from the head-quarters of each British detachment to which they are supplied, unless in cases where a different arrangement shall be made, with the consent of the British Commissariat.
3. "In order to obviate the difficulties which an immediate disbursement of funds for the purchase of the aforesaid provisions and forage might occasion, under the present circumstances, to the Government of Portugal, it is agreed that the British Commissary-general shall, for the present, provide those supplies for the British army, charging the cost thereof to the account of the Portuguese Government. As, however, cases may arise, in which it may be more convenient to receive such supplies from Portuguese magazines, for the purpose of avoiding competition in the markets, the British Commissary-general shall, in the execution of this agreement, concert his proceedings from time to time with a person appointed for that end by the Government of Portugal.
4. "The accounts of the British Commissariat being- approved and signed by the Commander of the Auxiliary Army, shall be delivered every three months to the Portuguese Government, which, having verified the same, shall either pay the amount thereof forthwith to the British Commissary-general, or carry it over to
1304
5. "The cost of provisions and forage, for the British troops shall be placed to the account of the Portuguese Government, from the clay of the landing of the said troops in Portugal, and shall cease to be placed to that account from the day of their departure, or of their passing the frontiers of Portugal.
6. "Her Royal Highness the Infanta Regent of Portugal, having consented that on this, as on former occasions, the forts St. Julien and of Bugio shall be occupied by the British troops, it is agreed that the said occupation shall continue so long as the auxiliary army shall remain in Portugal. Those forts shall be, from time to time, duly provisioned by the Portuguese Government, or by the British Commissariat, on account of the Portuguese Government, in the same manner as is provided in the foregoing articles with respect to the Auxiliary Army.
"Arrangements shall be made between the Government of Portugal and the Commander of the British Army, for the currying on of the service of the Pratique, of the Police of the Harbour, and of the Customs, by the proper officers of the Portuguese Government, usually employed for those purposes. A list of these officers shall be given to the British Commanding Officer, and they shall be strictly under his command in all that may relate to military service, and to the defence of the forts.
7. "His Britannic Majesty requiring, on the part of his ally, only that which is in dispensably necessary for insuring the proper maintenance of his troops, and for the good of the common service, declares, that he will not bring forward any pecuniary claims whatever against the Portuguese Government, on account of the assistance furnished by his Majesty, on this occasion, to Portugal, beyond what is specified in the preceding articles.
8. "The stipulations of this Convention shall remain in full force until the two High Contracting Parties shall mutually agree to make any change therein.
9. "The present Convention shall be ratified, and the ratifications shall be exchanged in London in the space of six weeks from the date hereof, or sooner, if possible.
"In witness whereof the respective
1305
(L.S.)
GEORGE CANNING.
(L.S.)
MARQUEZ DE PALMELLA.
"Done at Brighthelmstone, January 19, 1827."
GALWAY COUNTY ELECTION—BREACH
Mr. Spring Rice
rose to present a Petition on a matter affecting; the vital interests of parliament, and the privileges of the House. He moved, however, first, that the usual sessional order against tampering with or influencing witnesses to be examined on matters before the House, which was in that order declared to be a high misdemeanour, should be read. The order having been read, the hon. member stated, that his petition was from a Mr. Thomas Lambert, of Gal way, brother to the gentleman who had presented a petition against the return of Richard Martin, esq. The petitioner stated himself to have been since the late election, in a very delicate state of health, but upon receiving the Speaker's summons, he proceeded to London, and when in the lobby of the House, was insulted and assaulted by Martin French, esq., whom the petitioner believed to be the active supporter and warm partisan of Mr. Richard Martin. The petitioner declared he had given no provocation for such an attack, and prayed the protection of the House. The hon. member said, he did not intend to move for the attendance of the person mentioned, because he hoped that this notice of it would be enough to show that the House had the power of protecting its witnesses, and would enforce that power so as to put a stop to occurrences like that now complained of, and without which witnesses might often be exposed to difficulty and danger.
Mr. Wynn
thought the matter ought not to stop here; because it became the House to maintain its dignity and show its power. When its witnesses were molested some time ago, the House had sent a man to prison for attacking a gentleman in the lobby; and he therefore moved that the petitioner, and Mr. Martin French should be ordered to attend to-morrow.
The Speaker
asked,' if it was the pleasure of the House that the Serjeant-at-Arms should inquire if Mr. Lambert was in attendance, and the House having sig-
1306
The Speaker
.—Is it the pleasure of the House that Mr. Lambert should be called in?
The Speaker
.—What is your name?—Thomas Lambert.
The Speaker
.—Is this your name attached to this petition?—This is my name.
Mr. Lambert
then proceeded to state, that on Tuesday last he came down to the House, in consequence of a summons which he received to attend the committee appointed to try the Galway election. "I had not been five minutes in the lobby," the gentleman continued, "when Mr. French came up, and said, 'How do you do, Lambert, I am glad to see you,' and asked me to shake hands with him. In consequence of the conduct pursued by Mr. French, when a trial was pending on which my life was at stake, I declined to shake hands with him, but merely made him a low bow. I forgot to state that Mr. Baggot was along with me, and also a Mr. Phipps. Mr. Butler, who is a relation of mine, and a friend of Mr. French, was also with me. As soon as I made the bow, and declined to accept Mr. French's hand, he got into a violent fit of passion; so much so, that his countenance became suddenly distorted with rage. He said, 'I deserve this treatment, for contaminating this hand by offering to shake hands with such a contemptible rascal.' I bowed and thanked him. Two or three gentlemen, who happened to be in the lobby at the time, came over to my friend, Mr. Butler, and asked him if that gentleman
1307
The Speaker
.—Have you any thing further to add?
Mr. Lambert
said, "I forgot to mention that one or two gentlemen wished me to call for a constable, to give Mr. French into custody, but I declined to do so, as I did not think it necessary."
The Speaker
.—Has any hon: member any question to propose to the witness?
Mr. Spring Rice
.—Are you not in attendance in consequence of a summons issued by the Speaker, requiring your attendance as a witness before the committee appointed to investigate the merits of the Galway election?—Yes I am.
Mr. Wynn
said, that the usual course pursued by the House in cases of this description was to call both the petitioner and the person petitioned against to the bar of the House,—a course which he suggested should be pursued to-morrow, when Mr. French would have an opportunity of replying to the charge contained in the petition.
Mr. Hobhouse
, with all due deference to the right hon. gentleman, conceived that this was not a case in which the House was called upon to interfere. No impediment had been offered—no blow had been struck; and he must observe, that if any offence was given, it was the refusal, in the first instance, of the petitioner himself to return the common courtesy which Mr. French had offered him. He was therefore of opinion, that no case had been made out to warrant the interference of the House. If, indeed, the witness had been assaulted, and rendered incapable of giving his evidence, the House in that case
1308
Mr. J. Grattan
concurred in the opinion of the hon. gentleman who had just sat down. If any insult had passed between the parties, it appeared to have originated with the petitioner himself.
Sir J. Yorke
observed, that the question did not appear to be whether Mr. French was a hundred miles off from the petitioner, or only a yard; but whether an assault was committed, or attempted to be committed, within the precincts of that House.
Mr. Abercromby
agreed in the general principle, that the House had a right, in vindication of its honour and dignity, to call persons before them who were guilty of a breach of privilege; but at the same time he could not agree that the present case was one in which that power should be exerted. Another argument against the House interfering in this quarrel, was, that the civil power had already interposed between the parties. He therefore conceived, that the House would be wasting its time, and compromising its dignity, by interfering in the case.
Mr. Littleton
perfectly concurred in the view which the hon. and learned gentleman had taken of the subject. Nothing had occurred tending to a breach of the peace; and even if there had, the police had interfered to prevent any unpleasant consequences.
Mr. Spring Rice
said, that his duty, in the first instance, was confined to presenting the petition of Mr. Lambert; but now that the case was before the House, he must be permitted to say, that it was one in which they were called upon to exercise that sound and wholesome authority, which they possessed. He contended, that the consequences would be most dangerous, if insulting words, tending to a breach of the peace, were passed over without any expression of displeasure, because no blows had been struck. There was no principle more dangerous than this; and he conceived the House was imperatively called upon to discourage such a doctrine. His chief object in presenting this petition was, that persons summoned as witnesses before committees of that House, should know that the House was ready to take up any question, involving their safety or protection. He did not wish to have the person petitioned against in this case called to the bar of the House; but he hoped that the notice of this discussion would have its proper effect.
1309
Mr. Wynn
said, that a petition having been presented, and evidence having been heard at the bar in support of its allegations, he thought it would be wrong for the House to come to the decision, that the prayer of the petition should not be entertained. Witnesses who attended that House should be protected. If a gentleman refused to shake hands with another, that was no reason why he should be threatened. After hearing the petition read and its principal allegations supported by the evidence of the petitioner, he conceived that the party complained against should be called to the bar and admonished. It was said, that the civil power had taken up the case; but in what way did it do so? Merely by calling upon the parties to pledge their honour that nothing hostile should pass between them. This might be sufficient for the purpose of keeping the peace; but the House had another duty to perform; and it was a question to be considered, whether, if this case was passed over, the House would not be surrendering that protection which they should extend to their witnesses. The better way, he conceived, would be for both the gentlemen to attend at the bar of the House to-morrow.
Mr. Bernal
said, that the right hon. gentleman opposite seemed to think that one of the parties in this case had been guilty of a breach of privilege. Now, in that opinion, he could by no means agree; for not one word had been uttered in the lobby connected with the business, on which the parties had been summoned as witnesses. He, therefore, called upon the right hon. gentleman, whose authority in such cases was certainly high, and whose memory no doubt was furnished with ample precedents, to point out any one case similar to that which was now before the Mouse. He thought it would be a hard case if the House decided that Mr. French should be called to the bar and admonished.
Mr. Secretary Peel
said, he had not enjoyed the advantage of hearing the examination of the witness at the bar; but, from what he had heard, it rather appeared to him that the evidence did not entirely support the allegations of the petition. It was certainly questionable whether the party who had petitioned the House had exercised a sound discretion in doing so; but he had done so, and had stated that he was insulted. After the evidence which had been given, he thought that a
1310
Dr. Phillimore
said, that the case appeared to be this,—two witnesses, both of whom had been summoned on an election committee, had had a quarrel, and one charged the other with a breach of privilege. Under all the circumstances, he conceived that the House would not be doing equal justice, if both parties were not ordered to attend.
Mr. Alderman Waithman
considered the point upon which the attention of the House was employed as one of the most frivolous he had ever heard discussed. He would venture to say that there was hardly ever a committee, in reference to which some trifling squabble did not occur, which might not with as much reason be made the subject of an application for the interference of the House. The hon. member to whom the petition had been intrusted had done quite right in presenting it; but he was of opinion that there was nothing in it which called for any further step on the part of the House.
Sir Robert Wilson
differed entirely from the worthy alderman, and conceived that his own arguments were sufficient to prove that it was incumbent on the House to
1311
Mr. Martin French
, and Mr. Thomas Lambert were ordered to attend the House to-morrow.
PENRYN ELECTION—CASE OF JOHN STANBURY.]
The Speaker
begged leave to recall the attention of the House to an order made a few days back for the taking into custody John Stanbury, who was reported by the Penryn Election committee to have absented himself. It was directed, by order of the House, that he should be taken into custody, in consequence of his not having attended before the committee. The Speaker's warrant was accordingly issued for the purpose, and a messenger was deputed to carry it into execution; but the party having- absconded, all his endeavours to discover and apprehend him were unsuccessful; and although he was a second time despatched from town on a similar mission, his efforts were attended with as little beneficial results as before. The usual course on such occasions was to have the messenger to the bar, that the House might hear from himself what steps he had taken for fulfilling the order of the House; and if it should then appear expedient to the House, to present an address to the Crown, praying his majesty to issue a proclamation, with a reward for the apprehension of the party.
1312
The Speaker
asked if any member wished to put any question to the messenger; and no advantage being taken of the invitation, the messenger was permitted to withdraw.
Mr. Wynn
then moved, "That it appears to this House, that John Stanbury has absconded, to avoid being taken into custody, pursuant to an order of the House." Also, "That a humble address be presented to his majesty, praying that he will be graciously pleased immediately to issue his royal proclamation, with such reward as his majesty shall think proper, for discovering, apprehending, and detaining the said John Stanbury."—Agreed to.
SHIPPING INTEREST.]
Mr. Alderman Waithman
said, that there was already before the House a petition from gentlemen connected with the Shipping Interests of the city of London. He held in his hand a petition of a similar nature, from a body of ship-owners in London, of equal respectability. The two bodies to whom he alluded were associated, and had appointed a committee; and although the petition he was about to present was not united with the preceding, it was of a precisely similar nature. The present petition was signed by more than two hundred and fifty persons. They represented the hardship of their case arising out of the laws recently passed by the House, and by which the House had removed certain restrictions upon foreign shipping which had proved an essential security to the British shipping interest. The petitioners stated, that it was now impossible for them to enter into competition with foreigners,
1313
Ordered to lie on the table.
MUTINY AT BARRACKPORE.]
Mr. Hume
said, that in rising to submit to the House the question of which he had so long given notice, he felt it necessary to state, that whatever he should now do upon this subject would be done by him with the greatest reluctance. He would not have submitted this matter to their consideration, if he had not been fully convinced of its great importance as relating to our government in India, and to all our connections with the affairs of that country. The occurrence to which he was about to call the attention of the House took place in the early part of the month of November, 1824. When he mentioned that date, a question might naturally arise, why so great a delay had occurred in laying a subject of so much importance before parliament. Upon that point he should only state, that in the middle of the month of July, 1825, in the course of the session of that year, he had requested to know from the President of the Board of Control, whether the government of this country had received any information of the transactions which had taken place in India in the November preceding? The right hon. gentleman answered then in the negative; and gave the same answer up to the last week in the session, when it was too late to take any step on the subject. In the last session he had given two notices upon this subject; but by some of those chances which frequently occurred, he was twice prevent-
1314
1315
1316
1317
1318
batta
coolies
coolies
1319
1320
1321
1322
1323
1324
Mr. Wynn
said, he felt bound to do justice to the moderation of the statement of the hon. member, although he held it inconsistent with the good of the service, and with the prosperity of our government in India, to grant the documents required. The hon. gentleman had introduced no inflammatory matter, and no needless exaggerations; and if he was inaccurate in some of the details he had presented to the House, no blame for mis-information
1325
l
1326
1327
1328
1329
1330
Sir Charles Forbes
maintained, that the Report of the Committee of Inquiry ought to be produced, if it were only for the purpose of supporting the case which the right hon. gentleman seemed to suppose he had so triumphantly made out. Its publication was due also to sir Edward Paget, and to the European officers. It was due besides to the native officers who had been dismissed the service without a Court-martial, or any inquiry—a proceeding which would not have been adopted with respect to European officers. It was most unjust to have one law for the natives, and another for the Europeans. The same rule ought to be adopted for all. It was necessary to have the Report on the table, that every one might be able to satisfy himself where the blame rested; especially after a transaction of such a horrible nature, that nothing like it had before occurred in the British dominions, either at home or abroad. There was nothing in this case but what usually occurred among the native troops; who never scrupled to complain when they thought themselves ill-used, and even to mutiny until their grievances were redressed. Certain regiments had before so far mutinied, even in the face of an army; and sometimes whole armies had mutinied on the same grounds. The mutiny of the army of Scindea was an example. He did not mean to justify such things; they would be done among the native troops; but they did not require this mode of punishment; and, in point of fact, neither this nor any other example of the kind would prevent such things occurring among those troops. There was only one way to prevent mutiny among the native troops—and that way was, to do them justice, and to use them well. Treat them in this manner, and they would submit to the greatest privations and hardships, and might form an example to other troops. They had been sometimes in arrears of pay for eight, twelve, even eighteen months; having nothing but a bare subsistence. But they did not complain, and rested satisfied with the assurance of their
1331
1332
Mr. Wynn
in explanation, said, that the letter alluded to by the hon. member was a private letter to lord Amherst from captain Amherst, an amiable young man, acting at the time under the influence of warm and excited feelings; but in no part of the correspondence of lord Amherst with this country, was there any expression of censure upon the conduct of the commander-in-chief.
Mr. Hart Davis
said, he must, upon the authority of a letter received from a relative in India, deny the assertion made by an hon. member, that the artillery was brought unawares upon the mutineers. The fact was, that the tents of the mutineers were close to the cannon; that they were aware of the intention of the officer in command to make use of the artillery; and that, notwithstanding their being aware of such intention, they actually
1333
Mr. Hume
answered in the affirmative.
Mr. Hart Davis
.—Even taking the sentiments in that letter to be as stated by the hon. member, was it fair towards the commander-in-chief, or towards the writer of the letter, who, under the excitement of heated feelings, had, in a letter strictly private, expressed his opinions, to bring them forward in a public discussion? Would it be fair towards any man, to bring-forward upon a motion attaching censure to him, the opinions expressed by other persons, in a confidential communication? He should be glad to know, what would be the feelings of the hon. member for Montrose, if such a course were pursued upon a motion made with respect to the
1334
Colonel Davies
said, the hon. member who spoke last, had alluded to the proverb, "that those who lived in glass houses ought not to throw stones." He would leave the House to appreciate the good feeling and good taste of such an allusion. He would not himself give any opinion on the subject, much less would he, in imitation of the hon. member, bring before the House the misfortunes—for he could call them nothing but misfortunes—which befel the hon. member himself some years ago. If he followed that hon. member's example, he could mention transactions, connected with the hon. member's name, which would bring a blush of shame on that hon. member's cheeks [cheers and murmurs].
Mr. Hart Davis
rose instantly. "I call; upon the gallant colonel," said he, "to explain what he means. He may say what he pleases. I defy him."
The Speaker
said, that he never interfered with the proceedings of the House without great pain, and often not without some doubt as to whether, in what he was doing, he might be doing good. Certain he was that his interference could never do good, except in cases where it was absolutely necessary—a consideration which often kept him silent. But perhaps the best proof which could be had of the utility of observing even rigorously the forms of the House, was to be found in the inconvenience which commonly arose from any deviation from them. In the beginning, the mischief seemed trifling; but it almost constantly very soon increased to an extent which the House itself could not bear. The hon. member for Bristol could hardly fail to be aware, that he had begun, in the present case, by deviating from the immediate subject before the House, and alluding to topics connected entirely with other matter. How far the observations made
1335
Colonel Davies
resumed. Certainly, he said, when he rose to speak, he was labouring under feelings which were painful to utter; but he believed the great body of the House would concur with him, that his feelings were such as ought to animate every man who had a heart. The gallant member then referred to the details of the melancholy transaction which they were discussing. He was the last person who would impute cruelty to the gallant general who commanded. He believed him to be a brave, honourable, and humane man: but he contended, nevertheless, that the production of the papers was necessary to the vindication of sir E. Paget's character; and to shew where the guilt really lay.
Sir H. Vivian
expressed not only his regret at the occurrence of so many mutinies in India, within the last twenty years, but his conviction of the necessity of putting an end to them by such a measure as that adopted by sir Edward Paget. He had known and served with his gallant friend many years: he had been in the same regiment and the same company with him; and he had had many opportunities of witnessing the humanity of his disposition. It was well said, in a general order issued by an illustrious individual, whose loss they had lately to deplore, that "the brightest gem in the character of the British soldier was humanity." Now, in no bosom did that gem shine more brightly than in that of his gallant friend. He could assure the House, that there was no officer in the British army more adverse to unnecessary severity of discipline, than that gallant officer. Menacing and mutiny on the part of soldiers, with arms in their hands, ought to be instantly suppressed on all occasions; but particularly in a country so circumstanced as India. Were not all proper means used to prevent the unhappy
1336
Mr. Money
admitted that more lives were lost than was necessary, but it was natural that soldiers, irritated and let loose on their opponents, should commit excesses that humanity must deplore. As to the effects of the example made on that occasion they were most beneficial; as appeared from the present superior discipline of the Bengal army. The hon. member said, he should oppose the production of the report.
General Duff
spoke with great warmth against the motion. The hon. gentleman who had brought it forward, had, he said, undertaken to treat of a subject which he did not understand. He might be very good
1337
Mr. Maberly
was not of opinion that the conduct of sir E. Paget was blamcable; but it was equally clear that there was something connected with this mutiny which the public were not to see. The Sepoys complained of grievances, which had since been admitted and redressed. It was evidently necessary that some substantial remedy should be applied, to prevent the recurrence of an event which might lead to the loss of our vast empire in the east.
Sir Joseph Yorke
said, he had heard several, but not all of the speeches which had been delivered, on this occasion, and among others, that of the hon. baronet (sir C. Forbes) whose speech seemed to comprise all the observations that had fallen from all the East India proprietors during the last twenty years. He had also heard the very temperate and conciliatory remarks of the Chair, in its endeavour to produce a better understanding between two hon. members; but he certainly had not heard any attack attempted on the character of sir E. Paget, although he had heard it vindicated, as if some hostile animadversions had been made upon it. The fact was, that sir E. Paget, in the extraordinary situation in which he found himself, had but done that, which every brave and humane man, in the capacity of commander-in-chief, would have done under similar circumstances. He had, undoubtedly, acquitted himself in an honourable, a just and a gallant manner. But the question before the House was, whether these papers should or should not be granted? All agreed that sir Edward had not proceeded to extremities, until that course could be no longer avoided. But, in answer to this demand for the papers necessary to put parliament in possession of the history of this unfortunate transaction, he had heard one of his majesty's ministers affirm, that their production would be exceedingly inconvenient; and if it rested on that right hon. gentleman's own responsibility,
1338
Mr. Forbes
considered that the papers called for were absolutely requisite, to shew whether a case of sufficient necessity really did arise, for the dreadful massacre in which, not only one hundred and sixty of the native soldiers had lost their lives, but many women and children, residing in their huts, were sacrificed also.
Sir J. Beresford
, when he heard some hon. gentlemen really doubting whether the transactions which had been so much referred to that evening, did or did not amount to a mutiny, begged to observe, that he had received a letter from a brother officer of rank, who was present at the scene, and who not only described it as a mutiny, but declared that sir E. Paget had—by his forbearance in the beginning, and his determination at the conclusion, of those transactions—as much entitled himself to the praise of having saved his country, so far as her eastern dominion was concerned, as lord St. Vincent had done, by his admirable conduct in the mutiny off Cadiz, in preserving to Great Britain the allegiance of her navy. This officer had written,
1339
Mr. Hume
, in reply, contended, that the right hon. gentleman himself, with a degree of candour for which he was bound to thank him, had, in fact, admitted the whole of the case, with one or two exceptions that were of little moment; for he admitted, that the evils complained of by the native troops, as to the deficiency of beasts, and other means of transport and accommodation, had existed, and that they had since been remedied. He was very glad to hear this assurance; but the admission with which it was coupled sanctioned the principle of the motion now before the House. In stating the loss of human life, however, on this melancholy occasion, at only one hundred and sixty, the right hon. gentleman greatly underrated the extent of the calamity, for he did not include the one hundred and fifty natives who perished in their attempt to escape over the river, and were shot at like so many wild fowl. As to those who had been described as the great fomenters of the discontents, and the necessity of whose removal had been, in some sort, made the excuse for the attack upon the sepoys, it was notorious that they lived in line with the rest of the native troops; and might, at any moment, have been all of them seized and executed, if their destruction was thought essential to the preservation of our influence and power in India. But our own troops and officers had, by their acts, increased the discontent and resentment of the sepoys; who did, however, manifest, in return for what they felt as insults and injuries, the most extraordinary forbearance. Among other instances of this forbearance on their part, was the case of colonel Dalzel. That officer, who did not understand a word of Hindostanee, in the irritation of the moment, reviled and abused them, and addressed to them epithets, which among our own soldiers and sailors would be re-
1340
The House divided: For the motion 44; Against it 176: Majority against the motion 132.
List of the Minority.
Althorp, lord
Lamb, hon. G.
Baring, W. B.
Lombe, E.
Bernard, Ralph
Lumley, J. S.
Brougham, Jas.
Lushington, Dr.
Buxton, T. Fowell
Maberly, J.
Cradock, col.
Maberly, W. L.
Dawson, Alex.
Monck, J. B.
Dundas, hon. T.
Nugent, lord
Dundas, hon. sir R.
Ponsonby, hon. G.
Dundas, hon. G. L.
Rowley, sir W.
Easthope, J.
Smith, John
Forbes, sir C.
Stewart, John
Forbes, J.
Sykes, D.
Gordon, R.
Taylor, M. A.
Grattan, H.
Tennyson, C.
Grattan, J.
Warburton, H.
Harvey, D. W.
Webbe, col.
Heathcote, R. E.
Wells, John
Hobhouse, J. C.
Western, C. C.
Honywood, W. P.
Wood, ald.
Hutchinson, H. (Cork)
TELLERS.
Jephson, C. D.
Davies, col.
King, hon. R.
Hume, Joseph
GRANT TO THE DUKE AND DUCHESS OF CLARENCE.]
On the order of the day, for the third reading of the Duke and Duchess of Clarence's Annuity Bill,
Mr. Hume
said, he could not allow this bill to pass without again raising his voice against it, and declaring the grant to be a profligate waste of the public money, and that it placed his royal highness in a most degrading situation. However, he would not press the question to a division, as he had on a former occasion experienced its inutility.
Mr. D. W. Harvey
said, that he had divided against this grant on every occasion, but not on either of the grounds which had been advanced by his honourable friends. Those who might be termed the
1341
Mr. Pallmer
supported the bill. He thought it must be satisfactory to those who supported the grant to know that the illustrious personages who were the objects of it, exhibited a pattern of domestic virtue and hospitality.
Lord Rancliffe
said, he was so averse to the grant, that he would take the sense of the House upon this the last stage of the measure.
Lord Althorp
said, he had opposed the vote in the first instance, but had abstained from taking a part in the discussion since that period. He put it to his noble friend whether, as it was evident, the majority of the House was favourable to
1342
Lord Rancliffe
expressed his disinclination to trouble the House unnecessarily, or to do any thing that might be considered ungracious. He would therefore not press his opposition to the measure to a division.
The bill was then read a third time and passed.
SALMON FISHERIES BILL.]
Mr. Kennedy
moved for leave to bring in a bill to regulate the Salmon Fisheries of the United Kingdom. He proposed to allow ample time for filling up the blanks; so that all parties likely to be interested in, or affected by, the bill, might be in possession of its details.
Mr. Warburton
said, that a former report on this subject had assigned, as one of the causes of the diminution in the breed of fish, that the rivers of England were fished too hard; and it was suggested, that water-bailiffs should be appointed for their better superintendence and protection. Now, to him it appeared, that a much more eligible mode might be hit upon for increasing the supply of this fish, than the adoption of any new system of Game-laws, as he was tempted to call this proposal. Fresh salmon, under the existing law, was a prohibited article. Perhaps the gentlemen of Scotland who possessed salmon wears and fisheries could explain how this had happened. Turbot and lobsters might be freely imported; but not so salmon. Now, when his hon. friend's bill should be brought in, he meant to contend for a free trade in salmon.
Sir R. Fergusson
was convinced that his hon. friend could not have read the bill; the object of which was, to open the salmon fishery of this country, which, by the present law, was closed. The aim of his hon. friend's bill was to increase the breed by diminishing the period within which salmon might be taken.
Mr. G. Lamb
hoped that sufficient time would be allowed to transmit copies of the bill to all the proprietors of these fisheries throughout the United Kingdom. The original report he had read; and he ap-
1343
1344
Mr. Home Drummond
had no objection to the bill being introduced, but he begged to forewarn the hon. member for Ayr, that, if his information as to the nature of some of its clauses was correct, the measure would be considered, by the owners of salmon wears in Scotland, as a mere attempt to take money out of the pockets of one set of proprietors, in order to deposit it in the pockets of another set.
Leave was given to bring in the bill.
INDEX
INDEX TO DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS.
A
Address on the King's Speech at the Opening of the Session, 11
C
Catholic Emancipation, 146, 405, 456, 600, 646, 820, 1013, 1082, 1218, 1281
Corn Laws, 145, 164, 220, 404, 599, 624, 1020, 1154, 1293
D
Death of the Duke of York, 413
E
Emigration from the United Kingdom, 317
G
Game Laws, 680, 1286
Grant to the Duke and Duchess of Clarence, 516
I
Indemnity Bill, 330
Irish Vestries, 820
K
King's Speech on Opening the Session, 9
King's Message respecting Portugal, 336
M
Ministry; State of the, 1280
N
Navigation Laws, 1280
P
Portugal; King's Message respecting, 336
R
Roman Catholic Emancipation, 146, 405, 456, 600, 646, 820, 1013, 1082, 1218, 1281
V
Vestries in Ireland, 820
W
Weights and Measures; New, 1154
Wool Trade, 1293
Y
York, Duke of; Address of Condolence on, 413
INDEX TO DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.
A
Address on the King's Speech at the Opening of the Session, 26, 111
Address on the King's Message respecting Portugal, 350
Arigna Mining Company, 147, 196, 207, 243, 313, 330
Army Estimates, 570, 591
Army Commissions, 184
Athlone Election, 221, 1165
B
Barrackpore; Mutiny at, 1313
Bradley, Colonel; Case of, 321, 460
Bribery at Elections, 99, 654
Brogden, Mr.; Case of, 137, 196, 207, 243, 313, 330
C
Canada Clergy Reserves, 586
Cape of Good Hope, 303, 320
Chairman of Committees of the House, 137
Catholic Claims, 95, 284, 407, 411, 417, 651, 787, 792, 825, 1163, 1258
Clarence; Grant to the Duke and Duchess of, 475, 517, 565, 650, 818, 1236
Committees on. Private Bills; Resolutions relative to, 152, 224, 513, 590
Corn Laws, 97, 125, 143, 208, 398, 412, 449, 601, 630, 758, 1033, 1091, 1144, 1271
County Elections; Mode of taking the poll at, 1187
Court of Chancery, 692, 1173
Criminal Laws Consolidation Bills, 632, 1155
Currency, 208
Customs and Excise Informations, 216
E
Education of the Poor in Ireland, 1859
Elections; Bribery at, 99, 654
Emigration from the United Kingdom, 142, 227, 298, 475, 653
Exchequer Prosecutions under the Customs Laws, 1178
Excommunication by Catholic Priests, 284
Expenditure and Income of the Country, 541
Exportation of Machinery, 291
F
Flattery, Roger; his Petition respecting Arigna Mining Company, 148
Flogging in the Army, 679, 1123
Foreign Goods Imported in 1824 and 1826, 200
G
Galway Election, 1184, 1305
Gourlay, Mr.; his Petition respecting Emigration and the Poor Laws, 142
H
Hackney Coaches and Cabriolets, 1186
I
Impressment of Seamen, 450
Irish Stipendiary Magistracy, 1247
J
Jamaica; Treatment of Missionaries at, 1166
Joint Stock Companies, 232
K
King's Speech on Opening the Session, 9, 26, 111
King's Message respecting Portugal, 334, 350, 1302
L
Leicester Election, 1198
M
Machinery; Exportation of, 291
Mutiny Bill, 679, 1123
N
Navigation Laws, 1266, 1312
Navy Estimates, 434, 450
Newspapers and Pamphlets; Duties on, 400
Northampton Election, 606
O
Oaths of Deists in Courts of Justice, 171
Ordnance Estimates, 559
P
Parkin, Thomas; Petition of, respecting Joint Stock Companies, 232
Poor in Ireland; Education of, 1259
Poor Laws, 142
Poor Laws in Ireland, 1086
Portugal; King's Message respecting, 334, 350, 1302
Private Bills; Resolutions respecting Committees on, 152, 224, 513, 590
R
Resolutions relative to Committees on Private Bills, 152, 224, 513, 590
Roman Catholic Claims, 95, 284, 407, 411, 417, 651, 787, 702, 825, 1163, 1258
S
Shipping Interest, 1206, 1312
Slave Trade at the Mauritius, 605
Somerset, Lord Charles; Conduct of, 303, 320
Southey, Dr.; his Return for Downton, 111
Speaker, Choice of, 2
T
Taylor, Robert; his Petition respecting Oaths of Deists in Courts of Justice, 171
Tregony Borough Election Return, 115, 178
W
Water; Supply of to the Metropolis, 1258
Writs of Right Bill, 471
Y
York, Duke of; Death of, 425
INDEX OF NAMES—HOUSE OF LORDS.
B
Bathurst, Earl, 319, 330, 336, 624, 1029
Bexley, Lord, 1033, 1297
Buckingham, Duke of, 21, 1227, 1298
Bute, Marquis of, 1289
C
Carbery, Lord, 167
Carnarvon, Earl of, 689, 1234
Chester, Bishop of, 623, 1229
Clifden, Lord, 24, 166, 405, 459, 601, 691, 824, 1018, 1224, 1231 1235
Clancarty, Earl of, 1018
Colville, Lord, 13
Cornwallis, Earl, 11
D
Darnley, Earl of, 24, 1225, 1231, 1298
Devonshire, Duke of, 1281
E
Ellenborough, Lord, 1015, 1016, 1290, 1300
F
Falmouth, Earl of, 1286
H
Hardwicke, Earl of, 689, 1288
Holland, Lord, 343, 599
K
King, Lord, 15, 145, 164, 170, 220, 600, 626, 627, 628, 649, 820, 1013, 1291, 1298
Kingston, Earl of, 1018
L
Lansdown, Marquis of, 167, 170, 317 348, 628, 691, 1017, 1020, 1082, 1224, 1283
Lauderdale, Earl of, 21, 145, 146, 166, 169, 332, 404, 405, 600, 625, 1020, 1032, 1154
Limerick, Earl of, 627
Liverpool, Earl of, 24, 165, 166, 167, 404, 405, 413, 456, 517
Londonderry, Marquis of, 1218, 1280
Lord Chancellor Eldon. 7, 600, 650, 1016, 1224 1225, 1282, 1285, 1292
Lorton, Viscount, 646, 1014, 1015
M
Malmesbury, Earl of, 687, 1154, 1293, 1301
Mountcashel, Earl of, 601, 1019, 1235
N
Norwich, Bishop of, 1223, 1234
R
Redesdale, Lord, 628, 1016, 1032, 1288, 1300
Richmond, Duke of, 1297
Roden, Earl of, 1231
Roseberry, Earl of, 1032, 1288
Rosslyn, Earl of, 1032
S
Salisbury, Marquis of, 166, 1238, 1298
Shaftesbury, Earl of, 26
Spencer, Earl, 146, 1222
Stanhope, Earl, 627
Striingford, Lord, 825
T
Teynham, Lord, 600, 689
W
Wellington, Duke of, 347
Westmorland, Earl of, 146, 1289, 1299
Wharnclifle, Lord, 680, 1286, 1293
Winchilsea, Earl of, 459, 1085, 1219
INDEX OF NAMES—HOUSE OF COMMONS.
A
Abercromby, Hon. James, 115, 124, 181, 183, 288, 299, 536, 622, 542, 651, 675, 677, 757, 1258, 1263, 1308
Ackland, Sir Thomas, 225, 1246
Althorp, Lord, 98, 99, 110, 157, 521, 621, 642, 654, 676, 779, 1072, 1148, 1187, 1197, 1341
Attorney General (Sir Charles Wetherell), 611, 653, 745, 1174, 1176, 1181
Attwood, Matthias, 264, 271
B
Bankes, Henry, 380, 777, 1071
Bankes, George, 163, 225, 515, 722, 876, 1175
Barclay, Charles, 1071
Baring, Alexander, 295, 377, 501, 557, 587, 598, 675, 1117, 1176, 1267, 1269, 1270
Barnard, Lord, 679
Batley, C. H. 105, 173, 516, 646, 1176, 1190
Beaumont, T. 1246
Beckett, Right Hon. John, 1132, 1133
Benett, J. 136, 215, 302
Beresford, Sir J. 1338
Bernal, Ralph, 467, 679, 1182, 1309
Bourne, Right Hon. W. Sturges, 2, 516
Bright, Henry, 298, 390, 495
Brogden, James, 73, 80, 137, 196, 198, 208, 255, 258, 330
Brougham, Henry, 35, 122, 320, 380, 401, 433, 529, 724, 783, 981, 1075
Brownlow, Charles, 497, 790, 888
Brydges, Sir John, 95, 1271
Burdett, Sir Francis, 407, 785, 825, 1119, 1212, 1258
Burrell, Walter, 1180
Buxton, Thomas Fowell, 605, 1172
C
Calcraft, John, 93, 136, 193, 226, 436, 538, 1075, 1146, 1245, 1274
Canning, Right Hon. George, 42, 125, 138, 255, 335, 360, 390, 758, 779, 993, 1073, 1682
Carrington, Sir Edmund, 174, 585
Carter, John, 125
Cave, R. O. 1209
Cavendish, Lord George, 1118
Chancellor of the Exchequer (Right Hon. F. Robinson) 435, 517, 545, 599, 673, 1046, 1075, 1179, 1192, 1237, 1271, 1274
Chetwynd, Sir George, 643
Chichester, Arthur, 1185
Clerk, Sir George, 437, 442, 444, 446, 451, 452
Clive, Lord, 1033, 1113
Cockburn, Sir George, 437, 441, 442, 446, 448
Colborne, N. R. 569
Cole, Sir C. 194
Colthurst, Sir N. 1086
Cooper, B. 590
Copley, Sir John,
see
Cripps, Joseph, 645, 1145, 1274
Curteis, E. J. 1144
Curwen, J. C. 528, 1146
Cust, 892
D
Davenport, E. D. 214, 631, 819
Davies, Colonel, 106, 156, 278, 435, 571, 1130, 1334
Davis, Richard Hart, 282, 892, 1332
Dawson, G. R. 787, 791, 803, 854, 1088
Dawson, Alexander, 65, 589, 1161
Denison, W. J. 1144
Dickinson, William, 1194
Drummond, Home, 1344
Duff, General, 679, 1336
Duncombe, 603
E
Ebrington, Lord, 1165
Eliot, Lord, 903
Ellis, Hon. George Agar, 793
F
Ferguson, R. C. 81, 262, 539, 776, 1072, 1147
Fergusson, Sir Ronald, 1342
Fitzgerald, Right Hon. W. V. 577
Fitzgerald, Right Hon. Maurice, 567, 797, 1088, 1215
Folkestone, Viscount, 208, 632
Forbes, Sir Charles, 280, 454, 1008, 1330
Forbes, J. 1338
Foster, J. L. 657, 809
Fyler, Thomas B. 456
G
Gascoyne, Isaac, 194, 1089, 1268, 1270
Gilbert, Davies, 125, 1075
Gipps, 1273
Gooch, Sir Thomas, 1059, 1110, 1275
Gordon, Robert, 679
Goulburn, Right Hon. Henry, 224, 288, 992, 1216, 1250
Gower, Lord F. L. 569, 805
Graham, Sir James, 299 Grant, Right hon. Charles, 777, 1070, 1104, 1146, 1268, 1277
Grant, Sir Alexander, 269
Grattan, Henry, 89, 95, 792, 1086, 1089, 1256, 1261
Grattan, James, 286, 299, 490, 789, 811, 1090, 1259, 1308
Grosvenor, General, 309
Gurney, Hudson, 278, 616, 1216
H
Hamilton, Lord Archibald, 227
Hardinge, Sir H. 327, 329, 467, 560, 563, 564, 583, 1140
Hare, Hon. William, 411
Harvey, D. W. 216, 232, 474, 592, 716, 1173, 1175, 1178, 1184, 1340
Hastings, Sir C. A. 1208
Heron, Sir Robert, 818, 1247
Herries, J. C. 578, 583, 1183
Hill, Sir George, 790, 791, 795, 811, 813, 1257
Hobhouse, John Cam, 263, 643, 677, 1126, 1149, 1307
Hope, Sir Alexander, 583, 585, 595, 1127, 1143
Horton, R. Wilmot, 282, 298, 304, 309, 475, 511, 586, 587, 588, 589, 653, 798, 1171
Howick, Lord, 1118
Hume, Joseph, 49, 136, 143, 171, 177, 184, 195, 218, 291, 298, 303, 306, 312, 321, 325, 327, 328, 371, 400, 412, 434, 438, 440, 441, 444, 445, 448, 452, 460, 463, 469, 470, 474, 509, 522, 540, 552, 563, 564, 565, 575, 580, 682, 583, 585, 587, 591, 592, 593, 650, 679, 1129, 1186, 1237, 1260, 1313, 1339, 1340
Hurst, R. 144
Huskisson, Right Hon. W. 123, 126, 205, 212, 275, 292
I
Irving, John, 1276
K
Knatchbull, Sir E. 131, 449, 602, 779, 1041, 1270, 1274
L
Lamb, Hon. George, 163, 227, 677, 680, 1342
Leigh-Keck, A. 1216
Lethbridge, Sir Thomas, 97, 603, 780, 1069, 1152, 1195, 1270
Lewis, Frankland, 812, 1276
Leycester, Ralph, 113, 1123, 1128, 1130, 1244
Liddell, Hon. T. 26, 1105
Littleton, E. 152, 224, 227, 293, 513, 516, 1308
Lockhart, J. I. 121, 219, 473
Lombe, Edward, 451, 491, 593
Lowther, Lord, 1196
Lushington, Dr. 1133, 1134, 1165
M
Maberly, John, 62, 157, 197, 301, 436, 439, 540, 579, 596, 631, 1238, 1337.
Maberly, W. Leadar, 606, 1106, 1183, 1191
Marshall. John, 61, 603
Marten, Sir Byam, 453
Marten, John, 540, 1236, 1237
Marten, Richard, 93, 313, 316, 330, 671, 898, 1184, 1185
Master of the Rolls (Sir John Copley), 692, 905
Maxwell, H. 795
Maxwell, J. 630
Milton, Lord, 601, 673, 674, 675, 676, 677, 678, 782, 1108, 1192, 1215
Monck, J. B. 528, 585, 593, 1086, 1153, 1245
Money, 1336
Moore, George, 91, 284, 287, 290, 894, 1278
Morpeth, Lord, 849
Mundy, 591
N
Newport, Sir John, 450, 667, 777, 791, 899, 1070, 1087, 1149, 1161, 1264, 1278
Normanby, Lord, 790
Nugent, Lord, 815, 1125, 1196
O
Onslow, Mr. Serjeant, 172, 1175
Ord, William, 308
Owen, Sir E, 442, 455
P
Pallmer, C. N. 109, 1197, 1217, 1341
Palmer, R. 664, 675
Palmerston, Viscount, 190, 323, 326, 328, 461, 570, 573, 580, 582, 585, 596, 679, 1136
Parnell, Sir Henry, 200, 295, 1090, 1101
Peel, Right Hon. Robert, 107, 161, 174, 179, 181, 183, 226, 230, 289, 297, 300, 313, 398, 404, 425, 450, 465, 505, 532, 617, 623, 624, 632, 646, 667, 676, 748, 813, 957, 1064, 1147, 1150, 1155, 1161, 1162, 1164, 1209, 1262, 1265, 1279, 1309.
Peel, W. Yates, 156
Pendarvis, E. 1242
Phillimore, Dr. 1310
Phillips, George, 603, 1112
Plunkett, Sir William, 792, 805, 928, 1245, 1264
Portman, Edw. B. 4, 781, 1148, 1163
R
Ranclifie, Lord, 1216, 1341
Rice, Thomas Spring, 285, 287, 614, 868, 1162, 1266, 1276, 1306, 1308
Rickford, William, 598
Robinson, Right Hon. Frederick,
see
Robinson, George, 279, 540, 616, 1111, 1274
Russell, Lord John, 623, 660, 675, 678
S
Scarlett, James, 108
Sebright, Sir John, 115, 679, 781, 1126
Shadwell, Lancelot, 471, 474, 1162
Smith, Alderman C. 1247
Smith, John, 272, 281, 723, 1124, 1183, 1262
Smith, William, 162, 175, 1191, 1243
Speaker, The, (Right Hon. C. M. Sutton) 4, 7, 8, 151, 221, 255, 470, 1186, 1305, 1311, 1334
Spence, 220
Stanley, Hon. E. G. 586, 589
Stuart, Villiers, 417, 873, 1247, 1257
Stuart-Wortley, J. 178
Sutton, Right Hon. C. M.
see
Sykes, Daniel, 645, 1139, 1198
T
Tavistock, Marquis of, 565
Taylor, M. A. 692, 708
Tennyson, Charles, 1239
Thompson, Alderman W. 207, 780, 1269
Torrens, Colonel, 134, 207, 215, 286, 294, 326, 492
French, Colonel, 1090, 1127, 1266
Twiss, Horace, 125
V
Van Homrigh, P., 813, 1090, 1257
Vivian, Sir H. 1143, 1335
W
Waithman, Alderman Robert, 72, 79, 136, 139, 147, 151, 158, 196, 199, 207, 208, 243, 262, 282, 314, 516, 589, 592, 622, 819, 1113, 1310, 1312
Warburton, Henry, 134, 203, 296, 300, 451, 588, 1128, 1269, 1342
Ward, William, 1062, 1152
Western, C. C, 70, 111, 116, 135, 775, 1056, 1273
Wetherell, Sir Charles, see Attorney General.
Whitmore, W. 132, 603, 778, 1091, 1148, 1278
Williams, John, 399 Wilson, Sir Robert, 82, 335, 369, 433, 1131, 1310
Winn, George, 31, 91
Wodehouse, Edmund, 135, 1147, 1273
Wood, Colonel, 133. 527, 782
Wood, Alderman Matthew, 455, 1148, 1246
Wood, John, 376, 651, 1145
Wrottesley, Sir John, 448, 777, 1193
Wynn, C. W. W. 6, 102, 119, 124, 151, 163, 164, 181, 223, 314, 665, 674, 678, 1172, 1183, 1185, 1194, 1205, 1305, 1307, 1309, 1324
Y
York, Sir J. S. 7, 79, 92, 436, 439, 441, 446, 1308, 1337
END OF VOL. XVI.