• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Title Page
 Table of Contents
 Title Page
 March 1827
 April 1827
 May 1827
 June 1827
 July 1827
 Appendix
 Index to debates
 Index of names














Group Title: Parliamentary debates (1820-1829)
Title: The parliamentary debates
ALL VOLUMES CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00073533/00017
 Material Information
Title: The parliamentary debates
Uniform Title: Parliamentary debates (1820-1829)
Physical Description: 20 v. : ; 25 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Great Britain -- Parliament
Hansard, T. C ( Thomas Curson ), 1776-1833
Publisher: Published under the superintendence of T.C. Hansard
Place of Publication: London
Publication Date: 1820-1829
 Subjects
Subject: Politics and government -- Periodicals -- Great Britain -- 1820-1830   ( lcsh )
 Notes
Dates or Sequential Designation: New ser., v. 1 (1820)-v. 20 (1829).
Numbering Peculiarities: Covers Mar. 1820-Feb./Mar. 1829.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00073533
Volume ID: VID00017
Source Institution: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: oclc - 07655703
lccn - sn 85062629
 Related Items
Preceded by: Parliamentary debates for the year 1803 to the present time
Succeeded by: Hansard's parliamentary debates

Table of Contents
    Title Page
        Title Page
    Table of Contents
        Table of Contents 1
        Table of Contents 2
        Table of Contents 3
        Table of Contents 4
        Table of Contents 5
        Table of Contents 6
    Title Page
        Title Page
    March 1827
        House of Lords - Friday, March 23
            Page 1
        House of Commons - Friday, March 23
            Page 3-4
            Page 5-6
            Page 7-8
            Page 9-10
            Page 11-12
            Page 13-14
            Page 15-16
            Page 17-18
            Page 19-20
            Page 21-22
            Page 23-24
            Page 25-26
            Page 27-28
            Page 29-30
            Page 31-32
            Page 33-34
        House of Lords - Monday, March 26
            Page 35-36
            Page 33-34
        House of Commons - Monday, March 26
            Page 35-36
            Page 37-38
            Page 39-40
            Page 41-42
            Page 43-44
            Page 45-46
            Page 47-48
            Page 49-50
            Page 51-52
            Page 53-54
            Page 55-56
            Page 57-58
            Page 59-60
            Page 61-62
            Page 63-64
            Page 65-66
            Page 67-68
            Page 69-70
            Page 71-72
            Page 73-74
            Page 75-76
            Page 77-78
            Page 79-80
            Page 81-82
        House of Lords - Tuesday, March 27
            Page 83-84
            Page 85-86
            Page 87-88
            Page 81-82
        House of Commons - Tuesday, March 27
            Page 89-90
            Page 91-92
            Page 87-88
            Page 93-94
            Page 95-96
            Page 97-98
            Page 99-100
            Page 101-102
            Page 103-104
            Page 105-106
            Page 107-108
            Page 109-110
            Page 111-112
        House of Lords - Wednesday, March 28
            Page 113-114
            Page 115-116
            Page 117-118
            Page 111-112
        House of Commons - Wednesday, March 28
            Page 119-120
            Page 117-118
        House of Lords - Thursday, March 29
            Page 119-120
            Page 121-122
            Page 123-124
            Page 125-126
            Page 127-128
            Page 129-130
            Page 131-132
        House of Commons - Thursday, March 29
            Page 133-134
            Page 135-136
            Page 137-138
            Page 139-140
            Page 141-142
            Page 131-132
            Page 143-144
            Page 145-146
            Page 147-148
            Page 149-150
            Page 151-152
        House of Lords - Friday, March 30
            Page 153-154
            Page 155-156
            Page 157-158
            Page 151-152
        House of Commons - Friday, March 30
            Page 159-160
            Page 161-162
            Page 157-158
            Page 163-164
            Page 165-166
            Page 167-168
            Page 169-170
            Page 171-172
            Page 173-174
    April 1827
        House of Commons - Monday, April 2
            Page 175-176
            Page 177-178
            Page 179-180
            Page 181-182
            Page 183-184
            Page 185-186
            Page 187-188
            Page 173-174
            Page 189-190
            Page 191-192
            Page 193-194
            Page 195-196
            Page 197-198
            Page 199-200
        House of Commons - Tuesday, April 3
            Page 201-202
            Page 203-204
            Page 205-206
            Page 207-208
            Page 209-210
            Page 211-212
            Page 213-214
            Page 215-216
            Page 217-218
            Page 219-220
            Page 221-222
            Page 223-224
            Page 199-200
            Page 225-226
            Page 227-228
            Page 229-230
            Page 231-232
            Page 233-234
        House of Lords - Wednesday, April 4
            Page 235-236
            Page 237-238
            Page 239-240
        House of Lords - Thursday, April 5
            Page 239-240
        House of Commons - Thursday, April 5
            Page 241-242
            Page 243-244
            Page 245-246
            Page 247-248
            Page 249-250
            Page 251-252
            Page 253-254
            Page 255-256
            Page 257-258
            Page 259-260
            Page 261-262
            Page 263-264
            Page 265-266
        House of Lords - Friday, April 6
            Page 267-268
            Page 269-270
            Page 265-266
        House of Commons - Friday, April 6
            Page 271-272
            Page 269-270
            Page 273-274
            Page 275-276
            Page 277-278
            Page 279-280
            Page 281-282
            Page 283-284
            Page 285-286
            Page 287-288
            Page 289-290
            Page 291-292
            Page 293-294
        House of Lords - Monday, April 9
            Page 295-296
            Page 293-294
        House of Commons - Monday, April 9
            Page 297-298
            Page 299-300
            Page 301-302
            Page 303-304
            Page 305-306
            Page 307-308
            Page 309-310
            Page 311-312
            Page 313-314
            Page 315-316
            Page 317-318
            Page 319-320
            Page 321-322
            Page 323-324
            Page 325-326
            Page 327-328
            Page 329-330
            Page 331-332
            Page 333-334
            Page 335-336
            Page 337-338
            Page 339-340
            Page 341-342
            Page 343-344
            Page 345-346
            Page 347-348
            Page 349-350
        House of Commons - Tuesday, April 10
            Page 351-352
            Page 353-354
            Page 355-356
            Page 357-358
            Page 359-360
            Page 361-362
            Page 363-364
            Page 365-366
            Page 367-368
            Page 369-370
            Page 371-372
            Page 373-374
            Page 375-376
            Page 377-378
            Page 379-380
            Page 381-382
            Page 383-384
            Page 385-386
            Page 387-388
            Page 349-350
        House of Lords - Wednesday, April 11
            Page 389-390
            Page 387-388
        House of Commons - Thursday, April 12
            Page 389-390
            Page 391-392
    May 1827
        House of Commons - Tuesday, May 1
            Page 391-392
            Page 393-394
            Page 395-396
            Page 397-398
            Page 399-400
            Page 401-402
            Page 403-404
            Page 405-406
            Page 407-408
            Page 409-410
            Page 411-412
            Page 413-414
            Page 415-416
            Page 417-418
            Page 419-420
            Page 421-422
            Page 423-424
            Page 425-426
            Page 427-428
            Page 429-430
            Page 431-432
            Page 433-434
            Page 435-436
            Page 437-438
            Page 439-440
            Page 441-442
            Page 443-444
            Page 445-446
            Page 447-448
        House of Lords - Wednesday, May 2
            Page 449-450
            Page 451-452
            Page 453-454
            Page 455-456
            Page 457-458
            Page 459-460
            Page 461-462
            Page 463-464
            Page 465-466
            Page 467-468
            Page 469-470
            Page 471-472
            Page 473-474
            Page 475-476
            Page 477-478
            Page 479-480
            Page 481-482
            Page 483-484
            Page 485-486
            Page 487-488
            Page 489-490
            Page 491-492
            Page 493-494
            Page 495-496
            Page 497-498
            Page 447-448
        House of Commons - Wednesday, May 2
            Page 499-500
            Page 501-502
            Page 503-504
            Page 497-498
        House of Commons - Thursday, May 3
            Page 505-506
            Page 507-508
            Page 503-504
            Page 509-510
            Page 511-512
            Page 513-514
            Page 515-516
            Page 517-518
            Page 519-520
            Page 521-522
            Page 523-524
            Page 525-526
            Page 527-528
            Page 529-530
            Page 531-532
            Page 533-534
            Page 535-536
            Page 537-538
            Page 539-540
            Page 541-542
            Page 543-544
            Page 545-546
            Page 547-548
        House of Lords - Friday, May 4
            Page 549-550
            Page 551-552
            Page 553-554
            Page 547-548
        House of Commons - Friday, May 4
            Page 555-556
            Page 557-558
            Page 553-554
            Page 559-560
            Page 561-562
        House of Lords - Monday, May 7
            Page 563-564
            Page 565-566
            Page 567-568
            Page 561-562
            Page 569-570
            Page 571-572
            Page 573-574
            Page 575-576
        House of Commons - Monday, May 7
            Page 577-578
            Page 579-580
            Page 581-582
            Page 583-584
            Page 585-586
            Page 587-588
            Page 575-576
            Page 589-590
            Page 591-592
            Page 593-594
            Page 595-596
            Page 597-598
            Page 599-600
            Page 601-602
            Page 603-604
            Page 605-606
            Page 607-608
            Page 609-610
            Page 611-612
            Page 613-614
            Page 615-616
            Page 617-618
            Page 619-620
            Page 621-622
            Page 623-624
            Page 625-626
            Page 627-628
            Page 629-630
            Page 631-632
            Page 633-634
            Page 635-636
            Page 637-638
            Page 639-640
            Page 641-642
            Page 643-644
            Page 645-646
            Page 647-648
            Page 649-650
            Page 651-652
            Page 653-654
            Page 655-656
            Page 657-658
            Page 659-660
            Page 661-662
            Page 663-664
            Page 665-666
        House of Lords - Tuesday, May 8
            Page 667-668
            Page 665-666
        House of Commons - Tuesday, May 8
            Page 667-668
            Page 669-670
            Page 671-672
            Page 673-674
            Page 675-676
            Page 677-678
            Page 679-680
            Page 681-682
            Page 683-684
            Page 685-686
            Page 687-688
            Page 689-690
            Page 691-692
            Page 693-694
            Page 695-696
            Page 697-698
            Page 699-700
            Page 701-702
            Page 703-704
        House of Commons - Wednesday, May 9
            Page 705-706
            Page 703-704
        House of Lords - Thursday, May 10
            Page 705-706
            Page 707-708
            Page 709-710
            Page 711-712
            Page 713-714
            Page 715-716
            Page 717-718
            Page 719-720
            Page 721-722
            Page 723-724
            Page 725-726
            Page 727-728
            Page 729-730
            Page 731-732
            Page 733-734
        House of Lords - Friday, May 11
            Page 735-736
            Page 737-738
            Page 739-740
            Page 741-742
            Page 743-744
            Page 733-734
        House of Commons - Friday, May 11
            Page 745-746
            Page 747-748
            Page 749-750
            Page 751-752
            Page 743-744
            Page 753-754
            Page 755-756
            Page 757-758
            Page 759-760
            Page 761-762
            Page 763-764
            Page 765-766
        House of Lords - Monday, May 14
            Page 767-768
            Page 769-770
            Page 771-772
            Page 773-774
            Page 775-776
            Page 777-778
            Page 779-780
            Page 781-782
            Page 783-784
            Page 765-766
        House of Commons - Monday, May 14
            Page 785-786
            Page 787-788
            Page 783-784
        House of Lords - Tuesday, May 15
            Page 789-790
            Page 787-788
            Page 791-792
            Page 793-794
            Page 795-796
            Page 797-798
            Page 799-800
            Page 801-802
            Page 803-804
            Page 805-806
            Page 807-808
            Page 809-810
            Page 811-812
            Page 813-814
        House of Commons - Tuesday, May 15
            Page 815-816
            Page 817-818
            Page 819-820
            Page 821-822
            Page 823-824
            Page 825-826
            Page 827-828
            Page 829-830
            Page 831-832
            Page 833-834
            Page 835-836
            Page 837-838
            Page 813-814
            Page 839-840
            Page 841-842
            Page 843-844
            Page 845-846
            Page 847-848
            Page 849-850
            Page 851-852
            Page 853-854
        House of Lords - Thursday, May 17
            Page 855-856
            Page 857-858
            Page 859-860
            Page 861-862
            Page 863-864
            Page 865-866
            Page 867-868
            Page 869-870
            Page 871-872
            Page 873-874
            Page 875-876
            Page 877-878
            Page 879-880
            Page 881-882
            Page 883-884
            Page 853-854
        House of Commons - Thursday, May 17
            Page 885-886
            Page 887-888
            Page 889-890
            Page 891-892
            Page 893-894
            Page 895-896
            Page 897-898
            Page 899-900
            Page 901-902
            Page 883-884
        House of Lords - Friday, May 18
            Page 903-904
            Page 901-902
        House of Commons - Friday, May 18
            Page 903-904
            Page 905-906
            Page 907-908
            Page 909-910
            Page 911-912
            Page 913-914
            Page 915-916
            Page 917-918
            Page 919-920
            Page 921-922
            Page 923-924
        House of Lords - Monday, May 21
            Page 925-926
            Page 927-928
            Page 923-924
        House of Commons - Monday, May 21
            Page 929-930
            Page 927-928
            Page 931-932
            Page 933-934
            Page 935-936
            Page 937-938
            Page 939-940
        House of Commons - Tuesday, May 22
            Page 941-942
            Page 943-944
            Page 945-946
            Page 947-948
            Page 949-950
            Page 939-940
            Page 951-952
            Page 953-954
            Page 955-956
            Page 957-958
            Page 959-960
            Page 961-962
            Page 963-964
            Page 965-966
            Page 967-968
            Page 969-970
            Page 971-972
            Page 973-974
            Page 975-976
            Page 977-978
            Page 979-980
        House of Lords - Wednesday, May 23
            Page 981-982
            Page 979-980
        House of Commons - Wednesday, May 23
            Page 981-982
            Page 983-984
        House of Lords - Friday, May 25
            Page 983-984
            Page 985-986
            Page 987-988
            Page 989-990
            Page 991-992
            Page 993-994
            Page 995-996
            Page 997-998
            Page 999-1000
            Page 1001-1002
            Page 1003-1004
            Page 1005-1006
            Page 1007-1008
            Page 1009-1010
            Page 1011-1012
            Page 1013-1014
            Page 1015-1016
            Page 1017-1018
            Page 1019-1020
            Page 1021
            Page 1023-1024
            Page 1025-1026
        House of Commons - Friday, May 25
            Page 1027-1028
            Page 1029-1030
            Page 1031-1032
            Page 1033-1034
            Page 1035-1036
            Page 1025-1026
        House of Commons - Monday, May 28
            Page 1037-1038
            Page 1039-1040
            Page 1041-1042
            Page 1043-1044
            Page 1035-1036
            Page 1045-1046
            Page 1047-1048
            Page 1049-1050
            Page 1051-1052
            Page 1053-1054
            Page 1055-1056
            Page 1057-1058
            Page 1059-1060
        House of Commons - Wednesday, May 30
            Page 1061-1062
            Page 1059-1060
        House of Commons - Thursday, May 31
            Page 1061-1062
            Page 1063-1064
            Page 1065-1066
            Page 1067-1068
            Page 1069-1070
            Page 1071-1072
            Page 1073-1074
            Page 1075-1076
            Page 1077-1078
            Page 1079-1080
            Page 1081-1082
            Page 1083-1084
    June 1827
        House of Lords - Friday, June 1
            Page 1085-1086
            Page 1087-1088
            Page 1089-1090
            Page 1091-1092
            Page 1093-1094
            Page 1095-1096
            Page 1097-1098
            Page 1083-1084
        House of Commons - Friday, June 1
            Page 1099-1100
            Page 1101-1102
            Page 1103-1104
            Page 1105-1106
            Page 1107-1108
            Page 1109-1110
            Page 1097-1098
            Page 1111-1112
            Page 1113-1114
            Page 1115-1116
            Page 1117-1118
            Page 1119-1120
            Page 1121-1122
            Page 1123-1124
            Page 1125-1126
            Page 1127-1128
            Page 1129-1130
            Page 1131-1132
        House of Commons - Wednesday, June 6
            Page 1133-1134
            Page 1135-1136
        House of Lords - Thursday, June 7
            Page 1135-1136
            Page 1137-1138
            Page 1139-1140
            Page 1141-1142
            Page 1143-1144
        House of Commons - Thursday, June 7
            Page 1145-1146
            Page 1147-1148
            Page 1149-1150
            Page 1143-1144
            Page 1151-1152
            Page 1153-1154
            Page 1155-1156
            Page 1157-1158
            Page 1159-1160
        House of Lords - Friday, June 8
            Page 1161-1162
            Page 1163-1164
            Page 1165-1166
            Page 1167-1168
            Page 1159-1160
        House of Commons - Friday, June 8
            Page 1169-1170
            Page 1171-1172
            Page 1173-1174
            Page 1167-1168
            Page 1175-1176
            Page 1177-1178
            Page 1179-1180
            Page 1181-1182
            Page 1183-1184
            Page 1185-1186
            Page 1187-1188
            Page 1189-1190
            Page 1191-1192
            Page 1193-1194
            Page 1195-1196
        House of Lords - Monday, June 11
            Page 1197-1198
            Page 1195-1196
        House of Commons - Monday, June 11
            Page 1197-1198
            Page 1199-1200
            Page 1201-1202
            Page 1203-1204
            Page 1205-1206
            Page 1207-1208
            Page 1209-1210
            Page 1211-1212
            Page 1213-1214
            Page 1215-1216
            Page 1217-1218
        House of Lords - Tuesday, June 12
            Page 1219-1220
            Page 1221-1222
            Page 1223-1224
            Page 1225-1226
            Page 1227-1228
            Page 1229-1230
            Page 1231-1232
            Page 1233-1234
            Page 1235-1236
            Page 1217-1218
            Page 1237-1238
            Page 1239-1240
            Page 1241-1242
        House of Commons - Tuesday, June 12
            Page 1243-1244
            Page 1245-1246
            Page 1247-1248
            Page 1249-1250
            Page 1251-1252
            Page 1253-1254
            Page 1255-1256
            Page 1257-1258
            Page 1241-1242
        House of Lords - Wednesday, June 13
            Page 1259-1260
            Page 1261-1262
            Page 1257-1258
        House of Commons - Wednesday, June 13
            Page 1263-1264
            Page 1261-1262
            Page 1265-1266
        House of Commons - Thursday, June 14
            Page 1267-1268
            Page 1265-1266
            Page 1269-1270
            Page 1271-1272
            Page 1273-1274
            Page 1275-1276
            Page 1277-1278
            Page 1279-1280
            Page 1281-1282
            Page 1283-1284
            Page 1285-1286
            Page 1287-1288
            Page 1289-1290
            Page 1291-1292
            Page 1293-1294
            Page 1295-1296
            Page 1297-1298
            Page 1299-1300
            Page 1301-1302
        House of Lords - Thursday, June 14
            Page 1301-1302
        House of Commons - Monday, June 18
            Page 1303-1304
            Page 1305-1306
            Page 1307-1308
            Page 1309-1310
            Page 1311-1312
            Page 1313-1314
            Page 1315-1316
            Page 1317-1318
            Page 1319-1320
            Page 1321-1322
            Page 1323-1324
            Page 1325-1326
            Page 1327-1328
            Page 1329-1330
            Page 1331-1332
            Page 1333-1334
            Page 1335-1336
            Page 1301-1302
            Page 1337-1338
            Page 1339-1340
            Page 1341-1342
        House of Commons - Tuesday, June 19
            Page 1343-1344
            Page 1345-1346
            Page 1341-1342
        House of Commons - Wednesday, June 20
            Page 1347-1348
            Page 1345-1346
            Page 1349-1350
            Page 1351-1352
            Page 1353-1354
            Page 1355-1356
            Page 1357-1358
            Page 1359-1360
            Page 1361-1362
        House of Commons - Thursday, June 21
            Page 1363-1364
            Page 1365-1366
            Page 1367-1368
            Page 1369-1370
            Page 1371-1372
            Page 1361-1362
        House of Lords - Friday, June 22
            Page 1373-1374
            Page 1375-1376
            Page 1371-1372
        House of Commons - Friday, June 22
            Page 1377-1378
            Page 1375-1376
            Page 1379-1380
        House of Lords - Monday, June 25
            Page 1381-1382
            Page 1379-1380
            Page 1383-1384
            Page 1385-1386
            Page 1387-1388
            Page 1389-1390
            Page 1391-1392
            Page 1393-1394
            Page 1395-1396
            Page 1397-1398
            Page 1399-1400
        House of Lords - Tuesday, June 26
            Page 1401-1402
            Page 1403-1404
            Page 1405-1406
            Page 1407-1408
            Page 1409-1410
            Page 1411-1412
            Page 1413-1414
            Page 1415-1416
            Page 1417-1418
            Page 1399-1400
            Page 1419-1420
            Page 1421-1422
            Page 1423-1424
        House of Lords - Friday, June 29
            Page 1425-1426
            Page 1427-1428
            Page 1423-1424
        House of Commons - Friday, June 29
            Page 1429-1430
            Page 1427-1428
            Page 1431-1432
            Page 1433-1434
            Page 1435-1436
            Page 1437-1438
            Page 1439-1440
            Page 1441-1442
            Page 1443-1444
    July 1827
        House of Lords - Monday, July 2
            Page 1445-1446
            Page 1443-1444
    Appendix
        Page i
        Page ii
        Page iii
        Page iv
        Page v
        Page vi
        Page vii
        Page viii
        Page ix
        Page x
        Page xi
        Page xii
        Page xiii
        Page xiv
        Page xv
        Page xvi
        Page xvii
        Page xviii
        Page xix
        Page xx
        Page xxi
        Page xxii
        Page xxiii
        Page xxiv
        Page xxv
        Page xxvi
        Page xxvii
        Page xxviii
    Index to debates
        Index
    Index of names
        Index 1
        Index 2
        Index 3
Full Text



THE


PARLIAMENTARY



DEBATES:


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.




COMMENCING WITH TIE ACCESSION OF GORGE IV.



V 0 L. XVII.

COMPRISING THE PERIOD
FROM
THE TWENTY-THIRD DAY OF MARCH,
TO
THE SECOND DAY OF JULY, 1827.




LONDON:
printeb bg 9. (. Wangarb at the paternafterot iotn Pre#f,
FOR BALDWIN AND CRADOCK; 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. PODWELL; R. H. EVANS; BUDD AND
CALKIN; J. BOOTH; AND T. C. HANSARD.

1828.












TABLE OF CONTENTS

TO

VOLUME XVII.

NE W SERIES.





I. DEBATES IN TIIE HOUSE or IV. KING'S MESSAGES.
LORDS. V. PARLIAMENTARY PAPERS.
II. DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF
COMMONS. VI. PETITIONS.
III. KING'S SPEECHES. VII. LisTs.



I. DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF LORDS.
1827.
Mar. 23. Roman Catholic Claims ................................ 1
26. Breach of Privilege .................................... 34
Petition of the Vauxhall Coiners ........................ 35
27. Roman Catholic Claims-Select Vestries in Ireland .......... 82
Grant to the Duke and Duchess of Clarence ................ 86
28. Roman Catholic Claims ................................ 111
29. Corn Laws-Lord Redesdale's Resolutions.................. 120
Poor Laws in Ireland .................................. 128
30. Fees on Private Bills .................................. 152
Appeals from India .................................... 152
April 4. Spring Guns Bill..................................... 235
5. Spring Guns Bill ...................................... 239
6. Spring Guns Bill ..................................... 265
Game Laws Amendment Bill ........................... 268
9. State of the Ministry .................................. 293
Spring Guns Bill ...................................... 295
11. Corn Laws .......................................... 387
May 2. New Administration-Exposition of the late Ministers ........ 448
4. New Administration................................... 548
7. Catholic Emancipation ................................ 562
New Administration ................................... 564
Catholic Question .........................,,....... 571





TABLE OF CONTENTS.
Page

May 7. Appeals-Deputy Speaker of the House of Lords ............ 573
8. Corn Laws .......................................... 665
10. Affairs of Portugal .................................... 706
New Administration-Corn Laws ........................ 707
11. Game Laws Amendment Bill ............................ 733
14. Vote of Thanks to the Army in India ..................... 766
New Administration-Foreign Missions .................... 774
15. Turfier's Divorce Bill ................................. 787
Corn Laws-Lord Redesdale's Resolutions ................ 789
17. New Administration ................................... 853
Case of Miss Turner.................................... 876
18. Portugal ............................................ 901
21. Catholic Emancipation................................. 923
23. Sale of Game Bill...................................... 980
25. Supply of W ater to the Metropolis........................ 984
Corn Bill ......... ...... .... ........................ 984
June 1. New Administration................................. .. 1083
Corn Bill ................................... ............. 1086
7. Secret Service M oney .................................. 1136
Corn Bill .................................. ......... 1139
8. King's Message respecting Portugal ...................... 1160
11. Supply of Water to the Metropolis-Grand Junction Company 1195
12. Corn Bill ........................................ .... 1217
13. Corn Bill............................................ 1258
Criminal Laws ......................................... 1261
14. Sale of Game Bill .................................... 1302
22. Corn Averages Bill .................................... 1372
23. Warehoused Corn Bill... .............................. 1380
26. Foreign Office ........................................ 1399
Disscnters' M arriages Bill ................................ 1407
29. Free People of Colour ............... .................. 1424
Dissenters' Marriages Bill................................ 1426


II. DEBATES IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.

M ar. 23. Breach of Privilege .................................... 3
Court of Chancery Bill ................................ 4
Pcnryn Election-Commitment of John Stanbury ............ 6
Galway Election-Breach of Privilege .................... 7
Corn Laws .......................................... 7
Protestant Dissenters--Test and Corporation Acts............ 12
Spring Guns Bill ................................ .... 19
26. Tobacco and Snuff Duties .............................. 36
Foreign Relations ........... ............. ........ ... 39
Financial State of the Country ......................... 67
Corn Laws .......................................... 78
27. W rit o Right Bill .................................... 88





TABLE OF CONTENTS.
Page
Mar.27. Corn Laws .......................................... 95
Spring Guns Bill ...................................... 106
Turnpike Act Amendment Bill .......................... 108
28. Game Laws ...................... .................. 117
29. Corn Duties Bill ............................... ....... 132
Orange Processions-Magistrates of Lisburne ................ 133
30. State of the Administration .............................. 157
W rit of Right Bill .................................... 172
April 2. Corn Duties Bill ...................................... 174
Sussex County Elections Bill ............................ 199
3. Carlisle Election-Interference of the Military .............. 206
State of Churches in Ireland ................... ......... 208
Imprisonment for Debt................................ 223
5. Emigration Committee ................................ 241
Mode of taking the Poll at Elections ...................... 241
Irish Miscellaneous Estimates-Motion for a Select Committee 243
Court of Chancery .................................... 253
6. Roman Catholic Claims ................................ 270
Change of M ministry ....................... ............. 280
Breach of Privilege-Threatening Letters sent to Mr. Secretary
Peel ............................................ 282
Corn Duties Bill ...................................... 286
9. County Courts ........................................ 297
Devon and Cornwall Mining Company-Petition complaining of
Abuses .......................................... 299
Breach of Privilege-Mr. 11. C. Jennings reprimanded........ 343
Corn Duties Bill .................................... 345
10. County Fire Office-Revenue Inquiry .................... 349
Arrest for Debt upon Mesne Process ..................... 384
12. Oaths in Courts of Justice-Forged Petition-Robert Taylor .. 389
Change of the M ministry ................................ 390
Corn Duties Bill ...................................... 391
May 1. New Administration-Mr. Peel's Exposition................. 393
2. Catholic Question-New Administration ................. 498
3. New Administration .................................... 504
Shipping Interest ...................................... 547
4. New Administration.................... .............. 553
7. Catholic Emancipation-New Administration .............. 576
Consolidation of the Criminal Law ........................ 591
Shipping Interest of the Country .......... ............ 592
8 Vote of Thanks to the Army in India.................... 667
Elections Regulations Bill .............................. 676
Borough of Penryn .................................... 682
9. Transubstantiation-Petition of General Thornton .......... 703
Sussex Election Bill .................................... 704
11. New Administration-Test Act-Supplies................ 743
14. Reported New Creation of Peers ........................ 783
Salmon Fisheries Bill ................................. 786





TABLE OF CONTENTS.
Page
May 15. Trade with India ...................................... 814
Cornwall and Devon Mining Company .................... 845
17. Administration of the Cape of Good Hope .................. 883
Spring Guns Bill ..................................... 895
18. Penryn Election Bill .................................. 903
21. Emigration .......................................... 927
New Administration................. ................. 930
Criminal Justice ...................................... 934
22. Court of Chancery-Jurisdiction in Matters of Bankruptcy .... 939
Coventry Magistracy Bill .............................. 974
23. Small Debts' Bill-Arrears upon Mesne Process ............ 981
Roman Catholics' Land Tax ............................ 982
Registration of Freeholds ............................... 983
25. Supply of Water to the Metropolis-Petition of the Western
Portion ............................................ 1026
New Administration-Committee of Supply ................ 1028
28. W ool Trade .......................... ............... 1035
Penryn Election Bill.................................... 1042
Election Expenses Bill.................................. 1057
30. Regulation of Wages-Petition from Norwich .............. 1060
31. Publication of Libels-Motion for Repeal of one of the Six Acts 1062
June 1. The Budget .......................................... 1098
Frivolous Arrests' Bill .................................. 1130
Arrests upon Mesne Process Bill .......................... 1131
Coventry Magistracy Bill.............................. 1132
6. Turner's Nullity of Marriage Bill ........................ 1133
Grand Jury Presentments of Ireland ...................... 1135
7. King's Message respecting Portugal ...................... 1144
Corporation and Test Acts .............................. 1145
Bank of England-Circular respecting Country Banks........ 1149
Penryn Election Bill........................ ............ 1155
8. Cape of Good Hope-Petition for a Representative Government 1168
King's Message respecting Portugal ...................... 1175
Coventry M agistrates' Bill .............................. 1191
11. Supply of Water to the Metropolis-Grand Junction Company.. 1197
East Retford Disfranchisement Bill ....................... 1200
12. Rate of Wages-Petition of Spital-fields Weavers............ 1241
People of Colour in the West Indies ...................... 1242
Poor Laws............................................ 1256
13. Pauper Lunatics of Middlesex ........................... 1262
14. distresses of the Commercial and Industrious Classes of the
Community ........................................ 1265
Preston Borough Election Bill ........................... 1300
18. Corn Trade .......................................... 1302
Coventry Magistracy Bill...... .......................... 1339
19. Private Bills .......................................... 1342
Dissenters' Marriages Bill ............................. 1343
20. Royal College of Physicians...................... ......... 1346





TABLE OF CONTENTS.
Page
June 20. Small Debts Recovery Bill .............................. 1350
21. Real Property in India.................................. 1361
Naval Promotions .................................... 1368
W arehoused Corn Bill .................................. 1371
22. East RetfordDisfranchisement Bill........................ 1375
Abuse of Corporate Funds to Election Purposes ............. 1379
Cape of Good Hope-Conduct of Lord Charles Somerset...... 1427
East Retford Disfranchisement bill....................... 1438


III. KING'S SPEECHES.

July 2. King's Speech at the close of the Session ... .............. 1444


IV. KING'S MESSAGES.

June 7. King's Message respecting Portugal ...................... 1144


V. PARLIAMENTARY PAPERS.

Convention between his Majesty, and .the Emperor of the Brazils,
for the Abolition of the Slave Trade. Signed at Rio de
Janeiro, November 23, 1826 .......................... 40
Convention between his Majesty and the United States of
America, for the final Settlement of certain Claims of the
United States, arising out of the Convention concluded at St.
Petersburgh, July 12, 1822. Signed at London, November
13, 1826 .......................................... 42
Correspondence relative to Commercial Intercourse between the
United States of America and the British West-India Colonies,
August, 1826, to January, 1827 ........................ 44
Lord Redesdale's Resolutions respecting the Corn Laws ...... 120
Finance Accounts for the year ended the 5th of January, 1827 Appx. i


VI. PETITIONS.

Mar. 26. PETITION of the Vauxhall Coiners........................ 35
April 9. - from Brighthelmstone, on the Abuses of the County
Courts................................... 298
10. - of the Directors of the County Fire Office, complain-
ing of the Commissioners' of Revenue Inquiry.... 360
May 25. - of the Inhabitants of the Western Portion of the
Metropolis respecting the Supply of Water ...... 1026
June 11. -. of the Grand Junction Water Works Company...... 1197
20 from Birmingham, praying to be represented in
Parliament ,,..... ,, .... .......... ....... 1438





TABLE OF CONTENTS.


VII. LISTS.
Page
Mar. 27. LIST of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on the Resolu-
tions respecting the Corn Laws ................ 105
29. of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on Mr. Brown-
low's Motion respecting Orange Processions, and
the Conduct of the Magistrates of Lisburne........ 151
30. of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on Mr.
Tierney's Motion for postponing the Committee of
Supply .................................... 171
April 2. of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on the Second
Reading of the Corn Duties Bill ................ 199
5. of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on Sir John
Newport's Motion for a Select Committee on the
Irish Miscellaneous Services.................... 252
of the Minority, on Mr. D. W. Harvey's Motion respecting
the Court of Chancery ....................... 265
May 22. of the Minority, on Mr. M. A. Taylor's Motion respecting
Jurisdiction in the Court of Chancery, in Matters of
Bankruptcy ................................ 974
28. of the Majority, and also of the Minority, in the House of
Commons, on the Penryn Election Bill .......... 1055
31. of the Minority, on Mr. Hume's Motion for the Repeal of
one of the Six Acts, respecting Blasphemous and
Seditious Libels ............................ 1083
June 7. of the Minority, in the House of Commons, on the Penryn
Election Bill ............................... 1160
12. -of the Majority, and also of the Minority, in the House of
Lords, on the Corn Bill ...................... 1238



















PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES.











Parliamentary Debates


During the FIRST SESSION of the EIGHTH PARLIAMENT
of the United Kingdom of GREAT BRITAIN and IRELAND,
appointed to meet at Westminster the 14th of November,
1826, in the Seventh Year of the Reign of His Majesty
King GEORGE THE FOURTH.


HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, March 23, 1827.
ROMAN CATHOLIC CLAIMS.] Lord
King had several Petitions to present from
that people, who stated themselves to be the
most wretched, the most ill-used, and the
most oppressed, people in Europe; namely,
the Irish Roman Catholics. Wretched, how-
ever, as they were, he did not think there
was any hope of removing their grievances ;
for, as the noble and learned lord on the
wool-sack had really stated, this House
had repeatedly rejected every specific pro-
position, and the other House had come
to a sweeping resolution not to listen to
or consider their complaints. It had been
stated that there was a great deal of har-
mony, good-will, and friendly feeling in
Ireland. Yes, he believed there was just
as much harmony and good-will as there
was between oil and vinegar. The anta-
gonist principle was in great force in that
unfortunate country. Landlords were set
against their tenants. The population
were against the property of the country.
The parsons were against the priests; and
hatred existed in every possible shape. He
did not know what was to be the future
plan of government with respect to Ire-
land. No one had ventured to point out
what government intended to do; but
when they should bring forward a plan,
what was to be the instrument ?" to use
a Cromwellian phrase. The instrument
of government, he believed, would be the
cannon, that ultima ratio of Protestant
VOL. XVII. {NE .}


ascendancy. The Catholics thought Pro-
testantism a job in Ireland, established by
a variety of laws, the worst of which was
by far the Select-vestry act. The Protes-
tants thought that the Catholic religion
was idolatrous : so that one part of the
community considering as imposture the
religion of the other part, and the other
part of the community considering the
established religion to be a job, was what
he considered to be a pretty state of
things. The noble lord then presented
petitions from the town and vicinity of
Wexford, against the Select vestry-act, and
in favour of Roman Catholic emancipation.
The Duke of Buckingham said, he gave
the noble lord credit for the sincerity of
his efforts, but he could never admit that
the manner in which he made those efforts
was at all calculated to allay the feeling of
irritation, or to produce the effect which
he wished to produce. He never could
hear it quietly stated, that there was no
hope for the Roman Catholics. He not
only hoped, but was convinced that the
measure which was the object of the noble
lord's efforts must, at no distant day, be
granted.
Lord King said, he had not stated any
thing with regard to the hopes of the
Catholics. All he had said was, that he
himself entertained no hope whatever of
their cause. If he looked to the late
decision of the other House, he should
find it far less conciliating than any thing
that had fallen from him on this subject.
Ordered to lie on the table.
B





Court of Chancery Bill. 4


1HO USE OF COMIMON S. The Speaker said, that the motion not
friday, March 23. having been seconded, this was not neces-
day, March 23. sary. He was extremely glad of what had
BREACH OF PRIVILEGE.] Mr. Hart now been stated by both the hon. members.
Davis rose to call the attention of the Of all the breaches of privilege which the
House to a subject, which was connected, House were called upon to punish in
in some measure, with its privileges. The persons out of the House, none were so
hon. member held in his hand The difficult to deal with as those which arose
Times" paper of this day. He said, it was from a breach of the rules within the
therein stated, that in the course of the House. He thought the matter would
debate of last night, a gallant colonel rest very well as it now stood; but he
opposite had said, that "if he had been trusted the House would permit him to
so disposed, he could have placed before remind it, that any deviation from the
the House some transactions in which he rules of debate was liable to produce mis-
(Mr. H. Davis) had been concerned, which understandings, and to give offence often
might bring a blush into his cheek." when it was by no means the intention of
These, if not the exact words, were very any party that offence should be given.
like those used by the gallant colonel.
Now, either the gallant colonel was CouRT or CHANCERY BILL.] The
acquainted with some circumstance of his Master of the Rolls moved the further
life which deserved the terms in which he consideration of the report of this bill.
had spoken of him; or he had used those Mr. Abercromby hoped the right hon.
terms in consequence of the excitementto and learned gentleman would not press
which debates in that House sometimes the proceedings on this bill in the absence
gave rise. He hoped, in the former case, of so many hon. and learned gentlemen,
the gallant colonel would, in justice to now on the circuit, who had taken a deep
himself, state if he knew any such dis- interest in the measure, and who were best
graceful facts; and if not, he trusted the qualified to judge of its practical effects.
gallant colonel would say that he had been The Master of the Rolls said, he had
betrayed, by the warmth of the debate, no desire whatever to press the bill in the
into expressions which he would not other- absence of those who might wish to ex-
wise have made use of. press their sentiments upon it. If, how-
Mr. Calfraft objected, that the contents ever, the second reading was deferred until
of a newspaper should be quoted as an after Easter, he feared it would be too late
authority upon such a subject in that in the session to forward its necessary
House. stages through the other House.
Mr. Hart Davis said, he was obliged to Mr. Abercromby could not see that
take some steps in the matter, and he there was any ground for apprehending
should, therefore, move that the printer ofi such a result. Ample time, he conceived,
" The Times" be ordered to attend at the would be afforded to the bill, if the second
bar of the House. reading was deferred until after the holi-
Colonel Davies said, he was ready to days. He did not think that his learned
admit that he had used the words attri- friends, now attending their duty else-
buted to him, under very considerable where, would be fairly treated, if they
excitement. That excitement was caused were not allowed an opportunity of expres-
by what he considered a very irregular sing their opinions upon this bill before it
mode pursued by the hon. member, in passed into a law.
alluding to circumstances wholly foreign Mr. M. A. Taylor hoped that the right
to the matter then before the House. He hon. and learned gentleman would yield
had now no hesitation in saying, that any to the suggestion thrown out, and consent
thing which might have fallen from him to postpone the measure.
in the heat of debate was not intended by The Master of the Rolls said, that the
him to hurt the feelings of the hon. mem- only object he had in view, was to render
her, and he trusted that what he now said the bill as perfect as possible, and that
would be perfectly satisfactory to the every information should be given upon
House and to every body else. the subject. He had no wish to derive
Mr. Hart Davis expressed himself satis- any benefit from the absence of any hon.
ied with the explanation, and offered to members; but he thought that, on other
withdraw his motion, grounds, he ought to be acquitted of all


3 HOUSE OF COMMONS,





5 Penryn Election-Commitment of John .. .. MAncri 23, 1827. 6-
blame. The commission upon the Court concluded by postponing his motion to
of Chancery had sat for two years, and the 4th of May.
the report of that commission had been Sir J. Newport was surprised to hear
two years upon the table of the House. any apprehension expressed respecting the
Last session, he had moved for leave to probable fate of that bill in the other House.
bring in a bill, grounded upon that Mr. M. A. Taylor said it was immate-
report; which had been abandoned. It rial whether the measure was postponed or
was, however, well known, both to the not, as he doubted whether any benefit
House and to the profession, that the bill would result from it. Those who were at
was founded upon the report, and he had all acquainted with the business of the
already given an explanation upon that court of Chancery, knew right well that
point. On the very day that he had taken this bill was made use of as a tub to catch
his seat this session, he had given notice the whale. After the very little that had
of his intention to bring in this bill, and been done heretofore, he hoped hon. mem-
when he did so, he had expressly stated to bers would not place much reliance on any
the House, that he did not act solely upon promises that might be made with respect
his own opinions, but upon the report to the effect of this bill on the proceedings
which had been laid before the House. of the court.
Gentlemen, therefore, had hadeveryoppor-
tunity of considering the subject, not only PEN.YN ELEcTION COMMITMIENT
with respect to its principle, but its entire oF JouI- STANBURY.] The Speaker
details. So far was he from wishing to said, he had to acquaint the House that
act otherwise, that when he brought in the serjeant-at-arms had taken into cus-
the bill, he had gone out of his way and tody John Stanbury. Mr. Wynn moved
got the principal parts of it printed and That the order of the House of yesterday,
circulated amongst the members of the on this subject, be discharged." The clerk
profession. They had now been a fortnight then read the order of the House, that an
in the hands of members, and the House Address be presented to his majesty, pray-
was in full possession of every thing which ing him to issue his proclamation for the
was necessary to be known. He was apprehension of John Stanbury. The
aware, however, that lie must sometimes order was discharged.
give way, not only to what was just and Mr. Wynn moved, That John Stan-
necessary, but to prejudice; and he should bury, having absconded in order to avoid
feel extremely sorry, that misrepresenta- being taken into custody, pursuant to the
tions should go abroad, which would be order of the House, be for the said offence
the case, if he shewed any disposition to committed to his majesty's gaol of New-
have the bill passed, without allowing gate, and that the Speaker do issue his
every opportunity for discussion. He was warrants accordingly."
desirous, as far as possible to guard Mr. Hume thought that, previously to
against misrepresentation ; and desirous, coming to any such resolution, the indi-
also, as well to promote the public advan- vidual should be called in, and heard, if
tage as to accede to the wishes that had he had any valid excuse to offer.
been expressed upon the subject. He Mr. it. said, that a report of an
would postpone the further consideration election committee had already declared,
of his bill to an early day after the recess; that he had absconded to avoid being
but he hoped that, when it was brought served with a process to attend as a wit-
forward, every facility would be given to ness before that committee; and he had
its progress, lest, if it should be brought again absconded to avoid being taken
into the other House at a late period of into custody. There was a precedent for
the session, that circumstance should this course in a case that occurred six or
afford the means of completely frustrating seven years ago. If he had any explana-
the measure. He feared there might be tion to offer, the regular way would be to
found those who were not very cordial do so by petition.
supporters of the bill; and it might be Mr. Hume said, that the evidence on
alleged, that a measure of such vital im- which the warrant was issued was ex parte,
portance should not be brought before the and he thought an opportunity ought to
legislature, at a period when there was be given to explain. He would not, how-
not a sufficient opportunity for its due ever, press his objection.
consideration. The right hon, gentleman The motion was agreed to.
B2





7 HOUSE OF COMMONS,
GALWAY ELECTION BREACH OF
PRIVILEGE.] On the motion of Mr.
Wynn, the order of the day was read for
the attendance of Mr. French and Mr.
Lambert at the bar. The right hon. gen-
tleman suggested, that, as a charge had
been made against Mr. French, that gen-
tleman should be first called, that he might
have an opportunity of explaining. Mr.
French having been called in,
The Speaker addressed him as follows:
"Mr. French, I have to acquaint you,
that yesterday a petition was presented to
this House on the part of Mr. Thomas
Lambert, complaining of conduct on your
part towards him in the lobby of the
House. The House is anxious to know
whether you have any observations which
you wish to offer to its consideration with
reference to this subject?"
Mr. French said, that some of his
friends had already informed him that
he had said that which was considered
offensive to the House. If he had done
so, he assured the House that he was
sorry for it, and that it was under the
influence of very strong feeling. Here
the hon. gentleman paused for a moment,
evidently much affected.
Mr. Secretary Peel said, he believed the
gentleman at the bar did not fully under-
stand the object of what the Speaker had
addressed to him. The object was, that
he should state the facts as they occurred
to him and not to offer any apology.
Mr. French then proceeded for a few
minutes, but not a word of what he said
was audible in the gallery. He appeared
to be very much affected, and at last was
unable to proceed.
There were now several cries of with-
draw," and the Speaker having intimated
to Mr. French that he might retire,
Mr. Wynn said, that, under the feelings
which the gentleman had evinced at the
bar, he hoped it would be deemed that
sufficient had now been done. At the
same time he trusted that what had been
done would be an example to others, that
the House would, upon all occasions, be
ready to extend its protection equally to
all persons whom it might call before it as
witnesses. He then moved, That Mr.
French and Mr. Lambert be discharged
from any further attendance."
The motion was agreed to.

CoRN, LAws.] Mr. C. Grant moved
rlii oider of the day for bringing up the


Corn Laws. S
Report of the Committee on the Corn Trade
Acts. On the question that the report be
brought up,
Lord Althorp said, that a mistake had
gone abroad, arising out of a misrepresen-
tation of what had fallen from him during
one of the early discussions on this sub-
ject, which he was anxious to correct. It
would be in the recollection of the House
that on the second day of the discussion,
he had stated that he was happy to in-
form the House, that, at the last market-
day in Northampton, his constituents had
generally expressed themselves in favour of
the propositions of ministers with respect
to the Corn-laws. This was what he had
said; but he had been represented to
have stated, that at a meeting of his consti-
tuents at Northampton on the last market-
day, they had agreed to resolutions ap-
proving of the proposition of ministers on
those laws. This he had not said; for
nothing of the kind had happened. He
had only stated what he had understood
to be the opinions of his constituents;
but it was fair to state, that their opinions
on the propositions of ministers had since
undergone a change on this subject, be-
cause, in all the discussions they had not
been made acquainted with the real merits
of the question.
Mr. Denison wished to put a question
to the right hon. gentleman, which he had
asked on a former occasion, but which had
not received an answer. He wished to
know, whether the singular anomaly of
taking the averages in the Winchester
measure, and buying and selling accord-
ing to the Imperial measure, were still to
continue ?
Mr. C. Grant assured the hon. gentle-
man that his not having answered his
question proceeded from no want of cour-
tesy to him, but was wholly accidental.
With regard to the measures, the Winches-
ter measure was that in which the averages
were already takenby the existing acts; and,
as no mention was made of any other mea-
sure in the resolutions before the House, it
would of course continue.
Mr. Denison.-So that you take the
averages with one kind of measure, and
buy and sell with the other.
Mr. C. P. Thompson was anxious to
call the attention of the House to the
strange anomaly which this course would
involve. In Mark-lane and other markets
the imperial measure was generally used
for buying and selling corn. -Why, he





9 Corn Laws.
asked, might not the same measure be
used for all the other purposes connected
with this trade ? If it made the difference
of the fraction of a farthing in the amount
of the duties, he would not press it; but as
it made none, he hoped that, for the sake
of convenience and uniformity, the one
measure would be adopted in all cases.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer begged
to remind hon. gentlemen, that it was
impossible, from the prescribed forms of
the House, that any alteration could be
made in the measure at its present stage.
It was in the committee that any propo-
sition to that effect must be originated.
Any discussion, therefore, upon that
point, must at present be premature and
irregular.
Mr. Baring thought that the law ought
not to be framed on the Winchester mea-
sure, whilst the averages were to be calcu-
lated by the Imperial measure, inasmuch
as it would lead to infinite confusion and
inconvenience. He repeated the recom-
mendation which he had suggested on a
former night; namely, that it would be
better to raise the standard price to 62s.
and use the Imperial measure, than to
leave it as it now was at 60s., and use the
Winchester measure.
The Chancellor qf the Exchequer denied
that any inconvenience would arise from
the system embraced by the resolutions.
As a proof of what he said, he referred to
what had occurred since the issuing of the
orders in council of the 1st of September
last. Since that time a million of quar-
ters had been imported, and the practical
men had felt no inconvenience from
calculating the duty upon it by the old
measure.
Mr. Calcraft contended, that the in-
convenience of the system would be felt
in the home and not in the foreign trade.
He thought that it would be best to revert to
the Winchester measure. If the standard
were taken by the Imperial measure at
62s., it would be considered in the coun-
try as an additional boon of two shillings
granted to the landed interest.
Sir G. Clark differed from the hon.
member for Wareham, upon the question
of making 62s. the standard price on
which the averages ought to be calculated.
If the act of parliament distinctly stated
the object of the advance of 2s., he was
sure the people would never mistake it.
He thought the House ought to adhere to
the- Imperial measure, as it would save


MARCH 23, 1827. 10
them from the confusion created by fre-
quent changes. The hon. baronet went
on to speak of the very great confusion
that had existed with regard to measures,
before the act for the Imperial measure
was passed, and of the advantages which
had been gained by regulating the stand-
ard. If any other measure than the Im-
perial was in any way recognized in an act
of parliament, it would operate as a virtual
repeal of the act which had introduced it.
He should be sorry to see such an event
take place. To avoid such an evil, he
should prefer adopting the proposition
for an advance of 2s. on the calculations
made on the Imperial measure ; which he
anxiously wished to preserve.
Mr. Davies Gilbert also made some
observations on the confused state in which
the commissioners had found the measures
in the Exchequer. Hie agreed that no
inconvenience might arise from departing
from it among merchants who had large
dealings; but he was afraid that incon-
venience would arise among uninformed
persons, who were not so well able to
calculate the difference between the Im-
perial and the Winchester measure. He
thought that 62s. should be fixed as the
standard from which the duties rose and
fell, and that the Imperial measure alone
ought to be used. Besides, after the com-
munications which had been made to
foreign governments of the alterations
we had introduced into our measures, and
after the declarations which some of them
had made of their willingness to adopt
measures in uniformity with our own, he
thought that we ought to adhere to the
Imperial measure.
Mr. C. Grant thought that no practical
inconvenience would arise from adopting
the system marked out in the resolu-
tions.
Mr. Baring expressed his determination
of taking the sense of the House on the
suggestion which he had thrown out, on
the very first opportunity which the forms
of the House would allow him. The lion.
member insisted very strongly on the gross
inconsistency of calculating the duty upon
one measure, and the price upon another.
Sir J. Sebright said, that, if calculations
were made upon the Winchester bushel,
the common people would think that the
Imperial measure was abandoned. He
wished an uniformity of measures to be
established throughout the country, ahd
preferred the Imperial to the Winchester







measure, as it was calculated on a more Mr. C. Grant consented, as he saw
clear and intelligent principle, there was a feeling in the House in favour
The report was brought up. On the of the adoption of the Imperial measure,
question that it be read, to have the Resolutions recommitted.
Sir J. Wrottesley remarked upon the The Resolutions were ordered to be re-
inconvenience arising in his neighbourhood committed on Monday.
from the confusion of the measures. He
was obliged to sell by the Winchester PROTESTANT DISSENTERS-TEST AND
bushel of thirty-two quarts, and bought in CORPORATION ACTS.] On the order of
one market town at the rate of thirty-six the day fo. the commitment of the Annual
quarts, in another at the rate of thirty- Indemnity bill,
eight quarts, and in another at the rate Mr. W. Smith, before the Speaker left
of forty quarts. the Chair, observed, that he should not
Mr. Warburton recommended, that the oppose the bill, though he considered this
averages should be calculated not by the annual measure as an instrument of great
old, but by the scale of the Imperial mea- injustice to the Protestant Dissenters, of
sure. which body he was himself one. For that
The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, reason, he was unable to hold any office,
that if an alteration was made in one however insignificant, under the Crown,
instance, it would be necessary that it or to sit as a magistrate in any corporation,
should bV pursued with respect to every without violating his conscience. This
species of grain. The calculations now was an exclusion hard, unjust, and un-
before the House were made, bonia fde, necessary ; and when be complained of it,
according to the Winchester bushel; and I he was told that he found his relief from
an alteration of them would induce the all his grievances in this bill of Indemnity.
inconvenience of a fraction. This would This bill was the stalking horse, by means
create very considerable difficulty to those of which the Test and Corporation acts
concerned in the corn trade; because, to had been continued in existence for a
maintain the relative proportion, in the century. If this bill had not been passed
first instance, they would have to reckon yearly, both those oppressive acts must
not Is. but Is. and the thirty-second part long ago have been repealed.
of a shilling. If they altered the propor- Mr. D. W. Harvey said, he could not
tions, it would take a pretty considerable conceal his astonishment at the contrast
time before the measure was completed. which marked this bill, and the course
Mr. D. Gilbert said, that the fraction pursued, as it regards the Catholic claims.
might, when grain was at a high price, be For nearly forty years the Indemnity bill,
allowed to the importer, and when at a low which he characterized as a measure of the
price, to the grower. most barbarous legislation, had been al-
Lord John Russell did not think there lowed to steal silently through the House,
was any magic in the numbers sixty and without provoking a syllable in explanation
twenty, which should induce the right of its objects, or in justification of the con-
hon. gentleman to adhere to them, which tinuance of those penalties against which
would be the means of continuing the old it professes to be a security. While the
standard, when a new one had been pro- claims of the Catholics are urged, year
vided. It would be better to go through after year, with the vehemence of party,
the calculations, and to make the Imperial enlisting in their support the mightiest
measure the general standard. It was the powers of energy and eloquence; the real
measure recognized by the legislature, and substantial claims of the Protestant
and it would be wrong to call on the Dissenters, whose claims are founded in
country to adopt the old measure, after it the immutable principles of the rights of
had been, in a great degree, given up. conscience, and the inviolability of private
Sir G. Clerk thought there could be no judgment, are entirely disregarded. It
difficulty in adopting the proposition of was both false in fact, and injurious in its
the hon. member for Bodmin. There influence, to confound Catholic concessions
would then, when wheat was above 60s., with religious freedom; they had no con-
be a small fraction in favour of the im- nexion with that hallowed feeling. The
porter; and when below 60s., a fraction claims of the Catholics rested altogether
against the importer, and in favour of the on the policy and expediency of them, and
home-grower, were remote from any sentiment connected


11 H-OUSE OF COMMONs',


Protestant Dissenters-






with religious freedom. Nothing could senters, with the turbulent and factious,
be more opposed to correct sentiment than and oftentimes seditious, harangues and
such an union; and it was from this fact movements of the Catholics of Ireland,
that the Dissenters were chiefly led to who urged their members to terrify parlia-
view all concessions to Catholics with well- ment into submission, on the pretence that
grounded apprehension. For it was a giving seats in the senate to the famished
peculiar property of the papal faith, that crowds of that country, would relieve and
its articles and canons were in all times remove all difficulties, he was at a loss to
and circumstances unchangeable ; and trace the wisdom of the statesman, or the
though persecution might assume in dif- calm reflection of philosophy. And the
ferent ages various shades, still exclusion evil was the more palpable, because the
of all ecclesiastical rivalry, and the sup- Dissenters of Ireland were actually allowed
pression of sectarianism, formed the basis to hold corporate offices, while they were
of that uncongenial faith. It ought to be guarded by penalties and proscription in
borne in mind, that it was owing entirely this country. It had been said, that the
to the heroic and manly sacrifices of our Dissenters were generally unfavourable to
non-conforming forefathers, that we were the Catholic claims. He believed they
indebted for the great blessings of the were; and he had generally found that
Protestant ascendancy. Had not the those amongst them who best understood
Dissenters consented to the thraldoin im- the subject, and were the most deeply im-
posed by the Test and Corporation acts, bued with the spirit of religious liberty,
the Catholics in the reign of ( mi .. must and sensible of its blessings, were the most
have been ascendant in the cabinet and alive in their apprehensions on the subject.
the field; and it would be the greatest I For they found it difficult to reconcile the
stigma on the Dissenters, and a reproach security of spiritual freedom, with the
to the parliament, were the Catholic claims bondage and superstition of Catholic
conceded before the Dissenters were eman- dominion.
cipated; and, for one, he should never be Lord John Russell rose to defend him-
inclined to countenance the one, until the self and the great portion of his friends
other was secured. He was bound to look from the imputation made upon them by
at the conduct of parties in that House the hon. gentleman who had just resumed
with extreme jealousy; as nearly forty his seat-namely, that, for the purposes
years had been allowed to pass away of party, they broughtforward the question
without an effort in favour of the Dis- of Catholic emancipation, while they did
senters. Honourable members might urge not equally insist on the restoration of
the millions who profess the Catholic re- freedom to the Protestant Dissenters. He
ligion, and the Dissenters might also recur was ready to declare, for himself, and on
to their numerical strength, did not their behalf of the great body of his friends,
pretensions stand on the higher and better that, on the principle of general religious
grounds of moral excellence, pure devotion, liberty, without any compromise or ex-
and a steady attachment to the civil rights ception in favour of any one sect, he would
of the people. What could be more pre- give his support to any question that might
posterous or unjust than that two millions come before the House. He would further
of well-informed persons should be pre- state, that, on the subject of the Test and
eluded by law from filling stations in the Corporation acts, some very respectable
corporate towns where they had earned persons, Protestant Dissenters, had applied
and generously expended their fortunes, to him-an humble individual, undoubt-
and whose municipal functions they are edly, in that House-to bring it forward.
so well able, from education and character, He was asked, whether he was ready to
to uphold and adorn? He trusted, there- move the repeal of those acts? He an-
fore, that some sincere and speedy effort swered, that undoubtedly he would; but
would be. made to rescue the Dissenters, he added, that it was a question for them
and the country, from one common charge to consider what was the proper time for
of inhumanity and injustice. When he that purpose, and in whose hands they
contemplated the peaceful tenor of their would place it. A noble friend of his, in
conduct, the sobriety and virtue of their the other House, had, in like manner,
lives, their cheerful and generous support always stated his readiness to bring forward
of every object of utility or benevolence, the question, when the aggrieved body
and contrasted them, the Protestant Dis- deemed it expedient and politic tohaye it


Test and Corporation Acts.


MARCH 23, 1827. 14







discussed. His hon. friend, the member established Church. The exceptions, he
for Norwich, could testify to that fact. knew, were many and honourable; but he
Having given those assurances, why were believed he had spoken correctly of the
they to be taunted with party designs, and great body. On the other hand, that what
factious views, in bringing forward the he called the government opposition to the
claims of the Catholics ? What interest Catholic claims rested not so much on
had they but in the general prosperity of the fear of the admission of Catholics
the empire ? Yet it was urged as a charge to that House, as on the fear that the con-
against them, that they brought forward cession to the Dissenters of all their rights
the question, which, having the name and privileges would be a necessary con-
Popery attached to it, was exposed to pre- sequence of the emancipation to the
judice ; while, it was said, they neglected Catholics.
the cause of the Protestant Dissenters, Mr. Van Homrigh addressed the
against which the same prejudice did not Speaker, but the impatience of the House
exist. What reason could they have for rendered him inaudible. He complained
following the course imputed to them ? of this inattention. He remarked, that he
They could bring forward the claims of might have made a few observations to the
the Dissenters at any time, without ex- IHouse before, but this was the first time
citing any angry feeling, or reviving any he had formally addressed them. He was
ancient prejudices ; but there were not the sure, more loyal subjects than the Catho-
same urgent reasons as in the case of the lies of Ireland could not be found, and
Catholics. The tests exacted by law from they had been so from the earliest days of
the Dissenters against the national religion, antiquity. At the time of the Revolution
he was free to admit, were the most ab- they had sworn allegiance to a king to
surd, the most odious, and the most dis- whom they faithfully adhered. It had
gustirig, that were exacted by any legis- been his fortune to see the descendants of
lature. One instance he would cite-that those men who fought at the memorable
of requiring them to take the sacrament battle of the Boyne, collected together on
against every feeling of their conscience, the same spot, to offer the demonstrations
which, he would not hesitate to declare at of loyal attachment to their present king;
once an act of mistaken policy, and a pro- and he was sure that his majesty would, if
fanation of religion itself. Yet, he would he were asked the question, be ready to
say, that the grievances of the Protestant declare that a more loyal body of men than
Dissenters were not practically so great as his Irish Catholic subjects did not exist.
those of the Catholics. The proof of this It was quite ridiculous to say that the
fact was before him. All the Catholics Catholics were not worse off than the
in the kingdom were excluded from parlia- ProtestantDissenters. Letthembe placed on
ment; while his hon. friend, the member the same footing-let them have an annual
for Norwich, was able, though a Dissenter, Indemnity bill likewise, and theywould ask
to take his seat. The law, indeed, was no more. The true way to judge of the
founded on principles of persecution, but Catholic, at least the way he judged of
the annual bill of Indemnity, in fact, gave them, was by his own feelings. If I were
that relief to the Protestant Dissenters a Catholic," concluded the hon. gentle-
which was denied to the Catholics. man, I declare I would never be satisfied
Sir Robert Wilson said, that the hon. until I had completely succeeded in vindi-
member for Colchester, had put the saddle eating my claim to equal rights with the
on the wrong horse. The reason why the rest of my fellow-subjects."
claims of the Dissenters had not been dis- Mr. Warburton reminded the hon.
cussed was, that they had not asked for member for Colchester, that the removal
relief. If they had been practically ex- of disabilities from one class of subjects,
cluded from the pale of the constitution, did not necessarily imply the propriety of
there would have been as many petitions removing similar disqualifications from
from them as from the Catholics. He con- another class.
fessed, however, that he thought it un- Mr. W. Smith trusted that the hon.
generous in the Dissenters to withdraw member for Colchester's representation of
their auxiliary support from the Catholics. the Dissenters would not be taken as a
'he main body of the Dissenters were just or fair view of them. He was willing
'reainlv more opposed to the Catholic to believe the statement of the gallant
claims' than even the members of the -member for Southwark, as far asit was the


1`5 HOUSE OF COMMONS,


Protestant Dissenters-





17 Test and Corporation Acts.
result of his own observation; but he must
deny such to be a fair representation of
the feelings of the Dissenters. He thought
they felt too much for the cause of civil and
religious liberty, not to wish that the cause
of Catholic emancipation should succeed.
Mr. Hume, seeing the right hon. Secre-
tary for the Home Department, very
attentive to the debate, wished to put a
question to that right hon. gentleman,
for whose sincerity he had the highest
respect. In the course of the late
discussion upon the Roman Catholic
claims, the right hon. gentleman had
stated, that he was a sincere friend of
toleration and of civil and religious liberty,
and that he was willing to concede every
thing, save and except political power.
Now, the right hon. gentleman was aware
that the Test and Corporation acts were
repealed in Ireland, and that Protestant
Dissenters were permitted to sit in that
House. He wished to ask the right hon.
gentleman whether he would give his sup-
port to a bill for annulling those tests al-
together ?
Mr. Secretary Peel said, he thought it
rather hard that he should be punished
with a question, because he happened to
be paying attention to the debate. In the
first place, he would say, in answer to the
question put by the hon. member, that
during the debate upon the Catholic claims,
he had not said one word on the subject
of the Protestant Dissenters. What he
had said upon that occasion applied to
Roman Catholics, and was to this effect,
that he would resist any measure for giving
them political power, but that he was
willing to admit persons of that belief to
the enjoyment of all the privileges to which
the law entitled them; and that in such
cases, he would make no distinction
between them and Protestants, each having
equal qualifications as to moral character,
and professional skill. He did not think
it necessary at present, to say a word
respecting his opinion of the tests, as they
affected Protestant Dissenters-sufficient,
for the day was the vote thereof; and that
evening he intended to vote for the bill,
which he looked upon as a measure of
relief. He could not agree in what had
fallen from the hon. member for South-
wark, that a measure of relief ought not
to be granted to the Dissenters, because
0i. y \1ha not presented petitions in favour
of the Roman Catholics. Such a ground
for refusing to afford the Dissenters relief,


MAacn 23, 1827. 18
appeared to him to be the most extraor-
dinary that could be assumed. His reason
for not entering into the general question,
whether or not the Test and Corporation
acts ought to be repealed, was two-fold:
first, because no notice had been given of
the intention of any hon. member to dis-
cuss that question in any stage of this bill;
and secondly, because it appeared to be
the disposition of the House to concur in
this measure without discussion; the more
particularly, as it was understood that it
was the intention of the noble lord oppo-
site, to bring the general measure under
the notice of the House, in a distinct and
separate shape. When that should be the
case, he would be ready to state his
opinions upon that question, but until then
he should decline giving any answer to the
question put by the hon. member.
Mr. D. W. Harvey said, that as the
hon. member for Bridport had made
some allusions to his constituents, he must
beg leave to offer a few observations. The
greater part of his constituents were Pro-
testant Dissenters; and he was of opinion
that not only they, but the great body of
Protestant Dissenters in England were
opposed to the Roman Catholic claims,
from a firm conviction that the conceding
of those claims, would be injurious to civil
and religious liberty. Whoever cast his
mind back to what took place when those
acts were passed, would find that the Pro-
testant Dissenters of that day, had placed
themselves under the thraldom of those
acts, for the purpose of saving to the
country the benefits of Protestant princi-
ples and Protestant liberality ; and, at that
period, it was understood, that the Dis-
senters were to be relieved, as speedily as
possible, from the operation of those acts.
Among those of the Protestant Dissenters,
who opposed the Catholic claims upon the
ground already stated, were to be found
men whose general information was such
as entitled their opinions upon such sub-
jects, to considerable respect.
Sir R. Wilson, in explanation, observed,
that what he had said had been misun-
derstood by the right hon. Secretary.
What he had said, and what he now re-
peated, was, that the Protestant Dis-
senters were satisfied to remain in an in-
ferior situation, provided, by doing so, they
could prevent their Roman Catholic fellow-
subjects from enjoying the privileges of the
constitution. Of the minority of two
hundred and seventy-two, upon the late





19 HOUSE OF COMMONS,
discussion of the Catholic claims, he could
not help saying, that the members who
composed it had given the most disinterest-
ed votes that had ever been given in that,
or any other parliament; because, by
voting in support of the late measure, they
had excluded themselves from all the
advantages which, in all probability, would
result from voting the other way.
Lord Rancliffe, in answer to what had
fallen from the hon. member for Colchester,
must say, that among his constituents,
whom he had now represented in three
parliaments, there were many Protestant
Dissenters who had given him their votes
upon the ground, that he was the friend
of religious liberty to the fullest extent.
No question had ever been put to him by
any of his constituents, as to the vote which
he intended to give upon the Catholic
question; and, he would say, that he had,
by his vote in support of the motion of the
hon. baronet, the member for Westminster,
supported the cause of civil and religious
liberty.
Lord J. Russell said, he had a decided
opinion upon the Test and Corporation
acts, and should bring forward a motion
upon those acts, if the Protestant Dis-
senters should think it to their interest
that he should do so; but, otherwise, he
did not intend to make any motion upon
the subject.
The bill then went through the Com-
mittee.

SPRING-GUNS BILL.] Mr. Tennyson
moved the order of the day for a Commit-
tee of the whole House upon the bill for
prohibiting the use of Spring Guns.
Having, he said, on former occasions,
stated the grounds upon which he had
recommended this measure to parliament,
he should notnow enterintoanelaborate ex-
position of the principle, or dwell upon the
mischiefs ensuing from the practice, against
which the bill was directed. Those mis-
chiefs were perfectly notorious. Since the
last discussion on this subject, a multitude
of dreadful accidents had occurred. He
concluded that the object of those who
set Spring-guns was to destroy and maim
mischievous trespassers-but he could not
accommodate the patrons of these ma-
chines by stating, that even in one of
those instances this end had been an-
swered ; for the death or mutilation in-
flicted in all the cases which had come to
his knowledge, had fallen to the lot of in-


Spring-Guns Bill. 20
nocent individuals. But it was not neces-
sary to insist on that which was the known
result of the practice : the House had
merely to consider, whether these horrors
ought longer to be endured, or should
straightway be put down. It was matter
of new astonishment to him, every time he
reflected upon the subject, that in a coun-
try blessed with an organised system of
law and jurisprudence, there should exist
such a practice, or any necessity for argu-
ment respecting it. It would be a strange
anomaly, if, in such a country, a man
should be allowed, upon his own authority,
to seize upon an offender within his own
domains, and sitting in judgment in his
own case, subject him to the punishment
which the public law of the country had
annexed to the offence; but yet, suppos-
ing that to be warranted, there would, in
the case supposed, be a specific individual
accused, a hearing, an examination of tes-
timony, a deliberation, a conviction, a
judgment, and an execution, all in orderly
sequence, and the punishment would be
that which the law had proportioned to
the crime. But, in the case of a Spring-
gun, the castigare preceded, and frequently
superseded, the audire. The punishment
was not addressed to a crime, but to a
civil injury, a mere trespass, for which, in
most cases, the injury being nominal, more
than a farthing would scarcely be given as
damages. Neither was the punishment
applied to a specific trespasser, but to any
person, trespasser or not, who might hap-
pen to be walking in that direction, to
meet the possibility, that such person
might be an individual actuated by some
lawless intent. Again, as there was nei-
ther crime nor culprit, so neither was
there hearing, inquiry, or deliberation;
they were identified with the judgment
and the execution by the summary dis-
charge of the indiscriminating machine
employed, which, to complete the anomaly,
administered as a punishment the arbi-
trary and unmeasured infliction of the
party upon whom the trespass was com-
mitted. Of course, a gentleman who
should deal justice in this way to his
neighbours by the simple old fashioned
process of a pistol discharged by his own
hand, or that of an intelligent deputy,
would himself be dealt with, at the next
assizes for his county, by the common
hangman. But, if this measure were re-
jected, he hoped some member with more
influence than himself would move for a





21 Spring-Guns Bill.
bill to remit the punishment of death,
and, on the contrary, declare lawful, all
regular, well-considered and deliberate
murders, committed by esquires and gen-
tiemen of note upon poachers and others,
being wilful and mischievous trespassers
on their property. Thus we should at
least escape from the evil of which he
chiefly complained-the slaughter and
mutilation of individuals perfectly inno-
cent. At least, the punishment would
then be inflicted on the real trespasser;
and, although it might be a visitation
somewhat harder than the laws had yet
sanctioned for trespassers, even in pursuit
of game, still we should at length know
what we were about. Seriously, he would
ask, whether it would not, i fact, be bet-
ter to invest a being endowed with powers
of discrimination with an authority of this
description, than to leave the matter to
these irresponsible and undistinguish-
ing engines ? or, would it not be more ex-
pedient at once to denounce the pursuit
of game upon another man's land as a
crime, and attach to it even the punish-
ment of death or mutilation, to be inflicted
in the ordinary course of justice, than to
attain the end of so punishing it in this
underhand, uncertain, and, in every way,
objectionable manner. The truth was,
that the use of these machines enabled
lords of manors to deal with poaching as
a capital offence; and while we declaimed
against the old laws of France and other
countries on the subject of their Game-
laws, we must perceive that the feudal no-
hility there had nothing in comparison
with this privilege. He was ashamed to
say that it was a practice peculiar to this
country. The rankest weeds were some-
times found on the richest soil, but, if
suffered to remain, they became ruinous
to its wholesome produce. Did our
boasted code require such an auxiliary
as Spring-guns-an auxiliary which must
tend to exasperate and brutalize the peo-
ple ? If certain gentlemen thought pro-
per to congregate large quantities of game,
this was a self-indulgence, a mere luxury.
Was a self-indulgence, a private luxury,
in which the public did not at all partici-
pate, to be protected at this rate ? Was
an idle fancy to be defended at such an
expense of blood and principle-at the
cost of the lives and limbs of a consider-
able number of his majesty's subjects an-
nually, and those not the individuals ac-
tually guilty of interfering with these


IMARC 23, 1827. 22
amusements ? Oh-but gentlemen would
quit the country if they were not permit-
ted to preserve game after their own
fashion Yet, gentlemen of fortune and
devoted sportsmen appeared to live hap-
pily in those districts where Spring-
guns were not used. Neither did lord
Suffield, or Mr. Coke, who refused to em-
ploy them, quit the country; indeed,
their estates had the reputation of being
better stocked with game than any other
in the kingdom. But, if there were gen-
tlemen who would run away unless they
were allowed this indulgence, such gentle-
men could not too soon take their depar-
ture, for they must be nuisances to any
country in which they resided. In his
judgment, 'the man who would deliberately
expose his fellow-creature to death or inu-
tilation for the object of increasing his
breed of pheasants, disgraced the high
character of an English country gentleman.
When he pictured to himself a game-pre-
serving 'squire-one of these anthropo-
phagi, sitting in his hall, surrounded, like
an Ogre, by death-dealing machines, so
arranged upon his territories as to spring
upon and kill, or maim any one, whatever
his purpose, who might unwarily approach,
and thus setting the laws of God and the
feelings of mankind equally at defiance-
he could not avoid thinking that such a
being entered into the class of a demon,
and deserved the execration of his species.
It appeared that Spring-guns furnished a
cheaper mode of preserving game than
that number of gamekeepers and assistants
required by lords of manors with extensive
districts. But, whatever the cost might
be, it was one which should be borne by
the individual preservers of game them-
selves, and not by society at large. Was
the cost which this practice imposed upon
the public, the cost of so much human
blood annually spilt, in order to secure a
private indulgence to the game-preserver
and none to the public who could not par-
ticipate in it, even by purchasing game-
was this cost, he would ask, that which it
was either just or expedient to pay in
order to prop up a vicious, distorted, and
notoriously defective, system of Game-
laws? If that system were such as to
prohibit all legal means of supply for a
natural and increasing demand, which the
reiterated efforts of the legislature had
failed to stifle ;-if thus the supply were
forced through illegitimate channels, and
the poacher rendered necessary to the





23 HOUSE OF COMMONS,
wants of the public-were the consequences
resulting from the necessity thus absurdly
created, to be counteracted and repressed
by the outrageous violence of Spring-guns ?
Some gentlemen pleaded motives of hu-
manity for the use of them, contending,
that they rendered nocturnal conflicts with
game-keepers less frequent. But, in those
conflicts, the game-keeper was paid for the
risk he incurred, and the poacher was, ac-
tually, the party engaged on the other
side ; whereas, the Spring-gun almost
uniformly mistook its victim. Besides,
the sumn of mischief arising from Spring-
guns was infinitely greater than that aris-
ing from such conflicts, without referring
to'the general principles upon which those
machines were objectionable. If the
Game-laws were altered, so as to furnish
a legal supply of game to the market,
these conflicts would cease with the exist-
ence of that flagrant description of poach-
er which now infested the country.
There were some gentlemen adverse to
the present system of Game-laws, who
thought they must not put an end to Spring-
guns until the whole of that system was
reformed ; on the ground that they were
necessary to resist the arms of poachers,
to which, they admitted, it gave birth.
But he reasoned in an opposite direction,
and he would invite those gentlemen to
consider, that Spring-guns were equally
the fruit of that degenerate tree-the off-
spring of that vicious parent which they
were anxious to destroy. If this parent
were deprived of the support which it de-
rived from its monstrous progeny, it
would be a material step towards its own
destruction; for, when gentlemen, who
were found to cling to the old system,
were deprived of the aid they now derived
from Spring-guns, they would be driven to
a rational reform of that system, which, in
reality, generated the depredations of
which theycomplained.--Onthese grounds,
and those which, on former occasions, he
had urged, the hon. gentleman implored
the House to concur with him in putting
an end to a practice which degraded and
disgraced the character of this country,
and was utterly incompatible with every
principle on which the institutions of a
civilized people ought to be founded.
Sir J. Shelley contended, that the hon.
and learned gentleman's measure was, in
fact; an attack on gentlemen who wished
to preserve their plantations and woods.
The words of the bill went to prevent the


Spring-Guns Bill. 24
setting of Spring-guns in Woods and Plan-
tations; but no mention was made of
gardens, orchards, and other inclosures,
so that a school-boy might be shot for
going into an orchard and stealing an
apple, while the thief and the poacher
might enter a gentleman's pleasure grounds
without apprehension, and commit what
depredations he pleased. The hon. gentle-
man's bill was founded upon a false prin-
ciple. It would be admitted, he presumed,
that it was better to prevent a crime than
to punish it. Now, his firm conviction
was, that the terror of these machines
prevented a great deal of crime. For his
part, he never set them up himself, but he
put up a board to say he had done so [a
laugh]. The fear of these machines, he
was persuaded, was extremely salutary.
The hon. member had called the gentle-
men who set Spring-guns on their estates
demons and Anthropophagi. These were
hard words certainly, but he could assure
the hon. member, that such was the salu-
tary influence of fear on rogues and depre-
dators, that he knew an instance in which
a board with the words woAx4av s3oo
lhoxarns are set here," had had all the
effect of the usual notice about steel-traps
and Spring-guns, and had struck such
terror into the minds of the poachers, that
his grounds were never visited by them.
He could not help thinking that this was
an instance in which a hard word was
turned to better account than that which
the hon. member had applied to country
gentlemen. The hon. baronet proceeded
Sto read a letter from the proprietor of ex-
tensive plantations in Ireland, in which it
was stated, that the setting of Spring-guns
on his estates had put an end to the depre-
dations and outrages which had previously
been committed on them, and that no loss
of life or other inconvenience had resulted
from the practice. In fact, the bloody
battles between poachers and preservers of
game scarcely ever took place where guns
and traps were set. He never knew an
instance in which they had occurred. He
had certainly heard of some accidents
having happened ; some persons had, un-
doubtedly, been caught in these traps
[hear, hear! from Mr. Tennyson]. The
hon. and learned gentleman cheered, and.
with reason; for he was going to state
that he had heard, the other day, of two
lawyers having been caught in a trap [a
laugh]. He agreed this was a melancholy
occurrence; but then it was so rare: an





~5 Spring-Guns Bill.
event for a lawyer to be caught in a trap,
that he hoped the House would not sup-
port the hon. and learned gentleman's
bill on that ground. He should not fol-
low the hon. gentleman in the vast variety
of topics he had introduced; but he
trusted the House would see the expedi-
ency of preserving plantations against
depredation, and that they would there-
fore oppose the measure.
Lord Blandford thought the House
would not act wisely, if they removed the
protection afforded by the salutary terror
which the setting of Spring-guns occa-
sioned. If this measure were agreed to,
armed bands must be marshalled against
the midnight invaders of property, and
the conflicts of the two parties would pro-
duce much more human suffering than
ever had resulted, or ever could result,
from the setting of Spring-guns. He had
himself, for several years, made use of
these instruments for the protection of his
property ; and, as he considered the ob-
jections urged against them to arise from
a kind of morbid sensibility, he was deter-
mined to give the present bill his decided
opposition. Looking at the question,
indeed, upon the point of humanity, he
felt convinced that the aggregate amount
of human suffering would be, under the
provisions of that bill, if it received the
assent of the House, infinitely greater
than any that could be produced from an
occasional casualty under the existing
system.
Mr. Secretary Peel said, that, although
he approved of the principle of the mea-
sure, as he would show by the vote he
intended to give that night, he neverthe-
less felt himself bound to express his very
strong doubts with regard to the practical
consequences likely to be produced from
carrying the principle into effect. He
was by no means satisfied that the taking
away the protection afforded by Spring-
guns would not have the effect of increas-
ing the tendency to commit crimes, by
increasing the temptations to incroach
upon property. Resistance would then
ensue, and conflicts would be the conse-
quence, to an extent as great, perhaps, or
greater than before. In a society, consti-
tuted like the present, he thought they
ought never in that House to discuss a
question on mere theoretical principles,
"illl:ot looking at the effects that were
likely to flow from their adoption. Agree-
ing, therefore, as he would, with the prin-


MAacu '3, 1827. 20
ciple of the measure, he doubted: its
effects; and the longer he lived, he was
the less disposed to predict what would be
the consequence of any measure founded
even on the best principles, without waiting
to ascertain its practical effect; and he
could not divest himself of a fear, that
there might be ultimately an increase of
crime by the adoption of the present bill,
from an addition to the temptation to
commit offences against property. When,
however, he saw the consequences arising
from the placing of Spring-guns in unen-
closed grounds, and when he heard of the
daily accidents and misfortunes arising
from the use of them in general, lie felt
that he could not any longer defend the
continuance of such a system, and that it
was better to run the risk of an experiment,
even upon a theory, than suffer it any
longer to exist; and he felt that the con-
sequences of the change, whatever they
might prove, must be less pernicious than
if the laws, under which such things
happened, were permitted to exist. When
he looked to the practical consequences of
the present state of the law, he felt con-
vinced that the punishment intended to
be inflicted upon trespassers by Spring-
guns seldom or ever fell upon the guilty.
The poachers, he believed, seldom or ever
suffered. In most cases, the punishment
fell upon the totally innocent, or upon the
keeper, and the persons who had placed
them for the protection of the game. He
would vote, as he had said, for the bill;
but he gave that vote and that assent
qualified by his expression of an appre-
hension for the consequences, and with
an opinion that some relaxation of even a
very good principle would be ultimately
found necessary. He repeated, however,
that when he looked to the mutilations
and the calamitous results which arose
from the use of Spring-guns, he could not
refuse his assent to the bill. The right
hon. gentleman then alluded to the argu-
ments which had been used by the hon.
baronet and others with respect to the
influence produced upon the minds of the
poachers by the dread of Spring-guns,
and observed that the hon. baronet might
still continue to use his 7rowvupos3oir's in
the same manner as before [hear! and a
laugh]. There were several portions of
the bill to which he objected; such as
allowing Spring-guns to be placed in an
open field, and some others of that kind.
He did not see how or why Spring-guns






27 HOUSE OF COMMONS,
were not to be placed in an enclosed field,
and yet allowed in anropen common; but
as these defects, if they were defects,
might be remedied in the committee, le,
would conclude by expressing his cordial
assent to the hon. gentleman's motion.
Mr. P. Mildmay was sorry that he
could not arrive at the same conclusion as
the right hon. gentleman. He was con-
vinced that, so far from diminishing the
amount of crime, the repeal of the Game-
laws would have the effect of increasing
the crime, and those conflicts which pro-
duced such unfortunate results, in a most
alarming degree. Some hon. gentleman
had stated, that the offence of poaching,
and the committals for stealing game were
much fewer in those counties were Spring-
guns were not placed, than where they
were in general use. Now, he had moved
for some returns on the subject, which
showed, that in those counties where
Spring-guns were not used, the committals
were much greater than in others. He
was convinced, indeed, that great mischief
rather than benefit would accrue to society,
from any change of the laws respecting
the protection of game, and he therefore
felt himself bound to oppose the committal
of the bill.
Mr. Charles Barclay said, that in a
great part of Suffolk, the county with
which he was acquainted, there were no
Spring-guns used. In Norfolk, the owners
of the largest estates, Mr. Coke and lord
Suffield, adopted no such means of se-
curity, and yet their property was pro-
tected. The question seemed to him to
resolve itself into this: whether they were
entitled to set Spring-guns to destroy a
man for the purpose of presers ing a phea-
sant or a hare? He himself had set
Spring-guns, and did now; and he would
tell the House the result. The very first
person who came in contact with one of
the wires, was his under-keeper, who, in
chase after a woodcock, quite forgot what
had been set. The gun went off; the
man stumbled over the wire and fell. As
he thought himself shot, he did not attempt
to stir, but laid still, expecting to die
every minute; finding, however, that he
was still alive, after a little deliberation,
he turned round, and finally called out to
his companion not to be frightened, for
that he was not dead. It was not, how-
ever, so improbable a thought; for the
man had seen the guns loaded with an
immense quantity oi' powder and shot,


Spring-Guns Bill. 28
not knowing that he (Mr. Barclay) con-
stantly ordered his head-keeper to draw
out the shot. The next person who was
near falling a victim to them was
his wood-keeper; who complained that
he, by accident, went into the park,
and trod upon one of the wires, and that
it would have been a very hard thing for
him to have been shot. A number of
similar instances had occurred, whilst he
had never remembered a poacher having
been wounded by a Spring-gun, although
they frequented woods where guns were set.
Mr. J. Grattan said, that Spring-guns
were nearly unknown in Ireland.
Mr. W. Smith said, that the hon.
baronet who had argued the most strongly
for setting Spring-guns, had acknowledged
that he himself had never set them a
fact which was better than a thousand
arguments. If a street was saidto be con-
tinually infested with thieves and house-
breakers, was that a reason why a cannon
should be discharged down the middle of
it by way of clearance ? This was, how-
ever, the principle on which Spring-guns
were defended.
Colonel French said, he was determined
to oppose the bill, not only because he
felt that its principles were founded upon
a feeling of morbid sensibility, but be-
cause he thought that the favourers and
supporters of the new system of philosophy
and of political economy seemed to forget,
that the honest English country gentleman,
though he might not have the same know-
ledge of philosophy and political economy
as they had, yet formed in himself the
very subject and essence of the English
character. He would propose, whatever
became of the bill with regard to England,
that Ireland and Scotland should be left
out of the sphere of its operation. In the
first place, there was little or no game in
Ireland; and in the next, the arms which
must be put into the hands of the keepers,
in the event of Spring-guns becoming
illegal, would form a temptation to the
commission of murder, in order to get
possession of them. It was usual in that
country to plant many thousand acres
with young trees; and he knew many
instances in which parties of one or two
hundred persons had gone into one of
these plantations, and destroyed the
greater portion of the trees: Spring-guns
had, however, been placed in these plan-
tations, and no individual had ever since
ventured to commit a trespass.





29 Spring-Guns Bill.
Mr. Saunderson shortly opposed the
bill, and moved as an amendment, that it
be committed ou that day mouth. He did
not object to all its details, but he would
prefer considering its provisions as an
amendment to the bill on the Game-laws,
which it was probable they would have to
consider when it came from another
place.
Sir R. Heron had no objections to
Spring-guns, when placed in houses and
gardens, and other places where such a
protection was necessary; but he con-
tended that they ought not to be placed in
fields or woods, where a man might happen
to go for very justifiable purposes. He
would, however, rather relinquish the pro-
tection afforded by Spring-guns, than be
a witness to the consequences which re-
sulted from their indiscriminate use.
Mr. W. Duncombe opposed the bill, but
had no objection to the use of Spring-guns
being prohibited between the hours of
sun-rise and sun-set. By the adoption of
that amendment, he thought the objections
to the use of Spring-guns would be ren-
dered nugatory. It was very well for
hon. gentlemen to say that other means
might be resorted to for the protection of
game; but it ought to be recollected, that
every man could not, like lord Suffield
or Mr. Coke, afford to keep an army of
twenty or thirty game-keepers to keep his
preserves. That House, in legislating,
ought to look at the condition of the
middling class of landowners as well as
the higher; and consider what was neces-
sary to the preservation of their property.
Spring-guns were, however, to be de-
fended upon a principle of humanity.
They prevented the frequency of those
deadly conflicts which must result from a
withdrawal of the protection hitherto
afforded the preserves of game; and
upon that ground he would oppose the
bill.
Lord Sandon said, lie had that night
heard two arguments adduced against this
bill, which, he trusted, he should never
again hear mooted upon any occasion.
The first literally went to support the use
of Spring-guns, on account of their
superior cheapness, in sacrificing human
life, and shedding innocent blood. And
the second, the absolute necessity which
would be imposed upon gentlemen who
had preserves, of maintaining additional
game-keepers, if these instruments were
dispensed with. To the first argument,


MAciCH 23, 1827. 30
no reply could be necessary. To the
other, he would only answer, that if gen-
tlemen were so eager to maintain the pos-
session of an expensive and fatal luxury,
they could hardly complain of the hard-
ship of being compelled to make more
extensive and legitimate provision for its
preservation [cheers].
Sir Edmund Carrington said :-I hold
myself bound, by the law of England, to
support this bill. On the legality of the
act of setting Spring-guns or man-traps in
woods or plantations, to preserve them
from the apprehended invasion of poachers,
or of other trespassers, there is no express
statute; but all the analogies of law, as
well as all the feelings of humanity, are
in opposition to the practice. The poacher
is a mere trespasser, and liable only to be
dealt with and punished for a trespass ;
could the proprietor of the soil, if he met
the poacher, even armed, and at night,
presume at once to shoot him through the
head, or to maim, or to disable him?
Could he presume to delegate such an
authority, or to issue such a mandate to
his keeper, or his woodman ? Would he
venture, even on the notice which warns
all invaders from his territory, to add the
threat, that his keepers had orders to fire
upon, or to despatch the trespasser?
Would such a notice be endured for a
moment ? And shall he delegate to acci-
dent a power which he neither dares to
execute in person, or to delegate to any
moral agent? Shall he make chance his
proxy, for the purpose of murder, or of
man-slaughter, or of mayhew ? But, Sir,
by the law of England, as in all manly
and consistent reasoning, where the direct
performance of an act is forbidden, its
execution by indirect means is forbidden
also. If, therefore, the setting these en-
gines of destruction be an unlawful act,
what is the situation, and what the peril,.
in which a gentleman places himself by
authorizing or commanding the resort to
so desperate and so forbidden an expe-
dient ? Admitting that he is absent at the
time, that he is ignorant of the explosion
of the instrument, yet, by the very orders
he has issued, he becomes a principal in
the offence; for, by having laid the means
of destruction, which have taken effect in
his absence, and without his specific
knowledge, he is constructively present,
and personally responsible to his country
for the offence of which he was the cause,
and of which it was his duty to foresee







the natural consequences. We all know assure the House, that many friends of
,aith what anxious caution the law sur- his, resident in his own neig'bbourhood,
rounds the life of man, even where the had started with a firm determination
person slain has been the original aggres- never to employ Spring-guns for the pro-
sor; how minutely it exacts, that the tection of their grounds and game; but,
object of attack shall not have exceeded in consequence of the terribly mutilated
the limits of a just and necessary defence, and wounded state in which their game-
and that the right to slay his adversary keepers often returned from some acci-
ceases with the emergency that alone dental collision with the poachers, they
could authorize it; no suspicion, no fear had been reluctantly compelled to resort
of future attack, will justify the killing an to the use of these machines.
adversary to preventhis mere apprehended Mr. Wynn declared his firm belief to
hostility, even to the life of another : the be, that if they should continue to make
law provides its safeguards, and interposes it legal to set Spring-guns by night, they
its protection, and to the law alone must would continue to be set also by day.
resort be taken for the securities it can He had never known an instance where
and will exact. In the language of the accidents had happened in the day time
Roman orator, Quis hoc statuit unquam, from Spring-guns being unawarely trod
aut cui concedi sine summo omnium upon by unoffending parties, in which it
periculo protest, ut eum jure potuerit occi- did not appear that the keepers had pro-
dere, a quo metuisse se dicat, ut ipse mised to take them up in the day time,
posterius occideretur?" These, Sir, are and to keep them down only at night:
the principles of our law, and not of the and there could be no doubt that game-
law of England only, but of those systems keepers would always contrive to employ
of general law which have been so admi- them as much as possible. Then, as to
rably expoundedby Grotius, and the great the principle of their employment at all,
jurists who, like him, have enlightened it should be remembered, that the offence
mankind on the principles of moral action, against which they were meant to guard
and the sanctions of legal and social re- was but a trespass on a certain descrip-
sponsibility. On these principles, and for tion of property. Now, however excessive
the safeguard even of those who, from in- the degree of punishment, as compared
advertence, or from too eager a regard to with the nature of the offence, might be,
the preservation of a favourite property, which these Spring-guns inflicted, there
have been led into what I consider an un- would be something in the argument, as
authorized usurpation of the powers of to the necessity of their employment, if
prevention or of vengeance. I shall vote the guilty only suffered by them. The
for going into the committee. contrary was, however, notoriously the
Mr. Ridley Colborne observed, that if fact; for hardly an instance could be
the bill had only gone to restrain the set- cited in which the offender was the victim.
ting of Spring-guns to the night season, But then it was contended, that the know-
and to making the setting of them by day ledge of their being set in grounds ope-
illegal, it would have had his full and en- rated to deter the guilty from trespassing;
tire concurrence. Another principle on but if the innocent were to suffer, in order
which he was disposed to support, to a that the guilty might be alarmed, that
certain extent, the use of Spring-guns, House would never sanction the use of
was this-that it was much better to em-! such weapons. This argument, therefore,
ploy them than to resort to the only other fell to the ground. Some hon. gentlemen
alternative which their disuse would leave had supported the use of Spring-guns, by
for the protection of property; namely, the example of flogging, of which they
the increase of that numerous armed force observed, that though it was not very
which was at present scattered over the pleasant to any party who was subjected
country for its security. If there was one to it, it might, and did, undoubtedly,
part of our existing system of Game-laws deter others from committing offences, for
which more disgusted him than another, which they would be amenable to the
it was this extensive force; and the direct same penalty. Now, this attempted
operation of the hon. gentleman's bill analogy appeared to him to rest on no
would be to increase its extent, and to better grounds of reason, than the ancient
multiply those murderous conflicts which practice in this kingdom, according to
were already too frequent. He could i which, the tutors of princes never punish-


31 HOUSE~ OF t'011NIONS,


7e Bill.






Mg AS u. ac i1 263, i0'27. 34


ed their royal pupils for their delinquen- the bill his hearty support. He had
cies, but whipped some innocent boy, who had some experience as to the effects pro-
was substituted for the royal pupil. No duced in his neighbourhood by Spring-
doubt, the notion was, that the royal guns; and he could state that the only in-
pupil would be deterred from a repetition stance of individuals being previously hurt
of his fault, by witnessing the punishment by them had been in the case of gentle-
inflicted on account of it; but what could men and gamekeepers by whom they had
be said of the principle, upon which the been set. He had never heard of a single
innocent substitute was made to undergo accident happening to a poacher. He
the infliction ? He confessed he had heard would add, that the whole tenor of this
no argument sufficient to justify the con- discussion inspired him with the con-
tinuance of the practice in question, after viction, that some alteration in the Game-
all the calamities which their experience laws was absolutely necessary. A bill
had shown to result from the setting of upon this subject was at present in pro-
these guns. For his own part, though gress in another House, which he hoped
much attached to sporting, he should be would pass there by a triumphant majority,
wretched indeed, if a poacher, however and come down to this House, where it
determined or inveterate in his pursuits, would also receive every support.
should be mutilated in the act of trespass- Lord Althorp observed, that, singularly
ing upon any property of his; and still enough, the whole discussion upon this
more so, if that poacher should lose his motion had turned, not so much upon the
life, from the explosion of a Spring-gun. question of the expediency of employing
In conclusion, he could attach no sort of Spring-guns, as on the necessity of pre-
weight to the suggestion, that the com- serving game. Now, fond as he was of
mittee on this bill ought to be delayed field sports, and disposed as he might feel.
until after the consideration of the Game under other circumstances, to preserve
bill; and, therefore, he should give the game, God forbid that, while the punish-
motion his most cordial support. ment of offences against this property was
Mr. Denison protested, that no person so excessive as that which the use of
was more convinced than himself of the Spring-guns entailed, he should sanction
utility, and, indeed, essential necessity to the preservation of that speciesof property!
this country, of country gentlemen living He thought the setting of Spring-guns was
upon their estates, exercising a generous at variance with the sound principles of
hospitality, and maintaining with their English law. One of those principles was,
tenantry every sort of reciprocal good to establish a due proportion between the
office. It was with this conviction that punishment and the crime; but here a
he rose to vindicate the country gentle- punishment of mutilation, and in some in-
men'from the imputation which had been stances of death, was proposed to be sub-
very freely cast upon them, in the course stituted for what was nothing more than
of the debate, that they were obliged to a trespass. He hoped, therefore, that in-
have Spring-guns and armed bands, both struments would be no longer permitted,
of them frequently destructive to human which gave a sanction to inordinate punish-
life, for their amusement. For himself, ment for a minor offence.
he could only say, that he had never used Sir H. Vivian said, that, in his opinion,
the one or the other; and yet if any hon. this was a question between the employ-
gfntleman would do him the favour to ment of Spring-guns, and the employment
visit him in the season, he would show of a great additional force of gamekeepers;
them as much sport as if he had been one and as his mind was made up as to the
of 'the strictest preservers. If, however, alternative, he should oppose the bill.
there really were country gentlemen, who The question being put, That the
could not reside upon their estates without Speaker do now leave the Chair," the
Spring-guns and bands of armed men for House divided : Ayes 104; Noes 42.
'their amusement, the sooner they left the
rrointil, the better. They had much HOUSE OF LORDS.
!..rtt,.r ,'ome un to town at once, and put Monday, March 26.
hi,,-.:.:l. under the protection of theondy, rch26.
\ .-ir.hiiw, who were the armed keepers of BREACH OF PRIVILEGE.] The Lord
Berkeley and Grosvenor squares. Chancellor said, he thought it his duty to
Sir R. Fergqsson said, he would give call their lordships' attention to what he
VOL. XVII. C


Sprinirg-Gunsi Bill.





35 HOUSE OF COMMONS,
conceived to be a breach of privilege. By
an order of their lordships, strangers were
not permitted to appear below the bar.
The officers of their lordships' House had
thought proper to disobey that order, and
to admit strangers, upon which he would
say nothing at present, but did not allow
them to come in with sticks and umbrellas.
A person, presenting himself for admit-
tance, had therefore been desired to leave
his umbrella behind, which he did, and
which was afterwards taken away. That
person had thought proper to bring an
action against the officer of the House, to
recover the value of the umbrella ; and had,
moreover taken upon himself to serve him
with the process in their lordships House.
Thathe conceivedto be breach of privilege.
He thought that the regular course for
their lordships to pursue would be to call
the officer to the bar, to state the cir-
cumstances of the case, which he must
depose to on oath. Their lordships would
then decide whether a breach of privilege
had been committed.
The Earl of Rosslyn said, that the in-
dividual had no right to bring an action at
all; and that bringing an action would of
itself have constituted a breach of privilege.
Strangers were then ordered to with-
draw. The officer of the bar desposed to
the fact, and the person who had brought
the action was ordered to appear at their
lordships' bar to-morrow.


Tobacco and Snuff Duties- 36
Humbly sheweth; That in the act of
Parliament entitled 59 Geo. 3rd, cap. 49,
date 2nd July, 1819, the 10th and 13th
sections use the word coin instead of
money, which term is employed in the
11th section.
That after permitting money to be
melted into bullion, the 10th section al-
lows bullion to be manufactured namely,
without limitation in respect to the money
of the realm ; indeed, there is subjoined,
any thing in any act or acts in force in
Great Britain or Ireland, to the contrary
thereof in any wise notwithstanding.'
That the 13th section prohibits a de-
basement of money after its manufacture;
but not during that operation.
That, with reference to the 10th sec-
tion, your lordships will be pleased, for the
words 'and to manufacture or export, or
otherwise dispose of the gold or silver
bullion produced thereby,' meaning from
melted money, to substitute 'and except
counterfeiting or imitating the money of
the realm, to manufacture or export, or
otherwise dispose of the gold or silver bul-
lion produced thereby; as well as for the
words and it is expedient that the traffic
in gold and silver bullion should be un-
restrained,' to say and it is expedient
that the traffic in gold and silver bullion
should be restrained,' are the humble re-
quests of your petitioners, who, as in duty
bound, shall ever pray, &c."


PETITION OF THE VAUXIIALL
COINERs.] The Earl of Carnarvon rose
to present a curious Petition to their lord- HOUSE OF COMMONS.
ships. It was the Petition of Shadrach Monday, June 26.
Walker and Jeremiah Andrews, who had
been committed to prison on a charge of ToBAcco AND SNUFF DUTIES-PE-
coining. The petitions represented to TITION OF R. M. PRICE.] Mr. Calcraft
their lordships, that they had only been said, he rose to present a petition upon a
manufacturing money, and that this manu- subject of great importance to the revenue.
facture was allowed by the 59th of Geo. The petitioner was a Mr. Robert Morgan
3rd. The prayer of the petitioners was Price, residing in the Vauxhall road, a
even more strange than what he had gentleman well versed in the business con-
already stated; for they prayed that the nected with the petition. He had for-
offence of coining might in future be made merely laid before the lords of the Treasury
capital against all those who should follow a plan for preventing the smuggling of
their example. The petition was read as tobacco, and had been referred to Mr.
follows : Carr, the solicitor of Excise, with whom
"To the Right Honourable the Lords he had had several interviews. But as
Spiritual and Temporal of Great Bri- soon as Mr. Price proposed the repeal of
tain and Ireland, in Parliament as- an act which had been passed at Mr.
sembled. The Petition of the un- Carr's suggestion, that gentleman would
designed Prisoners, arrested near have nothing more to say to Mr. Price's
Vauxhall, on a charge of forgery of scheme. It must be admitted, that Mr.
money, Carr's office was largely paid, by fees






Mg AS u. ac i1 263, i0'27. 34


ed their royal pupils for their delinquen- the bill his hearty support. He had
cies, but whipped some innocent boy, who had some experience as to the effects pro-
was substituted for the royal pupil. No duced in his neighbourhood by Spring-
doubt, the notion was, that the royal guns; and he could state that the only in-
pupil would be deterred from a repetition stance of individuals being previously hurt
of his fault, by witnessing the punishment by them had been in the case of gentle-
inflicted on account of it; but what could men and gamekeepers by whom they had
be said of the principle, upon which the been set. He had never heard of a single
innocent substitute was made to undergo accident happening to a poacher. He
the infliction ? He confessed he had heard would add, that the whole tenor of this
no argument sufficient to justify the con- discussion inspired him with the con-
tinuance of the practice in question, after viction, that some alteration in the Game-
all the calamities which their experience laws was absolutely necessary. A bill
had shown to result from the setting of upon this subject was at present in pro-
these guns. For his own part, though gress in another House, which he hoped
much attached to sporting, he should be would pass there by a triumphant majority,
wretched indeed, if a poacher, however and come down to this House, where it
determined or inveterate in his pursuits, would also receive every support.
should be mutilated in the act of trespass- Lord Althorp observed, that, singularly
ing upon any property of his; and still enough, the whole discussion upon this
more so, if that poacher should lose his motion had turned, not so much upon the
life, from the explosion of a Spring-gun. question of the expediency of employing
In conclusion, he could attach no sort of Spring-guns, as on the necessity of pre-
weight to the suggestion, that the com- serving game. Now, fond as he was of
mittee on this bill ought to be delayed field sports, and disposed as he might feel.
until after the consideration of the Game under other circumstances, to preserve
bill; and, therefore, he should give the game, God forbid that, while the punish-
motion his most cordial support. ment of offences against this property was
Mr. Denison protested, that no person so excessive as that which the use of
was more convinced than himself of the Spring-guns entailed, he should sanction
utility, and, indeed, essential necessity to the preservation of that speciesof property!
this country, of country gentlemen living He thought the setting of Spring-guns was
upon their estates, exercising a generous at variance with the sound principles of
hospitality, and maintaining with their English law. One of those principles was,
tenantry every sort of reciprocal good to establish a due proportion between the
office. It was with this conviction that punishment and the crime; but here a
he rose to vindicate the country gentle- punishment of mutilation, and in some in-
men'from the imputation which had been stances of death, was proposed to be sub-
very freely cast upon them, in the course stituted for what was nothing more than
of the debate, that they were obliged to a trespass. He hoped, therefore, that in-
have Spring-guns and armed bands, both struments would be no longer permitted,
of them frequently destructive to human which gave a sanction to inordinate punish-
life, for their amusement. For himself, ment for a minor offence.
he could only say, that he had never used Sir H. Vivian said, that, in his opinion,
the one or the other; and yet if any hon. this was a question between the employ-
gfntleman would do him the favour to ment of Spring-guns, and the employment
visit him in the season, he would show of a great additional force of gamekeepers;
them as much sport as if he had been one and as his mind was made up as to the
of 'the strictest preservers. If, however, alternative, he should oppose the bill.
there really were country gentlemen, who The question being put, That the
could not reside upon their estates without Speaker do now leave the Chair," the
Spring-guns and bands of armed men for House divided : Ayes 104; Noes 42.
'their amusement, the sooner they left the
rrointil, the better. They had much HOUSE OF LORDS.
!..rtt,.r ,'ome un to town at once, and put Monday, March 26.
hi,,-.:.:l. under the protection of theondy, rch26.
\ .-ir.hiiw, who were the armed keepers of BREACH OF PRIVILEGE.] The Lord
Berkeley and Grosvenor squares. Chancellor said, he thought it his duty to
Sir R. Fergqsson said, he would give call their lordships' attention to what he
VOL. XVII. C


Sprinirg-Gunsi Bill.





35 HOUSE OF COMMONS,
conceived to be a breach of privilege. By
an order of their lordships, strangers were
not permitted to appear below the bar.
The officers of their lordships' House had
thought proper to disobey that order, and
to admit strangers, upon which he would
say nothing at present, but did not allow
them to come in with sticks and umbrellas.
A person, presenting himself for admit-
tance, had therefore been desired to leave
his umbrella behind, which he did, and
which was afterwards taken away. That
person had thought proper to bring an
action against the officer of the House, to
recover the value of the umbrella ; and had,
moreover taken upon himself to serve him
with the process in their lordships House.
Thathe conceivedto be breach of privilege.
He thought that the regular course for
their lordships to pursue would be to call
the officer to the bar, to state the cir-
cumstances of the case, which he must
depose to on oath. Their lordships would
then decide whether a breach of privilege
had been committed.
The Earl of Rosslyn said, that the in-
dividual had no right to bring an action at
all; and that bringing an action would of
itself have constituted a breach of privilege.
Strangers were then ordered to with-
draw. The officer of the bar desposed to
the fact, and the person who had brought
the action was ordered to appear at their
lordships' bar to-morrow.


Tobacco and Snuff Duties- 36
Humbly sheweth; That in the act of
Parliament entitled 59 Geo. 3rd, cap. 49,
date 2nd July, 1819, the 10th and 13th
sections use the word coin instead of
money, which term is employed in the
11th section.
That after permitting money to be
melted into bullion, the 10th section al-
lows bullion to be manufactured namely,
without limitation in respect to the money
of the realm ; indeed, there is subjoined,
any thing in any act or acts in force in
Great Britain or Ireland, to the contrary
thereof in any wise notwithstanding.'
That the 13th section prohibits a de-
basement of money after its manufacture;
but not during that operation.
That, with reference to the 10th sec-
tion, your lordships will be pleased, for the
words 'and to manufacture or export, or
otherwise dispose of the gold or silver
bullion produced thereby,' meaning from
melted money, to substitute 'and except
counterfeiting or imitating the money of
the realm, to manufacture or export, or
otherwise dispose of the gold or silver bul-
lion produced thereby; as well as for the
words and it is expedient that the traffic
in gold and silver bullion should be un-
restrained,' to say and it is expedient
that the traffic in gold and silver bullion
should be restrained,' are the humble re-
quests of your petitioners, who, as in duty
bound, shall ever pray, &c."


PETITION OF THE VAUXIIALL
COINERs.] The Earl of Carnarvon rose
to present a curious Petition to their lord- HOUSE OF COMMONS.
ships. It was the Petition of Shadrach Monday, June 26.
Walker and Jeremiah Andrews, who had
been committed to prison on a charge of ToBAcco AND SNUFF DUTIES-PE-
coining. The petitions represented to TITION OF R. M. PRICE.] Mr. Calcraft
their lordships, that they had only been said, he rose to present a petition upon a
manufacturing money, and that this manu- subject of great importance to the revenue.
facture was allowed by the 59th of Geo. The petitioner was a Mr. Robert Morgan
3rd. The prayer of the petitioners was Price, residing in the Vauxhall road, a
even more strange than what he had gentleman well versed in the business con-
already stated; for they prayed that the nected with the petition. He had for-
offence of coining might in future be made merely laid before the lords of the Treasury
capital against all those who should follow a plan for preventing the smuggling of
their example. The petition was read as tobacco, and had been referred to Mr.
follows : Carr, the solicitor of Excise, with whom
"To the Right Honourable the Lords he had had several interviews. But as
Spiritual and Temporal of Great Bri- soon as Mr. Price proposed the repeal of
tain and Ireland, in Parliament as- an act which had been passed at Mr.
sembled. The Petition of the un- Carr's suggestion, that gentleman would
designed Prisoners, arrested near have nothing more to say to Mr. Price's
Vauxhall, on a charge of forgery of scheme. It must be admitted, that Mr.
money, Carr's office was largely paid, by fees





37 Petition of R. M. Price.
upon Excise prosecutions, arising out of
the existing system. The hon. gentleman
proceeded to show, from the petitioner's
statement the great facility which his
plans would afford for collecting an in-
creased revenue, and preventing smuggling.
In consequence of the present imperfect
system, there was a great defalcation in
this department of the revenue. In one
article, that of cigars, his suggestions had
been attended to, and the result was, that
in four months, the quantity on which
duty was paid had increased from eighty-
four pounds to sixteen thousand pounds of
that article. Mr. Price calculated that if
his plans were adopted, they would pro-
duce an increase of 1,000,0001. a year,
with a decreased duty ; but not under the
present laws. For even at the decreased
duty the smugglers might still realize a
profit of 1,2001. per cent. In America
the price of the raw article was Id. per lb.
In Holland it was 2d., and in England
2'd.; and the duty was 3s. per lb. So
that the House would see what a wide
field was opened for smuggling. Now, it
was to put an end to this practice, and to
give an improved revenue that Mr. Price
had directed his attention. He thought
that this plan of Mr. Price was well worth
the attention of government, embracing as
it did a proposition to increase the revenue
by so large an amount, and at the same
time to check the practice of smuggling.
What he wished was, that there should
be an investigation, either by the House
or by the Treasury, into Mr. Price's plans.
The necessity of some such inquiry would
be evident, from what was stated with
respect to the decrease in the quantity
on which duty had been paid in Ireland,
which had decreased from 9,000,0001. to
4,000,0001. The subject was one which
deserved investigation, and if the right
hon. gentleman consented to the appoint-
ment of a committee he was ready to
assist in the inquiry.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer said,
he did not mean to deny the respectability
of the petitioner, but he thought the hon.
gentleman attached too much importance
to the petition, and he did not think that
the facts were fairly stated. So far from
the plans of Mr. Price having been re-
jected as unworthy of consideration, he
himself had had interviews with that gen-
tleman on the subject, and had read over
with attention a variety of papers submit-
ted by him; but he protested he could


MAncrr 26, 1827. 33
not make himself so far master of them as
to say he clearly understood them. The
plans consisted, for the most part, in the
suggestion of an infinite variety of restric-
tions on the tobacco trade. Now, he
owned he was not disposed to commit
himself by adding to the restrictions on
this trade ; which, though they might, he
could well conceive, be approved of by
the great dealers, would not meet the
general approbation of the trade, and
would be injurious and vexatious to them,
as tending to produce large monopolies
One reason why he was unwilling to sanc-
tion any such restrictions was, that some
time ago Mr. Carr had proposed a new
tobacco excise bill, adding many pro-
Svisions much more onerous on the trade
than those which already existed, but the
proposition being opposed by the great
mass of the trade, was abandoned by the
right hon. gentleman who then held the
office which he had now the honour to
fill. He was unwilling, after such a re-
jection, to press what he knew would add
to the restrictions already in force. It had
been insinuated that Mr. Carr refused to
pay further attention to Mr. Price's plan,
when that plan suggested any alterations
in his own act, as if such alterations would
lessen his fees from prosecutions. Now,
the fact was, that, if Mr. Carr had any
fault, it was that of suggesting many re-
strictions which if adopted would have
the effect of materially diminishing his
own profits. If the hon. member were in
the situation which it was his fortune to
fill, and were compelled to attend to all
the schemes for the amelioration of par-
ticular branches of the revenue which he
received from ingenious, and he might
say, fanciful men, he would find that he
would have no time to bestow upon the
real and more important business of his
situation.
Sir John Newport recommended the
right hon. gentleman to pay attention to
the subject matter of this petition. In
Ireland 400,0001. was annually raised
upon these tobacco duties, of which
200,0001. was paid back to the preventive
service. He conceived that if the duty was
diminished to Is. 6d., the revenue would
be augmented by the increased consump-
tion of the article which the diminution
of the duty upon it would create. Be-
sides, it would act as a prevention to that
demoralization which always prevailed
among a population which was aecus-
C2







tomed to engage in offences against the sum, he should be obliged to ask for a
revenue laws. further vote, to make up the deficiency.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer rose The third portion of the papers which he
again, merely for the purpose of repelling had to lay before the House, formed the
the imputation attempted to be cast upon completion of the correspondence which
Mr. Carr, who had repeatedly told him had taken place between this government
that, in his opinion, a low duty upon all and the United States, regarding certain
commodities that were in constant re- commercial regulations between the United
quest among the people, would prevent States and the British West-India colo-
smuggling more effectually than any other nies. This correspondence had already
mode that could be resorted to. been laid before the Houses of Congress
Mr. lMaberly thought that the best way of the United States, and three of the let-
to prevent any imputations from being ters had already been published. As the
cast upon Mr. Carr, was for the right hon. world was at present in possession of a
gentleman to carry into effect the recom- part of the correspondence, he saw no
mendation which had been given with re- reason to withhold the rest, and the
aspect to that gentleman's office, and to whole, therefore, would be printed. There
give him a permanent salary. was no cause for keeping any part of it
Ordered to lie on the table. secret. All the papers to which he had
referred were authenticated, according to
FOREIGN RELATIONS.] Mr. Secretary custom. The right hon. gentleman spoke
Canning said, he had some papers to lay in a very low tone of voice, and seemed to
upon the table of the House. The first of be still suffering from the effects of his late
these was a Treaty entered into between indisposition.
his Majesty and the Emperor of Brazil, for Mr. Hume asked, whether the letters
the final and total abolition of the African now to be laid before the House finished
Slave-trade. This treaty had lately been the correspondence, or whether it was still
signed, and its object was to be effected in continuation ?
in three years after the exchange of trea- Mr. Canning said, he considered it
ties; and, during the interval, the Bra- finally closed, for he had had the last
zilian slave system was to be subject to word.
the same impositions and duties as the! The following are copies of the said
Portuguese slave system was at present. Papers.
The second of these papers was a Treaty
between the United States and this coun- BRAZIL.-Convention between his Ma-
try, regarding a dispute which had existed jesty and the Emperor of Brazil, for
ever since the war, and which had been the Abolition of the African Slave Trade,
the subject of much discussion. That Signed at Rio de Janeiro, November
dispute related to the claims made by 23, 1826. Presented to both Houses
American citizens, in respect of slaves of Parliament, by Command of his
taken from their owners and proprietors Majesty, 1827.
during the war. The House were aware Whereas, upon the separation of the
that this subject had been referred to the Empire of Brazil from the Kingdom of
arbitration of a third power-he meant of Portugal, his Majesty the King of the
the emperor of Russia, who had decided United Kingdom of Great Britain and
it unfavourably for his majesty. Since Ireland, and his Majesty the Emperor of
then the discussion had been renewed, Brazil, respectively acknowledge the obli-
principally with regard to the amount of gation which devolves upon them to
compensation claimed ; and two years renew, confirm, and give full effect to, the
ago he (Mr. Canning) had come down to stipulations of the treaties subsisting be-
the House, and had obtained a vote of tween the Crowns of Great Britain and
200,0001. on accaint. Whe-n the second Portugal, for the regulation and final
discussion was terminated, the amount abolition of the African Slave-trade, in
claimed was settled, and the compensa- so far as these stipulations are binding
tion, which the Amerieans had first stated upon Brazil:
at 2,000,000 dollars, was finally bated And whereas, in furtherance of that
down to 1,200,000 dollars. As the money important object, his Majesty the King of
which the House had already voted on the United Kingdom of Great Britain and
account was insufficient to satisfy that Ireland, and his Majesty the Emperor of


1139 HOUSE OF COXE'MONS,


Foreign Relations.







Brazil, are animated with a sincere desire nuary, 1815, and on the 28th of July, 1817,
to fix and define the period at which the and the several explanatory articles which
total abolition of the said trade, so far as have been added thereto.
relates to the dominions and subjects of Art. 3. The high contracting parties
the Brazilian empire, shall take place, further agree, that all the matters and
their said Majestieshave accordinglynamed things contained in those treaties, together
as their plenipotentiaries to conclude a with the instructions and regulations, and
convention for this purpose, that is to forms of instruments annexed to the treaty
say:- of the 28th of July, 1817, shall be ap-
His Majesty the King of the United plied, mutatis mutandis, to the said high
Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, contracting parties and their subjects, as
the right hon. Robert Gordon, a Member effectually as if they were recited word for
of his Majesty's Most Honourable Privy word herein; confirming and approving
Council, and his Envoy Extraordinary and hereby, all matters and t. ings done by
Minister Plenipotentiary at the Court of their respective subjects under the said
Brazil:-And his Majesty the Emperor of treaties, and-in execution thereof.
Brazil, the Most Illustrious and Most Ex- Art. 4. For the execution of the pur-
cellent Marquis of Inhambupe, Senator of poses of this convention the high con-
the Empire, of the Council of State, Dig- tracing parties further agree to appoint
nitary of the Imperial Order of the Cross, forthwith mixed commissions, after the
Commander of the Order of Christ, and form of those already established on the
Minister and Secretary of State for Foreign part of his Britannic majesty and the king
Affairs ; and the Most Illustrious and of Portugal, under the convention of the
Most Excellent Marquis of Santo Amaro, 28th of July, 1817.
Senator of the Empire, of the Council of Art. 5. The present convention shall be
State, Gentleman of the Imperial Cham- ratified, and the ratifications shall be ex-
ber, Dignitary of the Imperial Order of changed at London within four months
the Cross, and Commander of the Orders from the date hereof, or sooner if possi-
of Christ, and of the Tower and Sword :- ble.
Who, after having communicated to In witness whereof, the respective Pleni-
each other their respective full powers potentiaries have signed the same, and
found to be in due and proper form, have have affixed thereto the seals of their arms.
agreed upon and concluded the following Done at Rio de Janeiro, the 23rd day of
articles:- November, in the year of our Lord 1826.
Art. 1. At the expiration of three years, (L.S.) ROBT. GORDOX.
to be reckoned from the exchange of the (L.S.) MA1RQUEz DE S. AInARxo.
ratifications of the present treaty, it shall (L.S.) MARQUEz DE INIIAMBUPI:.
not be lawful for the subjects of the Emperor .AsnRICA. Convention between his
of Brazil to be concerned in the carrying invention eteen
on of the African Slave-trade, under any Majesty and the United States of Ane-
pretext or in anan manner whatever, and rica, for the final settlement of certain
pretext or in any manner wvhatev er, and claims of the united States, arising oit
the carrying on of such trade after that pe- claims of the United States, arising out
riod, by any person subject of his Imperial the convention concluded 2. St. Pc-
Majesty, shall be deemed and treated as tersburgh, July 12th, 122. Signed at
-piracy. London, November 13th, 1826. Pre-
pwacy.sented to both Houses of ianu b
Art. 2. His majesty the king of the seated to both Houses of parlament, by
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ire- command of his Majesty, 1827.
land, and his majesty the emperor of Bra- Difficulties having arisen in the execu-
zil, deeming it necessary to declare the tion of the convention concluded at St.
engagements by which they hold them- Petersburgh on the 12th day of July,
selves bound to provide for the regulation 1822, under the mediation of his majesty
of the said trade, till the time of its final the Emperor of all the Russias, between
abolition, they hereby mutually agree to Great Britain and the United States of
adopt and renew, as effectually as if the America, for the purpose of carrying into
same were inserted, word for word, in this effect the decision of his Imperial Majesty
convention, the several articles and provi- upon the differences which had arisen be-
sions of the treaties concluded between his tween Great Britain and the said United
Britannic majesty and the king of Portu- States, on the true construction and mean-
gal en this subject, on the 22nd of Ja- ing of the first article of the treaty of


Foreign Relations.


MARcii 26, 1827. 422





43 HOUSE OF COMMONS,
peace and amity, concluded at Ghent on
the 24th day of December, 1814; his
Britannic Majesty and the said United
States, being equally desirous to obviate
such difficulties, have respectively named
plenipotentiaries to treat and agree re-
specting the same, that is to say :-
His Majesty the King of the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland,
has appointed the right honourable William
Huskisson, a member of his said Majesty's
most honourable Privy Council, a member
of Parliament, President of the committee
of Privy Council for Affairs of Trade and
Foreign Plantations, and Treasurer of
his said Majesty's Navy; and Henry Un-
win Addington, esq., late his Majesty's
Charge d'Affaires to the United States of
America : And the President of the
United States, Albert Gallatin, their En-
voy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipo-
tentiary to his Britannic Majesty :-who,
after having communicated to each other
their respective full powers, found to be in
due and proper form, have agreed upon
and concluded the following articles:-
Art. 1. His Majesty the King of the
United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ire-
land agrees to pay, and the United States
of America agree to receive, for the use of
the persons entitled to indemnification and
compensation by virtue of the said deci-
sion and convention, the sum of 1,204,960
dollars current money of the United States,
in lieu of, and in full and complete satis-
faction for, all sums claimed or claim-
able from Great Britain, by any person or
persons whatsoever, under the said deci-
sion and convention.
Art. 2. The object of the said convention
being thus fulfilled, that convention is
hereby declared to be cancelled and an-
nulled, save and except the second article
of the same, which has already been car-
ried into execution by the commissioners
appointed under the said convention, and
save and except so much of the third arti-
cle of the same, as relates to the definitive
list of claims, and has already likewise
been carried into execution by the said
commissioners.
Art. 3. The said sum of 1,204,960 dol-
lars shall be paid at Washington to such
person or persons as shall be duly author-
ized, on the part of the United States, to
receive the same, in two equal payments
as follows :-
The payment of the first half to be made
twenty days after official notification shall


Foreign Relations. 44
have been made, by the government of the
United States, to his Britannic Majesty's
Minister in the said United States, of the
ratification of the present convention by
the President of the United States, by and
with the advice and consent of the senate
thereof.
And the payment of the second half to
be made on the first day of August, 1827.
Art. 4. The above sums being taken as
a full and final liquidation of all claims
whatsoever arising under the said decision
and convention, both the final adjustment
of those claims and the distribution of the
sums so paid by Great Britain to the
United States, shall be made in such man-
ner as the United States alone shall de-
termine: and the government of Great
Britain shall have no further concern or
liability therein.
Art. 5. It is agreed that, from the date
of the exchange of the ratifications of the
present convention, the joint commission
appointed under the said conven-
tion of St. Petersburgh, of the 12th of
July, 1822, shall be dissolved, and upon
the dissolution thereof, all the documents
and papers in possession of the said com-
mission, relating to claims under that con-
vention, shall be delivered over to such
person or persons as shall be duly author-
ized, on the part of the United States, to
receive the same. And the British com-
missioner shall make over to such person
or persons so authorized, all the documents
and papers (or authenticated copies of the
same, where the originals cannot conve-
niently be made over) relating to claims
under the said convention, which he may
have received from his government for the
use of the said commission, conformably
to the stipulations contained in the third
article of the said convention.
Art. 6. The present convention shall be
ratified, and the ratification shall be
exchanged in London in six months from
this date, or sooner if possible.
In witness whereof the Plenipotentiaries
aforesaid, by virtue of their respective full
powers, have signed the same, and have
affixed thereunto the seals of their arms.
Done at London, this 13th day of No-
vember, in the year of our Lord, 1826.
(L.S.) WILLIAM HUSKISSON.
(L.S.) HENRY UNwIN ADDINGTON.
(L.S.) ALBERT GALLATIN.

AMERICA. Correspondence relative to
commercial intercourse between the





45 Foreign Relations.
United States of America and the Bri-
tishWest-India Colonies, August, 1826,
to January, 1827, 'presented to both
Houses of Parliament, by command of
his Majesty, 1827.
No. 4.-Mr. Secretary Canning to Albert
Gallatin, Esq. Foreign-ofice, Nov. 13,
1826.
The Undersigned, &c. would willingly
have abstained from offering any observa-
tions on the note addressed to him by Mr.
Gallatin, &c. on the 22nd of September,
in reply to the answer which had been re-
turned by the Undersigned to Mr. Galla-
tin's note of the 26th of August ; the facts
of the question agitated between Mr. Gal-
latin and the Undersigned admitting of
no dispute, and their previous correspond-
ence having exhausted all the arguments,
on each side, of which the matter in dis-
cussion is susceptible.
But, upon reperusal of Mr. Gallatin's
note, after an interval of a few weeks,
there appear to the undersigned to be two
or three points much relied upon by Mr.
Gallatin, which it would be improper to
leave unnoticed.
The first of these points, and that
which affects, more or less, the whole of
Mr. Gallatin's reasoning, is the question
of right-the right of a mother country to
monopolize the trade of its colonies. Mr.
Gallatin discusses this question much at
length, and attaches himself in that discus-
sion, rather, perhaps, to the terms, than to
the substance, of the proposition intended
to be put forward by the undersigned.
The proposition of the undersigned is
simply, that there is a right in a mother
country, universally admitted among na-
tions, to interdict to foreign nations a
trade with her colonies.
It may be true (as stated by Mr. Galla-
tin) that every country has the same "right"
to interdict with foreign nations a trade
withitself. Butbe the abstract" right"what
it may, this, at least, cannot be denied,
that the exercise of that right" has been
so usual in onc case, and so unusual in
the other, that the difference of usage (if
it be no more) amounts almost to a dif-
ference of principle.
Foreign nations might justly complain
of the one interdiction, that of trade with
the mother country, as an innovation, but
they have no just ground of complaint (and
no other nation than the United States
has ever complained) of the interdiction


MARCH 26, 1827. 46
of trade to the colonies; because, in all
ages, all nations having -colonies have
maintained such an interdiction.
Mr. Gallatin, after having objected, in
the beginning of his note, to the use of the
word "right" as applied by the under-
signed to the colonial trade of Great Bri-
tain, applies the same word himself (in-
advertently, perhaps,) in a subsequent part
of his note, to the interdiction by the
United States of a trade in British ships
between the United States and the British
West-India colonies.
That trade Mr. Gallatin describes as a
trade which had been carried on merely by
"permission" a permission which (says
Mr. Gallatin) the United States had a right
to grant or to withhold."
Now, as according to Mr. Gallatin's
doctrine, the United States have, in strict-
ness, a right" to exclude British trade
altogether from their ports, the under-
signed cannot presume to contend that
they have not the same right" to pro-
hibit a trade between those ports and the
Bristish colonies.
But the undersigned ventures to affirm,
that the right which they have exercised
in the latter prohibition has no peculiar
and separate character growing out of
long and general usage, to distinguish it
in principle from a prohibition of all trade
whatever with the United States.
Up to the year 1818, Mr. Gallatin ad-
mits that the trade, since prohibited by the
United States, was enjoyed by British
vessels, in common with those of all other
countries. The interdiction, therefore, is
not of ancient usage, and so far is it from
being generally applied by the United
States to foreign vessels, that it operates
against Great Britain alone.
Is it not at least singular that Mr. Gal-
latin should reserve for a practice thus
novel and thus partial, the character of
"right" which he denies to an usage as
old as the establishment of colonies, and
universal among all nations to which co-
lonies have belonged ?
Is it not singular, also, that while Mr.
Gallatin denies any claim on the part of
Great Britain to the continued enjoyment
of a trade in the United States, which she
is admitted by Mr. Gallatin to have en-
joyed uninterruptedly up to the year 1818,
Mr. Gallatin puts forward a claim on the
part of the United States to trade with
the West-India colonies of Great Britain,
on the ground of usage and practice ?






The United States, says Mr. Gallatin, sel could enter the ports of the British
found their reclamation to participate in West-India colonies, except under occa-
that commerce" (the trade with the Bri- sional and temporary suspensions of the
tish West-Indiacolonies) on this ground:- colonial law. And yet it is upon this usage
That trade has been allowed by Great that Mr. Gallatin founds,
Britain, it may be said, from the begin- First.-A right in the United States to.
ning, and at all times, and has become prohibit British vessels from clearing out
thereby so far assimilated to that with the from the ports of the United States to the
European dominions of Great Britain, British West India colonies;
that the United Sates did think that they Secondly.-A claim on the part of the
had the same claim to a participation in United States to participate in the colonial
both." As early as the year 1783, the trade of Great Britain.
government of Great Britain, deviating The things may be right or wrong in
from that principle of colonial system, ac- themselves; but usage surely points ex-
cording to which her colonies were pro- actly the contrary way to that in which
hibited from trading directly with any Mr. Gallatin apples it.
other country, allowed her West-India Mr. Gallatin has yet another ground on
colonies to trade directly with the United which to rest this claim of the United
States of America in British vessels." States to participation in the colonial trade
It may be observed as to these facts, as of Great Britain:-
stated by Mr. Gallatin himself, that no During the European war, Great Bri-
two things can be much more different tain found it convenient occasionally, but
than a permission (on the one hand) given repeatedly, to open her West-India portsto
by Great Britain to British vessels to American vessels; at the same time thatshe
trade directly between a British colony was asserting the principle uniformly de-
and another country (the vessels of that nied by the United States, that a neutral
othercountryremainingbylaw, and, infact, was not authorized by the law of nations
excluded from the ports of the colony) and to carry on in time of war a trade with a
that participation," on the other hand, colony, in which he was not permitted to
which implies a trade between the United participate in time of peace."
States and the West-India colonies in ves- First.-If the ports were occasionally
sels of the United States. opened, the very terms of the proposition
The relaxation to which Mr. Gallatin show that they were generally shut. It
refers, in fact, did nothing more than would be difficult to imagine either a more
permit British vessels to bring certain ar- complete proof of the acknowledged right
tides into the colonial ports directly from to admit or exclude foreign trade from the
the place of their production, instead of colonies, as the governing authority might
bringing the like articles circuitously think fit, or a more perfect refutation of
through the United Kingdom. Theques.- the plea of usage in favour of a perma-
tion, whether these articles should be im- ently open trade.
ported circuitously through the United Secondly.-The rule of 1756 appears to
Kingdom, or directly from the place of have littleapplication to the point in dispute.
their growth, was a mere municipal con- It might to be sure be, in all such cases,
cern, which did not vary the exclusive a question with the neutral, whether he
character of the colonial system, so long would be tempted by the open ports of one
as that importation was confined to Bri- belligerent, to run the risk of capture by the
tish ships. other. But the point in dispute is, whe-
Undoubtedly the United States might their by occasionally opening her colonial
then, if they thought proper, have inter- ports, Great Britain virtually abandoned
dieted the trade to British vessels between the right of closing them again when she
their ports and the British West-India thought proper: and on this point, the
colonies, unless American vessels were al- merits of the rule of 1756 have not, so far
lowed to participate in it, but they did not. as the undersigned can make out, the
The history of the usage, therefore, is, most distant bearing.
that up to a certain period, a trade be- Thirdly.-As it is intended to prove
tween the ports of the United States, and that the United States have a claim to par-
the British West-India colonies in British ticipate in the colonial trade for ever, be-
ships, went on unquestioned, while, as cause the ports of the colonies were oc-
Mr. Gallatin, is aware, no American ves- casionallyopenedduring the war, Mr. Gal-


47 HOUSE OF COMMONS,


17oreign Relations.





49 Foreign Relations.
latin describes the ports as having been
opened to American vessels. True, but
not to American vessels only, or speci-
fically. The ports were open to the ves-
sels of all friendly powers. The argu-
ment therefore, as to the special claim of
the United States, falls to the ground.
The truth, however, is, that under the
words right" and claim," so frequently
recurring in this discussion, lies the real
and fundamental difference of opinion be-
tween Great Britain and the United States,
which has frustrated all attempts to settle
the dispute question of colonialintercourse
upon common principles, by conventional
arrangement.
I I,.. it is contended that the right"
by which Great Britain prohibits foreign
countries from trading with her colonies, is
the same "right with that by which she
might (if she thought fit) prohibit them
from trading with herself, this argument
(which is employed by the United States
alone) implies, that the special prohibition
is a grievance to the United States, if not
of the same amount, of the same kind, as
the general prohibition would be.
This is a doctrine which Great Britain
explicitly denies.
It seems to be admitted, indeed, that
there was a time when the distinction be-
tween colonial trade and the trade of the
mother country was tenable. But it has
been assumed, in no obscure terms on the
part of the United States, that the colo-
nial system is now virtually at an end.
Great Britain denies this assumption.
Whatever relaxation Great Britain may
think fit to introduce for her own sake,
and for that of her colonies themselves,
into her colonial system, she holds her
" right" to maintain that system, as with
respect to foreign nations, to be unaltered
and entire. Great Britain, therefore, can-
not consent to any diplomatic arrangement
by which such right" may appear to be
relinquished, or by which her assertion of
it can be understood to be in any degree
qualified or controlled.
Hence the impracticability (already so
repeatedly proved) of any treaty upon this
subject between Great Britain and the
United States.
Hence the necessity for Great Britain
of doing whatever she means to do in the
way of relaxation of her colonial monopoly,
by acts of her own legislation.
This deduction brings the undersigned
to the last point in IMr. Gallutin's note,


MARcii 26, 1827. 50
and that on which he is most anxious
that there should be no misconception be-
tween them.
Mr. Gallatin speaks of a permanent
exclusion of the United States by Great
Britain, from a trade open to the rest of
the world," as a measure different in cha-
racter from a general exclusion of all fo-
reign nations.
But is this a just description of the ef-
fect of the act of 1825 ?
Considerations (of which Great Britain
alone is the judge) have induced her to
open her colonial trade to other nations.
She opened it to them not as a matter of
special favour, or of special "claim" to
any one, but on specified conditions, com-
mon to all nations who might think fit to
subscribe to them, and to the United
States among the rest.
If some of the nations of the world have
taken advantage of the opening thus of-
fered to them, by accepting the condi-
tions annexed to it, and others have omit-
ted to do so, and if the United States are,
by their own choice, in the latter class,
surely it is not a correct description of the
consequence of this, their own voluntary
omission, to say that the United States
are excluded" by Great Britain from a
trade, which, on the contrary, Great Bri-
tain invited them to share.
Exclusion of foreigners from the colonial
trade is the general principle of colonial
policy; admission to that trade is the
exception-an exception, which, in this
instance, Great Britain was willing to
grant to all those who were ready to pur-
chase it on terms tendered equally to all.
The United States cannot mean to put
forward the pretension, that what is

granted to others on terms, should be
granted to them unconditionally. If not,
it seems difficult to imagine how they can
feel it to be unjust or unkind (it certainly
is not so felt, or intended, on the part of
this country), that the United States hav-
ing, upon a free, and (as is known from
the public proceedings of their legislature)
deliberate consideration, declined to sub-
scribe to the terms on which exception
from colonial prohibition was tendered
impartially to all nations, they should find
themselves, in common with such of those
nations as have decided like themselves,
liable to that exclusion, which is and al-
ways has been, the general principle of co-
lonial trade. The undersigned avails him-
self, &c. GlonoRG CAN rl G.





51 HOUSE OF COMMONS,

No. 5.-Albert Gallatin, Esq. to Mr.
Secretary Canning. Upper Seymour
Street, Dec. 28, 1826.
The undersigned, &c. did not fail to
transmit to his government the note which
Mr. Canning, &c. did him the honour to
address to him, on the 13th of Novem-
ber, in reply to the answer which had
been returned by the undersigned to Mr.
Canning's note of the 11th of September.
But, unwilling to continue a discussion
which did not seem likely to lead to any
practical result, he abstained from making
any further observation s on the subject, until
he should have received special instruc-
tions from his government, in reference to
a state of things which was altogether un-
expected at Washington at the time of his
departure.
Having now received a despatch from
the Secretary of State of the United
States, the substance of which he is in-
structed to communicate to Mr. Canning,
the undersigned, in performing that duty,
will, on those points to which he had al-
ready alluded in his former note, have but
some explanatory remarks to add.
The right of Great Britain, which is
that of every nation, to prohibit or allow
foreign commerce with any part of her
dominions, is unquestionable. That right,
in reference to her colonies, has never
been denied by the United States, any
more than with respect to any other part
of her possessions, and it is also admitted,
that she may, within her own jurisdiction,
prescribe the conditions on which such
commerce shall be tolerated, and, at her
will, again interdict altogether the inter-
course thus permitted.
On the other hand, the United States,
unless restricted by treaty, which in this
case they are not, have precisely the same
right to prohibit, to allow, and, within
their own jurisdiction, to regulate foreign
commerce with their dominions, whether
that commerce be with the foreign country
itself, or with its colonies or possessions
abroad. It was not inadvertently that the
undersigned used the word right," as
applied to the United States: he did not
object to the use of the word, as applied
to Great Britain. What he attempted to
show was, that this right, which was ad-
mitted, and although it might at any time
be exercised, had no bearing on the ques-
tions which had been the subject of dis-
cussion between the two countries.


Foreign Relations. 52
What has been contended for is, that
since to any commerce there must always
be two parties, the mutual consent of both
is always necessary, in order that such
commerce may at all exist; that what-
ever its nature may be, whether of ancient
or modern date, whether with colonies or
with possessions of a different description,
from the moment it does exist, it becomes
a fit subject for negotiation : and that
there is no reason why an agreement
should not on that, as on any other spe-
cies of trade, be founded on terms of just
reciprocity, though relating to colonies,
from an intercourse with which foreigners
had formerly been, and might again be,
excluded.
The various relaxations of the colonial
system of Great Britain, as they never
were, nor could have been intended for the
benefit of the United States, and as they
were always accompanied with restrictions
exclusively favourable to her, could not be
viewed as a boon to them, and never were
accepted as such. The extent to which
the commerce, when not laid under too
severe restrictions, was carried on between
the United States and the British colonies,
is an irrefragable proof that it was equally
advantageous to both parties. If equally
advantageous, there had been no favour
conferred on either side, there was no
ground for a pretension by either party
that the intercourse should be regulated
by unequal conditions.
No such pretension had in fact been ad-
vanced. The proposals made by both
parties, during the negotiations of the
year 1824, were avowedly founded in a
fair reciprocity, and brought the parties
very near together. Unable still to agree
on some points, it was concluded to suspend
the negotiation, with a distinct understand-
ing that it should be again renewed at
some convenient day.
Mr. King was, in 1825, empowered to
treat on all the subjects of the previous
negotiation. He was instructed, in the
first instance, as being a subject of more
pressing urgency, to call on the British
government to remove the impediments
which prevented the execution of the St.
Petersburgh convention. If his instruc-
tions on other subjects were not for-
warded to him, it was because he was en-
gaged in discussions respecting that con-
vention, and it was believed that the state
of his health did not admit of his entering
at that time upon the more arduous





53 Foreign Relations.
duty of resuming the suspended negotia-
tion.
Of this his majesty's government ap-
pears to have been fully aware. On the
22nd of March, 1826, Mr. Vaughan ad-
dressed an official note to the Secretary of
State of the United States, in which he
says-
I have received instructions from his
Majesty's Government to acquaint you,
that it is preparing to proceed in the im-
portant negotiations between that country
and the United States, now placed in the
hands of the American minister in Lon-
don. Mr. Huskisson has been already
introduced to Mr. R. King, as his Majes-
ty's Plenipotentiary, and the Minister of
State, having the department of Foreign
Affairs, has received his Majesty's com-
mands to associate Mr. Addington, late
his Majesty's Charge d'Affaires in Ame-
rica, with Mr. Huskisson, as joint Pleni-
potentiary, on the part of Great Britain.
The negotiations will, therefore, be forth-
with resumed; and it will be for the go-
vernment of the United States to judge
whether, considering the state of health
of Mr. R. King, which Mr Canning la-
ments to say has been, since his arrival in
England, far from satisfactory, they will
join any other negotiator in the com-
mission with him."
The President did deliberate on that
friendly suggestion ; and the nomination
of a person to be associated with Mr.
King was contemplated, when a letter
from him, dated the 21st day of March,
desiring permission to return, was received ;
upon which, the duty of renewing those
important negotiations, devolved, to his
great regret, on the undersigned alone.
His instructions were of a character
authorizing the hope that their result would
be satifactory: his departure was hastened:
on his arrival in England, the Order in
Council of July last had already been en-
acted. Indeed, it appears that the de-
termination not to renew the negotiations
on the Colonial intercourse, and to regu-
late it exclusively by acts of parliament,
had been taken before July, 1825, when
the acts to that effect were passed. Had
Mr. King been provided with the same in-
structions, which the undersigned received
they would have been equally unavailing.
Of that determination, the government
of the United States had not the least
notice. On the contrary, although Mr.
Vaughan's communication offered the op-


MARCH 26, 1827. 54
portunity of making known the intentions
of his majesty's government, positive as-
surance was given of its being prepared
to proceed in the important negotiations,
and that the negotiations would be forth-
with resumed, without any suggestion that
the colonial intercourse would form an ex-
ception.
The acts of parliament of the year 1825,
in which that intention was to be dis-
covered, never were officially communi-
cated. That of the 27th of June, passed
only a few days before that of the 5th of
July, and not specially repealed by it, was
not calculated to elucidate the object in
view; and several causes concurred to in-
duce a belief, that this last act was not in-
tended to affect the trade between the
British colonies and the United States, as
carried on under the act of June, 1822.
This belief, and the reasons for it, were
distinctly expressed in a letter from the
Department of State to a member of con-
gress of the 25th of December, 1825, a
copy of which is enclosed. That letter
was published inthe American newspapers;
a copy was furnished to Mr. Vaughan;
and he is understood to have transmitted it
to his government.
That opinion was corroborated by the
construction ultimately put on the act
by the British authorities. It was thereby
provided that certain privileges granted to
foreign ships should be limited to the
ships of those countries which should com-
ply with the conditions therein stated,
unless his majesty, by his order in council,
should in any case grant such privileges,
although the conditions had not been per-
formed. And the act was declared to
come in full force and operation from the
5th of January, 1826. It had at first been
determined at Halifax, that the port should
accordingly be shut against American ves-
sels after that day. This decision was
afterwards revoked, although the con-
dition had not been performed, and al-
though no order in council had granted
the privileges in question.
It now appears that the act of the 5th
of July, 1825, (6th Geo. 4th, cap. 114),.
which contains no repealing clause of
former acts, refers, under the name of the
law of navigation, to another act of the
same date (6th Geo. 4th, cap. 109); that
this, although it contains also no repealing
clause, is understood and construed as
having superseded all former acts on the
same subject; and that the actual repeal





55 HOUSE OF COMMONS,
of the act of 1822 (3rd Geo. 4th, cap. 44,
sec. 3, 4), is to be found in another act,
also of the 5th of July, 1825 (6th Geo.
4th, cap. 105), entitled, An act to re-
peal the several laws relating to the cus-
toms."
The intricacy of those several acts, and
the difficulty of understanding their pre-
cise meaning, of ascertaining what parts
of former acts were actually repealed, and
what still in force, a difficulty which, in
the case of the Jubilee, seems to have led
into error one of the highest tribunals of
Great Britain, may well account for the
construction put upon those acts in the
United States; affording, at the same time,
a sufficient reason for having preferred a
renewal of the negotiations to a pure ac-
ceptance of the conditions contemplated
by the act of the 5th of July, 1825, (6th
Geo. 4th cap. 114), had it been only for
the purpose of ascertaining the true in-
tent and meaning of the act.
Even so late as October last, Mr.
Vaughan, as appears by his correspond-
ence with Mr. Clay, was not provided
with instructions that enabled him to give
a satisfactory answer to the inquiries, whe-
ther, accordingto the British interpretation,
American vessels might trade between the
British colonies and foreign countries,
and whether discriminating duties of every
species had been abolished.
The proposition made during the last
session of congress, and to which Mr. Can-
ning has alluded, affords an additional
proof of the imperfect understanding,
owing to the complexness of the several
acts of parliament which at that time pre-
vailed, respecting their true object and in-
tention. That proposition was only for a
repeal of the discriminating duties, and if
adopted, would have been unavailing,
since, not embracing a repeal of the re-
strictions on the circuitous intercourse, it
is now understood that it would not have
been accepted by the British government,
as a compliance with the condition re-
quired by the act of the 5th of July, 1825.
It is not intended, by these facts and
observations, to convey any reproaches
against his majesty's government on ac-
count of the unexpected resolution which
it has taken. But they satisfactorily show,
that the United States could have en-
tertained no doubt of the continued dis-
position of Great Britain to settle the
colonial intercourse by an amicable ar-
rangement, and that there were per-


Foreign Relations. 56
emptory reasons for preferring that mode
rather than to legislate on the subject.
Supposing even that the determination
of the British government not to renew
the negotiation on that point had been
communicated or known, the specific con-
dition on which American vessels might
be allowed to participate in the in-
tercourse between the United States and
the British colonies was so expressed in
the act of parliament as to have required
explanations before it could be complied
with.
The condition required from countries
having colonies was both distinct and re-
ciprocal. '..il more was asked than
that they should grant to British ships the
like privileges of trading with their colonial
possessions, which were granted to their
ships of trading with the British posses-
sions abroad. No regard was paid to the
importance of such colonial possessions.
Sweden, by permitting British vessels to
trade with the island of St. Bartholomew,
was allowed privileges which were offered
to the United States on very different
terms. And, with the exception of some
of the German states, those terms applied
to no other maritime power than the
United States. All this Great Britain had
a right to do ; no complaint is preferred on
that account; it was the condition which
was required from them which they had
to consider.
That condition was, that the United
States should place the commerce and
navigation of this country (Great Britain),
and of its possessions abroad, upon the
footing of the most favoured nation.
Had the condition been limited to the
commerce and navigation of the British
colonies; had it been so intended and ex-
pressed, as that the United States might
have satisfied it, by placing the intercourse
between their dominions and the British
colonies on the same footing in every
respect, as the intercourse between the
United States, and the colonies of the most
favoured nation ; the condition, though not
altogether free of objection, would at least
have been apparently reciprocal. To re-
quire besides, that it should be extended
to the commerce and navigation of Great
Britain generally, that it should embrace
that intercourse between her and the
United States which is regulated by a
special convention, that they should grant
any privilege in that intercourse to British
vessels, not stipulated by that convention,





57 Foreign Relations.
as the price for the permission of trading
with the British colonies, was a total de-
parture from the principles of a just re-
ciprocity.
But it appeared also extremely difficult,
if at all possible, to understand what was
meant-by placing that commerce and
navigation on the footing of the most
favoured nation.
If Great Britain only asked to be placed
on that footing, on giving the same
equivalent which any other foreign nation
may have given to the United States, in
order to have privileges which she does
not enjoy, the navigation law of the
United States has already made provision
in that respect. There is no privilege en-
joyed in the United States, by the com-
merce and navigation of any foreign na-
tion, which great Britain may not obtain,
by allowing to them the same reciprocal
advantages which they enjoy in the ports of
such foreign nation, and on which such
privilege depends. To comply with the
condition thus understood,the United States
would have had no new act to perform.
This could hardly be presumed to have
been the intention of the act of parliament.
But if, by that act, it was intended to
require, as the condition for allowing to
American vessels the privilege of trading
with the British colonies, that the com-
merce and navigation of Great Britain
and of her possessions abroad, should,
without any other equivalent, be generally
placed on the same footing with the com-
merce and navigation of any other foreign
nation, which, by reason of reciprocal
advantages allowed to American vessels,
may, now or hereafter, be entitled to
greater privileges than Great Britain now
enjoys, the condition was inadmissible.
British vessels, and those of several
other nations, may now, by virtue of treaty,
stipulations, or of other reciprocal regula-
tions, import into the United States, arti-
cles of the produce or manufacture of the
countries to which such vessels respec-
tively belong, on the same terms, and on
the payment of the same duties of ton-
nage, and on the cargo, as if imported in
American vessels. In every instance the
privilege is reciprocal, and will cease with
respect to any of those countries, whenever
vessels of the United States laden with
produce of the United States may cease
to be admitted into the ports of such
country on the same terms as its own ves-
sels.


MARac. 26, 1827. 58
In conformity with the navigation law
of the United States, the prohibition to
import, in foreign vessels, merchandise
not the produce of the country to which
such vessels respectively belong, extends
only to the vessels of such nations as
have adopted a similar regulation. Great
Britain is accordingly one of the few na-
tions to which the prohibition applies.
In pursuance of the treaty concluded in
December, 1825, between the United
States and central America, whatever may
be imported into or exported from either
country in its own vessels, to or from any
foreign place whatever, may, in like man-
ner, and on payment of the same duties,
be imported or exported in the vessels of
the other country.
If, therefore, it was meant by the con-
dition required, that the commerce and
navigation of Great Britain, and of her
possessions abroad, should be gratuitously
and generally placed on the footing of the
most favoured nations, the United States,
in order to comply with it, and, as the
price for the permission to trade with the
British colonies, would have been obliged-
1. to admit the importation of British mer-
chandise in British vessels, on the same
terms, and on payment of the duties, as if
imported in American vessels, although
the convention of 1815 should have ex-
pired, and he correspondingprivilege was no
longer allowed to American vessels in Bri-
tish ports; 2. to admit the importation,
in British vessels, of the produce of every
foreign country, although the importation
into British ports, of the like produce in
American vessels, should still be prohi-
bited; 3. if the condition was intended
to apply to privileges granted subsequent
to the date of the act of parliament, to
admit the importation of such foreign pro-
duce in British vessels, even without being
charged with any discriminating duties,
and generally to allow to British vessels,
without reciprocity, all the reciprocal ad-
vantages to which the vessels of Central
America are entitled.
If this was not the intention of the act
of parliament, if the words commerce
and navigation of this country," were
meant only to include the circuitous in-
tercourse, the expressions used to con-
vey that meaning must be admitted to
have been much too general. This last
interpretation has been suggested only'by
the observations that have occurred in the
course of Mr. Canning's correspondence





59 HOUSE OF COMMONS,
with the undersigned. If such, or any
other admissible construction was intended,
the most obvious way of preventing both
an erroneous interpretation of the condi-
tion, and any unfounded expectations, in
reference to a renewal of the negotiations,
would have been an official communica-
tion of the act of parliament, accompanied
with a full and free explanation of the con-
dition required, and of the intentions of his
Majesty's government on the whole subject.
The government of the United States is
animated by the most sincere desire to
maintain with that of Great Britain not
merely the forms of courtesy and amity,
but to cultivate a cordial and lasting
friendship, to settle every controverted
question between them upon principles of
justice and reciprocity, and by an enlarged
liberality in their mutual intercourse, to
advance the real prosperity of both.
Entertaining this desire, it has learnt
with regret the resolution of his majesty's
government to close the door against those
friendly explanations, and that free and
mutual exposition of the wishes and views
of the parties, so essential between two
nations whose interests and happiness are
so interwoven as those of Great Britain and
the United States, and which can be but
partially and imperfectly interchanged, if
mutual legislation is substituted to nego-
tiation and to the ordinary mode of treating.
As the only alternative which this
course has left, it was the President's in-
tention to lay the whole correspondence
which has passed between the two govern-
ments on that subject, including the in-
structions given to the several American
ministers near his Britannic Majesty,
before Congress at their present session.
It will remain with that body to decide,
whether the Colonial intercourse shall be
altogether closed, whether that portion of
it left open by the Order in Council shall
continue so, or on what conditions com-
patible with the interests of the United
States that trade may be placed.
The Undersigned has been further in-
structed to give at the same time to his
Majesty's government, the assurance, that,
notwithstanding its late decision, that of
the United States will be ready, at Wash-
ington or at London, to treat of the
Colonial intercourse, whenever it may be
the desire or inclination of Great Britain
to negotiate on that subject.-The Un-
dersigned, &c.
(Signed) ALBERT GALLATIN.


Foreign Relations.


(Enclosure in No. 5.)-The lon. H.
Clay to the hon. C. C. Cambreling, H.
R. Department of State, December 25,
1825.
Sir.-I have perused the letter which
you left with me, and which is herewith
returned, respecting the construction put,
at Halifax, upon the late British act of
Parliament, opening the trade and inter-
course between the British American
colonies, and foreign countries. And I
have also examined the acts of Parliament
of the 4th and 5th George 4th, referred
to in the 5th section of the above-men-
tioned act. The result is a belief, that
the Halifax construction is not that which
was intended by the British government,
or, if it be, that it was designed by an
Order in Council to except the trade and
intercourse with the United States from
the operation of the act, when so inter-
preted. I should strongly incline to think,
but for the opposite view entertained at
Halifax, that the act to regulate the trade
of the British possessions abroad, passed
in July last, did not intend to disturb or
affect the trade between the British
American colonies and the United States,
but meant to leave that trade on the
footing which it was put by the aforesaid
act of the 4th George 4th, and the sub-
sequent act of indemnity of the 5th
George 4th.
That the British government did not
look forward to such an operation of the
act of Parliament as is about to be en-
forced at Halifax, I think clear from the
following considerations:-
First. It would be inconsistent with pro-
fessions made by that government to this,
and with negotiations between the two
governments, contemplated, if not yet
resumed.
Second. No 'notification has been given
at Washington or at London of such a
purpose as that which, for the first time,
is indicated at Halifax.
Third. The British minister here is un-
advised by his government of any intention
to close the colonial ports against our
vessels; and,
Fourth. No information has been re-
ceived here from any British colonial port,
except Halifax, of such intention.
If the Halifax construction be correct,
I am persuaded that the British govern-
ment must have intended to have created
an exception to our trade, by an Order ia





61 Foreign Relations.
Council, which had not arrived at the
date of the last advices from Halifax.
If I am right in that conjecture, the
order may yet reach that place before, or
a few days after, the day fixed (the 5th of
January next) for the commencement of
the act. I am, &c.
(Signed) H. CLAY.
The Hon. C. C. Cambreling, &c.
No. 6. Mr. Secretary Canning to
Albert Gallatin, Esq. Foreign-office,
Jan. 27, 1827.
The Undersigned, &c., has the honour
to acknowledge the note addressed to him
on the 28th ultimo, by Mr. Gallatin, &c.
in replying to which, the Undersigned
will, as far as possible, conform himself to
the example of Mr. Gallatin, in putting
aside those points of the question in agi-
tation between them which have been
already exhausted in argument, and the
further discussion of which would not
tend to any practical advantage.
The parts of Mr. Gallatin's note which
appear to the Undersigned to require any
observation, relate to matters rather of
fact than of reasoning.
Mr. Gallatin complains that the act of
Parliament of 1825 was not officially
communicated to the government of the
United States.
It is perfectly true that it was not : nor
has it been the habit of the two govern-
ments to communicate reciprocally to
each other acts of their respective legisla-
tures.
The act of Congress of 1823, an act,
the provisions of which specially affected
Great Britain, was not officially com-
municated either to the King's minister at
Washington, or to his Majesty's govern-
ment by the American minister resident
at this Court. So far from any such com-
munication being made, or any voluntary
explanation of the bearing of that act
being offered, it was not till after repeated
and pressing inquiries that his Majesty's
minister at Washington succeeded in ob-
taining from the American Secretary of
State the true construction of the most
important clause of that act-the clause
in which the United States claimed that
their trade to the British West-India
colonies should be put on the same footing
with the trade to the same colonies from
" elsewhere;" and learnt, to his great
astonishment, that under that word else-
where" was intended to be signified, not


MaRCH 26, 1827. 62
only the other dependencies of Great
Britain, but the mother country itself."
The Undersigned, at the same time,
begs that it may not be supposed that the
British government withheld from the
government of the United States a com-
munication of the act of Parliament of
1825 from any notion of retaliation for
the omission of the government of the
United States to communicate to that of
his Majesty the act of Congress of 1823.
He refers to that instance of omission
on the part of the American government
only in proof,
First. That the ordinary and natural
course between States is not to make di-
plomatic communications of the acts of
their respective legislatures ; and, second-
ly, that no inference could be drawn from
such an omission on the one side any
more than on the other, of (what the Un-
dersigned disclaims for his government)
an intentional want of courtesy or respect.
But the act of 1825 did not relate spe-
cially to the United States. It held out
to all nations of the world certain benefits,
(or what were believed by the British go-
vernment to be so) on certain conditions.
If a communication of the act had been
made to one nation, it must have been
made alike to all. Such communication
would have been liable to different misre-
presentations; some governments might
have considered it as a solicitation to which
they were bound in courtesy to give some
answer, explaining their reasons for de-
clining, if they did decline, to avail them-
selves of the provisions of the act: others
might, perhaps, have taken umbrage at it,
as an authoritative pretension to impose
the legislation of this country upon other
nations.
The simplest course was to allow the
provisions of the act to find their way to
general knowledge through the usual
channels of commercial information.
The Undersigned has no reason to ap-
prehend that this course has proved less
effectual on the present than on former
occasions.
The conditions of the act of 1825 have
been accepted and carried into effect by
some governments : that of the United
States has not thought it expedient to take
advantage of them. But the Undersigned
cannot but be still of opinion, that the re-
solution proposed in the House of repre-
sentatives, at Washington, at the begin-
ning of the last session of Congress, for





63 HOUSE OF COMMONS,
the express purpose of urging the execu-
tive government of the United States to
come into the terms of the act of 1825,
the debates which took place upon that
proposition, and the final rejection of it by
a majority of only two votes, show that it
was not for want of a sufficient under-
standing of the intent of the act of parlia-
ment, that the conditions of it were not
accepted by the United States.
To one piece of evidence, which proves
the perfect understanding in America, not
only of the purport and provisions of the
act of parliament of 1825, but of the con-
ditions which it would be requisite for the
American legislature to perform, in order
to entitle the United States to the benefit
of that act, the Undersigned might have
scrupled to refer (as not being of the na-
ture of a diplomatic document), if Mr.
Gallatin had not encouraged him to bring
forward any document tending to throw
light on the matter in dispute, by citing,
in support of his own view of that matter,
a private letter from Mr. Clay to a mem-
ber of Congress.
Early in the session of Congress of
1825-26, a petition from Baltimore was
presented to both houses of the American
legislature, in which petition it was dis-
tinctly pointed out, that the British act of
parliament of July, 1825, had not only
manifested the readiness of this country
to remove all discriminating duties, but
also to permit American ships to clear out
from British colonies, not, as theretofore,
to the ports of the United States only,
but to all parts of the world (the United
Kingdom and its dependencies alone ex-
cepted.)
The petition, with equal distinctness,
invited the attention of the American le-
gislature to the conditions on which these
advantages might be secured to the United
States, and prayed for the removal of the
several restrictions imposed by the Ameri-
can act of 1823, not of the discrimi-
nating duties" only, but of the prohibi-
tion of what is called by Mr. Gallatin,
circuitous intercourse in British ships;"
the petitioners expressly submitting to
Congress the propriety of admitting Bri-
tish vessels, from whatever ports, on the
same terms as the vessels of the most fa-
voured nations.
It appears from the reports of the pro-
ceedings of Congress, that it was against
the prayer of this petition (but without im-
peachment of any of its allegations) that


Foreign Relations. 64
the decision of the American legislature,
at the close of the session, was taken : it
cannot be doubted, therefore, that the
American legislature, had the whole pur-
port and bearing of the act of 1825 full
before their eyes.
The fact, that some of the British au-
thorities abroad took upon themselves to
suspend the execution of the act of 1825,
towards the United States, is undenied.
But the only effect of this suspension
was--the continuance of the benefits of
the then existing state of things to the
United States, for nearly a twelvemonth
longer than they would otherwise have en-
joyed it.
That continuance was permitted by the
British government mainly in considera-
tion of the then pendency in the legisla-
ture of the United States, of the resolution
herein before mentioned, for conforming
to the conditions of the act of 1825.
Immediately upon the receipt of au-
thentic intelligence of these proceedings
at Washington, an instruction was sent
out to Mr. Vaughan, grounded on the be-
lief of the British government, that Con-
gress would not separate without adopting
the resolution then under their considera-
tion. In that case, and upon receiving
an assurance from the American govern-
ment that the restrictions and charges on
British shipping, and British colonial pro-
duce, would be withdrawn by the United
States, Mr. Vaughan was authorised to
deliver a note to the American Secretary
of State, declaring-that the discrimi-
nating duties imposed upon American
ships and their cargoes in the West Indies
should immediately cease. Mr. Vaughan
was actually in possession of this instruc-
tion, when the resolution, on the assumed
adoption of which the instruction to Mr.
Vaughan had been founded, was rejected.
It was no part of Mr. Vaughan's duty to
make any communication upon the sub-
ject to the American government before
the result of the discussion was ascertained.
After that result (wholly unexpected in
this country), any such communication
would have been not only useless, but
might, perhaps, have been considered as
an improper appeal against the formal de-
cision of the American legislature.
That Mr. Vaughan should not after-
wards have been authorized to enter into
any discussion of the provisions of the act
of 1825 so late as October last," is not
surprising, when it is considered that Mr.





65 Foreign Relations.
Vaughan, immediately after the close of
the session of Congress, was instructed to
announce the intention of his Majesty's
government to pass the order in council of
July (consequent upon the decision of
the American legislature), by which the
terms of the act of 1825 were virtually de-
clined.
Mr. Gallatin accounts for the rejection
of the resolution, proposed to the Ame-
rican legislature, by the persuasion which,
he says, the government of the United
States entertained, that the negotiation on
the subject of the commercial intercourse
between the United States and the British
West-India colonies would be renewed.
The undersigned is at a loss to under-
stand on what ground it was assumed at
Washington, that there would be, at all
times, an unabated disposition on the
part of the British government to make
the trade of its West-India colonies the
subject of diplomatic arrangement.
The circumstances of the case were en-
tirely changed.
Repeated negotiation had failed to pro-
duce any material approximation of opi-
nions upon that subject.
The last attempt at an adjustment had
been made, with an evident conviction on
both sides that there existed between them
an unconquerable difference of principle,
and that it was by that difference, rather
than by any decided irreconcileableness
of interest, that a satisfactory arrange-
ment was rendered hopeless.
The nature of that difference has been
sufficiently discussed ; it lies in the de-
termination of the United States to dis-
pute, and in that of Great Britain to main-
tain, the established distinction between
general and colonial trade.
Great Britain had, therefore, an obvious
motive for doing thenceforward whatever
she might think it right to do, in relax-
ation of her colonial system, rather by the
instrumentality of her own legislature than
by compact with a State, with which she
disagreed in opinion, as to the principles of
colonial trade, so widely, that it would
have been impossible to construct a pream-
ble to a treaty on that subject, in the
enunciations of which the two contracting
parties should have concurred.
But there was yet another reason for
avoiding further negotiations upon the
subject.
Hitherto, when the trade with the British
West-India colonies had been opened at
VOL. XVII.


MARCH 26, 1827. 66
all, it had been opened chiefly though not
exclusively, to the United States; to no
othercountry had it been openedby specific
and positive convention.
But a time had now arrived when, from
motives of general policy, Great Britain
thought it advisable to allow access to her
colonies to all foreign powers, without ex-
ception, on conditions tendered alike to
all.
Such indiscriminate opening could only
be effected by some process common to all
those who were permitted or invited to
take advantage of it; impartiality was
thus maintained towards all parties, and
the power of control over her own colo-
nies was at the same time retained in the
hands of the mother country.
The undersigned believes thathe has now
touched on every topic in the last note ad-
dressed to him by Mr. Gallatin, to which
he had not had occasion to advert in former
stages of their correspondence. He will not
allow himself to be drawn again into a dis-
cussion of topics already more than suffi-
ciently debated.
The undersigned trusts that it is unne-
cessary for him, in concluding this note,
to return to Mr. Gallatin's assurances of
the friendly disposition of the United
States of America, assurances equally sin-
cere, that there is the most cordial desire,
on the part of Great Britain, to cultivate
the friendship of the United States.
The ties of common origin, laws, and
language, must always form strong bonds
of national alliance between them. Their
respective interests, well understood, har-
monize together as much as their feelings.
But it has never yet been held a duty
of international amity (any more than of
friendship in private life) to submit to un-
equal compacts. Nor has it ever been
held an offence against such duty that a
nation (any more than an individual)
should decline to make uncompensated
sacrifices.
Between two nations, as between two
individuals, most friendly to each other,
there may sometimes happen, unfortu-
nately, to exist some known subject of in-
curable difference of opinion. In any
such case, it is perhaps most advisable to
keep that subject as much as possible out
of sight, and to take care that it shall not
interfere with the tenour of their general
intercourse and of their habitual relations.
The refusal to regulate the trade of our
colonies by a commercial treaty which
D





67 HOUSE OF COMMONS,


the British Government may think (even
if erroneously) disadvantageous to its in-
terests cannot give just cause of offence to
any power whatever.
In the present instance the undersigned
is most happy to be able to qualify such
refusal with the declaration, that it is not
in any degree dictated by sentiments either
unfriendly or disrespectful to the United
States, or by any indifference to the ami-
cable settlement of all other questions, at
present pending between them and Great
Britain.
Of these questions, one has been already
happily arranged since Mr. Gallatin's ar-
rival in this country.
The undersigned looks forward with con-
fidence, no less than with anxiety, to such
an arrangement of the remainder, as, ef-
facing all traces of past discussions, and
satisfying allfair and reasonablepretensions
on both sides, may secure, for a longperiod
of years to come, reciprocal good under-
standing and good will between two kin-
dred nations. The Undersigned has the
honour, &c. (Signed)
GEORGE CANNING.

FINANCIAL STATE OF THE COUN-
TRY.] The Chancellor of the Exchequer
moved the order of the day for the House
resolving itself into a Committee of Sup-
ply. On the question, that the Speaker
do now leave the chair,
Mr. Maberly said, he should not have
risen to oppose the motion for the Speaker's
leaving the chair, had he not felt it to be
necessary to call the attention of the
House to the state of the finances. He
supposed the right hon. gentleman in-
tended, when the House was in a com-
mittee of supply, to move for a vote on
account. Now, he thought that the
House ought to come to a resolution to
vote, at the commencement of the session,
small sums on account of the several
branches of the public service, and to de-
fer the voting of large sums until it was
made acquainted with the sources from
which the money to make them good was
to come. Last year, the right hon. gen-
tleman had told the House, that he had a
sinking fund of 5,000,0001., when in point
of fact he had no such thing. He had
also told them, that it was necessary to
diminish the unfunded debt, and had ab-
solutely been allowed to raise a loan of
8,000,0001. to do so. Now, he should
like the right hon. gentleman to tell the


House what he had done with the sum.
which he had raised for that purpose?
The right hon. gentleman carried, he be-
lieved, the act which he obtained into
execution; and he was informed that
the right hon. gentleman had received
3,500,0001. in Exchequer-bills, and the
remainder in money. Now, that loan was
granted for the express purpose of paying
off 6,000,0001. of the 11,000,0001. due
from the government to the Bank. What,
he would ask, had the right hon. gentle-
man done with the proceeds of the loan
after he had obtained it? Why, he took
the 4,500,0001.-which he had received
in money, and which he had obtained for
a specific purpose-and applied them to the
ways and means of the year, and to what
he was pleased to denominate the sinking-
fund. The hon. member then asserted,
that no reduction in the amount of the
unfunded debt had been effected by the
loan which the right hon. gentleman had
obtained last year. He had been informed
that the right hon. gentleman had appro-
priated 1,200,0001. to the service of the
sinking-fund for the present quarter.
Now, he should like to know where the
right hon. gentleman was to get that sum ?
Not from the revenue, he was quite sure.
He must either borrow it from the Bank,
or get it from some quarter with which the
House was not, though it ought to be,
acquainted. He did not blame the right
hon. gentleman for not having a revenue
equal to his anticipation, but he did think
that, in consequence of the defalcation
which had taken place in it, the whole
subject of our revenue should undergo the
investigation of a committee. The con-
sideration of our finances ought not to be
deferred till May; it ought to be under-
taken immediately. When our finances
were in a flourishing state, the right hon.
gentleman had brought on the budget
early: now that they were in a deranged
state, he deferred it to the latest oppor-
tunity. He contended that the right
hon. gentleman had no sinking-fund of
5,000,0001. this year; and that he ought
therefore to state his ways and means be-
fore he asked the House to grant a supply
of 20,000,0001. Without having any
wish to embarrass the right hon. gentle-
man, he felt himself under the necessity
of opposing the motion for the Speaker's
leaving the chair.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer said,
that the hon. gentleman had declared that


Financial State qf the Country.





69 Financial State of the Country.


he had no intention to embarrass him; determined to support his majesty in the
but if he were to be drawn by the hon. policy which he had adopted. Therefore,
gentleman into a premature explanation if parliament, when it met, had postponed
of his plans for the year, he should not giving effect to that policy, it would have
only be greatly embarrassed himself, but adopted a course which would have been
should produce much embarrassment, and most prejudicial to the success of the
inflict infinite mischief, upon the public. measures, in behalf of which it had pre-
Now, as he did not wish either to embar- viously voted. That was the reason why
rass or to injure the public, he must de- he had said, that it would be impossible
dine, with all courtesy to the hon. gentle- for him--without reference to any con-
nman, to answer any of his questions. siderations immediately personal to him-
Not that, by so doing, he intended to self, which he allowed that he could not
admit that any of the hon. gentleman's call upon the House to notice-to bring
statements were correct, or to conceal, or forward at an early period of the session
wish to conceal, the financial circum- the general finance of the country. He
stances of the country from the House, reminded the House of the course which
when the proper time came for disclosing he had hitherto pursued with regard to
them. It would be absurd in any man the budget, and desired them to infer
who filled the situation which he had the therefrom, that he had no desire to post-
honour to fill, to think of mystifying its pone the consideration of the financial
accounts. He had no such wish: he state of the country, because it appeared
only wished to avoid being drawn pre- to some gentlemen not to be in the
matmuely into a statement, which, if mis- most flourishing condition. In January
understood, might do much mischief. 1823, he was appointed to the office
The hon. gentleman had complained, that which he now had the honour to fulfil.
he had postponed his annual statement of It was a department entirely new to him,
the finances of the country, because they and he had, he confessed, his lesson to
were not in a flourishing condition. Now, learn; but, notwithstanding all the diffi-
he begged leave to say, that he had done culties of his situation, he had brought
no such thing. He had stated, on a former forward his financial statement on the 21st
occasion, why it had been impossible for of February. In 1824, he had brought it
him to do that which the lion. gentleman forward on the 23rd of February. He at
seemed to think he ought to have done that time stated his decided opinion as to
long since. He found that, at the close the principle on which he meant to act.
of last year, circumstances affecting the He thought, and he then made the de-
foreign relations of the country had oc- claration, that it was indispensable, in time
curred, which made the sending out an of peace, that the statement of the finances
armament to assist its ancient ally, the of the country should be laid before the
king of Portugal, a matter of indispensa- House at the earliest possible period. In
ble necessity. That armament could not 1825, the budget was submitted to the
be sent without causing an expense which House on the 28th of February. Last
was not anticipated; and, although the year it was not introduced until the 15th
expense of maintaining it was to be repaid of March. That, however, was not his
hereafter by the Portuguese government, fault. The statement was prepared and
still it was necessary to provide funds for ready at a much earlier day; but the
it in the interim. Until the effects of House must recollect how much parlia-
that armament were seen, until the time meant was at that time occupied with the
of its stay was calculated, until the extent important question of the currency. And
of the operations in which it was to be he could assure the House, that it was
engaged was fully ascertained-it would sorely against his desire, that his financial
have been absolute madness in any minis- statement was put off from day to day.
ter to have attempted to inform the House He thought he had now shown, pretty
that the finances of the country would clearly, that he harboured no wish to put
only be affected to a given amount, in off the business unnecessarily; and though
consequence of that armament. When he would not do so foolish a thing as to
his majesty sent down to the House his promise, that, under every possible cir-
message, informing it of his intention to cumstauce, he would bring forward, at a
support his ancient ally the king of Por- particular time, his financial statement-
tugal, the House, by an immense majority, still he thought the House would not sup-
D2


MARCH 26, 1827. 70






71 HOUSE OF COMMONS,
pose, because it was impossible for him to
introduce the statement this year so early
as gentlemen wished, that he felt any dis-
inclination to do so at a proper season.
He had already shown what his sense of
duty was. He conceived the course he
had adopted, in the outset, was a right
one. So far as the government was con-
cerned, the putting off to a late period
the financial statement was the most in-
convenient course that could be pursued :
and, but for the circumstances he had
stated, it would have been in readiness
long before. Now, he would ask of the
House, whether, in fairness, he could, with
any view to the public advantage, enter
into a partial discussion of this subject-
which would, he must say, be wholly un-
intelligible? He had, the other day,
asked for the means of defraying the army
and navy estimates, agreeably to the pledge
given by the House, in answer to the king's
message : and he had then observed, that
the vote for civil contingencies, with re-
spect to some of the items of which a dis-
pute might arise, should not be called for,
until the account was perfectly ready.
His motion, this evening, would only be
for a certain sum, on account. He had
not done any thing unreasonable in taking
this course; and, whatever might be the
opinion of the hon. member, he thought it
his positive duty to seal his lips on this
subject, until he was ready with the whole
statement.
Mr. Maberly said, he wished an estimate
of the supply and of the ways and means
to be laid on the table.
Sir J. Wrottesley said, that 20,000,0001.
had already been voted for the army, navy,
and ordnance, without sufficient attention
having been paid to so large an appropria-
tion of the public money.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer said,
that only 16,000,0001. had been voted.
Sir J. Wrottesley was of opinion, that
not much less than 20,000,0001. had been
voted; and it was- high time that the
House should endeavour to lessen so enor-
mous an expenditure. There might, he
was convinced, be a very great reform
effected in all the establishments of the
country; and he warned the right hon.
gentleman, if he came forward to lay any
more burthens on the country, that he
would, if he stood alone, oppose such a
proposition, and call for some reform in
the expenditure of the state. The ques-
tion, relative to an issue of Exchequer bills,


Financial State of the Country. 72
which was put to the Bank directors a few
days since, had not been satisfactorily an-
swered by the hon. governor, or by the
right lion. gentleman; and he now en-
treated him to consider the inconvenience
which the country would experience if
there were a fresh issue of Exchequer-bills.
They had now Exchequer-bills outstand-
ing to the amount of 25,000,0001.; and
the Bank had 21,000,0001. of notes in cir-
culation, which it was not in the nature of
things that they would be called on to pay.
But if any unfavourable circumstance
arose in the foreign policy of the country,
the right hon. gentleman might be called
on to pay those 25,000,0001. of Exche-
quer-bills, without a shilling in the trea-
sury to meet the demand. Was that a
situation in which the country ought to be
placed ? He knew that the Exchequer-
bills carried a very low rate of interest;
but, in what a situation were they placed a
twelvemonth ago, when they were obliged
to cancel a part of those Exchequer-bills !
If the sinking fund had been made use of
on that occasion, they would have received
1001. for 1001.; but, instead of doing
that, they employed it in purchasing three
per cents at 951. and 961. ; and when they
wished to contract the amount of Exche-
quer-bills, they funded in the four per-
cents at 107. If what happened last No-
vember should occur again, Exchequer-
bills would, undoubtedly, be at a discount.
He warned the right hon. gentleman to
pause before he increased the quantity of
Exchequer-bills. If, in future, there
should be a fair surplus revenue, he trusted
that the right hon. gentleman would get
rid of the delusion of a Sinking-fund, and
employ that surplus in relieving the coun-
try from a portion of its burthens. If, in
that case adverse circumstances should
occur, the government would be enabled to
defend the country with effect, or to assist
the merchants, should they be in distress.
Mr. Hlume protested, on the part of the
public, against the procrastination of busi-
ness of so important a nature. He had
heard nothing from the right hon. gentle-
man, but that particular circumstances
had prevented him from bringing forward
his annual statement. But what those
circumstances were, he did not know. It
was pretty evident, however, that if there
was no government, as was in some de-
gree the case at present, no business of
importance could be brought before the
House. The hon. member for Callington





73 Financial State of the Country.


had, on a former night, very justly ob-
served, that he did not know of whom the
administration consisted, or who were the
responsible parties. This was a very se-
rious evil, and ought to be rectified as soon
as possible. The right hon. gentleman
said, it would be madness for him at the
present moment, to state any thing about
the financial situation of the country: but,
it was greater madness to adopt the con-
duct of an inconsiderate spendthrift, and to
plunge into expense, without knowing
what they had to meet it. The reasons ad-
duced by the right hon. gentleman for de-
lay were quite insufficient. Why not lay
on the table of the House the items of ex-
penditure, to show why the expense in
particular departments this year, went be-
yond that of other years ? The rule
which the right hon. gentleman had laid
down on entering office was, to produce
the accounts as early as possible, and he
had done so for four years ; but he now
said, I cannot lay my statement before
you, because I do not know what the ex-
pense on account of Portugal may be."
This was the worst possible reason that
could be devised. Having been hurried,
by a species of madness, to meddle with
other people's affairs, instead of minding
their own, they were now told that no es-
timate could be formed of the probable ex-
pense that would attend their interference.
Much had been said about entering into
this dispute, for the purpose of upholding
the honour of the country; but, in his
opinion, it would redound more to the
honour of the country if they maintained
their credit, by paying their debts, instead
of creating fresh ones.
The House having resolved itself into
the committee,
The Chancellor of the Exchequer said,
the estimate of the civil contingencies for
1827 was 290,0001. This was lower than
the estimate of last year, and what he now
proposed was, to ask for 200,0001. on ac-
count. That was the only vote he meant
to submit to the committee.
Mr. Hume said, he always had, and al-
ways would, object to this mode of voting
money; and he would take that opportu-
nity of calling the attention of the Secre-
tary for Foreign Affairs to one or two items
in the accounts of civil contingencies.
Some gentlemen in this new parliament
were not, perhaps, aware of the expense
of the diplomatic service. They ought to
know, that 226,0001. were voted for it in


the civil list. Under the head of contin-
gencies," there were in addition to that,
200,0001. ; and there were 88,0001. extra-
ordinaries, in addition to the 226,0001. of
the civil list. Last year, the minister to
the court of France (for it seemed to be con-
sidered necessary that this country should
vie with the Autocrat of Russia, in hav-
ing the most splendid palace for the re-
presentative of his majesty) caused 11,0001.
to be laid out in the purchase of a superb
building. This sum was taken from the
civil list. There was besides a charge of
between 16,0001. and 17,0001. for the ex-
traordinary expenses of his suite; and
12,5861., in addition to the sum taken
from the civil list. Thus a sum of be-
tween 23,0001. and 24,0001. was laid out
for one individual as the representative of
Great Britain at the court of France.
The diplomatic expenses, including plate,
for the last year, amounted to 364,0001.
This, however, was exclusive of a large
grant for consuls and missions to South
America. So that there was nearly
500,0001. a-year expended on the diplo-
matic service. This scale of remuneration
was far beyond what the country could
bear; and therefore he objected to voting
the present sum. The expense of the di-
plomatic department in nine years,
ordinary and extraordinary, had been
3,000,0001. sterling. Now, he put it to
the right hon. gentleman and his col-
leagues, whether this expenditure ought
to be tolerated, when they saw their table
covered with such appalling statements of
distress? When their countrymen were
in rags, and absolutely wanting food, was
it fair to support a few individuals in such
splendor? It kept up an appearance,
on the part of England, which she was
not able to support. The people on the
continent imagined, on account of this
system of extravagance, that England was
overflowing with wealth ; when in fact the
country was a patch-work of pauperism
and wretchedness. The expense of this
department ought to be cut down to
150,0001. per annum; and then it would
be twice as much as it was in 1795. He
observed, that there was likely to be an-
other addition to the public expense; as
it had been announced, that the marquis
of Hertford was about to be despatchedot
the court of Russia, in compliment to
that monarch. Let them look to the si-
tuation in which they were placing them-
selves, by this act, with reference to that


MARCH 26, 1827. 74





75 HOUSE OF COMMONS,
power. It would make the emperor more
haughty and imperious than ever. He
would suppose that this country was hum-
bling herself to conciliate his good graces.
Last year, the duke of Wellington was sent
on a special mission to Russia, which cost
the country 6,5361. The duke of Devon-
shire had also been sent on a special mis-
sion to that court, on occasion of his im-
perial majesty's coronation; for which a
charge of 10,0001. was made. Now, they
had been told, that the duke of Devon-
shire would defray all the expense him-
self. [It was here intimated, that it was
the duke of Northumberland who had ex-
pressed his intention of bearing all the ex-
pense, when he attended the coronation of
the king of France.] He certainly never
understood that the duke of Devonshire,
who was a particular acquaintance of the
emperorNicholas, wasto be repaid. At that
very time, too, we had an ambassador to
Russiawhowascosting thecountry 16,0001.
or 17,0001. a year; for in these matters there
were no small sums, and tens of thou-
sands were the only figures employed in con-
nection with ambassadors and royalty. Yet,
after this expenditure on diplomatic cere-
mony and court etiquette, another mission
was about to be fitted out to the same
prince. Neither was extravagance of this
kind limited to the old world; the re-
publics of the new were to be initiated into
the mystery of spending money without
limit or object. Sir C. Stuart had been sent
to the Brazils at an expense of 12,0001.,
to which was to be added a fresh charge
for his secretary, lord M. Hill. Besides
all this, there was a sum of 25,0001. for
presents of snuff-boxes to foreign minis-
ters. Was it fair to ask, if our own mi-
nisters received 25,0001. in the same way ?
He hoped they did, in order to keep up the
reciprocity of the transaction. In India
if the same amount as was given in a pre-
sent, was not returned in the same way,
it was considered an insult. But to come
to these items. The first was a present, to
the amount of 1,0001., from his majesty to
the French Chancery, on the exchange of
the ratifications of a commercial conven-
tion. The next was a sum of 5001. to the
Swedish Chancery, on the exchange of the
ratifications of a convention. Then there
was to the chevalier de Los Rios, late en-
voy extraordinary from the king of Spain,
upon the termination of his mission, 4001.;
so that an ambassador, on his coming, re-
ceived a present, and when he was going


Financial State of the Country. 76
away, he got another. The next item
was 5001. to colonel Hamilton, for having
brought from Bogota the treaty with
Colombia. A sum of 23,5321. then fol-
lowed, which was paid to Messrs. Rundell
and Bridge, for gold snuff-boxes, as pre-
sents from his majesty to foreign minis-
ters on different occasions. Among these
were, to count Ozarowsky, charged with
a special mission to his majesty from the
emperor of Russia, 788/. 10s. The next
item was for boxes to the Swedish minis-
ter, the Russian minister, and to the mi-
nister of the United Provinces of Rio de
la Plata, 3,3331. Then, to the Colom-
bian ministers, on the exchange of the
ratifications of a treaty, there was 1,963/.
10s. Now, he objected to this as set-
ting a bad example to republics, and as
being an attempt on our part to cor-
rupt these honest, unsophisticated states.
The hon. member then alluded to presents
to the amount of 8361. 15s. to the minister
of the Hanse Towns; 1,086/.15s. to prince
Polignac; 4,5561. 12s. to the ministers
of the Ottoman Porte; and to his grace
the duke of Northumberland, a diamond
hilted sword, value 10,8121. Considering
such items as these in the light of an ex-
travagant waste of the public money, he
felt every disposition to oppose the present
vote.
Mr. Secretary Canning (who spoke in
an exceedingly low tone) was understood
to say, that the vote which the hon. mem-
ber opposed, and all the items which he
had submitted to so minute an examina-
tion, had already received the approba-
tion of the House; inasmuch as they were
included in the estimates, not of the pre-
sent, but of the preceding year. Under
these circumstances, it might not have
been necessary more particularly to notice
the hon. member's objections, had not
names been alluded to in the course of his
speech, which every one in that House
must know were entitled to the utmost re-
spect. The hon. gentleman had said,
in reference to the mission of a noble duke
to a foreign court, that he had been
informed that the embassy had been in-
trusted to that noble person, on the con-
dition, and with the understanding, that
its prosecution should be attended with no
expense to the country; and further, the
hon. member appeared to suppose, that
some such arrangement, expressed or im-
plied, had been, on a former occasion, al-
luded to in that House. Now he was at





77 Corn Laws.
issue with the hon. member on that fact.
So far from any such assurance having
been given, the direct contrary was dis-
tinctly understood. With respect to the
dukes of Northumberland and Devonshire,
he was clearly of opinion that no man,
however exalted his station, or affluent his
private fortune might be, should be allowed
to represent and support the dignity of this
country, in the eyes of foreigners, at his
own expense. If the duke of Northum-
berland had made a considerable advance
of money out of his own private funds, to
sustain, in a becoming manner, the cha-
racter of this country, for liberality and
hospitality, at the court of France, it was
quite right that he should receive some
testimonial, if not a remuneration, for his
services. With regard to the duke of De-
vonshire, who went to the court of St.
Petersburgh, on a special embassy to the
emperor of Russia, on the occasion of his
coronation, he could assure the hon.
member, on his word of honour, that the
10,0001. which had been granted, was a
sum which nothing like defrayed the ex-
pense incurred by that nobleman in his
mission. In fact, it did not cover one
third of the expense of the noble duke
on that occasion. He repeated, that it was
against his judgment and wish, that indi-
viduals, however exalted, should be placed
in such situations, and permitted to bear
any part of the cost. However, he should
probably gratify the hon. gentleman, by
assuring him, that the noble marquis, to
whom he had alluded, was going out at his
own expense.-This was contrary to his
wish ; but, on the present occasion, he had
been obliged to give way to the noble mar-
quis, although he did not approve of allow-
ing private individuals to take a high office,
and sustain its dignity from their own
private resources, and without expense to
the country.
Mr. Hulme said, that the right hon. Se-
cretary had taken no notice of the repairs
of the English Ambassador's palace at
Paris.
Mr. Canning said, it was really useless
to give explanations to the hon. member,
for he went on repeating his objections, as
if nothing had ever been said to enlighten
him. He had, on a former occasion, told
the hon. member, that he had no more to
do with the purchase of the palace in
question, than the hon. member had. Two
years ago a question arose as to whether
it would be better to sell the palace or re-


MaRCH 26, 1827. 78
pair it. Surveyors were sent from Eng-
land to report on the subject. They re
ported in favour of repairing it ; which was
accordingly done. It was most unfair in
the hon. member to add the accidental ex-
pense occasioned by repairing the palace
to the salary of the Ambassador, for the
purpose of making it appear that the an-
nual charge was enormous. It was not lord
Granville who decided upon the repairing
of the palace, but the Treasury.
The motion was agreed to.

CoRN LAWS.] The House having re-
solved into a committee to consider further
of the Corn Trade acts, the report was re-
committed.
Mr. C. Grant said, that in compliance
with the wish expressed by the House on a
former night, he had altered the resolutions,
in order to accommodate them to the im-
perial measure. It was not necessary to
state the grounds on which he had made
his calculation, but would only state the
result at which he had arrived. The duty
proposed to be payable upon wheat per
quarter Winchester measure was 20s.
when the price should be 60s. The corres-
ponding price of the imperial measure
would be 61s. 10-d., and the corres-
ponding dutywould be 20s.71d. He had
taken the price at 62s., and the duty at
20s. Sd. The duty would then go on
rising and descending as before proposed,
without any alteration of the resolutions.
As the resolutions at present stood, the
duty upon barley, when the price should
be 32s. Winchester measure, was fixed at
12s. He now proposed that the duty
should be 12s. 4d., when the price should
be 33s. imperial measure. The duty on
oats was 9s. when the price was 24s.
Winchester measure: he proposed that the
duty should be 9s. 3d. when the price
should be 25s. imperial measure. The
duty upon rye, peas, and beans, was fixed
at 15s. when the price was 36s. per quar-
ter. The corresponding price and duty
per imperial measure would be 36s. and
15s. 6d. With respect to oatmeal, it was
extremely difficult to calculate how much
could be produced from a given quantity
of oats. He had calculated the produce
at 1961b. per quarter, but he had received
representations, that no such quantity
could be produced. He had, therefore,
thought it right to refer to the act of 1791,
in which it was fixed at 1761b. per quarter.
According to this standard, the corres-





79 HOUSE OF COMMONS,
ponding quantity per imperial measure
would be 1811lb., the duty upon which
would be the same as that on a quarter of
oats.
The resolutions, thus altered, were then
read by the chairman.
Lord Althorp wished to call the atten-
tion of the House to one point; namely,
whether the duties ought to be taken ac-
cording to the average prices of one week,
or from the averages of several weeks to-
gether. He knew there were many ad-
vantages in favour of the former system,
but he thought the disadvantages were
greater, seeing that it would enable per-
sons of large capital to affect the duty to a
very material extent. He preferred that
the duty should be taken according to the
estimate of six weeks instead of one.
Mr. Irving believed that the House was
mistaken, with respect to the power of the
corn merchants. In former times, there
were a few individuals who, possessing
large capitals, were able to control the
market; but now it was quite otherwise.
The inducements to men of great capital
to continue in the corn trade had long
ceased; and in that, as in many other
trades, the capitals of the middle-men had
been lost. There was, therefore, little
reason to fear any combination that could
materially raise prices; more especially
when the House considered, that it was
absolutely necessary, in purchasing up
the corn in the home market, that the
money should all be laid down.
Mr. Alderman C. Smith said, that such
a combination might take place, and there-
fore, it would be well for the House to
guard against it. The safer course would be
to take the average of six weeks, instead of
one.
Colonel Wood also thought it desirable
that this course should be pursued, to
guard against the possibility of danger,
arising, not only from speculation, but
from bad seasons. The House would re-
collect, that in 1817, in consequence of
severe rains, and the apprehension of a
bad harvest, wheat, within the space of
ten days, had risen to 100s. per quarter:
and this might happen again.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer said,
that although it was true that the price
of corn had risen as high as had been
stated by the hon. member, yet, the cir-
cumstances referred to by him, had no
connection with fraud: and did not, there-
fore, bear upon the argument. His own


Corn Laws. 80
impression was, that such an alteration
as that proposed would be neither useful
nor necessary. The hon. member for
Bramber had stated, that the country
would have a better security against fraud,
if the estimates were taken weekly; and
reasoning a priori, he had come to the
same conclusion.
Mr. Baring admitted, that the author-
ity of the hon. member for Bramber was
very strong in favour of the weekly ave-
rage; but he could not help thinking, that
some period longer than a single week
would give more security against the dan-
gerous effects of speculation. It might
be quite true, that no one great House
could command the corn trade; but the
House should recollect, that they were
legislating not for a particular year, but
for a series of years. He confessed he
was apprehensive that the corn merchants
might meet and combine at little expense
to raise the price for a week. He was not,
however, for adopting the period of six
weeks. He thought that if the averageswere
taken every four weeks, the possibility of
mischievous combinations would be pre-
vented.
Mr. Littleton argued, that if the period
were limited to three weeks or a month,
the security would be greater.
Mr. Whitmore said, he had consulted
some authorities to which he attached
great importance, and they concurred in
assuring him, that the weekly average was
decidedly better than the quarterly. From
the same sources, he had learnt also, that
the practice of fictitious sales had never
prevailed to any considerable extent. If
it had been possible, undoubtedly it would
have been extremely dangerous; as the
Corn-market would, at any moment, have
been liable to a sudden rise.
Sir J. Newport expressed his surprise
at the hon. gentleman's statement. No
man could doubt that fictitious sales were
made continually. The same wheat was
notoriously sold over and over again, on
the same day, in Mark-lane. The public,
he thought, therefore, would have no se-
curity against combinations, unless the
term of the averages was at least four
weeks.
Mr. C. Grant said, that whatever the
right hon. baronet might think, there was
a great diversity of opinion with regard to
the extent and effect of fictitious sales.
He believed that the practice prevailed
equally on both sides of the question;





81 Roman Catholic Claims.
and therein consisted the security of the
public. He was rather afraid, that if the
parties engaged in a combination to raise
prices had three or four weeks before them
for their operations, they would be in a
more favourable condition for the accom-
plishment of their purpose. It was possible,
however, to throw further safeguards round
the public. The receiver of the Corn re-
turns might be armed with a power to
reject any bargain of unusual magnitude
and suspicious appearance. Another sug-
gestion he would throw out was, that the
London returns should be combined at
once in striking the average with the re-
turns from the country, instead of waiting
for them as at present.
Mr. Baring reminded' the House that
they could not fairly judge what would
take place under the new law, from what
had taken place under the existing law.
Under the system of weekly averages, the
struggles of speculators would be much
more frequent. Now there was a bustle,
only when the averages approached the
opening price.
Mr. Curteis suggested that one pre-
caution might be, that the same corn
should not enter into the average, if sold
a second or third time the same day. He
had known it sold ten times over; and he
was sure there were constant frauds prac-
tised in the corn-market.
Sir J. Wrottesley was adverse to the
period of four weeks for taking the
averages. Fraudulent speculations would
thereby be greatly assisted, as the price
might be raised considerably every week.
He was favourable to the shortest period
possible beyond a single week; say two, or
at the utmost, three weeks.
Mr. Irving said, that combinations to
raise the price of grain were already a
misdemeanor at common law. His right
hon. friend might introduce some additional
penalties into the bill, which would effec-
tually suppress the practice, if it really
existed.
Mr. Warburton said, that much of the
irregularity and uncertainty in the taking
of the averages, originated in the system
of selling by samples, in the country, by
which, neither the farmer nor the pur-
chaser being bound, those sales were fre-
quently not carried into effect, yet were
always taken into account, as actual
sales. The practice in London, of selling
by tickets,bywhich both partieswere bound,
ought to be made universal.


MARCH 27, 1827. 82
Sir E. Knatchbull denied that combina-
tion or fictitious selling took place among
the agriculturists. They had no oppor-
tunity for such acts; nor were they people
of a character or inclination to commit
them.
Mr. N. Calvert put no particular faith
in the character or inclination of the
agriculturists; but he thought it pretty
nearly impossible for them to combine.
Mr. Whitmore believed it was already
the custom of the receivers of averages in
country towns to leave out any contracts
which bore very decided marks of fraud.
Mr. Charles Barclay would not deny
the claims of the farmers to the character
for probity which the hon. baronet had
given them; but he would remind the
committee, that since the year 1815, the
importation of foreign oats had been pre-
vented by some combination or other,
which was effected, he believed at Boston.
Precaution was therefore necessary.
The resolutions were agreed to.

HOUSE OF LORDS.
Tuesday, March 27, 1827.
RoMAN CATHOLIC CLAIMS-SELECT
VESTRIES IN IRELAND.] Lord Holland
said, he held in his hand two Petitions,
which had been sent to him to be presented
to their lordships, one of which came from
the Roman Catholic Inhabitants of the
parish of St. Peter, in the county of Drog-
heda, and the other from the parish of
Naas, in the county of Kildare. The
prayer of both the Petitions was to the
same purport; namely, that their lordships
should repeal an act of the present king,
which had been passed in the last session,
respecting Select Vestries in Ireland. With
respect to the allegations contained in the
petitions regarding that particular act, he
was not able to say any thing; as he had
no local knowledge of the circumstances.
He believed that act was passed with a
view to lessen the evils which were com-
plained of; but it had, as the petitioners
stated, greatly aggravated those evils; and,
if only half of the statement of the peti-
tioners were true, concerning which he
begged to be understood as not saying any
thing, he had no hesitation in declaring,
that the act ought to be immediately re-
pealed. He wished to be understood as
delivering no opinion of his own on the
subject; as he was not very well acquaint-
ed with the circumstances of the case,




83 HOUSE OF LORDS, Roman Catholic Claims., 84


from not having had the advantage of
attending the discussion which had taken
place last session on the subject. All he
had to state was, that the petitions were,
in point of form, unexceptionable, and in
language highly respectful. He therefore
conceived that there could be no objection
to receiving the petitions, but for one cir-
cumstance. One of the petitions, in urging
arguments for the repeal of the act he had
mentioned, stated, what, although it might
be very true (which he did not, however,
take upon himself to say) was certainly
extremely unpleasant for their lordships
to hear, and what he thought was doubt-
ful whether part of their lordships would
admit. The petition stated, that the
church of Ireland was the richest church
in all the world, where so few persons pro-
fessed the faith of that church. The
petition stated, that a very large propor-
tion of the people of Ireland did not pro-
fess the faith of the Established Church.
The petitioners also stated, that by the
ancient laws of the country, and by the
common law, which, for all they knew,
was still in existence, a part of the reve-
nues of the church ought to be appropri-
ated for the relief of the poor, and the
building and repairing of churches. The
petitioners also stated, as he was informed
by the letters of the persons who had sent
the petitions to him, for he had not read
them thoroughly, that at the time when
the church and its revenues were trans-
ferred from the control of their Catholic
progenitors to that of the Protestant
establishment, the churches were in com-
plete repair, and that no additional
churches were required to be built; but
that by neglect or abuse, or by evasion of
the law, the churches had been allowed to
get into total decay ; and the petitioners
complained, that the act of parliament
laid on the Roman Catholics the burthen
of repairing those churches which had
been incurred by some of the ministers of
the churches themselves. That was what
had been stated to him. He had no in-
tention of moving any thing at present on
the subject. He was aware that some
persons might say, You see that the
intention of the Roman Catholics is, to
subvert the Irish Protestant church : you
see in that petition a proof of that which
we have repeatedly stated to parliament,
namely, that the Roman Catholics are
actuated by a hostility to the Protestant
establishment." All he could say in


answer was, that if such were the views of
the Roman Catholics, and if such hostility
did exist in their minds against the Pro-
testant church, it was created by those
very persons who made that objection. The
people of Ireland might submit to the
payment for the support of that church,
the faith of which they did not profess :
they might submit to that payment with-
out feelings of irritation, when they con-
sidered that that church was preferred by
the opulent part of the country, and
cherished and protected by a large pro-
portion of the empire to which they
belonged. But when they were told, and
told repeatedly in the most emphatic man-
ner, that that church was the great bar to
the enjoyment of their rights, it was a
little too much to expect that they should
not be actuated by feelings of hostility;
or to suppose, that when parliament chose
to thwart the only mode which could lead
to peace and good government, that they
should not wish to destroy that edifice
which had divided, for a long period of
time, the Roman Catholics from their pri-
vileges. But it was the rejection of the
claims of the Roman Catholics by persons
who were opposed to the measure, which
alone had raised that hostility, and given
effect to those feelings of irritation. Before
he answered the objection of those persons
who thought the constitution would be
endangered by granting those claims, he
wished them to point out, in what manner
the admission of a few Roman Catholics
into parliament would add one jot to their
power, while at the same time it might
diminish some of the hostility which ex-
isted. Upon those persons must the re-
sponsibility fall; and they must be
answerable for all the effects which the
frequent rejection of the Catholic claims
might produce. He beheld with some
degree of concern the natural effect which
the rejection of the claims of the Catholics
of Ireland had produced in that part of the
empire.
The Earl of Longford said, he had not
intended to offer a word on the subject,
knowing how inconvenient to the House
such conversations were ; but when their
lordships heard such remarks as the
noble lord had just made, brought forward
from day to day, he could not let
them go forth to the country without some
observations, and in doing so he should
confine himself to the last remark of the
noble lord. The arguments for granting





85 Grant to the Duke and Duchess of Clarence. MancH 27, 1827.


the Roman Catholic claims might be re-
garded in two points of view. The first
was one of general policy, resulting from
motives of expediency or justice; and the
second was, with respect to the effect
which the granting of the Catholic claims
would have on the tranquillization and
amelioration of the condition of Ireland.
He doubted the justness of those opinions.
It was now a hundred and fifty years
since those restrictions had been imposed
which excluded the Roman Catholics from
political power. Repeated opportunities
had occurred for considering, re-consider-
ing, and discussing, the object of those
restrictions; and every time parliament
had decided, that those restrictions were
necessary and politic, and every time had
objected to repeal the laws which enacted
them; and he was surprised how any per-
son could declare that those restrictions
were unjust, which the law proclaimed to
be just. He was quite sure that every
time this subject should be discussed,
their lordships would be more and more
convinced, that the continuance of these
restrictions were both just, and necessary
to preserve the Protestant constitution.
When equal privileges were demanded,
equal securities ought to be given. It
was principally on account of the political
results, that parliament was induced to
give a constant and uncompromising
denial to the claims of the Catholics.
Lord Holland said, the noble lord was
mistaken, if he supposed the petitions re-
ferred to the repeal of the Roman Catholic
restrictions.
The Earl of Longford said, he had not
intended to advert to the petitions, but to
the observations of the noble lord; and
when the noble lord stated, that the re-
sponsibility was upon those who rejected
the claims of the Catholics, he must say,
that the responsibility was upon those who
would do away with restrictions, which
were so necessary to the security of the
country, and who would tear away the
bulwarks of the constitution.
The Earl of Bclmore presented two pe-
titions from the Roman Catholic inhabi-
tants of parishes in the counties of Fer-
managh and Tyrone. He would not enter
into the general merits of the question at
present, but would take the liberty of re-
marking, that not only the noble lords
who were of the same opinion as himself
on the subject of the Catholic claims, but
also those noble lords who were of a dif-


ferent opinion, were relieved from all re-
sponsibility, by the acts of the members
who composed his majesty's government,
who had gone to the full extent of con-
cession to the Roman Catholics, without
giving them political power. The only
question now was, whether they should
stop short without completing that plan.
He expressed deep regret-not at the fate
which had attended the Catholic question
in the other House of parliament, for that
circumstance only went the length of
showing that opinions were very nearly
balanced there, on a subject on which par-
liament was not only divided in their
opinion, but also his majesty's govern-
ment, but what he felt regret for was, be-
cause he could not perceive from the de-
clarations of the opponents in the measure
for granting relief to the Catholics, that
they limited their objection to time or cir-
cumstances. It would be a great satisfac-
tion to him, if he could look forward to a
period, however remote, when their opinion
would be altered. It appeared that the
argument chiefly relied on for the exclu-
sion of the Catholics from power, was, that
it was inexpedient to free the Roman Ca-
tholics from the disabilities under which
they laboured, on account of the principles
of the Roman Catholic church. That ar-
gument went to the extent of declaring,
that the constitution of this country was
not calculated for the comfort of one third
of the people of the British empire. He,
for one, could never accede to such a pro-
position; nor could he comprehend how
those persons who had allowed relief to
the Roman Catholics to a great extent,
could be satisfied to suffer the laws to re-
main as they were, and stop short in a sys-
tem, which had been so well begun, and
say that, admitting the Catholics to po-
litical power was incompatible with the
principles of the British constitution.
Ordered to lie on the table.

GRANT TO THE DUKE AND DUCTIESS
or CLARENCE.] On the order of the day,
for the second reading of the Duke and
Duchess of Clarence's Annuity bill, being
moved by earl Bathurst,
Lord King said, that the noble earl,
who had just moved the second reading of
the bill, had thought proper not to say a word
to their lordships on the subject. Heshould
have thought that, in such a case as the pre-
sent, the noble lord would have stated some
reason for the additional grant. From





87 HOUSE OF COMMONS,
the circumstance of this bill having been
left a long time elsewhere, without any
notice being taken of it, there seemed to
be a desire to get it smuggled through
theirlordships' House, without saying word
upon the matter. Perhaps the noble lord
thought that, as he was going to make corn
dear, it was necessary to raise every thing
in proportion. Or perhaps it was because
he thought the time favourable for propo-
sing such a grant. He had chosen a
favourable opportunity for it while great
distress existed among the manufactur-
ers; as next year, probably, there would
be great distress among the agricul-
turists. The noble lord had timed his
shot well; he had sent it between wind
and water. He did not know the reason
why the government had been so long
without a head. He certainly wished for
an efficient minister, to take charge of
such things as the present. He thought
the noble lord looked like an efficient
minister yesterday. It was high time for
their lordships that there should be an
efficient minister, for they looked like a
flock of sheep without a shepherd, and
they were bleating in every note of the
gamut, from L sharp to R flat. This was
certainly the golden age for princes, for
palaces, and for Ireland. He had had a
petition to present against the present
bill; but he had not known when it was
to be read a second time.
Earl Bathurst stated, that his noble
friend, the earl of Liverpool, in moving an
address in answer to the message of his
majesty, proposing an increase to the pro-
vision of the duke and duchess of Clarence,
in consequence of their present situation,
had stated what would be proposed as the
amount of that additional increase. His
noble friend had stated, that an income
of 3,0001. devolved on the duke of
Clarence in consequence of the death of
the duke of York, and that an addi-
tion of 9,0001. was proposed to be made
for the maintenance of the duke and
duchess of Clarence. He had also stated,
that 3,0001. was to go to the duke of
Clarence, and 6,0001. to the duchess.
Such was the statement which had been
made by his noble friend when he moved
the address. Their lordships had unani-
mously consented to it, and he therefore
had a right to conclude, that they had con-
sented not only to the increase itself, but
to the particular manner in which that in-
crease was to be made. Such being the


Writ of Right Bill. 88
case, he did not think it necessary to
trouble their lordships with any observa-
tions in moving the second reading of the
bill; because that bill only enacted that
which his noble friend had stated to their
lordships. And what was this increase?
It was an increase, by which the duke and
duchess of Clarence would be entitled to
receive upon the whole, an income of
35,5001. He could not conceive that
there could be any objection to such in-
come for the heir presumptive of the
crown of Great Britain and Ireland. His
noble friend had devoted a great deal of
attention to the financial distress of the
country; but their lordships would recol-
lect, that they had unanimously granted
60,0001. per annum as a provision to her
royal highness, the princess Charlotte of
Wales. At that time she was standing in
the same relation to his majesty, as the
duke of Clarence now stood in, namely,
the presumptive heiress of the crown of
Great Britain, the duke of Clarence being
now the presumptive heir. But the prin-
cess Charlotte was one degree further re-
moved than the duke of Clarence, being
presumptive heiress to the heir apparent.
He was convinced their lordships could not
object to such a grant; and he was satisfied
that the public would approve of the man-
ner in which a considerable portion of the
grant would be expended; nor could a
grant be made in a manner more accepta-
ble to the feelings of his royal highness,
since the greatest part was left at the dis-
posal of her royal highness.
The bill was read a second time.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, March 27.
WRIT OF RIGHT BILL.] Mr. Shad-
well moved the order of the day for the
second reading of this bill.
Mr. D. W. Harvey said, he earnestly
hoped that the hon. and learned member
would not press the second reading of this
bill; for, though he did not intend to di-
vide the House on it, he felt justified in
characterising the proposed measure as the
rudest and crudest specimen of modern
legislature. The design was good, and
that was all. The execution had not the
merit of being even harmless, for it could
not fail to prejudice the great plan of im-
provement which was in contemplation, in
respect to the entire code of laws touching
real estates. The bill before the House





81 Roman Catholic Claims.
and therein consisted the security of the
public. He was rather afraid, that if the
parties engaged in a combination to raise
prices had three or four weeks before them
for their operations, they would be in a
more favourable condition for the accom-
plishment of their purpose. It was possible,
however, to throw further safeguards round
the public. The receiver of the Corn re-
turns might be armed with a power to
reject any bargain of unusual magnitude
and suspicious appearance. Another sug-
gestion he would throw out was, that the
London returns should be combined at
once in striking the average with the re-
turns from the country, instead of waiting
for them as at present.
Mr. Baring reminded' the House that
they could not fairly judge what would
take place under the new law, from what
had taken place under the existing law.
Under the system of weekly averages, the
struggles of speculators would be much
more frequent. Now there was a bustle,
only when the averages approached the
opening price.
Mr. Curteis suggested that one pre-
caution might be, that the same corn
should not enter into the average, if sold
a second or third time the same day. He
had known it sold ten times over; and he
was sure there were constant frauds prac-
tised in the corn-market.
Sir J. Wrottesley was adverse to the
period of four weeks for taking the
averages. Fraudulent speculations would
thereby be greatly assisted, as the price
might be raised considerably every week.
He was favourable to the shortest period
possible beyond a single week; say two, or
at the utmost, three weeks.
Mr. Irving said, that combinations to
raise the price of grain were already a
misdemeanor at common law. His right
hon. friend might introduce some additional
penalties into the bill, which would effec-
tually suppress the practice, if it really
existed.
Mr. Warburton said, that much of the
irregularity and uncertainty in the taking
of the averages, originated in the system
of selling by samples, in the country, by
which, neither the farmer nor the pur-
chaser being bound, those sales were fre-
quently not carried into effect, yet were
always taken into account, as actual
sales. The practice in London, of selling
by tickets,bywhich both partieswere bound,
ought to be made universal.


MARCH 27, 1827. 82
Sir E. Knatchbull denied that combina-
tion or fictitious selling took place among
the agriculturists. They had no oppor-
tunity for such acts; nor were they people
of a character or inclination to commit
them.
Mr. N. Calvert put no particular faith
in the character or inclination of the
agriculturists; but he thought it pretty
nearly impossible for them to combine.
Mr. Whitmore believed it was already
the custom of the receivers of averages in
country towns to leave out any contracts
which bore very decided marks of fraud.
Mr. Charles Barclay would not deny
the claims of the farmers to the character
for probity which the hon. baronet had
given them; but he would remind the
committee, that since the year 1815, the
importation of foreign oats had been pre-
vented by some combination or other,
which was effected, he believed at Boston.
Precaution was therefore necessary.
The resolutions were agreed to.

HOUSE OF LORDS.
Tuesday, March 27, 1827.
RoMAN CATHOLIC CLAIMS-SELECT
VESTRIES IN IRELAND.] Lord Holland
said, he held in his hand two Petitions,
which had been sent to him to be presented
to their lordships, one of which came from
the Roman Catholic Inhabitants of the
parish of St. Peter, in the county of Drog-
heda, and the other from the parish of
Naas, in the county of Kildare. The
prayer of both the Petitions was to the
same purport; namely, that their lordships
should repeal an act of the present king,
which had been passed in the last session,
respecting Select Vestries in Ireland. With
respect to the allegations contained in the
petitions regarding that particular act, he
was not able to say any thing; as he had
no local knowledge of the circumstances.
He believed that act was passed with a
view to lessen the evils which were com-
plained of; but it had, as the petitioners
stated, greatly aggravated those evils; and,
if only half of the statement of the peti-
tioners were true, concerning which he
begged to be understood as not saying any
thing, he had no hesitation in declaring,
that the act ought to be immediately re-
pealed. He wished to be understood as
delivering no opinion of his own on the
subject; as he was not very well acquaint-
ed with the circumstances of the case,







proposed to restrict the period in which adopted and embodied in the present bill ?
writs of right could be brought from sixty He was far from thinking unkindly of the
to thirty years : but it did not say that learned gentleman ; but he really thought
no title should be required beyond the he had fallen into the vulgar and preju-
latter period, which was indispensable, to dicial error, that, to make a perfect states-
give efficacy to the plan. Nor would any man, he must give birth to a bill, it mat-
injury arise from delay; for he did not tered not how short or how crude. This
believe that three actions of this sort were prolific and prodigal spirit was the bane of
brought in all England in any one year, modern legislation, and that man was the
and in two of those the right occurred greatest friend of his country, and would
within the shorter period. Nor did the eventually earn the most solid and lasting
bill abolish the absurd errantry of knights praise, who should curtail and prune down
clothed in the drapery of feudal times; our Statute-book, by rendering our laws
nor did it cut down the number of jurors intelligible and few. For these reasons,
from sixteen to twelve-clauses which and many others that might be urged, he
were as important as the restriction in the trusted the learned member would leave
time. But there was still greater feeble- the subject in the hands of the right hon.
ness in the part relating to fines. The Secretary for the Home Department, who
bill proposed, that when an individual pur- had promised, at no distant period, to take
chased a freehold estate, a declaration all the laws touching real estates under his
should be inserted in the conveyance, that consideration, and, by subjecting them to
the wife was not to be dowerable; while the revision of a commission composed of
the present plan was to convey the estate competent persons, increase the enviable
to a trustee to effect the same purpose; load of gratitude which he had, by his
probably an abbreviation of fifty words, amended criminal code, already laid on
and the same number of pence, might the country.
be thus saved. But why, he would ask, Mr. Bernal said, he should be very sorry
did not the learned gentleman go at once if the hon. and learned gentleman aban-
boldly and honestly to the source of the doned this bill, as he was persuaded that
evil, and cut off the expensive and dilatory it would be very useful. On the one hand,
process of fines ? Here was a field worthy it went to regulate matters of dower; and,
of his talent and of his standing at the on the other, proceedings in writs of right.
bar; but he presumed the learned gentle- In both these cases, its provisions would
man, like the rest of the professional fra- tend to save much needless expense, es-
ternity, was afraid to do too much at once, specially with respect to the antiquated
in the fear that the venerable pile might forms of writ of right, which were so very
bury himself and his hopes in the general tedious in their nature, and ought to be
ruin. But he need not dread any incon- abolished. It was little less than ridiculous
venience from the plan he (Mr. H.) pro- to see such things existing in the year
posed, for it was of immemorial establish- 1827 ; and he thought they were such as
ment. On the alienation of copyhold pro- required the attention of the right hon.
perty, in which married women were inter- Secretary, who had done so much, and so
ested, they had only to present themselves well, in the reform of the other part of
before the steward of the manor, who, our law. As the law at present stood, a
handing to the lady one end of a rod, or man who possessed real property, and
not unfrequently a poker, and retaining was anxious to dispose of it by will, could
hold of the other himself, by this simple not do so, unless his will was witnessed by
symbol divested her of her interest, and three persons. Such were the restrictions
thus satisfied all the objects of the law. upon the disposition of his freehold pro-
A custom, not less efficacious, prevailed in perty, even though it should be ever so
the city of London, and in the borough small; while, on the other hand, if the same
which he had the honour to represent. In person was possessed of 10,0001. in the
both these places, as also in many others, funds, or of 15,0001. in customary or
the wife appeared before the mayor, and copyhold property, he might dispose of it
privately expressing to him her voluntary without having one witness to his will.
concurrence, a valid transfer was effected, Why was this difference made ? It seemed
at a nominal expense, and in a way strik- to him, that no cause could be assigned
ingly simple and complete. Why, he for it. It was positively disgraceful, that
would ask, could not this course be in this country, and at this time, the laws


Writ of Righrt Bill.


MARCH 27, 1827. 90







in which all persons had so vital an inter-' turely proposed. Whatever was done, the
est, should be in so confused a state. No most cautious, and indeed the most severe,
man could now transfer his property with- inquiry ought to precede it. However, he
out encumbering himself with conveyances, must take that opportunity of saying, that
and loading himself with stamp duties; he did not agree with the hon. member
nor could he stir a step in altering the for Rochester, as to the difficulties that
nature of his title, without throwing on must be expected from the opposition of
himself or his purchaser such a great ex- interested individuals. He feared no such
pense, as nearly invalidated all the bene- difficulties; and, indeed, he did not expect
fit they might expect to derive from the them. On the contrary, he had received
matter. The alteration of such legal offers of assistance from some of the most
grievances was a subject well worthy of i eminent men in the profession. He might
the interference of the right hon. gentle- be permitted to mention the name of Mr.
man opposite, and he called on him no Butler, who had made an offer of that
longer to defer the measure. Let him not kind. Besides that gentleman, there were
fear any opposition that interest might others who had made similar offers, and
create. He might, perhaps, think that who were now engaged in devising some
he could not grapple with such difficulties, plan for the reform of our civil laws. He
without first being assured of the support of was sorry to say, that from having been
the House. Upon that support, in such recently overwhelmed with business, he
a cause, he might fairly calculate; since had had but little time to consider the
every gentleman was interested in remov- matter. Indeed, when the subject should
ing these vexatious restrictions upon his be brought forward, he thought he should
control over his own property. However, best consult the advantage of the public,
he was well aware of the difficulties that by proposing to devolve the preliminary
the proposers of any reforms in this matter inquiries upon a commission, to be specially
would have to encounter; and felt con- appointed for that purpose ; since he was
vinced that, whenever they did go into the convinced that the inquiry was of such a
subject, they must be prepared with arms nature that it could not safely be intrusted
and weapons, and they must expect a to one individual. He should, therefore,
painful warfare of principle against itself; consider it best to refer it to a commission,
but let the right hon. gentleman attempt to be assisted in their inquiries by gentle-
it, and the House would carry him through. men conversant with the subject. Whether
It was perfectly true, that there were in those gentlemen gave their services gra-
the legal profession some men as high and tuitously or not would be a matter of little
honourable in their feelings as any in the importance: though, if they aided the
country, but there were also men in it who commission by their labours, he thought
lived on the existence of its abuses, and they ought to be allowed some remunera-
who would use every effort to maintain tion. That some such inquiry as to the
them. But the opposition of such men ought present modes of transferring real property,
not to be feared. It was manifest the should precede any legislative measure on
abuses did exist, and the sooner they were the subject, he had no doubt; and the
put down the better. He called upon the question was one to which he was dis-
right hon. gentleman to say, whether or posed to give the fullest consideration.
not it was his intention to bring the mat- Dr. Lushington congratulated the House
ter under the notice of parliament, and the country on the prospect of their
Mr. Secretary Peel admitted, that he obtaining some amelioration in the prac-
had intimated such an intention, and had tice of transferring real property. He
used, in the discussion on the Chancery thought there was no subject that required
bill, some expressions indicative of his a more close or accurate investigation.
opinion as to the necessity of an alteration The proceedings that were at present
in the forms restricting the transfer of real necessary to create a title in any person,
property. That opinion he had not aban- or to transfer that title from himself to
doned, but at the same time he could not another, were productive of infinite ex-
undertake the adjustment of a question of pense at the moment, and of infinite
so much importance. Of this he was con- litigation afterwards. As a proof of the
vinced, that those who were most willing enormous expense attendant upon the
to see a reform of the laws would, of all present practice, he might mention, that
things, not wish any measure to be prema- in one instance an abstract of a title laid


91 HOUSE OF COMMONS,


Wriat of Right Bill.





87 HOUSE OF COMMONS,
the circumstance of this bill having been
left a long time elsewhere, without any
notice being taken of it, there seemed to
be a desire to get it smuggled through
theirlordships' House, without saying word
upon the matter. Perhaps the noble lord
thought that, as he was going to make corn
dear, it was necessary to raise every thing
in proportion. Or perhaps it was because
he thought the time favourable for propo-
sing such a grant. He had chosen a
favourable opportunity for it while great
distress existed among the manufactur-
ers; as next year, probably, there would
be great distress among the agricul-
turists. The noble lord had timed his
shot well; he had sent it between wind
and water. He did not know the reason
why the government had been so long
without a head. He certainly wished for
an efficient minister, to take charge of
such things as the present. He thought
the noble lord looked like an efficient
minister yesterday. It was high time for
their lordships that there should be an
efficient minister, for they looked like a
flock of sheep without a shepherd, and
they were bleating in every note of the
gamut, from L sharp to R flat. This was
certainly the golden age for princes, for
palaces, and for Ireland. He had had a
petition to present against the present
bill; but he had not known when it was
to be read a second time.
Earl Bathurst stated, that his noble
friend, the earl of Liverpool, in moving an
address in answer to the message of his
majesty, proposing an increase to the pro-
vision of the duke and duchess of Clarence,
in consequence of their present situation,
had stated what would be proposed as the
amount of that additional increase. His
noble friend had stated, that an income
of 3,0001. devolved on the duke of
Clarence in consequence of the death of
the duke of York, and that an addi-
tion of 9,0001. was proposed to be made
for the maintenance of the duke and
duchess of Clarence. He had also stated,
that 3,0001. was to go to the duke of
Clarence, and 6,0001. to the duchess.
Such was the statement which had been
made by his noble friend when he moved
the address. Their lordships had unani-
mously consented to it, and he therefore
had a right to conclude, that they had con-
sented not only to the increase itself, but
to the particular manner in which that in-
crease was to be made. Such being the


Writ of Right Bill. 88
case, he did not think it necessary to
trouble their lordships with any observa-
tions in moving the second reading of the
bill; because that bill only enacted that
which his noble friend had stated to their
lordships. And what was this increase?
It was an increase, by which the duke and
duchess of Clarence would be entitled to
receive upon the whole, an income of
35,5001. He could not conceive that
there could be any objection to such in-
come for the heir presumptive of the
crown of Great Britain and Ireland. His
noble friend had devoted a great deal of
attention to the financial distress of the
country; but their lordships would recol-
lect, that they had unanimously granted
60,0001. per annum as a provision to her
royal highness, the princess Charlotte of
Wales. At that time she was standing in
the same relation to his majesty, as the
duke of Clarence now stood in, namely,
the presumptive heiress of the crown of
Great Britain, the duke of Clarence being
now the presumptive heir. But the prin-
cess Charlotte was one degree further re-
moved than the duke of Clarence, being
presumptive heiress to the heir apparent.
He was convinced their lordships could not
object to such a grant; and he was satisfied
that the public would approve of the man-
ner in which a considerable portion of the
grant would be expended; nor could a
grant be made in a manner more accepta-
ble to the feelings of his royal highness,
since the greatest part was left at the dis-
posal of her royal highness.
The bill was read a second time.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Tuesday, March 27.
WRIT OF RIGHT BILL.] Mr. Shad-
well moved the order of the day for the
second reading of this bill.
Mr. D. W. Harvey said, he earnestly
hoped that the hon. and learned member
would not press the second reading of this
bill; for, though he did not intend to di-
vide the House on it, he felt justified in
characterising the proposed measure as the
rudest and crudest specimen of modern
legislature. The design was good, and
that was all. The execution had not the
merit of being even harmless, for it could
not fail to prejudice the great plan of im-
provement which was in contemplation, in
respect to the entire code of laws touching
real estates. The bill before the House





93 Writ of Right Bill.
before him consisted of no fewer than
eight hundred sheets. That circumstance,
however, reflected no discredit upon the
solicitor from whose office it was issued,
and who was one of the most honourable
men in the profession. The truth was,
that from the very technical manner in
which titles were now prepared, that ex-
treme length was rendered unavoidable;
for, unless the abstract had been prepared
in that manner, no person could have
proceeded to sell the estate, nor would
any conveyancer have sanctioned the
purchase of it. He happened himself to
be concerned in the purchase of property
sold under an act of parliament; and, the
respectable conveyancer employed, felt it
his duty to object to the title, under the
very act which he had himself framed, and
it had cost a hundred guineas to have the
doubt as to that title removed. Now, he
thought that when such difficulties at-
tended the purchase of property, and
the establishments of titles, it was
high time for the legislature to inter-
fere. But their first step should be, to
ascertain the nature and extent of the
evil, and then, in devising a remedy, care
should be taken that other evils were not
let in, as great as those which it was in-
tended to remove. He was glad that the
subject was likely to be placed in such
excellent hands ; and he believed that the
right hon. gentleman would give a greater
boon to the landed proprietors in giving
them the means of transferring their
property with a clear and secure title, and
without those expensive processes which
were now necessary, than he would do by
removing from them the whole amount of
the poor-rates. Let him, then, proceed
to the task, and so frame the laws re-
lating to the transfer of real property,
that there should be no other restrictions
than those which were absolutely necessary
to make the title of the purchase clear and
secure, without embarrassing parties with
the present expensive mode of proceeding.
Mr. Ferguson said, that as this bill
involved the vital principles of every
species of landed property in the country,
the House ought to proceed in it with
every degree of caution. If a commission
should be appointed to inquire into the
state of the laws affecting real property,
he trusted that the hon. and learned gen-
tleman who had originated this bill would
be appointed a member of it. He thought
the country was greatly indebted to Mr.


MAnCH 27, 1827. 94
Humphries, for the excellent work which
he had written upon the subject, and that
several of his suggestions deserved serious
consideration. He hoped that the learned
member would not press his bill on the
House at present, but would leave the
matter in the hands of the right hon.
Secretary, who had expressed his willing-
ness to have this portion of the law of
the country amended.
The Attorney-General said, he did not
object to the abolition of the circuitous
forms which at present attended the trans-
fer of real property. He admitted that
the existing law might be amended, but
he must remind the House, that the
greatest caution ought to be observed in
any attempts which they might make to
amend it. Whilst they were simplifying
forms, and putting an end to the unmer-
ciful consumption of parchment which
now took place, they must take care that
they did not injure the vital rules and
principles of law. He was ready and
willing to lend his humble assistance
towards the improvement of the formal
and instrumental modes of conveyancing.
Mr. Peel repeated, that he did not
mean to pledge himself to the appoint-
ment of a commission. He wished the
inquiry into this branch of the law of
England, whenever it took place, to be
conducted by persons whose experience
would carry with it a warrant to the pub-
lic, that any measures which they might
propose would be judicious. He pledged
himself that the subject should shortly be
taken into consideration, and that no
measure should be taken upon it without
its undergoing the minutest inquiry.
Mr. Shadwell said, he would gladly
give his assistance to such a commission as
the right hon. Secretary had spoken of;
but as some time would necessarily occur
before the recommendations of that com-
mission could be carried into execution,
he thought that his bill ought to be in
operation during the interval. It appeared
to him to be the more rational plan to re-
move, as soon as possible, a portion of an
evil, the existence of which was universally
acknowledged, than to suffer it to continue
with unabated force. He was therefore of
opinion, that even supposing that this bill
afforded but a partial remedy, more good
would be done by permitting it to pass
now, than by postponing it to an indefinite
period.
The bill was read a second time.







CoNa-LAws.] Sir A. Grant brought up the importation of grain. It was the de-
the Report of the Committee of the whole cided opinion of those who had given the
House on the Corn Trade Acts. On the subject more and deeper consideration
question, that it be read, than he had been able to apply to it, that
Mr. Hume said, he wished to take that the farmer was really as much interested
opportunity of delivering his opinion on the in having food at a low price, as the manu-
general policy of the Corn-laws, which facturer of cotton or wool. The present
opinion, in some respects, was different was a question between the proprietors of
from that of any hon. gentleman who had the soil and the rest of the community.
yet spoken on the question. He began It was not to be denied, that farmers who
by recapitulating some of the points urged had leases might be injured, to a certain
by the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, when degree, by any sudden depression; but
he first brought forward the subject, and the claim put in by the growers of corn
dwelt particularly on the claim put in by generally, for what they called a remune-
the agricultural interest, and admitted by rating price, was one of the most prepos-
the right hon. Secretary, to protection. terous that had ever been submitted to
Ministers had professed to adopt a course any assembly. Because corn had been at
between the two extremes: but, at the a high price when their leases were grant-
same time, taking the average price at 60s., ed, and was now likely to be lower, the
they had given the balance in favour of farmers, as was natural to all speculators,
agriculture, and had professed to do so. called upon the House to assist and sup-
They had avowedly proceeded upon no port them, and to keep up the cultivation
fixed principle; and he was on this ac- of poor lands to the exclusion of the pro-
count the more anxious to state his view. duce of other soils. He protested against
He was decidedly convinced that protec- any such principle, and called upon the
tion ought not to be afforded to the landed House to apply to the trade in grain the
interest to the extent of a single shilling, same system which it had applied to va-
unless they could prove that they sus- rious other branches of commerce and
trained a weight of taxation which was manufactures. The foundation of the re-
not borne by other classes of the commu- solution which he meant to submit was,
nity : to whatever extent they could esta- that corn ought to be bought by the sub-
blish, that they were sufferers beyond others, jects of this country wherever they could
to that extent he was ready to give them obtain it cheapest, and that importation
protection ; and upon that principle mi- ought to be allowed from any part of the
nisters and parliament had already pro- globe. Nine-tenths of the community,
ceeded in the recent improvements of the upon this important question, were oppos-
system, by the establishment of free trade ed to the landed interest. Now, if any
in other commodities. Three or four man could procure for the price of his la-
years since, ministers had made their bour, two bushels of wheat instead of one,
declaration on the subject of free trade; he wished to establish a law by which he
and they had properly felt bound to take might resort to that country where he
a course between contending interests, but could so obtain for the same sum twice
they had shewn no partiality, no undue the quantity of food that he could procure
favour as in the case of grain. Instead of in another. The object of the law which
benefitting one party to the injury of ano- ministers wished to establish was, to com-
ther, they ought to adopt only measures pel nine-tenths of the community to give
consonant with the general advantage of their labour for one bushel of corn instead
the whole community. He could see no of two. He might be told, that the land-
difference between the claims of the owners wished that every person should
grower of corn, and of the maker of shoes, receive a just remuneration. But how did
or any other article : both had invested their conduct bear out that assertion, when
capital, and both ought to have the same they endeavoured to keep up the price of
fair play in employing that capital to the every necessary of life, and thus prevent-
greatest profit, as far as it did not preju- ed the manufacturer from competing with
dice the prosperity of other classes. It was foreign countries ; the consequence of
the height of injustice to give to the few which must necessarily be, the decrease of
an advantage at the expense of the many ; wages, and the throwing many individuals
yet this was what the right hon. Secretary out of employment? It was, however,
had admitted he had done, in reference to said, that unless this system of protection


95 HOUSE OF COMMONS,


Corn Laws.







was continued, the country would run the every year, until it came to a permanent
chance of being visited bya famine. It tax of 10s. Though he was willing to do
is not," said the land-owner, for my own this, yet he was convinced that the agri-
sake, but for the sake of the public, that culturists were not able to show that
I desire this protection." A more fal- they paid in taxes more than four shillings
lacious argument never was advanced. If above the other classes of the community.
they would suffer corn to be imported only If this were done, the population would con-
when it arrived at those very high prices sume all the corn that was imported, as well
which could rarely occur, then foreign as that which was grown in this country;
countries would not be encouraged to grow the workman would be well paid, and the
corn, which they might exchange for Eng- manufacturers would be enabled to get off
lish manufactures; but if, on the other their goods. Such would be the effect
hand, corn was freely admitted, then the of setting free the trade in corn ; but
whole world, on whom they must depend the present law tended to produce want
for trade, would be able to prepare an and destitution in the country. He
abundant supply of grain, to assist this wished to introduce a countervailing tax,
country, if it suffered from thefailure of to the amount which the land-owners
the crops, or from any other circumstance. could show they paid beyond the other
Without looking to averages a system parts of the community. He was per-
which might be abused-without looking fectly willing to do one of two things;
at the price of grain-he would open the and he should like to know how far the
ports to corn, in the same way as they hon. member for Wareham (Mr. Caleraft)
were open to other articles. He would would meet him. The land-owners, it was
open a trade immediately with every said, paid ten or twelve millions more of
country that had surplus corn to sell, and taxes than the other branches of the
thus increasethe demand for the manufac- community did. Now, he would either
tures of England. But, if they went on repeal those taxes, or give them acounter-
imposing a duty of 20s. 8d. when wheat vailing duty in proportion to the amount
was at 62s., it would be a long time in- which they could prove they paid beyond
deed before they secured such a trade. the otherclasses ofthecommunity. It had
A contrary course would open a wide been asserted by a noble lord in another
door for the manufactures of this coun- place, that the land-owners paid 24-25ths
try, and would be exceedingly beneficial to of the poor-rates. This, however, was not
those who were at present starving. As the fact. Last year the poor-rates and
the law now stood, it was not worth parish-rates amounted to 6,900,0001.
the while of the foreigner to cultivate Of this, 2,700,0001. was raised on dwel-
grain; and if there should be a bad ling-houses, and theremaining 4,200,0001.
harvest, the country would most likely on the land; therefore, the land ap-
be afflicted with a famine. Foreigners, peared to contribute two-thirds of the
under the existing system, would scarcely poor-rates, or 2,000,0001. more than
be induced to speculate in the cultivation the other classes of the community.
of corn, which they would probably be If, however, this sum of 4,200,0001.
obliged to keep for years, until it was were divided into three parts, it would be
spoiled. Suppose the duty were fixed at found that one third was not paid by the
15s., without reference to average or land-owners. The remaining two thirds,
price, the consequence would be, that or about 2,500,000/., were paid by them.
every state in Europe which was able to But, of this 2,500,000/., nine-tenths, he
supply a small quantity of corn, would was prepared to show, consisted of wages.
be ready to open a trade with Great 'He had compared the rate of wages in Scot-
Britain; and he was perfectly satisfied land, where there existed no Poor-laws,
there were very few hon. members who and in some counties of England where
looked to the amount of the supply of they were comparatively light, with other
corn from 1815 to the present moment, districts differently circumstanced; and
who could entertain any great fear, that lie found that, wherever the poor rates
the quantity of corn likely to be im- wereburthensome the wages were low, and
ported would injuriously affect the landed that, adding the amount of poor rates to
interest of this country. His proposition the rate of wages, both were still not
was, that the duty should now be laid equal to the rate of wages paid in Scot-
at 15s., and that Is. should be taken off, land. Twenty or thirty years ago, tha
VOL. XVI I. E


C(orn Laws.


MARcit 27, 182!7. 98






99 HOUSE OF COMMONS,
wages of agricultural labour in Scotland
were twenty per cent below the wages
of agricultural labour in England ; but it
was a curious fact, that they were now
twenty per cent higher, arising entirely
from the mal-administration of the Poor-
laws.-Next, as to tithes-it was his
firm conviction, that tithes were, in a
great measure, paid by the consumer, and
therefore the land-owners had no claim to
peculiar advantages. As to the land-tax,
when first it was imposed, it was not con-
fined exclusively to land, nor was it so
now : it applied to all branches of in-
dustry in a greater or less degree; but he
was willing to take into consideration
whatever sum was borne by the landed in-
terest, to the exclusion of other classes of
the community. Another item in the
claim of the owners of the soil arose out of
county rates; but it ought to be recollected,
that country gentlemen were themselves
the authors of county rates, ana they
ought only to permit them to be raised for
legal purposes. If, indeed, the land only
had to bear the charge of the prosecution
of criminals for instance, relief to that ex-
tent ought to be afforded, and the expense
paid out of the general funds of the coun-
try.-The agriculturists had a monopoly
of the sale of various articles of agricultural
produce-such as pork, mutton, tallow,
and other things, by the imposition of
duties on the importation of those articles,
amounting to a prohibition. It was with
astonishment that he had heard it asserted
by some, that it would be better that no
free trade at all should be allowed, and that
the people should be compelled to pur-
chase from the home-growers alone, such
articles as the home-growers could sell
them. He maintained, however, that the
prosperity of the country depended mainly
upon the freedom of foreign importation,
and' that if this was put an end to, the
agriculturists would ruin their own cus-
tomers, and bring the population of the
country to a state of starvation. The
amount of the value of goods manufactured
in 1824 was 44,000,0001. ; in 1825,
49,000,0001.; and in 1826, 47,000,0001.
Now, it was impossible that this country
could consume manufactures to this ex-
tent. But if the trade in corn were
thrown open, it would afford a vent for
those manufactures; and every knife or
stocking sent abroad would produce a
profit, that would enable the manufacturer
to pay his portion of the interest of the


Corn Laws. 10(9
national debt. The landholders appeared
to think that the country could not do
without them, since they paid so much of
the revenue out of their rents; but he
contended that the taxes would be much
more easily paid by the mass of the popula-
tion, if there were no rents at all, and
therefore the country would do very well
without the land-holders [coughing]. He
did not mean to deny, that the depriving
them of their rents would be a gross in-
justice; but he repeated, that the people
could, with much less difficulty, pay the
taxes, if there were no rents at all. He
thanked the House for the attention they
had paid him, and trusted he had stated his
sentiments so as not to be misunderstood.
He concluded by moving his first Resolu-
tion :
That from and after the 5th of July
1827, and until the 5th of July 1828, a
duty of 15s. shall be imposed on every
quarter of wheat imported from any foreign
country into the United Kingdom; and,
for the year from the 5th of July 1828, to
the 5th of July 1829, a duty of fourteen
shillings per quarter; and, in every suc-
ceeding year afterwards the duty shall be
reduced one shilling, until the 5th of
July 1833, after which time the duty of
ten shillings shall remain a permanent and
fixed duty, payable on every quarter of
wheat imported from foreign countries,
except Canada, as hereafter provided for."
Mr. Marshall seconded the motion, and
stated that a great part of the very numer-
ous and intelligent population which he
represented, were not satisfied with the
arrangement which the ministers had pro-
posed on the subject of the Corn-laws,
from which they expected no substantial
relief.
Mr. Irving began by paying personal
compliment to the hon. gentleman who
had preceded him, but to whose opinions
on this subject he was diametrically op-
posed. The price of food, he contended,
was of little importance to the welfare of
the nation, compared to the greatness of
its capital. He totally differed also from
the hon. gentleman who had brought for-
ward the amendment, and who, in sup-
port of it, had argued, that if the land
paid no rent, the country might prosper as
well as ever. Did that hon. gentleman
not see, that if such a state of things ex-
isted, the occupier of the land would be
in effect, the proprietor ? This, however,
was not entirely a question of conjecture







Prussia, Poland, anda great part of Russia, would ever have occasion to depend upon
were cases in point; and what was the foreign markets for a supply. Such being
condition of the landowner, in those coun- the case, it became the duty of the House
tries, but one of constant need ? Was that to consider well before it permitted the
the state to which the hon. gentleman home-grower of corin to be interfered with
wished to reduce the landed gentlemen of by the foreigner at all times.
this country? Nothing could be more Sir Henry Parncll said, that the more
frightful than the distress that pervaded this subject was investigated, the more
the countries to which he had referred. evident it would appear, that the policy
The people were sunk into the lowest of forcing a home supply, by restraining
stage of want and wretchedness; and, in importation, was injurious to the public
reality the government had become the interests. There was no doubt that, in
general proprietor of the land. The main the produce of manuf'actu.res, capital
doctrine of the hon. gentleman was, that might go on to be applied almost un-
the intercourse of nations should be equal limitedly, and that the result would be a
and unrestricted. He admitted that the continued reduction of the article pro-
principles of free trade were good in the duced, in price; but the case of n1rricul-
abstract; but they were unfortunately im- tural produce was entirely different.
practicable. This country might make The extent of the fertile land which we
what regulations she pleased for her own had to cultivate, must determine the ex-
trade; but do what she would, other tent in which capital could be applied to
countries would, in their own defence, cultivation with advantage. Up to a cer-
continue to prohibit as much as they could tain point-so long as we worked only
the introduction of her manufactures. No upon fertile lands-the application of
advance, he maintained, had been prac- capital tended to produce increased
tically made, towards a system of general i cheapness of price ; but when the con-
reciprocity. He denied that the Corn- tinned application of capital led us into
laws had been injurious in their operation cultivating poor soils, then the effect of
on any branch of the public welfare. The that course would be a rise of price ; the
law of 1822 certainly could not; for it quantity of labour, &c., requisite to make
had never affected prices ; but, if it had, those soils productive, was greater than
agriculture was entitled to protection, that which we had been accustomed to
What right had any body-even the House apply before. If we cultivated poor land,
of Commons itself-to tell any class of while land of a superior quality was at our
the community, that their industry should disposal, we in fact paid so much more
be placed in a worse condition than that than we need do : it was so much labour
of any other class. Yet the effect of the or capital thrown away ; and this was ex-
new doctrines of the hon. gentleman actly the effect of our refusing to take
would be, to subject the most important corn from foreign countries. To look at
interest in the country to a course of slow this system, therefore, as it affected the
but constant depression and decay. It manufacturing interest, the quantity of
had been proved that the land of this corn consumed annually in this country
country was capable of raising corn suffi- was about fifty millions of quarters. If,
cient for the subsistence of the population. by any law or arrangement, all that corn
Justice, he said, therefore, required that was purchased at the rate of 1Os. a quar-
theconsumption of grain shouldbe confined ter higher than it need be, the charge so
to our native produce, as it was with re- laid upon the public would be 25,000,0001.
gard to our own manufactures. That in money. And this was the system
would be the best system of national policy, which gentlemen argued produced no in-
because it was founded on a due regard jury to the country What would be
to all the great interests. In illustration said, if the Treasury proposed to levy a
of its advantages, he cited the instances of tax of 10s. upon every quarter of corn
Ireland and Scotland, both of which were consumed ? If all this 25,000,0001. went
formerly importing countries, but which even to the landlord, that would not be
now yielded a large supply of corn to this entirely ruinous : at all events, it would
country. He had no doubt, if further be a transfer simply of so much money
capital were applied in those countries to from the pockets of one class of people
the growth of corn, that there could be to those of another. But the fact was,
no fair apprehension that this country taking the admitted .i.-i.. that only
E2


Corn Laws,.


AMACn 27, 1827.







one third of the gross produce of land duced no inconvenience to our manufac-
went for the landlord's rent, the landlord tures; but, in this respect, he was quite
got only a third of it; at the utmost, he mistaken. Every country that exported
did not receive half. And what became corn had taken umbrage at our having
of the rest of the 25,000,0001.; that was, excluded their corn, and had retaliated by
of the additional 10s. a quarter? Why, raising the duties on the importation of
the rest was directly wasted-thrown our manufactures. What took place in
away--laid out in producing that from a America in 1823 was particularly in
lower soil, which a higher would have point. The grand and only popular ar-
produced without its expenditure; it was gument of the supporters of the new
wasted in growing corn at a higher price tariff in America, in that year, was
than we could purchase it. The conse- entirely bottomed on the Corn-laws of
quence of this wasting so much money in England. England," it was said, is
growing corn on bad land was the lessen- now deluging the Union with manufac-
ing every year of the power to accumulate tured goods, but will she take our raw
new capital, and the keeping the amount produce in exchange ? Is there any reci-
of the national wealth below what it procity in her proceedings ? Has she ad-
would otherwise be. It served to check mitted a single bushel of foreign corn, the
that progressive prosperity, which the hon. staple product of our country into her
member had said was so desirable to be markets during the last three years ? Is
maintained ; it curtailed the power of it not absurd, then, to expect to continue
employing labour, and also the resources your commerce with a nation acting on
of taxation : it produced all the evils such exclusive principles? Ought we not
which can arise from keeping the wealth rather to profit by her example; and, as
of the country from making such advan- she excludes our corn, does not sound
ces as it was capable of making, if not policy dictate the propriety of excluding
obstructed. The hon. member had stated her manufactures, and of raising up ,an
opinions respecting the effect of the pro- internal manufacturing population in the
tection of corn upon our manufactures, to Union, sufficient to take off the surplus
which he could not agree. In place of produce of our agriculturists." Here,
the protection of the landed interest being then, was decisive evidence of the direct
of any service to manufacturers, it was inquiry which the restricting of the im-
particularly injurious to them. The rise in portation of foreign corn produced to the
price which it occasioned of corn, produced public interest. In regard to what the
a rise in wages and. as such a rise of wages hon. member had said of the necessity of
was followed by a lowering of the rate of sustaining high rents, in order that the
profit which manufactures could derive taxes might be paid, if what he had ad-
from their capital, it depressed the pro- vanced was true, that the additional price
gress of the accumulation of agricultural of corn produced by protection served to
capital; but what was of more import- diminish the national capital and wealth,
ance it seemed to make it more advanta- the consequence of that protection, as to
geous to the owners of it to transfer it to the public Revenue, must be, to diminish
foreign countries, and employ it there, the produce of the taxes; as that would
than to continue to employ it here. This always be in proportion to the general
was the way in which the stability of the wealth of the country. The hon. baronet
British manufacturers was the most ex- concluded by saying, that he was sorry
posed to be shaken. It was not by allow- the hon. member for Aberdeen had pro-
ing artisans to go to foreign countries, or posed his plan to take effect so soon as
machinery to go to foreign countries, that the 1st of next July. He considered ;it a
we incurred any risk; but it was by better plan than that proposed by minis-
making it more profitable to employ ters; but, seeing that the existing law was
English manufacturing capital abroad than one of prohibition, he thought a longer
in England, that areal dangerwas created time ought to be allowed for making so.
of losing the superiority that British great a change, and therefore he could.
manufactures now had in competition in not vote for the amendment.
foreign markets with foreign manufac- Mr. Whitmore said, he could not con-
tures. The hon. member had spoken cur in the amendment of his hon. friend;
of our commercial connection with foreign but his dissent arose, not upon the amount
countries, as if our Corn-laws had pro- of duty proposed by his hon. friend, but.


Coin Laws.


103 HOU,4E OF COMMONS,





105 Spring- Guns Bill.
because he objected to a fixed duty, of,
whatever amount, under any circumstan-
ces; and he trusted that the House would
not support resolutions, which would be
applicable in times of scarcity. Another
objection to a fixed duty was, that it fre-
quently happened, that a year of scarcity
in this country was a year of scarcity in
France; and, in that case, both countries
would be competitors in the markets of
Poland; and the fixed duty proposed by
his hon. friend must lessen the quantity of
foreign corn which could be brought into
this country. The hon. member here
mentioned the years of scarcity between
1794 and 1825, and, having mentioned
one year, during which the price of corn
rose as high as 177s., asked the House,
whether they could sanction resolutions
which would impose a duty of 10s. per
quarter, even if corn should again reach
that excessive price? His own opinions
upon the measures proposed by govern-
ment remained unchanged ; but, he must
admit, that those measures appeared to
him to proceed upon a better principle
than the resolutions of his hon. friend.
For these reasons he should vote against
the amendment.
Mr. Cripps said, he could not forbear
expressing his opinion that we ought not
to expose ourselves to a foreign market,
because the cultivation of poor land might
cost a little more than that of rich land.
For his part, he had not the good fortune
to possess much land, but he thought the
corn question had been fairly settled, and
he should therefore oppose the amend-
ment.
Mr. Warburton did not think that
the single inconvenience which had been
pointed out by the hon. member for
Bridgenorth was a sufficient argument
against the amendment of the hon. member
for Aberdeen. He thought, that a greater
inconvenience would result from regulat-
ing the duty inversely, than from a fixed
duty. He looked upon the question as a
choice of difficulties, and as that of the
hon. member for Aberdeen appeared to
him to be the lesser one, he should vote
for it.
The House divided; For the original
Resolution 140; For the Amendment 16;
Majority 124.

List of the Minority.


Bernal, Ralph
Iirch, Joseph


MARcH 27, 1827. 106


Folkestone, lord
Harvey, D. W,
Howick, lord
Lushington, Dr.
Maberly, John
Maberly, W. L.
Marshall, John
Monck, J. B.


Nugent, lord
Rancliffe, lord
Thompson, C. P.
Wood, aid.
TELLERS.
Hume, Joseph
Warburton, Henry


SPRING GUNS BII.L.] The report of
this bill being brought up,
Lord Belfast rose for the purpose of
moving that a clause be added prohibiting
the extension of the principle of the bill to
Ireland. The noble lord began by observing,
that Ireland was unhappily not so far ad-
vanced in civilization as England ; and that
therefore those measures of legislation,which
might be perfectly justifiable when ap-
plied to this country, were, in some cases,
by no means fitted for the state of society
in the sister kingdom. If a man went
into a wood there, it was not so much
for the purpose of poaching, as with an
intent to destroy or steal the timber. If
a thief broke into a dwelling-house, it was
not so much for the purpose of taking
money, as of carrying away fire-arms.
Much additional protection was therefore
necessary to the inhabitants of that coun-
try; and he certainly thought that the
government were culpably negligent in
not providing more effectually for the
safety of those whose interests were com-
mitted to their care. The noble lord
then alluded to a circumstance which had
occurred in the county of Tipperary, on
that very night week ; and which, he con-
tended, shewed clearly the necessity of a
continuance of the protection of Spring-
guns to Ireland. About ninety acres of land
had been ploughed up by the nightly legis-
lators in the neighbourhoodof Thomastown.
Between four and five hundred attended;
several hundred shots were fired, and an
incessant discharge of fire-arms kept up
during the whole night. On the next day
a notice was served on Mr. Smithwick,
the owner of the land, to the following
effect-" Notice is hereby given to Black
Jack Smithwick, if he does not immediately
give the wood and road-fields to the dis-
tressed poor for potato ground, at a
moderate rent, he will meet with the fate
of Baker, and Farrel's wife. Any person
who stops up those sods, will meet
with the loss of his life; and if you do not
comply with this, we will shoot your
stock, burn your dairy-house, men, and
milk-women. This is enough-Given at


Cave Otway
Darvies, col.






107 HOUSE'OF COMMONS, General Turnpike Act Amendment Bill. 108


the Council-room by the Provider of
the Poor-RocrK." Now, he contended,
that when the matter at issue was, as it
appeared at present to be, the preser-
vation of life, that House was justified in
granting a permission to make use of more
than ordinary means of defence. As to
the bill itself, he could not, he confessed,
agree with its lion. mover that it would be
the means of preventing the effusion of
blood. When men in parties of ten or
twenty were, by the removal of the ordi-
nary methods of defence, to be brought
into hostile contact with each other so
frequently as they must be, he very much
feared that the provocation to the effusion
of blood would be much increased, and
the number of the sufferers from breaches
of the Game-laws by no means diminished.
He had thought it fit to make these few
observations, and he now begged to move
a clause, that the bill may not extend to
Ireland.
Mr. J. Grattan certainly did not expect
to hear, among the charges brought
against the government of Ireland, that it
had failed in its duty, from neglecting to
plant Spring-guns. He could not agree
with the noble lord, that Spring-guns
could be any protection to woods in that
country. On the contrary, he thought it
very probable, that if it was once known
that there were Spring-guns planted in a
wood, the fact would be an incentive to
the people to set fire to that wood, and
destroy it altogether. In the county of
Wicklow, where he resided, there were
very extensive woods; and he could say
with safety, that they were never injured
in any way, although no Spring-guns
were planted in them. The people of
Ireland were, he was sorry to say, guilty
of great negligence in the performance of
the ordinary duties of life; and he was
convinced that, from forgetfulness and
other causes, the use of ': .;"--...- to
any extent in that country would be pro-
ductive of the most lamentable results to
the innocent, as well as prove a means of
adding greatly to the outrages already too
prevalent.
AMr. Spring Rice also opposed the clause,
and contended, that so far from declaring,
as the noble lord would by his motion
wish them to declare, that Spring-guns
should be used where they had not been
used before, they should rather do every
thing in their power to abolish the practice
altogether.


Mr. Secretary Peel hoped the noble
lord would not press his motion. The
effect of it would be to make that House
declare itself as permitting the use of
Spring-guns in certain cases, at the very
time when the legality of the use of them
in any case was more than questionable.
Lord Belfast, as there appeared to be
a feeling in the House hostile to the
clause consented to withdraw it.
The report was agreed to.

GENERAL TURNPIKE ACT AMIEND.
MENT BILL.] Sir T. Lethbridge moved
the Order of the Day for the further con-
sideration of the Report upon the General
Turnpike Act Amendment bill.
Mr. Baring declared himself hostile to
the principle of the bill. Nothing could
be more monstrous than the powers which
it proposed to give the commissioners, to
sell and exchange, and barter and dispose
of, the property of parishes to suit their
ideas of convenience or propriety. The
commissioners of Turnpike Trusts had too
much power already, and he must, unless
some very strong ground was shewn,
oppose any attempt to give them more.
He had given himself the trouble to in-
quire rather minutely into the circumstances
under which the bill came before them,
and he understood it arose solely from
the failure of an attempt to shut up an
old road near the hon. baronet's country
residence. His informants were very re-
spectable men; and their testimony had
been corroborated by the hon. baronet's
colleague before whom the matter came,
as a magistrate, at quarter sessions.
He believed, indeed, that but for that
failure the House would never have heard
of the hon. baronet's attempt to amend
the Turnpike-laws.
Sir T. Lethbridge repelled, with some
warmth, the insinuations of the lion. mem-
ber, that he was actuated by any selfish
motives in bringing the bill under the
consideration of the House. He was sur-
prised that the hon. member, who seemed
to have taken his instructions from a paper
which had been circulated pretty freely in
the vicinity of the House, could lend him-
self to such charges, without first making
himself better acquainted with their truth.
The paper to which he alluded he could
trace to a party, whose conduct he did not
hesitate to pronounce base and scandalous,
and whose assertions he could prove, if he
thought it worth his while, to be mean,





109 General Turnpike Act Amendment Bill.


false, and malicious. He had no hesitation, the old one, subject, however, to the very
in saying, that he was confident he could, right of avenue or way to which he had
if he pleased, have induced the House alluded. Now, he apprehended, that the
to vindicate, by its privileges, the charac- hon. baronet's object was to get rid of that
ter of one of its members, as falsely and clause; and if he saw good grounds for
injuriously assailed. The whole of the thinking that it was inconvenient, and
paper was, he repeated, a foul misrepre- ought to be repealed, or that the acts were
sentation; and he did not envy the feel- so voluminous and obscure that they could
ings of the hon. member for Callington, not be properly construed, he would re-
when he thought it fit to allude to the cir- commend him, instead of pushing forward
cumstances itdetailed, as likely to influence the present bill, to move for a committee
his judgment in bringing in the present to examine the whole of the acts, in order
bill. As to his hon. colleague, if he to have them consolidated and amended
had any statement to make, he ought to after the recess.
have been present in that House, to put Mr. Cripps agreed with the hon. mem-
them in possession of his information from ber, that it would be better to withdraw
his place. He once more asserted, that the present bill; which could only be said
there was not the slightest foundation for I to add another to those statutes which
the charge, that he was at all influ- were already too voluminous. By the la-
enced by any private feeling in the dis- bour of a committee, he thought he might
charge of a public duty. The hon. ba- very well be in a situation to submit a pro-
ronet then entered into a defence of the posal after Easter, for the consolidation of
bill, and contended, that so far from giv- the whole of the Turnpike-laws.
ing any new power to the commissioners Mr. R. Gordon did not think it right,
of Turnpike-trusts, it was merely decla- that the House should govern its opposi-
ratory, and in explanation, of two im- tion or consent to any measure by a refer-
mensely long and obscure statutes, the ence to the hon. baronet's disputes with
3rd and 4th of Geo. 4th, both of which his neighbours in the country. He would
gave the very same power of selling and recommend him to withdraw the bill, and
exchanging to which the hon. member move for a committee. If that committee
so strongly objected. He concluded by examined the subject as it ought, he hoped
declaring, that the whole of the statement that it would take into its consideration
of the hon. member was false; not as re- the expense of Turnpike-acts, and adopt
garded him, but with reference to the some measure by which they might be
authority from which he received his in- made public instead of private bills. At
formation, present they were private bills, in force for
Mr. Baring expressed himself very a term of only twenty-one years; so that
unwilling to give offence to the hon. at the end of that time the whole of the
baronet, and very sorry if he had stated enormous expense attendant upon their
what was not true; but he had received enactment was to be incurred anew.
his information from some of the most Mr. F. Lewis strongly recommended, in
respectable men in Somersetshire. The preference to the present measure, the con-
hon. baronet did not deny that the matter solidation of the laws on the subject. The
hadbeen before the quarter-sessions. The system of Turnpike-roads in this country
fact was, that the commissioners having became every day more and more im-
made a new line of road over the hon. ba- portant. When it was considered that
ronet's property, wished to shut the old the commissioners of the roads were em-
one, but the inhabitants resisted that mea- powered to tax the people to the amount
sure, on the ground that there were a great of a million and a half annually, and that
many avenues from that line to various until the recent act of parliament they
farms and grounds, which must be conse- could not be called to account for the
quently shut up too: and the quarter-ses- manner in which theyexpendedthe money,
sions, upon being appealed to, confirmed it was evident that the whole was a tre-
the propriety of the resistance. The hon. mendous machine, which called loudly for
baronet said, the act gave no new power : legislative regulation. The proper nature
he was not well versed in such things, but of that regulation, however, so as at once
he found on referring to the old act, that to render the system one of greater faci-
it gave a power, in the case of mak- lity, and to check the abuse of it, could
ing a new line of road, to sell or break up be considered only in a committee above


MVARCH 27, 10f17. 110







stairs. The matter could not be accom- and intolerance-where you are not called
polished in the present session ; but if the upon to sacrifice every other consideration
hon. baronet would withdraw his bill, he to please the advocates of Protestant as-
would endeavour, by the next session, to cendancy-and where the road to power
prepare a consolidation of the existing is not through the presentation of pesti-
laws, for the purpose of submitting it to lential petitions from Protestant parsons,
the consideration of a committee above nor from the scribbling of pamphlets, still
stairs. more pestilential, to be afterwards preached
Sir T. Lethbridgesaid, thatwiththe un- as sermons in a chapel at no great dis-
derstanding that the hon. gentleman would tance from that House, in order to tickle
next session move to refer all the laws on the noble and learned lord who sat not far
the'subject to a committee above stairs, from him." In Prussia there were no at-
he was quite ready to withdraw his bill. tempts to make proselytes by mischievous
Mr. F. Lewis observed, that it would and mistaken zealots, or uncandid and
be impracticable to attempt to do any aspiring politicians-men who, to suittheir
thing in the present session. own views, declare a crusade against the
Sir T. Lethbridge then intimated, that Catholics, and assert the finger of God to
he would withdraw his bill. be visible in every movement. Enthusiasts
.__in religion might think, and artful politi-
HOUSE OF LORDS. cians might be ready to say, whether they
I' March 28. thought it or not, that the Almighty fa-
I.. ,v rch oured their enterprise ; but, he would tell
Ro)1AN CAT.roLIc CLAIMS.] Lord these zealots and interested enthusiasts,
King, in presenting a petition from the that unless the modern crusaders had
Catholics of Ireland, relative to the Test more inspiration, as well as more success,
Oaths, said, that the petitioners com- than the old hermit and his adherents,
plained, and he thought most justly, of there was but little probability of their
the cruel slanders cast upon them and converting the "benighted people of Ire-
upon their faith, by that law which re- land." It had been happily observed, in
quires every person called upon to take a one of the daily journals, that it was as
seat in the legislature, or to perform the feasible to bring about such an event-the
duties of a public office, to take certain grand consummation ofconvertingthe "be-
oaths, by which every judge, bishop, or nighted people of Ireland," as it was to
sheriff, was obliged to declare the Catho- attempt to bottle off the Atlantic ocean."
lie religion was an execrable superstition, But, againstthoseProtestantjesuits-those
and the Catholics themselves to be base never-ceasing conversionists, the very best
idolators. This proceeding, the peti- authority would be found in a charge de-
tioners considered most unjustifiable, and livered by thepresent archbishop of Cashel,
he entirely concurred with them in the who stated it to be his opinion, that in at-
opinion. Many petitions had been pre- tempting to proselytize, it was advisable
sented to their lordships against these ca- that they should look not merely to the
lumniated Catholics by the right reverend probability of success, but to something
bench, and great numbers had also been more; namely, that such attempt might
presented from bodies of the clergy, who be fraught with danger to Christianity
evinced any thing but what was likely to itself. He had heard of great danger to
create among their fellow-Christians cha- our finances by a few pepper-corns being
rity, harmony, and good-will. He had brought into the Exchequer at the expense
lately read an extract from a German pa- of millions, so there might be imminent
per, and he could not help contrasting the danger by a few converts being brought
conduct of our clergy with that of the into the church at the expense of the re-
king of Prussia, who had expressed his ligion of the country. However, some
approbation of the manner in which a Ca- political priests cried Woe be to those
tholic priest and a Lutheran parson had who interfere with the blessed work of this
exerted themselves, in bringing about har- new reformation." But those who cried
mony and union between parties not pro- "Woe, woe" were ready to inflict woe
fessing the same faith. He could not help upon others, while they were ready to
exclaiming on the occasion :-" Oh, happy undergo martyrdom; but, very fortunately
people, and happy country! where nothing for themselves it was only the martyrdom
is to be gained by the profession of bigotry of promotion.


Roman'Catholic Claimls.


III HOUSE OF LORDS,





ManRCH 28, 1827. 114


Earl Stanhope observed, that his noble the observation which he had made in
friend, in the observations he had made that House upon the hope of the conver-
with respect to the state of religious sion of the Catholics, and which the noble
sects in Prussia, and the treatment they lord had made the subject of so much
received from the state, entirely overlooked comment, by the expression that "he
the fact, that in Germany there were no thought he saw the finger of God in the
popular constitutions. If there were no recent conversion of the Catholics of
elements of a popular constitution in this Ireland, and that woe would be to those
country, he would be as willing as the who should presume to lift up their hands
noble baron to concede to the Roman Ca- and voices in vain and impotent attempt-
tholics the whole of their demands; but ing to stem the flood of Gospel light that
in a country where all the institutions was bursting over the country," he begged
were decidedly and entirely Protestant, to say most distinctly, that he did not
he was convinced that no further powers intend to declare spiritual or temporal
could with safety be granted to them. woe to those who opposed the will of the
He could not help observing, that some Most High. But he would repeat, that
remedy must be applied to the condition of if any man did attempt to stand up against
Ireland, which would strike at the root of the will of God, and oppose his puny
those evils under which that country at efforts to such will, woe would be to him
present suffered, sooner or later. He had only one word
The Bishop of Chester, notwithstanding to add, by way of encouragement to those
the very strong language and the direct who were engaged in the work of reforma-
personal allusions of the noble baron op- tion. He had endeavoured, as a member
posite-allusions which he had made in of the legislative assembly, to speak in
language extending far beyond the usual terms of prudence and caution of those
parliamentary licence-would have been evils which, in such an attempt, were to
contented to listen to the noble lord's be avoided, and to guard against that
observations in silence, and to have prac- kind of hostile opposition which nothing
tised that lesson of Christian charity but the union of great worldly wisdom
which the noble lord seemed not yet to with the most devoted piety could possi-
have learned-a lesson which taught him bly counteract; and he hoped that in
never to apply hard words to the innocent doing so he had not made use of expres-
and unoffending, had he not felt the sub- sions which were averse to the profession
ject which gave rise to those observations of a minister of God.
to be of paramount importance. The Lord Holland said, he did not wish to
noble lord had alluded, with something prolong the present conversation, which
like contempt, to what he had said on a he thought could not tend to any useful
former evening with regard to the pro- purpose, which he knew was irrelevant to
gress of the reformation in Ireland. Now the petition before the House, and which
he was quite sure he had on that occa- was altogether unconnected with the great
sion uttered no sentiments which were question upon which they had been so
inconsistent with Christian charity or frequently called to decide. He could
Christian kindness towards persons of all inot, however, suffer the matter to termi-
religions whatever. If they were to be- nate, without observing, that the right
lieve in reformation at all, or in the ac- reverend prelate who, if he would permit
counts of those events by which the most him to borrow one of his own phrases,
remarkable reformations were preceded, was one of the most polished weapons of
they must be prepared to admit, that the ecclesiastical armoury in that House,
some signs must be shown when Ireland had begun by rebuking the noble lord for
was to be enlightened; that some symp- having introduced his petition by the use
toms must be manifest to point out the of hard words, while the right reverend
time when the work was to be under- prelate seemed to have forgotten, that the
taken. And if there were at present in whole proceeding was founded on the use
Ireland some of those symptoms, was it of hard words, and that the very matter
not, he would ask, the duty of a Chris- of complaint, on the part of the Catholics,
tian teacher not to cast reproach and was the application of those hard words,
rebuke upon those appearances of the which it was contended ought to be ex-
reception of truth, but rather to foster ercised against those who used them in
and encourage them ? With reference to return. The whole matter reminded him


Roman Catholic Claims.





115 HOUSE OF LORDS,
of a little anecdote which he had found
in an old Spanish jest book. In Spain,
the flocks of sheep are often in danger
from the wolves, and the shepherds, as a
protection, arm themselves with a long
spear, tipped with iron at one end, and,
at the same time, avail themselves of the
assistance of a large dog. Now, it hap-
pened that one of these shepherds and a
dog had a quarrel, and the shepherd, in
defending himself against the dog, killed
him with his spear. The shepherd was
seized by the owner of the dog and car.-
ried before the alcalde, to be tried for the
offence. "Why," said the magistrate,
"did you kill the dog ?" The shepherd
replied, because he ran at me with his
mouth open, to bite."-" And why did
you strike him with the spear of your
stick; why not rather strike him with the
butt end, and beat him off?"-" Because,"
said the shepherd, he came against me
with his mouth foremost, and not with
his tail." So it was with the Catholics.
The Protestants called them idolatrous
and superstitious; they loaded them with
the most opprobrious and insulting ex-
pressions; they goaded them on to vio-
lence; and then they affected to feel
surprise, when the Catholics attempted to
retort upon them any portion of that lan-
guage, or that insult. With regard to the
conversion of the Catholics, or the new
reformation, as it is called, what that had
to do with the question of emancipation
he had yet to learn. Either it must be
admitted that it had nothing to do with
the question, or it must be meant that
the penal laws were to assist the work of
conversion, and to force forward the work
of reformation. If that was so, then he
would call the proceeding persecution.
To make use of a temporal weapon for
spiritual purposes, was, to all intents and
purposes, persecution. If, however, it
was conceded, that the work of conversion
had nothing to do with the question, then
they were equally subject to the reproach
of making use of spiritual weapons for
carnal and temporal purposes, and equally
guilty of persecution. In either way,
therefore, what they were now doing
meant nothing, or it meant to give coun-
tenanceto persecution. The right reverend
prelate had, however, gone further, and
ad denounced woe to all those who should
attempt to lift up their hands to stay the
flood of light.
The Bisho of Chester said, he had not


Roman Catholic Claims. 116
uttered anything of the kind. He had
said, when that reformation began, woe
be to him, who should attempt to stem
the flood.
Lord Holland continued. Well, "when
that reformation began," was a saving
clause certainly. But in whatever way the
woe might be applied, he apprehended
there might unhappily be found some who
were not unwilling to use it. But there
was another point to which he wished to
call their lordships' attention. When the
question of Catholic emancipation was
discussed in that House, he recollected
perfectly well, that the merits and de-
merits of the Catholic religion formed,
with some learned and reverend lords, one
of the most prominent topics. The merits
of the Catholic religion discussed among
Protestants, and where none but Protes-
tants were present! He would not say
how such a proceeding might be consider-
ed in that House; but, in private society,
the discussion and the decision of a ques -
tion in which two parties were interested,
and only one was present, would be con-
sidered ungentleman-like and uncharit-
able. He recollected, too, that one of the
topics dwelt upon as a ground of hostility
to the claims of the Catholics, was the
anxiety to make proselytes, which charac-
terized those who professed the Catholic
faith. Now, he would say that the House
must make choice of one of two things.
They must either say that it is not right to
blazon forth the deeds done in the cause
of reformation, and to harangue upon the
interposition of God on behalf of the purer
and better faith, or they must admit that
they, the Catholics, are also to be com-
Smended for their zeal to produce reforma-
tion. And they must, perhaps, even go
further, and judge of both by the effects
of their labours, declaring that religion to
be the purest which produced the most
abundant proofs of the truth of their faith.
He would ask, was any man disposed to
go thus far, and place the truth of the
faith of Protestants upon such a trial, and
the purity of its doctrines, and its favour
and acceptance with the Supreme Being,
upon a constant alternation of temporary
triumphs ? He concurred in opinion with
the just and exemplary archbishop of
Cashel, whom he was sorry not to see in
his place, and whom he would be proud
to have the pleasure of knowing person-
ally, and whose near relationship to the
wise and comprehensive-minded Dr. Law-






rence left no surprise upon his mind that victims of that provision which prevented
he had trod in his steps. That truly game from being brought to market like
Christian prelate had given it as his opin- other articles. This provision held out a
ion, that any attempt to convert the Ca- temptation to the poorer classes which
tholics of Ireland would be attended with they were unable to resist. He appealed
bad effects; and that whether the cause to the honourable members who were ma-
of Protestantism would gain was dubious, gistrates, whether the evil attendant on
but that the cause of Christianity would the present Game-laws was not a greatly-
lose, was certain, increasing one, and whether it had not ar-
Lord Carbery said, that noble lords rived at a height that required legislative
opposite seemed to think, that all the hard interference ?
words ought to be used on the one side, Sir C. Burrell said, that the persons
and none on the other. The Catholics who were imprisoned for offences against
were, he contended, more inclined to make the Game-laws were victims, not of those
use of strong expressions than the Pro- laws, but of their own imprudence in vio-
testants, and went so far as to declare lating them. He agreed with the hon.
that no Protestant was entitled to salva- member for Staffordshire, in the necessity
tion. of preserving the game. With respect to
Ordered to lie on the table. the alleged hardship suffered by the tenants
in not being allowed to kill game on the
IIOUSE OF CO M M ON S. land which they occupied, it ought to be
recollected, that when they obtained their
Wednesday, March 28. leases, they were aware of that circum-
GAME-LAWS.] Mr. Littleton said, he stance.
had to present a petition from a most re- Mr. Estcourt said, it could not be denied
spectable portion of the inhabitants of but that those laws tended to the demora-
Wolverhampton, praying for an alteration lization of the people. He would state to
of the Game-laws. The petitioners stated, the House a fact, which had come within
that they paid very heavy poor-rates, a his own personal knowledge. In one of
portion of which went towards the support the prisons in Wiltshire, there were lately
of poachers in prison. Now, the petition- confined no less than two hundred and
ers said, that such portion of their rates thirty prisoners. Now, the House would
ought not to be so expended, since they be surprised to hear, that out of that num-
had a right to buy game. The hon. ber, one hundred were incarcerated for
member said, that, in a former parliament, breaches of the Game-laws. The House,
he had given his support to a measure, knowing that fact, must, he thought,
having for its purport, an alteration of the see the necessity of altering those laws.
Game-laws; and he now wished to see Sir J. Wrottesley said, he agreed in
those laws altered, as he thought much the prayer of the petition; and, after the
good would accrue to society from a judi- statement which the House had just heard
cious alteration of those laws, which, in from the hon. member for the University
their present shape, were so injurious to of Oxford, they could not, he thought,
it. He could not, however, agree with defer any longer the devising of some
the petitioners, when they said, that poach- measure, to check the evils of laws which
ers were the victims of those laws. He assumed such an enormous magnitude,
did not think so; and he would not vote Something should be done; and he
for any alteration of them, which would thought the first step ought to be the re-
not give protection to landed proprietors pealing of the laws which prevented the
for the preservation of the game on their sale of game. A bill had been introduced
grounds. The landed proprietor had as into that House, about three years ago, by
good a right to have the game on his land an hon. member, now a member of the other
protected, as the merchant had to have House. It contained a provision to legalize
his wares protected, the sale of game; but there was so much
Sir J. Sebright concurred with his hon. other matter mixed up with it, that he
friend in the necessity of protecting the could not approve of all the provisions
landowner; but he also concurred with of the bill. He thought that if the hon,
the petitioners in terming the persons im- member who spoke last would bring in a
prisoned in consequence of the Game-laws, bill to legalize the sale of game, disencum-
the victims of those laws. They were the bered of the objectionable provisions of the


Game Laws,


MARCH 28, 1827. 118







stairs. The matter could not be accom- and intolerance-where you are not called
polished in the present session ; but if the upon to sacrifice every other consideration
hon. baronet would withdraw his bill, he to please the advocates of Protestant as-
would endeavour, by the next session, to cendancy-and where the road to power
prepare a consolidation of the existing is not through the presentation of pesti-
laws, for the purpose of submitting it to lential petitions from Protestant parsons,
the consideration of a committee above nor from the scribbling of pamphlets, still
stairs. more pestilential, to be afterwards preached
Sir T. Lethbridgesaid, thatwiththe un- as sermons in a chapel at no great dis-
derstanding that the hon. gentleman would tance from that House, in order to tickle
next session move to refer all the laws on the noble and learned lord who sat not far
the'subject to a committee above stairs, from him." In Prussia there were no at-
he was quite ready to withdraw his bill. tempts to make proselytes by mischievous
Mr. F. Lewis observed, that it would and mistaken zealots, or uncandid and
be impracticable to attempt to do any aspiring politicians-men who, to suittheir
thing in the present session. own views, declare a crusade against the
Sir T. Lethbridge then intimated, that Catholics, and assert the finger of God to
he would withdraw his bill. be visible in every movement. Enthusiasts
.__in religion might think, and artful politi-
HOUSE OF LORDS. cians might be ready to say, whether they
I' March 28. thought it or not, that the Almighty fa-
I.. ,v rch oured their enterprise ; but, he would tell
Ro)1AN CAT.roLIc CLAIMS.] Lord these zealots and interested enthusiasts,
King, in presenting a petition from the that unless the modern crusaders had
Catholics of Ireland, relative to the Test more inspiration, as well as more success,
Oaths, said, that the petitioners com- than the old hermit and his adherents,
plained, and he thought most justly, of there was but little probability of their
the cruel slanders cast upon them and converting the "benighted people of Ire-
upon their faith, by that law which re- land." It had been happily observed, in
quires every person called upon to take a one of the daily journals, that it was as
seat in the legislature, or to perform the feasible to bring about such an event-the
duties of a public office, to take certain grand consummation ofconvertingthe "be-
oaths, by which every judge, bishop, or nighted people of Ireland," as it was to
sheriff, was obliged to declare the Catho- attempt to bottle off the Atlantic ocean."
lie religion was an execrable superstition, But, againstthoseProtestantjesuits-those
and the Catholics themselves to be base never-ceasing conversionists, the very best
idolators. This proceeding, the peti- authority would be found in a charge de-
tioners considered most unjustifiable, and livered by thepresent archbishop of Cashel,
he entirely concurred with them in the who stated it to be his opinion, that in at-
opinion. Many petitions had been pre- tempting to proselytize, it was advisable
sented to their lordships against these ca- that they should look not merely to the
lumniated Catholics by the right reverend probability of success, but to something
bench, and great numbers had also been more; namely, that such attempt might
presented from bodies of the clergy, who be fraught with danger to Christianity
evinced any thing but what was likely to itself. He had heard of great danger to
create among their fellow-Christians cha- our finances by a few pepper-corns being
rity, harmony, and good-will. He had brought into the Exchequer at the expense
lately read an extract from a German pa- of millions, so there might be imminent
per, and he could not help contrasting the danger by a few converts being brought
conduct of our clergy with that of the into the church at the expense of the re-
king of Prussia, who had expressed his ligion of the country. However, some
approbation of the manner in which a Ca- political priests cried Woe be to those
tholic priest and a Lutheran parson had who interfere with the blessed work of this
exerted themselves, in bringing about har- new reformation." But those who cried
mony and union between parties not pro- "Woe, woe" were ready to inflict woe
fessing the same faith. He could not help upon others, while they were ready to
exclaiming on the occasion :-" Oh, happy undergo martyrdom; but, very fortunately
people, and happy country! where nothing for themselves it was only the martyrdom
is to be gained by the profession of bigotry of promotion.


Roman'Catholic Claimls.


III HOUSE OF LORDS,





119 HOUSE OF LORDS,
bill he had alluded to, it would meet with
the support of the House.
Mr. Littleton said, he must dissent from
the opinion of his hon. colleague. He
thought that making game saleable would
be the reverse of an improvement of the
Game-laws.
Mr. Secretary Peel said, he thought it
desirable to try the experiment by a par-
tial operation, and to ascertain the effect
of making game a saleable commodity.
He was far from meaning to say, that if
game were made saleable, the Game-laws
ought to continue in their present state.
He had long felt that a change had taken
place in society, which absolutely required
that those laws should be revised, and
placed upon a different foundation. He
had no wish to interfere with the privi-
leges of private property. The owners of
estates, and of game preserves, would na-
turally defend their rights. All that nas
desirable was, not to withdraw the protec-
tion from game, but to put the Game-laws
upon a better and more practicable foun-
dation. At present, the sale of game was
confined to poachers, and it was desirable
to let the owners of game come in compe-
tition with them. In Scotland, the laws
relative to game were of a much better de-
scription than those of England. As to an
alteration of the laws now in force in Eng-
land, it appeared to him an easy matter.
It could not be difficult to legislate in
such a way, that persons who were now
entitled to kill game should have an ad-
vantage over those who had not such a
description of property; but in doing this,
he should certainly wish that the qualified
person should not have the exclusive pri-
vilege of selling game. He wished, too,
that something might be done to withdraw
the ground of quarrel which frequently
took place between the small and the large
landed proprietors residing in the same
neighbourhood. He did not at all enter
into the fears of those who thought that if
the right of shooting was extended, the
.,ian of three acres would materially dimi-
nish the game of his neighbour possessing
three thousand. On the contrary, a com-
promise would generally take place, in
which the person of such small property
would be glad, for a trifling sum, to agree
not to shoot at all. To say that the man
whose few acres contributed to the food of
the game, should not have the privilege of
killing the very birds that devoured the
produce of his field was monstrous. Gen-


Corn Laws- 120
tlemen would find it perfectly fruitless to
attempt to continue their laws in their
present state. Such was the altered con-
dition of society, that those laws could
not remain ten years without material mo-
difications.
Ordered to lie on the table.

HOUSE OF LORDS.
Thursday, March 29.
CoRN LAWS LORD REDESDALE'S
RESOLUTIrNS.] The following is a
Copy of the Resolutions on the Corn
Trade, printed and circulated by lord
Redesdale :
1. That the wealth and strength of
Great Britain originated in the cultivation
of its soil, and must always be dependent
on that cultivation, whatever other advan-
tages the country may possess.
2. That the cultivation of the soil of
a country is a trade and manufacture, and
is so far the most important trade and
manufacture in every country, as every
other trade and manufacture must depend
upon it.
3. "That though the production of
corn for the food of man is in Great Bri-
tain one of the most important objects of
cultivation, yet the means of obtaining the
production of corn, the quantity purchased,
and the profit to be derived by the culti-
vator from the production, are all depen-
dent on many other objects of production,
and especially on the production of ani-
mals, and of food for animals, and on the
further produce or other benefit derived
from such animals; and the general profit
of the cultivator is the result of the com-
bination of all the several articles so pro-
duced, each article contributing to the
more profitable production of the rest, the
amount of the whole production at the
same time greatly depending on the capi-
tal and skill employed in fitting the land
for the purposes of cultivation, and on the
capital and skill employed by the culti-
vator; and it is the combined effect of all
these operating causes which gives plenty
from cultivation, and renders cultivation
profitable.
4. "That the laws now in force regu-
lating the importation of foreign corn, are
founded on the principles expressed in the
foregoing Resolutions, having in view the
extension and improvement of the cultiva-
tion of the country, the increase of its
productions, and insuring to the improvers






rence left no surprise upon his mind that victims of that provision which prevented
he had trod in his steps. That truly game from being brought to market like
Christian prelate had given it as his opin- other articles. This provision held out a
ion, that any attempt to convert the Ca- temptation to the poorer classes which
tholics of Ireland would be attended with they were unable to resist. He appealed
bad effects; and that whether the cause to the honourable members who were ma-
of Protestantism would gain was dubious, gistrates, whether the evil attendant on
but that the cause of Christianity would the present Game-laws was not a greatly-
lose, was certain, increasing one, and whether it had not ar-
Lord Carbery said, that noble lords rived at a height that required legislative
opposite seemed to think, that all the hard interference ?
words ought to be used on the one side, Sir C. Burrell said, that the persons
and none on the other. The Catholics who were imprisoned for offences against
were, he contended, more inclined to make the Game-laws were victims, not of those
use of strong expressions than the Pro- laws, but of their own imprudence in vio-
testants, and went so far as to declare lating them. He agreed with the hon.
that no Protestant was entitled to salva- member for Staffordshire, in the necessity
tion. of preserving the game. With respect to
Ordered to lie on the table. the alleged hardship suffered by the tenants
in not being allowed to kill game on the
IIOUSE OF CO M M ON S. land which they occupied, it ought to be
recollected, that when they obtained their
Wednesday, March 28. leases, they were aware of that circum-
GAME-LAWS.] Mr. Littleton said, he stance.
had to present a petition from a most re- Mr. Estcourt said, it could not be denied
spectable portion of the inhabitants of but that those laws tended to the demora-
Wolverhampton, praying for an alteration lization of the people. He would state to
of the Game-laws. The petitioners stated, the House a fact, which had come within
that they paid very heavy poor-rates, a his own personal knowledge. In one of
portion of which went towards the support the prisons in Wiltshire, there were lately
of poachers in prison. Now, the petition- confined no less than two hundred and
ers said, that such portion of their rates thirty prisoners. Now, the House would
ought not to be so expended, since they be surprised to hear, that out of that num-
had a right to buy game. The hon. ber, one hundred were incarcerated for
member said, that, in a former parliament, breaches of the Game-laws. The House,
he had given his support to a measure, knowing that fact, must, he thought,
having for its purport, an alteration of the see the necessity of altering those laws.
Game-laws; and he now wished to see Sir J. Wrottesley said, he agreed in
those laws altered, as he thought much the prayer of the petition; and, after the
good would accrue to society from a judi- statement which the House had just heard
cious alteration of those laws, which, in from the hon. member for the University
their present shape, were so injurious to of Oxford, they could not, he thought,
it. He could not, however, agree with defer any longer the devising of some
the petitioners, when they said, that poach- measure, to check the evils of laws which
ers were the victims of those laws. He assumed such an enormous magnitude,
did not think so; and he would not vote Something should be done; and he
for any alteration of them, which would thought the first step ought to be the re-
not give protection to landed proprietors pealing of the laws which prevented the
for the preservation of the game on their sale of game. A bill had been introduced
grounds. The landed proprietor had as into that House, about three years ago, by
good a right to have the game on his land an hon. member, now a member of the other
protected, as the merchant had to have House. It contained a provision to legalize
his wares protected, the sale of game; but there was so much
Sir J. Sebright concurred with his hon. other matter mixed up with it, that he
friend in the necessity of protecting the could not approve of all the provisions
landowner; but he also concurred with of the bill. He thought that if the hon,
the petitioners in terming the persons im- member who spoke last would bring in a
prisoned in consequence of the Game-laws, bill to legalize the sale of game, disencum-
the victims of those laws. They were the bered of the objectionable provisions of the


Game Laws,


MARCH 28, 1827. 118





119 HOUSE OF LORDS,
bill he had alluded to, it would meet with
the support of the House.
Mr. Littleton said, he must dissent from
the opinion of his hon. colleague. He
thought that making game saleable would
be the reverse of an improvement of the
Game-laws.
Mr. Secretary Peel said, he thought it
desirable to try the experiment by a par-
tial operation, and to ascertain the effect
of making game a saleable commodity.
He was far from meaning to say, that if
game were made saleable, the Game-laws
ought to continue in their present state.
He had long felt that a change had taken
place in society, which absolutely required
that those laws should be revised, and
placed upon a different foundation. He
had no wish to interfere with the privi-
leges of private property. The owners of
estates, and of game preserves, would na-
turally defend their rights. All that nas
desirable was, not to withdraw the protec-
tion from game, but to put the Game-laws
upon a better and more practicable foun-
dation. At present, the sale of game was
confined to poachers, and it was desirable
to let the owners of game come in compe-
tition with them. In Scotland, the laws
relative to game were of a much better de-
scription than those of England. As to an
alteration of the laws now in force in Eng-
land, it appeared to him an easy matter.
It could not be difficult to legislate in
such a way, that persons who were now
entitled to kill game should have an ad-
vantage over those who had not such a
description of property; but in doing this,
he should certainly wish that the qualified
person should not have the exclusive pri-
vilege of selling game. He wished, too,
that something might be done to withdraw
the ground of quarrel which frequently
took place between the small and the large
landed proprietors residing in the same
neighbourhood. He did not at all enter
into the fears of those who thought that if
the right of shooting was extended, the
.,ian of three acres would materially dimi-
nish the game of his neighbour possessing
three thousand. On the contrary, a com-
promise would generally take place, in
which the person of such small property
would be glad, for a trifling sum, to agree
not to shoot at all. To say that the man
whose few acres contributed to the food of
the game, should not have the privilege of
killing the very birds that devoured the
produce of his field was monstrous. Gen-


Corn Laws- 120
tlemen would find it perfectly fruitless to
attempt to continue their laws in their
present state. Such was the altered con-
dition of society, that those laws could
not remain ten years without material mo-
difications.
Ordered to lie on the table.

HOUSE OF LORDS.
Thursday, March 29.
CoRN LAWS LORD REDESDALE'S
RESOLUTIrNS.] The following is a
Copy of the Resolutions on the Corn
Trade, printed and circulated by lord
Redesdale :
1. That the wealth and strength of
Great Britain originated in the cultivation
of its soil, and must always be dependent
on that cultivation, whatever other advan-
tages the country may possess.
2. That the cultivation of the soil of
a country is a trade and manufacture, and
is so far the most important trade and
manufacture in every country, as every
other trade and manufacture must depend
upon it.
3. "That though the production of
corn for the food of man is in Great Bri-
tain one of the most important objects of
cultivation, yet the means of obtaining the
production of corn, the quantity purchased,
and the profit to be derived by the culti-
vator from the production, are all depen-
dent on many other objects of production,
and especially on the production of ani-
mals, and of food for animals, and on the
further produce or other benefit derived
from such animals; and the general profit
of the cultivator is the result of the com-
bination of all the several articles so pro-
duced, each article contributing to the
more profitable production of the rest, the
amount of the whole production at the
same time greatly depending on the capi-
tal and skill employed in fitting the land
for the purposes of cultivation, and on the
capital and skill employed by the culti-
vator; and it is the combined effect of all
these operating causes which gives plenty
from cultivation, and renders cultivation
profitable.
4. "That the laws now in force regu-
lating the importation of foreign corn, are
founded on the principles expressed in the
foregoing Resolutions, having in view the
extension and improvement of the cultiva-
tion of the country, the increase of its
productions, and insuring to the improvers





1l1 Lord Redesdale's Resolutions.
and cultivators of the country the just re-
ward for their expenditure and labour, as
expressly acknowledged in the preamble
to the act of the fifteenth year of the reign
of King Charles 2nd, entitled An Act for
the Encouragement of Trade.'
5. That under the encouragement
proposed by the said act of the fifteenth
of King Charles 2nd, and many other acts
since made, in conformity to the principle
expressed in the preamble to that act,
great quantities of land, which were in the
fifteenth of King Charles 2nd lying waste
and yielding little, have been improved
with great cost and labour, and much more
corn has been produced, and great num-
bers, of people, horses, and cattle have
been employed, and a population very
greatly increased in number, and consum-
ing a much greater quantity of corn in pro-
portion to their number, has been provided
with food by means of the improvements
so made, and the produce of the country
has thereby become equal to provide for
such increased population, both with corn
and other food, in great abundance; un-
less, by the dispensation of Providence,
the extraordinary inclemency of a particu-
lar season should happen to render the
production of that season considerably less
than the production of an ordinary season-
6. "That under the apprehension of
the possible occurrence of such an extra-
ordinary season, and the consequent failure
of crops, provision has been made in the
said act of the 15th of Charles 2nd, and
in all the subsequent acts respecting the
importation of foreign corn, to prevent the
scarcity which might be produced by in-
clement seasons, the importation of foreign
corn being allowed whenever the prices of
home-grown corn, estimated according to
the value of money at the several times
of passing such acts respectively, should
indicate so great a failure of crops, as to
raise just apprehensions that the produce
of the country might be insufficient for
the consumption of its inhabitants ; but at
the same time allowing to the home-growers
of corn the benefit df a rise in the prices
of corn, corresponding with the deficiency
in the quantity produced, and thereby
compensating to them, by increase of price,
the loss which they would otherwise have
suffered by deficiency in their crops, when-
ever that deficiency did not, by an extra-
ordinary rise in price, indicate the danger
of distressing scarcity.
7. That considering the present value


MARncI 29, 1827. 122
of money, and the great rise of prices of
almost every article of consumption, and
the great increase of burthens imposed on
the people of Great Britain, and especially
on the produce of the soil; the prices of
60s. for the quarter of wheat, of 32s. for
the quarter of barley, of 24s. for the
quarter of oats, and of 36s. for the quarter
of rye, peas, and beans, cannot be con-
sidered as indicating such a deficiency in.
the quantities of the same different sorts
of grain produced in the country, as to
warrant any apprehension of scarcity; and,
on the contrary, those prices are not more
than sufficient to remunerate the corn-
growers for deficiency of crops in ordinary
years, as they are very little above the
prices in very plentiful years, when the
prices are always lower than fair remu-
nerating prices in an ordinary year, as the
supply in such very plentiful years greatly
exceeds the demand, and the surplus
forms part of the consumption of the suc-
ceedingyear, and often at an advanced price.
8. That the continual and great varia-
tions in the prices of different sorts of grain
during the course of above one hundred
and fifty years, of which there is clear
evidence, demonstrate that, assuming cer-
tain prices for each or any species of grain,
as the prices, or nearly the prices, for
which such grain may be sold with ad-
vantage to the producer in every year, is
an attempt to do that which is impossible;
and, on the contrary, that the fair prices
of each year must depend on the amount
of the produce of each year, which may
vary so greatly from year to year, as to
make the fair prices in one year greatly
exceed or greatly fall short of the fair
prices in another year.
9. That to allow the importation of
foreign wheat into Great Britain at all
times, without payment of any duty on
importation, and to permit such wheat
afterwards at any time to be entered for
sale on payment of a duty of 20s. only,
whenever the average price of wheat, taken
weekly in certain districts, shall amount to
60s., and to impose a scale of duties in-
creasing as the average price should fall
below 60s., and diminishing as the average.
price should exceed 60s., would be to fix
indirectly the price of 60s. for the quarter
of wheat, as the highest price for which
wheat should be sold, even in the most
unfavourable years, inasmuch as foreign
wheat may generally be obtained at so
low a price, that on payment of a duty oL







20s. only, it can be brought into the market the House of the great variation from year
for sale, with considerable profit, at a price to year, and from month to month, of the
below 60s. the quarter; and if a proposi- prices of all sorts of grain in this country,
tion to that effect should be made law, and in every other country with respect to
wheat produced in Great Britain can never which evidence has been procured, the
be sold at a higher price than 60s. the prices varying in many instances, almost
quarter; and the effect of such a law must in the proportion of two to one, and seldom
be to keep the price of wheat at all times in any two successive years bearing nearly
under 60s. the quarter, whatever failure the same proportion; and as the amount
may happen in the home-grown crops. of the produce in every country, of each
10. "That in like manner the importa- year, must vary from the amount of the
tion of barley, oats, and other sorts of produce of precedent and subsequent
grain, under the same circumstances, to years, according to the season of each
be entered for home consumption on pay- year, so the price must vary to render the
ment only of several duties bearing a like cultivation profitable; and that variation
proportion to the prices of those articles must be greatest where cultivation is most
as before mentioned, would operate in- expensive or most artificially conducted,
directly as a law limiting the prices of and where the people are most burthened'
such several articles as the sums proposed with taxes and other charges; and the sale
as the average prices on which the rise of corn at a regulated price in any coun-
and fall of duties should take place, and try, can only be effected by the introduc-
would compel the sale of barley, oats, and tion of foreign corn, to compel the culti-
such several sorts of grain, always at prices vator to sell his corn at less than the cost
rather under than above the medium prices of its production; and this attempt, by
at which such duties should take place. ruining the cultivators, must finally tend
11. That limiting the prices of wheat, to raise, rather than to reduce, the ordinary
barley, oats, and other sorts of grain to price of corn.
the several prices before mentioned, at all 13. That the foreign corn hitherto
times, however unfavourable the seasons imported, has always been, and the foreign
might prove, must have the effect of corn- corn hereafter to be imported, probably
spelling the growers of such articles to sell will always be, paid for in money, and not
the same at great loss whenever unfavour- by a corresponding export of British ma-
able seasons may cause any material failure nufactures, or other commodities, to the
of their crops ; and by taking from them places from which such corn has been, or
all profit, must gradually deprive them of shall be brought.
the means of cultivation, and render the 14. That at all times when the quan-
tillage lands of Great Britain gradually tity of wheat produced in Great Britain,
less and less productive, without further together with the wheat imported from
diminishing the actual price of corn ; until, Ireland, shall be equal to the demand for
hy the ruin of the agriculture of the coun- consumption in Great Britain, the import-
try, the cultivated land should become so ation of foreign wheat in addition to that
far unproductive as to be very unequal to quantity must be useless, or must have the
the support of its population : and then, effect either of excluding from the market
unless foreign production should be im- and rendering useless an equal quantity of
ported to an enormous amount, the de- home-grown wheat and Irish wheat, or a
ficiency of supply to answer the demand quantity of wheat consisting of foreign and
would again raise the price of corn, and home-grown and Irish wheat, equal to the
the country would at the same time pay a quantity of the foreign wheat imported,
high price for the corn consumed in it, and that quantity must remain in store,
though in great part foreign corn, and without any other effect than that, by
would become dependent on, and tributary occasioning a glut in the market, the im-
to, other countries for its daily bread. portation of foreign wheat might reduce
12. That the idea of fixing a certain, the prices both of foreign, and home-grown,
or nearly a certain price at all times for and Irish wheat so low, as to discourage
grain of any description, in any country, the growth of wheat both in Great Britain
with any regard to the welfare of the and Ireland in succeeding years, and'
cultivators of the soil, is extravagant and thereby reduce the quantity of land culti-
absurd, as demonstrated by the experience vated both in Great Britain and Ireland. ,
otalt countries, and by the evidence before 15. That in like manner the importa-


M2 HOUSE: OF LORDS,,


Corn Trade-






MARCH 29, 1827. 126


tion of other sorts of foreign grain, whilst
the production of the country with the
assistance of Ireland should be equal to
the demand, must have the like pernicious
effects.
16. "That if a million of quarters of
foreign wheat should be purchased in the
Baltic, or elsewhere, at the price of 26s.
the quarter, and paid for in money, and
not by a corresponding export of British
manufactures, or other commodities, and
afterwards sold in the home market at 60s.
the quarter, having paid a duty of 20s. the
quarter, and if an equal quantity of home-
grown wheat and Irish wheat should be
thereby excluded from the home market,
the sum of three millions of pounds ster-
ling, which would have been received by
the home-growers of Great Britain and
Ireland for the same quantity of wheat,
would be transferred to others; namely,
1,300,0001. would be transferred to fo-
reigners for the price paid in money for
such foreign wheat, one million would be
paid to the public revenue for duty, and
700,0001. would be paid to individuals of
various descriptions for expenses of import
and other expenses, and for profits to the
speculators in the purchase of such foreign
wheat.
17. That if (of which there is no pro-
spect) such million of quarters should be
distinctly paid for by the export from
Great Britain of manufactures or other
commodities, and not in money, yet the
value of such exports would be only to the
amount of 1,300,0001., and the clear
profit derived to manufacturers and traders
from such exports would be of very small
amount, whereas the loss to the home-
growers of wheat would still amount to
three millions sterling, though the public
revenue would gain a million sterling by a
tax really paid by the home-growers of
corn, already burthened with an enormous
disproportion of the public charges; and
in like manner, by the importation of
foreign barley, oats, and other grain, whe-
ther purchased with money or with com-
modities exported, the loss to the home-
growers of those articles would be equal to
the amount of the whole quantity of foreign
corn sold in the market, whilst the gain to
the manufacturers, if any, would be of
trifling amount; and the governmentwould
be the principal gainer, by a new tax, thus
imposed, in effect, on the home-growers.
18. "' That the state of the currency of
the country must at all times affect the


real prices of all commodities estimated at
the nominal value of such currency, and
may materially affect the profit derived
from the importation of foreign corn, and
of all articles imported from foreign coun-
tries, and the profit to be derived from the
importation of foreign corn may become
enormous, by reason of the state of the
currency of this country, and the rate of
exchange between this country and the
country where such corn shallbe purchased,
which may give rise to the most extrava-
gant speculations in foreign corn to be im-
ported into Great Britain.
19. That the effect of the importation
of foreign corn at duties so low as to
operate as a restriction on importation,
may be judged of by the effect of the
importation of foreign wool, by which the
price of the home-grown wool, and especially
of short wool, has been greatly reduced,
and great quantities of such wool remain
in the hands of the growers, driven out of
the market by the importation of foreign
wool; and the importation has greatly in-
creased since the reduction of the duty,
whilst the export of woollen manufactures
has decreased instead of being increased;
so thatthe home-growers of short wool are
now suffering an annual loss of great
amount, great part of which amount has
been paid to foreigners for foreign wool,
without any adequate benefit to this
country; and further loss has been sus-
tained by the importation of foreign tallow,
hides, skins, and other articles.
20. That by importation of foreign
wool, tallow, hides, and skins, and of other
commodities, the produce of agriculture,
the cultivation of the country, and all
persons interested in the lands of the king-
dom, and particularly the cultivators of
tillage land, have suffered great injury, in-
asmuch as the profit derived from those
articles enabled them to adopt that system
of husbandry which has so much increased
the productive powers of tillage land, by a
regulated course of crops, to which the
profits arising from wool, tallow, hides,
skins, and other offals of animals is essen-
tial, and the price of meat as well as the
price of corn must eventually be greatly
affected by depriving the cultivators both
of tillage lands and of grass lands of those
profits, which are important parts of the
profits derived from the breeding and feed-
ing of animals bred and fed for the pur-
pose of producing meat for the foodof man.
1l. "That much as the island of Great


Lor~d Redesdale's Resolutions.





127 HOUSE OF LORDS,
Britain may suffer from any material
alteration of the existing Corn-laws, Ire-
land will probably suffer more, inasmuch
as the corn market of Great Britain is now
at all times open to Ireland, and the im-
portation of corn from Ireland has been
(since the free intercourse has been allowed)
continually increasing, and ifnot obstructed
by foreign competition, the cultivation of
Ireland must continually increase, so as to
enable that country to supply any defi-
ciency which the most inclement season
may occasion in Great Britain, and render
the importation of foreign corn, at anytime,
unnecessary; and the constant importation
of foreign corn, at the rates of duties before-
mentioned, must be a death-blow to the
rising cultivation of Ireland.
22. That the employment of capital
is essentially necessary to the proper cul-
tivation of any country, but the importa-
tion of foreign produce has already de-
stroyed a large proportion of the capital
which was employed in the cultivation of
Great Britain, and the constant importa-
tion of foreign corn will greatly reduce the
capital still employed; and such importa-
tion must prevent that increase of agri-
cultural capital in Ireland, which is essen-
tial to raise that country to the high state
of cultivation of which it is capable; and
the same causes will prevent the improve-
ment of vast tracts of land in Great
Britain, which are still capable of great
improvement.
23. That the constitution of the go-
vernment of the United Kingdom, in all its
parts, and the symmetry and security of
the whole, are founded and depend upon
landed property, and cannot subsist in
their present form if the value of such pro-
perty shall be materially diminished, and
its due weight in the government of the
country shall be thereby destroyed; and
any material injury to that property, by
destroying the just balance of the consti-
tution must lead to the overthrow of the
existing form of government, and the sub-
stitution of some new form of government,
unless the misery of general confusion shall
bring the country back to that form which
has produced its happiness and prosperity
for so many years.
24. Thatthe experience of many years
has proved the wisdom of those laws which
have been founded on the system adopted
on the Restoration of Charles 2nd, and on
which the existing laws regulating the im-
portation of foreign corn were founded.


Poor-Laws in Ireland. 128
25. "That a general system of free
trade is incompatible with the present con-
dition of the world, and particularly with
the condition of this country, burthened
with enormous taxes and charges of various
descriptions, and loaded with an enormous
national debt, which renders all the rest of
the inhabitants of the country tributaries
to the public creditors, who are maintained
in idleness by the industry and at the
charge of others, through the medium of
burthens imposed on many articles of pro-
duction, and most especially the produc-
tions of cultivated land, which are loaded
with charges far exceeding the burthens
imposed on other productions, and cannot
therefore be brought into the market on
equal terms with the productions of coun-
tries not so burthened; and the unequal
burthens thus imposed on cultivated land
could not now be sustained, if a portion of
those burthens were not borne by the rest
of the community, through the medium of
the prices paid for the commodities raised
by the cultivation of land.
26. "That a general system of free
trade can only be founded upon the estab-
lishment of universal and constant peace,.
and universal and constant goodwill of
man to man, and is utterly inconsistent
with the present condition of mankind,
divided into various states, under various,
governments, founded on various and
conflicting principles, jealous of and
hostile to each other, and particularly
jealous of and hostile to the internal and.
external prosperity of this country, and its
extended dominions in the eastern and
western world, all of which are objects- of
the ambition of other nations, and for the
protection and management of which it
has hitherto been found expedient to main-
tain a large armed force, both naval and
military, and other large establishments,
creating a necessity for the continuance of
a large portion of those heavy burthens
with which this country is charged, even if
its national debt were annihilated."

PooR-LAws IN IRELAND.] The Earl.
of Darnley, seeing a noble lord in his
place, who had paid great attention to the
subject of the Poor of Ireland, wished to
know from him whether it was his inten-
tion to submit any motion to their lordships
on this subject? At present, the poor of
Ireland were suffering very great distress,
and many of them had, he believed, perish-
ed of hunger. If it was not the noble







lord's intention to propose any resolution The Earl of Darnley said, he agreed
to their lordships, he did not know that he that the poor-laws, as they existed in
should not himself call their lordships' at- England, could not be introduced into
tention to the subject. He did not suppose Ireland; but he could not agree, that in a
that the system of English poor-laws could civilized country, the poor should be left
be introduced into Ireland ; but he thought to die without any notice. It was not to
it was their lordships' duty to take the be tolerated-though their lordships might
subject into their consideration, particular- not be able to find any remedy for the evil
ly as the measure had been rejected to -that it should not be inquired into. He
which he looked for the tranquillity of that hoped the noble lord, when he presented
country. Although the poor-laws were, he the petition he had mentioned, would make
knew, a subject of great dislike to a noble a specific motion, and that his majesty's
lord opposite, who entertained the most government would take the subject into
serious apprehensions on this subject, he consideration.
must contend, that, in the present situation The Earl of Limerick said, he had read
of the poor of Ireland, something ought to of people perishing from want, but he did
be done. He wished, therefore, to know not give credit to every thing which
of the noble earl, whether it was his inten- appeared in the newspapers. And did not
tion to propose any measure for their lord- people perish of hunger in other countries
ships' consideration ? as well asin Ireland ? It was, he thought,
The Earl of Carbery said, that he had, not very likely to occur, for the peasantry
on former occasions, moved for returns of that country, with all their faults, were
relative to the poor of Ireland, which as charitable and humane as any in the
were then on their lordships' table; and world.
though he did not at present intend to Lord Holland was of opinion, that before
submit any motion to their lordships, he their lordships instituted an inquiry into
had a petition to present on this subject, what ought to be done for the relief of the
and when he did present it, he should ex- poor in Ireland, they ought to ascertain
plain his views. He wished it, however, what had already been done. He was not
to be understood, that he did not suppose lawyer enough to know what was the state
that the English system of poor-laws could of the law for the relief of the poor of Ire-
be introduced into Ireland ; though he felt land ; he had not any particular acquaint-
that the poor of Ireland could not be left ance with that part of the country ; but
in their present situation, he could not believe that the government
The Earl of Limerick having been could have so long existed, without some
alluded to by the noble earl, could assure law which tended to the relief of the poor.
him that he was mistaken, in supposing The first inquiry should be into the state
that he entertained more serious appre- of the law on this point.
hensions on the subject of introducing the The Earl of Enniskillen thought, that
poor-laws into Ireland, than any other a great deal of mischief might be done by
person. He saw many noble lords near proposing to introduce the poor-laws into
him, who felt quite as apprehensive on the Ireland. It would excite hopes among
point as he did, and were convinced, that the people which could never be gratified.
of all mischiefs, none could be so great as The poverty of the people in Ireland was
that of introducing those laws into Ireland. caused by a succession of bad crops, by
Was there not, he would ask, misery over-population, and by the non-residence
enough in Ireland already? Would their of the landed proprietors.
lordships call more into existence, by tell- Lord Redesdale said, that in the neigh-
ing the lower classes, already prone to sedi- bourhood of Dublin there were collections
tion, that they were starved by the upper made at the churches for the poor, and by
orders? He called on their lordships, to that means they were relieved. The
take care how they employed their talent whole body of the people were in such a
in making speeches, which he admired as state of poverty, that what they could con-
much as any man ; but he conjured them tribute was not much. He was afraid, how-
to choose some other subject for display ever, that if a system of poor-laws were
than the one before their lordships. They introduced, it would destroy all industry
could not choose a measure which would among the people. The best mode of
inflict more suffering than the poor-laws relieving the poor of Ireland, would be to
would do in Ireland. introduce a better system of farming; to
VOL. XVII. F


Lordc Redesdalec's Regolutio n~s.


MARncii 29), 1827. 130





131 HOUSE OF COMMONS,
abolish small farms, and to have a body of
farmers like those of England. If there
was such a body of men, there would be
more employment, and not so much misery
in Ireland. But to have them several
things were necessary. The farmers must
have capital, and they must be intelligent,
for it was rather the skill of the superin-
tendents of the labourers to which he
looked, than to the labourers themselves.
When small farmers cultivated land them-
selves, they grudged every shilling laid
out for labour, and their land was never
properly tilled. In most cases, where the
poor-rates were excessive, they were made
so either by manufactories being esta-
blished in the neighbourhood, or by the
land being divided, as in some parts of
Sussex, into small portions. Wherever
the farms were large, the labourers were
better off than where the farms were small.
He did not wish to see compulsory relief
for the poor introduced into Ireland, as
that would destroy industry; and, after a
better system of cultivation was introduced,
probably the best mode of administering
relief would be by voluntary contributions.
In Scotland this was the general practice;
but in some places compulsory rates had
been introduced, and they had been fol-
lowed, he understood, by unfavourable
consequences. Connected with this sub-
ject, he must remind their lordships of the
Corn-laws. At present, the English market
was open to Irish corn, and cultivation
had been much extended in that country
by the exclusion of foreign corn. He
hoped, therefore, that their lordships would
remember, whenever the subject of the
Corn-laws came before them, the bearings
of these laws on the cultivation and pros-
perity of Ireland.
Lord Ellenborough deprecated the intro-
duction of the poor-law system into
Ireland. The noble lord who had spoken
first, insisted on the necessity of doing
something; but he entreated their lord-
ships to take care, if they consented to
make any compulsory regulations, that
they were not led further than they in-
tended to go. Let their lordships recol-
lect how the English poor-laws had been
twisted from their original form, and
consider, if a compulsory system were
introduced into Ireland, whether it would
not be twisted in the same manner. Some
inquiries had already been made on this
subject; and he was of opinion, that
organising a system of voluntary collection


Corn Duties Bill. 132
and distribution, as had been recommended
by the committee of 1822, was the only
safe course. He entreated their lordships,
before they began with any compulsory
enactments, to consider where they meant
to stop.
The Earl of Darnley said, he had no
intention of proposing any compulsory laws;
but, in the present state of Ireland, the
subject urgently required the consideration
of their lordships.
The Earl of Belmore said, that though
there was no statute law in Ireland for the
relief of the poor, there was a common law,
which was stronger than any statute law.
There was also a common right, which was
considered so by the pauper, and acknow-
ledged to be so by those who never failed
to give them relief. If a law were to make
it compulsory to provide for the poor, that
law would diminish the means which at
present existed.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, March 29.
CoRN DUTIES BILL.] Mr. C. Grant~
in bringing in a bill founded upon the late
resolutions with respect to the Corn-laws,
said he wished shortly to state what it was
intended that this bill should do. It was
a measure which had grown out of the
resolutions lately adopted by the House,
It was intended to divide the new regula-
tions upon the Corn question into two
bills: the one having for its object the
regulation of the importation duties ; and
the other to direct the mode of taking the
averages, and the other machinery of the
measure. He now proposed to introduce
the first bill; and he hoped in a few days
to be able to introduce the other, which
was meant to compass the objects which
he had already described. This bill enacted,
that the averages by the imperial measure
were to be struck weekly, and that at the
end of every month they should be pub-
lished in the Gazette, and also an account
of the quantity of corn entered and ware-
housed in each month. It was intended,
that this act should take effect from the
period of its passing into a law; but not to
affect any importations allowable under
the present act, if any such should be
allowable, upon taking the averages on the
15th of May. But those species of corn
not admissible by the existing law were to
be subject to the provisions of the new bill
The bill was read a first time.







ORANGE PROCESSIONS-MAGISTRATES whether they depended upon the security
or LISBURNE.] Mr. Brownlow said, that and support of Ireland ?-and he found
after considerable delay, he was at length it generally thought, that Ireland was a
happy to bring this subject under the spot upon which the greatness and glory
consideration of the House; and he was of England might be overthrown. Two
the more anxious to do so, because he felt years ago, a bill was introduced into and
it to be one of great importance to the passed that House for the suppression of
interests of Ireland. If hon. members all associations in Ireland. Many men
would but condescend to listen to him for thought that the bill emanated from the
a short time, he felt assured that they opponents of the Popish party, while on
would coincide with him in this opinion, the other hand, it was said to be levelled
The object of this motion was, to induce against the Orangemen, with a view to
the House to place upon their table, the suppression of their societies. He, for
papers containing the correspondence be- for one, supported the measure, because
tween the magistrates of Lisburne and the he thought it would have the effect of
Irish government, relative to a recent suppressing all illegal societies. Now, he
transaction which had there taken place. was not called upon to show that such
In introducing any question relative to was the effect of that bill; inasmuch as
Ireland, he felt the difficulty under which they all knew it had not put down the Ca-
he laboured. Things which were mere tholic Association. It was at this moment
matters of fact in that unhappy country, well known that the Catholic Association
were looked upon as the fictions of was in full force and vigour; that it held
romance throughout the other parts of the its sittings, and made its orders, in the
united empire. It had been said, that if same way that that House did; that it
any complaint existed in Ireland, it was represented the bulk of the Irish Roman
sure to find its way to the government of Catholic body, and levied taxes upon them.
the country. Now, he was anxious to But he would say-let no man ridicule
furnish the House with at least one sample the Catholic Association; let no man
of that bad article which was called go- make little of the speeches made by the
vernment in Ireland. It was needless to go members of that body, because they do
back to the history of former ages. They not square either with his feelings or his
saw in Great Britain, in this boasted age, politics; let it not be for a moment
the greatest, the most flourishing improve- imagined that each word uttered in that
ments in every branch of agriculture, Association would not have a ready echo
manufactures, and commerce improve- from the Catholics of all parts of Ireland,
ments so great, that, if the great lord and find every breast ready to carry its
Chatham were to arise and open his eyes, resolutions into effect. There was, indeed,
he must feel as if in a strange place, and a time when the aristocracy kept aloof, as
gaze with wonder and astonishment upon well as the priesthood, from the great
them. But, if he should look to Ireland, body of the people; but that time had
there too would he find equal cause of passed away, and now the aristocracy, the
wonder and astonishment. He would prelacy, the priesthood, and the people,
there see, that from the reign of Henry 6th were united and acted as one body, and
down to the present period, there had they all looked up to the Catholic Asso-
been continued, with little variation, the ciation, and received their commands, with
same system of favouritism, and monopoly i an obedience never exceeded by that paid
of places and power, on the one hand, and to any legislative body in any country.
the same continuance of bars, barriers, Such were the persons who, upon pre-
and exclusions towards the great mass of senting their petitions to that House, for
the people. This was an evil to be relief from the disabilities under which
measured only by the discontent and they laboured, were told that they had
alienation of feeling which it had pro-I not made out even a primd facie case, in
duced in that country. The great ques- I support of their claims even for an inquiry.
tion for their consideration, as legislators, Thus driven back, the Catholics felt that
was this :-Had they so acted as to unite they had now to surround the Throne with
and enlist the hearts and hands of the their loud and bitter complaints. This, he
Irish people in the cause of the empire? maintained, was a state of things which
He had put this simple question to every ought to arrest the attention of ministers,
English gentleman whom he had met- and of that House, and induce them to
F2


Orange Pr~ocessions.


MARCH 29, 1827. 134






135 HOUSE OF COMMONS,
interfere while it was yet time. He said,
that the Catholic Association ought to be t
put down. But how? Theyhad already
tried to put it down by law; and they s
had failed. They could not then put it s
down by law; they could not put it down
by force, or by penal enactments ; but they
might put it down by wise and judicious
concessions. They might put it down by 1
creating in the minds of the Irish people
a feeling of respect and obedience to the t
laws and institutions of the country, which
could only be done by shewing them that
they were entitled to equal rights and equal
privileges with their other fellow-subjects.
-Having said so much, he now came to
the more immediate matter of which he
had given notice. In 1825, the magis-
trates of Lisburne met for the purpose of
taking steps to prevent the usual party
symptoms which were manifested on the
12th of July. The magistrates agreed,
under the opinion of the law officers of
the Crown, that the Orange exhibitions
usual on such occasions were illegal, and
therefore determined to suppress them;
but a gentleman, the rev. Mr. Johnston,
was determined to try the question. This
was on the 11th of July. On the following
day, the 12th, the usual parade, accom-
panied by drums, &c., was announced, and
the magistrates to whom he alluded,
acting upon their decision, proceeded to
the spot, pronounced the conduct of the
persons so conducting themselves to be
illegal, and ordered them to disperse.
While in the act of doing this, the rev.
Mr. Johnston came up and asked what
they were doing ? The magistrates replied,
that they were acting upon the resolution
to which they had yesterday come, and
were advising the people to disperse, in
order to avoid the penalties of the law.
Ah," said the rev. Mr. Johnston, that
may be just as you please-I think other-
wise." The rev. gentleman then led on
the Orange mob; who shouted: -
Hurrah, hurrah for Johnston," and the
town was kept in a state of alarm and
confusion during the whole of the day.
On the next day the magistrates sat to
take informations, and to inquire into the
reverend gentleman's conduct. They all
transmitted those informations to his
excellency, the lord lieutenant, and they
were by him transmitted to the lord
Chancellor of Ireland. In a few days
after this, the rev. Mr. Johnston received
a letter from the lord Chancellor, con-


Orange Processions- 130G
ratulating him upon his conduct, ard on
lhe satisfactory explanation he had given
)f his conduct. When the magistrates
aw this, they were astounded; they could
carcely believe their eyes; they said
'We were expressly called together by
government to take steps to prevent these
Orange processions, and therefore this
better of approval of the rev. Mr. Johnston's
conduct must be a forgery ; it is impossible
;hat this gentleman, who marshalled the
Orange band, and directed them which
way to go, could receive from the lord
Chancellor a letter of congratulation."
Such, however, it was found, was the fact.
Mr. Hawkshaw, one of the magistrates,
feeling the question as he ought, wrote to
the Irish Secretary, stating that he
had heard of the lord Chancellor's
letter of congratulation to the rev. Mr.
Johnston, and begging to know what was
thought of the conduct of himself and
those who acted with him upon that
occasion ? To this letter he received an
answer from the right hon. Secretary,
informing him, that his excellency the
lord lieutenant highly approved of the
conduct of Mr. Hawkshaw and his brother
magistrates. While the conduct of Mr.
Johnston thus received unqualified appro-
bation from Dublin, the letter which the
magistrates sent up received no answer.
Surely that was misgovernment: it was
worse: it was a satire upon any thing like
good government, and all that Junius
ever wrote was not so powerfully satirical,
nor could it equal in the bitterness of its
words, this practical illustration of inat-
tention to the proper duties of government.
Was it in an assembly of Englishmen that
such conduct was to be described as go-
vernment? Was it, he would ask, the
part of any good government, either di-
rectly or indirectly, to sow divisions among
the people? Or ought any one to be per-
mitted thus to set one man against another ?
Were the Irish people to be the victims,
whose humour, or error, or misinterpre-
tation, was thus to create an unusual law ?
He never was, nor ever should be, ashamed
to own that he had once been an Orange-
man. There was not in the whole king-
dom a finer race of subjects-a more
independent, highminded, or public-spirited
body, or a set of men more willing and
more anxious to do their duty, according
to their sense of it-than the Orangemen
of the North of Ireland. They possessed,
in an eminent degree, both spirit anti





137 Magistrates of Lisburne.
strength; and if these were properly
directed to the service of the true interests
of their country, instead of being employed
in that maddening question which wasted
its strength, their existence would indeed
be a blessing to Ireland, promoting a
general love among the people, instead
of maintaining their present unhappy
enmity to each other. The Orangemen
possessed energy and industry sufficient
to make the country prosper in a time of
peace, while they were also distinguished
by that manly spirit which would guard
and defend it in the time of war. But,
unfortunately, their energies were misdi-
rected, and nothing but misery to the
country was the consequence. On the
Orange anniversary, it ought to have been
the care of every man to prevent any thing
that might lead to riot ; but, if one body
of persons were permitted to walk in pro-
cessions, another would do the same.
Quarrels must be expected to ensue,
perhaps loss of life-and vengeance would
then be bequeathed as a sort of legacy to
the survivors. Hence arose that anarchy
which was the curse of Ireland : hence the
want of employment, the want of food,
the want of national production, and of
contribution to the general necessities of
the state : hence it was, that Ireland was
one vast mad-house of demoniac spirits,
one half of which were ready to range
themselves under the standard of any man
who would undertake to lead them to the
destruction of their fellow-subjects. The
more distinguished theirleader, the better
for them, since he would be more able to
justify their conduct, or to shield them
from its consequences. On the other
hand, the remaining half would be the
willing soldiers of any man who possessed
the talent to state their wrongs; the wish
to relieve them ; and especially if that
individual had not the means of gratifying
his wishes and their own by the operation
of the laws. The hon. member then
alluded to the divisions of the cabinet,
and declared that it was his decided
opinion that they were productive of much
harm; that, if it were not for them, the
evil would be much diminished, if not de-
stroyed ; for that they were, in fact, if not
the source, at least the cause, of the aug-
mentation of the evil; since they descended
from the highest to the lowest ranks, and
perpetuated the divisions in Ireland. The
hon. gentleman concluded by moving for
" Copies of the Correspondence between


MARCI 29, 1827. 138
Mr. Hawkshaw and three other gentlemen,
four of his Majesty's Justices of the Peace
for the county of Antrim, and the right
hon. Henry Goulburn, relative to the
Marching of a Body of Orangemen, on
the 12th of July, 1825, in Lisburne, toge-
ther with Copies of all Affidavits for-
warded by said Magistrates to his Majesty's
Government."
Mr. Goulburn said, that if the object of
the hon. member, who had just concluded
a long address to the House, had been to
repress that party spirit which had been,
and still was, so injurious to Ireland, he
had adopted a very strange method to
bring about such an end; and if he
thought that the welfare of that country
depended, in any degree, on the existence
of harmony and good will between magis-
trates of different sentiments, on the one
great subject, he had, indeed, taken a
strange mode to promote such an object,
by listening so totally to the one side, and
dropping so completely the defence of
the other. It was the duty of the Irish
government, and was, surely, equally the
duty of each individual member of that
House, when bringing forward and dis-
cussing charges of a personal nature, to
take the pains to inquire into the origin
of those charges, and to ascertain the
grounds upon which they were made.
Now, he would first of all declare, that the
government of Ireland, though formed of
those who differed upon the one great ques-
tion, uniformly acted with the greatest im-
partiality; and that, though there were
many persons in it, who thought that con-
cessions to the Roman Catholics ought to
be granted, and others who felt and con-
tended, that they ought to be withheld,
whenever questions came before it, with
reference to the existing law, there was no
difficulty in the government being perfectly
agreed upon that law, whether it affected
an Orangeman, or a Catholic, or any other
class of the community. In all cases, the
strictest justice was given, and the law
most impartially administered. To the
case now before the House, he was pre-
pared to show that a proper consideration
had been given, and that a decision upon
it had been formed-not by the lord lieu-
tenant in one way, and by the lord Chan-
cellor in another; not by the Secretary
for Ireland after one fashion, and by the
Attorney-general for Ireland after another
-but that, whether the decision had been
right or wrong, nodifference of opinion





139 HOUSE OF COMMONS,
had existed with reference to it. The cir-
cumstances of the case were these. It
was perfectly true, that previous to the
12th July, 1825, the government did take
every means in its power to prevent such
expressions of popular feeling as might
tend to excite animosity, either on one
side or the other, and to promote riot and
disturbance. With this view, his majes-
ty's Attorney and Solicitor General were
called upon to deliver their opinions as to
the illegality of Orange processions; and
those opinions decided the government in
the course it was to pursue. On the 11th
July, the magistrates of Lisburne had a
meeting for the purpose of giving effect to
the wish expressed by the government.
At that meeting five magistrates attended,
four of whom held opinions such as had
been stated by his hon. friend, and one of
them, the rev. Mr. Johnston, differed from
them. He said he entertained doubts, as
to the statute referring to processions at
all; and he, therefore, stated to his bro-
ther magistrates that they should resort to
every means, before they resorted to force, to
prevent them from taking place. He didn't
however refuse to co-operate with them; on
the contrary, he declared his readiness to
assist them in their views, at the same time
that he declared his opinion, that force
ought not to be resorted to. Now, he
would state his conviction, that no rational
magistrate need be ashamed to hold such
sentiments; or to think that, before he
resorted to force, he was bound to use
every other means, and that to force he
should only apply as a last extremity.
When the House was informed that this
magistrate was also a clergyman, and that
he was, therefore, more especially bound
to inculcate the lessons of humanity, and
when to this was added, that at the period
referred to he was in his seventy-eighth
year, the House, he felt assured, would
not be inclined to tax him with any want
of proper vigour, or any distaste to discharge
his duty, in counselling his brother magis-
trates, that they ought not to resort to
force to suppress those processions; or, at
least, not until every other means had been
tried, without effect, to suppress them.
The next day was the 12th of July, and it
was true that a riot did take place at Lis-
burne, in the early part of that day, but it
was strenuously denied by Mr. Johnston,
that he had promulgated the opinion
which he had previously given to the ma-
gistrates, and it was declared by him on


Orange Processions- 140
affidavit, that he had given that opinion
to the magistrates alone. He had, how-
ever, been charged with promulgating
such opinion, and he could do no more than
deny it. On his side it was distinctly
stated, and confirmed by affidavits, that
he did not arrive at Lisburne until after
the riot had taken place; and that, subse-
quently to this riot, and after he had been
present, no material disturbance of any
kind occurred. On the receipt of the ap-
plication which so greatly affected the
character of Mr. Johnston, the lord lieu-
tenant directed the papers to be laid before
the lord Chancellor, who immediately ap-
plied to the accused party for an expla-
nation of his conduct. This explanation
contained the facts now stated. On re-
ceiving Mr. Johnston's first letter, the
lord Chancellor made no reply; but that
gentleman, being extremely anxious that
some decision should be come to, wrote
again to his lordship, and forwarded to
him additional statements and affidavits.
To this second letter, the lord Chancellor
sent the following answer:-" Sir; I am
sorry that you should have had the trouble
to write a second letter, as your first was of
so satisfactory a nature as to have rendered
it unnecessary. That first letter reached
me when I was on the eve of quitting Ire-
land, or it should have received a reply.
Assuring you that I do not feel myself
called upon to censure you in the discharge
of your magisterial duty, I certainly differ
from you in the construction you have put
upon the opinion of his majesty's law offi-
cers; for, undoubtedly, if Orange Socie-
ties be illegal, any deputation from a pro-
cession of them must be equally illegal;
independently of the effect that such pro-
cessions must have in irritating the minds
of many persons, and the danger that they
may lead to riot and disturbance." So,
then, instead of giving support to this ma-
gistrate in the declaration of his opinion,
here was the lord Chancellor directly con-
demning it; and it would be difficult to
say how he could have more distinctly
declared that he differed from him, than by
the words which had been now read from
his letter. If the gentlemen who placed
the information in the hands of his hon.
friend had had common. candour, they
would hardly have instructed him so com-
pletely to condemn a letter containing
such a paragraph. Now, it so happened,
that in consequence of the Chancellor's
going to England, these papers cameinto






the hands of the civil officers of the Crown ; Mr. Spring Rice said, he would put it
and it was thought, as there were such to any member to declare, whether the
conflicting statements contained in them, production of the papers that had been
that the better way would be, to lay them moved for could, by possibility, do more
before the Attorney-general-a gentleman injury than had been done by the debate.
whom, at all events, the hon. member The House was now in possession of all
would not stigmatize as an Orangeman; that could be said, both on the one side
and the short note which he (Mr. G.) re- and on the other; and the motion was
ceived from the right hon. gentleman was merely to put it in possession of documents
as follows:-" I think the magistrate in on which it might hereafter act. The ques-
question has given such an explanation of tion at issue was, whether lord Manners,
his conduct, as must quite do away with in writing the letter referred to, was justi-
any necessity for his removal." Such was fled or not? in considering which, it was
the opinion of his right hon. and learned necessary to recollect, that Mr. Johnston
friend, and it was in strict accordance came into the town of Lisburne, in his cha-
with that of the lord Chancellor. Mr. racter of a magistrate-in his character of
Johnston subsequently made an applica- a clergyman-decorated with Orange em-
tion to the lord-lieutenant for the affida- blems; and, forgetting every thing but his
vits which had been made, and the letters passions, lent the sanction of his name and
that had been written, relative to his con- character to the proceedings of the Orange-
duct, and containing charges made against men there assembled. By the letter in
him as a magistrate, in order that he might question, lord Manners stood convicted of
make them the ground of an inquiry be- not having carried the law into effect.
fore a legal tribunal. But the government The hon. gentleman proceeded to enforce
of Ireland had conceived itself bound to the arguments of the hon. mover; con-
consider the effect which the granting tending, that if ever there was a case
such a request might have upon the public which called for the application of that
mind, in perpetuating discord, and con- power with which the lord Chancellor of
tinuing that irritation which it was their Ireland was clothed, the present was that
earnest desire to repress. He (Mr. G.), one. The right hon. gentleman had said,
therefore, wrote to Mr. Johnston a letter, that the Attorney-general for Ireland had
in reply to his application, stating, that it approved of the letter of lord Manners.
did not appear to the lord-lieutenant that But, what was the fact ? That when the
it would be proper to place in his hands case was laid before him, he merely said,
the documents for which he sought, or to he saw no cause for striking Mr. Johnston
give him any assistance, in bringing the out of the commission of the peace. The
subject before a legal tribunal. Such, hon. gentleman here pronounced a warm
then, was the state of this transaction. eulogium upon Mr. Brownlow, whose frank,
He had endeavoured to explain it fairly honest, manly, candid, avowal of former
and openly, and as he conceived it to be. errors, gave the very best proof that the
There was, however, one point more on alteration in his opinions was sincere. He
which he had to observe. The reasons had earned and received the blessings of
that induced the Irish government to with- the independent portion of his country,
hold from each party the statements made and had only taken that course freely and
by either, against those to which they liberally, which others, less prudent as well
were opposed, would have the same effect as less candid, would hereafter find them-
now, in inducing him to withhold the do- selves compelled to adopt.
cuments for which the lion. member had Sir William Plunkett said, the House
moved. Their production could not pos- would feel that hecouldscarcely give silent
sibly do good; and would only tend to vote upon the present occasion. He did
excite that animosity, and renew those not agree with those hon. gentlemen who
irritated feelings, which, but for the ex- treated the question as one merely of fact.
peetation of this motion, would long since The fair question, he thought, was this :
have passed away. To bring them for- whether the hon. member for Armagh had
ward would be only to rip up those sores made out such a primd facie case, as
that had been long healed, and to bring called upon government to produce the
once more into being, those feelings of bit- correspondence referred to ; and he had
terness and hostility, to suppress which had no hesitation in saying that, in his opinion,
been the policy of the Irish government, no such primdfacie case was established.


Alayistrates of LisburnLe.


MARCH 29, 1827. 142





131 HOUSE OF COMMONS,
abolish small farms, and to have a body of
farmers like those of England. If there
was such a body of men, there would be
more employment, and not so much misery
in Ireland. But to have them several
things were necessary. The farmers must
have capital, and they must be intelligent,
for it was rather the skill of the superin-
tendents of the labourers to which he
looked, than to the labourers themselves.
When small farmers cultivated land them-
selves, they grudged every shilling laid
out for labour, and their land was never
properly tilled. In most cases, where the
poor-rates were excessive, they were made
so either by manufactories being esta-
blished in the neighbourhood, or by the
land being divided, as in some parts of
Sussex, into small portions. Wherever
the farms were large, the labourers were
better off than where the farms were small.
He did not wish to see compulsory relief
for the poor introduced into Ireland, as
that would destroy industry; and, after a
better system of cultivation was introduced,
probably the best mode of administering
relief would be by voluntary contributions.
In Scotland this was the general practice;
but in some places compulsory rates had
been introduced, and they had been fol-
lowed, he understood, by unfavourable
consequences. Connected with this sub-
ject, he must remind their lordships of the
Corn-laws. At present, the English market
was open to Irish corn, and cultivation
had been much extended in that country
by the exclusion of foreign corn. He
hoped, therefore, that their lordships would
remember, whenever the subject of the
Corn-laws came before them, the bearings
of these laws on the cultivation and pros-
perity of Ireland.
Lord Ellenborough deprecated the intro-
duction of the poor-law system into
Ireland. The noble lord who had spoken
first, insisted on the necessity of doing
something; but he entreated their lord-
ships to take care, if they consented to
make any compulsory regulations, that
they were not led further than they in-
tended to go. Let their lordships recol-
lect how the English poor-laws had been
twisted from their original form, and
consider, if a compulsory system were
introduced into Ireland, whether it would
not be twisted in the same manner. Some
inquiries had already been made on this
subject; and he was of opinion, that
organising a system of voluntary collection


Corn Duties Bill. 132
and distribution, as had been recommended
by the committee of 1822, was the only
safe course. He entreated their lordships,
before they began with any compulsory
enactments, to consider where they meant
to stop.
The Earl of Darnley said, he had no
intention of proposing any compulsory laws;
but, in the present state of Ireland, the
subject urgently required the consideration
of their lordships.
The Earl of Belmore said, that though
there was no statute law in Ireland for the
relief of the poor, there was a common law,
which was stronger than any statute law.
There was also a common right, which was
considered so by the pauper, and acknow-
ledged to be so by those who never failed
to give them relief. If a law were to make
it compulsory to provide for the poor, that
law would diminish the means which at
present existed.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Thursday, March 29.
CoRN DUTIES BILL.] Mr. C. Grant~
in bringing in a bill founded upon the late
resolutions with respect to the Corn-laws,
said he wished shortly to state what it was
intended that this bill should do. It was
a measure which had grown out of the
resolutions lately adopted by the House,
It was intended to divide the new regula-
tions upon the Corn question into two
bills: the one having for its object the
regulation of the importation duties ; and
the other to direct the mode of taking the
averages, and the other machinery of the
measure. He now proposed to introduce
the first bill; and he hoped in a few days
to be able to introduce the other, which
was meant to compass the objects which
he had already described. This bill enacted,
that the averages by the imperial measure
were to be struck weekly, and that at the
end of every month they should be pub-
lished in the Gazette, and also an account
of the quantity of corn entered and ware-
housed in each month. It was intended,
that this act should take effect from the
period of its passing into a law; but not to
affect any importations allowable under
the present act, if any such should be
allowable, upon taking the averages on the
15th of May. But those species of corn
not admissible by the existing law were to
be subject to the provisions of the new bill
The bill was read a first time.





143 HOUSE OF COMMONS,
In fact, he did not recollect ever to have
heard a complaint brought before the
House, which had been pressed with more
earnestness, or had been more destitute of
real ground to stand upon. It was difficult
to collect the object of the complaint. He
gave every credit for purity of motive to
the hon. gentleman who had introduced
it; but he did not see what practical ad-
vantage was to be gained by investigating
the history of an insulated transaction,
which was two years old, and which
every body had forgotten. Was it meant
to prosecute any of the parties concerned
in the quarrel in question? Or was it
meant to remove the magistrate, Mr.
Johnston, from his place; or to fix a cen-
sure upon the lord Chancellor of Ireland ?
His belief was, that the object desired was
none of these ; but that there was a wish
to convince the House of the evils which
the administration of the law was exposed
to in Ireland, in consequence of the divided
politics of the government of that king-
dom. Then, if this was the case, he had
never seen a more complete failure; for he
appealed to the House, whether every step
which had been taken in the transaction
in question, did not show that, however
divided the members of the Irish govern-
ment might be upon other subjects, as to
that there had been among them the most
entire accordance. The hon. member for
Limerick had expressed his regret that he
should take upon himself the task of de-
fending the conduct of the lord Chancellor
of Ireland. He had no doubt that this
regret was meant in a complimentary
sense: but it was a compliment which he
could not accept; for hehad no hesitation
in saying, that upon the present transac-
tion, as well as upon every other point
connected with the administration of jus-
tice, he was most perfectly ready to identify
himself with that noble and learned lord.
It could hardly be necessary, he hoped, for
him to defend himself against every im-
putation of favour to Orange principles or
Orange feeling. In office, and out of
office, he had incessantly showed himself
an enemy to the Orange system, and had
done his best to put it down. In his
endeavours to accomplish that end, he
might, perhaps, be accused of haste or
indiscretion; but there were few who
would refuse him credit for having been
sincere in his endeavours. Therefore,
while he agreed with his right hon. friend
that the great body of the Orange party


Orange Processions-- 144
was composed of as honest, independent,
and worthy men as any in Ireland, yet he
thought that their very connexion with
that system poisoned all their utility, and
neutralized all their good qualities. Free-
masons, Orangemen, Ribandmen, or what
not-the opinions of the Irish government,
ever since he had been connected with it,
had been that all associations were preju-
dicial to the well-being of Ireland, and the
uniform object of the government had
been to put them down. There were
many honourable persons near him, from
whose general views of policy he differed;
but as to the treating every description of
association, of whatever character, with
discouragement, there had never been a
difference of opinion among them. Now,
in the case of the transaction immediately
in question, his hon. and learned friend,
the Solicitor-general for Ireland, with
himself, had been consulted, as to the
exhibition of processions of the same cha-
racter with that of the 12th of July; and
they had at once been of opinion that they
were illegal. The society, whether it were
one of Masons or of Orangemen, being ille-
gal, it followed that its procession must be
illegal; and it was further illegal, because
it was sworn upon affidavit, that it was
likely to lead to a breach of the peace.
Then what, upon the showing of the hon.
member for Armagh himself, had been the
conduct of Mr. Johnston ? Mr. Johnston
had thought, and thought very weakly,
that because the word "procession" did
not appear in the act of parliament, there-
fore the procession could not be illegal;
but that was Mr. Johnston's opinion only.
The question now was not upon his opi-
nion, but on his conduct. From what had
been said by the hon. member for Limerick,
the House might be led to suppose, that
Mr. Johnston had promulgated this opinion
to the mob, but he had done no such
thing; he had expressed his opinion to the
magistrates, but to the mob he had used
no advice, but that they should at once
yield to the law, as it was laid down to
them, and disperse; and they had, in
consequence, dispersed without any breach
of the peace, and from that day to the
present there had been in Lisburne no
similar procession. The mob were aware
of Mr. Johnston's opinion; but they
yielded to his advice; and, instead of pro-
ducing mischief, he had rendered a service:
to the country.-And now, what was the
charge against lord Manners ? It was,





145 Magistrates of Lisburn.
that he had written a letter to Mr. John-
ston, in which he explained to him that
he had been mistaken in his view of the
law, but had approved of the conduct
which he had actually pursued. Why, this
was exactly the true state of the case. Mr.
Johnston's law had been wrong; but his
conducthad beenjudicious and considerate.
There was no congratulation in the letter
of lord Manners. It merely said, You
are altogether mistaken in your view of the
law, as to these processions; but I am
happy to find, from your explanation of
your conduct, that you have done all in
your power to discourage them; and that
the unpleasant duty does not devolve upon
me of passing censure upon an individual
of respectability." Then, for the memoran-
dum alluded to as made by himself. He
had certainly stated, in that memorandum,
that he thought there was no ground for
removing the rev. Mr. Johnston from the
magistracy. He had stated this, and he
now added, that he did not think there
was ground for pronouncing any censure ;
because, while he had always done that
which he could to put down these associa-
tions and processions, still he was opposed
to the system of doing this violently, and
by prosecutions, which, unless they were
peremptorily called for, must do mischief
to the object which they were intended to
serve. He believed that the Orange spirit
in the north of Ireland was abating, and
that it would expire, unless injudicious
measures (and none could be more unfor-
tunate than violence) were resorted to,
which should have the effect of provoking
and keeping it alive; but for this reason
it was, that he regretted the introduction of
the inquiry before the House, as tending
to revive differences and ill-feelings, long
since dead in the minds of those who had
originally entertained them. There was
one part of Mr. Johnston's conduct, cer-
tainly, which he condemned : he meant
the wearing of the Orange ribbon. This
had been made the subject of a good deal
of rhetorical exaggeration. It had been
called a "coming down decorated with
Orange emblems," &c. The short fact
was, that he had come down with an
Orange ribbon about his neck-a sort of
decoration which he had been in the habit
of wearing for years; but there could be
no doubt that to do so, at such a time,
had been indiscreet. Still, Mr. Johnston
could not be prosecuted for wearing an
Orange riband. To have removed him


MARCH 29, 1827. 146
from the magistracy for doing it, would not
only have been unreasonable, but highly
impolitic and mischievous. And giving,
as he repeated he did, every credit to the
sincerity and pure intention of his hon.
friends, the members for Limerick and
Armagh, he could not help doubting whe-
ther it had been worth while to rake up
this stale story out of the oblivion into
which it had fallen. He left this question
to the House. The intention of the hon.
gentlemen, no doubt, was excellent; but
the circumstances had all happened two
years since: they were forgotten over and
over again; and the place in which they
had occurred had ever since been perfectly
tranquil. For the conduct of the govern-
ment, however, of Ireland, he must once
more declare, that whatever differences of
opinion upon other subjects might exist
among its members, upon every question
connected with the administration of jus-
tice, there had always been among them
-without reference to Protestants or
Catholics-the most perfect uniformity.
Sir J. Newport said, he never expected
to see the day, when his right hon. friend
would admit an identity of principle with
the lord chancellor of Ireland.
Sir W. Plunkett begged pardon for in-
terrupting his right hon. friend. Every
man who heard him knew that, upon the
great political question that divided the
country, and upon several others, his
opinions were, toto celo, at variance with
those of the learned lord alluded to; but,
with respect to the administration of just-
ice in Ireland, he fully identified himself
with him and the other members of the
Irish government.
Sir J. Newport said, he would repeat
his regret, that, in the particular transac-
tion then under discussion, his right hon.
friend had condescended to identify him-
self with that learned lord, who, in a
question respecting the conduct of the
magistracy of Ireland, had acted in the
manner which had that night been de-
scribed, and which could not be justified.
He felt proud of his connexion with his
right hon. friend; but a sense of public
duty compelled him, and, were he his
brother, would compel him, to state his
opinion of his conduct. Instead of ex-
hibiting unity of sentiment and of action,
the transaction in question, beyond any
other that could be adduced, displayed
the consequences that resulted from a
divided government in Ireland. The





147 HOUSE OF COMMONS,
question before the House was, the pro-
duction of certain documents, to enable
the House to judge by them, whether or
not the assertions of the hon. mover were
borne out, respecting the lord chancellor
of Ireland. His right hon. friend had
said, that, on the occasion referred to,
Mr. Johnston had come into Lisburne
with an orange ribbon in his breast as
usual. But it had been sworn, that Mr.
Johnston had worn a broad orange sash.
Was that usual with him? His right hon.
friend had also said, that Mr. Johnston
had expressed his opinion respecting the
act of parliament to his brother magis-
trates. Did he confine his delivery of
that opinion to them ? The fact of con-
flicting statements as to the contents of
the documents called for, was, of itself,
sufficient to induce the House to grant
them, in order to enable them to judge
which set of statements was correct. He
could not agree with his right hon. friend,
that Orange processions in Ireland were
rapidly decaying, and would be soon ex-
tinct. His hon. friend (Mr. S. Rice),
could bear testimony to the fact, that
during the last year those processions had
not been less frequent than in the year
preceding, when the procession connected
with the motion before the House had
taken place. Whilst upon that subject,
le would direct the attention of the House
to what was stated in the year 1811, when
the right hon. the President of the Board
of Control brought under the notice of
the House the Orange Societies in Ire-
land. Upon that occasion, the Secretary
of State for Foreign Affairs, and several
other right hon. and hon. members, had
said, that if parliament did not interfere
with those Associations they would decay
of themselves. What had been the re-
sult? That, in the year 1824 or 1825, a
bill was brought into parliament, em-
bracing, among other objects, the suppres-
sion of those associations; and, upon the
former occasion, he well recollected the
statement of the noble lord now no more,
that he was convinced, when the legisla-
ture expressed its disapprobation of such
associations, the good sense of the people
of Ireland would suggest to them the pro-
priety of not indulging in processions of
an irritating and exulting nature; but the
result proved how much that noble lord
mistook the feelings of the individuals
composing those associations. It appear-
ed to him, that when, in support of the


Orange Prooessions- 148
motion, certain statements were made,
when those statements were met by direct
contradictions, and when those who gave
the contradictions opposed the produc-
tion of documents, which would at once
convince the House on which side the
truth lay, it must be taken for granted,
that the parties who opposed the motion,
were afraid to appeal to those documents.
Mr. Secretary Peel said, he should con-
fine his observations to the single question
before the House; namely, whether any
parliamentary grounds had been adduced
for the production of the papers. He
would not follow the example of the hon.
gentleman who had occupied the greater
part of the time during which his speech
lasted with debating the Catholic ques-
tion. When called upon to pass an opin-
ion upon high public authorities, he was
sure that the House would not mix up
with that the question of the Roman
Catholic claims. Though he did not
believe the hon. gentleman had introduced
this topic for the purpose of influencing
the House upon the present question, he
must say that he thought the introduction
of it at all any thing but fair. The right
hon. baronet had said, that the conflict-
ing statements which had been made were
a sufficient ground for the production of
these papers. He could not admit the
extent of the right hon. baronet's reason-
ing. He thought that the question upon
which the House had to decide was this-
Had such a primd facie case been made
out, as to satisfy the House that further
investigation was necessary? For his own
part, he thought that there never was a
case to which less suspicion attached. He
thought he should argue the question
fairly and properly, if he took this view of
it-that a magistrate had or had not
acted improperly, and that the chancellor
of Ireland had or had not supported and
encouraged him in his improper conduct.
First, however, he must be allowed to say,
that he heartily wished all these associa-
tions were at an end. He believed that
they were dying away; but at the same
time he agreed with the right hon. baronet,
that if the processions were done away
with, it would be better for the peace, the
tranquillity, and the happiness of Ireland.
Any opinion, therefore, which he might
hold-any of the strong opinions which
he was known to entertain respecting
Catholic emancipation-could not fairly
be supposed to influence him upon the





149 Miagistrates of Lisburne.
present question. If he were a private
gentleman in Ireland, he declared to God
that he would, by his influence, by his
example, by every means in his power,
endeavour to put down these associations
and processions. With respect to the
question before the House, they were now
called upon to investigate circumstances
which had happened two years ago. He
held in his hand the statement of Mr.
Johnston, respecting these circumstances,
and his motives. The hon. gentleman
opposite appeared, by his cheers, to ask,
why he did not produce it. He would
tell the House why he would not-because
it implicated other persons-because Lis-
burne had been in quietness ever since-
and because these circumstances had been
for some time past buried in oblivion.
Why, then, should he renew the disturb-
ances even in recollection? It appeared
that a complaint had been made to the
lord Chancellor respecting Mr. Johnston,
and the latter was immediately called
upon for an explanation. The outline of
this gentleman's statement was as follows:-
He was an old clergyman, seventy-eight
years of age, and had no intention what-
ever of interfering, when the circumstances
complained of took place. He was, how-
ever, called upon by a police magistrate,
who entreated him to attend a meeting of
the magistrates. He went there, and
found them debating how they should
behave on the following day, which was
the anniversary of the battle of the Boyne
-a day which it had always been cus-
tomary to celebrate by processions. He
was told, that in the opinion of the Attor-
ney and Solicitor General, these proces-
sions were illegal; but upon looking over
the act of parliament he did not find the
word processions" in it, and he there-
fore gave it as his opinion, that the act
did not include processions. At the same
time, however, he strongly recommended
them, as a friend, not to use force. He
denied that either directly or indirectly he
took any part in the proceedings; and
though he took a different view of the
law from the Crown-lawyers, yet, as a
friend, he advised them to disperse peace-
ably. It was true that he entered the
town with an orange ribbon, and certainly
he would have been better advised if he
had left this distinguishing badge at home.
Mr. Johnston, however, stated, that he
thought he should have more influence
with the Orange party, if he wore the in-


MARCH 29, 1827. 150
signia which proclaimed him their friend,
and appeared with a badge which he had
worn on that day for nearly forty years.
He thought this a fair and honest decla-
ration; but, at the same time, he would
repeat, that, in his opinion, Mr. Johnston,
as a magistrate, did not act judiciously in
appearing with this distinguishing mark.
This statement had been sent by Mr.
Johnston to lord Manners, and he received
no answer to it; it being the custom of
his lordship, when he received a vindica-
tion which he thought satisfactory, not to
return any answer to it, but to let the
matter rest. Mr. Johnston, however, was
uneasy at receiving no answer, and wrote
to lord Manners, who replied, that though
he differed entirely with him as to the
law, he was glad that he had been able to
send him so satisfactory a vindication.
Could this be called encouraging Mr.
Johnston in his conduct, when the Chan-
cellor expressly told him, that the view
which he had taken of the law was wrong ?
He thought this a fair statement of the
case, and, if it was, he would ask if any
parliamentary grounds had been made out
in favour of the motion ? If, after a lapse
of two years, no worse case had occurred
-if the hon. gentleman who had brought
forward the motion had not been able to
adduce any thing of a more aggravated
nature-was it wise to revive this circum-
stance ? Was it not fair to infer that oc-
currences of this nature had been made
to wear away by good example? When
these occurrences took place, it must be
recollected, that the act which forbad
them had only just passed. If it had
happened lately, the matter would have
worn a very different aspect. It must be
recollected, that the person in question
was a very old gentleman; that he had
been in the habit of seeing these things
done all his lifetime, and at times when
exhibitions of this nature were not looked
upon in the way in which they had sub-
sequently been viewed. Some allowance
must be made for circumstances and ex-
ample; and a little consideration should
be had for adherence to former opinions.
He entreated his hon. friend (for he must
allow him to call him so) to recollect, that
this circumstance took place in July 1825,
and that in the March preceding, his hon.
friend had presented the petition from the
Orangemen, which prayed an inquiry into
the institution, objects, signs, oaths, and
pass-words of the Orange lodges in Ire-





151 HOUSE OF LORDS,
land, and stated that the Orangemen were
most anxious for inquiry. He (Mr. Peel)
had taken a part in the debates of 1825,
and he then held precisely the same lan-
guage which he held now, and said that
nothing could compensate for the exist-
ence of these associations. He never
could agree to the production of papers
which would inculpate parties who had no
disposition whatever to violate the law;
and, under these circumstances, he should
decidedly oppose the motion.
Dr. Lushington said, that the right hon.
gentleman had promulgated the doctrine,
that the best way to judge of Mr. John-
ston's motives, was to refer to that gentle-
man's own statement. For his part, how-
ever, he thought the facts of the case
would be a much surer guide to this
point. The state of it was this: there
were the opinions of the two legal officers
of the Crown upon a certain point of law;
and the rev. Mr. Johnston, a person alto-
gether unacquainted with the law, thought
proper to differ from them, and to act
upon his own opinion. It was stated, that
one of the parties, which formed these
processions, marched under his immediate
guidance and direction; and, if this were
true, he thought that the person who had
so prostituted justice ought not to be al-
lowed to remain in the commission.
The House divided : For the motion
69; Against it 124: Majority against the
motion 55.
List of the Minority.
Abercromby, hon. J. IIeneage, G. F.
Althorp, lord Heron, sir R.
Baring, A. IIonywood, P.
Baring, F. Howard, hon. IH.
T3 i kl1l tlT dT1, l


entllnllLe L, IUor. .
Buxton, T. F.
Calcraft, J.
Clifton, lord
Colborne, Ridley
Davies, colonel
Dawson, A.
Denison, W.
Du Cane, Peter
Easthope, J.
Ebrington, lord
Fazakerley, N.
S Fergusson, sir R.
Fitzgerald, John
Fortescue, hon. G.
Gordon, Robert
Graham, sir J.
Grattan, H.
Grattan, J.
Harvey, D. W.
Heathcote, G.


HIume, J.
Hutchinson, H.
Jephson, O.
Kemp, T. R.
Kennedy, T. F.
King, hon. R.
Labouchele, H.
Lombe, E.
Lushington, Dr.
Maberly, W. L.
Macdonald, sir J.
Marjoribanks, S.
Martin, R.
Marshall, W.
Maule, hon. W.
Monck, J. B.
Morpeth, lord
Nugent, lord
O'Brien, Lucius
Parnell, sir 11.


Appeals from India.


Ponsonby, hon. G.
Ponsonby, hon. F.
Robarts, A. W.
Robinson, G.
Russell, lord J.
Russell, lord W.
Rumbold, C.
Smith, W.
Stanley, hon. E.
Stuart, Villiers


Sykes, D.
Tomes, J.
Tierney, right hon. G.
Warburton, IH.
Western, C. C.
Wood, alderman
Wood, Charles
TELLERS.
Brownlow, C.
Rice, T. S.


HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, March 30.
FEES ON PRIVATE BILLS.] The Earl
of Hardwicke presented a Petition from
himself and several other proprietors of
land, in the Bedford Level, complaining
of the great expense of passing Private
Bills, and praying their lordships to insti-
tute a committee to inquire into the mat-
ter. The petition was presented in conse-
quence of a bill then on its way through
parliament for underdraining the South
Level. It was of some importance, that
undertakings of such a description, which
materiallybenefitted the community, should
not be exposed to any unnecessary ex-
pense. In this case the petitioners com-
plained, not merely of the amount of the
fees levied, but of the uncertainty of what
that amount would be. On this bill there
were no less than fourteen sets of fees to
be paid; so that the parties could not
know what the expense would be. In his
opinion, such things ought to be a matter
of notoriety, so that persons bringing a
private bill into parliament, should be cer-
tain beforehand what it would cost. In a
case which recently occurred to the bishop
of Exeter, it was necessary, in order to
improve the cathedral, to pull down some
houses, and the act of parliament enabling
the dean and chapter to purchase the
houses to be pulled down cost more than
the property was worth. It had been
stated by a noble lord, that the expense of
passing private bills had been much in-
creased by the practice of appointing
agents; but this he did not believe was
the case. The agents saved the parties a
great deal of trouble, and transacted that
business by correspondence, which persons
must otherwise come from a great distance
to transact.-The noble earl concluded by
moving for the appointment of a commit-
tee, to inquire into the subject, which was
ordered, and the committee appointed.

APPEALS FROM5 INDIA.] TheMarquis







of Lansdown rose, in pursuance of the no- president of the privy council-none of
tice which he had given, to call their lord- their lordships, who had acted with him on
ships' attention to the subject of Appeals committees, and were aware of his manner
from India. He proposed by his motion of managing business in them, or in that
to put their lordships in possession, by the House-could for one moment suspect
information it would cause to be laid on that he was to blame for this delay. But
their table, of some circumstances which it did appear that there existed a great
would show them that a great practical practical grievance-a great delay in get-
grievance was suffered by that portion of ting those appeals brought to a hearing-
his majesty's subjects who constituted 'which defeated the intention of the legis-
that distant part of the empire. He lature, when it cast on the privy council
hoped their lordships would think no the duty of hearing and determining these
apology necessary from him for bringing appeals. The consequences of these de-
before them a question, concerning which lays were most injurious. As long as liti-
he did not pretend to have any local in- gious suitors in India knew that they had
formation; but it must happen, while the a power, by lodging an appeal, of keeping
government of countries of vast extent, a cause suspended for years, it was a
and at a great distance, was under our temptation to them to do so, as they were
sway, that such questions should come sure of deriving a fraudulent benefit from
before their lordships, and it was their their injustice; when, if they knew from
duty to collect as much information as authority, that such appeals would be
possible on all questions in which the wel- heard and decided, they would never bring
fare, the happiness and, above all, the them. As the number of those appeals
administration of justice in that distant increased, which came from courts in dis-
country was concerned. He did not mean tant parts of the country, their effects ex-
to say from what cause the difficulty had tended over more individuals, and pro-
arisen; but the fact would be proved to duced greater mischief. Heknewitwould
their lordships by the papers, for which be said, that the delay was caused by no
he meant to move. Ever since the year agents being appointed; and this was, he
1773, when, by the act of parliament for i believed, the case; but, unless the ma-
regulating the judicature in India, the chinery was provided for bringing these
duty had been cast on the privy council, appeals before the privy council, it must
of hearing and deciding appeals, a large be difficult for the native suitor, who em-
number of them lay, not merely not de- ployed fakeels as his agents, to find the
cided, but on which no proceedings had means of following up his suit. He did
taken place at all. The number of these not know exactly what that machinery
appeals, from one court, amounted to ought to be, whether there should be an
forty or fifty, on which no proceedings officer appointed here to bring forward the
whatever had taken place. In one in- appeals, or whether any other measure
stance, there was an example of appeal, should be adopted. The fakeels, who
in which the property of the whole Zemin- conducted business before the supreme
dary of Ramnad was concerned; which court, might be competent to manage the
was an extensive district, containing many business here; but many appeals came
square miles, and many thousand inhabit- from provincial courts, and in them the
ants ; and, during the time the appeal was suitors were destitute of all means of bring-
pending, on which no proceedings had ing their cause under the consideration of
taken place, no man could tell what were the council. It was necessary to recollect,
his rights in the district, and the people that some of these appeals came from
were ignorant to whom they ought to pay persons immediately connected with the
their rents. He did not mean to impute government of India: they were trans-
blame to any person, or to say that these mitted, some to the India House, and
causes had been put off or delayed by any some to the Board of Control; but, in
one man's conduct; because he was in- many cases, they came from persons who
duced to suppose that the machinery was were accustomed to lay their statements
defective by which appeals were sent from before one or other of these bodies, and,
India to England, so that they were not after sending in a roll of paper, to wait in
brought under the consideration of the silence, and without impatience, for a de-
privy council. No man who knew the termination. From whatever cause the
zeal and ability of his noble friend, the difficulty arose, it was due to the people


Appealsftom India.ir


MARC11,30, 1817l. 154





155 HOUSE OF LORDS,
of that country to endeavour to remedy
it. If it arose from the constitution of
the privy council, the members of which
might find some difficulty in determining
questions arising from a dispute concern-
ing rights which had to be determined by
the laws of India, an obvious remedy ought
to be found, by calling to the assistance
of the privy council some of those respect-
able individuals who had filled high judi-
cial situations in India, who now enjoyed
pensions for their services, and who might
give this assistance for those persons, and
which he was sure they would be most
willing to give. He did not say whether
they should be employed as assessors, or
whether his majesty should be advised to
place some of them in the privy council.
If the difficulty arose from counsel, there
could be no difficulty in finding a remedy
for it. If it began at the other end of
the proceedings-if it arose from a diffi-
culty of preparing and transmitting ap-
peals, and bringing them before the privy
council, some provision should be made
to facilitate the bringing them before the
council, so that they might be speedily
decided. At present, from whatever cause
it arose, the appeals could not be prose-
cuted to a conclusion, and the delay
amounted to a denial of justice. Many of
these appeals had been lying over ten,
twelve, and twenty years. They came
from different parts of India, and left
numberless questions connected with pro-
perty in an unsettled state. The noble
marquis concluded by moving for a return
of all cases of appeal which had been
transmitted from various courts in India,
since the year 1800; and from Ceylon,
the Isle of France, and our other Eastern
dependencies, since they had been in our
possession, stating how they had been dis-
posed of. It had been his intention, he
said, to have moved for the return from
India since 1773; but on finding that,
previous to1800,the communications on this
subject had not been made regular, he had
extended his motion only to the year 1800.
The Earl of Harrowby said, he did not
rise to oppose the motion, to which he
could have no objection under any cir-
cumstances. His noble friend, who had
frequently called their lordships' attention
to many important subjects, had undoubt-
edly a right to call their attention to this ;
and had he even done it in a manner dif-
ferent from what he had, no feeling of
soreness could have arisen in his mind.


Appeals from India. 156
But the manner in which his noble friend
had brought forward the subject was cal-
culated to do away any unpleasant feel-
ing, were it possible, which it was not,
that any could exist. His principal object
in rising was to make one or two explana-
tions, that it might not be supposed that
the privy council was the cause of the
delay which existed. Their lordships
were aware that the privy council was a
court of justice, and, like other courts,
could take no cognizance of causes unless
they were regularly brought before it It
could not hear those appeals, unless the
parties were present, or some agent for
them. But when the appeals were entered
and followed up by the agents, they were
heard to an end, and were not delayed.
For what passed before the cause came
before the court, or before one of the
parties made an application to it, the
privy council could not be responsible.
He believed his noble friend was mis-
informed, however, as to the number of
the appeals which were undecided. He
thought the number of appeals, since
1800, had not exceeded nine; and, except
in one instance, no step had been taken,
no agent had been appointed, and no
means adopted for carrying them on.
Their lordships would see, that merely
sending a petition did not enable the privy
council to proceed. Surely the counsel
who advised the appeal from India, should
have sufficient experience to know, that
unless there was an agent here to be an-
swerable for the fees, which went to the
public, and to employ counsel, the appeal
could not come before the privy council.
It could take no notice of it whatever.
As far as the privy council was concerned,
he could say, that whenever causes were
brought before it, there was no unneces-
sary delay. There were at present only
four causes ready for hearing. As to the
privy council not being properly consti-
tuted as a court, and as to his noble
friend's suggestion to have assessors,
the council had questions to decide of
Dutch law, of French law, of Spanish
law, and of the law of every people from
whom we had ever taken a colony, and he
had not heard any complaints made by
the learned and able persons who sat in
the privy council, that they could not un-
derstand those laws. He was persuaded
that they did not find a greater difficulty
in deciding such questions, than their
lordships had in deciding questions of





157 State of the Administration.
Scotch law. He believed, also, that, by
the assistance of counsel, questions of
Hindoo or Mahomedan law might be de-
cided in the privy council. It appeared
to him, therefore, premature to suggest an
alteration in the constitution of the court.
He had not the least objection to produce
the papers, though he must say, that no
pri7nd facie case had been made out for
imputing delay to the privy council.
The motion was agreed to.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, March 30.
STATE OF THE ADMINISTRATION.] The
Chancellor of the Exchequer moved, that
the Report of the Committee of Supply be
brought up. On the question being put,
Mr. Tierney said, he wished to suggest
to the House the propriety of postponing
this vote of supply till the last day of
April. He had two objections to the
vote: one was the large amount of it;
the other arose from the existing state of
public affairs. As some gentlemen might
not be aware of the nature of the vote
proposed by the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer, he must trespass for a short time on
the patience of the House, whilst he gave
a brief explanation of the course of pro-
ceeding in such cases. The elder mem-
bers were aware that about five and twenty
years ago, a question had been agitated
in the House respecting the arrears of the
civil list for some time previous. These
arrears occasioned the attention of parlia-
ment to be directed to a consideration of
some remedy for the evil, and the means
of preventing a recurrence of it. In 1815,
an act came into operation, by which the
civil list got rid of a great number of pay-
ments by which the arrears had been occa-
sioned. These had amounted to a large
sum in the years immediately previous to
1815. This formed the estimate of the
outgoings of the civil list; and it became
the duty of the House to prevent an im-
proper application of the public money so
granted. The mode of proceeding was
for the ministers to present an estimate of
what was necessary, and next year to pro-
duce a statement, to show what had been
done with the money voted upon it. This
year the statement was 296,0001. The
estimate was 300,0001. to meet the coming
expenses of the current year. It was im-
possible to imagine a grant which was
more a grant of confidence than this, His


MARCH 30, 4827 158
chief objection was, that it was a grant
of confidence; and confidence in whom?
He wished to express himself in a manner
entirely free from disrespect towards any
person in the House; but before he con-
sented to grant a sum of 300,0001., he
must know to whom it was to be granted,
and who were to be responsible for the
proper application of it [hear]. With re-
spect to the grant itself, there was a great
deal to be said, if this were the proper
time to say it; but, unless he could succeed
in prevailing upon the House to defer the
consideration of the vote, it would be a
waste of time to detail his objections. He
would just observe, however, that the sum
for diplomatic services this year was not
much less than 370,0001. In stating the
enormity of this sum, the House would
agree, that the subject was worthy the
attention of parliament. This sum was
Greater than that of last year, and infinitely
greater than the average of 1791, 1792,
and 1793. The estimate for 1803 and
1804, including all extraordinaries, was
150,0001.; so that the present was now
more than double. He did not find fault
with the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
The right hon gentleman, he admitted,
only followed the steps of his predecessors.
Neither did he find the least fault with
the diplomatic persons themselves; but
such a gross disproportion between the
exigencies of the service and the ex-
penditure, called for the attention of
parliament. He knewthat the Chancellor of
the Exchequer would say, I will explain
every item ;" but that was *not a very
satisfactory mode of proceeding either to
the country, to the House, nor to the

right hon. gentleman himself: because
there were many things which he might
have a strong disposition to do, but which
it was not by any means requisite should
be done. Now, there was the sum of
23,0001. for snuff-boxes, which seemed
an unnecessary expense; but it would be
placing himself in an unpleasant situation
with regard to foreigners, if the right hon.
gentleman refused to give them ; but if the
House refused to furnish the means an
excuse was provided for him. The special
missions were another source of un-
necessary expenditure. The missions
of the dukes of Devonshire and North,
umberland had produced not only a
heavy cost to the country, but an enor-
mous expense to themselves. Allthat the
ministers required of these illustrious





151 HOUSE OF LORDS,
land, and stated that the Orangemen were
most anxious for inquiry. He (Mr. Peel)
had taken a part in the debates of 1825,
and he then held precisely the same lan-
guage which he held now, and said that
nothing could compensate for the exist-
ence of these associations. He never
could agree to the production of papers
which would inculpate parties who had no
disposition whatever to violate the law;
and, under these circumstances, he should
decidedly oppose the motion.
Dr. Lushington said, that the right hon.
gentleman had promulgated the doctrine,
that the best way to judge of Mr. John-
ston's motives, was to refer to that gentle-
man's own statement. For his part, how-
ever, he thought the facts of the case
would be a much surer guide to this
point. The state of it was this: there
were the opinions of the two legal officers
of the Crown upon a certain point of law;
and the rev. Mr. Johnston, a person alto-
gether unacquainted with the law, thought
proper to differ from them, and to act
upon his own opinion. It was stated, that
one of the parties, which formed these
processions, marched under his immediate
guidance and direction; and, if this were
true, he thought that the person who had
so prostituted justice ought not to be al-
lowed to remain in the commission.
The House divided : For the motion
69; Against it 124: Majority against the
motion 55.
List of the Minority.
Abercromby, hon. J. IIeneage, G. F.
Althorp, lord Heron, sir R.
Baring, A. IIonywood, P.
Baring, F. Howard, hon. IH.
T3 i kl1l tlT dT1, l


entllnllLe L, IUor. .
Buxton, T. F.
Calcraft, J.
Clifton, lord
Colborne, Ridley
Davies, colonel
Dawson, A.
Denison, W.
Du Cane, Peter
Easthope, J.
Ebrington, lord
Fazakerley, N.
S Fergusson, sir R.
Fitzgerald, John
Fortescue, hon. G.
Gordon, Robert
Graham, sir J.
Grattan, H.
Grattan, J.
Harvey, D. W.
Heathcote, G.


HIume, J.
Hutchinson, H.
Jephson, O.
Kemp, T. R.
Kennedy, T. F.
King, hon. R.
Labouchele, H.
Lombe, E.
Lushington, Dr.
Maberly, W. L.
Macdonald, sir J.
Marjoribanks, S.
Martin, R.
Marshall, W.
Maule, hon. W.
Monck, J. B.
Morpeth, lord
Nugent, lord
O'Brien, Lucius
Parnell, sir 11.


Appeals from India.


Ponsonby, hon. G.
Ponsonby, hon. F.
Robarts, A. W.
Robinson, G.
Russell, lord J.
Russell, lord W.
Rumbold, C.
Smith, W.
Stanley, hon. E.
Stuart, Villiers


Sykes, D.
Tomes, J.
Tierney, right hon. G.
Warburton, IH.
Western, C. C.
Wood, alderman
Wood, Charles
TELLERS.
Brownlow, C.
Rice, T. S.


HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, March 30.
FEES ON PRIVATE BILLS.] The Earl
of Hardwicke presented a Petition from
himself and several other proprietors of
land, in the Bedford Level, complaining
of the great expense of passing Private
Bills, and praying their lordships to insti-
tute a committee to inquire into the mat-
ter. The petition was presented in conse-
quence of a bill then on its way through
parliament for underdraining the South
Level. It was of some importance, that
undertakings of such a description, which
materiallybenefitted the community, should
not be exposed to any unnecessary ex-
pense. In this case the petitioners com-
plained, not merely of the amount of the
fees levied, but of the uncertainty of what
that amount would be. On this bill there
were no less than fourteen sets of fees to
be paid; so that the parties could not
know what the expense would be. In his
opinion, such things ought to be a matter
of notoriety, so that persons bringing a
private bill into parliament, should be cer-
tain beforehand what it would cost. In a
case which recently occurred to the bishop
of Exeter, it was necessary, in order to
improve the cathedral, to pull down some
houses, and the act of parliament enabling
the dean and chapter to purchase the
houses to be pulled down cost more than
the property was worth. It had been
stated by a noble lord, that the expense of
passing private bills had been much in-
creased by the practice of appointing
agents; but this he did not believe was
the case. The agents saved the parties a
great deal of trouble, and transacted that
business by correspondence, which persons
must otherwise come from a great distance
to transact.-The noble earl concluded by
moving for the appointment of a commit-
tee, to inquire into the subject, which was
ordered, and the committee appointed.

APPEALS FROM5 INDIA.] TheMarquis







personages was, that they should support and forbearance. No one could be more
in splendor the honour of the country; inclined than he was to evince the utmost
and no one could carry that support of the liberality towards the noble lord whose
country's honour to a higher pitch than unfortunate illness they all deplored; and
they. He did not dispute the sums given if any man would get up, and say
and expended on these missions ; but he that there was any chance of the noble
doubted the propriety of such missions at lord's recovering from it, so far as to be
all. Why should it be necessary for one again competent to the toils of office, he
crowned head to send an expensive mis- would sit down immediately, and not say
sion of compliment to another ? Many of another word on the subject. Though
these items were extremely high. It was he had not the honour of an intimate
utterly incomprehensible to him how such acquaintance with the noble lord's family
an enormous difference between the esti- and connexions, he believed he was not
mates for the present and past years which misinforming the House, when he said
he had stated, could arise. There was that there was no such chance. He was
no fault in the foreign ministers, who told, that though the noble lord's life
supported in splendor the country's cha- might be still spared to his family and
racter; but when the circumstances of the friends, it was absurd to hope that he
country were considered, he thought un- would be restored to any more than his
necessary splendor should be dispensed family and friends. He, therefore, con-.
with. The nobleman now at the court of sidered lord Liverpool, as a public servant,
France might represent the king at less already extinct; and he had no doubt
than half the expense of a mission, which that, if the noble lord were now asked,
was eaten up by the Frenchmen dependent whether he wished to remain any longer
upon it. Then the consequence was, in office, and were in a condition to give
that persons of small fortunes were shut an answer to that question, he would say,
out from such missions. The right hon. "The time is come form resigningthe offi-
gentleman then reverted to the circum- cial situations which I have so long held,
stances of the country, and repeated that and therefore let no delicacy towards me
this was a vote of confidence in ministers ; interfere with the demands of the public
and it was impossible for the House to service." He conceived, that in the pre-
know in whom that confidence was to be sent situation of the country, an important
reposed. There hadbeen great forbearance question like this depended upon other
displayed upon that point on his side of circumstances than delicacy and forbear-
the House, considering the language ance. What was right at one time might be
which had been used out of doors, and wrong at another; and punctilios, on which
the anxiety of the public to see a termi- individuals might stand with propriety on
nation of the present unsettled state of some occasions, might be quite inde-
things. Gentlemen on his side of the fensible on others. It might be ineon-
House had not only shown a degree of venient, nay, it might be indelicate, to
forbearance with regard to this question, form a new administration, whilst there
which he almost considered to be blamea- was any rational hope of lord Liverpool's
ble, but had also abstained from checking recovery; but let the House look at the,
a number of votes, which, in the present condition of the country, and say, if it
condition of the country, he conceived could, that any time ought to be lost
ought not to be granted. From the un- before the formation of an efficient ad-
willingness of gentlemen on his side of the ministration. Look at the state of the
House to do any thing which could em- finances. Did the Chancellor of the Ex-
barrass the government, or impede the chequer mean to say that the state of the
passing of the supplies which were neces- finances was not at present of the most
sary to carry on the public service, every appalling description ? It was impossible
thing which government required had to doubt that the country was at present
been granted, just as if there had been an bowed down to the earth by a weight of
entire administration. The time, however, debt, which had many years ago been pre-
was now come, in which it was the duty of dicted as the necessary result of our ex-
the House to show some signs of life. travagance, though the prediction had
The country expected that it would at unfortunately been addressed to deaf and
length exert its energies, as it was a mere unbelieving ears. Did any man in his
mockery to talk any longer about delicacy senses doubt, that the scanty hope on


159 HOUSE OF COMMON'-,,


State of' the Aclmniuistrautioll.






which the country had long subsisted, of king of England ? We ought to know
extinguishing its debt by the aid of the whether the foreign policy of the country
sinking-fund, was now gone and vanished was likely to continue to be directed by
for ever ? Did any man in his senses his master-mind; or whether it was likely
doubt that the revenue was falling off hour to be transferred to the management of
after hour, and that the defalcations in it some inferior and subordinate spirit. We
were of the most alarming extent ? He wanted a minister who enjoyed confidence
believed that, on that point, there was no at home and consideration abroad. No
longer matter of dispute. He confessed, one at present knew who were ministers,
that to him this was a source of bitter dis- what were their views, or to what point
appointment; for he had not expected that their efforts were directed. How strange
the distress which had been pervading the the rumours were which prevailed in
country would have continued so long. England, on these points every man knew;
Look at the condition of our trade. It but how much more strange, how much
was paralyzed from one end of the country more wild and extravagant they were
to the other. Ask any banker, and he abroad, no one could imagine who had not
will tell you that in the city never was such heard them. Look also to the state of
distress known. Look at the condition of Ireland. Who is to govern Ireland, or is
our manufactures, and you will find that Ireland to be governed at all ? He did
those who absolutely make them, the ope- not wish to provoke any discussion, either
ratives, as it is now the fashion to call regarding bur foreign policy, or regarding
them, are ground to the dust, by the that which wascomnmony! called theCatho-
privations under which they suffer, and lic question. Hedid notwish toadvanceany
are labouring at such reduced wages as thing for purposes of mere party ; the only
scarcely enable them to keep life and soul point at which he was labouring was,
together. Look at the state of agri- that some intelligible measures should be
culture. If you are to believe the country devised for the general good of the whole
gentlemen, who have been pouring their community, and that the whole com-
complaints into our ears for weeks past, munity should not be left, as it was at
never was agriculture worse off. You present, in a most unprofitable state of
have thus a population, of which a part suspense and uncertainty. He did not
insists that you are to make no alteration even pretend to blame ministers for not
in your Corn-laws, and another complains, bringing the negotiations-if negotiations
that if you do not instantly take measures had been commenced on this subject-to
to lower the price of provisions, they must a close. He had been accustomed, from
die in heaps from starvation. Look at the the language of the constitution, to con-
condition of our Foreign Affairs. He sider that the supreme arrangement of
could not be expected to be intimately these matters rested with the king, and
acquainted with the minute details of our that no one was responsible for the forma-
political situation with respect to other tion of a ministry, though every minister
countries ; but he could not help surmising was responsible after its formation, for the
that something interesting was expected, acts which he might recommend his
when he saw the large army which we had majesty to sanction. Now, if it were the
sent out, and were maintaining in Portugal. duty of the present advisers of the king to
He knew and approved of the reasons on recommend him to form a new adminis-
account of which it had been sent there. tration, and if they were anxious to form
And if he could be sure that the right such an administration, surely it was an
hon. Secretary for Foreign Affairs would excuse for the House of Commons to
remain in the situation in which he was be anxious to see that administration when
at present, the confidence which he had it was formed. If it were so difficult, as
reposed in government from the beginning, was now represented, to find a first
he should continue to it till the end. minister of state, surely, it would be a shame
[Great cheering from the Opposition.] to the House of Commons not to be anxious
But how did he know that, in a few days, to know who that minister was. It was
the aspect of affairs might not be altered undoubtedly the privilege of his majesty
by the general confidence of foreign powers to choose his own ministers ; but then it
being withdrawn from England in conse- was no less undoubtedly the privilege of
quence of the right hon. Secretary's the House of Commons to stop the sup-
being withdrawn from the service of the plies, until the royal prerogative was exer,
VOL. XVII. G


State of the Adcmin~istration.ll


MARCH 30, 1827. 162





157 State of the Administration.
Scotch law. He believed, also, that, by
the assistance of counsel, questions of
Hindoo or Mahomedan law might be de-
cided in the privy council. It appeared
to him, therefore, premature to suggest an
alteration in the constitution of the court.
He had not the least objection to produce
the papers, though he must say, that no
pri7nd facie case had been made out for
imputing delay to the privy council.
The motion was agreed to.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Friday, March 30.
STATE OF THE ADMINISTRATION.] The
Chancellor of the Exchequer moved, that
the Report of the Committee of Supply be
brought up. On the question being put,
Mr. Tierney said, he wished to suggest
to the House the propriety of postponing
this vote of supply till the last day of
April. He had two objections to the
vote: one was the large amount of it;
the other arose from the existing state of
public affairs. As some gentlemen might
not be aware of the nature of the vote
proposed by the Chancellor of the Exche-
quer, he must trespass for a short time on
the patience of the House, whilst he gave
a brief explanation of the course of pro-
ceeding in such cases. The elder mem-
bers were aware that about five and twenty
years ago, a question had been agitated
in the House respecting the arrears of the
civil list for some time previous. These
arrears occasioned the attention of parlia-
ment to be directed to a consideration of
some remedy for the evil, and the means
of preventing a recurrence of it. In 1815,
an act came into operation, by which the
civil list got rid of a great number of pay-
ments by which the arrears had been occa-
sioned. These had amounted to a large
sum in the years immediately previous to
1815. This formed the estimate of the
outgoings of the civil list; and it became
the duty of the House to prevent an im-
proper application of the public money so
granted. The mode of proceeding was
for the ministers to present an estimate of
what was necessary, and next year to pro-
duce a statement, to show what had been
done with the money voted upon it. This
year the statement was 296,0001. The
estimate was 300,0001. to meet the coming
expenses of the current year. It was im-
possible to imagine a grant which was
more a grant of confidence than this, His


MARCH 30, 4827 158
chief objection was, that it was a grant
of confidence; and confidence in whom?
He wished to express himself in a manner
entirely free from disrespect towards any
person in the House; but before he con-
sented to grant a sum of 300,0001., he
must know to whom it was to be granted,
and who were to be responsible for the
proper application of it [hear]. With re-
spect to the grant itself, there was a great
deal to be said, if this were the proper
time to say it; but, unless he could succeed
in prevailing upon the House to defer the
consideration of the vote, it would be a
waste of time to detail his objections. He
would just observe, however, that the sum
for diplomatic services this year was not
much less than 370,0001. In stating the
enormity of this sum, the House would
agree, that the subject was worthy the
attention of parliament. This sum was
Greater than that of last year, and infinitely
greater than the average of 1791, 1792,
and 1793. The estimate for 1803 and
1804, including all extraordinaries, was
150,0001.; so that the present was now
more than double. He did not find fault
with the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
The right hon gentleman, he admitted,
only followed the steps of his predecessors.
Neither did he find the least fault with
the diplomatic persons themselves; but
such a gross disproportion between the
exigencies of the service and the ex-
penditure, called for the attention of
parliament. He knewthat the Chancellor of
the Exchequer would say, I will explain
every item ;" but that was *not a very
satisfactory mode of proceeding either to
the country, to the House, nor to the

right hon. gentleman himself: because
there were many things which he might
have a strong disposition to do, but which
it was not by any means requisite should
be done. Now, there was the sum of
23,0001. for snuff-boxes, which seemed
an unnecessary expense; but it would be
placing himself in an unpleasant situation
with regard to foreigners, if the right hon.
gentleman refused to give them ; but if the
House refused to furnish the means an
excuse was provided for him. The special
missions were another source of un-
necessary expenditure. The missions
of the dukes of Devonshire and North,
umberland had produced not only a
heavy cost to the country, but an enor-
mous expense to themselves. Allthat the
ministers required of these illustrious






163 HOUSE OF COMMONS,
cised, and the House was made acquainted
with the person to whom the disposal of
those supplies was to be intrusted [hear,
hear]. In the observations he had just
made he had no intention to censure
ministers. If he had said any thing in
the warmth of debate which cast censure
upon them, he had said it unintentionally
and wished it unsaid. He was desirous of
performing the task which he had imposed
upon himself in the mildest manner, and
without exciting any political feeling or
irritation. He thought that no one
could with justice blame gentlemen on his
side of the House for want of forbearance I
or delicacy. All that he and they now
asked for was this-that the king or some-
body for him, should take the necessary
steps to give the country an administration.
For himself he had determined not to part
with one farthing of the public money
until an administration was formed. It
was fine talking to say that the House
ought to regard measures, not men; but
though it was fine talking it was still not
a whit the less nonsense [hear]. It would
not do for ministers to say, So much is
wanted for the army, so much for the navy,
and so much for the other departments of
the State." Something more was wanted.
It was necessary that the House should
know who was to command its army, who
was to direct its navy, and who was to be
at the head of the other departments. It
was right that when public affairs were in
the miserable state of incertitude in which
the affairs of this great empire now un-
fortunately were, the representatives of the
people should keep in their hands the
means of making the fitting appropriations
for the service of the commonwealth.
It was his bounden duty, as a member of
the House of Commons, to prevent the
House from being sent about its business
when all the grants were gone through,
without knowing to whom the administra-
tion was to be intrusted, until the time of
its next meeting; and the best mode of
preventing that result appeared to him to
be the withholding of the supplies. The
present was a moment at which the
greatest anxiety prevailed among all
ranks and conditions of men, to see
a decided order of things once more
established in the country. He wanted,
he repeated, no discussion about the pro-
priety of this or that political arrangement;
and having said so, he trusted he might
be .permitted to add, that if ever there


State of the Administration. 164
was a moment of great public anxiety in
the history of this country-if ever there
was a time in which there was great dis-
trust in the wisdom of their governors felt
by all who entertained sober and discreet
views among the governed-if ever there
was a period when it was absolutely
necessary that the public confidence should
repose somewhere-the present was that
period; and the only chance which the
country had of being rescued from the
difficulties which surrounded it, was in
having its distrust dispelled, and its con-
fidence re-invigorated. That which the
country had for weeks been wanting, was
a strong, an efficient, and a united admi-
nistration; and if such an administration
were not speedily formed, its difficulties
would soon gain such a head that it would
not be within the power of man to over-
come and remove them. What he meant
by the words united Administration he
would not at present define, because he
had no intention to provoke a discussion
upon any dubious or controverted points.
He used the words in their ordinary ac-
ceptation, and in no other; andhe thought
that the good of the country could only
he consulted by setting over it an ad-
ministration, endowed with that combina-
tion of integrity and talent, which would
enable it at once to preserve the respects
of foreign powers, the confidence of its
own sovereign, and, above all, the grateful
attachment of the people intrusted to its
care. Give the country such an adminis-
tration, and there was no danger which
we might not hope to overcome; leave us
without it, and the difficulties of our
situation would become more appalling
than ever, and we should exhaust ourselves
at last in vain efforts to subdue them.
He should say no more, lest he should
provoke that discussion which he was
anxious to avoid, but should conclude by
moving, that the further consideration
of this report be deferred till the 1st of
May."
Mr. Secretary Canning then addressed
the House; but in a tone of voice so in..
distinct, as to be only partially heard in
the gallery. However, he said, he might
differ from the motion which the right
hon. gentleman had just submitted to the
House, he still agreed in one proposition
which the right hon. gentleman had laid
down in the course of his speech; namely,
that the government had no reason to
complain, either of the House in general,




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs