Imágenes de página
PDF
ePub

that they were not termed delegates, but deputies; that they had (met only three times, and that in an open room to which newspaper reporters were admitted; that they had separated by an absolute dissolution, and not by an adjournment; nor were they to meet again in March, as was alledged in the Report of the Committee, The petition was ordered to lie on the table.

February 25.

On a petition being presented, praying for a reduction of the duty on wine, the Chancellor of the Exchequer declared that, under existing circumstances, no reduction could be made on the duty on wine.

Sir Matthew Ridley made his promised motion for an address to the Throne, to reduce the number of the Lords of the Admiralty, in such a way as was not incompatible with public safety, and was most suitable to the exigencies of the time. The principal speakers against the motion were Lord Castlereagh, Messrs. Croker, Canning, Huskisson, and Law; in support of it, Messrs. Brougham, Bankes, and Warre, and Lord Althorpe.

On a division the motion was negatived by a majority of 56.

February 26.

He

Lord Castlereagh having moved the first reading of the Habeas Corpus Suspension Bill; Mr. Bennett expressed his surprise that the noble Lord should not have adduced a syllable in support of a Bill, which was to take from the people, not a trial by jury only, but all trial. It should be remembered that in the face of a Report made in 1794, and another in 1812, both by Secret Committees, the persons accused by them were, when tried, acquitted, and the testimony of nine-tenths of the witnesses proved to be false. suspected that the present Report was founded on similar evidence. The idea of a handful of armed rioters taking the barracks by surprise. also the Tower and the Bridges, was too ridiculous to dwell upon. And who were these conspirators? what were their means? Six men in a waggon, with a stocking full of ammunition! He dared any Member of the Committee to say that there was one nobleman, one gentleman implicated, or even any of the middle classes of society.

The Lord Advocate of Scotland said, he had given evidence before the Committee. Early in January he learnt that secret meetings had been held in Glasgow; that a conspiracy was organized there; and that the members were bound by a secret oath.

Sir Francis Burdett said, if the present motion passed, he should propose in the Committee some clause against the torture of prisoners who might be the victims of

this measure; so that, if their personal liberty was to be restrained, they should endure nothing more. It might be said, that it was sought to suspend the Act bat for a short time; but no man who appreciated the value of liberty, or knew the horrors of a dungeon, could consider any time short that was passed in a prison.

Lord Castlereagh, in reply, said, the Hon. Baronet's speech was not made to convince the House, but was addressed to persous in another place.-Being called to order, the Speaker said that all speeches made within those walls must be considered as delivered only to the House.

Messrs. F. Lewis, Wynne, Wrottesley, and Courtenay, spoke in favour of the Bill; Lords Russell, Althorp, and Rancliffe, with Sir S. Romilly and Mr. Ponsonby against it. The second reading was ultimately carried by 273 to 98-Majority, 175.

[blocks in formation]

February 28.

Sir James Shaw presented a petition. from the Common Council of London against the Suspension of the Habeas Corpus, which Sir James considered as unnecessary.

Mr. Brougham presented a petition from Liverpool on the same subject.

On the third reading of the Habeas Corpus Suspension Bill, Messrs. Bankes, W. Quin, Protheroe, Lambe, the Lord Advocate, the Attorney General, and Sir Arthur Pigott, spoke in favour of the Bill: Messrs. M. A. Taylor, Lyttleton, W. Smith, Tierney, Sir S. Romilly, and Lord G. Cavendish, spoke against it. The third reading was then carried, on a division, by 265 to 103; majority 162.

Mr. Ponsonby moved a clause which went to limit the duration of the Bill to the 20th May, which was negatived by 239 to 97.

HOUSE OF LORDS, March 3.

Lord Holland wished to be informed by the noble and learned Lord (Eldon) on the woolsack, whether an individual, unfortunately detained in any prison by order of government, under the power given by the Habeas Corpus Suspension Bill, would have the means allowed him of petitioning Parliament; or, if that should be thought to involve too much publicity, at least of petitioning the Sovereign. He was the more desirons of being informed upon

this point, because knowing the kind of regulation that was enforced in some prisons, it was of essential importance that an individual, placed in the situation he had alluded to, should not be debarred from the free exercise of the right of making an application to the Government respecting the circumstances of his case.

The Lord Chancellor said, that every individual arrested on suspicion of treason, by order of Government, and detained under the provisions of this Bill, had in his favour the presumption of law, which always supposed every person under accusation to be inuocent, until proved to be guilty; and as far as he could answer a general question, every individual in that situation had the right of petition ing either the Sovereign or the Parliament, a right which the gaoler, in whose custody he was, had no right to deprive him of. He must observe, at the same time, that this privilege would not be allowed to be asserted as a mere colourable pretext with a view to other objects.

The Earl of Rosslyn complained that the Bill was unnecessary. The amendments made in the Bill by the House of Commons were then agreed to; and a message was ordered to be sent to the House of Commons to acquaint them therewith.

In the Commons, the same day, Mr. Bootle Wilbraham presented a petition from the hundred of Blackburne, in Lancashire, complaining of the attempts made by designing persons to mislead and to instigate them to measures subversive of the Government and Constitution.

Mr. Cawthorne said, that with respect to the meeting at Preston, it had, no doubt, been regularly convened; but the doors of the hall had hardly been opened, when in rushed a rabble of cotton spinners and weavers, and others of the very lowest order of the people.

Some discussion took place on the second reading of the Seditious Assembly Bill. The Solicitor General said that meetings called by Lords Lieutenants, Justices of the Peace, or the Mayor, Aldermen, or other officers of a Corporation, or division of a Corporation, would not be affected by this Bill. Another opening to petitioning was left; for on a requisition being signed by seven resident householders, a meeting might at any time or place be convened; but the justices who attended at such meeting would be authorised to declare it an unlawful assembly, if it proceeded to discuss any subject tending to alter matters of state, without the authority of King and Parliament. Another regulation was, that any person propounding matters of that sort, or propounding any seditious matter, might be

taken up for so doing. All those regulations were precisely similar to what had been introduced into the Bill of 1797. The first object of the measure, therefore, was to prevent any meetings or assemblies of above 50 persons, except such meetings of Corporate Bodies, &c. as he bad already mentioned, and except such as were called together upon a notice signed by seven householders. In the Committee, however, it was his intention to propose a clause to prevent those meetings, so convened by seven householders, from being adjourned, and to prevent their being held at any other time or place than should be at first specified, by way of adjournment. A second object of the Bill would be to prevent the existence of debating societies, lecture-rooms, readingrooms, &c. for admission to which money was received. He should further observe, that the 39th of the King had for its object to suppress by name certain Societies, whose existence was regarded as prejudicial and detrimental to the State; it also declared other societies to be unlawful which were constituted in a particular way, such as imposing oaths, engagements, tests, declarations, &e. or having branches, divisions, employing delegates, &c. Another object of the Bill would be to suppress a particular society or societies, calling themselves Spenceans, or Spencean Philanthropists. If ever there was a society, the doctrines of which were utterly subversive of every well-regulated state, subversive of all property, order, and good government, it was that society. At the present moment there was an immense number of persons who belonged to it; and therefore, without inquiring whether it employed delegates or not, it was condemned by the very doctrines which it promulgated, and was rendered as unlawful as any Corresponding Society that ever existed. With respect to the using of delegates or missionaries, he was aware that many societies of the most exemplary kind did so: he believed the Quakers had persons who visited their dif ferent communities in that character, though under a different appellation, and therefore it would be a provision in the Act, to except from its operation all sɔcieties constituted for charitable or religious purposes. The Hon. and learned Gentleman then concluded by moving the second reading of the Bill.

Messrs. Bennet and Calvert, Sir F. Burdett and Lord Cochrane, were decidedly averse to the Bill.

Mr. Baring remarked that the Report said much of the prevalence of blasphemous doctrines. He believed the reverse was the case that religious feelings existed very generally amongst the great body of the people-that with some it

might be considered a period of enthusiasm, from a desire to dive into unfathomable mysteries, but that at all events there was no disposition to throw contempt on the venerable precepts of religion.

HOUSE OF LORDS, March 4.

The Royal Assent was notified by Commission to the Habeas Corpus Suspension Bill. The King's Bench Bill was read a second time, after a few words from the Lord Chancellor, stating the object of it to be to allow one Judge of the Court to sit in another place to decide upon the justification of bail, whilst the other business of the court proceeded in the mean time before the other three judges.

In the Commons, the same day, Mr. Sharp presented a petition from Mr. James Davison, who was committed to prison by order of Christophe, heavily ironed and tortured for several days by thumb screws. At length his life being considered to be in danger, and the other British residents at Cape Henry having made frequent and spirited remonstrances against his detention, he was liberated.

March 5:

A long discussion took place this day respecting the scarcity of food in Ireland, when Mr. Peel, on account of the expectations and great alarm it would create, declined supporting any measure having inquiry for its object, stating at the same time that the Irish Government had taken all the means in its power to guard against the dangers of scarcity, by taking on themselves the responsibility of admitting American flour, which the law did not permit. Mr. Peel said in conclusion, that government were decidedly averse to stopping the distillers from using corn.

A short conversation then took place between Mr. Brougham and Mr. Wellesley Pole. The latter admitted that the execution of the King's head on the half crown had disappointed his expectation; but said, while he belonged to that department, he would not relax his efforts until public expectation had been realized. The Bank of England, he also stated, had sent bullion to the Mint to be coined into guineas, in order, at the appointed time, to resume their payments in cash.

[blocks in formation]

lief. The rates amounted to 18 or 19 shillings in the pound. The other petition was from a parish which contained 1300 inhabitants, not one in seven of whom were independent of parish aid. Here those rateable to the poor paid a guinea in the pound. In one of these parishes every farmer had given notice to quit, and in the other several, so that the rate next year would fall heavier on those who remained. Private charity (particularly a liberal donation from Lord Eldon) had for a short time ameliorated the evil; but the subscription which had been raised, would be exhausted the 22d of this month, He should move that these petitions be referred to the Committee on the Poor Laws; at the same time, he must regret that there was no equalization of these burdens over all classes of property. The fundholder should be made liable to the assessments which affected those less able to pay them,

Lord Castlereagh said, he wished to make only one observation on this subject. The House and the country ought always to keep in view, that a great proportion of the wages of labour of the country were paid out of the poor's rates. The farmers, from a system, the bad effects of which had been already too much felt, had been long in the habit, in many parts of the country, of paying a great proportion of the wages of farming labour in the shape of poor's rates. This accounted in a great measure for the rapid rise in the amount of the poor's rates from 1 to upwards of seven millions. He was convinced that in cases where 19s. or 20s. in the pound were paid for poor's rates, 15s. of that would be found to be wages paid in the shape of poor's rates. The country could not in any other sense, have supported such a load of taxes.

Mr. Curwen observed, that with respect to the fund-holders, it was indeed true that a great part of the property of the country, for want of meaus of coming at it, had hitherto escaped from bearing its share. The more he contemplated the subject, the more he was convinced that the House ought, before they separated, to take some measures for subjecting the fund-holders to their share of the burdens of the poors' rates, without which it would be found impossible to continue to relieve the distresses of the country.

Sir C. Burrell said, he was convinced that when the fund-holder was trenched upon, and through him honour and pub. lic faith were violated, the present distress would be increased tenfold. He augured much from the present state of the funds, which held out a reasonable expectation that the monied interest would assist the landholders by way of mortgage, which could not be hoped for when the funds

afforded

afforded 5 per cent. on money invested. He was convinced that any interference with the fund-holder, would therefore be an injury to the land-holder also (Hear!) He was surprised that the Member for Carlisle (Mr. Curwen), who was remarkable for sound sense, should have joined in so wild a theory as the proposal for breaking faith with the creditor. thought it would be most desirable to increase the circulating medium, which would give a facility to the employment of the labouring classes throughout the kingdom, and would do more to restore prosperity than any remedies which had been proposed.

He

Mr. Lockhart said, he was anxious to correct an erroneous idea which a noble Lord (Cochrane) had either expressed or implied, namely, that it was in contemplation, by way of reform in the Poor Laws, to propose to refuse relief to able bodied men who were without employment. No such idea was entertained, be believed, by any Member of the House, and certainly not by any Member of the Committee on the Poor Laws; the idea entertained by the Committee, was to encourage industry, but by no means to refuse relief when industry was found unavailing. He agreed in what had been said by the noble Lord (Castlereagh), as to the bad effects of mixing up poor's rates with the wages of labour, but he denied that this system had been voluntary on the part of the landlords.

Mr. Brougham protested as well against the proposal of the noble Lord (Cochrane) as that of the Hon. Baronet, who had professed so much abhorrence of the noble Lord's proposition. The difference between the noble Lord's project for reducing the interest of the debt, and the Hon. Baronet's proposal for increasing the quan tity of the circulating medium, was only the difference between two modes of bankruptcy, or, as had been well expressed by a celebrated writer on these subjects, the difference between secret fraud and open violence. The distresses in the manufacturing districts were under-rated; for the average rate of wages was not more than Ss.

The petitions were brought up and read.

March 10.

On the motion of Mr. Bennett, the Committee on the Police of the Metropolis was revived. Mr. Bennett presented a petition from several colonists in New South Wales, complaining generally of the mode in which the Laws were administered in the Colony, and particularly of the unjust and oppressive conduct of the present Governor.

Ordered to lie on the table.

In a Committee of Supply, Lord Palmerston moved for several sums, and a vote for 121,000 men, including the Army in France. Granted.

In conversation, Mr. Vansittart stated that Government had saved 600,000l. on the interest of Exchequer Bills, and that a farther issue of these Bills was probable.

HOUSE OF LORDS, March 11.

Earl Grosvenor concluded a prefatory speech on the subject of sinecures, useless places, &c. by moving the four following propositions: 1st, that sinecures should be abolished after the expiration of the lives during which they were at present held; 2d, that useless places should be abolished forthwith, or properly regulated; 3d, that places or offices should no more be granted in reversion; and then, 4th, he should propose a regulation in favour of some reform.

The speakers against the motion were the Earl of Liverpool and the Earl of Lauderdale; for it, Lord Holland, Lord St. John, and Earl Darnley.

The motion was negatived by 45 to 5.

In the Commons, the same day, Sir W. Geary presented a petition from the freeholders and inhabitants of the County of Kent, praying for retrenchment, and reform in Parliament.

Sir E. Knatchbull said it was signed by the Sheriff alone, and must therefore be considered as the petition of that individual: it did not speak the sense of the County, and scarcely that of the meeting, by a part only of whom it was adopted..

Mr. Peel obtained leave to bring in a bill, the object of which was to introduce into disturbed districts in Ireland an efficient Police, and render less necessary, on ordinary occasions, the services of the military. Mr. Peel stated that the army would be reduced from 25,000 to 22,000

men.

March 12.

In a Committee of Ways and Means, the Chancellor of the Exchequer proposed a vote of 18 millions of Exchequer Bills for the service of 1817. The Chancellor intimated that it was his intention to pay off the unfunded debt of Ireland by Exchequer Bills raised in this country, the interest of which would be only four per cent. while in Ireland it was five per cent. Agreed to.

A short conversation took place respecting whether the House could receive 527 reform petitions, 468 of which were printed, 28 drawn up in language deemed to be disrespectful, and the others not signed.

Sir F. Burdett and Lord Cochrane complained of so few Members being present: they had mostly retired to dinner, and left

the

the petitions of the people of England neglected.

Mr. Bathurst said, that the Members knew what kind of petitions they were, and they had accordingly retired.

The 527 petitions were then all rejected.

Murch 13.

Mr. Brougham, after a most eloquent and dispassionate speech on the state of the manufactures and commerce of the country, the length of which precludes the possibility of our giving even an outline, moved : "First, That the manufactures of the country are in a state of unexampled difficulty, that demanded the most serious attention of the House.-2d. That that difficulty is materially increased by the system of restrictive policy, pursued with respect to Foreign Powers, which ought to be rescinded.-3d. That it is further increased by the severe taxation under which the country suffers, and which ought to be removed by every possible means.-4th. That the system of foreign policy pursued by the British Government has not been such as to obtain for this country those advantages with respect to trade and manufactures, to which the just influence of Great Britain fairly entitled her." The first resolution having been put from the chair,

The Hon. F. Robinson saw that no possible good could result from the adoption of this motion: he would beg leave to move, as an amendment, that the House should pass to the other orders of the day.

After the question upon the amendment had been put from the chair, Mr. Brougham begged to explain that in what he had said of the watch trade and unemployed tailors, he meant merely to advert to them as developing some of the general symptoms of prevailing distress.

Mr. C. Grant thought that the object of the motion was to criminate his Majesty's Ministers on their foreign policy. On this ground he would oppose it.

Lord Castlereagh said he was willing to go along with the Hon. and Learned Gentleman in admitting the existence of a great degree of distress; but the latter part of his speech was rather directed to wound the Government, than to point out the mode of relieving the people.

After an able reply from Mr. Brougham, the House divided. For Mr. Brougham's motion 63; against it, 118; majority 55.

March 17.

In a Committee of the whole House on the East India Trade Act, Mr. Robinson submitted a resolution that the privilege of trading to the East Indies should be communicated to Malta and Gibraltar : the resolution was read a second time.

Mr. R. Ward stated that the ordinary and extraordinaries of the Ordnance Estimates were in the aggregate 749,0001. The charge for the ordinary service was this year 538,000l. which was less than the former estimate by the sum of 135,000l. The extraordinaries amounted to 211,000. leaving a reduction under this head of expence of 104,000/. He concluded by moving for a sum of 248,000l. før the service of the Ordnance till the 30th of June 1817.

Mr. Bennet noticed that the Ordnance Board had forbidden map - sellers and others from making any copies of the trigonometrical surveys of the country taken at the public expence. This appeared to him to be acting in the spirit of a pedlering trader, rather than of a public department. Many could not afford to purchase the original chart, and by this prohibition the general object of utility would be defeated. It was not upon this principle that foreign Governments acted. In Paris any one might go to the mapboard, and see not only those which were, but those which were not published.

Mr. Ward said that by preventing these surveys being pirated, they would produce 10,000l. anuually, and effect a saving to that amount.

HOUSE OF LORDS, March 18.

Lord Holland moved for papers connected with the treatment of Napoleon Buonaparte at St. Helena. Humanity alone, observed his Lordship, might justify such a motion; but the chief, if not the only motive for bringing the subject before their Lordships, was a regard to the character of the Country, of Parliament, and of the Crown. The heads of complaint made by his Lordship, were, 1st, that the liberty allowed to Buonaparte of riding and walking to several parts of the island, had of late undergone considerable restriction. 2d, That he was not permitted to receive such books, journals, newspapers, and public prints, nor to subscribe for such publications as he thought proper. 3. That Buonaparte had been refused permission to send a sealed letter to the Prince Regent. 4. That the expence of Buonaparte's establishment had been curtailed from 20,000l. to 8000%.; and he had been told that this country could afford no more, therefore he must find the other 12,000. himself. His Lordship then observed, that if an extraordinary expence was necessary, it should · be kept in view, that it was owing to the place where Buonaparte was confined; and it was unworthy of a great country, first to say, "I will place you in a situation where a great expence is necessary and then to come like a beggar and say, "You yourself must be at the greater part of that expence." The Noble Lord concluded

[ocr errors]
« AnteriorContinuar »