General Tarleton presented a Petition from certain Inhabitants of Liverpool trading to Africa, against the bill brought in for prohibiting the Importation of Negroes, in British ships, into the Colonies of Foreign States not at war with this country; and also into such islands as have been captured by this country during the war.—Mr. Jervis brought in a bill for rendering more speedy the trial of persons accused of offences committed in distant parts, on the high seas; which was read a first time.—Mr. Perceval brought in a bill for making more effectual provision for the maintenance of Stipendiary Curates, and for their Residence on their Cures; which was read a first time.—Mr. Huddlestone rose to acquaint the house, that he thought the production of certain India papers, for which he had in- tended to move, no longer necessary, as they were merely extracts from what had been already communicated in another place. He therefore relinquished his intention of moving for those papers. Lord A. Hamilton immediately gave notice, that on Monday next he would move for the production of those India papers which the hon. gent. had, to his surprise, declined moving for —On the motion of Sir J. Newport, the order of the day for the 2d reading of the Dublin Paving bill was read; and after Some conversation, in which lord De Blaquiere, Mr. Alexander, and Dr. Duigenan, took a part, the bill was ordered to be read a 2d time on the 1st of May.

rose to request the attention of the house for a few moments, to a motion which had been appointed for this day, respecting the Sheriffs of Waterford. He hoped, that if it should appear, that what had been done proceeded from ignorance, or inattention, the house would be inclined to pass it over, and that lenity would be shewn to those who had been chargeable with the oversight. But he would also submit to the consideration of his right hon. friend, who had given notice of the motion, that there had been some difficulty in the interpretation of the act on the subject, and that the law as it now stood in Ireland, had been the subject of considerable doubt, and difference of opinion.

said, that he was disposed to pay every attention to what had fallen from his right hon. friend. The act imposed a pecuniary penalty on the sheriffs, unless the return was made within 40 days; but it was not meant to give them a discretionary power, to postpone their return of a member to the utmost limit prescribed by the law. Still, however, as some misconstruction of the act had taken place in Certain instances, he did not wish to bear hard on any individuals, who had not complied with what appeared to him the plain meaning of the act. The only question for the house to consider would now therefore be, whether it would be proper to amend the act, so as to remove every doubt, or whether a resolution of the house would be sufficient to prevent any such irregularity for the future.

stated for the information of the house, that the sheriffs in Ireland had a power which was not possessed in this country. In the case of a return for a county member in Ireland, the two attor- neys-general Of the different countries had given opinions diametrically opposite. This was enough to shew that considerable misapprehension existed on the subject of the act.

said, it was clear that the penalty could not be levied, if the sheriffs made their return within the period prescribed by the act.—Mr. Fox then agreed to abandon the motion of which he had given notice. [WITNESSES DECLARATORY BILL.] The Attorney General having, moved, that the house resolve itself into a committee on the Witnesses' Declaratory bill,

said, that though in his opinion there was no necessity for the present bill, yet he would defer his Observations upon it till it had received those amendments which were likely to be made in the committee, and if therefore, he should not oppose it in the present stage of its progress; but he could not avoid making one remark on the bill, which had with him considerable weight. The design of the bill was to enact that to be the law, which was the opinion of a majority of the judges. But it appeared to him, that 6 out of the 8 judges, who approved of the principle of the bill, intended to give a qualified opinion. They seemed to think there might be exceptions from the general principle. The present bill, therefore, seemed to ascribe to them the unqualified adoption of an opinion which they entertained with certain exceptions. This was an objection which he should take an opportunity of urging against the bill, unless certain qualifications of the general principle were introduced into it.

said, that since his learned friend had expressed himself dissatisfied with the principle of the bill, he submitted it to him, whether it would not be more consistent to oppose the bill in its present progress, and state fully his objections to the principle, than afterwards to urge those objections, when the house had spent much time and attention on the amendment of the bill, and which, after all, it might see reason to throw out altogether.

defended the consistency of his learned friend. He could not help considering the present bill as unnecessary, but he would pay every degree of deference to the opinion of those who thought otherwise. If it should come out of the hands of the committee in a shape not very unsatisfactory, it should not then meet with much opposition from him. Had he been called upon to give his opinion on the subject of the bill, he should have given that which was held by the minority of the judges. But since the majority of the judges had given a solemn decision on the point, for the purpose of guiding the opinion of the lords on a bill before that house, he could not help considering the matter as sufficiently set at rest. He should think that no judge would henceforth act upon his own private opinion, in opposition to that of the majority, since it could not fail to be overruled by the majority of the judges. The law, therefore, was already sufficiently declared: there seemed no occasion for any interference of the legislature, and the house of lords had acted on the opinion which had been laid before them. But, as it had been already stated by his learned friend, the majority of the judges had delivered a qualified opinion. They said that, generally speaking, a witness was compellable to answer. This bill, however, converted into a universal proposition, what they only delivered as a general one. But he trusted that certain exceptions and qualifications would be introduced into the bill; and in that case, from the deference which he felt for the opinion of the judges, he should not oppose its passing into a law.—The house having resolved itself into the committee, several amendments were proposed by Mr. Giles, which were agreed to, and the report ordered to be received to-morrow.

said, that previous to the holidays he had asked his majesty's ministers whether they intended to move for a Vote of Thanks to be conferred on the military and naval commanders, to whose meritorious services the country was indebted for the possession of the Cape of Good Hope. He was then given to understand, that it was thought proper to wait for further dispatches that might communicate the account of the complete conquest of the Settlement. These dispatches had now arrived, and seeing his majesty's ministers in their places, he took the present opportunity of enquiring whether they meant to confer any mark of public approbation on those who had achieved that important conquest. A noble lord (Howick) had come down to the house with great alacrity in the case of sir John Duckworth, and he believed that had it been his parti- cular province, he would have been equally forward on the present occasion.

begged to state most distinctly to the house, in answer to the question of the noble lord, that his majesty's ministers had not abstained from proposin a Vote of Thanks on this occasion, from any want of approbation of the conduct of the officers and men who had been engaged in the expedition. They had done all that was wished to be done, and they had done it well; but it did not appear that the capture of the Cape was a military exploit of that splendid nature that called for such a distinguished mark of approbation as the Thanks of the House, which should not be made cheap by being too frequently conferred. A certain degree of discretionary judgment with regard to the more and the less, must be left with ministers; and on the best judgment that they were able to form, the achievement alluded to was not one of those which called for the solemn Thanks of Parliament.

did not wish to enter into the merits of the conquest. The acquisition of the Colony—(Here the noble lord was interrupted by the Speaker, who observed that there was no question before the house.)