rose to make some observations respecting the Petition of Mr. Finnerty, which had been presented to the House on Friday. The hon. gentleman said he rose for the purpose of vindicating the magistracy of the county of Lincoln from any imputations which the allegations contained in that Petition might have a tendency to excite. He spoke, then, generally of them as a body of gentlemen every way worthy of the trust reposed in them. He next adverted to the severe and cruel treatment which Mr. Finnerty complained of having received from the gaoler. He affirmed, on the contrary, that the treatment had been most kind and indulgent, till the impropriety of Mr. Finnerty's conduct had rendered a more rigorous sort of treatment absolutely necessary. As to the apartment of which so much had been said, he had been in it. It was a room 22 feet by 11, and 16 feet high. There was one window of 4 feet by 4½ feet; and when ht was there, he did not perceive any offensive smell. He upon that occasion saw Mr. Finnerty in the court-yard.; and he then understood, that until Mr. Finnerty had forfeited all title to any indulgence by the impropriety of his conduct, he not only had free access to the court-yard, but was allowed to walk in the gaoler's garden, and had liberty to read in the gaoler's green-house. He concluded by expressing his belief that the gaoler was not a man disposed to treat his prisoners cruelly, and that the magistrates were a most respectable body of men.

said, that nothing had fallen from the hon. gentleman to alter at all in his mind the material points of this most extraordinary case. He was not disposed to question the title of the magistrates in general of the county of Lincoln, to the character given of them by the hon. gentleman; but of this he was clear, that if they, or any of them, held with Mr. Finnerty such a conversation as he charged them with having held, they were no longer fit to hold their offices as magistrates—and if the conduct of the gaoler was such as had been represented, he thought that that person should no longer be suffered to abuse a trust of which he must in such case have proved himself so unworthy. What! was it to be endured that a gaoler should turn the sufferings of his unfortunate prisoners into a source of emolument? Mr. Finnerty was suffering the sentence of the law—but was he therefore removed out of the protection of the law? Was this gaoler to be allowed to play the part of his brother in the Beggar's Opera, who had his fetters of all prices, and was loading captain Macheath with an enormous pair, until the captain bribed him to afford him a lighter? He trusted the House would interfere to prevent such unconstitutional oppression.

said that the most serious part of the charge against the gaoler, that of his having aggravated the sentence of the court, which was mere deprivation of liberty, into the infinitely more grievous punishment of solitary confinement—that part of the charge had not been touched upon by the hon. gentleman. This was, perhaps, the most important part of the question, whether a gaoler being entrusted with the charge of two defendants, both sentenced for the same offence to the same term of imprisonment, could, at the suggestion of his own caprice, or for purposes of his own emolument, make those punishments essentially different which the court of King's Bench had originally intended to be substantially the same. Solitary confinement was not so much different from, as opposite to, mere ordinary imprisonment, where a man had free access to his friends, and every accommodation he would have in his own house, with the exception of the restraint upon his liberty. As to the noisome smell in Mr. Finnertys apartment, he had been among the first to vouch for the truth of that fact; at least as far as he could vouch for the truth of any fact which he had not known from personal observation. An hon. and learned friend of his who had been in the ceil assured him that the common sewer passing under the flooring of the cell emitted a most loathsome smell. Were there, how-ever, no other facts than those respecting the gaoler's conduct in changing Mr. Finnerty's sentence into solitary confinement, and that other also respecting the conversation held by the magistrates with Mr. Finnerty—were there no other than those two, he fully concurred with his learned and hon. friend (sir S. Romilly) in thinking that both or either in themselves, not with standing the late period of the session, furnished ample grounds for grave parliamentary inquiry.

replied, that the coercions sabsequently imposed upon Mr. Finnerty might have been found necessary in consequence of his attempts to seduce the under officer of the prison from his duty. So far from his confinement having been solitary, he was allowed a servant, who was in constant attendance on him.

said, be should be extremely sorry that a question of such great public importance should pass over like a matter of course without any observation. Although the passing of Insolvent Bills, from time to time, became necessary from the defect of our laws, the very necessity of them was a reproach to our law. He thought that it would be infinitely better, that some general act should be passed on some fixed principle: for example, that after an imprisonment of twelve, or six months, or any other fixed time, any debtor should be intitled to his liberty on his giving up his property. By the existing law the creditor was entitled to imprison his debtor for life, yet the legislature found that this was a system on which it was impossible to act. It appeared to him, that it would be much better to amend the defect of the system by a general law; and he highly approved of the principles of a Bill brought in in another place'(lord Redesdale's Bill), although he thought it was capable of improvement in some of its clauses.

hoped, that by the next session gentlemen would be disposed to acknowledge the propriety of passing some general act upon this subject; as the Insolvent acts now operated, they did almost as much evil as good, as they certainly let out a great number of fraudulent debtors.

was extremely sorry that it was not in his power to propose some measure for the relief of the Petitioners. He was glad, however, that the Petition had been referred to a Committee, as the Petitioners themselves would be better satisfied, when they found that although the House could give no relief, they had bestowed their serious attention to the case which had been laid before them. It was certainly a most afflicting consideration, that in the town of Manchester and its vicinity there were no less than 25,400 persons, who had in some shape or another, received parish relief in the present year

observed, that the Report of the Committee being now before the House, it must be disposed of in some regular manner.

suggested, that it was the usual course in such cases for some gentleman to move the farther consideration of the Report at some day beyond the probable duration of the session.

rose to move that the Report be taken into farther consideration that day month. He said that the conduct of the Petitioners throughout was highly praise-worthy, and such as must excite the greatest sympathy for their misfortunes. He, however, deprecated the idea of reviewing the general policy of the government of the country in an investigation of this nature. If any gentleman saw anything wrong in the general policy of the government,—it should be brought forward as a substantive measure, and not blended with the sufferings of any particular class of people. This might excite all the bad passions, and those most dangerous to the state, without doing the least service. If any particular manufacture fell into disuse, the only remedy the persons employed, in it could have, was either to work at lower prices, or to employ their labour in some other manner. He thought that many, of our manufacturers would be obliged to turn their attention to agriculture, which would make this country independent of the rest of the world. He thought it was necessary to extinguish any hope of their meeting relief in any other manner.

said, that should the case of the Petitioners come before the House next session, he should then feel it to be his duty to enquire into the causes that led to their distresses.

in referring to the orders in council, did not think that as yet the advantages arising from them were so great, or the dangers to be apprehended from their continuance so alarming, as to make persons quite positive as to their ultimate result either way. He confessed, however, that even from what they bad already done, if he was not very sanguine, he indulged strong hopes; they had revived our trade, and almost annihilated that of the enemy. He spoke highly of the merits of the petitioners.

gave his testimony also to the temper and patience of the Petitioners. He hoped their good sense would see the impossibility of that House interfering to compel the masters not to lower their prices, and that they would wait with patience till the circumstances of the country would effect; their relief; applying themselves in the interim to the other, branches of the trade which could be turned to any account.—The motion then passed in the affirmative.

rose to move for public Monuments to the memory of major-general Mackenzie and brigadier-general Lang-worth, who fell at the battle of Talavera. He was extremely concerned, that he was so misconceived on Friday as to be understood to mean sir W. Myers in his notice. Although he was as sensible as any man of the gallantry of sir W. Myers, who fell at the glorious, battle of Albuera, yet the House would see that it was necessary to draw a line somewhere, and that a person must have arrived at a certain military rank before such an honour was paid to his memory. Major-general Mackenzie and brigadier-general Langworth were of that rank, and he took some shame to himself for not having proposed it before. The fact was that when he moved the vote of thanks on the former occasion, it was the first time he had ever made a similar motion, and he did not then know that even the rank of major-general was sufficient to have such a public honour bestowed; but upon enquiry he found that it was usual. After touching shortly on the merits of general Mackenzie, which were eminently displayed in the command of the advanced guard of Talavera; and also after bestowing commendations on brigadier-general Langworth, an officer in the German Legion, he concluded by moving "That an humble Address be presented to his Royal Highness the Prince Regent, that he will be graciously pleased to give directions that Monuments be erected in the cathedral church of St. Paul, London, to the memory of major-general Mackenzie and brigadier-general Langworth, who fell on the 28th day of July 1809, in the glorious battle at Talavera de la Reyna; and to assure his Royal Highness that this House will make good the expense attending the same."—Agreed to, nem. con.

wished to put a question to some hon. members, whom he then saw in their places. He read from a newspaper, the proceedings of the Missionary Society, at a public dinner. To those resolutions were signed the names of Mr. Wilberforce, Mr. Babington, Mr. Grant, and Mr. H. Thornton. The part to which his attention was particularly directed, was that Resolution by which 250l. was to be given, to pay persons for reading the Scriptures in the market places of the populous cities in Asia. He wished to know, whether those gentlemen avowed such a resolution.

spoke to order.

said, that it was certainly quite new in the proceedings of parliament, for members to be questioned in that House about what passed at tavern dinners.

said, that this paper would go to India, and might do a great deal of mischief there. It appeared to him a matter of such public importance, that he must, in some way or other, bring it before parliament.

rose in pursuance of the motion of which he had given notice. He thought it was most evident, that the Property-tax, as it was called, was very unequal in its operation, and very oppressive on many classes of society. A person who had 200l. per annum by way of annuity, which would expire with his the, was called upon to contribute his 20l. as well as the man who had his 200l. per annum from land that would sell at thirty years' purchase, although the one man would have property to the value of 6,000l. to leave to his family, and the other would have nothing. This was in the highest degree unequal and unfair. It was very hard upon poor excisemen, whose salaries were but 70l. or 80l. a year, that they should be obliged to pay income-tax. It was extremely hard on those whose incomes are not 60l. per annum. It was also extremely oppressive on the small stock-holder whose dividend amounted to forty-shillings a year. If it could be proved that the tax was unequal and unjust, it ought to be equalised and set right, even although the revenue might lose by such alteration. After some farther observations the hon. baronet concluded by moving "That this House will, early in the next session of parliament, take into its consideration so much of the Property Tax as relates to the Contributions and Exemptions."

was always averse to the House giving such pledges unless there was something very particular in the nature and urgency of the measure proposed, as without such a pledge it was competent to any member of parliament to bring the subject forward as early as he pleased in the next session; and the giving the pledge, while it did not really bind the House to adopt any particular motion, would yet appear to the public like pronouncing an opinion upon the subject, and holding out some sort of promise, that an alteration was to be made.,. Now, when a former administration thought proper to raise the income tax to ten percent, he thought they had acted wisely and manfully; and although he did not agree with them in the argument, that it would be pleasanter to pay ten per cent. at once, yet he approved of the increase of the tax. If he thought it necessary at that time, the public expenditure was certainly not diminished since that time, and therefore he must oppose a material diminution of the revenue. The hon. baronet had himself been aware, that the alterations he intended to propose would produce a material diminution in the revenue, and there would be no way of supplying it but by laying taxes on some of the necessaries of life, which would press as strongly upon the poorer classes, as the tax from which it was proposed to relieve them. As for laying a higher income-lax upon the richer classes, that would be a complete subversion of all the principles of justice, by which the property of all men should be equally protected by the law. As to what the hon. baronet had said of the war being carried on from a sanguinary motive, he could not agree with him; he did not think the people of this country were actuated by any such principle, and he was certain the war had never been continued by ministers on any other ground than from a thorough conviction of its absolute necessity.

admitted that the tax as it stood was free from many of the objections which attached to it in its original state. It had been matter of astonishment to him that, as it first stood, any minister should have ventured to propose such a tax for the endurance of a free people, or that it could have been pressed down their throats without military force. The rigid inquisition into the private fortunes of individuals had been even more offensive than its inequality; now, however, it was certainly less objectionable. In its original Slate it was almost exactly the tax, which the revolutionary tribunal proposed to impose in London, provided they conquered it, as had been shewn in one of the daily prints at that time. But even to the tax as it existed at present, he thought the hon. baronet's objections well founded. The right hon. gentleman had said, that the notion of a tax upon capital would lead to a levelling principle, if pushed to an extreme; but suppose the principle of the tax on income, which it was at present, were pushed to an extreme; a person having 60l. a-year was liable to pay a 10th part of it. Now, there were persons with families who could not, by any economy, live on less than 60l. a year, and consequently, without some adventitious aid, if the tax was paid some of the family must starve. This, however, he acknowledged to be a subject of great difficulty, and nothing but an approximation to equality could be expected. But the principle ought to be to leave with persons of small income the means of decent living in the first place, and then to tax incomes beyond this in nearly an equal degree. The war might vet last a long time, and though he himself might, upon the plan which he suggested, be liable to pay more than he now paid, yet if the poorer classes were in some measure relieved, by removing the burthen to the higher classes, he believed the country would be better satisfied. He therefore wished that a pledge should be given this session that the House would reconsider the principle of this tax, allowing, at the same time, that it was impossible to relieve the lower classes in any way that would not produce a defalcation in the amount of this particular tax.

shortly replied. He never had an idea of taking the whole tax off the lower classes, and placing it on the higher; but he thought a medium of approximation might be hit upon; and it was on the principle of contributing according to ability, that he wished to advocate the measure, if ever there was a period in which there was necessity for ministers to consider how far the people could contribute from inability, the present was unquestionably that period. Every thing that could be done by courage and noble exertion he was confident would be effected, but the struggle he was convinced would be long, and it would be highly necessary to husband our means of carrying on the war. It was impossible we could hold out otherwise against the superior population of Prance, because for every 5,000 men we lost, they could afford to lose 20,000. This motion had engaged his serious attention for a great length of time, and he thought it so important, that even if he should now fail in it, he would certainly bring it forward in the course of the next session.