moved, "That there be laid before this House, a detailed Account of the expenditure of the sum of 10,205l. 12s. paid from the Treasury of Ireland, for publishing Proclamations, and other matters of a public nature, in the Dublin Gazette, and other newspapers in Ireland, from the 5th of January 1811 to the 5th of January 1812, specifying the titles and dates of the Proclamations so published and paid for." In making this motion, the right hon. gentleman reprobated the wasteful manner in which the public money was expended, by the publication of these Proclamations, which, he said, were frequently given to the proprietors of newspapers, as a remuneration for their services, in supporting the measures of the government.

felt no disposition to object to the motion, although the right hon. gentleman had not given any regular notice of his intention to bring it forward. With respect to the wasteful manner in which the right hon. gentleman had stated the public money had been squandered, he had only to observe, that during the last year, for the first time, the expenditure for the purposes alluded to, had been much less than on any former occasion, having been within the sum allowed by parliament for that purpose. When the right hon. gentleman was Chancellor of the Exchequer for Ireland, the expenditure was 17,000l. per annum, and was never less than 15,000l. The newspaper in which the proclamations were generally inserted, was The Dublin Journal, which it was known had been the channel through which the Irish government had issued their orders for fifty years. As to the assertion, that the Irish government had rewarded or encouraged the conductors of newspapers who had thought proper to support their measures, by any unnecessary expenditure of public money, he begged leave to give it the most unqualified contradiction.

gave full credit to the right hon. gentleman, for the œconomical measures which had been pursued by the present government of Ireland. He, however, observed, that it had been candidly admitted by his predecessor in office (lord Wellington,) that those proclamations were given to certain papers as a reward; for their advocating the measures of government.

postponed till to-morrow his motion for repressing the issue of Local Tokens. He should now, however, pursuant to notice, move for leave to bring in a Bill to increase the penalties imposed last year on the imitating and counterfeiting of tokens issued by the Bank. He proposed also, that provision should be made in the Bill for repressing an abuse which must have come within the observation of many gentlemen—he meant the engraving of pieces of paper which had all the semblance of Bank notes, and which were calculated to catch the eye of the unwary. He had seen a parcel of these papers, which at a little distance, and when not narrowly inspected, had the appearance of bank-notes for one, five, or twenty pounds, which escaped the charge of forgery by having the word 'pins' instead of pounds, but which from their texture and appearance might escape detection and pass with the unwary, as had actually happened in a variety of instances. The present penalty for fraudulently putting off such papers was only six months imprisonment. He proposed that the Bill should increase it to 12 months imprisonment for the first offence, and that the offender should find security for his good behaviour for two years. For the second offence, he had to propose transportation for years. For the more effectual prevention of the counterfeiting of Bank tokens, he proposed, that the offence should be made a transportable felony for 14 years. He concluded with moving, "That leave be given to bring in a Bill for the further prevention of the counterfeiting of silver coin issued by the governor and company of the bank of England, called dollars; and of silver pieces issued and circulated by the said governor and company, called tokens; and for the further prevention of frauds practised by the imitation of the notes or bills of the said governor and company." Leave granted.

moved the order of the day for the third reading of this Bill.

said, the principle of this Bill was such, as to call for general approbation; yet there were clauses in it which, in his opinion, would completely overbalance any good effects which might result from it. He should, therefore, give his vote against its passing into an act.

said, he was really going to see whether the opposition of the worthy alderman was given with a grave face or not. He saw it was, although he observed a smile on the countenance of the worthy alderman, at which he was not surprized, when he recollected that the only objection which induced him to oppose the progress of the Bill was, the fact of there being no exemption of the Charities of the city of London. He begged to assure the hon. member, that there was not the slightest suspicion entertained of the honour of the different guilds of the city of London; but if they were exempted from registering their donations, the same privilege would be claimed by other corporations, and the great object of the Bill would be defeated. Indeed, such claims had actually been made from Bristol and other places, but they had been studiously resisted, as interfering with the main principle of the measure.

expressed his surprize at the objection which had been urged by the hon. baronet. The more especially when he considered that there had been but one single petition presented against the Bill, and that from the Merchant Taylors' Company; which, while it approved of the principle of the Bill, objected to provisions therein which did not in reality exist. The regulations proposed were extremely simple, and such as no honest man could fairly dissent from.

stated, that he had received a letter from the Merchant Taylors' Company, calling upon him to oppose the Bill, as unwise and unnecessary; but on examining its merits, so far was he from concurring in the opinion that it was unwise or unnecessary, that he conceived it of great importance, and likely to be productive of the utmost benefit to the public, as it would prevent those abuses in the disposition of charitable donations which had so long existed with impunity. He should give it all the support in his power.

conceived the Bill wholly unnecessary, and only calculated to put money in the pockets of the persons with whom the registries were to be made.

supported the Bill.

wished that royal hospitals should be exempted.

said, the objection to the Bill did not arise with the corporation of London, but with the twelve companies.

wished to ascertain whether it was intended to adhere to the accustomed rule of not permitting witnesses to be in hearing during the examination of others. It was right that this point should be settled at their outset. Upon this a conversation of some length arose, in which Mr. Brougham, the Speaker, Mr. Tierney, Mr. Ryder, and other members participated, and it was at last understood, that witnesses in hearing during the examination of preceding witnesses, should be liable to be objected to on that account.

not having been in the House last night, rose to ask a few questions. He wished to know if the right hon. gentleman opposite meant to go into a committee merely to ascertain the distresses of the country, and not to endeavour to discover a mode of relieving them? If so, it was to add insult and illusion to the misery of the petitioners. He asked if, consistent with the Declaration published within these few days by the government, it was possible for them to yield the relief of a repeal of the Orders in Council? They could not; and therefore he thought the Committee nugatory, and the hope of these unfortunate persons forlorn. He required explanation on several other points in the discussion of last night.

said, that what he had stated last night was, that it did not follow that America would, of course, be satisfied with the repeal of the Orders in Council.

explained a misrepresentation of his speech last night. He did not say that it would be necessary to have Vattel, and Puffendorf, and Grotius on the table of the committee, but that if every matter connected with the enquiry was gone into, as held out by gentlemen on the other side, that might be the natural consequence. With regard to the Petitions against the Orders in Council, he had said, that if it had been thought ministers were inclined to alter their system of policy, there would have been a number of counter Petitions. He had also maintained the doctrine, that a country might cease a retaliating measure, if it found itself hurt by it.

, alluding to an expression of sir T. Turton, that the committee would be illusory and insulting, animadverted, in pointed terms, on the use of such language. If the course taken by government were called so, nothing could be more mistaken than the motives imputed to them; and what would, on the other hand have been said, had they refused to go into this committee?—that they had refused to hear the Petitions, and enquire into their distresses; and then, indeed, the charge of insulting would have been rung in their ears. He considered it to be due to the petitioners to ascertain the full extent of their grievances, while at the same time they might determine to persevere in that line of policy most beneficial to the general interests of the empire. With regard to the Declaration alluded to, it certainly contained the sentiments of the Prince Regent's government, called forth as they were by the statement of the French minister, declaring the Berlin and Milan Decrees to be fundamental laws of the French empire, and attaching no consequence to the repeal of the Orders in Council, unless accompanied by the abandonment of our maritime rights. After this he was convinced, if America acted with the impartiality she professed, when this document was produced, she could not, without making common cause with France, pretend to say, that the Berlin and Milan Decrees were repealed—and must be bound and obliged to put this country on an equal footing with France, nor grant her indulgences not granted to us. But at the same time ministers entertained these views, were they, as members of parliament, to refuse to enquire into the extent of the mischief done to our manufacturers, and ascertain how much might be attributable to the Orders in Council—how much, to other causes?

said, that from the arguments of the right hon. gentleman, and from the Declaration of the government which had just been published, he was quite convinced that, till within a few hours of the time, that right hon. gentleman had been disposed to resist going into this committee; and, therefore, he was not now to ascribe his acquiescence to respect to the petitioners, but to his being compelled to the vote, by the hints of his own friends, that they would not give him their support in refusing the enquiry. He denied that the Declaration was well founded, and maintained that the policy of the right hon. gentleman, if persevered in, and not checked by the House, as his former determination had been, must inevitably lead to an American war.

earnestly recommended to the House to enter into this examination with a proper and serious feeling for the distresses of the country, and with their minds purged of all party views. They ought to set themselves fairly to ascertain the extent and amount of the evil, and to what causes it was to be ascribed, with a desire to remove them if possible. This being their duty, he could not help condemning the line of argument adopted by the hon. gentleman who spoke last. It was wrong to impute bad motives for an act which he himself considered to be a good one; instead of the most obvious and natural motive, a feeling for the distresses of the people, and a wish to relieve them. The House would do their duty, and prove themselves the friends of the people by entering into this enquiry, and the more so if they beforehand purged their minds of all those acrimonious opinions, and only endeavoured to contribute the greatest sum to universal happiness.

coincided entirely in the wise and candid sentiments expressed by the hon. gentleman who had just sat down. It was impossible that the House could go into the intended committee with better impressions. This was no common investigation, for the nation was, he would not say, in a state of universal distress, but certainly in a state of universal com plaint, as was proved by the numerous Petitions. He hoped that every member would go into the committee without any bias and for his own part he most solemnly declared that his mind was divested from all former opinions, and ready to admit any evidence as if he was in a Jury box.

stated, that some of the witnesses not being in town, would cause the course of examination to be more desultory than intended; and after a few words from the Chancellor of the Exchequer and lord Stanley,

Attwood, high bailiff of Birmingham, was called in, and examined by Mr. Brougham. This witness was principally cross-examined by Mr. Stephen; but some questions were also put to him by Mr. Whitbread, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Baring, Mr. Wilberforce, Mr. Lyttelton, and Mr. Brougham; after which he was ordered to withdraw. The second person called to give evidence was Mr. William Whitehead, a master manufacturer in the town of Birmingham. The examination of this witness having been concluded, the House resumed, and the further proceedings of the committee were adjourned till to-morrow.

expressed a wish that a document, for which he had called previous to the first debate on the Orders in Council, but which had been refused, might now be laid before the House. It was particularly necessary, as the inquiry had been begun, that this paper should be produced. It was an account of the Exports of Great Britain to all parts of the world, for a certain period, distinguishing the Exports to each country. This was exactly the same document, which, until within the two last years, had been annually laid on the table. If the right hon. gentleman opposite conceived that danger would arise from so detailed an account, he might omit those items which he considered objectionable; but, to refuse a document in toto, which was so necessary to direct many questions which must be put to witnesses as to their trade with different places, would seem to indicate an opposition to the object of the committee.

did not think the production of a part of the account would answer the object of the hon. gentleman; and he could very easily form in his own mind the danger to be apprehended from laying the whole account on the table. By it those parts of Europe and of the world would be pointed out to the enemy, with which we carried on the greatest trade, and much mischief might arise from such a disclosure, when it was recollected how anxious the enemy was to occupy with his troops those ports where British manufactures were permitted to be landed.

conceived the account might be drawn up in the way mentioned by his learned friend, from which no danger was likely to arise.

agreed, that a full disclosure would be likely to occasion ill consequences; but the account, he thought, could be so generalized as to give every information, without producing any harm whatever. The trade to the Straits, the Brazils, Portugal, Spain, and the Spanish colonies, could be stated without any fear of the discovery causing a diminution.

said, he only wanted an account of the description mentioned by his hon. friend. To the places enumerated by him he could wish to have added, Sicily, Malta, and Heligoland.

expressed himself willing to give every information consistent with prudence. If no danger attended the production of the document, he and his friends would be extremely happy to grant it. By fully shewing the system on which trade was at present conducted, it would operate decisively in defence of the measures pursued.

was anxious that the account of our Exports to Spain and Portugal should be laid before the House. Some time ago, those Exports were stated to amount to 18,000,000l. per annum. He should be glad to know how much the Exports to our army contributed to that sum?

observed, that the increase was in a great measure owing to our supplying those articles which were formerly furnished by Holland, but which trade our Orders in Council had prevented.

said, he did not believe a single item of the Exports to the army was contained in the list of Exports After a few words from Mr. Brougham, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Mr. Barham, the conversation ended. The Minutes of Evidence were then brought up, and ordered to be printed.