observed, that at the time when the Exchequer bills were first proposed to be issued last year, great doubts were entertained by many members of the possibility of realizing the payment of them. He was happy however, to be able to state, that half the loan had been already discharged; but as representations had been made to him from various parts of the country, of the advantages that would result from delaying the payment of the other instalments for some time longer, on account of the peculiarly embarrassed state of our manufactures at the present moment, and the inconvenience with which any such payment would be attended to them, he therefore proposed to extend the time of payment for six months longer. One instalment would be due in July next, and another in October. His intention was to substitute for these months, January and April in the ensuing year; and he should therefore move for leave to bring in a Bill to that effect.

spoke in favour of the motion.

said he had taken the liberty of stating to the late Mr. Perceval that the greatest distress was felt on account of the payments which had been already made of these bills; and that no further payments would be received. To this Mr. Perceval replied, he did not anticipate any extension of time. But it now appeared, that the distress was so great, that payment was to be prolonged from July to January next. The Chancellor of the Exchequer ought to inform the House what were the numbers of those who applied for this prolongation; whether any of the securities had yet been called upon; and what measures government had taken for realizing payment from either principals or securities. He was not sure if all the Exchequer bills which were long ago issued to West India proprietors were yet paid; but of this the Chancellor of the Exchequer would inform them. He wished also to be informed what prospect there was that the payments would be made good in January next?

observed, that one prospect which afforded very reasonable grounds of expectation, was the opening of the American trade, which would certainly relieve our manufacturers. Government had not thought it necessary to call on the securities.

wished to know from the right hon. gentleman whether he meant to say that the issues had been principally made to persons trading to America?

said a considerable number, but not the whole of the persons receiving assistance were of that description.

Leave was given to bring in the Bill.

wished upon this occasion to put a question to an hon. member (Mr. Kenrick), the Master of the Houshold, whom he observed in his place, whether there was any truth in the report that he was extremely desirous of becoming a Welch Judge? He thought that the House ought to come to a resolution that the office of Judge should not be a matter of political favour. If the report were true, it would be decidedly so in the present case; and he only wished to ascertain the fact, to make it the foundation of a future motion.

said, he had never heard a question so irregularly put before.

said, it was the very fittest opportunity to put such a question, when the situation of Welch Judge, filled by the late Solicitor General, was now vacated, and the hon. gentleman was named as the person who was to succeed him. If the question had not been asked by another he would have put it himself; and he certainly thought it a most extraordinary circumstance, that it was refused to be answered, when the hon. gentleman said he was to found a motion on it.

said, the fact must be some time or other known if true; but it was irregular to ask any member as to his private intention.

said, he had had no notification of any such appointment, otherwise he would not have appeared to-day in his place.

presented a Petition from St. John Mason; setting forth,

"That the petitioner has perused a printed document purporting to be "A Copy of a Dispatch from his grace the lord lieutenant of Ireland to the right hon. Mr. Secretary Ryder, respecting the Case of St. John Mason, esq. dated Dublin Castle, 11th of January, 1812," and ordered by this honourable House to be printed the 2d and 13th of June instant; and that the petitioner humbly conceives the same to be an authentic document of this House, it having been given to him by an honourable member thereof, to whom it had been presented by the proper officer; and that, as said Dispatch or Report contains many charges of a false ands slanderous description, made by the persons therein mentioned against the petitioner, and which are attempted to be imposed upon the House as true, the said petitioner begs leave roost respectfully to approach the House as a petitioner for justice, and in refutation of the same; and that said slanderous allegations, some of which amount to high treason and misprision of treason, are too manifold for the petitioner to enumerate in his present petition; the said petitioner being unwilling to intrude upon the House longer than is absolutely necessary for the furtherance of justice; but that the petitioner most feelingly prays for its indulgence and permission to state as specimens a very few of the slanderous allegations contained in said Report or Dispatch; and that said Report alleges that the petitioner, in promotion of treasonable purposes, had upon certain occasions gone to Cheltenham, Tenby, Dover, and Liverpool; but the petitioner declares, with perfect truth, that he never has been at any one of the towns or places so specified; and that said Report further alleges, that, in pursuance of his said treasonable purposes, the petitioner had gone to the several continental towns or cities of Hamburgh, the Hague, Coblents, and Embden, the falsity and wickedness of which charges are demonstrated by the simple fact that the petitioner never has been upon the continent; and that the petitioner now humbly prays, that an opportunity may be granted him of vindicating his character to the House and to his country, against the said false and wicked charges, and against many others equally base, which are contained in said Report; and the petitioner ventures, with proper humility, to observe, that, in his opinion; such opportunity may, with peculiar consistency and propriety, be allowed to the petitioner by the House, in consequence of the said document having emanated from its proceedings, and having been printed by its order: and the petitioner submits to the House the great hardship and injustice which would necessarily be inflicted upon him, but which, he is firmly convinced, this House is incapable of inflicting, by having charges so heavy, and of which he has now, upon perusal of said Report for the first time, received any notification, recorded upon its Journals, without affording him a fair opportunity of being heard in his defence and vindication; the said humble petitioner further observing to the House, that, although its unsuspecting integrity may not be aware of the deception which is attempted to be practised upon it, yet, in point of fact, that the sanction of its high name has been surreptitiously endeavoured to be made instrumental to the base views and designs of the vile instruments of that government under which he had been so unjustly confined, and so barbarously treated; and that the petitioner, therefore, with becoming respect, most humbly and feelingly prays, that the said Report or Dispatch be referred to a select committee of the House, and that the petitioner be fully heard before said honourable committee in defence and vindication of his character upon the whole merits of his case, and of said Report, and in support of his Petition presented to the House on the 17th of May, 1811."

Ordered to lie upon the table.

wished to oppose the duty on Leather as injurious to the husbandry of the country, and burthensome to the lower classes, on whom it would chiefly fall. It was no doubt true, that war was expensive; and nothing was more foolish than to wish to go to war, and afterwards grumble when the taxes became heavy. His objection was not to the amount, but to the nature of the tax: it was not the best tax that might have been chosen, though it was not his business, but that of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to point out a better. With respect to its pressure on husbandry and the lower classes, he would take for an example a farm of 100 acres of land. On such a farm, at an average, not fewer than two pair of horses and three persons were employed throughout England. He did not refer to the Northern parts of the em- pire, where agriculture was in a more improved state, namely, in Northumberland, and the southern parts of Scotland, but to the other parts of the island:—it was a melancholy fact, that the strongest prejudices yet kept possession of the minds of persons engaged in husbandry throughout the greatest part of England, and particularly in the Western parts. Such was the number of horses unnecessarily employed in husbandry, that in many parts he was sure the number on a farm of 100 acres, was the double of what he had stated; but he would take the average at only two pair of horses and three servants. Now this schedule laid on an additional duty on these horses and servants, as he would afterwards explain. The leather tax operated as a discouragement to farmers in another way. Supposing a hide to weigh 60 pounds, there would be a duty of more than 7s. on each head of cattle, which in so far would be a discouragement to the rearing of stock. The tax on shoes would be felt most unequally; for the upper classes would pay much less than the lower, the duty being laid on by weight, and consequently falling very heavy on the coarse and heavy stuff used for the shoes of the working classes. He understood that the effects of this tax would be to raise the price of the shoes of farm servants, at least 1s. 6d. on an average, and allowing them two pair of shoes per annum, it would be a tax of 3s. a year. The leather used in harness and other agricultural purposes, amounted to a very considerable sum annually. Upon the whole he would consider this as a tax on husbandry, amounting to 2l. annually, on a farm of 100 acres. Did gentlemen consider this nothing in addition to the great expenses to which farmers were subjected? Taking the rent of England at 30s. an acre on an average, the rent of a farm of 100 acres would amount to 150l. This useful class of men were placed in a very peculiar situation in respect to the property tax; for while all the other classes of the community paid a tenth on their annual gain, the farmer was rated, not in proportion to what he gained, but what another person gained; namely, the rent he paid to the landlord. In England, when he was taxed on three-fourths of the rent, that was 120l. in 150l. the property tax amounted to 12l. But these taxes which he was now opposing, were equal to one-sixth part of this property tax. The farmers were at present, he would not say groaning under their taxes, but loudly complaining of them; and yet they were going to impose additional taxes on them, equal to one-sixth of their property tax. He would therefore give his solemn protest against the measure. He would not enter into the necessity of throwing no discouragements on agriculture, or endeavour to show its importance to a country situated as this country now was. In this part of the island every person wore shoes; and consequently the duty on leather was in fact a poll tax, but a poll tax not on the head but the feet (laugh).—As his right hon. friend (Mr. Tierney) now suggested to him, the ministry seemed to have substituted a foot tax for the late hat tax. But his right hon. friend, who had now got hold of the feet of the lower classes, would do better, he thought, not to begin his career under such inauspicious circumstances, and rather grasp at five fold duties on the gloves and hats of the higher classes. Why did he not set on foot a poll tax at once. The wearers of shoes amounted to ten millions. Why not at once, instead of making the rich pay 1s. and the poor 3s. make every person pay 2s. This would raise one million, whereas the present tax would not bring in a fourth part of that sum. He did not mean to say, that he wished a poll tax should be substituted, he only said such a tax, however objectionable, would actually fall lighter on the lower classes.

objected to the tax from its unequal pressure on the lower orders. The price of a labourer's shoes were from 12s. to 14s. and the tax would amount to 10 per cent. on that sum, while it would not amount to 3 per cent, on the shoes of the higher classes. No addition had been made to the duty on leather since the time of queen Anne, for this reason, that it was always considered as a most unfit object of taxation; and what, he would ask, was the time chosen by the right hon. gentleman for the imposition of this tax, which no preceding ministers had ever ventured to have recourse to?—a time when the quartern loaf was 1s. 7¾d.; when the manufactures of the country were at a stand, when it was almost impossible for an agricultural labourer to bring up a family without the assistance of the parish. He should move as an amendment, That the Bill be taken into consideration this day six months.

seconded the amendment, on the ground, that the tax went to levy a contribution on the industry of the poor. He recommended to government not to adopt the sentiments of the Roman emperor, who thought that 'Lucri bonus est odor ex re qualibet.'

said, however necessary the imposition of new taxes might be, the present tax on leather was certainly highly objectionable from the unequal manner of its operation, and the discouragement it would occasion to the agriculture of the country. If taxes were to be laid on the agriculture of the country, why, he would ask, was the titheholdcr to be exempted. In proportion as a tax was heavy on the farmer, it was a bonus to the titheholder, into whose pockets the tenth of the tax paid by the farmer most unquestionably came. The truth was, that the interest of the person who held the tithe was frequently better than that of the person who held the property; and he had known instances where actually a fourth part of the land had been demanded for it for a liberty to inclose.

stated, that the leather tax would be a considerable hardship on the army, particularly on the colonels of regiments.

said, he had been instructed by the tanners of the Borough, who lately had a meeting on the subject, to complain of the severe manner in which this tax would affect them. They had now eighteen months stock on hand; their trade had been for a considerable time very bad, from the high price of oak bark. The Scotch and Yorkshire tanners were as badly off in that respect as the Irish tanners, who paid no duty; and the consequence would be, they would be undersold in their own market, if the duty in England was to be doubled, while nothing was laid on in Ireland.

spoke against the tax.

expressed his hope that the third reading of the Bill would not be immediately pressed forward.

said, that before he could assent to the imposition of new taxes, he must be satisfied that proper measures were taken for securing economy in our expenditure. Were this done, the nation would no longer have to complain of extravagance, and the burthen of new impositions would be spared. He had also to complain that the taxes were not equally and fairly collected. It appeared, for instance, from the 6th Report of the Committee of Enquiry, at which an hon. gentleman on the floor (Mr. Bankes) presided, that the income tax had been by no means exactly levied in Scotland. In that part of the country, the expence of collecting the revenue was considerably greater than in England, for which he saw no reason. These circumstances proved, that the existing taxes were not equally and diligently levied; and till these abuses were remedied, he could not assent to the proposition of new burthens.

said, that he had not risen sooner to address the House on this question, because he was desirous previously to collect the various opinions that existed in the House on the subject under their consideration. The hon. and learned gent. who commenced the present discussion, had admitted the necessity of additional taxation; he might also have admitted that as during the last century every article of use and consumption had been subjected to impost; it was nearly impracticable to resort to any mode of taxation but an increase of the existing duties. It so happened that no increase of duty had taken place on the article which was the subject of debate for 101 years, during which period almost every other article of use or luxury had undergone a gradual increase of taxation. The objections to the proposed tax on hides and skins resolved themselves into three classes; those who maintained that it would be injurious to agriculture; those who maintained that it would bear severely, and with partiality on the poor; and those who maintained that it would materially affect the manufacturing interest. With respect to the first kind of objection—namely, that the increase of the duty would be injurious to agriculture, if even all the calculations of the learned and hon. gentleman opposite were admitted, the case he had made out for the farmers, appeared to be that, taking into the account all the taxes they were liable to, with the addition of this increase duty, they were subject to a taxation of something less than two pounds for every hundred acres. But the hon. and learned gent. had in some degree furnished an answer to his own argument; for he told the House, that if the farmers would but adopt throughout the kingdom the improved practice of agriculture which prevailed in some districts, the advantages which they would thence derive, would amply compensate for any increase of taxation. There could be no doubt that this improved practice would by degrees spread itself over the whale country; and that human labour, and the labour of horses, would be much abridged by the gradual introduction of machinery to perform the various agricultural operations, such as threshing, &c. to which it was applicable. But the fact was, that after all, the proposed increase of duties would not be at the rate of above 4d. or 5d. an acre to the farmer. Could it be supposed that this would occasion any material injury? Still less could it be apprehended (as seemed to be apprehended by some hon. gentlemen) that it would cause any diminution in the existing rents of farms. So much for the first species of objection. He would proceed to the second; namely, that the proposed increase of duty would materially and partially affect poor people. Than this, nothing seemed to him to be more unfounded. He admitted that the poor must feel their share of the proposed increase, as they always felt their share of an increase of any of the duties on articles, either of necessity, or which custom had intoduced into general consumption. It was true that the increase of the excise duties on hides and skins would compel the poor to pay somewhat more for their shoes; but even after the increase, the price which they would have to pay would not be so great as it was in the days of queen Anne, when the original duty was imposed. It had been said that the poor would suffer not only indirectly, but directly. This he denied. The calculation which had been made on this subject was most erroneous. It would appear by that calculation that the duty would be increased 300 per cent. to the consumer. Into whose pockets would this exorbitant increase on the consumer go? The tanners denied that they would receive any of it. The curriers and shoemakers did not admit that they would receive much. But let the probable fact be examined. The weight of a poor man's pair of shoes might be estimated at two or three pounds. The direct tax, therefore, could not amount to above 4½d. or 5d. on each pair of poor man's shoes. As to the shoes of the higher classes, it was well known that a great part of the price paid for them was not in consideration of the leather, but of the fashion. He had still to reply to the third class of objections, viz. that the increase of duty would very much injure the manufacturing interests. He had even been desired to postpone the progress of the Bill, in order to receive the communications of the manufacturers, and to hear their objections. He had received their communication, and he had heard their objections. Every hon. gentleman present had doubtless a copy of the paper which he held in his hand, containing the statement of those objections. The first objection in the statement was, that the increase of the duty would operate exclusively on the manufacturers. Nothing could be more unfounded. Indeed it was directly contradicted by some of the objections in the latter part of the statement, for it was impossible for the manufacturers to support all the objections which this paper contained. They clashed. It was impossible that they could maintain that the price would be raised to the consumer, and at the same time that the operation of the duty would be confined to the manufacturers. He would here observe, that it was not intended to charge the additional duty on the stock in hand, and the manufacturers would therefore gain some advantage by the necessary rise in the price of that article, which they had laid in on comparatively advantageous terms. He would proceed to the consideration of the next objection contained in the manufacturers' statement—namely, that the increase of the duty would check exportation. How could this he? A drawback was allowed on exportation. Goods exported would be therefore free from duty, and there would be the single inconvenience, that during the interval between the manufacture and the exportation, the duties must be advanced, so that a larger capital might be necessary than would be requisite in other circumstances. The next objection urged by the manufacturers (although it had nothing to do with themselves,) was, that the duty would have the effect of lowering the price of oak bark.—Now really if the manufacturers raised the price of leather to the consumer, so much as it was by some said they would do; they would be able to pay more for oak bark, instead of wishing to procure it on easier terms than at present. The manufacturers also complained that the increase would give an undue advantage to the Irish tanners. In what manner? The Irish tanners at present paid a duty somewhat less than that paid by the English tanner, and when the existing duties in England were doubled, it was evident that the Irish tanner would pay much less than the English tanner. But in what market could this affect the English tanner? Not in the English market, for if the Irish tanner brings his goods to an English market, he must pay the English duty; and if, on the contrary, the English tanner carried his goods to an Irish market, he would receive the drawback, and would be subject only to the Irish duty. The remaining objections in the paper, containing the statement of the manufacturers, consisted of a reference to the hardships which the lower classes of the community would endure from the encreased price of leather. But as he had before observed, these objections were wholly incompatible with the first declaration, that the evil would rest exclusively on the manufacturing interest. As to postponement, he really did not see how delay could throw any light on the subject. The whole case was before the House. It was a very simple one. Similar objections would be made to any tax that could be devised. He was not one of those who concurred in the soundness of the principle, that the rich alone should be subjects of taxation.—Neither was it true that taxes which bore on the rich were not felt by the poor. For instance, if (as had been recommended in some quarters) the income tax were increased in its operation on the higher classes beyond the fair proportion, what would be the consequence, but that the higher classes must diminish their expences; that they must dismiss part of their different establishments; they must dismiss the number of persons employed by them in the various occupations of life, and the evil would thus he communicated from the most exalted to the lowest members of the community. The true principle was, that as the rich and the poor had one common interest in the safety and welfare of the country, so the legislature ought to take care that one common system of taxation should, if possible, be applied to them.

contended, that the only reason why the leather tax had not been increased these hundred years was, from a conviction that it would not bear it. It was acknowledged to be a land tax equal to five-pence per acre, and the poorest as well as the richest land would be equally affected by it. He again recommended the sale and cultivation of the waste lands as a resource against famine, and of revenue.

did not mean to enter into the arguments against the tax, but thought that the Chancellor of the Exchequer could not resist the reasons which had been urged for some delay of its consideration. It would materially affect a very worthy and industrious set of people,—he meant his former, and probably his future constituents at Stafford; and those who had witnessed the decayed state of its trade, and the want of work, there experienced, would pause before they assented to this measure. He knew no tax that would fall so much on the poor, from the quantity of leather which the ploughman had in his strong rough shoes, compared with the man of fashion in his light ones. If it were to be paid only on the fine trappings, the smart saddles, and the hussar boots of cur fashionables, he should not regret it. No article had risen in price so much as leather. When he had the honour to be Secretary of the Treasury some years ago, this tax was proposed, but soon rejected.

A division then took place, when there appeared for bringing up the Report, Ayes 66; Noes 40; Majority 26.

moved, that the paper laid on the table, relative to French officers on parole, be printed. He said, the great number of French officers who had taken an unfair and dishonourable advantage of the confidence placed in their honour, by the government of this country, was almost incredible; and he thought some effective measures should be adopted to prevent the re- currence of similar breaches of faith, and the abandonment, by those who so broke their faith, of every principle of morality; the numbers were so great that no former war was in the slightest degree to be compared to them. He thought therefore the Transport Board should be empowered to put an end to such shameful proceedings; or at least to render them less frequent.—While he was on his legs on this subject, he could not help observing, that the enormous number of foreigners residing in this country amounted to a great grievance. It was his earnest wish to give every degree of protection to such unfortunate persons as had been compelled to reside here from persecution in their own country; but he thought those who had come here, and still remained, without being able to produce proof of such being their situation, should be sent out of the country directly.

thanked the hon. gentleman for the observations he had made. The subject deserved every consideration, and government were very desirous to pay all attention to it, though there would be great difficulty in discriminating in a case so intermixed.

said, he thought something was necessary to be done as to officers breaking their parole; but still, from some statements he had received, even those persons thought they had reason to complain. He then mentioned the complaint of a French officer, who for that offence was now confined on board a prison-ship at Chatham. He was a man of great family and connections in France, as well as of education; and he complained of being put into the society of three or four hundred common soldiers of his country. He had stated, that if an English officer, being a prisoner in France, had committed the same offence, he would have been committed to close confinement; but not in such company as he was, for he was actually over-run and devoured, as it were, by vermin.

said, that when an officer had proved he was not to be trusted on his parole of honour, he had brought upon himself a debasement of character which justified his being confined with persons of an inferior rank; and though there might be 400 common soldiers in the same place with him, he had, by his conduct, brought himself below their level.

said, this man had been allowed to go at large on his parole of ho- nour, and had been apprehended in attempting to make his escape out of the country. So many, however, and so respectable were the representations which had been made to the Transport Board, of his being a man of family and education, that he was once more allowed to go at large on his parole of honour, and had a second time broken it. If he was covered with vermin, it must have been his own fault. He himself had visited the prison-ships at Chatham, in which the greatest cleanliness prevailed, the prisoners were well treated,—carefully separated according to their several degrees,—were in the highest spirits,—had many pleasures to resort to, even that of billiards. He begged to take the opportunity to state, that the Board of Admiralty had taken steps to prevent all those who should break their parole, from being allowed to be exchanged during the war; but there had been so many solicitations from various quarters, backed by such powerful interest, that they found great difficulty in adhering to their resolution, though it was so highly necessary. He hoped gentlemen would be more cautious in future how they signed their names to recommendations on this head.

said, there never was an instance of an English officer having broken his parole who was not stigmatized by his government, and deprived of promotion.

mentioned an instance which occurred at the Admiralty only yesterday, when very powerful interest had been employed to promote a midshipman, who had broken his parole some years ago, but the answer given was, that an officer, who had forfeited his honour, by breaking his parole, was no longer deserving his Majesty's commission.

having lately gone over the prison-ships at Chatham, bore testimony to the cleanliness and comfort of all the men there confined.

explained the difficulties under which government laboured in refusing admission to foreigners.

expressed his opinion, that the act of parliament lodged in the hands of government power which might be abused; but he did not mean to assert, that it had been abused. He did not see any reason for refusing residence to aliens, as long as they conducted themselves peaceably and obeyed the laws. The conduct of the general officer alluded to was most scandalous, and in his opinion government had behaved with too much lenity to him, and too great injustice to the private soldiers, in disgracing them by the company of such a man. He rose principally to notice the immense accumulation of prisoners in consequence of the protracted warfare, and he expressed his determination before the rising of the House, to move for certain documents to shew what endeavours had been made to procure an exchange of prisoners with France.

reminded the hon. baronet that such a motion had been made 18 months ago, when it appeared that the rupture of the negociation upon the subject was owing to the indisposition of the French government.

enquired whether any message had been received from the enemy upon the subject since that time?

replied, none; but he begged to add, that, subsequent to the rupture of the last negociation, more than one attempt had been made without success by the British government to renew it.

After a few words from Mr. Calvert, in which he stated that the return included the names of no less than five general officers who had broken their parole, the Speaker informed the hon. member that the printing of the document in question had been already ordered some days ago.

moved, that the House should go into a committee on Mr. Palmer's Per Centage Bill, and that it be an instruction to the said Committee to insert a clause therein, pursuant to the Resolution of the Committee of Supply, granting the sum of 78,344l. 12s. 9d. to Mr. Palmer.

protested against the vote as a misapplication of the public money.

A division took place—Ayes, 40; Noes, 9.—Majority in favour of Mr. Palmer, 31.