said, that from the appearance of the House, which was very thinly attended, he expected little opposition would be given to the proposition he was about to make. Indeed, he could hardly conceive a situation of public affairs in which it would be more proper to arm the government with powers to enable them, during the summer, to make vigorous exertions in any quarter in which circumstances might render it necessary. The public were so well aware of the state of things at present, as not to require any particular information on the different points which called for the vigilant superintendance and attention of government. It was known that the British army had penetrated into the centre of Spain; and, under all the circumstances, the necessity of continuing those vigorous efforts, by liberal supplies, which had already produced such signal benefits on the peninsula, was most apparent. It was not his intention to propose to the committee a greater sum than he had mentioned when moving the supplies, namely, 3,000,000l.; because he thought, that with the advances already made for the public service, it was as large a sum as would be wanted before parliament met again. Having made good the extraordinaries of the last year and the expenditure of the present, he hoped the military expences would not exceed what had already been voted by parliament. There was one source of expence with which the country had been heretofore burdened, which he hoped would be now, in a great measure, removed. He alluded to the expences of our foreign military establishments, which were greatly increased by the unfavoura- ble state of the exchange. In the last year, owing to this cause, a loss of 2,000,000l. had been incurred. In consequence, however, of our renewed intercourse with America, he hoped that evil would be remedied in a very great degree. That the hands of government should be strengthened by this grant, he did not think admitted of any doubt; for, whoever might be intrusted with the management of public affairs, at the present period, must be armed with large powers. The right hon. gentleman concluded by moving for the sum of 3,000,000l.

said, that every farthing of the last vote of credit was applied to military services; supposing, therefore, that the war was continued on the same scale, the present vote of credit would probably be applied to a similar purpose, and what fund would then remain to meet any exigency which might arise out of the state of Europe?

was aware that the last vote of credit had been expended in military services; but it should be recollected, that it went to make good the extraordinaries of the last year. That extraordinary expenditure had been calculated on in the present year, and to provide for it, an additional sum had been voted, which would have the effect of leaving part of the present vote applicable to any emergency.

unfortunately did not understand the right hon. gentleman. He then reiterated his statement, and enquired whether, under the circumstances stated, the present vote of credit would be sufficient to arm ministers with powers fit to meet any circumstance which might occur in the summer?

said, that having, in the present year, granted two millions, under the head of "Extraordinaries," more than in the preceding year, they must, in the ordinary course of things, have two millions to spare.

said, that as no subsidy was last year granted to Spain, every assistance which had been given to our allies there, had been defrayed by the vote of credit.

observed, that if every expence connected with the peninsula, and all other contingencies, were to be defrayed from the vote, not a shilling would be left for the service of any other part of Europe.

said, if the public exigency required it, parliament might be applied to.

rose in consequence of the assertion made use of by a right hon. gentleman, that the present war was carried on with vigour. From the beginning of the contest to the present time, he could not perceive any vigour, except the vigour of expence. He protested against the mode in which the war was carried on; as he could not entertain any hope that, under such a system, its termination would be favourable.

took that opportunity of asking the noble lord, whether he had communicated to the Judge of the Court of Admiralty, the information which he had received from the American minister, within the last few days, respecting the repeal of the Berlin and Milan Decrees? He considered this communication of the highest importance to the American merchants, the seizure of whose vessels was now a matter of investigation in the Admiralty Court—their vessels having been seized subsequent to the repeal of the French Decrees, as appeared by the document to which he alluded.

said, that the paper referred to by the hon. gentleman had certainly been sent to the Judge of the Admiralty-Court. It remained with the Court, however, to decide upon the evidence which might be adduced before them, whether the Berlin and Milan Decrees had in reality been repealed at the time stated or not. It was not the province of his Majesty's ministers to give an opinion: the whole of the facts would be before the Court; and no doubt their decision would be perfectly consistent with justice.

observed, that the question was not of a limited nature, but extended generally to the policy of the Orders in Council. If those Orders were not of a retaliatory nature, they were null and void; if all cause for retaliation had ceased, they must of course be considered completely nugatory; and where seizures had been made, under their authority, restitution should of consequence be made.

said a few words in support of the expediency of awaiting the judgment of the Court of Admiralty, which, he said, would be guided by the strictest justice towards all parties.

said, that the adoption of any step which was not of a conciliatory nature towards America, would be exceedingly pernicious. For his own part, under existing circumstances, he was an enemy to all discussions upon this topic, and thought he should be acting the best part towards both countries, by abstaining henceforth from opening his mouth on the subject.

The question for the Vote of Credit was then put, and agreed to.

rose, in pursuance of his notice, to call the attention of the House to the case of captain King. In submitting a motion upon the case of this gentleman he felt considerable regret, for several reasons: first, because he was of opinion, that individual cases of this description were seldom considered of sufficient importance to occupy the serious attention of the House; but, principally, because he felt that, at the present crisis, and at a period when the finances of the country were in such a state of embarrassment, any claim of a pecuniary nature should be listened to with considerable jealousy. The case of captain King, however, was one of such peculiar hardship and injustice, that he had every reason to believe the House would concur with him in believing that they could not better discharge their duty towards themselves and the country, than by listening to his demands, and by doing something towards remunerating him for his arduous and meritorious services. He hoped he should not hear in the House similar observations to those which were circulated abroad, and that he should not be told that captain King had precluded himself from all advantage which he had reason to expect from the generosity of the crown, because he had presumed to submit his grievances to parliament. The fact was, that captain King did not determine to submit his case to the House, until he found that the most assiduous applications elsewhere were wholly useless. The noble lord wished here to observe, that the case of captain King was in no respect connected with that of sir Home Popham: it was wholly confined to its own merits, and whatever prejudices might be entertained in taking a view of it, if connected with the case of sir H. Popham, he trusted would be completely dissipated by this declaration. The noble lord then proceeded to recapitulate all the circumstances attending the case to which he alluded: adverting first to the expedition to the Cape of Good Hope, under the command of sir Home Popham, who had thought proper, although not appointed a commodore, to promote lieut. King to the rank of captain. He next alluded to the expedition to Buenos Ayres, and to the meritorious and gallant exertions of captain King, both at sea as a captain of the Diadem, and on shore as the commander of a body of troops: and in taking a review of all these circumstances he contended that captain King having been thus appointed, was fully entitled to a captain's share in the prize-money which was allowed for the capture of Buenos Ayres. This, however, had been refused him, upon the ground that as sir Home Popham had not been regularly appointed a commodore, he had not the power to raise him to the rank of captain. The noble lord then urged a variety of ingenious arguments in favour of captain King's claims, contending, that as he had performed all the services of a captain had incurred all the responsibility, and had afterwards received the confirmation of his commission from the Admiralty, that he was fully entitled to share according to the rank he held. His lordship concluded by moving—"That the Papers laid before the House, on the 28th April and 1st May, should be referred to the consideration of a committee of the whole House."

observed, that the noble lord must be aware that there was a standing order which precluded the possibility of submitting any question to a committee which involved the consideration of remuneration to any individual, unless recommended from the crown.

said, that his motion did not bear upon the face of it any allusion to remuneration whatever.

remarked, that the whole of the noble lord's speech went to establish the claim of captain King to remuneration, and unless he could so frame his motion as to avoid that construction, it could not be entertained by the House.

After some farther observations from the noble lord, he amended his motion by moving, "That the papers already mentioned be referred to a committee, to enquire into the conduct of those who had advised the form of warrant for the division of prize money for the capture of Buenos Ayres."

said, he was only induced to oppose the claims of captain King, from an imperious sense of duty. It could be no secret that sir Home Popham was sent out to the Cape of Good Hope, from whence he went on an expedition to Buenos Ayres, preparatory to which he made some arrangments in the way of promotion, for the advantage of the public service. Those promotions had, however, been declared null by a court of justice, and it was well known that the law regarding the distribution of prize-money, distinctly enacted, that no persons could share beyond the rank they held under general orders, whatever might be the arrangements of the commanders under whom they served. The right hon. gentleman after some further observations upon the law respecting prize money, said, that by those laws, however reluctant he might feel to oppose captain King's claims, he was bound by his duty to give a negative to the motion which had been submitted by the noble lord.

was convinced, even from what had fallen from the learned judge, that, had the documents now before the House been brought in evidence into his court, the judgment would have been very different. He thought that captain King had been treated with great severity; while, on the other hand, every indulgence had been shewn to sir Home Popham. He acknowledged the merit of that officer; but captain King had also distinguished himself during the present war in all parts of the world, and deserved to be treated in a manner equally favourable. The hon. gentleman concluded by supporting the motion.

knew the details attending sir Home Popham's expedition; that gallant friend of his was well aware that he was sailing without a commodore's commission, but was only to assume the rank in case of the absence of a senior officer. Captain King was also aware of that circumstance; and such were his doubts, in consequence, that, previous to sailing, he had asked sir Home Popham whether or no he should get his regimentals as captain? This he had from captain King himself. This circumstance of want of legal rank was utterly unknown to sir David Baird, who commanded at the Cape of Good Hope, and was prevailed upon by sir Home Popham to embark some troops, for an expedition against Buenos Ayres. He would not, however, send the troops without a responsible land officer, and he made choice of general Beresford, who, in point of fact, was senior to sir Home Popham. He would state no more in sir Horue's absence; he had for him the greatest regard; but he was sure that no officer in the navy had ever acted in a similar manner in similar circumstances.

observed, that the whole subject had been so satisfactorily explained by the right hon. and learned judge, that there remained but little for him to say; he would observe, however, that the House could not too soon come to a resolution. They ought not to encourage those private unfounded applications, unless indeed they were determined to become a court of appeal from all the courts in the kingdom. He did not mean by that to curtail the right of petitioning, but it should be exercised only when the proper tribunals had neglected doing justice. In the present instance, the House ought to be even more cautious than in any other, for were they to interfere with the navy and army, there was no knowing where the evil would stop; they would put a stop to all subordination, and infringe on the privileges of the crown. After briefly recapitulating the different points of the case, his lordship said he should vote against the motion.

said, that as the House was open to petitions against all grievances, and had the paramount authority to redress them, he should vote for the motion.

was of opinion, that all difference of opinion might be done away in a committee.

The motion was negatived without a division.

asked an hon. gentleman opposite whether or no orders had been issued to prevent men unable to undergo at once the number of lashes to which they had been condemned, from being brought a second time under the halbert?

replied, that no such order had been issued, nor had he been asked his opinion as to the propriety of adopting such a change. He had before declared, in that House, that no man ought to be liable to more lashes at one time than he could bear; but this declaration did not warrant the interpretation put upon it by the hon. gentleman. He did not wish to prejudge the question as to men being flogged a second time, he only wished to state, correctly, the opinion he had announced, and to declare at the same time, that no such order as alluded to by the hon. gentleman had been issued, or was, he believed, in contemplation.

maintained, that that mode of inflicting punishment was the most cruel, atrocious, and unjustifiable, that could be devised.—Here the right hon. gentleman was reminded by the Speaker, that there was no question before the House.

observed, however, that he could very easily bring himself into order again, by introducing his motion relating to Mr. St. John Mason, and which was perfectly analagous to the subject of unjust and cruel punishments. The noble lord opposite had objected, on a former occasion, to the House entertaining complaints of this kind, and perhaps he might object to his motion on the same grounds. He could not, however, conceive an objection less founded; for it was one of the first duties of the House to listen to complaints of grievances; and they had a standing committee appointed for that very purpose. There was, however, a great difference between his motion and that relating to captain King. In the last case, complaints were made only of a loss of money; but in the case of Mr. St. John Mason, the loss of property had been attended with personal injury, and defamation of character. It was that last circumstance which had principally inspired him with that unshaken perseverance with which he had sought for redress. Here the right hon. gentleman read a letter from Mr. William Hoare Hume, member for Wicklow recommending Mr. Mason's case to Mr. Gratian's consideration, as he was himself unable to attend his parliamentary duty. The right hon. gentleman had known nothing of Mr. St. John Mason before; but some complaints having been made to him, of the abuses practiced in the Irish gaols, and Mr. Mason having written a pamphlet on the subject, from his own experience, this brought them acquainted together. Here the right hon. gentleman entered into an account of the enormous abuses and unparalleled oppression practised in Irish gaols, which, however, much to their honour, government had sought to remove. On a motion of his, grounded on the information he had received from Mr. St. John Mason, a commissary had been appointed to inspect all gaols throughout the country. Some abuses had already been removed, and further amendments were expected. The right hon. gentleman then came to the Report, which was the subject of his motion, and he maintained, that it would have been a reflection on the House, if, after an enquiry had been, on their re-commendation, ordered by the Prince Regent, the result of it had not been brought before them. This Report, addressed to lord Hardwicke, on whom the right hon. gentleman passed a high encomium, had been transmitted by the duke of Bedford, accompanied with a letter. This Report, the production of a Mr. Townsend, who had been principally engaged in Mr. Mason's arrestation, was, however, a most curious production. It detailed the grounds on which Mr. Mason had been arrested, those under which he had been detained, and his behaviour while under confinement. It was well worth attending, at first, the grounds on which he had been arrested. Mr. Mason lodged at a respectable boarding-house at Seapoint, within tour miles of Dublin; and he had been arrested because he had been too late to dinner. The Report stated, that from that delay in attending his meals, although no proofs could be adduced that he had had any communication with the rebels in Dublin, yet, owing to the fermented times, it was strongly to be suspected. Mr. Mason was also acquitted in the Report, of having had any part in the murders which took place in Dublin on the 23d of July; but as he had the night after slept in St. James's-street, near the scene of action, this formed another strong ground of suspicion. Another charge against Mr. Mason was contained in the anonymous copy of a lost original of a letter produced by Mr. Flint, as a justification for the arrest of that gentleman.—(Here the right hon. gentleman read the letter, which contained the charges against Mr. Mason, of having associated much with the Irish rebels, and being one of a treasonable committee held in Exchequer-street; with having been at Tenby, Liverpool, the Hague, Coblentz, &c. for treasonable purposes. The names of persons were marked by stars, on which Mr. Sheridan commented with much humour.) Every word of these accusations was directly false, for Mr. Mason had never been at any of the places mentioned in this anonymous letter. The fact was, that Mr. Mason had been trouble- some, by complaining to every successive Secretary of State of the detestable and inhuman manner in which the prisoners had been treated, and his object was, to obtain an opportunity of replying to the falshoods by which his character had been aspersed, by appealing to the justice of parliament. The right hon. gentleman concluded by moving, "That a Select Committee be appointed to take into consideration the Report of the lord lieutenant of Ireland, relative to the case of Mr. St. John Mason, and that Mr. Mason be heard before the said Committee."

said, that he was wholly unprepared to travel through the extent of matter which the right hon. gentleman had gone through, and which could not have been expected from the notice he had given. He thought it was not perfectly fair to give such a high colouring to the abuses complained of in the prisons, when those abuses had been long since removed, and were altogether unconnected with the motion before them. The noble lord then went into the complaints preferred by Mr. Mason, which, he contended, were in a great measure unfounded, particularly those against Dr. Trevor, whom the letter of chief justice Downes completely exculpated. Every attention had been paid to the complaints made, and redress given where they were well founded. With respect to the particular case before the House, it was obvious on the face of it, that the grounds of arrest could not be made public, without the grossest breach of faith on the part of government; and it was quite unreasonable to expect, after the lapse of eight years, that all the particulars of the case should be gone into, when there had been three lord lieutenants, seven secretaries, and three attornies-general, in that space, in Ireland. The conduct of Mr. Mason could be traced during his confinement which greatly aggravated his guilt; for he had exerted himself to effect the escape of Emmett and Russell, who were confined under the mostserious charge that could be brought against them, that of high treason. This alone formed a sufficient ground for the conduct of government. There could be no ground for acceding to the present motion unless there was reason to suppose the conduct of the lord lieutenant had been culpable; and, besides, he might be allowed to say, that Mr. Mason had less right to expect any further proceedings when he had not taken the trouble of going to Ireland while the committee of enquiry was sitting. On all these grounds he felt it his duty to oppose the motion.

supported the motion, and contended, that if there was no time when the grounds of accusation were to be made known in cases like the present, they might as well be given over to despotism; or they had better resort to the method formerly prevalent in Venice, of putting accusations into the lion's mouth, by which any person, however innocent, might be denounced on secret anonymous information. The hon. baronet commented on the peculiar severity of Mr. Mason's case and the bad conduct of Dr. Trevor, which, though substantiated on oath before the commissioners, was yet approved of in their Report. He was disposed to acquit lord Hardwicke of all participation in the abuses which had prevailed, but he considered the underlings blameable. He was sorry that the motion did not go to refer the whole Report to a committee of the House, instead of being limited.

maintained, that the conduct of Mr. Mason after his arrest, sufficiently shewed that there had been grounds for it; nor could he discover any reason for the anxiety shewn by Mr. Mason for the escape of general Russel, except that of sympathy. As for the second part of the charge, relative to the treatment in prison, when complaint was made, inquiry had been instituted. The right hon. gentleman should have done lord Hardwicke the justice to say, that so early as 1804 that enquiry had been made by his lordship's desire, and all the evils complained of had been removed. No possible blame could attach to lord Hardwicke, who, from the moment he heard of any complaint, was most anxious that the cause should be removed.

conceived that, in justice, the motion ought to be acceded to. The noble lord had argued on the length of time since these transactions had taken place, but he knew, of his own knowledge that Mr. Mason had been using every exertion for the last three or four years to obtain a hearing; and he also knew, that his not having gone to Ireland arose from a misunderstanding. All the charges against Mr. Mason were unfounded, as to his having been at Dover, Liverpool, Cheltenham, Hamburgh, or the Hague; and no man could say that any credit was to be attached to a letter which contained so many falsehoods. He also could prove, that he had no connection with Emmett for five years; and with respect to every other charge, he only demanded an opportunity of refuting them. He did not pretend to deny, that Mr. Mason had been highly culpable, in endeavouring to effect the escape of prisoners; but at the same time he should have been confined without having any cruelties inflicted on him. The hon. gentleman then enlarged on the criminal conduct of Dr. Trevor, of which he gave several instances, among which he mentioned that of his having suborned a man to swear falsely relative to the bread with which the prison was supplied. He asked them, whether it was too much to grant enquiry? If Mr. Mason failed in his proofs, let it be on his own head, but it was an abominable insult to disregard the complaints of a man because he was irritated from his sufferings. He exculpated lord Hardwicke, but thought enquiry was necessary.

said, that the question before the House was not what guilt was imputed to Mr. Mason, but what was the presumptive evidence which made it justifiable in the Irish government to cause him to be arrested. Besides, the cases of Emmett and Russel carried back a degree of confirmatory suspicion with them, which justified the conduct of government. As for the letter which the right hon. gentleman had so humourously commented on, it was not anonymous in any sense but that the name was not given, and the grounds of suspicion were quite sufficient. With respect to the merits of the case, he thought there was no ground for inquiry at the present time.

supported the motion, and said that Mr. Mason deserved the highest honour for having been the cause of an enquiry into the abuses which prevailed in the prison of Kilmainham.

was disposed to vote for an enquiry into the abuses which had prevailed during the suspension of the law, and he knew no man more entitled to the reputation of innocence than Mr. Mason, from the continued anxiety he had shewn for an investigation into the merits of his case, which was that of a gentleman of liberal profession, honourable connections, and independent property, plunged into a prison for two years, and deprived of all the advantages he possessed. He was decidedly of opinion that the question ought to be entertained, and with that impression would vote for the motion, though it did not go as far as he could wish.

shortly replied, and said, that even though the House should refuse his motion, Mr. Mason would have the satisfaction of knowing that his character had been amply vindicated by the testimony of several hon. members.

The House then divided,

called the attention of the House to the Petition of Mr. Fletcher, a brewer of Westminster, which he had presented some time since, and which complained of the unwarrantable proceedings of the excise officers, by which he had been totally ruined, his property sold for 140l. though he had laid out 5,000l. on the premises, and a lease of sixty-two years lost. The sum he had been sued for amounted to 200l. which he disputed, and had appealed to the Commissioners and the Treasury in vain, and was therefore compelled to apply to the House for that redress which was denied him elsewhere. The hon. baronet concluded by moving, "That the Petition of Mr. Fletcher be referred to a select committee, to examine the matter thereof, and report the same to the House."

said, that the case before the House was one wholly undeserving their notice, as the person in question exercised the joint trades of a brewer, maltster, and brick-maker, and had been convicted several times for fraudulent practices against the excise laws in each of those capacities, but had been constantly treated with the utmost lenity. The convictions had been confirmed, in every instance, on appeal, and an extent had been issued against him. He looked on the case to be that of a shuffling trader, without capital, endeavouring to make a fortune by evading the excise laws. The right hon. gentleman then read a petition from Mr. Fletcher to the Prince Regent, couched in very strong language, and expressed a hope, that without his making a comment on such unbecoming language, the House would reject the motion.

said, in reply, that the right hon. gentleman had not given any answer to the facts stated in the petition, and again commented on the hardships of the case, the consideration of which ought not to be influenced by the petition addressed to the Prince Regent, under the influence of extreme suffering and injury.

said, that the hon. baronet laboured under a total misconception of the case and of the excise laws, which had been so repeatedly and flagrantly violated by this person, that his own counsel thought it right to abandon his cause before the Commissioners.

The motion was then negatived without a division.

moved the order of the day for going into a committee on this Bill. He proposed to go into the committee merely for the purpose of making some technical amendments, and that the Bill should be re-committed to-morrow.

said, he had hoped that the Bill would have been divided. Some parts of the Bill, he believed, were necessary, but there were others which required further consideration.

thought that dividing the Bill would only multiply law to confuse the magistrates. He should therefore resist any such proposition.

was decidedly of opinion that the Bill ought to be divided.

The House then went into committee.

said, that as the law now stood, no man could act as a magistrate who was not possessed of a landed estate of 100l. a year in the county in which he resided, and acted as such. He had therefore a new clause to propose to the committee, the purport of which was to give a power to the King to appoint magistrates in the disturbed districts who were not qualified by law. Such persons to remain as magistrates only during the continuance of the Bill.

said, that this was the most monstrous proceeding of the noble lord's he had ever heard of. The main argument in favour of the Bill had been, that it was not putting the country into the power of the government, but into that of the respectable magistracy of each county so disturbed. The state in the country which the magistrate held by having at least 100l. a year of landed estate, formed in the estimation of the public one great feature of his respectability. This, however, was a clause which went to set aside the whole of the respectable magistracy, and put into the commission of the peace men without any property. What was it in fact but putting the whole country into the hands of the noble lord's agents? It altered the whole tenour and nature of the Bill; and he was sure that many gentlemen who last night voted for it, and had since left town, would, if informed of this clause in time to do so, come back and vote against it. It was taking the committee completely by surprize. The noble lord might fancy himself in Ireland, and be inclined to suppose the people of this country in a state of rebellion; but Englishmen were unused to such proceedings. He hoped, therefore, the House would not agree to have the Bill recommitted before Thursday.

said, he saw no reason for such a delay. The right hon. gentleman would have an opportunity of objecting to the clause in the committee; another on the report; and again on the third reading of the Bill.

thought the clause tended to degrade the magistracy, and that at a time when extraordinary powers were to be given to the magistrates. He was therefore afraid it would have a bad effect.

spoke warmly in favour of postponing the committee to Thursday, to give time for the consideration of so extraordinary a clause.

Bootle said, the clause was, in his opinion, open to much discussion, and appeared to be very objectionable; he would, therefore, be for delay.

was of the same opinion.

said, as he saw the committee did not view the clause in the same light as he did, he would withdraw it for the present, and propose it, in some other modified form, on the Report.

Mr. Abercromby, Mr. W. Smith, and Mr. Bennet spoke against the clause. Mr. Bathurst defended it.

insisted it was taking the House by surprize to introduce such a clause in the committee, after the Bill having been read a second time, and many members were gone out of town who had voted for the Bill, without having an idea such a monstrous clause would be attempted to be introduced. He was sorry the noble lord should be allowed to withdraw his clause without meeting with the censure of having it negatived.

Some further conversation ensued, after which leave was given to withdraw the clause. The House then resumed, the chairman repotted progress, and asked leave to sit again.

moved for leave to bring in a Bill for enabling the persons appointed to examine into matters relative to the Revenue of Customs in America and the West Indies, to enquire into the Revenues and Property of the Crown in the West Indies and South America, and for regulating the Fees of Officers of the Customs in America and the West Indies.

could not but feel considerable surprize and regret, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer could feel himself at liberty to introduce a Bill of such importance at this late hour of the night, and at this late period of the session; the objects which it had in view, both upon public and private grounds, demanded more consideration than could be bestowed upon it at this state of the session, when 4–5ths of the House were out of town, and scarcely a business day of the session remained. With respect to the first object, namely, that of regulating the fees of custom-house officers in the West Indies, the right hon. gent. would admit, that as it affected the rights and interests of absent persons, it was a subject of very grave consideration, and ought not to be proceeded upon till an ample opportunity had been afforded to those absent persons of knowing the operations of the Bill, and of stating their objections to it. It ought not to be undertaken too, but upon strong parliamentary grounds; but at present there was no information whatever upon the table of the House to shew, that abuses existed in the custom houses in the West Indies, so as to make regulations necessary, or that the regulation proposed by the Bill, proceeded not merely on grounds of expediency to the public, but upon grounds of justice to those individuals whose rights were to be affected by it; there was no report or paper before the House, to shew the foundation of this proceeding, and surely the House would not proceed in the dark, upon a blind confidence in these commissioners, without any the least opportunity of knowing whether they proceeded upon a just view of all circumstances and considerations connected with such an enquiry, or whether they proceeded to curtail these fees, because they thought that that was the object of their errand, and an acceptable service to their employers. With respect to the other object of the Bill, namely, to enquire into the property of the crown in South America and the West Indies, he could not possibly conceive how an act of parliament could be necessary for the purposes of such an enquiry; why should custom house commissioners be entrusted with such an enquiry? Are there not governors in the different islands competent to make the enquiry? Who more fit than those governors? It is a necesary part of their duty one would think, and could not be delegated to others without some slight or indelicacy, but if it be insisted that commissioners are necessary, there are commissioners of public accounts resident in the West Indies armed with all necessary power to enquire into all public matters, without saddling the country with the expence of an extraordinary board; but the enquiry is scarcely necessary, for his Majesty's ministers have taken upon themselves to commit the whole of the property of the crown in the Dutch settlements, which contains by far the greater part of the crown property, to a certain description of persons in this country forming a company not unlike the old Sierra Leon company, to be by them dealt with, cultivated or not cultivated, preserved or not, at their will and discretion. Upon this part of the subject, much constitutional ground of objection presented itself to his mind, which he would not now press upon the House, as it would more fitly form matter for separate discussion: besides it appeared to him to involve in great risk, the whole system of things in the West Indies, and to have imposed upon the government a great and awful responsibility; but that was a part of the subject also, upon which much remained to be urged at some future period. He mentioned the circumstance now to shew, that there were persons enough in the West Indies to make this enquiry, without detaining an extra set of commissioners there, for that service. Upon the whole, he earnestly entreated that the right hon. gent. would suffer the Bill to lay over till the next session. And in the mean time it was indispensably necessary that he should put upon the table of the House, the report of the commissioners upon which the Bill was founded.

vindicated the government in the disposal which they had made of their property, and highly extolled the motives of those who had undertaken the trust.

wished the Bill to be brought in, and assured the hon. member that the report of the com- missioners should be laid upon the table, and that the Bill should be printed, and time afforded for its consideration, before the second reading.

Leave was then given to bring in the Bill.