presented a Petition from the ministers and elders of the church of Scotland, met in general assembly; setting forth,

"That, observing that there was lately under the revision of the legislature, and may again come under their revision, that part of the public law of the state, which subjects Roman Catholics to certain disabilities, the petitioners are deeply impressed with the conviction that they should be wanting in duty to that great and loyal body of his Majesty's subjects which compose the national church of Scotland, of which they are the representatives, did they fail to express to the House the deep interest and concern they must ever take in all discussions and measures which have for their object to innovate upon the laws which our forefathers in their time, deemed necessary for securing to the people of these realms the blessings of civil liberty and of the Protestant religion: and that the petitioners have, at all times, felt the utmost anxiety that religious toleration should be preserved inviolate; and, at a period so full of peril to the security and independence of the empire, are aware of the peculiar importance of removing every ground of disaffection, of diffusing universally sentiments of genuine patriotism, by opening to all classes of his Majesty's subjects the paths of honourable ambition, and affording them all the consequence which property, talent, or successful industry bestow; but that the petitioners cannot be insensible to this peculiarity in the situation of Roman Catholics, that they maintain a certain intercourse with a foreign hierarchy, and observe a certain submission to a foreign pontiff, which may prove hostile to our ecclesiastical constitution, and is generally involved in political connections unfriendly to British prosperity; they know all full well how prone human nature is to corruption and superstition, and how powerfully the Roman Catholic creed, and the confidential intercourse with the priesthood, by auricular confession, tend to subjugate the worthiest characters, and to discipline and mould them into instruments for promoting the purposes of their sect; if, therefore, the House, and the other branches of the legislature, deem in their wisdom that the exigency of the times is such as to authorize any change in the system of securities adopted at the Revolution, that glorious era from which these nations date the blessings of freedom, order, religious toleration, and political prosperity, the petitioners trust and pray, that the utmost caution and prudence will be exercised, that none of the bulwarks of the constitution, ecclesiastical or civil, be, on any account, exposed to hazard, and that effectual precautions be adopted to exclude foreign influence from the councils of the state and the administration of the government, and to maintain this happy land impregnable, as heretofore, to foreign innovation, foreign intrigue, and foreign corruption; and that while the petitioners cordially express their reliance on the wisdom of parliament, and their full conviction that the rights and privileges of the church of Scotland will continue to enjoy the protection of parliament, they presume to annex to their petition a solemn declaration, in which they pledge themselves, before God, to the House, and to their country, that they will discharge, with fidelity and vigilance, the duties incumbent upon them as office bearers in that Protestant church which was established in Scotland at the blessed Reformation from Popery, and will continue to cherish, in the minds of the people committed to their care, those principles of religious liberty which are incorporated with the British constitution, and which are the glory of this Protestant land."

said, he would avail himself of that opportunity to state the great satisfaction he felt at the stand that had been made within these few days, by the lay Catholics of England, against the efforts of an insulting and domineering priesthood. He was inclined to augur much good from their resolutions; they shewed themselves determined to eman- cipate themselves, and were worthy of the support of parliament. He hoped, that their example would have due effect with the lay Catholics of Ireland.

Ordered to lie upon the table.

observed, that the Committee was now come to the second Resolution, regarding the China trade; and he thought the most convenient mode would be to reserve the debate on this head to the bringing up of the Report, when the question of time during which it was to remain in the hands of the Company could also be discussed. He should, therefore, merely move the second Resolution, which was, "That it is expedient that the intercourse with China should be conducted by the Company, and that the trade in tea should remain exclusively in their hands."

meant to reserve what he had to say on this Resolution till the bringing up of the Report.

thought that the British merchants would by no means be satisfied with this monopoly. Was it meant that they should be prohibited from exporting our own manufactures to China?

replied, that it was meant the tea trade should be exclusively in the hands of the Company, though the merchants would be allowed to import from the eastern isles, other articles, the produce of China. It was also meant that there should be no direct intercourse with China, except through the Company; though our manufactures might find their way to that country through indirect channels.

was against continuing the monopoly of the China trade in the Company. From his experience, he was certain that the circuitous trade was much greater and more profitable than many persons were aware of. It was strange, that the British legislature should exclude their own subjects from a profitable trade that was open to every foreigner upon earth. It was more lucrative, he was convinced, than the direct trade. He knew that the people of England paid one million and a half annually more for tea than they would do were the trade open, and was of opinion that it would be better for us to pay this sum at once to the Company than to continue the system as it stood at present. We ought to encourage our carrying trade, as it was the best and only nursery for seamen for the navy. Had it been encouraged as it ought, the country would not have to lament its late naval disasters. The Company had not shewn, by any good reasons, that it had a right to this exclusive trade. The only reason urged in their behalf last night, was their immaculate talents compared with those of the other vulgar and barbarous sons of commerce. But the persons who brought forward this reason, ought to have looked back to the early history of the Company. Had they done so, it would not afford much cause for triumph; as the Company's proceedings, about an hundred years ago, were so cruel, that it was made a source of complaint against them in the House of Commons, and their conduct was declared disgraceful to religion, good morals, and humanity. This would appear by looking back to the Parliamentary History of the year 1694. A few years after that, a director of the East India Company had been known to have practised extensive corruption, and to have given away in bribes to members of the House of Commons 90,000l. for the purpose of having the Company's charter renewed.^* He stated some other facts of a similar nature, and said, that they were so notorious as to lead to the inquiries instituted in 1784. The Company called themselves the protectors of India; but they protected it as the vulture did the dove, or the eagle the lamb. When they talked of their good government and humanity, &c. it reminded him of the story of the Pharisee and the Publican in the Gospel. No reason had been given for this monopoly that would not equally well justify any other kind of monopoly by any other class of men. How different were the tones of the East India Company when they wanted money, and when they wanted a new charter. In the former case (which was an annual one) they talked of nothing but their resources—then they had 15 millions a year of well paid revenue; but now, when they wanted a new charter, they cannot go on without a monopoly of the China trade. Their ancestors had formerly declared joint stock companies public nui- sances, and injurious to the property and rights of the subject. He wished the House to follow their example, and was strongly against the present Resolution.

^* See the new Parliamentary History of England, vol. 5, pp. 896, 914.

said, that the Company in 1792, shewed every wish to grant licenses to such British merchants as were desirous of embarking in the fur trade with China.

expressed his surprise that his hon. friend should have taken that opportunity of making a violent attack on the Resolution, when it seemed to be the general sense of the committee, that it would be better to postpone the debate on the principle, till the bringing up of the Report.

sen, said, it was altogether unfair to argue on the character of the present Company from that of a company no longer existing. The complaints which, according to the hon. gent., had in the time of king William, been preferred to the House against the conduct of the company of that day, came chiefly from adventurers and interlopers in India who wished to take the trade to themselves, who succeeded by clamours and exactions in getting themselves and their coadjutors established into a separate Company, which by its hostile competition nearly ruined both itself and the old Company. Among all the calumnies vented against the present Company he had never heard the strange accusation now so confidently brought forward by the hon. gent., that they had occasioned the destruction of so many of the natives of India! He wished to know where the hon. member had made this discovery, and that he would shew on what authority the accusation rested. It could only have been lately that he had entertained such views, for he had been a member of the Company, and had even taken a leading part in their general courts; but it could not be supposed he would have belonged to the body had he viewed the character of it then, as he represents it now. It was very probable that in the course of British administration in India, particularly in the earlier stages of it, exceptionable things might have been done by individuals. He did not mean to stand up as the universal advocate for all per-sons and measures which had appeared on the Indian scene; but was a system to be condemned because the conduct of every individual concerned in the execution of it was not perfect? Then must the British constitution be given up. It was impossible wholly to prevent devia- tions and irregularities. And if the government of this country could not with all its care exclude such defalcations and abuses as were fresh in the recollections of those who heard him, and wounding to the feelings of the nation, it ought not in fairness to be imputed to the Company as a subject of reprobation that excesses or malversations had sometimes occurred in the East. The system of the Company was no more to be given up on this account than was the British constitution because functionaries employed under it were sometimes guilty of abusing the trust reposed in them. The general administration of the Company and their servants for a series of years past was such as to improve the happiness of the people under their care, and to establish their own reputation for good government. It had, indeed, been echoed by the hon. gentleman, from the speech of a noble lord, that it was to the legislature, and the Board of Controul, that the good government of India was to be ascribed: and Mr. Grant said he did not mean to deny that the regulations of parliament, and the administration of the Board of Commissioners, had contributed to that end; but he must contend that the radical principles of the most material reforms which had taken place in the administration of India, were first developed in the writings of the Company's servants there, and adopted by the Court of Directors at home; that it was their province to originate instructions for the administration of affairs in India, and those instructions were submitted to the Board of Controul, who generally acquiesced in them without material alteration. It was not, however, on their character alone, that the Company stood, that came in as a subordinate question. Nor did they argue for the continuance of their privileges merely on commercial principles; although more was to be said for the origin and continuance of them in that view than the hon. gentleman seemed to allow. In their commencement, queen Elizabeth had been the willing patron of them for national purposes, and did not confound the privileges of great commercial bodies with such abuses as the monopoly of particular articles of internal consumption given by patent to private favourites. The Company contended for the maintenance of the existing Indian system, because they thought it was recommended by the true policy and real interest of this country.

The hon. gentleman had said tea was rendered so much dearer to the consumer here by the exclusive trade of the Company, that it would be better to pay them a million and a half yearly than to continue the monopoly. But this was altogether an exaggeration. The Company neither gained so much by the tea, nor would a free trade, if it could be established, produce the benefits that were supposed. The comparison of the price of teas here, with that quoted from the American market, involved a great deception; for things sold and compared under the same name were in fact very different. What was dignified in America with the title of Souchong, a tea of superior quality, was, in fact, often nothing but what was known here by the inferior name of Bohea. The teas were put up by the Company at little more than prime cost, and all the advance beyond was by competition among the buyers.

The hon. gentleman had very much misstated the ground on which the Company came forward sometimes (not as he said annually) to parliament, for pecuniary aid. They were necessitated to do so formerly because the government had taxed them beyond their ability, on the score of participating in the territorial revenues. All loans of this kind made to the Company had been repaid. Of late the Company had been obliged to apply to parliament twice for the payment of just demands, owing them by the nation on account of advances for the public service abroad; and they had applied on some other occasions to be enabled to defray territorial debt transferred here, which debt had been incurred under the sanction of parliament, and it was well known, never could, in the nature of things, have been discharged out of the home funds of the Company.

declared, he had never any concern with the East India Company but as holder of stock, and never attended the assembly but once, when he voted with the directors, in a case in which they appeared to him to be in the right. It was true, that the price of tea was raised by the buyers; but then they had no other shop to go to.

said, that this did not force them to give 3s. 6d. for teas, when put up at 2s.

rejoined, that the Company put up their teas at a price at which they were sure of a benefit, and had besides the exclusive advantage of competition from the buyers.

animadverted on the expressions which had been used on a former evening respecting the character of British traders. When the discussions took place on the renewal of the charter in 1793, he had a seat in that House, and was appointed by the northern manufacturers to treat with the ministry in their behalf, and he had in consequence been authorized by Mr. Pitt and Mr. Dundas to inform the manufacturers that great concessions would be made to them, although those gentlemen conceived themselves obliged afterwards to recal their promise. He deprecated the continuance of a state of things by which a trade was forced into the hands of the Americans, to which British capital was adequate. At present he could maintain, that the country was in every respect equal to carry on the trade to India with its own capital; and he would put it to the House, whether the people of Great Britain alone were to be excluded from the benefit of a trade, to the existence of which they so very largely contributed?

jun. said, that he had, on the former night of the debate, explained that he did not mean to apply his remarks to British traders in general, and that explanation it was not necessary for him then to repeat.

reverted to the time of queen Elizabeth for the origin and progress of the tea trade. All the best teas were purchased by the Company, and the Americans, whose participation in the China trade had been so much complained of, only were able to obtain teas of an inferior quality. And such was the confidence which the Chinese, notwithstanding the well-known jealousy of their disposition, placed in the Company, that if perchance bad teas were brought to this country, it was only necessary to send out an intimation to that effect, and to state, that those teas had been sunk in the Thames, to procure a full allowance for the money paid for them. If a promiscuous intercourse was once established, and if sailors and persons of all characters and descriptions were allowed to embark in the trade, and to visit India, the consequence would be, that the confidence of which he had spoken would be completely destroyed; and those advantages which had hitherto been derived from the trade, as it was at present constituted, would be completely lost. Upon the whole, he was firmly of opinion, that the trade could not be carried on with more advantage to the consumer, to the revenue, or to the country, than it was at this moment. When it was said, that our connection with India had made millions unhappy, he would repel the imputation by holding up to view the present ameliorated state of India, and by reminding the House of the profound knowledge of ethics and politics, displayed during the evidence given at the bar, by those who had acted in India under the administration of the Company.

said, that the persons from the outports had not demanded the concession of the China trade; and, therefore, he was not disposed to give any opposition to the second Resolution, although he thought the time therein specified for the continuation of the trade, not such as was calculated to give general satisfaction.

was of opinion, that the question, as to the limitation of the monopoly, would be discussed more effectually, and in a more satisfactory manner, at some future stage of the Bill, on the bringing up of the Report or otherwise. For the present, therefore, he thought it would be expedient to postpone the consideration of this topic, so that no impediments might be thrown in the way of the House, in proceeding to the discussion of the third Resolution, which involved so many points, of which different and contending opinions might be entertained.

was not disposed to agree with the suggestion of the noble lord, conceiving, as he did, the present as the best opportunity of discussing the principle of the Resolution before the House. He could not comprehend upon what grounds the monopoly of the China trade was to be continued to the East India Company, and thought the time of the Committee could not be better employed, than in inquiring into this subject. The point for decision was not, whether the monopoly in question should be allowed to exist for five, ten, or fifteen years, but whether it should be allowed to exist at all; and for this reason he would object to the arrangement proposed by the noble lord, deprecating, as he did, the existence of the monopoly of the China trade for a single hour.

was decidedly in favour of the discussion of the Resolutions in detail, and in a committee, as, from such a mode of proceeding, the most material benefits were likely to arise to the House and the country, from the opportunity which was afforded to every member to speak as often as the subject might require. Upon the subject of this branch of the question, he meant the China trade, it appeared to him, that no argument whatever had been adduced, from which the House could fairly infer, that it would be either prudent or expedient to sanction a further monopoly of that trade, upon the part of the East India Company. The House was told, that unless such a mea-sure was adopted, the China trade would be completely ruined: that was as much as to say, that if competition was allowed we should have our teas dearer and of a worse quality than heretofore. This was a sort of phenomenon which he must imagine applied only to the China trade. He did not believe it would be credited by that House, nor did he think that British merchants were disposed to swallow it very easily. But it was plain to observe, that the India Company were desirous to make the people of Great Britain pay for the expense of their sovereignty in the East, and this only was to be effected through the medium of the China trade. If such a principle was now admitted and sanctioned by the House for a further term of twenty years, the consequence would be, that at the expiration of that time a new argument would be afforded for the further continuance of the same privilege, and hence would the India Company become the undisputed and acknowledged sovereigns of the East. He before stated that the vices of the East India Company had been corrected, not by themselves, but by the interference of parliament; and this assertion he now begged leave to repeat. Viewing the state of India in general, and the kind of mixed government by which it was controlled, he did not think that the interests of that country would be more effectually protected by being placed under the direction of parliament than by remaining in the hands of the Company. He was the decided enemy of monopoly in every form, and he saw no more reason for carrying on the China and India trade under such a system, than he did for adopting a similar plan, with respect to the Baltic, the Turkey, or any other trade. In fact, nineteen-twentieths of the arguments which had been adduced, only went to convince him of the impolicy and evil tendency of longer binding up the Indian trade in fetters. Upon those general principles, he would oppose the whole Resolu- tions, but more particularly that respecting the China trade.

after the most attentive inquiry, was convinced that the confinement of the China trade to the Company was highly expedient, but before he entered upon this part of the subject he vindicated the advocates of the Company from the assertion that they had employed an unwarrantably imperious tone in proclaiming the merits of the present rulers of India. In the committee, several grounds were taken to prove, that the monopoly of the China trade ought to be continued, but principally it was urged that the commerce with the Chinese could only be conducted with safety and advantage through the Company by means of a monopoly; that the general principles of commercial dealings could not to them be applied; that their government, their manners, and their jealousies were anomalous, and that no traffic could be conducted with individuals in the usual routine of trade. It was known to all who knew any thing upon the subject, that the emperor of China, in consequence of his fixed opinion that commerce was unnecessary, had confined it to one port and to one season, and required that some ostensible responsible person, such as the agents of the Company, should be present to conduct it. Another motive for confining this branch of the trade, was the facilities obtained and employed by the Company for introducing British manufactures in large quantities among the natives, facilities that could not be allowed to private adventurers. A third argument for this resolution was, that if it were not adopted, the revenue would most materially suffer, and in support of this position, Mr. Baring referred to the testimony of several witnesses who had asserted, that the defalcation might perhaps be to the extent of three-fourths of the present produce of the tax upon tea. The only question in his mind was, whether the government had made a sufficiently advantageous bargain for the country? If it were true (as he believed it was,) that if put up to auction, half a million per annum might be obtained for this exclusive trade, it might be asked, why is not the East India Company called upon to give what would willingly be afforded by others? To this question he had not heard any answer completely satisfactory, and the formation of a contract so disadvantageous to the nation, seemed to imply that the government of India was so bad a thing, that the Company was entitled to a bonus of half a million annually to induce them to continue it. He concluded by affirming his strict impartiality.

objected to this monopoly entirely: and in point of principle, he had no doubt, those who proposed a more limited period agreed with him: for, unless the thing was improper in itself, why continue it for ten rather than twenty years? Their object no doubt was, to produce a compromise between the government and the Company, which he could not approve. He did not mean to reproach the Company; but when it was said, that the beneficial regulations in regard to India originated with them, he could not help just reminding those who made that assertion, that the Company exerted all its force and influence to oppose regulations which their servants recommended. He would ask what had been their disposition towards that excellent man, sir Philip Francis, when he suggested those reformations which Mr. Fox and Mr. Burke had been so instrumental in carrying into execution? But then it was argued, that the Chinese would only trade with the Company: he really never heard before that one of the peculiarities of the Chinese was, that they would trade with nobody but monopolists. They traded with the Americans, and the Americans were not monopolists. The monopoly, it ought to be observed, did not confine itself to the article of tea, it ex-tended to silks and other commodities. It had been alleged that the monopoly of the China trade was necessary to the due administration of India; but he believed there were other reasons. The Company had ostentatiously stated, that they were losers on their Indian trade: but it was singular that they should be so anxious to continue a trade by which they were losers. They, however, demanded the monopoly of the China trade, in order that though they lost by their India trade they might be gainers on the whole. But there was another reason: perhaps if they were to look very closely into the affairs of the Company, they might find that the Company would hardly be able to pay their dividends of ten per cent. on their stock, unless they obtained this trade: and to this consideration the general interests of the country must be sacrificed. Another reason was, that the patronage of China was more valuable than any other. The appointments there were a sure road to fortune, and it was not surprising that the directors should be anxious to retain this certain mode of providing for their relations and friends. But this was no reason why the public should grant this advantage. It had been then argued, that the revenue would suffer. But he always understood that the best means of increasing the revenue was to throw open the trade. It was bad political economy to restrain the general improvement of trade for the sake of raising a little more money upon a particular article. In regard to the necessity of having factories, and persons of authority and dignity in China, he asked whether his Majesty might not send a consul and dignified officers as well as the Company. The political ought to be separated from the commercial character of the government, instead of allowing the Company to carry it on in the several capacities of sovereign, trader, and monopolist.

observed, that nobody had ever contended, that the Chinese would only trade with a monopolist. The argument was, that the trade could be best carried on by a great Company, from the peculiar character of the Chinese. They might trade with private individuals; but then circumstances were more likely to occur to annihilate the trade entirely. The American trade with China, was therefore much more precarious than our's. The right hon. gentleman, who spoke last, had likewise forgot this material circumstance, that the Company had the power of introducing our commodities to China to a much greater extent than any private individuals could do. The stamp of the Company was the passport for these goods. The confidence which was reposed in the Company, was among such a people of the highest importance, and we ought not rashly to deprive ourselves of the advantages resulting from that circumstance. The Company had introduced payments in British commodities into a country which had always before been considered as the peculiar drain of the precious metals. In regard to the remark about the factories and officers of the Company in China, he agreed that his Majesty might send a consul; but he denied that in China he would be held in so much consideration as an officer of the Company. In a place where our country was known, the feeling would be different; but in China our country was but very little known, while the Company had established its character there for respectability and integrity.

denied that he had ever said the monopoly of the China trade was intended as a compensation for the mismanagement of Indian affairs. He had merely observed, that it was given as a compensation for the trade to India, which was represented to be a losing trade. When it was asserted by the right hon. gentleman, that there was a risk of losing the trade to China, by the misconduct of the private trader, he could by no means agree to such a proposition. He could not view the private traders in so dangerous a light. But if, as the right hon. gentleman had asserted, the Company had such immense advantages over the private trader; if, as he asserted, the Chinese would trade with none but the Company, why should a competition be opposed, which, if his argument were correct, could not at all injure the East India Company, because the natives would purchase from none but them? His argument, then, resolved itself into this, that great danger would arise from the misconduct of the private traders. Now, he never could admit the proposition, that the private traders were likely to conduct themselves in such a manner as would ruin their own interests, as well as those of the East India Company.

adverted to an instance in which a merchant sent out articles to China, equal to any exported by the East India Company, and by no means dearer, which he was unable to sell, the merchants declaring they would purchase only from the Company. It was true, there was no great competition; but this might be looked upon as a specimen of what was likely to be the result of trading speculations to that country.

said, he should be glad to know, if goods were sent from this country by private merchants, with the same marks upon them as those made use of by the Company, would they not be received equally well as if they absolutely came from the India House? With respect to the facility of trading with China, he could state this fact to the House, that the first ship which reached the river of Canton from America, did not carry out specie enough to pay for her cargo; but the Hong merchants absolutely supplied the new traders with the means of purchasing the necessary commodities. It was the Hong merchants who became responsible for the good conduct of the traders; and, if they were willing to become responsible for the Americans, he could see no difficulty to prevent their being equally friendly to the private merchants of England. The sum paid to the country for this monopoly, was about 500,000l. per annum. He, and several friends of his, would be very happy to give twice that sum for such an advantage. By a reference to the London and New York Prices Current, a difference of no less than 85 per cent. would be found in the sale of teas of a similar quality. It might be said, that the American teas were of an inferior description; but certainly the Americans declared that they were of a superior quality, compared with those imported into Great Britain. The hon. gentleman then adverted to the great profit which the Company made by allowing the commanders of their ships to traffic in tea; and those very commanders, after paying duty and all incidental expences, were such considerable gainers, as shewed at once the immense advantage which individuals would derive from a participation in the China trade. He then defended the character of the British merchant, the British seaman, and the British agent, who, for the purpose of shewing the danger which would result from a free trade, had been described as ruffians and ragga-muffins; and in conclusion, argued at length to prove that the fears entertained of an increase of smuggling, if the trade were opened, were not well-founded.

stated, that, according to the present policy of the Company, their commanders were not permitted to take out woollens, tin, and several other articles to China. He hoped this system would be abandoned, and that the commanders would be allowed to carry out as much British manufactures as possible. If permission were given, many of them, he believed, would dispose of eight or 10,000l. worth, on every voyage.

though he was willing to concede much to the East India Company, could by no means agree to their retaining the monopoly of the China trade. With respect to India, he allowed that a great deal was due to them: they had spent much treasure, and much blood had been spilt in securing that territory; but no argument of this kind applied to China. Those who called for the trade with that country must run the risk of a refusal on the part of the Chinese government. They, in fact, demanded nothing which the legislature could absolutely grant, as it ultimately depended on the will of others. To those who desired to have that trade confined to one port, as an emporium, he would put this question, whether it would not be better to extend the benefits of the trade to the whole country, than to restrain it to one particular point? An argument against opening the trade, had been deduced from the nature of the Chinese government, which was hostile to commerce; but was it not strange, that the Chinese government should permit the residence of the agents of a commercial company, and not suffer the agents of free traders and the representatives of a monarch, to come within their territories? The country could no longer avoid opening the trade, and the arguments of those. who were for continuing the monopoly for five or ten years longer, would be as good at the expiration of that period as they were now. He would vote against the Resolution, in the hope, that the demand for British manufactures in China would, under a free trade, increase to an almost incalculable extent.

said, that he did not wish to enter into the subject, as it would be more convenient to discuss it in another stage; but as the Committee was likely to come to a vote on the Resolution, he wished to say, that if he did not vote against the Resolution now, he by no means engaged not to oppose the continuation of the China monopoly for an indefinite period, or even for six months after the expiration of the charter. All his vote would say was, that he did not wish immediately to abolish the monopoly. He was by no means convinced that the monopoly was necessary to China or to the India Company. America had carried on a large trade with China; in consequence of the war with that country a vacuum was created, which it would be necessary to fill up with free trade from Britain. He purposely abstained from entering into the question, but he would vote for the Resolution.

said, this was the moment for throwing open the monopoly, when we were at war with America.

said he should vote for the Resolution, in the understanding that the monopoly should be continued only for a short period.

would also vote for it, on the consideration of there being no restriction in point of time.

The Resolution was then put and carried without a division.

said, as the third Resolution embraced such an extensive field, there was little prospect of coming to any decision on it that night. As the Resolution was complex, it would be advisable to consider each provision as a separate question. He wished, therefore, to open the discussion with the first branch of the Resolution, and the debate on it might be carried on to a reasonable hour. He wished at present merely to call the attention of the House to those supplementary regulations in the Resolutions which did not stand in it as originally framed. One great feature, not in the former, was the restriction of the intercourse between the British and the people of India. This intercourse, he thought, should be subject to all those controuls which had been found adequate from time to time. One other leading branch of regulation was, with respect to the strengthening the hands of the Company, to enable them to guard against any abuse of intercourse. This principle existed in the law as it now stood. At present they could send home any person whom they conceived to be dangerous to the tranquillity of the country. He wished to follow the same principle, however, still farther, and to establish a proper controul over Europeans in the interior of the country, so that protection might be immediately given to the natives without the delay and inconvenience of an application to the supreme courts of the country. In the course of the Bill he would offer additional regulations for that purpose. He would proceed now to the particular branch of the Resolution.

After a desultory conversation, in which lords Milton and Castlereagh, Messrs. Ponsonby, Robinson, C. Grant, Huskisson, Stewart Wortley, and Wynn, took a part, the several Resolutions, up to the 12th inclusive, were agreed to, with the exception of the 7th and 8th, which were postponed in consequence of a solicitude expressed to afford more time to the Court of Directors, and the shipping interest of this country, to consider these Resolutions which refer to the employment of India shipping. The 13th Resolution, which relates to the introduction of Christianity into India, was also postponed for further consideration, in consequence of their recent intro- duction to the notice of the House. Upon the subject of these Resolutions lord Castlereagh expressed a wish that such a delicate question should be as little discussed in that House as possible, but that the arguments connected with it should by those who were agreed on the main points, be left to the discussion of that Board of Controul, which was invested with the power of superintending the government of India, by which Board he had no doubt that adequate provisions would be made to meet the views of the House.

The House having resumed, the chairman reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again this day.