presented the following Papers:

SUBSTANCE of the Engagements between the Courts of St. Petersburgh and Stockholm, signed at St. Petersburgh, the 24th of March, 1812, so far as the same are referred to in the Treaty between his Majesty and the King of Sweden, signed at Stockholm on the 3d of March, 1813.

The object of the emperor of Russia and the king of Sweden, in forming an alliance, is stated to be for the purpose of securing reciprocally their states and possessions against the common enemy.

The French government having, by the occupation of Swedish Pomerania, committed an act of hostility against the Swedish government, and by the movement of its armies having menaced the tranquillity of the empire of Russia, the contracting parties engage to make a diversion against France and her allies, with a combined force of 25 or 30,000 Swedes, and of 15 or 20,000 Russians, upon such point of the coast of Germany as may be judged most convenient for that purpose.

As the king of Sweden cannot make this diversion in favour of the common cause consistently with the security of his dominions, so long as he can regard the kingdom of Norway as an enemy, his majesty the emperor of Russia engages, either by negotiation or by military co-operation, to unite the kingdom of Norway to Sweden. He engages, moreover, to guarantee the peaceable possession of it to his Swedish majesty.

The two contracting parties engage to consider the acquisition of Norway by Sweden as a preliminary military operation to the diversion on the coast of Germany, and the emperor of Russia promises to place for this object, at the disposal and under the immediate orders of the Prince Royal of Sweden, the corps of Russian troops above stipulated.

The two contracting parties being unwilling, if it can be avoided, to make an enemy of the king of Denmark, will propose to that sovereign to accede to this alliance, and will offer to his Danish majesty to procure for him a complete indemnity for Norway, by a territory more contiguous to his German dominions, provided his Danish majesty will cede for ever his rights on the kingdom of Norway to the king of Sweden.

In case his Danish majesty shall refuse this offer, and shall have decided to remain in alliance with France, the two contracting parties engage to consider Denmark as their enemy.

As it has been expressly stipulated that the engagement of his Swedish majesty to operate with his troops in Germany in favour of the common cause, shall not take effect until after Norway shall have been acquired by Sweden, either by the cession of the king of Denmark, or in consequence of military operations, his majesty the king of Sweden engages to transport his army into Germany, according to a plan of campaign to be agreed upon, as soon as the above object shall have been attained.

His Britannic Majesty to be invited by both powers to accede to, and to guarantee the stipulations contained in the said treaty.

By a subsequent Convention, signed at Abo, the 30th of August 1812, the Russian auxiliary force was to be carried to 35,000 men.

An ACCOUNT of Bills of Exchange drawn on the Lords Commissioners of his Majesty's Treasury, and of Monies issued under their Lordships' Warrants, for the Service of the Swedish Government, in virtue of the Treaty of the 3d March, 1813.

Memorandum of Swedish troops arrived at Stralsund:—

Foreign Office, June 16, 1813.

"It appears by the latest advices received from his Majesty's servants on the continent, that successive divisions of Swedish troops had arrived at Stralsund from their different points of embarkation in Sweden: the total strength of which (exclusive of a corps of Pomeranians) is stated to amount to about 28,000 men."

said, that after the disposal of the profits by the existing Act, which had never been attended to, the present Resolution could only arise from parliamentary infatuation. He should not oppose it, but when all the Resolutions came to be disposed of, he should endeavour in two or three concise Resolutions to express the real state of the Company's affairs.—This Resolution, together with the 6th, was agreed to.

The question being put on the seventh Resolution,

observed, that this Resolution, which obliged the Company to separate their political from their commercial accounts, would be of no avail, as the Company would, according to custom, refer every thing to political expence.

said, that the Company would be checked by the Board of Controul.

The Resolution was agreed to.

The eighth Resolution, concerning India-built shipping, was negatived, lord Castlereagh having stated, that it was his intention to omit this subject in the Bill.

On reading the ninth Resolution,

objected to the Company making dividends, without having in fact any profits; whereas, in former times, they applied to parliament, when the funds out of which those dividends were payable were not sufficient, and this wholesome practice gave the House a paramount controul over their management. By their charter the dividends were to be paid out of the surplus of the territorial revenue in India, after discharging the necessary expences, but now they were in the practice of making dividends for themselves at any rate, and for which they provided by loans or any other way they thought most convenient. It was not to be endured, that after the experience the House had had, the Company should have another lease of 20 years, to go on precisely in the same manner. He thought it necessary, in consequence, to provide a clause by which they should be prevented from making dividends for themselves, unless they had really a surplus of territorial revenue, and obliging them, in case this should fail, to apply to parliament.

thought the Company ought to have their funds at their own disposal, unless parliament should come forward to gurantee the payment of their dividends.

denied that the Company's dividends were to be paid out of their territorial funds. The trade with China alone was sufficient to cover their dividends. Their dividends were paid out of the net produce of their sales at home.

thought the noble lord and he differed only in appearance, but not in point of fact. The dividends were from the net produce of the sales, but these sales were from investments made in India, on the faith of the territorial revenue.

said, it was the intention of the Resolution to prevent the Company from applying their territorial revenue to purposes of commerce without the special consent of the Board of Controul, as there would, in that case, be an unfair competition against the private trader.

wished to have some parliamentary check on the Company, with respect to their dividends, as the Company, he contended, had been known to borrow money from this country, and send it out to India, for the purpose of procuring investments, out of which the dividends have been paid here.

The Resolution was then agreed to, as were also the tenth and eleventh Resolutions.

then moved the third Resolution, which had been previously postponed.

expressed his wish, rather to go on with the twelfth and thirteenth Resolutions; and to postpone the third till to-morrow, as a right hon. friend of his, (Mr. Tierney), who proposed making an amendment on this Resolution, was still confined, from the unfortunate accident he had met with, but would be able, in all probability, to attend in his place tomorrow.

was anxious to afford every accommodation; but any postponement till to-morrow would be extremely inconvenient, as there were other matters of sufficient importance to occupy the whole of to-morrow night.

The third Resolution having been read,

was aware of the inconvenience which would arise from delaying the progress of this important question, and could only have been induced to propose the postponement of the consideration of the third Resolution, in the apprehension that the time of the House might be occupied in discussing those which remained. As, however, it was thought expedient not to acquiesce in his suggestion, he should take the liberty of proposing an amendment, which was consistent with that his right hon. friend (Mr. Tierney) had in contemplation. The object of the present Resolution was to throw open the trade to India altogether. This was a measure of so much importance, that he thought it ought not to be adopted with too much precipitation. He thought it much better that the proposed alteration in the trade as it at present existed, should be effected gradually, and to this end he conceived the best course to pursue, in the first instance, would be, at the same time that vessels were allowed to sail from every port of the empire to India, that in their return they should be confined to the port of London only. He meant not by this arrangement to confine the trade ultimately to the port of London, but he did think that such a mode of proceeding would tend to dissipate many of those alarms which were now felt in the contemplation of the intended changes. As it respected the merchants, this arrangement would be found most advantageous; and, in the end, he was inclined to think that all parties would find themselves in a more beneficial situation. By this plan, also, the gentlemen of the out-ports would have an opportunity of trying that expe- riment without any possibility of danger to themselves, and the government would have the advantage of witnessing the effect of the experiment without endangering their revenue. He was aware that the port of London could have no particular claim to preference, except so far as it was best calculated to answer the purposes of the merchants in general. Establishments had been formed in the port of London, however, with the view of affording facilities to a trade of such magnitude, which did not exist in other ports, and he thought it but fair that those persons who had embarked in these establishments should have every encouragement which circumstances would allow, and not be hurled at once into ruin. By taking this sort of middle course, that asperity of disappointment, which, under other circumstances, might arise, would be avoided, and the measure would be regarded in a less obnoxious light. If the House agreed to the amendment which he should propose, it would be easy to suggest other regulations which its adoption would naturally require. The House might not be inclined to agree in the view which he took of the case, but, in all events, he entreated them, in making the experiment they had in view, to be cautious, and weigh well the possible results as well to private individuals as to the nation at large. The hon. gentleman concluded by moving an amendment, the object of which was to confine the return of vessels from India to the port of London. If this amendment was agreed to, he should propose such a limited period for the continuance of the arrangement, as the House might be disposed to agree to. He would, for the present, propose five years.

supported the amendment, on the ground that such a limitation would operate to the better security of the revenue, and would offer a more convenient market for foreigners.

opposed the general principle of the third Resolution, and said, that the amendment of the hon. gentleman only went to confine the delusion to a shorter period than that which the Resolution itself proposed. If it really was the interest of the merchants to make their return to the port of London, they had it in their power so to do under the present clause: it was unnecessary, therefore, to come to any specific regulation for that purpose. In his opinion, the out-ports had already ceded too much, and had got much less than they had a right to expect; he must object, therefore, to any proposition which tended, in the slightest degree, to lessen those privileges which the noble lord was inclined to grant them. The object of the hon. gentleman who moved the amendment, seemed to be, to bring under the eye and controul of the East India Company those persons who were their competitors in trade. This was the very thing which he deprecated. What he was anxious for was, that the trade should be perfectly free and unshackled. To attain this, he had already used his most strenuous exertions, and having failed, it now only remained for him to take care that no new shackles were imposed, or no new measure adopted, the effect of which would be, to render the arrangements of the noble lord more oppressive than they at present really were. He should, therefore, give his decided negative to the amendment of his hon. friend.

advocated the claims of the out-ports, and contended that they only asked to participate in the same advantages which were already enjoyed by the Americans. He denied that the opening of the trade to India was a matter of experiment, on the contrary, he was satisfied that the House would agree with him in believing, that from the evidence which had been submitted, the certainty of success was clear and manifest. As to danger, none was to be apprehended. Those gentlemen who had been examined at the bar, had distinctly stated, that no apprehensions were to be entertained that any considerable number of persons would attempt to settle in India, and if they did, the regulations which were there in existence would be quite adequate to prevent the recurrence of any ill consequences from such an event. With respect to the proposition of the hon. gentleman who moved the amendment, he thought it one of the most extraordinary he had ever heard. It was neither more nor less than saying to the out-ports, "we will grant you a free trade to India, but will deprive you, by bringing you to the port of London, of the advantages which yon would be likely to derive from such a privilege." He denied that it was the interest of the merchants of the out-ports to bring their goods to the port of London. He would ask, could it be the interest of the manufacturers of Lancashire to have their cottons brought to London instead of to Liverpool? Would it not be far more for their benefit to have the raw material of their manufactures brought to that port which was most convenient to the place of its consumption? For his own part, he was distinctly of opinion that the out-ports should be perfectly free to take their cargoes to whatever place, in their own opinion, might be most conducive to their interests. With regard to the alarm which was felt respecting the collection of the revenue, he denied that any just ground existed for such an alarm, and contended that the smuggling in the out-ports was nothing when compared with the port of London. If this argument was once admitted it might as well be said that the vessels from the West Indies and other places should be excluded from the out-ports.

said, the merchants of the out-ports were infinitely obliged to the hon. gentleman who had moved the amendment for the care which he seemed to take of their interests. They could hardly help regarding his professed friendship for them, however, with some degree of distrust, when they recollected that he had come down that night, as the professed representative of a night hon. gentleman (Mr. Tierney), who was the acknowledged advocate of the East India Company—

"Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes."

The general policy of the measure prepared for the consideration of the House was so evident, that it required little argument to support it. Nothing could be more satisfactory to him than to find that the general merits of this measure had been acceded to by the House upon no other evidence than that which had been presented by the India Company itself. The out-ports had an immense body of evidence which they could have brought forward, but this he was extremely happy to find was wholly unnecessary. In conclusion, the hon. gentleman said he perfectly agreed in what had fallen from the hon. member who spoke last.

observed, that there had been already so much said on the subject, that he should have felt it unnecessary to make any further remarks, but that he was influenced by a sense of duty to enter his protest against the measures that were in contemplation, which he considered most dangerous and detrimental to the country. The cause of the success of the Americans in the trade to India consisted in their neutral character, and he deeply regretted that they had ever been admitted to a participation of that trade; but unless they could transform the out-ports into neutrals, they could not give them the advantages possessed by the Americans. There was great delusion upon this subject—delusion which was almost become proverbial: but yet it was so eagerly sought by the out-ports, that he might apply to them the line in the old song—

"Little Water Wagtail, come and be killed." The gentlemen of the out-ports were ready to be killed—they embraced the delusion, and would suffer destructive consequences. If no beneficial effect could be proved to be likely to arise, the proposed change should not take place. They should not, with a sweeping hand, turn adrift those numerous classes of persons who had been ingrafted on the present system for a period of 200 years. It was true, that in one sense their lease was out, but he had always heard, that when the tenant had been an improving and eligible one, a sensible landlord seldom refused a renewal of it, unless when a much greater benefit could be expected by not doing so, which was not the case in the present instance. A great statesman, now no more, had once exclaimed, "Perish commerce—live the constitution!" he would adopt his words, and apply them to the proposed commerce of the out-ports—he would say, Perish that commerce—live the constitution! Live the country! Live all that was valuable, either in this country or in India! It was for the good of the whole empire that every commodity should be brought from India to the port of London. The Company were often taunted with having given up the export trade, by some gentlemen, while others charged them with not being disposed to give up any thing. Now, he thought it rather hard to be taunted in both ways, and the fact was, that they had never given up the export trade, there had been only something said of it in conversation. The present measure, he contended, was the consequence of disappointment in every other trade, for which the Company were now to suffer. In this spirit of blind speculation skates and warming-pans had been sent to a climate where ice was a phenomenon totally unknown. Scrambling and clamour would surely attend the opening of the trade, which, he thought, should be more wisely confined to Billingsgate than extended to the out-ports. With re- spect to the taunting language about conceding and conciliating, he said, the Company had conceded nothing, though they were willing to adopt any fair and liberal measure of arrangement.

said, in explanation, that he did not desire the outports to be made neutral, but placed on the same footing as neutrals in India.

said, that he saw some difficulties in deciding upon the present question, but from a fair and impartial consideration of all the circumstances, he thought it, on the whole, most desirable, that the East India Company should acquiesce in the regulations which had been submitted to the legislature. On one point he entertained no doubt, that of giving the import trade to the out-ports, when they gave them the export trade. The inconveniences which would result from changing place, from delays which would arise by the necessity of having two warehouses, instead of the merchant bringing his cargo at once to his own door, and the loss of time in waiting for the sales of the Company, three, four, or five months, would be productive of great loss and injury to the merchant at the out-port, who might thus lose the opportunity of re-shipping his goods for another market. Such a proposition appeared to him to be the merest mockery. Much had been said also of the danger which would be incurred in the department of the revenue, by suffering the out-ports to import direct from India, but this apprehended danger, he did not hesitate to say, appeared to him most visionary. The Company had laid much more stress on the evidence of Mr. Vivian, the solicitor of the excise, than on that of the commissioners of customs and excise. For his part, he knew Mr. Vivian, and entertained the highest respect for his character and ability, but he was the last person whom he would consent to take as authority upon the subject, nor had he ever read any thing more misconceived than his evidence. He had said so to Mr. Vivian himself, for he would assert nothing there that he had not mentioned in his presence. For his own part, he believed there was more danger of smuggling in the port of London, than all the rest of the kingdom. The facilities for illicit practice from the channel up to London on each side were innumerable, nor with all the assiduity that could be exerted, was it found possible to prevent it. The right hon. gentleman then commented on the evidence of Mr. Vivian, and adduced several arguments and facts to disprove the statements which had been made relative to this part of the subject, and concluded by again expressing his firm conviction, that all the fears of smuggling were visionary, and that the manifests would be sufficient to protect the revenue from this evil.

senior, observed, that the first expectation which had been entertained of the great advantages to be gained from opening the trade appeared now, in a great degree, to have subsided, while the measures which had first been contended for were contended for still as strongly as ever. Whatever opinion might be entertained of the merits or demerits of the Company during the period they had enjoyed the exclusive trade to India, the vast importance of the subject in all its branches should be well weighed, more particularly as there was another great interest depending on the result of their decision, whose happiness or misery would in so great a degree be affected by it. The chief arguments which had been advanced by the opponents of the Company were founded in theory and presumption, while the evidence of facts was invariably against them. The consequences which were likely to follow could not be remedied by any after regulation. The hon. gentleman then advanced a variety of arguments on the danger of smuggling, and defended the conduct of the Company from the charges brought against them. It would be extremely proper to make some experiment on a less extended scale, by the success of which they would be able to legislate a measure of larger compass, should the nation in future deem such a measure proper. He cordially supported the motion of the hon. gentleman.

was disposed to give full credit to the directors for sincerity, and for believing the assertions which they made on the subject of the Indian trade; but he could not consent to give up his judgment to them, or believe that the merchants of the out-ports were not equally capable of judging with the East-India Company, how far a free trade to India could be carried on to advantage. The people of the North country could build ships fit to sail round the world as well as the East India Company. The two ships in which captain Cook sailed round the world were built at Whitby. Captain Cook himself was a Yorkshire-man, and chose those ships in preference to any other, and he believed they lasted uncommonly well. The fact was, that the East-India Company fitted out ships 20, 30, and even 40 per cent. dearer than ordinary merchants did. He was informed by one of the Company's ship-builders whom he would not name, that the Company paid for their shipping 40l. per ton. He asked that gentleman at what rate he could fit out a merchantman for Calcutta, in his own way, and he said he thought he could do for 25l. that for which the Company were paying 40l. This was carrying on trade at an extraordinary rate indeed! The India Company's ships were fitted up very expensively; but it was by no means necessary to fit out vessels so expensively for the purpose of carrying out goods to India. The captains in the North were quite astonished when told of the expence of the Company's ships. The hon. gentleman ridiculed the pretensions of the India Company to continue the monopoly, because they had been suffered to monopolize so long. Indeed, these pretensions called to his memory a Petition which was presented in the 15th century from Bridport, praying the king and council not to allow hawsers and cables to be manufactured in any other part of England, because the inhabitants of that place had derived considerable benefit from having long exclusively enjoyed the manufacture of these articles. He also recollected a petition from Worcester, that no village in the neighbourhood should be allowed to manufacture woollen cloth, but that the manufacture should be confined to the inhabitants of that city, because they had long derived great advantage from it. But many other instances, of equally absurd pretension, might be quoted; none, however, he must confess, at all on a par, or approaching to par with the pretensions set forth upon this subject by the merchants upon the banks of the Thames. In fact, their monopoly was so excessive, that government could not send a thief to Botany Bay, without a licence from the India Company, and it occurred to him, that a friend of his at Hull having once hired a ship to government, for taking out transports, brought home some wood, which, of course, he was obliged to commit to the warehouses of the India Company. For this article his friend paid 350l.; and it was actually sold by the Company for 50l. Such was the fate of a private trader under the discretion of this famous Company, in praise of which so many writers had been lately in such activity, as to deluge the country with their productions. Among these writers he had lately seen the name of Macpherson, who was, he understood, pretty remarkable for book-making, and this gentleman, in a work entitled "The History of the India Company," asserted,—what would the House conjecture?—why, that the commercial and political administration of that Company was as near perfection as possible. Who paid for the writing of this book he did not know, though certain reviewers had hinted pretty strongly at the matter. In opposition to all these writings, there were but few on the other side. One of these few, however, very recently published, had just come under his view, and among other extracts of letters from Calcutta it was stated that the Indian government, aware no doubt of the object of the pending discussion, had imposed a duty of 8 per cent. upon all cotton exported by private merchants, while the India Company were to pay no duty whatever. Such was the liberality of the Company towards private traders, and he hoped the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the noble lord (Castlereagh) would take care to provide against similar exactions in future: for if the agents of the Company should be at liberty to exercise such partiality, the opening of the India trade to private merchants would be quite a mockery, as no merchants could calculate upon success against the rivalry of the India Company, if opposed by such a system. As to what the House had heard upon the subject of smuggling, which it was alleged must go to a great extent if the trade were extended to the out-ports, and so fully opened to private traders, it was a fact generally reported, that there was more smuggling from the ships of the India Company than from all the shipping of England besides. The report was, indeed, justified by the extreme precautions generally taken to prevent such smuggling, revenue cutters being uniformly sent to watch the ships of the India Company as soon as they were understood to come within reach of land. Now, with respect to the danger said to be apprehended from the introduction of strangers into India, he thought the apprehension quite chimerical, while he could not help considering it as most extraordinary, that the manu- facturers of Manchester and Birmingham should be excluded from trying whether they could, by penetrating into the country, induce the Indian people to buy some of those wares which all other people in the world to whom access could be found, were enticed to deal in. He would ask upon what principle our manufacturers should be denied the opportunity of making this experiment, especially as it was stated in evidence that for the last twenty years the people of India had not bought a single new article of British produce? This, he was persuaded, could not be the case, if the people of those extensive territories were accessible to the enterprise of British manufacturers. But he trusted that opportunity for such access would in future be fully granted, and not left to the discretion of the agents of the India Company. The hon. gentleman quoted the authority of Lord Wellesley in support of the opinion that the trade of India should be so fully open as to enable British merchants to bring home the whole produce of India, which the India Company were notoriously unable to do, and which in consequence was in a great measure exported by foreigners, who could, as well as our own private merchants, carry on the India trade with more advantage than the Company, because they incurred less expence in freight or shipping, required a less crew, and could accomplish the voyage within a much shorter period, the American ships having often performed the voyage to and from India in four or five months. From these considerations, and persuaded that the opening of the trade would operate to increase the shipping, the seamen, and the revenue of England, he declared his intention to support the original Resolution.

spoke in favour of the East India Company, which from its original establishment had contributed most materially to benefit the country—a Company whose shipping and various resources had often been most successfully employed for the service of the empire—a Company which had, by introducing the article of tea, actually contributed no less than four millions to our annual revenue. With such claims, he thought the claims of the East India Company entitled to the peculiar attention of the British parliament. He was astonished to hear the hon. gentleman who had last sat down adduce the failure of an alderman, in a speculation to Botany Bay, as an argument against the East India Company. That alderman, whoever he might be, seemed to know very little of the business of a merchant, although the part of the country to which he presumed him to belong was allowed to produce men of very acute knowledge. With respect to the shipping employed by the East India Company, he would appeal to any man of sense, whether they could be built for 25l. per ton? Could any private ship, built at such an expence, be capable of contending against an enemy of the description opposed to the ships of the Company? or could such private ships be fit for the service of the country, in the event of a war breaking out, under such circumstances as the Company's shipping had to contend with?

replied to the statements of Mr. Thomson with respect to the sale of private property in the Company's warehouses. The regulation of duties which had been alluded to, had not proceeded from the Court of Directors, but was merely local, and he was clearly of opinion that no alteration should take place in that respect without the sanction of the authorities at home. He should vote for the Amendment, though he was of opinion it did not go far enough.

said, he had listened to the speech of the hon. director who spoke last with much pleasure, because its tendency was to bring the House back to the real question before it. The hon. chairman of the Company had spoken early in the evening; but true it was, he had said something about Smithfield, and something about Billingsgate, as if to put them in mind that the question really related to the city of London; yet, nearer to the question he had not gone. He, however, could not withhold his surprize from the conduct of those who opposed the system that was wished to be established, for they would thereby support an untried, unmitigated, and outrageous system of monopoly—he would say further, that the supporters of the Amendment could not be considered the friends even of the present system. The transfer of British capital to India he could not consider, with an honourable director, as a danger; it was not considered as such by lord Wellesley. He thought the people of India had a right to as great an extension of the private trade as was possible to accomplish; and if ultimately the increase of the trade of India should become such as to supersede that of this country—why, it would be a dispensation of Providence to which we ought to submit. He thought the House ought to negative the Resolution before them, or to exclude the Amendment.

argued in favour of opening the trade. He treated the danger which was apprehended from the influx of strangers into India as chimerical; and contended, that the Company themselves appeared to have abandoned that ground of opposition, because it was futile to suppose, that more danger was to be apprehended from persons proceeding from the out-ports and returning there, than from those who proceeded from the out-ports, and afterwards entered the port of London. With respect to the increased facility of smuggling he observed, that the large vessels of the Company afforded greater opportunities for the concealment of goods, than the comparatively small ships which would be employed by the private merchant could present. And he was convinced, that many years would elapse, before the private trade would give rise to so much smuggling, as was at present carried on in the ships of the East India Company,

complained of the restrictions laid upon the private trade, and should the sovereignty be continued to the Company, he feared any explanation that might be made would be of little avail. He wished the Company had confined themselves to the China trade, and left that of India open to the private traders. The Company should be bound to give every facility to private trade, and no alteration on the subject of the existing duties should take place without the sanction of the government at home. But the Company wished to establish an exclusive trade in India, and these lords of Asia were in the practice of opening shops for breeches, pantaloons, stockings, and similar articles, as stated in private letters, of which the hon. gentleman read a variety of extracts. In the year 1793 the number of Europeans in India had amounted to 15,000, now they were 30,000, and piece goods had become in great request among the natives. The investments ordered from India this year, by the Company, amounted to four millions sterling—double the value of what had ever been ordered before.

lamented, that notwithstanding the various services which the empire had derived from the patriotic exertions of the Company, a disposition was manifested on all sides of the House to destroy a system that had produced so much good. He contended, that, however the gentlemen who opposed the Company might exclaim against monopoly, the proposition which they supported recognized that principle, since the trade was to be thrown open to only a few favoured ports.

observed, that when he considered the most wide and complicated nature of the subject they were then discussing, he was not surprized that many gentlemen who had spoken upon it were tempted to wander into more discussive disquisition, embracing all the topics connected with it. But, while he thought that some advantage resulted from allowing to hon. gentlemen the liberty of such diffusion, he could not but think it would be more advantageous if they were to confine their debate to the specific subject under discussion; and that more especially on a night, when, by their vote, they were about to express their opinion upon the merits or demerits of the great cause to be tried before them. The single question was, not whether the Indian empire was to be shaken by the influx of adventurers—not whether the ruin of the out-ports was to take place from the eagerness of injudicious speculation—but whether all ships going to India (for wisely or unwisely, it had been determined that ships should go out from certain out-ports), were to be confined, on their return, to the port of London. He, for one, was most willing to admit that the motion of the hon. member (Mr. Baring), had been brought forward, according to his own declaration, from pure benevolence, from pure kindness, from pure mercy to the out-ports. It did not originate in any desire to uphold the interests of the East India Company; it was not to preserve to that body its exclusive monopoly; it was not to exclude the rest of the country from participating in the benefits of the Eastern trade! No—it was to step between the rashness of adventurers and their ruin; it was to implore the interposition of parliament in behalf of heedless men who did not foresee their own danger; it was to prevent that House from inflicting on those whose petitions loaded their table, the intolerable grievance of granting the prayer of their petitions; it was to snatch the out-ports from that awful gulf of ruin into which they were precipitating themselves; and oh! unex- ampled patriotism! to permit the East India Company, in the generous enthusiasm of their feelings, to plunge into it themselves! The out-ports, like so many Curtii, were preparing to leap into the abyss which they had dug, as it were, by their own petitions; but the East India Company rushed between them and perdition, and were willing to sacrifice themselves for the good of their country: for himself, however, he must own that he did not precisely see the necessity of this self-devotion on the part of the Directors. He really thought the gentlemen of the out-ports were tolerably shrewd and discerning, and not in that state of infantine innocence, and in that simplicity of ignorance, which rendered them objects of the humane interposition of parliament. He was rather inclined to think they might safely be left to take care of themselves. The question, however, narrowed to its true limits, presented itself in a state that the House need not long deliberate what to do. It had been complained by the Directors that the proposition, as it stood, would infallibly subvert their empire in India, throw its commerce into confusion, and create distress from one end of the kingdom to the other; and they fancied they had found a panacea for those evils in recalling to the port of London all the ships allowed to go from this country. But what relation, what proportion was there between the evil and the remedy? If it were true, that sending forth adventurers from hence would destroy all our interests in India, that the allegiance of our subjects there would be impaired, that discord would be sown, and ruin become inevitable, by what possible magic, he would ask, could the simple calling back of the ships to the port of London, not cure, but relieve those evils? How was it to happen, that he who, when in India, would exhibit in his conduct the worst features, that he who would foment dissention among the natives, who would embroil our affairs, and who would weaken our authority, was to be transformed, not only into an innocent, but into an highly meritorious and useful being, by the mere circumstance, that the ship in which he had sailed from Liverpool would, on its return, enter the port of London? What relation, then, was there between the circumstances?—There was this relation, and he wished the hon. gentleman had openly and candidly stated it as his plan: it would render the whole system useless—it would destroy the fabric which parliament was rearing with so much care and assiduity; for the out-ports, thwarted, crippled, and confined by such a regulation, would abandon the trade, and then the East India Company would again possess its monopoly undisturbed. That was the object of the amendment. Five years of disappointment and difficulty would damp the spirit of enterprize, and make the out-ports reject the boon with which parliament would but mock them if that amendment passed. The hon. member had disclaimed any view to the interests of London in proposing his amendment; and he (Mr. Canning) had no doubt that disclaimure had produced on the minds of many gentlemen the same impression that it had produced upon his. In the innocence of his own apprehension, he regarded it as a very generous renunciation; and yet he could not help puzzling himself to comprehend how the interests of the port of London did not interfere with those of the out-ports. In fact, it would be the same whether limited to any one, it would impose an intolerable fetter upon trade. It had been said that it was monopoly against monopoly; that Bristol, Liverpool, and Hull, were contending for monopoly, and London was contending for monopoly. He denied that, however: Bristol, Liverpool, and Hull, were contending generally for the nation; and it was parliament, which in its wisdom, thought proper to impose limits. They asked for no limit, the prayer of their petitions was for a free trade; they did not prescribe any restrictions: it was parliament who prescribed limitation, and it was parliament who indicated the boundaries of that limitation, though it was to be remembered that parliament as yet had indicated nothing: and it surely was not the fault of Bristol, Liverpool, and Hull, that they were in a state of greater preparation and forwardness for the reception of the East India trade, according to the regulations contemplated by government, than any other of the out-ports. He denied, however, absolutely, that the port with which he was more immediately connected (and he doubted not the gentlemen connected with the other ports could do the same) entertained any idea of exclusive privilege, or any desire of monopoly. If the amendment were adopted, its direct operation would be to pronounce trade to be synonimous with the prosperity of London only. The out-ports would be doomed to wait like hand-maids upon the metropolis, and to receive, if he might use the expression, her cast off clothes as the gift of her bounty. But, if they could impose such restrictions (and he did not mean to doubt the possibility), would it be wise to do so? Would it be prudent to impoverish the extremities of the empire, that the head might be swollen to a morbid bulk? It was not right that London should be allowed to prosper at the expence of the other ports of the kingdom.—He then alluded to the continuance of an arbitrary power in the resident governors of India, to lay whatever new duties they might please. The letter read by his hon. friend had been called anonymous. But it was not so, as it had the sanction and the names of some of the most respectable merchants in India. A letter had been put into his hands that night, which was not anonymous, as it was written by the secretary of the government of Bombay, in May, 1810, to a most respectable mercantile house, informing them that the government had prohibited any exports of pepper for England until further orders. This proved the abuse and the existence of the arbitrary power which had been already noticed. The parliament might grant freedom of trade, but whilst this power was allowed to continue, it would defeat that freedom. Was this a state that such a trade ought to be in? No such orders ought ever to be given without authority from home. A necessary controul at home was requisite over these local authorities, and if this was duly arranged, he believed, notwithstanding all the opposition and disparagement given, that the interests of the Company, and those of the country, would not be found incompatible.

admitted that such a regulation might happen from the local duties, but it was intended in this Bill to provide against such occurrences as this by a proper regulation of the duties abroad. It was intended that the Company should pay the same duties as the private trader in every case where they came in competition.

The House then divided: For the Amendment, 43; Against it 131; Majority 88.

then proposed another Amendment respecting the nomination of the outports to be admitted to the free trade; but he was reminded by the Speaker that he was out of order, as the House had decided by negativing his former amendment, that the words as they now stood should stand part of the Resolution. It would therefore be necessary that the hon. member put his amendment in some other shape.

said, he should propose an amendment not liable to this objection, which he thought would meet the views of the hon. gentleman. His amendment was, that such outports should be added, from time to time, as might be determined on by parliament. To vest the nomination in government was giving ministers too much power. He therefore moved, that it be added at the end of the first paragraph, "and provided also that the names of such outports shall be appointed by parliament."

thought this rather an extraordinary sort of an amendment, as the paragraph, as it now stood, directed that the names of such outports be laid before parliament. Something ought to be left to the executive. It would be enough to make it necessary to take the sense of the House upon the names proposed.

contended, that it would be better to have the outports fixed by law, which would relieve ministers from the teasing applications that they might otherwise be liable to. He contended, that the whole subject remained still open to regulation.

observed, that the measure opened the ports generally; but there might be local regulations necessary, from a consideration of the revenue, and therefore this, in the first instance, ought to be left in the hands of the executive, as the natural guardians of the revenue. He was for the clause, therefore, as it now stood.

thought the power might be exercised by ministers for improper objects, such as electioneering purposes.

contended, that the same argument might be applied to parliament, as the ministers, according to the paragraph now, could not select any out-port without the consent and approbation of parliament.

thought the hon. gentleman who spoke last must have misunderstood the Resolution, as it intrusted the power of nomination to government. The exercise of this power might be, no doubt, subject to the review of parliament, but a specific motion and considerable enquiry would be previously necessary.

The Amendment was negatived without a division.

proposed an amendment, providing that with respect to places not immediately within the Company's charter an application should be made only for licences to the Board of Controul, who might, on their part, consult the directors, if they thought necessary.

objected to the private trade having any licence from the Company.

Sir John Newport and Mr. Horner opposed the amendment, not seeing it necessary that there should be any licence at all with respect to places not within the Company's charter. Mr. C. Grant, sen. and sir Mark Wood, spoke in favour of the amendment.

said, he should have liked it better had there been no licences at all; but if that could not be obtained, he saw no great objection to this arrangement, as they might be considered more properly as certificates than licences.

After a conversation between the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Findlay, Mr. Abercromby, sir J. Newport, lord Castlereagh, and Mr. Baring, the amendment of lord Castlereagh was agreed to: For the amendment 122; Against it 19; Majority 103.

proposed an amendment, taking from the Board of Controul the power of obliging the Company to grant licences to persons going to India, which was negatived without a division.

A motion of adjournment having been proposed by lord Milton, it was negatived, and the third Resolution, as amended, agreed to.

The 12th Resolution was agreed to after a long conversation. On the 13th a desultory discussion took place; a question of adjournment was proposed and withdrawn, but at last it was consented to adjourn the debate on this Resolution to Tuesday, it being understood that a Bill should be in the mean time brought in on the other Resolutions, and that they be sent to the Lords. The 14th Resolution was agreed to, and leave given to bring in a Bill or Bills in pursuance of the Resolutions. The Resolutions were ordered to be sent to the Lords, and a conference to be desired with their lordships thereon.