presented a petition from the manufacturers of Coventry, praying that that part of the 5th of Elizabeth, cap 4, which inflicted penalties on persons exercising trades to which they had not served regular apprenticeships, should be rendered efficient. He should merely move "that the petition do lie on the table;" but, before he sat down, he wished to inquire of the learned gentleman (Mr. Serjeant Onslow) who had given notice of his intention to introduce a Bill on the subject, whether he meant, in his proposed measure, to confine himself merely to the repeal of that part of the 5th of Elizabeth which sanctioned those penalties, or to do away with the Act altogether? He also wished to know, whether the learned gentleman intended to push his Bill through the different stages in the present session; or, having introduced it, to let it he over till the next? In his opinion, a committee ought to be appointed, in the first instance, to examine the whole of the petitions that had been presented relative to the 5th of Elizabeth, and also to look into the provisions of that Act.

said, most unquestionably he did not mean to go beyond the terms of his notice, in the measure he should introduce. He had stated, explicitly, the part of the Act that he wished to have repealed, and he had not since altered his determination. With respect to the second point of the hon. gentleman's interrogatory,—"Whether he intended to hurry the Bill through the House" he would answer, that he certainly did not. But the hon. gentleman seemed to forget, that the present period was, virtually, almost the commencement of the session and that very important business was yet to come on. He (serjeant Onslow) undoubtedly did wish to have the sense of the House taken on the Bill before the session terminated. And this, he thought, could be done without any imputation of hurry. In the last session the Treasurer of the Navy (Mr. Rose) had presented a petition from a great number of persons who were desirous that the penalties should be continued; and moved for a committed to investigate the allegations of the petitioners. A committee was granted—it sat from day to day—and the evidence adduced before it was printed. He (serjeant Onslow) inquired of that right hon. gentleman, whether he intended to found any motion on this evidence? And, understanding that he did not, he stated, at the close of the last session, that he would himself submit a motion on the subject. Soon after parliament met, he gave notice of a motion for the 30th of November; but, in consequence of a number of gentleman, who represented large manufacturing districts (particularly the hon. member for Yorkshire) not being then in town, he postponed it till the 22nd of February, and had finally put it off till the 27th of the present month—knowing that a call of the House would take place between that period, which would ensure a full attendance when the proposed measure came to be discussed. That the country was not unprepared for it, was evident from the numerous petitions which had been presented in favour of it. Petitions of that nature had been received from Leeds, Birmingham, Hudddersfield, Bristol, and many other populous neighbourhoods. Several petitions had also been presented against it. How they were procured he did not know; but the language in all of them appeared very nearly the same. With respect to the principal trade carried on by the constituents of the hon. gentleman, it would not be at all affected by the new Bill, because, it was already guarded by a variety of enactments, totally independent of the 5th of Elizabeth.

said, it was very true, that his constituents (the freemen of Coventry) were obliged by act of parliament to serve a regular apprenticeship, before they could carry on the business alluded to by the learned gentleman. Now, they were alarmed, lest by the proposed Bill they should be deprived of a right which they had long enjoyed. They therefore were anxious that the Bill should not be hurried through the House.

said, that as they were then almost on the eve of the holidays, and as there was no business of importance before the House, he did not think there was any necessity for prefacing the motion of adjournment, of which he had given notice on the preceding evening, and which was perfectly in unison with the ordinary proceedings of the House, with any observations. He then moved—"That this House do, on its rising, adjourn to Monday se'nnight."

felt it his duty to take notice of the manner in which the right hon. gentleman had proposed his motion. The present, it was true, was a very unusual session; the recesses had already been very long, and they had been proposed at most extraordinary periods. But these were circumstances that could not justify the right hon. gentleman in thinking, that the proposed adjournment was a mere matter of course. It seemed to him, that the right hon. gentleman acted somewhat disrespectfully to the House, in not informing them why they were then called on to adjourn to a period not, in his opinion, very common; because it was by no means unusual for that House, as the right hon. gentleman's parliamentary knowledge must suggest, to meet on the Wednesday in Easter week. Now, he could conceive, that the absence of a noble lord (Castlereagh)—the want of time to arrange the documents received by government—or the expectation of events of great importance (on which he would not offer an observation)—might induce the right hon. gentleman to move an adjournment till Monday se'nnight.—But having, at one time, stated, that the adjournment should take place on Thursday, and having now anticipated that day, it did not appear to him to be quite a matter of course: and, therefore, he called on the right hon. gentleman to assign his reasons for taking this step. It was to him, as a member of parliament, a very unsatisfactory mode of proceeding, although the right hon. gentleman passed it over so lightly and indifferently.

said, he was certainly not conscious of any want of respect for the House, in proposing an adjournment which was usual, and in which the convenience of members was consulted. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Whitbread) had himself assigned a powerful reason, if such were necessary, for the adjournment in question; or even for a longer adjournment, if the interests of the public required it. It had always been, customary at this season of the year to propose such an adjournment as that which he had suggested, unless public business of a paramount nature required the House to meet at an earlier period; and as there was no such inducement for departing from an almost uniform practice, he did not think it was necessary to enter into any particular explanation.

had said distinctly; that he did not mean to oppose the adjournment, and had only objected to the manner in which it had been proposed by his Majesty's ministers.

rose, in pursuance of notice; to move for the renewal of the committee which sat in 1800, to enquire into the intercourse of spirits between Great Britain and Ireland. Since that committee had been appointed, repeated Acts had been passed to prevent the intercourse between the two countries; and as it now became desirable that the subject should be brought to some arrangement advantageous to both countries, as a preparatory step to that proceeding, he begged leave to move—

"That a committee be appointed to inquire into the regulations which govern the drawbacks and countervailing duties on the importation and exportation of spirits the manufacture of Great Britain or Ireland, from one country to the other respectively; and also what alterations it may be expedient to make in respect of the same, in order to place the intercourse between England and Ireland, and Scotland and Ireland respectively, in the article of spirits, upon those terms of reciprocity which are required under the articles of union between Great Britain and. Ireland; and that they do report their observations and opinion thereupon, from time to time, to the House."

was extremely desirous that the committee now proposed to be appointed should examine the question for their consideration fairly, and with a determination to come to some certain regulation upon this important subject; as nothing was so improper as the temporary acts which had been passed, and which were in direct violation of the first principles of the Act of Union. It was extremely impolitic always to be looking solely to the present moment, without paying any regard to futurity. With respect to the motion of the right hon. gentleman, it was not his intention to oppose it; but he did apprehend that the object in view would be attained with more certainty, if the instructions to the committee were not of a nature so general as those contained in the motion. The inconveniencies of such instructions had been fully proved by the result of the deliberations of the last committee, which had never been able to come to any fixed conclusion, in consequence of the variety of matters by which the attention of its members had been distracted. He thought it would be best to confine the attention of the committee solely to the question at issue between the two countries; and with that view, he begged to suggest to the right hon. gentleman the expediency of so wording his motion.

said, that there was no wish on the part of his Majesty's government, that the committee should direct their attention to any other point than that in which the two countries were particularly interested.

said, that as long as the instructions to the committee were so general, it would be in the power of any member to bring forward the discussion of any collateral branch connected with the spirit intercourse of the two countries.

had no wish that the committee should go further than the hon. baronet thought necessary; and had formed his motion merely with a view of letting it be understood that the committee was similar to that appointed on a former occasion.

wished to be informed, whether there was any reason for omitting to lay before the House, according to the terms of the act of parliament which was passed in a former session, an account of the population of Ireland?

said, he was extremely glad the hon. baronet had given him an opportunity of explaining to the House the cause of this omission. The fact was, that returns had been received from the clerk of the peace in Ireland of the nature alluded to; but they were in such an imperfect state, that they were utterly unfit to be laid on the table of the House. Many of the counties had neglected to send in any returns whatever; while others were of so incorrect a nature, that they were wholly unsatisfactory. He had however, since written to the Judges and to the foremen of the grand juries of different counties; and was in hopes that by the next session such returns would be made as would meet the wishes of the House.

expressed himself satisfied with this explanation.