rose to present a petition from certain merchants of London, against the Ship Letter Act. They particularly complained of the clause which enabled the port officers to search for letters and parcels on board merchant vessels. Their ground of complaint was, that they were obliged to pay, in cases where Government had provided no mode of communication, for the transfer of their correspondence. To this clause their main objection applied.

concurred in the object of the petitioners. In the affairs of the East India Company he had had opportunities of seeing the inconveniences which arose from such a regulation as this Act imposed.

said, the subject was one of great inconvenience, so much so, that the owners of vessels, in several commercial towns would not allow any letters to be sent through their medium, lest their ships ] should be exposed to such an examination. This was a hardship, in cases where Government provided no mode of transfer.

said, that the Bill contained no new provisions; some of its clauses were as old as the reign of queen Anne. The Government, on behalf of the revenue, had no idea of imposing inconveniences upon the mercantile interest of the country; and he had little doubt, that on a general view of the subject, such regulations might be made as would answer all purposes, without the intervention of injury or inconvenience to any of the parties.

repeated his objections to the Act, and gave notice, that on that day week he would move For copies of all correspondence relative to this subject, between the Postmasters-general and the Court of Directors of the East India Company, also between the East India Agents and the Lords of the Treasury. The Petition was then brought up, and ordered to lie on the table.

in moving for leave to bring in a Bill to prevent the removal of chargeable paupers till a final adjudication of their respective settlements, observed, that it might at first view appear extraordinary that the law could ever have been otherwise than according to the proposal which he was now about to make. But in looking back to the times when magistrates were first authorized to remove, it would be found that the question of settlements did not then, as now, involve decisions on some of the most intricate and subtle points of the law. It was intended merely to give power to justices to remove those who had no fixed abode in a parish to the place of their last residence; or, if they had none such, of their birth. But the law of settlements had long become so complex and voluminous, that it seemed utterly grievous and intolerable to continue to delegate a power so vitally affecting the happiness, livelihood, and morals of paupers, and so expensive to parishes, to a hasty first decision of two magistrates founded on ex-parte evidence. A pauper might thus be dragged or carted from one end of the kingdom to the other; from the home where all his connexions were formed, and the spot which had hitherto furnished him with the means of an industrious livelihood, to some remote parish "where there was only a poor-house to re- ceive him, and nothing but the parish dole for his support. And after all this cruelty had been committed, and cost incurred, a little more inquiry might show the order to be founded on erroneous or imperfect facts, or mistaken law; and the prosecution of an appeal might drag the pauper back again as a witness to the county from whence he came; and if the order should be confirmed, he might be sent a second time back to the place of his first removal; or, if quashed, perhaps to some other parish in the same neighbourhood. But all this he had dwelt so fully upon last year, that he would not debate it again. Sir Egerton said, it was his purpose to put an end to the sufferings and expenses of these intermediate and useless removals. But if such were the evils to be removed, were there any objections to counterbalance the good of the plan proposed? Really, of the only two of which he could hear, one seemed to him perfectly visionary, and the other founded on injustice and cruelty. The first was the supposed difficulty of contriving means to enforce re-imbursement of the relief granted by the parish where the pauper is resident from the first examination of his settlement, till a final confirmation of the adjudication of that settlement. Sir Egerton said, this was a difficulty perfectly imaginary: and the plan proposed perfectly effectual for the purpose. As to the second objection, that to take away the vexations and hardships of intermediate removals, would be to abolish a useful check to improper and unreasonable demand for relief; he hardly thought that so long as the Legislature entertained the principles of the poor laws, it would endure the inconsistency of defeating its own objects by cruel and contradictory provisions and conditions. As to the detail, that would be better explained by the Bill itself, if he was permitted to bring it in. He would only say, that after a final adjudication of a settlement filed at the Quarter Sessions, it would be at the option of either parish to demand the removal of the pauper, should he still continue chargeable, at its own expense, except under such circumstances as cause the suspension of removals by the existing law; this alteration of the law with regard to immediate removal, cannot, for obvious reasons, be applied to to cases of women pregnant of bastard children. The hon. baronet concluded with moving, "That leave, be given to ] bring in a Bill to prevent the removal of chargeable paupers till a final adjudication of their respective settlements.? After a short conversation between Mr. Atkins Wright, Lord Milton, Mr. Lock-hart, and sir C. Monck, leave was given to bring in the Bill.

rose to state the grounds on which he should move for leave to bring in a Bill to enable the King to accept the services of the Local Militia, either in or out of their counties, under certain restrictions. The Bill, in fact, which he intended to propose was a revival, with certain modifications, of the Act of the 53rd of the King, which expired on the 25th of March last. Under the particular circumstances of the period when that Act was passed, such a large portion of our regular army and militia had been called away to serve under the duke of Wellington, that, lest the fortresses should be denuded of troops, the Local Militia had been allowed to volunteer for garrison duty. The present situation of affairs had called on the Government again to propose such a measure to the House, in consequence of a great part of the regular army having been embarked for the continent, while a considerable portion of the remainder had not yet arrived from America. The alteration he should propose in the present Bill was, that the time during which they might remain on duty, which in the former Act had been 42 days, should be limited to 28 days, the longer term having been found inconvenient, particularly in the agricultural counties. He concluded by moving, "That leave be given to bring in a Bill to enable his Majesty to accept the services of the Local Militia, either in or out of their counties, under certain restrictions."

contended, that circumstances did not warrant this measure. At the time when the last Act was deemed necessary, every body was anxious to give all possible assistance to the country, under the very extraordinary situation in which it was placed, and, however unconstitutional the measure, no objection was made to it. But in the way ministers were proceeding, the Militia and the Local Militia Acts were a mere nullity, for there was never a session in which some alteration was not made in them. Every step led to another, and it was impossible the men could have any con- fidence in the promises of the Government, while they were thus trifled with. He trusted that the delusion would not prevail, that the war in which we were about to embark would be one that would terminate in a few months: he should therefore hold the contents of this Act to be as durable as the war. To draw on men to volunteer beyond the period or places for which they were enlisted, was unfair towards them; and he considered the conduct of officers to be reprehensible, by inducing the men to take a step which they themselves had never thought of. It was like shaming the men into volunteering, as the being unwilling to be left behind by others who had turned out was a part of the natural character of a soldier. The Act would go completely to falsify that system which caused the original formation of the Local Militia, and would erect it into precisely what the old militia formerly was. Indeed, he should not be surprised if next year the right hon. gentleman was to bring in an Act to enable the Local Militia to volunteer abroad; and also, with respect to the old militia, to renew indefinitely that measure which was temporarily adopted in 1813. As he considered all measures for tampering with the militia to be so many breaches of faith towards the men, he should oppose the motion.

explained, that the regular militia being at present very incomplete, the object of the present Bill was to enable the Local Militia to supply the vacancies, or to move out of their respective counties, if necessary, to take garrison duty, that the regulars and old militia might increase the effective force of the country.

was of opinion, that an understood bargain existed between the Legislature and those men who were now enlisted, which ought not to be broken in upon. He should not oppose the motion, though he must confess that his right hon. friend had disappointed his expectations in it.

thought the measure might be salutary, as the House had agreed on the necessity of additional means of defence; but he thought, instead of accepting the volunteering of whole regiments, it would be better to take a few men only from each, and thus leave those who had families or business in their counties to attend to them. As the emergency was as great now as it was ] in 1813, be could see no possible objection to the measure.

said, the present Bill was a subversion of the militia system, as at first established. When the regulars were called from their respective counties, the local militia, at great inconvenience, undertook their duty, but upon condition, that they should not be sent from their own district. With what justice could they now be put to this inconvenience, when several of the regiments, whose removal had first caused this change, were about to return from America? in fact, part of them had actually reached some of the ports in Ireland. He therefore hoped the Bill, if enacted, would become nugatory.

objected to this system of recruiting, on the general principle, that the men were induced to give a reluctant consent, by being placed in a very odious situation if they refused. He trusted nobody would doubt his earnestness for the defence of the country, but be did not think the circumstances in which it was placed rendered the present measure indispensable.

admitted, that the American army was on the eve of its arrival in this country, but its services were likely to be called into action for purposes which might render its removal necessary. The only question was, whether it was likely that the public interest should at a future time require the service of the local militia for 28 days in particular places. If such an event was probable, he trusted the House would agree to the Bill.

was of opinion that the measure would altogether fail in its effects. It could only succeed where great influence was used over the men, such as was possessed by lord Rolle. In some parts, all the officers might turn out, and none of the men might follow.

thought that much of its success would depend on the facilities which would be afforded for providing for the families of the men during their absence. Leave was given to bring in the Bill, which was brought in accordingly, and read a first time.

observed, that as very few persons in the country were aware of a measure of this nature, it was proper to allow due time for its consideration before it should be read a second time.

said the Bill was merely a revival of the measure brought forward eighteen months ago, and therefore that its character and object were fully known to the country. The second reading was fixed for Friday, and the Bill was ordered to be printed.

observed, that some improvement was necessary in the system of this establishment. He could not conceive any good reason why the public should not be admitted into this institution every day, instead of being excluded three days in the week, as was the present custom; and he thought that more facilities should be afforded to the reading of the books contained in the Museum. At present no one was allowed to look into those books without a recommendation from a trustee, or some officer of the House; and those country gentlemen and others who had no acquaintance with those trustees or officers, were, however respectable, excluded from any access to this valuable library.

thought that the system upon Which the Museum was at present conducted scarcely admitted of any improvement, and particularly deprecated the idea of farther facilitating access to the library of that institution. For it must be known, that through improper facilities, many public libraries had been, stripped of the most valuable books. Such had notoriously happened to the public library of Paris, when opened indiscriminately to all visitors; and it would be recollected that several valuable prints had recently been stolen from the British, Museum.

called to the recollection of the hon. gentleman, that those prints were purloined, not by an ordinary visitor, but by a friend of a reverend gentleman, one of the officers of the Museum. He hoped that the suggestions which he had thrown out would be taken into ] consideration by the proper authorities. The motions were agreed to.

called the attention of the committee to a clause of the Bill which enacted that his Majesty should be empowered to retain the service of foreign troops for twelve months after the conclusion of any war in which he might happen to be engaged. There were other points connected with the Bill, such as the appointing foreign officers to commissions in British regiments, which he thought demanded the most serious attention of the House, and especially when they recollected the wholesome and constitutional jealousy which our ancestors entertained of the employment of foreign troops. He was sure many members who were then absent, would be anxious to express an opinion upon such a Bill, and to know from the framers of it the precise objects it was intended to embrace. He did not mean to oppose its present stage, but he thought it his duty to state thus shortly his view of the Bill.

said, that considering the great importance of the Bill, and the just and weighty observations of the hon. and learned member, he should take the liberty of moving—That the chairman do leave the chair, report progress, and ask leave to sit again. This was accordingly done, and leave was granted for the committee to sit again to-morrow.

moved the second reading of the Bill for the amendment of the laws relating to insolvent debtors.

hoped the hon. and learned gentleman would not then press the second reading, as many members who were decidedly hostile to the principles of the Bill, and who intended to oppose it, had left the House.

agreed that it would be useless to discuss the Bill in so thin a House. He should be happy to have the opinions of every one upon it, and had not the least objection to defer the consideration of it to any day that the hon. general might name.

said, he had no desire to press the second reading at present, nor to provoke a debate upon the Bill itself; but, as it was probable he should not have any future opportunity of delivering his sentiments, he would venture to trouble the House with a few observation. The Bill, in its present form, certainly appeared to him very objectionable. It embraced two objects; the one, to compel the application of a debtor's property to the payment of his debts; and the other, to inflict a certain proportion of punishment upon debtors who had no property, or only a small portion. With regard to the former, nothing certainly could be more desirable; but he did not think the mode provided by the present Bill was the best. It was hostile to all the soundest principles of legislation, to compel a man to make a declaration upon oath, and then, if that declaration was not true in every respect, to punish him as a felon. He was aware that in the bankrupt laws such a practice prevailed; but it did not, therefore, follow that it was wise to adopt the same practice with regard to all debtors. It was torturing a man's conscience against himself, in a manner which the House ought to pause upon before they sanctioned it. Another objection which he felt to that provision of the Bill was, that its very severity would render it ineffectual, as was the case with the Lords' Act, from which he believed it was exactly copied, and. which was already obsolete, there being but few instances in the memory of the oldest professional men where it had been enforced. It would be much better, therefore, to dispense with an enactment, which would soon become a mere dead letter, and substitute in its stead something which might accomplish the desired end. It was fair that debtors should be obliged to give up their property; but the mode of compulsion proposed by his hon. and learned friend, appeared to him to be too severe. He strongly objected to the graduated scale, connected with the Bill, by which a debtor, having given up all his property, was to be imprisoned for a greater or a less time, in proportion to the quantity of debt he was enabled to liquidate. Thus, if a man's property was only equal to the payment of 5s. in the ] pound, the individual was to be confined for a greater length of time than he who paid 10s.; and soon, in a certain gradation. This he considered very unjust. When a person had given up all his property, why should he be subjected to farther punishment? Looking to the professional experience of his hon. and learned friend, he had expected a great deal more than he saw in the present measure. He thought it would be better, for instance, to compel the debtor, by legal process, to give up his property, than to produce this effect in the way now proposed. A clause might have been proposed to take the lands of the debtor in execution, which could not at present be done. He also conceived that his hon. and learned friend might have introduced some provision to do away sham pleas and writs of error, by which money was put into the pockets of the officers of the court, and an unfair delay was procured by the debtor, detrimental to the interests of the creditor. These points he expected to have seen remedied; and no person was better able to have introduced provisions for that purpose, than his hon. and learned friend was. He observed a clause in the Bill, by which a debtor, even though he paid a small dividend, could procure his enlargement, provided a majority of his creditors were willing to give their consent to his liberation: but there was not a word in the Bill, as to the manner in which that consent was to be expressed. Sir Samuel concluded by observing, that if such a Bill as this could only interest so small a number of members of parliament as were then present, that circumstance, of itself, formed a strong objection to the progress of the measure. A Bill of this kind ought not to pass, without having the decided approbation of a large portion of the representatives of the people.

said, he was not so much attached to the provisions of the measure he had introduced, as to reject any clauses which his hon. and learned friend, or any other gentleman, might propose for the purpose of carrying his object into effect, and, at the same time, removing the objections to the present Bill. He abhorred and detested perpetual imprisonment, as much as any gentleman could; but still he looked upon the term of confinement, under the Act which he was desirous of amending, as too short to effect any useful purpose. His hon. and learned friend admitted, on a former evening, that there was, probably, a species of credit, that would be affected by the Act, as it now stood—but he denied that there was any foundation for supposing that its provisions tended to relax the moral feelings of the country. He entirely differed from this sentiment; and he thought it impossible for any gentleman to look at the papers laid on the table of the House, and notice the number of persons who had come from all parts of the country to the metropolis, to get relief from debts, which they had contracted under circumstances that totally precluded the capability of their liquidating them—it was impossible, he said, for any man to contemplate this, without perceiving, that the facilities afforded by the new Act, must have had a powerful operation in impairing the moral character of the people—unless it was intended to be argued, that there was no criminality in contracting a debt, and, instead of paying it, living for a certain time in a state of extravagance and profligacy, and then coming forth, completely freed from any further trouble or molestation on the subject. His hon. and learned friend had adverted to the necessity of making various alterations in the Bill, in a committee. He had no objections to that. He wished his hon. and learned friend might hear examined at their bar the keepers of the principal prisons in the metropolis where debtors were confined, and who were the most competent persons to speak to the effects of the late Act. They would inform him, that such was the system of dissipation carried on by debtors who had thronged into their respective gaols, to take the benefit of the Insolvent Act, that they (the keepers) were obliged to apply to the courts at Westminster for stronger powers than they before possessed, to check the growing evil. He was glad his hon. and learned friend concurred with him in the propriety of compelling persons, who would rather continue in prison than give a just account of their property, to make a satisfactory return—although he objected to the severity of the punishment, in case of a refusal to make the necessary disclosure. His hon. and learned friend thought, instead of being transported, the offending parties ought to be subjected to certain penalties: but surely it must suggest itself to the excellent understanding of his hon. and learned friend, that a Bill providing penalties would be completely nugatory. If ] the coercion of imprisonment would not induce a debtor to make a discovery of his property, how could any penalty produce such an effect? This compulsory clause, however severe, was not new in legislation. Under the Lords' Act the compulsory clause was confined to debts not amounting to 100l. The reason that it was rarely acted on was therefore evident. It must occur to every one, that the cases to which the clause applied, would seldom be connected with circumstances, that would make it worth the while of any individual to prosecute under that provision. One instance, had, however, taken place in the term just closed, where a person who had refused to give up his property, was indicted under the Lords' Act. The compulsory clause ought, as it did in the Bill before the House, to refer to cases where individuals, possessed of extensive means, having contracted immense debts, chose to live extravagantly in prison, instead of satisfying their just creditors: and, he believed, many individuals, who now lived most luxuriously in gaol, would pay their debts the moment they found they were threatened with a severe punishment, if they persisted in withholding their property from those who had claims on it. Though he was by no means friendly to the seventy. of the old law, by which a man might be confined for an indefinite period, still he conceived, that considerable severity was called for, in order to compel the payment of debts. In this point of view, the graduated scale which this Bill embraced, struck him as being well calculated to obtain his object. By that scale, the greater the dividend which the debtor paid, the less would be the period of his confinement. Encouragement was thus given for a prompt and early settlement of every demand. His hon. and learned friend expressed some surprise that he had not endeavoured to provide against sham pleas, and other modes of procuring delay, hurtful to the creditor. Now, it did appear to him, that the graduated scale of payment and imprisonment would prevent the evil complained of; because, if a debtor had recourse to the forms alluded to by his hon. and learned friend, the proceeding would necessarily tend to increase the original debt, and to consume his means of paying it. The debtor would, therefore, every step of this kind he took, be subjecting himself to an increased term of imprisonment. If, how- ever, this were not deemed sufficient to remedy the inconvenience, be was ready to bring in a clause himself, for that purpose, or to adopt any provision which his hon. and learned friend might consider necessary. With respect to a legal process, to compel the discovery of property, he had no objection to such a measure; and he thought it ought to extend both to landed and funded property. This, however, did not appear to him proper to be comprised within the provisions of the Bill: a separate enactment would probably be better. If, however, his hon. and learned friend was of a different opinion, and introduced a clause on this point, be would give it his support.

was proceeding to make some observations, when

rose to order. He said he had been unwilling to prevent the learned Serjeant from replying to the hon. and learned gentleman, but he must now desire that the House might be counted.