presented the following message from the King:—

"George R.

"His majesty being informed that doubts have arisen touching the powers vested in his majesty to dispose of any real, copyhold, or leasehold property to which his majesty was entitled before and at the time of his accession to the crown, and also concerning the powers of his majesty's successors to dispose of the real, copyhold, or leasehold property to which they at the time of their accession to the crown may be entitled, his majesty recommends to his faithful Commons to take this subject into their consideration, and to make such provision respecting the same as may appear to them to be proper. G. R."

to present a petition, which, he said, disclosed a case of great individual hardship. The petitioner was col. Allen, who, having served many years in the army, had at, untied the rank of lieutenant-colonel. In 1817, he was with his regiment, the 55th, in the island of Jersey, where he had some disagreement with general Bailey, who commanded the garrison there. General Bailey had accused him of making false returns, and that he should be suspended from the command of his regiment. It was impossible for col. Allen to submit to this imputation: he invited an investigation into his conduct; and this application having been disregarded by general Bailey, he wrote to head-quarters, preferring the same request. He heard nothing in reply for three months, when an order came down, not for the inquiry which he had sought, but for a court-martial, by which he was tried on three distinct charges: for making false returns; for trying men at drum-head courts-martial; and for having more men in the barracks than they ought to have contained. On the first charge, the sentence was tantamount to an acquittal; for, although the returns were technically incorrect, they had been pronounced not to be willfully false. On the second, he had been found guilty: but with the exception of the evidence not being reduced to writing, a court-martial at the drum-head was as satisfactory as a trial by any other method. The sentence was, that col. Allen should be placed 12 months lower on the list, and be reprimanded. The prince regent had been pleased to confirm this sentence, and had moreover ordered, as it appeared inconsistent with the well-being of the service that col. Allen should continue in com- mand of the 55th regiment, that he should be allowed either to retire on half-pay, or to sell out. Now, this proceeding, by which the severity of a court-martial sentence had been increased, was altogether illegal. Whoever had advised that act, had done what was illegal. Owing to the alternative of retiring on half-pay which had been presented to col. Allen, he had not obtained the difference to which he would otherwise have been entitled. This had, therefore, the effect of imposing a pecuniary fine; and the crown had no power to do so. Col. Allen had, therefore, no alternative but to pray the interference of the House; and he trusted they would not, because he was a military man, deny him that justice which they would grant to the meanest subject in the realm. He complained not so much of the crown, as of the ministers of the crown; by whose illegal advice that injury had been done for which he now sought redress.

said, that on general principles, any interference with that branch of the prerogative which related to the appointment and removal of the officers of the army, was totally inexpedient. Of all the privileges of the crown, none was more ancient, and none had been of more uninterrupted exercise, than that of dismissing officers, whether they had been tried or not, or whether any reason was or was not assigned for their dismissal. It was a power held, not for the benefit of the crown, but for the maintenance of the rights and liberties of the people. He would argue, that, upon general principles, this was not a case which called for the interference of the House. He might go farther, and state, that there were circumstances connected with it which afforded much stronger ground for refusing any parliamentary interposition. Col. Allen had been tried on three distinct charges, on all of which be was found guilty. On two of those charges, the verdict was accompanied by a particular qualification. On the third charge, he was found guilty, without any qualification. The noble lord adverted specifically to these charges, and to the frequency, and severity of punishments in the regiment which col. Allen commanded. In no very long interval, 79 soldiers had been flogged, and 4,817 lashes had been inflicted. General Bailey had issued an order, that no inflictions of punishment should be carried into execu- tion, until a previous report had been made to him. Yet, on a visit made by the general to the hospital, he found two men suffering under the effects of punishment. That discovery led to a further investigation, the result of which was, that in disobedience of general Bailey's order, 15 soldiers had suffered under the sentence of regimental courts-martial, and 1,750 lashes had been inflicted between January and April. Let those who considered col. Allen ill-treated, take which alternative they pleased. Either he understood the order of general Bailey, or he did not. If he understood the order; he was guilty of disobedience. If he did not understand the order, he was not fit to command a regiment. Seven soldiers had also been tried by what was termed a drum-head court-martial. The very term indicated the absence of all those formalities, and that due deliberation which should ever characterize judicial investigations. There might arise circumstances where the evil required such a violent corrective, either under the exigencies of actual service in the field, or in the ebullitions of a mutiny and outrage; but no such palliations existed in the present instance. The drum-head trials of col. Allen took place in a period of profound peace, within 30 yards of the regimental orderly room; and that there was no reason for such precipitancy was evident, from the fact, that though the trials took place on the 24th, the punishments were not carried into effect until the 28th. The offence of the first private tried in this summary way was for having two blank cartridges in the pocket of his jacket, and not in his cartouch box. His punishment was 25 lashes. The offence of the second private, was for disobedience of the regimental regulations of the 3rd of March. No specification was given to the soldier. When or where he haft committed the offence was not detailed. The House would naturally wish to learn what the order of the 3rd of March was, against which the soldier offended. It was this, that in the ranks, no soldier, without orders, should go from the carry to the support. In other words, that he' should not support the firelock with the angle of the arm, but with the palm of the hand. For such an offence 25 lashes were inflicted. The offence of the third person was drunkenness on parade. Now, if there was one crime more than another, in the trial of which the summary pro- ceeding at the drum-head ought to have been avoided, it was that of intoxication—when the faculties of the offender were stupified by liquor, and his reason in a state of abeyance. The punishment inflicted was 100 lashes. The offence of another person was, levelling his piece. One would suppose, from the wording of this charge, that a mutiny had taken place in the regiment, and that this man had levelled his musket, charged to the muzzle, at his commanding officer. But the fact was, that the unsoldierlike conduct complained of was, "for levelling his piece in the air, when the regiment was practising with blank ammunition." It appeared, that the offender, instead of levelling with mathematical precision, had presented his piece in an angular direction towards the horizon. Now, when an individual, who had exerted his authority' for the punishment of such trifles, came forward and complained of severity, could the House be expected to interfere? "Quis tulerit Gracchos de seditione quæentes?" He would contend, that an officer who could supersede, without reason or necessity, the ordinary rules of the service, was unfit to remain in his situation. For these reasons col. Allen was dismissed; but he was allowed to sell his commission; although every step he had taken in the service, from his ensigncy emanated from the pure grace and favour of the crown.

said, that corporal punishment was wholly unnecessary in the army. It was liable to great abuse, and ought to be put an end to. He was sorry that the commander-in-chief did not avail himself of the opportunity which this court-martial afforded him, of stating his disapproval of the infliction of corporal punishment.

said, that when it was proved, that corporal punishment had been unnecessarily and improperly resorted to, the commander-in-chief was, he conceived, bound to express his disapprobation of the system.

observed, that when he had Made a statement on the subject of corporal punishment, last session, he was told, that no such thing ever took place in the army. The truth, however, had now come out; and it appeared that corporal punishment was inflicted to a great extent.

said, he had no acquaintance whatever with colonel Allen. He stood there to vindicate a principle, without any reference to the individual. When the Mutiny bill should be considered, it was his intention to move an instruction to the committee on this subject. Colonel Allen had expended 2,000l. in raising 200 men. It was, therefore, hot correct to say that he got his promotion for nothing.

contended, that, if ever there was a case in which the prerogative of the crown had been exerted with propriety, and tempered with leniency, it was the case of colonel Allen.

said, that the noble lord had made very light of the charges which had been preferred against certain individuals in col. Allen's regiment. One of these was an accusation against a soldier for not levelling his piece properly. Assuredly, it was of some importance, that soldiers should know how to use their arms effectively. It was not an easy matter to teach them to do so. He recollected, when a sergeant of marines was drilling a number of men, so badly did they point their pieces, that he declared he would stand their fire for a halfpenny a shot, and was confident he should make a fortune by it. Many of those raw soldiers appeared more anxious to direct their muskets against Jupiter or Saturn than against the enemy. Was drunkenness a light crime? Was it fit, ting that a soldier who thus misconducted himself, should not be punished? When no impression could be made on a man's reason, it was necessary sometimes to make an impression on his back. Gentlemen seemed to be extremely hostile to the system of corporal punishment. If it were abolished in the army, he supposed it would also be abolished in the navy. He was not, however, prepared to say, that corporal punishment should be discontinued in the navy; and he hoped, if its entire abolition were attempted, that it would be resisted. Much blame had been imputed to colonel Allen; but why should he alone be selected for censure? Was there no other officer in the regiment who concurred in his proceedings?

said it was within the recollection of the House, that, during the last session, he had been repeatedly pressed by several hon. members from both sides of the House, to express what were the opinions and intentions of the Irish government, upon the subject of a commutation of tithes; and that he had uniformly replied, that early in the present session, he should be prepared, either to introduce a measure for the consideration of parliament, or to state the reasons why the government of Ireland were unable to recommend any particular proposition to the House. It was to fulfil the pledge which he had so made, that he now offered himself to their attention. In entering upon the subject, be was far from being insensible to the difficulty of the task which he had undertaken. It was, indeed, impossible to contemplate the variety of interests involved in the question of tithes, their identification with the institutions of the country, and the various opinions afloat thereupon, without being prepared, on introducing a plan in the way of remedy, to expect a variety of conflicting opinions, and to relinquish all hopes of securing general approbation. But, notwithstanding this impossibility to attain unanimity, he thought it right to propose for discussion the best plan which, after mature consideration, he was prepared to submit to the House—a plan which he knew, at the same time, must excite apprehensions in some, and distrust in others. Nevertheless, the time had, he thought, arrived, when some specific measure became expedient. It was his intention, on the present occasion, to confine himself to a simple statement of the outline of his bill, to have it printed and circulated throughout Ireland, and to postpone the discussion upon the details until a future period. Under these feelings, he should now state the objects he had in view. It was his intention to request leave to bring in two bills—one for a temporary composition of tithes in Ireland; the other for a permanent commutation. His first bill related to the limited composition, and proceeded upon the principle of endeavouring to effect a voluntary agreement between the owners and the payers of tithes; and the mode by which it was proposed to effect that voluntary agreement, was, by an arrangement, rendered complicated indeed in its process by the peculiar situation of Ireland, the minute extent of the claim of tithes upon all classes, and the difficulty of working any local machinery in that country, owing to the different tempers and habits so often found in the middle and lower classes there, compared with those of the corresponding ranks in England, whose executive assistance was resorted to with so much effect and advantage in local measures. The proposed arrangement was this—that the lord lieutenant should have the power, upon the requisition of the incumbent of any benifice or parish, or upon the desire of a certain number of the payers of tithes within the parish, to direct the assembling of a given number of the inhabitants to act in the nature of a special vestry, to regulate the preliminary nature of the arrangement between the parties. It was obvious, that much of the value of the arrangement would depend upon the character and conduct of the parties acting as a special vestry. It was therefore intended to propose a qualification, which was to constitute the eligibility of the parishioner to sit upon the inquiry. Those who paid a certain amount of tithes were alone to be competent for the purpose; to the exclusion of the great mass of the small payers, whose presence, instead of assisting the arrangement, would render the place a scene of tumult and contention. He trusted that the persons called to act in behalf of the parishes would be prudent, impartial, and sensible men. Such persons would, as it were, be a representative body on the part of the parish; and, from the circumstance of their paying a higher amount of tithe than the bulk of their fellow parishioners, they must naturally be deemed by the latter as sufficiently interested in promoting the views of the whole. To a special vestry so constituted, it was intended to intrust the power of selecting some persons of property, whose qualifications were to be described in the bill, who were to open a negociation for the composition of the tithes of their parish for a time to be limited. One commissioner was to be appointed on the part of the parish, and the incumbent was to have the power of nominating another commissioner. To avoid, however, the possibility of the incumbent's appointing an incompetent person, it was to be in the power of the vestry to object, upon showing sufficient cause. The two commissioners, when appointed, were to have the power of nominating an umpire, should they disagree upon terms; and, in the event of the umpire not deciding, it was to be in the power of the lord lieutenant to nominate an umpire for the purpose. He had omitted to state in his preliminary observations, when he spoke of the assembling of the select vestry, that three cases might he expected to arise—either the clergyman or the parish might be unwilling to change their existing situation; and in such an event, the bill was to have no operation: or one might he willing and the other not. Supposing the machinery of the bill to work smoothly, and the parties to act in concert, then the question would arise upon the manner of affixing a scale of pecuniary composition; and for this he proposed that the average price of corn, for the three preceding years, should be taken as a standard, and that triennially the compact should be renewed. He was aware, that certain compositions of a similar nature had been made upon an average of fourteen years' produce; but over such an extent of time there was the difficulty of making the composition on a scale too high for the clergyman, and therefore unreasonable for the parishioners, or, vice versâ. He thought the triennial adjustment better and fairer for all parties.—With respect to the manner of levying the composition upon the parishioners, it was intended to appoint special assessors, who were to affix and levy the several assessments upon the holdings of individuals within their parish in a manner similar to the poor-rates assessments in this country by the local vestries. Land at present tithe-free was of course to retain its present exemption; but there was another species of land—that which paid tithe in agistment—which was not to be so exempt, but to bear its equal proportion of the assessment. The only remaining point to explain respecting the temporary bill was to secure to the incumbent his power of levy in case of non-payment; and for this it was provided, that his subsisting remedy, namely, a priority of claim upon the crop before the landlord, should be still secured to him.—Such was the outline of his temporary measure. His permanent one was this: it was proposed, that in every case where the mutual assent of the clergyman and the parishioners should be obtained, a permanent contract should be entered into, for the purpose of securing to the incumbent a certain proportion of land in fee, in lieu of tithes. The parties were to have tile power of applying to the commissioners for the reduction of the national debt for money to purchase such land in fee, and they were to be repaid for the interest and principal of the money so sunk by the due amount of the composition affixed for the tithes of the parish. This mode of raising the money would ultimately prove, advantageous to the public; for the terms upon-which, according to the number of years purchase land could be obtained in Ireland, were so favourable, that the eventual income received by the commissioners would increase in a greater comparative value, and afford them an augmented facility of purchasing up the debt. He trusted that this would be found to be a measure, not having regard to any local or mere individual interests, but directed to the attainment of ends highly essential to the common good.—The right hon. gentleman then moved, "That leave be given to bring in a Bill for establishing a Composition for Tithes, for a time to be limited."

gave great credit to government, for the efforts they were making to diminish the evils under which Ireland laboured. With regard to the measures now proposed, he did not distinctly understand how that which was to be permanent would work, nor how that which was to be temporary was to be limited in time. He could not see the advantage in the latter of the references every three years; nor did he think that part of the bill which required the assembly of special vestries applicable in many parts of Ireland. In many parishes of Ireland there was not even a substantial farmer, much less a resident gentleman; and, in many instances, not a single individual belonging to the established church. He was apprehensive that the new estimates which were to be made, would be attended with great uncertainty, especially as much scope must necessarily be given to the operation of conflicting interests. He was sure that the proposition which he (Mr. M. Fitzgerald) was going to recommend would materially contribute to the security and comfort of the established church. While he perfectly agreed with the right honourable gentleman in the principle of the arrangement which he proposed, and thought that it was highly desirable to include in it the tithe of agistment, he could not think the vote of the Irish parliament of the year 1735 a robbery of the clergy. Just before that vote, several claims had been set up by the, clergy to the tithe of agistment, although he believed no such tithe had actually been levied. The claim, however, had been advanced in the court of Exchequer, and its validity established. What he hoped was, that the necessary support for the clergy would be equally levied on land of all description, except that essentially tithe free. In his opinion, some measure of a permanent nature would be infinitely preferable to any temporary and fluctuating proposition.

wished to know, on what principle of valuation the composition was to be made, whether the full tenth, the value in the proctor's books, or the actual value of the tithes received? To the first he should altogether object. He hoped that, in the progress of the bill, the regulations would be made somewhat more compulsory. He wished to secure the total abolition of tithes, and not to allow any parish to continue them. If the select vestries were to be composed only of persons who paid large sums for tithes, now that pasture lands were to be made liable, it would be the interest of the vestries in grazing districts, to preserve the present system of tithes, by which their own lands would be free, and the burden left upon the poor tillage cottiers and farmers. He thought the measure would prove an effectual remedy for the evil of tithes. It would wholly do away with the annual valuation of proctors, and the oppressive collection by proctors and tithe farmers. By combining the principle of an acreable tax and a commutation for land, it had the advantages of both plans. In respect to giving land, he thought that regulation the best part of the measure, and that the commutation of land for tithe might be accomplished without any loss to the public. The thanks of the public were due to the right hon. gentleman, and the noble marquis at the head of the Irish government, for this important measure. It would put an end to a system of great grievance and oppression, and contribute essentially to secure the tranquillity of Ireland.

was persuaded, that the measures proposed could not fail to do great good. He was of opinion, that the valuation should be made, not on claims and demands, but on receipts. It was extremely satisfactory to him, that the burthen of tithes was to be more equally borne than hitherto. The bill, he must say, promised most fairly. That it was in some degree complicated in its details, was, in a great measure, attributable to the state of society in Ireland. The working of a bill of this description must necessarily be more difficult in Ireland than in this country; in consequence of the unhappy condition of the former. If the difficulties in the way of the arrangements respecting the parish vestries could be got over, a double benefit would accrue; for when once that machinery was established, it might subsequently be made use of for other and highly beneficial purposes.

expressed his satisfaction that the right hon. secretary had moved for leave to bring in the present bill. He held in his hand the resolutions of the grand jury of Wexford, in favour of a just and fair commutation of tithes, such as might secure the stability, dignity, and independence of the established church, and the general interests of the community. In those principles he fully concurred. He would never advocate a system which did not protect the interests of all parties. Provided the clergy performed those duties, for the performance of which, tithes and church property were originally appropriated, he would never consent to invade that property; but when he found a general complaint of the neglect and non-performance of those duties, he did say that such a system required amendment.

could not resist the temptation of congratulating Ireland on the prospect which was opened to her, by the conduct of government. What could present a more striking contrast than the present and the last session of parliament in that respect? The last session commenced with the suspension of the Habeas Corpus in Ireland, which was followed by the Insurrection act. The present session was distinguished by measures of conciliation and wisdom. The right hon. secretary had last night given notice of a measure, the tendency of which would be to unite all classes of the community in Ireland. To-night he had brought forward a measure, which would put an end to nearly all the grievous and oppressive practices of the tithe system. Such benefits to Ireland would not be thrown away, but would produce a rich harvest of gratitude and attachment. The only difficulty which he contemplated in the bill, related to the complexity of the machinery. The Protestant population were, in some parts of Ireland, so reduced by circumstances, that he feared materials would scarcely be found for its construction. If so, some supplementary power must be sought for, to give the measure an effective direction. He much wished, that the equivalent rent charge, instead of being paid by the tenant, should be paid by the landlord; so that the Catholic tenant should never more hear of tithes, and the support of the church to which he belonged should exclusively proceed from the inheritor of the land.

said, that having, year after year, declared in his place, that justice was not done to Ireland, he felt it to be his duty to express his great satisfaction at the complete change of disposition in that respect, which manisfested itself in the conduct of his majesty's present ministers. In thanking them for Ireland, he felt that he was thanking them for the empire; which the course now pursuing would render irresistible. His thanks were due to the whole of his majesty's government. They were due to the chancellor of the exchequer, for the kind and generous manner in which he had spoken of Ireland; they were due to the secretary of state, who had declared his wish to avoid all irritating subjects; and they were due to the other secretary of state, who had declared the determination of ministers to support the present government of Ireland. This last-mentioned declaration was calculated to do infinite good to Ireland. Having for years maintained in that House an angry opposition against government with respect to Irish affairs, he felt it his duty, now that he saw the anxiety which existed to do every thing that was right and proper, to give to government his warm approbation and support.

was also anxious to express his warm approbation of the present measure.

said, that, according to his view of the measure, it was calculated to redeem all the promises which had been made by government on the subject.

said, it was his opinion, that the surplus revenue of the country would be more beneficially applied, if appropriated to the relief of the people, by a further remission of taxation, than it would be if appropriated to the purposes to which the chancellor of the exchequer had declared his intention of appropriating it. He was a friend to the principle of a sinking fund; that was to say, to the application of surplus of revenue, to the bonâ fide reduction of the debt. He would say, "apply it to such a purpose now," if he did not think that it would be more beneficial to the public creditor, to have it applied to the remission of taxation. That was his view of the question. But it was said, "If you go on in this manner, no one will lend you money again in your emergencies." Now, he held a contrary opinion; for he would venture to say, that there was no person who lent money to the state, who looked so much to the sinking fund as the security out of which his debt was to be paid, as he did to the substantial wealth and. opulence of the country. Were the funds now at such a price, that it was necessary to increase them by appropriating a large sum to the sinking fund? He saw nothing in the situation of the public creditor, that called on the House to make the proposed application of this surplus revenue. The proposition which he should now make was, that the House should postpone the further consideration of this report till the 21st of April. This proposition, if acceded to, could produce no effect upon the public creditor; for till that period, at any rate, all the surplus revenue would be appropriated to the sinking fund; and the only difference would he, that instead of the public accounts being made up to the 5th of April next, they must be made up to the 5th of July next. It might be asked, what reason he had for making this proposition? His answer was, to try whether, in the interim, a further reduction of taxation could not be effected. For after the appropriation had once taken place, no man could expect a further remission of taxes.

said, if he did not in his conscience believe that a real sinking fund was most necessary for the interests of the country, he would not vote for the bill.

was convinced, that the country at large would be much more benefitted by the further diminution of its burthens, than it would be by the paying off of a comparatively small part of the national debt, for the period during which peace might continue.

of Wilts, contended, that the repeal of taxes must always benefit the landed interest. By taking off taxes from the tenant, the parliament, in fact, gave so much to the landlord.

did not think he should be exorbitant, when he asked the chancellor of the exchequer to repeal two millions more taxes, in addition to the two millions of which he had already given notice. A surplus of three millions for a sinking fund, or to meet possible contingencies, would then be preserved.

said, that the sinking fund had been attended with loss to the country. If it remained on its present footing, at the end of any given number of years, it would not be found to have reduced the national debt one farthing. The minister of the day would always apply the surplus in time of need, to any purpose but that for which it was intended. The chancellor of the exchequer had stated on a former night, that the debt, by means of the sinking fund, had been reduced 24 millions. To show that the statement was not correct, he called upon the House to attend to the following calculations:—The amount of unredeemed funded debt, 5th Jan. 1816, was 816,311,939l. On 5th Jan. 1822, 795,312,767l. Diminution since 5th Jan. 1816, 20,999,172l. Unfunded, 5th Jan. 1816, 43,938,823l. On 5th Jan. 1822, 41,514,061l. Diminution 2,424,762l. Making the real diminution 23,423,924l. But the chancellor of the exchequer had said, that the diminution was 24,766,520l. This was accounted for as follows, viz:—Of the loans raised in 1815, for which no less than 87 millions of capital was created, at the rate of 100l. for every 52l. of money received, 5,939,803l. of the money remained to be paid after the 5th Jan., 1816, although the whole of the capital created was included in the account of 1815; and with the 5,939,803l. of money received in 1816, three per cent stock was purchased at 62, to the amount of 9,563,082l. And there was cancelled between the 5th Jan. 1816, and the 5th of Jan. 1822, by conversion into life annuities, 3,268,964l. In 1816, there was received from the Bank three millions, at an interest of 3 per cent, with which three millions there was cancelled of other 3 per cent stock, 4,840,000l., being an excess of 1,840,000l. And in 1818, 2,999,920l. money was received from certain holders of 3 per cent stock, to the amount of 27,272,000l. for converting that amount into a 3½ per cent stock, and with the 2,999,920l. there was purchased of three per cents, 3,846,000l. And in 1820, seven millions of exchequer bills were funded for 6,930,000l. of 5 per cent stock, with which amount of bills, 10,202,500l. of three per cents were purchased, being an excess of 3,272,500l. And there has been cancelled of 3 per cents by the operation of redemption of land tax, 664,032l. Total diminution accounted for, 22,454,578l. Leaving, by the operation of the sinking fund, a diminution of only 2,311,944l. according to the chancellor of the exchequer's own statement, and of 968,758l. only, according to the real fact; although, in the same period there had been an actual excess of taxes of no less than 7,528,869l.; and so far from there being any diminution in the annual charge, although the rate of interest on the unfunded debt had been reduced from 3½d. to 2d. per day, making a total reduction of no less than 941,500l. per annum, the amount actually charged for interest and management of the unredeemed debt, funded and unfunded together, had been, in 1817, 31,266,601l.; in 1818, 31,351,751l.; in 1819, 30,792,025l.; in 1820, 31,256,120l.; in 1821, 31,966,078l. The hon. gentleman concluded by insisting, that present relief was the policy of the country, until all interests were set straight. He was decidedly against the plan of keeping a surplus in hand, to meet possible future deficiencies of revenue.

believed it would have been impossible, without the aid of the sinking fund, to have raised the immense supplies that we had raised during the war. He thought, indeed, that even what was called the sham sinking fund, had been useful during the war, as it had tended to keep up the prices of stocks, and to support public credit. Whenever the funds had fallen, the commercial interest would be found to have suffered. He remembered the three per cents at one time as low as 47; and scarcely a merchant at the time knew one day whether he should be able to take up his acceptances the next. Recommending, in its fullest extent, economy and retrenchment, he should vote for the propositions of the chancellor of the exchequer.

under the present circumstances of the country, contended, that a sinking fund was not only useless, but decidedly mischievous. The arguments in support of one were—I, to keep up the price of stocks; 2, to extinguish the debt. With respect to the first, he doubted whether the mass of the fund-holders derived much benefit from the high price of stocks. If they received the interest for their money, that was all that they wanted. Perhaps to large capitalists, who speculated much in foreign loans, it might be advantageous, because their object was to sell out. But even this effect had been exaggerated; as in 1792, when the sinking fund was very low, the three per cents were at 97. The national debt had been so contracted, that it could never be reduced. The more that was paid, the more we had to pay. We had, in fact, sold annuities of 3l. for 571., which we were to redeem, if at all, at 100l.—a bargain which would never be maintainable in a court of equity. If the nominal capital of the debt was 1,000 millions, and the price of stocks 70, the country, according to the selling price, was 700 millions in debt. If we paid off 100 millions of this debt, though the capital would be numerically reduced, the price of stocks would have risen from 70 to 90; so that, instead of having reduced, we should have increased the real amount of the debt. It would be much better, instead of attempting to pay off that debt, to apply the surplus revenue to the reduction of taxes. In this way, the Americans, at the close of the war, having an expenditure of four millions of dollars beyond their revenue, raised small loans, till, in the last year, their revenue had increased so as to enable them to reduce their debt.

said, it was true that the government of America had borrowed 4,000,000 dollars, and that, by bringing capital from other countries, it had, in fact, improved its resources. It was also true, that the effect of the sinking fund was at present to raise prices against ourselves. But this was true of every sinking fund. The question was, had not the sinking fund reduced the annual charge? It certainly would do so if correctly applied. A real sinking fund, if properly appropriated, was a great good. To a fictitious sinking fund he had many objections. But there was a great difference between the two. A real sinking fund applied to pay off the debt, would raise the price of stocks, and enable us to borrow on better terms. Many members had no hopes that a real sinking fund would be preserved. They, therefore, objected to grant a sum for a purpose, the beneficial effects of which they were never likely to see. His hon. friend, the member for Taunton, had facetiously observed, that because he (Mr. R.) thought ministers were going to rob the sinking fund, he would willingly take it away himself. It was, he thought, good policy, when his purse was in danger, rather to spend the money himself than allow it to be taken from him. He did not, he confessed, think the national purse safe in the hands of ministers. It was too great a temptation to entrust them with. What he wanted was a real sinking fund, and therefore he supported the present as far as it was real. But there was every reason to believe it would become fictitious; for every sinking fund had, in its origin, been real, but had all been turned into fictitious funds. As to the Annuity bill of last year, he hoped the whole of it would be repealed, and the amount be transferred to the sinking fund. It had been estimated that 2,000,000l. of those annuities would die off annually. Let this sum be applied to the purposes of the sinking fund. The hon. member for Taunton had, on a former evening, been severe on him, giving him credit for the ability of his calculations, but denying that he looked sufficiently at their political and moral consequences. Now, he claimed the merit of extent in the scope of his views beyond the hon. member. He felt deep alarm at the heavy amount of the debt, and at the want of proper means to lighten it. His hon. friend, with his enlarged views, wished for a sinking fund, not to pay off the debt, but to furnish ministers with the means of going to war, in cases of extremity. But, if this fund were to be so appropriated, how was the debt to be paid off? He would tell his hon. friend, if no means were taken to pay it off, that he was sleeping on a volcano. He thought a national debt of 800 millions a very serious evil; and he thought so from the heart-burnings which were occasioned by the taxes levied to pay it, which in one year affected one interest, and the next year another interest. Taxation pressed on every interest; and did he not propose to benefit mankind when he said we ought to endeavour to get rid of the debt? By doing this, should we not get rid of the expense of collecting taxes Should we not get rid of the im- morality of smuggling, and of the excise laws? By getting rid of smuggling, should we not benefit trade? For all the profit of the smuggler was a tax on the whole community. Neither would it be a trifling benefit, in a constitutional point of view, that it would deprive ministers of a great deal of patronage. It would also confer great benefits on our commerce, by putting it in a natural state. At present, from the duties and restrictions of customs and excise, it was in a most unnatural state. Was this legislating for men, or for stocks and stones? He had before stated, that he thought a great effort should be made to stet rid of the debt; and he had mentioned a plan which he thought should be adopted. The hon. and learned member for Winchelsea had opposed his plan; and had said, that it would throw the whole land of the country into the hands of pettifogging attorneys; but of this there was no danger. Parliament might interfere, and give secure titles to the land which was disposed of, without the interference of pettifogging attorneys. Let it not be said, that he was not aware of the difficult situation in which the country stood. Nothing else could have induced him to recommend the measure. He could be quite easy in recommending the measure of a sinking fund, if they had a different kind of parliament—one that moved in more direct sympathy with the people. He confessed his fear of the present parliament, and its disposition to ministerial compliance. His hon. friend asked, in case of applying the sinking fund, what they were to do should a new war break out? If that was the real view, they should not call it a sinking fund. They might call it a fund for ministers to divert to particular purposes, but not a sinking fund. But, suppose a new war to break out, no such thing as a sinking fund ever having been heard of—was his hon. friend ready to vote a fund prospectively to be at the disposal of ministers, in that event? Let him say yes, and they would understand each other.

said, that, with every respect which he might have for his hon. friend's talents and the ingenuity which marked the speech which he had just made, he must be allowed to say he had never listened to one which led to such—(not to say absurd—that term would savour of want of courtesy), but so singular a conclusion. To begin with the plan of pay- ing off a part of the debt, by a new disposition of the property of the country, he must be allowed to say, that it was the plan of a man who might calculate well and read deeply, but who had not studied mankind. It was ingenious in theory, and obvious enough; but not very sound for practice. His hon. friend said, that they could give a good parliamentary title to the property to be disposed of. He would put it to the country gentle men, whether all the burthens of taxation, of which they had complained, could make them experience half of what they must feel, on having a proposition put to them to convey, by "a good parliamentary title," not less than one-third of their property to the fund-holders. He did not pretend to ally thing like the reach of intellect possessed by his hon. friend, but he thought his hon. friend sometimes over-reached himself, and lost sight of man, and of all practical conclusions: On another point, the sinking fund, his conclusions appeared equally extraordinary. He admitted that a sinking fund was good in itself. Then, it must be good as it should last in a real state. Were it only for a year, pro tanto it must, by his own admission, be a benefit. Ministers had his hon. friend's argument to set off against his vote. He had always thought the question of finance unfairly stated, when one interest was set up against another. The question was, as to what should be done, upon a general view of the finances of a great empire. When hon. gentlemen talked of getting rid of taxation, and relieving the country of burthens, they should also say what course of general policy they could suggest to relieve the country from the responsibility and consequences of the war. He considered the sinking fund useful, as something to begin upon, in case of a war. In making a loan, much saving would be effected through it. They all knew, that if the war did come, loans must be made, because the expenses would always go beyond the ways and means of the year: but that contingency could be no objection to the operation of a sinking fund, employed, in the mean time, to decrease the debt. The case of America, cited by an hon. member, appeared to him to be the strongest of all. Except in time of war, and during the declaration of independence, America always had a sinking fund in action. Since the late war, all their surplus had been applied to the immediate reduction of debt. The real principle of a sinking fund went farther than to the reduction of debt: it gave certainty to the transactions both of the government and of the country. The sinking fund, during the war, served as a barometer to ascertain the pitch of public credit, and by that the limits of the nation's resources. The hon. member for Aberdeen had gone over a long string of figures; but the argument, that applying a sinking fund to the reduction of debt would plunge the country deeper into it, was as much be could listen to—more than be would undertake to reason upon. It was like arguing him into a belief, that the place in which he was then standing, was in perfect darkness. The power of the sinking fund over the debt had been under-rated. It was said, what are 5,000,000l. towards the reduction of 800,000,000l. But the 5,000,000l. should be compared with 30,000,000l. of interest, and not with 800,000,000l. of capital: 5,000,000l. of interest represented 120,000,000l. of capital. That sum settled in permanency, would soon exhaust the debt. He was convinced that we were pursuing a right course. If the people were to be continually invited to petition for the reduction of taxation, they would not stop while a single tax existed.