, in presenting a petition against the present high duties on foreign wines from Mr. James Warre, a wine-merchant in London, called the attention of the chancellor of the exchequer to it, as proving beyond a doubt that, in matters of revenue, two and two did not always make four. It appeared from the statement of the petitioner, that in 1801, when the duly was 8s. 9d. per gallon, the sum paid into the revenue was 2,307,000l. and that from the year 1821 down to the year 1823, the average sum paid was only 1,927,000l. though the duty was nearly doubled. He called upon the right hon. gentleman to increase the comforts of the people by reducing these duties, and thus allowing them to have their wine at 3s. and 3s. 6d. instead of 6s. a bottle.

expressed his surprise that the right hon. gentleman had not taken some notice of the observations made by the hon. member for London. He trusted that the right hon. gentleman would give the House some information on this point on the 23rd; and that if he did not then give some prospect of having these duties reduced, some hon. member would bring forward a specific motion for their reduction. He was convinced that by taking off half the duty on French wines, tire quantity consumed would be more than doubled, and that the benefit to the revenue would in consequence be considerable. Besides, smuggling would be prevented; and by that means a sum of a million a year now expended on the preventive service, would be entirely saved to the revenue of the country.

in rising to move for the production of the papers which he had annually moved for, respecting the Bank of England, said, that before he proceeded to remark on the accounts which were the object of his motion, he would, with the permission of the House, state very shortly the reasons which induced him to forego calling on the Bank for the production of a part of the papers which had been originally comprehended in his notice, he meant, an account of the amount of Bank-notes and post-bills actually in circulation. At the time when he had first intended to move for those accounts, he did not anticipate that there would be any objection to the production of the accounts, which would bring the account of Bank-notes in circulation from March last, down to the present time. However, subsequently to the notice he had given, an hon. director had stated that the Bank had an objection to the production of the account of the amount of notes in circulation. His hon. friend had stated the objection of the Bank to the production of such an account to rest on this ground—that since the resumption of cash payments by the Bank, that body discharging all demands upon it according to the ordinary law, it was precisely the same as calling upon any individual merchant or banker to furnish the House with an account of the amount of his acceptances, as to call upon the Bank to produce an account of the actual amount of its circulation. He could not agree to the justness of this parallel. When he considered the great public trust reposed in the Bank—when he considered that thirty millions were entrusted to the Bank annually to pay the dividends to the national creditors—when he considered that the whole of the revenue of the country might be, according to law, paid by the different revenue departments into the Bank of England—and when he remembered all the other exclusive privileges which the Bank enjoyed, the like of which no private establishment could boast of; he could by no means admit, that it stood in the same situation as an ordinary mercantile establishment. On the contrary, he held it to be the duty of the House to call upon the Bank, from time to time, to render an account of its issues. But, as he thought it might not be expedient to press for the production of the account, he should not at present persevere in his motion. There was also as yet unrepealed the Stamp act, which directed that the Bank of England should yearly produce to the Stamp-office, the amount of its notes in circulation weekly for the preceding year, that the sum might be calculated which it should pay in lieu of stamp-duty. If that bill were not re- pealed, the Bank would be soon called upon to produce the amount of its circulation without any special order of the House; but in the same bill it was directed, that when cash payments should be resumed, some other principle of commutation would be established. As that subject would, of necessity, soon come under the consideration of the House, he should not now press for an account of the notes in circulation, but should confine himself to those annual accounts, to the production of which no objection would be made. These accounts were the statement of the balance of public money in the hands of the Bank, and of the charge made by the Bank for the management of the public debt. As to the balances of public money those who recollected the discussions in the House on the subject, would know that formerly they had fluctuated from ten to twelve millions, and that in the last four or five years, in consequence, as he believed, of what had been said in the House, they had been reduced to an average of about four millions. From this reduced amount of balance, however, the Bank, he was prepared to contend, derived a larger profit, than the service they rendered to the public deserved. The public, it would be remembered, were paying the Bank 3 per cent interest on fifteen millions, the whole original amount of the capital of that corporation. Calculating on this rate of interest, the profit of the Bank on the four millions was 120,000l. per annum. Now, if the sum were lodged in the hands of any private banker, he would think himself liberally paid by 20,000l. per annum. The public, therefore, lost on this account, and the Bank gained 100,000l a year.—Now, as to the charge for the management of the public debt, he would repeat, after the most attentive consideration, that on this head also a very considerable saving might be effected. In the last year, the charge for the management of the public debt was nearly 260,000l a-year. In speaking of this charge, he could never mention it without doing justice to the Bank, by saying, that no service could be performed with more advantage to the public, and credit to those who executed it. But, however perfectly it was performed, it might be overpaid, and instead of 260,000l., he had no doubt, that by 160,000l. a-year, the management of the debt would be very amply and liberally paid. Here, then, under proper regulations, would be another annual saving of 100,000l. It was, he knew, contended by the Bank, that under their charter, strengthened by the act of 1808, they had a right to the sum now paid for the management of the public debt, and that it would be a breach of faith to reduce it. A case had been some years ago laid before the Attorney and Solicitor-general on this subject, and their opinion was undoubtedly in favour of the interpretation of the Bank. He, however, need not say, that the opinions of legal gentlemen, very much depended on the mode in which cases were drawn up. There were two points connected with that case, which, if he had drawn it up, he would have stated in such a manner as would, he thought, have given those learned persons a different view of the subject. He did not pretend to speak from his own knowledge of the law; but he was fortified in his opinion on this matter by the concurrent opinion of a very high authority. The late Mr. Horner, when the act of 1808 was passed, had stated, that there was nothing in the act itself, or in the circumstances under which that act was passed, that prevented the public from revising the system, and reducing the sum paid to the Bank for managing the public debt.—The hon. gentleman concluded by moving, "That there be laid before this House; 1. An Account of the aggregate amount of all Balances of Public Money in the hands of the Bank, including the money taken from the Exchequer by the Bank in Exchange for Exchequer Bills deposited at the Exchequer; and including also, the balances of the Accountant General of the Court of Chancery, Unclaimed Dividends, and Lottery Prizes, and all other Public deposits, on the 1st and 15th days of each month, for the year 1823; stating the average amount of the whole, made up from the said days." 2. "An Account of money paid or payable at the Bank of England, for the management of the public debt in the year 1823; together with an Account of all Allowances made by the Public to the Bank, or charged by the Bank against the Public, for transacting any Public service in the year 1823, describing the nature of the services, and the amount charged thereon in the said year, and including the sum of 4000l., under the denomination of ' House Money,' or 'House Expenses,' and also the sum of 1,898l. 3s. 5d. under the denomination of 'Charges of Management on South Sea Stock;" and stating the aggregate amount of the whole.'

said, that with respect to what had fallen from the hon. gentleman, as to the right of calling upon the Bank to furnish ah account of the Bank-notes issued, he confessed he thought it would be extremely hard upon the Bank to expect, under the circumstances in which they stood towards the public, that they should, as a matter of course, furnish such an account. He would not go so far as to say, that there might not be circumstances which would justify the House in calling for such an account; but he could not concur with the hon. gentleman, as to the justice or expediency of calling for it as a mere matter of course. With respect to the other topics which the hon. member had introduced, as he had no objection to his motion, he did not think it necessary to enter into them at any length. The subject was not before the House, and no practical result could follow from discussing it on the present occasion. The hon. gentleman had stated most accurately, that within the last few years, the balances in the hands of the Bank had been greatly diminished, and rendered available to the public service. The Bank had most readily acquiesced in the arrangements by which the amount of those balances had been diminished. With respect to the charge for the management of the public debt, he did not quite understand whether it was the intention of the hon. gentleman to call upon the House to express any specific opinion as to the expediency of reducing that charge. He would not pretend to offer any decided opinion upon a question of law, but it certainly did appear to him, that the grounds upon which the law officers of the Crown had given their opinion as to the right of the Bank to claim an adherence to the agreement made in the time of Mr. Perceval, were most solid and substantial. He could not think, therefore, that the House would be justified in calling upon the Bank, whether they would or not, to manage the public debt at a reduced charge. The House would recollect, that some years ago, the Bank consented to a reduction of charge with respect to all that portion of the public debt which exceeded a given amount, by way of general compromise. As long as the Bank charter lasted, he thought, that in fairness, that compromise ought to be binding on the public. Looking, as he did, to the fact, that the Bank had, under circumstances of great public difficulty, contributed most essentially to the welfare of the country, he thought they ought not to be looking out for every possible opportunity of straining the law to their prejudice. He felt, therefore, that it would be unjust in the public to call upon the Bank to accept, during the remainder of their charter, a less sum than they were entitled by their agreement, to receive for the management of the public debt, in the discharge of which duty they had so essentially contributed to the public service.

said, it was of very great importance, that his majesty's ministers should take immediate steps to free themselves from the trammels in which they had long been held by the Bank. As the interest of money was now nearly on a level with what it was when the Bank lent a large sum to government, he hoped the Chancellor of the Exchequer would not listen to any application for a renewal of the Bank charter, but would pay off every shilling that had been borrowed from the Bank. It would not be difficult to do that, as the 3 per cents were at par. Let the country gentlemen recollect, that the Bank were now acting as pawnbrokers on a large scale, and were lending money on estates—a system entirely contrary to the original intention of that institution. The intention was, that they should be ready, on any emergency, to discount for the public interest, for the benefit of trade and commerce. Now, I what did this body really do? They kept up discounts above the current rate of the day. They kept up the rate of discount at 4 per cent, when every where else it could be obtained at 3 per cent. He could not accede to the opinion of his hon. friend, that it was inexpedient to call for an account of the issues of Bank-notes. He thought the House ought to have before it a return of the amount of discounts effected by the Bank. He only wanted the amount of the discounts, he did not seek for the names of individuals. It was said, that this monopolizing company had given great assistance to the country, and that trade and commerce could not go on without them. But what assistance had they given? Circumstances were now changed; and, without any aid from them, trade and commerce were going on as well as they ever had done. Let government pay them off the fifteen million which the public owed them, and if they afterwards wanted loans, the Bank would advance them money enough for 2á or 3 per cent. The country gentlemen would thus receive effectual relief; for the Bank would not know what to do with their money, and must lend it at a very reduced interest. He hoped, before the expiration of the charter, that a regular inquiry would be instituted into the whole subject. He did not pretend to be a man of deep legal learning; but he would state a fact or two on the subject of the charges demanded by the Bank, for managing the public debt, which were worthy of notice. The bargain, which the chancellor of the exchequer now argued ought not to be broken, had taken place in 1800, and a bill had passed in 1808, creating a new bargain, in which it was declared, that as the amount of the public debt had very much increased since the year 1800, it was reasonable that the Bank should have an increased allowance for its management. The debt had increased one-third, that was from 600 to 800 million, and the terms of the bargain were therefore altered for the purpose of granting to the Bank a proportional increase of allowance for the charge of management. There was no ground, therefore, for the assertion, that the bargain between the Bank and the public could not be altered; and, as the allowance was increased in 1808, it was equally reasonable that it should be reduced now, when circumstances called for its reduction. He was satisfied, that by making such a reduction, 150,000l. might and ought to be saved, which now went out of the pockets of the people.

said, that he thought the House should no longer delay to turn its attention to the expediency of renewing the charter of the Bank of England. Heretofore, it had been the regular custom to renew the charter several years before the existing charter had expired. The last renewal was made when the existing charter had eleven years to run: The present charter had nine years only to continue, and he felt very anxious to prevent the making of any agreement between the government and the Bank for a renewal, without a full examination of the policy of again conferring upon the Bank of England any exclusive privilege. The practice had been, for government to make a secret arrangement with the Bank; to submit it immediately to the proprietors of the Bank for their approbation; and to call upon the House the next day to confirm it; without affording any opportunity of fair deliberation. So much information had been obtained upon the banking trade, and upon the nature of currency in the last fifteen years, that it was particularly necessary to enter upon a full investigation of the policy of renewing the Bank charter, before any negotiation should be entered upon between the government and the Bank; and he trusted the government would not commence any such negotiation, until the sense of parliament had been taken on this important subject.

said, he did not mean to oppose the hon. member's motion. The Bank had ever shown the greatest readiness to lay its affairs before the public. He had no objection whatever to the account of the public balances in the hands of the Bank, nor to the amount of the charges for managing the public debt, being produced. With respect to the returns made to the Stamp-office, which had been alluded to by the hon. mover, they would undoubtedly be continued for public purposes. The hon. member for Aberdeen had thought it quite right that the amount of the issues of Bank-notes should be laid before the House: but, surely, it was rather novel to ask for a list of bills, or to inquire into any retail transactions of a banker. If they once entered into this minute examination, he saw no mode of preventing a constant recurrence to it. The hon. mover had spoken of the large sums that were made by the Bank for the management of the public debt; at the same time that he did not deny the accuracy and promptitude with which the public business was conducted. The management of the debt was not, however, overpaid; for it should be observed, that the Bank were obliged to run the risk of forgeries in the transfer of stock. The charge for managing the public debt was exactly 7d. in the hundred pounds, which was no very exorbitant sum. The hon. member for Aberdeen had censured the Bank for lending money to the landed interest, as being a practice opposed to the principles on which that establishment was founded. Now, the fact was otherwise. They were empowered by their charter, to purchase lands, manors, and hereditaments; and an act had been passed in the time of king William, for the express purpose of encouraging the Bank to lend money on land. After all the complaints of gentlemen in this House on the subject of agricultural distress—after the repeated statements that they could not get any relief from the country bankers, it was surely rather hard to blame the Bank for granting that accommodation which could not be obtained elsewhere.

said, that the hon. director had totally misrepresented the argument of his hon. friend, the member for Aberdeen. His hon. friend had not made it a ground of charge against the Bank, that they had advanced money to the landed interest; on the contrary, he had contended, that if the government paid off the debt to the Bank, that corporation would be enabled to lend their money at a cheaper rate. With respect to the propriety of that House requiring from the Bank a statement of the amount of their notes in circulation, he admitted, that if the Bank were merely a corporate body, without any extraordinary privileges, like the Bank of Scotland, they would have no right to call upon them for such an account. But, the situation of the Bank of England was an exception to all general rules. It was a great monopolizing body, enjoying privileges which belonged to no other corporation, and to no other class of his majesty's subjects. Those privileges were granted for the benefit of commerce; but, instead of employing their capital for the advantage of trade, as was intended on its original establishment, the whole conduct of the Bank had been directly opposed to the commercial interests of the country. It was difficult, he knew, to find a set of men in that House to take this view of the subject; because the system of the Bank was in favour of the great capitalists. If a great capitalist went into the market, the conduct of the Bank did not affect him in borrowing; but it did affect the rate of discount between an individual and his banker, and it sensibly affected men of moderate capital. While others would be content to discount for 3½,the Bank kept up the rate to 4 per cent. As the Tariff of the Bank of England was a rule to all the other banks in the country, every person who went for discount to his banker, was obliged to pay 4l. per cent for it, because the Bank thought proper to charge that sum. He wished it to be seen, but, for himself, he did not believe, that of the legitimate security—commercial bills—in which the Bank ought properly to vest their money—he did not, he said, believe, that their security of that description amounted to half a million; and that only among the worst bills that came into the market. And yet it was said, that the House had not a right to ask the amount of the Bank paper in circulation. In his opinion, it was most necessary to ask that question, that the country might know whit it had to trust to. Suppose money to be suddenly wanted, how, under the present circumstances, must the Bank proceed to raise it? Why, either they must sell Exchequer bills, and so distress the government; or call upon the landed interest, and so distress the country gentlemen. There was really an aversion to disclosure about the Bank, which he did not know how to account for. The director who had spoken last had said—"Would you ask us the amount of our discounts?" And, why not? Was the Bank of France in a jot the less credit, because it stated annually, not only the amount of its discounts, and of its paper in circulation, but actually of the profits which it derived, and of the bullion it had in its coffers. He took, of the whole question, the same view with his hon. friend near him; and, if ever it was in the power of the country to repay the Bank advances, he trusted that the opportunity would not be lost, of making government independent of that body. Such an arrangement, as it seemed to him, was particularly desirable, before the question of the renewal of the Bank charter came on. He hoped that that exclusive charter would never again be granted; and that the conduct of the Bank during the last ten or twelve years would make government very cautious how they entertained any such proposition. The right hon. the chancellor of the exchequer had protested against the idea of straining any point to the prejudice of the Bank. He thought, however, that the Bank had very little to complain of, when their stock, after all their past profits, was at 238. Upon the question, however, of the in competency of the House to interfere with the management of the public debt, he differed entirely from the right hon. gentleman. With respect to the agreement between the Bank and the public as to the ma- nagement of the public debt, there was a part of the correspondence with Mr. Perceval, in 1808, which very much strengthened the view which his hon. friend, the member for Aberdeen, had taken of the case. Mr. Perceval's words were these:—"Under this disposition I am strongly inclined to give way to the suggestions of the Bank, as regards the manner of arranging that part of the public debt, so far as it applies to present circumstances, or to circumstances expected to occur within a short period." It was evident, from these words, that it was not the intention of the government to preclude the House from any future consideration of the subject, or any alteration in the terms of the agreement, which circumstances might subsequently render necessary. At a time when reductions had been made in every department of the public service—reductions which, in many cases, operated with great severity, as a tax upon the income of men who had served the public—the country had a right to expect a reduction in the inordinate allowance made to the Bank for the management of the public debt.

contended, that the conduct of the Bank did not deserve the censure which had been passed upon it. The directors had not been induced to refuse the accounts, because they were afraid to produce them, but because they did not conceive it fair, or warranted by the occasion. With regard to the balances, four millions sounded high in a round sum: but the House was mistaken, if it supposed that the Bank derived such vast advantage from it. The total was made up of various small sums under sixty different heads of account; and therefore could not be productive of very great profits.

said, he thought it was premature to be discussing at the present moment the question of renewing, or not renewing, the Bank charter; but if any persons believed that the country would be able to get on without any such establishment as a Bank, or without an establishment a good deal like what the Bank was at present, he differed from such persons in opinion, and he thought that they would find themselves mistaken. With the management of the public debt he would not meddle, for it was a subject which had been already canvassed over and over again. The question of the balances, as it seemed to him, had always been most unfairly stated by the hon. member who had opened the debate. It did not appear to him, that the sum of 120,000l. was more than they were entitled to; for one of the items in the correspondence between the Bank and Mr. Perceval was, that the Bank should receive a compensation at that rate; so that the balances being now four millions instead of six, he thought that the sum of 120,000l. was not more than the Bank had a right to receive. Another part of the complaint against the Bank was, that they lent their capital at the rate of 4 per cent. It was undoubtedly true, that at present the public could receive no advantage on these terms; but the House were bound to remember the time when the Bank did lend at 3 per cent, and that, too, at a considerable advantage to the public. With respect to the loans of money by the Bank upon mortgage, there was no doubt that under existing circumstances, the country gentlemen had been greatly benefitted by the practice: but, at the same time that he fully admitted the extent of the present advantage, he was compelled to consider the principle as in the highest degree doubtful. And he thought it, indeed, a course the most likely that could be taken to carry the country, at some future period, back to the distress and evils of a paper system. If the country, while we were in a state of peace, was to be kept in readiness for a state of war, an efficient bank was just as necessary to us as an efficient army and navy. But, if the Bank should have twelve or thirteen millions of capital vested in mortgages, in addition to the burthen of the dead weight, they would be but ill-able to render the country any assistance, should we be compelled to enter into a war of any importance, where a great exertion would be required; so, that, although he was perfectly sensible of the partial advantages conferred by the system of loans on mortgages, yet he trusted that the House would not shut its eyes to the public danger that might arise from the practice. It was impossible for him to mention the subject of the naval and military pensions, without recalling to the attention of the House the constant and decided warnings which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had received, against entering on so extraordinary a project. From no man of sense, had he received the least encouragement; and he really believed the right hon. gentleman had been drawn into the scheme, merely from a desire to screen his predecessor from exposure. He could never believe that the right hon. gentleman could ever have originated such a proposition; particularly when he recollected the sound, and enlightened, and liberal opinions, which he had heard him, with so much satisfaction, deliver in that House. He conceived that the greatest possible sacrifice had been made by the public, when that bargain was made with the Bank. It was worth to the Bank nothing short of a million and a half. They might talk of 120,000l.: but, let any man only take the trouble of putting pen to paper, and he would find that there had, at least, been a sacrifice, on the part of the public, of a million and a half [hear, hear!]. At the time when the contract was made, the government undertook to get money from the Bank, for five years prospectively at 74. Thus we borrowed at 74 and paid at 90, and very possibly we might have to pay at par. It was a strange financial operation, by which the country was to borrow at 74 and possibly redeem at 100. He knew the answer that would be given to this statement, "the stocks have got up, it is true, but might they not, have fallen? and if so, would not this have been a good bargain on the part of the public?" But, let the question be considered in what manner it might, still he thought the measure most impolitic and injurious for, if the country had been drawn into a war then the bargain would have been good for nothing; inasmuch as the Bank would have been choaked with the burthen of it, and would have been unable to render the country assistance; and, if it was expected that we should remain at peace, then, he contended, the one million and a half had been completely thrown away. However, he must again repeat, that he completely exonerated the Chancellor of the Exchequer from any blame in the arrangement; and he sincerely trusted, that nothing would induce him again to renew a financial operation of that description. Let any gentleman only look to the balance-sheet of this year, and he would see how perplexing and unintelligible this operation was. He defied any gentleman in that House, not connected with the Treasury, to explain what was its precise meaning or tendency. If any country gentleman, wishing for information on that subject, and not acquainted with its technicalities, should take up that paper with a view to inform himself, he must throw it down in disgust, unable to discover its meaning. There was another circumstance to which he wished to call the attention of the House. It had been suggested as being desirable to pay off the debt due to the Bank. Now, it appeared to him quite useless to pay off the debt for the purpose that had been alleged, namely, that of rendering the government independent of the Bank. But in the present state of the money market, he saw no difficulty in accomplishing that object; for the government could render themselves independent of the Bank in five minutes, by borrowing the fifteen millions, which were due to it. On the subject of the sinking fund, it would perhaps be more convenient to remark after the chancellor of the Exchequer had made his expose of the finances of the country, but it appeared to him, that the best application of that surplus of the revenue would be to the payment of those claims on the country which must be paid in money; either to defray the sum which was due to the Bank (if that were considered necessary), or the payment of Exchequer Bills; but he protested altogether against its present application, namely, the repaying at 100 what we had borrowed at 50 or 60.

said, that though the right of the House, now that the Bank paid in specie, to call on them for a return of their notes in circulation might perhaps, be questionable, he thought it matter of great public interest, that the amount should be periodically known; as, in point of fact, the Bank issues, payable in specie or not, had an immense influence on all money transactions: and he would put it to the Bank Directors themselves, whether, in continuing to give the public such information, they would not consult their own convenience, and indeed safety: as any alarm which at any time might arise, might bring the same sort of ruin on them, as took place in 1797, and be infinitely increased, by an exaggerated idea of the amount of their notes in circulation: the effect of concealment then having been, that Paine had estimated the notes of the Bank at sixty millions, when it was found they were only nine.

said, he considered the profit which the Bank of England derived from the management of the public debt much more than they had a right to receive; and he thought it would be very adviseable that a committee should be appointed to examine the matter, and determine what profit the Bank should receive; and if, as had been stated, 100,000l. was sufficient for them, he could see no good reason why they should receive 200,000l. He was ready to give them a fair and liberal remuneration, but he was not prepared to give them any thing they might demand. They might talk as long as they pleased of the Bank lending money to the public at 3 per cent; but he believed, if a committee were appointed, it would be satisfactorily proved, that they received 5 or 6 per cent. He could not say positively that, according to their charter, they were not entitled to it; but if there was not an express stipulation to the contrary, he would not allow the Bank more than a fair and reasonable profit. He thought the chancellor of the Exchequer should take some legal opinion upon the subject; and, if no doubt was found to exist upon that point, the Bank should not be allowed to receive more than a fair remuneration and a liberal profit.—On the subject of the dead weight he could never speak without deprecating that contract with the Bank, as most impolitic and unwise; and as a measure by which an enormous gain was given to the Bank, and an enormous loss was sustained by the public. It was a most wanton bargain, by which the country had suffered considerably.

said, he did not conceive the Bank was enabled by its charter to lend money on mortgages. He knew the word "pledges" was introduced; but that referred to gold and silver, and merchandize belonging to merchants, and if mortgages had been contemplated, they would, no doubt, have been introduced. Nothing could be more dangerous to the public, than for the Bank to invest its capital in mortgages. What would be the situation of the country in case of a war, if the capital of the Bank was tied up in mortgages the Bank would be coming down to that House, having invested, perhaps, twelve or thirteen millions of capital, with a statement of their distresses; they would be obliged to stop payment in money: and then we should see renewed all the evils from which we were only now recovering. If any illustration were wanted of the state of things which he was endeavouring to describe, he might advert to the failure of the country banks in 1815. Many of those banks were solvent in effects; but for those effects they were unable to get money, and thereby desolation was spread around the entire country. They now found the Bank of England exactly fol- lowing in their footsteps. If the Bank themselves were to be the only sufferers, he should not complain; but their conduct would affect the country at large. The only security against the catastrophe which had occurred in 1797, would be, to institute a proper inquiry into the state; of the Bank. If that inquiry had been made at that unhappy period, the calamity to which he had alluded would never have occurred. The Bank of France had been most properly cited as an example, for they not only furnished a statement of their accounts, but a committee was actually appointed to sit in judgment on them, to ascertain their profits; and they were not allowed to divide more than their due. He could see no other means whereby the evils of 1797 could be avoided, than by compelling the Bank to publish an annual account of their issues. It had been stated, that it was desirable there should be some great company like the Bank to lend money to the public; but did we not know that there were many companies who would be glad to do it on more advantageous terms? It had also been asserted, that the Bank had maintained its credit for twenty years; but, in the year 1797, they were compelled to stop payment; and God forbid that such another twenty years should ever return! He hoped that, when the Bank charter came to be considered, its renewal would not be granted, as a matter of course; for he was quite persuaded that in the city of London, twelve merchants could be found whose security would be just as unquestionable as that of the Bank, and who would be glad to do the public business gratuitously. He therefore saw no reason whatever why we should make a compliment of 2 or 300,000l. a year to the Bank.

rose, pursuant to notice, to move for leave to bring in a bill to amend the Gaol act passed in the last session. It had been found, upon carrying that act into execution, that there were one or two particulars which impeded its operation, and to amend it in these respects was the object of his present motion. In the first place, the act as it now stood required certain things to be done at the general quarter sessions in each county. The counties of York and Lincoln being divided into districts, and the periodical administration of justice in those counties being under a different regulation, there were no general quarter sessions, and therefore, until by a new enactment they should be included in the act, they could not be brought under its operation. Another of the amendments which he proposed to introduce was, to give to local magistrates a power of committing prisoners to the county gaol at once, instead of to the district prisons. He was convinced that the more this practice was reduced the better; and if, would be still more advantageous, if there were only one gaol in each county, to which all the prisoners should be committed. As far as he had been able to gather the general wish of the inhabitants of the districts he alluded to, they would prefer having their prisoners committed to the county gaol, and would willingly pay the expense of carrying them thither. The uniformity of discipline which prevailed in county gaols could never be attained in smaller prisons; while any abuses which crept into the former would be more readily discovered and corrected, The prisons of the local jurisdictions sometimes contained no more than four or five prisoners; they were not subject to the same visitation as the county gaols; nor was it possible to place them under that inspection which was so easily applied to a larger number. There was also another topic which he intended to include in the bill. Great difference of opinion prevailed, with respect to the compelling prisoners who were committed for trial, to labour in the same manner as those who were under sentence. He had no hesitation in saying, that he thought prisoners ought not to be kept to hard labour before trial; but, for the purpose of removing all doubt and difference of opinion upon the subject, he should insert a clause to that effect. An hon. gentleman (Mr. G. Bennet) had given notice of his intention to propose a measure respecting this particular subject, but as he understood that to be only in case he (Mr. Peel) did not take some steps in it, the hon. gentleman would now probably not think it necessary to fulfil that intention. He concluded by moving for leave to bring in a bill to amend the Gaol act of the last session.

concurred entirely with the right hon. secretary, in the amendments which he proposed, and deprecated the practice of keeping prisoners to hard labour before trial. There was, however, another, and no less objectionable practice, namely, where prisoners who had been sentenced by the court to imprisonment, but not to labour during that imprisonment, were still made to labour, upon the principal that they ought to provide for their support as long as they were within the prison. He thought that some remedy for this illegal practice ought to be provided in the proposed amendments.

took that opportunity of complaining of the hardship and injustice which was experienced by the land-owners in being compelled to pay the whole expense of the administration of criminal justice in each county. That expense was entirely defrayed out of the county rates, and had undergone so rapid an increase within the last fifty years, that it was now a very important charge. He had looked into the accounts of his own county for some years past, and, without troubling the House at any length, with the particulars of the great increase, he would merely state, that in the year 1761 the charge for printing was 33l. 18s.; while in 1819, it had increased to 1,200l. The salary of the clerk of the peace in the first mentioned year was 300l. per annum, and now by means of additional fees, it amounted to 1,300l. He was aware that at present there was no other source but the county rates from which these expenses could be paid, but he trusted that the right hon. gentleman would recognize, among the alterations which he proposed, the principle, that this expenditure should be borne by the nation at large, and not be taken from the land alone. He hoped that a committee would be appointed to inquire into the best mode of relieving the land-owners from this charge, and that at the same time an inquiry would be made into the mode of assessing the poor-rate, which might be considered as an item of the county-rate.

rose also for the purpose of suggesting to the right hon. gentleman an alteration in the consolidated gaol act of the last session; he meant so far as related to the classification clauses. If they were to be carried into execution, it could only be done at an expense which the smaller counties were ill able to bear, and which moreover appeared to be quite unnecessary. In Breconshire, the county which he had the honour to represent, the gaol Consisted of four yards, four day- rooms, and six cells; an estimate had been made of the sum it would cost to make the alterations required by the consolidated gaol act, and it was found that at the least it would take 3,000l., or the amount of four county-rates; while it was quite certain that one half of it would never be occupied. In the adjoining county of Radnor, the gaol consisted of two yards, two day-rooms, and four cells; the only prisoner was sentenced to two years imprisonment, and he had petitioned to be transferred to the other county gaol, in order that he might not be kept in solitary confinement. He trusted that, seeing the number of prisoners in the gaols of the Welsh counties, which, for the honour of the principality, he was glad to say were very few, those gaols would be exempted from the operation of the classification clauses.

rose for the purpose of calling the right hon. gentleman's attention to the injurious consequences of the introduction of the tread-mill into the prison discipline. Notwithstanding the reports which the right hon. gentleman had received respecting it, he (Mr. H.) thought that a mere inspection of the machine was sufficient to prove its inadequacy to the purpose for which it was intended. All the persons sent to it were exposed to the same degree of labour; without any allowance being made for difference of strength and constitution. The committee on prison discipline had furnished even a more cogent reason why punishment should be in some degree modified, when they denounced it as a dangerous instrument of oppression in the hands of wanton and ignorant persons. He was happy to see the promptitude with which the secretary of state for the home department had met the gross misapplication of this system in a recent case where magistrates had contended for the power of dooming persons to the treadmill before trial. How any living beings could, for one single instant, have presumed that they were justified in such a misapplication, appeared to him a most extraordinary phenomenon. And (said Mr. Hobhouse) I must be allowed here to say, that if the magistracy of this kingdom evince such a promptitude to exercise powers of harshness and oppression, and unless such a spirit be met by the resistance of this House, and of the government, that body, which have, perhaps too hastily, been called a blessing, will dege- nerate into one of the greatest curses with which the people of this country could be afflicted. It is too much the case for magistrates to consider themselves, not as magistrates merely, but as parcel and part of the government; and therefore it is that I feel it highly creditable to the right hon. secretary, that he has given them this lesson—that, when they assume a power in which they are not justified by law, by him they will not be countenanced. In what code of legislation in any country—in what usage of their own—could they have found even a pretext for such a course? It is no excuse for men bound to execute justice, that they thought they were right. If their own consciences were silent they had the same means that were open to every other person of consulting those, who were conversant with the statutes of the country before they proceeded to act upon such an assumed power. And here he could not help suggesting a hope, that the right hon. secretary would direct his attention to those punishments, latterly introduced into our prisons, where men not sentenced to that kind of punishment were placed in solitary imprisonment. He did hope that the utmost circumspection would be exerted in watching the operation of the new system, lest it might be converted, in the hands of ignorant and wanton persons, into an engine of dread-full oppression.

could not coincide in the fears of his hon. friend, as to the apprehension of any excess of punishment from the introduction of the tread-mill. That system of labour had been in practice in the city of London for the last hundred years, on the commercial quays; and he, therefore, could not see any reason to suppose that that portion of labour which was voluntarily undertaken by the labouring classes, could operate prejudicially as a species of prison discipline. In the gaol of Newgate a severer kind of labour was made applicable to the wants of the prison, and no bad effects had been experienced from it. With respect to the proposition thrown out by the hon. member for Somersetshire, he should only say, that complaints of expense came with a very bad grace from a county whose prison and whose prison discipline had been the subject of censure in a parliamentary report. As to the expenses attendant on the administration of criminal justice, he begged to say is answer to the hon. baronet, that, with the exception of the expenses to witnesses, which lay with the judges, the remainder was under the control of the local magistracy. The city of London met its expenditure, great as it was. Why should not Somersetshire? on what grounds, was the country at large to be burthened with expenses, incurred for local purposes?

stated the severe hardship which the new law imposed upon the counties in Wales. The greatest number of prisoners that he ever knew to have been in the gaol of Glamorganshire were 18. The annual average was six; and yet, under the classification of prisoners, the expense to the county would be 5000l. He trusted some exception would be made in favour of the Welsh counties thus circumstanced.

said, that in reply to the observations of the hon. baronet, the member for Somerset, he should only observe, that he would willingly attend to any suggestion, which would afford the best means of giving the fullest information to parliament, on the subject to which the hon. baronet had alluded. But he was persuaded that, for a due control on the expenditure which local burthens created, the local magistracy was best calculated to devise the means. To place such a duty on a public officer for the country generally, was, in his judgment, most objectionable; and would lead to a much larger expenditure, and to a less efficient check. He must be allowed to add, that if great burthens arose in counties from the expenses of criminal prosecutions, the certain method to reduce the amount, was by a salutary and efficient system of prison regulation. With respect to what had fallen from his hon. friends, the members for the principality, with every disposition to attend to the particular cases, he felt great difficulty in. admitting the principle that there should be no classification of Welsh prisons. In his present view of their objections, however, he should merely throw out as a suggestion, that though it was impossible to admit the exemption claimed, yet he thought the difficulty might be met, by three or four Welsh counties combining to erect a prison for themselves. The purposes of classification would, in that case, be fully answered. With reference to what had fallen from the hon. member for Westminster, he really wished that hon. gentleman would take the trouble to peruse the returns, which would shortly be laid on the table, on the subject. He (Mr. P.) had caused a most minute inquiry to be made, and the weight of individuals subjected to the punishment of the tread-mill to be noted; from which it would appear, that so far as increased weight was an indication of good health, the punishment could not have operated injuriously. As the labour was only for the short period of a quarter of an hour at a time, nothing could be more easy, if it were found necessary, than to give to the robust man two turns, and to the weak man only one. Indeed, the peculiar advantage of this punishment was, that it could be graduated. If it were said, why, then, was it not? the answer might fairly be, that the magistrates did not find any ill effects on the parties subjected to this discipline. On the whole, he considered the tread-mill as an admirable contrivance, and that no system of labour could be devised which was so little liable to abuse. It was not necessary for him to defend the general conduct of the magistrates of this country. He believed there was only one single case of a misconstruction of the act, and that was in the north riding of Yorkshire; but to remedy that, he should introduce a clause to exempt a prisoner from the labour of the tread-mill prior to his conviction.

said, he had next to address the House on a subject of considerable importance; namely, the consolidating, and in some degree amending, the various acts relative to the summoning and challenging of juries. It was wholly unnecessary, in this period of our history, or in that House, to pass any eulogium on that great barrier of public security. Neither would it be supposed that any measure he was about to introduce was intended to weaken, in the slightest degree, the efficiency of that admirable system. His object was, to consolidate all the various statutes now in existence, and in some particulars to amend the jury enactments. When he assured the House that there existed no less than fifty different statutes applicable to the summoning, the qualifications, and the challenging of jurors, the very existence of such a fact would shew the propriety of consolidating all those various enactments into one act. There were also many of those enactments which had been partially repealed, or whose provisions had, in the progress of time, been made a dead letter. Looking at the titles of some of these statutes, it would be difficult to ascertain that they bore the slightest reference to the impanelling of juries, so mixed up were they with the most incongruous subjects. They would find the title of one of those acts to express itself a provision for the recovery of small fines, and also for the summoning of jurors. Another they would find to express itself an act for the regulation of vagrants, the exporting of leather, and the ease of jurors. Another went to provide for the payment of seamen's wages, the prevention of clandestine traffic in silk mixed with stuff, and the summoning of persons from juries. Then came a fourth, for the exemption of apothecaries from filling the office of scavengers, and certain exemptions also from serving on juries—so vague and incongruous were the acts of parliament which regulated the qualifications and the duties of that most important duty. It must, therefore, be an object of general satisfaction to extract from these various statutes, which amounted to twenty at least, all that was valuable and necessary. So far as to the acts which regulated the summoning of jurors. He did not believe that those which referred to the challenging of jurors amounted to so many, but still they were numerous. With the permission of the House, however, he would bring in the bill, and when printed, an opportunity would be afforded for examining those amendments which it was impossible for him at present accurately to describe. He trusted that there would not be found in it a single provision, the effect of which would not be an amendment of the present system. But, the chief amendment would relate to an extension of the qualification of jurors. The bill would also contain some enactments, having in view more effectually to compel the attendance of jurors, and thus to equalize the burthen of the duty on the community. It would likewise provide the means of taking from subordinate officers, such as constables and tithing-men, the naming of jurors. Magistrates would have the power of checking the returns of such subordinate officers, of inserting the names of all persons qualified to be jurors, and of punishing the omission of such names. He would defer any further remarks until the measure should be before the House, in a printed form; and would now move for leave to bring in a bill "to consolidate and amend the laws relating to the impanelling of Juries."

expressed his earnest hope, that some similar measure would be extended to Ireland, where the abuses on the subject were such as almost to amount to a surrender of the administration of justice into hands wholly unfit to hold it. When the measure should be brought before the House, he would take an opportunity of staling which of its provisions might be advantageously applied to Ireland. He did not believe that the same bill could be made to embrace Ireland. For many reasons, the measure must be separate. But with the local knowledge which he possessed of the great evil of the law, as it now existed in Ireland, and of the gross oppression which was the result of the lax administration even of that law, in consequence of the subordinate hands into which the administration of justice fell, and of the prejudices and local jealousies which operated to its perversion, he should not be doing his duty were he not to claim for Ireland the benefit of some similar measure.

highly approved of the measure, and dwelt on the expediency of introducing a bill to enforce the attendance of special jurymen, who, in many counties, were very negligent of their duty. He was desirous also that returns should be regularly made of the persons summoned to serve as special jurymen, especially in the courts of Middlesex. Disclaiming the slightest intention of casting any reflection on the learned persons presiding in those courts, he could not help thinking, that in some of them, especially in the court of Exchequer, there was a considerable laxity of proceeding on this subject: He repeated his entire approbation of the proposed measure. By a steady and quiet attention to such subjects, though no noisy fame might be attached to it—the right hon. secretary would confer the greatest benefit on the country, and one which the great body of the people would duly appreciate.

observed, that he had last session moved for returns respecting this subject. He had long been perfectly satisfied, that the composition of juries ought to be left to chance; that was, that the members of them ought to be drawn by lot or ballot: for if the honestest man that ever lived were entrusted with the selection of a jury, it would be impossible that strict justice could be done. It was with great pleasure, therefore, that he heard of the modification of the existing law, which the right hon. gentleman proposed; and he trusted that he would introduce into it a provision for appointing juries by ballot. If ever there were grounds for any legislative proceeding, the right hon. gentleman had laid those grounds. Nor did they stop there; they extended to the necessity of subjecting the whole statute law to the same simplification. It was well known that a noble lord, now no more, had proceeded a great way in the simplification and consolidation of the statute law. With the disposition which his majesty's government seemed now to entertain, he could see no difficulty in carrying so desirable an object into effect, and of reducing the five-and-twenty massy volumes, in which the statute-law was now spread out, into a space which would enable every man to ascertain how far, in any particular proceeding, he was or was not violating that law. In making some inquiries recently respecting the prerogative courts (a subject which it was his intention shortly to bring under the consideration of the House, in consequence of the exorbitant fees which he found charged on the recovery of property in those courts), he found that, in an act of parliament passed so late as 1813, which had been introduced by lord Stowell and sir John Nicholl, and which had for its object the regulation of tithes, clauses were introduced wholly unconnected with the subject, and relating to the employment, and to the exceptions to the employment, of proctors in those courts. This afforded an additional proof of the necessity of revising, simplifying, and consolidating our Statute-book.

did not mean to oppose the right hon. gentleman's motion, nor would he have risen at all, had it not been for what had just fallen from the hon. member for Aberdeen. He must say, that he regarded with some jealousy these consolidation acts. They were seldom purely such. There was always some new provision which appeared so desirable, that flesh and blood could not resist introducing it. For instance, the right hon. gentleman no sooner proposed a consolidation of the jury laws, than the hon. member for Aberdeen branched out into a proposition for consolidating the whole of the statute-laws of England. As far as he could judge of the amendments proposed by the right hon. gentleman, he did not dissent from them; but he must say, that every new act of this nature seemed only to create, instead of to remove doubts. What had been the case that very evening? Scarcely two sessions had elapsed since a general Prison law bill had been passed, by which it was said that that subject was set at rest; yet now parliament was applied to to agree to a bill to amend the provisions of the former act. He admitted that there was much confusion in the Statute-book, owing, in a great measure, to carelessness in the formation of many of the statutes, and especially of the old ones; but this was a subject which ought to be treated with considerable caution. As to the evils of the jury system, he certainly should not object to their being remedied by a separate bill; but really that system seemed to him to work so well, that it might be safely left in its ancient form. It was impossible to know where these consolidation acts were to end. One observation had always struck him; namely, that whenever the legislature passed one of these consolidated acts, it had always the effect of reviving some absurd and oppressive, but until that period, obsolete statute.

said, he was very unwilling to engage in the present discussion, but he could not allow the observations which had just been made to pass without remark. His hon. friend who spoke last thought that parliament ought to be satisfied with the existing statutes, in the confusion in which they were; and conceived that there was danger in consolidating them, because in the operation some error might creep in, which it might be afterwards necessary to rectify. The answer to this was, that here was a great existing evil; so great, indeed, that it was almost impossible, on any given subject, to ascertain what the statute-law was. He would venture to assert, that there was no lawyer in the land, however learned—not even the noble lord at the head of the law in this country—who could say, with reference to any subject, that there might not be some statute respecting it, of which he had no knowledge. The multiplicity and confusion of our statutes constituted one of the greatest grievances conceivable. And if so, why should not a remedy be applied? Was the apprehension, that something might creep in of which it would be afterwards desirable to get rid, to operate, in deterring parliament from such an undertaking? It was contended, that if a consolidation of the statutes were to be effected, the country would lose the benefit of the decisions which had taken place on the law as it stood. But he would appeal to any lawyer, whether, in suits of law, cases were not cited by the counsel on both sides without end; and with equal earnestness and confidence, until the unfortunate judge was overwhelmed with contradictory decisions on the point before him? Was not that a great grievance? There was another. Not only was the law in many respects unknown to those whose duty it was to study it, but the community at large were wholly ignorant of it. Many were the persons who had been executed for acts which, before the commission of them, they did not know were capital offences. As to the bill for amending the gaol act, leave to bring in which had that night been granted; it was not wonderful that a measure which had occupied the legislature for two sessions, and which was of so difficult and complicated a nature, should be found to have some defects requiring correction. It would be highly advantageous for the magistracy of the country if the statutes were simplified and consolidated. At present they were obliged, what with statutes and reports, to have almost a lawyer's library, the value of which was about a thousand guineas. He was convinced that the more the subject was considered, the more apparent would be the necessity of consolidating the existing statutes.

was much in favour of a consolidation of the laws relating to the impanelling of juries; although he was not at present prepared to admit the necessity of extending the qualifications of jurors.

rose to submit a motion to which he could not anticipate any reasonable objection. It was merely for some returns as to the names and religious profession of certain individuals filling particular offices in Ireland; and his motion was, in effect, concurrent with that of which a noble lord had recently given notice. The house were well aware that, in 1793, an act was passed, declaring Roman Catholics, as well as Protestants, eligible to all offices and posts in Ireland, with the exception of such as were therein byname excepted. Now, the immediate object he had in view was, to show how this statute had been acted on, and who had been omitted out of its operation since 1793. And he really did believe that these returns would go far to demonstrate what was the real cause of the political evils which had so long afflicted Ireland; for they would prove, that, out of the many offices which the act declared Roman Catholics competent to fill, there was hardly one to which a Roman Catholic had been admitted. If it had not been for this most unjust and invidious sort of exclusion, Ireland would not have been agitated by half the troubles which had befallen her; and such an evasion of the act of 1793 was productive of more harm than all the penal statutes that oppressed her. At all events, if Parliament were to repeal the latter to-morrow, the repeal would scarcely effect greater benefit to that unfortunate country, than the due observance of this equitable act would ensure to her. Of 74 trustees of the Linen board, not one was a Catholic. The directors of the Bank of Ireland had the management of a great portion of the Catholic property, and yet not a single director was a Catholic. He would move "That there be laid before this House, a return of the names of the persons holding the following offices or appointments in Ireland; distinguishing those who profess the Roman Catholic Religion—barristers, commissioners of bankrupts; barristers, commissioners of insolvent court; barristers, commissioners of inquiry into fees, &c. of courts of justice; barristers, taxing officers of law courts; barristers, counsel to the crown for the six circuits, for the assizes of 1823; barristers, counsel to the customs, excise, commissioners of stamp duties, and other government offices; barristers, magistrates (with salaries) of police of the city of Dublin; barristers, commissioners of appeals in revenue causes; chief magistrates under the insurrection and constabulary acts; trustees of the Linen board; general inspectors of prisons; governor, deputy governor, and directors, of the bank of Ireland: scholars of Trinity College; commissioners for distributing the grant to the lord lieutenant, for promoting education; commissioners of general board of health; commissioners of inland navigation; commissioners for auditing public accounts; commissioners of customs; commissioners of excise; commissioners of stamp duties; commissioners for paving and lighting the city of Dublin; commissioners for erecting fountains in the city of Dublin; commissioners for preserving the port of Dublin; commissioners for wide streets in the city of Dublin; crown solicitors; clerks of the crown; clerks of the peace."

said, it had not been his good fortune to be in the house when notice of this motion was given, and it was only by accident that he had seen it in the paper. But, as it stood there, it was by no means so detailed as the motion now submitted by the hon. gentleman; for it was there described as a "return of the names and religious persuasions of all persons connected with the general administration of justice, receipt and management of the revenue, the general manufacture and education of Ireland." He thought that every body, upon reflection, must see a sufficient reason for his refusing these returns. It would be the first time that this house, by an order of its own, had ever thought fit to call on certain bodies in the community to make a return of the religious persuasion of the various persons of whom they were composed, or of those of the officers they employed. Hon. gentlemen must be aware, that even in the case of the common population returns, which it was considered expedient to make at stated periods, an act of parliament was always passed to authorize the degree of power necessary to be exercised, in order to get such returns prepared. Yet, in a motion of this inquisitorial nature, it was thought sufficient that an hon. member should merely come down and move the returns as matter almost of course. It had, indeed, been the policy of the legislature to require, that the candidates for certain offices in the state should make a profession of faith before they were allowed to enter upon them, but such a test was never required of those who had already entered, and were in the enjoyment of offices. This would be a principle quite new to our constitution, and one which he would ever oppose. The motion called for the return, not only of grand jurors and petty jurors, but also of all persons connected with the adminis- tration of justice. Now nothing could be more unreasonable than that, in such returns, should be included individuals whose services were purely honorary, and without emolument. He had no objection, however, to a return that should be confined to those who had already taken the test oaths. In the stamp and other departments, there was no necessity for inquiring into the religious persuasion of the officer; and, during his own connexion with Ireland, had he made it a rule to forbear, in cases of such appointments, from inquiring at all into the religious or political opinions of the party. On the grounds he had stated, he should resist the motion.

said, that when the House considered, that five-sixths of the people of Ireland were Catholics, and that scarcely one of them had been appointed since the year 1793 to those offices which, by the law, they were eligible to fill, they could not suppose it was the mere effect of chance. Much more fair was it to say, that it was the effect of that exclusive system which had been so long acted on in Ireland, and which had produced so many misfortunes. The right hon. gentleman had said, that he never considered the religious opinions of persons whom he appointed to offices; but, if that principle had been acted upon in Ireland, how could the House possibly account for the fact, that so very few Catholics had been appointed to offices of emolument in Ireland. The right hon. gentleman had said that the motion would, if granted, lead to the exercise of inquisitorial power. Now, there was nothing inquisitorial about it. Was it not perfectly notorious who were Catholics and who were Protestants? The object of the motion was one of considerable importance. In Ireland, the returns moved for might not be of so much importance, because there the exclusion of the Catholics was perfectly well known; but in England the fact was otherwise, and it was of great importance that those returns should be laid on the table of that House, in order to show to the people of this country the real extent of the Catholic grievances. For his own part, he was not at all aware, until he had made particular inquiries, of the small number of Catholics who had been appointed to offices of honour or of emolument in Ireland. The returns would tend to shew how few were excluded by law, and how many were excluded by prejudice. Such was the wretched state of Ireland, that her people were considered a degraded caste; and so they were likely to continue, as long as the penal laws remained what they were. The returns would shew this country the importance of Catholic emancipation. They would also shew how Ireland was really governed. He could not see any fair objection to the motion.

said, that the noble lord had in a great degree anticipated the observations which he intended to have made. The object in view was, to ascertain whether the act of 1793 had or had not been carried into effect. How could the House come at that fact, save by the returns which his hon. friend had moved for? The House had a right to be acquainted with the fact, whether Roman Catholics had or had not been admitted to those offices to which, by law, they might have been appointed. He had the act before him—he saw the offices to which Catholics might have been appointed. On the other hand, he had a document, under the hand of a gentleman of respectability, stating that Catholics were not admitted to any one of those offices.

Without meaning any disrespect to the gentleman who made the statement, I must say, that it is not the fact.

resumed: The right hon. gentleman might be right: the question was one of importance; conflicting assertions were made; and the returns which had been called for could alone show who was right. The noble lord had said that nineteen out of twenty of those appointed were Protestants; and an hon. friend below him, had stated, that they amounted to 49 out of 50. As to what the right hon. gentleman had said, that that House had no right to inquire as to who were Protestants, or who were Catholics, was it not the daily practice of that House to make inquiries? Would the right hon. gentleman take upon him to say, that the persons who held offices in Ireland would object to answer the question as to their religion? No, they would answer with alacrity: these inquisitorial horrors existed only in the imagination of the right hon. gentleman. The object of the motion was, to show, how completely the religion of a man operated as a bar to honour, and to emolument. The people of Ireland were, like the people of England, and like every other people in the world, fond of influence and of honours, felt the bitterness of degradation and unjust exclusion. The House had a right to become better acquainted with the system carried on in Ireland. It was the expressed wish of the sovereign, on his visit to that country that no difference on matters of religion should prevail—that no unjust preference should be given. Had that wish been carried into execution? Did no unworthy preference prevail? These were points which the returns now moved for would establish one way or the other. The fact, he believed could not be doubted, that a very insignificant party, compared to the population at large, engrossed the honours, the influence and the emoluments of Government. Of the offices in the law, which were open to the Catholics, there were eight open to Catholic barristers, and 13 other offices connected with the administration of justice; and yet not one of those offices was filled by a Catholic. When the House reflected upon the fact, that Ireland had, from the dawn of her history, displayed great talents; that her people, naturally ardent and aspiring, cultivated the science of eloquence; that at the Bar some of the most eloquent of its members were Catholics—they could not fail to see the injustice and the impolicy of that exclusion. Forty-nine out of fifty offices in Ireland were filled by Protestants. What, then, with that fact before them, could the House think of that equal participation—thateven-handed justice—which ministers were so much in the habit of boasting of having dealt out to the people of Ireland? The right hon. gentleman had objected, that some of the appointments were merely honorary; but the Irish, like the rest of the world, thought something of the honour, as well as of the more substantial emoluments of office. The excuse which the right hon. gentleman had given for his opposition to the motion, was at least a very suspicious one; and, without meaning any thing personally disrespectful to him, surely it was not quite the true one. The fact was, the right hon. gentleman did not like that there should be laid on the table of the House a record shewing that not one Roman Catholic had been admitted to any of those numerous offices to which they were equally competent with Protestants, under an act of Parliament. How many Roman Catholics there must be, the right hon. gentleman very well knew.

said, he really did not.

.—Then, if the right hon. gentleman did not know, he ought to inquire how many Roman Catholics were employed by the government in any official appointments in Ireland. Could any knowledge be more necessary for the secretary for Ireland? The return now moved for would shew, that all the boastings of parliament, as to what they had done for Ireland since 1793, were vain; that they had only kept that predominating party in power, which claimed not only power, but arms also, exclusively. To that party arms had been given, which never would be laid down but with their power; and, indeed, it was only last session, he believed, that one of their petitions from Londonderry honestly set forth, that having won their rights at the era of the glorious revolution, by the victories which their ancestors had gained under king William, they could not be expected to surrender the arms with which those rights had been won. Having never before spoken upon the subject, the House would pardon him for trespassing upon their attention. It was his opinion, that Englishmen could not too often enter into the discussion of Irish affairs. They should consider Ireland as an integral part of their country, and watch with common solicitude over her interests and her rights. He hoped the right hon. gentleman would not persist in objecting to the motion; if he did, undoubtedly it would be renewed; the House must have the returns. He hoped that that part of the government who professed more liberal views towards Ireland would act a candid and manly part, and would not resist the production of returns which would place in a striking point of view, the effects of that deplorable system of misrule which had been so long upheld. To expose that system would be to insure its downfal. Was it to be endured, that the people of Ireland should be for ever treated with insult and injustice?—If such a system were persevered in, could they expect the friendship of Ireland? He did not say that they would not receive it, but of this he was sure, that they would not deserve it. He hoped the right hon. gentleman would reconsider the grounds of his objection, and would' be guided by the opinion of his more liberal friends.

said, he could see no reason why the motion should be granted, embracing, as it did, a principle which would call upon every man holding a situation in a public office to state what his religion was: he would therefore concur with his right hon. friend in opposing it. He rose principally for the purpose of setting the last speaker right in one point, and to assure him that there did not exist in his majesty's government any disposition to exclude the Roman Catholics from their fair proportion of patronage in the offices to which they were by law eligible. He would mention two instances in which Roman Catholics had been appointed to situations: one of them, Mr. Troy, to that of inspector of customs at Liverpool; and the other, Mr. Mahon, to the office of commissioner of stamps; and he believed that the noble lord at the head of the Treasury did not know whether they were Catholics or not. This of itself would show that there was no disposition to exclude Roman Catholics from office by any previous inquiry as to their religion.

said, that the instances stated by the right hon. gentleman were only exceptions to the general rule. He was glad the right hon. gentleman had stated the fact, because it went to shew that appointments made by the Treasury here were more likely to be regulated by a fairer standard than appointments made in Ireland. What he wished was, to have power taken out of the hands of that faction in Ireland, who were always ready to abuse it. On a former occasion he had stated in that House, that few, if any, Catholics were appointed to offices of emolument in Ireland. The right hon. secretary for Ireland had said, he was wrong; but it now turned out, that the right hon. gentleman knew nothing at all about the matter. His charge was, that the people of Ireland were irritated and offended, because the few were preferred, and the many were neglected. He would ask whether the opposition that was given to the motion, was not likely to confirm the suspicions which already existed? The right hon. gentleman had talked of inquisitorial power. Was it inquisitorial, to ask a question which would be answered voluntarily and with pleasure? He could have wished that the conscience of the right hon. gentleman had been equally tender, with respect to the various acts of oppression which he (as the organ of government, had carried into effect in lreand—acountry which suffered under more than Turkish degradation. [Hear!]. Yes, it was his firm opinion, that the Greeks were not so much oppressed—so keenly insulted—as were the miserable people of Ireland. The state of Ireland was one which demanded inquiry, and with a view to that inquiry, information was sought. Upon what ground of justice could it be refused? Did the right hon. gentleman and his friends think that refusal could fail of exciting disgust and irritation? If the demand of his hon. friend was unreasonable, he would not have supported him. That part of the ministers who entertained liberal views towards Ireland, had commenced a new and promising era: he hoped they would persevere in it, and that their liberality and good sense would induce them not to refuse hearsay information as to the state of that country. He could assure them, that if the motion were resisted, it would not be the last time it would be brought forward.

thought the motion ought to be acceded to by the secretary for Ireland, if it were only for his own satisfaction; for as he did not seem to know the proportion in which the offices were divided between Protestants and Roman Catholics, he ought not to refuse that which would give him correct information on the subject. It ought not to be suffered to go forth to the Roman Catholics of Ireland, that no motion tending to give them the same advantage as their Protestant fellow-subjects, in situations to which they were alike eligible, could obtain the sanction of that House.

said, it was unfortunate for the inference drawn by the hon. member for Aberdeen, that the two Roman Catholic appointments spoken of were not originally made by the English government. They were originally made by the Irish government, and in the late arrangements by the Treasury, they were continued. So that it was unfair to infer, that these were exceptions to the general rule of the Irish government. With respect to the motion before the House, he would say, that if the object was, to show that the Roman Catholics had not their fair share of patronage, the present mode was a bad one. Let the object be fairly stated; let it be shown, if it could be shown, that Roman Catholics, being in other respects equally eligible in point of qualification were excluded solely, because they were Roman Catholics, and let the onus of answering such a case rest with the government. But, he could not think of endeavouring to come at such an object, by adopting a principle which would say to every man in a public office, "Are you a Roman Catholic, or are you a Protestant?" But, suppose it could be shown that the greater portion of the appointments to public offices took place in favour of Protestants; still, seeing that the great mass of property—he would not say all—was in the hands of Protestants, he could not see anything unfair in it; unless it could be shown, that Roman Catholics with superior, or even equal, qualifications, were refused to make way for Protestants. If such a case could be made out, let it be fairly brought forward; but no tangible object could be gained by bringing forward the question in its present shape. An allusion had been made to the Linen Board. There were 74 members of that Board; it might so happen that they were all Protestants; but then it should be recollected, that the Linen trade was almost entirely confined to the north, which was the Protestant part of Ireland; a fact; which would go pretty clearly to explain what had been stated with respect to that Board. But the return which the hon. gentleman had moved, even if granted, would be insufficient; for it ought in fairness to state, not whether Protestants were appointed to offices, but whether Protestants had been unfairly selected, and in what instances Protestants were preferred to Catholics of superior qualifications. He was surprised that the hon. gentleman had not carried his motion farther, in order to ascertain the particular faith of various occupations and professions. For instance, he might wish to know of what religion were the ironmongers in Ireland, and whether the majority of the barbers were Protestant or Catholic. There was, in fact, no end to the inquiry, if it were once commenced.

said, he could very easily imagine the object of those who maintained the fitness of exclusion, and thereby kept Ireland a divided people, in resisting this motion. They wished to hoodwink the natives of England, by making them believe that the question was of small importance, because it only applied to the offices included in the act of 1793. As long as the odious distinction was preserved, the act of 1793 would be inadequate; and it was very important to show that at this moment, with very few exceptions, the Roman Catholics were not in possession of any of the advantages then conceded. The right hon. gentleman who spoke last, had taken great credit for the appointment of two Roman Catholics; but, under what administration had those offices been filled up? This was a very material inquiry, when so much stress was laid upon the matter. The truth was that both Mr. Troy and Mr. D. Mahon had been selected by the government of 1806 [Hear, hear! from the Opposition benches, and "no, no," from the Ministerial]. He maintained it as a fact: he had good reason to know it, and was prepared, if necessary, to prove it. But, giving to the present ministry whatever credit was due for this proceeding, at all events, it filled up but two appointments with Catholics, while all the rest were indisputably Protestants. It only showed the distress of the present government, when they were obliged to resort to these two instances; with which, however, in truth, they had had nothing to do. The object of the hon. mover was, to prove how fallacious was the statement of the noble earl, at the head of the cabinet, when he declared, that he anxiously desired to see Roman Catholics participate in all the benefits of the constitution, to which, by the existing law, they were entitled. This assertion ought to be put in comparison with the fact; and that purpose would be accomplished, if the documents now required were laid upon the table. It might be very true, that the trustees of the linen board were needless; it might be very true, that no talent was wanted to render a man fit for the situation; yet those individuals possessed an honorary rank in the country, and enjoyed, besides, great influence and patronage. As to property, were not such men as lord Fingal, and sir E. Bellew, fit to be appointed trustees of the Linen board? The Roman Catholics of Ireland had watched the progress of the late lord Avonmore; they had seen him, by birth only the son of a woolcomber, rise to be Chief Baron of the Exchequer, and a peer of the realm. Why should they not enjoy the same opportunity of advancement? Why were they not allowed the opportunity of distinguishing themselves, and of illustrating their names and families? At present, insult only was heaped upon them: they were excluded from their rights; and, what was still more grievous, they were told that they ought to be contented and happy in their degradation. It was impossible that the people of Ire- land should not be acutely sensible of all they endured, and take no interest in the prosperity of that state, whose wants they were compelled to supply, but whose benefits they were not permitted to share.

said, that the latter part of the right hon. baronet's speech had turned upon topics, in some of which he felt with him, though he did not think the present moment exactly suited to their discussion. The last topic, as it went to show the interest which the humblest individual might feel in the question of eligibility to the highest office, and that therefore the hope of such office should not be shut out from any, was one which addressed itself to the feelings of all, and the principle of which he had often exhausted himself in upholding. But, the subject of discussion was not now, whether new privileges should be granted—whether all the offices of the state, from the highest to the lowest, should be open to Roman Catholics? On that point he perfectly agreed with the right hon. baronet. What he had always sought on behalf of the Roman Catholics had been eligibility; but, the motion now under consideration went to actual election. What he had so long contended for was, that there should be no bar between the Crown and its subjects—that there should exist no religious disqualifications; but he had never conceived that the effect of accomplishing that object would be to point the attention of the Crown to one class only, and to make it a crime in the administrators under the Crown to distribute office fairly and impartially. The advocates for the Catholic claims asserted, as a general principle, that all the king's subjects were equally eligible, but that statutes had supervened, limiting unjustly the power of the Crown to reward meritorious services. The object, therefore, was, to remove those disqualifying statutes; and as the hon. member for Westminster had said, in reference to a passage of great beauty, to enable the rays of the royal bounty to shine equally upon all. It was singular, therefore, that the right hon. baronet did not see that the mode of inquisition he wished now to be set on foot was directy contrary to the principle on which the Catholic question had been promoted, and to the usual policy of parliament on all subjects of the same nature. By the law of the land, certain persons, not Roman Catholics, could not be employed in offices of the state. What was the remedy? An annual indemnity bill. But, did the House ever think of instituting an inquiry to ascertain who were benefitted by that indemnity? Was not the true policy of parliament not detection, but concealment? The same policy had been adopted with regard to the Catholic question. The endeavour had been, not to make a distinction, but, as far as possible, to confound it, and to unite all under one denomination. Far, indeed, were the friends of concession from wishing that any man should be required to declare whether he was a Catholic or a Protestant. What, then, was the motion intended to do, but to put this very question? and to such a question, he would, under no circumstances, consent; since, though innocent in the outset, it might hereafter be applied to purposes of the worst description. Let the House consider how the matter stood a few years ago. Until 1819, no Roman Catholic could attain certain rank in his majesty's army; and many a pathetic appeal before that date had been made to the House on the bitter proscription to which so many millions were subjected. Supposing a motion of this sort had been then made, what would have been its effect? If carried, it would have subjected to punishment many Roman Catholics who had hitherto served in the army, by connivance. Thus the application now made was contrary to the policy of indemnity; contrary to the whole policy of toleration; and founded on a radical misapprehension of the state of the laws regarding the Roman Catholics. Laws had been superinduced to control royal benevolence—laws which he wished and had laboured to remove in toto: but whether they were removed entirely, or only in part, his wish had been, and ever would be, that all parties should be united, instead of perpetuating the memory of offensive distinctions.—He objected to the present motion on another ground. As long as this kingdom was a monarchy, and the executive government had the distribution of offices under the Crown, it was not discreet in the House to inquire into the exercise of patronage unless crime or fault were imputed [Hear, from the Opposition]. He ununderstood that cheer; and he undoubtedly agreed, that it might be morally wrong for a government not to employ men of a particular religious sect. But here a distinction was to be taken; and he maintained that such was not the sort of moral wrong which ought to be investigated by this parliamentary inquisition. If the practice of naming Protestants only existed, it might be founded upon error and prejudice; but that error and that prejudice could not be corrected and removed by the proceedings of the House, but should be left to the slow and sure operation of time. He did verily and entirely believe, that, in the present Irish government, there existed a strong disposition to admit to a fair share of patronage, and to the service of the state, all who were qualified: aye, a disposition quite as strong and as genuine as, during that boasted administration to which the right hon. baronet had so often triumphantly referred, and which he naturally enough thought was the best, the most enlightened, and the most liberal that had ever blest the nation with its counsels. To institute an inquisitorial proceeding like that now recommended, was not calculated to inspire either respect or confidence. The two offices filled by Catholics had not been brought forward with any other object than to contradict the position on the other side; and if, on the part of the present authorities in Ireland, there was a desire to admit Catholics, as "well as Protestants, to places of honour or emolument, it was very certain that it was not likely to be increased by motions I of this kind, which could only augment differences where they existed, and create them where they did not. In the conscientious belief, that if this proposition were carried, it would be a firebrand thrown among those, at present too ready for conflagration; he should give it his determined opposition.

said, that during the present session, endeavours had been made to shew, by details, that Ireland had been badly governed, and that the Roman Catholics were a persecuted race. Its warmest friends might, perhaps, at this moment, despair of success in bringing forward the general discussion; they might despair of inducing ministers to alleviate the miseries of Ireland, by promoting conciliation; and therefore were resolved, as far as was possible, that the House and the country should be in possession of all the information connected with the subject. For this purpose various motions had been and would hereafter be made, to shew, that the benefits intended by the law, were withheld by the practice of the government. If the, present ministers did not determine to overcome their prejudices, and to give to persecuted millions their due weight in the constitution, the storm would at last inevitably burst and overwhelm valued institutions in the ruin it would occasion. The infatuated people of Ireland would, in time, see their interests: they would unite, and compel the minister to be just to their claims, or they would separate themselves entirely from Great Britain. He yet hoped to see the wounds of Ireland healed by concession; for despair of redress and protection might at length drive the people to dangerous extremities.

said, that he had not brought forward his motion with more ceremony, because he really thought that, as it was only the consequence of papers already moved for by a noble lord (Althorp), it would not be resisted. He should divide the House, and not content himself with receiving merely a ministerial negative.