presented petitions from parishes in Cork, complaining of the Vestry and Subletting Acts. And after referring to the cases of the petitioners for the purpose of showing the great abuses practised on the levying of vestry rates in parishes where a very small number of the inhabitants are Protestants, gave notice of his intention to move for the repeal of a portion of the Act of George the 2nd, in order to enlarge the power of the King's Bench in granting a mandamus where the parishioners apply to it and complain of the levying of such rates.

gave notice of his intention to submit a motion to the House relative to our relations with Portugal, on Thursday, the 18th instant.

said, he observed that the Act of the 9 Geo. 4. had, by some mistake, omitted to point out the method by which the sum arising from licensing Lunatic Asylums was to be disposed of; he now moved for leave to bring in a bill to authorize the magistrates of counties to call upon the clerks of the peace to pay over the money to the treasurer of the county, for the fulfilment of the purposes of the Act. These sums were now considerable, amounting in one county, to 1,100l.

seconded the motion, and leave being given, Mr. Gordon brought in the bill; it was read a first time.

said, he had moved for returns of the number of persons committed to the various prisons of the metropolis in the year 1829,; upon arrest for debts under mesne process; and also for a return of the number of persons committed for small debts to those prisons, specifying the amount. He would take this opportunity to ask the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Peel) whether, after so many years' experience, he was not prepared to adopt some alteration in the law relating to mesne process. He knew there were a number of persons who. suffered a confinement of forty days in consequence of proceedings in the Court of Requests for sums so low as 18d. of original debt, although the expenses incurred in procuring their release amounted at all times to many pounds. He pressed the subject strongly on the attention of the Government. He was more convinced than ever that arrests for small debts in particular, were injurious to creditors as well as debtors. The Attorney General (Sir J. Scarlett) had lately said, that to imprison an Englishman, except on the verdict of a jury, was a disgrace to the law; and yet that learned Gentleman had opposed any modification of arrests in mesne process. Though the facts were so notorious, they went on from year to year without any remedy being; proposed. It was a crying evil of great magnitude; and he repeated, did the Government intend to propose any remedy? All those who were in sponging houses deserved the sympathy of Members; they were exposed to the most grievous exactions, and to most demoralizing conduct.

said, he thought that the hon. Member was scarcely warranted in assuming that nothing had been done to improve the law on these subjects for some years, when it was recollected that his honourable friend the then Solicitor General (Sir C. Tindall) brought in, and carried through Parliament a bill, only two years ago, limiting the amount of arrest on mesne process to sums above 20l. Whatever had taken place, however, he (Mr. Peel) was thoroughly convinced of the necessity of looking at the whole of the subject in detail, before they adopted any specific remedy, for he was satisfied that the adoption of any arbitrary sum, under which no arrest should take place, would have the effect of punishing with greater severity a number of innocent debtors, who would be sent to prison through the effect of the process of execution sued out in the Court of Requests, and others of local jurisdiction. He was, indeed, so deeply impressed with the necessity of looking at the whole of the law on the subject of arrests before they attempted the alteration of any particular parts, that he had even felt it his duty to recommend the consideration of it to the commission now sitting, to inquire into the practices of the higher courts of law. [hear] He believed, indeed, that the commissioners had made some progress in their inquiry on the subject; but as it was important that they should follow up their Report on some questions which had for some time been before them, in order that the whole might be clearly connected, and brought fairly under consideration, they had not been able to continue their inquiries on the subject of small debts to a satisfactory termination. When they had reported on the subjects now before them, the commissioners would then be able to devote the whole of their time to the inquiry; and he put it to the hon. Member whether it would not be better to wait and bring the question before men of such experience as the present commissioners, rather than incur the expense of appointing a new set of commissioners who could not be so well acquainted with the subject.

said, it was worthy of notice, that out of twenty thousand arrests, seventeen thousand were for sums under 100l. This appeared from Returns which had already been made to that House. Remedy must be accompanied with summary process over the assets of debtors.

said, he wished to know how soon the commissioners would prosecute this part of their inquiry? He understood that which they were now engaged upon would take two or three years.

said, he could give the hon. Gentleman no assurance upon that point. Having commenced the inquiry into the state of the Common Law, it appeared to him that these commissioners were the proper persons.

said, the principle of the division of labour would be of service. He hoped that the right hon. Secretary would think of some other mode of giving-relief to the public on this subject than by that of the protracted labours of this Commission. No Committee of the House was necessary. His Majesty's Attorney General—he said it without meaning the slightest disrespect to that gentleman— ought to be prepared to bring forward measures of relief for the subject in such cases. He would wait for two months longer; if nothing were done in that time by his Majesty's Government, he would himself bring the matter forward.

said, he knew of a case where one man arrested another for 60,000l. without ever having seen him or had any dealings whatever with him. In his opinion all arrest for debt ought to be abolished, except after judicial proceedings.

said, he would, in the mean time, move for Returns of the number of' prisoners for debt committed to the custody of the keepers of the King's-bench, the Fleet, Whitecross-street, the Marshalsca, and Horsemonger-lane prisons, in the year 1829; distinguishing those in custody under mesne process, or under judgments recovered, or for costs of suit; stating how many for sums above 100l., for sums between 50l. and 100l., for sums between 50l. and 20l., and the number of sums under 20l. (excluding Crown debtors, prisoners for contempt of court, and persons committed by process out of Courts of Request); stating, also, the number in custody in each of those prisons on 1st January 1830.— Of the number of warrants granted for debt; distinguishing whether upon mesne process or on writs of execution against the person, by the sheriffs of London and Middlesex, and by the sheriff of Surrey; and the number of bailable processes executed by them; in the year 1829.—Of the number of debtors committed to the Whitecross-street and Horsemonger-lane prisons, on process out of the Courts of Request, during each of the last two years ending 1st January 1830; stating the aggregate amount of debts and costs separately, in each prison, in each year, showing, in classes, the number con- fined from one to less than ten days, for ten days and less than thirty, fifty, seventy, and one hundred days, in each year; stating, also, the amount paid out of the county or other rates for the maintenance and support of such prisoners, in each year, as accurately as possible, and of the number of prisoners committed for debt to the custody of the keepers of the Four Courts, Marshalsea, city Marshalsea, She-rifts' prison, St. Sepulchre's Minor court, and St. Honore's Manor court, in the city of Dublin and its liberties, in the year 1829; and also, the number of prisoners committed for debt to each of the other prisons in Ireland in the year 1829; and the number in custody on 1st January 1830; distinguishing those in custody under mesne process or under judgments recovered, or for costs of suit; stating how many for sums above 100l., for sums between 50l. and 100l., for sums between 50l. and 20l., and the number of sums under 20l. (Crown debtors and persons for contempt of Court to be put in a separate return); stating also the number in custody in each of those prisons on 1st January 1830.—Ordered.

moved for an abstract or return of the number of causes and matters pending in the high Court of Chancery, to the credit of which any sum of money is vested in the Bank Annuities or in cash (presented 4th June 1829), to be prepared, and laid before the House.—He said they showed that forty millions were ingulphed in that court; and that upwards of eight hundred causes concerned property under 200l. value. [hear]—Returns ordered.

moved an Address to his Majesty for a Copy of the Minutes of the Evidence of Alexander Baring, before the Privy Council, on 26th April, 1828, touching the adoption of a Silver Standard, &c. He would withdraw the motion if the Government would produce the evidence.

replied, that he had no objection to produce the evidence; but it ought to be accompanied with the evidence of other individuals taken on the same occasion. [hear]

said, he understood it was the in- tention of a noble and learned Lord in the other House of Parliament (Lord Lyndhurst) to bring forward the subject of the Court of Chancery, and to propose some arrangement relative to that Court. He should therefore rather postpone any observations he had to make on the state of the Court of Chancery to that period, when he should be apprised of the nature of the alteration which it might be proposed to make. This was, he believed, the best course which he could pursue. He, therefore, should only repeat his determination that no circumstance should ever make him relax his efforts to cure the evils of that Court; he was not dismayed by failure; he had undertaken that task for the last fifteen years, and he meant to proceed till, in his opinion, the evil was cured; and if the measure brought down should be the same as that which was introduced in the last session of Parliament, which he conceived to be by no means sufficient, he would unquestionably submit his own proposition to the House. He should now move for Returns in continuation of those he had called for last year, to the production of which he hoped there would be no objection—namely, an account of the number of re-hearings of appeals pending before the Lord Chancellor on the first day of Hilary Term, 1830, an account of the number of cases of demurrer pending at the same time, &c.—Ordered.

said, his Majesty's Government had felt it to be their duty to avail themselves of the very earliest opportunity to redeem the pledge which they gave at the close of the last session of Parliament, that as soon as possible after the commencement of the present session, they would themselves propose a Committee of Inquiry, for the purpose of investigating the state of the commerce between this country and our Indian possessions. And if, in proposing that Committee, his statement should appear disproportionate to the vast importance of the subject, or if he forbore from entering on the present occasion, into the manifold and most interesting details which were necessarily mixed up with it, he begged it to be understood, that he took that course, not from any insensibility to the paramount greatness of the question, but from a recollection of the peculiar position in which he stood that night, and from a strong feeling of the duty which was placed before them, and which the public expected they would perform with calmness and caution. [hear] He did not consider that it was part of his duty to submit to this House on the present occasion, the consideration of any plan for the future government of India—that it was any part of his duty to state the opinion of his Majesty's Ministers as to the renewal of the present East India Charter, or to point out any modification which might be made in the existing system by which India was governed. He trusted that they would come tonight to a calm and dispassionate inquiry into the propriety of appointing a Committee to examine into this great question, leaving the details to future consideration, when the Committee should have stated its opinion. He considered that to be the only question before them. He felt that this was an inquiry which would impose on them higher obligations, with reference to moral feeling, than almost any other in the whole sphere of public affairs; and therefore he did not wish to agitate the ultimate question precipitately. He had also another motive for avoiding, if he could, the discussion of the details of this question, because it was not his plan to have a lengthened debate on mere opinions relative to Indian affairs. He hoped, in the first instance, that the subject would receive the most serious consideration of a Committee—a consideration worthy of the importance and dignity of the question in issue. [hear] He meant to propose one general Committee for the purpose of examining the great mass of documentary evidence that was ready to be submitted to the House, and also to enter on a faithful examination of persons who were conversant with all the facts connected with the situation of India, and who possessed local information with respect to the commerce carried on with that country. He proposed one Committee rather than two or three Committees, because he doubted whether the subjects to be considered were not so closely connected together, that the evidence on one point might tend to elucidate another, and therefore it appeared to him better that the whole should be laid before one body, instead of thus dividing it amongst many. He thought, if one Committee were appointed to inquire into the finance of India, another to look into the trade of India, and another to take into consideration the commerce with China, that much inconvenience would ensue. The subjects were so nearly connected, that he feared if such a course were pursued, much confusion would be the consequence. If the plan proposed by the hon. Member for Callington (Mr. Baring) were followed,— namely, that of having two or three Committees—it would not, in his opinion, answer the purpose. Such an arrangement, he conceived, would be bad. If two or three Committees were appointed, there was a very great chance of the House being bewildered, amongst various conflicting opinions from the different Committees. He would propose this Committee with the plain and honest view of having a full, perfect, and unreserved investigation with respect to the affairs of the East India Company. [hear] Every document connected with the trade, with the commerce, and with the finance of India, should be laid before that Committee. He proposed this Committee, not for the purpose of ratifying any engagement previously existing between the Government and the Company. In fact, no such engagement, open or secret, express or implied, existed. [hear] The Government in the fullest sense of the language, were free agents. [hear] He repeated, that he did not propose this Committee with a view to the sanctioning of any previous engagement with the Government. No such thing was in existence, and in any future proceeding the Ministers were desirous of being guided according to the result of the inquiry. As there was no such irrevocable engagement on the part of the Government—as the whole subject was open to investigation—he felt himself entitled to impress on the House the extreme importance of the inquiry into this great question. He, however, begged to implore Gentlemen to consider that they had greater objects to look to in the progress of that inquiry, than merely to determine in what manner British commerce was to be carried on. He entreated the House to recollect that there were other questions connected with this subject, of greater importance than the extension of trade. [hear] They would have to consider the whole character of the Government —a Government placed over an immense extent of territory, wielding a powerful force, and administering a revenue of very great extent. They would see, in approaching the subject, a wide and ample field for inquiry and observation. They were bound to consider the various modes in which that Government affected the people over whom it ruled; they were bound to consider how any alteration might affect the influence of the Crown; and there were various other points which would also claim their attention. He here felt it likewise necessary to speak of the East India Company; and, looking to the information of which he was in possession,—viewing the documents that were in his hands, he was bound to say that any investigation into the conduct of that body would, he believed, tend to their credit. [hear] He did think, that they had ever been excited by a sincere desire to promote the welfare and interest of those who were placed under them. [hear] Contrasting the administration of the Company with that of any other colonial establishment that ever existed, he was convinced that their conduct would redound greatly to their honour. Let Gentlemen consider, that they were legislating for a body very peculiarly situated; and let them bear in mind, that the present form of government extended over many millions of people, and that it had existed for a great number of years. Now, although he was not prepared to say that another form of government might not be devised, from which equal benefits would flow, still he must contend, that sufficient was known of the present system to induce them to pause before they rashly interfered with it. [hear] In looking to the financial state of the Company, they would have to compare the amount of revenue now received with what was likely to be called for and produced in future. They would have to consider the amount of civil charges, and to see whether the gross revenue received by the Company was equivalent to those charges. With respect to the commercial concerns of the East India Company (continued Mr. Peel) the documents that will be presented to the Committee will contain much important information. On this subject, however, I abstain from pronouncing any opinion; but I may, nevertheless, refer to the returns that will be made, as sufficient to convince any calm and right-judging man, that too sanguine an expectation has been held out as to the result of any arrangement for opening the trade with India. However, means of judging on this point will be fully supplied. It will be shewn by documents already prepared to be adduced what effect the free admission of the Americans has had—what the price of tea has been in all parts of the world—what difference there has been in the price of that article as furnished by the Company and by individuals trading on their own bottom, for private speculation—on all these points the fullest information will be given and any other information that can be procured shall be laid most unreservedly before the Committee. Among the other considerations which will present themselves to this Committee, I have reserved for the last place that which appears to me to be the most important— the welfare and interests of those who are now subject to the dominion of this country. [hear] I have seen returns which make the amount of the native population immediately subject to the control of this country, not less than ninety millions of persons. [hear] When we consider the extent of territory over which our power is acknowledged—when we consider the enormous mass of population subject to our dominion—when we call to mind the great revolution of empires by which that dominion has been established—when we reflect on the immense distance from which sovereign authority over those regions is exercised— when we call to mind the difference in language, manners, religion, and usages, between ourselves and the almost countless thousands over whom we govern, the mind cannot fail to be amazed at the contemplation of objects so vast and various. But whatever may be the sentiments we entertain upon the question, sure I am, at least, that we must approach the consideration of it with a deep feeling, with a strong sense of the responsibility we shall incur—with a strong sense of the moral obligation which imposes it upon us as a duty to promote the improvement of the country, and the welfare and well-being of its inhabitants so far as we can, consistently with the safety and security of our dominion, and the obligations by which we may be bound. We shall undoubtedly feel ourselves called upon to consider what are the measures that may best tend to protect the natives of those distant regions from wrong—to secure to them their personal liberty and the fruits of their industry; in a word, to endeavour, while we still keep them under British rule, to atone to them for the sufferings they endured, and the wrongs to which they were exposed, in being reduced to that rule; and to afford them such advantages and confer on them such benefits as may, in some degree, console them for the loss of their independence. [hear] These, Sir, are considerations which, whatever may be the anxiety to extend British conquest and to maintain the rights of British subjects, must indisputably be entertained in a British Parliament. [hear] Avoiding, then, Sir, all minute reference to subordinate details, however important—unwilling to touch upon any topic that may provoke discussion, which, for the reasons I have already stated I am anxious to avert—I have cautiously refrained from mooting any point upon which there could be any conflict of opinions; and now, Sir, in this same spirit I shall conclude, by simply moving:

"That a Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the present state of the Affairs of the East India Company, and into the Trade between Great Britain, the East Indies, and China; and to report their observations thereupon to the House."

said, he felt that the line which the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Peel) had adopted in his address to the House was the most proper. He thought that the course he (Mr. Peel) had pursued, in declining to enter upon the examination of details connected with the question, and in avoiding bringing forward any points which might give rise to opposition, was, under all the circumstances of the case, decidedly the most prudent that could have been adopted. He thought the same course should be followed by all the other hon. Members who proposed to speak upon the question. They were then on the eve of an inquiry, the magnitude and importance of which certainly had not been over-stated, and perhaps could not be over-stated by the right hon. Secretary; for all men must agree that this question was one involving more extensive interests and more important considerations than any other that could now be possibly brought before the legislature of this country. But though not in the least desirous to provoke that discussion which the right hon. Gentleman so strongly deprecated, there was one observation which occurred to him, and which he was anxious to submit to the House before he resumed his place. He found that it appeared to be the intention of the right hon. Secretary to confine the duties of the Committee to an inquiry into the financial and commercial state of the Indian Empire but he considered that there were other matters of equal importance; and he felt convinced, that without a proper consideration of these matters, the labours of the Committee would not be brought to that satisfactory conclusion for which all must hope and look before they were again called upon to legislate for pur vast and distant possessions. The question to which he alluded was, the state of the Law; and he maintained, that in one at least of the Indian provinces, it was such as to cry out as loudly for inquiry as any question possibly could, [hear]. He trusted, therefore, that the House would see the necessity of the inquiry, and that the whole state of the Law, criminal as well as. civil, would be brought under the consideration of the Committee. He was quite confident, that otherwise the Committee would never be able to bring their neighbours to a satisfactory conclusion, so intimately was an examination into the state of the Law connected with the question respecting Commerce. He contended that the laws affecting what was called Colonization, were closely united to the commercial question, and he declared that the Committee would but ill discharge their duties if they suffered them to pass by unnoticed. The right hon. Secretary had expressed his conviction that the Committee would enter upon their duties with the anxious desire to discharge their duties well and wisely. So far as the desire went, he agreed with the right hon. Gentleman, though he must be allowed to entertain some doubt as to the performance. [hear] He certainly did think it a matter of doubt, whether the Committee would effect all that might be expected. He hoped, however, that in this he might be mistaken—he hoped the committee would not shrink from the labour of examining all points affecting the question immediately under their consideration; and, above all, he hoped and trusted that the Committee would be impartially chosen [hear]—one that should neither suffer the scale to be turned against the people of Great Britain; in favour of the East-India Company, or against the rights of individuals in obedience to any popular cry. [hear] Having stated thus much he would only beg to remind the House that this was a vital question, and declare that the Committee would ill discharge their duties if they did not, without delay, institute an inquiry into the state of the Law as administered in our Courts and in those of a similar nature, proper to the country.

.—If the right hon. Gentleman has, as I suppose he has, prepared a list of the proposed Committee, will he object to read the names to the House? The House may then judge how far the professed impartiality is to be carried. [hear]

hoped to be able to give the honourable Member a satisfactory answer. The Committee would be sufficiently extensive to ensure on all occasions a full attendance for the despatch of business; and it would also be numerous enough to subdivide itself for financial purposes. He would now read the list he had drawn up to the House. It would be seen that it was an ample one, and he hoped it would be observed that he had attempted to give the commercial and landed interests a fair representation therein. There were of necessity the names of many hon. Members left out whose services would undoubtedly be of advantage to the Committee; but he begged those Gentlemen to believe, that the omission had not proceeded from disrespect, or from anything like disregard for the zeal and talent they could bring with them to the inquiry. Hon. Members would be pleased to bear in mind that his duty had been to make a selection. He had done so to the best of his ability, and he hoped it would meet the approbation of the House. He would read the list.— The right hon. Gentleman then read the following list:— Marquis Graham, Mr. Baring, Mr. Huskisson, Lord Viscount Milton, Mr. Astell, Marquis of Chandos, Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Burrell, Mr. Ward, Mr. Arbuthnot, Sir Richard Vyvyan, Mr. Hart Davis, Mr. Ellison, Mr. Williams Wynn, Mr. Cutlar Fergusson, Mr. Robert Grant, Mr. Stanley, Sir James Mackintosh, Lord Ashley, Mr. Stuart Wortley, Mr. Lyttleton, Mr. Alderman Thompson, Mr. Hume, Mr. Spring Rice, Mr. William, Cavendish, Mr. Moore, Mr. Baillie, Mr. George Bankes, Mr. Irving, Mr. Courtenay, Mr. Wolryche Whitmore, Mr. William O'Brien, Mr. Poulett Thomson, and Mr. Jonathan Peel.

agreed with the right hon. Secretary as to the inexpediency of entering upon any detailed discussion upon the present occasion. He trusted, however, that all possible facility would be afforded the Committee to acquire information upon all such subjects as they may consider deserving of inquiry. [hear] The right hon. Gentleman did not under-state the importance of the question upon which the House was called upon to deli-berate, and on which the Committee would be deputed to inquire. Grave, indeed, were the considerations that would arise. They would have to consider, in the first place, whether a case did exist which would compel them to remain constant to that line of conduct by which, departing from all ordinary rules and principles of good policy, they maintained a great commercial monopoly—and next, they would have to determine, if this system were to be still kept up, under what regulations and restrictions it should be established, and whether free access and the right of settlement might not be granted to the natives of Great Britain; and, finally, under what rules these vast and distant countries might be regulated. These were considerations which undoubtedly affected the vital interests of Great Britain; but he was glad to hear from the right hon. Secretary, and to hear in language which, on such subjects, had not been usually adopted by a Minister of the Crown—that the welfare of the hundred millions who are under the dominion of England is at length deemed a matter of interest and importance by the Government. He was, indeed, delighted to hear the terms in which a Minister of the Crown had spoken of his Majesty's subjects in those remote provinces of the British Empire; and he trusted that the conduct of the Committee of that House, and of the Government, would be in unison with the feeling expressed by the right hon. Secretary. If anything could induce him to believe that there would be any departure from the line of proceeding advocated by the right hon. Gentleman, it would be that most extraordinary letter attributed to a noble Lord, (Ellenborough) who presided over the Board of Control. This production was the one on which some comments had been already made in that House, and it had then been hinted that perhaps the letter was not from the pen of the noble individual in question; and then it had been argued that the communication was strictly private. Now with this he contended the House had nothing to do; it might certainly be a matter of interest to the noble Lord and his friends, but it as decidedly could not be so to the House. It was enough for them to see and know that there was a communication addressed to Sir John Malcolm, the Governor of Bombay; and was it for his amusement? No, no; but for his official instruction— for an explanation and advice upon the political concerns of his government. The letter, therefore, could not be at all regarded in the light of a private document. That communication was directed to the Governor of a province, telling him, in a most extraordinary tone and spirit how he was to deal with the administrators of justice in that country. It was to the spirit and tone of that letter, as regarding the Government and administration of justice in India, that he addressed himself; and he contended that if the recommendation given in that communication were acted upon, the effect would be to control, and indeed utterly ruin and destroy, justice. He would ask the House if the writer of that letter wanted to bring all law and administration of justice into contempt, what better course could he pursue than by addressing such a communication as that to a person high in authority over a distant province, while at the same time the right hon. Secretary for the Home Department had been doing every thing in his power to sustain the independence of the Bench in other parts of the British Empire? And he really thought he was entitled to ask, did the noble Lord, who was supposed to be the author of this letter, disavow the fact? for, if he did not, he fancied the question was, whether they were not imposing a vast deal of unnecessary labour upon the Committee, since the noble Lord spoke with such entire confidence of the renewal of the East India Company's Charter. He (Lord Ellenborough) says, "As we or I (he forgot which) may not impossibly renew the Charter next year"—just in the same easy style as he might observe, "It is a rainy clay, and I may not impossibly think of taking my umbrella with me if I go out." [hear, and laughter] The answer, he was aware, was, the noble Lord merely wrote to his private friend—to a particular friend of his own. But then he would put it to the House, if this were not really ludicrous, when this letter to his private and particular friend commenced with the very familiar appellation "Sir." The fact was, he believed, that the noble Lord was not even acquainted, much less on terms of friendly intercourse and communication, with the gentleman to whom he wrote. [hear] But, in truth, as far as his argument went, it would make no difference whether the noble Lord was or was not upon those terms of friendship with the Governor of Bombay, since he looked not to the intentions of the writer, for which he cared little, but to the effect produced upon the public by this most extraordinary document. [hear] Now with respect to the list which the right hon. Secretary had read, he wished to observe, that in his opinion the House was on all such occasions very unfairly dealt with. A long list was rapidly read to them, and then they were forthwith called upon to vote respecting the merits and fitness of those hon. Members whose names had been so hastily pronounced. And then he felt, and he was sure the House would sympathize with him in the feeling, that it was an exceedingly invidious thing to rise and object to an individual Member nominated upon the list of a Committee. Therefore was it that he felt much difficulty in bringing himself to make anything bordering upon a personal allusion in the present instance; but, he confessed, that although he was well aware the right hon. Gentleman's list contained the names of many distinguished Members, whose talents and industry could not fail to be most useful in the Committee, yet he did not think that the general complexion of the list was such as would satisfy, or perhaps ought to satisfy, the commercial and manufacturing interests. [hear] It was clear that it must be considered as a matter of much importance that the people of England should be satisfied that their interests were properly represented in this Committee. He thought that in the present list there was too large an admixture of what were called great Indian authorities; and he wished to remark, that looking back to the last Committee appointed to inquire into Indian affairs, it was curious to observe how little the opinions and assertions of these great Indian authorities were borne out by events. He repeated his strong feeling as to the invidious appearance which at- tached itself to any personal objection. Thinking as he did, that the noble President of the Board of Control had written without book, that he had written with characteristic flippancy, and in entire ignorance of the opinions of his colleagues; believing that the right hon. Secretary (Mr. Peel) was sincere in the professions he had heard with so much pleasure, and was really anxious to ameliorate the condition of the inhabitants of India; he would venture to suggest that the Committee would hold the balance more equally between the East India Company and the public if some two or three additional representatives of the commercial and manufacturing interests were placed upon the list. [hear] He merely threw this out for the consideration of the right hon. Secretary, as the decision of the Committee would not be final. He would sit down with expressing the hope that the Committee would not permit any preponderance of interests on one side or other.

wished to know whether the Committee were to be confined to an inquiry into the present state of the government and commerce of India? He trusted this would not be the case, as much benefit might result from an inquiry into the effects which these improvements and institutions which had been made on the occasion of the last Charter had produced upon the country.

said, there was no idea of imposing any thing like a close restriction upon the Committee, whose decision would, of course, be founded upon the evidence adduced before them. With respect to the word 'present,' he had found it in the motion for the Committee of 1813, and he thought himself safer in taking the very words used with respect to that Committee than he could be with any other. Now as to the representation of the different interests in the Committee, he had laboured to make it as full and impartial as possible, and he did really think the commercial interests were sufficiently represented in having introduced the Members for Liverpool, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Preston, Lancashire, Staffordshire, Dublin, Limerick, and Yorkshire; and surely there was no want of the names of eminent advocates of their interests. He found the names of Mr. Baring, Mr. Irving, and Mr. Poulett Thomson, than whom none were more highly looked up to by the commercial and manufacturing classes. He begged the House once more to remember that the greatest benefit was to be derived from the examination of witnesses.

begged to suggest whether there were not many gentlemen on the list who were too deeply interested in the question to come to its consideration without some bias. He thought, therefore, the list might be advantageously reduced, by blotting out the three East India directors.

thought that more men of business should be added to the list. He recommended Mr. Stewart,^* the Member for Beverley, Sir H. Parnell, Mr. Maberly, and Mr. Warburton. These gentlemen could not but prove highly serviceable to a Committee that would be so extensively engaged with financial matters. He thought the India Directors ought to withdraw; and that some gentlemen who were "sheets of blank paper" [a laugh] might be removed to make room for the gentlemen he had named.

said, he was very anxious to address the House upon the subject of some reflections which had been cast upon a noble friend (Lord Ellenborough). He certainly had been embarrassed on a former evening, when the subject was suddenly introduced, and at a time when his noble friend was labouring under severe domestic affliction, which had prevented him (Mr. B.) from seeing him for a long time previous, or from speaking to him upon the subject of the letter which had been attributed to him. [Lord E. had recently lost his son]. He (Mr. B.) also felt embarrassed on other grounds. He then thought there would have been a necessity of alluding to circumstances affecting another person, and circumstances for which he would be, in all probability, put upon trial. The person he alluded to was Sir John Grant, and he was, of course, anxious to avoid saying any thing which might tend to raise a prejudice against one who was shortly to be put upon his trial.— He had since, however, ascertained that the charges preferred against Sir J. Grant, were in consequence of circumstances which had taken place before his noble friend had written the letter, and therefore the difficulty was removed. He had also

^*Mr. Stewart of Beverley was afterwards added to the List by Mr. Peel.

since seen the only copy of that letter, which was now in his noble friend's possession, and which he (Lord Ellenborough) had received from Bombay. It came from Sir J. Grant to his son in England, and through the courtesy of the latter gentleman was his Lordship furnished with this copy. And in this copy, which, having been taken in India, must undoubtedly be considered as the best authority, it appeared that his Lordship had said, not that we will RENEW the Charter, but that we will REVIEW the Charter. [Cheers, laughter] Thus it seems there was not only a difference between the Indian and English papers, but the chief word had been altered, as appeared, from the copy. He could assure the hon. Member for Calne (Sir J. Macdonald), and the House, that the supposition that his noble friend had the slightest intention of treating the Judges with indignity, or of attacking their independence, was equally unfounded. His noble friend entertained no such desire. Any construction of his noble friend's letter, imputing to him such intention, he (Mr. Bankes) who knew, or at least thought he knew, his noble friend so well, was convinced was a misconstruction. With respect to the circumstances which had led to the correspondence between Sir John Malcolm and his noble friend, although he felt that a great part of the embarrassment which pressed upon him on a former night was removed, he had no wish to allude to those circumstances further than was necessary for his noble friend's vindication. He would beg first to make a few observations on the peculiar hardship of his noble friend's case. This discussion was raised at the distance of many months from the occurrence—an occurrence not very generally known in London at the time, and now almost forgotten. The paper in question, therefore, appeared as if it were a kind of manifesto issued by his noble friend as President of the Board of Control, throwing imputations on the character and conduct of the Judges in the Supreme Court of Judicature at Bombay, and endeavouring to destroy their correspondence. So far, however, was this from being the case, that his noble friend's letter was a reply to a most urgent communication from Sir John Malcolm, made under circumstances which he considered of the highest importance. So deeply impressed was Sir John Malcolm with the fact that the natives of India (an attention to whose feelings and interests had been so ably and powerfully recommended by the hon. Member for Calne) were enduring the greatest distress and alarm in consequence of the new experiment which was making of extending the authority of the Judge, that he thought it necessary to send a despatch by the quickest mode of conveyance, stating the facts, earnestly soliciting the immediate interposition of the home authorities on the subject, and declaring that the tranquillity of that part of India and the honour of the Government were vitally concerned, and demanded the most prompt attention. [hear] Nothing could be more true than that it was our first and paramount duty, and as the hon. Member for Calne had justly observed, that it would be the first and paramount duty of the Committee about to be appointed, anxiously to consider and guard the interest and happiness of the natives of India over whom we were rulers; and he (Mr. Bankes) would say, that nothing could more strongly militate against the interest and happiness of these natives than allowing such an interference on the part of the Judges of the Indian Courts as that which had been unhappily attempted by the Supreme Court at Bombay, and which was an experiment to render the natives who resided at any distance whatever from the Presidency amenable to certain processes of the Bombay Court, to which they had until that period been strangers, and respecting which they entertained great apprehensions. He had had an opportunity of seeing minutes which had been made by the Marquis of Hastings, when he was Governor General of India, during a journey which he had made into those newly-ceded provinces which at. that period had fallen under the dominion of the British Crown. In those minutes, his Lordship stated, that he found one general, and indeed, as it appeared to him universal, feeling among the natives of India of abhorrence of the introduction of British law. They entertained the greatest fear of being rendered amenable, directly or indirectly, to the authority of the British Courts of justice. What, therefore, could be expected to be the consequences of the new and strange experiment which, without any adequate cause, was making upon them by the Supreme Court at Bombay? There was nothing to justify it; it was contrary to all the ideas of law entertained by any Judge who ever sat on the bench in any of the Courts of India, or by any lawyer who ever practised at the bar of any of those Courts. He regretted that he did not see the hon. and learned Member for Knaresborough in his place (Sir J. Mackintosh) or he would appeal to him on the subject, and ask him whether, while he was sitting as a Judge in India, he ever entertained such an idea, or whether, on the contrary, he would not have shrunk from endeavouring to subject to a power, which he knew they regarded with abhorrence, those natives in whose favour and defence that hon. and learned Gentleman had frequently spoken so forcibly and eloquently? Unhappily, however, it did occur to two of the Judges of the Supreme Court at Bombay, that natives residing at a distance from that Presidency were amenable to the processes of that Court, and that if they opposed those processes they were liable to punishment. That they conceived this conscientiously, he most readily admitted; but he maintained that they conceived it in ignorance of the law. However, they issued a process directed to a Hindoo, against whom there was no pretence for such a proceeding; and afterwards took other measures for enforcing their order. The aggrieved individual appealed to Sir John Malcolm, as Governor of Bombay; and Sir John Malcolm, satisfied that such an exercise of authority on the part of the Judges of the Supreme Court was illegal and unjustifiable, used the authority vested in him, and declared that such process should not, in the first instance, be allowed during his govern-ment—a process which might so easily be made the instrument of tyranny and oppression. The opposition, however, which Sir James Malcolm made to what he conceived an unwarrantable exercise of the power of the Supreme Court was distinguished by temper, mildness, and moderation. In the first instance he tried the effect of remonstrance. He implored the Judges of that Court not to persevere in their determination until the matter had been referred to the consideration of the home authorities. But the remaining Judges, after the death of Sir C. Chambers—of whom he was bound in justice to say, that an individual more amiable as a man, or more conscientious as a Judge, never existed—persevered in their unhappy mistake; for that it was a mistake he would produce undoubted authority to show, [cry of no, no] He meant the decision of the King in council, on that subject. Such being the state of things, Sir John Malcolm sent home a full and faithful statement of facts, and left them to the determination of the home authorities. It was with reference to this statement of Sir John Malcolm's, that his noble friend's letter was written; and there being two vacancies on the judicial seat of the Supreme Court at Bombay (for the Chief Justice had died without having taken any part in these proceedings) to those vacancies his noble friend had alluded. The hon. Member for Calne had upon this point gone much beyond what the expressions which had been used by his noble friend justified. It was impossible that his noble friend could be influenced by any improper motives in the appointments which he made for the purpose of filling up the vacancies in question. Both the individuals were wholly unknown to him, except by name. With respect to the appointment of one of them, (Sir Wm. Seymour,) he would refer to the words of his noble friend for the purpose of being enabled to give an explanation of those words, and to show, not only that his noble friend was not influenced in that appointment by any improper inducement, but that the motives by which he was really influenced reflected great honour and credit upon him. His noble friend said in his letter, "The puisne Judge appointed in the room of Sir C. Chambers is Mr. Wm. Seymour, of the Chancery bar. The Lord Chancellor has a very good opinion of him; and generally I think he appeared to have higher claims than any other candidate. He is a gentleman in his manners, and a man of cultivated mind. He seems to have right notions of his duty, [hear] and of the law, which has been so strangely misinterpreted." Now, as he (Mr. Bankes) had observed on a former night, here was one proof of the hardship of having a confidential letter exposed. For in such a letter expressions might be used, ambiguous to any other person, but perfectly intelligible to the person to whom the letter was addressed. His noble friend had peculiar reasons for saying that the gentleman of whom he was writing appeared to have right notions of his duty. The reasons were these;—when Sir William Seymour waited on his noble friend, on receiving an intimation that his noble friend was inclined to appoint him, his noble friend put various questions to him in order to ascertain his fitness for the situation. "Sir," said Sir William Seymour, "I cannot answer you better, or in any other manner, respecting the notions I entertain of my duties, than by showing you these extracts from the writings of Sir William Jones. These extracts appear to me to comprehend the duties of an Indian Judge, and by them I am prepared to regulate my conduct." It was to that circumstance that his noble friend referred when he said in his letter to Sir John Malcolm, that Sir William Seymour seemed to have right notions of his duty. He was sure the House would forgive his anxiety to vindicate his noble and necessarily absent friend, and to remove the unfounded imputations which had been thrown upon him. The feeling of his noble friend when he wrote his letter was one of the paramount duty (so well described by the hon. Member for Calne) of watching over the interest and happiness of the natives of India; and if the expressions which he used under that feeling were interpreted to indicate a disposition to lower the estimation, or diminish the independence, or degrade the character of the Indian Judges, that interpretation was a misinterpretation. His noble friend's sole object was, to protect the natives from the consequences of acts which it was stated by Sir John Malcolm had filled them with the utmost dejection and alarm. The question itself became the subject of consideration before his Majesty's Privy Council, which was the authority to which he had referred in a former part of his observations, and to the judgment of which authority all must bow as decisive. It was brought under the consideration of that authority, not by Sir John Malcolm, not by his noble friend, but by Sir John Grant; who, conceiving himself aggrieved by the conduct of the Governor, sent over a representation of the case to the Home Government. The case was heard before the Privy Council; and their judgment was, that in every part of the transaction Sir John Grant was entirely wrong, and that in every part of the transaction Sir John Malcolm was entirely right; and the judgment, in conclusion, admonished all who were concerned "to take notice of it, and to govern themselves accordingly." At the meeting of the Privy Council, from which this judgment proceeded, were present the Lord Chancellor, the Lord Chief Baron, and both the Chief Justices; for the subject was justly considered as one of the greatest moment. Under these circumstances, he must contend that his noble friend's error, if error it were, was of the most venial description: and arose entirely from his anxiety to protect the natives of India from what justly appeared to him to be an improper interference with them. In answer to the observation, that a person holding a high official situation ought not to state one opinion in his public despatches and another in his confidential communications, he had only to remark, that after the appointment of the Judges, his noble friend could not address any public despatches to them. They were responsible only to the King and to Parliament. This was not the first occasion on which disputes had arisen between Governors and Judges in India. About fifty years ago a similar occurrence had taken place, which all who were conversant with the history of our Indian Empire would easily recollect. It happened very shortly after the introduction of the forms of English law into India, and was the first instance of any collision between the Government and Councils of India and the Supreme Courts. To such great lengths did the affair proceed, that Parliament was at length obliged to interfere. The House were aware that he alluded to the transaction which took place, he believed, in the year 1781, between Sir Elijah Impey and Mr. Warren Hastings. On a reference to the Parliamentary Debates, it would be found that the subject had created a great sensation in this country; and in order to remedy the evils which had manifested themselves, a bill was brought into Parliament, to regulate anew the Supreme Court of Judicature in India, and to restrain and confine its powers within certain limits.— [The hon. Member read a portion of the preamble of the bill] He mentioned this circumstance to show that his noble friend had done no more than his duty in opposing the attempted extension, by the Supreme Court at Bombay, of the powers by which they had been invested by law. He begged to apologise to the House for having trespassed so long upon their attention; but it was impossible for him to sit still and hear the charges which were thrown out against his noble friend without endeavouring to show their utter want of foundation. All he regretted was, that his noble friend had not had a more competent advocate to vindicate him from the aspersions which had been cast upon him. He by no means presumed to say that, looking at his noble friend's letter as published in the newspapers, there was nothing in it against which an objection might be taken; but he utterly disclaimed, in the name of his noble friend, the slightest intention on his part of lowering the dignity or diminishing the independence of the Judges in India.

said, he was of opinion that an immediate and extensive inquiry ought to be instituted into the administration of justice in India. He especially reprobated the practice of appointing local Judges in the provinces by the Government, without due inquiry into their qualifications. Those Judges were dependent on the Government, and were removable at the pleasure of Government, which gave the Government an influence over them utterly inconsistent with the impartial administration of justice. In support of this statement, he would read an opinion which was given two years ago by the Master of the Rolls, Sir John Leach, in delivering his judgment on an appeal brought before him from the decision of one of those local Indian courts. It stated, that he had before had occasion to deplore the constitution of those Courts, as giving rise to a partial and disgraceful mode of administering justice; and that on that occasion he had represented the matter to the Board of Control, with a view to the correction of the evil, recommending that those Judges should be appointed at home: but the President expressed his opinion that the jealousies existing between the King's servants and the Company were so great, that it would be impossible to interfere. The present case had been decided in the Court of Surat, contrary to every principle of law and justice. He had forwarded copies of the proceedings to the President of the Council, as evidence of the mode in which justice had been administered in this Court; and he had taken the opportunity of requesting the President to re-consider the opinion he had before given. These facts accounted for the statement of an hon. Member, that the natives of India were averse to the introduction of the English law. On that point he differed from the hon. Member. He did not believe that the natives of India were averse to the introduction of the English law. But the House would see, from the circumstance to which he had alluded, the way in which the English law was in some cases administered in India. He was glad to find that the noble President of the Board of Control had at last got a copy of his letter to Sir John Malcolm. It appeared that the first use which Sir J. Malcolm made of this confidential letter, after reading it, was to send it to the breakfast table of Sir John Grant. [an exclamation of no, no] He had so understood it; and he also understood that it had been sent home by Sir John Grant to his son. Yet this was the letter which the hon. Gentleman (Mr. G. Bankes) had laboured to prove was strictly private and confidential, never intended to be made use of, and which could have seen the light only by a disgraceful breach of confidence. Of the letter itself he would say that it was most disgraceful to a King's Minister. [hear] In due time the House would perhaps see the letter from Sir John Malcolm, in answer to which the hon. Gentleman had said this private and confidential letter of the noble Lord was written. He should like to know by what law Sir John Malcolm was authorized to interfere with the Courts of law in India. The hon. Member had alluded to the first act by which the Supreme Courts were appointed, and to the differences between the Council and the Chief Judge at Bengal. He wished the hon. Gentleman had gone further, and had alluded to the resolutions of the House of Commons on the subject and the recal of the Chief Judge. In order to neutraliza the animosities which prevailed between the Sovereign Council and the Supreme Court, Mr. Hastings appointed Sir Elijah Impey, in addition to his office of Chief Justice of that Court, Judge of the Sudder Duannee Adaulut. The consequence was, that the subject was taken up by the House of Commons in 1782, and certain resolutions were agreed to by a majority of 53; declaring that it was highly improper that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Judicature should hold any other office or appointment. This was followed by an Address to the King to recal Sir Elijah Impey, in order that he might answer to the charge preferred against him, and he was recalled accordingly. There certainly might be cases in which the interference of the Indian Government with the Courts might be expedient; but he denied that the case under consideration was one of them. Such interference tended to create a prejudicial dependence. In the Charter of the Supreme Court of Bombay, all persons in authority, civil and military, were enjoined to be aiding and assisting the Court in enforcing obedience to its authority. Had the Governor and Council of Bombay complied with this injunction? On the contrary, Sir J. Malcolm wrote a letter to the Judges requiring them to abstain from exercising their authority, and expressing his intention to resist it. The Supreme Court was wrong, and the question was, whether the Government was right. It was said that, by the decision of the Privy Council, the Judges were declared to be in the wrong, and the Government right. He denied that. On that occasion the only question was as to the Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. There had been much talk of the East India monopoly. The trade between Great Britain and India, and Great Britain and China, were two distinct questions, and altogether unconnected with each other. The trade with British India was not a monopoly, though it was not altogether free; it was a trade to our own colonies; but the trade with China was clearly a monopoly of trade, an independent Empire conducted on different principles, and under different circumstances. He was most anxious that a Committee or Commission should be appointed to inquire into and remedy the present defects of the administration of justice in British India. At all events, he wished for the appointment of two Committees—one to inquire into the Trade between India and China; and the other, into that between India and Great Britain.

said, he had been misunderstood. All he meant to say was, that he did not know from whom Sir J. Grant received the letter. It was marked "private."

.—How does the hon. Member know that that is correct?

said, he must add that he had not stated that a copy of the letter had been received from Sir John Malcolm. It was not received from Sir John Malcolm, or with his knowledge. In that copy the letter appeared marked as "private."

.—How do you know that is correct?

.—All that I have stated, Sir, is, that the manuscript copy varies from the printed copy. I do not carry it further. I do not pretend that it is correct.

explained.—He had only inferred that Sir J. Malcolm had sent the letter.

said, he should not approve of the Committee reporting its opinion too early to the House upon this important question. The report of a Committee did not bind the House, but it went far towards prejudicing public opinion, and was certainly an instrument in the hands of Government to effect a corresponding feeling in the House, In the year 1813, when the renewal of the Charter was under consideration, the course taken was, the House required from the Government its views in the shape of a resolution, and then, evidence was taken preparatory to the House expressing its own views. That course was erroneous, and the result proved that it was so. All that the country had a right to expect was, that the truth should be fully and fairly investigated, and he therefore approved of the method now proposed to be pursued.

said, in the course of the observation she had made, he had expressly stated that his hope was, that the House would reserve to itself a judgment on these important matters, and he had no difficulty in assuring his hon. friend that he, for one, should be content that, on so important an occasion, the Committee should only report the evidence, and abstain from making observations with a view to bind the judgment of the House. There might be great inconvenience in the Committee presenting a summary of the evidence. Questions might arise connected with the administration of justice; to which the Committee might think it. important to call the attention of the House. If they were precluded from making observations, they would have no such power. In the case of the Committee on the state of Ireland, they had power to report observations, and they presented a general summary of their inquiries, but abstained from giving any opinion on the Catholic question. He proposed the Committee with no view to prejudice the House, and left it to the Committee to exercise its own discretion, whether any observations on the evidence should or should not be made.

said, the answer of the right hon. Secretary was perfectly satisfactory to him.

said, the question now before the House was not the transactions which had occurred at Bombay, or the letter of the right hon. the President of the Board of Control; but the question was, exclusively the state of affairs between this country and India. As, however, reference had been made to the letter, he must, for one, enter his protest against its being considered a mere private letter. He could not admit that the letter of any adviser of the Crown, addressed to another public servant, in a very distinguished situation, and treating exclusively of matters of the very highest importance, was not fit to come under the cognizance of Parliament. Were it made the matter of a substantive motion, he should rind it difficult to reconcile to his feelings the character given of it by an hon. Member, that it tended in no degree to lower the dignity or independence of the Judges. The letter was a matter of great public importance. Nothing was less compatible with the dignity of a Judge than to be in the unfortunate situation of being obliged to undergo the discipline to which a wild elephant was submitted. As to the question itself, he had heard with the greatest satisfaction the proposal of his right hon. friend, thereby redeeming the pledge given last session by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that a Committee should be appointed, and that the Committee should have all the necessary powers for going into a comprehensive, general, and effective inquiry into the interests which connected this country with British India. After the explanation which had been given, no one could doubt that this would embrace every necessary inquiry. That Committee, he had no doubt, would inquire into the administration of criminal and civil justice; and if they did not do this, they would find it difficult to enter upon the improvement of the civil condition of the natives of India. In like manner, when finances were inquired into, he trusted that the Committee would not merely investigate the amount of income, and the charges upon it, but ascertain the mode of its collection— the sources whence it was derived—how many monopolies were connected with it, and what was the effect of those monopolies. He was satisfied the Committee would be so formed as to make a complete and satisfactory report to the House. He had heard, with satisfaction, that the Committee were not to receive from Government any prescriptive system or opinions whatever. He was sorry that an impression should go forth that the right hon. Gentleman was not willing to part with any of the machinery by which the trade of India was carried on. If this were the case, the interests of the out-ports, the interests of the consumers, could not prevail against the opinion that Government and the Company were against those changes which the public voice wished to impress upon the Government and the Parliament. There was an opinion prevalent that there was a disposition to uphold the present system. It could not be right that the monopoly should continue as it was—an impediment to an intercourse of individuals with India, and without being a benefit to the Company. He would take the present opportunity of asking the right hon. Gentleman whether it was the intention of Ministers to deal in this manner with the Charter of another company—the Bank of England—which was of equal importance with the East India Company. He believed that it was from the abuse or misuse of the powers of the Bank of England grew most of the evils and difficulties under which this country was now labouring. He would not then go into that subject, but would say that if the productive interests of the country were now in difficulties, they were to be attributed in a great degree to the conduct of the Bank of England during the war. No one could look to the history of the last thirty years without seeing that it was in the power of the Bank of England to affect the interests of all classes of the community more than even the Crown itself. He would ask his right hon. friend (Mr. Peel) whether there was any intention to deal with the Charter of the Bank of England in this manner, as it must be renewed— reviewed he should say—[a laugh]—in one or two years? He saw the evil of not reviewing it frequently. [hear, hear] He hoped the Government would follow their own example, and give a Committee of Inquiry before renewal. By so doing both the Bank and the public would be put into better security. It was his own opinion that the Bank Charter ought to be renewed, with certain modifications. Former renewals of that Charter were made without inquiry, but they were made under peculiar circumstances, when we were at war, or wanted large loans.

could not but defend the general conduct of the East India Directors, and of the official men who conducted their Government in India. He felt disposed to complain that persons were to be on the Committee who were not qualified for the task.

explained.—He had not intended to cast any imputations upon the Court of Directors.

said, he differed from his right hon. Colleague with respect to the formation of this Committee. He was not satisfied with the appointment, nor with the mode of appointing the Committee. The appointment had evidently been made merely for purposes which Ministers had already settled. Where, in this Committee, were the Members for the various commercial towns? There were none but for Bristol and Liverpool, and only one of the Members was taken from each of these towns. It appeared, therefore, to him that the selection of this Committee was one of which the House could not approve, especially with reference to what was intended in the consideration of this question. Among the rest of the names he saw that of Mr. W. O'Brien, the Member for Ennis. When he saw that name he naturally asked what it was which made that hon. Member the object of selection? and he was answered, "Oh'. He has written a pamphlet infavour of the East India Company." Now that was, or it was not, a reason for naming him on the Committee; and as the hon. Member did not seem to have any particular interest in the question, he might not be very objectionable; but if there were opportunity, he (Gen. Gascoyne) thought he knew different individuals whom he might recommend, and who were at least full as well calculated to be members of the Committee as the hon. Member for Ennis, although they had not been named upon it. From this and other circumstances, he did verily believe that Ministers had already come to some con- clusion on the subject, and that they intended to renew the Charter; or else they would be willing to separate the questions, and to appoint different Committees to consider first, the state of the trade to China, and secondly, that of India generally. As to the proposed Committee, he could tell them that neither the agricultural nor the commercial interest would be satisfied with it. He complained of the nominations, not individually, but generally; and he thought it indicated that the minds of the Ministers were resolved on a renewal of the Charter. He said that, because it seemed to him they had taken pains to secure a Committee that would not give a different result. He could assure them that he did not wish to be on the Committee himself, indeed he would decline a seat there if it were offered to him; for in his opinion there never had been, and never could be, j a Committee appointed on a more important subject, or requiring more constant and severe attention to the subject it was called on to consider. Still he must say that he did not like the manner in which this Committee had been appointed, and he should have preferred it if it had been chosen by ballot.

said, he did not complain of the hon. Member for finding fault with him in the appointment of the Committee, but for making his objection in that respect the ground of a suspicion that the Government intended to renew the Charter. He had stated, in the few observations with which he had introduced this subject to the House, that he did not propose that Committee with a view of ratifying any engagement of any kind, or of sanctioning any previous arrangements made by the Government with respect to any commercial or trading speculation. [hear] After this distinct declaration, the House would give what weight they thought due to the suspicions of the gallant General in opposition to his (Mr. Peel's) express declaration.

said, as he was a Director of the East-India Company, he had not intended to make any remarks on this question beyond that of stating that the Directors wished for nothing more than a very full inquiry on this subject. All he had to complain of, and in that complaint he was supported by his brother Directors, was, that the inquiry had been so long delayed. Inquiry would be most useful, and would remove the mist of errors, many of which had been wilfully circulated; when they should have heard the report of the Committee, it would be for the House to say whether the duties imposed by law upon the Directors could be otherwise discharged than they were at present. He could assure the House that the Directors never shrunk from inquiry; on the contrary, they wished it; and they deplored that ignorance which now existed respecting the relations between this country and her Indian possessions, and which was the cause of considerable prejudice against them, and which had been made the means of misleading the people on this subject. When the documents should have been examined, and when the whole question should have been sifted to the bottom, things would then be better understood, and the House would see that under the management of the Directors, the greatest portion of happiness had been secured to the people of India; and they would at the same time see, not merely whether the present system could be improved, but whether indeed it could be materially altered, without great disadvantage to the native inhabitants. He was not so blind as not to admit that some improvements might be introduced: he had spoken of the system generally. He was willing-, if he could, to give every assistance to the Committee in the inquiry. Neither he nor his brother Directors had any other object in view but the interest of the country, and from that they never had separated themselves, nor ever would. He repeated, that nothing was so much desired by them as an investigation into the whole question. He knew not why the acknowledged defenders of the East India Company were not to be heard in that House, and in the Committee, as well as its professed opposers; or why a right hon. Gentleman, because he had been the advocate of opinions hostile to the renewal of the Company's Charter, and because he had presented petitions to that effect from Liverpool, was, on that ground, to be appointed a member of the Committee, even to the exclusion of a Director. He claimed it also as his right, in the full belief that he was not incapacitated by the circumstance of his being an East-India Director, from doing his duty to the country. He had hesitated about making these remarks, but the observations which had been made in the course of the debate drew them from him. He felt bound to state his opinion on that point, and he fearlessly called on the House to say whether he was incapacitated to act on the Committee, and whether his connection with the Company was, in itself, a sufficient reason for his exclusion?

said, he could not allow the observations just made to pass without notice. He had not been the individual who originated the objection to Directors of the Company being members of the Committee. At the same time, if he were asked his opinion on the subject, he must state that there was a difference between them and persons who had not the same degree of interest in the concerns of the Company. When the hon. Member spoke of ignorance among the people, and charged it as having been made the means of misleading them, he claimed on his part, as that hon. Member had done on his own, full credit for having in the opinions he had maintained, no other object in view but the interest of the country.

said, as the Bank Charter had been alluded to, he trusted that as little delay as possible would be interposed between inquiry, because it was a matter of importance to the public. With respect to the present Committee, the subject was of such importance and extent, that if the inquiry was to be directed to one particular point, the members of the Committee ought to be informed of it at once. One word on the subject which had been started by the hon. Member opposite (Mr. Astell). If it were not that the Committee really wanted the information which gentlemen connected with the East India Company were best able to afford for the purpose of explaining the subject they were appointed to consider, he should not notice it. The necessity for obtaining information from these gentlemen was very great; but he must say that, prima facie, the fact of their connection with the Company was an objection. As far as that simple fact went, it was certainly a ground of incompetency: but then it was balanced by the great advantage the Committee would enjoy from their superior knowledge of the subject. If it was a Company of another description—a Gas Company, or any other of the recently-formed Companies—no person could hesitate a moment in saying that a fair and impartial inquiry might be made without the assistance of any of the members of the Company. But it was different here, and yet the great advantage to be obtained from their information was no doubt liable to the objection that they had a strong motive to support the Company, from the great extent of patronage they possessed. With these observations he did not think that the objection that had been made was altogether without foundation; but the necessity for obtaining the information they could afford was one of paramount importance, and the main object was, to gain all possible information. On the inquiry itself, he wished to say a few words. He almost doubted whether this extensive subject was within the grasp of one Committee. The importance of all the subjects connected with it was so great, that each of them might almost require a separate consideration. The rights of millions of men—the state of the constitutions—the nature and character of the inhabitants of India, and its vast dependencies, together with the extent of trade—the finances of the Government, and the administration of the law, were all to be the subject of inquiry by this Committee. The immense distance of the country whose affairs were thus to form the subject of discussion, was another difficulty in the way of inquiry. The difficulties of an investigation into our own affairs were known to be sufficiently great; and though the commission of inquiry into the Courts of law was composed of some of the most qualified men, they had hardly been able to look into one Court. Yet this duty, in addition to all the inquiries relative to the trade, the finance, and the government of India, were to be submitted to one Committee. He must confess that it was with some apprehension he should approach the debate on all these varied and important questions; and he should go into the discussion with a strong impression, that the task imposed on the Committee was beyond their power. There was one thing in their favour. He believed the intentions of the right hon. Gentleman were clear and honest. He had not an idea, from what had already passed, what were the intentions of Government; or whether, as the gallant General supposed, they had in fact adopted any. With this feeling he should have less difficulty in the per- formance of his duty on the Committee; but if he were dealing with a more tricking Minister, he really should fear that the subject was too great for examination by one Committee, and that it had been assigned to them, in order that, by the length of time they would be engaged upon it, the House and the people might get tired of it, and the Charter of the Company might be got through Parliament silently, and without opposition, or even notice. However, he had every confidence in the Government, and he should therefore feel less hesitation in undertaking the task assigned him as a member of the Committee. He had had the honour of sitting on the Committee appointed to examine into the Finances of this country, and what had they done? They laboured through one whole Session, and got through the Board of Ordnance. How much more difficult was the subject now to be submitted to their consideration? In finance alone, how much greater the amount to be considered? India supported a larger expenditure than this country, in the bare expenses of the Government, after abstracting the National Debt. Under all the circumstances, he almost apprehended that the importance and variety of the subjects would be such as to bring the Committee little else but discredit, for the manner in which the service would be performed. He could therefore wish that there might be separate Committees; but, at the same time, he felt that there were great objections to such a course.—He thought the Committee would have fully enough to do, if the question of the Trade with India and China was alone submitted to them, leaving the Trade, Colonization and Laws for future consideration. The question of the extent of the Liberty of the Press—of the character of the Rights of the People—and of the expediency of admitting some of the chief men of India into the subordinate departments of the Government, might be well assigned to one Committee; while the matters of Trade and Finance and the form of Civil Government might be submitted to another. The Committee ought to have power to make separate Reports, for there were points on which, if that Committee was to be of use at all, they must report from time to time; for, if they were, at the end of their labours, to throw a great mass of papers on the table of the House, their appoint- ment would have served to little purpose indeed. They ought to state what was the financial condition of the country, and to what extent the China trade was profitable, and what was the effect of the difference in the quality and value of tea with regard to consumers in this country. The opinions of the Committee, valeant quantum, ought to be stated—and not merely their opinions, but the reasons on which they were founded, in order to enable the House to come to a conclusion upon them. Under these circumstances, he felt apprehensive that the right hon. Gentleman would find the Committee had so much to do that they would move very slowly. If they did their duty to every part, they could make but little progress with such an immense question, and at the end of one Session, he feared it would be found they had but got together an unmanageable mass of matter, the consideration of which they must resume in the next. With respect to the appointment of the Committee, he would only say, that one thing which appeared to him clear beyond all doubt was, that there had been no selection for any particular purpose, but that it had been left as free as it possibly could. He thought it was as fairly chosen as any Committee could be.

said, it appeared to him that the Government ought to have determined on some definite line of conduct, and to have brought a measure down to that House, and called on them to confirm it; and then, if doubt had been expressed, to request to refer it to a Committee. That would have been a more agreeable mode of proceeding. He agreed with the hon. Member for Callington, (Mr. Baring) that the question, by the present mode of proceeding, might be thrown over to another Session. He only rose to claim, on his own part, the fullest right to investigate the evidence laid before the Committee, when it should come under the notice of the House; and he could almost venture to propose that it should be an instruction to the Committee to report the evidence, and not their opinions; for in what situation would the House be when influenced by the weight and authority of the opinion of the Committee, without having equal time to gain a knowledge of the evidence on which it was founded? Under these circumstances, and reserving to every Member of the House the right of examine- ing the evidence laid before the Committee, and of calling for further evidence if necessary, it was possible that the appointment of this Committee might be the best way of considering the matter. For the due investigation of the questions referred to the Committee, no man's life would be sufficient; certainly two or three years might be occupied. The right hon. Gentleman had said that some of the evidence was prepared, but how was it possible for him to know whether the Committee would be satisfied with it? Perhaps there might be occasion to send over to India. He must say he had his doubts of the advantage of appointing the Committee under present circumstances; but, as the House seemed to differ from him, he would not oppose it, although it would be impossible to say when the inquiry, if properly pursued, might terminate. If any change happened in the Administration—and who could tell what might happen—how much would the difficulties resulting from protracted inquiry be increased. He should reserve to himself the right of judging the Question just as if no Committee of Inquiry had been instituted.

wished to make a few observations on what had fallen from the hon. Member who had just sat down. During the whole of the last Session that hon. Member was loud in calling for a Committee of that House, yet now he reproached the Ministers for not coming to the House prepared with a measure, and then asking concurrence in it. He had often said, that it was not for Ministers to bring forward measures affecting the interests of large bodies of people, and he called for Committees of Inquiry on subjects with which the welfare of thousands was connected. Now he called on the Ministers to propose legislative measures, and seemed to think inquiry useless. Surely this was a little inconsistent, for was not this a question involving the interests of thousands, nay, indeed, of ninety millions of people? As far as his opportunity of judging went, he would take on himself to say that there was nothing more unfounded than the observation, that the people of this country and of India would not be satisfied with this inquiry. Had Gentlemen who made such assertions read what was constantly passing here, and had they not observed an universal call for inquiry? 'Let us be heard,' was the language pf all who had met to deliberate on this subject; and he might fairly anticipate, that if they could have heard the people of India, they would have been found to hold the same language. In the appointment of a Committee of Inquiry, he thought the Government had acted most wisely; and the only doubt he felt was, whether two Committees would not be necessary in order to divide between them the consideration of so important a subject? One Committee might, he thought, be employed in considering the relations of this country with China, and another upon the general state of India; or perhaps the financial state of India and the trade of China might constitute the subject of inquiry for one Committee, while the judicial Administration in India might be submitted to the other. However, on this subject, he would not venture to do more than throw out a suggestion, as he had merely risen to reply to the remarks of the hon. Member who preceded him.

, in explanation, said, he was a friend to inquiry, but he thought the Ministers might have prepared their own plans on the subject, and submitted them to the House, and thence to the Committee, for consideration. He remained of that opinion still.

would now propose the names of the Committee (see page 278) according to the list which he had previously read. But he wished to say one word only before he put the names of the Members of the Committee into the hands of the Speaker. He did not see how it would be possible to separate the financial and commercial concerns of the Company, as had been suggested; but if, in the course of the inquiry, the Committee should think that any detached portion of the great subject could be advantageously examined by a special body, the proposition might be laid before the House, and it would, no doubt, receive all the attention due to such a recommendation. In the first instance, it seemed proper that one Committee should undertake a general view of the whole system.

admitted that he was well aware of the difficulty of making a selection; and that, at all events, many hon. Members must be omitted who would be capable of giving valuable assistance. He thought, however, that in the list of names, many had been included who would seldom attend, and when they did attend, who would not be very efficient.— Among the omissions, however, he found one hon. Gentleman who possessed most extensive knowledge of the commercial interests and resources of the country, and who had most advantageously and very recently displayed that knowledge at a meeting held at Leeds. He alluded to Mr. Marshall, who was one of the representatives of a great manufacturing country. On the other hand, among the insertions, he was surprised to see so many merely country gentlemen; and as an instance, he might mention that he was not aware that the hon. Member for the county in which he (Mr. Huskisson) resided, had displayed any peculiar qualifications, or was very likely to be sedulous in his attendance.

said, he was not aware that the hon. Member for Sussex (Mr. W. Burrell) would be unable to attend. He had been selected as a representative of a county mainly interested in the growth of Wool. Sir R. Vyvian might be considered as a country gentleman, but he was one of the representatives for a very important county. Admitting most freely the right of Yorkshire to have a voice on the Committee, it would be observed that on this account the name of Lord Milton would be found in the list.—Between England, Ireland, Scotland, and the Government, great difficulty had been experienced in choosing Members properly to represent all interests.

begged to give notice that on an early day he would move an instruction to the Committee, to take into consideration the trade with China, and the propriety of removing impediments in the way of a free trade with India.

suggested that Mr. Stewart from his extensive and local knowledge, would be a most valuable addition to the number.

consented immediately to that hon. Member's appointment.

said, he brought forward his present motion, in pursuance of the pledge he had given on the subject, to call for papers that would show the fallacy of all the vaunted statements and deceptive Returns as to the Exports of the country having increased. Under ordinary circumstances, he would have contented himself with merely moving for the Returns, but after the assertion in the Lords Commissioners' Speech, and repeated by the Ministers, and those who supported them, he must trespass on the House with some details. He had exposed the fallacies last Session, but after the language to which he had already adverted, a repetition of the exposure became necessary. Hon. Members would, no doubt, be astonished at the great variation between what was called the Official and the Real Value of Exports; and if they looked back to the documents on the Table, for the last thirty years, they might, as he had done, collect the proofs of the extent of that variation; but at the present moment, when matters of trade were of so much importance—when a Committee had just been appointed to inquire into one great branch of commerce—and when it was held out, in the Speech from the Throne, that the Exports last year exceeded all former years—it was necessary that facts, as they actually existed, ought to be laid, in a clear and simple view, before the House and the country. He had gone through all the documents, and had collected a vast deal of useful information upon the difference between the Official and Real Value of Exports, and he had commenced his first account with 1798, that being the year after the suspension of cash payments by the Bank, and had brought it down to 1814, the year of peace, and when some discussions took place regarding the currency. Going back to 1798, it might be recollected as a matter of history that Mr. Pitt had then quoted the Official Value as only 19,000,000l., while at that date the real value ascended to 33,000,000l., and the account he (Ald. Waithman) had made out showed that the real value gradually increased from 1798 to 1814, the whole gross excess of real over the official value of goods exported during such period was no less than 240,000,000l., or at the rate, on an average, of more than 15,000,000l. per annum. The next paper he had prepared applied to the period between 1814 and 1828, both inclusive, and in this interval the official value had been as constantly increasing as the real value had done from. 1798 to 1814: the advance had been gradual from 36,000,000l. to 52,000,000l. per annum; and in the last year the real value was no less than 16,000,000l. below the official value. The decrease from 1814 to 1819, the currency year, was from forty-seven to thirty-seven millions. Since the alteration in the currency in 1819, the Real Value had become eighty millions less than the Official Value.^* It might be said, as indeed it had been said, that the Real Value was of no consequence—that the cheaper goods were obtained and exported the better; but one important question was, whether the Real Value had increased? Taking a period of thirty years, it would be found that during the last ten the Real Value had fallen off between eight and nine millions per annum, as contrasted with the ten preceding years; in the ten preceding years the increase had been at the rate of about two millions per annum. Such being the case, and such being known to be the case, there was not a junior clerk in a merchant's counting-house who did not justly laugh at the proceedings of the House, founded upon the defective information by which it was misled. Ministers asserted that the trade of the country was increasing; they had not condescended to state whence they drew their information; but he would establish that it had decreased to the amount of at least eight millions, on the average, each year during the last ten years. And yet we were sacrificing our internal trade and neglecting productive sources of real wealth to increase our nominal exports. In spite of all the schemes of Free Trade, however—in spite of the cutting-down of the ship-builders and of the ship-owners—our trade was diminished. An hon. Member said, he did not believe a word of it.—[The Chancellor of the Exchequer disclaimed having made such an observation.]—Mr. Alderman Waithman said it was the hon. Member for Westminster, below him, who had said so. [Mr. Hobhouse who occupied that seat, said, No, no] Whoever said 'No' to the statements, he would pledge his veracity for the correctness of them; and he would be prepared to submit to any degradation which the House or the country could inflict upon him if he failed to prove that the trade of the country had diminished to the extent he had said.

^*See Table, p. 313, 314.

Now, a word with respect to the last year. It was said that, when we took corn from abroad, other nations would take our goods in return. He had taken some pains to discover how the exports were when large importations of corn took place, and he found that there was a larger decrease in the exports then than at other times. If we received six millions worth of corn, as was the quantity, according to his estimate, of course we must export goods or gold in return. If the right hon. Gentleman had acted with his usual candour, he would have stated whether the accounts were taken upon the Real or the Official Value, and would also have informed the House that the supposed increase was owing to the great importation of corn. But they were told it was quantity and not price that was to be regarded. As goods to nearly that additional extent had not been returned, the conclusion was, that gold had left the country to supply the deficiency. As Sir John Barnard had been alluded to on a previous occasion, he should take the liberty of quoting a little of his reasoning as applicable to this point. Sir J. B's argument was—If a man were in the habit of selling a hat for a guinea, and if, by bringing down the price to 17s. 6s., he could sell two for 35s., although it was true that the profits of the manufacturer and the seller were reduced, yet, if employment were given to one thousand people, an advantage was gained by the change. But he (Mr. Ald. Waithman) would say, that if we sent out two pieces of goods instead of one, and if instead of raising the price from a guinea to 35s., they sold them for 10s., this, he said, was a loss. It was said, in a triumphant tone, would any set of men be so foolish as to carry on the export trade from year to year without any profit or prospect of it? He had never contended that they would, but the fact was, that in every year where embarrassments arose from over-trading, goods were sold at immense sacrifice. He could state from his own experience, and from his own sufferings, which were apt to make a man remember such things, that years of excess of exportation had been most disastrous and most ruinous. He thought it extraordinary that Chancellors of the Exchequer (he did not now allude to the right hon. Gentleman opposite in particular) but that any Chancellor of the Exche- quer should be found to boast of prosperity, and to sound the horn of triumph, and to call upon the whole nation to rejoice at the extent of our trade, and the prospect of wealth and glory. Such precisely had been the case in 1825, when nothing was talked of but the elasticity of trade, the extent of our resources, and the abundance of our wealth. As this prophecy was not very happily verified, the whole blame was thrown upon the Bank of England, with whom the Government had been so many years in league and concert. Those who had availed themselves of the assistance of the Bank for a series of years, then with the vilest ingratitude turned round upon their old friends, and charged them with being the authors of all the calamities of the country. By a Return he held in his hand, he found that within the last thirty years the price of weaving a piece of cloth had fallen from 10s. 6d. to 1s. 9d.; and the price of a quarter of wheat had fallen from above 80s. to about 50s. while the number of commitments for criminal offences had increased from four thousand to upwards of sixteen thousand. And the 3 per cents averaged sixty-two between 1800 and 1810, and were ninety-four in 1829. From 1800 to 1810 the average of wheat was 83s.; 3 per cents were 62 per cent; wages for weaving a piece of cambric was 10s. 6s.; and the committals for crime four thousand in number; from 1810 to 1820 wheat was at 88s.; stocks 65; wages 6s. 9d.; and commitments five thousand; from 1820 to 1828 wheat 57s.; stocks 81; wages 3s. 6d. and commitments fifteen thousand. In 1829 wheat 50s.; stocks 94; wages 1s. 10d.; and commitments sixteen thousand five hundred and sixty four. By referring to the details, it would thus be discovered that within the last three years, despite of the march of intellect, the spirit of improvement, and the schoolmaster abroad in all directions, the produce of the poor man's industry was decreasing constantly, and the scale of crime alarmingly increasing. These were the boasted consequences of our prosperity. As to the state of the Retail Trade, the opinions entertained of its prosperity were founded on very fallacious grounds. Printed goods were exhibited in some shops at six-pence half-penny a yard, and great crowds were collected to purchase. He knew, in one case, that a person bought a very large quantity of these goods, at six-pence halfpenny, of which the Government received duty, and he afterwards retailed them at sixpence, being a loss of one half-penny in every yard, to make an exhibition of great trade. This was the way business was at present conducted, and these were the means by which an appearance of prosperity was kept up, and carriages blazoned with arms and coronets were seen crowding their doors. As to the question of taxation he must contend and strongly that the Government kept one army of Customhouse-officers and Excise-men to take the taxes, and another to take them off! [hear] For his part he despaired of any reduction of taxation. He saw no prospect of it. He saw no good it would do to any extent that it was likely to be carried—even if it were reduced one half. When he heard a placeman or a pensioner deplore the public distress—say how much he pitied the sufferers, and express his desire to relieve at the same time that he declaimed the impossibility of attempting it, he confessed he could not understand him. If a man holding a place of 2,000l. a-year, as did one of the right hon. Gentlemen over the way for instance, were however, to say that he felt so much for the sufferings of his neighbours that he was willing to resign a portion, or the whole of it for their relief, then, indeed, he would believe him—then, indeed, he could give him credit for sincerity. In the language of Hudibras he might say of such a placeman,

"He who hangs, or beats out's brains,

The Devil's in him if he feigns."

But, until Gentlemen were prepared to take that course, he did not see the prospect of any effectual relief. The retail traders of the Metropolis were losing nearly forty per cent on their stock; and the greatest mischiefs were added by the change of seasons and fashions. The first parcel of goods he ever purchased in his life was from Sir Robert Peel, and he had often afterwards obtained a reduction of twelve or fifteen per cent between the price he paid at the beginning of the season and the price he paid afterwards. These changes, the weight of taxation, and the improvident measures adopted with regard to trade, had reduced some of the most respectable tradesmen in the Metropolis to ruin; and not a day passed over his head without receiving applications from them and their families for every kind of employment, and not unfrequently to support a petition for their being admitted into the police. He wished it, however, to be understood, that it was not at all meditated by him to attack the funded interest or rob the stockholder. The more oppressive property, and that because it was not liable to change with the changes of other property, was that of the great proprietors in land. Rents were kept up by imprudent competition amongst the tradesmen themselves, and many of them had been by this, or the general stagnation of trade, so much reduced, that the right hon. the Home Secretary could, no doubt, testify to the truth of the statement to which he had just alluded, that many respectable tradesmen had, after failing in their shops, been most solicitous to obtain a situation as Policemen. The number of persons interested in the Funds would be seen by a return he had prepared on Parliamentary Documents. [See page 314] He firmly believed that the paper he had alluded to would be found to be the index of the increase or diminution of our Exported Produce at different periods, and by that paper it would be found that the annual value of our Exports, in real value, upon an average of six years, from 1814 to 1819 inclusive, was 45,746,9761. whilst upon the average of the last nine years the real value was only 36,711,949l, making a yearly decrease of real value in the Exports of the last nine

begged leave to second the motion; but he must at the same time take leave to show that his hon. friend was completely mistaken in the conclusions he attempted to draw from the apparent decrease of the real over the official value since the year 1814. The Tables from which his hon. friend had taken his statements were drawn up by Mr. Marshall, a gentleman with whom he had long been acquainted; his (Mr. M.'s) object was, to show that the active industry of the country had, within such period, doubled, and nearly trebled, as compared with preceding years. Of the merits of those Tables there was but one opinion; but it was a complete mistake to take the returns of official values of goods passing through the Customs as a criterion of any thing except the mere quantities. In fact they were not so intended, and they very imperfectly, as it was well known, represented values; in so much so that these accounts, in 1798, took the official values at about nineteen millions; whereas it was ascertained that the real value of our exports was in that year full thirty-three millions. The same might be said of the return of the last year's official values, taken as at sixteen millions. It was certainly true that prices had gone down; but it should be recollected that there was a very great depreciation in the cost of the imports. He admitted all that his hon. friend had stated with respect to the decrease in the official value at one period, and its increase at another; but he was prepared at the same time to show that the decrease and increase proved a state of things the very reverse of that supposed by the hon. Member. It was said that the prices of all manufactured goods had fallen, but was it not considered how much the price of the raw material had also fallen? American cotton at one time was three shillings and sixpence a pound, now it was one shilling and three-pence. India cotton had been eighteen-pence, now it could be bought for four-pence halfpenny. But then the wages for weaving a piece of cloth in the year 1798 were fifteen shillings, now they were one shilling and ten-pence. [hear from Mr. Waithman] His hon. friend might call 'hear!' but he wished he could get him to understand that this was the way in which he accounted for the difference of value which seemed so hard to be understood. To take, for instance, bobbinet. That at one time could not be purchased for less than a pound a yard: now it could be purchased for eighteen-pence. This was the proof of the improvements we had made in machinery, so that two men could now do as much work as five hundred at the time to which he alluded. Could any man deny that this was a great benefit? He could not illustrate the difference between the real and the official value of an article better than by referring to the price of cloves. Supposing that the price of cloves had been five shillings a pound before the war; that during the war they reached fifteen shillings a pound, and that after the war they fell again to five shillings. The official value being fixed at five shillings, and remaining the same during the war, then the real value would appear to be on the increase; but after the war, when the price again fell to five shillings, or below it, the official value would seem to be increasing. When, therefore, his hon. friend cited this falling-off of the real value with reference to the official value, as a proof of the falling-off in trade, it ought rather to be taken as a proof of its greater activity. He did not deny that there was a great depression in many branches of industry, but he contended that we were now in a better situation to meet the burthen of eight hundred and fifty millions of debt than we were in the year 1792 to bear a much smaller amount. He could not understand what all the bother and nonsense about the weight of the debt was intended for;—if the country would be but true to itself, and make the most of its resources, difficulties would be averted. When Gentlemen, who unluckily represented important and respectable towns, came down to that House preaching such intolerable nonsense and hum- bug, he felt inclined to ask them what would Venice, Genoa, or any other of the powerful maritime States of Europe have been without their commerce. [hear] Some of those notable legislators had even gone so far as to say that it would be better for England to have no foreign commerce whatever. But this was such unmitigated and irremediable absurdity, that it did not deserve a moment's consideration. Why, except for Free Trade, the people would soon be reduced to utter ruin, and driven to the necessity of eating-one another, surrounded as they must be upon all sides by a political wall of brass. [laughter] He would wish, however, most earnestly, to see taxation more equalized, and taken as much as possible off the poor working classes, upon whom it now pressed so hard. The labouring poor at present contributed four-fifths of the taxes, while millions gave comparatively nothing. Saying that it was impossible to afford relief was equivalent to complaining that a man could not run after having been chained to the ground. Let the burthen of the taxes be imposed chiefly on property and capital, the owners of which were so forward to claim priority in representation that it would be a pity to refuse them precedence in this particular likewise. In that case he affirmed that the land would no longer be burthened with pauperism, manufacturers would flourish, and the whole body of society be improved in proportion. Let hon. Members look at soap, candles, and leather, which were respectively doubled in value to the consumer by taxation. Any Gentleman could go into a shop and buy tallow for himself at 3d. per pound; but when he purchased it in candles he was obliged to pay 6½d. or 7d., losing at the rate of thirty per cent in that article alone. He recommended the House to consult a document containing much useful information upon the subject, which was in possession of the Member for Cornwall, who, he was sure, would readily give a copy to any Member who might desire it. Much of the misunderstanding that prevailed relative to the value of our Exports, and Imports, arose from the want of a determinate standard by which they should be measured. There was one value fixed on the Import and another on the Export of the same article—on cinnamon, mace, cocoa, (nearly double) and coffee, for example; and one rate of duty in Scotland and another in Ireland. Hence the different conclusions from the same premises, and hence, so much misconception that might be so easily avoided.

said, that notwithstanding the hard terms dealt out by the hon. Member for Aberdeen against those who did not agree with him in their notions of commercial policy, he could not avoid offering a few observations to the House. The hon. Gentleman appeared to have mistaken the object of the hon. Alderman's motion, which went no further than to show that the accounts of the official value of Exports, as they were made up, could not be fairly considered as a proof of the prosperity of the country. The hon. Gentleman appeared to him also to have mistaken the argument of the hon. Alderman as to the decreased value of the Exports. In fact, the hon. Gentleman had gone so far as to infer an increase of prosperity from the decreased value of the Exports. In what did the value of the Exports consist? It consisted of two elements— the capital, and the labour employed. If then, as unfortunately was the case in this country at the present moment, the price of labour was too low to afford a fair remuneration, could it be considered in any other light than as a proof that the commerce of the country was on the decline? But no, said the hon. Member for Aberdeen, it is a proof that your commerce is increasing, and consequently is in a state of prosperity. It had been said that those who were opposed to the principle of Free Trade did not sufficiently estimate the importance of foreign commerce. But when the hon. Gentleman contemplated making other nations tributary to this country, he should remember that it was not in our power, by any measure of internal legislation, to effect so desirable a purpose. We must first get other nations to agree with us, and he was sure that a right hon. Gentleman opposite—for whose profound theoretical knowledge on such subjects he had the highest respect—he was sure that right hon. Gentleman would not say that we had yet succeeded in bringing other nations to our opinions.—The only point on which he differed from the right hon. Gentleman was this—he understood him to wish that the whole commerce of the world should be thrown open, and conducted as if mankind were all one great and friendly family, exchanging with each other the products of which each stood in need. If all the world were so disposed, he was not so stupid as to deny that the principle would be attended with the utmost benefit to mankind. But that it was not so, nor likely to become so, was an undeniable fact. Other countries, so far from agreeing with us in this principle of Free Trade, had actually resisted our policy by hostile enactments.—The Report of the French Minister recommended what it called a reasonable system of protection, and expressed an opinion that, on the principle of Free Trade, England would be able to overthrow their manufactures. Accordingly France had refused to relax her restrictive system, as the best means of contending with the commercial efforts of this country. And how did the United States of America proceed? Every one knew the restrictive nature of the late Tariff: in addition to which he could state a fact which had come to his knowledge—namely, that a committee appointed by Congress to revise the Tariff had recommended that it should be continued. In consequence of this recommendation the Tariff would be continued, so that America as well as France had refused to comply with the liberal system of policy of which this country had set the example. The right hon. Gentleman, (Mr. Robinson, now Lord Goderich) and the Government, which had adopted his views, employed, as one of the arguments in recommending their system, that other countries would follow the example of England. But how had the fact turned out? The other countries had not followed the example. Was not that a reason for re-considering this system?—All that was asked was, that it should be reconsidered, in order that, if useful, it should be continued; or, if injurious, got rid of; for no man could deny that if the system was founded in error, the sooner it was got rid of the better. So much had been said about the distress of the country, that he would only add that a sufficient quantity of it existed to justify the House in proceeding at once to inquiry. What he complained of was, that Ministers had refused to attend to the petitions of the people last Session for inquiry, and that there appeared but little probability of their attending to them now-The Speech, at the opening of the Session, held out no favourable prospect on that head. But the country would not be satisfied to let another Session go on without inquiry. No man could deny that the evils of the country originated in many causes; but the principal evil was the extreme pressure on the labouring classes. He thought Parliament had not sufficiently considered the means of giving employment to the poor. It was a subject of vital interest. If the labouring population were permitted to go on sinking in penury and degradation, it was impossible that the country could be said to be in a prosperous state. He would not undertake to enumerate all the causes of the present distress, but there were three causes which he would state as the principal:—The first was, the pressure of taxation on the labouring classes; they ought to relieve the productive industry of the country. Another cause was, the effect produced by machinery. Much ridicule had been thrown on a noble person, in another place, for assigning the improvement of machinery amongst other causes of the distress experienced by the labouring classes. The fact, however, was undeniable. Neither he nor the noble Lord intended to question the ultimate advantage of these improvements, but that their immediate effect was to throw many hands out of employment was a fact which did not admit of contradiction. The third cause to which he should refer, was the establishment of Corn Laws. He did not mean to say that the landlords should be deprived of all protection, but he would say that they ought not to be exclusively protected at the expense of the labouring classes; but that the laws by which they were protected constituted an operative cause in the production of distress. Upon the whole, if something were not done upon the subject, he should conclude the House was only competent to do injury, but incapable of doing good. He feared also, that much of our distress must be imputed to the competition of other countries. The hon. Member for Aberdeen had said much of the Free Trade principles making the world tributary on England for her manufactures; but the hon. Member had forgotten that France and America, acting on the restrictive system, had both extended their trade last year. The increase, for example, of the value of Imports into the port of Havre (the Liverpool of France), amounted last year to twenty millions of francs over those of the preceding year, and the Exports of the United States were five millions of dollars more last year than in 1828. Was it not evident, then, that other nations were benefitted while this was injured by the present system? Why should we take the Silk of France unless she reciprocally bound herself by treaty to take our Cotton and Hardware manufactures in return? In a word, why should not the system be made one of bona fide reciprocity, or be revised and amended?

said, he was willing to admit, that the system of determining the value of our Exports by that called the "official average value," was not altogether as perfect as might be desired; but it was the most perfect that he knew of, or, he would affirm, that any Member of that House had as yet devised. He had tried one or two other modes of arriving at a value of our Exports and Imports, but found them not so successful; and he should be obliged to any hon. Member who would suggest a mode less liable to error than that of the official value. Some artificial standard was necessary, for the difference of kind and size, &c, of commodities rendered mere quantity an inefficient representative of real value. He would not then enter into an analysis of the hon. Alderman's statements, as a more fitting occasion would shortly present itself; but would content himself with contending that increase of Exports proved so far an increased activity of commerce. How could these Exports be made, without an increased amount of shipping, and of the employment of machinery and labour? Hon. Members said that because the price or rate of profit of those Exports was low, that therefore they were of no national benefit; but they forgot that the extent of the market was as the lowness of profits—that if they wished for high prices, they must count on small sales, and vice versâ;. The hon. Member for Worcester, (Mr. Robinson) said that France and America had not followed our example in adopting the anti-restrictive system. Now it was a sufficient answer to the hon. Member to say that the Secretary to the Treasury of the United States had in his last report asserted the very doctrine which had been over and over advanced by Ministers,— namely, that the transition from a state of war to that of peace, the application of science to machinery, (which God forbid he should denounce or not appreciate,) and other concurrent causes, necessarily induced a temporary distress, for which there was no legislative remedy. Then with respect to France, it was a fact that our Exports to that country had increased considerably last year, notwithstanding the so-much-objected-to Free Trade system. When, last Session, he addressed the House on the subject, he contended that the Silk Trade, the then subject of complaint, would be extended by the very measures which hon. Members declared would be its ruin; and he appealed to the candour of every hon. Member, whether the fact was not as he had predicted. And so it would be with other branches of trade, as he would endeavour to prove on another occasion.

said, he was not surprised that the hon. Member for Aberdeen should be hailed as a great authority on the state of the nation by hon. Members opposite (on the Treasury bench) since his statements went to bear out their ill-founded assertions. But the hon. Member had a condition of his own, which went, if examined, to upset the very doctrines which he meant to uphold. The hon. Member had, on various occasions, contended that the present Free Trade system gave to us the market of the world; and yet strangely argued that there should be a reduction of 20,000,000l. of taxes, else we should be driven out of that market by other competitors. [Mr. Hume said, he did not specify 20,000,000l. he only mentioned a large reduction]? No matter, three, five, or ten millions, be the sum what it might,—it was equally a death-blow to Ministers. He did not doubt that, according to the official returns, the amount of Exports appeared last year greater than those of the preceding. But an examination of these official returns showed that there could be no dependence on any inferences drawn from such imperfect data. One hon. Member drew one inference, namely, that the money value of the Exports was less; another that the money value was more,— each taking some particular article as the sole criterion of the increase or decrease. He regretted that such documents as these trade accounts should occupy the attention of the House. If arguments were to be founded on such documents, they should at least be framed on a less absurd and preposterous plan. When a statement founded on them proceeded from the throne— when his Majesty was made to speak like a Custom-house clerk—when in the midst of awful calamities and impending changes, the people, who looked forward with anxiety to the Throne and the Parliament, were mocked by statements founded upon such documents,—if the Ministers intended to alienate the people, and proclaim their inefficiency to the country, it was impossible for them to adopt a more effectual course. He valued low prices as much as any man, but he dreaded a rapid transition from high money prices to low money prices as a great evil. It was impossible not to see that the real value of the Exports of the country had been misrepresented. A fictitious and capricious value had been placed upon them, without having any standard, either in the real value of the article itself or any other value which could be put upon them. What would the House think when they were informed that the official value of the Exports from this country to Europe, as compared with the Imports for the last six years, exceeded 110,000,000l. sterling? This showed upon how fallacious and unreal a foundation these official returns were made. He could easily understand the disappointment which the country would feel when, groaning under the most urgent distress, they expected some substantively efficient measure from the Government, but were met only by a Speech from the Throne which could give any thing but satisfaction at home, and must provoke (he would almost say) the contempt of foreigners, [hear]

said, if the hon. Member had brought a just accusation against his Majesty's Ministers, a much juster accusation could be brought against him. He believed the distress of the country to be great, though not universal; but however great it might be, he could not believe that a remedy for it existed in the use of language that must inflame, or that it could answer any useful purpose to proclaim any part of the House to be indifferent to the distress of the people. The hon. Member having described on a former evening his object as to the depreciation of the standard, the House now knew how to meet him, and gentlemen must beware how they aided a plan which was calculated to be a fraud on the country.

said, he must protest against personal motives being attributed.

said, he did not intend to impute personal motives.

.—If any hon. Member imputes to me any measure of dishonesty or fraud it is perfectly false. [hear, and order]

requested the hon. Member to abstain from such observations. He felt persuaded that the hon. Member for Dover had used the observations only in the way of argument.

said, in reference to the opinion the hon. Member was known to hold, he must repeat what he said; that he could not but conceive that a measure which would reduce the standard of the country was one calculated to effect a fraud; and he was glad of an opportunity to speak of the measure, that the House might not be led to adopt schemes of that kind. The distress occasioned by overproduction was not remediable by legislative enactments, nor could any retrenchment cut off a very great sum from the expenditure of the country. A remedy might be found in a mutation of taxation. A large proportion of the taxes pressed on the industrious classes, whilst those who were better able to bear them were exempt. The hon. Member (Mr. Attwood) had said, that any one who asserted, as the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Courtenay) had, that we could receive Imports from a country which prohibited our Exports, asserted what was absurd and dangerous. He (Mr. Thomson) considered, that it was equally absurd and dangerous to assert the contrary. The Imports must have been purchased either by our Exports or those of some other country. He wished the system of official values not to be abandoned, because it showed quantity more conveniently than any other mode.— He would not say more on this subject now, as many opportunities would occur when it might be more advantageously discussed.

said, he felt himself called upon to answer the observation of the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Courtenay) which implied that Trade was getting better, and that the experiment as to the Silk Trade had succeeded; by asserting that there was now the greatest distress in the Silk Trade, and that principally occasioned by the measures of last Session. Many large Manufacturers were now insolvent. He quite agreed with those who said that France had not met us half-way in our advances to promote a Free Trade, and this was a reason why it should not be continued.

said, he would not enter into the discussion at that late hour, though, if any thing could move him, it would be the quantity of unnecessary and incorrect matter which had been lavished on the subject.

said, he must complain of the use of the word 'fraud' in the speech of an hon. Gentleman, and said it was unfair to attribute improper motives to those Members who stood up in their places honestly to discharge their duty. He noticed this because what was said in that House went forth to the country, and he repeated that such assertions ought not to be made. He would say why his attention was called to the question of the currency. He had listened with attention to the debates, and when he found it stated that the money was accumulating in a few hands, and the general condition of the people was falling off, he thought it time for independent men to [speak out. It was a lamentable state, and it was, in the political body, what would be called in the physical a determination of blood to the head. [hear and a laugh]

explained: when he used the term fraud, he meant not to apply it to individuals, but merely to represent that any act to depreciate the currency would be a fraud on the country.

said, he thought all persons who were paid in a depreciated currency, had a fraud committed on them.

moved the preliminary Resolution on the Lords Commissioners Speech— "That a Supply be granted."

regretted that some Member more conversant with the forms of the House did not rise to oppose the Speaker's leaving the Chair. The distresses of the country were so great, the cries of the people for relief were so loud, and the promises of his Majesty's Ministers were so vague and unsatisfactory, that he felt himself called upon in duty to oppose in limine the granting of one shilling of supply at present. He would therefore move, as an amendment, "That this House will not vote any Supply or Estimate until the grievances of the people be taken into consideration, and relief for their distress be granted." The Chairman of the Committee (Sir A. Grant)—[as the Speaker had left the Chair without the noble Marquis having risen in sufficient time to propose his Amendment] intimated that such Amendment was informal, as the House were new in Committee.

.—The motion is regular—it requires only a verbal alteration; and its principle I approve:—Before I grant a supply (said the noble Marquis) let there be a redress of grievances. The Amendment was then altered, by the substitution of the word 'Committee' for 'House.' It stood, as put in the Committee, as follows:— "That it is the opinion of this Committee, that no supply be granted, until the grievances and distress of the people be taken into consideration, and redress be granted."

said, he did not come to the House prepared for any such amendment as the present. He understood, certainly, that an amendment was to be moved in the Committee of Supply on Friday, to which the present motion was a mere formal preparation. He hoped the noble Lord would withdraw his motion, or, if he were determined to press it to a division, he thought the better way would be to postpone the Committee, as, in the present state of the House, [twenty-eight Members only were present], no division could take place, the calling for a division would be to have the House counted out. The noble Lord had certainly adopted a novel course towards the House, and which was not likely to make a very favourable impression on the public generally; but he had the power, and he must use it as he pleased.

.— I am no party to any understanding as to any motion on Friday. If hon. Members are not present to do their duty to the people, it is no fault of mine; here am I to do my duty; I shall divide. The division being called for, proceeded; but as it appeared that there were not forty Members present, the numbers could not be declared, and Mr. Speaker resumed the Chair; and forty not being then present, he declared the House to be adjourned.