the land-owners and occupiers of land adjourned to an inn in the town, where, at a very respectable meeting, certain resolutions and the present Petition were agreed to. He was anxious to take this opportunity likewise of deprecating all inflammatory language on a subject in which the passions of the multitude were more easily roused than on any other. In a speech attributed in the daily prints to the lord mayor of London, there was much of this sort of language; but he could not believe that a person in the high situation which he held could really have made such observations. It was a libel on the lord mayor of London. It was impossible that he, who was bound by the duties of his office to pay every possible attention to the peace of the city, could have made use of language which was so likely to inflame the passions, and mislead the understandings of the multitude, and to create riots and disturbance among them. In this libel on the lord mayor, as he must suppose it to be, his lordship was stated to have said, that the proposed regulations would raise the price of the quartern loaf to 16 or 18 pence. How was it possible that it could have this effect? The lord mayor, he presumed, must know that about 104 quartern loaves ought to be made out of a quarter of wheat; and suppose the quarter of wheat to be at SO shillings, how Could the quartern loaf be raised in price to 16 or 18 pence? The quartern loaf, even supposing the quarter of wheat to be 80 skillings, ought not by any fair means to be more than one shilling. Whether the quarter would or would not make 104 loaves, it was at least clear that it would make 80 loaves; and he again asked, could the price of the quartern loaf be 16 or 18 pence? It was true, the quartern loaf was dearer in London than in other places; for what reason was best known to the lord mayor and others in the metropolis. At Canterbury the quartern loaf was at 10d., in London it was 112d.; but he begged not to be understood as saying that the speech attributed to the lord mayor of London was actually made by him; he only wished to state his decided condemnation of such observations as were calculated to mislead that part of the people who were least capable of forming a correct judgment on the subject, and who were governed on such occasions merely by their passions and feelings. Earl Stanhope said, that the noble marquis who presented the petition having done so from the opposition side of the House, whereas he usually sat on the ministerial side, he was induced therefore to hope that the noble marquis was hardly serious in his support of the object of the petitioners. The noble earl who had just sat down had said, that he could not believe that the observations attributed in the daily prints to the chief magistrate of London, were really the observations of the lord mayor. Now, he should have imagined that if the noble earl had any doubt upon that subject, the most regular way would have been to have sent the lord mayor a copy of the newspaper where the speech was given, and to have asked his lordship whether these were his observations. The noble earl said, he was not at the meeting where the lord mayor was stated to have made use of the observations in question, and therefore he could not of his own knowledge say whether they had been made by his lordship or not: but this at least he would undertake to say, that they were the observations of a sensible man. It was becoming and necessary to speak strongly against a measure, the effect of which, whatever might be the intention, must be, to a certain extent, to starve the poor, whom the noble ear! had called the rabble; but it ought to be considered, that these people were in a great measure composed of the labouring class. They must all be aware of the denunciations of the prophet Isaiah, and others, against those who "grind the faces of the poor;" and the proposed measure, taken along with the stupid regulations now in progress on the subject of taxation, would, in his opinion, have that effect. The burthen of the intended taxes would fall heavily on the poorer classes, instead of their having that relief afforded them which he had proposed on a former occasion. Those who kept carters, porters, shopmen, &c. were to pay 31. for such servants, without whom their business could not be carried on. Was this a wise regulation, or was it not the most stupid and delusive that ever was heard of? The classes ought to be relieved in the mode which he had suggested in a resolution now on their lordships journals, and not by such regulations as those which were now in progress in the other House of Parliament. The Earl of Lauderdale said, that when the noble earl who spoke last talked of starving the people, and grinding the faces of the poor, it was impossible for him to suffer such expressions to go forth to the public, without stating his most decided conviction, that such views of the subject were most unfounded, erroneous, and dangerous. The noble earl himself surely could not believe that there was a single individual in this or in the other House of Parliament who wished to grind the faces of the poor. For his own part, he was a most decided and strenuous supporter of the regulations with respect to grain now in progress in the other House of Parliament but he was so, not merely with a view to the interests of the land-owner, but because he was convinced that the plan would be most beneficial to the labouring agricultural classes, the most valuable part of the superior orders of the community, and likewise to the people of the country at large. He was convinced, that all would feel the advantages of this regulation in the steady and moderate price of corn. Having said thus much, he did not feel himself called upon to go more at length into the subject at present. It would soon come before their lordships in a regular and formal shape, and then would be the proper time fully to explain his ideas on this most important question: but he repeated that it was not the object of any one to raise the price of grain on the poor; and whenever such charges were made, they could only have the effect of inflaming the passions of the people, misleading their judgments, and producing riot and disturbance. The Earl of Liverpool said, that his opinion coincided so much with that of the noble earl who had just spoken, that he should not have thought it necessary to say a word at this time, had he not been desirous of making a single observation as to the assertions respecting the intended new regulations on the subject of taxation. It was not his intention to enter at large upon that subject at present. The time would soon come when their lordships would have an opportunity of examining those regulations, and of delivering their sentiments respecting them in detail. In the mean time, he should only say, that it was impossible for any government, -not speaking particularly of those with whom he was more immediately connected,—but for any government not to be anxious to relieve the people from their burthens, as far as circumstances would permit. The regulations in question had been cautiously framed, so as to press as lightly as possible on the poorer (VOL. XXIX.) agricultural classes, and on the poor in general, as he should be prepared to shew when the proper period arrived. The effect of the regulations would be to relieve the people to the extent of nine millions: how, therefore, could any man seriously contend that there was an inclination not to relieve the people as much as the circumstances would allow? It was impossible, he repeated, for any government to have for its object to extend those burthens further than was absolutely necessary. Earl Stanhope declared, he had never said that it was the object of any man in parliament to grind the faces of the poor. He had only said that such would be the effect of the proposed regulations on the subject of grain. As to the new tax regulations, he still contended that the effect of them would be to bear heavily on the poorer agricultural classes. For example, the tax with respect to carters-were there no carts employed in agricultural labour? These taxes must, as he contended, bear heavily on the poorer classes. This would be the effect likewise of the proposed regulations with respect to grain, though he never had said that such was the object and intention of those who supported the regulations in question. The Earl of Darnley said, that in speaking of the rabble of Maidstone, he had merely used it as an expression to denote those who were incapable of forming a correct judgment on the subject of these corn regulations; while it was of all others a subject on which their feelings and passions were most alive, and with respect to which they were most liable to be misled. As to the observations respecting the chief magistrate of London, he thought he had sufficiently guarded himself by saying, that he did not mean to state that the sentiments ascribed to that chief magistrate had really been uttered by him. But this, however, he would say, that such remarks, by whomsoever made, must have the effect of misleading those who were least capable of coming to a sound conclusion on the subject in question; and that if riots and disturbances took place, the consequence must, in some measure, be attributed to that sort of inflammatory language. He, himself, had been unable even to obtain a hearing at the Maidstone meeting; and this was an instance of how little the uninformed part of the community were disposed to exercise their judg ments on the subject. (4 F) Earl Stanhope said, he had not attended the Maidstone meeting, nor had he desired any of his tenants to attend: but if he had been there, he would have begged and prayed the meeting, on his knees, to hear the noble earl, because he was satisfied that nothing would have been said by that noble earl which could have convinced them. The Petition was then ordered to lie on the table. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Thursday, March 2. such name was mentioned, as that to which the hon. member had drawn his attention. The hon. member also desired to know whether any rule existed, in the office of the Home department, for preventing Portuguese subjects (for he seemed to confine himself to them) from remaining in this country, unless they had a passport signed by the Portuguese minister at this court. He now could inform the hon. gentleman, that no such rule ever did exist. Mr. Whitbread said, he had not made the statement alluded to, as one that he could vouch for from his own knowledge. ALIENS.] Mr. Addington rose to call He then held in his hand, the representathe attention of the House, for one mo. tion which induced him to notice the subment, to a statement, which though it did ject; and, at the time he referred to it, he not affect himself, materially affected the expressed his hope, that the right hon. credit of the office to which he belonged. gentleman would be able to give it a full It would be recollected, that the hon. contradiction. In adverting to it he might member for Bedford had, on the pre- have made a mistake in the date, and he ceding evening, adverted to a case, was sorry the right hon. gentleman had which, he said, came within his own not examined the books a little farther back knowledge.-["No," said Mr. Whit- than he had deemed it necessary to go. bread.] If, then, it did not come within He bad not made any charge against the his own knowledge, he ought to have relation of the right hon. gentleman; but taken care to inform himself fully on the he had reprobated the way in which the subject, before he had alluded to it. The Alien Act had been executed, and had circumstance on which he touched, related specifically stated, that the noble lord was to the conduct of the Secretary of State not in the office during the whole time for the Home department, and the hon. that the Act had been in force. The rule, gentleman had put a pointed question to he understood, formerly was, that no Por him, with reference to it. The case ad- tuguese subject should be allowed to reverted to by the hon. gentleman was that main in Great Britain, without a licence of M. Correa, a Portuguese, who was said from the Portuguese ambassador; and the to have been sent out of this country, and, circumstances of the case, as represented as he had expressed it,' shipped to the to him, were these:-The Chevalier AnBrazils,'-["No," from Mr. Whitbread,] selmo Correa, formerly chargé d'affaires because the Portuguse ambassador here, to the court of Stockholm, came to this. the Chevalier de Souza, would not sign his country, but having made himself oblicence. He confessed, at the moment noxious to the Chevalier de Souza, the the statement was made, his opinion was latter refused to sign a licence for him, that no such thing had ever occurred. and he was sent out of this country, with He then observed, that he had never heard a messenger from Mr. Ryder's office, in of such a transaction, and that the name the most summary way. He (Mr. Whitof the individual was quite new to him; bread) did not assert that he was shipped but that it might have occurred during a from hence to the Brazils. From this temporary absence from his office. This country he was sent to Lisbon, and, of his day, however, he made inquiries on the own accord, he afterwards proceeded to subject: he had asked his noble relation the Brazils. He there laid his case at the (viscount Sidmouth) whether he recol- foot of the throne, and received a pension, lected any thing of the affair, and was and various honorary rewards. This stateanswered, that no such case had ever oc- ment was not now disproved, and he hoped curred while he was in the department, the right hon. gentleman would push his and that he knew nothing about it. He inquiries a little further, and state whether then searched the books of the depart- he could find any trace of it. ment, from the period his noble relation became connected with it, and the result was, that no such case was to be found, no Mr. Addington said, he understood the circumstance to have been noticed, as if it had happened while the present Secretary of State for the Home department was in office. If it were otherwise, why should the question be put to him? How could he be expected to answer a question, of which he could not be supposed to know any thing? Under these circumstances, he thought, in common, he believed, with every gentleman in the House, that the charge which was made referred to the conduct of his noble relation. Mr. Whitbread said, he hoped, as the right hon. gentleman was now set right on the subject, he would make a more extended inquiry. With respect to the ignorance of the right hon. gentleman on the case alluded to, he (Mr. Whitbread) conceived that he paid him a compliment in asking for an explanation of what had occurred before he belonged to the Home department; because he supposed that he was perfectly acquainted with the antecedent proceedings of his office, and could at once call to his mind the circumstance he had stated. PETITIONS AGAINST THE CORN BILL.] Sir James Shaw presented a Petition from the ward of Cripplegate, praying that no alteration should be made in the existing laws respecting corn, until a sufficient time had elapsed to enable the House to judge of the effect which peace would have on the commercial, trading, and agricultural interests of the country. The hon. baronet said, he was instructed to state, that the inhabitants of this ward were duly summoned to consider this question. The meeting took place in the parish-church, and was attended by a greater number of inhabitants than was ever known to have been assembled there on any occasion in the memory of man. The meeting was conducted in the most regular manner, and the unanimous sense of the people was expressed against any interference with the Corn Laws. No previous attempt was made to procure the signature of names; but the moment the petition was left for signatures, persons from every part of the ward affixed their names to it. There was no distinction of party, of religion, or of profession, attended to. All the inhabitants of the ward united in praying the House to abstain from making the proposed alterations. The petition was ordered to lie on the table. Mr. Protheroe stated, that he held in his hand a Petition signed by 40,000 inhabi tants of the city of Bristol, praying that no alteration should take place in the Corn Laws, on account of its ruinous tendency to the rest of the community. Notwithstanding the number of names affixed to this petition, many had been left behind, owing to the eagerness of the city to have it laid before Parliament. They thought they had no time to lose in expressing their sentiments to the House. He had assured them, that the legislature would not allow a measure of this importance to pass without the necessary delays for deep investigation. But he was sorry to say, he had been disappointed in his expectations, and the assurances which he had given had proved unfounded. The gentlemen who had gained so much credit for the moderation with which the measure had been introduced, had departed from their course, and hurried the discussion in a manner and with a tone of which he did not approve. Respecting what was said of discouraging popular clamour, he thought, except in extreme cases, language of this sort rather unbecoming a representative of the people. He knew there were several gentlemen in that House, who were friendly to the expression of public feeling on questions of peace and war, and a variety of others, equally important; and yet those very persons would not permit the people to deliver their sentiments on this subject, which mainly affected them, without stigmatizing the expression of their opinion as mere clamour. He liked to hear the opinions and sentiments of the people on all subjects. He was pleased to see them vent their clamours in petitions to that House-either that the cause of their discontent might be removed, or that the impropriety of their complaints might be pointed out. On the subject of the price of bread, above all others, their sentiments, he conceived, ought to be attended to. No man respresenting a great city, as he did, could be ignorant of the general wants and necessities of the poor-and those wants and necessities must be evidently increased by any measure which tended to enhance the price of bread. The feelings of the people were, therefore, perfectly natural, and he could say with great confidence, that their sentiments were now precisely the same as those they manifested last year. The people of Bristol, in the petition he then had the honour to present, shewed that their ideas on the subject remained unchanged; and, he was sure, if time were allowed by the House, the voice of the entire population of the country would corroborate his assertion. Mr. Davis stated, that he had received a letter from the mayor of Bristol, relative to the petition then before the House. The mayor informed him, that it was not only most numerously but most respectably signed, and that it spoke the undivided sense of the people of that city. He was sure that those who brought forward, and those who supported the measure, had but one object in view, the benefit of the community in general. He believed the interest of no particular party was attempted to be served by this measure, but that the representatives of the country consulted the interests of their constituents as much as their own. For his own part, he was inclined to favour the measure; and, in voting against it, as he had hitherto done, he spoke rather the sentiments of his constituents than his own; and this, perhaps, was the only question on which he would consent to sacrifice his opinion to the sentiments of others. The petition was laid on the table. the officer alluded to, tolerated a dangerous abuse of authority, when he was called to order by The Speaker, who said, that the hon. member's proper course would be, to give notice of a motion on the subject, as the House could not be converted into a place for mere general conversation. Mr. Wallace stated that the subject to which the hon. gentleman referred, had been very seriously examined. Every means had been adopted to prevent the natives from suffering any oppression; and he was sure the result of the steps which had been taken, would be found perfectly satisfactory. WINDOW TAX.] Lord Milton stated, that he was desired by a considerable number of his constituents, to ask of the Chancellor of the Exchequer a question, relative to the proposed extent of the new Window Duty. This question embraced two points. One of them referred to the manufacturing counties—those, he meant, where cotton factories were erected, and which required a greater number of windows than was necessary for the mere purpose of lighting the building. The other related to those large buildings, called cloth-halls, which were so numerous in the West Riding of York ments were not formerly chargeable, and his lordship wished to know, whether the right hon. gentleman meant now to extend the new duty to them and to the factories. EAST INDIES.] Mr. Whitshed Keene wished to call the attention of the House to certain proceedings, of the highest importance, that had recently taken place in India. It appeared, from a late Cal-shire. The windows of these establishcutta Gazette, that an officer of rank was tried by a court-martial, for having extorted money from the natives, for his own purposes; and, in his defence, he admitted the fact, but stated that it was a customary proceeding. The court. martial, however, in opposition to the evidence, and to the petition of the accuser, acquitted him. The circumstance afterwards came under the cognizance of the court of directors; who expressed their unequivocal displeasure at his conduct, and observed, that, but for certain circumstances, they would have caused his name to be erased from the list of the Indian army. They also declared, that if any case of a similar kind occurred in future, it would be so dealt with, and if the court-martial did not inflict an adequate punishment, they would cause the delinquent to be suspended, and sent to Europe, by the first opportunity. The hon. member then pointed out the neces-ject, before any decision took place. sity which existed for giving due protection to the natives of India, and was proceeding to animadvert, with severity, on the conduct of those who, in the person of The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, that with respect to the charge on the windows of factories, it was his intention, when the consideration of Resolutions was resumed, to propose a modification of the tax, by which the charge on those buildings would be diminished. As to the buildings which were made use of as clothmarkets, and which were termed clothhalls, he had never heretofore taken them into his consideration. It was a subject worthy of inquiry; but he did not know on what principle they could be excluded from the operation of the tax.. As, however, they came under circumstances of a more peculiar nature than other buildings, it would be proper to look into the sub Lord Lascelles said, that the buildings termed cloth-halls, which were to be met with in Leeds, Halifax, and Huddersfield, were of very great extent. The manus |