Obrazy na stronie
PDF
ePub

a representative of the united kingdom, and therefore he was bound to consider the permanent interests of the country, rather than the temporary distress of any particular portion of it. He considered that the present measure would, if adopted, be a very bad precedent for future times. He thought the principle of it had been completely disapproved of by a report of the Committee which sat in the year 1807. There had been abundant evidence before that Committee, to shew that there was no possibility of preventing great frauds upon the revenue, if sugar was used instead of malt in distilling. The lowest cal. culation of the loss of the revenue was 110,000l. per annum, which, in the present circumstances, was a serious object. It would be seen, by consulting the journals of the House, that during the time the distilleries were prevented from using grain or malt, many petitions were presented from different parts of the country, stating the great evils which had resulted from it in diminishing the price of corn below what was necessary to allow a fair profit to the farmer. As to the distilleries consum ing a great part of what would serve as the food of man, it might be observed, that independent of barley, which was not commonly used for that purpose, a great deal of damaged corn, which would otherwise be wasted, was used in the distilleries. He did not think it cer tain that this country would want any supply of corn from foreign countries; or, if it were wanting, he did not despair of procuring it. Canada, at least, was open to us at present. From all the views he had been able to take of the subject, he considered it as a measure which would be very prejudicial to the landed interest, and which was not absolutely necessary.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, that, in bringing forward the resolutions, his Noble Friend had only followed the spirit of the report of the Committee, which recommended, as a measure of precaution purely, the prohibition of distillation from grain for a certain period, leaving it, however, in the power of the Crown to stop the suspension, if, in the interval, a change of circumstan ees to make it adviseable should take place. Considering the intercourse, with respect to grain, which was really esta

blished between England and Ireland, no step could be taken with respect to a saving in the former part of the empire which should not equally apply to the latter. He trusted, that the landed interest, considering for what period it was to continue, would not oppose the measure or reject it because recommended by a party from which they would rather it did not come.

Mr Ponsonby and Sir J. Newport severally protested against the introduction of the proposed measure to Ireland.

Mr Foster was sorry that his duty to Ireland compelled him to resist the measure, if it was meant to extend it to that part of the empire.

Mr Windham said, the conduct of those who supported this unnatural measure, was like that of a hen hatching a brood of ducks. They first introduced it to relieve the West India planters from their overgrown stock, but an Hon. Gentleman had found out a prospect of a great scarcity in the crops, and brings it in, like Bayes's army, in disguise, pretending it to be only a temporary measure; but he would warn them against too much meddling with the agriculture of the country. To be sure, if it were necessary to lower the prices of grain, by hanging a few farmers, it might be done ; but there would be very few another year. He conclud ed by saying, these discussions would tend to raise the price of corn, by creating an alarm among the people.

Lord Castlereagh strenuously supported the motion. As an argument in favour of the measure, he asserted, that the price of grain was at present higher than in the scarcity of 1795, and as high as the scarcity in 1800, when the distilleries were prohibited. Add to this, we bad not at present any prospects of a foreign import, so that any measure that tended to husband our present sources of supplies, it was adviseable to adopt.

Mr John Smith supported the measure. The greatest possible calamity that could befal any country was a scarcity of corn. It must be considered, that for the last eighteen years a very large importation of that article had taken place, and we ought to provide for the consequences that might arise from our being deprived of all foreign sources. He really believed, too, that the West India planters were a most inju

red

red set of people, and that some measure was necessary for their relief.

Mr Malcolm Laing opposed the motion. Lord Binning briefly, in reply, observed, that the measure he had the honour of submitting to the consideration of that House, was one which it would have been proper to have adopted, even if the West Indies had never existed. He certainly was far from thinking this measure unnecessary for Irelnad. He concluded with observing, that he felt his case was completely made out, and that his opinion was not in the least altered by any thing that had been said upon the other side of the House. The House divided

[blocks in formation]

to the protection of Parliament. Their distress, owing to circumstances over which they had no controul, was so great, that several estates, particularly in Jamaica, had been abandoned. The persons concerned in the West India trade contributed largely to the stock of national wealth. The imports from the colonies amounted, one year with another, to between eight and nine mil lions sterling; a fourth part of our na. viga ion was employed in it; they took off five or six millions in manufactures and provisions, and contributed five and a half millions of actual revenue to the Exchequer. If these resources were to fail, the landed interest would see what a weight would be thrown upon them. The relief solicited would be of no in

Majority in favour of the prohibition 14. convenience, or very small, if any, to

Monday, May 23. DISTILLERIES.

Lord Binning moved that the house do resolve itself into a commitee. The question being put,

Mr Coke said, that he felt it a duty which he owed to the country at large, to take every opportunity of opposing this measure. The Chancellor of the Exchequer supported the measure upon an idea that corn was high, than which there could be no opinion more errone. ous. Corn was so far from being high, that it barely afforded a remunerating price. Nothing, he observed, could be more dangerous than to hold out the apprehension of a scarcity, for which there was no foundation. The crop of last year, he would admit, was not abundant, but it was sufficient nevertheless. No importation took place, for none was necessary; and from all the information he had received, the country might look forward to as good a crop this year. If agriculture were properly encouraged, we should be able to grow corn enough for our subsistence, and save, in consequence, the immense sums which were sent out of thecountry every year. He referred to the evidence of Messrs Chambers, Scott, Kent, and others, to shew that the interference of Parliament, on occasions like the present, produced all the evils it was intended to prevent.

Mr Rose thought, that the situation of the West India Planters entitled them

the landed interest, and could not be given at a better time, or in a better manner to the West India interests.

Mr Barham began a very long and able speech, with observing, that the question before the House was to be considered in three points of view. It was first to be considered as a question purely domestic, without any reference whatever to the West India colonies.It was next to be viewed as a question purely colonial, which would lead to an enquiry whether the colonies were worthy of relief, and whether the mode proposed was sufficient; and lastly, it was to be considered in a more general point of view, as affecting the interests of all parts of the empire. As to the first, it was admitted that we imported to a great amount (about 800,000 quarters) from the Continent; and that we were now cut off from that source. Would not that person who should find a substitute for these Soo,ouo quarters, and that without in the smallest degree affecting the landed interest, be entitled to the thanks of the public. All the persons who had been examined before the Committee, agreed, that the crop of barley for the last year was deficient one-third, or, according to some, one-fourth. He would agree that the landed interest should have a remunerating price, but where barley farms were to be let, he invari ably found that the landlord required double the rent which he last received. This, he supposed, was what was called a remunerating price. This was the

land.

landlord's idea of remuneration; he treme cases, in which it would be ne

would next shew what was the farmer's.
First, as it was just, he should be expect
ed to be able to make enough to pay his
rent. Next, he expected such prices as
should secure him against short crops.
In addition to this, he calculated upon
gaining as much as should enable him
to live comfortably and genteelly, in a
manner much superior to his ancestors,
or to the ancestors of his landlord, and
lastly, that he should be able to lay by
a provision for his family. This was
the farmer's idea of remuneration. Was
it not evident from all this, that the
price of land was too high? While the
landlords and farmers were rioting in
wealth, the West India proprietors were
in a state of the greatest distress. One
third of the plantations were actually
under foreclosure. The supplies of clo-
thing, provisions, &c. for the negroes
must be stopped, and the existence of
the colonies consequently endangered.
Was not this a crisis worthy the interfe-
rence of Parliament? The distresses of
the West India interest would admit of
no delay. They must be instantly re-
lieved, or some great convulsion would
ensue. They had the strongest claims
upon the gratitude of the country; they
contributed to its wealth-to its reve-
nue; they consumed its manufactures,
they supported its navigation, and what
did they ask in return?-Why, a market
for their produce. That was the com-
pact between the colonies and the mo-
ther country, and that was denied to
them. The annual importation of su-
gar was about 290,000 hogsheads, of
which 200,000 might be consumed in
Great Britain and Ireland. There was,
therefore, a surplus of 90,000 hogsheads,
for which, by the acts of government,
there was no vent. Instead of facili-
tating its exportation, they forced the
sugar of all the world into England.
This additional supply, in the course of
the last year, amounted to no less than
60,000 hogsheads.-Was it to he ex-
pected that the West India proprietors
could bear up against these accumula
ted disadvantages?

Mr R. Dundas concurred in the genetal principle laid down of not interfering with the corn laws, an interference which could not be productive of any beneficial consequence. But at the same time, he must allow that there were ex

cessary to resort to such interference. The question therefore was, whether the present circumstances of this country were such as to constitute a case of that description. The late crops of barley and oats had been short, but not the crop of wheat. Though there were no danger of scarcity at present, yet they ought to look to the future, and in the event of a short crop this season, they would not be justified in not leaving to the Executive Government the power of giving to the public consumption that amount of corn which was consumed in the distilleries. He did not agree either with those who supported this as a colonial measure, or with those who defended it on the score of existing or apprehended scarcity, but with a view to the great national interests which it was calculated to promote.

The Solicitor-General of Scotland said, when he cast his eye on the report, and recollected the facts by which it was substantiated, he could not help thinking it was a measure of prudence to stop the progress of distillation of corn for a time. He knew, from private and indisputable evidence, that grain was very scarce in Scotland; and when he considered this, and considered also that our annual importation of corn, amounting to 800,000 quarters, was now no more to be expected, he would give his support to any measure by which he thought our domestic produce was likely to be best husbanded.

Sir Henry Mildmay maintained that the present measure was calculated to injure the landed interest, and of course could not be beneficial to the country. It was calculated to unhinge and unsettle our agricultural connections.

Mr Wilberforce supported the measure, on the ground that the necessity of the present period warranted the interference of the Legislature.

Lord Binning replied very shortly, when The question being loudly called for, a division took place, and there appeared,

For the Speaker's leaving the chair
163
Against it 127

Majority,

-36

The House having resumed, the Chairman reported progress, and obtained leave to sit again.

HOUSE

HOUSE OF LORDS.

Friday, May 27.

CATHOLIC PETITION.

The order of the day having been read, Lord Grenville moved, that the petition of the Catholics of Ireland be read by the Clerk; which being done, his Lordship rose and said, he knew not what the feelings of others might be on the subject now before the House, but no words could possibly express the increased satisfaction with which he brought it forward. The discus. sion which it had undergone within these few days (in the other House)-the nature of that discussion-the great display of eloquence and argument which was shewn in opening the debate the moderation and patience with which it was debated-the important statements which it led to-the manner in which it was resisted-and even the decision which took place upon it, were all to him matter of the highest satisfaction. His Lordship, in a long and able speech, very similar to that delivered by Mr Grattan in the Commons (as detailed p. 699.) entered into a full view of the question; but as his arguments were almost the same with that gentleman's, we decline entering into it. He concluded by moving that the petition be referred to a Committee.

Lord Sidmouth said, the view he had taken of the subject was totally different. He would candidly and openly say, that his mind could not conceive any time or any circumstances in which such a discussion would be proper; but as to the bringing forward this petition at the present time, and under the present circumstances, he thought that the petitioners had acted imprudently, and that they had put themselves in the situation of having their public spirit called into question. It was universally adanitted, that the object of the petition was to enable a certain description of Catholics to enter into the first offices of the State, civil and military. His objection to this part of the petition was, that it was narrow and circumscribed in its object, and did not embrace the condition of the great body of the people. He thought the Legislature ought rather to look to the great body of the population, and not confine themselves to certain classes of the community, while they passed by the great body, whose attachment was the principal object. He thought a Protestant King should be surrounded principally by Protestant officers. On these principles he opposed the motion.

Lord Moira could not agree that any imputation could lie against the loyalty of the Catholics of Ireland. He thought they had a clear and undoubted right to a full participation in the blessings of the Constitution.

The Bishop of Norwich, in a maiden speech, ably supported the claims of the Catholics, to which he said several other Reverend Bishops were also friendly. He answered in their order the various objec tions which had been made to those claims. It had been said, that no one could claim the highest civil or military offices as a right, or complain of not receiving them. It ap peared to him, however, that it was most clearly an injury to any description of his Majesty's subjects, to check their honourable ambition, and prevent them receiving those rewards which might be due to their merit. With respect to the religious op nions and tenets of the Catholics. he thought it strange that other persons should pretend to know the doctrines which were held by the Catholics of the present day, better than the Catholics themselves. The Catholic body had in the most solemn manner, and by oath, denied those abominable doctrines which were imputed to them. It was in vain then to go back to the Councils of Lateran or of Trent, to look for the dogtrines of the Catholics of this day. The opinions which they did hold appeared to have no bad practical effect on the conduct of their lives; for the Legislature had seve ral times borne testimony of their loyalty as subjects; and it would not be said that, in private life, they were governed by the principle imputed to them, that no faith was to be kept with heretics. If they really did hold such a doctrine, they would not only be unfit for political power or for privileges, but they would be absolutely unfit for human society. In the present age, if we were to look over the whole world, we would hardly be able to find another country where men's opinions on matters of religion excluded them from civil or political rights. He should be sorry, indeed, that this country, which had been in many instances celebrated for its liberality of sentiment, should in the present instance be backward in following the example of almost all other nations.

The Archbishop of York begged their Lordships to believe, that though he differed with the Rev. Prelate who had just preceded him in the debate, he was not actuated by any, motives of bigotry, or that he was at all averse to the most liberal principles of toleration. Whilst the spirit of the Constitution allowed the Catholics the fullest and purest principles of toleration, it forbad that they should enjoy political

power.

The Bishop of Bangor said, that with every wish and desire to promote the principies of toleration to the utmost extent, ke must still object to the present motion.

Lord Hutchinson thought the motion of

his Noble Friend, to refer the matter of this petition to a Committee was highly just and proper, and as such it had his hearty concurrence.

Earl Stanhope said, much stress was laid on the difference of the tenets of Catholics and Protestants; and yet, strange to tell, the difference in the prayer-books of Oxford and Cambridge were 3600 and odd; so that the uniformity, so much talked of by the Reverend Prelates, was altogether absurd, which, in his opinion, ought to make the Bishops ashamed.

Lord Mulgrave was extremely sorry that a question of this kind was brought forward at a time when so many dangers were to be apprehended, from exciting a spirit of discontent among the Irish people. The arguments used by Noble Lords were conducted in a way not at all consistent with his views of correct reasoning. was said, that three millions of people were to be appeased and gratified by the conces sion required; as if the few places contemplated in the petition could be enjoyed by

them all.

It

Lord Buckinghamshire referred to a variety of publications to shew the spirit and character of the proceedings of the Catholics. He highly complimented the Noble Baron (Grenville) for the ability he had displayed in submitting the petition to the attention of the House; but added, that he should most decidedly oppose its being referred to a Committee.

The Duke of Norfolk supported the mo

tion.

Lord Erskine insisted that the petition ought to be considered in a Committee, and introduced into his speech many arguments, both from constitutional law and national policy, in support of his opinion.

Lord Hawkesbury was satisfied that nothing could be more impolitic than giving countenance to the present petition in the manner suggested. It was said that the country was exposed to a serious danger. He was ready to admit that it was not only in a state of serious danger, but that the danger was more imminent than at any former period of our history; but exactly in proportion to this peril ought to be our endeavours to preserve the Constitution in Church and State, as by law established, unimpaired.

Lord Holland spoke most ably in support of the petition. Lord Auckland spoke against it. Lord Suffolk argued in support of it; and Lord Grenville closed the debate by a short speech in reply

At near five o'clock the House divided on the question,

Contents, 74-Non Contents,-161Majority against the petition, 87,

[blocks in formation]
[ocr errors]

My Lords and Gentlemen,

"We have it in command from his Majesty to express to you the great satisfaction which he derives from being enabled, by putting an end to the present session of Parliament, to terminate the laborious attendance which the public business has required of you.

"The measure which you have adopted for the improvement of the military force of the country, promises to lay the foundation of a system of internal defence eminently useful, and peculiarly adapted to the exigencies of these times.

[ocr errors]

The sanction which you have given to those measures of defensive retaliation, to which the violent attacks of the enemy upon the commerce and resourses of this kingdom compelled his Majesty to resort, has been highly satisfactory to his Majesty.

His Majesty doubts nop that, in the result, the enemy will be convinced of the impolicy of persevering in a system which retorts upon himself, in so much greater proportion, those evils which he endeavours to inflict upon this country.

"Gentlemen of the House of Commons, "We are commanded by his Majesty to return his most hearty acknowledgements for the cheerfulness and liberality with which the necessary supplies for the current year have been provided.

"His Majesty directs us to assure you, that he participates in the satisfaction with which you must have contemplated the flourishing situation of the revenue and credit of the country, notwithstanding the continued pressure of the war: And he congratulates you upon having been enabled to provide for the exigencies of the public service with so small an addition to the public burdens.

"His Majesty commands us to thank you for having enabled him to make good his engagements with his allies; and to express to you the particular gratification which he has derived from the manner in which you have provided for the establishment of his sister, her Royal Highness the Duchess of Brunswick.

"My Lords and Gentlemen,

"His Majesty has great satisfaction in informing you, that, notwithstanding the formidable confederacy united against his ally the King of Sweden, that Sovereign perseveres, with unabated vigour and con stancy, to maintain the honour and inde

pen

« PoprzedniaDalej »