Commons Sitting of 12 March 1804

MINUTES.—
Sir W. Pultency brought up the Scotch Bank. Bill, which was read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time on a day afterwards to be fixed.—On the motion of Sir T. Henderson, the Template Bar Improvement Bill was read a second time, and referred to a select Committee—Roydell's Lottery Bill was reed a third time and ordered to the Lords.—Mr. Hurst presented a petition from John Wilson, confined in Newgate for prevarication before the Aylesbury Election Committee, staling several circumstances in mitigation of his offence, and praying for those reasons that the House would have the goodness to order his discharge. The petition having been received, the said John Wilson, the petitioner, was ordered to appear at the bar of the House on Wednesday next, in order to his being discharged.—A message was brought from the Lords, announcing their concurrence to several private bills.—On the motion of Mr. Vansittart, the Bill for permitting the Importation of Raw Hides, &c. into Ireland was read a third time and passed.—A petition was presented from the trustees of the British Museum, praying for further

839
aid. Ordered to lie on the table. It was moved, That there be laid before the House the different sums already granted to the Museum, which was accordingly ordered.—The Chancellor of the Exchequer moved the order of the day for a Committee of the whole House on the supply. Moved, That the order stand over to Wednesday next. Agreed to.—The Chancellor of the Exchequer presented to the House, by his Majesty's command, "An Account shewing the charge of the civil list, as estimated by the account laid before Parliament the 6th of July, 1786, and the charge of the same in the year ending the 5th of January, 1804, with the increase and decrease there of, as near as the same can be ascertained;" and also, "An Account of the payments which had been made on the 5th of January, 1804, in discharge of the debt of the civil list on the 5th of January, 1802, shewing the excess or diminution of the charges paid compared with estimates of the debt laid before Parliament;" and also, "An Account of the debt of his Majesty's civil list, on the 5th of January, 1804, as near as the same can be ascertained." Ordered that the said accounts be referred to the Committee appointed to consider of the charge upon his Majesty's civil list revenue.

EXCHEQUER BILLS.—
The Chancellor of the Exchequermoved the order of the day for the Committee of Ways and Means. The Speaker having left the chair, the Chancellor of the Exchequer rose, he said, in pursuance of a notice which he had formerly given, to move the House for a vote of two millions on Exchequer Bills, for the farther service of the year. He moved for this loan, the right hon. gent, said, that time might be given to arrange the taxes to be raised within the year, and to give them as great a latitude as possible.—The House having resumed, the report was ordered to be received to-morrow.

IRISH DUTIES BILL.
Mr. Corrymoved, in pursuance of the order of the day, the Committee of the whole Home on the Irish Duty Bill. On the question being put from the chair,—Mr Corry said, that on a former evening an objection had been offered on the measure proposed by this bill, founded on an idea that it went to affect the hereditary revenue of the Crown, and that, therefore, no measure of the kind could be legally entered info, without obtaining his Majesty's previous consent. If he had mistaken the grounds of the objection he should be glad to be set right; and
840
as he saw the right hen. gent. (Mr. Foster) in his place, begged to to be informed if he had not stated the objection fairly.
Mr. Fosteradmitted that such certainly were the grounds of his objection, and. to which he was still inclined to adhere.
Mr. Corryadmitted, that the interests of the Crown were affected by the present measure, but wished the House to consider in what manner they were affected; if it was not in the same manner as by similar measures adopted in this country. The hereditary revenue of the Crown took its origin in Ireland about the same period as in this country, and is, perhaps, more extensive there than here; he meant, he said, in its operation. The right hon. gent. here mentioned several duties which were rot known in this country. For the defence of the country there was also an excise inland and import, and for defending the seas, as it was called, customs had been granted. But it was not till the reign of Charles the II. that any hereditary or private revenue had been granted to the Crown. In the 14th and 15th of Charles II. duties had been granted for this purpose on teas and tobacco. A duty of 2½d per lb. on tobacco was granted to Charles II. Additional duties had been granted also to William III. on the same article, but with a clause, at the same time, declaring 2½d per pound, as formerly, the hereditary duty, and were continued so till the Consolidation Act, in the 31st of the present King, when 2½und was again declared to be the hereditary duty, and those additional duties were supposed to expire on the demise of the King. In the 31st of the King also a civil list was granted to his Majesty, on the same principles as in this country; and this civil list was considered as an equivalent for the hereditary duties belonging to the Crown, and as accepted instead of them. That they might have the hereditary revenue in their own power, they entered into a contract with the Crown. Whatever the amount of the hereditary revenues might be, they thus reserved the power of increasing or diminishing, or otherwise modifying them. After the civil list had been thus established, other additional duties were granted sessionally, some, times for 5 years running. These were at first granted triennially, when Parliament was triennial; and afterwards annually; but uniformly the same clause in regard to the 2½d per pound on tobacco, as the hereditary duty, was inserted, for which no consent of the Crown was ever asked or

841
given. For this reason the right hon. gent. conceived, that the precedents of the Parliament of Ireland would by no means justify any objection of that kind that was brought forward. In the 14th and 15th of Charles II. a duty of 6 per cent, had been laid on tea. That duty continued to be Levied ad valorem according to the old book of rates, till Geo. II. when a new bock of rates was made out, and a new duty on tea, higher in proportion to its raised value in the new book of rates. This continued till the 7th of the King, when, instead of a duty ad valorem. it was enacted that a duty of 4d. par pound on the black, and 6d. per pound on the green should be levied. The duty on the whole might amount to 10,000l. but it was enacted that 7,300 l. should be the hereditary portion dne to the Crown. This was done without the Crown having signified any consent to Parliament. Tobacco and tea were thus the only two articles from which the hereditary revenue was supposed to arise; and in order that the hereditary part of the revenue might not be affected, a permanent rate had been fixed, so that any deficiency might be made up to the Crown, and that the surplus, when any, might be applied to the public service. These annual duties, the right hon. gent. further insisted, had even been continued three different times since the union, without any intimation from the crown. The right hon. gent. (Mr. Foster) who had managed those revenues, which were now entrusted to him, would feel, he flattered himself, the justice of what he had said. His recollection and greater experience would enable him even to corroborate more strongly his statement. But not only were the precedents of the Parliament of Ireland in favour of his mode of procedure, but those of the British Parliament also, in relation to the same subject. A case perfectly the same had occured in the 37th of the King, in regard to the consolidated fund, when it was enacted that a certain fixed sum should belong to the Crow, and that the surplus should go to the public service. The consent of the Crown on this occasion was not asked, nor was such a previous step deemed necessary to enable Parliament to proceed.—Should any gent, however, be disposed to attribute this circumstance to want of attention in the House, and still insist that it was a step previously necessary to obtain his Majesty's consent, he would by no means resist the proposition, nor could he have any objection to consult the Crown an a subject of this nature.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerwas of opinion, that his right hon. friend was sufficiently justified by the precedents he had adduced in his behalf. He had at any rate given the House an opportunity to investigate the proper mode of proceeding. For his own part, he was perfectly satisfied, at the same time, that should the Crown withhold its consent from such a measure, no precedents whatever could justify the House in their farther proceeding where the interests of the Crown were in any degree affected. Put this consent might be given or with held at any stage of the bill. It could not be learned from the title of the bill that the interests of the Crown are concerned. It was from the statement of the right hon. gent. only, that he had learned that the Crown was concerned in the present bill; and having learned this, he had applied to his Majesty, and had authority to say, that his Majesty gave his consent in the most ample manner.
Mr. Fosterstated, that the duties on tea and tobacco were far from being prominent objsct3 in his mind when he had started the objection. It was the interest of the Crown in general he had considered, and those not only as they related to the life of his present Majesty, but as they affected his successor.
Mr. Rosesaid, that the House might, perhaps, not be aware of what was the proper mode of procedure on such an occasion, but it was certainly much obliged to the right hon. gent. for his objections on a former evening, as it had led to an application to his Majesty, the result of which was so agreeable to the House. The question certainly was not in regard to the amount to which the Crown might be interested, but in regard to the principle. It was quite indifferent whether it was 500 or 5,000, but whether the measure was constitutional. It was unconstitutional, be thought, that any alteration should take place in the fixed revenues without a message from the Crown. Whatever may have been the practice of the Irish Parliament, such a proceeding was certainly contrary to the practice of the British Parliament. The House may perhaps be satisfied with this method of getting information of the consent of the Crown, but he wished it to be understood, that, in his opinion, it was by no means the usual way, and that nothing less than a message was constitutional.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerwas willing to appeal to the House, if a message was at ail necessary on such an occasion. Many instances such as this had occurred on grants, and on Committees of Supply, where

843
the Crown was interested, and where the consent was not deemed previously necessary. But so far as the interest of the Crown was concerned, he again repeated, that the consent in question was fully given.
Mr. Roseagain begged leave to say, that in regard to the consolidation of the duties in 1797, the interests of the Crown were perfectly safe, and that the cases were cot quite analogous.
Mr. G. Ponsonbywas surprised that on this bill no communication from the Crown should be thought necessary. When a bill of nearly the same nature passed in Ireland in the year 1793, a message had been received from the Lord Lieut., and that message ordered to be ingrossed in the books previous to any proceedings of Parliament.
Mr. Ormsbybegged to remind the House, that in the 34th of the King, an act passed of nearly the same nature, without any message whatever from the Crown.
Mr. Vansittartstated, that his principal motive in rising was only to say in regard to the heriditary interest of the Crown, that the act of the 30th of George II. was passed without any notice from the Crown.
Mr. Fosterwas of opinion that, even if his present Majesty should be satisfied, it was necessary also that he should intimate his approbation and consent as far as respected his successor, or the interests of the Crown at large.
The Chancellor of tie Exchequerbegged leave explicitly to state, that his Majesty had given the fullest consent, not only in regard to himself, but as it respected also the general interests of the Crown: but at the same time he wished to state, that his Majesty did not mean that the House should be fettered in the smallest degree in their discussions.—The question was agreed to,—The House having resolved into the Committee,
Mr. Fosterrose, and objected to the mode of proceeding which the framers of this measure recommended, as it went to render taxes permanent which had been heretofore but annually voted. This was in his mind taking the Irish nation by surprize, from which he was confident that a number of petitions would be immediately presented, if the merchants were aware of the nature of the bill and the additional taxes which it proposed to impose, particularly on linen, salt, hops. &c. He thought the measure of perpetuating the taxes objectionable, as involving an invasion of the rights of ids Majesty's successor, also in point of time, as the period was so rapidly approaching when, from the relative state of the debts of the two countries a total revision of the taxes would
844
become necessary. The right hon. gent, concluded with moving an amendment, "that the period for the continuance of those taxes should be fixed for the 25th of March, 1805."
Mr. Corryobserved, that to all which the right hon. gent, advanced, he had already made, in his judgment, quite a sufficient reply; and, therefore, as often as such arguments were repeated, he must be under the necessity of troubling the House with a repetition of his former answer, thus imitating; the conduct of a right hon. gent. who, when; any motion or speech was made against the American war, always said, that he would read his American speech, which contained arguments to his mind of the policy of that war, arguments which appeared to him to require no addition. The right hon. gent, proceeded to state "the superior advantages which the linen manufacturers had over the manufacturers of this country, every article belonging to that manufacture, except flax, being subject to a tax in this country, while ail the same articles, namely, pot ash, barilla, train oil, &c. were exempt from taxation in Ireland. He complained of the species of observation used by the mover of the amendment, as calculated to mislead and inflame the public mind with respect to the amount of taxes which were necessary in order to protect the very existence of the country.
Mr. Burroughsagreed with the right hon. gent, who moved the amendment, as to the propriety of allowing time to the Irish merchants, and other persons interested, to inquire into and communicate their opinions upon the different taxes. This was the more necessary as the schedule of those taxes was only printed and delivered on Tuesday last, since when even the members of that House had scarce had time to examine it. With the general principle laid down by the right hon. gent, on the Treasury Bench, as to the justice of equal taxation upon the same manufactures of both countries, he did not mean to dispute; but as it appeared to him the question to consider was, how far the peculiar state of the manufacture in each country would justify the House in acting upon such principle; and here it was material to be recollected that linen was the staple trade of Ireland.
Mr. Corrysaid, that the schedule of the taxes laid before Parliament last session was very generally circulated among the merchants in Ireland; but he was ready to admit that there was some difference between that and the schedule now before the Committee.
Lord Castlereaghrecommended, that time should be taken to examine and compare the schedule now before the Committee with that of last year, which his right hon. friend had stated to have been circulated among the persons interested in the taxes referred to; and if any substantial difference should be found to exist he was sure that his hon. friend would be as willing as any member of the House, to press the adoption of the bill until the Irish merchants should have full opportunity to canvass the merits, and to state their opinions upon every part of the schedule; at the same time he begged to call to the recollection of gentlemen, that 3 years had now nearly elapsed since it was known to be in contemplation to render those taxes perpetual, that is to say, to assimilate the concerns of the Irish revenue to the practice which prevailed in this country, and to the soundness of the principle, he conceived, that no objection could be offered, for cither the proposed annual review of those taxes must be a mere parade, or the public creditor must be, inn great measure, insecure. The noble lord then moved, that the chairman should be directed to report progress, and ask leave to sit again.
Mr. G. Ponsonbyexpressed his hope that that postponement was a prelude to the abandonment altogether of this obnoxious plan of taxation.
Mr. Foxsaid, that if it was intended to render those taxes perpetual, nothwithstanding all that had been urged to the contrary, the House might as well come to a vote on the subject this night; but if the purposed delay was merely a temporary retreat, from a consideration that it would be more decorous to give apparent time for the consideration of the schedule, and that the time of the House was meant to be again occupied with the same discussion, he could not forbear to condemn such an expedient.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerobserved, that no gent, was in titled to assume from any thing that had fallen from his noble friend, that it was at all intended to abandon the proposed assimilation of the mode of taxation in Ireland, with that which existed in this country. The only delay proposed in the progress of the measure was until tomorrow, and the only motive of that delay was to give an opportunity to his right hon. friend (Mr. Corry), to compare the two schedules for the purpose described by his noble friend.
Mr. John Lasoucbpressed strongly for further time, from a sense of duty to a great proportion of his constituents, the merchants of Dublin, who were particularly interested,
846
and whose opinion ought to be consulted before such a bill were suffered to pass the House. The motion was agreed to that the Chairman should report progress, and ask leave to sit again to-morrow. The House resumed, and the Chairman obtained leave accordingly.

VOLUNTEER CONSOLIDATION BILL.
Mr. Secretary Yorkemoved, that this bill be re-committed. The right hon. gent, proposed several verbal amendments, which were agreed to.—On the clause for allowing commanding officers of corps to discharge men for certain specified clauses, Mr. Secretary York proposed, that after these specifications these words should be added, "or for other good causes." The right hon. gent, observed, that this power of dismissal is only to belong to volunteer officers while in a disembodied state, but that when they shall be called into actual service, their commanders shall have only the same power which belongs to the colonels of regular regiments. He proposed that in case any volunteer shall be aggrieved by unjust dismissal, he shall have the power of appeal to his Majesty, with whom it shall rest, if sufficient grounds appear, to order a court of inquiry to be summoned on the case by the lord lieut. of the county in which the corps of the appellant may reside, and upon the result of such inquiry shall depend the confirmation or rejection of the dismissed volunteer; the lord lieut. to have the reinstating the man in his corps, if the judgment of the court of inquiry should be in favour, and also the power if he see fit to remove the officer, the latter subjected to his Majesty's approbation.
Mr. Foxrenewed his objection to this clause, as conferring too great a power upon the commanders of volunteer corps, by enabling them in effect to press men into the militia or army of reserve, for the most trifling cause. The idea of a vindictive court of inquiry, to be obtained by the means proposed, he considered as not at all a sufficient protection to the volunteers against the abuse of this extraordinary power. The dismissal ought, in his judgment, to be preceded rather than followed by a court of inquiry.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerargued that the power which the clause proposed to confer was great, but he contended that the court of inquiry, described by his right hon. friend, would be a sufficient check upon the exercise of that power.
Mr. Wardthought that the amendment of "other good causes," rendered the specifications which preceded than altogether superfluous.
Lord Castlereaghconsidered the mode of appeal proposed the best that offered. As to the principle of allowing commanding officers of volunteer corps, the power of discharging their men, the colonels of all the regiment in the army had a similar power, and it was essential to military discipline that such a power should be vested in them. If a volunteer commander should discharge a man without just reason, such man could have his redress.
Mr. Foxbegged to set the noble lord right. The colonels of regiments had not She power, of their own sole will, to discharge their men without any previous trial or court of inquiry; at least it was a power that was never known to be exercised. The clause before the Committee, therefore, proposed to confer a power on volunteer commanders far exceeding that possessed by any other description of officers. He argued that a volunteer commander should be obliged to state his reasons for discharging a man, or otherwise the mode of appeal proposed against the abuse of his power, would be quite impracticable. He ridiculed the idea of declining, from the pretext of humanity, to make it imperative on those commanders to state their reasons for dismissing any volunteer.
General Loftussaid, that in the course of his service he had never known an instance of a colonel of any regiment discharging a man from the service on his own authority solely, as the noble lord on the treasury bench asserted.
Mr. Pitt.suggested that an appeal to the lord lieut. for a court of inquiry upon any discharge might be allowed, provided the discharge were for any other cause than those specified iii the clause, namely, for badness of character, for instance, which was a good ground for discharging a man, although it would be proper, in such a case, to oblige the commanding officer publicly to state as a reason. The mode of appeal supplied in the amendment of the right hon. gent, he considered nugatory and objectionable in principle.
Mr. Greyproposed an amendment that after the words "that it shall be lawful for such commanding officer," these words be inserted, "to summon a Board of Inquiry, who shall determine on the propriety of dismissing such volunteer, &c."
Mr. Secretary Yorkeopposed it. He admitted that the power conferred by the clause would be great; but yet it was to be considered that this was a great power to supply the place of many other great powers. This power, however, he bagged to observe,
848
was not severe. It was exercised during the last war among the volunteers, although it now excited so much objection.
Mr. Greyadmitted that the power was not new, but yet it Was to be recollected that the consequence that would result from the exercise of that power was quite new, and might be productive of serious inconveniences to individuals.—After several other observations, the question was called for, and on a division there appeared,

For the original clause 116

Against it 69—Majority 47.

Mr. Pitt's clause for levying a fine not exceeding the sum of 5s. on those who may be guilty of non-attendance or misbehaviour during the time of their corps being under arms, or 1s. penalty if the party be exempt from the payment of the poors' rates, was after some discussion, rejected without a division.
Mr. Secretary Yorkesaid that he had not any other clause to propose; he meant only to move that the report be now received pro forma; and he should afterwards move, that the bill be taken into farther consideration on Friday.—The House then resumed, the report was then brought up, ordered to be printed, and taken into further consideration on Friday next.

NAVALX INQUIRY.—
Mr. Secretary Yorke,wished the right hon. gent. (Mr. Pitt) would have the goodness to state to the House what were the papers which he intended to move for, in order that the object of the motion might be clearly understood.
Mr. Pittdeclared that he had no objection to gratify the desire of the right hon. Secretary in that respect. He said he had indeed already communicated the substance of his motion to one of the Lords of the Admiralty, from whom he thought ministers might probably have heard it. It was his intention to move for an account of the number of that description of force which is best calculated to repel the attacks of the enemy at the present moment, that we have now in commission, he meant frigates, sloops, cutters, and all the smaller description of armed vessels which were capable of sailing in shallow water, and defending our coast. He meant also to move for an account of a similar nature, with respect to that species of force in the year 1S01, with a view of comparing them together. Pie should also move for an account of the naval force of the country of another description, namely, ships of the line, which we had in commission in the year 1793, and in the year 1801, and also the amount of those which had been launched since that

849
period, or which may have been laid down, or building in his Majesty's dock-yards. The number of seamen which were employed in his Majesty's navy at those different periods should also be an object of his motion. Upon the whole, as it was his wish to have every information which could lead to a fair comparison of the state of our naval defence at different times and under different circumstances, he could not positively say that it might not possibly branch out to oilier heads than those which he had already stated.