Commons Sitting of 30 May 1809

DUTIES ON SALT.—
General Gascoyneproceeded at some length to comment upon the inequality of the Duties imposed upon the importation of British and foreign salts into Ireland, which he contended went to discourage the efforts of the British manufacturer, by giving an undue advantage to the foreign market. He admitted the excellence of the Bay salt, but insisted that the British Salt would with proper encouragement very shortly arrive at a comparative degree of excellence. The British manufacturer had a right to every encouragement from Ireland, and he thought this would be best done by an equalization of the duties. He concluded by moving, That the house do resolve itself to-morrow into a Committee, for the purpose of considering the propriety of equalizing the Duties on British and Foreign Salts, imported into Ireland.
Mr. Fostersaid, that the British salt was made by the operation of fire, and what was called bay salt was made by the operation of the sun. The British salt was employed only prior to the packing of the beef, and the bay salt in the packing, so that there were no sort of competition in the Irish market between the two kinds of salt, as they were both employed for different purposes, or at least in different branches of the art of salting beef; the British salt would not be fit in packing the beef, because that kind of salt having undergone the process of boiling would be apt in warm countries to melt and slip from between the interstices of the beef, and so fail in the object of keeping the beef; in fact, what had made the Irish beef so famous in different quarters of the world for keeping so well in any climate, was the virtue of the bay salt with which it had been cured. The bay salt had been formerly 80 pounds to the bushel, while the British salt was but 56 pounds to the bushel, so much as to the inequality of the duties, since the measures of each bushel were rated at 56 pounds, and then the duties were on the one 1s. 5d. per bushel, and on the other 2s. the bushel. Any subject, however, that excited so considerable an interest in so respectable a part of the community as the town of Liverpool, he should be at all times ready to pay every attention to. But it was now just at the end of the session, and too late to get the necessary information from those in Ireland who were so interested in the question. He should
786
be willing at an early period in the next session to agree to its being brought before the house, but he did not think the present the proper opportunity for discussing it.
Mr. Hutchinsonagreed with the right hon. gent. who had just spoken, on the propriety of postponing to the beginning of next session a question of such importance.
Mr. Jacobentered into a chemical analysis of the nature of salt, and shewed, that the slower the process of drying the salt the slower the evaporation, the stronger the salt, and, that of course, if the process by fire was contrived to be as gradual as that by the sun, he did not see that the salt made by the fire, might not be as serviceable as the foreign bay salt.
Mr. Fostersaid, in explanation, that he was aware that an atttempt had been made in Lymington to make bay salt, and that it had failed. He said, that it was called bay salt, because made by being exposed to the sun in inlets or bays in Portugal.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that he trusted his hon. friend who brought forward this motion would now be satisfied that it had met with as favourable a reception from his right hon. friend near him as circumstances could possibly admit of. He hoped, therefore, that the motion would not at present be pressed any farther, with understanding that the question would meet with every attention from that house early in the next session.
Sir John Newportsaid, that, the evidence at present was but ex parte evidence, and they ought to wait until they heard the sentiments of those in Ireland interested in the subject, before they decided either upon lowering the duties on British salt or augmenting those upon foreign salt.
General Tarletonsaid, that England had been on all occasions bounteous and indulgent towards Ireland, in giving her every fair advantage in her trade; and that if it was made out that the British salt was as effectual in curing provisions as the foreign salt, he thought Ireland should not object to the equalization of the duties. The bay salt was the cargo under which brandy in general was smuggled: and perhaps it might be owing to this method of disguising smuggling that the gentlemen in Ireland were able to drink such good wines. He had often been indebted to them for a very hospitable portion of their excellent wines; and

787
he knew them to be very select in their wines in general, indeed they drank it much cheaper and better than gentlemen in this country were able to do; and that they did so, might be owing to the Irish market being pretty abundantly supplied in this way.
General Gascoyne then consented to withdraw his motion.

FRAUDS IN THE IRISH REVENUE—Mr. BEAUCHAMP HILL.
Sir John Newport, pursuant to uotice, rose to make his promised motion, relative to the appointment of a person (Mr. Beauchamp Hill), to a situation in the Excise in Ireland, in direct violation of a statute of regulation made for that country, and which was expressly intended to guard against the Frauds committed on the revenue of that country. If this should appear to be the case, and that the person alluded to had actually incurred his dismissal from the situation he had formerly held in the Excise, under the very letter and spirit of that act, instead of the promotion he had met with, what terms were too strong to reprobate such a conduct in those concerned in such a proceeding? How did the present case stand? By a statute made in 1806, it was enacted, that any officer in the customs or excise in Ireland, convicted of taking money in the execution of his office, should be incapable of holding any place under the government. By a former statute on the same subject, it was declared, that such persons, taking a bribe for neglecting their duty, should be incapable of holding any employment; but it was found they got out of this statute, by asserting they took money for performing their duty. To remedy which the former statute was enacted. It appealed from the report of the Commissioners appointed to inquire into abuses in the Customs and Excise in Ireland, that in Sept. 1806, they called before them a person of the name of Beauchamp Hill. Upon his examination, he stated, he had been a surveyor for four years, and that he was in the habit of taking a present of 20 guineas per month from every still contained in his walk. It also appeared, by his examination, that he justified this practice on the ground of precedent and notoriety, and also from necessity, owing to the inadequacy of his salary to his support. This might be admitted as some excuse in his favour, but still the law was precise in marking the offence, and pointing out the penalty; and though the offence might be overlooked on the plea of
788
necessity, yet he conceived that should have been the extent of the mercy shewn him. Notwithstanding, however, he was found, in the month of March, 1808, promoted to the office of Inspector-General of Excise; that is, to oversee that others did not abuse that trust of which he himself had been convicted; and this, jointly with another person, in the room of two, who were removed on charges of misconduct, which they had denied, and upon which they had demanded a trial. He concluded with moving: "That it appears to this house, that, by the 46th of his majesty, ch. 88, it was enacted, on the 12th July 1806, that any Officer of Customs or Excise in Ireland, who should, directly or indirectly, ask, take, or receive any sum or sums of money from any Distiller, for or on any account whatsoever, should be deemed and taken to be guilty of a misdemeanor, and should be rendered incapable of holding any office or employment civil or military:—that it appears to this house, from the fifth Report of the Commissioners of Enquiry in Ireland, appointed by parliament, that Mr. Beauchamp Hill declared before the said Commissioners of Enquiry, in his examination upon oath, in the month of Sept. 1806, that he the said Beauchamp Hill, being a surveyor of excise, was then, and had been for some time previous to his said examination, receiving 20 guineas per month from each distiller in the district committed to his charge, which was a part of the city of Dublin:—That it appears to this house, that, on the 8th day of March, 1808, the said Beauchamp Hill, having, by his own confession, under the provisions of the before-recited act, incurred the penalty of incapacitation attached to his misconduct, was promoted to the responsible office of inspector-general of that department of the revenue in which this breach of the law was committed, in direct violation of the enactment of the said statute."
Mr. Fostersaid, that certainly owing to the inadequacy of their salaries, an universal system of corruption had formerly existed among the revenue officers of Ireland, and that out of 32 excise officers examined by the commissioners of inquiry, 30 of them had confessed that they had received similar presents. They justified it from its being a constant practice, and known to be so by the board who employed them, and who yet took no measures to stop it. The practice of receiving these gratuities was so universal, and so

789
long in a manner connived at, that it would have been unfair to select one or two individuals for punishment, as almost every other officer in the revenue equally deserved to be dismissed. Mr. Hill, however, was ever ready to give every information in his power to the commissioners of inquiry, and was in every other respect a very good officer. He was therefore promoted for his merit, although he had in common with all the other excisemen done a thing illegal and improper. He therefore moved the previous question.
Mr. Hutchinsonthought nothing could bring the house into greater contempt than passing over so lightly such a flagrant case as had been now stated. Who could believe that it was utterly impossible to find a single honest man to fill any office in the Irish revenue? If the revenue officers were so corrupt from bottom to top, they should be all removed, and honest men sought for. If men in high situation had known of their frauds, and connived at them, they should also be dismissed. He had heard with infinite pleasure, that his majesty had been advised to annul a commission granted to a noble lord (lord Burghersh). He hoped he would also be advised to annul this appointment.
Mr. Crokersaid, that it was sufficient proof of the corruption of some of the revenue officers that they were alive; for if they had trusted to their salaries, they must have starved. The salaries were settled in the reign of Charles II. and were but 40 l. a year to the gnager, and 65 l. a year to the surveyor. It therefore became necessary for them to get by some other means those necessaries of meat, drink, and cloathing, for themselves and their families, which the pure abstract patriots of the present day might not think they had any right to think of. It was lord Annesley who had recommended this particular promotion, on no ground but that Mr. Hill was an active and good officer.
Mr. Peter Mooresaid, that without pretending to those abstract ideas of perfection, he would still say, that although he had before heard a system of bribery and corruption avowed, he never did suppose that such a scene of bribery and corruption as this could ever have been justified or excused. It appeared from the Report of the Commissioners of Inquiry, that the frauds committed on the Irish revenue by the licensed distillers amounted in a year to 856,000 l. and that the principal cause of these enormous frauds was, that those
790
officers were bribed to connive at them. These distillers now deprecated all manner of inquiry into those transactions.
Mr. R. S. Dundasdefended the promotion, on the ground of its being necessary to select for promotion persons in the service of the revenue; and that it would have been absolutely impossible to have dismissed them all.
Sir Samuel Romillysaid, that he had never in his life heard such doctrines gravely stated, as might be deduced from what had fallen from an hon. gent. (Mr. Croker). If a man's salary was not sufficient, was that an excuse for his taking bribes, and conniving at all manner of frauds against the government which employed him? As to the ridicule which the hon. gent. appeared to throw out against those pure and abstract patriots, who would not consider the necessity of providing meat, drink, or clothing for themselves and families a sufficient excuse, he would say that it never was allowed as an excuse for dishonest actions. If it were, any person indicted at the Old Bailey for a robbery would say it was only for the purpose of getting meat, drink, and clothing for himself and family. Such an excuse would not be admitted at that place. If the salaries of these places were not sufficient, did any body oblige these men to become excisemen? He must therefore support the original motion, as he conceived the promotion of such a person highly improper.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerdid not think his hon. friend (Mr. Croker) had maintained the general proposition that the hon. and learned gent. imputed to him. It was to be considered that in this particular case, when all the excise-officers in Ireland had been in the habit of taking certain regular presents from the distillers, it would have been impossible to dismiss them all at once, as although that might be good in the way of example, yet it would be a sacrifice of the revenues of Ireland for two years. If it were not contended that all the revenue officers of Ireland should be dismissed, there was no reason why the best of them should not be promoted. This man, although he had taken money as others did, yet in other respects he did his duty. The cause, however, of this great corruption had now been removed by the increase of the officers' salaries, and the act might in future be strictly enforced. The act was of a prospective and not of a retrospective

791
nature; and as to the case of Mr. Hill, there had been no legal conviction against him, nor any thing but his own confession before the commissioners, which was not asked for the view of turning him out of his place. It did not appear to him that it was desired to select this man or any other for punishment, and therefore, if he were allowed to stay in the revenue, he saw no reason why he should not be promoted if he was diligent and useful.
Mr. Hornerspoke shortly in favour of the motion. He expressed his surprize at what had fallen from the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that a man should be continued in office who had been found guilty of corruption. He for his own part thought that a more flagrant abuse of power was never heard of; a more unblushing breach of purity, he was certain, never till then appeared before that house, and as such he thought it his duty to give it his decided reprobation.
Sir John Newportreplied, generally, to the several arguments urged against his motion. He thought the defence set up so extremely weak and defective, that it was only necessary to make a few observations. He insisted that the charge of Mr. Beauchamp Hill had been made out as strongly as the case would permit. The malt books of Ross Crea walk had not been returned. It was said some of them had been carried away; but what remained, proved that Mr. B. Hill was the surveyor then, that 15,000 gallons of pot ale had been found there suppressed; so that if you could not positively say a charge was found, it was very reasonable to suppose it. He declared he did not previously know Mr. B. Hill, nor any of his connexions, nor any of those persons in whose room he had been promoted; so that he could not be actuated by the slightest bias or motive of favour or partiality. The first he knew of Mr. Hill was seeing his name in the Report of the Commissioners of Inquiry He censured the ground of argument that men known to be corrupt should be employed, on account of their ability to fill a particular station. On the contrary, he thought that in a public officer honesty and character could not be balanced by, nor ought they to be put in competition with any ability, however great it might be, He should therefore take the sense of the house on his motion.
Mr. Barhamsaid, there was one argument which ought to make the house cautious in what way they dealt with this mo-
792
tion. It had been publicly and generally asserted, that many persons sat in that house by improper means. The public had taken the alarm; and it had been found in support of that alarm, and those assertions, that a cabinet minister had actually been concerned in bartering for a seat in that house, and was defended for such an act. It was by the motion that moment under consideration, and the arguments urged in support of it, further asserted that corruptions prevailed in a most extensive degree over the whole revenue of Ireland. If something was not done to rectify these corruptions and abuses, if no steps were taken towards removing them, he dreaded to think what the public opinion of that house must very soon be.
The question being loudly called for, the house divided, when their appeared:

For the motion

50

Against it

77

Majority against sir John Newport's motion

—27

IRISH TITHES.
Mr. Parnellrose to move for the appointment of commissioners to enquire into the state of Tithes in Ireland. He said that he was authorised to consider the opinion of the house as favourable to an alteration in the system, inconsequence of the sentiments which were expressed by those who had opposed his former motion. The grounds upon which that was negatived were, because in the opinion of some members this period of the session was too late to entertain a specific plan, and because in the opinion of others there was a want of information on the subject. To meet the objections of the first description, he intended to bring forward a plan for a commutation of Tithes early next session, and to remove the objections arising from a want of information, he now moved for a commission. He said that a commission was preferable to a select committee of the house, because if we were to wait till the next session to appoint a committee, which would be necessary, nearly a whole year would be lost in making the inquiry, and besides a committee if appointed, could not well, sitting here, obtain the information which was wanted. Whereas a commission could proceed upon the enquiry immediately; and an inquiry to be made by persons appointed by the crown would be more agreeable to the body whose interests were immediately concerned, than an enquiry made by a committee of this house; and in this, as in all other respects concerning the mode of

793
paying the clergy he wished to proceed in the way that would least offend their feelings. He said that there were several precedents for this mode of proceeding since the Union. Commissioners had been appointed to enquire into the state of the finances of Ireland, of education, and of prisons, and for trying controverted elections, all which inquiries naturally belonged to select committees, but which, in consequence of the distance of Ireland, could not so well be made as by commissioners acting on the spot.—The house should consider in coming to a decision on his motion, why any inquiry at all was wanting; if Ireland had continued to have a local parliament, no such inquiry could have been wanting, because each member would have been completely informed of the state of the tithes; the house then was bound to place the people of Ireland by an enquiry on the same footing as they would have been without one, if the Union had not taken place, and to remedy as far as it was able this great injury, which Ireland had sustained by the Union, of the legislature being ignorant of the condition of Ireland and of the nature of the evils of which she complained. Besides the house should consider this motion with reference to the petitions on the table, and feel that they were now called upon to give an answer to those petitions. When a specific plan of redress was proposed of the evil complained of in these petitions, it was rejected for want of information, and will the house, now that a mode of obtaining information is brought forward, reject that also, and say we will neither adopt a remedy for the evil, nor enquire into the nature of your complaints? If the house does so, it will do that in regard to the people of Inland, which his majesty would never do towards the meanest subject that petitioned him; for an instance was never known where a complaint was preferred to the throne, to which at least this degree of attention was paid to it, of giving for answer to the person complaining, that the nature of the complaint should be enquired into. The hon. member said, that he hoped, therefore, that the house of commons would not refuse to give the same degree of attention to the complaints of the people of Ireland, which was uniformly given by his majesty to the complaints of even his poorest subjects. He moved, "That an address be presented to his majesty, to appoint a special commission to enquire into the manner in which Tithes
794
are collected in Ireland, and such other matters relating to the buying and collecting of Tithes in that country as they shall judge it proper to direct their attention to, and to report thereon."
Mr. R. S. Dundas(secretary for Ireland) opposed the motion, upon the ground, that before they went the length of addressing the king to appoint commissioners to make such inquiries they should first be satisfied, that some practicable measure could be proposed and adopted, to remedy the evils complained of, and acknowledged to exist, in regard to the buying of Tithes. It would only tend to raise the expectations of the people, while they could not realise them. The hon. gent. must be aware, that the feelings and passions of many individuals were already too much alive upon this subject throughout every district in Ireland; besides, the house were not at present deprived of information upon Irish subjects. It might as well be said, that they could not legislate as to the Tithes of Scotland, without instituting an inquiry; whereas it was well known that a law was lately passed relative thereto, merely upon the statement of those acquainted with that country. He doubted of the expediency of the mode of inquiry proposed, and also of its necessity, as sufficient information could be derived from gentlemen connected with Ireland.
Mr. Maurice Fitzgeraldexpressed his surprise at hearing such an opposition to this motion, as the former one had been opposed upon the ground of there being a want of sufficient information. With respect to exciting dangerous expectations in the minds of the people of Ireland, by the measure proposed, he could assure the right hon. gent. that they could only be excited by the continuance of the present system, and he was persuaded the inquiry would have quite an opposite tendency. There were parts of Ireland where the most serious disturbances had been excited within these last two years, upon this very subject; and he was sorry to say, such had been the case in that very part which he had the honour to represent. He was convinced the right hon. gent. when he became acquainted with the actual state of the Tithes in Ireland, would retract his opinion and sentiments in a future session. There were many abuses existing there, which did not exist here. From the sentiments generally expressed in the house upon a former night, he was sure that an inquiry would be the best preliminary to

795
any measure that parliament could adopt to remedy those evils. He should touch upon a few of the grievances relative to the raising of Tithes in Ireland, in order that gentlemen might contrast them with the mode adopted in England. In many cases the tithes were collected by the agents of absentee clergymen in the most severe manner. It was also a general habit for clergymen to set them up to auction, and sell them to a respectable tenant, who employed another to extort the utmost from poor and unfortunate individuals. If such practices existed in England no minister would dare to resist a parliamentary inquiry. In Ireland, almost all the lower orders of the people subsisted by cultivating the soil, and it was upon them in particular this tax operated as a grievous burden. Even the potatoe garden of the peasant did not escape the most rigorous exactions. This was contrary to the principles of taxation adopted in any country whatever. Add to the severities of collection, the plan of apportionment was far from being equitable. In some counties, such as Ulster and Con-naught, the potatoe-gardens were not tithed at all. In Kerry, the tithe of potatoes was at the rate of 36 s. per acre, and in two districts close to it, it was treble that amount. This he thought was a severe injustice. The disturbances of the White-boys were solely owing to the grievances of the tithe system in those counties, where arbitrary modes of exaction existed; while in others, where they did not exist, no disturbance had taken place. He did not wish to connect this inquiry with the question of religion, as he was convinced the catholics paid the tithes more freely and more willingly than the protestants. The former abstain from resistance, from motives of delicacy, and no political disaffection mingled itself with their conduct; the utmost they demanded, in any instance, was, that they might be allowed to deal immediately with the clergyman for the tithes. If the matter of tithes was to become the subject of future discussion, it was surely proper that the house should be prepared for it. In the views he had in regard to a commutation of tithes, he thought nothing but a complete commutation would ever tranquillize Ireland. It would put the established church on a happier footing, and would afford greater encouragement to agriculture. It was quite paradoxical that pasture land should be exempted from any pre-
796
mium to the church. Indeed all the great landed proprietors, although more interested in the church establishment, were exempted from the payment of tithes, a circumstance which was most discouraging to agriculture, and an evil which could only be remedied by a commutation of tithes, by which every individual should pay his portion to the clergyman. Under these circumstances he should vote for the motion for inquiry.
Mr. Dundas, in explanation, said, he never meant to convey any other opinion, than that this was a subject highly worthy of the consideration of parliament. He thought, however, that the inquiry proposed at the present time was altogether unnecessary.
Mr. Ponsonbysaid, it would be highly satisfactory to know at what period government would think fit to make any inquiry, or adopt any measure upon this subject. Last session the Chancellor of the Exchequer had said, he had even gone the length of preparing a bill to remedy these evils; but this session he said it was so full of difficulties, that he had neither bill to propose, nor any measure to adopt. When his hon. friend (Mr. Parnell) moved for leave to bring in a bill, the previous question was moved, for the want of information; no information was yet procured, and now the house were told it was unnecessary.—The time was not far distant when that right hon. gent. and all others would find that information, as to Ireland, was indispensably necessary. The system of tithes was a subject of great importance, and surrounded with great difficulties, but not such as were wholly insuperable. The arguments used against adopting this measure, were the best reasons in the world for taking it immediately into consideration.—The longer it was deferred, the more was Ireland exposed to calamities and difficulties of every kind. Why did the right hon. gent. not take some step in the interval, since last session, to procure the information he wanted? Why did he now say, that on account of the difficulties and importance of the subject, he should take no step at all?—The subject was of such vital importance for the tranquillity of Ireland, as well as of this country, that he hoped his hon. friend would take the sense of the house upon it, and that government would not meet the house with the same ignorance next session as they did upon this one. As to exciting dangerous expectations, how could it be supposed

797
that such a matter could be conducted secretly? It was impossible to proceed in any way without exciting the hopes and expectations of the people of Ireland upon this subject. The measure proposed by his hon. friend appeared to him to be both judicious and temperate. It applied to the crown, as to the head of the church, to inquire into this church property. It placed the nomination of the persons composing the commission entirely in the executive government, where it ought to be. He hoped that these repeated motions on this subject would at least have this good effect, that they would compel ministers to adopt some measure to ameliorate the situation of Ireland.
Mr. Grattanthought that the Commission of Inquiry proposed would not have the desired effect, as it bad been generally found that such commissions were inadequate to the objects in view, and rather tended to discourage the adoption of a measure than otherwise. Even although such a commission were to deliver in a report, he should not be disposed to reckon it binding. He had seen many commissions appointed by the crown, but they had been found never to go to the root of the evil, and rather tended to recommend a feeble than an effectual measure. He thought that it would be better to move, next session, that a committee be appointed, and that the loss of this motion would not embarrass that one.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerdid not think that the house were in ignorance with respect to the subject of tithes in Ireland; but he conceived that the difficulty was how to find out a practical mode of securing the property of the church. He had never objected to the former motion of the hon. member, on account of the want of information; but he objected to it, because it was not a measure, capable of being adopted for the reasons he then gave. He had not been remiss in making inquiries, and had even produced a plan, which however he afterwards found it necessary to abandon, as it appeared it could not have the effect desired. He could not be persuaded that any inquiry, either by commission or committee, would do any good, for they did not want information, but they wanted merely a plan of how to get the better of the difficulties they knew to exist.
Sir J. Newportspoke in support of the motion. He thought the arguments used against it were very extraordinary. If they
798
did not institute a previous inquiry, the house were attempting to apply a remedy, without knowing what was the nature of the disease, which appeared to be entirely a new mode of legislating. If the result of the commission did not satisfy the house, they might have recourse to some ulterior information. At all events, the noble lord opposite (Castlereagh) was bound by his former professions, at the Union, to find out some modifications to lighten the burdens of the poor oppressed people of Ireland. Instead of doing so, however, that noble lord appeared to forget all his pledges for the public good, and merely to attend to those that went to provide for individuals whom he had taken care to seduce to his own standard. That noble lord professed to be the follower of Mr. Pitt; sequitur non passibus equis. If he were so, he ought undoubtedly to perform the pledges which that statesman had made, as well as to perform those which he himself had undertaken. If ministers profess to be the successors of Mr. Pitt, let them come forward, with one consent, and redeem the pledges he had given, otherwise they could not pretend to be other than unworthy successors.
Lord Castlereaghstated, that he knew of no pledge whatever that was made either by Mr. Pitt or himself, upon the subject of tithes, or upon the Catholic question. He should most distinctly deny that he ever had made any pledge as to Ireland.
The Hon. C. H. Hutchinsonsupported the motion, and in strong terms deprecated the conduct of the noble lord opposite (Castlereagh), as to Ireland. He looked upon that noble lord as the parent of the Union, and he, in order to effect it, had made many promises; but whenever any question, as to the amelioration of the situation of Ireland came to be agitated, he either put a negative upon it, or moved the previous question. If the noble lord thought he should be handed down to posterity, either for private virtue, or public political conduct, he (Mr. H.) must beg leave to be of a contrary opinion. [Here was a cry of Order! order! and the Speaker interfered and observed, that it was irregular to allude to the private character of any individual of that house.] If (continued Mr. H.) the whole of the country were to stand up in support of that noble lord's conduct, he should be proud in standing single, and stating that he had grossly discharged that public duty which he owed to that country, called Ireland.

799
How many years had passed since the Union, and yet nothing had been done to ameliorate its situation! No one of the expectations of its unhappy people had been answered, nothing but personal degradation had ensued. Absentees were greatly increased, the capital had been deserted by its nobility, and almost the whole of the great landed proprietors. Much had been promised to that country, but nothing had been as yet performed.
Mr. Parnellsaid, in reply to the assertion of the right hon. gent. that a want of information had not been laid as a ground of objection to his former motion, that he could appeal to the recollection of several members now present, whether the Secretary for Foreign Affairs had not distinctly stated as the reason which induced him to negative that motion through want of information on the subject which prevailed in the house. If there was any doubt upon this point, he said it was cleared up by the absence of that right hon. gent., for he had a right to infer, that he was absent because he could not vote with his colleagues on this motion, in consistency with the opinion which he had given on the former motion. In answer to what the right hon. gent. had said, of his appearing not to be aware of the difficulties which attended the plan which he recently proposed, because he had not replied to the objections which he had urged to it, he said that the reply made to those objections by a right hon. friend of his, rendered it unnecessary for him to do so. He had said, that the plan of enabling incumbents to make leases for twenty-one years was a plan of no detail and of no difficulty. The fact was, that nothing would have been so easy as to have secured the successor to the incumbent making the leases against injury, because it would only have been necessary to have adopted the same regulations as those under which all tenants for life under settlements are controled in making leases of their lands, and then the situation of the successor to the incumbent making leases, would have been exactly the same as the situation of tenant in remainder under the established law. With regard to what the right hon. gent. had said about no inquiry being necessary, and of the competency of the house to discuss and decide upon any specific plan that may be brought before it, without any previous inquiry, he begged the house would not forget the declaration of the right hon. gent. when he should bring for-
800
ward a specific plan next session, in order that his motion may not be opposed as his former one was, on a plea of want of inquiry and of information. The chief Secretary for Ireland had said, the proposed inquiry could do no good, because it was impossible that it could lead to any practical plan. To this doctrine of the impossibility of the house being able to discover any plan for a commutation of tithes he must protest; for though it might be difficult to say what plan was the best, still there were so many great authorities in favour of a commutation, and who had pointed out plans for effecting it, that it certainly must be in the power of the house, if it would sincerely set about the work, to discover some plan which would meet the evil complained of. The authority of Dr. Paley was quite decisive upon the subject; he had said that he knew of no measure so practicable, and of no alteration that would be so beneficial, as a commutation of tithes for corn rents. This opinion should therefore give the house reason to suspect, that the assertion of the right hon. gent. that no practical plan can be discovered, was wholly unfounded. He begged the house to consider, that they were now called on by his majesty's ministers to tell those who had sent petitions to this house, that the house would not inquire into grounds of their complaints; and he submitted to the justice and good sense of the house, whether, under the circumstances of Ireland and of the continent, this was an answer that ought to be given to them.
The house then divided,

Ayes

75

Noes

146

Majority against the Motion

—71

MEDICAL BOARD.
Mr. Wardlerose to bring forward his promised motion upon this subject. The supply of the army with proper medicine and medical aid was, he was observed, a matter of so much importance, that he could not conceive it possible to raise a doubt, as to the propriety of making it the subject of parliamentary investigation, where any ground for complaint appeared. That such ground existed was manifest from the Report upon the table. For in this Report it was stated, that out of 20,000 men employed in expeditions to the West Indies, no less than 13,000 were the victims of disease; one-third owed their death to the ignorance of their medical men. But this was not the only ground of complaint which

801
he meant to refer to the consideration of the house. The charge for medicine was enormously dear. He instanced the article of bark, which was charged at no less than 100 per cent. beyond the prime cost; upon this article alone he observed that the sum of 15,000 l. was laid out. To prove this exorbitant charge he was ready to produce the most satisfactory evidence at the bar both documentary and oral. As a principal witness to substantiate his statements, the hon. gent. mentioned the name of Dr. Chisholm.—With the two facts he had stated, he did not think the motion which he was about to submit could be consistently opposed with a view to the necessary inquiry. He understood, indeed, that no opposition would be attempted, and therefore, without further preface, he moved, "That a Return of the whole of the Medical Department should be laid before the house, namely, the physicians, surgeons, inspectors and deputy inspectors, apothecaries, &c. distinguishing the period of the appointment of each, the situation from which removed to such appointment, together with the length of service."
The Secretary at Warwould not object to the motion, but could not help expressing a wish that the subject had been rather referred for inquiry to the board of officers, which being constituted by parliament, had the power of obtaining the fullest and most satisfactory information applicable to a case of this nature.
Mr. Rosewas surprized at the unqualified assertion, that upon the article of bark alone, the sum of 15,000 l. had been lost to the country (No, no, no! from the Opposition Bench). Having had occasion to inquire into the subject of the medical supply to the army, he was enabled to state, that the medicine for that department was furnished at a rate of seven or eight per cent. less than that of the navy. If, however, there was any real ground for complaint, he thought it would be better to refer the case to the Commission of Military Inquiry, which having the power to administer oaths, was competent more satisfactorily to investigate the business than any committee of that house, which had no such power.
Mr. Wardlerepeated his assertion with respect to the charge for bark, correcting, however, the misconception of the right hon. gent.; as he only staled 15,000 l. as the amount of the supply. With regard to the Commission alluded to, he would
802
frankly state that he had no faith in Commissions of that nature, and therefore he wished to bring this business before the house. And as to that, Commission he had no hesitation in saying, that it would not do its duty if it did not produce to the country a saving of 100,000 l. a year in the department to which his motion referred.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerwould not hesitate to state, that if the hon. gent. was in possession of information that 100,000 l. a year could be saved to the country, and if it was his object, as no doubt it was, to conduce to the public benefit, it was his duty to furnish such information to the Commission alluded to. That Commission, it was to be remembered, had the power of administering oaths, and was therefore best enabled to act upon the hon. gents information. It therefore struck him as desirable that the case should be referred, in the first instance, to the Commission, and should the result of its inquiry not prove satisfactory, the hon. gent. would not be precluded from again bringing it before that house.
After a few words from Mr. Whitbread, Mr. Rose, Mr. Wardle, and general Walpole, the motion was agreed to.

AMERICA.
Mr. Marryatt, after a few prefatory remarks, with regard to the propriety of satisfying this country and America also, as to the conduct of our government upon the subject of recent transactions, in which the commercial interest of the country and the character of its government was so deeply involved, observed, that he had understood it to have been alleged by the highest authority, that our ambassador was authorised by his instructions to conclude the arrangements which government had lately refused to ratify. In order, therefore, that parliament and the public should fully understand the case, he felt it his duty to move an Address to his majesty, praying for copies of the Notes which passed between our ambassador and the government of the United States, respecting the repeal of our Orders in Council of January and November 1807; also for copies of the Instructions transmitted to our ambassador, authorizing him to enter into a negotiation, and to conclude an arrangement upon this subject.
Mr. Secretary Cunningobserved, that although upon a former occasion, when asked, whether it was the intention of his majesty's ministers to make any communication to parliament respecting our relations with America, he answered, that it

803
was not deemed expedient to do so pending the existing negociations with that country, he did not feel it inconsistent with the motive of that declaration, to give his assent to the present motion, which was rendered necessary by the peculiar circumstances of the case. The Notes referred to in the first part of the motion having been published in America, there could be no objection to authenticate, them by complying with the call for their production; and as to the Instructions, his majesty's government having, in that spirit of frankness and candour which marked the whole of their communication with the American government, directed those instructions to be shewn to that government, he saw no reason for with-holding them from the house, although the production of such a document was rather unusual. As the papers were not before the house, he would abstain from delivering any opinion upon them. It was known that he had no disposition to throw blame upon the individual implicated in this transaction; but as a matter of fact and truth he was bound to state, that which our ambassador would have full opportunity of explaining, namely, that he had not only not acted in consonance with his Instructions, but in direct contradiction to them: that being authorised to make certain concessions to America in return for stipulated conditions, he had thought proper to go to the full extent of the concessions, without having obtained any of the conditions. At the same time that the right hon. gent. acquiesced in this motion, he thought it right to say, that he should feel it his duty to oppose the production of the Instructions transmitted to an ambassador with respect to the affair of the Chesapeake, at least pending our present discussions with the American government.
Mr. Ponsonbythought that as the alleged proceeding of our ambassador was so very extraordinary, it would be right, in order fully to understand and fairly to judge of the case, that any justification or attempt at justification, sent home by this ambassador, should be also laid before the house, together with the papers referred to in the motion. He was not aware that any such paper as he alluded to was in existence, but if it was, and the right hon. gent. had no very urgent reason for resisting the production of it, he should much wish to have it laid on the table, and to know whether the right hon. gent. had any objection to do so.
Mr. Secretary Canningdeclined for the present decisively to answer the right hon. gent.'s question. When the papers moved for were laid before the house, the right hon. gent. would then be better qualified to decide whether any, and what further papers, were necessary.
Mr. Ponsonby and Mr. Canning mutually explained; in the course of which the latter observed, that unquestionably a dispatch had been received from our ambassador, transmitting the intelligence which gave rise to the motion.
Lord H. Pettyconceived with his right hon. friend, that it was essentially necessary to a just comprehension of the subject under consideration, that the reasons assigned by our ambassador for concluding the arrangement alluded to, should be laid before the house. He therefore hoped, that if it were consistent with his public duty the right hon. gent. would not withhold this information. Many occasions occurred in war to justify a departure from positive instructions; so in a diplomatic mission circumstances might arise to furnish a similar justification. Possibly, such was the case in this instance, and the paper required by his right hon. friend was necessary to enable the house to form a correct judgment. Indeed, it was almost indispensible, and therefore, unless it was produced, he must disapprove of an attempt to bring forward what he could not help considering as partial information.
Mr. Canningbegged not to be understood as refusing the paper required by the noble lord. He only deferred deciding upon the proposition to produce it.—In answer to a question from lord Milton, Mr. Canning stated, that the expectation to be formed as to the conduct of the American government towards our trade, must depend upon the existence of a correspondent disposition on the part of that government, to that manifested here upon the occasion which gave rise to the discussion. But in fact, what arrangement might be made by that government, must be, he observed, at present mere matter of speculation, of which any other man could form an opinion as well as himself.
The motion was then agreed to.