HC Deb 04 August 1835 vol 30 c47

The House then went into Committee on the Weights and Measures' Bill.

On Clause 20th,

Lord Ebrington,

referring to the division on the former discussion, by which the stamping Clause (19th) had been omitted, said he would persist in proposing the re-introduction of that Clause on the bringing up of the Report. The present Clause, however, involved the principle of the one which had been rejected, as it contained the machinery of stamping, and notwithstanding the result of the division on the other Clause, he should persist in proposing this.

Mr. Warburton

was adverse to stamping, as it would only lead to illusory confidence.

Mr. Estcourt

had received communications from various parts of the country, urging him to continue his opposition to the stamping Clause.

Mr. Houldsworth

said, it would be better at once to throw out the Bill itself than to omit the stamping Clause.

Mr. Warburton

said, that he was not favourable to the recommendation of the Committee of 1813, that the maker's name should be stamped on weights and measures, but he would have this system rather than the Stamping-law proposed.

Sir George Clerk,

as author of the Report of 1813, wished to say, that though at that time he was favourable to having the maker's name stamped on weights and measures, he now entertained great doubt as to the utility of this Clause.

The Committee divided on the Clause: Ayes 60; Noes 6—Majority 54.

The Clause was agreed to.

The remainder of the Clauses were agreed to, and the House resumed.