Lords Sitting of 18 February 1831

MINUTES.
Bills. The Postmaster General's, read a third time, and passed. For procuring Animal Returns to Parliament, relative to the Poor-Rates, read a first time.
Petitions presented. By the Earl of ROSSLYN, from the Post Masters of Fife, for an exemption from the Post Horse Duty. By Lord KING, from Chichester, for a Reduction of Taxation, and Abolition of Pensions; from the Shipwrights of Dublin, for a Repeal of the Union; from Collumpton, fox an Inquiry into the rate of Wages;
656
and from West Walton, for a Revision of the Tithe System:—By Lord DURHAM, from Brancepest, to the same effect. For Reform, by the LORD CHANCELLOR, from Portsmouth:—By Earl GREY, from Aberdeen, Irving, Renfrew, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Bathgate, Dumfries, Kinross, Caithness, Stoke St. Mary, Somerset:—By the Earl of ROSEBERRY, from Alnwick. By Earl GREY, from the Tradesmen and Freeholders of Galway, for an Alteration of the Law relative to the Franchise.

MALT AND BEER DUTIES.
The Earl of Winchilseapresented a Petition from Sitting bourne, in Kent, praying their Lordships to devise some means of giving Employment to the Labouring Classes; also a Petition from Lenham, praying for the Repeal of the Malt Duty. His Lordship expressed himself in favour of the reduction of the malt duty, which he considered would have a much more beneficial effect than the repeal of the beer-duty. The consequence of the repeal of the beer-duty had been the increase, to an enormous extent, of public-houses, beyond the control of the magistracy; and as they afforded commodious and convenient places for assembling, he attributed much of the disturbed state of the country to them. They were, besides, the means of encouraging smuggling, for though they were nominally opened for the sale of beer, their real object was, to dispose of smuggled spirits.
The Duke of Wellingtonwas sorry to hear the noble Earl state, that the repeal of the beer-duty had not been attended with all the benefits which had been expected from it. The tax was considered to be one bearing upon the poor, and therefore such as ought to be repealed. The noble Earl had stated, that the repeal of that tax had done much to occasion the disturbances which had lately taken place in the country; but he would remind the noble Earl, that the repeal of that duty did not take effect till the middle of October, and he believed that the noble Earl was aware that the disturbances in Kent commenced at an earlier period than that. The repeal of that tax could not, therefore, have occasioned those evils.
The Earl of Winchilseasaid, that he had not stated that the disturbances in Kent arose from the repeal of the duty on beer. What he said was, that those disturbances were very much increased by the conveniences afforded by the beer houses for the assembling of men together.

COAL DUTIES.
The Duke of Wellingtonstated, that he saw by the votes of the House of Commons, that it was pro-

657
posed to repeal the duty on Coals. No man was more desirous than he to relieve the public, if possible, from that duty; but he begged to remind the noble Earl, that vast abuses prevailed in the coal-trade in the City of London. Now he wished to know whether the noble Earl proposed to adopt any measures to put a stop to those abuses; and, more particularly, whether the noble Earl meant to introduce any measure for the purpose of repealing the duty on coals received by the city of London, and applicable for the purpose of building the new London bridge. If the noble Earl did not mean to introduce any such measure, he (the Duke of Wellington) was afraid that very little would be done to remove the abuses of the coal-trade; and if the noble Earl did intend to propose some measure for that purpose, he begged to remind the noble Earl of the necessity of finding other means for supplying the deficiency which would be thereby created in the fund for building London bridge.
Earl Greywas as well aware as the noble Duke opposite, that the proposed measure of Government would only remove part of the evils which pressed on the coal-trade. He well knew that there existed also great evils, arising from the abuses in the conduct of the coal-trade in the port of London. He believed that notice of a bill on this subject had been given in another place, to the principle of which he was friendly, and to the details of which he should lend his assistance. With respect to the duty, to which the noble Duke had alluded, as applicable to the purpose of building the new London-bridge, that was a subject for future consideration. It would be desirable, undoubtedly, to relieve the coal-trade from that duty if possible; but at the same time it should be remembered that it was only of a temporary nature. The subject, he admitted, was worthy the consideration of Government.
Lord Teynhamcalled the attention of Government, to the duties collected at such places as Brighton.
Earl Greysaid, these duties were local duties, collected for local purposes, and totally unconnected with those duties to which the measure of Government applied.
Lord Kingsaid, that the tax on coals at Brighton was applied to the lighting and watching of that place.
The Marquis of Londonderryfelt grate-
658
ful to the noble Earl at the head of the Government, for being the first to come forward to relieve the people from a tax on such a necessary article as coals. No other Ministers had listened to the repeated representations which were made to them on this subject, but he hoped that the noble Duke opposite would give his support to the bill which was about to be introduced to Parliament, on the subject of the duties collected at the port of London.
The Marquis of Butesaid, his Majesty's late Ministers were the first who consented to the appointment of a Committee to inquire on the subject of the coal duties, without which inquiry it would have been wrong in the Government to have proposed the repeal of the duty. He did not pretend to know what were the intentions of the late Ministers, but he believed that in consequence of what passed in the Committee, they would have come forward with a measure for the repeal of the coal-duty.
The Marquis of Londonderrybelieved, as far as the municipal duties of the city of London were concerned, that the late Government would have had no objection to their repeal; but he could not give it credit for any intention of relieving the country of the coasting duty. The noble Duke opposite appeared to him to show a decided disinclination, in the Committee up-stairs, to relieve the coal-trade of the duty of 6s. per chaldron. He thought that a very unjust cry had been raised against the present Ministers, with respect to every thing they had brought forward. Their object appeared to him to relieve the labouring and industrious classes, and he considered it nothing but just, that the funded interest, whose prosperity depended on the welfare of the State, should be called upon to contribute to the necessities of the State. He recollected that the late Government came forward with the spirit-tax, and stamp tax, which they found not palateable, and therefore they were obliged to make other arrangements.

GREECE.
The Earl of Aberdeenrose to put a question to the noble Earl opposite; but before doing so, he wished to observe, that if he had hitherto refrained from bringing under the attention of the House some matters connected with foreign affairs, he had not adopted that course from not feeling the deepest conviction of

659
the importance of those matters. On the contrary, the House must have seen quite sufficient in the aspect of foreign affairs to justify the anxiety and serious attention of every man. There was, indeed, much that required, and he had no doubt would receive, full explanation. He knew, however, what was due to the situation of the noble Earl opposite; the honour and safety of the country was confided to his hands, and he (the Earl of Aberdeen) should be very sorry immaturely to interfere in any course of proceeding in which the noble Earl and his colleagues were engaged. But the point to which he was desirous of drawing the attention of the noble Earl was not liable to any such objection, for it was not immediately connected with the safety of the country. It would be recollected by the House, that in the course of last Session he had the honour of laying upon the Table of that House, by command of his Majesty, certain papers explanatory of the pacification and final settlement of Greece. Among those papers was a protocol, by which the limits and condition of Greece were settled. When, by the decision of the illustrious person destined to be the sovereign of that country, part of that arrangement remained incomplete, he (the Earl of Aberdeen) in formed the House, that the first measure adopted by the plenipotentiaries of the allies was, to assure the Turkish and Greek Governments, that no change should take place in the arrangement as to the limits of the country, but that every thing as respected them should remain immutable. Now, he should not have thought it in the least necessary to call their Lordships' attention to this subject, and would have been willing to leave to the leisure of the noble Earl who was now engaged with more important, perhaps, certainly more urgent duties, than the selection of a Prince for Greece, had not his attention been called to a report of a speech spoken by the Secretary of Foreign Affairs in France. In answer to an attack, in the Chamber of Deputies, on the French Government, by a Member who objected to the contracted limits of Greece, the Secretary of Foreign Affairs at Paris stated "That the affairs of Greece had engaged the attention of Government, and he did not suppose that the hon. Gentleman could ever think that French intervention in this part of the world could have been without effect. It was to the intervention of France—to her arms—an omi-
660
nous expression,—to her sacrifices, that Greece owed her liberty and independence. The frontiers of Greece at first were narrowly circumscribed: they would, he hoped, be extended, and the new State find in them safety and prosperity." He (the Earl of Aberdeen) asked for no explanation on this subject, neither did he ask the noble Earl to state whether the speech he had just read was authentic or not; but he thought that statement justified him in desiring to know whether, after the long and painful investigation which took place on the subject, after the conclusion which was arrived at, and after the assurances given and repeated in the most solemn manner, that that conclusion should in no wise be changed, it was really possible that the noble Earl should have voluntarily opened this subject again, and entered upon another negotiation. The question, therefore, which he rose to ask was, whether any negotiation was now taking place, having for its object the extension of the limits of Greece?
Earl Greysaid, that to the question introduced with so much solemnity by the noble Earl, he should certainly have been better prepared to give an answer, if the noble Earl had done him the favour to communicate to him his intention of putting it. He (Earl Grey) did not hesitate to say, that, pressed by other matters of much greater urgency, he had not paid the same attention to this subject as he had to other subjects which were certainly of greater importance. All that he could say at present was, that he was not aware of any thing passing in the way of negotiation respecting that question to which the noble Earl had alluded. It was possible, notwithstanding this declaration, that some negotiation might be begun, and certainly he should have no hesitation in saying, that if limits of a better description could be assigned to Greece, consistently with good faith, such a result would be most desirable for the future independence and safety of that country, as well as for the general advantage of Europe. The noble Earl had read an extract from the speech of the Minister for Foreign Affairs in France, and then said that he did not call upon him (Earl Grey) for explanation. He certainly thought that the noble Earl could hardly call on him to explain a speech delivered by a Secretary of a Foreign Government, still less of a speech which he (Earl Grey) declared he had never seen. To say whe-

661
ther the speech was authentic or not, was completely out of his power. There was a phrase in the speech which he observed had particularly alarmed the noble Earl— namely, that to intervention by the arms of France, the Greeks owed all they enjoyed of independence and security. Now, however much the noble Earl might be alarmed by the intervention of France, it was unnecessary for him to remind the House, that that intervention, for which the French Minister claimed so much credit for the Government of France, as having thereby established a title to the gratitude of Greece, took place long before the present Ministers came into office. Whether that intervention was right or wrong, —whether it had lessened the credit of this country, or established the influence of France in Greece,—would be discussed when the question came before their Lordships; but, whatever might have been its effect, whether prejudical or otherwise, to the honour and interest of this country, for that the present Government were in no degree responsible. To revert to the question which the noble Earl had asked, he might, perhaps, be thought deficient in the discharge of his public duty, not to be prepared to give it a clear and satisfactory answer; but he pleaded guilty to thus much delinquency,—that being pressed by other and more urgent matters, he had not directed his attention to this subject, and was not, therefore, prepared to give the noble Earl an immediate answer.
The Earl of Aberdeensupposed, that the noble Earl would have no objection to give a decisive answer to the question when he should become acquainted with the subject. with respect to the French Minister's speech, he begged to say, that it had not excited the least alarm in him, nor did he object to the intervention of France; but he thought the term a little ominous after all the declarations which had been made of non-intervention; neither did he object to what had been done by France, seeing that it was done in concert with the allies. He would not now enter into the question whether it was desirable to extend the limits of Greece. But the question which he had put was, whether, after an arrangement had been completed, and solemn and repeated assurances that that arrangement should not be changed, the noble Earl had thought fit to open the question again, and enter into fresh negotiations.
Earl Greythought, that if, after mature
662
consideration, it should be found necessary to change any stipulations of the treaty, there was nothing to prevent such alterations being made as might be advantageous to the parties interested.

SCOTLAND REFORM PETITIONS.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, he was intrusted with a petition from the city of Edinburgh, signed by upwards of 21,700, which he believed to convey the sentiments of all the inhabitants of that city, with the exception of a few individuals, who, amidst the general change which had taken place in the feelings of the country, still held out and retained their old opinions. The petition was very short, but he would not trouble their Lordships with having it read, as he could state in a single sentence its import. They stated, that in Scotland the Representation was entirely a mockery; and that by law, all the Members could be returned by persons who never saw the soil of the country. The petitioners further stated (he used their own words) that the effect of this system was, to degrade the people, to render Members unaccountable, and Parliament corrupt, and they prayed their Lordships to remedy the evils created by the system in Scotland, by adopting some plan for the improving the Representation of that country. In that prayer he cordially concurred. Independently of his connexion with his Majesty's Government, he was now, as he always had been, an advocate for a temperate, safe, and effective Reform, at the same time that he was a friend to all the established forms of the Constitution, and an enemy to rash and untried theories on this, as he would be on matters of far less importance. He rejoiced that a system of Reform, such as he alluded to, had received the unanimous support of that Government of which he had the honour to be a member. To state at present any thing of the nature of the intended plan of Reform, would be to depart from that resolution which Ministers had taken, as well firmly to press it on the attention of Parliament, as not to divulge any part of it to any man until the time should arrive when the whole would be submitted to Parliament,—a course as wise as it was respectful to Parliament itself. It was wise that to Parliament the first communication of the plan should come, except the respectful communication to a high quarter—that gracious Prince

663
whom his colleagues and himself had the honour to serve, and of whose assent to the whole plan they were entirely and confidently assured.
The Petition to lie on the Table.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, he had now another petition to lay before their Lordships, still more numerously signed than; the last. It was from the Merchants, Manufacturers, and Inhabitants of the City of Glasgow,—a city which had still more reason to complain of the state of the Representation of Scotland than that of Edinburgh. The latter city was said to have the choice of one Member—he did not say it had—and to state that the inhabitants of Edinburgh sent one Member to Parliament was only a fashion of talking, for that Member was not the choice of the 140,000 inhabitants of the city, but of thirty three gentlemen, very respectable, no doubt, in their way, but he would venture to say, that a man might visit Edinburgh over and over again without ever once hearing the name of any member of the Town Council, by whom this one Member was sent to Parliament. These respectable gentlemen took upon themselves the task of saving their fellow-citizens the trouble of selecting a fit and proper person to represent them in Parliament. They also managed the fiscal affairs of that city, just so well as to preserve its Corporation from becoming bankrupt, after the fashion of some other Corporations in that county,— whose leading members, the bailies, as they were called, when they contrived to involve the affairs of the town in complete ruin, left the people to get out of the scrape as they could. By good fortune, however, this was not the case in Edinburgh. But while Edinburgh enjoyed the nominal advantage of having one Member to represent it, Glasgow, with its population of 240,000 and upwards, had only a fractional part of a Member—being only a fourth or a fifth,—the other fractional parts, constituting one whole Member, being shared by other burghs, some of them very ancient, no doubt, but numbering very few inhabitants. The petitioners prayed the House to adopt some measures for removal of the evils of which they complained; and, considering the nature of their grounds of complaint, he could not but admire the calmness and temperance with which they presented their case to the House.
Petition to lie on the Table.

MINISTERIAL PLANS.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, he had now to present a Petition to their Lordships, from the county of Cornwall, also praying for Reform in Parliament; and in so doing he would take the opportunity of correcting an error which seemed to have gone abroad respecting the motion which was to be brought forward on Reform in another place, by his noble friend the Paymaster of the Forces (Lord J. Russell). In communications made to him on this subject, he had been asked, whether the plan to be submitted was the plan of Lord J. Russell, to which the Ministers would give their support, or whether the noble Lord was only the organ through which the plan of Ministers was to be submitted? He now answered, that the plan which his noble friend, the Paymaster of the Forces, would bring forward, was altogether the plan of Ministers, as much as if it had to be introduced by the noble Lord who represented the Government in this or the other House of Parliament. From the prominent part taken by the noble Lord on that subject, it was considered that the plan of Ministers might, with great propriety, be placed in his hands. A similar course was adopted under the Rockingham Administration, when a plan, avowedly that of Ministers, was brought forward by the Paymaster of the Forces.
Petition to lie on the Table.