Lords Sitting of 16 August 1833

MINUTES.
Bills. Read a second time:—Notaries Public; Fines and Recoveries; Lunacy Commissions.—Committed:—Royal Burghs (Scotland); Grand Juries (Ireland).—Read a third time:—Parish Apprentices; Militia.
Petitions presented. By Lord KENYON, from several Places, in favour of the Factories' Regulation Bill.—By the Marquess of LANSDOWN, from Glasgow; and by the LORD CHANCELLOR, also from Glasgow, for Extending to that Place the Provisions of the Royal Burghs (Scotland) Bill.

POST OFFICE.
Lord Ellenboroughpresented a Petition from persons interested in the trade with the United States, praying for an emendation of the laws relating to the inland postage charged upon letters going from the metropolis through Liverpool and the other out-ports to the United States. The statement of the petitioners was, that they had hitherto enjoyed the privilege of sending such letters otherwise than through the Post-office, but that lately the Postmaster General had enforced the laws on the subject, and done away with the practice. He did not, indeed, see how the noble Duke (the Duke of Richmond) could do otherwise according to the existing laws; but it was most desirable that the utmost facilities should be afforded to the transmission of letters.
The Duke of Richmondhad been anxious that a petition of this kind should be presented, that he might have the opportunity of explaining the circumstances and motives which had caused him to pursue the course to which the noble Lord had
712
referred. He must admit that there was no duty more imperative upon the Post-master General than that of giving every possible facility to the mercantile intercourse of the country; but the prayer of these petitioners was that they might be permitted to send letters for the United States through Liverpool or the other out-ports, without going through the Post-office; and he must say, that he thought that compliance with their prayer in this respect would lead to considerable loss to the revenue. If the privilege in question were granted to the merchants of London, there could be no reason why the Man chester and Birmingham merchants, and the merchants in all other parts of the kingdom, should not exercise it also: and the consequence of conceding the principle would be, that of giving up in future of all such postages upon letters going abroad. It was not true that the Post-office had neglected to forward mail bags by the fast-sailing ships. In the last year 4,888 ship letters had been forwarded from London, and from Liverpool 1,220 had been sent. Nor was it true that the privilege of sending letters by other conveyances than those provided by the Post-office had been possessed by the merchants of London during twenty years. The question was whether or not letters should be sent by these merchants by stage-coaches, instead of through the Post-office, and if a Post-office was to exist at all, he (the Duke of Richmond) did not see why these petitioners should be favoured to the exclusion of others. If the House were prepared to say, that a tax upon letters should no longer exist, of course he must bow to their decision; but if taxes were to be reduced at all, other branches of the revenue might be found in which the advantages of reduction would be more considerable. He could not sit down without observing, that attacks had lately been made in another place upon the department at the head of which he was, to which he had not had the opportunity of replying. He had made the most ample inquiries, however, on the subjects to which those attacks referred, and were it not that as a Peer he could not there reply to arguments used in the other House, he was in a situation to contradict and correct statements made by the hon. member for Greenock, respecting which he must say, that he did not think he had been treated by that hon. Member with the candour which one Gentleman had a right to expect from another.

CHINA TRADE.
Lord Aucklandsaid, that this Bill came within the Standing Order relative to Bills concerning trade, and therefore he moved, that it be referred to a Select Committee.
Lord Ellenboroughconcurred in the Motion, and he was anxious to draw the attention of the House to a particular clause in this Bill, with regard to which he should feel it necessary to move an instruction to the Select Committee which the noble Lord was about to propose. It had been a long-established custom of that House to waive any inquiry respecting anything relating to the imposition of taxes in Bills that came from the other House of Parliament. That such a forbearance on the part of that House on all occasions, and under all circumstances, was for the public benefit, appeared to him to be rather doubtful, but at the same time he would admit, seeing how long the custom had existed, that it should not be proposed to their Lordships to depart from it, unless under very extreme circum-stances indeed. Cases, however, might occur in which it would be the bounden duty of their Lordships to interfere for the protection of the public interests, and the constitution of Parliament. Now, such an extreme case appeared to him to occur in this Bill. In this Bill the power of levying taxes was delegated to the King in Council, without any limitation whatever. The King in Council was empowered under this Bill to appoint officers at Can-ton, with powers that were not specified, to give them such salaries as he might choose, and those officers would have the power of levying what duties they pleased upon the goods of his Majesty's subjects trading to Canton. They would have the power of levying those duties in a foreign country—in China. He was not aware of any such instance of legislation on the part of the Parliament of this country, and with a view to discover whether there had been any similar instance of legislation, he would move that it be an instruction to the Committee to search for precedents for the purpose of ascertaining whether that House had ever passed a Bill delegating to the King in Council the power of levying duties on his Majesty's subjects. It would be found on looking at the probable amount of those duties that this was no trifling matter. The expense of the proposed Superintendents at Canton, with the Judge and the officers connected with his Court, would be likely to be about 27,000 l. or from that to 30,000 l. per annum. Now,
714
the trade between the port of Canton, India, and this country, would not for some time, at least, exceed 54,000 tons annually. This expenditure, therefore, would cause the imposition of a duty of 10 s. a-ton on that trade—that was to say, as the vessels trading there generally averaged 300 tons, that his Majesty would be empowered to levy a duty of 150 l. each on the vessels so employed. He could not avoid expressing his surprise that a clause of this kind should have been passed in the present House of Commons, the more especially as so many persons interested in the trade and commerce of the country had been by the Bill of last year introduced into that House. They had been told, that on account of the introduction of such persons, they might expect greater vigilance and attention in the present than in all former Parliaments to the rights of the people and the privileges of their Representatives; and it was, therefore, not a little extraordinary that in the first important measure that had been passed by the present House of Commons a power was given to the Crown, without any limitation whatever, which had never been given to it by any former Parliament—the power of levying taxes according to its discretion on the subjects of the Crown. Of this he was certain, that there was not one of the constituents of any of the members of the present House of Commons that ever intended that such a power should be delegated to the Crown.
Lord Aucklandsaid, that he was as much surprised as the noble Lord that the clause in question contained no limitations. In the clause as it stood in the Bill when originally introduced, the power proposed to be given by it was limited, and why that limitation had been afterwards omitted he did not know. In introducing those Superintendents as a substitute for officers that had through usage exercised similar powers at Canton for a long period of time, it was thought necessary, for the protection of the public interest, and the interest of trade, to give a very large discretionary power to the Government on the subject. In the Committee which he was about to propose, he should introduce a clause for limiting in some degree that power, and, therefore, it would be unnecessary for the noble Lord to persevere in his Motion for an instruction to the Committee to search for precedents, as no precedent of the kind could certainly be found.
Lord Ellenboroughwould, under such circumstances, withdraw his Motion.
Lord Aucklandremarked, that the noble Lord was correctly informed when he estimated the expense of those Superintendents at from 27,000 l. to 30,000 l. per annum, but he believed that a duty of 10 s. upon every 100 l. worth of goods would be sufficient to meet the expense.
Bill to be referred to a Select Committee.