Sitting of 20 February 1807

MINUTES.
This day the following members were chosen by ballot to try the merits of the Downpatrick election :—R. P. Scudamore, esq. B. Cook, esq. W. M. Pitt, esq. hon. W. Howard, D. Giddy, esq. A Strahan, esq. lord Althorpe, F. J. Wilder, esq. D. P. Coke, esq. hon. C. Herbert, J. Wharton, esq. hon. W. Broderick, Thos. Kemp, esq. nominees, H. Martin, esq. C. W. Wynne, esq.—Mr. Grenville (from the commissioners for executing the office of lord high admiral) acquainted the house, that their lordships having judged it expedient that captain sir Home Popham should be tried by a court martial for having quitted the Cape of Good Hope, for the purpose of attacking the Spanish settlements in the Rio de la Plata, without having received any direction or authority whatever for that purpose, had accordingly issued their warrant to the marshal of the high court of admiralty for taking him into custody; that, as captain sir Home Popham is a member of this house, their lordships had thought it a respect due to the house, to inform them of his commitment, and to lay before them a copy of the warrant, by virtue of which he is now in custody. And Mr. Grenville delivered in at the table, a copy of the warrant to the marshal of the admiralty,

931
to take into his custody the said captain sir Home Popham: and the said copy was read. Ordered, that what Mr. Grenville hath now communicated to the house, and also the said copy, be entered in the journal of this house.—The house having, upon the motion of sir J. Newport, resolved into a committee of ways and means, the .right hon. bart. proposed a resolution for discontinuing certain duties, and enacting others in their room. He read over a list of new duties which he proposed to impose, namely, upon every man whose house and land was above the value of 4l. per annum, and less than 7l. one shilling and sixpence a year; if more than 7l. and less than 10 l., two shillings, if not liable to the hearth tax; if more than 10 l. and less than 40 l,. three-pence in the pound; and for every pound above 40 l., four-pence in the pound, if not liable to the window tax. He also stated his proposed scale of taxation upon windows and hearths, and concluded with observing, that it was the intention in all matters of personal taxation to make bachelors pay double as much as married men. Upon the paper manufactory the right hon. baronet proposed to impose a tax according to the number of vats used by the manufacturer, instead of mills, which were heretofore the criteria, and which had led to a great loss of revenue. There were several duties heretofore annual, which the right hon. baronet announced his intention of proposing to be made permanent. In answer to a question from colonel Barry, the right hon. baronet stated, that an increased tax upon horses was meant to be imposed upon those who had four or more horses, unless for purposes of agriculture, but that the increase was not to go lower.—The resolution was then agreed to.

MUTINY BILL—ROMAN CATHOLICS.
Lord Howickmoved the reading of the order for the second reading of the mutiny bill on Tuesday next, with a view, as the noble lord stated, to move the postponement of this order to a future day. The propriety of this postponement in the absence of his right hon. friend (Mr. Windham) would, he had no doubt, be readily admitted. But there were other objects which rendered further delay necessary, in order to afford time for the preparation of some additional clauses which it was intended to bring forward. It would be remembered by many members, that in the year 1793, a clause was inserted in the
932
Irish mutiny bill, allowing catholics to hold a certain rank in the army, and this clause it was now proposed to make general. It was also proposed that all catholics in the army should be allowed the free exercise of their religion. This was, no doubt, the practice already; but it was understood that it would afford much more satisfaction if it were made the law. In addition to these there were other clauses of less moment which it was proposed to submit to the house. Such were the reasons which urged the noble lord to move a further postponement of this measure.
Mr. Yorkeasked, whether it was likely that the discussion would be brought forward upon the day mentioned by the noble lord, or whether it would be postponed any further?
Lord Howicksaw no reason to apprehend that any farther delay would be necessary. The noble lord moved, that the order for the second reading of this bill should be fixed for Tuesday se'nnight.—Ordered accordingly.

WESTMINSTER ELECTION PETITION.
Mr. Sheridanrose, pursuant to notice, to move that the order for the appointment of a committee to consider the petition upon this subject should be discharged, with a view to move for the further postponement. The right hon. gent. was so much of opinion, from what had passed when last this question was before the house, that a motion for further postponement would be immediately assented to if required, that he confessed he heard with considerable surprise of the intention to oppose the motion, particularly on the part of the noble lord (Folkestone), by whom a similar proposition was last submitted to the house. Had he happened to have stood in the predicament of being unable to bring forward such a motion, he really thought that the noble lord would have been ready to propose it himself. At least he felt that he should be warranted, from the noble lord's former language and conduct, in relying upon his readiness to second him in this proposition. Of the grounds of this reliance, and the justice of his opinion, the house would be able to judge from a short review of the history of the case. When the petition before the house was presented, which was about the 23d of December, the first or second day after any petitions could be received, the noble lord announced the desire of the petitioners that the earliest day possible should be appointed for the bal-

933
lot, and that they were ready at once to go before a committee. Accordingly the 13th of January was appointed. But, notwithstanding the declaration of the noble lord, and the publicly proclaimed resolution of the petitioners, he received, not many days afterwards, a note from the noble lord, stating, that it was through a mistake he presented the petition so soon, and that the parties were not ready to go into the investigation on the day originally appointed. The noble lord, therefore, requested his consent to a further postponement, as a matter of personal accommodation to himself, and a matter of justice towards the petitioners, who would otherwise suffer through his error. Having had an acquaintance with the noble lord, he was certainly disposed to accommodate him, but yet he felt himself bound, before he complied with the noble lord's request, to consult the opinion of his friends, and they decidedly objected to the delay required. However, when he came down to the house upon the day appointed for the motion, the noble lord applied to him again: and again asking his consent to the motion as a personal favour, he did grant it. So far as he had gone, he believed the noble lord could not say, that what he had stated was not strictly true. But as to the conversation which took place the day the noble lord's motion of postponement was agreed to, he held in his hand a document which contained it. He knew that he could not distinctly allude to the evidence he had adduced, because according to the orders of that house, strangers were understood to be excluded. But somehow a memorandum of what was said on the day alluded to, did find its way into print, and certainly it was detailed with considerable accuracy. In looking over this memorandum, it would be seen that all the arguments advanced by the noble lord made against his motion, and of course it was a very natural inference that the motion owed its success to something else. That something was his concurrence; and he recollected very well, as it appeared from this memorandum, that he mentioned, at the time, his apprehension that the 24th of Feb. would go too near the circuit, which would render a farther postponement necessary, as his counsel would be out of town. Such was his statement then, and it was only upon the express condition that farther delay would be acceded to, if necessary, that he gave his assent to the noble lord's motion. This he
934
could aver from his own memory, but there were not less than 20 or 30 gentlemen present, who also heard the noble lord, and who could bear testimony to the noble lord's observation. The noble lord did state upon that occasion, that when he mentioned the 24th of Feb. he was not aware that the circuit was so near, and that if that day should in consequence become inconvenient, there could be no objection to a farther postponement. This declaration the noble lord was understood to have made by several friends near him. The house, he had no doubt, would agree with him in thinking, that when the petitioners urged the noble lord to move for the former postponement on the ground that they did not wish for the trial on an early day, that the noble lord was not aware of the resolution relative to a speedy trial, which these petitioners had just before published, and in all probability the noble lord was equally unaware of this circumstance, that the counsel for the petitioners did not go any circuit, while those retained on his part did. But of this the petitioners were fully apprised, and they would fain urge him to trial without the advantage of his counsel. It might be asked, why he did not make this proposition of postponement somewhat sooner? He would candidly answer, because, as he stated before when this subject was under consideration, he really did not think the petition would be persisted in, but from what he had heard of their proceedings within the last few weeks, he was led to believe that his opponents were much more sanguine, even than he suspected, and that they were resolved to persevere. Upon the whole, however, the right hon. gent. could not persuade himself to suppose that that house would call on any gentleman to enter upon such an important investigation, stripped of the aid of his counsel; and he could not help observing that the attempt to take advantage of him this instance, was not a very liberal return for the manner in which he gave way to the noble lord's motion upon a former occasion.
Lord Folkestonewished that he could return the compliment which the right hon. gent. had thought proper to bestow upon his accuracy; but he differed from him entirely as to his report of the conversation which took place on a former day. So far from the right hon. gent. having expressed a wish for further postponement, he had treated the proposition at the time as an omen of the petitioner's total abandon-

935
ment of the case. Without referring to any of the newspaper reports brought forward by the right hon. gent. he had no hesitation in positively asserting that he never made any such pledge or promise of agreeing to farther postponement, as that stated by the right hon. gent. But he would go farther. He denied that the right hon. gent. so understood him at the time of the discussion, or so understood him since. But the right hon. gent. was not more inaccurate in his text than in his preface, particularly relative to the private note. For he denied having ever asked the right hon. gent.'s consent to his motion. He merely sent him a line, as he thought himself bound in courtesy to do, apprising the right hon. gent. of his intended motion. But he would deem it very improper indeed to apply for the leave or concurrence of the right hon. gent. As to the observations made by him upon the subject of the circuit, he did not recollect, nay, he was certain, that he did not utter, one word that could warrant the conclusion drawn by the right hon. gent. He merely said that the propriety of farther postponing the ballot in consequence of the approach of the circuit might become matter for subsequent consideration. But he made no pledge, nor did he think the right hon. gent. either then or since believed him to have made any pledge upon this subject. The noble lord, after re-stating the manner in which he was led into the mistake of presenting this petition sooner than the petitioners wished, and commenting upon what he called the 'right hon. gent.'s perversion of the fact,' declared that he did not know until the preceding day, who were the counsel employed on either side, and concluded with expressing a hope that the house would not countenance a motion Supported upon such light grounds, and brought forward only four days before the day fixed for the ballot.
Lord Howickthought the house should be always jealous of motions of this nature, and decide upon them with the utmost impartiality. With regard to what had passed on this subject on a former occasion, he could not hesitate to say that the impression upon his mind, from what the noble lord had said, was precisely the same as that stated by his right hon. friend. He would enter into no contest with the noble lord as to accuracy of memory, or as to the precise words he used: but most certainly he understood the express condition of his
936
right hon. friend's assent to the motion was this, that if the circuit should interfere with the day then named, the noble lord would concur in a farther postponement. It was under these circumstances, for the house to consider, whether his right hon. friend had made out such a case as entitled him to the indulgence for which he applied.
Lord Folkestone,in explanation, again denied that he made any pledge.
The Attorney-General declared, that having heard the noble lord, the last time this subject was under consideration, the impression upon his mind, from what the noble lord said, was precisely the same as that which his noble friend who spoke last entertained. Without at all implicating the noble lord, whom he conceived as much above joining in such a thing as any man in that house, he could not help observing that the circumstance of naming the 24th of Feb., a day which it was known would be so near the circuit, had very much the appearance of a statagem on the part of the petitioners. For they were not unaware that the two able counsel, Mr. Serjeant Lens and Mr. Scarlet, who were retained for his right hon. friend, would be on the circuit, while their eminent advocate, Mr. Plumer, would be in town.
Mr. Percevalcould not speak with confidence as to the words used in the conversation which took place when this subject was last before the house, for his attention to it was not so diligent as to justify any reliance on his memory. But, from the general impression on his mind, he could not say that he understood the noble lord had made any such pledge as that referred to. Nor did the right hon. gent. (Mr. Sheridan) appear to him to have at all pressed any point at to counsel; for he spoke rather in an air of triumph, as if he relied on the total abandonment of the petition, and that the house would hear no more of it. The absence of counsel on the circuit he thought very insufficient ground to allege for the postponement of a question of this nature; for upon that ground all the petitions before the house might be postponed.
Mr. Peter Mooreregretted that the liberality of his right hon. friend should have prompted him in a former instance to consent to the postponement of this measure. But he recollected well the condition upon which that consent was given, although this condition seemed now so entirely forgotten by the noble lord. With

937
regard to the petition, if the petitioners would forego the aid of their counsel, he was sure his right hon. friend could, unaided by any counsel, have no hesitation to go to trial at once with them, notwithstanding all the confidence of their boasting, all the activity of their enquiries, and all the acrimony of their contrivances.
Lord Folkestonecontended that the learned gent. (the attorney-general) was not warranted from any part of the conduct of the petitioners, in imputing to them any description of fraud or stratagem.—After some farther conversation, the house divided; for Mr. Sheridan's motion 167; against it 12; majority 155. The order for a ballot was then fixed for Tuesday the 14th of April.

IRISH MISCELLANEOUS SERVICES.
The house resolved itself into a committee of supply, to which the various accounts respecting the Irish Miscellaneous Services had been previously referred. Sir John Newport moved, and it was resolved by the committee, that the several sums in the respective estimates, be granted for his majesty's further services to which they referred, for the year ending the 1st of January, 1808.
Mr. H. A. Herbertobserved upon the resolution voting a certain sum to the association for discountenancing vice and promoting the knowledge of religion and virtue, that however he might respect the individuals composing that body, he could not entirely approve of any self-created corporation, not relying upon their own voluntary contributions.
Sir J. Newportsaid, that the grant now called for, was for the purpose of enabling the association to purchase a quantity of Bibles and Testaments, in order to retail them at a very low rate to the lower orders of the community.
Mr. Corrywished it to be generally understood, that the sums now called for, for the miscellaneous services of Ireland were in principle guaranteed by the union compact; as to the association interested in the resolution now before the committee that association was incorporated before the union, and sanctioned uniformly by the parliament of Ireland, and most deservedly so, for the country had derived the most inestimable advantages from its unwearied zeal in the cause of religion and morality.
Mr. Wilberforcethought the diffusion of Bibles and Testaments the best possible
938
way of promoting the moral and intellectual improvement of the lower orders in any country, but above all in Ireland.
On the Resolution that a sum of 5000 l. be granted for the Roman Catholic college, at Maynooth, in addition to the sum of 8,000 l. annually, which additional grant was for the erection of other buildings, for the further accommodation of the students in that seminary, a short conversation took place.
Mr. Percevalhad no objection, as this establishment had been founded previous to the union, to granting the sum of 8,000 l. as usual; but as he looked upon the present proposed addition as the commencement of an increasing expenditure, which would tend to make that institution rival the university of Dublin, and tend to the establishment of the catholic religion, he felt it his duty to express his dissent to it in the first instance, though he did not then mean to press his opposition to a division. If he was rightly informed, the youth of the Roman catholic gentry were educated in the university of Dublin, before the establishment of this institution; which practice had wholly ceased since. If this addition were in this instance to be granted, it would be the foundation for a further application next year, and he was against the policy of giving any encouragement to the growth of the Roman catholic religion.
Sir John Newportobserved, that the question was, not whether the catholic clergy should be educated in foreign countries, or at home; for, in the present state of Europe, they could not go for education to foreign countries. The question therefore was, whether they should be educated at all. Every gentleman would admit, that the catholics could not, by being educated abroad, be rendered better subjects, and that a domestic education for them was most desirable. Since the establishment of the institution by the disuse of foreign education, the demand for a supply of catholic clergymen had increased, in order to replace the infirm or the dead, and had increased to such a degree that the college did not afford sufficient. It had on that account been recommended by the government of Ireland to increase the grant, for the purpose of providing greater accommodations. The petition was solely for the education of the catholic clergy; but a lay seminary had been established near the college, which had the benefit of the professors of the college. The catholics

939
had not been allowed to enter the university of Dublin till the relaxation in 1793, and this institution had immediately been founded.
Mr. H. A. Herbertsaid, that there was not an item in the whole accounts, to which he should give so hearty and cordial an assent, as that which was now before the committee; he insisted, that if we were in earnest with the people of Ireland, if Maynooth college was not a mockery, we should not hesitate to give the grants necessary for its maintenance.
Mr. Percevalsaid, that many of the catholic gentry were educated in the protestant university of Ireland, before the erection of Maynooth college; but that since that impolitic measure, the number of catholic pupils in Dublin college had considerably diminished.
Sir J. Newportthought, that the right hon. gent. must have been misinformed on that head, as before the year 1793 no Roman catholic students were admissible.
Mr. Percevalfurther contended against the policy of any institution for the encouragement of Catholicism in Ireland, to the manifest injury of Protestantism.
Sir J. Newportdenied that there was a lay institution of the nature asserted by the hon. member; the college founded and supported by government, was for the education of the priesthood, and the priesthood only; instruction to the laity however, he admitted, might have been a secondary object.
Mr. Grattansaid, that the question lay within a narrow compass; whether the Roman catholic was to go abroad; form foreign connections; involve himself in foreign relations, and bring home foreign affections to his country; or whether he was to remain in his native land, and there acquire the instruction he was there to disseminate? If this could be as well effected in the college of Dublin, he should rejoice at it; for he would ever wish to see the catholic and protestant walking hand in hand together; he would wish to have them acting in such co-operation as to have in common the one grand impulse, and the one grand end; but the expence of instruction was complained of. What was the expence? 13,000 l; and what was got by that 13,000 l? the instruction of 3 millions and a half of people; this would be more than economy; it would be worse than parsimony; keep the Roman catholic at home; home education will promote alle-
940
giance; foreign education can engender no great loyalty; kept at home and taught to love his country, he must revere its government.
Mr. Bankesthought the institution highly impolitic, and maintained that catholicism in Ireland should be discouraged rather than upheld.
Captain Herbertwarmly supported the institution, and illustrated its policy, by an allusion to a certain occurrence in the French revolution, at the expulsion of the priests, and the consequent degradation of the protestant clergy.
Lord Stanleyapproved of the principle of the institution.—The resolutions were then agreed to, and on the house resuming, the report was ordered to be received on Monday.

SLAVE TRADE ABOLITION BILL.
Lord Howickmoved the order of the day for the second reading of the Slave Trade Abolition Bill.
General Gascoynesuggested the propriety of deferring the hearing of counsel till Monday, on the ground that on the first reading of the bill, it was understood that the whole of this day was to be occupied with this most important question, and that at that hour of the evening it was not likely there would be such an attendance to hear the arguments of counsel with patience and decorum, as the magnitude of the measure required.
Lord Howickwas as much disposed as any man to consider this as a question of great importance: perhaps it was the most important that had ever been submitted to a legislative body; but when the louse was told that this was an inconvenient hour to hear counsel, and to hear counsel alone, for it was understood that no debate was to follow, he did not see how such an assertion could be supported. He certainly regretted that such a delay had occurred, which was to be attributed to the unexpected time that had been occupied by the public business that had been brought forward on that evening. It was not a very late hour, and he was of opinion, that there was a fuller attendance at that time than could be expected at the hour proposed by the hon. gent. opposite.—Gen. Gascoyne declaring that he did not mean to persevere in his recommendation of postponement, counsel were then called in, in the following order: Mr. Dallas, for the merchants and planters of Jamaica; Mr. Alexander, for the

941
merchants of London trading to Africa; Mr. Scarlett, for the merchants and planters of Trinidad; Mr. Clarke, for the mayor, corporation, and merchants of Liverpool. After Mr. Dallas had pleaded at considerable length, he prayed, that evidence might be called in to prove the truth of his assertions. He was then ordered to withdraw, and gen. Gascoyne moved, that evidence should be called to the bar. Mr. Fuller seconded the motion.
Lord Howickwas persuaded, that the hon. gent. could not believe that the motion would be acceded to. Not any thing that the counsel had stated was new to the house, except one point, the relative situation of St. Domingo and Jamaica, and this was a mere matter of opinion. If after so many years of enquiry, the house still went on to investigate this subject, they would never come to a decision.
Mr. Fullerdeemed it extremely unfair to prevent evidence from being heard in support of the opinions of the learned counsel. As to what the noble lord said about opinion, what was the state of this country? Was it not governed by opinion? Was not the admiralty influenced by the opinion of a noble earl, a near connection of the noble lord's (earl St. Vincent), who had the other evening made a speech on this subject in the house of lords? He was desirous of hearing the evidence of those who were acquainted with the subject; and, when such an immense property was at stake, if there was any fairness, propriety, or decorum in the house, they would agree to the motion.
General Gascoyneexpressed himself surprised at the opposition of the noble lord. If any evidence could illustrate this momentous subject, it was the evidence of the two respectable persons whom the learned counsel wished to call to the bar. Did the noble lord mean to say, that all that had been urged by the learned counsel was matter of opinion, and that nothing new had been stated by him? The mere hearing of counsel, without allowing evidence to be called to support their statements, was a mockery.
Mr. Hibbertrecommended that evidence should be called in.
Sir C. Poleurged the production of evidence, and declared that he could prove that the immediate abolition of the slave trade would be the most barbarous proceeding, even to the negro himself.
Mr. Wilberforcehad not heard in the
942
whole of the pleadings of the learned counsel a single new point, except that which had been justly termed by the noble lord matter of opinion. Evidence was therefore unnecessary. It was still less so in the present case, because one of the witnesses alluded to was a member of that house who would be heard in his place with that deference to which he was so justly entitled. Nor did he think the governor of a West-India island the most proper person to examine as to the state of a negro slave. If any one wished to enquire into the condition of a peasant in this country, would he ask persons of rank and consequence? Would he not rather apply to those who were of an humbler class, who were more intimately acquainted with the subject? With regard to any further evidence, he was convinced that the house would see no reason for it, when they considered that for the last three years, both down stairs and in committees, every species of evidence that could possibly elucidate the question, had been gone into.—The question was put, "That the counsel be again called in, and directed to proceed with his evidence," and negatived without a division. Mr. Alexander then proceeded with his pleadings, and afterwards Mr. Clarke. At the close of the speeches of each of the learned counsel, he requested that evidence might be called in; and general Gascoyne made successive motions to that effect, which were negatived without a division. Mr. Scarlett was then heard for the island of Trinidad; he also concluded by requesting that evidence should be adduced; and after having retired, was again called in, on the motion of lord Howick, to state the points on which he wished that evidence should be examined. They were in substance, the loss that would be sustained by certain persons who had been induced by the British government to become settlers. After the learned gent. had again withdrawn,
Mr. Wilberforceremarked, that this was not the proper time for hearing such evidence. If the question of compensation should, at a subsequent period, be brought before the house, that would be the opportunity for receiving it.
Mr. Howarthwarmly urged the propriety of hearing evidence. He trusted justice would be done to the white, as well as the black, and moved that the counsel be called in, and directed to proceed with his evidence.
Lord Howickopposed the motion. The learned counsel had stated two points which he wished to establish by evidence. The first was, that no more ground could be cleared in the island of Trinidad without fresh importation of slaves; the second' that great loss would be sustained by the settlers by the abolition of the trade. The first was a self-evident proposition, and, would lead merely to a question of policy: the second would be a question of future consideration. Those who demanded compensation, might hereafter submit their case to the house, who were never backward in listening to the claims of justice.
General Gascoynecould not forbear expressing his satisfaction that the principle of indemnity seemed to be acknowledged by the noble lord.
Lord Howickin explanation said, that he had only stated a general principle.
Sir P. Franciswas not willing to allow the possibility of a case in which the public ought to compensate an individual for any losses which might arise from the abolition of such iniquitous practices.
Mr. Roscoedeclared, that, after having performed the great duty of abolishing the Slave Trade, which had so disgraced the land, he thought the house bound to consider the situation of those who should suffer from the annihilation of a system so long sanctioned by the Legislature.
Mr. R. Thorntonthought that there would be few cases entitled to compensation. Those engaged in commercial concerns were necessarily exposed to risks, and sufficient warning had long been given to those engaged in this abominable traffic.
Mr. S. Stanhopeconceived that it would be convenient if the principle on which compensation would be allowed was stated Before the passing of the present bill.—The motion was then negatived without a division. After which, lord Howick moved that the bill be committed, and the debate motion on that was adjourned till Monday.