Sitting of 23 February 1809

THE DUKE OF YORK'S LETTER TO THE SPEAKER.
The Speakerrose and stated, that since he had come to the house, he had received a Letter, the contents of which related to the Inquiry now pending before the house respecting the Conduct of his royal highness the Duke of York, and he wished to know whether it was the pleasure of the house that he should read it. [A general exclamation of Read! read! read!] The right hon. gent. then announced that the Letter came from his royal highness the Duke of York, was signed "Frederick," addressed to the Speaker, and dated Horse Guards, Feb. 23, 1809. The contents were as follow:
Sir, Horse Guards, Feb. 23, 1809."I have waited with the greatest anxiety until the Committee appointed by the House of Commons to enquire into my Conduct as Commander in Chief of His Majesty's Army had closed its examinations, and I now hope that it will not be

1033
deemed improper to address this Letter, through you, to the House of Commons.
"I observe with the deepest concern, that in the course of this Enquiry my name has been coupled with transactions the most criminal and disgraceful; and I must ever regret and lament that a connection should ever have existed which has thus exposed my character and honour to public animadversion.
"With respect to any alledged offences connected with the discharge of my official duties, I do in the most solemn manner, upon my honour, as a Prince, distinctly assert my innocence, not only by denying all corrupt participation in any of the infamous transactions which have appeared in evidence at the Bar of the House of Commons, or any connivance at their existence, but also the slightest knowledge or suspicion that they existed at all.
"My consciousness of innocence leads me confidently to hope that the House of Commons will not, upon such evidence as they have heard, adopt any proceeding prejudicial to my honour and character; but if, upon such testimony as has been adduced against me, the House of Commons can think my innocence questionable, I claim of their justice that I shall not be condemned without trial, or be deprived of the benefit and protection which is afforded to every British subject by those sanctions under which alone evidence is received in the ordinary administration of the Law.
I am, Sir,
Yours,
FREDERICK."
The Speaker of the House of Commons.
The Speakerthen said, that though it was usual on such occasions to order the Letter to lie on the table for the perusal of the members, yet as gentlemen on each side of him were anxious for the perusal; and as it was desirable to give the individual members of the house, as speedily as possible, possession of the contents of the
1034
Letter, he suggested the idea of taking the Letter from the table now, in order to have it entered without loss of time upon the Votes and Journals.
Mr. Bankessaid, that, as this appeared to him to be an extraordinary proceeding, he must appeal to the knowledge and recollection of the Speaker, as to former precedents, in order to direct the house in what was proper to be done.
The Speakersaid, that the constant usage of the house, to the best of his recollection, had been, that all letters received by the Speaker, and which he should deem proper to be communicated to the house, in the first instance were laid on the table, in order afterwards, at a convenient opportunity, to be copied into the Votes and Journals. In all ordinary cases this had been done. Letters had been received by the Speaker, even on an occasion not remote, upon the subject of charges pending before the house; and this was the uniform custom, even without putting any question. But, where a letter on a subject of so much more than ordinary importance was addressed to him for communication to the house, and when gentlemen to his right and left were anxious to peruse it, he felt it. his duty to suggest the propriety of immediately ordering it, in the first instance, to be copied on the Votes and Journals, that no delay might occur in placing it in the possession of every member of the house.
The house concurred in the suggestion, and it was adopted accordingly.

EAST INDIA COMPANY'S AFFAIRS.—
Mr. R. Dundusrose to move for a renewal of the Committee which had sat last session on the East India Company's Affairs. The house Would recollect that last session a Petition had been presented from the East India Company, praying for a settlement of Accounts with the public, and also for aid. On this a Committee had been appointed, and though it had performed the duty to a considerable extent, yet there were various points which still remained to be considered. The finances, the trade, and several other matters had not been so thoroughly inspected as they ought to be. He stated last year, that it would be most proper to appoint such persons as were most conversant with East India Affairs; he would now move for the re-appointment of the same persons, with the exception of two, who said that it would be very inconvenient for them to attend. The exceptions were Mr. T. Grenville and Mr.

1035
Hobhouse; and in their places, he would propose lord Temple and Mr. Addington.
Mr. Creeveyobserved, that he had several objections to the plan of constituting the Committee, as it had been before constituted, and he conceived this to be a proper time for briefly stating those objections. For the purpose of placing those objections in a just light, he adverted to the Committee, that had been appointed on the motions of Mr. Burke and lord Melville. On the Report of the Committee appointed by lord Melville, had been formed the Board of Controul, and members would, no doubt, recollect how his lordship had come down, session after session, with congratulations to himself and to the country, upon the prosperous state of our empire in the East, owing to his system. The noble lord opposite (lord Castlereagh), who had been educated in his school, followed his steps exactly, and repeated his congratulations. In 1806, however, when another noble lord (Morpeth), a friend of his, held a situation in the Board of Controul, a very different statement was produced. In 1807, the Company had come to the house with a Petition, that they might be allowed to borrow money upon their bonds, lie resisted that, unless they would consent to make a complete disclosure of their affairs. This they promised in the following sessiton, and a Committee was accordingly appointed. The house was aware of the importance and extent of the matters to be inquired into. The house had passed a Resolution disapproving of further conquests; but instead of adhering to the plan recommended in this Resolution, the Indian politicians persevered in their destructive schemes, till a great number of the native princes were destroyed, and the greater part of their dominions added to the territories of the Company. All the predictions with respect to their finances had failed, except that in one instance they had performed part of their engagements to the public, by paying 500,000l. The debt, which was to have been liquidated long before the time at which he was speaking, had constantly increased. It was impossible there could be a grosser case. In addition to this, the Committee had to consider the declaration of all the Directors, excepting one, that the wars of the marquis Wellesley were the cause of their embarrassments—that he had acted in violation of their laws, and had introduced into India a system of complete des-
1036
potism. What subject could be more grave and urgent than this? The whole causes of the disappointments experienced for such a long series of years; even the utility of the system of controul, might be called in question, as well as the conduct of all those connected with it. There might also appear some reason to conclude that the conduct of the Directors themselves ought to be arraigned; and yet the Committee selected to inquire into all these transactions were the very persons whose conduct might be called in question, as connected with these transactions; and they were thus to sit in judgment upon themselves and their system. There never was such a mockery of inquiry before. The person who proposed the Committee, and those of whom it was to be composed, was himself at the head of the Board of Controul, and nearly connected with its founder; and, therefore, it was to be presumed, that none of the Committee could be so uncivil as to open the lip against that system, or deny its utility. And though the marquis could not be on that Committee, yet care was taken to place his connections there; and the right hon. baronet (sir John Anstruther), who was the friend of the marquis Wellesley, and had been intimately connected with his system in his capacity of Chief Judge of Bengal, was to be the Chairman of this Committee! Would the hon. and learned baronet say a word upon the despotic system of the marquis Wellesley? But then it might be said, that two of the Directors were there. These Directors were, however, suing the Committee for money, something in the manner of paupers, and they were, out of doors, suing the right hon. gent. (Mr. Dundas) for a renewal of their charter. It was not probable, under these circumstances, that they would be very obstinate in their objections to whatever policy the right hon. gent. should approve. But it might be said again, how could we get information on these subjects, unless the Committee was composed of such as were most conversant with these matters? The best way to come at information was by the examination of records and of witnesses. Those persons most capable of giving information, might be examined by impartial though unlearned persons, and much more good would result. As a confirmation of this he mentioned the result of the labours of the unlearned Committee of Mr. Burke, which by the examination of witnesses and records, had produced a Re-

1037
port abounding in information. The information given in by lord Melville's Committee was not so profound and ample; but the Reports of both were admirable, when compared with the miserable production of last year by these knowing gentlemen, He blamed the Committee also for not producing the document for which he had moved last year. It was the very worst Committee that could be appointed, if the object was to give accurate information to the public. The great object of Buonaparte was to get to India; and he had already attempted to pave the way to that object. He had been successful at the court of Persia; and if he could reach our Indian possessions, he could not have two better allies than the embarrassment of the finances and the alienation of the natives. A Committee of this kind was calculated to preclude, and not to elicit information, and therefore he protested against it.
Sir Arthur Wellesleythought it rather an odd way of selecting a Committee, to fix upon those persons who were ignorant of the business to come before that Committee, to the. exclusion of those who were informed upon the subject. The hon. gent. had objected to him (sir A. Wellesley) in a pointed, he might almost say in a personal manner, but he appealed to that hon. gent. as to the line of conduct pursued by him in the course of the proceedings of the late Committee. He begged leave to observe, that it could not be owing to any material difference as to the sincerity of his views with respect to East India politics, for he (sir Arthur) had divided with that hon. gent. on a question of no trifling importance, that had been before that Committee, and he did assure that hon. gent., that of this he might be sure, that whenever the conduct of his noble relation came before that Committee, the fullest and the most rigid inquiry into that conduct should at all times have his most cordial support. Indeed, he never should shrink from not only inquiry into that, but into all that either his noble relation, himself, or the marquis of Cornwallis, had done, even from the time of the year 1782. That our East India settlements had been most considerably extended, he did not think to constitute in itself a serious accusation, but he was fully prepared to prove to the Committee, whenever they would go into it, that the extension of our dominions had not been owing, as it had been presumed, to any aggression on our part; neither had they been undertaken with any view
1038
of ambitious aggrandizement. Whether and how far they were to be followed up, would be a question of a very different nature. It was certain, that war was in no country so expensive as in the East Indies. Since the peace of Deccan, concluded by him in 1803, there had not been in that province the slightest symptom of a tendency to hostilities. With respect to the Exposition, he thought that every paper relating to it ought to be produced. He wished the Exposition to have fair play, and it should be the intention of the Committee to give the details of all matters of Exposition. He could only say, with respect to the propriety of his own appointment, that if the house should think proper to add his name to that Committee, he never would oppose any question with respect to India, and he would; in every respect, discharge his duty with impartiality, and to the best of his abilities.
Mr. Creevey,in explanation, denied that he had made any personal objections whatever to the gallant general, his objection was generally to those filling official situations.
Lord Archibald Hamiltonregretted that it was so often his misfortune to differ from gentlemen in that house upon the subject of East India affairs. He did think that the oppressions arising from the abuses of power by Buonaparte, were not greater nor more unjustifiable than those practised by the British government in India, and there had been a time when those opinions were more generally maintained, and more openly avowed, than they now certainly were. He was therefore at all times anxious for inquiry the most strict, which to he so ought to be the most impartial. He had no personal objection to any hon. member of that. Committee, but he was sure that any member being personally unobjectionable, was not therefore a sufficient reason why he might not be objectionable on the score of partiality.
Mr. W. Smithwas satisfied that there was nothing personal meant in the objection taken by his hon. friend, to the propriety of admitting the hon. general to a place in the Committee. The objection referred to official capacity only, and he did think the objection in this point well grounded. With respect to precedent, as alluded to by the hon. general, he was one of those who thought that forty precedents together could never sanction error. So far was he from thinking that the precedent of appointing informed per-

1039
sons should only be adhered to, that he thought that the house in nominating persons to this Committee, should rather look for impartiality with the means of obtaining information, than partiality, however fully possessed of that information, for in his experience he never met with many free from bias. He did not mean improper or corrupt bias, but that tendency to decide according to one's wishes; in the case of a common jury it was surely a matter of recommendation, that they were wholly ignorant of the merits of any case they were called upon to try. But if the persons to try in the present instance were not only acquainted with the circumstances of the question, but were parties in it, it was vain to say, that such persons could be competent judges. Here, then, the objection of his lion, friend lay; it was not to the individual, but to the situation which that individual had been in; and so far had he thought this principle objectionable, that it had always been his opinion, an opinion from the open avowal of which he had never shrunk, that the great mixture of the officers of the crown with the members of that house, had a tendency to prejudice the character, by improperly influencing the decisions, of parliament. This had been at all times his opinion; at the same time, he was aware of the suggestion, that it was perfectly possible to let the officers of the crown have seats without votes.
Mr. Wilberforcesaid, he was not present at the commencement of the debate, but as he had a personal interest in the question, (he being one of the members proposed for that Committee,) he did wish to say one or two words. He dissented altogether from his hon. friend who had just sat down, as to the principle that would, in its application, tend to the exclusion of the servants of the crown from a share in the debates and decisions of that house; in every tribunal it was not to be doubted that impartiality was not only a desirable, but an indispensible qualification; but he could not go so far as to assent, that due information upon any question to be tried was inconsistent with impartiality. How would such a principle, carried to such an extent, apply to the officers who conducted in that house the business of the country? Were they to be driven from the privilege of defending in public whatever measures for the general good they had devised in private? Were they to be forced to leave to others to explain what
1040
they themselves best understood? and was it the most gracious way to encourage and assist their exertions to exclude them from the common privileges of the government, because they had taken upon themselves the arduous responsibility of governing? He could not pass over the observations of his hon. friend in silence; but with respect to the Committee, he thought it an advantage that it should not be deprived of those gentlemen, whose information must be of such service in the course of its inquiries: as far as respected himself, he unaffectedly assured the house, that he did wish to decline being a member of that Committee. He was afraid he could not possibly devote to it as much attention as he wished, and he should be glad that the name of some other gentleman was substituted in place of his own.
Mr. Whitbreadsaid, that the hon. gent. had begun by informing the house that he had not been present at the beginning of the debate: That he had not, was pretty manifest from the tenor of his speech: there was in that speech internal evidence that the hon. gent. did not hear what had gone before him. But with respect to the principle laid down by the hon. gent., in reference to public men, he had the misfortune widely to differ from that hon. gent. He protested against the principle of confidence in public men, and contended for it, that the constitutional principle was distrust—distrust in all public men, be they whom they might. He differed farther from the hon. gent. as to the importance of information on the part of those who were to inquire: information was seldom unaccompanied with bias either to the one side or the other, and even if it were not, he doubted the great advantages imputed to it. They had in their recollection three Committees: two of them, with respect to their previous ignorance of the matter into which they were to examine, might be denominated the unlearned Committees. The unlearned Committees had done their duty, while they had had as yet but one Report from the learned Committee. He had heard the speech of the gallant general, but he had heard nothing to do away the objection that officially existed against his appointment. The gallant general had told the house that he could prove such and such matters in the Committee—that he could prove the justice of his noble relative's administration in the East—that he could prove also the justification of the measures of the marquis Cornwallis—why,

1041
this was all very well in any other character, but not for the man who was to commence an unbiassed inquiry. Let the hon. general go before the Committee, and give in his depositions as a witness, but let him not assume to himself the character of an unprejudiced judge in matters in which he has prejudged already; in short, he was of opinion that the hon. general had disqualified himself by his own speech. But the hon. general was not the only person objectionable. Was the situation of War-Secretary such a sinecure, as that the noble lord could be spared from that department to attend to the business of this Committee? Could the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer quit his official situation, as the hon. general had quited the Chief Secretaryship for Ireland, to discharge the very important duties of a member of this Committee? And as for the Directors, and the members of the Board of Controul, he rather thought that they should be examined against each other as witnesses, than be suffered to preside as judges. The prophecies of sir Philip Francis were fully verified, a man who not only possessed information and integrity, but what was equally important, was independent of office. He did not think that the son of a noble lord who had established the Board of Controul, and who was in other respects so interested in India affairs, or that the brother of a noble marquis, whose administration was thought by some to be so hostile to the interests of Great Britain in India, were the fittest persons to be appointed members of this Committee, He disapproved also of sir John Anstruther being a member of it, upon no other ground than that the mind of that gentleman was already made up upon the subject, and this, he thought, in itself amounted to a disqualification.
Mr. Fullerentered into a comparison between the East and West Indies; the former he viewed as represented by Boards of Controul, Courts of Directors, and he knew not what, while the latter was denied justice, and oppressed.
Mr. W. Smithrose to order. It was rather out of order to accuse the house of commons of injustice and oppression towards the West Indies; and, besides, it had nothing to do with the present question.
Mr. Fullerresumed, and made a few further remarks approbatory of any reform that could be effected.
Mr. C. Grantsaid, if the Committee
1042
was such as he supposed it to be, viz. to inquire into the present state of the Company's Affairs, and the causes which brought them into such a situation, it appeared to him to be fairly constituted.
Mr. P. Mooresaid he thought the Committee a perfect farce and mockery of the public, for it will consist of two parties who ought to be in permanent hostility against each other. The gallant general had said the last war in India had produced the longest peace that had ever been known there; whereas the peace of 1781, made in a few hours, continued for a period of 19 years, till the gallant general was sent out to India with a discretionary power of peace or war in his pocket. The whole system of India had been wrong ever since the minister of the crown had interfered to set it right. The India Company were sufficient to do every thing that could be wished, but the Board of Controul would not permit it. Print the journals of the Board of Controul, and there would appear a system of the greatest fraud and peculation that was ever heard of. When the house came to the consideration of the finances of this country, which he hoped would soon be the case, it would be found that here, as in India, the shameful profligacy and lavish expenditure which had for so many years existed in full blossom, had wasted all the resources of the country in undue patronage, and influence of one kind or other. As to the Exposition, it ought to be produced, that those in the house who wished not to be on any Committee, might see how the resources of the country had been managed. Whilst the whole play of dethroning princes and rajahs was carrying on, not a word of information was sent to their masters the Directors: but they continued in full correspondence with the Board of Controul, and now they were going to club their efforts as a cover to blind the public, and keep them in ignorance of what is going on. He would advise the Chancellor of the Exchequer to take care how he parted with the public money, for he would shew soon, that the looseness and profligacy which had been used in lavishing it away, had drawn the country into all the difficulties under which it now laboured; and to give us a system which, had annihilated all the resources of the India Company, was absurd and preposterous. He had thought it necessary to trouble the house thus much on the business of this Committee, but his chief aim

1043
was to caution the Chancellor of the Exchequer how he parted with the public money.
Mr. G. Jolmstonespoke in favour of this Committee, which, if it had any fault, it was that of leaning too much towards the East India Company. He coincided with Mr. Whitbread, in his panegyric on sir P. Francis, whose name, if he had been in the house, would have been one of the first proposed by his hon. friend to be upon the Committee.
The question was then put, and carried.
Mr. Creevey,in consequence of his notice, rose to move for the production of the Exposition, which had been laid before the last Committee, which he considered as calculated to give more information than the Report of the Committee. In order to shew the grounds for this impression on his mind, he would read certain passages from the paper.
Mr. Wallacespoke to order, he considered it irregular to read from a paper, of which it was the object of the motion to obtain the production.
The Speakerobserved that it was perfectly in order for a gentleman to state the grounds for his motion.
Mr. Creeveyproceeded to read from the Exposition, when,
The Speakerinformed him that it was not regular to read to the house that which he was asking the house to order to be produced. It was the same as with a petition, of which a member might state generally what was the scope and nature, but it was not allowed to be read, even at the table, till the permission of the house was received.
Mr. Creevey,desisting from reading the passages, took a general view of the motives which induced him to offer this motion to the house.
Mr. Dundassaid, it was very unusual, when a Committee was appointed, to anticipate the report of that Committee, by calling for any particular document before the time when the others were to be produced. He doubted not but the Committee would produce that and every other paper relating to the affairs of the Company in due time.
Mr. Whitbreadcompared the conduct of those interested in keeping back the paper called for, to that of a schoolboy he had read of, who would not say A lest he should be compelled to say B. The Exposition called for was of great importance. It could do no harm, it might be productive
1044
of much good; he therefore trusted it would be brought forward.
After some further observations, the motion was negatived without a division.

CORN DISTILLERY PROHIBITION BILL.
The Chancellor of the Exchequermoved the order of the day for the house going into a Committee on this Bill; but before going into the Committee, he moved that it be given, as an Instruction to the Committee, to admit a clause into the Bill, empowering his majesty to prohibit, by Proclamation, the distillation of spirits from corn in Ireland, how and when he should think fit.
Mr. Barhamsaid, it was far from his intention to offend any one; but it was his intention neither to give nor take assertions without proof. He then proceeded to speak on the consumption of spirits, and the beneficial effects which would result from a more general distillation from sugar. Here he gave in a variety of statements and calculations to shew the bad effects of suffering a distillation from corn to exist, to the extent it did at present. He then spoke of the necessity of manifesting a greater regard for our colonies, by opening a more extensive market for their commodities. No one could be ignorant of the low state to which they had been reduced; they had now, in some measure, recovered themselves, but unless such a measure as that he proposed was pursued, their situation would inevitably become worse than ever. Adverting to the affairs of Ireland, he strongly censured the idea of any thing like a combination being in existence; it was a libel on the generous feelings and the understandings of the people of that country. The people of Ireland, he declared, were not averse to the operation of the Bill; he therefore should move, "That an instruction be given to the Committee to extend the provisions of the Bill to Ireland."
Mr. Fostersupported the measure. He stated, that from Jan. 1808, nearly six millions of gallons of spirits had been distilled in Ireland, although not one gallon was distilled from sugar during the whole nine months of the operation of the Bill. It was solely the production of clandestine distilleries, although every exertion had been used to execute the laws, and the collectors had been most vigilant. The hon. gent, who opposed its operation being discontinued, had stated that 2,000 quarters of barley had been purchased at Lynn, at 43s. per quarter, for the purpose

1045
of importing into Ireland; but he (Mr. F.) should aver, that no man would have done so unless he was intending to distil it clandestinely in that country, for 33s. per quarter was at present at the medium price. His opinion was, that the agricultural interests of the country should never be invaded but upon the apprehension of scarcity; and he should prove that there was no such apprehension at present existing in Ireland, to call for the continuance of the former measure. He did not believe that there was a man in Ireland who wished the distillation from sugar to go on, save only those interested individuals, who had attended the meetings which were said to have taken place at Dublin, Cork, Waterford, and Limerick. In regard to the meeting at Waterford, the magistrates issued a notice for that purpose in the newspapers, but assigned no grounds for opposing the measure, as the Petition itself would shew. Every one in Ireland knew that the former bill was soon to expire, and yet no one had come to petition parliament in order to renew it. The obvious reason was, that at this moment there was an uncommon supply of grain in that country, insomuch that England had received from Ireland last year an importation of one million of barrels of oats more than ever before occurred. The continuation of the prohibition would not tend to yield any more food either for man or beast. He had a return from the officers of excise, stating the quantity of stills seized, together with their size and estimated produce, from which it appeared, that from the 10th of Jan., to the 10th of Dec. 1808, unlicensed stills had been seized capable of distilling 800,000 gallons of spirits per month, a quantity that would amount to half a million of gallons more than ever was formerly produced in Ireland within the same space of time. An idea had gone abroad in several parts of Ireland, that the clandestine stills afforded a more ready market to the farmers for their grain, which led these, kind of stills to be in general favourites with the lower orders of the people. Now, the object of the present measure was to bring the people to reason, and shew them that by encouraging the legal stills, preferably to the clandestine stills, the markets would be equally good, sure, and advantageous, and the revenues encreased. By putting the licensed stills thus in competition with the unlicensed ones, the feelings of the people would then be, which of them were most for their interest, to support. By
1046
doing away the unlicensed stills, he had no doubt it would prove a source of wealth to the people. The revenue, last year, upon malt and stills, amounted only to 120,000l. instead of one million and a half. Thus, there was nearly one-fourth of the revenue depending upon this measure, besides the destruction of the morality of the people. He believed the bill had already had a fair trial, and as it had not been found to succeed in Ireland, it ought to be discontinued.
Sir John Newportwished that the petition from Waterford should be read, in order to convince the right hon. gent. that his statement was erroneous, as to its not assigning any reasons for the opinions of these petitioners. Never did a petition contain stronger grounds, or a greater variety of reasons. It was signed by a great number of most respectable names, He had the authority from the mayor who transmitted it to him, to state, that if it could have been allowed to lay longer for signatures, it would have received all those of any note or consequence in the town. He could assure the house, he had no knowledge of the progress of any such petition, so that it came to him totally unsolicited on his part. There were few parts of Ireland more competent to form a judgment of the quantity of grain on hand throughout the country than Waterford, as nearly one-third of the whole grain was supplied from it. The town of Clonmel was in one of the most perfect districts of Ireland, and every person there was unanimous in their opinion as to the propriety of continuing the restriction of distillery from corn. The right hon. gent. had taken very fallacious grounds in arguing that the prices of grain were low throughout Ireland, for he had made his calculation when the price of spirits was 7s. per gallon, and did not advert to the consequences arising from its being now at the price of 17s. per gallon. The fact was, that the increased price of spirits had the effect of increasing the consumption of malt in the breweries, instead of the consumption of grain in the distilleries, besides producing the best effect upon the morals of the people. When it was said that the encouragement to the legal distillation would put down illicit distillation, it was not advocated in Con-naught, and almost the whole of Ulster were formerly, as now, dealing in illicit traffic of that nature. Orders were issued to send two revenue cutters to intercept the grain and spirits so produced, and that

1047
measure was proved to have had a beneficial effect in suppressing illicit stills; but it had been of late discontinued, he knew not why.—He could not agree with t the right hon. gent., that the lower order of the people were the only class that encouraged illicit distillation; for in his opinion, the higher orders were equally participators and encouragers of that traffic, and he had heard gentlemen of respectability defend them on the same principles as had been uttered this night. He thought the higher class were much more culpable than the lower. A bounty had been given upon the higher species of stills, which made it impossible for the lower or smaller stills to be so much employed as they otherwise would have been. The only reason for this was, that the higher stills were more easily watched than the smaller ones; but it was not adverted to, that the higher description of stills required much more capital to work them, and could only be employed by wealthy inhabitants. The effect of this was that the market was taken from the door of the former, and operated as an encouragement to malt distillation. The farmers in Ireland had not the advantage of navigation to convey their grain to market, and therefore they found the small stills the most beneficial. Upon that ground, then, it was evident that one cause of complaint would be removed by taking away the bounty upon large stills, and placing them on a footing with the smaller ones; for, by that means, the incentive to illicit distillation, would be completely removed. The right hon. gent. then entered into a comparison of the prices of grain for the last 3 years, by which he shewed that they were higher at present than formerly, and therefore if it were wise to put a stop to the distillation from grain in May, it was much more necessary now. It was a serious thing to advise the distillation from grain, when there were evident grounds for apprehending a scarcity. He begged the house to pause before they adopted such a measure as that now proposed; and the more especially, as in the North of Ireland there were apprehensions of a want of employment for the flax spinners, in consequence of the dearness of flax. If any increase in the price of provisions took place at a time when there was a diminution of labour, let ministers not be surprised that discontents should remain. When there were petitions from Belfast and from Waterford, places quite distinct and unconnected
1048
with each other, and therefore no common interest nor concern between them as to this particular measure, it was evident that there was nothing operated upon their minds, but the scarcity which the people of Ireland thought likely to arise from it. —These were striking and strong facts; but there was also another which he might advert to, which was, that a very large proportion of the potatoe-pits had been opened; and in consequence of the floods, the potatoes had been found to be rotten; and he begged the house to advert to what might be the consequence, it the whole of them was found in the same state.—Besides this, he should call upon the house to consider well before they, by adopting such a measure, put. it in the power of the crown to continue or discontinue an act, putting Ireland on a footing with G. Britain, and thereby infringing the act of union.—The right hon. baronet concluded an eloquent and impressive speech, by stating, he had felt it his duty to submit these matters to their consideration, and by assuring them, that they had such weight upon his mind as would induce him to vote for the amendment proposed.
General Mathewsupported the present Bill. Clonmel, the capital of the county which he represented, no doubt was against the bill, but other 14 or 15 towns in the same county supported it.
Mr. Bagwelldid not believe potatoes had been cheaper in Ireland for many years than during the present. He must, therefore, be excused in voting against the inclinations of his constituents of Clonmel.
Mr. W. Smithwas clearly of opinion that colonial interests should at all times yield to those of the native country; but at the same time, he could not so separate the interests of the countries, as to say that England should be said to have no sufficient supply, while Ireland had. It appeared to him to be a matter of great risk to make two laws, one for one part of the country, and the other for the other.
Sir Arthur Wellesleysaid lie was of opinion last year, there was not a sufficient quantity of food in Ireland for the demands on her. He was of a different opinion as to the present period; although the prices were high in Dublin, he was convinced there was more than a sufficiency to supply any demands that could be made on her.—He was well aware, if the distillers were not allowed to go on

1049
in their usual course, they would go on privately, and defraud the revenue of the country.
Mr. Marryatsaid that the arguments in favour of the measure proposed were not satisfactory. As to the price of corn, its inequality could not long exist, from the proximity of the two countries. The result to the revenue would be very different from that stated by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, for what was distilled in Ireland could be brought over to England, as the officers who would accept a bribe to permit illicit distillery, would take one in any other case, and Ireland would become a second Dunkirk to Guernsey and Jersey. This measure had affected the price both of grain and sugar; for since its introduction, sugar had fallen in price, and grain had advanced. He concluded, by saying he would vote in favour of the amendment.
General Tarletoncalled the attention of the house to the petition he had presented, and expressed the effect the measure had had upon Lancaster. Considering the state of the continent, our military operations, the little probability of peace, the situation of the Baltic, and America, he would support the amendment.
Mr. Macnaghtensaid, on account of the clause putting it in their power to prohibit the use of grain being introduced, he would vote for the measure.
Mr. Ellissupported the amendment.
Mr. Westernobjected to the bill altogether; any interference of parliament tended to increase the price of grain.
Mr. Wilberforcesaid, that the knowledge of its being in the power of government to stop the distilling from corn at pleasure, would only increase their exertions in Ireland, to use the privilege while they had it.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that he should certainly not support this measure, if he imagined that Yorkshire, or any other part of the united kingdom would, by the operation of it, be deprived of any part of the supply which they would otherwise receive from Ireland. He was convinced, however, that the surplus of the corn in Ireland would otherwise be employed by the illicit distilleries to the prejudice of the revenue in the sum of 700,000 l. annually.
Lord A. Hamiltonmentioned, that the western parts of Scotland would suffer materially by permitting the corn distillery in Ireland.
The house then divided on the Amendment, which was negatived, Ayes 37, Noes 40; majority for Ministers 3.—The original motion was then put and carried.
[The following report of the speech of Mr. Hibbert upon this Bill, on the 6th instant, will be found fuller than the one given at p. 374.]
Mr. Hibbertapproved of that part of the principle of the Bill which further restrained the Distillation from Grain. If the measure of last year had not yet shewn its ill effects, one might fairly conclude that to it was in no degree imputable the scarcity and dearness of grain which, since that measure, had been progressive. Upon this fact, and upon the continued uncertainty of foreign supply, rested the expediency of prolonging the disuse of grain in the distillation, and the landed interest in that house did not appear at present inclined to oppose it.—But he presumed that he was in order, when he considered as part of the principle of the proposed Bill, the exception of a large division of the empire from its operation; a matter he conceived of too primary importance to be reserved for argument in the Committee. One part of the United Kingdom could not fail to partake either of scarcity or plenty existing in the other; the prohibition therefore, if it was right at all, should be general. The right hon. gent., in giving notice of the Bill, at a late hour, and when the house after a long debate was little inclined to attend to any observation on the subject, had indeed stated as a reason for this exception of Ireland, that since the act of the last session, the use of sugar had not been extended, nor the use of grain diminished, in that country, while the revenue from spirits had almost totally failed there from the stimulus which had been given to illegal distillation. Even admitting these facts, they were not conclusive; for the experiment had not been fairly tried. In England and in Scotland the duty imposed by the late act on spirits from sugar, had been made exactly equivalent to that which in those parts respectively attached on spirits from grain. Not so in Ireland, where sugar spirits had been subjected to a duty of 8s. 3d. per gallon, the duty on corn spirits being no more than 5s. 8d.; under which disparity the legal distillation, and the legal importation, were both discouraged, while a considerable premium was held out to the contraband dealer. Evidence could be given to the house, that

1051
had the duty on sugar spirits been levelled to that on corn spirits in Ireland, the legal distiller would have worked, and the importation of spirits would have been extended, to the advantage of the revenue. He believed this provision of the late act had been matter of surprize. He trusted that, however good in general the counsel of the Chancellor of the Exchequer for Ireland, his authority on this occasion would not be followed implicitly and without examination. The sentiments of that right hon. gent. were well known. He was adverse to the whole principle of the measure. No scarcity, or dearness of grain could reconcile to him its prohibition in the distillery in any part of the empire, and it was not therefore to be wondered at, if he had been anxious to save Ireland from its operation. These were not, however, the sentiments of that house, nor of the right hon. gent. who introduced the Bill, and it would be unwise to adopt a proceeding so extraordinary and so partial, without a fair experiment under provisions and regulations that might afford the best chance for its success. The Act of Union, it was well understood, wanted revision in some of its parts for the benefit of both countries; but it was most consistent with its spirit to proceed to that work at once, and not by prohibiting the intercourse in any instance to cut the gordian knot, which a little patience and attention might unravel. The interest of the revenue was said to be at stake. The principle of the Bill had nothing to do with revenue, but into that consideration should enter how far the deficiencies complained of were or were not inevitable, and how far any accidental deficiency might be amply made good by the additional tax of 3s. per cent, on the whole of the sugar consumed within the kingdom; this tax, which attached only at certain average prices of the article, would in his decided opinion be levied upon the coming crop, if the sugar distillery was extended to Ireland, and not otherwise—He offered these observations not in opposition to the Bill, but earnestly recommending a reconsideration of the proposed limitation of its opetion, which he believed to be inconsistent, unfair and impolitic.