Sitting of 16 April 1812

PETITION FROM DUBLIN AGAINST THE CLAIMS OF THE ROMAN CATHOLICS.
Mr. Shawpresented a Petition from the lord mayor, sheriffs, commons, and citizens of the city of Dublin, in common council assembled, 10th April 1812, setting forth, "That the lord mayor, sheriffs, commons, and citizens, of the city of Dublin, whose loyalty to their most gracious sovereign, and his royal ancestors, monarchs of these realms, has ever been firm and unequivocal,

401
beg leave to approach the House, in perfect confidence of its fixed determination to maintain unimpaired the Protestant constitution in Church and State; and that, reposing in full security on this confidence, the common council have not for some time past appeared as Petitioners before the House, notwithstanding the repeated demands of the Roman Catholics, but now, when it is publicly asserted that the Protestants of Ireland are favourable to such demands, and when every power of artifice and intimidation is employed to give colour to such assertion, the Petitioners should feel that they shrunk from their duty if they did not now declare, that in their opinion the concessions already made to the Roman Catholics are such as, if exercised with gratitude to the state, and for the tranquillity of the country, would be most amply sufficient to make the situation of the Roman Catholics happy under the present Protestant establishment; and praying the House to persevere in maintaining the constitution unimpaired in Church and State."
Ordered to lie upon the table.
Sir John Newport.—I much regret. Sir, that I did not enter the House a few minutes earlier, whilst the Petition just read was under cognizance of the House, that I might have enabled this House, by a statement of circumstances which occurred in that very assembly of the corporation of Dublin which framed that Petition, duly to estimate its value, and that of the meeting whose sentiments it conveys. It was there proposed to grant the freedom of the city of Dublin to major O'Donoghoe, in consideration of the signal valour and ability which that gallant officer had displayed in the defence of Tariffa, against an infinitely superior French force. His eminent services in that defence were proved by his being entrusted with the dispatches, which bore testimony to his distinguished gallantry. The majority of that corporate assembly gave a decided negative to the freedom, which was expressly refused to major O'Donoghoe be because he was a Roman Catholic! How striking is the display of loyal attachment to the constitution, in thus withholding from the brave defenders of their country their well-earned rewards!

PETITION OF THE ROMAN CATHOLICS OF QUEEN'S COUNTY.
MR. PARNELLpresented a Petition from the Roman Catholics of
402
the Queen's County, in Ireland, setting forth,
"That the Petitioners beg leave respectfully, at this most important conjuncture to solicit the favourable attention of the House to the peculiar condition of the Roman Catholics of Ireland, under the severe penal laws now in force against them; and that, if they appear to the House to persevere with more than common earnestness in their humble solicitations for the abrogation of those laws, and for a free admission to the blessings and benefits of the civil constitution of their country, the Petitioners trust that their perseverance will be viewed rather as a proof of their just title to the liberty which they seek, and of their sincerity in its pursuit, than as the result of any sentiment hostile to the peace or true interests of this empire; and that the Petitioners should sincerely-dread lest their silence might be construed by a faithful but feeling people as an indication of despair, and they would not lightly abandon the pursuit of a laudable and most important object, strengthened as they are by the concurring support of their generous and enlightened fellow countrymen, as well as by the fullest approbation of their own conscientious feelings; they beg leave humbly to state to the House, that they have publicly and solemnly taken every oath of fidelity and allegiance which the jealous caution of the legislature has, from time to time, imposed as tests of their political and moral principles; and, although, they are still set apart (how wounding to every sentiment of honour!) as if unworthy of credit in these their sworn declarations, they can appeal confidently to the sacrifices which they and their forefathers have long made, and which they still make (rather than violate conscience by taking oaths of a spiritual import contrary to their belief), as decisive proofs of their profound reverence for the sacred obligation of an oath; and that, by those awful tests, they have bound themselves, in the presence of the all-seeing Deity, whom all classes of Christians adore, to be faithful and bear true allegiance to their most gracious sovereign lord king George the 3rd, and him to defend, to the utmost of their power, against all conspiracies and attempts whatsoever against his person crown, or dignity; to use their utmost endeavours to disclose and make known to his Majesty and his heirs, all treason and traitorous conspiracies which may be

403
formed against him or them, and faithfully to maintain, support, and defend, to the utmost of their power, the succession to the crown in his Majesty's family against all persons whomsoever; and that, by those oaths, they have renounced and abjured obedience and allegiance unto any other person claiming or pretending a right to the crown of this realm; that they have rejected, as unchristian and impious to believe, the detestable doctrine, that it is lawful in any ways to injure any person or persons whomsoever, under pretence of their being heretics, and also that unchristian and impious principle, that no faith is to be kept with heretics, that it is no article of their faith; and they renounce, reject, and abjure the opinion, that princes, excommunicated by the Pope and council, or by any authority whatsoever, may be deposed or murdered by their subjects or by any person whatsoever; that they do not believe that the Pope of Rome, or any other foreign prince, prelate, state, or potentate, hath, or ought to have, any temporal or civil jurisdiction, power, superiority, or pre-eminence, within this realm; that they firmly believe, that no act, in itself unjust, immoral, or wicked, can ever be justified or excused by or under pretence or colour that it was done for the good of the Church, or in obedience to any ecclesiastical power whatsoever; and that it is not an Article of the Catholic Faith, neither are they thereby required to believe or profess, that the Pope is infallible, or that they are bound to any order, in its own nature immoral, though the Pope or any ecclesiastical power should issue or direct such order, but that, on the contrary, they hold that it would be sinful in them to pay any respect or obedience thereto; and that they do not believe that any sin whatsoever, committed by them, can be forgiven at the mere will of any Pope, or of any Priest, or of any person or persons whatsoever, but that any person who receives absolution, without a sincere sorrow for such sin, and a firm and sincere resolution to avoid future guilt, and to atone to God, so far from obtaining thereby any remission of his sin, incurs the additional guilt of violating a sacrament; and, by the same solemn obligations, they are bound and firmly pledged to defend, to the utmost of their power, the settlement and arrangement of property in Ireland, as established by the laws now in being; that they have declared, disavowed, and solemnly abjured, any intention to
404
subvert the present Church establishment, for the purpose of substituting a Catholic establishment in its stead; and that they have solemnly sworn, that they will not exercise any privilege, to which they are or may become entitled, to disturb and weaken the Protestant religion or Protestant government in Ireland; and that they can, with perfect truth, assure the House, that the political and moral principles asserted by these solemn and special tests are not merely in unison with their fixed principles, but expressly inculcated by the religion which they profess; and they do most humbly trust, that, as professors of doctrines which permit such tests to be taken, they shall appear to the House to be entitled to the full enjoyment of religious freedom, under the happy constitution of these realms; and that frequently has the legislature of Ireland borne testimony to the uniform peaceable demeanour of the Irish Roman Catholics, to their acknowledged merits as good and loyal subjects, to the wisdom and sound policy of admitting them to all the blessings of a free constitution, and of thus binding together all classes of people by mutual interest and mutual affection; and that yet may they humbly represent to the House, and they do so at this perilous crisis, with sincere regret and deep solicitude, that the Roman Catholics of Ireland still remain subject to severe and humiliating laws, rigidly enforced, universally felt, and inflicting upon them divers injurious and vexatious disabilities incapacities privations and penalties, by reason of their conscientious adherence to the religious doctrines of their forefathers; and that, for nearly the entire period of the last twenty years, the progress of religious freedom has been obstructed, and, whilst other Christian nations have hastened to unbind the fetters imposed upon religious dissent, the Roman Catholics of Ireland have remained unrelieved; and that the laws, which unequivocally attest their innocence and their merits, continue to load them with the pains of guilt; their own consciences, the voice of mankind, acquit them of crime and offence; their Protestant fellow citizens press forward, with generous ardour and enlightened benevolence, to testify their earnest wishes for their relief; yet these penal laws, of which they humbly complain, cherish the spirit of hostility, and impede the cordial union of the people, which is at all times so desirable, and now so necessary and that

405
these penal laws operate for no useful or meritorious purpose, affording no aid to the constitution in church or state; not attaching affection to either, they are efficient only for objects of disunion and disaffection; they separate the Protestant from the Catholic, and withdraw both from the public good; they irritate man against his fellow creature, alienate the subject from the state, and leave the Roman Catholic community but a precarious and imperfect protection, as the reward of fixed and unbroken allegiance; and that the Petitioners forbear to detail the numerous incapacities and inconveniences inflicted by those laws, directly or indirectly, upon the Roman Catholic community, or to dwell upon the humiliating and ignominious system of exclusion, reproach, and suspicion which they generate and keep alive; perhaps no other age or nation has ever witnessed severities more vexatious, or inflictions more taunting, than those which the Petitioners have long endured, and of which but too large a portion still remains; and that relief from these disabilities and penalties they have sought through every channel that has appeared to them to be legitimate and eligible; they have never consciously violated, or sought to violate, the known laws of the land, nor have they pursued their object in any other manner than such as has been usually adhered to, and apparently the best calculated to collect and communicate their united sentiments accurately, without tumult, and to obviate all pretext for asserting, that the Roman Catholic, community at large were indifferent to the pursuit of their freedom; and they can affirm, with perfect sincerity, that they have no latent views to realize, no secret or sinister objects to attain; any such imputation must be effectually repelled, as they humbly conceive, by the consideration of their numbers, their property, and their known principles and character; and that their object is avowed and direct, earnest yet natural; it extends to an equal participation of the civil rights of the constitution of their country equally with their fellow subjects of all other religious persuasions; it extends no further; and that they would cheerfully concede the enjoyment of civil and religious liberty to all mankind; they ask no more for themselves; they seek not the possession of offices, but mere eligibility to office, in common with their fellow citizens; not power or ascendancy over any class of
406
people, but the bare permission to rise from their prostrate posture, and to stand erect in the empire; and that they have been taught that, according to the pure and practical principles of the British constitution, property is justly entitled to a proportionate share of power; and they humbly trust, that no reasonable apprehension can arise from that power which can only be obtained and exerciser through the constitution; and they are sensible, and they do not regret, that this equality of civil rights, which alone they humbly sue for, will leave a fair practical ascendancy wheresoever property shall predominate; but, whilst they acknowledge the wholesomeness of this great principle, they cannot admit the necessity of the unqualified disfranchisement of any part of the people in a constitution like that of these realms; and that they are gratified by the reflection that the attainment of this their constitutional object will prove as conducive to the welfare and security of this great empire, as to the complete relief of the Roman Catholic community; that it will secure the quiet and concord of their country, animate all classes of the people in the common defence, and form the most, stable protection against the dangers which heavily menace these islands; for the Petitioners most humbly presume to submit to the House, as their firm opinion, that an equal degree of enthusiasm cannot reasonably be expected from men, who feel themselves excluded from a fair participation of the blessings of a good constitution and government, as from those who fully partake of its advantages; that the enemies of this empire, who meditate its subjugation, found their best hope of success upon the effects of those penal laws, which, by depressing millions of the inhabitants of Ireland, may weaken their attachment to their country, and impair the means of its defence; and that the continued pressure of these laws in times of unexampled danger only spreads the general feeling of distrustful alarm, and augments the risks of common ruin; and that, to avert such evils, to preserve and promote the welfare and security of this empire, and to become thoroughly identified with their fellow subjects in interests and affection, are objects as precious in their eyes, upon every consideration of property, principle, and moral duty, as in those of any other description of the inhabitants of these realms; and that, if, in thus humbly submitting their depressed condition, and their earnest

407
hopes, to the consideration of the House, they would dwell upon the great numbers, and the property of the Roman Catholics of Ireland, already so considerable and so rapidly encreasing, and to their consequent most important contributions to the exigencies of the state, they would do so not with a view of exciting unworthy motives for concession, but in the honest hope of suggesting legitimate and rational grounds of constitutional relief; and deeply indeed should they lament, if these very recommendations should serve only to hold them out as the objects of harsh suspicion at home, or of daring attempts upon their allegiance from abroad: may the Petitioners then, with hearts deeply interested in the fate of this their humble supplication, presume to appeal to the wisdom and benignity of the House on behalf of a very numerous, industrious, affectionate and faithful body of people, the Roman Catholics of Ireland, and to pray, that the House may be pleased to take into their favourable consideration the whole of their condition, their numbers, their services, their merits, and their sufferings; and that they may be restored to the rights and privileges of the constitution of their country, be freed from all penal and disabling laws in force against them, on account of their religious faith, and may thereby become more worthy, as well as more capable of promoting the service of the crown, and the substantial interests of this great empire."
Ordered to lie upon the table.

PETITION FROM STIRLING RESPECTING THE RENEWAL OF THE EAST INDIA COMPANY'S CHARTER.
A Petition from the provost, magistrates, and town council of the royal burgh of Stirling, North Britain, was presented and read; setting forth,
"That, in the prospect of the East India Company's Charter being soon expired, the petitioners beg leave to address the House on this very important subject, so highly interesting to the empire at large; and the petitioners humbly plead the natural right that every British subject has to exercise a free trade with every country dependent upon, or in amity with, the British empire; and that the experience of past ages sufficiently proves the general inexpediency of commercial monopolies; that the monopoly hitherto enjoyed by the East India Company, while it has excluded British subjects from any participation in the trade, so far from operating
408
to the advantage of the Company, has laid them under the necessity of frequently applying to government for enormous sum" of the public money to support their establishment, so that, even in this respect, it is a national grievance; and that it is extremely discouraging, and in itself unnatural, that the merchants of foreign nations should be allowed the benefit of a free trade to British possessions of such magnitude, which is denied to British merchants; and the circumstance of Americans and other foreign nations carrying on trade with the countries comprehended in the East India Company's Charter, completely refutes the arguments urged by those interested in the monopoly, of a free trade being prejudicial to private merchants; and the petitioners beg leave further to state, that the continuance of this monopoly bears peculiarly hard on British merchants at present, when our inveterate foe is exerting all his power to shut out this nation from commercial intercourse with the continent of Europe, which renders the continuation of that system peculiarly inexpedient; on the other hand, the admission of a free and unfettered trade with such a large proportion of the population of the globe, most fortunately presents a very seasonable substitute for the loss of European commerce, the vast extent of countries and variety of climates situated between the Cape of Good Hope' and Straits of Magellan, affording an extensive field for mercantile talents and capital, beyond the tyrannical grasp of the enemy, and such an opening cannot fail to prove highly gratifying and beneficial to the British empire at large, strengthen and secure its vital interests by reviving languishing commerce and manufactures at home, and most effectually defeat the grand object of our inveterate foe on the continent; and praying the House neither to renew nor continue the exclusive privileges of the East India Company, but to adopt such measures as may render it lawful for any of his Majesty's subjects, from and after the 1st of March, 1814, to carry on from all ports of the United Kingdom, a free and unlimited trade with the British possessions in India, and with all other countries situated to the east of the Cape of Good Hope, and to the west of Cape Horn."
Ordered to lie upon the table.

MOTION RESPECTINC THE CLERKS IN THE NAVY OFFICE.
Sir F. Burdettrose to

409
make a motion respecting the Clerks in the Navy Office, who wished only to be put on the same footing as other clerks, and particularly with those in a similar department,—the Navy Pay Office. Some of these men had been 25 or 30 years in office, without any increase of emolument; and of late years, under pretence of economy,—an economy of which, in the present instance, he could not approve—their salaries were considerably diminished. Some of these clerks laboured under peculiar hardships, as they had purchased their places. Lord Barham, the late comptroller, had received their money, of which, as the emoluments had so considerably decreased, they were, in fact, cheated and swindled. He should move therefore, for an account of the number of clerks in the Navy-office, specifying their salaries, periods of service, and their respective emoluments. Also for a copy of the letters of the Navy Board, and of the Clerks' Memorial respecting an increase of wages, the subsequent letters relating to this subject, and the Prince Regent's order thereon.
Mr. Bennetseconded the motion.
Mr. Yorkesaid, that it was not usual to accede to such motions as the present, unless some strong ground was shewn to the House to induce them to take the matter into farther consideration. He thought that the hon. baronet had not made out a case sufficiently strong. As to the buying of places, and lord Barham's implication in such traffic, he did not know how it might have been; but nothing of that sort, he apprehended, could now happen, as the sale of a clerkship would subject the seller to a high responsibility. He could not allow the peculiar hardship insisted on by the hon. baronet, as the clerks had all consented to the present arrangement.
Sir F. Burdettsaid, that these clerks did not ask for privileges above others in similar situations; they wished only to be put on precisely the same footing. He could not conceive that this application would induce other clerks to lay their case before parliament, as the present was one of a peculiar nature. It was, in his mind, an additional motive for acceding to his proposition, that the conduct of lord Barham might be enquired into; especially as, from what had fallen from the right hon. gentleman, it appeared that such conduct was now properly stigmatised by the government. Lord Barham's
410
conduct ought certainly to be investigated, as through his means the clerks had been completely swindled out of their money. It was illiberal and unjust to talk of the consent of these clerks to the new arrangements. What could they do? Could they resign? Were they in a condition to contend or make bargains with government?
Sir C. Polethought it inexpedient, in the present hardships of the times, to encourage any hopes of increase of salary which could not be realized. Other clerks might also be induced to come forward with similar applications.
The House then divided—For the motion 15—Against it 62—Majority 47.

MOTION RESPECTING THE LICENCE TRADE.
The Hon. William Herbert, on rising to move for the production of certain papers connected with the trade now carried on under the Licence system, observed, that he had refrained from bringing the subject forward at an earlier period, only from a wish that his right hon. friend, the Judge of the High Court of Admiralty, should attend in his place on the discussion of a question in which, from the office he held, he must feel so deep an interest. He now wished that these papers should be laid before the House previous to that grave decision which they might expect soon to be called on to make with respect to the numerous petitions against the Orders in Council.—He had communicated his intention to submit this motion to the right hon. gentleman opposite, who desired to consult with the Judge of the Court of Admiralty before he answered as to the objections which he might have to make to the motion. After consulting with that right hon. and learned gentleman, the right hon. gentleman bad acquainted him with the necessity which he felt of opposing the production of these papers. He should have imagined, there fore, that his right hon. friend, the Judge of the High Court of Admiralty, would have deemed it necessary on this occasion to attend, and inform the House on what general grounds it was, that he was averse to produce documents, without which it was impossible to have an accurate knowledge of the frauds, the perjuries and forgeries with which the Licence trade was carried on. The speech of the right hon. the Vice President of the Board of Trade, when the Orders in Council were lately under consideration, had filled him with great anxiety, which he had shewn per

411
haps too plainly, in rising at a very late hour on that night, when he found it, however, impossible to procure a hearing; but he had ever since felt, and still continued to feel the same anxiety to shew and to prove by uncontrovertible evidence how unfounded were the assertions then hazarded by that right hon. gentleman.—He was fearful on that occasion, and his fear alone had induced him to intrude en the patience of the House, that his silence on hearing such statements and assertions Dade without contradiction, should have been interpreted into an acquiescence in their correctness and their truth. The reason slated by the Chancellor of the Exchequer for resisting the production of the papers asked for, namely, that it would be inconvenient, because, if they were to be granted, it would be necessary for those on the other side to move for papers explanatory of the neutralizing system, seemed to him to be most extraordinary, and in this opinion the House must agree with him, when it was considered what the nature of those papers must be. The neutralizing system was one for the disguising of property, to prevent persons in this country from discovering to whom it really belonged, and, to such perfection was it carried, that even persons of the utmost astuteness were disappointed in their endeavours to come at the fact. He should now proceed to shew to what extent perjury existed in the Licence trade, and that it was necessary for the continuance of that trade in this country. The first paper he should move for went to prove, that oaths were required to be taken on the continent, before any vessel could be permitted to clear out, that she was to proceed to a port named, or any other port, and was to carry such and such property. Every English port, however, and every species of English property, however, being always excepted. To prove this he should confine himself to one instance, where the captain having, as was required of him, taken this oath on the Continent, made an answer in the Admiralty Court in this country, which he should also move for, that though previous to his clearing out from the Continent, he had sworn that he was not to proceed to any English port, yet in reality he was destined for the port of Leith. This, he presumed, would be sufficient to shew, that oaths were taken on the Continent that vessels were not to proceed to this country, when in reality they were bound for this country under licence. But what
412
he was most anxious to point out to the attention of the House was, that these perjuries were recognised in the courts of this country. To prove this fact, he should move for papers in a case where it being obvious and notorious to every one, that the master and every one of the crew were perjured, the vessel was restored on that perjured evidence, such being considered the machinery necessary for carrying on the Licence trade of this country. In the case to which he alluded, the vessel came to this country from Amsterdam; from hence it proceeded to St. Petersburgh, and from thence returned with a cargo to this country. There the master, mate, and all the crew, for the satisfaction of the Russian government, swore that they had proceeded direct from Amsterdam to Russia, and accounted for the length of time that had intervened by a fabricated statement of tempestuous weather which they had encountered, of bad treatment on an inhospitable island, and of interruptions by the ice. Were it not that he understood from the right hon. gent, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that the papers he wished would not be granted to him, he should have moved for the whole of this doubly fabricated history; and should have shewn from the answer of the captain in the Court of Admiralty here, that during the time he was struggling in the course of his voyage through the ice, as sworn to in his affidavit in Russia, he was actually in this country. He should not read the whole of these papers, which were of considerable length, but he simply stated these as their contents. When this case was argued before the Court of Admiralty, a junior counsel, who, in the simplicity of his soul, thought that a perjured document could not be received in an English court of law, was treated with contempt for his ignorance; and was almost hooted at by his more experienced brethren, for objecting to a document which was necessary for carrying on the trade of this country. This doctrine was assented to by the court, and the objection was instantly over-ruled. He asked, was he not founded in justice, in saying, that this was a system so destructive to morality, and to the well-being of the country, that it ought not at least to receive the favour and protection of the Court of Admiralty of this country? There was another paper which he would have moved for, namely, a copy of instructions how to act in case of a vessel's being detained, as exhibiting a most ding

413
gusting picture of the frauds which the country was reduced to practise, in order to; be enabled to carry on this trade by licences. It would not be necessary for him to fatigue the House by an enumeration of the different false, fabricated, and inconsistent documents which these instructions recommended every captain to be provided with, so as to suit every emergency. It was sufficient to say, that perjury was universally practised throughout the whole system; and that it was even admitted and tolerated in our courts of Admiralty. That this was the case he had already explained in the instance of the vessel from Amsterdam, to which he had already alluded.—For, if he could shew, which he pledged himself to do, if the papers were granted to him, that a single vessel had been liberated where it was evident all the documents were grounded on perjury, then there could be no doubt what the principle was, and that it ought to be looked at with horror and detestation. He could not say that, to his conception of the matter, the Court of Admiralty had done its duty. Was a person sitting in judgment to be told, that it was necessary to colour and protect property by fraud and perjury, to listen to that idea, because he was informed, as a reason for his doing so, that the perjury was committed, not for the purpose of deceiving this country, but for the purpose of deceiving our enemies? He could not listen to such reasoning. He must continue to have his ideas directed by the rules of justice. He could not swerve from his duty; but was bound to believe, that a person who would not scruple to perjure himself, or to take a false oath for the purpose of deceiving our enemies, would have equally little scruple in deceiving us where were the limits to such a system, he asked, to be drawn? Where was it to slop? He did not know if such a question had ever come before any of our courts of common law. If it ever did, he sincerely hoped they would follow a differeat course, and would not give credit to perjured men and to perjured documents. The next article to which he begged to call the attention of the House, was the abuses resulting from this system, and from this trade. An hon. friend of bis, when this subject was formerly before the House, called their attention to the fact of two licences having been granted for brandy, at a time when such licences were not generally granted, and when two such, lieences would have been well worth to
414
any man, as it was stated, the sum of 15,000 l. The excuse then made was, that this was a solitary instance of clerical inaccuracy, and, as such, was not of much importance. The papers he should have moved for on this subject, he conceived, might have been granted, notwithstanding the objection stated by the right hon. gentleman to the production of the other papers, for the papers on this subject were not at all met by the neutralizing system. What he begged, in the first place, particularly to allude to was, the antedating of licences. On this bead he had a circumstance to state which would, in all probability, never have come to light, had it not been for the exertion of an active gentleman, who had been able even to trace an erasure on the subject in the council books. The case to which he referred was that of the Vrow Debora, for which a licence was applied for by Messrs. Baker and Son, to import a cargo of butter and cheese. This petition was presented on the 20th of January, and the answer was—" refused." The vessel was afterwards captured, and, on the 30th of January, an application was made to have the licence granted, with an alteration or addition, that the cargo should be exported in a British vessel, and with this addition, the licence was granted. Mr. W. Rotherey, of Doctors' Commons, bad made affidavit on this subject, in which he stated the above facts, and that there was an entry in the council books, when he originally searched them, under date 20th January, to the effect that the application for a licence to the Vrow Debora was refused, but that on a subsequent examination in April following, the word 'refused' bad vanished, and the word 'granted' appeared in its stead. He (Mr. Herbert) was satisfied the noble lord at the head of the Board of Trade, and the right hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Rose) had nothing to do with this; but, if such practices were suffered, what a door for corruption and fraud of every kind was thereby opened. He had in his possession a correspondence from the other side of the water, which shewed what was the opinion there entertained of the persons who had influence on the Treasury Board of this country, and went far to prove, that the statement of an hon. and learned friend of his on a late import-ant debate—that the persons who had influence there were no better than hawkers and pedlars, was not too highly coloured: it went far to shew that the members of that

415
Board were swayed by the advice of some persons who imposed upon them; and that, however pure themselves, they were operated upon by those who were not so. Before be proceeded to this correspondence, however, he begged to notice the fluctuating policy by which the Board of Trade were actuated, varying as it did every day, and thereby giving rise to the most mischievous speculations. The correspondence to which he referred, proved the existence of a trade in buying up licences which had expired, and fabricating excuses to the Board of Trade to induce them to renew such licences. Adverting to a correspondence from certain persons in Bourdeaux to an agent in this country, he stated, that in one letter the foreign correspondent directed his agent to give 3,000 franks for an expired licence, and to send it to him, that a story might be fabricated, or himself to fabricate a story such as might be calculated to induce the Board of Trade to renew it. In another letter a similar measure was recommended, and it was stated, that a traveller would be sent to meet the agent in England, so that the matter might be more cleverly concerted. It was also in the knowledge of this correspondent, as expressed in his letters, that another person had already successfully practised this iniquitous fabrication. In other letters this correspondent informed his agent, that if he could get two licences, one for the Isle of France, and another for Guadaloupe, he might give for the former 500 l. and for the latter 700 l.; and these sums he was afterwards authorised to increase to 2000 guineas. These sums, it was to be observed, were offered, not as if licences were an article which could be dealt in, but actually as bribes; and the same correspondent seemed to think that, by offering additional bribes, he could get the conditions of licences changed. Gentlemen might smile, supposing that he imagined that the Board of Trade had been bribed. That was not an idea which had ever entered his mind; but this he must be allowed to say, that the Board might have been necessitated to take advice from persons who had been bribed. Whether the licences so wished to be purchased had or had not been obtained, he (Mr. Herbert) had no knowledge. But this, at least, did appear, that there existed a belief in the ports of France that they might be obtained through bribery; a belief which it was hardly probable should
416
have existed, unless it had been founded on experience. The only argument the right hon. gentlemen had used, or could use, for this practice, fraught with so many evils, and with so much ignominy to the country, was the recriminating one, that similar licences had been issued by their predecessors; but this fell altogether short, both in the extent to which, and the principle on which former licences had been issued. It was his opinion that the House of Commons ought to mark their sense of these proceedings, and therefore he should conclude by moving the following Resolution: That the House sees with regret the system of fraud and perjury recognized and protected by the high court of Admiralty, as justifiable and necessary under the present circumstances of the commerce of the country; the abuses and corruptions to which the system is liable; the depraved example it holds out to the morals of the nation, dangerous to the fundamental principles of evidence, and encouraging a disregard of truth in courts of justice, where truth only ought to be admitted; as well as the unprincipled monopoly of conducting trade with an enemy by means of licences, from which neutral nations are excluded, on a plea of necessity, subversive of the most sacred principles of the laws of nations."
Mr. Roseexpressed his utter astonishment at the motion just read, calling upon the House to pass the strongest censure upon the Court of Admiralty, without the slightest testimony being adduced to prove that it was well founded. He complained that the expressions which he had used in a recent debate on this subject had been much misrepresented; and he was convinced in his conscience that there was much less of perjury in the courts of Admiralty under the licence system, than what formerly existed in the neutral system. At that time, enemy's property was only introduced into this country through the medium of its being falsely sworn to be neutral property: whereas at present, there was no occasion for perjuries of that nature, as it could be introduced by licences. He was firmly persuaded, that if the system now adopted were abandoned, the consequence would be the extinction of the commerce of Great Britain.
Mr. H. Thorntonwas surprized that the motion had not been confined to the production of papers, on which the hon. gentleman might, perhaps, have founded some

417
future vole of censure. He admitted that frauds did exist, and thought that it would be fit that an enquiry should be instituted to ascertain their origin: and he deprecated receiving in our courts of Admiralty the testimony of men who were forsworn upon the continent.
Mr. Ponsonbyagreed that the Resolution read from the chair was ill-timed and imprudent, and that, notwithstanding the declared opposition that was to be given, it would have been better simply to have moved for the papers. He felt the full weight of the remark of the hon. gentleman who spoke last, and was convinced that no profit which Great Britain could derive from fraud, could compensate for the injury that would arise from the destruction of the public morals. As to the proceedings of the court of Admiralty, he was not prepared to give any positive opinion, without much previous inquiry, and therefore moved as an amendment, That this House will, on the I st May, resolve itself into a Committee of the whole House, to take into consideration the state of the trade of this country as carried on by licences." Should, however, this suggestion, as he supposed it would, be negatived, he should recommend to his hon. friend to move for the production of the various documents to which he had referred.
The Chancellor of the Exchequercould not support the amendment, although he thought it not so objectionable as the Resolution, which conveyed a strong censure on the Admiralty Court, in the absence of the right hon. judge (sir William Scott).
Mr. Brougham supported the motion. Mr. Marryatt and Sir John Nichol opposed the motion. Mr. Thompson, Mr. Whit-bread, Mr. A. Baring and Sir John Newport supported it. Mr. Herbert replied, and the motion was then negatived without a division.
It was then ordered, "That there be laid before this House, a copy of the Licences whereby permission is granted for importation of goods of the produce or manufacture of France, on the previous exportation of British manufactures or colonial produce to the amount of 5l. per ton in value upon the admeasurement of the exporting vessel." Also, A copy of any bond or obligation required of any merchant or others to whom licence has been granted to import goods of the produce or manufacture of France (upon condition of first exporting to France goods of the manufacture
418
of England or colonial produce, to the value of 5l. per ton, on the admeasurement of the exporting vessel) to export goods of English manufacture or colonial produce to the full value of the goods imported from France, and of any obligation to warehouse the French goods imported, until the exportation of English goods equivalent."

IRISH PEASANTRY.
Earl Stanhoperose to make his promised motion on this subject He protested against the idea of making a long speech; for when the object was plain and clear, the explanation might and ought to be brief. He had to call the attention of the House to a train of sufferings not exceeded, perhaps not paralleled, by those of the slave,—in all cases equally unjust, and in most equally attended with horrid and calamitous circumstances. He alluded to the stale of the Irish Peasantry under the present laws, as they related to the recovery of rent. In that country there were gradations and classes of those pernicious holders called middlemen; and the distress for ail their consecutive rents might be levied upon the peasant who tilled the ground. He
394
might thus have to pay his own rent, and the rents of ten people above him. This was a genuine oppression, and it had occurred as such to other people's minds. The noble earl here alluded to a correspondence between two great law authorities, which he had seen, and which described the practice as likely to be highly oppressive. The consequence of enforcing the law, according to the present system, was the certain beggary of the tenant, whose ordinary rent was the utmost that his labour could extract from the ground, and who, of course, when a double or a triple rent was demanded from him, had no resource but abandoning all, and wandering to beg his bread, with his wife, and not unfrequently, an infirm and infant family. Was it to be wondered at, that in a country where there were no poor's rates, such a man should be discontented, as he must be beggared? It might not be so here, where there were poor's rates, and where the whole parish would exclaim against the landlord whose cruelty should expose them to such a burthen of pauperism: but, in Ireland, this happened frequently, the peasant was forced to seek his daily bread from cabin to cabin; and was it to be wondered at, that he should seize the first rusty pitchfork, and use it vindictively at the moment, or treasure up his revenge till it could be certain? The noble earl said he would instance a case communicated to him, on the credit of a great land-proprietor. He should arrange the classes of lessors in the order of the alphabet, and they stood as follow: B paid to A, the original lessor, a rent of 90 l.: B let this to C for the sum of 700 l. C to D for the sum of 750 l.; and D to about twenty tenants, who might be called E, for about 940 l. The whole of these sums might be demanded by distress, from the tenants E as the law now stood. Was there any thing more necessary to be said on the subject? The noble earl said he was most anxious to see this grievance taken up by the legislature: but, in bringing it before them, he had only the merit of intention,—the great merit was due to counsellor O'Dedy, the author of a most excellent and feeling pamphlet upon the subject.—He would then state as the substance of the first clause of his Bill, that it should be enacted, that no remedy of distress should he against any tenant but: at the suit of his immediate lessor, saving the original lessor of the land. The second clause was one which provided, that what-ever

395
sum the tenant paid to the original lessor by distress, should be accounted as part payment to his immediate lessor. The noble earl proceeded to reason at considerable length upon this part of the Bill. He trusted, that nobody would be so whimsical as to say that the original landlord would be injured by this proposal, when in reality, he would be benefited. By this measure the under middle-man could not distrain till he had paid the original rent, and the other could not distrain at all. He concluded by moving, that the Bill be read a first time.
Lord Redesdaleadmitted the existence of the evil, but whether an adequate remedy could be applied, he very much doubted. While he resided in Ireland, his mind had been very much occupied with this subject. He had often reflected upon it, and endeavoured to find out some suitable remedy; but it involved so many important considerations, and was altogether a matter of so much difficulty, that he had never been able to come to any satisfactory conclusion. From the difference, as to improvement in the state of Ireland some time ago, and now, and from other circumstances, he could very well conceive that land might, at no very distant period, have been let at 90 l. per annum, which might now yield 940 l. a year. He himself knew an instance, where a gentleman had let 13,000 acres for lives, or a long term of years, reserving 800 acres of demesne lands; and now he had a greater rent from the 800 acres, than from the 13,000. But these grants of long terms at low rents, had been very prevalent at one time; and a great proportion of the Irish tenures were of this description. They had, indeed, been considered as almost equal to grants in fee simple, so far as they went. Where such small rents had been retained by the original landlord, the lands would naturally sub-let, perhaps, six deep, the rente rising progressively. His friend, the gentleman to whom he alluded, did not use the remedy of distress, but of ejectment, which was sufficient to procure the payment of such a small rent. But in Ireland, a whole year's rent must be due before the remedy, by ejectment, could be effectual; for after the landlord had got possession, if, within the subsequent six months, the tenant filed a Bill in Equity, and paid the rent and costs, he again got his land. It was clear, therefore, that in the circumstances of the landed proprietors of Ireland,
396
the remedy of ejectment was not always sufficient. Suppose land let for lives, or a very long term, such as one thousand years, and sub-let three deep, it would be very difficult to get the rent by ejectment, and therefore they were compelled to resort to the remedy of distress. Yet, by the plan of the noble lord, this remedy would be rendered, in a great measure nugatory. Take the instance which he himself stated, for example, of land let by A to B for 90 l.; by B to C for 700 l.; and by C to D for 750 l. In this case C could not distrain for his 50 l. perhaps the whole of his means of subsistence, till he had paid 90 l. to A and 700 l. to B, which it might be utterly impossible for him to do. In Ireland, he was sorry to say, the remedy of distress was more commonly applied than in England. Almost every estate had what was called its driver. The occupiers, unfortunately, often took the lands at more than they could pay, except in plentiful years; and only the-produce of the land remained to pay the rent. This gave occasion to many frauds in removing that produce; and these, he was sorry to say, had a bad effect on the character of the Irish Peasantry, which was not what one would wish it to be. They had, in general, no capital,—the rent could only be paid out of the produce of the land, and a bad season consequently disabled them to pay. This made the remedy of distress so much more common than in England. It was not, therefore, any difference in the law that produced the evil, but the difference of the circumstances of the two countries in other respects. He could not exactly agree with the noble lord in his suggestion, that it was enough for the middle-man to have his remedy upon his contract, without being permitted to resort to the land. To take the example before alluded to, B had a good title to the land, paying 90 l. to A; and it he had the right to sub-let to C, and chose to reserve his power of distress, it would be a violation of the laws of property to deprive him of it. If, therefore, the noble lord's provision on this point was intended to be retrospective, it would be the cause of gross injustice to many persons. Indeed, the mischief might be more extensive than some were at present aware of. Suppose C in the instance stated, died in--solvent, or assigned his interest; the noble lord's plan in cases of that nature, might be the means of great injustice, and create a prodigious new subject of litigation.

397
The noble earl said, that the under-tenant, was no party to the contract. This was a mistake, he was a party, and in that view there was no injustice in keeping him to that which he had accepted with his eyes open. His title to the land must be derived from those above him, and he must, therefore, be a party to that upon which alone his right was founded. This, however, was a very important subject, and he hoped their lordships would consider well of it. Every one must wish that the evil should be removed; but they ought to take care not to legislate rashly, lest they might do more mischief in one way, than they prevented in another. They might cast about in their minds, whether the sub-demising of land, with a power of distress, might not be checked; whether it might not be provided, that afterwards no subletting, with such a power, should be allowed. That, he thought, was the utmost extent to which they could go; that in subsequent sub-demises, the power of distress should be either taken away or modified. He himself happened to hold some land in Ireland, and had expended a good deal of money upon it. When he left that country, no purchaser could be found, and if he had not had the power of sub-demising, with the remedy of distress, he should have had no remedy at all, and the property would have been of little value. This was owing to the unfortunate state of Ireland. The disturbed situation of that country gave occasion to the frequency of the instances in which this remedy was resorted to. If the country were perfectly tranquil, the evil would soon remedy itself. Those who, without capital, were now the tenants of the soil, would then be labourers on the farms of others, and the mischief, would be done away, or at least exist only in the same degree as in England. Indeed, the practice of sub-demising was already beginning to be less frequent. Landlords now began to understand that it was their interest to grant leases with a condition not to sub-let, and the evil was gradually diminishing. But, however, the subject deserved the most serious consideration, and he certainly should not oppose this Bill at present. He should be most happy if a remedy could be provided, but he confessed that he could not see any method by which the evil could be effectually cured. He could at this moment, he was sorry to say, conceive no plan which would not do as much mischief in other respects, as it would do good in this.
The Earl of Clancartyvery much doubted whether any adequate remedy could be provided: and as to the measure proposed by the noble earl, he was sure that he himself must see the difficulties which stood in the way of its adoption. The noble earl said, that the middle-men might be left to their remedy upon contract independent of the land, because the subtenants were no parties; but it must be remembered, that the sub-tenants were like purchasers, with notice of the fact. They knew the powers of those above them, and took the land subject to the burthen. To deprive the middle-men of their rights by an ex post facto law, would be gross injustice; but he believed, that the practice of creating these middle tenants, was very fast going down, from the landlords better understanding their own interest, and the value of their property. It also became less the interest of those who might be disposed to put themselves in the situation of middle-men to have any thing to do with such leases, for the profits were but very small, compared with those of former demises of that nature. The practice had arisen, or at least, attained the great height to which it had reached, from the peculiar circumstances of Ireland: bat since the late improvements in that country, the evil was diminishing, and he trusted, would soon be done away. He would not, however, oppose the printing of the Bill. The subject was worthy of the most attentive consideration; but if the noble earl meant to restrict subletting, he wished him to consider what would be the effect, especially in large towns, such as Dublin and London, if the provisions of the Bill were to be extended to both countries, as he understood they were.
The Earl of Suffolkagreed, that it was most desirable that a remedy should be provided, but doubted whether this one could be adopted. He was glad, however, to hear from the noble lord who spoke last, that the practice of sub-demising was going down. He himself happened to have come to the knowledge of an instance which so far corroborated that statement. A gentleman of great property in Ireland, had sent his steward to survey his estates there. The steward found it necessary to have a considerable guard in going round the property. But alter the survey, he resolved to put an end to the practise of demising to middle tenants, and the people were so well pleased at

399
this, that they could with difficulty be prevented from taking the horses from his carriage, and drawing it themselves. He agreed that this was a subject which deterred the most serious consideration.
Lord Holland,after observing that his noble friend deserved the thanks of the country for having brought forward this question, said, that he did not think his proposal had been fairly treated. Considering the magnitude of the subject, he thought the noble lords on the other side ought to have waited till they had the printed Bill in their hands before they met the plan with so many expressions of despair, as to its propriety and capability of remedying the evil complained of. That the evil was of a most serious nature, no one could doubt; and if it was possible that any remedy could be applied without violating the fundamental laws of property, there could be as little doubt but it ought to be adopted. The noble and learned lord, (Redesdale) had admitted the existence of the evil, but had dwelt chiefly on the difficulty of applying a cure. That, however, was no reason against entertaining the subject, and the objections to it had better be reserved till another time. The noble lord over the way (lord Clancarty), had adverted to the effect which such a plan might have on existing contracts. That objection did not come well from him, who had voted in favour of a measure formerly proposed by his noble friend, (the Bank-Note Bill), which went to violate all subsisting contracts. How happened it that the noble lord did not then think of an objection, which applied much more to that measure than to this? He could not conceive how the noble lord could consistently make this objection now, when he had disregarded it in the other case. It was clear that the practice in question was one great cause of the disturbed state of Ireland, and of no small degree of oppression. If he had wanted any confirmation of this, the statement of the noble and learned lord opposite would have been sufficient to convince him; for the statement was, that the middle-men were compelled by a regard to their own interest, to have frequent recourse to the ruinous measure of distress. He agreed that they ought to proceed with caution and circumspection, but the forms of the House were a sufficient security for that. If the principle of the Bill should be found to be good, the committee would be the place
400
to suggest amendments and alterations. The Union with Ireland had existed foe several years; and he recollected one great argument for it was, the profound attention which would be given the affairs of Ireland. It was with pain that he witnessed how little that expectation had been answered. He was sorry to see so thin an attendance on a subject of so much importance to that country. But it might, perhaps, be some excuse to Ireland, that the attendance was likely to be equally thin on a subject of no less importance to this country, the discussion of which was to have come on that night [alluding to the Insolvent Debtors' Bill.] The object in both cases was similar—it was to remove an evil which produced a mass of human misery and oppression. In both cases, the existence of the evil was acknowledged: the difficulty was to provide the remedy. But they ought to struggle the more against that difficulty if there "as any possibility of its being surmounted.
The Earl of Clancarlyin explanation maintained, that he had supported the Bill alluded to by the noble lord, on the ground of preventing the tenant from being ground to the dust by being called upon to pay more than he ought to be compelled to pay, under the equity of his contract.
The Lord Chancellorsaid, that the subject unquestionably deserved the most serious attention; it involved many considerations with regard to the law of landed properly, which had not as yet been alluded to. The law was the same in England and Ireland, and it ought to be remembered, that the landholders there had it in their power so to contract as to render this Bill unnecessary.
The Bill was then read a first time, and ordered to be printed.