Sitting of 11 February 1819

CONTAGION IN THE PLAGUE—SELECT COMMITTEE APPOINTED.
Sir John Jackson, after observing that he believed there would be no objection to his motion, moved, "That a Select Committee be appointed to consider of the Validity of the Doctrine of Contagion in the Plague; and to report their Observations thereupon to the House."
Mr. Wynnobserved, that as no explanation of the reasons of this motion had been given, it seemed to him a subject on which it would be better to call for the opinion of the college of physicians than of a committee of this House.
Mr. Robinsonsaid, he trusted he should be able to show that there were sufficient parliamentary grounds for the present motion. The quarantine laws, it was well known, were very rigid in their nature,

425
and entailed much inconvenience and expense on the ships that were subject to them. These laws were entirely founded on the opinion which, for some centuries, had prevailed, that the plague was contagious; but recent inquiries had thrown considerable doubts on the validity of that doctrine. It would be extremely desirable to collect all the means of decision as to the validity of that doctrine. The question had been brought under the consideration of the branch of government with which he was connected, and he confessed he had been struck with the reasonings which had been adduced in favour of the opinion that it was not contagious, but epidemic. The subject had been referred to the college of physicians, who had originally advised the enactment of the quarantine laws; their opinion certainly was, that their original doctrine was sound and untouched by subsequent experiments. The subject, however, deserved every degree of light which could be thrown upon it, and it so happened that the committee which had sat last year on the prevailing epidemic fevers in London, had added to the doubts which had been entertained as to the nature of the plague. He trusted, therefore, that the subject was not unworthy of the consideration of a committee, as the settlement of this question, especially if it should be established that the plague was epidemic and not contagious, would be of the highest importance to the interests of commerce, and the happiness of the world.
Mr. Wynnsaid, that after the explanation which had been given, he could have no possible objection to the motion. But he trusted the House would pause a little before it legislated, if a committee of the House should be of a contrary opinion to the college of physicians.
Sir John Jacksonbegged to state the reasons which had induced him to trouble the House with the present motion. He had been on the committee which had inquired, in a former session, into the nature of the epidemic lever prevalent in London. The testimony which Dr. Roberts gave to that committee, had perfectly astonished him. Dr. Roberts had been for 24 years the principal medical attendant at Bartholomew hospital, and declared, that in all that period of his practice, he had scarcely known an instance of a fever being contagious. He hoped the House would consent to take the subject into consideration.
The motion was agreed to, and a committee, consisting of the following members, was appointed: sir John Jackson, Mr. Boswell, Mr. Frederick Robinson, Mr. Fowell Buxton, Mr. Henry Clive, Mr. Cust, Mr. Dawson, Mr. Wilberforce, Mr. Fazakerley, Mr. Davies Gilbert, Mr. Wallace, Mr. Sandford Graham, Mr. Hudson Gurney, Dr. Phillimore, Mr. Morritt, sir Charles Monck, Mr. Macqueen, Mr. Fleming, Mr. Legh, Mr. Heygate, and Mr. Bennet.

CHIMNEY SWEEPERS REGULATION BILL.
Mr. Bennetsaid, he rose for the purpose of moving for leave to bring in a bill to prevent the Sweeping of Chimnies by means of Climbing Boys. As there were many members in the present parliament who were not in the last, he deemed it requisite to mention some of the circumstances which had been stated to a former parliament. The report which a committee appointed by that parliament had made, the communications which had been received from all parts of the country, and the evidence which had been collected and placed before the public for inspection, must have fully justified those who were sanguine last year, in being more sanguine during the present year. It was not necessary for him to detail the miseries to which these poor children were exposed; they met the eye of every man in his daily walks. The report of the surveyor-general of the board of works, which had been drawn up during the recess, stated that the chimnies might be divided into four classes—910 in the first, class, 50 in the second, 80 in the third, and 10 in the fourth, out of every thousand. Of these only 10 could not be swept by means of machinery. The house of a distinguished individual (be believed he might mention his name—it was earl Spencer) was said to have its chimnies constructed in such a manner as to render it impossible that they should be swept by machines: by his advice, however, machines had been applied to them; and he was happy to say, that they had all been swept by them. He would therefore affirm, that there were no chimnies which could not be swept by machines, or, if there were any, that they were only found in the mansions of the rich and opulent. The expense, therefore, of altering them could not be severely felt; or even if it were, ought not to be set in competition with the anguish and misery suffered by these

427
climbing children. To show the use of the machine in another point of view, he would only add, that during the last month a chimney had been swept at the Tower with a machine in half an hour, which a boy was five hours sweeping some time since, and in which, as he was informed, a boy was once confined eight and twenty hours. To prevent the recurrence of such misery, he begged leave to bring in the present bill, which had been approved of by the last committee. The only alteration which he had made in it since that time was, to allow two years instead of one, before he called for the total abolition of the present practice of sweeping chimnies.
Leave was given to bring in the bill.

EXCHEQUER BILLS BILL.
On the order of the day for the second reading of this bill,
Mr. Elliceobserved, that in a return from the Bank of England, he observed the following note:—"This account is exclusive of all exchequer bills and Irish treasury bills purchased by the Bank, whether advertised to be paid off or not." He wished to know whether this note referred to exchequer bills held by the Bank, which had been advertised to be paid off, and which that establishment had not sent in? And secondly, whether they had been so detained in consequence of any understanding with government?
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that it sometimes happened, that when exchequer bills were advertised for payment, the public received for them either money or other bills. In the same way, the Bank had continued to hold exchequer bills over. The note to which the hon. member had referred was common to all returns relating to the advances made by the Bank to government; the exception was always made.
Mr. Ellicebegged to explain his reason for putting the questions. The chancellor of the exchequer, on a former night, had said that government had paid off 5,000,000 l. out of 8,000,000 l. due to the Bank: if the payment had been made, and the Bank at the same time withheld exchequer bills that in due course would have been paid off, so far it would amount to no payment. Was he to understand that the two transactions did not interfere with each other?
The Chancellor of the Exchequeradded, that the two transactions did not inter-
[428
fere. When he had spoken of 5,000,000 l. due to the Bank having been paid off, he meant to say, that all the advances to government by the Bank had been reduced by that sum.
The bill was then read a second time.

CONGRESS AT AIX-LA-CHAPELLE—HOLY ALLIANCE.
The Earl of Liverpoolhaving laid on the table, an Additional Paper relative to the payment of the pecuniary indemnity by France to the Allied Powers under the convention signed at Aix-la-Chapelle, on the 9th of October 1818,
Lord Hollandwished to ask the noble earl, first, whether any paper had been laid upon the table respecting the slave trade; and next, for some explanation respecting the documents which had been laid before the House. He did not mean to desire an explanation of the language

423
of some of the protocols, in which the noble earl would, perhaps, find it difficult to discover a meaning, but to confine himself to certain expressions which appeared to refer to what was commonly called the holy alliance (to which it had been hitherto understood England was not a party), and to ask whether the noble earl intended to communicate a copy of the holy alliance to the House? In a protocol signed at Aix-la-Chapelle, the 15th November, 1818, by the plenipotentiaries of Austria, France, Great Britain, Prussia and Russia, he found it declared, "That they" (that is to say, the powers above-mentioned) "are firmly resolved never to depart, neither in their mutual relations nor in those which bind them to other states, from the principle of intimate union which has hitherto presided over all their common relations and interests—a union rendered more strong and indissoluble by the bonds of Christian fraternity which the sovereigns have formed among themselves." Those bonds of Christian fraternity, he concluded, meant the holy alliance; and this treaty being thus alluded to in a protocol agreed to by this country, he thought it of importance, with a view to a proper consideration of the subject, that the House should be in possession of a copy of that treaty of holy alliance, in order to ascertain what were its stipulations.
The Earl of Liverpool, with reference to the question respecting the slave trade, stated, that he expected shortly to be enabled to lay papers upon that subject before the House. The other question of the noble lord he had no hesitation in answering. The treaty of holy alliance was signed at Paris, in 1815, personally by the sovereigns of Austria, Russia and Prussia, without the intervention of any ministers, and was communicated to this government. It being, however, contrary to the constitution of this country, for the Prince Regent, acting in the name of the sovereign, to sign an autographic treaty, without the intervention of a responsible minister, intimation to that effect was transmitted to the other sovereigns, stating, at the same time, that the treaty alluded to was in conformity with the disposition of the British government; and this government had since indirectly acceded to it. It certainly, however, was not his intention to lay upon the table a copy of the Treaty of Holy Alliance.
Lord Hollandthought, that their lord-
[424
ships ought to be told what the principles were to which the noble secretary of state alluded. The protocol on the table declared, that the five powers, of which this country was one, were united, and acted on a principle of intimate union, rendered indissoluble by the bonds of Christian fraternity. The treaties and conventions of Aix-la-Chapelle were represented to have been on certain principles, and those principles, it was to be inferred, were the same which had served for the foundation of the Holy Alliance. It appeared proper, therefore, that that paper should be communicated to their lordships; and he wished to know from the noble earl, whether he meant to lay it before the house.
The Earl of Liverpoolsaid, he had already stated, that this country was no party to the treaty in question: it followed of course that it could not be regularly called for by their lordships. It certainly had not been his intention to produce it, nor was he aware of any ground on which it could be laid before the House. The reference to principles to which the noble lord had alluded, was merely to those on which the allied powers had all along publicly acted.
Lord Hollandwas sorry the noble secretary of state was not disposed to give their lordships this information. He was extremely anxious to see what were the bonds of Christian fraternity to which the protocol he had alluded to referred.