Sitting of 5 June 1820

PETITION OF WILLIAM COBBETT RESPECTING THE CURRENT VALUE OF MONEY.
Mr. Coke, of Norfolk, presented a Petition from William Cobbett, of Botley, in the county of Southampton, farmer, setting forth,
"That it is essential to the harmony, happiness, and safety of every civil community, that the law afford equal protection to all the members thereof, but that, owing to the imperfection inseparable from human institutions, cases will sometimes arise where not only the law, how well so ever intended, is inadequate to the giving of protection against wrong, but where the wrong proceeds directly from the law itself, and it is to such a case (a case to meet which the right of petitioning the legislature is peculiarly adapted) that the Petitioner now beseeches the attention of the House; that the Petitioner has suffered, and is still suffering, great and grievous hardship, and is in danger of suffering still greater and more grievous hardships, from the operation and effects of acts passed by the late parliaments, and particularly from an act passed on the 2nd of July, 1819, intituled, "An Act to provide for the gradual Resumption of Cash Payments by the Bank of England; "that in the year 1805, and in the eight immediately succeeding years, the Petitioner purchased and improved an estate, consisting of lands and tenements, in the county of Southampton, at the cost of 30,000 l. and upwards, and that at the close of the above-mentioned period, he gave a mortgage on the said estate for 13,000 l.; that the Petitioner, owing to circumstances uncontrollable by him, has not been able to keep discharged the interest due on the said mortgage agreeably to the letter of the contract, and that he, having some time back given quiet possession to the mortgagee, has now received a notification from the mortgagee's executor (who has acted in this case with all possible mildness and delicacy), that this
840
latter must, in due execution of his trust, proceed to an immediate foreclosure of the mortgage, and consequent sale of the said estate; and against this proceeding, which under the present circumstances, and as the law now stands, must be ruinous to the petitioner, and deeply injurious to all who have claims on his pecuniary resources, he earnestly and most humbly implores the protection of the House: It is with extreme regret, that the petitioner finds himself compelled to trespass on the time of the House, but when the magnitude of his sufferings shall be duly considered, together with the circumstances that his case is the case of thousands, whose sufferings differ from his merely in degree, he hopes that the House will permit him to explain the causes of those sufferings, and to state the grounds on which he rests for obtaining that relief, which he most humbly seeks, and which cannot be obtained without the protecting interference of the House; that the chief immediate cause of the suffering injury and wrong of which the petitioner complains, is the rise which, since the aforesaid mortgage was given, has taken place in the value of the current money of the country, compared with the market price of the various productions of the laud; and that this rise in the value of money has been produced by measures and acts of the late parliaments, more especially by the act afore-mentioned, passed on the 2nd of July, 1819, which measure and acts could not possibly have been in the; contemplation of the petitioner at the time when the mortgage-contract aforesaid was made; seeing that, from the resolutions which the legislature adopted in 1811, it was clearly to be inferred that the current money had experienced no depreciation at that time, and that, of course, no laws would ever be passed recognizing such depreciation, and causing the value of money to be raised, both which have in effect been done by the provisions of the aforesaid act of the 2nd of July, 1819; with regard to the proportion or degree of this to him injurious rise in the value of money, the petitioner begs leave to state, that during the six years immediately preceding the period when the aforesaid mortgage was given, the average price of wheat was 104 s. the quarter; that, during the six years which; have succeeded the date of the said mortgage, the average price of wheat has been 75 s. the quarter; and that therefore the

841
measures and acts aforesaid, relative to cash payments by the Bank of England, have raised the value of money as affecting the petitioner, have augmented, in fact, the sum borrowed by him on mortgage, and have, even if the relative price of wheat alone be taken as the basis of calculation, given to the mortgagee 104 l. for every 75 l. lent by him to the petitioner; but the petitioner begs leave further to state, that in order to arrive at a just conclusion as to the degree of the rise in the value of money, as applicable to the present case, the relative price of the article of wheat ought not alone to be taken as the basis of calculation; but that, if it were not to render the representation of the petitioner intolerably tedious, the relative price of all the articles of farm produce ought to be exhibited, in order to form such basis; first, because wheat, being an article of indispensable use and universal consumption, will generally be the last in point of time to experience a decline in price from a rise in the value of money, and will also experience this decline in a less degree than articles with which the community in general can more easily dispense; and, second, because the price of wheat is liable annually to be very greatly affected by the nature of the seasons, which is not the case with regard to other articles of produce, which require a process of years to bring them to a state of maturity; while, therefore, the petitioner abstains from a prolix enumeration of these latter, he thinks that, in bare justice to his case, he ought to state that, during the six years immediately preceding the date of the aforesaid mortgage, the average price of fat hogs was 16 s. a score, that of a good cow, 22 l., that of a two year old cart colt 40 l., and that of a South Down ewe at Weyhill fair 42 s.; and that, during the six years which have elapsed since the date of the afore-mentioned mortgage, the average price of fat hogs has been 9s. a score, that of a good cow 12 l., that of a two year old cart colt 18 l., and that of a South Down ewe at Weyhill fair 25 s.; the petitioner does not lay this statement before the House as being in all its parts minutely correct, but, after the most diligent inquiry and the most mature consideration, and with an anxious desire to surpass in no instance the boundaries of fact, he declares to the House that, to the best of his knowledge and belief, the statement which he has here respectfully submitted is substantially
842
true; and from this statement it results, that upon the whole of these last mentioned important articles of agricultural produce there has taken place, since the date of the aforesaid mortgage, an average decline in price to the amount of more than one-half, whence it will be manifest to the House, that if the mortgage were now to be paid off, without any regard had to the change in the value of money, the petitioner would, in the proportion that the price of land has been affected by the fall in the price of these articles, have to pay in fact double the sum borrowed by him on the said mortgage, and that, amongst the ultimate consequences, not to be wholly unexpected in such a case, might be the total ruin of the petitioner, and the beggary of every one dependent on his pecuniary means; that against consequences so cruelly injurious, and so manifestly speedily approaching, the petitioner beseeches the House to protect him; and that he now, with due deference to the judgment of the House, proceeds briefly to submit the grounds on which he rests his claim to that protection.; that the petitioner thinks it will not be denied, that without money there can be, in a community constituted as this is, nothing which can be correctly called property, because it is by the use of money, and by that alone, that the possession or enjoyment of any other thing can be obtained or secured; that money is to all other kinds of property what blood is to the other constituent parts of the animal body, the functions of which parts must have blood to exist with, or cease to exist at all; that without money there can be no contracts relative to the transfer or pledging of other property; that the amount of the money is a principal and vital condition of the contract; that, if the value of the money be changed, subsequent to the making, and previous to the fulfilment of the contract, the contract is violated in the point most essential to its just fulfilment; that the money is described to be "good and lawful money," by which must necessarily be meant the money which is still in existence and in common use under the authority of the legislature at the time of making the contract; that every subsequent step with regard to the fulfilment of the contract ought to be regulated according to the money in which the contract was made, and not according to

843
money of a different value, and that to adopt a contrary principle would be to introduce into bargains and agreements between man and man such uncertainty and confusion, and to place parties to contracts in such great and constant peril, that confidence as to all matters of property, must speedily be wholly destroyed; that if the House concur with the petitioner in the foregoing propositions, as he begs leave humbly to express his hope that the House will, he has only further to represent that the money now in circulation is not the same as that which was in circulation at the time when the mortgage aforesaid was given by the petitioner; that the change, to him so injurious, in the value of money has been produced by measures of the Bank, authorized by acts of the legislature, and by acts of the legislature itself; that these measures and acts could not (for the reason before stated) have been in the contemplation of the petitioner at the time when the contract was made; that the great and grievous sufferings to which he is subjected, in common with thousands of others have not arisen from causes which were at all within his control, or against the effects of which any degree of human prudence or caution could have secured him; that the rise in the value of money the fall in the value of land, and the consequent loss to him during the progress of this dreadful evil, as well as in its fatal result, have not been occasioned by untowardness in seasons, by failure in crops, by vicissitudes of commerce, or by visitations of God, but solely and entirely by legislative measures and acts, which have changed the value of money, altered the effects of his contract aforesaid, and which, without any act on his part either of illegality or improvidence, have, if the law as it now stands be enforced against him, wholly despoiled the petitioner of his estate; and the petitioner therefore, beseeching the House to take the premises into their indulgent consideration, most humbly prays, that the will be pleased to afford him relief from his sufferings, by reducing the current money to the value which it bore in 1813, or by providing for a revision and rectifying of contracts, or by adopting such other means and measures as the House shall, in their wisdom and justice, deem to be most meet."
Ordered to lie on the table.

FROM KINGSTON-UPON-HULL.
Mr. Sykessaid, he held in his hand a petition signed by a number of persons of property and character, in favour of a limited alteration in the representation of that House. The petitioners were the freeholders of the county of the town of Kingston-upon-Hull. Its freeholders, amounting in number to between six and seven hundred, considerable also in property, were not allowed to vote in the election of knights of the shire for the county of York, nor of burgesses for the town of Hull. Though freeholders, they were wholly unrepresented, while at Bristol and Southampton, which were counties within themselves, the freeholders were allowed to vote for the representatives of those places. The present petition had arisen out of the discussion on the Grampound case, and the petitioners prayed, in the event of the transference of the right of return from Gram pound to the two ridings of the county of York, that they may be permitted to vote at such election. He entirely concurred in the views of the petitioners, and considered such a principle of reform both safe and practicable. He took that opportunity of giving notice of his intention, either to ask for leave to bring in a bill to that effect, or of moving a clause with such a purport, to be embodied into the Grampound Disfranchisement Bill.
Ordered to lie on the table.

PETITION FROM LIVERPOOL IN FAVOUR OF TIMBER DUTIES
General Gascoynepresented a petition, which he said was very respectably signed by the merchants and ship owners of the town of Liverpool. It was different from the petition which he had lately the honour of presenting to the House. It was founded upon a report which had gone abroad of an intended alteration of the duties on timber coming from the Baltic. It pointed out the advantages to be derived from a continuance of the timber-trade to our American colonies, which among its other benefits occasioned a consumption of British manufactures which could not be expected from the Baltic, if we should renew the timber-trade with that quarter by lowering the duties. Such decrease of the duties would, they observed, not only be extremely injurious to the shipowners, but to the seamen now employed, and to those emigrants who had gone out to the Canadas.
Sir Isaac Coffinsaid, that fron his own knowledge he could assure the House that not a single emigrant in Canada was employed in cutting down the timber imported from America.
Ordered to lie on the table.

PETITION FROM THE SHIP-BUILDERS AND SHIP-OWNERS OF LONDON, IN FAVOUR OF TIMBER DUTIES.
Mr. Marryatpresented a petition from the shipbuilders of the port of London, stating the distress under which they, and those dependent on them laboured. They were not enabled to give employment to the one-third of their former amount. It might be thought that they would be favourable to a remission of the duties on timber coming from the Baltic, as the timber would be cheaper; but they were not so. They had the good sense to see, that if that trade were opened, it must have the effect of destroying the trade with our North-American colonies, which they stated would be most injurious to our shipping trade. The petition, he observed, was signed by one of every respectable ship-building firm (with one exception) at both sides of the water, from one end of the river to the other.
Ordered to lie on the table.
Mr. Thomas Wilsonpresented a similar petition from the ship-owners of the city of London. It was, he observed, most numerously and respectably signed. It was said, that the decrease of the duties on the Baltic timber was intended to conciliate the northern powers, and to increase our trade with them: but at a period like the present, with the enjoyment of the liberty of the press, and when our newspapers were circulated in all parts of Europs, those powers must see the situation in which this country was placed. They knew the amount of our national debt, and the deficiencies in our ways and means, and they could therefore have no reason to owe us a grudge for a duty on timber. It was not so offensive to them as the duty on foreign wool, which was imposed in the fifth year of peace. It was objected, that the relaxation of the duties on the Baltic timber would open a larger field for the exportation of our manufactures, but it should be recollected, that we obliged our colonies to deal with us exclusively, and they were enabled to do so, to a large extent, by means of this trade; but if we took our timber from the powers
846
of the Baltic, we could not oblige them to deal with us, and the chance was, that, having the choice of markets (which our American colonies had not), they would go wherever they found goods cheapest. His conviction was, that if this trade were opened, it would have the effect of annihilating our trade with our North American colonies, without giving us any thing like an adequate return. It would throw nearly 200,000 tons of British shipping out of employment. It was contended, that this trade did not employ any of the emigrants who went from this country to Canada; but even admitting that to be true, he maintained that, while it gave employment to so large a portion of our capital, and to so many of our seamen, it ought not to be given up.
Sir W. Curtissaid, that if ever there was a body of British subjects entitled to the consideration and respect of parliament, it was the present petitioners.—During all the difficulties of the war, they had been ready to make every sacrifice for the safety and honour of the country. He hoped that no interference would be made with those navigation laws which had so essentially led to our maritime greatness.
Mr. Marryat*said: Mr. Speaker; I feel it my duty to bear testimony to the truth of the allegations contained in the petition now in the hands of my honourable friend the member for the city of London; and to give my best support to the prayer of the petitioners. They state that they are labouring under great and serious difficulties, as well from the depression of commerce, as from the competition of foreign ship owners; and the facts of the case unfortunately bear them out too well in the assertion; for no description of property has, I believe, been depreciated to j such an extent as that of the British ship owners. I admit, that on the breaking out of the late war, the value of shipping rose, the rate of freight advanced, and I that the ship owners, in common with the landholders, the manufacturers, and all other classes of the community, enjoyed for a time a considerable share of prosperity. Ships, however, are but of limited duration; they last from fifteen to twenty years, according to the goodness of the materials of which they are built. The
* From the original edition published by the committee of the society of ShipOwners.

847
war continued more than twenty years; and therefore almost every merchant vessel now in use, has been built at the high rate of war charges. The war gave us a monopoly of the carrying trade of almost all the world, and ships were built to meet the demand; but at the peace we restored most of the colonies we had conquered to their former owners, and each nation resumed that share of commerce which she had formerly enjoyed. To add to the distress of the ship owners, near a thousand sail of vessels which had been engaged in the transport service were at that very time discharged. The surplus of tonnage then became so great, that it was impossible to procure employment for vessels, even at freights which would pay the expences of navigating them; and the consequence was, a great depreciation in their value. In proof of this, I will state to the House, that about the year 1810, I built one ship, and purchased another, of rather more than four hundred tons burthen. Each of these ships cost me 14,000 l. The depreciation in their value, arising from age, may be estimated at 5,000 l.; but such has been the fall in the price of ships, that these vessels are only valued, in the policies of insurance effected upon them for the voyages on which they are now engaged at 3,800 l. each.
It would be unfair not to admit that the return of peace did fortunately open some new channels of trade, which provided employment for part of our surplus shipping. The private trade to India, which was opened on the renewal of the company's charter, was one of this description; and according to the statement of a noble lord in another place, 61,000 tons of British shipping were employed in it last year. The losses, however, in this branch of trade have been so great, that many of the ships at first engaged in it, have quitted it for the timber trade to the British colonies in North America, and others are daily following their example. Peace also restored a free communication between the powers in the Mediterranean, and for some time we enjoyed almost a monopoly of their carrying trade. It is well known that the British flag was the only European flag respected by the Barbary powers. Our ships, therefore, navigated the Mediterranean in perfect security, and were insured at peace premiums; while those of other nations were exposed to capture, and consequently were obliged to pay war premiums. Indeed, they had
848
not only to insure their ships and cargoes, but their crews also; for such policies were frequently effected at Lloyd's. The masters were usually valued at 100 l., the mates at 80 l., and the seamen at 50 l. each; which sums, in case of capture, were appropriated to the redemption of the parties. This state of things gave us so decided a superiority in the carrying trade of the Mediterranean, that not less than five hundred sail of British ships were employed in the corn trade, between the Black Sea and the different ports of Italy, exclusive of the trade from one part of the Mediterranean to another. But, sir, in one of those fits of magnanimity to which we became subject, in consequence of being hailed as the deliverers of Europe, we thought proper to equip an armament against the day of Algiers (the only ally who remained faithful to us during the whole war,) in order to put an end to the predatory practices of the Barbary powers; and we certainly did achieve the liberation of about five hundred Sardinians, Neapolitans, and other foreigners, at the expence of the limbs and lives of a far greater number of British seamen; of more (as I understand) than a million of of money; and the farther expense, of throwing about eight hundred British ships and ten thousand British seamen out of employment; for the result of this enterprise was, that all other European powers could navigate the Mediterranean with the same security as ourselves, and being able to sail at less expence than we can do, they immediately supplanted us in this carrying trade, which does not, I believe, give employment to one single British ship at the present moment. The other branch of trade which opened, on the return of peace, and by far the most extensive and important of the whole, is the timber trade with the British colonies in North America, which last year employed no less than one thousand five hundred and twenty sail of vessels, of three hundred and forty thousand tons burthen, and navigated by seventeen thousand six hundred British seamen. As I before observed, the private trade to India is on the decline, and the carrying trade in the Mediterranean is totally lost; this trade, therefore, is the sheet anchor, the last remaining hope of the ship owners, and the House cannot wonder at the alarm they express in their petition, at an attempt to deprive them of this, their only resource.
So far from the interests of the ship

849
owners being in an improving state, the depreciation in their property is increasing more rapidly than ever, as I shall prove, by quoting actual sales of ships, which have taken place within these few months, owing to the insolvency of their owners. The Sesostris of four hundred and eighty-seven tons burthen, was launched in 1818, and cost 12,175 l. She was sold in 1820, after having made one voyage, for 6,300 l. The Midas, of four hundred and twenty tons, was valued in 1818, at 6,300 l.; was repaired and coppered that year at Liverpool, at an expense of 3,500 l.; and in 1820, was sold for 3,200 l. The Hebe, of four hundred and seventeen tons, was valued in 1818, at 6,000 l. and sold in 1820, for 3,250 l. The St. Patrick cost, in repairs and fitting, in 1818, independent of the then value of the ship, 7,100 l.: and was sold in 1820, for 3,000 l. The Lady Raffles, of six hundred and forty-six tons, was built in 1817, and cost 23,000 l.;s after making one voyage only, she was sold in 1820, for between 12 and 13,000 l. These facts show the utter inability of the ship towners to bear any farther disadvantage, and that the loss of the timber trade with the British colonies in North America, must complete their ruin.
If it is supposed that the ships and seamen now employed in bringing timber from the British colonies, might be engaged in the same trade to the North of Europe, the answer is, that two circumstances render this impossible. In the first place, the voyage to the Baltic is so much shorter than that to North America, that the same trade would not occupy half the number of ships or men. In the next place, all the trade between Great Britain and her colonies must be carried on in British ships only; but that with the Baltic would be carried on chiefly in foreign ships. I have moved for returns which will lay the present state of this trade fully before the House; but in the mean time, I am enabled to state, from official documents, that of 101,117 tons of shipping employed last year, in the trade between this country and Norway and Sweden, only eighteen thousand eight hundred and twenty-seven tons were British and eighty-one thousand seven hundred and forty tons were foreign. This must be so in the nature of things; for timber, iron, hemp, flax, provisions of all sorts, and seamen's wages are much lower in the North of Europe than in Great Britain. The heavy taxation to which we
850
are necessarily subject, in order to provide for the interest of our national debt, raises the price of labour, and of every thing that is produced by labour; and therefore to expect that a country burthened with taxation as this is can compete with other countries where taxation is comparatively light, is to suppose that a horse staggering under a heavy load, is likely to win a race against one that carries only feather weight. If the present protecting duties, in favour of timber from the British colonies are reduced, and the trade transferred to the Baltic, the inevitable consequence will be, that the tonnage employed in it will be diminished one half, and that of that half four-fifths will be foreign; so that twelve or thirteen hundred sail of British shipping must either remain without employment, or be thrown on the other already overloaded branches of British commerce, to the incalculable injury of the ship owners.
The alteration in these protecting duties was first recommended to the House, by the hon. member for Taunton (Mr. Baring), on presenting a petition from certain merchants of the city of London praying for the abolition of all duties merely protective from foreign competition. The right hon. the president of the board of trade, who expressed strong objections to taking up the doctrines contained in that petition as general rules of practice, nevertheless coincided with him in the expediency of his suggestion as to the protecting duties on foreign timber, and announced his intention of bringing forward some proposition of that sort, in the course of the present session of parliament. I really heard that declaration both with surprise and concern; with surprise, as I had ever been accustomed to hear him support measures founded on true principles of commercial policy; and with concern as I am conscientiously persuaded, that of all the wild and extravagant projects that would follow the unqualified adoption of the principles so broadly laid down in that petition (but which the hon. member who presented it most judiciously qualified in his speech), none could be imagined more pregnant with mischief, not only to the interests of the ship owners, but to the best interests of the country at large, than the very measure which the president of the board of trade thought proper to stamp with the seal of his approbation.
Before I point out the mischiefs to

851
which I have alluded, I shall make a few-observations upon the specious arguments by which the measure in contemplation has been supported. In the first place, it has been argued as if it was a question between parties who have equal claims to our preference; whereas, in point of fact, it is a question between our own fellow subjects and foreigners. We have been, told that we ought to consider all the world as members of one great family. Now, Sir, I cannot carry my notions of consanguinity quite so far. I am ready to consider all the inhabitants of my own country as one great family; but I must consider the inhabitants of all other countries as so many other great families; and when I am called upon to injure my own countrymen in order to benefit them, I look upon the application in the same light, as if I were desired to starve my own children, in order to provide for the children of strangers, and reject it accordingly. Then, Sir, we are told that the protection we gave to the timber trade with our own colonies, is dictated by a spirit of hostility towards the northern powers of Europe, and has excited great dissatisfaction against us throughout the continent. The system of imposing protecting duties, in favour of the produce of their colonies, has uniformly been acted upon for centuries past, and continues to be acted upon to the present moment, by every power in Europe; and therefore no umbrage can reasonably be taken against us, for adhering to the universal practice, But the complaint that this branch of trade with our colonies originated in a spirit of hostility towards the northern powers comes with a very bad grace from them, as the truth is, that it originated not only in their hostility, but in their perfidy and ill faith towards us. These powers, notwithstanding the Berlin and Milan decrees of Buonaparte, continued an intercourse with this country, which was carried on by means of licences, till the year 1811, when at the command of their great master and our enemy by a sudden and simultaneous movement, they confiscated every vessel in their ports that came from this country, together with their cargoes, to the value of not less than seven millions of money. They probably fancied that we were dependent upon them for our supply of timber, hemp and other naval stores; and that by cutting off all communication with us, they would oblige us to make peace on such terms as
852
they might think proper to impose. But Great Britain excluded from the old world, found out a new one in her own colonies, and discovered resources in them, which enabled her not only to maintain the contest, but to bring it at length to a successful and glorious termination. She then explored the forests of Canada, and drew from them those supplies of timber which she had formerly procured from the Baltic; and now that this trade has grown up to its present height, and is carried on with equal advantage to ourselves and to our colonies, we must surely be dotards and idiots to sacrifice our mutual prosperity, at the request and for the benefit of those who wish to regain that which they lost by their own ill-faith and injustice.
Great stress is laid on the advantage we should derive from what is called a more liberal system towards foreign powers; and we are told that if we take more from them they will take more from us. These cargoes of timber, if imported from our own colonies, are and must be paid for in goods from this country, as they are allowed no commercial intercourse with any other; but if imported from the Baltic, they will be drawn for in bills of exchange, and the proceeds invested wherever they can be employed to the best advantage. That foreigners can undersell us, is not only matter of just inference from the weight of taxation under which we labour, and from which they are exempt, but is also a plain matter of fact, admitting of demonstration. The Havannah is a free port into which the goods of all nations are admitted on equal terms: the number of vessels that entered there last year from Great Britain was less than one in ten of those that entered from the other countries of Europe; a plain proof, that nine-tenths of the articles required for the consumption of the inhabitants of Cuba are procured cheaper from other countries than from Great Britain. This fact is confirmed by another of equal notoriety, that the vessels engaged in the timber trade from the Baltic, instead of taking goods from this country in return for their cargoes, were so generally in the habit of going home in ballast, that in order to encourage them to take some small portion of British manufactures, an order in council was issued permitting the masters and crews to ship private ventures for their own account, without subjecting the vessels to any extra expense in clear-

853
ing at the custom-house. No great extension of the sale of our manufactures in Europe appears practicable, because every manufacturing nation has adopted a system similar to our own; and endeavours to secure the supply of its own consumption, for the encouragement of the industry of its own subjects. The only marts for our manufactures which we can hope to improve, are our colonies, and those distant nations who do not manufacture for themselves. Our home consumption, and our colonies, and dependencies, take off seven-eighths of all our manufactures; and to throw this trade open, as the opposers of all restrictions advise, in order to have a chance of extending the other one eighth, would be acting, with the desperation of a gamester who would play with the odds seven to one against himself, rather than not play at all.
Another argument used in favour of procuring this timber from the Baltic is, the very inferior quality of that which is brought from North America. It cannot be denied, that all new concerns are conducted with less expertness than those which have been long established. The American logs of timber are not so neatly squared as those from the Baltic, and measure to great disadvantage; but I understand that this defect is gradually decreasing, and that the difference between the one and the other, in this respect, will soon be imperceptible. Much of the prejudice entertained against American timber, arose from its being applied to purposes for which it was unfit; some particular descriptions of it, which will last under cover, instead of being used for inside work, were exposed to the weather, and consequently soon decayed; but as the quality of it became better understood, this objection to it was removed. With respect to its general inferiority, the demand for it such as it is, and the repute in which it is held, are proved beyond the reach of controversy, by the increase of the trade, from eighty thousand tons of shipping that were employed to bring it in 1811, to three hundred and forty thousand tons in the year 1819.
Other advocates for the Baltic timber, assert, that the quantity of tonnage employed in bringing timber from the British colonies last year, was the effect of over-trading; and that the wood lies on hand, and cannot be sold.
854
The increase in the tonnage has not been sudden, but gradual and progressive, and therefore does not wear the appearance of over-trading; but if it really is so losing a trade, it must soon die a natural death, and therefore to put an end to it by new legislative enactments is altogether unnecessary. An hon. baronet has told the House, that this timber is not the produce of Canada, but of the United States of America. Admitting this for the sake of argument, I should say that whether we procure our timber from one neutral power or from another, is a matter of indifference; but that the securing the freight of it to British ships is a matter of great importance; and that this object, which is effected by importing it from the British colonies, would be lost by importing it from the Baltic. I readily concede to the hon. baronet, that at the commencement of this trade, when we were suddenly excluded from the Baltic, the demand for timber was so great, the price so high, and our own establishments for procuring it so inadequate, that the greater part of what was shipped from Canada, came from the United States; but I understand that at present our establishments are competent to the object, that our own population would be jealous of any interference with the employment on which they depend for subsistence, and that the price of the timber is so low, that it would not bear the charges of a double transport. I therefore believe the whole of the actual import to be the produce of our own colonies.
We are reproached with folly for bringing timber from such a distance, when we might procure it so much nearer home; and it is wittily observed, that it would be an improvement of the present system, to pass a law obliging all the vessels engaged in this trade with the British colonies, to return by the way of the Cape of Good Hope; or to enact, that the colliers from Newcastle, instead of coming direct to London, should go north about; as these measures would give still greater employment to seamen, at the expense of the consumers of the different cargoes. It is easy to place any subject in a ridiculous point of view, by exaggeration. In this manner, a likeness is converted into a caricature. The disadvantage to the consumers of timber, in

855
consequence of its being brought from the British colonies in North America, is highly exaggerated. If brought from the Baltic, more money is paid for the timber and less for the freight; if from our own colonies in North America, less is paid for the timber and more for the freight; but the price to the consumer is not materially enhanced. If, however, this were the case, Great Britain would be acting on that system of policy which has governed her conduct in various similar instances. It has ever been her paramount object to keep up a numerous and hardy race of seamen, whose services she may command in time of war; and this she can only accomplish, by so extending her carrying trade as to find them employ rent in time of peace. With this view, she gives encouragement to the ship owners, not for their own sakes, but as the only instruments with which she can act, in pursuing her great object, the support of her naval power. With I this view she gives bounties upon her fisheries, which this House has thought it wise to renew this present session of parliament. With this view, she prohibits the supply of this metropolis with coals from the nearest mines, by means of canals; but obliges the inhabitants, by law, to import them coastwise, from a greater distance and at a heavier expense. With the same view, she formerly gave bounties also on the importation of masts, timber, deals, and staves, from the British colonies in North America, which were only discontinued in the year 1781; and, in the same spirit, she now encourages that trade in British ships, by the protecting duties on timber imported from the Baltic in foreign ships.—All these measures are considered by our modern political economists as great practical errors as violations of their rule, to buy every thing where it can be bought cheapest. They would permit our fish, our coals, our timber, our colonial produce, and all other commodities, to be imported by foreigners. By this system they might perhaps make some saving in the freight of these articles, but it would be at the expence of that pearl of high price, our naval supremacy; for if we had no carrying trade we could have no seamen, if we had no seamen we could have no navy, if we had no navy we could have no security for maintaining our independence, but must run the risk
856
of sinking into the situation of tributaries to some foreign power; and then we should find these cheap articles dear indeed. If the British hon.like the lion in the fable, will suffer his teeth to be drawn and his claws to be pared, he must expect, like him, to have his brains knocked out for his folly. There is a false economy in public, as well as in private life. More considerations than the mere prime cost, enter into the question of whether articles are really cheap or dear; and unless, we value pounds, shillings, and pence more than either our safety or our glory, we shall never adopt the estimates of these advisers.
Having thus noticed the different arguments that have been urged in favour of the transfer of the timber trade from our own colonies to the northern powers of Europe, I shall now point out the mischiefs that would attend this measure. Official documents show, that this trade actually furnishes employment for one thousand five hundred Land twenty-five sail of British vessels, manned with seventeen thousand six hundred and thirty-four seamen; being one seventh part of the whole carrying trade of Great Britain. The loss of such a trade would produce the most serious effects at any time; but more particularly in the present state of this country. It would occasion such a farther depreciation, in the already dreadfully depreciated property of the British ship owners, as must involve them, and all those numerous bodies of men whose interests are intermingled with theirs, in absolute ruin. The consequences of the loss of our carrying trade in the Mediterranean, after the expedition against Algiers, showed themselves in the number of distressed seamen who wandered, without food or shelter, about our streets. Their pitiable state excited general commiseration, and temporary relief was afforded them, by a liberal and patriotic subscription, till they were provided for in the following spring by this very timber trade to the British colonies. The loss of this trade would again plunge them into aggravated distress, and leave them without resource. They must either find employment abroad, and add to the naval force of foreign powers what they deducted from that of Great Britain, or be maintained by their respective parishes, and thus increase the weight of our already enormous poor-rates.—

857
Our exports to the British colonies, which have kept pace with the increase of this trade, must dwindle into insignificance; and the manufacturers and artisans who now find occupation and the means of subsistence for themselves and their families, in preparing goods for that market, will, like the seamen, be thrown out of employment, and must be maintained at the public expense.
The British landholders also have a strong interest in this question. The present duties on foreign timber are not only a protection to colonial timber, but to British timber also; the price of which would fall, in proportion to the extent of reduction on those duties. I have lately purchased British fir, at from 3l. 5s. to 31. 15 s. per load, which is certainly not more than a remunerating price to the grower; and any far-therreduction would discourage gentlemen from extending those plantations, which contribute to the present embellishment, and may be essential to the future defence of the country. The British land holder is as much entitled to protection against foreign timber, as against foreign corn; and though the advocates for the system of buying every thing where they can buy it cheapest, wave the application of their principle to the Corn laws for the present, yet if they carry their point as to timber, they will establish a precedent against the landholder, of which they will avail themselves hereafter.Obsta principiis is a good maxim in politics as well as in medicine; and if the landholders are wise, they will resist, in the first instance, any interference with that protection which they derive under the existing laws.
Another mischief would attend the proposed transfer of this trade, which ought not to escape notice. Our commerce with our own colonies is under our own control, and independent of the decrees of any emperor, or the non-intercourse act of any foreign power; but that with other nations, depends only upon the will and pleasure of their respective governments, and by any change of policy on their part may be shut against us in a moment. In proportion as we extend the former, we become independent; but in proportion as we extend the latter, we become dependent; and (as the experience of the last war has taught us) expose ourselves to sudden revulsions, which may not only interrupt our national pro-
858
sperity, but endanger our domestic tranquillity.
An evil of great magnitude that would arise from the loss of the trade with the British colonies, is the discouragement of emigration. Nothing can be of more importance to a country having a redundant population, without adequate means of employment at home, than to send her surplus numbers abroad, to situations where their labours will still contribute to her advantage. With this view, we voted last session of parliament 50,000 l., to assist individuals emigrating to the Cape of Good Hope; and this sum, I understand, has not only been expended, but exceeded, without providing means of conveyance for more than a small proportion of those who wished to embark for that destination. Within these few years, not less than fifty thousand individuals are said to have emigrated to Canada, at their own expense, and more are constantly embarking. On this point I speak from actual knowledge; several families having gone, some time ago, from the place which I have the honour to represent, and from my having been employed within these few weeks, to engage a passage for others, who have been induced by their representations to follow their example. I understand, too, that the tide of population, which ever follows encouragement, has set in very strongly to our colonies, from the frontiers of the United States, since the establishment of this timber trade; and I firmly believe, that, whether we shall establish in Canada a numerous, flourishing, and well-affected population, able and willing to serve as an effectual barrier against the future ambition of the government of the United States, or whether we shall have a thin, distressed, and disaffected population, ready to submit to the first invader, depends upon the decision we shall come to on the present subject.
The House ought to know, that the existing duties on timber, so far from depriving the northern powers of Europe of a fair participation in this trade, and operating as prohibitory duties, actually give them a greater share of it than is enjoyed by our own colonies. I have moved for papers which will give full information on this head; but, in the mean time, I am enabled to state the comparative imports into the port of London, for the last year, which were as follows:

Pieces of timber from our American

52,412

Pieces of timber from the Baltic and Norway

58,994

Deals from the former

812,099

Deals to from the latter

1,622,440

Staves from our American colonies

1,236,095

Staves from foreign powers

1,897,902

From this comparison, the House may judge of the probable import into the other ports of the United Kingdom; and the conclusion to which it leads is, that nothing can be more unreasonable than the complaints of foreign powers of those existing duties, which place them at least on an equal footing with our own colonies. The complaint would come with more justice from the other parties that we do not give them that full protection in our home market, which, according to our colonial system, is the return to which they are entitled, for that double monopoly we impose upon them, of taking every thing from, and sending every thing to, the mother country, in British ships; thus making them marts for the consumption of her manufactures, and the foundation of her naval power. Even the most strenuous advocates for free trade, have applauded this system. Dr. Adam Smith, speaking of oar Navigation law, says, "It is not impossible that some of the regulations of this famous act may have proceeded from national animosity; they are as wise, however, as if they had all been dictated by the most deliberate wisdom." In a subsequent passage he observes, "The act of navigation is not favourable to foreign commerce, or to the growth of that opulence that can arise from it;" and, after explaining this point, he concludes thus:"As defence, however, is of much more importance than opulence, the act of navigation is, perhaps, the wisest of all the commercial regulations of England." This testimony is the more valuable, as; coming from the mouth of an unwilling witness, one of the greatest opposers of all commercial restrictions; who, however, acknowledges, that every other consideration ought to give way to the paramount object of maintaining our naval supremacy.
Some foreign writers of considerable eminence, have urged the same system that is now contended for by many of our own countrymen; the taking off all commercial retsrictions, and throwing trade entirely open. One of them, a man whose views of commercial and colonial policy are equally acute and profound, I mean
860
the Abbé de Pradt, avows his object to be, not to increase but to diminish our national prosperity, and to apportion it more equally among the other powers of Europe. He declares, that our colonial and commercial monopoly is so predominant, that it calls for a coalition of all other nations to put it down, as much as such a coalition was called for, to put down the military despotism of Buonaparte. He says, that our colonies form a chain of fortresses that engirt the globe, and command the entrance of every sea; that we confine all the other nations of the world captives in their respective positions, of which we, their gaoler, hold the key; that our maritime superiority is so absolute, that unless the independence of the colonies, and a free trade with them can be obtained, all Europe ought to burn their ships at once, as they are reserved for no other fate than to be carried in triumph into the Thames. He lays down principles of colonial policy, shows that by conforming to them we have succeeded, that other nations by deviating from them have failed, and ascribes our prosperity to the superior wisdom of our political institutions. Here, indeed, he differs widely from our friends at home; who would persuade us that they are founded in folly, and that the sooner we get rid of them the better; but if the tree is to be known by its fruit (as we are taught by high authority to believe), we must admit the Abbe de Pradt to have taken the more correct view of this subject. The Abbe, too, tells us, that we ought to consider all the world as one large family; and to throw all the commercial riches of the world into one common stock, into which every individual might put his hand, and take out just what he wanted for his own use. But, Sir, we are the parties who must contribute almost the whole of this common stock; and should recollect that if so many hands are put into it, very little will come to our share. This proposal reminds me of one that was lately made by a certain set of gentlemen here, called Spencean philosophers; who, having a great taste for agriculture, but no land of their own to try their experiments upon, modestly requested that all the land in the kingdom might be thrown into a common stock, and equally divided among all the inhabitants. The motto of the standard under which we fight, Sir, is Dieu et man droil We must defend our rights and properties against all innovators, whether

861
foreign or domestic; and I trust his majesty's ministers will never be induced, either by solicitations on the one hand, or menaces on the other (for the United States of America are at this moment trying to coerce us into the surrender of our carrying trade to our West India colonies), to give up the great foundations of our wealth and power.
The exertions of the mercantile petitioners to whom I have so often alluded, may be most usefully directed to the removal of those restrictions, by which British commerce is at present cramped and confined, and to the giving it all possible scope and expansion; but let them not interfere with those wise and salutary restrictions upon foreigners to which we owe the high rank we at present hold among the nations of Europe. I shall conclude, Sir, by recommending the following words of that enlightened statesman, lord Clarendon, to the serious consideration of his majesty's ministers. "They that shall be so honest and so wise, as duly to maintain the laws, thriftily and providently to administer the public treasure, and to preserve the sovereignty of the seas, that ancient true and best defence of these realms, that body, whomsoever it may be composed of, shall have the weight of England on its side; and if there can be any of any other frame, they must, in the end, prove miserable, rotten reeds." I have only to apologise to the House for having occupied so much of their time, and to thank them for the indulgence with which I have been heard.
Mr. Baringsaid, that it was not intended on his part, or that of those with whom he concurred, to interfere with any part of our colonial policy, the timber trade alone excepted, and that nothing was farther from his purpose than to injure the interest of our shipping. There was, indeed, no class with whose interest he would be more unwilling to interfere, than that connected with our shipping. But when the whole question should be regularly brought before the House, after due and deliberate consideration by the committee for the appointment of which he proposed to move, without making any observation, after the present motion was disposed of, he would enter fully into the discussion of this subject.
The Speakersuggested to the hon. member, who had just sat down, that, according to the arrangement of the business of the day, he could not regularly bring for-
862
ward the motion, of which he had given notice, until the orders of the day were disposed of, those orders having the precedency of the notices. The right hon. gentleman also observed, that there were no less than 17 orders, some of which related to matters of considerable interest, and were likely to give rise to much debate. Therefore, the hon. member would no doubt feel the propriety of waving his purpose of bringing forward, so soon as he had just stated, the motion of which he had given notice, because, although he meant to make no observation upon that motion himself, he could not answer that others would not make so many as to produce a prolonged discussion.
Mr. M. A. Taylortook occasion to animadvert upon the practice which had of late crept into that House, of raising a discussion upon mere motions for presenting petitions. The House had been now about an hour and a half engaged in discussing the merits of a petition which was not yet laid on the table, and upon which of course the House was as yet incompetent to decide. Such a course of proceeding was obviously so irregular, whilst it interfered so much with the ordinary business of the House, that he hoped gentlemen would feel the impropriety of persevering in the practice.
Ordered to lie on the table.

PORTSMOUTH ELECTION.
Lord clive reported from the Select Committee appointed to try the merits of the Portsmouth Election,—"That the committee had determined, that it appeared to the said committee, that the merits of the petition did in part depend upon the right of election; and therefore the committee required the counsel on both sides to deliver to the clerk of the committee statements in writing of the right of election, for which they respectively contended: That, in consequence thereof, the counsel for the petitioner delivered in a statement as follows; That the right of voting in the borough of Portsmouth, as contended for by the petitioner, is in the mayor, "aldermen, and burgesses of the said be' rough only, such mayor, aldermen, and burgesses being resident within the said borough, and the limits and liberties thereof:' That the counsel for the sitting member delivered in a statement, as follows: "That the right of election of 'burgesses to serve in parliament for the borough of Portsmouth is in the mayor,

863
'aldermen, and burgesses of the said bo-`rough only:' That upon the statement delivered in by the counsel for the petitioner, the said committee have determined, that the right of election, as set forth in the said statement, is not the right of election for the borough of Portsmouth, in the county of Southampton: That upon the statement delivered in by the counsel for the sitting member, the said committee have determined, That the right of election, as set forth in the said statement, is the right of election for the said borough of Portsmouth: That the said committee have determined, That admiral John Markham is duly elected a burgess to serve in this present parliament for the said borough; that the said committee have also determined, that the petition of the said sir George Cockburn did not appear to the committee to be frivolous or vexatious."

FOREIGN TRADE—SELECT COMMITTEE APPOINTED.
Mr. Baring moved, "That a Select Committee be appointed to consider of the means of maintaining and improving the Foreign Trade of the country, and to report their opinion and observations thereon to the House "The motion was agreed to without any observations, and the following gentlemen were appointed members of the said committee, viz. Mr. Frederick Robinson, lord Castlereagh. Mr. Tierney, Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Mr. Baring, Mr. Lamb, Mr. Thomas Wilson, Mr. Irving, Mr. Canning, Mr. Finlay, Mr. Wilmot, Mr. Gladstone, lord Althorp, Mr. Wallace, lord Milton, sir John Newport, sir M. W. Ridley, Mr. Keith Douglas, Mr. Huskisson, Mr. Sturges Bourne, Mr. As-tell, and Mr. Alexander Robertson;—with power to send for persons, papers, and records; and five to be the quorum: The petitions presented in the present session relating to commercial restrictions and duties on timber, were, on the motion of Mr. Baring and Mr. Marryat, referred to the said committee.

GRAMPOUND DISFRANCHISEMENT BILL.
Lord John Russell,in rising to move the order of the day for the committal of the bill upon this subject, stated, that he did not feel it necessary at present to occupy much of the attention of the House, as he had already so fully explained the nature and object of the bill. With respect to the question, whether the
864
right of voting for Grampound should be merely extended to some adjoining districts, or that the right of election heretofore possessed by that borough should be altogether transferred to another and more populous district, he had no hesitation in saying, that the latter alone, which would amount to a real disfranchisement of this truly rotten borough, would be consonant to the principle and object of the bill. Therefore, if any instruction should be given to the committee, precluding it from making such transfer, and confining the right of election to the adjoining hundreds, he must regard that instruction as a complete departure from the spirit of this measure. He should hear with respectful attention any suggestion that might be offered by such gentlemen as the members for Northumberland or Surrey upon this subject, and he would be most happy if he could consistently acquiesce in their views, but as to his majesty's ministers, their conduct had been throughout so extremely inconsistent and wavering, that he did not think-that any independent member could well care one straw about what part they might happen to take.
Mr. R. Smithspoke in favour of the bill, which he thought highly honourable to the public spirit, judgment, and perseverance of his noble friend. But the laudable object of the bill would, in his opinion, be lost if the right of election were not transferred from Grampound to some other district;—he meant to some great populous town, from which a direct representation in that House was really necessary. If such a representation had existed for the great towns in the North, he firmly believed that that quarter of the country would not have been agitated in the course of the last autumn. But he was an advocate for this bill from a solicitude to establish parliamentary reform, as well as from a desire to satisfy the public mind. In speaking of reform, he did by no means imply those wild theories which were advocated by the would-be-patriots, who had so much disturbed the country in the course of the last year, and who were in truth the worst enemies of real liberty. He wished also to be understood, that when he urged the propriety of satisfying the public mind, he meant the intelligent, well regulated opinion of the country, which had unanimously decided in favour of reform, and against which all the eloquence of the

865
Treasury-bench was excited in vain. It was impossible that that eloquence, even combined with all the power of those by whom it was wielded, could long withstand the universal desire for reform.
Mr. Serjeant Onslowdeprecated the idea of confining this measure merely to the extension of the right of voting to the hundreds adjoining Grampound, as such a proceeding must, among other exceptionable results, serve to give an undue right of voting to the freeholders of a particular district, and that too in a county which had the power of returning an amply sufficient number of members to that House. But upon what ground could the total disfranchisement be resisted? For, as to the precedents, where was the precedent to show such flagrant corruption as had existed in this borough, where no candidate dared even propose that the bribery oath should be administered? It was urged in objection to the proposal for transferring the right of election to Leeds, that there was no precedent for the creation of the right of voting by an act of parliament. But this allegation was an egregious mistake, as there were many such precedents. In Chester, in Durham, and in the Welsh counties for instance, the right of voting was created by different acts of parliament. With respect to the question, whether there should be four representatives for Yorkshire, or whether the right of electing two members should be conferred upon Leeds, he hoped the friends of this measure would not allow their strength to be weakened by any dissention upon such a question, but that all would unite in securing that which was most desirable, namely, the total and radical disfranchisement of Grampound.
The motion for going into the committee was about to be put, when the Speaker asked whether any hon. member meant to move an instruction to the committee? Upon which,
Mr. Davies Gilbertsaid, that the case of Grampound was one which admitted of no justification, and it was impossible to deny that a system of corruption had for a long period of time existed in that borough, which called for the animadversion of the House. In considering, however, the remedy which it would be roost expedient to apply to an evil which was admitted on all hands to exist, he confessed himself unable to accede either to the proposition of the noble lord who
866
brought forward this motion, or to the other proposition which had been suggested as a substitute for that of the noble lord. He wished rather to follow the course of former precedents, in cases where a disfranchisement of the borough had ensued upon a proof of similar corruption, instead of giving his support to a measure which was not warranted by the practice of parliament, and which must inevitably form a precedent for the future. He did not wish to prevent this case from establishing a precedent to the extent of subjecting any borough which might hereafter become equally corrupt, to the punishment which it had been the usage of parliament to inflict; but, beyond this limit he was not prepared to go. Another ground upon which he opposed the proposition of the noble lord was, that it had a direct tendency in favour of a measure, which the advocates of that measure had assumed to themselves the privilege of calling by the name of parliamentary reform. To general propositions for reform it was scarcely possible to offer any opposition: if, for instance, it were proposed to reform the courts of law, or the judges, it would be difficult to object to a proposition of that general nature. But if he were asked to consent to any particular plan of reform—to a mode, for instance, of electing the judges by universal suffrage, he should then be able to state distinctly, the grounds of his opposition. He objected to parliamentary reform, because its tendency was, to make that House a more democratic assembly than it was; and as an hon. gentleman had on a former occasion alluded to the lamp of Aladdin, which, though covered with rust, still retained its charm, he thought the present constitution of the House, with all its imperfections, possessed all the charms of Aladdin's lamp. From the records of ancient history he was justified in drawing the conclusion, that a country governed by a democratic assembly would inevitably fall into a state of anarchy and confusion. With respect to the proposition for transferring the right of voting from the borough of Grampound to the town of Leeds, he thought that if this example were set, all the other large unrepresented towns would endeavour to find out flaws in other boroughs, for the mere purpose of transferring the elective franchise to themselves. Agreeing, as he did, that an effective reformation ought to be made in the borough of Grampound,

867
he thought that object might be effected by following the precedents upon their Journals, without, as it was called, travelling out of the record. The hon. member concluded by moving, "That it be an instruction to the committee, that they have power to make provision in the bill, to extend the right of voting for burgesses to serve in parliament for the borough of Grampound to freeholders of the hundreds of Powder and Pyder, and for limiting the right of voting in the said borough."—Upon the question being put from the chair,
The Chancellor of the Exchequerrose to move, that the farther discussion of this question be adjourned till to-morrow, alleging the absence of his majesty's ministers at a cabinet council, upon a subject of high importance, as the ground of this motion.
Lord J. Russellsaid, he was willing to accede to any arrangement which might accommodate the right hon. gentleman, but he fell that upon the present occasion he was scarcely at liberty to do so, without the concurrence of his hon. friend the member for Durham, whose motion upon the state of the representation stood for to-morrow.
Mr. Lambtonsaid, that the House was called upon by the motion of the right hon. gentleman to postpone the debate upon a subject of considerable importance, but the right hon. gentleman had stated no public ground for that adjournment. He was aware that the right hon. gentleman and his colleagues felt themselves in a situation of some difficulty, in consequence of her majesty having embarked at Calais for this country, and that a cabinet council had been this day called upon the subject. This, however, was no ground for delaying the public business; and, though he had every wish to accommodate his noble friend, yet as his own motion upon parliamentary reform stood for to-morrow, he could not consent to the adjournment of this debate, unless some strong grounds for that measure were laid before the House.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that he had moved the adjournment of this debate, not from any considerations of personal convenience; but because their duty to their sovereign demanded the attendance of ministers in another place. It would be for the House to determine whether the debate should be adjourned till to-morrow, or to any other day.
After some further conversation the debate was adjourned till Monday.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS BILL.
Upon the motion of lord Althorp, the House resolved itself into a committee of the whole House upon this bill.
Mr. Denmanobjected to the appointment of three commissioners instead of one. He said, he was averse, in general to the investing any man or body of men with arbitrary power, but such a measure as this could never be efficient, unless the absolute power of carrying its provisions into effect were lodged in a single hand. Three judges in different places would follow different rules and precedents, and decide upon different principles. He thought there should be no appeal in these cases if an appeal were permitted, there would be great risk of a perpetual disagreement among the three members, or it would become a mere mockery of justice, and nothing more than a mere formal decision of the same case before the same court. It was contended that if only one commissioner were appointed, it would be necessary to have examiners out of court; but he saw no such necessity, nor did the proceedings in insolvent cases involve any investigations which one judge was not fully competent to undertake. Unless creditors exerted themselves to bring the property of their debtors under the control of the court, no exertions on the part of the court would be sufficient for that purpose. Upon public grounds, too, the unnecessary multiplication of judicial and other offices, was a subject which ought to be watched with extreme jealousy, and he could not help thinking, that if the committee suffered this clause of the bill to pass, they would give an indirect sanction to a transaction, which was felt throughout the country to be a very gross job; he alluded to the recent appointment of a fifth baron of the exchequer in Scotland. He moved, therefore, that instead of the words, "three-commissioners," the words "one commissioner"' be substituted.
Mr. Abercrombyobserved, that the country was much indebted to the noble lord who had brought this measure before the House. The most essential part of the bill was, that there should be associated with the chief commissioner two commissioners who should examine accounts in private; and this he contended, was most desirable. In conclusion, he paid a

869
high compliment to the present commissioner, with whom he had the honour of being acquainted, and than whom no man could be more devoted to the discharge of his public duties.
Sir F. Ommanneyargued in favour of the appointment of three commissioners.
Mr. D. W. Harveyobjected to the expense of the measure, and contended that from the seventy bankrupt commissioners the offices of the commissioners contemplated by the bill might advantageously be filled up. He admitted that three commissioners were better than one. It would prevent any exercise of arbitrary power, by allowing an appeal from the decision of an individual commissioner to the judgment of the commissioners in court assembled. The great advantage, as he understood it, of the noble lord's proposition was, that there would be two examiners under the name of commissioners, who being employed in examining accounts in private, would leave to the chief commissioner the principal administration of the law.
Mr. Abercrombymaintained, that the expense attendant on the measure would by no means be great, and that it would be most advantageously incurred. He agreed, that it was desirable to reduce the number of bankrupt commissioners, but he contended that the best way of doing so would be to adopt the present measure, which would so reduce the profits of the bankrupt commissioners, as speedily to diminish their number.
Mr. Wrottesleyobjected to the bill, on the ground that it would occasion two systems to be going on at the same time. The late bill was a grievous disappointment to the country; for it had turned out to be one of the most mischievous and demoralizing legislative measures that had ever been adopted. If, however, the bill were to be adopted, he was sure that three commissioners would be necessary to administer it, and he trusted that they would be able to remedy some of the evils of the late bill.
After some desultory conversation, Mr. Denman agreed to withdraw his amendment. The original proposition for filling up the blank with the word "three" was agreed to. The other clauses were filled up, and the House resumed.