Sitting of 22 March 1825

PRIVATE COMMITTEES—WANT OF ACCOMMODATION.
Mr. Calcraftcalled the attention of the House to the great inconvenience which had been felt by many members attending private committees, from the want of sufficient accommodation. There was at present a great press of private business and much confusion and delay had arisen, from the want of a sufficient number of rooms in which the committees might sit. On that very day he had seen not fewer than 150 persons sitting in the body of the House, transacting business in private committees Now, he was certain that nobody would object, on the score of economy, to having a sufficient number of rooms for the accommodation of members in their private committees. As he was on the subject, he could not avoid observing, not only on the general want of accommodation, from

1133
not having a sufficient number of rooms, but also on the state of the rooms to which private committees could have access. They were, for the most part, so narrow and confined, that members, witnesses, and other persons attending, were much annoyed by the heat and pressure. He trusted the attention of government would be turned to this subject.
Mr. Stuart Wortleythought the subject was one which deserved serious attention. It was a source of much confusion, and a great obstruction to the progress of private business, to have, as was frequently the case, two committees sitting at the same time in one and the same room, where it sometimes happened, that two counsel were at the same moment speaking before each committee. This, of course, created great annoyance, and had the effect of rendering the observations of each unintelligible.
General Gascoynebore testimony to the inconvenience felt by members, from the want of large rooms for private committees. It sometimes happened that the whole of the members appointed on a committee could not obtain admission for want of room; or, if they did, the room was so crowded, that they could with difficulty pass from one side of the room to the other. It was not an uncommon thing to see a hundred members mixed with witnesses and strangers in the same room.
Mr. Secretary Peeladmitted, that the subject was one which deserved attention. It was evident that if the press of private business should continue, something ought to be done to afford additional accommodation. He would do all in his power to afford the desired remedy.
Mr. Littletonthought that the occupation of the House during the day by private committees, would be found particularly inconvenient to members attending in the afternoon, as it would create an unwholesome air. He thought, therefore, that if possible this use of the House during the day should not be permitted.
The Speaker said, that the application had been made to him during the morning by the sergeant, who had stated, that some committees could not proceed for want of room. He had therefore given leave to the parties to sit in the House itself. It must be cle The Speaker said, that the application had been made to him during the morning by the sergeant, who had stated, that some committees could not proceed for want of room. He had therefore given leave to the parties to sit in the House itself. It must be clear, that any improvements which might be made, could not take place in the present session; and he did not see, if the press of private business
1134
continued, how he could refuse to allow parties to hold their private committees in the House, unless the House itself signified its dissent.

ROMAN CATHOLIC RELIEF BILL.
Mr. Estcourt,seeing an hon. baronet in his place, would wish to put a question to him. It was generally reported, that the second reading of the bill which he had obtained leave to introduce, was fixed for the 14th of April, and that the discussion on it was to take place on that evening. Perhaps, many gentlemen were not aware, that the 14th of April would be in the middle of the quarter-sessions week, and that it would be a great inconvenience to hon. members who were magistrates to be obliged to be absent from their duties in the country. He wished to ask the hon. baronet, whether he would consent to the postponement of the discussion from the 14th to the 21st.
Sir F. Burdettsaid, it was true that the second reading of the bill had been fixed for the 14th of April. That arrangement had been made with several friends of the measure; and it was understood that it would be convenient for all parties. He felt disposed to meet the wishes of the hon. gentleman, if it could be done without injurious delay to the bill; but, on a question of this importance, where the opinions of others were to be taken, he would not take upon himself to decide. He would therefore defer answering the hon. member's second question until to-morrow.
Mr. Secretary Peelwas anxious that the discussion on the second reading should be deferred at least a few days longer than that which the hon. baronet had named. It was three weeks since the hon. baronet obtained leave to bring in the bill. That time had been occupied in drawing it up, and it was not yet introduced. It was also understood, that new measures had been introduced into it, which had not been discussed or heard of on the former debate. It was therefore necessary that time should be given for the consideration of those measures, before the general discussion on the principle of the bill was gone into. Let the hon. baronet recollect that it would be necessary to communicate with Ireland on the subject of these new measures. To the friends of emancipation it must be important, that it should not owe its success to the unavoidable absence of

1135
many of its opponents. He hoped, therefore, the hon. bart. would consent to the postponement. As he was on this subject, he felt it right to state, that he would take the sense of the House on the second reading of the bill.
Mr. Tierneytrusted, that the hon. baronet would not depart from the arrangement already made for the second reading of the bill. He was anxious, as a friend to the measure, that it should be forwarded from that House as early as possible, in order to give full time for its discussion in the other House Even without any alteration of the present arrangement, it could not go up to the other House before the end of the first week in May, which would not leave a very long time for its discussion, between that and the end of the session. The right hon. gentleman had said, that three weeks had elapsed since leave was given to bring it in, and that it had not yet been introduced. That was true; but let him recollect, that the Irish assizes had intervened, and that nothing could be done until they were ended, as so many gentlemen interested in the bill were absent. At all events, the non-introduction of the bill could make no difference, as it could not be read a second time till after the holy-days. He thought it would not be treating the other House fairly, if as much time as possible were not allowed them for the discussion of the measure. He did hope, therefore, that, considering the magnitude of this question, and the great importance that as little delay as possible should occur in its progress through that House, the hon. baronet would not give way.
Mr. Peelhoped, that, in the expression of his wish for delay, it would not be imagined that he was actuated by any improper motive; but it was, in his opinion, important that full time should be given for the most mature consideration of this subject, and that a day should not be chosen for the discussion which might be found inconvenient to any party. The delay of a few days could not make any difference, as the discussion was on the principle of the bill. A call of the House was fixed for the 13th, and this discussion was to take place on the 14th. We were now near the holy-days, and they would last a fortnight; so that, in fact, very little time would be given for the consideration of the measure, if the discussion were fixed at so early a day after the meeting of the House. He repeated that so early a day
1136
would be found inconvenient to many members; and let hon. members who were friendly to this measure recollect, that several gentlemen who concurred with them in the principle, might be very unwilling to vote until they knew what ulterior measures were to be adopted. He did hope, under all the circumstances, that if the hon. baronet could not concur in the delay of a week, he would consent to postpone it for at least four or five days beyond the time fixed.
Mr. Tierneyrepeated his opinion, as to the importance of allowing as little delay as possible to take place in the progress of the bill; and assured the right hon. secretary, that though he saw no reasonable cause for acceding to his wish for postponement, he gave him full credit for the fairness of the motive which induced him to make the request.
Sir F. Burdettsaid, it would be a great pleasure to him to find that he could accede to the wishes of the right hon. secretary, as he was anxious, as far as depended upon him, to consult the convenience of all parties; but, after the weighty reasons which had been stated by the right hon. gentleman below him, for proceeding with the measure without loss of time, the right hon secretary must allow him to take time till to-morrow, before he could give him any further answer.

IRISH POOR RELIEF BILL.
Mr. Grattan,in rising to ask for leave to bring in a bill for the Relief of the Poor in Ireland, said, that the object of this measure was to leave it optional in parishes to assemble in vestry to appoint a committee to investigate the state of their several parishes, to receive reports from such committee, and to collect subscriptions to relieve distress, in case the committee should be of opinion that distress existed. If the subscriptions should not be equal to the relief of the distress which they were intended to obviate, his plan was, to enable the vestry to assess the parish to a certain degree. As his bill was only an experimental measure, he designed to limit its duration to a given time, in the hope that during that interval some other plan might be devised to enable the poor of Ireland to support themselves. His bill had no resemblance to the Poor-law of England; though he must say, that if some system to relieve the poor had existed in Ireland in the years 1816 and 1822, all those evils which the country

1137
so much deplored might have been avoided. For his own part, he did not expect that any permanent tranquillity would be found in Ireland, until it had the benefit of some parochial system.
Mr. Goulburnsaid, he had no intention of opposing this measure in its present stage. He thought that the best time of considering the merits of the bill would be on its second reading. It was a subject which required deep and serious attention; for the points to which the hon. gentleman had so briefly alluded were, in his opinion, of paramount importance.
Sir H Parnellhoped his hon friend would examine the case, as regarded Ireland, thoroughly; for if he did, he was satisfied he would see that the best policy was, to let the matter alone. If the poor-laws were introduced into Ireland, as appeared from the evidence before the committee on the state of that country, before a few years passed the whole rent of the landlords would be swallowed up in that gulf of national prosperity.
Mr. V. Fitzgeraldcontended, that if a system of poor-laws were introduced into Ireland, it would perpetuate its poverty and degrade its population for ever. He regretted that his hon. friend had not deferred the introduction of his bill until the committee on the state of Ireland had brought in its report.
Sir James Mackintoshsaid, he had only one observation to make on this question. It was his deliberate opinion, that the poor-laws were the only curse which had not been inflicted on Ireland; and he earnestly trusted, that the House would not consent to inflict it upon that country, after the experience it had had of their lamentable consequences in England.
Mr. Curwenwould not give any opinion upon this bill at present; but, when he heard so much said about the poor laws, he thought it right to mention a fact which had fallen under his own knowledge. Since the enactment of the law giving magistrates in England power to pass to Ireland such natives of that country as became chargeable to English parishes, the Irish in England had not only became more sober and industrious, but more prudent and provident than they had formerly been.
Mr. Baringwas of opinion, that the objection to the poor laws rose more out of the abuse than the use of them. He declined giving any opinion on the hon. gentleman's bill, because, to say the truth,
1138
he did not know what the hon. gentleman meant by it.
Mr. M. Fitzgeralddoubted whether Ireland could ever be placed in a fit condition to receive a system of poor-laws. But though that was the case, the House would be wanting both in humanity and in good sense, if it shut its eyes to the condition of the poor of Ireland; most of whom were at that present moment thrown upon the state for support. He trusted that, if his hon. friend did not, some other member would, originate a bill which should do justice to the pressing nature of their wants and emergencies.
Mr. Carus Wilsondid not object to the poor-rates so much on account of their-burthen, as on account of the abuses connected with their administration.
Mr. Moncksaid, he had formerly been hostile to the poor-laws, but had recently seen cause to alter his opinion. Had it not been for the poor-laws, he believed that the peasantry of England would, during the late winters, have been quite as turbulent as the peasantry of Ireland had been.
Mr. Bennettwas of opinion, that if the poor-laws were introduced into Ireland, manufactures would be established, and capital would flow into it. He was therefore glad that this bill was introduced as an experiment, and trusted that the hon. gentleman would persevere with it to the end; as, if it were carried, it must be productive of singular advantages to Ireland.
Leave was granted to bring in the bill.

LAW OF SETTLEMENT.
Mr. S. Bourneentered into a short history of the Law of Settlement, of the various changes that had been made in that law, and of its present state; and, observing that, in consequence of doubts that existed in the minds of many persons, and, among the rest, of a learned judge on a recent occasion, with respect to the construction of certain parts of that law, it was desirable that such an alteration in the law should take place as might remove all doubt upon the subject, moved for leave to bring in a bill "for alteration of the Law of Settlements, in so far as regards renting of tenements, and being assessed to the poor-rates.".
Mr. Curteisapproved of the principle of the bill, but wished that some securities should be introduced against persons: returning from sea after long absences, obtaining settlements.
Colonel Woodwas for a mixed calcula-

1139
tion of property and rating as the claim to settlements. To adhere to the latter exclusively would be productive of considerable injustice: for many a person who had 10 l. in property would be deprived of a settlement, unless his property had been rated at a similar sum.
Mr. Sykesconcurred in the principle of not adopting value as the criterion of settlement. The frauds to which the former course was opened were notorious; for upon any occasion three or four witnesses could be got to swear to property, whereas the evidence as to rating could be derived only from the parish books. He was friendly to any arrangement which would go to diminish the number of settlements.
Colonel Daviesrecommended the repeal of all the present laws relating to settlement, and making birth the only claim to that provision.
Mr. Bennettpreferred rating to value, as the more simple of the two criterion?. The facility of producing the parish books in evidence of rating, was at all times preferable to oral evidence of the value of property.
Mr. S. Bournesaid, that one of his objects was, to render the parochial charges less burthensome. He had once attempted to establish the law on what he considered an equitable principle—a certain residence; but he had found it necessary to abandon if. He had formerly also desired to facilitate the acquisition of settlements. The observation, however, that the labouring residents in any parish who were not entitled to a settlement in that parish, were in general the most industrious and the best conducted, had induced him to change his opinion. He should be glad to ascertain, as extensively as possible, the general sentiments of the country, with respect to the objects of the bill for which he had just moved; and therefore after it was brought in, and the blanks were filled up in the committee, he should refrain from any further proceeding upon it until after the recess; in order that the details of the measure might be discussed at the quarter-sessions throughout the country.
Leave was given to bring in the bill.

WINE DUTIES BILL.
The House resolved itself into a committee on this bill.
The Chancellor, of the Exchequersaid, that the only alteration in the resolutions
1140
which he had the honour to propose some time since would be this—that, up to the 5th January, 1830, the duty on Cape wines should be 2s. per gallon; but after that period the duty to revert to its former standard of 2s. 6d. per gallon.
Mr. Humewished the right hon. genleman, for the benefit and encouragement of the trade, to make the duty 1s. 6d. a gallon for two years, and 2s. for three years, which would cover the term of five years, on which the right hon. gentleman propose to reduce the duty.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, he could not. comply with this suggestion. He had already met the trade half-way, and he generally found that to meet a party on such occasions half-way was to satisfy him.
Colonel Palmerstated his reluctance in giving an opinion upon a subject wherein be was personally interested; but, considering himself in some measure to"be more acquainted with it than others, and perhaps enabled to give some information, he wished to make a few observations upon the reduction of the duties. It appeared to him that, unless means were taken to prevent the monopoly of the trade, the public would derive but little benefit from the measure. As to the port trade, the remedy was in the hands of the government, who had only to call on Portugal for the performance of her engagement, in the treaty of 1810, which would effectually protect the trade from the monopoly of the Oporto Wine Company, and at once throw it open for the benefit of both nations. As to French wines, and especially claret, the same monopoly existed, but from a different cause; that trade being governed, for the most part, by a few merchants at Bordeaux, who supplied a few merchants in London, who on their part considered the reduction of the duty as an injury, instead of benefit, to themselves. This was stated to him by an individual of the trade, before the reduction took place, who observed, that it would be injurious to his (the hon. member's) interest, as a claret-grower, by opening the market to the cheaper wines of France; but, however that might be, it would at least be a benefit to the public, and especially those who, from having visited France since the peace, preferred the wines of that country, to be enabled to purchase them at a price they could afford; whilst, on the other hand, looking to the principles of free trade adopted

1141
by government, he was surprised that, having made up their mind to a reduction of half the duty, they should still leave France the only exception to the rule, and thus deprive both nations of the benefit of their measure; for the difference of duty still shut the door of the English market to the general entry of French wines; and as to claret, admitting the price to fall the amount of the duty lowered, was it to be supposed that the saving of 15 l. out of 100 l. to 120 l. would induce the purchaser to increase his consumption? This brought him to the information which he considered a duty to offer to the public, and also to the trade. He had no hesitation in saying, that the price of claret in this country was at least double what it ought to be, and actually was, before the late war with France, when the consumers in England and Ireland were in the habit of purchasing the best at about 25 l. the hogshead. What, then, had been the causes of the increase of price and the decrease of consumption? First, the augmentation of duties during the war, which, independent of the necessary increase of expense, raised it higher by the additional capital required, and other expenses of the trade, which brought it into the few hands in which it had since remained; added to which, the consumer had the profits of two intermediate parties to pay, betwixt the grower and himself; first, the Bordeaux merchant, who purchased of the grower, and who skimmed the cream of the bargain for his own benefit; and then the London merchant, who, what with the price at Bordeaux, the heavy addition of the duty, long credit and bad debts, was obliged to charge an exorbitant sum to pay himself. But this was hard upon the consumer willing to pay a just price for the article; and the best remedy for the evil would be, for the London merchant to buy of the grower, to enable him to supply his customers at a cheaper rate, and prevent their saving him future trouble, by importing their own wine. But, to effect this, certain prejudices which had hitherto favoured the monopoly it would be necessary to remove. For instance, it was asserted, and generally believed, that the best claret was only grown upon the estates called Chateau Margaux and Lafitte; whereas that made upon others was equally good; and not a hundredth part of the claret sold by the merchants under these names, came from the estate of either. In proof of
1142
this, he declared, as a proprietor, that the vines upon his own property (to say the least of it) were in all respects whatever, equally good as those of Chateau-Margaux; and that the claret of the well-known vintage of 1815, made upon his estate, and landed in England from his cellar at Margaux, was equally well flavoured and full-bodied as the best of the same vintage from the merchants' cellars at Bordeaux. The first assertion, as matter of fact, he was ready to prove, if not to the satisfaction, at least in the teeth of any Bordeaux or London merchant who might have asserted or believed to the contrary; and the other, as matter of opinion, he would refer to those who had tasted both wines, at the best cellar and table in the kingdom. It was also said, that the pure claret had not body enough for the English market; this was true with respect to ordinary years, but the claret of superior vintages had sufficient body for this climate, and was preferred generally by the best judges in its natural state; whilst all that was or could be added, without destroying the quality, was a certain portion of hermitage, which involved no secret nor difficulty whatever in mixing.—He had thus stated the causes of the high price of claret; but if the right hon. gentleman, who in bringing forward his budget, had observed how much the increased duty on wine had checked the hospitality which formerly was the character of the gentry throughout the country, who from the ease and independence of their circumstances were enabled to keep up that social intercourse and friendship which formed one of the greatest enjoyments of life, and the best criterion of the general happiness of the people—if the right hon. gentleman wished to promote that object on one hand, and to make up to the revenue for reduction of duty by increased consumption on the other, he would avail himself of the opportunity which the expiration of the treaty with Portugal now afforded, of equalizing the duties upon foreign wines, and. by opening the English market to those of France, contribute to the mutual interest and good understanding of both nations.
Mr. Bernalwished to submit to the right hon. gentleman one circumstance connected with the duties on wines, which appeared to him deserving of attention. It was known that, at present, independently of the duty on wine, there was

1143
a separate duly on the glass bottles in Which the wine was imported. This duty operated, particularly in the case of French wines, to a very oppressive extent.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that undoubtedly the duty on bottles imported into England from wine countries, whether those bottles were full or empty, was about 8d. on each bottle, besides 8s. 3d. per cwt. on the glass; so that the gross duty was very nearly 1s. on each bottle, and, pro tanto, therefore, increased the expense of the duties it contained. It was a subject that had before been pressed on his attention and it should receive it; but the hon. gentleman would remember, that there existed in this country a very old excise duty on our glass bottles; so that, tinder any modification that might here-After be adopted, foreign bottles must still be taxed, in reference to that excise duty.

CALEDONIAN CANAL BILL.
On the bringing up of the report of this bill,
Mr. Humeexpressed a hope, that the chancellor of the Exchequer would, by advertisement, or in some other manner, dispose of the canal to some Joint-Stock Company. Such a measure would, he felt convinced, be productive of much advantage.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, he had no objection to adopt the course pointed out by the hon, member, provided he would allow him to nominate him principal director [a laugh]. Mr. Alderman Wood observed, that if his hon. friend had been earlier appointed to that situation, he had no doubt but a considerable saving would have been made in the expenditure of that canal.
The report was agreed to.