Sitting of 25 July 1832

MINUTES.
Papers ordered. On the Motion of Mr. FOWELL BUXTON, an Account of the total Number of Captured Negroes liberated in each of the different Colonies, and of the Number of Crown Slaves liberated in each Colony.—On the Motion of Mr. WARBURTON, an Account of the Names, Duties and Salaries of the Persons belonging so the Vaccine Board.
Bills. Read a third time:—Boundaries (Ireland).
Petitions presented. By Mr. SADLER, from Derby,—in favour of the Factories Regulation Bill.—By Mr. FOWELL BUXTON, from Weymouth; and by Mr. SADLER, from Horsham, Haddington, and other Places,—for the Abolition of Slavery.—By Lord KILLEBN, from Rathfeigh and Skreen,—in favour of the Ministerial Plan of Education (Ireland).—By Mr. KING, from Cove and Green Island,—against Tithes.—By Mr. FRANCIS BARING, from Portsmouth and Portsea,—against the Plurality of Benefices Bill.

MUNICIPAL POLICE.
Colonel Lindsayasked whether it was the intention of the Government to bring in a Bill for the establishment of a Municipal Police in the various towns of the kingdom, agreeably to the statement of the King's Speech.
Lord Althorpsaid, the Government had no such intention in the present Session of Parliament. He hoped the anticipations of what the Government meant to do on the subject would not prevent the municipal authorities in the kingdom from introducing Local Acts.
Sir Robert Peelhoped, that a Select Committee would be appointed on this subject to give the Government the best assistance in their power. Although not very friendly to Select Committees, he would undertake to say, that the noble Lord would be obliged to refer this matter to such a Committee.

LIBRARY OF THE HOUSE.
Sir Robert Inglismoved, that the House should resolve itself into a Committee on the state of their Library. He did not suppose that there would be any opposition to the Motion, and in the Committee he should move that an Address be presented to his Majesty to give directions for the erection of additional buildings for the more convenient custody of the books and papers belonging to the House of Commons, and to provide sufficient accommodation for all the Members.
Sir Frederick Trenchsaid, that he objected to the plan that had been prepared. He thought that, before a grant of money was made, a plan ought to be submitted to the Members at large, for their consideration.
Mr. Humethought it was not advisable to build a library, without a view to the permanent accommodation of the House. It might, perhaps, be deemed advisable to have the place they now sat in converted into a library, and better accommodation than now existed provided for the Members, whose numbers were now too great for the present space allotted to them. He strongly recommended the postponement of any definitive proceeding at the present moment.
Lord Althorpthought it would require more time than they had at present to decide upon this subject, in connexion with others relating to the House generally. He therefore concurred in recommending that postponement should take place.
Sir Robert Inglishad not supposed that there would be any objections to his proposal as it had been unanimously agreed to by the Committee up-stairs. The buildings were necessary for the safe custody of the papers and books; and if it was intended to have the library in use next Session, the building ought to commence without delay. He did not, therefore, think the matter ought to be postponed.
Sir Matthew White Ridleyhad some doubts whether the plan proposed was the best which could be devised, and he therefore recommended further delay.
Motion postponed for a week.

CHANCERY SINECURES.
Sir Edward Sugdencalled the attention of the noble Lord opposite, to the filling up of the sinecure offices of the Court of Chancery, which he understood were to have been abolished. The promise to abolish them was made in that House, when the Bankruptcy Bill, which had entailed such a great and useless expense on the country, was introduced; yet he now found that they had been filled up. The greatest complaints were made when one of these offices was held by a son of Lord Eldon's, and the various offices and the various fees of the Court of Chancery were then attacked freely enough; but not one word of objection was uttered now that the money was to be received by different persons; and the offices themselves, that were then so vigorously attacked as abuses, were now quietly filled up, and filled up, too, he begged to observe, after he had intimated that he should call the attention of that House to them. He complained, besides, of the delay that had taken place in
722
settling the salary and the retired allowances of the Chancellor. He did not wish to mix up that which was a personal matter with another and a different subject, and he had thus been prevented from moving what he should otherwise have done—the repeal of nine-tenths of the Bankrupt Act. He wished to know in what way the noble Lord opposite explained the recent appointment of Registrar of the Court of Chancery?
Lord Althorpregretted that the hon. and learned Gentleman had availed himself of the opportunity of putting a question, to make an attack upon the Lord Chancellor, and said, that those offices, which were in the gift of the Lord Chancellor, must be filled up as they became vacant, until they were legally abolished. He was desirous that the question of the Lord Chancellor's salary should be decided as soon as possible; but he had hitherto been unable to bring it forward on account of the important business already before the House.
Sir Robert Peelsaid, that it was impossible to believe, that the appointments in question could be otherwise than merely provisional. In the Committee appointed to inquire into what reduction could be made in salaries of offices held during the pleasure of the Crown, the Lord Chancellor himself declared his intention to abolish all sinecure offices. He thought it would be a great improvement, if the measure were extended to the Court of Chancery, which was applied to other Courts, for putting an end to sinecures, and making proper compensation to the persons holding them. To show that this was the view which the Lord Chancellor himself took of the subject, he would read a passage from the evidence of the noble and learned Lord before the Committee. Being asked, "Are the Committee to understand that it is your intention to divest the office of Lord Chancellor of all sinecure situations?" he replied, "If I can obtain the concurrence of Parliament, it is my intention to divest the office of Lord Chancellor of all the sinecures which have hitherto been given for the maintenance of his family." Under these circumstances, it was impossible to consider the present appointment as more than provisional. Of course, if the sinecure offices should be abolished, the Lord Chancellor must receive a fair consideration for them.
Mr. Humesaid, that as a Member of the

723
Committee, he could corroborate what had been said by the right hon. Baronet respecting the declared opinions and intentions of the Lord Chancellor. He was sure, therefore, that the appointment must be provisional, for the whole tenor of the noble Lord's evidence was, that the head of the Court of Chancery ought to be deprived of all sinecure appointments. As to the offices held by the son of the late Lord Chancellor, he (Mr. Hume) took it as a matter of course, that the five sinecures of that Gentleman (Mr. Scott) would be abolished without delay. The Ministers were bound in honour to the House, and to the country, that all appointments of the kind were only provisional, and were accepted by the persons appointed to them, subject to the contingency of abolition or reduction, as soon as the other more pressing questions which now occupied Parliament should allow the House to take up the subject of these offices.
Sir Charles Wetherellsaid, that the salary of the Lord Chancellor ought to have been settled long ago, and that when the patronage of the Bankruptcy Court was taken from that Judge, he ought to have been compensated by an addition to his salary.
Mr. Robinsonexpressed his astonishment at the appointment, which he could not reconcile with the solemn and repeated pledges given by the Lord Chancellor in favour of retrenchment and Reform. He thought this was a sorry instance of the spirit with which his Majesty's Ministers meant to fulfil their promises of economy. Was it possible that the Lord Chancellor filled up the office of Registrar without consulting his colleagues?
Mr. Wasonwas satisfied that the appointment could only be provisional. He had no doubt that Mr. William Brougham had accepted the office with the understanding that he was appointed merely to fill it up until it should be formally abolished.
Sir Francis Burdettwas also of opinion that the appointment was only provisional; for it would be impossible to suppose that there was any intention to maintain those offices after the repeated declarations of the Lord Chancellor himself on the subject. The appointment must have been merely an official proceeding; as it was necessary to have some one in the place of Registrar until the office should have been abolished by law.
Mr. Alderman Venableswas sure that the appointment would cause great disappointment and regret throughout the country, and would be looked upon as a breach of faith on the part of the Government.
Sir Edward Sugdenbegged that it might be understood that he had not made a personal attack upon the Lord Chancellor. He had asked the question merely to gain information.
Lord Althorpsaid, that if the hon. and learned Gentleman had not made a personal attack upon the Lord Chancellor, he did not know what a personal attack was.
Sir Robert Peelconsidered the discussion altogether premature. It was impossible that the appointment could have been intended to be permanent, inasmuch as the Lord Chancellor was pledged to the abolition of all sinecure offices in his Court.
Sir Frederick Trenchtrusted that his Majesty's Ministers would take a hint from the lesson which their adversaries had generously read to them. For his part, as a plain man, he could not suppose anything else than that the appointment was intended to be permanent. He could not imagine that the Lord Chancellor's brother was put to the inconvenience of resigning his seat in Parliament for the purpose of filling provisionally an office of which the abolition was looked upon as no very remote contingency. However, he trusted that the Government would act upon the generous suggestion which had been just thrown out, and would make the appointment only provisional.
Mr. Humesaid, that it was most probable that the Lord Chancellor had appointed his brother because he could more easily abolish an office held by him than one held by any other person. Subject dropped.

CUSTOMS DUTIES BILL.
The House, on the Motion of Lord Althorp, resolved itself into a Committee on this Bill.
Clauses from 1 to 17 were severally read and agreed to, with amendments.
The 18th clause being read, imposing a penalty of 100 l. on persons for each individual they might hire to land goods without paying the duty,
Mr. Robinsonthought that the amount of penalty was not proportioned to the offence and the resources of the offenders. He would recommend the imposition of a larger penalty on those who hired persons for landing goods illegally. He was of opinion, that until the laws against com-

725
mon smugglers had expired, more severe measures should be taken against the principals in extensive contraband transactions. After the commission of the second or third offence, principals might justly be made liable to the punishment of transportation.
Mr. Spring Ricesaid, that the question of the penalty, resolved itself into a matter of arithmetic. It should be recollected, that for every person hired, the penalty would be 100 l., which, if ten were employed in landing the goods, would amount to 1,000 l.
Mr. Courtenaysaid, that the penalty would not operate with all its apparent severity, owing to the difficulty of proving the fact of hiring. He was inclined to believe, that an increased punishment after the first offence would be advisable.
Colonel Evanssaid, they might inflict what punishment they pleased, but the only and the true way to prevent smuggling was to lower the duties.
Mr. Poulett Thomsonsaid, that at present there was a penalty on contraband running, but those who employed the runners could not be reached, and it was to meet this case that the penalty was imposed. As these men generally worked in gangs the penalty was sufficient, as it might amount at the rate of 100 l. for every man employed, to 2,000 l. or 3,000 l. A very high amount would only defeat their object.
Mr. Robinsonproposed an Amendment to the clause, that for the second offence the fine should be 200 l., or an imprisonment of one year, at the discretion of the Court before which the case might be tried. This would be a security against the higher class of smugglers.
Mr. Ewartdid not think the Amendment necessary.
Mr. Poulett Thomsonrepeated, that in his opinion, the fines already proposed would be found sufficient, and he therefore could not agree to the Amendment.
Mr. Humehoped that the hon. Member would not press his Amendment. Let the Bill as it stood in that part have a fair trial.
The Amendment negatived, and clause agreed to.
The other Clauses of the Bill were agreed to, and the schedules as far as D.
On schedule D being read,
Mr. Littletonsaid, he had presented a petition from a wholesale druggist in
726
London, who would lose 4,000 l. or. 5,000 l. by the proposed alterations, and he begged to ask his Majesty's Government whether this loss might not be prevented.
Mr. Poulett Thomsonstated, that Government had taken the case into consideration, and had communications with the druggists. Drawbacks were out of the question, on account of the adulteration of drugs, and it was the general opinion of the trade, that it would be more for their advantage, to submit to the loss of having the duties removed at once, than to suffer from the stagnation of the trade which would be caused by any plan to reduce those duties six or nine months hence.
Mr. Humewas glad of these reductions, as they would put a stop to adulteration. He wished to ask what duty was still imposed on bark?
Mr. Poulett Thomson: It is removed.
Schedule agreed to. As were the duties on the articles enumerated under the letters from E to N.
On the proposition (under the head "Oil") of reducing the duty on castor-oil to 2s. 6d. per cwt.,
Mr. Briscoeobjected, as this reduction would injure the British manufacturer. He knew one who would lose 5,000 l. by the alteration.
Mr. Humeapproved of the member for Surry taking care of his constituents, but for the interest of the community, he should like to see this duty reduced to 6d. The oil might then be used for burning, and great quantities might be imported from India at a low rate.
Mr. Hodgsonwished, like the hon. member for Surry, that the interests of the home manufacturer should be taken care of. The duties ought not to be suddenly but gradually reduced.
Mr. Poulett Thomsoncould assure hon. Members, that the representations sent into Government led him to believe, that the proposed alteration would not be injurious to the British manufacturer. The castor oil they manufactured was cold pressed, and quite different from that imported.
Sir Charles Forbessupported the proposed reduction as an act of justice to our East-India colonies.
Lord Althorpwas persuaded from the representations made to Government, that the hon. member for Surry was labouring under a mistake. It was the wish of the great majority of the trade, that the

727
alteration should be made and made speedily.
Motion agreed to, and the different divisions down to Z agreed to.
On the question that clause 35 be agreed to,
Mr. Burgerose to move a reduction of the duty on coffee, which he was sure would be beneficial both to the colonies and to this country. Coffee was the article, of all others, upon which free labour might be most beneficially employed, and the reduction of the duty would tend to the encouragement of free labour, while it would also promote the comforts of the people of this country, by placing the article more within their reach. As to the effect of the reduction of the duty upon the revenue, he could prove that the reductions which had hitherto taken place had been attended by a proportionate increase of consumption, and consequently had increased instead of diminishing the revenue. He moved that the duty on coffee imported from the West Indies be reduced from 6d. to 4d. per pound.
Lord Althorpwas quite ready to acknowledge that too high duties by no means tended to improve the revenue; but, on the other hand, if the reduction of duties proceeded beyond a certain limit, it must injure the revenue, because the consumption of an article could not extend beyond a certain quantity. He certainly was afraid, that the reduction proposed, as it was small, would not increase the consumption to any great extent. He was not prepared to say, that the reduction proposed by the hon. Gentleman would not increase consumption at all, and he should be very glad indeed if he could try the experiment. In the present state of the revenue, however, he did not feel that he should be justified in doing so. The reduction which the hon. Gentleman proposed would amount to 200,000 l., if it were not made up by an increased consumption; and he doubted that such would be the case immediately, although it was very likely that in a few years it might occur. He could not, therefore, consent to give up so large an amount of revenue. He had had hopes of being able himself to propose a reduction, and in that case he should have moved that the duty should be reduced to threepence, as he thought that a very small reduction was not likely to produce the effect desired by the hon. Gentleman. He was sorry to be
728
obliged to oppose the Motion, but the present state of the finances compelled him to do so.
Mr. Courtenaywas willing to admit that the noble Lord had met this question in a very fair and candid manner; but if his hon. friend persevered in his Motion, he should give him his support. It was true, as the noble Lord had stated, that the reduction of the duty might not be followed immediately by an increased consumption of the article; but it should be remembered that the duty of 6d. per pound produces nearly twice as much to the revenue as the duty of 1s. per pound did. The noble Lord said, that the small reduction now proposed, could not be expected to produce a similar effect to that consequent upon a large reduction; but the proposed reduction of 2d., was one-third of the whole duty, almost equal to the largest reduction that had been proposed in the duty on sugar. With reference to the revenue, he had always been for reduction, even at the expense of a sinking fund. If, proceeding on any system at all, they were making both ends meet, he certainly should not be disposed to advocate an experiment of this kind, but the case was different with the revenue of the country in its present state. Next year it would be absolutely necessary that some general and strong measure should be adopted. He apprehended that there were many reasons why it was desirable to encourage the consumption of coffee. It was a stimulant to which the poorer classes generally resorted, and which was not productive of any mischievous consequences to themselves. If there ever was an article, with reference to which we had a right to predict that a reduction of duty would be followed by increased consumption, it was that to which the Motion of his hon. friend was directed. They were all, he hoped, advocates of an anti-slavery system, and those most anxious for the abolition of slavery, must be desirous to extend the cultivation of any article but sugar in the West Indies. He must add, that this reduction would, in his opinion, be attended with very little risk to the revenue; and, under all the circumstances, he thought that the noble Lord, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, might agree to the Motion.
Mr. Patrick Stewartthought the revenue could not admit of this reduction; until the Treasury was in possession of a surplus

729
revenue, it would be dangerous to have recourse to such a measure. At present the price of coffee was on the rise, and it was looking more favourably than any other article of colonial produce. It was one of the last commodities therefore which he should select for a reduction of duty.
Mr. Humedid not conceive, that the reduction would at all injure the revenue. He did not see why the noble Lord might not try it for a year. It would be, on the noble Lord's own showing, a small loss to the revenue, and a great boon to the planters, and he hoped that the Motion would be successful.
Mr. Dixonwas also of opinion that the reduction of duty would not affect the revenue. The remark that the price of coffee was rising, was an indication that the revenue would not suffer, and that the present was a proper time to make the reduction.
Mr. Poulett Thomsonsaid, he must oppose the Motion on the grounds stated by his noble friend. It should be recollected that when the duties were reduced before, it was some time before the consumption made up for the decrease of the revenue, although at that time there happened a concurrent reduction in the price of the article which could not be expected now. He certainly thought, that the reduction proposed, would benefit the coffee grower, but it would as certainly injure the finances; and the financial effect induced him to oppose the Motion.
Mr. Irvingopposed the reduction which the hon. member for Eye wished to be effected in the duty on coffee, because the advantage to the consumer would be incommensurate with the disadvantage which would accrue thereby to the revenue.
Mr. Alderman Venableswould support the Amendment of the hon. member for Eye.
Mr. Burgesaid, in reply to the objections urged by the noble Lord, that the question had not been met by him on its proper footing; for he had objected to the reduction in the duty on coffee on the ground that the risk to the revenue was much greater than the advantage which the consumer would derive from the reduction, whereas the consumer was not so much interested in this question as the West-India grower of coffee, who would be greatly benefited by the reduction.
Lord Sandonsupported the Amendment,
730
because the reduction would both benefit the poor of this country and the suffering planters of the West Indies.
The Committee divided on the Amendment: the numbers were—Ayes 22; Noes 53—Majority 31.
Mr. Burgenext proposed a reduction of the Duty on Colonial Vinegar from 1s. 6d. to 2d. per gallon.
Mr. Poulett Thomsonobjected to the proposed reduction, on the ground that if the duty on colonial vinegar were reduced, a corresponding reduction must take place in the excise upon British vinegar, which could not be afforded at present. An opportunity of discussing the question more fully would arise when the whole subject came before the House, as it shortly would.
Mr. Kearsleypressed the hon. member for Eye to take the sense of the House on his proposal.
Mr. Burgewithdrew it.
Mr. Burgemoved, that the duty on ginger of 10 s. per cwt. be reduced to 1s. Negatived; as was also a motion made by the same Gentleman to reduce the duty on pimento from 5d. to 1d. per lb.
Mr. Dixonnext rose for the purpose of bringing forward his proposal for reducing the duties on rum. At present, the duties on rum imported into Scotland was 9s. the gallon, and he wished that reduced one half. The high duty on that article of colonial produce was extremely injurious to the West Indies and to England, because it operated to the advantage of the continental producer of spirits. He would, therefore, recommend that it be reduced to the same level with the duty on British spirits. In proof of his assertion, that high duties were injurious, he might quote the fact, that nearly the whole of the brandy and Geneva which were consumed in Scotland were prepared from whisky, which was coloured for the purpose of deception: thus the high duty defeated its own object. He begged to move, as an amendment, "That the duty on all rum imported from the West Indies into Ireland and Scotland be reduced to 4s. 10 d. per gallon."
Lord Althorpsaid, he was not then about to argue with the hon. Gentleman that the change he proposed would be any loss to the revenue, neither was he disposed to deny that the West Indies possessed a good claim to the reduction proposed; but, at the present period of the Session, it would be impossible to entertain such a question. From his own experience of

731
the House, he could undertake to say, that there would be the utmost difficulty in carrying through such an alteration at a time like this. When he heard that the hon. Gentleman gave notice of this proposition, it occasioned in his mind no small surprise that any Gentleman connected with Scotland should have made such a proposition; and of this he felt perfectly assured, that he would meet with very little support from Scotch or Irish members; strong opposition to such a change might, he was sure, be expected from both those classes of Members; and, considering that so many of them had left the House, it would be hardly fair to entertain any question in which they were so deeply interested, and which it was known they would resist to the utmost of their power; at the same time that he was perfectly ready to admit that a prohibitory duty on West-India produce ought not to continue, though he was sure most hon. Members would agree with him, that, under present circumstances, it would be impossible to make any change.
Mr. Humethought it was very desirable that a reduction of the duties on imported spirits from the colonies should take place; but he admitted, however desirable the reduction might be, that it was at present impracticable, owing to the Session of Parliament being so very near its close.
Mr. Andrew Johnstonsaid, that as respected Scotland, he should oppose any reduction of the duties now levied upon spirits imported from those colonies. The consumption of spirits in Scotland was already enormous, and calculated to destroy the morals of the people. He should, therefore, strenuously oppose a motion that would facilitate the supply of ardent spirits for the advantage merely of the hon. Member's constituents at Glasgow.
Mr. Patrick Stewartwould support the Amendment of the member for Glasgow, if he pressed it to division; but, looking at the state of the House, he advised his hon. friend to withdraw the Motion.
Mr. Dixonregretted that a proposition of this importance should be discussed in so thin an attendance of Members, owing, he was afraid, to the practice of Members neglecting their duty in order to go canvassing amongst their constituents. It was not his fault that Members absented themselves when the most important mercantile Bill of the whole Session was
732
under discussion. The land-owners and others were eager enough to attend and support Ministers when their own interests were not concerned, but they forgot principles and duty when a measure touched their own pockets. How the advocates for free trade could resist a proposition for equalizing the duties on rum and other spirits he could not conceive. He regretted that the noble Lord, though he could not make this a Government question, did not even vouchsafe him his individual support.
Mr. Goulburnhoped the noble Lord would take the subject into his serious consideration, both as respected the West-India interest, and as regarded the prevention of smuggling spirits from Scotland into this country, and adopt in the next Session some legislative regulations suitable to the emergency.
Amendment negatived.
Sir Charles Forbeshad given notice of motions to reduce the duties on saltpetre imported from India from 6d. to 3d. per cwt.; on rice, from 1s. to 6d. per cwt.; and on pepper, from 1s. to 6d. per lb.; but understanding from the President of the Board of Control, that the whole of the duties on commodities imported from India were to undergo revision, he would not press his Motion. He could not, however, forbear from expressing his regret that the interests of India were so little attended to in that House. Neglect and injustice would, sooner or later, drive India to assert her rights. We might hold India by the sword, but it was the sword of the natives, and let them once turn against us, and our power would pass away instantly and for ever.
Mr. Poulett Thomsonthought that was not a proper occasion to complain of injustice to India, or even that her interests were neglected. The merchants trading with India had been consulted on the subject of this Bill, and of seventy articles on which they recommended a reduction of duty, on thirty-three the duty had been materially reduced, in some cases even fifty or sixty per cent lower than was demanded.
Sir Charles Forbesadmitted, that the Government had not altogether overlooked the subject, but the articles on which they had reduced the duty were of trifling importance compared to those on which no reduction had been made.
Lord Sandonrose to submit a Motion for the reduction of the very high duties

733
now levied upon currants. This article was the only reliance of nearly 100,000 of our Ionian subjects; and yet it was still charged with the whole amount of the war-duty of 44 s. 4d. per cwt., and was, perhaps, the only article on which no reduction had ever been granted. This duty was as 550 to 100 in relation to the price paid to the grower, a proportion unexampled in our taxation, except in the instance of tobacco. Between the years 1818 and 1824 the price of currants had risen very much, and an extraordinary stimulus was given to the cultivation; much land was given up to currants which had formerly been devoted to the growth of corn, and the result had been, such an increased production of the article, that the price had fallen to nearly one-fourth. At that point the price could not stand, inasmuch as it did not remunerate the grower, and, therefore, the cultivation would be diminished, until a diminished supply should have had the effect of raising the article to a remunerating price; indeed, that effect would have been already produced but for the hope and expectation that some alteration in the duty would soon be granted, a part of the benefit of which would fall to the share of the grower, and thus enable him to maintain the same extent of cultivation. Under the influence of the former low prices, the consumption in this country had risen from between 4,000 and 5,000 to 7,000 tons, giving employment to our shipping, which a diminished supply would again restrict, and also proving, that the low price of the article tended to extend its use. Indeed, if they knew not this fact from evidence, it might be inferred, because currants were an article of luxury to that numerous class in this country, the lower division of the middle class, which, though not rich, and, therefore, obliged to consider closely the prices of all that they consumed, were yet enabled to command the enjoyment of a vast variety of little superfluities from every quarter of the globe. Under the influence of low prices, the consumption had increased so far, as to produce a revenue amounting, in 1819, to 200,000 l., and, in the last year, to 328,000 l. But at that amount it could not remain. The supply would be diminished, the price would rise, the consumption fall off, and the revenue, fall back to its former amount. If the revenue from this article could not be maintained, would it not be better that the reduction
734
should be made at once by the Chancellor of the Exchequer; thus affording remuneration to the Ionian grower, additional employment to the shipper, the merchant, and the dealer, and a cheap luxury to a vast body of consumers in this country, than that he should wait, till it appeared upon the face of his Custom-house returns in the shape of diminished consumption, with all the accompanying circumstances, the very reverse of those he had enumerated? Even if it were thought impossible to reduce the duty, at once, to the amount it stood at before the war, from 44 s. 4d. to 24 s., a reduction of duty in proportion to the increase received last year upon the former year, namely, of one-fourth, or 11 s., might be hazarded, for a higher amount than 250,000 l. could not, for a continuance, be collected from currants. The noble Lord had better make the reduction in time, for if the destruction of the vines, which had begun, should be continued, no subsequent encouragement which he could offer, would bring back an equal quantity in less than five years, the period requisite for the perfection of the plant. The duty on currants, he must also remark, was excessive, as compared to the duty levied on raisins, which were not the produce of our own dependencies. On all these accounts, he would suggest, that a reduction of the duty, which was now 44 s. per cwt., should take place, and that, in future, this article should only pay 28 s. per cwt. duty on importation.
Mr. Poulett Thomsonsaid, he was desirous, as well as his colleagues, that this duty should have been reduced in amount; but he regretted to say, that revenue to so great an extent could not be spared from the fund raised for the public service in the present year.
Mr. Goulhurnagreed with the right hon. Gentleman, that relief by any reduction of this duty this Session was out of the question, more particularly as the government, of the Ionian islands had refused to take off a tax which it now levied on the exportation of the commodity—a burthen loudly complained of by the trade and by the inhabitants of these islands.
Mr. Alderman Thompsonsaid, that the export duty was inconsiderable as would appear when he stated, that the price of currants on shipboard was not more than 8s. per cwt.; and further, that it was necessary, in order to defray the expenses of a government in the islands. He was

735
of opinion that our trade with the Ionian Islands must be altogether lost, unless a considerable reduction was made in the duty imposed on this their staple commodity. He thought that the duty ought not to exceed 20 s. per cwt.
Mr. Alderman Venablessupported the recommendations of the noble Lord. He thought that the Government stood in a manner pledged to reduce this duty, and he could find no excuse for not doing it except that the revenue could not at present spare the sum.
Lord Althorpthought, that the worthy Alderman had quite misunderstood the promises of Government which were conditional, and no case could, be made out, to justify the reduction of duty here, whilst the article continued to be taxed on its export from those colonies to England.
The Clause agreed to without amendment.
Remaining Clauses also agreed to, and the House resumed.

CHANCERY SINECURES.
Mr. Spring Ricehaving moved the Order of the Day for the House to resolve itself into a Committee of Supply,
The Attorney Generalrose and requested the House would indulge him with their attention for a few moments. He understood that in an early part of the evening some observations had fallen from an hon. and learned Member on an appointment which had recently been made by his noble and learned friend the Lord Chancellor. He regretted that he had not been informed by the hon. and learned Member that it was his intention to bring the subject before the House; for had he (the Attorney General) been present, he should have been prepared to have immediately given a perfectly satisfactory explanation of the conduct of his noble and learned friend. It had been supposed that the Lord Chancellor had, in his statement of last year, intimated an intention that was entirely inconsistent with the step which he had just taken. His Lordship, in the discussion alluded to, did certainly declare his opinion, that the payment of judicial salaries, especially that of the Great Seal, by fees and sinecure offices, was unsatisfactory and inconsistent with the dignity which ought to belong to those offices; and, therefore, that it was most desirable that such a mode of remuneration should be got rid of. But his noble and learned friend had
736
actually prepared a Bill on the subject, which was perfectly ready to be laid on the Table of the House of Lords; and which the Lord Chancellor would have introduced into the House of Lords some time ago, but for circumstances over which he had no control. The death of Mr. Scott, and the subsequent appointment, would make no alteration whatever in the Lord Chancellor's determination to proceed with the Bill, one provision of which was the abolition of the very office in question. But, until some arrangement were made with respect to that office, there were some important duties connected with it which it was absolutely necessary should be discharged; and that arrangement could not be made until the Lord Chancellor's Bill became, as he hoped it would become, the law of the land. While the office did continue in existence, therefore, his noble and learned friend felt it to be his duty to his family to confer it on an individual who had so strong a claim upon him as his brother. But, he repeated, there was nothing whatever in that act which was inconsistent with the former declarations of his noble and learned friend. He hoped the House would not think that he (the Attorney General) had acted unreasonably in taking the earliest opportunity to remove any impression which might have been made unfavourable to so distinguished an individual and public officer.
Mr. Goulburnquite agreed with the hon. and learned Gentleman that he did right to take the earliest opportunity of vindicating the noble and learned Lord; but he must maintain, that the hon. and learned member for St. Mawes equally did his duty, when he thought that there was anything reprehensible in the conduct of a public officer, in taking the earliest opportunity of bringing the subject under the consideration of the House. With respect to the Bill to which the hon. and learned Gentleman alluded, at the present period of the Session it might be exceedingly difficult to get it through Parliament.
Lord Althorpsaid, that he did not understand that his noble and learned friend had any idea of passing the Bill in the present Session, although it was his intention to introduce it, and to explain the new arrangements which he meant to propose.
Mr. Robinsonhoped it would be per-

737
fectly understood that, however the office in question might be dealt with hereafter, the public would not hear of any claims respecting It, founded on vested rights.
Lord George Bentinckwished to know, if it was the intention of his Majesty's Ministers to bring in any Bill giving compensation to the Lord Chancellor for the loss of fees consequent upon the new arrangement?
Lord Althorpreplied, that in the earlier part of the evening he had stated, that it was his intention early next week to move the Miscellaneous Charges of the Civil List, and he would then advert to the Bill for regulating the salary of the Lord Chancellor, and for placing all judicial salaries on a permanent footing.
Mr. Humethought, that at this late period of the Session, it would be better to take a sum on credit, and make the definite arrangement in the next Session.
Lord Althorpobserved, that if he postponed the settlement of those questions, and then in another Parliament should be unable to carry them, it would be imputed to him that he had so acted on purpose. He himself was satisfied, that in a Reformed House full justice would be done to every claimant; but as there were others who entertained a different opinion, he would not run any risk.
The House went into a Committee of Supply.
Several votes of the Colonial and Ordnance Estimates were agreed to without observation, and the House resumed.

REGISTRAR OF DEEDS (IRELAND) BILL.
The House went into a Committee on this Bill.
On the Motion of Mr. Sheil, that the Registrar be required to attend daily, the Committee divided: For the Original Question 35; Against it 4—Majority 31.
Mr. Humethen moved, that the Registrar should attend from eleven to two each day.
The Attorney Generalsaid, that in such circumstances, the minimum of time set down would be considered by the officer as a maximum, and it would be better to leave it to the conscience and discretion of the Registrar.
Mr. Cramptonsaid, if a stated time was mentioned, the Registrar would never attend beyond that, and there were occasions when his presence for a longer period was necessary.
Amendment negatived.
Mr. Humeproposed, that the salary of the Registrar should be reduced from 1,500 l. to 1,200 l. a-year.
Mr. Warburtonsupported the reduction.
Mr. Spring Ricestated, that he did not consider the salary extravagant or objectionable.
Motion withdrawn.
The other Clauses of the Bill agreed to—the House resumed.