the supply, there be laid on the exportation of all salt to the continent of Europe, a duty of 9d. per bushel; and on the ex Mr. Secretary Canning stated, that he also had received a letter upon this subject, which he had transmitted to his noble friend the secretary for the home depart-portation of all salt to distant parts in the ment. M. Sheridan wished to know the distinction taken in this case between an official and unofficial form of communication. The individuals concerned could make the communication, as it appeared from all that had been said, only as private persons. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, that when a communication was marked' private,' no disclosure could with propriety be made of its contents, nor of the name of its author, nor could it in any way be used as a public document. Mr. Sheridan said there must have been some mistake on this head, as such privacy could never have been intended by those who put themselves so pubiickly forward in this and in other places, to correct the grievance. Mr. Mellish said a few words in vindication of Mr. Mainwaring, who had, in conformity with his duty, referred this matter to the magistrates.-The Petition was then ordered to lie on the table. EXPORTATION OF COTTON.] The house resolved itself into a committee. of ways and means, Mr. Wharton in the chair. The Chancellor of the Exchequer proposed to lay the same duty on the exportation from this country of cotton wool, the produce of British colonies, as now existed on the exportation from this country of cotton wool, the produce of any other part of the world. His object in proposing this was, not for the purpose of raising a revenue, but to effect a prohibition in the only way it could be effected. He had, therefore, calculated the duty so as to be just under the amount of the insurance which merchants would pay for the risk, if the article were prohibited. He therefore moved, That towards raising the supply there be laid on every pound of Cotton Wool exported from this country, being the produce of British colonies, the duty of ninepence. The article of salt was in great demand in the north of Europe, where it could not be dispensed with. By the mea'sures of the enemy the exportation from this country would be increased, rather than obstructed, for those measures empowered the country by the law of retaliation, to prevent the continent from getting salt any where but from G. Britain. He therefore moved, That towards raising VOL. X. world (with the exception of British colonies) a duty of 3d a bushel.'—A conversation ensued, in which Mr. Ponsonby and lord H. Petty disputed the expediency of these propositions. The Chancellor of the Exchequer and Mr. Huskisson maintained the expediency of them. On the latter proposition Mr. Davenport and gen. Gascoyne recommended caution and deliberation. Mr. Baring was apprehensive that these duties on salt would act as protecting duties on the salt of American manufacture, and that when we had once lost the market for that article, we should be unable to regain it.-In answer to a question from lord H. Petty, the Chancellor of the Exchequer stated, that he meant the duty also to apply to the exportation of salt from the Bahamas to America.— The Resolutions were then agreed to. ORDERS IN COUNCIL BILL.] The Chancellor of the Exchequer stated, that in consequence of an amendment which he intended to introduce into the Orders in Council bill, he should propose that the bill should that night go through a committee, pro forma ; that the report should be received on Monday, and that on Tuesday a recommitment should take place, when the bill might be discussed. Mr. Ponsonby expressed his satisfaction that the right hon. gent, had changed his opinion on the subject since 3 o'clock on that morning. His objection, however, to the principle of the bill was so strong, that he could not allow the Speaker to leave the chair without taking the sense of the house upon it. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said it was not his intention to protract the discussion of this measure. He was not until this day aware, that alterations were necessary. If the right hon. gent. had a desire to take the sense of the house he might. It appeared to him, that the reason for taking the sense of the house upon the present occasion might be, that the right hon. gent. looking at the strength of the house might think, from the thinness of what were called the ministerial benches, that he was sure of a triumph. Mr. Ponsonby explained, and denied any such motive. Mr. H. Martin thought the measure was one of such paramount delinquency, that every opportunity should be taken to ex2 Y Matthew Russell, the rev. John Buller, clerk, John Evans, gent. John Stephens Croft, and Isaac Toby, delivered in a statement as follows: The petitioners contend, that the Right of Election of members to serve in parliament for the pose its injustice. He was surprised at the | insinuation thrown out by the right hon. the chancellor of the Exchequer against his right hon. friend, who he knew was incapable of the motive attributed to him. He was satisfied the right hon. gent. could marshal his troops with much more celeri-borough of Saltash, is in every person ty than could be effected on his side the house. A division then took place, when there appeared, For the postponement Against it, Majority -86 When strangers were re-admitted, we found the chancellor of the Exchequer on his legs, assuring the right hon. gent. (Mr. Ponsonby) that the division had convinced him, that he was mistaken in the insinuation he had previously made, with respect to any wish of taking an unfair advantage. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Monday Feb. 22. [MINUTES.] Col. Stanley brought up the report of the Evesham Committee. The report stated that the sitting member, sir M. Lopez, bart. was not duly elected, and ought not to have been returned; that the petioner, H. Howorth, esq. was duly elected, and ought to have been returned; and that the opposition of the said sir M. Lopez, bart. to the petition of the said H. Howorth, esq. was not frivolous or vexatious. seised of an estate for life, or some greater 'estate, in an entire ancient burgage tene'ment, situate in the borough aforesaid, 'whereon an ancient dwelling house now stands or formerly stood, and in no other persons.'That the counsel for the petitioners W. Henry Fremantle and Tho. Francis Fremantle, esquires, delivered in a statement as follows: That the Right of Election for members to serve in parlia 'ment for the borough of Saltash is in the mayor and free burgesses of the said borough, being members of the corporation within the same, and in no other per'sons:-That upon thestatement delivered in by the counsel for the petitioners, the said W. Henry Fremantle and Tho. Francis Fremantle, esquires, 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 said borough of Saltash:" That upon the statement delivered in by the counsel for the Petitioners James Buller, esq. and others, the said committee have determined; "That the Right of Election, as set forth in the said Statement, is the right of elec tion for the said borough of Saltash, so far as the said right is therein described:" That the said committee having duly considered the said statements, and the evi right of election for the said borough of Saltash, have determined; "That the Right of voting for members to serve in parliament for the borough of Saltash is in every person seised of an estate for life, or some greater estate, in an entire antient burgage tenement, situate in the borough aforesaid, whereon an antient dwelling house now stands or formerly stood, and in no other persons." And the said determinations were ordered to be entered in the Journals of the house. [SALTASH RIGHT OF ELECTION.] Ordered, That Mr. Wharton do make the Report from the select committee appointed to try and determine the merits of the Pe-dence adduced before them, touching the tion of James Buller, esq. Arthur Champernowne, esq. Matthew Russell, esq. the rev. John Buller, clerk, John Evans, gent. John Stephens Croft, and Isaac Toby, each of whom are seised of an entire ancient Burgage Tenement, situate within the Borough of Saltash, whereon an ancient dwelling house now stands or formerly stood; and also of the Petition of W. Henry Fremantle and Tho. Francis Fremantle, esquires, respecting the Right of Election for the said borough. Mr. Wharton accordingly from the said committee informed the house, PETITION FROM BOLTON, FOR PEACE.] That the said committee required the Col. Stanley presented a Petition from the counsel for the several parties to deliver inhabitants of Bolton in Lancaster, setting to the clerk of the said committee state- forth, "That the petitioners suffer great ments, in writing, of the Right of Elec-privations on account of the depressed tion for which they respectively contended: That, in consequence thereof, the counsel for the Petitioners James Buller, esq. Arthur Champernowne, esq. state of the manufactures, whereby the price of labour is reduced in the most unprecedented degree, and thousands of the petitioners threatened with the want of employment: that, in the judgment of the of which they complain, the mode of obpetitioners, the great suspension of com-taining that cure which they have adopted, merce arises chiefly from a want of the customary intercourse with the continent of Europe; and that the depressed reduction of trade reduces thousands of the petitioners to the most extreme distress: that many useful enterprising and ingenious manufacturers, have been reduced from afluence to complete poverty, the consequence of which is, that number of the petitioners have been reduced to the absolute want of the necessaries of life for themselves and helpless offspring; and that the present situation of affairs still threatens the petitioners with additional sufferings to those they now experience: that, in the opinion of the petitioners, the present evils under which they so severely suffer, are owing to the continuation of the present war, which causes the extensive depression of foreign commerce, which the petitioners humbly presume can only be restored by the blessings of Peace: that the petitioners are not induced to petition the house on the subject of Peace from any dread of the enemy, but from a desire that no opportunity may be omitted to enter into negociations for that purpose; and that the petitioners, should the enemy, from ambitious motives, be induced to make demands inconsistent with our national honour and independence to grant, will ever feel it to be their duty, with one heart and mind, to think no sacrifices or privations too great when made for the honour and security of their king and country; and therefore praying, that the house would, in its great wisdom, recommend to his majesty, that no means be omitted, consistent with our national honour and security, for restoring to his faithful subjects the blessings of Peace."-On the motion, that the Petition do lie on the table, Mr. Secretary Canning said,—"Sir, I do not rise to object to the motion, satisfied as I am of the propriety of the terms in which the petitioners have claimed the attention of the house to a subject so highly interesting to the whole country; although I cannot but, at the same time, feel that it is a subject which must always be in the contemplation of this house, and of those whose duty it is to advise his majesty. I trust, sir, I shall not be considered as deficient in feeling for the situation of the petitioners, if I express my sincere opinion and conviction, that even were peace to be the immediate cure of the evils must necessarily retard its acquisition. While I allow that it is perfectly natural for the petitioners, experiencing the pri vations which they do experience, to look eagerly to any remedy that appears to promise them relief, yet, on the part of those who ought to take a more extensive view of the subject, I must deprecate any accusation of hardness of heart, if they declare their firm opinion, that, should they be driven to a negociation under circumstances in which they must feel fettered and embarrassed, such would unquestionably not be the mode of obtaining the object prayed for by the petitioners; namely,. a peace, consistent with the security and honour of the country. In expressing these sentiments, sir, I am sure I speak those of my colleagues. We are anxious to avail ourselves of the best means to accomplish this desirable end. Our duty and our interest unite to induce us, if possible, to obtain a peace consistent with the security and honour of the country. We have missed no fair opportunity for that purpose. Sir, I am anxious to repeat, that we feel most strongly the distress of that situation from which the petitioners wish to be relieved; but we are bound to advise his majesty conscientiously to the best of our judgment, and we are satisfied that, by a premature negociation, or one commenced on any grounds but those of perfect equality and independence, not only would the object of the petitioners fail of being realized, but any subsequent hopes which they might be led to entertain would be disappointed, in a manner the most injurious to them, and to the country at large."-The Petition was then ordered to lie on the table. [TREATY WITH SWEDEN.] Mr. Ponsonby observed, that on the first day, of the session he had noticed a passage relating to Sweden, in the Speech of the lords commissioners, and having inquired of the right hon. secretary, whether by that passage it was implied, that the house should make good a subsidiary treaty with Sweden, the right hon. gent. had replied, that he expected shortly to have his majesty's commands to lay on the table of that house, a subsidiary treaty with Sweden. Above a month had elapsed, but no such treaty had been produced, although it was rumoured, on what authority he knew not, that a considerable sum of r f money had actually been sent from G. Britain to that country. He wished to know whether any money had been so transmitted? and if it had, whether it was under the conditions of a treaty subsisting prior to the observation in the speech, or in consequence of the conclusion of a more recent treaty? in this instance was, that it might ultimately be the means of introducing other articles into the continent. He moved, that the house should go into a committee to consider of the prohibition of the exportation of Cotton Wool and Jesuit's Bark. The Speaker left the chair. The resolutions were put and agreed to; the report received; and bills ordered. [ORDERS IN COUNCIL BILL.] The report of the Orders in Council bill was brought up. Mr. Tierney objected to the bill on the ground of informality. This was a bill not only for imposing duties, but for the regulation of trade. But it was provided by a standing order of the house, founded upon that of 1703, that no bill for the regu Mr. Secretary Canning replied, that the reason why the passage in his majesty's speech had not been followed up by the presentation of the treaty was simply this: until within these few days there had been no arrivals from the continent. No less than eight or ten Gottenburgh mails had become due. Within these few days, however, dispatches had been received from the British ambassador at Stockholm, stating that the Treaty with Sweden had been actually signed. His majesty's government were in daily expectation of receiv-lation of trade should orginate, except in a ing it, and within as short a period as possible after the arrival of the treaty, he should feel it to be his duty to bring it down to the house. It was unquestionably true, that a sum of money had been sent to Sweden, not in pursuance of any prior treaty concluded with that country, but in the contemplation of the treaty that had recently been signed. committee of the whole house, called a Committee for the Protection of Trade and Navigation. That part of the bill which went to the regulation of trade, ought therefore, in his opinion, to have originated in such a committee. He had looked for precedents, and found one exactly in point in the Convoy Duty act. The course which had been pursued by [EXPORTATION OF COTTON WOOL AND the right hon. gent. opposite (Mr. Rose) JESUITS BARK.] The Chancellor of the Ex- in that instance was this that part which chequer stated, that he understood, by re- was matter of commercial regulation was presentations from various quarters, that referred to a committee of trade; that it would be more acceptable to have a di- which regarded the duties was referred to rect prohibition of the exportation of cer- a committee of ways and means. The retain articles, the produce of neutral states solution of the ways and means was first as well as of this country, which it was in-reported and a bill ordered. The other tended to have prohibited by duty. The resolution was then reported, and an inmode of prohibition under the Orders instruction given to those appointed to bring Council was certainly generally intended in the Duties bill to make provision purto be that of imposing duties. However, suant to that resolution. The present was as a direct prohibition of the exportation a bill precisely of the same nature, and the from this country of such articles as were same course ought to have been pursued, produced by America as well as our own The right hon. gent. opposite (Foster) was colonies appeared to be considered the to move resolutions of the same sort with preferable mode, he should adopt it. He respect to Ireland; and he would ask him, would, therefore, move for leave to bring whether he would not feel it his duty to in a Bill to prohibit the exportation of adopt the course which he had described? Cotton Wool and Jesuits Bark; with a proviso, however, that licences might be granted in certain cases for such exportation. As to the prohibition of the exportation of Bark, he was led to it by the information that the severest pressure was already felt on the continent from the want of that article. It was of great importance to the armies of the enemy. He understood that at Paris it had risen from 10s. to 70s. per pound, and that attempts had been made to procure it in spite of all obstacles. The object of the prohibition The Chancellor of the Exchequer replied, that all that was required by the Standing Order of 1772, which had taken place of that of 1703, was that any regulation as to trade should originate in a committee of the whole house, and a committee of ways and means was such. But, besides this, there was a clear difference between the Convoy Duty act and the present bill. There the alteration in the trade was the work of the legislature here it was the work of the king, and to make the alteration, he contended the king was fully competent. All that the legislature had to do with it was to impose the duty, and for that the committee of ways and means was the proper place. The Chancellor of the Exchequer admitted, that there was something in the argument respecting forfeitures. He would therefore not object to the dividing of the bill when it came to the committee.-The report was then received, and the bill or and, on the motion of Mr. Tierney, it was agreed, that there should be an instruction to the committee to divide the bill if it thought fit. He also gave notice, that he would then move for the reference of the matter of regulation to a committee of trade. Mr. Tierney mentioned some of the clauses which went to make new regulations in trade, and touched incidentally up-dered to be re-committed on Wednesday; on the pernicious custom the house was getting into, of overlooking the principle of confining the ways and means within the limits of the supplies. The words of the Property Tax act placed the proceeds from time to time in the hands of ministers, so that they might have the supplies under that act without any committee of ways and means at all. The war-tax act placed some millions in the hands of ministers beyond the estimated supplies. On the principle he had stated, he strongly objected to the bill going forward without an estimate of the expected amount of the duties imposed. Returning to the essential ground of his objection, he said, that the king might regulate the mode in which ships were to come to England, but he could not regulate the mode of their going out. There was also a clause for remitting forfeitures which could not be regulated by the crown. The bill, therefore, ought to be divided in order to pro-qualification had been accordingly given ceed in the proper way. Mr. Rose said, that there was a radical difference between the case of the Convoy Duty bill and the present. There a distinct alteration in trade was made by the legislature, here it was made by the crown. The regulations in the bill were minute points, and it was customary in the committee of ways and means to allow such regulations as were not essential, in addition to the duties. The Speaker stated, that it was customary in the committee of ways and means to interfere in regulations respecting trade, such as in the instance of the expiring laws. Though the committee of ways and means was the only place for duties, yet, since 1772, the house had been in the habit of admitting there of certain minute regulations closely connected with these duties. Unless they were thus connected, the house would order a separate bill, originating in another committee. This was the principle, the house would apply it as it thought fit. Mr. Tierney said, that the question was, whether the regulations in question were such as the Speaker had said might be adopted in the committee of ways and means, along with the duties? [GREAT GRIMSBY ELECTION.] Mr. Horner rose to move that the order for taking into consideration the Petition complaining of the undue election for the borough of Great Grimsby, should be discharged. The grounds upon which his motion rested were, that the standing order of the house had not been complied with by the petitioner in the last session; that order requiring that the petitioner should give in a statement of his qualification within 15 days after notice to that effect had been served upon him, subsequent to the presenting his petition. Such notice had been given to the petitioner last session, but no in; and thus the qualification had, within the regular time after the renewal of the petition in the present session, been returned to the house, in the absence of any precedent, since the enactment of the Grenville act, that the house should be governed by the analogy of its practice, antecedent to the passing of that act, which would be fatal to the claim of the petitioner to be heard. He therefore moved that the order be discharged. The Solicitor General stated, that he agreed with the learned gent. as to the practice of the house antecedent to the passing of the 10th of the king, the Grenville act. But he contended, since the enactment of that statute, which transferred all jurisdiction on matters of controverted election from the house to the committees chosen under it, it was not competent to the house to discharge any order for a committee to determine the merits of an election, in any other manner than as prescribed by the act. The whole jurisdiction rested with the committee, which alone was to decide upon the question respecting the qualification, and therefore the house could not have power to dis charge the order pursuant to the motion of the hon. gent.-After a few words from |