Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

inefficacy, notwithstanding the existence of these laws, the whole, or nearly the whole of the gold coin of this kingdom, amounting, probably, to between 20 and 30 millions, has entirely disappeared, and scarcely a remnant now remains of the sovereigns which were issued in the year 1817. The prohibition, indeed, adds something to the difficulty, and consequently to the expense of exportation, and may therefore be supposed to operate, in some degree, as a seignorage upon our coinbut it is a seignorage perpetually varying, according to the greater or lesser facilities for smuggling which may at different moments exist, and affording therefore an uncertain, and in point of fact, an inadequate protection. The means also, by which this protection is afforded are highly objectionable, there being no possibility of distinguishing between bullion produced by the melting of foreign or of English coin. The only security is that of an oath; and the law, therefore, has no other operation than to offer a great, and, as experience proves, a successful temptation to perjury.

the testimony of others, whose sentiments and
authority upon such matters must be of great
weight. The Committee being fully sensible,
that if the opinions of the two first witnesses
be well-founded, any attempt to remove the
ineffec-
restriction upon the Bank must prove
tual, unless the mint regulations for the
coinage of silver were first altered, according
to the principle upon which that opinion ap-
pears to be founded, have given this part of
the subject full consideration; and they think
it their duty to state, that they see no ground
to apprehend that the present mint regulations
respecting the silver coinage, so long as such
silver coin shall not be a legal tender beyond
the amount of forty shillings, and the mint
shall not be open to the public for the coinage
of that metal, will oppose any obstacle to the
successful execution of the plan, which they
have ventured to recommend.

The House will find, in various parts of the evidence, and in the Appendix, a great mass of valuable information, illustrating not only those points which the Committee have dwelt upon in their report, but also many other points of considerable importance, to which they did not think it necessary to advert. They have judged it best to confine themselves as much as possible to a practical view of the question referred to them by the House, and to rest the proposal which they have brought forward upon grounds which might recommend it sufficiently, if not equally, to persons widely differing in opinion upon many of the considerations involved in any discussion upon so extensive and complicated a subject.

The Report was ordered to be printed. After which, the earl of Harrowby stated. that it was his intention to propose some resolutions founded upon it, on Thursday se'nnight.

Even upon our ancient system of coinage, in which the value of the metal in coin is equal to that of the metal in bullion, and the whole expense of the coinage falls upon the public, it may be doubted whether the prohibition does not increase rather than diminish that expense; although the latter was probably one of the chief objects which the law had in view. As our coin is now either melted previously to exportation, or melted in the country to which it is exported, because it is not there known or current, when it returns, it returns in the shape of bullion, and if the mint is open, and the price such as to make it worth coining, it is carried to the mint and coined at the public expense. Whereas, if our coin were legally exportable, it would probably return into this country as coin, whenever the state of the exchanges Earl Grey urged the propriety of giv rendered it a more profitable remittance than bills or merchandize. No country in Europe ing more time for the consideration of the has maintained so large a metallic currency as report, before bringing forward any proFrance, without any prohibition upon the positions on the subject, if it were merely melting, the export, or the sale of the coin. to preserve the appearance of decency; The Committee cannot conclude their re-it being impossible that a report, with the port without adverting to the opinions which appendices, which had taken the commithave been expressed and very fully explained tee three months to deliberate upon and by some of the witnesses, that the present regulations of the mint for the coinage of arrange, could be fully considered by their lordships within the short period silver must of themselves occasion a perpetual drain of gold from this country, and thereby allowed by the noble earl, previous to oppose an insurmountable obstacle to the re-moving his proposition: add to this, the sumption of metallic payments by the Bank at the ancient standard of value. These opinions have been directly and strongly controverted by other witnesses. The committee more particularly refer to the evidence of Mr. Page and Mr. Fletcher on one side, and Mr. Mushett on the other; and to a paper received from the master of his majesty's mint: but much important information on this part of the subject may likewise be collected from

vast importance of the question, extending as it did, into so many ramifications of detail, and affecting so materially the public interest. The House, besides, might pledge itself with respect to general principles, whilst the House of Commons, in which any legislative measure upon subject would originate, might come to a different conclusion, and thus the two

the

Houses might be placed in the very embarrassing situation of holding conflicting opinions upon a question of such great and general importance. He trusted, therefore, that the noble earl would not object to afford more time for the consideration of the report. He suggested also, that it would be a great convenience if the noble earl would communicate to the House the nature of the propositions he intended to move.

The Earl of Liverpool could not see any just ground for postponing the consideration of the report beyond the day mentioned by his noble friend; on the contrary, he thought it of the greatest importance that the earliest possible period should be chosen for bringing on this question, involving as it did so many considerations of the highest public interest. With respect to what had been said by the noble earl, of there not being time to understand the report, the fact was, that the question would be best understood after it had been discussed in that House. As to the mode of bringing on the discussion, he contended, that upon all questions of great public importance, it was by far the best course to discuss the principles which were to form the groundwork of any legislative measure respect ing them, previous to bringing forward any legislative enactments. This had been the course adopted with regard to the Irish propositions, and the renewal of the charter of the East India company, and the advantages of it were, that all the bearings of the question could be ascertained with much more accuracy by both Houses, than by coming at once to the consideration of legislative enactments. As to the propositions, he had no doubt his noble friend would communicate the nature of them to the House, previous to bringing on the discussion.

The Earl of Harrowby expressed his readiness to communicate the nature of his propositions to the House previous to the discussion, but saw no reason for postponing that discussion beyond the day mentioned.

The Marquis of Lansdowne agreed that it was right to fix the earliest day possible for going into the discussion. The public were so deeply interested in the question, that he thought it was due to them that no time should be lost in giving to it all the consideration it could receive in that House, and at the same time imparting to the public all that information respect(VOL. XL.)

ing the subject which must of course be derived from its being discussed by their lordships. It did not however follow, that the day mentioned was to be irrevocably fixed, as if it should be found in the interval advisable to postpone it; the noble lords on the other side would doubtless not object to that postponement.

The Earl of Lauderdale reminded their lordships, that the committee, whose report was now before them, had sat nearly three months before they had come to the opinion submitted to the House. Their lordships saw the size of the report which lay on the table; from its bulk they might conjecture what a mass of evidence they had to wade through; and yet the noble earl proposed to allow only ten days for the consideration of that evidence. He spoke in the hearing of the members of the committee, and he was certain that no noble lord who had sat on it, and recollected what had been the state of his mind during that inquiry, would say that by Thursday se'nnight his just opinion could be formed on the evidence. He must indeed declare, that to allow only the short period of ten days from the printing to the consideration of the report would be an absurdity. There was a great variety of other business before the House, and if any noble lord thought, notwithstanding the various subjects in which his attention might in the mean time be called, that he could digest all the evidence attached to this report in the course of ten days, that noble lord must have a very different idea of the nature of the inquiry from that which he had by experience found it to be. The noble earl said, that the public mind would be best settled by the discussion of the subject in that House. This was true; but that noble earl ought to recollect, that if the public looked up to the decision of that House on the present or any other subject, it was because they believed that their lordships took sufficient time to form an accurate opinion. He would take upon himself to assert that, no individual, though accustomed to the consideration of subjects of this nature, no merchant in the city of London, would say, that it was possible so to digest the evidence of this report in ten days, as to give an opinion upon it. How, then, could it be expected that their lordships, many of whom were altogether unacquainted with the subject, should make up their minds so quickly-should come (Q)

so rapidly to a decision on questions of the most important nature ever submitted to the consideration of parliament? The noble earl had drawn a distinction between the consideration of the evidence and a decisive result; but, for his part, he was at a loss to understand how any resolutions could be framed, that were to have no result, and to pledge their lordships to nothing. What he was afraid of was, that it was the intention of the noble lords opposite to pledge the House, in some way or another, to certain results of the committee, one of which was of a nature more novel than any thing that had ever entered into the brain of the wildest theorist. Ten days did not appear to him a sufficient time for examining the report, and if a course of precipitation was to be adopted on this occasion, their lordships would deprive their deliberations of that high character which they had hitherto held in the estimation of the public.

Earl Grey had no expectation of being able to form a proper opinion on the report by Thursday se'nnight, and must once more appeal to the candour of the noble earl opposite for farther time. He was willing to allow the full truth of all that the noble earl had said as to the advantage of discussion with respect to its effect on the public mind; but then, for that discussion to be useful, it must be the discussion of informed persons, not of men who were denied time for delibe. ration and reflexion. The members of the committee, who had been three months pursuing the investigation, might be expected to come prepared to give an opinion; but was it reasonable to ask this of those who were as yet unacquainted with the subject? Where was the necessity for so much haste?

Lord Redesdale understood that it was not meant that the general discussion of the subject should take place on the day chosen by his noble friend, but merely that an opportunity should then be afforded for comparing what was proposed to be done with the evidence, and of considering how far the evidence supported what was stated in the report. In that case, it would probably be found most convenient merely to move the intended resolutions, and appoint a future day for their consideration.

Earl Grey intimated, that he should be perfectly satisfied if it was only meant to open the discussion on this day fortnight,

and afterwards, to fix a day for the discussion of the resolutions.

The Earl of Liverpool concurred in the opinion that it might be advisable for his noble friend to open the subject to their lordships some days previous to this day fortnight, but that day was the latest he could contemplate for the general dis cussion of the resolutions.

Earl Grey regarded the previous opening of the subject by the noble earl as of little value, if their lordships were to be limited to ten days for the consideration of the report. The noble earl was master of his own day for his motion; but he now gave notice, that if a farther time was not allowed, he should as soon as the resolutions were proposed move to adjourn the debate to a future day.

The consideration of the report was then fixed for this day se'nnight.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

Friday, May 7.

GRAND DUCHY OF BADEN.] Mr. Sinclair said, that he was desirous on this occasion to put a question to the noble lord, which he had been prevented, by want of a proper opportunity, from asking at an earlier period. It related to a transaction which had excited considerable interest, not only in this country, but throughout the whole of Europe. A treaty had been entered into between the courts of Munich and Vienna, for effecting, in behalf of the former, an eventual dismemberment of the grand duchy of Baden; and it was understood that this arrangement had received the sanction of several other powers. In order to avert this calamity from his subjects, the late grand duke of Baden executed a formal deed of settlement, by which he declared his dominions to be indivisible, and called to the succession a regular series of heirs. He (Mr. S.) therefore wished to know from the noble lord, whether this solemn act had been considered and recognised by the congress at Aix-la-Chapelle, and whether the courts which had entered into a conspiracy for despoiling a defenceless ally, had been induced to renounce this unjustifiable design?

Lord Castlereagh replied, that if the hon. member would wait until the treaties connected with the territorial arrangements of Europe were before the House, he would be better enabled to form an

opinion on this subject. In the mean | lect committee of that House. The hon. time, he could assure him, that no such communication as he had alluded to, was made to the congress at Aix-la-Chapelle.

member then proceeded to state circumstances within his own knowledge some years ago, to prove that such a mode of redress was inefficient. With the greatest respect for the House of Commons, the guardians of the liberty of the people, he must say that election committees frequently came to a decision not consonant to the law of the land. Was he wrong in trying to get rid of such practices? Was he wrong in trying to establish as a principle, that all who voted at elections should have bona fide votes? The remedy which he proposed was not new. There was some approach to it in the reign of Anne, and there were two acts of George the 2nd, which got rid of the evil as far as counties, and towns which were counties in themselves, were concerned. His object was to extend the operation of those acts to every borough in the kingdom. Who would say that such a proposition. was adverse to the constitution, or to the principles of law? He knew there were persons who thought that there was something peculiar in what were called burgage tenures, which ought to exempt them from the operation of his bill. He really could not understand why they should be so exempted. Why should members of parliament be returned in any place by illegal means? Let the legislature, however, expressly declare that, and he should be satisfied. For himself, he thought those burgage tenures the greatest blemish in the constitution, and subversive of the rights of the people. It could not be expected, therefore, that with such an opinion he should introduce the exemption in the bill, but if the bill were allowed to go into a committee, and the sense of the committee should appear to be in favour of taking the burgage tenures out of the operation of the bill, he would not oppose it. The oath that he proposed was not a new one. By the 25th of the king, an oath

ELECTORS OATHS BILL.] Mr. W. Williams rose to move the second reading of this bill. After every consideration that he had been able to give the measure, he felt assured that his bill went neither to alter the mode by which members were seated in that House, to impair the rights of individuals, nor to disturb any species of property. Its object was solely to make that illegal which was acknowledged to be prima facie fraudulent, and to extend to boroughs the same principle which was so salutary in the election of representatives for counties. It demanded that a legal consideration should have been paid, and that the party voting should have actually the freehold in his possesThe fraudulent practice of splitting freeholds first took place in the reign of Charles the 2nd, at the period of the Popish plot, when the Presbyterians, inflamed with deadly animosities against the Papists, introduced, for political purposes, that practice; but its introduction was considered by the highest authorities of that day as illegal and unconstitutional; and on a cause tried at Kingston before lord chief justice Pemberton, that learned judge declared it to be a practice contrary to the principles of the common law, and subversive of the purity and dignity of parliament. In the reign of James the 2d, the practice was renewed, as a means of enabling that monarch to effect his favourite object of restoring Popery. Thus it was that the two parties, with objects so opposite, had recourse to the same fraud to accomplish their respective ends. The evil had so much in creased, that in one county, on the eve of an election, 500 fictitious and fraudulent freeholders were made. The Act of Anne checked its progress, and since the pass-was prescribed, of which that which he ing of the 19th of George the 2nd, he believed there was no instance of any of these occasional and fraudulent votes being allowed at elections for counties. Why, then, should such a practice be tolerated for boroughs? On what principle could a distinction be made? And yet no man could deny that the practice existed in these places to a considerable extent. It might be said in answer, that it was open to the party complaining to prove such votes fraudulent before a se

now proposed was only an alteration. All that he wanted was, that the oath should state distinctly, in virtue of what right the individual taking it was about to vote. At the present moment when the public mind was so much agitated on the question of parliamentary reform, he intreated the House to consider what a support and what a handle they would give by the rejection of such a measure to those who, under the pretence of reform, wished to overturn the constitution. Although he

[ocr errors]

objected to all speculative and wild schemes, he gloried in being a parliamentary reformer to a certain extent, so that the people should have their due influence, and the prerogative its fair weight. In conclusion, he entreated the House not to reject a bill which would remedy a great evil, and was founded solely upon a practical view of necessary amelioration. Mr. Davies Gilbert complimented the hon. member on the bold and manly manner in which he had treated the subject; and which rendered it, on the first view of the question, difficult to see what objection there could be to the adoption of the bill. The bill purported not to make any alteration in the existing law of the land, but only to render it more effectual. To one provision of it, indeed, he saw no objection, namely, that which required every proprietor of a house or other property coming to vote at elections, to state the particulars of his right, the nature of the tenements on which it was founded, the locus in quo, and so forth. But his objections to other parts of it were most decided, for the bill in fact went to an entire subversion of one essential part of the constitution of the kingdom. He alluded to the most material and radical alteration it intended to make in the rights of voters in burgage tenure boroughs. It was known that according to the present practice, any one possessed of burgage tenure property to a sufficient extent, was permitted to give his vote, without the qualification of having been in possession a certain time before. Now, the bill went to make that qualification necessary. The hon. gentleman said, very candidly, he had a dislike to that mode of exercising the elective franchise. He (Mr. Gilbert), however, undoubtedly looked upon it as one of the essentials of our excellent constitution He contended, that that assembly did virtually represent the people of England, and that the interests of all classes were there effectually protected. But he thought it one of its principal excellencies, that, while it represented the people, it never yet consisted of a direct delegation from the whole body of the people. It was not possible that such a House-a House composed of delegates from all the nation-could co-exist with the remaining branches of the constitution, unless it were to be kept in awe and order by a military force. He was persuaded either that the execution would prevail by means of a military force, or

that the delegated body would overthrow the monarchy. Foreigners and theoretical writers were fond of imagining that there was a balance in our constitution of parts opposite in views and interests. Such a balance he esteemed wholly visionary, or if there was any balance, it was to be found in the elements of the House itself; and he asserted, that the balance was effected through that part of the representation which came from the boroughs in question. He supposed that, after the strong manner in which the hon. gentle. man had expressed himself of burgage tenures, as that they were a scandal and a disgrace to the country, he would scarcely give up the provisions of his bill which respected them. Unless, however, the hon. gentleman would consent to take away the provisions to which he referred, he thought he should best discharge his duty by taking the sense of the House on the motion. He begged leave to repeat, that he did not object to that clause of the Bill which called on an elector to explain the foundation of the right on which he wished to vote, though, perhaps, it would be difficult to say how far it was applicable to burgage tenures; and certainly it would be embarrassing for the tenant in all cases to say whether he tendered his vote in right of freehold or burgage tenure tenements. Undoubtedly, all the objectionable parts to which he had adverted, might be removed in the committee, and he therefore trusted the hon. member would declare whether, if the House agreed to the motion, he would consent to introduce such amendments as he had hinted at.

Mr. Williams said, that thinking as he did of burgage tenures, it could not be expected that he should himself exempt them from the operation of the bill; but if in a committee the sense of the House should be adverse to that part of the bill, they might deal with it as they thought proper.

Mr. Brand maintained, that the system of nomination was one of the greatest blots on the constitution. He thought the hon. mover's proposition perfectly fair. Let the bill go into a committee, and then let the hon. member for Bodmin propose to take the nomination boroughs out of the operation of the bill. Besides, it should be considered, that the provisions of the bill were applicable to other descriptions of franchise besides burgage tenures, to the correction of the irregularities attend

« ForrigeFortsett »