fallacy of the assertion was proved by the fact, that the tax last year produced 180,0001. and that near 8,000,000lb. of wool were imported. This showed that the importer did not consider it to be a ruinous speculation.

After a few words from Mr. Baring, the petition was laid on the table, and ordered to be printed.

April 17.--The house having gone into a committee on the assessed taxes acts, Mr. Lushington moved three resolutions, which were agreed to, viz.-1. That the composition for the window-tax be continued for six years; 2. That the composition for the servants' carriages' and horses' taxes be continued for three years; and the 3d related to those who had already compounded, that an addition of five per cent. be added to the composition.

Petitions for parliamentary re. form, and retrenchment in the public expenditure, were presented from Tavistock, the county of Devon, the freeholders of Plymouth, Boston, Ely, Alresford, Southwark, a numerous body of the inhabitants of Suffolk, the county of Cumberland, and the town of Nottingham.

Mr. Lambton then rose to address the house on the subject of the above petitions. He quoted a recent observation of Mr. Justice Best, in an address to a grand jury, to the effect, that knowledge had been greatly extended; and that a state of knowledge was so different from a state of ignorance, that it would be as absurd to apply the same regulations, as to treat in the same way things that had, and things that had no animation. This observation he had

found to be correct with regard to the population of the northern counties, and he believed it was equally applicable to the kingdom at large. In his last canvas there was not a village, however secluded, in which he was not questioned on every important topic of our national interests, and reminded of those abuses which required correction. Amongst these they felt the most prominent, and the fruitful parent of all the rest to be, the glaringly defective state of the representation of the people in that house. To this they distinctly ascribed that mismanage ment of our political affairs, which had saddled us with an enormous standing army, 850,000,0001. of debt, and an annual taxation of 53,000,0001., which had involved our agricultural, manufacturing, and commercial interests, in unparalleled distress; and which had tarnished our national honour, by making us parties to the disgraceful cessions of Norway, Genoa, Venice, and Parga; to the obstruction, by alien acts, of the free intercourse between civilized nations; and to the efforts now making by that unholy league, which arrogated to itself the title of the holy alliance, to crush the awakening spirit of other states, and to rivet, for ever, the chains which they had already worn too long. Mr. L. after expatiating on this topic, proceeded to state the encroachments made on the original right of election, which extended to all freemen, and the measures by which parliaments, at first elected every year, became triennial and afterwards septennial. He then gave an outline of his plan of parliamentary reform. He proposed to make the duration

of

of parliament triennial, to disfranchize the rotten boroughs, transferring the representatives to the counties, and to extend the elective franchise for counties to householders, copyholders, and lease holders, paying taxes. There were clauses in his bill for abridging the period of polling, and for dividing counties into districts, by which means the electors might give their votes without going to a distance from their place of residence; the returning officers in those districts, to be magistrates, annually chosen by the overseers. Upon this plan he calculated that each representative would, on an average, have 2500 electors. He proposed to disqualify from sitting in parlia ment all persons performing duties abroad, such as ambassadors, governors of colonies, and naval and military officers. He should not now move for leave to bring in the bill; but should move that the house should resolve itself into a committee, to take into consideration the state of the represen

tation.

Mr. Whitbread seconded the motion, which was also supported by Mr. Hobhouse, sir R. Wilson, Mr. Abercromby, Mr. F. Palmer, lord Bury, lord Milton, and Mr. Honeywood; and opposed by Mr. Wilmot, Mr. H. Twiss, Mr. S. Wortley, and Mr. R. Martin.

Soon after one o'clock, the Chancellor of the Exchequer moved an adjournment, which was agreed to. The next evening the motion was lost by a majority of 12.

House of Lords, May 4.-The earl of Liverpool moved the third reading of the Cash Payments Bill, after briefly stating its provi

sions.

The marquis of Lansdown ob

served, that nobody could now doubt the capability of the bank to pay all demands upon it. But whether a recurrence to cash payments would diminish the number of crimes was doubtful. He found that in the course of the last twenty years the convictions for coining amounted to 3191, whilst the convictions for forgery during the same period, with all the facilities afforded to the commission of that crime, by the defective state of the existing notes, amounted to only 1581. When gold came into circulation, the temptation for coining would be greater; and he was sorry to learn that, in the opinion of the best informed peo ple on this subject, great facilities were afforded for the adulterating of gold by the introduction of pla tina. He regretted that the resumption of cash payments, which, to a certain extent, must have the effect of increasing the weight of the existing public burdens, was accompanied by an addition to the taxes, for the purpose of merely keeping up the show of a nominal sinking fund.

Lord Lauderdale hoped the bank would cautiously use the powers vested in them by the bill. It was a remarkable circumstance, that gold had remained nearly at the same price for the last six months. He thought silver ought to be made a legal tender to any amount, and urged the total abolition of the sinking fund.

Lord Liverpool said that the object of the bank was, in the first instance, to substitute gold for the one pound notes, the amount of which was between six and seven millions. He vindicated the measures taken to establish an efficient sinking fund to the

amount

amount of five millions. A compulsory reduction of the interest on the public debt would be monstrous injustice. A depreciation of the currency would only be doing the same thing in a more objectionable mode. Ministers were, of themselves, disposed to make all practicable retrenchments. The best course would be to try the effect of the present bill for one year.

After a few more observations from lords King, Darnley, and the duke of Wellington, the bill was read a third time and passed.

May 7.-The royal assent was given by commission to the following bills:-The Irish Starch Duties Bill, the African Company Abolition Bill, the Bank of England and the Bank of Ireland Cash Payments Bills. The commissioners were the lord chancellor, the earl of Shaftesbury, and the marquis of Winchester.

Petitions from Whitby and Luton were presented on the penal laws.

Mr. Brogden brought up the Scotch Hereditary Revenue Bill, the Scotch Court of Admiralty Bill, the Irish Prison Fees' Abolition Bill, and the Irish Court of Chancery Bill, each which was read a first time.

House of Commons, May 8. Mr. H. G. Bennet complained of an article in the Sunday newspaper called The John Bull, in which he was charged with having told an untruth, and of having basely and in a cowardly manner broken his faith. A resolution was in consequence put, and carried unanimously, that the article was a false libel and a breach of the privileges of that

house, and that R. T. Weaver, the printer attend at the bar of the house to-morrow.

Mr. Lennard, in a speech of great length, moved for the repeal of the seditious meetings and the blasphemous and seditious libels bills. The motion was lost by a majority of thirty-one.

Mr. Scarlett observed, that he should state the grounds of his motion for the amendment of the law for the relief of the poor as shortly as possible. The subject called for the most anxious and deliberate attention. He could certainly have wished that whatever measure he might suggest should have received the previous sanction and countenance of government, or at least that it should have been recommended by that body of gentlemen who had formed the select committee from which the able and laborious report on the question had proceeded; but as neither of these had brought forward any remedy for existing evils, he had undertaken the task, not from a consciousness of his

own abilities, but from a deep and solemn conviction that it was absolutely necessary that something should be done. The subject was not by any means new to him; it had for years occupied his thoughts, and although until lately he had not been able to go through the mass of information the house possessed upon it, he had found all his views confirmed and strengthened by that infor. mation. The great evil appeared to result from this- that by the law or practice of the country there was established an unlimited provision for the poor. He laid the more stress upon the word unlimited, because, a priori, it

seemed

in Cheshire, in the year 1816. From that document it appeared that the progressive expense had become so intolerable, that the parishioners in their reference to it declared that though the price of corn was not then higher than it had been in 1801, and though the wages of the poor were considerably higher, yet still the parochial claims had increased, to the injury and deterioration of the morals, industry, and habits of the working classes, and to the abandonment of their diligence, prudence, and economy. Such being the state of things, and the sense entertained by the country of the operation of the poor laws, it became absolutely necessary that something should at length be done to endeavour to stem the torrent. The simple remedy in auch a case was to ascertain the source of the evil, and then take away the cause. This was the obvious course, unless in removing the cause, a greater evil was likely to be inflicted, than that which the removal was intended to remedy. The first step to be taken was in his judgment to limit the provision collected under the existing laws. With this view he meant to suggest the declaring a maximum beyond which there should be no assessment for these rates. Now, according to the attention which he had bestowed upon this part of the subject, he thought it most expedient that the last year's rates throughout the kingdom should be fixed as the poor rate maximum. They were not then at the highest ratio; but they were perhaps nearest to it; and he should propose that from and after the passing of the act, it shall be unlawful to assess

or levy in any parish or place in England any larger assessment for the relief of the poor than that assessed and levied for them in the year ending on the 25th of March, 1821. That was the first measure which he intended to submit to the house; and if he found that they were likely to go with him in the principle which he laid down, it was his intention to follow up such a bill as he had sketched with another, having for its object the establishment of a different system of administration for the poor laws. It was well known that the original object of the legislature, when the act of Elizabeth was passed, was not to disseminate a premium for idleness, but to confer a relief for those whom old age or infirmity had disabled and rendered incapable of supporting themselves by the efforts of their own industry. A practice, however, had since grown up in the administrative system of those laws, not to confine the relief to the original objects of the law, for whom it was alone intended, but to extend it (which was done in very many parts of the kingdom) to persons who represented themselves as unable to obtain work. The abuses of this modern practice were incalculable. He thought it absolutely indispensable that the legislature should correct either the law or the practice. To correct the latter was perhaps impossible: if even it could be practised, the effect would perhaps be deemed extremely severe; for it should be retrospective in its operation, and would consequently affect large families reared up under the security of a protection which the law led them to think permanent