me as to purfue any meatures that would put an end to cordiality, and divide the two king doms. Something had been faid alfo of the twentieth refolutior, by which the furplus of the Hereditary revenue was to be fecured for the ufe of the navy of the empire; and gentlemen' had taken occafion to argue that the perpetuity of the grant was a proof that it was unconttirational, because all grants ought to be only for a time, if Parliaments withed to preferve their own existence, and the liberties of their conflituents. But did gentlemen recollect the nature of the fund, the furplus of which was to be thus fecured? It was an hereditary fund, granted long fince in perpetuity to the crown; nay, the furdus itfelf was abfolutely and folely at the difpofal of the crown (This last expreffion Mr. Pitt retracted on feeisg Mr. Sheridan thake his head, by way of denying the foundation of the affertion.) He then faid that the furplus had been claimed by the crown, that the parliament had refifted the claim; and that ao final decifion had-ever been had upon it fince. From the nature of the fond, he faid, he hoped it would appear that there was no breach of the Conftitution, ia fecuring for ever for the use of the public, a furplus arting out of a revenue, which is to be levied for ever on the public, in confequence, and under the authority of very old faws. Having argued thus in favour of the propofitions, ire concluded by faying he would give a most hearty vote in fupport of the Addrefs. he had the honour to aft, had, under the. preaure of all thele circumstances, unanimoutly concurred in the first refolution. Bat till they were of opinion that the minifterdid not find, but had actually created the necelity, as it d d not exift until he himfelf had Birred up Ireland to call for what the never thought of before. Might not a' man then be perfectly confiftent who thould fay, the necefly I am ready to admit, exiff's now; but F contend that it owes its exiffence to you, and never would have been talked of, had not you yourself,, brought it forth into light. The Right Hon. Gentleman, in maintaining that the fourth refolution, guarded as it was, would not be injurious to the conflitution or independence of Ieland, had not been very jutt or candid in the charges he brought againft thofe, who had opposed it as fubverfive of the independence of Ireland. If the refolution had paffed in the original thape, in which it was propofed, could the Right Hon. Gentleman have had even a fhadow of ground for faying that Breland in adopting it, most not have agreed to be bound by laws paffed in England If the refolution was guarded now, who had taken the pains and the precaution to guard it? Was it not his Right Hon. Friend (Mr. Eden)? Did not the Minifler at first refift thofe guards that were propofed, by which the laws that were to bind Ireland, were to be paffed by the Farliament ?—and was: it not with reluctance that be at length admitted them? If therefore there was any merit in having made that refolution lefs exMr. Sheridan obferved, that the right Hon. ceptionable than it was originally, it belonged Gentleman having fet out with inveighing not to the Minifter, but to those whom Ire again pofitive affertions, unfupported by ar- now made the objects of his cenfure. But guments, he took it for granted that he would after all, with all the guards that had been not have fallen into an error, which he had put into it, could any man lig his hand ɑpow fo strongly condemned in others; and there- his heart and fay, that there was a reat diffore he had been led to expect that he would tinction between these two propofitions,--this have adduced frorz, weighty, irreftible, the English navigation laws thall be proprio and unanfwerable arguments in fupport of his vigore in force in Ireland,—or that the ParFuem; but never had expectations been more liament of Ireland thall be bound implicitly miferably disappointed than his; for he had to enrol them among her statutes? If there never heard more affertions than from the was no difference, and he believed there was Right Hon. Gentleman, and fewer proofs. none then, notwithfanding all that the Right He had indeed endeavoured to make it appear Hon. Gentleman had faid, notwith @anding that fome members on the oppofition fide of the guard, that had been placed against bis the house had been inconfitent, because they will in the fourth refolution, this was an athad concurred in an unanimous vote that the tempt to recover the right of legislating for intercourte ought to be finally fealed between Ireland; a right, which had fo recently been Great Britain and Ireland; and yet had in- affected by her, fo recently renounced by this fited this night that there was not originally country. "If the Irith had no other objection any necelity for fach a fettlement. to the whole fyftem, this would unqueflionwhere was the inconfifiency in this? When ably appear to them to be a fatal one; and he the Minifier of the crown had fubmitted would not hesitate to fav that there were noz ecrtain propofitions to both Movies of Parlia-at this moment two opinions upon it in all ment in Ireland, when thofe propofitions were carried there, and followed up by addref fes from both Lords and Commons to the King, that they might be carried into effect; when the King referred them to his Parliament in this country, then indeed it became neceffary that fome fettlement should take place; and therefore those friends with whom But Ireland; it was execrated by every clafs of " people, who were exasperated not only on account of the attempt to falter their legillature, but of the fraud and deceit which appeared in the whole tranfaction. Que Minifier, who, if he might be described from his own emphatical words, might be called the paramount Minifter, who fuperintended and watched ever.all the other Cabinet Minifters, had no idea of the fourth refolution, when the plan was firft fent to Ireland; he had no idea of it, when it was first introduced into the Parhament of this country. But what was the language of his colleagues, in another house? Colleagues who faid they held themselves refponfible, each in his feparate department, and collectively, as Cabinet Minifters, for all the measures in which they concurred? Thefe colleagues had in the most folemn manner declared, that from the beginning they had never once loft fight of this propofition for making England legiflate for Ireland; that they always looked upon it as an effential and indifpenfible condition of the fyftem; and that without it they never would have confented to the fettlement that had been propofed. Why then was it not boldly and fairly avowed by Mr. Orde in Ireland? Why was fo confequential a part of the fyftem, confequential to the interefts of England, and to the conftitution of Ireland, kept back from the knowledge of the Parliament, whofe independence was to be facrificed? Minifters knew that Ireland would not bear it; that he would fire at it; and therefore it was infidioufly withheld for a time, in hopes that it might be offered a little later with a greater profpect of fuccefs. The contradiction of minifters on this great point were as hard to be reconciled, as the paradoxes of a noble Marquis in another place, who had reprefented the manufacturers as hard headed people, and who yet did understand their own interefts; who defcribed the Irish as the most loyal nation in the world, and the next moment warned minifters to beware of a rebellion there; who afferted that Ireland could not rival this country, for want of refources; and who, nevertheless, just come from the woods," faid, there were paks kulking under the bogs of Ireland juft ready to fart up the moment a bousty fhould be offered. The Right Hon. Gentleman had faid, that there could be no wrong done to Ireland by her parliament, confenting that he should be bound by laws that would hold out equal reftraints and equal benefits to both countries: but it required no great depth of penetration to discover cafes, in which the letter of the law might do fo; but in which the spirit would destroy the reci procity of restraints and advantages: he had often mentioned fome; he would now mention a cafe that happened this day; a bill had only a few hours ago been paled through that Houfe, which prohibited the importation of tobacco into Great Britain from any place except that of which it was the produce. This made no exception against Ireland; the words were general; but it would effectually prevent for ever the Irith from bringing a fingle hog fhead of tobacco through Ireland into this kingdom. The minifter perhaps had not read the bill; indeed he had of late feemed not to think it neceffary to read any bills: the engroffing clerk had been kept this very day hours at the table to engrofs claufes and a man riders, that ought to have been in the body of the bill, if thofe whofe duty it was to draw it up carefully, had beftowed a quarter of an hour's time in reading it. Before he fat down, he begged leave to fay one word more it was on a topic on which he had heard much of late, and greatly to his forprise it was aa union between Great Britain and Ireland. Some people thought that the object of the fyftem was to bring about fuch an event; he did not believe it was: but many feemed to think that an union was lurking under it. He warned minifters not to entertain fuch an idea; an union between the two kingdoms was, perhaps of all things upon earth the most impracticable; there was not a man in Ireland would think of it for a moment; it was the wildeft whim that ever got into a minis fter's head; the Irish had the most rooted averfion to it. The minifter who would make. the propofitions would be obliged to make it from the cannon's mouth, and the credentials that he muft fend with his ambasadors on fuch a negociation must be fifty thousand flands of arms; the people would not liften to the proposal, without having been previously con quered.- -There was no neceffity for an union; the two countries might by a wife. minifter be kept together to their mutual fatisfaction, withont an union; they were al ready united by ties of blood, of laws, of conftitution, and a thousand other ties, a mil lion of times stronger than any acts of parliament: thus united, they would, though under different legiflatures, be for all imperial purposes, one kingdom and one people :—a corrupt or an unwife government, might tearall thofe ties afunder. He concluded with this remarkable expreffion :" that if the "propofitions which were the fubject of the "addrefs, did not produce a union, they would "certainly produce a war." Here there was a cry for the queftion. Mr. Pitt than moved for leave to bring in a bill for finally fettling the commercial intercourfe between Great Britain and Ireland. Mr. Fox in a very fhort speech, opposed the motion on two grounds; one that it was ab furd to bring in a bill to carry the propofitions into a law before it was known whether the Irish would accept them or not; the other was, that enough had been already done to provoke Ireland, and that it was injudicious to add infult to injustice, by fuppofing that the was capable of acceding to propofitions that must degrade her; the bringing in of the bill fo quick upon the heels of the address, went certainly the length of forh a fuppofition. Mr. Dundas thought that the bill ought to be brought in immediately, because it was in fact, part of the meafure of the addrefs, and without which the addrefs would be incom plete. Many invidious infinuations had been thrown out, that there was an intention in this country to refume the independence of Ireland; this bill, would when printed, find its way to that country, and thew how that macter flood. It was not indeed furprising that men 1 1 men fhould be afraid of feeing this bill, who Mr. Fox obferved, that when he declined Mr. Eden faid, that in point of order, the The Speaker faid this was not the time for drder. Mr. Sheridan faid, that it was no new thing The queftion was then put, and carried HOUSE OF LORDS. Friday, July 29. HAWKERS AND PEDLERS BILL. the capital. To this it was replied, that the Edri Ferrers faid, their lordships had fre- At length the Committee divided on the Not Contents 8. 4. The Committee, then proceeded with the Lord Hopetoun rofe and moved, " to omit the E them, them, that their effential interefts were involved in the existence and profperity of the Haw kers and Pedlers of Great Britain. That they were the means of diftributing and vending large quantities of manufacture, which could not otherwife be circulated and fent to market. That if the Hawkers and Pedlers were ruined, their ruin would reach them. He endeavoured to make manifeft the difficulties the clause would subject Hawkers and Pedlers to, and to prove that it was almoft impoffible for them to comply with it minutely and Arictly. He asked how they were to define the distance of two miles from every market town that they approached? He dwelt for a confiderable time on the great ufe of Hawkers and Pedlars in a trading kingdom, as well from their being the means of fupplying parts of the different countries fituated at a diftance from towns, as from the affiftance they gave to the manufacturers. He faid, it had been urged that they took off the small articles of ma nufacture; but he was authorized to ftate, that they dealt in articles of great importance, as they had been proved to be at the bar, although before the examination of the manufacturers that had lately taken place, the articles had mistakenly been deemed of infignificant confequence, because they were low in price. Manchefter alone took fome hundred thousand pounds of the Hawkers and Pedlers, 'and the manufacturers of other places in an adequate proportion. With regard to Scotland and her manufactures, the latter received very confiderable affistance through the means of Hawkers and Pedlers. The manufactures of Paifley, and other places in Scotland, had attained fuch a height of perfection, that they had made their way into foreign markets. Nay, to fuch a degree of fuccefs had one of the articles of Scotch manufacture arrived, that it even got the better of the fame article in France, though manufactured in that kingdom; and its progrefs was checked by an arret du Confeil du Roi, forbidding its impor'tation into the country. That market having been thus shut upon Scotland, was it wife and politic to cramp and impede her home fale, as the bill upon the table would indifputably cramp and cripple it, if it were paffed in its prefent form into a law? His lordfhip obferved that the whole of the fum expected to be produced by the Bill was no more than fix thousand pounds; it could therefore be a matter of fmall moment to government whether the Bill was loft or not, in confequence of the amendment he had moved being agreed to; but he was free to fay, that if the fum to be raised by it was a regular aid to his Majefty, and amounted to one hundred thoufand pounds, his conduct and his oppofition to it would be ftill the fame. He thought the regulation propofed by the claufe in queftion, an improper regulation; and let him find it where he would, in a Money-bill or not, he held it his duty firmly to refift it. With regard to any etiquette between the two Houfes of Parliament, he profeffed every poffible refpect to the other Houfe; but ftanding up a member of that Houfe, he never would admit, that he or any other noble lord had not a right to deliver his fentiments freely and fully on bills of every kind that fame before them, and to propole fach amendments and alterations as to him appeared neceffary. If that were not the cafe, and they were obliged to (wallow bills whole like a bolus, without waiting to examine the ingredients they were composed of, to what end take the bills that were fent from the Commons under confideration, in the various ftages of first and fecond reading, committing, reporting, and third reading? It would be much the eafter mode of proceeding, and would fave a great deal of their lordfhips time and trouble to lay the bills upon the table, and let the Lord Chancellor put the different queltions pro forma, and for their lordships to be filent. Putting this very strongly, the Earl, after fammarily recapitulating the heads of the argument he had ufed, concluded with repeating his Motion," that the clause be omitted." Lord Walfing bam rofe to reply. His lord. fhip began with obferving, that it was fingelar enough that the Bill fhould be now complained of as hard, oppreffive and fevere, when at the minister's firft propofing it, the idea was deemed to be just, and it was popular. He faid he had been prefent at the time when it was propofed in the Houfe of Commons, when it was originally fated, as a means of rendering another tax more palatable and agreeable. At that time the propofition was received with applaufe from all parts of the House, and most of the members who rose to speak upon the subject, advanced some reason or other to prove, that a reftraint on Hawkers and Pedlers was abfolutely neceffary, in order to give the refident thopkeeper the fair advantage of his fituation. His lordship contended that at the time that Hawkers and Pedlers were first adverted to by the Legiflature, the fate of internal trade and traffick was extremely different from what it now was. There were few thops in any but the largest towns, and thofe families who refided at a diftance from fuch towns, were under great difficulty in accommodating themselves with various articles, that were now to be purchafed in almost every village throughout the kingdom. The great refort of all country people for purchase of goods was then to wakes and fairs; and therefore, under fuch circumflances, Hawkers and P.d lers were indifpenfibly neceffary; but the face of the internal parts of the kingdom was completely changed fince that time and fo far from Hawkers and Pedlers being any longer neceffary, they were complained of generally as a nuifance. His lordthip went into an ar gument to prove, that the Hawker and Ped"ler had advantages over the refident thop-keeper, that would enable him to bear the reftrictions of the bill, and took away all caufe of complaint on his part. Being an inerant, : and no houfe-keeper, he had neither parochial burthens, nor public taxes incident to housekeepers to pay; while the refident fhop-keeper had to contribute to church and poor, to the houte tax, and various other impofts. He realoned upon this for a confiderable time, and defended the claufe as well as the bill in general very ftrenuously; but one of his principal arguments was, that if the Hawker and Pedler was diffatisfied with the restrictions the bill imposed, it was in his option to turn refident fhopkeeper. Lord Hopetoun returned his fincere thanks to the noble lord for his argument; it was in his opinion, the beft proof that could be given, that his motion for leaving out the claufe ought to be acceded to. If there had been any other ground to have defended the bill upon, he was perfuaded, he said, that the noble lord would not have taken such bad ground; for what had the noble lord confined himself to? An argument, that the claufe in queftion made no part of the pages neceffary for impofing an additional tax on Hawkers and Pedlers; but that it was introduced as a douceur to thopkeepers to make them gulp down the tax that had been impofed on them by another bill. He faid, if fuch a ground of introducing extraneous claufes into Tax Bills were countenanced, there would be no end to the abfurdities that it would lead to. He asked their lordfhips what the attornies would fay, if when she bill impofing a duty on Licences to be taken out by them was under confideration, and they complained of the hardship, they were to be told, "Why, if you don't like to continue in the profeffion of an attorney, under the obligation of paying for a licence, there's another avocation open to you; you may turn Hawker and Pedler." And yet the giving fuch an answer was of a piece with faying, that if Hawkers and Pedlers did not like the reftrictions contained in the claufe in queftion, they might turn (hop-keepers. But even taking the argument in its fullest extent, and allowing that the reafon of the bill was to countervail the tax on Shopkeepers; confidering it in that point of view, he would maintain that the Hawker and Pedler was much higher taxed than the Shopkeeper. By way of making this out, his lordship reminded the committee, that in order to pay eight pounds a year shop tax, athopkeeper mot live in a houfe of eight pounds a year rent; whereas no fuch rent, he believed, it would be contended, was paid by any fhopkeepers but thofe refident in London, Weftminster and Southwark, and those were not the fhopkeepers who would receive any benefit even from the abolition of Hawkers and Pedlers. The fact, he said, was, that the fhopkeepers in general with whom Hawkers and Pedlers could be stated to interfere at all, would not pay above forty shillings a year to the fhop-tax. His lordship dwelt upon the feverity of loading the Hawker and Pedter with so much more duty, and at the same time nar◄ rowing his opportunity of enabling himself t payit, by reftraining him from entering mar ket towns. With regard to what the noble lord had faid, of the fhopkeepers being houfekeepers, and the Hawkers and Pedlers being itinerants, be asked, were the latter to be condemned because they had neither house nor home? Let their lordships recollect, that if they had no fixed refidence, they could have no fettlement, and confequently in the hour of fickness and infirmity they were entitled to receive no parochial fupport, which certain ly was a fevere balance against the advantage of neither paying to the poor, the house-tax, the commutation-tax, nor any other of the various, taxes to which houfekeepers were lia ble. He defired not to be confidered as speaking from any factious motives, or with a view to increafe any degree of clamour or unpopularity that might exift against the frop tax. He added a variety of other Reafons in fupport of his motion; and faid, had the manufactu rers of character and eminence who had defired to be heard, been permitted to be exa mined at the bar, they would have depofed upon oath, the various facts and reasons against the claufe, and in favour of the Hawkers and Pedlers, that he could only aver and state to their lordships. Lord Sydney faid, the noble lord had no oce cafion to express any anxiety, left improper motives fhould be imputed to his conduct on that or any other occafion; neither was it ne ceffary for him to apologize for any thing he had faid; his lordship had proved himself a very able debater, and a very able trader likewife, but he muft permit him to make a remark or two on one part of his argument. He could not by any means agree, that saying, if a hawker and pedler did not like to continue in that line of bufinefs, under the restrictions ftated in the bill, that he might turn shop. keeper, was any thing like telling an attor ney, If you don't chufe to pay for a licence, you may quit your practice, and turn hawker and pedler." The hawker and pedler was en abled not to go out of his way of bufinefs, but to continue to deal in the fame articles, only with the difference of being a refident fhopkeeper, inftead of an itinerant hawker and pedler; and when it was confidered that from his experience, he was the best of all poffible judges, where he could purchafe goods at the lowest price and fell them to the best advantage, he had it in his power to fet himself down with a fort of certainty of fuccefs, let him fettle wherever he pleafed. His lordship dilated on this idea, and afterwards defended the claufe, upon the ground that the bill would be loft it were altered. Earl Ferrers reprobated the bill, and condemned it exprefsly. He was for throwing the bill over the table, and saving so useful a body of men as the Hawkers and Pedlers from hardship and oppreffion. Lord Walfingham, in a fhort speech declared |