Sir Richard Mr. Demp fter. could be taught fome new ftep. He had many reafons befides thofe already urged, for requefting the right honourable gentleman to forego this projects and he had the greater hopes of fuccefs, as it was the first requeft he ever made to him. Ireland was a country to which he, in common with the right honourable gentleman, had fome attachment, and he affured him the prefent was by no means an Irish propofition. There was nothing to render him more unpopular in Ireland than taxing this commodity; and nothing could give him (Mr. Courtenay) more favour there than being the inftrument of making him give up the point. The right honourable gentleman was not among those whom he should be apt to fufpect of encouraging proftitution. He might perhaps join with him if there was now any occafion, but it appeared to be in fo forward a state already, that to countenance it any farther would be needlefs. He faw no reafon for introducing fresh blood into their veins, to make them more Table to proftitution than before. Not that he was of that rigid way of thinking as the wife of Bath was, who thought The Conftitution ne'er could thrive, Till all the whores were burnt alive. On these grounds he was determined to oppose the motion, and he made no doubt of having at leaft the fupport of every Irish member. Sir Richard Hill hoped the noble Lord (Surrey) would not perfift in dividing the Houfe in that stage of the business, but wait to fee whether fome modification could be made fo as to make it palatable; he affured the noble Lord, that he was against the tax, unless modified, but wifhed to see it go to a Committee. Mr. Dempfter was ftrongly against the tax, and wished the Minifter to turn his mind to abolishing the total ufe of franking; for a variety of frauds were committed, by having letters come to improper perfons under the cover of a member of Parliament: to obviate which, he propofed that no double letter fhould come or go free, unless it was fuch as contained parliamentary proceedings, and they might be open at the one end for the Poft-office to fee. He likewife thought a tax-might be laid on all perfons wearing watches; and, in fact, a variety of other modes might be adopted preferable to the one propofed on maid fervants; however he wished to fee the bill brought in, and referred to a Committee: Mr. Rolle was likewife againftthe stáx. Mr. Mr. Whitbread reprobated the tax, and thought the Mi- Mr. Whitnifter fhould turn his mind to enforcing the receipt tax, which bread. certainly was the best ever invented, and would, if properly collected, bring in a million of money. Mr. Powys likewife was against the tax, but wifhed not to Mr. Powy oppose it in the first instance, and hoped that the noble Lord (Surrey) would not divide the Houfe upon it. Lord Surrey faid, he certainly fhould divide the Houfe, as Ld. Surrey, any regulations to be made, of the kind proposed by his right honourable friend (Fox), must be in another bill. Mr. Rofe was of a different opinion. Mr. Crewe thought the tax a bad one, as it would affect Mr. Crewe, farmers in the country who were compelled to keep many maid fervants in their dairies, &c. Mr. Fox, Mr. Rofe, and Mr. Pitt, faid a few words by way of explanation; after which Alderman Watfon opposed the tax, but promised he would Alderman' do it in a way that should not have any effect on the risible Watson. faculties of any member in the House (on which a loud laugh took place;) and the Alderman proceeded to ftate, that inftead of women, men-milliners, barbers, ftay-makers, and every effeminate perfon throughout the kingdom, ought to be feverely taxed; likewise a double tax fhould be laid on foreign fervants, as it was fhameful to admit them into the inmoft cabinet or drawing-room. The House then divided on the refolution, 97 24 Majority against the women 73 The other refolutions were then read and agreed to. Wednesday, May 11. A petition was received from the tanners in London against the Irish resolutions. Mr. Powys then moved that the tanners be heard by them- Mr. Powys. felves or counfel at the bar. Mr. Chancellor Pitt objected to the petition being received, Mr. Chan as it came fo late, and appeared to him to be more calculated cellor Pitt, for the fake of delay than any thing else. Mr. Powys faid, that the petitioners did not fee the danger Mr. Powy. that the feventh refolution of the Irish Parliament fubjected their trade to until yefterday. VOL. XVIII, Some little converfation then took place; when the House divided on the queftion, whether the petition fhould be received, 261 143 118 Majority Several other petitions against the Irish refolutions were offered, and rejected. Mr. Pitt then moved, "That the House be now called over." Mr. Marsham moved as an amendment, "That the words four months be inferted, instead of the word now;" on which a trifling debate took place: after which the Houfe divided on the original motion, Noes Majority 241 213 28 Mr. Eden. Thursday, May 12. Mr. Stanley prefented a petition from the manufacturers of Manchester and its vicinity, praying that the Irish propofitions may not pass into a law. Ordered to lie on the table. Mr. Eden intreated the indulgence of the House to be exerted in a patient hearing of what he had to propofe, as it was a fubject of importance, and demanded every attention. It had yesterday been the decifion that no other petition against the fyftem in agitation fhould now be received; at leaft fo it might be inferred from their rejection of that from the tanners of London. But he now had a petition to prefent, which came recommended by fuch peculiar circumstances as demanded an exception: it was a petition from the iron manufacturers of Warwickshire, Shropshire, Staffordshire, Briftol, and London, which had been hitherto kept back by a mis conception under which the petitioners laboured. They had applied to a gentleman in office, and therefore poffeffed of a proportionate fhare of authority; they had then stated, that as the difference of duties on the importation of bar iron into Great Britain and Ireland amounted to near 20 per cent. in favour of the latter; if thefe duties were not equalized, the confequence would be a material injury to their manufactures, if not abfolute ruin, were the propofitions paffed into a law. They They had then received fuch affurances as determined them to remain paffive; they were informed that every care should be taken of their affairs, and that every precaution fhould be applied that their manufacture might not fuffer an injury. Induced by these promises, they yielded to what they now deemed a fallacy, and when undeceived they now ftepped forward to claim the protection of the legislature. They were not men of inconfiderable note; they, on the contrary, were men who gave employment to upwards of 200,000 manufacturers, and paid a duty to Government on the raw materials which they used, The House had entered, he faid, into a hafty determination yesterday, but that, he hoped, would not impede their attention to the prefent application. They had then refolved that the petitions fhould not be received, which were presented on the eve of the day appointed for the final decifion of the fubject. But to fome, even of them, this principle had been wrongly applied. One petition (from Glasgow) had, to his knowledge, been handed to the honourable and learned gentleman the day before, for the purpose of being prefented; that gentleman had thought proper to defer the difcharge of that duty, and his petitioners were therefore punished by the rejection which followed. On the whole, he was of opinion. that the petition he had now to prefent, ftanding on different grounds from thofe that had been rejected, and conveying a different fpecies of information to the House from any that had been hitherto exhibited, claimed every exemption from the prohibition which had been made. The Houfe therefore, he hoped, would afford that attention which it deferved, and concluded with moving, that the petitioners be heard by themfelves or counfel. Mr. Chancellor Pitt faid, that as the petition affigned no Mr. Chan. reafon of fufficient importance to determine the Houfe to give cellor Pitt. it a hearing, its fole claim to that diftinction refted on the affertion of the right honourable gentleman who had prefented it, that the petitioners had hitherto laboured under a mifconception. This affertion however he did not make from his own knowledge; he did not therefore think it of fufficient weight to induce the Houfe to act in contradiction to the rule which they had implicitly made by the proceedings of yesterday. The Lord Advocate of Scotland (Mr. Campbell) defended him, The Lord felf from the charge that had been made against him of with- Advocate of holding the petition from Glafgow. It was handed to him, Scotland, he faid, while engaged at the bar of the Houfe of Lords; yet he even then returned with the intention of prefenting it, but Kk 2 was Mr. Fox. was informed, that as the Committee on the Irish trade was not to fit until this day, it mattered not whether it was prefented on Tuesday or Wednesday. Such information, from authority the most respectable, had determined him to retain it until yefterday. Mr. Fox faid, that after fuch an apology he could not certainly arraign the conduct of the honourable gentleman, but it happened very unfortunately for the petitioners, whofe petition, if it had been prefented on Tuelday, when the honourable gentleman received it, might have been heard the following day. All the arguments which had been yesterday advanced against hearing it, would have in that cafe been obvi ated. A pretty long debate occurred on this point, and an altercation enfued on a charge made by a Mr. Gibbon of Bristo', against Mr. Rofe of mifreprefentation. After this the Houfe went into the Conimittee, and after fome time spent in the examination of witneffes, the evidence was finally clofed. The following is a lift of the different petitions of the manufatturers, dealers. &c. of Great Britain, against the Irish come mercial propofitions. PETITION S. 228 Petition from merchants, &c. of Liverpool members of the Chamber of Commerce of Glasgow, Paisley, &c. cashire merchants, &c. of Manchester, &c. callico manufacturers and printers in Lang manufacturers and dealers in British ma nufactures of London, &c. merchants, &c. of Briftol March 3 fermline Commercial Committee of Birmingham cotton and callico manufacturers of Blackburn, praying to be heard by counsel merchants, &c. of Wolverhampton fociety of merchant adventurers of Bristol fugar refiners of Bristol manufacturers of Nottingham weavers and inhabitants of Paisley merchants and manufacturers of Dum. manufacturers and traders of Derby Petition |