Imatges de pÓgina
[ocr errors]

three children the issue of the marriage diying, viz. one lon and two daughters,

endir til avoit The facts_respecting the adultery of Mrs. Ricketts witły Cha Wm. Taylor, Esq., were proved to have taken place in the month of May, 1797, and, at subsequent periods, principally by the evidence of one Crook, a taylor who resided oppofite to the house of Mr. Taylor in Margaret street, Ricketts, who deposed, that her mistress had acknowledged

Pramonia lquare, and by the waiting woman of Mrs. to her the

adulterous intercourse, which sublifted between her and Mr. Taylor. Several letters which passed between Mrs. Ricketis and Mr. Taylor, in which the nature of their con nection was repeatedly alluded to, were also read. in evidence.

It appeared further, that Mr. Rickeris broughe an action against Mr. Taylor in the Court of Kiug's Bench, in Miachaelmas term, 1797, and obtained thereina verdiet in his favour, and an award of damages in the sum of

A final sentence of divorce a mensa et thoro was also obtained by Mr. Ricketts in the Consistory Court of London.

After the evidence had been gone through, the question was put for the appearance of the petitioner at the bar, agress ably to the late regulations of the House, when their Lord Thips resolved in the negative.

The bill was then read a fecond time, and ordered to be committed on Monday nextas-After which their Lordfhips adjourned to that day. „120 stoida its !"HOUSE OF COMMONS.


2 FRIDAY, DEC, 28, The bill for suspending the Habeas Corpus A&, aud the bill for exempring certain perfons- ferving in the volunteer corps from being

ballotted in the militia, were read a third time, and passede sie lui

INCOME BILL. The Chancellor of the Exchequer moved the order of the day for the House to take into further confideration the report on the Income Bill. i merr

Mr. Dent said, he could not helpi obferving that the House was much too thin to proceed on fuch important business as this. If the attendance of members could not be enforced otherwise than by a call, he thought the call ought to take it place. It was a very improper thing for such a measure as


[ocr errors]

this to be neglected by the members of that Houfe. Here was a bill for railing ten millions of money on the people of this country, and scarcely fifty members of the House of Commons present at the discussion of it. This, he took leave to say, was disgraceful on the part of those members who did not attend.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer faid, there was no doubt but that this bill was very important, and he allowed it was for raising ten millions of money; but he did not see why the members should be particularly rebuked for their absence on this particular stage of the proceeding, when it was well known that a pretty full attendance had been given to it in the discussion of the principle, and in the course of the detail. As to the idea of a call, it would certainly force members to walk into the House, but it could not prevent them from walking out again.

Mr. Dent laid, he thought a call would have some effe&t in point of attendance.

The order of the day being read, the House proceeded on the amendments made in the committee on the bill, some of which were agreed to, and others rejected, &c.

The Chancellor of ihe Exchequer then observed, that he had a number of clauses to propose, which he wilhed to have discussed in a committee and therefore he proposed to have the bill recommitted in respect to these clauses only, and for the purpose of receiving several amendments to the bill. He moved to that effect.

Mr. W. Smith asked, whether this differed in fubftance from a recommitment of this bill?

The Speaker said, it would have this difference: the committee would be confined to clauses which should hereafter, be offered, and to amendments in the body of the bill; whereas a recommitment of the bill generally, would annut all the proceedings of the House in agreeing to 'or rejecting any

of the amendments of the former comınittee. This was not a novel proceeding, it had been heretofore adopted in the House.

The motion being put, the House resolved itself into a committee of the whole House to consider of clauses to be offered, &c.

Several new clauses were proposed and agreed to, after a good deal of conversation.

The House being resumed, the report was ordered to be received the next day.--Adjourned.


SATURDAY, Dec. 29. The report

of the committee on the Herring Fishery was brought up, and ordered to be taken into consideration on Monday:

The bill for establishing a Court of Judicature in New.. foundland and the Inlands adjacent, went through a committee of the whole House, and the report was ordered to be received on Monday.'

INCOME,BILLI Mr. Jibu Smirh brought up the report of the committee of the preceding day for amendments in the body, and for receiving, new clauses to the Income Bill. The amendments were all read and agreed to, and a number of new clauses were proposed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and adopted by the House,

Mr. Tierney said, he was desired by a number of Noblemen and Gentlemen of extensive polfellions to ask leave of the House,

to bring in a clause for allowing them to deduct from their incong before it be made chargeable by this bill, the allowance they made to their

agents for managing their estates.. He did not uncan stewards, but persons who were necessarily employed in the management of their eftates. These were not to be confidered as persons employed out of parade, oftentation, or indolence of the owners of the land, but were perfons alifglutely necessary for the management of estates where the pofleflions were extensive. Supposing, for instance, a man of fortune who had one estate at Berwick and another at Excier, it would be impossible for such a person to aftend to the management of both at once; he was, therefore, under the ncceflity of employing an agent. Bankers were allowed to deduct the salaries of clerks under the head of expences of management, and it seeined but reasonable that i

the: necessary expences of management of land should have the same allowance.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer was decidedly of opinion that the cases of the banker and the

great land owner in the expence of the management of their affairs was not at all parallel; that, generally speaking, if a man did not chuse to, manage his estate himself, he was not, upon public principles, au object of indulgence, so as to be exculed from any



[ocr errors]

part of the public burthens on that account. He added also, that the more extensive a man's estates were, the less reason he had to complain of this or any other impoft.

There being no more clauses offered, the question was put, that the bill be engrofied ?

Mr. Jones said that this bill comprehended every description of persons in this country, and as it was a matter of such intricacy, and of so much importance, he hoped time would be allowed between this and the third reading. It ought to have a full, free, and fair consideration after all these clauses were brought in, which, by Monday next, he was fure was quite impoffible.

The Speaker reminded the hon. Member there was no motion for the third reading before the House. The motion was, That the bill, with the amendments, be engrcfled.

That question being put and carried,

The Chancellor of the Ezchequer moved, that this bill be read a third time on Monday next, if then engroffed.

Mr. Jones obferved, that if the right hon. Gentleman said it must be so, there was an end of it; but he really felt it to 'be quite impossible to understand the clauses produced that day, by the time now proposed for the third reading. What would the inconvenience of a few days be, compared to the advantage of a full dcliberation upon this subject. Let the one be but balanced against the other, and it would foon appear what course ought to be taken. He would atk, whether a bill, comprehending every description of perfons in this country, should be read a third time in a day or two after so many material alterations had been made in it; or, whether it would not be better that every Member in the House should have an opportunity of understanding it? And, whether it was possible for Meinbers to understand a bill in which there were forty or fifty clauses which none of them had ever read? For that was the case in the present instance. He, therefore, intreated the Chancellor of the Exchequer to allow the third reading to be deferred until Wednesday.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, that this bill had undergone more ample deliberation and frequent discullion than any other measure he ever knew presented to that House. He saw no reason for any further delay, especially as he had no hope that there would be a fuller attendance on Wednesday than on Monday next.

Mr. Tierney faid, that the new clauses added to the bill were not at present understood by the House it was impossi-.


ble they should, and he thought that some allowance ought to be made on that account. The right hon, Gentleman {cemed to conceive that the clauses produced ihat day did not materially alter the provisions of the bill. On the contrary, they did appear to him to be clauses materially altering the provisions of the bill. He agreed with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, there was no better hope for a full attendance on Wednesday than on Monday. He was sorry to say that members of that House neglected their duty in not attending; it was a negligence that was disgraceful 10 them, and he begged to be understood as making no distinction in what he was now saying, but that he was applying it to both sides of the House. He had it now in his power to put an end to the further progress of this bill for the present, for there were not present members fufficient to constitute a House; if he defired that they be counted, an adjournment would be the effect of it: but this he would not do, because it would appear to be an invidious thing. This, however, is in the power of any member of the House to do at any time when there were not forty members present. That had frequently been the case in the course of the discuslion of the present bill; and, to speak plainly at once, he thought it a Icandalous thing that a bill of this importance should have been discussed when it was so often in the power of any one member, who probably might not have attended to any thing that had been palling, to put a stop to the progress of the bill; and yet such mighi have been the case frequently, and such it might be at this moment. He did not think this the right course of proceeding upon grave and important measures in that House. He did not indeed. if he did not find himself able to understand the bill as it now stood, after attending in every stage in the most minute detail, what must be the case of all those members who had been out of town for the last week at least? How could those members who were wavering in sentiments, whether they ought to vote for this measure, or against it altogether, make up their minds by Monday, so as to be enabled to give any conscientious vote whafever upon the subject? He knew there were many wavering upon ihe question altogether, whether they should adopt it as a inatter of necessity to support the state, or whether they should reject it as hostile to che constitution. If these members, after they had attended the discussions of former parts of the bill were wavering in their opinion, what must they be now, after the introduction of so many clauses, upon which

3 C2


« AnteriorContinua »