reign service were stated as part of the effective strength of those regiments, while in the early returns they were not included, so that the house would be unable to judge accurately of the comparative strength of our regular army at different periods; he therefore moved that there be laid before the house a return of the number of recruits for regiments on foreign service at the foreign depot on the 1st of January, 1804, 1st of January, 1805, and 1st of June, 1806; observing, that as these returns could with ease be made by the next day, he should not be obliged to delay his motion on account of them.

The Secretary at War said, that in the returns of the two first periods in the hon. colonel's motions, those recruits (amounting then to one thousand men) had not been included; in the return of the last period (to the amount of two thousand men) they had been included. Colonel Craufurd's motion was then agreed to.

The Dublin harbour improvement bill was read a second time, and ordered to be committed the next day.

On the motion of Mr. Foster it was ordered that the house should the next day go into a committee on that part of a certain act which related to military surveys in Ireland.

Mr. Ormsby brought up the report of the committee of supply, the resolutions of which were read and agreed to, and bills ordered accordingly.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer moved the second reading of the Duke of Athol's compensation bill.

Mr. Curwen opposed the motion, repeating all his former arguments against the justice of the duke's claim on the public, and concluded by moving as an amendment, that the bill be read a second time that day three months.

After Mr. Fuller had spoken in favour of his grace's claim, and Mr. D. Giddy and Mr. Windham in opposition to it, the house divided, when there appeared,

For Mr. Curwen's amendment
Against it
Majority

12

50 -38

The bill was ordered to be committed the next day.

On the order for the third reading of the smuggling pre vention bill, counsel was called in on behalf of Dan Brock, and other jurats of Guernsey, who had presented a petition against the bill, on the ground that it affected their rights, by interfering with the internal legislation of the island.

Mr. Plomer, as counsel for the petitioners, maintained, that the islands of Guernsey, Jersey, Alderney, and Sark, were appendages

322

appendages of the crown, as dependencies of the duchy of Normandy, remaining annexed to England after the conquest of Normandy by the French king. The union of these islands with the British dominions was a union with the crown alone. The British parliament had not a right to legislate for these islands, any more than for Scotland and Ireland before the legislative union with these countries. The king in council had a right to propose legislative measures for the islands, which were valid when registered by the states of the island. The counsel allowed, that it was necessary to check the smuggling, and stated, that the petitioners. were only desirous that their independence might not be invaded in the checks to be imposed.

In consideration of some objections made by the counsel to some of the details of the bill, the Chancellor of the Exchequer wished to defer the further proceedings till the next day, and they were accordingly deferred, after some conversation, in which Mr. Windham and Mr. Grey stated, that they thought the rights of the islanders deserving of most serious consideration; and the Chancellor of the Exchequer maintained the right of parliament to pass acts including these islands in their operation. Mr. Fellowes said that it was felt by his constituents that the evils complained of in the bill required a strong remedy. Mr. S. Bourne thought it odd that the counsel and the petitioners contended for the comparatively arbitrary legislation of the king in council, in preference to the more deliberative legislation of parliament.

The exchequer bills bill went through a committee, in which a clause was introduced, on the motion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to indemnify the bank for advancing money on the exchequer bills of the year 1803. The reason for this clause was, that among the occasions of the vote of credit for that year, stated in the preamble of the bill, the invasion then apprehended was mentioned as the first. In engrossing the bill, by an inadvertence of which this was not the only instance, all the other occasions but the invasion were left out. As there could be no doubt that the objects of parliament in passing the vote of credit were not restricted to the event of the invasion, the money had been advanced; and it was not till lately, perhaps from the effect of events that had recently happened, that it occurred to them to desire this indemnity, which there could be no doubt the house would grant for their satisfaction. The clause was agreed to. The reports were ordered to be received the next day. A person

A person from the South Sea house presented accounts relative to the unclaimed dividends on the South Sea stock.

Mr. Bulley, from the exchequer, presented further accounts of the grants not made good by parliament.

Mr. Huskisson obtained leave to bring in a bill for better regulating the property tax, so far as relates to dividends on East India stock.

Mr. Huskisson presented an account of the number of men enlisted into his majesty's regular army for the two years ending 5th of January 1804, and 5th of January 1805. Also an account of the number of men who had volunteered from the militia into the regular service, under the act of this year.

Mr. Huskisson brought in a bill for regulating the collection of the assessed taxes in Ireland. Read a first time, and ordered to be read a second time the next day.

Mr. Huskisson gave notice that in the committee of supply the next day he would move the remaining miscellaneous services of the year.-Adjourned,

HOUSE OF LORDS.

FRIDAY, JUNE 28.

Lord Walsingham presented a petition on the part of certain persons, against the woollen manufacturers' penalty suspension bill. It concluded with requesting permission to be heard by

counsel.

The Duke of Montrose thought the prayer of the petition should not, under the present circumstances, be acceded to. The act passed last session would expire on the 1st of July, and unless continued, as was proposed by the bill now before the house, many of the woollen manufacturers would be subject to actions for very considerable penalties. The whole of the subject was now under consideration; and he had no doubt that, in the course of next session, a bill would be brought in which would satisfy all the parties interested in the business. Under this impression the suspension was only proposed to be continued until the 1st of March.

Lord Holland had had little opportunity of ascertaining the precise nature of the present bill; but, unless there were very cogent reasons to the contrary, he thought the usual practice of hearing petitioners by counsel should not be departed from in this instance.

Lord Hawkesbury stated the ground of dispute between the manufacturers

manufacturers and the workmen to consist in the introduction of machinery, which was prohibited by various old statutes that had long ceased to be enforced. It was a question of considerable difficulty, whether those statutes should be wholly repealed, or how they might be so modified as to remove all reasonable ground of complaint on either side.

Lord Holland professed himself to be satisfied with the explanation just given by his noble friend, and he said he only regretted that the bill did not go to the total repeal of the statutes in question.

After a few words from the Lord Chancellor the question for hearing counsel was negatived, and the bill was immediately after read a second time.

Lord Stanhope brought in a bill for the better securing of trust money. His lordship stated that serious inconveniencies had arisen where trustees had become insolvent, and that the object of the bill now proposed was, to give the parties, for whose benefit the money was vested in trust, a remedy, by application to the court of chancery.

The Lord Chancellor expressed his approbation of the principle of the bill, and it was read a first time.

The second reading of the Irish revenue regulation bill was, on the motion of Lord Hawkesbury, postponed to that day three months.

The bill to continue the proceedings in the case of Mr. Justice Fox went through a committee.

The stipendiary curates' bill was recommitted, and having undergone a variety of amendments, it was ordered to be reported the next day.—Adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

FRIDAY, JUNE 28.

The committee on the Paddington canal coal bill was appointed for Monday.

The report of the committee on the hop duty act was brought up, and a bill ordered accordingly.

The report of the committee on the sugar drawback act was also brought up, and a bill ordered.

The Dublin bakers bill was reported, and ordered to be read a third time on Monday.

The report of the corn bill was brought up, a new clause was added, providing that the average price of grain in the 12

maritime

maritime counties of England and Wales, should be the standard for Great Britain. The bill was then reported, and or, dered to be read a third time on Monday.

Mr. Sheridan moved the committee on the Isle of Man bill. Mr. Curwen declared that he was resolved to take the sense

of the house upon it.

After a few observations from other honourable members, the house divided;

For the committee

Against it
Majority

A message was brought down from the lords, stating that their lordships had agreed to Mr. Pitt's indemnity bill, the land tax redemption, Crinan canal, and two or three other bills of a more private nature.

Certain accounts of interest on exchequer bills were presented, and ordered to be laid on the table.

Mr. Whitbread moved for leave to bring in a bill to indemnify Mr. Trotter and all other persons who were employed in any office under Henry, Lord Viscount Melville, while he was treasurer of the navy, from any consequences that might otherwise result from their connexion with the transactions for which he stands now impeached, in order that they may be enabled to give evidence against the said Henry, Lord Viscount Melville. Leave was then given, and Mr. Whitbread, Mr. Fox, Mr. Sheridan, and Mr. Grey, were ordered to prepare the same.

Leith harbour bill was ordered to be reported on Monday. The order was read, that the southern whale fishery bill be referred to a committee of the whole house.

Mr. Barham expressed a wish that some delay might take place before any further progress was made in this bill, in order that the petitioners might have an opportunity of being heard against the bill. They were Americans who had been encouraged to settle in this country for the purpose of improving or extending that branch of commerce in this country. Now that they had accomplished that object, at least to a considerable extent, and while they might have ships upon their voyage home, he thought it would be ungenerous to press any thing that might militate against their interest.

Sir Charles Price said that there was but one house which could be at all affected by the bill, and he thought it would be acting very unfairly towards the London merchants to give any settlers an advantage over them.

Mr.