from this he maintained, that property could only be represented through the mean of influence or interest.

Sir F. Burdett, on every consideration he was able to give that bill, from the moment of its original introduction, and through the various discussions which attended its further progress, declared he could arrive at no other conclusion than that it was a measure of indemnity for past corruptions, and of security for future similar offences. You yourselves have admitted the propriety of the question. You have discussed a species of what you call reform. Whatever reform such a measure may create in the regulation of your house, I strenuously deny that it tends to any reform in the representation of the people. I am, Mr. Speaker,, and ever have been, ready to avow my opinions upon all public subjects, and I do presume my conviction of the absolute necessity of a reform in the constitution is very well ascertained. Were I then to subscribe to the present measure, as constituting any essential part of the reform which I feel to be necessary, I should then be guilty of not only having aggravated the evil, but of having added injury to insult, in the disappointment such a course of conduct would give to the fair hopes of the country. I speak this, because I am convinced that such an affectation of reform would not satisfy that enlightened portion of the British people, to whose judgment, and whose discrimination, whatever the gentlemen who meet here may say to the contrary, I am, and ever shall be, most desirous to give credit and attention. All that has or is demanded are the rights of the constitution! Upon that constitution individuals will speak according to the particular bias of their opinions and their objects. The time is now arrived when I feel it necessary no longer to leave room for those insinuations which have been so frequently,and so generally expressed under the definition of public demagogues and popular agitators, and of which I know that I was the butt. On my part there shall be no ambiguity. I wish the people, upon the vital questien of reform, to know the nature and extent of my opinion; and I am determined that this house shall not separate that its members shall not return amongst their constituents-in fact, that this house shall not continue longer in the contaminated state in which it has exhibited itself, without giving some

pledge to the country of its future inten tion upon the vital question of reform→ and thereby giving peace and confidence to the public mind. With that object it is my intention to come down to this house and propose a short resolution, calculated to inform both this house and the people the length I am inclined to go. I have only to add, that my views on the subject are neither hastily considered, or suddenly put into a practical system. Whatever opinion may be ultimately pronounced upon them, I feel the consolation of having weighed them with attention. I have, therefore, only to take the present opportunity of giving notice, that on to-morrow, I will submit to this house a resolution, binding it early in the next session to take into its consideration the propriety of a parliamentary reform.

Mr. Curwen defended the bill even under the change which he lamented had taken place.

Mr. Windham argued against the principle of the bill. He agreed with the hon. Baronet's (Burdett) observations, namely, that this was asort of attempt at reform, and, with him, he reprobated it, because it could produce no good. His hon. friend still clung to his amputated bill, consoled by the old adage, that "half a loaf is better than no bread." Mr. W. concluded with assuring the house that such a delusive attempt would only, by its deception, exasperate the people.

Mr. Perceval began by expressing his surprise that gentlemen on the other side should express sentiments so hostile to the bill which they had set out with supporting. The right hon. gentleman who spoke last, attempted to show that the bill was not calculated to answer its avowed end. He would ask, if a pre amble such as that of the bill in question, pledging arliament against corrup tion, and al species of that corrupt traffick, was nothing? As to the introduc tion of the oath, he thought that the practical difficulties, resulting from it, seemed to be admitted even by the right hon. gentleman who spoke last. He sincerely thought that the bill in its present shape was calculated to do much good, and that it might now be safely passed into a law.

Mr. Tierney agreed with Mr. Perceval, that before the house would rise that night, some one or other of its members would be exposed to imputations of in

sincerity of conduct in the progress of the bill then pending. When his hon. friend introduced this bill, he confessed he hailed it as a source of real good to the best interests of the country; but since that period the bill had undergone such changes, it had been so mutilated and defaced, that its very principle was essentially altered, and consequently its end must be different. He denied therefore that he was justly liable to any charge of inconsistency for now voting against the bill; for what he had originally support ed was not that which he now opposed, and that was the reason why he opposed it. The 500l. penalty which was intended to be imposed on the person giving the bribe, not one syllable of that clause now remained in the bill! He would ask, was the omission of such a clause no material alteration in the nature of the bill? But the truth was, that the right hon. gentleman through the whole progress of the bill betrayed a great anxiety to throw a shield round the members of that house; there was no scruple in dealing out punishments to the electors, as the baser part, but there was manifested upon all occasions a wonderful jealousy for the elected. Now, unfortunately, whatever was the cause, the public did not think precisely that way. They did not think them altogether above punishment. The right hon. gentleman who had thrown out such sly hints against the sincerity of others, had brought his own to rather a queer trial in the committee. He was a friend to the bill, and the moment he got it into the committee, he never stopt till he succeeded in making it as unlike the measure he professed to befriend as any measure could possibly be. The bill went into the committee with the clause of penalty; the clause respecting the oath, and that regarding the office; and before it was allowed to come out of it, the right hon. gentleman has deprived it altogether of penalty, oath, and office! As for the preamble, notwithstanding the fine eulogium the right hon. gentleman had passed on it, he thought it amounted to neither more nor less than nothing. The bribery act would not be carried into effect by it-and why? because that might go to affect members as well as voters, and there was no saying too much about the tenderness the right hon. gentleman had manifested for the former, though, to be sure, it was a fine thing to talk big of mulcting a minister in the penalty of

VOL. VI.

66

1000l. as if such a fine could be a preventive-but this was of a character with the rest, and was only throwing a shield about the members; and yet, if the sincerity of the right hon. gentleman. was appealed to, it might be difficult for him to account why there should be any difference between the elected and electors. He had insisted upon the introduction of "express," which did away the whole force and use of the clause. When that right hon. gentleman acted as a new reformer recently, he took a different course with respect to his own measure. [Here Mr. Tierney read passages from Mr. Perceval's bill to prevent the sale of offices, and observed that the term express" was not included in that bill, nor ought not in the present.] But he could not believe it possible that the right hon. gentleman really meant to prevent the sale of seats in that house, his conduct in the treatment of that bill was totally irreconcilable with such an intention. He again adverted to the preamble, and said there was nothing in it--it was joking with the public-it was laughing in their faces, and giving them more then pretence for saying to that house what Dr. Johnson said to Macpherson--" Hereafter I shall be more inclined to believe what you shall prove, than what you shall say." They, indeed, said a great deal in all conscience, and it was now time for them to do something. The public had observed the course they had taken during the session, and would not be inattentive to the manner in which they would close their career. Though his hon. friend was deserving of great praise for having introduced the bill, yet, after the alterations it had undergone, it would do him but little credit: and he (Mr. Tierney) would advise him to take care that it should go out to the world not as his, but as the measure of the right hon. gentleman. For the reasons he had stated, he must oppose the bill.

Mr. Wilberforce said a few words against the bill. He thought that if the bill was suffered to pass, it would stand in the way of something better, and that, on the other hand, if it were thrown out, something more effectual would be substituted in its place. Besides, if it did not pass, there were some, and among those perhaps his right hon. friend (Mr. Perceval), who might think that enough was done already.

E

The gallery was then cleared for a division, when three divisions took place. The first, on the third reading-Ayes, 98-Noes, 83-Majority for the third reading, 15.

The second, that the bill do passAyes, 97-Noes, 85-Majority 12.

The third divison was on the title of the bill-Ayes, 133-Noes, 28-Maj. 105. The other orders of the day were then disposed of, and the house adjourned.

Tuesday, June 13.

Mr. Wardle gave notice that he should on Monday next move for a return, shewing the amount of the annual national expenditure. This motion was connected with what had formerly passed on the subject of introducing greater economy in the management of public business, by which, as he had frequently stated, it was his opinion, that eleyen millions might annually be saved.

Lord H. Petty withdrew his motion for a copy of the instructions given to Mr. Erskine relative to the attack upon the Chesapeake, in consequence of understanding from Mr. Canning that negociations were still pending withAmerica. The Scotch judicature bill was reported.

Mr. Horner observed, that next to a reform in the representation of Scotland, the admission of jury trials in civil causes would be the most valuable benefit that could be conferred on that country.He next adverted to the enormous abuse in the law of Scotland of extracting the decree. He stated, that in Scotland the whole of the proceedings, statements of facts, and arguments of counsel, were entered upon the record, and before the suitor, in whose favour the decree was made, could proceed to execution he was forced to have a copy of this voluminous proceeding, often amounting to a thousand pages, every page of which was signed by an officer of the court, and on every signature there was a fee! He mentioned instances where the objects of suits, though amounting to 3001. were inferior to the expences of extracting the decree, for which 500l. was sometimes paid. He also thought that the commissioners ought to have made some specific report on this point, instead of causing unnecessary. delays by entering upun subjects which did not concern

them.

Mr. Dundus observed, that the subject Was of so much importance that these

points ought not to be concluded without a great deal of deliberation.

Mr. Abercrombie admitted that nothing could be more proper than all due caution, but contended that some unnecessary delay had taken place.

Mr. Perceval observed, that the commissioners had a great deal of inquiry to make, and that they were perfectly right in taking care not to act with precipi

tancy.

The bill was then read a third time, and passed.

a

Mr. Holdsworth rose to submit a motion on the subject of the exemption of foreign property in the funds from the income tax. he thought the state of the Continent was such, that foreigners were compelled to invest their money, from principle of security, in our funds; and it was owing to this that Mr. Perceval was able to borrow money at so low a rate. This exemption was taxing of our friends, in order to serve our enemies. He should now move a resolution, "That this house will in the next session enquire into the expediency of discontinuing the clause in the property act 13 Geo. III. which exempts the funded property of foreigners."

Mr. Baring contended, that the saving of the comparatively trifling sum of 60,000l. a year should not be put in competition with the character which this country had always maintained for honour and good faith, and which enabled this country to draw its resources even from those nations with which it might be at war.

Sir T. Turton supported the resolution.

Mr. D. Giddy said, that the sole right of taxation depended on protection being afforded. But as these foreigners owed this country no allegiance, they did not appear to him to be the proper subjects of taxation.

Mr. Fuller thought, that as the property of these foreigners was protected, as well as our own, at an immense expence of blood and treasure, it was but fair that they should bear a share of the burden. There were a number of foreigners who got their living in this country, and some who were even said to make their 60001. a year for warbling and pleasing people's ears; in God's name let them have it, if people chose to give it to them; but when we were compared to a ship in distress, and not

knowing where to look for taxes, he thought we should make them pay something for the protection of their property. Mr. Perceval said, that after all the consideration he had given the subject, he was rather inclined to think that the discontinuance of this exemption was neither incompatible with the principles of justice or policy.

Mr. Holdsworth then said, that as he saw the temper of the house was not friendly to his notice, he should withdraw it for the present.

Lord Ossulston rose to make his promised motion, for a resolution of the house to limit the granting of pensions and sinecure places. He made a few observations founded upon a part of the evidence taken before a committee which had been appointed by the house, but which had not made its report.

After being called to order by Mr. Perceval,

The Speaker declared it to be irregular to make any motion upon the proceedings, before the committee should make their report.

The resolution was then put, and negatived without a division.

On the order of the day being read for the house going into a committee on the animal cruelty prevention bill, Mr. Windham stated his objections to it, and declared that he did not consider it of sufficient importance to call for an act of legislation, and particularly one of so novel a kind as this was. He was of opinion, that the bill would open a dreadful source of arbitrary vexation. Great censure would alight upon a poor man for whipping up his fatigued horse to the discharge of his duty, while the man, who, a little before, had been riding for the creation of an appetite, overlooked the application of his spur to the sides of his own horse. Thus men would never be wanting to exercise all the christian virtues at the expence of others. He should object to the ambiguity also in which the bill was worded. Was it not as malicious an act if a horse was

wantonly disabled in hunting as in the soberer occupation of the farmer? Yet we had heard, that on such a day the hounds threw out at such a place-fine running-and a number of horses thrown behind, three in at the death, and three killed in the chace; and the account closed with remarking that it was a glorious day's sport. Would we send such offenders as these to the house of correction? If not, where was the fairness of this bill? He should conclude by moving, that this bill be committed on this day three months.

Mr. Wilberforce complained of the treatment given to the bill by the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Windham) considering the respectable authority by which it came recommended to them.It was a measure, he remarked, that had been long called for, and every man acquainted with a crowded city must be sensible of the necessity of it. If necessary, he argued, that the bill might be altered or improved, but begged that they would not throw it out without due consideration, as, by such a step, the existing evil would be increased. The different species of cruelty might be so far defined as to render the act applicable to most of the cases that appeared necessary.

Messrs. Perceval and Giddy, though friendly to the principle of the bill, opposed it, as tending to establish a system of indefinite jurisprudence, verging to tyranny.

Sir Samuel Romilly, Lord Porchester, Messrs. W. Smith, Jekyl, and Morris, supported it.

On a division, there appeared-For the Speaker's leaving the chair, 40– Against it, 27.

The house then resolved itself into a committee on the bill, Sir C. Bunbury in the chair, and after sitting a short time, resumed rather abruptly, in consequence of its being discovered that only 12 members were present. —Ad- · journed.

SPAIN.<

THE SUPREME GOVERNING JUNTA

TO THE SPANISH NATION.

of liberty, which their fathers had bequeathed to them, and although all the provinces of Spain successively struggled to defend it, our evil stars which now began to pursue us, have rendered useless those generous efforts. After having silenced reason and justice, the laws from that time forward, have been nothing else than an expression more or less tyrannical, or more or less beneficent of a particular will.-Providence, as if to punish the loss of that beautiful prerogative of freemen, has sentenced us to be unhappy, and paralised our valour, arrested the progress of our understanding, protracted our civilization, and after having blended and exhausted the fountains of prosperity, we have come to that condition, that an insolent tyrant has formed a project of subduing under his yoke, the greatest nation of the globe, without reckoning upon its will, and despising its resistance. In vain have there been some instances within these last three ages of disasters, in which the best directed will of the prince has attempted to remedy this, or the other plagues of the state,-In vain the increased illustration of Europe has lately inspired our statesmen with projects of reforms, both useful, and necessary.-Buildings cannot be erected upon sands, and without fundamental and constituted laws to defend the good already done, and to prevent the evil which is intended to be done, it is useless for the philosopher in his study, and the public man in the theatre of business, to exert himself for the good of the people. The most useful meditations, the best combined projects, are either not put in execution, or if they should be, they immediately fall to the ground.-In the moment of a happy inspiration, succeeds another of an unfortunate one-to the spirit of economy and order, a spirit of prodigality and rapine--to a prudent and mild minister, an avaricious and mad favour

ite-to the moderation of a pacific monarch, the rage of an inhuman conqueror--and thus, without principles, without an established and fixed system to which public measures and dispositions can be affixed, the ship of the state floats without her sails, without a helm or direction, until, as has happened to the Spanish monarchy, it is dashed to pieces on some rock by the hurricane of tyranny.

The evils which are derived from so vicious a beginning cannot be calculated, when they are accumu lated in such a manner, that nothing less than a revolution can destroy them. The junta itself, in the midst of the which you power had placed in its hands, a power which makes them tremble on account of its unlimited extension, frequently meets in those ancient vices, insuperable difficulties in the execution of its wishes.

If the disorders of the government in the last twenty years had been less, believe, Spaniards, that your evils at this moment would not be so great-believe, that our enemies would not enjoy the advantages they obtained, not over the zeal and prudence of your government, nor over the valour and constancy which every moment are greater in you, but over the ruinous and miserable state to which the many years of arbitrary government which has been passing over us, has brought us to.

Thus it is, that when the supreme junta took upon itself the supreme authority, it did not deem itself less called upon to defend you from the enemy, than to procure and establish your interior felicity on a solid basis. It announced this solemnly to you from the beginning, and as solemnly obliged itself in the face of the world to the performance of this sacred duty. The events of the war prevented at that time the commencing the grand work, to which it is now going to put its hand, and the