best interests of the state; that the petitioners are fully persuaded that these sentiments are likewise those of almost all reflecting people, as well as of a majority of the members of the legislature, because when the act for the continuance of the state lottery was passed in the last session of parliament, not a single argument was adduced in its favour, the necessity for it alone being insisted upon; that the petitioners were happy to learn from the report made, on the 8th day of February last, to the House, on the finances of the country, that the aforesaid plea of necessity is now entirely obviated; that the petitioners believe that the loss to the state, even in the revenue, from the pernicious effects of the state lottery on the morals and habits of the lower classes is far beyond any profits which can arise from it; that the petitioners have great apprehensions, since banks for the savings of the poor, under the special sanction of the legislature, are become so general, that if the state lottery be suffered to continue, its pernicious consequences will be much increased, and that the effects of the saving banks will be rendered frequently prejudicial; it is even probable, that emissaries will be employed by the lottery offices to traverse the country for the purpose of personally tempting the depositors to speculate in the state lottery, and these will be ready to insinuate, that the legislature has encouraged the establishment of such banks for the purpose of enabling them so to do; that the petitioners moreover are of opinion, that before the country be farther called upon to establish and support national schools for the education of the children of the poor, and to build free churches for the religious instruction of the lower classes, the state lottery, which is so directly and strongly opposed to the success of such institutions, ought to be abolished; that the petitioners cannot but feel and acknowledge, that the Almighty hath not dealt so with any nation as he hath done with this, having exalted her to unexampled riches, and honours, and power; and that therefore we should, as a people, be wanting in gratitude to him, and be deserving of the most exemplary chastisement, were we to continue legislatively to sanction and enforce a measure which is now aeknowledged on all hands to be offensive in the sight of Him who is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity; the petitioners do therefore most earnestly and respect fully solicit the House, that no bill in future may pass which shall have for its object the raising of money for the public service by way of lottery. Ordered to lie on the table. TRIAL BY BATTLE ABOLITION BILL -PETITION OF MR. THELWALL AGAINST IT.] Sir F. Burdett presented a petition from John Thelwall, of Lincoln's Inn Fields, gentleman, setting forth, "That the petitioner, in common with every subject of these realms, hath a vital interest, but he hath also a particular and personal reason for feeling and expressing that interest, in the inviolable preservation of so much of the ancient constitutional right of appeal as is connected with the security of the lives, limbs, and personal liberty of individuals, subjects of these realms, against the violence of abused power, whether civil or military, and in the precautions which that wise and salutary law has for many centuries most jealously preserved, for securing, even against the exertion of royal prerogative, the just punishment of those who, instigated by the hopes of pardon, might otherwise be induced, in times of political division and party heats and animosities, by kidnapping, by maiming, or by murder, to execute a rigour, not only beyond the law, but in direct violation and defiance of all law, but which nevertheless might happen to be agreeable to a wicked administration; and the petitioner further showeth to the House, that the said law of appeal hath ever been held and declared, by the highest legal and constitutional authorities of this realm, and particularly by that most virtuous and upright judge, the lord chief justice Holt, (who for his firm integrity, and undeviating loyalty to the constitution, was, at the period of that glorious Revolution which prepared the way for the house of Brunswick to the throne, elevated to the presidency of the court of King's-bench), to be a noble privilege, and a true badge of English liberties, and that therefore the liberties of Englishmen, and the security of their lives, limbs, and personal freedom, would be essentially impaired by the total abolition of the said right of appeal; and the petitioner further showeth, that he believes himself capable, if called for such purpose to the bar of the House, and there examined (either upon oath or otherwise as to the House shall seem meet), to lay open a series of most iniquitous practices and conspiracies all tending to show the importance of this law, which iniquitous practices and conspiracies he believes himself also capable of still further proving and exposing, by the testimony of other credible and respectable witnesses, relative to the repeated attempts that have heretofore been made upon the life, limbs, and personal liberty of the petitioner; and from the reiteration and further perpetration of which, and the accomplishment of a formed design to murder the petitioner, or convey him forcibly beyond seas, there is reason to believe there would neither have been prevention nor means of redress, if the law of appeal had not been then in existence; and the petitioner therefore prays, that such parts of the ancient constitutional law of appeal, as have heretofore been regarded, and ought still to be regarded, as protective of the life, limb, and personal freedom of the subject, may not be revoked or abolished; and that the petitioner, and the subjects in general of these united realms, may still continue to enjoy, as their forefathers have enjoyed, the advantage of this sacred and venerable institution, which puts it out of the power even of royal prerogative, however instigated by a corrupt and tyrannical administration, effectually to shelter from due punishment the perpetrators of any murder, or similar atrocity, such as have been attempted upon the person of the petitioner, on any factious, political, or other pretence whatever; hereto the petitioner craves the particular attention of the House." Ordered to lie on the table. majesty, towards defraying the expense of the building of a Penitentiary-house at Millbank, for the year 1819." Mr. Alderman Wood expressed his surprise at the expense which this building had cost, and condemned the erection in it of a steam engine. Mr. Long replied, that that plan had been adopted which seemed, in all respects, to be the most eligible for the attainment of health, security, separation, and inspection. The object of the steam engine was to grind corn, and raise water for the convicts, they being employed in such a way as would enable them to be useful to themselves and to the public on their liberation. Mr. Alderman Wood, while he admitted the propriety of the mode of employment adverted to by the right hon. gentleman, observed, that the water might have been raised, and the corn ground (as he had seen in a prison in Paris), by the labour of a very small portion of the prisoners. Mr. Bennet observed, that a prison capable of containing the same number of felons might have been built at one-half the expense, he might almost say onethird. There were carpenters, shoemakers, and other trades at work in the Penitentiary. Indeed, no one could go there without seeing persons hard at work. Lord Nugent stated, that a vertical wheel had been constructed in the prison at Aylesbury, for raising water to supply the prison and the town. The height to which the water was raised was 70 feet; eight men were employed at a time, and they were relieved every hour. PENRYN ELECTION.] The order of the day having been read for taking into Mr. Hume objected to the voting money further consideration the report of the for a steam engine. If they were to credit committee on the Penryn election, Mr. the newspapers, disturbances of a serious Atkins Wright moved, that the resolutions nature sometimes took place in the Penibe read a second time, which was done, tentiary, and in his opinion, pumping and they were agreed to. The hon. mem- water, grinding corn, and other severe laber next moved, 1. "That the attorney-bour, would be a proper punishment for general be directed to prosecute Henry the refractory. Swann, esq. for bribery at the last election for the borough of Penryn. 2. That the attorney general be directed to prosecute John Goodeve, Henry Durnsford, and Abraham Winn, for corrupt practices to influence the last election for the borough of Penryn."-Ordered. COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY-PENITENTIARY HOUSE AT MILLBANK.] In the Committee of Supply, Mr. Arbuthnot moved, "That 60,000l. be granted to his Mr. Holford observed, that the statement of disturbances in the Penitentiary was greatly exaggerated. There would be an end to the plan of separating the prisoners, if they were to be employed in raising water, for that would necessarily bring a number of them together. Mr. Alderman Wood moved as an amendment, that 40,000l. only be granted. After some farther observations the amendment was withdrawn, and the resolution granting 60,000l. agreed to. CALEDONIAN CANAL.] Mr. Arbuth- | not then moved, "That 50,000l. be granted to his majesty, towards defraying the expense of making an inland navigation from the Eastern to the Western sea, by Inverness and Fort William, for the year 1819." Lord Carhampton wished the right hon. gentleman would state all the items on which he grounded this claim. It was asked for the Caledonian Canal; but where was Caledonia? The name and the race of the Caledonians had been extinct for 600 years; for since the thirteenth century there had been no such place as Caledonia. Tacitus had told us where Caledonia was in his time; but since that it had been inhabited by the Picts and the Scots. This canal, he believed was begun in 1803. He supposed it was then calculated what it would cost; but how much had been granted since? It was originally devised for the purpose of employing the labourers of Scotland; but all that benefit had been reaped by Ireland. Lord Binning said, that the original estimate in 1803 was 500,000l. but it had already cost 700,000l. The question now was, whether they should withhold 50,000., which were necessary for the completion of a work that gave employment to so many. It had already employed annually 100 workmen of that country. When the nature of the work was considered, it would not be wondered at, that English and Irish labourers had been employed. The chief benefit, however, had been enjoyed by the Scots, the Picts, and the Caledonians-those objects of the noble earl's solicitude. The work had been undertaken at the request of those concerned in the Baltic trade, and on petitions from Ireland, Liverpool, Bristol &c., showing that many ships had been lost in going round the northern extremity of Scotland. In fact, such a canal had been projected as far back as the time of Charles 2nd. There was every prospect that the canal would answer all the purposes for which it had been originally intended. During the last year 152 voyages had been performed through it. The invention of steam-vessels would, he had no doubt, remove those obstacles which, it was feared at one time, would frustrate the object for which object for which the canal was proposed. He believed, that 30,000%. next year would entirely complete the work. Mr. Hume hoped the commissioners, before they applied again to the House, would have a new estimate, and say expressly what sum would complete the work. His opinion was, that when the canal was finished, the duties on ships would not repay the expense. Mr. W. Smith said, that the canal was begun with the best prospect of success, and it was the opinion of every person qualified to judge, that it would be productive of the greatest benefits. It had been supposed, that while the trade to the Baltic would be benefited, labour would incidentally be provided to a great number of workmen, he believed that this incidental advantage had proved even greater than had been anticipated. The spirit of labour which had been introduced into that part of Scotland, was, in his opinion, worth more than all the money that had been voted. Of those who had been employed in this labour, there were not two in a hundred who were not Scotchmen; and surely the noble lord would not object that now and then a poor Irishman should be employed. The work had cost 700,000l., which was more than had at first been thought sufficient; but the question was, whether they should lose that sum altogether, or reap the advantages originally expected by giving an additional sum of 80,000l. The resolution was passed. TRIAL BY BATTLE ABOLITION BILL.] The Attorney General moved, that this bill be now read a third time. Sir Robert Wilson said, he thought it his duty to state the grounds on which be should give his vote on this bill. He meant that his observations should be addressed not to the present ministers only, but to all their successors; not to the present generation, but to all futurity. He begged to assure the attorney-general, that he gave him full credit for purity of motive, and integrity of intention. When this bill was first brought in, none was a greater enemy than he was to the trial by wager of battle. That part of the bill which abolished all appeals to the judgment of Heaven, he most fully approved of. The practice of calling for judicia Dei by the exercise of sticks, staves, and other weapons, had its origin in the ignorance and superstition of a barbarous age, and could not stand the light of truth and the test of reason; but the right of appeal to a jury against the prejudiced verdict, or an unwarranted pardon was a very different passed. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Tuesday, March 23. ROYAL BURGHS OF SCOTLAND.] On a petition being presented from the royal borough of Dundee, against the present system of governing the Scotch burghs, Lord A. Hamilton took an opportunity of contradicting a statement which had been made during the last session by the lord advocate that the people of Scotland were perfectly satisfied with the reform which his bill had provided. The reverse was clearly proved to be the case, by the number of petitions presented to the House. The Lord Advocate said, he saw no reason to alter any opinion he had expressed on the subject. He did not think the wish for reform was by any means general. question, and seemed to him to merit a | Ayes, 64; Noes, 2: Majority 62. The very different kind of treatment. It might bill was then read a third time, and be said that this was a very difficult question for him to argue. It was true indeed that he was not very conversant with the intricacies of the law, but he would always endeavour to perform his duty as a representative of the people; and in contending for the reasonableness and utility of the right of appeal, he was not less the advocate of the army than the representative of the people. The people ought to be governed, not by the sword of the soldier, but by the authority of the civil magistrate. If soldiers should ever be called to suppress a popular tumult, they ought to be restrained by every consideration, from a rash and fatal use of military weapons. Lord chief justice Holt had warned an officer on such an occasion to beware of firing upon the people; for if he should, he would be found guilty of murder. The officer must further have known, that the Crown would not have the power of granting him a pardon. The officer would, therefore, be very cautious in his proceedings. If, on the other hand, a minister of the Crown could have said to him, "Obey our orders, and if any conviction against you should be the consequence, we have a pardon in our pockets for you," might not the officer have forgotten what was due to the constitution, to the army, and to his fellow subjects? He was most anxious to prevent the power of life and death from being placed in the hands of persons who might be influenced by private or factious motives. He contended for a great constitutional principle. He did not wish to encroach on the prerogative of the Crown, but he was against its interference with public justice; he wished not to restrain the exercise of mercy, but he deprecated its being made the instrument of bloodshed and cruelty. He had read of the opposition made to the Riot act; but if this bill should pass, they would consummate the evil of that measure. He concluded by moving, as an amendment, "That the bill be read a third time this day three weeks." Mr. Alderman Wood said, he had heard a very able speech from a learned gentleman on the other side of the House, in support of the bill, but the right of appeal appeared so important to the liberty of the subject, that on that ground he would vote against the bill. The House divided upon the question that the bill be now read a third time. (VOL. XXXIX.) Mr. Hume contended, that the people of Scotland had a right to expect some redress. The situation of the very borough from which this petition came proved the necessity of a reform. He had a list in his hand of the magistrates of that town for the last twenty years, and he found that one set of magistrates presided this year, and the other set presided the next; and that the public property of Dundee had been let at half its value to friends of the magistrates. The petition was signed by nine-tenths of the population. Lord A. Hamilton presented similar petitions from Crail, Hawick, and Elgin. Mr. Brougham said, the learned lord had stated that the people of Scotland were satisfied with the present state of the burgh system. When petitions however came in signed by so many, he thought his learned friend should make some exception to that observation. The Lord Advocate said, he was still persuaded that the great body of the Scots population did not desire any such alteration. Were they unanimous, it would be different, but they were not, and besides the petition from Hawick just presented, was not from a royal burgh. Much dependence could not be placed on those petitions, which came from a few interested persons. Sir James Mackintosh said, that of all the speeches he had ever heard, with re(4 C) spect to the presentation of petitions, that of the learned lord was the most extraordinary, and to him the most unintelligible, he had ever listened to. On all former occasions when his majesty's subjects applied to that House for a redress of grievances, the House particularly wished to see petitions from those persons who really were aggrieved; whose interests were injured; who demanded a definite redress, for a definite evil. But, if he received the learned lord's doctrine, he must relinquish all these principles. He seemed to say, that the petitions were not worthy the attention of parliament, because the statements contained in them were made by persons who were suffering under the grievance of which they complained, and whose situation enabled them to point out the most effectual remedy. Because persons, who had no specific connexion with these transactions, did not appear at the bar of the House, he argued, that no evil existed. If he had said, that the great body of burgesses had not petitioned, and had inferred from that circumstance, that they were satisfied, he would have understood him. He, however, had said no such thing; but had observed that the great body of the people of Scotland had not petitioned. He had proceeded on a sort of universal suffrage principle, and seemed to suppose, that the great body of the Scotch people were the proper persons to judge of the constitution of the burghs, instead of those who really understood the subject, and who suffered from the existing system. Tomorrow or next day he should have the honour of presenting three or four petitions, praying for an alteration of that system, and he believed the learned lord would find, that a great majority, in point of property, character, and numbers, would very shortly appear before the House, complaining of the grievances under which they laboured in consequence of the mischievous manner in which their affairs were managed. Mr. W. Douglas said, that much of the confusion which had arisen in the funds of the Scots burghs was occasioned by the self election of the magistracy, and the want of control which the inhabitants had over the receipts and expenditure. The bill introduced last year was by no means adequate to remedy the evil. The expectation of the different incorporated trades in Scotland had been much excited by the charter given to Montrose; and he could not help thinking it a very extraordinary thing in government to act as they had done to the burgh of Aberdeen, thereby crushing all the hopes they had formerly excited. Sir R. Fergusson contended against the impolicy of government in refusing the same charter to the trades of Aberdeen, as they had granted to those in Montrose. In the latter borough the happy effects of such reform had been already felt. Mr. Boswell impressed upon the House the necessity of not placing the fullest reliance on petitions of this description, particularly when they called for what the petitioners were pleased to consider their inalienable rights. Had they confined themselves to a control over the expenditure of the burghs, or what was termed the common good, he was disposed to give his co-operation to the success of their application. A bill to that effect, he understood, was in preparation; and to that extent it should have his support. Mr. F. Douglas stated, that under the present management of the royal burghs, the inhabitants were not only robbed of their rights, but almost of the power of giving expression to their grievances. Ordered to lie on the table. NEW SOUTH WALES-CONDUCT OF GOVERNOR MACQUARRIE.] Mr. Brougham said, he rose for the purpose of presenting two petitions from two individuals named Blake and Williams, free settlers at New South Wales, complaining of the conduct of governor Macquarrie. He felt it his duty to present them, having satisfied himself that they were couched in respectful language. The truth of the allegations sat forth, must rest with the persons who signed them, but he must add, that he had made an inquiry respecting the petitioners, and the result satisfied him that they bore good characters, and were not likely wilfully to mislead the House. With respect to the conduct of governor Macquarrie he should say, that if culpable, he was disposed to consider such conduct rather as a fault of the system than of the man. He was placed in a situation of high and uncontrolled authority, in a distant settlement, under very peculiar circumstances-not alone peculiar from its distance, but from the character of a great portion of the people subject to his government, they consisting principally, on the arrival of governor Macquarrie, of convicts, although a very |