this session the committee had met, with -the exception of the honourable member, who was the object of the motion, when, on reporting his non-attendance to the house, they had obtained permission to adjourn further to this day, in the hope that the hon. member would attend in his place, and that they should have the benefit of his advice in their proceedings. He, however, had neglected to attend, and in consequence the chairman thought it his duty, for the furtherance of justice, and in order that the com. mittee might be enabled to proceed, to submit the motion he had made to the house, particularly as the provisions of the election. laws authorised a committee, on an Irish petition, to proceed, though it should be reduced to nine members.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer hoped the house would not accede to the motion, unless very cogent reasons should be assigned for the absence of the hon. member. To discharge a member from his attendance on a committee, was an indulgence which the house never granted but upon very substantial grounds, and unless :ome conclusive reasons should be assigned in the present instance, he should feel himself under the necessity of dissenting from the motion.

Mr. Charles Grant begged to be indulged, while he stated in justification of the hon. member what he knew of the cause of his absence. The hon. member was at present on duty with his regiment, which having been lately raised, required all his care and attention. He had not been aware of the order of the house which authorised election committees to continue, notwithstanding a prorogation of parliament, and had neglected to attend under an impression that such committees were necessarily dissolved at the end of a session. This was a fact which he could confidently state, as he had himself received a letter some weeks since from the hon. member desiring to be informed on the subject, which information he was not at that time competent to give.

The Speaker observed that there were two distinct questions for the house to consider : first, whether it should be its pleasure, for the furtherance of justice, to enable the committee to proceed, by discharging Mr. Grant from further attendance; secondly, what conduct it would be its pleasure to adopt, wish respect to the hon. member who had absented himself from his duty. These questions were wholly distinct, and it would be for the house to determine in what manner it should think proper to dispose of them. There was a case in point on the journals. It was the case of Mr. Booth Grey, who,

removing from town on urgent business pending the sitting of a committee, of which he was a member, wrote a letter to the chairman, stating the circumstance, and request ing him to communicate the same to the house. On the letter being produced, he was discharged from further attendance on the committee, but ordered to attend in his place on a certain day, and account for his absence.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer concurred with the sentiments that had fallen from the chair. He had no objection to discharge the hon. member from further attendance, in order to enable the committee to proceed, provided it could not operate to limit the discretion of the house, as to the conduct it may think proper to adopt with respect to the defaulter. He, however, submitted, whether the object of the motion might not be attained as well by wording it differently, that is," to enable the committee to proceed, notwithstanding the absence of this member."

Mr. Ward concurred in the suggestion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and observed that the object of the hon. chairman would be fully effected by so wording his motion, which had been drawn up in the other form with an unintentional inaccuracy.

Mr. Tierney did not think the case of Mr. Grey applicable in the present instance. In that case Mr. Grey had appeared by letter before the house, in the present there was no appearance whatever: and he trusted that for the regularity of the proceedings ot the House, they would not suffer such a resolution to be placed on their journals, without being accompanied by a good and sufficient reason for the ground on which they had adopted it.

Mr. Bragge agreed with his hon. friend (Mr. Tierney) that such a proceeding should not appear on their journals without some document to shew why it had been adopted. He submitted to the hon, member (Mr. Charles Grant), whether he might not put what he had already stated in that form to the house, whereby it would be justified in agreeing to the consequent preceedings.Mr. C. Grant's statement was then entered on the journals, as the ground on which the house assented to the following motions: 1st. That F. W, Grant, Esq. be discharged. from further attendance on the committee. 2d. That the committee be enabled to proceed notwithstanding his absence; and, 3d. That F. W. Grant, Esq. be ordered to attend in his place on Wednesday tha seventh day of December next.

[DESERTION OF SEAMEN.- Mr. Jarvis rose, pursuant to the notice he had given, to move for leave to bring in a bill to prevent the desertion and escape of petty officers, seamen, and others, from his Majesty's service, by means or under colour of any civil or criminal process. He should detain the house, but a very short time, in stating the grounds and principles of the measure he proposed to bring forward. There were too many convincing proofs, that the processes of law had been frequently perverted, for the purpose of enabling individuals to escape from the naval service, in which they had been employed. It would not be necessary for him to trespass on the attention of the house, by enumerating the various instances of fraudulent arrests for civil actions, or the many pretended criminal charges, under colour of which, seamen had been removed from the authority of their naval officer, and then set at large, to the manifest injury of his Majesty's service. The measure, he proposed, would correct this abuse altogether; and he felt great satisfaction in assuring the house, that it would not interfere with the rights, nor infringe the privileges of any description of men. It would leave the seaman, who might be improperly impressed, in the same situation as to his habeas corpus, in which he now stands; and it would not weaken the claim of creditors, nor trench upon their just and legal rights. It would leave the arrested seaman, in the same situation precisely, as to service, in which he stood before the arrest, as its principal object would be to secure his return to the service to which he may have belonged, as soon as the action should be satisfied. The principal object of the measure he meant to introduce, was to make sheriffs responsible for the return of such seamen as should be arrested under their authority, to the service, instead of being left at large on their release from the arrest. It was to be obligatory on the sheriff, in such a case, to convey the seaman, within a reasonable time, and for an adequate compensation, to the nearest port, and give him up to the port-admiral, or regulating captain, commanding there. consequence of this regulation would be an essential benefit to the seaman, who would be conveyed back to his ship free of any cxpense. With regard also to seamen fraudu lently arrested, the bill would have a most salutary effect, as it would effectually prevent any future perversion of the process of the law, to cover the desertion of persons se ving in his majesty's navy. These were the leading features of his measure, and, he trusted, the house would concur with him in

4

The

its expediency. He therefore should move for leave to bring in the bill. Leave was given. Mr. Jarvis then brought up the bill, which was read a first time, ordered to be read a second time on Tuesday next, and to be printed.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

Monday, November 28.

[MINUTES.]-The Speaker took the chair at half after three.-Col. Hayn” then presented a petition for leave to bring in an inclosure bill, which was granted.-Mr. Foster appeared at the bar from the Exchequer office, with an account of the net produce of the taxes of the current year, ending the 10th of October. The account was ordered to lie on the table, and a sufficient number of copies to be printed for the use of the members. Sir C. Bunbury presented a petition from the debtors confined in the county gaol of Suffolk.-Ordered to lie on the table.Mr. W. Dundas gave notice of his intention to bring in a bill to explain the acts relating to statute labour in Scotland, with respect to the construction of which, doubts subsisted. He declined mentioning a particular day, stating that it was his intention to write to the representatives for Scotland, and to fix such a day, as would be convenient to them, for ti e discussion of the subject.-Lord Castlereagh gave notice of his intention to move, on Wednesday, for leave to bring in a bill, relative to the bonding of East-India goods. -Mr. Hobhouse brought up the report of the committee of supply. The resolution for granting a supply was agreed to nem, con. and the committee ordered to sit again on Wednesday- Mr. Vansittart moved, that there be laid before the house, the following estimates, viz.; An estimate of the ordinary expenses of the navy for the year 1804; an estimate of the expense of the half-pay of officers of the navy, and such officers of the royal marines, as served in the last war; an estimate of the expense of building and repairing ships of war, and other expenses in his majesty's dock-yards, generally known by the denomination of wear and tear, for the year 1804; an estimate of the expense of guards and garrisons, and other descriptions of his majesty's land forces for 1804; an estimate of the expense of ordnance for land service, for the year 1804; an estimate of the expense, incurred for services, not provided for by Parliament; an estimate of the expenses of transport service, for the year 1804. Ordered. Mr. Vansittart also moved, that an humble address be presented to his Majesty, praying that his Majesty would

tended to. The right hon. gent. concluded with moving, that the 24th of February next should be the last day fixed upon for the acceptance of private petitions. This motion was agreed to.

[WATERFORD ELECTION COMMITTEE.]——Mr. Deverell, a member of the Waterford Election Committee, rose to move that James Pedley, Esq. one of the members of the said committee, be excused his attendance on that committee, as his presence was necessary elsewhere, on accout of the death of a near relation, and private business of a very urgent nature.

The Speaker informed the hon. member that the usual mode of proceeding on such occasions, was, that the member who moved the leave of absence should come forward to the table, and state in writing the grounds upon which he rested his motion. That he should verify these grounds upon oath, and that then the house would decide on the propriety of acceding to the motion. -The hon. member having accordingly approached the table, and deposed upon oath the grounds of his motion,

The Speaker acquainted the house, that the grounds of the motion were, that James Pedley, Fsq. was called to Jamaica by very urgent private affairs. That he had taken his passage on board a vessel that was to sail from Portsmouth for that island, and that he had received a letter intimating to him that the ship was ready to sail without delay.

Mr. Deverell, after stating these grounds, moved, that James Pedley, Esq. have leave of absence from further attendance on the Waterford Committee.-On the question being put.

The Attorney General rose, and observed how painful a task it must be to any man to oppose a motion supported on such grounds as those upon which the present motion was rested. But the house must feel how essential it was to pause before a precedent of such importance should be established. He certainly could not now pretend to make up his mind upon the question, and should feel it his duty to take advice upon the point, before he gave it his assent. The learned gent. then proceeded to observe that the Waterford Committee was already reduced to twelve-that should the leave of absence now solicited, be granted, the number would be eleven, within two of the number absolutely necessary for prosecuting the business before the committee. Thus might a complete suspension of the most essential business of the House of Commons be brought entirely at a stand; be

sides sickness, and other equally embarrassing difficulties, might preclude the attendance of the remaining members, which might induce a total suspension of the most important and essential proceedings. Under that impression, he felt ithis duty to move that the debate on the motion be adjourned till to-morrow.-The question was put on this amendment and agreed to.

[BARRACKS.]-Admiral Berkeley, seeing the Secretary at War in his place, rose to ask a question respecting the mode in which the house were to be informed of the expense of the barrack department. When he had inquired into this matter yesterday, an hon. gent. [Mr. Vansittart] had not been able to give him an answer which he could consider satisfactory. What he desired to be informed of was, whether the expense of the barrack establishment was mentioned in the general estimates to be laid before the house. The contracts for the building of barracks were enormous, particularly in the part of the country (Sussex) where he had lately resided. At a time when the general expenses of the country were so great, it was of importance to have the expense of contracts fully considered. With the view of bringing the matter under consideration, it was however, previously necessary that the point to which he had referred should be explained.

As

The Secretary at War [Mr. Bragge] could not at present give a decided opinion in what manner the estimates for the barrack department would be brought forward. He could mention, however, generally, that it was not intended to include them in the estimates for the expense of the army. to the amount of the contracts, he should only observe that they were formed on principles of as strict economy as government could obtain. It was not to be supposed that, in the present circumstances of the country such works could be executed at as cheap a rate as in other periods. Labour had necessarily increased in price, and the difficulty of procuring workmen to complete the works with sufficient celerity naturally enhanced the demands of those who contracted with government.

which was ordered to be entered on the journals of the house. It was nearly to the same effect as the answer made to the address of the House of Commons.-The hearing of certain appeal causes were then severally ordered for the ensuing week; after which the Lord Chancellor informed their lordships that he had some matters of consequence to communicate which respected their privileges. Strangers were in course ordered to withdraw; and after a short interval the house adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS,
Wednesday, November 30.

[MINUTES.]-Colonel Stewart took the baths and his seat.-The Speaker acquainted the house, that the petitions complaining of undue elections, and the returns to the boroughs of Hull, Leominster, Shaftesbury, and Boston, had not been renewed in the present session of Parliament, pursuant to the provisions of the 28th of his present Majesty and that he had certified to his Majesty's court of exchequer, that the recognisances in these cases had been forfeited.-General Bartlett brought up an enclosure bill, which was ordered to be read a first time.--Mr. Manning brought up the report of the committee to whom the petition of the London Dock Company had been referred, and obtained leave to bring in a bill to allow the said company to raise by loan, or otherwise, a sum of 500,000 1. in addition to their original capital of 1,200,000 1.-Sir P. Stephens, in a Committee of Supply, moved, that it be the opinion of the committee, that 100,000 seamen, including marines, be voted for the year 1804-That a sum not exceeding 2,405,000 1. be granted to his Majesty, for wages for these 100,000 men, for thirteen lunar months, at the rate of 11. 17s. per man per month; that a sum not exceeding 2,470,000l. be granted for victuals for them for thirteen lunar months, at the rate of 11. 18s. per man per month; that a sum not exceeding 3,900,0001. be granted for wear and tear of ships for that complement of men for thirteen lunar months, at the rate of 31. per man per month; that a sum not exceeding 325,0001. be granted for ordnance for the sea service, for that complement of men for thirteen lunar months, at the rate of 5s. per man per quarter.-The resolutions were all agreed to; and the house being resumed, the report was ordered to be received to morrow.-Mr. Secretary Yorke gave notice, that he should on Friday next, move, for leave to bring in VOL. IV.

two bills, to continue, for a time to be limited, two bills of last session, for the suspension of the Habeas Corpus Act; and for the suppression of rebellion in Ireland. -Mr. Vansittart moved, that there be laid before the house the following estimates: An estimate of the expense of the hire of transports from January 7, to December 31, 1804; An estimate of the expenses of prisoners of war, in health, for the same period; An estimate of the money that will probably be wanted for sick prisoners of war, for thirteen lunar months, from January 7, 1804.-The motions were all agreed to, and an address ordered to be presented by such members as were of his Majesty's Privy Council, that his Majesty would be graciously pleased to order the said estimates to be laid before the house.

[EAST INDIA BONDS.]Lord Castles reagh, pursuant to his notice on a former day, rose to submit his motion to the house, on the subject of the East-India Company's bonds. The house would be aware of the importance of the measure he had to propose, inasmuch as the value of the East-India Company's capital was materially influenced by the circumstances under which their securities were circulated in the market. The object of the bill he meant to bring forward, would be to place India bonds, as nearly as possible, on the same footing as Exchequer bills, and the operation of it, of course, would extend to two points, in which they differed from such government securities. The first point related to the manner in which the duty charged under the property tax act was levied on income, arising from such property, which rendered it less desirable to the holder, and of course, tended to depreciate its value. As the tax was levied under the provisions of that act, the directors were authorised to deduct the shilling in the pound from the interest payable on India bonds; so that, whatever may be the income of the holder, the full amount was in this instance to be levied, even though he should not possess 1501. per annum. Such a mode of levying the tax, operated directly to diminish the convenience of such property, and consequently to depreciate its value. It was, however, to be admitted, that the party had a remedy by an application to the commissioners for an abatement in every case, where his rate of income, or other circumstances, should entitle him to such abatement. But, when it was considered how onerous and operose such application must prove to individuals, he trusted the house would not object to the principle for simplifying the mede of col