Lords. Another hon. member (Mr. Att-
wood), whose opinions and observations
upon the subject of Joint-stock companies.
deserved particular attention, not only
from his general knowledge, but from his
experience upon such matters, which was
certainly greater than that of any man in
that House-as great, perhaps, as that of
any man in the country-that hon. mem-
ber had asserted, that the company to
which he alluded was no delusion. He
had been accused of being too vague and
general in his charges; but instead of
vague and sweeping observations, he had
confined himself to facts; one was, that
the company gave out that the directors
held three hundred shares a-piece, which
they altered, without any public notice, to
twenty shares. He would ask the hon.
gentleman as an auditor of this company,
with forty-five directors, seven of whom
were members of parliament, whether they
did not libel an individual who opposed
the company; whether the money for the
insertion of that libel in a public journal
was not paid for by a check subscribed by
three of the directors; and whether that
check was not paid by the house of the
hon. member who was auditor of the com-
pany?
He would here take occasion to
mention, that it was the object of those
opposed to the bill to prove that it never
could be a public benefit. The great
argument for the bill, in the original pream-
ble was, that it would prove so; but let the
House mark the hypocrisy with which the
company conducted their operations.
When it was found that the point was to be
opposed, it was struck out of the bill.
If that bill had received the sanction of
parliament, no tradesman could have car-
ried on his business with security.

voured him before, to trouble them with any thing in the shape of a reply; but he could not abandon his motion without stating why he had no objection to the amendment. He had at first submitted that motion to the consideration of the right hon. gentleman opposite, and ascertained that he was not hostile to its object; but he had avoided any confinement of the inquiry, such as that effected by the amendment, because he wished to shun the appearance of attacking any particular individual. Agreeing, as he did, however, with respect to the propriety of the amendment, and observing that all parties in the House seemed to be of the same opinion, whatever might be the tenor of their observations in other respects, he would not have thought it necessary to trouble them with any further remarks, had not some gentleman, in the course of the debate, seemed to labour under an impression of his being disposed to condemn Joint-stock companies generally, and not those particular speculations to which he had taken the liberty of directing their attention. He had not, certainly, contemplated the necessity of guarding himself against such an inference, nor did he think it likely that any man could have supposed him guilty of such a want of discretion, as to attack, or call for condemnation on, those who had embarked their property in speculations, where the basis of the enterprise was well understood, and its objects clearly and precisely defined. He never intended to cast any putation on such companies; and he begged to say, once for all, that he agreed, to the fullest extent, in every thing which had fallen from the right hon. President of the Board of Trade, upon the subject of those institutions which were fostered and promoted through the means of Jointstock associations. He fully appreciated the advantage which the country, as well as individuals, had derived from the application of capital in that form; and he repeated, that his observations had re-ingly appointed. ference only to those speculations which had no definite object; which were bottomed in fraud, and were solely intended to delude the ignorant, the credulous, or Wednesday, December 6. the unwary. With respect to the obser- ROMAN CATHOLICS-EXCOMMUNICAvations of the hon. member for Midhurst, TION BY CATHOLIC PRIESTS.] Mr. Moore upon the Equitable-loan company, he said, he held in his hand a petition from begged to premise, that all the documents Mr. Emanuel Hutchinson Orpen, of Dubupon which he had grounded his state-lin, on a most important subject. ment had been produced to the House of petitioner complained of the power exer

im

The question as amended; namely, "That a select committee be appointed to inquire into the origin, management, and present state of the Arigna Iron and Coal Mining Company," was then put agreed to; and a committee was accord

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

and

The

in Ireland Roman Catholic priesthood when the various election petitions from

Ireland came to be considered. If those petitions should be abandoned, then he would be entitled to say that no such im

ber regretted the combination of religion and politics. He regretted it also. Every good man regretted it. It defiled religion, and perverted politics: The error, however, was in those institutions which persevered in connecting them. In the laws which withheld their civil rights from the Catholics, might be traced the origin of the evil complained of.

the denounce by way of excommunication, persons of their own faith, who refused to concur with them in their political objects. The dangerous charac-propriety had occurred. The hon. memter of a control of this description must be too obvious to render it necessary for him to insist upon it; and it was not his intention to enter into any details at that moment, as, in the course of the session, various occasions would arise when it might be more advantageously discussed. The House would, however, permit him to make one observation. The power against which Mr. Orpen petitioned was a power not quiescent. It was a power which was not only capable of being exercised, but which had been actually and extensively exercised, for the purpose of inflicting some of the most serious grievances to which any member of a community could be subjected. It was a power, the bare possession of which, ayen if it were never exercised was caleulated to give to the Roman Catholic priesthood a most dangerous influence over the laity. One of the most striking characteristics of this power was its creation of that mixed system of religion and politics which had placed his majesty's Roman Catholic subjects in Ireland in that position with respect to the state, which put it totally out of their power to give security for the due exercise of whatever political rights might be conceded to them. He confessed that this consideration, with many others, impressed him most strongly with the conviction, that the Roman Catholics could give no security which would render it safe to make any further conces-curity which would render it safe to make sion to them.

Mr. Spring Rice did not rise to oppose the bringing up of the petition. On the contrary, it was his opinion that every man was entitled to complain to that House of any grievances under which he laboured. He rejoiced, therefore, that Mr. Orpen had come to that House; and he trusted, that if petitions from other individuals of a different nature should come to the House hereafter, the hon. member would be disposed to receive them with equal readiness. The hon. gentleman had stated what was known to all; namely, that the Roman Catholic priesthood possessed the power of excommunication. The question was, whether or not that power had been carried beyond its proper exercise. That was a question which would be tried upon the evidence of witnesses on oath,

Mr. James Grattan said, he could not hear the allegations of the petition without declaring in his conscience, that he did not believe that the power possessed by the Catholic priesthood had been exercised to the extent alleged. He knew it was utterly impossible to disconnect the subjects of religion and politics in Ireland; but he believed that the opposite party was liable to a similar imputation. If the Roman Catholic priesthood exercised their influence with the Catholic laity, for political purposes, there could be little doubt that our own clergy exercised their influence for similar objects. He regretted that the hon. member should have indulged in a tirade against the Catholics, on grounds which, in his opinion, were wholly untenable.

Colonel Torrens observed, that the hon. member who had presented the petition had uttered one sentiment, which he would never hear in silence. That sentiment was, that the Catholics could give no se

any further concession to them. What security was required? If the legislature gave them political power, would not their love of that power induce them to retain it by their conduct? If the sentiment of the hon. member were largely acted upon, it would tend directly to the dismemberment of the empire.

The Petition was then brought up and read. It stated the outrages and atrocities which had, at various times, been committed in Ireland, and which it imputed principally to the influence of the Roman Catholic priesthood; and it prayed, that henceforward, any person denouncing an individual by way of excommunication, or pronouncing an anathema upon him, should be subject to a penalty of 201., recoverable by civil bill before the assistant Barrister; and that any individual so ag

4

t

strong and premature impression. Let it on the great question alluded to. WhenLet it on the great question alluded to. Whenbe recollected, that the question about to ever the subject came regularly before the be considered and determined was a novel, House, he should be prepared to discuss untouched, untried, question; and, there-it to the best of his ability; but until then

he would avoid all allusion to it. This, however, he would say, that he most sincerely believed that the parties on both sides would consult their best interests, by abstaining from all exhibitions of violence and intemperance. Confining himself to the simple question before the House, he could assure the House, that the advice which he should give on the occasion would be given on principle, and without considering from which side of the House, or from what party, the petition emanated.

new parliament should come to the On looking at the petition, hemanated.

fore, that all possible pains should be taken
to avert from it every thing tending to the
creation of an undue and injurious preju-
dice. In the appeal, therefore, which his
hon. friend had made to the hon. member
by whom the petition had been introduced,
he most sincerely concurred. He would
venture to say, that no person in that
House contemplated the approaching dis-
cussion on the state of Ireland with a more
intense feeling of anxiety than he did. To
him it appeared to be most expedient, that
this
discussion of that great question with
minds free from prejudice; and, above all,
that they should be fully sensible of its
immense and vital importance. For
twenty years, he had attended every dis-
cussion in that House on the Catholic |
question, and had, on every occasion,
voted in favour of Catholic emancipation.
During that period, he had frequently been
in Ireland. He had also been in Ireland
since the last agitation of the question;
and he declared that he had never re-
turned from that country so deeply im-
pressed with the urgency of carrying that
measure. He was convinced that it was
their most serious duty to take every
means, if it was not yet too late, to save
the integrity of the empire. So feeling, he
asked the House if the subject was not one
which required the calmest consideration?
He trusted that others would be of the
same opinion; and he intreated the House
to enter upon the consideration of this
great question, whenever it should be
brought forward, with reference only to
what was the existing state of Ireland in
the year 1827, and to what was the mildest
and best course which an honest parlia-
ment could adopt. Nothing which had
recently occurred in Ireland had altered
his view of the great merits of the case, or
had shaken his opinion in favour of Ca-
tholic emancipation-a measure which
he had always thought desirable, and
which he now thought absolutely necessary.
He implored the hon. member for Dublin,
not to be instrumental in any act calculated
to excite prejudice and animosity. For
himself, no person had ever more uniformly
set his face against violence and intemper-
ance on either side of the question.

Mr. Secretary Peel would not say a word
VOL. XVI.

it was the petition of a single individual. Now, every individual had an undoubted right to communicate his sentiments to the House in the form of a petition; but the House had also an undoubted right to abstain, if they thought proper, from giving those sentiments publicity. He found, in this petition, that a certain class of persons were said to be" notorious for their avarice, drunkenness, and debauchery." Now, he certainly did not think it fair, that, under the pretence of petitioning that House, any individual should be enabled to give circulation to statements affecting the personal character of others. He therefore joined with the hon. gentleman opposite in expressing his hope that his hon. friend would not press the printing of the petition. When an individual abused the privilege of approaching that House by petition so far as to indulge in calumnies on the private character and conduct of others, and to introduce treatises on political questions, while the House allowed him the right of presenting his petition, they ought to exercise their own right of refusing to give circulation to that petition at the public expense.

Mr. Moore observed, that he conceived he should not have performed his duty if he had refused to present the petition, and indeed, with the exception of the single sentence which had been animadverted upon by the right hon. gentleman, it appeared to him to be unobjectionable. It was far from his wish to be instrumental in placing any statement on the records of the House which might have the effect of creating any unfair prejudice on the minds of any of its members when this most important question should be brought under their consideration. He would not there

L

fore press his motion for the printing of the petition.

The motion was accordingly withdrawu.

tory laws would ruin the whole silk trade
of England. Ministers, however, had
persevered in their enlightened views;
and so far from the English silk manufac
turers having been ruined, they were even
benefitted by the new system. The oppo-
sition to the exportation of machinery
arose from the same narrow views and per-
sonal motives, and he did not see why the
government should not extend their prin-
ciples to that branch of our industry.
The House had been so strongly impressed
with the impolicy and injustice of prevent-
ing British artisans taking their capital
and ingenuity out of the country, that they
had come to a unanimous resolution of
allowing artisans to export themselves
wherever they pleased. The rational
consequence of this measure ought to be,
that artisans should be allowed to export
their machinery as well as themselves.If
the exportation of machinery were to be
prohibited, artisans would export them-
selves to an extent to prove highly inju
rious to the country. The effect of the
law, as it now stood, was to encourage the
emigration of our most useful machinists.
No apprehension could be entertained of
foreigners being enabled to rival us in ma
nufactures by obtaining our machinery,
for it was in large works that required the
use of machinery, in which our supplies
of coal and iron, our canals and our large
capital, gave us the advantage over foreign
manufacturers. In works that required
little combinations of capital, and only the
application of small machines, foreigners
might rival us. Labour in France, con-
sidering the relative value of money, was
almost as dear as in England. The law,
as it now stood, was so contrary to good
policy, that it could not be carried into
effect; and it accordingly operated solely
as a bounty upon the smuggling of ma
chinery out of the kingdom. The law in
its details was most absurd. He expressed
his most anxious wish that it might be
speedily abolished, and moved, that the
petition be brought up.

EXPORTATION OF MACHINERY.] Mr. Hume presented a petition from the Machine Makers of Manchester, praying for an alteration of the law prohibiting the Exportation of Machinery. The hon. member said, that the petition involved a principle of very great importance to this country. He recollected hearing the right hon. gentleman at the head of the Board of Trade say, that he hoped the day would soon arrive when the word "prohibition" would be expunged from our commercial system. He perfectly agreed with the right hon. gentleman in the sentiment, and he appealed to him whether it was right to continue a system of prohibitions with respect to machinery, when he was endeavouring to abolish that system with regard to every other article of industry? The object of the petitioners was to abtain a repeal of the law which prohibited them from exporting the produce of their ingenuity and labour to the markets that would afford them the best remuneration or reward. This object, at all times just, was rendered infinitely more necessary now that the markets at home did not afford a demand for their industry. The petitioners declared themselves to be totally out of work, and in a state of absolute starvation; the British manufactures affording them no employment, and the foreign markets being shut against them, by the prohibitory system persevered in by ministers. Every man was now allowed to export the produce of his industry to where he could find a purchaser, except the unfortunate maker of machines. The consequence of this was, that the machinists of England were in a state of destitution, whilst their sufferings were increased by a knowledge that it was in the power of ministers, by opening their trade, to relieve their distresses. Those who opposed the exportation of machinery were like those who had opposed the Mr. Huskisson appealed to the hon. opening of every other trade, in order to member, whether a question of such vast augment their individual gains, and to importance could with propriety be dis secure to themselves a monopoly. He cussed at a period when thousands of mamight illustrate the truth of this by refer-nufacturers were either out of employ or ring to many trades, but particularly to but partially employed? He assured the the silk trade. The persons engaged in hon. member, that if a bill were to be inthat trade had done every thing in their troduced, which had for its object the power to persuade the country and the abolition of every restriction upon the exgovernment, that removing the prohibi-portation of machinery, it would be pro