Kamendments, fome of which were offered by a noble Earl (Stanhope) and adinitted.

The Houfe adjourned.

Tuesday, 20th June.

The Houfe in a Committee went through the bill for making a crofs street from Temple Street to the new bridge. Counsel against the bill were called in, and informed the Houfe that it was recommended to the Corporation of Briftol to agree to the application, and to give up the fite of a wall, which feemed to be of no ufe to the Corporation, and would prove ferviceable to the new avenue.

thurst.

Earl Bathurft obferved, that every additional avenue would Earl Ba be a public benefit to the city, and therefore ought not to be oppofed. For thefe reafons he recommended an accommo

dation.

The Counsel replied, that he fhould confider their Lordships' recommendation as a command, and as such should state it to his clients.

The bill was then read a fecond time, and ordered to be committed on the morrow.

The Houfe adjourned.

Wednesday, 21st June.

The Earl of Carlisle prefented a petition from several eminent dealers in wine, praying to be heard by themselves against the bill now before their Lordfhips for bringing the duties on wines within the excife laws; the petitioners conceiving that the mode would prove highly injurious and oppreffive to all perfons concerned in that branch of bufinefs, his Lordship was about to move that it should lie upon the table, when

Lord Sydney contended, that as the petition was, in fact, Ld. Sydney. a petition against a money bill, it must be precluded from a reception. He defired that the clerk might read the refolution of their Lordships, on a cafe in point, which was the rejection of a petition from the city of London, in respect to the alteration of the ftamp duties. It was accordingly read, and by that Lord Sydney obferved it was proper that the Houfe fhould be bound.

The Earl of Carlisle answered, that he had not the honour The Earl of to coincide in the fentiment of the noble Lord, nor did he Carlisle. hold the matter of the ftamp duty to be at all fimilar to the prefent cafe. He trufted therefore that their Lordfhips would permit the motion to pass for the petition to lie on the table.

Earl Bathurst infifted that the cafe was in form, and that Earl Ba

R 2

the thurst,

Ld. Lough borough.

Earl Bathurft.

the prefent was, to all intents and purposes, a petition against a money bill.

Lord Loughborough expreffed his wonder that the House should entertain any idea of refufing to hear and to redress any grievance complained of. The bill was not a money bill; it was a modification of a law, by altering the collection of a particular impoft, in exchanging it from the customs to the excife. This modification, the perfons who were principally interefted deemed pregnant with grievous oppreffion, and they applied to Parliament for redrefs. The House of Commons, equally jealous of offending the precedent, of not receiving a petition against a money bill, as the noble and learned Earl feemed to be, had admitted the right of the petitioners, and therefore heard them at their bar. If the bill had been confidered in the very place where it originated, as a money bill, the Commons would have rejected the application of the merchants in the first inftance; but the fact was otherwife. He trufted that the common fenfe and the candour of the Hopfe would fee this in its proper point of

view.

Earl Bathurst ftill maintained his firft opinion; and he ap pealed to the clerks, whether, in their opinion, when it received the royal affent, the words would not be, Le Roy remercie fes bons fujets?

Ld. Lough- Lord Loughborough anfwered, that the title of the bill was borough. not yet established, and it might therefore be altered. No

Earl Bathurft.

Lord Carlifle.

The Duke of Richmond.

The Duke

argument, of courfe, could be well-founded on that principle. But if the noble and learned Earl perfifted in direct oppofition to what was conceived to be the right of the subject, it would become neceffary for their Lordships to have it proved whether any precedents for receiving fuch a petition as that in queftion was on the journals, and therefore be fhould move that a Committee be appointed to inquire into "the fame."

Earl Bathurst contended, that the petition fhould be first difpofed of, as that was the queftion before the House.

Lord Carlisle replied, that the petition was only presented, and no motion made thereon; confequently what his noble friend moved must be next difpofed of.

The Duke of Richmond propofed taking the middle way, which was that of permitting the noble Lord's motion to pafs; then that the bill fhould be read a fecond time, in or der to expedite the public bufinefs, and afterwards to have the petition decided upon at the third reading.

The Duke of Chandos warned their Lordships against eftaof Chandos blifhing a precedent which might hereafter become very in

jurious.

Viscount Viscount Townshend adverted to what he defcribed as a

Townshend

very great degree of impropriety in poftponing the petition until the merits of the bill were argued. The information fhould always precede the determination.

Lord Loughborough faid, that he approved of the mode Ld. Lough propofed by the noble Duke.

borough.

Stafford.

The Marquis of Stafford obferved, that he liked the pro- The Marpofition, because the bill was not confidered as a money bill quis of by the House of Commons, and confequently the petitioners had an apparent right to apply to their Lordships.

It was at length agreed that the petition fhould for the prefent be withdrawn, the fecond reading poltponed, and that a Committee might in the interim be appointed to look for precedents.

8

The Earl of Carlisle went below the bar, and confulted the petitioners; after which he withdrew the petition, and a Committee was appointed to fit on the next day in the Prince's chamber.

The Houfe adjourned.

Thursday, 22d June.

The order of the day, for taking into confideration the Report of the Lords Committee appointed to search for precedents for and against receiving petitions on tax bills, was read.

The Earl of Carlisle moved, "that the petition of the wine merchants fhould be read ;" and it was read accordingly.

Lord Sydney moved, "that the Report of the Committee fhould be read;" which being done, he obferved, that as no precedent was found on the journals to warrant their Lordships in granting the prayer of that petition, he fhould move" that it be rejected."

The queftion was put, and the petition rejected.

The order of the day was then read, for the third reading. of the "bill," with the amendments, " for repealing certain duties now payable on wines imported, and for granting new duties in fieu thereof, to be collected under the ma"nagement of the Commiffioners of the Excife."

The Earl of Carlisle reprobated the principle of the bill, The Earl contending that it held out for its expediency the moft alarm- of Carlife. ing confequences to the liberty of the fubject. He befeeched their Lordships to examine the refult, as well as the neceffity, and to weigh in their minds whether the evil complained of was not much less than the remedy propofed. All increase of the excife laws had been in the highest degree of deteftation by every man who was even fuppofed to pay an outward, much more an inward, refpect to the conftitution of

this country; and hence it was but a natural effect that the prefent bill thould cause a general and a very juft alarm in the minds of the People. Indeed they already had, reafon to be fealous of their privileges under the prefent fyftem of government; they found the rights of their ancestors daily encroached upon; and every hour presented them with new plans to encroach upon the best charter which a country ever enjoyed, the right of trial by jury. Pretences of fuppreffing evils (the common hackneyed excufe for fuch innovations) were all that Government and their adherents had to fupport their approaches to this most unconstitutional fyftem, which he now thould oppofe, and which he trusted the fpirit of Englishmen yet would be able to repel. The arguments offered by thofe who fupported the bill were, the neceffity of increafing the revenue without laying additional burdens upon the fubject: but when any man of common fenfe came to examine the contents of that bill, he would find no other motive but a multiplication of the patronage of the Crown by an enormous and fudden increase of excife officers. Was the real benefit of the revenue one object of the bill, it would have truck at the root of the evil at once, by a duty upon the articles which decreafed the importation, and not by an excife upon the wines. The liquor which adulterated the produce of Oporto and Spain, was what in this country came under the denomination of fweets, and without which sweets it was impoffible to make any composition resembling, either in tafte or colour, what is known-in this country by the appellation of Port wine. He was not wine merchant enough to prove this, by the process of making and mixing, and therefore he had to lament that the rules of the House were found to be against hearing those who only could have made the matter evident to their Lordships in all its particulars. It was certain that a visible decrease appeared upon the face of the Cuftom-house books, in the duties upon wine; but it was equally apparent to thofe who wifhed to fee that this decrease was not entirely owing to the prefent mode of mixing fweets with the juice of the grape. In former days the people drank much more than they now do; and wine ta verns were much more frequented than at present. The arguments which chiefly met the bill were its oppreffion, and unconftitutional tendency, to effect that which could be done without any fuch evils to be apprehended. A tax upon the fweets would answer all; nay, more than the prefent bill could ever perform. Hence it was evident that a multiplication, as he already obferved, of the excife laws, and an additional influence to Government, by an increase of excisemen, were the main objects of what was now before their Lordhips. The increafe, when duly confidered, was of a molt alarming

ance,

alarming nature. It was not, as stated in another Houfe, an increase of an hundred and fixty officers; but of nearly two thousand. This was easily calculated. There were about seven hundred wholefale dealers, and about ten thousand retailers, who would all be affected by this bill. To each of the principal merchants there must be one excifeman. Thete would make 700; and, upon an average, among the reft, there could not be less than 1300. Hence it was clear that two thousand excifemen, armed with the moft arbitrary unconftitutional powers, were faddled upon the public, to effect that which could moft evidently be done without their alliftAs to laying a duty upon fweets, it was nothing more than an additional impoft upon raifins, a foreign commodity, and, in a great meafure, a luxury, without which we would find no material inconvenience. Upon the whole, fuch ftrong and weighty reafons appeared for not extending the excife laws, and for preventing the present fyftem of diminishing the right of trial by Jury, that he should conftantly oppofe, though with little hopes of fuccefs, the present bill paffing into a law. The prefent, like most of the bills paffed under the direction of the prefent. Adminiftration, was fraught with a variety of errors. Among others, he could not avoid taking notice of the claufe in the 42d folio of the bill which enacted, that no dealer in foreign wines fhall have in his cuftody any British-made wine or fweets on pain of forfeiting the fame, and paying over and above that forfeiture the fum of ten fhillings for each gallon in his cuftody, and fo in proportion for a greater number: and yet in that on the 48th folio there was a claufe that all fweets fhould be deemed foreign wine in whatever cellar or other place they may be found, and fhall be deemed to be, and taken for foreign wine, and pay accordingly. Did the framers of the bill mean that the wine fhould firft be feized, condemned, and the perfon in whofe cellar it was found fined, and that it fhould be deemed neat wine, and again feized and condemned, because it was not entered, or that it fhould pay duty if it was entered? There was fomething fo abfurd and contradictory in those two clauses, that he trufted for the honour of the ftatute book, they would never be admitted to difgrace its pages in their prefent form.

Viscount Townshend having obferved that no man upon vifeonat earth entertained a greater veneration for the principles of Townend the Conftitution than himfelf, added, that he notwithstanding faw fuch an abfolute neceffity for endeavouring to increase the revenue, by preventing the exercife of adulteration and fmuggling, that he fhould give his hearty concurrence to the present measure. The manufacture of Port in this country had arifen to such a pitch, that there was no fuch