TOBACCO REGULATION BILL.

Mr. Sheridan observed that, considering the greaness of the subject, it was extremely to be lamented, that it had been brought forward so near the close of the session, when unfortuately so much of the essential business of the session was before the house. In so thin a house, the bill could not meet the attention which its importance deserved; and, therefore, as gentlemen did not like the trouble of attendance to hear the examination of witnesses, he wished that the right honorable gentleman (Mr. Pitt) would allow the evidence of each day to be printed, day by day, that the members of the house might have an opportunity of knowing what passed, and enable themselves fully to understand the subject, before it became necessary to vote upon it.

Mr. Pitt admitted, that it would be exceedingly idle to attempt to pass a bill of such importance to the revenue, without endeavoring at least to have it perfectly understood. He had some doubt, how ever, as to the propriety of printing the evidence, day by day, because, as a good deal of new light was frequently obtained by crossexamination, it would not convey any complete information to the members, if the evidence of the witnesses was printed before they had been cross-examined. He had no objection to printing the evidence as fast as the examination of each witness was concluded; or so as to give very sufficient time for gentlemen to make themselves masters of it, before the report was made.

Mr. Sheridan answered, that the right honorable gentleman's mode of printing the evidence would equally satisfy him.

Some evidences having been examined, the house adjourned.

JULY 3.

NEWSPAPER DUTY BILL.

On coming to the clause restricting newsmen from lending out newspapers to read for hire, Mr. Pitt rose and supported it.

Mr. SHERIDAN considered it as a principle too erroneous to be introduced merely for the sake of an

advantage so extremely trivial. He was a friend to newspapers, not merely because they blazoned forth the virtues of the present administration, but because they proclaimed their actions. He was glad they would state that there was so thin an attendance when the most important business was before the house. He accused the Chancellor of the Exchequer as the cause of the thin attendance, by wilfully and systematically putting off the public business till that period of the session. The right honorable gentleman had said, that those who let out newspapers derived two parts of their livelihood from newspapers, the one for their loan, the other from their sale; and, therefore, the clause would not take away their livelihood. It would nevertheless take away one part of their livelihood. It was soothing one set of men for oppressing them, by oppressing another; and as the hawkers and pedlars were sacrificed to the shopkeepers, so now the newsmen were to be sacrificed to the newspaper printers. Mr. Sheridan declared himself against the tax itself, which he thought injudicious, because it would be unproductive. He lamented the abuse of the press, but thought that it should not be checked in such a manner. The laws of this country afforded every man who was injured by the press ample redress, and it ought not to be in the power of Ministers, by unreasonable impositions, to load it so, as effectually to prevent its exercise. The additional tax on advertisements was highly injudicious, and would prove a loss rather than an advantage to the revenue. It was not the casual advertisers, such as the want of a horse, the sale of a chaise, the loss of a watch, who were to be looked up to; but the staple advertisers, the auctioneers and booksellers? the latter allotted a given sum for advertising according to the price of the book; and if, by increasing the charge of each advertisement, the given sum, would pay for so many advertisements short of what it would do formerly, the revenue

must, consequently, lose in proportion as the number of advertisements diminish.

Colonel Phipps having remarked, that if the honorable gentleman would take the trouble to read one of the newspapers of the ensuing day, he would perceive that his arguments had most of them been answered before he entered the house, and contended that the increase of duty on the advertisements would not decrease their number.

Mr. Sheridan answered, that he would certainly look the next day to that miraculous paper the honorable gentleman talked of, but he did not before know that the Hibernian journal was printed in London; and no other paper he should have conceived would have made him answer arguments which he had never heard.

The committee divided; ayes 29; noes 9.

JULY 6.

REFORM OF THE ROYAL SCOTCH BURGHS.

Sir James Johnson observed, that as the reform offered by the present bill was by no means wanted, he should object to its commitment. There were grievances in Scotland, but the constitutions of the royal burghs were not among the number. They had no militia, nor any trial by jury. If a man committed high treason, he must be tried by the Scotch laws, which were different, in several essential respects, from those of England. Another circumstance was with regard to the qualification of a justice of peace; in England, a justice must have a certain qualification; in Scotland, none was necessary; so that if a justice in England committed an innocent man to prison, he could obtain a remedy; in Scotland, no remedy could be procured. Sir James agreed with Mr. Sheridan, that every man who received money from the public, should be accountable for that money, and was willing to consent to that part of the bill. He spoke of the endless system of litigation under the Scotch laws, and mentioned a case that had been heard nine times over, and determined by the court of session; and after the ninth determination, an appeal was brought before the house of lords, which they reversed. Thus it followed, that few persons were likely to outlive their lawsuits, unless at the commencement of their litigations, they were in a state of vigorous health.

Mr. SHERIDAN declared, that he entertained so high an opinion of the benevolent and patriotic prin

ciples of the honorable baronet, as to rest assured that he would not oppose any measure which he thought calculated to answer the end of civil liberty. The honorable baronet thought the grievances which the bill went to remedy, were only imaginary; but he had stated a variety of other grievances which he knew to exist with respect to Scotland in general; and which, instead of being an argument against the bill, afforded a strong presumption, that the grievances of which the promoters of the bill complained existed also. He hoped, therefore, the honorable baronet would suffer the bill to go to a committee, where alone he could be satisfied by proof, that grievances which he conceived to be imaginary did exist, and called loudly for redress.— Before entering on the bill, he would say a few words of the petitioners, and the manner in which they had proceeded. The business had been taken up, four years ago, by persons of the first credit and respectability in the different boroughs; and conducted since that time with peculiar temper and perseverance. They had corresponded, they had met and consulted on the most constitutional mode of applying for redress; they had resorted to no improper or inflammatory means. This, surely, was not the conduct of bad subjects, or men who were enemies to regularity and good government. Of fifty-six boroughs, fifty-two had concurred in the application to parliament; and of these, all the burgesses, but those who were in the practice of abuse, and derived a benefit from it. Their petition, signed by nine thousand persons, certainly proved that they complained justly, and they wished only for an opportunity of substantiating their complaints. The first object of the bill was, to provide a remedy for the want of a judicature, before which the magistrates should be compelled to produce their accounts; and the second, was to prevent the magistrates from electing their own body, one set at present chusing another in regular succession. The

means

consequence of this abuse was a waste of public money, an oppressive exercise of usurped power, and arbitrary impositions arbitrarily levied by imprisonment and other penalties. These were natural consequences. Whenever there was power without responsibility, there would be abuse. This was the ordinary course of things, and he wished it not to be otherwise, but to stand as an important lesson to mankind, not to grant power, without establishing the means of punishing the misuse of it. On this obvious principle, the abuses in the internal government of the Scots boroughs were easily traced to their source; the perpetuity of the same junto of magistrates, and the burgesses having no of redress or control. Forty of the charters, copies of which were before the house, contained clauses favorable to the rights of the burgesses, and only five to the assumed rights of the magistrates; therefore, no innovation was proposed. The charter of Stirling had been newly modelled by Mr. Dundas, in the manner which he conceived to be most advantageous. The plan established for Stirling was very nearly the same with that now proposed for the other boroughs; and what the learned and right honorable gentleman had thought good for one, he must, if he acted consistently, approve of for the whole. He was ready to make out as strong a case, and to prove abuses as flagrant as had been the ground of reforming the borough of Stirling. The honorable baronet had admitted, that the magistrates ought to account for the public money; yet, there was no judicature before which they could be called to account; neither by the Court of Session, the Exchequer, nor the Convention of Delegates. The latter, indeed, would be a very imperfect remedy, if it existed; for, it was not to be supposed that those who were in the practice of abuse themselves, would be very ready to pronounce against those who were similarly accused. To prove that the Exchequer had no juris