time to satisfy every member with regard to his vote on the general question of abolition. For his part, he required no evidence-no further information to convince him, that the power possessed by the West India merchant over the slave, was such a power as no man ought to have over another. He conceived that the evidence now wanted was not connected with the establishment of regulations in the trade; nor, indeed, necessarily with the general question, which it was undoubtedly proper to decide upon previously to the expiration of the pre

sent session.

The motion was carried without a division.

APRIL 27.

POST HORSE DUTY FARMING BILL.

The order of the day being read, for the second reading of this bill,

Mr. SHERIDAN having signified his intention of moving for some papers extremely necessary, in his conception, to be submitted to the house previously to the second reading of the bill; he relied, therefore, on the right honorable gentleman's (Mr. Pitt) candor, that he would have no objection to postpone the second reading for a few days, which could be attended with no sort of inconvenience; and by that time, in all probability, the papers could be got ready and presented. Mr. Sheridan moved

for

"An account of the gross produce of the post horse duties for the year 1787, ending the first of August;" also for

"An account of the number of districts under the farmers' act; the names of the farmers, and the amount of the rents respectively, with any variations thereon, that have taken place from the first letting to the present time;" also

"An account of such of the farmers of the post

horse duties as have become defaulters, and to what amount;" and also

"An account of the expense of collecting the post horse duty, previous to the passing the act of the 27th of his present Majesty, and the amount of the saving to the public, in the article of collection, in consequence of passing the said act."

Mr. Pitt answered, that he could readily consent to the production of the papers moved for; but as the use intended to be made of them, might as well be employed in any other stage of the progress of the bill, as on the second reading, he saw no reason for delaying it.

Mr. Sheridan replied, that to press the matter with so much precipitation, betrayed a want of candor; and he contended that the house ought not to have proceeded a single step with the bill, until the right honorable gentleman had given the necessary information as to the produce of the tax, whilst under the old mode of collection, compared with that under the farming bill, which was originally introduced or revived, by a bill of experiment; and the principle of which should not be adopted as a permanent mode of collecting duties, without very full information, and mature discussion. It behoved the house not to proceed towards deciding on the principle of the bill, until the papers were before them; from which he (Mr. Sheridan) meant to prove that the principle was false; and the expectation of greater advantage being capable of being derived from it, than from the old mode of collection, utterly fallacious.

Mr. Pitt rejoined, that if the honorable gentleman had thought the papers necessary to be before the house prior to any proceeding with the bill, he ought to have moved for those papers, antecedent to the first reading, and not to have delayed moving for them till that day. For his own part, he had not the smallest objection to the production of the papers now moved for; although he saw not how they could possibly throw any additional light on the subject. By the papers giving an account of the net produce already before the house, there was an evident increase; for whatever the gross revenue might appear from the papers moved for, the net produce, it was

plain from the papers before the house, had increased from 97,000l. in 1786, to 102,000l. the first year that the duty was farmed, and in the second to 127,000l.

Mr. Sheridan observed, that lawyers too frequently discovered a tenacity in overturning the rules and orders of that house, which the honorable and learned gentleman's argument evinced; as upon a moment's reflection, the honorable and learned gentleman must perceive that the rule of proceeding in opposing bills, was directly the reverse of that which he had laid down. It was a curious way of using dispatch, to postpone the business to a late period of the session, and to endeavor to make up for the loss of time, in the first instance, by hurrying the most important bill through with indecent celerity. To prove his assertion, that the farming duty bill had not been so productive as had been stated by the right honorable gentleman, he had it from good authority, that the whole of Scotland had been farmed out as one district, without the advance of a single shilling, on the produce of the duty, under the old mode of collection; and this circumstance was still further strengthened, as an argument against the new plan of farming out the collection of the revenue, by the speculation which might have been expected to take place in this year beyond all others, in consequence of the extra use of post horses, which a general election would necessarily occasion.

The question was put, and the original motion carried. The bill was, therefore, read a second time, and committed for the ensuing Friday.

APRIL 29,

LOTTERY BILL.

Mr. Rose brought up the new lottery bill, and as soon as he had presented it, stated to the house, that the only new clause in the bill was a clause to subject the printers of newspapers to a penalty of fifty pounds for each offence, in case they advertised any illegat

shares. The bill having been read a first time, and ordered to be read a second,

Mr. SHERIDAN rose, and declared that in his opinion, it was a most extraordinary clause; nor could he possibly conjecture how it was to be carried into effect. He supposed, the clause provided proper counsel for the printers, to consult as to what was or what was not a legal share; or perhaps itself gave a definition of that important point; because, without either the one or the other, he saw not how printers could avoid incurring the penalty, although they might not mean to offend against the law, for they could have no more interest in advertising an illegal share, than a pamphlet, which upon perusal, turned out to be a libel, or any other matter in itself illegal ;-and it was well known, that in such cases, the subjecting the printer to a penalty, was a principle equally novel and oppressive; and, therefore, a principle which materially concerned the liberty of the press. Mr. Sheridan proposed to have the clause printed.

Mr. Rose answered that the honorable gentleman might recollect that it never had been usual to print a single clause of any bill; and in the present case, it was wholly unnecessary, as the clause in question was but short, and contained on the one side of a single half sheet of paper-the honorable gentleman, therefore, might, at one reading, make himself master of its contents.

Mr. Sheridan moved to have the whole bill printed.

Mr. Pitt observed, that it was altogether unusual to print suck bills as that in question, nor could he see the smallest occasion for it.

Mr. Sheridan contended, that the new clause might cramp and affect the press; but it could not be considered as a regulation to prevent gambling.

The motion was negatived without a division.

EXCISE DUTIES ON TOBACCO.

The order of the day for receiving the report of this bill being read,

Mr. Sheridan observed that the honorable gentleman opposite to him had expressed himself so strongly on the recommitment, that it was necessary he should take some notice of his argument; but having lately experienced a considerable share of indulgence from the house, they might be assured he would not trespass long upon their patience. The honorable gentleman had spoken with pathos on the trial by jury; and yet, he concluded with saying, it was not his intention to vote for the opportunity on which he might move to introduce the very point he recommended. Whenever he heard of a trial by jury being applied to the excise of tobacco, or any other single article excised, he always suspected it was thrown out as a lure and a decoy to attract attention, and draw the eyes of the house away from the main consideration. Professions of regard for that old-fashioned trial, could only be proved in an old-fashioned manner-not by words, but by deeds. The honorable gentleman had said, a great deal about trial by jury, and, nevertheless, declared he would not vote for the re-commitment. He would leave it to the house and the country, to judge of the sincerity of the honorable gentleman's professions, who contradicted them by his conduct. For his part, he should never think any gentleman sincere, who did not oppose every extension of the excise laws, till the trial by jury was universally adopted in all cases of excise. If the honorable gentleman was sincere, he supposed that he would bring in a clause for a trial by jury at the third reading. Though not quite consistent with order, he must make some reply to an observation of the honorable gentleman, founded on what he said, in a former debate; but he conceived it could not be more irregular in him to reply to it, than it had