Sir Francis Burdett, for Middlesex: they had even been told that this was the reason; and, he would ask, were publicans, at the will of a magistrate, to be deprived of the free exercise of the elective franchise more than the other inhabitants of this country? He alluded to another case which had occurred at Fulham, where a house, remarkable for the usual decorum of its keeper, had been deprived of the license, merely because, on one occasion, a few Welsh girls, returning to their own country, had been indulged with a fiddle and a hobble. These were arbitrary powers, which, he submitted, were not fit to rest with one or two individuals, without the person accused being acquainted with the charge against him, and allowed to defend himself. Neither, he maintained, was it even then fit that they should exist without appeal. All he asked was, that every person so accused should have the charge against him furnished to him in writing, and that he should be heard in his defence; and, afterwards, that he should have it in his power to appeal to the quarter sessions. He could not think it possible but that the magistrates themselves must be pleased that an appeal lay from their decision. If not actuated by personal motives, the knowledge of such appeal must be consolatory to their feelings: all he wished at present was, that the bill should extend to Middlesex and Surrey. He confessed that he had received letters which would do more than cover the table, containing similar complaints from every part of the country, so that he might be fortified in maintaining that the alteration should extend throughout. But still, high as was the respect in which he held Mr. Graham, and one or two others of the Westminster and Middlesex magistrates, he could not so far shut his eyes as to put them on a level with the independent country magistrates. The former held their places, for which they received an emolument, at the will and pleasure of his Majesty's ministers; while the latter exercised a gratuitous and burthensome duty. There was another subject, which he had alluded to elsewhere, and before an auditory far more numerous than that which he had now the honour to address, namely, the power exercised by brewers over publicans, by being proprietors of public-houses, &c. With all the regard which he felt for many gentlemen connected with the brewing business, this was a practice which he was aware, ought to be checked, if not abolished. Nothing was more clear than this, that brewers might meet

together, agree that they would not interfere with the houses which were held under the dominion of each; and in this manner they had it in their power to impose whatever trash they pleased on the poor-an expression which he did not like in the acceptation in which it was frequently received-more properly, on the laborious part of the community. What they had after labour was of as much consequence to their health, and to their existence, as food. It was, therefore, an object well deserving the interference of the legislature, to see that improper means were not resorted to, to disappoint them of it. The period of the session, however, would not allow time for so extensive a regulation. All that he now desired was to provide that a man, merely because he was a publican, should not be ruined, and his family turned on the parish, without having an opportunity of knowing what was charged against him. He concluded by moving, that the bill be now read a second time.

Mr. Moore recommended, as more inquiry seemed necessary, that the bill should be withdrawn, rather than let it go to a division.

Mr. Sheridan professed his disposition to yield to whatever appeared to be the general wish of the house, and therefore, he should comply with the request of his hon. friend (Mr. Moore), to any suggestion from whom he should be always happy to attend. At the same time he could not help noticing the surprise expressed by the right hon. gentleman (the chancellor of the exchequer), that he should have brought forward this bill at so late a period of the session. What, said Mr. Sheridan, the right hon. gentleman, who has surprised the house and the country so much himself; he who has surprised the house at a late period of the session with his plan of government for Ireland; who has surprised it with his new military project; who has surprised it by proposing to suspend that highly laudable and universally praised system, the plan of enlisting for a limited time. And yet, after all that the right hon. gentleman should talk to me of surprising the house. But among all his surprises there was one surprise which he could not produce namely, that of surprising him (Mr. Sheridan) by opposing this bill; for he suspected it.

The right hon. gentleman proceeded to state the manner in which he had acted with a view to produce a satisfactory bill. First, he drew up a bill such as some gentlemen now professed

to wish for, combining the case of brewers owning public-houses with that before the house respectively; but then objections arose, to which he yielded, in proposing to make those the objects of separate bills. Again, he proposed to make the bill general; but to this very great difficulties were suggested; he found many men, and magistrates particularly, who were willing to let him do what he pleased with Middlesex, and Surrey, provided he let the remainder of the country alone. He, therefore, endeavoured to make a beginning of that reform in those counties, which so many gentlemen have professed to desire to extend to all England. But a committee of inquiry was required previous to the introduction of such a bill as this. He, however, would beg those who desired such a committee, to reflect upon the expense and trouble that must attend such a committee; to consider if witnesses were to be summoned from all parts of England, and Wales, what time such a committee must last, and when it was likely to end? Each case would, in fact, be a suit before the committee, for he should propose to do that with regard to the magistrates, which they, under the existing law, declined to do towards the publicans; that is, he should have the magistrates apprized of any ground of complaint urged against them, and afforded the opportunity of vindicating themselves. What time, then, would such an investigation occupy ? As to the cases he had adverted to upon this occasion, the right hon. gentleman stated, that they were but a few out of a large mass, and while gentlemen called for deliberation and delay, he could assure them and the house, that many persons were starving in jail in consequence of the law which he proposed to correct. There was one case in particular into which he believed a right hon. gentleman (Mr. Rose) had made inquiry, and which he knew was peculiarly oppressive, namely, that of Mrs. Unthank. The case of Mr. John Morris, a respectable man, who had a shop over the way in King-street, furnished the strongest grounds of complaint. This Mr. Morris, for whom, from his own knowledge of him, he could not hesitate to avow the utmost respect, was deprived of his license by the magistrates, merely because his house was to be taken down in order to make some coxcombical improvement about Westminster Abbey-to show that building to the members as they came down to the house. But he had communicated the case of Mr. Morris to the trea

sury, and he hoped for redress. There was also one with regard to a Mr. Bignall, of the Broadway, Westminister whose license was withdrawn by the magistrates, upon grounds which they would not explain, and the poor man, finding every effort to procure redress unavailing, absolutely died of a broken heart about a fortnight since, leaving a helpless family to deplore his fate. With such facts before him, he did not think it too much to propose this temperate measure. However, as the opinion was so strongly expressed, that if such a bill was necessary, it should be made general, he should acquiesce in the wish for time to inquire into the subject. He hoped and trusted, that by the next session petitions would pour in from all quarters, praying the removal of the existing grievances, and that such petitions would be presented by the highest authority, by that of the county representatives of the respective petitioners. For himself, he should for the present only say, that which was only a repetitioh of what he had said before, that while he had a seat in that house, he should ever be found an advocate of the weak against the strong, and of the helpless against those who had the power, and he was sorry to say too often the will, to oppress them.

The bill was withdrawn.

AUGUST 13.

STATE OF IRELAND.

MR. SHERIDAN rose to make his promised motion, and spoke in substance as follows:-I rise, sir, under some degree of apprehension, that from the lateness of the hour, and the quantity of less important business which the house has already gone through, I may be felt to trespass on your attention; but it was, I assure you, not less my intention this night, than it was on Monday, to address you at a much earlier hour of the evening, had other business permitted. The lateness of the hour on Monday was indeed one of the causes which induced me to postpone my motion until this evening; and I cannot but regret that on this, the last day, nay, the last hour of the session, it should become necessary for me to arrest your attention; because I know that, at such a time, to delay your sitting cannot be agreeable to your feelings or to your habits. I am aware that it must have somewhat of an ungracious appearance to postpone your

separation at such a season; and believe me, I am as willing to enjoy the benefits of that separation as any one among you; but I am too strongly impelled by a call of imperious duty to yield to any desire of accommodation. The necessity which gave rise to that call was not created by me; nor was the postponement of the proposition I am about to submit, from Monday to this late period, by any means my fault. The propriety of adopting it is, to my conviction, rendered perfectly obvious by the circumstances of the two bills which you have recently passed with regard to Ireland. When you have determined to suspend the constitution and laws of Ireland, is it not reasonable to propose to you some inquiry into the causes alleged for such suspension, and how far such causes are removable; is it not wise, when you are sending such acts to Ireland, to communicate at the same time such assurances of your resolution to take the state of that country into your consideration? I am confident that such conduct would be at once consistent with policy and humanity, and that much of the apprehension and irritation which those acts of parliament may be naturally expected to produce, would be mitigated if accompanied by the adoption of a motion of the nature of that which I hold in my hand.

With regard to the intentions entertained by the last administration, to propose two acts similar to those I allude to, or to the character of the persons to whom the execution of the extraordinary powers which these acts confer, might be entrusted by either the late or the present government, it is my intention to say very little indeed. Because I do not wish to touch upon any topic of irritation, I will not enter much into comparisons. My hope and desire is to obtain an unanimous assent to the motion, as unanimity is necessary to give it complete effect. I shall abstain cautiously from anything that resembles invidious distinction. I know that to no set of men could power have been more safely confided than to the members of the late administration. I am sure, that in the hands of none, would power have been less liable to abuse; and whatever my disinclination to comparison may be, to them cannot be denied this just distinction, that power might have been granted to them with the less reluctance, as they manifested a disposition to accompany its existence by every means of concession and conciliation. When I reflect in whom the power of these acts was to have been in