to exercise their influence for that pur-| pose. The amendment was put, and negatived. After several clauses had been agreed to, Lord Kenyon moved that the House resume, and the chairman report progress. Earl Grey and Lord Holland suggested the propriety of the committee continuing to consider those clauses which were not likely to excite much discussion, and to pass over those which might give rise to objections. After some conversation, Lord Kenyon persisted in his motion, that the House should resume, and their lordships divided upon that question :-Contents 14; not-contents 113; majority 99. In the absence of strangers, Lord Rolle threatened if the committee continued to sit, to divide it upon every question that could be raised. Under these circumstances, the duke of Wellington submitted to an adjournment, HOUSE OF COMMON S. Tuesday, April 7. ROYAL CANAL COMPANY OF IRELAND.] Lord Tullamore said :-I hold in my hand a petition from the Directors of the Royal Canal Company of Ireland, complaining of a grievous injury inflicted on their vested rights. I feel it my duty, Sir, to call the attention of the House to this petition, as the subject matter of complaint involves principles of great public importance; and I can assure the House I will not trespass longer on their time than I feel is absolutely necessary in discharge of that duty which I owe to the petitioners who have done me the honour to intrust their petition to my care. Sir, the petitioners have not presumed to address your honourable House, till they have been deprived of all other means of resistance. From the peculiar circumstances in which they are placed, no other course is left open to them but this; and they come here to seek protection from the injury about to be inflicted on their rights and properties. Sir, there exist in Ireland two canals-the Grand Canal and the Royal. Most unfortunately for the interests of both, they were executed in parallel lines, ROMAN CATHOLIC CLAIMS.] Mr. Max- running for about thirty miles from Dublin, well presented a petition from the inhabi- at a distance of about six miles from each tants of Paisley, expressive of their satis- other. This fatal error has been attended faction at the Catholic Relief bill having with such ruinous consequences to each, passed; and observed, that the petitioners that the Royal Canal does not yield one lamented that this excellent bill should per cent on the capital expended. At this have been followed by an inroad upon point the canals diverge to their extreme certain constitutional principles of their point of separation between seventeen and fellow-countrymen, but with great judg-eighteen miles. Now, the complaint conment, confined their expression to the fact of the case. He agreed with them entirely the principle of the constitution was attacked; but no right was violated, and no advantage withdrawn from the miserable instruments of suffrage, who had no claim to the title of freeholders. He had given no vote on the bill at all-not as being against the bill-but from the fear of having it used as a precedent in cases of future votes upon corrupt Boroughs. He could see no use that the votes on Irish forty-shilling franchises were, either to the individuals or to the empire. He found them destructive to their temporal interests, and a great encouragement to those hovel establishments which sent out constant swarms of poor uneducated labourers, who were driven by want to acts of outrage, and by acts of outrage into England and Scotland--in both countries destructive to the comfort and well-being of the native workmen. : tained in this petition is, that the government have sanctioned the issue of 18,0007. out of the public purse, for the purpose of executing an off-branch from the Grand Canal to Kilbeggan, in the direction of the Royal Canal, which will again approximate the two canals, and bring them within eight or nine miles of each other. This extension by an off-branch, they are advised by the highest law authorities in Ireland, is illegal. Now, Sir, as the government exercise a control over their expenditure, they are prevented from following any other mode of attempting to obtain redress for the injuries complained of. I must explain, in a few words, the circumstances attending this grant. About the time of the dissolution of lord Liverpool's government, the directors of the Grand Canal Company, and John Lambert, the proprietor of the town of Kilbeggan, applied to the lord lieutenant for an advance of money out of the consoli of parliament for protection against this injury. I am aware that the noble lord will attempt to justify the conduct of government, by assuming, that the act of 40 Geo. 3rd is virtually repealed; but I deny that it is so. That act was formed for the protection of the rival canals, as well as for the issue of 500,000l. towards their completion. When that sum was expended, it was necessary to pass other acts to empower the granting of further sums of money; but nothing in any recent acts repeals the protecting parts of this act. This, then, Sir, is the injury of which the petitioners complain; the more so, because this lavish expenditure of the public money can be productive of no sufficient benefit to the public; a few individuals will alone receive advantage from this work, which is useless, unprofitable, and uncalled for; and I will assert, that if inquiry is instituted, it will be found the loan commissioners have issued the money without sufficient or proper security, and that no reasonable expectations can exist that the principal will ever be repaid. The village of Kilbeggan has no trade, and is situated in the centre of an unproductive district, bounded on the north by the Royal Canal, on the west by the river Shannon navigation, and on the south-east by the Grand Canal: it is within five miles of Tullamore, the largest inland corn market in Ireland, affording every facility possible for trade, and where, as well as at Athlone and Ballymahon, individuals have expended large sums in building corn stores and warehouses, on the belief that the same sources of supply would be continued to those markets. It is not the Royal Canal Company who alone complain, it is the public generally. These, Sir, are the injuries against which the petitioners complain; and they pray that parliament will support its own enactments, and afford them protection. I beg to express my most anxious hope that government will take this petition into their consideration : if not, I shall feel reluctantly obliged, on a future day, to give notice of a motion founded on this petition, and that the petition be referred to a committee up stairs. dated fund, for the purpose of making a branch canal to the town of Kilbeggan. I got intimation of this application, and addressed a letter to lord Melbourne, the then Secretary of State for Ireland, stating, amongst numerous objections to this proposed work, that the 10th and 40th George 3rd had not been complied with, which enacts "that no aid out of any public • money shall be given for completing any canal unless the scheme be first laid before the directors-general of inland navigation." After some correspondence, it was determined to submit the plans to the board of directors, and to stand by their decision; who, after a minute investigation, reported, that it would be injurious to existing and long-established interests, and that they could not feel justified in recommending the work as being one of public utility. The measure was, in consequence, abandoned; and great was our surprise to find, that on the appointment of lord Anglesey, as lord lieutenant, and my noble friend as Secretary, the application for this advance of money was renewed, and was carried on with so much secresy, that I believe the warrant was actually signed before the application for this money had transpired. I wrote several remonstrances to the noble lord, and have to thank him for the courtesy and attention which he paid to my communications; but, how great was the consternation of the Royal Canal Company, to find it was the noble lord's determination to sanction the issue of this money, in direct opposition to an act of parliament, the 40th George 3rd, the 26th section of which states, "that no off-branch shall be authorised by the said directors which shall interfere with or approach towards either canal," &c. From this startling determination the Royal Canal Company wished to appeal to the lord lieutenant in council, but were informed the acts of parliament had not contemplated this case; that if the directors had approved, and the lord lieutenant had negatived, an appeal day to the council against his decision, but no provision was made for the present case. If they came to this House and asked for a private committee, government would not meet the expense. Government controls their expenditure, and naturally would not allow of an expenditure of their funds in applying against their own decisions. This, Sir, is the only course left for the petitioners to pursue, and they look with confidence to the justice and wisdom Lord F. L. Gower said, he had recommended the extension of the benefits of the branch canals to the lord lieutenant, so as to embrace the district alluded to; as it appeared to him that that part of the country ought not to be precluded from the advantages of inland navigation, Ordered to lie on the table. CHARING CROSS IMPROVEMENTS.] Mr. D., W. Harvey, in rising to move for some returns connected with the expenditure of the Charing Cross Improvements, said, it was very desirable that the public should understand what was the exact sum which those alterations were to cost, and that they should not vote 400,000l. while they left to an architect or a surveyor the power to increase it to the extent of a million if it pleased his fancy or his caprice. It was necessary for the interests of the public that these persons should be tied down to some precise estimate, or system of expenditure; for according to what they had lately seen, there seemed to be no bounds to the extravagance practised by the public agents and surveyors in the accomplishment of their designs. The sum originally voted for the improvements of the Strand and Charing Cross was 851,2131., but the whole sum expended was 1,147,5137. making an excess of upwards of 296,000l. over the original estimates. It appeared, too, that although this sum had been expended, the whole of the productive available property in the hands of the commissioners was only worth 956,9107. leaving a sum of 190,6031. as a dead loss to the public from this transaction. That was the dead loss of the concern, and it was accounted for by sums paid to architects, surveyors, auditors of accounts, and all the other parts of the machinery that those improvements had put in motion. Now, it was for the purpose of ascertaining the way in which this sum of 190,0007. had been applied, that he moved for the return; because he understood, that, in addition to the sums received by these architects and surveyors, some of them had been permitted to take advantage of their situation, and obtain the preference of leases of plots of ground, which they were afterwards able to dispose of at a considerable profit. In addition to this, which he called an act of injustice, because the land should be offered fairly to the highest bidder, he understood that still greater injustice had been practised by the commissioners, by the manner in which they purchased particular plots of grounds and tenements. The act for making these improvements allowed the commissioners a period of seven years to complete them, and they had taken advantage of that power to purchase in various places; so that manyhouses, particularly about St. Martin's lane, were left in an individual condition, and their inhabitants, from the removal of their neighbourhood, deprived of a great portion of the business they formerly enjoyed. He had conversed with one of them, a butcher, on that very morning, and was assured by him, that his business, which three years ago brought him in upwards of 4,000l. a-year, was not now producing returns of more than 1,2002. a-year. He would therefore move," That there be laid before the House 1, an account in detail, under separate heads, showing what particular sums were respectively applied to the different purposes specified in the item 542,2091. 19s. 4d., as stated as expended in the account A of the return ordered by this House to beprinted on the 19th March last,- 2. A "similar account, specifying in detail, under separate heads, the several particu lars, comprising the item for the original estimates of 748,7921. 12s. 10d., granted for the Strand improvements, and mentioned in account B. of the same return, contrasting the same with the sums actually or contemplated to be paid, together with a statement of the causes of the differences, if any, between the original and the present estimates.-3. " A return containing a description of the property purchased and agreed to be purchased, and the date and terms of each contract, for carrying into execution the act of 7th Geo. 4th., c. 77, specifying such parts, with the terms thereof respectively, as have been disposed of; together with the estimated value of the residue, whether the same be disposed of by rental or absolute sale.-4. "A return containing a description and the locality of the Crown property sold, or agreed or contemplated to be sold, as comprised in the several items of 143,9267. 11s. 9d., and 159,9051. 88. 6d., and 139,100l. also mentioned in the said account." Mr. Warburton supported the motion, and complained of the course adopted by some surveyors, who instead of putting the lots up to public biddings, had taken leases themselves, and had afterwards underlet the ground at great advantage. This was a practice that ought to be checked, and which demanded the attention of the go... vernment. 『rs»::es, *r}#* Lord Lowther, in reply to the observa❤ tions of the hon. member, with reference the excess of expenditure over the original estimate, and the disappointment as to the proceeds, he could only refer the hon. member to the difference which was produced, by adding the improvements of Exeter 'Change to the original plan; the widening of that part of the Strand ; and the general loss sustained by making that great thoroughfare sixty feet wide from Exeter 'Change to Charing-cross. If hon. members, after the plan and estimates were laid before them, determined upon having Exeter 'Change pulled down, they must allow for the additional expense; and it could not be supposed that if so much ground was thrown into carriage and footways, the plots would be as valuable as when they were twice the size. The hon. member had gone a good deal into details; but for his part, he did not see the objects to be attained by granting the returns he moved for; while, at the same time, they would expose transactions and agreements to the prejudice of the parties, and calculated, at the same time, to retard those arrangements which still remained to be carried into effect with others. For these reasons, and because the whole of the accounts would be laid before the House, in the triennial statement, a short time after the Easter holidays, he hoped the hon. gentleman would be content to receive any information he desired at the office, and withdraw his present motion. to the undue preference shewn to surveyors, and to particular individuals, begged to say, at once, that there was not one word of truth in those allegations. It was quite true, that the commissioners had seven years to complete the works, but the act had not passed that House more than three years, and during that time they had not the opportunity of clearing more than a very small portion of ground. He believed there were three plots disposed of for building at the present moment. The first of these plots had been disposed of to the vicar of St. Martin's, to build a new vicarage. The second had been let to a tradesman, after the commissioners had advertised it, and received public tenders from various persons. The third had been let to Mr. Baker, a builder, well known to many members: but not one of the lots had been disposed of to any one connected, in the slightest degree, with the office of Woods and Forests, or without allowing all reasonable competition; and as long as he had the honour to manage the affairs of that office, he was determined to pursue the same course, with reference to all its transactions, and to dispose of all the ground by public tender. If the hon. member choose to assert, that the commissioners had been lavish of their gifts to those connected with them, he thought he was bound to prove his charges. All he could say at present was, that they were altogether unfounded. It was equally Mr. C. Barclay said, that while this unjust to say, that any preference had subject was before the House, he would been shewn in favour of those who offered take occasion to suggest to the noble lord their houses for sale. The persons to the propriety of finishing that most useful whom the hon. member alluded, were work, the opening of the Bird-cage-walk. those who demanded most extravagant A very few hundred pounds, would, he besums for their good-will; which the go-lieved, be sufficient for that purpose; and vernment commissioners could not, with any regard to their duty, consent to pay. It was impossible to judge, from the mere exterior of the shops, what was the value of the trade; and when they were told, as they frequently were, "My trade here is nothing compared with large orders I have from the country, and which I shall probably lose by my removal," they could not do otherwise than refer the matter to a jury, in order to ascertain what compensation they really deserved. For these reasons, the clearing proceeded very slowly, and those who complained were so extravagant in their demands, as to render an appeal to arbitration, or a jury, absolutely necessary. Upon the questions of as a very populous neighbourhood was now growing up in the vicinity of the king's Palace, he hoped this improvement would be completed as soon as possible. Mr. Hume understood, that the individuals who had been appointed to ascertain the value of some of the buildings to be pulled down, had themselves become the purchasers of those buildings, in order to take advantage of the re-sale, and in other instances had taken leases under similar circumstances, in order to benefit themselves by sub-letting them. If this really had been the case, he thought it was high time that some decided measure should be taken to prevent a continuance of it. With respect to the present motion, as the noble lord promised to put the hon. gentleman in possession of whatever Sinformation he required, he thought it bwould be as well that he should withdraw the motion; although he thought that it had very properly been made. 『 1 Mr. Bankes thought, that a more efficient control than that which at present existed over the expenditure of the public money on public buildings and improvements, was highly expedient. Great sums had been lately expended in this way, which had produced very unsatisfactory results, rendering it highly necessary, that the actual cost should be nearer to the estimates than had hitherto been the case, In the case to which he more particularly alluded, the estimate was fixed at from 400,000l. to 500,0007., while more than three times that amount had been already spent, without completing the plan of the estimate. The Chancellor of the Exchequer admitted, that it was very desirable that the actual cost should approach as near as possible to the estimate, and that the control argued for by the hon. gentleman should exist. The subject had been for some time under the consideration of the government; but there had been no new undertaking to test the efficiency and practicability of definite rules, on the apportioning of the expenditure to the estimate. 里 The motion was withdrawn. the commissioners, that sir Jonah Barrington improperly detained 600, of which he gave no account or satisfactory return. In the other case, the same judge was charged with detaining 2004., in a matter relating to salvage. He felt that this was an inquiry of the utmost importance, as well as it related to the individual whose conduct was impugned as to the purity and integrity of the discharge of judicial functions. Besides the eighteenth Report of the commissioners, he would also propose to refer to the Committee a Letter which he had received from sir Jonah Barrington, subsequently to the close of the labours of the commissioners, on the subject of these charges. This Letter had Rot been received until a period after that at which the commissioners intimated to him that it was their intention to close their labours. However, he thought it was but right that sir Jonah should have an ample opportunity for his vindication; and he therefore proposed to annex this Letter to the Report of the Commissioners. The motion was agreed to. SPANISH CLAIMS.] On the bringing up of the Report of the Committee of Supply, Mr. Hume wished to know what was the nature of the claims for which so large a sum as 200,000l. was to be voted. A satisfactory statement upon this subject should be laid before parliament before so large a sum Lord large a sum was appropriated to such a purpose. IRISH ADMIRALTY COURT.] Lord F. L. Gower rose to move "for the appointment of a Committee to inquire into certain proceedings in the Court of Admiralty in Ireland." It would be necessary for him only to call the attention of the House to a few circumstances on which he rested his motion. He would, in the first instance, propose to refer to the committee the eighteenth Report of the commissioners of Judicial Inquiry in Ireland, which rendered it necessary that some further proceedings should be instituted. In that report, the conduct of the chief judge of the Admiralty, sir Jonah Barrington, was animadverted upon in two instances, during the period from 1797 to 1810, in which he presided over the Admiralty Court in Ireland. The transactions referred to in the Report of the 1.commissioners occurred in the year 1805. The first of them referred to the case of the ship Nancy, in which it was stated by The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, that since the last meeting of the House he had obtained some information on the nature of the claims, which he trusted, would prove satisfactory to the hon. gen. tleman. These claims were of three classes. The first related to the capture of slave-ships which had been seized but not condemned, between the years 1808 and 1817, previous to the Convention, respecting the capture of ships, which had been entered into between his majesty and the king of Spain. The claim on account of one vessel alone amounted to 15,000l. The second class of claims was on the score of demurrage and the detention of Spanish vessels during our war with North America. Our cruizers during that period entertained a suspicion of Spanish vessels, and from this arose the detention, in some instances, out of which, |