of England, he thought their petitions truly refpectable, and that the Minifter could not decently remain in office, if the voice of the people was against him. Mr. Fox declared, that he would not retract from the declaration he had made on a former day, and he wished inftantly to meet him on the ground, and decide upon it. He had declared, that if fuch a doctrine was established, they must go to another place, and rescue themselves from flavery by other arguments than words. He called upon Sir Fletcher Norton, as the highett legal authority in the kingdom, to give his opinion, whether there was not, in the conftitution of Parliament, an inherent right in the Representatives of the people to control the exercise of any power in the Crown that tended to support a government by influence and corruption, against the voice of the people, against the redrefs of every national grievance, and in fubverfion of the freedom and independence of Parliament. The Speaker proceeded to give his opinion on this great conftitutional question, ftated in this critical fituation of public affairs. He first alluded to fome private tranfactions betwixt himself and the Minifter, which had proved the noble Lord to be no friend to him; and that, neither in his public or his private capacity, could he ever be a friend to Lord North either as a Minifter or a man. He stated, with the utmolt latitude, the right of the fubject to petition, and the duty of Parliament to give the utmost attention to the delires of their conftituents; but that in the prefent instance, the known integrity, apparent ability, and extensive property, rendered the prefent petitions as refpectable as if they had proceeded from the general voice of the people of England. Affociations and Committees he thought beyond the line of conftitutional application, and might run to excefies that were dangerous to public peace, and the fecurity of the State itfelf; but the petitions deferved a better treatment than they had found; they ought immediately to have been referred to a Committee, and the people of England ought to have been fatisfied how far the prayers of the petitions could or could not be complied with. With regard to the question of right, whether Parliament had a right, he was free to declare, that as Parliament had granted the Civil Lift for life, and given it in truft, as long as the conditions of the truft were obferved, Parliament ought not, and therefore he would fay could not inter fere in the expenditure of that revenue which they had given in truft. The conditions of that truft were but two-to maintain his household in dignity,—and to fupport the civil government of the country. Had it been proved, or even fuggefted, that the civil government had been stopped, or the King's household not properly maintained? We have no right then, at this time, to interfere with the controul of the King's household, much less to impofe conditions on the management of his own domeftic affairs, in a manner that the meanest subject could not bear. But the question before us involved, not only a queftion of domestic arrangement, but a queftion of ftate; and fuch matters were in every inftance liable to the infpection, and were the immediate objects of the controul of Parliament. The Board of Trade was a department of state, not of the household; it was become not only useless in its functions, but mischievous in its effects; it anfwered now no purpofe whatever, but to bring feven or eight penfioned Members to vote in every queftion that came before Parliament. He was therefore clearly, confcientiously, and firmly of opinion, that the Board of Trade ought to be abolished. In regard to the influence of the Crown, he was as much aftonished that any man should have the effrontery to deny its increafe, as that any man, who hoped to retain a reputation of public or private integrity, could rife in fupport of it. Influence had grown upon the weakness of our country; and perhaps our constitution had more to fear from its pernicious progrefs, than the foil of our country had to fear from the utmost efforts of our united eLemies. He himself held it his first and principal duty to oppofe the influence of corruption; as long as he was in the Chair, he would ardently with for the decreafe of the influence of the Crown; and if he left the Chair, his moft zealous efforts fhould for ever be employed in establishing and cementing the independence of Parliament. Lord North faid, that the honourable Gentleman had declared that he had not treated him as a friend, and that he could not in return look upon him as fuch. He did not know, he said, that he had ever given the honourable Gentleman any cause for complaint; he had not broke any promife with him. They had, indeed, had fome words leading to a negociation, but the honourable Gentleman and he could not agree; that was all. The Speaker in reply opened all the cir cum cumstances of the negociation. He faid, when he was appointed to the Chief Juftice hip in Eyre, he had ftipulated that he fhould not go out of the line of his profeffion. A meffage was fent to him by a Right Honourable Gentleman then in his eye, intreating him to accept of the chair of that House. He had accepted of it, under the exprefs condition that he should fucceed to the first high office in the law that should become vacant. After this he had heard from authority, which he could not difbelieve, that the Chief Juftice of the Common Pleas was to retire upon a penfion, and that a Gentleman whofe profeffional knowledge, fhort ftanding, want of experience, and fize of abilities were not equal to thofe either of the perfon who was to retire, or to many who had a better title, was to fucceed. This intimation, he faid, not a little furprised him. He went to the Minister, and took a friend with him, to infift that they should come to an implicit explanation. The noble Lord avowed the fact, and fhuffled and cut through a multiplicity of arts, to compromife it. Lord North faid, that he had not broke the contract. It was made by his predeceffor in office, and he did not think himfelf bound to obferve it. At the fame time the Committee would not discover any thing criminal in all this transaction. It was no more than one Judge going out of office, and another Gentleman fucceeding. The Speaker faid it was fomething more, and the Committee would call it an abominable tranfaction, when they were told that the change was to be made for money. Lord North faid, if it was fo, he was to touch none of it; it was, he fuppofed, to go to the Gentleman who was to retire. Mr. Rigby faid, he was the meffenger mentioned by the honourable Gentleman, and he would do justice to both parties. He had carried the meffage to the honourable Gentleman, and he had certainly accepted of the place under the conditions he had mentioned. But he did not know, for his part, that the noble Lord was privy to the terms, for he had carried the meffage from his predeceffor in office. The Attorney-general faid, it was to him the honourable Gentleman had alluded, as the perfon fuppofed to have the promife of the Chief Justicefhip of the Common Pleas he could however fay with truth, that he had never made any contract with the noble Lord, nor expected from him any favour whatever. He had indeed rejected fome proposals, which he did not think adequate to his fervices and his labour; and he would be happy to receive, with gratitude, the favour of his Sovereign. He admitted the inferiority of his talents, and acknowledged he was unequal to rank with that Gentleman. He adverted to the question, and opposed it, because a Council of Trade would be incompetent, precarious, and uncertain; and he objected to interfering with the King's revenue at all, because it would render the King dependent on his Minifters, and deftroy the monarchy of the empire. The Committee divided upon the claufe at two o'clock. Ayes 207-Noes 199. The Supporters of the bill therefore have carried the claufe, for abolishing the Board of Trade. Wednesday, March 15. Mr. Wilkes made his annual motion for expunging the refolution refpecting his former election for Middlefex. No debate enfued, but the House divided. For the motion 101-Against it 113 Majority only 12. NEW TAXES. At a quarter before fix, the Houfe having refolved itself into a Committee of Ways and Means, Lord North rose to open to the Committee his plan for establifhing a fund for the payment of the inte reft on the new loan of 12 millions. His Lordship obferved to the Committee, that his propofition was for an additional malt-tax. This duty to affect the private brewery, not the public. He did not mean that it thould lay any additional burthen on the pot of porter, or that the public brewer should have the most diftant pretence for railing the barrel of beer. The private brewery was totally free from the beer tax with which the public brewery was charged. It would therefore be juít and equitable to lay this additional duty upon those who brewed their own ale. Á difficulty arofe in the difcrimination of the tax. It had been prudently and wifely contrived for the fecurity of our freedom individually to reftrain excife-officers from entering the honfes of private men. It was his with to obferve the fame caution, and for this reafon he had rejected a mode which had been propofed of fecuring it by compofition, which would open a door for the evil; for where the compofition was not ftrictly and properly paid, the officers muft enter the house to fecure the revenue. had, therefore, preferred another mode, U He wirich which was, To lay a duty upon all malt, and to grant an allowance to the public brewer for the quantity of beer fold. To afcertain the quantum of this allowance, it would be neceffary to inquire into the manner of the brewery. The number of bushels of malt confumed for the last two years in England were 34,249,189, and the duty on this was 1,356,2291. The average receipt for one year was 678,114. From this there would be to deduct the quantity confumed in the public breweries. He had inquired minutely into the nature of the brewery, and he found, that in London two quarters of malt produced five barrels and three quarters of a barrel of beer. In the country, the fame quantity produced four barrels and a half. The allowance to the public brewer, therefore, ought to be, to the London brewer 1s. 4d. 16-23ds. per barrel, and to the country brewer 1s. 8d. 4- 19ths. He would propofe, however, that the fractions fhould be ftruck, and the allowance be to the London brewer 1s. 4d. and to the country is. 8d. per barrel; because certainly the new duty would tend to increase the bufinefs of the public brewery, and they would be very well pleased to pay that fraction for the advantage they would receive. He proposed to allow 4d. per barrel on the fmall beer. Perhaps, he faid, nothing ought to be allowed for that article, as in many breweries the small beer was drawn from the strong beer. In fome, however, it was not, and 4d, would be a very fair and just allowance. Apply these allowances to the quantity of beer produced in the public brewery, 250,000 23,000 In London to the amount of £. 90,000 In the country On fmall beer and the nett amount of the additional tax -on malt would be 310,000l. He begged leave to mention, that the duty on malt would be differently collected in Scotland than in England.—There was a kind of beer in Scotland known by the name of two-penny, which by an act about the time of the Union was to be in this proportion; when a tax was laid in England of 4s. 9d. it was only to be 2s. in Scotland. He said, that the barrel of beer in Scotland was produced from nearly the fame quantity of malt as it was in the country of England: the allowance, therefore, on this two-penny would be 3d. per barrel. The additional duty on malt was 6d. per bushel, which doubled the annual fun ded tax, but was only two thirds of the whole duty on malt; and this additional duty, after the allowances, he calculated to produce 310,000l. Having then laid a burden on the proper British beverage, it was natural for him to turn his eyes to other beverages; he first therefore fhould propofe additional taxes on low wines and fpirits, made from malt; on the former he proposed to lay a duty of id. per gallon, which would produce full 20,6171. On British fpirits he propofed a duty of 3d. a gallon, the produce of which would be 34,5571. The next object in his view was foreign fpirits; and firft brandy, on which he fhould propofe an additional duty of is. per gallon, which would produce 35,310l. Rum, though it came from the Weft-Indies, he could not but regard as a species of foreign fpirit, and he meant to lay the fame duty upon it as upon brandy, viz. 1s. per gallon; which, as the importation was more than double that of brandy. would at leaft produce 70,9581. Some perfons, he faid, might fuppofe he had laid too heavy a duty on rum and brandy, and that it would tend to increase fmuggling in brandies; he was convinced he had not; that the new duty would not leffen the confumption; and as to fmuggling, the duties were already fo high, that no increase of that dangerous trade was to be dreaded from the addition propofed. As brandy and rum were both not only luxuries, but pernicious luxuries, he thought them very fair objects of additional taxation. The next article he had turned his eye to had been lately tried, and experience had fhewn, that it would very well bear an additional duty, and that without any éncrease of price to the confumer. The article he alluded to was foreign wines. The Legiflatute had two years fince imposed a tax of 4 guineas a tun on Portugal wines, and 8 guineas on French, which, on the former, amounted to 1d. per bottle. The confequence was, the retail-venders, the masters of taverns, coffee-housemen, innkeepers, &c. had univerfally raised it upon the public 6d. a bottle. The profits upon this encrease had been fhared between the wine-merchant and the tavern-keeper, &c. the former having, as he understood, made the latter pay 121. a tun additional price, on account of the new duty. The tax he meant now to propofe was juft double the former, viz, an additional penny per bottle, and the wine-merchant and tavern-keeper having, as he had ftated, taken 6d per bottle of the confumer, might very well af ford ford to pay the new tax, without charging their cuftomers more than they now charged them, viz. 2s. 6d. per bottle. His Lordship dilated upon the probable effect of this new tax, and faid it was not the intereft of Great Britain to lay any heavy du'y on Portugal wines, because Portugal was our ancient and best ally; we had a kind of na tural connection with her in the wine trade. The new tax, he was pretty certain, would not decrease the importation, and as to any bad effects of it at home, he saw none. He ftated the whole amount of the importation of foreign wines, whence it appeared that out of 19,000 tons, annually imported, 14,000 and odd came from Oporto, 400 from France, best part of the remainder from Spain, and about 70 tons from Germany. He chatged the new duty at only 41. on Portugal wines, and 81. on French, declaring that for the fake of regulating the Custom-house business he meant to add the 5 per cent. the same as had been laid on other imports, &c. last year, which would bring the duty up to 4 guineas and 8 guineas, the fame as before. His Lord hip frated the produce of the additional tax on foreign wines at 72,000l. His next object was coals exported. To fhew that this was a juftifiable object, he remarked that the duty paid at the port of London was 2s. per chaldron more than was paid at Newcastle on exporting to Rotterdam, and other places, and therefore he meant to impose an additional duty of 4s. the Newcastle chaldron, which was double the London chaldron. The produce of this he gave at 12,8991. Upon the whole of thefe taxes, bis Lord fhip faid, he fhould propofe the additional duty of five per cent. the fame as was laft year impofed, which he took at 46,1931. All these feveral taxes put together would ftill fall fhort nearly 100,000l. of the fum wanted; in order to make up this, he fhould propofe various fmall taxes, and first a tax upon an article, which he was aware was a neceffary of life, and equally fo to the poor and the rich; the tax therefore would be felt univerfally, but he trusted the mode which he meant to impofe it would render it so trifling a burthen, that no person, however poor, would have caufe to complain. The article he meant had not been taxed last year, and was the article of falt. He stated the number of bushels accounted for to the Salt-office, faid the grofs produce of the prefent duties (which he alfo circumstantially stated) amounted to nine hundred thousand pounds, and yet the net revenue of falt was no more than 240,000l. charge of management, as had been freNor was the decrease imputable to the quently fuppofed. The entire charge of management was no more than 26,000l. The great difference between the grofs receipt and the net revenue was occafioned and bounties, upon the exportation of falted by the number of drawbacks, debentures, provifions, and for various other matters, all established for the benefit and encouragement of trade and commerce. A bushel of falt contained 56lb. The duty he meant would not give any colourable pretext for to impose would be rod, per bufhel, which the retail-vender to charge the confumer tion to the prefent price, because that 16. more than one farthing a pound in addi 24. per bushel, even had he impofed the duty at that rate, would only amount to a farthing a pound. His Lordfhip stated that a peck of fat was fufficient for the ufe of any little family a twelvemonth, and therefore tax, on a dread of its being oppreffive and there could be no ground of alarm at this grievous to the poor. His Lordship took the produce of this tax at 69,000l. additional duty of 6d. on each advertiseThe next matter he mentioned was an produce of which he estimated at goool., ment inferted in a public newspaper, the Another object was entirely a new tax, nual licence to be taken out by all dealers His taxes would then ftand thus: Malt 701,616 The total amount, his Lordship remarked, would somewhat exceed the money wanted to pay the intereft of the loan, but then there muft neceffarily be fome allowance for contingencies, He remarked further, that the collection of all these taxes would not occafion the appointment of an additional officer, or coft the Public any expence. He congratulated the Committee on the comfortable profpect for the next year, affuring them that there were, to his knowledge, various fubjects of efficient taxation yet open to the Public as refources, and which he had this year forborne to touch upon, for certain reafons. He mentioned alfo the 200,000l. of public monies which would fall in next year, and spoke of the Eaft-India Company as another field of expectation; declaring that the three, confidered together, would be more than adequate to any probable neceffity of the Public. His Lordship concluded with moving his first propofition. Mr. Hartley rofe as foon as the Chairman had put the question, and arraigned the proposed method of making an allowance to the brewer, fhewing that it was open to great fraud, especially in the allowance upon small heer. Lord North thanked the hon. Gentleman; faid he was by no means obftinately bent on his own propofition, that he should be glad to hear a better method fuggefted, and would most readily adopt it. The other motions were then put, and carried without any further oppofition. Monday, March 20. The order of the day being called for, the Contractors bill was read a third time, and palled. The Houfe then refolved itself into a Committee for the better regulating the King's Civil Lift. Mr. Elwes in the chair. The Committee proceeded to the claufe which pointed out the manner in which the office of the third Secretary of State should be difcharged; but as that office had not been abolished, the providing claufe was expunged. The next claufe was for referring to a Committee of the Privy-council the bufinefs now executed by the Board of Trade. Lord Nugent opposed the clause on conftitutional grounds. No public office or board, he said, had ever been established or abolished by act of Parliament but once; because it came properly within the prerogative of the Crown. At the Revolution, the Whigs found many establishments which they did not think proper to abolish. The Whigs had not new-modelled the conftitution, but had restored it to its former ftate: they had feparated the legislative from the executive power, and left both their indifputable rights. To make alerations in the conftitution might beddangerous; reformation was good-but, carried too far, it would end in the deftruetion of the State.-That there was a conftitutional influence in the Crown he admitted: that there was an increase of it at prefent he denied. Did the paffing of the Contractors bill that day day urge an increafe of influence? Did the abolition of the Board of Trade argue it ?—To refer the business of the Board of Trade to the Lords of the Council would be doing nothing; for they being at prefent fo numerous, very little attendance would be given, as one would always fuppofe, that from the number of Privy-counsellors there would be a fufficient number to attend business: hence would naturally follow a neglect of bufinefs. When he was at the Board, the late Lord Prefident and he had often a tetea-tete for hours together, without being able to find a third to make a Board; he therefore recommended it to the Committee to let the bufinefs flow in its own channel. Mr. Burke urged strongly for his clause. He was not, he laid, making any innovation by it; he was restoring to the Council the rights of judging in cafes where the colonies were concerned, and which rights, according to the authority of the Chief Juftice of the King's bench, could not be taken from it. If the Council was compofed of a great number of Members, be could point out a Committee from them that would attend to the bufinefs. The Marquis of Rockingham, Lord Shelburne, Lord Camden, Mr. T. Townhend, Col. Barre, would not refuse to act if they fhould |