that clothing, without which these new churches would be of no utility.

Mr. Maberly argued against the principle upon which it was proposed to accede to the prayer of this petition. The manufacturers and merchants of Scotland had, as well as the same classes in other places, materially profited from that monopoly of trade which Great Britain had enjoyed throughout the war. Those people, through whose labour that profit was obtained, were now distressed in consequence of the cessation of that monopoly; and was it fair, that instead of having their distress relieved by the capitalists whom they had enriched, that relief should be demanded from the public funds? He called upon the House to resist such a demand; any concession to it must serve to establish a most dangerous precedent.

and, and secondly, against the doctrine of the noble lord, that no relief should be granted to the poor, who were the subject of this petition, unless the proprietary of the district should submit to the poor's rate. To the observation of his hon. friend he would say, that he thought parliament equally bound to attend to the complaints, or to relieve the distress of every part of the inhabitants of Great Britain, all of whom had contributed to form the fund from which that relief was solicited; and to the position of the noble lord he would observe, that it would not be right to extend the poor laws to Scotland. But while he said this, let it not be understood that he was an enemy to the principle of these laws. That principle was indeed so entwined with the institutions of this country, that any one who should propose the repeal of the laws which rested upon it, must be deemed fitter for another place than for that House. But if these laws were restored to their original use, they wouldrose to move for the re-appointment of create no dissatisfaction in the country. It was their mal-administration, and especially the misappropriation of the funds in payment of wages, which had occasioned so much discontent. But, to return to the petition, he trusted that its prayer would be duly attended, and that some relief would be granted to such a deserving class of sufferers who, in fact, desired only to be employed and to be rewarded for their industry by the means of common subsistence.

Ordered to be printed.

SCOTCH BURGHS.] Lord A. Hamilton

the Committee to inquire into the state of the Scotch Burghs. He understood, that no opposition on the part of ministers was intended to the motion. The only alteration he should propose, was, to substitute, in the place of a gentleman who was not likely to attend, another hon. member. The report that was made by the former committee, was before the House, and he could appeal to it, as confirming every observation he had ever uttered on the subject. The abuses proved to exist, Lord A. Hamilton, on moving that the were so gross, so perpetual, and he might petition should be printed, stated, that it say, so flagitious, that nothing but an inwas a mistake to suppose, that there were vestigation into the causes could provide no poor's rates in Scotland, those rates a remedy. These abuses sprung from being very considerable, although there the practice of self-election in corporate were no poor laws in that country. But bodies endowed with the power of perpeeven if the system of poor laws were esta-tuating the abuse. When he had introblished in Scotland, were gentlemen aware that there were no less than between 20 and 30,000 persons in Glasgow who were not natives of that country, and how were those persons to be relieved? The Chan-peated now what he then stated, that neicellor of the Exchequer had last year obtained from parliament the grant of 100,000l. for building churches in Scotland, on the ground that the people were in want of such churches, but there was paragraph in this petition stating that the people could not go to church from want of clothing. Would it not, then, be but considerate in the right hon. gentleman and his colleagues, to consider of she means of supplying the people with

a

duced the subject first to the consideration of the House, it was retorted upon him, that whatever he might profess, his object was parliamentary reform. He re

ther himself nor the petitioners from the Royal Burghs sought parliamentary reform directly, although neither he nor they disguised from the House, that any alteration in the burghs must collaterally and in a small degree affect the representation in that House. If parliamentary reform grew out of the change, it would do so collaterally, and not directly. The strength of the existing abuses were fully illustrated in the fact, that three most

populous places, Inverness, Aberdeen, and even Edinburgh, were under a sentence of disfranchisement. As to Edinburgh, though he saw in his place the right hon. member (Mr. W. Dundas), yet it was now a question before the Court of Session, whether there had been an election or not? Aberdeen was in a worse state, as it had no vote whatever. Inverness, he believed to be in the same predicament. Under these circumstances, he was warranted in asking the House to pursue the inquiry further. The noble lord concluded with moving," that the Petitions from the Royal Burghs of Scotland be referred to a Select Committee." Mr. W. Dundas observed, that the noble lord, in moving for the renewal of the Committee, had said a great deal, of which he (Mr. D.), had never heard before, and which was not in any degree confirmed, even by the luminous report of the last committee. As to the election of Edinburgh, the only question arose from the chance absence of one of the magistrates. The noble lord had stated the Burgh of Aberdeen to be bankrupt; that he denied, and dared him to the proof. The noble lord had that night struggled to show, that parliamentary reform was not his object; he believed the noble lord before to feel that parliament would not suffer those corporate rights, guaranteed by the articles of the Union, to be shaken. All that could be expected was, to replace the boroughs in the state in which they stood previously to that compact, so that no burgess should be made liable to debts, over which he had no control.

Mr. Forbes reminded the House, that during the discussions of last session, he had uniformly maintained, that the burgh of Aberdeen was not bankrupt. He could now prove that facts justified his opinion: Aberdeen was paying an interest of four per cent on all its debts, and in the course of a year five per cent would be paid up on the arrears of the two last years. The town of Aberdeen was considered good security, and most of its creditors would feel greatly disappointed were the debts paid off. He did not rise to oppose the motion, for as far as the labours of the first Committee went, they were as productive of as little evil as of good.

The motion was agreed to, and Committee appointed.

gent rose, pursuant to notice, to move, "That there be laid before this House, a return of the number of persons liable to be struck off from the Chelsea Out Pension List, in consequence of His Royal Highness the Prince Regent's Proclamation, dated 28th October 1819; distinguishing those who originally enlisted for seven years under the Act 46 Geo. 3rd, whose time of service, according to engagement, has expired, and who are entitled under that act to certain pensions in consideration of wounds." His object in so moving was, to be enabled to move hereafter, for leave to bring in a bill to expunge so much from the act, commonly called the Chelsea Pension Act, as affected a certain number of persons now deprived, unjustly as he conceived, of pensions intended for the reward of their service. He did this with the greater pleasure, not only as he conceived that his motion affected a strong subject of public inquiry, and a subject involving points of no small constitutional importance; but also, because it affected a class of persons, than whose claims, he would venture to say, on the justice, the sympathy, the huma nity, and the gratitude of this country, it would be difficult to conceive any of a more sacred or imperious character. These men had come forward at the very time when it was found necessary to recruit the army by a new and invigorating system, in order to enable it to cope against a veteran and successful enemy. They had earned their well-contested glories, and had now retired on small but honourable pensions; which pensions, if the law had any power at all, the law of the land ought to establish as their property. He required parliament to look at their own acts, and to look at, what he thought, the illegal proclamation of October last. That proclamation set forth, that all those persons (excepting certain regiments only from its operation) who should not report themselves for a certain length of service, should be deprived of the pensions which they then enjoyed. Now, there were many hundreds who would be affected by this proclamation; particularly those (whose claims he should support) who were originally destined for seven years service; and who, having received certain wounds, were entitled to certain pensions, settled by the provisions of what was commonly called Mr. Windham's act. Such persons

CHELSEA PENSION LIST.] Lord Nu- having received their discharges, and

as these for desertion? He should apprehend they could not do so for being, in fact, no longer soldiers, they could not come under the enactments of the Mutiny bill, which only applied to the precise description of persons mentioned in its preamble: and although these "might not be actually discharged" from further service, yet the case was quite different with this body of men (for whom he addressed them), who might be broken in spirits and enfeebled in body, in consequence of wounds received in their country's service; and could not therefore be contem

being in fact, no longer soldiers, he would ask by what right, by what law, by what power, they could now be deprived of the pensions awarded to them by the act. He confined himself to that description of persons whose term of service had expired, and who received such pensions. Au hon. gentleman the other night had required them to admit the right of the Crown to deprive persons of their pensions, even in cases where they had been granted for life: he did not not intend to answer his requisition; he would not answer it, because it was not relevant to this subject-but more particularly be-plated by the provisions of the Mutiny cause, if necessary, he could find cases bill. Those individuals, in consequence directly to the point, which would go of those very wounds which obliged them quite counter to the hon. gentleman's as- to retire, would be placed under the nesertion. His own case was that of per- cessity of obeying any call made on them sons who had served their term of ser- by government, under the penalty of vice; and he rested it upon three grounds being deprived of their pensions. If the -upon enactments, upon regulations, and bill were to have a contrary operation, it upon authorities: on enactments, because would be a measure, not affecting the unof Mr. Windham's bill; on authorities, wounded soldier, but grievously affecting because of the opinions expressed in the that class of men, who, having performed speeches of all the hon. gentlemen who great public service, deserved a commenhad spoken upon that bill, at the time of surate public reward.-He next came to its introduction into that House; and on the rules and regulations of Chelsea hosregulations, because of those which were pital, which applied to their case. If any adopted conformably to it. [The noble one of those could be pointed out that lord here read two clauses of the act. tended to nullify Mr. Windham's bill, he 46 Geo. 3rd]. If this bill did not give to then should deny the right of the Crown, the soldier a vested right and property by promulging any set of resolutions, to to such pensions as should have been ap- nullify existing laws. There was, howpointed by the rules and regulations in ever, nothing of the kind in the rules and force at the time of the enactment, he regulations. There was not amongst them should be glad if the hon. gentlemen op- any one provision, which in any degree posite would tell him what it did do. In affected the interest of those persons. If fact, he could not in any other way un- a reference to these rules and regulations derstand what it meant. If it intended did not make his case strong enough, he otherwise, it was an absurdity, or worse should further support it by quoting sethan an absurdity; for it would hold out veral authorities, the force of which, he certain advantages to men enlisting them- believed, would not be disputed by hon. selves for a certain number of years; gentlemen opposite [Here the noble whereas, after so enlisting and serving, lord read an extract from Mr. Windham's they would find that they were liable speech, in which he insisted upon the neto be called out at any time of life under cessity of keeping strict faith with those penalties. These men had retired with who should enlist under the idea of enhonourable scars, and had received pen-gaging for limited service; and explained sions to which these honourable scars established their best title; but then came the proclamation of his majesty, dated in last October, and turned the whole of their claim to pension into waste paper. It called them out, perhaps at very great inconvenience to themselves, from their wives, their families, and their homes, and possibly from their trades and Occupations, under penalty. He would ask, how were they to punish men such

the advantages of his bill.] In addition
to this, he possessed also the authority of
the noble lord, the secretary for foreign
affairs, of the right hon. the president of
the board of control, and of the late Mr.
Perceval; and he defied the noble lord
(Palmerston) to produce any thing of
equal authority which could be held to
affect the claims of these men. He would
venture to say, that no act could be found
which might authorize the taking away of

similar pensions, except in the cases of persons who had engaged for life, or for a certain number of years, and had not gone through their stipulated service. A departure from a compact like that to which he had directed their attention, would be fatal to the spirit, and almost to the existence of the service. The superanuated soldier had imposed a debt of gratitude upon his country, which could never be repaid but by the most anxious, the most tender, the most vigilant solicitude, to secure for him that reward and that repose which his past services had so eminently merited.

the enjoyment of a pension; and if they did not, what did they give? In his opinion, these words were introduced to give conditional pensions to those who had not received pensions previous to the passing of the act. The noble lord, he thought, had entirely mistaken the object of this clause. It was well known, that previous to the passing of the act, the pension granted to the soldier was entirely dependent on the bounty of the Crown; and in this state of things, not alone was the man bound to prove a case of service and disability from wounds, but he must also produce the recommendation of his comLord Palmerston objected to the shape manding officer. Now, in the opinion of in which the noble lord had brought for- Mr. Windham, it was desirable to do away ward his motion. The paper which he had with this discretion, and to enact, that if a called for was not that which was neces- man should present himself, in every other sary for his purpose. He was very will-respect with a sufficient claim, his pension ing, however, to meet the noble lord upon should be granted, and he should not be the principle of this bill. Its intention subject to the caprice of his commanding evidently was, to enlarge the military force officer, or to the unjust or improper exof that day, by holding out farther induce-ercise of the authority of the Crown. It ments to recruits. The noble lord thought that this bill gave a permanent and indefeasible right to the soldier to enjoy his pension, under whatever circumstances he might have received it. This was not the case, nor had such a regulation ever been contemplated by Mr. Windham: all the law did was, to create a right under certain conditions, which conditions or regulations were reserved for the Crown to make. What were the words of the act? With regard to the 5th section, it did not bear at all upon this question. The only meaning of the 5th section was, that men, who entered the service under certain regulations should not be deprived of the benefit arising from those regulations by the Crown, at any subsequent period. In short, it went to secure to the soldier the benefit of the regulation which existed at the time of his enlistment. But the third section was that on which the question turned. The 3rd section said, "that from and after the passing of the act, &c., any soldier shall be entitled to his discharge by reason of the expiration of the period of service, fixed in the orders and regulations of his majesty's government;" leaving it in the power of the king to fix the period of service: and it further provided that men so discharged should be entitled to receive such pensions, allowance, or relief, as should be fixed in the orders and regulations in such cases respectively." These words he apprehended, did not give a perpetual right to

only remained then to say, what was the period at the end of which a man should be entitled to a pension, or what degree of disability would justify his claiming. This point was left in the discretion of the Crown, who adopted such regulations as the circumstances of the service seemed to warrant; and to these regulations, whatever they might be, the soldier was bound to submit. This he thought, was the only fair interpretation of this act. But the noble lord said that he had authorities which led to a different interpretation. Now, he was sure he could refer to the authority of Mr. Windham himself, as corroborative of his proposition, that this bill did not give to a man an indefeasible right to his pension. If either Mr. Windham or general Fitzpatrick had entertained such a notion, they would have distinctly stated it on the passing of the bill; but so far from this being the case, the regula tions adopted under their auspices, after the passing of the act, clearly proved the converse of such a proposition. In fixing the periods for which the men should enlist, it was seen that for the first seven years no pension was granted; but that if an enlistment took place for fourteen years, and that period was completed, the right to a pension existed; and if the service was extended to 21 years, the right arose to a larger pension; but if a soldier were discharged before the completion of the three full periods of service, namely, 21 years, and should be in the receipt of his