Page images
PDF
EPUB

What had they been doing, ever since the question was first agitated, but compromising in some way or other? In consequence of the regulations that had been made, much amelioration had taken place, and that gradual system was, in his mind, the best and most certain way of finally effecting an abolition. From what they had already seen, it was fair to conclude that slavery would be abolished by the West Indians themselves, and equally so to believe, that in the same proportion as it was discontinued by them, the barbarism of the Africans would be diminished.

Mr. Este objected to the plan proposed, as tending to the rapid separation of the colonies from this country. A distinction had been attempted to be made between taxation and legislation, but in this question they could not be separated. The agitation of the question of legislating for the colonies was dangerous in the extreme. It would, in fact, be drawing the sword against the colonies, to attempt, by an act of the British legislature, to tax the islands.

Mr. W. Smith agreed with those who were for a total and immediate abolition; at the same time whilst that could not be obtained, every measure that tended to ameliorate the condition of the slaves should have his support. He thought it necessary to say something on the argument, that much might be expected from colonial legislation; to call the attention of the House to the laws of those islands; and then ask them what they had to expect in fairness from such legislators? For this purpose it became necessary for him to read the laws of the different islands for the management of their negroes. Mr. Smith then read those of the latest date in each island, and commented on their absurdity, cruelty, and injustice.

Mr. Secretary Dundas said, he did not intend to enter into the general question of the abolition of the slave trade. With regard to the question itself, he would repeat what he had stated before, that unless we had the concurrence of the colonies themselves, all that we could do in the way of internal regulation was not worth a straw. The hon. gentleman had opened his speech by desiring the House not to anticipate any of his conclusions, and, if he was rightly informed, had been so cautious as to conceal his intentions by this motion, from his own confidential friends. This caution had at least secur

ed him a patient hearing; for if he had told them, that his proposition went to the subversion of all colonial laws, property and rights could be productive of no one good purpose, and tended to produce an immediate and dangerous quarrel between this country and her colonies, he certainly would not have been suffered to bring forward any such proposition.-He agreed in the general opinion, that the question of right to legislate ought not to be agitated, except in cases of necessity; and he would venture to say, that the bill, if passed into alaw, could produce no good, but would be extremely dangerous in its consequences, by opposing to the com plaints already made in our colonies a question of doubtful legislation. He should therefore give the motion his decided negative.

Mr. Manning contended, that the regu lations adopted by the colonial assembly of Jamaica in 1792, which were most advantageously framed for the happiness of the negroes, were, in themselves, sufficient to prevent any necessity for the measure proposed. If the hon. mover referred to that act, he would find that the greatest attention had been given to the rearing of children.

Mr. Francis, in reply, observed, that if the declarations which had been so frequently and so strongly made by those who opposed his plan, had been attended to by themselves, he should not that night have brought forward his motion. He apprehended, both from the result of a former debate, and the probable event of the present, that nothing effectual would be adopted for the relief of the men whose miserable situation was submitted to the judgment of the House, It had been urged, that the bill which he proposed to introduce went to renounce the right of taxing the colonies; but he positively denied that it could bear such a construction. He would not press a division on his motion, but hoped that gentlemen would come forward themselves, and propose measures to alleviate the distresses of the slaves.

The motion was then negatived.

Mr. Abbot's Motion for a Committee to inspect Temporary Expiring Laws.] April 12. Mr. Abbot rose and said :--In consequence of the notice which I had the honour to give yesterday, I shall now beg leave to mention a subject which appears to me of very considerable importance;

| public affairs may force upon our considerations must certainly be desirable. It would enable us to profit readily by the experience of our ancestors; and either to preserve a consistent policy by reenacting similar laws under like circumstances, or to improve upon the given precedents of former ages; and at all events not to depart from them unadvisedly, whenever such a departure might be judged prudent and politic. A digested report of this class of laws would accomplish all these important ends.-If, Sir, the House should be disposed to adopt the motion which I shall now submit to their consideration, I can venture to assure them, that although the investigation may require some length of labour, and although the details may be in some degree operose, nevertheless the result of it may be expected within no great compass of time. And I cannot but hope that there may possibly be derived from this inquiry some useful information upon the general condition of our statute laws; if the House should be farther inclined to authorize the committee to report such observations as may arise out of the matters referred to their consideration. The motion which I shall now move is, "That a Committee be appointed to inspect and consider all the Temporary Laws whatever of a public nature, which are expired, or expiring; and to report to the House, a statement of all such expired laws, as shall appear to them to have been made upon occasions, whereof the like may recur hereafter; and also a statement of all the expiring laws of a public nature: describing each statute by its principal matter, date, chapter, section, and title; and distinguishing the duration of such as are expiring; together with the observations of the said committee arising out of the several matters referred to them."

stating at the same time, that the measures (which according to my conception) ought to be taken at present, will not be attended with any great difficulty, nor liable (as I should hope) to any objection whatever. The subject, Sir, is the general state of all our laws which are of a temporary nature. Gentlemen are aware that a partial inquiry into this matter is annually intrusted to committees appointed for that purpose; and the committee of the present year have pursued their ordinary labours, according to the customary course of its duty, and according to the limited nature of their authority. But, Sir, upon revolving this matter in my own mind, and searching into the usage of parliament in former times, and conferring with several persons whose peculiar stations, pursuits, and habits of life render them more immediately conversant with subjects of this sort, it does appear to me, that we owe it to our selves and to the public, to extend the scale of our inquiries, and to enter upon a larger field of investigation: not merely confined in the ordinary way to the consideration merely of such expiring and expired laws as are immediately, and at present fit to be revised or continued; but comprehending a view of all the temporary laws whatever, and providing ourselves with a permanent register of their contents. With regard to the expiring laws, the absolute necessity of it is obvious. Mischiefs may happen (and such mischiefs have happened heretofore) by the undesigned expiration of a law which ought to be continued, or by the supposed continuance of a law which has in fact expired, a circumstance which may very possibly escape notice where any such laws have originated at any remote period of time, and now lie buried in the multiplicity of our statutes. If, in the execution of criminal justice, any one such instance of mistake should occur (as in other times has actually occurred in civil cases) every man would shudder at an event which might he irretrievably fatal. A register, therefore, of these laws, with their duration accurately noted, and always present to the attention of parlia ment, would effectually prevent such a calamity. The knowledge of our expired laws, if not of equal urgency, is perhaps not of less importance. To have a ready view of all the experimental legislation of former ages, in regard to such matters as the course of time or probable chances of [VOL. XXXII.]

The motion was agreed to, and a Committee appointed. Ön the 12th of May, Mr. Abbot presented to the House the Report from the said Committee; a copy of which will be found in the Commons Journals, Vol. 51, p. 702.

Debate in the Commons on the Dog Tax.] April 5. The House having resolved itself into a Committee on the Leicestershire Petition for a Tax on Dogs,

Mr. Dent intreated the indulgence of the committee, while he stated the grounds of his motion. A tax upon dogs, he said, was not only much desired, but [38]

Per

was become absolutely necessary. haps this was the first instance, in which the people demanded an addition to their burthens. It was the chief object of the motion, to promote the relief and benefit of the poor. If carried into effect, it would lessen the poor-rates, render provisions more cheap and plentiful, diminish the instances of hydrophobia, and at the same time open a considerable source of revenue. The diminution of the consumption of flour, oatmeal, and those broken victuals which came from the tables of the affluent, and which at present, were consumed by dogs, would contribute greatly to alleviate the distresses of the poor. An increase of population was always the effect of plenty of provisions; and upon this principle, the applieation of that quantity of food which was at present consumed by dogs, to the use of the poor, would tend to augment the population of the country. The number of dogs had lately increased so much, that it afforded matter of serious alarm. He calculated the population of the country to be ten millions, and these might compose two millions of families. Allowing a dog to each family, the number of dogs would amount to two millions; but supposing them to be diminished one half in consequence of the tax, there would still remain one million. Upon these he would propose to levy a tax of 2s. 6d. a head, indiscriminately, except those which serve as guides to blind men. This would produce a revenue of 125,000l. -Mr. Dent proceeded to state from do.cuments in his possession, the ravages which were committed by dogs, the quantity of provisions consumed by them, and the increase of hydrophobia. He first mentioned a recent pamphlet by Dr. Barry, upon the subject, which contained many unanswerable arguments in favour of the tax: next a number of letters, which he had received, to show that a tax on dogs was desirable on account of their destruction of cattle; and last their great consumption of provisions. From the Manchester Philosophical Transactions, it appeared, that 15,000 sheep were annually destroyed by dogs. He thought this number much under-rated, and that it amounted nearer to 50,000. He had a letter, informing him, that in a forest in Devonshire, one dog had wounded 400 sheep, and his correspondent added, that 200 men, with as many dogs, had gone in search of this destructive animal, but

had not been able to find him. Another dog had been seen killing two sheep, which having done, he went and washed himself in a pond, so that there were no marks of blood upon him. The fact was told to his master, who agreed to hang him up for a few minutes by the hind legs, in order to put his guilt or innocence to the test, and from the quantity of blood which he vomited, he was declared guilty. He wished the chancellor of the exche quer to pay particular attention to these facts, as a certain dog had been found killing sheep in the neighbourhood of Holwood in Kent, with "The right hon.

(he left the House to fill up the blank) upon the collar, and the dog was spared on account of his master.-Hy. drophobia had lately increased to a shocking degree. In one week, in the course of last year, no fewer than $3 persons, infected with this distemper, had applied to the Manchester Infirmary. So far he called on the humanity of the House to adopt his motion, and he trusted they would be the more inclined to do it, when he informed them that allowing a penny per day for the food of one million of dogs, it amounted annually to 3,000,000l., which was 700,000l. more than all the rates for the aged poor of the country, and yet no dog, he thought, could be kept for less than a penny per day. By a letter from a gentleman at Kingston-uponThames, he learned that sheeps heads, sheeps hearts and plucks, &c. were bought up as offal to feed dogs, although the poor were glad to purchase such provisions, and from his inquiries at twenty different markets, he learned that in London people did the same. One gentleman he had heard of, who contracted with his mealman to supply his kennel with wheat and flour, oats, and meal, at 800l. per annum. He himself knew a gentleman who expended 400l. per annum on the same articles for his dogs. pack of fox-hounds could not be kept for less than from 1,000l. to 2,000l. per year, and it was an absolute fact, that after a long chase, a gentleman rode into a country town with his fox-hounds clamouring with hunger, and every baker's shop in the town was ransacked for bread to satisfy them. Under all these circumstances, therefore, he hoped that the resolutions he meant to propose would not be rejected. He then moved, "That a tax of 2s. 6d. per annum be imposed on Dogs of every description.

A

Mr. Pitt did not think there was any thing improper in laying some tax on dogs; but the committee would feel it necessary to draw a line of distinction. It was clear that the poor should not keep a great number of dogs; there were many indigent persons, nevertheless, to whom dogs were useful. Such persons ought to be distinguished from the opulent; otherwise the tax would be a harsh one. He should therefore propose, by way of amendment, that instead of a duty of 2s. 6d., there be a duty of 3s. on each dog, meaning afterwards to propose in a committee on the bill, that all persons who do not pay assessed taxes, shall be charged only the duty of 1s. for each dog.

Mr. Buxton thought the proposed tax a good one, but considering it rather a regulation of police than any thing else, he saw no reason why the dogs kept by the poor should be distinguished from others. If a poor man kept a dog, and received relief from the parish, the parish supported his dog as well as himself. Mr. Wilberforce thought the humanity proposed to be extended to the poor was, in this case, misapplied. The true spirit of the tax was not to take from the purse of the poor, but to prevent those who were not perfectly able to bear the waste and expense, from keeping dogs. He was persuaded, that, though the hydrophobia did not so often as was generally supposed, proceed from the bite of mad dogs, yet it was so often the case, that every thing should be done that had a tendency to abridge the excessive number of those animals. By doing this, humanity would be best shown to the poor; for experience had proved, that the sufferings from canine madness were almost exclusively confined to the poor. The higher orders very seldom suffered in that way.

popular, this he believed would be so; and he felt great satisfaction that he had been among those who first suggested it. He mentioned several instances to show that dogs, multiplied as they now were, were a great nuisance.

The amended motion was agreed to; and on the 15th, a bill pursuant thereto was brought in and read à first time.

April 25. Mr. Dent moved the order of the day for going into a committee on this Bill. The question being put, "That the Speaker do now leave the chair,"

Mr. Sheridan said, he had never seen a bill so absurd and objectionable throughout; and indeed he was not sorry that it was so it appeared to him a just punishment for the pride and presumption of those who, because they had a seat in that House, imagine themselves to be so many chancellors of the exchequer, and impatiently stepped forward to propose new taxes. He knew not whether the hon. mover was stimulated upon Pythagorean principles, to pursue at present those resentments or antipathies which he might have conceived in some former state of existence against a race of animals so long distinguished as the friends and favourites of men; he would undertake however to show, that the present bill was not admissible, in any of its provisions. In regard to the bill itself, he never met with one more extraordinarily worded. The folly of it extended even to the title; the title should have been a tax bill, it was nevertheless entitled "A bill for the better protection of the persons and property of his majesty's subjects against the evil arising from the increase of dogs, by subjecting the keeping or having such dogs, to a duty." Hence, instead of supposing, as Mr. Lechmere had long thought that a it generally had been supposed, that dogs measure of this sort was wanted. He were better than watchmen for the protectrusted it would be of service to the pub- tion of property, people might be led to lic at large, and particularly to the poor imagine, that dogs were guilty of half at this time of scarcity. Gentlemen who the burglaries usually committed. In the kept a pack of fox hounds, ought to be preamble there was the same singular specompelled to pay high for them. He cies of phraseology: it began by stating thought that all dogs used for pleasure that "Whereas great and serious dangers, should be subject to the tax; and that injuries and inconveniencies,"-[He begladies lap-dogs should be taxed the high-ged the House would admire the beauty est. It was shameful to see an athletic fellow, in a gaudy livery with a couple of lap dogs under his arms, walking after a lady through the Parks for a whole morning.

Sir G. P. Turner said, if ever a tax was

of that climax]" and more especially the calamities of canine madness, of late alarmingly increasing, frequently happen to the persons of his majesty's subjects, and to their cattle and other property." It certainly was by no means extraordinary ተ

that a man's cattle should be injured by the bite of a mad dog, but he could not conceive what was meant by other property, as he had never before heard that property could be affected with the hydrophobia. In The Adventurer, a periodical paper by Dr. Hawkesworth, he remembered, indeed, a sort of humorous account of a dog that bit a hog in the streets; the hog bit a farmer, and the farmer bit a cow; and, what was most extraordinary, each conveyed his peculiar quality to the other; the hog barked like a dog, the farmer grunted like a hog, and the cow did the best she could to talk like the farmer. He should have imagined that there must have been something like this disposition in inanimate things also, by the hon. gentleman's looking so very carefully after property; for, unless an instance had occurred of furniture behaving in a disorderly manner, or a dumb waiter barking with the hydrophobia, he conceived such a phrase could not be properly introduced. The way in which the bill proposed to enforce its provisions was most inhuman. He particularly adverted to the clause in which it was proposed "That no person or persons shall be liable to any action, for killing, destroying, or converting to his own use, any dog for which the owner shall not have paid the duty." If this clause were to remain, and any person did destroy or convert another person's dog, he would most probably assume that it was not paid for. So far the bill was repugnant to the principles of humanity; for it was nothing less than a death-warrant against that valuable race of animals. Besides, he wanted to know what principle the bill proceeded upon, that the same privilege should not be also allowed with respect to horses, since there was a certain species of dogs, such as pointers, setters, &c. that were scarcely less valuable. According to the same mode of reasoning too, he did not see why there should not be a general scramble for all the hats upon the heads of those gentlemen who did not pay the hat duty; nor why any person should not convert the powder, another man wore, to his own use, if he suspected that man had not taken out a licence. It was true, that after any person had lost his dog in this manner, a clause was provided, whereby he might bring an action, and maintain a right to recover damages from the converter; but how would it happen, if the dog, still fond of his former attach

ments, should follow his old master? That master might, in such a case, be whipped as a dog stealer, though he should afterwards gain an action to prove the prosecutor the thief. The deprivation in this instance was not all: by the general slaughter which the tax would occasion, they were liable to convert into ferocity that mild and humane character which had hitherto been the just boast of Englishmen. Were the national manners likely to be improved by a system which tended to familiarise the rising generation to the spectacle of seeing those animals slaughtered or hanging at their doors, which they had been accustomed to consider as their friends and play-fellows? The charge of ingratitude would also lay against them for such a decree of massacre against these useful animals, at the very time when they acknowledged them as allies of the combined powers, and when their brethren formed a part of that combined army in Jamaica, which was fight ing successfully against the Maroons, and supporting the cause of social order, humanity, and religion. He came at last to the qualifying clause, which was intended to enact, that puppies, when born, should not be liable to the penalty. He wished to know at what time they were to be made liable, and by what parish register they were to ascertain the birth of puppies. A doctrine had been inculcated that dogs devoured the sustenance of the poor; and therefore we were to be placed in the state of a besieged garrison, and feed upon the fare of dogs and cats. The bill in this instance tended to defeat its own object; for could it be supposed that the poor, at this moment of dearth and scarcity, could afford to divide their scanty meals with such animals? And if they did, what was the conclusion, but that they would rather deprive themselves of some of the necessaries of life, than lose their faithful companions. If the tax were levied only upon hounds and sporting dogs, he should oppose it, because it would tend to the diminution of the few pleasures which induced gentlemen to spend their fortunes on their own estates.

Mr. Windham said, he did not mean to object to the whole of the bill, but to part of it only. He thought a tax upon all sporting dogs fair, because they were a kind of luxury, and their owners could afford to pay. There appeared, however, a

passion, a spleen, an enmity against the canine race in the formation of this bill,

« PreviousContinue »