operation, it was therefore natural to presume; but this very circumstance was a sufficient argument against inquiry. The dilemma then proposed by the noble lord, whether or not the people had an opportunity to rise, he was desirous should not be entertained. To determine that point, to justify the confidence of co-operation, would inevitably lead to the most dangerous disclosures, to the public designation of our friends in that country, their number and situation, and of the whole correspondence on which the confidence of co-operation was founded, and the practicability of the object presumed; a procedure that might not only prove injurious at the present, but interfere with all future operations of a similar kind. In candour, therefore, to all the parties concerned, he trusted the noble lord would not press his motion. Earl Spencer was at a loss to know on what grounds the motion would be made. He confessed it was one of those difficult things that could be thrown in the way of ministers; for on their silence suspicion was attempted to be thrown, and their disclosure of, the circumstances must lead to serious consequences. He would assert, that the expedition was taken up on justifiable grounds. The noble lord had made many omissions, and had dwelt upon such parts of the expedition as tended to set it in the most unfavourable point of view. The noble lord acknow. ledged that the expedition had objects sufficiently important to induce this country to undertake it. He admitted, that to rescue Holland, and to cause a diversion in the forces of the enemy, were legitimate objects. He admitted that the capture of the Dutch fleet was an advantage gained for the country. On these two points, the expedition had not failed; of three objects, two had succeeded most completely. The House would call to mind the month when the expedition took place, and to what good effect it operated in favour of the allies. The signal defeats which the enemy experienced, was one of the good effects occasioned by this expedition; for it was fair to infer, that the forces called into action in Holland, as withdrawn from the French in Italy and Switzerland, tended to weaken their efforts and increase the force of the combined armies. Lord King delivered his maiden speech in support of the inquiry. He observed, that as ministers had declared their deter[VOL. XXXIV.] mination to continue the war, it became the duty of the House to investigate their conduct in the last expedition, in order to ascertain whether they ought to be entrusted with the farther prosecution of hostilities. If he referred to "the test of experience and the evidence of facts," the favourite phrase of administration, he had still stronger grounds for inquiry; for the incapacity of ministers had been already manifested by the expeditions to Corsica, Toulon, Quiberon, and Ostend. With respect to the weather and the unfavourable winds which had prevailed, that consideration could not be urged in their defence, as ministers had sufficient time to make every preparation. The object was clear and precise, and lay at the distance of only forty-eight hours sail. And was it not the duty of adminis tration to run as few risks as possible? If there appeared even a faint chance of failure from any inclemency of the weathey, why was not the expedition undertaken in June or July, when that chance would have been considerably lessened? The House could not forget the two inquiries which had been instituted during the American war; and at present the grounds for a similar proceeding were much strengthened, since administration, being possessed of unlimited means, both in a financial and military view, was of course more responsible for the use and application of those means. If our object was, to impose and establish a strong government in Holland, such an object was not legitimate, as it went to interfere in the wishes of the people of that country. The proposed inquiry was absolutely necessary for the vindication of ministers. After a short speech against the motion from lord Darnley, and a reply from lord Holland, the House divided: Contents, 6. Not-Contents, 51. The bill would go, not to compel, but to enable the magistrate to do justice to the poor. The law indeed, if enacted, might generally lie dormant, and only be enforced in hard times, when the poor were oppressed as they now are in several districts. The more he examined the Poor laws, the more convinced he was, that the fault lay not in the laws themselves, but in the execution of them. Where they were well executed, the poor en for them to enjoy. But where they were not duly enforced, the poor endured the most intolerable miseries. To prevent these abuses was the object of his bill. He would therefore move, "That leave be given to bring in a bill to explain and amend so much of the 5th Eliz. cap. 4. as empowers justices of the peace to regulate the wages of Labourers in Husbandry." provisions of it, observing, that a thorough | labour. This was highly oppressive to revision of the Poor laws was necessary; the labouring poor. A law therefore apand he pledged himself to bring in a bill peared necessary for enabling the justices for that purpose. The bill was brought to regulate also the minimum of labour. in and printed, but was never brought In this view, he submitted his motion for under the discussion of the House. All reviving his former bill. He wished only its provisions were regarded as impracti- that it might be read a first time, and cable. Finding that the right hon. gen. then printed, and a proper interval altleman had given up all idea of prosecut-lowed for a thorough consideration of it. ing a measure which he formerly seemed to have so much at heart, he himself was determined to renew his attempts, and to revive his bill. Those who knew him would not suppose that he wished the poor to be overpaid. He was well aware that in many places, especially in great manufacturing towns, those who earned more than was sufficient to provide for their families, usually squandered the surplus away, in ruinous luxuries. But in every well-regulated community, arti-joyed as much comfort as it was possible ficers and labourers should be paid so as to be enabled to keep themselves and families in a comfortable situation. It was his creed with respect to the poor, that no excuse should be left them for doing wrong, and that when they offended, severity should be employed in punishing their offences. He hoped the House would concur with him in that opinion; and if so, how was it to be reduced to practice? The right hon. gentleman had contended, that nothing effectual could be done by regulations, that all must be the result of principle: and that, in amending the Poor laws, no regulation could be made respecting the amount of wages, but that labour should be left to find its own level. It was impossible, however, that labour should find its own level, as the laws on that head now stood. What first gave rise, in his mind, to the idea of the bill he wished to introduce, was, the situation to which the poor were reduced in 1795. Their distresses then were nearly the same as they are now; and very exemplary attention was likewise then shown by the richer classes to alle viate their distresses, but, before they received that relief, the pressure under which they laboured was extreme. The farmers would not raise the price of labour: he consulted the Statute-book, but could discover nothing in it that would compel the farmers to do their duty. The justices, he found, had no power to grant relief; but they were armed with power to oppress the poor, In virtue of the fifth Elizabeth, c. 4, the justices had the power of regulating the maximum of Mr. Pitt said, though he disapproved of the measure, he would not oppose the motion. He opposed the measure formerly, because he was convinced it would not be productive of benefit to the lower classes: not because he intended to bring forward some preferable plan. The measure now proposed struck him as highly improper. It went to introduce legisla tive interference into that which ought to be allowed invariably to take its natural course. The greater freedom there was allowed in every kind of mercantile transactions, the more for the benefit of all parties. It was likewise always inexpedient to frame a general law to remedy a particular evil. Besides, the principle of the bill was inefficacious; and if adopted, it would have no good effect. It proposed one standard for the price of labour, without considering whether the labourer was young or old, whether sickly or robust, whether an unmarried man, or a man with a numerous family to support. The distresses of the poor would be best relieved, not by any general law, but by parochial aid administered by those who were intimately acquainted with their situation. The hon. gentleman said, that the Poor laws were quite sufficient, if they were strictly put in execution. Now, it seemed rather strange that they should be complete, and yet should not contain within them some power to enforce their execution. He himself admired the system of Poor laws in England, though they had of late years greatly degenerated from their original simplicity and efficacy. It had not been his intention to overturn them, but to recall them to their original principles, and to give them such subsidiary aids, as a change of circumstances had rendered necessary. Whether he should bring that bill again before the House was extremely uncertain. He was convinced of its propriety; but many objections had been started to it, by those whose opinion he was bound to respect. Sir W. Young was of opinion, that the bill was altogether unnecessary. The justices were already obliged, under a pe nalty of 10l. to do nearly what was required by the hon. gentleman; and was it probable that an act was a good one which though enforced by such severe penalties, had lain completely dormant for many years? The qualifications of the workman should be considered as well as his wages. Mr. Buxton thought that the measure would do more harm than good. The scarcity was great but, from the benevolent attentions of the opulent, at no time was the condition of the labourer more eligible. Mr. Ellison opposed the motion. By the generous exertions of the higher classes, the poorer had been comfortably supported. Why then introduce a law which was unnecessary? Mr. Whitbread said, he was ready to give the higher classes credit for their charity; but he thought it an alarming thing, that so many of the lower classes of society was doomed to subsist on charity. By an increase of wages some good might be done. Charity afflicted the mind of a good man, because it took away his independence-a consideration as valuable to the labourer as to the man of high rank. The object of the bill was to empower magistrates, for a limited time, and within a limited extent, to determine the sum below which the wages of a labouring man in full vigour should not be reduced. But it was said, that the price of labour would find its level. How did it find its level? If labourers found they were not sufficiently paid, they combined, and the price of their labour was raised. The multiplied statutes to prevent combinations operated more strongly against the labourers in any attempt to raise their wages, than against the masters who might attempt to reduce them. was brought in and read a first time. On Leave was given. On the 13th the bill the 21st the question, that the bill be now read a second time, was negatived, and, on the motion of lord Belgrave, it was ordered to be read a second time upon that day six months. House of Commons respecting the Assize of First Report of the Committee of the Bread, and the Deficiency of the last Crop of Grain.] Feb. 10. Lord Hawkesbury presented the following REPORT. The Committee appointed to consider of means for rendering more effectual the provisions of an act, made in the thirteenth year of the reign of his present Majesty, intituled, "An Act for better regulating the Assize and making of Bread;" and who were instructed to consider of the most effectual means of remedying any inconveniencies which may arise from the deficiency of the last Crop of Grain; and empowered to report their Proceedings, from time to time, to the House; Have proceeded, in pursuance of the orders of the House, to consider of the provisions of the said act; and are decidedly of opinion, that the act of the 13th of George 3rd in its present state, is completely ineffectual for the regulations contained in it are, in many repurposes for which it was intended; that the spects, defective; and that the execution of it would be totally imcompatible with the present mode of setting the assize of bread by law, and would answer no object, unless, at a time when bakers are prohibited from making, according to the demand of their customers, different kinds of bread, millers should be of flour. prohibited from manufacturing different sorts how far it might be proper to recommend to Your Committee proceeded next to consider the House to adopt such farther regulations and restrictions; and as they understood a prejudice existed in some parts of the country against any coarser sort of bread than that which is at present known by the name of the "Fine Household Bread," on the ground tricious than the latter, they thought it imthat the former was less wholesome and nuportant to obtain the opinions of some eminent and respectable physicians on this point. The result of their evidence appears to be, that although a change of any sort of food, which forms so great a part of the sustenance of man, might, for a time, affect some constitutions; that as soon as persons were habituated to it, the standard wheaten bread, or even bread of a coarser sort, would be equally wholesome with the fine wheaten bread which is now generally used in the metropolis; but that, in their opinion, the fine wheaten bread would go farther with persons who have no other food, than the same quantity of bread of a coarser sort. Your Committee were next desirous of ascertaining, whether a standard bread was likely to be acceptable to the people of this metropolis; they have examined for this purpose several considerable bakers, who agree in stating, that scarcely any bread is consumed in the metropolis but that which is made from the fine wheaten flour; that attempts have been formerly made in times of scarcity to introduce a coarser species of bread into use, but without success; and that, in their opinion, the high price of bread would be considered, by the lower classes of people, as a small evil, when compared with any measures which would have the effect of compelling them to consume a bread to which they have not been accustomed. Your Committee then proceeded to inquire, whether a measure, which compelled the millers to manufacture only one sort of flour, would be likely to increase the quantity of sustenance for man. It has been stated to your Committee, that, according to the mode of manufacturing flour for London and its neighbourhood, a bushel of wheat, weighing 60lbs. produced 47 lbs. of flour, of all descriptions, which were applied in various ways directly to the sustenance of man; that about 1lb. was the waste in grinding, and the remaining 12 lbs. consisted of bran and pollards, which were made use of for feeding poultry, swine, and cattle. It has, however, been suggested, that if only one sort of flour was permitted to be made, and a different mode of dressing it was adopted, so as to leave in it the finer pollards, 52 lbs. of flour might be extracted from a bushel of wheat, of the beforementioned weight, instead of 47 lbs.; that this proportion of the wheat would afford a wholesome and nutritious food, and would add to the quantity for the sustenance of man, in places where the fine household bread is now used, 5 lbs. on every bushel, or somewhat more than one-ninth. But as this saving is computed on a finer wheat, and of greater weight per bushel than the average of the crop may produce, and can only apply to those places which have been stated, and as a coarser bread is actually in use in many parts of the country, the saving on the whole consumption would, according to the calculation, be very considerably reduced. Your Committee have considered how far other circumstances might operate, or the saving likely to be made of flour by adopting this proposition. They beg leave, in the first place, to observe, that if the physicians are well founded in their opinion, that bread of a coarser quality will not go equally far with a fine wheaten bread, an increased consumption of bread would be the consequence of the measure, and this increased consumption might, in a considerable degree, make up for any saving which might result from the use of the finer pollards. In the second place, if the millers were permitted to make only one sort of flour, it is to be apprehended, that sieves would be introduced into many private families, for the purpose of sifting the flour to different degrees of fineness: such a practice might, in times of scarcity, increase the evils which it would be the intention of parliament to remedy. The quantity of flour extracted from a bushel of wheat depends very much on the skill of the miller, and the perfection of his machinery. The extent of his concerns, and his interest in his trade, is a security that he will endeavour to draw from the grain whatever it will produce; but the comparative want of skill, and want of attention to the nicer parts of the operation, in private families, might lead, upon the whole, to a very great and unnecessary expenditure and waste of flour. Your Committee are of opinion, that to change by law the food of a large part of the community, is a measure of the greatest delicacy, and on the face of it highly objectionable. If a considerable benefit could be proved to arise from it to the community at large, your Committee might be induced to recommend it, notwithstanding any inconveniencies which might for a time result from it; but from all the consideration your Committee have been able to give to this subject, and from the evidence which has appeared before them, they are not satisfied that any saving would arise proportionate to the disadvantages that would, in the first instance, necessarily attend upon it. Your Committee have hitherto confined their observations to the idea of compelling the people, by law, to consume a particular sort of bread. They are sorry, however, to be under the necessity of stating, that, in consequence of the last wet and unfavourable season, the crops have been unusually deficient; and although a considerable importation of wheat from foreign countries has already taken place, and more may be expected, yet they feel, that they should not discharge their duty, unless they strongly recommended to all individuals to use every means in their power to reduce the consumption of wheaten flour in their families, and encourage in the district in which they live, by their example, influence, and authority, every possible economy of this article. Impressed with the idea of the importance of such economy at the present moment, your Committee earnestly recommend the adoption of a measure, which, from the una The King's Message respecting Advances to the Emperor of Germany, &c.] Feb. 13. Mr. Pitt presented the following Message from his Majesty : nimous opinion of those who have appeared in evidence before them, would lead to a very considerable saving of wheat flour. The evidence of the bakers who have been examined before your Committee, cannot fail to convince the House, that in families where bread which has been baked for some hours is used, the consumption is far less considerable than in those where it is the custom to eat it new. They differ in the proportion of this saving: some have stated it as amounting to onethird, some as amounting to one-fifth, and others only to one-eighth; but when it is considered that one-half of the bread in Lon don is consumed the day on which it is baked, there can be no doubt that a great saving would ensue (perhaps one-tenth or twelfth part of the whole consumption in London), if the bakers were prohibited from selling it, until twenty-four hours after it was baked. Your Committee are strongly induced to recommend this measure, from the consideration that a very respectable physician has given it as his decided opinion, that new bread is far less wholesome than that which has been baked a certain number of hours: and they think it important to add, that, in the opinion of the bakers in the metropolis, no material inconvenience or detriment to their trade would arise from the adopting this regulation. Your Committee have heard, with very great concern, that from the mistaken application of the charity of individuals, in some parts of the country, flour and bread have been delivered to the poor at a reduced price; a practice which may contribute very considerably to increase the inconveniencies arising from the deficiency of the last crop. And they recommend that all charity and parochial relief should be given, as far as is practicable, in any other articles except bread, flour, and money, and that the part of it which is necessary for the sustenance of the poor, should be distributed in soups, rice, potatoes, or other substitutes. Your Commit tee are of opinion, that if this regulation was generally adopted, it would not only, in a very great degree, contribute to economize at this time the consumption of flour, but that it might have the effect of gradually introducing into use, a more wholesome and nutritious species of food than that to which the poor are at present accustomed. Your Committee think it important to state before they conclude, that government, in conformity to the declaration of the chancel. lor of the exchequer in the last session of parliament, have abstained from all interference in the purchases of corn in the foreign markets; and as they conceive the speculations of individuals are more likely to produce an adequate supply of foreign wheat at the present crisis, than any other measures that could be adopted, the policy of government in this respect meets with the decided approbation of your Committee. "GEORGE R. "His Majesty is at present employed in concerting such engagements with the emperor of Germany, the elector of Bavaria, and other powers of the empire, as may strengthen the efforts of his imperial majesty, and materially conduce to the advantage of the common cause in the Majesty will give directions that these encourse of the ensuing campaign; and his gagements, as soon as they shall have been completed and ratified, shall be laid before the House: But, in order to ensure the benefit of this co-operation at an early period, his Majesty is desirous of authorising his minister to make provisionally such advances as may be necessary, in the first instance, for this purpose; and his Majesty recommends it to the House to enable him to make such provision accordingly. G. R." A similar Message was presented to the Lords by lord Grenville. Debate in the Lords on the King's Message respecting Advances to the Emperor of Germany, &c.] Feb. 14. The order of the day being read, for taking the King's Message into consideration, In Lord Grenville said, he conceived after theuniform votes of the House, on the subject of prosecuting the war with vigour, that it would be an idle waste of time were he to enter into detail on the matter under consideration. It had been generally admitted by parliament, that it was the truest policy of Great Britain to procure the assistance of the forces of continental states, by subsidizing their sovereigns; and upon that received principle it was, that his majesty had negotiated with the German princes, for a certain number of military forces for the ensuing campaign. deed, these treaties were in such forwardness, that although he could not officially state that they were concluded, he could take upon himself to declare to their lordships, that by this time the principal of them were finally settled, and upon terms highly advantageous to the country. As the sending the treaties over here, and the return of them previous to their final ratification, unavoidably took up much time, his majesty's ministers had thought it their duty to apply to parliament, to authorize them to make such advances pro ! |