Mr. WINDHAM, in explanation, said, he did not distrust the loyalty or the spirit of the militia; but he still thought them inferior to troops of the line.

Balloting was undoubtedly the constitutional | of granting the whole bounty mentioned in mode of providing that militia; but if the the resolution. question was as to the injury done to recruiting, there could be no doubt that the mode of ballot was the most injurious.-There were contrivances in this country to render the ballot less onerous by means of parish subscriptions: the present was only a mode of making the country subscribe, as a body, to raise the men which it was called upon to provide. He was satisfied that Ireland could not be considered as in a perfect state of security, if it was trusted to the protection of the regular troops alone.

Mr. HILEY ADDINGTON said, the argument which had been used, that the present measure would be injurious to the recruiting service, had been conclusively answered by his Rt. Hon. Relation. In fact, there was a conclusive answer to it in the nature of things, as it was well known that many persons would prefer a larger bounty and enlisting for life, whilst many also would prefer a small bounty and a limited period of service. He had held a pretty high situation in a fencible regiment, part of which he had himself raised, and he did not know any individual of it who would recruit; and even when it was disbanded, not one fifth of the whole became regular soldiers. With respect to the militia, he would ask a distinguished officer (Sir Eyre Coote) who had spoken in this debate, whether a regiment of militia in service at the period of the expedition to Holland, and sent thither, would not serve with as much courage and discipline as any other? The Hon. Gent. (Mr. Elliot) as well as his Rt. Hon. Friend (Mr. Windham) had taken a comparative view of the militia and the regulars, but in such a way as to give all the merit to the latter; and he confessed some comments had been made upon the militia, which excited uneasiness in his mind. If the present was, as had been stated by a Rt. Hon. Gent. a period of greater danger than any during the late war, why depreciate one of our best supports? He could not help thinking that they shewed a want of consistency. The Rt. Hon. Gent. (Mr. Windham) had thrown out a charge against his Majesty's Government, of a want of prospective wisdom; and another Hon. Gent. (Mr. Elliot) had charged them with submissive and pusillanimous conduct. He defied those Hon. Gent. to produce a single instance to prove those charges; and till they did that, such charges must be considered as mere random assertions.

Mr. WICKHAM said, it would be still open to the colonels of militia, or the Lord Lieutenant, to continue the bounty as it was before this measure, or to lower the present bounty. There was no intention at present

Mr. DAWSON thought it whimsical that the present measure should be opposed only by the late Secretary at War for England, and the late Secretary at War for Ireland. The Irish militia, he said, had put down rebellion, and had materially contributed to repel in

vasion.

The resolutions were then agreed to, and a bill ordered pursuant thereto.

HOUSE OF LORDS.

Thursday, March 17. (See Minutes, p. 507.)

[IRISH CHALKING ACT.]-The second reading of the Irish chalking act being moved,

Lord AUCKLAND rose to make a very few observations on the bill. He did not mean to go into detail on the subject, but considered it his duty to allude to the difference which the bill went to establish betwixt the criminal laws of the two parts of the United Kingdom. A difference of this kind was in every case to be deprecated, but more especially when it regarded the criminal laws of the country. Some delay, therefore, in proceeding to the committee on the bill might be desirable, to enable their Lordships to consider how far it might be expedient to extend the provisions of the bill to this country.

The ARCHBISHOP of DUBLIN professed his inability to form an opinion how far the extension to which the Noble Lord alluded might be applicable to the circumstances of this country; but of its necessity, as far as Ireland was concerned, no one acquainted with the state of that part of the United Kingdom could doubt for a moment. In this country the crime was of rare occurrence, and therefore it might be a matter of doubt how far policy would suggest the propriety of making a general enactment on the subject. No man, however, could have lived twelve months in Ireland, without being convinced that it was essential to the safety of the peaceable part of the community.

The LORD CHANCELLOR called the attention of their Lordships to a point which was entitled to particular attention. He had more than once had occasion to advert to the mode in which bills of the most important kind were introduced into that House. The secon reading was not preceded, as it certainly

ought to be, with respect to bills whose that Monday might be fixed for going into a general nature was not understood, by a short committee on the bill. explanation of their object, but as a mere matter of course. This observation, in the present instance, was suggested by the title of the bill. It was entitled, A bill for the more effectual prevention of chalking; practice, of the nature of which he professed his ignorance, and he believed many other Noble Lords would acknowledge the same ignorance. It was certainly the duty of those who were employed in introducing the bill, to have given this explanation, and thereon he took this opportunity of alluding to a general ground of complaint. His Lordship agreed with the Noble Lord who began the discussion, that it was highly desirable to have as little discordance as possible betwixt the criminal laws of Ireland and this country, but gave no decided opinion how far the extension might be necessary.

Lord CARLETON gave a short sketch of the circumstances which rendered the present bill necessary. The practice which it was designed to punish was one which, at the time when the act was framed, had become highly alarming; and it was to counteract so serious an evil, that it was originally submitted to the Irish Parliament. About two years ago it had expired, but at the present moment it had again appeared necessary to renew it. He agreed with the Noble and Learned Lord who spoke last, that the title of the bill was not one very intelligible in this country, where the practice from which it was derived was almost unknown. In Ireland, however, the practice was unfortunately too well known, and the title was one universally understood. He professed himself not in possession of such a knowledge of the existing circumstances of the country as to be able to judge of the expediency of the extension.

Lord ELLINBOROUGH saw very powerful reasons for some improvement in the criminal law of this country, so far as assaults, with intent to commit murder, were concerned. He alluded particularly to the case of a trial at the Old Bailey (the trial of two men for cutting and maiming a man near Hammer smith, at one of the late sessions), where, under circumstances of the greatest atrocity, the capital part of the indictment was done away, because the crime of the prisoners did not come within the meaning of the act under which they were tried. He was desirous, therefore, that their Lordships might have an opportunity of considering how far the extension of the act to this country might be, desirable. His Lordship adverted particularly to the manner in which the bill was framed. There was a great deal of superfluity of expression, which might in the committee be curtailed. His Lordship therefore wished

Lord ALVANLEY corroborated the statements of the Noble Lord, and argued in favour of some improvement in our criminal code. As the law now stood, an assault with a view to robbery was a felony, though not of a capital nature; whereas an assault with the view of perpetrating the crime of murder was a simple misdemeanour. He agreed entirely with his Noble Friend in what he had said about the case to which he had alluded, and he was sure all of their Lordships must see there was a necessity for revising the law, when a crime, in all its circumstances so atrocious, had escaped adequate punishment, merely from want of evidence that the criminals had lain in wait with the intention of perpetrating the crime. His Lordship was very pointed on the loose and inaccurate manner in which the bill was couched. In this respect it required very considerable improvement. He alluded to several clauses in which the language was extremely inaccurate. In one part of the bill it was enacted, that no person being in Ireland, should, without subjecting himself to certain penalties, be guilty of the crime specified in the bill. There was, however, a great want of precision here, because it might be inferred from that, though a person could not, without subjecting himself to penalties, be guilty of this crime in Ireland, he might with impunity perpetrate it in England, in Scotland, or, in short, in any other quarter. After dwelling on this topic, his Lordship concluded by declaring his complete approbation of the proposed delay.

The bill was then read a second time, and committed for next day.-Adjourned.

HOUSE OF LORDS.

Friday, March 18.-(See Minutes, p. 507.) [THE NAVY.]-The Earl of CARLISLE called the attention of their Lordships to a motion, which he proposed to make that evening, had he seen those Ministers he had expected in their places. The proposition was of that nature, which he thought, on considerations of fairness and candour, it would not be proper to urge without at least giving some notice. What he had in contemplation (the Noble Earl observed), respected the artificers in his Majesty's dockyards, on the discussion of which subject he thought it would be proper that his Majesty's Ministers in that House should be present, particularly, his Lordship seemed to say, the Noble Earl at the head of the marine department, from whom it was naturally to be expected, peculiar information and assistance would be derived. For his own part, he

came forward as an independent Peer of Par-
liament, and actuated by no other motives
whatever than his own sense of what was his
duty in that character. He came forward on
his own motion, unconnected with parties,
as an unbiassed and independent Member of
that House: he was, happily,
“Unplac'd, unpersion'd, no man's heir or slave;"

without reference to the opinion or assertions of individuals, be continued to them as long, and in such degree, as they continued to deserve it.

The Earl of CARLISLE and the Lord CHANCELLOR afterwards spoke severally in explanation; in the course of which the Noble Earl stated, that his motion should be for the production of the monthly returns, at certain periods, respecting the artificers in his Majesty's dock-yards.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.

Friday, March 18.—(See Minutes, p. 507.)

[MILITIA OFFICERS' BILL.]-The order of the day was read for taking into considera tion the militia officers' bill.

as such, he would freely, and without reserve, deliver his sentiments upon all public questions, in the discussion of which he should take a part, without reference to the opinions, the feelings, or the language of any person. He was unsolicitous whom his public conduct or his language offended, while it was inspired by a strong sense of what he conceived to be his Parliamentary duty. He was regardless of what the effect, under such impressions of his language, in delivering what others might deem his poor and narrow Lord FOLKSTONE said, he was surprised opinions, might be. He was regardless of the remarks, which their delivery might draw down that an opposition had not been made to this from any quarter, either in the way of in- bill on its first reading, and he could not but vective, sarcasm, or pretended admonition. express his astonishment that no other Gent. He was utterly regardless of what might be had stood up to oppose a bill, which he asserted of him in that respect: whether his thought went to reduce the dignity and connotions and sentiments pervaded only the sequence of the militia of this country. The narrow and limited circle of society in which militia was supported by men of fortune, he moved, or whether their effects or consewhose situation in life would not permit them quences were said to be more extensive; it to enter into the regular service, as they could was of no consideration to him what might not leave the country, or conform to many be said in that respect, so long as he felt he necessary laws which attend the regular serperformed his duty conscientiously as an in-vice; and therefore every care ought to be dependent Peer of Parliament. With respect to his proposed motion, the Noble Earl said, it was his intention to bring it forward on an early day next week, should he see Ministers in their places.

The LORD CHANCELLOR quitted the woolsack, and observed, that with respect to the motion which the Noble Earl had announced his intention to bring forward, he could of course say nothing, because he knew nothing of its nature, from what the Noble Earl had stated. It might be of an unobjectionable, or perhaps of a questionable nature-he could not then possibly decide. With respect to other parts of the Noble Earl's observation, he should only say, that, in regard to the Noble Earl's Parliamentary conduct, he was convinced it would always be guided by pure and honourable motives. The Noble Earl would, at the same time, recollect that others had their feelings with respect to what may be said, as regarding unfounded imputations thrown out, as well as the Noble Earl himself. The question was not so much what individuals may think of themselves, as what others thought of them. As to the confidence of the country, those with whom he had the honour to act, had every reason to be satisfied from the conduct of that constitutional organ of the country, the Parliament-that confidence, they trusted, would,

persons from mixing with gentlemen of the taken to prevent improper and unqualified first consequence in the country. The bill now under discussion would allow persons to enter into the militia who were by no means qua lified, which would prevent men of fortune an object of their ambition, consequently its from considering a situation in the militia as present importance would soon be on the decline. A number of half-pay officers would be daily entering into the militia in preference to the regular service, where they ought to be. He did not mean by this observation to say any thing disrespectful of those gentlemen; but he thought every care ought to be taken to keep up the dignity of the militia, and every inducement held out to gentlemen of fortune to enter into it. On these grounds he thought proper to oppose that clause of the bill, which allows unqualified persons to enter into the militia.

The SECRETARY at WAR said, he thought the speech just delivered by the Noble Lord, went to give a death-blow to the militia of this country. The clause objected to by the Noble Lord went to this effect, that those gentlemen who held a rank in the militia last war, should have the privilege to hold the same rank in the present militia. This principle had been acted upon before, and he now saw that this clause would not be productive of any ill effects, or tend to lessen the dignity of

the militia of this country. He thought that I did not come forward, Government must take the Noble Lord's observations, with respect such measures as will be necessary for the to qualified persons going out of the militia, security of the nation; and he hoped the Noble if the persons alluded to enter into it, was Lord's example would have a better effect than very improper, and ought not to have been his speech. made. No Gent. in the House could feel a greater desire to support the dignity of the militia than himself; but he thought the Noble Lord's objection to the clause he alluded to would not meet with the support of the House, as it was highly advantageous to the constitution of the present militia.

that Noble Lord's services than he did. He felt the obligations which the country owed to Earl St. Vincent, and no man could more duly appreciate his great and eminent services. But, on the other hand, the more especially on such a crisis as the present, he had to consider his own duty as a Member of Parliament. The Noble Lord in question was to be regarded as a public character, and it was essential that the management of the affairs of the department over which that Noble Lord presided, should be such as to meet the present exigency of affairs. Its vigour and alertness, his Lordship seemed to say, should be such as to enable us to meet the French off Brest. He must be allowed to entertain his own doubts, and to observe, that even generally, in the public mind, some existed with regard to the management of the affairs of the Admiralty. It was important it should be known how Ministers had acted in these respects during the summer, and at a time when they were alternately arming and disarming, and whether the other measures of Ministers at home were commensurate to their conduct abroad. In this view, he thought it was incumbent on Ministers to afford every information. He had, at first, no wish to urge the motion, but entertained an idea of withdrawing it; but after what had passed, he had his doubts with respect to the propriety of such a proceeding.