What is known by the name of the Habeas Corpus Act, is, the statute 31 Charles II. cap. 2, which has been called the second grand charter of English liberty. By this celebrated statute the means were provided by which any individual detained in custody may, on the application of his counsel, obtain a writ of habeas corpus directed to the officer under whose charge he is-that is, an order to the said officer to bring up his prisoner immediately before either the Court of King's Bench or that of Common Pleas, who shall do in the case as the law may require. Several attempts had been made before this statute was passed to secure the same object: but they were all found to be ineffectual. Since it has been in operation it has become impossible for an inhabitant of this country to be in any circumstances detained in custody contrary to law, except in the case of his existence being kept entirely concealed. The Habeas Corpus Act, however, may be, and occasionally has been, suspended either generally or for a particular part of the empire; but this can only be done by a bill carried through the different branches of the legislature. According to Earl Grey's bill it is proposed that it shall be a sufficient return to the writ that the person detained is kept in custody by virtue of this pro-Receipts, not of the Ordinary Revenue posed act, but that only for the first three months after his

REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE.

THE net public income of the United Kingdom, for the year ended 5th January, 1833, according to a return ordered by the House of Commons to be printed on the 15th February, was 46,988,7551. The expenditure for the same year was 46,373,9967. The following are the details, omitting frac

time demanded for the other business of parliament. The presentation of a single petition frequently consumes a considerable space of time. According to what was the practice up to the commencement of the present session, although the petition itself is rarely read at length, but only its prayer stated by the clerk, its presentation often occasioned no fewer than four successive motions or questions, on each of which a new debate might arise. There was first the motion that the petition be brought up; then, another, that it be read; then, a third, that it be laid on the table; and, lastly, a fourth, that it be printed. A resolution, proposed by Lord Althorp and agreed to by the House, on the 6th February, limited this right of speaking to the two questions that the petition be laid on the table, and that it be printed; but still this does not get rid of the principal part of the difficulty. Were there to be only one opportunity of debate upon cach petition, it would still be almost impracticable for the House, upon the plan that has been hitherto followed, to get through the reception of the vast numbers that are every session put into the hands of members. The order of precedence in the right of presenting petitions has been of late years a matter of constant contest. Formerly the practice was for those members who wished to secure an opportunity of presenting the petitions with which they had been entrusted to strive who should be first at the House in the morning, when, by putting down their names on a paper, they entitled themselves to precedence over those who did not make their appearance so early. Under this system, as one of the witnesses examined before the Committee states, a few members were in the habit of getting the priority in a great number of cases; those who lived near the House constantly took advantage of their proximity to win the race from their competitors, frequently presenting themselves at six o'clock in the morning. Of late the matter has been arranged by allowing members having petitions to present to ballot for precedence; but although, on the average of the session, about twelve members have been in the habit of attending daily at the ballot, it is stated that only the first five whose names were drawn, have in general had any chance of getting their petitions presented in the evening before the public business came A member has often attended regularly for many days, and even weeks, without being fortunate enough to attain a sufficiently high place on the list. Soon after the commencement of the present session, Lord Althorp proposed a new plan of proceeding in regard to this important subject, namely, that there should be no ballot, but that members wishing to present petitions should put down their names upon a paper from which they should be called upon by the Speaker in their order, day after day, till the whole list should be gone over. And in order to afford time both for private business and for the reception and discussion of petitions without encroaching upon the time necessary for public business, his lordship further proposed that the House should, for the former purposes, assemble every day (except Saturday), with the Speaker in the chair, at noon, and sit till three o'clock, when it should adjourn till five, at which hour it should again meet and proceed at once with the business set down in the order-book. This plan has since been agreed to by the House.

on.

In addition to the embarrassment occasioned by petitions, on account of their consumption of the time of the House, the printing of those of them that are ordered to be printed has been a source of considerable expense. From 1789 down to 1817 the practice was to print all public petitions, either at length or in the form of a short abstract, in what is called the Votes, that is the record of those proceedings of the House which properly come under the description of business done, but not including resolutions which are merely proposed without being determined upon, and some other matters which are only inserted in the larger record, called the Journals. In 1817 the plan was adopted of printing and distributing the Votes every day; and since then, only those petitions have been printed respecting which the House has thought proper to give an order to that effect. They are printed in the form of an appendix to the votes. The proportion of petitions ordered to be printed to the whole number submitted to the notice of the House, appears, since the commencement of the new system, to have varied considerably in different years. Of 4074 petitions, for instance, presented in 1828, only 1579 were ordered to be printed; whereas of 4041, presented in 1829, the number ordered to be printed was 3394. Of the whole number of 24,492 presented in the

five years ending 1831, 10,685 were ordered to be printed. And the expense thus occasioned amounted for these five years to upwards of 12,000l., or between 2000l. and 30007. a year. Moreover it appears that the mass of matter thus laid before the House and the public excites comparatively but little interest even among those who are most in the habit of attending to parliamentary proceedings. The Report states that some members decline receiving the appendix, considering it as an incumbrance, and that during the year 1831, while there were sold to the public 400 copies of the votes, there were not sold more than 150 copies of the appendix. The appendix for the year 1829, in which Parlia ment sat from the 6th February to the 24th June, formed a volume of 1535 folio pages, consisting entirely of public and election petitions. It is suggested in the Report that a select committee might be appointed at the commencement of each session to arrange and classify the petitions presented, and having a discretionary power to decide as to the printing at length of any containing facts or reasoning of which, in their judgment, the House ought to be apprised. A resolution to this effect was, on the motion of Lord Althorp, passed by the House on the 20th February, and the Committee appointed.

QUAKERS' AFFIRMATION.

THE House of Commons came to a gratifying decision on
the 14th of February in the case of Joseph Pease, Esq. re-
turned one of the members for the southern division of the
county of Durham, by resolving that this gentleman was
entitled to take his seat upon making his solemn affirmation
and declaration, instead of taking the usual oaths. This is
the first decision that has admitted any member of the so-
ciety of Friends to the British legislature. In consequence
of the claim advanced by Mr. Pease, a select committee was
appointed by the House, on the 8th, to report such prece-
dents as they could discover bearing upon the subject.
Their Report, which was brought up on the 11th, presents a
full detail of the various enactments which the statute-book
contains in reference to the Quakers since they originally
attracted the notice of the legislature. The first which they
quote is an act passed in 1674, (the 13 and 14 Car. II. c. 1).
by which it was declared that any person refusing to take
an oath when lawfully tendered, should, for the first offence,
be fined 57., and if three times convicted, should suffer the
penalty of banishment. By a subsequent act, (the 16 Car. II.
c. 4, § 16,) the further penalty of transportation was affixed
to the offence. It was not till the year 1689, that by the
statute 1 William and Mary, cap. 18, (commonly called the
Toleration Act,) the affirmation of Dissenters from the
Church of England who scrupled to take an oath was legally
recognized. This act, however, only exempts such persons
from the pains and penalties of the statutes against Papists
and Non-conformists, and that only on their subscribing a
certain declaration of allegiance, and a profession of their
faith in the Trinity. It was by the act, 7 and 8 Will. III.
cap. 34, passed in 1697, that Quakers were first permitted
to substitute their solemn affirmation instead of the usual
oath, in civil causes, in the courts of justice. The act, which
was to be in force only for seven years, was by a subsequent
enactment, (13 Will. III. cap. 4,) passed in 1702, continued
for the further period of eleven years; and in 1714, (by the
1 Geo. I. § 2. c. 6,) it was made perpetual. The next statute
in order was the 8 Geo. I. cap. 6, passed in 1722, by which
the forms of the declaration of allegiance and of the solemn
affirmation were altered. But the most decisive enactment
bearing upon the subject, appears to be the statute 22 Geo. II.
c. 46, passed in 1749, by which it is declared, "that in all
cases wherein by any act or acts of parliament now in force,
or hereafter to be made, an oath is or shall be allowed,
authorized, directed, or required, the solemn affirmation or
declaration of any of the people called Quakers, in the form
prescribed, &c. shall be allowed and taken instead of such
oath, although no particular or express provision be made
for that purpose in such act or acts." It is, however, at the
same time provided, that no Quaker shall, by virtue of this
act, be qualified or permitted to give evidence in any criminal
cases, or to serve on juries*, or to bear any office or place of
profit in the government. It was only by the act (9 Geo.IV.
cap. 32,) passed in 1829, that Quakers and Moravians were,
for the first time, allowed to make their solemn affirmation

* A capital conviction by the Court of Admiralty was recently set aside because a Quaker, having been on the jury, had affirmed, instead of taking the usual oath.

instead of the usual oath in giving evidence" in any case whatsoever, criminal or civil." And this is at present the extent of the privilege they enjoy. They are still inadmissible to places of profit in the government without taking the oaths. On the 15th of February, however, the day on which Mr. Pease took his seat, Lord Morpeth gave notice of his intention to move to bring in a bill to relieve them from this only remaining disability. The notice at present stands for Tuesday, 2d April.

From the Report of the Committee, it appears that there is only one other case on the Journals in which the question of the admissibility of a Quaker to take his seat on affirmation came before the House ;-namely, that of John Archdale, Esq., returned for Chipping-Wycombe, in 1699. This gentleman made his claim by a letter to the Speaker, dated (Tuesday) "the 3d of the eleventh month, called January, 1698-9," which was read to the House the same evening. The House, after hearing it, ordered that it should be taken into consideration on the Friday following, and that Mr. Archdale should be in attendance on the morning of that day. The act of the 7 and 8 Will. III., legalizing the affirmation of a Quaker, in certain cases, was at this time in force; but the decision come to by the House, nevertheless, was an order that the Speaker should issue his warrant to the clerk of the crown to make out a new writ for the borough of Chipping-Wycombe. In the course of the late debate, both Mr. Wynn and the Solicitor-general stated that, even in the then state of the law, they held this decision to be wrong. But even admitting it to have been correct, still no parliamentary decision, as the committee remark, had ever been given, before the late case, on the construction and effect of the statutes now in force. It appears, however, that the Court of King's Bench has decided, that a Quaker, on his affirmation, may be admitted a freeman of a city, and also a member of the Turkey Company. In the latter case, Lord Mansfield, who said that the point was quite clear, seems to have been guided simply by the consideration that the place in question was "not a place of profit in the government." Of late also, Quakers have in several instances been admitted barristers, on making their affirmations instead of taking the usual oaths. And since the repeal of the test and corporation acts, a Quaker has served the office of sheriff of the city of York on his affirmation.

peace in each county, in which any of the property required may be situated. A duplicate of the plans, &c., must be afterwaras shown to the owners and occupiers of the lands required, and their assent, dissent, or neutrality, ascertained, a list of which answers is afterwards lodged in the Private Bill Office. A general statement of the plan, and of the direction and extent of the measure, containing the names of the parishes or places which it will include, or through which it will pass, is advertised in the "London Gazette," and in at least one newspaper in each county affected by the measure, and is also placarded on the door of the Sessionshouse in the same, during the Michaelmas and Epiphany sessions.

These preliminaries, which are all prescribed by what are termed the Standing Orders of the House of Commons, having been fulfilled within a certain defined time before the assembling of parliament, and a list of subscribers (the amount of whose subscription must be four-fifths of the estimated expense before the bill can be transmitted to the House of Lords) having been obtained, the draft of the bill is prepared, and a petition is addressed to the House praying that it may be received. This petition is referred to a select committee, taken by ballot from certain lists into which the whole House is divided for particular divisions of the country. This committee having ascertained that the standing orders have all been complied with, report the same to the House, and the bill is, as a matter of course, received and read a first time. After the lapse of a certain number of days, it is moved that the bill be read a second time, when, if any objection is made, it is then stated, and the bill is either rejected or referred to a select committee, who consider it clause by clause, and are empowered to examine witnesses, and to hear counsel both in support and opposition. The committee, in almost every case, introduce a maximum of the toll, or duty, or rent, according to the nature of the measure, to be levied, and in many cases declare a maximum of interest to be divided on the capital, and order the surplus to be invested in the public funds, till the amount is sufficient to repay the sums advanced by the shareholders-the improvement to be then thrown open for the free enjoyment of the public. In many cases, also, provision is made to secure the completion of the work when once begun. A copy of the bill, with a plan, is now sent to the clerk of every parish through which the proposed work is to be carried, where it is open to the inspection of any one desirous of seeing it. The committee having completed their labours announce their decision in a report, after which the House A VERY important part of the business of the legislature proceeds to the third reading of the bill, when it may be consists in deliberating and deciding upon what are techni-again discussed, though the report of the committee is in cally called Private Bills. These are, to a certain extent, bills of divorce, for naturalization, change of name, and other objects of a merely personal nature; but for the most part they are to enable private individuals, associated together, to undertake works of public utility at their own risk, and, in a degree, for their own benefit. To effect this, it is necessary to confide to them greater power than they possess in their individual capacities; and the legislature, having ascertained that a public advantage is likely to accrue from the proposed measure, invests them with the required powers under certain conditions, and then leaves them to conduct the business in a manner most conducive to their own interest, the funds being wholly derived from their own resources. We shall endeavour to give a connected view of the progress of a private bill.

PRIVATE BILLS.

The wants of the public having directed attention to any supposed improvement, requiring the co-operation of a company and the sanction of a private bill, the usual course is for the original proposers to draw up the plan of the association, with a statement of the advantages to be derived from it, and the proposed method of carrying it into effect. This is submitted to a meeting of those who are most immediately interested. If the plan is approved, a subscription is opened to defray immediate expenses, and means are taken to give publicity to the plan so adopted, in order to procure the names of a sufficient number of individuals who engage to be answerable for such sums as are agreed upon. An estimate has generally been formed of the amount which is considered sufficient for the completion of the object; and the individual advances, called shares, are agreed to be paid in such proportions, and at such times, as shall be afterwards fixed by the bill.

Surveys are then made, and plans prepared, of which a copy, and book of reference, are lodged with the clerk of the

most cases agreed to without any further opposition. If the bill is passed, it is carried to the House of Lords, where it goes through nearly the same forms; and if it be finally approved of by the Upper House, and receive the royal sanction, it becomes an act, and a part of the law of the land. It should also be stated that, early in the Session, the House fixes periods within which the different stages of private bills are required to be forwarded. The times so appointed for the present session are as follow:-No petition to be received after the 22d of February; the first reading to be not later than the 25th of March; and no report to be received after the 20th of May.

The forms above detailed are extremely well calculated to secure a due consideration of the subject and to prevent injustice; but in consequence of many of these bills being considered of a wholly private nature, they are too frequently left to the management of those in some measure immediately interested. The consequence is, that bills, or particular clauses in bills, of a questionable or even injurious tendency, are occasionally smuggled, as it is termed, through the House. Of this a notable example was afforded during the last session, when a bill, avowedly for the purpose of enabling certain parties, who had been carrying into effect some improvements at Glasgow, to dispose of their interests in those improvements among themselves by lot, was made the medium of re-establishing a private lottery, after the state lottery had been abolished as immoral and pernicious.

We have only to add that at each of the stages mentioned certain fees are payable, of which a table is published under the Speaker's authority. These fees have been long complained of as being too heavy, and as having the effect of preventing or throwing unnecessary impediments in the way of public improvements, but no measure has been yet adopted for their removal or amendment

county
(Southern division).........
28. Norwich, city
29. Oxford, city
30. Petersfield, borough..

Comparative Classification of Private Bills for Eight Years. 31. Portarlington, borough

32. Ripon, borough....
33. Salisbury, city
34. Southampton, town
35. Stafford, borough

19 26 25 19 16

11 6 5

2

6 2 3 3

Total. .

73 47 39

108 83 63

ཱཋ

15

51

ཚོ

།སྨཱ

83 83 7 6 5

64

11 5 C

45 33 45 48 40 35

286 206 185 182 207 208 194 185

One of the most important private bills introduced in the present session is that for constructing a rail-road from London to Birmingham. It is intended that it shall commence on the north bank of the Regent's Canal, on the west side of the Hampstead-Road, and proceeding by or near to Kensall Green, Harrow, Pinner, Bushey, Watford, King'sLangley, Hemel-Hempstead, Berkhampstead, Long-Marston, Tring, Ivinghoe, Fenny-Stratford, Shenley, Potterspury, Darlescote, Weedon, Rugby, Willenhall, Coventry, Coleshill, Little-Bromwich, and Deritend, terminate at a place called Nova Scotia Gardens at Birmingham. The estimated expense of this work, is 2,500,000l., to be raised in 1007. shares, nearly the whole of which is already subscribed. In addition to the magnitude of the work, opening a means of communication so rapid as to enable the heaviest loads to e transmitted in seven or eight hours between two such marts of commerce and manufactures as London and Birmingham, the circumstances of its being the first rail road out of London, and the precursor without doubt of many others, give it an additional interest. The measure was first introduced into Parliament during the session of 1832, and passed through the House of Commons, but, after considerable discussion, was rejected by the Lords. In the present session the petition was presented on the 12th of February, and the first reading took place on the 15th.

A petition was also presented on February 19th for leave to bring in a bill respecting the Thames tunnel.

Sir W. Long and Sir J. Pulley
Richard Ash, and others.
Fras. King Eagle, Esq.
Jas. Hughes and John Lawrance.
O. J. E. Nanney, Esq.
Edw. Chichester, and others.
Jas. Morton, and others.
W. Taylor Copeland, Esq
J. Townshend, Esq., P. Deane,
Esq., and others.
Wm. Odell, and others.
Pat. Carmody, and others.
M. J. Blake, Esq., V. Blake,
Esq., and others.
J. Disney, Esq., and others.
J.S. Duncombe and J. E. Spald-
ing, Esqs.
Henry Rich, Esq.
David Howell, Esq., and others.
C. D. W. Sibthorp, Esq.
J. J. Hope Vere, Esq.
A. A. Watt, and others.
Visc. Forbes, A. Lefroy, Esq..

37. Tiverton, borough
38. Warwick, borough

39. Weymouth and Melcombe
Regis, borough
40. Windsor, borough
41. York, city .

R. W. Brandling, R. P. Philip-
son, Esqs., and others.
John Cozens, and others.
Wm. Hughes Hughes, Esq.
Hylton Joliffe, Esq., and others.
Hon. G. L. Dawson Damer.
George Jackson, and others.
Hon. D. P. Bouverie.
Joseph Clark, and others.
Wm. Blount, Esq., Wm. Rogers,
and others.

James Johnstone, Esq.
Wm. Anstey, and others.
Wm. Tibbitts and others.

G. C. Welsford, and others.
Sir J. E. De Beauvoir.
Samuel Judd.

SOUTH CAROLINA AND THE AMERICAN

TARIFF.

THE news from the United States has of late been of unusual interest, by reason of the discontent which has prevailed in the Southern and Western States at the tariff imposing duties on foreign goods imported; and so great has been this discontent in the state of South Carolina, that the people of that state have openly declared their resistance to the tariff. The legislature of South Carolina published an ordinance, declaring the laws passed in 1828 and 1832 for the imposing of duties on the importation of foreign commodities to be unauthorized by the constitution of the United States, and therefore null and void; and that a protecting tariff should no longer be enforced within the limits of South Carolina. It was added, that if the general government should attempt to coerce them by military power, they would firmly resist, and supplies were voted for that purpose. Upon this the president of the United States issued a proclamation, stating it to be the intention of the general government to maintain the integrity of the Union by force; but the South Carolinians appeared disposed to persist in their resistance, although unsupported by Georgia and other states to whose interests the tariff was also believed to be hostile; and the president more recently issued another proclamation, removing the custom-houses, and making other regulations for thwarting the opposition. The president's conduct has been sanctioned by several of the Northern States, especially that of New York, the annual value of whose manufactures is upwards of twenty-five million dollars. Whether these disputes will be amicably arranged, or will terminate in a dissolution of the North American republic as at present constituted, it is not easy yet to foresee; but it may be useful, in the mean time, to give some account, firstly, of the American Constitution as applied to the question at issue, and secondly, of the Tariff which has been the cause of the irritation.

The American Union is composed (exclusively of certain Territories sending delegates) of twenty-four States, each of which has its separate legislature, invested with the entire regulation of its local concerns. These States, independent in other respects, are united by a federal compact, which is the eonstitution of the United States, and according to this the president, and the congress, consisting of the senate and the house of representatives, are elected. By the constitution, the congress has power to levy and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises; to pay the debt, and provide for the common defence and general welfare of the United States, and to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among the several states. The powers not delegated to the United States by the constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. Such being almost verbally the language of the constitution, the question is, whether or not congress has power to impose a general tariff which is binding upon each individual State. Now if the power of congress extends to all taxes, whether for the purpose of revenue or of protection, it is plain that the objection of the South Carolinians-that the tariff operates unequally, is scarcely tenable, because, as the president observes, such an objection may be made with truth to every law that has been or can be passed. The wisdom of man never yet contrived a system of taxation that would operate with perfect equality." Much less does South John Harper and C. S. Gil- Carolina appear to be warranted in throwing off her allegiman, Esqs.

and others.

Wm. Murphy, and others.
Edw. Jones and Thos. Owen.
Dennis Maguire, Esq.