Star. — London, England, 1816-04-11 00:00:00

...., Stowable Gentleman to induce him to sleet ve from sl qty ttirt. t5.3.d he, as the Right Honourable Gentleman owned so mod) to desire, erect him into • a House of Commons, and listen to his opinions' as tieing those of the whole House.. " When the proper ime should srdet, therefore, he shoold fed himself, ballad to give that explanation so rnoch desired ; and, in the mean time, he should not oppose the motion for the production of the papers. Mr. 'I'IERNEY said, that his great reason for moving for the estimate was, to receive such an ex rilanation as would prevent those speeches, founded On misrepresentation which the Noble Lord had referred to, from being made. Nothing could pre— went such occurrences ineffectually as having 41 the documents before the House—he meant, on this par ticular paper to have fouaJed a separate motion.— When he knew that a WAfTA,)t was issued under the sign manual of the Prince,ltegent, directing the Lord Chamberlain to lay before the Lords of the Treasury an estimate of the -probable expense of each quarter; and when he was aware that no estimate was made for the varlet ending in January—was it too much for him ru ask CI. explanation ? The Rade Lod said, he would give the explanation at a future time. This was one of his denials of explanation, founded on no ground whatever. The House could not bp satisfied that a regulation, which commenced only in April last, should be set aside merely at the plea sure of Lord Hertford. The secret correspondence which had taken place, rendered the transaction sus- Ficious. The House would wish to know why the treasury did not force Lord Hertford to send in an estimate. All he (Mr. Tierney) got in citisequence of his motion, was a statement that no such estimate existed ; but all explanation was refused. The No ble Lord said, he would give the necessary explana tion, when the whole subject came under discussion. He would, therefore, inform the Noble Lord, 66 that' on Monday, the 6th of May, be should move to refer the papers relative to the Civil List, to a Comniittee of the whole House, the said Committee to have the powerof sending for, and'examining per sons, papers, and records" It was most important to the public, that the subject should be thoroughly investigated. It was peculiarly suspicious that three weeks before the discussion of the question, the No ble Lord should state there was a circumstance which Le could explai.i, but which he refused to clear up, without giving any good reason for adopting such a cbusse. Strictly speaking, he (Mr. Tierney) had taken nothing by his motion. But he conceived the line pursued by the Nt.ble Lord, furnished. him with the most unanswerable argument, in favour of the propriety of arming the Committee with the power to bend for persons, papers, and records. The No ble Lord said it was unusual to invest a Committee with such powers. Now, after what had occurred, 1u could not help examining Lord Hertford, if lie even wished to avoid it. Could any person now doubt the propriety of examining him as to what was door in his department ? The motion was then agreed to. PIiCHNIARY EINGAGESUCNTS WITH FRAME?. Mr. HAMM:MEV rose to move for an ac count of the sums of looney due to this country by the French Government, for the maintenance tit pri- SOWS of war, and which the British Government had abandAntd in consequepce a the claims of British subjects on the French funds having been ac knowledged. The Honourable Member retuarked on the imp 'licy and danger of encouraging by any means the placing of British capital in foreign funds. His observations at present might be, perhaps, con sidered ill timed, as the pecuniary conventions-with )fiance had aiready received the sanction of the House; but as it was impossible in one night to dis cuss the substance of seventy treaties, he did not con ceive himself precluded, by any previous vote, front future observations—(Hear.) Tome treaties, in his mind, did honour to me Noble Lord opposite ; but that one which referred to the surrender of the claim for the support of French prisoners had not been suf ficiently examined, He was anxious to know exactly what sacrifice we bad made, and for that purpose he had brought his present motion. The motion being read, Lord CASTLEREAGH rose, and said, that he had Alt) Gbit:Cllern to the principle of the motion, but would wish to havetome alteration in it for the purpose of facilitating the return. He feared, however, that if the Honourable Member expected from any return of the claim of this Government, to learn how much WAS actually due by trance, be would be disap pointed—for the question of claim respecting priso ners of war had been on both sides subject to much dipute, and atter ascertaining the demands of the French Government, the balance would either be struck u kb difficulty, or be perhaps very little in our Lower. He declared that he had never been disposA to look ith special favour on those who speculated in foreign funds ; and if the demands of British sub jects on France rested simply on that ground, he would not have endeavoured to establish thend. But they were of a match higher nature, inasmuch as they bed been fortified by Treaty—had been taken up at the Treaty of Amiens—and the final arrangement, in 1814, was but a continuance of the protection that bad been previously granted. That property had been sequestered by the French Guveniment ; and the question was, whether that sequestration, in breach of Treaty, should be submitted to by the British Government ? On that principle alone had he ran. dertaken to establish the claim, fur had he acted on the general principle on obtaining indemnity for all the losses sustained by the sequestration of British' property, such a claim would have been endless, for not in France alone, but in almost every part of the Continent, had France, either directly, or by her ihfloence, caused itnmenW Joists to this country.- 1:11w sequestration had, however, been made in breach of treaty, and it was one of his strongest arguments with' the French Government, that the Treaty bad been made with the Bourbons, as it was also no slight reason for that Government to accede to it.— With respect to the general good faith of that Go vernment, be felt it uetessary to state, that not only io this instance, but also in its other engagements shish the Allies, it bird uniformly manifested the purest principles. None of the payments under the Conventions were in arrear ; all had been regularly paid to the present momeut. Mr.- TIERNEY said, that no one tier doubted that a large balance had been due by France to this cutrutzt, on account of iiriassicrs 01 war-4unsethina, he believes', about s e ven millions sterling . ; and die only 'reason - hi could see for the Noble Lord's not on.: that claim. was' the greater. edat hihoped to pan by procuring from France a large 'suns, under the name of indemnities and contribii tions. He took advantage of the opportunity affor ded him by the present motion to state to the Houie the result of the Noble Lord's pecuniary negotiations with France.. The House and the country had been given to understand, that those contributions would be sufficient to defray all the expenses of the army of occupation, and leave to England besides a consider able sum. 01 the 125,000,000 of livres indemnity to this country, the Government had thought. proper, of its own authority, to give 25,000,000 Al the army that fought at the battle of Waterloo. He had many strong objections to make to such a donation; but those he should waive for the present, to consider what actually remained to this country of all the No. bit Lord's promise. Those 25,000,000 to the army were, of course, to be thrown out of the indemnities, so that the total sum which was remaining at the dis. posal of the country for the payment of the army was £6,598,000. This could not be denied, for the offi cial return was on the table. The charge for sup porting the army was to be set against this, and the annual outgoings for the pay, ordnance, provisione, forage, increased rations for officers, hospital medi cine, Bcc. would amount to £1,160,000, which raol tiplied by five, the number of years that our army was to remain in France, would give a sum total oaf , R 5,800,000; so that the suer total remaining in this country at the end of that period would, making every fair allowance, not exceed £300,000. In the present year we had received about e 8892,000, leav ing a deficiency to be supplied by this country for the support of the army, of £267,000. Next year, when the grant to the.army would become due, we would receive so much less, only £595,000, leavingifts6l4ooo to be made good by this country for the expenses of the army during that year. But the Noble Lord will say, 44 Why don't you go on to the third year?" Undoubtedly, in the third year we shall receive a larger 5um0e1,636,000, making a surplus in that year of £176,000 ; but Mixt that surplus from thei deficiencies of the two preceding years, and there would still remain a deficiency in the third year of £355,000. In the fourth year, the surplus would about make up the deficiency on the three preceding, and defray the interest of the sum ; while the surplus of the fifth and last year would leave to this count's' a disposable sum for 46 indemnity for the past, and security for the future," of about R 598,0001 Anti if unfortunately during . the three or four first years the relations if peace with France should by any mis fortune be broken, instead of having received any Imoney from that country, we should lie down under a very considerable loss. Such were the indemnities' of five millions Which the Noble Lord had promised. Lord CASTLEREAGH observed, that the Right Honourable Gentleman seemed to have forgotten every thing that he (Lord Castlereagh) had stated, and had imputed to him' things that he had never stated. He had never given the House or the coun try ary reason to expect an indemnity of five mil lions, having merely stated, that although the French Government had recognized the principle of defray ing the expenses of the army of occupation, yet the contributions for that purpose were on the general scale of Continental armies, and not with reference to the special expense of a British army. It was, how ' ever, no small sacrifice on the part of France, and no' l inconsiderable advantage for England, as well as for the rest of Europe, to have an army of 150,000 men supported on the French frontier, at the sole expense of the French Government. Suppose that the pro position had been reversed, and that it was necessary for this country and the other Allied Powers to have such an army maintained on the French frontier, to which we should pay our regular contingent, would any person in the country object to such an arrange ment Z He felt convinced that the country would not recede from its duty, and that the arguments of the Right Hon. Gentleman would not cause it to feel less the advantages of the existing Treaties. Mr. BARING thought the House and the country should feel grateful to his Right Hon. Friend for set ting them right on the subject of our pecuniary en gagements with France. He said, that by substituting British for foreign troops, in maintaining the native Government of France, we had sacrificed .100 lions of traucs. The Noble Lord - seemed in every re spect to have been over-reached in his money dealings with the French Government. He had given up all the charges incurred by this country for the mainte nance of prisoners of war, and had altogether over. looked the expense incurred by the recovery of the French colonies, after the return of Bonaparte from the island of Elba. Even since that event, considera ble charges had been undergone for prisoners of war, which had been also sacrificed. The Noble Lord bad said that great difficulty would be experienced in making up the returns, in consequence of the diffe rent and contested claims of both Governments ; and because France had, at the breaking out of the war, detained many persons whom we were unwilling to acknowledge prisoners of war. This claim on the part of the French Government could not, in his opi nion, be productive of much difficulty, for those persons then detained were most of them idle travel lers, in no want of money, and by no means of that class of persons who required food and clothing from' the Government. There could not, he was confident, be 5,000 of them who could have caused any expense to that country. It would, indeed, seem as if the Noble Lord had put forward those persons to conceal the real facts and the sacrifices made by the country. i One kind of property had been given op to obtain another of less value—the property of the country had been socrificed to secure that of a few individuals. If the Treaty of 1786 had given this county a lair , claim to the property of British subjects in the French Funds, he saw no reason why two or three times its value should now be, paid for it. But be denied that there was a fair ground of claim. The fact *as this, the French Government found it necessary to reduce its debt to one-third of its original amount, and in the consequences of this reduction, all the public cre ditors were necessarily involved, and among them certain British subjects. The British Government then demanded that the other two-thirds should be returned, bui this he considered as unjust and impo litic : for if ever a necessity should unfortunately arise in this country of- wiping 001 part of our debt, we have established a precedent in favour of the French creditor from whit* we could not depart. The CHANCELLOR or The EXCIIE4PER Waterer heard >ugh stianee atguments as had been advanced by the Henoerable,Gentleman opposite; but he was particularly surprised at the censure that had been directed against his Majesty's Ministers, for net enforcing the payment of the expenses incurred by the maiiirerance of prisoners of war. Such an accusation had never on any former Treaty been made against the Ministers, and it should be Terrier:. tiered that if we were victorious with respect to France at the conclusion of the last war, sn were af:e other Allies, and yet not one of them had insisted on such a s claim, although Russia must have had a very considerable nee against- France. The Right Hon. Gentleman ( Mr. Tierney) had said, that the Gevern meat had neglected to enforce the claim, for the pur pose of obtaining an indemnity; but the transactions were altogether different ; for the former had been commuted for the claims of British subjects on the fends, in 1814, and the indemnities were acquired in 1815. He contended, that it was a just principle, that. British subjects in France should have the same protection that was enjoyed by French subjects in England. When Parliament thought it necessary to impose a general tax on the income of every persan in the State, French subjects were free from it ; and he considered ihe two.thirds taken away by the French Government, from the public creditors, to bear an exact resemblance to the 10 per cent. on the property of individuals in this country. The dif ference was in amount, and no; in principle. Mr. HAMMERSLEY and Lord CASTLERICAOH ex plained. Mr. BROUGHAM conceived the resemblance drawn by the Caancellor of the Exchequer between the Property Tax in England, and the operation of the tiers constlidies in' France, extremely ill-advised, and one winch would be gladly seized on by France, to turn against him. There was not, in tact, the least analogy between them. He would not be taken fir a favourer of the Property Tax; but to give it its due, as the worst character is said to deserve, it could not be likened to the sweeping act of coiai - ,ca. Lion practised by the French Government. The CHANCELLOR of the 'EXCIJEQUER disclaimed any intention of aslimilating a general tax on the entire community with a breach of pallic faith. lie wished merely to remark on the liberality of this country, Nhich exempted foreigners from the operation of the Property Tax, while it affected every subject. He then proposed as an Arnendmet - a, " That an saccount or estimate be laid belie the House of the wins claimed by the British Govern. ment from the French - Government, for the maim... aance of prisoners of war in the years 11;14 aiel 18 15, and also the sums claimed by the French Govern ment from the British Government on the same. account." _ _ Mr. HAMMER SLEY had no objection t!ist the amendment should be substituted for his motion. Mr. TIERNEY could not see any difference be.. tween them; he, however, would propose an audi tion, merely to know host the conduct of the legiti mate Government differed from that of the mate. The addition was—" And the sums muttill!) , demanded at any period within the last ten years." Lord CASTLEREr'IGI - I—‘ , It will be toond that every Government endeavoured to press the best claim it coull" The Motion, with the addition, was then carried. Mr. FORBES expressed Rn anxiety, that the Navy should be enabled to draw their pay on their foreign stations. The only objection he had heard to such a 1 proposition was, the additional expense that it would cause. For the purpose then of ascertaining whether that duty might not be committed to some odicer already paid by the country, and whose duty at pre bent was fight, he begged leave to move for a Return of the duty of the sevrral Officers in the Puymaster- General's Department, with their respective salaries and establishments. Sir C. POLE said, that the Navy were at present allowed to send hall.their pay to their wives and fa milies—to draw one-third wore in sl.ps, with a pound of tobacco—by which means very little of their pay remained. He did not think it pOitic to enable them ' to draw all their pay on foreign stations; thus pre venting them from looking to England for some en joyment on their return, and some money atter the,- long services. They were thoughtless, and on re• turning from the Pay-office at home with only a kw pounds, alter two or three years service, never re membering that they had previously enjoyed their money. they would esteem k severe not to have more to shew atter so long an absence. Considering, as he did, that the principle of the proposition of the Honourable Gentleman in itself was bad, and that the argument in support of it was worse, he should, if he stood alone, divide the House. Sir GEORGE HOPE agreed in sentiment with the gallant Admiral who had just sat (town. lie said it was utterly impracticable to pay the crews of ships of war every time they came into poll. The consequence of such a system would produce culable mischief both in point of delay aii,l If the regulations at present adopted were atteluied to, it would be impossible to pay a ship in less than three weeks. The books would all require to 1w made up, and the accounts regularly audited —s,) that if once a ship came into harbour, it would be impossible again to get her to sea until all tip; timi been done. Had such a practice been in torte when Lord St. Vincent was off Cadiz, and, iptitting his ' station, went to Gibraltar for provisions and water, [ the French fleet, which in consequence came cut, might have ranged triumthant in the Mediterranean for three weeks. Mr. ROSE said, it was utterly impossible to cf. fect the payment of the navy abroad, an the same manner as was done by the Paymasters of the army. Admiral MOO &SOM . agreed in the impossibility of effecting the Hon. Gentleman's object.. • Sir G. WARRENDER deprecated the discussion of these questions, which only excited hopes that .it was Impossible w realise: He moved, with a view of getting rid of the motion, the resumption of the - debate on the Navy Estimates. Mr. FORBES said, that he had the opinion of several Admirals is the service as to . the. practicabi. lity of the measure he had suggested; and he trusted the House would agree tisk as one which was both just and necessary. It there was an objection to pay the common seamen in this way, he would ask why the officers could not be allowed to draw their pay t 'He did not desire that they should receive:the whole sum. If they wad only get two or direr months pa, nut of the twelve mrmrh, that wont be 4 , 4 advant4re. Mr. W SMITH said, that the Hon. Gentlem,, (Mr. Fru bt-f) had much ti nth and juspee 0 , 1 side. tie teyretted that in Tuitions of this mute'. ptoftssional gentlemen were too apt to adhere to e 4 4 * !rums. He thought there was a grand defect in IN system of the Bfitish Nrvy, and particularly th at more farce and coercion WAS used than was new. sary. By adopting a &intent course, and by grart. jpg every indttleenre t thr sraman, constitetit with propriety, he nr.,c satisfied the sifamen would bec•infe more attacli.d to the public service. Sir C. POLE observed, if, answer to the Homan. able Gentleman who' spt,lte P,•it, that such wls the nature of our naval rervice, tl!at coercion was 4 !, 5 „. le.tely recersary—unief-s tliis was the case, h e ~„,„. , 1 , 1 be the l.ist :non to support it Anothf,r against the proposition of the ilinnourableG, w ,„,,,,, (Mr. Forbes) was the immense tepe:,ce *Liji it would require to keep pay.clut ks in every foreign port. Mr. FORBES explained. Sir GEORGE WA R RENDER no r b egge d to withdraw his amendment, and move a dirtct negative to the motion. The papers ailuded to by the tine. Gentleman being already on the table of the Home, in the Army Estimates. Mr. FORBES said, the returns of the duties of the Officers in question were not in those Estiliat'!s. The question was then put, and negativel wi t h out a division. SILVER CURRENCY. Mr. GRENFELL rose to move for . ten , PPM relative to the importation of gold aied ttlit country. He took this occasion to advert to the it's graceful state of nor silver currency, alich saLi consisted, for the mnst part, of the silver coin of France, and of a couutcrte‘t coin m mut:muted here. He that day recei.o.d information from a Frervt merchant (.1 some importance, that in tee cr•urse4 the last twelve months, the importation if Aver c. is trnm France into this country amounted to no less thaa € 4 .:(;0,000; the pri.tit upon which was at least ..ti) per cent. Whatever reasons freight have existed some time back, for not giving us a good siiver coin• age, th.tt reason no longer existld, as, in point of fact, the valise of silvar had been reduced to the Mint I price, nanyly, Fr.: Th:s. Honourable Gen -1:4 moved, " Tnat there shcull I Le I.wi i}ctr)re thr Home an account of all the Eal I end sqrer coin and hallion imported into this coin. I try, hom the Is! of January, ISIO, to the latest pe. davtingiii:.iung cacti piAtter, and the amount coin and bullion. an acc•ntht 0- the fortiga gold sworn otT before the Lord NIA vor." The CHANCELLOR. of the 'EXCHEQUER. said, be had uo objection to the production Lf these accounts. Mr. BARING did hope.tbe Right Hon. Gentle man (the ellioicellor if the *Exchequer) would hate paid iarme ittertion to t!►is very impoftant sobjtci, namely, the present state of the silver currency ci the country. He trusted that some proposition would be made to the House upon this topic, in the course of the Session. if on other Gentleman introduced the qu►•st:v.n, he should feel it his duty to take some itep upon i!. he thought souse Auntie° ought to take place in the sillier standard of the country, irad he Waa qu,ite saiisfied this might be done without the :I►ghte+t L'etnr• any measure of this sort took place, however, he considered it was proper that it should be preceded by a Committee of the Home. Ch•: Honourable Gentleman then adverted to the stale of the New Mint, which, he observed, notwith standing the immense expense that had been incur red in its establishment, was almost useless. Among the faw Bank tokens th..t the persons employed there had been called upon to strike, not a man was loud to know his business—every thing was done iu a bu►►gling manner—the dies were broktn—and, I tact, the grossest ignorance was manifested on all ►des. He dud hope, that the subject would be at teuJ►'d to by his Majesty's Government. The as- I eouots were then ordered. NAVAL ESTIMATE. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved the Order ot the Day for the How.: recriteg the Ittpiat of the etammittee of Supply, relative to the Depat talent of the. Admiralty. The Report was then brGught up, acid the Reso- lotions weie read. Sir CHARLES POLE, adverting generally to the Amount of those Estimates, said it was impossible for the country to go on unless they underwent some serious alteration. He alluded particularly to the Estimatuc for the Supemimeraries and Hal4;l. In 1791, the Estimate under this head had been but. 4:17:4900, winaeas it was now ,e 1,257,000. This a as an increase to him unaccountable—and therefore it was lie thought the subject should undergo a cont. ph•te ri-vision. The Report upon this head was then agreed tn. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER then moved the consideration of the Report of Ole Coinauttee of Supply upon die Navy Office. The Resolutions bring read, Sir CH A RLES POLE stated, that the Books of the Pay Cleiks had nevtr been made up since the ' year I;S6 —hence the public had no check upon this 1 source of expet,ditute. 1 Mr. ROSE said, that the Books of the Navy Of. 1 Lice had been completely made up, pa ssed, and audited o the latest pert ad. Sir CHARLES POLE persisted in his statement, that the Pay Book l, namely, those in which the p 4 l of Seamen was entered, had not been made up slate 1 . 786, and advised the Treasurer of the Navy (NV. Rose) to inquire into the subject. Mr. ROSE—" I ani to understand front the lll nourable.Gentleman, that the Pay Books hate '''t been made up since 1786 ?" Sir C. POLE —g , Yes, certainly."—The Report was then agreed to. • ' The Report respecting the Half-pay and &q.t. numeraries was then take). into consideration. Mr. BARING begged to ask in what way the produce of Old Stores was to be accouated tor, me votes. lacing taken for the full amount of the Es,i mates upon each bead ? Mr. CROKER said they were taken as part of the 'Nays nod Means of the year. • Sir C. POLE remarked, that the qoestion had often been asked in that House, what should bz Or 'epxritterciii cif principles sy stem should k o e f • s c u a Pe rri r ecl an thought that at no former period had the councrt niunaut)ioentie:nt d ? en osovtb;it. • 1 -' O -