The Statesman. — London, England, 1822-03-14 00:00:00

• PUKLIC ACCOUNTS. Mr. MARERLY wished to know if the information which had been promised to him on a former night, and on which promise he Lad put off his motion respecting the Public Accounts, was to he given or not. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was un able to give an answer in the absence of his Hon. Friend (Mr. laushington.) When he arrived he would probably be alskraostathifyilre Hon. Gentleman. Mr. Alderman WOODpreaented a Petition from Cal lingerood, in the Township of Oldham, in the County Palatine of Lancaster, praying for the remission of the remainder of Mr.• Hunt's sentence.—Ordered to lie on the table. . . POSTMASTNIS ONNERAL. Lead NORMANBY would feel the diffidence which he expressed when addressing the House much increased igthe motion which he had to submit were of &personal nature. But from this feeling be was relieved, as he only rose to perform a duty open to every Member of Parliament, that of bringing before the House a case in which a clear reduction mild be made. To him it was matter of satisfaction that the present motion did not involve soy of those hardships on individuals which were inseparable from many which had economy for their object. When it was proposed to dismiss those in dividnals who either in the field or in official !about' bad spent their youth in the service of the country, it was painful to contemplate the privations to which they might be exposed. But when he looked at the case of those who now, or who at any time possessed the offices, one of which he meant to reduce, he could not doubt that the decision of the House would be cheerfully ac quiesced in, if the motion should be carried. It was also a matter of r•tisfection that this was not a case la. %Jiving a claim of remuneration. No charge could be preferred against the department to which be wished to direct the attention of the House. It was impossible too highly to praise the manner in which the business of the Post-Office was carried 00, and the activity and courtesy constantly found there. Nor did any blame attach to the Government Job, as that had originally been, to which, he objected, and job as it had continued, it was to be remembered that it had endured in good and in bad time; and it was perhaps too much to expect from any Government that it would nder such a branch of patronage of itself, without receiving a hint from that House. It, however. became necessary that it should he abandoned ; and he hoped that Ministers, feeling the importance of economy, would give that attention to this suggestion, which in its judgment it might fairly demand.—He was not responsible for first bringing the matter forward for the discussion of the House. It was not a new question, for he found that two Bills had been introduced to the Honse in 1ci1213. The one, being en titled a Bill for abolishing sinecures and offices. the du ties of which were executed by Deputy , be found in Schedule A. a passage which stated "'that the duty of the Joliet Postmaster-Generalship should be executed by one person, and the salary of the other be thereby saved to the public." It was now to be determined whether the House was less disposed at the present period to come 'to such it resolution than at the time to which he had referred. This office had been originally vested in one person only, as the 9th of Queen Anne expressly de clared. This being the case, lie thought it impossible to say that the original intention of Parliament had not been departed from. At least it required more legal subtlety than he possessed, to prove that one made two. The luggage of the Act could not be mistaken. The period had been called the Augustine age; and certainly although the Acts of Parliament might not be very clas sical in their construction, they were at least written in good English, which was more than could be said of those passed in more modern Jays. When the office in question was divided he could not exactly trace, but it doubtless took place soon after the passing of t he Act, as there was at that time a great disposition to create new offices and places. He could not say whether the salary was doubled at the division of the office. But as the system of remuneration which then prevailed was that of fees, it was most reasonable to suppose that such fees were doubled. It would be seen, hot , that for some time after the appointment of two Postmasters-Ge neral, one of them assisted in the transacting of official business, so that at least in those days, the offices were not those complete and dignified sinecures, which they were now. He also found in those days the names of Freeling, Crag s, Walpole, and Harris, as performing the iduties of the office. iVith respect to the duties of the offices, as they at present stood, it was impossible that their abolition should be detrimental to the public service. He felt the onus of proof upon this point very mach lessened by the fact that the House bad twice ex pressed its opinion that they ought to be abolished, in the Sinecure Bills which had passed. If the oasts were not thus lessened for him, there was the notorious fact l'iat not one of these officers, much more both of them, had Pony duties to perform. Both might he reduced without any disadvantage to the public. That, however, it was not his object to propose, as he was willing to allow there was some satisfaction, if not profit, in having a great name at the head of so important an establish ment. There was another point upon which the Hon. Gentleman said he would make a few observations. It had been said, that the responsibility of the proper col lection of the Post-Office revenue was shared by the Post-masters-General, and that this was a double se curity. Now it was so absurdly preposterous to suppose that one should be a check upon the other, that no man, he was convinced, could seriously lend his ear to it. A sort of ambiguous opinion had been expressed by the Finance Committee of 1817 upon this question. The only reason which made them unfriendly to the abolition was, that so important a responsibility as the collection of the revenue in this department ought not to he left to one individual. But to what would this principle lead? It mast lead to the duplication of all offices of respon sibility. And there were many cases in which new offices must be created if that principle were acted upon. His Right Honourable Friend, the Treasurer of the Navy, for instance, must have a colleague. In fact, his Right Hon. Friend was not only alone in a situation of responsibility, but he was I • . elf a double represen tative of official trusts, for be filled two °Hires of that nature. There was an opinion of Mr. Palmer given in evidence before a Committee of that House, that it was disadvantageous to the business of the Post-office, to have frequent changes in the heads of the department. I f the occasional changes dependent upon a change of power produced such disadvantages, he would put it to the House what practical good could arise from the al ternate changes of superintendence which constantly took place between the two Post-Masters-General. There was an opinion of Lord Chesterfield, when he was Post- Master-General, given before the Finance Committee of 1799, which he would read to the House. His Lordship was asked, " If any difference of opinion should exist between the two PostMasters-General, how would they conic to a decision?' To which he answered, " Such a case, I believe, would very seldom occur; but if it-did, I suppose the i junior would he disposed to give way to the senior." file House would therefore see that the, were paying 2,5001. a year to a Noble Marquess, to ena ble him to be disposed to give way to a Noble Earl. It ought also to be remembered, that for the greater part of two years the Noble Earl was engaged in diplomatic transactions abroad, so that it was quite clear he had no duties to perform connected with this office. He would say a few words as to the Irish and Scotch departments. Ti was not his intention to include Them its iiis resolu tion, as bo should keep as close as possible to the sche dule of the fortner 'Bill which lie bad quoted. But the conceived that It she House admitted the principle, by agreeing to the Revelation, they would afterwards battirititttiipeistion With tilled to Scotl thOre was, complete tie was managed 1 General. In fact, the s piareil it. In Ireland it en Member, who had looked -hat the Post-office expo was of opinion, that batt that country ought to be abolished, if they looked at t. duty which was to be performed by them. But as no thing could be so desirable as to keep Gentlemen in Ire land, he would even make the sacrifice of one, although both might be reduced with perfect safety to the public service. He begged to observe that he had brought forward this question as a measure of specific economy. He did not at all wish to put it in the light of affecting the iotluence of the Crown, and he should therefore deliver no opinion upon that subject. When it came before the House in a regular shape, he should be quite prepared to deliver his sentiments upon it. however, his motion was to be opposed upon the ground of its lessening the influence of the Crown, he should then say that the people had a just right to complain of the manner in which their distress was considered. A long war, and its consequent expenditure, had produced an over-grown state of taxation, which gave the Crown an increase of patronage and influence; and it was most unjust to say that such circumstances were to be turned against the people, as the necessary preservative of the power of the Crown. Before he sat down, he was anxious to call the attention of the House to the import ance of the decision to which they must come upon this question. Not only upon its own merits as a measure of practical economy was it importaner bbt considered relatively to the decision' to which the House came few nights ago when two useless offices were abolished.— The present decision would prove whether Gentlemen meant tbeir vote of the other night as a first dividend of economy paid to their constituents, or whether it was intended as a discharge in 11111 of all their demands.— He rejoiced in the success of his Hun. Friend's motion upon that occasion as much as any man; but if it in volved no principle—if it was meant by those who sup ported it as the definitive quantity of reduction which they would support, and then use it as a proof that they had redeemed their pledges of economy, he would rather that his Honourable Friend had sat in solitnde on that side of the House, and uttered his single "Aye," when the question was put. He did not mean to say that Honourable Members were bound by that vote to sup port every motion for reduction which was afterwards to be submitted to them. lint if they considered the two Postmasters-Oeneral to be no more necessary than seven Lords of the Admiralty, they were bound to sup port him. And that was the ground on which he was anxious to place the question. He did not see his Hon. Friend the Member for Yorkshire in his place, bat lie certainly hoped for his vote, Übe acted in conformity to his former declaration, that he should support every reduction which did not involve the safety of the State. If his Hon. Friend, therefore did not consider that the office was a necessary one to the public service, lie meet vote for the motion. If be opposed it, it must be on the ground that it was indispensible. Its trollied that the House would see the question in the light in which be had endeavoured to place it. If they rejected the motion, they would be acting in defiance of the opinion of the emirate, in derision of its sufferings, and in utter oblivion of all the pledges of economy which th:T had given. He concluded by moving the following reso lution : " Th.t it is the opinion of this House, that without detriment to the public service, the duties of the office of Joint Postmoster.lienersi mat- be performed by one . . • individual. and tk salary of tite . other be thereby saved to the puhlie."- • • Mr. F. ROBINSON said that he did not consider himself at liberty to follow the Noble Coro through the details of his speech, but would meet the proposition upon the plain broad principle to which the Noble Lord referred—namely, whether the effect of this propo sition, if successful, would be to diminish the iretwoce of the Crown. And he begged to remind the House that it became him to take his stand upon this principle at that inoincot, for the Noble Lord had asesod them that the present was but one of a series of similar mo tions. If such a course was in the coutemplation of the Noble Lord, then lie would say that the House were at once challenged to decide upon this motion, whether or not the influence of the Crown should be diminished. It was easy indeed, when one said that he was ready to vote for every safe reduction—it was easy to throw ri dicule on him, and charge him with inconsistency,when a proposition was made to the House for a specific re• auction. to which such a person did not think himself justified in assenting. Bnt he trusted that the fear of reproach or ridicule would not operate so far upon the minds of Gentlemen as to induce them to overlook the consequences of lending themselves to a measure which, in appearance, had in view a trifling reduction, but, in reality. embodied a principle which required of them to pause . long before they decided upon it. He would then repeat that the question before them must be debated, not upnn the narrow consideration whether a reduction of 2000/. a-year ought to be made, but upon the larger— the more important, and more enlightened view, of its being a measure calculated to infringe on the great in fluence of the Crown. And was the House prepared to sty, at that moment, that the influence of the Crown was too great? He for one would say that there was no reason to believe that the influence of the Crown required to be diminished. It was not necessary for him to go over the Constitutional arguments which had been front time to time urged, in order to prove the ne cessity of upholding the due influence of the Crown. Itat that man took a very unjust view indeed of the in- MIMICe of the Crown who did not take into account the counteracting circumstances which were constantly pre sented against an undue influence of the Crown. Let any one look at the moral state of the country, and he would readily admit that there was a degree of comfier actinp force constantly in opposition to the working of the influence of the Crown. When one considered the vastly extending information of all classes in the coun try— when one considered that, within the last century, the intelligence of the people increased to a degree be yond all anticipation—when one took this into view, was lie prepared to say that there was not, in such a state of things, an effectual impediment to the improper exercise of the influence of the Crown ? Was it possible for a public man of the present day to do an act which might not become, or actually would not become, the subject of universal canvass? On account of this, lie would call happy the improved state of the public nand, as a greater responsibility was an nexed to the situation of public men. An individual in any of the principal public situations could scarcely walk the street without meeting at every turn some person fully informed about every part of his conduct. He was far from regretting such a condition of the country. He considered the circumstance as a great blessing, because it had a great effect upon the conduct of put• lic men. Hence the wonderful difference that might be traced between, not only the conduct, but the motives of men high in office now, and those of mss of a si milar rank in tunes when the facilities of information and the intelligence of the public were awe limited.— He would not hesitate to state, that there wasintioirely less selfishness in their public career is the present day, than there bad been at any former period.—Here then • was a counteracting influence, operating against the in fluence of the crown ; and if the house were prepared to state that the influence of the. Crow. was not kept ant ficiently in check by the antagonist inflame, they might but /Mr is thsT Nub* taird• prop sitlob, Puffilll. tie Hon. Membsee foe Shitstir to briar is a Bill to dip te from eitnag is the hssu rested his measure upon this -de of the house upon it. Um .aas prepared to deelan that the it rows was too great, they swat oppose this motion. lie knew very well that he and his /lon. Friends near him would be charged with an indifference to the interests of the country—that they were setting their faces against every reduction which might be pro posed—and that, in order to retain their places, they were ready to maintain an extravagant extent of expen diture. He was prepared to hear these reproaches, and be should bear them with indifference. It was the duty of those who filled the offices of Government to watch with jealousy any proposition having for its object the diminution of the due influence of the Crown I and to maintain, as far as they could, the integrity of the institutions of the country: and the Ministers who bad not nerve enough to withstand the reproaches and imputations cast upon them in their honest, though un popular adherence to wise and salutary principles, were unworthy to administer the affairs of a great na tion.—(ilear, hear.) Mr. H. GURNEY said, that so far as he understood the speech of the Right Hon. Gentleman, be fully ad mitted that the second Post-Master was unnecessary.— (Hear.)—At a moment when the Government was sedu lously employed in reducing the incomes of poor clerks and other subordinate officers, it appeared to him that the House would eternally disgrace itself with the coun try, if, under the poor ,pretence of maintaining the just influence of the Crown (and which, so far from strength-1 ening, only weakened that induence),it were to continue to give the sum of 2,5001. per annum to a great Lord, in order to induce him to support the Administration of the day.—(Hear ) A MEMBER from under the Gallery made a few ob servations, which could not be beard in the Gallery. Sir J. SEIJRIGHT said that if he had consulted his own private feelings on this occasion, he should give a vote very different indeed from that which be felt it a duty imposed on him to give. He had received malty acts of kindness from one of the Noble personages now before the house (the Marquess of Salisbury)—he bad witnessed his kind and conciliatory conduct in the dis charge of his duty as Lord Lieutenant of the county which he (Sir J. S.) had the honour to represent, and knew him to be looked np to with admiration and respect by all who knew anything of his lif.. Bat the motion be fore the house demanded from the Alrnihrts the forget fulness of all private considerations. and that theyshould listen to the dictates of public duty only. He had heard it stated by the Noble Lord who moved the proposition, that a second Postmaster-General was unnecessary, and he did not hear the reverse attempted to be proved, or Nan asserted. The duties of the situation, he believed, were.discharged entirely by Mr. Freeling, and every one sequsiiited with the character of that tientleman, was toady to bear testimony to his seal, ability,and efficiency. Under these circumstances he considered it his duty to support the motion. Mr. H. SUMNER considered that the populace had been misled at County Meetings, by a cry of "retrench ment," which would lead to any thing bust their sub ofantial relief. He did not know whether these offices wen necessary in point of duty or not, but he should op peas the motion because he thought that instead a She power of the Crown being too great, It was the pi= influence which bad increased beyond its proper Sir J. YORKE said, that after the vote which Ise bud given the other night, be wished to explain that whisk he stionlil give upon the present occasion. He emir stood the office in question to be opposed upon the ground of its being useless, and defended upon that of its being material to the indoence of the Crown. He bag always been taught to believe that the power of the Crown amongst a loyal and a freecri. did net want** se be bolstered up by a ball dosed lama. If both of these Postmasters-General were wanted, it aPPared that they were not both on duty at once, and therefore as they took watch and watch about, they ought to di vide one salary between them. He should support the motion of the Noble Lord. Mr. DENISON understood the observations of his Hon. Colleague, with regard to the cry of "retrench. meat," to be applied to him. He begged to state that he should always be an advocate for retrenchment the most unsparing. In reply to the doctrines of the Right lion. Gentleman opposite, he wield say that the power of the Crown had increased and would increase. Mr. FR EEMANTLE was decidedly hostile to the pro position of the Noble Lord. He conceived that he should be deficient in his duty if he did not state his objections to the manner in which the question .bad been brought forward. The Noble Lord had put the question epos the ground of saving 2,5001. a-year. Now if this had been the whole ease, and the contemplated saving had been 23!., no man would have been more willing than he to support it. Bat the question ought not to be put in this narrow point of view. They ought to look to its general effect upon the country, and to remember that it went to destroy the most ancient institutions which had °prated so much good to the people. If they went from one department to another and said " bete is an office well conducted, but it will be as well managed by a clerk," they would go on until they bad destroyed all the ancient institutions of the country. Upon the ques tion of Crown influence, be was convinced that so far from its being increased, it had been considerably lessen. ed of late years. Upon these grounds he should vote against the motion of the Noble Lord. Mr. S. WORTLEY should not have addressed the House but that he understood lie had been alluded to in his absence by his Noble Friend the Mover of the Re. solution. His mind had been occupied by this question, to which he had paid serious attention. lie did not mean to say, nor could any one pretend to say, that this office was necessary to the safety of the State. But the question was, where did Gentlemen opposite mean to lead them? A week had scarcely elapsed, since two places which were under the influence of the Crown, were severed from it. Taillight another WA!. proposed, and to-morrow a whole Board was to be brought before the House. There most be a point at which they must stop, and if the country were not prepared to say that the Government ought to become more of a republic, they could net expect these things to be granted. If Gentlemen were disposed to stop here, lie should not Wed this office. Bat if this were to be led on to other offices in the same manner, be would not vote tur the present motion. He held it to be necessary for the safety of the country to allow • sufficient influence in the Crown; and so long as he had a seat in Parliament, he trusted his constituents would not expect him to act otherwise than his sense of duty prompted. He aster would consent to beat down the power of the Crown.— If it was told to his constituents. and misrepresented, as what he had said bad been before now, he should say, that be came there with the intention of doing his duty honestly and conscientiously ; but if they wanted him to come there to pull down the power of the King. they must pet some other person, for he would never cement to do it.—(Cheers.) Mr. BANKES understood it to be contended that of fices, however expensive and useless to the country. were to be kept up to support the indurate, of the Crown.— (Hear, heer.)— He had always heard, from the first au thority in that House, that the influence of the Crown was confined to the necessary offices of the State.— (Hear, hear, bear.)—These were the legitimate sources 364PagnaAar "rageallid the cal ilheyligi.siiireasead.iltpteasill"r 2emliegdmirieebtel:thh;rinnerthhil =1 1 6 6 4 bad u been. Crw 8 Bat e a w►le es l r them useless, thee only it was that they should inter fin with them to abolish them. The Noble Lord ha d diluted to two Rills which be bad the honour t o p ro . peat, sad the Right l'ari. Oesdeman be believed 0 have seppertadtken, he 'write sew Ilea thrif o t o Cientlemaa on the seemed bench (Mr. Presseematle)(d. and he thought his Right Hon. Friend did elm. ft wai t ' Iteml l 4 l 7 ID Plod fortPt9 arttotillth illts,tad whe ever In di ff ered from h am it leas with veer peat Oei a n . He bad the highest opinion of bit taftptsaffil*;,4 . and be would sot say more in We press** . He thins - 1,1 the Noble Lord bad jest gone far; i ozr o litith his . re ee . latices, and sot too far. He had as far as he (Mr. B.) went in 1812, and. there wes....l=± l fference i n the armament:es of the two stub i t . dues the House to change its dethielors i regard to the argument of sot kaewiwebow to• slop. he saw no. thing in this Rsosbeiewsehiab pledraloir Hen. Mem ber to any ulterior ammo Ndr. 'Redactions of other offices might be pereel, sad setae of which he should support, whilst others be would oppose. He should feel himsel fat perfect Ilhetty to exercise his men discretion upon every individual ease which cams Watt the House. He had not heard one word advanced I s support of this office upon t round of its utility. H e perfectly agreed with the Nil e lord in viewin g de e T question as one of just eco y, and not as attemptine to pull down a long constititad office to lessee the in dunce of the Crown. It was only acting ups* the principle of reducing every thing as for as was safe awl just to the country, which they had pledged themselves to do in the address which he bed the hewer to mows in 1821. He thought Ministers were not redeeming that pledge by opposing the motion of a n H on . B efoul the other night. If he was to take that as a *petition of their economy be should be exceedingly disappoidted. He supported the motion because not one word had been said in defence of the office upon the ground of Rene cessity. Neither was it, as had been represented, se of fice of such ancient standing. It was not equal to anti quity and importance to many of the offices which they bad abolished is the Exchequer and elsewhere. It bad not been dignified by great names io remote period's"( history, nor had its possessors the power of turning it to the advantage of the country. He trusted the House would go along with him in sow porting the motion of the Noble Lord. Mr. PEEL said, the Noble Lord had called epee tie boom to decide the present question. on the waked me rits of the case; and had been followed by hie (Mr.P.'el Right Hon. Friend, who had argued it upon priseiple ; though his Right Hon. Friend by no means conceded to the Noble Lord the argnineut that the office in condos was useless. He hoped be should be considered asdis coming the question fairly if he addressed himself to both its elements ; inquiring, first, whether the ogre was useful; and. secondly, whether, independent of its usefulness, it was necessary for the preservation of the just int, aeon of the Crown. In looking at the first of these breaches of the argument, it became necessary to ascertain when the office was founded, though be admit ted that antiquity alone was not a conclusive arguseet for its continuance. The year 92, was a constant date among Hon. lientlemes opposite, arid to a degree which would lead one to believe that they considered it the standard date of financial perfection. He wend refer the house to the yeas /2; but it was in 1692, that he found the office was first hestitesed,oed be fogad dittos its first institution it was held by two post-masterogest ral. The next question was, wheoher the duties had in creased or diminished s: nee its smulaweenneut. In those duties there had been a gradual increase: and they bad become quintupled since the commencement of the last reign. This might be inferred from the revenoe, which in 1764 was 400,0001. ; in 1793, 600,00 W.; in 1;95, to 700,0001. ; and in 1815, two millions. With every de ference, therefore, for the opinion Obis Hon. Friend, the Member for Code Castle, he thertht it was rather too much to call this au inefficient office. Even in the docu ments of the house, in which it bad been mentioned, mo dification rather than reduction had been suggested.— The Committee of 1797 had bete justly complimented for its labours, and its authority had been trenerally ad mitted ; but that Committee merely awe! that it usiolo be worthy of consideration whether a Board of Conine sioners would not ensure attentioa to the duties of the *am in whit* there was much depending on skilful usanagoineat. . Thameditication wpald, if adopted, have increased. rather than dinsinisk the influence of the Crown, for a patronage over five sloes of 10001. a-year each, was more desirable for the of intent e. than a patronage over two offices o l l i gra-yeor each.— It appeared that the Hon. Gentleman opposite would wish the minor patronage of this office to he transferred to the Treasnry.—(Hear, hear, from tbe Opposition.)— He really had no wish to misrepresent any argument, but he certainly considered that it was proposed the office should remain under the entire patronage of Mr. Freeling, or be transferred to the Treasury. The mole in which the duties of the office were at the present p rint' discharged, gave, he believed, general satairti , s; and no one had suggested that any improvement in that mode was even possible. Referring to the Report of the Committee of 1817, he certainly was not preparel to say that all these duties should be imposed upon one person ; duties which produced a revenue of two mil lions, and required a vigilant attention to a consider -big expenditure. The opinion of Mr. Fretting hi a sell; oP°° his examination, was in favour of the two Lords. He (Mr. P.) could not admit the justice of the inference drawn from the evidence of Lord Chesterfield ; for all that it amounted to was, that the junior, urn a &ler ence of opinion, conceded to the senior—an arrangers, it adopted in all well-managed offices. The salary of the office was fixed by Act of Parliament in 17e5, at a tittle when every attention was paid to easores of econon% • Mr. Burke, at that time, proposed o alteration of the office • for his objections were print- ally to the othe r ,,i Third Secretary of State and the Bo dof Trade. CO. sidering all these circumstances, be dame to a co nclusion different from his lion. Friend, aryl could set ad ult that the office was either useless or ilefficient. Ileolo'4 . offered these observations on the ti t part of the aoh ject, he came to the other with con •derahle diffilette ... It was not easy to de fi ne what was t e just ioiseace 0: the Crown. If he found an of . sting at the Itei. , , - . lotion, that office constituting a part the inguence , t the Crown, he only wished to main in it no w in d ie 1,.. same just sense, and to the same eat The doctrine!, that were held on this subject, and on nasty ethers. w!t.' regard to Government, surprised him. lie had beartitt argued by an lion. Member, that bee use he had foto I occasion to dischar,/e 4 of his clerks in his business, that all the public departments should be reduced in the nine proportion. There was no analog s b etwe en the case: . • and such an argument did not call fur 5 serums refa.n.,t tion. He had also heard doctrines, that no provi e should he made for torn oho consumed the greater pot of their lives in the the service of the State. It was said that they should be considered as a mer e corporation . who ought 'from their own resources, or from ;he Sc ings of their salaries, provide adequately for their fu my ' . wants. He had heard it argued, that the ditties of ti State should he performed bv men to slim e auto , L b office would be a su ffi cient reward ; or by noes 0 1 °e a " . to whom a pecuniary rerotopence would be 1 l"liff e t ; i l l, Bet such principles were altogether inroad de* ~.... those familiar to the nature of our Conuitutioa —to i'l'',, also laid down by Burke who bad said, and el an :ln pa .fo i u d n ee d " wi i Llo of m a , n t r ha r t the son S ...;< tate it s e llo r ld4ot epel l ieqdreiltririi, THE. Won to thosibraneisies eft* depavttOdel c . 6110444 tblrtrotion of the Ni Scotland. le tindeiwtood that we delre'llerst tilost itaspeld hate been I splete Amore; for the collection of the at Mica to mime down with a waged under the Eaglis'h PosvMasters- question to anion,. When the ict, the Act of the 9tli of Anne bad so bury, last Session, proposed I stand it was Impossible but that eyery,lon. qualify Perms. bohllog axes lad looked at the accounts, mast perceive that Hon. Member candidly rot office expeoses were nearly double. We principle. and took the sense of that both the Post-masters General in less then the house was papas refit to be abolished, if they looked at the flueoee of the !?own was too