The Sun. — London, England, 1837-12-09 00:00:00

tr eed th ose A cts w i t h your eyes o p en , and why should the H ,,, u l, O of Commons now be called upon, at the suggestion ofth m Member for Colchester, to go into the most fruitless, e most painful, and, I will say, into the most disgusting in- VP',. , • —(Cheers from both sides.) Now, if that inquiry , 2.11 the Hon. Baronet, would have been painful in 1834, shall it not be equally so now ? If it were disgusting then , Tl ie l" we be betray ea into it now ?—( Continued cheers.) „ Hon. Baronet then continued to reed the extract : G ! , do not quite understand that cheer from Honourable itlemen opposite. Undoubtedly, such an inquiry must n ecessarily be painful and disgusting to the good feeling of ai mankind."—(Cheering from the Opposition.) After this declaration, I ask, would not the parties whose cases are th us spo k en o f h ave a right to calculate, whoever might propose such an inquire, that the Chancellor of the Ex chequer, at least, ulci not be found to sanction Position cheers.) If one of !hem were told that such an in (tire, were threatened he would say, " I have looked at the s peech of Lo r d Althcrp and to that of the Secretary for the !reasury, who is now the Chancellor of the Exchequer, an d I find that both of them have declared themselves , a .gninst such a proceeding, which the latter has even cha racterised as f ruit l ess an d disgusting, and, looking at these 7 1 elarations, I have a perfect security, as perfect a secu ,!Y as can be grounded upon the characters and plecle;es t ' Public men—( Opposition cheers)—that the family set tlements and pecuniary arrangements into which I have .euntered, depending upon these payments, will not be dis lot.rdeed."....4 Loud cheers.) Suose the case of a military provision of limited means, and looking round to see what Knvision he can make for those dependent upon him for sup- Port His attorney says, " This pension is only given for the 'e of the Crown, and, therefore, it is not such a security as 1 _ good for a settlement, or for the advance of money." , To 4, t ills the m ilit ar y o ffi cer re pli e s : " I have pet feet confidence at My pension is safe; the declarations of p ublic men on 7 th7 sides unite to assure it to me ; then read the speech of Althorp, and then read that of the Gallant Secretary of in° Treasury, who succeeded him in the Exchequer, and I am s ure I am safe in their hands." The Right Honourable Baro net then continued the perusal of the extracts he held in his h and N : Let me suppose the case of a meritorious military 1 3 incer—(Opposition cheers ;)—suppose such officer to have received a pension for years; is this Hottest disposed to call upon him either to forfeit the grants to which he has now a legal right, or to come before a Committee to recite his ser !.lees, proclaim his own merits, to make cut a case, and substan tiate his claim to what his Sovereign has granted ? Why, ,? I r, I say this is a species of inquiry which must necessarily , r painful to every well-regulated mind."—(Renewed cheer- Th ,g• " I have read the speech of the Chancellor of the Ex chequer," this meritorious military officer would say, " and I Stu told by him that I shall lict have to wait in the lobby of t he House, to ask for Committee-room No. 13, and there recite my merits and my services in order to entitle me to the reward which my Soueriegn has awarded me." Lord Althorp is not here now, hut the Right Honourable entleman was in office with the Noble Lord, and acted in accordance with him, and in that Right Honourable Gentleman, therefore, the pledge is still sacred. Mr. Rice said further on that occasion—" I should like to know what it IS . that Hon. Gentlemen propose to themselves if they go into Committee. I only beg to state to the House, as among my °ejections to this inquiry—l only ask them, as practical men , What they expect to extract from it, unless, indeed (this was addressed to the Hon. Member for Southwark) — ( Hear , near)—unless indeed they proceed upon motives which I will hot attribute to any Hon. Member—motives of undue curiosity, and a desire to investigate the private circumstances of indi viduals? But we are told by Hon. Gentlemen opposite, that they seek to trace the origin of these grants. Now, the Hon. Member for Bath stated that most of those who were the re sponsible advisers of these grants are no more—their evidence and their responsibility arc therefore alike excluded. Are we, then, to call all the parties who are themselves in the receipt of these pensions before us, and the responsible Ministers who advised them not being in office or in existence—are we to go into an examination of the private case of each of these Parties? If so, what is to be the course of your inquiry, and how are you to conduct it ? I cannot imagine an inquiry that could by possibility be of so disagreeable a character ; I cannot imagine an inquiry so painful not only to the feel ings of those who arc the subjects of it, but to t hose who nave to conduct it. I only ask the gentleman, whoever he may be, who is a candidate for the honour of the future chair of this Committee, whether he anticipates any very useful or aerceeble duty ?"—( Loud cheering from the Opposition.) i lnys, if the House felt in 1834, according to the Report of Lord Althorp, which was adopted by Parliament, that con siderations of justice and propriety would prevent the adopt mg of such an inquiry, or that. if such an inquiry were desi rable at all, it should be made by the Crown and not by Par liament—if the House concurred with the Right Hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer that such an inquiry would be fruitless and painful, that they found even it might prove dis gusting, • is it not better, I ask, again to refuse to violate what You feel to be, what your conscience tells you are, the dictates of justice and propriety ?—( Opposition cheers.) Remember that if even the Ministers were alive under whom these pen sions were granted, it would be unjust to apply the principles of the present day upon this subject as a test of their principles. In those days it was not so strictly and universally understood as at the present day that pensions were only to he granted as th e reward for signal and definite public services; although t the same time it was then admitted, that they should not be made use of for mere purposes of corruption and abuse. If they had been so male use of, the Minister would have Been to blame. But how is that now to be ascertained ? t should be remembered that in those days , in cases of ,exalted rank or character, where the part ie s had not the rta i n soi n : of supporting the legitimate decorum of their station e tY, it was not considered a misapplication of the minis terial trust to afford such persons a contribution in aid of their Bu PPort. Bear in mind, also, that it was then considered no I mpropriety on the p a rt of a Minister of the Cro wn to g ive a moderate allowance to those who had acted faithfully as their Secretary. Review the laborious lives of men so employed in high stations in the Government of the country, and do not seek to deprive any confidential and faithful secretary they May have had of this small return for his services, although not of a nature to be at this later period strictly investigated and estimated at their value. Look back upon the history of this country, from 1804 to 1830, a period of twenty-six years, and you will fled that time and death have swept away all the Ministers who successively presided over the destinies of this country during that eventful period. Call to mind the fate of Castlereagh, of Canning, of Liverpool, whose deaths Were hastened by their devotedness to the service of their country. I shall never forget the words addressed to myself by Lord Liverpool but a few days before that fatal blow which end e d i n his decease, when I remarked to him with satisfac tion that I thought him looking better than I bad seen him for some time previously. " Ah," was Lord Liverpool's re "no man knows what it is to have been the Prime Mi nister of England for seventeen years, and never during that Period to have received his letters by the post in the morning, without a feeling of anxiety and epprehension."—( Cheers. ) They are in the grave I These pensions were granted by their advice. They arc unable to give an account of them, or of the grounds upon which they were given. Do you think it just now to brand their memories with a stigma, because the Only evidence upon their conduct and their motives is beyond our reach ?—( General cheering.) William IV. is de scended into the tomb of his ancestors ; he has been suc ceeded by a Sovereign in the bloom of youth and promise.— . ( Cheering.) Recollect that all these pensions were granted by her grandfather, and were confirmed by her two uncles, all in return for signal public achievements, or as testimonies for private worth and services, which the Sovereign thought Worthy of reward, but the particulars of which we can hardly after this lapse of time pretend to appreciate in detail. You thought it would be hard to advise William IV. not to confirm these grants of his pre decessors on the Throne. Remember that your youthful Sovereign is now the fountain of justice, of privilege, and favour.—( Cheers. ) You have offered your respectful assu rance t o her Majesty that you will afford ample provision for the comfort and dignity of her station ; and do not let the t hankfulness and kindly feeling with which that assurance has bee n received by our Gracious Queen be embittered by the reflection that she, of all British Sovereigns, is the first who Is to be subjected to the hardship of departing from uniform Preceding usage, and of rudely breaking u p all those family s ettlements and pecuniary arrangements w hich have been made in firm r e liance on an adherence to invariable custom—a reli ance which has since been converted into certainty by your n wri acts and declarations.—( Loud cheering from the Opposi ti°ll. ) The Hon. Baronet concluded by moving the following resolutions as an amendment " That upon the occasion of the accession of his late Majesty 'king Willi am the Fourth, a Select Committee was appointed in 1831, on the motion of Lord Althorp, then Chancellor of t he Exchequer, to take into consideration the accounts pre sented by order of his Majesty relating to the Civil List. " That the Committee so appointed took into consideration together with other classes of the Civil List, that of the pen sions, and after stating that they felt it to be their duty to ex- Plain to the House fully the caee in respect to Pensions, made to their report the following, among other observations At the same time it would be a harsh measure to overlook on the present occasion that which has been the uniform usage on all for mer se t t l em ents of the Civil List. Pensions on the I' 4l l List have always hitherto been cons idered to be g ranted or life, and in fact no instance has occurred wherein a Pension e t a the Civil List granted by one Sovereign has been disconti tiled on the accession of his successor. It is more than pro therefore, that parties relying on an adherence to an in variable custom, have made family settlements and peen , I, la rY arrangements of various kinds , with all of which s Maje s ty must necessarily interfere , shou ld the continu alll", of these Pensions, for the first time, on his accession to t " the Throne be refused. Adverting to all the circum - t l h an ces of the case considering that no material reef to ti 'finances of the country could be derived from the li st most Measures of retrenchment applied to the Pension List ; th at many cases severe distress, in some actual i n j ustice, 0 .4 arise to ineividuals from the general discontinuance Pensions ; that such discontinuance on the occasion of his siesty's accession would be a departure from an usage inva ir,ablY observed on the accession of his Majesty's predecessors, ti - 3 111. Committee do not think it advisable to withdraw from t he Crown wn those funds which may . enable the Crown, if it shall le fir, to continue the pensions on the Civil List of his sh e Majesty. These observations, however, do not apply.to a .grant of future pensions on the Civil List ; if granted with 4... di stinct notice to the individuals receiving them that they are nto legally terminable on the demise of the Sovereign by e avi u they have been granted, but that they are liable to be tb a rti or discontinued on the settlement of a new Civil List, of can be no obstacle to the re-consideration at that time e then existing Pension List.' %io n e C ommittee proceeded to recommend that t he Pen kii2eists of England, Scotland, and Ireland s hould be con ''lted into one alphabetical list ; that pensions to the THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY, DECEMBER 9, 1837. that the people refused to confirm and ratify the agreement not to dispute it—that doubt must be removed by the fact that the subject was submitted for discussion in that House. An appeal had that night been made in favour of the existing Sovereign. Now, though gentlemen on the opposite side of the House might claim the merit of exclusive loyalty, yet he could safely say, that however democratic the feelings of some might be at his side, they were not deficient in respect for, and confidence in, her present Majesty. All the freedom and hap_ piness which could be procured under a Republican form of Government were, he was sure, attainable under the reign of her present Majesty.----(Hear.) And as for affectionate re gard towards her person, and an anxious desire to promote her comfort, these were feelings in which he believed no man in the country would be found wanting.—(Much cheering.) But they with whom he acted did consider it essential to the peace and comfort and tranquillity of that royal person, if her Lame were coupled with that odions Pension List—( Cheers) —that there should be such a revision of it as would satisfy the people of the country, who did not enter into all the tech. nicalitics of their personal inconsistencies, but who looked to the great principles which ought to regulate the conduct of all public men, and who are determined that there should be a full, fair, and honest investigation.—(Loud:cheers.) Mr. ACL AND thought the Chancellor of the Exchequer had little reason to congratulate himself on the support which he had received from the Hon. Member ; for whilst the Right Hon. Gentleman asserted that the onus probandi rested on those who assailed the Pension List, the Hon. Member for Sheffield contended that the most meritorious persons ought not to remain on the list, unless they could show a prima facie case establishing their claim.—(Opposition cheers.) He did think that when a negotiation of this kind was entered into, it ought to be borne in mind that it was a harsh principle that the individual who filled the Throne was the only proprietor in England who was not permitted to give a pension to her servants without the interference of Parliament. When her Majesty devolved the right of affixing her private revenues on that House, she felt that she was committing a delicate trust to 658 English Gentlemen 1 but pained must she be when she found her Ministers return back and return the answer, that in our feelings of justice we were regardless of every thing but cold utility, and that we showed no regard for individual feelings, and he thought, after the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet, he might add for individual rights.—(Opposition cheers.) Mr. WILBRAHAM thought this a motion of justice to all parties. However much their feelings of compassion or sympathy might be excited by those who had served long and meritoriously, he repudiated the notion of these claims being urged as a matter of right. The idea that those who possessed them had a freehold title in these grants had no other effect than to shake the foundation of the rights of all property.—( Hear, hear, hear.) When he saw such sums as two shillings and three shillings a-week taken from the poor, he thought that every pensioner should be examined, under the reflection that it was drawn from the pockets of the people, and that those rewards should be confined strictly to those who deserved them. The proposition of the Chancellor of the Exchequer did honour to the Government and would be hailed by the people as proof of their disposition to serve the best interests of the country.—( Cheers. ) Mr. P LUMPT RE was influenced in his vote on this question by the considerations which had ever guided his conduct, namely, by an anxious desire to reward merit, but at the same time to watch carefully the distribution of this fund as a trustee for the public. Mr. PEND ARVES thought her Majesty's Ministers en titled to much praise for their conduct concerning this List. Mr. WOOD said there was on the Pension List the name of a very near relation of his own ; and if he thought that any Hon. Member could imagine that any personal feelings in fluenced him on a question, the magnitude of which could not be exaggerated, he should ask for the indulgence of the House whilst he stated the circumstances of that case. The indivi dual to whom he referred was Secretary to the late Lord Cas tlereassh, and when that Noble Lord retired from office on the Walcheren expedition, and on his difference with the late Mr. Canning, he was appointed vendue master of Malta. That office was found to be extremely lucrative in a time of war, and the Government took it into their own hands, and his relative's name was consequently placed on that List, as entilecl to 1,000/ That gentleman had spent in the public service forty fears, and upon retiring a short time ago, received no other al lowance than his pay under the Pension List. He did not think, under these circumstances, that he could be accused of having a personal interest in the question when he opposed a motion for inquiry. He was opposed to the system of pensions when they were not bestowed for merit ; but he could never over step what a strict line of justice demanded. The Hon. Mem ber for Leeds asked who could define what justice was ? He thought the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and the Home Se cretary, and Lord Althorp had formerly done so ; and the Right Hon. Member for Tamworth had certainly that night stamped the line of eternal justice.—( Opposition cheers.) Colonel SIBTHO RP had ever been consistent in the ex pression of his opinions, and it was his intention to be so on the present occasion. He was a man —" Null ins addictus jurare in verba rnagistri ;" and, therefore, believing that an inquiry into the Pension List was called for, although to do so he would have to separate himself from those with whom he generally acted, he should support the motion of the Right Honourable Gentleman the Chancellor (Stile Exchequer. But was the Right Honourable Gentleman himself as consistent as he might have been ? lied not he changed upon this question ? In fact, urged by he knew not what cogent reasons, had be not actually taken this questi ni out of the hands of the Hon. Member for South .l ark ? The Right Hon. Gentleman and his colleagues were like drowning sailers, and therefore they caught at the Hon. Member's straw.—( A laugh.) " Tempera mutantur, et nos mutamur in illis," nas the only reason given by the Right Hon. Gentleman for his introducing the question. For his (Colonel Sibthorp's) part, he courted the support of no party. He held no pension, and, thank God, no member of his family had ever received a sixpence of the public money.—( Cheers.) But had he a pen sion, or any member of his family either, he would say, « In quire, inquire, inquire, as much as ever you please."—( Loud cheers.) So convinced was he of the justice of the British House of Commons, as to feel assured that if the pension was cleservell, it would not be taken away ; and if after inquiry it was re-granted, the claim to it would be tenfold strengthened. —( Loud cheers.) The conduct of the Marquis Camden, i n surrendering a pension he held by patent, afforded an example w:deli he regretted not to have seen more generally followed ; and if for no other reason than that inquiry might produce this effect, he contended that inquiry should take place. He would, acting in the spirit of Ys usual consistency, vote for the mo tion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer.—(Cheers.) That vote he directed individually against eo one. It was based on the general principle, that those who feared inquiry could not deserve what they received.—( Loud cheers.) Sir CHARLES DOUGLAS intimated his intention of supporting the amendment of the Right Hon. Baronet the Member for Tamworth, an amendment which he felt convinced represented the sentiments of his constituents. Mr. H A NDLE Y thought that the Parliament which had passed the Poor-law Bill were bound to satisfy the wishes of the people in regard to the Pension List. There was a strong analogy, in his opinion, between the two cases ; and looking at the House of Commons as the great Board of Guardians of the State, he maintained it was their duty to enter upon the inves tigation sought for.—( Hear, hear.) Mr. MI LN ES supported the amendment. Lord EBRINGTON thought that long possession gave a strong claim to the holder of a pension, and if he were to con sult only his ()en feelings and inclinations, apart from his sense of public duty, he would not be indisposed to leave all present recipients of the public bounty in undisturbed possession of their income. Ile might then be asked to say what had ope. rated a change in his mind. He hesitated not to say it was the conduct of Parliament in reference to the Poor-laws.— ( Cheers.) It had been his duty to take from the poor, under the new Act, allowances which they had long received under the old law. Under those circumstances he felt that he must not flinch from taking from the rich that which he bad not flinched from taking from the poor.—(Hear.) Sir E. SUG DE N observed that the proposition of the Right Hon. Gentleman was for a Committee which would inquire into all grants of pensions. Now, the Right Hon. Gentleman said that he bad bad many opportunities of exa mining into the nature of the pension grants, and that be bad in no case met with a pension which appeared to him to be in danger. Now, would the House, by the appointment of a Committee, consent to stigmatise the pensions which the Right Hon. Gentleman had so described, as well as the rest? The Right Hon. Gentleman charged those who sat on his ( Sir R. Sugden's) side of the House with inconsistency, while the fact was that it was the Right Hon. Gentleman and his friends who were inconsistent. In 1830, her Majesty's Minis ters held a different opinion ; but a change in those opinions had been brought about by . the pressure of parties. There were many more reasons for inquiring into the subject on the death of George IV. than on that of William IV. Mr. WHITTLE HARVEY wished to remove an impres sion under which an Honourable Member appeared, in com mon with many other Honourable Members, to labour, namely, that the motion which had now been brought forward by her Msjesty'e Government was the result of some suspicious com promise which had taken place between her Majesty's Govern ment and the Radical Reformers. For himself he might be allowed to say, although at the hazard of whatever imputation might he thrown unon him, that when he entered the House the night of the discussion of the Civil List he had no reason for believing but that the amendment which he had it in con templation to propose would be resisted, and would be resisted as effectually as any of his former propositions. He would also say that up to the present hour he was not aware whether or not it would be proposed that he should be a Member of the Committee. If, therefore, Honourable Members were apprehensive of his disposition to inquire too closely into such matters—if they thought be entertained too gr eat an anxiety to pry i nto the circumstances under which pensions had been granted by either party—the best course which they could adopt, in order to relieve themselves from those apprehensions, was to omit his name in the list of the Members of the Committee. He thanked Government, aal he congratulated Government, for having at length eman cipated themselves from the thraldom on this subject under they m ‘ fi a h ardm i n e nn h edeor, irttdp,lideewl period I o h awedt a had ahh h taeen i hitherto ieelfrtal former dreoamvftleuaedrbri furnished h u ps hea r e laboured. mostom. period. gs Htu intelligent etyen deeplytarguments rejoiced gtecoiregretnr ttextremelyheeaninnrddot that at present ; for, he would ask, but for Lord Al t h o rp's uphec r a e tifito t n t eat e eiht r ene i tyats but for Lord A lthorp's resolution—but for the Report of the former Committee, declaring that there should be no inquiry —where would the Right Honourable Baronet the Member for Tamworth have been that night? Those documents, the letter of Lord Althorp, the resolutions of Lord Althorn, the Report of the Committee, had been the text of the Right Hon. Baronet's speech. When, therefore, he heard from the Right Hon. Baronet's a desire expressed to im part to the present discussion a more than usual moral tone, a-5 ear. amount of 75,0001., on the first part of the list, should be placed on the Civil List, and the remainder charged to the Consolidated Fund. " That his Majesty's Government proposed, and Parliament sanctioned, measures in respect to the Civil List Pensions, founded upon the recommendations of the Committee, and in precise conformity with them, making provision to enable the Crown, if it should so think fit, to continue the whole of the pensions on the Civil List of King George the Fourth. " That at a subsequent period the Howe of Commons passed resolutions in respect to the grant of all future pensions by the Crown, expressing an opinion that they ought to be con fined to such persons as have just claims on the Royal Benefi cence, or who, by their personal services to the Crown, by the performance of duties to the public, or by their useful disco veries in science, and attainments in literature and the arts, have merited the gracious consideration of their Sovereign, and the gratitude of their country. " That it appears to this House that the course advisedly taken on the accession of his late Majesty, by the Cro7n and Parliament, was calculated to justify increased confidence in the continuance of the then existing pensions, and in the per manence of family settlements and arrangements of various kinds,' made by parties relying on the adherence to invaria ble custom,' and that whatever harshness or injustice there might have been, on the accession of his late Majesty, in over looking on that occasion the uniform preceding usage, would on the present occasion be greatly aggravated, not only by the lapse of time, and the intervention of a whole reign, but by the direct sanction given, in 1831, by the Crown and Par liament to en expectation that the principles then acted on, so far as applicable to the then existing pensions, would be there after adhered to. _ _ _ " That, under these circumstances, it is the opinion of this House, that regulations having been established in respect to the grant of future pensions, and precautions having been taken in respect to the revisal or discontinuance of them on new sentiements of the Civil List, it is advisable now to make such provision as shall enable the Crown, if it shall so think fit, to continue those pensions which were continued by the Crown on the accession of his late Majesty, or which were granted by his Majesty." Lord ELIOT said, with respect to the motion of the Chan cellor of the Exchequer, he thought that every Member who voted for it, who had voted with the Right lion. Gentleman on former occasions in respect to this very subject, would be called upon to state his reasons for considering that an inquiry which would have been fruitless axd disgusting in 1830 would have become wise and proper in 1837. The Right Hon. Gen tleman, in coming forward to make this proposition, alluded to the state of parties in this House, and seemed to shrink from the disgrace of being left in a minority, and of sacrificing some small share of popularity out of doors.—(Opposition cheers.) Her Majesty's Government should recollect that many of these pensions had been granted as far back as 1780 ; that it had been the invariable practice of Sovereigns of this country to grant such pensions upon grounds which seemed sufficient, and of their successors to confirm them ; and he believed that hitherto no Minister of the Crown bad ever stood forward to advise the Sovereign to depart from this principle, and that the Right Honourable Gentleman (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) was the first Cabinet Minister who had ever come forward to adeise a Sovereign of these realms to venture upon a step of so much acknowledged hard ship and difficulty.—(Opposition cheers.) lie (Lord Eliot) was one who thought that no one should receive a pension on any other grounds but those of services rendered to the public, and in no case upon considerations which might not be openly stated to the world.—( Cheers from both sides.) Bnt the ques tion which they now had to decide was, whether that principle should be applied retrospectively ?—(" Hear," from the Op position.) He was aware that there were a great number of persons connected with high and noble families in the kingdom who enjoyed some of these pensions, and he must say that be should be glad to see many of these individuals come forward and withdraw their names from the Pension List.—( Cheers.) He had only one more observation to make. It was in reference to a powerful and eloquent speech which he had heard on a former occasion from the Honourable Member for Southwark, in the course of which the Honour able Member taunted the Conservative party of England with, while they stood up for the inviolability of the pensions granted to persons in higher rank, consenting to the alleged cruelties and hardships practised upon the poorer recipients of public bounty under the new Poor-law Act. He ( Lord Eliot) did not wish to enter into the accuracy of the latter allegations against the Poor-law Act ; all be would say was, that one case of cruelty or hardship could not justify another. What he should advise would be, to leave to the dependants on the poor-rates of the country the pittances they had been accus tomed to receive, and in like manner to these in higher life the pensions to which, he conceived, the honour and dignity of the country were pledged.—( Opposition cheers.) Mr. G. H. WARD assured the House that no taunts or in sinuations should deter him front doing what he considered right and equitable.—( Cheers.) The party on his side of the House were taunted with being driven to support this motion by the apprehension of losing some portion of their popularity out of doors. For himself' he could only say, that he came into this House in the year 1833, strongly im pressed against the abuses of the Pension List ; but he had always supported the arrangement which had been en tered into between the Government and the House of Com mons on the subject, because he considered that the practical justice of the ease required it. If he voted this evening in a say which seemed inconsistent with his previous line of con duct in reference to this question, he begged to say that it was not because be happened to represent a larger constituency than he did before, nor with the slightest view to catching a little temporary popularity. They were now for the first time in a condition to consider the Pension List with a mind per fectly free and unfettered by any previous arrangement. They could now, therefore, freely do their duty to the people, whose representatives they were, tempered at the same time with every feeling of leniency and consideration towards those who depended in a great measure upon public liberality for the means of subsistence.—( Hear, hear.) But he would say that Parliaments bad a right to examine the list of these indivi duals, in order to see that there was at least some shade of a plea of public service to warrant tine continuance of these al lowances. lie was not an opponent of a properly regulated Pension List. Far from it. lie believed that in a country like this, where there were so many roads to distinction and fortune opened to men of ability and acquirement, if they did not hold out the expectation of a perma nent provision to those who devoted their services to the public good, they would exclude all men of talent from the public service except those who were con nected with hereditary means.—( Hear, hear, hear.) It was always most repugnant to his feelings to see men who had wasted their strength and faculties in earlier life in the public service discarded in their more advanced years, and left to beg gary and want. He had always considered it disgraceful to America, that such men as Jefferson, who had sacrificed to the public cause talents, which if exerted in other ways, would have ensured fortune and honours for life, should be deserted without provision in their declining years.—( Hear, hear.) lie had witnessed a delightful instance the other day of the principle that great public service should meet its reward even after a long lapse of years ; and he could wish that all faithful public servants should be treated as the East India Company had recently acted towards the Marquis Wellesley.—( Cheers.) If treated in this light, a pension list would then, indeed be sacred to all who loved the glory arid prosperity of their country.—(Cheers,) He would go further, also and allow that private secretaries to mi nisters, even though their public services were not so sig nal, should not go unrequited.—( Hear, hear, hear.) But when he looked at that list, and found on it the names of the wives, the mothers, the aunts, and relations of some of the richest aristocrats, he felt that, however right might might be the feelings displayed by his Noble Friend opposite, he was bound, as a trustee of the people, to ask the Government, on the renewal of the Pension List, how it happened that a public fund of this nature was made to contribute to the sup port of such individuals ?—( Cheers.) When he saw, too, on the Pension List such singular marks of partiality, of gene ral and undefined favouritism, he would not mention names, for he did not think it fair that persons about to submit to examination should be publicly noticed, when they could not be mentioned with favour—but when he observed six names of one family, and seven of another, and ten of a third, and twelve of a fourth, and fourteen of a fifth (for he had noted these numbers down), he had a right, and felt compelled to demand how this singular distribution of a public fund had taken place, and on what principle of utility these persons had been favoured by the Crown?—(Cheers.) Making every al lowance for, the merit of these individuals, he could not con ceive that their claims to reward should run in such a con tinuous stream that the individuals bearing these several names should be deemed worthy of some mark of their Sovereign's approbation.—(Hear, hear.) Great use had been made in that discussion of the authority of Mr. Burke. But he begged to remind those Hon. Members who rested so securely on the favourable tendency of that Gentleman's opi nions to their views, that he might be quoted most effectively on either side of a question.—( Hear, hear, and an expression of dissent from the Opposition.) Adverting to the question of the responsibility of the Crown, he held " that it possessed no public right or property in these pensions. That the power which it possessed over them was held in trust, and enjoyed for certain purposes—those of good government and the well being of the community." That principle, if fairly carried out, would justify no pension except as the reward of some act of public services—( Hear, hear.) There might be cases of charity having a fair claim to relief ; but these ought not to overbear the number of pensions given for ostensible and ac knowledged merits.—(Cheers.) It should not be forgotten that there was a great difference between the case now be fore the House and the motion for economical reform made by Mr. Burke in the middle of a reign and during the life of an existing Sovereign. The matter had been, as it wnew ere, forced on them. They stood at the com mencement of a reign. The Right Honourable Baronet asserted that the pro ceedings of the House in 1831 strengthened the claims of those on the Pension List. Now what was the value of that precedent? In 1831, the question being open whether the House should grant a shilling in support of p ensions or not, a proposal was made by the Crown that his then Majesty would give up half the amount of funds to which he was entitled on this head. provided all the existing pensions were continued during that Sovereign's life.—(Hear, hear.) They had. had the benefit of that agreement on one side, and the Crown on the other. They fulfilled the pledge, and kept it with a fide lity that made nature almost tear the seal from the bond into which they had entered not to revise the Pension List. He could not, therefore, attach the slightest weight to the argu ment contained in the amendment, that the injustice of inter fering in the manner contemplated by the present Committee would be greatly aggravated by the expectations held out in 1831 to the objects of the bounty of the Sovereign, The con tract entered into in 1831, was not even considered binding for the duration of the existing reign. If a doubt could be en tertained on this point—that the question of the revision of the Pension List was misunderstood by the country, or at least he hoped ber Majesty's Government would derive some advantage from that friendly advice, and would at least avoid those quicksands of experiment and expedience on which they had well-nigh foundered, and given great advantage to their adversaries in the treatment of this subject. Before he noticed the prominent points in the speech of the Right Hon. Baronet, who it was said had begun and ended all the discussion of the subject he wished to say a few words on what had fallen from the Hon. Member for Middlesex. The course which that Hon. Member had pursued showed that he felt the pressure of the justice of the case, and that it was ne ce:;sary for him to employ his influence for the support of a relation who was on the Pension List. Now, how mauy ancient Dowagers were there on that List ?—and he protested, not withstanding the delicate insinuation of the Right Honourable Baronet, that with these ancient Dowagers he (Mr. Harvey) never had aught to do—(a laugh)—he did not know how many of those darling charmers, the List taking its rise back so far back as 1764, there might be upon it, who had not in that House a friend like the Honourable Member for Middlesex, to stand up for them, and defend their case as the Honourable Gentleman had defended his friend who had held an appoint- ment in the sunny island of Malta. He ( Mr. H. )confessed that he had rather lagged behind in the debate, in the hope that other Hon. Members might start up, like the Hon. Member for Middlesex, and defend their near relations from the imputation of having had their pensions improperly bestowed upon them. Many Hon. Members had near relations on that List ; for there were many persons on the List who had not been on it so long that all their family connections were extinct. There were some who bad been placed on the List within the last seven or eight years, whose minds must still be impressed with gratitude for the rewards which they had received for their ser vices. Why did not the friends of those persons stand forward in the same way the Hon. Member for Middlesex had done? Was it that they would not take an unfair advantage of those less fortunate individuals who had not the benefit of powerful connections; and as they meant to vote against the Committee they would vote in silence ?—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) But it appeared that Hon. Members could not bear the indignity that persons of high blood, connected with the first families in the country, would be exposed to by having their claims examined by a Committee of the House of Commons. Was it to be endured, they said, that the feelings of honourable persons and of right honourable persons of eighty years of age were to be thus outraged ? All sympathy with such persons was, it seemed, fair and proper, compared with sympathy with the hardened feelings and miserable condition of— (Cries of " No, no," and cheers, which prevented us from hearing the conclusion of the sentence.) He (Mr. Harvey) was now anxious to come to that speech which had been cha racterised as the alpha and omega of the debate, as having comprehended in it every thing that could be said on the sub ject. He willingly admitted that the Right Hon. Baronet had introduced into that speech every argument both for and against himself, distorting and misstating them with an ingenuity that was most remarkable. I( the Right Hon. Baronet had made that speech in a court of law, any experienced critic who had listened to him would have exclaimed, " There's the ablest man I ever heard, with the worst cause that I ever knew."— ( A laugh.) After dwelling on Lord Althorp's letter, and on Lord Althorp's resolutions, the Right Hon. Baronet proceeded to dwell on what he stated to be the fact, that these pensions were made the subjects of family settlements —things which he (Mr. Harvey) begged to observe were very different from Poor-law settlements.—( A laugh.) Really, any one would presume from hearing the Right Hon. Baronet's statements, that these pensions were all made the subjects of settlements, placed in the hands of numerous trustees, and secured by deeds as long as the Right Hon. Baronet himself would draw. Sir R. PEEL observed that that was a quotation. Mr. HARVEY said that it certainly was a quotation, but the Hon. Baronet had contrived to make that quotation one of the most prominent parts of his speech. When he made it, he turned round and addressed himself to the lords of the soil at his back.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) The Right Hon. Baronet knew that he was appealing, not only to powerful heads, but to iron-chests; he knew that he was appealing to persons who would be highly indignant at the notion of having all their family papers ransacked, and all their contingent re mainders exposed.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) Of thi3 he (Mr. Harvey) could assure all who might be interested in the subject, that if he were on the Committee, and it should be made to appear with reference to any lady on the list, whe ther she was old and ugly, or whether she was young and beautiful, that her pension had been made the subject o a marriage settlement, he would endeavour to smile appro bation of the circumstance, and would pass the case with out further notice.—(Great laughter.) But let the House consider these facts. There were 1,300 grants on the Pen sion List ; many of them under 50/. in amount. Taking the whole of the grants, the average amount of each was only 18d. Now, really the idea of making a pension of 50/. or orated f ranted 45/ , to be received as long as the person to whom it was g old or young, might live, or as the grantor might live (how ever the usage might render the latter consideration unimpor tant), the object of a settlement, with three or four trustees, with a deed as long as the land which it conveyed, was a fancy so extravagant that only such a skilful debater as the right Ho nourable Baronet, knowing the character of the persons whom he was addressing, would have ventured to indulge in it— ( Hear, hear.) The right Honourable Baronet also contended that in some cases these pensions had been made the subjects of assignments for the pyment of debts—for that they had been made over to parties for that purpose. Now although he (Mr. Harvey) was perfectly satisfied that there was nothing to warrant any such supposition, he was ready to declare that wherever he found such an as signment, or such a security, he would readily afford protection to it. The right Honourable Baronet also observed that Mr Burke was decidedly opp( sed to any investigation of the pension list ; and he had compared the power of the Crown, at the time Mr. Burke made that statement, a ith its power at recent pm iods. It cer tainly was well known that in 1780 there was scsrcely any limit to the extravagant grants of the Crown, which exercised what was conceived to be an unbounded right of grants on what were called the land revenues of the Crown. To such a criminal extent gas this practice carried, that a sum was granted which would have been abundantly sufficient at the present day to maintain the most splendid royal esta blishment. Such was the cupidity that surrounded courts that the largest portion of those revenues was at that time granted away, and was now in the hands of some of the noblest fami lies in the country.—( Ilear, hear, hear.) And well might Mr. Burke say, after he had arrested such an unbounded flood of corruption. that he did not care whether a subject so compara tively trifling as the Pension List were to become a matter of inquiry or not. The Right Hon. Gentleman who made the motion had asserted that this was not a vulgar question of pecuniary calculation, but that it was a question of moral profit, that it was a question of eternal justice, that it was a question that should be decided with reference to the will of that power 4‘ Who sees with equal eye, as Lord of all, A hero perish, or a sparrow fail." But it was maintained on the other side that that was not the case, but that the country would view with very dif ferent feelings the deprivation of the persons on the Pen sion List of their incomes, and the deprivation of allowances which had occurred under the new Poor-laves to persons who had spent all their lives in hard labour.—(" No, no.") So it had been stated. The House had been asked if there was any comparison between the ssinpathy excited for the per sons whose names were on the Pension List, and the sym pathy excited for merely the aged widow s of the poor, and the decrepid labourers, rendered decrepid by toil rather than by ago—(for there would be found no pauper in the country whose claim went back as far as 1764)—worn down by severe work, by privations, by exposure to weather, and by all the other hardships to which the poorer classes were subject.—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear, hear.") " This," continued the Honourable Gentleman, "is to be found in your own Reports ; and arc not the temples of your living God—the places into which the poor are invited to enter to find comfort in this world, and the assurance that in another all inequality shall be removed—are not the doors of these temples placarded with the names of the aged matrons and ancient fathers who have toiled to enrich the soil upon which they were born, and from which you, its here ditary possessors, have derived your wealth—( Cheers)—are not their names from day to day, and from week to week posted upon your church doors to become the objects of the most searching scrutiny, for the purpose of ascertaining whether by some miserable contrivance they may not be made to maintain themselves, or be fixed for life upon the support of relatives whose condition in the world, perhaps, is but slightly superior to their own 2—(Cheers.) But then we are told that under the righteous decree of eternal justice there is a distinction between the artificial forms of society and this humble but most useful class.—(Cheers.) Let the Hon. Gentlemen opposite, who are influenced by so nice a sense of delicacy upon this subject, find comfort in the assurance that no individual whose sentiments coincide with my own can be guilty of acting with an iron heart towards any of the persons whose names are upon this list of pensions. The very im putation that we bring against those who have acted with such unfeeling severity towards the poor will be found to be the protection of the rich ; and unless you are pre prepared to say that the persons whose names are placed upon this list—that the relatives of many of the Hon. Gentle men opposite are ashamed and afraid to undergo the ordeal to which they are to be exposed—unless Honourable Gentle men are prepared to say that, I would ask, can anything be more unkind, can anything be more severe, can anything be more cruel, than the course they propose to pursue in denying this inquiry ?—( Hear, hear.) Whether it be a prejudice that has been fostered by ungenerous imputations, or whether it be grounded upon facts and circumstances that cannot be denied, it has become an universal sentiment that an inquiry ought to take place. —( Hear, hear.) It is a sentiment that runs through every class and every rank—it is entertained by persons of every grade and of all ages, from the richest to the poorest, from the youngest to the oldest—it is common to all ; and you who will vote against the inquiry believe and know that there are many names upon the list which you are sorry to see there. Is it not a fact that there are persons, whose names are upon this list, who have for their relatives persons proud of their heraldic bearings, proud of their ancient families, and of their extensive and almost boundless possessions ? Do you not find connections of this kind upon the list? And is it not a matter of deep shame and deep regret with those who cannot help it, that persons who have the means of doing so do not interfere to rescue their Honourable and Right Honour able relatives from the imputations which are cast upon them in consequence of having their names placed upon this list. —( Cheers.) If I were upon the Committee, I have no diffi culty in stating to the House the course by which I should be guided. And here, without indulging in the slightest suspicion as to the course which the Chancellor of the Exchequer proposes to pursue, I must be allowed to say that I do not subscribe to the limitation which lie proposes to place upon the inquiry. I gather from him that ho will place the onus of establishing the impropriety of contested claims, not upon the party who urges the claim, but upon the party who challenges it. If that be so, it appears to me that it would he better if we had no Com mittee at all.—(Hear, hear.) If I may speak for myself, and it may be presumed that I have as much curiosity upon the subject as any other Member of the House— apart from the ungraciousness of the office—it would be far from me—l should shrink from it as a duty that did not belong to me, to ransack the claims, and to enter into any evidence as to the title which these persons have to the pensions which have been allotted to them.—(Hear, hear.) I think they ought to be invited, or rather required, in terms, of course, as delicate and respectful as possible, to state the grounds upon which their claims are rested.—(Hear, bear, hear.) Let the request he delivered by private hand, or by some livried attendant of the Court. Do it with all the respect, all the deference to which these ;:igh personages are entitled ; but call upon them in some way to state the grounds on which the grant was made to them, whe ther it was granted to them individually, for services ren dered, and if so, request them to revert to that service and state its nature.—( Hear, hear.) And if the grants have been made for services not rendered by themselves, but by some near relative, surely there is not so much inherent injustice in these pensioners as to prevent them from calling to mind those virtues of their ancestors to which they are indebted ;or their present pay.—( Cheers.) And if it should happen that some individuals were placed upon the list in past times solely and exclusively upon the ground of charity—if it should be found that the circumstances which justified the original grant, un fortunately for the individual, still continue—and if it should further appear that the grantee has nothing else whereupon to exist—has no near relative, no father, no mother of title and affluence—no brothers, no sisters rolling in wealth, boast ful of their titles, and proud of their possessions—if he should appear to be one of the deserted of mankind, scarcely knowing his origin, disinclined to say what he believes of it, having no connections that can be called legitimate— (Laughter)—if upon the list there be found any unfortunate wanderers of this kind, though there may be some extraordi nary evidences in their features to tell the tale of their origin— (Laughter and cheers)—yet I for one would say, " Pity their sorrows and continue them upon the Pension List. "—(Loud cheers.) When I see the Noble Lord (Lord Stanley) oppo site, who, of course, has a right to be proud of his title and property, I am a little surprised that he has not called toge ther men like himself for the purpose of looking over this list, and of providing a fund from their own resources for the support and maintenance of their own poor relatives.—( Loud cheering.) Allow me to tell the Noble Lord that hereditary sneers are not natural eloquence—(Cheering)—and that whatever in private life may be our differences in point of rank and fortune, we are all equals here as Representatives of the People.--( Continued cheering.) Moreover, the Noble Lord will allow me to tell him that there arc examples, though of a lowly kind, and amongst a despised class, which it would be no discredit for him to imitate.—(Cheers.) Are there not Funds of every kind—Trades' Funds, Widows' Funds, Fun is of every variety—to aid and support mankind from the cradle to the tomb, all of which have their rise and owe to their con tinuance to the honourable and independent spirit which ac tuates the humbler classes, and renders them disdainful of deriv ing assistance from any other than their own resources ? Have not these funds been sanctioned and protected by Acts of Parliament? Are there not upwards of 5,000 of them in the country ? Is it not the object of your boasted Poor-law Amendment Act to foster and encourage them ?—(Cheers. ) Allow me, then, to tell the Noble Lord that he may learn something from " the simple annals of the poor."—(Great cheering.) 1 was about to state, that in dissecting this list I can suppose, without knowing it, that there may be persons upon it whose merits justified the grant ; and though their fortunes might be great at the time that they received the grant, and may be greatly improved since, yet it may be possible that their services were such as deserved some mark of Royal favour, surpassing in their estimation all the value of mere pounds, shillings, and pence.—(Hear, hear.) If there be any such, I would continue them upon the list.—(Cheers.) But, then, I say, let these remarkable cases—let these bright examples be plucked from the scenes of obloquy and filth by which they are surrounded, so that they may stand forth an their original purity, recommended by the circumstances which justified the grant at the time it was made, and which no age nor years have been able to tarnish.—(Cheers.) Do you wish to protect that class from inquiry ?—( Hear, hear.) Are you afraid, when the Report of the Committee shall be made, that the mass of the people, and especially the despised poor, will fail to recognize those cases of real merit which at wide intervals may be found upon the list? Do not deceive yourselves—do not misunderstand the poor of England : they would be the first to denounce any act of an unjust or ungenerous kind.--(Cheers.) If there be any case, any circumstance that can be stated—any story, even, that can be exaggerated in favo'sr of any one of these pensioners, the best way of protecting them will be not to attempt to shield them under the pretence and artifice of an amendment, but by an appeal to the sympathy and generous feeling of the people of this country.—( Cheers ) I will presume that-there are persons upon the List who have been placed there not in consequence of any service immediately rendered by them— not in consequence of any of those influences to which I will not now refer, but in consequence of their poverty. If their poverty be not exaggerated by them, I should not be the in dividual to apply a stern rule to cases of that kind.--( Hear, hear.) Although there has been an obvious desire to avoid the parity of the Poor-law Amendment Act with this inquiry, yet I maintain that it all the arguments aka-aced by the Right Honourable Baronet (Sir Robert Peel) had been ad duced before the passing of the Act, the Act itself would have obliterated all the pretensions that aro made to these pensions. For what is the principle upon which the Poor law Act proceeds ? That no man or woman shall be al lowed to live upon the labours of others, where strength or years enable them to labour for themselves—(Cheers) —or whose relations are in a condition to extend to them that support which nature requires and kind and proper feelings prompt. —(Cheers.) Upon what principle, then, do those gentlemen who are so anxious to maintain these pensions—l will not say who are benefited by them—upon what principle do you defend them? I ask you to apply the same rule to these State pensioners that you apply to your parochial pen sioners.—( Cheers.) And here let me advert to a remark rude by the Right Honourable Baronet (Sir R. Peel.) He sacs, looking over this List I see there have been eleven Prime Ministers, eight of whom have been gathered to their finalaccomit, three of whom only remaine ill you call upon a per son who had the grant of an annuity, or a pension, made to him during the life of either of the eight Ministers who have ceased to exist, to explain and justify the circumstances of that grant ?—', Hear, hear.) Now let us carry this analogy a little further. A poor woman who has been receiving 2s. a week shall be told by the guardians that she can no longer have this relief, and is asked under what circumstances it was originally granted to her ? " Oh," says she, "it was granted to me twciey years ago by old Brown, the Churchwarden. --(Laughter and cheers.) I was at his funeral twenty years ago. Lord love you, do not deprive me of it."—( Cheers.) What do the Guardians say to this ? " You were very lucky in having such a Churchwarden as Mr. Brown ; there is a different race now—( Great laughter and cheering) ;—we must have some little conversation with you, my good old lady ; you look strong and hearty ; can't you go out to chair ing ?"—" Why," says she, " I do sometimes go out a charing, now and then I get sixpence a day, and once or twice I have got a " Don't you think if you were to go a little more about the parish you could contrive to get more ? You must learn to be more active, to be more industrious ; you must seek to maintain yourself; our anxiety is to infuse into your mind the moral, the high sense of the eternal principles of juetice—(Loud and long-continued cheering); but you say that you are frequently afflicted, and that you find it im possible, except when the weather is very fine, to go out charing even for the few times you speak of. Have you not got a son or a daughter ?"—" Ycs, thank God," says the poor old creature, " I have a son and a daughter ?" " Are they your own children ?"—(That is a question I shall not put in the Committee.)--(Great laughter and cheering.) " Are they your own ?"—" Lord, love you, Sir, whose do you think they are ?" " Well, then, what is your son ?"—" Oh, he is a boy, and as good a boy, though I say it, as any mother ever bad." " And what does he earn?"—" Fifteen shillings a week." " And what does your daughter do?"—" She is married." " Has she any children e"—" Yes ; two pretty babes." " And what is her husband ?"—" A journeyman car penter ?" " And what does he earn ?"—" Why, when he is at full work, he earns a matter of twenty-five shillings a week." "Then," exclaims the indignant Guardian, with wonder in his eye and stern displeasure on his brow, " why, my good woman, how can you have the impudence to come here—(Loud and long-continued cheering)—how can you have the impudence to come here and ask for the continuance of the relief that old Brown gave you, when you have a boy and a girl of whom you are so justly proud, the one earning 15s. a-week, and the other having a husband who gets 255. a-week ? Get away, you hussey I"—(Great cheering.) Such would be the predi cament of many of these pensioners if we were to in. quire into the real circumstances of their case.—( !leer, hear, hear.) I will venture to say that there are many men and women upon this List who, if asked as to their relatives, and what was meant by their having attached to their names the appellations of " Honourable " and " Right Honourable," of Lady," " Dowager," and " Dame," after recovering from the first surprise occasioned by the impudence of the in quiry, would tell you that they had a long line of ancestry, who bad their origin with the Piantagenets, and those who came over from " Facry land."—( Great laughter and cheer ing.) Yes, they would tell you that there was no monarch, from Harold to the present day, with whom they were not in some way connected.—( Cheers.) Some of them would be so proud of their superior blood—of having in their veins none but the best blood—that I very much doubt whether they would not be disposed to carry their pretensions even further than the ancient and noble house of Stanley.—(General cheering.) And if you inquire further—if you sty to these persons, " If such be your connections, while their titles live, have they survived their inheritances ?" what would be the reply? Assuming the attitude, and speaking in the tones of injured dignity, they would say, " No, Sir, the Noble Lord, or the Noble Duke, who is my relation, is rolling in wealth, has the largest estates in the county in which I dwell, corn. mands the re presentation of that county, and has two Con servatives at this time in the House of Commons."—(Great cheering.) Are we, then, to be told by those who passed the Poor-law Amendment Act , to im p rove the condition and give a high moral tone to the labouring community—( Great cheering)—are we to be told that the only example you are prepared to set to the humbler classes, for whose welfare, mo ral and physical, you have so carefully, so wisely, so generously provided—( Cheers)—are we to be told, I say, that the only example you are prepared to set them of your virtue and sin cerity, is to make them (the poor and humble) labour on for the maintenance and support of these your relatives and friends. —(Cheers.) lam not aware that anything more need be said upon the subject. Undoubtedly many suggestions occur to my mind; but having frequently under the indulgence of the House, been permitted to express my views upon this interest. ing subject—the more interesting, because it assumes now a practical and I would fain hope a successful form—l will not at this • moment intrude further upon your time. I will not abuse the indulgence I have received. on fearer occaflnns as well as the present, further than to express my deep regret that the gentlemen who form the Conservative party, .avow edly, as it is said, the unpopular side—who have to o ; the hustings been speaking of the Poor-law Bill—( Great .c ow ing from the Ministerial benches) --many of whom have been returned to this House by exaggerating the deice a of that measure, and often denouncing its merits—( Renewed cheering)—who have occasionally spoken of pensions and pensioners —(Cheers)—l deeply regret, nay, I will not be lieve, that gentlemen who pride themselves upon their high stations and the purity of their principles, will so soon forget those influences through which they ex cited the popular resentment, those assurances by which thov awakened tile pcpu'ar expectation, as now to rally round their leader for a mere party purpose--( Great cheering)— with the view of prevene.ng an inquiry, which it would re flect great discredit upon our new Sovereign to reject— ( Cheers)—which confers great honour upon the Government that countenances it—( Cheers)—which will cheer the hearts of many who are now afflicted by a sense of oppression arising out of the inequality of the laws as between the rich and the poor—(Cheers)--and will be taught by your vote to know that there is some thing less than base hypocrisy in your strong eapressiona of attachment and devotion to the cause to which you appeal, when you invite us to recollect that in the :mall and comparatively insignificant inquiry into which we are about to enter, we shall involve that great principle of eternal justice which is attached to the gate of heaven itself.—(Great cheer ing.) And though you may row be proud Of your artificial condition, of your high rank and large possessions, recollect that the humblest of those to whose prejudice these too inju rious distinctions have been made, aye eh:seined in the great hereafter to possess the same boon—to enjoy the same bless irgs with the richest and the proudest of you all—remember that the lowest, the humblest, the most despised, have hopes in that place, where they are assured that poverty will find an acceptance. —( Loud and long-continued cheering.) Lord STANLEY—If one fortnight ago I had been asked who would be the person who, at the close of these tumul tuous cheers, would now, as upon many previous occasions, have greeted the conclusion of the speech of the Honour able Member for Southwark—if, I say, I had been asked who, at the close of those cheers, would be the first to rise with alacrity, and on the foundation of the policy of the Go vernment, their past professions and principles, their con stant and continued course of adherence to what they felt to be the principles of truth and justice—if I had been asked who, upon those grounds, would be the first rise to repudiate and regret the motion of the Honourable Mem ber for Southwark, a fortnight ago, •I should with con fidence have said that man will be the Chancellor of the Exchequer.—(Great cheering from the Oppo sition.) Because I felt persuaded that no light cause, no fear of' unpopularity, no fear of Parliamentary desertion or defection, no fear of offending this party or of pleasing that, would have turned aside her Majesty's Ministers from that course which one and all of them have declared to have been founded upon no temporary expediency, hut upon immuta ble justice.—( Opposition Cheers.) As last night I had the satisfaction of seeing her Majesty's Government, and a small portion of their supporters, in concurrence with the large body on this side of the House—( Hear, hear)—and, I speak it to their creclit—( Oh, oh ! from the Ministerial benches, and cheera from the Opposition)—in the maintenance of that which they felt to be the continuance of justice, go out against even a considerable body of their own supporters, so I had hoped that I should on this occasion also have fol lowed my Right Hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exche quer, after heating him, in a manner which would have ren dered it unnecessary for me to say anything, with his accus tomed and wonted eloquence, on a subject on which that elo quence frequently been exerted, refute, as I have heard him before refute, the arguments and refuse acceding to the propo sition of the Hon. and Learned Member for Southwark. But I know not how it is, the tables are strangely turned within these few years. —( Hear, hear, and a laugh.) I now see the Chancellor of the Exchequer moving the very resolution which he two years ago condemned.—( Hear, hear, and laughter.) I have seen the leader of the House of Commons approving and supporting the doctrine which be has constantly repu diated, and I see them now both adopting and taking even the part of voting on the very question which they have always rejected when moved by the Hon. and Learned Gentleman the Member for Southwark —( Opposition cheers. ) I congratulate that Hon. and Learned Gentleman upon the victory he has gained.—(Cheers from the Opposition, and laughter.) I cannot, however, congratulate her Majesty's Government upon the submission which they have exhibited. —( Hear, hear.) But whatever may be the course taken by her Majesty's Ministers, I for one cannot forget that I was a Member of the cabinet of Lord Grey—(Opposition cheers, and laughter from the Ministerial benches)-1 for one will not forget that I shared the credit to which I think that Govern :vent was entitled fur introducing a reform of the abuses which had been for a length of time in the system of administering end granting pensions ; neither will I forget—nay, I look with equal, with greater pride, to the fact that I was one of those who shared in the part taken by Lord Althorp, which was taken by Lord John Russell—l speak of the Minister of that day—(Hear, hear)—and which was tal:en by the present Chancellor of the Exchequer (the then S cretary of the Trea sury), and in which we, one and all, declared that g reat as was the benefit which the country would derive from the adoption of a sound principle for the future—great as was the popularity which might be derived from it to the Go vernment by yielding to popular clamour, and making an instantaneous and retrospective reform, yet we would pur chase neither popularity to ourselves, nor benefi• to the public, at the expense of the national faith, and at the sacr:fice of private interests. But since that time the Government has been emancipated from some of the scruples which it then entertained. We have been told by the lion. and Learned Member for Dublin, over and over again, of the vast diffe rence the: - e is between the Whigs of 1835 and the Whigs of 1536 ; we are told that the dross has ben purged from the Cabinet since then —( Cheers from the ;Ministerial benches.) If the Right lion. Gentleman wl o so loudly cheers thinks that is is evidence of anything of the nature of dross, unworthy aed base of a teal to adhere to the Nth of Parliament, to remain unflinchingly the advocate of a co -scientious act— (Cries of " Oh, oh 1" from the Mideerial beaches, and loud cheers from the Opposition) —to maintain a so iet determina tion net to be tempted by any con.aid ration to infringe these rights which private indit iduala claim, and which they are defenceless to eeforce except by your ssnse of juad -7 e—if this be considered unworthy, I am willing to Le purged off as such dress, hut I share that misfortune with the names of Graham— (" Oh, oh !" from the Ministerial benches, and cheers from the Opposition)—of Spencer—( Cheers) aed of Grey—(" No, no !" and cries of " Hear, heir !") I have no right to speak of Lord Grey's present opinions; but if I know any thing of Lord Grey, I know this, that sooner than he would have yielded to a demand which he once declared and believed to be most unjust, he would cut off his oe n right hand. —( Hear.) I know nothing of Lord Spencer's present views—( Hear, hear)—but if I alas trust Lora Spen cers's declarations—his Parliamentary conduct, his unchanging language up to the last hour of his presence as a Member of Parliament, I knew from those declarations and that conduct this, that so long as he remained a Mini ter of the Crcwn, he never would consent to that which he eve r characterised as an act of flagrant injustice.—( Hear, hear ) If Gentlemen are inclined to dispute that as I state it, and as I think to much to the honour of Lord Spencer, permit me, in addition to those passages which have been quoted by my ilight lion. Friend to night, to read one passage from a speech made by Lard Al thorp in 1832 upon this question, and before the Pension List was dually settled. It was made open the question of the in troduction cf that. Act which provided for prusions charged upon the Consolidated Fund. " I still remain of the opinion " says Lord Althorp " that if are take advantage of the fact that these pensions were settled during pleature, we sl all, as the re presentatives of a great country, be taking an advantage most un worthy of us ; because I believe that nothing can be more detri ' mental to the honour of England than to act contrary to our promise, and proceed in consequence of having a mere tech nical excuse for such a proceeding. This appears to me so clearly a debt of honour, that, whatever I may think of some of the appointments, I feel bound, as a gentleman—( Hear). — not to consent to the taking away any of these pensions so long as"—what does the House thick ? During the life of the present Savel eign ? No ; but "so long as I shall be a Minis ter of the Crown."--( Cheers ) Was Lord Althorp speaking in his individual capacity ? No, he was speaking as the leader of Lord Grey's Government in the House of Commons ; and in that declaration he pledged, not himself as Lord Althorp, but he pledged himself as the colleague of Lord Grey, as the leader of Lord Grey's Cabinet, in the name and on behalf of the Cabinet who had passed the Act whereby the pensions were reduced prospectively.—( Opposition cheers.) Now, Sir, there is no person who has mere strenuously maintained this doctiine than the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Ile did so in 1834. The Right Hon. Gen tleman is well aware of the speech.—(Cries of " Question," " Order.") I will not quote my Right Honourable Friend's own speech, but I will make the quotation which he himself made from Mr. Burke, because, as be has said, it would seem to imply an absurd vanity on his part of wanting to compare any argument be could offer even with the finest part of the works of that great Statesman. As an ietroduc tion. and an illustration of his own precise siaws on this ques tion, my Right lion. Friend quoted the following passage " Those places, and others of the same kind, that are held for life, have been considered as property. They have been given as a provision for children—they have been the subject of family settlements—they have been the security of creditors. What the law respects shall be sacred to me. If the harriers of law should be broken down upon ideas of convenience— even of public convenience—we she'', have no longer anything certain among us. If the discretion of power is once let loose upon property, we can be at no I , :ss to determine whose power and what discretion it is that will prevail at last. It would be wise to attend upon the order of things, and not to attempt to outrun the slow but smooth and evert course of nature."—(Cries of " Oh, oh.") Some Gentlemen may think that Mr. Burke was neither a good speaker nor a sound reasoner, but the majority of mankind arc of a dif ferent way of thinking—( Cheers)—and certainly this is a passage in which the beauty and harmony of the language is only equalled by the dignity and justness of the sentiment.— (Cheers.) Mr. Burke proceeds—" There are occasions, I admit, of public necessity, so vast, so clear, so evident, that they supersede all law. Law, being only made for the benefit of the community, cannot, in any of its parts , resist a d em and which may comprehend total of the public interest." There was a cheer from - the Honourable and Learned Member for Southwark at that part of my Right Honourable Friend's g oes on —" Let the Honourable and Learned ci G u en t a t Gentleman wh° prove n that the total of the public interest' is at issue on this motion, and then, and not till then, will his cheer be justified." Mr. Burke continues—" No law can