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

s:iy that a Minister was more subject to personal risk or loss of pr.verty, but he could not move without having the eye of the public upon turn at every turning, and that with the public know ledge of all his acts. Every thing he did was attended with a fearful responsibility quite beyond that which pressed upon 'him in times when the influence of the Clown pressed more directly upon Parliament.—(Hear, hear ! from the Oppo ition.)—fle was glad of this. lie was glad of it, because it operated as a check, which was conducive to the benefit of all interests. Then, looking at the question as it struck him, and not in the light in which his Noble Friend wished to place it, he did say that all these causes combined to prevent the possibility of his sanctioning any further decrease in the influence and power of the Crown. His Noble Friend -saw the convenience, in bringing the question forward upon : the ground he had chosen. He knew very well that 'many - votes might he obtained upon the question as a measure of economy, which would not have supported a distinct proposi tion for lessening . the influence of the Crown. That experi ment was tried in the last Session, and perhaps his Noble Friend had the Hon. Member for Shrewsbury's motion in view, -which proposed the disqualification of all placemen for seats in that !House. This was brought forward upon the direct ground of lessening the influence of the Crown in Parliament ; but the House rejected that proposition. It was impossible ,now to separate the two principles in the present case ; and unless they were prepared to contend that the influence of the Crown was too great, they could not support the motion. If they voted in its favour without taking these things into their consideration, they would not be doing their duty to the country. These were his reasons for opposing the motion, and he trusted he had 'stated them fearlessly and openly. He knew it might be charged against them, as such imputations had been made, that they set their faces against all reductions, and that with the sordid motive of maintaining themselves in power. Such imputations could not affect them, devoid as they were of all Foundation: But if , they had not nerve enough to bear up against such attacks, they would be totally unfit for the situa tions which they filled. His sense of duty compelled him to meet the motion of his Noble Friend by a negative.—(Hear, hear, hear !) Mr. H. GURNEY thought the House would eternally dis grace itself. if it rejected'the motion for the sake of keeping up an office to support the influence of the Crown, which must only tend to weaken its power. It was nothing but a job for giving five and twenty hundred pounds a year to a Noble Lord, forisupporting the existing Administration. Mr. Alderman C. SMITH trusted that, in the present case, every honest and loyal man would rally round the Throne, to protect its just and constitutional privileges. He should expect that, if the House yielded to the present application, that one by one, each of the Ministerial Officers of the Crown would be abolished. Under this impression he should vote against the motion. Sir J. SEBRIGHT said, that if his private feelings were to influence him upon the present occasion, he should not vote for the motion of the Noble Lord. One of the Noble men who held those offices had shewn him the greatest per sonal kindness as Lord Lieutenant of the County with which he was connected, which he believed to be greatly indebted to that Noble Personage for his liberal attention to its interests. But he was not standing there as a private individual, and therefore he must not be actuated by private feelings. His duty was to vote for the reduction of every office which could possibly be spared with safety to the State. It did not appear to be con tended that there was any danger in reducing a Postmaster- General ; and however he regretted giving a vote against the interest of the Nobleman to whom he had alluded, his sense of duty was paramount to all other considerations. Mr. H. SUMNER considered that the populace had been misled at County Meetings, by a cry of" retrenchment," which would lead to any thing but their substantial relief. He did not know whether these offices were necessary in point of duty or not, but he should oppose the motion because he thought that instead of the power of the Crown being too great, it was the popular influence which bad increased beyond its proper limits. Sir J. VORKE said, that after the vote which he had given -the other night, he wished to explain that which he should give upon the present occasion. He understood the office in ques tion to be opposed up on the ground of its being useless, and de fended upon that of its being material to theinfluence of the Crown. He had always been taught to believe that the power .of the Crown amongst a loyal and a free people did not want to be bolstered up by a half dozen useless offices. If both of these Postmasters General were wanted, it appeared that they were not both on duty at once, and therefore as they took watch and watch about, they ought to divide one salary between them.— Be should support the motion of the Noble Lord. Mr. DENISON understood the observations of his Honour able Colleague, with regard to the cry of "retrenchment," to apply 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 Honourable •Gentleman opposite, he would say that the power of the Crown had increased and would increase. Mr. FREE MA NTLE was decidedly hostile to the proposi -tion of the Noble Lord. He conceived that he should be de fieient in his duty if he did not state his objections to the man ner in whith the question had been brought forward. The Noble Lord had put the question upon the ground of saving . 2,5001. a year. Now if this had been the whole case, and the contemplated saving had been 251. no man would have been more willing than he to support it. But the ques tion 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 hrd operated so much good to the people. If they went from one department to another and said, " here is an office well conducted, but it will be as well managed by a clerk," they would go on until they had destroyed all the ancient in stitutions of the country. Upon the question of Crown influence, he was convinced that so far from its being increased, it had been considerably lessened 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 he understood he had been alluded to in his absence by ; his Noble Friend the Mover of the Resolution. His mind had been occupied by this question, to which he had paid serious at tention. He did not mean to say, nor could any one pre tend to sayohat 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 se vered from it. To-night another was proposed, and to-morrow, a whole Board 'was to , be brought before the House. There must be a point at which they must stop, and if the country were not prepared to say that the Government ought to be corlie more of a republic, they could not expect these things to be granted. If Gentlemen were disposed to stop here, he should not mind this office. But if this were to be led on to other offices in the same manner, he would not vote for the present motion. He held it to be necessary to the safety of the country to allow a 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 never would consent to, beat down the power of the Crown. If it was told to his con- Itituents, and misrepresented, as what he had said had been before now, he should say, that he came there with the inten lion 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 get some other person, for he would never consent to do it.—(Cheers.) Mr. BANKES understood it to be contended that offices, however expensive and useless to the country, were to be _kept up to support the influence of the Crown.—(Hear, hCar, hear !)--He had always heard, from the first authority in that House, that the influence of the Crown was confined to the necessary offices of the State.—(Hear, hear, hear !)—These were the leg i timate sources of patronage, and the only legitimacy which he recognised. All offices while they ex ist2d should be at the pleasure of the Crown to a greater degree than he thought they had been. But when Parliament thought them useless, then only it was that they should inter • fere with them to abolish them. The Noble Lord hr.d alluded to two Bills which he had the honour to propose, and the Right Honourable Gentleman he believed to have suppqrted them. He was quite sure that the Honourable Gentleman on the second bench (Mr. Freemantle) did, and he thought his Right Hon. Friend did also. It was generally his good for tune to agree with him, and whenever he differed from him it . . was with - vei.y great pain. He had the highest opinion of his talents tnd integrity, and he would not say more in his pre sence. He thought the Noble Lord had just gone far enough with his resolution, and not too far. He had gone just as far -as he Cllr. B.) went in 1812 ; and there was no difference in the cirzumstances of the two periods which could induce the 'House to change its decision. With regard to the argument of not knowing when to stop, he saw nothing in this Resolution which pledged any Honourable Member to any ulterior course whatever. Reductions of other offices might be proposed, and some of which he should support, whilst others he would op pose. He should feel himself, at perfect liberty to exercise his own discretion upon every individual case which came before the House. He had not heard one word advanced in spport of this office upon the ground of its utility. He per fectly agreed with the Noble Lord in viewing the question .as one of just economy, and not as attempting to pull down a long constituted office to lessen the influence of the Crown. It was only acting upon the principle of reducing every thing as far as was safe and just to the country, which they had pledged themselves to do in the address which he had the honour to glove in 1821. He thought Ministers were not redeeming that pledge by opposing the motion of an Hon. Baronet the other night. If he was to take that as a specie enof their economy, he should be exceedingly disappointed. He supported the motion, -because not one word had been said in defence of the office, spon the ground of its necessity. Neither was it, as had been re presented, an office of such ancient standing. It was not equal in antiquity and importance to many of the offices which they had abolished in the Exchequer and elsewhere. It had not been dignified by peat names in remote periotWof 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 supporting the motion'of the Noble Lord. • Mr. PEEL said, his Noble Friend who had commenced the discussion liad treated the question with reference solely to the duties of the partieulir office. He was followed by his Right. Honourable Friend (Mt: Robinson), who had met the question on the general ground of principle, and had declared that the proposition ab initio to be resisted as an attempt to diminish the legitimate influence of the Crown. ' He did not, however, understand that his Right Honourable Friend in any way conceded that the office was unnecessary—(Hear?)— because he had met it on more enlarged grounds, which he thought sufficient to decide the question, and which were enough for the limits of a speech. He hoped, however, be should not treat the subject unfairly, if be combined both the elements of the discussion which bad been heretofore taken separately, and considered in the first place whether the particular office was so entirely inefficient as it had been represented to be; in the second place, what effect its aboli tion would have ou the general interests of the State. On the first part of the question be should submit some consi derations, which, if not conclusive in themselves, it was at least fit that the House should advert to. In considering the nature of a particular office it was first fit to inquire when it was founded, in order to ascertain the circumstances which might have called for it. Antiquity was not in itself a woof of the importance of an office, but, on the other hand, if it was created under temporary circumstances, which had pass ed away, a very strong argument in favour of the abolition of an office was afforded. They were now constantly referred to 92 ; the establishment of that time was the standard to which every thing teas to be brought. If the office had been created since that time, in consequence of the war that had intervened, there was a fair presumption that it should be abolished. He referred back to 92; but it was sixteen bun- . _ dred and ninety-two, and in that year he found the office in existence, and held by two joint Postmaster-General. — (Hear!)--That therefore was a slight presumption in itself in favour of the office; but there might have been, it was true, such a diminution in the duties of the office, and the nature of it might have so changed, that that presumption might be detfroyed. Was there any such diminution ?—(Hear)— He asked the House to look at the duties and the efficiency of the office, as measured by the Revenue which it controll ed, and they would see that the office established at the Re volution had had a constant and gradual increase of duties assigned to it:—(Hear!)--He only said that this was a pre sumption in favour of the office; but it certainly was a strong presumption, if they found that of an office established at such a time the duties had since been quintupled. He should only take a few periods in the present reign to shew the in crease of the Post. Office Revenues In 1773 the Revenue of the Post O ffi ce was 430,0001.: in 178,3 it was 434,0001.; in 1793 it was 705,0001. ;and in IBIS, and since, it was upwards of two millions.—(Hear !)—So much as to the increase of the duties of the office, from which the House would judge whether it could be presiimed to be entirely inefficient and useless.— As to the particular testimony as to the office, they had an authority beyond all exception, in the Committee of 1797 i for never was there a Committee to which such general amt just compliments had been paid, without reference to party. What was the Report of that Committee ? Why, that on account of the importance of the establishment to com merce and to the revenue, it- was worthy of consideration whether there should not be a Board of Commissioners, as in the other great departments of the revenue. The Committee stated truly, that much depended on the skill in making the various and numerous contracts:. Now the measure sug gested by the Committee would have greatly increased ,the influence of the Crown ; for, supposing five Commissioners were appointed at 1,000. a year, though there was not more expence than with two joint Post-masters at 2,5001. a year, there could be no question that the patronage would tie aug mented by the distribution. The Committee observed a:so, that the patronage in the hands of the Post-office was most extensive and important, and required much knowledge and considerable attention to the characters of individuals.— (Hear, hear ! from the Opposition.)—Now what was the pro position of one Hon. Member? That it should all be trans ferred to the Treasury.—(Hear, bear!)—So he understood the proposition, that Mr.'Freeling should be the executive officer. The proposition of the Committee of 1797 was sup ported by the Committee, on the ground that greater regula rity and dispatch would be obtained front a Commission. But the business of the Post-office could not he managed with greater regularity and dispatch than since 1797 ; and it was not fair,in acknowledging the result, toattribute all the merit of this universally acknowledged result to a subordinate offi cer of the Board. Certainly, if the question was between firm and the Committee, of 1797, whether the Board of Commis sioners should be appointed, he had no doubt the Gentlemen opposite to him would hold his argument to be valid. Then came the Committee of 1817, which bad, indeed, after the experience the country had had, decided against the proposal for putting the management of the Post-office under a Board of Commissioners of inure than two, but still was not pre pared to say that the business should be managed by only one. The duties of the office were of a peculiar nature, not only as regarded the amount of the revenue, but the amount of the expenditure. The revenue amounted to two millions; the expenditure was as much as half a million. Now all the payments were under warrant of the Joint Post-master, and Mr. Freeling, whose testimony on this point would perhaps not be taken, had stated his opinion that there should be two Lords. : As for the evidence of Lord Chesterfield, no inference unfavourable to the office could be drawn from it. Being asked, what was the result when there was a difference of opi nion on any subject referred ? he answered, that thy business was so amicably managed that a difference seldom occurred, but that if any did occur, the junior would naturally yield to the senior. Now this was necessarily the case in all co-ordi nate jurisdictions—the least experienced officer generally gave way. The salary of the Joint Post-master had been fixed in 1785 at 5,0001., the present amount. Had they heard nothing of economy then ? Had there been no reform of the Civil Llst: no regulation of political, household, and useless offices.—(Hear, hear!)—Did Mr. Burke, however, at that time, when in the full career of his reforms, touch the office of Joint Postmaster, the Revenue under whose management was one third of its present amount? The only two State Offices which Mr. Burke proposed to touch, were the Presi dents of the Board of Trade and the Third Secretary of State. The Office of the Postmaster-General mustbave been under consideration, but lie left it untouched.-- I (Hear!)—When they saw, therefore, that Mr. Burke, in laying down his large and luminous principles for the management of every department of the State had thought it unfit to be abolished —when the duties had since been trebled—when it was proved that there were daily matters of reference on the most important matters—when the Revenue managed was two millions, and Site actual payments 500,0001., he could not consent to treat it as an entirely useless and inefficient office. —(Hear, hear, hear!)—He now approached with much greater difficulty the consideration of the other branch of the subject, which was at once one of the utmost delicacy and magnitude. The Right Hon. Gentleman excelled in the diffusion and spread of knowledge throughout the country, which was to be attributed in a great measure to the Executive Govern ment, and it would be a strange return on the part of that people to seek any abridgment of the legitimate influence of the Crown. But the people did not appear to solicit that abridgement. What the influence of the Crown ought to be, it was, as he had said before, very difficult to define. But when he found the office to which the motion referred had existed at the Revolution, and had existed ever since, he felt, it fair to conclude that the maintenance of ,that office was essential to the due support of the constitutional influence of The Crown. Still the abolition of this office was called for by the Gentlemen on the other side, on the score of economy. In discussing the several propositions which had emanated from that side on the subject of economy, he had heard such doctrines, as really served to excite his surprise. For instance, the Hun. Member for Sandwich, stating that he had in con sequence of a decrease of business reduced four clerks, argued from thence that a similar reduction should take place in the several public offices of the State; but he (Mr. P.) could never allow the conduct of any commercial establishment, however eminent, to determine the proceedings of those who held the highest offices in the State.—(Applause.)—Again it was urged, that the salaries attached to high offices should be reduced to a comparatively trivial amount. But if this system were adopted, the consequence must be, either that the must im portant and confidential offices in the State would be con signed to persons who could not afford to serve the country for nothing, or the administration of the Government would fall into the hands of a wealthy oligarchy.—(Applause.)—Here the Right Hon. Gentleman quoted the authority of Mr. Burke, against the doctrine of calling upon public men to act gra tuitously. For what said that Right Honourable Gentleman upon the introduction of his plan fur economical Reform— " I will even go so far (said Mr. Burke) as to affirm, that if men were willing to serve in such situations without salaries, they ought not to be permitted to do it." For, added this great philosophical writer most wisely—" ordinary services must be secured by the motives to ordinary integrity. I do not hesitate to say, that that. State which lays its foundation in rare and heroic virtues, will be sure to have its superstruc ture in the basest profligacy and corruption." Hence the doctrines at present preached with regard to the allowances proper to he made to public men, formed no part of Mr. Burke's plan of Reform. But these doctrines - had not fortu nately that influence upon this House which. its authors de sired. Foi the House, in all it• public grants, was governed by its-sense of public duty and the maintenance of proper station, without regard to ansother consideration. Thus it, made a grant to the Queen Ist Session, although her Ma jesty thought proper in the coirse If the discussion to ex press her purpose to refuse tint grant—but still the House determined to do its duty. widthe rant was adopted. There were other points connected sith ttis question, upon which however he did not mean inudi to (well, although 'they in volved a diminution of the intheme of any public servant by increasing the burthen of bit utice. The office mikbtuo doubt be still the same in the eye d ambition, notwithstatideo ing the diminution of its influrice;hrough the increase of its business. But let-the House ',what the increase of business in the Trea - sury, for instance, as asample of the other public offices. At the. Treasury. in 1193 the number of papers re ceived was 3,903; in 1815, 15,0 CD; and in 1821 and 1822, about 20,000 each. Thus it appezred, that in about 20 years the actual business at the Treasury had 'increased nearly eight-fold ; and could any mat stppose, that when such was the increase, time public office at the Treasury could be so much the object of ambition is Nibleinen or Gentlemen ? Yet such superfluity of business was found to prevail in almost all the public offices .of the State. But to return to the sub ject immediately before the :louse he did not mean to say, in answer to a Gentleman on the other side, whether time ac ceptance of the office under consideration was essential to the substantial safety of the Clown: but he would say, that its maintenance was material 1. the substantial interest of the country. If, however, the resent office were abolished upon the ground stated, it would be hardly possible to say where the principle, or its appliotion, would terminate, or how much it might be extended. The Right Hon. Gentleman concluded with declaring, Lhat on the most conscientious grounds he telt himself called upon to vote against the Motion beim e the House.—(Loud 'cheers.) Sir-J. MACKINTOSH rose and said, that if it were not for the introduction of extranems topics, he had not intended to trouble the House this evening ' but merely meant to give a silent vote in favour of the No ble Lord's Motion. But there were other questions connected with that motion, which, as he should shave by and by, were really the only subject for consideration tonight; and these questions involving novel , ties more dangerous and alarming to the constitutional li berty of England than any he had ever heard in the coun try, much less in any intelligent and independent assembly, he could not forbear from taking notice of them. These no velties were indeed such as, according to the language of Gentlemen on the other side, apply to the very root of the Constitution.—(Applause.)—lt was indeed for the very first time alleged, that it was necessary to the stability arid in- ' fluence of the Crown to preserve useless offices.—(Hear, • hear, hear !)—An Honourable Gentleman had .argued, that useless offices were only to be regarded as sinecures or as pen sions, fur the servants of the• Crown, which ought not to he disturbed; and for this doctrine the Honourable Gentleman quoted the observations of Mr. Burks. Whether Mr. Burke were or were not right, in supporting such an opinion, be (Sir J.) would not then stop to inquire. But it was to be re collected, that since Mr. Burke had expressed that opinion, an arrangement had been made .for'authorising the Crown to grant pensions to meritorious public servants, and therefore the establishment of the system of sinecures could no longer be deemed necessary. Still the Gentleman who spoke so stoutly as second in the debate, made a gallant effort to maintain the proposition that useless offices ought to be pre served, in order to preserve the influence of the Crown. The Right Honourable Gentleman who spoke last, had not, with all his zeal, attempted to assert that the existence of two Postmasters-General was necessary, in order to perform the duties of the Post-Office; hot the Right Honourable Gentle man had seemed ter argue, that as these offices were ancient, they were therefore efficient. It should, however. be within the recollection of the Right Honourable Gentleman, for it happened only a few years ago, that several offices, which were very ancient indeed, which were as ancient as the Plan tagenets, were abolished in 1812 and 1813, because from circumstances those offices had become obsolete and super annuated. Upon what .principle, then, should the office of . . Second Postmaster-General be maintained ? Several of the offices to which he lyiki alluded had existed in 1792, as well as that of the second Postmaster-General, and yet they were now no -more, because they became palpably useless. But what office could he more useless than that to which the motion referred ? The Right Honourable Gen tleman, in defending this office, had truly said, that the busi ness of the Post-office had increases! Live-fold since 1792. But did this increase of official business require a proportionate increase of Postmasters General ? For if so, the Post-office should have flee Postmasters General instead of two ;—(a laugh, and hear, hear!)—and the Hon. Gentleman opposite, instead of being engaged in arguing against the reduction of one Postmaster, should be eagerly occupied in pressing for an -increase. But the fact is, that the increase of business at the Post,offiee furnished no apology whatever for augmenting the Postniasters General, who had, in truth, nothir 6 , to do with the management of that incr e ase, o r with th e performance of the duties of the office. The Bight Hon. Gentleman had ob served. that great injury might result to the department of the Post-office, if the appointment of the several officers com petent to do the duty of that, department were transferred from the Nobleman who usually presided over it, to the Trea.. _ . sury, or to tiny other public oilier. Now he (Sir J..) did not wish to commit himself so far with official men, as to allege that they had framed any particular document for the distri bution of patronage, which had not yet appeared before the public; but he could say, that a strong rumour was afloat that arrangements were already made, and orders issued by the Treasury; to transfer to that department the patronage of the Post-otlice, including the appointment of deputy Post masters, &c., this being deemed by the Treasury a more con venient way of conductiw , business than was afforded by the the present system. Hillis rumour were correct, the appre _ pension of the Right Hon. Gentleman as to the transfer o patronage could nut apply' against the • !notion , before the House. But, whether correct or'not, how could it be neces sary to have two Postmasters General to imperintend the dis position of places at the Post•ollice, and that both these Post masters should have a large salary?—Such appointments for such a purpose could certainli , not be 'necessary. In propo sing that there should be only one Postmaster Genera 4 his Noble Friend surely proposed quite enough ; and lie recom mended that this one Postmaster General should have an ample salary. But it could never enter into his Noble Friend's mind, that it could he requisite to have one Peer of the realm watching over the conduct of another in the appoint ment of deputy Postmasters or Clerks, or in the discharge of any oth e r trivial business connected with tit.. office of POstacaster General. No, one Prer must be sufficient for such pnrposes ; and his Noble Friend could never mean any such reflection upon the character of. that Great Body, with which he was so intimately connected, as to suppose the contrary.—(Hear, hear, hear')--He (Sir J.) could never think of referring to former debates upon any subject, because such irregularity was calculated to lead to perpetual litiga tion and confusion. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman, no ticing a smile on the Treasury Bench (from Lord London derry, as we could learn), observed, that that smile might be applied to others ; but as he had never taken part ►n any re ference to the debates of a former day, he was as much en- titled as any Gentleman who heard him to reprehend a prac tice at once so likely to lead to unpleasant controversies, and so directly involving a violation of the duties prescribed in both Houses of Parliament. He now came, the Learned Gentleman said, to the question immediately before the House, and to the doctrines advanced to warrant a resistance to the motion. The Right. Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down had maintained that this office of second Postmaster- General was essential to the good government of the country, while he at •the same time said that it was very difficult to define that influence of the Crown which this office was re quired to support. So that here was a doctrine Which was calculated at once to put an end to the consideration of any further retrenchment or economy—to pufa bar indeed to all inquiry upon the subject. But the Hon. Member for Corfe Castle, whom he did not then see in his place, had already discussed this part of the question in particular, with so much ability and intelligence, that it was not - perhaps ne cessary to discuss the principle farther. But he begged leave to add a few words. Influence he could not regard as a primary principle for the maintenance of the Crown, but merely as an appendage to that institution which he hoped and trusted would long continue to exist for the happiness and honour of this country. But while the Crown had such an immense revenue as that of 60,000,0001. at its disposal, with 70,000 soldiers and a considerable nary at its command, the patronage of the Law and the Church, and the disposal of the great offices in India, as well as in our other numerous colonies, was it not quite 'absurd to talk of the necessity of maintaining a useless public oflice in this country, in order to uphold the influence of the Crown ? If instead of calling for the abolition of this useless office, it was proposed to deprive the Crown of any one of its thirty-five Colonies, which were so much the sources of influence, there might be some apology about this outcry against an attempt to re d uce th e influence o f the Crown. But at present this outcry was quite senseless, especially as the influence of the Crown had so much increased of late years—as it had advanced indeed from year to year. Yet the night Hon. Gentleman who spoke last had stated that this influence was undefinable. But how different was the language held by the then Member for Pete' borough, who was now Member for Hertford, upon the discussion of the measure for appointing a Vice-Treasurer for Ireland. For that Hon. Gentleman then mentioned, and very properly, that it was one of the happy peculiarities of our Constitution, that the influence of the Crown had a natural limit, which was tolerably well known But at the present day, when such reductions had been made in the lower classes of public officers, as he should certainly have deprecated at an early period of the Session, had the state of his health enabled him to address the House, was it to be borne that an office of high rank and great emolument should remain without even any diminution of revenue, although that office was of acknowledged, or at least of demonstrative, inefficiency ?—(Hear, hear, hear !). What would the public say to such an arrangement, particularly when it was held out by Ministers' that the iehintion of such an office pro. ceeded from a solicitude for the influence of the Crown ? Were they not likely to say, that while the Crown possessed such extensive means of influence, as htbad already de scribed, that institution must be in a verfiottering rotten state indeed that could require the suppoct& an useless office. But instead of considering the retention or s such an office as essential to the legitimate influence of the Crown, were not the people rather likely to regard that retention as mere corruption ?—(Hear, hear !). He was glad to hear the Right Honourable Secretary express his joy at the spread of knowledge and intelligence - amimg the people, and that spread was no doubt going on very rapidly. The diffusion of knowledge had indeed become most extraordiniry, espe cially of late years, and it would extend still further, what ever might be the conduct of the Government. But how came it not to occur to the mind of the Rt. Hon. Gentleman, when he so tenaciously insisted upon the maintenance of the influence of the Crown, that it would never be necessary to call in the aid of that influence, if the measures of Government were in accordance with .the interest of an enlightened people? And the people of this country were truly enlightened.— Therefore the Parliament and the Government should study to consult their wishei and promote their views, but above all things to avoid any discord or litigation with such a peo ple.—(Hear, bear !).—The Right Hun. Gentleman would not, Sihe r 3.) could assure him, succeed in any degree in recon ciling the people to the rejection of the present motion, al though be had so ingeniously endeavoured to bring in a regi ment front the enemy's camp, to fight his battles; but in rain. If Government supported the interests of the people, they re quired not to employ the influence of the Crown ; and if they opposed those interests, with the opinion upon which they were founded, they might yet feel the folly and the danger of employing that influence in their support. Addressing himself to the Country Gentlemen, who had of late made so many pledges in favour of retrenchment and econo my, he exhorted them not to violate their pledges up on this occasion. He begged them to consider that the same principle which urged them to vote for the aboli tion of the two junior Lords of the Admiralty should operate with more force on this occasion, as the inutility of the office ' alluded to in the motion was so much more palpable ; for there were many arguments used in favour of the junior Lords • of the Admiralty, which were not in the slightest degree ap plicable in this instance, as in the one case there was some attendance or some duty performed, while in this case there was none whatever. Of precedents and authorities for sup porting this motion, he could produce the strongest; nut merely front the Reports of the Committees of 1797 and 1818, but from the Acts of that House in 1812 and 1813, by which Acts several great Offices, comprehending the 'fellers of the Exchequer, and the Justices in Ayr, and others, which were among the most ancient O ffi ces in t he country, were totally abolished, because they were useless; and yet what could be more useless than the o ffi ce which the motion sought to set aside, and which was defended by Ministers solely upon the 'pretence that it was necessary to the maintenance of the in fluence of the Crown.—(Loud cheer:.) Mt. ROBINSON and Sir JAMES MACKINTOSH mutu ally explained, Mr. WYNN said, he bad supported the Bill for diminish ing the influence of the Crown, because a power to reward public services was substituted. Much obloquy had been previously thrown upon sinecures, and it was considered ad viiable to provide for public services in another mode. He admitted the merits of the Secretary of the Post•otlice ; but he could not agree to entrust so extensive a public depart- relent to his sole management ; especially as a political con- nectiou was necessary between Ministers and the higher public officers. He believed it was by no means the wish of the people to strip the Crown of its legitimate influence, which was the best safe-guard of the Constitution. The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said, he would state shortly the grounds on which he should ask for the vote of the House. The question had been so 'powerfully argued by his three lion. Friends, that it would he only necessary for him to touch on some of the arguments used on the other side.— The true view to be taken of the question was, not to rest it on any consideration of the influence of the Crown, or of the functions of the office itself, but on both combined. He was as ready as any person in that House to disclaim the doctrine of suppotting useless offices, with a view merely to the influence of the Crown, that sort of corrupt influence that might be employed to prevent the proper discharge of public duties. The lion. and Learned Gentleman (Sir J. Mackintosh) contended, that his Right Hon. Friend (Mr. Peel) had completely closed the chapter of retrenchment by the line of argument be adopted. The Hon. and Learned Gentleman seemed to think, that by refusing assent to the proposition before the House ' nothing further in the way, of reduction could be expected. The feelings of Govern ment on this subject could not be more distinctly proved, than by referring to the measure submitted to the House the other night by his Right Honourable Friend (the Chancellor of the Exchequer). The House would recollect, that besides the reduction then proposed in some departments, there were others in contemplation, and Commissions were at that time actually inquiring into every establishment in the State, with a view to any re duction that could be made consistently with the public ser vice. In considering the present question, they must look at it not merely with a view to retrenchment or influence ; they must see how the machine of Government was likely to be affected by the abolition of the offices. When he said this, he distinguished it entirely from the Army and the Navy. In speaking of the machine of Government, he considered it as depending on certain great offices through which the power of the Crown was administered, and in this view the office now under consideration could not, he contended, be abo lished. If it could be proved that the Crown possessed an excess of unconstitutional influence, then he would admit that his argument was at au end. It was flying away altogether from the question, to consider the high offices of Government merely on pecuniary grounds. It was never the doctrine in this country, that no offices were to be maintained but such as gave full anti adequate employment to those who filled them. It was impossible that the machine of Government could go on without the existence of offices, the duties of which were compatible with seats both in that and the other House of Parliament. He had no hesitation in declaring, that if offices were abolished, because there was riot full employ ment for those at the head of them, the machine of Govern ment would be necessarily destroyed. They often beard from the other side of the Haase that nothing could be done with out a reform of Parliament—that it was the only way of pro curing an effectual check to Government. This, be thought, would be a most effectual mode of reform, for it would de prive Government altogether of the means of carrying on the public service- He begged the House to recollect, that he did not oppose the motion as one for the abmilition of a mere sinecure office. It was not an office of that description, nor did he think his Hon. Friend (Mr. Bankes) was bound to support it, merely because it had been mentioned in - time schedule of the Bill he brought in in 1813. Parliament gave no authority at that time to press the abolition of the office, for, in fact, when thB subject had been more fully considered, it was excluded from the Bill. It af terwards became a subject of consideration with the Fi nance Committee. They did not consider it a sinecure, and their opinion was, that it would not be desirable to have no more than time Postmaster General. The Gentle men oppbsite, he knew, were fond of running down the Finance Committee ; but there was another, that of 1797, the justice and propriety of whose opinions were never question ed. Did they say the office was useless, and ought to be sup- pressed? They did not ; and he would contend, that if the business of the Post-oflice were committed to one Postmaster general, it would introduce the worstand the greatest inno vation that had ever been made in the collection of the re venue.--(Hear! froni the Opposition.)—lf a plurality was judged necessary in the Customs, the Excise, the Stamps, even in the Hackney-coaches—if no one branch of'the revenue was entrusted to a single person, he believed it would not be a very sound or safe practice to entrust the Post-office to a single individual. It would be rather a bold experiment to make a trial of collecting 2,000,0001. of revenue, with the superintendance of only one officer. In the attempt to save by these means two thousand five hundred pounds, he believed in his conscience they would lose a hundred fold. Disclaiming the idea of its being a sinecure, believing oilices of this kind necessary to keep the machine of Govern ment in action, combining these and other considerations al luded to with! what he judged to he the best fiscal admini stration of the revenue, he would oppose the motion. He called upon every Honourable Gentleman to state his sen timents with candour and firmness, like his Honourable Friend the Member for Yorkshire (Mr S. Wortley), careless of any clamour that might be raised against him.—(Loud cries of Hear! from the Opposition.)—He trusted the gen tlemen of England would follow the example of his Hon. Friend, that they would openly and manfully declare their sentiments, careless of what party they might offend. By crouching to the vile spirit that was abroad, which, under the cloak of retrenchment, sought for something more, they would only betray their duty, and by ill-directed efforts to save, would only betray their country. Sir J. NEWPORT said, that if the Noble Lord meant by not crouching to the spirit that was abroad, that the opinions of the people were not to be attended to , ,_ he differed very much from him. It was the duty of the House to decide on the utility of an office when the subject was brought before them. The Committee of 1797 admitted the office to be use less, for they said that it ought tp be regulated by a Cons mission, in the same way as the other branches of the reve nue. He was convinced that the country and the Govern ment would go on better without such offices, and that the legitimate influence of the Crown would be strengthened by abolishing them. Sir 1. COFFIN supported the motion. He observed that the Postmasters-General did not do any duty, and therefore he thought they should be both abolished. Lord — NORMANBY, in reply, said, that after the gra ious communication made from the Crown, which n o p er s on ,heard with more gratitude than himself, he thought it rather hard that the Crown should be put forward as the means of defending a place which was one of mere Ministerial pa tronage. Ayes 159 Noes _ _ _ 184 Majority —25 • ORDNANCE RETURNS. Upon our re-admission to the Gallery, we found Mr. HUME on his legs, but from the noise that prevailed in the House, we could not learn the nature of his observa- • tions. We understood them to apply to the votes for the Ordnance Estimates of last year, which he said required ex planation, before the House was called upon to rote for the same service this year. He particularly alluded to the vote of 10,0001. for " Works at Demerara.'" Why an item of expenditure for the Colonies should appear in the Ord nance Estimates he knew not; but he knew that Deme rara was well able to pay its own expences, and there fore should draw nothing Irons this country. When the House looked at the sums expended upon the Staff, and other Establishments of that Island, they would see, that if it was able to support that which could not be necessa ry, there was no occasion to call upon that House to vote money for any works whatever. With a view to put the House in possession of information on this head, he should move for a return of all appointments fur that' colony, civil and military. He was sure it would be found that there were many appointments made in time of war, which were now use lessly 'continued. But he particularly wished to impress upon that House, that while that colony was able to pay 7,0001. a year to a Governor, and 2,5001. to a Major Chap man, who also held a situation as Ordnance Storekeeper, they bad no right to money from this country for any works front which we were to derive no benefit. The first return for which he should move was, to know in what way a sum of 35,0001. voted in the Ordnance Esti mates for 1821, to defray charges incident to the Tower and Forts in different parts of the kingdom, had been applied. Mr. WARD said, that with regard to Ibe observations the Hon. Heinber had made relative to Demerara, he . should leave his Hon. Friend behind bins (Mr. Wilmot) to answer him on that point, as he was much more competent to do so than himself. He would however generally state, that the suns voted for that Colony was to save the property of the Colony from the inroad of the sea. With regard to the other items on which the Honourable Member had remark ed; he must express• his surprise that any comments had, been made, since be (Mr. Ward) had agreed to the produc tion of the Return. He had spoken to the Master-General of the Ordnance on the subject of the Return, and his answer was that lie had not the slightest objection to it, as far as regarded the information required by it. As it affected that question, he rather wished that any Hon. Member of Par- • liament should come and inspect the interior of the Department himself; but he observed that if returns were required em bracing such immense details, considerable expence must be incurred to furnish them, as well as delay,lnow that the De partment was reduced to the lowest scale. And he must warn the House, that in case of a continuance of such motions for Returns, it would become necessary to have an item in the Estimates for extra labour. With regard to any houses that belonged to the public, but which were let by the Officers of the Ordnance, he could only say that if such a practice ex isted, it would he put a stop to, and the spare houses or apartments let for the benefit of the public. Mr. WILMOT begged to acquaint the House, that the item of 10,0001. for Demerara, remarked upon by the Hon. Member (Mr. Hume), was merely an item on account. It was to be expended in works necessary for the defence of the colony, and to be defrayed out of its revenue, A claim had been founded by the colony to its being defrayed by this Country, in consideration of their having at a former period given up a gang of negroes ; but it had been replied to by his Majesty's Governmeat that the works were isot for mili tary defence, but for the protection of colonial property.— (Hear, hear !) The motion was then agreed to. Mr. HUME then moved for similar Returns relative to Use application of the sums voted for rB2l, of 15,0001. to furnish beds and bedsteads; 40,0001. for stores, stating the prices and amount of stores, and time when purchased; 14,3551. for the Clerk of Ordnance Work ; the gstimate of the Work to he done for 10,0001. granted for Demerara ; together with a list of all the 'houses and apartments belonging to the per sons in the Ordnance Department, which are not occupied by them, but let to others. The Hon. Member .observed, that be did not think the country ought to give any money on account for the protection of the Cotton or Sugar Planta tions of the Colony of Demerara. That COlony should pro tect its own property. Mr. GOULBURN said that it was a very erroneous idea that the object of the vote of money for Demerara was to pro tect cotton or sugar plantations. It. was to prevent the seat breaking in upon the principal town there—Kingston; and as the Government barracks were in the immediate neigh bourhood of that town, this country possessed a sufficient in terest in the matter to justify the present advance. After a few words from Mr. BENNETT, the question was put upon the different motions, and carried in the affirmative' MUTINY BILL. Mr. BROGDEN brought up the Report on this Bill. Mr. HUME begged to put a question to the Noble Lord, in allusion to what hail fallen from him on a former occa sion relative to the Articles of War. That Noble Lord said, that these Articles were part of the law of this country:— With reference to that sentiment, he begged to ask him, whether Sir James Mansfield did not say, when those arti cles were pleaded before him in a particular case, that he knew of no Articles of War, but only the Mutiny-Bill, as the law of the land ? .Lord PALMERSTON confessed he was not acquainted with the merits of the law case referred to by the Honourable Member; but he knew that the nth Section of the Mutiny Act empowered the King to frame Articles of War which it declared were to be taken notice of by Courts of Law. No man therefore could find any remedy in a Court of Law for any punishment inflicted under these Articles. The SOLICITOR.GENERAL said, that the case referred to was one where a soldier applied to the Court for damages for having been punished for not paying money towards schooling, which was not reqUired, nor - in any way sanction ed, by the Articles of War. The Report was then read and agreed to. SMUGGLERS COMMITMENT BILL. Mr. LUSHINGTON moved, that the Order of the Day for going into a Committee en this Bill be postponed till to morrow. Mr. LAMBTON asked, in what way it was intended to change the nature of this Bill ? As it at present stood, 3 more scandalous measure was never brought into that House, as it went to deprive Smugglers of the right of Habeas Corpus. The SOLICITOR:GENERAL said, it was intended to pro: vide that the evidence , upon which a party was committed should be annexed to his commitment, so that the CourS, might judge.whether there was sufficient to justify the act. Mr. LAMBTON said this alteration would remove all hi s objections to the Bill. After a few words from Mr. WETHERELL, the motion wag agreed to. • The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the H o use adjourned at Eleven o'Clock. MORE SUCCESS AT HAZARD'S !!!--No. 7,8399 drawn this Day a Prize of Twenty Thousand Pounds, was sold in shares by HAZARD and Co.; who also sold in shares No. 467, drawn a Prize of Twenty Thousand Pounds on the first day 0 1 drawing, last Tuesday fortnight. As a proof that property in Leeds, well Si; tuated, still maintains its value, the house talc' premises, near the Cross, which, for many years past, have been occupied by the Misses HAPS' WELL, at 40 guineas per annum, were last Fridai sold by auction, for 1,3601. A petition, we understand, has been presentee' to the Court of Session, at the instance of CaPt' BROWN, superintendant of police, against Messrs' W. RITCIIIE and A. ABERNETHY, proprietors) and Messrs. ABERNETHY and WALKER, printed' of the Scotsman newspaper, complaining of! number of paragraphs which have appeared I° that paper, relative to certain matters involved 113 1 th e suit now pending before the Court, at the instance of the Commissioners against the Super' intendant, these paragraphs being, it is allege!!! a contempt of Court, and an interference if 10 : the administration of justice.—( Edinburgh Evefi ing Courant.) 1......