The royal gazette — [Charleston] S.C., 1781-07-07 00:00:00, page 4

AS soon as the Order of the Day was read, that the Bill for reform
ing the Civil Eftablilhment of his Majesty's Houfhold, and
for other purpof&s, be read a second time,
Mr. Burke (after having had the resolutions of the 6th of April
read) rose, and said he had but a very few words to offer in that stage
of the business. All he meant to premise was, that there would be
found to be a clause in the printed Bill, which might hereafter, should
his Bill have the good fortune to get into a Committee, appear to
be altogether needless ; as Gentlemen would be aware that should
that prove to be the case, the clause might be crossed out, he hoped
ne argument against the Bill itfelf would be built on that circum
itance....
Mr. De Grey then in a very clear and correct speech obje&ed to
the principle of the Bill, the second reading of which he was prepared
to oppose, and was ready to state his reasons for his opposition at that
moment. He said, as that was the fit moment for discussing the
Principle of the Bill; and as the objections, he had to the Bill, ap
plied to the Principle, he was prepared to state them immediately.
He paid Mr. Burke some compliments on the able manner in which
he had originally opened the fubjedt to the House, as well as upon
his speech of Thursday the 15th inflant, and on the Bill itfelf. If
©economy alone were the object of the question, he said there could
neither be much debate, nor much difference of opinion, because
©economy was certainly necessary in publick and in private, and most
essentially necessary, when a country was situated as Great-Britain
then was, involved in a dangerous and expensive war. As the Bill
pointed out, and connected the objects of the reform, as well as the
manner of carrying thatreform into execution, the whole of the fy
flem, as far. as the Bill extended, was before the House. Such a sy
stem he should oppose, and for these reasons : The Bill coupled two
objects, which, in his opinion, ought to have been kept separate,
viz. the regulation of the Civil Lift, and the regulation of the differ
ent public offices. With regard to the Civil Lift, it was neither a
question ofright, nor a question of power ; but a question of propri
ety. That the House was competent to enquire into, and correct all
abuses in the management of the publick revenues, no man doubted,
neither would any man dispute. The House, however, had not at
any time interfered with the Privy Purfc. Even the secret commit
tee of 1741,had held the Privy Purse sacred. Possibly the House might
have the power of resuming the Civil Lift, and of depriving the
Crown of its constitutional independence : but to enforce such a re
sumption, struck him as neither just, expedient, nor confident. It
would be of the most dangerous tendency ; and when weighed against
the mifehiefs that were to be dreaded from such an innovation of the
constitution, could, not be an objed. Thea& for establishing the
King's Civil Lift, puffed in the firfl year of his present Majesty's
feign, freely and unanimously gave him eight hundred thousand
pounds a year ; and that sum had since been encreafed by a grant of
100,0001. a year for life ; such was the bargain made with his Ma
jesty in lieu of the income given to his Royal Grandfather. A Pen
non Bill had been rejected as inconsistent with those proceedings, and
when the Land Tax was voted, it was declared that 4s. in the pound
and no more, should be the deduction from certain offices, pensions,
&c. What did this imply but an acknowledgment, a tacit acknow
ledgment at least of the pensions themselves ? Then was the fit time
to have agitated the question, as had been done in the year 1744.
Mr. De Grey observed, that while the words for life flood in the sta
tute book, it could never be maintained that the Civil Lift was meant
to be voted during the pleasure of Parliament, and that it was re
fumeable at its will. In order to give a reasonable force to the argu
ment, the Civil Lift Bill must be repealed, and then gentlemen might
avow such a doctrine with greater plausibility. From the reign of
King William to the present reign, it had, he said, been the policy
of this country to give the crown a revenue for life ; before King
William's reign the case was otherwise, and perhaps the misfortunes
of those times were owing to that very circumstance ; but the in
fluence of the Crown, so much complained of, was not less. Even
Charles the firft had an hereditary and landed income of near
400,0001. a year. He would not compare the King's Civil Lift to
private property, but no man would deny that cases and rules of pri
vate life would apply to it. After a father has made an establishment
for his son, would he, if he thought his son had too many servants,
take upon him to difeharge feme of them, and apply their wages in
another manner ? Surely he would not, and especially if he had late
ly increased his fon's establishment. The Bill, it was true, held out
compensation to those, whose places were places for life, but would
not every liberal-minded man feel a great unwillingness to break into
any perfoTs possession so held ? The profits of such place were legal,
and had been considered by tire possessor of the place as a legal securi
ty. If this was the case in the infiance of a chief Justice in Eyre, and
the Welch Judges, and of those who held the patent offices of the Ex
chequer, (and he thought it was very properly so in all these cases,)
why should not the fame principle prevail with refpe& to the Crown,
that had made a bargain with the public, by which the public were
considerable gainers, gainers to the amount of more than 100,0001. a
year ? Mr. De Grey here quoted a page of the Journals of 1777,
whence it appeared, from a paper presented at that time, that, ex
clusive of the 500,0001. voted in 1769, there then was a balance upon
the bargain, in favour of the public, to the amount of 1,800,0001.
Mr. De Grey commended the Bill for not intending to> resume the
Exchequer offices during the lives of those in possession or reversion:
He said, those advantages were joined by the families who held them,
as the rewards for the labour and services of their ancestors, and they
operated as a famulus to the ambition, the honest ambition of their,
successors!
Here he mentioned the Duke of Richmond's grant, and the decla
ration made by a member of Parliament in King William's time, ref
pedting the making the King a freeholder as well as himfelf.
Having Rated both, he went on to observe, that with regard to
secret service money, it had always been a delicate question, and that
the Journals afforded various precedents, whence it appeared, that
when the House actually addressed the Crown for an account of the
application of secret service money, it was absolutely refufed, the
Crown declaring, that to comply with such a requisition, would not
be for the public benefit; an answer that had always been acquies
ced in. He put the case, supposing that the exchange had not taken
place, and that the King enjoyed his grand-father's revenues ; Would
the House have alienated them, and which of them ? Some were of
very antient date; and several were exchanged in Charles the fe
cond's time for divers perogatives given up by that Monarch. If the
principle were once admitted, he contended that the crown would
'have no independence left. Judge Blackstone had observed, " That
“ every Prince, in the firft Parliament after his accession, has by
" long usage, a truly royal addition to his hereditary revenue fettled
“ upon him for his life ; and has never any occasion to apply to Par
" liament for supplies, but upon some publick necessity of the whole
66 realm. This restores to him that constitutional independance,
“ which, at his firft accession, seems, it must be owned, to be want
“ ing."
Supposing the Bill to have passed, to what a state would his Ma
jesty have been reduced, for it would not be merely the royal assent,
but the precedent that was the matter of difficulty. So that the King
must either refufe his assent, (and if this Bill, or any like it, passed
both Houses, he hoped that would not be the case,) or he must give
up an independent life-rent for a precarious establishment, liable to
be dimimfhed or revoked by future Parliaments, just as their caprice
directed. The Honourable Gentleman who brought in the Bill, he
cbferved had complimented the King of France on his economy ; he
begged the House to confider that the Civil Lift in France, and the
Civil Lift in England, were so extremely different, that no true com
parison could be made ; but even if it could, he trusted gentlemen
would confider the whole of the French King's conduct, that they
would oppose his unjust war to his ©economical reform, and upon the
balance, he believed it would be found that the advantage did not
preponderate so greatly in favour of France, as to alarm us. Bad
faith, he said, was always bad policy, and he had no doubt but the
greater evil of the war would swallow up the lesser good of the
©economical retrenchments, which would go but a little way indeed
towards carrying it on. At the fame time he declared Great-Bri
t in had better profpecfts, and a more reasonable ground of exultation ;
every attack that had been made on the Crown, and on the legislative
authority of Parliament, had been repelled, and he hoped every man,
both within those walls and without, would ever hold it in his mind,
Parliamentary Proceedings.
House ^Commons, Tuesday, February 17.
that this war was rot begun to fupprrt :hepower of the Crown, but
because the Crown refufed to accept the allegiance offered it, inde
pendent of the legislative authority of Parliament. He hoped also,
that it would be universally remembered, that the constitutional li
berty of the fubje& had always been anxiously and religiously adhered
to at home, and the law of nations, and the faith of treaties uniform
ly observed towards foreign powers.
Mr. De Grey made a few short observations on the various objects
of the various clauses of the Bill, and said, as the principle was then
the propet fubje& of discussion, he did not confider himfelf at liberty
to go into them much at present; he hoped, however as they a
mounted.to a degradation of loyalty, the House would never submit
to them. He concluded, with faying, that as the Bill was unjust in
. its principle, he was clear it would be impracticable in its execution,
and therefore he should vote against the second reading.
.The Hon. 'John Town,send replied to>Mr. De Grey, and said, he
should give his most hearty support to a Bill that had for its objects
consequences of such great national importance as the saving of pub
lick money, the application.of. that saving to the use of the publick,
and a reduction of the encreafed and encreaung influence of the
Crown. But though these were great obje&s, the Bill had another,
if possible, still more essential object in view. For when the Bill had
received the Royal assent (and to suppose it would not receive it on
the grounds of public distress would be highly indecent) it would
prove to that House and to the world that the Crown really feels for
the distresses of the kingdom ; that it is unwilling to' avail itfelf of
too liberal an augmentation of revenue ; that it is desirous to remit
to calamity what may be supposed by some perlons to have flowed
from prosperity.
It would be the Bond to connect together more firmly the affections
of his Majesty and his people. It would prove that we have all one
common union, one common happiness, and one common fortune.
That his Majesty cannot wish to plunge the country into wars con
trary to its interest, since the Crown means to fink its own revenue
in proportion to the diminution of the property of the fubje&. He
observed that Mr. De Grey had objected to the Bill on the principle
of its being a resumption on the Crown. Mr. Townfhend said, he
should speak upon this ground with peculiar diffidence, because it
belonged only to persons of much superior knowledge to himfelf to
speak upon it with confidence ; but he had always understood that
Parliamentary resumptions were no new proceedings. From the
time of Henry VI. to Henry VIII. scarcely a reign passed without
some parliamentary resumption, and these were not merely resump
tions of grants made by preceding Sovereigns, but of grants made by
the King himfelf for the time being. In the reign of Henry VIII. an
A& of Parliament passed for the abolition of sundry needless offices
and unnecessary pensions, and the ground of it was very remarkable,
—it was to enable his Majesty to defray his charges in maintaining
his expensive war against our ancient enemies the Scots.
; He was well aware; he said, of objections that might be made to the.
instances he alluded to upon this principle, that these resumptions of
different Parliaments were not of grants made by themselves, but
that in such cases they acted as arbitrators, in a manner, between the
Crown and the fubjed ; whereas in the present inftancc it might be
said in contradiftih&ion, that Parliament resumes upon its own
grant, defeats its own a&, and violates its own contrast. But if this
reasoning be admitted, on wliat principle are any of the former re
sumptions to be juftified? For when the Crown paged the a&s above
mentioned, did not the Crown then defeat its own grant, and aft in
violation of its own contrast ? But in general what were the causes of
those resumptions? Why public distress and public calamity. In
some few instances he allowed the impropriety of the grants them
selves might have been the occasion of resuming them. Nor indeed
would he deny the force of such an argument applied to the present
occasion. But in general, the distresses of the country were the foun
dation of these resumptions. And could any one assert that the Crown
could formerly, in its legislative capacity, on these grounds, resume
upon the fubjedt to whom it had made a grant, but that the Parlia
ment, in the fame legislative capacity; and on the fame grounds, can
not resume upon the Crown, which is the grantee of Parliament?
What was Parliament used to fay on former occasions to the fubjedt ?
It said, “ it is very true the Crown has made you this grant ; we ac
knowledge it to be your own private, diftindt, separate property;
and we are very ferry to be obliged to concur with the Crown in the
necessity it is under of defeating its own a&. But the exigencies of
the State require that you should wt be enriched with that wealth
which would relieve the distresses of the country." If this was jus
tice in the Crown towards the fubjedl, why might not Parliament
now fay also to the Crown. “It is true we have made this grant to
you ; we wished to place you in a state of magnificence and fplen.
dour ; we wished to shew every mark of our affection for your royal
person, and of refpe& for your situation ; but the condition of the
country is different from what it was when we made the grant ; we
were not then engaged in war with four powerful enemies, we were
not then pressed under that load of debt which now overwhelms us;
and if on the .grounds of public universal distress, we now desire a
resignation on your part, we must be no more considered as violators
of our grants to you, than your predecessors were of their grants to
their fubje&s." Public distress was then unhappy apology of both
proceedings; and will any one contend that such a cause would up
hold the propriety of a general resumption of the whole estates of
numbers of fubjeCTS, and that it will not support the justice of a mere
partial resumption of only a part of the revenue granted to the Crown?
With refpe& to the hafdfhip of the case, which Mr. De Grey had in
lifted upon, Mr. Townfhend asked, if the pressure was not much hea
vier in the case of the fubjedt, than in that of the Crown. The fub
je& gave no assent to the adt, but an implied virtual consent by re
presentation ; whereas the Crown in its own person, in its own right,
and by its own voice, seals and c^firms its approbation of the aft.
Volenti nonfit injuria. It becomes tuen a voluntary resignation of part
of that gift to those persons who, on their part, as voluntarily con
ferred it, who conferred it with liberality, who expert the resigna
tion of it with, regret, but who are compelled to require it by the
urgent demands of necessity.
Mr. Townihend having eftablifhcd the principle of the Bill, next
animadverted upon Mr.. De Grey's observations refpe&ing the small
ness of the saving proposed, and the improper tendency of the Bill.
With refped tto the firft observation, he contended that the saving
of nearly two hundred thousand pounds was by no means an incon
siderable object.—The argument of the Hon. Gentleman who spoke
last was curious indeed—considering the many millions that had been
and were yet to be expended, such a saving as this was too trifling to
deserve the notice of Parliament. It is confeffed that we are deep'd
up to the very lips in poverty, but ceconomy is not the way to relieve
us. How then are we to be relieved ? Is the country to recruit itfelf
by parliamentary inattention, and is it to be restored to its health
and vigour by an obstinate perfiftance in the prodigality of expence ?
But, Mr. Townihend said, it was not the mere saving proposed that
recommended the bill to his support. Another object of it (which
the Hon. Gentleman had argued to be an improper one) had dill
greater weight with him; he meant the reduction of the influence
of the Crown. He would not weary the patience of the House by any
attempt to prove the exigence of improper influence.. The journals
of the House had recorded the fa&, and if they had not done so, yet
every serious mind now yielded an honed confeffion of the truth of
it. The increase of influence had been before acknowledged by per
sons whose profeffion perhaps did not lead them to be extremely hos
tile to its exertions. 700,000!. had been dated by Sir W. Blackstone
as an ample provision for the crown. His language on this fubjedt
is, " That much indeed is given up by the Crown, but much also is
acquired by it. That the stern commands of prerogative have yield
ed at length to the milder voice of influence." Perhaps Sir W.
Blackstone would not have thought that 65,0001. per annum added
to the Crown by late deceases in the royal family, and an additional
grant of 100,0001. per annum, would render this mild voice of influ
ence less engaging and perfuadve.
Mr. Townsend went on to observe that objections had been made
to the bill, because it did not adopt the proper constitutional method
of proceeding in cases of misapplication of the Civil Lift, which me
thod used to be by parliamentary impeachment. But he argued that
nothing could be so nugatory as a parliamentary impeachment, when
perhaps the very tribunal before which the cause was to be brought,
had been tainted with the malignity of its infection : when the ma
jority of those who carry on the prosecution are supposed to have been
the objects of the guilt of the criminal, the partners and accomplices
in his crimes. He said, that the Bill meant to destroy the evil at
ence, by sapping the very foundations of it. That it was one of
those evils which demanded prevention, otherwise it would be in
vain to think afterwards of the mode cf punching the criminal
" Cetera malefeia turn perfequarc übifacta fur.t; hoc vero niji preroidcri,
'' ne accidat, übi evenit, frujira judicium implores."
After all, he said, his firft and principal motive for supporting this
Bill, was to uphold the character of a Britifti House of Commons
It was well known, that great obloquy had been cast ageinft the ho
nour of that House. If there were falfe imputations, this was the
moment to refute the malignity of such calumny, and to vindicate
their loft reputation.
He reminded the House of an exemplary instance in Roman His.
tory. When Verras was brought to trial by his accusers, the judges
(who were of senatorial order) were supposed to be so corrupt, that
the people wished to have the jarifdi&ion transferred into other
hands. The friends of liberty despaired of his condemnation, and
his own party considered his acquittal as certain. The judges how
ever routed by such imputations, proceeded to try the criminal with
the impartiality which their situation required, and with that fcrupu-'
lous attention which the importance of the charge naturally excit^ 4
They saw his guilt, and they punched it with baniihment.'
" There is now before before you, said Mr. Townfhend, a crimi
nal much more flagitious and baneful than Verres. Of his guilt you
must be fully fatisfied; and if you have any regard for the dignity of
your own honour, if you have any ambition to emulate those, who
by a single ad of determined integrity, redeemed the loft charaeer
of their order, you will indict the punilhment due to the criminal be
fore you,, by sentencing him, in like manner, to pcrp.tt.al bard,,
inent."
Powell, h opton, & Co.
H^VE FOR SALE,
JAMAICA Rum—Loaf Sugar—Mufcovado ditto in Tierces
and small Cafles—Southampton Port and Calcavella Wine
in Quartercalks —Claret and Port Wine in Cases of fix Dozen,
at one Guinea per Dozen—Lemon Juice —Boxes of Window
Just Imported in the Ship MARTHA,
And to be Sold, BY
WILLIAM M'W HAN N,
Next to Messrs. Lindsay's, on the Bay;
A Neat Assortment of
European and East-India Goods o
OSNABURGS
Irish Linens
Ditto Sheeting
Cambrick
Lawn
Printed Linens and Cottons
Checks and Bed Tick
Printed and Check Handkercluefe
Barcelona and India ditto
India Chintz and Nankeens
India and Engliih Persians
Plain and figured Lutefirings
Trimmings for ditto
A neat Assortment cf fafhion
able Ribbons
Silk and Thread Gauzes
Diaper Table-Cloths
Womens and Girls Stays
Corded and India Dimity
White Callicoes and Humhums
Velverets and Jeanncts, spotted
and striped
A neat Assortment of Mille
nary
Mens fine falhionable Hats
Felt Hats
Superfine Broad Cloths with
Trimmings
Hunters do.
Coarse and fine Blankets
Diaper and plain Tape
Ivory and Horn Combs
N. B. Excellent Red Port at 245. the Dozen—best single
refined Sugar by the Loaf at 2s. the Pound—Strong Ale at
16s. the Dozen.
Mr. Percival, among other objections to the Bill, grounded as Mr
De Grey's objections hud been, said, he could not fubferibe to the
dodrine so much inufted on both by the Hon. Gentleman who in
troduced the Bill, and the Hon. Gentleman who spoke last, viz. that
the prelent Parliament was obliged implicitly to adopt the resolutions
come to by the last Parliament, and to a& in consequence of them.
He, us a new member, saw no reason to hold himfelf bound by reso
lutions, to which he neither had consented, when they passed, nor
had he heard any thing since, that would have induced him to con
sent, because he.had not yet learnt that the resolution Was founded
in sass.
SHOOLBRED & MOODIE,
Beg to inform their Friends in particular, and the Publick in general,
THAT they have removed their store from the corner of
Church and Broad ftrects, to Tradd-ftreet, near the Bay,
where they have for sale, a compleat aflortment of Dry
Goods, which they will fell on reasonable terms for cash, good
bills of exchange or produce.±
For Sale on Burn's Wharf,
WOOD, Lumber, Rice, Indigo, Salt and Cordage. En
quire, at the Scale-House, of JOHN SMITH, f
Any person in want of a SCHOONER, may apply as above.
ALL persons anywise indebted to the estate of John . Lyon,
deceased, are desired to make immediate payment; and
those to whom the estate is indebted, are requited to render
in their accounts, properly attested, to
ELIZABETH LYON, Executrix.
N-B. A Front Store and CELLAR to be let.
AS I have been obliged to break up my PLANTATIONS.
I will dispose of all the LANDS I am possessed of at the Conga™
rees. They consist of several trails lying on both tides of the river,
making in the whole, according to a late re-survey, 2910 acres; 1362
are river swamp, esteemed by good judges not inferior to any on that
river, and very valuable ; about 400 of it are cleared, and under good
fences. Upon the high land, which lies on the north fide of the river,
and is in general tolerably well limbered with pine, are two settle
ments, and on one of them is a very comfortable dwelling-house of
three good rooms upon one floor, pleasantly situated upon a hill near
the river, which is upwards of 200 feet above the level of the land on
the opposite fide, ana commands a very extend ve profped. Whoever
is inclined to purchase the said lands, will be informed of the terms
by, and may treat with Col. William Thomson at the Congarees,
or, at Goofecreek, with f HENRY MIDDLETON.
THE fubfaiber finding it neceflary to reside constantly in
the country, will dispose of his HOUSE, No. 69, in Broad
ftreet, and the whole of the lotupbn which it Hands. It is a conve
nient, roomy, well finished house, and will accommodate a large fa
mily ; the out-offices belonging to it are also large and convenient.
The lot extends from street to street, and affords ground fufficient for
a very good garden. The premises may be viewed at any time by
such persons as are inclinable to purchase, and the terms will be made
known to them, by applying at the said house to Charles Drayton,
Esq; Messrs. John & ADAM Tunno, or, at Goofecreek, to
, HENRY MIDDLETON
[To BE CONTINUED.]
Needles and Pins
Mens and Womens Gloves
Stationary
Glass, Queen's, China and Tin
.Ware
Scotch, Rappee and. Plain Snuff
Aiforted Calks of Hardware
,Mens coarse and fine Shoes
Military ditto
Womens and Girls leather and
callimanco ditto
Mens and Womens silk, thread
and cotton Hose
Sail Duck and Cordage
Linseed Oil in Calks
Paints ground in Oil
Bar Iron, Nails
London Porter in Bottles
Strong Beer in ditto
Port Wine in ditto
Barley in Kegs
Best single refined Sugar
Best double Gloucester Cheese
A few Firkins of Rose Butter
Crofseut and Pit Saws with filer
and rasps
Soap and Candles
Mutton Hanis
Hung Beef
[ Tongues
I Ship Bread
I &c. &c. &c.