The Sun.
London, England, 1864-06-17 00:00:00

HOUSE OF LORDS—Last Evening,
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at.
5 o'clock.

THE DANO•GERMAN WAR.

The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH gave notice that to-
morrow he would ask the Secretary of State for Foreign
Affairs whether measures had been taken to render the
British fleet equal to blockading the German ports ?

FTA Tr
I sent, leaving theto attend to them and
administer
the funds, That bill did not become law. In 1853 the
Whig Government again brought is a bill, and pledges
were then given as to the mode of carrying the provisions
of the measure into effect, which, he would show the house,
had been violated. The Lord Chancellor of ti at day, Lord
Russell, who was then a member of tis oust), and the
noble viscount opposite, had given pledges and made state-
ments with regard to the bill which had all been violated.
The Lord Chancellor, when proposing the bill known as
the Charitable Trusts Act of 1853, stated that the expense
of the leoard would not exceed £5,000 a year. But the ex-
pense for the present year was £18,250. Lord John Rus-
sel;, when moving the second reading of the bill, referred
to the report of the select committee of the House of Lords,
and stated that the opinion of the committee was, that the
commissioners should be entirely separated from the inte-
rests of party. But that recommendation was set at nought
in every appointment that was made, far there was not a
single man tinged with Conservative principles upon the
board. The hon. member then went through the list of offi-
cials in connectionwith the commission,contending that they
were all political appointments, made in gross violation of
the assurance given by Earl Russell that party politics
would have no influence in the appointments made under
the Charities Act. Having referred to the appointment
of Mr Bouse, as inspector under the board, that gentleman
having been previously election agent of a private secretary
of the noble lord at the head of the Government, he con-
tinued—What did they say in the West of England ? Why,
that the private secretary of the noble lord had paid his
election expenses through the appointment of Mr Bouse,
If a select committee were appointed, he believed that cir-
cumstances anything but creditable to the noble lord and his
private secretary would come out. Ho now came to the third
inspector, Mr John Symonds, who was declared by the right
hon. member for Caine (Mr Lowe) to be "a gentleman who
has not been, as far as I (Mr Lowe) am aware, brought up
to anything. (Loud laughter.) He (Mr Ferrand) would
tell the house who Mr John Symonds was and what he had
been, and he would show how the public taxes were squan-
dered by the Whigs in office, who were pledged to peace,
retrenchment, and reform. (Laughter.) This gentleman was
not Mr John Symonds—he was John Symonds, jun. (Loud
laughter.) John Symonds, jun., was an uneducated man,
who could write indifferently,-tut could not spell. (Loud
laughter.) Let the house bear in mind a charity inspector
ought to be a man of the highest integrity, and above all
suspicion, coming as he did in contact with trustees who
were charged with the administration of vast property,
(Hear, hear.) Now this John Symonds, jun., was a coal and
potato dealer in the Hampstead-road—(roars of laughter).—
there could be no doubt about it. " Here is his card," said
the hon. member, amidst roars of laughter, "as black as a
coal and as dirty as a rotten potato." (Sensation.) To use
the language of the right hon. member for Caine when he
refused a return of the trade, profession, and calling of
this man, it might have "lain on the floor of a grocer's
shop for twelve months, or been nailed to a coster-
mongers barrow." (Great laughter.) Here is the address,
" Jo'an Symonds, coal merchant, Bridge Wharf, Regent's
Canal, Hampstead-road." At the end of 1853 this coal
e.nd potato dealer—(laughter)—fled to Australia, but
while there he was reduced to beggary, and became a
hired labourer. In 1855 Mr Wood, the chairman of the
Inland Revenue Board, was dangerously ill, and the inten-
tion was immediately formed that John Symonds, jun.,
should be appointed to his place, with a salary of £2,000 a
year. Mr Wood, however, did not die until October in the
following year, and, Sir G. Lewis being Chancellor of the
Exchequer, so the coal and potato dealer had to be provided
for as third inspector under the Charity Commissioners.
(Hear, hear.)
Sir J, FERGUSSON—At what salary ?
Mr FERRAND—£BOO a year. Ihe Charity Act received
the royal assent on Aug. 14, and immediately John
Symonds, jun., was written to in Australia, desiring
him to come home, as a lucrative Government office had
been provided for him by one of the highest in the land.
According he arrived in England early in 1856, and he had
to undergo two months' preparation before his friends dared
to let him enter the office of the Charity Board. At the
expiration of that time he was recommended to her Majesty
as duly qualified, and he received his appointment from the
Queen on April 21. Now one of the creditors of this newly
appointed charity inspector to whom he owed £2,800, money
which he had received as his agent, had authorised him (Mr
Ferrand) to state that he was prepared to come before a
select committee and prove that the appointment of this man
was one of the most disgraceful acts ever perpetrated by any
Minister. If the house desired, he would give the name of
this gentleman, who was one of the most eminent members
of the Coal Exchange. He said that, knowing the antece-
dents of the man, he would have as soon have expected a
costermonger to have been appointed to the office. This
gentleman went to the °Mee in St. James's-equare, where
he found his runaway debtor. He demanded his money,
but the inspector pleaded poverty, declaring that he es as
living in lodgings at 8s a week. The creditor, however,
discovered that he was living in a large, well-furnished
house. In 1857 the inspector was sued for the debt—he being
then a charity inspector in receipt of a salary of £BOO, and
was described as among the most industrious, honourable,
and valuable of her Majesty 'a public servants—and met this
demand by pleading the statute of limitations, and thus
defrauded his creditor. On June 24, 1859, the noble lord
the member for Tiverton was gazetted First Lord of the
Treasury, and on the following day the Hampstead-road
1 coal and potato dealer, the runaway fraudulent debtor, the
Australian day labourer, the statute of limitations pleader,
was presented to her Majesty at a court levee by Viscount
Palmerston, who stood by and witnessed this insult to his
sovereign. (Laughter.) This corrupt appointment was
connected with a scandalous transaction in which a Cabinet
Minister was deeply implicated. He was prepared to name
him, (Cries of "Name.") The noble viscount opposite.
If he did not prove this statement in all its material bear-
ings, he was unworthy a seat in the house. (Hear, hear.)
Where was the Chancellor of the Exchequer ? Why was
he absent that evening—he who had taunted the gentlemen
sitting on the Opposition benches with being spendthrifts
of the public taxes? Why was he not upon that bench
looking at the noble lord ? Why was he not at home to-
night ? (Loud laughter.) Had he been in his place, he
(Mr Ferrand) should have told the right hon, gentleman it
was his duty, as guardian of the public purse, to demand
to-morrow a meeting of the Cabinet, and to have insisted
upon a distinct, positive, and truthful statement from the
noble lord of all his transactions connected with this odious
and iniquitous appointment. And if he told the whole
truth, to-morrow's sun would set upon a broken-up Cabinet
and a disorganised Ministry. (Great laughter.) He ap-
pealed to the financial reformers opposite whether he had
not already made out a case to justify the appointment of
a select committee, (Hear, hear.) He next came to the
appointment of an accountant to the commission, which
was in violation of the law, as there was no authority in
the Act of Parliment for such an appointment. If what
he suspected was true, that appointment was a gross job.
Now, who did the house suppose had got this appointment P
When he mentioned the name of Mr G. Goodenough
Hayter, the house would see whether it was a gross job or
not. This was not the lion, member for Wells, but he was
told he was his nephew. Then there were the financial
clerks, of whom the public would have known nothing had
not he (Mr Ferrand) made a violent speech on the 20th of
February, and made the Government give the returns. The
Brat clerk was T. W. Erie, who, he supposed, was the son
of Peter. (Laughter.) Then he came to another office,
constituted in violation of law, that of the record keeper,
with a salary of £320 a year, His name was Mr E. A
Groville. They told him (Mr. Ferrand) he was a
Whig. (Laughter.) Then came eleven second-class
clerks, nine third-class (twenty-eight in all), two-thirds of
the appointments gross jobs. The expenses of the board in
1864 amounted to £18,243, although the Government had
pledged themselves that it should not exceed £5,000 or
£6,000, and to be reduced in four years to £1,200, of which
Bum £7,560 was for the appointment under the Whig patron •
age of the First Lord of the Treasury. The cost of the three
additional job-inspectors had cost the tax-payers since 1855
118,1300, or £3,000 annually, for their salaries. The ex-
penses of the present board amounted already to £181,224;
the expenses of the commissioners before the board
amounted to 4315,609, besides the printing, or a total sum
of £496,514. al
—'"O on the 22d of October, 1853, the board
wss appointed. 1n1854 the expenses amounted to £9,416,
being nearly double the amount the Government had
pledged themselves should be the cost to the taxpayers.
In 1855 the ex
thpen reeses araounted to £10,833, including the
salaries of the commissioners. In 1856 three addi.
were £l4 al inspec
291 tors
and in 1861, were appoas e
im
bed.
had already told the house,
In 1857 the expenses
~
£18,250. The inspectors were to be the working power of
the board. They were to go throngb the country, to visit
.t the
in
which
different charities, to bring justice to the public in every
part of England and Wales, and they had
ore art to
they hadappeared
their first annualreport,
distributed
15,000 circulars
previous to the 31st December, and there had been 30 or 40
in which assistance and advice had been asked, but there
was no statement that an inspector had visited one. In
1855 there were 1,100 special applications, of which the
inspectors had investigated about 800. In 1857 they laid
their fourth annual report on the table, and in it the inspes.
tors reported that they had proceeded with their labours in
various charities. Up to 1863 even the names of the in-
spectors had not been mentioned, but in that year, after he
had given notice of his intention to bring the conduct of
the commission before the house, they said the inspectors
had been actively engaged in inspecting several charities,
particularly in the metropolis. Now, ho had taken pains to
ascertain what the charity inspectors had been doing, and
had got there an account of the travelling expenses of
Thomas Hate Skirrow, T. 0. Martin, Symond-,, and Bono,.
The money allowed to Mr Hare for travelling throughout
the country to carry justice where it was required was £7l,
or a weekly average of £1 78 6d. The next was Mr Skir-
row, who he believed remained at the Charity Board, and
was the most active and useful man among them. His
expenses were £6O 121, or £1 3s 6d weekly. Now ho came
to T. 0. Martin, whose appointment he was told was a
grafts job ; and he believed it was so, too. He would not,
however, give the evidence he had in his possession, lest
he should defeat the ends of justice. (A laugh.) His ex-
penses were £1 166, 8d weekly, or about £9B per annum.
In 1856 this man's travelling expenses..-1 man who was
absolutely necessary to carry on the administration of the
law—amounted to £22 63. In the following year they were