The Sun.
London, England, 1830-06-15 00:00:00

new items in the estimate of this year. The first
was a pension to the late Governor of 500/. a-year;
and the other a charge to the same amount for the
arrears -of that salary. He wanted to know what
those arrears were.
Sir G. MURRAY said, that this pension had
been assigned on a fund which had since been un-
productive. That fund was the quit rents of the
colony, which had not been paid up, and the pen-
sion, therefore, bad been charged in the estimates.
Mr. ROBINSON thought that this case pro-
ceeded upon quite a new principle.
Sir G. MURRAY said the salary of the Gover-
nor had formerly been small—only 8001. a-year. It
was now increased ; but the former Governor had
been pensioned off before the increase, and after a
service of 10 years in the colony.
Mr. HUME was of opinion that the Government
ought to giVe some account of these quit rents, and
why they were not paid.
Mr. W. HORTON said they could not be paid
in the present state of the colony.
Mr. HUME thought the whole system was a
farce, and the Government which had assigned a
pension on such a fund ought to pay the arrears out
of their own pockets.—(llear, hear.)—Let them
take the island, and make what they could of it; he
made them a present of it, provided they took the
charges with it.—(Hear.)
Mr. W. HORTON repeated, that in giving the
colony a population, Parliament would give them the
means of bearing the expences of their own Govern-

merit.
Mr. THUMB trusted that the Committee would
reject this pension, as it had rejected those of two
sons of Ministers.
Mr. MABERLY remarked, that the strongest
part of the case was that the revenue of the colony
was 10,0001., and its expences were only 4,0001.—
There was, therefore, a surplus revenue of 6,0001.,
which might bear the expences, but which he found
thus marked—" Surplus Revenue to be applied in
the erection of public buildings, of which there are
none of any description." He hoped that with such
an income and expenditure, the Right Hon. Gentle-
man would pledge himself that Parliament should
not be called on in future for any grant for this

colony.
Mr. STANLEY expressed a similar wish.
Mr. W. HORTON said, the revenue was under
the direction of the province, and was not subject to
the controul of the Government at home.
Sir R. PEEL observed that the general rule
was, that civil Governors should have no retiring
allowances. But there might be cases in which the
state of the colony rendered it advisable that the
Governor should withdraw from the colony without
any blaMe being imputable to him, and he could
hardly be called on to retire without a pension being
conferred on him. That was the case with the
Governor here referred to, who was the brother of
Sir Sidney Smith, and who had been in the office
ten years.
Mr. STANLEY asked whether he could not
have been placed in some other colony ?
Sir R. PEEL said, that it could hardly be done
when at the time of his retirement he was betas een
60 and 65 years of age.
I ord HO WICK objected that the pension had
been granted without the knowledge of the House,
and contended that it ought to have been returned
to them like other superannuations.
Mr. TRANT should support the resolution.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY—This case seems to s!iow
that there is a secret power existing somewhere to
charge every thing on the quit-rents co-extensive
with their amount. This incidental discussion will
probably throw some light on the matter. It can
be better examined in this way than by long set
speeches ; for it will give us the opportunity of
examining into the proverbial corruption of the
Colonial Administration, and show us the cause
of that fondness with which the Government
adheres to the Colonies. We ought to know, Sir,
why the Colonial system, after all that has been said
about it, is thus pursued. We ought to he in-
formed what is the amount of these quit-rents. But,
above all, we have a right to know who has had the
audacity to deal with these quit-rents without the
assent of Parliament. These quit-rents are public
money. They are as much public money as the
revenue of the Crown Lands, arid ought in the same
way to be accounted for. But then it is said that
there is nothing public in this Colony, for that there
is no population ni it. Indeed! There are all the
elements of an expensive government—there is a
Governor with a salary of 1,5001. a year—There is
a Chief Justice with 1,0001. a year. Surely there
can be no need of administering justice where there
are no people to require it. But then there is
another officer, whose existence announces a high
state of refinement in society—l mean the At-
torney-General.—(A laugh.)—Why, if there are
no people, there can be no libels—(Hear, bear, and
laughter)—and who can want an Attorney-General
if there are no libels ?—(Loud laughter.)—l say,
Sir, from these facts, it seems clear that in this
colony there is every thing to constitute a colony
but the people.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. W. HORTON said it had always been the
custom, at least for the last twenty years, for the
Crown to take certain revenues in the Colonies, and
apply them in this manner.
Mr. STANLEY denied the right of the Minister
of the Crown to do ths.
Mr. MABERLY said that no explanation had
been given of the fact to which be had adverted—
namely, of the existence of a surplus revenue unac-
counted for. He thought the colony could bear its
own expences, and be should propose to reduce the
vote to 201.; and would move to take it away alto-
gether, but that the forms of the House did not
permit him to do so. In his opinion no person in
that House could go to his constituents and tell them
he had done his duty, if he did not vote for this
reduction.
Sir G. MURRAY said, that in 1826, the re-
venues of the colony were estimated at 9,6941; and
in 1828, they were estimated at 6,676/., so that the
revenues had been greatly overrated.
Mr. MABERLY said that the point was not sa-
tisfactorily made out to him, and he should, there-
fore, move that the vote be reduced by 3,8001.
Sir R. PEEL said, that his Right Hon. Friend
proposed that there should be in all future years a
Colonial Budget; if the practice that prevailed was
a wrong one, at all events it had prevailed for many
years, and what more could his Right Hon. Friend
say than that he would do all he could in future to
set the thing on a right footing ?
Mr. MABERLY only wanted a full explanation
on the subject, and he would be satisfied. Why
could not the same pledge be given on this as on
other votes ?
Sir G. MURRAY said, that there must be some
mistake either on his part or on that of the Hon.
Member; he undelstood that he had already given
that pledge.
Mr. BROUGHAM did not see distinctly the
state of the fact on which this pension had been
granted ; the power of that House to deal indirectly
with those funds undoubtedly existed, but they
could not do that without communication with the
colony ; and he understood the Right Hon. Geniis-
man to pledge himself to afford all such particulars.
The defence for this pension was rested on its being
charged on the quit rents; but lie wished to know
what was the state of that fund at that time. Was
it a real fund or was it only ideal ? The best way
of settling that was to state what that fund yielded
for the two years before the pension was granted ;
if it yielded 5001. at that time the pension was well
and good ; but if, as he suspected, it turned out
that it was not producing 500 farthings, what right
had the Crown, in this round-about way, to grant a
pension which must ultimately be paid by the people
I of this country ?
Mr. WILMOT HORTON would give the best
answer he could, but was not responsible for the
pension. As far as he could remember, he was able
to say that the fund was a producing fund, but if he
were asked whether there was at that time a surplus
for the payment of the 5001. he answered unequivo-
cally, not ; but at the same time he as unequivo-