The Sun.
London, England, 1837-12-16 00:00:00

NEW HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT.

Mr. STANLEY brought up the report of the Commis.
sicners on the new Houses of Parliament.
POST-OFFICE.

Mr. HAWES asked if it were the intention of the Go-
vernment to turn their attention to the recommendation of the
Commissioners of the Post-office inquiry in their Ninth Report,
relating to the reduction of the postage, and also as to allow-
ing the use of penny stamps. The subject was one of deep
interest to the metropolitan interests generally.—( Hear.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
was not prepared to go to the full extent of the Ninth Report
of the Commissioners, but some of their suggestions he was
about to try. He was about to make an experiment of how far
the stamp covers would convenience the public, and some doubts
which he himself entertained as to the expediency of adoptieg
them would he decided by it. With respect to the reduction
of the fourpenny postage, ho proposed, under the provisions of
an Act passed last session, to try the effect of reducing it one-
half ; but for the present ha intended to confine the experiment
to the metropolitan districts. This would be a satisfactory
means of proving how far the reduction of the postage might
benefit the public, and in how great a degree it would affect
the revenue. The reduction could be effected under the
provisions of an Act, passed last Session, without its
being necessary to apply to Parliament on the subject.
Sir SAMUEL WHALLEY did not clearly understand
the plan of the Right Hon. Gentleman.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, who
bad spoken throughout with his back to the Reporters'
Ge.llery. made some rep!y which was quite inaudible.
Sir R. PEEL hoped the Right Hon. Gentleman would re-
peat the outline of his stet!ment for the benefit of his (Sir
R. Peel's) side of the House, as they bad not heard one single
nor-i of it.—( Loud cries of " Hear, hear.") An experiment
was about to be tried of introducing stamp covers in the two-
p7nny post di;tyLit.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Yes.
Sie ROBERT PEEL—And with respect to the General
Post, he unders'ood the Right ilon. Gentleman to say, th!t
ha was about to try the ell-perioient of a two-penny postage
within limited distances.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—AI-
though the question was one of public interest, one naturally
tureed to the person who asked it, but he certainly had no in-
tention of giving the matter the appearance of a private con-
versation, or of concealing- anything ho had to state from the
other side of the House. The answer he had made to the lion.
Gent. was that he should adopt the recommendation of the
Post-offiee Commissioners within the metropolitan district, by
trying the experiment of s:arnp covers within the limits of the
Twopenny and Thi cepenny Post. It was raid that people
did not like sending their letters to be post-paid; but if they
were enabled to buy stamp covers they would no doubt
Fend letters in that method to a much greater extent. That
he was resolved to try with respect to the second point. Ile
had stated that S 3 much observation had been made on the
s&ject of the effect which a reduction of the rate of postage
;vould have i❑ increasing the revenue, that he had turned his
attention to it, and intended to try the experiment
more extensively' than could be dune by confining it within
the limits of the Twopenny post.—(Her, hear.) Within
shell distances all over England the charge for letters was 4d.,
and that was a heavy charge on the poorer classes. The
amount of revenue derived from that charge was defined. It
was within that distance that they proposed to make the ex-
periment : he proposed to reduce the 4d. postage, not only
in tho metropolitan district but through out the empire, from
V, to 2d..--keeping an exact account of the amount received
the number of letters carved at 4d., and the amount re-
ceived and the number of letters carried at the reduced postage
of 21. He should lay the result of that enquiry on the table
of the House, and it would then be seen, as far as the
experiment went how far a large reduction of the amount of
postage would or would not increase the revenue, and the
question, so far as that went, would be clearly set at rest.
Sr ROBERT PEEL wished to know whether it was
possible to combine the reduction of the rate of postage with
the other branch. Ile meant whether, in reducing the rate of
postage throughout the United Kingdom, it would not be
possible to unite the experiment of stamped covers. Would
it not be possible, he asked, to combine with the reduction of
postage an experiment with respect to the General-post, of
stamped covers also ?

Baronet opposite. With this explanation he would leave the
matter in the hands of the House.
Sir GEORGE SINCLAIR said that if the House would
come to an understanding that it should not come on after 10
or 11 o'clock, he would not press his motion then.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY trusted the Hon. Baronet ( Sir
George Sinclair) would persevere with his motion, because he
thought this was the first time an experiment of this sort had
ever been .made with reference to an individual Member.
—( Hear, hear, hear.) As to how far the Hon. Baronet might
contemplate the addition of many names, and many reasons
in support of these names was not a subject into which he was
invited to enter, but he did not think it becoming or fair to
allow the name of a Member of that House to stand ie the
votes for many days together, leaving it as a matter of
conjecture and of all sorts of whispers, without some
declaration being made on the subject.—( Hear, bear.)
He was asked by almost every Gentleman who entered the
House, whether he was to be on the Committee or not ?
( Hear, hear.) Why, if the general impression of the country was
true, that every Member who was on a Committe was well paid
for being on the Committee, it might be a matter of anxiety to
him or others that they should be there; but as it was a place of no
profit, but of singular trial to those who were anxious to do
their duty, he, for one, if he was anxious to consult his
own personal convenience and personal engagements, should
be well pleased to be excused. He thought, however, it was
due to him that the Chancellor of the Exchequer should
say whether he was to be on the Committee or not.
Yes or no.---( Hear, hear.) Whether he intended to put on
the list the individual with whom this inquiry originated.
—( Cheers.) The Right Hon. Gentleman (the Chancellor
of the Exchequer) could not impute to him that he was
pressing him with any indelicate inquiry. If there was
any foundation for the imputation of acting with inde-
licacy to any individual, that imputation ought to originate
with himself, because the Right lion. Gentleman was the first
individual who ever took out of the hands of a Member of
that House a subject with which he had been labour-
ing- for a great part of his life through " good report
and through evil report," making it the subject of a
wonted boast that he could not frame the resolution in better
words than he found it, and leaving it as a matter of town
talk, of Cabinet conjecture, and of all sorts of intimations,
whether he was or was not to be on the Committee. He was ask-
ing no favour of the Government.—( Cheers.) Ile had no de-
' sire to be on the Committee; and lie wished to relieve the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer from all apprehensions on the subject
by stating that if he was not prepared to say at once whether
he (Mr. H.) was or was not to be on the Committee, he
would not serve at all.—( Cheers.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
question would come on at a fit and proper time.—( Hear,
hear.) There was a notice on the Order Book for a
discussion, and he would be ready to give a definitive
answer at the fitting time ; but if he was to be called
upon categorically to answer questions, he would not do it.—
( Hear, hear.) With respect to the other motion, all he had
to say was that it would be so inconvenient to enter into it
then, that he would adhere to what was the just and
legitimate course of Parliamentary proceeding. He was
ready to speak to the question he had moved, but would
not be led into a premature discussion.—( Hear, hear.)
If no notice had been given, there would then be some legi-
timate reason for the Hon. Member putting such a question
to him. As, however, he thought proper to take that course,
he would reserve himself for the discussion which was to take
place upon it.
Several Hon. Members cried out " Divide, divide," but
Sir GEORGE SINCLAIR said that as he was certain the
debate on the Pension List would not come on before ten
o'clock, he would not divide the House.
The amendment was then negatived without a division.
DUCHIES OF CORNWALL AND LANCASTER.
On the Order of the Day, for going into Committee on the
Civil List, being read—
Mr. HARVEY said that the present vies not only the most
appropriate, but the only time at which the subject of which
he had given notice could be usefully brought under the
consideration of the House. It was that the Committee
into which the House was about to resolve itself should make
adequate provision for the appropriation of the revenues aris •
ing out of the Duchies of Cornwall and Lancaster for the
benefit of the public. He owned he was much surprised
that this important question had not been brought for-
ward under the immediate sanction of her Majesty's
Government because, disposed as he was, to make every al-
lowance for those heated expressions which, in the eagerness
of party conflict, dropped from those Gentlemen who com-
posed the Orposition of the day, yet he could not banish
from his mind the solemn declaration which had proceeded
from that side of the House with respect to this
question ; a declaration which, he believed, to speak
their real sentiments. It would be in the recollection of many
Hon. Members whom he was now addressing that when the last
Civil List was brought under the notice of that House under
the Administration of the Duke, of Wellington and the Right
Hon. Baronet ( Sir R. Peel), the most distinguiseed
person in the ranks of the Op7osition, not the Leader,
but one of the most able men amongst them, and
the more able because of his legal pretensions,
declared not only that the terms of his Majesty's Speech
implied the surrender of these revenues to tile public, but
that he considered such surrender ought in justice to
be made. It would be in the recollection of the
House that when that Government was borne down
in consequence of the course which it thought fit to pursue
with respect to the Civil Li;t, a Noble Lord who since be-
came Chancellor of the Exchequer, expressed his per-
feet concurrence in the propriety of that surrender, and
at the same tisie declare] to the Government with
which he had so very recently become connected, was
only deterred from making the revenues of the Duchies of
Cornwall and Lancaster a branch of those about to he surren-
dered by a communication from their Royal M :star, that such
was not his intention. His object in bringing this motion be-
fore the Hote.e was, to test not only the ity of Hon.
Gentlemen opposite, but of the Noble Lerd and those who
acted with him, and who were now unfettered by any intima-
tion frora the Throne of a similar minim. lie was anxious to
test the sincerity of those who called themselves Reformers.
Those Members who took the trouble to look over the rolls of
that House, would find that within the last quarter of a century
the question of these Duchies being public property had
frequently been brought before the Parliament. Attempts had
bear made to make these Duchies public property ; sonic met
the question with a direct negative., and many others had put
the question off from time to time in consequence of
the inaptitude of the period at wi ich it was brought fora d—
ell of that way of thiaking said, you cannot do anything
with this until the demise of the Crown. Th-A thane
had now arrived--they must either enter upon the question
then, or according to all human views none of those whom he
then addressed would ever have another opportunity of
doing so.—( Hear, hear.) The Civil List which they
were about to close was to be a fied grant for a life,
which, according to all human probability, would survive any
of those who were then present. There was, therefore, no
resting place for those who loved temporising—there was now
no ground upon which they could make a stand.—( Hear.)
Unless they then threw the shield of Parliament over the funds
of these Duchies, there would be an end to the hopes of all
advantage to the public during the present generation. The
hour had arrived, and that was the time when the question was
to be tried. He had the greatest authority for saying that
these flinds were public property—the authority of an indivi-
dual to whose judgment the members of the Government must
pay respect, inasmuch as they had raised him to the highest
judicial authority, certainly for his standing in that House,
but of course and most undoubtedly for his knowledge of the
law—he meant Lord Brougham, who, only seven days before
he took the Woolsack, declared these revenues to be public
property ; that opinion was concurred in by the then Chancel-
lor of the Exchequer (Lord Althorp), who did not revolt at
the nature of the claim, but who at an after period, said he
hid deferred his own opinion to that of his Royal Master.
It was important that this question should assume something
of an every day character, something that the people could
understand. It was the duty of the House to tell the people
what the real nature of the property was which the Crown
possessed. There had been lately laid on the table of the
House the report of the Civil List Committee, and he could
not but own that he was a little surprised at the meagre
character of it.--( Hear, hear, hear, and cheers.) He
should like to bo informed whether the revenues of the
Duchies of Cornwall and Lancaster in any way or mariner
engaged their attention. Now what was the purport of the
appointment of that Committee ? It was for the ample sup-
port of the dignity, splendour, and comfort of the Crown ;
and that provision, which had been made by that Committee,
the House was invited to embody into a law. Now, he wished
to know whether they were to understand that in part of the
385,0001., which was to be appropriated to this object, it was
considered that the revenues arising from these Duchies were
essential to the attainment of this object ?—( Cheers.) On
the contrary, was it not the fact that the provision
which had been made was abundant, and more
than abundant, for all the objects for the main-
tenance of the dignity, splendour, and comfort of the
Crown. In his opinion, the Committee had revelled in the
riot of royalty—( Laughter ;)--they had not only acceded to
all that her Majesty's Royal predecessor had received—they
had even gone farther than that—they had rieinded a
sum which they had thrown in without any occasion
whatever as a make-weight. In order to make the sum equal,
they had actually exceeded the income of the late King by a
sum of 8,000/. They had done more ; it appeared by the Re-
port that the expenditure of the late King, bearing in mind the
different adjuncts—( Laughter)—by which he was surrounded,
and from which her present Majesty was free, had been exceeded
by a sum something like 15,0001. or 16,0001. In addition to
this he would ask, was her Majesty to be in the possession of
the uncoutrouled revenues, exaggerated if they pleased
by the public statements that had gone forth, but at
any rate excessively great, which arose from those
two sources. If the statement which he made was an
over-statement, there were those present who could bring
it within the boundaries of truth. He believed that he
was not exaggerating, when he stated that from those
two sources, a sum little short of 50,000/. found its
way into the secret coffers of the Crown.—( Hear, hear.)
Let those gentlemen who came into the House under the de-
nomination of Reformers, see to a salutary reform. Those
gentlemen who, when on the other side of the House and at
the hustings were so scrutinizing as that nothing could es-
cape their opposition—let them say that in addition to a
Privy Purse of 60,0001.—in addition to 10,000/. or 12,0001. ex-
pressly for the purposes of charity—in addition to an approved
accession between the receipt and expenditure of the money
that was allotted to her predecessor—an addition of 8,0001.
actually thrown into the grant for the purpose of making the
grant a round sum—in addition to all those, was the House
still further to say that those revenues, amounting, as he Lad
stated, and as he believed, one year with another, to no-
thing short of 50,0001.—was that also to bo thrown

•
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
the answer he would give was one which the Right Hon.
Gentleman would probably anticipate—they would try the ex-
periment first on the shorter distances. If they succeeded
there would be no difficulty in applying it to more remote
distances, but they ought to be certain that it would succeed
before they went to any greater extent. He did not wish to
speak disparagingly, b❑t he was not very sanguine as to its
success. The experience of a few months would, however,
determine that.

Mr. HALL hoped that as the experiment was about to be
made, those parties who resided in the 3d district would he
reduced to 2d. For instance, he hoped that those parsons
who resided in Regent's-park would no more be charged more
for letters than those residing at Windsor.
Mr. M. PHILIPS enquired whether it wai intended to re-
duce the postage generally throughout the country—more es-
pecially in large towns?
The CHANCELLOR ofthe EXCHEQUER had already
stated that he intended to try the experiment in all places in
the empire where a 4d. postage was now taken.
In answer to Mr. CLAY, the Right Hon. Gentleman said,
it was intended to sell the stamped covers at twopence.

BODMIN ELECTION.
On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the E XCHEj
QUER, the petitioners against the return for Bodmin ob-
tained an extension of the time to complete their recognizances
required by the regulation of the House to the 23d December.

CIVIL LIST.
On the motion that the Order of the Day for the House
going into Committee on the Civil List--
Sir GEORGE SINCLAIR said that he would take
that opportnnity of putting a question to the Right Hon.
Gentleman opposite. He wished to know whether it was
his intention to bring forward to-night the subject of the ap-
pointment of the Committee on the Pension List, and whether
he intended to move that the Honourable Member for South-
wark should form one of that Committee. He also wished to
know at what hour the Right Hon. Gentleman would be likely
to bring it on.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said,
that if the Honourable Gentleman had remained in
the House last night, he would have heard from him the
course he intended to adopt. He stated the first question
would be the Civil List ; the next the increase of income to
her Royal Highness the Duchess of Kent; and that if, after
that, there was time sufficient, be should bring forward the
subject of the formation of the Committee with respect to
pensions. Until he saw at what hour the discussion in the
two first subjects terminated, he should reserve giving any
decided answer to the Hon. Baronet.
Sir GEORGE SINCLAIR said that such being the case,
he felt it his duty to move as an amendment, that the Order of
the Day for the nomination of the Committee on the Pension
List should be now read.

The SPEAKER having put the original question and the
amendment,
The CHANCELLORofthe EXCHEQUERobservedthat
according to the regulations that had been entered into by the
House, he believed it had been settled that Government on
Fridays were to bring forward that species of business
which they thought most proper and pressing, and he
was of opinion that it was far more expedient to bring on the
Civil List of her Majesty than the amendment of the Hon.

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY, DECEMBER 16, 1837.

into the vat of the Monarch, either to be expended or to be
treasured up just as her Majesty should think fit ? If it was
to be so, let it be so understood ; but let the public hear no
more of the pernicious influence of 10,000/. of secret service
money—let the public hear no more of property which was
to be at the disposal of the Crown, but of which Parlia-
ment was to have no cognizance.—( Hear, hear.) If those
extravagant sums which, under an improved system, might
probably produce double the amount—if they were to be the
sport of Courts—if they were to be hoarded up or expended as ex-
travagances might suggest, let that be understood. Then he was
to be told that his fears were groundless, because it was the
intention of Government to institute an inquiry into those reve-
nues, and to place them upon a footing that would give Par-
liament a cognizance of their application. Why that was of little
value. If there was to be an inquiry into those revenues, with
a view to their improvement, but at the same time the improved
benefit was to be placed at the irresponsible disposal of the
Monarch for the time being, it might be very gratifying to
that illustrious individual to participate in the benefits
resulting in that inquiry, but so far as regarded the public, the
benefit would be none at all.—( Hear, hear, hear.) But it
was the more important that the House should ex-
tend its willing and ready superintendence of this property
with a view to make it available to the public, because it must be
held as a probable contingency—at all events not an improbable
one, that in the course of two or three years they would be called
upon to take off their hats to hear a Royal Message read asking
the House to make a provision for a happy circumstance
that had arisen, which was to preserve the uninterrupted suc-
cession of the House of Hanover to the British Crown—
( Hear, hear, and laughter)—and that they would be in-
vited to grant some 50,000/. or 100,000/. for an
heir-apparent to our Crown. —( Renewed laughter.)
This property was the proper provision for the Prince of
Wales, when there was one. But if her Majesty ought to
possess this 50,000/. per annum as part of her annual income,
in what way was the deficiency to be made up, when the Royal
being to whom he had adverted made his appearance and
claimed this money? If it was to be considered as essential to the
comfort, the dignity, and the splendour of the Sovereign, how
was the deficiency to be supplied but by some other grant ? On
every ground, therefore, this property ought to be protected
from misapplication. One could not help smiling at the at-
tempts which had been practised upon the credulity of Par-
liament on this subject.—( Loud cheering.) In the year
1830, it was " a matter of deep regret" that the Civil
List Committee was debarred from entering into this desir-
able inquiry, by being restrained from calling for persons,
papers, and records. The inconvenience arising from this
want of proper power in the Committee, was owing to the in-
experience of a Government who had for a quarter of a century
been looking for power, but had not then been seven days warm
in their seats—( Laughter)—and for whom, therefore, some
excuse might be made. But the authors of that Committee
were the framers of the present one ; yet they came to this
House with the old lamentation, that they could not enter
into this inquiry, to which they were prompted alike
by inclination and by duty, because the Committee was
not empowered to send for persons, papers, and records.
And why not ? Who had stopped them ? Why when they
had framed the words of the appointment did they not intro-
duce " and that the Committee have power to send for
persons, papers, and records ?" One consequence was, that
they had another meagre production—and they would have the
same extravagance and the same amount as the former reigns.
And then they were told that the grants to former Monarchs
were the same, and that they had added nothing more than
was found on the list. What was the constant course taken
by Honourable Gentlemen in opposition ? Were they not con-
stantly talking of the great extravagance of the Civil List,
and did they not say that it required a strict investigation?
—( Hear.) Did Hon. Gentlemen suppose that no attention
had been paid to these statements? Did they suppose
that the memory of those was so fragile that there was
no recollection of what they had said ? Could Honourable
Gentlemen call to their recollection, either by having
been in the House, or by having read the debates which took
place in the year 1816, when the Civil List of the Prince
Regent was established ? Could they forget the cutting
sarcasm of George Tierney to the then Lord Castlereagh,
about the ridiculous Chamberlain, Lord High Steward, and
Knights and Women of the Stole ?—( A laugh.) Had he not
held all these up to ridicule; and what was the answer of
Lord Castlereagh at that time? " True, they were extrava-
gant; but look at the high prices of everything, and the ne-
cessity that existed of adapting the establishment of the Royal
Household to the extravagance of the time." Why, if in 1816
it was necessary to do that in consequence of the high prices,
was not that a reason, when they were surrounded by every kind
of economical reform and competition, with its consequences,
that therefore they ought to look into the matter with a view
to its reduction. Besides, let them look at the improved
lights that had been shed on the Government of late.
Had they not Commissioners travelling throughout the
country making experiments upon the gastric organs of men,
and ascertaining what quantity (by refined and generous
experiments on their conditions and appetites) was necessary
to support a strong-armed, healthy, and rural labourer? And
now that it had been proclaimed that the giant strength and
muscular frame, and six feet of elevation of the labourer was
to be sustained at 6s. per week, was such a standard of eco-
nomy to be applied to the lower classes of the commenity, and
yet that the Committee should run riot and take no heed of
those things in 1837, which formed the subject of severe
and well-merited ridicule in 181G?—or wes it to go forth
to the world that these statements were merely made in
mockery of party conflict, and that when these things
were pressed upon the attention of their opponents they
had shrunk from the economy they bad so loudly de-
claimed about ?—( Hear.) Whoever looked through the
present Civil List would find not only that there was
no change for the better, but a considerable change for the
worse. Let it not go forth to the world that they
had produced a Civil List for the support of her Majesty
which was less than that of her Royal Uncle. It ought to
be borne in mind, although it had not been previously stated,
and at all events it had not prominently been put forth that
his Majesty stood in very different circumstances, and was
surrounded by claimants on his parental attention which
did not belong . to the present illustrious individual.
And why should there have been any delicacy in the iiivestiga-
tion? In the former Report it was stated they felt disinclined
to enter into any of the expenses of the Royal Household,
because it was considered as extremely unpleasant to the
feelings of the Royal Individual who filled the Throne ;
and because it was said it was well known that the individuals
who composed at the time what might be considered the royal
or domestic household, were familiar to it—that the Royal in-
dividual had been an inmate of the palace for years himself; he
could not pace its floors, nor walk its anti-chambers, ncr
cross its parks, but what he saw some ancient and faithful at-
tendant of his Royal Father cr Mother, with whom lie from
his childhood had been familiar, and whose removal or dimi-
nished income would be a matt-r of anxiety to him. Not so
with her Majesty the Queen ; she could have no sympathies of
this sort, and he was satisfied that the first feeling of her
heart must have been to have these establishments put on that
correct foundation which would be justified by inquiry. In-
stead of that, this Committee, which had been shut up with
closed doors for six or seven days, occasionally soothing its
monotonous labours by a fruitless division, came to that House
and proposed a grant even greater than that of William IV.
because though it was important the public should not be
misled by contrasted figures, at the same time they were
not apprised of the circumstances which created that
difference. It was very true that the amount pro-
posed to be granted to the Queen wits less than the
sum that was proposed to be granted to her Royal
predecessor ; yet, in point of fact, it was greater, because the
emit to the King embraced 50,000/. a-year to the Queen.
That, of course, was disposed of in another way—that was
the country got 50,0001. by having no Queen Consort, and
it lost 50,0001. more by having a Queen Dowager.—
(Hear, hear, hear.) Then there was 55,000/. taken from
the Royal Grant, inasmuch, as there was nothing to be
allotted to Pensions, but when Hon. Members looked at the
two sums, taking the 50,0001. given to her late Majesty, and
the 75,000/. with which the Pension List was charged,
they would find the sum actually now proposed to
be voted to her Majesty, was 20,0001. more than it was
to her Royal predecessor.—( Hear, hear, hear.) Now he
was well aware that he was talking to the wind.—(Hear, hear,
and laughter.) He was as satisfied as he was of his own
being, that if the Chancellor of the Exchequer had come
down to the House and said that he was about to
move, in obedience to the Royal Message, in conse-
quence of what appeared to be the nearer proximity of the
Duchess of Kent to the Throne, a proposition which they
were gratified to find they were enabled to do in the exuberance
of their feelings—feelings in which that House and the country
largely participated, by having them moderated by a previous
standard—if they were to look to the sentiments of
affectionate regard for the Duchess that existed in
the country, they hardly knew where would be the limit to the
propositions, but inasmuch as they found there had been a
100,0001. a year granted to the widow of the late King,
they could not for a moment doubt the House would
think that if the widow of a King ought to have
100,0001, the mother of a Queen ought at least to have the
same, and he had no more doubt than he had of his own
existence, that that proposition would have been received
with precisely the same acclamations as the proposition of the
30,000/. was, with this difference, that Gentlemen would have
been still louder in their condemnation of the conduct pursued
by her Majesty's Ministers in not telling them in good time
they meant to propose 100,000/., so that they might have been
there with their proud presence to congratulate the Duchess on
that liberal, but not too bountiful, supply.—( Loud cheers.)
As regarded the grant of 30,000/. a-year to the Duchess of
Kent, he was ready to admit that it was moderate. Ile could
not see if a grant of 100,000/. a-year and two palaces, one of
which took 23,000/. to put into order, why the mother of
the Queen, who was now placed in a degree of increased state,
for she reflected a portion of the dignity of the Crown,
should not obtain a grant of 30,000/. a year, while so large a
grant as that of 100,0001. a year was made to the Queen
Dowager. Ile did not think, however, that this grant to the
Duchess of Kent was made in a becoming or generous
way. The Honourable Member then referred to the
. Act passed in 1831 for the grant of 10,0001., and proceeded
to say, that it did not bear the interpretation put upon it by
the Law Officers of the Crown. It was due to the public
to know exactly how the matter stood.—( Hear, hear.) Three
different grants had already been made to the Duchess of Kent,
and they were called on to-night to give a fourth. The first
grant was made upon her marriage to the late Duke. The
Parliament of that day, who were not economists or reformers,
sat down to consider what would be an adequate provision in
the event of the Duchess becoming a widow, and determined
that the sum of 6,000/. was sufficient. Were they now to turn
round and say that when the event took place that sum
was too little? In process of time the Duchess had a child,
and 6,000/. a year more was granted for her maintenance and
education. When that child became an adult, and succeeded

1 to the Throne, ought not that allowance, in common sense, to i
cease? Then it was that 10,000/. further was granted to the
Duchess, 4.0001. of which was to be for the Duchess as
long as she lived, and 6,0001. as long as the Princess should
lire; and the lawyers said that by that Act the Duchess
was entitled to the 6,0001., as long as the Princess lives,
and that, therefore, she might sell it, though she might die.
If any person would take the trouble to look at the Act, they
would at once find that that was not only a most overstrained
construction of the Act, but one entirely at variance with
its provisions, for the Act said that the receipt of the Duchess
was to be a full discharge. Now, how could the receipt
of the Duchess be given by _her when she was dead ?
--(Hear.) The real effect of the Act was this, that
the Duchess of Kent should have 4,0001. as long as she lived,
and she was to have the 6,0001. as long as the Princess Vic-
toria was under her care. But in stepped the present
profound lawyers of the Crown saying that the
Duchess of Kent was fully entitled to that amount,
as long as the Princess lived, and they say what is the value
of 6,0001. for such a life ?—( Cheers.) They further said
that in point of fact though the House was giving the Duchess
8,0001., we (the Ministerial Cabinet) are doing something fur
your good. This he was afraid was so fine a reverie as would .
find no harbour in any one but a most fine calculator.
And then allow him to say, for they would never have an op-
portunity of discussing this matter again, same year or two
hence, when a little more distress was prevalent, and when
Royalty was less rampant, they would be reminded—sonic
gentlemen near him—sonic of the ultra-Radicals, would get up
and remind them of the readiness with which they conceded
this grant—they would be taunted with it, and asked why slid
they not say something against it at the time ? They would
answer—well, so we would, but the House was so indi-
gestible at the time, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer so
singularly seductive, that they could not ; but this we will tell '
you, if ever there is another Civil List we will act differently,
and as it is a fair chance that some of us will survive a young
lady of nineteen, only give us credit for our future good inten-
tions.—( Hear, hear.) But he did not mean to act in
that way; and he desired to ask one or two questions
more about this 30,0001. a-year to the Duchess of Kent.
Was the Duchess to have this under all circumstances?
Mr. G ROTE —Yes, yes.
Mr. D. W. HA RVE Y—Yes, yes, he heard I He sup-
posed that lion. Gentlemen would like to have to pay it out
of some of his own paper 1--( Much laughter.) He was asking
the guardians of the British purse, whether it was intended that
this 30,0001. a-year was to be paid to the Duchess of Kent
under all circumstances ? In all public meetings at the
present day it was a general toast to drink the health
of " the Royal Family now in Eeglaed."—( Hear, hear,
and cheers.) It was objected to the King of Hanover that
lie spent in another country the money which he drew from
the pockets of the British people. Might not the Duchess of
Kent cease to. live iu this country ? And was it intended in
that ease to continue the payment of this 30,0001.—( Hear.)
lie would now proceed at once to his motion.—(Cheers.)
The Chancellor of the Exchequer cheered him. Certainly
the Chancellor of the Exchequer might cheer him, for the
Right Hon. Gentleman was himself distinguished by the
straight and direct manner in which he always proceeded to the
question before the House.—(Cheers and laughter.) His
motion was in the terms which appeared upon the ordet a,
" That it be an instruction to the Committee that provision be
made in the Civil List Bill, for the protection of the right of
Parliament to inquire into, and appropriate the revenues of the
Duchy of Lancaster and the Duchy of Cornwall respectively."
Mr. C. BULLER seconded the motion.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
notwithstanding the provocation which the Hon. Member,
with his usual eloquence, bad given, he would not eater
into the details of the Civil List, or the annuity of her
Royal Highness the Duchess of Kent, but would confine himself
to the motion of the Hon. Member. The Hon. Member ap-
peared to suppose the Duchies of Lancaster and Cornwall were
included in the hereditary revenues surrendered by her Majesty
at the opening of the session, for if not, why, the consent
of the Crown was necessary to discuss this question.
The Hon. and Learned Gentleman could not complain of be-
ing taken by surprise with reference to the real meaning of
the Queen's speech. On two distinct occasions he had ex-
pressed that meaning to the House. The Hon. and Learned
Member had referred to the King's speech in 1830, and had
stated that on that occasion a Noble Lord who was then a
great ornament of that House had interpreted the words con-
tained in that speech to mean that the Duchies of Cornwall
and Lancaster were included. It was not for him to state
what was the discussion that took place on that occasion, for it
had no reference to the Queen's address from the throne on
the present occasion. The interpretation put on the speech
of William IV. was expressed in the Civil List Act of Wil-
liam IV., and in that Act those duchies, so far from being
surrendered, were reserved in the full possession of the
Crown. And what did the Message from the Crown say
on the present occasion? It stated that the same here-
ditary revenues which wet e surrendered by William IV.
were surrendered by the -present Queen. Her Majesty
gave up the hereditary revenues which stood surrendered in
the Civil List Act, but this did not include the revenues of
the Duchies of Cornwall and Lancaster, and consequently
they were not in a position to discuss this proposition. Flu
should be sorry, however, if this explanation should have the
effect of taking the Hon. and Learned Member for Southwark
or any other lion. Member by surprise in any respect. He
had stated at the commencement of the Session and during
the progress of the Civil List in the last debate, what the in-
tention of Government was with regard to these ties) Duchies.
The answer he had given was, that it was not intended to
include in the Civil List any arrangement for the surrender
of the Deehies of Cornwall and Lancaster, and what he had
then stated had been made matter of observation on both
sides of the House. Therefore Hon. Gentlemen in the
House, and the people out of it, were perfectly aware of the
nature of the proposition he intended to submit to the House.
He had then stated a matter which had been cheered by many
lion. Members, and he believed by the Hon. and Learned
Member. He then mated the great objections wore applicable
to the present system of mats igement, and to the mystery of
the administration, and he added that it was the intention of
the Government to introduce a Bill or Bills into Parliament
to provide first for a better administration of the property of
the Duchies, and also to provide for rendering annually to
Parliament an account of the Duchies, and that that which
was so long a mystery should be brought specially under the
notice of Parliament, namely, the amount of money received
and receivable, and the system under which the property was
administered.—( Cheers.) To that declaration he entirely
adhered.—( Heer, hear.) There was no gentleman connected
with the Duchies of Cornwall or Lancaster who was not
aware that this was a very complicated subject. It was a very
easy thing to say—put these Duchies under a simpler end
better system of management ; but the operation was attended
v ith great difficulty. As an instance he would take one mat-
ter connected with the Duchy of Cornwall. The question of
the tin duties had been brought under his consideration by va-
r:ous gentlemen coenected either by property or retreseeta-
tion with the Duchy. He hoped most sincerely is the pro-
gress of the session to be able to mske a proposition on this
subject. From the communications which he had had on
both sides, he was perfectly well aware that this was a
very difficult subject to approach, and that, too, with a view
to consult the interests of all. There were, therefore,
many difficulties in the consideration of the present ques-
tion. Lest possibly any Honourable Gentleman should be
taken by surprise, he would on the present occasion state
that it never was the intention of Government, on the
contrary, it was the reverse of their intention, that these re-
venues should be surrendered by the Crown. He would
not follow the Honourable and Learned Member through his
details. The House would recollect that the Duchy of Corn-
wall was held profitably by the Crown only as long as there
was not a Prince of Wales. If there should be a Prince of
Wales, under the law of the land the revenues of the Duchy
of Cornwall became vested in him as Duke of Cornwall. It
was, therefore, not necessary to %ome to Parliament for any
revenue for the support of the Prince of Wales. The revenues
of the Duchy of Cornwall were appropriated for that purpose,
they were accumulated to provide for the wants of the Prince
of Wales, and were applicable, when a Prince was born, to
his maintenance. He would say one word as to the state-
ment regarding the Civil List Committee. He begged the
attention of the House for a moment. The representations
of the Honourable and Learned Member for Southwark were
calculated to mystify the House, and he would, therefore,
beg their attention to the facts. The Honourable and Learned
Member said that the Committee of 1830 had, through the
inexperience of the Government, neglected to clothe them-
selves with power to send for papers, persons, and records.
The Hon. and Learned Gentleman wanted to have it in-
ferred that the Committee expressed deep regret that they
had not been furnished with adequate powers on the occasion;
and yet that the present Government, who were the same
people who moved the former Committee, had fallen into the
same mistake, and that the inquiry, therefore, was defective
and insufficient. Now it was no such thing. The facts were
entirely contrary to the Hon. and Learned Gentleman's recol-
lection of them. Sir Henry Parnell moved for the Com-
mittee—he moved it while in opposition, and he begged the
attention of the Hon. Member for the City of London who
was interested in this subject. On the 12th of November,
1830, Sir Henry Parnell moved that the Committee should
have power to examine the accounts laid before the House,
but that they should not have the power to call witnesses.
Mr. Banks said that he did not wish to have enlarged powers,
but he wished to have full explanation ; and Lord Althorp
said that "it was stated that they could come to no satis-
factory conclusion unless the Committee had leave to send
for papers, persons, and records. Such a permission would,
he knew, be a very great increase of power ; but could no in-
formation be afforded if this power was refused ? He ad-
mitted that a great degree of delicacy ought to he observed
with respect to certain heads of the Civil List. For his own
part he felt no desire to examine closely into them ; on the
contrary, he wished not to have such power." After the Re-
pert of the Committee Lord Althorp stated that the Com-
mittee had not the power to examine witnesses or records, nor
to go into matters inconsistent with the dignity of the Crown ;
but added that questions had been asked of hies (Lord Al-
thorp), and that so far he considered himself responsible. The
Right Hon. Gentleman, in conclusion, urged the House to
confine its attention to the subject immediately before them,
at the same time pledging himself to give his best attention to
these revenues, in order to introduce a better system of ma-
nagement wherever it was practicable.
The SPEAKER repeated what he had before stated, that
without the consent of the Crown, no motion for any inter-
ference in the management of the Duchies could be enter-
tained by the ileuse.—( Hear, bear.)
Mr. C. BULLER then rose to address the House, but
was called to order by Lord Sandon, who submitted that,
after what had fallen from the Chair, the Honourable Mem-
ber could not I“;ci_,.d.--(Ciit's of " Hear, hear, (tear.")
Mr. C. BULLER wished to know how the point of form
could be got over to discuss a great national grievance.—