The Sun.
London, England, 1837-12-20 00:00:00

NATURALIZATION BILLS.

Mr. BERNAL also brought to tho bar twollills of Naturaliza'i
tion which had been passed by the House of Commons, but we
did not distinctly hear the names of the parties.

SLAVE COMPENSATION.

Mr. BERNAL and others from the Commons brought up
the Slave Compensation Bill.
Lord BROUG II ANI would be glad if her Majesty's Go-
vernment would give them some information as to what the
Slave Compensation Act meant.
Viscount DUNCANNON explained that tart of the com-
pensation to the slave-owners was paid in stock, and the re-
mainder in money ; and the object of the Bill was to facilitate
tho payment in money by converting the stock into money.
Lord BROUGHAM complained of the hurried manner in
which legislation was generally carried on at the close of the
Session, by which Noble Lords were prevented from ascer-
taining the nature of the various Bills submitted to them. He
did not, however, mean on the present occasion to offer any
objection to the Bill before the House.
'the Bill was then read a first time, and ordered to be
printed and to be read a second time to-morrow.
Lord BROUGHAM then moved for certain returns con-
nected with the Court of Chancery, which he had moved for
the last day of last Session, and which he wished to extend to
the Ist of December.—Agreed to.
The House then adjourned till to-morrow.

HOUSE OF GOMMONS.—Dge. 19.
(Continued from our First Edition of Yesterday.)

On our return to the gallery we found
Sir R. PEEL on his legs. The object of the present grant
was to enable the Crown to grant pensions annually to the
amount of 1,2001. Supposing there was no demand upon the
Crown for more than 8001. in the course of the year, let there
be no inducement held out to grant more than that sum. Let
the money be only granted in eases of inevitable neces-
sity, and by that means if they granted only 800/. in
one year they would be enabled to grant 1,6001., the
following year. Let the House provide that the sum shall
not exceed 1,200/. per annum, and if the House would accede
to that proposition, perhaps the Right Hon. Gentleman op-
posite would introduce a few words to that effect ; the framer
of the Bill was of course better able to do so than any other
person.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER concurred
in the suggestion of the Right Hon. Baronet, because it was
evident that if any portion of the grant stood over from one
year to another, it would the better enable the Crown to meet
any cases that would present themselves in the following year.
On these grounds he thought the suggestion deserving of sup-
port.
Sir ROBERT INGLIS proposed the introduction of the
words " at the rate of 1,2004 per annum" in the clause,
which would meet the suggestion of the Right Hon. Baronet.
Mr. HUME hoped the Right Hon. Gentleman the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer would not give way to the proposition.
The words of the motion were " not exceeding 1,2001. per
annum." If in any one year there were no meritorious indi-
viduals upon whom the Crown might confer pensions, the
country ought certainly to have the benefit of the saving.
It was unfair if there was a saving in one year that it should
be squandered the next ; and, under these circumstances, he
hoped the Right Hon. Gentleman would adhere to the pro-
position which had been agreed upon in Committee.—( Hear.)
Mr. WAKL EY was surprised to hear his Hon. Friend,
the Member for Kilkoniy, express a hope that the Chancellor
of the Exchequer would not yield to the proposition of the
Right Hon. Baronet. There was no yielding in the case, for
the Right Hon. Gentleman appeared delighted with it. The
most perfect harmony existed between the two sides of the
House upon that question.—( Hear.) It seemed to him that
they were very awkwardly situated on that side of the House.
—(Laughter from the Opposition benches.) It appeared to
him that his ( Mr. Wakley's) friends ought to remove from that
side of the House, and the Right Hon. Baronet and his huge
party go over and take their places.—(Laughter.) The real
opposition in that House appeared to be reduced to 19 or 20,
or 22 Members.—( Hear, hear.) No proposition eame from
the other side of the House that the Right Hon. Gentleman
did not at once accede to, but if he wished to maintain the
Bill in its present share, he hoped he would not consent
to tha alteration in its principle now proposed. The argu-
ment of the Right Hun. Baronet was that if for ten years
there was no expenditure, they would take care that not one
shilling should be saved to the public. Was it not preposter-
ous that a sum of 1,200/ a-year should be added to the al-
ready enormous income of the Crown ? A sum of 385,000/.
was secured by the present Bill ; and now they wanted to
add 1,2001. per annum for the purpose of bribing the literary
and scientific characters of the country. It was nonsensical
and absurd to speak of the Crown as the party which conferred
these Pensions, and the Right lion. Baronet would ere long

enjoy the situation and the patronage which the other party
were now providing for him. The Right Hon. Baronet ex-
pected that he would very shortly have the distribution of that
patronage, and he (Mr. W.) believed that if the Right Hon.
Baronet was in office, he would not have proposed so extravagant
a Bill to that House. The House would then see the danger of
these gentlemen being in office, and retaining so considerable
a share of the patronage of the country. Her Majesty's Mini-
sters were now doing that which the people would not sanc-
tion, if done by the Tories. If such a Bill had been in-
troduced by the Right Hon. Baronet and his party, meetings
would take place all over England, and they would hear no-
thing but the doings of the Tories. Now mischief after mis-
chief is committed, and the poor Radicals are left in a mino-
rity of 22 or 23. He trusted the Speaker would exercise his
authority, and have a few benches drawn across the floor of
the House, for the Radicals were placed in a very awkward
position, sitting, as they were obliged to do, behind those in
whom they had no faith.
Mr. G. F. YOUNG considered the proviso onght to be ex-
punged on economical grounds, for if the money which was
not granted in a year was lost to the Minister, there could be no
doubt, as he could have no difficulty in obtaining persons willing
enough to receive it, the whole 1,200/. would be granted in
every year.

Lor-d JOHN RUSSELL could not see that they would be
imposing any additional burden upon the public, for if the
proviso were allowed to remain in the Bill, it no doubt must act
as an inducement to the Minister to grant the whole sum an-
nually. With respect to what had fallen from the Hon.
Member for Finsbury, he could not allow so great a com-
pliment to pass without acknowledgment.—(A laugh. )
Accordng to that Hon. Member, whatever were the proposi-
tions of the Government, still they possessed the confidence
of a portion of the public he could not allow so very high a
compliment to pass without infringing upon that modesty
which every Government ought to possess.—( Laughter. )
Mr. LEADER said it appeared to him that they
were fighting with a shadow. Supposing the proviso were
struck out, was any one sanguine enough to hope that one
single shilling of the 1,2001. would be saved to the country ?
The Noble Lord had mistaken what had fallen from
his Hon. Friend (Mr. Wakley); that Hon. Member had
only stated that the Government had the confidence of a
portion of the public ; by that he only meant that they had
the confidence of the Irish portion of the people—( Hear)—
and certainly they deserved that in some measure, for they
had contrived to govern that country in a better spirit than any
other part of her Majesty's dominions. If the Right Hon.
Baronet (Sir R. Peel) and the gentlemen opposite had been
in the Government, he did not believe that they would have pro-
posed such a Civil List, nor would they have hurried the Bill
through the House with such indecent haste. The people
actually knew nothing of the provisions of the Bill ; nor
could they, until the Bill became law. In such a case
the Noble Lord and those about him would have been
found declaiming most eloquently against the enormity
of the grant, and then, instead of going into the lobby,
19 or 20 strong, the Radicals, with the assistance of the Noble
Lord might have mustered to the number of 120 or 130.
Mr. T. DUNCOMBE did not see that it mattered
much whether the proviso was retained its the Bill
or nut, so far as the public were concerned. If it
were struck cut the working of it WAS in this way ;—the
Government would spend 600/. in one year, in order to favour
an individual during the next; that favoured individual might
apply for a pension of 4001. a year, but the Government hav-
ing only 20C1., said, wait till next year, we will have more
at our disposal, and you will be satisfied. Upon the former
division he had gone out with the Government, because he
thought that they were determined to stand by their Bill ;
but as they had so easily fallen into the trap laid for them by
the Right Hon. Baronet, he would oppose the Government
in so far as be was able.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear,"
and cheers.) The Right Hon. Baronet the Member for the
University of Oxford had said that the conduct of the Go-
verraneet upon the Pension List had not given satisfaction to
the Radicals, and had alienated the affections of his (the
Tory) side of the House. He (Mr. D.) thought that the
Noble Lord was now trying to regain that affection ; but If
he should unfortunately succeed in his object, it would be at
the expense of the loss of all confidence.
Mr. BROTIIERTON had voted in the majority in the
last division—be trusted that the Ministry would stand by
their Bill as it passed through the Committee, otherwise he
must oppose them upon the present occasion.
Mr. II AWE S considered the proviso es a mere limit to the
fair grant which was contained in the Bill. However, he for-
merly had opposed the grant, and considering that the Pen-
sion List eas under the revision of a Committee, he was of
the same opinion still that the matter ought to lay over until
the Committee had reported.
Mr. HUM E had referred to the words which had been
agreed to in Committee. They were, " a sum not ex-
ceeding- 1,2001. in one year."—( Cheers.) So that it was a
breach of confidence now to say that the Ministers might
have the power of granting to the amount of 1,600/ or
1,800/. a Year. Why was not the proposition brought for-
ward in tile Committee? It was due to that Committee that
its decision should be abided by; and he would take the sense
of the House upon the present proposition.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw.
The House divided and the numbers were :
For Sir Robert Peel's motion ll4
Against it 26
Majority BB

On our re-admission to the gallery we found,
Sir ROBERT PE EL addressing the House. He said
that he would not press an amendment which he was re-
commen ling (and of the nature of which we could collect
no knowledge), but he was desirous of recording his objection
to the clause then before the House.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER would not
trespass ou the Houso further than to say that he would give
the proposition of the Right Hon. Baronet his most decided
Opposition. _

After a few words from Sir Robert Peel, the amendment
was negatived, and the clause agreed to in its original form.

SECRET SERVICES,

Mr. CHALMERS then rose to bring forward the motion
of which he had given notice. The Honourable Gentleman,
who was very imperfectly heard, said that his object was that,
instead of making the allowance of 10,0001. a-) ear for secret
service a permanent charge on the Consolidated Fund,
it should be voted annually in the Committee of Supp!y.
The Hon. Member concluded by moving that clause 15, re-
ferring to the secret service fund, be omitted.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER opposed
the motion, stating that when the present Government came
into office the amount granted for such service was 45,0001.,
and that it had been reduced by them to 41,000, to 39.000.
to 37,000, and in the last year to 36,0001.:--thus making a
total saving to the country on this head of 10,0001.
Mr. HUME asked why 10,000/. a year for secret services
was placed upon the Consolidated Fund, and not put under
the controul of the House, as the 35,0001. was?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said it
was thought expedient to have a permanent amount fixed for
this purpose ; as well as the fluctuating amount which was
annually granted for the same object, and which he would en-
deavour to render still lower than it had already been,
The House then divided, and there appeared—.
For the motiol lOO
Against it 25
Majority

On re-entering the gallery we found Mr. G. F. Young
on his legs. The Hon. Member moved, on the grounds
that the report of the Pension List Committee had not yet
been laid before the House, that the Bill do not pass till
the Ist of February.
Mr. HUME said that after what had passed, postponing
the Bill would only lead to unnecessary delay.
Mr. G. F. YOUNG withdrew the Bill on going into
Committee, as he said his only object was to place his opinion
on record.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL would wish to know, before
the Bill was withdrawn, whether any motion of a similar kind
was to come before the House.
Mr. YOUNG said that he was not in communication with
any other Hon. Members, and could not therefore answer the
Noble Lord's question.
Mr. HUME said, that as the amendments on the Bill had
been completed, the only question now was, whether the Bill
do pass. As ho had given opposition to several of the items,
he would not now persevere in his opposition to the Bill
itself.—( Hear, hear.) At the same time, he felt it due
to the House to explain to them how the Civil List
was fixed for years to come. If they had submitted to his
amendment, they would have kept the Civil List within
1,2001. of what it was before. The Civil List, however, as it
stood for the year 1838, exceeded former years by 62,0001.
The Civil List of William the Fourth amounted to 510,0001.
The support of the other Members of the Royal Family
amounted to 206,0001., making on the whole 716,000/. The
aggregate amount of tke Civil List for 1838 was 778,0001.,
including the allowance to her Royal Highness the Duchess
of Kent and the Queen Dowager, being a difference of
62,000/. between that and the preceding year. He must say
that for a Reforming Parliament to sanction such a departure
from the principles of economy was to him a matter of deep regret.
He would say that the man who created profusion, and in-
creased the expenses of royalty, was not the friend of Monarchy.
If they looked back at the page of history they would find it was
the extravagance of the Monarch in France that led to the de-
struction ofthat Monarchy. Unfortunately they wero now taking
that course, and rendering the Monarchy unpopular in the
country, and he could tell them comparisons would be made
between the expenditure of royalty in that country and in
others. He held in his hand a return of the whole expenses
of the American Government.—( Laughter from the Opposi-
tion ; " Hear, hear," from the Ministerial side.) He knew the
comparison was not a pleasing one, and it was considered un-
gracious to refer to the simple forms of Republican Govern-
ment ; but the House would recollect that there were indivi-
duals in that country who looked at the expenses of royalty
in England as compared with the expenses of other Monar-
chical Governments and with Republican Governments, and it
was highly injurious to the !cry existence of Monarchy to see
the extravagance and profusion displayed at the present time.
Look at the salaries of the President of the United States and
the Secretary's *down to the lowest Consuls, and they would
find that 33,6001. was the whole expenses of the American
Government. The President had only 5,000/. per annum,
and let the House compare that with the sum of 778,0001.
which they were now voting, and if they took into account
the expenses of keeping up the royal parks and other mat-
ters, they would find the cost to the country little short of
800,0001. or 900,000/.—( Hear, hear.) The 33,0001. to
which he had alluded embraced the expense of Government,
including the three Secretaries of State, the First Lord of the
Treasury, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He did not
want to saddle the present Government with the whole of the
35.000/. granted for secret service, because a large portion of
that were pensions granted by the preceding Government. With
regard t 9 the expenditure of this country, he felt bound to say

that they were proceeding upon a system of extravagance un-
paralleled. Look to the Master of the Horse ; the income
of that department had been raised from 12,0001. to 27,0001.
He would give the House an instance of the extravagance in
that office. There was a sum of no less than 6,000/. allowed
for liveries in the department of the Master of the Horse-
-3,0001. in the Lord Chamberlain's department. What was
allowed in the Lord Steward's office he could not tell, as that
return had not been furnished. Was it fit, he would ask, when the
country was in such a state as to render it necessary to call
for relief from taxation--was it fit that 120 servants belong-
ing to the Master of the Horse should be allowed upon an
average 50/. a year each for liveries? When he saw men
going through the streets with clothes standing almost
erect with gold, he could not but complain—( Hear,
hear)—when he recollected that it was paid for by
the country.—(Laughter.) Such things as these had arisen
through the folly and mismanagement of George the Fourth.
—(Laughter.) He would venture to assert that the country
had been ruined by the extravagance of the livery of that
Monarch. —( Laughter.) Those liveries ought to be put down.
—(Laughter.) The extravagance of them was unparalleled
except in France previous to the Revolution.--( Laughter.)
In his opinion Ministers, if they had done their duty, would
have told their youthful Sovereign that her ancestors had
set a bad example with respect to the liveries of their servants.
It might be said that the people were taken by such gaudy
shows, but he denied that they were so. The example
of the Court had, in his opinion, led to the ex-
cessive extravagance of the aristocracy. ( Laughter. )
They were about to give 6,200/. to the Royal Family more
than had been given in the most extravagant times. This he
considered highly impolitic, and a course not at all friendly
to the Queen. Ministers were acting a ♦ery unfortunate part
in beginning a new reign saith extravagance instead of advis-
ing the Queen to carry on the Government with economy,
so that she might obtain the love and affection of her subjects.
He found a sum of money was granted to the Lord Chamber-
lain, the Lord Steward, and the Master of the Horse. It
would maintain 14,600 families, or five and twenty thousand
persons for the whole year at the rate of eight shillings a
head per week.—( Hear, hear.) And why was there to be
such an enormous expense incurred, merely for the purpose of
keeping up an additional number of Lords and Ladies of the
Bedchamber, beef-eaters, and yeomen of the guard with cocked
hats and fine gold liveries ?—( Laughter.) This nsight be a
laughing matter to those who had an abundance of everything,
but when the pinching hour of poverty came and food was
wanted, and when comparisons were made why every article
of food was taxed, it was no laughing matter with those who
made such inquiries.—(Loud cries of " Hear, hear.")
It was against this he had endeavoured to persuade the
House. He knew a great majority of the House differed
from him, and he was sorry for it. He would not create any
more vexatious delay in regard to this Bill.—(Hear, hear.)
If the system of extravagance which had been commenced at
the beginning of a new reign was followed up, the day might
somt arrive when discontent arising from the enormous amount
of taxation entailed by this extravagance, her Majesty's Mi-
nisters would incur a heavy responsibility.—( Hear. )
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said with
regard to the Royal Parks and Gardens, the people of
England had a great interest in their being properly
preserved. Who enjoyed Hyde Park," or St., James's,
or Kensington Gardens, but the inhabitants of the Great
Metropolis ? The Hon. Member (Mr. Hume) had talked
of the expensive liveries of the Court attendants. But let
him, following up his own analogy, go to the levees, and behold
the gaudy array in which the officers of the United States
appeared before the Sovereign of this country.—( Hear, hear. )
The Hon. Member said, look at the expences of the
Monarchy, and then compare them with the small expences
of a Republican form of Government.—( Hear, hear.)
He certainly felt it his duty to protest against such a
principle, which would be subversive of the Constitution of
the country. If he were forming a new Government he would
not look out for a cheap one, but would at once and always
keep in view what would be for the benefit of the
governed. He owed his allegiance to the throne of his
country ; his hopes, his feelings, his gratitude, were all bound
up in his loyalty, and he would resist every such principle
as was laid down by the Honourable Member, as he
considered they would be subversive of the Constitution of the
country.
Mr. HUME explained.

Mr. `VAKLEY was much disposed to blame the Minis-
t2rs for cztra►agance,, but he considered that the greater
blame rested upon the Members of that House who
voted the immense sums granted by this Bill—granted by
those who c...11ed themselves the representatives .f the people.
Considering the temptation thrown in the way of the Minister,
it was to be wondered that the sums asked for had not been
greater. The country would bear in mind, that when his
lion. Friend (Mr. Hume) proposed to reduce the grant,
by only 50,0001., out of 200 Members there were only nine-
teen found to support so reasonable a proposition.
The Bill was then read a third time.

Mr. G. F. YO UNG withdrew a notice which he had given,
as he found one of a similar nature was to be brought on by
the Hon. Baronet, the Member for Leeds.

The Bill was then passed.
NEWRY ELECTION.

The SPEAKER acquainted the House, that the petitioners
in the case of the election for the Borough of Newry, had not
perfected their recognizance!.
The order for taking the petition into consideration was ac-
cordingly discharged.
COUNTY OF KERRY ELECTION.

The SPEAKER acquainted the House that the petitioners
in the case of the Kerry County Election had not perfected
their recognizance!.

The order for taking the petition into consideration was
then discharged.
COUNTY OF LIMERICK ELECTION.

The SPEAKER acquainted the House that the petitioners
in the case of the Limerick County Election had not perfected
their recognizances.
Mr. FRES HFIE LD, before the order was discharged,
had a petition to present from the agent of the petitioners,
who stated that on the 25th of November last he had obtained
an affidavit of the sufficiency of the intended securities,
and on the 2d of December that affidavit was lodged
at the Hanaper Office. The petition was presented on the 4th
Dec., and therefore the time for completing the recognizances
would have terminated on the 18th inst. The affidavit of the
sufficiency of the recognizances was forwarded to London, and
the securities were proposed on the sth Dec. ; but having yester-
day appeared before the examiners the agent was afraid that
the affidavit having been sworn before the petition was pre-
sented to that House ; it was irregular, and could not be re-
ceived. He hoped the House would give relief in the present
case by extending the time for completing the recognizances.
Hs found on the Journals of the House, that on the 10th of
January, 1807, a similar case with respect to the borough of
Penryn, and he could assure them that it was no poc-
ket case, as it had occurred thirty years ago, when he
(Mr. Freshfield) had had no connection with that borough.
It might be the more proper course to move, as in the case of
Peuryn, that the Journal should be read, and that he should
move for relief ; but it would be more satisfactory to him if the
House did not at the present moment decide the question. It was
competent for the House to discharge the order for taking the
petition into consideration, unless a case had been made out ;
but it would be more satisfactory to him that the petition should
be printed and taken into consideration to-morrow.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL did not rise for the purpose of
objecting to the course proposed to be adopted by the Hon.
Member opposite, but as the House had been sitting now for
some time, he thought it should adjourn for a certain time ;
what he should propose was, that they should adjourn now, and
meet again at eight o'clock.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. C. BULLER thought, before the House adjourned,
the subject brought forward by the Hon. Member opposite
should be put off till to-morrow definitively.
Colonel PE RCE VA L complained of the course proposed
to be adopted, as the result of it would be that the parties on
the opposite side would be in their places, while those who
usually sat on that side of the House were not.

Mr: C. WOOD protested against the unfair imputations
that had been thrown out against his side of the House, of
having thrown unfair delays in the way of these petitions, when
the fact was the request for delay came from lion. Members
opposite.

Colonel PE RC E VAL was not aware that any proposition
of the sort had come from his side of the House. Here was a
case, however, that had been under the consideration of the
House the night before, and he thought that the Law-officers
of the Crown were bound to some forward, and re-state their
opinion with respect to it.
The petitions were then ordered to be laid upon the table.