The Sun.
London, England, 1831-02-05 00:00:00

ere head originally moved for the Committee on the civil
List first, he had wished to obtain some clear and proper
understanding of what was the plan of the Right Hon.
Gentleman then Chancellor of the Exchequer; and, next
he hoped to reduce the total sum required for the Civil
List. It bad never entered into his mind that the Com-
mittee should prepare the estimates by entering into a pre-
liminary examination of the details. The course this night
adopted by the Noble Lord seemed exactly that which
ought to be pursued, since it did not shift the responsibility
of the Minister upon a select body delegated by the House.
He had made his statement, and was about to submit the
changes he contemplated to the examination of a Commit-
tee. He also thought the Noble Lord fully justified in the
separation lie had made in the amount of the Civil List,
as it would tend both to the simplification of public ac-
counts, and to the due controul of the disbursement of the
public money. At the same time he could not approve of
what the Noble Lord had said regarding the diplomatic ex-
pences of the country ; for he saw no reason why the
items of the account should not be annually brought be-
fore Parliament : every sum ought to be separately
i dis-
cussed and voted, and the whole subject included n the
Sessional Budget ; thus every thing would be clearly
brought before the House, and, through the House, before
the people. Without entering into details, he could not
avoid expressing his disappointment at not finding the
Noble Lord make any reductions below the statement of
the late Chancellor of the Exchequer : in his (Sir H.
Parnell's) opinion, there was room for such reductions,
although he could not undertake to say exactly where
they ought to be made. To one branch of expenditure
he felt decided objections--the salaries of the Household
Officers; the emoluments of the Lord Chamberlain, of the
Master of the Horse, and of one or two more, were cer-
tainly too large. In not making some reductions when
they had the opportunity, Ministers had exhibited an ab-
sence of that spirit of economy by which they ought to be
governed in the present circumstances of the country.
Mr. HUME was anxious to state shortly, wherein he
differed frons the Noble Lord, as well as to express his
regret that he could not entirely agree with him. He was
not at present sufficiently master of the facts to be able
to discuss the details, and in the Committee he should
have ample opportunities of examining the details upon
the second and third heads of the expenditure of the
Civil List. He should only now say generally,
that the estimate considerably exceeded what he
hoped it would have been, and he was satisfied that
a great reduction might and ought to be made. Look-
ing at the list of pensions now before the House, he
could not find one name in fifty of a person who had ever
been at all connected with the Crown. That was in itself
quite enough to prove the necessity of those pensions com-
ing under the consideration of Parliament every year.
He, for one, could not consent to the giving ninety-eight
thousand pounds of the public money, to be paid away
in pensions at the uncontrouled disposal of the Minister.
The Noble Lord had, on a former occasion, said that the
country could no longer be governed by patronage; he
(Mr. Hume) hoped that the Noble Lord may also be con-
vinced that it could no longer be governed by corruption.
He had said, that the greater part of those pensions were in
fact charitable donations. Now he (Mr. Hume) was of
opinion, that if Piers were unable to maintain themselves
suitably to their rank from their own estates, they ought
not to do so upon public charity, but to lay down their
titles.--(Laughter.)—The Peerage was instituted by the
Constitution to stand between the Crown and the people;
but it wa- not contemplated by the Constitution, that,
when unable to keep their places in the State, they should
he supported by the people.—(Hear.)—When the ques-
tion would come to be discussed in the Committee, he
should certainly propose that each individual pension
should be examined separately.—(Hear, hear. )—lf
lie could not effect that examination thoroughly in
the Committee, he would do so in the House. Their
time could not he better occupied, even should the in-
quiry occupy them until June.—(Laughter.)—His view of
the subject was supported by law, according to which
all pensions cease upon the demise of the Crown.
Therefore, the pledge of the present Government, the law,
and the claims of the country, were now all with him.
The pensioning, intletd, was said to be charity; but he
thought that charity ought to begin athome.—(Laughter.)
—lt was the duty of the House to consider that the dis-
tresses of the country had been occasioned by the pressure
of taxation, of which so great a part was imposed for the
maintenance of pauper Peers. Who were the fitter ob-
jects of the charitable consideration of the House ? The
distressed people of England, or the Peer who had rela-
tions rich enough to provide for them ? To support such
persons with the money of the people was not charity—
it was profusion and extravagance.—(Hear.)—lt was a
time for Parliament to interfere and put an end to the sys-
tem. He trusted that Ministers would not allow a false
delicacy to prevent them from fulfilling their promisee of
retrenchment. It ought to be remembered that the average
value of pensions was twelve years' purchase, so that the
7,000/. of yearly charge which had recently fallen in,
were worth £4,000/. to the nation..—(Hear, hear.)—
Now, in one year (1800) the Government of the day had
bestowed pensions to the amount of 5,000/. a-year; which
were worth, at twelve years' purchase, 60,0001. given
away by the Minister in one year. From 1800 to the
present year, tl,e individuals so pensioned had received
upwards of a million of the public money: and, as they
are still in existence, they may probably make up the sum
of their pensions to a million and a half. He hoped the
present Ministers would put an end to the system.
He would consent to giving the present pensioners
nee half of the former allowance this year, one-fourth
next year, and so terminate the pensions in the third year.
-_(Laughter ) The late Ministry had called for 960,000/.
on account of the Civil List ; the present Ministry only
set down 500,000/. to that account, but then he could
not gee the advantage to be gained for the country by the
other 460,000/. going to the Consolidated Fund. By that
arrangement, the diplomatic expenditure, as well as some
other expenses, were kept out of sight. The people of
England were never allowed to know their burthens. He
had only to protest against that one arrangement. He also
ished the country to know what is the amount of in-
come derived from the Duchy of Lancaster. He would
remind the Ministers of what they had themselves said at
the beginning of the Session—that the King's Speech in-
cluded a surrender of all the sources of revenue. He hoped
that the influence of the other side of the House would
not cause them to change that opinion.—(Hear.) He
hoped they would explain the value of those
estates; and
if lie found them giving such earnest of their intentions,
he would give them all the support in his power.
Lord ALTHORP said, that, considering the character
of the present King, be (Lord Altherp) did not think
that lie ought to be the first Sovereign called on to give an
account of his private revenue. With regard to what his
lion. Friend opposite had just stated respecting the opinion
which Members of the present Administration had ex-
pressed as to the meaning of the King's Speech, he (Lord
Althorp) would say that, for his part, he did understand
the revenues of the Duchy of Lancaster to be included
in the surrender mentioned in that Speech ; but he now
was convinced that it never bad been intended to give
them up.
Mr. MABERLY wished to say a few words in reply
to his lion. Friend opposite, in order to show that his
view of the arrangement explained by the Noble Lord, re-
specting the Civil List, was fallacious. It was a mistake
to suppose that the Consolidated Fund was not under the
controul of Parliament, although the Civil List was out of
its controul. Charges certainly were put upon it, the par-
ticulars of which were not explained hi the House; but
still the House had the list completely under its controul,
and could at any time examine into those charges. He
considered that by that fact his lion. Fiiend's argument
must fall to the ground. The diplomatic expenditure of the
country had been greatly diminished in consequence of having
been brought under the consideration of Parliament; and
be insisted that the Noble Lord had done the country a
great benefit by placing it permanently under the controul
of the House. —(Hear. ) The principle on which he had acted
was excellent—to give to the Sovereign what he wanted for
the maintenanceof his dignity and comfort in one sum, and
to separate all other es pences from that. Now, he would
ask, was it no important advantage to the country to have
all the expellees of the Civil Government of England and
of Ireland brought annually under the consideration of
Parliament.—(Hear.) Was it no advantage that the Noble
on looking into the duties of the Auditor of the
Civil List, and finding that the office was altogether use-
less, be at once proposed to abolish it ? With regard to
the Pension List, he (Mr. Maberly) thought not only that
h to b dd but un—
dergo.
would bring the subject before the House, he (Mr. M.)
would decidedly vote against the continuance of the pen-
) The country was at present in that state
which demanded that the public expenditure should be
controlled by a severe hand. Some bold measure to check
the system of pensions was at the present conjuncture in-
There was upon the list one Noble Lord
ho derived twelve thousand pounds a year from the
public purse, on account of two distinct. pensions—a go-
vernment and the coininsnd of a regiment. He received
four thousand from the Consolidated Fund, three thousand
in the Four per Cent +' ; his pay, and the other emolu-
;melts of his Coliiiieley, animintid to two thousand more,
and hi, sal try as Governor was two thousand eight hun-
dred pounds. Consolidation of the pensions bad thus one

great advantage, that it enabled the country to see at one
view how much it paid to one individual.
Mr. GOULBURN agreed with the Hon. Member for
Middlesex that no pension ought to be granted without the
approbation of Parliament.—(llear, hear.)--But an Hon.
Gentleman opposite bad said that he (Mr. Goulburn) had
misrepresented the arrangements of the Noble Lord oppo-
site, in stating that there was, in point of fact, no diffe-
rence between the present proposition and that which he
had had the honour of submitting to the House in the
early part of the Session. He (Mr. G.) insisted that that
statement was correct; because the diplomatic expendi-
ture, whether set down to the Civil List or to the Con-
solidated Fund, was equally under the controul of Parlia-
ment, according to the express provision to that effect con-
tained in the Civil List Bill.
Mr. MABERLY explained.

Mr. GUEST said that as the Pension List had been so
often referred to in the course of the evening, he would
take that opportunity of stating that the intention which
he had announced of referring it to a Committee was not
changed. There were many things connected with it
which admitted of no justification ; amongst others the
pension of Sir Robert Shaw, a banker in Dublin, which
that Baronet had obtained by purchase. He (Mr. Guest)
thought such a pension could not be justified.
Mr. ROBINSON could not agree that the proposition
of the Noble Lord opposite was the same in effect as that
brought forward by his Right Hon. Predecessor. He
considered the modes adopted by the two Chancellors es-
sentially different. The late Chancellor refused to have
the Civil List referred to a Committee. The Noble Lord,
on the contrary, had come forward voluntarily to propose
that it should be submitted to a Committee. The great
merit, however, of the Noble Lord's plan was simplifica-
tion, and the separation of the charges for the support of
the Sovereign from all others. There was a great ad-
vantage in having the Diplomatic expenditure, the salaries
of the Judges, and the expences of the Board of Works dis-
tinguished and separate. He did not partake of the alarm
of the Right Hon. Gentleman below him (Mr. Goulburn),
that there was danger to the State in setting apart and
distinguishing the sum paid for the maintenance of the
Sovereign. But he (Mr. R.) agreed with his Hon.
Friend, the Member for Middlesex, that there was a great
deficiency in the Noble Lord's plan, inasmuch as it did not
comprehend the Pension List. He was sorry to hear one
thing which the Noble Lord had said, and it was seldom
that he heard from him anything which lie could not ap-
prove. He was sorry to hear him say that the greater part
of the pensions were charitable donations. But could he
even agree with the Noble Lord in that assertion, still
lie should not allow that it ought to be in the power of any
Administration to give away the public money in such a
way, when the country already pays six or seven millions
sterling annually in charity to the poor of a different class.
—(Hear.)--He would not, perhaps, object to leave such a
sum as seventy-five thousand pounds at the disposal of the
King, for the purpose of rewarding merit, if any mode
could be devised whereby the Minister should be prevented
from abusing that trust ; but it was well known how
much it had hen abused in the last reign.
Mr. GORDON did not see that there was any actual
reduction effected by the plan which the Noble Lord had
explained. The alteration made in the Civil List made a
difference without a distinction. He (Mr. Gordon) knew
that when the expenses now separated from the Civil List
were charged upon it, it was not usual to bring them under
the consideration of Parliament; but that when placed
upon the Consolidated Fund, there was a chance of their
coming under the consideration of the House. But the
expenses of the Ambassadors ought, as a matter of course,
to be subject to the controul of Parliament every year.
He did not think it enough to leave it in the power of any
Minister to have those expenses discussed by a motion on
the subject. The country required that Parliament should
exercise a strict and regular controul over them. From
the whole tenour of the arguments which the Noble Lord
on the Woolsack advanced respecting the King's Speech,
when he occupied a seat on the other aide of that House,
it would be inferred, that if the Members of the present
Administration had the power, they would place the reve-
nues of the Duchy of Lancaster at the disposal of Parlia-
ment. There was evidently much absurdity, folly, and
inconvenience in making distinctions between the revenues
of the Sovereign as King and as Duke of Lancaster. On
the ground of that distinction his Hon. Friend (Mr.
Home) had been defeated in his motions respecting that
Duchy. The Ministers would give an account of what
his Majesty received as King, but they would give no ac-
count of what he received as Duke of Lancaster. He
(Mr. Gordon) hoped that his Noble Friend would give
proof of the sincerity of his declarations, that the country
could no longer be governed by patronage : and that he
would bring the whole of the Pension List under the re-
view of Parliament. He would not go so far as the
Hon. Member for Middlesex. He would not say that
the pensions should be all reduced by a per tentage.
But he hoped that the Ministers would re-take the subject
into consideration. He had heard the statement of the
Noble Lord with great sorrow. He hoped be would re-
consider the subject.
A MEMBER, whose name we did not learn, said that
he entirely concurred with what had been said by his
Hon. Friend near him (Mr. Maberly); but he greatly
differed from the Hon. Gentleman who had just sat down.
He had not heard the statement of the Noble Lord with
sorrow, but with joy ; and he knew that it would be re-
ceived throughout the country with great joy. Consider-
ing the principle of separating the accounts more impor-
tant than any other, he thought that the Right Hon.
Member for Armagh had cast an unfair imputation upon
the Noble Lord, in saying that he had not submitted the
arrangement of the Civil List to a Committee. But he
thought that the Noble Lord would have been to blame if
he had not taken upon himself the responsibility of that
arrangement. When a Committee was called for in the
early part of the session, there were no means of bringing
the Chancellor of the Exchequer for the time being, to
consent to the separation without a Committee. ( The Hon.
Gentleman was interrupted by loud cries of " Question !"
" Order !" &c. ; and after a few words, which, on ac-
count of the noise, we could not catch, he sat down.)
Mr. HUNT said he heard with great pain the state-
ment made by the Noble Lord opposite, for he felt that it
would occasion deep disappointment to the country at
large—he felt that it would disappoint those expectations
which the people were entitled to form from the earnest
which the present Government held out to the nation.
When he spoke of the people, he spoke of those most in-
terested in the matter then under consideration—he spoke
of those by whom the means of defraying the expences of
the Civil List were supplied—he spoke of the industrious
and useful classes of society—the productive portion
of the population, and not the drones, by whom evilly
thing was consumed. In the present moment of
deep and overpowering distress, the people were looking
up to the new Administration in the hope and confi-
dence that on their first appearance before Parliament and
the public they would come forward with a proposition for
the relief of those wants which it was impossible ade-
quately to describe, and scarcely possible to endure.
The Civil List certainly formed but a small portion of the
expenditure of the nation ; but the proposition of the Go.
vernment would go forth as an earnest of their intentions,
and the decision of the House would go forth as an earnest
of its intentions, and of what the country had to expect
from both. On the subject of the Noble Lord's state-
ment, he did not agree with the Hon. Member for Crick-
lade, that there was any mystification in it—it was un-
fortunately, but too clear. He had before that night
imagined that it was always the object of Government to
mystify matters of that sort, and of every sort connected
with the expenditure of the country. He had always
given them the fullest credit for mystification ; but on that
occasion he must do them the justice to say, that they had
evinced no disposition to mystify. He trusted, that as he
was so young a Member, they would extend to him the
indulgence his inexperience required, and give him credit
for every wish to avoid, in the delivery of his sentiments,
any thing approaching towards personal offence, or any
want of that respect towards the regulations of the House
which he should be at all times willing to manifest; but
having been sent there by the people, and having been re-
turned in a very extraordinary manner, by a great body of
the people, without any solicitation on his part, and even
without his knowledge, lie felt that he should grievously
disappoint the expectations which they had a right to form,
if he permitted that opportunity to pass without giving
expression to the consideration which the conduct of
the Government unavoidably suggested. He confessed,
it appeared to him that the whole of the question
then before the House bad been that night argued as if
the people had nothing at all to do with the matter—as
though it was a matter entirely between the Crown and
the House—as though the House were to pay so much
money out of their own pockets to the Crown—and that
there was no such thing in this country as a people from
whose hard earnings alone could the sums under discussion
I.e drawn. He could assure the House that no man was
more sensible than himself how much a friend to his
people was the present King. The King of England
proved that he felt fur his people, while his Ministers be-
trayed a very opposite disposition of mini. In substance
and effect the Noble Lord had told them that there was no
relief to be expected on the motion of the Civil List.
Now, he desired to learn why it was the former Govern-
inent had found themselves under the necessity of,. jesign-
ing? What was it that broke up the former Government,
and called the present Ministers to fill their places ? No-

thing more or less than this, that the former Govern-
ment told the Parliament, and through them the people,
that no relief could be afforded through the medium of
the Civil List—that in that department there could he
no reduction of, the public expenditure.—(flear, hear. )
It was upon this ground, then, that he affirmed the
disappointment which could not fail to be gene-
rally felt from the course which his Majesty's Govern-
ment had thought proper to pursue. It was not for him
to determine what might be too much or too little
for the Civil List, but he too well understood, and
too painfully felt, what the people were able to pay. If
all the Members of that House were to visit the wretched
dwellings which recently it had been his distressing lot to
enter, they could not but agree with him, that so far from
being able to continue the endurance of the heavy burdens
laid upon the people, they were in a condition demanding
instant and extensive relief. In presenting a petition yes-
terday he had not an opportunity of stating a fact, which had
he then known he certainly should have stated, but the
knowledge of which only reached him by means of a letter
since received. It was, that in one of the districts whence
that petition came the working people were not able to
earn more on an average than from 4s. 6d. to ss. a week,
and from what he saw at another place in the same
county, be could declare most conscientiously that he
readily believed that statement. When he was at Preston
one Sunday, instead of going to church—(A laugh)—he
went round to the habitations of a considerable number of
the poor persons resident in that town and its vicinity.
The highest sum that any of them could emu was 6s. a
week. Their breakfast was oatmeal broth—their mid-
day meal was potatoes, and oatmeal broth again in the
evening; they paid 61. a year for the wretched hovel they
inhabited ; 2s. a quarter for taxes ; and 2s. a quarter for
the clergy, with lid. for each chimney in the miserable
dwelling. He inquired of them hew long since any of
them had new clothes, and could not learn that any of
them bad bought a new garment within the last five
years ; they never were able to compass any thing beyond
second-band clothes, and the poor unhappy beings were so
ragged and dirty, that they could not think of going to
church. He called upon those who attached so much
importance to religious and moral instruction, to ask
themselves how they could even indirectly be accessary to
a system that kept the people in a condition in which they
were unable to attend public worship—so ragged, so mi-
serable, so filthy, so destitute even of soap to clean them-
selves, that every one of them was compelled to remain at
home, and never to visit their parish church. They
were taxed in bread, they were taxed in beer, soap, can-
dles, and even in potatoes, and all that with the Pension
List, which was now to be submitted to Parliament.
They had been told that all of those Pensions legally ex-
pired at the demise of the Crown. Why then, he would
ask, not abolish the whole Pension' List, and allow the
King to grant all the pensions anew to such only as de-
served them ? There was not a petition presented to that
House which touched upon the subject of the public dis-
tress, or the financial difficulties of the country, without
calling for a reduction of the Pension List. It was the
unanimous demand of the people, that all pensions be abo-
lished except those which have been merited by acknow-
ledged public services. If those petitions were to be de-
finitively answered in the manner in which his Majesty's
Government then proposed they should be answered, the
people would be driven to despair, from whence the tran-
sition to disturbance was easy and but too certain. He
was not the man to say elsewhere what he shOuld be
ashamed to repeat in that House; but as long as be
was a Member of that House be hoped and trusted
that he should so conduct himself as never to fail
in respect towards any individual Member, or towards the
House collectively—(Hear, hear, hear !)--but with every
wish to be governed by such a feeling, lie would call upon
the House to demand information respecting the property
derived from the Duchy of Lancaster. It was the duty of
the House to see all that the Crown possessed. He was
not one of those who called for any reduction of what was
necessary for the ease and comfort of the Crown, but let
the means for promoting that be seen and understood. He
was perfectly sensible of the disposition which his Majesty
had shown to contribute to the relief of his people. The
King was justly so popular that anything in which the
Ministers failed would be laid at their own door, and not
at that of the King; for example, nothing could more
merit the gratitude of the people than the manner in which
his Majesty had declined the outfit for the Queen of
50,0001. How different was the conduct of the Minis-
ters! the reason their conduct formed a bad earnest for the
future was, that it afforded indication that they had no in-
tention of reducing their own salaries. He' remembered
well when those salaries were raised to the present high
amount—when a message castle from the Crown recom-
mending an increase of the incomes of the several Members
of the Royal Family, and the high Officers of State, on the
ground that every article of life had risen one hundred
fold, and that therefore, the King, the Royal Family, the
Judges, and the other Officers of State, could no longer
live upon their former incomes—but out of whose pockets
were those incomes to come? Out of the pockets of
those who themselves were called upon likewise to pay
for every necessary of life at an enhanced price. He
thought that if that consideration had been mentioned
at the time, it would have had the effect of preventing
so unjust an arrangement. As matters then stood, he
hoped the House would not let it go forth that there was
to be no reduction in the Civil List—no reduction in
the Pension List. Though it was intimated that there
was to be a reduction of one-half in the Pension List,
he must take the liberty of saying that, substantially there
was no such reduction. It would be little, then to the
credit or advantage of the present Government, to have it
go forth in the papers of the following morning, that the
just expectations of the people were to be disappointed,
and that the present Ministry, like the last, were pursuing
a course calculated to drive the people to despair. In
making that observation, however, he felt bound in jus-
tice to bear testimony to the humanity and wisdom which
the Government had recently shown in respect to the un-
happy persons who had been tried and found guilty in the
disturbed districts—that proceeding was more calculated
to restore tranquillity than any other which they could
adopt, and he sincerely hoped that these merciful disposi-
ti,ns would be carried still further ; under the influence of
such a sentiment, he intended on an early day to move an
Address to the Crown, praying for a general amnesty to
the whole of those unhappy beings—if such an Act as
that was passed.—(Cries of question.)—He apologised
to the House if he had departed in the slightest degree
from the precise question under consideration. He should
be ashamed of himself if he wilfully travelled out of any
question which he might take a share in discussing; at
the same time, that he should be still more ashamed of him-
self—if, sent to that House by poor and honest men, who
lived by the sweat of their brow and the toils of their
hands, he did not deliver his sentiments manfully and
sincerely—if he did not make an humble, though earnest
appeal to his Majesty and to his Ministers on so pressing
an occasion. _ _

Sir ROGER GRESLEY next addressed the House,
hoping, as we understood, that no innovation would be
allowed to disfigure our blessed and beautiful Constitution
—that nothing would be withdrawn which was required
for supporting the dignity and splendour of the Crown, or
tending to diminish that bounty of which the Crown was
anciently the dispenser.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM (who was for some moments
inaudible) said, in reference to the speeches of the Hon.
Members for Crickdale and Preston, that he should gladly
have the benefit of their assistance, to enable him to deter-
mine whether the speech of the Hen. Member for Durham
was intelligible. As to the particular question under eon •
sideration, he thought he had a right, on behalf of his
colleagues and himself, to claim from Hon. Members a
little indulgence, in the way of time. He thought they
were entitled to a little forbearance from those who had
expressed so high an opinion of their honesty. Before
they decided, something ought to be seen of the measures
of the Government. The Hon. Member for Preston had
treated the House with respect; and though recollecting
the constituency who sent him there, he did not forget
what was due to the House. On that ground, he (Sir
James Graham) should treat the Hon. Member with the
forbearance that was due to such forbearance. The Hon.
Member recommended his Majesty's Ministers to re-con-
sider their proposition. The Government had bestowed
upon the subject that night submitted to the House
the most anxious deliberation ; and, imitating the
conduct of his Noble Friend, he felt bound to state
that he could not flatter any one with the slightest
expectation that the advisers of the Crown could
depart from the proposition that night submitted to
the House. The Hon. Member for Preston had most truly
said, that all that was gracious in the proposition flowed
from the Sovereign himself. In that assertion every
Member of the House must agree ; while all that was un-
palateable was the act of his advisers. That was true ; but
it was also true, that the proposition that night submitted
t.) the House was the result of the unanimous Couneil. If
they thought a certain amount was required for the decent
splendour of the Crown, they would be guilty of betraying
the Monarch did not they not express that conviction,
and having once arrived at a fixed opinion, it would be
treachery towards the country if th.•y hesitated one mo-
ment to submit that opinion to Parliament, and call for
its assent.--(Hear.) As had been already stated, all that
was gracious in the proposition proceeded frem the
Monarch himself, and all that was disagreeable and
extravagant was in consequence of the advice of his

Ministers. Now, to begin with the list, he should not
go beyond the statement of his Noble Friend. First, with
respect to what might be considered necessary for the
decent splendour and comfort of the Crown. After the
most attentive consideration to the daily expences of the
establishment necessary for the Sovereign, no less a sum
could be proposed than that which his Noble Friend laid
before them. It was well known that the Sovereign
lived under the eyes of his people. They felt that nothing
could be withdrawn from the necessary expences to which
his kindness and generosity led—to which his splendid awl
noble hospitality gave occa•ion. He did himself, as well
as other Members who had spoken, owe his seat to a popu-
lar election, and he should be sorry did he utter a single word
calculated to disappoint the just expectations of his consti-
tuents ; but he greatly deceived himself, if there was ene
man in England who desired to put down one single com-
fort enjoyed by the Sovereign. There was not a man in
England, if called upon to answer the question, who
would not unhesitatingly answer, let every one of them
remain undiminished.—( Hear, hear.)—So far, then, for
that much of the subject. The House had already been
made aware of the magnificent conduct of the King, with
reference to the proposed sum for the outfit of her Ma-
jesty. It would be recollected how nobly he had over-
come the feelings of the husband and the man, and feeling
metely as a King who sympathised with the necessities of
his people. Ministers were perfectly ready to propose that
sum; but his Majesty objected, and decided that it should
not be proposed to Parliament. That he felt bound, in
justice to his Majesty, to state. The next subject to which
he should apply himself was the Revenues of the Duchy
of Lancaster ; previous to that he begged to remind the
House that his Majesty bad surrendered the Droits of the
Admiralty and the Four and a Half per Cents. He should
further observe, that an attempt was made to contrast
their conduct with that of the late Ministry, in reference
to the Civil List, or rather to establish the assertion, that
the conduct of both Administrations was the same on
that subject. Nothing could be more destitute of foun-
dation ; in the Pension List, concession after conces-
sion had been made, and then they were told that
the conduct of the two Administrations was alike.
He would now apply himself to the Revenues of the
Duchy of Lancaster, He presumed no one would deny
that that was part of the hereditary revenues of
the Crown, and from those it had never been separated
excepting in the reign of Henry IV., Henry VII., and
during the Protectorate of Cromwell. Now he saw no
ground whatever for taking the amount of those revenues
into consideration in fixing the amount of the Civil List.
If he might be permitted to use so bumble an illustration,
he would say, that it would be as just—in fixing his
salary as First Lord of the Admiralty—to institute an
inquiry into the value of his estates in the country—(Cries
of " no, no !")—the cases, he would contend, were pre-
cisely similar. The revenues of the Duchy of Lancaster
were not part or parcel of the revenues at the disposal of
Parliament ; they constituted an important portion of the
hereditary revenues of the Crown, over which Parliament
could exercise no controul, for they had never been sur-
rendered by the Crown, nor could they ever come under
the consideration of the House otherwise than by the free
consent of the Monarch. It was also important to be
borne in mind, that they were not then making an elee-
mosynary grant, no equivalent being given on the other
side. So far from that being the fact, they were com-
pounding with the King for the large hereditary posses-
sions which he had surrendered—possessions so large
that the extent was doubtful ; but there could be no
doubt that the hereditary revenues surrendered
were of much greater amount than the Civil
List ; it was a bargain—anything but a grant.—One
word as to the Pension List. It had been treated
throughout as if no reduction had been made in the
Pension List, when the fact was, there had been
a reduction made of one-half; and he would call upon
his Hon. Friend near him, who was ao anxious a Re-
former, to say in what manner he could effect a better re-
duction, or one more simple and complete, than that
which had been proposed by his Noble Friend ? The late
Government proposed a Pension List Of 140,0001., giving
his Majesty full power to dispose of them year by year as
they fell in; whereas the present pre/position was to place
half of them on the Consolidated Fund, and to bring them
to the public credit as they fell in. The Hon. Member
for Preston desired to s e the difference between the Civil
List of the former and the present Government. He
would explain for the information of the Hon. Member :
The late Government proposed, upon their own responsia
bility, a Civil List of 920,0001., and the details were not
submitted to the House ; the present Administration pro-
posed a Civil List of 520,000/., and said the details
should be submitted to Parliament. The late Govern-
ment proposed to place the whole 920,000/. absolutely
beyond the centroul of Parliament ; whereas the present
Government proposed to leave a considerable portion of
their Civil List within the controul of the House—no less
a portion than 450,000/. With respect to the portion
to be fixed on the Consolidated Fund, that certainly
was not to be annually brought under the considera-
tion ; but being fixed upon that fund, it would always
be within the reach of Parliament whenever it might
be necessary to supervise it. As to the pensions granted
upon the Civil List, he had to observe that those hold-
ing them might be considered as possessing a legal or
equitable title to those provisions : on the faith of pos-
sessing them, debts had been contracted, settlements made,
and many irrevocable transactions had been founded upon
them. He did not deny the power of Parliament to cut
them off whenever they might think proper ; but he must
be allowed to say, that, under present circumstances, it
would be most unwise and unfair to put an end to them;
and he trusted before such a question were entertained,
the House would well consider what they were about.
Something had been said of unworthiness—of bending
and truckling to the popular voice. He begged to say,
that he believed his conduct was as little open to the
charge of truckling as that of any Hon. Member could
possibly be. He had the good fortune to enjoy the good
opinion of his fellow-citizens, humble an individual as he
might be; but yet, as a faithful servant of the Crown, he
should never, for the sake of any popularity, adopt a
'course inconsistent with the conscientious feelings which
he trusted should ever govern his conduct. Before three
short weeks should have passed over their heads, his Noble
Friend the Paymaster of the Forces, would have laid be-
fore the House the decision of a united Cabinet, which lie
trusted would be received, and, on examination, would be
found to comprehend a full and effectual Reform of that
House; and then Parliament and the country would see
if the professions of the present Government were
founded in truth and sincerity. A British public would
then see if the Government had redeemed the pledges they
had freely given. The time was not distant, and he
thought himself entitled to call upon Hon. Members to
wait a little, and see •be great body of the measures of the
Government before they came to a decision—before they
arrived at the conclusion that his Right Hon. Friends and
be had done any thing inconsistent with their former feel-
ings or professions. He begged, in conclusion, to assure
the House, that nothing less than a wish to set himself,
and those with whom he acted, right with the public,
could induce him to trouble them at that time of the night
and in the course of such a debate.—(Hear, hear, hear.)
Mr. CALCRAFT said it was evident that there were
to be no reductions beyond a trifling amount of five or ten
thousand pounds. His Noble Friend opposite had mys-
tified the Pension List most adroitly, for he managed so
throw upon the public all the young lives, and, by keeping
the elder ones alone on the List, give himself a chance,
during his own Administration, of having it in his power
to advise his Majesty upon the filling up of every one of
those. It was said that the late Government refused a
Committee—they merely said, that at the beginning of a
reign there was no precedent for referring to a Committee
the Civil List ; such reference was never made except in
cases where the debts of the Crown were to 1)a provided
for. Even if the Ministers wanted to make a reduction in
the Civil List, experience showed that the best way to
effect that was by a Committee of the whole House. It
was by such Committees that the greatest reductions had
always been made. By such a Committee was it that the
great reduction in the army was made; it was by a Com-
mittee of the whole House—not by a Committee up stairs,
a garbled Committee, one that might be called a Mi-
nisterial Committee, prosecuting its inquiries with closed
doors, shut out from all publicity, a Committee to
do as the Ministry bid it—(Hear, hear)—that was
certainly not the sort of Committee the late Ministry re-
commended, but that was the sort of Committee now re-
commended. Here was to be no publicity—no open in.
quiry. If the Ministers wanted retreuchment, they
would have an open Committee of the whole House, all
whose proceedings were public. The Committee they
proposed, however, was a Committee up stairs. If his
Noble Friend, in appointing such a Committee was so dis-
posed, he might make it an unfair Committee.—(Hear,
hear.) Oh, he understood that the Committee was al-
ready appointed, aad his Honourable Friend who made
the motion for that Committee, the great leader who
turned out the late Government, was sitting at that—
the opposition side of the House—(Hear, hear.) His
Honourable Friend might exclaim, " Oh, kill your
next Percy yourselves—(A laugh)—you are there and I
am here."—(Laughter.) He hoped his Honourable
Friend would soon make a similar motion, and that the
House of Commons would give the country the benefit of
a similar decision.—(Laughter.) The Ministers gave the
House the same estimate that the (the Opposition) had

defenhtt; and ihis lionotirt)N Friend would give than
the opportunity, the same persons would again defend it.
The Ministers, however, had objected to the estimate that
they now inconsistently defended, and had reduced them
(the Opposition) to the dilemma in which they were placed.
Then the Ministers said their estimate was irrevocable.
That was most extraordinary in them, Is lio prided them-
selves on their popularity, and looked to the public sup-
port to maintain their places. They said they would send
the estimate to a Committee; but that appeared of no use,
for they said, at the same time, that the estimate was irre-
vocable. Did they mean that they would allow Parlia-
ment to make no alteration in it? He hoped not. The
Ministers were to stand by public opinion—they expected
to be upheld by some sort of Utopian ideas of public good
—they looked to the House of Commons for support, and
yet they said their estimate was irrevocable. He hoped he
should be able to justify the estimate of the late Govern.
ment should he be restored to place, and he was delighted
to see his Hon. Friend, the Worthy Baronet, the Member
for Queen's County (Sir Henry Parnell), on that side of
the House, and he was also pleased to see there his excel-
lent friend, the Member for Cricklade, with his pleasant
satire and his disposition to cheek extravagance, and he
hoped, by the exertions of these his friends, and his own,
to be speedily restored to the other side of the House.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM explained that he bad cer-
tainly used the word irrevocable, but not in relation to a
Committee of that House.—(Hear, hear.)—When the
Hon. Member for Preston proposed that Ministers should
reconsider the estimate, he had replied that as far as the
Ministers' responsibility went, they had fully considered
the estimate, and their decision was on that point irrevo-
cable. He did not say, however, that the House was not
to revise the decision of the Ministers ; he knew, he hoped,
his situation and theirs too well. He begged leave to con-
gratulate his Right Hon. Friend on resuming his station
on the opposite side of the House ; for he had just delivered
one of those speeches to which he was formerly delighted to
listen.—(Hear, hear.)

Mr. CALCRAFT was satisfied with the explanation of
the Right Hon. Baronet. He wished to ask, however, if
the estimates were cut down in a Committee, would the
Ministers resign 7—(A laugh.)
The motion was then agreed to.
CALL OF THE HOUSE.

Mr. MAXWELL rose to make the motion of which
he had given notice yesterday. His object in proposing a
call of the House was not with a view to any particular
measure, but to ensure a full attendance of Members, as
he conceived this one of the most important Sessions that
Parliament had ever assembled. He should move, there-
fore, that the House should be called over on March 18th.

On the SPEAKER putting the question, several voices
cried out " No !" and the Gallery was ordered to be cleared
for a division. No division, however, took place, and the
motion was agreed to.
Mr. HUAIE rose to move for returns relative to the in-
comes of the junior branches of the Royal Family. He
stated, that formerly all these revenues were paid out of
the Civil List ; and as all other salaries, pensions, and
revenues were to he reduced, he thought the revenues
of the Royal Family might be reduced also. Up to
1806, each of the junior branches of the Royal Fa-
mily had not more than 12,0001. a year; then, under
the Administration of the Talents, 6,0001. a year was
added. The Act then passed stated, however, that the in-
comes should not exceed 15,0001. a year ; and be thought
there were good grounds for inquiring into the subject
when he found the Duke of Cambridge had 27,0001. a
year, besides the emoluments of a high situation in an-
other country. The grants to the other members of the
royal family were proportionably large. He knew that
what each one of the royal family received might be ascer-
tained by the public accounts on the table, but he wished
to have all their incomes placed before the House in one
view. He regretted that he had concurred in the Act of
Parliament for providing for the servants of George the
Third. He believed that that King had left no property
behind him, or otherwise he certainly should never have
agreed to that act. There was, however, much property
left behind, and it was wholly unaccounted for. The whole
of these expences were not less than 271,000/. a year—a
sum fully sufficient to maintain the dignity of the Sove-
reign. Every person in the country strove to live up to
the pattern set by the Sovereign and the Princes of the
Blood. Following their example, every man in the coun-
try lived beyond his income, and was encouraged to do so
by the extravagances of the Princes, and by the example
set by that House. He was not in the habit of referring to
The Quarterly Review to enforce his statements ; but it
was very ably stated in that work last year, that the extra-
vagance of the salaries given to public men had had a most
pernicious influence on the country, by affording a bad
example. At present all the higher classes were in great
difficulties; and if the House hoped to cure these evils,
it must begin at the head. He hoped that the good sense
of the members of the Royal Family would induce them
to consider the value of public opinion, and reduce their
expences; There was another part of the subject which
he wished to notice. On the death of any branch of the
Royal Family, the incomes of the survivors were liable to
be augmented. He wished, therefore, to have a return of
the income of each member of the Royal Family, and of
the contingencies of increased income of which they had
expectations. The Hon. Member concluded by moving
for " A Return of all Sums of Money paid out of the
Consolidated Fund to the several branches of the Royal
Family, separate from any payments to be made from the
Civil List ; stating the amount paid to each, the Acts of
Parliament under which it was granted, and the amount
granted to each; and also what contingencies each mein-
bember might expect under the Acts."
Ali.. GOULBURN, knowing that it was better to cor-
rect a false impression at the moment than afterwards,
rose to say that the incomes of the younger branches of the
Royal Family were not liable to be increased at the death
of any of the members of that family. That, he
knew, was a general opinion, but it was an incorrect one.
—Motion agreed to.
PENSIONS TO THE ROYAL SERVANTS.

Mr. HUME also moved for an account of all sums
paid to the servants of George HI., the servants of
Queen Charlotte and of Queen Caroline, under the
Acts of the Ist George IV., chap. 129 ; the 55th
George 111., and the 3d of George IV. ; showing the
amount paid in each year, and the whole amount paid.—
Motion agreed to.
PENSIONS TO OFFICERS OF THE STATE.
Mr. HUME said there was another class of pensions
well deserving the consideration of the House, on account
of the abuses of them. The 57th of George 111. was
passed at a time when there was a great reduction of sine-
cures, with a view of giving to the Sovereign the power
of rewarding his public servants. But the manner in
which that Act had been carried into execution had led to
great abuses. He found that persons received pensions
three times more valuable than their services. He found
pensions granted to persons who had fifty thousand
pounds a year. There was a pension of 1,5001. a year
granted to the Governor of Madras, who had also a salary
of 10,0001. a year. That was an abuse never contem-
plated by the Act. He found that Lord Sidmouth had a
pension of 3,000/. a year, Mr. Lushington 1,5001., Mr. Goul-
burn 2,0001., Mr. Hamilton 1,000/. Mr. Croker 1,500/.,
Mr. Courtenay 1,0001., Mr. Hobhouse 1,000/., Mr. Planta
1,0001., and Lord Bexley 3,0001. The services of all these
gentlemen were never worth 3,000/. That was his con-
scientious opinion. He considered that most of these
pensions were a pure waste of the public money, and he
appealed to the Hon. Member for Dorset, whether the Bill
had not disappointed him? The Hon. Member concluded
by moving for a return of all persons entitled to pensions
under the 57th George 111., chap. 65, and the 4th of
George IV., chap. 90, stating the names of these persons,
and the amount of their pensions, and the length of the
services fer which they were granted.
Mr. COURTENAY seconded the motion. His name
was one the Hon. Member mentioned, and he must state
that he, for one, courted the investigation, and should be
quite ready to meet the Hon. Member whenhtehecsheoAsectts.
to
bring
uld the
n o
t do
subjectits
dutyfo forward.—(Hear, w ai
fr di.
t— -d
i(dHneoa rt ,
discontinue ear.)
Mr. G. ROBINSON stated, that he thought the House
principle of these Acts was to give a power to the
Thewo
Crown to grant pensions for public services, whatever
might be the services of those servants, and whatever
their private fortunes. That was a most vicious principle.
It was anticipating the power of Parliament. He could
readily conceive a case of a public servant entitled to a
pension, but he must protest against the principle of con-
ferring unnecessary pensions on those who had private
fortunes. One Member of a Ministry might retire and
need the 3,000/. a year, another might have a fortune of
50,000/. Suppose a Minister retiring with a fortune of
that kind, would he dare to ask the House of Com-
mons, or would he induce any other person to ask
the House of Commons to grant him such a pension
for life ? Certainly he could not. And if he did ask for
a pension, he believed that there would be sufficient virtue
and decency in the Nouse to resist the preposition. Those
Acts further gave pensions to the Under Secretary of
State, to the Secretary of the Admiralty Board, to the
Seeretary of the Board of Controul, to the Secretary for
Ireland, and to various subordinate officers they gave a
retiring pension for life. The consequence was, the
country was saddled with various pensions, far beyond
what he believed the public was aware of, and far be-
yond what it would be disposed to grant. The Act
ought, in his opinion, to be repealed; and if the Hon.