The Sun.
London, England, 1812-02-12 00:00:00

LEEWARD ISLAND DUTIES.

Mr,: CREEVEY said he rthe, in consequence of a
notice" he had given, to submit a motion to the
House on that part of tire public revenue called the
Barbad'oes Four and halt per Cent. or Leeward
Island Duties. The present moment he conceived
to be the most favourable for removing all doubts .
connected with, this sourze of revenue, as new ar-
rangements were now ,about to take place in the
Household. For his part, lie was always of opi-
nion that they should be applied to colonial pUrposes
alone in Barbadoes and the Leeward Islands Wm-
selves. The next point he shotild maintain was,
that it they must come into the public revenue here,
they shouldhe applied to public purposes ; and the
next, that such abuses had taken pl.ice in the ap-
plicaiiim of them as rendered some alteration neces-
siry. 111 tire beginning of the reign of Charles -
the First, the island of Barbadoes was granted to the
Earl of Carlisle, but it was then of very litire • im-
j4ortance, being extremely poor'and thinly inhabit-
ed.. In the reign, of Chinks, the Second it became
triOre.. populous, when the second Earl of Carlisle
succeeded to the possession, by whom it' was dis-
posed .of to\ he Earl of Kinnool. An application
was again made us' the Crown to vest the sole pro-
perty of it-in the Earl of Carlisle, but a Petition *as
for warded by the-Plamers to the Privy Council, stating
the alietation which had taken, place to the island, and
the consequences .which 7 would result from. a,,sign-
ing it Ater. This circuMstaned was alluded to by
the Earl of ClorendOn, whO'was accused of tyranny
with respect to that 'bland, in cooseqUence of the ad-.
vice, as he supposed, which he tad given to Charles
If. Lord Clarendon conceived, there was something
like a 'promise of making it a Roy-al revenue, in case '
the claims were given up; the final adjustment
,vas
however reserved till the Count it sat iii Barbadnes,
and the first written documint to w'fileh the
could appeal on the. stito,•M, was the act' of tt at
Coun6d. f-lere he quoted a passage from the At,
stating, that the sum of four and 'a half per cent. in
.speck On .every five score should be -granted to his
MAjeSty, in Consideration of the necessity of support-
'Mg the dignity 'of POVelp/nent; acid of building a
fort i and o her public works for the benefit of 'the
colony. He then pursued the History of this grant,
through the succeeding reigns,' down to the present'
tithes. From Charles it descended' to James, with-
out anything remarkable occurring, until' it' came
down to \Viliiarn 111. During this reign, it 'was.
mentioned)n certain Acts as forming apart of what
were called' the
,sniall Heredi ary Revenue.
.But
any one who read the original Att must conceive
this to be a mistake, and it was so considered fur
sixty years afterwards. n was presented
to the House by the AgeniS and Planters of Barba-
does, in the reign of Queen Anne, stating, that those
duties were diverted from their original purpose,
and praying that they might* be turned back to the
colonial onjects for which they 'were gtanted. Ac-
cordingly when the HOusehold Bill of Queen Anne
was Passed,' a 'specific exception was made in favour
of those duties, and they ‘A ere restored to their
ginal purposeS. 'ln the reign of George the First,
on the Danger of tiie Hcreditsoy Revenues,
the four and a halt p, r cent.' duties 'were again ex-
cepted, arid atso •ir, that of George the
.Seeoud.On
-
the accession of his piesent I\i4j,-31y, a new arrange.-
went was by which he surrendered up hi's
Ihrnief revepues.,.'and agreed to' accept in their place
, 800,0001. It was said that this turd was not men-
tioned by name in the eiturneration on the 'JournalS ;
but how could it be mentioned George the Se-
cond never had it, forit. Was excepted out of hi;
ACt ; George the First never had it, lOr it wits ex-
cepted out of his AM Aid ; and Queen Anne never
'had the same reason.' How then could Geo.

lf.Lave diSpoSed'ol But if that were not the
case,-and that the ditties alldded to must come into
this 'country, the King having given up the lesser
hereditary' revenut s', they 'shotild be applied actord•
Mg to the faith of that agteernent.' 'The next
point was the abuse of the at plleal ion of this Rind.
In, 1809, he (Mr. Creevey) had mUVed. (or fin ac-
count of the proJuee friint the tune of his Majes-
ty's coining to the Throne, and lie found by that
return iliac it had producediit the above-mentioned
pert,id 1.68 stun of 1,600,0001. Of t his sum Jour
hundred thousand pounds were applied to the pay-
incnt t Governots Salaries, not 01 13arbadoes add t lie
'Leeward Islands, but of Jersey and Guernsey, and
otloAs in no way connected with them. Three'
hundred and twenty-,ix thousand pounds wete apa
plied to special service, though we had a special
fund of our own with ',toper checks. It
possible not to entertain some suspicion on
S:, vs
this head, when they saw 414,0001. granted to one
Secretary of the TicasOly, attd 70001. to anollnr.-7

AnotheFapPlication was a sum. of 170,0001, to the.
Civil List; an abuse elich it was high time to rehtedv
in the present arrangement. The next head Was
that of peareons, to which a sum was applied from
this fund amounting to 740,0001. In deft nee of
the provisions of Mr. Burke's Bill, the Paymaster
of the Forces derived from this source a pension
I goo!. a year ; Lady Chatham and Lady Grenville
had similangrants, and all thefashionable pensioners
were indebted to it. If he wanted to shew the ab-
surdity of the condual of Government, he would,
tekt~ it in .this was. The poor people of Barbadoes
had had the honour of supporting the late Duke of
Gloucester at the rate of 90001.. a-year for takierty
}tars; it was afterwards thought neees,•ary to ob-
lige the people of this country by distinguishing
them with his support** for twenty wears also ; but
no sooner was the Deice provided for, in this way
than his Majesty himself obtained from the 4 and a
half per Ceete, different sums' in different years,
amounting altogether to 170,0001. . After a few
further-observations enforcing the importance of the
subject and the necessity of inquiry, he Concluded
with moving for a Select Committee to inquire into
the nature and extent of the revenues arising from'
the 4 and half per Cent. Leewaad Island Duties, and
the appropriation of the same, distinguishing each
year Irem his Majesty's accesaion to the throne, with
their observations thereupon.
Mr. LONG said, that the Hon. Gentleman had
not r ontented himself with stating that the duties to
which he alluded were granted for colonial purposes
alone, but had gone on to assert that they weie
abused in the hands of his present Majesty. Hte
had professed great candour, but it was to be lameet-
ed that its all his admonitions he had admitted no 4
thing which could make against' himself, not evert
those facts Which were necessary to a correct state-
ment of the case. He had given the history of that
branch of the revenue, from the first gift of Barba,
does to the Earl of Carlisle, arid endeavoured to prove
that the Act of 1663 e as granted for local purposes.
In the history, however,he was mistaken, for it would
be found, that the Ministers of Charles I. were charg-
ed with an intention of drawing a iiublid revenue,
from that country; and that Lord Willoughby had.
been sent to B irbadoes to raise a revenue to pay bff
different pensions.' He would admit that the Act
cited ,by the Hon. Gentleman stated some local pur-
poses, such as building, &c. to be defrayed out of
that fund ; but did it say that there was no grant 10
the King ? If they doubted it, the Act itselt would
inform them, that it was granted to the King in
consideration of . the lands. which they held under
him, and they would find that the Act; as far as it.
regarded ithe otheraislands, did not even contaiu an
allusion
.to other purposes. The very year after this
Act was passed, ,five or six thousand pounds were
paid into the Exchequer here, a circumstance which•
strewed that though Barbadoes 'had annexed some
. loCal purposes, the other'lslands had -given the cow
plete and- tell disposal of the Fund to his Majesty,
When thellon. Gentlemafi alluded to 'the Act of
Queen Anne, he ought to have given a little of its
history ; had. he done so, they would find that a
Commission was sent out by' her Majesty to exa-
mine. the stare of the. fortifications at Barbadoes,
which they reported to be in' a ruinous state; that
in consequence of this an Address was presented,
praying that the 5 and half per Cent. duties
should be applied to one of the purposes 'for
which they were ofiginally granted, which Address
was: complied with. But was this saying that
-.they were granted for that. purpose alone, or if it
was, did her Al bind her successor? He enters,
tained a high reaped for a Resolution of that House,
but a Resolution was not an Aet of the Legislature,
and his Majesty could not be divested 'of per of his
hereditary, revenues but by an Aul of the Lagisia-
Lure. It was excepted in lite Ads of Qeorge tee
-First' and Second; and his present, Majesty hed
given up certain enutnerated branches of the here-
ditary revenue, in lieu of the Civil List, among
W inch, this was not mentioned. It bad been said,
that this fund was out of sight ; but from the reign
'of George the First, accounts were repeatedly laid
before Parliament. The Hon. Gentleman himeelf•
had moved for Accounts in 1740, which he had now
. omifted to mention, because he. knew that they
would snake against him. There was not an AO,
not a report of that House, which did not recognize'
the four and it half per cents. as part of the heredie.
tary revenue. He thought he might even appeal
to the Speaker, whose Judgment must contribute
so materia4 to strengthen his own opinion, whee
ther it was not the case. When the Prince Regent
agreechte.give up a. imrt of his Exchequer Revenue,
it hadaeheen decided by him (the Speaker), that the
proper Officer should appear, for the purpose of sure
rendering if as a part of the hereditary revenue.. In
confirmation of that opinion, he had cited the case
of 1766, in which the King's consent was held
necessary to deliver up the Four and Half per Cent.
Dtities of Scotland, for which ael his Majesty ree
-caked a Vote of 1 hanks. With respect to the
Duke of Gloucester, the fad was, that the Paid was
not sufficient to pay him, and therefore other pro, i
sion was made. It should also be remembered, that
when Mr: Burke's Bill was brought in, the pen-
-sioua paid out of this Fund were in his knowledge,
and left untouched by him. It was also stated by
the Finance Committee in 179 T, of which thta
Speaker was'Chairrnan, that the Crown had other
hereditary rights with which it had not pa:ted,
'among which rights, those very Duties were euft-
'berated. The accuracy of the Report or that'Conf-
in:tree was known. He thought this was 'enough
to shew that the FiVe per Cent. Duties were a part
of the hereditary'tevenues existing m the Crown,
and Trot given up by any legal -enactments. • But it
had been said that they were misapplic d. He
(Mr. Long) could stateee hat from 'the beginning of
the reign Of'George I. they were applied to stint: fir
puepeses sv it h those objected to by tie Hon. Geu-
payment of the salaries of the Go-
. verntirs of .Berrneda, Jersey, and Guelney.
Mil(teneEe4e (to explanation' said, that he had
not disputed those lams.
p thatr .lVvlairicit:eld4porefeoes.re
nat, said,cearip
ttif,t.ll'
irct:at
tepi
oanfis t
was t man granted
, he nt let ee
d same
not as
trespasshal
tong upon their attention. In the reign of G: care
the Second, 120,0001. was granted from it to the
special service. Early in the present reign, a pen-
sion faidrtieen granted out of it to the Earl of Chat-
hameeand 'Lords Hardwicke andeCamden ho
were these Attorney and Solicitor-General) -had do
doubt as melte right of the Crown to do so. It had
been ealli'thafLord Thurlow opposed a, grant from

it, but his Lordship wall not more placable In his
pol.t;cal resentments than others ; besides, having
agreed in the justice of a grant to Lord Auckland
fro n the same fund, he could not be considered a
very impartial or a very consistent authority. The
Hon. Gentleman was desirous of referring thisinb-
jett to a Committee. Committees were, indeed,
much th- fasinon of late; the, Civil List had been
referred to it, but he hoped that delicacy would pre-
vent- them from adopting such a course in the pre-
sent instance; respeating a fund which was entirely
at his Majesty's disposal.
Mr. P. MOORE' was for the appointment of the
Committee, were it only to legalise that which 14 as
undoubtedly most doubtful. It appeared to him,
that at present the Crown bad no more right to
grant pensions out of these Leeward.lsland Duties
than it' had to grant them out of the revenue of the
Duchy of Cornwall. Let a Bill be brought in to
vest this right in the Crown, and he would be the
man to support it. Whatever the true splendour of
the Crown required, his Constituents were ready to
go without shoes and stockings to afford ;' hut. they
demanded in return, that (or the api lication of the
sums so granted by them, there should be some le-
gal responsibility.
Lord FOLKESTONE observed, that the motion of
bis Honourable Friend was, not to'censure the ap-
plication of these duties, but to appoint a Com-
mittee to consider whether the'y had been properly
applied or not. The only advocate for the present
mode was an interested advocate, who received out
of the 4 and half per cent. Fund a greater pension
than by the existing law could otherwise be con-
ferred upon him. The argument- urged by this
Right Honourable Gentleman was most fallacious.
it was no defence of the present abtise to say that
it had existed in former reigns. The original object
of the duties, as described in the original Aa,
was for maintaining the honour and dignity of
bis Majesty's authority_ in Barbadoes, for repairing
the ports, fortifications, &c. Were these objets
answered by granting a pension of 15001. a year. to
, the Right Hon. Gentleman, of 30001. a year to one
Lady, and 30001. to another ? In Queen Anne's
time., in-consequence of a representation from Bar-
badoes, .that the fortifications, &c: were in ruins,
an&that these duties were not applied to thepur-
pose for, which they were originally imposed, they
were restored to their proper channels. They were
excepted from the Civil List of George I. and
George 11. And in the beginning of the present
reign, when a compaet was entered into between
the King.and Parliament, by which the former gave
up his hereditary revenues, in lieu of a stipulated
allowance, an inquiry was instituted on the subject,
and in the document laid on the table of that
House, liese fourand a half per cent dtities did not
appear among those hereditary revenues, which, in
his opinion, was a complete answer to the argument
that they were vested in the Crown.

Mr. LONGi in explanation, denied ever haying ar-
gued that the long existence of an abuse was a rea-
ton for its continuance. His argument was ap-
I lied to a practice which he did not consider an
abuse.

Mr. ROSE contended, that when the Four and
Halt per Cent. duties were originally imposed, al-
though it was undoubtedly meant to apply a part of
them to colonial purposes, yet that this was entirely
at the discretion of the Crown. During the whole
of the reigns of George the First and Second, the
accounts reipeaing these duties were open to the
inspedion of Parliament, from which the inference
was clear that Parliament did not consider that they
had been improperly applied. In various instances
these duties had been recognised as belonging to the
Cro.vn. Adverting to what the Noble Lord had
said of the pension granted to his Right Hon. Friend
he put it iu the House, whether 15001. a year could
be considered as too large a sum for one, who, for
nine or ten years, had so ably executed the duties of
the situation which his-Right Hon. Friend had held.
The application of these duties had gone on for a
full century in the way in which it was now pro-
ceeding, and seeing nothing in the particular cir 7
cumstances oft he piesent-time which"deManded in-
quiry, he should oppose the motion. . •

Mr. MsaaYA:rT "described the distressed state of
the West Indies, and expressed his anxiety that an
investigation shOul,' be et4ered into of the b,.!st mode
of saving the Islands from the ruin which hung over
them, and which in its fall would probably involve
the Mother Country.
Mr. CLEEVEY made a short reply. He contend-
ed that,it was allowed on -fit hands, that the law
was as he had stated it to be. Should the House
negative his present proposition, it would probably
not be long before another-opPortunity was afforded
of renewing the discussion, and of putting the mat-
ter on that basis upon which it ought to rest.
The CIIANCELLOII of the EXCHEQUERhad thought
that atter the spyech of the Right Honourable Gen-
tleman near him, there would. have been no appe-
tite for renewing this discussion at any future period.
Notwithstanding all that had been so ably urged by
his Right Honourable Friend respeEling the original
Ad, the Hon. Gentleman persevered in confining
his observations to Barbadoes, leaving out of his
consideration all the other Leeward Islands, the
duties in which Were positively granted to the
Crown, on the condition that the owners of estates
iu those Islands should have their rights to those
estates confirmed. Adverting to what bad been
said by an Honourable Gentleman respecting the
present situation of the West Indies, he observed
that it was absurd to attribute that situation to the
operation of the 4 and half per cent duties. It
ori;inated in circumstances of a very different de-

.Mr. WHITBREAD Slid it was unusual, after the
moving of any propositina had been allowed, to re-
ply, fur any one, and especially so prominent an
individual as the Right Hon. Gentleman, to rise to
address the House. The Right Hon. Gentleman
seemed to imagine, that what he termed the clear
and conclusite statement of his Right Hon. Friend,
was to put down all further discussion on the sub-
jei't. In the first place, without Meaning any per-
sonal disrespect to that Right Hon. Gentleman, he
must say that lie was a vety.questionable advocate.
Su tar was he (Mr. W.) from hating hls appetite
blunted by what had fallen from the Right Hon.
,Gentleman that his stomach was rather whetted for
for a further consideration of the subject. He did
21 ot think the Right Hon. Gentleman had fairly

treated the MR. Centlentan who had deicribed the
West Indies as.adeVoted part of the empire, ex-
posed to inevitable ruin, unless some steps were
taken for its salvation. It was not fair so to put
down an Hon. Member who had coincided with,
the Right Honourable Gentleman during the period
that, unfortunately tor the country, he had been in
the administratiOn of its Government. With re-
, spea to the assertion made by the Right Honour-
ableGentleman (Mr. Rose) that the pension granted
out of these duties was not too great a reward for
the services of his Right Hon. Friend, he Would ask
that Right Hon. Geeisteman, whether, if these Duties
had not existed, ho-thought Parliament would have
addressed the Crown to grant his Right Hon. Friend
a pension of 1.5001-. a year—the only way in which
a pension to that amount could, by the provisions
of Alr.Burke's Act, be legally conferred ? 'He would
say one word on the subject of the special ser-
vices, charged on the Fund in question. When
the House saw, as items of these special services,
the sum of forty-eight thousand pounds to Sit Grey
Cooper, and another considerable sum to Mr. Ro-
binson, it was impossible for them not to recall to
their minds the calumnies, as they had been then
termed, -of former times, (for it was not allowable
to hint at the existence of such praatces at present),
when it was boldly asserted that large sums were de--
voted to the purposes of influencing Parliament, or,
in other words, of gross and rank bribery; and not
to suspect that, for these assertions, there might be
some foundation in truth.- He should most assuredly
•vole for the motion.
The House then divided--
For the motion - • 19
Aganist it - -
Majority • - -31
OFFICERS OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.
The CHANCELL-OR of the EXCHEQUER, after some
prefatory obserVations, moved for leave to bring in
a Bill to repeal the 50th of The King; respecting
the regulation of the Officers of the House of Corn-
tnons, and to establish other and further regulations
respeaing the same. -
Mr. P. MOORE did not rise by any means to op-
pose the motion, but merely to ask whether there
was an absOlute necessity for a Deputy Serjeant at
Arms ? He was always averse* to the appointment•
of a deputy for an officer who could himself execute
the duty.
The CHANCELLOR Of the EXCHEQUER replied,
that a Depety 'Serjeant at Arms was indispensable.
Certainly Ito one could say that the attendance in
the House was too great, and he was sure that Hon.
Gentlemen must recollect a no very distant occur-
rence, in which-great practical inconvenience was
sustained from a want of sufficient attendance. .
COMMITTEE ON CIVIL LIST.
Mr. EDEN, however unwillingly, rose to move
that he be discharged from his attendance on the
Committee upon the Civil List. He had moved for
the appermtment of that Committee in order that an
investigation of great national importance might be
entered into; bnt deprived as it was of the privilege
of sending for persons, papers, and records, the
powers of the Committee must necessarily be so
crippled as to render it wholly inadequate to the ob-
jea for which he -had proposed it. • The Commit-
tee might. indulge in conteetureS, but could not form
any well-fonnded opinion. It might feel regret at
the expense of the'Civi List, and wish for its reduc-
tion, but it could not point out the cause of the
expense, or suggest the means of reducing it. On
these grounds, feeling confident tbat the- labours of
the Committee must be useless, he moved that he
be discharged from his attendance upon it.
Mr. YORKE expressed his concern at the incon-
sistency of the Hon. Gentleman, who, because the
House did not think proper to listen in every point
to his advice, with respect to the formation of the
Committee, which, nevertheless, originated in his
own proposition, expressed his wish to be relieved
from attendance on the Committee. He (Mr. Y.)
had voted last night against granting the Committee
-the privileges which the Hon. Gentleman desired,
because he saw no reason- for departing from the
precedent of 1804 on that subject. If, when the
Committee met, they found the necessity of further
powerS, it would be competent to them by their
Cheirman to ask for those powers ; or- it would be
competent to any individual of the. Committee, if
he couN nut prevail on the Committee to accede to.
his view of the subjea, himself to make to the
House any proposition that he thought fitting.—
Under these circumstances, he could not consent to
release the Hon. Gentleman from the duties in
which he had voluntarily engaged.
Mr. HORNER defended his Hon. Friend from the
charge of inconsistency. The Committee, consti-
tuted as it had been, would be unable to effect the
objet which his Hon. Friend had in view in pro-
posing it. Although a ComMittee expressly on ac-
counts, was denied the privilege of sending . for a
single person, paper, or record, to elucidate those
accounts ! And this, notwithstanding the declare-
tion of the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, during
the discussion on the Household Bill, that if that
Bill were not impeded in its progress, every oppor-
tunity should subsequently be afforded for pursuing
any investigations that might be thought necessary.
The observation of the Right Hon. Gentleman, who
had just spoken, that if the Committee found their
powers inadequate, they might come to the House
fbr an extension of them, was idle. If the Corn-
tnittee proceeded in the spirit of his Hon. Friend's
intention in proposing it, it could not sit five minutes
without resolving on the necessity of sending for
persons, papers, and records. As to the precedent
of 1804, it might be erroneous, and ought not to
be followed. Indeed, that it had been erroneous
the result had shewn. Besides, the Committee ap-
pointed in 1804 was not to inquire into any circum-
stance of suspicion. Now the single purpose of his
Hon. Friend's motion was the appointment of a
Committee to inquire into circumstances, which, on
t he face of the documents, appeared to be suspicious.
He thought his Hon. Friend perfealy justified in
wishing to be relieved from that which he felt to be
an inefficient situation.
Mr. BATHURST denied that a Committee sitting
to investigate the inienecFate dornestio economy of
the ,Sovereign, had never been vested with such
powers as those required by the Hon. Gentleman',
and which would enable them to examine every
domestic servant of the Crown; than which nothing
could be more indecorous. It would be much more

tttitig that in the lust Instance the totiimifted aid .thi
meet and receive any communications which the
Crown might think proper to make. Shou:d those
cornmunicatiOM be found inadequate to the purtiose
for which the Committee was constituted, that"
would be the time for considering the proprieydof
granting to the Cottunittee an extension of potter: •
But even in that case on such a subject it would,be
a que,iiion how far it might be. advisable to obtai4,
that information by an Address to the Crown, ra
ther than by any direct vote of the House.
Mr. P. MoottE contended, that the coedua of
the Hon. Member, wishing to be excused trbrn at-
tending the Committee, was perfeatly consistent.
_ _ _ _ _

M'DoNALD -wished to know if the Right
Hon. Gentleman would consent to an address to the
Crown from the Commiltee, for any information
which they might require.
Mr. M. MONTAGU objeaed to the Motion, as
one likely to be produative of great future iuconve-
nienee.

The question was then put, and the Motion ne-
gatived without a division.
Mr. BROUGHAM pOstponed•his Motion for a Com-
mittee on the Admiralty Droits which stood for
Friday, to Tuesday next.