The Sun.
London, England, 1840-02-28 00:00:00

; have had opportunities of estimating the services of those
; I who were employed in denartmenta which might be con-
sidered comparatively subordinate. Alter twenty years
devoted to the civil services of the country, although he might
not be able to enter into the political debates in that House,
surely an individual was entitled to a recompence for his
services; and there was not one of those persons to whom
the Noble Lord bad referred, who hal not gained his pen-
; shin by the devotion of his best facalties during the greater
portion of his life to the execution of the public service of
h-s country.—(Cheers.) The Noble Lord had complained
of an attempt to divert the attention of the House from the
proper subject in debate, and had expressed his desire that
the debate should be confined to that subject, and, encou-
raged by his precept rather than by his example, he would
endeavour to confine•hia attention solely to the matter now
' before the House. Ile would repeat, as he had done on
the last occasion that this s ibject was before the House,
that he would be the last man in the world to attempt to
depreciate from the merits of Sir John Newport. He ad-
mitted his great abilities. and he admired the high integ-
rity of his character.—( Cheers.) He sl:ould be unwilling
to deprive him of any reward which his services might
have merited, and he should not be unWillirna
to grant a pension to him if it were proposed to
do so. But the Noble Lord had no right to shelter the
Government behind the character of Sir John Newport—
( Chem s)—and from that position to show fight, as the
Noble Lord called it.—(Cheers.) When a question arose
as to the public conduct of the Government, were they to
be drivan from that question by the Government, saying,
" Don't ask us that question for fear of embittering the last
years of the life of a worthy man ?" The conduct of the
Government was fairly open to question—and if it were
truly the caae that the consideration of the question would
so.embiiter the last years of a worthy man, the Govern-
ment were responsible for it.—(Cheers.) The question
was a question as to the conduct of the Executive Govern-
ment and as to whether they had acted properly in grant-
ing, a pension to a person holding the office in question.
The resolution of his Hon. Friend affirmed two principles;
I at. That the office of Comptroller of the Exchequer ought,
on account of the peculiar nature of its duties, to be inde-
pendent of the Crown. Could any man deny that the eb_
sect of Parliament in instituting the office in question was
;ei free it from any dependence on the Crown? What said
the Act of Parliament ? The Act which had been brought
in by his Right Hon. Friend, the founder of this office, for
the regulation of Pensions. It enacted that the Crown
should have the power of granting pensions for certain
services. There was, however, one office exempted, anti
only one, by name.—(Cries of " No, no," from the Minis-
terial benches.) No ! there were other classes of offices
exempted, but only one office was named, and that was
this particular office. The 15th clause of the Act demon-
strated this, and the only office specially named was this
very office of Comptroller of the Exchequer. Now, what
svas the meaning but this ? that the office should be kept
not only independent of party, but that the owner of it
should have no hope of favcur from the Crown. There
ass another and an analarrous provision in the Act which
was that the Crown should not be able to appoint the per-
-on holding this office to any other situation to be heid
luring the pleasure of the Crown, anti that he could only
be removed by an address of either House of Parliament.
It was evidently the intention of Parliament in framing that
Act, that the holder of that office should not look to the
Crown for any favour. The Noble Lord could not deny
,list the Crown h-tl no power of granting this pension
under the Act of Parliament, and therefore he had
granted it on the Civil List. The Noble Lord
admitted that this case ought not to be drawn into a pre-
sedent. Now, he either differed from the resolution, and
Thought the granting a pension to a Comptroller of the
Exchequer defensible, or that this case ought not to be
drawn into a precedent. If he thought the holder of that
office clearly entitled to a pension, why did he not meet
.he resolution with a direct negative ?—( Cheers.) He did
not do so; he met it with another resolution, which he
asked the House to adopt. Now, what was that resolu-
tion? Let them consider for a moment what was the pre-
amble to the Act for the limitation of the granting of pen-
sions. That Act imposed no restriction, it merely pro-
vided that until the Pension List should be reduced below
a certain amount, no pensions should be granted of a
greater amount, in certain casts, than 3001. a year--that
in no case, until that happened, should any pension be
granted amounting to more than 600/. a year—and that
every information on the subject of those pensions should
'ee laid before Parliament ; but when the amount of
:he Pension List was reduced below 90.0001., a free
ind unlimited discretion of granting pensions reverted to
he Crown. and there was no necessity for laying those
pensions before Parliament. If they had read the speech
,f Mr. Burke they would have found that Mr. Burke had
:aid that he could not control the exercise of the prero-
[ gative, but that he could control the amount, and PS long
is the Pension List was below that amount, there was no
nich limitation enacted in ;he Act of Parliament. Now,
.at least, he hoped the Noble Lord, if he succeeded in
aarrying the first part of his resolution, would put it
into such a form as not to bring discredit on the
House by the manner in which it was to be
entered on the Journals. He now came to the second
resolution of the Noble Lord, which lie considered to be
the most important. The Noble Lord said that this case
ought not to be drawn into a precedent. Now it was not
proposed to deprive Sir John Newport of his pension—if
,t were attempted to do so he should oppose it; and if
that pension had been proposed by a special application to
Parliament, he for one should have voted for it. He was
rather surprised at the resolution proposed by the
Honourable Gentleman opposite. He (Sir Robert
Peel) had said, the other night, that in such a
ease as this, Parliament ought to be appealed
to. Now, notwithstanding all that had been said by the
Noble Lord, he was still of opinion that, in case of special
rind peculiar Parliamentary services, entitling a man to a
public reward, it was batter that Parliament should give
that reward in the special case. He was surprised that
.he Noble Lord had not recollected that the pension which
:nits been granted to Mr. Grattan had not been granted
ay the Crown, but by Parliament. Mr. Pitt's debts lied
been paid off by a Parliamentary grant, and when he said
duet he theught that Parliamentary services might in a snecial
case entitle a person rendering those services to a Parlia-
anantary provision, lie thought that those services ought to
be of a nature so peculiar and so extraordinary, that the
;rant could not be made a matter of party consideration,
nut that there should he one universal recognition of the
value of those special services to entitle the party to
ouch pension. He was not afraid of this power being
*bused by Parliament, he thought it more likely that
;he Crown should exercise its influence improperly
Than that that power should be abused by Parliament.
They had provided that the whole amount of the pensions
which the Crown could grant to literary and scientific men
was 1,2001. a year, and they were now giving five-sixths of
that sum to a Government servant. That, however, was
decidedly contrary to the intentions of the Act; and he
would appeal to every man in the House, if, supposing
when he had come into office in 1835—be would ask the
question of those who were opposed to him—if, when he
wad come into office in 1835, while the resolution he had
referred to was fresh in the mind of every one, which
limited that grant of 1,2001. a year, providing it as a re-
ward /or literary and scientific merit—if he had done
what the Government was now about doing, and
f he had taken five-sixths of the sum, and given
it as a pension to some gentlemen on his side of the
House who had retired from the service of Parliament
—if he had created a vacancy in an office which should be
independent of the Crown in order to grant that pension
( Hear)--if he had effected the vacancy in order to facilitate
a political arrangement—( Opposition cheers)—if he had
,lone that, he asked them whether, by an immense majority
rrom that side of the House, they would not have condemned
that act in much stronger language than that of the reso-
lutions before the House. They would not be content
with saying that this case should not be drawn into a pre-
cedent. But would they not have said that that had been
a violation of the independence of the office of Comptroller
at the Exchequer, and that that had been an absorp-
ion for party and' political purposes of five sixths of
the sum which they bad allowed as the only reward
sf literary and scientific merit? The most moderate
resolution he would then have expected, and which
he was sure would have been carried with acclamation by
Hon. Gentlemen opposite, if they could have carried it at
sll, would be, not that the grant should not be drawn into
a precedent, but that an address should be presented to the
Crown for the purpose of removing him from office.—
; Cheers.) That, he believed, was the course they would
lave followed ; and he asked them now to be so far con-
Is!rnt as to refuse the grant, while they acknowledged

hat it could not be drain into a precedent. Ho would
e•ll them that they could not put a 'mit to the power of
he Government, if they once allowed the precedent
o pass.—(Hear, hear, hear.) If they assented to the
mcndment, they would recognise the power in

he has performed public duties ? Sir, I hope I have performed
my promise, in abstaining from personsl considerations, and
adverting only to public grounds. We have the admission
of the Noble Lord that this ought not to be drawn into a
precedent. I ask the House to have the courage and the
manliness to vote that it shall not, and thus provide
against the possibility of undermining the independence of
an office, the integrity and independence of which arc
essent'al to the proper issue and control of the public
• funds.—( Loud cheers.)
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER then
rose, and said—Sir, I wish, as much as possible, to con-
fine the attention of the House to that which is the real
state of the question, and not to be led into those topics
which my Right Hon. Friend opposite so dexterously in-
, troduced—(Cheers)—l cannot help thinking, rather with
the view cf catching some stray votes,—( Cheers. ) Nei-
ther do I think it necessary to go into the attacks he has
made on the whole financial administration, or answer
the accusation made against my Noble Friend ; all
I will say is, that he often heard of it while in office—
that he was rather less inclined then to defend his friends
than he now is to attack them.—(Cheers.) Now the
the Right Hon. Baronet has first dwelt or. the necessity
for the independence of the office of the Comptrollership
I heard laid down, for the first time, the principle that
persons holding that office arc incapable of being pen-
sioned off. Ido not find it in the Report of the Commis-
sioners who examined into the whole question, nor in the
Act itself. Then, Sir, the Assistant-Comptroller, in the
absence of his principal, often necessarily protracted, has
much responsibility and authority as the Comp-
troller, yet the Assistant-Comptroller, it is not denied,
may be pensioned off. But, Sir, if I wished for an
analogous case to show that the conduct of the Govan-
ment cannot justly be conridered on this new principle, I
should take the case of the Auditors of the Excheo,uer,
whose independence of the Crown I think fully as im-
nortant as that of the Comptroller of the Exchequer.
Why, the Auditor had the control of expenditure of So-
me-set House in the first place, and they were appointed
for life—and they were Parliamentary officers—not officers
of the Crowns—( Hear.) They had also important ju•
diciul powers. They had the power of taking evidence
upon oath.--( Hear.) They audited the accounts of the
Treasury. If therefore there was a case analogoos to
that of the Comptroller of the Exchequer, and in which
'his principle now contended for ought to be applied, it
was that of the auditors of public accounts, and yet they
constantly received retiring allowances. When the Right
Hon. Baronet was in office, he gave, and he (the Chan-
csllor of the Exchequer) admitted, most deservedly, a re-
tiring allowance to one of those Gentlemen. He contended,
therefore, that there were no reasons, eitho r in the Act of
Parliament or in analogous oiliest, for the House to suppose
that the office of Comptroller of the Exchequer was
one in which this important constitutional principle
was involved, and which precluded the Crown from taking
into consideration au), other services than such as were
performed in that office. The Right Hon. Baronet who
spoke before his Noble Friend, stated that "if her Ma-
jesty's Ministers had given the pension to Sir John New-
port
before he accepted the office, lie should not have
quarrelled with it, such was his respect for that Right Hon.
Baronet, and his knowledge of his services." He
(the Chancellor of the Exchequer) called upon the Gen-
tlemen opposite to show upon what ground of analogy they
ventured to say that the claim which Sir John
Newport had in 1834 was forfeited by his not applying
for a pension, which would then most deservedly be
;ranted, and by his showing a willingness, on the contrary,
to continue to give his services to the country in a most
important office.—(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Ba-
ronet attacked the amendments of his Noble Friend be-
cause they included the words of Mr. Burke, which were
not enacting words, and were therefore of no importance.
But he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) would ask were
these words introduced into the Act and was there no reason
for adopting them ? Were they mere surplusage ? Or was it
not the intention of Parliament that they should be a guide
to future Governments as to tho persons whom they should
recommend to the Crown as deserving of pensions?—
( Hear.) The Right Hon. Baronet said they only formed
part of the preamble. But in the Act of Victoria they were
more conclusive and stringent; and yet the House was now
required to say that those words were to have no weight in
the Act.—(Hear, hear.) The Right Honourable Ba-
ronet had commented on some (as he thought) in-
consistencies of his Honourable Friend, because he
objected on a former night to give Sir John Newport a
pension from the Crown instead of by a Parliamentary
vote. If his Hon. Friend had changed his opinion, he
tad the very good authority of the Right Hon. Baronet
the Member for Tamworth, for that change. In 1834 it
was proposed to place those pensions under the control
of Parliament, upon which the Right Hon. Baronet said,
n I am, however, quite averse to allowing such a power to
reside in this House. A popular assembly never wisely
interfered with the distribution of patronage"—( Hear,
hear)--" and no instance can be found in history, either
remote or proximate, of this House having wisely exer-
cised the powers of the Executive.") He (the Chancellor
of the Exchequer) thought that those words peculiarly
applied to the present question.—(Cries of " Divide.")
The Right Hon. Baronet continued in these words:—
" I think the House of Commons too much governed by
impulse, for the just exercise of such a right. Hear that
tinder certain circumstances it would give too much,
whereas under the influence of other considerations, it
would be swayed by circumstances of the moment—and
neglect public services of the highest value. I cannot
help thinking that under the influence of temporary cir-
cumstances, Hon. Gentleman might be induced to over-
look services of the highest moment." There was only one
other point to which ho wished to advert—that was. the
amount of the pension. The Right lion. Baronet said there
was only 1,200/. to distribute in pensions for services of merit,
and that, in the present case, 1,0001. had been given to one
individual. Now, he, (the Chancellor of the Exchequer)
must say in the first place, that the power of the Crown was
not exhausted by the grant—( Hear)—and that whenever
claims of literary or philosophical merit were presented,
there still remained a sufficient sum to meet them.—
( Hear.) He hoped the House would not be deluded
with the impression that because 1,0001. had been spent
in the year out of the 1,2001., the Crown had not a reserve
which would be applied to this purpose. The Right
Hon. Baronet seemed also to forget the argument he made
in the case of Prince Albert. On that occasion the Right
Hon. Gentleman contended that there was no analogy be-
tween the allowance to the Queen Dowager and that to
be given to the Prince, because the Prince was in his
youth and was likely to receive it for a long period of
years, whereas her Majesty the Queen Dowager was ad-
vanced in life.
Sir R. PEEL made some observation which was not
heard in the Gallery.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was
not surprised that the Right Hun. Baronet was
disinclined to hear his own arguments repeated.—
( Laughter.) But when he complained that the enormous
proportion of five-sixths of the entire sum which the Crown
had to dispense in the year was given; as a reward for
political services, to one individual, he should re-
member that the receiver of the pension was of a very ad-
vanced ag,e, and was not likely to enjoy it for a long term
of years—and that Sir John Newport was not likely long
to honour the Pension List with his name. His Noble
Friend had not referred to the political pensions on the
list in any unfair manner. He had said that he was not a
fit judge of the merits of those who received them, as he
titd not acted under the same Governments with them ;
hut that no less pension than that received by Sir John
Newport was given for political services.—(Cries of
" Divide.") He begged the House to consider the admis-
sion of the Right Hon. Baronet, that if the pension had
peen granted before Sir J. Newport accepted the office of
Comptroller of the Exchequer, the Government would
have done right. He bogged the House to recollect that
it was admitted that this was not an unfair exercise
of the prerogative of the Crown—and he asked, would
they come to a vote of censure upon the Govern-
ment which gave, and upon Sir John Newport
who accepted, the pension, against the essential propriety
of which there had not been ene argument ?—( Hear.)
Mr. HUME rose amidst cries of " Divide, divide,"
He said, that having been alluded to, he could not allow
the discussion to be closed without stating his opinion to
ee that both sides had taken a wrong course. It he was
called upon to vote either for the original motion or the
amendment, he felt that he should be compelled to vote for
loth.—(Cheers.) The Hon. Gentleman who had pro-
posed the original resolution did not apply his speech to.
it. If the Hon. Gentleman meant a vote of censure to bs

passed upon Lord Monteagle, neither his speech nor the
resolution went to that. Therefore it was that he did not
know how to ect. If it was intended to blame any party,
he thought they ought to have been brought before the
House by name. The Right Honourable Baronet had

_ .
luestion on the part of the Crown,e In the first place, with not been so fortunate in his dates, as he had been strong
every respect for the character and every acknowledgment in his reasoning. because he said, if in 1835 be bad
of the services of Sir J. Newport, he hoped and trusted made such an appointment, what would have been the con-
that the House would not establish the principle of coming sequences ? Now the Right Hon. Baronet must have
to a vote of thanks in favour of a civil officer of the Crown known that the law did not exist at that time, vetich gave
couched in mornglowing terms than had been ever used to her Majesty the power of granting pensions every year
towards any military officer.—( Hear, hear.) They could to the amount of 1,2001. That law did not pass till 1837.
proceed then from precedents. They had not done so in The Right Hon. Baronet must bear in mind that the Corn-
the case of either Mr. Fox, or of Mr. Pitt. He did net miteee to which allusion had been made, had reported that
recollect any single it.stance in which the House of Corn- no pension ought to be placed on the Civil Li,t, and in his
mons had put on record such a recognition of civil (Mr. flume's) opinion, no man was entitled to receive
services as they were . doing now.--( Hear, hear.) pub!ic reward without receiving it openly.—( Hear, hear,
But the Noble Lord sneered at my Right Hon. Friend, hear.) The Right Honourable Baronet knew that
who, ho says, shrunk from his public duty, but who really it was quite an accideut that 1,2001. was proposed,
saved more money to the public than almost any other man. hneause when that sum was proposed by the Noble
Is not this inconsistent ? But it is said that Sir *John Member for Aberdeen, an objection was taken by the
Newport exerted himself to restrain unnecessary expense, Right Hon. G ntleman that so small a sum was not in-
to promote education, and improve the intercourse between tended to recompense political services. He considered
Great. Britain and Ireland. Why, those are duties which that the doctrines 1 aid down by the Noble Lord the
every public man ought to perform— (Cheers)—and ought Secretary for Ireland, and (Weeded by the Noble Lord
never to entitle him to the special thanks of those cots- the Member for Stroud, held out an inducement to every
nested with him.—( Hear, hear, hear.) The conclusion man to look' forward to reward for political services.—
was, in the amendment of the Noble Lord, that, " Con- ( Hear, hear.) With respect to the rem nal of Sir J.
sidering that Sir John Newport was not in affluent cir- I Newport and the appointment of Lord Monteagle, it was
cumstances when he received the ofnee, this House is (perhaps unfortunately) supposed that the vacancy was
satisfied that the grant to the pension, to the retired Comp- emitted on purpose to enable the Government to support
troller of the Exchequer, cannot be drawn into a prece- Loll Monteagle, and all that ho had to regret was that
dent ;" not even that, however, absolutely, for it went on such was not the case lied not been stated in more distinct
"in favour of persons who have not just claims on the terms. He should hsve wished to have seen a letter
Royal benifieenee, or who are not distinguished by the showing the date when the application was mode.
performance of duties to the public." I venture to say I because that would have removed all doubts and suspicions
that you will, by timing for this amendment, be giving a respecting the transaction. He could assure the Noble
direct Parliamentary sanction to this precedent, for no Lord that the whole transaction was denominated a job,
doubt, every person in future appointed to the Comoro!. and it wits supposed to be done purposely to favour Lord
lership of the Exchequer will have been a person of some Monteagle. That was the supposition, and the great
-Activity and talent in public life ; and therefore may it not difficulty was, to remove that from the public mind.—
be said of such persons in future, that they have just claims I ( Hear, hear.) He felt bound, thee efure, to vote for the
on the Royal beneficence, and have been distinguished by original motion.—( Hear, hear.)
the performance of duties to the public—( Hear, hear)— i Lord JOHN RUSSELL made a few observations in
and that the Crown might be perfectly satisfied, on these
wdiaysidfern,'p'
single whichex
observationisted i in
thatth e House,it fell
fro from
t
explanation, but in consequence of the cries of " Divide,
oasnsidblethteococralcuhsioan
grounds, to grant the retiring allowance ?—( Hear, hear.)
Why, they may take my lion. Friend the Member for
Lincoln (Colonel Sibtborp) arid say, Look to the say- the Noble Lord.
ings he has made—look to etie returns he has moved for— Mr. DUNCOMBE—Sir, the question is, how are we
(Laughter)—look to the Commisei nit he has opposed. —to deal with this job? It it' were -.
possible ,foryou, cboen-e.
(Laughter.) By one blow he saved 20 0001. a year to the ' sistently with the farms ofthoeffb House, to put the
Member
three
country.—( Cheers and laughter.) Why not give him a i propositions—the proposition Hon. . .
reward for his ~ great public services ?"—( Loud laughter.) , Durham, the proposition of the Noble Lord the Member
I ask any Member, if this amendment would not be esta. for Yorkshire, and also the proposition of the Hon. Mer-
blishing a direct sanction for the grant of pensions from her for Kilkenny, T. should have the greatest satisfaction
the Civil List to any person who fills the office of Comp- in voting against the three.—(Cheer-s, and laughter.)
troller of the Exchequer, on the simple affirmation that There never were three mere absurd propositions ; but if

London : Printed and Published by 31IJRDO YOlllSl' e
No. 112, Strand; at The Sten Office, No. 11n, r.-trand, it t
county of „Iliddlesex.—Friday, February 28, 1840.