The Sun.
London, England, 1857-05-23 00:00:00

.SHE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, 19_,A Y €23, 1857

dowry for the wife of a Prince of Prussia. It is hoped
that there will be no attempt to follow the example of the
Parliament ?f Ireland and to fix the people of England
with the payment of an annuity. (Hear.) I have there-
fore ventured humbly and inefficiently to propose to the
Parliament of England the view I have just stated. Let
it be a generous sum, but let it not be hampered by an
annuity, and let us at once and for ever discharge our ob-
ligations. (Hear.) Sir, we forget that this Royal lady is
about to be allied to one of the great Powers of Europe.
With that Power—may God avert it !—we may be at war.
(Hear.) In my own time that has been an event within
men's expectations. (Hear.) I cannot forget how Eng-
land has recently been treated by Prussia, and, although I
have every feeling of respect and deference to my Sove-
reign, and every desire to meet her wishes and to set her
daughter forth in happiness, I cannot forget bow my
country has been treated by that house to which the Prin-
cess Royal is about ally herself. (Cheers.) Sir, this being
the case, and receiving this as a warning, I say to the
house of Commons, do not hamper this country or your-
selves by an annuity paid every year. Let her have every-
thing that her necessities and her happiness require ; let it
be done generously, but let it be done once and for ever.
(Cheers.)
Lord PALMERSTON—I entreat the house not to enter
by anticipation into a discussion upon a proposition which
my right hon. friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer is
prepared to submit to the consideration of the house. I
make every allowance for the earnestness of the opinions
of the hon. and learned gentleman, but I submit to the
house that it is neither consistent with the respect that is
due to the Crown nor to the efficiency of our proceedings
to discuss a matter which is not yet laid before the house.
(Hear.) My right hen. friend will state the proposal we
intend to make and the reasons upon which it is founded,
and when the house knows what we propose it will then be
the fit time to discuss the subject. (Hear, hear.)
The house then went into committee, Mr. FITZROY in
the chair.

The address in answer to the Qaeen'a message having
been read by the Clerk at the table.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER then rose
and said—ln rising to request the house to redeem the
pledge whioh it has already given in its address to her
Majesty to take into consideration her gracious message
respecting the marriage of the Princess Royal, I trust that
I need not say one word to them to entreat them not to
suffer their judgment in any way to be anticipated by the
remarks which they have just heard from the hon. and
learned gentleman, but to enter into the examination of
the question with unbiassed minds, and to form their opi-
nion upon the facts and arguments which it will be my
duty to submit to them. Before I proceed to state the pro-
position which I shall presently place in the chairman's
hands I beg the committee to allow me to explain the na-
ture of the arrangement by which the Sovereign and the
Royal Family are provided for, in respect to ther mainte-
nance and their pecuniary means under our constitutional
laws and regulations. My hon. friend the member for
Sheffield said that this was an occasion on which we must
be just before we are generous. Now, in the proposition
which I have to submit to the house I shall not appeal
merely to their generosity. What I have to put before
them will address itself to their sense of justice. It is
well known to the committee that in former days the
Crown of this country possessed large hereditary estates,
and that the entire expenses of the Sovereign and
his family were defrayed out of those revenues, which were
regarded as the inherent property of the Crown. By a suc-
cession of constitutional compacts those hereditary revenues
have been surrendered to Parliament, which at the same
time engaged to make an adequate provision for the dignity
and the honour of the Crown, and for the maintenance of
the Royal Family. During the last century the surrender
of those revenues was pirtial, and since the reign of Wil-
liam IV. that surrender has been entire. It has been
deemed a matter of policy in this country wholly to strip
and denude the Sovereign of all hereditary property, and
to render him during his life entirely dependent upon the
bounty of Parliament. We see that in foreign States pos-
sessing free institutions this constitutional jealousy has not
I been observed. It is well known that after the expulsion
of Charles X. from his throne, and the succession of Louis
Philippe, the latter was not called upon to surrender the
large hereditary possessions of the House of Orleans, but
retained them as King of France, and, indeed, retained
them for some time after he had ceased to be the Sovereign
of that country. A similar arrangement exists in the
kingdom with which the Princess Royal is about to con-
tract a matrimonial alliance—l mean Prussia. Although
the kingdom of Prussia possess constitutional forme, and is
governed by a Parliament associated with the King,never-
theless the Royal family has a hereditary provision
which renders it independent of the votes of the Prussian
Parliament. In England a different course has been fol-
lowed, dictated by a constitutional jealousy of the over`
weaning power of the Crown. The Crown has been de-
prived of its hereditary revenues. But in consequence of
that deprivation there arises on the part of Parliament a
corresponding elongation to make a sufficient provision for
the maintenance and the dignity of the Crown. (Hear,
hear.) Therefore, on occasions of this kind, when it is the
duty of the Executive Government to appeal to this house
to make provision for those wants of the Crown which have
not been included in the settlement of the Civil List,
an obligation arises not merely of generosity and bounty on
the part of this house, but one of strict justice, owing to
the uirangesnent which has been made with respect to the
hereditary revenues of the Crown. With the view of show-
ing the nature of the position of her present Majesty in re-
gard to her income and expenditure, I will state the azrange-
rn en ts of the present Civil List, and then contrast them with
the Civil List of King George 111., with which it appears to
me most naturally to come into comparison ; and for this
reason—that her Majesty has a numerous family growing
up and to be provided for. The same was the case with
King George 111., but it was not the case with any of the
Sovereigns intermediate between King George 111. and her
present Majesty. Now, the committee ought to be informed
that the comparison of the Civil List of King George 111.
with that of her present Majesty is not a perfectly simple
question, inasmuch as the Civil List of ding George 111.
was founded on principles different from those on which
the Civil List of the present reign was constructed. Agree-
ably to the arrangement by which not only the personal
expenses of the Sovereign, but also various branches of
civil government were charged upon the hereditary revenues
of the Crown, the Civil List of King George 111. included
several important heads of expense not comprised in the
present Civil List—such expenses, for instance, as the
salaries of the judges and those of the diplomatic agents
abroad. Therefore, in order to make the comparison fair,
it is necessary to extract those items only of the Civil List
of King George 111. which correspond with the Civil List
of the present reign. I have made that extract, and it is
as follows :

CIVIL LIST OF GEORGE 111.
Per annum.
Privy purse £60,000
Household bills
Ditto salaries
Ditto other salaries 16,905
Royal bounty, &e.

Total 447,436
Thus, 447,4361. per annum was nearly the corresponding
•barge for the Civil List of King George 111., as contrasted
with that of the present reign. With the permission of the
house I will make a short quotation from the Commenta-
ries of Sir W. Blackstone—(laughter)—in which he ex-
presses his opinion upon the Civil List of King Geo. 111.
And the committee will see on this comparisonjwhether the
Civil List of her Majesty may or may not be deemed mode-
rate. This passage was written near the beginning of the
reign of King Geo. 111., and it conveys the opinion of a
very competent authority on that arrangement. Sir Wm.
Blackstone, in vol. 1, page 335, says :--
And though complaints have sometimes been made of
the increase of the Civil List, yet, if we consider the sums
that have been formerly granted, the limited extent under
which it is now established, the revenues and prerogatives
given up in lien of it by the Crown, the numerous branches
of the present royal family, and above all the diminution
of the value of money compared with what it was worth in
the last century, we must acknowledge these complaints to
be void of any rational foundation, and that it is impos-
sible to support that dignity which a King of Great Britain
should maintain with an income in any degree less than
what is now established by Parliament."
This was the judgment of one who may be taken as a com-
petent witness on the moderateness of the Civil List of
King Geo. 111. Let me now compare with that Civil List
the items of her present Majesty's Civil List.
The Civil List of the Queen's is as follows :

Ist class, Privy purse £60,000
2d „ Salaries. 131,260
3d „ Expenses
4th „ Royal bounty, dm 13,200
,sth „ Pensions -
6th „ Unappropriated 8,040

Total
The present salaries are 10,0001. more than the allowance
in the reign of George 111. Then the Committee must
bear in mind this fact, that at that time there was
an extensive system of perquisites, gratuities, and fees
paid to members of the Royal household, and even I believe
to the servants of that household. Therefore, taking into
consideration that system, the allowance for salaries was
then greater than it is now. The total amount of the pre-
sent Civil List is 385,0001. as compared with 447,0001., the
amount of the Civil List of George 111. With the permis-
sion of the committee I will next call their attention to
certain other facts which aro material to the question be-
fore us. In the first place King George 111. aid not sur-
render the whole of his hereditary revenues. Therefore,
in addition to the allowance made for the Civil List he had
certain hereditary revenues, out of which a portion of his
expenses were defrayed. It appears that not less a sum
than 12,705,461/. was placed at the disposal of the Crown
from the hereditary revenues during the reign of Geo. 111.
Of this sum 2 600
0001. was applied to the public service,
and 3,372,834'
1. was appropriated in payment of prize. I
money during the war,
leaving a sum of not less than
6,732,927/. applicable to Civil List expenses. The commit-
tee will therefore observe that in addition to the Civil
List provided by Parliament and
l payable from Parliamen-tarp
of oGrarbogeupsiii. hmeirlieocue vs
aenddinathhealcfoutrhsee
his
f urnedisgntostinnt
whole of which has been surrendered by her present, the
and no portion of which is receivable by her family.
The Royal hereditary revenue of Geo, 111. received during
the minority of the Prince of Wales the revenues of the
Duchy of Cornwall. A different course has been pursued
during the reign of her Majesty ; the whole, of the revenues
of the Duchy of Cornwall have bsen set apart for his Royal
',Highness the Prince of Wales, and a portion of them has

been applied to the expanses of his education and mainte-
nance, but the whole of the surplus has been vested for his
future benefit. That source of revenue, therefore, which
was enjoyed by King Geo. 111. has not accrued in any re-
spect to our present Queen. But, in addition to this source
of revenue which King Geo. 111. possessed, but which her
Majesty does not possess, there was at the same time
carried on by the King and the Royal family a system of
incurring debts which were discharged by this house, but
from which system the reign of her Majesty has been alto-
gether exempt. (Cheers.) The Civil List at that period
was treated as a very elastic fund, considerable debts were
incurred in various branches from year to year, and at cer-
tain periods the executive Government came down to Par-,
liement and proposed votes in Committee of Supply to pay
off the debts of the Civil List. Those debts, therefore, in-
cluded the expenses of the evil Government as well as the
personal expenses of the Sovereign. There might be, for
Instance, some extraordinary payments for diplomatic pur-
poses or other similar objects, and these would be voted in
a general sum, together with the payments far the personal
expenses of the Sovereign. It is therefore impossible on
merely looking at the votes for the excesses of the Civil List
at that period to define, without examination, what por-
tion of them were for the personal debts of the Sovereign ;
but a considerable portion of them were undoubtedly for
'that object. I will trouble the Committee with merely a
short statement of the amount of debts on the Civil List
paid during the reign of George 111. I think they will he
surprised] at the 'large amounts that were thus defrayed,
and the frequent appeals which must have been made to
the liberality of Parliament for what was in fact an in-
crease to a great extent of the allowance of the Sovereign
fixed by the Civil List. In 1769 there was a sum of
513,5001. voted ; in 1777, 618,300/. ; in 1784, 60,000/. ; in
1786, 210,0001. ; in 1802, 990,0001. ; in 1804, 591,0001. ; in
1805, 104,0001; in 1814, 118,0001. in 1816, 185,00/. ;
making altogether for votes granted by this house for ex-
cesses in the Civil List in the reign of George 111. not loss
than 3,297,0001. But I do not meaji tosay that the wholeor
even half that sum was for the maintenance of the royal
family, but a considerable portion of it was, in fact an aug-
mentation of the expenses of the Sovereign as fixed by the
Civil List. In addition to the sums which I have stated,
George 111. received certain indirect benefits from the cessa-
tion of charges for annuities to members of the Royal family
which had been fixed upon the Civil List. In addition to the
allowance made to King George 111. on his accession, the
following allowances were added to the Civil List—viz.,
the Princess Dowager of Wales, 50,0001. a-year ; the Duko
of Cumberland, 15,0001. a-year ; and the Princess Amelia
12,0001. a-year ; making altogether 77,0001. a-year. On the
cessation of these annuities from natural causes, the Civil
List was, in fact, relieved to that extent. There were also
other charges of a similar nature for the younger branches
of the Royal family which, by a similar cessation, benefited
the privy purse of the King, or at all events the Civil List,
to the extent of 36,0001. a-year. Therefore the result of
what I have stated is that George 111. during his life re-
ceived from the unsurrendered branches of the hereditary
revenues 6,732,6271., and from special grants 3,297,0001.,
making altogether 10,029,627/. A considerable portion, no
doubt, of the hereditary revenues was for expenses of the
civil government charged on the Civil List; but I am un-
able to state the precise portion. Nevertheless, another con-
siderable portion was in aid of those branches of the Civil
List which weradestined for the maintenance and benefit
of the Sovereign. The Civil List also benefited by the ces-
sation of annuities to the extent of 113,0001. a-year in ad-
dition to what I have already mentioned. Besides the
greater magnitude of the Civil List, whieh I have already
explained, there were other allowances which George 111.
possessed, and by the non-possessson of which her present
Majesty is placed in a less favourable position. The an-
nuity to Queen Charlotte the Queen Consort, was originally
fixed at 58,000/. a-year, but at the commencement of the
malady by which George 111. was affiieted it was increased
by 10,000/., making altogether 68,0001. a-year, whereas
the annuity of the present Consort, Prince Albert, is only
30,0001. a-year. Allowances were likewise made for the
maintenance of the children of George 111. from an early
age. No such allowance has hitherto been asked for on be-
half of her Majesty. There were allowances for the Prince of
Wales and the Duke of York from an early period, and
also for other members of the Royal family. At a later
time ample provision was made by Parliament by succes-
sive arrangements for the maintenance and education of the
Princess Charlotte by grants to the Prince Regent, whereas
nothing has been asked for the education of the daughters of
the Queen. In 1801 the Civil List debts for the support of
the Princess Charlotte were 21,9671., and they were voted
in 1802. On the 4th June, 1801, the Prince of Wales was
allowed out of the Civil Liet 6,1001. a-year for the Princess
Charlotte when she was three or four years old, and that
was continued until her marriage with Prince Leopold. By
the 145th of the 46th year of the reign of George 111. a fur-
ther sum of 7,0001. was allowed to the Princess Charlotte.
In 1813 further annual sums varying from 1,4001. to 1,8001.
were paid to the Princess out of the Civil List. In 1801 a
sum of 28,6351. had been incurred on account of the
younger branches of theßoyal family. These examples prove
that at that time we were in the habit of making allow-
ances for th e maintenance and education of younger branches
of the Royal' family even from an early age, but of such al-
lowances we have hitherto had no instance in her Majesty's
reign. Her present Majesty has been subjected to large ex-
penses of a public nature, which could scar oely have entered
into the consideration of Parliament when the Civil List
was arranged, with regard to which, however, she has made
no claim upon this house, although assistance for similar
purposes was granted in former reigns. I allude particularly
to the visit which her Majesty paid to the Emperor Louis
Napoleon at Paris—a visit which was purely for public and
State purposes, and not for her private pleasure. (Cries of
" Oh !" and great laughter.) That visit was not merely for
the personal enjoyment of her Majesty, but for the public
good, as was well understood at the time, and it was ac-
cepted as such by the Emperor Napoleon. (Hear, hear.)
I can hardly conceive that it is a novel idea to the house
that the visit of our Sovereign to the Sovereign of a
foreign country is not so much for that personal gratifi-
cation which a private individual enjoys in visits, but
rather for a more general and political object. Similar
visits were made by his Majesty King George IV., to
his electoral dominions of Hanover, and to Scotland and
Ireland; but, instead of the expense of those visits being de-
frayed exclusively from the Civil List, ho received in 1821
from the Admiralty droits a sum of 40,C001., and in 1822
a sum of 52,970/. There is also a large expenditure which
in former reigns was defrayed out of the Civil List, or in
some cases out of the civil contingencies fund. I allude to
the expenses attending the visits of foreign sovereigns and
foreign princes to this country. In former reigns, too,
there were considerable charges on account of the erection
of palaces for the sovereign, whereas her Majesty has out of
her own purse paid for furniture and repairs at Bucking.
ham Palace one amount of 12,8001., and another of 21,3001.
It appears, too that while on the one hand her Majesty has
voluntarily subjected herself to expense under those heads,
the Civil List has, on the ether hand, been diminished by a
payment of 6,1801. per annum for income tax in time of
peace, and of 15,5001. per annum in time of war. (Cheers.)
The Committee will thus see that while on the one hand
the allowance to George 111. was clinch greater than the
allowance to her Majesty, she on the other has undertaken
various expenses which George 111. was not called on to
defray. 'That being the case, I think I have shown the
Committee good grounds for sowing to the conclusion that
the provision which I shall ask them to make with regard
to the Princess Royal is one which appeals not merely to
their generosity, but also to their sense of justice. (Cheers.)
Without dwelling on this subject, I would remind the
house that her Majesty on no occasion since the commence-
ment of her reign made any appeal to this house for the
payment of debts, that her household has been carried on
with a strict regard to economy, that she has maintained
her establishments within the income allowe I by Parlia-
ment, and that she has to the very letter fulfilled her duty
as a constitutional Sovereign, which, in this respect con-
sists in observing with perfect strictness and integrity the
contract made with her at the beginning of her reign as an
ample provision for :her annual expenses. (Cheers.) In
making comparisons I may seem to disparage former Sove-
reigns of this country, but I cannot refrain from calling
the attention of the Committee to the example which her
Majesty has set at all events to all future Sovereigns in the
strictness and integrity with which she has discharged that
obligation. (Hear.) The committee are aware that the Civil
List arranged at the commencement of the present reign
makes no provision for the younger branches of the Royal
family, and that it makes no provision for such an event as
that now contemplated—viz., the marriage of her Majesty's
eldest daughter. It makes provision only for the duration
of the Queen's life, which provision shall entirely cease
when another Sovereign succeeds to the throne, and the
hereditary revenues cf the Crown are resumed by him.
Therefore, in the event of the house making any provision
to endure for the life of the Princess Royal, it is neces-
sary that a special grant should be made in her behalf.
(Hear.) As the lion, and learned member for Sheffield has
adverted to prececents, I will take the liberty to call the
attention of the committee to two precedents—(a laugh)—
which bear on this case. The first precedent is that of the
Princess Royal, daughter of George 11. (Great laughter.)
I am at a loss to understand why gentlemen laugh. It may
provoke the merriment of the house to call its attention to
a precedent of this kind, bat if I do not perhaps I may be
taunted with having kept back from the house information
which It is desirable it should possess. (" Hear," and
laughter.) lam not bound to give gentlemen information
on matters of history—(more laughter)—but surely the ac-
cession of the House of Hanover is not an event so remote
that my allusion to the second monarch of the line should
provoke merriment, or that it should be a matter of sur-
prise when I refer to precedents in that reign which are
not inapplicable to the present case. (Hear.) The Princess
Royal, the daughter of George 11., formed in 1734 a mar-
riage with the Prince of Orange, which, though gentlemen
seem entirely to have forgotten it—(laughter)—very much
interested the nation at chat time, and was received with ri
great joy and cougratulation. (Cheers and laughter.) The
question, however, to which I wish to direct the attention
of the committee is the provision made by Parliament on
that occasion. An annuity out of the Civil List of 5,0001.
per annum was granted for life, and an act of Parliament
—viz., the ith of George ll.—was passed for that purpose.
(Laughter.) In addition to the annuity so fixed she had a
dowry of 80,000/., raised by the sale of certain lands in one
of the West India islands, and that under the sanction of
another act passed in the 6th of George 11. (Laughter.)
The Princess Royal, the daughter of George 111., received
a similar provision when she married the hereditary Prince
of Wurtemberg in 1797. She received a dowry of 80,0001.
and an annuity of 5,0001. from the Irish Parliament. On
the consolidation of the two exchequers this annuity came
to be paid from the British exchequer, and I may fur-
ther mention that one-half of the larger portion given
to that Princess was settled upon her children. In sub-
mitting our proposition with respect to the provision for
the marriage of the present Princess Royal we have follow-
ed as nearly as possible these two precedents ; but, on ac-
count of the difference which exists in the circumstances of
this marriage, we have altered the proportion which the
annuity bears to the marriage portion. If the Government
had thought it desirable to agree to the suggestion of the
hon. and learned member for Sheffield to reject altogether
the plan of an annuity, they might have proposed a sum
which, when invested, would have prodaced a sufficient
annuity for her Royal Highness, and which at her death ,
would have accrued for the benefit of her children. That
seems to have been the idea which dictated the proposition
of so large a marriage portion as 80,0001. in the case of the
daughter of Geerge III.; but, inasmuch as the person with
whom her Royal Highness the present Princessianee itshtahte heir presumptive
similar
provision t o the
r
Royal is
and the Government thought it
about to c omnn
otar aty cdhtinraabl
presumedll e
ttitiinsg to propose an annuity of 800,1. and a marriage
childrenolt hor roenefi,
portion of only 40,0001. In the case of the provision which
was made in 1797 the sum of 80,0001. was invested in the
name of trustees in the English funds, and on account of
the low state of consols at the time--under 50, I think—it
produced 165,0001. stook, the income arising from which
was 4,930/. Therefore, taking the annuity granted by the
Irish Parliament into account, the provision made for the
then Princess Royal amounted to just upon 10,0001. a-year.
I trust that the committee will
rtoyagarleeHtioghthniessrse.aslonnacbalseeasnodf
perfect unanimity; some
tmhoisdesorartteitpLovvisaiionn
toforhohpeor
for
persons may wish to make the annuity smaller and the
marriage portion larger, but on the whole I think the pro-
Ipoilsoapl
ewthhiocnhoTuahaavewmillandeo
bisdireasonable
eagnrda
emiooudeenreastse, of andits

act by criticisms npou the proportions which the marriage
portion and tne annuity bear to each other. Perhaps,
before I sit down I may be permitted to call attention to
the fcct that Prince Frederick William of Prussia, whose
marriage with her daughter her Majesty has sanctioned, is
not an alien in blood from the Royal Family. He is a de-
scendant in the direct male line from the daughter of
George I. and is, in truth, within the limitation of the
Act of Settlement, being a descendant of the Electress
Sophia and a Protestant, and the alliance, therefore, which
her Royal Highness is about to contract is iu complete ac-
cordance with the recognised policy of this country. I
hope, therefore, that the house will have no hesitation in
agreeing to this proposal. The rules of the house make it
necessary that I should move the resolution relating toths
annuity in this committee, and that relating to the mar-
riage portion in committee of supply, but that is merely a
natter of form, and it will only be necessary, after agree-
ing to the first resolution, for the Speaker to take the chair
in order to enable us to form a committee of supply. The
right hon. gentleman concluded by moving the following
resolution, That an annual sum of 8,0001. be granted to
her Majesty out of the Consolidated Fund, the said annuity
to be settled ou her Royal Highness tha Princess Royalfor
her life, i n such a manner as her Majesty may think pro-
per, commencing from the date of the marriage of her
Royal Highness with his Royal Highness Prince Frederick
William of Prussia."

Mr. Coningham and Mr. Roebuck rose together, but
there being loud calls for " Roebuck" Mr. Coningham gave
way.

Mr. ROEBUCK said—l rise to move an amendment to
the effect that a provision be made for her Royal Highness
by way of a certain sure. It appears to me that by an an-
nuity we get ourselves into great difficulty; we enter into
what our cousins across the water call " entangling alli-
ances." If we at once provide a certain sum we discharge
our obligation to the Sovereign, we provide completely for
the happiness of the Royal lady, and we get rid of the
anneal grievance of an annual payment. (Hear.) The
right hon. gentleman told us that upon the accession of
William IV. the whole of the hereditary revenues of the
Crown wore given up, but surely the hon. gentleman was in
error. Every year there is paid into the privy purse a sum
of 20,0001. from the Dachy of Lancaster. (Hear.) I re-
collect, having been a student of Lord Grey's Administra-
tion, that previous to that noble lord coming into office,
when the Duke of Wellington was Primo Minister, it was
supposed by those in opposition that all the hereditary
Crown revenues were given up, and Mr. Brougham com-
plimented the sovereign on his magnanimity ; but he was
obliged afterwards to call back his words, as the whole
hereditary revenues of the Crown had not been given up,
the Duchy of Lancaster having been retained. Therefore,
it is not quite so correct to say that the position of her
Majesty is very different from that of George 111. (Hear.)
But surely George 111. and his doings are not to be brought
into this Parliament—the doings of an unreformed Parlia-
ment are not to be held up as an example to us. Nothing
could be more preposterous than tho doings of George 111.
and his Parliament; so preposterous wore they that when
Lord Grey came into power—the right hon. gentleman be-
hind me (Sir J. Graham) will remember the circumstance
—upon a motion of Sir H. Parnell, carried against the
then Ministry, the Civil List was separated, and from that
time the Civil List has been conducted ou rational prin-
ciples—Parliament has known, in fact, what it has been
doing. But let me recall to the house what we are doing.
Every year we pay to the Sovereign of this country very
nearly a sum of 4u0,0001. We have provided for her Con-
sort. (Hear.) We have not only given him 30,000/. a-year
but many lucrative offices besides. We havejust built for
her Majesty that—l wont call it a magnificent palace, for I
think it an abortion; but that is not our own fault. It
cost the nation a groat sum of money, and, measuring it
by its cost, was a great thing for us to do. But I will ask
has one thing been wanting to her Majesty's comfort— (hear)
—or to the comfort of her consort or of her family? Have
we not been to her a generous nation 4 She has returned our
generosity. (Hear.) She has shown herself worthy of the
people over whom she rules; but we have shown ourselves
equally worthy of her. Therefore I think I am justified in
saying that we have given with no niggard hand everything
which was required for her comfort or her honour. I will
not follow the right hon gentleman in his talk about how
much she has expended upon her journeys. I will not
enter into the consideration of whether those journeys
were for her pleasure or for the profit of the country—l
hope that they combined these results—(hear, hear)—but I
will say that, looking to the interests of the country, and
looking to the future for, recollect, I repeat the phrase,
we have a large family to provide for, and it is somewhat
hard that we, who represent the hard-banded, hard-work-
ing, and often sorrowing people of England--{hear, hear)
--ehould not remember those whom we represent, but
should only cast our eyes upward and pay all the deference
and aloration which power always obtains—l say that, as
the representatives of the hardworking people of England,
we are bound, not to be just before we are generous-4
never said we were—but while we are generous we are
bound also to be just. (Hoar, hear.) Therefore I will
move, by way of amendment

"That in the opinion of this committee a suitable mar-
riage portion should be granted to her Royal Highness the
Princess [loyal in lieu of any annuity. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. W. WILLIAMS seconded the amendment. He
had known no question relating to the expenditure of the
public money in which the people of England had taken so
deep an interest as they had iu this subject; and the do-
sire out of doors certainly was that a round sum, and not
an annuity, should be paid to her Royal Highness. He was
anxious to deal liberally with this question, but he should
like to be informed whether the Government intended to
continue the payment of this annuity to the Princess
Royal, after she became Queen of Prussia. Nothing could,
be more offensive to the people of England than the pay-
ment of money raised by taxes levied upon them to the
Queen either of rrnssia or of any other foreign country ;
and it was worthy the consideration of the Government
whether this annuity—if an annuity were granted—should
not cease when her Royal Highness became, as she pro-
bably would, Queen of Prussia. (Cries of " Divide !
divide !")

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER.—The pro-
position of the hon. and learned gentleman is very diffi-
cult to deal with, because he does not state what gross sum
he proposes to give to her Royal Highness. He has not
stated that the proposition of the Government is an un-
reasonable one; and if he proposes to give a sum which
will produce anything approaching to the annuity now
suggested he must increase the sum to be voted in com-
mittee of supply to a very large amount. Allow me to say
that, although he professes to speak for the poor taxpayer,
he would, according to his plan, make a bargain which
would be exceedingly disadvantageous to the public. He
proposes that a largo sum of money should be invested in
she hands of trustees who should pay the interest to her
Royal Highness, rya that at her death the principal sum
should be divided among
(here a(Hear.)
)c h
sdrree nli
have
vs shee
thmaydiminishede marriage
portion What I propose is that the larger part of the grant should
be in the form of an annuity terminating with the life of
rlelsrs"reason that it
her Royal Highness.
part of the grant
proportion which in the case of the two Princesses Royal,
appearedther or tdioanu gbhottroee rust
soo
desirable
the e
ao.nrgu edttlyo.
fiao;:rcdrtehGa
ese
increase
the
a
which would cease with the life of the Princess Royal, and
to diminish that which would be granted to her and her
descendants in perpetuity. With reference to the objec-
tion which has been made to granting an annuity, let me
for, moment call the attention of the committee in the
first place to the fact that that has been the way in which
former Parliaments have provided for the members of the
Royal family, and in the next place to the great reduction
which those annuities have undergone since the accession
of her present Majesty- The annuities granted or in-
creased and those which have dropped during her Ma-
jesty's reign ara shown by the following table :
Annuities propped. I Annuities Granted or Increased.

1839. Duchess of Kent
and Princess Vic-
toria •• £22,0 0
184). Princess Elizabeth 13,000
Princess Augusta • • 13,000
1043. 11.11.11. the Duke
of Sussex .... • .
1845. 11./I.EI. the Prin-
cess Sophia of
Gloucester
1848.11.11.11. the Prin-
cess Sophia .. • • 16,000
18:9. Queen Adelaide 100,000
1850. 11.K.H. the Duke
of Cambridge •• • • 27,000
1852. H.R.H. the Duke
orCumbealand,late
King of lianover.• 21,000
1857. 11.R.fl the Duchess
of Gloucester

1839. The Duchess of KentX3o,ooo
1830. Princess Sophia 3,000
Princess Mary,
Duchess of Gleces-
ter ••• • • • 3.000
11 11 11. Prince Al-
bert of tiakeCoburg
and Gotha
1850. 11.11.11. the Duke
of Cambridge
E.R.H. the Prin-
cess brary of Cam-,
bridge .
n.R.11. the Prin-
cess Augusta, now
Duchess of Meek-
- lenburg-Strelita 3,000
The Duchess of Cam-
bridge

X 256,00:,

Granted .... 90,000
Saving ...... 166,000

Diminution of charge•• ...... X 166,000

*£256,000

The committee must see that if they accede to the pro-
posal now made for granting the annuity of 8,000/., the
charge on the consolidated fund will be slight indeed
compared with what it was at her Majesty's accession
tion to the throne. In reference to the objection of
my hon. and learned friend (Mr. Roebuck), that in the
event of a wer with Prussia there would be an im-
propriety iu paying this annuity, I am unwilling to con-
template any such contingency, but I would call the atten-
tion of the committee to the tact that during the late war
with Russia this nation, true to its financial engagements,
continued to discharge the interest of the Russian loan,
which was an international obligation very.different from
that which would exist towards tho Princess Royal. With
these explanations, I trust that the committee will have no
difficulty in agreeing to the original motion. (Hear, hear.)
Sir C. NAPIEi said, that it appeared to him that be-
fore the house settled the dowry of her Royal Highness,
they ought to be informed what settlement the King of
Prussia intended to make upon his nephew. (Laughter.)
That was the practice in matrimonial alliances entered into
between private families, and he did not think that a prac-
tice so salutary ought to be departed from. (Hoar, hear,
and laughter.)

Lord J. RUSSELL—I confess, Sir, that the question to
be decided by the committee appears to me to too a suffi-
ciently simple one. When her Majesty came to the throne
an arrangement was made--not, I conceive, one of extra-
vagant generosity, as represented by the hon. and learned
member for Sheffield, but one by which a sum was settled
upon her Majesty which was considered a fitting sum to
enable her to maintain her royal dignity ---(hear, hear)—a
sum not greater than any Sovereign of this country ought
to receive to enable him or her to maintain the dignity of
the throne. (Loud cheers.) That settlement was made upon
a very just princiale, established by Lord Grey, and Lord
Althorp, which
provided that, instead of having a Civil
List, of which part should go to the household, part to the
judges, and part to the Speaker of this house, and part to
the diplomatic service, a certain sum should be given to
the Privy Purse and to the Lord Chamberlain and Lord
Steward to maintain the household of her Majesty. Ac-
cording to that principle, there was settled upon her Ma-
jesty the sum which it was thought proper for the nation
to grant to its Sovereign. (Hear, hear) Now, the hon. and
learned gentlealan says that we have been showing extra-
ordinary generosity, but I confess I am unable to see
where. (Hear.) Since the settlement to which I have re-
ferred was made we have bad no pecuniary transactions
with the Sovereign of these realms. (Hear.) Her Majesty
has done that which the nation readily acknowledges (hear,
hear) ; she has preserved duo economy and order in her
household—(hear)—and has avoided any extravagance of
expenditure which might have made it necessary for her to
apply to this house for means to pay debts which she had
contracted, while, at the same time, she has maintained
the splendour of the throne and the dignity of the nation.
(Loud cheers.) That being the case, we have now, twenty
years after the accession of her Majesty, an application
made to us ou an extraordinary occasion. Her Majesty's
beloved daughter is about to be married, and the match is

.

not only a suitable match, but I believe also that it is a
match of affection, to a prince of a Protestant country—a I
prince of the Royal. House of Prussia, and it is necessary I
that some provision should be made for her upon the occa- I
sion. It appears to roe, sir, that the best way we can an-
swer
the appeal which is now made to us is to agree to the I
proposal brought forward by the advisers of the Crown if
it contains nothing preposterous or extravagant. (Cheers.)
As far es I myself am concerned, I consider that the pro- I
posal for a settlement of a capital sum of 40,0001. and an
annunity of 8,0001. is by no means an extravagant proposal
—(cheers)--and more particularly when I consider that it
has been the custom to provide fur the eldest daushter of
the Sovereign a more ample dowry than for the younger
members of the family. The hon. and learned gentleman
proposes that the dowry of her Royal Highness should
be given at once, in one fixed KM. Now, sir, I confess
that I see no advantage to be derived from such a course.
(Hear, hear.) On the contrary, it appears to me that,
as the Princess Royal, upon her marriage, will not be
placed at once in aposition which will give her a very large
income, it is desirable that upon her first entrance into
Prussia she should receive such an annuity as might befit
tne nation from which she came, and also the people of
whom some day she may be the Sovereign. (Hear, hear.)
So far from thinking; as the hon. and learned gentleman
seems to think, that the poorer classes of the community
may be indisposed towards the grant, for my part I believe
that there is no class, however poor, which will not be
ready to testify affection towards her Majesty —(hear)—
and I am persuaded that the people of this country will
display their readiness in snaking not an extravagant but a
proper provision for the Princess Royal, the eldest daughter
of their Sovereign. (Hear, hear.) Under these circum-
stances I can take no other course than to agree with the
proposal of her Majesty's Government. If the right hon.
gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer had proposed
a capital sum I would have listened to the reasons which
he advanced, but the right hon. gentleman has stated his
reasons why an annual sum should be fixed, and he has
stated very truly that, under the proposed arrangement,
should the Princess Royal be blessed with a family, there
will be no occasion for a large capital sum to be settled
upon her children, as was necessary in the case of the
Princess of Wurtemberg. With that family I have but
little acquaintance, but I have some acquaintance with
Prince Frederick William of Prussia, and a man more
faithful to his word Ido not know. (Hear, hear.) He is
a highly talented and distinguished Prince, and permit me
to express a hope that the Princess Royal, when she leaves
the country and the house in which she has been brought
up, may practise all those domestic virtues in which the
family to which she belongs so pre-eminently excel—(hear)
—and that in the land of her adoption she may find a home
in which the remainder of her days may be spent in com-
fort and happiness. (Loud cheers.)
Mr. ROEBUCK—There was something in the tone of
the noble lord which seemed to imply that I was finding
fault with the magnitude of the dowry proposed. Now,
Sir, I think that I began by saying that I believed it to be
the desire of the house to provide for a daughter of Eng-
land in a manner befitting her honour and our own—(hear,
bear)—and I stated that this house had never dealt with
the Sovereign in a niggard spirit. (Hear, hear.) All that I
propose is that the sum to be given should be given in a
different manner. Now, what the Government proposes to
give is equivalent to 216,0001. (" No, no.") I beg pardon
—22 years' purchase of the annuity added to the capital
sum of 40,0001. amounts to 216,0001. Now, the right hon.
gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer has stated that
the fixed sum must be voted in Committee of Supply, and
therefore I am not called upon to make any suggestion
with regard to that sum in this committee. The house is
capable of judging what sum is necessary, and I am cer-
tain that the provision which it will make, whatever may
bo the form in which it is made, will be worthy of the
house and of her Royal Highness; but, for my own part,
I am persuaded that we should best discharge our duties
by fixing a certain capital sum. (Hear, hear.) The ques-
tion is one upon which different opinions may exist; but
I do not think that any imputation can rest upon me for
the course which I have felt it my duty to pursue. (Hoar.)
Mr. B &SS would prefer an annuity to a capital sum.
He thought that the form of dowry proposed by the Go-
vernment was that which would best satisfy the people of
this country_ There was another consiaeration which
ought not to be lost sight of. Prussia had, within a very
few years, suffered from political convulsions, which might
recur, and the Princess Royal might be driven back to this
country. (Oh, oh !) God forbid that such a thing sbonld
occur, but at the same time the possibility of it ought not
entirely to bo lost sight of.
Mr. CLAY thought the committee ought not to divide
until they understood the question upon which the division
was to take place. (Hear, hear.) He should therefore wish
to know from the hon. and learned member for Sheffield
whether his objection was to the amount of the sum pro.
posed or merely to the mode in which that sum was to be
paid. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. ROEBUCK.—I have not the slightest hesitation in
saying, Sir, that my objection is both to the amount and to
the manner in which it is proposed to be paid.
Mr. DISRAELL—The right hon. gentleman the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer has given it as his opinion that una-
nimity was not to be expected among the members of this
House upon an occasion like the present. I confess, how-
ever, that the question under our notice seems to me to be
one with respect to which it is most desirable that unani-
mity should prevail. (Hear, hear.) So long as that ques-
tion related merely to the form in which the intentions of
the House should be carried into effect our difference of
ojeinion with respect to it was of a very narrow character,
and until the last declaration made by the honourable and
learned member for Sheffield I confidently hoped that we
might arrive at a decision without being compelled to go
through the ceremony of dividing, (Cheers.) But, as I now
understand the views of the hon. and learned gentleman,
he objects not only to the amount of the grant, but to the
form in which it is proposed to be made, and I therefore
cannot refrain, Sir, from troubling the House with a few
observations before we go to a division. I have, for my
own part, :always felt that the Crown of England is placed
in a somewhat painful position when it is obliged to appeal
in this or in analogous cases to the liberality of the House
of Commons. We should, however. I think, bear in mind
what the causes are which have rendered such appeals ne-
cessary. The jealousy of Parliament has, in my opinion,
carried somewhat too far the principle that the Crown
should, upon occasions of comparative insignificance, have
recourse to its aid and asssistance. (Hear, hear.) That
jealousy it is which requires those appeals to be made,
and it therefore becomes us to consider them in a cordial
and generous spirit when they are brought under our
notice. (Hear.) Ido not mean to follow the right hon.
gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer through the
ample and minute details—(hear, hear, and a laugh)— with
which he has favoured us in reference to the pecuniary
position of King George 111. Taking a broad view, how-
ever, of the relative situations of our present Sovereign
and her illustrious grandfather, it must be admitted that
the latter Sovereign obtained supplies from the Civil List
of which her Majesty has not the advantage. (Hear.) It
must also be borne in mind that, independent of the sup-
plies to which the right hon. gentleman has referred, her
Majesty has been deprived of those revenues of the king-
dons of Hanover which her predecessor enjoyed ' • nor
ought we to forget that during the 20 years of her happy
reign no appeal to this house has been made in consequence
of any debts incurred in connection with the Civil List,
while, as the noble lord the member for London has re-
minded us, a splendid hospitality, combined with a just
economy, is maintained by the Sovereign in a manner
which reflects honour and dignity upon the nation. (Hear.)
I cannot agree with the hon. and learned member for
Sheffield that the Civil List is settled upon her Majesty
solely for her own advantage, and to promote the comfort
and happiness of the Royal family. Upon the contrary,
I think that the high ceremonial and etiquette which it
contributes to uphold concern the dignity of the country
quite as much as they do the convenience of the Sove-
reign. (Hear, hear.) Taking these circumstances, then,
into consideration, I am bound to acknowledge—as, in-
deed, all those bon. members who have spoken this even-
ing have acknowledged--not only that this appeal to us is
necessary, but we should be ready to welcome the event
which has led to its being made with feelings of sympathy,
respect and affection. (Hear.) Are we not now then engaged
in discussing a point of a very trivial character. (Hear.)
I We are employed in calculating what may be the value of
an annuity, or whether it is desirable that the present
settlement should be made through the medium of a par-
ticular machinery. (Hear, hear.) For nay own part, I
think that man must have great confidence in his opinion
who upon a question of this nature would lay it down as a
peremptory principle that the most advantageous way to
carry out the proposed settlement must be either in the
shape of a round sum, as the hon. and learned gentleman
the member for Sheffield has termed it, or by means of that
mixed process which the Government has submitted to our
consideration. If, however, we agree in arriving at the con-
clusion that this appeal to Parliament is one which ought
to be made—if we are all prepared torespond to the appeal
and are desirous that it should be carried into effect in a
spirit of liberality--then Isay that the question is one with
respect to which we might to place confidence in her Ma-
jesty's ministers, who, it is but reasonable to suppose, have
given it the most mature consideration. (Hear, hear.)
Upon the exact amount of the sum to be voted it is not
possible that in an assembly numbering so many members
as the House of Commons wo could all agree. (Hear, hear.)
If every hou. memberwere to write down his own estimate
of what that sum ought to be on a piece of paper and
read it to the House, I imagine we should find
that the fixing upon sums very various in amount would
be the result. (" Hear, hear," and a laugh.) Indeed, I think
the feelings of the House upon this subject can be very well
ascertained when we reflect that, even in the case of those
who aro opposed to the proposition before us it seems to be
a question as to whether the sum to be granted shall be
20,0001., 30,0001., or 40,0001. (Hear, hear.) That being so
Sir, it seems to me that it would be a most ungracious pro-
ceeding that we shruld go to a division ou a question of a
character so trivial. (Hear, hear.) If the principle of the
grant were opposed, I could understand a proposition
based upon that view. But the principle being one to
which a cordial assent has been given, there ought to be
no difficulty in settling the amount of the grant in a
manner which would bring the house to an unambiguous
and unanimous conclusion. (Hear, hear.) We should not
lose sight of the fact that were it not for that settlement,
which Parliament iu its wisdom determined to make in
connexion with the Civil List, and the disposal of the
estates of the Crown, her Majesty would be in a position
to come down to this house and demand a vote of money
to defray the expense of keeping up that ceremonial in the
maintenance of which, as I said before, the country and
the Sovereign are equally concerned. I say nothing of the
circumstances under which this royal 'marriage is to take
place. It does not become me to speak of a princess so
near the Throne as the royal lady who has so often been
alluded to in the course of this discussion. I may, how-
ever state—that which we all feel—that she is one who is
worthy of her tamily and of England—(cheers)--one who
is well calculated to adorn that throne which she is des-
tined to occupy. All those who have the privilege of being
acquainted with her bear the highest testimony to the
brightness of her mind and the sweetness of her disposi-
tion, and I cannot help thinking that when an event such
as that to which our attention now directed takes place,
and when there is no objection to the principle of the
grant which, in anticipation of that event we are called
upon to vote, it would be but becoming unanimously to
support the proposition which her Majesty's Ministers,
acting upon their own responsibility, have submitted
to us for our approval. (Hear, hear.) I must at the
same time beg of the hon. and learned gentleman the
member for Sheffield by no means to believe that I am op-
posed to the principle which he advocates of the expe-
diency of voting this money in a round sum. I frankly
admit that that may bo the best course to adopt. I must,
however, say that the hon. and learned gentleman ought
not, because I deem unanimity to be so desirable upon the
present occadon, seek to give currency to that which
would be a misrepresentation—namely, that while such is
the opinion of those who differ from him, they do not
sympathise with the working classes in this country quite
as much as the hon. and learned, gentleman when he

opsnsd this discussion this evening, to declare his willing-
ness to meet the appeal which has been made to the house
in a spirit of generosity, and I should therefore ask him
whether, entertaining such views, ho could not come to
the conclusion to accede in that spirit to a proposition
which the Government have made after mature censidera-
Lion, and thus contribute to close, in a most gracious
manner, the connexion of the House of Commons with an
event which I hops will lead to the most happy conse-
quences in tho case of the Royal pair whom it so inti-
mately concerns. (Cheers.)
Mr. CONINGHAM wished to state his reasons why be
should support the amendment of his hon. and learned
friend (Mr. Roebuck). He supported that amendment,
first, on pecuniary, and, secondly, and still more, on poli-
tical grounds. (Hear.) The Princess Royal was about to
marry into a foreign house—a German house. After she
bad once left these shores and had become identified in in-
terest with a foreign house and a foreign dynasty he deci-
dedly objeated to the continuance of such relations with
this country as the proposed annuity would establish.
(Hear, hear.) Her domestic relations with this country
would-still remain, but so long as a German Prince was a
stipendiary of this country he should view that connexion
with the greatest jealousy. On these grounds he was in fa-
vour of a fixed payment, and was opposed to an annual
payment. Ho did not wish to stand between the house and
the division, nut would content himself with stating that
he should vote for the amendment of his hon. and learned
friend the member for Sheffield. (Cheers.)
Col. NORTH, who rose amid loud calls for a division,
said there was ono point which had been lost sight of dur-
ing the debate which doses ved to be borne in mind. The
people of this country interfered with the marriages of the
Royal family in a manner that members of that house per-
sonally would not tolerate. (Cries of " Oh, I" " Divide.")
He referred to the interference which was exercised in de-
claring whom the members of the Royal family should
marry. As long as this interference was kept up Parlia-
ment was bound to act most liberally to them when mar-
riages did take place. (Hear.)
Lord ELCHO (who rose amid cries of " Agreed,") hoped
that his hon. and learned friend would withdraw his
amendment. It was extremely desirable that upon occa-
sion like the present the house should adopt the recom-
mendation of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Disraeli) and
pass this resolution unanimously. (Cheers.) He was sure
there was not a member in the house who would not cor-
dially respond to what had fallen from every hon. gentle-
man who had addressed the house with reference to the
loyalty and duty which they all owed to the Sovereign.
The only difference between the hon. members was whe-
ther they should pay the Princess Royal an annuity or a
sum down. (" Divide." "Agree.") He was strongly of opi-
nion that, regard being had to the position of this country
towards foreign countries, it was desii able that the dowry
should be paid in one sum ; but he did not wish to see the
house divide on the subject, and he hoped that his hon.
and learned friend would be induced to withdraw his
amen Iment, so that the house might come to a unanimous
vote in favour of this resolution. (Cheers.)
Mr. ROEBUCK and Lord PALMERSTON- rose together,
but the noble viscount gave way in deference to the wishes
of the house. The hon. and learned gentleman said,—l do
not desire to press my motion. (Loud cheers ) I have told
the house what I think it 'ought to do, and if it will permit
me I will now withdraw my motion. (Cheers.)
The amendment was by leave aithdrawn.
The first resolution proposed by the CHIKOELLOR of the
EXCHEQUER was then agreed to, and ordered to be reported
to the House.

The house resumed, and again resolved itself into com-
mittee of supply.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER then moved
the second resolution, relative to the payment of the
40,000/.