The Sun.
London, England, 1850-08-06 00:00:00

CONSOLIDATED FUND.

The Consolidated Fund Bill was read a second time,
and ordered to be committed.
ASSESSED TAXES COMPOSITION.

The House then went into Committee on the Assessed
Taxes Composition Bill, and the several clauses of the
Bill were agreed to.
STAMP DUTIES ON LAW PROCEEDINGS
(IRELAND).
The Stamp Daties on Law Proceedings (Ireland) 8,11
went through Committee, and was reported.
ASSIZES (IRELAND).
The Asslz-s (Ireland) Bill went through Committee.
DUKE OF CAMBRIDGE'S ANNUITY.

Lord J. RUSSELL moved the third reading of the
Duke of Cambridge's Annuity Bill.
Mr. HUME said he had been so abused for withdraw-
ing the amendment of 8,000/. which he had proposed,
though be thought 5,0001. would be sufficient, that he
should now propose it again. Seeing that labourers'
wages were down to Bs. a week, the 12,0001. a year going
to be given to a young man who had his commission,
would suppert 576 fsmilies, which at five persons each
gave 2,833 individuals. This scion of royalty was about
to receive 12,0001. a 'year, while the greatest ministers of
state had not more than a third of that sum for their ser-
vices. The time was come to consider whether 700.000/.
a year was not too much for the civil list. The Noble
Lord and those who supported him in this act of extrava-
gance were the worst enemies of royalty. If achange came
over the country such as in 1842 and 1843, no one coVd
fetesee the consequences. There was also 250 000/
pensions to persons who had done nothing, such as Lord
Camperdowu, Earl Nelson, and others; this he certainly
begrudged. The salaries of the inferior clerks were re-
duced ;hut the Duke of Cambridge was allowed to swill
at the bunghole of the cask, as in the picture, while the
two cormorants, the King of Hanover being one of
them, stood in the corner, He (Mr. Hume) had tried
every means to stop this drain, but iu rain. Ile now
addressed himself to the country gentlemen on the
subject.
Colonel SIBTHORP had voted before, and he in-
tended to vote again, for the 12.0001. a year, yet he
hope .I he was as much disposed to economy as the Hon.
Member. He could not forget that the Duke of Cam-
bridge was a descendent of that great and good King,
George lll.—(Laughter.) lle had the greatest respect
for his father, than whom a more excellent and charit-
able man did net live, and no man left the world more
deeply regretted by the country. He (Col. Sibthorp)
hen no doubt the present Duke of Cambridge would
follow the example of his father, and therefore he sup-
ported the proposition of the Noble Lord. He con-
sidered, in giving his vote in favour of this grant, he
was doing good to the country.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment ... ... 52
Against it ... ... 111
Majority ... —59

The Bill was then read a third time.
Mr. BRIGHT moved a clause to the effect that the
Duke of Cambridge should not receive more than
12,0001. a year from any source. That if his Royal
Highness had any other appointment the amount should

be deducted each year frOni the 12,0001. a year. The
Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) had not defended the
vote. He hai left that to the Hon. and Gallant Mem-
ber (Colonel Sibthorp), who, with his general avoidance
of anything approaching to logic, had justified the grant
on the ground that the Duke had a good grandfather,
and was of English blood. He had net been able to dis-
' cover a single political party in favour of this vote.
And it would be surprising if there was, because the ge-
neral opinion in the country was that our forefathers
had been inconsiderate and profuse in this sort of grants,
and that we ought now to act with more care. He had no
doubt that in about five months, on the recommendation
of the Noble Lord, they would find some sinecure
office, with a large salary attached, to be given to the
Duke of Cambridge. In the case of the late Queen
Dowager, who had a vote of 100,0001. a year, there had
been severe comments on the extravagance of the grant
both in some of the public papers and at various public
meetings. The Duke of Cambridge might possibly live
ti be pointed at in the same way as a man who did no-
thing for 12,0001. a year out of the public taxation. If
these burdens were levied on the people without regard
to altered circumstances, they might in the end tend to
break down the monarchical institutions of the country.
To prevent the Duke from getting rangerships of parks
and other overpaid offices, let the House fix his income
at 12,000/. a year, and no more. If principles which
were applied to all other officers receiving public money
were applied to the Duke of Cambridge and other indi-
viduals equally distant from the Throne, the public would
feel more contented.

Lord JOHN RUSSELL rose to object to the proviso,
on the ground, without wishing to give any further large
emolument to the Duke of Cambridge, that it was
inexpedient to say, that whatever tae military ser-
vice of the Duke of Cambridge, and to whatever
military post he might be appointed, he should have
no reward fur his services, and no moans of increasing
his income, thereby implying that it was the wish
of the House the Duke of Cambridge should not give his
services to the country in the manner in which they
would be most honourable and useful. The Honourable
Gentleman had used an argument which might be
pu.bed to any extent. The Honourable Gentleman said
that the lire Queen Adelaide had 100,000/. a year, and
that she might have had all the enjoyment, dignity, and
comfort she wanted for 20,000/. a year. But the argu-
ment that even this 20,0001. was drawn from the taxes
of a suffering people, and that the SUM would maintiiu
500 or 1,000 labouring men's families, might have been
used by others who might have thought that sum too
large. All the arguments were applicable to the 20,0001
a year that were applicable to the 100,0001. a 3e ,r—not
it was true, in the same degree—but they were appli-
cable, and therefore if the Honourable Gentleman had
succeeded in reducing the income Lf the Duke of Cam-
bridge to 8,000/. a year, there were plenty of persons
who would say, " why should a Prince of the blood be
paid 8,000/. a year, when so many hundred labourers
could be maintained out of that bum? " The sum of
8,0001. a year was as open to the criticisms of those
who wished the sum to be 3,0001. He would say no
more on. the subject. He thought the House was con-
vinced it was inexpedient to say that no income should
attach to any service the Duke of Cambridge might
render to his country. He believed that it was right
and proper that the Duke of Cambridge should give
himself to the military service of his country; and ho be-
lieved the people of England, far from making invidioui
comparisons and caleu:ations, from their feeling of at-
tachment to the Royal Family, would wish rewards to
be given, not grudgingly or enviously, when they saw
the Duke of Cambridge perform his duty as became a
man in his nosirion.—(Hear.)
Colonel SIBTHORY wished the Hon. Member (Mr.
Bright) to imitate the example of the late Duke of Cam-
bridge, by watching over his workpeople and op si atty.. a
with as much we as the late lamented Duke d.d over
his fel lo w-crea' ures.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For the proviso ••• 39
• Against it
Majority 69
The Police Superaunuation Fund Bill passed through
Committee.

The C4nterbury Settlenimt of .Lsnds Bill was read a
Second time..
The Public Health (Ireland) Bill was postponed till
next session.