The Sun.
London, England, 1826-09-16 00:00:00

Cent

)+•l‘,
1/4
ft:4e
ARMY AND X.T''
A,tr.f"rA.
4 iioVilg

(From therwoorawiti
Army and navy prize-money a subject of vast extent,
and vast importance. It comprises, in the course of a
single war, treasures of great magnitude, and embraceithe
interests of all-the sailors and soldiers, officers and privates,
of the British empire. It has received, and still continues
to receive, the anxious attention of the Executive Goveni-
ment, but has hitherto excited -yelp, little interest in the
nation at large. It is understood, that Government has
had under its consideration two propositions, for securing
to the army and navy their rights in the prize money
which. Ills Majesty is graciously pleased, at the commence-
ment of every war, to grant to them, as a reward for their
exertions in the service of their country. The original
appropriation of prize-money flows from the bounty of the
Crown, and it is due to the generous purpose of the King,
that it shall, in future, be guarded against the various acci-
dents and frauds, to which hitherto, notwithstanding
numerous parliamentary regulations, it has, unfortunately
been exposed. If a statement were to be given of the
sums, which, during the last war, have been awarded to the
army and navy, as prize-money, grant, bounty-money, head-
money, and salvage, it would become a matter of astonish-
ment, that their distribution should have 'been intrusted
wholly to agents, who gave very 'small and inadequate
security for its due appropriation. The funds were suffi-
ciently momentous to have been plated under the controul
and direction of responsible public officers, who c ould
have derived no benefit from the money, which shopld
have been deposited undei: the safeguard of the Bank of
England.
_

Suppose, for the sake of argument, that the sources
which; have enumeruted, produced in the last war alque
10,000,0001. will it be Contended that this is not a fund
of sufficient magnitude to demand the controul of compe-
tent public officers ?—or will it be •contended that 'indivi-
duals, appointed by individuals, generally from induce-
ments, which shall hereafter be touched upon, were the
proper depositories of this great treasure ?--to play with
it in their private speculations, or to use it in their mer-
cantile adventures ? The interest of the agent, stud his
duty, became 'from' the moment of his appointment :at va-
riance, or, rather, in direct and mischievous opposition td
each other. His 'duty demanded the earliest possible dis-
tribution of the funds intrusted to his care: his interest,
the latest. " Budge," saith the fiend; Budge not,"
saith my conscience.

" Do you mean," it will be asked, " do you mean to
charge the agents generally with knavery ?" To which I
answer, "It is unnecessary!' My view of the subject
does not require the aid of so offensive a charge. That
there arermanytnonthotiourable agents, I can bear conscien-
tious testimony; but that some have been dishenest, and
more unfortunate, is but too well attested in the schedules
and balance-sheets of the bankrupts and insolvents, whose
prize-money deficiencies are the heaviest items. If I can
prove clearly and unanswerably, that much more than a
million of money has been lost to the two services
by the , present authorized mode, of distribution, by
agents, who, long previously to this branch or their
duty commencing, have the uncontroulled use cif
the money paid into their hands, I Shall make out a
case strong enough to warrant and to demand some
fundamental change in the distribution of
.prize-funds.
That a case thus imperative shall be substantiated, I ven-
ture to pledge myself; and if the supposition that the
amount of grant and prize-money accruing during the last
war was 10,000,0001., and the loss 1,000,0004 startles the
reader, his mind will become better reconciled to its pro-
bability, when he remembers that the grant for One battle
alone was 1,000,000/, and the loss, by the failure of the
house of one West India agent, was upwards of 100,0001.
of prize-money. The statutes relating to prize money
have been, from time to time, ameliorated, as their defects
have been practically developed. But the principle in
which they originated with respect to agents, was not only
faulty, but grossly unjust to the service, and to the public;
consequently, all the alterations which have been adopted,
not being founded upon a change of principle, have remedied
minor evils, leading the great mischief untouched.
In practice, all prize-money is paid, before distribution
into the hands of agents. In principle; those gentlemen
ought to have been prevented from receiving a single shil-
lhig. If there must be prize-agents, (but which 1 contend
is quite unnecessary, and has always been unnecessary),
will chalk out for them, in a future letter, sufficient em-
ployment in return for their commission, without allow-
mg them the opportunity of hazarding, or spending the
hard-earned rewards of our gallant soldiers and sailors.—
But the foundation of any substantial improvement
in the laws relating to prize-money must be, that
the grant of the Crown, and the produce of prize,
shall not be withdrawn from Some safe public deposi-
tory, until it is paid, direct, into the hands of the parties
entitled. By this single and simple alteration, the answer
to a sailor's claim could never be that " his money had
been paid over to a bankrupt agent, whose property was
all swallowed up in paying a dividend of a farthing in the
pound to his general creditors," nor would the soldier
over be astounded with a reply to his demand at Chelsea-
hospital, " that Mr. A. 8., who had received his prize
money, had run off with it to America." The soldier and
the sailor cannot understand why this sPecies of public
property should be intrusted to some obscure individual.
The former was not aware that his commanding officer had
a cousin, who was a prize-agent. The latter is ignorant,
that his captain had overdrawn his agent, and must, there-
fore, give him the charge of, and the benefits to be made
by, the prize money belonging to his crew. Both find
themselves defrauded f that for which they have fought
and bled, and public honesty is arraigned for individual
malpractices.

I ain aware that it will be said, that the officer may ap-
point one prize-agent for every capture, and the crew- -tir: regiment may join in appointing another; but is this, in
ofto ti.
olti s
shallprinciple
have,
a ve,
fact, ever done? Could the private object to, or interfere
with, the full exercise
,of the power of the officer in the
appointment, without rendering himself obnoxious ? And
if two prize agents were appointed, as the letter of the Act
of
WParhellitaml ebnatvealloocrevass,
iiosntht: allude,n
imischievous
eays
prize-rnoneygetting into private hands altered, by its being* paid to two irresponsible persons instead of one ?
dividuals instances for the illustration of the truth of my
remarks,—when I bring forward examples of these evils,
to which the public attention has never been sufficiently
drawn—when I point out sonic
cases,in
which
the
whole
produce of a capture has been received and squandered by
some spendthrift agent; others, where the shares of the
claimants have dwindled fro
m pounds to shillings; others,
n Hospital has been cheated of the five
per cent., which the agent 1 '
seaman's
•has deducted from the
shares expressly for that Institution; others, where the for-
feited and unclaimed shares, which by
law are appropriated
to the maintenance
and support of the disabled or wounded
soldier,
,have been gambled away at the Stock Exchange,
"`when
I have proved, beyond all possible refutation, that
this is not a question of tens and twenties of pounds, but
of hundreds of thousands, surely it will be considered a
subject of sufficient interest and magnitude to create atten-
tion in a time of peace, the only time in which the prize
law can, without a surprise upon any party, be put upon
its proper footing.
Let it not be supposed by any of, your readers, that I
have taken op the subject with a feeling of hostility to the
body of paleinen, whose employment has been that of
prize,geilts; or against any individual of that body, with
ninny at whom I Would freely, from my knowledge of
their honour and integrity, trust my own private property.
Bat the present system of prize-agency is altogether bad'
,;trod defective in detail, and dafeCtive in principle. It pro
duces distrust and dissatisfaction in our troops, and in our
ships at home and abroad. It robs the sailor and the
soldier of the security which he has a right to expect from
the Government;—and, Whatever obstacles private inte
rests may oppose to its alteration, altered it must be, and
the sooner it le effected the greater will be its benefits,