Star.
London, England, 1808-02-12 00:00:00

or unwisely, was not then the question, bad been left
to the sole disposal of the Crown. If, however, thit
House or any Member• of it was of opinion that •
fund amounted to such an enormous sum as ought
not to be vested in any one without the controul
Parliament, and wished to bring the subject under the
consideration orthe House, such Member had a right
to move for such accounts as would be necessary to
bring the question properly before the House. If the
question arose out of the amount of the sums of which
this fund consisted, then it was necessary to knoll,
what those sums were, and when that was once given,.
the next question would naturally arise, as to its ap-
plication. As to the instance which had been men-
tioned of the Hon. Baronet behind him (Sir Home
Popham), part of the cargo, which was his own. pro-
perty, became forfeited to the Crown from a breach
of the law in a case which the East India Company
might have licenced, and in consequence of the ser-
vices which the Hon. Baronet had rendered the
Crown and his Country, also from his services while
he was in India, it had been thought fit, under all the
circumstances of the case, to remit the -forfeiture ;
but the remission of a forfeit was nothing like a grant
of droits, and therefore be thought not at all applica-
ble to the present debate.
Mr. ADAM said, that he wished as much as any
one, that this question should come to a full and com-
plete issue, and this could only be attained by procu-
ring an ample and perfect account of the amount of
those droits ; and it was his opinion that the motion
made by the Hon. Baronet could not attain that ob-
ject. He thought at the same time that the amend..
meat was capable of effecting it ; but still he thought
that was in itself defective, inasmuch as it dickixot go to
the application of the money arising from those droits.
Would that be proper at the present moment ? He
thought not, but that it would come with better ef-
fect after the House had obtained the amount of the
fund in question. He was of opinion that the trans-
action which had been mentioned by his Hon. Friend
near him (Mr. Lnshington) ought to he inquired
into, but not in this way. The droits of the Admi-
ralty had been left at the sole disposal of the King ;
and in 1795, his Majesty gave for public purposes
the money arising from several Dutch prices, which
amounted to a million ; and the House by their ac-
ceptance, had sanctioned the right of the King's dis-
posing of those droits which way he thought proper.
Still, however, this fund appeared to be too great to
be possessed by any one without being subjected to
' the controul of Parliament, especially if it could be
shewn that there had been any instances of a misap-
plication of the money arising from it. He hoped,
therefore, the Hon. Baronet might be induced to with.
draw his motion, and let the amendment be adopted,
which in his mind would more completely answer the
purposes he wished to attain.
Sir C. POLE said, neither the original motion nor
the amendment met his idea of effectually obtainnig
the object proposed : neither of them took any notice
of any other captures than those made at sea, whereas
there were many that were made in our ports. He
I then read, as part of his speech, an amendment which
had suggested itself to him, and which he thought
would be effectual—which embraced the captures of
ships in port also, and directed the amount of pro-
ceeds to be given in different columns, distinguishing
the particular nature and amount of each capture.—
He further stated', the captors in the case which had
been alluded to )`ad not received their prize-money
till last May, which was an interval of ten years, and
which rendered it no prize-money at all, for from such
a lapse of time, perhaps, more than one half of the
captors were dead.
A division then took pace on the amendment :
For the amendment, 82
Against it, .57—Majority, '25.
On being admitted into the Gallery, we found
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER on
his legs, and mentioning a Bill which he meant to in:-
troduce to-morrow, in consequence of the Resolutions
agreed to some nights past on the Orders in Council.
It was, he said, his intention, after the Bill had been
read a first time, to have it printed, and he hoped the
Hon. Gentlemen opposite would have no objection
to discuss the principle bf the Bill on Tuesday.
EXPEDITION TO PORTUGAL.
Mr. ABERCROMBIE said, that at the request of the Right
Honourable Secretary of State, he should postpone the Motion of
which he had given notice for that evening, to Monday next.
NOTICE.
Mr. EDEN gave notice, that he would to-morrow movefor an
Account of all Neutral Vessel, brought into any of the Ports of
Great Britain, is pursuance of the Order of Council of Noveml•
9,1807.

sure the Hon. BarOllet who made it, wished to have a
fall and sqmplete account of those droits, and also of
the application of the money arising from thca. The
original motion would, in his opinion, effect this : but
he did not think the amendment would, and therefore
he thought the original motion should be persisted in.-
Sir FRANCIS BURDETT said, that in his mak-.
ing the motion, he tettainly wished for the fullest dis-
covery as to the droits, and also the application of the'
money arising from them : - it was matter of verygreat
importance, and which he, as a Member of Parliament,
thoughthe had a rightto demand. From the candid and
liberal manner in which the Right Hon. the Chancellor
of the Exchequer had expressed himself, in introducing
his amendment, he felt extremely inclined to accede
to it ; but from the unexpected turn which the debate
had taken, and the disclosure of so extravagant and
flagrant a misapplication of a certain part of the mo-
ney arising from the proceeds, his opinion was greatly
altered, and he thought his duty required that he
should persist in his motion as it had been originally
introduced.
Mr. WHITBREAD said, he thought that now
the Committee had withdrawn, the House were in pos-
session of the Advocate General's speech again, and
he Might proceed as if no interruption had taken place.
The ADVOCATE GENERAL then proceeded
to- state, that the Hon. Baronet, when in India, was
known to persons in the highest offices there to be a
British subject; that he was very much countenanced
by them, and in consequence of the services he had
rendered the East India Company, by taking the
soundings of Prince of Wales's Island, and other parts
in thOse seas, he had received such recommendations
to the Court of Directors, as had procured him some
very valuable presents from them. From India he
had, however, sailed to China, and at Canton had
taken in a cargo of tea without any licence from the
India Company, which rendered the transaction a
breach of the law, and as such the cargo was
liable to forfeiture; but it was not a Droit of the
Admiralty ; it was not what had fallen to the King
as a capture in time of war, but was merely what be-
came vested in his Majesty as a forfeiture, in conse-
quence of the cargo being illegal, for want of a licence
from the India Company. With this cargo of tea,
the Honourable Baronet was proceeding to Ostend,l
in the ship El Trusco, when she was met with and
seized by his Majesty's ship the Brilliant ; and the ship
and part of the cargo were condemned, for the bene-
fit of the captors ;• but this part of the cargo, which
was the property of the Honourable Baronet, became
vested in the King as a forfeit ; and under all the
circumstances of the case, it became a question whe-
ther it was a fit forfeiture for the Crown to take ad-
vantage of it. On a mature anti deliberate considera-
tion of the case, he was of opinion that it was not;
and therefore he advised the remission of it, which ac-
cordingly took place. As he had before stated, this
fund was given to the King for his sole use ; and he
had out of it made several grants for public and na-1
tional purposes. He had also granted several sums out
of it for the use and benefit of the younger branches of
the Royal Family; and he thought his Majesty had
most undoubted right tbetelhs, unless it should be ex-
rected that he should only father of a family
in this country who was not at liberty to shew pe-
cuniary favours to his offspring. There might be
those who thought otherwise ; but he was not
ashamed to say, that he differed entirely with them.
on that head. He begged pardon for so long a
trespass on the time of the House ; but thought it
necessary to state those circumstances, as it had been
said, that he felt a reluctance to sign the warrant of
remission.
• Mr. LUSHINGTON, in explanation, said, that
he had heard it was with reluctance that the Rights
Honourable Gentleman who spoke last had
s'gned the warrant for the restitution of the pro-
perty of the Honourable Captain, and he had stated
it as a fact which he thought highly honourable
to the character of the Right Hon. and Learned
Gentieman. With respect to what had been said
by the Honourable Captain, as to his having
brought forward this subject thus suddenly with-
out having given him any intimation of it, the
fact was, that he had heard of this transaction sorhe
time ago, and finding the motion which had been
made was to come on that evening, 'he had pur-
posely gone to the Admiralty to look into the records
of ths transaction ; that this had taken up so much
time, he was not able to get down to the House till
the motion was made, and then not knowing the
Honourable Captain by sight, he had even asked one
or two of his friends if he was in the House, who told _,
him that he was. Had the Honourable Captain been PENinto SIONS.
e House resolved itself
absent, it was his intention to have stated the trans- Th a Committee on the Malt and
P
action without mentioning names, and have left that ension Bill.
Sir JOHN NEWPORT said, that in one of the
to some future occasion. As the Right Honourable
clauses relative to Pensions, those of Widows of Offi.
and Learned Gentleman had however expressly stated,
cers of the Navy who fell in the service of their coun-
that no misapplication of the money arising from this
try were exempted from the Property Tax; but those
fund had taken place, he thought it his duty to men-
of the Widows of Officers of the Land Service who
eon it in the way he had done, as he thought it a
fell in the same service were not. He should be glad
most glaring and flagrant misapplication, and What
therefore to know the reason of this distinction, which
ought to be more particularly enquired into. he thought very unfair ; as the Widows of Land Of-
Mr. BRAND said, he thought this motion was in-
ficers were as much entitled to exemption as the
tended to come at a very important fact, viz. the
others.
of the proceeds arising from these droits ; Mr.IIUSKISSON said, the clause in question was the same as
amount
and, as such, he would vote in favour of it • ; the had been in the Land. and Malt Bill for many years past; he would
amendment being, in his opinion, a colourable pre- however make enquiry before to-morrow, and if there was any
tence for weakening and curtailing the effect of it. error, it should be rectified.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that those
matters which at first sight appeared extraordinary, frequently
rose for the purpose of proposing his amendment • but turned out to have arisen from circumstances which were strictly
The SPEAKER told him he could not speak to justifiable. It probably might ar
mightise from
made by a differenan ce in
adj the grantt
the whole motion, having spoken before, and must of the pensions, provision be ustmen
in another way. The House was resumed, and the Report or-
therefore confine himself to explanation.
dered to be received to-morrovf.
Mr. HUSKISSON then rose, and moved an EXCHEQUER BILLS.
g purport ;-4,- An Ac- The Exchequer Bills Regulation Bill was read a third time,
amendment to the following
count of the net Proceeds in the Registry of the Court ands
of Admiralty, or which had come to the hands of the SPEAKER'S asking if there was any amendment to be
proponooßr
Nctißserbrought urprlttoereb.:watdce.de
Recsiver'General of Droits, for Captures taken on
the High Seas, from the Ist January, 1793, to the ,e
clause in it by which
contractors for circuLting Exchequer Bills were exemaed from
present time, distinguishing the amount in each year." vacating their seats in Parliament, and he saw no reason why those
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, ii contractors should be exempted trom that more than any others.
explanation, said, that so far from the amendment be- in Mhr. HAUSKfISSObst N said, the clause in question washthe same as
weret neither
rymear ;
naenrdithattthe contract
han the horws
who
oerrea men-
iftg a colourable pretence to weaken or curtail the effect tioLd
thane
of the original motion, it would have the direct con- Exchequer Bills and diseounted them, and were, to all intents an&
trail 'tendency : for the Hon. Baronet's intention purposes, the same as a purchaser of an Exchequer bill ; and tit*
would be more fully answered by it, than by the the word circulating was merely an *ld expression used in the Ex-
chequer.
• original motion. The Hon. Baronet wanted to ob-
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER supported tike
tam the fullest discovery of the amount of droits, and argument of Mr. .
insertsHuskinom aid, the clause objected to Inks
this the amendment would procure most effectually ; a verbatim cepy of the clause ned in every bill, *ince the first
and it would be only to wait a few days, and then h e adoption of exchequer bills : that it merely meant to protect Cho
Bank as agents for the lending of money upon exchequer bills.—
might, when he was in possession of the amount of
No objection to this clause had ever been ade before ;no actual
this fund, move for an account of the application of it. abuse of it had ever yet been imputed, during 60 years; atnl
t I.;; had hewn: stated, that this nand, whether wisely therefore be cola not accopt for the proem apprehensionaro',