Star.
London, England, 1808-05-13 00:00:00

MR. PALMER'S PETITION.

Major PALMER moved, that the House do now
resolve into a Committee to consider the report of a
Select Committee on the Petition of John Palmer,
Esq. of the City of Bath.
The SPEAKER left the Chair.

Major PALMER stated, that before he should
make a motion he must entreat the indulgence of the
Committee, as he stood forward in the delicate situ-
ation of an advocate on behalf of his father. He
trusted, therefore, that the Committee would grant
him that sort of attention which it would bestow upon
any person, standing in a similar situation. He then
moved that the Resolution in the Report of the Com-
mittee be read, which was in effect, that Mr. J. Pal.
rifer was entitled to £l5OO per annum from the year
1793, and to two and a quarter per cent. per annum
on an increased revenue to the Post Office from that
period, and during his natural life. This resolution
having been read,
Mr. LONG stated to the Committee, that the
same subject had been agitated before the House nine
years ago, and that the application for the ccmpensa-
lion now recommended had been refused. Th • Ho-
nourable Gentleman in bringing the matter forward,
ought to have stated the facts attending it, wa:cli
were, that the late Mr. Pitt contended, that Mr. Pal-
mer had not fulfilled his engagement, and, even had
his claim been allowed, Still that Government expec-
ted from Mr. Palmer the discharge of certain official
duties in the Post Office. Indeed the charges against
Mr. Palmer were, first, that he had caused a delay in
the delivery of letters from the Post Office, in order
to throw the blame of that delay on the Postmaster
General. Secondly, that he had suffered a person
named Wilson to pass an exorbitant account for con-
veying the mails ; and thirdly, that he had thrown
the Inland Office into a state of confusion. Mr. Long ,
contended that Mr. Palmer having accepted £3OOO
a year during his life in full, as a remuneration for his
plan of conveying the mails in a more safe and speedy
manner by coaches, was not entitled to charge two
and a half per cent. on the revenue that had accumu-
lated since, as the £3OOO a year daring his life, was
acknowledged by Mr. Palmer in the presence of Mr.
Pitt and himself (Mr. Long) to be fully sufficient.
Major PALMER replied, that the plan of his fa-1
flier, for the speedy conveyance and greater security
of the Mails, had been eagerly embraced by Mr. Pitt
and the Lords of the Treasury, and that they had
earnestly recommended its adoption to the Postmaster
General. Still he contended Mr. Palmer, sen. was ,
entitled to the two and a half per cent. on the increase
of the revenue which had accrued from the enhance-1
ment of the prices of postage of letters from the intro-'
duction of mail coaches, and that such had been the
original stipulation with his father, but that it had
ceased when he had been suspended from his duties
in the Post Office. With regard to the charges against
Mr. Palmer, the Major said they were not well foun-
ded, neither could they be proved ; for the Commit-
tee, years ago, before whom they were stated, sent
the evidence to the House by their Chairman, with-
out making any report upon it at all, and that such
evidence ought not to have been received, as the Corn.
mittee had been ordered to report the evidence, with
their opinions and observations thereon, to the House.
Mr. ROSE said, the reason which induced the
Postmaster-General to suspend Mr. Palmer from his
office, was, his instructing those under his command
to make out vouchers prejudicial to the public.
Mr. CROKER, as one of the Committee who
made the report, contended that it was made upon
the fullest conviction of the strong claim Mr. Palmer
had upon the public for a remuneration, agreeably to
the original engagement, and he was, in his own
opinion, perfectly convinced of the propriety of that
Report. Mr. Palmer, in bringing forward his plan,
had a numerous host of enemies to combat in the
'ost-office, and they ultimately triumphed. The
juarrel originated about a key, which formed a key

for the Post-masters to dismiss him, and he was af
terwards betrayed by the only man in the Post-office
in his confidence (Bonner), who was immediately
placed in Mr. Palmer's situation. He concluded by
I moving, that " Mr. Palmer was entitled to 21 per
Cent. on the improved Revenue of the Post-office.'•
Mr. PE RCEVAI, contended, that the grant hav-
ing been forfeited by !qr. P.'s misconduct, he had
been treated more liberally than he deserved, in re-
ceiving 30001. per annum for life.
Mr. WIND HAM was fully convinced from the
Report, and what he had heard, that Mr. Palmer.,
. claims were placed beyond a doubt. Though he for-
feited his office from neglect, he could not in jus-
tice and candour be deprived of his patent, which war
confirmed to him for life, a patent which benefit.;d
the revenue beyond the sanguine expectations of Mr.
Pitt.

Sir J. NEWPORT stated several points in the evi-
dence, inserted in the Report, which went entirely in
confirmation of the claim.

Sir F. BURDETT raid, this was not a party (pm
tion, and lie hoped the House would do justice to the
merits of an individual, who had sacrificed his fcr.
tune, and a great-deal of his time, in bringing to cia.
turity a plan which had been of the greatest benefit
to the Public. All those points which had been irri-
tably brought forward, could not, in his opinion, dc
away the strong and urgent claim of remuneration.
Coupled with what the Report recommended, the
opinions of the first legal authorities in the kingdom
were in his favours e. Lord Chief Justice Mansfield,
Lord Erskine, Sir V. Gibbs, and Mr. Adam. Inde.
pendent of that, his patent was a greater proof of his
claim. It was not attempted to deny that it was hie
plan that improved the revenue. The amount was
no objection, when it kept pace with the benefit that
resulted from it. He thought it was the fairest claim
that could come before the House.
Mr. G. JOHNSTONE defended the conduct of
Mr. Perceval in resisting the claim.
-Mr. WINDHAM and Mr. CHOKER explained.
Lord H. PETTY thought that Mr. Palmer should
be remunerated.

Sir THOMAS TURTON defended the Reper:,
and said, even Mr. Palmer's enemies in the Post-Of-
fice acknowledged his fidelity and exations in the dis.
charge of his duty.
After a few words from Major PALMER in rep'',
the Committee divided, when the question was carri:ti
in the affirmative, by 137 to 74

On our re-admission, the question was, for receiving
the Rel•6rt to-morrow. On this a second division look
place, when the A) es were '26, and the Noes 51. The
Report teas therefore ordered to be received on Mon-
day.