Star.
London, England, 1822-10-02 00:00:00

•
OMB game the Pike s& which Mr. Wiekwar supplied satisfieeterry *sport Upon that branch of the'snliject
itse Stationer./ Office with- paper of a eimilar quality. referred to them. They hoists however, collected a
Hi pitiaini for this, Mr. Wickwar drew a bill at two con&derable luau ofevidence;oral and docbliientatyt
qr Int* 'months.date upon Mr. HartOell, and sent it and they strongly recommend that a Committee
jo►Str:Paisrm,' desiring, that he would obtain Mr. should be appointed in the course of the next Session;
Hartnell's acceptance. Mr. Hartnellrefused, alleging ; to examine and digest this evidence, sited to insratute
that hesclid not like to accept a bill fin. so small a ; some further inquiries for the more complete eluci,
sum at so long a ate; and Mr. Wickwar, becoming dation of a subject connected with an important
urgent, and applying to Mr. Parson to procure pay- branch of the public expenditure.
ment, Mr. Parsorthimself advanced the money, which Although your Committee are compelled to
;post•
was some time afterwards repaid to him by Mi. Hart- _pule this part of the matter referred to them yet
nell; This matter may seem to the Holm to be they think it;due to Mr..Hansard, Mr. &raison, 3i!r.
scarcely worth noticing; and it certainly appears Nichols, and to the other individuals employed it
that no favour was shewn in the price charged for the Parliamentary Printing, to state, that nothing tending
parer; but considering the relation in which Mr. in any degree to countenance imputations against
Hartnell and Mr. Wickwar respectively stood to Mr. the characters of these persons, hat appeared in dal
Parson, it will no doubt strike the House, as it did the course of the inquiries of your Committee.
Committee, that a transaction of this kind ought not 30th July, 1823.
to have taken place between a person in the Stationery
Office, -and tradesmen with whom that office bad er-
isting contracts; and there appeared in all these par-
ties a Marked anxiety to'conceal the truth, evinced
by a mode of giving their evidence, to which your
Committee cannot but express their extreme disap-
probation. But your Committee think it, however,
right to state; that there does not appear to hive beep
anything in the conduct of those persons with reference
to this matter, deserving of -a more severe reprehen►
sion, than that which they have thus deemed it their
duty to express.
Allegations, similar to those preferred against Mi.
Hartnell, having also .been preferred against Mr.
Thorowgood and Mr. Ciowes, who have contracts
with the Stationery Office for printing, your COM-
niittee proceeded to investigate those charges; and
they have the satisfaction to report, that no part of,
the conduct of these two persons seems liable to cen-
sure. A deposit of paper appears to he intrusted to
the charge ()leach; but it is inconsiderable, and pro.
bably not more thin necessary to answer the current'
demands upon them. They seem to have been ofteW
in the habit of using their own paper for the public
service, and not to have authorized- their servants to
employ the Government paper for their private use,
except to replace paper of their own so previously
lent to the Public. • • •

During the proceedings of your roMmittee, Mr.
Jennings, the person already named, thought fit to
address a letter to the Board of Treasury: in which,
amidst a great deal of wild and extravagant matter,
and many vague and unintelligible insinuations, he
asserted his belief to their Lordships that a member
of this Committee (meaning, as he afterwards stated
in evidenCe, Mr. Thomas Courtenay) had sold the
place of Cashier of the Stationery Office, held by him
a number of years ago, and the value• of which*ip-
pears to have been at•that time 5001. per annum, to
Mr. Church, the present Cashier, for 1,800/..'
—The Board of Treasury transmitted• this' letter to
the Committee, who called upon Mr. Jennings to ex-
plain' and make good his tharge. He was not ena-
bled to give anything like a precise explanation upon
the subject, but named tb the Committee. five- wit-
nesses (Mr. Chidch being one) ivhom your Commit-'
tee immediately proceeded to examine touching. this
matter, so deeply affecting the honour of a member'
of this Hchise;.knd the result of thii inquiry will beat
appear from the followibg unanimous Resolution of
.the Committee, irrstipport of which they beg leave
to refet to the evidence in the Appendix: •
ResolVed, That this Committee having examined i‘fessrs."
Pation, Hunt, Galliets, King, and Church, of the'Stationery
Office, the only persohs named by Mr. Jennings to them to be
examined, relative to the statement contained•in Mr. Jennings's
letter to the Lords of the Treasury, that Mr. Courtenay had
sold the 'office of Cashier of the Stationery Office to Mr. Church,
are unanimousli of opinion that the said chirte is locally ea-
founded." •
Yout Committee regret that so snitch of their time
should have been unavoidably taken'up by these dif-
ferent heads of inquiry; but they trust that the result.
will not prove useless to: the Public. -The transac-
tions detailed in the evidence, and Itir.which they
have commented, have tended to con/Ante them that
the Stationery Office'onght:` to be -raumodellhd; and
placed under a more efficient supeyintendence; •• ' -
It appears tharthrei persons high in The Otte,
namely, Sir M. Bloxam, Mr Dickens; arid Mr. Par-
son, have borrowed money frbni contractors finder
the department: Nour- Commiltte 'lre persuaded
that it cannot he necetsary fc<th'im' to point out eat
such a practice deierves the severest ihimidversion;
and that when a public'officer platei himself under
petuniary obligation to a contractor, Whom he ought
to check and cotitrohl, if fie ddes nOt disqualify him%
selffrom an upright discharge of his public duty, he
at least exposes 'himself to imputations from whith
the servants of the Public Oriiht at all times to' be
-free The Committee submit that these transactions
afford a strong ground in support of the recommin-.
&dots above given.
Your Committee would theiefoie recommend to
the Treasury to revise the Establishment, and to
place it..opon a different -and more efficient footing.
It is only 'necessary upon this head further to add,
that whatever arrangement it may be thought expe-
dient to adopt, it is the'decided opinion of your Com-
mittee that the interest of the Public will behest con-
sulted by continuing the present system of supplying
the various Public Offices lay.general contracts, ra-
ther than by reverting to the old system of allowing
each Office to provide its own stationery ;t and it ap-
pearing that sonie of the Public Offices still continue
to procure articlesof stationery from private trades-
men, your Committee strongly reconunend.that the
whole supply ot. stationery for the public service
should be made in one and the same manner, under
whatever arrangement they may think fit to adopt.
Yoty Committee, without being prepared to give
29. opinion upon, the subject, would suggest the pro,
prietTof iskquiring whether it might not be desirable
to have paper manufactured for the use of the pub-
lic Offices with &peculiar mark by which it might al-
ways be kipasin,an4 which would render
.fraud or
embv,;lejuent more hazardous ; 'and they would also
recommend, with a view to economy, that the com-
mon- and inferior work done for the Public offices 1
(particu)4rly,tlus differenthoards of Revenue), should
e executed upon paper of inferior quality, and of a
ley, Nice? .
The Committee:tate to regret, that the time they
have been obliged to devote to the. investigation of,
the,.different charges brought before:them, should have
rendered it impossible for, them so to. arrange and
method* the information they have received upon
the subject of the printing for the two houses of
Parlispeutt as to be enabled t 6 make a distinct and

~ - Y~.