Star.
London, England, 1809-01-25 00:00:00

some mannei • 'rich Fe was pleased to speak of his
,
t'Nt.l •• tl .he duty which devolved upon
Marble ring th suppose the Right Honour-
He " II placing him at the head of the
• ;p Gcntleir
r: a :iccept the situation he had before
•1/4is''e
to ii and did not desire to impose upon
c
him the painfu: and invidious task of objecting per.
s,.maily to ;my member named in the list just-read:
he
In any sentiment which he might express upon this
cabiect,
Housepote w
oo
anyould, he was confident, excuse
' i intention of private of-
-411' a•Phit
it not im
which he felt as a public duty. As to the
fne.: •
„ince of hi,. name on the new list, he had not
• .ec,ed to it, as his Right Hon. Friend had express-
°ejeda that he would allow it to stand there. He
t the same time convinced his Right Honour-
was a • .
nht have chosen a much more proper
ableiend might
•ird mi.dit have found many persons upon
roil •
tile list, ot the Committee much more competent to fill
tae Chair. a
'although in the duty of regular atten.
ibnce and zeal, to the best of his ability, he would
Y;eld to note. He begged leave, however, fairly to
t,,at as the list was now constituted, it was quite
inT(,s3l- e
'id for him to admit of being called to the
•
chair, No consideration on earth should induce him
to 'Ake the Chair of the Committee as just named.
,Ir. PETER MOORE said, that if the Honour-
able Gentleman who had just sat down had not ex-
pressed his disapprobation of the Committee as it was
•d h •
Jto be constitute , e was prepared and re-,
Pc'se
sjed to du it. The es. tablishment of the Committee
Liabcen a mere farce to delude the people, and its
rec, inmendations had never been attended to. In
e report a suggestion was made relative to an ar-
/,°,1! ement with the Bank of England, which would
ve t c. untry 200,6001. but by its not having been
followed up, the country was made to make the sum
up. In another report it aas stated, that large sums
of money had passed through the hands of a Mr.
Thomas Steele, formerly a Member of that House,
and that he had appropriated 19,7001. to his own use
from the public nroney, yet no steps had been taken
to recover it or punish the delinquent, as ought to
have been done by the Attorney-General. Reports
were frequently made, but no attention was paid to
them, and the consequence was, that any new Corn.
mince could only recommend what had been recom.
mended by the Coramitteus. of 1797 and 17943. He
censured Ministers severely for their neglect and dis-
regard of the subject, and accused them of know.
ingly pr blic money to pass into other
channels than that to wLich it was intended by the
constitution. Bye and bye, he said, he should put 'a
certain Gentleman, whom he saw opposite him, upon
his trial, on a charge of taking money from the trea-
sury, and paying it away in an unwarrantable man-
ner. He saw no mason why Ministers should not be
regul..rly called upon to account for their application
of the public money before they called upon Parlia-
ment to vote more. The misconduct of Mr. Pitt, In
neglecting the application of the public money, was
highly reprehensible, as appeared from the trial of
Lord Melville, notwithstanding his boasted talents as
a financier. He said that he could prove that large
sutas of money, which were raised upon the people,
never came into the Exchequer at all, and he pro-
mised to make it a subject of parliamentary investi-
gat;on on a future occasion.
Lord HEIIRY PETTY bore his testimony to the
meritorious conduct of the Hon. Gentleman who
sp.ke last butt one ; and who had so fully anticipated
his own sentiments, that in consequence of what had
fallen from him, he himself must abstain from any
attendance upon a Committee so nominated.
Mr. YORKE was of opinion that the reduction of
fat Committee, in the manner proposed, was an im-
ph, .i stigma on the Members whose names were omit-
ted; z. he Fhould rather prefer the smaller ineon-
venicfcu that might arise from reviving the whole
Con,. :tee, than the greater and much more objec-
tionabie alternative of calling into discussion the merits
of individual Members. He regretted the opinion ex-
pressed
by the Hon. Member who had spoken second
on this question, because he knew that opinion would
go forth and had weight with the public, whom it
might disincline to attach confidence to the Commit-
tee. The public would never be satisfied with the
CGmmittee nominated by any particular set of me*.
lie did not mean to say that abuses did not exist that
nui.6lt demand reform ; and if the Committee was to
be :7-dyed, it would be better' to reappoint it just as
it stood before, than force the House to the invidiousl
task of discussing the merits of particular men. But
for his part, he was aot quite sure it was necessary
to reappoint the Committee at all. In all events, he
thought it would be better to give the House a day
for examining the reports already made, and after-
wards reappoint the Committee, if it sould appear
necessary.
Mr. WHITBREAD said that after what had al-
ready been stated, it was quite impossible the public
could expect any good to arise from the Committee.
He -1,-
:ght a nomination coming from the Honour-
able Member who first opposed this list, as an inde-
pendent country Gentleman, infinitely better than one
from any Chancellor of the Exchequer, be he who he
might. The Hon. Member who first opposed this
list, had acknowledged his own suggestion for a re-
duction of the number of the Committee ; but it was
obvious to himself that great partiality might be used
in the omission of particular names and the retention
of others that were highly objectionable ; though he
would admit that some names were left out as objec-
tionable as any that were retained. Upon one name
in this list particularly he had objected upon what he
ronc-ived to be good grounds. A question had been
put certainly, upon that name, and his objection was
overruled ; and he certainly should fell it his duty to
repeat his objection against it now, and put it again
to a question. The public bad certainly a right to
expect, from the original appointment of the Finance
Committee, that much public good might be derived
—and, undoubtedly, if the reports they had already
made had been acted upon, hundreds of thousands,
nay, millions of money, might have been saved to the
country. Of what effect was it for the Committee to
deliberate and report, if their recommendations were
remain a dead letter. Was it expected that they
old live centuries ?—and centuries they must live
produce any effect, if it was considered that in the
'. le of the last long Sessions, they were enabled to
• ',ace but one• Report. The Hon. Gentlemanwho
Nosed this list, had shewn the greatest zeal and
oi his endeavours to render the labours cf -the
;1 .tee efficient for the purposes of their appoint-
man was a more competent judge than