Star.
London, England, 1816-05-07 00:00:00

*cached this subject Most feel that Ai: was a disad;l
vantage of the most serious kind. But it:appeared'
now that this was not the oily disadvantage under
which hehe labsuied, for the Noble Lord had not onlY
kept back the evidence but had been tampering with
the Jury. What be meant bytlits was, that the No-
ble Lord had held meetings at his own house, com-
posed of certain Members of the House, where this
subject had been privately discussed. Now he would
leave it to the House to judge on this conduct. Those
Members, who were commonly called ,independent,
or the country Gentlemen, were invited by the No.
We Lord to hold private meet.ngs at his house,
where they had the whole details of the business ex-
plained to them. The evideoce, thetefore, was with-
held from the House as a whole, while to a part of
the Members it was secretly explained. He would
appeal whether there could be a stronger proof of the
nervousness of his Majesty's Ministers—ot their feve-
rish anxiety on this topic, than this necessity under
which they found themselves of having part of the
House pre-informed upon the question ; although,
perhaps, not strictle irregular, yet he did complain
that it was a course of proceeding very unfair.
(Hear, hear.) The Noble Lord had done him no
more than justice when he allowed the other night
that he (Mr. Tierney) was actuated by a disposition
to maintain the splendour of the Royal Family.—
Between himself and the Noble Lord the only ques-
tion upon this subject was, how and to what degree
this splendour ought to be maintained ? If by splen.
dour was meant that outward glare and show of
mionificence which displayed itself in ostentatious
trifles, then he would oppose it. But if it meant that
honest splendour which applied to material concerns,
.which &hewed itself in an unblemished character, and
in the true digriity of conduit, then be would say, it
was a splendour which heilesired studiously to main-
tain. The Noble Lord had said, that there was a
disposition within the last few lien to throw the
amount oldie whole expettiliterd et the Civil List on
the Royal Family, with a view to vilify and degrade
them in the eyes of the people. Such a dispositoon, for
his own part, he begged entirely to disavow. But at
the same time, be could not exactly say, that the
Noble Lord had quite disproved all the imputations
of extravagance on the part of the Royal Family,
which might have been cast upon them. Accounts
had been laid upon the table, which 'hewed that ex-
penses had been pertinaciously continued whicfrproved
that these imputations were by no means groundless.
No man had ever said that the whole extravagance
of the Civil List was: occasioned by the Royal Fa-
mily. For his own part he said it was not ; and,
in every discussion upon this subject, he had endea-
voured to point out every separate branch 'in which
the expenses were incurred.—(Hear, hear.) The
Noble Lord, however, endeavoured to :hew that
only 4409,000 per annum, or at least only about one
third of the amount of the Civil List was bestowed in
the expenses of the Royal Family, and then the
Noble Lord said, that he wished the House knew
what was the amount of the Civil List in France.—
Now he knew not what the Noble Lord might have
picked up in the course of his travels to enable him
to prove that the Civil List of France is, above all
others, worthy of admiration; but at least of this he
was sure, that if the Noble Lord had examined into
every thing connected with the Civil List of France
and the expenses of the King of France, and of the
Royal Family, he would have round one trait worthy
of imitation; he would have found, that' when the
Parliament of France lately voted a liberal sum for
the support of one branch of the Royal Family, there
had been a corresponding act of liberality by the re-
turn of half the sum so voted. All the circumstances
of this country considered, it would not have been
improper or unfitting if his Royal Highness had sent
down a message to the same effect with that to which
he had alluded in Frame, and announcing that be
had himself resolved to act upon those principles of
economy and retrenchment which he had recommen-
ded in his speech from the throne. It was genero-
sity, not justice, on the part of the French Monarch.
But here it would be very different; for the people
Of England had done so much to support the Crown
that they now could scarcely support -themselves.—
(Hear, hear, hear.) It was important that the House
should understand the real situation of the Royal Fa-
mily. The papers before the House stated, that if
the hereditary eevenues of the Crown bad remained
in the hands of his Majesty, the amount 'would be
much greater than 0800,000, for which betted given
them up. There was not a word of truth in that,
statement. Those revenues were not, beteditary—
they were limited, and most of them would have
ceased with the life of George the Third. He had
made himself a statement of the revenue which the
Royal Family, in all its blanches, derived from the
country, and' should leave it to the Noble Lord and
to the House to decide whether-the public liberality
' had not been carried to the utmost possible extent.
The /barge for his bliu)esty's Estiblishatent at WWl-
sof .IWas . . . . . £lOO.OOO
For her Majesty and Household , 55,000
For the four Princesses • - - 152,000
-hi all far the Windsor Establishment • m 0250,000
0100,000 appeared to him an enormous grant for
the first part of the establishment at Windsor. Could
it be necessary, in his present unfortunate situation,
that his Majesty should have four Lords of the Bed-
chamber, and as many Grooms ? The revenue of
the Prince Regent would be found still more liberal.
Hts Ro
yyal Hide
ussreceses privy purse misted of (per.
fatl ) . . . Mom)
He had es salditieeal anewsmo et . 10,000
uet, et Cemarrap pesieoell his - 15,000
egad) hie pot en et the liebeee et tbe ciemildated
Fund . • • • 43,000

Of which no account whatever need be given. But
this was not all : the revenue which he derived under
the fourth and fitth classes amounted to 4384,000,
which, added to 4128,000, made 4512,000, entirely
for the Prince Regent's personal splendour. As to
the younger branches of the Royal Family, their re- ,
venue was rather too inconsiderable: it amounted, in
the aggregate, to only £298,000, paid out oi the
Consolidated Fund. The whole revenue of the Royal ,
Family, however, apart from the Civil List, was not
less than 41,030,000. No one proposed,to diminish
that revenue, but it would have been more gratifying
conduct on their part. had they spontaneously ofred
to curtail the charge thus made on the people. He
should now endeavour to follow the Noble Lord in'
the statements which Iss bad made last Fziday. Tbs.

charge fOr the Civil List ending in Sannary, 11316,1
'lnt 4060,000; that 'for 1604, had 'only been
4919,0(00, to that there was an, excess of 4181000
over 1904. The average estimates of the seven years
ending in January, 1811. was 41,103,000, which
being deducted from 41,860,000 now proposed, left
'en excess of 4257,000. The Noble Lord would say,
that by a Bill brought into Parliament in 1811, the
House hactrecognised that only in the cases in which
the increase should exceed one hundred' and twenty-
four thousand pounds would an application become
necessary. This he denied. but even then, there w iuld
still remain an AugMentation of E 133,000. The House
were so accustomed to millions, that a few hundred
thousand pobnds might produce but little effect upon
them. As to himself, he thought the sum of 4257,000
of alarming magnitude, and one which ought to in-
duce the House to pause before they came to a vote
on the subject, He wished to infuse a spirit of honest
inquiry into the House, and for that purpose, should
propose the appointment of a Committee to consider
the Civil List Accounts, with power to send for per-
sons and for documents. Any other course would
be mere mockery. He then stated, that he had ceased
to attend the Committee last year, because he had
found it impossible to proceed without the evidence
of persons, whose attendance he was not allowed to
procure. He objected to the present Report of the
Committee on account of the manner in which that
Committee was composed. He had last year called
upon the House to appoint a Committee to consider
how to draw a proper estimate for the Civil List.
This *.a resisted on the ground that it would be an
outrage on the feelings of the Royal,ramily. Yet
the Noble Lord had done that which 'lie would not
allow the House to do. Suppo;et Ww-' the Committee
which he (Mr. Tiereer) had mooed for last year had
been granted, and that the Noble Lord had pro-
that it should be eeclusively composed of the
pro-
posed
Paymaster of the Forces, the Treasurer of the Woods
rui Forests, and the Secretary to the Treasury, such
an impudent proposal would have been rejected with
indignation. Yet this had actually taken place, and
Mr. Long, Mr. Huskisson, and Mr. Arbuthnot had
been appointed by the Noble Lord to repott On the
subject of the Civil List. How had they even made
their estimate ? Was it merely their own specula-
dint or the result of inquiry ? In examining it he
should leave out occasional payments altogether, and
'the sums from which the Civil List was to be cleared.
The charge remaining after the exclusion of such ex-
penses was, for 1815, 41,150,000, and the average for
the seven years ending in 1811, 4915,000. There was
an increase upon those years therefore of £85,000.-r•
By the establishment of 1815, this augmentation
would be reduced to £42,000. After stating the
manner in which that reduction was effected in the
different items, he asked the Noble Lord Now he
came to find th..t 'el 1,000 rr annum would be suf-
ficient for Ambassadors, when he had declared the,
year before that they could not live under £12,W0
a year ? If the House resisted the 811,000, he had
no doubt they would soon have it reduced to 410;000.i
He complained of the expenses winch attended the
Noble Lord's Special Missions to the Continent, and
which amounted to £43,809; and of those of his
assistants, Lord Stewart and Lord Cathcart, the
former of whom, besides his pay of £:2500 as Gene-
ral on the Staff, had spent £24,147; and the letter,
including his salary, £23,000. The outfit of Am-
bassadors, which last year was rated at £74,000, was
now only 451,000. - The salaries of Consul' were
also reduced from 4140,000 to 4150,000. The House
must feel that they were trifled with, when what was
represented one year as absolutely necessary was
spontaneously given up the next. He then entered
into an examination of the proposed chaige for the
Lord Steward's department. It was now eighty-five
thousand pounds, instead of ninety-six thousand
pounds as last year. What bad happened to cause a
demand for 96 thousand pounds to be made last
year, and one of only 85 thousand pounds this I He
did not believe, in fact, that Lbrd Cholmondeley had
made any suchdemand. Ninety-six thousand pounds
had been given him to be spent ; and, as tar as feed-
ing and eating could, be had endeavoured to go
through that sum, but bad failed. Bylooking at
the quarterly estimates, he chewed that with all his
exertions and advantages the Lord Steward had not
been able to-make his Royal Highness eat his way
through more than eighty-six thousand pounds..—
This. Was the true cause of the estimate being now
reduced to 485,000: In 1814, it was only 474,000,
and yet in the teeth of the return, signed by the Lord
Steward himself, he was now made to ask for
485,000. The next .department he should examine
was that of the Lord Chamberlain. It was estimated
last year at £43,000, and this year at £44000.—
Some of the charges were ;—For St. James's patine,
41200 ; for Kensington, 4300 ; for Kew, 4200
for Hampton Ctiurt, 4600. But for Carlton House,
and the other residences of the Prince Regent (and
he had no other, as Brighton was his private property)
425,000 had, last year, been required, and £-20,000
this. This was most enormous, especially if all the
sums spent during the last three years in furniture,
were taken into consideration. On account of the
visit of the Allied Sovereigns '480,000 of furniture
had been ordered in store, more than was wanted,
and it would almost appear impossible to introduce
any more into Carlton House. During the seven
years ending in 1814, St. James's cost 43000, but it
was occupied by the Royal Dukes of Clarence, Cum-
berland, and Cambridge. Since that time, the ex-
penses of the younger branches of the family had been
most cruelly reduced. Kensington was the resi-
dence of two Royal Dukes (Kent and Sussex), and
they were not supplied with the means of repairing
a broken pane of glan.r-(Cria of Hear, bean).-
-They were pared down to 4150 a-piece, and all
that to swell the expenses of Carlton-House to 28
Thousand Pounds 1 He then stated that his Majesty's
expenses at Windsor, including the Queen's house,
had not exceeded 411,714 per annuals during the
seven years already alluded to. And yet there was
sufficient splendour around him, and fetes were given
more siratilying to the eyes of the.people than those
that had since taken place, and yet they were now
called upon to vote £20,000 to Carlton-House. To
be sure, if the furniture were to be changed with
every new fashion, the money might easily be spent.
But if it were furnished, as Royal Palaces were in
former times, for seven or eight years at once, 10
thousand pounds a-year would be more than sufficient
to keep it its a state of proper repair and splecdour.
As to other residences 01 the Prince Regent, these