Star.
London, England, 1810-02-16 00:00:00

I-. sv.i; Secretary to the Admiralty, it was the
ish of Lord Mu!grave, that the same revs.
which prevailed in the Navy Pay-Office and
ions
AdmirAlty, might also be adopted in the Navy
ego. But from the constitution of the establishment
Riche clerks, it was found, after an attentive investi-
- ion of the case, that thew regulations could not he
coccoduced into the Pay-Office, without a con iderable
orifice of expense. In this opinion too the Corn-
issioners of Naval Revision concurred. This state-
ment he felt it his duty to make, • and he hoped it
could be satisfactory to the Hon. Gentleman.
Mr. WARDLE explained.
Mr. WHITBREAD did not think the explanation
t; the Hon. Gentleman satisfactory. He should
ilerefore vote for the papers on the ground of what
.Icl been stated by his Honourable Friend, and the
Friends of the Noble Lord (Mr. Wilberforce and
:r.
The CtiANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
id not think the House ought to feel in the same
i.inner as the friends of the }Table Lord, nor agree
;;Cle motion, unless a sufficient ground were laid for
The Report of the Committee of 1788 recommen-
ita the abolition of fees, and an increase of salary in
lea of them. The Order in Council for the abolition
tithe fees did not issue till 1796, so that the old prac-
rre continued till that period. As the fact, to which
the paper moved for applied, had taken place before
that period, he trusted the House would not think
. inquiry into a practice, not then prohibited, ne-
tts;iry, A.s to what had been said relative to a tran-
ti.)n in the Barrack Department, it would have
ten desirable that the Hon. Gentleman had been
etre explicit. If the transaction had taken place at
v time stated by the Hon. Gentlethan, October last,
come to his knowledge, he was sure he must
rilakic inquiry respecting it. He begged the
lion. Gentleman to be more particular on that head,
cord r to enahle Gentlemen to apply their minds to
6e orticular case.
Mr. IVARDLE, in reply, informed the Right'
lion. Gentleman,
,that a written statement had been
given in to the Commissioners of the Barrack Board-
on the 31st of October last, by Wm. Pierce, a Clerk
in that department, containing an accusation against
a Mr. Prentice, another Clerk, employed in a very
tesponsible and confidential office in that department,
that he had sold the offices in it, and that too since
tile Bill of the Right Hon. Gentleman (the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer), against the sale of offices.
It also charged him with having employed clerks to
prepare false accounts. He had further to state, that
:letter had also been written to the Lords of the
Treasury, stating the practice, and calling their often-
ton to it. He had himself seen the letters, and he could
me the Right Hon. Gentleman, and the House,
that they would hear out his statement.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER de-
clared his readiness to agree to the motion for the
production of thi-se papers.
Lord FOLKSTONE having received information
that, in consequence of a prosecution some time since
instituted against a firm for the sale of offices in the
City, the penalties of which prosecution the parties
were now sutfaing, some papers or letters'
leg other parties in similar offences had been put into
the hands of the law officers of the Crown, lie wish-
ed% be informed by these Gentlemen, whether such
documents had been given to them ; and if so, whe-
ther it win their intention totals. proceedings against
the parties so implicated ?
The ATTORNEY GENERAL answered, that
it had been stated by the parties, the objects of the
prosecution (Messrs Pohlman and Keylock), in order
to give colour to their own practices, that persons
high in office were concerned in the sale of offices.
Amongst others, it had been stated that the Duke of
Portland made 030,000 a year by the sale of offices,
awl also that the Lord Chancellor was engaged in the
Practice. Upon such grounds, he could not harbour
the slightest suspicion, still less institute a prosecution.
He had no paper of the kind mentioned by the Noble
Lad put into his hands, and consequently he had no
poceedings to institute.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL begged to give
the same answer.
Mr. H. ADDINGTON declared his intention to
Tote :or the papers relative to the Barrack Depart-
sea, for which a Parliamentary ground had been
laid, but should oppose the other motion cf the Hon.
Gentleman's.

The qaestion was then put upon the first motion,
and negatived without a division. .
Mr. WARDLE next moved,
" That there be laid before the House a general Return of all the
°IAA emplcyrd in the different departments of the Navy Office,
try Pay Of the Ttaasport Office, and the Sick and Wounded
SoaHel a:ql Prisoners of War Office, with the date of their ori-
tod entre into the some, their ages, number of years service,
" Wailes, on their 'entrance into these offices, together with
C'elYeteluent additions which may have been made to the same."
Alla a few words from Mr. ROBERT WARD
anl Mr. DAVIES GIDDY against the motion, and
relohservations from Mr. WARDLE in support
it, this motion was also negatived without a dim
Mr. WARDLE then moved,
That there be Lid before *the House a Copy of a Memorial
by William Pierce to the Commissioners for the Barrack
Lkpartrm it, dated October 31, 1E4)9, and also a C.,py of a Let-
,t7 trot,. the same Person to the .1 .ords Commissiimers of the
calling their attention to that Memorial."—.Agreed to.
EMBEZZLEMENT BILL.
as the notion of Sir Joan NEw roar the Embezzlement Bill
10..1tLcoarititted, Mr. James Abercrombie in the Chair.
f,:tral duties were gone throtigh.
u•I the clause declaring it felony, fraudulently to secret, ern-
Itzzles or make use o any of the public money, a long converse-
G 4 ensued, in which Mr. Rose, Sir J. Newport, the Attorney-
Teta'. Mr. Giles, Mr. H. Thornton, &c. took a part.
gr.TiIoRNToN particularly objected to the words " make
°f+. at tieing sufficiently defined.
41' NUN NEWPORT had no objection to 10ter the clause
eeoily to the words in the Bankers Bill, where the words
'td vitae" make away with," and moved an amendinent to this

rhe SOLICII OR-GENERAL strongly objected to the whole
P:iaciFle of the clause, as going to deprive Government of every
14'u ti it flow had, in the event of any deficiency arising. At
retzt the embezzlement of public money was punished as a
44cittanour, by which the delinquent was subject to unlimited
Zetall4 huprisontnent, and even to pillory ; while, at the sante
kt' all„his property, of whatever description, his person also,
the, property of his sureties, were subject to Writs of Ez-
for the security of the debt flue to the public. liy the pre-
''''trr•
iessure, however, supposing a public dekulter to flee the
' hot only the property of his sureties,but even any estates
.....7taself might leave behind hint, would be free, us the debt
7 tette in the felon.
tu`7I,S:ROMILLY concurred, that great inconvenience would
jititc:lrm nuking this felony, for the reasons stated by the So-
-Genetal. hut the objection /night be obviated by leaving
• be word felony, and supposing the offence to remain a mis-
, sonnet, however, to the proposed punishment by