The Statesman.
London, England, 1815-02-16 00:00:00

uld he productive of more accommodation, and
:,ets%ir e than could be looked for from any pro-
posed evension Of the prevent Post Office.
Mr. BAILING affirmed, that the Corporation of
JA,„doo had Irvis influenced by the management of
Ministers on this subject, and that the allegation of
the Petitioners was unfounded. The threat of re-
moving the l'ost-Office to the West send of the tnwu
hid, he had reason to believe, the effect of produe.
in!, r chaug,eof determination in the Common Gouts-
cd, a majority of which resolved to abandon the'
smile plat. last year. By this plan the Honourable!
Member observed, that from two to three hundred i
rr,olis were to he deprited of their property in the
lichlity of St. Martin'asle-Grand, without any doe
retice ; and he saw no reason for exemptingtheCor-
pot at ion of London from the Standing Orders of the
'louse, which applied to all other private Petitioners.. ;
The proposed erection would, he had no doubt,
co,t sOO,OOOl. which expellee he felt to be unneces-
sary, as the present Post-Office could, witk the es.
peuditure of about 50,000 E be' rendered fully age.;
quate, lie appealed to the House then, whether,
wider the present circumstances of the country, the
utmost economy being obviously necessary, it would
be rise to incur such an extravagant expenditure,
especially where no public necessity called for it.—
Indeed, those who were most competent to judge of
the necessity of such a measure, namely; the leer.
chants of London, were notoriously adverse to the
plan of the Petitioners, which plan he firmly believed
to be the merejob of certain persons who hoped to
derive a profit from its adoption.
Alderman CUkTIS vindicated the conduct of the
Corporation of London, and maintained• that the
improvements proposed by the Betitismers were
highly necessary to the pablic• accommodation, al-
though, were he to consult hie own private conveni-
ence, he should, from his resideuce in Lombard.
street, be disposed to oppose them.

_ .
Mr. GRENFELL denied that the Merchants of
London unanimously disapproved of the proposed
removal of the Post-Office, as those residing west-
ward must rather think that removal desirable; but
there wenseother classes of persons whose accommo-
dation was to be consulted, as well as that of the
Merchants of London, and the new plan would
materially accommodate all the inhabitants of the
west-end of the town, who would receive their letters
half an hour sooner in the morning, and beonabled
to send off letters half an hour later in the evening.—
On these considerations he approved of the project
referred to by the Petitioners.
Mr. GORDON could not conceive that any such
accommodation as that just stated, or indeed.any
other accommodation that could be expected froth the
proposed plan, could be worth 600,0001. particulirly
in the present Oat* of our finances,
Mr. PONSONBY entirely concurred in the opi-
nion of his Hon. Friend, and expressed a wish to
know what was the estimated expence of the proposed
plan for removing the Post-Office. As to the early
delivery of letters, he could not think it right to tat
the public for the accommodation of individuals, bet
would rather recommend, that Gentlemen wiscs wish-
ed for an early delivery of their letters, should pay
one guinea a-year, which he himself was in the habit
of doing.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
did not regard this as the proper stage for entering
into any consideration of the expence of the measure
alluded to ; but he was happy to learn, that while
the measure was indispensibly necessary to the publie
accotnnsodation. the execution of it would be attend-
ed with less expence than any other plan suggested,
certainly with less than the plan proposed for en-
larging the present Post-Office, which could not be
rendered sufficiently commodious by any practicable
enlargement.
Mr. H. SUMNER spoke strongly against the pro.
posed measure alluded to in the Petition, which he
expressed his resolution to oppose, alleging that the
houses which must be purchased in the vicinity of St.
Martin's.le.Grand, before the building of the New
Post-Office could commence, would cost above
350,0001. while the purchases uccrs:;a,y hi the vicinity
of the present Post-Office, with a• %letc to the arte.
ewe enlargement of that building, would not iris,
more than 70,0001. The Hon. Member animadvert.
ed upon the origin and application of the Orphans'
Fund, maintaining that greet abase was allowed In
Parliament to p►evail on dui' subject; all the inhabit.
antsin and near London,who had coals from-that part,
being, in fact, compelled to pay a tax, in order to
discharge the interest of II debt originally due by th,
Ci,v of London, as appeared from the Act of sth of
William W.

Air. Alderman gIIAW, warmly replied to the lest
spralscr, vindicating the conduct of tbeCorporation
of London with respect to the Orphans' Fund, and
stating that that Corpeiatiots had agreed to pay out
of its futhls onr-third of the expellee to be incurred
in purchasing the trite of the new. Post-Office, with
a view to erect a new and commodious street to the
great Ninth road, by the eniaigement of St. Mar-
tin's-le-Grand.

Mr. 11. SUMNER. frequently explained, as did
Mr. Alderman SHAW, who admitted that the ad-
vanc. to be made by the Corporation of Lendon was
to be out of the Orphans' Fund, which Mr. Simmer
contended not to be the legitimate property of the
City of London.
Mr. I3ANKES wished it to be understood, that
im voting for the motion he should not hold himself
Vedged to support the measure iii contemplation,
respecting a mew Post-o%re, fur while he wished for
every neeemary accommodation on this subject, he
must be anxious to have that accommodation furnished
as cheaply as possible; and his impression was, that
the accommodation required, might be had et less ex-
pence by enlargiug the present rest-Office.—The
Rouse then divided.