The Statesman.
London, England, 1822-05-03 00:00:00

THE

of the thwernment had created is the people t* oars.
their measures, and taus it a thaw for keeplagsp oM
less places that the intelligeboe of the people had callad
up a jealousy of-the tiovernutent ?- Theory IV, refers,
was no longer 1114.81 or partial ; and was it the way to
remedy that aril, if one it were, by denying to give up
any thing ? Ought they sot rather to teach the people
to be moderate, by being•moderate theruselyes? It car.
tainly was not the way to oppose that which was right.
By skilful management they might be able to direct
that, the force of which would only be aggravated by
rttemplilit to chock tip the passage with useless obits-
tits. To persist in such a course would only destroy
the lingPriox hopes of the people, and entirely deprive
them of all confiden.e in that Bosse. The Noble Lord
concluded by moving—" An humble Address to his
Majesty, representing that his faithful Commons, relying
' on his most gracious answers to former addresses of the
House, of his desire to concur in all measures of eco-
nomy tibial the exigencies of the times might require
by making such redactions in the civil departments of
the State, as should seem eligible, most humbly re-
quests lie will be graciously pleased to order the office
of oce of the Postmasters General to be abolished, in
order that the salary may be saved to the public."

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
be trusted the British public would ever judge with
nation of the proceedings of that House; and that'
Parliament would pursue its course of propriety, usin-
tinenced by any apprehension of public opinion. He
hoped that it would ever decide on a fair investigatioa
of each question, and not by an anxiety to secure mem
popularity. He complained that appeafa of that nature
were too trequently brought before the House. end mix-
ed up with many questions most unnecessarily. Though
the Noble Lord had, by varying the terms of Lis motion,
complied with the regulation of the House, it was not
fair to bring before it, In the same Session, a question
which had been disposed of. If such a practice was to
prevail, it would retard the business of the House, and
interrupt the progress of the boldness essential to the
country. The Noble Lord had carefully abstained from
entering into the actual merits of the question be had
brought forward.—(Hear.)—Me had avoided repeating
the arguments which had been advanced before, and
which were so ably refined—Meer, bear)—and applied
himself wholly to declamation on the iafinente of the
Crown. Bolls the Postmasters General were jointly re-
sponsible for the duties of their office. He could not
think it right to place under the control of one person
ao ochre which received two millions of gross revenue
annually. However high the rank or the character of
that individual might be, be could not agree to have
such an office placed under Isis single control. It was
one of such extensive detail—he might say, nth great
machinery—that it resembled an immunise manufactory.
It could not be placed with security under a single au-
thority. The question was before the Committee of
1797, and they then rejected it. It was merely if the
office should fie intrusted to the care of four or five gen-
tlemen of inferior rank, or two Noblemen of high dig-
nity. He considered there were many sound reasons to
prefer the present arribgerneet. The qnestion at that
moment could not be decided without peculiar 'emigre-
ofenee. as there was an inquiry now in progress into all
tie details of the business of the Post Office. When
the result was laid before the House, they would have a
much better opportunity of judging on the question
than at present. The subject hod engaged the peculiar
attention of the Treasury. He trusted that they would
not undertake to decide the question until that inform-
Lion was laid before them.
11r. BANKES said that the examination alluded to
could only affect the question of the details of the Post-
office, and not the management of the highest depart-
ment. The Committee of 1797 hail referred it to the
House to pat the office under the contrast of a Beard
similar to the Boards of other departments. Lord Col-
chester Lad presided at that Committee. From the ex-
perience be bad of the manner in which the besieges
was conducted, be woad be-serry to eras It put iota a
more expensive Idea% whist lie considered that of •
Board would be. He kk that a coasideruble saving
might be made in the principle of the department by
carrying the present Motion. He was sot favourable to
the )(slat responsibility of this office, or that of any other.
Ile recollected the case 3f two persona who were em-
ployed ii a joint trust as minor storekeepers. One of
them became ill, the ether was intrusted with the key;
lie robbed the till, and rats away with the money.—
(Loud cheers and laagLiag.)—He was very far indeed
from imputing, to either of the Noble Lords—(Hear,
(tear,) —the possibility of sack an aceldent.—(Hear,
bear.)—He only alluded to that case to thew bow absurd
the ides of this joint responsibility was. We should
admit in that case the same principle as that of the
Committee of 1912 and 1913, which regulated the sillic•
of the Paymaster-General. Though be did ant se, the
late President of the Board of Contrail in the Hesse,
yet be saw the present President, whose support he had
in 1813, when he bad the honour of making a modes
that all sinecure offices should be abolished. He recol-
lected to have had then also the support of the Right
Hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and of the Com-
missioner of the Woods and Forests (Mr. Huakissoa.)
Now be asked why any Member who then voted for the
abolition of any office not detrimental to the public set-
vice, should oppose the motion of the Noble Lord?
Why should they alter their opinion of what oraeurred
in the cinema/Aces of the country sines. whisk should
make them shrink from a duty which they thaw Why
imperative, or whether the tiemsces of the antra kid
since become so prosperous as to render say dimiuntles•
of the expeaditure unnecessary? If it were then ad-
mitted that the exposes of the civil Goverment of
the country. and the number of persons employed.
should be reduced as low as possible (which he believed
was the substance of his motion), he did not know
any thing that occurred since that period which 'midst
to prevent the same decision now, and on that principle
was the present motion entitled to theeopport of the
house. The abolition of one of these offices if Post-
master-General would by no means contravene the mo-
tion which bad been made last year. This address he
conceived to be in accordance with the spirit of that
motion, and ought not be brought as an 'moment
against the present. If the house did not wish to at.,
ford an additional argument for reform—if they wished
to show that Parliament was adequate, in its pretest
constitution, to the performance of its functions, and
that it was disposed to sympathise with the pimple. be'
did not know an instance in which they had' a better
opportunity than by voting for the reduction of the of
Though he was not one of those who thought Par-
liament ought to veer about on every °meths with po-
pular feeling, and that it was not long before the people
gave their assent to those measures which the wisdom
of Parliament considered it lit to adopt, yet, when Le saw
the present office was a perfect sinecure, he did not
think its continuance could be justified on any grounds.
I o expressing a wish that all sinecures should be abo-
lished, he recollected having been asked by a Gentle-
man what sinecures remained after the reductions that

bad taken place ; and he replied. this office of Pat•
master-General only. He knew that it had been main-
tained that no office should be abolished bacons, the in-
licence of the Crown in that bons* ought to be uphold ;
hut to such a principle he could not jive his assent.
Even if such a principle were maintained, lbws was no
office which could be aholisbed with less &Minnie to
the Crown than the office of Postmaster-Gametal. H.
heartily recosameoded the consideration of this quests.
the 'house. It tram, in his opinion, utterly impossible
to defend it, if Parliament showed eny &spastics to
adopt pxinEiple,uf -sound economy or A conci4stisg

-.