The Statesman.
London, England, 1812-01-22 00:00:00

Ii

neceqsary to be shewn was, that there was a liability
to misapplication. This Fund, he said, had its ex-
istence from a practice not authorised by the Law of
Nations.
Mr. ROSE, though he agreed with some of the
Gentlemen who had preceded him, in their estima-
tion of the lion. and Learned Gentleman who had
brought forward the present motion, thought, at the
same time, that he had received a distinct and plain
answer to every point which he had thought proper
,to urge. Could any abuse be pointed out in the ap-
plication of the proceeds of the Droita of Admiralty?
The whole state of the expenditure was before the
House, and lay open for their investigation—then this
Fund taken from the Crown, it would be injurious
to many claims which are at present taken into consi-
deration. When Lord Nelson, then Capt. Nelson,
thought proper to suspend, of his own accord,
the Navigation Laws in the West Indies, he was
threatened with law suits, that would infallibly have
ruined any man in his then situation. It had fallen
to his lot to examine into the conduct-of Capt. Nel-
son, and, after a full consideration of the business,
he told him, that it appeared to him he had done his
duty, and if the judgments of the Courts of Law
should go against him, he would take care to pro-
tect him from the consequences. At that time Capt.
Nelson eas not worth 5001. in the world, and if he
bad been condemned in '2O or 30,0001. without any
interfets.nce os the part of Government, he might
have laia in poison all his life.
Mr. ABERCHANd BY would state ia a few words
the grounds and object of his vote. He did not
wish to consider bow the money had been applied,
nor did he charge misapplication of it ou any indis
vidnal ; for in that case, the business would have
come under the consideration of Parliament, in a
very different form from the present. His view was
to inquire, as these funds were of a permanent nature,
and were likely always to exist, who ought to have the
con .)ul over them. No doubt in any future appro-
priation of those funds, a great part of them in any
case would be applied as heretofore. But the ques-
tion was, who was to have the controul ?—Surely it
ought to he Parliament--and to say that no misap-
plication had yet taken place, was really no answer ;
If there was a capability of misapplication, it was
the duty of every Member of Patliamen:, who did
not wish to depart from his public duty, to provide
against any such probability of abus. The lumi-
nous and masterly statement which his Honourable
and Learned Friend (Mr. Brougham) had that night
submitted to them, would have astonished every man
who heard him, wereit not known, and had he not by
his eloquence on former occasions sufficiently satis-
fied every person, that he was • one of the most pow-
erful and considerable men in that House.
Mr. WM. SMITH wished merely to ask one ques-
tion. The Account now submitted to the House be-
gan in 1793, and ended in 1810, and taking the
amount at 7,300,0001. the annual sum was 430,0001.
a sum-which, it was contended, should be wholly
at the disposal of the Crown. Now, what he wished
to ask was, merely, if any one had demanded, in
1793, that a sum of 430,0001 should be anomaly at
the uncontrouled disposal of the Crown, for 17
years, how would the proposition, at that time, have
been received?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER saw
no particular weight in the question which had been
just put, to make any Member alter his opinion on
this subject. There was as wide a distinction be-
tween the case which he had supposed, of the sum of
430,00-)l. being annually at the uncontrouled discre-
tion of the Crown, and the present, as could well
be between any one ease and another; because it was
impossible for any person to look at the paper now
before the House with care, without seeing that, the
amount of the sum which he had stated was limited
by the abatertents and deductions necessary in bring-
ing it into existence, to less than the half of what 1101
bad stated ; and whenever an application was made
of any part of that remainder, it was subject to be
canvassed by Parliament. Wiatever may have been
the practice of former Administrations, he would for
his own partsay, that on the very first moment he heard
of any suspicion as to the manner in which any part of
the funds had been disposed of, he had shewn a per-
fect willingness and readiness to produce an account
of it, that it might be seen in what manner the ap-
plication hed been made. The account now before
the House was produced in 1810, and the lion. and
Learned Gentleman (Mr. Brougham) had had two
yams to bring forward the declamatory attack winch
he had that Hight thought proper to make. They
bad heard much of the talents and eloquence dis-
played that night by the Learned and Hole Gentle-
mae ; but..bitterer .opinion might be entertained of
his taleutret tilt elogoettee, sure he was Oat the ap-
plication of iltem in the present case was not calcu-
leted to give much satisfaction. But whatever his
eloquence might have been, it was in tifs opinion not
unanswered, and even in -sundry parts of his argu-
ment by the ifout. Gentleman who was the seconder
of his motion. ' To that Gentleman he wished to ask, ;
if, after the argument delivered by him, he would
support the present question? He thought that he
understood that Hon. Gentleman, and really he
could not couceive how with the doctrine he had
held, he could increase the list of those admirers of
eloquence, who agreed with the arguments, and sup-
ported the Resolutions of his Honourable and Learn-
ed Friend-,.(Laugh.] The lion. and Learned Gen-
tleman (Mr. Brougham) had stated, that it was pos-
sible to carry on war with this inordinate sum of eight
millions, without the assistance of Parliament; for
In order to justify the eloquence and violence of
the Hon, and Learned Gentleman, it appeared ne-
cessary for him to state, that the fund amounted to that
extent, without taking the smallest account of the ne-
cessary deductions to which it was subjected. Was he
really serious in urgingsuchanargurnent tothe House ?,
The question before the House naturally resolved
Itself Into the legality of the existence of this fund,
And the propriety of its continuance--and with re-
gard to the legality, he was really astonished that
Any lawyer should have thought proper to state in
that House, because the Droita of Admiralty were
not mentioned in the Statute de Prerogativa Regis,
that, therefore, they were illegal. In what respects
(lid the Droits of Admiralty differ from other prism?
All wive whatever were vested in the Crown, The
fact is, that there had not been a statute passed since
the reign of Queen Alum, in which the right of the
Crown had cot been recognized by Parlittmegt.

..