The Statesman.
London, England, 1812-02-08 00:00:00

THE 'err.,

AN.

~~..
::~ ., a. rte.

ittcheque;himselfllt wai,
thing, connected with
, bimlitn.hoe:jCerhaly
of the Crown, si e
uceonlltoliroopfretlrioegatives
, • .
'l;v:OtightfOrwaril, •It mast have been evident that the ‘.tual tratare, and not likevatly
increase or the expenditure was unavoidable> and i the fluctuation df manners or habits, the law ought' wholly erroneous to assert that the measureinfring ti.
object was to preserve its interests, andir
pitrevve9nrYt a lavish and unnecessary expendittue of •
that it wad no' more than must have been felt by !to be perpetual also. The allowing
I". as d
vesting
eing ittheosveerSiooiiigc7soiunl would
hheahv ea
hands
of
fffienectoornf
pefrteAtttepnetiry:i
every person from his own private expenditure,
could not be avoided. 0
though'its
Lard.pß,&NaKtfaLE..obsesved, that•the Hilt. woe poNS, in children, and in • persons, who1 revenue. Granting, places in reversion Kor
%.eiThoacha- ow not enprily iyprove, although 1 competent to discharge the dutif's of the .Offices I was a most improvident mode of rewardin
ht watpeifectli asiare of the •difficulty attending a :at the period*. of the grant,. might be- incompetent '.even meritorious services, because flue inmediatg
tack in makidg a 'Prevgion for a case so new and ! whew they should succeed to them. The consis advantage was extremely small, and the ila
distinct from any former situation of things. He i (peace was, that these offices would it last timate . prospect of a larger profit • extrernoir
'agreed with' the Noble- Secretary oeState, that it . come to be considered as sinecures;--that other uncertain. It was doing injustice bogs to the Cri
was an essential object for their !lordships to have iii i persons would be nominated to them. who were arid to.the People, to. permit the practice loner f,',
view, that the arrangement to be formed was not tit to discharge the duties. lie did . not mean Continise.. He concluded by expressing his astonish.
in its nature necessarily permanent, and that as their : to hold out that this Bin would hive - the effect 'Mint that do Chancellor of the Exchequer, aftej
hopes had been hitherto unhappily disappointed, so of operating any great saving io the
.national expen- maintaining that the provisions were of little' fs.
their fears might be agreeably undeceived. Ilis first ! diture; brit whatever operated as a reduction of any portauce, and gaustrriug all pertinacity in opposiquu,
1
objection to the plan now submitted was, that it was : useless expenditure, and guarded against the careless- should
't down by expressing his determination to
intricate, involved, and obscure, whereas, in his opi- ness of the Crown, was certainly of importance.- As ido what hi had the moment before condemned.
nion, it should not lie on such an occasion, it ought not !to what had been stated respecting the encroachment Mr. WHITBREAD remarked, that the only tiro
' merely to be clear and intelligible, but so clear and on the Prerogative, be contended that there was tin perient `who tad spoken against the Bill were two
intelligible that every man in the kingdom should ' material encroachment on the prerogative. 'lt e',3lllkrl. very principal reversioners. The Honourable tie:L.
uuderstßnd it. lie was not prepared to argue the in fact, put the Crown into a state of greater strength tleman wlio first opposed the motion had noticed
question of the gill on the principle of the suffici- ' than if these Offices in Reversion were allowed to. eomethiog that fell from him (Mr.
. Whitbread) four
envy or excess of the particular sums appropriated continue. He contended, that though the;saving in Tears age, which was, that ho was a reversioner,
to different purpiases. All their Lordships undoubt- itself was not great, yet the principle of economy in i flu. Hon. Gent. complain:A that this assertion, ~ had
edly felt-the necessity of supporting now, as well . itself was of great importance.—[llearn s l been thrown at his head."—lt was true, that he had
i
is at any former tlme, the dignity and state better'. ! The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER caughttt in his mouth, and it seemed had been. chew.
the .- it the F tions of Royalty, and , - ;hed tr- k, that the Honourable Mover of this i, it r,r situ- FA 1, -it?
j Thr

in to the exercise ot a.
to the person in whatever situation, or labouring
under whatever calamity, who continued to wenr:the
Crown. They all felt that it was not merely for
a sick person, but a lick King, for w:.om
vision was to be made.----He had often la-
mented . that in all the arrangements of the Civil
List, two objects should have been combined so
obviously dissimilar as the provision for the civil go-
vernment of the country, and the expenditure for the
Royal Household. This was not the proper oppor-
tunity for entering into such a consideration, but he
did think it, in due time, a subject highly worthy of
their Lordships' attention. An extreme case might,
indeed, occur, which would render it expedient to
make some alteration with reference to this arrange-
ment, but except in such an extreme case, it was
uh-
questionably th, duty of the Legislature to respect
the contract which had been entered into between tie
country and his Majesty, when he was competent to
give or to withhold bis assent. Upon the subject. of
the excesses incidental to the Civil List, Lord Gres-
, vale stated, that when in office, he had conceived it
to be the most regular and expedient course to Ted
these excesses with any available fund in the uncon-
trollied possession of the Crown, rather than to ap-
ply for Parliamentary aid. His Lordship, after
stating his acquiescence in the necessity of maki•tg
adequate provision, as well for the dignity still due
to his Majesty's situation, as for that of the Prince
Regent, concluded by enquiring of the Noble Lord
(Liverpool) what was proposed to be The mode of ac-
count between the Treasury and the .otlicers of his
Majesty's Household ?
Lord !Lk:MOWRY made a few observations on
the groupds of the proposed arrangement.
A conversation then took place between Lords
Grenville and Lirerpool as to the kgal accountability
of the King's Lords steward and Chamberlain to the
Lord Treasurer, after which the Bill was read a.third
time, aid the House adjourned.

wisp. .o remark,
Bill (Mr. Bankes) had at length admitted, that it
would not have anreffect in reducing the public ex-
penditure; and that whatever might be its policy, it
was not on the ground of being, in the tlightest
gree, calculate!' to save, the public money,, or to ree)
litre the people from their 'burdens, •that he recom.:
mended it to the House. Both parties now under-
stood one another. The object, that the Bill had in
view was comparatively of little magnitude, but i
whenever, on former occasions, it had been pressed
forward by Members with a strong feeling of its
importance, he had never felt any disposition to
oppose its progress ; but although he had not deemed
it worth while on former occasions to resist it, circum-
stances, it would be admitted, might since have occur-
red, which might render it necessary for him to express
his dissent from the measure. If, in the first place, the
Resolution of the House had been to abolish nearly all
offices that could be granted in reversion, the mainte-
nance of the few, that it might be thought right to
continue, would scarcely be deemed a matter of suf-
ficient consequence to induce any opposition to the
general plan ; but if, in the second place, the House
and the country should be of opinion, that the great
mass should remain for the reward of meritorious ser-
vices, and only a few be abolished, then it would not
be considered advisable to support a measure so ex-
tremely limited in its operation. He certainly, on
the general principle, felt no greater disposition now
to oppose the Bill than he had done on foymer oc-
casious ; but finding by the experience of the last
and preceding years, that it was likely to meet
with serious resistance elsewhere, and thinking
that the provisions themselves were of little .ino-
meat, he did not think that there was any nieces.;
sity for raising a topic.of disagreement which might.'
be attended,with the greater evils than those *ilia
the Bill proposed to remedy. If indeed it could be I
shewn that great constitutional injury would result i
from the rejection, it doubtless would be expedient to
carry it through the House. His Hon. Friend (Mr.
Bankes) had observed, that any proceedings which-had i
occurred, or any pertinacity which had beet. .!town
formerly to this measure in another place, ought not
to be adverted to by this House in contemplating the
subject, but surely he would admit that it would be
right in the first instance to examine on which side
this pertinacity had been shewn, whether by the sup-
porters or by the opponents of the • Bill, and then
another question would arise, from whose pertinacity
most injury was likely to arise. lie (Mr. Pert eval)
conceived that this measure, by erroneous opinion
within, and by popular clamour without the House,
as well as by other means, had been swelled to a mag-
nitude which by no means belonged to it : no such
Important results could be derived from it, as many
seemed anxious to suppose. Separated as it now was
from such ideas, by the candid admissions of his Hon.
Friend, who acknowledged that the effect would be
rather to increase than to diminish t1;•3 Influence of
the Crown, and that as a measure of economy it
would effect nothing, at least some of the main
grounds on which this erroneous opinion and popu-
lar clamour rested, were removed. Stripped of
these two principal advantages, the naked Bill must
be acknowledged to be so insignificant in 'every
point of view, that it was in reality not n orti
supporting. He trusted, notwithstanding he had
fallen in with the strong, sentiments expressed is
favour of the Bill on fofmer occasions, that the House
would do him the justice to believe that he now re-
sisted it from a sincere wish to preserve cordiality
between the two branches of the Legislature. lie
Owens)* opposed the second reading.
Mr.' BANKES explained, that inasmuch as the
Bill recommended the abolition of certain offices, it
was to be considered in some degree as a measure of
economy."
The TOANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
lidded, that pending any measures respecting the
abolition or reform of existing offices, he had never
offered any'opposition, nor would he, while he had
the honour to hold the office he now filled, give any
interruption to such a proceeding.
Lord A. HAMILTON pointed out certain offices,
the abolition of which was proposed, and which
made the present a measure of public .economy. The
present situation of the country rendered it necessary
that not a farthing should be uselessly expended.
Sir S. ROMILLY wa.s much surprised at the con-
clusion to whirl) the Chancellor of the Exchequer
had come, since from every thing he had said he had
expected a vvy different determination. He denied,
'that . the present Bill, which had several times
received the sanction of the "house, was of slight
.im-
portance; nor was it more correct to state, that it
bad been previously carried by popular clamodr. It
was true that the public had fornied a very strong
opinion of the necessity of the Bill ; and the coun-
try would learn with mech surprise and disappoint-
meats that the Chancellor of the Exchequer bad this

ierntshe
,it.sheuerreei
futottolu:tsreetplarfieo,4.l
jp:B6.ittetbit.ltehbvettedpi
ea,l;.v'iceae;,•saiLbtied stilla:eifgntt'vt oi:euitritte,:tievc.
any co:.stitutioual object like the present, it was un.
doUbtedly the most s.nztul policy to attain the object
so much desired. The Right Honourable Gentleman
(Mr. Perceval), however, thought otherwise, and
maintained' that the measure was of little or no
porlance, although popular clamour had swelled it
into magnitude, and his only reason for now resisting
it was, his opinion, as opposed to that of the whole
cbuntry—that it was too insignificant to deserve at.
tention. Had he, or his colleagues, consulted their
interests or their duty, they would never have thrown
• cold water upon it. • :vas assumed too (which the
r House would not grant), that it was net a measure
of economy. Irmo rather singular that this dor-
. trine should be supported by a person who holds the
reversion of one of the greatest places in the gift of
the Crown. If it wants regulation, an answer was
immediately returned, that it could not Wallowed.
Why ? Because the Chancellor of the Exchequer pos-
sessed the reversion, and if it were regulated, era
[tuny being the object, it would dOubtless be abolish.
ed. • Did the Right Hots. Gentleman mean to sas,
that he, sitting in his place in that House, was not a
practical contradiction of his own assertion? Another
proo(might be found in the odious appointment of
Col. 111‘Mahon to the office of Paymaster of
•doe s' Pensions, the abolition of which had been re.
.Commended thirty years ago, and yet there, too, no
regulation was to be allowed—because it was graved
Lin reversion. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer
.had not the expectancy of Lord Ardetes place,.it
might he investigated—a:Complete exemplification of
;'what the Chancellor of the Exchequer had denied.
It was.a4'mitted on all hands, that these grants hi re-
version wet a sort of forestalling of the prerogative
Vof the Crow tro (Near, hear !1 and no man who
osiihed them to be ebolished, liftd any desire to dim'.
ash the-prerogative ; the object Was to prevent de.
signtag Ministers from granting festoon to their own
I Infants. Plear,Accull He :. usted, uotwithstand,
log the specious arguments employed, that the House
of Commons. u the Represteittalves of the People,
• would pass r. Bill, from which their Constituents
expected, and would d, rive such important benefits.
He cop:a anticipate no disagreement between the two
branchos the Legislature upon a subject where the
(1,•••••• of both was so obvious ; and under thee!
eircupseta,.. a he felt confident that the Lords would
cordially join in a measure, which it was true the
Chancellor of the Excheqtter said is not important to
be done, which the Country exclaims is important to
be done, and tvhich the Ilonse declares it is important,
to do.
Mr. D. GIDDY supported the Bill shanty. Ile
insisted that the Hill had for object an important
saving of the public money, and the out-rooting of a
great defect which had crept into the fabric of the
Constitution.—Whenever the sulject of the rever-
sion of plaees,was mentioned, the existence of the
practice excited the greiteet disapprobation.
Colonel BASTARD contended, that there were
'two points of. economy to be considered-1, econo-
my of public expenditure; 2, economy of pubiic
opinion. If regard were had to the latter, thepee-
pie would cheerfully pay those taxes, of the exaction
of which they now complained, especially when they
knew that the money, of which their families were
-deprived, was not misapplied-
. Sir JOHN SEI3RIG iiT pointed out the extreme
inconsistency of rejecting a Bill upon such flimsy
grounds as those urged, which had before twice re-
ceived the unanteurns absetrortbi
Mr. ELLIOT 'observed,' that granting offices in
reversion was extremly disadvantageous to the
Crown, since it was in truth mortgaging its inte-
rests: there were many examples to prove that the
exercise of this power had been most injurious both
to King and People.
Mr. PONSONBY—" Although I have often ex-
pressed my sentiments upon this question, I cann.t
refrain from. troubling the House with a very few
words. I cannot at p.ll egree that this is a matter
of little importance, on the contrary, it appears to
Me to. he of very considerable magnitude, oven iu au
economical point of ig'W j because nothing can be
more unfit than that iZ should be in the power of
-tiey Minister, when it is -conienient to him to call to
his -own 'aid, that money which ought only to be the •
resource of the Crown, arid to apply it to his
.own
purposes, so as to carry, by forte of influence, a mea-
'sdlrdperhaps highly disemeable, or even injurious,
te the nation. The Conduct pursued br the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer on the present. occasion,
stn ell me as somewhat extraordinary : formerly. he
voted for the 'Bill, .because he said it was of little
importance: nowise votes agaiest the Bill, Waite,
he says, it is of little ittaportauce. The same reason
of its' being of little importance :serves his purpose
equally well for or against the measure, as occasicia
Jetty requiris—[flear,,heci,s ft is not, however,
of 'such light ceniseqnence as at relatis to the proceed.
ings of the House, in ofhich it has been so repeatedll
and unanimously adopted' tab, conformity to the
cOition' of the country, scarcely less .unauitnoas.—
Now, however, for tee first time, ii, was couteuded

r

night thrown out what he had before strenuously
supported : for the Reversion Bill was suggested by
the Finance Committee, whose appointment bad
beet►-reeeaneewded itfthe beginning of the &teen of
:1107,, and whose labours had bees approved at its
tera*tiont inks. *sob fron.tht Tbrone, writua
•