Page images
PDF
EPUB

to procure a supply of specie on the continent, which was found to be the only course by which the country could be protected against the ruinous expenses thrown upon her by the then state of the exchanges. Such a trust, he would main tain, could not with propriety have been confided to less distinguished characters than colonel Gordon and Mr. Herries, and of the merit of the latter gentleman they had earnest, as Mr. Perceval, with his accustomed penetration, had selected him to be about his person. For those various and arduous charges, for all the operations he had carried on, he possessed the very highest qualifications. He admitted col. Gordon's merit, he willingly assented to all that had been said of him; but Mr. Herries, he must say, was eminently qualified for that situation from his vigilance, activity, and perseverance, and was, entitled to the utmost confidence. In this most laborious and highly responsible office, he continued for five years. Now if the principle of half-pay were admitted, he would be found to have been treated as in the lowest class. In giving half-pay, the principle of proceeding was, that when an officer had served 10 years, he should be entitled to half his salary; when he had served twenty years, to two-thirds: therefore, on this principle, they put him, since he had served only eighteen years, on the lowest scale. On the first part of the question, therefore, it appeared that Mr. Herries had not received even a sufficient retiring provision. On the second question, whether in the event of his accepting another situation he should forfeit his half-pay, he could show that such a rule by no means applied to this case. When Mr. Herries accepted the situation of auditor of the civil list with a salary of 1,500l. per annum, it was not to be expect ed that he would give up his allowance of 1,350l. which he was free to enjoy without doing any thing; it was not to be expected that he would take upon himself the duties of auditor of the civil list for the additional 150l. a year. That would have been to accept of an inferior situation to that he had formerly had, which was inconsistent with the practice in all such cases. It was well known, that when paying diplomatic services, they placed them in a different situation; it was always a higher one than they had occupied, never an inferior one. The allowance on retiring was not to be viewed as the halfpay of a military officer, which was consi(VOL. XXXVI.)

|

dered as a retaining fee. The officer in the army might be called on to serve again, as might the retired diplomatist; but neither could be forced out of his line. When then Mr. Herries had been called upon to give ministers the benefit of his talents in a new way, they had no right to call upon him to relinquish the allowance he had received on retiring from the office of commissary general. Mr. Herries acted in foreign countries as commissary-in-chief; he had crossed the sea into various parts of the continent, therefore he could not be reduced to an inferior appointment. In common justice, and in common liberality, he could not be called upon to relinquish his 1,350l. in consideration of being appointed auditor of accounts of the civil-list. The right hon. gentleman opposite seemed to have viewed the appointment altogether as one part a job, and the other part a sinecure. He had shown that the first was not a job; he would now prove that the other was not a sinecure. It was clearly established, by two committees of that House, that the office of auditing accounts on the civil list was one of great confidence; and a noble friend of his considered it of the last importance, that the civil list should not be again neglected, so as to bring it again before the House. Mr. Herries, then, having already performed duties of extraordinary importance, was again called upon to undertake a duty of extraordinary importance; for to superintend and correct the accounts on the civil list was an office out of the common line, and required a man of tried integrity and talents, and diligence. The question, therefore, was (for he had discussed the subject separately), as to the proper provision for Mr. Herries on retiring, and whether he was bound to renounce that provision on being appointed to a situation of great importance: the question was, whether, since the salary of this last appointment did not exceed the whole amount of his former salary of 2,700l., he could be called upon to renounce the 1,350. He thought it a fair appeal to that House, whether such a demand could, in common justice, be made; whether, considering the integrity and ability for which Mr. Herries had been distinguished, he enjoyed too high an allowance. Another point of view in which he would beg leave to represent the subject was, that by this arrangement an actual saving was effected to the public. An auditor of the civil list was necessarily (U)

to be appointed, and to be paid 1,5007. | took the task. He could not be called Mr. Herries had 1,350l. Had another upon to attend to the duties of this office, person been appointed to be auditor, if he had not been disposed to perform there would in consequence be 150l. more them; but if he took it, he must renounce paid. The hon. gentleman who had open- all the advantages of his former situation. ed the subject had given it a great deal of Mr. Herries then was, or was not, in a colouring, but he (lord Castlereagh) military situation; if he was, he was enticould not but think it would have been tled to half-pay, but could hold no other a great injustice to Mr. Herries, after he situation; if he was not, he could not have was removed from being commissary-in-half-pay, he could not pretend to both; chief, to have given him less than he now 'enjoyed. He, therefore, upon those grounds very conscientiously appealed to the House, whether, since it became necessary to appoint a person to audit the civil list, a situation of great importance, the selection of Mr. Herries for that undertaking was not, in every point of view, a proper one.

unless Mr. Herries' friends should propose to make a new principle in his behalf. With all half-pay officers it was a rule, that when they received a new situation, they must give up so much as they had previously enjoyed: that is, if they had 1,000l., and they got an appointment of 3,000l., it was provided by act of parlia ment, that they could not hold the former sum. It was quite absurd to attempt to exempt this case from the same rule. In every case in which care, and diligence, and service, were rewarded, it was clear by this act, that no person could enjoy any thing at all more than a pension. So ought Mr. Herries to be treated. Was the principle insisted on here applicable to all commissaries general, or to Mr. Her

Herries was a very deserving person; he believed him to be entitled to all the praises bestowed on him; he had never seen him, he had never heard of him till the present subject had introduced his name; he believed him to be a deserving person, but not deserving of this favour. He was favoured he believed. Now though he admitted that he might be a very able and a very upright person, he did not think him deserving of such favour. If favour were thus allowed to influence such questions, every gentleman would have some friend whom he considered deserving and entitled to a similar favour. Nothing of this kind was a compensation to the public for the waste of their money. He felt himself, therefore, bound to condemn this transaction as an improper application of the public money.

Mr. Ponsonby, notwithstanding the reasoning of the right hon. gentleman, and notwithstanding the distinctions of the noble lord, could not see any grounds for thinking that the office of commissary-inchief was not of a military nature. An argument, if the House could consider it an argument—an argument of a puzzling and curious nature had been used on this point. The situation was one of great im-ries only? He dared to say that Mr. portance and responsibility; the emolument was corresponding to its importance; but when over, nothing but what the Treasury allowed remained to him who had held it, and therefore the situation was not military. Very differently were all other military officers treated. They could receive no other office. It was said they had promotion; they had the prospect of rising from lieutenant to captain, from captain to major. This was very true during war, and during war the commissary-in-chief had 2,700l.: but when the war was over they had nothing but halfpay. From the most indigent to the most affluent of them it was the same. Why, therefore, should the situation of commissary-in-chief be treated on a different principle, and what was the force of this argument of ascending rank? But suppose it conceded that Mr. Herries was on the civil list; he had a situation for life of 1,500l.; he was not bound to quit it and to accept of the appointment of commissary-in-chief: therefore, he could claim nothing in consequence of his own voluntary act. Mr. Herries was offered the appointment of auditor; he was not obliged to accept of it; but he had accepted of it. He could not be compelled to give his time and labour, but he of choice under

Mr. C. Grant, junior, said, there were two questions under their consideration; 1st, whether the Treasury had exercised a proper discretion in allowing Mr. Herries 1,350l.; and 2dly, whether there was any censure incurred for having given him the auditorship of the civil-list. He would prove that the superannuation act, as the 53d of the king was called, to which the right hon. gentleman had alluded, did not apply; and that the Treasury could not

give Mr. Herries only military half-pay. | The act applied only to the resignation or dismissal for age or infirmity, of persons holding offices; but here the office was abolished, a case not contemplated by the act. It was therefore a distinct case. The Treasury was free and unfettered as to the allowance to be given to Mr. Herries. He thought the case of half pay officers not at all analogous. They had their half pay as a retaining fee. Mr. Herries had no retaining fee, and no promotion. His was complete exclusion, and the Treasury had not the matter left to their option. Mr. Perceval had settled that it was not within the sphere of half-pay. It was, therefore, no longer optional for the Treasury to regard it as a case of half-pay. As to the question of suitable compensation, it should be always remembered that Mr. Herries had forsaken a situation for life of 1,500l. The Treasury seemed to him therefore limitted to the view of this circumstance, and of the extraordinary services of Mr. Herries during the five years he was commissary in chief. The hon. gentleman and his noble friend had agreed in the praise of colonel Gordon; he too was disposed to do him every justice; but Mr. Herries was called to perform the most arduous duties at a most eventful period; he had to conduct the most difficult arrangements, and to manage a various and necessarily intricate correspondence. At the close of the war he proved himself a very able person, and sustained a burthen of the highest importance: he had provided our armies with every thing necessary, though in different and remote places; he had, in addition, procured specie in abundance to meet the necessities of the army, and the demands of foreign powers. No man could have been expected to perform all that he had done. The expenses of this country would have been very much greater than what they had been, but for his exertions. Several millions had been saved to the conntry by him. He would ask, therefore, of any man capable of appreciating such services, whether this gentleman could be thrown upon half-pay? The hon. gentleman who opened the debate had contrasted Mr. Herries's services with the military exploits of others. He thought this contrast unfair and invidious, because it was not easy to form any comparison between the fatigue and hazard of war, and the labour and assiduity of civil functionaries. He thought it also unsound and unwise; for the reward of military toil and

danger was the admiration of their country, and the renown transmitted to posterity: it was therefore unsound and unwise to contrast those services clothed with splendour, against the labour and duties, not less severe, though less renowned, of civil life. He was perfectly convinced that no more than strict justice had been done to Mr. Herries.

After a short reply from Mr. Bennet, the House divided:-Ayes, 42: Noes, 93. List of the Minority.

Atherley, A.
Aubrey, sir J.
Bankes, Henry
Barnett, J.
Birch, Jos.
Brand, hon. Thos.
Brougham, Henry
Calcraft, John
Duncannon, visc.
Calvert, C.
Ebrington, visc.
Fazakerley, Nic.
Fergusson, sir R. C.
Fitzgerald, rt. hon. M.
Folkestone, visc.
Grant, J. P.
Grenfell, Pascoe
Heron, sir R.
Guise, sir W.
Hornby, E.
Jervoise, G. P.
Lambton, J. G.
Latouche, Robert

[blocks in formation]

TITHES LEASING BILL.] Mr. Newman moved the order of the day for going

into a committee on this bill.

Lord Ebrington observed, that great expectations had been excited in the country by this measure, of some beneficial arrangements. He was aware of strong objections to any parliamentary interference, which some considered as a sacrilegious attack on church property. He wished, however, to preserve the clergy's rights, without unnecessary burthens on the country.

Sir W. Scott moved an instruction to the committee, "That they have power to extend the provisions of the bill to the leasing of lands substituted for tithe, or annexed to small livings by means of queen Anne's bounty."-Agreed to.

Mr. Davies Gilbert moved an instruc

tion to the committee, "That they have power to make provisions for continuing current leases to the end of the year, in cases of avoidance of benefices and for

rateably dividing the emoluments between

the late and present incumbent."-Agreed | to; as was also an instruction, "to extend the provisions of the bill to glebe land under certain conditions."

On the motion for going into the committee,

Mr. J. H. Smyth said, he thought it would be injustice to a successor to be bound by acts to which he was not a consenting party. There were three provisions proposed-the consent of the incumbent, patron, and a sworn surveyor; but he did not think they would be adequate to protect the successor against the act of an incumbent. Blackstone had observed, that the old provisions were found insufficient. He did not oppose the bill; but doubted its effect, and feared it might increase instead of diminishing dissensions.

Sir W. Scott said, he looked with great anxiety at the removal of ancient usages. Such measures in the present state of the world, were not free from great danger. He should be better able to judge of the bill when it came in a regular shape from the committee; but it seemed to strike at a great principle of law, that a tenant for life should not injure his successor. He did not mean now to press his observations farther, but must call the earnest consideration of the House to the whole subject. He therefore trusted for a full consideration of all the details of a measure that might affect the security of a most valuable class of persons; and hoped that time would be given for it. The university which he represented had not yet presented any petition on the subject, but its members felt a corresponding anxiety with Cambridge. He then read part of a letter from Oxford, stating that the bill was objectionable in principle and professions. Lord Palmerston did not rise to oppose the bill, but trusted that the objections to it would be done away in the committee. It related to a subject that might disturb many people's minds, when it was said that tithes were a grievous tax, though they were as much the property of the church as any property was of the landlord.

Mr. Ponsonby understood no attack to be made on the clergy or their rights, but thought that a bill regulating clerical property might be passed as well as a bill regulating any other species of property. With this view he would go into the committee. He was favourable to the bill, because he believed its provisions would be as beneficial to the clergy as to the other parties interested.

Mr. Savile considered the church property as inviolable as any other property. Mr. H. Martin concurred in the principle of the bill, not more because it was agreeable to the landholder than because it would promote the interests of the clergy, whose right to the enjoyment of tithes was as sacred as that of any landholder to the lands that yielded them. From his situation he was acquainted with the interests of the church, and the sentiments of the clergy; and he was sure that the measure before the House would promote the one and meet the other.

Mr. Lockhart supported the bill, and replied to an observation of sir W. Scott, relative to the principle of English law, that a tenant for life could not bind his successor. Much of the prosperity of the country had arisen from an interference with this maxim. The guards in this bill were sufficient to prevent injury to church property.

Mr. Brougham said, that the principle of the bill had his support. He denied that any attempt was made to alarm the clergy.

Mr. Newman understood, when he undertook the measure, that it would be agreeable to the clergy, and would promote their interests. He had consulted their rights and wishes more than that of the other class, whose property his bill might affect. He was averse to delay in passing the bill. Much had been said of plans for relieving the poor. This measure, by encouraging agricultural improvements, would be found to be more prac tically beneficial than any of them.

The House then resolved itself into a committee, when the instructions moved in the House were received. After some time spent in the committee, the chairman reported progress.

HOUSE OF LORDS.
Friday, May 9.

EXTENTS IN AID.] The Duke of Beaufort presented a petition from Bristol, against Extents in Aid.

The Earl of Lauderdale said, that the principle of extents in aid was attended with great disadvantage to the commerce of the country. It would be a most salutary regulation to prevent any man from being a partner in a country bank, who happened to be connected with the collection of the revenue.

The Earl of Liverpool agreed as to the

propriety of the principle laid down by the noble earl; it was one upon which he had acted since he first came into office. During that period he had never given a situation to any person connected with the collection of the revenue, without an understanding that such person should not engage in the concern of a country bank. The Earl of Rosslyn thought that a restriction to that extent would not be sufficient. If any banker in whose hands the money was lodged by the collector of the revenue, had himself such a connexion, the disadvantage would be equal. It would, therefore, be proper to extend the operation of any measure that might be introduced so as to include such cases. The Lord Chancellor said, that the subject of the petition ought to be brought to the notice of the barons of the exchequer, who best understood it.

The petition was laid on the table.

POOR LAWS.] The Earl of Liverpool rose, pursuant to notice, to move for the appointment of a committee to consider the present state of the Poor Laws, and whether any and what remedy could and ought to be applied to the evils of the system. Considering the importance of the subject, it might perhaps be proper that he should state the reason why he had not brought forward the subject at an earlier period. Observing that a committee had been appointed in another place for the investigation of the same subject, he certainly had felt desirous to see what progress would be made in that investigation before he called upon their lordships to appoint a committee of this description. Great inconveniences often arose from inquiries on the same subject going on at the same time in both Houses; and sometimes undoubtedly, that course of proceeding was attended with great advantages. In his judgment, this was a case in which it was desirable to wait to see what would be done by the committee of the other House, and for that reason he had delayed calling their lordships attention to the subject sooner. It was irregular to allude to what had been done by the committee of the other House; but whatever might be thought of their conclusions, one thing was certainthat a most valuable mass of information had been collected, of which their lordships committee might avail itself: but from all that he had heard, it would be of great importance that, notwithstanding

the labours of the other committee, the subject should be investigated by a committee of their lordships. The other House had no advantages for such an investigation which their lordships did not possess in fully as great a degree. There were many in their lordships House as well acquainted with the practical effects of the system, and as competent judges of what measures ought to be adopted. It was not his intention now to enter into the discussion of the principles which ought to govern their proceedings with respect to the poor-laws, as these might be considered and discussed with more freedom in the committee; and till the committee should have made its report, it might be proper to refrain from stating any distinct opinion on the subject. And he was the more inclined to follow that course, because, however general the coincidence of opinion was as to the effects of the system, and the evils that resulted from it, there was very considerable difference of opinion as to the proper remedies. This latter point was that as to which the great difficulty existed. The difficulty was not in tracing the source of the evil, but in finding the proper remedy for that evil. It was now generally admitted, that our system of poor laws was an evil; but then it was an evil which had existed for 200 years, and was so intermixed with the habits and prejudices of the people, that remedies which might at an earlier period have been easily applied could not now be adopted. He himself knew many persons whose information on this subject was not less than their candour, who had imagined that a remedy might be found without much difficulty; but when they came to probe the matter to the bottom, and to examine the subject in all its views and bearings, they themselves admitted, that they had found their remedies either such as could not possibly be adopted, or such as were highly objectionable. Under these circumstances, he thought that it might be attended with great advantage to have the subject investigated by a committee of their lordships, if those among them, who were most conversant with the subject of the poor-laws, would attend that committee, and give up a great part of their time and serious attention to the investigation. He had conversed with several noble lords of that description, and he was happy to state that he had received such assurances as afforded the best hopes that every thing

« PreviousContinue »