had failed, not one of the new taxes having produced any thing near the fums they were estimated at. His Lordship then faid, that the great object he had in view, and all the Lords who acted with him, had been mifreprefented as an attack upon the power of the Crown; and an innovation on the form of Government. To clear this matter up, he defired their Lordships to remember that he was always an advocate in that Houfe for the prerogative and legal power of the Crown; this he would never oppofe; but it is the influence of the Crown arifing from the vast number of offices created by the fyftem of funding and taxation, and which must increase fo long as that fyftem continues, that hath brought this country into the ftate of profurfion and wafte now complained of. His Lordship then difcuffed the difference between regal power, and the minifterial influence of the Crown. His Lordfhip proceeded to give a very humorous defcription of the progrefs of the public money, in only one fingle tax, the Land-tax. He fhewed what a number of hands it went through, who had perquifites for collecting it, for auditing it, for telling it, for locking it up in a cheft, for iffuing it out again, for paying it to the army, navy, &c. &c. It was first abridged, he faid, by the Tax-gatherers; they had 3d. in the pound; zdly, by Collectors, they had 1d. in the pound; 3dly, by the Receivers, they had 3d. in the pound. After this, the procefs was ftill not a quarter gone through; it was to be clipped at the Accomptant's office, at the Teller's office, at the Excife office, at the Clerk of the Rolls-office, at the Treafury-office, and at a thousand other intermediate offices, at every one of which it received its proportionable production, till at last it came out from thefe repeated furnaces, with not above half the magnitude with which it originally went in and befides the poundages, he mentioned the feveral reting places where it remained fome time in the hands of different perfons for their profit. Upon the whole, he made it plainly appear that many of thefe offices are ufelefs, and that the public money might be collected and expended on a plan of œconoty that would be a very great faving to the nation, and an ample recourfe to prevent fresh taxes on the people. With respect to the affumption of the 100,000l. addition to the civil lift granted to his Majesty a few years fince, if that was thought a proper tfep, he understood it would come propeily into one act of Par liament, and would be propofed in a few days by a Gentleman of great abilities in the other Houfe; he fhould therefore only trouble the Houfe with his ideas concerning the other propofitions in the refolution to be moved. He meant to have all grants of monies and all expenditures brought within acts of Parliament, in order to prevent the vaft fums in extraordinaries drawn for upon Government, and not accounted for to Parliament. To open all contracts to the best bidder; that no favourites of Minifters might have it in their power to make immenfe fortunes at the public expence ; to reduce the number of Officers for collecting, auditing, paying, &c. of the taxes, by fome plan to be agreed on with the Bank of England; and to abolish undeserved penfions. This done, he vowed to God his intention was to retire into the country, and very seldom even to vifit London. But till the minifterial influence, which struck at the root of the constitution, by a fyftem of corruption, venality, and profufion, is destroyed, he could not retire in peace, for no man would be fafe in any corner of the kingdom. The Earl of Coventry feconded the motion, and gave a melancholy account of the fituation of affairs in the counties where his eitates lie; the landlords cannot get their rents, the farmers cannot get a proper price for their commodities, and are unable to pay their taxes; from whence, and the fenfe of the people expreffed in their petitions, he concluded that it would be highly proper for the House to come to the refolution moved by Lord Shelburne. The Earl of Carlile only objected to the mode, and thought it rather an impeachment of the honour of perfons holding offices under the Crown to exclude them from being of the Committee. This idea was adopted by feveral other Lords, and was by fome confidered as a very high affront; they refented the imputation that they were not at liberty to promote the welfare of the nation by a plan of ceconomy as well as any Lord out of office. Lord Hillsborough was very warm a、 gainst the motion; he faid, if he had not known the candour and abilities of the noble Lord who made it, he fhould have confidered it as a ftring of libels, and fo fortified with infurmountable objections, that it must have been intended to make the majority of the Lords put a negative upon it; which negative was to be the ground for a pompous proteft to be printed, and e-echoed back to the county affociations, in order to foment discontent, and to force Parliament into the meafures of the petitions. The leaders of thefe affociations, he faid, would go to the brink of rebellion, their inclinations perhaps led them further, but it was not quite fo fafe. After fhewing the impracticability of the motion, his Lordship faid, he hoped fome proper method of obtaining the fame end would foon be propofed to Parliament. The Duke of Manchester spoke in favour of the motion, and in fupport of the rectitude of the conduct of the petitioners; and Lord Sandwich having obferved that there would be a majority of protestors against the petitions, his Grace was fevere upon the protestors of Huntingdonshire, as acting under his Lordship's influence, and faid it was unusual for majorities to proteft. The Duke of Richmond, in a long fpeech, combated every objection that had been made to the motion and to the petitions. He defired the motion might be amended, by leaving out the words both Houses of Parliament,' and appointing only a Committee of their House; and he went over every argument he had used on former occafions, concerning the ftate of the nation and the neceffity of the measure. Lord Mansfield replied, and agreed to every thing that had been faid in favour of fome plan of oeconomy; but he said, there were eafy, plain remedies, without involveing the two Houfes in difpute. If any man commit a fraud in the difpofal of the public money, the King reprefented the Public, and he might be called to account for it by law. He remembered, when he was Attorney-general, he had profecuted an Agent Victualler for taking five per cent. on all the rum furnished to the army in the war before laft, and he was obliged to refund. He had also profecuted a Colonel of a regiment at Antigua, who received the pay for the cloathing of a complete regiment, though he had 400 men defective, and he had made him refund the money into the proper office. His Lordship was of opinion, that the redress ought to begin in the other Houfe, and then it would come up regularly in the form of a bill. Lord Shelburne replied; after which the Lord Chancellor made a long fpeech against the motion, ending it with faying, that he hoped no noble Lord would be terrified from voting against it, fince it required no very large thare of perfonal courage to be able to defy all the malice that could be fhewn without doors, againit thofe, who, though they were as willing to adopt any feafible plan of economy, as the noble Earl whofe propofition was under difcuffion, dared to object to a motion impracticable in its manner, and fruitless in its object. Lord Camden replied, and defended the motion, declaring he did not regard it as the single motion of the noble Earl near him, but as the motion of the majority of the people. His Lordship mentioned his penfion, which he faid was the price of long fervices, and fo fmall, that as much, if not more, had been given to a puisne Judge as a recompence for refignation. At half pait one the Houfe divided when there appeared Contents Proxies Non-Contents Proxies Majority against the motion LORDS PROTEST. Die Martis 8 February, 1780. Diffentient, 46 ift, BECAUSE, however the waste of public money, and the profufion of useless falaries, may have been heretofore overlooked in the days of wealth and profperity, the neceflities of the prefent time can no longer endure the same system of corruption and prodigality. The fcarcity of money, the diminished value of land, the finking of rents, with the decline of trade, are melancholy proofs that we are almost arrived at the end of taxation, and yet the demands are annually increased, while the hopes of peace are every year put to a greater diftance. For let any man confider the immense debt increafing beyond the poffibility of payment, with the prefent accumulation of taxes upon every article, not only of luxury, but of convenience, and even of neceffary use; and let him carry, his thoughts forward to those additional duties which muft immediately be impofed to make good the intereft of the approaching loan, and of that debt which will remain unfunded, he will find that at least one million and a half of interelt must be provided for, befides what may be farther neceffary to make good the deficiencies of the late taxes. Under thefe circumftances, the favings of a ftrict and vigilant ceconomy in every branch, and the application of overgrown falaries, unmerited pensions, and utelefs places to the public fervice, are almost the only only refource left in the exhaufted ftate of our finances. But, befides this ftrong argument of neceffity that preffes upon the prefent moment, fuch and fo great are the abules in the management and expenditure of the public money, as would call for the ftricteft enquiry and animadverfion even in the best of times. The practice of expending immenfe fums, without confent of Parliament, under the fallacious head of Contingencies and Extraordinaries, the greater part of which might eafily be comprized in an estimate; but because fome unforeseen articles are not capable of fuch precifion, the Minifter bas, under that colour, found out a method of expending the public money firft ad libitum, and when it has been fo expended, has found means to induce Parliament to think itself bound in honour to ratify and make it good; deferves the higheft cenfure; and no Minifter who fhall dare to stake the public credit, for money that has not been voted, ought to be justified by a less authority than an act of indemnity. The millions which remain in confequence unexplained and unaccounted for; the fhameful facility of admitting almost every claim; the improvident bargains made for the public fervice; the criminal neglect and even contempt of the few checks eftablished in the Board of Treafury, befides great part of the money being fhared in its passage among a tribe of collectors, clerks, agents, jobbers or contractors, or paid away by official extortion, or ftopped in its courfe to breed intereft for fome ingroffing individuals; are grievances which the prefent motion has in view to remedy. zdly, But, great and important as the motion is in this view of it, it is ftill more important in another, as it tends to narrow the wide-fpreading influence of the Crown, that has found its way into every corner of the kingdom. It is fufficient to allude to this grievance, without any further enlargement: but this argument, though perhaps the ftrongest in favour of the motion, has been turned into an objection to it, as if it meant to abridge the rights of Monarchy, and make the Crown dependent upon the Parliament. If the objection means to infinuate that corruption is neceffary to Government, we thall leave that principle to confute itfelf by its own apparent iniquity. That this motion is intended to diminish the conftitutional power of the Crown we deny. The conflitutional power of the Crown we are no lefs folicitous to preferve than we are to annihilate its unconftitutional influence. The prerogative rightly understood, not touched, or intended to be touched by this motion, will fupport the Crown in all the splender which the King's perfonal dignity requires, and with all the authority and vigour neceffary to give due effe&t to the executive powers of Government. It has been argued, that this is not a proper time for reformation, when all the attention of the kingdom fhould be employed upon the war, as the great and only object in the prefent time of diftrefs; to which we beg leave to infift, that the prefent is, for that very reason, the propereft time, because nothing is so effential to the conduct and profecution of the war as the frugal management of that supply. by which only it can be carried on with any profpect of fuccefs. Nor ought the plan of economy to be any longer delayed at the rifque of a general bankruptcy, and from the history of this, as well as other countries, times of neceffity have been always times of reform 3dly, Becaufe we conceive that the mode of a Committee, which might be to act with a Committee of the other House, and might if neceffary be rendered durable, and vefted with due powers by an act of the whole legiflature, might bring back the public expenditure to its conftitutional principle, might devife proper regulations for opening contracts to the propofals of every fair bidder, for reforming the abufes of office, and the enormity of fees, with a variety of other abufes, particularly that of large fums of money lying in the hands of individuals to the lofs of the State. An objection has been ftrongly urged on the ground of an apprehenfion expreffed by fome Lords, as if they feriously entertained it, of its producing, a quarrel between both Houfes of Parliament, in confequence of which, the public business might be obftructed by a claim, on the part of the Houfe of Commons, to an exclufive right of confidering and providing for the fubje&is of this motion. Such a claim certainly cannot be fupported as a confequence of the claim of that Houfe to originate money-bills. Not a fingle Lord appeared to entertain an idea that fuch a claim would be well founded. In truth, the objection fuppofes it to be ill founded, and that therefore this Houfe will refift it; and yet it affumes that the House of Commons will advance and perfift in this ill founded claim. We cannot dif difcover any colour for fuch a fuppofition, unless we were to adopt the infinuations of thofe who reprefent the corrupt influence (which it is our wish to fupprefs) as already pervading that Houfe. Thole who entertain that opinion of one Houfe of Parliament will hardly think less disrespectfully of the other. To them it will feem a matter of indifference whether the motion is defeated by the exertion of that influence to excite a groundlefs claim in the one Houfe, or by a groundless apprehenfion of fuch a claim in the other. But we, who would be underflood to think with more refpect of bath, cannot entertain an apprehenfion fo injurious to the Houfe of Commons, as that they would, at this time especially, and on this occafion, have advanced fuch a claim. The motion has likewife been objected to on account of its difqualifying perfons poffeffing employments or penfions to be of the propofed Committee. We are far from fuppofing that the poffeffion of place or penfion neceffarily corrupts the integrity of the poffeffor. We have feen, and the public have feen, many illuftrious in itances of the contrary; yet we cannot But fuppofe that the public expectations of advantage from this meafure would have been lefs fanguine, if they had feen perfons poffeffing offices felected to distinguish how far their offices were useful or their falaries adequate; they perhaps would not think the poffeffor of a pention or office the fittest judge how far that penfion or office had been merited or was neceffary. We cannot therefore think the motion juftly exceptionable on this ground; it rather appears to us to have been drawn with a proper attention to noble Lords in that Parliament exempting them from a fituation which they muit neceffarily with to decline. We conceive ourselves warranted in the mode propofed by precedent as well as reafon, and it was ftated to the House to have been recommended by the most approved conftitutional authors who have written fince the Revolution, but having offered to meet any other propofition which might carry with it fubftantial remedy, and no fuch being offered, notwithstanding the time this propofition has lain be fore the Houfe, we cannot help confidering the prefent negative as going to the fubftantial as well as formal part of the motion, and hold ourselves obliged to avail ourselves of our right of entering our proteft against the rejection of the above 4thly, We are farther impelled to prefs The voice of the people will certainly be complied with. Minitters may, as they feem to have done in a recent inftance, deprive any man of what he holds at their pleasure, for prefuming to exercife his undoubted right of thinking for himself on thefe or other public fubjects; but it will not be wife in them to treat thele affociations with contempt, or call them by the invidious name of FACTION, a name by which the minority in both Houses of Parliament have been fo frequently and fo falfely calumniated, because the name fo applied will recoil back upon themselves when acting against the general fenfe of the nation, nor will they be able to reprefent thofe numbers fo refpectable in rank and property (as they did but too fuccefsfully the difcontented Americans) as a mob of indigent and feditious incendiaries, be caufe the people to whom this is addressed, M ae HOUSE OF COMMONS. Wednesday, January 26. THE Committee of Privileges fat in one of the Cominittee-rooms to hear the complaint moved by John Wilkes, Efq; against the Duke of Chandos, for having interfered in the Hampshire election. The letter on which Mr. Wilkes grounded his complaint being produced, evidence was given that it was the hand-writing of his Grace the Duke of Chandos, after which Mr. Wilkes moved a resolution to the following purport: That it appears to this Committee, that the Right Hon. James Brydges, a Peer of Parliament, and Lord-Lieutenant of the county of Hants, hath concerned himfelf in the late election of the faid county, in direct violation of a vote of the House, of the 26th of November, by which it was Refolved, That it is a high infringement of the liberties and privileges of the Commons of Great Britain, for any Lord of Parliament, or any Lord-lieutenant of any county, to concern themselves in the elections of Members to ferve for the Commons in Parliament.' Mr. Love! Stanhope objected to the motion, contending that it infinuated more than was true, because it had not been made appear to the Committee, that the Duke of Chandos had interfered as a Lordlieutenant, or ufed any of those powers to influence the election, with which he was invested as his Majesty's Lord-lieutenant of Hampshire. Mr. Henniker fupported the fame argu ment. Mr. Wilkes and other Members, on the other hand, maintained that it was by no means neceffary to afcertain that the Duke of Chandos had concerned himself in the election as Lord lieutenant, but that it was an ample juftification of the motion, and a perfect compliance both with the letter and Ipirit of the vote of the Houfe of the 26th of November, to prove that the Duke of Chandos, confeffedly a Peer of Parliament, and confefledly Lord-lieutenant for the county of Hants, had interfered in the late election for that county. Mr. Stanhope, perfifting in his pofition, was determined to take the fenfe of the Committee upon it, and therefore moved as an amendment, that the words and Lord-lieutenant of the county of Hants,' do not stand part of the motion. The Committee divided, but it was carried against the amendment by a confiderable majority. Wednesday, February 2. Mr. Bacon brought up the report from the Committee of Privileges, wherein it. appeared that the Duke of Chandos had written between three and 400 letters to Freeholders in Southampton to influence. them in their choice of a Reprefentative in Parliament for that county. Lord Nugent expreffed his concern that the proceedings on the noble Duke's letter had been carried fo far; he had expected that the honourable Member (Mr. Wilkes) on whofe motion the bufinefs had been taken up, would have before then return ed to his former good-humour and goodnature. The Duke, he said, was as amiable a hearted man as lives; and though he would not attempt to juftify his interference in elections, yet he was confident that Peers of great property never could be prevented from ufing the natural influence they derive from that property: if they could not do it openly, they would certainly fimuggle themselves into elections, and direct as much as they could. His Lordship concluded with moving, that the further confideration of the report fhould be poftponed to that day four months. Mr. Wilkes faid, that if the noble Duke had in the warmth of friendship recommended his friend to an acquaintance, he never would have taken up the matter; but when he faw him make ufe of the Crown |