rose, in pursuance of his notice, to move a certain Resolution relative to the above institution, somewhat similar to that which he had lately proposed as to Greenwich Hospital. He knew it would be objected to what he was about to propose, that this charitable institution had been originally supported by private voluntary donations, but it appeared to him to be now under the immediate management of government, the more especially as parliament had been called on to vote considerable sums of money for its support. No doubt the private donations from other individuals were very important, but still there appeared no reason for separating its mode of management from that of Greenwich Hospital, as described in the Charter. Here the hon. baronet gave a statement of the most important public and private contributions to this Asylum. He observed, that a very large portion of that called "private contribution" was given from the Patriotic Fund, which was avowedly for the purpose of relieving the distresses of the relations of those who fell in the naval battles of their country. Surely, then, the offices of this charitable and naval institution could not be better bestowed than upon those who had survived these battles, but unfortunately were disabled. The sum subscribed by the Patriotic Fund amounted to 40,000l. and such being the intention of that fund, it surely never could be supposed, that other persons subscribing small sums could mean that their donations should be bestowed otherwise than upon individuals connected with the navy. They could never imagine they were subscribing towards the relief of persons, such as those already appointed to offices in that Asylum, who were as far removed from the naval service as the Great Mogul. The house were formerly told, that the office of Auditor of Greenwich Hospital must be filled by a lawyer, that Hospital possessing great sugar estates, and also great estates of other descriptions in the North; but, in the present case, what was there of law business to transact for the Naval Asylum? It was not, however, a lawyer that had been appointed to the Asylum, but a wealthy clergyman, who, fordoing little or nothing, was to enjoy, in addition to other income, a salary of 300l. a-year as Auditor. Besides which, he was to possess a free house and garden; and a very large sum of money had been laid out in repairing a house for his residence, amounting, he believed, to about 1700l.; and added to all this, even furniture for the house. He really was convinced the duties of the office he alluded to might be performed by some poor wornout or disabled naval or marine officer at a salary less than 100l. a-year; but instead of this, no less than 700l. was thus squandered away upon a spiritual gentleman, who had no occasion for any assistance whatever. Another thing he should object to upon this establishment was, the appointment of a surgeon who had never been at sea during his life, and inducing him, by a great salary, to give up his private practice, instead of appointing a naval surgeon, who would be less expensive and more thankful for the favour bestowed upon him. There were various other appointments, which he thought objectionable, such as the clerk to the institution, the clerk of instructions, &c. but the chief ones were those he had mentioned, the auditor and the surgeon. He had no difficulty in saying, that the persons who had appointed an Irish clergyman to the office of auditor of the Naval Asylum, had done wrong, if they knew that he was already possessed of four church livings in Ireland, and a glebe land so extensive, as to contain 540 Irish acres. The gentleman he alluded to was Dr. Thomas Brooke Clarke, to whom besides, there had been granted several very large sums, by resolutions of the house, as might be seen by their Journals. Here certain Resolutions were read by the clerk, at the desire of the hon. baronet. Amongst these was the sum of 556l. granted to Dr. Thomas Brooke Clarke, for his trouble in enforcing the residence of the clergy, whilst he himself intended to establish ins residence at the Naval Asylum, instead of being at any of his livings in Ireland. This rev. doctor was also secretary to the library of the prince of Wales. Had all this been known when this reverend divine was recommended, he certainly thought he could not have been appointed to that lucrative situation. There were many of the old disabled officers in the navy, with large families, who would have been most thankful and grateful for the appointments of auditor, surgeon, or clerks to the institution. He should now sit down with the hope that the Resolution which he should propose, would meet with some consideration; for in doing this they were saving the public money, and adding to the comforts of those really entitled to relief, and who would ever be grateful for the favour bestowed. It was with that view that he should propose this Resolution, "That it appears to this house, that the appointment or competent and qualified persons from the naval and marine service to hold offices and employments in the several departments or the Royal Naval Asylum will be productive of much advantage to the empire, by materially encouraging the naval service, and diminishing the public expenditure."—This Resolution the hon. baronet said, if acceded to, he should follow up with another, for an Address to his majesty, praying that he would be graciously pleased to take the most summary means of carrying that object into effect.

said, he was happy to concur with any motion that was made for the benefit of those who served in the navy, or the near relations of those who fell in battle; but he must inform the house, that the present motion was unnecessary; as the commissioners were framing regulations for the conduct of the Naval Asylum. Two years ago an account of the state of the Naval Asylum was laid before the house, and the hon. admiral now only came forward with a pompous parade of his complaints, though he never said any thing on the subject while he was himself one of the lords of the admiralty. The institution was established originally by voluntary subscription; and when it was taken under the protection of his majesty, and the duke of Cumberland was appointed president, it was then agreed to retain Dr. Clarke, who first suggested the idea of the institution, and two commissioners, at the request of the original subscribers. He declared that he was not personally acquainted with any of the parties, nor did he recommend a single person to any office, and for these reasons he moved the previous question.

said, if the right hon. gent, had imputed to his hon. friend the charge of having brought forward the present motion with that simplicity, manliness, and good sense which distinguished all his efforts in that house, it would have been a charge more likely to be credited than that of parade and ostentation. As to the motion itself, he could see no one ground for rejecting it. He thought it very strange, that a person who had been so active in informing against non-residents, should himself have been all the time a stranger in Ireland, though possesing two such lucrative livings there. He thought it upon the whole so gross a job, that he did think the house was bound, not merely to agree to the motions of his hon. friend, but to follow them up with an address to his majesty, for the immediate dismissal of that gentleman from a situation he must be in every respect so incompetent to fill.

said, that he had never heard of a transaction, that could with greater justice be termed a job, than the appointment of Dr. Clarke; but could not agree with his hon. friend on the floor in his expression of surprize, that the reverend doctor should himself prove to be one of the non-residents he had been so active in detecting; as it appeared to him to be nothing more than an illustration of the truth of the homely proverb, "set a thief to catch a thief."

entered into a vindication of the character and conduct, and appointment of Dr. Clarke, who, he said, was a gentleman of high respectability and accomplished manners; and such a man only was fit for the situation he filled, and the official intercourse he had to maintain. His employment, however, was not such as could be easily filled, as the hon. admiral stated. He had not only the disbursements of the charity to audit, but the accounts of the officers in every department. He had to prepare the estimates, to manage the contracts, and to examine the accounts of all the builders and other tradesmen employed. Besides, to his superintending care of this institution in its infancy, was its present existence owing; and his continuance in the situation which he held from the beginning, was at the special and stipulated recommendation of the private subscribers, who had contributed 40,000l. to the undertaking. He could not, however, reconcile the zeal of the hon. admiral for economy, and his abhorrence of profusion, with his declaration this night that he should not have thought any thing of the extravagance he arraigned, had the fruits been enjoyed by naval men.

supported the motion. He said, an hon. member had given a very comical reason for the appointment of doctor Clarke, viz. that he had good will to the navy. Why, upon the same ground every man should become an auditor, for every one bore good will as well as the good doctor; it was said, however, that the doctor was concerned the origin of the institution; aye, so it seemed, for he took especial care, to provide for himself. The good doctor was so fond of charity, that he was determined to follow it in all its branches, and so let it begin at home. It put him in mind of some pious founders of a temple, who, in their great and ardent zeal, made a niche for themselves. But the good doctor was a man of liberal education and therefore fit for the office! But if every man of liberal education were to put in his learning as a plea, pray how many auditors should we have? He did not think the general objection to the doctor's appointment was at all done away by this enumeration of his qualifications. It was said, that it would be a breach of the contract entered into by the founders of this institution with the crown, on its receiving the royal charter. However, that could be no reason why the house should not interfere to remedy an abuse. Gentlemen were however ready to cry out, 'what, do you attempt to throw impediments in the way of good actions? Will you repress charity?' &c. This was not his desire; he wished to prevent the perversion of charity; he wished to counteract the injustice of putting a man not in the naval service nor at all connected with it, in the situation purposely formed for the protection of distressed naval characters.

observed, that at the commencement of the institution, it was made a point by the founders that Dr. Clarke should be placed in his present office; and it would be a little hard if he who was himself one of the first founders of this establishment should be himself precluded from all its advantages. An hon. gent. (Mr. Whitbread) thought a great point was gained for him by the motion for the residence of spiritual persons in Ireland, since he had found out that Dr. Clarke possessed livings to a great amount. This very bill should set the hon. gent, at ease, for by it Dr. Clarke would be reduced to the dilemma of either relinquishing his valuable livings, or of relinquishing the situation of auditor of the Naval Asylum.

said a few words in reply, in which he stated the case of a purser who had served a long time in the navy, and who certainly was full as competent to fill the situation of auditor as a doctor of divinity.—The house then divided, For the Resolution, 46; Against it, 71. Majority, 25.

proposed the usual annual giants. He stated, that he would postpone any of them on reason assigned.

hoped he would postpone the whole, as the papers were not yet printed. He objected particularly to the grant of 1,200l. for 250 copies of the statutes for the use of Ireland, on account of the negligent manner in which they were distributed among the magistrates.

agreed with the right hon. member as to the irregularity of the distribution, and promised to attend to that subject; but this was merely for 250 copies for the use of the public offices. He saw no reason for postponing the whole of the propositions.—The grant was then agreed to.—On the proposition for grants to various clerks in public offices,

observed, that no statement had been made respecting their necessity. He thought that some explanation ought to have been given as to the insufficiency of the salaries of these officers, before these sums were voted by parliament.

said that these grants had been always made ever since he had been in parliament.

also stated, that the sums had been always allowed by the Irish parliament, and that the officers looked to them as part of their emoluments.

would not oppose them now, though he was not quite satisfied with the answer, and would inquire further into the subject.

observed, that the hon. gent, might find in the journals what these officers had done for the grants.

said that the question was, whether their regular salaries were not a compensation for their trouble? If they were not, he thought that an addition to their salaries would be a better mode of rewarding them than these annual votes.— The grants were then agreed to.

wished that the grant of 23,103l. to the incorporated society of Dublin for the encouragement of protestant chartered schools, should be postponed. The reason he gave was, that a document which related to this grant had only come into his hands as he was entering the house. This was a catechism which was put into the hands of the children, having a tendency to encourage religious animosities.

hoped the hon. gent, did not wish to prevent this charitable institution from receiving the necessary supplies for the present year, because he objected to the principles on which it was founded. These might afterward undergo alterations, but the present grants were absolutely necessary.

thought the matter might be compromised by granting a small supply for the present, and afterwards, when a larger supply came to be voted in another committee, the subject might be thoroughly investigated.

said, he did not fee] at all surprised to perceive the hon. gentlemen opposite anxious to oppose the prosperity of the Protestant establishment. This establishment was solely for deserted and helpless children, who were, in consequence of their forlorn condition, received into these schools, and educated in the Protestant religion. During the vice-royalty of the duke of Bedford, these schools had been subjected to the examination of a committee, by no means overstocked with Protestant zeal. Their report was highly favourable to the institution. The grant had been uniformly made, for 50 or 70 years back, without any objection. The catechism in use, he believed, was the usual Protestant catechism, set forth in the Rubric, and was calculated to correct the political errors of the Roman Catholics, which were founded on their monstrous religious tenets.

said, the catechism was very different from that in common use. The first question in this catechism, he stated, was, 'What religion are you of?' To which the child was taught to reply, 'I am, thank God! a Protestant.' Such opinions were merely calculated to revive all those latent sparks of animosity, which, but for the culpable industry of some, might have long since been extinguished. The whole system of education in those schools, he maintained, was destructive to the peace and tranquillity of that people, who had been too long and too lately reminded of those mischievous and unfounded assertions, those envenomed calumnies, and antiquated stories, which had hitherto been employed most effectually as the means of exciting those against each other, whose natural benevolence of dis- position must have, in the ordinary course of things, led them to unite in peace, concord, and the common cause and general welfare. He was happy, however, to find these calumnies and gossippings seemed of late rather to be confined to that house. He should not have any objection to the present grant, but he nevertheless thought it his duty to State his intention of bringing the whole establishment very shortly under the review of parliament.

thought the opposition of the hon. member, even supposing he had the document to which he wished to refer the house now in his hand, perfectly irregular, since there could be no motion made in the committee for the reformation of the general establishment.

maintained, that the antiquity of these establishments and grants were alone but sorry reasons for their continuance. Many others, which had commenced nearly about the same time with these, loudly called for abolition. It was not the character of the lower order of Irish to neglect their children, nor were the Catholics of Ireland the most prone to commit this unnatural crime; they had at least the feelings and humanity of men, if they had not their political advantages. He maintained, that the children educated in these schools were not proper objects of charity. Their education and temporary support were too often made the means of purchasing them perhaps by the inadvertence of their parents, from the religion of their forefathers. Hence whatever pains might be taken, there was not above one-fifth of those who received their education in these schools, who were added to the number of the established church. It was, then, a great delusion held out to parliament to suppose the supplies yearly granted for this purpose were in any degree proportioned to the advantages the country received. In most Catholic and remote parts of Ireland, those schools had been much on the decline, while they had proportionally increased within the vicinity of Dublin.

rose to justify the character of the board appointed under the government of the duke of Bedford. By enumerating some of the persons who composed that board, he thought he could justify them from any intentions hostile to the established religion. These were the primate of Ireland, the provost of Trinity College, Dublin, the chief justice, and several others connected both with the government and the established church.

said, the evils of Ireland were of a particular description, and arose from the prejudices of the lower order, and the mischievous principles disseminated by misguided and depraved characters of the higher order. The publications of the day were fraught with the venom of party; and a late pamphlet published in Dublin by an association of priests, to the amount of 110, had set forth a detail of all the flagitious and criminal misrepresentations of the conduct of England to Ireland. When such extravagancies were committed without reprehension, he was almost surprised to hear there existed in Ireland an Attorney-General.

thought these works, if they did exist, had been published by way of reprisals; many of a Very inflammatory nature having been published on the opposite side of the question, by the friends of the learned doctor. He had still, however, to congratulate the country, from the disposition betrayed by the learned doctor, that he did not fill the situation of Attorney-General for Ireland.—This Supply was also granted.

thought the arrangements for the service of the present year might and ought to be made without any additional taxes. He recommended the creation of a contingent fund by the sale of Crown-Lands, to which the public might become tenants. The sums for which Crown rents might be sold were almost inconceivable. One hundred pounds had been demanded of him for a rent of 8s. 9d. Such parts as might be sold to advantage might be disposed of, and the sum of 600,000l. might easily be created, so as to be available after the first dividend; the surplus of the Consolidated Fund to be brought in aid, whenever any deficiency should require it.—After a few observations from Mr. Tierney, Mr. Giddy, Mr. Vansittart, and Mr. Huskisson, the 1st resolution was voted, and the report was ordered to be received to-morrow.

said, that it had been the inclination of his mind to have opposed the third reading of this Bill, in order that the house might take another course, which would have appeared to him more suitable. Having however conversed much upon the subject with his hon. friends who sat near him, he had consented to give up his former intention, and not to oppose the third reading, fie must say however, that he conceived that that house was extremely tender and cautious of any difference with the house of lords, especially when it was recollected that the house of lords had now rejected a second time, a bill which had passed that house almost unanimously, on the recommendation of a committee specially appointed to enquire into the situation of the public finances. That committee had pointed out ways and means to the amount of 65,000l. annually, which was an object of important consideration. As the house of lords had twice rejected a bill which came from such strong recommendation, he could not but doubt very much whether they would adopt the expedient that was now proposed to them. He thought the conduct of his majesty's ministers was somewhat suspicious. The right hon. chancellor of the exchequer had suffered the bill to pass through that house without the slightest opposition, and afterwards, by his own confession, conceited with a noble lord (Hawkesbury) to move an amendment to it in the other house. He thought it not very decorous for the right hon. gent, to confess in that house, that he had connived with any of his colleagues to defeat the object and intention of a bill which he suffered to pass through that house without opposition. These circumstances made him very diffident of the success of the expedient that was now proposed, but nevertheless he should not oppose the third reading of the bill.

maintained, that in conniving, as the hon. gent. termed it, with his colleague in another house, he had only been actuated by a wish, that the house of lords should not completely defeat a bill which had been approved of by that, house. He saw no chance of its passing the house of lords without the amendment which had been proposed. If there was any thing improper, to the ideas of the hon. member, in the suggestion of that amendment to his colleague, he could only say, that he was not aware of any such feeling.

expressed himself decidedly hostile to the present bill, because it did not, in his mind, tend to remedy the evil it professed to prevent altogether. He considered it merely as a compromise made with a party that nobody knew, and which that house ought not to submit to. The bill in itself was certainly either good or bad. If it were good, is ought to meet the universal concurrence of the house; if it were bad, it was entitled only to general rejection. It ought however to be recollected that it was recommended by a committee especially appointed by that house to enquire into and take into consideration the state of the finances of the country, who had recommended the measure as a primary step towards making much more extensive and important reforms and retrenchments; and he did not perceive that it was opposed by any one, save those who were decided enemies to any reform at all-Taxes to a very great amount had been imposed on the people, and he allowed most properly imposed; because their safety, and security in every thing that was dear to them depended on it. No man should however tell him, that places could be suffered to be given to sucklings, without the greatest disadvantages resulting there from. The chancellor of the exchequer was supposed to have a considerable share of power over the king's conscience; and how could he in any reasonable way grant a reversion of that? He could not but feel hostile to the bill altogether; but the preamble was sufficient to make him so, for it went only to suspend that which he thought should be entirely abolished; and he was sure the country looked for something more effective than such a half measure. He called the attention of the house to the situation of the country—to the very heavy taxation to which the people were liable; and yet he was happy to say, there never was a period in the history of the country in which the people shewed a warmer zeal for its interests, or a more determined loyalty towards the existing government.

thought the house was not in a situation to give an opinion of what gentlemen on the other side would be at; at one time they were satisfied with the bill, now they were dissatisfied. It was impossible to understand their meaning. They had talked a great deal about places in reversion, and of the necessity of shutting the book. Why had not the minister of the day, to whom those gentlemen were attached, who received 24,000l. a-year of the public money—why had not he been the first to shut the book? [Here there was a cry of name! name! which continued for some time, until—

observed to the hon. gent, that lie must see the inconvenience resulting from allusions to former debates.

proceeded. He thought there never was a time so ill calculated to bring forward such a subject. When the country had a minister who set himself forward as an honest man, which he certainly was, he could not help considering an opposition of this kind as the most unprincipled that ever existed. They only wished to set themselves up in the places of the present administration. (Much laughter from the opposition side of the house.) 'As for you,' said the hon. gent., 'I have known you these thirty years.'

at War opposed the bill, as not likely to produce any good effect whatever. It had been held up as the corner-stone of a system of reform which he was much afraid could never be realized; and it was a duty which the house peculiarly owed to themselves, by way of supporting their own honour and dignity, not to hold out hopes which must inevitably be disappointed. He had no doubt but the Committee of Finance had great merit, not only in the diligence of their researches, but in the acuteness with which they were desirous of entering upon the investigation of the public expenditure; yet he was of opinion, that no false hopes or expectations should be held out to the people at the present moment.

alluded to the expressions of Mr. Fuller, who appeared to suppose that in his characteristic coarseness he monopolised in his own breast the whole political honesty of that house. With respect to the bill, it was the peculiar province and duty of parliament to regulate and watch over the distribution of the public money; to sec that it was not lavishly expended; and to be frequent in the exercise of those functions, which as the representatives of the people, were vested in them by the constitution. At this most important crisis, any thing which related to public economy was not unimportant. It became the legislature to institute inquiry, to stop abuses, and to prevent, as much as lay in their power, prodigality. For these reasons, he, as one delegated by the people, could not approve of the middle course which the house were now pursuing in adopting this bill—a bill which savoured more of prudence than of spirit. The house had been told, that by passing the former bill they were entrenching upon the prerogative of the crown. The prerogative, however, he must contend, had increased fourfold to what it was in former times. Instead of the former bill being an infringement upon the prerogative, it was, in fact, a shield from encroachment. He for one was a firm friend to the prerogative; but he could not at the same time, forget that the constitution provided that this house should hold as sacred the rights of the nation. It was therefore the duty of the legislature to preserve and protect the one, and guard against the other. The hon. gent, then alluded to the speech of an hon. friend of his (Mr. Ward) on a former night; a speech which no panegyric of his could do justice to. With the sentiments contained in that speech he concurred, and with his hon. friend lamented to see the names of princes of the blood, recorded in opposition to the bill. He would not suppose that they went into the house other than as peers of parliament, nor that the votes they had given proceeded from any other motive than a thorough conviction of the injurious tendency of the bill. He must, however, deprecate the effect on the public mind. He would suppose a case: It might be said, that a faction existed, that that faction had in view no other object than to refuse a redress of grievances to the people. If it should be so said, and that it was the determined intention of that faction to nip the first appearance of reform in the bud, what would the people of England say upon reading the names of the princes of the blood in hostility to the measure of reform. The houses of parliament ought to be guided in their proceedings by constitutional principles. The princes of the blood, the nobles and chiefs of the land, would consult their own dignity by abstaining from opposition to the measure. He trusted that this house would be able to overcome the faction, to subdue, and finally expel them from all control over the responsible ministers of the crown; and that in so doing, redress of grievances might no longer remain a dead letter in the constitution; that the attachment of the people might thereby be cultivated; and that now, when it was most wanted, it might be secured.

here arose again, and exclaimed, that the words imputed to him by the hon. gent, had not been spoken. He had never said he possessed all the hones- ty in the house—(Hear! hear!) 'I could' (said the hon. gent. with much energy), 'throw as much folly and thick headedness into his num-scull.'—(Order! order!)

made some observations, in a good-humoured tone, by way of reply to the last speaker; in which he observed, that the hon. gent, was undoubtedly possessed of every quality which was either agreeable, convincing, or persuasive. (A laugh.)

said he would support the present bill, rather than run the chance of losing it entirely. He observed, with much irony, upon the polite, urbane, and gentlemanly conduct of the hon. member who had that night been so often declared out or order by the chair.

spoke in favour of the bill.—If, would reflect honour on the hon. gent. who brought it in; and, if passed by the other house, would also add honour on the administration under whose auspices it was carried.

thought it better that the bill should be read a third time, and then such modifications as might be deemed necessary could be proposed.—[The bill was accordingly read a third time.]—The noble lord then proposed certain amendments, with the view of reconciling the bill to what was originally in the contemplation of the house. He should deplore any difference of opinion between that house and the house of lords; but they surely did not ask too much of their lordships in requesting that they would suspend their opinion for a season, and grant to the commons a sort of armistice, till the grounds on which they differed were explained. They were not to go to their lordships as sturdy beggars, who, if they could not get their petition granted in one shape were ready to accept of it in another. What he proposed was, that the word prohibit' should be restored in the preamble of the bill, instead of the word 'suspended,' and that the words 'with the view to inquiries now pending in the house of commons,' also in the preamble, be omitted. The only other amendment he should propose was one limiting the endurance of the bill to six weeks after the commencement of the next session of parliament, which, being more in unison with the former proceedings of that house, would be conceding less on their part, and would be desiring less on the part of the lords. He concluded by moving one of his amendments.

should be always ready to bring forward the present measure when he saw any chance of succeeding in it; but he did not pledge himself to agitate it at all times, whether success was to be looked for or not. He should prefer the bill as it stood to an address to his majesty, as he should conceive the concurrence of the other house in the present hill went to pledge them to the principle of the measure. He was satisfied with having the practice suspended in the mean time, and hoped the period was not far distant, when he should be able to do a great deal more.

thought the country would find themselves disappointed in the public advantages expected to be derived from the measure, which would not take off a single burthen.

observed, that a noble lord had said that he did not wish to go like a beggar, with a club and crutch to the house of lords. Now, it was his wish, that having before gone with a club to that house, that noble lord, or any other member of that house, should not now be sent up there limping upon crutches, and begging alms of them in the name of that house. It was his wish that they should continue to express their sentiments, not captiously, or in a vexatious manner, but boldly, manfully, and constitutionally, as they were warranted in supporting the consistency of that house; that they should go hand in hand with the wishes of the country; and if this mode of proceeding should be found to fail, that an humble Address should be presented to the throne, where they would be sure of obtaining success; where no dark intrigue or unconstitutional influence could intervene. Where places were useful, they ought to be granted in possession only, because then the possessor and his capacity were known; whereas, if a useful place was granted in reversion, an idiot might rise from his cradle to inherit the office, or the places might revert, as was lately mentioned by a worthy baronet (sir J. Newport) from the son to the father, and the reversion be delayed so long that the father would be incapacitated by age to perform the duties of the office. Gentlemen could hardly mean to urge that useful places ought to be kept in reserve, in order that they might be filled by fools or dotards. On the other hand, where the place was unnecessary, no patriotic man, no man in his senses, in fact, would advise that the country, in a time of extraordinary pressure, ought to be deprived of the opportunity of being relieved from that pressure by the abolition of such useless places. In common policy, therefore, the reversion ought to be put an end to in all cases. If the prerogative of the reigning king was even to be in some degree prevented from anticipating the resources of the royal estate, it was to be recollected that the legislature at all times owed a duty to whoever might he the successor to the throne—that they should see that the estate was not mortgaged, and its resources anticipated. Rather than that any compromise should take place, he should wish for the honour of that house that it should stand upon their Journals that they were consistent in their recognition of this principle of economy. If the bill should afterwards be lost elsewhere, the public might then have an opportunity of judging which branch of the legislature was best entitled to their confidence.

opposed the amendment of the noble lord in toto. It had by no means been yet proved that the practice of granting offices in reversion was injurious to the country, and it appeared to him to be at least a very questionable assertion to contend that it was so.—He maintained that the language lately used in parliament was calculated to intimidate and dispirit the people from bearing up against the storms with which we were now threatened. Nay, it was calculated to exasperate them against ministers and their sovereign. These were times of uncommon difficulty and danger, and therefore the king's prerogative ought to be strengthened, instead of being curtailed; that his majesty might meet the common danger with increased energy. These were not times in which to harass ministers with frivolous and nugatory debates.

combated the arguments of the learned gentleman (Mr. Stephens), who having rebuked others for the temper shewn by them in this debate, had himself exhibited more of what was peculiarly denominated temper, than he had often witnessed in that house. Indeed, the whole speech of the learned gentleman seemed to have proceeded from it, consisting chiefly of reflections cast upon persons no longer in office, and its whole scope and tendency seemed to have that in view, rather than the question, or any of those important considerations na- turally suggested by it. To this must be attributed the palpable defectiveness of the learned gentleman's reasoning; which appeared to him no less erroneous with respect to principles of politics than of law. The learned gent. had adduced the situation of Europe, and the circumstances of the times as arguments in favour of prerogative; even if this granting of reversions was an abuse, these were not times in which it ought to be restrained.—Was it possible we could cast our eyes over the map of Europe, or the page of its history for the last fifteen years, and still be advocating despotism, and putting our trust in standing armies? Should we never learn that an armed people, proud of, and devoted to liberty, was the only method of making a country unconquerable, and a government secure? What! was it any want of prerogative that made Austria, Prussia, Russia, and all the despots of Europe fall at the feet of France? Or was it the want of their subjects hearts that deprived them of energy and support; that left them in the hour of danger abandoned and forlorn? This should teach princes and states, that those who had been accustomed to 'crook the preg 'nant hinges of the knee' before one master, could as easily perform the same baseness before another; which consideration might put them out of love with flattery and fawning; and teach them, that despotism was not less impotent than cruel, not less marked by infamy than folly; nor more to be hated than despised.—He had learnt, not only from those great writers whose theory, as the learned gent, said, unfortunately differed from the practice of the constitution—he had learnt not only from them, but also from high prerogative lawyers, amongst others front sir H. Finch^*, the high prerogative lawyer, in the high prerogative times of that high prerogative king, Charles the first, who lost his head for his prerogative, which he owed not a little to his high prerogative lawyers, that though the prerogative extended, as they said, to every thing, yet it could not extend to abuse, because, being in its nature for the benefit, it could not be exerted to the injury of the public. Why, then, the question was, were those reversionary places for the benefit or injury of the public? But, they were pointed out as a griev-

^* See Cobbett's Parliamentary History of England, vol. ii. p. 35.

ous injury and abuse by the committee of this house. This house had adopted that principle, framed a bill acknowledging it, and abolishing it, but we were now to be told it was unpalatable to the lords, that we must yield it to their prejudices: but it concerned too deeply the honour and character of the commons, which he would not consent to yield to the prejudice or the pride or the corruption of the lords, against which he would oppose the privileges of the commons. Nor would he consent, that the commons, in a measure, no matter how small, of economy, of saving the people's pockets, of controlling public expenditure, should bate an inch of privilege, much less sacrifice the principle, which, in fact, was the whole of this bill. The hon. gent, who brought forward this bill, now proposed to be rendered totally worthless, by a compromise with ministers, (and for whom he certainly entertained a better opinion than he had been pleased to profess he entertained for him) recalled to his mind, upon this occasion, Bottom the weaver, who playing the part of Lion in pageantry before the court, and being excessively apprehensive lest he should cause any alarm, when he makes his appearance in his lion's hide, pops his head through a hole in the neck, and says, 'don't be alarmed, for I who 'act Lion am not Lion, but Bottom the weaver, don't be frightened, and if you were frighted,' twere pity o'my life, I'll roar ye as gently as any sucking lamb.'— The learned gent, who had just sat down, had expressed his disbelief of the existence of any unconstitutional influence exercised by irresponsible persons, and controling the responsible ministers. This influence, however, was felt early in the present reign, denounced first by my lord Chatham, and he believed the public was well convinced it did exist—a mysterious and malignant power whose hand, felt, not seen, had stabbed the constitution to the heart.—But of all the many curious circumstances which had attended the progress of this bill, nothing appeared to him more curious than the conduct of ministers about it: they were not for it, and they were not against it: to the court they apologized for themselves, saying— 'We are not against it, because it will do you no harm:' to the people, 'We are not strongly for it, because it will do you no good; we do not wish to delude you, the measure is trifling, (nugatory, said the secretary at war,) it would be deceiving and raising the expectation of the people, only to disappoint it; it would afford them no relief.' Now, he perfectly agreed as to the inadequacy of the measure—the smallness of the boon; but, it was a commencement of reform, it acknowledged the principle—the necessity; and therefore, he should vote for it. He would also observe, that it was the last drop that made the cup to overflow; that the people were full of grievances and sufferings, tossing and tumbling on the bed of sickness; that they at present turned their anxious eyes towards that house for relief—that they should beware how they disappointed them, and turned their eyes elsewhere in despair.— But, it seemed, that ministers objected to a measure so inadequate, so paltry, not worth the people's acceptance. They had better stomachs for reform—wanted something more substantial. He supposed they wished for some independent country member to get up and propose that the ancient undoubted right of the people to annual parliaments, chosen by themselves, should be restored—or that no person bribed, or who should be bribed by a place or pension should have a seat in the commons house — that the good old laws of the land, Magna Charta, Bill of Rights, and Act of Settlement, should be restored, by repealing all those unconstitutional acts which had nearly annihilated them; or some other proposition worthy to be entertained by an English house of commons. —He could not sit down without expressing his astonishment at the quarter from whence the opposition to this very moderate measure came,—from those who, for doing nothing, had received and were receiving large sums of public money, who ought to have been the very last to oppose it, or rather, who ought to have been amongst its most chearful patrons and promoters— even though actuated by no other motive than that which guided every prudent tradesman, and make him consider present security, as well as future gain. He would, and with no unfriendly voice, call upon those persons to consider, whether, by their opposition to this bill of Reversion, they might not produce bills of Resumption; whether they might not, by opposing this small commencement of reform, cause themselves speedily to hear sounds the most unpleasant, he should suppose, to their ears—for he would have them recollect, that it was not the first time in the history of this country that the necessity of the times, and the indignation of the public, had echoed through the land, resume and refund.

did not think that the measure of abolishing Reversions would he so productive of advantage to the people as some of its warmest advocates seemed to suppose. The assertion of the hon. baronet, that it would be the commencement of reform, was to him no recommendation of it, knowing, as he did, the dreadful dangers which might ensue from misguided attempts at reformation, of which we had had sufficient examples in a neighbouring country. As to the corruption that was so generally asserted to exist among the higher orders, he contended that that corruption existed in an equal degree to the lower, and that the tree struck its roots as deep into the earth as it elevated its branches into the air.

should not have been provoked to say a word at so late an hour, by any thing but the extraordinary position which he had just heard from his right hon. friend. What! all corruption in the state was to be found only at the root! The people were the root, and from the people, then, sprung up all corruption! He must beg his right hon. friend to recollect that he had successively represented such a variety of places; whether the county of Norfolk, the city of Norwich, St. Mawe's, or Higham Ferrers, that even a memory like his, and such a known acquaintance with the constitution of parliament, could not well enable him to say of what place he was really the representative. His light hon. friend had chiefly insisted, that the root of corruption was to be traced only to the people. He would contend the very contrary. It was government that was the seducer; the people the seduced. The present question would put it to the test; and if his right hon. friend's principles were to be adhered to, it would only prove, that the drippings of the top of the tree were often the real cause of the branches of the branches, and the corruption of the root. Where root, branches, &c. all were undermined, could any fair fruit be after expected to blossom from such a ground? The question being loudly called for, the house divided.—For lord Porchester's Amendment, 60; Against it, 112. Majority in favour of the Reversion Bill as brought in by Mr. Bankes, 52.—The Bill was then passed, and ordered to the lords.