Manning moved the second reading of the Ramsgate harbour bill.

opposed it. The harbour, he said, was of great utility, but there was no necessity for this bill. An hon. baronet opposite had, in 1797, opposed a bill respecting this harbour, on the ground of its being a job. This bill oughtnotto go to a committee. Since the year 1797, 370,000l., had been expended, and yet Mr. Smeaton had thought that 17,000l., were sufficient to complete the work. To pass this bill would be a breach of faith, as it regarded the resolutions of the former committee. The first bill that recognised Ramsgate as a harbour was when it was a small town, with a small harbour of its own: the estate belonging to which the shipowners had taken and retained. The income now was 18,000l. a year, besides which, for six months up to December the 25th last, the income on foreign ships amounted to 1,500l. He might therefore, assume the profits from foreign vessels at 3,000l. a year: making at least 21,000l. a year, on the whole, which was sufficient for all that was wanted. He should therefore move as an amendment, " That the bill be read a second time on that day six months."

rose to defend the conduct of the directors of the harbour. He alluded to what had fallen from the hon. baronet relative to the former bill, which he again designated a job. "I" said sir William " attacked it; I rooted out that job, and a good job has taken place". He stated, that the plan on which Mr. Smeaton proceeded, was essentially wrong, and put the company to enormous expense. For instance, he mistook a chalk-hill for a rock, and it being found unfit for building on, all their work upon it was in vain. Some of the former directors had been making good jobs of it. One of them held 800,000l. in his hands during all the American war, but he at length died, thank God! The hon. baronet opposite might indeed talk of jobs, but did he never hear of any jobs in Kent? Did he never hear of a Maidstone gaol?

rose to explain. He did not say a word about the Maidstone gaol; for he agreed perfectly with the hon. baronet as to the impropriety of the entire transaction.

supported the amendment; but agreed that the harbour ought to be maintained; which, however, could be done at a less expense. Year by year the hon. baronet would come with proposals for fresh charges and duties, which might soon amount to more than it was worth while to expend on the harbour. The harbour revenues had increased from 10,000l. to 22 or 23,000l., a year, and there were about 30,000l. in the funds. He heard that 15 or 20,000l. had been laid out in building a banqueting House and an enormous kitchen, just on the principles which the hon. baronet might think necessary in the city of London. Was this necessary to resist the waves? The money was frittered away in lavish expenditure on buildings, as any body who knew Ramsgate might see. The present means were ample, without the least necessity of throwing fresh burthens on the shipping interest. There appeared a dishonesty in the proceedings: a bargain had been made with Sandwich to except its ships from tolls. Só it was with Dover, Weymouth, Melcombe-Regis, Lynn, Yarmouth, and Arundel, whose vessels were all excepted. Was this on the principle that Weymouth and Melcombe-Regis sent four members to parliament? This circumstance would be to him sufficient for his opposition to the bill. No stronger instance could be given of the defective state of the representation than the giving these particular favours to certain parts which returned members.

stated, that Weymouth and Melcombe-Regis and great Yarmouth were exempted in the original bill, because they had piers of their own to uphold.

said, he should be glad to learn that Sandwich was to receive a compensation of which he had never heard before. Twenty years ago Sandwich was allowed 200l. a year by act of parliament. Now Ramsgate harbour and Sandwich haven lay in the same bay, and the sand was thrown into the mouth of Sandwich haven, by which it was much injured. It appeared most proper to go into a committee to consider the objections to the bill.

opposed the bill.

said, that till the year 1792, the harbour had been kept up at the expense of only 5000l. a-year; since that time it had been in the hands of the present trustees, who were praised as economical, 10,000l. a-year had been at their disposal, and yet they now applied to parliament for 100,000l. more. The sum which they demanded would be supplied by the present income of the harbour, in five years, and if a million were granted them, the work which was necessary could not be completed in less than that time.

supported the bill.

thought there was not the smallest ground for the application to parliament.

The House divided:

rose in pursuance of his notice, to propose to the House an Address of Congratulation on the auspicious event of the marriage of her royal highness the Princess Charlotte Augusta, with Prince Leopold of Coburg. It was unnecessary, he observed, to attempt to create an interest in the minds of the House on this subject, as they had already warmly testified their feelings in the address which they had carried to the foot of the throne, and had shown their sense of the merits of the illustrious pair, by the ample provision which they had made for them, in the name of the people of England. He had now to propose an address on the completion of this happy alliance, to the Prince Regent, which he should follow up, by moving a congratulation to her majesty, and to the Princess Charlotte and her consort. He then moved " That an humble address be presented to his royal highness the Prince Regent, to congratulate his royal highness on the happy nuptials of her royal highness the Princess Charlotte Augusta with his serene highness Leopold George Frederick, duke of Saxe, Margrave of Meissen, Landgrave of Thuringuen, Prince of Cobourg of Saalfeld".

and ordered to be presented to his royal highness by such members as are of his majesty's privy council. Lord Castlereagh then moved, That the House do congratulate her majesty on these happy nuptials.—Agreed to nem. con. and lord Binning, lord Apsley, lord Lascelles, lord Jocelyn, and other members, were ordered to wait on the queen with this congratulation. Lord Castlereagh then moved, that the House do send a congratulatory message to her royal highness the Princess Charlotte Augusta, and his serene highness Leopold duke of Saxe, Prince of Coburg of Saalfeld, &c. on this happy occasion—Agreed to nem con., and the marquis of Worcester, earl Gower, lord Elmley, Mr. Law, sir G. Hill, sir T. Ackland, and other members, were ordered to convey this message to the Prince and Princess.

rose, in pursuance of his notice, to call the attention of the House to one of the most important subjects which, in his estimation, could well be brought under its consideration. He was afraid that, in discharging the task which he had undertaken, and which he viewed as a public duty, he should be obliged to occupy the attention of the House for a very considerable time—and, what was still more unpleasant, in listening to very uninteresting and dry details. He trusted, however, he should meet with the indulgence and candour of the House. When the noble lord opposite addressed the House on this subject, on Friday last, he (Mr. Tierney) complained that he had not been treated fairly, in having a paper introduced which he had not previously seen, and of which the majority of the members were utterly ignorant. Since that period he bad employed himself most assiduously in looking over that paper, and he flattered himself he had pretty well made himself master of its contents. He had still to complain, however, that the rest of the House had not the same advantage, and that they had not the paper in their hands, so that they might understand the observations he was about to make as he went on. If he had that one ground of complaint, he had also another, which was more material, and that was, that it now appeared the noble lord had not only withheld the evidence on this question, but had been tampering with the jury; for he had learnt that the noble lord had held a meeting at his own house, of those who without disparagement to others, had been considered as the most independent representatives of the people, he meant the country gentlemen, for the purpose of explaining to them the paper in question, and the grounds upon which it was to be supported. This was a course which he apprehended the House would think neither consistent with propriety nor decorum [Hear, hear!]. Such was the fact, and the only inference he could draw from it, and he believed the House would coincide with him, was, that this was a question which the noble lord thought required much private interference upon the part of government [Hear, hear!]. Though he could not complain of this course as irregular, yet the bias which gentlemen, thus pre-instructed and preinformed would have, would be felt by every one present.

The noble lord had done him no more than justice in admitting that he thought he was actuated by the same motives as himself, in the course he was taking on this subject, and that he bad no desire to withhold a proper degree of splendour from the royal family. Such was the true statement of his views; and the only difference between him and the noble lord was, as to what ought to be the real splendour of the royal family—what splendour it was consistent for the royal family of this country to maintain, considering its constitution and situation. There were two descriptions of splendour. If the noble lord only meant that splendour which was distinguishable by outward show and foolish parade, his ideas were at variance with those of the noble lord altogether; but if the noble lord meant that lasting splendour which was founded on the character of the monarch, and in the means of performing all the royal functions with propriety, the noble lord could not go beyond him in praise of such splendour. The noble lord had cast out a sneer, or insinuation, against that side of the House, that all the excess on the civil list had been attributed to the royal family for the purpose of degrading and vilifying them. Now, he (Mr. T.) had never attributed all the debts on the civil list to the royal family, but yet the noble lord had not cleared them from the charge of extravagance; for from the debates of the last year, no one could doubt that the expense was such, and there was such a determination of persevering in it, that it was at last necessary for parliament to interfere. The noble lord had stated, that for the personal splendour of the royal family only a sum of 400,000l. was paid by the country, besides the Windsor establishment, and he had begged the House to bear in mind what was the amount of the civil list in France. The noble lord, who, like many young travellers, had brought back all the vices of foreign countries, without any of their virtues, had been struck with admiration of the amount of the French civil list, but he had forgot the conduct of the French king in one material point. He should have remembered that his majesty the king of France, in return for the grant of the people to him, had made a liberal grant to them, and had desired their re-acceptance of a part of the civil list, on account of the state of the people of France, and by his own act had reduced his splendour. It would have been a wise measure in the noble lord to have advised the Prince Regent to send down a message to that House, renouncing a part of his civil list, thus giving an example of the economy which he had recommended; for the people had supported the splendour of the Crown, till they were hardly able to support themselves. The noble lord had spoken as if, while the country owed much to the Crown, the Crown owed nothing to the country. But the Crown must be sensible of the obligation it owed, and the present was, in his judgment, the proper time to show that sense. It was untrue that the country gained by what the noble lord called the bargain with the Crown upon the establishment of the civil list, at the commencement of his majesty's reign; for the fact was, that what the noble lord called the hereditary revenue was originally granted to George 2nd, and consisted, in great part, of taxes, which did not survive that monarch; therefore the country could not have gained by the growing produce of any existing revenue, as the noble lord intimated. The Crown was, indeed, amply compensated by the grant of 800,000l. a year, in lieu of this " hereditary revenue;" and the country, instead of gaining 6,500,000l. by the commutation, as the noble lord so confidently alleged, had actually gained nothing. Therefore the noble lord had presented a most fallacious view of the subject.

But this was not the only erroneous impression which the noble lord laboured to produce; for, according to the noble lord, the House had, truly, been rather niggardly towards the royal family. But how stood the case? He would state the sums granted to the several members of the royal family, and then leave it to the House to judge between this statement and the impression which the noble lord had in view. The allowance for the establishment of his majesty at Windsor was 100,000l., his majesty's privy purse was 60,000l., the allowance to her majesty was 58,000l., which taken together, with the annuities to the princes, formed a total for the Windsor establishment of 280,000l. Now he would ask whether his majesty's situation was such as to call for such a sum as that he had stated? The House would permit him to say that in his majesty's present painful condition, this was a most enormous establishment, and that a great saving might and ought to accrue, especially upon the grant of 100,000l. Indeed, if there existed any disposition to economy in that quarter, which ought to feel it in the present circumstances of the country, this saving would take place, and that without delay. For, in the name of common sense, how could it be necessary to maintain four lords of the bedchamber, a groom of the stole, and other similar officers, for the use of his majesty in his present melancholy situation? How could it be necessary to uphold the expense of a court, the splendour of which his majesty was unable, among his other calamities, even to see? Such expense was indeed a burthen to the country which gave it, while it could afford no enjoyment to him for whom it was given. Why, then, did not some retrenchment take placé under this head?

Now, as to the Prince Regent, his royal highness was allowed a privy purse of 60,000l. a year, which was perfectly unincumbered; and this he begged the House to bear in mind, because his majesty's privy purse was subject to some incumbrance for pensions. But, in addition to this, his royal highness had 10,000l. a year, which, together with the 15,000l. from the duchy of Cornwall, and 43,000l. from the consolidated fund, formed a total allowance for the Regent of 128,000l. a year. Surely, then, this sum was quite enough for his royal highness. He was aware it would be said, that a proportion of this sum was set apart for the payment of debts, no account of which, by-the-bye, had ever been laid before the House. But, however, the sum was applied, the country had to submit to the burthen of 128,000l. a year for the use of the Prince Regent. Then, as to the fourth and fifth Classes of the civil list, which were exclusively for the purse of the royal family, they amounted to 374,000l. So that omitting the 100,000l. for his majesty's establishment, the actual expense of the Prince Regent's court to the country was no less than 512,000l. Such was the sum granted to support the splendour of the Regent. But adding to this the 100,000l. before stated, together with the allowance to the queen and the junior branches of the royal family, the whole grant to the family would be found to amount to 1,030,000l. So that the House must see that the allowance to the royal family of this country was nearly equal to that enjoyed by the royal family of France, with which the noble lord thought proper ta institute a comparison, excepting any apanages which the younger branches of the royal family of France might happen to possess. Therefore, it was evident that this country could not be deemed niggardly towards the royal family; and he must be permitted to add, that in the present state of the country the House and the public had a right to look for a due return from that family, by making every practicable retrenchment—that such retrenchment should, indeed, be spontaneously and promptly made. But, independently of the allowances to the younger branches of the royal family, in which he did not mean to suggest any reduction, for he thought many of these illustrious persons very hardly dealt with, the sum granted to the Crown amounted to no less than 792,000l. Was it possible, then, that this country could be considered as niggardly towards the royal family?

Now, as to the estimates with regard to the expenditure of the civil list, the noble lord professed totally to disregard every estimate that had been laid before the House on the subject. They were, ac cording to the noble lord's view, to be entirely put out of sight; and it was no wonder that the noble lord should use such language, for the civil list expenditure of the last year exceeded the estimate of 1804 by no less than 391,000l. Yet this estimate was brought forward by Mr. Pitt, who, notwithstanding all his ability was, it appeared from the language of the noble lord, utterly incompetent to frame any just estimate upon this subject. No estimate was, indeed, according to that noble lord, entitled to any degree of attention, but that which the noble lord himself had lately presented. He (Mr. Tierney) would, however, be glad to know, if the estimate of a statesman so able and distinguished as Mr. Pitt, were to be set aside, as the noble lord said, as worth nothing at all, what guarantee could the House have for the validity of the noble lord's own estimate? But the fact was, that the House could have no such guarantee, or any assurance whatever upon the subject, unless an inquiry was instituted by the House itself, and unless such an inquiry entered fully into the consideration of the necessary expense of every department.

He now came to that branch of the case which related to the average expenditure of the civil list, and taking the period fixed upon by the noble lord himself, it appeared that for seven years up to 1811, the annual excess amounted to 257,000l.; and when the droits of admiralty became insufficient to discharge that excess, it became necessary to apply to parliament. Hence a bill was brought in, providing, that whenever the excess should afterwards amount to 124,000l., reference should be made to parliament; and from this provision, the noble lord now thought proper to infer, that the House recognised the justice of an excess above the estimate equal to that sum. But against the rectitude of that inference, he (Mr. T.) decidedly protested. It would indeed be recollected, that he entered his protest against such an inference, upon the discussion of the bill alluded to, with Mr. Perceval. But yet he, at the same time, prophecied that such an argument was likely to be drawn from the provision referred to, and the noble lord took care to justify his prophecy. Deducting, however, the 124,000l. according to the noble lord's argument, still there would be an excess of 133,000. above the estimate of 1804. From the commencement of the regency, indeed, there was an annual excess of 258,000l. He was old enough to remember when such, a fact would have created considerable astonishment and agitation in that House. Nay, even in the days of Mr. Pitt, the expenditure of 500,000l. would, he was persuaded, produce a stronger effect in that House than that of five millions at present; yet now, strange to say, notwithstanding the burthens and distresses of the country, some gentlemen were heard to declare, that an excessive expenditure of 258,000l. should not excite surprise, considering the great scale of our general expense, and even to thank God that it was no more. But was it possible that the House, bearing in mind the duty it owed to the country, could adopt such language, and treat the matter with such levity? All he wished was to infuse a spirit of inquiry into the House upon this subject. Whatever opinions he himself entertained he would not at present state. He only asked for inquiry, and his intention was to move for the appointment of a committee with power to examine persons, papers, and records. By such a course of proceeding, he was convinced, from the experience of last year, the House could alone contrive to probe this question, and ascertain the real merits of the case, Therefore, he hoped the House would adopt his motion.

It would be recollected, that when he last year made a similar motion, the power to send for persons, papers, and records was refused; but yet he consented to at tend the committee appointed on that occasion, upon the express understanding, that if it should appear necessary to send for persons, papers, or records, he should be at liberty to make another motion on the subject, and he was, not two hours in the committee when he was convinced of that necessity—when he saw that the professed object of the committee could not be attained without examining the marquis of Hertford and lord Cholmondeley, or at least their clerks, together with Mr. Nash. But yet his view had no effect upon the committee, and his motion in that House upon the subject was rejected. After that rejection he did not think it of any avail to attend the committee. Of what happened afterwards in the committee the House was aware. Among other singularities, a new estimate was framed for the future expenditure of the civil list, from which great benefit was promised. The adoption of this estimate, was, therefore, recommended by the opinion of the committee. [Here there was an intimation of dissent from the treasury bench]. The right hon. gentleman repeated, that this estimate was recommended by the committee. He was aware of the general warning of the noble lord, not to attend to any estimate but that which he himself had lately presented. The opinion, however, of the committee of last year was to be collected from the report, a part of which the right hon. gentleman read, to prove that their estimate was recommended to the committee. In consequence, no doubt, of the presence of some gentlemen upon that committee, an observation was introduced into the report, which served to show the miserable shifts to which the committee was willing to resort. With a view to guard against animadversions, the gentlemen of this committee stated truly, that "they did not feel themselves bound to offer any opinion upon the adequacy of the estimate, or the accuracy of its details." [A laugh, and hear, hear!]. This, then, was the salvo which this committee introduced into its report, and, he could, he thought, guess the quarter in which that notable salvo originated. But if this estimate were not meant to be recommended for adoption—if no steps were intended to be taken upon it, he would ask the gentlemen of the committee with what view it was introduced into the report? The fact was, that a bill founded upon that estimate would have been brought forward by the chancellor of the exchequer, if he (Mr. Tierney) had not protested against the proposition of such a measure at the then late period of the session. Yet this estimate was now given up. It was entirely denied both by the noble lord and the chancellor of the exchequer. They now appeared to be ashamed of their estimate of last year, and the House would not be surprised, if he thought that the noble lord's estimate, of which they were not yet ashamed, was such as ought not to be adopted, although the latter was reduced below the former by no less than one-half the excess of 1811. Thus material was the difference between the noble lord's present estimate and that presented eight or nine months ago. Whence this reduction? Nobody called for it. Perhaps ministers were struck by the same spirit which had lately appeared in the estimate for the ordnance and the army. Possibly the thought of reducing this estimate occurred to their mind upon the night the property tax was rejected. Thence probably it was deemed expedient to adopt a new system, and to abandon the estimate of last year. When he proposed last year to send for persons and papers, with a view to an effectual inquiry into the expenses of the civil list, he was resisted upon very lofty grounds—he should rather say pretences. It was stated, that it would be an outrage to the feelings of the royal family to inquire into their private affairs—that it would be an offence to the royal family to pry into such matters—that, indeed, such a proceeding would be quite unprecedented. Yet how had the noble lord's estimate been framed? Upon what grounds was it drawn up? If that House determined upon appointing a committee to form an estimate of this nature, and it were proposed that such committee should consist of the paymaster of the forces, the surveyor of woods and forests, and a secretary of the treasury, how, he would ask, was such a proposition likely to be received? Would it not be deemed, with due deference to those gentlemen, a most impudent proposition? Would not such a proposition decide the judgment of the House as to the object in view? Would the attempt of ministers to select three of their own officers to inquire into the means of reforming the expenditure of the civil list be conceived to imply any real disposition to reform? It was impossible that any such inference could be drawn by any persons out of the purlieus of the treasury. Such an inference would, indeed, be deemed an insult to the common sense of the House.

Yet what was the fact with regard to the noble lord's estimates? Why, that it was drawn up by the very three gentlemen to whom he had alluded. With regard to the estimate itself, he had no means of knowing whether it was drawn up on speculation, or after any inquiry into those affairs any approach to which, by a committee of that House, was last year so loudly deprecated. All he knew of last year's estimate was, that it appeared in the report of the committee. By whom drawn up he could not say. Perhaps it dropped from the clouds, and on what grounds it rested he could not say. The House was also to learn upon what grounds the noble lord's estimate rested; and therefore he hoped such an estimate would not be adopted without instituting an inquiry—without examining all persons and documents competent, to afford satisfactory information upon the subject. The noble lord left out in his estimate certain occasional payments. The estimate consisted of two columns, the one stating the sums to be hereafter omitted in the civil list; the other, those sums which were to be retained upon that establishment. But notwithstanding these omissions, this estimate set down the future civil list expenditure of 1,110,000l., which formed a considerable excess above that of 1811. Still this estimate was less by 42,000l. than that of last year.

After adverting to the items in which this reduction took place, the right hon. gentleman particularly animadverted upon the amount of the third class of expenditure, namely, that with regard to foreign ministers. It was in consequence of the amount of this head of expenditure, that the noble lord said that he thought it more proper on his part to stand forward as the mover of the new arrangement, than leave the task to his right hon. friend the chancellor of the exchequer. It was therefore that the noble lord professed himself willing to stand between the Crown and the country, to meet the responsibility of this expense; and certainly it became the noble lord to do so, for he had contrived to impose a greater burthen upon the country in appointment of and allowance to foreign ministers than any secretary for foreign affairs had ever done before. But yet he would be glad to know upon what grounds the noble lord had thought proper to make a reduction even in this head of expense, since the estimate of last year? According to the letter of Mr. Hamilton, the under secretary for foreign affairs, a certain proposition was made to the committee of last session, recommended, as the writer stated, by the opinion of the noble lord. This proposition related to an increase of the salaries and allowances to foreign ministers, namely, 12,000l. a year salary, and 6,000l. for outfit. Yet, by the noble lord's present estimate it was proposed to reduce the salary to 11,000l., and the outfit to 4000l.; and possibly if the noble lord brought forward another estimate next year he would make a further reduction. Perhaps he would be contented with a salary of 10,000l. a year.—Mr. Tierney called upon the House to consider this reduction. If it stoutly rejected the noble lord's spontaneous offer of 1,000l. a year, it was not improbable that he would add a thousand more. Thus the House might obtain a reduction of 2,000l. instead of 1,000l. But, seriously, he would ask, upon what grounds did the noble lord offer so much less this year than he recommended through Mr. Hamilton in the last? Now, as to the expense of special missions, which under the noble lord's administration, so much exceeded all former precedent, it appeared that the expense of the noble lord's own missions to Paris and Vienna for the years 1815 and 1816, amounted to only 43,809l. which, added to his official salary of 12,000l. formed an annual expenditure for these two years of no less than 55,809l. 10s. The noble lord might have thought it expedient to live with great splendour in order to maintain his ministerial influence, but in his (Mr. T.'s) opinion, that influence would have been effectually supported by doling out large sums to those who wanted it, had the noble lord been clothed in sackcloth and ashes, and lived upon onions. [A laugh].—For the persons with whom the noble lord had to deal, looked not for what he spent, but for what he could lend; and the money he could dispose of in that way would have served his purpose better than all his feasting and waltzing. [A laugh]—Yet the noble lord upon this subject said to the public, " do not look at my royal master, but at me." He (Mr. T.) no doubt admired both; but the noble lord's style of living on the continent eminently entitled him to the admiration and astonishment of the whole country, Then as to the expense of lord Stewart in his special mission, it amounted to no less than 24,000l. which, added to two thousand pounds a year from his commission as general on the staff, brought the coadjutor nearly to a level with the principal. Lord Cathcart's receipt was, however, still higher, almost indeed upon a level with that of his master. Surely, then, such expenditure called for inquiry [Hear, hear]. But to return to the difference between the estimate of last year and that of the noble lord, there appeared a reduction not only under the head of ambassadors, but that of consuls also, the expense of whom was reduced from 40,000 to 30,000l. Thus there was a difference of 25 per cent. within the period of eight or nine months. With such a variation in view, how could the House attend to such a witness? How could the House depend upon the noble lord's judgment in forming any estimate? [Hear, hear!].

With respect to the fourth class, which comprehended the departments of the lord chamberlain, the lord steward, and the master of the horse; he did not mean to dwell upon the latter, not only because it was not so considerable, but because there was something in that officer's department to gratify the country—there was something national and manly in encouraging a fine breed of horses. This department was therefore far superior, in his consideration, to those which consisted of nothing but mere eating and drinking—mere trappings and furniture. In the noble lord's estimate, he observed, that it was proposed to grant 85,000l. for the lord steward's department, which, by the way, was a considerable falling off from the estimate of last year, which proposed 96,000l. How came this difference? Did lord Cholmondeley suggest it? Did that noble lord ask for 85,000l.? In his opinion, that noble lord asked for neither the one sum nor the other. This indeed he had no doubt would be ascertained upon the inquiry which he proposed. It was impossible that the lord steward should ever demand such a sum for the maintenance of the Prince Regent's court. This officer had, it would be recollected, an allowance of 105,000l. for the maintenance of his majesty's court. But his majesty had several tables in town for the supply of the junior branches of the royal family, for equerries, &c. besides his establishment at Windsor, while the Regent kept a table only for his own family, with a table for his pages. The difference of expense was therefore, most material, and the proposed allowance for the lord steward's department was comparatively enormous. Such a circumstance, then, loudly called for inquiry, for the proposed establishment exceeded all rational calculation. The reason why that retrenchment had taken place, he believed he could satisfactorily explain. It would be seen, by referring to the estimates of last year, that 96,000l. was the sum which the lord steward was required to spend, and very diligently, no doubt, that officer endeavoured to obey his instructions. But all would not do, for it appeared from the return of the actual expense of the quarter ending October 10, 1815 (he spoke of that quarter, because the two preceding ones he had not yet obtained), that there was a saving of 5,000l. in spite of all his efforts. That was a sad falling off; so the next quarter he resolved to bestir himself, finding he was getting so much to leeward. [A laugh]. Every thing happened to be in his favour. The Christmas festivities at Brighton were conducted upon the most liberal scale; the utmost endeavours were made to collect visitants from all quarters, many members of that honourable House lent their assistance, and a sharp easterly wind set in on purpose, as it were, to give an edge to their appetites [A laugh]; and yet, with all those auxilliaries, the lord steward could not get beyond 1,000l. more than what he had spent the preceding quarter. If, then, the unfortunate savings of the two quarters were added together, it would be found that there were nearly 10,000l., through which they could not contrive to eat their way. Hence arose, no doubt, the economical zeal of the noble lord, from an absolute despair of being able to squander any more. But what ought to be the reflections of the House upon that point? They saw that estimates were formed upon the most extravagant calculations, without any regard to the real necessities of the civil list; and he would venture to affirm, that if 10,000l. were lopped off voluntarily by ministers, it would appear, from investigation, that 20,000l. more might be deducted, consistently with all due splendour and abundance to the royal table, even from the reduced estimate of 85,000l. Those deductions had nothing to do with the expenses incurred for the Princess Charlotte of Wales. He would pass them entirely over, though he must say that he saw certain articles charged under that head, which he could not comprehend.

When he considered the retired life led by her Royal Highness, he was at a loss to conceive how they could be incurred. Not only did she live without any show or ostentation, but absolutely in the utmost degree of privacy. It was sufficient, however, for him, to show that the estimate of last year, in the lord steward's department, was greater than could be expended, and also that the estimate for the present year was larger than that required for 1814.

He should next consider the fifth class, or the lord chamberlain's department. Last year that amounted to about 45,000l. for the mere expenses of the royal residences, exclusively of various heavy charges of other denominations. Now it was estimated at 40,000l. including St. James's and Kensington Palaces, Kew, Hampton Court, Carlton-house, &c. Of that gross amount no less than 20,000l. was absorbed by Carlton-house alone [Hear, hear!]. He was aware the estimate mentioned Carlton-house, and " the other residences of the Prince Regent." But, in point of fact, the Prince Regent had no other residence than Carlton-house which could be charged upon the civil list. Brighton was a private property. Now, would any hon. member who heard him believe it possible, that a sum of 20,000l. could be required, from year to year, merely for the purpose of supplying Carlton-house with furniture? Let the House recollect also, what enormous sums had been expended during the last three years for the same purpose, and then he would ask, whether there could even be any room in Carlton-house where any additional furniture could be put? Plate, linen, glass, every thing which the wit of man could fancy, or in which the most profuse extravagance could indulge, had been accumulated during that period, and yet they were now to be called upon to vote 20,000l. more for the same purpose. Nay, he did not know whether even more than that 20,000l. was not appropriated to the expenses of Carlton-house. There was an estimate of 10,000l. for contingencies, a considerable portion of which he believed it very probable, would be spent for the same object. And let the House bear in mind, that in addition to all that, it appeared upon the face of the report, that 30,000l. were voted last year for furniture, which was still in store. Now, what were the expenses of that branch of the lord chamberlain's department during the seven years from 1804 to 1811, when St. James's, Kew, and Kensington Palaces were regularly occupied? The average was nearly 3000l., but then the dukes of Cambridge and Cumberland resided in St. James's pa lace. At this present moment, Kensington palace was occupied by two of the royal dukes, the duke of Kent and the duke of Sussex, and only about 125l. per annum were laid out upon that residence. He was aware that 300l. were placed in the estimate, but in point of fact, the disbursements really made were not sufficient to pay for the repairing of a single pane of glass, if required. He knew from his own knowledge that not only splendour was wholly out of the question, but that actual conveniencies were neglected. And why was all that parsimony to be enforced in those instances? From motives of economy? Certainly not. The object was to diminish the gross amount of expenditure, in order that the particular expenditure of Carlton-house might be enlarged [Hear, hear!].—Then, with regard to the establishments at Windsor and the queen's palace. Their average expense during the seven years before referred to, was about 11,800l. and yet he believed there was no want of sufficient dignity and splendourabout the royal person. Now, 20,000l. were to be voted for one house alone, which, in point of size, might almost stand in the centre of Windsor castle. If such waste and extravagance were sanctioned, it would be mere mockery to talk of economy. During that interval, however, there was no want of royal magnificence. Installations were held, suppers and fêtes were given, and many entertainments indulged in, which he apprehended were quite as gratifying, and somewhat more so, in the public estimation, than some that have lately been exhibited. He declared he could not comprehend how 20,000l. a year could be expended upon furniture for Carlton-house, unless, indeed, every year there was to be alterations and changes to follow each frivolous variety of fashion. If such was to be the practice, then he was willing to admit that 20,000l. would not be sufficient; but if, being once furnished, it was to continue so, for a certain number of years at least, according to the custom heretofore, then he believed most conscientiously that 10,000l. would be found more than enough. Perhaps he should be told of the "other residences of the Prince Regent;" but he would repeat, not only that Carlton-house was the only one which could be justly charged upon the civil list, but that, in point of fact, his royal highness had no other residence, strictly speaking. Would the noble lord talk about the cottage in Windsor great park? That was no residence of the Prince Regent. It appeared sometimes in the public prints (a good authority in such a case, for a person filling his distinguished station could not move about without being noticed), that his royal highness passed two or three days there occasionally, and that was all. The great lodge, in Windsor park, was no royal residence, for it was at present occupied by Mr. Nash, and Cranbourne lodge was now empty, though he-hoped it would become the residence of her royal highness the princess Charlotte. Such, then, was the state of the lord chamberlain's estimates, so far as regarded Carlton-house. As to the board of works, though nominally under the lord chamberlain's direction, it was practically under the control of parliament, and therefore he was not so jealous upon that subject, because there would be no difficulty at any time in setting matters to rights in that branch. Upon the whole, it was his firm and deliberate opinion, that if a thorough and full investigation into the expenditure of the eivil list were adopted, savings to a very considerable amount (he would not specify any sum) might be obtained. He had frequently said in that House, and he would say it again, that there were too many public officers attached to it. There were too many lords of the bedchamber—too many equerries—too many grooms [Hear, hear!]. Yet he was not for curtailing the splendour of royalty. The lords of the bedchamber appointed about the person of the King were mere sinecures, and those about the Prince Regent were not much better; for where there were twenty drawing rooms held by his majesty there was not one now. It would be said, perhaps, that these were unpleasant things to discuss. They might be so. But the country was also in a very unpleasant situation; and he did not see how the latter could be relieved without such discussions as the former.

The next point of the noble lord's speech that required to be noticed, was the new mode of regulating the civil list, and the manner of carrying that regulation into effect. In the quarter ending October, 1815, the marquis of Hertford had made a return to the treasury precisely in the terms directed by the warrant of the Prince Regent. But why was no return made in the same manner for the ensuing quarter? He had repeatedly inquired for that return. At first the chancellor of the exchequer talked about the expenses at Brighton as a cause of the delay; and then the noble lord, taking up the matter, refused to produce the return, because he (Mr. T.) should not be permitted to go into the question by piecemeal, but should wait until the great day of explanation arrived. That day arrived last Friday—and what was the fact? The marquis of Hertford did make a return to the treasury, and he included in that return the expenses of the Brighton establishment. The treasury refused to accede to those expenses, and the marquis of Hertford in his turn, refused to make any estimate at all. Now, if such things were to be allowed, what security was there for the public? If the lord chamberlain might include items of expenditure which the treasury would not allow, and upon that denial, if the lord chamberlain might refuse any estimate at all, there was an end of those salutary provisions which the legislature had enacted, with the intention of controlling the civil list. The fact however was, ministers knew that the marquis of Hertford was their roaster, and they did not dare to face him [Hear, hear!]. He said that without fear of contradiction. And why did he say it? Because the treasury were about to appoint an inquisitor over the marquis of Hertford, to do that which they could not do themselves. That inquisitor was to have the power of examining the marquis of Hertford, and others upon oath. It seemed somewhat odd, indeed, that such an authority should be granted. He was not much of a courtier himself, but he should have thought a courtier's word might be taken. They, however, who knew the character of a courtier best, seemed to think otherwise. But what was the effect of that new system? In his opinion, the whole essence of the civil list was destroyed by it. How was he to know whether the said inquisitor would not be as much under the influence of government as any other individual? It might be said, that he was to hold his situation for life. True; but that was no adequate security in his estimation. He was to do that which the law, by the operation of Mr. Burke's bill threw upon the treasury. And why could not the treasury do it? Because ministers had condescended to take office upon the terms that the lord chamberlain's office should be beyond their control [Hear, hear!]. They sacrificed those honourable and independent principles upon which alone a minister ought to accept his situation; they came into office with their hands tied up on that particular point; they surrendered their privileges for the sake of office, and now the result of their conduct became visible [Hear, hear!].—What was the nature of the dispute between the treasury and the lord chamberlain with respect to Brighton? He had asked, and asked in vain hitherto, though he hoped to get at it some day or other, by a copy of the correspondence which passed between lord Liverpool and the marquis of Hertford. Whenever that correspondence should be brought to light, he was much mistaken if it would not disclose some very curious particulars. But on the 23d of February a Treasury Minute^* was entered, and that minute would prove to the House the nature of the proposal made by the marquis of Hertford to the treasury. It was, that additions in buildings, additions in land-purchase, and additions in furniture, having been made to the pavillion at Brighton, the expense should be defrayed out of the civil list. The treasury rejected that proposal, indeed, but they compromised the matter, and came to a resolution of applying the droits of admiralty for that purpose [Hear, hear!] If ever a case came before parliament which must undergo a thorough and complete investigation, it was the present. Some observations naturally suggested themselves upon the manner in which that paper had been returned to the House. It had always been the practice, when there was a deficit in the funds of the civil list, to apply all the resources of the Crown to meet that deficit; and if they were found insufficient, then to apply to parliament for aid. Now, how did the facts stand? Last year that House had granted 534,000l. to cover the excess in the expenditure of the civil list, and at the very moment when ministers came down to parliament, and called upon them for that vote, they had in their hands 493,000l. of the droits of admiralty [Hear, hear!] No wonder the noble lord wished to fight off the question of the droits of admiralty as long as he could. No wonder that the account was carefully withheld from the House to the last moment, and only disclosed at last when the noble lord was compelled to refer to it. But why was not the circumstance stated as usual? Why were not all the available revenues of the Crown applied to the debts of the Crown, before the country were encumbered with them? Why were the droits of admiralty so studiously kept in the back ground? For other purposes, he would venture to say, than what appeared upon the face of the transaction; and if an inquiry was granted, things would come out which would astonish the country. The treasury minute proceeded to state, that his royal highness the Prince Regent having considerably added to his residence at Brighton (private property be it remembered) it was but reasonable that some assistance should be afforded him towards defraying the expense, and therefore they directed that a warrant should be issued for applying 20,000l. out of the droits of admiralty [Hear, hear!]. But would any man endure to be told, that the droits of the Grown might be made over to increase the private property of any individual, however high or exalted his station might be? If such a practice could be permitted, what was to prevent the selling of those droits, or the raising money upon them and putting it into his own pocket? And let it be observed, that the advance was only towards defraying the expense. Who could doubt that a great deal more would be incurred before the transaction was at an end? But he should be told, perhaps, that this 20,000l. was not out of the pockets of the people. He denied that. It was a direct loss to the public, and he would tell the House how it was a loss. They gave 50,000l. a year to the Prince Regent for an indefinite period to enable him to pay off his debts; and if he had applied that 20,000l. towards the latter object instead of the former, which under all the circumstances of the case, he could not help thinking would have been more decorous and prudent, the public would have come to the redemption of that 50,000l. so much the sooner. The treasury minute then went on to represent, that a considerable expense having been incurred in furniture, at Brighton, 50,000l. should be granted out of the said droits to meet that expense [Hear, hear!]. Really it might have been thought, when 534,000l. were voted last year, for covering the excess of the civil list, a vote which, contrary to all former precedent, had not produced even a message of thanks from the Crown, his royal highness would have been tempted to live within such limits of moderation as would have saved the necessity of another grant. It could hardly have been expected, that he would immediately go down to Brighton and consider how much he could possibly expend, and contrive to lavish so enormous a sum as 50,000l. merely on furniture [Hear, hear!]. The treasury to be sure, took some sort of security for the country, which was almost disgusting to mention. The furniture was to be put into the House at Brighton, but it was to be recognized as the furniture of the Crown. In his conscience he believed there never was a more coarse transaction, as affecting the character and feelings of his royal highness. Thus had come to light the application of no less a sum than 70,000l., as resulting from the deficient estimate of the lord chamberlain: and thus the history of that estimate was at once disclosed. A scale of extravagance was indulged in such as could never be sanctioned by that House. He lamented that his royal highness was surrounded by advisers who precipitated him into such profusion. At his time of life something different ought to be expected. But there were those about him who encouraged and promoted those wasteful and frivolous projects. He did not mean to accuse ministers of doing it. For their own convenience even they would abstain, though he was willing to allow that they acted from more honourable motives. It was impossible, however, that things could continue to go on in that course. It was impossible it could be tolerated, that, year after year, the public money should be so squandered, for the droits of the admiralty were public money [Hear, hear!], without some check being provided. Would the noble lord presume to say that the 50,000l. for furniture was really necessary? He would not maintain so monstrous a proposition. No one, indeed, would maintain it who had ever been at the Pavilion at Brighton. It appeared, however, that 207,000l. of the droits of admiralty were still in hand, and he would say, that no time ought to be lost in taking care that that sum should not be paid for private purposes [Hear, hear!]. It was owing, m fact, to the House of Commons, for they had been deceived into a vote of money, which they had no business to grant while those droits remained unappropriated. That money ought to be repaid to the public, or employed for some public purpose. It was in vain, however, to hope that any thing could be effectually done without the appointment of a committee, who should examine all the transactions relating to the civil list, and to whom should be referred the question of the admiralty droits.

^* Copy of Treasury Minute, dated 23d February 1816:

"My lords are of opinion, that towards making good the deficiency of the civil list on the 5th January last, the 3 per cent. stock now standing in the names of Mr. Harrison and Mr. Litchfield, and which was transferred to them as trustees for the Crown in virtue of a sign manual warrant of 24th August 1815, the same having been decreed to his majesty in right of his crown, as the undisposed residue of Troutback, esq. deceased, who died without heirs, should be sold, and the proceeds of such sale paid into the exchequer to the account of his majesty's civil list revenues. My lords are also of opinion, that it is right and proper that out of the droits of the Crown such a sum should be paid into the exchequer to the account of his majesty's civil list revenues, as, together with the sum to arise from the sale of the stock before mentioned, will be fully sufficient to discharge the estimated amount of the deficiency of the civil list to 5th January last.

"The earl of Liverpool and the chancellor of the exchequer having also represented to the board, that his royal highness the Prince Regent has made considerable additions to his residence at Brighton, his private property, both by additional buildings and by purchase of land to annex thereto; they are of opinion, that it is just and reasonable that an aid

should be afforded out of the said droits, to the privy purse of his royal hignness the Prince Regent, towards the discharge of the expense incurred by his royal highness in making these additions to his residence at Brighton, his private property; and they are therefore pleased to direct a warrant to be prepared and submitted to his royal highness the Prince Regent, for issuing to the right hon. J. M'Mahon, the keeper of his privy purse, the sum of 20,000l. on this account.

"The earl of Liverpool and the chancellor of the exchequer having also represented to the board, that an expense has been incurred in providing furniture for the additional buildings at Brighton; and it appearing to my lords that it could not have been in contemplation that the extraordinary expense of furnishing these additional buildings belonging to the residence of his royal highness the Prince Regent at Brighton, as his private property, should be a charge upon the civil list; they are of opinion, that a sum not exceeding 50,000l. should be appropriated out of droits, to discharge these expenses: but as this furniture, though not provided through the department of the lord chamberlain, must be considered as belonging to the Crown, they are of opinion that the account of the expenses actually incurred should be submitted to the examination and control of some person or persons to be appointed by this board, and that no bill should be paid which should not be deemed by such person or persons to be just and reasonable; and that the person or persons to be appointed to this service should make out an accurate list or inventory of the whole of the furniture so provided, or of any other furniture not paid for out of the same private funds as the buildings, in order that the same may be lodged in the office of the lord chamberlain, and that the furniture may be taken under the care of that department, as furniture belonging to the Crown.

"Prepare warrants accordingly.

(Signed) " C. ARBUTTHNOT.

" Treasury Chambers, May 3, 1816."

He would beg leave, before he sat down, to advert to the prospective arrangements of the noble lord. The noble lord proposed to detach the uncertain charges from the civil list, and bring them by annual estimates before parliament like the sums voted for the other branches of public service. Mr. Tierney said, he had reflected a great deal on this subject, he had examined it, in all its bearings, and he was disposed to give it as his opinion, that the best plan that could be adopted was, to vote an entire sum, that might, upon an estimate formed by a committee, upon mature examination, be thought sufficient to answer all demands. It looked well in theory to say that estimates would annually be laid before parliament, and that thus a system of checking extravagance would be annually enforced, but in practice it would be found not so eligible. Ministers could make out their own case: they might conceal from the House many of the reasons on which these estimates were grounded; and they might choose a period of the session for bringing forward their measures, when there were few to check their extravagance. The House, too, it-should be recollected, was very unfit for discussing minute details; and the estimates must necessarily embrace such details: a committee above stairs was alone competent to such inquiries. Besides, he considered it as essential to the splendour of the Crown to have the control of the sums allotted for its support—the distribution of that amount of pensions and allowances which parliament should think it becoming to set apart for its disposal: that amount should neither be excessive nor parsimonious, but, when fixed within proper limits, should be left at discretion. No man could be more inclined than himself to vote a liberal, though not an extravagant sum. Let the House go into the committee for which he rose to move, and he would demonstrate his liberality [Hear, hear!]. Another part of the noble lord's plan regarded the creation of an officer for auditing the accounts of the household, and in the policy of this, he could as little agree as in the former. The House were gravely told by the noble lord, that no man who had the interest of his country at heart would wish to degrade the Crown in the eyes of Europe. But he (Mr. Tierney) would ask, what view must foreign princes or foreign nations take of our prince? What opinion must they form of him when they were told that he could not go to a single fruit shop, for the most trifling article, without the sanction of the lord Steward and lord chamberlain, and without its being shown to the treasury? But had the proposition of his royal highness being so fettered, been made by him (Mr. Tierney)—had he presumed, as the noble lord had done, to tell the prince, that so far he should go and no farther, there was little doubt but that he would have been instantly charged with endeavouring to lessen the respectability of the Crown, and to vilify the Prince [Hear, hear!]. He remembered well the very great pain his royal highness felt at the introduction of Mr. Pitt's bill, to regulate his conduct when a very young man. But it should seem the administration of the present day had the good fortune of making their regulations more paltable, and that the prince received them with a very good grace [Hear, hear!]. At the former period, he (Mr. Tierney) had access to know what were the feelings of his royal highness—now it was the province of the noble lord to tell what his wishes were. Should the noble lord ever go abroad again to those annual conventions held professedly for the peace and security of Europe which he hoped never would be the case, it would sound odd to the royal personages into whose society he might happen to fall, to tell them the restraints under which his regulations had laid the household of his royal master. Mr. Tierney said, he deprecated the idea of this application being made to parliament, as it had invariably been found, that whenever parliament had been so indulgent as to grant any aid, that aid had always been urged as a reason for procuring more. The day was not far distant—it was in the nature of things probable that it could not be far distant—when the House would be called on to make a new arrangement for George the fourth, and he therefore thought it would have at least been proper in the Prince and his advisers, to have remained satisfied for a little longer with the present arrangement. But if the House were now, in consequence of what had fallen from the noble lord, to regulate their proceedings by the bill to be brought in, it would demonstrate in the clearest manner, that in all their proceedings they acted more from deference to the minister than from respect for the public purse, or the feelings of the people of England. They had, indeed, already shown too great attention to the wishes of the minister. He trusted that the deference they had shown in former days would no longer exist. He trusted the House would once more vindicate its own character, and prove to the people of the country, that its desire for practical economy would no longer be confined to a mere wish or a few words, but would now be shown by deeds. The people had a right to expect economy; they now louldly called for it, and he implored the House to take care how they slighted the voice of an oppressed and insulted nation. [Hear, hear!]. Aware of the very great length he had presumed to intrude himself on the House, he had to apologise for the time he had occupied [Hear, hear!]. He had abstained from strong expressions as much as possible, and he was not sensible of having indulged in any improper warmth of temper. There might have been phrases in his speeeh, however, which were capable of being twisted into a violent and abusive meaning, and in this shape carried to the royal ear. He did not think the noble lord capable of such baseness but it might nevertheless be done, and he himself be represented as a person disposed to degrade royalty and to vilify the Prince Regent. He cared not for these imputations. They were more than counterbalanced by the consciousness of his having performed his duty. He could not have forgiven himself, after having attacked the salaries of a few poor clerks in the public offices, if he had not brought forward a measure that was to contribute to repress royal extravagance.—The right hon. gentleman concluded a most able speech with moving " That a select committee be appointed to take into consideration the several accounts and papers which have been presented to this House, relating to his majesty's civil list, with power to send for persons, papers, and records." If this motion was carried, the right hon. gentleman expressed his intention of moving "That it be an instruction to the said committee to report on the question of the droits of admiralty."

rose to examine some of the statements of the right hon. gentleman. He trusted the House would indulge him with a few observations. Although he did not mean to follow the right hon. mover through all his details and reasonings, he would touch upon a few of the points of his speech. The right hon. gentleman professed himself disposed to support the splendour of the Crown, and promised, if he made one of a committee on the civil list, to show his liberality; but he was not disposed to draw a very favourable omen of this disposition from the tenour of the right hon. gentleman's speech. He never heard a speech less conciliatory, or more calculated to inflame any jealousy that might exist of royal expenditure. More partial statements, more incorrect accounts, more unfair inferences, he had never heard. He would advert to some of the right hon. gentleman's misrepresentations, although he wished to turn his back upon every thing calculated to inflame, for the purpose of making some observations in which all could concur. The right hon. gentleman sat out with a misrepresentation, in saying that he (lord Castlereagh) had on a former night complained, on the part of the sovereign of this country, that our civil list was not so great as the sum dedicated for the same end in France. He had only mentioned the circumstance as an answer to the clamour of those who saw every thing extravagant that was done by our royal family. The right hon. gentleman night have spared his observations with regard to the sum allotted for the junior branches of the royal family. Their number did not depend upon the will of the Crown, or of ministers, but was a dispensation of Providence over which they had no control. Ministers-were not to blame for this expense, and nothing should be put down for the splendour of the Crown but the charges of the 4th and 5th classes, together with the privy purse; and they, instead of amounting to 500,000l.. did not exceed the sum he had mentioned, namely, 409,000l. It was impossible, likewise, for the Crown to control those charges that arose from the malady of the King. The right hon. gentleman had two ways of dealing with questions of this kind, both of which he had applied on the present occasion. He, on the navy estimates, moved to send them back without going into the committee, simply on a view of their primâ facie extravagance; and he now proposed a committee on the civil list, while he still threw the responsibility of making estimates on ministers.

The noble lord observed, that he would now proceed to direct the attention of the House to a comparison of the excess on the civil list, for the last four years, with the average excess for the seven years ending in 1811. Upon the third class, involving the expenditure of the foreign department, and the ministers employed abroad, there was a total increase during the last four years of 169,000l. He was not prepared at that moment to explain or justify all the items of which this aggregate amount was composed; but in point of general heads of expense it must necessarily explain itself upon a reference to the state of Europe, and the circumstances of this country during the latter period. For the seven preceding years we maintained little or no intercourse with the continental powers: at present, independent of the special missions which had been supported, we had eleven in different parts of Europe. On the 4th and 5th classes the entire increase was 184,000l., or a joint excess under these two heads of 46,000l. per annum for the four years. With regard to the details of these departments, he would remind the House that it was already in possession of minute and ample information. The House had before them the reports of five committees, and he could hardly conceive that the voluminous accounts which had been presented by them required the aid of any further inquiry. If the subject was not well understood, it certainly was not because it had never been investigated, or because there was any want of information. It certainly did appear to him that the right hon. gentleman was giving very improvident counsel, when he endeavoured to persuade parliament to call on the Crown to perform impossibilities, or to regulate its expenditure uniformly by the same limit. If such a principle were adopted, he was sure that in practice it would be found necessary to add not less than 250,000l. a-year to the civil list, the effect of which must be as an invariable limitation to make the Crown too rich at one period and too poor at another. An entire debt had grown up for the last four years of 900,000l., but it would be easy for him to show that this excess had been created for public purposes, and that the additional expenses of the household had been incurred only by the equipment of the regency without which there would have been a reduction.

He should concur with the right hon. gentleman in throwing out of his view the sum of 120,000l. for the establishment at Windsor. The difference in the accounts for the last year would be found, then, to consist in the first class of a sum of 14,000l. for the expenses of the royal family. The second, from which the judges and public officers were paid, remained the same. To the third he had already adverted, and should have an opporunity of giving the fullest explanations with regard to it. On the fourth there was a reduction of 25,000l., which was in some degree balanced by an excess in the fifth class of 21,000l.—In the sixth there was little difference; the seventh and eighth seldom varied: and on the ninth, there was an increase of 36,000l. On the whole, there was a diminution of the expenses, merely household, below the average of the seven years ending in 1811. The difference between the present estimate and that of the last year proceeded from the preceding estimate being framed on a different view of the expenditure abroad, rendered necessary by the critical situation of affairs in Europe. One part of this alteration was incidental to his own department and arose from the new principle which it had been thought by the House desirable to adopt in regulating the salaries of our foreign ministers. It had been deemed expedient to new-model their allowances, and to convert them into a nett sum, clear of all charges and deductions, which should be adequate to the support of the rank they held, and the functions which they had to discharge. Some regulation was likewise intended in the office and fees off he consuls.

The supposed reduction in the lord steward's department of 85,000l. instead of 96,000l. appeared to be misunderstood by the right hon. gentleman. The estimate under this head remained unaltered, and the apparent difference arose from the present estimate not including the expense of the royal gardens. There was no truth in any of those sweeping observations which ascribed a greater degree of splendour and expense than was necessary to the exalted situation of the person exercising the functions of sovereignty; nor would they be borne out by those who had had the most frequent opportunities of remarking on that subject. Neither was there any more foundation for saying that all public business was transacted at Carlton-house, or that there alone it was necessary to maintain a dignified establishment. The services both of the lord steward and lord chamberlain were often requisite at Brighton. The right hon. gentleman had not alluded fairly to the sum set apart in the lord chamberlain's office, in order to meet future contingencies; the true view was, first to look at what was the amount required for the due maintenance of that department. The right hon. gentleman had inveighed against the wanton profusion which he asserted to prevail in the royal residence at Brighton; and had intimated his opinion, that the original establishment might have answered all his royal highness's purposes. There were few, however, he believed who recollected what Brighton was a few years ago, who would be disposed to agree in this opinion. His royal highness once resided there as a young man, surrounded only by private connexions; but he now lived there occasionally when it was necessary for him to see his own illustrious family, and discharge the public duties of his high office. He was, indeed, the only individual in Europe exercising the functions of sovereignty who had not a variety of palaces. Besides his temporary residence at Windsor, the Prince Regent had only Carlton-house and the Pavilion.

The right hon. gentleman had chosen to represent the sums which had been granted out of the droits of the Crown, in aid of the younger branches of the royal family, as great misapplications of those droits. Now, it never had heretofore been doubted, that aids to the younger branches of the royal family were a branch of the public expenditure to which the application of the droits of the Crown was perfectly justifiable—just as much so as if parliament had been called upon to vote them; for in no degree did the aids in question differ from the aids which had been afforded in former times.

Towards the latter end of his speech, the right hon. gentleman had indulged himself in some very strong expressions on the 534,000l. which had been voted for the arrears of the civil list. He trusted that the House would discharge from their minds the misconception which the right hon. gentleman's remarks were calculated to produce, and that they would notsuffer the right hon. gentlemans' sweeping imputation to lead them to suppose, that in paying those arrears the country had been paying only the arrears of the royal expenditure. On a late occasion he (lord Castlereagh) had stated that the utmost amount of the arrears of the royal expenditure in four years was 184,000l. When, in the year 1812, parliament gave 100,000l. to the civil list, it was for two purposes; the first, that of liquidating the inevitable arrears which had taken place during the period of the restricted regency; the second, for the equipment of his royal highness the Prince Regent. The arrears, however, of the period of the restricted regency swallowed up the whole of that sum, and the expenses of the equipment necessarily became arrears in the lord chamberlain's department.

Other occasions would occur in which he might enter more minutely into the detail of the subject than at present; but there was one branch of them on which he would shortly trouble the House, feeling anxious as he did to afford every possible information on the question before them. The right hon. gentleman had said that he (lord Castlereagh) put himself very forward in the justification of the expenditure and of the arrears of the civil list. Why did he do so? Because he knew that the arrears of the civil list were attributable to the public expenditure, rather than to the expenditure of the Crown, and because he was aware that the foreign expenditure was necessarily increased, as compared with other periods of that fluctuating expense. In the progress of the bill which he should have the honour of introducing for the better regulation of the civil list, opportunities would occur for detailing the grounds on which he entertained these convictions, and for sifting them to the bottom. At present he only wished a little to disarm that jealousy which it was attempted to excite in the House, before a full examination of the grounds on which it was affected to be founded. He could not but persuade himself that the House would find the nature and extent of the expenditure to which he had alluded fully warranted by the circumstances out of which it had grown.

There were two or three points of attack on the expenses of the civil list, which the right hon. gentleman had selected, and on which he begged permission to say a few words, and more particularly on the special missions in which he himself, lord Cathcart, and lord Stewart had been engaged. As to the latter, the right hon. gentleman must allow him to say, that it was a most unfair statement to assert that those noble lords had been brought to Paris to assist him (lord Castlereagh) in the negociations which were carried on in that capital. They did not visit Paris for that purpose. They were there in the discharge of their duty as in" dependent public functionaries. Having been sent as ambassadors from this country to the emperors of Russia and Austria, when those emperors left their own capitals and went to Paris, it was indispensable that the noble lords in question should accompany the monarchs to whom they had been accredited. He repeated, therefore, that they came to Paris not to assist him in the negociations, there pending, but to discharge their public and particular duties. With respect to the expense ineurred by the missions of the two noble lords, it would be necessary for the House only to recall one fact in order to account for its being much larger than it otherwise would have been: he meant the unfavourable rate of exchange which existed during the two first years of those missions, and which threw on them a great increase of charge. In fact, the whole class of foreign expenditure in the civil list was swelled by that circumstance, as much as the whole of our military expenditure had been swelled by it. This was the natural consequence of a state of things in which, in order to be able to spend a hundred pounds, it became necessary to incuran expense of a hundred and thirty pounds, and in some cases much more. In addition to the consideration which he had just stated, it should be recollected, that after lord Cathcart had formed an establishment at Petersburgh, he was obliged to leave that city for Vienna, so that for some time he was under the necessity of maintaining two establishments. So it was with lord Stewart; after having created an establishment at Vienna, he was obliged to take the field, and thus incur a double expense. When these subjects should come to be more fully considered, he was prepared to give full satisfaction with respect to them.

As to himself, he did not believe when the right hon. gentleman came to examine the nature of the special missions in which he had been engaged, and to compare them with other special missions of former occurrence, that he would find any ground for reproach on the score of improvident expenditure. By the unfortunate manner in which the accounts of such missions were made up, all the expenses abroad (in that country at least to which the minister was sent) were drawn in the name of the minister. Thus it happened, that in the statement of the expenses attendant on his (lord Castlereagh's) missions, many items were introduced with which he had nothing whatever to do, and a general impression was thereby unjustly created, that those expenses were personally respecting himself. When the details came to be examined it would appear, that of the 43,000l. which stood in his name, 24,000l. was the whole amount of the expense actually connected with his missions. With the rest he had no more to do than he had with the couriers to the payment of whom a part of it was applied. He had been sent on foreign service three times. The duration of that service was, on an average about six months at each of those periods. The expense of each of his missions, therefore, was about 8,000l. He would not presume to say any thing of the importance of the objects with which he was charged on those occasions, but he must observe, that they compelled him, in the pursuit of them, to take very long and very expensive journies. Besides, he was placed in a situation very different from that of most other foreign ministers. He was obliged to carry a considerable establishment about with him, as a great part of the business of his office of secretary of state for foreign affairs was transacted by him while on the continent He had indeed no less than twelve gentlemen with him for that purpose; and he could assure the House, that although he sometimes found that number too few, he never found it too many. Some of these gentlemen came from his own department, some from other foreign ministers.; in all, however, there were twelve working individuals, forming part of his family. Under all these circumstances, he did not find 8,000l. more than sufficient for the expense of each mission. Without meaning to boast of very rigid economy, he could assure the House, that he had no superfluous splendour: so far from it, indeed, that it required the good nature of those who visited him to accept the entertainment which he gave them [Hear].

As to the motion of the right hon. gentleman he should oppose it, on the ground that it was not expedient for the House to travel out of the course which they had uniformly pursued on this subject. They had never exhibited any disposition to enter into a minute examination of the expenses of the royal household. On the representations submitted to them, they bad formed a general conception of what might be necessary for the service of the royal family; and not on those alone, but also on the experience of a long course of years, by which they were enabled to judge satisfactorily on the subject. For his own part, he really did not think that it was necessary, in order to obtain a clearer view of the question, to accede to the right hon. gentleman's proposition. Those who were disposed to give their minds and their time to the subject, complicated and difficult as it was, would find on the table of that House, a mass of information so large as evidently to preclude the necessity of any thing further. There was hardly a circumstance connected with the most trifling expense of the civil list which might not be completely elucidated by a reference to the reports, five in number, on the table of the House. If it was information which the right hon. gentleman wanted, had an attempt ever been made to refuse it? Down to the moment at which he was speaking there had never been an account called for, or an explanation required which had not been accorded with the utmost liberality, the House proceeding in those cases (as he hoped they would always proceed in similar cases), by an address to the Crown. He hoped, therefore, that the right hon. gentleman would not persuade them to depart from their uniform line of conduct, for the purpose of obtaining information, a request for which had never been refused. Nor did he think the proposition of the right hon. gentleman (if it were acquiesced in by the House) of calling individuals, and examining them as to all the little family details of the royal household, would be available to the purposes for which it was made. He was persuaded that no effort such a committee as that moved for by the right hon. gentleman might make, would enable them, varying as the foreign portion of the civil list must necessarily be, to fix the expenditure to a certain sum. He trusted that the House, having the report of the committee of last year before them, having the estimates of the present year before them, having a great mass of other information before them, and having further explanation within their reach, if further explanation should be deemed necessary, would reject the right hon. gentleman's motion for a departure from the ordinary course of parliamentary proceeding.

As to the general result of the estimates, the House would find, taking that portion of them which was applicable to the household, that it did not exceed the average expenditure up to 1811. In the third "Class, there certainly was an increase of 12,000l. And why? Because we had twelve more missions on the continent. This perfectly explained the cause of the augmentation of that part of the estimates in the present year. He did trust, therefore, that the House would adhere to the principle on which it had always acted with respect to the civil list; and that whatever information they might require on the subject, they would apply for by an address to the Crown. He would venture to say, that no additional information (if information was really the object), for which the House could wish would be withheld. He saw no objection to the appointment of a committee on the principle of that appointed last year, if it were thought necessary. But really, the report of that committee appeared to him to communicate abundant information. What he distinctly objected to was the examination of persons with respect to the details of the royal household. The right hon. gentleman had found that the House was against him on this point; for he had abstained from further attendance on the committee of last year, when the House refused to give to that committee the power which he required. The right hon. gentleman had attempted to point out some evils which in his opinion would arise from the control of the proposed auditor. The House would allow him to say that the appointment of that officer was especially recommended by the committee appointed by his majesty's government to investigate the subject. As to his power he would not have more than was possessed by the present auditors of the civil list. He was not to have any authority of a novel nature. The treasury, in order to enable them properly to regulate the household, must have a more immediate connexion with it. Besides, they had not time for the task. It was necessary that the audit of the civil list should be an early audit; and it would be impossible to leave that duty to general auditors without subjecting it to the inconvenience of falling into arrear.

He would not trouble the House any further at present on the question. He was apprehensive that they would think the details dry and little interesting. But, on the other hand, the subject was one of extreme importance. He trusted that the House, influenced by a proper spirit of economy, and at the same time feeling that deference to the Crown which had always marked their conduct, would have recourse to those modes alone of obtaining information which they had hitherto adopted. He trusted that in examining the details of the expenses of the household, they would always bear in mind, that comparatively few of the arrears of the civil list appertained to those expenses. The whole amount of the exceedings of the household in four years was 180,000l. and he was confident, if the equipment of the regency had not created an extraordinary expenditure, especially in the lord chamberlain's department, that no debt at all would have been incurred in that branch of the civil list. The right hon. gentleman had asserted, that the debt ought to have been extinguished by the droits of the Crown, and that parliament ought to have had nothing to do with it. That, however, would have been in contradiction to the existing statute, by which it was directed that under the circumstances in which that debt was placed, it should be brought before parliament in order that its nature and extent might be ascertained. The noble lord concluded by repeating his firm expectation that the House would not institute the kind of inquiry proposed by the right hon. gentleman, but that if they needed information, they would address the throne for it.

observed, that he could not agree with the noble lord, that a question at once affecting the splendour of the Crown and the burthens imposed on the people could ever be uninteresting to the House of Commons. He begged to ask, whether any of the other estimates of expenditure were ever found deficient? Was it ever necessary for ministers to come to parliament for the purpose of procuring additional sums? Certainly not; and for the plainest of all reasons—because, with respect to the estimates of the navy and army, and of other services, ministers were responsible, and were bound to apply the sums voted by parliament to the purposes for which they were granted. Why should not the same responsibility exist in the management of the civil list? The absence of it rendered inquiries necessary; and as to the delicacy of which the noble lord had said so much, although he would be the last to break through it in ordinary cases, yet, after committees upon committees had in vain reported, he thought that some other mode of investigation more effectual was indispensable. He put it on the footing of any other exceeding for which the public was made liable; and if the House of Commons was in earnest in its professions of economy, it was its duty to prosecute this inquiry. Where could it better commence a system of retrenchment than in the highest quarters? At the same time, he was willing to allow that a proper degree of forbearance ought to be observed. The noble lord had said, that the estimate first laid upon the table was not intended to be relied upon by ministers; and that, principally in consequence of the decrease in the price of provisions, it had been found practicable to reduce it to the extent of 100,000l. Why were not these important documents fitly prepared in the first instance, and what was the fair inference to be drawn from this vacillation? Was it not that the estimate of 1815, and those presented on other occasions, were all drawn up so loosely, and upon such vague materials, that the House could not place the slightest reliance upon them. On a former day the noble lord had spoken of the advantages of which the sovereign might now have been in possession, had he retained his hereditary revenue: to-night he had not touched upon that point, and he (Mr. C.) thought it would not be very difficult to show, that had the King retained the hereditary revenue of George 2nd,. he would not have had so large an annual income as he derived from the annuity for which it was commuted. The whole subject required immediate and thorough examination; and if the House refused to grant the motion of his right hon. friend, it must in future be completely at the mercy of the minister, who only prepared estimates like those now on the table, to answer the convenience of the moment. The noble lord had complained that his right hon. friend had treated this question invidiously. If to examine it with patience and acuteness, and to state the result with accuracy and ability, were to treat it invidiously, the charge was well founded. He (Mr. Calcraft), on the contrary, thought that the subject had been most fairly displayed; and if the details were surprising, they were with fidelity taken from the papers presented. All men must be astonished at the fact of furniture to the extent of 50,000l. being sent to one house, into which already so much had been crowded. The great remedy suggested by the noble lord was, to appoint an auditor, who was to be accountable; but if the great personages now concerned, the lords of the treasury, and the lords chamberlain and steward, did not afford sufficient security that the civil list would be properly managed, what confidence could be placed in a mere auditor of accounts, who was to be paid because the lords of the treasury would not fulfil duties hitherto imposed upon them? On a previous occasion the noble lord had complained that Great Britain had acted towards her sovereign in a niggardly manner, unworthy of her resources; and, to prove his assertion, he had instanced the greater revenues of the king of France. He (Mr. C.) was not aware that the splendour and the luxuries of the Crown had ever been abridged in this country, even when all classes were suffering: he thought the charge unfounded, and, had it been true, it did not follow that we should do better to imitate the example of France. When the whole nation was calling for retrenchment, it would ill become the representatives of the nation to refuse this motion. He could not persuade himself that it would be rejected; and if it were granted, more beneficial results would, he was convinced, be obtained than had flowed from the reports of all former committees upon this subject.

said, that the hon. gentleman who had just sat down, had accused his noble friend of stating, that the present question was one not interesting to the public. This he most expressly denied. His noble friend had said, that he was afraid the details (not the subject) would prove dry and uninteresting; but he had added, that in his opinion, it was one of the most important questions that could be submitted to the consideration of parliament. He did not ascribe to the hon. gentleman any intentional misrepresentation of the sentiments of his noble friend, but a more direct and complete misrepresentation had never occurred within the walls of that House. The hon. gentleman having first stated, that all the estimates, which, from time to time, had been framed of the expenses of the civil list, had turned out to be erroneous, had proceeded to ask how it happened that they were more so than the estimates of the army, or of the navy, or of the ordnance. The reason was obvious. The army, navy, and ordnance estimates were furnished every year; and if erroneous one year, were easily corrected in the next. Was that the case with the civil list estimates? On the contrary, there had been but two since the accession. The hon. gentleman had expressed a wish that the House should go into the proposed committee, for the purpose of examining the menial servants of the household, and in order to obtain the evidence of other persons connected with it. But that was precisely the proposition on which parliament had last year decided in the negative. "But then," said the right hon. gentleman, "why not examine into the other charges of the civil list?" It was the plan of his noble friend to do so. One object of his bill was, to bring those branches of the civil list, which were the most liable to fluctuation in their amount, regularly under the consideration of parliament. That, however, which had principally induced him to address the House on this occasion was, the observation made by the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Tierney) on the committee appointed by government to investigate the civil list, and which he termed an insult to the House. He (Mr. long) would state to the House the nature of the appointment of that committee. It originated in a treasury minute, which was communicated to him, and in which he and two hon. friends of his were desired to examine the estimate of the civil list of last year, with a view to its reduction, and to the restriction of the expenditure to its proper purposes. They had before them the different reports which had been made on the subject by the various parliamentary committees, and requiring further information, they had been furnished with it by the direction of his royal highness the Prince Regent, who had also expressed his approbation of the commission. They had diminished the estimates of last year by 139,000l. The hon. gentleman had intimated that their inquiries had been influenced by motives of an undue nature. Did the result show this to be true? They had suggested a reduction of 26,000l. in the department of foreign ministers; they had recommended a diminution in the departments of the lord chamberlain, the lord Steward, and the master of the horse, amounting to above 20,000l.; they had pointed out various desirable regulations in the different branches of the household; and, finally, they had advised the appointment of an auditor to examine speedily the accounts of the civil list. Did the hon. gentleman see in all this any disposition on the part of the committee, to court the favour of any individual? The fact was, that they exerted themselves to the utmost to do their duty, and they trusted they had rendered service both to the Prince Regent and to the public. It had always appeared to him, that there were two material defects in the arrangements of the civil list. The first of these was a fixed income being given to meet a variable and necessarily increasing expenditure—the second the want of an efficient control over that expenditure. Certain improving funds had been set apart for the civil list in the time of George 2nd. These, parliament engaged to make good if they should fall short of the sum of 800,000l.; but if they exceeded that sum (as they had constantly done) the surplus was to be enjoyed by his majesty. The funds referred to had considerably exceeded the sum of 800,000l., and the surplus had been retained by him according to the intentions of parliament. In the reign of Geo. 3rd, it had been thought advisable to give a fixed income in lieu of that provision of Which he had just had occasion to speak. The income fixed as it then was, had not since been augmented with reference to the altered circumstances of the times, though every man must be aware a great and unavoidable increase of the expenses of the Crown had occurred between that period, and the present time. Though things had greatly changed, the established income of the Crown had been held to be equal to all the situations in which the Crown might be placed, and to all the various circumstances of the country in peace or war. It had been expected to meet the rise in the price of every article, and to cover all the different payments to be made out of the civil list, which every one must know were liable to the greatest fluctuations. He would give an example. Till within these few years the printing for the two Houses of Parliament had been charged on the civil list. The estimate for this service had formerly been 10,000l. Up to the year 1803 it had never exceeded 20,000l. It had been taken off the civil list in 1804, and the annual expense of the printing for the Houses of Parliament now amounted to between 80 and 90,000l. He mentioned this as a singular instance of that fluctuation of expenditure, of which he had felt it his duty to speak, and the subject was one which might deserve some inquiry. The disbursements made to the foreign ministers, which had also come out of the civil list income, presented an instance of no less striking variation. In 1804 the estimate under this head was 10,000l.; it now amounted to 130,000l. These circumstances being known, he would ask the House if any thing could have been expected but what had happened? Was any thing to be anticipated but that the Crown must require new revenues to be provided for it, or come to parliament to seek the discharge of its debts? Such, he contended, must of necessity be the consequence of the arrangement he had described, and it thence followed that it was Unjust, under all the circumstances of the case, to say the incumbrances which had grown on the civil list arose out of any disregard for economy. That which had occurred was not to be ascribed to negligence or extravagance, but to that impolicy which had assigned a fixed income, to meet a variable and increasing expenditure. This was the true cause of the applications which had been made to parliament. The second defect which he had noticed in the system was, that no power of control over the civil list was given to those who were held to be responsible for any excess on it, It might be said that a control over it had been given by Mr. Burke's bill, but this he must deny. The control which that measure gave over one of the classes, went but to throw the charge of that class on the remainder, and that classification was absurd which did not effectually guard against inconveniences like those which had been experienced in the case in question. Of Mr. Burke, he must always speak with the greatest respect, but he must say, as a practical legislator his efforts were far from being always successful. Had his plans been as efficient when attempted to be carried into effect, as they were well founded in sound economy and in justice, results very different might have occurred. In some instances, certainly, he had done that which was productive of much good. The arrangement by which the sums formerly left in the hands of the paymaster-general, were taken from that officer and placed in the bank, he held to be a wise arrangement, and one which had proved highly beneficial to the country. But if they should go on to look at his other measures in the same office, which he (Mr. Long) had now the honour of superintending, it would be found that many of them had proved impracticable. After the experience of five and twenty years, his plan relating to the passing of accounts was found inefficient, and could not be acted upon. He (Mr. Long) had amended this plan by a new act, and Mr. Burke's friends upon that occasion admitted that what he had done, was what Mr. Burke intended to do. So it was with the civil list; his regulations to restrain the expenditure were insufficient, for the system of paying according to exact classification, could not be adhered to, unless adequate funds had been provided to meet the charge. He (Mr. Long) approved of the course which had been recommended on the present occasion by his noble friend (lord Castlereagh). He approved of it, as it went to remove from the civil list those charges which were most fluctuating in their nature, and, at the same time, to give that control over the expenditure which he had given it as his opinion had long been wanted. He approved of the plan, as it provided for the regulation of the civil list, by connecting the lords of the treasury with it, in a manner which had never been attempted before, and giving them that fair control over it which he would maintain they ought to exercise, and without which he thought no man ought to say they were responsible for its excesses. An objection had been made to the estimates of the civil list being framed by those on whom that duty had heretofore fallen, and it had been said that the House ought to take this task upon itself. He considered the best course would be to form them as till now they had been formed, and afterwards bring them before the House for investigation. The circumstance of the estimates being framed by the House would take away that responsibility of ministers touching them which ought to be preserved. The right hon. gentleman had called for the appointment of a select committee, with powers to send for persons, papers and records. No committee had been appointed to inquire into this subject down to the year 1802, and from that time to the present, no instance had occurred of such powers being given to a committee on the affairs of the civil list. The right hon. gentleman contended that without these powers, the committee could not form an estimate, and that the appointment of one would be altogether useless. He (Mr. Long) did not see it was at all necessary the committee should be armed with such powers; it was not the duty of the committee to form estimates at all. He saw no reason for deviating from the established practice of the House, and the course which the right hon. gentleman recommended was a novelty—an innovation which he trusted they would not be disposed to sanction. He would ask when information respecting the civil list had been required, if it had not always been called for by an Address to the Crown. If the House had desired to examine an officer, touching the expenditure of the royal household, he presumed the course would be that which he had described? Would then the House on this occasion delegate those powers to a committee which hitherto they had always refused to exercise themselves? He knew it had always been thought important to preserve the regular course of proceeding in such cases, from interruption. He knew if a motion were made as a matter of course for papers on the subject of the civil list, the Speaker had always considered it to be his duty to interpose his authority, and to inform the member that he could not do this but by moving an address to the Crown. Why was a different course now to be pursued—why was that form to be departed from on this occasion, which had long been so carefully preserved, and adhered to for the wisest purposes? The right hon. gentleman, in proposing to examine the menial servants of the Crown, had spoken of the high respect he entertained for the person of the sovereign, as that which would effectually guard against any improper use being made of the power to examine them. He doubted not the right hon. gentleman might be sincere in all he had said on this subject; but if the precedent were once established—if once the servants of the King's household were called before a committee of that House, however tender all parties at present concerned might be of touching on matters connected personally with the sovereign, who could say, that those who might hereafter stand in the same situation, would act with the same delicacy and propriety? Who could say that similar inquiries would not be demanded at some future period, for purposes very distinct from every thing connected with the public benefit?—[Hear, hear!]. If the object of the House was to withdraw the respect which they had always shown to the sovereign, to make the civil list a vehicle for party purposes, they would support the motion; if not they would reject it. In conclusion, he gave the plan of his noble friend his warmest support, as it went to remove those charges from the civil list, which, from the circumstance of their being most fluctuating in their nature, had been the chief causes of those appeals to parliament, which had become necessary. He approved of it as it went to reduce the charges to an equality with the income appropriated to the civil list; and finally, he approved of it, as giving the lords of the treasury that control over the expenditure which he was of opinion ought to be vested in those who were held responsible for the excesses which might occur.

objected to the calling on parliament for deficiencies in the civil list, when the droits of the Crown were sufficient to cover the greater part of them. He also condemned the manner of applying those droits, which, instead of being expended on the royal palaces, which were the property of the public, were laid out on private residences, which might, in a short time be given away to any favourite. He contended for the necessity of a committee, as it was important to know the reasons on which that extraordinary minute of the treasury, which his right hon. friend had mentioned, were founded. It was important to know why 50,000l. had been expended for furniture at Brighton, when, according to the declaration of the noble lord last year, a great quantity of furniture had been kept up in store for future exigencies, and that no new expense would be incurred on this head. This additional expense which had been since incurred, was in violation of the pledge which had then been given, and the House was now called upon to sanction it. The hon. gentleman contended, that the House was quite competent to examine into every part of the civil list, as well as any other branch of the public expenditure, and observed, that though it was necessary to support the dignity and splendor of the Crown, it was also necessary that in doing so, they should uphold those rights and privileges which had been bequeathed to them by their ancestors. It was not a valid argument against the present motion, that no good had resulted from former committees. The House should consider the present state of the country, burthened as it was with taxes, and should carefully scrutinize every item of the public expense, unless they did this, they would not faithfully discharge their duty to their constituents.

rose amidst loud calls for the question. He said, he was not desirous to enter at large into the discussion of the motion now before the House; but after what had fallen from the hon. gentleman who spoke last, and the right hon. mover, he was desirous of offering a few remarks with respect to the droits of admiralty, on which the language they had held appeared to him so extraordinary, that he could not but believe they had misunderstood the subject. It seemed to be supposed that a great breach of propriety had taken place, since the Crown had applied to the liberality of parliament for the liquidation of the arrears of the civil list, instead of applying the admiralty droits to the discharge of them. An erroneous idea appeared to be entertained of the extent of the profits arising to the Crown from the fund in question, and it was assumed that a very large balance was now in hand. It had been supposed that there was now in the hands of the treasury a balance of 277,000l., The right hon. gentleman was excessively mistaken in this idea, as he would prove from a paper which he held in his hand. In the note he had mentioned (which he here proceeded to read), and which was made out by the registrar of the admiralty, it appeared, that against the amount which had been mentioned as the balance in hand, there remained due, as rewards to captors, on account of vessels which had been condemned, no less a sum than 277,184l.: so that instead of there being the large unappropriated balance, there was barely enough to liquidate the outstanding debts. He had reason to believe, when all the claimants were satisfied, that something would remain, but the sum could not be great. After the expense of furnishing the royal residence at Brighton, he believed the balance remaining in hand might amount to about thirty thousand pounds. How the sums issued from this fund in the course of the last two years had been applied, he would now give some account from the papers before the House. The total amount of the payments made within the period he had named was 950,000l.; out of this sum there had been paid as rewards to captors of vessels nearly 450,000l. It would thus be seen that nearly half the large sum which had been mentioned had been given to the captors of vessels, and with this distribution of the monies in question, he did not expect the House would be other than satisfied. In addition to the sum thus applied, 390,000l. had been issued to discharge incumbrances on the civil list. It would thus be seen that out of the 950,000l. no less than 840,000l. had been directly applied to the service of the public. There was also a small sum that had been carried to the consolidated fund. Of the remainder of the 950,000l. he believed 20,000l. had been expended on the royal residence at Bright ton, and about an equal advance had been made to pay for furniture which had been supplied where the princess Charlotte had occasionally resided. These charges would give the House some idea of the manner in which the fund had been applied, and from this statement it would be seen that a balance like that which was supposed to remain, could not exist. That balance which might be ultimately returned, could not be so considerable as to excite any jealousy in parliament, on the subject of its applications. Whenever parliament could think the sum in hand of sufficient magnitude to make it desirable that they should decide on the manner in which thought to be disposed of, he apprehended there would be little difficulty in submitting it to their disposal. It was proper, however, that it should be always remembered, that without their interference, the sum of 1,500,00l. had been applied to the service of the public.

shortly replied. He persisted that no demand ought to have been made upon parliament to supply the deficiencies in the civil list, when the droits of the Crown, on which there still remained a surplus of 277,000l. might have been resorted to. He insisted that sufficient remuneration had not been given to the naval captors.

answered, that a much larger grant had been made to the captors during the last two years than had been customary during any former year.

The House divided:

List of the Majority and Minority.

When the gallery was again opened, lord Folkestone was on his legs, opposing the bringing up of the report of the bank restriction bill. He concluded by moving, that the House should adjourn. On dividing there appeared, for the adjournment, 65; against it, 183: Mr. Bennet afterwards moved the other orders of the day, with an intention of dividing the House, when the chancellor of the exchequer consented to postpone the report of the bank restriction bill to Wednesday.