HC Deb 24 July 1840 vol 55 cc937-9
Mr. Goulburn

begged to put a question to the right hon. Gentleman, the Chancellor of the Exchequer. When he had the honour of holding the seals of the Home Department, it happened that the office of Dean of the Chapel Royal of Scotland and King's Chaplain was vacant. He made inquiry, with a view to ascertain who in Scotland was the most eminent person and the best qualified for the situation, in order that he might submit the name to his late Majesty. He found that some communication had already been held by his predecessor with Dr. Macgill, an eminent divine, and he had reason to believe that his predecessor, from the good opinion which he in common with all acquainted with his merits entertained of Dr. Macgill, intended to have recommended him to his Majesty. Under these circumstances, and having convinced himself of the fitness of Dr. Macgill, he submitted his name to his Majesty, and Dr. Macgill received the appointment, in the usual form, of one of his Majesty's chaplains for Scotland, upon which he was appointed Dean of the Chapel Royal. The Treasury, however, refused to pay Dr. Macgill a salary under the appointment, and Dr. Macgill applied to him, he being the individual that recommended that rev. gentleman to the Crown. On receiving this intimation, he addressed a letter to the First Lord of the Treasury, pointing out the circumstances of the case, but although he had again written subsequently, that noble Lord, for some reason or other, had not thought fit to return a reply; and he was, therefore, under the necessity of troubling the right hon. Gentleman for some explanation. He found that there was no irregularity in the form of the appointment, and he was utterly ignorant of the grounds upon which the Treasury had thought fit to withhold Dr. Macgill's salary. That salary had been confirmed by a decision of the committee that sat upon the civil charges of Scotland. The subject was brought before the committee, and had been decided in favour of the King's chaplains. Under these circumstances, considering himself in honour bound to see this appointment, which had the sanction of his late Majesty when he had the honour of holding the seals of office, carried into effect, and having no means of obtaining information from the Treasury, he hoped to be favoured with some explanation by the right hon. Gentleman, the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

thanked the right hon. Gentleman for having communicated his intention of putting this question. There was nothing irregular in the form of this appointment, and no objection whatever was made to the rev. gentleman. The case stood thus: Subsequently to the Civil-list Committee, some discussion took place in that House, in which it was stated that it was the intention of the Government, that on future appointments to this office no salary should be given. In accordance with that declaration, he understood that the Treasury had refused payment of salary, the appointment being one unaccompanied with duties, to which, consequently, no salary was attached. He had not been able to refer to the particular debate on which such a declaration had been made.

Mr. Goulburn

did not consider the answer of the right hon. Gentleman at all satisfactory. The imperfect recollection of an unknown debate, of which there was no record, was set up against the recommendation of a committee, and against uniform practice.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

said, that a discussion took place in that House, during which it was stated that salary should not be withdrawn from the parties who then held office, but that in case of any future appointment, no salary should attach to the office. That discussion took place before Dr. Macgill's appointment, and when that rev. gentleman applied for his salary, the answer was that no salary attached to the office.

Mr. R. Steuart

happened to be in office at the time this question was discussed, and his recollection of it was this:—Very shortly after coming into office, the question was raised as to the salaries of the chaplains in Scotland, there being at that time four vacancies. The warrant appointing Dr. Macgill had been sent to the Treasury, and application had been made for the salary, but that had been done previous to the right hon. Gentleman opposite leaving his situation as First Lord of the Treasury, and the question was then raised whether the salary of 50l. a year should issue to Dr. Macgill. There was a distinct understanding, that this was one of the offices which was not to receive any salary. That was the real state of the case. The warrant issued from the Home-office then did not carry any salary.

Sir R. Peel

was in office when the appointment of the reverend gentleman was made. and he did think that after the recommendation of the Civil-list Committee, that reverend gentleman had everything on his side. He had the favour of his Majesty and the recommendation of a committee of the House of Commons, and considering that the appointment was one made by a deceased monarch, he thought it was bad taste to refuse the salary.

Mr. Hume

had taken some trouble in this matter, having written to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, reminding him that the Sinecure Committee had decided that no salary should be attached to this office. He thought the Chancellor of the Exchequer deserved the thanks of the House and the country for his conduct.