COMMITTEE. (Hansard, 3 May 1866)

§ MR. AYRTON
said, that before the Question was put, he was anxious to call the attention of the Secretary of the Treasury to the provision in this Bill by which it appeared that the estate of Claremont was to be granted to Her Majesty. He thought that if the attention of the House had been directed to this provision at an earlier period it would have seen considerable reasons for not proceding with the Bill unless the Government had consented to withdraw the clause; because it appeared to him that in this respect the Bill was a violation of some very important constitutional provisions which had been made by Parliament for preventing, he would not say extravagance, but, at all events, abuses from creeping into the administration of certain public affairs. A long time ago the House had to take into consideration the manner in which certain revenues which were placed at the disposal of the Sovereign had been administered. In the middle of the reign of King George III. Mr. Burke brought under the consideration of Parliament the subject of the Administration of the Civil List with a view to greater economy than had previously prevailed, and one of the enactments which he proposed, and which was ultimately adopted, was that the Crown should never grant any sum exceeding £1,200 a year except upon a Message 424 which should be sent to the Parliament expressing the object and purposes of the grant. Well, that statute (22 Geo. III. c. 82) had since been regarded as the regulating Act with reference to the Civil List, and ever since the passing of that Act it had been the practice of the Sovereign, when the Crown desired to grant a pension to any one of more than £1,200, to send a Message to the House, and the House proceeded only upon the Message. He might add, however, that notwithstanding this provision a number of charges and pensions of one kind or another, but of smaller amount, were granted to persons who were supposed not to be deserving objects, and at the beginning of the reign of William IV. a Motion was made for investigating the matter. This had the effect of putting an end to the Government of the Duke of Wellington, and bringing the Liberal Party into power. At that time it was recorded as a great party principle that the Sovereign should not be importuned by undeserving persons for grants of public money. When the Liberal Party got into power they did not pay very much attention to the professions they had made of economy in this respect; and at length the subject was solemnly brought under the notice of the House, and on the 18th February, 1834, this Re-solution was arrived at— That it is the bounden duty of the responsible advisers of the Crown to recommend to His Majesty for grants of Pensions on the Civil List such persons only as have just claims on the Royal beneficence, or who, by their personal services to the Crown, by the performance of duties to the public, or by their useful discoveries in science and attainments in literature and the arts, have merited the gracious consideration of their Sovereign and the gratitude of their country."—[3 Hansard, xxi. 498.] Well, on the accession of Her Majesty this Resolution was brought under the notice of the House, and it was thought so important to maintain its spirit and principle that it was embodied in the Act regulating the Civil List of Her Majesty; and in consequence, provision was made that Her Majesty should have the right of granting pensions to an amount not exceeding in the whole £1,200 in every year in that spirit:—so that, though there would be a considerable accumulation of the pension list, the country would still have the satisfaction of knowing that these pensions were granted to persons who had rendered some service to the country. For all pensions, therefore, above £1,200 a year Her 425 Majesty was bound to send a Message to the House; but Her Majesty was empowered to make smaller grants within certain limits for the objects mentioned in the Resolution to which he had referred. Now, without regard to any of these precautions, Her Majesty's Government had proposed to place at the disposal of Her Majesty property estimated to be worth £1,200 a year, and no communication had been made to the House as to the person to whom the property in question was to be granted. That seemed to him to be a great violation of the Act regulating the Civil List passed on Her Majesty's accession; and under the circumstances, he thought it was the duty of Her Majesty's Government to withdraw this clause from the Bill, unless they were prepared to advise Her Majesty to send to the House a Message stating for what purpose this money was to be applied. He wished, therefore, to ask the hon. Gentleman the Secretary for the Treasury, Whether he was prepared to give any explanation, and to inform the House whether this property was to be granted to the Queen for Her personal use and enjoyment, or for the purpose of being handed over to some one else?

§ MR. CHILDERS
said, he was afraid he could not give any better explanation than had been given the other evening by his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he introduced the Bill. That was regarded by a full House as a satisfactory explanation. The clause was absolutely necessary. The object of it was to give her Majesty a residence in addition to those which she at present possessed. His right hon. Friend had entered so fully into the question that he did not believe it would be proper in him (Mr. Childers) to add to or to take from that explanation.

§ MR. BEACH
inquired what arrangement would be made with regard to the sporting in the New Forest, power to lease which he observed was taken in the Bill. It had always been customary to treat with some consideration the claims of adjacent proprietors, and he thought that something like a priority on their part ought to be recognized. It might be a great hardship 426 if the sporting were let to persons who were not on good terms with the owners of the surrounding property.

§ MR. CHILDERS
said, there would be an obvious inconvenience in giving a pledge that those gentlemen should have secured to them an absolute priority; but the Commissioners of Woods and Forests, with whom the matter would rest, were never in the habit of dealing harshly with residents in the neighbourhood of the property under their management.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
said, his learned Friend the Lord Advocate having brought to his knowledge the fact that some apprehensions with regard to foreshores had been excited by the language of this clause, which was in reality an interpretation clause, to obviate any possible misunderstanding he proposed to omit it, and to introduce corresponding alterations into Clause 7.

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
said, any question which might be in dispute as to the title to the Crown lands, or indeed any land, would have to be decided in the ordinary Courts of Law; they only took care in this Bill that they transferred from one Governmental Department to another for the public interest such rights and interests as the Crown actually possessed. Any dispute as to what those rights might be would have to be settled in another way. The rights of others would not be taken away or at all prejudicially affected by anything contained in this Bill.

§ MR. AYRTON
said, he had ascertained from the Secretary to the Treasury that he had not been present at both of the explanations given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer upon this subject. Under such circumstances, it would be unfair to press the hon. Gentleman for an answer in the absence of the Chancellor of the Exchequer; otherwise, it had been his intention to move, by way of Amendment, a proviso at the end of the clause that Her Majesty should not be entitled to grant the use of 427 the estate to any person except under the provisions of the Act passed at her accession. He should, however, postpone moving the Amendment he proposed until after the Bill had been reported to the House, when he trusted that the Chancellor of the Exchequer would be present. It was impossible, after so solemn a settlement had been entered into as was contained in the Act passed at the time of Her Majesty's accession, that the House would permit it to be passed over by a side-wind.

§ MR. E. P. BOUVERIE
wished to say that although this Bill had passed off very quietly a very great improvement would be effected by it. For years a violent controversy had been going on between certain persons and the Commissioners of Woods and Forests. The latter had always considered themselves as trustees of the Crown, and had always acted with the view of making money out of the foreshores, instead of putting them to the best use for the public advantage. The result had been that a vast amount of soreness and ill will had been created by this method of administering the Crown lands, and many persons had had just cause of complaint. He apprehended that the transfer of the administration of the foreshores to the Board of Trade would be not for the pecuniary advantage of the Crown but for the public advantage. The public were greatly indebted to Her Majesty's Government for taking the matter up.

§ MR. CHILDERS
was bound to explain, in justice to the Commissioners of Woods and Forests, that since the passing of the Act of 1851 they had had no option but to treat the property as a source of revenue. He believed that these gentlemen had discharged their duties faithfully.