§ Mr. Serjeant Bestrose, pursuant to notice, to call the attention of the house to a transaction, which, if the circumstances were as had been stated to him, deserved the serious attention of the house. In 1795, government had thought proper to give orders to seize neutral vessels going to France with provisions. These vessels and the cargoes had been consigned, after a part of the provisions had been taken for the use of government, with the remaining cargoes to Mr. Claude Scott, to be disposed of for the public account. He was informed that the produce of the sale, amounting to two hundred thousand pounds, had been suffered to remain in the hand's of Mr. Scott, down to the year 1800. During this period, Mr. Scott had frequently supplied government with corn to a large amount, which there was reason to suppose he had bought with the public money, and for which he was paid in treasury bills, bearing interest, so that he not only derived mercantile profit from the public money, but also interest from the mode of payment. If these things were true, they were highly culpable: the person who had given him the information pledged himself to make good the fact at the bar; yet he hoped sincerely the hon. gent. could do away the charge. He concluded with moving for a variety of accounts relating to the sale of the vessels and cargoes, the payments made to the lords of the treasury, and the several contracts between Mr. Scott and government for meal and flour, &c.
§ Mr. Claude Scottstated, that the money was much more than 200,000l. which was one proof that the hon. gent. was extremely misinformed on the subject. The produce of the sale had been paid by him, to. the bank, and remained therefore unemployed. He offered to give it to government, but was told by Mr. Rose, that it was not settled to what particular account it was to go, but that as soon as this was settled he would be informed of it. The money for some months lay in the bank, and them upon an order from the treasury, he paid it over to the treasurer of the navy, and this was the whole of the matter.
Mr. Rosesaid, he did not believe that the hon. member, whose conduct was the object of the motion, had employed the public money for any length of time what- 445 ever. He was glad the subject had been brought forward, because it would afford that hon. member an opportunity Of making the whole case clear and public.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid he was desirous the papers moved for by the hon. and learned gent, should be laid before the house, but he could not help remarking the manner in which this motion was made. The hon. and learned gent. gave notice last night he should make this motion, by stating that it was applicable to the connection between government and Mr. Claude Scott, but he might have given an intimation of the ground of his motion, that those who wished to take a share in the discussion might be acquainted with the nature of the transaction, as it Was intended to be brought forward; but here was a matter of ten years standing brought forward without any such intimation, when gentlemen might not have the subject fresh in their memory. He was glad to observe, however, that what had been hinted at by the hon. mover, as to the cause of his motion, was likely to turn out to be totally unfounded.
§ Mr. Foxthought the conduct of his hon. and learned friend in not giving a mere descriptive notice perfectly correct, and such as he would have observed himself in a similar situation, for had he made a speech on giving his notice of the, motion, it would have been irregular in any other member to answer that, speech, however desirable it might be by such member that the speech should be answered. This complaint, therefore, of a want of a further intimation of the hon. mover, was properly a complaint that he had not been irregular.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, he did not wish that a speech might precede the notice, but the general grounds of it would have been so far from being irregular that it would have only been conformable to custom in cases of this nature.
§ Mr. Greymaintained, that ample information of the nature of this motion had been detailed in the notice, as entered in the order book, which he read.
The Chancellor of the ExchequerSaid, he had not seen the book, which appeared to contain sufficient notice.
§ Mr. Serjeant Bestjustified himself as to the distinctness with which he gave notice of this motion, as also for the motive with which he brought the subject forward; it was to lay the foundation of an Enquiry. He did this on a statement which was 446 made to him; which statement if correct demanded of him this conduct as a member of that house; if the statement was incorrect, he was imposed upon, and improperly made the instrument of bringing forward an unnecessary enquiry, in which event he should be among the foremost to bring his informant before the house, for the purpose of receiving its censure; for those who gave misinformation to members on such occasions, deserved censure. He understood the right hon. gent. (Mr. Rose) to say, that the hon. member (Mr. Scott) had not employed the public money for one moment. He was glad to hear it, and if so, he must have been greatly misinformed.
Mr. Rosesaid, he never was so absurd as to have said the hon. member never employed the public money in his hands for a moment, for it would have been a thing impossible for any man connected with government in a contract to have that said of him; all he said Was, that he had not kept the public money for any considerable time.
§ Mr. Serjeant Bestsaid, a month.
Mr. Rosesaid he believed not a month, or any thing like a month; but he spoke only from the best recollection he had on a subject which was ten years old; the impression of that recollection was, that the conduct of the hon. member (Mr. Scott) was perfectly correct and honourable. He knew very little more of that hon. member, beyond that contract With government, than the hon. and learned gent. did.—The question was then put and carried, "that there be laid before the house an account of such sales, delivered by Claude Scott, esq. to government, and an account when the produce of such sales were paid to government; also, that there be laid before the house a copy of an account of corn and flour, sold by the said C. Scott, esq. to government, between the year 1795, and 1800, and all monies paid by him on account of such sales; which were all ordered."