Commons Sitting of 9 February 1808

PETITION AGAINST THE CURATES SUSPENSION REPEAL BILL.
Mr. Whitbreadpresented a Petition from the rev. James Scott, rector of Brampton Bryan, in the county of Hereford; taking notice of the ingrossed bill from the lords, intituled, An Act for repealing an Act made in the 47th of his present majesty, intituled, An Act for suspending the operation of an act of the 36th of his present majesty for the further support and maintenance of Curates within the Church of England, and for other purposes in the said act mentioned, so far as relates to the avoidance of Benefices by the Incumbents thereof having accepted augmented Curacies; and setting forth, "that if the same should pass into a law, it will operate in a manner extremely injurious to the petitioner, whose title to the rectory of Brampton Bryan aforesaid cannot be disputed, as long as the said act of the 47th of his present majesty shall continue to be the law; and that the petitioner was presented and duly instituted to the Rectory of Brampton Bryan aforesaid in 1801; and in 1805 he was nominated to the perpetual curacy of Titley, in the county aforesaid; and that in 1806, the petitioner was appointed chaplain to his majesty's ship Lion, which by the Residence Act is a legal cause of absence; and the petitioner went in the said ship to China; and that at the time of the petitioner's accepting the perpetual curacy aforesaid, he was in total ignorance of a section in an act of 36 Geo. 3. commonly called the Curates Act, which makes a former Benefice voidable by the subsequent acceptance of a perpetual curacy augmented by Queen Anne's Bounty; and that, if the petitioner had been in the least aware of the said clause, he would have applied for a dispensation to hold two benefices, he being a batchelor of laws of the. University of Oxford, and as such in a situation to obtain such dispensation; and, that, during the last session of parliament, and whilst the petitioner was absent in China as aforesaid. a bill for the purpose of confirming clergymen who had acted in ignorance of the aforesaid clause in possession of their former Benefices, was, from the very commencement of the said session in the hands of several members of both houses of parliament, of some of the most eminent lawyers at the bar, and of many respectable clergymen; and that several weeks after the said bill had been in such extensive discussion, namely on the 27th of July 1807, the patron of the said rectory of Brampton Bryan presented another gentleman thereto; and that, by

409
the said act of the 47th of his present majesty, it was enacted, that all persons who, upon or at any time after the first day of the said last session of parliament, were or had been the lawful incumbent of any benefice, should, notwithstanding they have or had accepted any such augmented cures, remain and be the incumbents of such benefices until the fortieth day of the next session of parliament; and that the petitioner was on the said first day of the last session of parliament, the lawful incumbent of the said rectory of Brampton Bryan, and was nominated to the said curacy now above 3 years ago, and accepted the same, with the perfect approbation of the said patron of Brampton Bryan, who immediately upon the petitioner's acceptance of the said curacy, became the petitioner's tenant of certain tythes belonging to the said curacy, and has so continued to the present time; and therefore praying, that the said bill may not pass into a law, or that the petitioner may have such other relief in the premises as to the house shall seem meet."—The Petition was ordered to lie upon the table.

DROITS OF ADMIRALTY.
Sir F. Burdettseeing the chancellor of the exchequer in his place, wished to put a question to him, in order that he might be satisfied, upon authority, of the truth of certain rumours which were in circulation. It had been stated in the public prints, that his majesty had granted large sums, out of the proceeds of property belonging to nations not at war with this country, to several branches of the royal family, and particularly to the duke of York. What he wished to know was, whether this statement was correct; and if so, upon what ground it was that his majesty could seize the property of nations not at war with this country?
The Chancellor of the Exchequerwas willing to give the hon. baronet every information he required on the subject. But first he must apprise the hon. baronet of a misapprehension which he seemed to labour under, With respect to the principle upon which his majesty's right to the property in question was founded. It was true that the property had been seized previous to his majesty's formal declaration of war, but war had since been declared, and the question respecting the property had .been referred to the competent tribunal and condemned. The right of his majesty, therefore, grounded upon such a decision, was incontrovertible. It
410
was true that his majesty had granted a certain sum out of the proceeds of such property to each of the junior male branches of the royal family, and to the duke of York amongst the rest.
Sir F. Burdettthanked the right hon. gent. for the frankness of his answer, and intimated his intention to bring the subject before parliament on a future day.

CONDUCT OF MARQUIS WELLESLEY.
Lord Folkestonemoved, That the several Papers presented to the house in January, Feb. March, June and July, 1806, and in Feb. 1807, relative to the Affairs of the Province of Oude, be taken into consideration on Monday the 22d inst.
Mr. Creeveytook this opportunity of expressing his opinion, that the best mode of proceeding would not be that which the noble lord had stated, but that it would be better to refer the papers to a committee, to arrange and make their report. The papers already printed were so voluminous, that it was difficult indeed for the house to understand the subject, unless the necessary papers were selected in this manner. The subject was very comprehensive, extending to the whole system of policy in India for a considerable time. It would be recollected, that with respect to the policy of the marquis Wellesley's government, the East India directors had, with an unanimity unprecedented against the opinion of government, decided by a majority of 23 directors out of 24, against the noble marquis. When government afterwards sent marquis Cornwallis to succeed him, they evidently disapproved of his administration. He thought it was necessary that the dispatches of marquis Cornwallis, expressing his opinion of the conduct of his predecessor, should be before the house.
Mr. R. Dundasthought it was unusual to interfere with any hon. member in the manner in which he might think proper to bring forward any business before that house. When the noble lord should bring forward his Resolutions, that would be the proper time for offering such observations as occurred to any hon. gent. on the subject. It appeared to him, that as those papers had been already nearly four years before the house, it would be the best way to proceed to a vote upon those papers. The general policy of the system of government in India would be brought before the discussion of the house in another shape.
Sir A. Wellesleysaid, that it had always

411
been his wish, and that of all the friends of the noble marquis, that the house should come to a decision with as much speed as was consistent with due consideration. His noble relation was in a most unpleasant situation. Four years had now elapsed since the subject was first introduced, and it was nearly two years since the noble lord had moved for papers. It must be painful to the feelings of any individual to have such charges hanging over his head for an indefinite length of time; and the consequence which he thought would be likely to proceed from appointing a committee would be, that the house would be four years longer before it came to a decision.
Mr. Lushingtonobserved, that the right hon. general was under a mistake, in saying, the business had been four years before the house, as it had been introduced in May, 1806.
Sir A. Wellesleyadmitted, that he had not been exactly correct, but the hon. member was less so; for instead of May, 1806, it was May, 1805.
Earl Templesaid, he felt still the anxiety that he had always expressed, that this business should be brought to a speedy vote. He thought it injustice to the feelings of any individual to have such charges hanging over his head for a great length of time; and therefore he wished that the question should be put to rest, and that lord Wellesley's character should be settled one way or the other. It would be recollected, that he formerly pressed anxiously for a decision, but was at that time opposed by the friends of the noble marquis, gins on the other side of the house.
Mr. Windhamsaid, it appeared to him that the best way of understanding the whole of the subject, was to refer it to a committee, to select out of the voluminous papers which had been printed, those which were most necessary for the consideration of the house.
Mr. Wellesley Poleexpressed some surprise, that gentlemen opposite should now propose to go into, a committee upon this subject, as if the topic never had been before the house: was it forgotten that it had been in discussion repeatedly, ever since 1805? He heartily approved of the mode proposed by the noble lord, and, concurred in his motion for the papers he had moved for; but he was averse to the mode of proceeding by a committee.
Lord A. Hamiltonspoke in favour of the committee.
Lord Folkestonelamented the unfortunate predicament in which he stood, in having those only to approve of his plan of proceeding who, he knew, were against bins on the merits, while, again, those who were with him on the merits of the question, objected to his mode of bringing it forward. He must, however, adhere to the mode he had laid down for himself.x2014;The motion was then put and carried.
Mr. Creeveywith a view to the general discussion of the affairs of India, moved, that there be laid before the house copies of all letters sent by the late marquis Cornwallis to the Secret Committee of the Court of Directors, subsequent to his arrival in India in 1805. These letters contained the opinion of the noble marquis on every prominent part of the administration of our Indian empire, and the information they would give would be most important in directing the judgment of the house on a subject that every day called more loudly for a general, and particular investigation.
Mr. R. Dundasconsented to the production of all the letters but the last, which was not signed by the marquis, and from that and some other deficiencies, such as want of date, unfilled blanks &c. could not be considered as a fit document to be laid before parliament. The committee which he meant to move for shortly, was merely to consider the Financial Affairs of the East India Company.—After some conversation, it was agreed that the Papers should be produced, with the exception of the unfinished letter.
Mr. Creeveythen gave notice, that as the right hon. gent. meant to call the attention of the house to the Financial affairs of the East India Company only, he would move for a general inquiry into the state of our Indian empire, territorial and political.