HC Deb 24 April 1809 vol 14 cc191-203
Lord Porchester

requested the attention of the house to the few observations he had to submit to their consideration, previous to his bringing forward the motion of which he had given notice. The Bill which it was his intention to move for leave to bring in, was, word for word, the same as that which had already twice passed that house, but which had as often been rejected by the house of lords, on the ground of its being desirable that the business should be further considered. This question had already received the most ample investigation and discussion. The measure, his lordship observed, which he recommended Was no object originating in his own legislative views, it grew out of two Reports of that house, and was the first practical act recommended for adoption by two successive committees appointed by that house. In that house it had been on former occasions received without a dissentient voice; even the king's ministers did not feel it either justifiable or politic to interfere with it in its passage through that house. But an opposition formidable in its means and persevering in its hostility appeared in another branch of the legislature, and was for a time successful, not only against the unanimous feeling of that house, but also against the general and expressive voice of the country. The principle of the measure, after some modifications, had however at length passed that house, meeting in its progress considerable opposition in a quarter were one should suppose every duty to the country and every regard to personal dignity forbade intrusion. The opposition that was there exerted, was a question of no easy solution, but the protest which was subsequently affixed upon the Journals of that house, held no inconsiderable rank amongst the follies of princes either of past or present times. For that extraordinary record of human ingenuity he could not assign any rational motive, and for that best of all reasons that no rational cause was assignable. Every man who venerated the throne and loved the constitution, saw with pain the names affixed to that protest (alluding to the signatures of the Dukes of York, Cumberland and Cambridge to the protest against the present Reversion Act). That feeling, however painful, was considerably alleviated by the consideration that the prince nearest to the throne, and first in the public estimation and hopes, had too great a knowledge of the interests, and too strong an affection for the constitution of his country, to commit his character and his principles by giving his august signature to such a record. The nature of the Bill he meant to propose was perfectly well known to the house: for the value of it he would refer them to the third Report of the Committee of Finance. As to any objection that might be made to the bill, there was only one which he could anticipate, viz. that this was not a convenient time to bring forward such a measure. He was of a different opinion; he thought this was just the most convenient time that could be hit upon for the purpose, and that the least procrastination would be injurious to the interests of the public. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had just acknowledged there was no great pressure of business; but if there was, it was their duty to make time convenient when they had important duties to discharge, and he trusted they were now reassembled for the purpose of following up the most anxious wishes of the house and of the country. Delays were always injurious, and in the stormy times in which we lived every tomorrow brought its griefs and difficulties along with it; and if they suffered them to go on accumulating, they might grow too cumbrous to get rid of. He trusted the noble lord opposite (lord Castlereagh), from the experience he had in the business of reversionary grants, would afford (he house some information; at least, the result of his frequent practice. He did not require from that noble lord to dive into the chronicles of Ireland. They were no old legends from which he wished his lordship to draw his stores. All that was wanted was of his own memory, contemporaneous with his own time, nay with his own official existence. It was for him to give the catalogue of the reversionary grants which beyond numbers he had given; grants of offices, not in reversion, but what ought to be better termed, in resurrection, which the noble lord had conferred upon successive generations to come, with the hope of atoning for the period during which the same offices lay dormant for generations that were past. The fate of his proposed Bill the noble lord (Porchester) said, was connected with the incipient progress of that temperate Reform, which the country and the stormy period of this age demanded. It was for ministers to consider the course which they now intended to pursue; and he trusted they would not, at least on the present occasion, indulge themselves as heretofore, in the capacity of mutes. The house ought to feel its paramount duty; it should recollect that this was the first practical measure of Reform which Committees appointed by itself had most strenuously recommended. It should guard against that ministry, which since its accession to office had endeavoured to freeze up that general current of temperate Reform which their predecessors had set in motion. Whenever they should send this bill to the lords (and he hoped the house would decidedly determine to do so, as soon as it could with convenience be passed) he supposed they would be told that there was no necessity for it, as they had at this moment a suspension Bill, that prevented the disposal of places in reversion, till six weeks after the meeting of parliament in the next session. But this was a strong argument in favour of the bill being now brought in and passed, for if it was not earned in the course of the present session, six weeks would be too short a period, and the lords might take advantage of the circumstance, till the house had driven their lordships into a corner, as they had done before in the case of the Non-residence bill, when they might urge that as a reason for rejecting the bill; in which case, the Suspension Bill would expire, and many offices might be granted in reversion, which could not be abolished till after the death of the grantee, who was frequently an infant at the time of the grant. Six weeks was therefore too short a time to trust to; the Suspension Bill took eighteen weeks in passing through both houses, and it consequently behoved the house to do its duty in the present instance and take time by the forelock. They must speak plainly the truth. Princes had frowned on their undertaking, and when princes frowned, subjects were apt to tremble. Was it to be supposed that the house would by delay put them in better humour? Was it in that manner that Magna Charta had been obtained by our brave ancestors? Was it by waiting like needy supplicants at a minister's levee, that they were to expect to carry their point? No they must be strenuous, active, and determined, otherwise they would continue to fail as they had hitherto done. He was glad to see a full attendance of ministers; if they meant to oppose the bill, he hoped they would do it in a manly way. Let them not give sinister support and silent opposition. Let them not come with their amendments to instruct the house how to model their conduct and the bill, so as to render both agreeable to the lords. If advice they will give, let it be to princes to respect the proceedings of that house, and not to the house to study the means of pleasing princes. Let them seriously shew those princes, that the wealth and splendour with which they are invested, come from the liberality of the people, through the medium of that house; and that notwithstanding they are indeed the rich foliage of the Corinthian capital, yet the strength of it is in the shaft. When a prince took upon him to write to that house, there could remain but little doubt that he had met with those in that house who had been ready to aid him with advice on the occasion. Let them extend that advice where it was fully as much wanted, or they would not fulfil the duties of their station. If they faultered and wavered in so doing, they might shew they were ready "to ride on the whirlwind," but totally incapable of "directing the storm." The times were severe and scrutinizing. On this occasion, the conduct and character of the house was more at stake than at most other times. The present was a period in which, measures were not of much weight, unless supported by character. It might, perhaps, be objected to the bill that it was a bill of selection; it was well known reversions were given to children, and, therefore, the offices to be abolished must be selected. Feeling this a part of a system to which the house had pledged itself, he was anxious to know if they would follow up their measure. Delay could only increase the difficulties; and the house should feel that it was a measure called for by the country with universal acclaim. He was the enemy to innovation when he called upon parliament to effect temperate reform. In doing so, he by no means acceded to the opinion, that the period in which he lived was amongst the worst times of the constitution. He, on the contrary, believed, that liberty and constitutional blessings were better felt by the present generation than by our ancestors. Theirs was the keenness of pursuit, ours the calmness of enjoyment. And it was therefore nothing but infatuation, that could urge princes at this moment to raise the warhoop of pre- rogative; to doubt the constitutional attachment of that house to the executive, and to create general distrust throughout the empire. They ought to have been better lessoned; but his apprehension was that they were not apt scholars. The house was now called upon to decide a most important point. Having carried a measure of great political magnitude, which had been rejected by the lords merely on the ground of obtaining time for inquiry, as the lords had now the Report which afforded them the fullest information on the subject, it became the duty of that house, by passing the present Bill, to shew that they were as much and as feelingly alive to the public interests as when they first brought forward the measure. He would not therefore trespass further on their time, but moved, "That leave be given to bring in a Bill to prohibit the granting of Offices in Reversion, or for joint lives with benefit of survivorship."

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

was surprized at the way in which the noble lord had chosen to magnify the present subject, as if the endeavour to carry it, were similar to the struggles of our ancestors for Magna Charta and the Bill of Rights; and as if it comprised within itself every thing vital to the constitution. For his part, he had never disguised his opinion of the bill. He could never see in it that importance which was attached to it by many; he did not perceive that it contained any serious attack on the prerogatives of the crown: and much less did he conceive that it comprehended any valuable acquisition to the privileges of the people, or would lead to any considerable alleviation of the public burdens. As an economical measure it was nothing, or rather it would prove probably injurious; for there were instances in which at present services were rewarded with reversions, which services, if the proposed bill were to become a law, must receive some immediate reward of perhaps greater value.—Having stated what had always been his opinion on the present measure, he should now mention what were his grounds for opposing the introduction of the bill at present. He objected to it principally, because the bill was not at present necessary. They had at this moment an act which would not expire till six weeks after the commencement of the next session of parliament. They were thus guarded against the granting of further reversions in the mean time, and, in the course of the next week, they would, pursuant to the notice of the hon. gent, opposite (Mr. Martin), have a Report under consideration, the effect of the discussion upon which would go to determine, whether any of these offices should be abolished? Under these circumstances, to discuss the bill at present, appeared to him inexpedient and premature. The instance of the Residence Bill was not in point. Had that bill not been passed before the expiration of the temporary measure, considerable evils would have ensued; but should a bill for abolishing reversions be introduced in the next session of parliament, and should it not reach the period of its passing into a law, before the expiration of the Suspension Act, could it for a moment be supposed that any minister would advise his majesty to grant a reversion under such circumstances, and thus to take advantage of the interval of a fortnight or three weeks, that might elapse, at a time when the attention of parliament would be so steadily directed towards the subject?—The noble lord had stated, that the constitution of this country was never more entire, nor more perfect, than at this moment. In this he concurred. Was it not fit, therefore, that we should look with jealousy to any plan by which it was proposed to improve it; and that if our constitution was now most perfect, we should beware of those specious arguments of reform, which might have the effect of causing us to lose what we at present so happily enjoyed? He only wished the house to pause. There would be sufficient time during the next session even to think of this bill, if it should be deemed necessary. Upon these grounds, therefore, he should feel himself in duty bound to oppose the motion of the noble lord.

Mr. Bankes

said he had not entertained any intention of coming forward with this motion during the present session, because, from the general view which he took of the question, and the most mature consideration of all the circumstances, he thought it most wise to defer any further consideration of the subject, till the next session. However, though he had brought the existing bill into the house when it first originated, yet, aware as he was that when once brought in, it became public property, he could not help saying he wished the noble lord who had taken it up every success. If the noble lord entertained a different opinion of it, and of the policy of bringing it forward at this time, he had undoubtedly done right in submitting his motion to the house. He had himself, in the last session, brought in his second measure, the Suspension Bill, not from choice but necessity; prudential reasons operating on his mind to press no further at that period the bill for restraining the prerogative. In this line of conduct he had been supported by the arguments of the Chancellor of the Exchequer; and in the Third Report, which had been since laid upon the table, the question had been moderately, coolly, and he hoped, constitutionally discussed. He had it not in his power to carry his wishes to their full extent, but he was glad to do as much good as he could, though he could not do all he wished. A temperate discussion of the bill, now that it was brought forward, was certainly most adviseable; and he, entertaining his former sentiments with respect to it, would of course give it his support, though he would much sooner it had not come at present under their consideration. He must do the Chancellor of the Exchequer the justice to say, that his opinions on the bill were uniformly the same, and that he never had expressed any sanguine hope of an economical result from it. In this point, however, he undoubtedly differed from him, and could not help thinking that much retrenchment with great public advantage might take place in many offices, such for instance as in those of Tellers of the Exchequer. He had been induced thus shortly to state his sentiments on the bill, in order to set the house right as to his views of it, and that they might see he was not actuated by any spirit of indifference on the occasion, nor could be induced to abandon a measure in which the good of the country was so deeply interested. He thought there was time enough for a full consideration of the bill in the six weeks which had been reserved for it in the next session, and much wished its discussion had been deferred to that period; but since it had been brought forward be would support it to the utmost.

Lord H. Petty

observed, that after the great length at which the noble mover had gone into this question, it was not his intention to investigate its merits very largely. He could not help, however, remarking shortly upon the arguments of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, as they appeared to him to be very extraordinary. The right hon. gent, had began by remarking, that he did not think this bill likely to be attended with any economical effects. He would only ask him to appeal to the limited reforms of Mr. Pitt, of all the reformers in this country, and of all the ministers in Ireland, and he would see that the grand obstacle to all rational reform was this very Reversion system. Had it been in time abolished, they and the public would not now be pressed as they were by the multitude of places held in Reversion both here and in Ireland. The right hon. gent. had objected also in point of time to this bill. What was there then so very pressing between this session and the next to prevent its present discussion? He knew of nothing. The case would indeed have been altered, had it been a new measure unconsidered of, and never before the subject of discussion; but this, which had been repeatedly argued, and which had been even carried unanimously in that house, could surely now not need much time for deliberation. It could not need the reflection of a year to mature it. The right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer, had however even gone to his study for the purpose of objections, and had found out in his researches a notice of a motion on the Order Book. Now he could not anticipate what might be the matter or object of that motion, and so should not have made it the ground of an objection. For his part, he hoped, that motion would treat of many more subjects, and take a much more comprehensive scope, than that which the Reversion topic afforded. But even suppose it did treat of places in Reversion, how did that or could it militate against the present Bill?—Leaving these objections, if, indeed, they could be called objections, quite out of the way, there was one point which he should consider as conclusive on the subject, and that was the respect due to the house of lords; this was a Bill on which, although there existed but one opinion in the lower house, still in the upper one much difference was known to exist. Why not give them time, then, for full and mature deliberation? The importance of this Bill had even been attempted to be deprecated; and the right hon. gent, chose to denominate it a specious pretext of reform! When it was first brought forward, however, even he agreed to it, and of course if it was only a specious pretext of reform, he in supporting it aided its speciousness, and abandoned his duty.—He entertained a very different opinion of it, and therefore would give it his most hearty support; he would support it now, too, because he respected the house of lords, and did not see the necessity of delay in the commons, where the minds of all were unanimous on the measure.

Mr. Tierney

remarked strongly upon the silence of ministers, whose speeches were withheld, but whose opinions might, be guessed at. One right hon. gent, alone delivered his sentiments on the measure, who pretended not to be unfriendly to it, but to object to it only on the point of time, while others opposed it in silence. He was of opinion, not only that the measure was in time, but that it was in strict parliamentary time. He was of course reduced to the necessity of stating his own opinions generally on the bill; answer objections he could not, for none had been made. One point, indeed, and one only had been made, and that was, as be had just stated, with respect to time; the six weeks of next session would, it was said, be sufficient for the discussion of the bill, and were purposely allowed for it. The six weeks were allowed for no such purpose; but they were allowed to guard the house against a strained exertion of the prerogative in proroguing parliament during the session, before the house had come to a decision on the subject.—It was said that we need not be in such a violent hurry now to render this bill perpetual, because, while the Suspension Act continued, no place in reversion could be granted. What! was he to be told this, when he knew that on this very Suspension Act passing, a minister had been bold enough to say, that he would not hesitate to advise his majesty to grant a place in reversion immediately, and that for no other reason than because such a bill had passed! (Hear! hear!) The lords had before objected to the bill. Did the Chancellor of the Exchequer know that the lords had changed their minds on the subject? If they had not, send the bill, then, to them in time, and let them deliberate fully upon it. Let the people see that Parliament was interested, as far as it could, to relieve their burthens. He was no advocate for giving way to popular clamour, but he would never advise any set of men to oppose right by way of showing that they would not succumb to public opinion. Would it not be a pretty thing to say to the people (by way of evincing spirit), "we have agreed on a measure for years; but now since we see you wish to have it carried, we will disagree to it, and there's your clamour for you!" He would ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer had he any measure to ground upon the Third Report? What! he has not; he would have it lie on the table a dead letter, and he would demand as a consequence of such conduct, the confidence of the people.—He was glad this Third Report had been made the subject of a motion on a future day, though he confessed he would wish that such a motion should have come from those in power, because their official authority would have given it more weight. He agreed that little good as to the reduction of taxes could be occasioned by this measure; but, at the same time, ministers by concurring in it, would shew an inclination to reduce the influence of the crown, and to produce economy where it could be produced. From the right hon. gentlemen opposite he expected nothing. One of them did not think the measure worth opposing, and the other two observed a strict silence. From the house, however, he had better expectations. He hoped they would recollect that during the last sessions they were unanimous, and would by their vote of that night shew that they were still willing to do something to gratify the wishes of the country.—Those in power, indeed, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer in particular, seemed to get bolder and bolder every day against Reform. Why? Because popular clamour, was raised in its favour perhaps. He would advise that right hon. gentleman and his colleagues to abandon such a course; he would seriously advise them not to treat too lightly the heat of the people. Why was the Chancellor of the Exchequer so strenuous against reform? Why did he not endeavour to retrench unnecessary expences, useless offices? A noble relation of his (lord Arden) held a situation, or indeed two situations, whereof the proceeds were 35,000l. a year, of which, for the collection, 23,000l. was expended, and in whose hands for the last seventeen years, an annual balance of 200,000l. remained. He would support the motion as tending to diminish the too great influence of the crown, and to reduce the unnecessary expenditure of the public money.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

explained as to the allusions which had been made to his noble relation's offices; the balance did not remain in his hands, it was lodged in the Bank.

Mr. Whitbread

commented on the sur- prising silence with which ministers were afflicted all of a sudden; it was one of their periodical fits. He remembered, indeed, one occasion on which a plain blunt man, telling a plain blunt story, produced a splendid tirade from the right hon. gent, opposite, (Mr. Canning), but now he seemed completely dumb; there was no getting a word from him. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had, indeed, condescended to give his opinion on the subject, and what had he said? Why, indeed, this bill would produce very little saving. For his part, he always looked with a jealous eye at such expressions. This bill might produce a little saving, that bill might produce a little, and the other bill produce a little, and all these little savings rise to something considerable. He was an advocate for a partial reform, but he would not go too far; much, however, was to be done before that could be objected. Many Reports on the table were yet to be considered, and those reports would, if properly attended to, prove a mine of wealth. Much saving might yet be effected by economy, "Magnum vec- "tigal parsimonia" was an old and true saying. But this saving could not be effected, because the people thought it necessary! The Lord Chancellor had, it seems, said he would advise the king to grant an office in reversion, merely because the Suspension Bill was passed. Perhaps he would wish to give that advice in order that his royal master might fix upon him for the reversion (A laugh.) That noble lord was, it seems, a great reversionist himself, and on that account would not wish so good a thing should be abolished. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, too, deprecated the nomination of committees, "wide-wasting" committees, as they had been called; they did waste a little indeed; they wasted the Bank a little, and they wasted the East India Directors a little, and they were even powerful enough to waste the Dutch-Commissioners (A laugh). Oh! they were indeed "wide-wasting" Committees! He hoped ministers would be pleased to deliver their sentiments on the subject: their silence, indeed, reminded him of an old story which he once heard of the monkeys. The monkeys, it was said, could speak if they would, but they were too cunning, for they knew if they spoke they would be made to work; and just so the ministers chose to remain dumb, lest they might he employed.

Mr. Secretary Canning

said, that he felt himself always at liberty to exercise his discretion as to the period of the debate in which he thought proper to rise. The vote he should now give was in exact conformity with that he had given before. With respect to the question of Reversions, he did not think it of such importance as the noble lord seemed to imagine; there was no need of passion on the occasion, it might be said against Reversions, that they put it out of his majesty's power to reward services, because they anticipated giants; but it might be urged on the other side, that they afforded a stimulant to the public man by the consideration that the reward of his labours would descend to his children; either side might be embraced without subjecting the advocate to the imputation of any unfair principle. Upon the whole, he thought that the arguments in favour of Reversions were better than those against them. The public feeling, he was aware, lay on the other side, and in balanced and doubtful cases, that consideration ought to decide them. If there was a difference between the two houses of parliament, that was not the moment to renew the difference; he would follow up his vote of the former night, by continuing to act on the suspension up to the time agreed to. With respect to the advice which the Lord Chancellor had been said to have stated, that he should feel no hesitation to give to his majesty, he could only say, that the whole story was new to him; he had never heard it before, and did not believe it. He hoped he had exculpated himself from the charge of inconsistency, or any inclination to avoid the discussion of the question.

Mr. Ponsonby

ridiculed the idea of the measure now proposed having the effect of interfering with or obstructing the act of last session. It was the strongest mode of obstructing an act, to give it perpetual operation. He could by no means agree with those who thought the present measure one from which little advantage would be derived. It would both diminish the public expence, and also diminish the patronage of the minister of the day, by preventing him from pressing the future into his service, and confining him to what he had now, instead of extending his power over what might not be disposable for 40 or 50 years. But, if he could conceive the measure of little importance in itself, it had become of the highest importance in consequence of the circum- stances which had attended it, and which went to affect the consideration which the popular part of the constitution should always carry along with it.

The question being loudlycalled for,

Lord Porchester

rose to reply. He observed that the whole weight of the right hon. gent.'s argument rested upon the circumstance, that some public inconvenience might arise from the adoption of the measure. For his own part, he could not perceive any inconvenience that could be the result of the adoption of the measure, though he was firmly persuaded that great practical injury must result from procrastination respecting it. Why should the members of that house throw themselves upon the mercy of his majesty's ministers, or why should they defer the consideration of the measure in compliance with their views? The right hon. Secretary (Mr. Canning) had stated how nicely balanced his own opinion was on the subject, and that he wished to leave it to public opinion to decide; but it was somewhat extraordinary that the vote of that right hon. gent, was to be in opposition to the opinion of the public. But the right hon. gent, contended, that the course he pursued was founded upon the impression, that the contrary would be productive of danger to the safety of the public. His majesty's ministers, however, did not appear to him to meet the question fairly: they opposed it on the ground of inconvenience, but they passed by the interest which the public had in passing the measure. Upon the integrity of the house of commons was placed the surest hope and firmest reliance of the country. It had been said that this measure was not comparable to Magna Charta; but the principle of the bill was more compatible with the spirit of that instrument than the spirit of those who opposed it was compatible with that of those who supported Magna Charta. On the whole, therefore, he should persevere in his motion, and leave to the house to determine whether or not leave should be given to bring in the Bill.

A division them took place,

For the Motion 106
Against it 121
Majority against it — 15