§ 1782—Under Mr. Burke's Bill.— (22d Geo. 3. ch. 82.)
|Above 500l. a year,||-37||£.43,600|
|Under 500l. a year,||-97||13,900|
§ Under Treasury Regulations in 1782–3.
|Above 500l. a year,||-3||2,156|
|Under 500l. a year,||141||11,469|
|Making a Total of 278 Offices.£.71,125 Offices created to perform the duties of those suppressed,||62||10,909||In Annual Value|
|Reduction in the whole||Offices 216.||£,60,216|
|And Six regulated||(a)||60,000|
|Savings under this Act on an average of Peace and War may be||66,000||Ann. Value|
|Making total Offices 220||£.126,000|
|1785—Under the Auditor's Act. (25 G. 3. ch. 52)|
|Two Offices suppressed (b)||44,000|
|Expence of New Board||11,500|
|one Auditor of Hides in the Excise 400||400|
|Total saving by the three Offices||33,141|
|(a) The Auditor of the Exchequer, nett profit in 1782 was 19,880l. a year; the Tellers present profits are three times the amount of that year. The Auditors fees would therefore have been now||£60,000|
|The four Tellers full fees would now have been||88,000|
|Deduct Auditor's present Salary £4,000||14,800|
|Four Tellers, when they all fall in 10,800|
|Saving in time of war||£133,200|
(b) This is very much under stated, the amount at 100l. a million on the National Debt only would have been 60,000l. a year.868
§ The number of employments was not affected by these measures, as three new Commissioners for Auditing were appointed in addition to the two Comptrollers of Army Accounts.
|In 1785—Were suppressed as they should fall in, Patent Offices in the Customs, which were actual sinecures, and usually given to private friends, not being considered as local patronage||No.196||Ann. Value£.42,000|
|The offices were not abolished by Law till 1798, by the 33 Geo. 3, ch. 86, but no appointments were made to them (except in two special cases) from 1781; and so early as 1791 there had 38 fallen in of the annual value of 10,600l. a year.|
|In 1788—An arrangement was made by the Treasury which reduced the Officers of the Excise in their number||765||12,345|
|which saving was effected in the amount of salaries, although additions were made to those of the remaining officers to put them above temptation.|
|In 1799—The Offices of Auditors of the Land Revenue in England and Wales were abolished by Act 39 Geo. 3, ch. 83, after the deaths of the possessors||3||5,500|
|In 1799—The whole Salt Board and department abolished, and the duty transferred to the Excise; the total reduction, in consequence of which, after deducting the necessary appointment in the excise was||261||26,952|
|By this arrangement the Treasury lost the appointment of 459 offices, the new ones being in the gift of of the Excise.|
|1782—Under Mr. Burke's Act,||134||£57,500|
|1782–3—By the Treasury,||144||13,625|
|Do. Officers appointed to perform the duties of those suppressed.||62||10,909|
|Savings and reductions in the years above mentioned||216||60,216|
|1782–3—Under the Exchequer regulating Act, by abolition and reductions||4||66,000|
|1785—By the Auditor's Act, two offices for life of great value, the reversions of which were both open were abolished; but a new board was established (in which not one political friend was placed) the number of officers remained the same, but a saving was effected||33,141|
|1785—Patent Offices in the Custom||196||42,000|
|1799—Auditors of the Land Revenue, Sinecure Employments, the Reversion of one open||3||5,500|
|1799—Suppression of the Salt Boardand all its Officers; the whole in the gift of the Treasury||459||26,952|
|Deduct the Savings under Mr. Burke's Act, the Treasury Regulations in consequence of it: under the Exchequer Account||220||126,000|
|Savings made by Mr. Pitt's Measures alone||658||£.107,809|
§ In the preceding total of 878 offices of the annual value of 233,809l. suppressed since 1782, the offices suppressed in the Excise are not included, as they were in the gift of the Commissioners of that Revenue.
But it has been said the immense increase of Revenue in the war from 1792, had occasioned a proportionable number of offices and the necessary expence attendant thereupon; adding of course greatly to the influence of the Crown. In this instance however, the same attention to economy, and to avoid such an objection, will be found.
|From 1792 to 1799, Taxes were imposed to the Amount of 7,682,000l.|
|The Charges of management were.||6,955l.||59 Officers appointed|
|Salaries discontinued||3,779||53 Do. abolished.|
Not one Employment was therefore added: and the increased charge of collection only 3,176l. about 10d. in the 100l. or 2.400 per Cent.
§ This statements made to 1709, because it has been in print many years, with Mr. Rose's name to it, shewing the particulars in each department, and has never been called in question.
§ There should however be opposed to these savings some new establishments created subsequent to Mr. Pitt's coming first into office. The Board of Controul, with salaries to the amount of 6,000l. or 7,000l. a year, defrayed by the East India Company. The Committee of Trade; no salaries except to the clerks who were paid under the board suppressed. The Transport Board, against which is to be set the suppression of the Sick and Hurt Board, and the commission occasionally paid to persons employed from favour, to take up ships in the former war; and the naval members of this Board, having no other duties to attend to, the advantages derived from their attention very much exceed the expence of the establishment. The Barrack Board and the officers under it, against which is to be set the savings aris- 870 ing from keeping the men and horses in barracks, instead of at quarters in public houses; much more than equal to the annual expence of this establishment, as appears by a Paper in the Appendix to a Pamphlet published by Mr. Rose on Finance, in 1799. Several Commissioners added for the examination of Public Accounts at home and in the West Indies; which may amount in the whole to 20,000l. a year. And some smaller employments rendered necessary in different departments.
§ It is however to be observed, that the offices abolished were chiefly sinecures, disposed of as mere favours, and useful only as sources of influence; whereas the offices created have all been required by the actual necessities of the public service; they are all efficient, and cannot therefore be given to the same class of persons who filled those which have been abolished: of course, the influence derived from them is essentially different both in its degree and in its direction. Of the former, influence was almost the direct object: of the latter, it is only the collateral consequence.
§ Thus far there has been no reference to any thing but positive savings arising from the suppression of employments. Other measures, however, of higher importance than these were adopted both with respect to public economy and to influence.
- 1st, Loan and Lotteries.
- 2d, Contracts and Commission Business.
- 3d, Renewals of Crown Leases.
Suppose the saving by the mode adopted for the first time by Mr. Pitt, to be only * 3l. per cent, and the Loans 12,000,000l. (unhappily one year,
* How very moderate an extirpate this is may be judged of by reference to the following premiums on Loans in the American war:—
|1797, the amount was 32,000,000l.) the saving would be||£ 360,000|
|2d, Of the sums which would have been issued lo Contractors under the former system, it is very difficult to make an accurate computation; but it would be a low estimate to state it at 1,500,000l and we can hardly suppose, when the Contracts were given as matter of mere favor without competition, that the profit was so low as 5l. percent||75,000|
|Probably thirty persons, making purchases at 150,000l. each, at a profit of 2,500l. These were chiefly members of parliament, till the Disabling Act in 1782; after that they were still given us mere favour.|
|3d. Renewals of Crown leases has already under the new system, produced an increase of||† 59,611|
|In addition to these heads under winch there was a mixture of influence and prodigality, an important article respecting the latter is to be added. In former wars certain parts of the naval services were paid in navy bills, which from the middle of 1779 to 1785 were at a discount of from 10l. and 11l. to 13l. per cent. The non interest bills at 18l. and 19l. Those parts of the naval expenditure have amounted in the present war to upwards of 10,000,000l. annually, which are now paid in 90 day bills at par, received as ready money, by which there is a saving of more than||1,000,000|
|Secret service Money to the Treasury was on an average of four years to 1725, 83,000l. a year; in seven years to 1740, was 65,000l.; in the nine first years of this reign was 54,000l.; now limited to 10,000l.:|
|Let the saving however, be estimated at only||45,000|
Here, then, is a saving of move than a million and a half, in addition to the 233,000l. before stated; without reckoning any thing for the saving in Ordnance Debentures, or the profits on the Lottery in time of peace, or indeed in war, by which the public now derives a large profit It is also to be observed that the Lottery tickets, like the loan, were privately disposed of to the friends of the minister, The saving upon the whole may truly be stated at more than 2,000,000l. after deducting the 06,000l. saved under Mr. Burke's act and Treasury proceedings in consequence of it, and the 00,000l. under the Exchequer regulating act.
† This will go on increasing to more than 400,000l. a year; the leases till 1794 were granted at low reserved rents and small fines; now they are on the sworn value.
And exclusive of the reduced influence of the Crown here stated; there were eighteen Parliamentary offices among those abolished in 1782.
|Total 513||In England Members now holding place during pleasure||42|
|45||In Scotland Members now holding place during pleasure||2|
|100||In Ireland Members now holding place during pleasure||10|
§ Of the above, two or three are in decided opposition to administration; and if the remaining 51 or 52 may be supposed to be influenced by their employments, it is not less likely that a number of gentlemen in opposition are influenced by their desire for office. He had heard a great deal of good times, but in this respect they were much lessened. He hoped gentlemen would not suppose what he had stated was for the purpose of checking the ardour of gentlemen in bringing forward resolutions like the present; he had no such intention; in what he had done he was actuated solely by what he thought his duty at the present moment. As to the Resolutions, as far as they went they appeared to him to be unexceptionable.
was at a loss how to reconcile the Report which he held in his hand with the high panegyric which the right hon. gentleman had thought proper to pronounce upon his deceased friend. The right hon. gent. had gone so far back as the year 1713, when he came to treat of Pensions. If he had looked at later periods, he would have found that they had increased very much since the beginning of the present reign. From the Report under consideration it appeared, that the amount of the Pension List had been most enormously increased by Mr. Pitt. But this was a part of the case which the right hon. gent. had felt it convenient to overlook, although the subject of pensions was the first topic that offered itself in the Report. There was also a strong fact which the right hon. gent. happened to forget, but he would call it to his recollection. The right hon. gent. would, perhaps, remember when Mr. Pitt, and himself, induced that house to acquiesce in the grant of 9,000l. a year to the duke of Gloucester, from the public purse, upon the allegation that the produce of the 4½per cent, duties, upon which that sum had been previously charged, was inadequate to payit. By this grant the public lost 105,000l., yet soon after it was made, the "inadequate fund" was found a resource sufficient to provide 873 for several of Mr. Pitt's friends and relations. Indeed, but a short time afterwards pensions were charged upon it of 1,500l. a year for Mr. Long; 1,200l. a year for Mr. Huskisson; of 6 or 700l. a year to each of Mr. Pitt's nieces, together with an allowance to lady Chatham; and no less than 1,500l. a year to lady Grenville. With this fact, and several others of a similar nature in his recollection, he could not subscribe to the justice of the right hon. gent.'s panegyric upon Mr. Pitt's solicitude to curtail the public, expenditure, and to sacrifice to that object either personal connection or ministerial influence.
vindicated the conduct of his right hon. friend in the transaction alluded to, and averred that the 4½ per cent, duties were inadequate to furnish the allowance granted to the duke of Gloucester at the time the proposition complained of by the hon. gent. was brought before the house. He proved that in the year 1720, independent of the relative value of money, the Pension List was greater than at this moment. He also corrected his statements with respect to the 4½ per cent. fund, and shewed the nature of its application, in paying off 172,000l. of debt, after it was released from the payment of the duke of Gloucester's annuity. As to the provision which his right hon. friend had thought proper to make for his relations, he was sure that the country would justify that, when they considered the merit of a life devoted to their service, and the circumstances under which he died.
§ Mr. Wilberforce
thought the poverty in which Mr. Pitt died was very much to his credit; he was a man who practised virtue most, and made the least display of it; he indeed "Did good by stealth, and blush'd to find it fame."
§ Mr. Creevey
thought the crown had no title to the revenue arising from the 4½ per cent. The question was, what had the practice been? 20,000l. had been advanced in aid of the Civil List, which was the first sum ever thus appropriated, in 1791. He wished to know if any law could be pointed out to his notice that he might have overlooked, authorising the crown to give pensions out of that fund. He condemned the giving political pensions from this fund, which ought to be only appropriated to the salaries of government.
§ Mr. Long
would by no means admit this principle; it would be found that in the reign of George I. pensions had been 874 given from this 4½ per cent. fund, to many persons, and among the rest to lord Hobart, governor of Jersey. In the reign of George II. it was also applied to such purposes, as from 70 to 80,000l. had been drawn from it in aid of the Civil List, and in the year 1762, a pension of 3,000l. per annum was given to the late lord Chatham. No Attorney or Solicitor General, or Lord Chancellor, since that time, could be named who had not been a party in such grants. It did not come within the spirit of Burke's Act; for Mr. Burke himself expressly stated, in one of his pamphlets, that he had a view only to the Civil List in his regulations, and that he knew of the 4½ per cent. fund, but thought it best to leave that as a reward for merit. The hon. gent. had alluded to the annuity granted to the duke of Gloucester in 1786. What did parliament do on that occasion? Did they say such a grant was contrary to Mr. Burke's act? No, it had ever been admitted that that fund was a part of the hereditary revenue, and consequently at the disposal of the crown. The attention of every Committee of Finance was turned to the subject, and they all sanctioned the legality of this application.
§ Mr. Creevey
stated, that lord Grenville and lord Harrowby (then Mr. Ryder) had, in the Report of a Finance Committee, reported the 4½ per cent. funds as public money.
said, that he could not see, even admitting for a moment the truth of the statement, how it bore upon the question.
§ Sir J. Newport
said, that as his hon. friend had introduced this subject before the house, he hoped some gentleman for Ireland would institute a similar exposition with respect to that country, for he had a statement to make to the committee with regard to the financial arrangements of Ireland, at one time, that would, he apprehended, astonish gentlemen who heard him, and incline them to think that such an exposition would not be unnecessary. In the administration of a noble lord who was now a cabinet minister, he meant the Lord Privy Seal (lord Westmoreland), it was enacted by parliament, that until the Pension List establishment for Ireland should be reduced to 80,000l. the grants of pensions 875 should not in anyone year for each year exceed 1,200l. The act to this effect passed in the latter part of the month of July, in the year 1793, but was not to take effect till the 2.5th of March, 1794. Now, the Committee would scarcely believe, that in the interval of only seven months the enormous sum of 13,000l. had been added to the amount of pensions upon the Irish establishment in the administration of that noble lord, so that it appeared from the Returns made to that house, a copy of which he held in his hand, that, a leading member of the present cabinet had, when Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, taken advantage of the interval between the passing of a law and the time of its taking effect, to violate the spirit of that very enactment [Hear! hear!]: that so far from any attempt to reduce the Pension List; so far from confining the grants for any one year within 1,200l. he had actually within seven months imposed upon the establishment the enormous burthen of 13,000l. and thus disposed of the amount of ten years pensions within the short period of seven months. The gross amount was 13,500l., but from this he excluded lord F. Campbell's pension, and that to the Burgh family, leaving a sum amounting to 13,000l. and it would further appear from the accounts, that in the course of five years, from 1790 to 1795, the sum of 39,000l. a year was added to the public burdens in that country with regard to pensions. The time was now fast approaching when, by deaths, it was expected that the Pension List would be brought within the due limits; but whether that expectation would prove well founded or not, he had no hesitation in saying, that it was his intention, early in the ensuing sessions, to call upon parliament to continue the limitation of the grant of pensions to 1,200l. annually, until the establishment should be reduced to 30,000l. or at most to 40,000l. He stated farther that the 1,200l. in one year was disposed of between three members of that house, late or present.
denied that in the vice-royalty alluded to so much money had been granted in pensions. Deducting the pensions to the Burgh family and to lord Frederick Campbell, instead of 13,000l. only 4,000l. would appear to have been given.
§ Sir J. Newport
repeated his assertion, which was verified by the returns of the house of commons, and even ex- 876 pressly deducting the pensions now mentioned, 13,000l. annually would be found to have been granted.
§ Mr. Whitbread
declared it was not his intention to enter into the former details of the debate. He was very ready to confess that Mr. Pitt had laid many perspicuous financial statements before the house, and believed it to be his object, at one period, to attain the utmost perfection he could in the science of finance. Whether he deviated from that determination since the year 1793, it was for the house to judge. He certainly failed in some of his calculations, and as an instance the committee might refer to his prophecy in the year to which he alluded, that we should have a fifteen years peace. While he paid every tribute to the disinterestedness of his private life, and praised the poverty in which he died, still he must say that the war had been carried on with the utmost prodigality. In the barrack department alone the extravagance was amazing. Notwithstanding all that had been said by the right hon. gent. (Mr. Rose) to prove that every attention had been paid to economy, he still thought, that there were grounds for complaints of the most serious nature, when the great waste of the country's resources was considered which had been discovered in every branch of the war department. He thought it something extraordinary, that it should be said the hon. gent. received that pension still, which it was understood was to be given up by a person holding a situation of more than 2000l. a year. He did not know that he received more, but he supposed that at least his income amounted to that sum, and did not doubt but the hon. gent. would explain the matter in the most satisfactory manner. He did not intend to enter into the disputed question, as to the 4½ per cent. fund, but yet he thought both the right hon. gent. opposite (Mr. Long) and Mr. Burke himself most incompetent judges upon the subject, because they were themselves renters from that very fund. The corruptions of former times had been very much dwelt upon in contradistinction to the purity of the present; and much allusion had been made to the degradation of that house, at an early period, when bribery was common, and doles of the public money were dealt out to the members of that house by the government. Now, he had no doubt, even in those corrupt days, when reform and retrenchment 877 were proposed, that a loud outcry was raised on the occasion, and the integrity of contractors, &c. highly vaunted. Much it was said, had been corrected since; but much, he contended, had been left behind to correct; many branches of expenditure to be retrenched, and much extravagance to be curtailed. Now, because some men were pure, it was not necessarily to be inferred that all were so, and though he was of course inclined to pay the highest compliment to the patriotic forbearance of the right hon. gent. opposite (Mr. Rose), still he was not sure that every one else deserved the same eulogium. The right hon. gent. had touched, indeed, but slightly, on the subject of the Barrack Board, that great source of public extravagance, and still less on the abuses of the Transport Board, where such vast sums of money were so unnecessarily squandered. [Mr. W. Pole said across the table, he did not believe it.] The hon. gent. was welcome not to believe it if he chose, but he (Mr. Whit-bread) believed it, and thought it was a question even whether that board ought to be allowed to exist at all or not. Some time since a noble lord, member for Westminster, whose gallant and patriotic achievements were the theme of every man's panegyric, (lord Cochrane), was of opinion, that the influence of the crown in that house was greater than it ought to be, and moved for a return of all the members holding offices, sinecures, or pensions under government. That motion was afterwards made more general, and the returns to it referred to a committee, the Third Report of which committee was then before them. The influence of the crown he still thought greater than it ought to be in that house. He certainly did not mean to say that no officer of the Crown should sit in that house, but he thought the error too much on the other side. There were for instance the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and the other ministers of state, who might have seats in parliament; but it was not necessary for all the lords of the treasury, who, indeed, were generally silent in the house. Secretaries of the treasury may also have a seat in the house. Of one of these gentlemen he did not mean to speak otherwise than in panegyric, for his close and accurate habits of business, but the other was absolutely a mute, of whom they heard nothing, but saw a great deal. The Lords of the Admiralty, perhaps, also ought to 878 be excluded, but to the liveliness of one of them, he must pay his tribute. One person perhaps connected with the board of controul was requisite in the house. Of its President he could not speak, for he was at present so full of his Irish affairs, that in fact the office was vacant. Persons holding that office were understood to act gratuitously on their first appointment, but that idea was soon done away, and lord Melville received much in the shape of salary before he was created Treasurer of the Navy, and then created two new offices for the education of young statesmen under him. It was not exactly conformable to Mr. Pitt's practise, for young men who were but a few years in office to take pensions for life. He did not wish to speak of living persons, but he must be excused for the allusion, as so many were mentioned in the Report. He did not see the propriety of giving persons pensions for life after being in office two or three years. Men of talent would be found to fill the principal offices of the state, even though they were not thus pensioned off. Mr. Pitt, whom the gentlemen opposite professed to make their model, did not act so. He did not seek some snug thing for himself as soon as he got into power. He (Mr. Whitbread) thought the influence of the crown in that house ought to be less than it was, and would therefore, in order to bring the question fairly before the committee, more as an amendment on the Resolution, that the words "And as a further limitation, be it provided, that no person shall hold a seat in this house having a sinecure or other private place of emolument under I the crown," should be added. He wished to say a word or two on those very respectable members, the Welsh Judges. Though he thought them less exceptionable than others, yet there was a something in their sitting there which offended so far against the principle he wished to establish, that he would submit it to the house, whether or not they ought still to be considered as eligible to hold seats in parliament.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer
considered this amendment of the hon. gent. as founded upon a most aristocratic principle; it would throw the offices of the crown into the hands of those alone who could, from their property, very well dispense with their salaries. He opposed to the theory of the hon. gent. the constant practice of that house, and con- 879 tended that at all periods it proved the best bulwark of the liberties of the people, which plainly proved the fallacy of the argument that went to deny that it could be unduly influenced while officers of the crown had seats in parliament; for officers of the crown had always sat in it. The exclusion of magistrates of all descriptions, in his opinion, might be as well demanded as that of the Welsh Judges; for they never exercised their judicial functions except on circuit. He declared it his intention to give his utmost opposition to the amendment.
§ Mr. W. Smith
could not think the true interests of the country were consulted in pensioning off every subordinate officer of government after serving the public two or three years.
was of opinion that the Resolution of his hon. friend was most important in itself, and of the greatest moment to the constitution of the country. For his own part, he was inclined to the Amendment of his hon. friend, and if it was to be pushed to a division, should vote for it. But he wished to submit it to his hon. friend, whether it would not be desirable for him to adopt the same course respecting his Amendment which had been pursued with respect to the former Resolutions, namely, to suffer it to lie on the table for a few days, in order to allow gentlemen an opportunity of considering its contents. The question was one of great moment and delicacy, and required to be looked at gravely, with a due regard to the constitution of this empire. Nothing could be so hostile to the existence of union and tranquillity, as the division of the legislature into three estates, unless they were duly balanced: but the great perfection of the constitution of this country was, that no class of the community was excluded from its just share in the deliberations of the state.— Many bills had been passed with a view to prevent abuses; but the present question, if any, deserved the peculiar attention of that house. If he were to be called on to give a vote on the present question, he would support the Amendment of his hon. friend, though he should be much better pleased, if his hon. friend would consent to put off the discussion of it for a few days, as had been done when the Resolutions were at first proposed, in order to give the house an opportunity of comparing the Amendment with those Resolutions.
concurred in the suggestion of his right hon. friend, and recommended to the committee to defer the further consideration of the subject until both the Amendment and the original Resolution should be in the hands of gentlemen.
§ Mr. H. Thornton
contended, that as the navy, the army, the ordnance, the public debt, and every thing connected with the management of public affairs had considerably increased, so also must the influence of the crown have been proportionably extended. That influence could not but be communicated to a great number of members of parliament. It must have continued to work in secret and in silence, and it was the duty of that house to watch and counteract it. Having observed the progress of that influence, he was ready to agree in the principle of the motion before the house, or in any other measure that was likely to lead to a gradual and temperate reform of abuses.
was ready to enter into the discussion of the question at that moment, and would vote for the Amendment, though he had no hesitation to accede to the suggestion of putting off the discussion to another occasion. He could not, however, avoid saying, that the object of all former times had been to curtail the influence of the crown, and to prevent placemen from having seats in that house.
§ Mr. Whitbread
, though he wished for a decision upon the subject of his Amendment, had yet no objection to put off the final discussion to a future day. He saw no reason why chief justices should be made Peers, nor why Welsh Judges should be allowed to become members of that house. Neither could he admit that, because a person abandoned his profession, he should have a provision for life made for him for having abandoned it. He was ever ready to admit that a person, worn out in the service of his country, ought to be adequately provided for; he contended that no such extravagant compensation, as had been given to Mr. M'Donald for quitting his profession to become a Commissioner of American property, ought, under any such circumstances, to be granted. Such grants were contrary to the plans of Mr. Burke, Mr. Pitt, and lord Shelburne. The increase of the influence of the crown would be obvious, when it was considered how much the army, the navy, and every other branch of the public expenditure 881 had been augmented. He had no objection to suffer his Amendment to lie on the table for a few days, or to withdraw it altogether, with a view to bring it forward as a separate motion on Thursday next.
§ Lord H. Petty
entered into a justification of the appointment and remuneration of Mr. M'Donald, and concurred in the propriety of adjourning the discussion of the Amendment to a future day.
§ Mr. Wellesley Pole
rose to explain a statement in the Supplement to the Third Report, which concerned him. When lord Wellesley went to India, it was thought advisable to insert the hon. member's name in the patent of the office of Remembrancer of the Exchequer, in case the office should become vacant while lord Wellesley was absent; but the hon. member reaped no emolument whatever from this arrangement, and was very much surprised to find his name mentioned in the Supplement to the Third Report in rather an ambiguous manner. This mistake did not originate with the Chancellor of the Exchequer; and the hon. gent. had indeed made a statement to the committee, disclaiming the receipt of any emolument in consequence of the arrangement the hon. member had explained.
§ Mr. H. Thornton
replied, that the hon. member's name was introduced into the Report, in a manner that was perfectly unambiguous; for in one passage, after giving the hon. member's name, it expressly stated, that the profits were understood to belong only to lord Wellesley; and in another, after giving the hon. member's name conjointly with that of lord Wellesley, it was added, that the profits were supposed to belong to lord Wellesley.
The first Resolution was then read, and carried without a division.
§ Mr. D. Giddy
then left the chair, and reported progress to the house. The Report was ordered to be taken into further consideration on Thursday next.