Commons Sitting of 19 June 1809

RECAL OF EAST INDIA CADETS AND WRITERS.
Sir Thomas Turtonrose to bring forward his promised motion respecting the determination formed by the Court of East India Directors, to the peremptory recal of those persons whose appointments to India as Cadets and Writers were procured by corrupt or clandestine influence. The hon. bart. argued at length on what he termed the cruelty and injustice of not only recalling those persons from India, after years of faithful service, but totally ruining their future prospects, by declaring them incapable of being again employed in the East India Company's service; to the preparation for which, the whole education and study of their youth had been, devoted. Some of the persons who now became subject to this harsh sentence were young men of first-rate talents, who had carried out with them certificates of being the most accomplished proficients in the Eastern languages ever sent put from England. If any charge of criminality was fairly incurred in these cases, it was not by the parties doomed to be the victims, but by their friends who negotiated, and the Directors who procured their appointments; the persons themselves were not apprized that any risk was attached to these appointments, or that circumstances in the mode of their attainment might render them nugatory; of which it would have been no more than justice to apprize them, in order that they might have been induced to make minute and cautious in-
1072
quiry before they undertook the trouble and expence of a voyage to India, and devoted some of the best years of their youth to pursuits from which they must now be cut off, for facts of which they would receive the first intimation with the order for their recal. This determination he said, was founded upon a Resolution of a Report so long since as 1796. But even if the parties then injured were apprized of any law which made the places liable to forfeiture that were obtained by purchase or corrupt influence, it was not very natural for them to conceive the Company seriously intended the rigorous inforcement of such a law, when they every day saw advertisements in the public prints, for the open sale and purchase of such appointments, without any public or avowed discountenance from the Court of Directors. The hon. bart. concluded by moving, "That this house do not concur with the determination on the part of the Court in the Report of the Committee appointed to inquire into the Abuse of East-India Patronage, as far as it related to the immediate necessity of recalling, and declaring incapable of holding any future situations, those persons, who, though either innocent or ignorant of the means by which their situations were procured, would be thus visited by a measure of severity equally repugnant to British justice and the rights of humanity."
Mr. R. Dundasvindicated the conduct of the Court of Directors in the determination they had felt it their duly to adopt, however painful to their private feelings, but to which they were bound by every sense of official obligation. The hon. baronet was in an error when he stated that this determination of the Directors was founded upon an obsolete Resolution of 1796: for the Directors had long since resolved to pass over in amnesty all the appointments improperly obtained previously to that date. Equally erroneous was the hon. baronet's statement, that the public were not sufficiently apprized of the determination of the Directors upon this subject, or that any person could fairly plead ignorance in excuse; for not only had a positive act of parliament passed upon the subject, authorizing the court of directors to recal any of their servants in India whom they might see cause to recal; but so lately as the year 1806, they announced in the London Gazette, and in all the London and British provincial newspapers, the determination to annul every appointment in their service, which should

1073
appear to be obtained by clandestine or surreptitious means. But if, at the first moment that the Court of Directors, after a long and diligent inquiry, were enabled to discover the appointments thus improperly obtained, parliament was to interfere and prevent them from carrying into effect their resolution; and the offence was to pass with impunity in the only quarter where it could be punished with exemplary effect, it would be in vain for the Directors to pass any resolution, or lay down any law for the prevention of such abuses. For these reasons, not seeing the house of commons in any degree bound to adopt the proposition, he would, out of respect to the hon. baronet, rather than oppose him by a direct negative, move the previous question.
Mr. Bankesspoke in favour of the Report of the Committee, and thought that the house should pause before they would interfere with the Court of Directors. He called upon the house to recollect, that the act invested in the Court those powers which the present Resolution went to interfere with. He said that it was quite futile to make the provisions which had been made, if they were to be frittered away by excepting the sons of the persons who had purchased those situations. As, therefore, the motion appeared to him to have a tendency to interfere with the Court of Directors and the Act of Parliament, he should vote against the motion.
Mr. Windhamsaid that he could not help adverting to that subject upon which, on a former night, he had occasion to make some observations. He meant that sort of outrageous virtue, that, while it laid claim to immaculate purity for itself, went beyond all bounds in venting its vengeance against the alledged criminality of others. This was too much the principle in the present case. In this way of overdoing justice, gentlemen seemed to argue in the same way the great king of Prussia did; who, when a soldier in a fresh breeze had his hat blown oft^ had the soldier severely punished for this accident: and it certainly was observed afterwards, that whether the man was innocent or not, fewer hats fell off' afterwards. He, however, was not for arguing in this manner in Order to justify the punishing the innocent, which lie took to be impossible. And indeed, before any such absurd principle was resorted to, cuncta prius tentanda. Every means should be tried to get at the end desired, before they should adopt so
1074
harsh and unjust a mode as was suggested by the Report of the Committee. He should vote for the original motion.
Mr. Wallace,objected to the Resolution, because he could see no good to arise from it. The substantial object of the motion was to be relieved from the Resolution of the Directors, which the house could not effect by such a measure; and it would be most unconstitutional to attempt, by a Resolution of that house, to overawe the Directors in the due discharge of the duty vested solely in them by act of Parliament. It would, in fact, be to do away, by one branch of the legislature, what had been enacted by all the three branches, who had left the whole power of sending out and recalling their servants, entirely to the discretion of the Directors of the East India Company. The hon. baronet thought the Resolution of the Directors should at present be only prospective, but if that were to be the case, how could they, after what had passed, suppose that it would be more effectual than it had been on former occasions? He should therefore give it his negative.
Mr. Stephenspoke in favour of the motion. He said, that when this matter of the traffic in East India Patronage first came accidentally before the house, he had given it us his opinion, that the house, in appointing a Committee, went out of its province, and had no more business to interfere than they had with the conduct of the clerks of the Bank of England; but having once so far interfered, and the Committee, from feelings of a proper indignation, having expressed a strong opinion on the transaction, he thought it would be bat fair and reasonable in the house now to give their opinion on that part of the Report of the Committee, in order to neutralize the matter, and that the house might leave the question where they found it, and that the Directors might be at liberty to act as they thought proper after it. He coincided in opinion with Mr. Windham, and thought the Resolution of the hon. baronet not only an act of humanity, but of strict justice. He dwelt with considerable feeling on the hardship of ruining young men who had suffered the unspeakable torment of having torn themselves from their nearest and dearest relatives, friends, and from their native country, for the purpose of rising in the world; whose prospects would perhaps be just beginning to brighten upon them, when they would receive their recal, for

1075
an act done by their father or guardian, to which they were no parties, but altogether ignorant of any thing having been done amiss. Was it to the father who gave the money they were to be brought back? Alas! no—the father might be dead before their return, and it might be to the sorrowing arms of a widowed mother, who looked to him as the prop of her old age; or to those of destitute sisters, who would behold in him an object of beggary and ruin. He was a total stranger to all the parties who could be affected by the resolution of the Directors; but, from the circumstances he had mentioned, he could not refuse his support to the present motion.
Mr. Grant(the Chairman of the East India Company) went into an historical account of the proceedings of the Court of Directors since the year 1798, in which he enumerated the various reasons for entering into the Resolutions in 1799 and 1806, respecting the sale and traffic of East India Patronage, and said the Directors thought themselves bound to adhere to the letter as well as spirit of them. The power had been invested in them by the Committee, and if taken out of their hands it must weaken, and in the end destroy, the establishment. When the matter of there having been improper practices first came out before the house, it was very warmly taken up; a Committee was appointed to inquire into the business, and the daily papers teemed with comments and reflections, to the tendency of which the Directors could not be insensible. The learned gent, who spoke last had said, that he supported the motion because the Resolution proposed by it would neutralize the report of the Committee. He for his own part could not, however, see how it was so to operate; because the Directors did not form their Resolution on that Report, but from a conviction in their own minds that it was absolutely necessary. He had no authority from the Court to express their sentiments; but he could say for himself, that unless the opinion of the house should be peremptory and expressed as a kind of command on the Directors, he, for his own part, having acted from conscientious motives, and done what he thought the welfare and best interest of the Company required, could not alter his opinion on the subject. As to the argument of inhumanity, it certainly applied to the parents of the young men who are gone out, who knew they were acting
1076
wrong in giving money For such places, and by no means to the Court of Directors. He should therefore oppose the motion.
Mr. Fremantlesaid the Resolution was not meant to be imperative; it was no mandate, but merely the opinion of the house on the Report of one of its Committees. He thought the Resolution a very proper one, and called for not only as an act of humanity, but of strict justice, and as such it should have his vote.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerthought the motion, as worded, clearly told the Directors they had acted contrary not only to the principles of British justice, but also contrary to the common rights of humanity. He thought if the house adopted the Resolution, they ought to go further, and tell the Directors, that they have not only acted wrong, but must rescind their Resolution and blot it out of their book. The hon. baronet must, surely, mean that; or else, master as he had often proved himself to be of language, he would never have worded the motion as he had dons. The hon. baronet, and all those who supported the motion, had advanced the same arguments; had all contended there was not sufficient notice. He insisted on the contrary, that the Resolutions of 1799 and 1806, published as they had been in the Gazette, provincial papers, and in all the instructions of the Court of Directors, were fully sufficient. It had been said the house did not want to interfere with the powers of the Directors, but only to neutralize them. He thought the house could do no such thing, but that the effect must be what he had stated. The Directors had, in his opinion, fairly drawn the line; they had confined themselves to the facts last brought to light, and no one would suffer by the resolution but those who had used those illegal practices since 1806, which was no great length of time. For one, he thought the house ought not to interfere with the Directors, who had acted only in a responsible situation), in such a manner as to prevent the patronage of the Company from being abused. He must therefore oppose the motion.
Sir Samuel Romillysaw no impropriety in that he use coining to any Resolution upon a Report of their Committee; but he saw great injustice in the mode of procedure recommended for the recall of those gentlemen, whom they could not put into the same places here, of which they deprived them in India, though avowedly innocent of the offence they wished to put a

1077
stop to. Not to dwell upon the sacrifice of health, friends, and connections, which they had submitted to, the injustice itself was sufficiently flagrant without dwelling upon any other consideration; what, would they say of those legislators who should enact the punishment of the children of those offenders who had fled their country, in order to avoid the consequence of their crimes? The cases were parallel, for in the present instace they were going to punish the children for the offences of the father. But he confessed, he did not know how well to account for the great display of austere justice; gentleman on the other side seemed so ambitious to make, and in that house, too, in their places in parliament, and above all in that very session of parliament—a session in the course of which those austere notions of justice had been so softened down and accommodated to existing circumstances—a session in which there had been so much of generous allowance and clemency, and where such abundant room was made for the locus penitentiœ! [Hear! hear!] The offenders, to be sure, were rather of a higher order than that of a humble Cadet. But, surely such rigorous proceedings did not become that house in that instance against those avowedly innocent, when in a case in which a Secretary of State was the accused, they thought it right to go no farther in it, because it was possible that as he did not complete the crime, he might have haply repented before he would have completed it. If in that and other instances they thought it better to look rather to the future than the past, why should they think differently now? When even in the case of Mr. Beauchamp Hill, who was charged with receiving bribes, to connive at frauds in the revenue, they had thought it best to overlook what was gone by, upon what principle of consistency could they now adopt a course of such implacable severity towards the innocent.
The Attorney Generalsaid, he could not but think the opinion just given by his learned friend, had been adopted merely to introduce the observations he had made. He restated the arguments of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and said, the only question was, whether the house should by the Resolution, intimate to the Directors that they ought to rescind their Resolution. If this motion was adopted, it must have that effect; and he should therefore oppose it.
Mr. Peter Moorespoke shortly in favour of the motion. He said three Writerships had been disposed of. Who gave these Writerships? Mr. Thellusson. Who sold them? Mr. Woodford, his relation, to whom he gave them. Mr. Woodford had been obliged to leave the country, and Mr. Thellusson was turned out of the Direction. The Directors had punished those who were guilty, and they had done enough. Any thing more would be to visit the sins of the fathers on the children, and he should therefore vote for the motion.
Mr. Lushingtonwas so confident that the Cadets would suffer no injustice from the Court of Directors, that he would vote for the previous question.
Mr. Hutchinsonpaid a tribute to sir Samuel Romilly, and commented on the happy applications of that learned gentleman's great abilities, to the proceedings of that house during the present sessions.
Mr. H. Smithwas for the previous question.
Mr. N. Vansittartexpressed a wish that the Court of Directors would reconsider their determination.
Mr. H. Thorntonsaid, though the rule might in strictness be thought a harsh one, still as under the controul of the Directors it would experience relaxation, he thought the motion was unnecessary.
Sir T. Turtonthen replied. He said, that it was admitted that the rule ought to be relaxed, but if it was so harsh a one, why should it not rather be given up altogether? He denied that his Resolution had any tendency to interfere with the powers of the Court of Directors or with the acts of parliament. It was a Resolution upon a passage in a Report of their Committee, and it was every way competent for them to discuss and decide upon it.
The house then divided, when the Resolution of sir Thomas Turton was negatived, the numbers being,

Ayes

35

Noes

77

Majority against it

42

PUBLIC ECONOMY.
—Mr. Wardle rose and spoke nearly as follows:
Sir; Had I not been so loudly called upon, on a recent occasion, to explain a statement I at that time made, I should not at this moment have thought it necessary to trouble the house upon the subject; but being so called upon, Sir, I think I have a peculiar claim to the indulgence of the house.
In the first place, Sir, I beg to state what it was I did assert upon the occasion alluded to. I said, Sir, "That on the event of an efficient Reform in Parliament, such a reform as would insure to the people in their representatives, active supporters of their right? and faithful guardians of their purse, I did not hesitate to say, that I was of opinion that the amount of.the Income Tax might be done away."
Had no preceding declarations of a similar nature been made by others, I should not have been surprised at the insinuations that were thrown out, or at the clamour that was raised against me in consequence of such observation; but I confess I am not a little surprised at such insinuations and such clamours, when I have discovered that language similar in its tendency, though much stronger in itself, had been used by a statesman, so peculiarly respected by the gentlemen opposite; I mean Mr. Pitt, who, in 1782, said, "If there always had been a house of commons who were the faithful stewards of the interests of the country, the diligent checks of the administration of the finances, the constitutional advisers of the executive branch of the legislature, the steady and unqualified friends of the people, I ask, if the burthens which the constituents of the house were now doomed to endure, would have been incurred?" Surely, Sir, this is far stronger language than I used. Mr. Pitttelis you, that under such a house of commons the people would not have been taxed at all: the extent of my assertion was, that a given proportion of their enormous burdens might be done away. On that particular occasion to which I allude, and indeed on several other occasions, I was accused, together with those gentlemen with whom I am most in the habit of acting, of systematically attacking the characters of public men. I solemnly deny the charge; and I do declare, that I do not recollect a single instance in which directly or indirectly I bad aimed an insinuation against an individual. That I have attacked a system of corruption, that I have attacked the parties acting upon and defending that system of corruption, I am free to confess; but as to attacking an individual in any other shape than that of a direct and specific charge, I positively deny; if I bad done so, it would have been contrary to every principle by which my public and private life have been regulated.
1080
But to that system of corruption, which from my soul I deprecate, I shall ever oppose, myself; and in so doing I am again supported by the conduct of Mr. Pitt in 1782. He then declared, that "The defect of representation is the national disease; and unless you apply a remedy immediately to that disease, you must inevitably take the consequence with which it is pregnant. Without a Parliamentary Reform the nation will be plunged into new wars. Without a Parliamentary Reform you cannot be safe against bad ministers, nor can even good ministers be of use to you. No honest man can, according to the present system, continue minister." So much, Sir, for the system of corruption. And after these quotations I trust that the clamour that has been raised by the friends of this statesman will cease to exist.
Without further preface, I shall proceed to state the reasons on which I founded the opinion I ventured to give, making only one preliminary remark. That such a house of commons as I described would ever keep in view two points: the one, whether the thing was necessary; the other, (if found necessary,) that it ought to be carried into effect in the cheapest possible manner consistent with efficiency.
The first thing that gave rise to that inquiry, that established in my mind the opinion I delivered, was my observing in the Finance Reports that there was a regular and great increase in the expenditure of each successive year. That in the year ending 5th January 1808, was 71,989,000 l. that of the year ending 5th January 1809, 79,391,000 l. being an increase of 7,400,000 l. in one year of the public expenditure; this circumstance did much astonish me, and I have now closely gone into the subject. The result of my investigation I beg to communicate, and I shall begin with the Army. And the first point to which I beg to call the attention of the house, and one in which a considerable saving may be made, is that of the Household Troops. These household troops, independent of the guards, consist of two regiments of horse guards, 831 strong; and of the Blues (or king's own,) 654 strong. The two regiments of horse guards cost the country 73,317 l. per annum, besides the expence attendant on the horse appointments, &c. The whole of this expence might be saved the country, as the Blues, 650 strong, were quite sufficient for all parade duty; and

1081
it is a well known fact, that the two regiments of horse guards never were employed on service, and therefore, for the reason I have stated, a perfectly unnecessary expence.
Our Cavalry force at home (independent of the household troops,) of dragoon guards and light dragoons, amounted to 23,499. I believe it will not be denied by those military men who are competent to judge upon the subject, and upon whose opinions implicit reliance might be placed, that even under existing circumstances, with the continent open to us, that a force of 15,000 horse would be completely sufficient for any thing that could be wanted, besides the regiments of volunteer and yeomanry cavalry, and our dragoons in the East Indies. I then hold it unquestionable, that the regular dragoon establishment at home might be reduced to 18,000 men and 15,000 horses. The present expence of these dragoon regiments (exclusive of the expence of horse appointments, &c.) is 1,277,610 l. per annum; by this proposed reduction, the saving would be 340,000 l. per annum.
The next point of our military establishment to which I shall advert, is that of the Foreign Corps. This establishment is 24,572 strong; 3,470 of which number are cavalry, and 579 artillery. The expence attending it, besides contingencies, is 1,008,017 l. per annum. I shall boldly maintain, that a house of commons, such as that I have described, would never vote one shilling for the support of a force perfectly unconstitutional, and, in my mind worse than useless, extremely dangerous. That illustrious character lord Chatham, in 1757, in the midst of a war, when the bugbear of invasion was held out to alarm the people, thought it his duty to send all the foreign troops out of the country: and fully I am persuaded, that if the voice of the people was heard within these walls, such would be the case at this period. It is far from my wish to reflect upon any body of men; but if gentlemen would recollect the conduct of these foreign mercenaries at Quiberon, at Malta, &c. they must in necessity admit, that although some of these foreign regiments might have distinguished themselves, still that taking into consideration their good and bad conduct, the conclusion must be, that they are not to be depended upon, and therefore ought not to be continued. It is a well known fact, that in Hanover
1082
they deserted to the enemy, even with their horses and appointments; and that the British troops were employed to watch over them, and eventually to see them once more embarked aboard our ships. Nor when we consider the mode of levying them, can this be wondered at. Has it not been proved to this house, that numbers of them were taken out of our gaols, and at a bounty too, by M. Charmilly and others of that description. Nay, more than this, I know and can prove, that from the Spanish gaols they were also enlisted at a bounty, and thus was part, of Dupont's army received into our ranks. If this, Sir, is the sort of force that Englishmen would wish to have connected with their native army, I am strangely deceived: but, Sir, my opinion upon this subject stands confirmed by those of officers high in the confidence of his majesty's government. I allude to sir R. Wilson and the hon. general Stuart: the former, Sir, condemns the sort of force being connected with our establishment; and. general Stuart, in his pamphlet, thus expresses himself, "The sooner, however, that foreign troops are removed from our service probably the better, they are as expensive as our own levies; and Great Britain is, of all nations, that which neither requires nor ought to have foreign mercenaries." But on this point, as I have before stated, I have the high sanction of the great lord Chatham. I have, I am persuaded, still higher authority with me, the feelings and judgment of the people of England. And under this conviction, painful is the reflection to me, that above a million of the public money should be expended upon them. Another and a very strong objection to these foreign troops is that the general and field officers belonging to them had in some instances their commissions ante-dated, so as to put them in command over the British officer. This I know to be a fact, and it is a reason in itself sufficiently strong to induce me to say, they ought not to be suffered to remain in the country.
The next corps to which I shall speak, is one of a different complexion. It is an establishment of late years, the Royal Staff Corps. I can find no other estimate of the expence of this corps than one of 20,000 l. a year; but I am aware that the establishment is a very expensive one. This Royal Staff Corps is neither more nor less than a branch growing out of the Engineers, and formed for the purpose of

1083
patronage, our great and eternal bane; the numbers of the engineers might, if that had been necessary, have been increased, and this would have been done at a light expence to the country.
The next topic is that of the Militia, and I trust I may throw out a consideration that may be deemed worthy the attention of the house. The Militia of the United kingdom amounts to 109,070 men, the annual expence attending it is 3,000,000 l. If one half of the men were allowed to be absent the three harvest months, which would be infinitely serviceable to the agricultural interests of the country, the annual saving thereby effected would be 300,000 l. and on the score of discipline, little injury can be apprehended, as this formed part of the system of the great Frederick of Prussia. A further saving in the militia expenditure might be effected, by incorporating some of the small corps, and forming them into battalions of a thousand each.—Fifteen of the regiments, chiefly Welsh, would form five regiments of the strength I have mentioned, and would give a saving to the people of at least 20,000 l. a year.
In the next place, I shall advert to a new establishment, that of the Local Militia, and one that has been marked by a most profligate and wanton expenditure; an establishment, that in my mind is not of that description that ought to have been resorted to, in such times as these, when it is clear that the battle for our rights and liberties against our foreign foes, if fought at all upon English ground, must depend upon that invincible force, the armed population of the kingdom. By the Estimates on the table it appears, that there had already been voted on this account,

£

For pay,

458,532

For the Staff, (on account, when not embodied,)

306,960

Clothing

417,831

Contingencies,

36,480

£. 1,219,803

And in addition to this it appeared, that no less a sum than 240,000 l. had been paid to the volunteers, for changing from one home service into another. Of all the profligate public expenditures that I know of, this, Sir, appears to me the most profligate. And let me ask, whether such a house of commons as I have described, would thus have voted away the money
1084
of the people? Let the staff of this establishment first be considered, 306,960 l. the expence attending it, for that period when the militias were not embodied. Can any thing be more monstrous than this; does any one that hears me, believe that any good can arise from such extravagance! If the defence of the country was the object, if the discipline of the local militias was the object, nothing of this sort would have been resorted to. All this might have been effected without any expence of the kind. An adjutant and serjeant major attached to each of these regiments would have been enough, the old militias of the different counties sending in a sufficient number of their steadiest men, to act as lance-serjeants and corporals, during the month of exercise; thus would this enormous expenditure for the other eleven months have been spared to the country, and every possible end, or rather every good end of the establishment been attained Let the clothing be next considered. It is a fact, Sir, that in many instances the new clothing has rather been an incumbrance than otherwise, for several of the corps filled from the volunteer ranks, were perfectly well clothed and appointed before. But I argue further, that if any clothing at all was necessary, the voting such expensive clothing, was highly improper. I understand, that now given to them costs 3l. per man, but I contend that for half-a guinea per man a jacket and trowsers, are quite sufficient for the sort of service, might have been supplied to them; and I am strangely deceived if they would fight the enemy with greater gallantry in the one clothing than the other, and that in my opinion is the object that ought to be kept in view. On a due consideration of all the circumstances, I feel persuaded that here a saving of 700,000 l. a year might be made!
From this subject it is an easy transition to that of the Volunteers. I find the estimate of the expences of the volunteers, exceeds a million of money for this year, a circumstance that appears extraordinary, as I have just shewn, that no less a sum than 240,000 l. has been paid to the volunteers for exchanging their service to the local militia, and the total expence of this establishment last year 1,094,379 l. so it seems a determined point, that though the numbers are lessened, the expenditure should continue the same. But, Sir, I am of opinion that the million of money might

1085
be saved to the people, for why should we not resort to that system, that answered so well a few years ago, and which without a doubt might still be resorted to with good effect. In the year 1780, the volunteers of Ireland served their country without either pay or clothing, and I believe it must on all hands, be acknowledged, that more efficient volunteers never had been established. That the same system should now be pursued, is not only my opinion, but that also of officers high in the confidence of the government, I particularly allude to sir Robert Wilson, and beg leave to read an extract from his work. Upon the subject, he says, "Every householder should be obliged to provide, and keep a stand of arms in good order. Every man in the empire should be instructed in the use of them, and in short time the humblest individual would be ashamed, if he did not know the necessary exercise. Military ardour is very readily inspired, but the pursuit must not be attended with great inconvenience or expence." He adds "military clothing is not necessary for such a force. The eye may not be equally gratified, but appearance is not worthy a moment's attention. With the preparations for a contest which ought not to last six weeks, what has the attire to do? What advantage does a splendid dress offer to the state? Where are the funds for supplying this expensive equipment?" These, Sir, are the sentiments of a British officer, fixed upon by his majesty's government, for establishing a force of the sort at this period, in Portugal. I most cordially agree with him, and in agreeing with him, recommend the saving a million of money from the burthens of the people.
The next establishment to which I shall beg the attention of the house, is that of the Royal Waggon Train. By the papers on the table it appears, that besides the extra expenditure, which I understand to be great indeed, the annual expence of this corps is 48,993 l. and yet I am persuaded that all disinterested persons acquainted with this establishment, would declare it to be as useless as it is expensive. The waggons had been found fit only for home service, where they were not wanted; the absurdity of the system was fully ascertained in the expeditions to Copenhagen, Spain, and Hanover; where it was proved to be perfectly inefficient. Under this impression, I have no hesitation in saying, that this establishment ought to be abolished; the extent of saving by its
1086
being done away, further than the 48,993 l. a year, I have no documents to shew. This waggon train had been formerly attached to the ordnance, and it would, I believe, be difficult to give the house a satisfactory reason for its being removed from it.
The next corps on which I shall have to remark, is one that never has, as I am informed, either done or offered to do any service whatever. I mean the corps of Manx fencibles; it costs the people 24,184 l. a year; and is stationary in the Isle of Man, where volunteers are also established; to comment upon such an expenditure as this, must indeed be unnecessary. I claim the whole as a saving.
The Staff of the army I shall now proceed to comment upon. The general annual sum it costs the country now, amounts to no less than 449,649 l. the expence of the home staff according to the papers on the table is 255,590 l. a year, that for Great Britain, I believe, in the year 1793, was only 38,929 l. Any thing more flagrant than this could not readily be conceived, without dwelling upon a point that speaks for itself. I will at once pledge myself to shew, that 200,000 l. a year ought to be saved to the country.
I beg now to call the attention of the house, to the recruiting staff, bounties to recruits, and the levies. The recruiting staff costs the country 34,939 l. The extent of bounties given to recruits is known to the house, and above all the profligate expenditure that has existed under the head of levies, is fully ascertained. The expence that has attended this vile system is enormous, and I do not hesitate to say, that if a stop were put to it, and if that wise, just, and honourable plan of the right honourable gentleman near me, was acted upon, that a saving of 200,000 l. a year might be made, and the service materially benefited.
The next subject, is that of Army Agency, 61,075 l. was now annually expended, and I will take upon myself to prove that 51,075 l. may be saved, and the business as effectually carried on, by the addition of 10,000 l. a year to the general agency office already established.
I have before this period stated, that the business of the War Office might be effectually done for 30,000 l. a year, which would save 24,000 l. I repeat that assertion, and I beg to add, that a like saving might be made at the Pay-Office, giving to the country on both 48,000 l. a year.
I shall now take into consideration the

1087
Ordnance department, where I find the expenditure to be in the year ending 5th January,

1807,

4,511,064 l.

1808,

4,190,748 l.

1809,

5,108,900 l.

an increase in the last year, of near a million of money. But, Sir, without detaining the house one moment unnecessarily, I shall proceed to particulars. And first as to three establishments, bearing in some degree on each other. The horse artillery, consisting of twelve troops, which coat annually, independent of great contingent expellees of which I have no return, 113,000 l. The corps of artillery drivers 229,000 l. besides enormous contingent expences. The contract horses 299,083 l. The latter sum I have no fear to say, might certainly be saved to the country, for I have it from an authority I cannot doubt, that the horse artillery, with the corps of artillery drivers, was more than could be wanted under any possible circumstances. The artillery drivers are at present entirely attached to the guns, and part of their duty is performed by the contract horses, and this too at a moment when the horses belonging to the corps of artillery drivers were actually suffering from over-feed and idleness. If any gentleman doubted the fact, if he would only go as far as Woolwich, he would be convinced that such was the system of the ordnance, and that too at the very place, where we might have hoped, such flagrant abuses could not have existed.
The next subject, and one to which I think the attention of the house should be particularly directed, is that of our Fortifications at home. Particularly, Sir, as it is not many years ago, that after a long and able discussion it was declared to be the opinion of the house, that a stop should be put to what was then deemed an useless expenditure of the public money, and a more useless expenditure could not in my mind be readily discovered. By the papers on the table it appears, that about 700,000 l. has been expended in the last year, on the building and repairs of fortifications at home. This was highly unjustifiable, and would appear the more so, when the mode in which it was applied was considered. A more conclusive specimen of the waste of the public wealth, can no where be found better than on Romney Marsh, where for the protection of our shores as we are told, a great number of Martello Towers and batteries have been erected. It was intended that these
1088
towers should each carry a long gun and a howitzer; after they were all finished, it was discovered that the dimensions had been mistaken, and that they would only carry the long gun, and this gun cannot be brought to bear upon any object within 250 yards of the tower, leaving of course that proportion of dead parts; but this mistake is not the only one, the foundation was upon a par with the upper works; and in November last, there was no small degree of alarm for the safety of these towers, in consequence of there being several feet of water in them; four out of the number are built upon quicksands; but still a more extraordinary part of this system of defence, is that six miles of shore beyond the last of these towers, (rather more commodious far landing than that part that has been fortified), is left open to the enemy, without even one solitary tower or battery; there remains then one thing yet to be done, to persuade the enemy to allow the English Pilots to bring their ships within the range of our fortifications.
The Royal Military Canal is another specimen of folly and of wanton waste of the public money. This canal is intended as a line of defence; it begins on Romney Marsh, and is continued for about twenty miles. As a military work, it rivals the fortifications I have just mentioned; if possible, surpasses them: for it is so constructed, that the fire of the soldiers within the parapet cannot be brought to bear upon the canal, so that the boats of the enemy might cover it unmolested, particularly as the canal has not a single flanking position. These blunders, like those of the Martello Towers, were soon discovered after the work was finished, and now I hear it is a matter of dispute, how a further sum of money should be laid out, whether in flanking positions, or building towers for its defence. Thus was the public money wasted! and this too after the subject had been so fully discussed and decided in the house of commons. Fortifications are not wanted in this country: the people of England can defend their own shores! I would ask, what were the use of the enormous fortifications building on the heights of Dover? To man those fortifications, together with Dover Castle, would take twenty thousand men. And is there any one mad enough to suppose, that Buonaparté would attempt to land in the face of ten thousand British soldiers, without any fortifications whatever; but here

1089
was double that number of our troops to be locked up and incapacitated from serving in the field. Under all these circumstances, I do not doubt but that 500,000 l. out of the 700,000 l. annually expended, might be saved to the country, the remaining 200,000 l. appears to me a larger sum than ought to be appropriated to any such purposes. I have further to observe, that the fortifications erected in Essex are now falling rapidly into decay; and that whilst the famous military road in Surrey is ploughing up, it must be a satisfaction to the public to know, that another is forming in Scotland; and that probably when that is again ploughed up, that one may possibly be constructed in Wales.
I shall next proceed to consider the Commissariat. Of this department too much has been heard, too much is known to entitle it to any respect. The evidence so lately given upon this subject by sir Arthur Wellesley was quite sufficient to stamp its character; and I understand that this gallant officer, whose judgment and accuracy no man would doubt, was no better pleased with his present commissariat, than he had been with the one that preceded it. The papers on the table would shew, that from the army extraordinaries alone no less a sum had been expended in the foreign commissariat than 1,542,705 l. Of the expence of the commissariat at home there was no account; but that of Ireland deserved particular attention. The establishment in that kingdom is stated to cost 95,903 l. a year, the amount of the supply issued to the troops 159,231 l. so that about 75 l. per cent, is paid for the delivery. Whether the same economical system is pursued in the foreign and English departments I know not; but this I know, that the profligate expenditure of the commissariat is proverbial, and that a saving of at least 500,000 l. a year might be made without difficulty.
The next item of our military establishment, and one that keeps pace in Wanton and excessive expenditure, is the Barrack department. The barracks of Great Britain and Ireland cost the country last year 764,942 l. To prove this a most shameful expenditure, there would be no difficulty; fur amongst other things it, is a fact, that at the time 100,000 l. is granted for the building of new barracks, several barracks, long ready for the reception of troops, remain unoccupied, as do many for which annual rents are paid. In the country of Wicklow, I believe there are no less
1090
than three excellent barracks unoccupied, notwithstanding which the job goes on, and new ones are now budding, and this an a moment when timber is advanced from 50 s. to 25 l. per ton! add to this the abuses detailed in the Reports, and many of which exist in full force, and there can be little doubt but that 350,000 l. might be annually saved from this monstrous expenditure.
Upon the Medical department of the army I have already given my sentiments in this house; I have now only to repeat what I before stated, that I believe 100,000 l. a year might be saved to the country, independent of the heavy pecuniary loss we sustain in the numbers of our troops that fall victims to the maladies that so dreadfully prevail in the West Indies, and other such climates which medical men of ability, and acquainted with the subject immediately before us, calculated at much more than 100,000 l. a year.
To the next subject, I have also before Called the attention of parliament, I mean the Cloathing of the Army. Whenever I have an opportunity of renewing that discussion, I shall be ready to shew that nine shillings a man may be saved to the public, if open competition instead of private bargain is resorted to. Gen. Stuart in his pamphlet thus writes upon this subject. He says, "The clothing and accoutring of regiments ought to be undertaken by government, and not by colonels, who as inspectors of the contracts of others, will do the soldiers as much justice as by the present system; it is conjectured that a much smaller fund than is as at present raised by stoppages might suffice, if the method pursued in clothing the Austrian army was pursued in our own." Now, Sir, in confirmation of this doctrine, I learn that Mr. Courtney, the army clothier, his at this time 5s. 6d. a man by open contract less than Messrs. Pearse have by private bargain, on the clothing alone; and I maintain, if the accoutrements were also supplied by open competition, that the nine shillings would be saved, amounting upon 300,000 men to 135,000 l. a year. The clothiers under private contract were also, by their own confession, in the habit of charging at the rate of ten per cent. a year in consequence of not being paid under six mouths. Now, without much calculation, it is clear that the borrowing the money even at five per cent, and making prompt payments, would give an additional saving of 33,000 l. a year, supposing

1091
the amount of the clothing only to reach 700,000 l. a year. But here we are cutting with a two-edged sword; for in other departments I can shew, that money by impress bills is paid in advance to contractors and others (who ought not to be so paid), and our army clothiers are charging us at the rate of ten per cent. because that money is given to the contractors, and not applied to that purpose which would be of advantage and a great saving to the country. Another considerable saving, to the amount of 20,000 l. a year, may be made en the packing and insurance of the clothing to foreign stations. And in this year's extra clothing to Spain, &c. added to the colonial corps, if open competition bad been resorted to, 100,000 l. might also have been saved, making the amount of saving on this year's clothing expenditure 270,000 l.
I shall now, Sir, conclude the consideration of the military department, with a statement of what the general expenditure has been for the last four years.
In the year ending,

5th Jan. 1806

17,314,023 l.

1807

15,275,859

1808

15,596,539

1809

17,490,111

In justice to those gentlemen who never were in the habit of sparing me, but to whom I do not feel the less disposed to do justice, I must observe, that during the two years that they were in office, the military expenditure of the country was two millions less than what it had been under the management of their predecessors, or than what it was under the management of his majesty's present ministers.
Having done, Sir, with the military part of the subject, I shall now proceed to the civil. It appears to me, that a very material saving may be made in the expence that now attends the Collection of the Revenue. And first, with regard to the post-office; by reports that have been on the table, it was proved that within the four last years, immediately following the event of Mr. Palmer quitting the post-office, there was an increased expence in that establishment of above 180,000 l. Under Mr. Palmer's management, the expenditure did not exceed 200,000 l. a year, it was now 400,000 l. Why this increase had occurred, or rather why it had been suffered to occur, I know not, but I feel perfectly convinced, that no satisfactory reason can be given for it.
I have obtained much information with respect to the Collection of the Customs,
1092
and as to the patronage of that department of the revenue. Amongst other things, I find that before the erection of the East India, West India, and London docks, the landing surveyors had considerable difficulties to encounter from the extent of the wharfs over which they had presided. When those clocks were built, and the sphere of their labours was consequently commodiously contracted, it was fairly to have been expected, that their numbers would have been decreased, on the contrary three additional ones were appointed, and the public have ever since had to pay, ten instead of seven. Similar abust3 of patronage in that and other departments has come to my knowledge, but the one instance sufficiently proves the system, and it will not, I am persuaded, eventually be found that I have not strong ground for asserting that a very material public saving may be made here. In the stamp-office, the annual charge would be found 130,000 l. per annum; a decided waste of the public treasure was apparent here: this expenditure I could shew, might be greatly reduced indeed. For the collection of the window light duties in Scotland, the charge was 20 per cent, for that of the old malt duty, 16 percent.; for that on candles, 12 per cent. Would any one be bold enough to say, that these were proper charges? I think not, and I hope to prove hereafter, that they ought greatly to be lowered. I shall next advert to the receivers general, who are, I understand, allowed 1½d. in the pound, and that upon six millions of money annually, besides balances allowed to remain in their hands to the amount of 410,000 l. the loss of interest upon this to the public, is above 20,000 l. a year; but the fact is, as the accounts at the end of the year will shew, that instead of 410,000 l. balances, to the amount of near a million will be found in their hands and in those of the collectors. Why such a practice as this should be tolerated, instead of those balances being paid immediately into the bank of England, I am at a loss to conceive.
I shall next take a comparative view of the expences attendant on the collection of the revenues in England, and Scotland. I find it to stand thus. The expence of collection of the

Customs, England,

6l.

14 s.

5d.

Scotland,

8l.

5s.

8d.

Excess in Scotland,

1l.

11 s.

3d.

Excise, England,

2l.

15 s.

3d.

Scotland,

6l.

3s.

3d.

1093

Excess in Scotland,

3l.

8s.

0d.

Stamps, England,

3l.

2s.

11 d.

Scotland,

4l.

18 s.

8d.

Excess in Scotland,

1l.

15 s.

9d.

This difference appears to me very extraordinary, and I am persuaded, that the expellee of collecting, these revenues in Scotland, may at least be reduced to the rate now charged in England. The land and assessed taxes in Scotland, are collected at 2l. 19 s. 11 d. per cent, when the collection in England costs 37. 12s 9d.—an excess of 12 s. 10 d. per cent, in England. I would ask in what does this originate? The gross receipt of the revenue of Great Britain, for the year ending 5th January 1809, amounts to 64,734,272 l. the charges of management upon this sum, amounted to 2,816,568 l. being at the rate of 4l. 12 s. 9d. per cent, by reducing this charge to 31. per cent. of the practicability of which, for reasons already stated, and others equally strong, I have not in my mind the most distant doubt, the annual saving to the public would be 1,051,930. But, according to the system now pursued the expence of collecting the revenues increases annually: for the year ending

5th Jan.

1807,

it was,

4l.

5s.

0. percent.

5th Jan.

1808,

4l.

10 s.

5d.percent.

5th Jan.

1809,

4l.

12 s.

9d.percent.

Why was this? As the revenue increases, the rates of collection increases, when in fact, they ought proportionably to diminish. I will again, Sir, do the late ministers the justice to observe, that during their continuance in office, it was, that the revenues were collected at the lower rates, and indeed, since the year 1807, when they quitted office, the charge for collection has increased 7s. 9d. per cent. making a difference to the people of no less a sum than 205,252 l. per ann. I think I have now, sir, shewn sufficient ground for my opinion, that above a million a year may be saved in the collection of the revenues of Great Britain. I shall now proceed to comment on the rate of collection in Ireland, and I trust, when I am speaking of the savings that may be made, in this part of the United Kingdom, that it will be borne in mind that England pays in a proportion of fifteen-seventeenths to two, and therefore will benefit precisely in that ratio, by the saving that is made. As to the irregularities in the collecting the revenues in Ireland, the house has lately had so marked a specimen, attended with such a serious loss to the country, about a million and a half, that it is unnecessary for me to
1094
dwell one moment upon that point. The gross receipt of the revenue in Ireland, 5th Jan. 1808, is 5,554,669 l.; on this the charge of management was he less than 528,663 l., which is at the rate of 9l. 10 s. per cent. If this were reduced to the rate, (excessive as it is), at which the Revenue of Great Britain is at present collected, namely, 4l. 12 s. 9d. per cent. the annual saving would be 284,519 l. but in the present year, the charge of management has been increased to 11 l. 12 s. 6d. per cent. an annual saving therefore of 388,387 l. might be obtained, if that charge was only reduced to the rate of that at present existing in Great Britain, and that this might be effected, I am perfectly convinced. The charges on the management of the post-office in Ireland, was a strong feature of the extensive reforms that might be established; the charge per cent, on the gross post-office revenue in Ireland, for management, was 46 l. per cent, when that of Scotland was about 12 l. cent., and why was this? to give patronage, for no other possible reason. Put it on the same footing as that of Scotland, and the saving will be enormous, and I should be glad to hear a reason offered, why that ought not to be done! Another expenditure of minor consideration, connected with that department, though paid in England, is that of a constant express between the two countries, which has been kept up, ever since the rebellion in Ireland, at an expence of 7000 l. a year; now though this express when established might certainly have been necessary, still I believe the chief benefit now arising from this expenditure of 7000 l. a year, is the advantage the lord lieutenant derives, by having his newspapers, a few hours earlier than he would have them by the mail: on what authority this establishment exists, I know not, but this I know, that it has already cost the country 63,000 l. and ought to be abolished. Having detained the house very long, I shall not trespass further upon their time, by entering more particularly into the savings that may be made in Ireland, but proceed to speak of the commissioners and auditors of public accounts. Now, Sir, though I am ready to admit, that auditors of public accounts, may not only be useful, but necessary, still, I do not feel disposed to say as much of the different bodies of commissioners, that have from time to time been appointed—To do what? to rectify the abuses that have arisen, from the

1095
neglect of the representatives of the people. I maintain, Sir, that abuses so originating, ought to have been met by the authors of them, and that instead of taxing the people, to the amount of 70,000 l. per annum, in salaries to commissioners, the business ought to have been encountered by committees of the house; such, Sir, would, I am persuaded, be the sentiments of a House of Commons, such as I have described; and in one opinion, I think this house must agree with me, that there is, no prospect of the accounts ever being settled, through the medium of the present plan of commissioners. I believe very little, if any progress has been made, towards this most desirable end. With regard to the annual accounts, I take this opportunity of saying, that they ought to be made out as soon after the expiration of the year as possible, under distinct heads, and in that clear form, as would enable the guardians of the public purse to do their duty to the people, by closely examining the different branches of the national expenditure. The present is a mere system of estimate. Under the head of Commissioners I take a saving of 70,000 l. per annum; as I feel persuaded that committees of this house ought to undertake this task, however arduous it may be; and not resort, as I before said, to taxing the people for the sins of their representatives.
The next thing I have to observe is, that by the report of the Committee of Finance, the average balances of public money in the Bank (allowing for the arrangement with the American States) is about 10,500,000 l.; and that report proceeds thus: "Your committee are inclined to consider a sum, equal to 5 per cent. interest, on the average balances in question, to be not far from the amount of the profits arising from this source." The annual interest therefore, Sir, is between 5 and 600,000 l. The debtor and creditor account between the people and the bank stands thus:

The Bank Dr.

For interest of balances (say only)

£ 500,000

Paid to them for management of the national debt, year ending 5th Jan. 1809

210,000

£710,000

1096

The Bank Cr.

By 3 millions in 1806, at 3 per cent, instead of 5 per cent. during the war

60,000

By 3 millions in 1808, without interest, during the war

150,000

£ 11,686,000 old capital, 3 per cent. instead of 5 per cent.

233,720

£ 4,750,000 in advance on malt-tax, at 4 per cent, instead of 5 per cent.

27,500

£471,220

This gives a balance against the Bank of 238,780 l. a year. Now, Sir, instead of claiming the whole of this on the part of the public, to which, in my opinion, there is a perfect title, I am willing to adopt the line taken on the 10th February 1808, by a right hon. gent, near me (Mr. Tierney); thus he argued the case: "With respect to the rate of allowance charged by the Bank in regard to the management of the national debt, in his opinion, the Bank ought to do that business without any allowance whatever; for he contended that they then would be on a footing with every private banker." Now, for the reason given by the right hon. gent., as well as upon the ground I have taken, I do assert, that the sum of 210,549 l. charged by the Bank for the year ending 5th Jan. 1809, ought to have been saved to the people.
An hon. gent. (Mr. H. Martin) having so very ably, and so very recently, gone at great length into the subject of pensions, sinecure places, &c. I shall only have to make one or two remarks on this head. Under the terms objectional or questionable, he shews an amount of 822,296 l. Now surely, Sir, my claiming credit for a saving of 200,000 l. a year out of this sum cannot be deemed unreasonable. In my mind a much greater saving ought to be made here. But I wish to make one observation with regard to the doctrine, that pensions and sinecure places are to be held as sacred as freeholds, let them have been obtained how they may, or let the amount of the income arising from them have increased to ever so enormous an extent, by change of circumstances in the state. This doctrine, Sir, ought not to be tolerated. It cannot be substantiated; and that it is perfectly novel I am prepared to

1097
shew. In the year 1744, it appears that the tellership of the exchequer (amongst other offices) was revised, and the salary reduced, in consideration of the great increase in the amount of the army services and the fees thereupon. The reduction made was one third part of the amount of the salary! but now we are told, Sir, now when the army expenditure exceeds all bounds, when it amounts to above 17,000,000 l. a year, that these places are all freeholds! Why freeholds, in the year 1809, when they were not so in 1744? Is it the greater purity of the present times, when compared with the year 1744, that has given colour to such doctrine as this? doctrine, Sir, that never would be held in such a house of commons as I have described.
Under the head of Bounties I find an expenditure amounting to 527,070 l. a year. Now, upon this subject I shall not give any opinion of my own; but knowing that these bounties are deemed quite inconsistent with the established principles of political economy, both by Adam Smith and other authors who have written most ably upon these subjects, I do certainly think it well worthy the consideration of parliament how far the public money should be so expended; and fully aware of several items in this account that appear to me most extraordinary, such as bounties to the fishermen of London and Westminster, who, I am persuaded, have sufficient bounties from the high price of fish; and bounties upon linen in Ireland, with other detail not necessary for me now to enter upon, I have little doubt, that I should be able to show, independent of the general question whether or not any bounties ought to be given, that a saving of 150,000 l. a year might be properly made.
And next, Sir, I have to say a word or two as to some expenditure that I should hold to be, at this period, highly improper. I see, by the accounts on the table, that nearly 200,000 l. has already been expended in the building a new Mint, which I understand is still likely to cost a considerable sum more. Now, Sir, the impropriety of buildindg any mint at all cannot be more strongly marked, than from the circumstance of its being within our power to issue coin by contract, not only without expence, but at a profit to the country. This was the case in the late contract with Messrs. Bolton's on the issue of 1200 tons of copper coin. And when the fact has thus
1098
been proved, I would ask, why is the system to given up? Why, Sir, the reason is obvious. In order to create extensive patronage, it is necessary that we should have a new mint; and if we save the money of the people by the system of contract, we shall have no excuse whatever for our new mint. But when it is completed, these great objects will certainly be attained; extensive patronage, a great establishment, and no coin! But ministers, perhaps, are prepared to take off the Bank restrictions, and once more to allow us the sight of gold! But upon a general principle, I maintain that government should not have any establishment for carrying on mechanical trades. We are going to other and great expences in unnecessary buildings, such as the house in Downing street for the President of the Hoard of Controul, which has cost about 9,000 l.; and amongst various other improper waste of the public treasure, I observe 3,500 l. expended in repairs of an office of accounts in the Adelphi. I have thought it my duty to show that such things were; but do not mean to take credit in my proposed savings, for any of the sums so expended.
To our Colonies I next shall advert. I find, Sir, that in the army extraordinaries alone, that above. 1,500,000 l. is charged to this account. Under proper management, I believe that our colonies, instead of being a burthen, would prove no inconsiderable treasure to the mother country; but, as this subject is to be brought before the house, I find, early in the next session, I shall make only a few observations at this time. That our North American possessions would almost do more than counterbalance our issue of 1,500,000 l. there can be no doubt, provided the wonderful resources of that country were properly brought into action. The advantage, particularly in these times, of abundant supplies of hemp, timber, &c. from thence, cannot easily be calculated; and nothing con prevent our having abundant supplies but our own bad management. There is one point I cannot refrain from touching upon, that is our fisheries. When the trifling returns, even of that at Newfoundland, is before us, it would scarcely be credited to what an extent another fishery, in those seas, was carried many years ago, by the French. I mean that of Cape Breton, the extent of which is not much more than one-sixth of that of Newfoundland. In the year 1745, when Cape Bre-

1099
ton was taken by sir W. Pepperill, it appears that France employed 28,000 men in the fishery, and gained a million of money a year by it. It is clear, then, what our loss must be from bad and negligent management; but patronage seems the great object we have in view; as an example of which, let us look at the ex-pence of the civil establishment in Sierra Leone, amounting to no less than 16,000 l. a year; and as to the expence of the military establishment, that certainly keeps pace with it; for in one item, that of building and repairing forts, you have no less a sum than 23,000 l. If we go into the accounts of Gibraltar, Ceylon, Canada, the Prince of Wales's Island, New South Wales, &c. &c. we shall find nothing wanting in patronage or profligate expenditure. I therefore claim at least 500,000 1, a year, as the saving that ought to be made immediately.
I have yet to make an observation or two respecting the military establishment in Ireland; and I beg once more to observe, that England subscribes to all this expenditure in the ratio of fifteen seventeenths, according to the act of union between the two countries.
In the last four years of the American war, the average expenditure, to the 25th March, 1783, was 449,260 l.: the average of the four years, to March 25, 1799, 2,659,664 l.: expenditure of the year ending 5th Jan. 1809, is 4,226,421 l. It appears, then, since the year 1799, the army expenditure has been nearly doubled. And why, I would ask, has this been the case? Merely because we prefer keeping in check, by coersion, a gallant people, who pant for nothing more than the enjoyment of those rights and liberties that are secured to us, and which, when granted, would so endear them to the United Kingdom, as to render it at once strong and invincible. I would further ask, whether such a house of commons as that I have described, putting right and justice out of the question, would think it good policy to expend at least two millions in attempting to effect that, which conciliation alone can establish on a safe and permanent ground. I cannot quit the subject of Ireland without observing, that the total Irish expenditure in the year ending 25th March, 1793, was 11,735,267 l.: in the year ending 5th Jan. 1809, it was 9,563,727 l.

The debt of Ireland, 25th

March, 1793,

£.2,422,890

The debt of Ireland, 5th

Jan. 1802,

76,110,856

The loan for this year,

4,000,000

The present debt of Ireland, 80,110,856 And having stated this, Sir, I will ask whether something ought not to be done to ward off ruin from that country?
I believe, Sir, I have already shewn sufficient ground to justify the opinion I gave, that if the people were represented in the manner I have described, that the amount of the income tax might be saved. But, Sir, there yet remains for me to call the attention of the house to one other establishment, I mean that of the Navy. And here, Sir, under the high authorities I speak, it would be arrogance in me to offer any opinion of my own. A gallant admiral (Markham) in his place in this house, on the 1st March, 1805, said, "He could state, and the reports on the table would bear out his statement, that one third of the naval expences of the country would be saved by an honest and upright discharge of the duties of the offices employed in their administration." The victualling office, and the sick and wounded office, he had no hesitation in stating to be the most corrupt of all.
So much for the naval expenditure in 1805. I now, Sir, must call the attention of the house to another statement made in this house upon the subject, no longer ago than last February, when the hon. gent. opposite to me, the secretary of the admiralty (Mr. Wellesley Pole), in speaking of the victualling department, where the expenditure amounts to 5,313,901 l. declared "the system carried on to be most vicious and faulty; and that, in order to abolish it, those at the head must be removed." In addition to these statements, which it is not with me, or indeed with any one to doubt, I have only to say, that if confirmation had been wanting, the result of the inquiries I have made affords that confirmation. I find, Sir, and can shew, that in the purchase of timber there is a great loss to the country. I find, too, that the inspector of canvas is concerned in the supplying the canvas, and that consequently what is delivered is of an infamously bad quality. I find too, Sir, that instead of the different contracts being open to competition at the expiration of the year and half, that they are kept shut for years; and thus, for the sake of patronage, the public suffer most heavily. The hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Wellesley Pole)

1101
seems to deny the fact. I will ask him, then, whether Mr. Pinkerton's contract for the West Indies has not been shut for four or five years. Whether Mr. Grant has not had a like advantage in the Yarmouth contract; and I would ask him further, whether a person at Deptford has not been allowed to amass a considerable fortune by the article of grains alone, at the public brewery there; that contract has indeed at last been opened, and the price per quarter immediately advanced from ls. 10 d. to 2s. 10 d. and I fancy it will bear no inconsiderable further advance, as I understand the fortune in question was made by retailing them out immediately at 4s. 6d. per quarter.
In the Transport Department I shall have no difficulty in shewing great waste of the public money, and no where do we suffer more, I believe, from favouritism. With these facts before me, and under the high authorities that I have quoted, it is not, I am sure, with me to doubt that the saving stated may be made. I have only, Sir, to observe, that in the year 1804, to which the gallant admiral's remarks attached, the expenditure was 11,759,350 l. and that at this period, when we have the sentiments of the hon. Secretary of the Admiralty on the subject, the expenditure is 17,467,892 l. an increase of 5,700,000 l. I am sorry, Sir, to have detained the house so long; but what I owed to my country and my own character rendered it necessary. I feel much obliged by the patience with which I have been heard upon which I shall only trespass a few minutes longer.
I think, Sir, that the national accounts ought to be reduced into such form and order as would enable every member of the house to see whether or not the money of his constituents was properly and economically expended; and this, Sir, is an object I have much at heart, for I do feel most fully persuaded, that an enormous sum is annually lost to the country in consequence of the utter confusion in which the accounts have remained for years, a confusion that never prevailed more than at this moment. Admit, Sir, that only 20,000,000 l. annually remains unaccounted for, and I am sure I am much within compass, when I say that at a very moderate computation we must lose, in consequence of this confusion and non-settlement of the accounts, at least one twentieth part; does any gentlemen who hears me doubt that the public lose at least
1102
a million a year for the want of such a settlement; if any one does doubt the fact, let me refer him to his own private concerns, and let me ask whether he believes any individual who neglects year after year to look into the accounts of the expenditure of his property, and to strike a balance with his different agents, escapes with the loss of only a twentieth part? I am sure he would be infinitely a greater loser under such a system, and I am also sure that we do not escape with a loss of a million under that system so decidedly ruinous either to the individual or public body. Upon this subject I shall beg to read the statement and remarks of the late Chancellor of the Exchequer (lord Henry Petty.) In the year 1806, the noble lord stated to the house, that the enormous sum of four hundred and fifty-five millions of public money was unaccounted for. He then goes on to observe, "That it was unnecessary for him to urge how much the public necessities called for the most serious attention and investigation; that he need not state what were the evils which led to these inquiries, or what were the dangers of leaving accounts open for twenty years when the death of the parties may prevent the recovery of the public money, or grossest frauds destroy the revenue of the country, great as it is, and divert it to purposes of individual profit."

Recapitulation of saving on

Household troops, two regiments

£73,317

0

0

Dragoon guards, dragoons, and light ditto

340,000

0

0

Foreign corps

1,005,017

0

0

Subsidy annually paid Count Meuron for continuing his regiment in his majesty's service

3,000

0

0

Militia of the united kingdom

300,000

0

0

Staff of fifteen small militia corps reduced

10,000

0

0

Local militia

700,000

0

0

Volunteers of the united kingdom

1,000,000

0

0

Royal waggon train

48,933

0

0

Manx fencibles

24,184

0

0

Staff of the army

200,000

0

0

Recruiting staff, levies and bounties

200,000

0

0

Army agency

51,075

0

0

War office

24,000

0

0

Pay office

24,000

0

0

Contract horses

299,083

0

0

Fortifications and repairs at home

500,000

0

0

Medical department and, annual loss of men

200,000

0

0

Commissariat

500,000

0

0

Barracks

350,000

0

0

Army clothing

270,000

0

0

On the collection of the revenue in Great Britain

1,051,930

0

0

On the collection of the revenue in Great Britain in Ireland

388,307

0

0

Commissioners and auditors of public accounts

70,000

0

0

Bank, the sum charged for the management of the national debt

210,594

0

0

Pensions and offices executed by deputy

200,000

0

0

Bounties

150,000

0

0

Colonies

500,000

0

0

Catholic emancipation

2,000,000

0

0

10,693,663

0

0

Expenditure of the navy for the year ending January 5, 1809, 17,467,802 l. one-third of which is

5,822,530

13

4

Total Savings

16,516,193

13

4

Having once more, Sir, thanked the house for the indulgence I have experienced, I shall proceed to move for such papers as, if granted, will enable me to go further into detail early in the next session. I move, Sir, That there be laid before this House.

1. "An Account of the particulars of the total annual expence incurred by the Royal Staff Corps for 3 years, up to the 5th of Jan. 1809; distinguishing the numbers employed at home and abroad, and where employed.

2. "An Account of the particulars of all Expences incurred by the Local Militia up to the present time.

3. "An Account of the particulars of the Expences incurred by the Royal Waggon Train in the 3 years ending 5th Jan. 1809.

4. "An Account of the particulars of the Expences incurred by the Regiment of the Manx Fencibles from its establishment to the present time: together with a Statement shewing the Services which it has performed.

1104

5. "An Account of the particulars of the sum of 97,248 l. 2s. 1d. paid by the Paymaster General in the year 1808 for Public Offices.

6. "An Account, of the particulars of the sum of 285,685 l. 13 s. 3d. paid by the Paymaster-General for barracks in the year 1808 in Great Britain, and of the sum of 381,304 l. 13 s. 8¾d. paid in the same period in Ireland.

7. "An Account of the particulars of the sum of 131,818 l. 19 s. 2d. paid by the Paymaster General in Great Britain in the year 1808 for Staff and Garrison, and of the sum of 70,335 l. paid in the same period in Ireland.

8. "An Account of the particulars of the Expence incurred by recruiting the Army from the commencement of the present war to the 5th of Jan. 1809.

9. "An Account of the particulars of the Expence incurred for Clothing the Army in the 3 years ending 5th Jan, 1809.

10. "An Account of the particulars of the sum of 5,108,900 l. paid by the Office of Ordnance in 1808, for services at home and abroad, so far as the same can be made up.

11. "An Account of the particulars of the Expence incurred since the commencement of the present war, in building, repairing, and making Fortifications, Martello Towers, the Military Canal, and the purchase of lands connected with the aforesaid matters, throughout the United Kingdom, to 5th Jan. 1809.

12. "An Account of the particulars of the Expence incurred in building a new Mint, and providing Machinery for the same; together with an Estimate of the sum wanting to complete it.

13. "An Account of the Establishment of His Majesty's Mint, shewing the amount of the salaries and perquisites paid and belonging to each officer.

14. "An Account of the particulars of the amount of Monies paid fir Naval Services in the year ending 5th Jan. 1809, excepting so much as was paid for wages to officers and seamen, and to persons employed in his majesty's Dock Yards.

15. "An Account of the particulars of the Expence incurred in the present session for Printing and Stationary for both houses of parliament.

16. "An Account of the Expence incurred by the Military College, from its first institution to the 5th Jan. 1809.

17. "An Account of the particulars of

1105
the Expence incurred in the year ending 5th Jan. 1809, for confining, maintaining, and employing Convicts at home.

18. "An Account of the sums paid to American Loyalists since the year 1783, and of the expence incurred in investigating their claims.

19. "An Account of the establishment of the Commissariat Department of the United Kingdom; shewing the salaries paid to the several persons belonging to it, and particulars of the rents paid, and to whom, for houses, offices, and stores belonging to the department, and also shewing every expenditure thereof, in the 3 years ending 5th Jan. 1809.

20. "An Account of the particulars of the payment of 418,230 l. 7s. 10½d. in the year ending 5th Jan. 1809, out of the Vote of Credit for Ireland for that year.

21. "An Account of all sums advanced under any head out of the Public Fund to the support of the British colonies.

22. "An Account of the expences incurred by the corps of Royal Artillery, (Gunners and Drivers, for three years, ending 5th Jan. 1809; also an Account of the numbers of that corps that have been on Foreign Service during those years; and also an Account of all sums of money paid for the purchase, hire, and keep of contract horses by the Board of Ordnance during that period.

24. "An Account of all Monies paid as Remunerations to Commissioners, whether appointed by the crown or parliament, for all enquiries into Public Expenditure, from the year 1780 to the present time; distinguishing each Commission."

On the question being put, upon the first motion:
Mr. Huskissonrose and said; Mr. Speaker; With whatever feelings of surprize and regret I may have witnessed the conduct of the hon. gent., on the occasion of his first broaching, in another place, the subject which he has now at last brought under the consideration of the house, those feelings have by no means been awakened, either by the explanation which the hon. gent, has just given of the motives by which he has been actuated, or by the statement which he has submitted to the house in support of his proposition, If, in the first instance, I observed, with astonishment, a member of this house, one of the guardians of the public purse, and one too who professes to watch over the public expenditure with more than an ordinary degree of jealousy and anxiety, seek-
1106
ing an opportunity, not during the recess of parliament, but in the middle of a session, not in this house, but at a public meeting, stating that he could point out a plan by which eleven millions a year might be saved to the country; that astonishment was, if possible, increased, when I saw the hon. gent, attending, day after day, in his place here without giving the house any intimation of the means by which this most desirable object might be effected. The hon. gent, could not be ignorant, that, on the one hand, such a declaration was calculated to make a strong impression out of doors; that from the character of the meeting at which it was made, it would be disseminated through the public with a mischievous activity; and on the other, that it was only in this house that the plan could be discussed with a view to any beneficial result, or that any practical measure could be taken for attaining its professed object; and yet, Sir. the hon. gent, has just informed us, that it was not his intention to have brought forward any part of this notable scheme in the present session. In a tone, almost of anger and complaint, he tells you that he has been goaded and challenged by the frequent calls made upon him here; that yielding to such importunity, and not to any sense of his public duty, he, on this last day of the session, condescends to point out the means of relieving the public from the pressure of the Property Tax. What, Sir, is the light in which the hon. gent, places his own conduct by his statement of this evening? Two months ago he had ascertained, to the entire satisfaction, I presume, of his own mind, that a tax producing upwards of eleven millions a year could be taken off without any detriment to the public service; he had, at that time, so completely matured the measures of reform by which this saving could be effected, as publicly to record his opinion: and to-night he tells you that it never was his intention, in this session to follow up that opinion by any proposition in this house! In the view of the hon. gent., then, the saving of eleven millions is a matter of such little moment, that the means of enacting it being delivered by him in his middle of one session, it consists with his sense of public duty, to postpone the application of those means till the next. But it also consists with this same sense of duty, in the mind of the hon. gent., to send forth the assertion to the public, under such circumstances, and cou-

1107
pled such sentiments, as appeared to the meeting, where it was first uttered, best calculated to create an impression, that the blame of the continuance of this tax is solely to be ascribed to the corruption of this house. The blame, if blame there be, of not having investigated the hon. gent.'s plan of economy in this session must fall entirely upon himself. The mischief likewise, if mischief ensue, from his indiscreet assertions, must be laid entirely at his door. The delusion and the disappointment are equally of his own creating. That the hon. gent.'s plan will end in the disappointment of those who gave credit to his assertions, must, I think, be obvious to every member of this house, who has listened to the details brought forward by the hon. gent. I shall not attempt to follow him through all these details. If, indeed, they had been supported by any thing like reasoning or proof, I might have found it necessary to trespass upon the indulgence of the house, with such statements as the arguments of the hon. gent, might have appeared to me to require? but when the hon. gent, brings forward nothing but a string of bare assertions, it. would be a waste of time to meet them in detail by other assertions of an opposite nature. Indeed, sir, from the manner in which the hon. gent. treats this subject, I am at a loss to understand why he should confine his savings to eleven millions. With the same facility, and by the same process, he might produce a saving of twenty; and certainly there are other reformers, out of doors, with a degree of self-confidence, equal to that of the hon. gent., who do not scruple to tell the public that twenty millions might be saved without any detriment to the public service. Their assertions, I make no doubt, are made with the same sincerity, proclaimed with the same patriotic views, and calculated to produce the same beneficial purposes as those of the hon. gent. He, however, is only bound by the minor pledge; but having been the first to start, his anxiety to redeem that pledge, may, perhaps, have been quickened, this evening, by the bolder strides of those who have since followed him in this mighty career.
The first idea of this saving appears to have suggested itself to the hon. gent.'s mind in consequence of a discovery he made in the annual accounts, that the total expenditure of Great Britain, in the year ending the 5th of January, 1808, was seventy-one millions, and that in the year
1108
ending the 5th of January. 1809, it was seventy-nine millions. The hon. gent. finds an increase of charge to the amount of eight millions, and the necessary and natural inference is, that a saving of eleven may be made. Having come to this irresistible conclusion, the hon. gent, hastens to publish his discovery at the Crown and Anchor, and has since laboured to make up an account, shewing the means by which this saving may be effected. Before I proceed to say a few words on those means, I will endeavour to state very shortly to the house the principal causes of the increased expence in the year 1809, compared with the preceding year. This part of the case might have embarrassed the hon. gent.'s calculation, and he therefore very discreetly appears to have excluded it altogether from his account. In the first place there is the augmentation to the charge of the public debt, occasioned by the loan of the year, amounting to about 800,000 l. In the navy an increased expense of 1,500,000 l. owing principally to the increased price of naval stores. In the army, an increase to the same amount owing to the augmentation of our regular force, and to our having had a great proportion of that force employed in active operations in Spain and Portugal. There is also 1,500,000 l. in arrear of debt due by the public to the East India Company, for services performed by them in former years; and about 3,000,000 l. of pecuniary aid to our allies, of which 1,200,000 l. was sent to the king of Sweden, under the sanction of Parliament, and the remainder to aid the patriotic efforts of the Spaniards, with the concurrence and approbation of every man in the kingdom. I must leave to the house and to the public to judge, whether any of those branches of expenditure could have been abridged, consistent with justice or sound policy; and will now proceed to the plan of the hon. gent.
His first proposal was to disband the two regiments of Life Guards. They are represented by the hon. gent, to be totally unnecessary; but I think when the house considers not Only that these corps are connected with the splendour of the throne, and are called upon to attend upon the sovereign whenever he visits any public place in the metropolis, but that their services are required on all occasions of public ceremony, and are essential for the preservation of public tranquillity and good order, they will not be disposed to allow the hon. gent. to take credit for this pre

1109
posed saving. Indeed it must be obvious that if these two corps were reduced, other corps of cavalry, at least to the same extent, would be requisite for the service and police of London, and the utmost saving, therefore, that could be effected by the sacrifice of the other considerations to which I have referred, would be, the paltry difference between the pay of the life guards and that of cavalry of the line. The next saving is of a more extensive and sweeping nature. The hon. gent. proposes to reduce the cavalry at once to fifteen thousand men. Unquestionably, sir, if fifteen thousand men be a sufficient body of cavalry for this country to maintain, all above that number should be reduced; but the hon. gent, assumes the fact; and, if we are prepared, upon the mere ipse dixit of that hon. gent., to disband nearly one-half of our cavalry, the saving must follow as a matter of course. This is no wonderful discovery. But is the house prepared to act upon the bare assertion of the hon. gent., and to allow his authority upon this great military question, unsupported by any statement or argument whatever, unaccompanied with any comparative view of the proportion which the cavalry of an army like ours ought to bear to its infantry, to outweigh the opinions of all the great military characters who have been constituted upon this subject, and the judgment of the house itself? Indeed, sir, the time which the hon. gent. has chosen for proposing this reduction is somewhat singular. It is precisely at a moment when a considerable proportion of our cavalry is distinguishing itself upon foreign service, when we are called upon, from all quarters, to send a much larger corps to co-operate with our allies, and when our decisive superiority in this description of force has recently been so strongly marked and acknowledged by our own generals, and felt by our enemies. This is the period of the war which the hon. gent. selects in order to bring forward a proposal to get rid of nearly one-half of the cavalry.
To the Foreign Corps, his next head of retrenchment, he shews still less of his indulgence. They must be swept away altogether. He has talked of them as a description of men not to be tolerated, whose existence as a military corps is a disgrace to the country, and whose conduct on service has shewn them to be destitute both of fidelity and courage. In this general description I can by no means concur;
1110
such charges appear to me as contrary to recorded facts as they are cruel and illiberal towards that meritorious class of men, who, from feelings of loyalty and fidelity above all praise, have been the victims, for these last sixteen years, of that dreadful revolution which began by their ruin, and has now nearly effected the ruin of the civilized world. That some trifling instances of misconduct may have occurred in the emigrant corps, as they do in all other corps; that some of them were recruited by methods which I never did approve of, are facts which I am not prepared to deny; but those instances have been artfully and grossly exaggerated, whilst their deeds of gallantry and heroism are kept out of sight. I will not detain the house by recalling them at present; but if the hon. gent, is at a loss for one instance, let him look at the siege of Ypres by the French in the last war, when an emigrant regiment sallied forth with a spirit never excelled, to cut its way through the besieging army, an attempt which excited the admiration and surprize of the British and Austrian commanders, when the few, who had survived the desperate enterprize, joined the allied forces. But, Sir, what is the description of foreign corps which we now possess, and which the hon. gent, is so anxious to dismiss ig-nominously from our service? They consist of men, born subjects of and owing allegiance to the same sovereign with ourselves—of men who, when driven from Hanover by the unprovoked aggression of the enemy, sought an asylum in this country. What course on that occasion would the hon. gent, have taken? Would he have repelled them from our shores?—Would he have advised his and their sovereign to have shut his ports, and refused his protection to men who had such strong claims to that protection? Would he have driven them, in despair, into the ranks of the enemy, or would he now send them back to Hanover, in order that a conscription may force them into those ranks? Had such been our policy, the chance of war might perhaps have brought them into this country as prisoners; and instead of paving them to fight our battles, we might now have had to maintain them, at nearly the same expence, mixed in our prisons with the inveterate enemies of this country. Is this the only footing upon which the honourable gentleman would have been willing to have given them an asylum?—To the loose general charge the

1111
hon. gent. has thrown out against them of misconduct in the field, I can only oppose the authority of the British generals, under whom they served in Zealand and on the Peninsula, and, I trust, their favourable testimony will have as much weight with the house as the unsupported assertion of the hon. gentleman. After all, the house must recollect, that if we disband and send home these 20,000 foreigners, this diminution in our army must be made up by an equal number of Englishmen, to be raised at a much greater, and maintained at an equal expence; so that this discovery of the hon. gent, would effect no saving, unless he could also persuade the house and the country, that our regular force, which it has been the uniform endeavours of the house to augment, could undergo a reduction of 20,000 men without any inconvenience.
On the subject of the Local Militia I shall not detain the house by any detail. The hon. gent, has called it the most profligate of all establishments; I shall only say that it is an establishment called for by the voice of the country, and by the sense of this house; that it is the description of force which, from its nature and composition, seems of all others, the least calculated to increase patronage, and to afford scope for profligate establishments; that the hon. gent., with his view of the subject, should have opposed the measure itself, when it was under the consideration of parliament, a course which I do not recollect him to have taken. But when parliament has directed this force to be provided, the executive government would be grossly remiss if it neglected to carry the law into execution; and I am sure that it would be impossible to raise, embody, and officer, so large a force, without incurring the full amount of expence granted by parliament for this purpose. So long, therefore, as this force is maintained upon its present footing, the hon. gent, cannot expect any saving to be effected.
I shall not follow the hon. gent. through the details of all the other savings which he has proposed, because the house must have perceived that they all rest upon the same foundation—the mere assertions of the hon. gent., that such and such establishments are useless, that such and such reductions may be effected. To such assertions so supported, or rather so totally unsupported, it is unnecessary for me to oppose any thing more than counter assertions; though I cannot help observing
1112
that all the services to which he has objected are annually brought under the consideration of parliament; that provision is annually made for their support by the votes of this house: and that it is too much for the hon. gent, to expect that a mere declaration from him that such services are useless should be all the proof that parliament would require on the subject. In no instance does the hon. gent, condescend to explain either the principles of his retrenchment, or to give us any calculation by which he has ascertained the precise sum to be saved. Thus, in adverting to fortifications, he tells us that they are altogether unnecessary—that their present expence is 700,000 l. per annum, but that 200,000 l. would be sufficient. Can any thing be more loose in reasoning—more unsatisfactory in its result? Why not take credit for the whole 700,000 l.? As all for tification is useless, on what data is it that the hon. gent, finds that 200,000 l. per annum is the precise sum which ought to be appropriated to this unnecessary purpose? Is not this trifling with the time and good sense of the house? How far a system of fortification ought to form a part of the defence of this kingdom, is one of the questions upon which military men and this house have been most divided in opinion; but the hon. gent, feels no difficulty in deciding upon it. In his view, all fortifications are useless; but as 500,000 l. will answer his purpose, he is generously pleased to allow us 200,000 l. for the amusement of those who are of a different opinion. In the article of army clothing the hon. gent calculates upon a saving of 270,000 l. per annum. This is a downright fallacy. The great coats for the army, and all the clothing provided by government, whether for our own forces, or for those of our allies, are procured by public competition, and as this is the very mode by which the hon. gent. proposes to effect his saving, it is obvious that no further abatement can be looked for upon these supplies. As to the clothing which every colonel furnishes to his own regiment, government has no concern in it. The off-reckonings, out of which the regiment is clothed, are, as it is well known, an allowance of a very old standing, made to the colonel for this purpose, and which, notwithstanding the rise of every article, has not been augmented. The interference of government goes no farther than to take care that the regiment is clothed according to the regulations of the army.—

1113
The mode and terms of purchase are left altogether to the colonel, and the difference between the price paid by him, and the off-reckonings allowed by government, constitutes the chief profit of the regiment. If, under these circumstances, the general officers of the army, who are colonels of regiments, pay for their own clothing, as the hon. gent. states, more than is allowed by government to its contractors, it proves a liberal attention on their part to the comfort of their men, and on the part of government that every possible economy is practised; for in this head of expenditure the hon. gentleman's grievance is, that government is served cheaper than the individual. In the whole statement, the hon. gent. appears to proceed on the principle that the large establishments we are obliged to maintain, for the purpose of security and defence, as this house and the country have hitherto foolishly conceived, have no such object; but that the real object of them is in order to create a large expence. This is the discovery which it was reserved for the hon. gent. to make. The hon. gent. argues as if the order of proceeding in this house was this—First, to resolve to make our expenditure as large as possible, and then to frame our establishments accordingly. Hitherto, Sir, we have been taught to believe that our establishments were regulated according to the exigencies of the country, and that the grants of this house were governed by such establishments. But this view of the subject would not suit the hon. gentleman's purpose; and, in the whole of his argument, he has assumed that our present establishments were not necessary for any other purpose than that of adding to our expence. He has argued as if we were all agreed on this point, and as if the only difference of opinion would be whether they should or should not be kept up, for the sake of keeping up that expence. It is unnecessary, therefore, till we have settled this principle, to follow him into any further detail:—there is, however, one remaining point, on which I feel it necessary to correct a misrepresentation of the hon. gentleman. He stated the establishment of the commissariat department in Ireland to amount to no less a sum than 95,000 l. whilst the whole expenditure was only 235,000 l. The hon. gent., with an air of triumph, asked of the house to consider what must be the character of such a department, in which 95,000 l. was necessary in an establishment, in order to manage an expen-
1114
diture of 235,000 l. Now, Sir, the hon. gent. must know, that the whole expence of this department, so far as relates to what is generally described under the head of Establishment, such as salaries, allowances, office rent, coals and candles, &c. does not exceed 20,000 l.; and that in the estimate from which he has taken his statement is included a corps of waggoners, amounting to 1050 horses, with their drivers, &c. necessary in Ireland for the delivery of the supplies to the troops both in quarters and in camp, the contractors there not undertaking for the deliveries, as is the case in this country. In this respect, therefore, the statement of the hon. gent. was calculated to convey an unfounded impression, and a false charge, which I have thought it necessary to set right.
Although I have now trespassed on the attention of the house much longer than I intended, by the observations I have thought it right to make on the hon. gentleman's statement with respect to the public expenditure, I must request their indulgence for a few remarks, which I find it necessary to make on the animadversions which he has made on the collection of the revenue. He goes first into the Post-Office, and having ascertained that in Mr. Palmer's time this service was performed at an expence of 200,000 l. per ann. and that it now costs 400,000 l. he immediately infers that abuses exist to the amount of 200,000 l. and that this sum might be saved to the public. Now, Sir, I will take upon myself so assert, that if this subject is inquired into, in the most minute detail, the house will be satisfied that no increase of expence has been incurred in this department which was not absolutely necessary for the public service, or conducive to the improvement and increase of this branch of the revenue. The house must be aware, that in this department as well as in others, it has been found absolutely necessary to augment the salaries of the clerks and subordinate officers, who, I am sure, are not now overpaid. Where the numbers employed are necessarily very large, as in the post-office, including all the postmasters, letter carriers, &c. in the kingdom, an augmentation, however small to each person, amounts to a very considerable sum upon the whole. Whatever other augmentation of expence has been incurred, arises either from the increased accommodation which has been afforded to the trade, and to

1115
every part of the community, by opening new lines of communication, establishing new post-offices, by a daily delivery of letters to places where they were formerly conveyed only every other day, or twice a week, and very much by the increased establishment and expence of packets for maintaining an intercourse with distant countries, and for the encouragement of our foreign commerce. But, in making these improvements, I can assure the house, that the post-office, though at all times justly anxious to contribute to the comfort and convenience of the community, and particularly of the commercial class, does not lose sight of the interests of the revenue; and that there is scarcely one of them which does not amply compensate for the increased expence; so that the addition which has been made to the public charge in this respect, if examined merely as a revenue consideration, is money well laid out, and productive of a very large sum to the public income.
In the Customs, the hon. gent. has stated one instance of what he conceives to be a most flagrant abuse, and he called upon the house to take it as a specimen of what he conceives to be the whole system of the department. This instance is the appointment of three new surveyors general, making ten in the whole, at a time when the original number of seven ought, in the judgment of the hon. gent., to have been diminished, in consequence of the new docks; why, Sir, it is on account of these new docks that this addition became necessary, one for each of the three great establishments, West India, London, and East India docks. I will not trouble the house with details on this subject, but shall content myself with stating in the presence of members of this house, whose mercantile knowledge I am sure will enable them to confirm that statement, that so far from there being any superfluous officers in the customs, the treasury is constantly applied to by the trade of this and all the principal ports for an increase of the establishment. We have constantly representations before us, that business is retarded from the want of a sufficient number of custom-house officers. The board of customs is constantly assailed with complaints of a like nature; and it is always slowly, reluctantly, and not till they are most fully impressed with the necessity of the case, that they recommend any addition; and the treasury
1116
never makes any such additions without their recommendation. So much, Sir, for superfluous establishments in this branch of the revenue, in which I need not remind the house, that all sinecure offices, and places executed by deputy, were abolished by Mr. Pitt.
In the Stamps, however, the hon. gent. has discovered an expenditure of 130,000 l. whilst, in his opinion, the management and collection of that revenue ought not to cost more than 30,000 l. Nothing but the most complete ignorance on this subject can excuse such an assertion on the part of the hon. gent. The revenue of stamps amounts at present to near 5,000,000 l. The use of them is become necessary in almost all the transactions of life; and consequently distributors are required in every part of the kingdom. In the course of last year, the treasury directed the poundage allowed to those distributors to be reduced one-fourth; but we have since been obliged to suspend the order, upon finding that persons could not be procured to take upon themselves the trouble and responsibility of the distribution at that reduced rate; and that much more would have been lost to the public by a diminished sale than would have been gained by the reduction. The house, besides, must be aware, that when titles to property are invalidated, if the proper stamps are not used, when every species of security is made to depend upon them, and when to all this, heavy penalties are superadded, to compel the use of stamps, and for the protection of the revenue, it becomes the duty of the government to place them within the reach of the consumer; and that therefore, independently of revenue considerations, we are called upon not to abridge the means of distribution. With respect to the establishment in London, so far from its being excessive or overpaid, there is no department in which the salaries in general are so low, as gentlemen will see, when I state to them, that not a month ago, upon a clerk's situation becoming vacant, the commissioners applied to the treasury to appoint a successor, stating the salary was 50 l. per annum, and that the office required constant attendance, and every qualification that can be required from an efficient clerk, and was moreover a situation of great trust. How were the treasury to find out a fit person for such a remuneration? who would accept the appointment? All the other salaries are

1117
nearly in the same proportion, and I have no scruple to say, that not only justice to individuals, but to the public interest, requires that they should be raised, if the public expect efficiency and fidelity in the persons employed. The hon. gent. must therefore be prepared for an augmentation of charge in this department.
With respect to the collection of the Land and Assessed Taxes, the hon. gent. is not more fortunate in his observations. The poundage allowed to the receivers has been reduced one-fourth by the present treasury; and, with respect to the balances in their hands, they are limited to 6,500 1. for each receiver; a sum considered to be necessary to enable them to meet the demands to which they are liable for the public service, under the authority of acts of parliament; so that their profits will not be found to be more than adequate to the trouble, and especially to the responsibility of their situations as public accountants; to the risk to which they are exposed, and the immense securities they are required to give to the public. With respect to the balances in the hands of the parochial collectors, stated by the hon. gent, to amount to 380,000 l. is he not aware that these collectors are not servants of the public, nor under any controul of the treasury, but appointed by the district commissioners? These balances are probably arrears due by the respective parishes on their several assessments. In some instance, a delay of payment is unavoidable unless the commissioners, in whom is vested the power of enforcing it, should resort to measures of extreme severity; but as government cannot interfere with the collectors, in no case can these arrears be ascribed to the negligence of office; and with respect to the commissioners, they are certainly intisled rather to our thanks for their gratuitous services and zeal, in aid of the efficient collection of the taxes, than to censure for occasional indulgence to parties, who from a temporary pressure, maybe somewhat in arrear.
The hon. gent. has correctly stated, from the annual printed account, that the total charge for the collection and management of the revenue is 2,800,000 l. but, according to what calculation he assumes that 1,000,000 l. might be saved in this charge I am at a loss to conjecture. It is true that the hon. gent, states that the revenue might be collected at the rate of three per cent, instead of 4l. 12 s. 9d. the
1118
present rate. Here again we have nothing but the bare assertion of the hon. gent. Just as well might we have said two per cent. or even any lower rate; in point of reason, one assertion is as good as the ether; and for any purpose of impression out of doors (for I cannot believe such a mode of argument will have any weight here,) that assertion which promises the largest saving would probably best serve the hon. gent's views of reform. The hon. gent. has discovered, however, that in Scotland the rate of management and collection is higher than in England; and he at once concludes that the difference grows out of some abuse. In this he betrays his total ignorance of the subject. How can he suppose, that in one part of the country, poor and thinly peopled, a small revenue can be collected at the same rate as a much larger sum is in another part of the country, of a totally different description? Does the hon. gent. suppose that the revenue of a Welsh county or a Highland district, for instance, is collected at the same rate as that of Middlesex?
I cannot quit this part of the subject without observing that the hon. gent. appears altogether to forget, that this sum of 2,800,000 l., stated to be the charge for the management of the revenue, includes many services and expences which do not belong properly to the mere collection of the taxes. For instance, the whole establishment and expense of the post-office, which in one view ought to be considered rather as an undertaking of the first importance to the comforts and interest of every class of society, paid for by every man in proportion to the use and advantage he derives from it, and leaving a profit to the state by which it is carried on, than as a mere tax; with which, as such, we have nothing to do but to impose and levy it at the cheapest rate we can. In the customs, too, a great part of the establishment is framed, and of the expense incurred, not so much for the collection of revenue as for the enforcement of our navigation laws, and of the system of our colonial trade. This is particularly the case in ail our foreign settlements, and in some degree at home. All the outgoings in this department, therefore, are not to be charged to the expense of collecting duties under its management.
In the course of his statement the hon. gent, has found himself called upon twice

1119
to compliment the system of economy of the late ministers. A comparison of the expenditure of the army, during the year they were in office with that of the last year, afforded him the first opportunity. In making this comparison, however, the hon. gent. forgot to state, that with the increase of expense, the total number of the army had also proportionably increased, and that the amount of force employed on foreign service was much greater; so that whatever might be the merit of economy in a preceding administration, the present one is not to be blamed as wanting in this respect, unless it can be shewn that it was unwise to augment our regular army, and impolitic to employ a considerable part of it in active operations against the enemy. The other instances, however, the hon. gent, thinks conclusive. During the reign of these economical ministers, he says the charge of management and collection was only 4l. 8s. per cent, and it is now 4l. 12 s. 9d. an increase in the charge of collection to the amount of 200,000 l. brought on by the profusion of the present government. If the hon. gent, had been better informed on this subject, he would have been obliged to admit that this increase of charge was owing to very different causes. When the present Board of Treasury came into office, they found among other legacies left to them by their predecessors, a very detailed Report from the Board of Excise of the whole of their establishment. By this document it appeared that the salaries of the excise officers had not been raised for a great number of years, and that they were then totally inadequate to their support. The commissioners of excise represented, in the most forcible terms, the absolute necessity of increasing these salaries, as the only means of securing the revenue, by placing the officers above corruption; and, that, if the augmentation was any longer delayed, a general system of laxity, and a dependance on the parties whom they were appointed to survey, for loans of money, or assistance of some description, would be the inevitable result. With this representation, in which the commissioners who made it had no personal interest, as their salaries were not raised—with the example of Ireland, of which we have heard so much lately, before our eyes, with a revenue of 20 millions, and a system of collection, hitherto remarkable for its regularity and purity, at stake, and with such a forcible appeal
1120
from the officers themselves to the justice of the treasury, could we hesitate in acceding to the proposed augmentation of their salaries? It was granted, and though, upon an average, it did not exceed 15 l. to each officer, the aggregate increase of charge was considerably more than 100,000 l. a year.
Another great, but unavoidable augmentation in the charge of collection, arises from the abolition of fees in the customs. To the officers who have hitherto received their remuneration in this shape, fixed salaries are now allotted, payable out of the revenue. The apparent increase of charge arising from this alteration is very considerable, while, in point of fact, the officers receive less now than they did before; and though this is not an opportunity for going at large into the subject, I have no hesitation in stating to the house that both the revenue and the public have received great benefit and accommodation from this salutary regulation.
These two circumstances of an increase of salary to the officers of excise, and of the abolition of fees in the customs, would alone account for an augmentation of charge exceeding 200,000 l. per annum; and if the increase of charge upon the whole collection is not more considerable within these last two years, it is owing to reforms and retrenchments which have been made in other branches, such as the reduction of poundage in the office of taxes, and the abolition of certain offices in the customs and other branches, the continuance of which was found to be unnecessary. Two other savings which the hon. gent. has proposed, remain to be shortly noticed. The first is of a very singular description, nothing less than the abolition of the board of auditors, and all commissions for examining and stating the public accounts of the kingdom, The hon. gent. proposes that this service should be performed by Committees of this house. Extravagant as this idea must appear, I cannot give the hon. gent, credit for being the first to suggest it. I have seen it brought forward elsewhere, but as it appeared to me, not so much with a view to any practical result, as with a design, in which I am sure the hon. gent. does not partake, of calumniating this house. In the hands of others it has been, used as a pretence for vilifying the members of this house, for accusing them of indifference to the public expenditure, and of neglect of duty as the trustees of the people, far not look-

1121
ing into their accounts. Such imputations, for aught I know, may answer the purposes or those who are aiming at reform, by working upon the passions of the people, and the prejudices of the ignorant; but I am convinced that there is not one gentleman in this house, or one rational man in the country, the hon. gent, excepted, who can be of opinion that the public accounts can be effectually examined by committees of this house. The necessary duties which are already imposed upon members of parliament, both in the house and in its committees, are of themselves sufficient to occupy their time. But I do not rest my objection upon this. The examination of long, complicated, and intricate, accounts, involving questions respecting the rates of exchange, the value of foreign money, and a thousand other difficult points, is, in itself, a science requiring the uninterrupted attention of the auditors, and of able accountants, and experienced clerks under them. Could we expect these qualifications and this assiduity in committees of this house?—Could committees examine parties and witnesses upon oath and carry on a most extensive correspondence with them in all quarters of the world? This examination of accounts is, of all others, the service which a fluctuating body of men would be least competent to carry on. Further—could members of this house be divested of all party-feeling, be rendered inaccessible to all canvas and solicitation? for such, Sir, ought to be, and I believe is, the character and situation of an auditor. In his functions there is much which partakes of the judicial character, and his official tenure is the same as that of the judge's. In short, I am perfectly certain, that if the examination of the public accounts was devolved to committees of this house, they would either undergo no examination at all; or, if they were looked into, it would only be such a formal examination as would afford a cover to fraud, or occasionally, perhaps, an oppornity of gross injustice to particular individuals, who might be brought before us as accountants. The hon. gent. has described the board of auditors as not discharging their duty. In this he is mistaken. The establishment of this board was greatly enlarged by the late administration, and it is whimsical enough that the hon. gent. should almost in the same breath praise them for this exertion, by which the ex-pence was more than doubled (not improperly doubled,) and propose to abolish the
1122
establishment altogether. The fact is, that within these two years, a great many of the accounts in arrear have been audited, and that there is reason to hope that the whole arrear may be done away in a few years, by a continuance of the present establishment, subject to such modifications as experience may suggest. The other saving the hon. gent. proposes to effect is, by doing away the whole of the charge now stated in the printed accounts, under the head of Bounties, amounting to upwards of 500,000 l. per annum. From the manner in which they were noticed by hon. gent., one would almost conceive that he is disposed to represent these bounties as largesses or gratuities arbitrarily given, instead of being, as they really are, drawbacks and encouragements to our manufactures, and some of our most essential branches of national industry. There is not a shilling paid in this way, except under the express authority of some act of parliament, or which could be withdrawn, without involving in ruin some important establishment, or some great national object.
The amount of our public taxes, and the mode of collecting them, having been brought under the consideration of the house by the speech of the hon. gent., I trust I shall be excused for taking this opportunity of stating my entire concurrence in the view taken of our situation in this respect, as stated by a right hon. gent. (Mr. Windham) in the course of the present session. I agree with him, that great as is the amount of our present taxes, it is certainly not greater, in proportion to the means of the country to bear the burden, than in any former war; whilst in every other respect our situation is infinitely more satisfactory. I am aware that the sum levied annually upon the people of this country, is now three times as great as it was in the year 1793; and though this weight of taxation is severely felt by some classes, and especially by those who possess only unimprovable fixed incomes, a circumstance greatly to be regretted, I maintain that, upon the whole, the present generation of the people of England, considered as a nation, have more means of procuring to themselves the enjoyment of life than any of their predecessors; that, in point of fact, we witness daily, in every part of the country, a greater degree of luxury, and a greater share of comfort than at any former period; and that there is no corner of the

1123
kingdom in which, so far from there existing any symptoms of deterioration or decay, we have not seen, within these last twenty years, the most certain indications of improvement; an improvement, however retarded by continued war and increasing burthens, still progressive, and adding every year, more or less, to the stock of national wealth and public prosperity. The actual sum levied upon the people of this country, in proportion to the population, is, I admit, greater than any other country of Europe; but, notwithstanding this circumstance, I am fully convinced that there is no great nation on the continent in which the taxes are so lightly felt, and collected with so little of oppression and vexation as in this country. This observation is drawn from me, not by any thing that has been said by the hon. gent., but it is certainly not altogether foreign to the subject, and will not, I trust, be deemed misplaced by the house; as I perceive, that out of doors, persons professing to be the zealous co-operations of the hon. gent. in schemes of parliamentary reform, are using every endeavour to inculcate a belief that in France at least the taxes are few and light, and collected in the most gentle and lenient manner. Are those who would delude and deceive the people of this country by such statements, aware that in France, in addition to that most dreadful of all taxes and all oppressions, the military conscription, and to a thousand other arbitrary and vexatious exactions, personal and pecuniary, the land-tax alone frequently exceeds one-half of the rent; that in France, taxes in arrear are levied by a process little short of military execution; by the quartering of soldiers upon the party until the arrear is discharged? This is no imaginary picture; it is no other than a faithful description of what takes place under that rule of military depotism, and what would too soon be imitated, perhaps in this country, if those who were now most clamorous against our existing institutions could persuade the people of England to adopt their plans of reform, and incur the risks and dangers of a revolution.
There is only one topic more on which I will trouble the house at present. The hon. gent. has reminded us of the declaration of a gallant admiral (Markham), a member of this house, that one-third of the whole expence of the navy might be saved without prejudice to the service. That expense is now nineteen millions, and if
1124
the hon. gent., upon the strength of this assertion, has taken credit for a third of this sum, it will certainly be of main assistance to him towards effecting his proposed saving of eleven millions. The assertion, I am afraid, was made in this, house. Whether it was drawn from the hon. admiral in a moment of irritation, and when he was off his guard, I cannot pretend to say; but I have no difficulty in declaring that it was a rash and inconsiderate assertion, and one which could not be realized. Since it was made, that gallant admiral has been in office: he has not only been a lord of the admiralty, but what is called the managing lord, a phrase perfectly well understood at that board. In this situation he must have been anxious, not only from every feeling of duty to his country, but from the most powerful personal motives, to make good his assertion, and to establish the truth and solidity of it, by his own practice and his own retrenchments. Further, he must have been goaded to it every day and almost every hour, by that economical administration which has this night received the praise of the hon. gent., an administration under which the gallant admiral served, and the members of which had, in a manner, made themselves parties to this pledge, not less by their boasted professions of economy, than by the cheers of approbation they gave to the original assertion. Well, Sir, what was done? Were the estimates of the navy diminished? Was the sum required for wages, for wear and tear, for victualling, less than under the hon. admiral's predecessors? In fact, was the expense lessened at all, or in any material degree? It certainly was not, and the hon. admiral must have found his mistake. It would be preposterous to pretend, that in an expenditure of nineteen millions, there exist no abuses at all; but I maintain, that when they are discovered, they are corrected; that there is no wilful waste countenanced by the heads of departments; that there is as much vigilance and as much anxiety to keep down expense in the present admiralty as there could be during the management of the hon. admiral; and that many beneficial regulations have lately been made for this purpose; but that no such saving, as was rashly stated by him to be practicable, can be effected; and that the total expence cannot be materially, if at all, diminished, as long as the war compels us to keep up our navy to its present establishment.

1125
So far, therefore, from the hon. gent.'s statement haying derived any real support from the assertion of the gallant admiral, I say that he, as I trust the house and the public will, ought to take a warning from it, to mistrust his own assertions; and that the mischievous use which has been made of the gallant admiral's statement and authority out of doors, to create discontent, ought to have been a lesson to the hon. gent. to hesitate before he came forward here, or elsewhere, with similar assertions, calculated not to alleviate any real pressure, but to add to the irritation of the public, not to improve our resources, but to increase the difficulties and hazards inseparable from a protracted war, of which no man can foresee the issue, or determine the duration.
Mr. R. Wardsaid, the assertion of the hon. gent. with respect to the canvas being bad, and supplied by the inspector, was not correct. The contractor received but 1,400 l. per annum; out of that it could not be supposed the person could amass a fortune. If, however, the hon. gent. would come to-morrow and prove the statement he had made true, the Inspector should be turned out.
Mr. Parnell.Before, Sir, I make any reply to the arguments of the hon. member (Mr. Huskisson), I feel myself called upon to assert, that a charge more unfounded could not be made by one member against another, than that which he has brought forward against the hon. member behind me, for making his statement an the last day of the session. I appeal to every member in the house, whether or not the hon. member was not compelled to do so; and whether it was possible for him after the threat that was held over him from the moment at which he first expressed his opinion of the saving that might be made in the public expenditure, to permit the session to close, without coming down to the house and stating the grounds of that opinion. The hon. member has said, that the hon. mover has made a statement of mere assertion, and that he could just as easily have proved a saving of a million as a saving of 500,000 l. whenever he had said that he could save the latter sum. This, Sir, I positively deny; the statement of the hon. member was replete with sound argument, supported by indisputable facts, and corroborated by the best authorities; nothing was advanced in it which the hon. member did not most satisfactorily sustain, and it was very evident that, when the
1126
house heard this statement, a great degree of surprise was excited, inconsequence of the extent of proof which the hon. member was able to advance in support of his general opinion. In what the hon. member opposite has said, respecting the expenditure of the last year being greater than the expenditure of the preceding year by seven millions, he has altogether misrepresented the hon. member and me. He made no such absurd position, as that of saying, that because the expenditure had increased seven millions, therefore a saving might be effected of eleven. He referred to this fact merely with a view of shewing that grounds existed for forming a presumption that a considerable saving might be effected, and that whatever he advanced in the detail might be borne out. But how does the hon. member account for this increased expenditure? He says that a million and a half of it was paid to the East India Company, and to make out the remainder, he says, that we are to consider the great advance which has taken place in prices! Why, Sir, here it is that the argument of the hon. member behind me appears in its full force. Why has so great an advance in price taken place? Is it in consequence of any improvident measure of this house? I, Sir, maintain that it is—and that if this house did form a true representative body of the people, giving full effect to the abilities of the country, no such measure could have taken place as the Orders in Council, which is the immediate cause of this great advance in prices, and most particularly so on all articles for the navy, the purchase of which forms so considerable an item in the public expenditure. When, Sir, I come to consider the observations of the hon. member upon the statement which has been made to the house, I cannot avoid remarking how very superficially he has dwelt upon that part of it which relates to the Army. It is in this department where, according to common notoriety, the greatest abuses prevail; and in the general management of which, a greater want of sound principles is generally conceived to exist than in any other department; and though the hon. member behind me has made out items on which six millions, in his opinion, might be saved, the hon. member opposite has confined his observations to two of them only, the Foreign Corps and Fortifications. Is the house to conclude from this that the hon. member is unable to meet arguments and authorities advanced upon this general

1127
head? I think, Sir, it has, in a great degree, a right to do so; it has at least a right to infer that the hon. member who has proposed this saving, has not done so on the light grounds of mere assertion, imputed to him by the hon. member.
As to the Foreign Corps, any thing that has been said on this head was founded upon the opinions of the most able military and constitutional authorities. The argument of the hon. member, that 700,000 l. the whole estimate for Fortifications, might as well be taken off as 500,000 l. is founded in a misconception of what was said on the subject. Five hundred thousand pounds was proposed to be taken off, on the principle that no new Fortifications should, be built; a principle which the hon. member admits to be sanctioned by the highest authority, and it is intended to leave 200,000 l. per annum to maintain those which have been constructed in repair. Under the head of Charges of Management, the hon. member has attempted to shew an error in calculation on the part of the hon. member behind me. He has denied that a diminished rate of management of 1l. 12 s. 6d. per cent. would afford a saving of a million a year; and he seemed to rejoice extremely at the discovery which he had made. But the hon. member is himself grossly in error. He has calculated the saving upon the amount of the charges for management of 2,800,000 l. and not upon the amount of the gross receipt of the revenue of 64,000,000 l. on which he ought to have calculated it, and which calculation would have shewn him that the saving would exceed a million. As to what the hon. member has said of the impracticability of reducing the rate of the charges of collecting the revenue lower than it is now, I, Sir, can never accede to that doctrine; to pay near three millions a year for the business of collection, is to pay a most enormous sum, and a fact, that on the face of it proves an alteration of system to be absolutely necessary. The whole of the excise revenue is collected at little more than 2 per cent. Why, therefore, 3 per cent, should be too low a rate upon the whole revenue, it not easy to understand, unless that the other departments, being of longer standing, were more encumbered with sinecure offices, pensions and established habits of wasteful expenditure. In regard to the charge of collecting the revenue in Ireland, the hon. member had said nothing. It was proposed to reduce
1128
the rate from 11 l. 12 s. 6d. per cent, to 4l. 12 s. 6d. the rate at which the English revenue is now collected, and this would effect a saving of 388,000 l. No one, Sir, I believe, can deny that there exists good ground for effecting this saving. I am sure that I know of no reason arising from local circumstances, why this rate of 4l. 12 s. 6d. should not be fully sufficient; and if proper measures were adopted, I feel quite confident that it would prove to be so. The saving which had been proposed to be made by taking away the bounties on promoting and encouraging trade and manufactures, cannot be disputed by any one who forms his opinion on the subject, upon the established principles of political economy; and the hon. member not having objected to the amount which has been set down, in consequence of some of these bounties being rather of the nature of drawbacks of duty, than direct bounties for the mere encouragement of trade, as I had in some part conceived them to be, there is good ground to infer that a saving to that amount may be efcted. In speaking of the commissioners for auditing the public accounts, and inquiring into financial abuses, what the honourable member behind me said, has been wholly misunderstood. He said that he found these several boards cost the public 80,000 l. per annum, and that the progress made by them in auditing the accounts, and detecting abuses, was very slow and inadequate to such an expenditure, and that it would be better to appoint select Committees of this house to do that business, having one board of auditors to transact the business of each current year. If I understood the hon. member correctly, he proposed this plan with a view of ascertaining, in the most expeditious manner, what part of the six or seven hundred millions, that are now unaccounted for, is bona fide due to the public, in order that it might be recovered, before a long lapse of time, or accidents, might intervene to deprive the public of all chance of recovering what was justly due to them. It appears as if this work of passing such an immense magnitude of accounts could never be performed under the strict rules which bind the auditors, and therefore it is better to place the business in the hands of those who will be equally well calculated to do justice to the public, and at the same time possess great advantages in transacting the business with expedition. It is strange to act

1129
upon a system, as one of economy, which at the outset, imposed on the public a new expense of 80,000 l. per annum. It is, in fact, a system which will counteract any good that might be derived from it; and one that is likely to end in adding considerably to the burdens of the people, instead of producing the intended effect of diminishing them. The hon. member has misunderstood what has been said in respect to Newfoundland: it was not intended to take credit for a saving of a million on this head. The hon. member, who made the statement, has taken credit for 500,000 l. as a sum that might be saved, if the British colonies were so managed, that each should defray nearly all the expense belonging to its own defence. He stated the great value of the fisheries of Cape Breton and Newfoundland, in order to shew, that if due attention was paid to them, the inhabitants of those colonies might be enabled to defray all the expenses of them, and cease to be burthen-some to this country. Now, Sir, as to the opinion which the hon. member behind me entertains respecting the military expenditure of Ireland, in this I most fully concur with him, and am desirous to bear with him equal responsibility for the accuracy of it; for I defy any one to shew that this greatly increased expenditure, from 400,000 l. in the American war to two millions in 1799, and to near five millions in 1809, can be accounted for by any other means than by the impolitic resistance which is made to the constitutional claims of the people of Ireland. It is notorious to every one, that the object of that expenditure is in a great degree to keep the people in subjection, and that so large an army would not be wanting, if no such object existed. I have therefore a right to say, that if a wiser policy was adopted in governing Ireland, a great portion of this expenditure might be saved, and an additional security obtained for the defence of the country, against invasion, in the hearts and affections of the whole people of Ireland. The people of this country are greatly mistaken, if they conceive that this part of the public expenditure is of no concern to them. They pay of it, by the articles of the Union, no less than 15 parts out of 17; and they should be more on their guard, therefore, how they lend themselves to the designs of those who create alarms by talking of the terrors of popery. They should consider that they impose upon themselves a
1130
charge of no less than two millions a year by refusing to their Catholic fellow subjects their just and constitutional rights.
I must here, Sir, remark upon another point on which the hon. member opposite has greatly mistaken the statement of the hon. member behind me. He has argued as if he took credit for a great saving to be effected in the naval department, in order to make out a total saving of eleven millions. He has done no such thing. The savings which he has calculated upon are—in the army, 6,182,000 l.—Management of the revenue, 1,110,000 l.—Commissions of accounts and inquiry, 75,000 l.—Pensions, 300,000 l.—Colonies, 500,000 l.—Bounties, 150,000 l.—Allowance on management of debt, 210,000 l.—The military expenditure of Ireland, 2,000,000 l.—making 10,857,000 l. The savings which might be effected in the navy departments will amply make good what this sum wants of eleven millions; and it will also cover any errors that may have been made in taking the savings in the other departments so high as 10,857,000 l. I have felt it due, Sir, to the hon. member behind me, to make these observations in explanation and support of what he has said. The hon. member has undertaken a task of great responsibility, and one attended with great labour, with a view to promote a public object—his exertions, and the manner in which he has made out the grounds of his opinion, entitle him to the thanks of this house and of the country; and as I, Sir, think that the investigation which he has set on foot into every branch of the public expenditure will be attended with the best possible effects, I have felt it my duty to give what support it has lain in my power to give him.
Mr. Rosesaid, that as to the bounties, he could take upon himself to say, that no considerable saving could be made in this point, in fact, the greater part of the bounties were merely drawbacks; and if the plan of the hon. gent, were adopted in thus taking away these bounties, there would be at least 30,000 weavers in Spitalfields turned out of employment the first fortnight. Most of the bounties were merely drawbacks of duty on our manufactures upon exportation. There was no subject which he had considered with greater attention than this of bounties; he had gone over the subject again and again; and if it had appeared to him that any of them could have been taken off without doing an injury to the public, be certainly

1131
should have proposed it at times, in which the administration to which he belonged were at a loss to know what new taxes to fix upon. It could certainly be no object to the government to continue unnecessary bounties.
Mr. Lockhartsaid, that instead of there being too many officers employed in the custom-house, there was a pretty general complaint among the merchants that there were too few for the great weight of business that is now going on.
Mr. H. Thorntontook notice of the steps which had been taken by the Committee of Finance, to reform many abuses of which the hon. gent, had complained. As to the Pension List, he certainly wished it was smaller, but there were many parts of it which no man would wish to reduce. There were pensions to the amount of 355,000 l. annually to the royal family, and about 70,000 l. annually to the proprietors of Irish boroughs, as compensation under the act of Union. There were also pensions very properly given to many meritorious servants of the crown. It did not appear to him that out of the whole pension list there was more than 400,000 l. per annum, on which the proposed reduction could have any operation.
Mr. Wardlesaid, that he had never intended to institute any comparison between the modes of collecting the revenue in this country and in France. As to what he had stated about the inspector of canvas, he would be ready at all events to shew, that he had strong grounds for the statement that he had made.
The several Motions were then read. Mr. Huskisson objected to some of them, as being stated in such a way as to render it impossible to comply with them, and suggested, that the best plan would be to leave it to ministers to make up the accounts according to the scope of the motions, in the best manner they could; and if the Returns were not satisfactory the hon. gent. might renew his motions next session. Mr. Wardle assented to this, and all the motions were agreed to.