§ In the Committee of Supply, Mr. Wharton moved, That a sum not exceeding 554,441l. be granted for the expences of the Barrack Department for the current year.
§ Mr. Fremantlesaw many things in those Estimates, which appeared to him to require a great deal of explanation. New buildings which would bring on a very considerable expence, appeared in one part of the accounts to be ordered by the Commander-in-Chief, and in another part of them, he was at a loss to know whether the whole of this expence was now to be submitted to parliament. The expence of the Estimates for building barracks, appeared to be regularly increasing without any apparent cause. After adverting to the expences of the new buildings at Bexhill, he made several observations on the estimate of the new barrack projected to be built in what was called the Regent's Park. This barrack, which was only intended for the second regiment of Life Guards, was to cost 138,000l. Now it did appear to him that it was an enormous 302 sum to call for in the present times for the lodging of a single regiment of horse. He could not well conceive a more profligate waste of the public money. At Liverpool it was also proposed to build a barrack for 1,000 men, at the estimated expence of 82,000l. A new stable at Brighton was to cost 26,000l.; and a new barrack at Bristol for 800 men, was estimated at 60,000l. These were very large items, and required explanation.
Mr. Whartonsaid, it was true that many new barracks had been proposed to be built in 1811; but as it was not now intended to build them, the estimated ex-pence of course was not stated in the present accounts. The estimates were only of those buildings now in progress, and which were intended to be completed. The expence of buildings was in one schedule, and that of repairs and alterations would be found in another. The regiment of Life Guards had hitherto kept their horses in rented barracks in King-street, but the term was expired, and if they were to be kept in barracks at all, it was necessary that they should be built. At Brighton the stables formerly used by the troops were in a most dilapidated state, and it was necessary, if troops were to be kept there at all, that new stables should be built. The necessity of building the barracks in the neighbourhood of Bristol arose from the circumstance of there being a considerable depot of French prisoners in the neighbourhood, amounting to eight or ten thousand men. If the necessity for the buildings was admitted, he would say that greater economy or more diligent superintendence could not be used with respect to the expence. Those who were accustomed to barrack estimates for many years, would perceive that the present was not higher than was usual, and, in point of fact, the contract was generally much within the original estimate.
§ Mr. Fremantledid not mean to throw the least imputation on the Barrack Board, who were obliged to obey the directions of government. The sums, however, did appear to him to be very exorbitant.
§ Mr. Huskissonsaid, that notwithstanding the explanation which had been given, he could not feel satisfied. He remembered, that when he was at the Treasury, it had been proposed to build a magnificent barrack at Islington, and the ground was actually marked out for it. Now, although this was strongly recommended by military authorities, the Treasury thought the 303 expence too great, and that it might be postponed till some other time. If they had adopted all the plans submitted to them by the Military Board, an expence of two or three millions would have been incurred in building new barracks. In the present times, however, it appeared to him, that every expence should be postponed which was not absolutely necessary; and that the same considerations which made the Treasury reject many of those plans formerly, ought now to act with as much force as ever. If the House were to calculate the expence of this new barrack, they would find that it was near 450l. for every horse. It appeared to him that this was most extravagantly beyond any thing that really could be necessary. It was said, to be sure, that the men were also to be lodged there, but considering the manner in which men of their class in life were usually lodged, this sum appeared enormous, amounting, according to the interest generally given for money laid out in building, to 40l. per annum for the lodging of each trooper and his horse. He was afraid that in this new building there would be some attempt at splendour and awkward magnificence, and that the building would be something between a palace and a stable. At Liverpool he thought that it was unnecessary to go to such great expence, as many warehouses might be now got on easy terms, which would make very good temporary barracks. He thought that every expence that could be spared ought in the present times to be spared, and that even if the government were determined that the expences should amount to an hundred millions a year, there were other ways of spending the money which would be of more use in the prosecution of the present war. He thought there must be reasons fully as strong for postponing those buildings now, as existed at the time when he was in the Treasury, and he did not imagine there was any greater facility of borrowing money now, than there was then.
§ Mr. Parnellthought the House ought to pause before it came to a vote out of all proportion to the objects specified. He wished to call their attention to one item, namely, that of 25,000l. paid to the commissioners for auditing general Delancey's accounts, during the five years that they had been employed upon them. If the public was to pay that yearly for the detection of official defaulters, be thought 304 it would be better to let them go altogether unpunished.
Mr. Whartonobserved, that barracks for the Life Guards must be erected somewhere, if they were to be in barracks at all, for they could not remain where they now were. The estimates, he admitted, were large; but he apprehended they would not be thought disproportionate to the intended purposes (which were obviously very comprehensive) if they were compared with those of any preceding year in the same department. He repeated, however, that he had every reason to believe that the prices contracted for would fall considerably within the estimates. There was great inconvenience attached to the present system of the bar-racks in King-street, which contained accommodation for the horses only, while the men were scattered over the whole of this vast metropolis. With regard to the 25,000l. for the commissioners who were auditing general Delancey's accounts, he could assure the House that they had saved the public more than double that sum.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that there was a real necessity for erecting new barracks for the Life Guards. Government had been actually ejected from the possession of the present ones, and was obliged to make a new agreement with the lessor, paying an annual addition of 950l. for the convenience of remaining in them two or three years longer, while others were built. The system of having the men diffused over the metropolis, away from their horses and accoutrements, he thought a very reprehensible one. What might have been the consequences, had such a system been in practice during the late disturbances? Might not the men have been intercepted by the mob, from reaching their stables, and the peace of the capital have been most seriously endangered? The hon. gentleman imagined, that it would be a work of bad taste, but he could assure him, that he was not conscious of any unnecessary ex-pence. With respect to the barracks at Bristol, it would be hard to ascertain what sort of building it should be which was to last during the war, if that was a principle of limitation which the House would be inclined to adopt. If a barrack was to be built there, considering the extent and population of the town, considering also the accommodation it would afford to the military passing to and from Ireland, he 305 thought it should not be built upon any I parsimonious scale. The money that was thrown away under this denomination of; expenditure, was chiefly applied to the purchase of temporary barracks, which were now in want of repair. As to Liver-pool, it was considered to be a great inconvenience that there should be no barrack there; and with regard to the expedient of hiring the warehouses for that purpose, he hardly thought that government would be justified in taking advantage, as it were, of the temporary suspension of trade in that place.
§ Mr. Whitbreadsaid, that the right hon. gentleman appeared to him to have adopted erroneous views upon the subject, when he thought it of such little consequence to separate the soldiers from the people, as to be surprised at any objection to a grant for that purpose The right hon. gentleman had not argued that general question; the time was gone by; but he would declare it as his sentiment, that he was extremely jealous, and he was sure the country at large was jealous of the separating system. It had been said, that great advantage was likely to be derived from the labours of the Commissioners appointed to audit General Delancey's accounts. Perhaps at the end of four or five years, if the country should exist so long under such financiers, that advantage would greatly increase with the practices that rendered it necessary. But whence did the advantage arise? What was the necessity under which this boasted saving was made? The want of care in the controuling power. The negligence and mismanagement of those who, by proper application, ought to have prevented the occurrence of evils instead of leaving us to be obliged to the commissioners for the ascertainment of their extent. It was expected that if the commissioners proceeded, many other defalcations would appear. To him this was not consoling. An hon. gentleman had stated once, that the Chancellor of the Exchequer was the victim of the departments, and the public were given to understand that the hon. gentleman had left the Treasury through disgust at the want of a sufficient controul. But did the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer think, that he wanted military controul over the people of this country? Even at the end of the war, which the right hon. gentleman seemed to think would last long, and which he was sure would last as long as the career 306 of the right hon. gentleman, would it be necessary for us to look forward to the prospect of overawing them? Was this a principle to be maintained? Did any one ever hear a minister coolly assert it? But the right hon. gentleman disapproved of the idea of applying any of the warehouses of Liverpool to the purpose of accommodating the military. He who had made the loom useless, and the warehouse idle, who had spread starvation and discontent, had disapproved of that which to him appeared a natural course of proceeding—that of filling the warehouses with soldiers for the purpose of controuling the people under the inflictions he had brought on them and on the country. But it had been said, that there were French prisoners at Bristol. He would answer, so there had for the last twenty years. But even if the right hon. gentleman had been endeavouring to make the expence come up to an hundred millions, did he think, or could he think, that for three years more the country could go on as it was now going? If things proceeded as they were now proceeding, if expences continued to accumulate, and means to diminish, they must look for relief to a peace with the enemy, a peace which his measures had rendered unavoidable. In the transactions of past years he saw many great and glorious opportunities of ending this war neglected and lost, while, at present, the system of the right hon. gentleman was calculated to produce the necessity of peace by submission. But why was it necessary that the horse and the soldier should be more together now than at any other time? Did any reason exist now that did not exist before, why the soldier and the general population of the country should be kept apart, or why barracks, which he had always regarded in conformity with the opinions of the most constitutional authorities, as fortresses for controuling the kingdom, should be multiplied and enlarged? As to the policy of it, merely with regard to the soldier, he understood that when the men were on service, those who came from regular barracks, were not so healthful as others, so that even military purposes were not likely to be served by it. One of the most lavish expences under this head was incurred by the purchase of old houses at Clifton, in a ruined state, without a window; but now we were going back to Bristol again, to guard the French prisoners. Would to God that they were all out of this country, whether we continue 307 at war or not! The hon. gentleman concluded, with repeating his determination to vote against the resolution.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that the hon. gentleman must be positive indeed upon the subject, and confirmed in the opinion he had formed, when he thought it right not only to censure the conduct of his Majesty's government, but to vote against the Resolutions before the Committee.
§ Mr Whitbread,in explanation, stated, that his objection went only to the grant for building barracks.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerproceeded to observe, that to refuse it without knowing whether the soldiers could be otherwise accommodated, might be productive of much inconvenience. He supposed, however, that by the debating strain which the hon. gentleman had thought proper to adopt, and the topics to which he had resorted, he expected to do much towards tranquillizing the country. When he brought forward his arguments attributing the starvation he described to the conduct of government, did he really think there was any thing in their manner of conducting the war against France, which operated to produce the scarcity at Liverpool? Did he think there was any thing in it to call down the vengeance of Providence on our heads, and provoke him to deny the harvest to our hopes? If not, how could the hon. gentleman shut his eyes to what every man could see but himself, and resort to those imputations, which no man who was acquainted with the subject, could hesitate to reject? He would own that in some inflammatory publications he had met with some topics to which the hon. gentleman had alluded; but he did not expect that any member could be found who would come down to that House for the purpose of making such statements. The hon. gentleman had spoken of golden opportunities for making peace, which ministers had neglected: but he did not say, he could not say whether one of those opportunities presented itself now; and if no such opportunity existed, where was the policy in asserting, that there was no salvation for the country but in peace? It would be impossible for him to say so much against the peace he recommended, as by saying that we were unable to go on with the war. The hon. gentleman had always said that he would not accept of peace but upon honourable terms. If, then, peace could not be obtained 308 upon honourable terms, there was, according to the hon gentleman's own feelings, and those of the country, but one alternative. Why then should the hon. gentleman give the sanction of his authority to the opinion, that the war could not be conducted, and that we were only to look for consolation to the event of the enemy granting us peace? Nothing could be more improper, nothing more unjust, nothing more dangerous to the security of the country, or more calculated to inflame the minds of the people under the present high price of provisions, than flinging out opinions of this sort to the disadvantage of the great contest in which we were engaged. He would maintain, and he thought the hon. gentleman might have been included amongst the number of those who would insist upon the same doctrine, that if we could not obtain peace upon honourable terms, we must maintain the war at all hazards, and under all circumstances, and to the last extremity. As to what had been said of his intention to keep the people down by a military force, when he had driven them to madness by his policy, he would ask where was the proof? In that candour of mind, in which he hoped the hon. gentleman was not deficient, he might have acknowledged, for he must have known, that it was at least a matter of serious doubt, whether all the difficulties experienced in our trade, would not have been aggravated, if they were not met by the Orders in Council. In two years after the adoption of those Orders, this fact was demonstrated by an increase of our trade. Yet the hon. gentleman went on with his old proof, or rather with his old statement, in defiance of this striking fact, and insisted that our sufferings were not owing to the Decrees of the enemy, but to our own Orders in Council. If this was a logic, he was sure it was not a logic which the hon. gentleman would apply to any other subject; this confusion of cause and effect, this anticipation of consequence over the means that produced it, could, in no other than a political case, have warped the clear mind of the hon. gentleman. But if he was right in supposing that the effects which preceded the Decrees were not to be ascribed to it, how was it fair to represent them as the act of our own government? Was this his wisdom, was this his policy, was this his patriotism? The reasoning of the hon. gentleman would go to turn all the resentment not against the enemy, but 309 against the government; and that too, at a time when we were engaged in war with an enemy who, if the hon. gentleman was not aware, intended our destruction, he must he ignorant of what was known to every body else. From this country he had met with his most effectual check in the pursuit of his insatiable ambition, and in his progress to universal empire and universal tyranny, his certain disappointment. If the hon. gentleman did not see this, and he trusted in God that he did Hot, when he called upon the country not to look to Buonaparté and to France, but to its own government, with indignation, and ascribed the inflictions of Providence to them alone; if he did not see this, but could make such statements with a conviction that he was doing right, he was sure that such sentiments would meet with little sympathy and little support.—(Loud and continued cheers.)
§ Mr. Whitbreadrose, evidently in great agitation, and began by declaring that if it was not in that House, he would ask the warmest friend or the loudest cheerer of the right hon. gentleman, whether the whole of his speech was not a gross misrepresentation? The right hon. gentleman was mistaken if he supposed that he had obtained a victory over him. No; it was a victory over his own invention. The House of Commons was a fine place—the constitution of England was a great thing—every thing was to be admired, respected, and supported, when an adventurer from the bar was raised by his talent for debate to a great situation, but a great situation which nobody but himself could have accepted under such circumstances.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerhere signified his dissent from the statement that nobody would have accepted the situation but himself.
§ Mr. Whitbreadrepeated the statement, maintained the truth of it, and added, "If you doubt me, I refer you for information to a Letter signed Spencer Perceval." (Loud cries of Order from all parts of the House, followed this expression, and Mr. Whitbread attempted for some time in vain to be heard).
Mr. Yorkerose to order. The hon. gentleman had just made one of the most outrageous personal attacks on his right hon. friend, which had ever been heard in that House. With respect to the justice or propriety of the attack thus made, he
Mr. Ponsonbyrose to order—(Here the disorder became general, and cries of 310 Chair! Chair! resounded through the House; at length Mr. Ponsonby obtained a hearing)—I call the right hon. gentleman himself to order, and on this ground, that he having risen to call my hon. friend to order, did not confine himself to that point, but thought proper to advert to other topics, thereby transgressing the regulations of the House. I speak this before high authority, who will contradict me if I should be incorrect.
§ Mr. Lushington, the chairman, then declared his opinion to be, that Mr. Whit-bread had been out of order.
§ Mr. Whitbreadgot up again, and confessed he had risen in some heat, and unconsciously at the time had exceeded the limits of debate. He would however say, that if he was described as having told the people that they were to regard the government rather than Buonaparté as their enemy, it was a gross misrepresentation. Unfortunately it was too much a practice to identify the government with the minister, and convert the fair claims of the former to support and attachment, into a blind approbation of the measures of the latter. Whatever might be the construction put upon his words; he was determined ever to speak out in the House of Commons, to conceal no part of the truth, and to lend no helping hand to the delusion, any more than to the ruin of the people. He knew nothing more likely to prove destructive to the safety and greatness of the people than the prevalence' of a different doctrine. He did not confound the visitations of Providence, with the decrees of France, or the measures of the right hon. gentleman. But he knew that thousands of manufacturers were now out of employment, and that tens of thousands were now working at reduced wages, which scarcely sufficed to procure them subsistence. Was he, when he declared this, telling the hungry man that he had no bread? He knew that an unreformed House of Commons had approved of all the proceedings of the right hon. gentleman, and of all his Orders in Council, but he knew too, that the people and the merchants out of the House, were, in every part of the kingdom, of very different opinions. Was not this table already covered with petitions, that daily multiplied; and had he indeed abandoned all his patriotism, when he stated this? As to what he had said with respect to peace, how was it possible for him to speak positively as to the fitness of the present moment, 311 but how could any time be found appropriate, unless the experiment were made? Would the right hon. gentleman, looking back to that history in which he was so well read, pronounce it to be his opinion, 'that we were hereafter likely to obtain; such desirable conditions of peace as; might have been obtained at any former periods! The right hon. gentleman boasted of our being the great and only barrier to Buonaparté's desire of universal dominion. On this point there could be no dispute? why were we so? Because it was the policy of the authors of this and the preceding war which had made us so; which had first made Buonaparté consul for life, and afterwards in alliance with his own talents, had made him emperor, and had enabled him to trample upon every: hostile state. The same errors and fallacies were still circulating and still believed; one day Prussia was said to be arming against Prance, on another she was described as uniting her force to that of France, to assist in crushing the only independent state remaining on the continent. It was his duty, then, to ask the people to be misled no longer by the fatal policy of ministers; and he would ask the right hon. gentleman himself, not to become the victim of his own infatuation, by bringing the country to the end of its resources. He believed the period must soon arrive-when this would be the case. He should be sorry if any thing had fallen from him that might bear an interpretation foreign to his intentions, but he had deemed it an impressive duty to enter into this avowal of his sentiments.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerdeclared, that every offensive impression which the hon. gentleman had made, more on the feelings of his hon. friends than on his own, was completely removed. He had certainly not attributed to the hon. gentleman that which he imagined him to have done. As to the question immediately before the House, he held it to be desirable that in populous towns the soldiery ought rather to be kept apart, than to be quartered on the people. The hon. gentleman had again alluded to the Orders in Council; but could they be said to prevent the importation of corn, when it was generally known that, notwithstanding their operation, eight millions had been paid last year for foreign corn imported? The fact was, that the scarcity was felt as severely in France at present as in England.
§ Mr. Stephenconfessed that he did not hear the first speech of the hon. gent. but he had the misfortune to hear the two last. He should certainly think himself greatly wanting in his duty to the public, if he did not endeavour to counteract, by every effort in his power, the mischievous misrepresentations of the measures of government which were circulated insidiously through the country. Those misrepresentations were calculated to divert the resources of the country from that patriotic channel in which they ought to flow, into a channel of disaffection; they were calculated to make men turn away their confidence from the conductors of our public affairs, and to make them believe, that until certain measures were adopted—until a change, which he knew to be impossible, should take place—the country could never regain its former prosperity. It was the proper and peculiar duty of a member of parliament not to suffer the public to be deluded by artful misrepresentations,—not to suffer their ignorance or their prejudices to be worked upon by those persons in the country, who seemed to spend their time and talents in poisoning the minds of the people. He could conceive nothing more mischievous in a political, nor more infamous in a moral sense, than the propagation of falshood which was now disseminated; of falshood he should say, because there were many members on the benches opposite, and even the hon. gentleman himself (Mr. Whitbread) who had admitted at various times that the effect of the Orders in Council was not such as was now attributed to them. He held in his hand a paper which was just one of that description which now crowded the country newspapers, and in hand bills crept through the country; this paper was signed "A Staffordshire Potter," and it set out with a most notorious falshood, that before the Orders in Council, and under the first operation of Buonaparté's decrees, our trade was not diminished. (Hear, hear, from Mr. Baring.) What? did he hear a cheer from any gentleman opposite? or was the cheer from him who had often taken part in debates on this subject, and who must, therefore, be well acquainted with the truth of the fact which he was alluding to? Did the hon. gentleman mean that the representation of the paper was right? If so, he should certainly move a resolution on the fact, and have it officially before the House (Move, move! 313 from the Opposition benches.) He disdained those sneering cries, because he knew that there was no person who would venture to call upon him seriously for proof of a fact which was in evidence before the House. It was already known, that during the first three months after the issuing of Buonaparté's decrees, until the Orders in Council were adopted, our trade had not only diminished, but was entirely at a stand; that there were no exports, and that many of the cargoes which had cleared the river for the continent were obliged to be relanded. The insurance was even so high as 60 per cent.; so that scarcely any underwriter was to be found who would subscribe one. This was a stubborn fact; and yet in defiance of such a truth, there were men who could be base enough to mislead poor ignorant manufacturers, and make them attribute to the Orders in Council, and the government who advised them, the very contrary of their operation. Such a bold and rank imposture he would not impute to any member of that House, because he was aware that the intentions of them all were pure; but he would say, that such an imposture must proceed from a French party, animated by French spirit, imbued with French principles, entertaining French views, discontented with their own government, and willing to rush upon measures that must be fatal to all that Englishmen hold dear, to the freedom that Englishmen cherish, and the independence, without which they would not care to exist. Such a deed as this imposture, in such a country, and under such a government, was unparalleled in the baseness and profligacy of mankind. In justice to the poor deluded manufacturers, he wished to see these detestable arts abandoned; and this effort of his indignation was directed to no other purpose. He begged the lurking authors of those misrepresentations to look to the consequences; to see that they were only paving the way for the ravages of military force, and exposing the nation to a deluging waste of blood.—The hon. and learned gentleman then proceeded to shew, that in the six months subsequent to the issuing of the Orders in Council, the country had reached a pitch of prosperity unknown at any former period of our history,—that our exports were unexampled, amounting to no less than to an excess of 10 millions. After this statement, he would put it to the candour of the hon. gentleman, whether he was fair in the introduction 314 into his speeches of those little episodes on the Orders in Council; whether his custom of flinging a remark or two on this subject into the context of his casual speeches, was altogether very gracious, when he always declined making any specific motion,—any motion that could be distinctly met by the evidence of facts which were too strong to be broken down. The hon. gentleman was always carping at the Orders in Council, save the first two years when he thought it convenient to be silent on their effects; and now again he came forward with his views, and prospects, and prophecies; and it appeared that in his opinion there was no alternative for England but inability to carry on the war or submission. Really, although he was not himself totally devoid of apprehension, he confessed that he derived some consolation from the hon. gentleman's evil predictions. In fact the hon. gentleman's prophecy was to him the very best security he could wish for. The reputation of a prophet seemed to be the fame now most in vogue; and if the ambition of the hon. gentleman was very soaring, he would recommend him to become Editor of Moore's Almanack, in which work he could have a wide field for the display of his abilities. The prediction of sun-shine in the dog-days, or a fall of snow in December, might fortuitously and felicitously turn out to be realised, and the character of the hon. gentleman might be retrieved. The hon. and learned gentleman then argued, that the present scarcity was not to be attributed to the Orders in Council, contrary to what he understood had been stated by the hon. gentleman. (Here Mr. Whitbread signified his dissent.) He was glad to see that the hon. gentleman disavowed, by his gesture, that he had imputed the scarcity to the government,—that was at least one advantage gained by this irregular discussion. As to the asperity of the beginning of the debate, after the display of good humour by the hon. gentleman, he should not repeat the offensive expressions which were applied to his right hon. friend. At the same time he could not help saying, that when his right hon. friend was represented by the hon. gentleman as rising to his station by talent, and ingenuity, and dexterity, and afterwards said to have obtained his place because no one else would take it, there was some little appearance of discrepancy in the hon. gentleman's assertions. At one time it was his dexterity, 315 and the next moment it was the refusal of others to take his situation, that kept him in it. His right hon. friend's dexterity must certainly be very formidable, when there was no person on the other side who would venture to change places with him. But if it was not even choice but necessity to which his right hon. friend owed his situation, he must say, that it was a most fortunate necessity for the country. If the withholding of their services on the part of others was the means of preserving his right hon. friend to his country, then that refusal was a most important event in the history of England, and would be equally an important event to his character. It would shew that his fame, which was progressively increasing, and would increase to ages, arose, not from any ardent and sanguine love of power—that its spring was not in ambition, but that it was driven to display itself by the disinclination of others to strengthen the administration, to share in the toils and perils of his situation. It was pleasing to him to say, that he knew no minister who had better graced his preeminence; and under his auspices, he was confident that this country would not be reduced to the disgraceful alternative mentioned by the hon. gentleman opposite.—The hon. and learned gentleman concluded by saying, that if any blame was to be attached, in the present circumstances of the country, to the Orders in Council, the late ministers were to be charged with the responsibility of issuing the first of them, and of establishing their principle; and by alluding to the report of the French minister for foreign affairs, who, in his report to the Conservative Senate, of the 10th of March, laid it down as a maxim what would ultimately destroy the naval superiority and maritime rights of Great Britain, namely, that "free ships made free goods." Buonaparté was now sending forth his thunders to the Baltic, and Great Britain should be roused thereby to more determined resistance.
When Mr. Stephen sat down, Mr. Lushington begged to remind the Committee, that the business before them at present was merely the Estimates for the Barrack Department.
Mr. Ponsonbysaid, that if the chairman had not called the attention of the Committee to the immediate business before them, he certainly should have done so; he would not however take up much of its time. The hon. and learned gentleman 316 who spoke last, had indulged himself in a most lavish panegyric on his right hon. friend. Why not? Was it not most natural that he should do so? For if the right hon. gentleman had by any calamity not been minister, the hon. and learned encomist never would have had the place he now held. The hon. and learned gentleman had advised his hon. friend to become editor of Moore's Almanack; but he would ask the hon. and learned gentleman whether his hon. friend's foresight was defective in every other respect except changes of the weather. His hon. friend had foretold that this country, under the management of the right hon. gentleman, would be neither prosperous nor happy: and now for a few plain matter of fact questions. Two years ago the right hon. gentleman effected his loan at 70 in the 3 per cents.; last year at 04; and he should like to know was that any mark of extraordinary prosperity? Did he expect this year to get it higher than 59; and would this also be a step in the national prosperity? Were these calculations entirely within the range of Moore's Almanack? His hon. friend was not so absurd as to attribute the present scarcity to the Orders in Council as its immediate cause; but he said, that the operation of the Orders in Council made relief more difficult. Again, was not America affected by our Orders in Council? There was enough, he was afraid, of real evil on this point, and very little need of the aid of prophecy. He had promised not to stray much from the question; and what was the true question? Was it not whether we should vote the present immense sum, or go on in a limited scale of expence? Was it necessary for the carrying on of the war to an honourable issue, that 133,000l. should be spent on accommodations for 350 men and horses? Was that necessary? Was that prudent? The right hon. gentleman on the floor (Mr. Huskisson) had stated our annual expenditure at 30 millions in one way alone; and with such an expence, was it right to be so profuse as to throw away 138,000l. on a stable? Would the building of the stable help us to a more honourable conclusion of the war? His hon. friend was blamed for hinting at peace. If no person but those in the secrets of the cabinet was ever to ask for peace, he was afraid that we should be troubled with very little mention of it. As to the proper time for urging the necessity of peace, no member of parliament 317 could have any other ground to go on but general pacific principles; and it was on such that his hon. friend always acted. The hon. and learned gentleman who spoke the panegyric, seemed to be very indignant against inflammatory productions. All the hon. gentlemen on the other side, it seemed, were quite in a passion that such horrible productions could have been resorted to. They scorned to descend to such arts. Oh dear, yes, they rose above such meanness: they never deigned to play upon the vulgar passions or prejudices of the people! They never, innocent souls! imagined such a thing as the Church in Danger! They never dealt in hand-bills. They knew nothing, for in-stance, of the No Popery placards in Manchester; and, unquestionably, the immediate actors there had no connection or dependence upon government! The right hon. gentleman, too, had been very com-passionate to-night. He would not deny food even to his bitterest enemy. What a happy philanthropy! How greatly must the good wishes of that side of the House, for the benefit of the human race, be lately increased! and yet how intrusive would recollection sometimes be, for he declared he could not help remembering, that it was those very moral and religious ministers who were the promoters of the Bill for prohibiting the exportation of Peruvian bark to France.—(Loud cries of hear, hear!)
§ Mr. Huskissonagreed with the ideas of the right hon. gentleman who had just sat down, on the question immediately before the House. If the House was prepared, without document of any kind, to say that 133,500l. should be granted for barracks for 380 men and horses, and that accommodation for them could not be more economically procured, then, and not otherwise, they would vote for it. He proposed that this part of the estimates should be postponed till the House should be satisfied on this head.
Mr. Whartonthought any delay unnecessary. No farther information could be furnished on the subject; and the military department had declared the bar-racks indispensibly necessary.
Mr. Rosewas ready to maintain, that the Orders in Council were not the cause of producing a greater state of distress in the country. They did not prevent a supply; on the contrary, they gave facility to the supply, in aid of the people. Grain principally came from the Baltic, 318 and with the ports there the Orders in Council had nothing to do. He was afraid, if gentlemen were sanguine in the expectation of getting supplies from any part of Europe, they would be disappointed.
§ Mr. Whitbreadsaid, that the petitioners who had come to government, and also to parliament, complained that they were in a state of starvation arising from the want of employment, in consequence of which they were without money to buy food—a situation to which they were reduced in consequence of the Orders in Council. He had observed it stated, that the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Rose) had, to some of those petitioners who waited upon him from Birmingham, compared France and England to two men up to their neck in water, who must try which of them could stand the longest without being drowned. He could not suppose that the right hon. gentleman had so expressed himself. He was satisfied the right hon. gentleman could not have used such a metaphor, conceiving as he did, the good ship of England to be so high above water.
Mr. Rosesaid he had been very hardly dealt with in the business alluded to. He confessed that some such comparison had fallen from him [Laughter]—but denied that he had treated the distresses of the Birmingham petitioners with any thing like levity.
§ Mr. Whitbreaddid not suppose that the right hon. gentleman could have thought of treating with levity persons in so perilous a situation as he himself had described.
Mr. Baringagreed that the Orders in Council had no immediate effect in producing the scarcity of food, though it was equally true, that by reason of those Orders in Council, the manufacturers were deprived of the means of purchasing food, were it before them in abundance. Every thing, in his opinion, depended on economy in our expenditure, and, therefore, he was against the present grant.
§ Mr. Fullerwould not consent to repeal the Orders in Council, though it were even true that he could get nine shillings a pound for his sugars in France. If the two countries must be like two fellows pumping, each striving to save himself the longest above water, let it be so; but Old. England should never yield to France.
§ Mr. Huskissonsaid, he should move that instead of 534,000l. the grant be reduced to 400,000l.
Mr. Wynnobjected to a grant which 319 amounted to no less a sum than 380l. pr man and horse. In other barracks the estimate was 82l. per man. Was it to be understood that 300l. was for each horse's stall?
§ Mr. Calcraftobserved, that barracks had been built in his neighbourhood for 100 cavalry, at an expence of about 6,000l.
§ Mr. Fremantleobjected to granting a larger sum than it was calculated the intended barracks would cost.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that the sum proposed was not for procuring accommodation for the horses and men alone, but for the Staff also, for an inclosed exercising ground, and for temporary accommodation within the walls for a larger body of horse, when occasion should require.
§ Mr. Whitbreadappealed to the Committee if there was a single man in the House who had had the smallest idea of the nature of this grant till now. Either the right hon. gentleman who spoke last knew more on this subject than the Secretary of the Treasury did, or the latter had not done his duty. He asked, would the hon. Secretary not now agree to postpone this grant? Or would not the Committee feel a jealousy how they acceded to the granting of money on such an estimate?
Mr. Ponsonbysaid the question was not, whether this sum should be voted at all or not; but whether or not time should be given to the Committee to understand what they were doing. All he should say, if it was true that Prance and England were now to be compared to two men up to the neck in water, and if in such circumstances, barracks for 350 soldiers were to cost England 133,000l. it was not difficult to see which of the two must be choaked first.
Lord Folkestonestrongly objected to a larger grant than was proved to be necessary, particularly for the erection of bar-racks, which that House and the country had been accustomed to regard with a jealous eye. The speech of the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer too, furnished additional ground for postponing the grant till the House was better informed.
§ The House then divided, when the numbers were, against the Amendment 88—For it 40—Majority 48.
| List of the Minority. | |
| Baring, A. | Hurst, R. |
| Baring, Sir T. | Kemp, T. |
| Brougham, H. | Marryatt, J. |
| Bankes, H. | Montgomery, col. |
| Bannet, hon. H. | Ossulston, lord |
| Biddulph, R. M. | Parnell, H. |
| Babington, T. | Ponsonby, rt. hon. G. |
| Craig, J. | Popham, Sir H. |
| Calcraft, J. | Smith, J. |
| Creevey, T. | Smith, S. |
| Dickinson, W. | Smith, A. |
| Eden, hon. G. | Sinclair, G. |
| Folkestone, visc. | Thornton, H. |
| French, major | Taylor, W. |
| Fremantle, W. | Thompson, T. |
| Grenfell, P. | Williams, Sir R. |
| Horner, F. | Westerne, C. C. |
| Hamilton, lord A. | Warrender, Sir G. |
| Hutchinson, hon. H. | Wynn, C. |
| Huskisson, W. | Whitbread, S. |