HC Deb 09 January 1812 vol 21 cc103-8
Sir John Newport

said, in rising to make his promised motion for the reappointment of the Select Committee on the Public Income and Expenditure of Ireland, he should not have thought it necessary to trouble the House with many words, as the measure had been recommended from the throne, but he felt it proper to account for his making a motion, which, on the first view, might seem to come more properly from ministers. In doing this, he must call their attention to certain circumstances which had taken place in the last session. It would be recollected, that he had endeavoured to bring the subject of Irish Finance under the consideration of the House, a long time since; and the propriety of a Finance Committee originated with him. In the last session of parliament, notice of a defalcation in the revenue of Ireland was taken by the House. Several sessions preceding, he ineffectually endeavoured to call their attention to this object, which was certainly one of very considerable moment. However, the evil went on increasing till it became so alarming as to be noticed in the Speech from the throne, at the commencement of the last session. But, although that was the fact, no proposition was made on the subject, till, on the 19th of March, he called the attention of the House to those points, and proposed a set of Resolutions.* It appeared to be the opinion of many members, that the House could not enter into the consideration of the subject-matter of those resolutions, until documentary information was laid before them. In consequence, he withdrew those Resolutions, and immediately after moved for the appointment of a Committee to enquire into the state of the Finances of Ireland, and to report thereon to the House. This motion was negatived by a considerable majority, which included the Chancellors of the Exchequer for England and Ireland, and, he believed, all the other members of administration who were present. But, it was worthy of remark, that within six days after his motion had been negatived, the Chancellor of the Exchequer for Ireland: proposed the formation of a Committee exactly similar to that for which he had moved, and which had been so recently rejected. The measure having been agreed to, the Committee proceeded in its researches; and, at the close of the session, great credit was taken in the Speech for the benefit resulting from a measure, which bad originated with him, but which, on his proposition, had been negatived. At the commencement of the present session, the re-appointment of the Committee was called for from the throne; and, he would ask, had he not a right to come forward and lay claim to the honour of having originally proposed this measure, which had been afterwards stolen from him? He had only to add, with respect to the Report of that Committee, that he hoped any error, or apparent error, which was discernible on the face of it, would not be repeated. He had noticed one, which, if it had occurred in an Irish parliament, would certainly have been set down as a proof of their propensity to blundering. In that report he observed, under date of the 14th of June, a statement was made, founded on evidence, which evidence, by referring to the index, appeared not to have been given till the 1st of July following. The circumstance was of importance; for it was in that particular part, *See Vol. 19, p.424 attempted to be shewn that the defalcation had been occasioned by temporary causes. The deduction appeared to have been made on the 14th of June, and the evidence on which it was founded was adduced on the 1st of July! He could not avoid' expressing his surprise, that the Report should have been made up at a period, when many of the members of the Committee had left town. He hoped "his would not again occur, because it was not right that such a composition should be sent forth to the public, purporting to be the Report of the Committee. Having stated thus much, he would now move,

"That the several Accounts and Papers presented to the House in the last session of parliament relating to the Public Income and Expenditure of Ireland, be referred to a Select Committee; and that they be directed to enquire and report to the House, what has been, during the last 21 years, ended the 5th of January 1812, the increase and redemption of the public funded debt of Ireland, and what was the state and amount thereof on the said day; what has been the progress of the permanent revenue of Ireland during the same period, and what may be the expected future annual produce of the taxes now existing in that country; what has been the total expenditure of Ireland in each year of the same period, distinguishing the amount expended on account of the joint expenditure of Great Britain and Ireland, or which may appear to be still due on that account; and what was the amount of the unfunded debt and demands outstanding and unprovided for in Ireland on the 5th of January 1812: And likewise to take into their consideration the accounts relating to the trade and navigation of Ireland during the same period, and report the same to the House, together with their observations upon the whole of the matters referred to them:"

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

said, it would be necessary that some of the documents connected with the motion should be brought down to the latest possible date, and not, as they at present stood, to January 1811. He could assure the right hon baronet, that he never had the smallest intention of depriving him of the fame and glory of originating this measure. He should be very sorry to think that the fame of the right hon. baronet stood on so slight a foundation, as to be affected by such a circumstance. He certainly remembered the occurrence; but, as it did not make a very strong impression on his mind, perhaps the recollection of the right hon. baronet was more accurate. There had been a distinct and specific motion on the Finance of Ireland, and it appeared to him and others, as he stated at the time, that it would be better to have an inquiry on the subject, before a discussion was entered into. If he did not forget, he in his speech on the occasion, gave a notice on that very point. But, the moment the Resolutions were disposed of, the right hon. baronet, attacking his fame and glory, took the matter out of his hands, and immediately made a motion of that very description to which he had alluded in his speech. It was then negatived, and, being renewed on a future day, was acceded to. But it had not been taken up in consequence of any thing which fell from the right hon. baronet; for notice of such an intention had been given before he made his motion. If the right hon. baronet felt it right to step out of the way to make the present motion, he was by no means dissatisfied with him; the appointment of the Committee was all he desired. He did not feel inclined, in the smallest degree, to oppose the right hon. baronet if he proposed the Committee, as it originally stood, with the exception of any members who might be out of town. With respect to the statement, that part of the Report appeared to be founded on evidence of a later date than the Report itself, he was extremely sorry the Chairman of, the Committee was not present, who, of course, was more competent to explain the matter than he was. But, certainly, it did appear, that some discretion had been given to the Chairman, in drawing up the Report; and, documents had been furnished at a period when some clerical error might have been committed. He had nothing further to state, than that he was very willing the right hon. baronet should share in all the fame and all the glory of the measure.

Sir John Newport

said, there certainly had been an understanding that those papers which came in, when the Report was in a state of forwardness, should be then examined. It was not of that he complained; but of the introduction of a, new principle, an endeavour to account for the defalcation in the revenue of Ireland, from accidental and temporary causes. As to the members of the Committee, he would propose no alteration from last session; with the exception of two names, and those he wished to be excluded, as they had not attended the Committee once during the last session, and were at present out of town. As he wished the Committee to be active and efficient, he would propose the hon. member for Cork (Mr. C. Hutchinson) in the room of Mr. Maurice Fitzgerald; and lord A. Hamilton, in the room of Mr. Leslie Foster. Both the individuals he had named were deeply interested in the researches of the Committee. Indeed, he conceived, the hon. member for Cork ought to have been on the Committee originally.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

observed, that the substitution of the hon. member for Cork, in the place of another gentleman from the same part of the United Kingdom, could not be objected to; but he could see no good reason for placing the noble lord, who represented a northern part of the kingdom, in the room of Mr. L. Foster.

Sir J. Newport

said, his wish was to have gentlemen, from every part of the kingdom on the Committee. He then proposed his Committee, which was the same as that of last session, with the exception of the hon. member for Cork, and lord A. Hamilton.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

objected to the nomination of his lordship. He considered that the right hon. baronet had no right to arrogate to himself the exclusive privilege of nominating the members of the Committee. He had already introduced one new name, and, certainly, it was not just, that the second should also be of his proposing. He had no objection to let the Committee stand as it originally did; and, when he considered that that Committee had given the most general satisfaction, he thought it was hardly reasonable that any alteration should be made. If, however, it was thought expedient that a gentleman connected with North Britain should be on the Committee, he would propose Mr. Houston, member for Glasgow, as a very fit person.

Sir J. Newport

denied that the nomination of the Committee was with him. It was exactly constituted as proposed by the right hon. gentleman last year, with the exception of two names; therefore it was he who bad the nomination. It was his wish that members should be taken from all sides of the House; and it could not be disputed that the gentlemen on the opposite side were fully represented, He surely could not be fairly considered as arrogating any exclusive privilege to himself, when he asked that the whole Committee should remain untouched, with the exception of two persons. He would go farther, and say, that, when it was a defalcation in the revenue which was to be considered, perhaps it would be better to pursue the mode acted upon by the Finance Committee of England, of which ministers were not allowed to be members.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

did not mean to accuse the right hon. baronet of attempting to make the exclusive nomination of the Committee. If he had used the word exclusive, it was merely in reference to the two new members.

Sir J. Newport

said, he would, under all the circumstances, consent that the Committee should consist of the same members as last year, with the exception of the hon. member for Cork, in the room of Mr. M. Fitzgerald. This could not, he thought, be opposed, as it was merely an exchange of members from the same side of the House.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer

had no objection to this. He could not, however, help observing, that the right hon. baronet's desire to introduce members from different parts of the kingdom, appeared to have escaped his memory very suddenly.

The Committee was then agreed to.