§ The House then resolved into a committee on the Message of the Prince Regent respecting lord Lynedock; when
The Chancellor of the Exchequerimmediately rose, and, without comment, proposed a Resolution for granting to his lordship the annual sum of 2,000l. from the 3d instant, to be settled on himself, and his two next surviving heirs; which was also carried, nem. con. and the Report ordered to be received to-morrow.
§ The House having again resolved into a committee on the Message respecting lord Hill, to whom the Chancellor of the Exchequer proposed a similar annuity as that voted to lord Lynedock:
§ On the question being put,
Mr. C. W. Wynnobserved, that he was perfectly satisfied the sum proposed by the right hon. gentleman was justified by precedent; but he would ask whether 2,000l. a year could be considered a sufficient stipend to support the dignity of the noble lord in question, who, it should be recollected, was but the younger brother of a very respectable family? He was aware that this was the sum voted to lord Rodney thirty years ago; but he apprehend no person would deny that the value of money at that period, and at the present, was extremely different; and a sum which might then be considered liberal, would now be deemed parsimonious. He thought a grant of 3,000l. a year would be no more than commensurate with the rewards given on former occasions; and this he conceived, for every reason, had best be vested in land.
§ Sir Charles Monckwould be glad to hear it explained, why the provision made for a duke should be of a more lasting nature than that made for a baron? Was not a baron equally called upon to support his independence? and ought he not to be as independent as a duke, of the parliament and the crown? If this was admitted, he would ask, how it was that the proposed provision for lord Hill was only to extend to himself, and his two succeeding hens? He considered that 2,000l. a year was no independence; and that the man who had only stipend would be open to the panders of corruption.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerconsidered, that if the standard of independence which had been laid down by the hon. gentleman was that only at which independence could be maintained, the parliament would indeed be reduced to the greatest danger. He apprehended, many members of that House were capable of maintaining both their independence and their dignity with a much less sum than 2,000l. a year. The hon. gentleman seemed to have considered his own habits as the criterion whereby to form an estimate of the feelings and properties of others; but that this criterion had been erroneous, he believed the House in general would fully agree. With respect to any addition to be made to the proposed annuity to lord Hill, it would be in the recollection of the House, that he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had, in the proposition which he had submitted, acted from precedents: if it was thought proper to depart from those precedents, the House had the power of so doing. At present, however, he thought it would be best to agree to the rates as submitted, and to reconsider them on a future day.
§ Sir Charles Moncksaid, the right hon. gentleman had given no explanation as to the extension of the annuity beyond the grandson of lord Hill. Unless some satisfactory answer were given on this point, he should move an amendment to extend the annuity to all persons to whom the title should descend hereafter.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerremarked, that the expediency of such an amendment as this, would apply, to many noble families who had already, received annuities upon the terms now proposed.
§ Sir Charles Moncksaid, the House was not bound to adhere to bad precedents.
Mr. C. W. Wynnremarked, that lord Lynedock had an independent fortune; this was not the case with lord Hill. It might, however, be better, as suggested by the right hon. gentleman, to agree to the votes as they were now worded; and to re-consider, at future period, whether it would be proper, to extend them, either as to sum or period.
§ Sir Charles Monckconsidered, that in the proposition for confining the annuity to the two succeeding heirs to the title, his Majesty's ministers had it in contemplation, by rendering it necessary for the future baron to apply to the public purse 834 to support his dignity, to deprive him of his independence, and render him more open to the operations of corruption.
§ Mr. B. Bathurstsaid, the hon. gentleman had certainly attributed to his Majesty's ministers a refinement of corruption which was perfectly novel—for he not only gave them credit for desiring to preserve its influence at present, but for three generations to come.
§ Sir Charles Monckwas only desirous of Knowing, whether there was any disposition on the part of his Majesty's ministers to accede to the amendment which he had suggested? If there was, he was satisfied.
§ The question, in its original form, was then put and carried, and, as in the other cases, the House resumed, and the report was ordered to be received to-morrow.
§ The Message respecting lord Beresford was then submitted to a committee of the whole House. A resolution similar to the former ones was proposed, and agreed to, and the report ordered to be received in like manner.