HC Deb 09 April 1821 vol 5 cc90-1

The House having resolved into a committee on this bill,

Mr. Bennet

objected to the clause empowering his majesty's ministers to grant allowances to the discharged servants of the company, contending that they were engaged for public purposes, and had no vested or other right that could entitle them to compensation.

Mr. Goulburn

defended the proposed compensation, maintaining that, according to every principle of justice, individuals should not be allowed to suffer by arrangements made for the public service, especially where a great saving would result to the public from such arrangements.

Mr. Hume

denied that it was the disposition of his hon. friend to refuse compensation where a fair claim was made out. But his hon. friend objected, as he did himself, to invest government with the discretion to allow pensions to whom they pleased, and to what extent they pleased. The noble secretary for foreign affairs had himself justified the principle of such an objection, by declaring that a similar discretion, in the act of the 50th of the late king, had been so abused, that he was willing to give it up. Upon the ground of this declaration then, he would I oppose the proposition to which his hon. I friend had objected. But he had still stronger grounds. In the Ordnance office for instance, he found, from a document on the table, that in consequence of a similar discretion, superannuation pensions were allowed to young men of 23 years of age. He could not then grant a discretion so liable to be abused. Let a case be stated to the House, where, from services rendered, compensation was fairly due, and he had no doubt that it would be promptly granted. But, then, no such pension should be allowed to any person who might, upon the new arrangement proposed in this case, be still employed in the public service, either at Sierra Leone or in the West Indies. He had the strongest objections to this proposition. For what did it mean? Why, to make an additional charge upon the consolidated fund, which was already 8,500,000l. in arrear.

Mr. Gordon

thought, that, as the company's charter had been taken away, the least that could be done was, to afford some provision for its servants, he did not disapprove, however, of the check proposed to be instituted.

Mr. Bennet

then moved as an amendment, the introduction of the following words—"that no such allowance be finally or conclusively granted, until submitted to the consideration of parliament;" which was agreed to.