HC Deb 25 June 1821 vol 5 cc1310-1

On the order of the day for the second reading of the Duke's Annuity bill,

Mr. Bennet

said, that there never was a more unprincipled vote passed by that House: every person of every class entertained but one opinion on the subject. He would divide the House on every stage of the Bill.

Mr. F. Palmer

said, that the grant was reprobated in every part of the empire.

Lord A. Hamilton

objected to the grant, and to the manner in which it was introduced. The claim was founded on a vote of another parliament, made three years ago. He denied the existence of the debt and of the arrears. He was convinced that, in three years time, a question would arise, whether all grants, as well those to the royal family as others, should not be reduced instead of being increased. If the country continued, under the improved state of our currency, to pay its engagements at the same rate as before, they would not act consistently with the declared opinions of that House, nor of policy or justice. He considered the mode of proposing the grant improper, and the claim for arrears unpardonable.

Sir J. Sebright

said, he had not met with any one who had not considered the grant as unconstitutional in its mode, and as a waste of the public money. He would support the grant of 6,000l. a year, but he thought the 18,000l. for arrears most improper.

The House divided: Ayes, 64; Noes, 14.

List of the Minority.
Benyon, B. Martin, J.
Bernal, R. Newman, R. W.
Bright, H. Robarts, A. W.
Carter, J. Scudamore, Mr. Williams, O. jun.
Hume, J.
Hobhouse, J. C. TELLERS.
Hamilton, lord A. Bennet, hon. G.
Harbord, hon. E. Palmer, C. F.
Monck, J. B.