BOARD OF CONTROL.—

HC Deb 14 March 1822 vol 6 cc1120-65

Mr. Creevey

addressed the House to the following effect:—I rise, Sir, for the purpose of calling the attention of the House to the present state of a great public office—I mean the Board of Control, for managing the affairs of India. Every body who is at all acquainted with the history of this country for the last forty years, must be aware of the great difference of opinion which always subsisted between Mr. Pitt and Mr. Fox, as to the management of the affairs or India. It is well known, that finally Mr. Pitt's system prevailed, and that it is to him we owe the present board of control. But I beg to call the attention of the House to the principles upon which that board was founded by Mr. Pitt. In the year 1784, a sort of agreement first took place between the India company and the country as to the government of India. It was then thought proper to introduce the existing system; and Mr. Pitt, in bringing the subject under the notice of parliament, said, that it was a great pleasure to him to be enabled to state that this establishment would be attended with no expense to the country; that several honourable gentlemen would gratuitously discharge the duty of commissioners; that there was to be no charge—no salaries—no patronage; and that though his own time was much occupied in the business of his office, he would gladly lend his assistance to the commissioners. Mr. Pitt, in every respect, fulfilled his promise; and this commission lasted, unaltered, nine years—that is to say, from 1784, when it was first formed, until 1793. As Mr. Pitt had pointed out, the constitution of this board, during nine years, was unaccompanied by salaries, either to himself, or to the other gentlemen who had taken upon themselves the functions of its commissioners. In 1793, when a new constitution of the board took place, a different compact or agreement was entered into between the East India company and the public. The bill which had been originally introduced by Mr. Pitt, fell into the hands of the late lord Melville, and it was on that occasion, Sir, that the first departure took place from this unpaid, romantic, gratuitous system. Lord Melville procured a clause to be inserted in this bill, by which the East India company were to pay annually 16,000l. to the board of control. Of this sum 5,000l. was to go to three commissioners, who were to be appointed by the Crown. Lord Melville took 2,000l. a year himself, as chief commissioner and president of the board of control, and 1,500l. a year, each, was assigned to the other commissioners. This sum of 5,000l. was divided between the three commissioners, who were members of that House; the other 11,000l. being devoted to the payment of the remainder of the establishment. I should not omit to state, by the by, that before lord Melville left this board he made another alteration in Mr. Pitt's system; I mean, by taking from the hon. company a pension of some 800l. a year for one of his family, I believe. Well, Sir, this constitution of the board endured for nearly twenty years. In 1811, the present lord Melville became the president of the board of control; but his lordship thought that the provision which had been made by his father was too small; and, therefore, he brought in a bill enabling the company, in addition to the 16,000l. which they had agreed to pay under the act of 1793, to grant, yearly, 6,000l. for the same purpose; making altogether 22,000l. Now, out of this increased allowance, he took for himself 3,000l., making his own salary, as president of the board of control, just 5,000l. a year, instead of 2,000l., as it had been formerly. But this was not all; for before lord Melville left the board, he took also a present from the India company, in hard cash, of 20,000l. So much, Sir, for this board, which Mr. Pitt pledged himself, at its first institution, was to be accompanied by no salaries, by no emoluments, and by no patronage. And here I ought to state, in my own justification, that when lord Melville brought in that bill, I gave the strongest opposition to the clause by which he increased his own salary 3,000l.^* I did so, because I thought that his lordship, looking to all the sinecure allowances which himself or his father had already enjoyed, was not exactly the person who should have made this proposition to the House; and because I thought, that if 3,000l. a year more was necessary to be added to his income, it must be necessary to increase the incomes of the other commissioners; and that increase, I felt, was not necessary. I contended, therefore, but in vain, that the salary of the president ought not to be altered; conceiving, as I did, that the ^* See First Series, vol. 20, p. 324. funds which, for this purpose had been, with the consent of parliament, placed at the disposal of the Crown, were already applied in paying the first three commissioners. In 1813, a period of two years only, after this further agreement to increase the allowance for the board by 6,000l., a new addition was called for. This sum of 22,000l. devoted to the support of the board, was now raised to 26,000l.; and now, too, for the first time, further provision was made—not for the commissioners indeed, but for the allowances to be made for superannuations to the secretaries and other inferior persons belonging to the establishment.

Under these circumstances, then, the House must see that the board of control having begun, as I may say, gratuitously, has, step by step, gone on increasing in offices of emolument and patronage, until it has at length become the purchase of a particular family interest in this House. [Hear, hear!] Why, Sir, this is a tact which is notorious—it is proved—it is evident, and so evident that nobody can deny it. Here, then, is a board, which is the purchase, I repeat, of a family interest. I know very well that it may be said, "It is true there are ten commissioners, there is the president, the noble marquis opposite, the secretary to the commissioners, and the other commissioners; but seven of them are mere outside passengers. As for the three inside places, they are reserved for the family." [A laugh.] And, indeed, this may be truly said to be the most domestic board we have ever heard of; and yet, Sir, it is the board for the management of the affairs of India. One should not have much wondered, had these family gentlemen been scattered about, through the different departments of the public revenue. But no: this family must have a board to themselves, forsooth—no interlopers—no strangers—but all quite domestic. There they are, Mr. Speaker, a snug, comfortable family party. [A laugh.] Why, then, Sir, is this a board or is it not? Supposing that it were an object with any individual to be present while these three India commissioners should be amicably discussing a Mahratta war, or some great question of Indian policy, with all the vast machinery of the act before them; or supposing that one met in the street some individual who should say that the right hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Canning) was going out to India. What would we not give to see his instructions? It would be curious to learn in what manner they would communicate with him, to hear them advise him how be should manage with this or that Hindoo prince. [Hear.] But his instructions!—I wonder what would be demanded for the copyright? I should like to, know what a bookseller would give for it. Certainly, nothing is to be found in the annals of literature that would equal the enormous price that might be obtained for it. But I know I shall be told, that there is no board, in fact, that it is only such in name; or, perhaps, that it is a nursery for our young statesmen: and really I am very much inclined to be of that opinion; and I will state the reason why. It happened, Sir, that once in my life, some few years ago, I was secretary to this board myself [A laugh, and cheering]. I protest I am quite at a loss to know what hon. gentlemen mean by this cheering: but as I have been secretary to the board, I did suppose that I might be allowed to know what the board was doing while I continued with them. At that time, Sir, the three commissioners appointed by the Crown were lord Minto, Mr. Thomas Grenville, and my right hon. friend (Mr. Tierney), who sits near me. I was, Sir, about thirteen months in the situation of secretary; and if I were asked, I should say my impression is, that no board had sat all the time I was there; and as I was secretary, I think I must have seen it if there was. I remember that the three commissioners (the president and the two others) sat in one room, and I sat in another; sometimes reading the newspapers; at others, looking out of my window. But, lest my thirteen months experience should not have sufficiently qualified me to speak on this subject, I remember inquiring one day of a gentleman connected with the department, and possessing great accuracy and means of information, whether, within the memory of man, there had ever been a board? He answered, with great good nature and simplicity—"Not within my recollection certainly. [A laugh]. The fact is, I believe that the president or first commissioner sometimes did come down to the office, in order to look over the dispatches that were to go to India. He had, in truth, the power of re-writing them altogether, if he chose; for it would be a folly to suppose that any other commissioner would come down to assist in correcting them. The other commissioners, I take it, scarcely ever came, except to receive their salaries. Sure I am, that all the time I was there, there was not business enough for the situation. [Hear! from Mr. Courtenay.] I am glad to see the hon. secretary to the board exert himself; for as he gets a higher salary than I did, he ought to do something more for it. I do assume, therefore, Sir, that two of these commissioners are perfectly useless. But let the House observe, that in the motion which I have this night to submit, I do not mean to go so far. I only ask the House to appoint a committee which shall examine into the question and report their opinion upon it. I care not from which side of the House that committee may be selected. The noble marquis, if he chooses, may appoint it himself; and, if I should be so fortunate as to carry the House with me, and have to nominate my own committee, the noble marquis shall be one member, the right hon. member who sits near him another, and any Grenville that pleases shall be a third. My present object is, to ascertain this single point. If I am right in what I have assumed as to the commissioners, why, Sir, should those two gentlemen be allowed to sit in this House? We all know that the statute of the 6th of Anne says, that no person holding any place or office which shall be created after the passing of that act, shall be capable of sitting in this House. Why here are no less than four places, the possessors of which have seats, in direct violation of the statute: they are the president, the two commissioners, and the secretary of this board. Surely it is a matter of some importance that an act is thus infringed, without there being any case of necessity made out. It is contended, however, that the services of these gentlemen are highly necessary. But, if they are necessary at the board of control (and I doubt it), are they so here? In this House, who ever hears of India now-a-days? After looking at the statute of Anne, are honourable gentlemen prepared to say, that these four persons shall continue to hold their seats? Will they say so, before it is proved to demonstration that the presence of these individuals in parliament is necessary? I shall now adduce, Sir, the authority of another act of parliament; namely, the 15th of George 2nd. Under this act, the consideration of a great number of offices is included; and among other things, it is said, that a secretary of state can have, in the House but one under secretary of state. Now, the experience of every day, as I admit, proves the necessity of our having among us under secretaries. Nobody doubts the utility of the practice. There can be no question among reasonable men, as to the necessity of there being official persons for the purposes of information and inquiry. But, was there ever any principle imagined so contrary to common sense, as that while the secretary of state has but one under secretary in the House, this new board should have as many as four representatives?—There being always (let me add) a great deal to do in the office of a secretary of state, and very little to do in that of a commissioner for the affairs of India. Circumstances in this respect have altogether changed. They are not now, what they used to be when lord Melville was at the head of the board. Then there was an Indian budget and a regular exposition of the affairs of India. The case is altogether different in these times, and I believe I am correct in saying, that the right hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Canning) never above once presented himself in his official character of president to the attention of the House, and that was on the occasion of his moving a vote of thanks to the marquis of Hastings for his military successes in India. Admitting, however, that a necessity could be shown for the presence of two of these commissioners in the House (and two I think too many), to say, that four of those persons ought to have seats is monstrous; and is a doctrine not only incompatible with common sense, but with the constitution of the country. The manner in which so flagrant, so palpable a departure from the enactments of the statute of Anne (as the very circumstance of these four individuals retaining their seats in the House implies), has been permitted to pass, almost without observation, is a signal proof of the decay of all interest amongst us about strictly constitutional questions. If you complain to a friend of the infraction of a statute you are reminded, that the East India company supplies us with such excellent tea!—that they are so rich—they must be expected to have influence. If you advert to the fact of there being four gentlemen in the House representing the board of control, you are told that the company pays them; that there is nothing to be dissatisfied with: that it is the company's affair. But, is the House to sit still and hear all this patiently. Are the East India company to become dealers in members of parliament? Where, Sir, is this influence to Stop? Here is a board which began with no paid members, and has now four. These four gentlemen, I grant, are not paid by the country, but by the Company: so, too, is the remainder of the department. But, is there no danger in all this? 26,000l. laid out in members of parliament would make, I believe, a pretty decent addition to all the placemen that already sit in this House. Is it enough to say, that if the company can support these appointments, they may be kept up? The House, however, has been told to look at the matter as one of economy, as if the Company said, "We place 26,000l. at your disposal." Now, I would call upon the House to abolish these two commissioners, and to reply to the Company, "We are much obliged to you, and will pay 3,000l., a part of the sum, and which, is not now required, into the Exchequer." By act of parliament, the country is to have a share of the company's profits. I would say to the company, then—still treating it as a matter of economy—"the less members you pay for, the more money the country will have to receive of you." In regard to these commissioners, the real question is, not as to who pays them, but as to their votes. Look, for instance, at the learned doctor, now on the other side (Dr. Phillimore); who cares by whom the salary of the learned doctor is paid, or what its amount is? The company pays him 1,500l. a year; but, by the single circumstance of his having crossed the floor, with his friends, the country has still to pay 1,500,000l. a year, the amount of the salt tax. But a very little while ago, the doctor was the champion for the repeal of the salt tax; he was the foremost in the field against it; he was the leader; nothing could stop him; he must and would repeal it forthwith. [Cries of "Order, order," accompanied by laughter.] If I am wrong, and gentlemen will suggest any other name by which it is proper that I should call the doctor, I will avail myself of it; but I know of no other name but the doctor. The learned civilian then, I say was the champion for the repeal of the salt tax; but now, the company pays him 1,500l. a year, he gives them his valuable services cheap as dirt; but I am not going into the question whether those services have been purchased at a cheap or dear rate. Suffice it to say, that he and his friends have lost the country at one slap, 1,500,000l. There they are, Sir; and there is the learned doctor; but where is the salt? It is still the most expensive article this country has to purchase; and if the doctor and his hon. friends had not become commissioners of the board of control, we might have gained the repeal of the salt tax. The difference made by their going over, was in fact equal to four votes; for they voted against us, and had formerly voted with us; and we, Sir, accordingly lost the question by four.

In submitting to the House these observations, I have not merely the authority of my own inquiries and conviction on the subject, but I have, Sir, the support of those who were once the good old country gentlemen of this House: and to show this, I have brought down with me a specimen of the opinions of a gentleman of this description, which seem to have been quite prophetic of the very circumstances that the House and the hon. gentlemen themselves are at this moment in. The individual to whom I allude was a country gentleman, who, during the latter part of 'the administration of sir Robert Walpole, had been very active in supporting Mr. Sandys, who was then in opposition, and engaged in endeavouring to pass a place bill, as it was then called. The period at length arrived when Mr. Sandys (whether paid by the Crown or by the East India company does not appear) suddenly went over to the party of the ministers. The country gentleman I speak of, upon the question of bringing in the same bill which Mr. Sandys had usually supported, finding himself deserted by the friend with whom he was accustomed to concur in his votes, naturally enough makes these observations, which I shall trouble the House by reading to them. I need not claim attention, for I am sure of the attention of the House when I say that the name of the Speaker was no other than Sir Watkin Williams Wynn. [Cries of hear! hear! from sir Watkin Williams Wynn.] I do not know, Sir, whether I have unintentionally given the hon. baronet offence; but I know this that no gentleman need be ashamed of the sentiments which I am about to read; for they are such as do the speaker infinite honour. The speech was delivered on the 3rd of Dec., 1742, on seconding the motion for leave to bring in a bill, and commences in these words:

"Sir, as this motion was last session agreed to, and as the bill itself was brought in, and in every step approved of, by this very House of Commons, I should with great confidence of success rise up to second this motion, if I did not from experience know, that gentlemen often change their sentiments with their situation, and that a gentleman, after he becomes a placeman, begins to entertain notions of the prerogatives of the Crown, and the liberties of the people, very different from those he entertained whilst he was a plain, honest country gentleman. If any thing like this should happen in the present debate, it may tend to disappoint the motion; but with all those who are neither placemen nor pensioners, I am sure it ought to be an argument in its favour; and I hope it will prevail; with some gentlemen, who in former sessions opposed this motion, to alter their sentiments and their way of voting upon this occasion, when they have such a plain proof before their eyes, that if a place does not induce a man to vote against his honour and his conscience, it at least biasses his judgment, and makes him conclude that to be wrong j which before he thought to be right.^*"

If this is not precisely the case with the learned doctor and the salt tax, I know not how one case can be like another. He thinks that to be wrong now, which before he declared to be right, and advocates the very tax which he was all for repealing whilst he was a "plain, honest, country gentleman." But, sir Watkin goes on in the same prophetic vein, as if he knew actually what was to happen some day to his own flesh and blood: "I have, Sir, as great an opinion as any gentleman can, as any gentleman ought to have, of the honour and impartiality of those who are members of either House of Parliament; but it is arguing against common sense, common reason, and common experience, to pretend, that no member of this House will be biassed in his opinion, or influenced in his voting by 500l., 1,000l., or—" and then, Sir, in a spirit of prediction, so exact, that it is a still more astonishing effort of prophecy than even the foregoing part of his speech, the speaker names the precise, identical sum which was afterwards to fall to the lot of his own great grandson:—namely, 5,000l.—"500l., 1,000l. or. 5,000l." He goes on, Sir, in these words: "It has, in all countries and in all ages, ^* See New Parl. Hist. vol. 12, p. 873. been held as an established maxim, that no man ought to be allowed to sit as judge, or even as a juryman, in any case where he is to get or lose by the event of the suit; and as we sit as judges, almost in every case that can come before us, between the people and their sovereign, or those employed by him in the executive part of our government, surely no man ought to be allowed to sit here who is to get or lose the whole, or the chief part of his substance, by the judgment he passes upon any affair depending in this House." This is the language, Sir, which, eighty years ago, was held by a country gentleman in this House—a county member—upon a subject nearly the same as that on which I am now speaking. The only difference between us is, that the worthy baronet was then contending for a general reduction of placemen in this House; while I am contending for a committee to ascertain the utility or inutility of two only. My object is merely that the House shall ascertain for the present what are the duties that these gentlemen have to perform; and I cannot imagine, that they will refuse the committee. Having now done with the great men of this board, I will speak of another member connected with it, who is a little one. I mean, the secretary. And this I can say, that if that hon. gentleman has but very little to do with the arrangement of the affairs of India, he has manifested a most exemplary attention to his own. Upon what grounds he can have had his salary raised three different times, until it has reached 1,500l., I cannot imagine. When I was attached to the hoard (and I do not, Mr. Speaker, pretend to be better or more conscientious than my neighbours; though I never heard that any gentleman complained of me) I asked for no more salary than I found; thinking, as I did, that no public servant was ever better paid, considering how little I had to do. It is, too, not a little singular, that the very act which secures the present secretary his increased salary, lessens the duties of his office; for by its provisions, all those duties, the signing and sealing dispatches and so forth, he is enabled to perform by deputy. I think, Sir, I have made out an irresistible case for inquiry; and shall conclude with moving, "That it be referred to a Select Committee to examine into the different Duties annexed to the Office of the Commissioners for managing the Affairs of India, and by whom the same are performed; and to report their Observations thereupun to this House."

Mr. Thomas Courtenay

said, that he was not induced to offer himself thus early in the, debate, in consequence of the personal reference that had been made to him by the hon. gentleman. He would leave it to those who were the authors of the acts with regard to himself, which were so odious to that hon. gentleman, to answer him on that subject. His immediate object in rising was, to satisfy the House, that a direct negative ought to be given to the motion of the hon. gentleman. As to himself, he would only declare upon his honour, that from what he knew of the duties of the office he held, and from the manner in which he discharged them (and he regarded it as a moral offence to take a salary of which he was not deserving), that he looked back with infinitely more satisfaction to the period he had occupied the office of secretary to the board of control, than the hon. gentleman could do, to the time during which lie, held it. [Hear hear!] ' From the moment the hon. gentleman gave an indefinite notice of a motion to call the attention of the House to that board be (Mr. Courtenay) must own that he looked with some anxiety, and not a little curiosity, to the mode the hon. gentleman, would adopt in bringing the subject forward; Knowing the relation in which the hon. gentleman formerly stood to the board, he indulged at first in the expectation, that he would, perhaps, come forward and state that the secretary ship, while he held it, was an office of very great trust; that all the individuals connected with the board performed their duty; that they were, therefore, intitled to their salaries; but that the business of the secretary, as well as of the commissioners, was much better performed then than at present; and that these offices had now become little better than sinecure situations. Knowing, however, as he did, how the facts of the case stood, he felt that his expectation was too good to be true. He then thought that, perhaps, the hon. gentleman would come to the House, in a modest manner, with head abased and countenance suffused with blushes, and acknowledge that he had himself formerly been guilty of holding a sinecure [loud cheers, and laughter], as well as certain considerable persons who, during the time he had been in office, acted as presidents of the board. He had imagined that the hon. gentleman would have stood forth on the present occasion, voluntarily devoting himself to censure, for receiving a salary without performing duty, and that be would involve in one common ruin with himself, the respectable names of lord Minto, Mr. Thomas Grenville, and also that of the right hon. member for Knaresborough (Mr. Tierney), the last president under whom the hon. gentleman had served. But he had pursued a more ingenious course. He had not said that the office of president was a sinecure. The fact was, he did not dare to joke with the right hon. gentleman who Wits a pretty severe practitioner in that art; he certainly knew, that the right hon. gentleman was not prepared to admit, that the office of Resident was a sinecure while he held it, as the hon. gentleman seems to have admitted was the case, with regard to his own office. [Hear, hear.] But though the hon. gentleman spared the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Tierney), as well as the other, presidents who filled this situation, while he was secretary, he scrupled not to denounce the two paid commissioners of that period, as holding sinecures; the one Mr. Hiley Addington, not now living; the other a4toble lord (Morpeth), who, owing to a proceeding which afforded a good specimen of the taste of the whips, was not now a member of the House, and with respect to whom he would say, that there was not in, the whole circle of public men, one less likely to fail in performing his duty faithfully to his country. [Hear, hear.] In one part of his speech, indeed, the hon. gentleman had held up that noble lord, as being the last commissioner who did any thing.

Mr. Creevey.

—"I said in parliament."

Mr. Courtenay.

—Was it, he asked, fair to bring forward public men as useless functionaries of the state, because they did little in parliament, without considering the duties they performed in their offices? And could any thing be clone in parliament by a commissioner for the affairs of India, without a previous attention to the subject, in his office? As to the office he (Mr. Creevey) had held, he had made but little allusion to it; no more than he could help: and dropping all official manner, and assuming the tone of an independent country gentleman, he appeared on this occasion before the House, to call for the abolition of one of the commissionerships, as a useless and unnecessary office, and for a parliamentary inquiry to establish the fact; a. proceeding which the House well knew they ought never to support, unless such a strong case were made out, that the committee were not unlikely to come to a decision in favour of the view taken of the question by the person who proposed it.—Mr. Courtenay next proceeded to show, as he was confident he could, that there was no ground for granting the motion of the hon. gentleman; and this he would shew, by the information he should afford the House respecting the nature and importance of the duties of the India board, which a service of nearly ten years in the office he then held, rendered him competent to afford. The hon. gentleman had truly said, that on the institution of this board in 1784, the members or it did not receive salaries; but it was also true, that they received salaries from other offices. One of the situations held by the commissioners, not to mention the others which had been held by them, was that of joint paymaster-general. It was perfectly true, that that system of remunerating the president and commissioners by salaries attached to their offices, first commenced under the act of 1793, and these salaries had continued from that time at the same amount excepting the president's. The hon. gentleman was, however, altogether wrong in his statement, that the board was instituted in consequence of a bargain made with the company by Mr. Pitt in 1784; for the charter was renewed in 1781, and the board afterwards established was forced upon the company by the act of 1784. This was a circumstance which, though not very material, he thought it proper to mention, as skewing that the hon. gentleman had, in the commencement of his speech, set out in error. He would now explain to the House the nature and extent of the duties which the board of commissioners had to perform; and in doing, so, he would not trespass any longer on the attention of the House than was necessary. He need not point out the immense extent of the empire in India, which was especially placed under, the care of this board: but he must observe, that if the House measured the importance of the duties entrusted to it, merely with reference to the magnitude of those territorial possessions, by a comparison with the extent of this kingdom, or of any other state with which they were acquainted, they would fall into a great mistake, because there was in the British possessions in India, from the very nature of the system by which its public affairs was administered, a far greater quantity of business to be transacted than was known to any other empire. [Hear.] It gave infinitely more trouble than the affairs of any other government which are managed at a distance. There was not in that country, an extensive body of voluntary functionaries to conduct its police, to administer justice, and to superintend the collection of the public revenue on whom so much reliance was placed in other countries, and whose conduct seldom came before the government, unless some grievance was complained of. The whole details of our governments in India; every part of its transactions, extending to all the acts and proceedings of the local offices, are in the first instance, examined, by the different public boards, at the different presidencies, and afterwards considered by the governments. Every single act of the judges, the magistrates, and the collectors of the revenue, became a matter of discussion at the presidencies. All that has passed on the various subjects thus brought before the governing authorities in India, are in most instances communicated at length to the court of directors, who frame their instructions thereon, which, with all the necessary documents are subsequently brought to the view of the India board, whose duty it is to exercise a constant, systematic, and minute control, in regard to all questions thus brought under their consideration. The hon. member said, he knew of no such thing; but he (Mr. Courtenay) would maintain, that this duty was constantly, systematically, and minutely performed by the board. Let not the hon. gentleman, or the right hon. member for Knaresborough (Mr. Tierney), suppose he was imputing blame to him, or to any of those by whom so minute a control had not been exercised. The fact was, that the board had taken a great while to grow up to its present importance; and how it had acquired that importance, he should presently explain. He declared to God, that if he were giving evidence in a court of justice, he could say no more than he was then stating. Considering the short period those gentlemen had been in office, any censure could not be attached to them, on account of the board not having been during their time, in so efficient a state as it had since become: for it required at least three or four years to obtain that knowledge of the general business of the office, to initiate a person in the duties of it, and to render him at all effective. [Hear.] Nor had he any hesitation in stating that it was not till the year 1807, that the system of control was carried into effect, with any thing like the care and, minuteness with which it is now exercised; that until that year, it had not even began to assume any shape or form, more especially in those great and difficult branches of Indian detail relating to the internal administration of the country. The right hon. member for Knaresborough (Mr. Tierney), in a discussion which occurred some years ago, remarked, that "it was easy for any officer to make business, and bring his department into notice, if he pleased." He might, perhaps, think that this was the case in the board of control. [Mr. Tierney said across the table, "I was speaking of the treasurer of the navy's department."] Mr. Courtenay would, only say that if any such idea had been formed by the right hon. gentleman with respect to the India control department, he should have been at issue with him. He could affirm, that there had been no desire in that quarter, to create unnecessary work, and that the increase of duties had arisen from very different causes. He also trusted that no one would impute any such unworthy motive to those who had the management of affairs in the India board, as a disposition to make a skew of details, in order to give their offices a consequence they did not in reality possess, for the purpose of retaining their salaries. He would observe, that between the years 1784 and 1793, a great and important plan had been undertaken for the administration of the land revenues in Bengal, which was technically called "the permanent settlement:" in the origination of which, the India board was a chief party, and which was carried into effect by lord Cornwallis, in the year 1793. A new system for the administration of justice in the provinces was also established, at that period; and it was certainly a long time after the adoption of both these systems, that any close attention was given by the court of directors, or the board of control, to the revenue and judicial affairs of India. The board remained entirely ignorant of the operation the measure which had been carried into execution, in both those great departments. They knew not whether those measures were acceptable not to the natives; whether they had accomplished the objects they had in view, of raising a land revenue, without inconvenience or oppression to the contributors, and of affording to the great body of the population a better, a cheaper, a more expeditious and a purer administration of justice, than before. But in the year 1807 a great change in this respect, took place in the efficiency of the board of commissioners, and in the exercise of their control, also, over the other branches of India concerns, which arose out of a circumstance, apparently trifling in itself, viz. an arrangement adopted for conducting the business of the office, the merits of which were attributable to the present lord Melville, then at the head of the board, and still more, perhaps, to the hon. member for Queen borough (Mr. Holford), who was then the secretary. The business of the office was, by this arrangement, divided into different departments, corresponding with the departments of the Indian governments; and since that time, he could say that every paragraph of the dispatches from India, as well as those transmitted thither, had been subjected to the most careful, and he might in some respects say, enlightened investigation. When this arrangement was formed, the revenue and judicial affairs of India, complicated and difficult as they are, were subjects, almost new to the board. They were new also to the country, as well as to the board; and it had been taken for granted, that what had been done by Mr. Pitt and lord Cornwallis, in regard to the internal government of India, was perfectly right, and needed no revision. He could not, he said, come to this matter, without pausing to pay a tribute to the great merit of an individual. He had seen a smile passing over the countenances of some gentlemen, when he had ascribed, just now, particular merit to a former secretary, (Mr. Holford) for the share he had in introducing the arrangement he had described. The merit which he should now speak of, was that of a clerk; and he should be the most unjust and ungrateful of men, if he were to pass on, without expressing his sense of obligation due to a gentleman known to the members of of that House; he meant Mr. Cumming (hear, bear); who, under the arrangement of 1807, was appointed to the head of the revenue and judicial departments. To him, by his extraordinary labours and intelligence, belonged the merit of having been the first person who called the attention of the board to the practical opera- tion of existing systems in those great departments of the Indian governments; and the effect of his representations, was to bring into the office a load of important business, which could no more be compared with that which existed when the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Tierney) was in office, than the business of the county of Rutland, to the whole business of Great Britain. The course now pursued in regard to the revenue and judicial business of the office was, that every thing which came up from the India House in these departments, went through the examination of the very meritorious individual he had named. The proposed dispatches in the other departments were also brought under the inspection of other persons, of no ordinary talents, intelligence and industry. However worthy of attention the remarks and observations of these gentlemen might be, still it was not to be supposed that their opinions were to be implicitly adopted, or without due consideration in other quarters. Caution on this point, was the more necessary, when it is borne in mind that they might go to set aside the views and determinations of the twenty-four directors, many of whom possessed peculiar knowledge on Indian subjects, and the means of well qualifying them to judge on all matters brought under their attention. It was not, therefore, to be imagined that the decisions of such men would be thrown by, on the mere chewing of any clerk in the India board office, however well informed. Without meaning to assume any particular merit to himself, he was bound to declare that he had paid as much attention to his duty, as could be expected of him, and sometimes to the injury of his health; but he must confess his utter incapacity to go through the whole business of the office, before it passed to the president; to take an elaborate view of all the various subjects that were from time to time brought forward from the different departments, and to give to each that attention that could bring him to submit a fixed opinion to the president. It was here, then, that the duties of the other commissioners begun: and he would venture to affirm that the assistance they had afforded was very valuable and important. To go no further back than the short month which had elapsed since the appointment of the present commissioners, several cases of peculiar importance, cases of malversation, involving con- siderations of great interest, and admitting of no delay, had been disposed of. With respect to the late commissioners, very material aid and service had been derived from the member for Rochester (lord Binning), who had with the best effect, devoted his particular attention to the concerns of the judicial and revenue departments, having mastered the extensive and arduous business of them, to a degree which did that noble lord high credit. The right hon. member for Christchurch, (Mr. Sturges Bourne) was the other paid commissioner, whose judicial habits, and whose clear and upright understanding had been of the greatest use and importance, more especially on legal questions, on which it was necessary to go through large bodies of evidence, and to consider, not merely the justice of the sentence pronounced, but the purity of the Courts in which they were pronounced. He was not speaking at random; he was referring to actual cases. All this was in the ordinary ad- I ministration of the affairs of India; and ought to have been done from the early establishment of the board, though that this was not done was to be attributed more to accident, than to anything else. But in addition to the business that has been described, a very considerable increase had been thrown on the board by the charter of 1813. By that act, the duty was cast upon the board of protecting and watching over the interests of the private trader. The confusion of the two characters of sovereign and merchant in the company, which had long prevailed, exposed the company, sometimes unjustly, and sometimes justly, to much obloquy; but by that charter this inconvenience was removed, and no case of collusion between the company and the private traders had occurred. This alteration in the system had, however, occasioned much new business in the India office, upon which it rested to answer applications from persons desirous of going out to India; to inquire into their views in that country, and to decide on the propriety of granting them permission to proceed to it. Under this head, questions also quite new had arisen, as to demands for such permission. This branch of business alone occupied considerable attention. The business of the board had been also in another respect, augmented by the Charter act of 1813: he referred to the ecclesiastical establishment provided for by that act. He (Mr. Courtenay) dedicated as much time and attention as it was in his power to do, to the business of the office, even as he had said, to the injury of his health; but he must repeat, he found it quite impossible to read over and consider all the mass of papers, in different departments, that were brought before him. It was, however, absolutely necessary, before the subjects were submitted to the president, that the material parts of the papers should be pointed out to him by proper persons. To say that one, two or three commissioners should be reduced, and that the business of the board could be then got through in a satisfactory manner, was to say what it was impracticable could be. If there were six commissioners to-morrow, instead of three, he would undertake to give them as much business as would afford full employment to each of them, for a fortnight. [A laugh.] On the other hand, if there should be found one commissioner who was not idle, but worked day and night; was never hungry, nor thirsty, nor tired, nor sleepy; he might, no doubt, get through the work to be done, in half the ordinary time, and might do as well as two; but then he ought to have a double salary for such exertions [Hear, hear!]. The papers that came before the board were of a very different description from mere dispatches: they were of the most voluminous kind. "Why, that, sir," (said Mr. Courtenay, pointing to a huge bundle of papers on the table of the House) "would be but a mere abridgment that would be given to a junior clerk to examine." He had been told by the hon. gentleman that no boards were held by the commissioners; admitting, however, as he did, that none were held in his time, but observing that it was the practice in other departments of government to hold boards for the general transaction of business. Now his (Mr. Courtenay's) lungs, which were nearly worn out already by his exertions, would not allow of his reading a tythe of the papers in the office necessary to be read at the board, according to this mode of doing business. He could as easily read all those voluminous documents aloud, as repeat them by heart. All the board can do is to meet and distribute the business among themselves, previous to the final disposal of it by the president. While his right hon. friend (Mr. Canning), was president, who was not friendly to mere form, he seldom went into the hoard-room. It was not the custom for the president to sit in state at one end of a table, with the other two commissioners on each side of him, and the secretary at the other end, with a pen behind his ear, either reading over masses of paper, or waiting to take minutes of their proceedings. Bat it did not follow, that because these forms were dispensed with, that the business of the board was less efficiently carried on in the mode he had described; and with a constant communication existing between the president, the commissioners, and the secretary, on all matters that required their attention. The commissioners did not adopt all the forms of a board; but they left none of their duties unperformed: nor could they possibly be performed efficiently in that way [Hear, hear!]. On the parliamentary point respecting the propriety of the secretary and the commissioners holding seats in that House, it formed a distinct question from that now under discussion; it was not his intention, therefore, now to say any thing on that subject. It had, he remembered, been noticed last year by the hon. member for Shrewsbury (Mr. G. Bennet), who had given notice that he should again bring it on; and whenever it was specifically introduced to the House, he (Mr. Courtenay) would be ready to meet the arguments that might be advanced by the hon. member (Mr. G. Bennet), and which had been adduced in this night's discussion by the flyover of the question. On a former occasion that hon. gentleman (Mr. Bennet), with less than his usual courtesy, had observed that he (Mr. Courtenay) and his noble friend (lord Binning) were of no use in that House, or elsewhere [Hear, hear!]. The hon. member (Mr. Creevey) who had introduced the motion now before the House, had asked "of what use were those persons connected with the board of control, in parliament?" His answer was, that they were there, to answer all inquiries respecting the department to which they belonged, and to attend to the progress of all bills in that House connected with it. But did not the hon. gentleman know, that there had been introduced into the House a variety of bills relative to India since the passing of the charter, several of which he had drawn up himself? And both he and his noble friend (lord Binning) had attended in their places, to give explanations and answer objections to those bills: but none were made to them. But who was to blame for this, or was there any blame? The presumption was, that these bills were proper bills and correctly framed; and it was worthy of remark, that the Charter act of 1813, though it contained two hundred clauses, no explanatory bill had been brought in respecting it, except on one very immaterial point. If, on the contrary, they had brought in such a bungling bill as required continual amendment, the hon. gentleman would then have said, "Oh, we must have commissioners, for there is now much India business in parliament to attend to." But was it not, in the first instance, better to prevent the necessity of constantly calling the attention of parliament to India matters, by having the duties connected with the board of commissioners properly and carefully executed? With regard to the discontinuance of the India budget, he need hardly observe what a dull and disagreeable subject it had been considered in that House; and he feared would be so considered, unless, indeed, it were introduced by a humorous speech, like that they had this evening heard from the hon. member (Mr. Creevey). How few gentlemen had ever sat out a discussion on the India budget! The subject of India, the hon. member well knew was a tiresome one in that House; one to which members paid little regard. It was on this account, that the practice of making budget speeches had been of late wears discontinued. But the papers on which the budgets had been founded were still laid on the table of the House, and printed; and if any information were required from members respecting those papers, there were those present always, ready to afford it; but he thought that the time and attention of the House of Commons was quite enough occupied, without throwing away a day in the discussion of a topic that would be sure to drive gentlemen away from it. The hon. member (Mr. Courtenay) concluded his speech by saying that he trusted he had established sufficient grounds, to induce the House to negative the motion of the hon. member (Mr. Creevey), and to convince members that the two commissioners of the board were essentially necessary for carrying into execution the objects for which it had been instituted. As a proof of this necessity, he might mention, that at that moment, there were most important measures growing out of the late Mahratta war which were under the consideration of the board: the papers respecting which formed such a voluminous and in- tricate collection of matter, that if the assistance of two commissioners were to be taken away, it would be impracticable for his right hon. friend ( Mr. Wynn) to get through the business of his office. He (Mr. Courtenay) also expected that within the next six months, dispatches would probably be submitted to the board, for transmission to India, on some revenue and judicial questions of very special importance, most intimately affecting the welfare and prosperity of our affairs in a considerable portion of the Bengal provinces. He thought he had shown sufficient grounds to the House for rejecting the motion; and he really did not expect that the hon. gentleman, fifteen years after quitting the situation in which he had acquired the ignorance upon which he founded his motion [a laugh], would have brought forward such a motion as the present. He should meet it by a direct negative [Hear, hear!].

Mr. Tierney

said, he felt no wish to conceal any opinion he entertained on this subject, or to withhold from the House any information he could give, with respect to the office in question. He was as ignorant of the nature of the motion, until within the last two or three hours, as the hon. secretary himself, and therefore he was as much taken by surprise and had as little time to prepare himself as that hon. gentleman. But, however taken by surprise, or however unprepared, he would detail every thing which happened while he was in that office, with as strict an attention to truth as possible. The present motion seemed to embrace two objects; one, to inquire how far it was necessary to continue the number of members now in the board of control; the other, assuming the fact that so many ought to remain, to consider whether it was proper that the same number should continue to have seats in parliament? These appeared to him to be the two objects of the motion; and he thought they were extremely fair ones. As to the importance of the board of control, no person respected that institution more than he did, or was better acquainted with the weight of business that pressed upon it. But the question for the House was, whether those duties required three commissioners, or could be performed by a more limited number? And, so far as his experience went in 1807, he declared upon his honour, that he did not think three commissioners were necessary; for during the period to which he alluded, no board, in the strict sense of the word, was held. It was true, that he was in constant communication with the other two commissioners; they compared notes together, and the result was exactly the same to the public as if a board had met [Hear!]. With respect to his noble friend (lord Morpeth) and his hon. friend who was now unfortunately no more (Mr. H. Addington), he must say, that from them he received most material assistance. But though he received valuable assistance from lord Morpeth, and though when he called for the aid of his hon. friend, it was kindly and promptly rendered in the judicial department, still the mass of business and the weight of responsibility rested on himself. And he felt that that man would be unworthy of fulfilling such a situation, if he shrank from the heavy responsibility which was attached to it. He thought so at the time, and he held the same opinion now. Let any paper be shown to him, bearing his signature, and no matter by what other gentleman it was signed, he held himself responsible for it. But the hon. secretary had argued, that the labour was greater now than formerly—that the dispatches from India were not, some years ago, liable to the same minute investigation which they now experienced. All he could say was, that he knew of no dispatches—that he knew of no department of Indian affairs—that did not receive due and proper attention. And he would take leave to say, that without such able and intelligent clerks as the board possessed, it would have been impossible for three, or even the commissioners, to have gone through the business. The House were, however, led into error, when they were told that it was the duty of the secretary and the commissioners to read all the papers. How stood the fact? Before a statement came up, it was sifted at the India House by some of the most intelligent men that could be found in any situation; when it was there sifted, and the points at issue marked out, it underwent another revision by persons of equal or greater capacity at the board of control; so that before it was submitted to the president, a great part of the labour was removed, if he had confidence in the persons through whose hands it had gone. And he believed, that nothing like neglect or foul play could be attributed to the clerks of the India House or of the board of control. Every thing in dis- pute was fairly and distinctly marked, and brought, in the clearest manner, under the observation of the president. In his opinion, the hon. secretary must have made a mistake, when he said that two or three years were necessary for initiation into the duties of the board. It was a most extraordinary position. If it were correct, then, in all changes of the board, one person, who had served his apprenticeship, should certainly be left to instruct the new corners. But here, three gentlemen were sent to the right about, and three others were placed in their situations, who, according to the evidence of the hon. secretary, could know nothing of the duties they were selected to perform. When he (Mr. T.) entered the office, he was in some degree qualified for it; for he had previously taken a fancy—gentlemen would think it rather a curious one—to go through a series of Indian subjects. He, therefore, came to the study of his duties with some degree of advantage. But he must declare, that he never did undertake, and perhaps never would, any office more arduous in appearance than the board of control. He acknowledged the assistance he received from two of the commissioners; but still he thought that three were unnecessary. He would go further, and say, that not only was there time for the president to spare, but, in his opinion, an amendment might very properly be offered to the present motion, for the purpose of consolidating with this board the duties of the third secretary of state, and the business of the colonial department. This was his opinion, and, by effecting such a consolidation, a considerable sum would be saved to the public. It would be very proper, by such an amendment as that to which he had adverted, to inquire, not only whether there was a necessity for so many commissioners, who all sat in parliament, but whether a consolidation of the department of the colonies, under lord Bathurst, might not be superadded to the board of control, with the assistance of one secretary from that department. That office was considered necessary during a period of war. War had ceased; but, to enable the individual to go on with his functions, he was called secretary for the colonial department. The business of the country could be entirely done by two secretaries of state. Some of the new colonies ought, in point of reason, to be added to the duties of the secretary for the foreign department. Malta and the Ionian islands were clearly of that description. They came as much within the scope of our foreign policy, as any point of Europe: and the same observations would apply to Malta. With respect to New South Wales, that would properly come under the jurisdiction of the home department. There then remained only a few new colonies, including those connected with India, the business of which might be performed by the board of control. The saving, if this suggestion were adopted, would be nearly, if not quite, 10,000l. a-year. If the arrangement were carried into effect, he had no doubt that the whole business, both of India and the colonies, would proceed as satisfactorily as it did at this present moment. In all this, he might, however, be perfectly wrong; and therefore he would vote for the proposition of his hon. friend, because he had no information of the business transacted by the board since 1807, except what the hon. secretary had communicated. He wished to learn how the matter really stood; and he should like to superadd this amendment, to show how anxious they were to prevent improper persons from sitting in parliament, and to prove that they had economy in view, and were friendly to a reduction of expense on the whole scale of government. He knew it would be said, "If you take any thing from the board of control, the benefit would come round only in a circuitous way, so far as the public were concerned." But, the company were bound to give 26,000l. a year for the management of the affairs of India; and, if that management were effected for less, they could not object to the surplus being made applicable to the public service. He stated this on his deliberate conscientious opinion, and as a scheme which might be carried into effect with great advantage. He would repeat, that three persons were not necessary to manage the affairs of India, supposing them conversant with those affairs; but when they saw three gentlemen thrust into the office, who knew nothing of its details, it could not be seriously asserted that the service required any such number. He meant not to speak disrespectfully of those officers, but he wished to know what disadvantage it would be to the service, if, instead of three, only one of them was retained, since none of them were acquainted with the duties of the office. He had forgotten, however, that there was an ecclesiastical department, and perhaps the learned doctor (Phillimore) might know something of that. In his time, certainly, there was no such department. The business might, he conceived, be effectually conducted by a president, vice-president, and the usual clerks. He desired not to be understood to undervalue the labours of the board of control. No department in the state required more accurate information, and more steady application. Upon this point there could be no two views in that House. Whether the duties of the board required now more or less application than when he had been connected with it, he knew not; but this he knew, that none could more sedulously attend to its business than he had done. He had never been one day absent during the time that he had been president. He had bestowed all the application in his power to the government and to the finances of India. He could not pretend to say, that he had achieved much good. It had not been possible to have done much good in the short time that he was in office. All he would say was, that during that short time he had learnt sufficient knowledge of the business to justify him now in saying, that every one of the commissioners might be spared if the business should be conducted as at present; and that in the other way which he had stated, 10,000l. a-year might be saved to the public.

Mr. Canning

said, he rose under the same necessity that had called up the right hon. gentleman opposite, allusion having been made by the hon. mover to him (Mr. C.) and to his conduct of that office which he had recently had the honour of filling for five years. He felt it his duty to say of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Tierney), that at no time, so far as his retrospect carried him back, was the office of president of the board of control more efficiently discharged, than it had been by the right hon. gentleman. In many points referred to they both concurred; and with respect to some in which they disagreed, the change of circumstances, the progress of time, and the increase of business in the office, would, he believed, account satisfactorily for the difference. What he should have to state on the subject of the motion would be, like what the right hon. gentleman had stated, more in the shape of testimony than of argument. But before he proceeded to make that statement, and therein to lay the grounds of his objection to the motion of the hon. gentleman, he would beg leave to call the attention of the House to the precise nature of it, and to the circumstances under which it was brought before the House. The motion, then, had for its object the reform of a great and important department of the public service, and it turned out that one hon. member who made the motion had been secretary, and another right hon. gentleman who supported it the presiding minister, in that department; and that, both from their own respective statements and from the notoriety of the facts, it was established that one of them had been a most efficient, the other a most inefficient officer of the board. Such being the state of the case, if the right hon. gentleman, the former president of the board of control, had brought forward a motion to ascertain the manner in which the business of the, office had been carried on, in order to see what part of the duty had been satisfactorily performed, and where there had been a failure, and had concluded by moving for a committee to inquire into the conduct of an idle secretary of that board—had such been the character of the motion, he could have understood the motives which brought the subject before the House. But as the only data yet offered in support of a proposition for reform, was the assertion, or rather the just boast of efficiency on the part of the right hon. gentleman who had been president, and that efficiency aided by material assistance from the commissioners, but altogether unaided by any help whatever from the secretary, it was most extraordinary that this idle secretary should be the identical person to bring forward a motion for reform. This was reform with a vengeance! But it was a picture—and not an unfaithful picture—of the principles on which reform was clamoured for upon a thousand other occasions; and if they could trace the greater part of those clamours to their source, they would find, on inquiry, in nine instances out of ten,—Habetis confitentem reum—that the evil existed where the clamour arose [Hear.] It was most extraordinary, that any person could be so completely blinded by his own fancies, or by his own pamphlets, as to come forward with such a motion under such circumstances, announcing his own utter inefficiency.—"Me, me, adsum qui non feci," or rather "qui nil feci"—I am the man who did nothing; and I now call on you to inquire, why those who were associated with me, and who were diligent and laborious, failed to follow my example. I call on you to demand of them why they should thus break in upon the practice which my conduct went to establish, and disturb by their troublesome activity, the stillness of my stagnation [Cheers.] The hon. gentleman stated himself to have been well paid. He had received 1,500l. per annum, yet all that he had to do, at least all that he had done, was, to amuse himself with the newspapers. The president, indeed, was engaged in the penetralia of his inner cabinet, in forming plans for the good government of India, but the hon. gentleman had told them, "I washed my hands of every thing of this sort; I did not occupy myself in any such a way. I had only to repose myself in my office, and to look from the window into the park, to amuse myself with what might be passing there; and now I come to revenge myself on those whose industry formed so strong a contrast to my inactivity, by calling on the House to inquire into the manner in which those duties were performed, no part of which certainly was performed by me." Now, if the authority of the individual bringing forward a motion was to pass for any thing in that House, it was a little too much that they should be called upon to go into an inquiry, when no earthly grounds were laid for that inquiry, but the confessed fault of the party calling for it—when the grounds of the motion which he made were really and substantially laid in the inculpation of no man living except himself.

He (Mr. C.) did not wish to overstate the importance of that department of the state which the hon. gentleman had attempted to run down. The right hon. gentleman opposite, who, during the short period of his presidency, had applied himself so closely and diligently to the duties of his office, had stated them to be duties of some importance. He, however, hoped that that right hon. gentleman would not be offended with him, when he assured the House, that the actual business of the board, in point of extent, delicacy, and difficulty, compared with what it was at the period, when the right hon. gentleman presided over it, partly from circumstances arising out of the renewal of the company's charter, partly from the political and military changes which had since taken place in India, had materially increased. The circumstances to which he had alluded, would, of themselves, in a great degree, account for the burthen of affairs now thrown upon the board of control, being much heavier than formerly. He could not of course speak as to the former period from his own knowledge; but, from the information he had obtained from others, he could state, that if they compared the present state of the business at the India house and the board of control, with what it was in 1793, it would be found to have increased nearly a hundred fold. This he stated without fear of contradiction; and, what was still more to the purpose, he could assure the House, that it had increased, within the last five or six years, in the ratio of 20 per cent. If, then, two commissioners were found necessary in 1807, when the hon. mover, and his right hon. colleague were in office, it was surely not too much to say, that no reduction in these commissioners ought to take place at present.

During the debates on Mr. Fox's India bill, no question had been more argued, than whether the control of the Indian government should be vested in one person, or in a board of commissioners. Mr. Pitt and Mr. Fox, though they had widely differed in many respects, perfectly agreed in this—that a board was the fair instrument, not for the government—for there the mistake had been—but for the control of the government of India. A secretary of state was not the fit person for superintending such a board. A secretary of state was the servant of the Crown, by whom the pleasure of the sovereign was signified. It was not so in the hoard of control. In this office the king's pleasure was never signified. The duty of the board was great; but it was not in original, acting duty. With a trifling exception, which he would afterwards mention, the board originated nothing. He had no wish to enter into the details of such a subject, nor would he now proceed to do so, if it had not been actually forced upon him. The course of business, so far as related to dispatches sent out to India, was this. The dispatches were prepared by the court of Directors and sent up to the board of control for revision, correction, or approbation. No dispatch could be sent out to India without he approval of the board of control, signified by the signature of three commissioners. He did not mean to say that many dispatches were not forwarded in the form in which they were first prepared; but, in others, it was found necessary to make corrections, or additions, which were again sent back to the court of directors, assigning the reasons and adducing the motives which required such alterations. Now, such a course of proceeding afforded a guarantee for the diligent performance of the duties of the several parties concerned. If the president or the commissioners were even disposed to be idle, the House would evidently see, that where they were obliged to give their reasons for any proposed alteration or omission, no man would risk his reputation in giving such reasons, unless he had previously made himself acquainted with the subject. Such was the legal course of proceeding prescribed by the act of parliament and in no instance ever omitted. But custom had introduced another course, which, though it seemed to give additional trouble in the first instance, was calculated ultimately to save it. Previous to an important dispatch being made up at the India-house, its substance was usually, by courtesy, communicated to the president of the board of control; so that if there was any fundamental objection to the principle on which it was framed, this could at once be stated, confidentially, without committing the two authorities against each other; and the court of directors might be advised that it would be better not to draw up their dispatch in such a shape. On this intimation being given, the plan of it was commonly altered. When the directors were determined in their opinion of the propriety of the course they intended to pursue, then, not being in every degree bound to conform to the opinion of the president, thus confidentially and unofficially communicated to them, the dispatch was sent up to the board of commissioners as originally drawn, and had to go through the usual forms. It was then perhaps sent back with such alterations as were considered necessary. This would sometimes produce a remonstrance; to which a reply became necessary, and that reply frequently led to verbal as well as written communications. From this detail two things were evident: 1st, that this sort of amicable discussion is not the proper function of a secretary of state,—who signifies the king's pleasure; which is of course not liable to question or remonstrance. 2ndly, That no man can execute the duty of first commissioner—nor the duty of a commissioner of such a board, without making himself thoroughly, master of the business that comes before it—or of such part of that business as the presiding commissioner may think fit to assign to him.

That it might be seen what was the weight of business thrown on the board, he had caused an account to be taken of the number of dispatches which had passed through it during the time of his presidency. In four years and a half or nearly five years, he found that the number of dispatches which had come before it amounted to within a few of 1800. Of these, many of course were passed with no alteration, or with alteration so slight that they were hardly worth entering into a controversy about. But all must have been read, even to pass unaltered; and about one tenth of them had been thought to require such alterations as had led to detailed expositions of reasons, and to discussions with the directors—not certainly of a hostile character, but often very long and complicated. Nor was that all: for almost all dispatches came up accompanied by papers, and documents of such number and bulk, that when his hon. friend, the secretary to the board, had pointed to the pile on the table, it appeared to him that nothing but his hon. friend's natural shortness of sight could have led him to magnify that pile into any thing like an equality with his official collections. It gave in truth, no adequate idea of the bulk of papers and documents to be perused by the board. This subsidiary mass accompanied the dispatch, not like a little attendant bark, which— Pursued the triumph, and partook the gale; but with a proud and portly importance of its own, which often threw its principal into the shade. It was said, that there was no great labour in getting through these dispatches, and he had been asked the time which they consumed? He should answer the question by a few examples. He had seen a military dispatch accompanied with 199 papers, containing altogether 13,511 pages; another, a judicial dispatch, with an appendage of 1,937 pages; and a dispatch on the revenue with no fewer than 2,588 pages by its side. This, then, was the modicum, which, be it observed, must be read by somebody at the board—this was the sinecure, the little appendage which might be so conveniently transferred to the secretary of state for the home department, or to the office which transacted the affairs of the colonies of half the world. He did not believe that the physical strength of any single secretary would suffice to get through his part of the business, and the president must be utterly overwhelmed with the detail, before he could get at the substance—if he were to take that detail upon himself. It had been pretended, that an active president with a diligent secretary could get through the whole with ease. He ventured to pronounce it utterly impracticable.

He would state the means by which this business was disposed of at present. In the first place, much credit was due to the servants of the East India Company. The papers received from them were drawn up with a degree of accuracy and talent that would do credit to any office in the state. The board could not, with all the talents and industry of the president, the commissioners, or even of his hon. friend, their tried secretary, have transacted the business devolved upon it without the talents and industry with which that business was prepared for them at the India House. Now, taking the dispatches at 358 in the year, (that was the average number of the 5 years of his (Mr. C.'s) presidency), including many of those monsters which he had described, as it was necessary, not that the president of the board of control should read all of them all through, but that he should look accurately to all those respecting which any doubt had been started, was it too much that he should have two gentlemen to assist him, on whose understanding he could rely, and who would share in some degree, though not in a political sense, the responsibility of the office? It was necessary that he should have such assistants to receive the dispatches from the clerks, whose business it was to go through them literally and verbally in the first instance,—noting the points on which any question could arise, and referring to the papers substantiating them; and such assistance he had from his honourable friends near him, who had proved as efficient assistants to him, as the right hon. gentleman opposite had found a noble friend of his when he filled the same situation. While he was at the board, he had never passed a dispatch, on which he had not first availed himself of the light of their understandings. Ha did not say that he had never signed a dispatch, in confidence, without reading it; but he had never signed one with which they had not made themselves acquainted, and of which one or other of them had not given him the assurance of their exercised judgment:—and never one, upon which they reported a doubt, without carefully and critically examining it. He contended, therefore, that the present machinery was well adapted for the due discharge of the duties confided to the board; and be was satisfied that it was not too extensive. He should be ungrateful not to acknowledge the assistance he had received from his noble friend near him (lord Binning), in the judicial branch of the Indian policy, to which, intricate and perhaps repulsive as it was, his noble friend had devoted himself with an ardour kindled, perhaps, by the example of a gentleman already named in this debate (Mr. Cumming). With the greatest thankfulness he acknowledged also the assistance of his right hon. friend, the member for Christchurch (Mr. S. Bourne), without whose aid he would have been in the utmost perplexity, especially in legal matters and subjects of appeal. In debates, turning (as all debates now did) upon insinuations of personal motives and base corruption, it might not be improper to say, that both his noble and his right hon. friend had gone out of office against his earnest entreaty. If they had yielded to his prayer and wishes, his noble friend would still be rendering that service to our Indian government which, his acquaintance with its affairs rendered him peculiarly qualified to afford; and his right hon. friend would be now filling one of the highest judicial situations in India. That appointment, when he (Mr. C.) pressed it upon him, his right hon. friend had declined, and both were now, by their own free and unchangeable determination, out of office. Against such characters it was, that the House now heard insinuations thrown out, as if the board were a nest of sinecures: filled without talents, and with emolument unearned by any discharge of duty. While be was thus rendering tribute to individual merit, he could not pass over his hon. friend near him (Mr. T. Courtenay). Whatever blame attached to the increase of his hon. friend's salary, he begged it might fall on him (Mr. Canning). He was prepared to answer for it at the bar of that House—before the country—or even before the committee proposed by the hon. gentleman. When he first went to the board of control—a circumstance not of his own seeking, but the result of accident—he found his hon. friend in the situation which he now filled so much to his own honour. He only knew the secretary at that time, as the reputed author of a pamphlet in which he (Mr. Canning) was pretty severely attacked for a speech he had made in that House. It would, therefore, be readily conceived that they did not approach each other with any feelings of extraordinary personal prepossession; but the patient industry, the unostentatious activity, of the hon. secretary, had made him feel it to be his duty to raise his salary from a state of depression to a level with offices, to which it was not inferior in importance. He had found the hon. gentleman in the receipt of 1,800l. per annum. He was desirous of augmenting his income; and an opportunity presented itself of doing so, as the result of a measure of economy. The chief clerk's situation fell vacant; he had thought that office might be dispensed with, and accordingly it was not filled up. Two other offices which were nearly sinecures he had taken measures for putting an end to, at the expiration of the interest, now existing in them. He had thence gained the means, as he thought, both of strengthening the efficient part of the office and compensating the services of his hon. friend. He understood it had been said, that his hon. friend had extorted successive augmentations by successive and humiliating supplications. In refutation of this insinuation he would read the minute of the board respecting the augmentation of the secretary's salary.

[Here the right hon. gentleman read a minute which, after alluding to the diligence and length of service of the secretary, resolved, that he should have an increase of salary of 200l. immediately, 200l. more at the end of five years, and 300l. more at the end of seven years, making altogether 2,500l. at the end of ten years.] It appeared from this minute that of what had been arranged for his hon. friend, part was yet incompleted; and if he (Mr. Canning) had any weight on the subject, he, as the deceased president, bequeathed the performance of it as a legacy to his successor. This would place the office of his hon. friend in the same situa- tion with that of the under secretary of state, with which its business might, without disparagement, be compared.—It had been stated by the hon. gentleman, that the chief secretary to the commissioners was entitled to the advantages of superannuation. No such a thing. This was the single office in the state for which no superannuation allowance was provided. He would tell the House how this happened. In 1817, a bill was before the House relative to the provision to be made for the remuneration of persons who had discharged, for a specified time, the duties of high and efficient public offices. In that bill, the president of the board of control, and the chief secretary were not included; and the reason given by the report of the committee which recommended the bill for not including them was, that they were to be paid from a different fund;—that is, from the money of the East India Company. It was therefore suggested by the report, that a separate bill should be brought in for providing remuneration for those two officers: and upon him (Mr. Canning) it naturally devolved, to bring in such a bill. Those who considered the temper of the present times, and the temper of those to which he had referred, would not feel much surprise that he should have felt reluctant to bring in a bill to provide a retreat for the president of the board of control, with whose fate that of the secretary was involved. He had besides differed in opinion with the committee, not thinking as they did, that the charge of such a retreat ought to be thrown on the East India Company. He had therefore declined bringing in the bill,—of which he would himself have been the first to profit; and for these reasons his hon. friend had remained the only man of his class who was not so provided for. Under these circumstances, the increase of salary which he had received was not only what he had deserved, but what he had a right to expect from his (Mr. Canning's) hands. His hon. friend had been nearly ten years in office—he was now to be amerced in one-tenth of his income by, the arrangement about to take effect with respect to all salaries—and that at a time when, he might beg leave to say (though this was not strictly a parliamentary argument) his hon. friend was in daily expectation of the birth of a tenth child. [A laugh.] If there was any man in that House who would say that the salary was too great for such services—if there was any man who grudged his hon. friend such an augmentation—he could only say, that he did not envy that man his feelings—and, however he might be inclined to give him credit for economy, he did not feel disposed to share his coldness of heart [Hear!].

The hon. gentleman who had opened the debate had entered at some length into the structure of the board; and a cry was raised against the number of the commissioners. Now, to him it appeared, that there would be something unseemly in an arrangement which should subject the decisions of a body like the East India Company to be altered and nullified by the dash of a single pen. That a deliberative body should act on such occasions was not only due in courtesy to the Court of Directors (in fact the government of India), but was essential to the prosperity of the important interests confided to their care. Mr. Fox—no mean judge of these matters—had he been sparing of commissioners? He had proposed seven principal, and nine assistant commissioners. "O! but then his seven principals were not paid!" O! but the nine assistants were!" But the grand commissioners were not paid. Not paid! Why, they were to hold their offices for four years irremovable by the Crown: and they were to enjoy that of which he (Mr. Canning) had not one jot—all the patronage. After this, he should like to hear it again stated, that men were not paid for their services, who enjoyed the patronage connected with a revenue of sixteen millions. Mr. Fox's Bill had, indeed, been over-ruled, but it was elsewhere. The House of Commons passed it. Of Mr. Fox's commissioners he might say, as Pope said of Bufo's stipendiary poets— And some he paid with port, and some with praise. Some of the commissioners were to be paid with solid sums of money, and others with extensive patronage. Mr. Pitt tried the experiment of an unpaid committee of privy council, with a secretary of state at their head, for eight years, and then—What then? Why, an act of parliament established the board of control, as it now existed. What again resulted from that? That the president was made a responsible minister, with two salaried assistants, whose services he might command and profit by, if it were not his own fault; and, if they failed in the discharge of their duty, he (Mr. Canning.) would recommend their removal with as little ceremony as he would that of an idle, loitering, newspaper-reading secretary. [A laugh.]

The right hon. gentleman proceeded to describe the constitution of the board, and explained the importance of the several regulations by which it was governed; its connexion, through the president, when (as in his case) a Cabinet Minister, with the general body of the administration; and the use occasionally made of those privy councillors who are unpaid members of it, and some of whom occupied other departments in the state. In the early part of his presidency, when war was raging in India, he had not scrupled to apply to lord Teignmouth for aid, and from that noble viscount he had received the most important assistance. Mr. Sullivan, a commissioner who had resigned, remained at the board at his (Mr. Canning's) desire, and that gentleman's information and experience upon matters of local knowledge and practice in India, had been found most useful. It was, perhaps, hardly regular to allude to it, but on a former evening, during the debate on the motion respecting the lords of the Admiralty, a whimsical story had been introduced of a certain unpaid commissioner of the board of control, having gone to the office to inquire for a board; and having been told that there was no board sitting: he had been shown indeed a table covered with green cloth, and paper, and all the paraphernalia of writing; but as to board, Lord bless you, sir, said the office keeper, such a thing has not been known this many a day. Now this sounded very comical: but it might be true, and yet perfectly blameless. The inference meant to be drawn from this story, was this—that the whole office was perfectly nugatory; but it is no such thing. There are, by the constitution of the commission, two commissioners not privy councillors, who are there (by their own desire, no doubt) to learn Indian business. But it was quite silly to suppose that the history of our empire in India was to be learnt by attending a formal board; where, by the description which he had given of the course of business, nothing of the real substantial labour of the office was or could be done. There was a library; with 2,000 volumes of 700 pages each—not such volumes as were found in book seller's shops—but sol id substantial tomes of many cubical feet of knowledge; of which when the young commissioner had made himself perfectly master, there would be no objection to his being initiated into his place at the board. But the attendance of an unpaid commissioner was not wanted, nor did he think that important business could long be carried on in any country by unpaid servants of the public. These commissioners were treated with due respect. They were allowed the privileges of reference to all the records of the office, and in times of interest to all the current business: after this, for them to complain that more attention was not shown towards them, and that they were not asked to assist at the board with their counsel, was about as reasonable as it was in the lady in Blue Beard, who, being allowed to amuse herself with the curiosities in ninety-nine apartments, was miserable because she was not permitted to enter the blue chamber which was the hundredth [a laugh.] To sit in a body, and have a thousand pages read, would be a very ineffectual mode of doing business. The rational course to pursue, and the one he had always pursued, was, to distribute the business amongst different hands, and then to have the results brought for his decision. That was the real mode of doing business.

If an unpaid commissioner however had been excluded, and was offended at the exclusion, the hon. secretary could satisfy him that he had no great loss, for that, if admitted he would have found the matters which occupied the board extremely uninteresting. Two branches of business lately had indeed been added to the labours of the board—the ecclesiastical department not altogether a light concern since parliament had sanctioned two religious establishments in India. Hence had arisen the act for licensing Scotch marriages. New business had also grown out of the conditions on which the last charter had been granted. These had authorized individuals to resort to India; but it was required that they should apply for a license to the court of directors; and where such license was refused, an appeal might be made to the board of control. And here he felt himself bound in justice to speak of the conduct of the court of directors. When the provision which he had alluded to was made, it was opposed, on the ground that the directors would be likely to use it unfairly. The applications which had been made for licences to go to India since the renewal of the charter were between 4 and 500. Of these the court of directors had refused about one third. As a test of the general propriety of these decisions, he had to state, that but a third of that third which had been refused permission to go to India, had succeeded in getting the refusals reversed by the board of control.

If he had succeeded—aided as he had been by the right hon. gentleman (Mr. Tierney)—in spewing that a board of control was a fitter instrument than a secretary of state for superintending the concerns of the East India company—if the House were satisfied from the speech of that right hon. gentleman, that more strength, talent, and time were required in superintending those affairs than one man could be expected to supply—if they bore in mind, that the right hon. gentleman had received valuable assistance from those who had been associated with him, remembering that such assistance had been still more necessary to him ( Mr. Canning) from the great increase in the business—if this impression had been made on them, there were but two grounds remaining on which a motion could be supported, which had for its object if not the total abolition of the board, the weakening of the establishment, by the diminution of its numbers. These two arguments were, first, that in these times of distress, the salaries of the commissioners should be spared, and revert to the pockets of the public; and secondly, that if there should be no saving to the public, it would at any rate be consolatory for a suffering nation to see places reduced from which official persons in times of distress, enjoyed an invidious affluence. The right hon. gentleman opposite had answered the first argument, by stating, that the salaries of the board were derived from the East India Company; and that if the board was abolished, the money would revert not to the pockets of the subject, but to the coffers of the Company. The best proof of this assertion was to be found in the fact, that during the time which occurred from his (Mr. Canning's) resignation to the appointment of the right hon. president (Mr. Wynn), the salary which was not accepted by the holder of the office remained with the company. If the hon. gentlemen, therefore, wished a saving for the public, they ought to have been earlier in the field-they were a year too late.

But, he was aware that upon this subject of saving there was another favourite argument in reserve namely, that even though the public should reap no advantage from the abolition of the office, it was inexpedient at a time of public suffering, that the holders of office should be enjoying an invidious affluence. He knew the end to which this argumentum ad invidiam tended, and he would not, if he could help it, yield to the principle which it involved: He admitted that the emoluments of, office were not in the nature of property; but they could not be abolished on such a principle as this; that principle was one, which, pushed to its extent, involved all property—it was a principle, than had led to invasions of private rights, and had been the fruitful source of popular excesses, The belief, that whatever was enjoyed by the rich, was an injury to the poor—the happiness resulting from the diminution of another man's prosperity—the idea that the poor man should See no contiguous palace rear its head "To mock the meanness, of his humble shed, these were all fruits of that principle, which went diffuse the misery which we could not redress, and to destroy the possessions of one class of society, not because they were injurious, but because they were odious to those who did not participate in the enjoyment of them. He allowed, that between the salaries of office and the rights of property there was an immense distance; but the intermediate space was filled up with property of different denominations and held on different tenures, all of which this principle would equally affect.

Let it not, however, be imputed to him (Mr. C.), that when an office could clearly be proved to be useless, be would defend its continuance, or would argue against its abolition. But let the office in that case be abolished on the fair plea of its inutility, and not on the ground that it conferred affluence on its holder, and was an eye-sore to the wretched; not on the principle, that emoluments of office should alone be selected to suffer for the sake of the revenue. He knew only of two other classes of men, the Jews anciently, and more recently the Roman Catholics, who were considered as fair subjects of a taxation from which their fellow-citizens were exempted; and he protested against placing the holders of office in that situation, and conferring upon them the privilegium odiosum of bearing more than their due proportion of the public burthens.

When he argued for the utility of the office which the: motion went to abolish, he did not say, but that it was possible to abuse it—be did not say that it might not be filled by idle persons; but this he would say, that there was business enough to do, and that there were sufficient motives for activity, unless the commissioners formed a kind of conspiracy for indolence. No man would submit to fill the office inefficiently, without neglecting the discharge of useful and important duties. He was speaking of establishments, and not men; and, therefore, he would say, that a board with the present number of commissioners, headed by a president who was either a cabinet minister, or in immediate communication with the ministers, could conduct the business better than a secretary of state. The president would desert his duty if he did not consider himself as bearing all the responsibility of the office; but he might divide its duties with his assistants. Thinking, then, the board a useful establishment, believing that as at present constituted it answered all the purposes of its erection, and that the commissioners proposed to be reduced were necessary for its perfect efficiency, he could not consent to the present motion. When future presidents should cease to follow the example of their predecessors—when the business of office was neglected whether by commissioners or secretaries—he would then allow that it was an office which parliament might consent to reform, or, in other words, to destroy. At present, he would say, that such was the extent of business to be performed—such the vigilance, activity, and talent of the subordinate officers, with whose knowledge the commissioners must keep pace—if they valued their own character and the good opinion of those who act under (as powerful a check to a mind of sound and just feeling, as the criticism of equals, or the control of superiors)—such the importance of the matters for its deliberation and decision,—and such the publicity given to the conduct of the commissioners by discussions like the present, that every security was given for the faithful discharge of duty, and no commissioner could ever henceforth be allowed to be so idle as the hon. mover of the present, question had acknowledged himself to have been while in office.

Mr. Buxton

wished to say only a few words in praise of the conduct of the board. The House had heard last year some discussions regarding the burning of Hindoo widows, and the desire of a great body to see the horrid practice abolished. A dispatch had been drawn up by the board of directors on the subject, for the purpose of being transmitted to India. Now that dispatch was a disgrace to Christianity; and had it not been for the sound, large, and liberal views of the board of control, it would have been adopted and sent out to guide the conduct of the Indian government.

Mr. Wynn

said, it would be idle to enter into any defence of the board of control, after the able speeches of the hon. secretary and of the right hon. gentleman who had lately filled the office of president. He himself had not been in office more than a month; but, judging from what he had seen, he could say, that the statement of his hon. friends was completely borne out by facts. As the hon. mover who occupied the place of secretary in 1806, had kept silence fir fifteen years on the inefficiency of the offices which he now proposed to abolish, he must have some-reason for now speaking out, which he had not before. That object was easily guessed at. He had employed his motion merely as a peg on which to hang his attack upon him. In pursuance of that design, the hon. mover had stated that his (Mr. W's.) accession to office was a purchase of family interest. To answer seriously a charge of this kind would be to acknowledge the probability of its truth; and therefore he would not say one word on the subject. He had now sat in the House for twenty-five years, and he called upon hon. gentlemen who had observed his conduct to say whether he had given ground for such insinuations. The hon. gentleman, in order to make out the charge of sacrificing principle to place, had mentioned his (Mr. W's.) vote against the salt-tax before he came into office, and his support of it on a late occasion; but, was there any thing inconsistent in voting against a tax at one time, and for it another? He was glad of that cheer, because it showed that he was understood by those who with him, before the year, 1806, opposed the property tax, and who afterwards preserved and increased it. In the case in question, he thought the salt tax objectionable, and voted for its repeal. He still retained the same opinion; but he was prevented from giving his vote, by circumstances which had occured in the interval between the former and the recent discussion. House had voted that a sinking fund of 5,000,000l. was necessary to support public credit: the faith of parliament was pledged to this amount; the public creditor relied on its maintenance; a great financial operation, rendered practicable by a rigid adherence to national engagements, was going on in consequence; and this was the time chosen for moving the repeal of a tax which had entered as a necessary element into the fund which the resolution of the House had pledged it to support. If, after passing this resolution the House had, in the course of eight days, turned round and destroyed its own work, it would have rendered itself unworthy of the confidence of the public. He had not, therefore, changed his ideas of the im-policy of the salt tax; but he had allowed his ideas regarding its immediate repeal, to be overruled by imperious circumstances. The hon. gentleman had quoted to him the opinion of a branch of his family. He had the honour to belong to a family, the branches of family. He had the honour to belong to a family, the branches of which often took different sides in politics. He allowed those who differed from him the credit of honestly forming and following their opinions, and he claimed the same credit for himself. The argument drawn by the hon. gentleman against the possession of seats by the commissioners of the board of control did not appear to him to be well, founded. The parliament of queen Anne could not foresee that we should have, in. eluding our India establishments, a revenue of 80,000,000l. to be administered, and the act that had admitted the commissioners to hold seats was as valid as the act which was supposed to exclude them. With regard to the charge of his having changed his opinions with his situation, it was unfounded. He did not accept of office till he found that the opinions of those with whom he joined coincided with his own. If an opportunity should occur when an expression should be called for of any of his former opinions, he was prepared to show that they had undergone no change; and until such an opportunity arrived, he must be content to pass by with indifference any insinuations to the contrary.

Lord Binning

merely wished to state a word in answer to the charge of the hon. member for Weymouth, who had said, that a dispatch from the Board of Directors, which would have disgraced Chris- tianity, had been stopped by the Board of control, and prevented from being transmitted to India. Now this was incorrect: the dispatch was not stopped; it was not a disgrace to Christianity; it was freely dealt with at the board, and then adopted, but it did not originally deserve the character given of it by the hon. gentleman.

Dr. Phillimore

rose, only to repel a charge against his character; and he trusted that the personal attack of the hon. mover would not lead him to be personal in return. He must, however, tell that hon. member, that before he again threw out such insinuations, and indulged in such charges, he should examine more strictly the grounds on which they were bottomed. He was inconsistent, it was said, and he had cost the country a million and a half of money. Now, how was that charge made out? The hon. gentleman answered, that he had voted for a repeal of the salt tax before he came into office, and against that repeal when in office. The statement was incorrect. He had never voted for an immediate repeal, though the charge had been malevolently made out of doors, and attempted to be supported on garbled extracts from his speeches. He disdained to reply to the quarter whence this imputation proceeded, but in his place in parliament he was willing to explain his conduct. The resolution which he had brought forward, and which was studiously omitted in the garbled extracts from his speeches, merely pledged the House to take the earliest opportunity to consider of the repeal of the tax. He would conclude by assuring the House, that when he accepted of office he had done so with a resolution to do his duty to the utmost of his abilities.

Mr. Creevey

briefly replied. He said, he had understood before he came down to the House, that the great performer was to be put in requisition that night, and that this was his last appearance on that stage for some time. Like some other great actors, however, he had overdone his part. The House had heard all the changes rung on a few words, and each time his friends laughed at his repeated attempts at waggery, as if they were new. Thus they had heard no less than four or five times the very amusing phrases of the "idle secretary," "the idle, loitering, newspaper-reading secretary," "the idle park-window gazing se- cretary," "the idle secretary's stillness of stagnation." But, would the House believe that all these epithets applied to the great performer himself? The great performer was precisely the idle secretary. Did they never hear of an idle ambassador with a large salary, who went to a country where there was no court, to welcome a king who had never arrived? The great performer only took for granted that he was an idle secretary—a character which his right hon. friend (Mr. Tierney) would not give him; but all the world knew that he was a richly-paid idle ambassador. Let a jury of the country be impanelled—let him and the great performer be judged by impartial men, and he had no dread of the decision that would be given. Having attempted to turn out the noble marquis, his friend, he was himself turned out, and saw the noble marquis the distributor of office. He then accepted of a place under that noble marquis, whom he had pronounced incapable. This tip-top wag of the country; was sent out on an idle mission—he returned to serve under the noble marquis and, after having played his appointed time, he came down to night for his benefit. The house had heard his performance, and his friends had applauded. He appeared to be the delight of the House, when he talked of "idle window-looking secretaries" and "still stagnations." But leaving his jokes and waggery out of the question, what had the great performer said in defence of the board, and the two paid commissioners? Nothing at all; unless that it was necessary to have a noble lord and a right hon. gentleman to read his papers for him. Could not two clerks read these papers as well as two commissioners? Was it necessary for this purpose to have two members of parliament? The House had only heard of 15 bills being presented by them in so many years; but, could not these bills have been prepared without them? Why four members in the House from one board? he never denied the utility of the president; all he contended for was, that, with an active president, no assistant commissioners were necessary. Although this motion should be lost, he did not despair, notwithstanding all the waggery of the great performer, to carry his point at last, and turn out the learned civilian.

The House divided: Ayes 88. Noes, 273. Majority against the motion 185.

List of the Minority.
Althorp, visct.	Maberly, W. L.
Beaumont, T. W.	Mackintosh, sir J.
Baring, sir T.	Martin, J.
Barrett, S. M.	Maule, hon. W.
Bennet, hon. H. G.	Moore, P.
Benyon, B.	Marjoribanks, S.
Bernal, R.	Normanby, visct.
Birch, J.	Newman, R. W.
Bright, H.	Nugent, lord
Burdett, sir F.	O'Callaghan, J.
Byng, G.	Ord, W.
Boughey, sir J. E.	Ossulston, lord
Calvert, C.	Palmer, col.
Calcraft, John	Palmer, C. F.
Cavendish, lord G.	Philips, G.
Cavendish, H.	Philips, G. R.
Cavendish, C.	Price, Robt.
Coffin, sir I.	Pym, F.
Coke, T. W.	Ricardo, D.
Colborne, N. R.	Ridley, sir M. W.
Concannon, L.	Robarts, A.
Crespigny, sir W. D.	Robarts, Geo.
Crompton, S.	Robinson, sir G.
Denison, W. J.	Russell, R. G.
Duncannon, visct.	Rice, T. S.
Ebrington, visct.	Rickford, W.
Ellice, E.	Smith,—
Fergusson, sir R. C.	Smith,—
Foley, T. H.	Sefton, earl of
Folkestone, visc.	Stuart, lord J.
Griffith, J. W.	Sykes, D.
Haldimand, W.	Taylor, M. A.
Hamilton, lord A.	Tierney, rt. hon. G.
Hill, lord A.	Tynte, C. K.
Hobhouse, J. C.	Warre, J. A.
Hughes, W. L.	Webbe, E.
Hume, J.	Wharton, J.
Hurst, R.	Whitbread, S.
Hutchinson, hon. C. H.	Williams, W.
James, W.	Williams, R.
Johnson, col.	Williams, O.
Lambton, J. G.	Wilson, sir R.
Lennard, T. B.	Wood, alderman
Lushington, S.	TELLERS.
Leycester, R.	Creevey, T.
Maberly, J.	Smith, W.