§ The Earl of Suffolk called to their lordships' recollection, the motion, which, about two months since, he brought forward, for the production of an account of the bills drawn from the West India islands, upon the treasury, to which their lordships then agreed, and the noble secretary, now in his place, said he had no objection to those accounts; however, they had not yet been produced, and he greatly wished them to be brought forward before the end of the session. To obviate the objections on the score of inconvenience, which were made on a former evening, he would now move an address to his majesty, that there be laid before the house "an account of all sums drawn from the West India islands upon the treasury, amounting to 1,000l. and upwards, from the 1st day of December, 1798, to the 1st of December, 1801, specifying the dates, times of payment, &c."
§ Lord Hawkesbury observed, that the present was, in point of fact, a part of the motion formerly made by the noble earl, to which, as far as respected the object of it, he had no objection. However, the impossibility of being able to make out accounts of so voluminous a nature as those called for, within the time elapsed, should be considered. If the noble earl would expressly state what particular point he wished to be informed upon, what particular circumstance he wished to be explained, he would endeavour to procure it, and such should be produced in the shortest possible time. The same objections, on the score of incovenience or impracticability, applied to the second motion, nearly as much as to the first. The number of sums which it would embrace, the considerable time which it must unavoidably take up, the number of clerks selected, as the most conversant in such businesses, who must be employed, and taken away from important avocations, were points worthy of serious consideration; so much so, that 125 unless some specific point were more expressly adverted to, he should feel it his duty rather to resist the present motion. It would be better, upon the whole, considering the business was in such a train of proceeding, that the original motion should be followed up.
§ The Earl of Suffolk disclaimed any intention or disposition of creating unnecessary trouble to any department of government. He had sat in parliament nearly twenty-five years, and this was only the second time he had moved for any papers. His first motion was made about three years ago, the object of which was to lay before the house an account of the produce of the sale of old naval stores in Great Britain. The motion was then acceded to, but the accounts had never yet been produced. He should repeat that motion this night, but he should first advert to the motives upon which he grounded the propriety and necessity of the motion he before alluded to. It appeared to him (indeed he had it from the best authority) that much abuse existed in the manner in which bills from the West Indies on the treasury were paid. In proof of the existence of that abuse, he could cite the authority of the principal West India merchants in this country, or even bring them to the bar of the house, should such be their lordships' pleasure, to corroborate and substantiate his assertions respecting the abuse he alluded to. He would now content himself with adducing one instance from a great number of others, in which a West India merchant held bills of that kind on the treasury; they were drawn at 61 days, and when they became due, he presented them for payment. Instead of receiving the cash as he expected, accommodation bills were offered at 61 days further, bearing an interest of 5l. per cent. This was understood to be the usual practice, but the merchant whom he had in his eye, pleaded the necessity he was under of paying very heavy bills that pressed upon him, and that he could not keep up his credit, unless his just demand on the treasury was punctually paid. The 5l. per cent, interest could be of little moment to him under such circumstances; he might, therefore, persist in peremptorily insisting on immediate payment, otherwise he should be under the necessity of protesting the bills. The treasury at first demurred; but seeing the firmness of the merchant's resolution, they gave him an order for the 126 money. It was unnecessary to comment upon such an abuse. The individual suffered the inconvenience of the first instance; and the public were next saddled with the additional burthen of the 5 per cent. interest for the additional 61 days.
§ Lord Hawkesbury expressed himself wholly unacquainted with the transactions alluded to by the noble earl; besides, it referred to a department different from that over which he had the honour to preside. He then made some remarks, following up the observations he had already made, respecting the propriety of suffering the former motion to stand.
§ The Earl of Suffolk took the opportunity to advert to the circumstance of no effectual attention having been paid to his motion, for an account of the proceeds of the old naval stores, which he made two years ago, and which was then ordered by the house; that was the second time he had ever moved for papers, though he had twenty-three years the honour of being a member of that house. His late motion on this subject was withdrawn, in. consequence of a mistake he had made in the year. His lordship concluded by moving, "for a return of the proceeds of the old naval stores, from the 1st of December, 1803, to the 1st of December 1804."
§ The Marquis of Sligo, with reference to what had been said relative to the West India bills, observed, that these bills were generally at 91 days.—After a few observations from lord Hawkesbury, the noble earl withdrew his second motion, and permitted the first to remain as it originally stood.—The earl of Suffolk then moved for the account of the produce of the sale of old naval stores, but limited the period from the first of December 1802, till the first of December, 1804, which was agreed to.