OFFICES IN REVERSION. (Hansard, 9 February 1819)

Earl Grosvenor
rose, in consequence of his notice to make a motion on the subject of Offices in Reversion. What he then proposed was merely a motion for reversions granted by the Crown, but he now meant to extend his object further. The motion 386 which he had first to propose was so similar to others which had formerly been agreed to by their lordships, that he could not anticipate any difference of opinion upon the subject. With respect to the second motion, it might perhaps be thought, by some, liable to objection; though, as its object was merely to obtain information, he could not see any solid ground for resisting it. He was not going to propose a bill for putting an end to the granting of sinecures, or for suspending the power of granting them for a limited period, though that was a proposition which had already obtained their lordships' approbation: all he meant to ask for was, that an account might be presented to their lordships, showing what offices had been granted in reversion during the last year. Their lordships had formerly obtained, on orders they had made, accounts of grants in reversion for a much longer period. There could, therefore, be no objection, in principle, to the motion he had now to submit. It was true, that after what had passed, both in this and the other House of Parliament, on the subject of reversions, he could not expect any thing else than a blank return to his motion; still it was desirable that the return should be made, in order that parliament and the public might be informed of the fact. Publicity could not fail to be of the greatest advantage in this, as well as in other affairs connected with the administration of the government. It was the best prevention of abuse; and however well disposed ministers might be, one of the best securities for their acting properly was, the knowledge that every transaction in which they were engaged must be submitted to the tribunal of public opinion. From a due respect to that opinion, he believed his majesty's ministers had for some time abstained from granting any places in reversion, except one which, notwithstanding the nature of the office, and the person to whom it was granted, he could not help regarding as a violation of the principle that no farther reversions were to be granted. Besides the motion he mentioned yesterday for an account of the grants in reversion during last year, he meant to move for a return of grants made by other authorities. He thought that the same rule which had been applied to grants direct from the Crown, should be made applicable to public bodies of every description. It was their lordships' 387 duty to endeavour to correct all kinds of abuses; and it was, above all things, desirable, that questions of this kind should be laid completely bare; for if any thing more than another tended to disgust the public, it was an endeavour at concealment in public affairs. He hoped, therefore, that there would be no objection to his second proposition. His great object in wishing to prevent grants in reversion, was, to remove that bar to the abolition of sinecures and useless places which these grants presented. Much had been already done towards the abolition of sinecures; but their lordships would recollect, that in the bill which had been introduced on this subject, it was the wish of the noble and learned lord to except three offices, namely, that of the clerk of parliament, the clerk of the pleas of the court of Exchequer, and the lord justice general of Scotland. These offices had still been preserved. There were, besides, as he had already said, several offices in the gift of public bodies, of which it had been the practice to grant reversions. Of these, he apprehended parliament ought to have cognizance; and it was with a view to obtain necessary information for their lordships, that he HOW submitted two motions. First, for a return of all grants in reversion of offices held under the Crown, since the 1st of January, 1818. Secondly, for a similar return of all grants of offices in reversion by any public authority whatever.—The first motion was agreed to.

The Lord Chancellor
doubted whether the second motion was so framed as to produce any practical result. He was at a loss to know what the noble lord meant by the general term public authorities. Did he mean departments of state, public boards, and courts of law? It appeared to him that it would be necessary for the noble earl to specify what bodies or persons he meant by public authorities.

Earl Grosvenor
wished the motion to be as general as possible, and for that reason had chosen the term public authorities. He was desirous of obtaining a return of grants in reversion from every public body by which such grants were made.

The Earl of Liverpool
thought that the motion must be differently framed. No such term as public authorities was known in the law or constitution of the country. How was the proper officer to proceed when such an order, framed according to 388 the noble earl's motion, should be put into his hand? It would be impossible for him to know on whom he ought to serve it.

Lord Holland
did not think the objection to the motion valid. There were a great many acts of parliament in which the term public authorities occurred; it was, therefore, singular enough to assert that it wag unknown to the law and constitution of the country. He was of opinion that parliament had a right to call upon all public authorities, generally, for any information they could afford; but if a particular specification were necessary, the noble secretary of state was, from his office, better qualified than any other person to say how that ought to be done, and might teach his noble friend how to reach his object.

The Earl of Liverpool
said, that the House certainly possessed the right of calling for information; but when a noble lord proposed that such a call should be made, he ought at least to explain distinctly what he meant to call for.

Earl Grosvenor
said, he had purposely framed the motion in as general terms as possible, because it was his object to reach all grants in reversion of sinecures and places of every kind. His wish was, to obtain returns of those grants which were not made directly by the Crown: but as he understood that there was no intention: to oppose the principle of this motion, he would withdraw it, with the view of bringing it forward, on a future occasion, in a shape which he hoped would be more satisfactory to their lordships.