EARL NELSONbegged to assure the noble Duke opposite, the First Lord of the Admiralty, that in asking the Questions of which he had given notice he was actuated by He hostile feeling. It was now nearly two years since the present Royal Patriotic Fund Commissioners had held a meeting, and it was generally understood that a new Commission with additional powers, which were felt to be necessary, would forthwith be issued. He had no doubt there had been difficulties in the immediate appointment of that Commission, but in the meantime, of course, the present Commissioners were answerable for the distribution of the Fund, and he therefore hoped they would shortly be called together to receive the Report of the Executive Committee and draw up the Report to Her Majesty which ought to be presented annually. He therefore begged to ask the noble Duke the first Lord of the Admiralty, (1) Whether any, and if any, what steps have been taken towards the Appointment of a hew Commission, with additional powers, for administering the 1684 Affairs of the Royal Patriotic Fund? (2) When a meeting of the present Commissioners will be assembled to prepare their Annual Report to Her Majesty, and to receive Reports from the Executive Committee?
§ THE DUKE OF SOMERSET,in answer to the noble Earl, must first state that the noble Earl was somewhat in error, as the last meeting of the Commission took place on the 10th March, 1865, when he (the Duke of Somerset) thinking the administration of the Fund very unsatisfactory, brought the subject before the Commission. The Commissioners agreed with him as to the mismanagement of the Fund, admitting that it had been injudicious; but, at the same time, the Commissioners did not think it necessary to remove the Executive officer under whom the mismanagement had taken place. That being the case, he (the Duke of Somerset) had declined any further responsibility in connection with the Commission, and accordingly he withdrew his name from the Board. Since that time, therefore, he was in no way responsible for the acts of the Commission. With respect to the noble Earl's question as to whether any steps had been taken for the appointment of a new Commission, it was true that in 1865 he was considering the propriety of such a step, because on the large fund which had been subscribed for the Crimean war all the legitimate claims were exhausted, and in his opinion they ought to become available for other purposes connected with the army and navy. With those views he had made inquiries, and had ascertained that a new Commission could not be appointed without an Act of Parliament. The taking of that step was prevented by his own retirement from the Commission. He was still of opinion that a Bill ought to be brought in, but he did not know what steps had been taken with that view.
EARL NELSONsaid, he was much obliged for the answer he had received, but it had not met his difficulty. He did hear that the noble Duke had expressed his intention to resign, but did not know the fact as no meeting had taken place since. The Commissioners were in this awkward position, that there was no mode of summoning the Commission except through their President, and their President having resigned there was no one to summon a meeting.
§ THE DUKE OF SOMERSETsaid, that the late Duke of Newcastle had been 1685 President, and it was only after his death that he (the Duke of Somerset) was requested to issue the summonses He, in fact, never was President, and he ceased his connection with the Commission on the 10th March, 1865.
THE EARL OF LONGFORDwas of opinion that the proceedings of the Commission were very unsatisfactory. It was to be hoped that some Report of its proceedings would shortly be laid before Parliament.