Sitting of 4 May 1820

LONDON BRIDGE.
Mr. S. Whitbreadpresented a petition from the Middlesex watermen of the river Thames, complaining of the great insecurity of London Bridge, the danger that attended life and property, and the interruption it gave to the navigation of the river.
Sir W. Curtis,admitted that after the presentation of the petition, some inquiry into the state of the bridge was necessary, although he believed it was not in the state of danger described.
Mr. F. Lewissaid, it was highly necessary either that the worthy baronet or some other member should bring the subject before the House, as unless something was promptly introduced a most serious damage would be done to the navigation of the river below the bridge.
Sir W. Curtissaid, he should consult with the trustees and other parties interested, and bring the subject subsequently under the consideration of parliament.
Mr. Alderman Woodsaid, an inquiry had been going on for some time by the trustees; but he thought his hon. colleague had best leave the introduction of the subject of bringing it before parliament to one of the gentlemen who presented petitions against the present state of the bridge. As one of the trustees of the bridge in right of his corporate character, he declared himself quite prepared for inquiry.
Mr. Calvertthought something that essentially affected the fact was kept out of
92
sight. The corporation of London had an interest in the water-works, with which the taking down of London Bridge would interfere. As an hon. friend of his was about to make steam engines consume their own smoke, he hoped he would also extend his motion to have the water there worked by engines on the proposed new construction, rather than by wheels.
Mr. Alderman Woodassured his hon. friend, that the city had no interest in the water-works, except a small rent, which they would not hesitate to give up.
Ordered to lie on the table.

WOOL TAX.
Mr. T. Wilsonrose, for the purpose of presenting a petition from the manufacturers and merchants concerned in the wool trade of the city of London. Adverting to the duty which was imposed upon foreign wool in the course of last year, the hon. gentleman observed that it appeared to him, from the very first, a proceeding of an unwise and impolitic nature, considering that the manufacturing interest of this country was at that time involved in great distresses, and that a very large number of individuals were suffering under heavy difficulties and privations. He had always felt the truth of the maxim, that the imposition of a new duty upon the raw material was a measure never justifiable, except when the trade was in a flourishing condition. The resolutions which had been founded upon these considerations, and transmitted to his majesty's ministers, were such as, he thought, would make out a very strong case. It was evident that the great price of the raw article would enhance the price of the manufacture in proportion; whereas a fall, such as would be occasioned by the withdrawing of the duty, would enable us to meet the competition of foreign markets. It was very true, as had been stated, that a great number of merchants in the city had refused the order which was transmitted to England for the clothing of the Russian army. The more he had extended his observations, the more information he had been enabled to collect upon the subject, he was so much the more convinced that this tax must operate like a mill-stone round the neck of the manufacturer. He implored his majesty's ministers to consider the state of the country, the condition of the manufacturing classes; and to reflect with how much better grace it would come from them to repeal this tax in pity to

93
that country, and to those individuals, rather than to wait till the distress had increased to a degree which should make it imperative upon them to do so.—The petition was then brought up; it prayed that parliament would be pleased to confer upon the wool trade that protection which it had always received under all former reigns.
Mr. Baringthought, that a more important subject could not be brought under the consideration of the House. He could not, entirely unconnected as he was with the wool-trade, or with persons embarked in that trade, allow the present opportunity to pass, without saying that he considered this most ancient and valuable manufacture to be in very imminent danger. It could hardly be expected of him to speak more particularly to the subject. He was not exactly prepared to say whether the manufactures of the country could or could not bear this duty of 6d. per pound upon the importation of wool. But of this he was quite satisfied, that the duty last year was imposed without sufficient consideration. It seemed to have been laid on by the chancellor of the exchequer, more for the purpose of conciliating some hon. gentlemen who were reluctant to adopt another tax, probably almost equally severe upon them—the malt duty—rather than from other motives. He was quite sure, if it should appear that the manufactures of the country could not stand foreign competition while this tax existed, that to suffer it to continue for one or two years only might be the means of establishing manufactures abroad, which would entirely overcome that competition which we had sustained in their markets for centuries, and which would get to such a head that no subsequent efforts of ours, no mitigation of duties even would be able to undersell or put down. As far as regarded the agricultural interest, he would say that if the manufactures of the country were at stake by reason of the price of wool the agricultural interest was equally so—a fact which could be easily made out. He did not know what course the hon. gentleman meant to pursue, but he could not suffer the matter to pass, without begging that the House would allow him to say, although it was not usual to give that sort of notice in such cases, that he should on Monday next present a petition from the merchants of the city of London, relative to the general restrictions under which the com-
94
merce of the country was at present labouring. In Conclusion, he begged to observe, that he could not allow a petition like that which had been just presented to be brought up without offering a few words upon it, or without declaring that he considered it one of the most important description. He would say, that no parliament had ever been guilty of greater remissness in the discharge of their duty, than the last parliament had evinced, by the inconsiderate manner in which they had imposed such a duty upon the importation of wool.
Mr. Wilsonsaid, that he intended to follow up the petition, according to the prayer contained in it, by calling the serious attention of the House to the subject. But he should let the petition rest at present, until the House was in possession of numerous others upon the same subject, which he expected would be forwarded from all parts of the country.
Ordered to he on the table.

ROYAL BURGHS OF SCOTLAND.
Lord A. Hamiltonsaid, that having been given to understand that there would be no objection to his motion for the re-appointment of a select committee, to take into consideration the various petitions presented from the royal burghs of Scotland, praying for municipal reformation, he should abstain from offering any observations in support of his motion, taking it for granted that the House concurred in the propriety of the course he was adopting. The report of the last parliament was before the House, and he had only to refer to the information it contained, in order to prove the importance of the measure. If it happened that any hon. gentleman either from reading the report, or from any other cause, should offer any opposition to the motion, he then trusted he should be heard in reply, with the view as far as he was able, to remove the objections. He could assure the House, that the question had excited, and continued to excite, the greatest anxiety throughout that part of the country. Though the list of the committee which he had to propose was not exactly what he wished. As one name had been objected to by his majesty's ministers, yet he was determined to make no opposition to the alteration. The noble lord concluded with moving, that the petitions presented from the royal burghs of Scotland, in the years 1818–19–20, praying

95
for borough reformation, be referred to the consideration of a select committee, to examine the same and report thereon.
Lord Binningbegged to bear his testimony to the very liberal spirit in which the noble lord met the suggestions of his majesty's government, as to the constitution of the committee.
The motion was then carried, and a select committee appointed.

COURT OF EXCHEQUER IN SCOTLAND.
The Lord Advocate,adverting to the conversation which had taken place a few evenings ago in the House on the subject of the appointment of a fourth baron of the exchequer in Scotland, observed, that when the vacancy in question occurred, he had been required, in the discharge of his official duty, to make a report, on the recommendation of the commissioners, on the courts of justice in scotland, to abstain from filling up any such vacancy that might occur after that recommendation. In order the better to enable himself to execute this task, he had submitted the subject to the consideration of the highest law authorities in Scotland, namely, the lord president of the court of session, the lord justice clerk, the lord chief commissioner of the jury court, and the lord chief baron of the exchequer. Those high authorities were unanimous in their opinion as to the expediency of filling up the vacancy. He was solicitous that the House should be put in possession of tin's report; not because it stated the opinion of the humble individual who addressed them, but because it comprehended the opinion of the highest legal authorities in Scotland on the subject. He would therefore move, "That an address be presented to his majesty, praying that he would be graciously pleased to order that there be laid before the House a Copy of the report made by the lord advocate of Scotland on the recommendation contained in the sixth Report of the commissioners on the courts of justice in Scotland, regarding the discontinuance of one of the Barons of the Court of Exchequer in Scotland."
Mr. Abercrombyrose, not to oppose the motion, but to express his extreme regret that, when a report had been made by commissioners appointed by that House, expressing the opinion of those commissioners, that the office in question should, in the event of a vacancy, not be 611ed up, his majesty should nevertheless have
96
been advised to fill it up. He was happy that the learned lord had moved for the production of this paper, as it was an admission on the part of the learned lord that what related to that court was a fit matter for parliamentary investigation. He was unequivocally of opinion, that into the nature of the court of exchequer in Scotland it behaved that House to institute a diligent inquiry.—an inquiry founded on the large and extended principle of separating from official duties branches of business that were not properly compatible with those duties. It was most essential to public justice that the duties of a judge should never assume a political character. On these grounds, and mainly on the admission which the motion implied, of its being the duty of parliament to investigate the subject, he gave his cordial assent to it.
Lord Binningsaid, that the hon. and learned gentleman spoke as if his learned friend had himself originated the inquiry. It was not so. His learned friend had acted only ministerial. The secretary of state having required a report from his learned friend on the recommendation of the commissioners, he had done his duty by appealing on the subject to the highest law authorities of Scotland.
Mr. Abercromby,in explanation, observed, that it was substantially the same thing. From whatever source the inquiry proceeded, it was evident that the act of government was in hostility to the opinion of the commissioners. He begged, however, to be distinctly understood, that nothing could be more foreign to his intention than to intimate any thing that was not entirely respectful to the learned lord.
Sir J. Newportsupported the necessity of an inquiry into the constitution of the court of exchequer in Scotland. It was evident that the information which was to be afforded on the subject, was absolutely forced from government by the observations made by his noble friend.
The motion was agreed to.

GIBRALTAR.
Mr. Hume,before he proceeded to the motion of which he had given notice, wished to correct a mistake that had occurred with reference to one of his statements yesterday evening. He had said that in the seventh class of the civil list in 1815, there was to be found an: expenditure which he had characterised as useless, namely, the sum of 1,372 l. payable to the master of the hawks, not

97
the master of the horse, as had been erroneously stated. He now came to the question of the revenue derived from Gibraltar. He had on a former occasion submitted to the House a motion on the subject, which motion he had withdrawn, because it had been declared by the right hon. gentleman opposite, that the House had no right to interfere with the revenue derived from Gibraltar, and that it never had so interfered. At that time he was not so well prepared to meet the right hon. gentleman. But he was now able to inform him and the House, that the revenue derived from Gibraltar had been detailed and laid before the House in the years 1794, 1795, 1796, and 1797. In a note attached to the returns made of the items of the surplus of the Gibraltar revenue, it was stated that an account of its appropriation would be laid before parliament. That account, however, had never made its appearance. It was not only material to obtain this^ but it was most material seriously to consider the principle on which the revenue in question had been raised. For his part, he had always been led to believe that his majesty had no right to levy taxes upon any part of his subjects without the sanction of parliament. Let the House also consider the amount of those taxes appropriated to the civil list. That amount, from 1760 to 1820 was 124,226 l. being 2,070 l. per annum. The whole amount of the taxes levied on Gibraltar during the last sixty years was, however 860,000 l. The House ought surely to consider how far his majesty had a right to levy for his own purposes any tax on a colony. He was prepared to contend that no such right existed, and that all taxation on the subject not sanctioned by that House was a breach of its privileges. He begged the House to attend to one circumstance. The right hon. gentleman opposite refused to assign any reasons for the appropriation of the sums in question to the civil list, but said that it was the immemorial usage. The fact did not bear out the right hon. gentleman in that assertion. Let the House refer to the original charter granted in the reign of queen Anne, soon after the capture of Gibraltar in 1704. In 1705, the queen in council declared, for the encouragement of settlers and traffickers in the garrison, that no duties should be laid on ships, goods, warehouses, &c. This declaration had the effect of attracting a considerable number of settlers to the garrison. The returns which he
98
wished to obtain would show what the amount of the duties levied was, notwithstanding that declaration in 1760. In 1794, the amount assessed was 4,000 l. The House would be surprised to learn that it had since increased to 50,000 l. To the revenue derived from certain small portions of land, &c. that had devolved to the Crown, the Crown was fairly entitled; but the imposition of local taxes to so heavy an amount was disgraceful and unwarrantable.—He proceeded to another most serious part of the subject. When Gibraltar came into our possession the inhabitants were chiefly, if not entirely, Catholics; and our government being anxious to remove them by degrees, and to substitute Protestants, gave to the latter superior advantages in order to induce them to settle. The Catholics were subjected to a variety of restrictions, which continued until the duke of Kent became governor. With that liberality which always distinguished his royal highness, who felt that the Catholics ought not to remain under any ban of that nature, her represented to government its impropriety and its incompatibility with the peace and quiet of the garrison. In consequence, Mr. Windham, in 1807, wrote a letter to his royal highness, authorising the abolition of these restrictions. But what would the House say, when he informed them that ministers, by a late order in council, had laid a tax on every Catholic and Jewish inhabitant of the garrison. The will of such individual was declared to be invalid without the sanction of the governor; and a capitation tax of ten dollars a year was imposed upon him—a tax existing no where but in Turkey, and worthy of Turkey! But what he thought would surprise the House was, that, exclusively of all that he had mentioned, duties to the amount of many thousand pounds on almost every article imported into Gibraltar had been imposed. On ships touching there, a duty was levied. On a ship of 3 masts, 12 dollars; on one of 2 masts, 9 dollars; on smaller vessels, 4½ dollars. This was in direct contradiction to the original charter. During the year that he (Mr. Hume) was at Gibraltar, 5,000 vessels touched at that port. If they merely anchored they were subject to the duty. There were other taxes levied by the governor, general Don, in the most arbitrary manner, and without even the authority of ministers. In a list in his possession, it appeared that there was one

99
(he would not say improper in its object) imposed in 1816, of 91 l. a year on every retail wine and spirit shop. He knew he should be told by the right bon. gentleman, that this was confirmed two years afterwards by an order in council.—There were other taxes imposed by general Don on eating-houses, billiard tables, fishing boats, &c, and he was almost ashamed to say that the general had sanctioned the sale of lottery tickets, without the authority of government, by making the venders of Spanish lottery tickets pay a considerable sum for a licence. Whether or not those sums had been brought to the public account he could not say, but he knew they were levied; and he had hi his possession five or six of general Don's proclamations on the subject. This practice of levying taxes ad libitum, and remitting the produce home for the privy purse of his majesty, without the authority of parliament, was, in his opinion, most unconstitutional. The establishment of the place had also been most unnecessarily increased. He really believed it was increased just in proportion as ministers found it convenient to extend their patronage. He would give the House some idea of the amount of the increase, in order to show the kind of economy observed. During the war there was one town major in Gibraltar; since the peace there had been two. During the war there were two barrack masters; since the peace there had been three. During the war there was one pratique master; since the peace there had been two. Instead of paving and keeping the garrison in repair, out of the duties levied in it, large sums had been at various times voted in the different estimates for those purposes, while the money was all remitted to the privy purse. Now really this appeared to him to be a question demanding serious consideration. If any part of the hereditary revenue was given up by the act of the first of his late majesty, that at Gibraltar must have been given up too. It was not, however, simply the 124,000 l. that had been applied to the privy purse, but the extravagant establishment—contrary., to every principle of economy—which had been kept up, to which the attention of parliament ought to be directed. To him the system appeared to be most illegal and unconstitutional, and one which ought to be abolished. Not any part of the duties raised were applied to purposes advantageous to the establishment. There
100
were in Gibraltar two synagogues, two Roman Catholic chapels, and one Methodist chapel; but there was not one church of the established religion of this country, nor was there one school conducted upon the principles of that persuasion. He would go farther—there was not on the rock any establishment from which any Protestant could receive that religious consolation which he required.—He would now again advert to the revenues of that place, as well as to the manner of their collection. These revenues were collected at a grievous expense. The recent appointments, too, to public offices, were against a positive act of parliament. The act to which he alluded was one which provided against the discharge of the duties of any office by deputy. Mr. Wickham of Lincoln's Inn, had been appointed a receiver of certain branches of revenue, and this office he discharged by deputy. He only mentioned the name of this gentleman as an instance of the many which he could produce, and whether his case came within, or was previous to the act to which he alluded, would be shown upon the inquiry which he proposed.—The hon. member went on to state, that not long ago there was but one commissary of stores in Gibraltar; at present they had three. Not long since they had not a commissioner of accounts; now they had three. During the war a military secretary was employed; since the peace he had been struck off; but he was retained as translator of languages, with the continuance of his previous salary and emoluments. He would not farther detain the House at present. He had three motions to make:—The first was, "for a Return of all the Taxes and Duties levied in Gibraltar in the years 1800 and 1818." These two periods would be sufficient to show to the House the nature and increase of the revenue of that country. His next motion was, "for the Production of an Account of the number and nature of the various Offices and Establishments M Gibraltar, with the Amount of the Salaries and Emoluments received by the different Functionaries in 1800 and in 1818." This would show to the House, how far the system of economy, which was now considered the order of the day, was attended to. His third motion was "for a Return of the Amount of the Revenues of Gibraltar from 1760 up to 1820, distinguishing each year; and also an Account of the

101
Garrison and other Expenses; together] with the revenues transmitted to this I country."
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that he did not rise to oppose the motion; indeed, he had not, with the exception of a slight alteration, any objection to produce the whole of the accounts moved for. He could not, however, help complaining of the uncandid manner in which the hon. member had charged both the governor of Gibraltar and his majesty's council, in the course of his speech, with extravagance and extortion. He did not wish, at present, to go at length into this question, as a proper period would arrive for its discussion. But he hoped members would reserve their opinions until that discussion came fairly before them. With respect to what the hon. member had said relative to the right of the Crown over conquered colonies, he conceived that there was no principle of the law of nations more generally admitted than that which transferred to the conquering sovereign the rights exercised over such colony by that power to which it previously belonged. He did not mean to object to the first or second resolutions; but to the third, he would, if it were not altered, propose an amendment, which was, that the whole account for the time mentioned should be produced, without specifying the items from year to year. He wished at the same time to observe, that there was not any foreign port in which similar duties to those complained of were not exacted. The right hon. member made some observations relative to certain sums remitted from Gibraltar, and received by his late majesty.
Sir J. Mackintosh,having had occasion to know something of the administration of affairs in Gibraltar, and being acquainted with certain circumstances relating to the mode of making impositions on the inhabitants, could not but say that their rights had not been treated with that regard and respect which in justice should have been extended to them. At the same time, he meant to admit, that his majesty's government, in the revision of the Order in council, to which allusion had been made; had manifested a very commendable anxiety to do all they could to rectify a measure which he looked upon as improvident and bad; He could not, however, agree in the interpretation of the law of nations: which had been given by the right hon. gentleman and which, falling from a per-
102
son of such high authority, was likely to mislead those who had not considered the subject. He could not conceive any principle of the law of nations which bore out the assertion, that the power vested in an absolute prince became, in case of conquest, equally vested in a king whose power was not absolute. The law of nations only related to the regulation of certain connexions between different nations, and could not decide what power should be exercised by a state over any territory it conquered. That depended on the law and constitution of the country. With respect to the law and constitution of this country, he would state, that if the right hon. gentleman, who was so conversant with questions of this kind, recollected the case of Campbell and Hall, he would find that it was a very disputed point indeed, with whom the right of legislation over a conquered territory rested. That, in one point of view, it rested with the king was certain; but whether the king in council, or the king in parliament, had not, as he took it, been yet decided by those grave authorities whose opinions on matters of such importance were looked up to as conclusive. If his hon. friend, whose laborious attention to this and other subjects which lay out of the way of the general pursuits and studies of the members of that House, and for which he deserved the public thanks; if he would take a suggestion from him, he would rather advise him to accept the proposal of the chancellor of the exchequer, reserving to himself the right of making a more extensive motion at a future period. He thought the accounts offered to be furnished would be, in a general point of view, imperfect; although, perhaps, for the purposes of the approaching discussion, they might be sufficient:
Mr. Goulburncomplained of the uncandid course that had been taken by the hon. gentleman in bringing forward this question. He protested against the statement which he had made, and which tended to impeach the character of individuals, when merely moving for a return, of the amount of revenue raised at Gibraltar. He protested against such a course, because those charges could not be contradicted at the moment. He hail no difficulty in saying, that, throughout the long reign of his late majesty, every disposition had been shown to attendee the interests of the inhabitants on the one hand, and to support the just rights of

103
this country on the other. The hon. gentleman had stated that he was ready to prove his charge—lie (Mr. G.) was no less ready to show that they were not well founded. The hon. gentleman observed, that he had resided at Gibraltar. It had also been his fortune to have lived there, and he could therefore speak particularly to some circumstances. The hon. gentleman asserted that, though Jews, Methodists, and Roman Catholics had places of worship there, the members of the Church of England were not furnished with a building for the performance of their religious duties. This was not the case. Whether from his being there in the habit of going to church than the hon. member, or from what other cause, he knew not; but certain it was that he found a Protestant place of worship at Gibraltar, and went regularly to church every Sunday. The building was not a very extensive one, but it was commensurate with the size of the place, and the number of Protestant inhabitants. He had seen the troops mustered in it attending divine service; and perhaps he might recal it to the hon. gentleman's mind, by mentioning the monuments that were raised in it to the memory of several officers who had fallen in the naval service. There were other parts of the hon. gentleman's speech which he could meet and refute on grounds equally satisfactory.
Colonel Dalrymplesaid, the inhabitants of Gibraltar were, for the most part, Roman Catholics, Genoese, or foreigners of that description, and Jews; an extensive church was not, therefore, necessary. But there was a Protestant place of worship, and he had attended church for two years. In that edifice there was no want of room for those who pleased to attend divine service. He did not think that the garrison of Gibraltar would thank the hon. gentleman, if they were hurthened with a tax for the erection of a church. There were other inaccuracies in the statement of the hon. gentleman, which, at a proper period, he would point out.
The first and second motions were agreed to.
Mr. Humesaid, he had, in order to meet the objection of the chancellor of the exchequer, made the alteration which he had suggested in the third motion. That alteration had, however* defeated a very considerable part of the object he had in view, which was, to ascertain the annual amount of revenue collected in a
104
certain number of years, in order to show the House where taxation had begun; which would not be affected by the account that would be laid before it. It was said that his statements were erroneous; but at the proper time he would prove the truth of every charge he had made. The charge of having acted un-candidly would apply much better to the chancellor of the exchequer, who had imputed words to him which he had never used. With respect to the quibble about Protestant chapels, the admission of the hon. gentlemen themselves was, that no regular place of Protestant worship existed. He knew there was a garrison chapel. He had himself attended divine worship, when, he believed, it was performed at governor Campbell's house; but there was no regular Protestant chapel for the inhabitants of the town.
The third motion, as amended, was then agreed to.

PRICE OF SILVER.
Lord Kingrose to move for an account of the market Price of Silver, with the view of ascertaining whether it was not under the Mint price. He thought it very necessary that their Lordships attention should be directed to this subject; for if it should appear, as he believed would be found to be the case, that the market price of silver was less than the Mint price, that would be a proof that the currency was debased. The only rule for ascertaining this fact, was a comparison of the price of the precious metals; for a comparison with paper afforded no means of judging. It appeared that the Bank bought gold at the rate of about 3l. 17 s. 10 d., but they did not purchase silver, though it was cheaper in the market than at the Mint. The currency of the country was, however, in consequence of this difference of price, raised beyond its real value. It was their lordships duty to guard against the inconvenience of a variable standard. They must recollect what had been the consequence some years ago of the currency having been depreciated, and now the country was suffering in precisely the opposite direction by its rising. He might appeal to the evidence taken on the late
86
investigation relative to the Bank, to show that the Mint price of silver was not in proportion to that of gold; but his object was, to obtain a return of the market price, in order to compare it with that of the Mint, and he believed it would be found that the former was 1½d. per ounce below the latter, being a depreciation of about H per cent. He concluded by moving that there be laid before the House an account of the present market price of silver—Ordered.

CIVIL LIST.
The Marquis of Lans-downewished to ask the noble lord opposite a question, in reference to the civil list establishment, which was likely soon to come under their lordships consideration. He should be glad to know whether it was the intention of the noble lord to propose the appointment of a committee to inquire into the state of that establishment, or to give any information to the House which might be thought necessary, before the question came under consideration.
The Earl of Liverpoolsaid, he did not intend to move for any committee. As to information, the noble marquis was aware that when the civil list was settled in 1816, the accounts thought necessary at that time were laid before parliament. That information was still accessible to their lordships, and he thought it sufficient to enable their lordships to discuss the question which would come before them.
The Marquis of Lansdownnereminded the noble earl of what had passed when this subject gave rise to considerable discussion some years ago. It had been then, and on other occasions when the question was adverted to, uniformly stated, that when a new reign should commence an opportunity would be afforded to parliament for a complete investigation of the state of the civil list. This he believed was distinctly stated by the minister who made the arrangement in 1816. He had undoubtedly heard with much satisfaction the declaration made on the part of the Crown on the first day of the session relative to the civil list; but that declaration did not relieve parliament from the duty of now fully considering the subject, in order to ascertain whether the difference in the state of the country, and other circumstances, did not render it necesary that a new arrangement should be made. He was, therefore, justified in calling for the reprinting of the accounts which had been laid before parliament in 1816, and

87
for such other information as should afterwards appear necessary. Fie did not now mean to give any opinion as to what the amount of the civil list ought to be; but, independently of the principle of economy, which, in the present situation of the country, it was necessary never to lose sight of, there was another, connected with the civil list, of great importance, in his opinion, to the proper dignity of the Crown, for the support of which that establishment was granted. He meant that of simplifying the accounts so as to render it clear what part of the civil list went to the maintenance of the royal family, and what was applicable to other; purposes, or to services more strictly national. Some approximation to this object had been made in 1816, and he approved of the arrangement then adopted to the extent to which it went. But it had stopped short of the point of real utility, that of reducing the civil list to what might be granted for the regular expenditure of the royal family, and leaving every thing of a fluctuating nature, and all those expenses which were properly national, subject at all times to the consideration of parliament. The most proper arrangement, he thought, would be, to charge the consolidated fund with every expense which might be considered national, and to confine the civil list to what should be actually fixed upon for the permanent expenditure of the royal family. These charges on the civil list which were of a contingent and fluctuating nature should always remain open to inquiry. The neglect of a regulation of this kind exposed the royal family to imputations to which they otherwise would not be liable, and, owing to the confusion of the accounts, a variety of erroneous impressions were produced on the public mind. Hence, when application was made to parliament for supplying deficiencies, injustice had sometimes been done to the public, and some times to the royal family. It would be for their lordships to determine whether it was not proper to require that a separation and simplification of the accounts should take place at a time when they were called upon to consider the whole question of the civil list. He could see no reason for continuing to mix the laries of the judges, and the allowances to ministers abroad, with the expenses of the royal family, in such a manner as to make it extremely difficult for the public to discover the manner in which the money
88
was applied. These things ought to be completely separated; and as for the fluctuating expenses, the most simple and most useful mode would be, to present estimates of them to parliament from year to year. He had taken the present opportunity of throwing out these suggestions for their lordships consideration, and should now conclude by moving, "That the papers relative to the civil list, laid before parliament in 1816, be reprinted."
The Earl of Liverpoolhad no objection to the reprinting of the accounts to which the motion referred; but, though he did not wish to enter into any discussion on the topics on which the noble marquis had touched, he thought that some things which had dropped from him called for a few observations. He wished, in the first place, to remark, that there was no precedent for the course of inquiry which the noble marquis was desirous of seeing adopted on the present occasion. If they looked back to the commencement of any former reign, they would find no instance of the settlement of the civil list being preceded by a committee of inquiry. It had been, on all such occasions, the practice of parliament to proceed to the consideration of the civil list without calling for any information. He was not then discussing whether this course, which had been followed by their ancestors, was right or wrong; all that he meant now to say, was, that such had been the practice. It ought, however, to be recollected, that their lordships had at present an advantage which had been possessed on no former occasion of this kind. They had obtained, not indeed with reference to a new reign, but to a settlement for the same illustrious person who was now on the throne, all necessary information on the details of the subject which was about to be brought under their consideration. The papers presented in 1816 would enable them to understand all the parts of the subject in a manner for which no opportunity had been afforded on any former occasion. When the question came to be discussed, it would therefore be perfectly competent to any noble lord to argue, on reference to the recorded information, that there ought to be a difference between the settlement for the new reign and that which had been made in 1816. If the noble marquis referred to that settlement, he would find that every thing had been done with respect

89
to simplification, that was practicable. In every step of the arrangement then made the public advantage and interest had been maturely considered. The great object was, to take from the civil list and transfer to the consolidated fund, various payments for services of a public nature which could be advantageously separated. By this arrangement much improvement in the accounts had been accomplished; but it was proposed, that other charges of a fluctuating, an uncertain nature, should be voted annually, and thus made subject to the control of parliament. Upon examination it would, however, be found, that all the articles of this description were of a peculiar nature, to which such a check could not with propriety be applied. The department most subject to fluctuation in its expenditure was the royal household and its fluctuation was owing to the same cause that produced a variation in the expenses of any other family, namely, the difference of prices. Now, as to separating the expenses of the royal family from all charges for the maintenance of the civil government, in the manner the noble marquis had proposed, that was an arrangement of the propriety of which he entertained very serious doubts. The spirit of the constitution required that the expenditure of the Crown should be considered as part of the expenditure of the country. It was doubtless on that ground that the charges I for the civil government had been joined to the civil list, and he should therefore consider any attempt to produce a total separation as at least extremely indiscreet. Upon the whole, after the declaration made by the Crown on the opening of the session, and the papers to which their lordships had access, it must be obvious that parliament came to the consideration of this subject under more advantageous circumstances than on any former occasion. Their lordships had before them all the information on which the arrangement of 1816 was made for his present majesty as regent: and here he could not help observing, that if it were thought advisable to draw any distinction between the two periods, he believed the general feeling of the country would be, that the settlement now to be made should be something more rather than something less than the former. But that was not the ground on which he rested the question. His majesty had declared from the
90
throne, that he was satisfied, and had no desire for any increase of the civil list. Their lordships would, then, have to consider, whether they saw sufficient ground for continuing that arrangement. He admitted that the question lay in all respects fairly open. It might be proposed to reduce the establishment; but the expediency of adopting such a proposition would remain for their lordships determination.
Lord Kingwished that his noble friend had given notice of a motion on the subject of his question. He would have preferred that to the present motion; and if the question should be brought forward, he would vote for the appointment of a committee. It was true that the state of the civil list had been taken into consideration in 1816; but then it came before parliament in the shape of a vested interest. It was not a question of a settlement for the commencement of a reign, but for a regent, who administered the government in behalf of his majesty. With regard to the separation of the accounts, nothing could more strongly show the necessity of that separation, than the confusion which arose from some payments being charged, partly on the civil list and partly on other funds. The speaker of the House of Commons, for instance, received one half of the salary from the civil list, and the other half from the consolidated fund. He thought with his noble friend, that this separation was necessary for the proper dignity of the Crown; but inquiry into every branch of the question was peculiarly necessary at a time when the country was experiencing the deepest distress, and more especially when it was proposed that their lordships should renew the settlement of 1816—a period of most lavish expenditure, of great depreciation in the currency, and consequent high price. It would not be doing justice to the country to take the arrangement of that period as a rule for the expenditure of the civil list without inquiry. Among the heads which ought certainly to be separated from the civil list was the charge for allowances to foreign ambassadors, to which his noble friend had referred. The arrangement should be such as to create an inducement to economy on the part of the Crown. Were this done, the Crown, when too lavish under one head, would be obliged to economize under another. This, however, was not to be expected

91
if parliament allowed the present confusion of accounts to continue, and then supplied every deficiency. Grants for this purpose were not made in former times. Throughout the whole reign of George 2nd, the civil list continued as it had been at first fixed. As the matter now stood, there was no inducement to economy. The Crown, for instance, had no interest in keeping down the number of ministers sent abroad, but rather in making as many diplomatic appointments as possible, and allowing the ambassadors to retire on their half pay or pensions; for such a proceeding caused no diminution of the civil list, the deficiency being made up from other funds. He was desirous that a full inquiry should be instituted.
The motion was then agreed to.