Sitting of 6 June 1828

ST. MARY-LE-BONE VESTRY BILL.
The report of the committee on this bill was brought up. On the motion, that the amendment be read a second time,
Mr. Astellcontended, that no case had been made out against the present Vestry. After the books for the last twenty-two years had been examined, certain gentlemen had found that more money had been expended than they were pleased to think necessary; but that fact did not at all show that the Select Vestry were unworthy of

1117
the confidence of the parish. They were now called on to put an end to a vestry that had been established, by act of parliament, sixty years ago. It had been found necessary, at that time, to have a Select Vestry, on account of the extent of the parish; but if it was necessary then, how much more was it now, when the population had increased to one hundred and twenty thousand persons. What was the nature of the proposition in this bill? Why, that each inhabitant householder rated at 25 l. should have a vote in the election of vestrymen. Now, there were in the parish ten thousand rated houses; and would not the House be going too far, in extending so largely the power of such householders? The bill went to overthrow the vested rights of the higher classes of the inhabitants. Many complaints had been made of the vestry: but none of the allegations had been proved; and the duke of Portland had petitioned against the bill. It went to take out of the hands of the present vestry the fulfilment and management of the contracts into which they had entered. They had hitherto carried on the affairs of the parish to the satisfaction of the inhabitants; and no ground had been established to call on parliament to interfere with their management. He should move, as an amendment, "That the report be taken into consideration this day six months."
Sir T. Baringsaid, that the hon. gentleman was altogether ignorant of what had passed in the committee, and could not possibly know how far a case had been made out. He was himself acquainted with many members of the Select Vestry, and entertained respect for them individually, while he refused them his confidence as a public body. Their gross extravagance was proved by the fact, that the parish under their management had incurred the enormous debt of 227,000 l., although possessed of an income of 150,000 l. per annum. But, independently of this mismanagement, he objected to the body, on constitutional grounds. The principle itself was a departure from the spirit of the English constitution. They were invested with powers not granted to any body in the state. They nominated themselves, judged their own cause, and audited their own accounts. How could the hon. member say, that such a system had received the approbation of the inhabitants, in the face of their solemn protest
1118
against it? Not to mention other facts against the management of the vestry in 1811, such as the giving of 470 l. for a dinner, the parish actually borrowed money in 1814, at the enormous discount of twenty per cent. While they were building a chapel in the parish at a vast expense, an alteration was suggested, which compelled the architect to have a considerable part of it pulled down. It was also proved, that the item of church furniture was not less than 2,000 l. For covering the pulpit, the charge was 159 l.; for covering the reading desk, 139 l.; for the churchwardens' table, and its appurtenances, 166 l.; for two chairs, 213 l.; for cushions, 100 l.; and for the clerk's desk, 261 l. They had also purchased colonel Eyre's ground for a watch-house; they paid a large sum, and yet it was not yet appropriated to that purpose. Their rates had increased fifty per cent during the last four years. They wanted to have a picture for the church, and applied to Mr. West, who painted a piece on muslin according to their directions. Although it was to have been a transparency, they made no arrangement for fixing it before the light, and it was in consequence laid aside. This they might have had for 120 l., but they gave 800 l. To Mr. Rossi, for certain figures, they paid400 l. Aggrieved by such extravagance, and oppressed by so mischievous a principle, the parish had had no alternative but to apply for the present bill.
Mr. Rosssaid, that the hon. baronet had been misinformed in many of the statements he had made. He had stated the parish debt at 227,000 l.; but he had over-looked the fact, that a great part of it consisted of annuities. He had valued those annuities at the price they cost when the money was borrowed, which was 98,000 l., when he ought to have made his estimate upon the present value, which would reduce that amount by 30,000 l. The amount of the income of the parish he had stated at 150,000 l.; but it was in reality, only 110,000 l. In one instance, a dinner had been given on a perambulation, but that was the only instance of the kind. With respect to the change from the chapel to the church, the cost to the parish only amounted to 2,000 l. If the House thought there had been some unwise expenditure, at least no corrupt motive had been proved. Out of the seventeen members who had voted for this report,

1119
nine were not present when the evidence; was given, and of the remaining eight four only had attended a single meeting. He knew that they had said they did not care for the evidence, but that was not the thing he complained of. He denied that the accounts were a secret to the inhabitants. Every respectable parishioner was able to see the accounts of the parish, if he requested to do so.
Mr. Hobhousesaid, that the hon. gentlemen opposite had displayed a very earnest kind of eloquence on behalf of the select vestry, and he was not surprised at it, as they were, in fact, their own clients, being members of that body themselves. He was, however, notwithstanding all that had been said, as much opposed to the principle as ever; being well assured, that such power could never be exercised with satisfaction or advantage to the parish. It was asserted, that none of the allegations against their management were proved; But this he must deny, as several had been so far substantiated as fully to warrant a conclusion against the system generally. He was astonished to hear it asserted, that the inhabitants were satisfied, when it was known that five thousand had petitioned for the bill. Would it be affirmed that they were not parishioners? Although the duke of Portland was not a personal friend to the measure, five hundred of his tenants had given it their support. It was monstrous, that this irresponsible body, possessing a power so abhorrent from the spirit of the British constitution, should be suffered any longer to exist. The vestry said, "It was avowed that this bill, if carried, was only the first of a series of attacks against the system of select vestries generally." He, for one, avowed such an intention, and was about to give his vote in hopes of reforming the general frame of those bodies.
Colonel Baillieinsisted that the grievances complained of were wholly imaginary. The rates were less, on an average of ten years, than they had ever been, and the vestry contemplated a further reduction. The parishioners were in general satisfied with the decisions of the vestry in cases of appeals.
Sir T. Fremantlecontended that the charges against the Select Vestry were unfounded, and had originated in prejudice.
Mr. Humedenied that the annual revenue of the parish was only 100,000 l. In twenty-one years the vestry had col-
1120
lected 1,848,000 l. The last account stated the revenue at 154,000 l. in the preceding year it was 158,000 l., and in the year before that 149,000 l. This was exclusive of a debt of 227,000 l., making the actual expenditure in twenty-one years 2,075,000 l. In 1813, the parish agreed to build a church, which was to cost 19,810 l., and after it had been erected, even to the cupola, by a vote of seventy-six select vestrymen, it was ordered to be pulled down, and re-constructed at an expense of 75,000 l. He put it to the House, whether it was fit that the vast majority of a parish, hostile to such an extravagant vote, should be bound by it. It had been proved also, that 2,152 l. had been laid out upon velvet for the altar-piece, and 12,000 l. given for the site of St. Mary's church, which had been bought of individuals connected with the vestry. He did not, however, mean to bring forward any charge of corruption. The vestry had a lease of the workhouse from the duke of Portland; and from 1798, to 1827, 79,900 l. had been expended upon it. The sum of 27,000 l. had also been applied to the erection of a court-house for the meetings of the vestry. The vestry had borrowed money of one of their own body at five per cent., and had refused to take the loan from another party who offered it at only four per cent. These facts shewed that some control over the vestry was necessary. And what was the control provided by the bill? Merely that one-third of the vestry should retire every year; so that a vestryman continued in office for three years: the vacancies were to be filled up from the parishioners, and no man was entitled to vote who was not rated to the extent of 25 l. per annum.
Dr. Phillimoreobjected to the bill, as he thought such an election annually would be productive of periodical tumult and disturbance, and he did not think any blame attributable to the present vestry.
Sir E. Owencontended, that, for the sake of the peace and quiet of the parish, it was necessary that the bill should be passed.
Sir T. Baringsaid, he was as anxious as any body to avoid the evil of a popular election; and was willing to raise the qualification of a voter to 50 l., or even to 100 l.
Sir F. Burdettthought that the objection suggested by the learned doctor, on the ground that an election, such as that

1121
proposed, would disturb the peace of the parish, was wholly refuted by the practical effects of the same system in an opulent and extensive parish adjoining. They had there an example to the contrary. There was no annual tumult consequent on the election; but all their proceedings were conducted in the spirit of harmony and concord. The House ought to remember, that there was a large property at stake on the present occasion, and that if wealth, character, and rank, were entitled to consideration, they were arrayed in favour of this measure in the parish. What was the dangerous doctrine against which so much alarm had been excited? Why, a 25 l. annual qualification, and this apprehension was urged in a House of Commons as a too strong experiment of free election—a portion of whose members was returned by 40 s. freeholders. He did hope, in justice to the parish, in obedience to the dictates of common sense, and in accordance with the general desire expressed on the occasion, that the House would consent to the bill.
The House divided: For the Amendment 105; Against it 88; Majority 17. The consideration of the report was consequently put off for six months.

BULL BAITING.
Mr. Littletonrose, for the purpose of presenting four petitions from Staffordshire, praying that a law may be enacted for the prohibition of the practice of Bull-baiting. After the late member for Galway (Mr. R. Martin) had succeeded in obtaining a bill for the better protection of cattle, magistrates, generally, for some time, acted on the impression, that a bull came within the term cattle. The court of King's Bench, however, had come to a contrary decision; and all the Judges had given it as their opinion, that bulls were not cattle, and, consequently, that they were not protected from being baited. It was decided, that cows and steers, of the age of two years, were cattle; but, that the adult male did not come within the description. This refinement of the court of law, he did not understand; and if Mr. Martin had not thought that his bill would put an end to the practice of Bull-baiting, he would have introduced a clause for the purpose, that it might never be looked upon as a matter of doubt. On the question itself, he had great doubt whether it would be wise in the legislature to put an
1122
end to Bull-baiting by positive enactment. He could not make up his mind that it was proper to deprive the poor and labouring classes of this species of amusement or sport (if sport it really was), while the rich were permitted, by the game laws, to possess an exclusive enjoyment, which, upon every principle, must be held equally cruel. Hunting, shooting, and horse-racing, might be less brutalizing in their effects; but it seemed hard that a poor man, who earned his money by the sweat of his brow, and required relaxation, should not be allowed to spend a few shillings as he thought proper upon his pleasures. It was, perhaps, wiser not to interfere, but to trust to gradual improvement and to the consequent gradual advancement of civilization— for the termination of a practice to which, unquestionably, there were objections.
Mr. W. Smithsupported the prayer of the petitioners. As even the hon. member himself had admitted that the practice was brutal and brutalizing, the sooner it was put an end to the better.
Sir James Mackintoshpresented a similar petition from West Bromwich. He entirely concurred in the prayer of the petition, and, though he was not prepared with any practical measure, he thought that the legislature might interfere with effect to prevent these barbarous and brutal sports.
Sir J. Newportconcurred in all that had been said on the subject, and cited the case of Waterford, in which the brutal practice had been terminated by the resolution of the mayor of that city.
Mr. Benettfollowed on the same side. He said, he recollected when the practice was so prevalent, that in one day there were three Bull-baits in the cathedral church-yard of Wells. No legal mode of preventing it was available; as he was told that the people had a prescriptive right to bait bulls there on one day in the year. He was happy, however, to learn, that, from the influence of public opinion, the cruel practice had ceased altogether in Wells.
Sir J. Wrottesleyconcurred in what had fallen from his hon. colleague, being quite sure that the increase of moral and religious feeling would shortly put an end to Bull-baiting, without recourse to a legislative enactment.
Ordered to lie on the table,

MISCELLANEOUS ESTIMATES.
The House having resolved itself into a Committee of Supply, to which the Miscellaneous Services were referred,
Mr. Dawsonsaid, that, in laying these estimates before the committee, he should be ready to give every information in his power, as to the grounds on which they were framed. There was, however, one item to which he wished more particularly to call the attention of the committee, as he thought it related to a subject in which hon. members must feel considerable interest. He alluded to an item of 7,000 l. for finishing the committee-rooms of both Houses of parliament. This was the last sum which would be required for completing those buildings. When gentlemen considered the great convenience which had arisen from the increased accommodation afforded for the committees of that House, and the still greater convenience that would be afforded by the addition of a good library, he thought they would not think the expense too great. They had a room of very handsome proportions, a room possessing every convenience for a library, with the exception of books; and he thought it would be a reflection on the House, if hereafter any person went into that room and found it, as it was at present, without a single volume connected with law, history, geography, or general literature. He did not mean to propose any vote on this subject; but, in his opinion, a proper library ought to be formed, consisting of books of reference—books of general knowledge, connected, not only with the history of this country, but the history of Europe and the colonies. It was, perhaps, too late in the year to propose a grant for this purpose; but next year, if such a vote was brought forward, he trusted that it would meet with the encouragement it deserved.
Mr. S. Ricesaid, that, although when he first brought the subject of the library under the consideration of the House, his views had been misrepresented, and much sarcasm had been thrown on the project, he was convinced that it was a proper object on which to lay out a portion of the public money. He should be glad to see a sum of money voted in the present session for so desirable a purpose. He could wish the library to be open even when parliament was not sitting, for the convenience of members, who, when casually in town, might not
1124
have access to other depositories of knowledge.
Mr. Bankesthought the House of Commons ought not to be without a library. It would, however, in making a selection of books, be as well to wait until next year, because probably they might then obtain, at a moderate price, duplicates of valuable works from the British Museum.
Mr. Brightsaid, it was of very great importance to have a library to refer to.
Mr. Humeapproved of the formation of a library, and thought it ought to be kept open constantly. He was highly pleased with the conduct of Mr. Spiller, the librarian, who received only 100 l. a year for his useful and unremitted services.
The Speakersaid, he had heard with great pleasure the eulogium bestowed on Mr. Spiller. The duties imposed on the librarian were scantily remunerated. He, however, had never heard any complaint from that individual. He believed that, with the exception of a fortnight in the year, the library was open to every member.
Sir M. W. Ridleysaid, that the labour of Mr. Spiller in the library had become so great, that it would be necessary for the House to grant him some assistance.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerwas of opinion, that a larger remuneration should be granted to the librarian, and entirely approved of the formation of a library.
On the resolution," That 80,000 l. be granted to defray the expenses of the alterations in Windsor Castle,"
Mr. Humebegged to know when there was to be an end to these alterations? 'When they were in their prosperity and had a god-send, they gave part of it, 500,000 l., to finish Windsor-castle. Then it was found that more was necessary, and the estimate was 644,500 l. Now they were asked for 80,000 l.; so that there remained 64,500 l. to be paid. He must therefore beg to know whether this was all they would be asked for?
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, he felt himself bound to answer the question, from the double capacity in which he stood, of commissioner and chancellor of the Exchequer. It was true, that at first, 500,000 l. was thought sufficient to carry into effect all that had been contem

1125
plated; but it was soon found that more would be necessary, and the expense was then estimated at 644,500 l. He was bound also, in candour, to add, that it was supposed that 50,000 l. more will be required; making the whole nearly 700,000 l. It must be recollected, that the original data on which the estimate was founded were extremely uncertain. Windsor-castle was not a building that was to be raised from the ground, the expense of which might be easily estimated; but it was an old building that was to be repaired. However, an estimate was made, but on examination it was found that the timbers were in that state of actual rottenness, that it was wonderful the building stood at all. The replacing of these timbers enhanced the expenses beyond any thing that could have been contemplated. The foundations, too, in many parts of the building, were in such a condition, that perpetual additions were made to the expense. But this was one of the cases in which, though the expenses were great, they were extremely satisfactory. Windsor-castle had been not only made one of the most convenient and elegant palaces for the monarch of this kingdom, but it was among that rank of buildings which would be the pride of the country, and attract the admiration of foreigners. He believed the money not only to have been well laid out, but that the country had money's worth for its money.
Sir M. W. Ridleyconfirmed the statement of his right hon. friend. Not a single shilling had been wastefully expended; not a stone had been placed which was afterwards withdrawn. Every thing had gone steadily and regularly forward, and in the best possible manner. It was the unexpected rottenness of some of the timbers which had so much enhanced the expense. On one occasion, a ceiling of one of the rooms had given way; and had there not fortunately been workmen on the spot, the whole north side would, in all probability, have come down. There was every reason to suppose that no further sum would be required for furniture than that stated in the estimate. There must undoubtedly have been a much greater outlay on that account, had not all the ornamental furniture, the candelabra, &c, been removed from Carlton-house, and carried to Windsor. The 50,000 l. additional, which it might be necessary to call for hereafter, would be for the purpose of
1126
completing works not originally contemplated, because not considered at that period to be absolutely necessary, but which on further survey were found to be indispensable to the completion of what had been begun. It would be the last money called for, for the present purpose; but he must state it honestly to be his opinion, that Windsor-castle would not be what it ought to be, unless, at some future period, an additional sum of money should be laid out upon it.
Mr. F. Lewissaid, the fact was, that Windsor-castle had been left too long without repair. Nothing could be more gratifying than the sight of what had been done. He could not adequately express his admiration of the identity of effect which had been produced between the old and the new part of the structure. It was quite surprising that so much had been accomplished with the means. The money that had been already voted, however, was not, in his opinion, sufficient to do what ought to be done. Looking at the fair degree of splendor which ought to belong to the principal palace of the Sovereign of this country, he hoped parliament would not abandon the undertaking until it should be completed. No one could say that the money hitherto granted had not been well applied.
Mr. Humecould not permit the hon. gentleman's statement to pass without entering his protest against it. It was mighty well for an hon. member to talk of a splendid residence for the king of the country. The hon. member had said, that no one would object to the expense that had been incurred. There were millions who would object to it. At a time when bread could scarcely be found for a large portion of our population, it was unjustifiable to lavish such sums upon such purposes. The expense, within the last four years, of Buckingham-palace and Windsor-castle would not be paid with 1,200,000 l.; and yet the hon. gentleman talked of going on, until the castle was made to suit his taste. It now appeared, notwithstanding the chancellor of the Exchequer's statement, that a further grant of 50,000 l. beyond the sums comprehended in the estimate would be sufficient, that a million of money would hardly be adequate. He wished to ask the right hon. gentleman, why he did not convert various useless royal edifices to purposes of public benefit? For instance, there was Hampton-court,

1127
What was its use, except to maintain certain individuals at the public expense? The palace at Kew he was happy to understand, was about to be removed. The right hon. gentleman ought to direct his attention to getting rid of any of these buildings which were unnecessary, he did hope that a termination would be put to the expense of Windsor-castle. When they saw thousands ruined around them by the pressure of taxation in order to complete this place in a style of unnecessary splendor, it should induce them to pause in their career. The Crown of England did not require such splendor. Foreign countries might indulge in frippery, but England ought to pride herself on her plainness and simplicity. Yet we saw our soldiers clothed in gold lace and other finery, while thousands of the people were starving. This lavish expenditure, this profusion of gilding and gold lace were probably in conformity with the taste of the Committee of Taste. He understood that some of the chairs in Windsor-castle cost 100 l. or 200 l. a piece [cries of" No ! no!"]. At any rate, 167,000 l. was put down in the estimate as the expenditure incurred and to be incurred in furnishing the castle. He trusted that the right hon. the chancellor of the Exchequer, if he remained in office, would draw in this item of the public expenditure as much as possible.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that with regard to regret for the expenditure that had been incurred, that regret would have been better expressed before the works were begun. To complain now was to complain at the wrong end of the business. He must repeat, that, of all the buildings he had ever seen, Windsor-castle was the most magnificent, and the best adapted to its purpose. It ought to be recollected, that Windsor-castle was the only palace ever erected for the king of England. Other palaces had been presented to the king of England by his subjects, or bought and improved for his use; but Windsor-castle was the only palace in this country that had ever been built as such. As to the furniture of Windsor-castle, the fact was, that there had actually been none in it. His late majesty being anxious, during the long war, to avoid increasing the pressure upon the country, had forborne to add any furniture to that already in the castle. This abstinence imposed on his late majesty's successor the necessity of
1128
incurring a heavy expense to supply the deficiency. If, therefore, the hon. member thought the estimate for furniture a large one, he must recollect for how many antecedent years the public had been exempted from expense on that score. With respect to the general question, all he was desirous of was, to finish the works in a manner suitable to that in which they had been begun; and, when that should be accomplished, to avoid, as far as was possible, any further expense.
Mr. Humesaid, he had never objected to the king's having a suitable palace. The only question was whether, after all, he would have one. The palace at Buckingham-house was disgraceful to every one connected with it. The money which had been laid out upon it, and the manner in which the money had been expended, were equally censurable. Adverting to what the right hon. gentleman had stated of the forbearance of his late majesty in furnishing Windsor-castle, he thought the moderate expense of the late reign was more suited to the simple and chaste old English character, than the course which had been since pursued.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, he had merely stated, that, in consequence of a long and expensive war, his late majesty had refrained from purchases which were oven necessary, and the House had seen how the hon. gentleman had turned this expression. He was sure it was not necessary for him, in that House, to speak in defence of his sovereign; he was sure that in that country, the people entertained much juster notions of their sovereign, than the hon. member had expressed. The hon. member might charge him with keeping up unnecessary splendor, but it ought to be recollected, that his majesty had done much for the country, and that he at least deserved to be spoken of respectfully. [Cheers.] The hon. gentleman had chosen the very night on which the question of his majesty's splendid gift to the country—he meant the library of the late king—had been called to the attention of the House, to indulge in these observations. If, however, that gift, and the expenses of his majesty's palaces were set against each other, there would be found little charge upon the country.
Mr. Secretary Peelsaid, that, he could not hear what had fallen from the hon. member for Aberdeen, without entering

1129
his decided protest against the introduction of the name of the sovereign into the debates of that House. If the hon. member thought that a greater expense had been incurred than was justifiable, he ought to bring forward a charge against his majesty's confidential advisers. To introduce the name of the sovereign in discussions in that House was contrary to the doctrine and practice of the constitution. The hon. member must know that the Crown could not incur any expense, except on the advice of its ministers. It was, therefore, most irregular and unconstitutional, to introduce the name of the sovereign into the discussion. If introduced at all, it ought to have been introduced as the name of the patron of every liberal institution; the warm friend of the arts and sciences; the ardent and anxious supporter of the best interests of the country.
Mr. R. Colbornesaid, he was the last man to sanction any unnecessary expense; but he must express his admiration of the solid and excellent manner in which the repairs of Windsor-castle had been e fleeted.
Sir M. W. Ridleysaid, that the structure of Buckingham-palace, which the hon. gentleman had called a disgrace to all who were concerned in the erection of it, had nevertheless found admirers. He would venture to say, that when it was completed, it would be pronounced any thing but a disgrace to those who had superintended its erection. The same thing had been said of Regent-street; but what did people say of it now? As to the site of the palace, it was not the best possible, but it was chosen because it would not interfere with the conveniences of the people. It was at first proposed to build at Kensington-gardens, but that would have encroached on the comforts of the public. The same objection was thought fatal to the proposal to build the palace at the edge of the Green-park.
Colonel Daviessaid, that when he looked at the square towers at the side, and at the wretched inverted egg-cup, at the top of Buckingham-palace, he must concur with his hon. friend, that it was a disgrace to all who were concerned in it.
Mr. Humesaid, he had intended to speak of the king with no disrespect, but only to regret the taste which he had displayed. If, however, he had said any thing which could be construed into dis
1130
respect, he was sorry for it. He had intended merely to declare his sorrow, that the taste of his majesty was not of that simple, chaste, and solid English kind, which he thought most suitable to the character of the people. He was not aware that he had done more than that, and did not think that the right hon. gentleman had any occasion to read him a lecture on the subject. If, when he was called upon to vote away hundreds of thousands of pounds, regard for any individual was to prevent him from expressing what he honestly felt, there was an end to all deliberation.
The resolution was agreed to. On the resolution, that 15,000 l. be granted for the establishment of the Penitentiary at Milbank, from June, to December, 1828,
Mr. Humeasked, whether that establishment was intended to be given up. It had been admitted last year, that it had not answered the purpose for which it was built.
Mr. Secretary Peelsaid, there had undoubtedly been a considerable expenditure with respect to the Penitentiary, but the building being now completed, he thought it would be improper to abandon it. In proportion as capital punishment was mitigated, it became necessary to find the means of secondary punishment. The Penitentiary afforded one of those means. The establishment was conducted on the most economical principles. It was superintended by a committee of twenty-one gentlemen, who devoted their time to that purpose gratuitously.
Mr. Maberlysaid, that 500,000 l. had been laid out on this place, and the expense now required to maintain it was greater than would be wanted for supporting in the hulks an equal number of men. There was, besides, this objection, that in the latter place the labour was unprofitable, while in the hulks the labour of the convicts produced 80 l. a-head.
Mr. Secretary Peelsaid, that all prisoners could not be sent to the hulks, but only those who were strong enough to work. He thought it would be as erroneous to abandon altogether the hope of reforming prisoners, as it was to attach too much importance to it. As affording an opportunity of steering a middle course between the two extremes, the Penitentiary was highly useful.
The resolution was agreed to. On the

1131
resolution that 16,182 l. be granted for the expense of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in certain of the colonies,
Mr. Humeobjected to the grant. The Society had been a long time established, and for years used to receive a small grant from government, for the support of missionary clergy of the Church of England, but of late years it got this large sum, and had received altogether 145,000 l. Now, he wished to know how this large sum had been applied. From the account of a Mr. Griffin, who had been employed in Canada on the mission, it appeared that the episcopalians formed but a small portion of the inhabitants in Lower Canada, they did not form one sixteenth, and in Nova Scotia about one tenth. The great mass of the people did not wish for this grant, and ten thousand had petitioned against the application of the money of the public in this way. He would therefore propose, that one half the grant be reduced this year, and next year he would move that the whole be discontinued.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that this was not a new grant; a sum was formerly granted by government for the support of the clergy of the Church of England in Canada, but it had of late years been transferred to this society, who applied large funds of their own to the same purpose. In Nova Scotia twenty-eight thousand of the inhabitants, were members of the Church of England, which was a greater number than any one body of dissenters in that colony, He considered the assistance rendered in this way by government, for their instruction, well applied.
Mr. Moncksaid, he wished well to the society, and hoped it would increase, but he did not think that it required any addition from government for the object mentioned. It was clear the members of the Church of England in these colonies were the minority, and he did not see why they should not pay for their own religious instruction, as well as other bodies of Christians.
Sir R. Inglissaid, it did not appear that the money had been misapplied. He would therefore support the grant.
Sir T. D. Aclandobserved, that it would be great injustice to a very useful body to have this grant withheld, and that it would be unfair to take the House by surprise on this vote.
Mr. Humedenied that he took the House by surprise, for he had given notice of his objection last year.
Mr. Moncksaid, if he thought that the withdrawal of half the grant would leave the clergy of the Church of England destitute, he would not support the amendment, but he could not think that the members of that Church would refuse to provide for their clergy if left to themselves.
Mr. O'Neilsaid, he would support the grant, as he was unwilling to leave the clergy to the generosity of the public.
Mr. Laboucheresupported the original motion, but did not mean thereby to make the episcopal church the dominant party in the colony.
Mr. Hobhousesaid, that, unless he could get some assurance that the grant would be reduced next year, he must support the amendment.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, he could not give any assurance of that kind.
Mr. Stuart Wortleysaid, he had great doubts as to the policy of continuing this grant, which was applied exclusively to the ministry of the Church of England. A large majority of the North American colonists were dissenters, and it had lately been resolved by one of the legislative assemblies, by a majority of thirty-five votes, that the Church of England was not the predominant religion. He therefore thought it should be submitted to a committee of that House, to decide whether the vote should be continued, and if continued, whether the money should not be distributed according to the religious circumstances of the population of the colonies.
Mr. Humethought this a fit subject for the consideration of the Finance-committee, or some other that might be appointed for the purpose. He would therefore move, that the vote be postponed for fourteen days, to allow time to have it examined.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerremarked, that the hon. gentleman, as a member of the Finance-committee, must know how inconvenient it would be to have the course they had chalked out for themselves broken in upon, for the purpose of discussing the employment of the public money for religious missions in North America. The subject in itself was very important, but it could not be usefully undertaken by the Finance-committee; nor

1133
by the Canada committee; for their inquiries were too general and extensive to admit of their devoting sufficient attention to this subject.
The committee divided: For the Postponement 28; Against it 107; Majority 79. The original resolution was then agreed to.

List of the Minority.

Abercromby, r. hon. J.

Palmer, Fysche

Benett, J.

Pendarvis, F. W.

Brougham, H.

Ponsonby, hon. G.

Cave, Otway

Russell, J.

Davies, col.

Smith, Wm.

Dawson, A.

Waithman, alderman

Grattan, H.

Wilbraham, G.

Grattan, J.

Wilson, sir R.

Guest, J. J.

Webb, col.

Hobhouse, J. C.

Warburton, H.

Lumley, S.

Wrottesley, sir J.

Maberly, J.

Wood, alderman

Martin, J.

Wood, John

Monck, J. B.

TELLER.

Normanby, lord

Hume, Joseph

The other resolutions were agreed to, and the House resumed.

PROVISION FOR THE FAMILY OF MR. CANNING—PENSIONS' ACT AMENDMENT BILL.
The Duke of Wellington, in moving the second reading of the Pensions Act Amendment Bill, said, he would state to their lordships the grounds which induced him to be a party to the introduction of this measure, and those upon which he recommended it to their lordships' approbation. Mr. Canning, whose qualifications and abilities were well known to the country, entered his majesty's service in the year 1796, and, after having filled several important situations in the government of this country, died in the year 1827, holding, at the time, the office of chancellor of the Exchequer, and first lord of the Treasury. It was well-known that the salaries of officers, and particularly of high officers, in this country, were inadequate to defray the expenses into which they who filled those offices were obliged to enter. That might be good policy: it might be right, with a view to economy, that that should be the case; but it was quite clear, that when a person like Mr. Cunning, with but a small fortune, came to be called upon to perform the duties of one of those high offices, he must either perform them inadequately, or live in a manner unfit for a person holding a high office to live in, or fall upon some other means besides the emolument of his office for supporting its dignity. That was the case with that right hon. gentleman: he was obliged to expend those funds which were destined for the support of his family. He thought he might aver, that if Mr. Canning, instead of entering into the public service, had adhered to the profession for which he was educated, and for which he was so well qualified, there could, be no doubt that he would have risen to eminence in that profession, and would have left his family in a state of affluence. He

1101
might likewise mention to their lordships, that Mr. Canning was, in the year 1821, appointed by the East-India Company to fill the high office of Governor-general of India, and that he was on the point of sailing to take possession of that office, when he was called upon by his majesty to fill the situation of Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, in consequence of the death of the marquis of Londonderry. If Mr. Canning had been allowed to proceed to India on that occasion, in all probability, by the present time, he would have been on his return to this country, in possession of such a competency for his family, as would have rendered all anxiety on that subject unnecessary. Shortly after Mr. Canning had entered his majesty's service on that occasion, his majesty, feeling that Mr. Canning had given up the profits of that high office, thought proper to confer on him one of those pensions, which his majesty was enabled to confer, by the act which it was the object of the present bill to amend.—He must say, and he believed he was almost the only person, if not the only one, who was able to make the assertion on his own knowledge, that that act of grace, on the part of his majesty, was totally and entirely unsolicited by Mr. Canning. That right hon. gentleman, however, in consequence of never having been out of office, from the period when that pension was granted, had never, according to the provisions of the act of parliament, received any part of the emoluments of that pension. He was consequently exposed to all the expenses attending the representation of the office of Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, and obliged to defray those expenses from the salary of that office, and from funds derived from private sources. Under these circumstances, Mr. Canning found he could but ill afford to make that representation which his office required, and his family were in a condition by no means affluent, or such as they ought to be, considering their rank and situation. —He would also call their lordships' attention to the alteration which this act made in the prerogative of the Crown, and, consequently, in the situation in which Mr. Canning's family were placed. In all probability, if that act had never been passed by parliament, the same grace and favour which had induced his majesty to confer on Mr. Canning one of those pensions which his majesty was enabled to confer by that
1102
act, would have induced his majesty to confer on Mr. Canning a sinecure office; and, if Mr. Canning had been in possession of a sinecure office, he would have had an income equal to the support of the dignity of his office. That, however, was not the only view which might be taken of the effect of that act. When Mr. Canning died, it was well known that he possessed the confidence and favour of his sovereign; and no man who knew his majesty could doubt that if his majesty had possessed the power at that moment, he would have alleviated the afflictions of Mr. Canning's family, as far as they could have been alleviated, by granting to the son the sinecure office held by the father, or have made some other arrangement for providing for his family.—Under these circumstances, therefore, he asked their lordships to impower him to amend that act, in order to enable his majesty to do that which he would have done, if that act had never passed. He therefore hoped that their lordships' would allow the bill to be read a second time.
Lord Dacresaid, that if the proposition had been to vote a sum of money, he should not have offered any opposition to it. For, though he had, on very few occasions, while Mr. Canning was living, concurred with him, yet no man was more sensible than he was of the great talents, and vast acquirements of that right hon. gentleman. He had been opposed to that right hon. gentleman, on almost all questions of economical reform: he had met in him a most decided enemy to those constitutional principles which he (lord Dacre) had supported; and he had found him on all occasions, the active supporter of every proposition, which went to curtail the privileges of the people; but he must, however, say, that much as he was opposed to the right hon. gentleman, that would not have boon sufficient to make him oppose the bill. The noble duke had stated the grounds on which he should oppose the bill. The bill was, to amend an act, which, after long and repeated discussion, had been passed, to put an end to the power of granting reversionary offices, at a time when those who possessed the situation lately held by the right hon. gentleman, thought they had a just claim to enjoy them. The question now was, whether the bill, by which it was proposed to amend the 57th of his late majesty, which had been resolved on after long

1103
and serious debates, should pass; by which that act would be amended and repealed, which was introduced to prevent any future minister from establishing a claim to a reversionary place, while in the service of his majesty. To this he could not consent. The enactments of that act expressed, that it was of the highest importance to introduce some substitute for providing for those who held the high offices of the state, instead of providing for them by reversionary grants. Under the provisions of that act, the number of pensions granted was to be limited to six, in the course of twelve years. At present, there were only five of these pensions to be disposed of, and only one was loose and supernumerary. If it were considered, that, under this bill, one of those pensions was fixed on the life of a young gentleman, it served to throw a greater burthen on the country, by the age of the person to whom the interest was given, than was contemplated by those under whose auspices the act was introduced. Their lordships would see that either they were curtailing, by that act, the power of the Crown, or withdrawing from those who had a fair claim to the possession of such a pension, for the services they had performed. The persons next claiming such a pension would find, that one of those which, by the regulations of the act of the 57th Geo. 3rd., they might expect, was occupied by a very young life interest, and, by such an appropriation, there was a greater probability that there would be a pension less to give, than if it had been bestowed on a person who had filled a high office of the state.—He had stated thus much, in order to shew what were the conclusions to which parliament, after an arduous discussion, had arrived. The bill was intended to enable his majesty to provide by pensions for those who formerly had the power of providing for themselves by certain offices. It was certainly true, that Mr. Canning had never enjoyed the pension which had been conferred on him; but why was this? Because, after receiving it, he had been invariably in possession of an office with higher emoluments than the pension he might retire on. The pension was not to add to his salary while he held office, but to be a retiring half-pay. There was another part of the bill which struck him with some astonishment. He knew nothing of the private circumstances of Mr. Canning's
1104
family, but this he knew, that ministers had thought fit, to raise one of the family to the peerage. If the circumstances of the right hon. gentleman's family were such as their lordships had been led to conclude, he certainly thought that ministers should have taken care that such vote should have been applied to the maintenance of the dignity of the peerage. But the pension was not granted on the life of the eldest, but on that of the younger son, and was to be placed in the hands of trustees. He regretted that a precedent like this should be established; and could not but lament, that the noble duke had not distinctly asked for a vote of money. Admitting as he did, the great talents of the right hon. gentleman, though he differed from him in almost all questions of political economy, had the bill been merely to give a sum of money, he would not have voted against it. Such a measure would, he thought, have been more consistent with the dignity of the Crown, and more agreeable to the feelings of the individuals who were to receive it. He conceived it would be better to withdraw the bill, and bring forward such a measure as he proposed.
The Marquis of Londonderrysaid, he believed, that even his enemies would not suppose that he was animated by any feelings of political hostility or rancour; and he was sure his friends would not suppose that he acted from any such feelings. It would be in the recollection of their lordships, that during the last session, there was no person who took a more prominent part against the policy of the right hon. gentleman than he did. He disapproved of his arrangements, both as to our domestic and foreign policy; and he had expressed his opposition before their lordships. He would never allow of the phrase, that he had "called anew world into existence." He had opposed the lamentable treaty of the 6th of July. He had opposed the policy which had led, unfortunately, the Russian armies across the Pruth, and perhaps across the Danube, and which might lead to the destruction of the Ottoman Empire. Had it not been for the policy of that right hon. gentleman, the Russians would not have been encouraged to press forward; but he had made what s only a sentiment in him, but was life and death to the Russians, the basis of a treaty; and had he not urged forward the Russians, they would, probably, have fol-

1105
lowed the policy of the emperor Alexander on that question, and have remained at rest. Being opposed to both the domestic and foreign policy of that right hon. gentleman, if the noble duke had proposed the grant as an acknowledgment of the policy of the deceased, he should have been obliged to oppose the motion. He could not have heard any person stand up in that House and praise the proceedings of the right hon. gentleman. He was glad, therefore, to hear the noble duke ask the consent of their lordships, on the ground that the salary of the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs was inadequate to his office; that he had been prevented from going to India, and that his family was not provided for. He did not mean to speak of making up what that family had lost; he could feel for that loss as a man should feel. He was glad, therefore, that the noble duke had placed the vote on these grounds, so that he for one, was not prepared to oppose it. There are individuals around me (continued the noble marquis), who have received pensions for their services. Several noble lords have received pensions for diplomatic services. I, however, am one of those individuals to whom the late right hon. gentleman, out of personal hostility, did not choose to award the same pension, though I have the same claim as other noble lords [hear, hear!]. I will not, however, because the right hon. gentleman refused me a pension to which my services were entitled, refuse a pension to his family, being very sensible that his great talents and long services entitled him to it. These are my reasons for supporting the measure, and I give the vote with greater pleasure, in consequence of what has occurred within these few days. I was glad to see certain gentlemen, the friends of the late right hon. gentleman, retire from his majesty's councils. There was certainly a political incubus pressing on the cabinet, and I rejoice, that it has been repressed. Now that the noble duke has the materials of his government constituted equally and uniform, all will be well. I trust, that now the principle of the government will be stable, and that our commercial and agricultural interests will be steadily pursued, without any of those divergencies or those aimings after visionary projects, which had lately distinguished our councils.
The Earl of Dudleysaid, that after the speech of the noble duke, which had stated
1106
in so fair, so convincing, and so satisfactory, a manner, the present question, it would have been unnecessary for him to have said one word, had it not been for the statement of the noble marquis. That statement was calculated to convey an imputation on the memory of his late right hon. friend, which it was impossible for him to hear without contradicting. The noble marquis had said, that many persons had received pensions for political services, but that he, the noble marquis, had been refused his from political feeling, by Mr. Canning. Their lordships must be aware, that when it was a question of motive, no man was able to dive into the human heart, and to say what was, or was not, the feeling which prevailed there: it was impossible for him to disprove the imputation; but he would appeal, not only to the friends of that right hon. gentleman, not only to all indifferent persons, but to every political enemy which that gentleman had —with one single exception—and he would ask them, whether they thought Mr. Cunning so base in feeling, as to do so base an action in so base a manner? That that right hon. gentleman, like other men of warm feelings, was capable of strong resentments, he had no doubt. He might have felt resentment towards the noble marquis; but, if that right hon. gentleman had wished to show him any mark of his resentment, he would have done it in another shape than by the refusal of a pension. What mark of resentment could it have been, to refuse a pension of 2,000 l. a year to a noble lord possessing vast estates? He hoped their lordships would allow him to refer to what passed in their lordships' House last year. How did the refusal of the pension stand? An application for a pension was made by the noble marquis to Mr. Canning, at that time presiding over the Foreign Department. What was the result? Mr. Canning, instead of refusing the pension, with that delicacy of feeling which belonged to him, thinking, probably, the noble lord's not a proper case for a pension, but not choosing to take the responsibility of deciding upon himself, referred the application to a friend of the noble lord's brother, to a nobleman who, if he had any leaning at all, might be supposed to have it on the side of the noble marquis. He would not mention the shape in which the noble earl gave an answer to that application. He had no wish to twit the noble marquis on the terms which the

1107
noble earl had used: but the refusal was not Mr. Canning's, but lord Liverpool's. With what justice, then—with what fairness—he had almost said with what decency—were we to be told, with respect to an individual who, whatever faults he had, had never, in the whole course of his life, given the slightest cause for an imputation of one paltry action, that he had shown his resentment in so unworthy a manner? Faults he had; but no man was without them: and he could not sit silently and hear such a monstrous imputation cast on the memory of his right hon. friend. He would state the reason for which he believed—for he was not very conversant with the subject—the pension had been refused. The fact stood thus: —There was a certain sum which the Crown disposed of in pensions. The Crown was not, however, enabled to grant pensions to every man who had served a certain time. It was nominally enabled to do so until the pensions were exhausted; the whole amount of which did not exceed 40,000 l. Then, it certainly was not unfair, in granting a pension, to look at all the circumstances of the case; because it was quite evident that, by granting pensions to men of large fortune, the Crown would be prevented from giving pensions to others equally deserving, and much more in need of them. The noble marquis's income seemed to be very large, and that he took to be the clear and obvious ground, why he had not received a pension. That circumstance was, however, no disparagement to the noble marquis's services.—With respect to the manner in which the present bill had been brought forward, he could not, as a friend to Mr. Canning, help offering the noble duke his thanks for the manner in which he had introduced the measure. He did not mean to say, that the mode in which it was proposed to be clone, met his views in every respect, or that the sum to be granted was at all commensurate to the eminent services of the illustrious deceased. As it was, he was satisfied that this grant was only an act of justice, and a well-deserved tribute to the great services which had been discharged by an eminent public servant. Impressed as he was with a deep sense of the merits of Mr. Canning, he was aware, at the same time, that there were many persons who did not agree with Mr. Canning in the course of his political life; and he was ready to concede, that if this measure in
1108
volved a recognition of Mr. Canning's political principles, they would have good reason to object to it. But he would say, that this measure was founded upon different grounds: it was founded upon the great talents, and the unwearied zeal, which Mr. Canning had displayed in the service of the public for a number of years. It was given to the family of Mr. Canning, because, while living, his official salary was inadequate to the support of his official station, and he had been in consequence obliged to draw upon his private fortune.
Lord Goderichsaid, that while he had the honour of a seat in his Majesty's cabinet, this subject had been discussed, and he had then declared his decided opinion, that it was the duty of government to submit to parliament a proposition of this description. He conceived that the measure was justifiable, not merely on account of the splendid talents and great services of the eminent individual in question, but on the general principle, that if parliament chose to deprive the Crown of the power of conferring rewards upon the family of an individual who had held an important station under the Crown, and who had discharged the duties of that office with ability and zeal, it became the indispensable duty of parliament to bestow those rewards which the Crown had not the power to confer. It was always maintained, however, that though it was fit that parliament should deprive the Crown of that power, it was also equally fit that parliament should be called upon to fill up the deficiency, whenever a case arose which called for its generous interference. He could not, therefore, see any force in the objection of a noble lord to this bill, on the ground that it was an amendment upon an act which had obtained the sanction of parliament. It had been well observed by his noble friend who had spoken last, that this was the discharge of a debt of justice, rather than an act of liberality; and that was a sufficient answer to the objections of the noble lord. There was one observation which had fallen from the noble marquis with which he had been much struck. The noble marquis had said, that the pension which he had asked from the government, had been refused to him at the instance of Mr. Canning, and upon personal grounds. He should not weaken the effect of what had fallen from his noble friend (lord Dudley) by entering into a refutation of that charge, but he happened

1109
to know that Mr. Canning had nothing to do with the refusing of that pension. It was the act of lord Liverpool, and of lord Liverpool alone. He happened to be with lord Liverpool at the time when he received the letter of the noble marquis, applying for the pension. Lord Liverpool showed the letter to him and said, "This is a thing which it will be impossible to grant." The noble marquis founded his claim to the pension upon public services. Lord Liverpool distinctly said he had no right to it upon such grounds; and he certainly agreed with lord Liverpool in that opinion. He had stated enough, he conceived, to show that his noble friend was mistaken in supposing that Mr. Canning had any thing to do with the refusal of that pension.
Lord Seafordsaid:—My lords; if I eould consider the grant proposed to be made to Mr. Canning's family by the present bill, as affording in any degree a measure, either of his public services or of the estimation in which they arc held by the country, I must confess I could not but consider it to be very inadequate. There are, however, I am aware, circumstances by which similar grants are necessarily limited, and which have regulated and controlled the course of the government on the present occasion; considerations which, being quite independent either of the merits of the individual, or of the feelings of the country, render the present grant in no degree a correct criterion of either. And though I should have preferred that this grant had been regulated in the manner suggested by the noble lord, (Dacre) though I regret that it is not in its nature—that of a mere annuity on a single life; or in the amount of that annuity, more nearly commensurate with Mr. Canning's eminent services,—or more suitable to the liberality of a great and generous nation; I will not offer any objection to the present bill, but am content to accede to it, on the grounds proposed by the noble duke, who has introduced the measure with a fairness and candour, for which, as a friend of Mr. Canning, I feel bound to express my acknowledgments.
The noble duke has proposed this grant, if I understood him correctly, simply and generally as a tribute to the memory of an eminent statesman, whose splendid talents and whose life have been devoted to the service of his country, in the highest
1110
offices of the state. A proposition so general would, I should have hoped, have had the advantage of avoiding all opposition. It is, indeed, so general as to afford latitude for almost every possible degree of favourable opinion or feeling. If it does not satisfy the wishes, it justifies, at least, the votes of Mr. Canning's warmest friends and admirers; and, avoiding, as it does, any implied disavowal of opposite political opinions, it affords scope for the indulgence (where they exist) of the generous feelings of even a political antagonist. The proposition is also so clear and so simple in its nature, and it rests upon grounds so universally felt and acknowledged, that it has the further advantage of not requiring much argument for its support
There are, however, some circumstances which, though they bear only indirectly upon the case, and have been, in some degree, touched upon by the noble duke, yet constitute so powerful an appeal to the justice and honourable feelings of your lordships, that I cannot refrain from pressing them further upon your lordships' notice. Mr. Canning, early in life, was deprived of his legitimate inheritance; but he acquired by marriage, a fortune fully sufficient for independence and respectability in private life. At his death that fortune was found to have been considerably impaired. It was not injured by waste or extravagance. No man was less expensive in his tastes or habits than Mr. Canning. When out of office his establishment was small and unostentatious, and regulated with order and economy. But, during a considerable portion of his life, he held high official situations, which imposed upon him the necessity of an increase of expense and of establishment, for which his official salary did not supply the means
The noble duke has justly observed that the high offices of the state are greatly underpaid. It has, in consequence, been very generally the practice, for persons filling those situations to hold at the same time some other office of considerable emolument. Mr. Pitt, in addition to the offices of First Lord of the Treasury and chancellor of the Exchequer, held that of warden of the cinque ports. Mr. Pitt was a single man, not more expensive in his habits than Mr. Canning; yet Mr. Pitt died very considerably in debt. I have often heard this fact, (as your lord

1111
ships must), cited, and justly, to his honour, as a proof of his disinterestedness; but I never knew it made matter of reproach as a proof of his extravagance. It was, in fact the natural and necessary consequence of the inadequacy of his official salary to the expenses which his official station imposed upon him. At the death of Mr. Pitt, the office of warden of the cinque ports was given to lord Liverpool, which he has held in addition to the other high offices which he filled during the last twenty years of his political life. Lord Grenville, who succeeded Mr. Pitt as First Lord of the Treasury, held at the same time the patent place of auditor of the Exchequer. The duties of this office being considered to be inconsistent with those of the First Lord of the Treasury, an act of parliament was passed for the purpose of enabling lord Grenville to continue to receive the salary of the auditorship of the Exchequer; the duties being altogether performed by deputy, at the same time that he held the office of First Lord of the Treasury. On the breaking-up of lord Grenville's administration, when Mr. Perceval was appointed to the office of chancellor of the Exchequer, it was thought right to grant to him, in addition, the chancellorship of the duchy of Lancaster.
I will not take up the time of your lordships, by going through a long enumeration of similar cases; but I may venture to assert, that it has rarely happened, except in the case of individuals possessing very ample private fortunes, that the persons filling the high offices of state have not had the advantantage of also holding sonic other place of emolument. I do not cite these examples in praise or in blame, but merely in comparison, and for the purpose of shewing that Mr. Canning had not the same advantage which many persons in a similar situation did enjoy. The consequence was, that the insufficiency of his official salary, which was necessarily to be supplied out of his own income, not only absorbed the whole of that income, but compelled him to encroach considerably on the capital of his private fortune. An opportunity, however, of repairing this injury was offered as the noble duke has stated, by Mr. Canning's nomination to be Governor General of India. Had he gone to India, he would, previous to the period at which he was cut off, have accomplished this object, and might have bequeathed the means of affluence and independence to
1112
his family. These were reasons which might naturally and properly render a man of nice and delicate feelings, and which did render Mr. Canning most extremely anxious to repair the injury which had been done to the inheritance of his children. India also presented to him other attractions, high station, great power, and the example of fame and honours as well as fortune acquired by his predecessors, of whom many are now sitting among your lordships. But when these prospects were about to be realized, Mr. Canning was unexpectedly called upon to fill a station at home; higher, undoubtedly, and more important, and more gratifying to his ambition, but, on the other hand, necessarily involving the aggravation of that injury to his fortune which he was properly so anxious to repair. The station which he was about to fill in India, and that which was offered to him at home, presented a conflict of public and private duties. A tempting career was open to his ambition in each, but Europe was the greater theatre,—the part he was called upon to act more brilliant, and the service to his country more important. On the other hand, in a consideration of private duties, the scale preponderated decidedly in favour of India. His decision was not made without a struggle, but a sense of public duty prevailed
It has not been unusual for public men, when they have been called upon to make pecuniary sacrifices, on accepting high political situations, to stipulate for some provision for themselves and their families in compensation for those sacrifices. The sacrifice made by Mr. Canning, on giving up India, was fully equal to that of those professional prospects which it has been usual thus to compensate; but Mr. Canning made no stipulation. My lords, there arc sacrifices for which a high-minded man may, and properly, not choose to ask for a compensation; but there are those also which similar feelings equally forbid to be accepted without return. Such I conceive to be the case between Mr. Canning and his country; and though no claim has been preferred by his family on this score, though this bill is brought in on other and distinct grounds, it is not the less true, that a debt of honour has been incurred by the country. My lords, how was this felt in the highest quarter? Almost immediately after Mr. Canning's appointment to the Foreign Department, his

1113
Sovereign spontaneously, as has been stated by the noble duke, and unexpectedly by Mr. Canning as I know— and with a graciousness in the manner of doing the thing, which doubly enhances the value of an act of liberality—conferred upon him one of those pensions which had been placed at the disposal of the Crown upon the surrender of those sinecure offices which had been usually appropriated to the remuneration of eminent public services. But the king could only grant this pension to Mr. Canning for his life, and upon his retirement from office. By his premature death the generous purpose of his sovereign was frustrated, and parliament are now called upon to enable the Crown to carry that purpose into effect, by granting the same pension to one of Mr. Canning's sons. My lords, I conceive that parliament owe it to their own honour and to the honour of their country, not to refuse their concurrence to the acquittal of the debts which I have stated thus to have been incurred, and I cannot believe but that the consideration, that by this proposed grant this debt will not remain altogether unacquitted, will operate upon your lordships' minds as a powerful auxiliary motive in support of it
My lords, I would here have closed all with which I should have troubled your lordships, but for the observations which have been made by the noble marquis. The noble marquis has found fault generally, and almost without any exception, with the political principles and policy of Mr. Canning. There is, I must confess, a difficulty in replying to these objections, arising out of their generality. If I were to undertake a detailed defence of the whole of Mr. Canning's political life and principles, or to enter into the discussion of the merits of the Greek treaty, to which the noble marquis had specifically pointed his objections, it would be to trespass far more largely upon your lordships' indulgence than on this occasion I should feel justified in doing. With respect to those observations of the noble marquis which are of a personal nature, I shall not do Mr. Canning's memory the injustice of weakening, by any thing which I could say, the impression which must have been made upon your lordships' minds by the able, eloquent, and powerful reply, which has been given to that part of the noble marquis's speech by my noble friend near me. I shall, therefore, content myself
1114
with appealing from the disapprobation of the noble marquis, to the approbation of his sovereign and of parliament, confirmed and justified by the approbation of his country—to that approbation not withdrawn while he lived—to the grief which was expressed at his death—to the regret which has been felt for his loss—and which every day's experience has confirmed and encreased. Further, I appeal to the esteem and admiration which are coupled with his name in every foreign country. I cite and attach peculiar importance to the estimation in which Mr. Canning's name is held abroad, because the peculiar and ruling principle of his whole policy renders that testimony particularly valuable. I cannot better illustrate my meaning than by quoting the opinion of a person of no mean authority—a foreigner, influenced by feelings of the strongest prejudice, and of prejudice which rendered this testimony perhaps the most valuable that could be adduced. Your lordships probably have seen a character of Mr. Canning which appeared in the American newspapers, and which is supposed to have been written by Mr. President Adams. I will take the liberty of reading a short extract—
"With all our admiration of the mental "powers of Mr. Canning, whether, as "inherited from nature, or carried to "their highest pitch by the discipline of business and study; whether we marked "their efforts when brought to the most "momentous trials, or only gazed at them when they dazzled in lighter ones, "truth compels us to state, that he was "never the political friend of this country. "He was a Briton, through and through "—British in his feelings—British "in his aims —British in all his policy "and projects. It made no difference "whether the lever that was to raise "them was fixed at home or abroad, for "he was always and equally British. "The influence, the grandeur, the dominion "of Britain, were the dream of "his boyhood; to establish them all over" the globe, even in the remote region, "where the waters of Columbia flow in" solitude, formed the intense efforts of his "riper years. For this he valued power" —and for this he used it.
My lords, the American President was right. Mr. Canning was a Briton through and through—British in all his feelings-British in all his policy and projects, To

1115
establish the grandeur and influence of Britain, was the dream of his boyhood—the effort of his riper years, and let me add the successful effort. To have acted constantly under the influence of this ruling principle, and at the same time to have won the admiration, and command the esteem, of every foreign country, was the triumph of patriotism and ability, and completed the character of a consummate statesman. My lords, I am content, in Mr. Canning's justification, to go to a verdict of his country upon this testimony, in opposition to that of the noble marquis.
The Earl of Morleysaid, that, having been an intimate friend of the late Mr. Canning, he was anxious to bear his testimony in addition to that of his noble friend, to the public-spirited motives which induced Mr. Canning to relinquish the appointment to the government of India. He happened to have in his possession a document amply confirmatory of the sentiments expressed by his noble friend on that subject. In a private letter, written 30th September, 1822, at the period when he had given up the appointment of Governor-general of India, Mr. Canning, after stating his reasons for doing so, and for accepting of the office of Secretary for Foreign Affairs says—"I take no joy, and I feel none. I have sacrificed my interests, my wishes, and I believe my happiness; but I hope I have done my duty."
Earl Grosvenorsaid, that the act to which the noble duke had alluded was passed under a strong impression, on the part of parliament and the country, that sinecure places were of a mischievous nature. But the noble duke called upon them not to amend that act, but to make an addition to it; for the clause in question was an addition and not an amendment: its object was to authorise the Crown to do an act which it could not do under the existing law. The act which this bill proposed to amend, gave to the Crown the power to grant pensions to certain persons for public services rendered to the country, after their removal from office, and during the remainder of their lives. Now, a pension of that description could not last very long; but the one proposed by the noble duke might last for half a century. A noble lord had said, that this pension should be granted out of the consolidated fund; and he would prefer that mode of proceeding. He wished to consider this question solely in
1116
a constitutional point of view. Their lordships were aware, that his majesty had been advised, and was well-advised, to ennoble the family of Mr. Canning, by the grant of a peerage. Now, he would contend, that when a peerage was granted to any individual who had not sufficient means to support it, such means should be given to him along with the peerage. If it were otherwise, titles might be conferred, not in perpetuity, but for life; and a profligate ministry might, upon some profligate occasion, create twenty or thirty votes in that House, by conferring so many peerages for life. If it had been right to confer a peerage upon the family of Mr. Canning, he would say, that parliament, instead of voting a miserable 3,000 l. a year, should vote some adequate sum to support that dignity. The noble lord instanced the cases of lord Nelson and the duke of Wellington, in which parliament had voted money to support the titles which had been conferred in those instances. They had been told, that the fortune of Mr. Canning had been impaired, and that this 3,000 l. a year was to be granted to make up for that loss: and certainly, in that view of the question, he was ready to admit that they were called upon to vote it. He would vote for this grant upon public grounds, because Mr. Canning had impaired his fortune in the public service. He supported this grant on account of the zeal, the industry, and the talents which Mr. Canning had exhibited in the service of the country. He should have preferred that this grant had been attached to the peerage conferred upon the Canning family; but, under the circumstances of the case, he should give it his support.
The bill was read a second time.