Sitting of 16 August 1833

MINUTES.
Papers ordered. On the Motion of Mr. BLAMIRE, the Names of the Parishes respecting the Tithes of which Suits have been commenced in the Courts of Chancery and Exchequer, in the year beginning August 16th, 1830, to August 16th, 1833.—On the Motion of Sir EDWARD CODRINGTON, Copies of Warrants by which Prize Money was granted to the Crews of his Majesty's Ships after the Battle of Copenhagen, &c.—On the Motion of Mr. HUME, a Return of the manner in which the 25,000 l. voted in 1832 for the Support of Captured Negroes and Liberated Africans was Expended: also the Application of the Vote of 1832, for the benefit of Individuals of different Persuasions in Canada and other British North American Colonies: also the Names and Residences of British Consuls and Vice-Consuls, with their Emoluments.—On the Motion of Mr. SPRING RICE, the Number of Persons Imprisoned in Great Britain or Ireland for Offences against the Revenue Laws, on August 15th, 1833.—On the Motion of Mr. VERNON, an Account from the Inspectors of Corn Returns of the different Measures used in selling Corn in Great Britain and how the Amount of Duty on Imported Corn is ascertained in the different Ports.—On the Motion of Mr. RUTHVEN, the Receipt and Expenditure of the Central Board of Health for Ireland: the same from the General Board of Health for the City of Dublin.
Bills. Read a second time:—Buckingham Palace Furniture.—Read a third time:—Factories' Regulations.

BOARDS OF STAMPS AND TAXES.
Mr. Spring Rice Mr. Spring Rice moved the Order of the Day for the House to resolve itself into a Committee of Supply.
Lord Granville Somersetwas sorry to be obliged to call the attention of the House to the consolidation of the Boards of Stamps and Boards of Taxes. He did not object to their consolidation, nor to any saving which could be effected by such an arrangement; but he was confident, from the papers laid before the House, that the saving might have been much more extensive than it had been. He was of opinion, that, in all consolidations of departments, there should be one invariable rule, viz., that if the persons in those departments were fit for their public, duties, fresh and inexperienced persons should not be introduced. But, in the present instance, setting aside the claims of the old officers, Government had appointed an individual (Mr. John Wood) who was never before in the public service. There were the Chairmen of the
716
two late Boards (and to those he would confine himself), who had long filled their offices with the greatest credit to themselves. One (Mr. Mitford) had held the situation for thirty-six years, and was still in the enjoyment of health and vigour of mind and body, and would still be as serviceable as any other person could be. His appointment by the late Lord Liverpool was against his own wishes, but he was selected by that noble Lord for his great experience and knowledge of business. On what grounds, then, was he superannuated? It might be said there would be an objection by Mr. Mitford to serve under Mr. Thornton, the Chairman of the other department, or vice versa; but would the noble Lord (Althorp) deny, that a correspondence had taken place with the Treasury upon that very subject, and that Mr. Mitford had expressed his unwillingness to retire? Even if he had wished to retire, why was the public to pay so largely for the arrangement? His superannuation allowance was not beyond his merits, but it was enormous, and one that, from the present state of his health, he was likely very long to enjoy. The noble Lord, to effect this arrangement, had made the public pay 840 l. a-year more than they would otherwise have had to pay, besides having an inexperienced individual appointed to perform the duties. He feared there must have been some unexplained anxiety, on the part of his Majesty's Ministers, to get rid of old officers and appoint new ones. The papers which had been produced in consequence of the Motion he had made, did not contain the replies to some of the queries which had been put by the Treasury, and, therefore, he (Lord G. Somerset) was left in the dark as to the motives by which the Government had been actuated, and as to whether the thing had been done in concurrence with the feelings of Mr. Mitford. It was curious, that the instant Mr. Mitford was put on the superannuation list, he received an application from another department, and, for aught he knew, was now receiving another salary for less onerous duties.
Lord Althorpsaid, that the savings effected were not confined to the consolidation of the chief Boards, but were much larger, by the consolidation of the collection of taxes, under the same Board. He begged to say, that the replies to which the noble Lord had referred, as being withheld, were entirely confidential communications. He had recommended Lord Grey to select
Mr. Wood, not because he was a supporter of Ministers, for no man could say that gentleman's conduct had been at all subservient to their purposes,—but he had recommended his selection on account of his consistency of conduct, general ability, and because, although not following his Majesty's Government, he possessed their most entire confidence. In consolidating the Boards, the Government had not only to calculate the amount of saving which might be made directly in salaries, but also whether the persons to be appointed were most likely to effect the general savings in the most efficient manner. It had been proposed to Mr. Mitford, that he should remain in the situation with the same salary as he had received before; but it was necessary that the person at the head of the Board should be in the habits of confidential communication with the Government. He concurred in the encomiums passed by the noble Lord on Mr. Mitford; but he should do very wrong if he were not also to award the same meed of praise to Mr. Thornton, who had also retired. No man was more ready than that gentleman in promoting the wishes of the Government. It was not for the purpose of acquiring any patronage Mr. Wood had been appointed; the Government merely wished to have, at the head of the consolidated department, a gentleman with whom they could co-operate, and who was well known for his independence and ability. The saving by the change would be greater in the country than within the immediate department in town.
Mr. Humesaid, the question was, whether the consolidation was proper,—and whether the Government were justified in making a reduction of expenditure, from 11,500 l, to 5,000 l.? If the noble Lord was satisfied the duties could be performed at less expense, he was perfectly warranted in doing it; but he thought the noble Lord might have gone considerably lower. He had proposed a plan by which two Commissioners were to have done the whole duty; and he was satisfied, if it had been left to him, that he would have procured some of the ablest men in England to do the duty, and at a much less expense. If there was any one thing that he complained of in his Majesty's Ministers, it was, that they were not strong enough: they were (to make use of a word in a petition that had been presented yesterday) imbecile. He knew they had much to put up with, and he blamed them for not exercising
718
the power that was vested in them towards certain Lieutenants of Counties, who had made use of their authority, as representatives of the Crown, to political purposes.
Mr. Harveyexpressed his approbation of the course pursued by his Majesty's Ministers with reference to Mr. Mitford. In his opinion, however, the most import ant subject for the House to consider was, the great allowance that had been made to a retired public servant, when that servant was perfectly able to discharge the duties of his office. If Mr. Mitford was not approved of, surely he might have filled a subordinate office. If a horse was not fit to run at Newmarket, his owner might start him for an inferior plate; and, if he was unsuccessful, he would then do for a London cab. But it would be absurd to say, because he could not start for the Derby, that he was only fit for superannuation. He thought great blame rested with the Government in not appointing individuals who already stood in the pension or superannuated list, where such a course might be pursued without detriment to the public service. He was acquainted with a gentleman who had a retired allowance of 400 l. per annum, and who applied to be appointed a charity commissioner, with a salary of 800 l., by which the public would have been saved 400 l. a-year, but was refused the appointment. Many individuals were similarly circumstanced, and he earnestly recommended the noble Lord to have an alphabetical list of all pensions and superannuations, and, before any appointment was made, to cast his eye over it, and see if a saving might not be effected by giving the situation to a person whose name appeared in the list.
Mr. Warburtonsaid, if Ministers had expelled the heads of establishments for the purpose of introducing their own particular friends, they certainly deserved the most signal censure of that House; but as, in the present instance, they had only superannuated an individual who was politically opposed to them, and had placed in his situation a person of talent and respectability, who would cordially co-operate with them in effecting that extensive reform and reduction of the public burthens which had been so loudly called for, he thought they ought to receive the approbation of all parties; and be contended it was quite impossible they could do anything else, in justice to themselves, than appoint an individual for that purpose in whom they had the most implicit confidence.

SUPPLY—MISCELLANEOUS ESTIMATES.
The House resolved itself into a Committee of Supply on the Miscellaneous Estimates.
The following votes were agreed to without discussion:—12,275 l. 12 s. 3d. to make good the deficiency on the Fee Fund for the Colonial Department; 13,500 l. for the Fee Fund of the Privy Council; 2,000 l. on account of salary to the Lord Privy Seal; 7,500 l. for contingent expenses and Messengers' bills in the Treasury Department; 6,284 l. for contingent expenses and Messengers' bills in the Home Department; 39,600 l. for contingent expenses and Messengers' bills in the Foreign Department; 50,600 l. for contingent expenses and Messengers' bills for the Colonial Department; 5,453 l. for contingent expenses and Messengers' bills for the Privy Council; and 4,366 l. for contingent expenses and Messengers' bills for the First Lord of the Treasury, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, &c.
On the Motion, that a sum not exceeding 1,264 l. be granted to defray the expenses of salaries and allowances to certain Professors in the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge,
Mr. Warburtonsaid, he had no objection to the grant, if there were no University surplus funds that were available to this object.
Mr. Prymesupported the grant, because the Universities had no funds applicable to this purpose.
Mr. Ewartobjected to the grant, on the ground of the exclusiveness of the Universities. If dissenters were admitted, they would have much pleasure in agreeing to a much larger sum.
Mr. Spring Ricesaid, that the admissibility of dissenters into those Universities was the opinion—he could not say of the majority, but—of a great mass of the residents at the Universities. It was a growing opinion, and there was every probability, before Parliament met, that it would be a matter of discussion in the Universities. They ought, however, to be left to take their own steps on the subject, lest compulsion might defeat the important object in view.
Mr. Pottercould mention to the hon. member for Cambridge a method of increasing the funds of the University, namely, to admit the sons of dissenters to participate in the honours of science and literature. At present, as was well known, a dissenter could not send his son to either of the Universi-
720
ties, for, before they could take a degree, it was absolutely necessary that they declared their adherence to the doctrines of the Established Church.
The vote agreed to. The House resumed.
It being three o'clock, the House adjourned; and, in the evening sitting, again went into a Committee of Supply.
On the Motion, that 70,875 l. for the salaries of Consuls-General, Consuls, and Vice-Consuls for the ensuing year, be granted,
Mr. Humeobserved, that the contingent expenses connected with this grant amounted to 6,500 l. which was charged for the moiety of expenses incurred for chaplains, chapels, hospitals, and burial-grounds, in foreign countries. He had reason to doubt whether this was a wise grant. He understood that clergymen who had livings in this country, but were residing abroad, were in the habit of getting representations signed by the English residents in those countries, stating, that if the Government would pay one moiety of the expense of employing a chaplain to perform divine service for them, they would themselves pay the other. He was likewise informed, that when Government consented to pay one moiety, the English residents abroad refused to pay the other; but the clergymen did not complain of this, as their object was answered by obtaining the grant from Government. He thought, that the Committee ought not to lend itself to this plan of enabling our countrymen to live comfortably in exile abroad. At Lisbon, Rio de Janeiro, and some other places, where we had consuls, the expense of providing a chaplain was defrayed by the English merchants of those places. He thought, that that should be the case generally. He was happy to find, from the statement annexed to this estimate, that the noble Lord had not filled up certain consulships which had become vacant, because they were not wanted, that he had reduced the salaries of several vice-consuls, and that he had promised to reduce still more as opportunity offered.
Viscount Palmerstonsaid, that he could have no interest in making such appointments in places where chaplains were not wanted. He always took the recommendation of the residents at the place, liable, however, to the Bishop of London's approbation of the professional character of the chaplain recommended. A chaplain was appointed at every place where a consul was resident, under the notion that

721
the existence of a sufficiently extensive British community to require a chaplain, was proved by the fact of a consul being appointed by the Government to watch over their interests. He made a point of seeing that the moiety subscribed by the British residents was paid to the chaplain before he granted a farthing to him out of the public revenue. It was the intention of Government to withdraw consuls from all places where they were not required; and, as a proof that that intention was not to waste itself in mere words, he instanced the three consuls whom he had withdrawn from ports in the United States. The Committee would scarcely believe how numerous the representations were which he received from the mercantile part of the community, demanding that consuls should be appointed in places where they did not exist at present. He wished it to be distinctly understood, on the one hand, that he would not hesitate to withdraw consuls from those places in which they were not wanted; and, on the other hand, that he should not be reluctant to appoint new consuls in those places where a new distribution of trade rendered them necessary.
Mr. Cobbettobjected to paying the consuls by salaries instead of fees. When they were paid by salaries, the consuls were generally absent from their posts, and took no interest in the business of the merchants trading with the port at which they were stationed. It was quite different when the consuls were remunerated by fees proportioned to their activity in the discharge of their duties. He also wished to be informed whether there were any chaplains attached to the consulships which we had in the United States?
Viscount Palmerstonasserted, that the statement which had just been made by the hon. member for Oldham was not warranted by fact. The consuls might sometimes be absent from their post, owing to ill health, or to family circumstances, but generally they were at their posts, performing the duties with which Government had intrusted them. He defended the system of salaries, and contended, that it was better to throw the charge of keeping up our consular establishments upon the general revenue, than upon the private commerce of the country. He was not aware that any payment was made by Government, on account of chaplains employed in the ports of the United States.
Mr. George F. Youngrose to ask why so high a salary as 1,500 l. a-year was
722
paid to our Consul General at Hamburgh? The salary paid to that consul was higher than the salary paid to any other of our consuls, save those employed in the states of South America, whose emoluments were high beyond all proportion.
Viscount Palmerstonsaid, that the Consul General at Hamburgh was also a diplomatic agent to the Hanseatic towns. In point of fact, he was more of a diplomatic than of a commercial agent; and his salary was fixed more in reference to the salaries of the diplomatic servants than to those of the commercial agents of the country. The hon. Member had adverted to the salaries paid to our consuls in South America, which he had denounced as extravagant and enormous. Now, the hon. Member ought to recollect that in countries where the precious metals were produced as they were in South America, money was of less value, with regard to commodities, than it was in this country. He must take that opportunity of saying, that he had inquired into the case of the reverend Thomas Penrose, who was receiving a diplomatic pension, and who had formerly been attacked by the hon. member for Oldham. That gentleman had served his country, from the year 1791 to the year 1820, in a diplomatic capacity. He had served in Russia, in Prussia, and in Italy; and, during his residence in Italy, he had the good fortune to render a very signal service to the commercial interests of this country. By the timely intelligence which he had, some how or other, obtained of the movements of the French troops, and which he instantly communicated to our merchants at Leghorn, he enabled them to carry off property to the amount of 500,000 l., which would have been lost within twenty-four hours afterwards, if that intelligence had not been given them. Mr. Penrose at that time was not in orders, and it was not until he had quitted the diplomatic service that he had taken orders.
Mr. Claysaid, that, high as the salary of the Consul-General at Hamburgh was, it was not so high as the salary of the Consul-General at Morocco, or at Algiers, or at Tunis. The two first of these consuls had 1,800 l., and the last 1,600 l. a-year.
Viscount Palmerstonsaid, that the salaries given to our ministers were not more than would enable them to live respectably and decently in that society in which they must move, in order to perform well the duties assigned to them. As to the American ministers, he would say, that they got

723
a double salary for the first year, to meet the expenses of the outfit,—that was, they received three-years' salary for two years' service, after which time there was generally a change of ministers; but it had been admitted by the American Secretary for Foreign Affairs, that the ministers from that country to other states were underpaid.
Mr. Cobbettthought that the average service of the American ministers was four years. They were, in general, very clever men, and it was proved in their cases that high salaries were not necessary to the efficient performance of the duties of Ministers. At the same time he did not wish to see our foreign ministers underpaid. As to the case of the reverend Mr. Penrose, it appeared from the returns before the House, that he was Chargé d' Affaires only from May to October, 1800. That was only five months, though the noble Lord had said, that he had been in the public service twelve years. If the return was wrong, it was not his fault. He should like to know when he became a clergyman. It was certain he had been receiving the incomes of two livings for twenty-years, besides his pension.
Mr. Humeremarked it was strange, that though the services of this Gentleman had been performed before 1800, he had not received his pension till 1812.
Lord Palmerstonsaid, that he knew no more of it than from the documents which he found in his office. Amongst those was a letter from Mr. Wyndham, in which he stated that Mr. Penrose had been his private secretary for ten years, during which he was engaged in diplomatic missions. It was not stated that he had been Charge d' Affaires more than the time stated in the return.
The Motion agreed to.
On a Resolution, that a sum not exceeding 13,150 l. be granted for the salaries and expenses of the Commissioners of public charities to 1834,
Mr. Tookeobjected to the amount of this vote. The Commissioners had a salary of 800 l. each, besides an allowance for travelling expenses. He thought that if those large allowances were continued, it would protract the business of the commission to an immense extent. These commissioners had already cost the country upwards of 50,000 l. [Mr. Hume: Ay, more than 150,000 l.] That would afford a still stronger ground for limiting the expenses. He would, therefore, propose to reduce the
724
vote by the sum of 2,500 l., so as to cut off the travelling expenses.
Mr. Humewould suggest to his hon. friend to take a different course, and to object to the vote altogether. He did not see why the country should be called upon to pay these Commissioners 800 l. a-year each, when the same number might be selected from retired Commissioners of several departments who were now receiving retiring pensions. There were, for instance, the seven retired Commissioners of Stamps, who were as well able to perform public duties as he was, and better. These Commissioners, it was found five years ago, could not agree as to the manner of discharging their duties, so that three of them could scarcely be got together to perform the public business. Instead of dismissing the whole, as it would have been perfectly right to do, the late Government pensioned them all off on retiring allowances, and appointed seven more in their stead, though three would have been found abundantly sufficient to do the business. Now, what he would suggest was, that the Commissioners of charities, and Commissioners for other purposes which might become necessary should be selected from such retired public officers, and thus an immense saving of expense would be made, and the business be as well done.
Mr. Spring Ricesaid, that the appointment of these Commissioners of charities was by Act of Parliament, and therefore the Government could not be blamed for continuing them. They had done what they could to lessen the expense over which the Treasury had control, by diminishing the salaries from 1,000 l. to 800 l. each. He admitted the principle laid down by his hon. friend, that where the Government could find amongst the retired public servants men competent to the discharge of important public duties, they should select them instead of appointing men who had not before been employed and the Government had acted upon that principle by selecting 700 persons who had retired on allowances, and giving them appointments, by which a considerable saving had been made to the public but it did not follow that a retired public officer was always competent to fill new situations which might be required. A man, for example, might have been a very efficient Commissioner of Stamps, and not fit to be appointed a Commissioner of public charities. He would admit that amongst the retired

725
Commissioners of Stamps, there was one individual of whose great learning and talents he could not speak too highly, but this could not be said of all retired Commissioners.
Mr. Harveythought, that 800 l. a-year could not be considered too much for barristers who gave up their practice as such, in order to attend to their duties as Commissioners; but in the present case, he thought the Commissioners were more than paid for what they did; for, in fact, in their circuits through the country, they consulted more their own bodily disorders than they did the business for which they were paid. There were already about sixty volumes of Reports, and yet there were few, if any, counties, in which the inquiry was completed. If one wished to examine into the charities of any particular county, he had to search for them through many volumes, where parts appeared. The cause of this was, that instead of taking one county, and going through with it, they spread themselves from time to time over several counties, according as their bodily necessities or their tastes dictated. When they met in London, one said, "I should like to be this year in the neighbourhood of Harrowgate, the waters of which will be good for my scrofula." Another desired to take advantage of the hot wells of Buxton, and a third would like to avail himself of the bracing air of Brighton; and in this way the inquiries were disjointed, and would cost the country an immense sum before they were completed. They had already cost the country a quarter of a million. It appeared from the inquiries already made, though half the counties of England had not yet been gone through, that the sums applicable to education in those counties in which inquiries had been made amounted to 600,000 l. a-year, and that there were 2,000,000 l. of money in the hands of trustees. This was a sum which, if properly inquired into, and prudently applied, would be fully sufficient to give education to every child in the country, without any additional expense.
Amendment withdrawn, and vote agreed to.
On the question, that 55,967 l. be granted to his Majesty for defraying the charges of retired allowances, and superannuations of persons having been employed in public offices, and in the public service,
Mr. Claywas of opinion, that the system of retired allowances and superannuations
726
was so radically bad, that no improvement could be made in it. He disapproved of allowances to persons, no matter in what service they had been, whether in the army or navy. The principle should be given up, and nobody should be paid except those who were efficient, and actively employed. He did not wish that existing interests should be touched, but he wished to see a prospective plan laid down on the principle he advocated.
Lord Althorpwished it to be known, that in every appointment made by the present Government, a special agreement had been made, by which five per cent was deducted from the salary of the office towards the Superannuation Fund; and, further, that persons accepting those offices should be subject to any arrangements to be made by Parliament regarding both salaries and superannuations.
Mr. Humeasked why a superannuation allowance had been given to a Mr. Brownrigg?
Mr. Spring Ricesaid, that with regard to Mr. Brownrigg, he had been Secretary of the Inland Navigation Board. The Government had considered it expedient to abolish the office, and it was on that account he had been allowed 300 l. a-year. He (Mr. Rice) was convinced, that in place of this allowance being a burthen to the public, it was a saving. The officers of the Inland Navigation Board were not entitled to a superannuation allowance, because their duties were of a temporary nature; but in this case Mr. Brownrigg had been appointed to the office thirty-three years ago. At the time of his appointment, he was a civil engineer in good practice, and was obliged to abandon his profession on taking the situation, and at the age of eighty-four he was allowed this retiring allowance. In all other cases the officers of this Board had been refused any allowances, although strong claims had been made in behalf of some of them. But when they found a man who had abandoned his profession for the service of the public, and had continued in that service for thirty-three years, could they permit him, when the office was abolished, to be left perhaps to starve, at his advanced age? In this case, too, there would be no additional expense put on the country, but only a small diminution of the intended saving. He thought the House would be of opinion, that the Government had not done wrong in this case; and he felt convinced, that the statement he had made of

727
the services of Mr. Brownrigg would be satisfactory both to the House and the country.
Mr. Humewas ready to admit any just claim of humanity, especially when attended with length of service to the public; but he had been informed, that Mr. Brownrigg was a man of independent fortune.
Mr. Edward Ruthvensaid, that Mr. Brownrigg kept his carriage, and lived in good style, and had been agent for some years for the Marquess of Downshire.
Lord Althorpsaid, that if Mr. Brownrigg were found on inquiry to be in the circumstances stated by the hon. member for Kildare, his allowance might still be rescinded. He wished to explain to the House the system which he had followed in regard to the abolition of offices. There were two ways in which they could be abolished. The one was by waiting till the office became vacant by the death of the person holding it; the other, by abolishing the office at once, and making an allowance to the person who held it, for the loss of his situation. The course which he had followed was the latter. He wished the public to have a part of the benefit of the abolition at once; and the course had another good effect—it prevented all danger of the office being filled up when it did happen to fall vacant.
Mr. Robinsonsaid, that if the system of granting superannuations were abolished altogether, persons holding offices would then save as much out of their salaries as would make a provision for their old age, but that as long as the system of granting them in any cases was followed, claims would continue to be made, which, in some cases, it might be difficult to withstand. He hoped, that superannuations would be done away with altogether.
Sir James Grahamhad already stated his intention of bringing forward a Bill on this subject next Session. He hoped, therefore, that the business would not be delayed any longer by a continuance of the discussion, as the Session was near its close, and much business had yet to be done.
Mr. Cobbettsaid, that the Estimates ought to have been brought forward in the middle of the Session.
Lord Althorpapproved of their being brought forward early in the Session, but circumstances had prevented the Government from bringing them forward at an earlier period of this Session.
Sir Edward Knatchbull: I hope, then, that we are to understand, that no circumstances
728
will again prevent the Government from bringing them forward in the early part of the next Session?
Vote agreed to.
On the Motion to grant a sum of 56,000 l. for printing the Acts of Parliament, &.c,
Mr. Humewas glad to observe the immense saving that had taken place in this department, and he was happy to have the opportunity of giving the Government the credit of it. The thanks of the country were due to the Government for what they had done, and if some recommendations which had been given to the Government were acted on, a much greater saving might yet take place. Acts of Parliament which had before cost 4d. a sheet, were now to be had (and the circumstance ought to be universally known) at 1½d. a sheet. The consequence was, that the cost of delivering these Acts of Parliament to the Magistrates was much diminished. By the way, he objected to the continuance of that system of delivering copies of the Acts of Parliament to the Magistrates. He was not satisfied that they were fairly delivered. There was no evidence given of the arrival of the copies, and, for aught that was known, all that money might be thrown away. He thought it should be left to the Magistrates to provide themselves. He hoped, that the precedent which had been set, with reference to Acts of Parliament, would now be followed with regard to Parliamentary Papers, and that they would be sold, for the money thus obtained would be a great saving to the public. There was another head of expense to which he wished to call the attention of the House. It was that of printing the Journals of that House. There were now 62,000 volumes in store, not one-half of them was ever used, and yet the expense of reprinting them amounted to no less a sum than 89,000 l. He hoped the Government would not allow the Journals to be printed beyond what was needed for the two Houses, with a small surplus, and that the practice of supplying Members who sat for a single fortnight in that House would be put an end to. If these things were done, they would lead to a reduction of one-half the expenditure.
Vote agreed to.
On the proposition to vote 18,700 l. 18 s. 6d. for the civil expenses of our North American establishments,
Mr. Humeexpressed a hope, that the whole amount of the expenses of the

729
religious establishments in those colonies would be withheld. He thought, that the income of the Catholic Bishop of Quebec ought not to be paid by this country. The religious establishments of those colonies, unless the Government meant to assimilate them to Ireland, ought not to be a burthen on the people of England.
Mr. Secretary Stanleysaid, that the expense would not be greater than at present, as the reserved lands for the clergy would in the" course of time be sufficient for their maintenance. The grant to the Catholic Bishop had been long sanctioned by Parliament, and was given to that prelate in lieu of his former revenue. He was glad the hon. Member had mentioned the name of the Protestant Bishop of Quebec, as it gave him an opportunity of stating a circumstance as rare as it was honourable to that excellent prelate. He believed, that nearly the whole of his income was devoted to the benefit of those over whom he presided. He would also state, that such had been the increase of the number of Protestants in Canada, in consequence of emigration thither, that the Bishop of Quebec had made an application to Government to have a suffragan Bishop appointed for Upper Canada, but not at any expense to this country; for in the most disinterested manner he offered to give up 1,000 l. a-year out of his own income of 3,000 l. to pay the suffragan. He, however, had felt it necessary to decline the offer, as it might lead to expectations which could not be realized, for after the death of the Bishop of Quebec there were no funds from which the 1,000 l. could be paid. The offer, however, was not the less generous and praiseworthy on the part of the right reverend prelate.
Mr. Laboucheresaid, that the Roman Catholic parochial clergy in Canada were well provided for. They were comfortably situated, and their incomes arose out of tithes. It was different with the Bishops; if they should be deprived of their incomes they would be reduced to almost a state of poverty. On principle, however, he agreed, that the sooner the supporting of those ecclesiastical establishments was got rid of, the better it would be, not only for this country but for those establishments themselves. He did wish, that faith should not be broken with those ecclesiastics who had been induced to migrate on the promise of being provided for by this country. He trusted the hon. member for Middlesex would not persist in depriving of his
730
emoluments a person respected in the lower province of Canada.
Vote agreed to.
Lord Althorpsaid, that as the next Resolution which he had to move was new, he thought it necessary to explain why he considered it his duty to bring it forward. He was aware, that where money was advanced by the Government for the purpose of forwarding education, it was frequently mischievous—and that it was more desirable to leave schools to be supported by private subscription than public money. But in setting new schools on foot—especially in building school-houses—subscriptions were frequently deficient, and it was for the purpose of building new school-houses that he would now propose that a sum of 20,000 l. be granted. This sum he proposed should be placed at the disposal of the Treasury, but no part of it should be ex pended but at the suggestion of the two great School Societies of the kingdom—namely, the National School Society and the Lancasterian School Society. He thought, that the House would approve of the proposal. The noble Lord concluded by moving, that a sum not exceeding 20,000 l. be granted by his Majesty in aid of private subscriptions for the erection of school-houses for the education of the poorer classes in Great Britain,
Mr. George F. Youngcould not hear the name of Lancaster mentioned without expressing a regret, that a person who had done so much for his fellow-men should be allowed to pine in exile and in poverty. He hoped that something might be done in his behalf.
Sir Robert Inglishad never heard an Estimate brought forward in that House with greater surprise than the present. It was the commencement of a new system, the extent of which they could not know. He could not but express his surprise, that such a proposition should have been brought forward without notice, at the very end of the Session, and at two o'clock in the morning. He was not prepared, however, to oppose the Motion; but he thought the noble Lord ought to delay it.
Lord Morpethcould not but thank the noble Lord for the proposition, which, in his opinion, would be highly beneficial.
Mr. Humewould oppose the Motion, but not on the ground assumed by the hon. Baronet. He opposed it because bethought the plan of giving assistance to schools bad, and there would be no end to the demands for assistance from all parts of the country.

731
The result would be, that it would give dissatisfaction instead of being of service. He would suggest to the noble Lord the propriety of postponing the Resolution till some plan was formed which would extend to the community in general, or, at all events, till some inquiry could be made as to the propriety of the grant.
Lord Althorpquite agreed with the hon. Member, that the giving of assistance to schools after they were established was not proper, but the object of this grant was to give assistance towards building school-houses.
The Vote agreed to—The House resumed.

PROSECUTIONS FOR STAMP DUTIES.
Mr. Hume, in moving for leave to bring in a Bill for the repeal of the Act 60 George 3rd, cap, 10 one of the Six Acts, said, that he would not detain the House at that late hour by bringing forward any arguments in favour of the measure. He would refer hon. Members to the speeches of the members of the Government against the Six Acts, for better arguments than he could bring. He hoped, that late as the period of the Session was, the noble Lord would not object to his bringing in this Bill. He would therefore simply move, that leave be given to bring in a Bill for the repeal of the Act 60th George 3rd.
Lord Althorpsaid, that it would be impossible, at that late period of the Session, that any Bill on this subject could pass into a law. He should therefore consider it his duty to oppose the Motion, although he, as well as the hon. Member, felt, that there were several points in those Acts which were objectionable. He thought the better course to pursue would be, to bring in a Bill to amend, and not to repeal the Acts; for although there were many parts of them which were objectionable, there were others which ought to be continued. He thought it proper, that the subject should be taken into consideration, and he would take it into consideration during the recess, in order that he might be able to bring in a Bill at the commencement of the next Session, to amend the Acts. He hoped, therefore, that the hon. Member would not persevere in his Motion.
Mr. Hume, after what had fallen from the noble Lord, would not press his Motion.
Motion withdrawn.

MINUTES.
Bills. Read a second time:—Notaries Public; Fines and Recoveries; Lunacy Commissions.—Committed:—Royal Burghs (Scotland); Grand Juries (Ireland).—Read a third time:—Parish Apprentices; Militia.
Petitions presented. By Lord KENYON, from several Places, in favour of the Factories' Regulation Bill.—By the Marquess of LANSDOWN, from Glasgow; and by the LORD CHANCELLOR, also from Glasgow, for Extending to that Place the Provisions of the Royal Burghs (Scotland) Bill.

POST OFFICE.
Lord Ellenboroughpresented a Petition from persons interested in the trade with the United States, praying for an emendation of the laws relating to the inland postage charged upon letters going from the metropolis through Liverpool and the other out-ports to the United States. The statement of the petitioners was, that they had hitherto enjoyed the privilege of sending such letters otherwise than through the Post-office, but that lately the Postmaster General had enforced the laws on the subject, and done away with the practice. He did not, indeed, see how the noble Duke (the Duke of Richmond) could do otherwise according to the existing laws; but it was most desirable that the utmost facilities should be afforded to the transmission of letters.
The Duke of Richmondhad been anxious that a petition of this kind should be presented, that he might have the opportunity of explaining the circumstances and motives which had caused him to pursue the course to which the noble Lord had
712
referred. He must admit that there was no duty more imperative upon the Post-master General than that of giving every possible facility to the mercantile intercourse of the country; but the prayer of these petitioners was that they might be permitted to send letters for the United States through Liverpool or the other out-ports, without going through the Post-office; and he must say, that he thought that compliance with their prayer in this respect would lead to considerable loss to the revenue. If the privilege in question were granted to the merchants of London, there could be no reason why the Man chester and Birmingham merchants, and the merchants in all other parts of the kingdom, should not exercise it also: and the consequence of conceding the principle would be, that of giving up in future of all such postages upon letters going abroad. It was not true that the Post-office had neglected to forward mail bags by the fast-sailing ships. In the last year 4,888 ship letters had been forwarded from London, and from Liverpool 1,220 had been sent. Nor was it true that the privilege of sending letters by other conveyances than those provided by the Post-office had been possessed by the merchants of London during twenty years. The question was whether or not letters should be sent by these merchants by stage-coaches, instead of through the Post-office, and if a Post-office was to exist at all, he (the Duke of Richmond) did not see why these petitioners should be favoured to the exclusion of others. If the House were prepared to say, that a tax upon letters should no longer exist, of course he must bow to their decision; but if taxes were to be reduced at all, other branches of the revenue might be found in which the advantages of reduction would be more considerable. He could not sit down without observing, that attacks had lately been made in another place upon the department at the head of which he was, to which he had not had the opportunity of replying. He had made the most ample inquiries, however, on the subjects to which those attacks referred, and were it not that as a Peer he could not there reply to arguments used in the other House, he was in a situation to contradict and correct statements made by the hon. member for Greenock, respecting which he must say, that he did not think he had been treated by that hon. Member with the candour which one Gentleman had a right to expect from another.

CHINA TRADE.
Lord Aucklandsaid, that this Bill came within the Standing Order relative to Bills concerning trade, and therefore he moved, that it be referred to a Select Committee.
Lord Ellenboroughconcurred in the Motion, and he was anxious to draw the attention of the House to a particular clause in this Bill, with regard to which he should feel it necessary to move an instruction to the Select Committee which the noble Lord was about to propose. It had been a long-established custom of that House to waive any inquiry respecting anything relating to the imposition of taxes in Bills that came from the other House of Parliament. That such a forbearance on the part of that House on all occasions, and under all circumstances, was for the public benefit, appeared to him to be rather doubtful, but at the same time he would admit, seeing how long the custom had existed, that it should not be proposed to their Lordships to depart from it, unless under very extreme circum-stances indeed. Cases, however, might occur in which it would be the bounden duty of their Lordships to interfere for the protection of the public interests, and the constitution of Parliament. Now, such an extreme case appeared to him to occur in this Bill. In this Bill the power of levying taxes was delegated to the King in Council, without any limitation whatever. The King in Council was empowered under this Bill to appoint officers at Can-ton, with powers that were not specified, to give them such salaries as he might choose, and those officers would have the power of levying what duties they pleased upon the goods of his Majesty's subjects trading to Canton. They would have the power of levying those duties in a foreign country—in China. He was not aware of any such instance of legislation on the part of the Parliament of this country, and with a view to discover whether there had been any similar instance of legislation, he would move that it be an instruction to the Committee to search for precedents for the purpose of ascertaining whether that House had ever passed a Bill delegating to the King in Council the power of levying duties on his Majesty's subjects. It would be found on looking at the probable amount of those duties that this was no trifling matter. The expense of the proposed Superintendents at Canton, with the Judge and the officers connected with his Court, would be likely to be about 27,000 l. or from that to 30,000 l. per annum. Now,
714
the trade between the port of Canton, India, and this country, would not for some time, at least, exceed 54,000 tons annually. This expenditure, therefore, would cause the imposition of a duty of 10 s. a-ton on that trade—that was to say, as the vessels trading there generally averaged 300 tons, that his Majesty would be empowered to levy a duty of 150 l. each on the vessels so employed. He could not avoid expressing his surprise that a clause of this kind should have been passed in the present House of Commons, the more especially as so many persons interested in the trade and commerce of the country had been by the Bill of last year introduced into that House. They had been told, that on account of the introduction of such persons, they might expect greater vigilance and attention in the present than in all former Parliaments to the rights of the people and the privileges of their Representatives; and it was, therefore, not a little extraordinary that in the first important measure that had been passed by the present House of Commons a power was given to the Crown, without any limitation whatever, which had never been given to it by any former Parliament—the power of levying taxes according to its discretion on the subjects of the Crown. Of this he was certain, that there was not one of the constituents of any of the members of the present House of Commons that ever intended that such a power should be delegated to the Crown.
Lord Aucklandsaid, that he was as much surprised as the noble Lord that the clause in question contained no limitations. In the clause as it stood in the Bill when originally introduced, the power proposed to be given by it was limited, and why that limitation had been afterwards omitted he did not know. In introducing those Superintendents as a substitute for officers that had through usage exercised similar powers at Canton for a long period of time, it was thought necessary, for the protection of the public interest, and the interest of trade, to give a very large discretionary power to the Government on the subject. In the Committee which he was about to propose, he should introduce a clause for limiting in some degree that power, and, therefore, it would be unnecessary for the noble Lord to persevere in his Motion for an instruction to the Committee to search for precedents, as no precedent of the kind could certainly be found.
Lord Ellenboroughwould, under such circumstances, withdraw his Motion.
Lord Aucklandremarked, that the noble Lord was correctly informed when he estimated the expense of those Superintendents at from 27,000 l. to 30,000 l. per annum, but he believed that a duty of 10 s. upon every 100 l. worth of goods would be sufficient to meet the expense.
Bill to be referred to a Select Committee.