HOUSE OF COMMONS. Tuesday, February 20. KENNET AND AVON CANAL BILL.] On the order of the day for the second reading of the bill to increase, alter, and regulate the rates of tonnage and wharfage, cranage, and other duties granted by the 34th of the king, for making the Kennet and Avon Canal, Mr. Lockhart opposed this bill, the object of which, he said, was, to enforce additional tolls on boats navigating the canal in question, on the ground that no parliamentary reason had been assigned in the preamble, for its introduction. If the persons who undertook to form this canal could not obtain all the profits which they anticipated when they first entered upon the speculation, he thought that was no reason for levying a new burthen on the public, to reimburse them for their own imprudence. If parliament agreed to such a principle, there would be an end to all economy in such undertakings, and the strongest inducements would be afforded to foolish and ill-founded speculations. The hon. gentleman concluded by moving, that the bill should be read a second time this day six months. Mr. Dickenson also spoke against the bill. It was, he said, an attempt to impose a tax upon the buyers of one of the necessaries of life, the coals conveyed by the canal. Mr. Charles Dundas spoke in favour of the bill. He observed, that this canal had been formed at an expense of 1,200,000. and that the old shareholders of 40%. each, received but 15s. per annum for their profit. He trusted, that in looking at the utility of such a work, the House would not consider it unreasonable to allow these gentlemen the means of reimbursing themselves for the capital which they had sunk. Mr. Peel observed that the objection of the hon. gentleman who spoke first had not been satisfactorily answered. There certainly was no parliamentary ground Mr. Neville supported the amendment. Mr. Protheroe was also against the bill, and accused the company of a breach of faith towards the Bristol dock company. Mr. Gordon opposed the bill. principal object, he said, was, to acquire a coal monopoly. Its Mr. Preston spoke in favour of the bill, and submitted, that unless the House encouraged such speculations as these, there would be an end of all public improve-. ments. bill. Mr. Shaw Le Fevre was hostile to the The House then divided. ponement, 81; Noes, 19. consequently lost. For the postThe bill was MOTIONS FOR PAPERS RELATING TO Mr. INCREASE OF SALARIES, &c.] Bennet moved, "That an humble Address be presented to his royal highness the Prince Regent, that he will be graciously pleased to give directions that there be laid before this House, the substance of every patent, commission, sign manual, or other instrument, under which any place in the West. Indian or other colonies is held by persons. not resident therein, with the names of the holder and his deputy, the salary and average profits of the place and the date of the appointment."-Ordered. Lord John Russell wished to inquire of the chancellor of the exchequer, whether any augmentation had been made to the salaries of the commissioners of excise and customs in London, since the 1st of January, 1815? The Chancellor of the Exchequer replied,' that he must pursue the same course as on a former evening. If the noble lord wished for the information he could move for it. Lord John Russell then moved, “That there be laid before this House, an account of all augmentations which have been made in the salaries of the boards of customs and excise since the 1st day of January 1815, with the dates of such augmentations." Mr. Brougham said, before the question was put, he wished to make some inquiry respecting the patronage exercised by those boards in appointing to certain offices connected with them. The Chancellor of the Exchequer replied, that the hon. and learned gentleman could move for the information he required [a laugh].. Mr. Brougham. Then it is to be understood by the House, that the chancel(3 B) lor of the exchequer will answer no ques-¡ tions upon financial subjects which relate to the taking of money out of the pockets of the people. to. The motion of the noble lord was agreed offices which they were, no doubt, actively reducing on the one hand, and of the salaries they were reducing on the other? And if they were augmenting the salaries of the public officers, instead of diminishing them, which now seemed to be their only real pursuit, could they not at once boldly declare the extent to which they were violating that pledge of eco Mr. Brougham then moved, "That there be laid before this House, an account of the number of officers belonging to the revenue cutters and of the authori-nomy, which they had put into the mouthTM ties under which they are appointed: also, of the Prince Regent, on the first day of a copy of any treasury minutes or corres- the session? pondence between the treasury and the revenue boards relating to the said cutters since the 1st of January, 1815."-Ordered. Sir C. Monck said, he had a question to ask, and he should like to try whether the right hon. gentleman would be more indulgent to him than he had been towards others. He wished to know, whether it was in the contemplation of government to grant any augmentation of salaries to the officers of the navy board? The Chancellor of the Exchequer replied, that there would be no difficulty in giving the information required by the hon. baronet: but he could not take upon himself to do so, without giving offence to those gentlemen to whom he had refused similar information. Lord Castlereagh said, if the hon. and learned gentleman would be so good as to wait, the information which he required would be laid before parliament in a very short time, under the provisions of an act expressly provided for that purpose, and which imposed a duty upon his majesty's government to inform parliament, annually, of all augmentations and diminutions which had taken place in the public departments. He could not himself see under what view of expediency those questions were so frequently put. It was a very novel mode of procedure, and one which he was of opinion could. be productive of no public utility whatever. The information, too, which the hon. and learned gentleman had requested, was not a little singular; for not content. with confining his question to the augmentations which had taken place, he had gone still further, and required to know what were the augmentations contem Sir C. Monck then moved, "That there be laid before this House, an account of all the augmentations which have been made in the salaries of officers in the navy board department since the 1st of Janu-plated by his majesty's government. In ary 1815, with the dates of the same." his motion, however, he had acted with. more caution, and had restricted himself to the augmentations alone, without requiring a detail of the contemplative views of ministers. It was satisfactory to find that what was done, was done in a busi Mr. Brougham would fain suggest to his majesty's government, whether, although they might refuse to answer all questions of a difficult or an intricate nature, there was not some information which they might give, without infringingness-like manner, and that gentlemen any of those maxims of state prudence came down with all their questions reby which they were guided. Was it duced into writing. The subjects would necessary, he would ask, that gentlemen, thus come forward in a regular way, and when they came down to require expla- the information required would be given nation on particular subjects, should be in an official shape, which would prevent driven to the necessity of discussing the all those mistakes that might be expected propriety of asking information, before from answers given without due considerathey could expect to receive it-and tion. Upon the whole, however, he that too upon topics intimately connected thought the system of putting those spewith the expenses of the country? Could cies of questions was incompatible with not his majesty's ministers, in order to the ancient usages of parliament, and to prevent all this inconvenience, come down those practices which had been so long prepared with an account of all the re- and so properly observed. He was satrenchments and reductions which they tisfied they only tended to embarrass, and were making in the expenses of the pub-not to facilitate public business. lic from day to day? Could they not furnish to the House a statement of the Mr. Brougham said, that the very objection which the noble lord had made to the terms of his hon. friend's question, was the foundation upon which that question was to be justified. The noble lord had deprecated his asking what was in the contemplation of his majesty's government? Why, this was the very point at issue; it was upon the answer to this question every thing turned; for if the House was to wait until the return alluded to by the noble lord was made, the augmentations meant to be condemned would have taken place, the new officers would be appointed, and when called on to resign their situations, they would instantly exclaim with lord Arden, " It is my vested interest, my freehold estate!" To prevent this, and for that purpose alone, the question of his hon. friend was framed. Lord Castlereagh observed, that the hon. and learned gentleman must know, that a mere increase of salary to a public officer, was not a vested interest, notwithstanding the affectation of activity on the part of the hon. and learned gentleman, no possible benefit could arise from the course he was pursuing. Mr. Horner reprobated the very unusual tone which the noble lord had assumed-a tone which the House were unaccustomed to hear from any hon. member, let his situation be what it might. He was convinced, that there was no gentleman in that House, let him be an opposer or a supporter of administration, but must feel that on such an occasion, when the public were ground down by distress, and when the necessity and the determination to economise had been proclaimed from the throne, the noble lord had assumed a tone which that House ought not to tolerate, and which was quite inconsistent with the character of a minister. On a recent night, when the wretched state to which the grievous imposition of taxes had reduced the country, was represented to the House, the noble lord insulted not the House, but the people. It was impossible for him to forget the expression used by the noble lord on that occasion. In speaking of the popular conduct, he termed it" an ignorant impatience for the relaxation of taxation." On another grave occasion, when the noble lord opening the debate, had his choice of topics, one of the subjects which he chose was the sensibility of the people to questions in which their pecuniary interests were concerned, and he talked of them as apprehensive of being "touched on the score of money." This night, when an hon. gentleman was performing one of the most important duties of a member of parliament-a duty which he trusted would never be abandonedand was urging the noble lord to state what evidence, at the expiration of three weeks from the period at which the Crown pledged itself to economy, appeared to show that that pledge had been redeemed, he received the question with the tone which must have been condemned by all who heard it. And then the noble lord made an observation, which he presumed was considered satisfactory-namely, that if a question were not answered by his majesty's ministers, it might be reduced to writing in the shape of a motion. Now, it was manifest, that all questions could not be with effect reduced to writing in the shape of a motion. When a return could be made of something actually done, a motion would go to the office to which it was directed with effect; but where no such return could be made, where the question related as to that which it was intended to do, and not to that which was actually done, to ministers alone could it be put with the expectation f. a satisfactory reply. As to the usage of inquiring into what it was in the contemplation of his majesty's government to do, the noble lord must surely have supposed that the House had forgotten all the instances of such questions which had occurred. For his own part, as long as he retained his seat in that House, whenever he suspected that it was intended to increase the burthens of the people, he would inquire into the reality of such intention. It was the privilege of a member of parliament to do so;" and in exer cising that privilege," added Mr. Horner, "I am sure, Sir, I shall not be stopped by you." The House and the country must perfectly understand the reason which induced the noble lord to refuse to answer to the questions which had been put to him. He would have answered them, had he felt that his replies would have been satisfactory to parliament and to the nation. Nothing could be more insufficient than the statement of the no ble lord, that it was provided by act of parliament, that at a late period of the session-the middle of the session at leastthe 25th of March, a return should be made to the House of any diminution or augmentation of official salaries which had taken place in the preceding year, Was this to satisfy the House on the pre rized by the circumstances of the case, when he insinuated, that because the questions which had been put to his majesty's government were unanswered, that therefore his majesty's government were employed, not merely in augmenting the salaries of public officers, but in contem It was curious enough, however, to observe, that the hon. gentlemen opposite were not disappointed at receiving no replies to their questions. On the contrary, they seemed to expect this; for they were all prepared with written motions as substitutes. sent pressing occasion, during a session in which money affairs must become one of the most important duties of parliament-a duty paramount indeed to every other? The House had been told from the throne, that it was the intention of his majesty's government to use every means of diminishing the public expendi-plating the further augmentation of others. ture. From day to day, however, parliament witnessed the increase of the salaries of public officers, during a period of peace, and when the low prices of every article of necessary consumption rendered such augmentation less than ever necessary. He would distinctly state the course which he should feel it his duty to pursue on this subject; and he would do so by an instance. If he were to hear that the treasury had already increased the salaries of the officers of the tax board, he would make a motion for a return stating the fact. But if, on the other hand, he were to hear that the salaries of the officers of the tax-board having already been increased, the commissioners of stamps were applying for a similar augmentation, and that it was in contemplation to give it them, he would not hesitate to take the liberty of asking the right hon. gentleman opposite what were the intentions of his majesty's government on the subject. Lord Castlereagh again rose; but in consequence of a loud cry of " Spoke! spoke!" his lordship sat down. Mr. Vesey Fitzgerald said, that he had hoped the hon. gentlemen opposite would have endeavoured to redeem their character, by allowing his noble friend, who had shown his readiness on the occasion, to reply to the hon. and learned gentleman. After the language which had been used by that hon. and learned gentleman, he was persuaded he would be the last man to prevent his noble friend from being heard. If ever there had been an occasion on which the strict usage of the House might with propriety be departed from, it was surely the present, in which his noble friend had been accused of using language taunting and disrespectful towards hon. members. In making this charge, the hon. and learned gentleman, contrary to all the orders and precedents of the House, had alluded, not alone to an argument used in a former debate, but to the express terms in which that argument had been couched. In the course of his speech the hon. and learned gentleman, notwithstanding the accuracy of his mind, had drawn an inference unautho Mr. Tierney observed, that the inconvenience of the course which had been adopted by ministers was now apparent. His hon. and learned friend's experience of parliament had been comparatively short. He (Mr. Tierney) had had the misfortune of having sat in that House since the year 1789-he called it a misfortune, because it proved that he was so many years older than his hon. and learned friend [A laugh!]. During the whole of that period, he had never heard any minister, from Mr. Pitt in the plenitude of his power, downwards, hesitate to state whether government had taken such steps as those respecting which his majesty's present ministers had been so properly questioned. The House would see the consequence of a strict adherence to parliamentary usage. Both parties got heated. The right hon. gentleman who spoke last talked of his hon. and learned friend, and those who acted with him, redeeming their character. They had lost no character. His hon. and learned friend was perfectly right in calling the noble lord to order, when he attempted to speak twice. He had a right to say to the noble lord, "If you will not answer our questions, then you shall not speak twice on the same motion. If you enforce the strict usage of parliament, we will enforce the strict usage of parliament too." His hon. and learned friend had said, that the noble lord's refusal to proceed must arise from some motives which he did not choose to communicate. He (Mr. Tierney) believed so too; and he believed them to be very wrong motives. With respect to the chancellor of the exchequer, he was afraid that that right hon. gentleman had been in bad company lately; or, he was persuaded that he would not have conducted himself as he had done on this occasion. He was anxious to impress on the House a return stating, according to the directions of an act of parliament, what increase or diminution of salaries has taken place, can be returned to this House, distinguishing each of the offices."-The motion was agreed to. the inconvenience attendant on the refusal to answer questions, by 'making a motion. This would occupy some of the time of the House, for as he was not bound to write the motion himself, he would desire the clerk to take it down. Mr. Tierney proceeded slowly to dictate to the clerk at the table, pausing every three or four words, in a way which excited the general risibility of the House: "That there be laid before the House - an account how than the 25th of March to make the much sooner it is practicable returns.” showing Here the Speaker interposing, observed, that there was already a motion before the House. Mr. Tierney. " Oh! then, Sir, the 'clerk can scratch out what he has written, and begin afresh as soon as the motion before the House shall be disposed of." [A laugh!]. Lord Milton contended, that it was fair to conclude, from the conduct of his majesty's ministers, that it was in their contemplation to make the augmentation of salaries which had been alluded to. Sir John Newport, to prove that a motion would not always produce the information required, stated the circumstances of a motion for an address to the Prince Regent, made on the 20th of April last, and renewed in May, which had not been complied with, although the information it required might have been produced in a single day. The motion was acceded to. Mr. Tierney then proceeded to make his motion, the object of which was to ascertain whether or not it was practicable to lay before the House, at an earlier period than the 25th of March, the account of the increase or diminution that had taken place in the salaries of public officers. He would have put this plain question to the right hon. gentleman, had it been practicable to obtain an answer from him; and if that were practicable, he had no doubt that the answer would have been in the usual terms, namely, that such a return could be made in part, but not altogether. As it was, however, he had no resource but to apply to the clerk. Mr. Tierney then dictated to the clerk the following motion :-"That there be laid before the House an account, showing, according to the best judgment of the officers in the different public departments, how much sooner than the 25th of March Mr. Tierney. I have another motion to make; and as it would be irregular for me to write it myself, I must again apply to the clerk [A laugh]. The Speaker observed, that for the sake of the convenience of the House, it was usual for hon. members to write down their own motions, unless they laboured under some infirmity which prevented them from doing so; in which case they received the assistance of the clerk. Mr. Tierney. The infirmity of the hon. gentlemen on the other side of the House is, that they are dumb [A laugh]. Sir, I move, 66 That there be laid before this House, a return showing the number of men borne and mustered in the different garrisons abroad, from the year 1786 to the year 1791 inclusive, made up to the 25th of December, distinguishing each year and the different garrisons."Agreed to. Sir Robert Heron said, that notwithstanding what had occurred that evening, he would take the liberty of asking the noble lord a question, the circumstances attendant on which were so different from those belonging to any other which had been proposed, that he was not without hope that the noble lord would favour him with a reply. He could assure the right hon. gentleman, the late chancellor of the exchequer for Ireland, that he so little anticipated a refusal from the noble lord, that he was not one of those who were prepared for the alternative by having a motion ready written. The affair was simply this: it had been strongly rumoured that the British ambassadorhe could not say at the court of Lisbon, for court there was none-but the British ambassador at Lisbon had been recalled, and that a successor had been appointed. What he wished to ask the noble lord was, whether, if such a recall had taken place, the individual appointed was to enjoy the same emoluments as the late ambassador? Lord Castlereagh replied, that the mission of the late ambassador to Portugal had terminated a considerable time ago; as soon, indeed, as it was ascertained that the prince regent of that country did not mean to return to his European dominions. With respect to the latter part of the hon. |