members of parliament, in stimulating them to their duty, than to the certainty and the amount of the pecuniary compensation they might have to receive? The hon. mover had doubtless laboured a long time with a commendable perseverance, but he must say that he had yet done nothing. He had himself some objections to the mode pursued by the present Bill, and should have greatly preferred seeing every separate office put to the vote, and a Bill subsequently prepared conformably to that decision. But at least it was incumbent on those who talked of the necessity of remuneration, to shew the reality of the service. So far from believing them to be always concomitant, he was convinced it would be difficult to point out ten in the whole list that partook of this character. The public money was too often given, rather as a consideration for accepting office, than for the labours or the services performed in it. Pensions were allowed on all occasions, however, to those who had filled office, let the period be ever so short; the mere fact of having been in office, being held an indisputable title to a sinecure or a pension for life. Looking at the present situation of the country, he knew not what consequence might ensue, if parliament did not exhibit to the people some proofs, that they had the interests of the country rather than their own at heart. He implored the House therefore, to attend carefully to the real circumstances of the times, and to evince a disposition to protect, and act a guardian part to the people, by adopting at once a vigorous system of retrenchment and economy. Mr. Vansittart opposed the Bill; every provision of which he contended would be inefficacious. The Chancellor of the Exchequer objected so much to the Bill in its general principle, and in its sweeping operation, that he did not conceive it necessary for him to abstain any longer from delivering his opinion. He was sorry to hear that it was conceived by some gentlemen, that he had not acted fairly by the Bill in letting it go through the committee without observation, and delaying until the present stage of it to make any observations upon it. His opinion on the principle of the Bill was, however, well known, as he had never concealed it. As the House appeared to be in some measure pledged to the principle of the Bill, he wished at least, that the hon. gentleman (VOL. XXII.) should carry it through the committee, in order to present it to the House in the most perfect shape that he could bring it to. Now that it had come from the committee, he felt himself bound to state his objections to it, both in the details and in the principle. In considering the details of it, he could not avoid coinciding with his learned friend (the Lord Advocate of Scotland), in considering that the Bill proposed a most inconvenient union of different offices which should rather check each other, as the keeper of the great seal in Scotland, and the office of chief-justice general. He conceived that the idea of retaining many offices, and abolishing their salaries, was rather an extraordinary idea. In the same way the Bill had proposed to incorporate the office of auditorgeneral with that of president of the council, and saving the salary of the former place. Now he could not conceive upon what principle of justice the president of the council could be called on, without any additional remuneration, to take upon himself the responsibility of auditor of the exchequer also. The hon. gentleman said, that the latter office might be discharged, as it had hitherto been discharged, by deputy. Now it appeared to him contrary to every principle of justice, and most absurd to make any man responsible for the conduct of a deputy not of his own appointing. The Bill provided, that the office of clerk of the pells should be united to that of keeper of the privy seal; and yet on a very recent occasion, where money was to be raised, it had appeared, that the deputy clerk of the pells was a check upon the privy seal. After the Bill had stated what offices were to be abolished in Ireland, there was the remarkable proviso, "provided always that no offices shall from henceforward be granted in reversion." Now if all the sinecures were to be abolished, it was evident that nothing would be left of which reversion could be given, as it was most evident that efficient offices could not be so granted. The clerk of the first fruits and the custos brevium were offices in which a fee-simple had been granted, and therefore it was quite useless to talk of making any alteration in them, while it was professed that all vested interests must be protected. As to the law offices now in the disposal of the chief justices, he conceived, that with the present chief justices these were vested interests which could not be taken away from them; and (4 F) a that the labours of the offices, particularly much more influence to the aristocratic feeling would prefer the means of providing for his family, to any provision which which was to be made merely for his own life. No man who could secure a provision for his family by his exertions in private life, would consent to accept of office, unless he had also a prospect held out to him of securing a provision for his family, which one of those sinecure offices might give him. Mr. Bankes certainly was apprised a long time ago of the hostility of the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the principle of this Bill. He thought, however, that it was somewhat extraordinary, and contrary to parliamentary usage, to let the Bill be read a second time, and pass through the Committee, without any observations; and then to come forward in the present stage, and condemn not only the principle of the Bill, but those details which might have been altered in the Committee. He had not expected to have been hampered with this double difficulty: but, however, he should answer as well as he could the objections which he had now beard. The gentlemen from the North had opened a pretty sharp battery upon him; but they really appeared to him not to be able to perceive the distinction between office and salary, or to think it possible that the salary might be saved, up to the ministers of the crown. With regard to its immediate influence in that House, there had been times when such influence had been more openly excited; but could there be a doubt that much of it remained, and continued to be an object. of just suspicion to the people? The present measure, if passed, would have the beneficial effect of purifying the future parliaments of the country. He was really surprised to hear the offices which this Bill proposed to abolish, represented as in some measure the outworks and safeguards which were necessary to the protection of the crown. On the contrary, he rather regarded them as a mill-stone appended to the monarchy, in danger of weighing it to the ground; because these sinecures were become low, degraded, and odious in the estimation of the people. (Hear, hear!) The recent vote of the House, by which the sinecure held by col. M'Mahon was abolished, had raised their character in the eyes of the country. There never was a moment when it was more important to preserve and increase that estimation. Let them now shew that the act to which he had alluded was not the mere effervescence of the moment, but that they were prepared to proceed upon principle to the abolition of sinecures equally useless, and equally odious. He was not one of those who would delude the people with the idea, that the abolitions which he recommended would materially diminish the public burthens; but it would not fail to afford them much satisfaction, when they saw parliament determined, that that only should be expended which was necessary for the public service. He had not expected a debate on the second reading of the Report, much less a browbeating one. His Majesty's ministers might think, from the number of members in the House, they would have an advantage over him on a division, as many of the hon. members were not present when the question was regularly debated; but he was not afraid to meet them on a division, for he knew the sound and the office not abolished. The right hon. gentleman, however, clearly comprehended the distinction; but when he spoke of those offices and their responsibility, he should have recollected that they were rather quasi offices with quasi responsibility, and neither the duties of such offices, nor the responsibility attached to them, appeared to him at all too great to be confined to such men as would usually be appointed deputies. He knew that his Bill was necessarily defective in many parts; and he could have wished to have had the benefit of the right hon. gentleman's observations on the Committee. As to the Scotch places, which it was recommended to incorporate with other places, he was by no means convinced of the justice of the observations made by the Lord Advocate. He believed that those places which had been stated as checks on each other, had never, within the memory of the oldest man, been known to act in any way as checks. The honourable and learned gentleman had represented this measure as likely to overturn all vested and landed rights in Scotland; but he believed that it would appear to the House, that his description was considerably overcharged. The honourable member proceeded to declare, that he knew of no better mode of paying high and efficient offices in the state than by salaries proportioned to their importance. He had conceived, that as the House had formerly agreed to certain resolutions proposed by him, which laid down the principles that certain sinecure offices should be either abolished or regulated, they were bound to support the present Bill, which was in fact formed upon these resolutions. His right honourable friend had intimated an opinion, that the power of the crown had not increased of late years: but was it possible to look at the immense expenditure of the country, -at our great military and naval establishments, at the vast patronage thus placed in the hands of the crown-at the increase of our revenue, and of the number of people employed in its collection ;-ness of his cause. The right hon. gentlewas it possible, he would ask, to look at all these things, without being convinced, that dependence on the crown was extended to all parts of the country, in a degree quite unexampled in former times? (Hear!) It was no light consideration, also, that some of the greatest commercial and corporate bodies in the country were in the habit of looking man, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, had told them, that the power of the crown had not increased; at the same time, staring him in the face, since the New Era had commenced a new office had been made at a large salary. He had not a doubt if the Bill passed into a law, but it would do away with many of the existing corruptions of parliament. Were Mr. Pitt and Mr. Burke living, he was persuaded, they would give their support to the Bill; which did not go to deprive the crown of the power of rewarding merit, but to prevent the public money from being lavished on useless sinecures. He was always of opinion that the crown should hold its supremacy, but he thought the Bill before them was a safeguard to it, particularly when the public were in disgust with sinecures. It was the duty of the House to preserve the public interest. The House had, by a former vote, given the country an earnest of their independence, and would they then, by their vote that night, do away with the pledge? Mr. Courtenay said, in explanation, that in attributing to the hon. gentleman the adoption of a test of merit, he spoke from a note made at the time. He also said, that he had not objected to the abolition of sinecures, except in certain instances, but that his objections were to the principle upon which the substitution was to be established; and in that respect particularly, he charged upon the hon. mover a departure from the principles of Mr. Pitt. Mr. Canning rose and said, that at that late hour, and in the exhausted state of the House, he should only detain them a few minutes; but he was anxious shortly to explain the grounds on which he should vote for the original question. His right hon. friend (Mr. Perceval), had commenced his speech with arguing against the general principles of the Bill; but he could not resist the temptation of introducing some of its minor and petty details, for the purpose of mixing them with its principles, and obtaining the rejection of both together. This was a species of tactics which was not perhaps very unusual; but it would have been fairer to have made a stand against the principle of this Bill on the second reading; and on the other hand his hon. friend might be perfectly right in his objections to some of the minor details of the measure, while he made no way at all against its principles. The right hon. member (Mr. Canning) then commented on some of the arguments of the learned lord who spoke early in the debate, and ridiculed the importance which he attached to the continuance of certain sinecure offices in Scotland. He next alluded to the recommendation of measures of economy from the throne, at the commencement of the present parliament. The nature of the en quiries into the means of diminishing expenditure, then recommended by the crown, could not be mistaken, as the resumption of measures of the same sort as had been carried on in the preceding parliament was particularly specified in the speech from the throne. This, in reality, was a virtual recommendation on the part of the crown of some measure similar to the present, and totally removed the necessity which his right hon. friend supposed to exist, of having a separate recom. mendation of abolition for each of the 200 offices specified in the Bill. His right hon. friend had contended, that these offices were means in the hands of the crown for remunerating high services, and alluring to its employment the talents of unpatrimonied men. He admitted there was a possibility of a set of persons of rank, birth, and high fortune uniting for the purpose of drawing a circle round the throne, and monopolising all the offices of state. It was equally proper that the crown should have the means of averting such contingencies; but was the system of sinecures better calculated to attain that object than the one now proposed, which was to operate by the power of granting pensions? In this point of view the two systems seemed equal; but in another respect, the one was more eligible than the other, inasmuch as public opinion was hostile to sinecures; they were become odious to the people, while this Bill provided that pensions should be openly given and received as the reward of past services. It was public opinion which caused the dif ference; and he argued not on the ground of a diminution of the influence of the crown being necessary, but merely on that of a commutation of its form. He agreed with his right hon. friend in thinking, that the influence of the crown had not increased; or, at least, that it was counterbalanced by the increased wealth of the people, and particularly by that increased spirit of intelligence which was so generally diffused, and which necessarily operated as a check on the crown. concluded by remarking, that though there were some provisions in the Bill from which he dissented, yet he should support it, because he approved of the principle on which it went. He Lord Castlereagh opposed the Bill, as tending to deprive the crown of the power of immediately securing to an individual of talent that which, consistently with his duty to his family, he might require to be secured to him before he would dedicate his time to the public service. It went to deprive the crown of this power, and only left it the means of intimating to such a person, that if in the midst of conflicts with poverty, he could contrive to continue to serve the crown for five years; at the end of that time, be might be rewarded with a pension. He could not think the measure had been correctly described, when it had been represented as merely leading to a commutation of the power of the crown. He thought it unequivocally calculated to effect a great reduction in its power, and to make a retrenchment of its prerogative, inconsistent with the principles of the English monarchy. The House divided For the motion............. .....134 .........123 Majority in favour of the Bill...-1] The Bill was then recommitted. Mr. Wynn proposed to add the office of first commissioner for India affairs to the second class, which was objected to by Mr. Bankes and others, but was carried. He then proposed to include the office of judge advocate general. Mr. Tierney supported the proposition, contending, that such officers were not usually taken from high practice in the law; and that there was no necessity to tempt persons to take them. The Attorney General said, that Mr. Bond was eminent in the circuit, and that the present judge advocate had shewn great professional talent, though he had not been in great practice. Mr. Bankes hoped the hon. and learned gentleman (Mr. Wynn) would not spoil the Bill by such extensions. This office ought to be viewed as a judicial one, and not as political. It would be, therefore, more for its dignity and utility if it were exparliamentary. The Chancellor of the Exchequer saw no difference in the matter, whether the holder were in or out of parliament, as it respected the merit of his services. Mr. Whitbread thought his hon. and learned friend's amendment would overlay the present Bill: the office of first Mr. Manning concurred in the same sentiment. Mr. Wynn did not wish to press his amendment. Mr. Ryder supported it; and the question was put and carried. Mr. Wynn proposed to include the paymaster general, but after some conversation relinquished that amendment. Mr. Long proposed the clerkship of the ordnance for the 4th class. Mr. Bankes had no objection. Mr. Tierney said, he should move on the third reading, that it should be distinguished whether the service was in peace or war, on the same principle as the secretaryship of the Admiralty. The amendment was carried. Mr. Courtenay said that, in the committee he had asked the hon. mover whether he had any objection to allowing that service in an office inferior to the lowest enumerated in the Bill, should in the case of a person promoted from such inferior office to one in either of the four classes, be reckoned in the number of years required; upon the same principle as that which provided, that service in an office in the fourth class, namely, under secretary of state, should count towards entitling the party to the pension, in any higher class to which he might be promoted. The hon. mover had given an answer, which was understood not only by Mr. C. but by many other persons present, as being in the affirmative, but as no such provision was to be found in the Bill, he should propose it in a future stage. Colonel Barry objected to what affected the Irish pension list, as violating the agreement with the crown for the present King's life, and moved to omit that passage in the Bill. Mr. Canning said, that it did not affect the Civil List, but only its distribution. Colonel Barry's amendment was negatived. The House having resumed, the Report was received, and the Bill was ordered to be read a third time on Monday. commissioner for India affairs for instance, List of the Majority, who voted in favour of depended merely on the existence of the East India Company. Mr. Canning was of opinion, that it would be better that the judge advocate should be an exparliamentary officer. the Sinecure Offices Bill, |