Графични страници
PDF файл

the number of sailors to be double of that kept up in any former year of peace. The chancellor of the exchequer concluded by moving, “that, towards raising the supplies, there begrantedasum of 4,000,000l. out of the growing produce of the consolidated fund, for the service of the year 1803.” The resolution was carried. The resolutions also on the report of the committee were agreed to. The chancellor of the exchequer then moved, that the following sums be granted to his majesty, viz. 1,500,000l. of exchequer bills; 524,000l., paid for corn bounties, up to the 5th of October 1802; 25,000l. to make good bills drawn for the colony of South Wales; 191,584l. 17s. 6d. for the suffering clergy of France, the American i. and the St. Domingo sufferers. Also a variety of .# sums paid to the different officers and servants of both houses of parliament, pursuant to addresses of that house to his majesty, and which were not as yet made good by parliament. Mr. Stephens moved the sum of 1,238,000l. for the ordinaries of the navy; also the sum of 901,114l. for building and repairing ships. These motions were severally agreed to. In the committee on the 16th the 4-hancellor of the exchequer moved, that the sum of 15,000l. Os. 6d. should be granted to his majesty, to make good advances from the civil list, pursuant to the addresses of the house, and which had not been made good by parliament. The object of this motion was to carry into effect the proceedings of the house in the last and preceding sessions. Agreed to. The house having again resolved into the committee of supply,

on the 2d of March; the chancellor of the exchequer called their attention to the subject of the army extraordinaries. He said, that it would be in the recollection of members that during the last session the sum of 600,000l. had been voted, in the first instance, for this branch of the public service, which had been succeeded by another vote to the amount of a million. At that time he had taken occasion to apprise the house, that a further sum would, in all probability, be necessary; and what he had then anticipated was now found to be correct. A very considerable increase had now been ascertained to have accrued. This increase, he had to state to the committee, was to the amount of 1,032,1511. He, therefore, concluded with moving, that this sum expended from the 25th of December 1801 to the 24th of December 1802, and not yet provided for by parliament, should be then granted to his majesty for this branch of the public service. The resolution was

carried. On the 23d of the same month, in the committee, the chancellor of the exchequer, after having made an order that certain accounts relating to the disposition of grants to Great Britain, presented on the 23d of February, be referred to the said committee, moved the sum of 990,000l., of which, a sum of 868,923!. was to pay the interest on exchequer bills, which were to be paid out of the instalments of the late loan. This interest had been greater than had been at first estimated, because instalments were not paid in at the time expected, and consequently the exchequerbills continued a longer time outstanding. He then moved the last-mentioned sum, and afterwards the following Sullis :

sums:—1910l., to make good the like sum advanced to the commissioners for paying off the national debt; 500l. to the clerks in the of. fice of the exchequer, for extra trouble in making out the accounts; 23,564l. advanced to the bank, as discount on prompt payment of the loan; 22,538b. advanced to the bank for civil contributions; 371 l. to make good American claims; 3600l. paid for incidental expenses in the service of the year. All these sums were voted by the committee.—And on the 25th a resolution was carried for settling on sir James Saumarez, bart. K. B. the annual sum of 1200l. during his natural life, to be paid out of the consolidated fund, in consideration of his eminent services, and particularly thebrilliant victory obtained by him, and the ships under his command, over a superior squadron of Spanish ships, in the Streights of Gibraltar, on the memorable 12th of June 1801. The same day, the chancellor of the exchequer moved, that “towards raising the supply to be granted to his majesty, there be ranted a further sum of four mil#. to be raised by exchequer bills.” He prefaced the motion by saying, it must be recollected that, previous to the Christmas recess, he had given notice of his intention to move, in the course of the session, for exchequer bills to the amount of eleven millions. Government had, since that time, received authority to raise four millions more; a great part of which were to enable government to fund other exchequer bills that were outstanding. The tax bills produced but little discussion. The malt duty bill experienced some opposition, on the secondreading in the house of lords,

principally from lord Spencer. His lordship reduced what he had to say to these three heads: 1. The mode in which it had been . asked; 2. the apportionment of the establishments which were in part to be supported out of it; and, 3. to whom the application of those establishments, navaland military, was to be intrusted. . The supplies had been asked without any explicit communication from the throne, in regard to the express necessities and the clear unequivocal designs, to the expenditure of which they were to be applied. That mode had been demonstrated to be unconstitutional, because contrary to all precedents in that course of usage which formed the law of parliament. Of the apportionment of the forces, naval and military, which the supplies were to maintain, he might speak more at length. That 130,000 men, considering our large militia establishment, and that excellent aid the volunteer corps, might possibly be sufficient for the internal defence of the kingdom, he should probably not hesitate to allow; but still it would compose a land force barely adequate to the necessities of the military service, in a peace of which the honour and stability were in no degree uncertain. He should be far from disapproving the magnitude of the proposed land force, were it even greater and more expensive. Of the naval force he should willingly avoid to speak, since he did not then see in his place the noble lord who was at the head of the naval department of the administration; but compelled as he was to overlook that consideration, he could not hesitate to affirm that a naval force of only 50,000 seamen was far from being, in comparison *

e

the land force, duly adequate either to the ordinary uses of the naval service, or to any extraordinary necessities which might arise in it: 50,000 seamen were the number now actually employed in the royal navy; of these, a part were in squadrons upon foreign stations, which he believed to be judiciously distributed, and which he did not su

pose capable of being, at any j, future time, prudently diminished. The rest were in ships of war in our ports, or immediately upon our own coasts. These last were the only part of our naval force on which we could rely for defence against any sudden invasion. Yet they exceeded not the naval force which it would be proper to reserve on the home stations, though no extraordinary danger, no chance of sudden hostilities, were to be provided against. They were not, therefore, on the same scale with the land establishment. They were unfit to meet any sudden emergency. Our means of defence were there the weakest, where the danger and where our natural advantages for operation were the greatest. The third head regarded those in whose hands the application of this augmentation of force was to be intrusted, and the uses to which they meant to put those establishments. The noble and learned lord on the woolsack had informed them, that ministers might consider themselves at liberty to reduce this naval and military force, which they then demanded the means of supporting, without any communication with parliament at the time when they should think proper to make that reduction. A doctrine more novel, more at variance with the practice of the government and the parliament, in their mutual intercourse

and relations, he knew not that he ever heard. How should the defence of the country be trusted to persons who might thus disarm at the moment when the danger should be greatest? To what use ask money upon estimates, when it was to be expended without havingregardto them? His lordship then animadverted severely upon the general conduct of ministers, at the same time that he extolled the pre-eminently great qualities of Mr. Pitt, the only man, in the estimation of the noble lord, whose talents were commensurate with the exigencies of the times. Upon the considerations he had adduced, he felt himself compelled i. resist the commitment of the bill. The lord chancellor quitted the woolsack, and observed, that the question regularly before their lordships was, whether they would read the order for going into a committee to consider of a bill of supply, which not only went to af. fect the military establishments, but even the civil existence of the country. It was a bill which, in that house, had been regularly voted without opposition, from year to year; and which, they would bear in mind, not only regarded the naval and military, but the civil establishments of the country. He alluded to the animadversions on ministers; but as the topics on this subject had been already detailed, we shall decline a restatement of them here. His lordship concluded by voting that the bill be committed. The earl of Carlisle went over nearly the same ground with earl Spencer. The chief object of his speech, which was of considerable length, was to complain that ministers had not been sufficiently explicit in respect to the necessity for the augmentation of the naval and military force—and to affirm that the administration ought to be entrusted to abler hands. Lord Clifton (earl Darnley) succeeded, and remarked, that it was nerally understood that whatever it might be, in point of strict form, the present discussion was on the proposed establishment of the army

- 1803,

and navy, to which, large as it was, he should not hesitate to give his hearty support. The remaining peers who spoke on this occasion were lords Suffolk, Hobart, Carysfort, duke of Norfolk, lord Grenville, the lord chancellor, lord Pelham, and lord Minto. The question was then put, and carried without a division. * * *

# CHAP.

[ocr errors]

Navy Commissioners' Abuse Bill—Debates on that Subject.—Debate in the House of Lords on the State of the National Finances.—lmprovement and Consolidation of several Branches of the public Revenue—Debates on that Subject.—Bank Restriction Bill.—First and second East-India Bud

gets.

THE administration, strongly intent upon the amelioration of the national finances, were consequently attentive to the reformation of abuses. There was no department in a maritime nation with which it was more proper to commence than the naval. We shall not offer any comment on the proceedings of parliament in this instance at present, but content ourselves with reporting, that on the 14th of De

cember captain Markham moved,

the order of the day for the second reading of a bill, which he had brought in the preceding day, for correcting certain irregularities and abuses in the navy; upon which, Admiral Berkeley said, that the admiralty had already sufficient powers to enforce every thin which it was the object of the bill to effect, without having any recourse to parliamentary interference. He had not before seen the patent of the navy board; but he that day took occasion to examine it, and, from this examination, he found that the admiralty possessed powers to a much greater extent than he had at first imagined, though this was peremptorily denied by a lord of the admiralty. - -, •

Mr. Jarvis vindicated the bill; and showed that it was designed to extend the jurisdiction of the board of admiralty over persons whom they were not now empowered to examine on oath. He condemned the speech of the honourable admiral as inconsistent with itself; and contended, that, even allowing the commissioners of the navy board to be in possession of the power alleged, still the bill was a wise and salutary measure, as it subjected them, in common with the meanest person in the naval service, to strict and rigorous responsibility. The bill was then read a second time, and committed for the next day. On the 15th of December Mr. Kinnaird rose and took notice of a difference of opinion which occurred in the course of the debate; an honourable admiral on the other side of the house aserting that the admiralty and navy boards had already all the powers which the bill proposed to confer; and an honourable gentleman, connected with the admiralty, flatly denying the statement. He thought it o "the

« ПредишнаНапред »