were men who could not be mentioned without awakening recollections of national glory, and exciting feelings of admiration and gratitude. They were Admiral Bowen and Admiral Barlow-the one twenty years, the other somewhat less than twenty, in the civil service of the navy,—the former had a pension of 500l. the latter a pension of 450l. per annum. It was true, indeed, that Admiral Barlow had his half-pay in addition to his pension of 450l. To Mr. Dundas a pension of 500l. was granted; but he believed that he held the situation of Commissioner for a very short time; and during the time he held it, if he mistook not, that gentleman was engaged on two diplomatic missions. ["No, no," from the Ministerial benches.] He was employed at least on one; but if he recollected accurately, he had gone to St. Petersburg with the Duke of Devonshire on one mission, and with Lord Heytesbury on another. He would next call the attention of the House to that meritorious officer Sir Thomas Foley, who had his half-pay of 7501., and Sir Thomas Hardy, the captain of the great Nelson, who had 450l. per annum. These were men who had served their country in every climate, and who had asserted her honour in many a bloody action. The places given to Mr. Dundas and to Mr. Bathurst were places held during pleasure. It was, therefore, perfectly in the power of his Majesty's Ministers to dismiss them with or without pension, according to the service which they had performed. But what must the people think of the professions made by Ministers when pensions like these were granted,-pensions that were without precedent, pensions for which no adequate service had been rendered? Now he would ask, on what ground was it possible that these pensions could have been given? Could the act be defended on the ground of custom? He believed not; but even if it could, he was not aware of any abuse in existence that might not be defended, certainly not justified, on that ground. He would ask, what was the use of boasting of alleviating the sufferings of the people, when pensions such as these were allowed? These individuals were first improperly placed in these situations, and, when they were removed from them, they were with equal impropriety pensioned on the country. By such a system, a number of persons belonging to that noble profession, the Navy, who had infinitely higher claims to office, and were at least equally calculated to act in office, were excluded from beneficial employment; for he would say, that no young men were better educated for all useful purposes than those who entered the navy now were. He really hoped and trusted, that the Members of that House would, this night, by their vote, put an end to such a lavish and improper use of the public money. He trusted, that in this case, at least, they would show some fellow-feeling for their constituents, and prove that they were anxious to represent their wishes and to relieve their wants. He would say nothing farther on the subject, except by repeating his opinion, and it was a strong one,that the grant and existence of these pensions were highly improper, and that the conduct of those who acquired them for their families, who had no just claim. on the public, and who could not possibly want them, was such as he could not denominate otherwise than as paltry. In his mind also, Ministers, in allowing grants of this nature, were guilty of a mockery of the public distress. He then moved, "That the proposed grant of 174,5841. 9s. 4d. should be reduced by deducting from it the sum of 9001. The Question having been put,- The Chancellor of the Exchequer begged to assure the hon. Baronet that he was not one of those who imputed blame to him for the delay that had taken place in bringing on the present discussion-he was aware that the delay had been occasioned by an unwillingness to impede the public service by interposing unnecessary obstacles to the progress of the estimates. He felt anxious to address the Committee on this particular subject, because he thought the hon. Baronet laboured under an erroneous impression, in which in all probability other hon. Members participated, as to the conduct of the Treasury in giving its sanction to this Vote being submitted to Parliament. He thought he should best satisfy the Committee by stating the circumstances of the case, and the grounds on which the Treasury had proceeded in this particular instance, laying aside, as he intended to do, much of the extraneous matter which the hon. Baronet had introduced in the course of his speech. He said "extraneous," because he did not conceive it to be his duty, in considering cases of superannuation such as the present, to examine whe ther the ancestor of an individual had been | lost those opportunities of advancement Lord High Chancellor of England, or had which they would otherwise have had in held a high office in Scotland: it was not their several professions. These two genhis duty to decide cases by the pedigree tlemen were precisely in that situation. of individuals. The Treasury had dealt Mr. Bathurst, although called by the hon. with these cases by a reference to consi- Baronet a very young gentleman, had been derations which would have applied a considerable time at the bar [a laugh]. equally to the lowest or the highest person He really did not see what there was to atin the King's dominions, and he was not tract hon. Gentlemen's laughter in the conscious of any error in having done so. circumstance of a Gentleman pursuing an The present discussion arose from a consi- honourable profession. It might appear derable reduction which Government ridiculous to some hon. Members; but to thought it their duty to make in the civil him it seemed an honourable path for department of the navy. Two Commis- a man to pursue, whatever might be his sioners of the Navy Board, and one Com- rank in life. Mr. Bathurst and Mr. missioner of the Victualling Department Dundas, who had both embarked in difhad been reduced. It appeared proper to ferent professions, abandoned them on select the two persons in question for being put into the situations of Commisreduction one of the gentlemen, who was sioners of the Navy, and the principle of a Commissioner of the Navy Board, was compensation and allowances when reappointed to an office then vacant, conse-duced, applied perfectly to them. The comquently the charge of his salary as a Com-missioners who were appointed several years missioner was extinguished without deduc- ago to inquire into several of our public tion on account of allowance. There re-establishments, with a view to reduction, mained the other two Commissioners recommended an allowance of two-thirds whose names had been introduced on this of the usual salary, where the service had occasion to be dealt with, and their cases been for a less period than twenty years, were brought before the Treasury. As to and three-fourths where the period of serthe precise nature of the services of these vice extended to more than that time. individuals, he was not prepared to an In looking at other cases of reduction, swer. He thought it rather unfortunate where it was recommended to abolish inthat the length of their service had not ferior offices, and where allowances of been stated in the Estimate, but he be- an inferior rate were granted, it aplieved that their service was of about four peared that persons holding subordinate years' duration, the appointments having offices in the Customs for a less period taken place in 1825. In considering than ten years were to have half their these cases, the Treasury felt bound to salary, and those who had served longer adhere to the principle on which, upon the were to have two-thirds. Now the Treareduction of Boards at former times, offi-sury, in dealing with the present cases, did cers had received allowances. Here he might observe, that offices of this description, although, technically speaking, held during pleasure, were always considered as granted for the life of the party, or during good behaviour. The reductions in the members of the Revenue Board had been considered on the same ground as the present, and the Treasury proceeded on the principle of effecting a considerable saving in the public expenditure by the removal from office of several persons, who, be it remembered, had embarked in their several employments with the idea that their situations were to be permanent. The Treasury was the more disposed to adopt this view of the case, because persons embarking in such offices frequently abandoned some profession which they had previously embraced, and not avail itself of the rule laid down with respect to commissioners and high officers removed from the public service, but looked to the lowest scale that applied to subordinate offices. Besides, the Treasury insisted that the Admiralty should appoint these two gentlemen (who had been so reduced) to offices as they became vacant, in order to relieve the country from the charge of their allowances. If the Treasury were to be guided by the rule antecedently adopted, it could not decide differently in similar cases, according to the rank of the parties, and it was fully justified in submitting the present vote to the Committee. Let him advert to one circumstance, which at least showed that there was no wish to benefit particular individuals in the present instance, but that the object was to effect a saving in the public expenditure-what would involved an unjustifiable departure from its principles. It had been said, that these gentlemen had given up professions and embarked in these offices for life to the exclusion of other prospects. Unfortunately, however, for this statement, we found one of the gentlemen, subsequently to his appointment as Commissioner, accepting a diplomatic situation [hear, and cries of "No"]: at least he gave up his office, and accepted a situation in a diplomatic mission, and now he was to be compensated for the loss of an office to which he could not be fairly said to devote his time, having been put into another situation. When he looked at the enormous amount of superannuations, he thought the Committee would not be justified if it did not mark by its vote the utmost reprobation of this transaction. Within three years of 1810, the amount of superannuation allowances had doubled. Between 1810 and 1815, the superannuation allowance to the officers of the Customs alone had increased from 29,000l. to 100,000. Notwithstanding the Act of 1824, and the expressed opinion of the House of Commons, superannuations had increased since that time from 384,000l. to 488,000l. With such an example before them, it would be a gross neglect of duty if the Members did not oppose the vote. Colonel Sibthorp said, he had heard with astonishment the right hon. Gentleman, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, charge the hon. Baronet with introducing extraneous matter into his statement. Never was there a more plain unvarnished tale than that of the hon. Baronet. On the contrary, the right hon. Gentleman's statement was full of extraneous matter. The right hon. Gentleman said, that in his opinion the case of the highest and the lowest individual ought to be considered on the same principle, or simply in reference to the circumstances of it. He hoped it always would be so. But pensions and allowances ought to be granted for public services, and casualties, and what could the committee say when it found pensions of 400l. and 500l. granted to individuals, for what?-for doing nothing at all. The hon. Member proceed Sir G. Clerk observed, that whatever blame was imputable on the ground of the omission of the length of service of Mr. Dundas and Mr. Bathurst in the Estimate attached to him; it was intended that the period of these gentlemen's services should appear, and the hon. Comptroller of the Navy had brought him a copy filled up with these items, but, owing to a mistake of his own, a rough copy in which they were omitted had been brought down. Mr. C. Wood was of opinion, that the transaction in question was blameable; but at the same time thought, that the fault did not attach to any particular member of the Cabinet, but to Ministers generally, for sanctioning a vote which involved a most extraordinary principle of superannuations and allowances. Although it did not appear on the Estimates what had been the length of service of these two gentlemen, it was stated that it did noted to say he had submitted a memorial of exceed four years. Was that, he asked, a fair period of service for which to grant an allowance? This was to extend the terms of the Act of Parliament under which superannuations were granted, and the strongest nature to Government with respect to an individual of unimpeached character, who was eighty-four years of age, and had served thirty years in the army, applying for an addition of a paltry 953 Pensions for Hons. R. Dundas {MARCH 26} Mr. Hobhouse said, that whatever opi- 954 and W. L. Bathurst. unfortunate that these pensions should have been granted. It was quite impossible that these appointments could be defended; the Chancellor of the Exchequer had not defended them; the right hon. Secretary (Mr. Peel) would not defend them. Indeed, while the Chancellor of the Exchequer was speaking, he thought he saw upon the cheek of the right hon. Secretary something like the blush of shame, which seemed to say, "A profigate case has happened once, but it shall not happen again; erubuit-salva res est." He thought it very creditable to the right hon. Secretary that he had not risen to defend this proposition. He knew nothing of these gentlemen personally, and he did not deal with the question personally; but he could not help seeing that one of them held a place of 1,000l. a year, and that the same gentleman had held another situation that of Commissioner of Bankrupts. He did not mean to say, that there was any intention to create in this country what were formerly called in France " Ministerial families;" but he begged to ask, what the public would think when they found that men were placed on a level with persons who had performed great public services, merely because they happened to be sprung from certain ancestors. Such a system would and must discourage the servants of the public. The Chancellor of the Exchequer had told them that they had laughed because they found a scion of a noble house taking up an honourable profession. But they had not laughed at that, nor had they laughed at a noble scion abandoning that profession. What they had laughed at, but what the country would be indignant at, if these votes were passed, was, that noble scions who could not get briefs at the bar, managed to get themselves pensioned by the public. He would venture to say that never had any Government before received so much independent support as the present Government had received; but that support must cease when it was found that the pension-lists were filled with the sons of the colleagues of the right hon. Gentlemen opposite. Sir G. Clerk begged to call the attention of the Committee to the real question before it; that question was, whether there was any thing in the situations of these gentlemen which ought to induce the House to reThere was no instance fuse in their case what they would not refuse in similar cases. in which persons removed in consequence of the abolition of offices had been denied | But his meaning was, that the late Lord Colonel Dundas said, that he should not have intruded himself upon the House but for the unnecessary personality in which the hon. Baronet who brought forward the subject had thought proper to indulge. [Cries of "no, no,"] No! Why, the hon. Baronet had described the gentleman to whom he alluded as the son of a noble Lord who held office, and as the grandson of another noble Lord whom he called a sort of Viceroy of Scotland, who had performed somewhat equivocal services. Now it was impossible to mistake the allusion which the hon. Baronet intended to convey by the words "equivocal services;" but he thought that he might confidently appeal to the result of the circumstances to which the hon. Baronet alluded, as a complete answer to the calumny. In describing the noble Lord for whose memory he could not but feel the deepest respect-as having been a Viceroy in Scotland, the hon. Baronet had only given him an occasion to say, that he was proud of such an ancestor. The support which that noble Lord received from the people of Scotland during his life-time, and the monument which had been raised to his memory in that country since his death, were sufficient proofs of the estimation in which his noble ancestor was held in Scotland. Mr. Peel said, he was glad he had given way to the hon. Baronet, whose explanathe hon. Gentleman who had expressed tion, he was sure, must be satisfactory to himself on the subject with a degree of warmth that the circumstances undoubtedly justified. minster was mistaken in supposing that he The hon. Member for Westdisapproved of the proposition; but he could assure that hon. Member, that he was not insensible to the value of that independent support which, the hon. Member truly said, the present Government had received. Most sorry should he be to lose such support; and never, to the latest day of his existence, could he forget the conduct pursued by the Gentlemen on the other side of the House on the great measure of last Session. The manner in which the GentleGovernment at that time could never be men opposite gave their support to the forgotten by him; and he thought that the conduct pursued by those Gentlemen on that occasion reflected the highest credit on the political parties of this country. he agreed with the hon. Member who spoke With respect to the present proposition, last as to the nature of it. proposition made by the Government, It was only a which the House would reject or allow as it thought fit. It was a mere estimate, which, if the flouse thought improper, it would be its duty to reject. He begged of Mr. Maberly said, that this question had the real nature of the proposition was, behon. Members, however, to consider what been argued as though the vote were one of course, whereas it was clearly subject was a proposition which arose out of a fore they came to a decision upon it. It to the determination of the House. He revision of the establishments of the counhoped, however, that the vote of that night try which the Government had thought it would establish the fact, that no person their duty to make. should have a pension who had not per- had been pursued in this case by his The course which formed actual services. the youngest officers, and instead of a Majesty's Ministers had been to take away salary of 1,000l. to give them 4501., until But the main question was the intention of some other employment offered for them. his Majesty's Ministers in the measure, and he would read to the Committee the official correspondence which had taken place respecting it. The right hon. Gentleman here read the following letters : [Sir R. Heron and Mr. Peel rose together, but the latter gave way.] Sir R. Heron, in explanation, begged to say, that when he called the late Lord Melville a sort of Viceroy of Scotland, he alluded to an office and to duties which 66 no longer existed. As to the expression "Admiralty Office, March 20th, 1829. |