in the report of the committee on public offices upon the bank, with a reference to the allowance made for the management of the public debt, and has been since acted upon; and it no less evidently applies to the present case. But the grounds on which the commissioners have preferred their claim to a commission of five per cent. on the gross proceeds in their more recent statements, have chiefly been a precedent for that allowance, supposed to have been afforded in the case of a similar commission issued in the war of 1756, and the general practice of prize agents. The commissioners state themselves to have derived their intelligence on the former of these points from a conversation with the late Mr. Aufrere, one of the commissioners in 1756, but their information is very imperfect and incorrect; and the commissioner who gave evidence before your committee professed not to know whether the commission was charged on the gross or on the net amount of the proceeds of the sales. It appears by some authentic documents on this subject, of which copies are annexed, that a commission of two and a half per cent. on the net proceeds having been granted, out of which various undefined expences were to be defrayed, the commissioners represented these expences (which according to their construction of the term, included brokerage and various other charges besides those of their establishment) to amount to more than their commission; and that a commission of two and a half per cent. on the net proceeds of sales, independently of all expences, was consequently substituted. A copy of the entry in the account presented to the treasury by the auditor, after the termination of the transactions under this

commission, is inserted in the appendix, by which it appears, that the total sum paid for commission was 14,768l. 3s. It was divided among fourteen commissioners. The rate of commission charged by prize agents has been fixed by long usage at five per cent.; and has lately been applied by the law to the net proceeds of sale, having before been charged on the gross proceeds. It appears by the evidence, that the excess of the commission of prize agents above that of merchants, is justified chiefly by the peculiar trouble imposed on the prize agent, in the distribution of the proceeds of his sales among the crews of the capturing vessels, a trouble from which the commissioners for the sale of Dutch property were exempt. If also the capital employed by the prize agent, and the responsibility and risk to which he is subject, are taken into consideration, little disparity between the two charges will be found. Your committee will now present an estimate of the remuneration, to which the commissioners would be entitled, according to each of the three principles which have been mentioned. First, if the commission usual among merchants of two and a half per cent. on the gross proceeds of sales should be granted, about 50,000l. would be the amount of the allowance, out of which the expences of the establishment (in all about 17,000l.) would be to be defrayed, leaving about 33,000l. clear profit to be divided among the commissioners. 2dly.

If the principle adopted in 1756, of two and a half per cent. on the net proceeds, (which may amount to about 1,300,000. or 1,400,000l.) should be resorted to, a sum of about 32,500l. to 35,0001. would be receivable, which, the expences of the establishment bé

ing paid, would leave about 15,5001. to 18,000l. to be divided among the commissioners. 3dly. If the commission should be calculated at the rate which was usual among prize agents, at the time when the commissioners began to act, namely, five per cent. on the gross proceeds of sales, the sum would be about 99,000l. subject to a similar deduction, leaving a clear profit of about $2,000l. Your committee can by no means agree to decide the question according to this principle. The commission received by prize agents at the time when the commissioners were appointed, has lately been determined to be a more than adequate remuneration for the whole of their trouble. It should also be recollected that the commissioners not only have been exempt from the labour of distributing the proceeds of their sales among the individual sailors concerned in the captures, and from much other trouble and responsibility, as well as from the advances to which prize agents are subject, but are also enabled, by the magnitude of the sum on which their commission is charged, to transact the public business at a much, lower rate than is fairly due to individuals receiving ordinary consignments. On the whole, your committee recommend that a commission of five per cent. on the net proceeds of sales should be allowed to the commissioners, then paying the charges of their establishment. This allowance will probably amount to not less than about 50,000l. or 10,000l. to each commissioner, and will be more, by about 17,000l. than would be due to them, according to the usual practice of merchants, and more, by at least about 32,0007. than they could claim according to the precedent of 1756, to which they have

appealed. The excess of this remuneration above that enjoyed by merchants, as well as above that granted in 1756, may be justified on the ground partly of more than ordinary trouble imposed on the present commissioners, and partly by the length of time during which their commission has necessarily subsisted, and perhaps partly also by the circumstance of your committee, in consequence of the omission not only of the commissioners, but also of the government, having to recommend a retrospective arrangement. The sum which the commissioners will have to refund, in case of the adoption of this suggestion, will be not less than between 60 and 70,000. They will also fail to receive nearly 20,000l. which they appear to have expected to appropriate to their own use, for further interest and commission. Your committee cannot allow any weight to the observation, that two of the commissioners, having, after a term, quitted their professions with a view to the fulfilment of their trust, some reference should be made to this circumstance in estimating the amount of the remuneration. No notice of the intended sacrifice was given; and it is obvious, that by proportioning the general compensation receivable by the body to the special claims of two individuals, a more than adequate reward would be granted to the majority. If it should be thought fit to adopt the suggestion of your committee, the commissioners ought to be credited in account for the proposed commission, and to be debited for all sums applied to their own use, since they have been taken without due authority, the same general principles being observed by the auditors, in the settlement of the concerns of these commissioners, which are usual in similar cases,

Your committee further suggest, that the commissioners should be directed to use their utmost diligence to make up and transmit their accounts to the lords of his majesty's privy council, with a view to their being submitted to the board of treasury, and by them referred to the auditors. Your committee have not pursued their examination of all the topics to which their attention had been called, as will be seen by the evidence, partly because such investigation might detain them too long from their inquiries into other subjects, and partly on the ground of their not wishing to be considered as exempting the government from the duty of applying their attention to the transactions of the commissioners, or the auditors from the diligent and exact performance of the functions of their important office. The magnitude of the charges on the vessels and cargoes sold, which manifests itself in the difference between the gross and the net proceeds, and in the excess of the charges above the whole proceeds in the case of many vessels, appears to demand attention. Your committee have had it chiefly in their view to examine and animadvert upon those points which derive importance either from the magnitude of the saving in question, or from their involving some general principles, on which it might be material to insist. On a review of the whole of the subject which has been before them, they beg leave generally to remark, that to commit pecuniary trusts of extraordinary magnitude to persons, however respectable as individuals, and however qualified for their employment by the habits of their former lives, without settling, during a long course of years, the mode or

amount of their remuneration, without providing any material check on their proceedings, and without reminding them of their responsibi lity by calling for any regular or periodical account, is a neglect which may be expected often to lead to equally prejudicial consequences, and is a deviation from the acknowledged duty, and also, as your committee trusts, from the ordinary practice of government.

EAST-INDIA COMPANY.

Report from the committee of the house of commons, on the patronage of the East-India Com. pany. Ordered to be printed 23rd March, 1809.

The select committee, appointed to inquire into the existence of any corrupt practices, in regard to the appointment and nomination of writers or cadets in the service of the East-India Company; or any agreement, negotiation, or bargain, direct or indirect, for the sale thereof; and to report the same, as it shall appear to them, to the house, together with their observations thereupon; and who were empowered to report the minutes of evidence taken before them; and their proceedings, from time to time, to the house;

Began their investigation by examining into a case brought_before them by Geo. Woodford Thellusson, Esq. a member of this house, in which his patronage and confidence appear to have been grossly abused. The whole evidence being given at length in the appendix, your committee content themselves with inserting, in this place, a short abstract only of this, and every other transaction; giving the names

of

of the persons appointed, of those by whom they were recommended, and by whom their nominations were signed, together with the names of the intermediate agents in any of the negotiations where money was paid or received.-Those appointments which have been completed in consequence of any such bargains, and upon which satisfactory evidence has been produced, will be placed first; a second class will be found of nominations which appear to have taken effect, but with regard to which, from the death of some of the parties, or from deficiency of proof in other particulars, your committee are unable to ascertain the names of the persons who were sent cut to India. It is a satisfaction to your committee, throughout the whole evidence, to remark nothing which traces any one of these corrupt or improper bargains to any director, or induces a reasonable suspicion that it was done with the privity or connivance of any member of that court. Several negotiations which never took effect, will be found alluded to, or detailed in parts of the evidence; which it was thought proper not to reject under the comprehensive directions "that your committee should inquire into any agreement, negotiation, or bargain, direct or indirect, for the sale of such nomination;" and when such information was received, they deemed it inexpedient to withhold it from this house, though they are fully aware that their desire of opening every channel of inquiry has led to an extent of examination, and to a mass of evidence, from which much might be retrenched without detriment, if it had been easy to establish a satisfactory principle of omission, or abridgment, which might have left

nothing wholly irrelevant or fling, while it comprehended whatever might be interesting either to this house, or to the East-India company.

WRITERS. Mr. Ed. Js. Smith was nominated a writer to Bengal in the season 1806-7, by Mr. G. W. Thellusson; the appointment was given to his first cousin, Mr. Emperor J. A. Woodford, who sold the appointment for 3,5001. through the agency of Mr. Tahourdin, solicitor, who received 1007. out of that sum. The other persons concerned in this negotiation were Mr. Wimbourn and Mr. Laing.

CADETS. Mr. Henry Stoughton was appointed a cadet to Madras, Jan. 1808, by George Abercrombie Robinson, Esq. by the recommendation of Mr. Morland, who gave the appointment to Mr. Jones for a relation of his. Mr. Jones, through the agency of John Annesley Shee, sold it to Mr. Stoughton, father to the person appointed, from whom Shee received 500 guineas: he paid 180l. to Mr. Jones, and received of him an undertaking to pay 3201. upon his procuring for Mr. Jones a Woolwich cadetship. This appointment has been vacated by the court of directors, in consequence of their having discovered the means through which it was obtained.

Having reported between thirty and forty other cases: the committee say,

It appears in evidence, that some other nominations of this description have been purchased: but your committee have not been able to discover and bring before them some of the persons who appear to have been parties to these transactions; particularly Sir Nich. Nugent, Mr. W. Lowen Tugwell Robins, Mr. Jos. Home, Cap. Matthew, and Cap. Holmes. A further examina