Abbildungen der Seite
PDF

thing; and to suppose that they would not

feel for it would be to suspect them of being of a disposition unnatural indeed. I

dure say the gentlemen on loth sides have a

perfect fellow-feeling upon this score; and,

though they may differ as to certain little

points touching the manner of acting, and,

sometimes, touching the persons who are to

act; yet, upon the great fundamental prin

ciples of a tion, be assured, Mr. Hall, that

they are perfectly agreed; and, what is of great advantage, the people now want no

thing to convince then of the fact. The

people, Sir, who now clearly perceive the real situation of the country, have an equal

regard for “the gentlemen opposite" and the gentlemen upon the Treasury bench; and,

wheneyer an occasion offers for them to ex

press that regard in words and in a manner suitable to their feeling as well as to the respective merits of the objects regarded, you ūay rest satisfied that they will be as unonimous as your heart can wish. Leaving Mr. Hall to the enjoyment of those sweet reflections which conduct like his must produce, and which the state of things is so well calculated to prolong in his mind, I shall now briefly record the issue of the debate. The Honourable House divided, as it is called, at sir o'clock in the morning (for they care not for sleep, a nights, when the good of their country is in question), when there appeared for the amendment 155; against it, 350 ; leaving a majority, in favour of the ins of 105. What a striking proof is here of the utility of “appealing to the sense of the people !" Only two months before this appeal was made, the ins could muster, upon a day of the greatest trial, but 55 votes. They have now 350, there being to be noticed, with regard to personal considerations, merely the trifling circumstance that the ins were then outs / In the House of Lords, where the hereditary wisdom and honour of the nation are seated, the debate was nearly the same as in the House of Commons, and nearly —the same was the result; for, upon a divison, which took place at four o'clock in the unorning, the vote ; for the amendment (precisely the same as that in the House of Comnon-) were C7 s against it 100 ; leaving, on the side of ‘le ministry, a rivajority of Q3. on “c to statil iting ny country,” as the Moriri Post does, upon this “glorious triumph,” s wish, with all my heart, "I could with the editor of that paper, perceive how it, will tend to “appa; the tyrant of Porope " This, for my life, I cannot

p-reeve, t , ough it may be very evident to a *... soil liv rs in Londo... On the contrary, -

“ ce.

it appears to me, that our divisions, of all sorts, are likely to please the Emperor of France. The Morning Post does, indeed, give his reasons. He says, that the Emperor will, from these votes, “see, that the pre“ senterficient ministry are cordially support“ by the whole of the PEOPLE of this “ vast empire." But, my fear is, that he will see no such thing; that, owing to some fool or other that he will have about hijn, be will retain his old opinion of us, and will pay no more attention to these profound reasonings of the Morning Post, than the people of Westminster, on the 29th of June, paid to the words, “ down with the Horning Post "" which poor shoe-less wretches had, by the friends of that paper, been hired, at three shillings a day, to chalk against the walls and watch-boxes. II. FINAN cz CoMMITTEE. On the 1st of this month a motion was made in the House of Commons, to revive this Committee, of which so much has, at different times, been said. The outs wished to have all the members, who were upon the former committee, upon this committee also ; but the ins knew better! Faith, did they ; and, as a majority of the House was with the ims, the ins took very good care to have a committee very different from the last. According to the report in the newspapers, the Committee, as it now stands, is composed as follows : Mr. Bankes, Mr H. Thornton, Mr. Biddulph, Mr. W. Cavendish, Mr. Leycester, Mr. Alderman Combe Mr. Alderman Shaw, Mr. N. Calvert, Lord H. Petty, Mr. T. B ring, "Mr. H Browne, Mr Brogden, Mr Grattan, Mr. Holme Sumner, . Mr. Joddrel, - Mr P. Carew, Mr H. Addington, Mr Rutherfold Mr Leslie Foster, Mr. Ryder, Lord A Hamilton, Mr. Ellison. By a reference to vol. 11., p. 1125, the reader will perceive what alterations have been made ; he will perceive the extent of the new-modelling. Iteader, do you not see, that Mr. Leycester, the Welsh Judge, is upon this committee: Do you know him Do you recollect any thing about him 2 If you do, I am sure it is quite needless for nie to tell you to be satisfied; for satisfied, upon this subject, you certainly will be. ‘I he observations, which constitute the greater part of this debate, will be noticed under the head of Jobs, to which they properly bclong ; but, I must just insert Mr. Perceval's closing speech, first reminding the reader of what our friend, Mr. Hall, said upon the Speech, as connected with this matter ; namely, “ that the gentlemen opposite had “ asserted, that the object of the dissolutio: “ was to so. other the labouts of the l’inance

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

Committee; but His Majesty's Speech proved, that the present ministers were as anxious for the continuance of the committee as the gentlemen opposite.” I thought our friend, Mr. Hall, was a little hasty in talking of proof. To have continued the Committee, the very same persons, as nearly as possible, should have been put upon it. --But, let us hear Mr. Perceval. He said, “ that the accusations of “ partiality in the nomination of the propo. sed committee he retorted upon the gentlemen on the other side by stating, that, in the names he proposed, there were a considerable proportion of THEIR FRIENDS, while it was to be recollectcd that in a former committee there were only two gentlemen who were understood to have any attachment to the party with which he had the honour to act.” Why really, from this, one would almost imagine, that “ the gentlemen on this side" and the “ gentlemen opposite” were, somehow or other, parties deeply concerned in the inquiries of this Committee, instead of being all members of the House of Commons, guardians of the public purse, equally anxious to bring abuses to light. It would almost seem, that the ins and the outs were

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

litigating persons, choosing arbitrators. I

say, it would almost seem so from this report of the debate ; but, to suppose it to be so would be absurd ; because we know how anxious both parties are to see substantial justice done to the country. We know their hatred of peculators and jobbers ; and, though they did very widely differ upon this appointment, we must suppose, that, on each side, they were anxious to have the honour of dragging scoundrels of public robbers into day, “You had your friends be“ fore, we will have our friends now.” As if he had said, your friends had all the honour before, ours ought now to have their turn. They, too, patriotic and zealous men, ought to have their share in the glory of putting down these public thieves. This is the sense in which we must understand the thing and then all goes right. During the debate, Mr. Biddulph proposed, that the name of Sir Francis Bardett should be put upon the list, upon which Lord Howick (late Mr. Grey of parliamentary-reform memory) is reported to have said “that, al“ though he could assure the house there was no gentleman on the other side more adverse to the general conduct of that person than he was—although no man was tuore the subject of that person's attack and that of the party, if such thy could be talled, who had acted with him,

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

still he would advise the adoption of the hon, gentietuan's suggestion. It would be recollected by any person acquainted with the history of the times—that notwithstanding the attempts always made, said the noble lord, to connect us with this person's party, there was no party in the country more obnoxious to them than that with which I have the honour to act. This gentleman, it will be observed, stands forward as the enemy of public abuses, and I would recommend ministers to keep a vacancy open for him in this Committee. There he will have an opportanity of inquiring into the abuses of which he complains, and proposing the remedy in a much more proper way than he has heretofore done, or attempted to do. I should therefore wish to have him afforded the opportunity, although I happen to be so obnoxious to his attacks, probably not so much from the impulse of his own mind, as in consequence of the incitement of others.” My lord, my good lord Howick, dismiss your fears; for, there is not one same man in the nation, who connects you with Sir Francis Burdett. When I saw one half of your lordship's face, at a window in Curzon Street, looking at Sir Francis Burdett's car, on the 29th of June, if any one had told me, that the Member for Appleby's name, as to political views, was connected

[ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

except by way of contrast, will never be mentioued with that of Sir Francis Burdett. With respect to the rejection of Sir Francis by the House, the thing was quite natural. It was what the people would, in such a case, expect. Had he not been rejected, I should have been exceedingly mortified ; because it would have led me to fear, that all was not right. Nor does Sir Francis want any opportunity of inquiring into the abuses, of which he complains. There is no need of it at all. What he complains of he has proof in divers documents, to which he can easily refer. Besides, my lord, what need is there of being upon a committee to conne at the knowledge of what you and “ the gentlemen on time o, her side” have been telling him for this fortlight past ou have obligiogy informed the people of all they wanted to know. The slaves of the press seem dreadfully alarmed, lest the people should know too much ; but their alarm and precaution, as well as those of others, come a little too late ; and their grave admonitions put one in mind of the old simile of shutting the stable door after the steed has strayed. Poor fellows ' They are afraid, that, in good earnest, they shall be cut off from their resources. Never mind then, my lord, out with it; out with the whole budget. Never stop at a brace of pensioned sisters. Let us have it all. We have, however, quite enough to satisfy us. We have seen the sample, and we reasonably conclude, that the whole sack is of the same quality.—III. SIR HENRY Mild MAY moved, on the 20th of June, for the laying of his memorial before the House. His speech entire is given in the preceding sheet, and I now insert the memorial entire, wishing to afford him every opportunity of justifying his conduct. But the memorial produces no one alleviating circumstance. The facts, the undeniable facts, remain unshaken.—Why, too, was this memorial delayed until the 29th of June 2 His contempt for the news-papers was not, surely, extended to the board of Commissioners ? He says, in a postscript, that the erpenses of the inquest amounted to -É250. For what For what, I ask Twelve men eat and drink, in one day, £250 worth! This is dear justice indeed. Oh, but his two counsellors / Aye, but the public are not to pay for that, I hope, especially as the government sent no one to plead against thern ? In short, it will not do. The more he struggles, the deeper he gets.-But, why move for the production of the memorial, without moving for some inquiry or discussion upon it? Why leave the matter there 2 Yet, there might have been incidental discussion, if Sir Henry's name had been put upon the list of the Finance Committee; but, this was prevented by his having modestly requested that his name might not be put upon it; though, as my readers will remember, he promised his Portsmouth dinner men, that he and Mr. Chute would be upon the Committee, and would take care to put an end to peculation and jolling to the utmost of their power The thing must not die, however, especially in Hampshire, where, if we should be so happy as to have another election, the subject will be fully discussed. IV. INDIA AFFAIRs. I wish, at present, merely to communicate to my readers iny suspicion, that a bill, about to be brought in by the new President of the Board of Controul

*

* * *

o

(Lord Melville's son), is intended to make the people of this country answerable for a part, at least, of the East-India Company's enorrious debt. I shall return to this subject in my next. In the meanwhile, I hope the public will be upon the watch. —V. SIERRA LEoNE. Here is another Company, who, having failed in their undertaking, are modest enough to wish to surrender their sovereignty, their territory, into the hands of the king, and to place their debts upon the shoulders of the public These are the Negro-loving gentlemen, who, in 1802, said, that with a little help, they should civilize the whole continent of Africa. Sixteen thousand pounds was grant. ed them by “ the guardians of the public “ purse of that day.” The same sum has been annually granted since ; and, now, behold, a bill is actually before the House for saddling this burthened nation with the whole concern. It will be useful to find out who are at the head of this concern. I foretold, in the teeth of the report, what this would come to, in 1802.--VI. The chapter of jobs is too long to enter upon here; and, it will, perhaps, come better in company with the remarks upon the reception of Lord Cochrane's motion, for which, at present, I have not room.

MEMORIAL OF SIR HENRY ST. J O HN MILDMAY To THE cox' Missioners of Mill TARY EN QUIRY ; LAID BE For E THE Hous E of CoM Moss, Upon His Motion, MAD s oN THE 29th of JUNE, 1807. Gentlemen, Having seen that several passages in your Fourth Report, which relate to transactions in which I am personally implicated, have been industriously employed for the purpose of casting upon me the imputation of having either received undue favour from the government, or taken undue advantage of the public, I feel myself under the necessity of troubling you with a more detailed explanation, of every particular of those transactions, than umy examinations before you (from whom I received no intimation of any such suspicion) were calculated to produce.—About the year 1803, it was thought necessary to raise very extensive fortifications in the neighbourhood of Chelmsford, and it was decided, that they should be carried through the park and farm adjoining, and at about 400 yards from a mansion house, in which I was compelled to reside three months in every year. Sir James Craig, who commanded in the district, made an application to me for permission to begin the works without delay; to which I acceded, under an express stipula

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

tion, that, when they were complete, I should be entitled to receive compensation for any injury I had sustained. During the period of my residence at Moulsham, these works were constructing; and from the multitude of persons employed in raising them, and the great concourse of military, which the expectation of invasion on the Eastern Coast had assembled in the neighbourhood of Chelmsford, my living there with my family had become extremely inconvenient and insecure. I continued however to reside in the house till the inconveniencies arising from the above circumstanstances became intolerable, and till my pro

perty had become exposed to every sort of

depredation; footpad robberies were also committed in the very field next adjoining my garden, nine nights out of ten. In addi. tion to these serious inconveniencies, permanent Barracks were erected on each side of my house, at the distance of about half a mile, which rendered it wholly unfit for my family to remain there; I therefore considered I had a claim on the government to relieve me, by law, from a residence, which their own measures, for the public safety, had rendered untenable.—To the application i made to Mr. Addington's government, I received the following letter. ** White“ hall, Nov. 30th, 1803. Sir, I have “ had the honour of receiving your letter of “ the 26th instant, and have made it my ‘‘ business to see Mr. Addington this day on “ the subject; and am directed by him to “ acquaint you, that applauding as he does “ the liberal manner in which you appear “ to be disposed to act towards the public,

“if you will have the goodness to direct

“ your agent to communicate with Mr.Van. “ sittart, he shall be extremely ready to do “ on his part what may be proper to give “ effect to your wishes, respecting your fa“ mily seat near Chelmsford, as soon as he “ clearly understands what is desired by “ you, and in what manner it ought to be “ accomplished. I have the honour to “ be, Sir, your faithful, humble servant, R. Pole Carew.—To Sir Henry St. John “ Mildmay, Bart.”——This led to a bill, brought in under the sanction of government, and passed, to relieve me from compulsory residence for four years, and to enable me to let the premises at Moulsham for the same period A treaty with government followed, for my house completely furnished, stables, garden, gardener's house, leasure grounds, and about 16 acres of meadow lauds.--This fair overture was, I think,

[ocr errors]

made to Colonel Gordon; by whom I was. told that my offer should be communicated,

to the Barrack Departmen", who would make a report on the subject. After which I was informed, that a report hood been received from the Barrack Departnvent, that government were ready to treat woul, me; and I was referred to the Secretary at War; on whom I waited immediately, and explained to him my terms, (which I had previously done in writing to Colonel Gordon) for the lease; which Mr. Dundas said must be referred to the Barrack Surveyor, who would be directed to inspect the state of the premises, and to report on my terms, before the agreement could be concluded. Mr. Johnson, a person wholly unknown to me, was sent down to Moulshaun for that purpose, without any intinuation to me, of the time at which he was to make his survey. This gentleman was unaccompanied and of course uncontrolled by any surveyor, architect, or other person on my behalf. The result of this inspection, (after stating the solidity of the building, and enumerating some trifling repairs which would be wanting) was in these words: “to put the house “ into tenantable repair, will cost the sum “ of 20250; the annual amount will not “ exceed £50 to keep them in repair. The “ taxes are supposed to amount to £143. If the said premises are put in proper re“ pair, and to include the 20 acres of plea“ sure ground, &c. round the house, as de“ scribed on the general plan, I am of opi“nion €400 per annum is a fair rent to “ give for the same, after Sir Henry has put “ the premises in repair.” J. Jo HNSoN, Archt. May 24th, 1804.——On this report being communicated to me by the Secretary at War, I stated, that I was not aware the house required any repair, as a very large sum of money had been recently expended upon it; which was proved in the Committee of the House of Lords; but that I was willing to give up the first half year's rent (amounting to £200) if government would take the repairs on then)selves, and make them in whatever manner they thought proper.—On these terms the Secretary at War agreed with me at the rate of 4-100 a year for 4 years. Possession of the premises was given to government on the 24th of June, 1804, and they began the repairs immediately. I have in no way whatever interfered since that period, either with the occupation of the house, or with the repairs.—'t must be obvious to every one, that when be government were once put in possessio 1 of the premises, whether they chuse to use them

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

for the residence of a lieutenant general and

his staff, or only for a major general, or whether they thought it adviseable to make

any use of them, was a matter with which I had nothing to do, and for which I cannot be responsible. With respect also to the repairs, I must remark, that having paid .6200 according to agreement, I had nothing more to do with the transaction, and whether the money laid out on the premises has either amounted to, or exceeded that sum, I am at this moment wholly ignorant. During the whole of this transaction, I was not aware that any part of the arrangement was a matter of consideration for the Treasury; and I had at no time during its progress any communication on the subject directly or indirectly, to the best of my knowledge and belief, with any person connected with that department. I have already stated, that government took possession of the premises at . Moulsham Hall, and the land let with it, on the 24th June, 1804. On the 6th of August following (the military works in my park being nearly completed) a precept was signed by Sir James Craig : in consequence of which, a special jury, composed of the most respectable gentlemen and magistrates in the county of Essex, (General Strutt being foreman) was o in the Mansion House on the 18th of the same month. Government had then been about eight weeks in full possession of it, with the cther premises, and they had made considerable progress in the repairs, and it was notorious to all the country, that an agreement had been entered into between government and myself, which had placed the house in the hands of the Barrack Office.—The jury examined the evidence, took a very minute and accurate survey and view of the military works, and the damages; and after being shut for more than two hours, made the following award, as stated in the report page 164 – “ One thousand three hundred pounds to “ be paid for the use and possession of the lands (stated to contain 30 acres, 1 rood, 39 poles, in the occupation of Thomas Chandler and Wm. Meyhill, as tenants to Sir Henry Mildmay, but then occupied by the military works) from Michaelmas 1803 to Michaelmas 1804, and from that time of 600 a year so long as the same should be in the possession of his Majesty.”——There is nothing in this verdict which by any possible construction can have reference to the contract, which I had entered into with government, for the lease of my house, furniture, stables, garden, gardener's house, &c. I can neither conceive that this verdict precluded me from residence in the house, if I had thought proper; from pulling it down; from letting it to any in-dividual, or to the government; or inter

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

feres with any disposition of it, which I may s judge it prudent to make.—It is not possible that it could be considered, that the letting of my house for four years only, at £400 per annum, ready furnished, could be a compensation for the use of the land covered by the military works, and for the injury my house and estate must sustain, so long as those works should be continued; for it must be observed, that the contract for the house terminates in June, 1808, but there is no limit within my choice as to the occupation of the ground for the military works. Government may keep it as long as they please. The verdict confines itself strictly to 30 acres of land, which is particularly described to be in the occupation of Thomas Chandler and Wm. Meyhill, and which is stated to be covered by the field works. If the jury had intended to include the rent of the house, furniture, &c. in their verdict, they would have expressed such intention distinctly; on the contrary, they have stated their precise meaning to be otherwise, by defining the lands, as those alone occupied by the military works, containing 30 A. l R. 39 :-. in the occupation of Chandler and Meyhill. The premises let with the house, amount to about 20 acres, and the lands occupied by the military works, 30 acres. Had the jury intended to include both in their verdict, they would have stated 50 acres, and not 30. The lands let with the house were never in the occupation of Thomas Chandler and William. Meyhill, nor were any part of them used for the military works. It is therefore most obvious, that the jury did not mean to include them in their verdict, or to meddle in any way (as indeed I understood afterwards) * with any disposition, or any purpose, to which I might convert the use of the house and furniture and premises. This construction of the verdict of 12 of most respectable gentlemen, cannot be a wrong one.—I will only further remark, that by a referenee to various transactions of a similar nature, as well between individuals, as where the public has been a party, it will be found, the compensation which I have received, under all circumstances, has not been beyond that which has been customarily given.—On the - amount of the rent which I receive for the house, &c. from the public, I must beg leave to say, that having expended 50200 on repairs, which I did not deem necessary, my receipt is reduced to £350. The land occupied with the house, garden, gardener's house, &c. cannot be valued at less than of 60 a year. The furniture of a house containing 14 rooms on a floor, one of them 50

feet longs can be estimated at no inconsider

« ZurückWeiter »