it may be useful to suggest the general reasons:

First, the public have an interest in thus preferring the bank, which is nearly similar to that which the commissiouers may individually be supposed to have had in favouring their respective bankers. Andeed, since the Report on the Bank of England, made by the former committee on Public Expenditure, in which the average amount of the government balances in the bank was stated, that corporation has consented to make some compensation for benefit of this kind, by affording to the public the loan of a consider able sum without interest. A general intention of employing the Bank of England as the banker of the public, was then professed; and there can be no doubt that every preference shewn to the bank ought now to be considered as contributing to the liberal fulfilment of the general conditions of that arrangement, and even though not repaid by a specific compensation, as producing some corresponding advantages.

The more safe custody of the public money entrusted to the commissioners, is another motive for lodging it in the bank. Your committee conceive, that in the case of any loss arising out of the confidence which the commissioners have placed in private banks (an event, in the present high state of credit, admitted to be extremely improbable) the commissioners would have been personally responsible.

considerable balance of cash. The public accountants, who keep cash in the bank, are therefore under no temptation to render their balances necessarily large, and are likely not to fail in the punctuality of their payments into the exchequer.

Your committee have next to notice the too great magnitude of the balances of cash which appear in the cash-book of the commissioners, especially during a large part of the two first years, a subject not unconnected with the preceding observations.

The paper in the appendix shews the balance to have been, at the end of October, 1795, about 100,000l. and to have gradually risen by the end of April, 1796, to above 200,000l. between which period and the end of May, 1797, it fell to about 160,000l. It fluctuated be tween about 80 and 120,000l. during the next four years, and between 50 and 70,000l. during almost the whole succeeding period,

Your committee have learned by their inspection of the minute-book: of the commissioners, that on the 25th February, 1796, information was asked on the part of Mr. Pilt, whether any and what sum then in hand arising from the disposal of Dutch property, could be paid into the exchequer for the service of the current year; and that the commissioners replied, that no payment of consequence into the bank according to the act of parliament could be made, unless the treasury should first move the lords of the privy council to direct the India Company to pay a sum (amounting to about 118,000/ ( then due from the company to the commissioners.

At the time of thes aplication, the balance in haud, the amount of Kk 3 which

which appears not to have been stated to the treasury, was about 190,000l. and it was never so low as 150,000l. in the course of the next 15 months, a balance apparent ly much more than sufficient to allow of a payment of 50,000l. (the sum usually transferred at one time) into the bank under the act. The commissioners state to your committee, that demands upon them to the amount of not less than about 260,000 were then outstanding; but this sum must obviously comprise the payments which were to be expected in a long succeeding period, for all the actual payments of the following 16 months (if a sum of 50,000l. paid to government on the 30th June, 1796, and of 40,000l. transferred on the 31st December 1796, to the commissioners, on account of commission, and of about 49,000l. paid to captors, which had been previously received from the East India Company for that purpose within the same period, are excepted) amounted to only about 143,000l. according to a statement of the commissioners. These payments are undoubtedly no exact or very sure criterion of the sum which might fairly be considered on the 25th February, 1796, as likely to be wanted. They however furnish a strong presumption on the subject, and the circumstance of the 50,000l. Just mentioned having been afforded to government, besides 40,000l. to the commissioners, a few months after the 25th February, 1796, with out producing a reduction of the balance below, 150,000l. affords additional reason for thinking that there was no sufficient ground for objecting to make a payment into the exchequer as desired. It is further observable, that the com

missioners, in their statement on this subject, to your committee, omit to mention the sums which in February, 1796, they might expect to receive. The sums actually received in the first fifteen of the above mentioned sixteen 'months, (exclusive of the 49,000l. which were both received from the East India Company, and paid over to captors as already stated) appear by a paper called for by your committee, to have been more than equal to the sum paid in the corresponding period, if the before mentioned payments of 50,000l. to government and 40,000l. to the commissioners are included. It is moreover observable, that a sum of from 86,000l. to 665,000l. (which in conformity to a clause in 35 Geo. 3. c. 80, was gathering interest at 4 per cent.) lay in the hands of the East India Company from the beginning of March 1796, to March 1798, being the produce of sales made by them from time to time on account of the commissioners, a part of which fund, supposing a proper understanding on this subject to have subsisted between the commissioners, the government and the East India Company, might have been convertible to the purpose of supplying the commissioners with the means of meeting some of the demands coming unexpectedly upon them. It is therefore on the whole, presumeable, that at the time of the application in question, a further augmentation of the large balance already in hand, rather than a diminution of it, was reasonably to be expected.

Your committee cannot contemplate the magnitude of the balances as they appear in the cash-book of the commissioners, without expres

sing an opinion, that (supposing it allowable for the commissioners to adopt that construction of the act, which they have given to it) these balances ought to have been made productive by investing a very large proportion of them in exchequer bills for the benefit of the public. Probably not less than between 40 and 50,000l. would have accrued in the way of interest from a due attention to economy on the part of the commnissioners in this particular, and the employment of the chief part of their large cash for such a purpose would have constituted a much better apology than has been offered by them for withholding from the bank the sums which the act, according to the strict construction of it, required to be paid into it, and would unquestionably have been the most convenient arrangement.

. In the year 1799, a sum of 27,000l. due to captors, was turned to this use, which, through the accumulation of interest, amounted to 88,5531. at the time when it was paid; and a sum of about 33,000l. has been obtained for interest on the balances in the hands of the East India Company.

It has indeed been discovered in the progress of these "inquiries, that the commissioners have availed themselves of the opportunity so obviously afforded them of rendering their balances productive, but that they employed them, during the years which preceded the completion of their sales, entirely with a view to their own emolument.They have invested a part of them in exchequer bills, a part in India bonds, and a small part in the very exceptionable article of bills of ex

change on private individuals, which they have discounted.

No minute was made of any resolution of the board to employ any part of the cash in hand in this manner, and no proof of such employment of it appears among the receipts and payments of the cashbook; the balances of which therefore do not exhibit, as they ought to do, the amount of cash in the hands of the bank, and of the several bankers, but include the sum lent out at interest: neither has any trace of the transaction been exbibited in any account, nor any mention of it been made to government, except that at about the same time when it was stated to the committee on Public Expenditure, the treasury were furnished with a copy of the statement. The committee itself did not at once receive correct or explicit information on this point.

It will appear by the papers and evidence annexed, that on the 2d of March 1807, the commissioners were directed (nearly in the same terms in which the heads of other offices were required to furnish their returns) to give an "account of their establishment and names, how paid, salary, fees, and other emolu. ments, and amount of their receipts on an average of the last three years." The commissioners stated in their return, that they had " no salary, fees or emoluments, they being paid the usual commission on the sale of the property placed under their care, out of which they paid salaries to clerks, and all other expences of their establishment;" and they proceeded to say, that "their sales having ceased from the year 1798, and consequently their commission also, they expected to

be allowed, on the final settlement of their accounts, a reasonable remuneration for their services since that period." In an examination of one of the commissioners which took place a week after, he having mentioned that "a sum had been invested for the benefit of captors," was thereupon asked, "what was the amount of the sum vested in public securities?" and he replied, "about 27,000l. for the captors, and the whole remainder is invested also in public securities, which we shall account for to government (when we close our accounts) with interest."

In an explanatory paper, delivered to the committee a fortnight after this examination, the commissioners, after stating, "that they have taken particular care from time to time not to retain a larger balance than was necessary to meet the exigencies to which they were liable," add, that they have invested the greatest part of that money in public securities, with a view of making it productive while it remained in their hands." They then say, that they consider themselves accountable to government for the interest thus accruing." These expressions seem to your committee to imply, that they considered themselves accountable to overnment for whatever interestthey had at any time received by lending the balances in hand, with the exception only of that portion of interest for which they had represented themselves as accountable to captors. They further observe in this explanatory paper, that "on the other hand, having received no commission since the year 1799, hey conceive that the services, they

have since rendered, will not be more than adequately compensated by that interest, &c.” But when the commissioners were specifically required, by a subsequent order of 9th March 1808, to render "an account of interest and benefit of any kind derived from the possession of any money which, in virtue of their commission, may from time to time have remained in their hands, and of which no account had been rendered to the treasury,” they took a distinction between two considerable sums, received by them for interest at different periods, the one a sum of about 18,0001, (or of about 16,000. according to a subsequently corrected statement) received for interest before the completion of their sales; the other, a sum of about 26,000l. received after that period; and they remarked, that "it is for the last of these sums that they have declared themselves ready to account;" but that as to the smaller sum, first receiv ed," they have only kept an account of it as between themselves." They have declared themselves unable to furnish, from their private papers, all the information which has been asked respecting the sum first received, but they confidently remark, that the profit thus made is not more than the sum stated.

They endeavour to establish their title to the sum first received partly by claiming interest on their ba lances as a privilege common to public accountants, and partly by observing, that the sum in question is not equal to certain sums which they had relinquished, though entitled to them. The chief sum said to be so relinquished is that part of their commission which had been

applied

applied by them to the payment of the expences of their establishment (amounting to about 15,000l.) from the burthen of supporting which they now claimed a right to be exempt, although, in their original return, they had professed to charge themselves with it. Another sum, which they take credit for having relinquished, consists of some commission which they forbore to charge to captors, but the reason assigned for this renunciation is one which your committee cannot countenance or approve.

Annexed is a paper transmitted by one of the commissioners, in explanation of the meaning of the expressions used in their first return; but, in the judgment of your committee, it has not removed the ground of any of the preceding Observations.

Your Committee now proceed to the last point on which it is necessary to dwell, namely, the Amount and Mode of Remuneration which, under all circumstances of the present case, seem the most proper to be adopted.

The following is the amount of the Profits which were stated on the 10 Feb. 1809, to have been received by the Commissioners:

Commission at five per-cent, on the gross proceeds of their sales, after paying charges of their establishment.. ..74,137 Brokerage.... 4,346 Interest.. 36,458

Much the larger part of their Commission has been charged on property sold for them by the East India Company, who, by a clause in 37 Geo. 3. c. 80. were allowed five per-cent. for their expence in effecting such sales.

The Commissioners, in their first Return, have termed a commission of five per-cent. on the gross proceeds of their sales, "the usual commission;" but two and a half per-cent. on the gross proceeds is the highest rate common among merchants, and is the rate charged by them in the case of goods sold through the medium of the East India Company. The interest which the Commissioners have derived from the great balance of cash in their hands is not warranted by mercantile practice, an exact interest account being generally kept between merchants selling on commission and their employers, to whom indeed they frequently make large advances; and a commission of two and a half per-cent. is, there fore to be considered as in some measure a recompence for that accommodation. It may be further remarked, that the extraordinary magnitude of the sales of the commissioners form a reasonable ground

for