Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

responsible for the fulfilment of the term. Government had nothing to do with the scrip-holders. As to that part of the Resolutions which censured the terms of the loan, it was easy for ingenious men to confound facts, by stating some that were true, and omitting others that were equally true, so as to make their reasoning upon them apply to the particular purpose for which they were drawn up. His greatest objections to the resolutions were, that in them the hon. mover had contrived to put together a collection of truths, in such a manner as to convey all the malignity and venom of falsehood. He adverted to the term "open and free competition," from which he was said to have departed, and remarked, that in order to secure the interests of the public, and prevent the manœuvres of designing persons, every competition must, to a certain degree, be qualified, at least by the consideration how far the parties were competent to fulfil their bargain. He never meant any but a system of qualified competition; and from this it was not true, as stated in the resolution, that he had made a total departure. He then justified the propriety of his own conduct, in not having left himself at the mercy of Boyd and Co. but, when the qualified competition which he held out was declined by the others, in having taken such precautions as still enabled him to name his own terms. But he was asked, why did he not send the loan back again into the city? What after it had been rejected by two sets of gentlemen, and when it would come in the less inviting shape of qualified competition ! When the most favourable terms could only bring forward three parties, was it probable that the less favourable terms would produce more? When a day was fixed for conversation on the loan, it was necessary that some interval should take place, that the parties might deliberate on the terms. When all was finally arranged, he saw no good that could possibly arise from a delay of fortyeight hours, a period of suspense and uncertainty, of which advantage might be taken to occasion fluctuations in the public funds; one circumstance that made him determine not to let the contractor leave his house till the bargain was closed. He accounted for the delay which took place between the time the bargain was made, and its being intimated to the House, by his being disappointed in bringing on the budget, as he first intended,

It was well

on the 2nd of December. known that the pressure of public business totally precluded him from making the necessary arrangements for the budget. He defended the manner in which he had exercised his discretion in making the terms; and considering the state of the country, he thought credit was due to those efforts by which government had been able to contract for so large a loan in the fourth year of the war, upon even better terms than had been obtained in former years.

The next point was the effect of the king's message. Those who knew him best, knew that it was not in his mind when the bargain was made. But if he had foreseen it, he could not have foreseen the rise that took place in the stocks. He was no party to any such fraud; but to whatever cause that temporary rise was to be ascribed, it certainly was not produced by the message only. There was nothing more in the message than a declaration, that the time was arrived, to which his majesty had alluded in his speech to parliament. Those who carried its meaning farther, were either too sanguine in their expectation, or intended to raise hopes which could not be realized. Besides the message, there were other collateral causes for the sudden rise of the stocks-the unexpected victories of the Austrians, the increasing distresses of the enemy, the tranquil appearance of affairs at home, compared with that turbulent aspect which they bore during the period when the terms of the loan were originally settled. All these causes, coupled with the intimation that peace only depended on the disposition of the enemy, combined to give that sudden and extraordinary rise to the funds, which singly they would have failed to produce. After all, the extent of the benefit to the contractors, and of the loss to the public, had been greatly over-rated. An exaggerated statement of figures had been brought forward, in order to be echoed through the country. It had been stated, that the profit upon the loan amounted to 12 per cent. It amounted to this sum only for four days, during which stocks were exceedingly fluctuating; so that altogether it did not bear this price for above a few hours. order therefore to make this profit, all the shares must have been disposed of within those few hours; a circumstance which would have brought such a quantity into the market, as must have occasioned a

In

depression, that would greatly have overbalanced the temporary rise. All the profit is stated to centre in the individual contractors, and all the concurring and unforeseen causes, which operated to give so favourable a turn to the terms of the loan to have been the result of premeditation on my part. Under these circumstances, I am said to have given away the sum of 2,160,000l. by the mode of negociating the present loan! With this assertion the charge against me concludes, and with entreating the House to consider the extravagance of this assertion I conclude my defence.

Mr. Fox said, that he must, from the evidence before him, vote for the original proposition; and among the reasons which he had for the vote, he should give, was that of some expressions of the learned gentleman who had proposed the amendment, and also of the minister himself, who had said, that they had inferred guilt where there was no evidence of it, and had made insinuations which they half retracted. He thought he knew his duty too well ever to insinuate guilt, where there was no suspicion. With regard to the guilt, as it appeared to him in this case, he would state it to the House, as well as what he conceived to be the nature of the accusation. The mover of the resolutions never imputed personal corruption to the minister. He too, had always acquitted the right hon. gentleman of such corruption. But improvidence, in a minister of finance was no small erime; he was surprised to hear it stated as a mere peccadillo. What! improvidence in a chancellor of the exchequer a mere peccadillo! It was a very serious charge against a minister, to say that he had, in a transaction of this vast importance, made an improvident bargain. But it was not improvident merely; it was made under such suspicious circumstances, as the House ought not to be too ready to excuse. He must protest against the doctrine that no bad motive should be assigned to the minister, if it could not be proved what that motive was. This was against the common order of things, and entitled him to say, that the motive could not be a good one where the effect was so bad, and the circumstances so suspicious. The first point to which he should call the attention of the House, was the mode of transacting the loan. The right hon. gentleman had all along been an advocate for free and open com

petition. But how stood the matter in point of fact? In 1793, he brought before the House a bargain so extravagant, that he attempted to defend it only by stating, that it had been the result of a free and open competition. Why, then, he could not help suspecting the fairness of that loan, in which the minister abandoned this mode. This loan was as extravagant in point of terms, and more objectionable in point of manner, than the loan of 1793. And here he must make an observation, that the right hon. gentleman's exceptions were greater than his rules. For it was not true, that he had in substance followed the principle of public competition. The last two loans were not made by competition, and, in point of quantity, they nearly equalled all the others put together; amounting to pretty nearly fifty millions. The minister, therefore, had abandoned the practice of public competition; fifty millions had been added to the capital of our debt, and that without a competition in the bidding for the loans. According to the principles of common sense, was he not called upon to say that this loan was an improvident bargain for the public? And he would ask, whether the minister should pass uncensured, merely because it could not be proved what his motives were?-Mr. Fox then proceeded to take notice of the evidence as printed in the report, by which be inferred that a preference was really intended to be given to Mr. Boyd. At all events, it was extremely material to know when the minister had the first notice of Mr. Boyd's claims. On this point he thought Mr. Boyd's evidence inconsistent with the right hon. gentleman's declaration. Mr. Boyd said positively, on his examination, that as early as October he preferred his claim, and that the chancellor of the exchequer being convinced of its justice, came under a promise to give him the preference. To forget such an important fact as this, admitted neither of palliation nor excuse. Was it nothing, after having come under a positive promise to prefer an individual, to give notice to the governor of the bank of his intention to hold out proposals of public competition, in which he knew it would not be in his power to persevere, and which, in fact, he had been obliged to abandon? And here he would say some. thing upon the claim of Mr. Boyd. If the claim was invalid, it would only vary the degree of guilt; and if valid it was singular

that it should have been entirely forgotten. It certainly was not a claim founded upon a direct written or verbal agreement, but even though the claim was good, it was not sufficient to stand between him and the public. For, supposing that it would. have been better for the nation to have given the contractors a pecuniary com pensation; if the chancellor of the exchequer, or if the country, were bound to the contractors, they were bound to the contributors; and if such a compensa tion had been granted, it would have been but fair that its advantages should have been extended to the contributors, as well as to the contractors; for how the country could be bound to the contractor and not to the contributor, he was at a loss to conceive. It was said that these came under some degree of risk. But how long did it exist? Only till the deposit was made. What was the nature of the risk? A risk might be so much that it might be nothing at all. The contractor might sometimes be obliged to hold scrip for a considerable time; but so was the contributor, and the risk on his part was only less, as the contractor had commonly a greater share than the contributor. In the nature of things, then, there was nothing to authorize the claim.--Much stress had been laid on the conversation which took place between the chancellor of the exchequer and Mr. Boyd, in 1794. It seemed, the chancellor of the exchequer, in order to hasten the payment of the loan, had said, that the following February would be too late for the last instalment, because it might be necessary to negociate a new loan before that time. This expression was represented as a virtual recognizance of the claim of Mr. Boyd. But it was not necessary to ascribe this conversation to a tenderness for Mr. Boyd's right, when it was much more natural to suppose it proceeded from a concern for the public interest. This casual ex. pression, however, had such an effect upon the mind of the right hon. gentleman, that he could not efface the idea of Mr. Boyd's peremptory right to shut the market against new loans, till the last instalment upon the preceding loan should have been paid. To all this the right hon. gentleman asked, "Have I shown any symptoms of partiality to Mr. Boyd? On the contrary, was it not with the greatest reluctance that I deserted my favourite system, in order to satisfy his claim?" We had often seen reluctance used as a veil under which to conceal the

commission of acts which ought not to have been committed. With what "sweet, reluctant, amorous delay," the right hon. gentleman took leave of his professions he knew not. Still, however, he kept up some degree of competition. But if he was aware that it was such a competition as to excite contempt, it was a miserable expedient to cover his determination; and if he had a better opinion of it, why did he abandon it at the instance of two angry men? But here occurred a question of moment, respecting the time at which the loan was made. On account of some pressing business in the House, the minister could not bring on the budget, but yet he could not put off the loan, but concluded the bargain twelve days before he notified it to parliament; whereas, on former occasions, it used only to be concluded two or three days before the opening of the budget.-Mr. Fox then proceeded to speak of the motives which actuated the negotiation. If it was not allowed to operate as an instrument of corruption, it certainly had some reference to a transaction which took place in September, in which Mr. Boyd raised 2,500,000l. for government upon treasury bills, bearing a fictitious date at Hamburgh, though drawn here. This transaction he reprobated as extremely discreditable to government, and as disgraceful to those who set it on foot. When he saw the right hon. gentleman abandon his principles; when he saw him abandon them at the suit of an individual; and when he saw him abandon them in favour of this individual, after being engaged in a discreditable transaction with him, the circumstance could not but excite suspicion, and it would require stronger reasons than any that he had adduced to establish his innocence. But, said the right hon. gentleman, this was only a necessary supply, which Mr. Boyd advanced in the most liberal manner for the service of the country, in a time of difficulty, and when it would have been exceedingly inconvenient to have convened parliament. This representation served only to enhance the favour conferred by Mr. Boyd, and to establish the relation between that transaction and the negotiation of the present loan; for to relieve the minister from difficulties in which he had involved himself by im providence or extravagance, was too great an obligation to be easily forgotten. He might have negociated a short loan in September, which would have ope

[ocr errors]

He

rated as a present supply till after the ill character of the pecuniary concerns holidays; but this, it seems, could not of this country.-Mr. Fox next prohave been explained to France, nor would ceeded to take notice of the different it have given that power half the idea of causes, which the minister had assigned our financial superiority which she must for the rise in the price of the funds soon necessarily have formed from such a after the loan was contracted for, and highly-creditable transaction, as raising declared that he was clearly of opinion, money by means of fictitious Hamburgh that the king's message, which came to bills! Mr. Fox adverted to that part of that House on the day after the budget, the Report which related to Mr. Morgan. was the chief cause of that rise. The That gentleman had expressed himself right hon. gentleman contended, that the in his evidence consistently. It had news of the Austrian victories, had a been said, that Mr. Morgan appeared to considerable share in promoting the rise. be angry with the minister on this occa- These victories, let it be recollected, sion. Was that unnatural in a man, who were pretty general known before the felt that he had been insulted with a 25th of November. The rapid decay of mockery of competition? He had lost the French finances was assigned as anothat which was the object of his heart, ther cause of this political phænomenon. the loan, and therefore there was nothing He begged, however, to know, whether, wonderful in his anger. Mr. Morgan had after the 25th of November, the French said he would have made a bargain for the finances had decayed so rapidly, that even loan, which would have been better for the most sanguine calculator found his the public than this. Here was at once, calculations far short of the truth. then, the best of all possible evidences, was the more surprised at hearing this the evidentia rei, that the bargain was an language when he recollected that about improvident one. Why, it was asked, eight months ago they were described as did Mr. Morgan not bid above Mr. Boyd being in the agonies of death, in the very by his proxy in the House of Commons gulph of bankruptcy. All arguments rewhen the subject was debated, up to the specting the decay of the French finances, whole amount, which he stated the public he considered as so many childish and to have lost? The answer to this ques- contemptible pretences to veil the sustion was plain, and Mr. Morgan had al-picious conduct of the chancellor of the ready given it. He did not bid for the public good, but for his own good, and therefore, when he was bidding to the House of Commons when they were called upon to ratify a bad bargain, a sum considerable enough to make that bargain much better for the public, the less he advanced the better for himself. Such was the admission of Mr. Morgan; and he had not the smallest scruple to declare, that he felt as much willingness to believe a man who thus admitted that he wished to take care of his own interest, as he who pretended, in money matters, to have nothing in view but the public good. Here, then, we had a man preferred by the minister, with whom transactions of a very suspicious nature had been carried on, and this preference had cost the public an immense sum of money. What was he to say, on such a case? What could he say, but that the minister proceeded upon some motive or other that, from the circumstances and the manner of it, had rather the appearance of a bad than a good one? It had certainly operated to the very great detriment of the public at large, and to the

exchequer. When the right hon. gentleman was obliged to have recourse to such pretexts, in his opinion, no accuser could say more against him. He concluded with maintaining, that the terms of the loan were much more extravagant, not than the country had paid at some former times, but in comparison with the terms which might now have been obtained, by free and open competition; and gave it as his opinion, that the chancellor of the exchequer had been guilty of a breach of duty.

Mr. Sheridan said, that every possible method had been resorted to that day to mislead the attention of the House, and draw it away from the main question for consideration? No corruption on the part of the minister had been insinuated by his hon. friend; but he never could forget, that the chancellor of the exchequer, had himself, some years ago, made a similar charge against a noble friend of his, then the minister of finance*. The

* Lord John Cavendish, chancellor of the exchequer during the Coalition Administration, See Vol. 25, p.769..

right hon. gentleman had been one of the first at that day to raise a cry against his noble friend; he was therefore of all men the least entitled to complain, in terms of indignation and haughty resentment, that something should be said which might be considered as an implied censure of the transaction of a bargain for a loan made by himself, and attended with circumstances of a most questionable nature. A committee above stairs had been appointed. The examination had been chiefly in the hands of the right hon. gentleman's personal friends. He did not, therefore, envy the right hon. gentleman the triumph termed his acquittal; because he owned, had his public conduct as a minister of finance, been to have been made a subject of inquiry, he should not have considered a report in his favour from such a committee, a very honourable ground of pride or exultation. The report of the committee, he considered Little better than a mockery, and rejoiced that he was not one of those who were responsible for it. Mr. Sheridan then touched upon the several circumstances of the loan in a general manner, and declared, that his own opinion of what gained Mr. Boyd the preference was the transaction of the Hamburgh bills, a transaction which, he had a right to say, tended to tarnish the national credit, as the governor of the bank had not hesitated to declare, that if such a transaction had been operated by a private merchant, it would have been deemed a disgrace to his house. When he reviewed the chain of singular circumstances, that connected the different parts of the transaction, when he considered how extremely suspicious they were, the manner in which the inquiry had been conducted, the points left unexplained, and the sort of reasoning that had that day been set up in defence of it, he could not but withhold his assent from any resolution of approbation.

The House divided on Mr. Smith's first Resolution:

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

The 39th

first thirty-eight Resolutions. and 40th were negatived; and the following moved by Mr. Douglas, passed in their stead, viz.

"Resolved, 1. That it appears to this House, that the terms of the loan were fixed with a due regard to the magnitude of the sums borrowed, and provided for, as well as to the market price of the funds, and the situation of public affairs, at the time the bargain was concluded.

2. "That it appears to this House, that, in every part of the transaction of the late loan, the conduct of the chancellor of the exchequer was actuated by a view to the public interest; and that there is no ground to suppose that any interference took place on the part of any persons connected with government in the distribution of the said loan.”

February 29. Mr. Jekyll brought forward his promised motion respecting certain Treasury Bills bearing a fictitious date at Hamburgh, and moved the following Resolutions:

1. That it appears to this House, that, in the month of September 1795, Walter Boyd, esq. did, at the request of the chancellor of the exchequer, undertake to advance money for the use of government to the amount of one million, for which he was to reimburse himself by bills to be drawn upon the lords commissioners of the Treasury, to be accepted by them, and negotiated at his own convenience, and that bills to the amount of 700,000%. were drawn in London on the commissioners of the Treasury, in the name of Walter Boyd, jun. bearing a fictitious date at Hamburgh, several weeks preceding the time at which, with the privity of the chancellor of the exchequer, they were really drawn in London; and that the said Walter Boyd, jun. is a gentleman not engaged in any house of business at Hamburgh.

2. "That it appears to this House, that the amount of the said bills was immediately paid into the office of the paymaster of his majesty's forces, in direct breach of an act of parliament, and that the said bills, though drawn in London, yet professing to be foreign, and not written on stamped paper, were of such a nature and description as the Bank of England would have refused to discount for any commercial house whatever, and such as it would have been injurious to the credit of any private house to have nego ciated.

« ZurückWeiter »