GENERAL HISTORY. 



[17 



violated by this bill ; for last year 

 the country only recognized one 

 court; but parliament was now 

 called upon to establish two courts. 

 The honourable member then went 

 over the pecuniary provisions of" the 

 bill, and said that it went to form 

 funds over which parliament would 

 have no control, and that the 

 privy purse, instead of belonging 

 to the office of king, would come 

 to belong to the man, which was a 

 complete perversion of its intention. 

 He next made various observations 

 respecting the Prince's debts, which 

 he thought it would be better to 

 pay off at once, than to place in 

 his hands a sum " to meet certain 

 engagements of honour" to an un- 

 known extent, and with the possi- 

 bility of being unable, through 

 fresh embarrassments, to discharge 

 them. The charges of the civil 

 list were stated to have exceeded 

 the funds by a large annual ave- 

 rage, which had hitherto been 

 made good from other sources, and 

 if these became insufficient, then it 

 would be necessary to come to 

 parliament. What was this but 

 an indirect statement that an addi- 

 tion was to be made to the civil 

 list to the amount of this average 

 excedent, while in the outset the 

 Prince was to be curtailed of 

 50,000/. enjoyed by his father? 

 The fact was, that this was a plan 

 to keep the Prince Regent always 

 in restraitit, always under the ne- 

 cessity of applying for something to 

 ministers, for which, no doubt, he 

 was to give something to ministers 

 in return. Mr. T. dwelt for some 

 time on the idea of distrust of the 

 Prince Regent shown in the bill, 

 and then adverted to the great in- 

 crease of influence which it gave 

 the queen ; and he concluded with 

 Vol., LIV. 



expressing his wish that it were 

 deferred to a distant day, and that 

 a committee were appointed for in- 

 vestigating all the matters which 

 could throw light upon the subject, 



Mr, Johnstone made some obser- 

 vations concurring with those of 

 the last speaker, particularly with 

 respect to the importance of settling 

 a specific adequate sum for the 

 civil list, which should not be ex- 

 ceeded ; and he supposed that if 

 there had not been such a fund as 

 the droits of admiralty to have re- 

 course to, the excess of charges 

 would not have taken place, and 

 ministers would have economised 

 better. He gave an instance of the 

 want of adhering to the strict prin- 

 ciple of the civil list, in a payment 

 to sir Sidney Smith of a sum for ex- 

 traordinary disbursements in 1798, 

 which was not paid till 1811. This 

 circumstance was explained by Mr. 

 Matthew Montague, as the mere 

 discharge of a debt for money 

 advanced. 



SirThos, Turton, from a cursory 

 view of the documents on the 

 table, would point out one item 

 which in his opinion would render 

 the proposed addition of 70,000/, 

 to the civil list wholly unnecessary. 

 This was that of the diplomacy, 

 the charge on which had exceeded 

 the estimate of 1804 by no less a 

 sum than 96,000/. He adverted to 

 one particular sum charged, which 

 was that of 16^000/. for the marquis 

 Wellesley's mission to Spain for a 

 few months ; this might possibly 

 be a very proper item, but without 

 further investigation he could not 

 know it to be so. 



Mr. Whitbread, after alluding 

 to the cases of sir S. Smith and 

 marquis Wellesley as proofs that 

 further investigation was requisite, 



[C] called 



