S4] ANNUAL REGISTER, lSi2. 



supply its deficiencies, and the great 

 txcess of expenditure still acknow- 

 ledi^ed, which had been paid out 

 of this fund without application to 

 parliament; and he went through 

 several of the items of grants from 

 the admiralty droits,which appeared 

 to him of an unconstitutional kind. 

 He conclu<led a long and eloquent 

 speech with moving a string of 

 resolutions. The first of these de- 

 clared " That the possession by the 

 crown of funds raised otherwise 

 than by the grant of supplies from 

 the commons in parliament assem- 

 bled, and applicable to purposes 

 not previously ascertained by par- 

 liament, is contrary to the spirit of 

 the constitution, liable to great 

 abuses, and full of danger to the 

 rights of the subject, and tlie in- 

 terests of the country." The sub- 

 sequent resolutions went on to 

 assert the duty of" the House of 

 Commons to inquire into the na- 

 ture of such funds — to state what 

 the funds are which are called 

 droits of admiralty, and their pre- 

 sent amount, and also the fact of 

 their having been disposed of with- 

 out the interference of parlianaent 

 — and to assert the intention of the 

 House forthwith to proceed to 

 inquire into the best means for 

 bringing these funds under the 

 oontroul of parliament, for the 

 purpose of applying them to the 

 poblic service, and of providing 

 sueh additional sums, if any, as 

 may be necessary to the main- 

 tenance of the royal house- 

 hold. 



Mr. Brand rose to second the 

 motion. He thought it almost an 

 axiom in the constitution that this 

 House ought to have the disposal of 

 all the revenue of the crown, and 



he recapitulated some of the obser- 

 vations of the former speaker. 



Mr. Courtenay said, his princi- 

 pal object in rising was to protest 

 iigainst the principle of having a 

 stipendiary king, with an income 

 fixed by parliament, and never to 

 be exceeded. He thought the 

 honourable and learned gentleman's 

 supposition of the prerogative of 

 the crown being abused in the 

 manner represented, improbable, 

 and the danger theoretical ; and 

 he declared his intention of voting 

 against the motion. 



The Attorney General began with 

 considering the first question stated 

 by his hon. and learned friend ; 

 whether the crown had a right to 

 the revenue in dispute } In order 

 to show that his Majesty was not 

 dealing with, as his own, what 

 was not his own, he would refer 

 to tlie civil list acts. In the 1st of 

 the present king, by which 

 800,000/. was settled upon him for 

 life, as in former cases, many 

 revenues were collected into one 

 aggregate fund and named speci- 

 fically, but among them the droits 

 of admiralty were not included. 

 He tlien took a review of the prior 

 acts on that subject to that of 

 William and Mary, in none of 

 which that fund was alluded to ; 

 it therefore remained with his ma- 

 jesty as before. The next consi- 

 deration was, whether it ought to 

 be taken from him ? If a case had 

 been made out by his honourable 

 friend imputing to ministers the 

 fact of having corruptly taken and 

 applied that fund, there would have 

 been some ground for his motion ; 

 but as the question stood, they j 

 were to decide whether they would. ' 

 take it away, because it was pos- 

 sible 



