APPENDIX to the CHRONICLE. 441 



of harshfiess. The commissioner, 

 on whom the financial department 

 is said to Iiave devolved, is lately 

 dead : and the want of recollection 

 observable in many parts of the an- 

 nexed evidence, is a further exem- 

 plification of the inconvenience re- 

 sulting from the long delay which 

 has taken place. 



Your committee called fora copy 

 of such statements of the transac- 

 tions of the commissioners as had 

 from time to time been delivered by 

 them to the board of treasury. — 

 The chief paper furnished in return 

 is dated 20th July, 1796, being the 

 copy of a report presented to the 

 privy council, which was evidently 

 furnished rather with a view of 

 showing the sum then deemed 

 likely to accrue from the sale of 

 Dutch property, than of submitting 

 the transactions of the commission- 

 ers to examination. It is observa- 

 ble, that although in this report, 

 which is in a great measure an esti- 

 mate, the total amount of the 

 charges incurred is given, and seve- 

 ral particulars composing them are 

 specified, no mention of commission 

 is made, though it was undoubtedly 

 an item at that time sufficiently 

 large to have been included in the 

 enumeration ; for under this head, 

 the sum of 25,000/. had been then 

 divided. This omission might lead 

 to a supposition that no commis- 

 sion had been taken. 



In thecase of successive sales of a 

 similarkind madebymerchants act- 

 ing as factors,i t is the custom to make 

 up separate account-sales of the 

 several cargoes, until the delivery of 

 which the charge of commission is 

 delayed, and also to render an an- 

 nual account current, detailing all 

 tiie receipts and payments of the 

 year. If the transactions of the 



commissioners are to be considered 

 as of a mercantile nature, the pub- 

 lic ought not to be without the be- 

 nefit of those checks upon the 

 conduct of their agents which have 

 been generally established among 

 merchants. 



The act authorising the appoint- 

 ment of the commissioners, contains 

 a clause •• requiring" thattheyshall 

 " cause the proceeds of their sales," 

 after " payment of the duties and 

 expences,'' to be paid " into the 

 Bank of England, there to remain 

 subject to such orders as his ma- 

 jesty, with the advice of his privy 

 council, may from time to time think 

 fit to give thereupon," or as the 

 Court of Admiralty may think fit to 

 give in the case of sales made under 

 the authority of that court. Your 

 committee expected that thecashof 

 the commissioners would, in pursu- 

 ance of this clause, have been kept 

 solely at the Bank, but they find 

 that it was during the first year 

 lodged only with a private banker, 

 and that five private bankers have 

 been occasionally employed, each 

 of the commissioners having recom- 

 mended that a temporary account 

 should be opened with the banker 

 with whom he was individually con- 

 nected. The clause does not appear 

 to have escaped the attention of the 

 commissioners ; but it is stated in 

 the evidence, that they understood 

 it to apply, not to all the proceeds 

 of their sales as they arose, but to 

 the surplus of the proceeds above 

 the sums expected by them to be 

 wanted for charges and current pay- 

 ments. They have retained a large 

 balance of cash for these purposes, 

 and they represent that they were 

 obliged to do this, because other- 

 wiseanorderof his majesty in coun- 

 cil for a supply of cash, would from 



time 



