282 - LON 
he made a number of obfervations which are incapable of 
abridgment, as they all referred to particular faffs. One 
ftriking remark of a general nature we (frail however 
tranfcribe. “ If (faid the noble Speaker), at the time of 
the revolution in America, any one could have forefeet) 
that the whole commerce of continental Europe would 
have fallen under the iron grafp and dominion of France, 
they would haye looked to the eftablifhment of an inde¬ 
pendent (fate on the other fide of the Atlantic, out of the 
reach of French power, to become the carrier of our com¬ 
merce, and purchaser of our manufactures, as the greateff 
boon that could have been given us. Such an event has 
occurred as if providentially ; yet this great and ineltima- 
ble advantage has been deftroycd by the orders in coun¬ 
cil.” His lord (hip then adverted to the abufes.of the fy f- 
tem of licenfes, and to the fyflem of simulation and dilli- 
mulation by which our commerce was. now carried on, 
and which had thrown difcredit on the decifions of our 
prize-courts.' He finally contended, that every plea on 
which the orders of council had been founded was proved 
erroneous by the experience of four years; and he con¬ 
cluded by moving “ for the appointment of a feleCt com¬ 
mittee to take into confideration the prefent (late of the 
commerce and manufactures of the country, particularly 
with reference to the effects of the orders in council, and 
the licenfe-trade.” 
Earl Bathurft, in reply, went through with great clear- 
nefs all the particulars which could be adduced in refu¬ 
tation of tbe arguments of the noble mover, and endea¬ 
voured to prove the great advantages which had arifen 
from the fyftem adopted by government. He alfo refer¬ 
red to the origin of this fyftem, which he traced to the 
adminiftration of which the opposition was now compofed. 
He affigned other caufes for the late commercial embar- 
raflments j and affirmed that the clouds were now diffi- 
pating, and favourable' profpeCts were opening : whence 
he could not accede to the propofition fubmitted to the 
houfe.—After feveral other lords had fpoken on the fub- 
jeft, the houfe divided : for the motion 34, proxies 37, 
total 71 ; againft it 66, proxies 69, total 135 ; majority 46. 
March 3, Mr. Brougham, in the boule of commons, 
made a funilar motion for the appointment of a committee 
upon the orders of council. Of his long and elaborate 
fpeecl) to prove the impolicy and mifchievous effects of 
thefe orders, and of the arguments ufed by the other 
fpeakers on both fides, it is impoffible, in an abltraft, to 
give any adequate idea ; even on perilling them at length, 
the mind is diffracted by reafoning oppofed to reafoning, 
and fact to faCt. The time, however, was not yet come 
an which the queftion could be regarded apart from the 
confideration of the fuppcrt it was to receive. The mi- 
r.iffers were (till refolved to maintain their fyftem; and, of 
courfe, the votes under their influence were given againft 
the motion. It was, however, truly Hated by the mover, 
in his reply, that the votes of this night were to deter¬ 
mine the point of peace or war with America. The pro¬ 
portion of members in favour of the propofed inquiry 
was greater in the houfe of commons than in the houle of 
lords. On the divifior. there appeared, for Mr. Brougham’s 
motion 144, againft it 216 ; majority 72. 
The bill which had been carried refpefting offices in re- 
verfion, though laudable in its principle, was evidently in¬ 
capable of doing much towards the relief of the national 
burdens; its author, therefore, Mr. Bankes, with a view 
of ftriking a more effectual blow againft the wafte of pub¬ 
lic money, rofe in the houfe of commons on March 24, 
-,nd moved the reading of the three firft relolutions of the 
committee relative to public-expenditure in M.ay 1810. 
Their fubftance was to recommend the abolition of all of¬ 
fices which have revenue without employment, and the 
regulation of thofe which have revenue extremely difpro- 
porlionate to employment (with the exception of thole 
about the perfon of his majefty and the royal family), and 
to reduce all effective offices, the duties of which are dif- 
charged by deputy, to the falaryand emoluments actually 
DON. 
received for executing the bufinefs of thofe offices. Thefe 
refolutions being read, the honourable member laid, that 
there was nothing to which the country looked with’more 
pleafure than to the falutary principles of,regulation which 
ought to be applied to finecure ofiices. He guarded, how¬ 
ever, againft the indulgence of too high expectations of 
relief from the burdens incurred during war from fuch a 
meafure, or, indeed, of any immediate economical effect 
of the motion he meant to pr-opofe; but, if the principle 
were once eftablifned, it could not fail of a lure though 
(low effeCt. After fome further obfervations, be conclud¬ 
ed by moving, “That leave be given to bring in a bill 
for aboliflffng and regulating finecures and offices exe¬ 
cuted oy deputy, and for providing other means for re¬ 
compensing the faithful difebarge of high or effective ci¬ 
vil offices, and for other economical purpofes.” Leave 
was given; and Mr. Bankes, Mr. Wilberfcrce, and Mr. 
J. W. Ward, were ordered to prepare the lame. 
The bill thus framed did not come to a difeuffion till 
May 4; when, upon the order of the day for taking into 
confideration the report of the bill, Mr. W. Dundas rofe, 
and objected to it as violating the articles of union with 
Scotland. He faid, that the people of Scotland had fti- 
pulated at the union that their chief offices of ftate (houkl 
be preferred ; and he affied upon what ground it was that 
the very firft offices of that country, in defiance of folemn 
treaty and national faith, were to be abolifhed ?—The 
Lord Advocate of Scotland followed on the fame fide. 
He inftanced particularly as an infringement of a ftipu- 
lated right, the abolition of the office of keeper of the 
great i’eal of Scotland. The faCt being denied by Mr. 
Bankes, he faid the bill abolifhed the emolument of the 
office; and what remained of the office after the emolu¬ 
ment? He made other objections, to the bill; and faid 
that, if it fhould pafs into a law, it would canfe the greateff 
confufion in Scotland, and ftrike the whole people with 
immeafurable aftonifhment. 
Mr. Lyttieton made fome farcaftic obfervations on the 
attachment toemolument avowed by the laft fpeaker; 
and faid that he was fully convinced that the true reafon 
why the influence of the ariftocracy was fo debafed, was, 
becaufe thefe places had been continued. He gave his 
opinion that there was never a fitter time for wrefting 
this power of augmenting influence from the hands of the 
crown, when it was known that there prevailed in the 
court a bale fyftem of unprincipled favouritifm—when it 
was notorious that the regent was furrounded and hemmed 
in with minions, among whom, if there was a man of note 
or talent, there certainly was not one of any charafttr. 
Mr. Courtenay attempted to ftiow that the propofed 
bill, inftead of being a meafure of economy, would be one 
of profulenefs, and would tend to increase the improper 
influence of the crown. He obferved, alfo, that it was. 
contrary to all parliamentary practice to interfere with of¬ 
fices'appertaining to the hereditary revenue of the crown, 
without the confent of the crown previcufly (ignified. 
Lord A. Hamilton urged, in fupportof the bill, the dis¬ 
appointment which would be felt by the people at large, 
if, after the expectations held out to them, (ome meafure 
of the kind were not adopted.—Mr. Baftard took the fame 
ground, and dwelt upon the grievous burdens under 
which almoft all clafies were now fuffering. fie could' 
have wiflied that every feparate office had been put to the 
vote, and a bill prepared conformably to that decifion. 
It was at lead incumbent on thole who talked of the ne- 
ceffity of remuneration, to fhow the reality of the fervice. 
He was convinced it would be difficult to point out ten in 
the whole lift that partook of this character. The public 
money was too often given rather as a confideration for 
accepting office than for the fervices performed in it. 
Tiie Chancellor ot the Exchequer laid, that he felt him- 
felf bound to ftate his objections to the bill, both in its 
details and principle. In confidering the former, he men¬ 
tioned feveral inftances in which its proviflor.s were either 
inconfiftent or unjuft. With refpeCt to the principle, his 
opinion 
