He was sorry the committee had ever been taken out of the hands of the independent country gentleman who had first proposed it.

Mr. Biddulph said, he thought it was more the business of the house now to look prospectively than retrospectively; and that if it had many years ago been thought highly necessary to attend to the subject it must be infinitely more so at the present moment; and if by the investigation of the house into the public expenditure, they can give the public a confidence in their zeal for the general interests of the country, it would certainly be highly desirable. The committee should, therefore, be freely and fairly chosen, by their names being alternately called from each side of the house.

Mr Brogden thought the committee had gone further than was intended and than they had a right to do, in making a retrenchment on the privileges and prerogative of the crown, and as such he opposed the report.

. Mr. Ellison said, he was willing to go into every question of retrenchment in the expenditure of the public money, but it seemed to be the bent of the report of the honourable chairman to interfere with the prerogatives of the crown as such, he, for one had opposed it. An honourable member, whose accusatory disposition was well known, had said, by way of anticipation, that the com mittee, constituted as it was, would endeavour to throw obstacles in the way of reform, but he believed that, in following the dictates of their own hearts, they would be found as desirous of reform, as that honourable member or any other in the house.

Mr. Bankes said, with some warmth, that he could not sit silent and hear it said that the report which he had submitted to the committee contained any innovation on the prerogative of the crown. It was false that any word in it had tended to touch on that prerogative.

Mr. H. Thornton said, that the report, at the utmost, only went the length of saying, the influence of the crown ought to be diminished.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, if the honourable gentleman on the floor (Mr. P. Moore) alluded to him as the culprit, he would, on a future day, put in his defence, he could not do it too soon-(Mr. Moore answered across the house, it was not him). If (Mr. Perceval continued),

any of his honourable friends near him were alluded to, he was sure it would be equally their wish that the charg should be speedily brought forward. He insisted that every attention had been paid to the recommendations of the committee in the pay-office, and his right honourable friend (Mr. Long) had not only followed up every recommendation of the committee, but had given them information of the highest importance. With regard to the bank, he believed the honourable chairman (Mr. Bankes) would allow he had paid every attention to the report of the committee, and obtained thereby great advantages to the country. A variety of opinions had been formed as to the appointment of this committee. Some thought this, others that, the most proper mode of forming it. The object he had in view was to adopt as far as possible that mode which could the nearest assimilate to the idea of the honourable chairman, by reducing the numbers so as to obtain that dispatch he so much desired; and he could not then avoid expressing his hopes that his honourable friend would reconsider the subject, and determine to resume that office for which, in the opinion of the house and of the country, he was so eminently qualified. He was greatly surprized, he said, at the declaration of a noble lord (lord H. Petty), that he would not be a member of any committee nominated by a chancellor of the exchequer. He requested that noble lord and his friends would look back to the original formation of that committee; let them compare this list with that which was introuced by the noble lord, who, as chancellor of the exchequer, took it out of the hands of the Monourable gentleman who was its au thor, and out of twenty one members of which the committee was composed, nineteen were persons who were in daily habits of holding the same political opinions with bimself.

Mr. Ellison, in explanation, said, he had that night been speaking of a report on which he had a right to comment, and in doing so had used none other than parlia mentary language. If he had spoken so as to give offence, he would be willing to apologize; but his habits, both in public and private life, flattered him with the hope he had not done so. An honourable gentleman had used the word false, applied to what he had said, and he hoped he would so far explain what he meant as to free him from such an imputation.

Mr. Bankes said, all he meant was, an honourable gentleman took an unfair view of the subject, and therefore conceived an opinion of it that was false. With respect to all those who had differed with him on the various parts of the report in question, he wished to speak of them, and had always conceived them honourable inen, but acting as he thought, under a mistaken or erroneous opinion.

"

Mr. Ellison said, if the honourable gentleman. meant only to say that he had formed an erroneous opinion, he was satisfied.

The Speaker said he was sure in what had been said by either of the honourable gentleman, there was nothing intended that should cause either of them to retain it in their further remembrance.

Lord H. Petty, in explanation, denied that he bad taken the business out of the hands of the honourable gentleman (Mr. Bankes). If that gentleman had not been originally named on the committee, it was merely an accidental omission, and it would appear by the journals of the proceedings of that committee, that he had been the chairman from the beginning.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer allowed that the honourable gentleman alluded to had been the chairman of the committee from its first sitting, but still he would repeat that it was the full impression of his mind, that the appointment did not proceed from the suggestion of the noble ford, but from some gentleman on the other side of the house, who thought it most extraordinary that the proposer of the measure should not be upon the committee.

Mr. Biddulph said a few words in explanation.

Mr. Ponsonby said, that the objection of his right honourable friend was not merely to a committee appointed according to the list proposed by the chancellor of the exchequer, but he had objected to any individual member appointing the commitee. As to the comparison which the chancellor of the exchequer had made between his list and that of his predecessor in office (lord H. Petty), he should only observe, that the committee which had been nominated by the noble lord, was such a committee as the honourable gentleman (Mr. Bankes) was well content to act as chairman to; but the committee appointed by the chancellor of the exchequer was of such a description, that the house had just heard the honourable gentleman

declare, that he could not act as a chairman to it. The chancellor of the exchequer had said, that the noble lord had appointed nineteen of his own political friends, in a committee consisting of twenty one members. This was, however, nothing very unnatural or extraordinary, when the sentiments of the chancellor of the exchequer and his political friends were so well known with respect to all reforms, and particularly reforms in the expenditure of the public money. Not much public good could have been expected from putting enemies of all reform into such a

committee.

Mr. Sturges Bourne said, it was impossible for the right honourable gentleman (Mr Bankes) to have pro tested against acting as chairman to the committee ap pointed by the noble lord, as at the time of its appointment he did not even know that he was to be one of the committee.

Mr. Johnstone regretted much that the question had been stirred in the way it had been. He feared it would make an impression on the public mind, that the House had no serious intention of instituting a fair or satisfactory inquiry. He was sure there was no part of his majesty's speech which gave more sincere satisfaction than that which expressed a determination to introduce every practicable reform in the expenditure of the public money. He hoped the house would shew the same zeal, and he knew well that there was a very considerable portion of the public who did not believe that either side of the house was very zealous for reform; but thought they were all too anxious to provide for themselves. It might injure the committee very much in the public opinion, if the honourable gentleman (Mr. Bankes), should withdraw from it in the manner he had threatened. The committee had already done great services; it had pointed out an annual saving of 200,00 7. per annum, with respect to the bank; it had shewn abuses in the pay office, which had, in consequence, been reformed, and it had given such a detailed account of pensions and sinecure places, as must ultimately be productive of advantage.

Mr. Wilberforce was inclined to think that it would be advisable, that the house should have more time to make up its mind upon the subject. He thought that they should consider the general effect of the prejudice which would prevail against the committee, if it were constituted VOL. I.-1809. L

in such a manner that the honourable gentleman (Mr. Bankes) could not act with them. It was impossible to find a man less influenced by party motives or personal considerations than the honourable gentleman. He conceived that his retiring from the committee would be such a loss, that it would be better to pause, in order to see whether it would not be possible to adopt some middle course, which might be satisfactory to all parties, and to that honourable gentleman. He should therefore hope, that as soon as the question was carried on the resolution "that a committee be appointed," the right honourable gentleman (the chancellor of the exchequer) would not proceed any farther that night in the appointment of the committee.

The question was then put, that a committee should be appointed, which was carried without opposition.

SIR JOHN MOORE.

Mr. Whitbread rose to put a question to Lord Castlereagh. He wished to know why the last dispatches of that gallant officer, Sir John Moore, had not been communicated to the public in the Gazette, and also whether it was now the intention of his majesty's ministers to make that publication ?

Lord Castlereagh replied, that nothing would be more grateful to his majesty's ministers than to publish what would redound to the honour of that gallant officer, now no more. When the dispatch was received, it was considered not official, but confidential, and that that officer had left it to the discretion of his majesty's ministers to publish what parts of it they should think proper.

General Stewart stated to the House, that at the time that Sir John Moore sent him over to England with the dispatches, he was so excessively hurried, that he had not time to write so fully, or in so complete a way as he could have wished. The dispatch which he therefore sent to ministers, was rather of a confidential than an official nature. As, however, he thought it would appear extraor dinary to the public if no official dispatches were to be laid before them, it was his wish that ministers should publish such extracts as they might think proper. He felt, however, very anxious that the greater part of the dispatch should be published, as he was sure it would