Bloxam, to establish Contracts, renewable every four years, on tenders at a minimum of price, and arranged by way of discount on the Scale drawn up, only three years previously, by Referees appointed by the Treasury, and who certified that the prices were as low as could be afforded. This was, of course, destructive to the old tradesmen. I shall, however, not enlarge further on the practices sanctioned at that time by persons in power, through the agency of Sir Matthew and his associates-this shall be reserved for a future opportunity.

1

It is difficult to conjecture what could be the motives of the Treasury for exempting those great branches of Public Printing from the control of the Stationery Office, which was established for the very purpose; and to whose superintendance the Printers for the Revenue departments, the Printers for the Navy, Army, &c.-all concerns of great magnitude and confidentiality-had willingly and cheerfully submitted themselves. The annual amount of Parliamentary and Patent Printing, though very large in quantity, was not nearly so large as the printing carried on under the control of the Stationery Office, yet the sum charged by the Parliamentary Printers, even in the year 1809, must have been three times as great as that of all the other offices put together;

this is distinctly proveable, from the account printed by the Committee on Public Expendi» ture, in the Appendix to their Ninth Report, pages 188, 189.

I have so firmly determined to confine myself to facts which can be proved, and the selfevident deductions from those facts, that I will make no useless conjectures on the subject of the Treasury motives; let those whose duty it is to investigate these matters, perform that duty faithfully to the public, and let it not still be neglected for Thirty Years to come,

It is, however, not so difficult to conjecture why Mr. Pitt consented to the renewal of the King's Printing Patent in 1799, which must be ascribed to the wish to reward Mr. Reeves for certain well-known' services by a thirty years' pension of £1500; this no doubt he calculated would last his life, and so it turned out.

But it is only fair to allow, in extenuation of this injurious and inconsistent measure, that Mr. Pitt was led to believe the whole amount of the average annual profits did not exceed £3000 at the utmost; so that when £1500 was taken for Mr. Reeves, the remainder could not be too much for the public to pay, for the amount of work as it then stood, and any proportionate increase which might be likely to arise.

But surely the amount of the annual profits should have been matter for further and more minute inquiry at that time, and the rate of charge for printing fixed by a Scale, and made the condition of holding this Office, (for an Office it is, with a salary attached,) and not left to the option of the Printers, checked only by the vague words "fair and reasonable," at the end of the Patent, and the control of Treasury Clerks, ignorant of the

business.

A separate establishment should also have been arranged for the sale of books printed by authority of the Royal Prerogative, which, under a proper system of management, would have proved, I feel confident, greatly beneficial, as well as productive.

Yet this Fact is perfectly undeniable-that the Grant does not, by any expression used therein, authorise the appropriation by the Patentees as their own, of the very large Bookseller's Profits, which have arisen from the extravagant prices fixed on Acts of Parliament, and other papers sold by them; to which they are no more entitled, by the wording of the Grant, nor by the intention of the Grantors, as clearly proved by Mr. Reeves, than the writer of this narrative.

B

The statement of £3000 a-year profit, which Mr. Reeves's Bill in Chancery asserts, 'was made by one of the Patentees to Mr. Pitt, in the presence of Mr. Reeves and Mr. Thornton, could only have had reference to the Printing, not to a second profit from Bookselling; and although the answer to this allegation of Reeves is, that the Printer's statement was not made" with the knowledge of his (nominal) partner," yet if the Patent was renewed in faith and reliance upon that statement by one part'ner, and not contradicted, they are both bound by it, upon every principle of law and equity.

But have we no proof that a second profit was not intended, by the Words of the Patent itself, which gives only PRINTING, at a fair and reasonable price? What do we want more? The conclusion is evident, undeniable. The Patentees ought to account for all profits on the Sale of Acts, Books, and Papers, after deducting a fair and reasonable charge for paper, printing, and contingencies. This the public will expect to be enforced by the new Parliament, or they will, in despair, abandon every hope of benefit from their meetings.

How very unaccountable, then, has been the conduct of the officers at the Treasury, in whose department these charges ought to have been checked and scrutinized. It is evi-dent no kind of examination has taken place.

This is strongly animadverted upon by the Committee in 1810, whose remarks I shall give at length:

Your Committee think it necessary to advert "to the nature of the Patent of Messrs. Eyre "and Strahan, and to the general principle

66

66

66

on which such Patents are granted. The "clause already mentioned, which authorises "the Board of Treasury to exercise its judg"ment in respect to prices, is undoubtedly important, and diminishes the objection to "exclusive Grants of this description; but "the very principle of every Patent professing to give an exclusive right to sell a par"ticular article, involves at least some por"tion of the evil so well known to attend "commercial Monopolies, however guarded against; and it is practically found in the present instance, not only that the clause "in question appears to have had no operation, but that any reform so effectual as "that which a due attention to economy might now dictate, is obstructed by the existence of the Patent. Your Committee conceive, that the most economical mode of supplying the public with Acts of Par"liament, would be by separating the two "branches of Printer and Bookseller, now "considered by Messrs. Eyre and Strahan, "as united in them by authority of the Pa"tent; and it is chiefly the doubt which the "Committee entertain as to the construction "of the Patent in this respect, which has "restrained them from delivering a more "confident opinion, than that which they

66

66

66