CHAP. VII.

Meeting of parliament 20 of January 1791.---Encouragement of Brewerys.---Mr. Ponsonby moves for a felect committee to enquire into the use of certain offices.---Debate thereon.--motion rejected.---fecond motion on the fubject.-Speech's of Mr.. Ponfonby.-Sir Hercules Langrifle, &c.---motion rejected.---debates relative to fale of Peerages.---motion for a Committee of enquiry thereon rejected.---Clofe of the feffion, 5th May, 1791.

THE

HE Parliament met again 20th January 1791.-At this meeting, a rupture was apprehended between the Courts of Spain and Great Britain, but the Lord Lieutenant in his fpeech now conveyed the pleafing intelligence, that all differences had been amicably adjusted.

The immoderate use of ardent fpirits by the lower order of the people, induced the legislature to turn its attention to the prevention of this abuse, and the encouragement of Breweries became a fubject of enquiry during the present feffion.

?

On the 3d of February, Mr. George Ponsonby moved, "That a felect Committee fhould be appointed, confifting of members of the houfe of Commons not holding any employment, or enjoying any penfion under the Crown, to examine whether any, or what advantages have arisen to this kingdom from the appointment of two additional Commiffioners of the Revenue ;-from the feparation of the board of ftamps and accounts;-from the granting 500l.

a year

a year additional falary to the furveyor of the Ordnance; 2501 additional falary to the principal Store-keeper of the Ordnance ;-250l. a year to the Clerk of the Ordnance ;→→ 2001. a year additional falary to the Clerk of the Delivery of the Ordnance; 6ool. a year penfion to General Hale, in lieu of his refigning his employment of Lieutenant General of the Ordnance, in order to facilitate the fucceffion of the prefent poffeffor; 400l. a year additional salary to the Clerk of the Pipe ;-400l. a year additional falary to the Customer of Kinfale ;-and 150l. a year additional falary to the Barrack-mafter of Dublin; and that they do report their opinion thereon to the House.

Mr. Grattan feconded the motion, which was oppofed and rejected on a division of 56 against 117.-Upon the determination of this motion Mr. Ponsonby again address'd the house," I have (faid he) been always told, and I do firmly believe, that there are none fo blind as those who will not fee; and I am forry to perceive fo many blind men of that description on the other fide of the house.

1 have been often told, and I did believe it in general, that there was no man fo pofitive in his opinion as a bigot in religion. But may not a bigot in politics, be alfo as positive, and from the fame caufe that he allows his faith to controul his reason: I am forry to perceive fo many political bigots on the other fide.

The motion that I had the honour to make to you, Sir, being now difpofed of, I fhall make you another." That "a Committee be appointed, confifting of members of this "house, who do not hold place or penfion, to enquire and "report their opinion, what advantage the public have re"ceived from the appointment of two additional commiffion"ers to the board of revenue."

I make

I make this motion, Sir, because I have heard wife men in parliament fay, that you ought not to complicate queftions, but direct your enquiry to a single point; as in a compli cated question, part might be true, and part might be false.

I do this, because, tho' not quite fo apt a scholar as I ought to be, I am not quite infenfible to the precepts of wife men in parliament, especially at the moment I am fmarting under the correction of the house.

In the debate on this question;-Sir Hercules Langrishe faid, if he had held any doubt of one fundamental point of the Christian faith-to wit, the Refurrection of the Spiritsthe prefent queftion would certainly convince him. He thought the subject had been dead and buried long fince; but fince its fpirit has now rifen, he would beg leave to speak to it. He confidered the prefent motion as part and parcel of the fubject, which had been fo fully and repeatedly canvaffed at the conclufion of the last parliament; and the best mode of putting the house in poffeffion of every argument on the fubject, would be to move, that the Freeman's Journal and Evening poft of the last winter be laid upon the table for perufal of the members. He defended the encrease of public officers, and was certain the reports of the laft year, which were laid on the table, would fully juftify his affertion. The revenue bad encreased in the last year 38,000l. and the expence of collecting had decreased 12,000l. He therefore thought that a net gain of 50,000l. was no mark of imprudence in management. He admitted, that certainly the influence of offices had fometimes weight with men's votes in parliament; yet he denied that in any vote effential to the constitutional intereft of this country, the parliament had ever deferted her. Gentlemen complained of the great expenfes of government, and all was charged to the creation of unneceffary offices; there were other new offices created, of which gentlemen had taken no notice they were offices of

Lime and Stone. The new offices of that house, in those enormous new wings, on which fo much of the public money had taken flight, had very confiderably fwelled the public expense; but he hoped this was not to be charged to the extravagance of adminiftration. It might be neceffary to erect cloud capt towers, gorgeous palaces, and even folemn temples, but he was fure it was neither prefumptuous, nor pious, nor just to charge administration with excess on that account.

Mr. Forbes faid, the argument offered on the other fide is, that these offices fhould not be abolished, because they have not done the mifchief which was predicted they would do, they have not ftrengthened the hand of government to beat down all oppofition in Parliament. Do gentlemen who make this affertion forget, that in 1789, a penfion-bill paffed this house? and do they forget, that the next year it was opposed by the very men who fupported it in 1789? Do they forget this-and if they do not, will they fay, that the places which were beftowed upon the members of this house, in the interval between the two feffions, had no influence in altering their opinions?

It is faid, Sir, that thefe offices, and this augmentation of salaries is neceffary; to enquire whether they be neceffary or not, is the object of the resolution-if they be neceffary, why fhould gentlemen fear to have them examined?

Sir, there is upon your journals a folemn decifion, that feven commiffioners are fufficient: Would it not then have been decent to have laid before the house, the reasons which induced the Lord Lieutenant to increase the number, and to have taken the fense of parliament thereon? But this, like all measures of corruption, was carried on in fecret. The mark of an honeft measure is its open and undisguised publicity but this was carried on in difguife, and promulgated in words of ambiguity.

Great

Great credit has been taken by the friends of Lord Buckingham, for his conduct relative to the ordnance, for his address in detecting frauds, and his wisdom in applying remedies; but how have the public benefited? Did he restore the money recovered to the public? No; he stopped it in its tranfit to the Exchequer, and what he rescued from pecula tion, he applied to the purposes of corruption.

Mr. Corry faid, it might appear extraordinary if he did not rife to give an anfwer to fome part of what had fallen from the Hon. Gentleman. The gentleman had indeed admitted, he was not perfonally concerned; yet, as the part he bore in the tranfaction, and the office he had held in the ordnance might be supposed to affect his judgment, he could not be filent.

The Hon. Gentleman had faid, that the penfion bill had been rejected after the creation of the new places, by all the gentlemen on whom they were bestowed, and who had fupported that bill, before.

Mr. Forbes. I did not fay every man; but I fay, many, and that government acquired additional strength by the creation of offices.

Mr. Corry.-I ftand up equally to deny both his fact and his principle. I had the honour to fupport that bill before I held an office; I have had the honour to fupport it fince, and ever will fupport it. What then becomes of the gentleman's argument? He must either give up his fact or his principle-I think they are both untenable. As to the office. of commiffioner, the gentleman knows well it was not created for me; that if I chofe I might long ago have had it, but that I refused it, and I would rather have remained at the ordnance.

As