Page images
PDF

1,794,3S02.; the same for 1814, 3,294,3002. exclusive of exceeding* of army extraordinaries applicable to 1814, and supplied this year; there was also to be deducted the principal of outstanding treasury bills and lottery prizes 982,2402. and for votes of parliament which remained undischarged, appropriated to inland navigations and public buildings in Ireland, 57,4382. making the whole arrear due by the consolidated fund, 5,175,3582.; leaving a net surplus of the consolidated fund of Ireland on the 5th January last, of 688,807*.

Having thus stated the supply, he should proceed to state the Ways and Means. He should first take the surplus of the consolidated fund as made out above,

at £088,807

The Produce of the Revenue he should estimate at- - - 6,100,000 The Profits on Lotteries, one half of what had been computed for G real Bri

tain 125,000

Re-payment of Sums advanced by Ireland for Naval and Military Services - - 100,000 2-17ths of Old Naval Stores, 15 - 17ths having been taken credit for by England 90,305

Loan raised in England for the service of Ireland, 9,000,000 British 9,750,000

Making a Total of

Ways and Means £16,854,112
He stated the whole of the

above in Irish currency, and the committee would observe that there was an excess of Ways and Means above the Supply of 171,0002.

The Right Hon: Gentleman then gave a detail of the proposed taxes, of which he made the following recapitulation. He estimated the

Duties onTobacco,Cus

toms, and Excise £ 140,000

Malt 150,000

Assessed Taxes - - * 180,000
Silk and Hops - - - 15,000
Stamps - - - -" - 45,000
Spirit-duty - - - - 110,000
Regulations by increas-
ed charges - - - 120,000

Making a Total of • 760,000

British, equal to 823,3332. Irish, to cover a charge of 727,3502., wliich the interest and sinking fund alone had created.

Having submitted to the com* mittee this detailed explanation of the Ways and Means, the right hon. gentleman alluded shortly to the produce of the revenues of the former years. The net produce in the year ending the

5th Jan. 1812,

was - - - £4,431,035

5th Jan. 1813 4,975,000

5th Jan. 1814 - 5,140,000

AndSth Jan. 1815 - 5,627,000

being an increase of revenue in four years of 1,400,0002.; and he had to remark, that of the taxes of last year, only one half of the produce had been brought into this account. The diminution of the custom duties

[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

CHAPTER V.

Additional Grant to the Duke of Wellington: Thanks to him, and to Marshal Blucher, and the Armies.Motion for a National Monument of the Victory at Waterloo.Message respecting the Duke of Cumberland's Marriage, and debates.Repeal of the Assize of Dread Laws in Lon~don. Financial Acts.Speech of the Prince Regent on the Prorogation of Parliament.

BUT few of the remaining:proceedings in parliament were of sufficient importance to require notice.

The glorious Tictory of Waterloo produced a message to both houses from the Prince Regent on June 22d, recommending to them "to enable his Royal Highness to grant such additional provision to Field-marshal the Duke of Wellington us shall afford a farther proof of the opinion entertained by Parliament of the Duke of Wellington's transcendant services, and of the gratitude and munificence of the British nation." Parliament, never backward at such a call, unanimously concurred in a vote for adding the sum of 200,0001. to the former liberal grants by which its sense of his extraordinary merits had been demonstrated. The thanks of both Houses were afterwards voted to the Duke of Wellington, and to many officers of distinction in his army, and to Marshal Prince Blucher, the Prussian army, and the allied troops under the Duke's command. A motion being afterwards made in the House of Commons by Lord Castlcrcagh for au address to the

Prince Regent, that he would be pleased to give directions for erecting a National Monument in honour of the victory at Waterloo, and in commemoration of those who gloriously fell in achieving it, the same was unanimously agreed to.

The arrival of his Royal Highness the Duke of Cumberland, with his spouse the Princess of Salms, for the purpose of repeating the marriage ceremony in this country, is recorded in our Chronicle for the month of June. On the 27th of that month a message from the Prince Regent was received by both Houses of Parliament, informing them " thut ;i marriage, to which the consent of hisRoyal Highness was duly given, had been solemnized between his brother the Duke of Cumberland, and a daughter of the reigning Duke of Meeklenburgh Strelitz. niece to her Majesty the Queen of the united kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and relict of the Prince Salms Biaunfels." The message further expressed a confidence of the readiness of Parliament to enable his Royal Highness to make such provision for their Royal Highnesses on this occasion

as

ai tbeir rank and station might appear to require.

This message being taken into consideration on the following day by the House of Lords, the Earl of Liverpool stated, that the provision intended to be made was an addition of 60001. a year to the Duke's income, and a jointure to the same amount to the Duchess, if she should be the survivor. A corresponding address to the Regent was agreed upon without opposition.

In the House of Commons the subject was introduced by Lord Castlereagh, who, in the introductory speech to his motion, said that he could not conceive any grounds on which it was likely to be opposed. Having then stated the fact of the marriage, he moved for the grant of a provision to the royal pair to the amount above-mentioned.

The motion was opposed by Mr. Wkiiihed Keene and Sir M. W. Ridley on the ground of its being unnecessary to lay an additional burden on the public for augmenting the income of a branch of the royal family already adequately' provided for. Mr. Bermet took a different view of the subject. He said, and appealed to the public voice for the trutli of his assertion, that of all the branches of the royal family, the Duke of Cumberland was the one to whom the public feeling would be the least inclined to grant any pecuniary boon. He asked whether a marriage between the princess of Salms and another member of the royal family had not been projected, and broken off in consequence of certain circumstauccs; and whe

ther the Queen had not strongly expressed herself on the impropriety of the Duke of Cumberland's marriage with this princess, after her professed union with the Duke of Cambridge had been obviated.

This attack on the persons of the royal pair was followed up in the speeches of other members, notwithstanding the regret expressed by Lord Castleieagh at the turn which the debate had taken. To the observation respecting the secrecy with which the marriage had been conducted, he affirmed that it had, on the contrary, been, attended with all possible publicity, the duke and duchess having been married at Berlin in the presence of the king of Prussia and several members of the house of Mecklenburg. The question being at length called for, the House divided, when there appeared for the motion 87, against it 70.

The report of the committee with respect to the grant to the DukeofCumberland being brought up on the 29th, and a motion made for reading a second time the resolution in its favour, Mr. H. Gordon rose to oripqse it, and maintained, contrary to the assertion of the above noble lord, that it was the duty of the House to consider the question as a personal one, and to inquire whether the Duke of Cumberland had rendered any services to his country whicli could entitle him to the grant. In conclusion he moved to defer the second reading to that day three months. A further debate was then entered into, which the ministerial party in vain attempted to terminate by the cry of question, repeated as

each,

LEO] r each member rose to speak. Mr. W. Smith said that he apprehended that the marriage of the Duke of Cumberland was disagreeable to the Royal Family, and that it was reported thai his new connection would not be received at court, and he wished to ask Whether this were the fact. Mr. Tierney having repeated the question, Lord Castlercagh said that he should abstain from answering any interrogatories tending to vilify the Royal Family, and that he did not think the right hon. gentleman had a right to put such questions. Mr. T. however persisted, and asked whether her Majesty had not declared that she would not receive the Duchess of Cumberland at court; and whether she had not decidedly disapproved of a proposed marriage between the Princess of Salins and the Duke of Cambridge? These questions receiving no reply, the house first divided on the amendment, which Whs rejected by 74 to 62. A motion for bringing a bill conformably to the resolution was then carried by 75 to 62.

The bill being presented on the 30th by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and the first reading moved for. the opposition was resumed by Lord Archibald Hamilton Oij the ground of the uncontradicted report of the Queen's hostility to the marriage; and Mr. Burrcl, who followed, moved on amendment for rending the bill on that day three months. It now appeared that the question had taken a strong hold on the public feelings; for, in a much fuller house than before, the fust read

ing was carried only by the majority of 100 to 92.

The final decision took place on July I5d, upon the motion of the second reading of the bill. On this occasion Mr. If'ilberforce viewed the question as having a reference to the public morals. Me said that the various rumours afloat respecting the person with whom the connection was formed in this marriage, was a strong corroboration of the report that she would not be received by the Queen. He conceived that Parliament was called upon to exercise a sound discretion on the subject before them; and if in expressing its opinion any pain was inflicted, the blame was attributable to those only who had brought the measure forward. The House ought to withhold its sanction to the connection, if it were such as the Queen refused to approve, which refusal they were justified in inferring.

Mr. Western liaving moved for deferring the reading to that day six months, his amendment wns carried by the majority of one; the numbers being yeas 126, noes 125. Thus terminated a discussion which will be memorable in parliamentary history, as one of those examples of the preponderating influence of moral estimnte in the British Houseof Commons, which, whenever they occur, cannot but be regarded as highly honourable to the national character.

The high juice of bread for some years past had produced considerable research into the causes of a circumstance which pressed hard upon the lower ranks of society, and a committee

had

« PreviousContinue »