The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, he wished to explain why he had refrained from taking any part in the discussion on the present occasion. The bill had passed through all its stages up to the third reading without any objection, or the show of any opposition, having been offered on the subject of the duties. He had indeed been given to understand by the honourable member for Weymouth (Mr. Buxton), that it was his intention, and that of some of his friends, to avail themselves of the opportunity which the third reading would give them, of expressing their opinion on a part of the question. He (the chancellor of the exchequer) had suggested to the hon. gentleman that such a course would be inconvenient, but still it was preferred, and had now been followed. No opposition had, however, been offered, nor had any alteration been suggested, with respect to the duties. He thought, therefore, that he was fully justified in remaining silent, and that it could not be thought he had done so from any feeling of disrespect to the gentlemen who had thought fit to express their sentiments on other parts of the measure. What his opinion was, the bill he had brought in sufficiently explained. The duties for the year to come would be the same as they had been for the year past. He felt that whatever might be the theoretical principles belonging to this measure, it was one of so much difficulty and delicacy, that it would at present be highly inexpedient to act upon those principles in their rigid exWhether future circumstances would occasion a change in the measure he had submitted

tent.

or not, was what he would not now speculate upon; but he should have thought it unreasonable (and he had no doubt that other persons would have thought so too), if he had proposed any scale of duties different from those contained in the bill.

The bill was then read a third time, and passed.

The house adjourned at halfpast twelve o'clock to Monday

next.

House of Commons, March 21. On the motion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the house went into a committee of supply.

Mr.Herries moved, that 160,000l. be granted to his Majesty to defray the expense of civil contingencies.

Mr. Hume observed, that this grant was one of those which the committee generally voted on the credit of the minister, and on which members were obliged to confine their comments rather to the expenditure of the past than to the estimate of the coming year. On looking at our diplomatic expenditure, of which part came under this grant, he was compelled to say that it far exceeded what the country required. The country could not be aware of the sums which it annually paid to its residents at foreign courts; if it were, he was sure that there would be a loud demand from all quarters for its diminution. He could see a reason why it was formerly necessary for this country to have a resident at the different courts of the petty sovereigns of Germany; but he could see no reason why we should not withdraw them at present, since it was notorious that those sovereigns had now no will of their own, but merely

moved as the holy alliance pleased to direct them. Our diplomatic expenditure for the present year amounted to 300,000l. Now for this extravagant expenditure we had no balance, no return, and therefore it was that he called upon the committee to examine into its details. If in the year 1816, when it was proposed to bring within bounds the diplomatic expenditure of the country, which during the war amounted to any sum the minister pleased to charge, any body had said that the same rate of expenditure would be continued for 5 or 6 years longer, nobody would have credited the assertion; and yet such had actually been the case, for in the last seven years we had expended 2,060,000l. in the expenses of our ambassadors alone. Surely some mode of retrenching this expenditure ought to be devised, in order to rid the country of some of the vexatious taxes which now pressed so heavily on thousands of individuals. He complained of the manner in which the accounts of the diplomatic expenditure were intermingled with those of other departments of the state. For instance, in one class of the civil list,226,000l. was annually charged for the expenses of our ambassadors. He was aware that in one year, 11,000l. and in another 7,000l. or 8,000l. of this sum had been returned: but still the average amount was 226,000l. Now, in addition to this sum, bills were annually sent in from each of our residents, which had reached, he must say, a most unwarrantable amount. In the year 1792, they were but 5,9007.; in 1818, they had reached 27,000l.; but in the last year they had reached the ex

traordinary sum of 80,000l. So that our diplomatic expenditure at present amounted to somewhere about 312,000l.; and this, too, exclusively of the 60,000l. which was now wanted for the establishments of our different consuls in South America. He had no hesitation in saying that our diplomacy for the current year would, in some way or other,cost us 400,000l. He contended that the right hon. secretary for foreign affairs would consult the interests of the public by withdrawing our ministers from the petty states of Germany. A fund would so be created for defraying the expenses of our new diplomatic relations with South America, which, if it were not so defrayed, must ultimately become an intolerable burden upon the country. The hon. gentleman then complained of the great expense occasioned by our embassies to the various great courts of Europe, and especially to that of France, and concluded by expressing a hope that the right hon. secretary would do every thing in his power to lessen and curtail them.

Mr. Canning replied, that the house of commons had in the year 1816 minutely examined the whole diplomatic branch of the public expenditure, and then laid down a scale for its future arrangement. It was therefore by the result of that investigation they ought to judge of the present establishment. He could assure the house, that he had guided himself by the scale then laid down in all his arrangements respecting their diplomatic expenditure, and had also endeavoured, as much as possible, to make such retrenchments therein as could be made consistent with

the

the public exigencies. With reference to the expense of the different public missions to South America, that was a completely new subject-one of such large extent, and as yet so unexplored, that it was premature to call upon him, either to say, whether any given sum in the shape of a vote should be deemed the utmost extent which the public would be called upon to pay, or whether there might be a possibility of diminishing any of the missions already established among these new governments. He could, however, assure the hon. member, that he had carefully examined the allowances given in this branch of the public service, and was of opinion they ought to be considered as regulated rather lower than above the fair principle of remuneration. It was, he thought, quite clear with reference to these new governments, that if this country were disposed to encourage a close connexion with them, they must be prepared to meet the necessary burdens of the new expenditure arising out of such closer connexion. It was, however, as he had already said, a new and unexamined part of the public expenditure at present. But, as to what the hon. gentleman had said of seeking to defray the expense of this new part of the public service, by a retrenchment out of the diplomatic missions among the smaller states of Europe, he was quite surprised at such a proposition. The hon. gentleman must feel, that in many of these missions to the smaller powers there was involved a larger question than the mere expense of diplomacy, which would retard any wish of abandoning the subsisting diplo

matic connexion with the minor courts. It was surprising to hear such a wish hinted from the hon. member, who was always the advocate of preserving the independence of this part of the lesser European confederacy by the aid of British influence. He should have thought that such a retrenchment as the hon. gentleman had alluded to would amount, if carried into effect, to an abandonment of public duty. Indeed, he thought that the good-will of such powers was well purchased by the comparatively trifling expenses of the diplomatic establishments which it had been their policy to maintain in them; and he could assure the hon. gentleman, that in the three instances in which he had reduced the expense of these missions, it had cost the British government great pains to convince the courts where such reductions took effect, that it was not therefore intended to lower them in the estimation of either Great Britain, or the other larger states in Europe. With respect to what had fallen from the hon. gentleman on the subject of the Paris mission, he was entirely confident that the late ambassador would have been unable, without the aid of his private property, to have sustained the essential dignity of his diplomatic station out of the allowances which were assigned by the government for his use; and as to the present ambassador, with whose private affairs he was better acquainted, he could assure the honourable gentleman, that that noble lord would feel himself perfectly satisfied, if in addition to his allowance of 11,000l. he had not one half as much more, perhaps entirely as much, to supply

from

from his private fortune, in balancing his expenditure. He agreed in the propriety of selecting men of independent fortunes to fill such high offices; but he would add, that they ought not by undue reductions to make them unfit for others who might be called, without such private advantages, into the service of their country. He thought it was most desirable that the sovereign should be enabled to select the men best qualified to discharge these duties, without reference to accidental advantages, and always to have the office placed upon that proper scale, which would enable such persons to perform its functions in a be'coming and honourable manner. He repeated, that he had always endeavoured to regulate this department with reference to the scale agreed upon in 1816; but he must say, that he did not think the mere mention of particular sums in its expenditure, with a circumscribed reference to particular and evanescent circumstances, was the proper way in which the country ought to estimate such matters, either with justice to the individuals, or with reference to the honour and utilityof the public service.

Mr. Hume could not agree with the right hon. gent. that the scale of 1816 ought to be considered as permanently fixed upon the country, for it had been formed upon the expenditure of the three preceding years of great diplomatic extravagance. What he complained of was, that they had not retraced their steps, and made the expenditure more suited to their recognized principle of public economy. It was not for him to say, for he had not the necessary information for the task,

which of the German embassies ought to be reduced, or why they should be called upon to pay so many thousands a year for an embassy to the Two Sicilies, where a plain consul would answer just as well. But when the right hon. gent. talked of the feelings of foreign powers with reference to the amount of rank and expense assigned to the embassies to them, he begged to ask him, whether Holland, for instance, where the British embassy cost 14,000l. a year, and where a minister with 6,000l. could do the business, did not wish this country to reduce the rank of the embassy, and complained that she could not maintain one upon the same diplomatic scale to represent her in England? Indeed, so convinced was he that reductions could be made in the diplomatic branch of the public expenditure, except in the embassies to the three great powers, that he was very much disposed to propose a reduction from the large sums now paid under that head, which amounted to upwards of 300,000l. a year, exclusive of 60,000l. to the new American missions. There was

another branch of the items to which he wished to call the attention of his Majesty's government -he alluded to the item of 8,2471. for paying the expenses of the Spanish commission for investigating the claims of British merchants. Where were those commissioners-who were theyand what had they done?

Mr. Canning said, that though he could not, perhaps, give as satisfactory an account of the progress of these commissioners as might be wished, yet he hoped he could explain both the nature and

propriety, as well as necessity of their appointment. Among other concessions which it had been found difficult to obtain from Spain, there was one that always had been of most difficult persuasion namely, the tender of pecuniary compensation. It would be recollected, that a few years ago, many British ship-owners had incurred heavy losses by captures made upon them by Spanish subjects, contrary to the law of nations -they naturally solicited the protection of their own government to obtain redress, and various applications had, in consequence, been made to the then Spanish authorities. After this course had been duly taken in the statement of the losses of British subjects, and no proper redress afforded, the government felt itself called upon to issue an order to the British commander-in-chief on the West India station, to make reprisals upon the commerce of the Spanish islands to the amount of the British claimants; but it was thought reasonable, when this order was issued, and before it was carried into execution, that the government of Spain should be informed of the fact, before summary measures of redress were resorted to. This led to a further negociation: in the first stage of which the Spanish government conceded an acknowledgment of the principle of the British claims, and abandoned that denial of justice which was their previous ground. The matter was then referred, upon the admission of the principle, to convention which was to inquire into the specific extent of the losses, for the purpose of their eventual liquidation. During the

1825.

a

preliminary proceedings, and before this convention was in progress of execution, the Spanish government underwent a change, and the king of Spain upon his restoration annulled all the acts of the preceding government; but subsequently this single convention was again recognized: indeed, it was the only act of his predecessors which his Spanish majesty had admitted. The convention being thus resumed, the commissioners went to work but slowly, from the peculiar circumstances under which they had to act. Months were lost before the king of Spain had appointed new commissioners, and he was sorry to say, that even during the last year the Spanish commissioners had been changed no less than three times. Notwithstanding these impediments to the execution of the convention, he was glad to state, that of the claims of British merchants, estimated at upwards of 400,000l., nearly 200,000l. of them had been investigated and admitted by the Spanish authorities-he wished he could add, paid; but as he had already said, money was not easily obtained of late in that quarter. That the whole of the claims would be acknowledged he had no doubt, and he did not absolutely despair of their ultimate adjustment. This object had never been lost sight of by the British government, and had been retarded owing to the untoward circumstances which he had already explained. As to the expenses of the commissioners, he begged to inform the hon. gentleman that they would not be ultimately defrayed by the public generally, but by a per centage

P

levied