he meant the arrears of the duchy of Cornwall. That debt still remained indisputably due, either from the sovereign or the public; and towards the discharge of that debt, he could not conceive an application of the funds now under discussion, more grateful to the people, than in part directing them towards that object. His Majesty's munificence towards the younger branches of his august family was an act of bounty; in the latter case it would be an act, not of bounty merely, but of justice.

Sir Francis Burdett now declared, that though he had been inclined, from the candid and liberal manner in which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had expressed himself, to accede to the amendment which he suggested, yet, from the discovery of so extravagant and flagrant a misapplication of part of the money, it became his duty to persist in the original motion. Mr Huskisson, however, moved an amendment, which required only an account of the net proceeds, and of the balance now remaining. This, Mr Perceval insisted, would answer the Honourable Baronet's intention more fully than could be done by granting the original motion. When he was in possession of the amount of the fund, he might move for an account of the application of it. The amendment was then carried by a majority of 82 to 57. Sir Francis did not resume the subject. It would, indeed, have answered no other purpose, than that of calling the attention of the people to an abuse which they had no hope of seeing remedied; for by the manner in which he was told that he might move for the account, it was plainly implied that the motion would be refused. It was brought forward late in the session in the Upper

House, by the Earl of Suffolk, who affirmed, that June 17. if the Crown, without any inquiry on the part of the public, was permitted to devote the proceeds of these droits, enormous as they were now become, to its own purposes, it might be possible for an administration to begin and protract a war purely for the sake of the plunder which might be taken in this way.

Lord Holland said, the question was of the greatest importance. The droits had now increased to an enormous extent: and yet, in arranging the Civil List revenue, no regard had been paid to them; and we had been called upon no less than five times, within not a great space of time, to pay off the debts contracted on the Civil List, besides considerably augmenting that revenue. specific object of the Earl of Suffolk's motion was, to ascertain the amount of the property taken from the Danes; and, as this could not be done, the returns not having yet been made, he consented to withdraw it, pledging himself to bring it forward again.

The

It was urged by the Treasury members, that the grant to Sir Home Popham was not a donation from the proceeds in question, but the remission of a forfeiture, and the exercise of justice with mercy, said the Advocate-General, the prerogative of pardon, or remission of forfeiture, is one of the brightest jewels in the power of the Crown!-As a jewel of eloquence, this sentence might have shone among the base claptraps of sentimental loyalty in a modern comedy; but it was insulting the common sense of the House to talk of justice and mercy, and the prerogative of pardon, on such an occasion. The subject was brought

forward again by Mr Lushington, who, after having stated May 31. the case, and proved it to the full extent of the charge, by the most incontrovertible documents, concluded with moving, "That it appears to this House, that, by a decree of the Lords Commissioners of Appeal in Prize-causes, dated the 11th day of April, 1803, the ship Etrusco, and such parts of the cargo as were claimed by Home Riggs Popham, Esq., now Sir Home Popham, were condemned as good and lawful prize to the King, as the property of one of his subjects engaged in an illegal trade :-That by a Treasury warrant, dated the 24th September, 1805, the proceeds of the said ship and cargo, amounting to 25,9591. 9s. 7d., subject to certain expences, not exceeding 6000l., were granted to Sir Home Popham, who had been detected in prosecuting such illegal trade: That this grant is a misapplication of public money, in as much as, contrary to all custom and precedent, those funds which have, in part, always been appropriated to reward the exertions of captors, were bestowed wholly upon Sir Home Popham, who, being a lieutenant in his Majesty's navy, had been detected knowingly carrying on illicit trade, in contempt of the laws of his country, contrary to his duty as a British subject, and to the disgrace of the character of a British officer; operating at the same time as a discouragement to his Majesty's naval forces, by depriving them of the accustomed rewards of their zeal and activity; and as an incitement to the contempt and disregard of the

laws of the land, by bestowing reward and impunity on those who had been detected in the violation of them." The motion was disposed of by a direct negative, because of the merits of Sir Home Popham, and because the remission had been granted by Mr Pitt, "that great man," said Mr Long," whose purity of character neither the voice of party, nor the breath of calumny itself, had ever attempted to sully,that illustrious character, who, in the whole course of his splendid career, had been distinguished by the most inflexible integrity, by the highest sense of honour, and by the most perfect devotion to the cause of his country." As if the character of that minister had any thing to do with the conduct of Sir Home Popham,—unless it were admitted as a principle, that Mr Pitt could do no wrong!

The general avidity for personal scandal and private anecdotes, is one of the many melancholy indications of degeneracy in the present age. In this respect the public are like women. Sir Home Popham and his speculation in tea amused our talking politicians, and the weighty subject of the droits of Admiralty * was forgotten. That question must, however, be resumed. It is not becoming the dignity of England, that the Crown should derive any other advantages from war than those of honour and increased dominion, after the honourable manner of old times. The Crown should be above the suspicion of delaying its declaration of war for the sake of appropriating these droits,-above the temptation it must be supposed to be. This right

VOL. I. PART I.

of the Crown was formerly exercised only towards those ships which were seized in port ;-and as those ships lay at anchor, to be taken possession of by the first boat which was dispatched for the purpose, there were no captors who could complain. The first instance wherein ships taken at sea in the ordinary course of warfare were thus claimed as droits, was at the commencement of the last war with Spain;-the pretext was, that our Spanish merchants were to be indemnified with the proceeds :— but that the conduct of the Crown

in applying this money to its own uses, and in grants to the different branches of the Royal Family, was considered by the ministers themselves to be as unusual, as it must needs be unpopular, is manifest from the circumstance, that, when the fact was first stated, it was positively denied in the ministerial newspapers. If the Royal Family be not sufficiently and amply provided for by the State, let their revenues be increased; but never let it be said, that they secure for themselves the first fruits of privateering!

Ir is a melancholy task to record the parliamentary proceedings in this, or any other session of the Imperial parliament, respecting Ireland. The insolence, rather than the intolerance of one party, the factious rather than patriotic interference of the other, and the utter indifference towards the real grievances of that miserable country, which has been uniformly displayed by both, give little hope of any amelioration.

The first Irish question which was brought forward, was a March 3. motion of Sir John Newport's, That there be laid before the House a copy of the patent by which John Giffard, Esq. has been recently appointed to the office of Accomptant-General of the Customs in Ireland, together with a statement of the manner in which the vacancy of the said office took place. The case was this: Mr Giffard, in the year 1805, held a place of 700 7. a-year in the Revenue Of fice. The Catholics were at that time holding private meetings, to concert the best mode of preparing and presenting a petition to parlia

ment; and the Earl of Fingal, a nobleman of distinguished moderation, presided at these meetings. The Irish government were instructed by the government of this country, to prevent, as far as possible, any irritation of the public mind upon this occasion; and the Under Secretary was even instructed to send a confidential person to Mr Giffard, to ac quaint him with the wishes of government, and its especial desire that no discussion on the question should be agitated in Dublin. Mr Giffard, however, declared, that nothing should deter him from "giving a licking to the papists;" and, in spite of repeated admonitions, he made the most violent and offensive speeches, in the Common-Council, against the Catholics; for which Lord Hardwicke deprived him of his place. This measure gave offence to some of the Irish Protestants; and Lord Hawkesbury, much as he disapproved of Mr Giffard's intemperance, regretted that he had been displaced, for there was a cruel circumstance to be pleaded in excuse for him. During the rebellion, his

२