but it was a matter of peculiar delicacy to interfere in this [COMP instance.

Mr. Bankes objected to the practice of granting money, as appeared to have been done here, without the matter having been regularly before parliament, which had a right to examine into the grounds of giving away their money, and the manner in which it was expended, He ́ also thought, that a treaty of commerce ought to have ac companied this.engagement. The omission of an oppor tunity to do that, while we were giving away our money, might be felt in the case of Sweden, with respect to which, perhaps, we might be involved in great dificulty about our orders of council.

Mr. Huskisson stated that the account of the disposal of the money had been always laid before parliament, though the thing, he admitted, had not been done in the most re gular way.

The resolution was agreed to.

C

The Chancellor of the Exchequer then proposed, that 50,000. should be granted for the relief of the inhabitants. of Rossean, in Dominica, who had lost property to the amount of 600,0001. in gallantly repelling an attack of the French on the place.

A conversation took place as to the mode in which the sum should be distributed. The Chancellor of the Exche quer, Mr. Windham, and Lord Castlereagh, thought that the best mode of distribution would be pro rata of the loss, as every other mode seemed to be liable to insurmountable objection. Mr. Ponsonby, Mr. Barham, Lord Temple, &c. objected to this, proposing that the distri bution should be according to the merits and wants of the objects of this bounty. The proʻrata distribution was, however, at last agreed to. Many compliments were paid. to the inhabitants of Rosseau, whose merits were stated by Mr. Yorke to have been most singularly conspicuous. He wished that instead of 50,0007., the moiety of the loss, or 500,000l. had been proposed.

The resolution was agreed to.

67901. 10s. was voted for the British museum; and 50001. for repairing Margate pier.

Sir Arthur Wellesley proposed, that 10,000l. part of an estimate of 20,000. should be granted for improving Holyhead harbour, with a view to facilitate the communica tion with Ireland.

On this vote Mr. Sheridan suggested, that the newly proposed road to Ireland, was much preferable to that by Holyhead, and that the new harbour of Pony Clues was preferable to that of Holyhead, which was, in fact, no harbour.

Sir Arthur Wellesley maintained, that the harbour of Holyhead was far superior.

Mr. Herbert (of Kerry) argued to the same effect.

After some further conversation, in which Mr. Parnell spoke in favour of the new harbour, and Mr. Foster in fas vour of Holyhead,

Mr. Wardle supported Mr. Sheridan's idea, and thought the money ought not to be granted.

Sir Arthur Wellesley supported the motion. The esti mate was framed on a plan approved of by the committee on the case.

Mr. S. Bourne supported the resolation. The new port was, to his knowledge, in a very dangerous bay.

Lord Temple thought the matter ought to be referred to the opinions of seafaring men.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer said a few words in answer to lord Temple, and was supported by General Tarleton.

Mr.C. Wynne said the resolution ought not to rest merely on the opinions of the Holyhead captains, and that a committee ought to be appointed to inquire into the re lative merits of the two harbours.

Mr. Sheridan, if the money was to be granted, wished it to be applied in equal moieties to the improvement of

both harbours:

Mr. Secretary Canning ironically recommended a fair trial of the experiment, in which passage the greater num ber of Irish members would be lost in coming to this country, without any improvement in either.

Mr. Sheridan argued that there were other commodities of intercourse besides members of parliament, and that even these should have their option. He wished the Irish members who came to vote for catholic emancipation, to take the safe way of the new harbour, the name of which he did not know, (a laugh) and those who came to vote against that question, to come the hazardous way of Holyhead.

Mr. Herbert thought it desirable to improve both harbours. Mr. Biddulph spoke to the same effect. Admiral VOL. III.-1808. 3 G

Harvey supported the resolution. Mr. Beresford spoke on the same side. Mr. Windham wished the new harbour to be attended to.

The question being called for, the house divided :

For the grant
Against it

Majority

131.

48

83

Mr. Long moved a resolution, that 75,2001. should be voted for facilitating the access to Westminster-hall, and other improvements.

Mr. Windham objected to the mode in which the money was expended, and the bad taste which prevailed in the pretended improvements.

Mr. Rose said, that he really did not know under whose authority these improvements were conducted; but some of them consisted of lath and plaister, and he should be very happy that they were pulled down.

Mr. Sheridan compared the improvements to Dr. Duigenan's appointment to the privy council, which was. known to have taken place, but which no one would acknowledge. He did not object to vote any sum tending to the embellishment of the metropolis, but he should be sorry that the money of the people, when it was voted for such purposes, should be misapplied, as it had been hitherto.

The Speaker joined in condemning the improvements, as they were called, and, by some persons, had been thought, but for which he declared himself in no way responsible. With respect to what was to be done, the plans were now before the house, so that it only, and not the commissioners, would be responsible, either for adopting or rejecting them.

Mr. Bankes was glad that this subject had attracted the notice of the committee, and reprobated the practice of voting the public money when no one was responsible for its application. He moved that instead of 75,000, only 45,000l. should be voted, as amply sufficient to sup. ply all the demands of the present year.

Mr. Whitbread thought that a committee ought to be appointed to inquire who authorised the raising of the buildings, who audited the accounts, and who issued the orders for their payment.

Mr. Rose believed that the works were ordered by the

JUNE 13.]

MISCELLANEOUS,

surveyor general of the board of works, and that they' might have been paid by an order from the treasury.. But he asserted that every shilling of the money had been accounted for, and that the accounts had been as scrupulously examined as any public accounts ever had

been.

Lord Henry Petty, in answer to what had fallen from Mr. Rose, declared his total ignorance of any part of the operations which had been carried on.

The Speaker expressed his conviction that the buildings in addition to the house of lords were greatly wanted, but that they were without any direct authority till they started up of themselves.

Mr. Huskisson said, that in consequence of the difficulty of getting in accounts from the board of works, the treasury had issued a minute, ordering an inquiry to be made into the powers of this board and the controuls

over it.

Mr. Freemantle did not esteem this a satisfactory an swer to Mr. Tierney's proposition for the appointment of a committee to inquire into the authority and expendi ture of all works lately carried on.

Mr. Fuller said, that there was no handsomo plan of the buildings in front of the house of lords, corresponding with the grandeur of the scene within. This was the fault of those then in power. The work which had been erected was a paltry building, and he was not surprised the public thought their money thrown away upon it.

Mr. Perceval would have been a friend to the smaller sum, but he was afraid it was now due to the persons to whom notices had been given that the purchases should be carried through.

The motion on the smaller grant was then put and negatived.

It was afterwards ordered, that the sum of 75,250l. 11s. be granted for completing the purchases in the vicinity of Westminster hall.

Sir T. Turton, after recapitulating the different proceedings on the claims of Mr. Palmer; that a sum of about 68,0301. had been found due to him by the former committee, but that the committee to whom the amount of his balance was last referred had, on a different calculation, reduced it 14,000/.; concluded by moving that the

sum of 51,7021. being the balance of percentage on the net increased revenue of the postage, from 5th of April, 1793, to 5th of January, 1808, be paid to Mr. Palmer.

Mr. Wynue declared the grant to be unwarrantable in every respect. He thought there should be at least a de. duction for the amount of the turnpike duty, from which mail coaches were exempted.

Lord Henry Petty agreed with his honourable friend, but thought Mr. Palmer entitled to a set off for interest on the arrear due to him.

Sir T. Turton thought Mr. Palmer entitled to the consideration of interest, and also various other descriptions of set off.

Mr. Sheridan argued against the deduction.

Mr. Rose repeated some of his former arguments, to prove that Mr. Palmer had broke his compact with the public..

Mr. Holmes Sumner argued for the deduction on ac count of turnpike exemption.

Mr. C. Wynne moved that it be sent back to the committee to inquire what part of the increased revenue arosé from the exemption of mail coaches from the payment of tolls. On this a division took place:

When strangers were re-admitted into the gallery we found the house resumed, and the Speaker in the chair..

The Chancellor of the Exchequer adverted to the motion respecting Spain, of which notice had been given by a right honourable gentle nan (Mr. Sheridan); but with the purport and scope of which he professed himself not to be acquainted. He could not, therefore, but be anxjous to know what was the object of the right honourable gentleman's motion, as without that knowledge, it could' not be expected that is a matter of such delicacy he should feel it proper to assent to any proposition of such a tendency.

Mr. Sheridan thought it sufficient to observe, that be