1

603 in this case, which was not the production of the whole evidence; but merely the general grounds of the decisiolis, not with a view to revise them, but to see that the comé missioners did their duty.

Mr. Sheridan replied, that the noble Lord furnished a proof, that though a person attended to any business, he did not therefore necessarily understand it (a laugh). It was impossible that the grounds could be laid before the House for any purpose but revision, if necessary.

Lord Henry Petty and Mr. Grant, made cach a few olsservations, after which the bill was read a third time:"

Mr. Jolmstone proposed a clause to prevent any of the commissioners, not at present' members of Parliament, früh becoming so. After a few observations from Lord Henry Petty, the clause was withdrawn! The bill was then passed.

TREASURERSKIP OF THE NAVY REGULATION BILLY Mr. Whitbread rose, pursuant to the notice which he had given on a former occasion, not with wwiow, in the pre sent state of the House, and at this late period of the session, to move for leave to bring in a bill for the better regulation of the treasurership of the navy, But for the purpose of moving that, early in the next session, the House should take into consideration the act of the 25th of the King, entitled, "An Act for the better regalation of the Office of Treasurer of the Navy." Every member who now heard ́him, he apprehended, had read with atttention the report made by the committee appointed to examine the Journals of the House of Lords, relative to the late impeachment; and if they had read it, he trusted that they had taken it into their most serious consideration, as, according to what appeared in those Journals, eleven of the Judges of Eng land had given it as their opinion that the law gave no hold to the public on its officers; that, without violation of the law, such officers might make use of the public money for their own private purposes, if they pleased; and on proof being had of such application, that the officers were not punishable by informatiou or indictment. If that opinion was called for, and if the majority of the Peers pon the opinions of the Judges delivered to the above effect, had pronounced the acquittal in the late impeachment, then it was high time that this should be declared to be law, if it was law; or that if it was not law, it should be declared,

that

that it should become so in future. He regretted that at this late period of the session he could not propose, with propriety, to bring in a bill on that subject, but he hoped that early next session this would be done. As to the act of the 25th of the King, it did now appear, from the opinions of the eleven Judges, that the public had, from the moment it was passed, up to the present time, been under a most gross delusion with respect to its provisions, and that large sums of public money, as had lately happened, up the extent of 150,000l. might be drawn from the Bank, and deposited in any place whatever, by the treasurer: and that not only he, but one deputed by him might thus dispose of money, and lodge it in any place, even beyond the controul of the treasurer; he found not only that the assigned balances might be disposed of in this manner, but also when another object was in view, and when it appeared that the motive of the treasurer of the navy, or his deputy, was to make use of the public money for their own profit fand advantage, we still found, from these decisions, that such practices.. were not cognizable by law, and that the -partics were punishable on information or indictment. He wished that he could, even in this session, have brought forward a bill for the regulation of the office of treasurer of the navy, and the greater security of the public. As that, however, could not conveniently be done, he trusted that early next session his right honourable friend near him (Mr. Sheridan) would introduce such a bill, or if he did not, he h mself would do it; and he sincerely hoped that his right honourable friend would succced better in a measure for the regulation of his own office than his noble predecessor had done. The great difficulty he should feel, he protested, would be to find words more strong than those which had been employed in the act of the 25th. He hoped, however, that his right honourable friend would make the words so strong and clear, the sense so conspicuous and defined, and the enactment so plain and obvious, that it would be impossible that the provisions of his bill could be miscon ceived, or mistaken. He concluded by moving that this House do, early in the next session, take into consideration the act of the 25th of George III. chap. 81, relative to the regulation of the office of treasurer of the navy. On the suggestion of the Speaker, he also moved that the report of the committee appointed to inspect the Lords' Journals should be entered as read,

Mr.

1

Mr. Leicester rose, not with any intention to object, to the motion of the honourable gentleman, but because some things which he said appeared to him so extraordinary, that he could not pass them over without observation. He seemed to have supposed that the learned Judges had determined that embezzling the public money was no offence cognizable by law. The Judges had determined no such thing -Here Mr. Whitbread, by permission of the House, rose, and read the following extract from the Journals of the Lords:

"Whether it was lawful for the treasurer of the navy, before the passing of the act of 25 Geo. III. c. 31, and more especially when, by warrant from his Majesty, his salary as such treasurer as aforesaid was augmented in full satisfaction for all wages, fees, and other profits and emoluments, to apply any sum of money imprested to him for navy services, to any other use whatsoever, public or private, without express authority for so doing; and whether such application by such treasurer would have been a misdemeanor, or punishable by information or indictment?"

The Lord Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas delivered the unanimous opinion of the Judges upon the said question:

"That it was not lawful for the treasurer of the navy, before the 25 Ceo. III. c. 31., although after the warrant stated in the question, to apply any sum of money imprested to him for navy services, or other uses public or private, without express authority for so doing, so as to constitute a misdemeanor, punishable by information or indict ment;" and gave his reasons.]

Mr. Leicester, in continuation, observed, that he was perfectly aware of that; but then that was no embezzlement. The opinion only went so far as to say, that a tenporary use of the public money by individuals in office, was not an offence cognizable by law; and every one knew, who was at all acquainted with the course of business for these last thirty years, that this had never been, considered as a public offence. Where was the difference between the case of the late Lord Holland and such individuals; the honourable gentleman had said, that the judges had given it as their opinion, that money might by law be drawn from the Bank, and deposited elsewhere, for private purposes. They had said no such thing. They

had

had only said, that it was not illegal to draw money from the Bank bona fide for naval service. Whether afterwards the trust should be abused, was a quite different thing, and one which they considered themselves as having nothing to do with. The gentlemen on the other side, therefore, seemed to have misconceived them, and to blend the liberty of taking out the money with the emoluments made by Trotter.

Mr. Whitbread hoped that he would be indulged with the liberty of saying a few words in reply.. He had never mentioned the word embezzlement at all. The learned gentleman meant, he supposed, by embezzling, the making use of the public money and not bringing it forward at the making up of the accounts. He did not say any thing about that, nor had he any such thing in contemplation. What he meant was the applying of the public money to private purposes for a time, and this he and his friends had contended was an offence punishable at common law. As to the construction of the act of the 25th of the King, if the treasurer or his deputy might take out the money from the Bank for naval purposes, and afterwards apply it to purposes of private emolument, then he repeated, that the public had, up to this time, been labouring under a most gross delusion, for it was utterly impossible to suppose that the legislature had any other intention than that the money drawn from the Bank should be immediately applied to naval purposes, and to no other whatever. He again repeated that his great difficulty would be to find words more binding upon the treasurer not to draw out the money for any other than naval purposes, and not to apply it to any other purpose when drawn. It was, that we blended the liberty allowed, with the use made of the money by Trotter. We did no such thing; but it was the learned gentleman who blended the taking out of the money with the emoluments made by Trotter. Could his right honourable friend near him, then, allow Mr. Scott to take out the money, to deposit it at Couts's and make what use of it he pleased? If such a thing was done, he contended that it would be still impossible to permit such a thing to pass without, at least, an attempt to punish it.

He was not, at present, enquiring what was the law, in opposition to the Judges? but still they were fal lible men, and liable to error, even in construing the law. This House, and the other, might act in opposition to their

opinions,

opinions, as they were not bound by them, unless they appeared well founded; and it was no longer ago than the preceding day, that the House of Lords decided in direct opposition to the opinions of the Judges, after they had been solemnly called upon to deliver them. As the Judges, then, were not infallible, it became the legislature to consider, whether what they had delivered on this point was law or not. If it was law, then the law ought to be declared-if it was not law, then it was high time to have a new law, to render the point clear and certain.

Mr. R. Dundas admitted, that, according to the opinion of most persons, some new regulations were necessary with regard to the law upon this subject. But that the purpose for which he now rose, was to advert to something which had fallen from the honourable mover. That honourable gentleman professed to think that the House of Lords grounded its judgment upon that opinion of the Judges to which he appeared to object. But he could not allow that that bonourable gentleman, or any other person, was competent to say upon what, the Lords were induced to decide in the case alluded to; neither was the honourable gentleman correct in stating that that House should infer, from the admissions of Lord Melville, that the noble Lord connived at Mr. Trotter's application of the public money to his own profit.

Mr. Sheridan thought, that, after the opinion of the Judges, it was absolutely necessary that the law upon this subject should be satisfactorily settled. But, notwithstandIng these opinions, he should take care that, while he remained in his present office, the affairs of it should not be managed in any respect contrary to what the law prescribed; and his conception of that law was this, beyond all doubt, that neither pay-master, nor any other person, should take naval money from the bank, unless it should be at the moment wanted for bona fide naval purposes. Indeed, according to the present arrangement, his pay-master had no concern with a single guinea of the public money; and it was somewhat curious that this was the arrangement which Trotter suggested. Accounts are now opened at the bank in the name of each of the sub-accountants, to which money was occasionally transferred by order of the pay-master. Such was his impression as to the nature of this plan, that he had recommended it to

his