when those principles, vigorously acted up- | on, were about to work a reformation in every department, connected with the receipt and expenditure of 46 millions of mo ney, now annually raised out of the fruits of our labour; and, amongst these departments, our eyes were naturally directed, as to a great and primary object, to the result of the inquiries to be made in the MILITARY Department, in which department there is now annually expended upwards of 18 millions of money. I will not say, Gentlemen, that we have looked in vain. I will not say, that our expectations in this respect, have actually been disappointed. But, I cannot refrain from saying, nor from endeavouring to draw your attention to the fact, that the First Report of the Commissioners of Military Inquiry has been before the House of Commons for nearly two months; and that, as yet, no proceeding whatever has thereon taken place, though, as I think, you will be fully convinced, this Report contains matter full as worthy of parliamentary proceedings as any of the matters contained in the Tenth Report of Naval Inquiry. The subject of this First Report of the Military Commissioners is an inquiry relative to the money concerns of the BARRACK DEPARTMENT, of which LIZUTENANTGENERAL DELANCEY was at the head, under the title of "Barrack-Master General," from May 1794, until November 1804, when he resigned his office. A person of the name of GREENWOOD, an army agent, was, until the resignation of De Lancey (whose titles we will, for brevity's sake, now omit) Agent or Treasurer to the Barrack-Office. It appears, from the Report and the accompanying documents, that the money for the public service, in the Barrack-Department, was, as it issued from the Treasury, not lodged in the Bank of England, but was held by GREENWOOD; and, it further appears, that this GREENWOOD, who received ■ salary of £530 a year, had in his hands an average sum of 32,5001. of the public money during the whole of the time that he was the Treasurer. The interest of 32,5001. for one year, at 5 per centum, is 1,6251. and, when we consider the length of time, we shall find, that, by this mode of lodging the public money, the gains to GREENWOOD, Cr some other person, must have been immense, and that the loss to the public must have been of correspondent amount. But this is a mere trifle compared to what has come to light with regard to the public money appropriated and used by De Lancey himself, who, under the pretext of securing himself against losses, made, st different times, great charges under the head of contingencies, and thus drew out of the Treasury great sums, which still remain unaccounted for, and which are now actually due to the public. But, lest I should be accused of misrepresentation, I will here quote the Report itself, requesting you, gentlemen, to pay great attention to it."In answer to the precept of the Board, "Lieut. Gen. De Lancey furnished us with "certain statements and accounts, from "which there results a balance due to the "public of 6,8651. 4s. being so much which "Lieut. Gen. De Lancey has drawn from "the Treasury beyond the amount which "he states to be due to him; but, on reference to the items of these accounts, it 1. His pay as Barrack Master General, " and General Officer on the Staff. 2. His travelling expences. 3. His contingencies for additional charge and responsibi "lity upon unsettled accounts, at one per cent. on the expenditure of the barrack department in each year. The two "first heads have been made subjects of in"quiry, and the observations which may "arise on them will be hereafter noticed; "the third is the transaction to which we "have before alluded; and it is of so im 66 portant and singular a nature, that we "have been greatly influenced by the con"siderations which arise on it, to make "this partial report. The Lieut. Gen. in"forms us, that he takes credit for this sum on account of contingent charges, "such as, upon the making up and settling his accounts, he shall bring against "the public;" and in an explanatory paper on this subject, he adds, "that feeling most acutely the critical situation in which he has been placed, not only ""with respect to the losses to which he must be subjected from the mode to be applied to the settlement of his accounts, but likewise from the delay "" which has taken place, and which has deprived him of the means of recovering disallowances from the subordinate "accountants; he therefore, in order "" to indemnify himself from losses ""which may arise upon the settlement ""of his accounts, found himself under "the necessity of availing himself of the ""authority granted to him of making contingent charges, and stating a sum 66 66 "" in his contingent account for additional charge and responsibility to which in 'justice he ought not to have been sub""jected." jected." Admitting that losses are likely to accrue, and for the cause assigned, "it yet does not occur to us that Lieut. Gen. "De Lancey can indemnify himself against "such losses or disallowances, by appropri ating to himself so considerable a sum of "the public money; since this appropria tion must, in passing his accounts, be dis"allowed equally with any other charges "for which no voucher nor authority is pro duced. It is observable that Lieut. Gen. "De Lancey introduced a similar charge "of one pound one shilling per centum on "the barrack expenditure into his early "accounts, submitted to examination in the "war-office in 1795; which charge, from "the year 1794, he justifies on the ground **that the " War-Office had charged him "with large sums which he had never "received;" and for the period previous to 1794, on the ground, that he considered his increased responsibility to "take place from the commencement of "his account." But the fact of the in"troduction of this charge at a time when no delay had occurred; its being after"wards withdrawn from the accounts "which were passed at the War Office (withdrawn, as he states, by himself, that "no delay might have taken place in the """settlement of his accounts by any questions arising) ;" and his total si"lence on this subject in any communica"tions made by him to the Select Commit"tee of Finance in 1797, tend to invali"date the reasons adduced in its justifica"tion; and Lieut. Gen. De Lancey not shewing any authority for this charge, amounting to 88,9231. we are of opinion that this sum should be added to his ac"knowledged balance of 6,8651. 4s. beforementioned, and the total amount repaid without delay to the account of the present "Barrack Master General at the Bank of England. It further appears to us, that "there is an error in Lieut. Gén. De Lan"cey's personal account, the correction of "which will add to this balance. Lieut. "Gen. De Lancey takes credit for 1,5701.1s. 't he amount of a warrant granted him by "the War Office for his pay and allowances "for the year 1793; these charges are al"ready included in the two first items of his "account, and amount to 16261. 165. which "credit must therefore be cancelled, and added to the balance, making the total "sum due by Lieut. Gen. De Lancey to the "public 97,4151. !!' Mark the amount, gentlemen! And, let us, presently, hear the sentiments of the ministers with regard to the absolute, the hard, the cruel necessity, of the new taxes which they are now imposing upon the people.After the above statement the Commissioners proceed thus: "The appropriation of so large a sum to an unauthorised use, and especially of so great a proportion of it in the "last ten months of Lt. G. De Lancey's holding the office of Barrack Master General, afforded strong grounds to presume, “that the statements given in by the Barrack-Office, on which the Lords of the "Treasury proceeded in the issues of money "for barrack services, were not the correct "documents we should have expected them "to be; and, our inquiries have justified that presumption. The current services 66 66 66 were provided for by monthly statements, "and the extra, or unforeseen services by ""subsequent requisitions or estimates; but "the existing balances in the hands of the "Treasurer were no where noticed, nor was any allowance or deduction måde for sums received for rent of canteens, and "sale of dung, and re payments to a con"siderable amount. It is obvious, there"fore, how funds have been found to answer "the drafts of Lieut. Gen. De Lancey on "his personal account; and by reference to "Mr. Greenwood' examination, it will be seen in what manner a part of the sums drawn by him in the years 1803 and "1804, has been appropriated. indeed, obvious enough; for, from the examination here referred to, it appears, that, during the years 1803 and 1804, of the sums drawn out of the Treasury, and received by GREENWOOD on account of the public service, four sums, amounting_to 11,0961. were immediately carried to Dr LANCEY'S private account, instead of being applied to meet demands upon the barrackdepartment! And, observe, gentlemen, that, while this was going on, De Lancey was receiving pay from the public. that is to say from the people, that is to say, in part, out of our labour; from this source he was receiving pay, 1st, as Colonel of the 17th regiment of dragoons; 2d, as Barrack Master General; 3d, as a Lieut. Gen. upon the Staff; and 4th, for travelling expenses as Barrack Master General, at the average of about 1000l. a year! So that, in the whole, he was receiving, in pay and travelling expenses, about 5,000l. a year, and in mere pay alone about 4,000l. a year. But, before I proceed to draw the comparison between this case and that of Lord Viscount Melville and Mr. Trotter, I must stop for a mo ment to beseech your attention to the nature of the several offices, for the filling of which this person was receiving pay out of the pocket of the people. As colonel of the As colonel of the 17th regiment of dragoons, it was, unquestionably incumbent upon him, to superintend the affairs of that regiment; for, to what end is a colonel appointed to a regiment; to what end is he paid a thousand or two a year for filling that office; to what end is there any such rank, unless there be some duty attached to it? We shall be told, perhaps, that this is, from usage, become a post of mere emolument; that it is now a mere sinecure; that a man, by holding such a post, does not regard himself as bound to do duty with the regiment, but that he does not regard himself as bound ever to see it; that many offices about the court and at Whitehall, requiring constant attendance there, are filled by men, who are, at the same time, colonels of regiments, and who, of course, can scarcely ever see such regiments. As an illustration of this, we may be reminded, that GENERAL FITZPATRICK, who is now Secretary at War, and who has more than a hundred clerks under him, has during the few weeks that he has been in that office, become also a colonel of a regiment, a post given him, of course, by the advice of the Duke of York; and, it will, perhaps, be added, that the General has withdrawn his notice (which was given during last session of parliament) for a motion relative to the advice giren to the king to dis.miss officers, as in the case of Colonel Cochrane Johnstone, whose Letter to the Duke of York the public are in possession of. But, Gentlemen, these colonelships, though it would appear, that they are concerns of mere profit, are not sinecures for life, it being in the power of the king to take them away at any moment that he pleases; so that, there being now about 200 regiments, there are, of course, 200 men, many of whom are members of parliament, from whom his Majesty can, at any moment he pleases, take an office worth about 1,500l. a year; and, observe, that, in the ease of the army, there is no responsibility in the adviser, the dismission of officers of the army being an absolute prerogative of the crown.--The office of Barrack-Master General you have already some idea of, from the circumstance of the officer's being required to travel so much as to cost the public about a thousand a year in travelling expenses;. but, you will have a still better idea of its importance, when I tell you, that, in this department, and under this officer, there is expended annually about 1,500,0001. of ΤΗΣ the public money.- -Yet, to this office was added in the person of DE LANCEY, that of a Lieutenant-General upon the staff. STAFF, gentlemen, is not in this application of the word, a very intelligible name. It means an establishment of Generals and other officers, whose business it is to command, not particular corps, but the army, or parts of the army. These generals and other officers do, indeed, bear rank and receive pay, in their particular corps; but, they are selected from those corps, and taken away, for the time being, for the purpose of directing the operations of the whole of the corps considered as an army, and acting as such; they are relieved from the perform ance of their regimental duties, in order that they may be able to devote the whole of their time, attention, and talents, to the more important services of the army in general, upon which talents and industry so employed, the safety of a nation may frequently depend. Accordingly, at the head of OUR STAFF is the Duke of York, and, upon the same establishment, are, I believe, five of his royal brothers, unless the Duke of Cambridge be still upon THE STAFF of Hanover. The Duke of Gloucester is also a general upon the Staff; and, upon the same establishment was Lieut. Gen. De Lancey, though, as we have seen, he was, at the same time, Barrack-Master General, having the care of the expenditure of 1,500,000l. a year, and expending while travelling about the country upon the Bar rack business, about a thousand a year of the public money. The reasons for the Duke of York's putting De Lancey upon this establishment were, we must suppose, as cogent as those which produced De Lancey's selection of GREENWOOD for a Treasurer. The fact of De Lancey's being a Lieut. Gen. upon the staff, and of his receiving pay for filling that office is all that, for the present, we have to do with. I will just add, that the charge upon the public, on account of staff offi, cers and officers of garrisons, was, in the last year only, 289,0271. and yet that "unprinnaparté, has the impudence, the intolerable "cipled plunderer" of foreign nations, Buo impudence and insolence, to tell us that we have " no generals," and to laugh at our staff establishment! Were he to come here, Gentlemen, were he to dare to come, he would soon be made to laugh on the other side of his mouth! Begging your pardon for this long digres sion, I now return to the First Report of the Commission of Military Inquiry; and the way to view the matter, it appears to me, is to take it comparatively with the facts con best tained in, and the parliamentary proceedings upon, the Tenth Report of Naval Inquiry. From this last-mentioned Report, Gentlemen, it appeared, that large sums of the public money had, during the space of 16 years, been drawn out of the Treasury for alledged naval purposes, and had been applied, for a considerable time, at least, to other than naval purposes; for instance, to the discounting of bills, to the liquidating of private accounts, and, as in the case of the loan to Boyd and Benfield, to the accommodating of merchants (those merchants being members of the House of Commons) with the means, interest free, of paying their instalments upon loans made by them to the public, and upon which loans they were receiving interest from the public! This last, however, was, it would seem, an act of merit, rather than a crime, seeing that Mr. Fox and the other persons who have been chiefly instrumental in bringing Lord Melville to trial, have, very recently, voted for a grant of 40,000l. of the public money to pay the debts of Mr. Pitt, and that, too, upon the express ground of Mr. Pitt's public merit; and, we all know, that the naval money lent to Boyd and Benfield without interest, was lent with the knowledge of, and was, in fact, actually lent by Mr. Pitt's consent, and with the approbation and participation of Mr. Pitt. As to the two other characteristics, namely, the discounting of bills, and the liquidating of private accounts, with the public money, the Naval and Military Reports bear a pretty exact resemblance; for, though, as to the first, there does not appear any direct evidence to prove, that the public money which was drawn out of the Treasury on account of the Barrack-Office, and which lay at GREENWOOD's, or elsewhere, was employed in the discounting of bills, it would be very unreasonable to suppose, that it was not employed in some way or other for purposes of private emolument; and, as to the second, there is direct and positive evidence, that, in the years 1803 and 1804 only, the sum of 11,0901. which had been drawn out of the Treasury on account, and in the name of Barrack Services, was transferred to DE LANCEY's private account with his agent GREENWOOD. Thus far, Gentlemen, the two Reports proceed pretty nearly, if not quite, upon a parallel; but, there is one striking and most important dissimilarity in favour of the persons inculpated in the Naval Report; and, Gentlemen, I must bespeak your patience, while I endeavour to give you a fair description of it. You must remember, that it was frequently urged, by the defenders of Lord Viscount Melville, that his account with the public was settled; that it was cleared off; that he had actually paid the balance due upon his account; that, in short, the books clearly shewed, that he owed the public nothing, and that, therefore, nothing has the public suffered by him. This, said we (as we still say) is sophistical; it is a misrepresentation; it is a deception; for, though, at the end of his holding the office of Treasurer of the Navy, he made his accounts square; though he then brought and paid into that Treasury all the sums of public money that were in his hands; yet, that, during the long continuance of his treasurership,, he had. constantly large sums in his hands, or permitted such sums to remain in the hands of others, instead of leaving them in the Bank of England or in the King's Exchequer till wanted for naval services, and that he did thereby cause an injury to the public equal to the amount of the interest of such sums, to say nothing about the means, which, by the use of such sums were afforded, of procuring influence as to matters connected with politics. But, Gentlemen, while you will not fail to perceive, that this reasoning. applies with equal force to the case of DE LANCEY and those who are concerned with · him, I beseesh you to remark, that De LANCEY has not settled his account; that he has not paid in his balance due to the public; that, leaving his gains by interest out of the question, he now OWES, upon the face of his own accounts, 97,4151. to the public; that he has in his hands this immense sum of money, which, as you well know, has been raised, in taxes, out of the fruit of our labour; and, accordingly, as you have seen, in the part of the Report which I have ex+ tracted for your information, the Commissioners of Military Inquiry state, that heought to be made to pay, without delay, the said sum back into the Treasury of the nation. Thus, Gentlemen, having, with what degree of clearness I am able, placed the case before you, I might leave you to apply what has been called to your recollection at the beginning of this letter; but, it seems necessary to make an observation or two tending a little further to illustrate what was there pointed out. You remember bow, in the case of Lord Melville, the MORNING CHRONICLE (then the opposition newspaper) vociferated for justice; speedy justice; no delay! And you must remember, that, even before the Report was printed, what broad hints it threw out upon the subject. Yet, now, it is as blind as a mule, or, at any rate, as mute as a fish! Why this difference, Gentlemen? Why this foul, nay, I must call it, this base partiality? What is it to you and me, Gentlemen, whether a man be in place or out of place, so that he has our money in his pocket? What is it to us, who wants his place, or by whom he is protected? What is it to us, whom he has lent our money to, so that we have been deprived of the use of it? Bear in mind, too, that, in the case of DE LANCEY, there is a certain specified sum; the fixed sum of 97,4151. now due to the public, and recommended by the Commissioners to be inunediately ordered to be paid into the Treasury; and that, as yet, not one word has, any where, been said about acting upon this recommendation; or, that, if a word has any where been said about it, it has been said so very softly as for it not to have reached your and my ears. In the case of Lord Viscount Melville and Mr. Trotter, you remember, Gentlemen, that it was strongly urged by our Representative, Mr. Fox (who is now a minister), by Mr. GREY (who is now also a minister), by Mr. WINDHAM (who is now also a minister), and by LORD HENRY PETTY (who is now also a minister), that, one way, in which the public had been injured by Lord Viscount Melville and Mr. Trotter, was, the risk which the public ran in consequence of its money having been held in private hands, instead of being safe ly lodged in the Treasury or in the Bank of England. Let us apply this reasoning (very sound reasoning) to the case of DE LANCEY; and, where shall we find the cause of 97,4151. being now quiefly left in his hands, or in the hands of others of his choosing, without any security at all; or, at least, without any security that you and I have ever heard of? . It now remains for me to remind you of the public pecuniary circumstances, of the state of our national money-affairs, at the moment that, this great sum is left in the hands of DE LANCEY, or of others, to whose keeping he may have confided it. And here, Gentlemen, I shall trouble you with nothing of my own; I shall not (even suppose it nccessary) remind you of the endless and pressing calls of the taxgatherers of numefous descriptions, nor shall I exhort you to look at the 1,200,000 paupers, who now inhabit this fertile island, cultivated by all the means that the greatest degree of ingenuity and of industry combined are capable of producing: I shall content myself with just hoticing two instances of taxatien brought forward during the present session of parliament, namely the addition to INCOME TAX, and SMITH stated his objections to the bill, "which were, that it operated most unjust"ly and unequally, inssmuch as it taxed, at "the same rate, incomes which arose from "different species of property totally dis"tinct in their nature and value. It was a gross insult upon sense, to tax at the same 66 66 66 66 rate income from capital, and income "depending solely on personal exertion; "income from property not worth 3 years purchase, and income from property worth 30 years purchase. The title was false and delusive, for the tax was not upon property, but upon income, and it was to all intents and purposes an income "tax. He also objected to it on account of "the principle of disclosure which it in"volved, and which afforded such inquisi"torial and vexatious powers to the officers "of govt. as rendered it to the last degree "grating to the feelings of Englishmen. "This principle of disclosure had, however, "been much modified by a noble lord (Sid"mouth), now in the other house, and for "this he deserved the thanks of the country. But still the principle remained and "vitiated the whole bilf. He had no great 66 |