-[Addressed to the Commrs of the Navy.]

No. VII. Navy Office, 24th Oc tober, 1800.--SIR,-We have your letter of this date, informing us of your having received the sum of one hundred thousand pounds on our account, and we desire you will pay the same into the hands of the treasurer of his Majesty's navy, at his office in Somerset House. We are, Sir, your humble servants, A. S. HAMOND. C. HOPE. GEO ROGERS. [Addressed to George Glenny, Esq.]

No. VIII. Navy Office, 24th October, 1800.-SIR,-Mr. George Glenny, having received the sum of one hundred thousand pounds on account of this board, we have directed him to pay the same into your hands, and we desire you will please to receive it, and apply it towards the payment of navy, victualling, and transport ninetyday bills, as they become due.---We are, Sir, your very humble servants, A. S. HAMOND. C. HOPE GEO, ROGERS. [Addressed to the Right. Hon. Dudley Ryder.]

No. IX. THE EXAMINATION OF ALEX-
ANDER TROTTER, ESQUIRE, PAYMAS-
TER OF THE NAVY ;
TAKEN UPON
OATH, THE 15TH JUNE, 1804.

Q. By whom was the produce of the Navy Bills issued for the purpose of raising money for the service of the navy, between October, 1800, and May, 1802, received? A. Money was received at the Bank on account of the Treasurer of the Navy, which I believe to have been the produce of bills Issued under the circumstances alluded to in the question, and I also believe to have been the whole of the money raised by bills under this description.-Q. Has any allowance been made to the persons in whose fayour such bills were drawn, or to the persons employed to negotiate such bills? 4. I have no knowledge of the transaction, or of the negotiation --Q Did any correspondence pass between the Treasurer of the Navy and the Treasury, or the Navy Board, which led to the issue of these bills? A. I do not recollect any correspondence upon the subject.--Q Did the Treasurer of the Navy, between October, 1800 and May, 1802, meet with any difficulties in obtaining from the Treasury the sums applied for by him, by directions of the Navy Board? 4. Official difficulties will always occur in the frequent applications made for money, and I believe difficulties may have occurred during that period. [Signed by Mr. Troller and by the Commissioners.]

THE FURTHER EXAMINATION OF ALEXANDER TROTTER, ESQUIRE; TAKEN UPON OATH, THE IITH DECEMBER, 1804.

Q. It appears that several of the bills issued by the Navy Board for the purpose of raising money, were delivered to you and Mr. Thomas Wilson; were any of such bills discounted by you, or for your use? A. They were not. [Signed as before.]

No. X. Consists of Goldsmid's detailed account of the sales of the bills.

No. XI. THE EXAMINATION OF ABRAHAM GOLDSMID, ESQUIRE; TAKEN UPON OATH, THE 25TH JUNE, 1804.

Q. It appearing that in the years 1800, 1801, and 1802, bills to the amount of 4,300,000l. were drawn by the Navy Board in favour of Mr. George Glenny, and Messrs. Donaldson and Glenny, for the purpose of raising money, was you employed to nego tiate such bills, and by whom? A. I was; Mr. Long, the Secretary of the Treasury, asked me if I could discount such bills; and I afterwards received them from the Navy Office. Q. Has any allowance been made to you for your trouble in negotiating the bills? A. The account is not settled; the sum of the bills, the interest which had run on them, and the difference between the three-pence halfpenny per cent. per day, and five per cent at which rate they were discounted, were carried to the account of government, and I am to base one-eighth per cent. brokerage, which exceeds the interest by the sum of forty six pounds sixteen shillings and nine pence, upon the sum of 4,300,000 1. the amount of the bills. Q In what manner did you dispose of the bills? We got them discounted. Q. To whom, and when, did you pay over the produce of such bills? A. Whenever it was required by the Paymaster of the Navy, the money was paid into the Bank on account of the Treasurer of the Navy.Q. Did you pay over the produce of the bills as you discounted them, or did the produce of the bills re main in your hands any length of time? A. Never any length of time; the money was paid over as it was required. Signed by ABRAHAM GOLDSMID, and by THE COMMISSIONERS.]

-

A.

[THE FURTHER EXAMINATION OF ABRA HAM GOLDSMID, ESQUIRE; TAKEN UPON OATH, THE 9TH JULY, 1804.

Q. Is it customary, in calculating interest on bills, to include the day of the date of the bills, and the day of payment?

A. It is not; the day of payment is included, but not the day of the date of the bill.- Q. Was you aware that the ninety days interest on the bills drawn by the Navy Board, and negotiated by you previous to the 19th of December, 1801, included the day of the date of the bills, and the day of payment? A. No.-Q. It appearing from the account furnished by you to the Navy Board, of the produce of the bills drawn by that Board in favour of Mr. George Glenny, that bills to the amount of 100,000l. dated the 24th October, 1800, were negotiated by you on the following day, and that the sum with which you have credited the public beyond the principal sum of the bills, is £36. 15. 5d and that on the 5th of May, 1802, bills to the same amount were issued and negotiated by you on that day, and that the sun carried to the credit of government beyond the principal sum of the bills, is £63. 2s. rd.; how do you account for the latter sum being greater than the former? A. It was owing, in the first instance, to the money being provided before the bills were issued, some deJay having occurred owing to a difficulty in whose name the bills were to be made out. -The second sum is right according to a calculation made from a discount book, by which book we always make our calculations of interest.-[Signed as before.]

No. XII. Navy Office, 7th February, 1797. GENTLEMEN,-We have received your letter of the 1st instant, transmitting an account of the victualling bills payable in course, which have been registered in last month; and we conclude there are none outstanding previously thereto, although that circumstance is not mentioned in your letter. As we think that all the bills past under the same act of parliament ought to be uniform in all their terms, we are concerned to find that the days of your bills becoming due, as noted in this account, differ from those made out at this office, and at the Transport Office, viz.; that your's, registered on the 2d January, are noted to become due on the 2d April, and so on, forward; whereas at this office and at the Transport Office, they are made to become due on the 1st April (when 90 days for their running on interest expire) according to the custom which has been constantly adopted of including the first and last days on all occasions, dependent on length of time or number of days; and amongst the rest, in the mode of computing interest on the navy bills passed under the act of parliament in force immediately pre

ceding the present one, and likewise in conformity to the present act, which directs such interest to commence from the dates of the bills. -We are, gentlemen, your humble servants, H. HARMOOD. GEO. ROGERS. S. GAMBIER. [Addressed to the Commissioners of the Victualling Board.]

No. XIII. Victualling Office, 8th Feb. 1797.-GENTLEMEN,We received your letter of the 7th instant on the subject of the bills payable ia course, which have been issued by us in the course of the last month, as specified in the account transmitted to you in our letter of the 1st instant, being noted as becoming due a day later than the bills of the same description as issued by you, and the commissioners for conducting the transport service, on the same day.In reply to which we beg leave to acquaint you, that the bills in course, which since the beginning of last month have been made out in this department, are payable ninety days after date (instead of three months) conformably to the plan adopted by you. In ascertaining therefore the particular periods on which these bills severally become due, it appeared to us obvious, beyond the possibility of doubt, that the days on which they were respectively dated could not be included in the computation of the time they have to run, and of course the bills issued by us on the 2d January last (which were the first we made out) have been marked payable on the 2d April next, being according to the number of days in each month, the ninetieth day after the said 2d of January.--This rule is likewise consistent with that universally observed in respect to bills of exchange, to which, except in the instance of the three days grate usually taken, we understood it was the intention that these bills should as near as possible be rendered similar, and to which also we believe the custom you mention "of including the first and last days on all "occasions dependent on length of time

or number of days," has never applied; and we have the satisfaction to state, that the mode we have hitherto pursued has not occasioned the slightest remonstrance from any person receiving or holding such bills, of their having been made payable a day later than accuracy requires.- -The custom above referred to, which you are pleased to represent as having been constantly adopted on all occasions, has, we believe, been confined solely to the computation of the interest on the navy bills past under the act of parliament in force preceding the present one, and was then

But before that period, it was the invariable practice of this office not to include both the first and last days in the calculation of the interest; and, upon referring to the present act of parliament, it expressly enacts, that the interest shall commence "from" (not on) the dates of the bills. We beg leave to add, that in the formation of the plan we have thus pursued, we were not conscious of differing from the practice of other departments, nor had we any other object in view than a desire of acting correctly. We are, gentlemen, your most humble servants, G. CHERRY, G. P. TOWRY, F. STEPHENS, R. S. MOODY, J. HUNT, W. BOSCAWEN.

No. XIV. THE EXAMINATION OF RICHARD A. NELSON, ESQUIRE, SECRETARY TO THE NAVY BOARD; TAKEN UPON OATH, THE 8TH NOVEMBER, 1804.

Q. Was the report of the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty, respecting the arrangement of the Navy Board into committees, and the duties of its several members, upon which the order of his Majesty in Council, dated the 8th of June, 1796, was grounded or a copy thereof, transmit. ted to the Navy Board with the Admiralty order of the 17th Aug. 1796? A. It was not. --Q. Has that report, or a copy thereof, been since transmitted to the Navy Board? A. It has not.-—Q. Have any and what regulations been established since that period, for regulating the official duties of the Navy Board, or any particular member thereof? A. None.-Q. It not being specified in the regulations of the Admiralty of the 17th August, 1796, under what authority the Comptroller was to perform the secret services therein alluded to, under what authority did the Navy Board understand the Comptroller was to perform such services? A. The Comptroller is authorized by the order of 17th August, 1796, to execute secret services; and for any secret services which he has hitherto performed, and which have. afterwards been laid before the Board, he has produced the orders of the First Lord of the Admiralty.-Q. Is the Navy Board in the practice of following the directions of the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury? A. Yes, in many instances.- Q. How long has this practice prevailed?. It has always been the practice since I have been in the office; on looking over the books I have seen old orders from the Treasury addressed to the Navy Board.-Q. Upon what subjects are such directions usually

payment for timber felled in the King's forests; payments for ships detained before a declaration of war; and references for reports upon expenses in naval affairs.Q. Is it usual for the Navy Board to communicate such directions to the Admiralty? A. No.--Q Did the Admiralty, during the late war, direct the Navy Board to furnish them with copies of such orders as they might receive from the Treasury? A. No.

-Q. Are there any regulations by which the Navy Board, or any particular member thereof, is required or authorized to follow the directions of the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury? A. None that I know of.-Q. Do the orders given by the Treasury to the Navy Board for the payment of money, specify the particular sums to be paid, and the services for which the payments are to be made? A. The services are always specified; sometimes the rate. and sometimes the sum. [Signed by R. A. NELSON, and by THE COMMISSIONERS.]

THE FURTHER EXAMINATION OF RTCHARD ALEXANDER NELSON, ESQ. SEC. TO THE NAVY BOARD; ΤΑΚΕΝ UPON OATH, THE 12th JAN. 1805.

Q. It appears that on the 12th December 1801, a minute of the Committee of Accounts was laid before the Navy Board, proposing an alteration in the mode of paying the ninety-day bills, which was adopted by that Board on the 18th of that month, and ordered to take effect on the following day; was any general notice given to persons holding contracts, under the Navy Board, and their consent thereto required previous to carrying into execution the resolution of the Board above-mentioned? A. I do not recollect that there was.-Q. Have any remonstrances or complaints been made by the contractors to the Board, in consequence of this alteration? A. None that I remember.Q. Is there any minute on the proceedings of the Navy Board, shewing, previous to the resolution above mentioned, an intention of altering their mode of computing the time when the ninety-day bills became payable, either at the approach of peace or any other period? A. None that I know of.-Q. Do you know of any inquiry having been made, by order of the Navy Board, into the mode of computing the time of paying bills of exchange, or exchequer bills, in consequence of the representation made to them by the commissioners of victualling, in their letter of February 1797, or of any inquiry made by the Navy Board at any other time upon the subject ?d. I do not know

whether any inquiry has or has not been made, but no public enquiry has taken place by examination before the Board. [Signed as before.]

No. XV. COMMITTEE OF ACCOUNTS, 12th Dec. 1801.-Doubts having been suggested of the propriety of the mode in which the ninety-day bills issued from this office are made out, as to the expression of the time for which interest is to be paid on them, the committee, after investigating the business, find, that the mode of computation used in this office was adopted in conformity to the custom which had constantly prevailed, and still prevails on all occasions dependent on length of time and number of days, and among the rest in computing the interest on every navy bill paid since their first establishment, to include in the computation the day on which the bill is issued as well as that on which it is paid, and this mode of computing the interest being that to which the contractors with this office had been accustomed, it was considered as only keeping faith with them to continue the calculation of interest on the same footing; and the chief clerk at the time, and the late Mr. Davies (the preceding chief clerk) deeming it to be in conformity not only to the ancient practice of the office on all occasions, but also to the present act, which directs such interest to commence from the dates of the bills (they, according to official interpretation, conceiving the word "from" to mean inclusively, as in the computation of all broken time, whether for the payment of pension, salary, day-pay, interest, &c.) it has always been, and now is, the invariable practice to include under the expression of "from such

46

a time to such a time," both the day on which the salary, pension, day-pay, interest, &c. commenced, as well as that on which it terminated. The ninety-day bills issued by the Victualling Office are made out differently (though on the inspection of salary bills made out by that office, it appears that in their computation of broken time from such a day to such a day, they included both the first and the last day, construing the word "from" to be inclusive) in the ninetyday bills the first day is thrown out in the computation, by which means a bill drawn by that office falls due one day later than one drawn on the same day by the Navy Office; but it may be considered whether this day's interest is really any saving to the public, as it may be presumed that the contractors reckon upon it accordingly.-Under these circumstances, the committee refer to the Board's consideration, whether it may be

proper at this time to depart from the ancient usage of the office, and make an alteration in the computation of the time the ninetyday bills are made out to run, in conformity with the Victualling Office and the custom of merchants in discounting bills.—-18th December 1801. The whole of the preceding circumstances being this day taken into consideration, the Board determined, that the ninety-day bills to be issued in future, should not bear any interest for the day on which they are dated, agreeable to what is the practice with regard to exchequer bills, and bills made out at the Victualling Office. To commence on the 19th inst.—————BOARD.

No. XVI. Navy Office, 22d August 1804. GENTLEMEN.-We have received your letter of the 1st instant, desiring to be informed what induced us to continue the practice of including the day of the date in reckoning the interest of ninety-day bills, until the 19th of December 1801, and what afterwards led to our adopting the practice of the commissioners of the victualling, pointed out in their letter of the 8th February 1797; and we request to inform you, that we did not, upon receiving the letter from the commissioners of the victualling, in answer to the one we had addressed to them on the subject, see sufficient reason from what was urged by them, for altering a mode of computation which had constantly prevailed in this office since the first establishment of navy interest bills, of including the day on which the bill is dated, as well as that on which it is paid; a mode of computation which extends to all payments for salary, pension, full or half pay, and for all other allowances issued from this department.— In whatever light the consideration may have been held. in respect to, whether a bill be paid one day sooner or later (the sum paid for the interest being the same in one case as in the other) it was of course calculated upon by the contractors when they made their contracts, and we could not deviate from it while the contracts were pending, without subjecting ourselves to the imputation of having departed from the universally understood mode of rendering payments at this office; but when the time arrived, at the conclusion of the late war, that many contracts were put up, and many more were intended to be so, we thought it a good opportunity for altering the day of paying the ninety-day bills, in order that an uniformity in this respect might pervade the different public boards where bills of a similar description were issued.. -We have the honour to be, &c. W. PALMER. S. GAN

BIER. F. I. HARTWELL. [Addressed to the Com. of Naval Inquiry.]

No. XVII. Navy Office, 20th November 1804.- GENTLEMEN.-You having by your precept of the 1st instant, required that there be laid before you an account, shewing what standing contracts with the Navy Board had determined between 1st October and 19th December I801, and an account of the standing contracts in force at the latter date, and which continued so for twelve months afterwards; also, a copy of the minute or directions for altering the practice of including the day of the date in reckoning the interest on ninety-day bills: -We acquaint you, that the contract for tin machines of 6th November, for Portsmouth and Plymouth, and the contract for leather liquored for Portsmouth, are the only standing contracts that determined between 1st October and 19th December 1801. We inclose an account of the contracts in force at the latter date, with a copy of the minute required; and have the honour to be,-Gentlemen, &c. W. PALMER, S. GAMBIER. F. I. HARTWELL. - Addressed to the Com. of Naval Inquiry] [Here follows a detailed account of the contracts.]

No. XVIII. Transport Office, 12th Oct.

1804. GENTLEMEN,-In return to your precept of the 5th instant, requiring an account of the amount of the bills of this office, payable at ninety days, issued in each year, upon which the interest of the day of the date, and the day of payment was included; and a statement of the circumstances which led to the adoption and dis continuance of that mode of calculating the interest; we enclose to you the said account, and have to acquaint you, that the persons to whom payments were made by ninety-day bills, were, in strictness, entitled to their money upon the completion of the several services performed; but an interval of several days having almost invariably occurred. while their accounts have been under investigation, and the bills were preparing; it was upon this ground, and upon the construction we entertained of the intention of the act of parliament, that the interest was allowed by us both for the day on which the bills were dated, and that on which they became payable. This mode has, however, been altered ever since the month of December, 1801, from which time the interest has not commenced till the following day, understanding the like alteration was to be made by the Commissioners of the Navy, with

whose office list our daily accounts of bills issned are constantly incorporated, for the information of the Lords Commissioners of His Majesty's Treasury.--We are, &c. &c. RUPT. GEORGE, AMBROSE SERLE, THOS. HAMILTON, E. BOUVERIE. [Addressed to the Commrs. of Naval Inquiry.]

No. XIX. Navy Office, 16th October, 1804. An account, shewing the amount of the ninety-day bills issued from this office in each year, during the time interest was allowed both on the day of the date of the bills, and the day of payment. Commencing. Ending. 26 Dec. 31 Dec. 1796 1 Jan. 31 1797

Amount.

1798

90,534 14 11 3,537,291 8 8 2,611,926 17 2

No. XXI. Treasury Chambers, 1st May, 1804.-GENTLEMEN,-The sum of ninety-five thousand pounds having been imprested to for naval services, and the Lords Commissioners of His Mas jesty's Treasury being satisfied that disbarsements for those services have been made by them to that amount;-I am commanded by their lordships to direct you to cause a clearing bill for the said sum of ninety-five thousand pounds to be made out, to discharge your office from that N. VANSITTART. of the Navy]

in the books of imprest.--I am, &c. [Addressed to the Comrs..

No. XXII. THE EXAMINATION OF THE RT. HON. THE EARL SPENCER, K. G.; TAKEN UPON OATH, THE 6TH NOV. 1804.

Q. It appears, that between the 4th October 1799, and the 9th April 1801, navy bills, amounting to one hundred thousand