say, that they could not be discounted at LEGAL interest." Now observe, all the pawns, lodged, or said to be lodged, by Boyd in the hands of Mr. Pitt and his accomplice, consisted of government or EastIndia securities. If, therefore, they had all been at " long dates," the only harm that would have arisen to Boyd, if Mr. Pitt had refused him the loan, would have been, the payment of something more than legal interest; but, as it has already been stated, the securities were not at "long dates," the accommodation" having taken place on the 9th of September, and of the bills about 11,0001. out of the 40,0001. being payable at the Treasury or at the Victualling Office on the 28th October, the 11th and the 20th of November, next following, which, as was said before, left them only from six weeks to two months to run. Sure am I, therefore, that I may safely appeal to the reader whether it does appear in evidence "that it would have been difficult, and, "perhaps, IMPOSSIBLE, for for Messrs.

discharge them; when, in short, it became a question with him, whether he should suffer public credit to be destroyed,. or des troy in effect, the constitution: it is possi ble to find men ready to allow all this, but, I think, that even such men would begin to doubt of the justice of the pretensions of the minister, under whose famentaSway ble and disgraceful a state of things had arisen, and who began his career with this modest prognostication. "How happy am "I in having to perform a task so different "from any of my predecessors! Instead "of expending the money of the people, "I shall have the great good fortune to di"minish their burdens; and, I am uncom "monly happy in flattering myself, that

Boyd and Company to have procured advances upon the securities in their posses*sion;" and, I think, I may venture to encourage him to look confidently forward to the day, when this appeal will appear not to have been made in vainShould it, however, after all that has been said, be allowed, that the alleged necessity did exist, how does Mr. Pitt appear in his character of financier In his character of " first fi nancier in the world,” as his servile and now ridiculous flatterers call him, and in which character both himself and his adherents eem to have quite forgotten to provide an excuse for him? We may allow, that the "accommodation" to Boyd and Benfield was necessary; we may allow, that, such was the state of public credit, that money was not to be obtained upon government securities having six-weeks or two months to run; we may allow, that the public credit was within 40,0001, of annihilation, and that so pressing was the exigency, that there was not, as is alleged, time either to inquire into the state of Boyd's affairs or to consult the cabinet; we may allow, that things were actually arrived at that point, when it became a question with the minister, whether he should break through all the laws made as a check upon his conduct, whether he should withdraw money destined by act of parliament to the service of the navy and lend it, without interest, to members of that very house of parliament where the Jaw had originated, and that, too, at a time that naval bills of exchange were daily disTitcoms wherewith to

honoured for

HA

HREEP

my name will be inscribed on that firm "column, now about to be raised to public "credit, national faith, and national pros

perity."* Much did he say, on the same occasion, against the abuses in the expenditure of the public money; against fraudu lent contracts, and dirty jobs; and, I dare say, those who sat lifting up their eyes in ecstasy at his wonderous wisdom and more wonderous purity, would not have hesitated a moment to condemn, as a seditious libeller, any one who should have ventured to predict, that this same minister would, in the space of ten years, reduce public credit to such a state that, in order to prevent “a public embarrassment of a most serious and alarming nature,"† in order to prevent the danger of disabling the government from making another loan,‡ he would be compelled to resort to a gross violation of the law, and even to the lending of the public money, without interest, to members of parliament. members of parliament. Aye, would they! They would have condemned such a man as a seditious libeller; and, very likely, would have sentenced his work to be burnt by the hands of the hangman! But, if we should be willing to sacrifice the character of the financier in order to preserve that of the purist, we shall find our endeavours unavailing for, by a reference to the Parliamentary proceedings of the day, it will appear, from Mr. Pitt's own declarations, repeatedly made, that, either he intentionally misled the House of Commons, or, he regarded public credit as being in no danger whatever, at the very time, when, according to his present representation, it was in a state the most alarming that can well be conceived.

8

* On proposing the establishment of that grand source of popular delusion, commonly called the Sinking fund, on the 29th of March, 1786. His own words. See P. 865, - Ibid,

The reader will remember, that it was nearly the middle of September, 1796, when, in order to prevent, according to Mr. Long,

a great public mischief," the "accommodation" was given to Boyd and Benfield. Mr. Pitt has, in his evidence before the Committee, described the state of public credit to be such, that, had he not lent 40,000 1. of the public money to Boyd and Benfield, "the embarrassment that it would "have occasioned to the public service would "have been of a most serious and alarming "nature;" he has declared that it would have "affected the general credit of the country "to a very great and serious extent"; and he has further declared, that if Boyd and Benfield had been unable to make good the instalments upon their share of the loan then in the course of pay mert, there would have been " great danger of rendering the "fulfilment of any future contract to be "made with other parties, in a considera"ble degree precarious and uncertain.” Indeed, public credit is exhibited in as deplorable a light as possible. One would think, at hearing this evidence, that Mr. Pitt and his friends were speaking of occurrences during the administration of some political enemy. Such is their present description of the state of public credit in the middle of September 1796. The parliament (a new one) assembled on the 27th of the same. month; and, on the 6th of October, the House of Commons, after a debate of some length, voted an address to the King, in which, though they spoke parenthetically of some temporary embarrassments, congratulated his majesty on the state of the commerce, manufactures, and revenue of the country, as proving the real extent and solidity of the public resources, and as furnishing such means as might be equal to the great and vigorous exertions that were required." Lord Morpeth, who moved the address, said: "that, as to our internal si"tuation, we had witnessed it for some "time past with joy and exultation, and had

་་

reason to congratulate his Majesty and the "people at large upon our auspicious prospects in that respect." Sir William Lowther, who seconded the address, said:

" If

we regard our finances, they are abundant "in the extreme, and such as are adequate "to any emergency of the country." Little did these two honest gentlemen dream of the works which were at that moment going on between Messrs. Pitt, Boyd, Long, and Dundas! Mr. Fox having followed Sir William Lowther, and having expressed some fears as to the state of the national resources, Mr. Pitt, in his answer, said, that

our resources "furnished, in a moment like "the present" [the very time he was lending to Boyd and Benfield]" a subject of peculiar congratulation and well-founded "confidence......These resources," said he, "have in them nothing hollow or delusive. They are the result of an accumulated "capital, of gradually increasing com

66

66

66

merce, of high and established credit. "They are the fruits of fair exertion, of "laudable ingenuity, of successful industry; they have been produced under a system "of order and justice, while we, under many disadvantages, have been contending against a country, which exhibits, in every respect, the reverse of the picture; a proof that the regular operation of these principles must triumph over the unnatu "ral and exhausting efforts of violence and "extortion."- -Oh! how fine! How great! you might have heard the " young "friends" exclaiming from the benches at his back. The "regular operation" of his commercial principles did not " triumph," however; and we now know, to our cost, what it is to be left to the sway of a commercial minister.But, let us look at the pic ture he here drew of the credit and resources of the country; and, let us not forget, that this picture was drawn only about twenty days after he had made the loan, or given the accommodation," to Boyd and Benfield. How they must have hugged themselves! what difficulty they must have had to smother a laugh, when they heard the country gentlemen closing each period of the minister's harangue with a full chorus of, "hear! hear!" after the manner of the groaning responses during a methodist prayer! How Boyd and Benfield must have longed for the moment, when they could laugh out right! Many an evening must they have passed in jesting upon the credulous creatures, whose property, whose labour, and, in some cases, whose lives, they were sporting with!- -Well do I re

member the time when Mr. Pitt was making these declarations in Parliament. I was then in America, and the friends of England, in that country, will recollect the exultation with which I repeated his assertions, and circulated his reproof of those who dared to dispute the solidity of his system of public credit. Little did we imagine, that he was, at that very time, propping up the system by the miserable expedients which are now brought to light! Little did we imagine, that, in order to prevent a most serious and alarming injury to public credit, he had, but a few days before, been compelled to lend public money

to members of parliament without interest! In short, we believed all that he said: our confidence in his statements was implicit. I dare not look at, and I blush to think of, the pages, and I might say the volumes, perhaps, that I have written in praise of his talents and his qualities, but particularly his financial skill, and his purity! How many of my opponents have I, God forgive me, lashed like hounds for representing Messrs. Pitt and Dundas as men whose power was preserved by their giving of "accommodations" to members of parliament! What blows did I deal the writers who had, what I regarded, the impudence to assert, that the financial fabric of England was rotten; that bank notes would soon begin to depreciate, and would finally share the fate of the Congress paper-money; that the loans to government were always paid in paper, and sometimes in the paper already belonging to the public; that, while there was a grand exhibition of royal, aristocratical, and democratical power in the state, the whole machine was, in fact, moved by the minister and a little knot of low men engaged in the trade of paper-money. What blows did I deal them! And, what, then, should I have done, if any one had dared to assert, that, at the very time, when the minister was giving, in Parliament, the heart-chearing description of his "solid system of finance," and when he and Old George Rose were clubbing their talents to treat the world with a pamphlet upon the subject; what should I, had I had power equal to my zeal, have done to the man, who should have dared to assert, that, at that very time, this same minister was at work, with a contractor and a Jew broker, fabricating wind bills, wherewith to meet the demands upon the public! The Americans know well what wind, or accommodation, paper 'is. They will, therefore, be at no loss to form a judgment of the financial state of a country where the government could be driven to such an expedient; and they will agree with Mr. George Glenny, that it was very necessary to " disguise the transaction from "the eyes of the people." That disguise, however, has now been, in part, removed; and, though that part is small, though we have obtained, in all probability, but a mere glimpse of the transactions, yet, I trust, we shall not again easily be deluded; but that, in patiently waiting for the day when complete justice shall be done on all the parties concerned, we shall believe nothing upon the assertion of those, by whom we have been so grossly deceived. [To be concluded in the next sheet.]

REFORM OF FINANCIAL ABUSES. LETTER VII.

SIR,- -So much of late having been said and written concerning the expenditure of public money on naval purposes, it has occurred to me, to examine what light is thrown upon this subject in that notable parliamentary publication, No. 5. of the public accounts, which professes to be an account shewing how the PUBLIC MONIES remaining in the Exchequer, together with the MONIES paid into the same in the year 1803, HAVE BEEN ACTUALLY APPLIED. The latter part of which description is actually printed in Roman capitals. As I had learnt by perusing the Tenth Report, that the officer who paid all the naval expenses, was the Treasurer of the Navy, I was novice enough in the art of accounting to expect to find in this said No. 5, at least, a statement of the sums he had received and paid. But how great was my surprise to discover, after locking over pages from top to bottom not less than a dozen tanes, that not one word was mentioned concerning the Treasurer of the Navy, nor any other officer in the navy department. As, however, I discovered that an appendix belonged to this preliminary statement, I immediately looked for letter F. in hopes of attaining that degree of information which is usually to be met with in an appen dix. In this research my labours were mote successful, as I found an account signed by W. Palmer, S. Gambier, and F. J. Hartwell, Commissioners of the Navy. But, here again I was at a loss to understand what I was reading, because the authority was unquestionable, on which I had formed the notion, that all navy payments were made by the Treasurer of the Navy. I now proceeded to read again, and weigh every word of the title of this account, and my perseverance was well rewarded, as I discovered in the very last word the source of all my difficulties. This word is the word " applied." I found I had erroneously conceived, that this account of the expenditure of money was an account of money bonâ fide paid. It was no such thing, the term expenditure bears no such meaning in the language of the Exche quer. For in this language, and in this account, the public money had only been "ap

plied" for payments to be made so and so; it was by no means intended that these naval commissioners by having signed their names to it, had rendered themselves respon sible that it was so and so paid; and, thus it comes out how easily it is for the Naval Conimissioners to apply the public money correctly, whilst a Paymaster of the Navy may be discounting Exchequer bills with it. For

in this language of the Exchequer, it must be known, that the Commissioners of the Navy Office are said to apply money to certain services, when, in consequence of their memorial to the Treasury, the Treasury pay it into the Bank of England, to the account of the Treasurer of the Navy, under the head of the particular service for which he ought afterwards to pay it. Thus, for instance, if the Commissioners of the Navy Office, acquaint the Treasury, that a million of money is wanting for naval services, the million will be paid into the Bank to the credit of the Treasurer of the Navy, under the head of the particular service; and thus be APPLIED to naval services, though the payment of it for such a purpose rests with the Treasurer; and, in this manner it is, that the accommodating distinction arises between

money applied" and " money paid." That my statement is fully warranted, will appear from considering how the Commissioners of the Navy can be proper officers to account for money, the payment of which is the sole occupation of one distinct office. I am further supported in drawing the above inferences from the language made use of in these accounts; for if the money was actually paid, why should the term adopted be "actually applied." To me, Sir, it will be very satisfactory to discover, that there is no foundation for bringing a charge of so gross a deception upon the framers of the public accounts, as that of taking advantage of an official construction of one of the commonest and most intelligible words in our language, in order to conceal from the public the real uses made of their money. I shall be very happy to know that the system of stating the accounts is more perfect, than I can now believe it to be under the impressions which my endeavours to understand them have made on my mind; and, I really hope, for the credit of Parliament, that some of your correspondents will be able to prove, that the account of the public expenditure does contain an account of money actually paid; and not, as I apprehended it to contain, an account of money "applied," to be afterwards paid according as it may suit the convenience of a Trotter or a Jellicoe.Sir, &c.- -VERAX.- -June, 17, 1805.

I am,

EXTRACTS FROM THE MONITEUR. The following Extracts from the French Official Paper, the Moniteur, relate to England, Russia and France, and are worthy of particular attention. Dute, 1805.

May 31st. [Said to be written from St. Petersburgh on the 14th of May.] All the intrigues of Woronzoff, at London; have

miscarried. The Emperor Alexander has declared that he would not depart from his system of neutrality; that he would not make common cause either with England or France, but that he would not refuse his good offices for the re-establishment of peace; that he could not, however, give his interposition, unless there was an equal moderation manifested by both parties, and a reciprocal renunciation of all pretensions of superiority; in short, that the peace of the world might be re-established when the principle of the sovereignty of princes, both by sea and land, should be held sacred. It is positively stated, that, in consequence of these dispositions, the Emperor Alexander has written to the Emperor Napoleon, and that M. Novosiltzoff has set off for Milan.

June 1st. Now that the cabinet of St. Petersburgh has refused to adopt the views of the Ambassador Woronzoff, who resides at London, on the part of Russia, but who is more of an Englishman than a Russian ; now that the Emperor Alexander has declared his intention to remain neutral; to take part neither with France nor England, but to interpose in their quarrel, in order, as far as possible, to promote the re-establishment of a general peace; now, in short, that he has caused application to be made for passports for one of his chamberlains, whom he is sending to France; the English government, fearing the injurious impressions which such dispositions might occasion fat London, particularly at a moment when the weakness and absurdity of its war system are become palpable to all the inhabitants of Great Britain, instantly puts forward the idea of a treaty of alliance, offensive and defensive, with Russia. It pretends, that, if the Emperor of Russia is sending an ambassador to the Emperor Napoleon, it is in order to notify an ultimatum, and to trace the circle of Popilius. Nothing can be more false. So long as we shall have timber in our forests, so long as our population shall be renewed on the coasts, England must not compute on any dastardly concessions from us. Between her and us there can be no real and durable peace, till she abandons her impracticable plan of excluding us from the commerce of the world. Doubtless no one will accuse a nation, formed of 40 millions of men, of immoderate ambition, when it only requires to be on a footing with a na❤ tion consisting of 10 millions of men. . . . . There are two ways of obtaining peace; viz. To accept merely of the Treaty of Amiens in its whole, or, whether in the affairs of the Continent, whether in those of India, whether in the right of navigation and that of