Volume II Part 14 (1/2)
For what plausible reason are these princ.i.p.alities suffered to exist?
When a government is rendered complex, (which in itself is no desirable thing,) it ought to be for some political end which cannot be answered otherwise. Subdivisions in government are only admissible in favor of the dignity of inferior princes and high n.o.bility, or for the support of an aristocratic confederacy under some head, or for the conservation of the franchises of the people in some privileged province. For the two former of these ends, such are the subdivisions in favor of the electoral and other princes in the Empire; for the latter of these purposes are the jurisdictions of the Imperial cities and the Hanse towns. For the latter of these ends are also the countries of the States (_Pays d'etats_) and certain cities and orders in France. These are all regulations with an object, and some of them with a very good object.
But how are the principles of any of these subdivisions applicable in the case before us?
Do they answer any purpose to the king? The Princ.i.p.ality of Wales was given by patent to Edward the Black Prince on the ground on which it has since stood. Lord c.o.ke sagaciously observes upon it, ”That in the charter of creating the Black Prince Edward Prince of Wales there is a _great mystery_: for _less_ than an estate of inheritance so _great_ a prince _could_ not have, and an _absolute estate of inheritance_ in so _great_ a princ.i.p.ality as Wales (this princ.i.p.ality being _so dear_ to him) he _should_ not have; and therefore it was made _sibi et heredibus suis regibus Angliae_, that by his decease, or attaining to the crown, it might be extinguished in the crown.”
For the sake of this foolish _mystery_, of what a great prince _could_ not have _less_ and _should_ not have _so much_, of a princ.i.p.ality which was too _dear_ to be given and too _great_ to be kept,--and for no other cause that ever I could find,--this form and shadow of a princ.i.p.ality, without any substance, has been maintained. That you may judge in this instance (and it serves for the rest) of the difference between a great and a little economy, you will please to recollect, Sir, that Wales may be about the tenth part of England in size and population, and certainly not a hundredth part in opulence. Twelve judges perform the whole of the business, both of the stationary and the itinerant justice of this kingdom; but for Wales there are eight judges. There is in Wales an exchequer, as well as in all the duchies, according to the very best and most authentic absurdity of form. There are in all of them a hundred more difficult trifles and laborious fooleries, which serve no other purpose than to keep alive corrupt hope and servile dependence.
These princ.i.p.alities are so far from contributing to the ease of the king, to his wealth, or his dignity, that they render both his supreme and his subordinate authority perfectly ridiculous. It was but the other day, that that pert, factious fellow, the Duke of Lancaster, presumed to fly in the face of his liege lord, our gracious sovereign, and, _a.s.sociating_ with a parcel of lawyers as factious as himself, to the destruction of _all law and order_, and _in committees leading directly to rebellion_, presumed to go to law with the king. The object is neither your business nor mine. Which of the parties got the better I really forget. I think it was (as it ought to be) the king. The material point is, that the suit cost about fifteen thousand pounds. But as the Duke of Lancaster is but a sort of _Duke Humphrey_, and not worth a groat, our sovereign was obliged to pay the costs of both. Indeed, this art of converting a great monarch into a little prince, this royal masquerading, is a very dangerous and expensive amus.e.m.e.nt, and one of the king's _menus plaisirs_, which ought to be reformed. This duchy, which is not worth four thousand pounds a year at best to _revenue_, is worth forty or fifty thousand to _influence_.
The Duchy of Lancaster and the County Palatine of Lancaster answered, I admit, some purpose in their original creation. They tended to make a subject imitate a prince. When Henry the Fourth from that stair ascended the throne, high-minded as he was, he was not willing to kick away the ladder. To prevent that princ.i.p.ality from being extinguished in the crown, he severed it by act of Parliament. He had a motive, such as it was: he thought his t.i.tle to the crown unsound, and his possession insecure. He therefore managed a retreat in his duchy, which Lord c.o.ke calls (I do not know why) ”_par multis regnis_.” He flattered himself that it was practicable to make a projecting point half way down, to break his fall from the precipice of royalty; as if it were possible for one who had lost a kingdom to keep anything else. However, it is evident that he thought so. When Henry the Fifth united, by act of Parliament, the estates of his mother to the duchy, he had the same predilection with his father to the root of his family honors, and the same policy in enlarging the sphere of a possible retreat from the slippery royalty of the two great crowns he held. All this was changed by Edward the Fourth.
He had no such family partialities, and his policy was the reverse of that of Henry the Fourth and Henry the Fifth. He accordingly again united the Duchy of Lancaster to the crown. But when Henry the Seventh, who chose to consider himself as of the House of Lancaster, came to the throne, he brought with him the old pretensions and the old politics of that house. A new act of Parliament, a second time, dissevered the Duchy of Lancaster from the crown; and in that line tilings continued until the subversion of the monarchy, when princ.i.p.alities and powers fell along with the throne. The Duchy of Lancaster must have been extinguished, if Cromwell, who began to form ideas of aggrandizing his house and raising the several branches of it, had not caused the duchy to be again separated from the commonwealth, by an act of the Parliament of those times.
What partiality, what objects of the politics of the House of Lancaster, or of Cromwell, has his present Majesty, or his Majesty's family? What power have they within any of these princ.i.p.alities, which they have not within their kingdom? In what manner is the dignity of the n.o.bility concerned in these princ.i.p.alities? What rights have the subject there, which they have not at least equally in every other part of the nation?
These distinctions exist for no good end to the king, to the n.o.bility, or to the people. They ought not to exist at all. If the crown (contrary to its nature, but most conformably to the whole tenor of the advice that has been lately given) should so far forget its dignity as to contend that these jurisdictions and revenues are estates of private property, I am rather for acting as if that groundless claim were of some weight than for giving up that essential part of the reform. I would value the clear income, and give a clear annuity to the crown, taken on the medium produce for twenty years.
If the crown has any favorite name or t.i.tle, if the subject has any matter of local accommodation within any of these jurisdictions, it is meant to preserve them,--and to improve them, if any improvement can be suggested. As to the crown reversions or t.i.tles upon the property of the people there, it is proposed to convert them from a snare to their independence into a relief from their burdens. I propose, therefore, to unite all the five princ.i.p.alities to the crown, and to its ordinary jurisdiction,--to abolish all those offices that produce an useless and chargeable separation from the body of the people,--to compensate those who do not hold their offices (if any such there are) at the pleasure of the crown,--to extinguish vexatious t.i.tles by an act of short limitation,--to sell those unprofitable estates which support useless jurisdictions,--and to turn the tenant-right into a fee, on such moderate terms as will be better for the state than its present right, and which it is impossible for any rational tenant to refuse.
As to the duchies, their judicial economy may be provided for without charge. They have only to fall of course into the common county administration. A commission more or less, made or omitted, settles the matter fully. As to Wales, it has been proposed to add a judge to the several courts of Westminster Hall; and it has been considered as an improvement in itself. For my part, I cannot pretend to speak upon it with clearness or with decision; but certainly this arrangement would be more than sufficient for Wales. My original thought was, to suppress five of the eight judges; and to leave the chief-justice of Chester, with the two senior judges; and, to facilitate the business, to throw the twelve counties into six districts, holding the sessions alternately in the counties of which each district shall be composed. But on this I shall be more clear, when I come to the particular bill.
Sir, the House will now see, whether, in praying for judgment against the minor princ.i.p.alities, I do not act in conformity to the laws that I had laid to myself: of getting rid of every jurisdiction more subservient to oppression and expense than to any end of justice or honest policy; of abolis.h.i.+ng offices more expensive than useful; of combining duties improperly separated; of changing revenues more vexatious than productive into ready money; of suppressing offices which stand in the way of economy; and of cutting off lurking subordinate treasuries. Dispute the rules, controvert the application, or give your hands to this salutary measure.
Most of the same rules will be found applicable to my second object,--_the landed estate of the crown_. A landed estate is certainly the very worst which the crown can possess. All minute and dispersed possessions, possessions that are often of indeterminate value, and which require a continued personal attendance, are of a nature more proper for private management than public administration. They are fitter for the care of a frugal land-steward than of an office in the state. Whatever they may possibly have been in other times or in other countries, they are not of magnitude enough with us to occupy a public department, nor to provide for a public object. They are already given up to Parliament, and the gift is not of great value. Common prudence dictates, even in the management of private affairs, that all dispersed and chargeable estates should be sacrificed to the relief of estates more compact and better circ.u.mstanced.
If it be objected, that these lands at present would sell at a low market, this is answered by showing that money is at a high price. The one balances the other. Lands sell at the current rate; and nothing can sell for more. But be the price what it may, a great object is always answered, whenever any property is transferred from hands that are not fit for that property to those that are. The buyer and seller must mutually profit by such a bargain; and, what rarely happens in matters of revenue, the relief of the subject will go hand in hand with the profit of the Exchequer.
As to the _forest lands_, in which the crown has (where they are not granted or prescriptively held) the _dominion_ of the _soil_, and the _vert_ and _venison_, that is to say, the timber and the game, and in which the people have a variety of rights, in common of herbage, and other commons, according to the usage of the several forests,--I propose to have those rights of the crown valued as manorial rights are valued on an inclosure, and a defined portion of land to be given for them, which land is to be sold for the public benefit.
As to the timber, I propose a survey of the whole. What is useless for the naval purposes of the kingdom I would condemn and dispose of for the security of what may be useful, and to inclose such other parts as may be most fit to furnish a perpetual supply,--wholly extinguis.h.i.+ng, for a very obvious reason, all right of _venison_ in those parts.
The forest _rights_ which extend over the lands and possessions of others, being of no profit to the crown, and a grievance, as far as it goes, to the subject,--these I propose to extinguish without charge to the proprietors. The several commons are to be allotted and compensated for, upon ideas which I shall hereafter explain. They are nearly the same with the principles upon which you have acted in private inclosures. I shall never quit precedents, where I find them applicable.
For those regulations and compensations, and for every other part of the detail, you will be so indulgent as to give me credit for the present.
The revenue to be obtained from the sale of the forest lands and rights will not be so considerable, I believe, as many people have imagined; and I conceive it would be unwise to screw it up to the utmost, or even to suffer bidders to enhance, according to their eagerness, the purchase of objects wherein the expense of that purchase may weaken the capital to be employed in their cultivation. This, I am well aware, might give room for partiality in the disposal. In my opinion it would be the lesser evil of the two. But I really conceive that a rule of fair preference might be established, which would take away all sort of unjust and corrupt partiality. The princ.i.p.al revenue which I propose to draw from these uncultivated wastes is to spring from the improvement and population of the kingdom,--which never can happen without producing an improvement more advantageous to the revenues of the crown than the rents of the best landed estate which it can hold. I believe, Sir, it will hardly be necessary for me to add, that in this sale I naturally except all the houses, gardens, and parks belonging to the crown, and such one forest as shall be chosen by his Majesty as best accommodated to his pleasures.
By means of this part of the reform will fall the expensive office of _surveyor-general,_ with all the influence that attends it. By this will fall _two chief-justices in Eyre_, with all their train of dependants.
You need be under no apprehension, Sir, that your office is to be touched in its emoluments. They are yours by law; and they are but a moderate part of the compensation which is given to you for the ability with which you execute an office of quite another sort of importance: it is far from overpaying your diligence, or more than sufficient for sustaining the high rank you stand in as the first gentleman of England.
As to the duties of your chief-justices.h.i.+p, they are very different from those for which you have received the office. Your dignity is too high for a jurisdiction over wild beasts, and your learning and talents too valuable to be wasted as chief-justice of a desert. I cannot reconcile it to myself, that you, Sir, should be stuck up as a useless piece of antiquity.
I have now disposed of the unprofitable landed estates of the crown, and thrown them into the ma.s.s of private property; by which they will come, through the course of circulation, and through the political secretions of the state, into our better understood and better ordered revenues.
I come next to the great supreme body of the civil government itself. I approach it with that awe and reverence with which a young physician approaches to the cure of the disorders of his parent. Disorders, Sir, and infirmities, there are,--such disorders, that all attempts towards method, prudence, and frugality will be perfectly vain, whilst a system of confusion remains, which is not only alien, but adverse to all economy; a system which is not only prodigal in its very essence, but causes everything else which belongs to it to be prodigally conducted.
It is impossible, Sir, for any person to be an economist, where no order in payments is established; it is impossible for a man to be an economist, who is not able to take a comparative view of his means and of his expenses for the year which lies before him; it is impossible for a man to be an economist, under whom various officers in their several departments may spend--even just what they please,--and often with an emulation of expense, as contributing to the importance, if not profit of their several departments. Thus much is certain: that neither the present nor any other First Lord of the Treasury has been ever able to take a survey, or to make even a tolerable guess, of the expenses of government for any one year, so as to enable him with the least degree of certainty, or even probability, to bring his affairs within compa.s.s.
Whatever scheme may be formed upon them must be made on a calculation of chances. As things are circ.u.mstanced, the First Lord of the Treasury cannot make an estimate. I am sure I serve the king, and I am sure I a.s.sist administration, by putting economy at least in their power. We must _cla.s.s services_; we must (as far as their nature admits) _appropriate_ funds; or everything, however reformed, will fall again into the old confusion.
Coming upon this ground of the civil list, the first thing in dignity and charge that attracts our notice is the _royal household_. This establishment, in my opinion, is exceedingly abusive in its const.i.tution. It is formed upon manners and customs that have long since expired. In the first place, it is formed, in many respects, upon _feudal principles_. In the feudal times, it was not uncommon, even among subjects, for the lowest offices to be held by considerable persons,--persons as unfit by their incapacity as improper from their rank to occupy such employments. They were held by patent, sometimes for life, and sometimes by inheritance. If my memory does not deceive me, a person of no slight consideration held the office of patent hereditary cook to an Earl of Warwick: the Earl of Warwick's soups, I fear, were not the better for the dignity of his kitchen. I think it was an Earl of Gloucester who officiated as steward of the household to the Archbishops of Canterbury. Instances of the same kind may in some degree be found in the Northumberland house-book, and other family records. There was some reason in ancient necessities for these ancient customs. Protection was wanted; and the domestic tie, though not the highest, was the closest.
The king's household has not only several strong traces of this _feudality_, but it is formed also upon the principles of a _body corporate_: it has its own magistrates, courts, and by-laws. This might be necessary in the ancient times, in order to have a government within itself, capable of regulating the vast and often unruly mult.i.tude which composed and attended it. This was the origin of the ancient court called the _Green Cloth_,--composed of the marshal, treasurer, and other great officers of the household, with certain clerks. The rich subjects of the kingdom, who had formerly the same establishments, (only on a reduced scale,) have since altered their economy, and turned the course of their expense from the maintenance of vast establishments within their walls to the employment of a great variety of independent trades abroad. Their influence is lessened; but a mode of accommodation and a style of splendor suited to the manners of the times has been increased.
Royalty itself has insensibly followed, and the royal household has been carried away by the resistless tide of manners, but with this very material difference: private men have got rid of the establishments along with the reasons of them; whereas the royal household has lost all that was stately and venerable in the antique manners, without retrenching anything of the c.u.mbrous charge of a Gothic establishment.