« AnteriorContinuar »
plunder; and, they take special care not to attack the object of their common pursuit. We were not for the purpose of considering, whether it was proper to petition the king for inquiry into the cause of a great military failure. You called me to order, because 1 was making a statement of the expence of supporting the Duke of York, of whose failures and of whose memorable Convention at the Heider, I had just been speaking, as of the example, which had led to all our subscquent disgraceful capitulations : and conventions. And, if this was not being in order, what could be so Was I
not, when I was speaking of the services of
a person, to speak also of the compensation, which he received for those services 2 Why was this, above all other matter, to be avoided ? Was it because you did not wish the people to know how their money was expended ? Were you afraid, Sir, that they would begin to perceive, that the sacrifices
they were making were not for the defence
of their country I can see no other reason ; but, if another such opportunity should occur, the cry of order shall not prevent me from proceeding to discharge what I deem my bounden duty. - With respect to Mr. Garnier and his patent and emoluments, I should be fully justified in refusing to admit into my Register, any answer to what I thought proper to say at a public meeting of the county. The time and place for answering me was when and where the speech was made. I am ready, however, to admit any thing respecting this matter, until the discussion be fairly closed, because it is a shatter of deep and general interest ; but, I must, before I proceed further, beg you to observe, that it is upon this account that I admit your letter, and not from any persuasion, that I am bound to give an opponent at Winchester an opportunity of reviving the debate in my legister, which is intended for general circulation ; for, otherwise, every one who had a dispute with me, no matter of what kind, might claim the insertion of his letters, and the public, as far as they read my publication, would be entertained with, at best, the mere politics of Hampshire. Mr. Gart,ier's is a cage of great and general importance. I am happy, that he has, through you, chalierged this sort of discussion ; not, because I am convinced, that he will have cause to repent of having yielded to the suggestions of zealous, though injudicious, friends!,ip ; but, because I regard
his patent, and the concern growing out of
it, as being annongst those flagrant abuses, .
the exposure of which must, in time, work
a change in the minds of this deceived and torpid nation. o You tell me, Sir, that Mr. Gar; or loaths and abhors the very name and nature of war;” and this, ‘‘ from his general feelings of humanity, and troop having lost four sons in the service of .3 country by the war; and that most hopily would he restore the morey hel gained by the patent, if the blood he' lost could be restored to him.” Now, S. this is very full of fine sentirnest, and no do very well in a modern romance B? how far will it stand the test of rea, on l/hy did he place four sons in the army, navy, if he loashed and abhorred the wo name and nature of war : He, stirely, tended they should, sometime or other, forth to fight Or, if he made them s diers, or sailors, upon the speculation continual peace, I see, in his conduct, thing better than the proof of a †: obtain for them a livelihood out of the no lic burthens without any correspondirg to vices. This is a dilemma, Sir, from who I am of opinion, you will find it very diff. A to extricate Mr. Garniel. It is in vain, tit you apply a general argument in support a statement from personal knowledge; in vain, that you tell me, that “ his lik “ education, generous habits, and “ rental feelings, would prevent him fo “ bartering affections for interests : " : shall be satisfied with nothing but c clusions, drawn from facts. Look, into the list of places and pensions; : there you will find proofs of greediness: meanness too hateful to be described, in ro sons, who have bad, what you are pleast. the common phrase of the day, to colo “ liberal education.” Indeed, it work seem, that, in many instances, such edits tion, instead of baving produced dignia notions; instead of having given rise to * dependence of mind and of conduct, is k + ed upon as a sufficient plea for saddling to possessor as a sort of state pauper upon a polic. This education, call it wiat wo will, has a degrading effoct. I have ntoe yet seen it productive of any thing great a praiseworthy. I see it sending tortin a to of shanicless drones ai.d peculators; cotherefore, I despise it. . Of Mr. Garno generosity we shall, presently, see soice to stances not to be controverted ; but, give rio leave to make a general observation; cothat is, that, according to the old max to we should be just before we are genre: The Apostle, you well know, Sir, bids" give to those who need, a precept which is had copied from his Master; but, he so
soon ething, too, about the manner of getting what we give; and he tells us, to be sure to get it by our loboer; to earn it; to be able to call it our own, in conscience as well as in law, before we attempt to give it away. Whether Mr. Garnier's generosity will stand this test we are now proceeding to inquire. The date and the duration of Mr. Garnier's pote: it you have accurately stated. It has bee in in the hands of his father and himself for seventy-four years; during that time they have had, in virtue of their patent, a monofo/iz of the supply of the army with medirizes and surgical instruments. Mr. Garnier hioself has never, in any instance, performed any part of the duty; and yet, besides the immense profits derived from the monoPoly, he, who never has done an hour's duty, who has been proved upon oath rever to have given a moment's attendance, in any way whatever in the public service, has been in the receipt, and is now in the receipt, of the pay of ten shillings a day, as being upon the staff of the army, though he “Joaths “ and abhors the very name and nature of “ war ! ” Sir, fine sentiments will not silence this fact. Task to me not of the natural effect of a “ liberal education ; ” talk to me not of Mr. Garnier's “generosily ; ” for, if ever there was a proof of consummate meanness, it is that which we here have before us. Good God! I ook at the estates in and about Wickham; look at the endiess church preferment of his sons; look at his splendid mansion and equipage, and his numerous train of menials. Look at all this ; consider that it has all come from the public
burthens and without one day's service on
the part of the possessor; consider that this possessor still receives, in pay from that public, the sum of ten shillings a day, as an officer upon the staff of the army, in which office he has never acted for one hour; and then insult us, who are the payers of this man; then insult us again, I say, with an argument, in favour of his disinterestedness, focuded on his “ sikeral education” and his “...gene, ous habits " I should now enter upon a refutation of the statement, which you have made with respect to the profits of Mr. Garnier. But, Sir, yon are not to learn, that, early in the present year, a Report, relative to his department, was laid before parliament by the Commissioners of Military Inquiry, which Report, as far as it relates to the said profits, I shall, before I proceed further with my own observations, quote, word for word. The Commissioners first observe, that there is no efficient check to Mr. Garnier's Ac“ounts, either as to quantity, quality, or
- - prices. All that you have alledged about . long credit, the Apothecaries Compony's prices to the Navy, and so forth, was alleged before the commissioners; and, in this extract from their Report, you will find it all completely refuted.—“ Before we pro“ ceed to state the course we have followed “ in endeavouring to get at a correct judgment of the prices allowed in these bills, it may be proper to notice, that the form of the certificate, at present signed by the physician and stargeon general, differs from that which was in use when Sir Clifton Wintringham was physician general to the army. His certificate states, “ that the ruedicines “ and materials, as recited in the invoices, had, agreeable to their respective dates, been carefully viewed and examined by him, and that they were sound to be very good; and further, that he believes the prices, as far as his inquiries could ascertain, were reasonable, as being rated at the current price which they bore at the time they were supplied by the apothecary general.” From this form of certificate we infer, that the very articles named in the invoices had been examined by the physician general on the dates of their being placed in the packages ; and that the current rate of price on the days of the supply was that which was certified by him.— The present form of the certificate states, that the physican general and surgeon general “ have, from time to time, care“ fully examined the different articles “ contained in the account, and that “ they have uniformly found them of the “ best quality.” Whatever inference may be drawn from the words used in this certificate, we learn from Mr. Clarke. that there is no security litt the ‘‘ inte“ grity of the parties employed,” that the articles which have been in-pected are the articles which had been issued
in any one of the charges.
checking the apothecary general's charges, he always takes into consideration the variation in the prices of the medicines.” On an inspection, however, of the two accounts which we have procured from the treasury, one of which amounts to about forty-four thousand five hundred pounds, and the other to upwards of seventy-five thousand pounds, we cannot find, except in one or two instances, that there is any variation in the priees charged in each year; notwithstanding the supply is extended through the whole of the year ; and we have understood that, in one material article at least, that of bark, there was a very great variation in its price during one of the years.--We have remarked too, on an investigation of those bilis, that the prices charged by the apothecary general have been uniformly admitted; for we can find no alteration or deduction Yet this allowance for the delay in payment is not added by the physician and surgeon general at the end of the account as a percentage for a certain specified period on
the sun total of it, but forms part of
comparing them with the charges made by others in the trade. But, conceiving that the most satisfactory mode of doing it would be to compare the total amount charged by the apothecary general for certain invoices of medicines furnished to the army, with the total amount which others would have charged for the same under similar circumstances, we submitted particular invoices of medicines, furnished by the apothecary ge. neral in the years 1804 and 1805, but without his prices affixed, to the consideration of two or three eminent druggists and chemists, and we desired them to affix the prices which the best articles of the kind bore in those years. Aud, for a future comparison, we procured from the ordnance and transport boards the bills for medicines supplied for their use during the years 1804 and 1805 ; the first of these boards being supplied by a druggist, and the other by the apothecaries coinpany — the blank invoice which we submitted to Messrs. Kempson and Co. druggists in London, was, for a regimental ches of medicines fornished by the apothecary general in 1505, the
bill for which was communicated to us by Mr. Calvert Clarke. It will be seen, on an inspection of the two columns in which the different rates of charge of the apothecary general and of Messrs. Kempson and Co. are given, that the rates of the first are almost in every instance higher than those of Messrs. Kempson, and, on the annount of the whole, are 40 per-cent. higher than theirs : yet Mr. Kempson says, that “ his prices would have afforded him “ something handsome in the way of pro“...fit; and that the price of bark, “ particularly, is taken at a high valu. ** a tion.’’ The blank bills submitted to Messrs. Godfrey and Cooke, and to Messrs. Corbyn and Co., also chemists and druggists in London, were copi : foom invoices of much larger quantities than that submitted to Mr. Kempson, and were selected from the apothecary general's bills for 1804 and 1805. On an inspection of the comparative statement in the Appendix, of the rates of the charge of the apothecary general and of the gentlemen before named, it appears that there is often a difference i. the prices of these gentlemen as between themselves, and that, in some instances, their prices exceed those of the apothe: cary general; but that, on the whole, his prices erceed thase of Messrs. Godfre: ana Cooke by 41 per-cent and of Messrs. Corbyn and Co. by 18 per-cent in the year 1804; and in 1805 they ereeed to
first by 37, and the second by 19 per-cent.
is given, and by the risk of Payment: and, without a consideration of these circumstances, no comparison can be justly made. In the present case, we learn from Mr. Cooke, the partner of Mr. Godfrey, that his prices are fixed on the principle of his customer being a merchant buying largely, and at six months credit: “ was the credit," he says, “ to be extended to 12 months in “ addition (or 18 months altogether) he “ would have added about 10 per-cent. “ to his prices.” In comparing, therefore, Messis. Godfrey and Cooke's prices with the apothecary general's, of 10 percent. ought to be added to the former ; for the apothecary general's bills were seidon, paid wooller than eighteen monilo, “ and sometimes not until two years after “the supply was made. With respect to “Messrs. Corbyn and Co.'s prices, it is to “be understood that, in fixing them, they “have proceeded on the principle of the “articles being furnished to apothecaries, “to whom they give twelve months credit: “but they look on the risk, it seems, in “ this case, to be considerable, and they “ have taken it accordingly into their valu"ation. They have also calculated their “ prices on the small quantities of une“dicines usually furnished to apothecaries; “but if such large quantities were furnish“ed, as were described to be furnished in “a year by the apothecary general, Mr. Mles“ser (of Messrs. Corbyn's house) tho, ght “that Messrs. Corbyn's prices should be “reduced 10 per cent, oil drugs, and 20 per cent. on chemical preparations ; and, were the payment delayed for eighteen months, or two years, Mr. Messer says, taking into consideration the quantity of the supply, with certainty of payment, “ that he still thinks the prices which his “house had affixed to the bills ought to satissy any person. On the whole, therefore, we may consider that the prices of “. Messrs. Godfrey and Cooke, and of Messrs. Corbyn and Co. under the circumcumstances of a wholesale supply, and 18 months credit, without risk, would not have materially differed from each “other. But these are the circumstances under which the apothecary general has “furnished medicines, &c. to the army, “ and these prices are about one fifth higher
“ —We observe, on an inspection of the “ medicine bills of the ordnance and trans“ port boards, for the years 1804 and 1805, “ that the prices of some of the more valuable articles, unlike what we had observ. ed in the apothecary general's bils, vary “ frequently in the course of the same year. This circumstance, at the same time that “, it proved the inefficiency of the check on “ his prices, made it difficult for us to compare them with those chargo to the two * boards. We have extracted the prices, however, of some of the articles most “ commonly in use, from his bill for the “ month of July, in the year 1805, and the “ prices for the same kind of articles charg
“ed to the ordnance board by Messrs. Bush “ and Howard, and to the transport board “ by the apothecaries company in the same "year and month, and we have arranged “them in separate columns. This arrange“ ment shews, that the prices of the apo“theuary general do not much exceed those
than those which we have last considered. .
partment, are sent to the surveyor gene- ,
ral's office, and are discharged in course. In this case too, therefore, an addition ought to be made to the prices, in order to make a correct comparison between them and those of the apothecary general; but this addition must be much less than sixty per cent.—The result of this course of inquiry would shew, if the prices of the apothecaries company are to be the criterion by which to examine the apothecary general's bills, that the prices which have been allowed him are not very improper. But ought these prices alone to have guided those whose duty it has been to examine his accounts 2–Had the prices of the most eminent of the trade been also resorted to, for the purpose of checking the account, it would have appeared that, even taking into consideration the delay of payment, the prices of the apothecary general have exceeded, BY ONE-FIFTH AT LEAST, what should have been allowed him.—We bave already noticed that the subject of the supply of surgical instruments for the use of the army, by the apothecary general, had heretofore been under the con
by him to government.
been bought on the same credit as government took of him, and the Savigny and Evans were the only two persons in the trade competent to give credit ; and he alledges that these persons' charge to him on an annual credit, “ would have exceeded, by 10 per cent. what Mr. Garnier charged, which, ad“ ded to the proposed commission, would “ have made a real loss to government of “ 20 per cent.” Mr. Garnier subjoined a statement of what he then (1797) charged for each set of instruments, called capitals, and what would have been the charge is the plan had been adopted. In this he states, that bis charge was 4°17 17s per set; but that, it bought on
an annual credit, the charge to him would
be so 19 9s to which adding 10 per cent.
commission, the whole price would be
*C21 8s, or, a loss to government of 4:3 l is, (i. e.) 20 per cert.-lt is manifest, on a view of this statement, that it cannot be correct; for it assumes the point in question, and proceeds on the supposition that the instruments could not have been procured by Mr. Garnier at
less than 10 per cent. above the price
which, even under the circumstance of the long delay in payment, was charged That which we are about to state will shew that he was altogether mistaken in his representation on this point. For we have examined Mr. Evans, one of the tradesmen to whom, Mr. Garnier alludes, on the subject. We selected Mr. Evans, because it appeared
that his house has furnished surgical in
struments to the navy hospitals, under
the orders of the transport board, for a
considerable number of years. We have confined our inquiries relative to Mr. Evans's prices to the period subsequent to 1802, because, by a prior regulation, the instruments which are to constitute what are called full sets of capitals, and portable sets of capitals, are particularly enumerated; and therefore, when Mr. Evans
speaks of these different collections, it is
sident that he speaks of the same as are #####n the apothecary general's bills
- oo: In these bills for the 1805, we find that the 3ts is always nineteen Şillings each, and thirohillings for each set of ng this period, Mr.
for that then the instruments must have
would have been his prices :onder such a circumstance? But adding to the questicm at the same time (what was the fact in respect of the apothecary general), that the supply of surgical instruments in each year had amounted, on an average, to sever thousand pounds, with no ultimate risk of payment. His answer shews, that under all - these circumstances, he would not only not have added to the prices before named by him, but that he would have deducted from the total amount “ certainly not less than 5 per-cent.” This, therefore, ought to have been the principle on which the apothecary general should have made his charges; for it is the rule of charging between the tradesman and the consumer, for which he contends His charge, however, for a fail set of capitals, is about 19 per-cent. above Mr. Evans's, and 40 per-cent. atove Mr. Evans's charge for a set of portatles ; and these prices have been allowed (as it should seem without inquiry) by those whose duty it was to check the charge.— We have learned another fact from Mr. Evans deserving of attention, also, on a view of the prices which have been char. ged, and allowed, in the apothecary ge. neral's bills. The screw tourniquets, for which the apothecary general always charges twelve shillings and sirpence each, are sold singly by Mr. Evans at ten shillings and sixpence, and under a sort of contract with the transport board, are supplied by him to the navy at eight shiihings each; being an addition to Mr. Evans's prices of above 50 per-cent. by the apothecary general, as a compensation for an extension of credit of 15 or 18 months.--—The evidence which we have thus produced shews, we think, a very blameable inattention in checking the apothecary general's charges in respect of surgical instruments; for the slightest inquiries would have enabled those to whose consideration the prices were referred, to have ascertained that the char