Civil List Debt: Introduction

Introduction

The Account of the Civil List Debt at the death of Wm. III and subsequently unpaid.

Likewise the Account of the debt then owing to the Irish Regiments, and the 13 Dutch Regiments.

Introductory Note.

At the death of Wm. III his Civil List debt amounted to 803,379l. 4s. 6d. which was never paid at all; and secondly a further sum of 191,429l. 17s. 11¼d. which was paid off gradually out of the arrears of his Civil List revenues as they came in; and thirdly a sum of 9196l. 3s. 8¼d. which was paid for him by Queen Anne out of her own purse, that is, out of her own Civil List.

The reason for the existence of this finally dishonoured debt of 803,379l. 4s. 6d. has been explained in the Introduction to Vols. XI—XVII of this Calendar, pp. v—xlvi and the responsibility for the dishonour has there been laid quite impartially at the door of the House of Commons. A brief recapitulation is all that is here necessary.

For the period in question the phrase Civil List is really a misnomer. A more correct phrase would be "Civil Government Expenditure" so long as these words be understood as including the expenditure on the royal state as well as that on the ordinary Civil Departments. Throughout the Stuart period the idea was maintained that this expenditure was fixed and rigid. The conception became stereotyped at the Restoration in 1660 and the play of party politics in the later part of Charles II's reign only intensified and deepened the misconception. The parliamentary opposition, in the pay of Louis XIV, used it as a tool to thwart Charles's foreign policy.

But when William came to the throne it so happened that his foreign policy was also the policy of England and as a consequence the play of party politics did not wreck his campaign against Louis XIV as it had wrecked the foreign policy of Charles II. Parliamentary supply for the war with France was not stinted under William as such supply had been stinted for Charles's foreign policy. But the moment British party politics reverted to the domestic sphere this national unity of purpose disappeared, and with it William's momentary popularity. Throughout his reign Parliament was misled and mistaken on the subject of his Civil List. The funds which were voted for carrying on the Civil Government were insufficient and inelastic. A deficit inevitably resulted and that deficit fell on the ordinary executive or Civil Departments. It was entirely as the responsible champion and representative of all branches of the service as well as of his household that William felt the disgrace so keenly. He did not mince his words on the subject but the words fell on deaf ears and when he was dead neither the country nor the House of Commons troubled to vindicate his memory by clearing his Civil List debt, a debt which was entirely national and which could only be styled his debt by sheer misapplication of terminology.

Six years after William's death the House of Lords took up the matter on its own initiative. On the 25th March 1708 it appointed a strong committee to draft an address to the Queen to pray her that the debts due to the officers and soldiers of the army during the life of William III should be stated and laid before the House of Lords "as likewise the debts owing to any persons, or such as represent them, upon the Civil List to the death of his late Majesty" (Lords Journals XVIII, p. 552). The resulting draft address was adopted by the Lords four days later (29 March 1708) in the following form:

"We your Majesty's most dutiful subjects, the Lords Spiritual and Temporal in Parliament assembled thinking it very just and reasonable that those persons who faithfully served the late King and their country in the war against France, as likewise those who served him in his household and family should be paid all that is justly due to them and the rather because several [soldiers] have obtained Acts for making out debentures in satisfaction of such debts, do humbly beseech that your Majesty will be pleased to appoint Commissioners to state all the debts that remain unsatisfied and are still due to the officers and soldiers and the arrears for service done in the late reign; and likewise to state what is still owing to any person upon the Civil List to the death of his late Majesty King William." (Ibid., p. 557).

In her reply on the following day the Queen promised to appoint Commissioners to state the accounts desired (Ibid., p. 558) but it was not until the 8th June 1708 that a commission was issued to Gregory King, William Vanbrugh and Edmund Williamson "to state the debts to the officers and soldiers who served in the late reign and to the Civil List to the time of the late King's death."

This Commission took the unusual form of a warrant under the royal sign manual. It was not enrolled and is entered only in the Treasury records (Queen's Warrant Book XXIII, pp. 359–60) as a mere executive or administrative act or instrument.

The reason for this informality was that the House of Commons ignored the whole action of the Lords and the resulting proceeding so far as related to the Civil List debt.

Quite independently however the Commons had been reminded of certain other items of debt outstanding at William's death and still unsettled.

(1) The case of the arrears of the three French Regiments, Lameloniere's, Belcastle's and Lifford's (formerly Du Cambon's) was presented to the House of Commons as a petition on the 17 Dec. 1707 (C. J. XV. p. 471).

(2) The case of the six Inniskilling Regiments and the Londonderry officers and soldiers (8 Regiments of Horse and Foot and 3 Companies of Gunners who took part in the defence of Londonderry) was presented in the form of a petition to the English House of Commons on the 9th and 10th Feb. 1707–8 (Ibid., pp. 534–535), in the form of a petition and of a reference from the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland made upon petitions presented to the Irish Parliament on the 7th Oct. 1707. The original papers are preserved in the Journals. Ibid., pp. 627–8.

(3) By command of the Queen a series of papers of accounts was presented to the House on the 25th February, 1707–8 relating to the case of the arrears still owing to 13 out of the 28 Dutch Regiments which had accompanied William to England in 1688. (Ibid., pp. 570–5).

1708–9. March 10, 12, 16, 19, 23, 28.; 1708–9. March18, 22, 25, 29, April 12, Nov. 30, Dec.10.

These three items of arrears stood outside the general provision which had been made in 1699 by the Act of 11–12 Wm. III, c. 2 for the sale of forfeited lands in Ireland to meet Army Debts. In the above quoted Introduction to Vols. XI—XVII. pp. ccix—ccxiii a brief summary is given of the question of Army debts at the death of William. The concluding paragraph of that summary recapitulates the position as at Feb. 1710–11 for the Londonderry and Inniskillen officers and men and the three French Regiments, nothing having been done thereon during the interim period from the petitions of the year 1708 just referred to. A bill for relief of the three French Regiments proceeded no further than a second reading in March 1708–9. In the case of the 13 Dutch Regiments the House firstly adopted one adverse resolution on the 27th March 1707–8 by which the claim was cut down from 112,666l. 1s. 9¼d. to 69,197l. 12s. 10¾d. (C. J. XV, p. 636) and then in the following session by a hostile vote on the 10th Dec. 1709, negatived the proposal for a Bill for relief of these Regiments. Later attempts in April 1709 (C. J. XV, p. 197) and on the 9th February 1710–11 to revive the subject (C. J. XVI, p. 485) proved as futile. Three years later the States General wrote to the Queen on the subject and Anne ordered the letter to be laid before the House but the House returned no reply. (21 May 1714, C. J. XVII, p. 635).

To return to the question of William's Civil List debt the House of Commons completely ignored the subject and the investigation was left to follow the lines laid down by the action of the House of Lords.

Of the three Commissioners Edmund Williamson, a Serjeant at Arms, does not sign the report and it is not certain that he acted. The other two, Gregory King (Secretary to the Commissioners of Accounts at York Buildings) and William Vanbrugh (Comptroller in the Office of the Treasurer of the Chamber) carried out their work faithfully and apparently with despatch. But the reports which they. drew up remained unpresented and ignored.

Nearly three years later on the 15th February 1710–11 the House of Lords drew up another address to the Queen asking that the said Commissioners should be ordered to lay before the Lords "an account in writing of those debts as stated by them, what remain unsatisfied and to whom due and other their proceedings pursuant to their Commission" (Lords Journals XIX, p. 226).

Four days later, on the 19th February 1710–11 the Queen replied that she would give order to the Commissioners to lay the accompts desired before the House. They were accordingly so laid on the 19 Feb. 1710–11. There is no evidence that these accounts were simultaneously laid before the House of Commons. But the motion in the Lords had on the 15 Feb. stirred the Commons to some form of action with regard to its own moribund Commission of Accounts and 2 days afterwards viz. on the 17th February 1710–11 it resolved to re-institute the Commission for Public Accounts (C. J. XVI, p. 316). But it is almost unnecessary to add that the succeeding Reports of the Public Accounts Commissioners make no reference whatever to the Civil List Debt outstanding at William's death.

In the face of such a cold and unsympathetic attitude on the part of the House of Commons it was not possible for either the House of Lords or the Treasury or even Queen Anne herself to accomplish anything for the relief of the poor creditors of William's Civil List. All that could be done was to collect the arrears of William's Civil List revenues and to pay them away to Civil List creditors with such discrimination as could be exercised.

The account of the receipts of such arrears is as follows:—

Treasury Board Papers CXXIV, No. 62.

Another Treasury Board Paper CXXII, No. 58 (7) gives a different total and makes the moneys "arisen" of the arrears of William's Civil List revenues within the same period as 191,429l. 17s. 11¼d. But this paper occurs among other papers of estimates and does not appear as reliable as the figures of actual receipts in the Exchequer. In the Public Revenue accounts for the year it is impossible to disentangle the items of current Civil List receipts before 8 March 1701–2, the day of William's death, and the receipts of arrears after that date).

It will be understood that the claims so liquidated do not figure again in the statement of debt outstanding in Feb. 1710–11 so that in effect the actual debt of William's Civil List outstanding at the time of his death was 803,379l. 4s. 6d. plus this sum of 168,468l. 15s. 3¼d. but as this sum of 168,468l. 15s. 3¼d. was liquidated out of Civil List revenues provided by Parliament for William during his reign it leaves the net figure of Civil List debt finally unprovided for by Parliament at 803,379l. 4s. 9d.

From the day of William's death to the present this sum has never been paid. The debt has been completely dishonoured.

1710–11, April 19.

Report to the Treasury from the Commissioners for stating debts to the Army during the late King's reign and debts to persons on the Civil List at the death of the said King.

To the Right Honble. the Lords Commissioners of her Majesty's Treasury.

We the Commissioners appointed by her Majesty for stating all such debts as remained unsatisfied and are still due to the Officers and soldiers of the Army for service done in the late reign, and what is owing to any person upon the Civil List to the death of her Majesty's late Royal Brother, King William, being directed by her Majesty's commission to deliver such states to the Lord High Treasurer or Commissioners of the Treasury for the time being, do present to your Lordships the several States of Arrears on the Civil List incurred in the time of his late Majesty King William and standing out at his death on the 8th March 1701–2 (where not since discharged in whole or part), drawn up by us under the following heads viz.:

1. the Exchequer Account.

2. the Band of Gentlemen Pensioners.

3. Ambassadors, Envoys and other Ministers abroad.

4. the Greencloth or Cofferer's Account.

5. the Treasurer of the Chamber's Office.

6. the Office of the Great Wardrobe.

7. the Office of the Robes.

8. the Office of Paymaster of Pensions to the late Queen [Mary's] servants.

9. Pensions on the Excise.

10. Pensions on the Post Office.

11. the General Office of the Works.

12. the Office of the Works at Windsor.

13. the extraordinary expenses of the Stables.

14. Various sorts of claims not properly under any of these heads.

Whereby it will appear to your Lordships that the arrears to the several persons in this our report, for wages, fees, salaries, pensions and other allowances as stated by us under the aforegoing heads amount to the sum of 803,379l. 4s. 6d.

What observations have occurred to us in stating any of these arrears are particularly noted in the accounts themselves; and where the demands have been in any wise doubtful we have reported them specially for your Lordships' determination, except such as may arise from the construction of our commission

We shall only beg leave to add that as we could not allow some claims, how just soever, for want of proper vouchers and have reported others as equitable only, so it is possible there may be some of the nature of those we have stated which have not come to our knowledge.

Gregory King.

William Vanbrugh.

Queen Street, Westminster.

19 February, 1710–11.