[8] I have not attempted in this chapter to do more than give statistics in "round numbers," nearly approximating to precision.
[9] A commission instituted some years ago by the House of Commons, to inquire into the abuses of charitable trusts, found a clergyman at the head of a school, with a salary of £900 a year, and one pupil. Another received £500, had not a single scholar, and rented the school-room for a saw-pit.
[10] Our lamented countryman, Mr. Colman, estimated the number at 30,000. I think the text is quite low enough. And an enterprise is now started for the purchase of small freeholds by landless men, which, if vigorously prosecuted, will do much to break up the land-monopoly of England.
[11] It is undoubtedly true that this corn-law contest had its origin in the conflicting interests of two classes of monopolists, the manufacturers and the landlords. But, the turn which the conflict finally took made it a battle between Free Trade and Protection, and the victory redounded to the advantage of the former. The monopoly of the manufacturers will no doubt be overthrown in its turn. A great maritime monopoly has already shared the fate of the landlord monopoly in the recent repeal of the Navigation Laws.
[12] A writer in a recent number of the London Times, says: "There are various classes of pensions, but they all agree in this,—namely, that they are for the most part undeserved, and that the recipients do nothing for their money. There are pensions given under the pretense of supporting the peerage, in consideration of parties' circumstances, and to compensate for abolished sinecures. Others there are that may be called 'mysterious pensions,' that no man knoweth the origin of. Of the first sort, Lord Bexley's pension of 3,000l. is an example. This man was found unfit for the office of Chancellor of the Exchequer some years ago, and therefore was hoisted into the house of incurables. Lord Allen receives a good fat pension in consideration of his pecuniary condition. The Honorable Jane Carr receives 1000l., nobody knows for what. But the pensions for abolished sinecures are the most flagrant. Thus Lord Ellenborough receives 7700l. a year as compensation for the abolished nominal office of chief clerk in the Queen's Bench!—nearly as much as the Lord Chief Justice's salary!! There are even worse than this, however. J. C. Beresford receives between 4000l. and 5000l. as compensation for the abolished sinecure of storekeeper of the Customs, Dublin! The Reverend J. Burrard receives as compensation for the abolished sinecure of searcher of the Customs, Dublin, 1100l. a year!"
[13] The writer in the Times gives this "royal" list:—
| Per ann. | |
| The Queen eats and drinks | £63,000 |
| Ditto pocket money | 60,000 |
| Prince Albert | 38,000 |
| Queen Dowager | 100,000 |
| Natural children of William IV., about | 3,000 |
| King of Hanover | 21,000 |
| Leopold, King of the Belgians | 50,000 |
| Prince of Mecklenburgh Strelitz | 2,000 |
| His wife, the Duke of Cambridge's daughter, Augusta Caroline | 3,000 |
| The Royal Dukes and Duchesses, about | 100,000 |
The following are a few miscellaneous items:
| The repairs to the Pimlico Palace, estimated at | 150,000 |
| The Royal Yacht | 20,000 |
| Windsor Castle has cost within the present century | 3,000,000 |
| The repairs to St. James' Palace were about | 30,000 |
| Buckingham Palace, before the present repairs | 34,000 |
| The Kitchen Garden at Frogmore | 23,000 |
| George IVth's natural children have cost the country | 100,000 |
[14] I have often been obliged, in this chapter, to get my statistics by striking the average of a mass of contradictory authorities.