I therefore propose that the king’s tables (to whatever number of tables, or covers to each, he shall think proper to command) should be classed by the steward of the household, and should be contracted for, according to their rank, by the head or cover; that the estimate and circumstance of the contract should be carried to the Treasury to be approved; and that its faithful and satisfactory performance should be reported there previous to any payment; that there, and there only, should the payment be made.  I propose that men should be contracted with only in their proper trade; and that no member of Parliament should be capable of such contract.  By this plan, almost all the infinite offices under the lord steward may be spared,—­to the extreme simplification, and to the far better execution, of every one of his functions.  The king of Prussia is so served.  He is a great and eminent (though, indeed, a very rare) instance of the possibility of uniting, in a mind of vigor and compass, an attention to minute objects with the largest views and the most complicated plans.  His tables are served by contract, and by the head.  Let me say, that no prince can be ashamed to imitate the king of Prussia, and particularly to learn in his school, when the problem is, “The best manner of reconciling the state of a court with the support of war.”  Other courts, I understand, have followed his with effect, and to their satisfaction.

The same clew of principle leads us through the labyrinth of the other departments.  What, Sir, is there in the office of the great wardrobe (which has the care of the king’s furniture) that may not be executed by the lord chamberlain himself?  He has an honorable appointment; he has time sufficient to attend to the duty; and he has the vice-chamberlain to assist him.  Why should not he deal also by contract for all things belonging to this office, and carry his estimates first, and his report of the execution in its proper time, for payment, directly to the Board of Treasury itself?  By a simple operation, (containing in it a treble control,) the expenses of a department which for naked walls, or walls hung with cobwebs, has in a few years cost the crown 150,000_l._, may at length hope for regulation.  But, Sir, the office and its business are at variance.  As it stands, it serves, not to furnish the palace with its hangings, but the Parliament with its dependent members.

To what end, Sir, does the office of removing wardrobe serve at all?  Why should a jewel office exist for the sole purpose of taxing the king’s gifts of plate?  Its object falls naturally within the chamberlain’s province, and ought to be under his care and inspection without any fee.  Why should an office of the robes exist, when that of groom, of the stole is a sinecure, and that this is a proper object of his department?