HC Deb 20 June 1843 vol 70 cc160-74
Captain Berkeley

rose, according to notice, to call the attention of the House to the inexpediency and danger of employing the old class of ten-gun brigs under commanders, and re-establishing them as sloops of war in her Majesty's navy. He would first show the inexpediency, and next the danger, of employing the old class of 10-gun brigs under commanders, and re-establishing them as sloops of war; and he would contrast the authorities which upheld the re-establishment with the authorities who held an opposite opinion. A civilian, however high his attainments, or however great his talents, could not, from the mere fact of his being the First Lord of the Admiralty, know as much of naval matters as those who devoted themselves to that profession, and though the hon. Member for South Wilts, who would probably reply to him, might be able to offer an opinion as to the class of vessels which might be fit to sail around the Isle of Wight, it was not to be supposed that he was acquainted with the nature of the vessels or the burthen they could bear which were compelled to breast the waves of the Atlantic. He would rather take the hon. Gentleman's opinion as to the speed of a racehorse carrying a prescribed weight. It was of importance to ascertain whether the bringing of these vessels into operation with increased complement of men and stores accorded with the opinion of the Board of Admiralty, or was a measure concocted not at the Board but in a private room. It would be desirable to see what was the opinion of the naval Lords, and also what was the opinion of Sir W. Symonds, the surveyor of the navy; but during the time that the Admiralty was respectively presided over by Sir J. Graham, Lord Auckland, and Earl Minto, Sir W. Symonds then being surveyor of the navy, these Ill-gun brigs were considered unfit for such service.

He regretted the absence of the I-Tome Secretary from the House on the present occasion, as he hoped to be fortified by his opinion; but he had the opinion of three Admiralty boards to one against the employment of those 10-gun brigs as sloops of war under commanders. He would say nothing as to naval men which might be considered invidious, but there was on one side Sir G. Cockburne, Sir W. Gage, and Sir G. Seymour; on the other side Sir C. Adams, Sir W. Parker, Admiral Dundas, Admiral Elliot, and Sir J. Pechell, and he would ask, upon which side should opinion preponderate? There was one other name to whose opinion great weight should attach—namely, the late Sir T. Hardy, with whom he had served from a midshipman upwards to a place in the Admiralty, and upon whose opinions his own had been formed. There were, then, three Boards of Admiralty, and the same Gentleman who at present held the post of surveyor of the navy, who were adverse to the present plan, and condemned using the ten-gun brigs for the purposes now proposed. In opposing the measure, he was influenced by no political or party feelings, but by a wish to prevent serious calamity. When Sir J. Graham was at the head of the Admiralty board, it was at first deemed necessary to use these ten-gun brigs, but not under commanders. Some were placed under lieutenants after great reductions had been made to render them lighter and more buoyant, but the experiment had not succeeded. Some few, however, had been altered to brigantines, and had answered tolerably well. If he should be told that a point of etiquette was involved in this matter, be would ask, why not give officers employed on the coast of Africa a local rank, and thus get rid of the point of etiquette? There was another thing to be taken into consideration. They were going to send these vessels—the ten-gun brigs, to cope with their great rivals, the Americans, in the suppression of the slave-trade. Did they think that the Americans would send inferior vessels on that service? No; and the result would be that the slaver and the American vessel would run the ten-gun brig out of sight. Nothing but mortification and vexation would be left to the British officers and men and the Americans would reap all the harvest. In a late speech delivered by Mr. Webster, that gentleman expressed a hope that the American vessels would never meet the English under inferior circumstances. Yet the English Government were going to send out this condemned class of vessels, which were not able to fight, sail, or even to swim, to cope with the American vessels in rivalry of seamanship, He had received several letters from naval officers, expressing their opinion as to the utter inefficiency of the ten-gun brigs. One of the writers observed, that he looked back with horror at the six months in which he had been employed in them. It was known from public report and public documents, that the Americans denied the right of the English to search their vessels. Supposing a ten-gun brig was cruising in company with an American for the suppression of the slave-trade. The slaver would run away, chased by the American, and would soon lose sight of the English vessel. The slaver, then, would hoist the English colours, calculating that the American would respect that right, which in his own case he contended for, and would not dare to board him. The returns which he had moved for did not allow him to speak with confidence on the subject; but he believed that there were five good vessels at Devonport, that might be employed on this service. Why, then, should British officers and men be sent out in the detestable class of vessels of which he was now complaining? So much for the inexpediency of employing the old class of ten-gun brigs; and he would now advert to the danger which was likely to arise to the health of the crews they were going to put in them. According to intelligence he had received front Plymouth, L'Espoir had been commissioned by a commander, with two lieutenants, and a crew of eighty men; and he had since heard that the carpenter's and purser's cabins had been diverted from their original use in order that greater accommodation might be made fur the crew; but would the House believe it possible that eighty men could be accommodated in such a vessel? Supposing the crew only numbered sixty-five—he would go as low as that—in what space did the Board of Admiralty propose to put in vessels of an inferior class, sixty-five individuals, on the coast of Africa, where the thermometer stood at eighty, and sometimes above ninety—where an awning was obliged to be spread over the vessel, preventing the free access of the air into the interior. The whole length of the brig was from forty -eight to fifty feet, and its extreme breadth only twenty-four feet, and in this space allowance must be made for a store-room, a sail-room, and for a place to cook provisions for the ship's company. If a commander of such a vessel got to serve under him a few fine British sailors, such as captains liked to see in their vessels, from five feet ten incites to live feet eleven inches high, how could they live? Why the height from the deck to the beam above their heads was four feet, six inches, and in that space they could neither walk nor stand. In one of these vessels, the space was so small, that the officer took away the tables, and made his men mess on the ground. The objection to the employment of these vessels was still greater on the score of their danger. He held in his hand an official return, showing the number of men-of-war and packets lost between 1816 and the present time. He found that the whole number lost was twenty-two; and exactly one-half of these—namely, eleven, belonged to that class of vessels which he was now endeavouring to induce the House to condemn, five of them having been employed as sloops of war, and six as packets. By the same return, he found that six others of the vessels lost were of an inferior description to these, ten-gun brigs, leaving five only to account for of a class superior to the ten-gun brigs. Of these five, two were wrecked on shore, leaving only three that foundered at sea, while of all the ten-gun brigs that were I lost, not one went on shore, or was lost by coming in contact with rock or shoal, but every one foundered and all hands perished. With this fact before them, would they re-employ these brigs in the service as sloops of war? It might be asked that if these vessels were so extremely dangerous, how was it that men and officers were obtained to serve in them? To such a question he would answer, that wherever an enemy was pointed out, and wherever promotion was shown, there British sailors and officers would go. He also said, that a British officer thirst not —could not—refuse to take the command of anything he might be appointed to; and the character of British sailors was such, that wherever officers went the men would follow. On the score of humanity he thought he had said enough to induce the House to accede to the motion with which be should conclude, and if hon. Members were all members of the naval profession he had no doubt he should carry it. The gallant men they were about to send out in these vessels feared no danger but he begged the House to imagine what would be the feelings of those whom these gallant men left behind them what would be the feelings of their children and families, when the winter blast was howling about their dwellings on shore, and bringing to their minds all the perils which their friends and relatives were exposed to on the wide ocean? The hon. and gallant Member concluded by moving the following resolution:— That, after the lamentable loss of life which experience proves to have taken place in vessels of the class of old ten-gun brigs, this House views with apprehension the reemployment of such vessels in circumstances of increased danger, arising from the additional complement of officers and men, with the greater weight of provisions and stores thereby rendered necessary, and which it is now proposed to place in them.

Captain Pechell

seconded the motion, and said, he was anxious to know on what grounds the Board of Admiralty could refuse its consent to the reasonable and moderate proposition of his hon. and gallant Friend. It was lucky for the Board that the Navy Estimates had been gone through, without this subject and others of equal interest having been pressed upon the attention of the House. It had been shown by his hon. and gallant Friend that to send these ten-gun brigs to rival the American vessels employed on the coast of Africa would he ridiculous, and only tend to disappointment and dissatisfaction in the minds of the officers and men sent out in them. These vessels had already been employed in the suppression of the slave-trade, and a reference to their log-books now lying in Somerset-house, would show that the officers who had commanded them had suffered the deepest mortification, and they had never succeeded in capturing a slave-ship, except by some accident, or by the aid of their boats. He thought he could show by one single instance the distress and mortification suffered by officers in command of these ten-gun brigs. One of them, commanded by an officer whom he would not mention lest it might interfere with his claims, gave chase to a slaver well laden with slaves, and whose sailing was greatly deteriorated by the weight she had on board; still, after a chase of eight or ten hours, the slaver was lost sight of. The next day the ten-gun brig fell in with a vessel built by Sir W. Symonds, and this vessel pursued the slaver, though she had been lost: sight of for twenty-four hours, and after thirty-six hours' chase, captured her. This was a great mortification to the officers and crew of the brig. These facts were well worthy of consideration. What excuse could be offered for sending out these vessels again, he was at a loss to know, especially when there were other vessels both in the Mediterranean and the West Indies, better calculated to do credit to the service of this country in its rivalry with the American flag. Why should the officers and men be so again employed, when it had been shown that the service in them was most disadvantageous. Why send them out in these wretched vessels, which were a laughing-stock to all the slavers? The old ten-gun brigs were as well known on the coast of Africa, as the race horses at Epsom or New market. It had been truly said, that they could neither fight nor run; they had brought great discredit upon those who had constructed them, and they would reflect greater discredit upon those who should persevere in again sending them out to this station. But again, as his hon. and gallant Friend had asked, why not give the officers employed local rank and double pay as France did? But what was done in England? Why, you gave to an engineer of a steam-vessel increased allowances, and then in came the Chancellor of the Exchequer and attacked those increased allowances by levying the Income-tax upon him. This intention of renewing the ten-gun brigs was part and parcel of the system pursued by those who in 1818 and 1819 ruined the most beautiful class of vessels in the British service. His hon. and gallant Friend had spoken of the release of the officers from these ten-gun brigs being regarded as an escape. 'That might be true; but it was au escape to one of the jackass or donkey frigates so much complained of. He had gone through the ordeal of service in both, and if he could believe that the Board of Admiralty, after the speech of his hon. and gallant. Friend—after the well-known feeling of the country upon this subject, should return to this system, he thought, if it were possible to impeach the first Lord of the Admiralty, he would deserve it. Was it not melancholy that in 1843, after Sir W. Symonds had cleared out all the nuisances of the Navy Board at Somerset-house, the old system should be restored? He trusted, however, that the rumour had been got up as a hoax, and should so think, until assured of the reverse by the hon. the Secretary to to the Admiralty.

Captain Gordon

said, he was not himself aware (and he had not learned from his hon. and gallant Friend) that there was anything in the present circumstances of these vessels that they were to be considered less safe now than in the twenty or thirty years during which they had been employed in all parts of the world. Now, for himself, he confessed he entertained no such apprehensions as those expressed by the hon. and gallant Members opposite; and as he found in the Navy List several vessels of this class, he presumed that the opinion of former Boards of Admiralty was not quite so strong against them as his lion. and gall and Friend seemed to think. He would therefore ask, supposing vessels of this description were required for an important and delicate service, whether the Board of Admiralty would be justified, with such vessels at their disposal, to leave them unemployed, and the service un provided for? He confessed he thought the board would not be justified in taking such a course; and it also appeared to him that the tropics, where the weather was calm, light, and moderate, were just the place these vessels were calculated for, and where they could render the greatest service; but his hon. and gallant Friend had talked of the changes made in these vessels. He was aware that some alteration had been made in them at different times; but he could only say, if they were to be employed in an important and difficult service, it was highly desirable, if not absolutely necessary, that they should be both well manned and efficiently officered for a service in which so much discretion was required; and if, therefore, that class was to he employed, it could not he sent to any place where it would do greater service than that station, to which he believed that a single vessel was in commission and about to go. His hon. and gallant Friend had mentioned the many losses there had been of this class of vessels; but he believed the greater part of the losses had taken place when they had been employed as packets, and which, he must also observe, principally arose from the deficiency in the number of men to take in sail or to act in case of emergency. It had been said that the vessels would be very much crowded; but this was not new—these vessels had been employed thirty-years ago, and then they had full as many men as they had at the present moment. He much regretted the absence on the present occasion of his right hon. and gallant Friend the First Naval Lord, whose extensive experience and knowledge upon the subject would, he was sure, have had great weight with the House; he, however, trusted that the House would not be disposed to interfere with or come to a decision as to what description of vessels ought to be employed on the different stations, but would leave it to the Executive, which was responsible for the vessels employed; and, therefore, without entering into details, he should oppose the motion which his hon. and gallant Friend had brought forward.

Captain Plumridge

begged to say a word or two on the present occasion, especially as he had so long filled the duties of inspecting the packet station at Falmouth. He could state that during six or seven years the loss of these gun-brigs had averaged one in each year, and the total number of souls who had been swept into eternity by those losses was 234 during a period of seven-years. With regard to sending out 10-gun brigs against the slavers, it was like sending an elephant to catch a hare. As to the feeling of the public with regard to those packets, it was proverbial that passengers inquired, "is your next packet one of the coffins or one of Symonds's vessels?" His duty had been to examine all, and he could state not only that they were well officered, but had been well managed by officers and men both by day and night. On the whole, the sooner this class of vessels was either sold, or got rid o in some manner, the better.

Mr. S. Herbert

said, as charges had been advanced against the Board of Admiralty though the hon. and gallant Member who moved had said he did not wish to cast a censure on the Board, and as the hon. and gallant Member who succeeded him had improved the proposition, and had even talked of impeachment, he hoped he might be excused if he made a few observations to show these charges to be utterly and entirely unfounded. He hoped the House would bear in mind, that he, though a civilian, spoke the sentiments of officers in the naval service as high in reputation, (and he spoke not in disparagement) as those quoted by his hon. and gallant Friend. The charge of the lion, and gallant mover amounted to this—that though experience had shown that ten-gun brigs were dangerous, and that they were a bad class of vessels to be employed in this service, and that though certain Boards of Admiralty being so convinced, had gradually declined to use them, and had subsequently almost precluded them from service, or, if they employed them, did so under precautions that rendered them safe, the present Board, having at its disposal a better class of vessels, had wantonly gone back and resuscitated and re-employed them, in direct contradiction to the views and opinions of the Admiralty Boards by whom they had been preceded. This charge was founded, from beginning to end, upon misconception; and if the hon. and gallant Member had waited until the information laid upon the Table last week had been printed, he would have seen that such was not the fact. The hon. and gallant Member had said, that former Boards had wholly condemned the employment of this class of vessels. That might be so; but there were many officers of great distinction who had commanded ten-gun brigs, who said, that although not to be compared to the class substituted for them, still, their great defect was, that they were slow sailers. The only question, then, now at issue was, as to the danger of the employment of this class, and by that employment, the neglect by the Admiralty of the interests of the service. The hon. and gallant Member stated that the late Board refused altogether to employ them. [Captain Berkeley: Not altogether, but to employ them with commanders, and a full complement of men.] He begged pardon; but still he thought he understood the hon. and gallant Member right, for he admitted the late Board had employed them as surveying vessels with commanders on board, but the hon. and gallant Member forgot to mention that one of them so employed went round Cape Horn. It had also been urged that these vessels would be dangerous because of the increased weight on board, arising from the fact of a commander being on board. Now, it so happened, that if the hon. and gallant Member had waited till the returns were printed, he would have seen that with a commander, as proposed, there was proposed only an addition of one man in five over the existing complement where a licutenant was in command, and, in fact, by the diminished number of guns and stowage, the weight on board w ill be one ton less than when the hon. and gallant Member was a Lord of the Admiralty, and not more, as stated by the gallant Officer. The gallant Officer had made a mistake between the old class of ten-gun brigs and the present vessels. Front 1808 to 1832, four of the present class of ten-gull brigs had been lost as men-of-war, and three had foundered as packets. Those which had foundered as packets, were differently rigged, had three masts, and were not safe front carrying a press of sail, with a very insufficient complement. As to the weight carried by these brigs, many gallant Officers of previous Boards had sent these brigs to sea with the same weights. He thought he had shown that the gallant Officer was mistaken in saying, that they had resuscitated the ten-gun brigs. They were, in fact, reduced in number, and not half the number were employed by the present Board that were employed by the Board of which the gallant Officer was himself a Member, and superior vessels were building to supply their place, and he hoped, that they would soon be out of the service altogether, not because they were dangerous, but because they were comparatively slow vessels, and, therefore, comparatively inefficient. It was a pressure on the service which induced the Admiralty to commission three of these vessels though having a less armament and with the same weights. As to the charge of appointing commanders instead of lieutenants to these brigs, it was important that an officer of some standing should be employed in such service, involving intricate questions of international law, looked on as it was with great jealousy, and the cause sometimes of very great irritation. No one could say, that it was not important to put officers of rank in command of these vessels, and to secure their being officers to command the boats, and boarding parties detached from them. He should conclude with moving the previous question.

Sir Charles Napier

observed, that whenever the Admiralty got into any scrape, owing to their own ignorance, impropriety, or obstinacy, they always seemed to expect that the House would not interfere with them, or, as it was said, take the business out of the hands of the executive government. Now he thought that prevention was much bet- ter than cure, and whenever they saw an improper thing done by the Admiralty, he conceived it to be the duty of every Gentleman to correct the evil, before it could be attended with any very bad results. Why should not the Admiralty be thus reproved? Did they not see the right hon. Baronet (Sir James Graham) found fault with in that House? they not even find the head of her Majesty's Government found fault with? Did they not find the noble Lord at the head of the colonies very often found fault with? and why then, in the name of God,' when the Admiralty went astray by its own folly, was it not to be found fault with? and this, when it so happened, that, from time to time, and year after year, it had been committing errors, at least, he could say to his knowledge, ever since he had the honour of entering into her Majesty's service. The gallant officer, the Lord of the Admiralty, had pointed to the propriety of sending out ten-gun brigs to the coast of Africa, anti why so? Because the gallant Officer said, that there was a fine climate and light winds, and consequently these vessels could not there be unsafe! He asked the gallant Officer, did he ever hear of a tornado on the coast of Africa? Did he not know that these ten-gun brigs were the least calculated of all other vessels to resist its violence? Why, if he were to choose a part of the world which this sort of vessel would be unsafe, that part would be the coast of Africa, the very place where these brigs were about to be sent to. Then, the hon. Secretary of the Admiralty justified the employment of these vessels, because they could get no others. What, then, had the Admiralty been doing for the last seven and twenty years? Was it possible, that now a Secretary of the Admiralty, should stand up in that House, and say, that after a peace of twenty-seven years, they had not vessels to send out to the coast of Africa, but must be obliged to send out vessels which were totally unfit to be employed as packets or as men-of-war—and that those again should be brought forward, because the Admiralty had no other vessels. That, he must say, was the most extraordinary acknowledgement he ever heard. It was true, it might be said, that the present Gentlemen were not in office more than two years; but then, if they found that their predecessors had left the navy in a bad state, why not make some exertion to correct those deficiencies; and why, above all things, send out the very same sort of vessels which had been before objected to, and which had been lost in every part of the world. He had not heard the gallant Captain nor the Secretary of the Admiralty deny, that eleven of those ten-gun brigs had been lost—five of them as packets, and six of them as men-of-war. As packets, their weight had been reduced—they had only four guns, their masts and sails were reduced, their immense fore and aft mainsail was taken away, and yet five of these vessels were lost with all the crew and passengers, and six of them were lost as men-of-war. And yet, after all this, the gallant Officer, and the Secretary of the Admiralty, stated now, that having lost eleven of these vessels, they were about to send out some of the same craft. He thought the men who built them ought to be hanged, and those who employed them almost deserved the same fate. He had no patience when he saw this done, and knew, at the same time, that they had plenty of good vessels, and officers to command them. Instead of employing proper vessels, they were about sending out commanders who were not accustomed to an insignificant crew. It would be found, that this subject bore very strongly upon a question he had put some time since. It was this: if English and American vessels employed on die coast of Africa were to hunt in couples, was an English vessel, whether she sailed worse or sailed better than the American, to be at liberty to board a vessel hoisting American colours? His gallant Friend now said, that ten-gun brigs could not sail with an American brig, and the English vessel, to their great dishonour, must be left behind. lf, then, the American met a slaver, and she hoisted English colours, the American could not, if the treaty were as he understood it—the American could not board the slaver; and if the English afterwards met her, and she hoisted American colours, the English vessel could not board her either. He hoped that the House would not go with the Admiralty on this occasion; but that they would exercise their own judgment. Perhaps some of them would be applying to the Admiralty to have their sons sent to sea, and they might hear that their relations were lost, with all the crew of those vessels. He hoped that hon. Gentlemen would think of these things before they went to the vote that night. The late Board of Admiralty had properly not used these brigs. The present Board however, found fault with their predecessors, and now were about despatching them to the coast of Africa. This was of a piece with the general conduct of the Admiralty. There was, for instance, the Trafalgar, the launch of which was viewed by her Majesty. That vessel might be supposed ready for sea. It was not; but the stern put on by one surveyor was knocked off, and another put on, at the expense of from 5,000l. to 10,000l. He went, too, on board a steam-ship, and found that they had at last conic to build a steam-boat on a proper principle, that which all the world knew of before but the Admiralty, and that was, that it should be built with a flat floor. It was, too, as every one but the Admiralty knew, most important to put guns on the fore part of a steamer. The Admiralty, however, fortified the stern; but the English vessels did not present much of their stern to the enemy. It was most important, that the fore part of the steamer should be fortified, and yet, at the present moment, there was only one gun on that part of the steamer which he had seen. It was his opinion, that as long as the Board of Admiralty was constituted as at present, it would he half a century behind the rest of the world. For thirty years it had made no improvement. Considering the importance of the navy to this country, it was to be deplored, that so little attention was paid to it by the House of Commons. In conclusion, he had to remark, in reference to his gallant Friend who had brought forward this motion, that he was the only officer he ever knew who resigned his situation at the Board of Admiralty, when he saw them adopt proceedings of which he disapproved.

Captain Berkeley,

in reply, said, that if the hon. Gentleman had, in answer to a question he put some weeks ago, given the explanation given to-night, that these vessels were not to be used as sloops of war, with all the appurtenances, probably the House would not have been troubled with this motion. Throughout the service, the general opinion amongst the officers against these vessels was very strong; but if the Admiralty chose to commission a washing tub, such was the zealous character of the British sailor, he would not refuse to enter the craft. But, because that feeling existed, our seamen ought not to be sent out in unseaworthy vessels. He had done his duty to the service to which he belonged, in bringing this subject before the House, and he hoped hon. Gentlemen would not suffer themselves to be swayed by political feelings upon this occasion, but recollect that the lives of their fellow-creatures were at stake. If he might judge from the appointment made by the present Board of Admiralty of those who were to go to sea in these floating coffins, they were all connected with the other side of the House.

The House divided on the question, that that (Captain Berkeley's resolution) question be put:—Ayes 41; Noes 75:—Majority 34.

List of the AYES.
Aldam, W. Morrison, J.
Barnard, E. G. O'Ferrall, R. M.
Berkeley, hon. G. F. Plumridge, Capt.
Blake, Sir V. Protheroe, E.
Brotherton, Pryse, P.
Childers, J. W. Ramsbottom,.J.
Cripps, W. Redington, T. N.
Curteis, H. B. Scholefield,.J.
Duncan, G. Seale, Sir J. H.
Dungannon, Visct. Smith, B.
Evans, W. Smith, rt. hon. R. V.
Fielden, J Stansfield, W. R. C.
Gisborne, Stanton, W. H.
Granger, T. Tancred, H. W.
Hastie, A. Tufnell, H.
Heathcoat,.J. Villiers, hon. C.
Hill, Lord M. Wawn, J. T.
Hindley, C. Williams, W.
James, W. Wilshere, W.
Langston, J. H. TELLERS.
Mitcalfe, H. Berkeley, Capt.
Morris, D. Napier, Sir C.
List of the NOES.
Antrobus, E Flower, Sir J.
Arbuthnott, hon. H. Forman, T. S.
Bailey,.J. Fox, S. L.
Baillie, Col. Gladstone, rt. hn. W. E
Baillie, H. J. Godson, R.
Baird, W. Gordon, hon. Capt.
Baring, hon. W. B. Goulburn, rt. hon. H.
Baskerville, T. B. M. Graham, rt. n. Sir J,
Beckett, W. Greenall, P.
Benett,.J. Greene, T.
Blackburne,.J. I. Hamilton, Lord C.
Boldero, H. G. Hepburn, Sir T. B.
Borthwick, P. Herbert, hon. S.
Boyd, J. Hervey, Lord A.
Broadley, H Hodgson, R.
Bruce, Lord E. Hogg, J. W.
Burrell, Sir C. M. Hope, G. W.
Chapman, A. Hughes, W. B.
Christopher, R. A. Hussey, T.
Clerk, Sir G. Jermyn, Earl
Corry, rt. hon. H. Knatchbull, rt. hn. Sir E
Darby, G. Lockhart, W.
Dickinson, F. H. Lopes, Sir R.
Drummond, H, H. Mackenzie, T.
Eliot, Lord Mackenzie, W. F.
Marsham, Visct. Sheppard,
Masterman, J. Smith, A.
Meynell, Capt. Smith, rt. hn. T. B. C.
O'Brien, A. S. Stanley, Lord
Patten, J. W. Sutton, hon. H, M.
Peel, rt. hon. Sir R. Tollemache, J.
Peel, J. Trench, Sir F. W.
Plumptre, J. P. Turnor, C.
Pollock, Sir F. Waddington, H. S.
Pringle, A. Welby, G. E.
Pusey, P.
Rose, rt. hon. Sir G. TELLERS.
Round, J. Freemantle, Sir T.
Sanderson, R. Baring, H.

Motion withdrawn.