§ The House having resolved itself into a committee of supply,
§ Sir George Warrenderaddressed the committee on the subject of the supplies for the Navy for the present year. He stated, that a considerable diminution in the naval expenditure had taken place, partly in consequence of the reduction of 1,000 seamen, and partly owing to the diminished price of provisions. This diminution, however, was not intended to affect the exertions which were making in the cause of humanity and of science in this branch of the administration of public affairs. The hon. baronet concluded by moving, "That 22,000 men be employed for the Sea Service, for 13 lunar months, from 1st. Jan. 1821, including 8,000 royal marines."
§ Mr. Creeveysaid, it was his intention to oppose the vote proposed by the hon. baronet, as it was his fixed determination not to vote for a single farthing of the public money, before the estimates of the service for which it was to be employed, were laid upon the table.
§ Sir. G. Warrendersaid, that the hon. member, had mistaken the nature of his motion. It was not at all connected with the general estimates of the navy, which were always in the hands of members at least a fortnight before the resolutions founded on them were moved. The votes proposed in the early part of the session always related to the fleet afloat, and had no connection with either the raising or reducing the existing strength of the navy. The votes which he held in his hand related 343 solely to the fleet afloat. It never was the custom to present any estimates of them. They were made in consequence of an order in council, enabling the king to maintain the fleet afloat; and, unless the hon. member meant to depart from all parliamentary usage from time immemorial, he would not object to his motion.
§ Mr. Creeveysaid, that this having been the practice of the House from time immemorial was the reason of all their distresses. It was time, that they should change their manners. He then moved, that the committee report progress, and ask leave to sit again. In this manner he should treat every resolution proposed in any Committee of Supply in which the estimates of the money were not before the House.
§ Mr. Humestated, the great objections he entertained to the reduction of the naval force of the country, and the augmentation of the military. The increase of the corps of marines to the amount of 8,000 never could obtain his consent at a time when our military establishment was so great as it was. Still less could he countenance the reduction of our whole naval force down to the number of 14,000 seamen only. What means could they employ to man a fleet of any magnitude in case of emergency, if they went on annually decreasing this valuable body of men? It was most injurious to the interests of the navy. He would never consent to vote any money for this service, until he saw a disposition to reduce the useless and extravagant civil establishments. Before he voted any money, he must see if it was intended to reduce the number of commissioners of dock-yards and other place3 where they were equally unnecessary.
§ Sir G. Warrendertrusted the House would not be led away by the opinion of the hon. gentleman on the subject of the increase of marines, when they knew, that it was the opinion of all persons connected with the navy, and he believed of all the gentlemen on the other side, except the hon. member himself, that it was of the greatest advantage to the public service to increase the corps of Royal Marines.
Mr. Bennetwould not enter into the merits of the increase of marines. That would be a good question when the estimates came before the House. But he would not consent to vote a single shil- 344 ling of the public money unless the estimates were placed before him first. It was time, that the attention of the House and the public should be directed to what was going on in committees of supply. It was time that an end should be put to those farces; and in order to expedite that end, he would not consent to a single vote in the dark, if the consequence should be, that the session lasted till October. The country should no longer, with his consent, be pillaged in this manner.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerexpressed his surprise at the course which hon. gentlemen opposite thought fit to take. There scarcely was an instance in which the course of public business was attempted to be obstructed by such means. Let gentlemen refer to the journals for years back, and they would find, that, from time immemorial, the practice of parliament had been, to grant these preliminary notes without the estimates.
Mr. Marryatsaid, that the question appeared to him to be, whether the naval forces of the country at present in actual employment were to be maintained or not. The supply now asked was for men actually in service. According to all former practice, of parliament they were bound to vote for the maintenance of the seamen in actual service.
Mr. Bennetexplained, that he would willingly consent to a vote for the maintenance of those seamen for a month. But it was demanded, in this vote, for a whole year, and it was to that he objected, before the House possessed the means of judging how far it might be expedient or necessary to keep up this force.
§ Sir G. Clerkcould not suppress the surprise which he had felt at the different arguments which had been advanced by those who were adverse to the original motion. The argument of the mover of the amendment had gone principally upon the ground of economy, and the non-production of the navy estimates; but the hon. member for Montrose, so far from proceeding on a similar ground, seemed disposed to complain, that a sufficient number of seamen were not voted and consequently, that a greater expense was not incurred. After the present vote was disposed of, the question would then come before the House as to the sum necessary for the provisions and the wages of that number of men. It would readily occur to them, that from the great 345 diminution in the price of provisions, a considerable reduction of expense would take place in that department.
§ Mr. Humecontended, that no difference existed between his own argument and those of his friends. The hon. gentleman near him had called for the production of the navy estimates; the hon. member for Shrewsbury had done the same, and he (Mr. Hume) had also pursued the same course of argument in wishing to see how far the reduction in the civil establishments corresponded with the one now proposed. When he was told, that the present motion should pass as a matter of course, he would tell the House, that that would be the case, if the supply required was to pay off the expenses of the last year. But the motion was an anticipating measure, and referred to the ensuing year. He contended that our sailors had been neglected. We had ships enough, and marines could easily be procured, but we had not seamen enough even to form the germ of an armament.
Admiral Harveyexpressed his opinion of the great use of a marine force. On that subject he concurred in what had been said by the hon. mover of the resolution, and he believed it to be true, that such was the opinion of most officers in the service, To prepare a proper corps of marines required great care and attention; for it was preposterous to suppose, that a marine could do his duty unless he had previously been accustomed to proper discipline. It would be well for the House to consider, that the navy had now arrived to a great extent, and that a corresponding increase of marine force ought of course to take place.
§ Sir G. Cockburnexpressed his regret, that more professional men were not present. Had they been present the House would be satisfied, that the number of marines voted was not larger than required. It ought to be considered, that sailors were provided by the commercial navy of the country. It was true, that a disinclination existed to serve in the navy when a merchant service was open; but still, when merchant vessels could not be obtained, sailors would readily enter into the navy. Now it had been found, that the service of 1,000 men could be dispensed with, and he, in common with his colleagues, had felt it his duty to recommend a measure by which the public expenditure had been, lessened. If the 346 House should resolve to keep them in the service merely for the sake of keeping them, they would of course come to that determination; but, as their services were useless in the navy, it was certainly the duty of those, under whose department the business came, to recommend their dismissal.
§ Mr. Tremaynewas anxious to take that opportunity, before the estimates were produced, of impressing upon government, the necessity of turning their attention to the civil establishments of the navy, which he thought were capable of great reduction.
§ Sir G. Warrenderwas happy to be able to state, that a considerable reduction was contemplated in the civil establishment. He could not suffer that occasion to pass without again referring to the misapprehension under which the hon. gentleman opposite laboured. He was well aware, that that gentleman had no intention to misrepresent facts, but he could not avoid complaining of his want of accuracy, because the unavoidable inference which would be drawn by the public would be, that the House neglected the interests of the navy. Every one knew, that our armaments were supplied from our commercial navy, and that at no former period was that source so plentiful. It was that reason to which the economy prevalent in that branch of the service was to be attributed. He believed, if any circumstances should occur to require extraordinary exertions, that in a very short time a fleet of 20 sail of the line might be manned chiefly from the source which he had mentioned. The case was different with respect to marines. All the naval officers in the House knew the use of that body of men, and they knew also, that an effective corps was not raised without much difficulty.
§ Mr. Hurstsaid, that the House had scarcely ever come to a vote on the subject, without a regret being expressed, that more marines were not raised. He thought them a most useful and necessary body. They had always distinguished themselves in every war; and he highly approved of the augmentation.
Mr. Forbescomplained of the reductions which had been made of the naval force of the country, and the comparative neglect with which that branch of the 347 service seemed to be treated. For his own part he would rather see a reduction of 5,000 men in the army than 1,000 in the navy. He had reason to know, that the commercial navy of the country was by no means so well supplied with seamen as had been represented that night; and, therefore, greater difficulty than was apprehended might be experienced in manning an armament, if that should become necessary. The seamen of the navy had been thrown ashore at the close of the late war, destitute of every means of subsistence, and had been compelled to stroll in want about the streets, or to banish themselves to America or any other foreign country that would afford them protection and employment.
§ Sir G. Warrendersaid, that so far from the sailors being thrown on the country at the peace, 35,000 of them were pensioned, and l,175 midshipmen had been promoted as a just reward for their services after a long war.
§ Mr. Gladstonewas able to state, as a ship-owner, that in his opinion there was at present no want of seamen. No rise had taken place in the rate of wages, and that he conceived to be the best test that there was no scarcity of sailors. He was decidedly of opinion, that our commercial navy was at present greater than it had been at any former period. The trade to the Brazils had opened a new avenue for commerce, and the private trade to India was greater than it had ever been before.
Dr. Lushingtonthought, that the committee had swerved widely from the question at issue. His hon. friend had objected to the vote on the ground that he had no estimate to direct his judgment, and in the propriety of that objection he fully concurred. The hon. baronet had said, that for many years it had been the practice to vote a sum for the expenses of a certain number of seamen on the word; of a lord of the Admiralty; and, if so, he thought it a practice "more honoured in the breach than the observance." It was certainly advisable, that some better mode should be adopted, and that the representatives of the people should be put in possession of a greater stock of knowledge before they came to a vote. There was another subject connected with the present vote which he could not pass over in silence. It was grievous to reflect, that the government, in the event of a war, would have to man the navy through the medium of impressment—would have 348 to take so large a number of men from their wives and families, and force them into the naval service. Nothing but an overruling necessity could warrant a practice so repugnant to humanity, and so incompatible with liberty. It should not be looked to as an established and constitutional usage; and he thought it the duty of the Admiralty to attempt to devise a plan by which this practice might be abolished, and some other, more humane and constitutional, might be substituted in its stead. He had himself known cases in which seamen returning from the East Indies, after an absence of two years, had been seized and sent off to the West Indies, without being allowed to see their families and settle their affairs. No consideration of money should weigh with a great and generous nation, to induce its acquiescence in such a horrid system. Protection was what the country wanted, in the employment of its navy, or any other warlike force, and any sum of money should be paid for that protection, in procuring men, rather than tolerate impressment. The system was, indeed, so odious to the House of Commons, upon its first proposition, by Sir George Wager, in 1731, that the clause respecting it was rejected. He was persuaded, that any lord of the Admiralty, who should set aside that system, or provide some substitute for it, would acquire immortal honour.
§ Sir. G. Cockburnsaid, that all were agreed as to the evils of impressment, and that it should not be resorted to but under the pressure of an overruling necessity. To reduce that necessity, the Admiralty had done all that was in its power; for, with the assistance of that House, pensions had been granted to 35,000 seamen upon the condition of their return to the service when called upon. But, if more men should be required, and the seamen engaged in the commercial service would not voluntarily enter into our ships of war, they must betaken; for, otherwise, what would become of our fleets? Those fleets were necessary for the protection of commerce, and therefore there was a pretty good understanding between commercial men and the Admiralty upon the subject. With regard to the allegation, that many seamen were seen nearly starving in the streets of London upon the termination of the war, he was convinced it would be more correct to say, that many were seen starving in seamen's jackets; for the fact 349 was, that out of a number received in the ships provided by the Admiralty for the relief of those persons, several were found never to have been in the navy.
Dr. Lushingtondisclaimed the intention of arraigning any set of men for acting upon an old practice. But he hoped, that as we were likely to have many years of peace, that an endeavour would be made to devise some plan for getting rid of a practice so abhorrent to humanity.
§ Mr. Creeveyreplied. He said, that the question before the committee was, to vote 22,000 men, including 8,000 marines, for the service of the current year. Now if that number was voted, it would be necessary to provide food and raiment for them. He therefore wished to do nothing in the dark, and asked for the papers which would explain the necessity of having so many men, and the mode in which the money to be granted would be expended. But, it was said, that this was a novel proceeding, and ought not to meet with the concurrence of the committee. New or old practice, it was one which, as the House of Commons distributed the public money, it ought to put into effect. If the hon. members opposite would not agree to his amendment, he should feel it his duty to divide the committee on every resolution proposed to it relative to the vote of seamen. Strangers were ordered to withdraw. Not less than five divisions took place on the separate resolutions for the vote of seamen; for victualling them; for clothing them; for the wear and tear of the ships, and to supply the necessary ordnance for their use. The number of members who voted on each division, was—For the amendment on each resolution, 11; Against it 41: Majority, 30.
§ The House having resumed,
§ Mr. Creeveysaid, he had remarked on a former occasion, that if a real farce were wanted, recommend him to a committee of supply! He had to inform the Speaker, that during his absence from the chair, the committee had, within the last 20 minutes, voted away sums to the amount of 1,900,000l. Now there were 650 members of that House, trustees of the public money; 55 of whom only had been present during the time in which this money had been granted. There had been five divisions and the majorities by which it was voted amounted to 41, including the ministers. There was not one member who knew the purpose to which 350 the sums voted were to be applied. He himself, although there had been five motions, knew no more than the man in the moon what was the object of any one of them. He had made an effort to know what the money was voted for before it was granted, but he had been overpowered by numbers. It was his intention to take the first opportunity of introducing a measure, which would provide another and a different course of proceeding. If the people of England would look on and see their property disposed of as it was accustomed to be, they deserved any thing that might befal them. He trusted, however, that they would not, and that the table would be deluged with petitions and demands, until such a system was eradicated from the House.
Mr. Bathurstsaid, that he had been at a loss, until that moment, to know upon what ground the hon. member had been occupying the time of the House for the last hour. The plan which he had adopted was not new, for about twenty years ago, two members of that House were in the constant practice of making similar motions.
Mr. Bennetthought it useless for the hon. member to speak when so few members were present, and therefore moved, that the House be counted.
§ The Speakercounted the House and the number of members present being only 26, the House adjourned.