Commons Sitting of 7 May 1821

STEAM ENGINES BILL.
Mr. M. A. Taylor Mr. M. A. Taylor moved the order of the day for going into a Committee on this bill.
Mr. Lyttletonrecommended his hon. friend to postpone this measure for at least another year. If, the plan of consuming the smoke of Steam Engines was a good one, it would find its way without any legislative enactment; if a bad one it ought not to be forced upon the country. Were the measure confined to the metro-
536
polis, he should not object to it; but there were many parts of the country in which it would be extremely injurious. In the south of Staffordshire there were above 2,000 steam engines; and in the neighbouring counties at least 5,000 more. Parliament ought to hesitate before they imposed a compulsory expense and inconvenience on so many persons. If his hon. friend should persist in the measure, he would propose that it should not extend to steam engines employed in smelting ores or minerals.
Mr. J. Smithwas surprised at the objections which had been made by his hon. friend. He seemed to forget the injury which the poorer classes suffered from the existence of the steam engines in their present state. He could name a class of poor persons in London who so suffered: he meant the humble class who got their livelihood by washing. If a steam engine was established in the neighbourhood of the residence of these poor people, their occupation was destroyed altogether.
Mr. C. Calvertsaid, he would support the bill. He himself had a large steam-engine, and he used the apparatus for consuming smoke, which had succeeded as well as any machinery could be expected to do. By the attention of one man, a large column of smoke could be consumed in a minute. In his way to the House a printed paper on the subject of the bill, had been put into his hands, which mentioned that the apparatus used by Messrs. Barclay and Perkins had completely failed. Now this was the reverse of the fact. He then read a letter from Mr. Perkins, which stated that the apparatus had entirely succeeded.
Mr. D. Gilbert,although he thought the plan might be adopted with advantage in the metropolis, and in large towns, was averse to its compulsory extension to the manufacturing districts.
Mr. Buxtonregretted that he was under the necessity of opposing the bill. The plan had been tried in many instances and had completely failed. Nothing could be more fallacious than such experiments. It had succeeded in Messrs. Barclay's brewery, but with a very great additional consumption of fuel. But with an engine constituted as his (Mr. Buxton's) was, it was quite impossible to carry it into effect. He hoped his hon. friend would postpone the bill for a year or two. If not, he would move as an amendment, that the bill be committed upon this day six months.
Colonel Woodsaid, that representing as he did a county where manufactures were carried on by steam-engines, he felt it his duty to oppose the proceeding any further with the bill in its present shape.
Mr. Maberlytrusted the hon. mover would postpone the consideration of the bill, as in its present shape it went to compel the trying of experiments. The courts of law would have to try the merit of every experiment suggested by every projector. He thought the hon. mover was bound to show that the bill could be carried into effect.
Mr. Curwensupported the bill. He was convinced, from the experiments he had made, that the proposed alteration would cause an ultimate saving.
Mr. M. A. Taylorsaid, that if the House considered the present state of the law, no impartial man would hesitate in agreeing to the bill. Every steam-engine might now be prosecuted as a nuisance, if it affected the health, comfort or property of those in whose neighbourhood it was situated. In Cornwall and other places, steam engines were not prosecuted, because those who suffered from them had not chosen to prosecute, and because they were generally under the protection of the proprietors of the engines. But the engines had been introduced into villages to the great detriment of property, and the sufferers had not the ability to prosecute. All that the bill proposed was, to enable the court to reimburse the prosecutor, where the defendant was refractory, or to redress such nuisance as really existed where the prosecutor was unreasonable. It would put it in the power of the court to do what at present was done by a side wind. As to restricting it to the metropolis, he did not see why gentlemen in villages should not be relieved as well as the inhabitants of the metropolis. Why should a clergyman who kept a school in a village be smoked out. Why should Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, be annoyed by nuisances for the sake of Cornish miners. If hon. members would read the reports of the two committees who had considered the subject, they would be satisfied. He could produce the testimonials of persons who had found the plan successful at little expense. The hon. gentleman (Mr. Buxton) must have employed a very clumsy engineer.
General Gascoyneread a letter from the proprietors of a large establishment at Liverpool, stating that the new plan in-
538
creased not only the smoke, but the quantity of requisite fuel.
Mr. Philipshoped the bill would be postponed until another year. The plan required more care than could be usually applied. This was thought a new invention; but Mr. Watt had obtained a patent in 1785 for the consumption of smoke. The public were much indebted to the hon. mover for his exertions, but he felt it his duty to support the amendment.
Mr. Marryatsaid, that his attention had been called to the effect of the plan in the metropolis and other places, and he had found it successful. No man had a right to annoy or poison his neighbours.
Mr. Alderman Woodwas of opinion, that Mr. Parkes's plan of consuming smoke was highly beneficial, but he hoped that the clauses of the bill would not extend to Cornwall, as it would there produce the most injurious effects.
The House divided: For the original motion, 83. For the Amendment, 29. The House accordingly went into the committee.

CONTINENTAL AFFAIRS—MARCH OF THE RUSSIAN ARMY.
The Marquis of Londonderrysaid, that in rising to move the order of the day, for going into a committee of supply, he wished to advert to a question which had been put to him two days ago, and to which he had not at that time been able to give any other than an argumentative reply. The question to which he alluded was this—" Were the Russian troops continuing their march towards the south of Europe or not?" He had then stated, in answer to the question, that those troops had been put in march under special circumstances, and that, though he was not able to say that their march had been suspended, he felt himself entitled to observe, that the change of circumstances in Piedmont, where events had rendered it necessary to call in the assistance of an Austrian army, might produce a change in the movements of those troops. He could now state to the House from official information, that the Russian army would, not pass its own boundaries. In giving this information, he felt it to be due, not only to the House and to the country, but to the two great powers which had been most improperly, most illiberally, and most unjustly treated in that House—for it was sporting with them most unfairly

539
when hon. gentlemen got up in their places, without any knowledge of the facts on which they were speaking, to charge those illustrious individuals in whose hands the destinies of Europe were placed, with a design of overrunning it, for purposes which were no less tyrannical in themselves than injurious to the interests of the world; he felt it due, he repeated, to those great powers to state, that they had never had any such object in contemplation. He had on a former occasion, in the face of the House, entered his protest against the imputation that they were actuated by a spirit of aggrandizement, because his experience of their characters convinced him that the charge was wholly unfounded. He would take upon himself to affirm, that no information had come to his knowledge which could lead him to suppose that they were actuated by any sinister motives or selfish purposes in the policy which they had pursued towards Naples. This declaration he had made on a former evening, and what he had since learned had not caused him to alter his opinion. He had formerly stated his opinion, that that army would be arrested on its march. He could now state the circumstances under which it had been so arrested. The fact was, that in the present state of the king of Sardinia's dominions, a considerable part of his army having been disbanded in consequence of its late insurrectionary movement, it was only natural for that sovereign to apply to the allied powers for troops to occupy his dominions. That application had been made in the first instance to the emperor of Austria, through the medium of count Bubna. The emperor of Austria replied, that however anxious he might be to attend to that application, he was still more anxious to avoid all grounds for a charge of being desirous to aggrandize himself in Italy, at the expense of his neighbours, contrary to the faith of treaties which he had most religiously observed. He said, however, that he would apply to the emperor of Russia to allow a limited corps of his army, amounting to 25,000 or 30,000 men—to come down into the south of Europe, to execute the purposes which he had himself been requested to execute. The emperor of Russia had said, in the same spirit with the emperor of Austria, that he was also open to the same charge of aggrandizement, and he earnestly begged that every step might be taken to prevent any idea of such a nature being
540
attached to any movement of his troops. This statement would completely repel one practical notion which he had endeavoured to negative by inference—namely, that the Russian army was put in motion with a view to ulterior motions as respected Spain. The fact was, that such a charge against the allied powers was as visionary a charge as any that had ever been brought forward. He trusted that the information which he had given would be satisfactory both to the House and to the country.
Lord Miltonobserved, that the House and the country would feel satisfaction at the explanation which the noble lord had given upon a subject so important. He could not, however, think that hon. gentlemen were, in consequence of it, to be restrained from expressing their opinions upon the conduct of the continental powers. Allowing that both Russia and Austria were free from any spirit of territorial aggrandizement, still it was evident that they were actuated by a spirit of aggrandizement scarcely less injurious—he meant that of making the executive government too strong for the liberties of the people. He did not know whether the fact of one sovereign applying to another sovereign for a body of troops to keep down the discontents of his own people, was not a precedent as dangerous to the liberties of nations, as the fact of the Stuarts taking money from Louis 14th, to put down the rising spirit of England, would, if long continued, have been to the liberties of England. When he recollected the conduct of the allied sovereigns in general since the conclusion of the war, and especially when he recollected the conduct of the king of Prussia who had made more promises to give a constitution to his subjects than any other monarch, and who had nevertheless broken them all, he thought it rather too much for any member to say, that they ought not to look with an eye of jealousy at the designs entertained by these sovereigns.
Mr. Warrethanked God that there was yet one corner of Europe in which the conduct of the allied sovereigns could be freely discussed. He implored the House not to look upon the stoppage of the Russian army in any other light than as an abstinence from crime and violence.
The Marquis of Londonderryshortly stated the principles on which he had written the circular, with regard to the Neapolitan government, and distinguished

541
the case of Naples from that of Piedmont. Against the insurgents in the latter state, he maintained that Austria had an undoubted right to march, as they had gone so far as to declare war against Austria. With regard to the desire of aggrandizement, with which the emperor of Russia had been charged on a former evening, he would say this, that though he would not make himself answerable for the conduct of any individual, he believed, from his own knowledge of the character of the emperor of Russia, that that illustrious personage was too deeply impressed with a true sense of his own glory and his real policy, to seek for any further aggrandizement either on the side of Turkey or of Spain.
Mr. Denmanwas surprised that the noble marquis should have charged hon. gentlemen with injustice and illiberality, when those gentlemen were absent who had taken part in the debate of Friday last. He himself thought that those charges were perfectly untenable. The House had seen the conduct of the allied powers towards Naples; they had seen the emperor of Russia denouncing the revolution in Spain as an insurrection, at the very moment that it was completed; and they had seen his forces moving in the direction of Spain at the very moment that the forces of the emperor of Austria were moving in the direction of Naples. Under such circumstances, suspicion would have been impossible, even if they had known nothing of the partition of Saxony, the transfer of Norway, and the abandonment of Genoa. If the noble marquis had committed this country by approving of such enormous atrocities, it became doubly incumbent upon members of that House to denounce the continuance of so abominable a system.
The Marquis of Londonderrysaid, it was not his fault if the hon. members in question were not in their places: probably they had been kept away by the smoke of the bill of the hon. member opposite.

NAVY ESTIMATES.
On the motion, that the House should resolve itself into a committee of supply to consider further of the Navy Estimates,
Mr. Humerose to put a question to the hon. baronet, relative to the works in the dock-yards, particularly Sheerness. He confessed that he entertained considerable doubts both as to the necessity and the expediency of carrying them on. He
542
wished to know whether the hon. baronet would have any objection to postpone the vote regarding them until the correspondence between the navy and the ordnance board on the subject was laid before the House, or until a committee of the House had examined into it. After reading an extract from the 3rd report of the finance committee, relative to the public works, the hon. member proceeded to detail the sums of money which had been expended on those at Sheerness. The estimates for completing the whole of them in 1814 was 824,992 l. In 1818 it was stated that 433,800 l. was wanting to complete them, though large sums had annually been paid for that purpose. In the estimates of 1821, though 1,147,000 l. had been voted for the works at Sheerness, it was stated that a further sum of 955,421 l. was wanted to finish these improvements. He asked whether it was proper, in the present state of the country, to proceed to a committee of the whole House in order to vote these sums and much larger, without previous information. He wished to know, therefore, whether there was any objection to postpone the vote until a select committee had inquired into the subject.
Sir G. Warrendersaid, that the sum now required was not for the same works as were provided for last year, although 30,000 l. was to be devoted to the repair of the old yard at Sheerness. He had every reason to believe that the new works, that had for five years been proceeding, would be completed by the vote he was about to propose.
Mr. Humesaid, that before the House went into the committee of supply, he should propose a resolution. The House had before it three different estimates for completing and repairing naval works without any information regarding their necessity. In times like these it was fit to get at that information. The complaint against him and his hon. friends had hitherto been, that, excepting as to the army, they had only sought to save trifling sums; but now they were called upon to consider estimates of many millions: independently of the sums already voted by parliament, no less than 1,697,545 l. was required to complete the public works already begun. There were besides among them a great number of, uncertain amounts for undertakings at Kingston in Canada, in Jamaica, and at Trincomalee, which ought to be reduced to something like certainty. It ought not

543
to be forgotten that 3,568,501 l. had been already voted for these works; so that when finished they would cost the country 5,266,046 l. He begged to know, then, if it was not high time to stop in this lavish and unaccounted for expenditure, until a committee, not formed of men in office, but fairly chosen from both sides, had reported that it was necessary that it should be continued. Although the works at Sheerness had been for some time commenced, he had great doubt as to the policy and propriety of completing them; for the introduction of steam vessels had enabled government to tow the largest ships of war down to Chatham. He had the authority of men of experience and science for this opinion. The hon. gentleman then moved the following resolution:—"That the sum of 1,147,000 l. has been voted for the improvements in the Dockyard at Sheerness, in the last 10 years, from 1811 to 1820, both inclusive:—That the amount of the estimates for completing these works was 824,992 l. in 1814, and 433,800 l. in 1818; and although the large sum of 1,147,000 l. has been expended, a further sum of 955,421 l. is stated as necessary to complete the improvements in that yard, and which will make the total charge for one dock yard 2,102,421 l:— That, therefore, under such varying and uncertain estimates, it is expedient that a committee of this House should be appointed to inquire into the past expenditure and future estimates of all works in Dock-yards."
Sir G. Cockburnsaid, that if the works at Sheerness were not proceeded with, all that had been done would be lost by the encroachment of the sea. After the defence was completed, it was resolved not to continue the works until the whole had been proved. He was certainly adverse to delay.
Sir J. Yorkewould like to hear the names of some of the scientific and experienced persons who had informed the hon. member that the works at Sheerness were of no use since the introduction of steam boats. At Chatham the water was so shoal that ships of war sometimes grounded at their moorings; whereas at Sheerness there was a depth of 52 feet at low water. Since the project regarding Northfleet had been abandoned, government had wisely thought fit to restore and improve Sheerness.
Sir I. Coffinwas sure that if the hon. member inspected the works at Sheerness,
544
he would see the necessity of completing them. The question was not whether Sheerness was or was not the best port, but whether the sums already expended should be rendered useless by delay.
Mr. Bennetobserved, that his hon. friend did not ask the House to stop the supplies: he merely said, we have been so often deceived, that we ought not to vote more money without previous information. If the former plan had failed, it was by no means improbable that the plan now proposed would also fail. If the House went honestly to work, the truth would be extracted in a committee. Several sums were asked without any estimate at all. No proposition was more fair than that of his hon. friend. He merely asked them to look before they leaped.
Mr. Humere-stated that his object was inquiry, and not to obstruct any important public works. He was ready to vote 50,000 l. on account, during the two or three weeks that the inquiry might occupy.
The House divided: For going into a Committee, 82; For Mr. Hume's Amendment, 27.

List of the Minority.

Allan, J.

Jervoise, G.

Bernal, R.

Langston, J.

Benyon, B.

Monck, S.

Bury, lord

Milton, lord

Bright, H.

Maxwell, W.

Creevey, T.

Martin, J.

Crespigny, sir W.

Newport, sir J.

Crompton, J.

Ricardo, D.

Davies, col.

Warre, J.

Denman, T.

Wood, alderman

Grattan, H.

Wyvil, W.

Graham, sir C.

Williams, W.

Griffiths, R.

TELLERS.

Gordon, R.

Bennet, hon. H. G.

Harbord, hon. C.

Hume, J.

Hurst, R.

The House then resolved itself into a committee of supply. On the resolution, "That 129,395 l. 17 s. 4d. be granted for Wages to the Officers, Ship-keepers, and Men, of Vessels in ordinary,"
Mr. Humesaid, that a large expenditure was of late years annually incurred for royal yachts. He was aware that they ought to be fitted up in a superior manner for the reception of royalty; but still he was at a loss to see what necessity there was for keeping up annually some of the officers; for instance, there was a sum of 1,300 l. a year for surgeons. He understood that a surgeon was regularly kept

545
up for each yacht, when it was well known that, for the few weeks the yachts were at sea, it would be easy to get a surgeon from some of the depots. A saving of 1,000 l. a year might in this manner alone be saved.
Sir G. Cockburnsaid, that when the sovereign of Great Britain went to sea, it was not to be expected that he would abandon that state which was inseparable from his dignity. He could, however, assure the committee, that no unsuitable expense was occurred in fitting up the yachts. It was true that in the establishment of surgeons, the yachts were placed on the same footing as sea-going ships; and he thought there ought to be no cavil upon that, when it was considered that the appointment was reserved for old surgeons who deserved well of their country. The difference, too, between their half and full pay was so trifling, as to render the saving hardly worth consideration, when the objects of it were kept in view.
Mr. Humesaid, that he had already disclaimed any wish to limit the proper expenditure for fitting up the yachts in a suitable manner for the reception of his majesty, but he certainly objected to this annual full pay for a few weeks' service.
On the resolution, "That 970,400 l. be granted for Half-pay to Officers,"
Mr. Bennetcalled the attention of the committee to the situation of two unfortunate ladies, the wives of insane officers, who were plunged into deep distress, in consequence of the regulations adopted by the Board of Admiralty. They had for many years enjoyed the half-pay of their husbands, which had, however, been suddenly reduced, and they were thus placed in a situation of comparative penury. He could see no reason why the family of an individual, who had been deprived, of his senses while serving his country, should be considered less deserving of support than the relatives of the man who had lost a limb in her defence.
Sir G. Cockburnsaid, that persons suffering under the unhappy malady, were confined in a lunatic establishment supported by government at considerable expense. If lunatic officers had no family, government received their pay. If they had a family, then their friends might keep them altogether, and receive their full-pay, or receive half-pay, leaving them at the Lunatic Asylum. The two ladies
546
in question preferred leaving their husbands at the asylum. The government could, consistently with the rule that had been long acted on, allow them to receive only their half-pay.
Mr. F. Buxtonsaid, he was acquainted with instances in which the regulation adverted to had produced the utmost misery. He did not think the hon. member had, exactly met the point which his hon. friend had pressed upon the consideration of the committee. The case his hon. friend put was this;—"If an officer receives a wound in. battle, no deduction is made from his half-pay; why then should a deduction be made in the case of a man who, in the course of service, is visited by insanity?" In fact, the wound received by the officers to whom allusion had been made—the mental wound—one of them having been on active service at the time he was seized by the malady with which he was afflicted—was the most severe of all human misfortunes. He had abstained from introducing the subject that night, because he meant to move for a committee in order to have it thoroughly investigated.
Mr. Crokersaid, that the half-pay could only have been received by these ladies for so long a period, through some irregularity. There was this legal difficulty, which was entitled to consideration, namely, that if these officers were to recover, they might maintain an action at law against the treasurer of the navy, for the whole of the half-pay received without their authority, during the time of their insanity. The board of admiralty had, however, considered such insane officers to be dead in law, and had exercised a charitable, though not perhaps a strictly legal discretion, in granting a moiety of the half-pay to the unauthorized representatives of officers in that situation. The moral effect of conceding to the principle contended for by the hon. gentleman was also to be considered; for it would in fact be giving a premium to the relatives of persons in that unhappy situation to get rid of them.
Mr. Bennetsaid, the question he had asked was, whether persons who, like the relatives of the unfortunate ladies who had written him a statement of their case, had lost their reason in the service of their country, ought not to be placed on the footing of officers who had lost their limbs. The hon. gentleman had answered him by a legal quibble, as to whether a success-

547
ful action might not be maintained against the treasurer of the navy, and such stuff as that. Now, he would not look to legal quibbles, but would ask, whether or not it was fitting that these unfortunate ladies should be reduced to a state of pauperism? Persons in the situation of these ladies were not in circumstances to afford the expense of sending their relatives to places of private confinement; and the consequence would be, that they must send them to the parish workhouse, where the House was aware, from the evidence given before their own committee, of the cruel treatment which lunatics were in the habit of receiving.
Mr. Crokermaintained, that he had only stated the general rule upon which the conduct of the board of admiralty was founded. If officers became insane in consequence of wounds received in battle, it was evident that they were as much entitled to pensions as if they had lost a limb in the service. It was but a few days ago, that, in consequence of an application made on behalf of an officer who had become insane and paralytic, he (Mr. C.) had examined the log-books for thirty years back, to see whether he could not find some wound which would justify the grant of a pension. He felt it necessary to state, in his own vindication, that it was mainly owing to the exertions of so humble an individual as himself, that an asylum for insane officers had been established. He had himself laid before the first lord the information which had been collected on this subject before a committee of that House seven or eight years ago, and it was in consequence of his personal exertions that this asylum was established. He stated this for the purpose of showing the looseness with which the hon. gentleman was in the habit of shooting off his arrows.
Mr. Humesaid, he had reason to know that these unfortunate ladies, who had been in the receipt of their pension for 18 years, had been plunged into the deepest distress in consequence of this small pittance of 60 l. having been stopped. If ever there was a case in which the government was called upon to exercise a humane discretion, though in breach of an existing regulation, it was the present.
On the resolution, "That 1,094,589 l. be granted for the building, re-building, and repairs of Ships of War, in his Majesty's and the Merchants' Yards, over and above what is proposed to be done
548
upon the heads of Wear and Tear and Ordinary, for the year 1821,"
Sir J. Yorkethought this the most surprising proposition of any, considering that the wages of the artificers had been reduced one-fifth, and that the consumption of timber must necessarily be much diminished.
Sir T. B. Martinobserved, that as the Admiralty had contracted for a supply of timber up to the next year, no reduction could be made in the estimate until that period had expired.
Mr. Humereferred to the report of a committee, to show that the manufacture of ships had been carried much further than the circumstances required, and maintained that we were now building more ships than we should be able to man, if we were to go to war to-morrow. Under these circumstances, he would move that the estimate be reduced to 794,580 l.
Sir G. Cockburnadmitted, that if all our ships were now in good order we should want no more; but that was not the case; the ships now building would last almost for ever; for by lying a long while in ordinary, they would acquire a firmness which nothing else would give them.
Sir J. Yorkethought that half a million might be saved, avid doubted much the policy of continuing to build ships at Bombay.
Mr. Warrethought that though great sacrifices ought to be made to preserve the ascendancy of the British navy, its security would not be impaired by attending to the diminished scale of expense which was now proposed.
Mr. Humewithdrew his amendment, on the ground that if carried it would cause the violation of certain contracts, which government had entered into; but he did so only with the understanding, that the reduction proposed should take place after the fulfilment of the contracts.
On the resolution, "That 424,648 l. be granted, for defraying the expenses of improvement in the dock yards,"
Mr. Humeobjected to so large a grant for this purpose, without inquiry, and stated that this was only to be part payment of a sum of two millions, 1,600,000 l. of which was still to be demanded for the naval works. He thought a committee ought to be appointed to examine these charges; and concluded by moving, as an amendment, that the sum proposed be reduced to 212,324 l., or one-half.
Lord Miltonsaid, he was disposed to vote against the whole sum, if government refused inquiry.
Mr. Warreobjected to the expense of the new tunnel at Chatham as unnecessary and excessively expensive.
Sir G. Warrenderexplained, that the tunnel was intended to drain the whole dock-yard; but the hon. gentleman seemed to confound it with the saw-mills, which was a work already finished.
After a short conversation, the committee divided: For the original vote, 107; For the Amendment, 30.

List of the Minority.

Bernal, R.

Martin, J.

Bennet, hon. G.

Milbank, R.

Benyon, B.

Robarts, W. A.

Bury, lord

Roberts, col.

Brougham, H.

Rice, S.

Calvert, C.

Ricardo, D.

Carter, T.

Rickford, W.

Crompton, S,

Russell, lord J.

Denman, T.

Smith, J.

Denison, J.

Smith, hon. J.

Gordon, R.

Whitbread, S.

Hume, J.

Wyvil, M.

Hobhouse, J. C.

Wilson, Thos.

Harbord, hon. H.

TELLER.

Monk, J. B.

Milton, lord

Maxwell, J.

The chairman reported progress, asked leave to sit again.