HC Deb 05 April 1830 vol 23 cc1286-7
Mr. Pendarvis

presented a Petition from Cirencester, complaining of Distress, and praying for a Repeal of the Malt-tax. The hon. Member said, he would take that opportunity of calling the attention of the Members of the Government to the saving which might be effected in the Packet-service, with advantage to the country. He was induced to notice this in consequence of a letter addressed to him in a provincial paper, wherein the difference of expense was stated at 41,000l. He would place the letter in the hands of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He could not help observing, in the vessels employed in that service, the ten-gun brigs, which were not calculated for scudding, and were generally considered dangerous vessels, that two or three of them have been lost with their whole crews. He did not find fault with the packets being under the Admiralty, but if the statement he had seen was correct, he thought it would be more to the advantage of the country to employ hired packets, commanded by Lieutenants of the Navy, than the more expensive and dangerous vessels, ten-gun brigs. The difference of expense, amounting on the whole to 41,000l., arose in this way. It would be remembered, that soon after the war, the Packet-service was transferred from the Post-office to the Admiralty, and then it was, that ten-gun brigs were substituted for hired packets. The thirty-three hired packets before that period cost, at 1,977l. 10s. each, 65,257l. 10s. per year, while the expense of the present class of vessels, exclusive of the first cost of the brigs, (8,000l. each) but including the expense of a guardship, was 106,975l. making an increase, by the present plan, of upwards of 41,000l. This was a subject that he thought well deserving of the attention of a Government desirous to husband the resources of the country.

Forward to