Commons Sitting of 28 March 1831

MINUTES.
The Committee appointed to try the validity of the Election of the Member for the Forfar district of Burghs reported, that the Lord Advocate was not duly elected, and that Mr. Ogilvie was.—Return amended. Mr. OGILVIE took the Oaths and his Seat.
The Committee upon the Liverpool Election Petition reported, that W. Ewart, Esq. was not duly elected at the last election of a Burgess to serve in Parliament for the Town and Borough of Liverpool, and that the said Election was null and void. The Committee further reported, "That it appeared to the Committee that gross bribery and treating had prevailed during the last election for the Borough of Liverpool."
A new Writ was ordered for Winchilsea, in the room of the Hon. HENRY DUNDAS, who had accepted the Chiltern Hundreds.
Bills read a second time. The Sea Apprentices Settlement, and the Annual Indemnity. The Land-Tax Double Assessment Amendment, read a first time.
Returns ordered. On the Motion of Mr. GUEST, of all Dividends received upon Rentes placed in deposit with the British and French Commissioners under the Convention, No. 7, of 20th November, 1815, and with the British Commissioners under the Convention of 25th April, 1818; stating the dates of such receipts, and an account of all Rentes purchased with such dividends, from the period at which the return to the House of Commons, dated June 29th, 1821 (No. 728) ends, down to 26th July, 1826; also, of all sums of Money remitted by such Commissioners to England during the same period, and the rates of exchange at which, and the times when, such remittances were made, and an account of all sums invested in British public securities during that period, with the dates of such investments, the rates at which the same are invested, and all dividends received thereon:—On the Motion of Sir MATTHEW WHITE RIDLEY, of the number of Merchant Seamen who are now in Greenwich Hospital; distinguishing those that have served, and those that have not served in his Majesty's Navy; of the number of Children of Merchant-Seamen in the School at Greenwich Hospital:—On the Motion of Lord KILLEEN, of all Monies expended by the Commissioners of Woods, Forests, and Land Revenues, out of the annual rents or ordinary income of the Crown Land Revenues for redemption of Land-tax, charged on the possessions of the Crown, from the time the whole capital stock, appropriated for redemption of land-tax was disposed of for other purposes, according to Act 5th Geo. IV., c. 48, down to the time of making the return; of the amount of Land-tax redeemed on the site of Carlton House and Gardens, since their relinquishment by his late Majesty, for the purpose of granting building leases thereon, and of the rents in lieu of land-tax reserved from, or otherwise claimed or proposed
1086
to be charged by the Commissioners upon the tenants who have built, or may build, on that site; shewing also, how much of the amount of land-tax redeemed is charged, or proposed to be charged, on the parts not intended to be let for building:—On the Motion of Sir ROBERT INGLIS, shewing the amount of Monies which would have been applicable to his Majesty's Civil Government in England, if the hereditary and temporary revenues of the Crown, enjoyed by his Majesty King George 2nd, had been enjoyed by his Majesty King George 3rd, from 25th October, 1760, to 29th January, 1820; and by his Majesty King George 4th, from 29th January, 1820, to 26th June, 1830; distinguishing each year, and distinguishing also, the hereditary and temporary revenues of the Crown respectively; shewing also, first, the amount of the annuity received by their late Majesties in lieu of those revenues; secondly, the amount of Monies granted by Parliament for the discharge of the Civil List Debt, during the same period; and, thirdly, the difference to the public upon the balance of the said account, so far as the same can be ascertained i such account being in reference to the account marked 'Appendix C.' to the Report of the Select Committee upon the Civil List, ordered by the House of Commons to be printed, 16th June, 1815, No. 401; and also, in reference to No. 18 of [III.] Civil List, ordered by the House of Commons to be printed, 12th November, 1830, No. 22.)
Petitions presented For the Abolition of Slavery, by Mr. A'COURT, from Knareaborough:—By Sir F. BLARE, from Baptists at Arnwood, and twenty-five other bodies of Dissenters:—By Lord MORPETH, seventy-six, from different places in Yorkshire:—By Lord STANLEY, 160, from different places in Lancashire:—By Mr. HUMS, seventy-eight, chiefly from Middlesex, and some from Scotland. Against the Register of Deeds Bill, by Mr. A'COURT, from Southwell:—By Sir M. W. RIDLEY, from Solicitors at Newcastle and Gateshead, and from the Chamber of Commerce, Newcastle. For Reform, by Mr. FARRAND, (and praying that the East-Riding of Yorkshire might be considered):—By Mr. A. DUNCOMBE, from the Corporation of East Retfotd:—By Lord STANLEY, from various places in Lancashire:—By Mr. HUME, from the Bath Political Association:—By Mr. HOBHOUSE, from St. James and St. John's the Evangelist, Westminster:—By Sir J. SEBRIGHT, from the County of Hertford. Against Reform, by Sir R. INGLIS, from the western parts of London:—By Mr. MALCOLM, from Boston:—By Mr. ORD, from Morpeth. Against the Tax on Cotton Wool, by Sir W. RAE, from Cotton Manufacturers of Glasgow:—By Lord STANLEY, from Bury, Lancashire. By Lord KILLEEN, from Hacketstown, against Grants to the Kildare-street Society; from Navan, complaining of Distress, and for the Repeal of the Subletting Act:—By Mr. GRATTAN, a similar Petition, from Bray. By Mr. DENISON, from Market Gardeners at Battersea, to be Exempted from the Metropolis Police Act; from St. Mary's, Newington, for the Repeal of the Stamp Duties, and for a Repeal of the Assessed Taxes; and from Occupiers of Land in Stoke next Guildford, for a Commutation of Tithes. For the Repeal of the Malt Duty, by Sir JOHN OWEN, from Pembroke. Against the Liability of Landlords' Bill, by Mr. GUEST, from Merthyr Tidvil. Against the Abolition of the Coal Meters Establishment, Dublin, by Mr. SHAW, from Dublin:—By Mr. G. DAWSON, from the Corporation of Dublin, and from the Coal Meters of Dublin. By Sir M. S. STEWART, from Planters and Merchants at Glasgow, connected with the West Indies, praying for Compensation; and from the Procurators at Greenock, for the Repeal of the Duties on Certificates. By Mr. COOPER, from Sligo, for the Repeal of the Acts which restrict the circulation of Small Notes. By Mr. P. H. HOWARD, from Helensburgh, against the proposed Tax on Steam Boats. By Sir M. W. RIDLEY, from the Merchant-Seamen of Newcastle, against the Contribution to Greenwich Hospital. By Mr. WESTERN, from St. Paul's, Walden, for Reform, Commutation of Tithes, and the Repeal of the Assessed Taxes. By Sir J. BOURKE, from Barna, for an Alteration of the Galway Franchise. By Mr. S. RICE, from Skibbereen, for equalizing the Duties on East and West-India Sugar. By Mr. SYKES, from Cottingham, complaining of Distress.

REFORM—PETITIONS.
Sir W. Raepresented Petitions from the Fife district of Burghs, complaining of being deprived of the privilege of voting for Representatives in Parliament by the Reform Bill. The hon. and learned Member stated, that the population of the district was 6,000, and these petitioners had had the right of returning Members to Parliament ever since the Revolution. He concurred also in their view that they ought not to be disfranchised, and he hoped the Lord Advocate would take their case into consideration.
Colonel Daviesasked how many electors the district contained?
Sir G. Warrendersaid, there were at least 100 electors, who were selected from a larger body of Burgesses. The population amounted to 6,000. He was opposed to all measures of disfranchisement such as were involved in the Reform Bill.
Mr. H. Drummondsaid, these were not the petitions of close corporations, but of the inhabitants generally, who disapproved of the measures of disfranchisement.
Mr. S. Wortleydeclared his opinion, that the question of the Representation of Scotland rested on different grounds from the Representation of England and Ireland. He would support the Second Reading of the Scotch Reform Bill.
Colonel Lindsaywas opposed to the present plan of Reform. The people of Scotland were happy and contented, and he was of opinion that there was no necessity for an experiment to be made with a new Constitution.
Mr. Kennedysaid, the disfranchisement was not unprecedented, and, in confirmation of the statement, referred to the Scotch boroughs, which were debarred of the right of returning Members at the period of the Union with England.
Mr. Monteithdeclared, that a great mass of the landed proprietors and inhabitants of the principal towns of Scotland was decidedly opposed to the measure.
Mr. F. G. Howardobjected to the principle of disfranchisement which ran through the Bill; but was ready to admit that some Reform was necessary for Scotland.
Sir C. Forbessaid, it was a little inconvenient that the Lord Advocate should not be in his place during a discussion like the present. Not that he regretted the cause of the learned Lord's absence, however, for he thought the Lord Advocate had been very properly excluded by the Committee. But he supposed the learned Lord would
1088
succeed in getting in for some convenient little borough, such as Windsor or Milborne Port, previous to the Second Reading of the Bill. It was very well for Ministers to declaim against boroughs, but they were occasionally found rather necessary.
The Attorney Generalsaid, he hoped the learned Lord would shortly be in the House, and, till then, it might be better to postpone any discussion on the Scotch Reform Bill.
Lord Morpethcalled the attention of the House to an important petition on the subject of Parliamentary Reform, from the freeholders and inhabitants of the county of York, assembled at a county meeting, convened by the High Sheriff, in pursuance of a requisition to that purpose. The petition was signed on behalf of the meeting by a person deputed to preside over it by the Sheriff, who was prevented by illness from attending in person. The noble Lord, after referring to the numerous and important interests existing in the great county of which he had the honour to be one of the Representatives, observed, that no individual connected with one of those great interests had come forward to interrupt the unanimity of the meeting on the subject of the measure of Reform. The petition expressed the opinion of the meeting that the proposed measure for the amendment of the Representation would establish our legislative power on such a basis as would be calculated to secure the confidence of the nation, and that a Parliament so formed would be able to legislate fearlessly for all the interests of this mighty empire. In saying thus much he should have sufficiently discharged his duty, and should not have added another word in presenting the petition, had it not been for an opinion which fell from the hon. and learned member for Weymouth, in his speech on the Reform Bill that day week. The hon. and learned Gentleman, with great courtesy and infinite tenderness and consideration towards the Members for Yorkshire, was pleased to observe, that if the tri-partite division of the county were adopted (as proposed by the Bill), the members for York would no longer appear invested with the same weight and importance as at present. Now, professing himself, as he did most sincerely, deeply grateful to the general body of his constituents, he was content to submit to any personal diminution of importance which the change might occasion,—a course that he

1089
would be ashamed not to adopt amidst the examples of noble sacrifices in relation to the question of Reform by which he was surrounded,—examples presented by individuals connected with him by near ties of blood, as well as by other distinguished persons. The cases of Knaresborough and Horsham would not easily be forgotten; and it was pleasing to see virtuous examples offered, not only by our loftiest Dukes, but also by our poorest freemen. If Gentlemen wished to know whether the county of York resented the projected invasion of its territorial integrity, he could only say, that a feeling of approbation more general and complete had never attended any measure than that with which the present plan was received in Yorkshire, where it had been termed the great Charter of the fourth William. In proof of this feeling he referred to petitions, which he had already presented, from various places in the county, with from 50,000 to 60,000 signatures attached to them, and also to the present petition.
Mr. W. Duncombewould not follow the example of the noble Lord, who had turned his back on the Speaker, and addressed himself directly to another part of the House, which probably had peculiar attractions for the noble Lord. [An allusion to Lord Morpeth having turned his face towards the strangers' gallery during the greater part of his speech]. He had been assured, upon authority in which he placed the utmost confidence, that the meeting to which the noble Lord referred was a decided failure; in fact, that a thinner county meeting was never known to have occurred in the Castle-yard of York within the memory of man. He did not agree with the noble Lord as to the supposed complete unanimity of that county in relation to the subject of Reform. He admitted that there was a considerable feeling in favour of the Bill, but he also maintained, that a strong opposition to it prevailed in various parts of the county. It was not surprising, that a plan which gave two Members to each of the three ridings, and Representatives to several of the large towns, should be acceptable to many, but he denied that the measure had afforded undivided satisfaction. One objection to the Bill was, that it made the Representation that of one class only. The hon. Member quoted from a newspaper, in the political views of which he said he did not concur, to show, that at the commencement the meeting did not
1090
exceed from 1,000 to 1,500 persons, and that at one o'clock not above 3,000 were in the Castle-yard, including idlers, although it was the Assize-week. Be it recollected, that the Castle-yard at York was capable of containing 40,000 persons, and he (Mr. Duncombe) had seen it crammed to suffocation on an important constitutional occasion. Did it seem as if the great body of the county took a very strong interest in Reform when the meeting in its support was so thinly attended?
Sir J. Johnstoncsaid, the inhabitants of the county had expressed their opinions in petitions on the subject of Reform, and there was no occasion for persons living at a distance to attend at the city of York to petition again. It should also be recollected that the country was thinly peopled about York.
Mr. S. Worlleyconfirmed the hon. Member (Mr. Duncombe's) account of the thinness of the meeting, although held in the Assize-week. He did not undertake to say what was the opinion of the county of York on Reform; he only protested against this petition being taken as a decisive declaration of that opinion.
Mr. Sykes.—Did the hon. Member opposite (Mr. Duncombe) pretend to say that this measure was not popular. [Mr Duncombe.—I never said so.] The petition ought, in his opinion, to be taken as expressing the opinion of the county of York. At the meeting at which this petition was agreed to, the utmost unanimity prevailed. The letters which he had received day after day informed him, that there was a strong feeling in the large towns, in the small towns, and even in the villages, throughout Yorkshire, in favour of Reform, according to the plan introduced by his Majesty's Ministers. He had no doubt that it was impossible truly to contradict the existence of that feeling. The petitions which had been presented from different parts of the county established the fact. Amongst the people, the question appeared to be, whether they were to have a Constitution of King, Lords, and Commons; or whether they were to have a Constitution of King, Lords, and Borough-mongers?
Mr. J. Faneexpressed hisdecided hostility to the proposed measure, because it would have the effect of disfranchising the labouring classes, and would reduce them to the situation of mere hewers of wood and drawers of water. He could never bring

1091
himself to believe that those who sat there as popular Representatives, and whose duty it was, to guard the rights of the people of England, would ever condescend to delegate the power of declaring how the representation of particular places was to be altered, to three Members of his Majesty's privy council.
Mr. Bethellsaid, he believed that it was admitted on all hands, that this petition was not agreed to at a large meeting of the county of York; but from the information which he had received from various individuals connected with the county, he had every reason, to think that the great body of the population was in favour of the Bill.
Petition laid on the Table.
Lord Morpeth, in moving that the petition be printed took occasion to return his thanks to his hon. friend (Mr. Duncombe) for having reminded him that he had not addressed his observations in a manner sufficiently direct to the Speaker. That circumstance, however, was to be attributed not to intention, but to mere inadvertence. He should only state farther, as he had stated before, that this petition was agreed to at a meeting, of which all the world was apprised, and at which the whole county might have been present, and yet not a single dissentient voice was heard.
Mr. Sadlersaid, the meeting at York was by no means numerously attended. The inhabitants of the city of York and its vicinity amounted to 30,000 or 40,000, and if people were so enthusiastically attached to this measure as had been represented, he should be glad to know why they had not appeared at the meeting in greater numbers? Indeed, the editor of one of the county papers which was favourable to Reform observed, that he never recollected a meeting that excited less interest.
Lord Hothamsaid, he was not present on Friday when the hon. member for Tamworth (Sir R. Peel) pointed out the injustice which that Borough would experience if the plan now before the House were carried into effect. Had he been present, he could have fully borne out the statement of the hon. Baronet. He did not believe, in making the proposed arrangement, that there was the slightest intention, on the part of Ministers, to act with feelings of partiality towards any interest; but he was quite sure, that if they proceeded with the plan as it now stood,
1092
they would do great injustice in many instances. It appeared, that sometimes the criterion adopted, was the population of the Borough, and sometimes of the parish. The consequence was, that in some cases the Borough would retain its Members, because the population of the whole parish was taken; and in others it would lose one or both Representatives, because the population of the Borough only was selected. In the case of the borough of Leominster, which he had the honour to represent, it appeared that the population was only 3,650; but there was a note, at the bottom of the page, by which it appeared that the population of the parish amounted to 4,601 persons.
Lord Althorpsaid, that Ministers had acted on the last population returns—those of 1821. In fact, they had no other data to proceed upon. If, however, there appeared to be such great incorrectness in them as was stated, Ministers would not fail to attend to the fact.
Sir J. Johnstonesaid, that the meeting at which this petition was agreed to, was a most respectable one.
Mr. W. Duncombeobserved, that he had not asserted that Reform was not popular in the county of York; but he denied that it was popular to the extent which had been represented.
Petition to be printed.

LONDON COAL TRADE.
Mr. F. Lewis, in bringing in the Bill for regulating the taking off the Duties on Coals in the Port of London, said, that the Act which he had now to explain to the House, and to the provisions of which he begged their attention, was purely local, and applicable solely to London and its immediate vicinity. When, however, they considered the number of persons residing in the Metropolis who were interested in the Coal Trade; and when, too, they considered the extent and importance of the trade itself, and of the Shipping employed in it, he hoped he might be permitted to trespass a little on the time of the House while he attempted to explain the effect of the regulations which had prevailed in the Coal Trade, and of those which he proposed to submit to them in the Act now to be introduced. Every person who knew any thing of the price of coals, and every person whom he addressed was a consumer of them must have been struck with the difference between that price in the port of London, and any of the other great

1093
cities of the kingdom. In the port of Dublin, for instance, they would find that coals were seldom higher than from 21 s. to 23 s. a chaldron the duty being" about 1s. 6d., while in the port of London the ordinary descriptions of coal averaged a price of 44 s. a chaldron, weighing not more than twenty-four cwt. The price of coals was, however, much too high in all the Ports which received coals in the southern parts of the kingdom, and it was the duty of the Legislature to adopt some means of remedying the evil. The great manufactures, such as those carried on at Norwich, and some other places, have been for some time abandoning that part of the country because fuel is scarce and dear, in order to find greater facilities for carrying on the business in the places where fuel is cheap; and the consequence is, that great distress is frequently felt in particular districts from the emigration of the persons connected with those manufactures. It was, he repeated, the duty of the Government to remedy the evils which the want of fuel is producing, both in the Metropolis and elsewhere, as compared with the northern counties, and at all events to take care that they did. not increase and extend, the natural difficulties of any particular situation by any legislative provisions. The House would recollect that a Committee was appointed to inquire into the nature of the Coal Trade, and the best method of remedying some of the laws which applied to it. After the most patient and laborious investigation, that Committee were unanimously of opinion, that the Act of the 47th Geo. 3rd tended much to increase the evils of the system, and that the minute regulations and restrictions which it imposed on vessels in the Coal Trade, from the moment when they arrived in the river until their cargo was delivered to the consumer, tended greatly to increase the price of the commodity, and to stop all the fair competition of the market. From the moment the ship arrives, instead of leaving the owner to dispose of his cargo to the best advantage and according to the principles which should apply to all buyers and sellers, an individual is put on board to collect the Customs' Dues of the Port of London and the Dues of the City, and at the same time to conduct the whole of the bargains between the buyer and the seller in the disposal of the cargo. To that arrangement he made his first objection, because he
1094
thought it infinitely better that the same freedom of trade which prevailed in other commodities should be extended to the traffic in coals. With respect, however, to the collection of the Customs' Duties by the Meters, he had, after much deliberation, determined to let that part of the arrangement stand, and apply himself merely to the other; but when he heard it announced that it was the intention of his Majesty's Government to abandon those duties, he at once resolved to get rid of the City ship-meters altogether, and to put an end, if possible, to all the regulations with which they were connected. In the inquiries which he felt it necessary to prosecute for that object, he was bound to say, that he had received from every person connected with the trade, from all the City authorities, and from all the officers acting under them, the fairest, the most liberal, and candid treatment, and. every assistance in their power. In no one instance, indeed, was there the slightest impediment thrown in his way in the obtaining of any information which he felt it necessary to require. Under all the circumstances of the case, and after the most anxious inquiry, the course which he proposed to adopt in the Bill, with reference to the payment of the different duties, was briefly this—that all coals should in future be sold, and all duties collected by the ton weight instead of the chaldron. The Members of the House were all well aware of the fact, that the duties which were collected under the name of the Orphans' Fund had been mortgaged to a large amount, for securing the payment of the sums necessary to the completion of London Bridge, and that it was not therefore within the power of Parliament to make much reduction in their amount. The Committee had, however, succeeded in making an arrangement with respect to the collection of that duty; they had compounded the 10 d. collected from every chaldron of coals on account of that duty, for a sum of 8d. to be paid on every ton weight. With respect to the other duties—the 4d. due on every chaldron to the City, and several other sums under various denominations, it was proposed, and had been agreed to by the City, that the whole should be compromised on the payment of 4d. in the ton. This made the whole duty 1s. a ton; and by the addition of a 1d. for the market, which would make altogether 1s. 1d.., they would thus get rid

1095
of all the Dues which had hitherto been collected under so many different denominations. While he proposed this arrangement, he could not, however, avoid saying—although he did not wish to interfere with the arrangements of the Government that he thought it would be infinitely better to do away the Orphans' Fund altogether, and raise a sum in lieu of it by a certain small per centage on all the custom duties paid in the Port of London; a charge which, he thought, would be infinitely fairer than that which was now imposed solely on coals. He threw this out, however, merely as a suggestion which he thought worthy of consideration. In the Bill, he applied himself to the duty as it at present existed, and he had compounded for it by the sum already stated. With respect to the amount of coal which entered the Port of London in the different Colliers, he proposed to do away with the whole plan of measurement which at present existed: and, without substituting for it any other plan of taking the quantity by weight, to refer to the Ports from which the vessels sailed for a satisfactory account of their tonnage, which was now taken under competent officers; and, by that means, save all the expense of any establishment for the same purpose in the Metropolis. With this understanding on the extent of the tonnage of the vessel, and the quantity of coal which she would carry, he proposed to allow every vessel entering the Port of London to compound with the City for a given time for the amount of her dues. Everybody would know the tonnage of the vessel by the established registers, and the owner could then make his composition for any number of voyages or of years which he might think fit, for his benefit, and which the City might be disposed to allow; and, he was confident, from the course the trade would then fall into, that scarcely a single vessel would be engaged in the trade unless under a composition of that description. The next point, after attaining this economy in the collection of the duties was, to allow the Colliers to employ such men as they thought proper, at such wages as they could agree on for the discharge of their cargoes, and to get rid of all that class of persons called whippers, who had hitherto increased the cost of coal without adding to the facilities for obtaining it. The wages of the persons employed in the discharge of coal vessels was fixed by Act
1096
of Parliament, in the year 1807—an impolitic proceeding at any time, but most impolitic in the present case, in which the employer, although compelled to pay 16 s. a week to his men, contrived, by charging them for lodging which they did not require, and for beer which they did not drink, and for various other things of that description, to pay scarcely 4s. a week in money. He need not, therefore, say that one of the provisions of his Bill, went to the repeal of the clause which compelled the payment of any stipulated sum, and left the employer to pay as low, and the employed to demand as much, as the market of labour would allow them; the owner or master of the Collier being at liberty to employ whom he pleased, and the whipper to work for whom he pleased. With reference to the discharge of the cargo itself, and its ultimate delivery to the consumer, he proposed to do away with the whole system of selling coal by measure. Who could suppose that a measure would at any time hold the same quantity of coal? Was it possible, he would ask, to put the same quantity into any measure twice over? The thing was impossible and the law absurd; but the reason why the plan of selling coal by chaldron and measure prevailed so long was this, that the city of London was entitled to a duty of 4d. on every ton weight of coal, and to 8d. on every chaldron; or, in other words, it was entitled in the one case to a duty of only 4d.. on twenty cwt. and in the other to a duty of 8d. on twenty-six cwt.—an unwise provision, which had for a long time tended to increase the abuse of the trade, and to deprive the Port of London of a supply of that kind of coal which was at once the cheapest and the best fitted for its consumption. Every one knew that the larger and the better sorts of coal were the only kind brought to London, although its various manufactures required every kind which could be supplied. At Newcastle, and in the coal districts, thousands upon thousands of small coal were burned in waste, blackening the ground, and defiling the atmosphere, and putting the proprietor of the coal mine to a great expense in purchasing a place for burning them on, because that kind of coal could not be brought to the London market, although, under a better state of circumstances, it could and would be used in preference to any other in the various furnaces, and limekilns, and brick-

1097
kilns which abound in the vicinity of the Metropolis. It was a well-known fact, however, that no coals were shipped except the large coal for the London market; and why was this? Purely because the solid coal occupied a larger space when broken, and when sold by measure, enabled the shipowner and the coal merchant and the retail dealer to make a large profit on their trade. For this purpose, coal was broken by the lightermen, broken in the ships, broken in the docks, broken on the wharfs, and broken by the retail dealer, until it reached the consumer in the smallest pieces, which he would purchase at a rate rendered still more exorbitant by the deficiency of quantity, which by this process was concealed. If, then, coal henceforward should be sold by weight, the small coal, which had hitherto been destroyed at the pit's mouth, would speedily find its way to the market, and would not only prove beneficial to the trades which require such a supply of fuel, but at the same time tend much to keep down the price of the better kinds. Under the new plan of selling coal by weight, a material improvement would be effected in the method of detecting frauds on the delivery of the article to the consumer. At the present moment when a buyer has reason to suspect that the sacks are deficient in quantity, he is obliged to send for a meter to the neighbouring wharf, and after he goes through the whole of the process required by Act of Parliament, if the coals be not deficient he has to pay the expense of the measurement, and thus he actually inflicts a penalty on himself for having gone through the pain of getting the coal re-measured. In order to remedy this evil, he proposed that every sack shou,19 be made to contain as nearly as possible two hundred weight of coal. At every considerable wharf he would have a weighing machine, and instead of the coal being tossed to and fro, with an apparent alteration of the quantity in the measure at every trial, he proposed that the cart should be weighed first, and the sacks being then thrown on, the exact quantity of coal could be ascertained with the utmost precision. Having now stated the principal provisions of the Bill, he had only to say that the persons whose interests were affected by the new arrangements would not be left without compensation. The City of London was to receive, as he had already explained, a market penny a cwt., and out of the product of this fund,
1098
which it was calculated would amount to 11,000 l. the City undertook, that compensation should be given to the ship-meters, and the other persons who might suffer by the alterations. He trusted, by carrying these arrangements into full effect, to render the sale of coal as open and as free from all trammel and restrictions, as Corn in Mark-lane; and he was confident that, in doing so, he should benefit both the seller and the consumer. It was a common custom now for the person who purchased from the ships to give a larger price than he otherwise would have done, because he knew that he could charge it to his customer; but it was the bounden duty of the Legislature to take care that the trade was left open to competition, and that no provision of theirs tended to enhance the price to the purchaser. After observing that four land-meters could keep a register of the arrival of the ships and the amount of their tonnage, the right hon. Gentleman concluded by expressing an opinion that these regulations would on inquiry be found perfectly practicable; and he believed it would be also found that he proposed no alteration which was not supported by evidence before the Committee, or by the most extensive and accurate information collected from those best acquainted with the trade to which the Bill applied.
Mr. Alderman Waithmanagreed in the importance and utility of the alterations contained in the Bill; but he thought there was one fact which came to light in a recent action that ought not to be lost sight of. It appeared that the small coal sold at the pit's mouth was charged only 5s. if it was for the Irish market, and 14 s. if it was for the London market. Now it occurred that a person who bought coal for Ireland happened for some reason to sell it in London, and this coming to the ears of the vendors, they brought an action against the man who sold the coal in London, and recovered the difference. When the object of the Legislature was to get rid of impositions, and set the coal trade free from combinations and restrictions, he thought a circumstance of that kind should not be lost sight of.
Mr. Alderman Thompsonapproved, like his hon. colleague, of the principle of the Bill, and of the necessity of getting rid of all the grievances of the system of the coal trade; but there were several difficulties connected with the alterations, which re-

1099
quired consideration. The Orphan Dues, it should be recollected, were mortgaged for a sum of nearly one million and a half. It was necessary to take care that nothing should affect the fund thus pledged. He had doubts of the policy of getting rid of the ship-meters, because he thought there should be somebody between the buyer and the seller, and he confessed he had some misgivings with respect to the working of some of the other portions of the arrangements. Applying himself to the observations of the hon. Member with respect to Dublin, he begged him to look to the difference in the length of the voyage between London and Dublin. All the coals used in the Irish market did not come from one place. There were coals sent from Whitehaven, and from various parts of Wales, to the port of Dublin, the freight being seldom more than 6s. or 7s., while the freight of coal from Newcastle to London was 10 s. or 12 s.; indeed, nothing very short of 12 s. would be a remuneration; so that in that respect there was a difference of 5s. a chaldron. The right hon. Gentleman contended for a free trade in coal; and he (Ald. Thomson) admitted it would be beneficial to get rid of the restrictions which were now imposed on it; but he thought it was also necessary to get rid of the combinations which raised the price 6s. or 7s. at the pit, and which could only be effected by opening new channels for the trade, and encouraging the import of coal from Yorkshire and Scotland. That was the effectual method of breaking up the combination among the present great coal-owners. It was in evidence before the Committee, that a coal ship had been actually compelled to stop three weeks at Newcastle before she could obtain a cargo, because the coal proprietor declared he had delivered his month's supply of coal, and the ship must wait till the 1st of the next month before he could deliver any more. He thought this required the attention of Government quite as much as the regulation of the port of London; and that it was the duty of Government to take some measures to break up the combination of the coal-owners.
Mr. Belldenied, that the price of the small coal was different to those who purchased it for the Dublin or the London market. The price was, he understood, the same to both, being about 6s. 4d. or 6s. 6d. at that moment. With respect to
1100
the combination of the coal-owners, he could only say that the price of coal had fallen 7s. within a very short time at the pit's mouth; and if that combination could do any good to the coal owners, it was evident that it must be carried much further. This fall was, however, a proof of the inefficacy of any arrangements; and he believed he might add, that the city of London had not been, during a vast number of years, left for a single day without its proper supply of coal.
Mr. Alderman Thomsonexplained, and referred to the action which had taken place, and which had established that the difference between the prices asked at the pit for the same coal, if to go to Ireland, or to go to London, was the difference between 5s. and 14 s.
Mr. Alderman Woodapproved of the measure, and observed, that the large charge upon the public of forty meters, each at a salary of 200 l., would be done away with. He could not understand the argument of those who maintained that the public would not derive benefit from the proposed reduction of 6s. in duty, any more than they did from the former reduction of 3s. The fact was, that the coal merchants in London were vieing with one another, who should pitch their coals at the lowest rate. If he were to be told that the public would receive no benefit from the remission of taxation, then he would say that it would be better to remain as we were. It would be better for Government to retain the revenue, if the reduction of it gave no relief to the public. He felt confident, however, with reference to this particular article, that the public would experience the greatest benefit from the competition which would take place among the dealers in it.
Mr. Warburtonobserved, that it was peculiarly necessary to remedy one grievance of which the southern ship-owners complained—namely, that they were frequently exposed to a loss of freight in consequence of the refusal, if their ships had received the usual monthly supply at a pit, to allow them another supply until the next month.
Sir M. W. Ridleycharacterised the terms in which the hon. Alderman had expressed himself, as unjust, illiberal, and unfounded; not becoming to the House, nor fair in themselves. By a reference to the evidence in the Committee on the subject, it appeared that there were five

1101
or six different kinds of coal, and that if a ship-owner changed his pit, he might at any time obtain a supply. The regulation that at each pit supplies must be afforded in turn, was necessary to carry on the business, and prevent confusion. The evidence before the Committee clearly proved that there was no limitation. There was not a single instance in which the London market had not been over-supplied with coals. If any inconveniences had resulted from the difference between small and large coal, that inconvenience would be remedied by the provision in the Bill, that coals should henceforth be sold by weight, and not by measure. As to the allegation that the coal-owners would deprive the public of the advantage that ought to arise from the remission of the duty, he pledged himself that the public should know the price of coal at the pit's mouth before the duty was taken off, and after the duty was taken off; so that if the inhabitants of London did not receive the full benefit of the remission of 6s. per chaldron, it should be seen that it was not the fault of the coal-owners. As an instance of the way in which charges were accumulated on the original cost of coals, he would mention an instance in which a friend of his, having paid a Bill of above 160 l. to his coal merchant, the Bill for which he (Sir M. W. Ridley) analysed, and found that the sum paid for the coals to the coal-owner at Newcastle was 42 l., and that the surplus was divided between the carrier, the London dues, and the coal merchant. The only wish which the coal-owners had upon the subject was, for fair and open competition.
Mr. Robert Gordondid not think that there was the wished-for competition which the hon. Baronet alluded to; for at certain collieries only certain proportions of supply were provided. He should be very glad to see any regulations which would render the trade wholly open.
Lord Howickobserved, that his hon. friend forgot that there were certain imperative regulations to which all parties consented. It must be recollected that there were in Northumberland many extensive fields of coal the produce of which was not exported, because it would not pay. If, however, the owners of those fields saw other coal-owners making unreasonable profits, they would not have such a tender regard for them as to abstain from competition. On his father's estates
1102
there were many hundred acres of the best coal, only a quarter of a mile from the sea, which could not be worked.
Bill read a first time.
On the motion that it be read a second time on the 18th of April,
Mr. Alderman Thomsoncould not help observing that the hon. Baronet, the member for Newcastle, had taken an unwarrantable liberty in the words which the hon. Baronet had thought proper to apply to his former observations. He would, not follow the hon. Baronet's example by the use of similar expressions. If in either action or words he had behaved himself unbecomingly to the House or unfairly, he was sure that the Speaker would have been the first to interfere and prevent his proceeding. The hon. Baronet's taunts, however, would have no effect in deterring him from making any representations which appeared to him to be just, on behalf of those who had sent him to that House, and whose rights and interests he would take every fair opportunity of advocating. He appealed to the members of the Committee on the subject, if he had said one word which was not justified by the proceedings before that Committee.
Bill ordered to be read a second time on the 18th of April.

CIVIL LIST.
On the motion of Lord Althorp, the Report of the Committee on the Civil List was brought up and read as follows:—That, for the support of his Majesty's Household, and the honour and dignity of the Crown, there be granted to his Majesty, during his life, a nett yearly revenue of 510,000 l.; and that the same shall commence from the day of the demise of his late Majesty, and shall be charged upon and made payable out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. That all the hereditary rates, duties, payments, and revenues in England and Ireland respectively (other than and except the hereditary duties of excise on beer, ale, and cider payable in England), which, at the time of the demise of his late Majesty, King George 4th, made part of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland; and also, the hereditary duties and revenues (other than and except the hereditary duties of excise on beer, ale, and cider which were payable to his said late Majesty King George 4th,

1103
in that part of Great Britain called. Scotland); and also, the yearly sums of 348,000 l. and 6,500 l. payable to his present Majesty, out of the revenues and excise arising in England and Scotland respectively, under and by virtue of an Act of the last Session of Parliament; and also, the small branches of the hereditary revenue and the hereditary casual revenues, arising from any droits of the Admiralty or droits of the Crown, or from the four-and-half per cent duties, and from all surplus revenues of Gibraltar, or any other possessions of his Majesty out of the United Kingdom, and from all other casual revenues arising either in the foreign possessions of his Majesty, or in the United Kingdom, shall, during the life of his present Majesty (whom God long preserve), be carried to, and shall be made part of, the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. That the several annuities payable to their Royal Highnesses the Duke of Cumberland, the Duke of Sussex, and the Duke of Cambridge, out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, during the life of his late Majesty, shall, during their said Royal Highnesses lives, be charged upon and be payable out of the said Consolidated Fund."
Lord Althorpsaid, that in moving that the Resolution be read a second time, he begged to trouble the House with a few words, in order to prevent any misunderstanding as to what he had stated in the Committee before the Resolution was agreed to. The House would recollect that he had on that occasion distinctly stated, that in adopting that Resolution, he did not consider himself pledged on the subject of the education of the sum; although after considerable deliberation he was bound to say that he continued of opinion that the whole of the sum comprehended in the Resolution should be applied to the Civil List. The proper time for discussing this, however, would be in the Committee upon the Bill. When the different classes of the List were then considered, the different apportionments to them would be fixed. Now, however, there was no pledge with respect to any particular proposition.
Colonel Daviesallowed the justice of the noble Lord's statements; but declared that he would miss no opportunity, as far as his vote went, to vote for the sum recommended by the Committee above-stairs,
1104
the consequence of which would be to reduce the salaries of the chief officers of the Household. For his Majesty, he was willing and desirous to make the most liberal and even prodigal grant. If the sum which it was proposed to vote were to be applied to his Majesty's personal comfort, it would be another matter. But he repeated, that no consideration should induce him to stultify the proceedings of the Committee above-stairs, by voting those sums to the great officers of State which that Committee had declared were too large. One word on the Pension List. He could not help thinking that the proposition of the hon. member for Gloucester on that subject should be adopted: he meant the principle of the proposition—for he did not think the proposed equivalent was sufficient—that the present Pension List should be transferred to the Consolidated Fund, and that his Majesty should receive a specific sum to be disposed of according to his discretion. About double the sum proposed by the hon. member for Gloucester would, in his opinion, be a fair equivalent. At present the grant to the King was apparent and not real, for although 15,000 l. a year was nominally given, yet almost the whole of that was filled up, and his Majesty would not, perhaps, enjoy one-tenth of it during his life. The noble Lord (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had declared that he did not think the King should have the power of granting a pension without the consent of his responsible advisers, and thus Ministers had the patronage. This was not justice to the Crown, and it would be better if there were in reality a fund to a smaller amount placed under the exclusive power of the Crown.
Sir George Warrendersaid, he was always of opinion, that the proposed vote for the Civil List was rather too small than too large, and he believed it would turn out that the sum would be found inadequate for the wants of royalty. The people he knew were anxious that the Sovereign should be liberally provided for; and they had so many reasons to be grateful for his conduct, that to say thus much was not presuming too far on their good feeling. The people should understand that it was beneficial that the Sovereign should be paid liberally, and that the revenue given up by the Crown was much greater than the proposed vote, to which he gave his cordial consent.
Sir Henry Hardingesaid, after reading the Report of the Committee, and after having given due consideration to the subject, he had made up his mind to give his support to the grant proposed by his Majesty's Government.
The Earl of Darlingtonwas anxious to give his support to any measure which might be requisite to uphold the splendour and dignity of the House of Brunswick. If 600,000 l. a year had been proposed, he would willingly have given his vote for such a sum; but it was a different thing when the sum of 10,000 l. was proposed for contingencies, and 119,000 l. for the salaries of the officers of the household. He thought these sums might bear a reduction. It was only in the salaries of officers of that description that economy could be practised. In offices of trust it was not so easy to take off part of the salaries, as in useless offices, and in places of mere patronage. He thought a reduction of twenty per cent not too much, and should an amendment to that effect be proposed at any future period, he would support it.
Mr. Briscoewas of opinion that no pensions should be granted but for public services. The 10,000 l. did not at all relate to the comforts of the Sovereign; nor was it at a per centage to be taken off the 510,000 l. but off that branch only in which was included the salaries of officers of State. The present Government had set out with professions of the strictest economy; they had referred the Civil List to a Committee, and he thought the Government and the House ought to adhere to the Report of the Committee.
An hon. Member An hon. Member said, that he had opposed the last Government on this question; and as the present Government had referred the matter to a Select Committee, to see what reductions could be made, he would support the recommendations of that Committee. He did not care whether the reduction were 12,000 l. or 1,200 farthings, he went upon principle. It was utterly useless appointing Committees if their recommendations were not to be attended to.
Mr. Curteissaid, no man was more ready to support his Sovereign than he was; but while he supported the Sovereign, he could not forget that he had a duty to perform towards the people. He was glad no division was to take place, for if a division had been persevered in, he must
1106
have voted with the member for Middlesex.
Mr. Wilksconcurred in the vote, because he looked upon the additional 10,000 l. as a provision for contingencies.
Mr. Humeentered his protest against the argument of the hon. member for Worcester, and declared, that he never would be prodigal of the public money on any occasion, not even to contribute to the pleasure of royalty. He was of opinion that considerable reductions ought to be made in the expenses of the Household, though at the same time he thought that the numerous family of his Majesty ought to be taken into consideration. He said he could not agree, nor would he ever agree, to the vote before the House, but he would not take the sense of the House on the present occasion, but when the Bill was brought in, and came to the Committee, the House would then be able to see what particular sums were allotted to the different departments in the King's Household. At that stage of the proceedings he would renew his opposition, if necessary, but he confidently hoped that the noble Lord (Al thorp) would be induced to abide by the recommendation of the Committee. The item he objected to most was that of the Pensions, and which, in the eyes of the people, detracted more from the honour and dignity of the Crown than any thing else. His objection was, however, lessened, upon seeing that the amount voted under that head was half of the sum usually voted. He considered it unfair towards the king to make the pensions an item in the Civil List, because his Majesty could not have the free control of the money so voted. He should have no objection to provide a fund out of which his Majesty might be enabled to reward those only who had rendered him personal services; but the fact was, that the Pension Fund was taken out of the hands of the Sovereign, and controlled by his Ministers. The sum proposed to be voted for pensions, under the Civil List, was 75,000 l., which was only half of the whole amount. There still remained pensions to the amount of 82,000 l. to be provided for in some way or other, and when that question came before the House, he would take care to watch narrowly the mode in which it should be proposed to provide for them. His own opinion was, that there were many pensions which ought to be altogether dis-

1107
charged from the List; that Ministers should be called upon to make a selection of those who received pensions for services performed by themselves or their relations; and that all unworthy persons should be discharged from the List. No individual, he thought, ought to be allowed to receive a pension, if his income from other sources exceeded the amount of his pension. Whether he should make that proposition, or move for an entire revision of the Pension List, he was not yet determined. He was willing to allow the report to be brought up, though he did not waive his opposition to the vote.
Mr. Calcraftwas very glad that the hon. member for Middlesex did not intend to take the sense of the House on the question; and he must declare, that, in his opinion, the course which had been pursued with respect to the Civil List was not creditable to either side of the House. Hon. Members were constantly talking of gratitude and affection to his Majesty, and yet there was no instance since the Revolution, of the vote in the Civil List being nearly so long delayed. It was now nine months since his Majesty's accession to the Throne, and up to the present moment no decision had been come to on the subject of the Civil List. With respect to the amount of the vote, he was disposed to agree neither to a larger nor a smaller sum—and for this reason—because the experience of the last ten years had shown that the precise sum proposed had answered its purpose; and he would not consent, for the sake of a small saving or a large saving, to place the Crown in such a situation that it would be obliged to come to that House for the payment of its debts. To what purpose the sum of 10,000 l., which was the subject of dispute, was to be. applied, he did not care. If the great officers of the Household chose to relinquish so much from their salaries, he did not think the sum too great for a contingent fund. It should be recollected, too, that her Majesty, contrary to the usage of former reigns, got no outfit. He did not understand that the usual put fit had ever been offered, but only a part. If that were the case, he could very well conceive that his Majesty would refuse a sum, the very offer of which he might consider an insult, it having been the practice of all his ancestors to receive double the amount. They all knew how frugal her Majesty was in all her arrangements; but
1108
still the expenditure of a person in her situation must unavoidably be great, and he was afraid, that in preparing her outfit, her Majesty might be thrown into pecuniary difficulties. This was well worthy the consideration of the House, and he should like to know why her Majesty was not placed on the same footing, with respect to her outfit, as all other Queens? With respect to the pensions, they had been reduced from 145,000 l. a year, to 75,00o l.. That was an arrangement in favour of the public, but the House was in fact placing a powerless scepter in the hands of his Majesty. It nominally gave his Majesty the control of 75,000 l. for pensions: but if his Majesty wished to give him a pension of l,000 l. a year to-morrow, he could not do so, because all the pensions were anticipated. This fine grant, then, was a mere shadow; and unless somebody was obliging enough to move off the List, his Majesty could not move any one on,
Sir R. Inglissaid, the Crown did not sue in forma pauperis for its revenues, but the Civil List was given to it as a compensation for what it resigned. The whole was a bargain, and he would take care that the House was made aware of what the Crown gave up for the Civil List voted by the House.
An hon. Member An hon. Member said, that the country-ought not to continue burthened with so large a Pension List. Many of the pensions were disgraceful to those who gave, and those who received them, and the whole ought to undergo revision.
Sir T. Freemantlesaid, that it would be disgraceful to the country to allow the subject of the outfit to her Majesty to rest as it stood at present. For the part he had taken in this matter he was accused by some hon. Members of being set on by others. He declared that he had been set on by no human being whatever, but had only followed the dictates of his own judgment. He deprecated the course which was followed by some hon. Members of objecting to every vote of money that was proposed, and could not believe that those who acted in that way were very favourable to a monarchical form of government. His present Majesty deserved more of his country than any other King, and yet he had been worse treated by his subjects. If his Majesty was so treated by an unreformed House of Commons, how would he be treated when that House was reformed?
Mr. George Robinsoncould not agree with the hon. Member who had just sat down, in thinking that it was disgraceful for the House of Commons to accede to the King's wishes. Among the many acts which had endeared his Majesty to the country, nothing had tended to that effect more than the anxious desire which had been manifested by his Majesty to relieve the suffering people from every burthen possible; and he could not hear an hon. Member endeavouring to induce the House to vote away 50,000 l. without rising to express his dissent from that proposition. The same hon. Member had taunted those who were disposed not to agree to such a vote with being unfriendly to monarchical institutions. He had never heard any Member in that House venture to say that he was opposed to the monarchical form of government, and he did not think it fair to measure a man's loyalty by his vote on such a question. He must say, that he should be averse from voting 60,000 l. for the Queen's outfit if her Majesty would accept of it, not because he was insensible to her Majesty's many virtues, but because he was bound to be the jealous guardian of the people's purse. He was far from wishing to see the Crown deprived of any thing necessary to uphold its dignity; but he approved of the proposition to reduce the vote to the amount recommended by the Committee. He did not conceive that such a reduction would trench in any manner on the comfort or dignity of the Crown. The noble Lord opposite had admitted that all the pensions terminated, according to law, at the decease of his late Majesty; and had further stated, that there were many on the list which ought never to have been there at all. He lamented that the state of the Civil List of the last reign had placed that House in the unenviable situation of not being able to grant to the present King a fund, out of which his Majesty might be enabled to give what pensions he pleased. He hoped that there would be a revision of the Pension List, and that pensions would be taken away from all those persons who possessed large private fortunes.
Mr. Courtenayrecommended honorable Members who were continually finding fault with the Pension List to bring that subject regularly before the House. He supported the vote for the Civil List as proposed by the noble Lord, but considered that the arrangement made of removing
1110
various charges from the Civil List, and fixing them on the Consolidated Fund, far from economical.
Mr. Bankeswished to know from the noble Lord whether, if the Committee up stairs had recommended a vote of 510,000 l. he had intended to call upon the House to grant a larger sum? and whether at any time he had communicated to the Committee up-stairs an intention of asking the House for a surplus?
Lord Althorpreplied, that if the Committee had recommended a vote of 510,000 l. it was by no means his intention to ask for a larger sum. With respect to the other question which had been asked by the hon. Member, he stated that he had never communicated to the Committee up stairs any wish that there should be a surplus sum of 10,000 l. allowed.
Sir J. Yorkethought that the House was placed in rather an awkward situation for the proposition made was, to take a certain sum from the salaries of the King's servants, and place it in the King's pockets. Lord Althorp had not pledged himself as to the particular manner in which the 10,000 l. should be applied. That the House would decide upon, when the Bill came into Committee.
Mr. O'Connellsaid, it was not fair to reproach those who were advocates of economy with being the enemies of monarchy. The real friends of monarchy were those who made it popular, and not those who would increase the burthens of the people. The Irish Pension List was a part of the grant which required revision. There was a Mr. Leonard Macnally, a barrister, who had been always engaged against the Crown, in defending persons charged with high treason and publishing libels, who had for a period of eighteen years received a pension of 300 l. a-year from the Crown and which was not discovered until he died, when his widow applied to have the pension continued to her. There were other pensions or annual payments still paid to the persons who were connected with certain papers, such as the Patriot and Correspondent. Besides this, a sum of 200 l. had been paid yearly, since 1,706, to two persons, of the name of Hooper and Martin, until the sum of 2,000 l. was paid in full, which he believed had latterly been done. In looking over the Irish Pension List, he found the name of no person in it who had performed public services, except that of Lord Rod-

1111
ney. It was the practice, too, when Catholics became eminent at the Bar, to give them pensions, for fear, he supposed, of their turning agitators; till at last they became too numerous to be pensioned off in that way. But one gentleman had three pensions accumulated upon him; and he had his pension increased, because at a public meeting he voted in favour of placing the nomination of Catholic Bishops in the hands of the Crown. He concluded by stating that he should support the report of the Committee.
Mr. Grove Pricesaid, that after all the expectations of retrenchment which had been formed in the appointment of the Committee, the result was a proposition to retrench only to the amount of 10,000 l."—Parturiunt montes, nascitur ridiculus mus." But even that limited proposition was negatived by the noble Lord opposite the great patron of economy. The declarations of Ministers when in opposition, formed a striking contrast to their conduct when in office; and hoped that the country which had been abused by a gross delusion would distinguish between those who were the real friends of economy and those who were merely professors.
Mr. Lennardsaid, that what had been stated by the learned member for Water-ford in regard to Mr. Leonard Macnally confirmed the view he had always taken of the propriety of the Pension List being open. He thought that publicity would prevent all the abuses which had occurred in it: it would prevent improper applications being made, and it would prevent Ministers yielding, to them if they were made. He did not object to the amount of the Pension List proposed by the Government. He was not an advocate for placing the pensions on the Consolidated Fund, which would be taking from the Crown that which had always been considered part of its prerogative. But he hoped that the Government would agree that the Pension List should be annually brought before Parliament, which would prevent abuses in it. The hon. member for Sandwich complained that no good had been done by the Committee. He thought great good had been done by it, for by separating the personal expenses of the Crown from those which did not properly belong to it, a sum of between 400,000 l. and 500,000 l. had been placed under the control of Parliament, out of which he thought great savings would
1112
ultimately be made. He should vote for the proposition of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but he hoped the noble Lord would adopt the recommendation of the Select Committee, that the salaries of the great Officers should be reduced.
Mr. Long Wellesleywished only to explain the origin of the pension given to the venerable Lady Mornington. After the battle of Salamanca, Mr. Whitbread suggested that a larger pension should be given to Lord Wellington than he was inclined to receive; and then the pension was granted to Lady Mornington, without either reference to or application from any part of her family.
Mr. Goulburnwished to know on what fund the salaries were in future to be charged which it was proposed to separate from the Civil List?
Lord Althorpreplied, that he intended to charge a portion of them upon the Consolidated Fund, and to provide for the remainder out of the Supplies for the year.
The Resolutions read a second time. Upon the last Resolution being proposed,
Mr. Humesaid, that at that moment he suffered the subject of pensions to the members of the Royal Family to pass without notice; but he begged to state, that, on a future occasion, he should call the attention of the House to them. He should then require to know the authority by which such pensions had been granted, and the persons to whom the grant had been made. He should, therefore, move, on a future occasion, for a return of the pensions held by all the members of the Royal Family, exclusive of the King; and he gave this notice now, that he might not be considered as acceding absolutely to the present Resolution. He should submit, when the Bill got into Committee, the propriety of a reduction of the incomes of the junior branches of the Royal Family, on the ground that as their allowance, like that of others, had been increased on account of the high prices of provisions, they should now suffer the same decrease as the allowance of other public persons had suffered, in consequence of the present comparatively low price of provisions.
Mr. Goulburnhoped, that before the hon. Member brought forward such a motion, he would well consider the particular facts on which the measure of allowance had been granted.
Resolutions agreed to, and the Bill ordered to be brought in.

SUPPLY—NAVY ESTIMATES.
The House then resolved itself into a Committee of Supply. On the Motion of Sir J. Graham, there was granted to his Majesty the sum of 21,21 l. for the maintenance of the Naval Officers and Naval Yards abroad, and 534,124 l. 4s. 4d. for the pay and support of Men employed in the navy yards of his Majesty. On the vote that 810,000 l. be granted to his Majesty for the purchase and expenditure of the ensuing year in timber, stores, &c,
Sir J. Yorkeobjected to the vote as excessive. He felt a strong objection to the purchase of so many materials, when we had such choice and powerful vessels, either in ordinary or on the stocks. The yards were, generally speaking, on too extensive a scale, and too much had been sacrificed to expensive experiment, as in the case of building the ship, called the Pearl, over which a gallant Admiral, who displayed his flag on the station of the Emerald Isle, occasionally expended his solicitude. Jobs of every kind should be discountenanced, and the practice of altering brigs of war into vessels with three masts he must reprobate as a wanton waste of public money.
Sir James Grahamdefended the amount of the vote, by acquainting the House, that it was usual to make a liberal estimate on this head of expenditure, because out of it, should there arise a deficiency for the pay or maintenance of the seamen voted, that deficiency was usually made good, whilst, if there happened to be a less expenditure, the balance was carried on the next year to the credit of the public, under the head of stores. The building of ships had been rendered necessary of late years, notwithstanding the number of vessels in Ordinary, in consequence of the rivalry of other maritime countries whose vessels were so disproportionably larger than ours of a similar class, that we were obliged to build larger vessels, to enable us to maintain our station on the seas.
Mr. Humethought that there were in all conscience enough of fighting vessels, and even of round-sterned ships, when there was no prospect of a war with any other country. But what would the right hon. First Lord say in defence of the extravagant waste of the public money in keeping afloat not less than five Royal yachts,
1114
as well as one for the Commissioners of the Navy, and one for the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland?
Sir James Grahambegged to say, that the change in the proportions of fourth-rates and frigates of a large class by other maritime and rival countries, had rendered the building of new ships positively necessary to cope with these improved and more powerful vessels, against which our smaller ships of the line and large frigates would have no chance but in the desperate valour of our seamen. Of the five yachts in commission there was not one perfectly manned; their expenditure was small, and this was the only mode which was left to the Board of Admiralty to keep old veteran officers on full pay. The appointments were made with a jealous scrutiny as to merit; and when it was recollected how wide a field of reward was open to military veterans, by appointments to the command of fortresses, the public would scarcely think these five vessels, which constituted almost all of the patronage of the Admiralty in this way, was too extensive to ensure the welfare of the service. As to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, it was not proper that, representing, as he did, the person of his Majesty in his Government, he should, when proceeding to sea, appear without the paraphernalia of Royalty; and more especially the present Viceroy should not be deprived of that in which, from his strong bias to nautical matters, it might be supposed he would find particular gratification—namely, a handsome yacht, for purposes of pleasure or utility.
Mr. O'Connellsaid, there never yet was wanted an excuse when public money was to be squandered. In the very ludicrous instance of the Lord Lieutenant's yacht, he could assure the House that the noble Marquis at the head of the Irish Government was too much of a sailor to trust himself—whilst he possessed so admirably built and equipped a vessel as that which was his own private property—in such a heavy, clumsy, crazy craft as the Government yacht. The consequence therefore was, that whenever, on state occasions, the Lord Lieutenant left Dublin on a trip to sea, he proceeded from the harbour in this lumbering vessel till he reached the spot where it had been previously settled the steamer, or his own handsome vessel, was to meet him, when he turned his Majesty's yacht adrift, as she deserved, and proceeded in the other vessel.
Mr. Humeagain insisted that these yachts, with their appointments, were unnecessary, and ought to be abolished. And his right hon. friend, the first Lord of the Admiralty, seemed to think, that he was the member of a despotic Government.
Sir James Grahamsaid, that when he first went to the Admiralty, he thought, as the hon. Gentleman did, that the yachts might be dispensed with; but he had since ascertained, that from the time of William 3rd down to the present, this establishment had been continued in the same state, and that it furnished the only means of bestowing a reward for the services of meritorious officers. That being the case, although he was an advocate for economy, he did not think it would be judicious to abolish this establishment.
Mr. Humesaid, he did not doubt that the right hon. Baronet acted conscientiously, but he must say, for his part, that he cared nothing for William 3rd, and did not think that the wisdom of our ancestors was always a good guide. His question was, whether these vessels were necessary? and he the more particularly objected to their expense, as the Government refused to establish another hospital-ship in the river, which in reality was much wanted. The Dreadnought had been selected for this purpose, but was refused.
Sir Joseph Yorkesaid, that, if it were necessary to abridge one single iota of the naval service, the yachts were the first which ought to be dispensed with.
Sir Byam Martinsaid, that the expense of the yachts was really so trifling as to be ridiculous to look at. He believed that in the last year they had not cost more than 400 l. He hoped the Government would not consent now, or at any other time, to put them down, as it would be very injurious to the naval service.
Sir George Clerkthought that means ought to be afforded to the Sovereign of occasionally going to sea in a style befitting his regal dignity. Those yachts had always formed part of the royal establishment.
Mr. Warburtonsaid, that if it were necessary for the Sovereign to go to sea, he could go in a man-of-war. It was not necessary to maintain these vessels, painted and gilded like gingerbread, for the purpose. There was no scarcity of vessels at his Majesty's command.
Mr. Humewished to have some explanation concerning the refusal of the Dread-
1116
nought, and must request his right hon. friend to give him the explanation.
Sir James Grahamagain defended the continuance of these yachts, the command of which, he said, had always been given to men of real merit; and with respect to the conduct of the Government in the matter of the hospital-ship, he observed, that the Marine Society had required the Government to fit up the ship at the public expense, which the late Treasury had declined to do, as the sum required was considerable, amounting to no less than 1,600 l. A similar application had been made since he had come into office, and he having referred the matter to the Treasury, it was now under consideration.
Mr. Humethought the Government might better have incurred that expense for a great public benefit, than have resolved on others that produced no such advantage. It was very hard on the merchant-seamen to be obliged to pay 6d. per month for Greenwich Hospital when there was no asylum afforded them by the Government. The money thus taken from them amounted to 24,000 l. in the year, and was tranferred to Greenwich Hospital, from which, as merchant-seamen, they could derive no benefit.
Mr. George Robinsonsaid, if the merchant-seamen contributed so much, it would not be unreasonable to give them a ship at an expense of 1,600 l. out of the money; and if Greenwich Hospital could not go on without that money, it should be made up to it in another way.
An hon. Member An hon. Member stated, that great anxiety existed at the different sea ports on the subject of the payment to Greenwich, and most of the seamen looked to be relieved from that tax.
Sir James Grahamrepeated, that the matter was under the consideration of the Board of Treasury. If that Board consented to the application, he need not say how happy he should be to carry it into execution. With respect to the money drawn from the merchant-seamen, he observed that Greenwich Hospital would suffer much inconvenience from the want of that contribution. It was not true, however, that the merchant-seamen derived no benefit from this payment, for Sir Richard Keats had calculated that one half of the merchant-seamen passed through the King's service, and were, in that way, entitled to the benefit of Greenwich Hospital. But

1117
as merchant-seamen they had also a direct benefit, for their sons were entitled to education on the establishment, and Sir R. Keats had calculated that the proportion of merchant-seamen's boys was as four to five out of the whole number in the school. The contribution, too, was only made when the men were at sea, and in actual receipt of wages. In his opinion, Greenwich Hospital was indispensable to our naval superiority, and its means of relieving the unfortunate seamen ought not to be diminished. He would now only add, that he had at that moment the draft of a Bill which he intended to introduce after the Easter recess, and in which he meant to propose to the consideration of the House to give to the merchant-seamen, under certain circumstances, a concurrent claim with sailors in King's ships to the advantages of Greenwich Hospital.
General Phipps, as Representative for a sea-port, thanked the right hon. Baronet for this communication.
Mr. Warburtonsaid, if such a measure were carried into operation, there was not a ship-owner who would not approve of the levying of this tax. The hospital-ship, too, was a most useful establishment, as it admitted not only British seamen, but also seamen of any country who required such care and attention.
Mr. Humesaid, that if both the services were to be put upon an equal footing, it altered the case very much; and the only question that remained was, which was the proper way to effect it?
Mr. Schonswarsaid, the merchant service had hitherto felt it a most galling grievance that they were compelled to contribute to an establishment from which they derived no benefit.
Mr. Hodgsonbelieved that an arrangement of the kind proposed would satisfy the seamen.
Mr. Sykeswould prefer having the tax if it were to be continued, levied on the tonnage of the vessels rather than on the seamen.
Resolution agreed to.
The next Resolution was for a grant of 98,000 l. for improvements in his Majesty's Dock-yards at home and abroad.
Mr. George Robinsonbegged to ask, whether the first Lord of the Admiralty had in his possession any estimate of the expense of completing the establishment at Bermuda? He was told that the climate
1118
was ill adapted for the conservation of naval stores, and that Halifax was well adapted. At all events he was sorry that the country had been put to the expense of works at both places. There was another point to which he wished to call the attention of his Majesty's present Government—namely, a previous arrangement for the consolidation of the command in the West Indies and Nova Scotia. The duties could not possibly be efficiently performed where a space of fifty or sixty degrees intervened.
Sir James Grahamsaid, that the expense of the works at Bermuda was at present uncertain. But at the other stations, the sum now proposed would cover the entire expenses. The present Government were not responsible for the amount of these expenses, as the works had been undertaken by contract before they came into office. Although he had not, as yet, any estimate of the expenses at Bermuda he had appointed a confidential Officer, as a Commissioner, to report to him what portion of the original plan might be dispensed with. He believed that a considerable sum of money might be saved in this branch, and the sum that he now asked for was merely to carry on the works until he should have a complete estimate. He hoped next year to be able to announce the final expense of the completion of the works.
Sir Joseph Yorkesaid, that Halifax was certainly too far from the fine-weather country to be advantageous for the purpose for which it had been selected. The works at Bermuda might have been carried on upon too extensive a scale; but let not the right hon. Gentleman imagine that merely sending out a Commissioner would be sufficient; for Commissioners had already been employed, and great care bestowed upon the works. He would take that opportunity of asking why the basin at Sheerness, which had been constructed at so much expense, and which was, in reality a harbour itself, was not used by ships fitting out? There was there every convenience for the purpose of putting all their stores on board at a small expense, and such great facilities for extinguishing any fire that even Etna itself might be put out. Every store, from a sail needle to a bower anchor, ought to be put aboard there before the vessel went out.
Resolution agreed to.
The next Resolution was for 50,500 l. for

1119
the charges of Pilotage, and other contingencies, for the year.
Mr. Humecomplained of the expense of the light-house at Spithead, which, he said, ought to be thrown upon the Trinity House, which had plenty of funds.
Sir Byam Martinsaid, that the lighthouse was for the benefit of King's ships, and, therefore, properly came under the naval department.
Sir J. Yorkesaid, that merchant vessels also derived great benefit from these lights and he was of opinion that it would be fair to throw the expense of them on the Corporation of the Trinity House.
Resolution agreed to.
25,000 l. for Transports and Freightage, and 24,040 l. for the hire of Packets were voted.
The next Resolution was, 25,000 l. for ships building in Bombay.
Sir J. Yorkedid not think it right while we were contracting our establishments and keeping down the price of oak at home that such a large sum should be voted for encouraging Parsees instead of our own people.
Sir J. Grahamobserved that the charge in the estimate was for work already done.
Sir G. Clerksaid that, in 1828, the late Government had sent out orders to stop the building of ships in India. But on a representation that great loss would be experienced if permission were not given to finish the ships already on hand, leave was given for that purpose. The present, however, would be the last vote required for this object.
Sir Charles Forbeswas sorry to hear that there was an intention to abandon the building of ships at Bombay. The ships built in the East Indies were some of the finest in the service. There was not another ship of war equal to the Ganges. They were likewise built much cheaper than in England, and were almost everlasting. The natives of India had as much right to be employed in building our ships, as those of any other portion of the British Empire; but they seemed to be overlooked, and under the monstrous measure of Reform proposed by Ministers, he did not see how the interests of India were to be represented in that House or defended in the country.
Mr. Sloane Stanleysaid that, as a large proprietor of timber, he felt a great interest in the question. He certainly had heard that Indian teak was the best material for ship-building; but after that came Sussex
1120
oak; and after that the oak of his own county (Hampshire). But however this might be, he wished to know whether it was the intention of Government to supply the dock-yards, during the present year, with British timber, or whether they intended to supply the Navy with Indian timber, or with timber from the coast of Africa?
Sir B. Martinstated that the intention was to use one half British, and one half African timber.
Resolution agreed to.
On the Resolution granting a sum of 782,000 l. for Half-pay to the Officers of the Navy and Royal Marines,
Mr. Humeasked whether the regulations with respect to promotion were adhered to?
Sir James Grahamsaid, that the plan of making one promotion for three vacancies had been adhered to, and he was happy to say the effect of it was visible in a diminution of from 2,000 l. to 3,000 l. on the half-pay charge of the year.
Resolution agreed to, as were,
Resolutions granting a sum of 246,058 l. for pensions to Officers, their Widows and Relatives, granting 1,300 l. as Bounty to Chaplains.
On the Resolution that 249,200 l. be granted in Out-pensions of Greenwich Hospital,
Sir Joseph Yorkeasked what was the intention of the First Lord of the Admiralty as to admitting merchant seamen to a participation in the benefits of the Hospital?
Sir James Grahamsaid, another opportunity would arise for his giving explanations on that subject; but he might say that, as at present advised, he did not propose to admit merchant seamen as out pensioners, but he was disposed to allow their claim to enter the Hospital as inpensioners, in common with the seamen of his Majesty's service, subject, however, to the examination and consideration of the Board of Admiralty.
Resolution agreed to.
The sums of 155,905 l. for Superannuations in the Civil Department. 136,000 l. for defraying the expense of ships for the conveyance of stores. 3,000 l. for the conveyance of Stores to the Swan River; 88,500 l., for sending convicts abroad. 3,380 l. bounty for the capture of piratical vessels. 30,050 l. for the salaries of officers and the contingent expenses of the Victualling Office, were also voted.
On the Resolution granting 63,363 l.; for the expenses of the Victualling Yards,
Sir G. Clerkasked if it was the intention of the right hon. Baronet to discontinue the supply of beer for the Navy at home?
Sir James Grahamsaid, that it was intended to discontinue the supply of beer except in the case of a crew returned from a very long voyage, whose health required a change of that description, when the beer would be supplied by contract. It was by effecting various reductions in the yards of Deptford and elsewhere that he was able to reduce the estimates of the expense of each man from 32 s. to 29 s. per month.
Mr. Humewas at a loss to know why our naval victualling was not all supplied by contract. Instead of that, we adopted the most expensive mode of curing meat. If meat was anywhere at a higher price than elsewhere it was in the London market; and yet Government bought it in that market, and then sent it down to Deptford to be cured. A saving to a great amount might be effected by adopting a different practice. As the Army was victualled by contract, why not the Navy? The East India Company victualled their ships by contract; they had no stores. He had no doubt that 50,000 l. a year might be saved by a different plan of management.
Colonel Sibthorpasked if it was the intention of Government to discontinue the Commissioner at Deptford?
Sir J. Grahamsaid, that the answer to this question depended upon the course which would be pursued with respect to the suggestions of the hon. member for Middlesex. If the yards were to be kept up on their present scale, the retention of the Commissioners would be indispensable. The question, however, was, whether it would not be better to supply the Navy by contract. As a general rule there could be no doubt but that contract was the best method; but this rule admitted of exceptions, and beef was one. As the contractors were few, the establishment was found extremely serviceable in keeping-combinations in check; and he understood that, a few years ago, a sum was saved more than sufficient to cover the expenses of the establishment by defeating some such combination. With respect to bread there was no security for getting the best sort, except by manufacturing it. If bread was found to have even a slight de-
1122
fect, when a ship was on a foreign station, it was all condemned and sent home, with all the costs of freight—so that it was much more safe, and more economical also, to manufacture that article for the Navy, instead of obtaining it by contract.
Resolution agreed to,
24,242 l. for Salaries and contingent expenses of the Naval Medical establishment. 30,000 l. for Medical Stores in the Navy in 1831. 31,611 l. for provisions for Officers of ships in ordinary. 8,557 l. for provisions for Officers and men in the yard service afloat. 86,457 l. for new works in the Victualling and Medical departments. 157,576 l. for half-pay and pensions and superannuations to Medical Officers, pursers and Clerks. 175,000 l. to defray the expense of troops in Garrison on foreign service and convict service, were also voted.

SUPPLY.—CIVIL CONTINGENCIES.
Mr. S. Ricemoved, that a sum, not exceeding 80,000 l. should be granted to his Majesty, to defray the Civil Contingencies for 1831.
Mr. Humeallowed the vote was considerably diminished, but he hoped and trusted it would be yet made much less. He considered several of the items extravagant and objectionable. Under the head of diplomatic journeys he found 490 l. charged for a journey made by Lord Burghersh. Now, he knew of no journey the noble Lord had made, excepting that to England and back to Italy. He wished accordingly to move for an account to know what that journey was. He likewise objected to a charge of 1,373 l. made by Mr. Vaughan, our Ambassador in America—a sum nearly equal to the whole allowance of the American Ambassadors. He also saw an extremely objectionable charge of 1,500 l. made for installing the King of Wirtemberg, the Duke of Saxe Weimar, and Sir Edward Codrington, Knights of certain Orders. Now, he would be glad to know why the Commons of England should be called on to pay for the installation of these noble Persons? He would therefore move to know to whom this money was paid, and for what? The next item to which he objected, was 1,200 l. for the contingent expenses of Lottery Offices, which had ceased to exist for four years. The next item to which he took exception was 3,600 l. to Mr. Babbage, for his counting machine, two giants having been already made to that gentleman. He also disap-

1123
proved of 500 l. for a mail-boat to the Bahamas: this charge ought, in his opinion, to have been brought under the head of Post-office expenses, or expenses for the Colonial Department. He saw there was 346 l. paid to make out the Commission for the Ecclesiastical Courts. This appeared to him a gross abuse. Was the charge for fees, or writing? Why such a sum. should be expended for such a purpose he could not see. The Great Seal was put to the Commission, but the Chancellor was paid 7,000 l. a year for that amongst other duties, and he saw no reason why the country should be asked to pay over again in fees of this kind. He should also move for an account of this expenditure. He likewise found that 575 l. was charged for making out the appointment of a Board of Commissioners for the Affairs of India. He thought they should pay the expenses of the Commission. Why should they not pay the fees like Officers in the Navy and Army? He also objected to the 92 l. charged to defray the expenses of the India Board Office, and to the 1,279 l. paid to the Solicitor to the Commissioners for Charities; also to the 6,812 l. paid to Lecesne, Escoffery, and Gonville, on account of their deportation from Jamaica. Looking to the Irish Estimates, he thought it highly unreasonable that 318 l. should be paid to the Clerk of the Hanaper Office, as fines consequent upon the election of an Irish Peer to succeed Lord Head fort. A sum of 1,300 l. for three Inspectors of Police, as allowance for travelling expenses for a year, was excessive. He next saw an item of 1,451 l. for valuations in the city of Dublin. Surely an expense of this kind ought to be paid by local taxation, and not be thrown upon the country at large. He likewise protested against the Archbishop of Dublin receiving 276 l., as Chancellor of the Order of St. Patrick, on the delivery of the Collars to the Marquises of Drogheda and Waterford. The Archbishop of Canterbury formerly stood in the same way, but he was now obliged to content himself with the honour, as he thought, on his side, the Archbishop of Dublin ought to do. He also objected to the grant of 2,010 l. for pensions on his late Majesty's bounty, for 1829 and 1830; and as to the charge for clothing and standards for the three regiments of Life Guards, &c. (which he had omitted to mention before), he considered it should have appeared in the Army Estimates. He also, small us
1124
was the sum, objected to the charge of 78 l. for ringers at Christ Church, St. Patrick's, and St. Wereburgh's Church, on the occasion of his late Majesty's death. Adverting to the expense of Commissions, he observed, that Commissions for various purposes had cost the country 1,200,000 l. since 1800, and he doubted much whether their labours had been productive of a saving of half that sum.
Mr. Riceobserved, the particulars to which his hon. friend adverted were contained in the estimate of last year. The course pursued, however, by the late Government, was not open to objection, because the surplus which had accrued through their economy had enabled those now in office to reduce the vote. He was happy to be able to inform his hon. friend, in reply to his observations, that an arrangement was made, by which all charges under the head of diplomatic journeys, were for the future to be discontinued. In fairness be was bound to add, this was the act of the late Government. Extraordinary diplomatic expenses, too, were henceforth to be paid out of the fund for diplomatic expenses, without increasing that fund, and thus removed from the head of Civil Contingencies. In the head of outfits, also, a reduction had been made of from 9,975 l. to 4,875 l. by the establishment of a new scale. But the most important vote to which the hon. Member alluded was that to Lecesne and Escoffery, and he was sorry to say, that he had yet 11,000 l. to move for, to complete the compensation to those persons. The papers, however, connected with the affair, would soon be in the hon. Member's possession, and he would then see that the sum was by no means too great, and that the case was one in which no Government could have acted differently from the late Administration. These persons had suffered great hardship undeservedly, by their removal under the order of the Duke of Manchester, and it was at first considered that the noble Duke should be required to pay this himself; but as he had acted on the opinion of his legal advisers, it was deemed right that he should not be so called on. This was the reason why he had to move for the sum for them. People were fond of instituting Commissions of inquiry, but they were often expensive. A sum of 800,000 l. had been paid within these last ten years for such Commissions, but most of these had now come to a close. As to the vote to Mr.

1125
Babbage, it was one which the country would rejoice to pay. It was for a machine by which the most abstruse calculations could be worked with unerring certainty; mathematical, nautical, and other Tables could be constructed by it with ease and perfect accuracy; indeed, his hon. friend ought not to object to it, for it was probable that he himself would here-after be saved much trouble by it, and that some of his calculations on the Estimates might be made by mechanical means. The sum voted was for the purchase of the whole machine, which was to be applied to the public service. As to the expenses of the Life Guards, they being household troops, the expenditure could not be well brought within the regular Army Estimates. The expenses of the Solicitor for Charities were for proceedings under that Commission, and much of those expenses had been already recovered. The expense of conferring the Order of the Garter on foreign Sovereigns could not be avoided, while such orders continued in existence. With respect to the police of Ireland, some arrangement might be made by which the expense might be borne between the different counties and the country at large. As to the fees of the Clerk of the Crown and Hanaper, and other matters connected with this branch of the Estimates, the fullest account that could be procured should be laid before the House.
Mr. Warburtonspoke in terms of the highest praise of the invention of Mr. Babbage, which, he said, would, when completed, not only do all that had been promised, but much more. It would calculate all known formulae. The sum required for its completion, including the house in which it stood, would be 12,000 l.; and the money thus expended would soon repay itself by the saving it would effect in the sums now paid for the construction of single Tables. The machine would be completed in three years, and would be well worthy of the sum expended on it.
Mr. Lennardobjected to the sums paid to five of the principal servants of our Ambassador in France. He did not wish to underrate the services of that noble person, but he thought that, considering the salary paid to the Ambassador, this allowance to the servants was quite unnecessary. He objected, too, to the payment made to the servants of that Ambassador on account of family mourning. He wished also to call the attention of the
1126
House to the great number of Ambassadors and Ministers maintained by this country in the petty States of the German Empire, and he must express a wish that their number might be diminished. He admitted, however, that the reductions which the present Ministry had effected were sufficiently extensive to induce him to postpone for the present a motion of which he had given notice.
Lord Palmerstonremarked, that the hon. Member, when he made the observation respectingthe salary of our Ambassador in France, was not, perhaps, aware that it had suffered a reduction of 2,000 l. It had formerly been 12,000 l. per annum, but his noble predecessor had reduced it 1,000 l. a year, and he proposed to effect a further reduction to a similar amount. As to the number of our Ambassadors in Germany, he believed that when the time came he should be able to prove that they were by no means too numerous. Great reductions had taken place among them. In 1827, the salaries paid to these Ambassadors, and their expenses, amounted to 62,000 l.; in 1828, to 64,000 l.; in 1829 to 59,000 l.—the average of which was 61,000 l.; but in the course of the last year the sum was reduced to 40,000 l. He believed he should be able to bring down the amount by a further reduction of 14,000 l. He trusted, therefore, that this branch of expenditure would not be considered extravagant.
Mr. Goulburnsaid, that the hon. member for Maldon ought to have given the credit of the reductions, which had induced him to postpone his motion, to the late, and n it to the present, Ministers; and all the reductions now effected had been contemplated, and indeed begun, by the late Ministry. With respect to contingencies in the diplomatic expenses, he observed, that when the late Ministry took office, they amounted to 240,000 l.; but they were now reduced to 80,000 l., or exactly one-third. He did not think the item could be reduced much farther.
Mr. O'Connellobjected to several items in these Estimates, which, he contended, savoured strongly of the nature of jobs; some of which were for the erection of fountains intended to supply with water the poor, who could not afford to pay water-rates. In some instances, these were erected to please individual proprietors of the neighbourhood, though at the public expense, in places where the gentry only

1127
resided. In one instance, though the Chief Justice, Lord Downes, endeavoured to open a costly fountain in Merrion-square, he was obliged to desist from attempting to secure to the poor that supply of water which they were entitled to, because it was said that, at the time of the grant, it was expressly stipulated by Lord Blaquiere, who solicited its erection on his property, that the fountain (strange to say, though, perhaps, a perfectly consistent Irish stipulation) should never furnish one drop of water, lest the poorer class resorting to it should offend the eyes of the residents in that fashionable quarter of the city of Dublin. He did not know which to reprove most, the silliness or the corruptness of all this sort of jobbing, so frequent in the different departments of the Irish Government. He must also notice, that 2,000 l. was annually given to the sufferers in the Irish rebellion, at the rate of 30 l. each. He considered that a very large sum, and he could not help thinking that many persons were receiving the benefit of the grant, who had never suffered at all at the time of the rebellion. It was generally believed by the people that the money was voted to keep up an establishment of spies and informers.
Mr. Stanleysaid, that until within the last three years, the vacancies in the list of those pensioners had been filled up. Since then that practice had been put a stop to, and the vote was consequently in the course of diminution.
Mr. George Dawsonhoped that Government would discontinue the useless expense of Inspectors of Gaols, who had no duty to perform; and of Inspectors of Yeomanry, whose duty could be so much better performed by a Staff Officer of the regular army in each district.
Colonel Sib thorphoped, too, the charge of a per centage yearly to Sir Robert Chester, as a bonus on presenting presents of great value to foreign Ministers, would be discontinued, as totally absurd, and unnecessarily expensive to the country, overburthened as it now was with unavoidable charges and expenses. He thought too that the sum charged for Exchequer fees, of which he hardly knew the meaning, was excessive.
Lord Palmerstonassured the hon. Member he would never hear of these charges again; he had made arrangements for the abolition of this ancient but unreasonable custom in our diplomacy.
Vote agreed to, and the House resumed.

ELECTIONS—(IRELAND.)
Colonel Trenchmoved the Second Reading of the Election in Ireland Bill. The object of the Bill was two-fold: first, to make it incumbent on candidates at an election to warn every person who tendered his vote against giving it unless duly qualified; and, secondly, to settle, what was now in some degree a matter of doubt, whether a freeholder who held property in detached portions, of the value of 10 l. in the whole, had a right to vote. He was anxious, as a hint of a dissolution had been thrown out, to have these matters settled before the next general election.
Mr. Stanleyhad no objection to the Bill going forward that stage, but
Mr. Bankesobjected to taking a measure of that kind at so late an hour in the night.
The gallery was cleared for a division, but the Motion was agreed to without the House dividing, and the Bill read a second time.

CORPORATE FUNDS.
On the Motion that the Corporate Funds' Bill be committed—
Mr. Fylerobjected to proceeding with the Bill at that late hour, and moved the adjournment of the House.
The House divided: For the adjournment 20; Against it 43. The House resolved into a Committee upon the Bill.
The Marquis of Chandosrenewed the opposition to the proceeding with the bill, and moved that the Chairman report progress, and ask leave to sit again.
Mr. George Dawsonurged the adjournment of the consideration of the question.
Sir James Grahamadmitted, that it would be very inexpedient to fight the Bill at that late hour, and advised his hon. friend (Mr. Spring Rice) to give way.
House resumed.