Commons Sitting of 13 February 1832

MINUTES.
Returns ordered. On the Motion of Mr. HUNT, of the Number of Military Court Martials which had sat on Private Soldiers, from the 1st of January, 1831, to the 1st of January, 1832, detailing the Nature of the Accusation, and the Number of Lashes inflicted in each
258
Case where the Party was found Guilty;—On the Motion of Mr. POULETT THOMSON, of the quantity of Wool Imported and Exported from 5th January, 1831, to 5th January, 1832, with the Amount of Duties paid:—On the Motion of Sir ROBERT PEEL, for Copies of all Correspondence that had taken place between Individuals, the Water Companies, and the Treasury, relating to supplying the Metropolis with Water:—On the Motion of Mr. BERNAL, of all Sums received by the Corporation of the Trinity House from the Thames River Pilots, in pursuance of Act 6th George 4th, and the Names of the Persons holding Licences as Pilots:—On the Motion of Mr. CURTEIS, of any and what provision made to Instruct Prisoners in Reading and Writing, in pursuance of 4th George 4th, Cap. 64:—On the Motion of Sir WILLIAM RAE, of the Number of Judicial Factors appointed by the Court of Session, Scotland, in each of the last five years:—On the Motion of Mr. RUTHVEN, of the Number of Stamps issued to each Newspaper in Ireland in each quarter, from 5th January, 1830, to 5th January, 1832.
Petitions presented. By Sir EDMUND HAYES, from the Landholders and County Cess-payers of the County of Donegal, complaining of the Amount of these Taxes:—By Mr. EVELYN DENISON, from the Inhabitants of Mansfield, against the General Register Bill.

LONDON BRIDGE APPROACHES BILL.
Mr. Alderman Wood having moved the second reading of this Bill,
Mr. Briscoesaid, that he wished to have the Committee on this Bill postponed for three weeks, and if the hon. member for the City would not consent to that, he should oppose the second reading. Mr. Rennie, in stating his opinions with respect to the New London-bridge, had particularly alluded to St. Saviour's Church, and the beautiful chapel attached to it, which had recently excited so much public attention, and had remarked, these objects, would form a fine architectural feature by being opened to public view. But would the House believe that the London-bridge committee were now about to shut out the prospect of that church altogether? Within the last two years, a sum of 30,000 l. had been expended on this church, and this ought to weigh with the House not to allow of its exclusion from public view. He (Mr. Briscoe) only asked the Bridge Committee to give up the small space of 130 feet. The Bridge Committee were willing to give seventy, and surely the additional sixty feet could not be any great object when the subject was properly considered.
Mr. Alderman Woodsaid, that it was rather odd in the hon. member for Surrey to oppose the second reading of a Bill which was to give permission to make the opening he sought. At present the Committee had a bill which would close the view altogether, and this was to remedy that omission. The Committee, far from being blameable, had actually gone to a great expense in having Mr. Smirke to

259
make plans, and had fully satisfied the people of the Borough, by giving seventy feet for an opening. Let the Bill be read a second time, and if there were anything in the case, let it be examined in the Committee up stairs, which had the power of adjourning from time to time until they were fully informed on the subject. If the Bill were not passed, the City would be deprived of a great and noble street opening from the river into the heart of the town.
Mr. Cressett Pelhamwould not give his assent to a grant for more money than was actually necessary, and he thought Gracechurch-street was quite enough.
Mr. Huntsaid, that the Bill was for the London side of the bridge, and moreover the Committee had given those at the Surrey side all they had asked for. He was no Antiquarian, and though he might be considered Gothic, he must say that, in his opinion, what was called the Lady Chapel was a nuisance, by shutting out the view of the beautiful church.
Mr. Davies Gilbertthought the Bill ought to be read, and, either in the Committee, or on the third reading, any clauses deemed advisable might be introduced.
Mr. Briscoesaid, with that understanding, he would not oppose the second reading.
Bill read a second time. Ordered to be committed.

EDUCATION (IRELAND).
Colonel Conollypresented a Petition from the inhabitants of Mayne, in the county of West-meath, against the proposed plan of education for Ireland, and deploring the withdrawal of the grant from the Kiklare-street Society. The petitioners deprecated, in the strongest possible terms, the project advanced by his Majesty's Ministers under the pretence of conciliating all parties in Ireland and which was about to be generally carried into operation, having for its object the limitation of the diffusion of the Sacred Scriptures. The petitioners implored the House not to permit such a plan to be carried into effect, and they declared that it was utterly impossible that the Protestants of Ireland could coalesce in this plan, for, as Protestants, it must be odious to them, and as Christians, they could not submit to it. They therefore, prayed the House to withdraw their sanction to the measure, and to continue the grant to a society which was one of
260
the principal means of spreading peace and happiness through the country, by the dissemination of the Sacred Scriptures in their full and unmutilated form. He most cordially supported the prayer of the Petition, as it was in his opinion, a monstrous proceeding to call upon people to submit to the mutilation of the word of God. It was an absurd endeavour of a few persons to set up their own private judgment against the laws of their Creator and to attempt to modify or alter them at their pleasure. It was, in point of fact, waging war with the dignity of Heaven.
Colonel Rochfortfelt great pleasure in supporting the prayer of the Petition just presented by his hon. friend, the member for Donegal, and which he could state was most respectably signed. Whilst on his legs, he would take the opportunity to refer to a petition presented on a former day by his hon. colleague (Mr. Chapman), when he unfortunately was not in his place. That petition was stated to be signed by a clergyman of Westmeath. He considered it due to the clergy of that county to state, that the gentleman alluded to, was not a beneficed clergyman, or even a curate; he was several years ago admitted to orders, but had long since given up the Church. He begged further to remark, that the petition did not appear to have been signed by even those few landed proprietors who generally agreed with his hon. colleague in politics. He must take this opportunity of expressing the satisfaction he felt at what was said in another place some evenings since by the noble Lord at the head of the Government, and expressed his conviction that if it had been made before, it would have saved many lives.
Mr. Chapmanwas willing to bear his testimony to the respectability of the parties who had signed the petition just presented; but, nevertheless, he must assert, that it did not express the sentiments of the majority of the county with regard to the new plan of education for Ireland. That this new system was opposed, he did not deny; but the opposition was limited to one party of Protestants. The Moderator of the Synod of Ulster observed, that without some plan of this kind, education could not be carried to any great extent in Ireland. He regretted that his hon. colleague was not in his place on the occasion to which he had referred, as he appeared to have misunderstood him with regard to his having said that a certain

261
petition was signed by a Protestant clergyman. He had not said so, but he begged, in conclusion, to assure the House, that the feeling in favour of the present system of education was much more general than was imagined.
Sir Robert Batesonapprehended that the hon. Member was quite mistaken on one point. The remarks which he attributed to the Moderator of the Synod of Ulster emanated from a Mr. Cooke, who was a very distinguished individual, but not the moderator.
Mr. O'Connellthought the hon. member for Donegal was filled with religious zeal, when presenting a petition against the proposed plan of education for Ireland. If any system of education went to leave out a part of religious information or doctrine which was disputed between Protestants and Roman Catholics, they were told this was a mutilation of the word of God? Would the hon. Member compel Catholic children to be taught those doctrinal portions of religion in which their fathers did not believe? Would he have Protestant children forced to learn the Roman Catholic's creed. What was the principle upon which this system proceeded? It was that of education in common—of educating the children of Protestants and Roman Catholics together. The hon. Gentleman wished the Roman Catholics to submit to his decision; but would it be right for Protestants to submit to a Catholic education? Certainly not! In like manner the Roman Catholics were unwilling to submit to a Protestant system. The Government had wisely endeavoured to unite both parties, adopting a plan recommended by the Rev. Dr. Sadler (of whom he would say, that there existed not a man more entitled to public praise). He, with the Roman Catholic Bishop of Dublin, came to this arrangement. They agreed that, for four days in every week, the children should read certain extracts from the Old and New Testaments, so selected that no objection could rationally be made to them by Protestant or Roman Catholic. A difference of opinion prevailing upon certain points, they deemed it wholly unadvisable to put the Bible in its entire form into the children's hands. They looked out those general passages which inculcated universal charity and benevolence. On this course, then, there surely could exist no difference of opinion among real Christians. From these passages they formed a book for the
262
perusal of the children four days a-week. Was that mutilating the word of God? To this plan every rational man must assent. Two days in the week the Protestant and the Catholic children were taught their respective catechisms. The Roman Catholic children, on these two days, were instructed in religion exclusively, and apart from the Protestants: if they chose to bring a Bible with them, they were at liberty to do so. Thus four days were devoted to the perusal of these selections from the Scriptures; and two days (besides the Sabbath) to doctrinal religion exclusively, each child being taught according to the doctrines in which it was to be brought up. Could there be a fairer system proposed? He asked men of common sense, whether those persons who opposed it were not deceived by some interested individual? Might not the learned Member, the Recorder for Dublin, be wrong, when, in the height of his zeal, he offered a determined resistance to such a system, and, as it were, cried out "To your tents, oh Israel?" He felt satisfied that the Government had acted with great discrimination in adopting the plan in question. But if there was a feeling against it, he met the opinion of the parties opposed to him with that respect which he was always disposed to shew to the sentiments of those who differed from him upon religious questions. But let them have no forced consciences. He had seen the misery arising from a course calculated to coerce them. It was that course which originated the tribunal of the Inquisition—it had been that course which had led, in Ireland, to the cruel treatment of landlords. To such a course was to be attributed the worst of horrors.
Mr. Shawhad not intended to trouble the House upon the present occasion, had he not been called up by the observations of the hon. and learned Member. He was persuaded that the Table of the House would be covered with petitions of a similar character to that presented by his hon. friend. He himself had one to present, which would deserve the most serious attention of the House, coming, as it did, from the most influential and respectable persons in Dublin, including many of the highest characters of the church and the law. He had never wished to draw any invidious distinction between Protestants and Catholics in a religious sense, but he differed wholly from the view taken

263
by the hon. and learned Member, when he said, that the proposed system of education was in accordance with the Bible: he asserted the very contrary. What the Protestants desired was, not that extracts from the Scriptures should be forbidden, but that the Government should not attempt to put down one system, founded upon the whole Bible, to substitute another, founded upon a part of it. The hon. and learned Member said, Catholics ought not to submit to Protestant dictation; but, in answer to that, he would tell the hon. and learned Member, that Protestants would never allow the Bible to be withdrawn from their children at the dictation of Catholics. Protestants had already gone to the very verge of compromise to effect a mixed education. In the plan of the Kildare-street Society, they had allowed the Bible to be read in the schools without note or comment. They excluded all catechisms and books of religious controversy, and they admitted Catholic in common with Protestant teachers. He would not disturb the panegyric the hon. and learned Member had pronounced upon the Catholic Bishop of Dublin, and Doctor Sadler, further than by saying, that the Protestants of Ireland of every denomination were opposed to the proposed measure, and would never submit to leave the standard of the Bible for a book of mutilated extracts. The hon. and learned Member had so directly alluded to what he had said in another place, that he felt it necessary to reply in a few words. He had there said, that the Protestants were willing to obey their superiors "in all things lawful," that they continued to yield a willing obedience to the laws, even after these laws had ceased to protect them, but if it became a question between God and man, between human authority and the Scriptures, then the Protestants of Ireland would be found ready to lay down their lives for their Creator and his doctrines, rather than desert them for any human authority whatever.
Mr. Wysesaid, the simple question was, whether the funds of the whole country were to be applied for the good of all, or for the use of a part only, of the people. If the former position was correct, then the Catholics had a right to their full share. The great error in the late system was, that the Bible was to be read without note or comment; this the Catholics objected to, and the Protestants then said,
264
"you must take this, or none." Let any system whatever be adopted, the Catholics had no desire to interfere with the education of Protestant children, and they only required the same measure to be dealt out to themselves; and surely it was worth while to endeavour to promote cordiality by educating children of both persuasions together, by which early union of sentiment mutual good feelings might result in after-life. As to the mutilation of the Bible, which had been so much insisted on, he begged leave to ask, whether there were not passages in that Book unfit for the eye of youth, and for females more especially. And whether there were not other passages so subtle and abstract as would only lead to confusion and error by being placed in the hands of youth. These reasons guided the Catholics in their wishes not to intrust the whole Bible in the hands of children of either sex, and the Protestants themselves acted on this very principle, for they used an abridgment of the Scriptures, and a history of the Bible drawn up by some of the greatest divines of their creed. Further the proposed plan of education was very nearly similar to that of several of the continental states, and of the United States of America, in which the object contemplated was, to educate the youth of all persuasions together, and he could not conceive that the Exclusive Protestants of this country had higher claims to religion than the people of other countries. He, therefore, hoped the Government would persevere and go through with that plan which they had already so well begun.
Mr. Lefroysaid, it was well known that the Catholic opposition to the Kildare-street Society was founded on a Bull from Rome, so that the Government was presenting the extraordinary spectacle of legislating in common with that court, an event which had not been seen since the reign of Mary. As to a selection being-agreed on from the Bible, between the Catholic Archbishop of Dublin and Doctor Sadler, he had not before heard of it, and very much doubted the fact. With respect to the assertion of the hon. member for Tippeiary, that portions of the Bible were not fit for the eye of children. That hon. Member's fastidiousness might find such passages, but no Protestants ever met with them.
Mr. Wysehad never attempted to throw the slightest imputations upon the Scrip-

265
tures, he had as high a veneration for them as any man, but what he meant to convey was, that from the time at which they were written, and from some peculiar expressions they contained, certain parts of them were not fit for the perusal of young females; and the more recondite parts were not adapted for youth generally.
Mr. Ruthventhought the question was one of good Government, rather than of religion, and he regretted to see so much heat on both sides. The hon. and learned member, the Recorder of Dublin, had declared, that the Protestants were ready to support their religion against all human authority; he, as a member of the Protestant Church, wished to see it supported on its own merits; his ideas of it were, that it preached peace and good-will unto all, and did not require blood for its support. He knew that many Protestants of Ireland were of the same opinion, and, therefore, approved of the proposed plan of education, but the exclusive Protestants, he verily believed, would rather have no education at all, than share it with their Catholic countrymen.
Petition to be printed.

CHOLERA MORBUS.
Mr. Croker,seeing the right hon. the Vice-President of the Board of Trade in his place, begged to ask a question on a subject which had excited considerable sensation throughout the town. A report had been circulated, and he believed had been pretty generally credited, to the effect that several cases of Cholera Morbus had appeared in the lower parts of the town towards the river. This report was in circulation so early as Saturday last, but he had just heard a further report, which stated that similar cases had appeared in the higher parts of the town. It was with a view of ascertaining, as far as possible, the correctness of those reports that he then intruded upon the attention of the House. He felt assured, and he trusted that his Majesty's Government would agree with him in thinking, that the best possible mode of preventing unnecessary alarm, and of satisfying the public mind, was to have no mystery whatever on the subject, and he therefore begged to ask if the reports which he had mentioned were founded in fact, and whether it was the intention of Government to give the public any authentic information as to the origin and progress of the disease since its appearance in London?
Mr. Poulett Thomsonfelt no hesitation in replying fully to the question of the right hon. Gentleman. On Saturday last the Government, received information that two cases which were deemed very suspicious as indications of Cholera had occurred at Rotherhithe. Immediately on this information being received, a deputation of medical men from the Board of Health was despatched to that place, and from their report, it appeared that the two cases at Rotherhithe were decided cases of Spasmodic Cholera. On Saturday information of the spread of this disease to Limehouse had been received, but, as far as he was then informed, it had not as yet extended further. He could assure the House, and the right hon. Gentleman, that his Majesty's Government fully concurred in the propriety both of satisfying the public mind as far as possible, and of putting the public fully in possession of the course about to be adopted by Government in such a trying emergency. For this purpose it had been determined, through the medium of the public Press, to give all the information which had been received by Government on the subject. The right hon. Gentleman would therefore find, in the public papers of that evening, a detail of all the information that had been received. Being on his legs, he would take that opportunity of stating, that every possible means had been and would be adopted by Government for the prevention of the spreading of the disease, and for giving to the public the most accurate details of its progress. Already district inspectors and physicians had been appointed, whose duty would be, to detail to the general Board of Health whatever might occur in their respective districts on the subject. Government was determined to exert all the means at its command to check the progress of the disease, and the right hon. Gentleman might be assured that every sort of information of the least use should be given to the public.
Mr. Crokerwas much obliged to the right hon. Gentleman for the explanation which he had given on this alarming subject. He would take that opportunity of suggesting to Government the expediency, before it was too late, of tracing the approach of the first case which had occurred. He made this suggestion from a conviction that much benefit would be derived from clearly ascertaining the mode in which that extraordinary disease made its

267
appearance; and he thought if this inquiry was well followed up, it might eventually lead to a discovery of the manner in which it was propagated, and consequently enable the medical Faculty to have recourse to more effective measures for its prevention. He was sure, from the candid course adopted by Government, that they would be glad to receive any suggestion in such an emergency, and it was with such a view that he begged to offer with great earnestness, the recommendation that the earlier course, and particularly the first, should be carefully traced.
Mr. Robinsonsaid, it having been now officially announced that the Cholera was in the metropolis, and as such a statement was likely very materially to affect our commercial intercourse, he trusted that Government would lose no time in allaying, as far as possible, the fears of foreign states, and thereby making the inconvenience and obstruction which were likely to arise as little as possible. This inconvenience would most likely be felt most strongly with regard to our distant colonial possessions; and he, therefore, hoped all unnecessary impediments to the sailing of vessels would be avoided, as the very length of the voyage was a sufficient security that no disease could be propagated by them. The most precise intelligence should be conveyed to foreign powers; lest in the absence of positive information they should refuse to admit English vessels into their ports. If their fears on the subject could not be allayed, at all events their doubts might.
Mr. Warburtonhoped that Ministers would never lose sight of the primary object of their present exertions, which was to check the spread of the disease by every means in their power. It was his decided opinion that the disease had spread to the extent it had, in consequence of mercantile activity, and mercantile avarice and jealousy, causing Government to relax that vigilant check of all intercourse between infected and non-infected places. He, therefore, trusted, that Ministers would not be induced to imitate this dangerous example by any fears of the injury which the commerce of the metropolis would thereby experience. The mercantile interest was no doubt of great moment; but the public safety was a matter of far paramount importance, to which the interests of commerce must, if necessary, be made to give way. He hoped that he understood the right hon. Gentleman's
268
declaration of the intention of Ministers to give the most full and prompt publicity to the progress of the disease, to include the distribution, gratis, of the Board of Health gazettes among the medical gentlemen of the country, so as to make them fully acquainted with its character, &c.
Mr. Humewas sure that the only effect of adopting the suggestion of his hon. friend, to cut off all commercial intercourse between infected persons and places, would be to aggravate tenfold the evils of the disease. They had sufficient data already before them to warrant this opinion. On the one hand, it was seen—such was the strange and as yet unaccountable progress of the disease—that the freest intercourse might take place between an infected and a non-infected place, without its spreading to the latter. There was, for example, the most unrestricted intercourse between Sunderland and Durham, and yet but one Cholera case occurred in the latter. And so in Glasgow, the disease had not shown itself in a single instance, notwithstanding its free intercourse with Kirkintilloch, and other infected places. On the other hand, the disease extended itself, in spite of the strictest precautions enforced by a despotic Government, through the means of the most rigid military cordon. The fact was, nothing was known of the mode in which the disease was propagated but this—that no precautions hitherto tried could keep it out, and that it did not extend to districts under, apparently, the most favourable circumstances of propagation. The only effect, then, of the proposition, to cut off all intercourse with infected places, would be, to add famine to pestilence, and aggravate tenfold the evils of both. No, the best preventive was, to provide the poor and destitute with wholesome food, and fuel, and raiment, and to enforce rigid habits of cleanliness. In those colliery districts in Scotland in which the disease had raged with most virulence, its victims were almost invariably the destitute and the uncleanly.
Mr. Stricklandsaid, from all he could learn on the subject, he was convinced that attempts to stop the disease, by cutting off communication, would only increase distress without having the intended effect. The only thing to be done was, to try to improve the happiness and comfort of the people. He had two remarkable instances to adduce that under peculiar

269
circumstances, the disease was not contagious. During the whole time of its raging in Sunderland, persons were sent from there to the county prison without communicating the disease, and though there was constant intercourse between the places, no instance of Cholera occurred. The other fact was that of 600 medical men who had gone to visit the hospitals at Sunderland, Newcastle, &c, not one of whom had been seized.
Sir Henry Hardingebegged to suggest that the military force should be, as speedily as possible, put into barracks. In Berlin and Vienna, where this system had been pursued, although the population suffered dreadfully, the troops had scarcely any loss to complain of. In Berlin, he believed, only twelve men died, and the loss was very trifling at Vienna. This was of course to be accounted for solely by the strict military discipline to which they were subjected, and to their being in barracks. It was true the military should be ready to expose themselves to all risk in common with the rest of the population; but to render them effective in the services they would be called upon to perform, it was essential to take all measures to keep them in good health. He submitted, therefore, that they should be at once removed from such places as Tothill-fields. If they were to be left there, it was scarcely possible they could escape infection, from the miserable population of such districts. He made no allusion to this from a doubt that all proper precautions would be taken by the Commander-in-Chief and the Government, but because he had lately received communications from Vienna and Berlin, stating the means which had been resorted to, to prevent infection, and the effects which had been produced.
Mr. Dixonimplored the Government not to attempt cutting off or impeding the intercourse between different places. The only consequence of such a regulation would be, to produce famine and destitution among the working people, without having the effect intended. As another instance of the disease not being propagated by the present communication, he must mention that, although it had raged for some time at Kirkintilloch, and the intercourse between that place and Glasgow was frequent, yet not one case had occurred in the latter place.
Mr. Briscoesaid, some of the parishes
270
in London were in such a state as to call for the immediate attention of Government and the local authorities. In Bethnal-green, for instance, there were 6,000 persons receiving parish relief; and in the workhouse there were 1,100, with only 370 beds. There were also eighty cases of contagious fever, which was daily increasing. He had ascertained these facts from personal inquiry yesterday afternoon, and he earnestly recommended the subject to the attention of his Majesty's Government.
An Hon. Memberstated, that he had heard the Lord President of the Council, in another place, move for certain papers, with an intention, if a bill was brought up, to facilitate their Lordships' legislating on the subject, which he understood was to to enable the Privy Council to take the most effectual means to prevent the propagation of the disease. He hoped that the same papers would forthwith be submitted to that House.
Lord Althorpassured the hon. Member that he would that evening lay on the Table documents respecting the Cholera, the same with those which had been presented in the other House. He also gave notice that it was his intention to move for leave to bring in a bill to give additional power to the Privy Council, for the purpose of adopting and enforcing means to prevent the disease.
Mr. Goulburntrusted the Privy Council would not be very delicate at such a crisis in enforcing any means they thought necessary to allay the public apprehension, and prevent the spread of the disease; and he was quite sure they might consider themselves fully authorized to act even before the bill passed through Parliament.
Mr. Huntobserved, that the wretchedness and disease in Bethnal-green was not confined to the workhouse: the whole population was in the most miserable condition. He trusted something would be done to place them in a better situation. He had already laid their pitiable case before the House, without much effect. He must now allude to the state of the atmosphere in the House itself, and he thought it absolutely necessary that some measure should be taken to purify it, as it was occasionally most fœtid and unwholesome, and peculiarly dangerous if there was any predisposition to disease. He appealed to Mr. Speaker to use his authority in im-

271
proving the ventilation. He must say, that it would be very stupid in them to expose themselves to unnecessary danger, while they were deliberating how they might best provide security for others. He hoped something would be done to abate the nuisance. If the contagion reached the House, there would be flying right and left to get out of the way.

POOR LAWS INQUIRY.
Lord Granville Somersetwas anxious to take the present opportunity of putting a question to the noble Lord opposite, in some measure connected with the subject which had been just under discussion, before the House went into a Committee of Supply. It was in relation to the pauperism of England. Within the last ten days, reports had gone abroad that Commissioners were about being appointed to inquire into the state of the poor, and the funds by which they were relieved. Whether the principle of the appointment of the Commissioners was good or bad, he would not now stop to discuss; but he wished to know, whether they had been appointed, and whether the noble Lord had any objection to state the nature of the instructions given.
Lord Althorpsaid, that the Commissioners about whom the noble Lord had put the question to him had not yet received their appointment, nor were the instructions of Government drawn up; however, as soon as they were, there could be no objection to their being communicated to Parliament.

CURRENCY.
Sir James Graham moved the Order of the Day for the House going into a Committee of Supply.
Mr. Stuart Wortleywas very desirous of putting a question to the noble Lord op-positer especting the Curreney Question. He understood a report had been spread abroad, to which many people attached a belief, that there was some intention, on the part of his Majesty's Ministers, to alter the law which had passed in the year 1826, relating to the small-note restriction. It was of great importance that the public should not be under a delusion—if delusion it were—upon the subject; and, therefore, he begged to know, whether there was any truth in the report, that Government intended to propose any alteration in the Currency?
Lord Althorpwas not aware that any such report had obtained belief; but he
272
begged to assure the hon. Gentleman that, with respect to the Currency Question, his Majesty's Government had no intention whatever to propose any alteration.

SUPPLY—DATE OF THE FINANCIAL YEAR.
Mr. Goulburnwished the right hon. Baronet opposite to give some explanation of the reason why the Estimates were brought forward at this particular period of the year.
Sir James Grahamsaid, that, in moving the Estimates it was his intention to state his reasons for adopting the course which he now proposed to adopt in bringing the Estimates at this moment before the House.
Mr. Goulburnhad imagined, that it was the intention of the Ministers to adopt a new rule with respect to the Estimates, and to make the financial year commence on the 1st of April. If that was their intention, it struck him that, as a general measure, they would find themselves unable to continue it, and he should like to know the reasons for the alteration.
Lord Althorpsaid, that he should at once give an answer to the question, why the Estimates were now proposed, and why the financial year was intended to begin on the 1st of April. By the course hitherto taken, the Estimates had been proposed after a certain amount of the money had been actually expended, and, of course, that expenditure must have been made without the previous sanction of Parliament. It seemed to him an anomalous mode of proceeding, that they should vote the Supplies for the service of the year on Estimates, although, at the time the Estimates were submitted to them, a part of the expenditure had actually been made. With the view of avoiding that anomaly, he thought it more consistent with the privileges of that House, and with the theory of the Constitution, that the Estimates should be submitted for the ensuing year previously to the Supplies being voted, and before the Government had spent any of the money. In future years, that arrangement might easily be carried into effect, but, in the present year, there might be some difficulty in it. In future the financial year might commence in April. It might be said, that in selecting so early a period as April, there might be some difficulty in carrying the arrangement into effect. He admitted that a difficulty would be experienced;

273
but, he believed, that the plan would be found practicable after the first difficulties had been got over.
Mr. Cressett Pelhamsuggested, that, to enable the Ministers to carry their plan fully into effect, the House should resume its ancient practice of meeting sometime before Christmas. That would, on many accounts, be very convenient.
Sir Robert Peelsaid, that it must have frequently occurred to all persons that there was some anomaly in first expending a part of the public money, and then coming to the House to ask for a vote justifying that expenditure. If the plan now proposed could be effected without inconvenience, it would undoubtedly, remove a great anomaly. But many points were to be considered before it could be carried into effect. The public service required that the Estimates should be voted for the year, before the 1st of April. Now, some time would be required for the examination of these Estimates, and the time between the meeting of the Parliament and the 1st of April would hardly enable them to give the Estimates that examination which it was always desirable to afford them. Suppose Parliament was called together on the 15th of January, he was afraid that there might be subjects of great interest—subjects, perhaps, of greater immediate importance than the Estimates—that would occupy the attention of Parliament. If that should happen, then, unless the House voted every Estimate before the 1st of April, there would be nothing in their arrangement. He hoped that the noble Lord would not be obliged to violate the rule he had laid down, even in the very first year of its existence. By the rule he proposed, the noble Lord gave himself no alternative but to proceed and vote all the Estimates before the 1st of April. He, however, had no objection that the experiment should be tried.
Sir James Grahamagreed with the right hon. Baronet, that the success of the experiment depended wholly on the Estimates being voted before the 31st of March. They would necessarily be later this year than other years, because, as this was the first time that the arrangement had been attempted, it was plain it would force them to vote two Estimates in the present year, in order to bring up the arrears; whereas, in future years, one Estimate only would be required to be voted. He thought there was some force in the obser-
274
vations made by the hon. member for Shropshire. It had been the practice of the House to meet a short time before Christmas; but that practice had been changed, and he did not think it would be absolutely necessary to resume it in order to effect the object now proposed. He attached much importance to the intention of commencing the financial year on the 1st of April. It was one adopted in conformity with the Resolutions of a Committee, at which the right hon. Baronet, the member for the Queen's County (Sir Henry Parnell), presided. In the past year he had not been able to comply with the rule which the Resolution of that Committee proposed; for he had had to prepare the Estimates for fifteen months together, and to pass under review all the heads of expenditure of the different departments connected with that over which he presided. He believed he had not been unsuccessful in that labour. He had had to consider all the demands that would be made on account of foreign service, and to form an Estimate of their amount for some months. These labours necessarily consumed some time, and he had been, in fact, occupied for nearly five months upon them. He believed, undoubtedly, that great difficulty would be found in effecting the change; but the change, when effected, would, he was sure, be found invaluable, and if the House chose to enforce it, would secure that real control of the House over the expenditure which he desired to see established. If the House should henceforward assemble early in January, the existing Government would always find it necessary to lay their Estimates before them at a very early opportunity, which he had no doubt would be found perfectly practicable. He was now prepared to make the statement of the Estimates both for the quarter and the year, and he was not without some hopes that both might be found satisfactory.
Sir Robert Peelneeded no authority to convince him of the desirableness of the plan, if it could be effected. In a constitutional point of view it was evidently preferable; but as there were obviously many difficulties in the way, he thought the most mature consideration should be given to it, so as to make the change com plete at once.
Sir Henry Parnellsaid, that as he had been appealed to, he thought it proper for him to declare, that he had been most

275
anxious that this rule should be introduced; for he conceived it to be a great absurdity to say, that Parliament was to control the public expenditure, and, at the same time, to allow a considerable portion of the money to be expended before the vote authorizing it was agreed to. With regard to this particular arrangement, it was in some degree connected with the Report of the Committee alluded to, for a great part of which he was personally responsible. Whether the 1st of April was the most proper day that could be proposed, was, perhaps, a subject on which there might be some doubt, but, for his own part, he was ready to say, that he thought that day would answer.
Mr. Goulburnwas of opinion, that the matter should be made the subject of inquiry by a Committee. He was not disposed to make the experiment, ignorant as he was of all the facts on which the supposed necessity for it was founded. He thought there was a constitutional objection to the arrangement now proposed. By the original constitutional practice, that House was to assemble, not only to grant money for the public service, but, in the first instance, to hear and redress public grievances. The redress of grievance ought to precede the grant of money; but if this arrangement were carried into effect, he could not see how the House could possibly have time to hear and redress public grievances before they were called on to vote the Supplies. By the present system they had a control over the Crown, because they had a control over the expenditure itself, which they might refuse to warrant until any grievances of which they complained had been redressed; but if they were to be required to vote the Supplies before they had had time to hear and redress grievances, that control would be gone.
Mr. Robert Gordonrejoiced that this change of system had taken place, and he rejoiced the more, as the Ministry were now endeavouring to carry into effect the recommendations which they had made when seated on the other side of the House. He was well satisfied to hear what had just fallen from the right hon. Gentleman opposite, who had all at once become so anxious for the redress of grievances. It had been his fate to be opposed to the right hon. Gentleman for twenty years, and to maintain against that right hon. Gentleman that they were bound to enter
276
on the discussion of grievances before they granted away the public money. He was glad to find that the right hon. Gentleman had now come round to his opinion. But the right hon. Gentleman had not explained how that object was to be effected by opposing this vote. If the right hon. Gentleman wished to secure, beyond the possibility of doubt ample time for the discussion of grievances, before money votes were passed, that object could be attained, not by reverting to the old system, which the right hon. Gentleman seemed to recommend, but by altering the time for passing the Estimates from the 1st of April to the 1st of July. That plan would completely answer the purpose, and give them full opportunity for redressing grievances before passing the money votes.
Mr. Humewas much pleased with the proposal now made by the Ministers. He thought that the practice, ever since he had been in that House, was unconstitutional. His Majesty had not legally the power to expend one single farthing, without the expenditure having first received the sanction of that House. The mere vote of a Committee of Supply did not authorise the expenditure; a Bill was required for that purpose; for it was competent to that House to alter their vote before the appropriation clause was passed. He agreed with the right hon. Gentleman near him, that the grievances of the people ought to be redressed before the money was voted; but he thought that, by the plan now proposed, that might be done, and yet sufficient time be left for the consideration of the Estimates. However, he thought that, to obviate all possible difficulty on that head, it would be as well that the financial year should commence on the 1st of July, instead of the 1st of April.
Mr. Herriesdenied the doctrine put forth by the hon. member for Middlesex, that an Act of Parliament must pass to legalise the expenditure of money, which had been the subject of a vote of that House. Such a rule would offer a most serious impediment to the public service, and would, in his opinion, affect the privileges of that House. The money might be applied on the authority of a vote of that House, and it was well known, that every Ways and Means Act contained a clause authorising such an application. They should not bind themselves so strictly upon this point, or else, on many occasions, they might severely embarrass the public

277
service. On a recent occasion, when the Parliament had been dissolved suddenly, there had been no Appropriation Bill passed. The greater portion of the money required for the public service had been already voted, and the money required beyond that amount was so trifling, that he had not deemed it necessary to call the attention of the House to the money that had been so expended without authority. But if the hon. member for Middlesex really entertained the opinions he had just expressed, what a dereliction of duty it was in him not to have brought the subject before the House. With respect to the plan itself, he should only say, that he feared it would be found impossible to carry it into effect, under all circumstances. He saw no sufficient reason for departing from the practice which had prevailed for 100 years, but, as it was an experiment, he would not oppose it.
Lord Althorpconsidered it would be wise to establish a rule upon this point, and endeavour to act upon it as strictly as possible. He would allow, it might happen, that special grounds might exist, which would render it necessary to depart from that rule, but then this would be its exception. He considered the alteration an advisable one to make.
Sir Henry Hardingesaid, it was rather ominous to have the financial year commence on the first of April; but he did not rise to make any further remark upon that subject. He wished to know if it were intended to introduce the Army and Navy Estimates early in the year, as it would be necessary that the Mutiny Act should pass by the 24th of March. If that were not so, a greater license would be given to Ministers in framing those Estimates.
Lord Althorpadmitted it was of importance to provide for passing the Mutiny Act as early as possible; but, at the same time, it could not be necessary to advance it at an earlier period than April or even May. They were not bound to pass it by the 24th of March.
Sir Robert Peelthought this subject could be much better discussed in a Committee than on the present occasion. He wished the House to proceed with the Estimates.
Sir Byam Martinsaid, it would be very necessary to make certain naval contracts in February or March, which could not be then done with the consent of Par-
278
liament; and, on the other hand, if they were not made, great additional expense and delay would be sure to take place.
Sir James Grahamsaid, he did not see that the difficulty just stated was at all insuperable. The contracts should always be made in reference to the stock of provisions and materials in the different stores on the public account. If any special or urgent case should arise, in which an extraordinary vote might be considered necessary, then he considered it would be proper for Ministers to come down to the House, and state the special case, and take the sense of the House upon it.
Mr. Crokersaid, it would be necessary to make the contract for provisions for the Navy as early as the month of October or November; and, in fact, unless the vote for the current year was agreed to at once, there would be at least half a-year during which the navy would not have supplies. He did not object to the proposed plan of only voting Estimates after a due examination by Parliament that they were necessary, for it sometimes happened that Ministers and Parliament did not agree upon the amount of Estimates either for the army or the navy.
Sir James Grahamsaid, that there was almost invariably in the store-houses a supply fully equal to one year's consumption. If, however, any greater supply was necessary, it could be immediately provided by an application to Parliament.
The House resolved itself into a Committee of Supply.

SUPPLY—NAVY ESTIMATES.
Sir James Grahamsaid, he should not find it necessary to trespass on the time of the Committee at any length by his present statement. In consequence of the dissolution of Parliament which took place last spring, it was necessary to bring the Estimates again before the House, and they had consequently been twice proposed and canvassed; and the present Estimates were merely the quarter Estimates of the entire sum voted for the whole year on the previous occasion. He had stated to the House, that he had been enabled by a balance which he found in the Exchequer at the end of the year 1830, to carry on the navy service until the 31st March of last year; and the object he had in view was, to effect the purpose which had lately been under discussion in that House—

279
namely, to make the financial year commence on the first of April. The balance which he found in the Exchequer last year was, 1,300,000 l., and the balance in the Exchequer in the present year was about 80,000 l. more. The only other observation he had to offer on the subject of these Estimates was, that, in consequence of this sum being applicable to the service generally, he had thought it right, the sum being large, to follow the precedent set in 1816 by Lord Bexley, then Mr. Vansittart, who, in consequence of the considerable amount of supplies voted in 1815, and the shortness of the war which ensued on Napoleon's return from Elba, found a balance in the Exchequer of 3,000,000 l. Lord Bexley adhering, as he (Sir J. Graham) contended, to the very letter of the Appropriation Act, came down to the House, and stated, in the opening of his financial view for 1816, that that surplus of supplies was to be considered as Ways and Means, not applicable to the particular service for which it had been voted, but to the general service of the country. In bringing forward his budget, Lord Bexley found that the sum which he had calculated at 3,000,000 l. turned out to be 5,000,000 l., and he carried it to the Ways and Means. He had followed the same course. Having found a large balance in the Exchequer, and it having been the intention of Government to carry on the service for three months without applying to Parliament, he had thought it right to adhere strictly to this precedent. He, therefore, had considered the money as a balance of Ways and Means, and he came down to the House with three months' Estimates to obtain its sanction for the application of that balance to the general service. He was not aware that it would be necessary for him to go into further details on this subject. The supply voted last year had been more than sufficient to cover the expenditure; and only in two particulars had the Estimates been exceeded. The deficiency occurred under the head of timber and materials; the sum voted for which was, he believed, 810,000 l., in addition to 69,000 l. arising from the sale of old stores. The sum expended was 10,000 l. beyond the sums voted; but it would be seen by the papers laid on the Table, that there was a surplus of 47,593 l. for re-payments, under the head of timber and materials, which would more than cover the extra outlay. The other Estimate
280
in which a deficiency occurred was in the Victualling Estimate. It had been thought that 905,000 l. would cover the whole expense; but, to his great surprise, he found that the outlay had greatly exceeded that sum; and that it would be necessary not only to take a vote for the year of 905,000 l., but also a vote for this quarter of 60,000 l., and he had every reason to believe that this further grant would coverall the debts contracted by former Governments. The right hon. Gentleman concluded by moving a resolution, that 32,000 men including 10,000 Royal Marines, be employed for the sea service for three months, commencing the 1st of January 1832.
Sir George Clerkhad no objection to the amount of the naval force which was required, nor did he think it any want of prudence to hand over the surplus supplies of last year upon the naval Estimates to the general service. He thought, however, that the right hon. Gentleman was mistaking the Ways and Means for the Supply, and the Supply for the Ways and Means. It was true, that in 1816 the sums voted for both army and navy were subsequently not found to be necessary, and the surplus was handed over to the general service; but Lord Bexley then stated, that these sums would come in aid of the Ways and Means to meet other votes which were agreed to by Parliament. Indeed, unless the Estimates for these important branches of the service were so framed as to leave an available balance with Government, there would be no Supply for the navy and army for several months in the year. The right hon. Gentleman could not hand anything over of the Ways and Means to the Chancellor of the Exchequer of which that noble Lord could avail himself for the general service, for the Estimates now brought in to meet the million nine hundred and odd thousand pounds which remained over from last year would exhaust it all, and he feared, without much attention to the particular items to which it was to be applied. The right hon. Gentleman said, that certain claims were to be met which would require the addition of 115,000 l. in the Victualling Estimate, and he (Sir G. Clerk) should like to know what these claims were. The victualling balance was stated in the papers on the Table, and if the right hon. Gentleman meant to act upon principle he should also have inserted the naval balance, which he (Sir George Clerk) did

281
not perceive on the face of the accounts. The sea-pay due to ships on foreign stations should also have been set out in the statement produced, for that expense, amounting probably to half a million, would have to be defrayed upon the return of the ships to this country.
Sir James Graham,in answer to the question relative to the 115,000 l., said, that sum would be necessary to cover the charges which could be made good against the Victualling Board up to the 1st of March next, and previous to the consolidation of that Board with another. It was considered most desirable that this account should be wholly liquidated, before the consolidation took place. With regard to the naval balance, it was, he could assure the hon. Baronet, to be found in the account laid before the House, at the bottom of the balance-sheet, and amounted in round numbers to about 1,200,000 l. With respect to the provision necessary for naval pay and pensions, it would not be necessary to call for it till about the month of April, when the general Estimates would be fully before the House.
Sir George Clerksaid, if the principle on which the right hon. Gentleman was proceeding was a sound and good one, it should be equally applied to the Naval as to the Victualling Board.
Sir James Grahamsaid, it was so, although it appeared to have escaped the attention of the right hon. Gentleman. He would take that opportunity to state, that another alteration had been made relating to payments. It had been usual to pay all demands on the Navy and Victualling Boards, by bills at sixty days sight. They proposed, in future, to substitute prompt payment, which would very much facilitate making up the accounts correctly to any given period.
Mr. Crokersaid, that with regard to the contracts made for the early part of the year, the principle of the right hon. Baronet would not apply, and such contracts must be made without the sanction of Parliament. He had long thought of the plan of the right hon. Baronet, and wished to facilitate it, but found the difficulties too great to hazard the alteration. Whether it would produce any saving to the public, he knew not; but it would certainly afford great convenience in keeping and examining the public accounts. He saw no objection to granting this vote of
282
the quarter in advance, and then every year would hereafter stand upon its own merits. But it would be necessary for the right hon. Baronet to include the amount of the wages due to ships at sea. He approved of the change from payment by bills to prompt payment; but, in that case, too, it would be necessary to remember the sums, which being due abroad, could not be liquidated within the year.
Mr. Humethought, that the present was an improved method of doing business, and he expected beneficial results from the alteration. He was surprised, however, at the same number of men being kept up, for he thought that a considerable number were to be discharged on account of the transference of the Coast Guard duty to the Custom-house. This arrangement would, of course, throw an additional expense on the Custom-house; and if there were to be no corresponding reduction in the navy, the expense would, in fact, be increased.
Sir James Grahamsaid, that the Coast Guard would, under the new system, cost little more than half what it cost under the old. He might also mention, that there were several ships on their way home to be paid off; but this, though it would decrease the expense eventually, would require a considerable sum for the moment.
Sir George Clerkthought it would be right to have on the Table a return of the expense of the Coast Blockade. He had moved for it some days ago, for he thought that there was no great reduction of expense under that head.
Mr. Spring Ricesaid, that the Estimates referred to were preparing, and he thought he should be able to lay them on the Table in the course of the present week.
Mr. Herriesthought that there had been a greater introduction of foreign goods under the new than under the old system.
Mr. Spring Ricethought that, if smuggling took place, it was not, at all events, of manufactured articles; nor could any increase that might have taken place be attributed to the alteration of the system.
Mr. Robinsonsaid, he had no doubt that smuggling had been carried on to an immense extent, and even the illicit importation of manufactured goods was enormous. That was evident from the case which had recently been discovered in the City, and also from the quantity seen in every large house in the country, which was greater

283
far than it ought to be, when compared with the trifling amount of import duties paid into the Custom-house. Nothing could keep out smuggled French goods, so long as they were to be admitted at any rate of duty whatever, for those that had paid duty protected those that had not.
Vote agreed to.
The following sums were also voted:—270,400 l. for the wages of 32,000 seamen and marines until March 31; 18,000 l. for wages to officers and men on board vessels in ordinary; 9,817 l. 7s. 9d. for salaries to officers, and contingent expenses, of the Admiralty office.
On 7,939 l. 3s. 1d. for salaries of officers, and contingent expenses, of the Navy Pay-office, being moved,
Mr. Crokerexpressed a hope that the right hon. Baronet would pay strict attention to prevent the undue increase of superannuations and pensions, which, he feared was consequent upon the alterations he meant to propose.
Sir James Grahamsaid, the subject had attracted his attention, and he should take every opportunity of endeavouring to reduce them.
Sir George Clerkwas anxious to know why it was that the first clerk in the Navy Pay-office had had his salary increased from 600 l. to 800 l. per annum? He had no doubt but there was sufficient reason for it, but he was desirous of knowing what it was.
Mr. Robert Gordonsuggested that the offices of Treasurer of the Navy, Paymaster of the Forces, and Treasurer of the Board of Ordnance, ought to be united in one and the same person. His Majesty's Ministers, on coming into office, expressed their intention to introduce a measure to that effect, and he now wished to know whether they still meant to do so?
Sir James Grahamsaid, that such a measure was in contemplation, and it was intended to remove all executive duties from the office of Treasurer of the Navy.
Vote agreed to.
The following sums were then voted:—12,032 l. 13 s. 2d. to defray the expenses of the Navy Office.
5,268 l. to defray the expenses of the Scientific Department of the Navy.
On the sum of 20,581 l., for the contingent expenses and salaries of officers employed in the dock-yards, being proposed,
Sir George Clerksaid, he saw by the details, that the right hon. Baronet had found the necessity of replacing several officers whose situations last year, he thought could be dispensed with. He, therefore, hoped that the persons who had previously held these appointments had been replaced.
Mr. Humesaid, a rule was adopted last year, to fill up all offices with persons in the receipt of half-pay, so as to diminish the dead weight. He trusted there had been no evasion of that rule.
Sir James Graham: certainly not; where-ever it was practicable to find officers on half-pay, competent to perform the duties of a situation, they were preferred.
Mr. Humefound the rope-yard had been removed from Woolwich. He hoped it was not intended to establish another elsewhere.
Sir James Grahamreplied, it was not; for the rope manufacturers in the other arsenals would be able to supply all that was required.
Vote agreed to; as were the votes for 4,683 l. for expenses of dock-yards abroad. 154,200 l. for the purchase of timber for the repair of ships, was then proposed
Captain Yorkesaid, he hoped no more timber calculated for line-of-battle ships only would be purchased, as he thought we had a sufficient number of that class; and from the progress making in steam navigation, it was probable, in the event of any future war, vessels impelled by steam would, in a great measure, supersede all others.
Sir George Clerksaid, he understood the practice was again resorted to of building vessels for the public service in private establishments. That practice had heretofore been a bad one, for the vessels so built were always the most expensive, and ineffective, from being built of unseasoned timber. It had been resorted to during the war from necessity, but now, when the workmen were being discharged from the public dock-yards, he regretted to hear, that recourse was had to building by private contract.
Sir James Grahamsaid, there certainly were four small vessels building by private contract, and he had entered into these contracts advisedly, knowing all the circumstances alluded to by the right hon. Baronet. His object was, to ascertain precisely what was the cost of building in private dock-yards compared with build-

285
ing in public, and also the comparative quality of each vessel. The fairest trial would be allowed, and he trusted the result would show practically whether it was advisable to continue the present number of shipwrights in the public establishment.
Vote agreed to.
The next Motion was 17,500 l. to defray the charge for the repairs and improvements of his Majesty's dock-yards.
Mr. Leadersaid, he saw with much regret that the naval establishment at the Cove of Cork was utterly neglected, and that the naval force on that station was reduced to insignificance while there were no Supplies even kept for those ships that remained.
Sir James Grahamsaid, that there was now a larger squadron on the coast of Ireland than there had been for the last five years, and he assured the hon. Gentleman the buildings he had alluded to were properly taken care of, and that there was a sufficient supply of such stores as were required.
Vote agreed to.
12,033 l. for pilotage and other contingencies, and 5,188 l. to defray the charge of the Transport Establishment for the Naval and Victualling Department, were also voted.
On the Motion for granting 4,063 l. for the hire of packets,
Mr. Humesuggested, that the department ought to be abolished, and its duties transferred to the Post-office. In time of war there might be some excuse for conveying the mails in armed vessels, but there was not the least necessity for that practice at present.
Sir James Grahamsaid, that if his hon. friend would allow the vote to pass on the present occasion, he would take an early opportunity of laying on the Table the Report of Sir Pulteney Malcolm upon the subject. That gallant Officer had been specially appointed to make inquiries respecting it.
Mr. Robert Gordonsaid, it appeared, from the 22nd section of the Finance Report, that a sum of 300,000 l. was expended beyond what was necessary, by employing King's ships instead of hiring vessels to convey the mails.
Mr. Spring Ricesaid, the progress of steam navigation had entirely altered the circumstances alluded to by his hon. friend, and made other arrangements
286
necessary. The noble Duke at the head of the Post-office Department was particularly directing his attention to ascertain the most improved and economical method of conducting the business of his department.
Sir Robert Batesonstated, that he had heard great complaints in Ireland of the false economy pursued by Government with respect to the packets employed in carrying the mail between Dublin and Holyhead. He had the authority of a captain of one of those vessels for stating that the expenses were so paired and cut down by the Government, that the establishment had been rendered comparatively ineffective.
Lord Althorpsaid, the packets on the Irish station were in as effective a state as at any former period.
Mr. Shawbelieved, that the transmission of the mail between Holyhead and Dublin had been more irregular within the last six months than was ever known before.
Mr. Stanleysaid, that there had been an unusual prevalence of contrary winds, which prevented the Holyhead packets from making their passages with the same regularity as at other times. A minute inquiry, however, had been instituted by the noble Lord at the head of the Irish Government, and the result of the inquiry was, that the Government packets from Holyhead had been more regular in their voyages than the packets on the Liverpool station.
Mr. Goulburndid not think the fact stated by the right hon. Secretary for Ireland afforded any answer to the objection that the Holyhead packets were not well found. No doubt the shorter the voyage the more regular must be the passage, and, therefore, the comparative regularity of the Holyhead packets proved nothing.
Mr. Spring Riceassured the Committee that, though the Government was most anxious to economize, there was no disposition to carry the principle so far as to impede or diminish the facility of communication between England and Ireland.
Colonel Frenchsaid, he had been assured by the captain of one of the Holyhead packets, that his crew was so much reduced, that if he had two anchors down in consequence of bad weather, he should be compelled to let one of them remain, or lose it entirely, if his vessel was wanted in a hurry. It was bad economy to make the packets unsafe.

287
Vote agreed to.
The next question was, that the sum of 192,800 l. should be voted to his Majesty, for the half-pay of naval and marine officers up to the 31st March, 1832.
Mr. Humethought, that the system of naval promotion really deserved more consideration from the House of Commons than it had hitherto obtained. A sum of nearly 1,000,000 l. a-year was paid, under the name of half-pay, to naval Officers; and, in time of peace, there were frequent promotions of Lieutenants, Captains, and Commanders, by which all the savings made by the economical arrangements introduced in other branches of the service were swallowed up. It appeared from the official returns that, whilst there were only 600 naval Officers in active service, there were about 5,000 on half-pay and unemployed, which was a proportion of nearly nine to one.
Sir James Grahamthought the Committee would agree with him that the most rigid principle of economy had been adopted with regard to naval promotions. Unless the House should decide, that promotion ought to cease altogether, and that the spirit of the navy, on which the strength and safety of the country mainly depended, should be broken, he did not know how a more rigid principle could be carried into effect than that now acted upon. The rule laid down by the late Board of Admiralty, and which he had, therefore, the less reluctance in adverting to approvingly, was, that there should be no more than one promotion to three deaths. The effect of acting on this rule was, to diminish the amount of the half-pay list, within a short period, to the amount of 20,000 l. and he did not see how the system of economy could be carried further in this branch of the expenditure, without injury to the service.
Mr. Humeadmitted it might seem hard, but he was one of those who thought that, as the public interest required, promotions should cease during peace—[cries of "no! no!" from both sides of the House.] He knew that many hon. Members had connections in the navy, and would oppose the principle for which he contended. The system adopted in the British navy was most anomalous. If there were a certain number of places to be filled up, promotions might go on to such an extent; but the evil was, that there was no limit to the number of officers promoted, for the whole was
288
subject to the discretion of the First Lord of the Admiralty. The right hon. Baronet talked of "keeping up the spirit of the navy," and how was it kept up by the present system? One officer was promoted for the sake of bringing in another, who was also an expense to the country, and had no services to plead. This was what he (Mr. Hume) called damping the spirit of the navy, and he knew it was anything but satisfactory to some of the oldest and best officers, many of whom were put aside, whilst men were brought forward of less distinction and less experience, because they were sustained by parliamentary or family interest. He had always thought, and his opinion was unaltered, that it was a monstrous thing to keep up a war establishment and war promotion in time of peace. He hoped Parliament would see the necessity of abandoning such a system, and that the noble Lord, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, would not find money to enable him to carry it on. When the noble Lord came down, and stated that he had not a shilling to go on with, Parliament would find it absolutely necessary to depart from the present system. In the mean time, unpleasant as it might be to some ears, he (Mr. Hume) did not hesitate to declare, that it was his opinion that promotion should stop when the revenue of the country required it.
Mr. Robert Gordonwas most anxious for economy in every branch of the expenditure, but he could not unite with his hon. friend, the member for Middlesex, in wishing that the Chancellor of the Exchequer should not have a shilling to go on with, and felt called upon to state fairly, that he thought the scale of naval promotions could not be further diminished without injury to the service. It must be desirable to have a proportion of young men brought forward, and to have but one promoted for three vacancies was as little as could be required. The right hon. Baronet had admitted there was merit due to the late Admiralty for adopting this rule, and he might have gone further, and said, they had not broken through their own rule in leaving office, although that had been the practice with former Administrations.
Sir George Cockburnfelt himself called upon to notice the accusation which the hon. member for Middlesex had made, both, against the late and the

289
present Board of Admiralty, when he stated, that promotions were generally made in reference to parliamentary and family influence. His connection with the navy enabled him to state, that much the larger proportion of the promotions in that service had reference to the length of employment without regard to family influence. He had always contended that it was necessary, in order to sustain the spirit and character of the navy, that some individuals should be promoted upon the ground of interest and family connection. To that opinion he still adhered; but he challenged the hon. member for Middlesex (who was in possession of returns showing the number of officers promoted for service, as distinguished from those promoted by interest) to point out any year in which the largest number of promotions was not for service. He believed that the officers of the navy were generally well content that a certain number of persons should be promoted with reference to their family connections; and he was satisfied, that promotion could not be brought lower without injury to the service. The suggestion of the hon. member for Middlesex to stop promotion, might do very well if the hon. Member could give an assurance that this country should always be at peace. The House should never forget, however, that in peace the country must be prepared for war.
Mr. Huntsaid, he was one of those who thought that England, with a good navy, might set the world at defiance; but, at the same time, he agreed with the hon. member for Middlesex, that it was not necessary to have so many officers unemployed, and to go on increasing the number of them. There could be no doubt whatever, that the greater proportion of those whose names appeared in the list owed their promotion to patronage, and had no pretensions, from the length or importance of their services, to be placed there. He was, therefore, astonished at the assertion made by the hon. and gallant Officer who spoke last, that promotion in the Navy was always the result of long service; for he had frequently met old naval Officers who complained that they had not been promoted, because they had no parliamentary interest. It was notorious that such was the feeling abroad, and, whether well or ill founded, it was prejudicial to the Navy.
Mr. Crokersaid, the hon. member for Preston had misunderstood his hon. and
290
gallant friend (Sir George Cockburn). His hon. and gallant friend had not stated that promotions had always reference to length of service, but that the greater number of promotions were made upon that principle. In corroboration of that statement, he might be allowed to mention a fact. At the close of the war in 1815, a promotion of 1,500 naval Officers was made, and he could pledge himself, that it had been made without the slightest reference to parliamentary or other influence. The service-books were gone through, and this extensive promotion took place with reference to nothing but the merits of the individuals promoted.
Mr. Huntmerely wished to remark, that what the right hon. Member asserted clearly proved what he had stated to be the fact, for if those officers who had been promoted at the conclusion of the war had been brought forward in their turns during the war, instead of so many young men being promoted, who had no services to claim, but who were brought forward through patronage and influence, there would not have been so many meritorious officers to promote, and the half-pay list would not have been quite so large as at present.
Vote agreed to.
The sums of 72,605 l. for pensions to naval Officers, their widows and relatives, up to the 31st March, and of 1,300 l. bounty to chaplains, for the same period, were voted.
On the resolution that 65,000 l. be granted to the Out-pensioners of Greenwich Hospital
Mr. Humerose to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty, whether it was his intention to introduce a bill, of which notice had been given, for abolishing the tax imposed upon the commercial marine for the support of Greenwich Hospital?
Sir James Grahamreplied that, in the present state of the revenue, and of the funds of Greenwich Hospital, he could not consent to such a measure, and had, therefore, resolved to oppose the bill, of which his hon. friend, the member for Newcastle, had given notice.
Sir Matthew White Ridleysaid, it was his intention to persevere in bringing in the bill of which he had given notice, and he still hoped to be able to persuade the Government and the House that the measure was deserving of their support.
Mr. Robinsonthought it but fair to observe, that he had altered his opinion on

291
this subject: he had been convinced, from actual observation and inquiry, that merchant-seamen received incidentally great advantages from the establishment at Greenwich Hospital.
In answer to a question from Sir Richard Vyvyan,
Sir James Grahamsaid, that it was in contemplation to dispose of a portion of the Derwent-water estate, belonging to Greenwich Hospital, which, it was hoped, would have the effect of increasing the funds of that establishment.
Resolution agreed to.
The sum of 37,629 l. was proposed to defray the charge of superannuations to the civil Officers of the Navy.
Mr. Humebegged to ask the hon. Baronet, whether the superannuation granted to the late Comptroller of the navy for his civil services was in addition to his half-pay as an admiral.
Sir James Graham: It is.
Mr. Hume: "Then I say, it is a very great abuse." The example of giving compensation to particular individuals for civil services, in addition to their half pay, was most pernicious, and the practice ought to be wholly discontinued. Here was the case of an officer who had been employed some years at the Navy Board, receiving a large pension for his services, while others, employed as long in foreign and unhealthy climates, had no such compensation allowed.
Sir James Grahamfully agreed with the hon. Member in regard to superannuations for civil services, but the regulation could only be prospective, because many individuals had entered the service under the positive assurance that, after a certain period of civil services, they were to receive an allowance, in addition to their half-pay; and if a different principle was now applied to them, it would be a breach of public faith. As to the merits of this particular question, the gallant Officer alluded to, had applied all his time and talents to perform the duties of his civil situation, and had probably thereby lost many opportunities of distinguishing himself, and acquiring fame and renown in the profession of which he was an ornament.
Mr. Humebelieved the whole of the gallant Officer's civil services had been performed during peace. He thought that was a sufficient answer to the flourish of the right hon. Baronet. He wished that the part of the Act regarding superannua-
292
tions which authorized allowances being given in cases of this description, or which directed that any person should receive one third of the whole amount of salary in retirement after fifteen years' service, should be pointed out to him.
Sir James Grahamsaid, there were two Acts which referred to superannuation allowances, one of which granted higher pensions in retirement than the other, both of which had been brought under the view of the Admiralty on the present question, and on the best consideration they could give the case, they conceived that the gallant Officer was entitled to be put on the higher scale. But the case was before the House, and he had no doubt they would do it strict justice.
Mr. Huntknew it was unpopular in that House to oppose a vote of that kind, but he felt it necessary to say, that he fully concurred with the hon. member for Middlesex, and he was persuaded they had only to give the Ministers rope enough, and they would soon hang themselves.
Vote agreed to.
31,400 l. was voted for freight, &c., on account of the Army and Ordnance Departments.
22,135 l. for the expense of sending convicts to New South Wales.
150,800 l. for victualling 32,000 men up to the 31st of March.
7,512 l. for the salaries of the Officers, and contingent expenses of the Victualling Department.
15,838 l. for the salaries of the officers and workmen in the victualling yard.
6,044 l. for the pay of officers in the Medical Establishments.
7,500 l. for the expense of medical stores and hospital provisions.
7,902 l. for the wages of officers and men on board vessels in ordinary.
300 l. for conveyance of passengers and stores on account of the Colonial Department.
180 l. as bounty for the capture and destruction of piratical vessels.
2,139 l. 9s. for provisions for the yard service afloat were granted without remark.
Upon the proposition that a sum not exceeding 52,000 l. should be voted for carrying on certain works at the Naval Arsenal at Plymouth.
Mr. Humerose to inquire whether it was still intended to go on with the erection of machinery for brewing and baking, which was purchased at so much expense

293
to the public, and was now found to be of no use.
Sir James Grahamsaid, that the contract for furnishing the machinery was made with Mr. Rennie before he (Sir J. G.) came into office, and upon consideration it was thought better to proceed with the machinery, though it was not thought expedient to use it at present. The expense would be about 42,000 l. The brewhouse and bakehouse would be a most valuable addition to the naval arsenal in the event of a war, but he (Sir James Graham) left it for the Committee to determine how far it had been judicious in the Victualling Board to enter into a private contract for the machinery with the brother, and, as he believed, the partner, of the Superintendent of the Works.
Mr. Humesaid, he always understood the Victualling Board acted under the superintendence of the Admiralty; but, it appeared by what the right hon. Baronet had said, that Board had made a private contract under very suspicious circumstances, relating to machinery, which was of no present use. He thought it was likely there had been a great waste of the public money, and, he was sure the individuals making private contracts, which were so much reprobated, had forfeited all claims upon the public.
Mr. Huntobserved, that a sum of money had been laid out for the partly setting up certain machinery, which the right hon. Baronet said was of no use, nevertheless the right hon. Baronet had completed it. He wished, therefore, to be informed why he had not sold it for what it was worth, rather than have expended more money in finishing it.
Sir James Grahamsaid, when this machinery was erected, it was intended to use it immediately, but it was found unnecessary, since he came into office; but a great part of it having been already prepared, and the buildings for it erected, it was thought most adviseable to complete it, if it was only to preserve it. He had already stated, he had no doubt it would be useful hereafter, but the question was, whether it was right to expend so much money at the time, and upon a private contract.
Sir George Clerkwas glad to hear this explanation, for it now fully appeared the machinery was ordered before the right hon. Baronet had entered office, and that the contract was made without the
294
knowledge of the Admiralty by the Victualling Board. But the right hon. Baronet's charge had now assumed another shape, and he complained of the outlay of the money at an improper time, and that it was done by private contract. In answer to the first part of the charge, the right hon. Baronet had allowed it would be useful in the event of a war, and as there was no knowing how soon that might arrive, he (Sir George Clerk) thought it was right to be prepared for it, and he trusted the House would be of the same opinion. With regard to the private contract part of the charge, the machinery for baking was a recent invention, and, therefore, only to be executed by certain parties; and he took that to be a full reply to the objection made on that account. With regard to the brew-house, at the time the machinery was ordered, it was expected it would be wanted; for good stout beer was considered a much more wholesome beverage for ships' crews than ardent spirits. The circumstances of the case, with regard to the building were simply these: the premises where part of the public brewing was previously carried on, were held upon a lease, determinable on the demise of his late Majesty, and as the proprietor of the ground on whose land the house was situated, declined to renew the lease, it had become his duty to bring forward a new estimate on the subject. In the then state of the country, it was considered necessary to erect this brew-house; and, at the time when the work was undertaken, the machinery was intended to be brought into operation as soon as the building should be ready for its reception. Certainly, by a change in the system which the right hon. Baronet introduced last year, and which he had at that time strongly objected to; this brew-house had been rendered of no use. With regard to the baking machinery, it would bake sufficient biscuit to supply the whole of the seamen in the present state of our naval establishments. An exception had always been made as to biscuit which had never been furnished by contract, because it was impossible to procure it without adulteration, and of such good quality as would keep in all climates, unless it was manufactured in the public establishments. He trusted, from this explanation that the House would admit that, if ever the occasion arose for increasing our navy, the money which had been paid for the

295
construction of this machinery would be found to have been most beneficially expended.
Sir James Grahamsaid, that in every thing he had asserted on this subject, he had been careful to understate the case from a feeling of delicacy. He was perfectly ready to admit the evil had arisen from a vicious system, and not from the conduct of individuals. But as the right hon. Baronet had himself entered into the case, he had no hesitation in declaring that this transaction was, from the commencement, most irregular. First, a private contract or bargain was made; next, it was made with the partner and brother of the Superintendent of the Works; third, he had been misled as to the amount when he had first brought forward these Estimates. He had called upon the Victualling Board to state the entire sum which would be necessary for these works in the ensuing year; the reply was, "55,000 l.," and a grant to that amount was, therefore, prepared. He was afterwards informed that a further sum of 42,000 l. would be necessary for the purchase of machinery, which sum was quite independent of the contract. He again declared that this was altogether an irregular proceeding. They had been told that in case of war, these works would be useful. So they might, but, he begged to remind the House that the navy was victualled throughout the late war without them. It would be his duty to-morrow to bring the question on the remaining part of this sum more particularly under the notice of the House, and an opportunity would then be afforded for going through the whole of the transaction, from beginning to end. The Estimate laid on the Table was comparatively small considering the large outlay actually made upon these works, from sources not known to Parliament.
Sir George Clerksaid, that the brewing machinery being of no present use, was owing to one of the right hon. Baronet's own regulations, by which seamen were supplied with spirits instead of beer. As to his assertion, that the victualling of the navy was carried on, during the late war, without this machinery, the consequence was, that large and expensive contracts were necessary, and after all, a bad article, particularly bread, was obtained. It was in consequence of the repeated complaints that the biscuit supplied, would not keep
296
in foreign climates, and that unwholesome food was sometimes given to the sailors, while at other times a supply had to be obtained at any cost, that the machinery in question was erected.
Mr. Robinsonsaid, that the subject of this vote was attended with so much irregularity, that the House would not do its duty if it did not institute an inquiry, and obtain all possible information upon the circumstances. He felt it right, therefore, to move that the vote should be postponed.
Mr. Bernalthe Chairman, said, the hon. Member could not, according to the forms of the House, move the postponement of the vote. He could do no otherwise than either oppose it or agree to it.
Mr. Robinsonsaid, he did not wish to negative the vote directly.
Sir George Clerkexpressed his wish, that, since the Motion of the hon. member for Worcester could not be put, the right hon. Baronet (Sir J. Graham) would consent to withdraw the vote for the present, in order that the circumstances of the transaction might be minutely scrutinized. This was the more necessary, in consequence of the insinuations of corrupt dealings, which had been thrown out against the late Admiralty. He wished for the fullest inquiry, and, if any blame were found justly to attach to the late Board, he was quite willing to bear his share of it.
Sir James Grahamsaid, he had made no insinuations of corrupt dealings. The word corrupt had never escaped his lips. He had only said, what he would now adhere to—namely, that a private agreement had been made with a party who was the brother, and, he believed, the partner, of the Superintendent. As inquiry was courted, he should give an opportunity for it by withdrawing the vote for the present.
Lord Miltonsaid, there were two or three points that required explanation. He wished to know how it was, that a subordinate Board had made contracts without the knowledge of the superior? If they had a right to do so, according to the present custom, that ought to be abolished. Another point was, that it appeared these subordinate Boards thought they had a right to appropriate the money to other purposes, than those for which it was granted. For instance, if 20,000 l. had been voted for one purpose, and the expense exceeded that sum, and 30,000 l.

297
voted for another, the expense of which was less, was the overplus of the second applied to cover the deficiency of the first? If that was the practice, it was wrong. The overplus ought to be at the disposal of that House, and the deficiency duly applied for, or there was no effectual control over the expenditure of the public money.
Sir James Grahamsaid, the practices alluded to by the noble Lord, had been frequent. In one instance this misappropriation had gone to the extent of 500,000 l.; it was, therefore, his intention to bring forward a measure to remedy such irregularities in future.
Sir Robert Peelsaid, that after what the right hon. Baronet had stated, he should certainly not, under any circumstances, have agreed to this vote without ample inquiry. He had no knowledge whatever of the transaction, but he was fully convinced that the parties alluded to would be able to give complete satisfaction on the subject.

SUPPLY—CIVIL CONTINGENCIES.
Mr. Spring Rice moved, that a Sum not exceeding 200,000 l. be granted to his Majesty to defray the expense under the head of Civil Contingencies, for the one quarter, from 1st January to 31st March, 1832; and for one year, from 1st April 1832, to 31st March, 1833.
Mr. Goulburnsaid, he observed that 1,000 l. had been paid to Mr. Telford, to defray expenses already incurred in his survey for supplying the metropolis with pure water, and to enable him to proceed with the same. He must object to this item, because, first, he conceived that the expense ought to be defrayed by the Water Companies, and in the next place, because no answer had been obtained from Mr. Telford, as to the ultimate expense of the survey.
Lord Althorpsaid, that at the first view he had concurred with the right hon. Gentleman in thinking that the Water Companies were the proper persons to pay the money. But it would be recollected, that his hon. friend, the member for Westminster (Sir Francis Burdett) had said, he would be answerable for the expense of the survey, if the Treasury would authorise it to be made, which was consented to. At that time his hon. friend, as well as the Treasury, conceived that the Water Companies would be induced to pay the money. But it
298
now turned out that there was no chance of persuading them to do so. And then the question came before the Treasury in this shape. A Committee of that House had reported its opinion, that measures ought to be taken to procure a better supply of water for the metropolis, and were they not to endeavour to support that opinion? But the right hon. Gentleman thought that this was not an object for which the public ought to pay. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) did not think it should be said, that the public ought to go to no expense at all for so essential an objent as to procure a supply of pure water. Under all the circumstances, he thought the Government was called upon to make the advance.
Sir Robert Peelsaid, that some time after that Report had been made, he had refused to grant this money, and the House had approved of his refusal. He had had repeated communications with the Water Companies, and he was enabled to say, that they had never authorized the slightest expectation that they would pay for the survey. He must protest against the Government undertaking the expense. We were not here in the same situation as France was under the Bourbons, who provided for everything in the country. He was convinced that the projected work would never succeed, except as a private speculation. If it did not succeed, why should the Government be at the expense? and if it did succeed, why should not the expense be borne by those who were to benefit by it? He considered it a most dangerous precedent. If it was acceded to he saw no reason why they should not be called on to extend the principle to Liverpool and Manchester, and ascertain how those places could best be supplied with good and pure water. In conclusion, he begged to ask the noble Lord, what the whole expense of the survey would be?
Lord Althorpsaid, at the utmost it would not amount to 5,000 l., indeed, he believed, that 3,000 l. would pay the expense.
An Hon. Membersaid, that he had been one of the Committee on the Bill which was brought in by one of the Water Companies, for the purpose of obtaining the sanction of an Act of Parliament to a project, for rendering the river Colne available to the metropolis for the supply of fresh water, and it was then declared that Mr. Telford was perfectly ready to make a

299
survey for the purpose of ascertaining how best to effect the object of giving a fresh supply of water to London, but that the Water Companies were unwilling to bear the expense, and the public could not be charged with it. The Chairman of the Committee, the hon. Baronet (the member for Westminster), declared, that as such was the case, he would bear the expense himself. What subsequently passed between his noble friend (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) and the hon. Baronet, he did not know, but such was his statement at the time. There was no doubt that Mr. Telford would make a magnificent survey; and he would also put forth, probably, some magnificent plans; but no private Company could take up such plans, and he doubted whether the country would ever be able to do so, and, between the two, the supply of water to London would be left just where it then was; whereas had the Bill been allowed to proceed, and had the parties who were carrying it on not been deterred from so doing by this survey of Mr. Telford, the metropolis at the present moment would, in all likelihood, have been supplied from the sources of the river Colne—a supply which would have obviated all those horrors which attend, as was amply proved by the philosophers and chemists who had written so elaborately on the subject, on the drinkers of Thames water.
Sir Robert Peelsaid, this was one of the consequences of the interference of Government in private matters. Such interference was equally unjustifiable, as well towards the public as towards the private water companies, which companies, at the period alluded to by the hon. Member who spoke last, were preparing additional means for the supply of pure water to the metropolis, and would have provided them, probably, by this time, had not Government stepped in between them and their object, by encouraging, as was truly said, the proposal of magnificent plans, which would not and could not be carried into execution. He felt it, therefore, to be his duty to move, that the present vote be reduced by the sum of 1,000 l.; and, in order to justify this Motion on his part, he would trouble the House with a reference to certain Treasury minutes relating to this survey. The first of them was dated the 15th of March, 1831, and was consequent upon a letter, in which Sir Francis Burdett informed the Treasury, on the 25th
300
of January, 1831, that Mr. Telford was ready to make the survey. Mr. Stuart, the Secretary to the Treasury was ordered to write to Mr. Telford, to direct the survey to be made, and to Sir F. Burdett, informing him that the survey was undertaken on the condition proposed by Sir F. Burdett himself—namely, that he would bear the whole charge of it. Subsequently Mr. Telford referred to the Treasury, to know by whom the expense was to be defrayed. Mr. Stuart was then ordered by the Lords Commissioners to inform him that Sir Francis Burdett had undertaken that the public should be secured against any part of the expense of the survey; and Mr. Stuart was also directed to inform Sir Francis Burdett, that such a communication had been made to Mr. Telford. These minutes would sufficiently establish the fact, that Sir F. Burdett, and not the public, ought to be charged with this expense, and it was with that object directly in view that his Motion was made. He begged, therefore, to move, that the sum now proposed to be voted be reduced by the sum of 1,000 l.
Mr. Huntsaid, he did not know whether to call this conduct on the part of Government assurance or impudence. It was, in his opinion, nothing less than a most impudent attempt to impose on the House of Commons, in the very teeth of one of their own Treasury minutes; and it was nothing less than voting idly away so much bread and beer out of the mouths of the Lancashire weavers. He recollected well, at the time this offer of the hon. member for Westminster was made, that it was said of him he had found a cheap way of getting returned again for Westminster; and who was it brought forward the scheme, but one Wright, one of that hon. Member's constituents. He hoped the right hon. Baronet would persevere in his motion, for, if not, he would take it up.
Mr. Spring Ricepressed for a postponement of the item at present, in order that the hon. Baronet implicated, who was absent, might, at an early opportunity, give that explanation which all who heard him could not but feel thoroughly convinced in their hearts he would be most happy and most able to give. He wished the right hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel) to be undeceived on one point—namely, that Government undertook to furnish the supply of pure water itself; all it wished to do was, to lay such information before the

301
public as was in its power to procure, and not to assume that position, which despotic Governments alone could take, of regulating that supply themselves. With this view it had employed Mr. Telford, and all he could do at present was, to beg to be allowed to withdraw the charge from the estimate, until some explanation could be given on the subject.
Sir Robert Peelreadily acquiesced in the proposal of the right hon. Gentleman, in the hope of being afforded full and early information on the subject.
Sir Robert Heronrose, and said, that the hon. Baronet (Sir F. Burdett) who formed so conspicuous a feature in this discussion, was so constant an attendant at the House, as seldom to be liable to the charge of inattention to his duties there: he, however, was absent on that night, and his absence was caused by indisposition—an excuse which he hoped the House would readily admit as a reason for not prosecuting the discussion.
Sir John Hobhousesaid, that he would at once take upon him, in the absence of his hon. colleague, to say, that he would stand by any engagement to which he was bound. There was, however, a short story to be told about this same item of 1,000 l. Since the year 1825 there had been several Committees on the subject of the supply of water to the metropolis, and the right hon. Baronet (Sir Robert Peel) who was then in the Administration, had always declared that Government would not interfere, because he had a strong opinion that it was much better to leave the supply to competition. There was, however, a difference of opinion on this point between the right hon. Baronet and many other hon. Members; for they were of opinion, that unless Government stepped in and interfered between the public and the Water Companies, the public would get no pure water; and now, because 1,000 l. for surveyors was charged, in furtherance of the views of these dissentients to the right hon. Baronet's opinions, the House was to be told it was an overcharge. The fact was simply this: when the Report on the Water Companies' Bill was before the House, the hon. Baronet (Sir Francis Burdett) was told, that a survey would be made, but that there was some difficulty as to advancing the money; he immediately replied that he would advance it out of his own pocket. Upon which he himself (Sir John Hobhouse) rejoined, "they
302
had better take the offer." He was confident the hon. Baronet bad not for one instant contemplated any infringement of his engagement, and that if a claim were made upon him, he would be ready to meet it. As for what had fallen from the hon member for Preston, with respect to this offer of his hon. colleague being looked upon as an easy way of getting his return for Westminster again, he was content to regard all the hon. Member had said as an impassioned observation of the moment, and, as such, to take small heed of anything which escaped during those moments.
Mr. Robert Gordonsaid, this was not an item of estimate, but of account. They were called upon to vote 200,000 l. for five quarters for the civil contingencies, and, at the same time, there was an account produced showing what part of this money had been actually expended last year. In point of fact, the House had granted a certain sum of money to the Ministers in confidence, and out of that money 1,000 l. had been actually paid to Mr. Telford. He did not see how his right hon. friend (Mr. Spring Rice) could, by reducing the sum of 200,000 l. to 199,000 l., alter the expenditure, the money having been already paid. But they had wasted rather too much time upon this item of 1,000 l.; there were other charges to which the attention of the House ought to be called. The whole of these estimates had better have been referred to a Select Committee. Of all subjects that required to be submitted to such Committees, none were so necessary as the expenditure under the head of Civil Contingencies. He observed there was a sum of 800 l. for removing the Records of the Court of Common Pleas from Westminster Hall to the King's Mews, Charing Cross. Again, there was a sum of 2,000 l. paid to Mr. Babbage, for constructing a machine for the calculation and correction of various tables. Next came a sum of 6,623 l. 12 s. 6d. for defraying the expenses incurred in England and Scotland relative to the boundaries of the counties and boroughs as required by the Reform Bill. He would now allude to some items which related to Ireland: first, came an item of 923 l. 1s. 6d. granted to Lord Plunkett for an outfit when he became Lord Chancellor of Ireland. The occasion of this outfit arose from the usual practice of appointing English Barristers to judicial situations in Ireland, and, with a view to evince the

303
hospitality of the new Judge, he was allowed a sum to enable him to give dinners and other entertainments at a considerable expense. Ever since the Union, the practice had been, to give this outfit to the Lord Chancellor of Ireland; but the Lord Chancellor of England did not appear to have any outfit. He had looked in vain in these accounts for any charge on his account; but yet he understood there was some source from which an outfit to the Lord Chancellor of England was provided. He maintained, however, that in the situation of Lord Plunkett, who was removed from the appointment of Lord Chief Justice of the Common Pleas in Ireland, to the Lord Chancellorship of Ireland, that was, from one Judgeship to another, in the same country, there was no possible pretence, whatever, for an outfit to be given to him. He had no wish to push this matter further, but had made these observations to show the necessity of having these items investigated by a Select Committee.
Mr. Spring Riceremarked, that his hon. friend, perhaps, feeling that his talent did not lie in panegyric, had forborne to speak about the diplomatic expenditure. If he had, he could hardly have failed to give the present Ministers some credit for putting an end to diplomatic presents, and thus saving the country about 7,000 l. per annum, which was previously expended in snuff-boxes. The Earl of Aberdeen had previously made a reduction in the diplomatic department to the amount of 11,000 l. The present Government hoped to extend this reduction next year to 15,000 l. The first objection, however, made by his hon. friend was, that charge relating to the removal of the Records of the Court of Common Pleas. Had this charge been for their removal only, undoubtedly it would have been open to animadversion, but besides the charge of removal, that account covered all the expenses necessary to provide for their safe custody, and had been made after the Government had been urged, during the last Session, to remove the Records which encumbered Westminster Hall. The work had been done by contract, and if the House pleased, the Estimate should be laid before it. In reference to the sum paid Mr. Babbage, he begged to say, that it was a purchase of one of the finest specimens of mechanism in the world, and of which the public had now become possessed, and that on the payment, not of any remunera-
304
tion to the talented inventor, but merely of the actual expense of its manufacture. The next objection of his hon. friend rather surprised him, coming from a Reformer and a supporter of the measure which had passed the House last Session, and which objection was to an expenditure made for the purpose of laying before the House the information necessary to enable it to legislate on the subject, and which, if not afforded, would have raised an opposition to it. He could not think the House would say, that the expense had been too great. The last point to which his hon. friend had referred, was the item for the outfit of Lord Plunkett, as Chancellor of Ireland. He begged to deny the statement of the hon. Member, that the outfit had never been made in the cases of English Chancellors. It had been made, in 1827, to Lord Lyndhurst, to the amount of 2,000 l., while the outfit to Lord Plunkett was 1,000 l. Last year it had been granted to Lord Brougham; in 1828, a grant for outfit was made to Sir Anthony Hart, on his assuming the Seals in Ireland, and, in 1831, to Lord Plunkett. Mr. Ponsonby had also received a similar grant. The hon. Gentleman's argument was, that because Lord Plunkett, from being Chief Justice of the Common Pleas, was translated to the Court of Chancery in the same country, he was not entitled to any outfit. Lord Plunkett's elevation was not the first instance in which the outfit had been granted, for in 1801, Lord Eldon, on his promotion to the Great Seal, had received the usual grant. How, then, could the Government be justified in refusing the expense of outfit to Lord Plunkett, more particularly when it was remembered that his salary had been reduced from 10,000 l. to 8,000 l. per annum. He, however, begged to say, that, with respect to these items, the Government were perfectly ready to produce any documents or information that the House might require.
Mr. Robert Gordonsaid, he still observed in the Estimates that the presents of snuff-boxes were charged, and until they disappeared from the items, he could not go the length of giving the Government that credit which the right hon. Gentleman claimed as their due. As to the wonderful machine which his right hon. friend praised so highly, he had no doubt it was most ingenious, but it did not appear to be of much use to the public at present; perhaps, however, hereafter, its powers might go so far as to perform the duties

305
of his right hon. friend's office, and it would be certainly a saving to have the duties of a Secretary of the Treasury performed by steam. As to the outfit paid to the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, his hon. friend justified the payment on account of the reduction of salary, but such a charge had never been taken into account by the Committee which recommended that reduction, and he was, therefore, somewhat surprised that it should have been allowed, particularly under the circumstances of Lord Plunkett having removed only from one Court to another. He was bound to believe his hon. friend, when he asserted that Lord Chancellor Brougham had received an outfit also, but he had been led into the error by the noble and learned Lord himself, who had stated before the Committee, that he had up to that time received only 400 l. on account of his office.
Colonel Sibthorpconsidered the Government had no right whatever to pay upwards of 6,000 l. for ascertaining the boundaries of counties; that expenditure ought not to have been incurred without the authority of Parliament. As to the sum paid to Mr. Telford he would object to it, let the account be brought forward when it might.
Mr. Courtenaysaid, that a sum of 500 l. appeared on the Estimate to a Mr. Marshall for a set of statistical tables. That Gentleman seemed to be a coadjutor of the hon. member for Middlesex, and probably assisted him in his calculations. He should be glad of an explanation of this item.
Mr. Humesaid, this might be almost styled one of his jobs. He looked upon correct statistical tables to be of the greatest utility and advantage to the country. Mr. Marshall had been for years actively employed in such inquiries, and his inquiries had been productive of so much benefit, that he deemed it necessary, for the public good, to make them universally known. It was a compilation of all the public documents of that House, and contained tables of the income and expenditure of the country, in every possible point of view, for the last thirty years. This country was the only one without such condensed and valuable information. It was on these grounds, therefore, that he had recommended the work to the Government, and the item which appeared on the account was his recommendation.
Mr. Goulburnsaid, he had never expected to turn the tables upon the hon. member for Middlesex, and question him as to the items of public expenditure; but he really wished to know from the hon. Member whether this vote was to be the total of the expenditure to be incurred by the public for this work.
Mr. Spring Ricesaid, he believed that no additional expense would be incurred on account of the tables.
Sir Charles Wetherellbegged to ask the hon. member for Middlesex, whether these wonderful tables contained any means of supplying, in conjunction with the still more wonderful machine of Mr. Babbage, the deficiencies of a failing revenue.
Mr. Humedeclined replying to the jokes of the hon. and learned Member. A deficient revenue was too serious a matter to be trifled with, and could only be met by a decreased expenditure. He was ready to allow, that the present Estimates were the least objectionable he had ever seen, but still there were points which demanded explanation. First, then, with regard to the outfit of the Lord Chancellor, he objected to it wholly; but, if under any possible circumstances it could be tolerated, it should be placed among the items on the Civil List. Next, there was a large sum of 14,000 l. for Reports from the Commissioners of Inquiry at Mauritius and Ceylon; he hoped this was the last item of that kind. Thirdly, there was a sum of 3,600 l. charged for some Commission to inquire into the allowances of the retired Welch Judges, and for other purposes of a similar nature, but he understood some of these persons had been otherwise provided for, and, therefore, had no claim to retired allowances. There was a fourth charge of 570 l. for fees occasioned by the honour received by Sir James Saumerez, and other fees of a similar nature for Irish Peerages. He did not by any means object to his Majesty having conferred these honours, but he did think it was out of character for the public to pay such a charge for fees on account of it. There was a charge o. the sum of 12,000 l. for pensions to Spanish refugees, he had heard, he knew not if the statement were true, that some of these pensioners had other sources of subsistence. Lastly, he wished to know what was the amount of the charge for publishing the average price of sugar in the London Gazette, which was a profitable concern.
Mr. Spring Ricesaid, the fees which were paid on account of newly-created Peers went into an office fund, from whence they returned into the public purse. With respect to the Commission of Inquiry into the Courts of Justice, it was formed in order to ascertain what compensation was due to the Welch Judges when they were called upon to retire. The expense of the Reports of the Commissioners of Colonial Inquiry was now concluded: the item would not appear again. With respect to the Spanish refugees, great vigilance had been exercised to prevent abuse. The highest sum paid to any individual was 25 s. a-week. As to the publication of the Sugar Returns, the greater portion of the vote went to defray the expense of officers and clerks in preparing the accounts.
Colonel Sibthorpsaid, if the public knew they would have to pay fees amounting to 570 l. upon every Peer created, they would not be so clamorous for 100 or 200 to be made to pass the Reform Bill.
Sir Robert Peelsaid, that the explanations of the right hon. Gentleman were satisfactory, but he (Sir R. Peel) most objected to that vote which the right hon. Gentleman had not alluded to, because he supposed the hon. member for Middlesex had taken it under his especial care; he meant the sum of 500 l. for certain statistical accounts. If, as the hon. member for Middlesex stated, these tables were so exceedingly valuable, Mr. Marshall might be left to receive a recompense from their sale. There were various other works equally deserving of public patronage; but for the Treasury to assist individuals in this way was open to very great objection. The hon. member for Middlesex might have derived great aid from these tables, but that was no reason why the public should pay for them.
Mr. Spring Ricesaid, that the tables were considered to be of very great importance to the public interests, and Government had granted this sum in consideration of receiving a certain number of copies for the public offices.
Mr. Hunthad been in no small degree surprised by the conversations which passed between the right hon. Gentleman opposite, and the hon. member for Middlesex. He remembered well the admiration with which he used to read that Gentleman's speeches, storming the House and cutting down the Estimates. From the
308
slightness of the opposition which that hon. Member was now giving to the Estimates, he felt very much disposed to press upon the House the measure proposed by the hon. member for Cricklade—that is, that the Estimates be referred to a Committee. He should like to know what became of the 32,000 l. which was charged under the head of Rewards for the Apprehension and Conviction of Incendiaries? He had been applied to by many persons, who complained that they had not been adequately rewarded. Again, there was above 900 l. charged as paid to Doctor Bowring for his improvements in keeping public accounts. He did not know whether the Ministers had profited by his method, but most certainly nobody else had. He did not see why he, as a Member of that House, doing a public duty, should allow the public money to be voted away without expressing his opinion about the purpose to which it was applied, lest he should be accused of being personal—especially when the person to whom he should allude had not been at all nice in speaking of him, not only in his absence, but when he was in prison. That person was now certainly not in prison, but in the House of Lords; and as he and his family were receiving from the public so much as 30,000 l. a-year, he (Mr. Hunt) felt himself called on to protest against the allowance of 900 l. for that learned nobleman's outfit. He had merely passed from one Court to another, and surely he could afford to equip himself for the journey out of the large sums which he drew from the Treasury.
Mr. Spring Rice,in reply to the question of the hon. member for Preston, explained that the convicts with reference to whom the rewards had been given, were 577 in number, and the rewards were distributed amongst 1,887 persons. The sums paid to those persons amounted to 28,220 l. 12 s., and the expenses of the Commissions added to that, made up the sum of 32,000 l. charged in the Estimates. He believed that the sums charged were rightly distributed, and rightly applied, and that the House would not object to the item.
Mr. Huntbelieved, that much of the money was stopped on its way to the persons for whom it was intended. Many of the persons had not received so much as they were entitled to.
Mr. Spring Ricesaid, all these accounts

309
had passed through the Audit office, and there were stamp receipts for the amount of money paid to each individual.
Mr. Benettbore testimony to the propriety of the distribution; he knew Mr. Mawle had been at infinite pains to divide the money properly.
Resolution agreed to, deducting the sum of 1,000 l., the vote on account of Mr. Telford's survey being deferred.
The House resumed.