Commons Sitting of 8 August 1834

MINUTES.
Bills. Read a third time:—Starch Duties' Repeal; Spirit Duties.
Petitions presented. By Captain GORDON, from Aberdeen, against the proposed reduction of the Duty on Spirits distilled in Ireland.—By Mr. B. CARTER, from Portsmouth and Portsea, against any increase of Duty on Spirit Licenses.—By Mr. E. L. BULWER, from Lincoln and other Places, to the same effect.—By Mr. FEARGUS O'CONNOR, from the County of Mayo, for Relief from the payment of Grand Jury Cess.

MILITARY FLOGGING.
Colonel Evanspresented a petition from the churchwardens, overseers, and parishioners of St. Martin's-in-the-Fields, against military flogging. He was of opinion that military flogging was not necessary to maintain the discipline of the army. He was not one of those philanthropists who viewed the question merely as a matter of cruelty inflicted on the offender, but he looked at it as a dishonour and degradation to the British army; and even granting the punishment to be abstractedly good, he contended that, in the present state of the public mind, it ought not to be continued. The French army was one of the most efficient in the world, and yet the practice of military flogging was not known in it. He had been told it was unwise to set up the French army as an example to those by whom they had been vanquished, but he would remind the House that the Roman army, which was the best disciplined that ever existed, carefully studied the custom and discipline of the various armies they overcame. Our troops were certainly much more civilized than the Russian boors, but even in that army the practice of flogging was much less frequently resorted to than it was in our own. It was well known that no soldiers were more attached to the service than the Russians, and that desertion was rarely known to occur. He was of opinion a substitute might be found, but that substitute must be a severe one to maintain the discipline

1103
of the army. He would not say, that in very severe cases corporal punishment should not be adopted, but he thought, it would be much better that, in the most depraved instances, for the sake of example, capital punishment should be inflicted, than a repetition of what had proved worse than useless. In the course of last year 9,000 Courts-martial had taken place, and 5,000 soldiers had passed through the public gaols. The principle crime was that of drunkenness; but what did it show? Did it prove that flogging, which was now used, should be more frequently resorted to, or that it should be abolished? It was a maxim in punishment, that whatever mode of punishment excited the sympathy of the spectator in favour of the criminal was injurious. This alone he considered a sufficient objection to the continuance of corporal punishment, for whenever a flogging took place, the offender was considered an object of pity, and the offence of which he was guilty entirely overlooked. The difficulty was, to suggest a substitute, and what he proposed was, that some of the measures of the French minister Marshal Soult, which had been published, should be adopted in the British army. He proposed, that the power of the commanding officer to punish should be increased; that the power to imprison, which was at present for only thirty-eight hours, should be greatly extended, that the offender should be fed on bread and water, mulcted of his pay, kept to hard labour, with a weight tied to his leg if necessary, and that those who had been frequently flogged should be discharged the army and sent to the colonies. He thought the system of granting discharges in the British army was erroneous; the good man who possessed the means was allowed to purchase his discharge, while it was not in the power of the commanding officer to take any step to rid the army of the bad men. Whatever view the House might take of the question, this degrading punishment, he trusted, would not be suffered much longer to continue.
Mr. Tennysonsaid, he had been intrusted with a similar petition from some of the inhabitants of Westminster, and he would take that opportunity to present it, that both petitions might be disposed of at the same time. The hon. Member expressed the deep abhorrence the petitioners entertained of the practice of military flogging,
1104
and their disgust at the scene which had lately taken place at St. George's barracks, and earnestly hoped the system would be entirely put an end to. He considered the degradation of corporal punishment calculated to destroy that high sense of moral feeling and honour which should always animate the British army, and hoped to see it speedily abolished. He was happy to hear that a commission was about to be issued, but trusted it would not be composed entirely of officers.
Sir John Byngsaid, nothing was more calculated to insure a fair consideration of the question, and the hope of an entire abolition of the practice of flogging, than the temperate tone in which the subject had been discussed. He was far from finding fault with those individuals who petitioned the House on this subject, feeling satisfied that they were actuated by the most humane and generous motives; he was only desirous to observe that those were much mistaken, and knew very little of the character of British officers, who supposed they were opposed to the abolition of this punishment from any other motive than a wish to uphold the discipline of the army. He was free to admit, that public opinion had now advanced to that stage that some alteration must take place. Nothing was more difficult, in his opinion, than to find a substitute for flogging. He believed, that no substitute would be so good as that of solitary confinement, but even that was liable to many objections. It could not be adopted when the army was on active service or on march. Then with respect to mulcting a soldier of his pay, he thought, such a mode of punishment likely to lead to the most serious consequences, as there was no question on which a soldier looked with greater delicacy. Every substitute was liable to many objections, and, therefore, the wisest course would be to let the question be fairly and fully investigated by the commission which was about to issue. He suggested that, if the commission should be composed of any individuals who were not military men, the present and the late right hon. Secretaries at War should be among the number. He knew there was no Member of that House more averse to military flogging than the right hon. member for Nottingham (Sir J. Hobhouse), and that, whether in office or out of office he had done all in his power to put an end to it. For his own part he believed, from the

1105
feeling that was entertained by the present Ministry, the practice would be shortly done away with; but his recommendation was, that it should not be done hastily nor without the most mature consideration.
Sir Edward Codringtoncongratulated the House on the altered tone in which this subject was debated, and that the argument did not proceed upon the supposition that naval and military men felt a pleasure in the exercise of the power of administering the lash. He could only say, when it had been his painful duty to witness a flogging he had nearly fainted, though nothing else had ever caused him to faint in the whole course of his life. Those persons who taunted British officers with a delight in the exercise of the power of flogging knew very little of the subject, or of the character of those who had the command of the navy. When he had the power in his own hands, he should have been very glad to have got rid of it, or to have delegated it to some other person. He should be glad to see the practice abolished, if a substitute could be found to maintain the discipline of the army; but until that substitute could be found, the power should be retained, no less in behalf of the good soldier than the bad. The practice of flogging was continually resorted to by the civil magistrate—it took place under their own eye—and yet no complaint was ever made against the Magistrate for awarding such a punishment. So long, therefore, as it was made use of in one part of the public service, why should it not in another?
Mr. Buckinghamsaid, the army and the navy, it was well known, contained many inferior men, and what was the reason? Why, when men had been found unfit for anything else, it was said, "Oh, they are quite good enough for the army and navy." It was not to be wondered at, therefore, that so much insubordination and crime prevailed in the army; and so would they continue to prevail as long as the army was supplied with bad men. To render the army effective, and to make punishment unnecessary, an inducement should be supplied for better men to enlist. For his own part he believed, that drunkenness was the principal cause of the crimes and insubordination that existed in the army. He recommended that the higher offices of the army should be open to every man who entered it, and that they should be attained by those who exhibited good con-
1106
duct and attention to military duty. We thought by giving men an inducement to behave well by the prospect of rising in the army, the commission of crime would be diminished, and corporal punishment rendered unnecessary.
Colonel Leith Haythought it necessary to observe, that steps had been taken to afford the means of increasing the punishment of solitary confinement in the army. A report had been made to the Board of Ordinance in the year 1831, from certain persons appointed to inquire into the extent to which solitary confinement could be adopted in the army. That Report stated, that 102 cells would be equal to all that was required for the whole of the military. In conformity with that Report ninety-eight cells had been completed at the different barracks. With regard to the conduct of Colonel Bowater, he would remark, that it was not in the power of Colonel Bowater to alter the punishment awarded. The offender could not have been taken before any other tribunal, drunkenness and mutiny being cognizable only by a district Court-martial, and not a regimental Court-martial, except under circumstances of a very peculiar nature. As the offence, therefore, was one which could only be tried by a district Court-martial, and as Colonel Bowater did not possess the power to diminish one stroke of the sentence awarded by it, no possible blame could attach to that gallant officer.
Mr. Wilkssaid, that when the brave and gallant Admiral had fainted at the sight of a military flogging, there was some foundation for the sympathy of the people of England. He trusted, that the statements which had been made to-day would be satisfactory to the public. The feelings of humanity could not much longer be outraged by the infliction of corporal punishment, the result of which had been rather to increase than diminish crime. He agreed with the hon. member for Sheffield, that they must endeavour to introduce into the army and navy a superior body of men instead of the refuse of the gaol and the workhouse, and encourage good conduct and honourable ambition, by the prospect of rising to the highest station.
Sir Samuel Whalleycontended, that military flogging was not necessary to maintain the discipline of the army, as was proved by the 3rd regiment of guards in which no flogging took place. During

1107
the Peninsular war the greatest subordination prevailed in that regiment without having once resorted to the practice. He trusted the commission would not be composed entirely of military and naval men, such persons being no more competent to judge of the propriety of military flogging than a body of schoolmasters to judge of flogging school-boys.
Mr. Craven Berkeleysaid, the case of Hutchinson had been much misrepresented, and he thought it much better for those individuals who wished to see the practice abolished to say no more on the subject, as it would only tend to prejudice their case.
Sir Thomas Troubridgewas of opinion that, at least, much good would be done by the discussion. He thought the public would feel assured that the subject was seriously taken up by the Government, while the commission which was about to issue would be productive of general satisfaction.
Mr. Ashley Cooperstated, as far as his own military experience went, he could say, that corporal punishment was more frequently administered for stealing necessaries, which was the most general offence in the army, than for any other crime.
Captain Gordonwould be glad to see any punishment proposed that would meet his views as a substitute for corporal punishment, but until that was done, he could not consent to the entire abolition of the practice.
Mr. Ruthvenwas persuaded, that the crimes which took place in the army were all the consequence of the prevalence of drunkenness. If the soldier were deprived of the means of getting drunk, crime would be diminished, and the punishment of flogging rendered unnecessary.
Sir Edward Barnessaid, if he saw any one system of punishment brought forward as a substitute for military flogging, it should have his support. The suggestions with respect to solitary confinement, and other substitutes, he considered liable to great objections or quite impracticable, and he could not consent to the abolition of corporal punishment until some more effective substitute was suggested.
Colonel Peelwas of opinion, that much delusion prevailed on the subject of solitary confinement. He was persuaded, from fifteen years experience, that it would be inefficacious as a substitute for flogging. He was well acquainted with an instance
1108
of a regiment where solitary confinement was adopted, and found quite inadequate to prevent the crime of desertion, which at that time prevailed very much in the regiment. The mere threat, however, of the administration of the lash in the next case of desertion that occurred, had the effect desired by the commanding officer. He, therefore, was of opinion, that military flogging ought not to be abolished without the greatest caution, and the most mature consideration and inquiry, and not until some effective substitute were found.
Mr. Ellicecame down to the House on the present occasion rather to hear the observations that might be offered on this most important question than to offer any of his own, and he felt pleasure in saying, that nothing could more conduce to promote a satisfactory adjustment of the subject, difficult and embarrassing as it was, than the tone and temper with which it had been treated by every Member who had addressed the House. He was desirous, in the first instance, to correct a misstatement he had made to the House on a former occasion, not from any fault of his own, but arising out of the error of others, who misunderstood the nature of the return to which he referred. When he last addressed the House on this question, he stated, that the officers who made out the return for the last year, had informed him, that one-fifth of the British army had passed through the different gaols of the country. The officers by whom the return was made, calculated the proportion only upon the number of persons serving in the army in England, without including the garrisons in Ireland. When the proportion, therefore, was computed upon the whole army, both in England and Ireland, it was found not to amount to more than half the amount of what he originally stated. But even that result showed a frightful increase of crime. With respect to the gallant officer (Colonel Bowater) whose conduct had been the subject of so much animadversion, he felt it was only doing justice to that gallant Officer to say, that he had no more power to diminish or mitigate the sentence passed upon private Hutchinson, than any Member of that house; it was only his duty to see it carried into full effect. He had been asked by several hon. Members of what class of individuals the commission would be composed. When he stated that a commission should be appointed,

1109
he only mentioned it as his own view of the case, after a very full and mature consideration of the subject. He then stated, that the subject would undergo a very serious consideration by his Majesty's Government, and that a commission of experienced and competent individuals would be appointed for that purpose; but he had not yet decided upon the precise form of the commission, or the individuals of whom it ought to be composed. Nothing further had yet been done than collecting together the documents and all the evidence bearing upon the question that could be obtained, which it was the intention of Government to refer to the consideration of the commission; but of what individuals that commission was to be composed, had not yet been decided. It was of the greatest importance that in forming the commission two great principles should not be lost sight of, namely, that such a selection should be made as to obtain the confidence of the public, and hold out an assurance that the result of the inquiry would set the matter at rest, and at the same time to be extremely cautious that it was placed in the hands of persons who would, from their experience in military matters, give the country a pledge that military discipline and the effective force of the army would not be in the slightest degree impaired by any alteration which might be recommended. He thought it would be much better to leave the formation of the commission entirely in the hands of Government. He could assure the House that he paid the greatest attention to the suggestions that had proceeded from hon. Members, as well as those which he had received from all parts of the country. He was well aware of the importance of a speedy determination of the question, and agreed perfectly in the doctrine that the moral condition and improvement of the army could only be considered in time of peace; but he, nevertheless, would not consent to an alteration of the present law without the most mature consideration, wd the fullest evidence being gone into. The intoxication which had increased in the army to such an alarming extent, and was undoubtedly the cause of a great deal of the crime that took place, should be most specially considered, and an attempt made, if possible, to put a restraint upon it. This subject was one which ought to occupy the most serious consideration of
1110
the commission, as a great deal of insubordination arose from the effect of example alone. It was impossible the House could be aware of the difficulty with which the question of a substitution of punishment was surrounded. Not one of the suggestions of the hon. and gallant member for Westminster had been overlooked, but there was found to be an objection to each that was almost insurmountable. He would, however, remark, that every hope that could be grasped at, let it be ever so small, should not be suffered to slip in the endeavour to strangle the habit of drunkenness in the army. It would also be with the greatest care and caution that any diminution in the pay of the soldier should take place. It would be better to disband the army altogether than run the risk, by rousing a spirit of insubordination, to compromise the interests of the army both at home and abroad. If the practice of flogging was to be done away with—and he sincerely hoped it would—some sufficient means should be adopted to assure the officers of the army and navy that such a substitute would be provided as would ensure and maintain the discipline of the British service. He could assure the House that from the communications he had received from the officers in the army in every part of the country, an opinion was entertained by military men in perfect conformity with the public feeling, and was entirely in favour of an improvement in the mode of punishment resorted to in the army. He would only add, that if it were upon the ground of the sympathy which had been manifested in the case of private Hutchinson, it was the duty of Government to conform, as far as possible, to the wishes of the public, as no punishment was so bad as that which excited sympathy for the offender, and feelings of indignation toward those whose painful duty it was to administer it. He thought such a commission should be appointed as would not shrink from declaring that it was necessary for the discipline of the army the punishment should be continued if the evidence justified that conclusion. He also trusted, however the commission might be composed, that they would receive evidence from civilians as well as from military men, and that every man who had stated his opinion in that House would not only be afforded an opportunity to declare his sentiments before the commission, but would undergo

1111
examination, if he pleased, in order that the fullest and most perfect evidence on the subject might be obtained.
Colonel Williamssaid, so far as his experience, which was nearly half a century old, went, he would say that it was impossible to do away with flogging altogether, although he had always deprecated the frequent use of the practice. It was a punishment which ought always to hang over the heads of incorrigible villains. He was satisfied, moreover, it was rendered necessary by the prevalence of drunkenness, which was the principal cause of the crimes which were committed, and that it could not be abolished until intoxication was put an end to.
Colonel Evanswas perfectly satisfied with the speech of the right hon. Secretary at War, and stated, that separate Acts of Parliament for war and peace might be passed if necessary.
Petitions laid on the Table.

CONSOLIDATED-FUND-APPROPRIATION.
Lord Althorp Lord Althorp moved the Order of the Day for the third reading of the Consolidated-Fund-Appropriation Bill.
Mr. T. Attwoodconsidered the Appropriation Bill the most important measure in the Session, and yet it had been usual to pass it through the House literally in the twinkling of an eye. He was not disposed now to trouble them with any kind of remarks, but as several little matters had already been occupying their attention, he thought he might as well ask of the noble Lord one little question. He wished to know whether the foreign honour of this country was in safe keeping. He had lately paid some little attention to foreign affairs, and his opinion sincerely was, that England had every year been sinking deeper and deeper in political degradation. He did not particularly allude to the state of affairs in the Peninsula, but generally to Holland, Turkey, and Russia. Russia had been for a long period encroaching on England, and daily and hourly insulting her; and he wished in good faith and sincerity to ask the noble Lord whether, when all these immense resources were placed at the disposal of Government, their object was to purchase the degradation of England? If the effect would be to support the foreign honour of the nation, he should be quite content, although it was at the expense of domestic misery. He had no objection to their
1112
maintaining great armies and magnificent fleets, if it was not to be altogether in vain; but he would decidedly object to the passing of bill after bill if, under the pretence of supporting English interests, they were allowed to sink every year deeper in degradation and disgrace. Were they, after permitting Russia, in defiance of the honour of England, to retain quiet possession of Poland, to sit down and allow that power also to usurp the dominion of Turkey? He did not wish the noble Lord to make any disclosure that might be inconsistent with a due regard to the public service, but he trusted he should receive an assurance that the honour of England, athough long suspected, was not altogether sacrificed.
Lord Althorpwas happy to be able to give the hon. Member the assurance that the honour of Great Britain was supported abroad, and that it had sustained no detriment.
Mr. Humewished to know in what manner the sum of 100,000 l. given by the Bill in perpetuity for the payment of part of the tithe property of Ireland was provided for.
Mr. Littletonsaid, that the 100,000 l. was taken, in the first instance, from the perpetuity fund as far as it would go, and the deficiency was to be supplied from the Consolidated Fund.
Mr. Shawobserved, that the whole measure of the Irish Tithe Bill was a gross delusion; and that any expectation of ever recovering the money which was to be advanced to carry the Bill into effect, was entirely fallacious.
Mr. Littletonexpressed his firm conviction that the result would, in all respects disappoint the hon. and learned Gentleman's expectations. But if it should not be so,—if it should turn out that some sacrifice was necessary,—it must be recollected that that sacrifice was for the pacification of an entire country. The measure was one to which the Protestant clergy of Ireland were looking with hope and confidence. Among other representations on the subject, he had received a communication from the whole of the Protestant clergy of the diocese of Dromore, declaring, that if the Irish Tithe Bill were not to pass into a law, they should regard the consequences with the utmost apprehension and alarm.
Order of the Day read. On the Motion that the Bill be read a third time,
Mr. Shawmaintained, that so far from giving satisfaction in Ireland, the Bill had occasioned entire dissatisfaction: he could pledge himself, on his honour as a gentleman, to prove from the clearest materials that four-fifths of the clergy of Ireland were decidedly hostile to it. And not only was he enabled to affirm that such was the opinion of the clergy, but that the opinion of the laity fully coincided with theirs. He might be allowed to say, that he represented the clergy and the gentry of Ireland. Surely hon. Members did not suppose that he meant to say, that his opinions represented the great body of the educated class throughout Ireland; he had not the slightest idea of saying anything more, than that the constituency which he had the honour to represent was composed of the clergy and the gentry of Ireland. The University of Dublin had 2,500 electors, and they all belonged to the classes of the clergy or the gentry. He was, therefore, in communication with those. He believed he had a larger correspondence with Ireland than any Member of that House; and he thought himself fully warranted in affirming that the opinion of the majority ran decidedly in opposition to the tithe measure which had been introduced by his Majesty's Government.
Mr. Secretary Riceobserved, that the hon. and learned Gentleman, to be assured of that fact, must have had communications with twelve or thirteen hundred persons. He congratulated his noble friend, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, on the great increase of the Post-office revenue, which that circumstance must have occasioned. From what he knew of Ireland, however, he must deny the hon. and learned Gentleman's conclusion. If ever there was a measure which was considered to be for the good of the Protestant Church and the Protestant laity in Ireland, it was the Irish Tithe Bill. He should like to know, to what kind of representations, and what kind of incitements, the 1,200 letters received by the hon. and learned Gentleman were replies. He trusted that the prophecies of the hon. and learned Gentleman on this subject would prove as fallacious as all his former prophecies. Nobody could for a moment believe, that the Protestant clergy of Ireland would experience the inconveniences in their transactions with the landlords of Ireland, who were also chiefly Protestants,
1114
which they would have reason to apprehend in any transactions with the impoverished peasantry. He was sure nothing of that kind would occur. He was sure that the landlords of Ireland would give every possible facility to the arrangements on the subject. But in what condition would the Protestant clergy of Ireland be placed, if, instead of obtaining the advantages of the Bill, they were thrown back on the peasantry of that country, under new circumstances of excitement and discontent? He was convinced, that by placing the burden on the landlords they had got rid of the greatest cause of complaint and dissatisfaction. He considered the Irish Tithe Bill as one of the best answers that had ever been made to the cry for the repeal of the Union; and that, connected with the generosity which this country had exhibited on the occasion, it would do more to cement the Union, than any act which could be imagined. If the, hon. and learned Gentleman's predictions were to be verified, and if the Bill were to fail, the Church of Ireland would be in extreme danger. No man was more attached to the Church of Ireland than he (Mr. S. Rice) was. He had supported the Bill, for the sake of that Church; for he could not contemplate a continuance of the existence of the Church of Ireland if the Protestant clergy of that country were, by any circumstances, to be driven back to contend for their rights with an impoverished tenantry.
Mr. Ruthvenagreed with the right hon. Gentleman who had just spoken, that if some such Bill as the Irish Tithe Bill were not adopted, there would be an end to the Protestant establishment in Ireland. He believed, that by the adoption of that measure, the Protestant clergy of Ireland would be placed in a much better situation than they had ever been before. He considered it a great advantage to them, and that it would save them from utter destruction.
Colonel O'Gradywas in constant communication with his constituents, and he was happy to say, that out of all the clergy who resided in the county which he had the honour to represent, he had not received a single letter against the Bill. He understood, also, that all the gentlemen of the Grand Juries of Cork, Limerick, and Kerry, concurred in entertaining a favourable opinion of the Bill. He trusted

1115
that it would succeed. If it failed, it was clear that the whole of the tithes would go into the pockets of the landlords, and the Protestant establishment in Ireland would be irrecoverably lost. It was an awful moment, but he trusted that all classes would do their duty.
Mr. Lefroywas satisfied, whatever certain persons might have communicated to the right hon. Secretary for Ireland, that the great body of the laity would never join the conspirators in their endeavours to overturn the Church of that country.
Mr. Humesaid, those persons were greatly mistaken who supposed that the clergy of Ireland would be dissatisfied with this Bill. If the Bill did not pass, what would they do—what would become of them? For his own part he almost wished it would not pass, and then they would see in another year how different a shape the Church question would assume. The present measure was, undoubtedly, one of great liberality, and if defeated, would never be followed up by anything half so advantageous to the Church. The hon. and learned Recorder of Dublin (Mr. Shaw) would surely not allege that the clergy were indifferent to the peculiarity of their present situation, or that they did not know their own interest. If they did not choose to take what was now offered, he (Mr. Hume) would tell him that they might go without, for that House, he was satisfied, would vote them no more English money. Therefore, let them take that or none. That was the understanding, and it must be abided by. But what they had done he contended was wrong—it was wrong to vote 100,000 l. to keep up the Church in Ireland. Instead of thus voting money to keep it up—they ought rather to cut it down to the real wants of the Protestant portion of the community. They burthened the Exchequer, and did not do away with the dissatisfaction. He wished in that, the last Act of the Session to say a word or two to his Majesty's Ministers. And he must tell them plainly, that the country had been wholly disappointed in its reasonable and just expectations of amelioration and reform. Before the Parliament met, the people had naturally been indulging the hope that substantial reforms were preparing—that during the recess Ministers were maturing and perfecting those plans of relief which naturally sprang out of the great measure of reform. They
1116
had indulged the hope not only of reforms of a civil and financial character, but of a great and searching reform of the abuses connected with the Church Establishment, and the Sovereign himself from the Throne had adverted to these necessary reforms, thus giving the fullest sanction to them. They had also expected that those who were looked upon in some degree as an exclusive class in the country—as men beneath their fellow-men belonging to another creed—would receive an early and full relief from disabilities under which they had too long been permitted to labour. Did the Acts of his Majesty's Ministers satisfy any of these reasonable expectations? Assuredly not. Why, what was the amount of all that had been effected by the Government? Only one Bill which could be called a public Bill—that for the Amendment of the Poor-laws—had yet been passed. The Tithe Bill had been carried through that House certainly, but it was not yet passed. Every other measure introduced by his Majesty's Ministers had failed. Therefore was it that he (Mr. Hume) said, he was not at all surprised at the feeling of disappointment which so generally prevailed throughout the country. At the same time he must admit, there were some redeeming matters on which the public might look with satisfaction. They had fortunately removed from the Cabinet the Members who were most strongly adverse to those reforms on which the people were most bent. He could congratulate the country on being in a better situation in this respect. He did not wish to refer, in support of what he said, to any of those hon. Gentlemen who more peculiarly coincided in his views and acted with him, but he would appeal to the most moderate man in that House to stand up and say, if the expectations of the people had not been most signally defeated? He trusted these complaints would not have to be made at the close of the next Session. He hoped for better things. They had now got a Government which he hoped, by its acts, would prove itself a firm, steady, and liberal one. If this were the case, the people would soon cease to complain—they would not look back with dissatisfaction, but would rather look forward with confidence and hope. He would, before sitting down, take the liberty of saying a word or two to the noble Lord the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The noble Lord and his colleagues

1117
would now have time to look about them—they would have six months before them in which to prepare those measures which must infallibly be decided during the ensuing Session of Parliament. Those measures must necessarily be of a bold and decisive character, or they would not be final. They must have in that House no more piecemeal legislation—no scrapwork—no bit of reform here and bit of reform there—but they must have those large and comprehensive measures which would have regard to the interests and the welfare of all. They must cut down the Irish Church to its proper dimensions—they must give the most ample relief to that class which, in his opinion, formed the majority of the people—they must apply themselves to the reform of the Church of England—they must do away with the abuses of Corporations—a subject, by the way, which the noble Lord himself admitted to be next only in importance to the great question of Reform itself; and they must again go unsparingly to work in reducing the expenditure of the country. With respect to the latter subject, he had no hesitation in saying, that considerable reductions might be made in several of the great departments without impairing the efficiency of any branch of the public service. The collection alone of the public revenue amounted to between 3,000,000 l. and 4,000,000 l. a-year, and this, he was satisfied, without doing injury to any party, or to the State, might be reduced by one-third. The noble Lord (Lord Althorp) had, on many occasions, expressed himself friendly to the consolidation of various departments of the public service. Now what was there to hinder the noble Lord from consolidating the Excise, Customs, and Stamp-Duties' Offices? The Army, Navy, and, above all, the Ordnance, must in the next Session be greatly reduced. By the weakness of the late Administration the control of the army was taken from them, and, therefore, there could be no great wonder that reform had not been more efficient. Was the army still to be beyond the control of the Government? Such a state of things ought never to have been, and if it did continue, means ought to be promptly taken at once to put an end to it. The army was far too great—its numerical amount ought to he reduced. Now, that they had applied a real and substantial remedy to the great grievance of Ireland—
1118
and a costly one it was for this country—they had a right to expect a reduction of 10,000 to 12,000 of the 24,000 soldiers at present quartered in that country. If the sacrifices made by this country were not to be followed up by such results, where, in the name of God, was the policy in agreeing to them. He (and with him he was sure the country at large) would look for most material reductions in the expenditure for the army, as well as that for the Colonial and Ordnance Department. Why, in the latter department he found that the salaries of officers for preserving the stores amounted to very nearly twice as much as the stores themselves: the stores cost 40,000 l., the charges for management 73,000 l. Could any one suppose, that the country would rest satisfied with such glaring abuses? The fact was, the whole of the military branches ought to be consolidated. These ameliorations must be followed up by others, more especially those which bore upon the manufactures and productive industry of the country. Ministers must meet the question of the Corn-laws fairly and manfully, and if they gave way to a little pressure from without, he (Mr. Hume) did not think they would do the less justice to the manufacturer. Those laws injured all classes without doing any real or permanent good to that one which it was intended should be benefitted by their enactment. They, in fact, starved one portion of the community on the plea of giving warmth to the other. However, he should not go further—he thought he had marked out work enough for the noble Lord, and yet not more than with his many assistants he was able to accomplish. Let it, however, be recollected, that the noble Lord had plenty of hands to assist him—it was his duty to direct—to divide and portion out the work—he was the good genius to whom the people looked to superintend those ameliorations which other individuals must shape into forms. And if he, the noble Lord, only laid down the principles upon which the subordinates were to act, neither he nor the people of this country would, he thought, have much reason to fear the result.
Lord Althorpwould not attempt to follow the hon. member for Middlesex through all the details of his speech, but would make one or two observations on the main points which he had brought under the consideration of the House. As

1119
to the Estimates for the different branches of the public service he must say, that he perfectly agreed with the hon. Gentleman, that they ought to be reduced to the lowest amount consistent with the due efficiency of the public service. He certainly felt it his duty to reduce them as much as possible; but he would put it to the House whether his practice had not been in accordance with his creed—whether real and substantial reductions had not been effected by the Government to which he belonged? Then as to consolidation of offices, the hon. Member had certainly not mistaken his opinions. He always approved of such a course—he had always adopted it when it was possible to do so. At the same time the principle might be carried out to too great an extent, and this he considered would be the case if the Customs, Excise, and Stamp Offices were consolidated. The public service would, he was sure, be inconvenienced by the adoption of the principle in this instance. Indeed, he did not hesitate to say, that great confusion would be the result. But the hon. Member said "how little had been done." He, however, would ask the House to look back. He would freely admit, that more might have been done, but he really believed that no one would fairly charge the fault to the Government. He would ask the hon. Gentleman if he did not think it right to pass the Estimates early in the Session. If that were so, how could Government, at the same time, force on Bills of a complicated nature, involving, perhaps, new principles, and various and important details? Every day on which the courtesy of the House had given priority to the Government, Ministers had strenuously exerted themselves, certainly not to force their measures through, but to get them on as rapidly as was consistent with their own intrinsic importance, and with the respect which was due to the Members of that House. The Estimates were not passed till Easter, and then the Government had pressed on the Poor-law Bill, esteeming it of greater importance than any other measure. But many other important subjects had been entertained though not introduced by the Government, and many discussions had taken place which he hoped would be productive of good. If the Government, however, was to blame, he was the person on whom the censure of the House ought to fall. The fault was in him if business
1120
had not been properly pushed. It was, he admitted, very possible—nay, lie knew nothing more probable—than that he had not conducted the business in that House in the best possible manner; but of this he was sure, that he never interrupted its due course by long speeches. It was not by addressing the House oftener than his duty required—or by the length of those addresses—that the business of the country was impeded, and if it had been impeded, he did not see by what means he could remedy the evil. If, as had been suggested, he were to bring forward half a dozen important measures at the commencement of the Session, and to throw them at once upon the Table, he would be obliged to abandon most of them, while the progress of those which were pressed forward would be impeded to a very inconvenient degree. He, therefore, considered that it would be the duty of the Government, first to select the measures of the most pressing urgency, and then to adopt the requisite steps for preventing any unnecessary delay to their discussion and progress through the House. He was not enabled, at the present time, to state what were the most important measures, but he could assure the hon. Gentleman that the Government were resolved to introduce such as were necessary for carrying forward, in a temperate and proper manner, the reform which, he must admit, was required in various establishments of the country. He sincerely hoped that the measures which they should introduce would be such as to meet the approbation of the House. The hon. Gentleman had stated, that the Government ought not to heed any slight obstacles which they might find in their way: he would only say, in reply, that their conduct, in regard to the Poor-law Bill, was not such as to afford any ground for the observation of the hon. Member. As to the different details of the Estimates which had been referred to, he did not think it necessary to enter upon them, but he would admit, that it was undoubtedly the duty of Government to make reductions in the establishment, as far as was consistent with the public service. In conclusion, he should only observe, that the Government would take care that in every department, either of collection or expenditure, the most efficient economy should be observed.
Mr. Prymetrusted, that a satisfactory

1121
adjustment of the Tithe Question would be taken into consideration. Such an adjustment was of the utmost importance both to the landlord and the tenant.
Mr. William Peteragreed with the hon. members for Cambridge, and Middlesex, as to the necessity of settling the two great questions of English Tithe Commutation, and of Corporation Reform without delay. The people were most anxious on those subjects; and he trusted that they would not be postponed beyond another Session. With respect to the question more immediately before the House,—the Consolidated Fund Appropriation Bill; he concurred with the hon. member for Middlesex, in thinking that the mode, by which it was proposed, to supply the deficiency of the rent charges by payments out of the Consolidated Fund, was not altogether free from objections. Still the objections were greatly out-weighed by the arguments on the other side, by the probable, or, as he should rather say, by the sure and lasting benefits which must result from the measure. The hon. Member had said, that the money advanced from the Consolidated Fund, would never be repaid. Well, for the sake of argument, suppose such were to be the case; even then he (Mr. Peter) would maintain that the good of the plan greatly preponderated over the evil, that the money was judiciously laid out, was wisely, and advantageously applied. Better, ten thousand times better, that the sum should be expended in peace than in war; better, ten thousand times, that it should go in deeds of conciliation and kindness, than in deeds of violence, and bloodshed, and oppression, than in compelling hollow truces, and reluctant obedience by means of reinforced armies, and renewed coercion Acts! Admitting, then, that the money to be advanced, were never repaid, still he would contend, that this country would be a gainer, even in a pecuniary point of view. But why should this be the case? Why should the money be not repaid? Parliament had the means of repayment within its own power. Should the Perpetuity Purchase Fund; should the funds in the hands of the ecclesiastical commissioners be inadequate, still there were means, ample means, within the reach of Parliament. Let the Consolidated Fund be reimbursed out of the surplus revenue of the Irish Church as soon as that surplus
1122
should have been ascertained, and the spiritual wants of the Protestant population, in the fullest and amplest manner provided for. Such an application would be strictly just and warranted by the occasion; it would be an appropriation to purposes strictly Protestant and ecclesiastical. Let the Irish Church have whatever might be required for the spiritual wants and comforts of its Protestant congregations; but do not refuse, do not grudge, some little portion of its surplus funds, of its superfluous revenues, to the payment of so just a debt,—a debt contracted in the service of that Church, for the support of its interests, for the security of its property and institutions. One of the hon. members for the University of Dublin, had reprobated this as a strong, as an unprecedented measure. But was it not a strong case; and did not strong cases require strong remedies? But let that hon. Member, let him and his learned colleague look at Ireland; let them look at the state of public feeling in that country, and consider the difficulties with which the tithe question was encompassed on every side; let them seriously and honestly contemplate all these things, and then let them say, whether they really believed any better mode could be found for setting the question at rest; for settling it with any thing like justice or advantage to all parties? Gentlemen must know the danger of delay; they must all be aware that every month's, every week's uncertainty would embarrass the question with further difficulties, would involve Church property, and Church institutions in deeper peril, and more inextricable confusion. Suppose for a moment (though he could not contemplate the possibility without alarm), suppose the measure should be rejected by the other House of Parliament, what would be the consequences? what would become of the Irish clergy? what would be the fate of their Church? what the situation of Ireland altogether? Would any one pretend to say, that tithes could continue to be levied under the existing law, that even armies could overcome the passive resistance now in operation against them; or, did any one flatter himself that Parliament would again come forward with further advances in aid of the Irish clergy? What then was to be done, or how would the clergy be supported? how were tithes, or any portion of them to be rescued and secur-

1123
ed, should the proposed measure be rejected? The more he considered the subject, the more firmly was he convinced, that the only chance which remained of doing anything for the relief of the Irish clergy, or of securing any portion of Irish tithe property, was by adopting the proposed measure; was by transferring the burthen from the shoulders of the occupying tenant to those of the landlord: for this, indeed, the landlords should be fully indemnified, should be largely, and liberally remunerated. For the additional risque and labour thus thrown upon them, they were justly, they were legally entitled to the amplest compensation. But did not this Bill afford it to them? He contended, that it did so, and that the bonus of two-fifths, or forty per cent was adequate and ample. By the first proposition of the right hon. Secretary, in the Bill brought forward by him at the commencement of the Session, the bonus was only one-fifth. For every 100 l. due from the tenant, the landlord was to pay 80 l., retaining the difference, or twenty per cent for the risque and trouble of collection. But this was doubly objectionable; it was neither a sufficient compensation for the landlord, nor did it in any way relieve the occupying tenant, who would have had as much to pay as before,—with the sole difference of paying it to the landlord instead of paying it to the tithe-owner. The right hon. Secretary, therefore, instead of deserving blame, had acted wisely and judiciously in altering his plan—in increasing the amount of compensation to the landlord, and in allowing the tenant to reap the benefit of it during the remainder of his term. So far all was right; but one objection still remained behind, and that was the delay which must have occurred in carrying the measure into execution. The case was urgent, calling for immediate remedy; but the relief might have been postponed for years, might have been deferred until 1839. Ireland might have been in flame,—torrents of blood might have flowed,—Church property might have been irrecoverably lost, before the Act could have come into effectual operation. This was a serious and fatal objection; but, thank God, that objection had been removed, and there was at length, he trusted, every prospect of settling this long-agitated and unhappy question, and of thus extinguishing one of the most prolific sources of
1124
Ireland's discords, and of Ireland's woes. The hon. member for the University of Dublin, had, indeed, prophesied that the proposed measure would not succeed. He (Mr. Peter) would not say, that the wish was father to the thought; but he would tell those hon. Gentlemen why he differed from them, and why he thought that it would succeed. It would succeed, he thought, because it was palpably the interest of all parties, of tenants, landlords, and tithe-owners, that it should do so. It was a measure, which would be more or less advantageous to them all. The occupying tenant would be at once relieved by it from two-fifths, or forty per cent of his present burthen; the landlord would be remunerated for his share in the the transaction, by the tranquillized spirit and subordination of all around him, by the improved state of his tenantry, and by the consequently increased value of his property; and finally the tithe-owner would be an equal—nay, a greater gainer; for, though not receiving the strictly lull amount, though receiving but 80 l. out of every 100 l., to which he was nominally entitled; he would still receive more, infinitely more, than he could otherwise, by any possible means have hoped to obtain; he would receive it, too, clear of all deductions, free from all risk, and peril, and anxiety. Thus, then, would the measure be for the advantage of all parties; thus, would it be the interest of all to yield it obedience, and to promote its success. He rejoiced, therefore, to see such a measure passing the House of Commons; and he hoped, he prayed, for the sake of Ireland, for the interests of its Protestant Church, for the peace and welfare of all classes and denominations of its inhabitants, that the Bill would not be prevented by opposition in any other place from becoming a law. Sure he was, that the rejection, or even long retardment of such a measure would be fatal to Church property in Ireland,—would be detrimental to the best interests of all classes of the community, whether Catholic or Protestant, throughout that distracted country. Let the opponents, therefore, of the measure pause; let them reflect well on the course which they were pursuing, and on the awful responsibility which they would incur to their King, to their country, and to their God, should they succeed in throwing out, or in long retarding this beneficent measure.
Mr. Thomas Attwoodwas surprised at the pertinacity with which the Irish Tithe Bill had been opposed, as he considered it likely to be of great advantage to the tithe-owners. But he considered that the interests of the clergy were secondary, as compared to those of the farmer. The farmers, or peasantry of Ireland, were, however, all ruined, and considering that their rights were quite as sacred as those of the clergy, or, he might say, much more sacred, they had a stronger claim than the clergy on that House for protection. But he regretted to say, that the most useful classes, in the community, found neither commiseration nor relief.
Mr. Ewartsuggested, that the indirect taxation of the country should be apportioned on the various classes of the community, in a manner more approaching to the ad valorem, system. There were many articles used by the poor, which could be easily distinguished from articles of the same character, but of a better quality, which were consumed by the richer classes; and if an ad valorem duty were levied upon them, it would be like an indirect Property-tax.
Mr. Richard Potterhoped, that the circumstance of the Dissenters not having pressed their claims this Session, would not be against them; but that the Government would feel itself bound to place the redress of their grievances among the foremost of its measures.
Mr. Warburtontrusted, that the Government would, early next Session, propose the abolition of all taxes on knowledge,—printing, pamphlets, newspapers, ["malt."] No, no; he would say nothing about malt at present. With regard to these taxes on knowledge, their effect was, to transfer the instruction of the humble classes to persons destitute of moral character, who scrupled not to infringe the law, and mislead the people.
Mr. Bainessaid, that a general system of education should be adopted, so as to diffuse useful knowledge throughout the country.
The Bill was read a third time.

BANK OF ENGLAND DEBT.
on the Motion that the Bank of England (Debt) Bill be read a third time.
Mr. Thomas Attwoodsaid, that in his opinion, this Bill would provide the Bank of England with the means of playing with the national finances. He hoped that
1126
the noble Lord would keep his eyes upon the Directors, and not allow them to contract or extend the circulation for their own purposes, and against the interests of the public.
Lord Althorpsaid, he did not believe that any ill effects would ensue from the payment of this portion of the debt, which was due to the Bank of England.
Mr. Humesaid, he had no such apprehensions as the hon. member for Birmingham; but his objection was, that this had been a private transaction, although there was an Act of Parliament to prevent a Chancellor of the Exchequer from borrowing privately. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer required three millions and a half to pay off a certain portion of the Bank debt, lie ought to have afforded a public opportunity to all parties. to come forward with their offers. He had seen it stated, that there had been a breach of confidence with regard to the annuities; he would only observe at present that if any one body, public or private, had had an opportunity of benefitting themselves to the full extent which the public at large ought to have benefitted, it was highly improper. In the next place, some explanation should be given respecting the terms of the annuities, as they had generally been considered a ruinous system beyond a certain point.
Lord Althorpsaid, that his hon. friend laboured under a mistake. With respect to his making a bargain with the Bank, without going into the money-market and raising a loan, he had done so because the effect of going into the market and making a loan would have been to throw the money-market into confusion, and he believed he had made as good a bargain for the public as he should have done had he raised a loan, whilst he saved the market from a great injury. With regard to the annuities, he was not sorry that the hon. Gentleman had mentioned the subject, as he wished to give some explanation respecting them. There were two classes of annuities—life interests and annuities for terms of years. With regard to the former, they were not so disadvantageous to the public as had been generally supposed. It was, indeed suspected that certain annuities had been purchased upon lives at the older ages, and that the parties so purchasing hall gained an advantage over the Government. Inquiries had been made, and it was believed that this advantage had been

1127
taken on lives of, and above, eighty years. The Commissioners, in consequence of these inquiries, had determined to exercise the power which they had of refusing any annuities that were disadvantageous to the public, and accordingly they had refused them on ages above sixty-five, unless the party applying wished to insure his own life, where there could be no speculation. With regard to the annuities on younger lives, they were rather advantageous to the public. As to the second class of annuities, they were by no means disadvantageous; but where a very large amount of permanent debt was converted into annuities for a term of years, the annual charge on the public was raised to a very inconvenient amount. A short time ago the Commissioners finding that there was a danger of too large a sum being converted into terminable annuities for a short term of years, gave notice that in no one quarter should a larger sum than 500,000 l. of capital stock be converted into annuities for a shorter date than would expire in the year 1860. With regard to the alleged breach of confidence, none had taken place, a public notice having been put up at the National Debt Office as usual; but the Bank of Ireland did convert 500,000 l. at once into annuities for a term of ten years, which, in consequence of the arrangement he had referred to, absorbed the whole amount that would be converted during the quarter. That was the whole case. With regard o the system, he thought that so long as the pressure on the public was not very great, it was an advantageous mode of reducing the public debt. He would illustrate this by some Returns which he had procured in expectation that the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Hume) would allude to the subject. In the half-year ending 1833, the amount of interest paid on the permanent annuity amounted to 12,231,948 l.; and in the half-year ending July 1834, to 12,186,361 l.; whereby there was a saving of 45,777 l., or 90,000 l. a-year. The terminable annuities amounted, in the year ending 1833, to 1,600,741 l.; and in the half-year ending July 1834, to 1,783,966 l.; making an increase of 183,225 l. in the half-year, and causing an increase of somewhere about 37,000 l. a-year. With regard to the terminable annuities, the country might look forward to considerable relief. The following sums would fall in, in 1840, 1860, and 1867:—
1128

In 1840

£.200,000

1860

1,200,000

1867

590,000

To these sums might be added 800,000 l., which must fall in, in a short time; and thus, nearly 3,000,000 l. of annuities must, in a moderate space of time, accrue to the benefit of the public. He thought, after this statement, that the House would agree with him that the conversion of permanent into terminable annuities was the best plan, provided the annual burthen on the public was not increased to too great an amount.
The Bill was read a third time.