The noble Viscountadded, that he would take that opportunity to state that the hon. Gentleman last week asked him, whether there would be any objection to certain returns being laid-before the House relative to the amount of assistance rendered by his Majesty's Government to the Queen of Spain. Not having looked at the time to the particular nature of the returns required, he (Lord Palmerston) had stated to the hon. Gentleman that there would be no objection; and upon that the hon. Gentleman moved for them. It appeared, however, on communicating the order of the House to the Admiralty, that there existed very great objections to making some portion of the returns. The order required, in the first place, a return of the amount of the military and naval stores, arms, and ammunition furnished to the Queen of Spain under the stipulations of the Quadripartite Treaty, and the amount of payment received for the same by his Majesty's Government; and in the next place, it called for the number of vessels of war 135 and steam boats employed on the northern coast of Spain since the date of the treaty, and of marines, artillery, engineers, and sappers and miners employed in the co-operation granted by his Majesty to her Catholic Majesty. Now, it had always been a rule with the Admiralty, under all Administrations, that, pending naval operations, it was not expedient or desirable to lay before Parliament returns of the number of ships and men employed in those operations, and he was sure the House would agree with him that any departure from such a rule would be attended with the greatest possible inconvenience, because it would necessarily interfere with the operations of the force employed, by giving to the enemy a complete knowledge of the course which it would be proper for him to take. Therefore he hoped that, having given an unguarded and unauthorised assent to a return which he now felt ought to have been resisted, and which the House, he believed, would see reason not to sanction, the hon. Member would permit him to move the discharge of so much of the order as related to the number of ships and men employed. Presuming, however, that the hon. Gentleman bad some argument to found on the fact that certain officers and men of artillery and engineers had been employed in the squadron under the command of Lord John Hay, he was quite prepared to give the hon. Gentleman the full benefit of an admission of that fact; for he had no hesitation in stating, what indeed was known to all the world, that there had been attached to Lord John Hay's squadron one or two officers of artillery and engineers, and a certain number of privates belonging to those corps. He could not suppose that it would make any difference to the hon. Gentleman's argument whether that number was ten, twenty, or sixty. It was a question of principle, he presumed, and not numbers. He, therefore, hoped, the hon. Member would be content with the admission which had now been made to him, and content himself with arguing against the principle, which his right hon. Friend near him would tell him had always been contended for by the Admiralty under every Administration.
§ Mr. Macleanwas understood to say, that supposing he should bring the question forward, it would be a very serious impediment to his argument if the returns 136 were not made. He did not think that the general rule to which the noble Lord had referred was strictly applicable to our selves, as co-operating parties. He thought there was a very material difference whether we had employed ten, twenty, or sixty officers and men, or 600 or 700. At the same time he was extremely anxious not to occasion any inconvenience to the Government, especially after what had fallen from the noble Lord, and if the noble Lord gave notice of his intention and made his motion on a subsequent day, he would not oppose it.
§ Mr. Charles Woodsaid, it was very inconvenient to call upon the Admiralty to make a return as to the number of ships and men employed in any naval operations that were pending. If the hon. Gentleman, when speaking to him (Mr. C. Wood) on the subject of his intended motion, had specified to him the precise terms in which he afterwards shaped it, he should at once have told the hon. Gentleman that such a practice never had been pursued, and that it was contrary to all the rules of the Admiralty. He was perfectly ready to make any general admission as to men having been employed, but any return of the actual force so employed he must resist.
§ Sir Henry Hardingethought the rule laid down by the hon. Secretary of the Admiralty was a very proper one; but after his hon. Friend the Member for Oxford had been told by the noble Lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs that there would be no objection to a return of the number of ships and men employed, no blame certainly could be imputed to him for making the motion.
§ Mr. Macleancould not conceive in what way he could have given the hon. Secretary to the Admiralty a more distinct notice of the object of his motion than by putting into his hands in the morning a printed document setting forth that which he should move for in the evening.
§ Conversation dropped.