Commons Sitting of 26 February 1844

MINUTES.
NEW WRIT.—For Londonderry Co., v. Robert Bateson, Esq., dec.
BILLS. Public.—1°. Witnesses Indemnity (Gaming).
Private.—1°. Salisbury Branch Railway; York and Scarborough Railway; Severn Navigation; Edinburgh Cattle Market.
2°. Manchester and Leeds Railway (Bradford Branch); Huddersfield Branch Railway; Rochdale Gas; Brander Burton Inclosure; Leeds and Selby Railway Purchase; Sang's Naturalization; Manchester and Leeds Railway (Heywood Brandt); Manchester and Leeds Railway (Bury Branch); Wich Tree Roads; Birmingham Canal Navigations; Norwich and Brandon Railway; Great Western Railway; Birkenhead Docks; Birkenhead Improvement.
PETITIONS PRESENTED. By MY. O'Connell, from Tullylish, and 195 places, for Repeal of the Union.—From Haslington, and Pocklington Unions, for Amendment of the Poor Law.—From Truro, against Increase of Military Establishments.—From Sandwich, for a Harbour of Refuge.—By Mr. S. Crawford, from Edinburgh, for Withholding the Supplies.—From Kelso, and Lorn, for Increase of Remuneration to Schoolmasters (Scotland).—From Huddersfield, R. Nichols, and Great Yarmouth, respecting Window Tax on Licensed Victuallers.—By Mr. Dennistoun, from Glasgow, respecting the State of Ireland.—By Mr. Macaulay, from Edinburgh, for Repeal of Paper Duties.—From Samuel Gordon, for Consideration of his Case.—From Dundee, respecting University Professors.

REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES—SUPPLY—THE INCOME TAX.
On the Motion that the Speaker do leave the Chair for the House to resolve itself into a Committee of Supply
Mr. S. Crawfordrose, agreeably to the notice which he had given, to move the postponement of the consideration of the Committee of Supply, and he should endeavour as clearly as possible to state to the house the reasons which induced him to bring forward the subject, and the objects which impelled him to make that Motion. He had recently witnessed a nine days' fight in the House of Commons, a fight in which he took no part, and from which he feared no practical result would be found to follow. They had been engaged in firing blank cartridges, without producing any effect upon the condition of the great body of the people; it was a conflict of parties, in which the great and important interests of the people were little concerned. It was a long continued war of words, and the result

277
was, that the victory went to those who had the greatest number at their side. Now he was of opinion that the result ought not solely to depend on such a cause, and that attention ought to be paid to the just demands of the people for their rights, although the numbers of those opposed to them might be greater than those who were favourable to those rights. It appeared to him that when an intruding army came into a country, the duty of a skilful general opposed to such an army was to cut off the supplies, and he proposed, therefore, in a civil movement, to adopt the course of the skilful general, and cut off the supplies of the intruding party in order to bring them to just and reasonable terms. It was on that principle and with that view that he brought forward his Motion, in order to bring the party which was opposed to him to terms, and to rally some of the friends of the noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) in order to fight the real battle for the rights of the people. The noble Lord had not the country with him, for he did not found his proceedings upon principles which were calculated to bring the people round him in such a way as would enable him to overcome his enemies. He would first refer to a resolution on this subject, which he moved on a former occasion, as he believed that he had been by some hon. Members to a certain degree misunderstood. The hon. Member for Montrose appeared to think that he denied the competency of the House to vote the Supplies. Now, what he said was, that if the charges which had been made against the House were true, it would not be competent, and that the House ought to investigate those charges and redress the grievances of the people before the Supplies were voted. He had previously referred to petitions which had been presented containing those charges. One of those petitions was from the Chartists, and it contained charges which, as the House had received the petitions, ought, in his opinion, to have been investigated. Another was presented from Birmingham, signed by the Mayor. It stated that the House of Commons did not represent the people, that it had not the confidence of the people, that a large portion of its Members had obtained their seats by bribery and corruption, and that Parliamentary proceedings were influenced by selfish and party motives rather than by a regard for the interests of the people,
278
and that there was in the House of Commons gross ignorance of the condition of the people and carelessness of their welfare. The House received that petition, and, having received it, he would ask was it not necessary to inquire into the allegations which it contained? If the charges were not true, why did the House receive it, and as the House had received it, was it not incumbent on the House to cause an investigation into the truth? The House ought not to vote the Supplies until they had inquired into those charges. The House of Commons, represented certain classes—it represented the Landed Aristocracy—it represented a part of the middle classes, and it represented the monied classes, but the large mass of the working classes were unrepresented. He put it to the House, then, to say if they were the virtual representatives of the people, and if they were not, how could they take upon themselves to vote the Supplies? He called on the House to institute an inquiry as to what extension of the Franchise would make it a true representation of the people, before the Supplies were voted. There was another consideration with reference to the Estimates, to which he begged to direct the attention of the House. In the Motion which he gave notice of, he stated his intention to move that the consideration of the Estimates be postponed till after Easter, for he was of opinion that all the Estimates for the year ought to be brought before the House before any part of them was considered. Taxation had increased greatly of late years, and they ought to inquire into the cause of that increase, and into the means of diminishing it. In 1836, the Expenditure of the country was 44,200,000 l. it had now increased to 49,550,000 l., and before they voted the Supplies they ought to consider whether the Expenditure of the country could be reduced. He thought that his Motion ought to be supported by every Member who was an advocate for economy, and he hoped to have the support of the hon Member for Montrose, who had so long endeavoured to reduce the public Expenditure. The Members who advocated the repeal of the Corn Laws ought to support him, and the Irish Members ought also to support him. The Irish people demanded the same Corporate Reform as had been granted to England. On that point there had been a promise of some amelioration, but there

279
was no security that it would go to the extent that was justly demanded. The second point was, that a proportionate number of Representatives be given to the people of Ireland. Was there the smallest hope that this demand, however just and legitimate, would be conceded. Next, an equalization of religious freedom with the people of England and Scotland was required, and that with that view the people of Ireland should be disembarrassed of the burthen of the Established Church, and its revenues applied to education and other temporal purposes. Had any Irish Member reason to expect that they would effectually obtain any one of these objects? He maintained that the Irish Members ought not to go home satisfied, without having used every exertion to extort the concession of these demands from the Government. He called upon the Irish Members not only to support this Motion, but to exert their energies in every possible way to prevent the present Government, or any Government, from refusing those demands which were just and reasonable. He had heard certain constructions put upon law proceedings in the case of public meetings, and those constructions very ingeniously argued by lawyers on both sides; but the construction of lawyers was of little consequence to Governments, if they had the power to stretch the law to their own purposes. The real construction which they would require was that of the Commander of the troops. He was the man that would interpret the law for them more usefully than any other. If a Government could stretch the law to oppress the people, they would effect that purpose; but the real question was, had they the power to execute that object? The Commander-in-Chief was the adviser to answer that question for them. Nothing could more clearly or plainly show this than a reference to Irish history for fifty years back. The Lord Lieutenant became seriously alarmed at the intention to assemble meetings in military terms, to collect in military array, and at which the people were to go in a sort of procession, resembling the march of troops; but at former periods the Government was not so easily alarmed. He remembered the time when the people of Ireland assembled actually in military array, and any Gentleman who remembered the Irish Volunteers must be aware that they asserted the right to carry arms, and to as-
280
semble in arms, and demand the redress of grievances, and that they actually so assembled and demanded the redress of grievances with arms in their hands. Had any Government asserted that they were conspirators? No;—and why? Because it had not the power. The Government was obliged to submit to the demand of redress made by men who had arms in their hands. Such was the case of the volunteers. It was an altered case now, when Arms Bills were passed to prevent the people of Ireland from having arms, even for their own defence. The Volunteers, asserted the right to bear arms, and to call for the redress of grievances as an armed body. It was curious to remark some of the proceedings of that day. In the Journals of the period was to be found an Address to the Lord Lieutenant in 1782, which recorded the Acts of the Legislature and showed what had been accomplished. The hon. Member read an Address, which claimed an enforcement of the due administration of the laws, and asserted the right of legislation to be in the Irish Parliament independent of England. Those were the proceedings of the Volunteers, and at that time the Government were as anxious to uphold English laws, as the Government opposite now was to maintain the Union. This armed body subsisted for twelve or thirteen years, and was never declared illegal or a conspiracy; but on four different occasions received the thanks of Parliament for their services in the defence of the country against foreign invaders, and internally enforcing the laws in aid of the civil power. What was the consequence of the conciliatory course then adopted? In the following year, the year 1783, 5,000 troops were withdrawn from Ireland, the ordinary force being 12,000, and those who remained were recruits and undisciplined soldiers. The people were left to their own protection. How different was the state of things now! The right hon. Baronet in his speech commented on the nature of the Irish Parliament, and he admitted that it had become as corrupt a Parliament as could well be, but it had nevertheless, during its existence conferred incalculable benefits upon the Irish people, for it was possible that sometimes the most corrupt bodies could be influenced by popular fervour and do good towards the people. In consequence of the corruptions of the Parliament, and the divisions amongst the people,

281
the Irish nation lost all power, and down to this day the evil had remained in full force. Since the unfortunate rebellion of 1798, a state of suffering and violence had pervaded that country from one cause or another, but chiefly from the domination of a small party to the exclusion of the great majority. He was surprised that no allusion had been made in the late Debate to that enormous insult to Ireland, the Arms Act, from which he thought a great mass of evil would arise, but he supposed the reason for this silence was, that the working out of that Act was found quite impracticable. With respect to the Landlord and Tenant Commission, all he should say was that many persons looked at it with great dislike, because it was supposed that there was a desire in the Commissioners to screen the Landlords. He hoped the Commission would do its duty, if it did it would effect great good, and he was not one of those who would join in condemning it without a trial. The Government, in defending themselves for the use of military power, said that they were not the cause of the agitation which had been raised in Ireland. He must deny the correctness of that apology. There would be no agitation which would be at all dangerous to the Government, if it were not their obstinate refusal to redress the grievances of Ireland. It was this which caused agitation, and what he maintained was, that the Government ought not to be permitted to keep up an army which would enable it to refuse redress. It is the duty of Members to take every means that the forms of the House sanctioned, to prevent the keeping up an enormous army for such a purpose. All these matters ought to be considered, and, if possible, remedied, before the House voted those Estimates for the Army, which would enable the Government to withhold the redress which was called for. There had been a considerable manifestation of public feeling in favour of the course which he had felt it his duty to take on that occasion. On referring to the votes of the House, he found that Petitions had been presented from thirty-four different places, calling upon the House to refuse supplies until the grievances of the people should have been redressed. The Petition which he had presented that day from the City of Edinburgh well deserved the attention of the House; that Petition was signed by 17,000 persons. In order to
282
show that he was justified by the feelings of his constituents in taking this course, he need only refer to the memorial which had been sent to him from the Borough of Rochdale, requiring him to refuse supplies until the grievances of the people had been redressed. In the opinion of the memorialist, that was a Constitutional, just, and necessary course. The Petition was signed by 5,500 inhabitants of Rochdale, and by 400 Electors—a larger number than had voted for him at the time of his return for that Borough. He admitted that opposition to the Government in the voting of Supplies ought not to be undertaken on light grounds; but in his judgment, the grounds were now amply sufficient. The liberties of the people were in danger. If such proceedings as had taken place in Ireland were permitted to continue, the power of the people to express their opinions would be suppressed. There was a disposition exhibited to restrain the liberty of speech; and on this account, among others, it was necessary to pursue this course. The country was in a most alarming condition, and it was indispensably necessary that those Members who represented the people in that House should take such means as were in their power to secure redress. Those who deprecated the use of physical force, were bound to use every means in their power to make moral power efficacious in procuring redress, lest men should resort to other means. He might possibly be asked, what would be the effect of this remedy if it were capable of being carried out? He admitted that the result would necessarily be, either that the Minister must redress grievances or resign. He did not desire to see the right hon. Baronet in that position, if he would only hold out the smallest hope of redress. He did not hope that he alone could make any impression on the House in reference to this question; all he could do was, to ask the right hon. Baronet to take the grievances of the country into his serious consideration. He wished to prevent any supply being voted until some indications should be given of an intention, on the part of the Government, to redress the grievances of the people. Whether such a course should be adopted or not, depended upon the other representatives of the people. He had done his duty by proposing the course which he had proposed. The House would adopt whatever course it might think

283
proper. He had abstained from making any mere ad captandum proposition for the mere purpose of catching a few stray voters. He thought that a grand stand ought to be made by the representatives of the country, particularly when the Army Estimate should be proposed. The hon. Member concluded by moving as an amendment, that the consideration of the Estimates for the several branches of the public service be postponed till after the Easter recess.
Colonel Rawdonsaid, it was not without reluctance that he rose to second the Motion. He had always hitherto opposed Motions of this kind, but he must say that the Measures promised with respect to Ireland were not of so comprehensive a nature as he had wished for. There was, in Parliamentary language a form "in another place," which the Members of that House did not in effect possess, but he wished to be understood as entering his "Protest" against the course adopted by the Government. The social and Political condition of Ireland was such that every man who wished for the good of that country must be anxious for inquiry, and the Government ought to have consented to such an inquiry. Nations, like individuals, were not the best judges of their own affairs, and, therefore, he would quote as an authority, with respect to the condition of the Irish people, a writer who had been cited in the former Debate, and against whose impartiality there could be no imputation, as he was a foreigner. Mr. Kohl, in quoting from M. Beaumont, said—
"A French author, Beaumont, who had seen the Irish peasant in his cabin and the North American Indian in his wigwam, has assured us that the savage is better provided for than the poor man in Ireland. Indeed, the question may be raised, whether in the whole world, a nation is to be found, that is subjected to such physical privations as the peasantry in some parts of Ireland. This fact cannot be placed in too strong a light, for, if it can once be shown the wretchedness of the Irish population is without a parallel example on the Globe, surely every friend of humanity will feel himself called on to reflect whether means may not be found for remedying an evil of so astounding a magnitude."
He went on to say, speaking of Prussia—
"We have beggars and paupers among us, but they form at least an exception; whereas, in Ireland, beggary or abject poverty, is the
284
prevailing rule. The nation is one of beggars, and they who are above beggary, seem to form the exception. Every other day they feed upon potatoes, and nothing but potatoes. Now, this is inhuman, for the appetite and stomach of man claim variety in food, and nowhere else do we find human beings gnawing, from year's end to year's end, at the same root, berry, or weed. There are animals who do so, but human beings nowhere except in Ireland."
He asked whether any man of feeling could read this description of the Irish people without feeling that it was one which imperatively demanded redress? The author proceeded to say—
"There are nations of slaves, but they have, by long custom been made unconscious of the yoke of slavery. This is not the case with the Irish, who have a strong feeling within them, and are fully sensible of the weight of the yoke they have to bear. They are intelligent enough to know the injustice done them by the distorted laws of their country."
Here an impartial Foreigner said, that injustice was done to the Irish people by the distorted laws of their country. He knew it must weary the House to speak on the subject of Ireland after the long Debate that had taken place on that subject, but the House must recollect that more English Members had spoken than Irish, and he hoped, therefore, the House would allow him to say a few words. They had not had an intelligible answer yet from the right hon. Gentleman as to what course he intended to pursue with respect to Ireland. He had held out no hopes of redress for the wrongs of the people of Ireland. For the present the door might be considered shut against the Irish people. The Irish Members must go back and tell their constituents, that there were no hopes for the people of Ireland from that House. He had heard the other evening, with some indignation, an hon. and gallant Member express a wish that agitation should be put down in that House. He (Col. Rawdon) said, that that House was the place for agitation—the constitutional and the proper place. He still clung to the Act of Union, but when he heard such expressions as those he had alluded to, his feelings, he must say, began to waver. If there could be found one way more successful than another to increase agitation, it would be in attempting to suppress the discussion of Irish grievances in that House. He sincerely believed the time was come at which

285
Irishmen should make themselves more heard in that House. They must be more heard, for the Government were not determined on what was necessary and right. He could assure the right hon. Baronet (Sir Robert Peel) that, however conciliatory his expressions were, he could see nothing tangible in his intentions. The right hon. Baronet might stave off substantial Measures for a time, but it would be only for a time. Until he consented to a great alteration in the Church, and to a Franchise equal to that of England, there could he no hope of permanent peace in Ireland. For these reasons he seconded the Motion.
Sir H. Douglas,in reply to the gallant officer who had just spoken, assured him that what he had said the other night had been spoken in no heat, and certainly with no bad feeling towards Ireland. What he had said was, that he considered the Motion then before the House as one brought forward for a party purpose, and not for the good of Ireland, but as a consequence of the agitation going on out of doors; and that when it should have been as triumphantly put down by rejecting the noble Lord's Motion, as the agitation out of doors, had so far been effectually suppressed, he (Sir H. Douglas) should be happy to contribute his efforts to redress or remove any grievances of which Ireland might have cause to complain, so far as this might be consistent with the integrity of the Constitution, in Church and State.
Mr. W. Williamshad listened with attention to his hon. Friend the Member for Rochdale, and he was at a loss to discover any particular ground for the course which he proposed to take on this occasion. If his hon. Friend had added to his Motion that very important proposition which he had advanced in his speech, that the whole of the Estimates ought to be before the House previously to any of them being voted, and that the whole should be referred to a Select Committee, he should feel bound to vote with him, and should consider it the duty of every liberal man in that House to give such a proposition his support; but as the Motion merely proposed the postponement of the consideration of the Estimates till after the Easter recess, without, so far as he could understand, any distinct or peculiar ground for that course being shown, he did not feel that the proposition was one which held out any great advantage. He him-
286
self, as his hon. Friend knew, was not in a hurry to vote away these enormous sums of the public money. If any effectual good could be done by postponing from to-night the vote of the vast amount of money that was called for—twelve millions, in two Estimates—he should oppose such a proposition. But he rose principally to urge the necessity of the House having before it the Estimates for the Army, Ordnance, and Miscellaneous Services, before it was called upon to enter on the consideration of the Navy Estimates; and he must further say, that he thought the Chancellor of the Exchequer ought also to bring forward his Financial Budget before he called for a Vote of any Supplies: that he ought to state the sources from which he proposed to derive the revenue now required. Last year it was true, the right hon. Gentleman had been able to make both ends meet, with an addition of two and a-half millions, and five and a-half millions—altogether eight millions beyond what the people were burthened with a few years ago. The right hon. Gentleman shook his head, but it was a fact, that 5 per cent. had been added to the general taxation, and 10 per cent. to what were called the Assessed Taxes; and a little calculation would show this produced the result he had stated; and the Income Tax was five millions and a-half, or close upon it. The country was actually never acquainted with the exact amount of its taxation, nor how much of it was intercepted on its way to the Treasury, which amounted to four millions and a-half, deducted for cost of collection. There were, for instance, the Commissioners of Customs, who had been reported to the Crown to be totally unfit for their situations, and yet who intercepted taxation on its way to the Treasury to the amount of 1,200,000 l. The right hon. Gentleman (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had stated last year that there had been a balance of receipts over expenditure of 1,400,000 l., but this was not clearly proved by the financial account lately presented: for on the other side of the account it appeared, that 1,300,000 l. had been received from the sale of the Chinese dollars, 1,200,000 l. had been paid for the China opium which had been seized, and another part of the account showed that 1,600,000 l. had been borrowed to pay for the opium. If there was a Select Com-

287
mittee properly constituted, not composed of Members of the existing Government nor of the late Government, but of independent Members of Parliament, attached to no party, he had no doubt it would prove from the practice and experience of former years, that a large amount might be saved to the country. He would ask, what reason could there be for this enormous expenditure of the public money, required by these estimates, when at the opening of the Session Her Majesty had informed the House, that she had the strongest assurances of the most amicable disposition on the part of all Foreign Powers and of uninterrupted peace? What were the actual facts of the case? In 1835 the amount of the Navy Estimates was less by 2,000,000 l. than this year. In 1835, the Navy Estimates were 4,254,000 l., and in the present year they were 6,285,000 l. Could, he asked, the reason be stated for that vast increase? The marines on shore in 1837, 1838, and 1839, were 3,500 men, in 1841–2 the number was 4,000 men, and now they were 6,500 men. In his opinion, this was a surreptitious mode of keeping up a standing army. What else, he would ask, could be their reason for increasing this force, but in fact to add to the army of 129,677 men, a larger army than ever was known in this country since the occupation of France. He should like to hear this explained, the more so when they considered, that independently of this large army, no less than 10,000 pensioners had been embodied by a vote of that House last year. Did they support this large military establishment because they proposed to govern the country by military force? for if they did not, in the present state of the foreign relations of this country, there could be no pretence for it. The right hon. Baronet had told them the other night, that they intended to govern Ireland upon Tory principles; that was to perpetuate the oppression of the people; and as long as they persevered in that, they could not reduce this Estimate. In the amount of the Estimates, they had good proof that the Government was resolved upon persevering in the policy that had been announced by them, He called upon the Secretary of the Admiralty to say why it was that he required now 34,000 men for the Navy, when in 1822
288
only 21,000 were wanted, and in 1834–35 they had but 27,000. What he asked, were the circumstances that required a greater number of men than at the former period? Another important point was, the vast amount of the Navy Pension List. In 1818, immediately after the close of the war, the whole amount of the half-pay and pensions of the Navy was 1,230,000 l., and what did the House suppose it to be now? 1,400,000 l. This was twenty-eight years after the peace. The accounts of the Army were clear in every item; whilst in the Navy Estimates nothing was clear, and some items were actually unintelligible. In 1818 just after the peace, the pensions of the widows and children of officers in the navy were 118,800 l. He begged the particular attention of the Secretary of the Admiralty to this subject: because, if that hon. Gentleman would not give an explanation, he was determined to divide the House on every particular item in the Estimates. In 1822, those pensions were 112,000 l.: and this year they were 210,000 l. Why had the increase taken place? Let them, then, compare this with the amount of the pensions given to the men who fought their battles. It was 207,000 l. That was 3,000 l. less than the pensions of these widows of Officers. Could it, he asked, be any wonder, that the men felt themselves ill-used? That they should, in consequence, have joined the Americans in the last War, fought against the British flag, and in some instances successfully. He had next to call then attention to the pensions in the Civil Department of the Navy—that is, clerks in Somerset House. In 1818, the amount of these was 99,600 l. This year it was 163,000 l. That was very near double its amount at the close of the last war. Another point to which he had to call the attention of the hon. Gentleman was the vast expenditure on their Dock-yards. The amount proposed this year was 290,000 l., and during the last five years it had been 1,123,000 l. These sums were for Dockyards alone; and yet not a single Dockyard, with the exception of that of Pembroke, had been enlarged since the last War. Why had there been that increase in the last five years, when, during the preceding five years, the whole expenditure was 430,000 l.? That was during the time of the late Government. It appeared to him that these vast

289
sums of money were expended without necessity. He was sure that the hon. Gentleman could not show the necessity for it; 210,000 l. for the widows of Navy Officers was principally paid by taxes on the poor out of their nine shillings a-week, whilst in their misery there was nothing left for them but the sorrows of the workhouse. He called upon the House to compare the manner in which the accounts were presented to them from the War Office and the Admiralty upon this very subject—the pensions to the widows and children of Officers. In the one, they were clear and distinct. He gave no opinion upon them, but in the other case a much larger amount was required, and yet no explanation whatever was given. He thought he had now stated sufficient reasons to show why the Estimates should be referred to a Select Committee, where they might examine all the items, and go into all the details. He was perfectly convinced of this, that if they had for that purpose a Committee such as that of 1828, the result would be a great saving of expenditure.
Mr. Fieldensaid, before voting Supplies, it had become necessary to inquire how the sums to be voted had been raised, who were taxed and made to pay them, the manner in which taxes were levied, and whether or not a mode of levy, legal, fair, and impartial, was carried on, or one of great oppression and injustice? and it was particularly necessary to ascertain whether or not wrong had been committed by official persons in carrying into effect the avowedly arbitrary enactment called the Property and Income Tax Act? He believed that a considerable part of the money raised under that Act was forced out of the pockets of tradesmen and others by the most arbitrary process of assessment this country had ever known. The injustice towards the poor done by indirect taxation on the articles of necessity they purchased, and on which the duties were so much higher per cent. than on the articles consumed by the rich, had been so ably exposed by the hon. Member for Coventry, that he would not say more upon it than that the case had shown so great an injustice to the poor as to warrant the withholding of Supplies, unless an assurance were given by Ministers that these glaring irregularities should be corrected. The Stamp Taxes, and many others, were also unfairly imposed and
290
enforced, and equally required revision; but on that occasion he proposed to make known to the House the iniquitous and oppressive mode in which the Income Tax was assessed and exacted. He had heard of many cases in which persons had been assessed by the district Commissioners, and made to pay on profits derived from trade and manufactures, when so far from profit having accrued for the three years previous to the year of assessment, considerable loss had been sustained. These assessments had been acted on, the goods of the parties seized and sold, although they had tendered proof on oath to the fact that no profit existed. He concurred in an observation of the hon. and gallant Colonel, the Member for Lincoln, that this country was governed, not by Law, but by Commissioners, who swarmed over the land, whose powers were almost unlimited, and against whom there was no appeal. He was reluctant to speak on his own affairs, but he felt that he was performing a public duty in illustrating a great public grievance by reference to his own case. He was speaking now, not of the Property Tax, but of the Income Tax, and he would detail to the House what had happened, he believed, to many manufactures of his own class, by showing what had happened to himself. In his business as a manufacturer, he was, of course, subject to a tax on his property; but with respect to income from that business, he was subject or not, according as the business returned profit or not. He and his partners had received a letter, which he would read:—
"Stamps and Taxes, Somerset-house, February 14, 1844. Gentlemen—Her Majesty's Commissioners of Stamps and Taxes having directed immediate process to be issued for your arrear of Income Tax due the 20th of March last. amounting to 350 l, and returned into the Exchequer, I beg to inform you that, in order to save the expenses of a levy by the Sheriff, the amount must be paid to Mr. Peter Ormerod, of Todmorden, the collector, before the 24th instant. I am, gentlemen, your most obedient servant, J. Timm, solicitor for Stamps and Taxes."
To Messrs. Fielden."
Now, he would wish the House to mark that that letter informed him and his partners that the Commissioners of Stamps and Taxes had directed process to issue for arrears of Income-Tax, due the 20th of March last, that was more than eleven months ago. Why had not that demand

291
been enforced before? He had asked for no credit. If the debt was due from him and his partners, they ought to have been made to pay it long ago. He denied the debt. He feared that many, who could less afford to lose the money, had been assessed with equal injustice, but made to pay because too weak to offer resistance. He would now go into details, for it was right that the House and the country should know the vexatious and unjust manner the taxes were wrung from those who paid them. If he and his brothers had been the only parties unjustly treated under the Income Tax, the House would not have heard a word from him of their case; but when he knew that great numbers complained of the same grievance, and having been again and again applied to to take up the question, and expose the injustice and arbitrary proceedings of the officials and Commissioners, he should incur the charge of negligence if he did not do so. As the case of himself and his partners would probably be the case of thousands, which was, of course, familiar to himself, he would state it. In the autumn of 1842 he received a printed form, requiring him to make a true return of the profits of his trade under schedule D, for the year ending the 5th of April, 1843. He filled up the paper with the word "nothing," as the fact was. On the 24th of January, 1843, he received a notice that the Commissioners had made an assessment on him for the year ending the 5th of April, 1843, in these words:—
"To duties granted by schedule D on profits on trade, professions, foreign property, casual profits, 12,000 l. Duty payable, 350 l. Dated this 31st of December, 1843. J. Woods, Clerk to the Commissioners."
He gave notice that he should appeal, and on the 16th of February, 1843, attended the Commissioners at Rochdale, and being, as they required, first sworn, was examined by them, and stated that he had made a true return, that the busisiness of himself and partners had not yielded a profit, but had caused a loss. The chairman asked if there was no profit on the average of the then three last years. He answered no; that he had been required to make a true return, and any other than the one he made would not have been true. One of the Commissioners said,
"Mr. Fielden should understand, that in ascertaining profits no interest is allowed to
292
be deducted for the capital employed in their business."
He answered that he had so understood the Act, and that the capital he and his partners had employed in their business had been entirely unproductive, and had diminished in amount during the three years. Other questions and answers followed, after which the Chairman of the Board said, that the Commissioners were invested with extraordinary powers of inquiry, and a precept was handed to him to fill up and return to Mr. Woods within six days. He (Mr. Fielden) said he would see what return he could make to it, and on rising to leave the room, he was informed by the surveyor of taxes, then prevent, that he would be wanted there again after the precept was returned. He assented, and was told he should know when and where. The precept required a debtor and creditor account of profits on an average of the then last three years, and of gross profits, which were to be very full and particular. Within the six days he returned the precept as required, and stated in it—
"That we had no means of making out a debtor and creditor account of profit and loss on an average of the last three years, nor of our gross profits, otherwise than by an account in the following form, which would require an estimate of stock on hand both at the beginning and end of that period, and the result would show a heavy loss without any interest charged on capital employed:—

"PROFIT AND LOSS.

Dr. To stock three years ago

To materials purchased since

To wages and expenses paid

To rent of premises charged with Property-tax under schedule A

Cr. By stock now

By sales

By bad debts and other losses in trade

Balance showing a heavy loss on the last three years"

To this notification no answer was returned from the Commissioners, but he and his partners were served with a notice, dated March 30, 1843, by the collectors of the district, that they were returned in a schedule to the Commissioners of the district as defaulters in the sum of 175 l. then due, and that, unless paid, process would issue against them. On receiving this he applied to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who received him most courteously, and listened to him with atten-

293
tion. The right hon. Gentleman made inquiry, and the result was, that he received from him a copy of a letter which had been addressed to the Commissioners, through Mr. Woods, their clerk, by the Commissioners of Stamps and Taxes, through Mr. Pressley. This was the letter:—
"Stamps and Taxes, London, 27th of March, 1843.—Sir, I have laid before the Board your letter of the 15th, relative to the case of Messrs. Fielder, under the Property-tax Act, and, in reply, t am directed to state, that in their opinion, the proper course to be pursued is for the Commissioners to direct another precept to the parties, under the authority of section 120, requiring theca to deliver within a reasonable but limited time a schedule containing certain specific particulars, such as the amount of the several items set forth respectively under the head of 'debtor and creditor,' in their letter of the 21st ultimo addressed to you, and any other particulars which the Commissioners nay think requisite to enable them to determine the appeal; and that, in default of the parties delivering such a schedule within the time limited, the Commissioners will be justified in confirming the assessment; or, if such a schedule should be delivered, the Commissioners may, in like manner, call for any further information that they may deem requisite and so on from time to time until they are satisfied; and further, that they may call upon the parties to be examined viva voce before them, but not upon oath; and lastly, that they may require the parties to verify on oath the statements contained in the schedules delivered, and also the substance of their answers taken down in writing on their viva voce examination (the parties having liberty previously to amend such schedules and statements provided by section 122); but, that if the parties do so verify the same on oath, the Commissioners are hound to decide the appeal according to the result of the schedules and examination. I am to acid, that the Board think that a precept, calling upon the parties for a debtor and creditor account of profits and loss is too general and vague to justify the Commissioners in confirming the assessment in the present stage of the proceedings. I am, Sir, your obedient servant, C. Pressley. To J. Woods, Esq., Clerk to Commissioners, Rochdale."
This letter suggested two things to the Commissioners: first, that they should require of him and his partners a schedule containing certain particulars, such as the amount of the several items set forth respectively in the form which he had sent them, to be delivered within a reasonable time; and, secondly, that the account called for by the Commissioners was too
294
general and vague, and that they were not justified in confirming their assessment. He had never since been called upon for the account suggested by himself, and thus plainly approved by the Board of Stamps and Taxes, and yet he had now received the notice that his goods were to be seized by the Sheriff to satisfy a demand, that he had the authority of the Board at Somerset House for saying was not legally due. He and his partners had resolved to resist this arbitrary and illegal act of the Commissioners, and though they would stiffer the Government, if it liked, to come and seize upon their property, they would never pay a tax on profit that had not accrued to them, and which they had already sworn they had not realised. So much for the year 1842; the year 1843, he also returned "nothing," as profits of trade as before. On the 27th of December, 1843, he received notice that the Commissioners had again assessed him for profits. 12,000 l. This notice was dated 15th of December, 1843, and signed "J. Woods, clerk to the Commissioners." He again appealed, and on the 11th of January went before the Commissioners, and stated to them that he and his partners, instead of a profit on the three years preceding, had sustained a heavy loss; that they held a heavy stock of goods which had been accumulating over that period, and that the value of their stock upon the same quantity of goods had been less and less every succeeding stock-taking during that period; that the raw material used in their manufactures had fallen lower and lower until July last, when it was at the lowest; that they had kept up wages, which, had they been reduced, would have caused much suffering among their workpeople—that they had made had debts to a considerable amount—that the accumulated stock at the end of the three years was not worth what it had cost, and that the capital employed under schedule D at the commencement of the three years had diminished in amount at the end of that period. After many questions on these points, a precept was put into his hand requiring answers to these questions:—
"State each trade or profession you are engaged in, where they are respectively carried on, and who are the partners in each; state the capital employed in each concern, distinguishing the amount belonging to each partner.
"State the amount of interest on you r banking account.

295
"State the income from Ireland, or from any of Her Majesty's Dominions, or from any foreign securities or possessions.
"State the amount of the balance of profits in each concern, separately, for each of the three last years.
"State the particular deductions made in forming the above balances—
"For rent or taxes, or other expenditure of or connected with the dwelling house.
"For rent, or taxes, or other expenditure of or connected with buildings used for the purposes of trade.
"For bad debts, specifying whether the parties are bankrupts, or compounding, or how otherwise.
"For wages or board of servants.
"For improvements or repairs of premises, or depreciation in value thereof.
"For average losses.
"For repairs or supply of utensils or machinery, or depreciation in value thereof.
"Have you made any and what deductions for losses by bank or railways, or mining adventures, or any other not connected with your trade? or from capital withdrawn from trade? or from sums employed or to be employed as capital therein, or on account or pretence of interest or capital? or on account of the maintenance of yourself, family, or establishment? or for any annuity, interest of money, or other payment gratuitously allowed or otherwise? or on account of any monies, property, or unappropriated credits, reserved or set apart, being portion of or appertaining to your capital or undivided profits, not elsewhere assessed?
"You will bear in mind that the account is to embrace the period of three years, notwithstanding any change or succession of a firm, or of the partners therein."
The 20th of January was fixed on as the day for a further hearing on this subject, and on that day he attended the Board again, and, having looked over the questions, told the Commissioners that he could not possibly answer them, and he did not believe any one carrying on such a business as his could do so; but that he had made out a statement, showing the amount of capital in his business at the beginning of the period for which they had asked for a return, and the amount of the same at the termination of it, which showed a great loss. A long examination followed on this document, in which he informed the Commissioners that these amounts were obtained by valuations made by him and his brothers at their stock-takings, not to meet any demands for profits on income, but to determine each partner's share and interest in their joint property at the time, and what the representatives of any one or more, dying be-
296
fore the next stock-taking, would be entitled to receive out of the concern; that he and his partners signed a balance sheet at every stock-taking. He asked the Commissioners what more they required of him? Whether they disbelieved him? They answered, "No." He desired to know if they wished to see his books. They again answered, "No." He told them that if they did, and he did not force from them an acknowledgment of the truth of what he said, and that he had a losing business, he would submit to the charge. He was then asked to withdraw; and being called in again, was told by the Chairman that they had confirmed the assessment, but that if, on the 5th of April next, he could prove to them that be had no profit in his trade on the year ending that day, they would make a return of the duty as directed by the 133rd section of the Act. He told the Commissioners that they had done him injustice, and that he would not pay, upon which the Chairman observed, that the Commissioners had been instructed by the officials present. With respect to the first year he had, he thought, clearly shown that the Commissioners had not acted in accordance with the law, nor in accordance with the suggestions from Somerset House. He called on the Government to inquire into his own and other cases of the like kind, before he could sanction the vote of supply. As to the second year in which he had been assessed, he called on the Government here to interpose and prevent an equal violation of this law, sufficiently odious when administered in its letter, but intolerable as administered by the present Commissioners. What right had they to require him to attend there again on the 6th of April next, and prove whether or not he had made any profit on the year ending on that day? None. It was a stretch of power which he called on the Government to look into at once, for he could tell them that, although this had been borne once or twice, there were murmurs arising that would burst forth on a repetition of this injustice. The Act itself contained a rule for the computation of profits on an average of three years preceding the year of assessment. The words were these;—
"Rule 1. The duty to he charged in respect thereof shall be computed on a sum not less than the full amount of the balance of the profits or gains of such trade, manufacture, adven-

297
ture, or concern, upon a fair and just average of three years, ending on such day of the year immediately preceding the year of assessment on which the accounts of the said trade, manufacture, or concern, shall have been usually made up, or on the 5th day of April preceding the year of assessment."
Looking at that rule, he thought the Commissioners were prohibited from an inquiry as to profits accruing in the year of assessment, and this he told them, and that when that year came to charge he would deal honestly by them, and make a return on that, unless, indeed, they drove him, by their acts of injustice, to follow the example of a neighbour of his and make no return at all. He did not hesitate to support the Motion for postponing Supplies till grievances such as these and others complained of had some promise of redress.
Mr. S. Herbertthought it would save the time of the House, and be in every way more satisfactory, if he reserved his explanations upon the several points mooted by the hon. Member fur Coventry, until they got into the Estimates, instead of introducing any preliminary explanation in regard to them.
Dr. Bowringbegged to say a few words in explanation of the grounds upon which he was prepared to vote for the Motion of the hon. Member for Rochdale. The question was one which involved a great constitutional principle, and a great popular right. He thought that it must be admitted that the unrepresented portion of the community laboured under a grievous wrong in being obliged to pay taxes which were imposed upon them by the authority of this House, in which they had no persons deputed by them to watch over their interests. He thought it hard and cruel, unjust and unconstitutional, that the unrepresented millions of the community, whilst they had to pay taxes, should have no voice in this Assembly. This was a grievance which met them at every turn—it was one which was deeply and seriously thought upon by the public, amongst whom a very deep-rooted feeling of discontent had manifested itself upon the subject. He would not trespass longer upon the time of the House, than to repeat his approval of the Motion, and his strong sense of the injustice of the case, when out of twenty or thirty millions, which our population extended to, only about one million was represented.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, with respect to the complaints made by the hon. Member for Oldham, he begged to say, that Her Majesty's Government had no more control in the matter he complained of, than any individual Member of the House. The hon. Gentleman some time ago said he had reason to complain of two Commissioners in his district, and he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) caused art inquiry to be made into the subject. It appeared that the hon. Gentleman had made a nil return, that he had been applied to make a new return, in conformity with the requirements of the Act, and the hon. Gentleman refusing to do so, after some discussion, he was assessed. The Government had no power to interfere in such a matter; but there was a Clause in the Act which gave the power to any person who considered himself aggrieved, through the incompetency of the Commissioners to give a proper decision on his case, to make an application to special Commissioners to investigate it.
Mr. E. B. Rochein supporting the Amendment of his hon. Friend the Member for Rochdale, was anxious to offer a few observations explanatory of the vote he was about to give. He was quite aware that it was an extreme course to interpose any impediment to the passing of the Estimates, and could only be justified by an extreme case; but he thought the present was an extreme case. Now he would take the statements of the right hon. Gentleman opposite, and the Law Officers of the Government, as to the present condition of the country with which he (Mr. Roche) was connected. It had been asserted by those hon. and learned Gentlemen that Ireland (which contained one-fourth of the whole population of the United Empire) was convulsed with a treasonable and seditious agitation; and that a great majority of the people of that country were united in a conspiracy for the dismemberment of the State. If this great disaffection did exist, how had it been met by the Government? Had they reasoned with the people, or treated theirs as reasonable beings? No; but they had tried to put down the agitation by what was called—and in this instance it was not misnamed—the strong arm of the law. But could they suppose that behind, when she put forth a manifesto of bonâ fide grievances, would submit to be bullied out of it? He wished to know

299
what was to be done for that country? Were the Government united; were the various Members of it of one mind upon the important question how Ireland was to be governed? It was true they had some conciliatory speeches during the recent debate. The right hon. Baronet at the head of the Government had made a conciliatory speech, but it was too much to expect his constituents to be satisfied with a conciliatory speech coming from one Member of that which is not a united Cabinet. But the speech of the noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonies (Lord Stanley) was anything but conciliatory. Then they could not forget that the right hon. Secretary for the Home Department (Sir J. Graham) had only last year declared that conciliation in reference to Ireland was exhausted, and if they looked at the right hon. Baronet's speech of the other night they would find that very little alteration had taken place in his opinions. He had no desire to allude to—though it was impossible to forget the fact—that the right hon. Baronet had stigmatised his (Mr. Roche's) hon. and learned Friend and colleague (Mr. O'Connell), and those who had joined with him, in the Repeal agitation, as convicted conspirators. But what he was anxious to know—what his constituents were anxious to know—was, what was to be done for Ireland in the shape of legislation? How was the question of the Franchise to be dealt with? Had they heard anything in the speeches either of the right hon. Baronet at the head of the Government or the right hon. the Home Secretary to elucidate that important question? There was a habit which obtained amongst the leading Members of the Government of beating about the bush when they came to speak of practical subjects of legislation. They would tell you what you asked for, and what you might ask for, but not what they would give you. He had been sent to that House by his constituents to as certain what the intentions of Government were in the way of legislation; what was really to be done for them: and now what answer was he to give them? Another important question was the Church Establishment in Ireland. Now, in what state had that been left by the debate of the last fortnight? His right hon. and learned Friend the Recorder of Dublin had expressed himself satisfied with the declarations of the Government upon that
300
subject; but was it possible that the right hon. and learned Gentleman could be satisfied with the statement of the right hon. Baronet (Sir Robert Peel)? But whether or not, he could assure the House that it would not be sufficient for the people of Ireland; they would not be satisfied with the announcement that the right hon. Baronet had made, the statement which had satisfied the right hon. the Recorder, that it was now agreed the Protestant Established Church should be maintained as a political institution. As commissions were now so fashionable, he thought they might well, before they came to such a determination, appoint a commission to inquire how far that Church had served them as a political institution? The people of Ireland would never be content until the political nuisance which the Established Church was felt to be in Ireland was abated. Returning to the subject of the Franchise, if the noble Lord opposite would, on the part of the Government, bring forward a good, useful, and fair measure, it would be received with gratitude, and should have his (Mr. Roche's) best assistance. But it was not enough to give to Ireland a fair Franchise; the Irish people required not only fair and reasonable Franchise, but a fair representation in Parliament. They could not have confidence in the legislation of that House while they knew that their representatives were in a miserable minority as compared with the representatives of England. They wanted to know if any and what addition there was to be to the Franchise, and also whether there was to be any addition in the number of their representatives, so as to place Ireland in this respect more upon an equality with England in proportion to the population. He did not wish to disturb or agitate the people of Ireland, nor did he desire to interfere with the progress of legislation in that House, if they gave to Ireland an independent Legislature. Send him to Ireland to legislate on Irish ground, and he would make his bow and take his departure; but while they refused to give to Ireland that equality to which she had a right, and at the same time told him (Mr. Roche) that it was illegal to agitate in Ireland, to force the British Parliament to give to her an independent representation, he, for one, would lose no opportunity of bringing the grievances of his country under the notice of the House. What

301
he complained of was, that Government were not alive—they thought they were alive, but he asssured them they were not—not alive, he meant to the dangers of their Irish policy. He had no desire to aggravate those dangers—dangers important to the stability of the country. He admitted it fully. But what he held was, that the Government had not attempted to avert those dangers as statesmen. It had been admitted on both sides that the present occupation of Ireland was a military one. And it could not be denied that there were 20,000 troops and 10,000 armed police in Ireland, and a large number of armed steamers in the harbours and off the coast. But notwithstanding this large amount of force which was now maintained in Ireland, he must tell both sides of the House that they were wrong—they did not hold Ireland by military possession. They had fortified barracks, armed fortresses, and armed steamers, but they had not an armed occupation of the country. The only parties who had possession of the country were the Irish people. You hold it not by military possession, but by the strong affections and deep love and unchanging loyalty of the Irish people for their present Sovereign. Notwithstanding the ignorance which was supposed to prevail amongst the Irish people, he assured the House they well understood the principles of a limited Monarchy and a representative Government. They could distinguish between the prejudices of the Monarch, and the delinquencies of the Government. They remembered what the condition of the country was in years past and they knew what religious bigotry arid national hostility in this country would make people do; and they could distinguish between the unpopularity of the present Government, and the love and affection which they felt convinced, and which he (Mr. Roche) knew the Sovereign felt for her Irish subjects. He remembered, that the first act of her reign was to write to her Lord Lieutenant to express her determination, that equal rights and redress of grievances should be enforced in Ireland. Therefore he said, let them not deceive themselves. The possession by which Ireland was held, was one far more secure than if they had all the armies in Europe in that country—it was the possession of the people. Her Majesty held possession of the hearts of the Irish people, and her Ministers held
302
military possession of the barracks, fortresses, and harbours. He had no wish to waste the time of the House, but he could not avoid the expression of his opinion, and he did it without any disrespect, that the Statesmen by whom the country was now governed were not equal to the great occasion to which we had arrived.
Mr. Gisbornedid not take it, as a matter of course, that while grievances existed, the House must necessarily proceed to vote the Estimates, or, on the other hand, that by voting the Estimates, they declared that no grievances existed. If the Amendment of his hon. Friend had been to consider the question of the Franchise, the financial arrangements of the Government, or any specific grievance, before going into Committee of Supply, he should support it. But to a proposition for postponing the Estimates until after Easter, without saying what was to be done in the meantime, he could not assent.
The House divided on the question, that the word proposed to be left out stand part of the question. Ayes 105; Noes 11;—Majority 94.

List of the AYES.

Acland, T. D.

Duke, Sir J.

Ainsworth, P.

Duncombe, hon. A.

Arkwright, G.

Eliot, Lord

Arundel and Surrey,

Escott, B.

Earl of

Farnham, E. B.

Baillie, Col.

Flower, Sir J.

Baillie, H.J.

Fuller, A. E.

Baring, hon. W. B.

Gaskell, J. Milnes

Barnard, E. G.

Gisborne, T.

Baskerville, T. B. M.

Gladstone, rt. hn. W.E.

Beckett, W.

Glynne, Sir S. R.

Bentinck, Lord G.

Gordon, hon. Capt.

Boldero, H. G.

Gore, M.

Borthwick, P.

Goulburn, rt. hon. H.

Botfield, B.

Graham, rt. hn. Sir J.

Broadley, H.

Greenall, P.

Browne, hon. W.

Greene, T.

Bruce, Lord E.

Harcourt, G. G.

Bruges, W. H. L.

Hardinge, rt. hn. Sir H.

Buck, L. W.

Hay, Sir A. L.

Chetwode, Sir J.

Hayes, Sir E.

Clerk, Sir G.

Henley, J. W.

Clive, hon. R. H.

Herbert, hon. S.

Cockburne, rt. hn. Sir G.

Hodgson, R.

Colvile, C. R.

Hope, hon. C.

Corry, rt. hon. H.

Hope, G. W.

Cripps, W.

Howard, P. H.

Damer, hon. Col.

Hughes, W. B.

Darby, G.

Humphery, Ald.

Denison, E. B.

Jermyn, E.

Dickinson, F. H.

Jones, Capt.

Douglas, Sir C. E.

Kemble, H.

303

Knatchbull, rt. hn. Sir E

Shaw, right hon. F.

Knight, H. G.

Smith, rt. hn. T. B. C.

Lincoln, Earl of

Smollett, A.

Lockhart, W.

Somerset, Lord G.

Lowther, J. H.

Stuart, W. V.

Mackenzie, T.

Sutton, hon. H. M.

McNeill, D.

Tennent, J. E.

Masterman, J.

Thompson, Ald.

Meynell, Capt.

Tollemache, J.

Mitchell, T. A.

Trench, Sir F. W.

Morgan, O.

Trollope, Sir J.

Morris, D.

Troubridge, Sir E. T.

Mundy, E. M.

Turner, E.

Napier, Sir C.

Vivian, J. E.

Nicholl, rt. hon. J.

Wawn, J. T.

Peel, J.

Wortley, hon. J. S.

Plumptre, J. P.

Yorke, hon. E. T.

Praed, W. T.

Yorke, H. R.

Pringle, A.

Young, J.

Round, J.

Rous, hon. Capt.

TELLERS.

Rushbrooke, Col.

Fremantle, Sir T.

Sandon, Visct.

Baring, H.

List of the NOES.

Blewitt, R. J.

O'Connell, D.

Bowring, Dr.

Plumridge, Capt.

Duncan, G.

Roche, E. R.

Duncombe, T.

Williams, W.

Fielden, J.

TELLERS.

Hindley, C.

Crawford, S.

Maher, N.

Rawdon, Col.

On the Motion that Mr. Speaker do leave the Chair,

SUPPLY—NAVY ESTIMATES.
Sir C. Napierrose to call the attention of the House to the constitution of the Board of Admiralty. It would be in the recollection of hon. Gentlemen who had paid attention to naval subjects, that for many years previous to the time when the office of First Lord of the Admiralty was filled by the right hon. Baronet opposite (Sir J. Graham), the affairs of the Navy had been managed by the Boards, namely, the Victualling Board, the Navy Board, and the Board of Admiralty; and under those Boards it was well known by every naval man, that the Navy had been most improperly managed. First, in regard to the construction of ships, 44-gun ships were built with their lower deck ports not three feet out of the water, and consequently, in the majority of cases, the lower guns were useless; the 52-gun ships were but little better; and then there were the 26-gun frigates, which could neither tight nor run, were not strong enough to fight, and had no keels to enable them to run away—this was the reason that so many of those vessels had been captured by the Americans. In fact, corvettes, frigates,
304
and almost every class of ships had, under the management of the Navy Board been constructed in the most defective manner, even in comparison with the ships of other nations. Then there was the construction of the dockyard at Sheerness—a hobby of Lord Melville's—which had cost the country four or five millions, and was perfectly unfitted for the purposes for which it had been constructed. It was built on a lee shore, in a swamp, and he did not know how many millions of piles had been driven into the sea to form a foundation. It had been undertaken at a time when steam was making great progress, and when every man might have seen that vessels might ere long be towed further up. It was at all times exposed to the enemy, and he very much doubted whether it could ever be effectually defended. The right hon. Baronet was justified, then, in altering the constitution of the Navy Boards. The right hon. Baronet, assisted by Sir T. Hardy, than whom a more gallant and distinguished officer had never existed, and by Admiral Dundas, had consolidated the several Boards, and had placed the whole direction in the hands of the Board of Admiralty, and so far he (Sir C. Napier) fully concurred in what they had done. For two years before the right hon. Baronet had entered the Admiralty, he (Sir C. Napier) had himself recommended the adoption of a much stronger measure than was afterwards introduced. He now came to the consideration whether the system which had been substituted for the old one was good, or whether there were not still defects which might be remedied. The right hon. Baronet, in bringing forward his scheme, stated the objections of many distinguished officers, including Admiral Rodney and Earl St. Vincent, to the old constitution of the Navy Board. The new plan divided the government of the Navy into five branches—there was the Surveyor of the Navy, the Accountant General, the Storekeeper-General, the Victualling Department, and the Medical Department; and an additional Lord of the Admiralty was appointed to take up these duties. Now every naval officer who knew what these duties were, knew that they were very great and laborious. Too much duty was put upon the Board of Admiralty. The hon. and gallant Member here quoted the opinions of several Lords of the Admiralty, stating objections to the new con-

305
stitution of the Admiralty. The officers of the Navy Board were each put under several Lords of the Admiralty. They came in with every change of Ministry, and were necessarily very ignorant of the duties of their departments. But the plan was not rigidly adhered to, as the Lords of the Admiralty mingled in each other's duties. They went down from time to time to Somerset House to the office of the Navy Board, where they merely asked the officials there how things went on, took their hats, and went off again, leaving all the real duty to the officers of the Board, who were not responsible. He must state, however, that the Victualling and the Medical Departments were well conducted, because one Lord of the Admiralty was at the head of each. But the officials in the dockyards had a great number of masters. The Accountant General, the Surveyor General, and the Storekeeper General all corresponded with the superintendent of the dockyards. He now came to the formation of the Board of Admiralty. He had moved for some returns in 1842, with a view of showing how many persons had been taken into the service of the Admiralty from the Navy. With respect to the principal departments he found, that there were in the Surveyor General's Office two persons who had never been at sea, in the Accountant General's four persons similarly situated, in the Storekeeper General's two persons in the Victualling Department, and in the hospital six, making altogether fifteen persons in these important offices who had never seen any service. The same principle was carried out in other departments. He had, in 1842, moved for a return of the number of men who had seen actual service at sea, and who were now employed at the Admiralty, from the post of watchman upwards, and he found there were only two in the Surveyor General's Office, four in the office of the Accountant General, two in the Storekeeper's Department, one in the Victualling Department, and six in the Hospital Department—only fifteen in all, who had ever been at sea, shared any portion of the expenses of an establishment which cost the country 110,000 l. per annum. He found also by a return made in 1843, that there were only 165 men in the civil service, including the dockyards, who had ever been at sea; whereas it would have been highly cre-
306
ditable to them to have given employment to old sailors, serjeants of marines &c. One great advantage had accrued to the public from his motions upon this subject, and which of itself was sufficient to repay him for his exertions; it was a great point gained, that on every ship returning to port, the captain was obliged to make a return of his best officers to the Port Admiral, thus ensuring to meritorious services their fair consideration and ultimate reward. He had moved last Session for a return of the number of civil situations under the Admiralty and Navy Boards, together with the situations from whence the occupants were taken, and by whom the parties were recommended. His object, was to get at the number of gentlemen's servants and butlers who were put into those situations, but the hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. S. Herbert) would not give him this information—he would only give the numbers, but would not state by whom recommended, nor what the previous position in life. He had himself a servant, and a friend of his had another servant, and both of them applied to him to get them into the dockyard. He was refused at once, but they nevertheless got in, though how he could not tell. He would not name them for fear they should be turned out, but such was the way in which these situations were bestowed. He would now call attention to the manner in which promotions in the Navy had been conducted during the last twelve or thirteen years. They were told, after the present First Lord of the Admiralty had been some time in office, that he had introduced a spirit into the Navy which had not previously existed—that the ships were in the highest state of order and efficiency, and that the officers knew that they had but to excel in discipline and their promotion was safe. It was then alleged that Government went on too fast in promotion; and when Lord Melbourne came into office there was a Treasury Minute that the promotions should be one in three. Now, what had been the fact? In 1830 there had been thirty-one commanders made captains, thirty-one lieutenants made commanders, sixty-seven midshipmen made lieutenants, sixteen second masters made masters, twenty-two surgeons, and fifteen pursers. The obituary of that year was twenty-two captains, twenty-one commanders, and seventy-eight lieutenants. At the end of

307
thirteen years, from 1830 to 1843, there had been 332 commanders made captains, 535 lieutenants made commanders, 945 midshipmen made lieutenants; and the obituary was 284 captains, 359 commanders, and 928 lieutenants. After this table he hoped they should never hear a word more about the Treasury Minute. Unless they came to a regular system of giving a Retired List to the Navy it was impossible to look out for the smallest amount of economy in promotion. He asked for this now on stronger grounds than he before had done, because, when he had before asked, it was stated that the Commission, which a most distinguished officer, Sir Thomas Hardy, was not able to sign, had decided that there was no necessity for a retired list. He thought the right hon. Baronet would incur great responsibility if he did not at once entertain the question, and bring the British Navy into a state of efficiency, by giving a moderate sum to induce these men to retire from the list—presenting a list of lieutenants who were deficient, and rating them as marines were rated when they were allowed to retire on half-pay. Having obtained that point, he should say that no officer should be promoted till a vacancy took place. Let the Minister take one-third of the promotions to himself, give one-third to seniority, and one-third to the Admiralty. He again begged to impress on the right hon. Baronet the absolute necessity there was (in order that the Navy might be in efficient state) to show how many effective officers we had, and to let the rest retire. It appeared by the evidence given before the Committee on Shipwrecks, that a number of officers and men exerted themselves in saving the lives of their fellow-subjects. By the evidence of Captain Sparshot, who had been sixteen years in the department, in reply to questions by Captain Pechell, it appeared that in no one instance had any of these officers been promoted, notwithstanding strong recommendations to that effect. The gallant Officer read the evidence of Captain Sparshot on this point. He gave the right hon. Baronet opposite full credit for the changes he had effected, which, considering the extraordinary difficulties he had had to encounter, he could not have accomplished unless he had been backed by great majorities, yet still he thought that further changes were required. As to the masters, every officer
308
who sat in the House, and every man who had been at sea, must know the important services which a master had to perform. They must know that a captain, without a good master, would not be able to conduct his ship. When the right hon. Baronet came into office, a new regulation was made, by which the charge of the stores was taken out of the hands of ignorant warrant officers,—very good men to make boatswains, but, generally speaking, illiterate men—men who could hardly read or write, in consequence of the little encouragement which was given to nautical education,—and the right hon. Baronet appointed the masters to take charge of the stores, and gave them a certain allowance. It worked remarkably well; the only objection was, that, when the ship was indented the indenting was followed up by getting drunk. The charge of the stores was afterwards given back to the warrant officers. The captain was responsible for these stores, in conjunction with the master, and the master, at the present moment, got no remuneration. There was a late regulation at the Admiralty which gave the masters a most extraordinary sort of remuneration, although some of the regulations were very good. The pay of a master of a three-deck ship, not having charge of the stores (and it was impossible he could have, because, when a warrant officer died, a man was promoted in his place) was 212 l. This was the pay of the master of a first-rate, the highest appointment he possibly could have, unless he got into a dockyard or became master of a fleet; and yet would any man believe that the master of a small brig or vessel, where perhaps the whole amount of stores was not worth 100 l., who might have been made a master the other day, and who did not know his business as well as the master of a first-rate, received 219 l. 12 s. 4d.? So that the master of a three-decker, having charge of an immense ship, in all times and in all weathers, who, if he did his duty, was up all night—who must be on deck whenever the ship was near land—who had the charge of the masts, the yards, the sails, the rigging, and everything, that could be put on the masts—received 7l. or 8l. less than the master of a small craft having charge of the stores. Again, the master—who was the best seaman in the ship—who was a trustworthy and attentive man, without

309
whom no captain could go to sea (for he would not stop on board a ship one day if he had not a master in whom he could put confidence)—ranked under the junior lieutenant of the ship. Nay more; if a man was made acting lieutenant, to-morrow, the master ranked below him. Now, he would do away with the very name of master; he should be the same as a lieutenant; he should go through his examination the same as at present, but he should be just as eligible to be made a commander to-morrow if he distinguished himself, as the lieutenant, who might be made a commander at the end of two years. The present arrangement was an injustice to the masters, and he hoped the Admiralty would redress it. He hoped they would do justice to the masters, for it would be acceptable to every captain in the Navy and give no dissatisfaction to young officers, many of whom were too willing to learn from them what they ought to do. He came now to his own proposal. He had before said, that he approved of what the right hon. Baronet had done, and he only wished to make it more complete, and with very little trouble he thought it might be more perfect. He would first mention his own opinion in 1828, before the right hon. Baronet came into office. It was expressed in a letter addressed to a Member of Parliament, who afterwards became Lord of the Admiralty in 1830. He had long disapproved of the state of the Navy Board. He said that it was generally supposed that the office of Lord High Admiral was too high a situation for an individual; recourse must then be had to the Board. If there was a civilian at the head of the Board he should be assisted with the advice of Rear Admirals, which situation should be abolished as a sinecure, &c. The right hon. Baronet's arrangement was pretty nearly the same as this. The right hon. Baronet had referred to the constitution of the Ordnance Department: he (Sir C. Napier) wanted to see the Navy conducted pretty nearly in the same manner; he would appoint one of the Lords of the Admiralty superintendent of the dockyards; he would appoint another Lord of the Admiralty Comptroller of the Victualling Department, which was under one Superintendent; and then the Accountant General or the Treasurer of the navy, or whatever man you thought proper, should be ap-
310
pointed to attend to the accounts—then we should have the First Lord of the Admiralty or Vice Admiral of Great Britain to carry on the details of the Navy. Very few men were able to get through the work of the Admiralty as it was carried on at the present moment. As to the construction of ships, it was well known that there had always been great errors and great faults. Ever since he had been in the Navy, whenever they had a Surveyor of the Navy he had his own notions his own ideas and his own crotchets. Whether the Admiralty had the power of controlling him or not, he was not prepared to say, but he should say, from the specimens of ships which had been produced at various times, that there was great ignorance and great stupidity in the whole plan of ship-building. When the late Navy Board was in office it was impossible to persuade them that things were wrong; they resisted all attempts at improvement. Any man of ability or talent was obliged to give security to a large amount before he could get permission to build a ship, as in the case of Captain Symonds. He believed that Captain Symonds deserved great credit for what he had done in his office of Surveyor of the Navy, but still he was not perfect, be had his crotchets as well as other Surveyors, and unless he was strongly controlled he would destroy every ship in the navy, in order to bring them all under his own system. Although Captain Symonds had built some of the finest ships in the Navy, still he had himself given proof that he was not perfect, and it was to be tried yet whether his ships would be able to stand the exigencies of a long war, wherein they might be obliged to blockade an enemy's port for months in all sorts of weather; whether they would stand that or not, time and experience would alone tell. He had had the command of a squadron of six ships of the line in a very heavy gale off Alexandria, and he had fully expected that under such circumstances he should have seen the "Vanguard" the weather most ship of all; and he was astonished to find that two other ships had the advantage of her. He trusted the Admiralty would not allow Captain Symonds to run away with the whole of the building of the ships; he knew they were following a different plan; that they had given orders for ships at the various dockyards, and had employed various builders upon them. He

311
highly approved of the plan, as it would induce competition, and in ship-building it always did good. Of course, he would say, let the Surveyor build some, and let his ships come into competition with the other masters. Now, in reference to the magazines of ships, within a few years numerous alterations had taken place, and at an enormous cost to the country. He had heard of that, and moved for a Return of the number of ships which had been altered, and he found that within a very short period there were eleven ships whose magazines had undergone alteration. The cost of the whole he had not been able to arrive at, but he knew that the cost of the alterations of the Powerful of which he had the command, was no less than 7,463 l. At one time, one Surveyor of the Navy got the crotchet in his head that it was necessary to arm the sterns of all our ships, and they were accordingly all turned into round sterns, of course at a great expense. He had moved for Returns of the cost, but it was declined; however, that crotchet did not last long, and the round sterns were re-manufactured into another kind of round sterns; of course at another great expense. There was the Trafalgar, which was launched at Woolwich, before Her Majesty, and amidst immense pomp. It was proudly boasted that she was the most perfect ship in the British navy. Well, she was taken down to Chatham, and there all the pretty work of Mr, Laing was knocked to pieces, and the stern of some one else put in. He thought the Surveyor ought not to be attached to the Navy Board at all—he should be kept at the elbow of the Admiralty and all calculations relating to ship-building laid before him, upon which he should be called upon to give an opinion. During the late American war, it was found that our 46-gun frigates were totally unable to cope with the heavy frigates of America. Well, every one would have thought that that class of ships would have been abolished. But no, the Admiralty set to work and built seventy or eighty of them, and there they were now almost useless. One of them, the Penelope, had been cut asunder lengthened, and made into a steamer. When her engines were put in, and she was loaded with 500 tons of coals, her lower ports were no more than 3 feet 11½ inches from the water, while her
312
paddles were 8 feet in the water, and they ought to be no more than 3 feet. Her cargo of coals was reduced to 430 tons, when she started out of the harbour on her trial trip; still her main deck ports were no more than 4 feet 11½ inches out of the water, and her paddle wheels 7 feet in it in place of 3. Why she was fit for nothing but to drown her people. Yet they were building another at Chatham. Now she would not be one bit better than the Penelope. Not one of our war steamers could carry ten days' fuel, by which, in his opinion, they were wholly useless. Even the French did not make such mistakes as we did in our steamers. Had we sent down orders to Glasgow or Liverpool, we might have obtained perfect war steamers, for only those could build them who were acquainted with them. The Surveyor had not produced one steamer which was not a disgrace to the Admiralty. Even the Queen's yacht was a bungled job; such were the mistakes made in her build, that, even with very heavy engines, they were compelled to ballast her with 100 tons of lead. The Albion, when built was supposed to be a chef d'œuvre; it was boasted she was the first ship of the whole Navy—superior to the Rodney, the Nile, and every other. Why the Rodney when she sailed, was full of stores—she had fourteen months' provisions on board—she was full as the ship could hold, yet she drew less water; her ports were further from the water than the Albion's, with less than four months provisions on board. He hoped that the Admiralty would consider these matters and mend them.
Mr. S. Herbertsaid, there were some charges which the hon. and gallant Officer had made, which would, probably, come under consideration when the House got into Committee on the Navy Estimates, but there were other points in the speech of the hon. and gallant Officer on which he (Mr. S. Herbert) wished to offer a few (and they would be very brief) observations to the House. The hon. and gallant Officer complained of the constitution of the Board of Admiralty, and had criticised its conduct by the character of the ships which had been constructed under the authority of the Admiralty. He said the class of ships which had been built were of an extremely insufficient construction, but in making that charge as against the present Board, he forgot that in support of his charge, he had instanced

313
several ships which had been built under previous Boards of Admiralty.
Sir C. Napier: I produced two instances—one before, and the other since, the constitution of the Board of Admiralty had been newly constructed. I admit, that the errors have been less since.
Mr. S. Herbertwas sorry to have misunderstood the hon. and gallant Officer, and must take it that he had done so, on the hon. and gallant Officer's statement. The first charge then made against the present Board by the hon. and gallant Officer, had been as to die exercise of its patronage. The hon. and gallant Member stated, that having moved for a Return, he found that though there were between 600 and 700 persons employed in the various civil departments of the Admiralty, not a single naval person was to be found amongst them; but the hon. and gallant Officer had himself shown, that to 612 civilians already employed in the dockyards, 50 naval persons had been added since the Return was laid upon the Table. He was not opposed to the proposition for the employment of naval men in the civil service of the Admiralty. In some respects he had himself carried out that principle to a certain extent, viz., in the employment of pursers as clerks in the civil departments; but he knew that sometimes serious inconvenience arose from it. If an old purser was taken into the civil department as clerk, he no sooner learnt his duty than he was unfit for service; and, on the other hand, if a young, active, intelligent purser was so employed, he would not take it for a continuance, as he naturally was looking for another ship, and when he had learnt the business of a clerk he went away; so that constant interruptions took place, and after the trouble of teaching the man his duty, no advantage to the public service was gained from him. The hon. and gallant Officer had next pointed out as an excellent regulation to be adopted in the dock-yards, would be, that when ships were paid off it should be in the power of the Commander to recommend the most deserving of his crew for employment in the dockyard, on the condition of their going to sea again whenever called upon. This regulation had been already carried into effect, and by this means an efficient corps of labourers was maintained in the dockyards, and a reserve of able-bodied seamen kept ready to be put on board ship
314
upon any emergency. With regard to special promotions, he supposed the hon. and gallant Officer would not object to the instances in which special promotions had taken place even for particular services in Syria, for services in the Chinese war, and also for services in that most pestilential quarter of the world, the Coast of Africa. These promotions were all for special services, and were free from the possibility of any charge of favouritism. As to the promotions from the Coastguard service, he (Mr. S. Herbert) did riot know an instance in which the Admiralty had deviated from the recommendations of the Controller of the Coast-guard, the officer in whom (as we understood) the selection was vested. As to the masters, the present Board had not been remiss; in the first place, they had been made commissioned officers, and some had been promoted lieutenants, and one Commander of Her Majesty's Yacht. With regard to the building of ships, it had been said the Admiralty ought to take care not to give a monopoly to any surveyor of the navy. He had every respect for the genius and ability of Sir W. Symonds; but he did not consider even that able individual to be infallible, and, therefore, other builders had been allowed to compete with Sir W. Symonds, and the Board had now no less than nineteen experimental vessels in the course of construction by different individuals. As to the expense of the alteration of the magazines, to which reference had been made, it had been found necessary; for even the plan of the hon. and gallant Officer himself had been adopted in one instance, and pronounced by two most competent officers, to be exceedingly dangerous. As time advanced, science advanced; improvements followed; and hence alterations had been found to be absolutely necessary. The hon. and gallant Officer had alluded to the Penelope. He would read the report of the Commander with reference to her draught of water. That gallant Officer stated:—
"The draught of water on our arrival was 18ft. 5in. forward, and 20ft. aft. The height of the ports was 6ft. 3in. forward, 5ft. 7in. in midships, and 6ft. 3in. aft."
With respect to the qualities of the Albion, he would just read a letter which came to his hands from Cove a few days ago. It was addressed to Sir W. Symonds; and was in these terms:—

315
"It affords me great pleasure to comply with your request, and particularly so, as I am most conscientiously able to refute the vile and diabolical assertions respecting our noble ship. In the first place, I will give you her flotation when provisioned for five months, of all species, and she will now take another month's provisions comfortably under hatches, and more of bread. She stows 410 tons of water, and has 12 months' stores, with 10 months' fuel. Her draught then was—forward, 23ft. 6in.; aft, 24ft. 7in.; height of midship port, 6ft. 6in.—this should he called 6ft. 8in., as the port sills amidships were cut down to allow the depression of the 84-pounder guns which the Admiralty thought of putting into her; she is now armed with 12 68-pounders, the remainder long 32's, 56cwt., except on the quarter-deck and forecastle, 24 No. 32-pounders, 8ft. 6in., 42 cwt. guns, and two 68-pounders on the quarter-deck, making in all 90 guns actually mounted. This line of flotation, I should observe, agrees to half-an-inch of her talented constructor's calculation. Now for her qualities, so far as we have been able to judge, at sea; she works and steers like a boat, that is quicker and better than any ship I ever sailed in. On Sunday last, we had a good trial by the wind, with as much wind as her masts would bear, under double-reefed topsails, courses, &c.; her inclination never exceeded 4½ degrees; she was then going 10 knots, and working within 10½ points of the compass; at this time there was a short sea, and on one tack a-head she was far from being uneasy; her motion is quick but very easy, and on the whole I do think her the most splendid ship ever built, and her constructor must be proud of her; for my part, I am perfectly unprejudiced."
This was signed "William Bowles." He had also a letter from Mr. Lofthouse, the Master of the Albion, which stated:—
"I am just returned from the Albion, and I cannot delay expressing my admiration of her in the strongest terms. She is quite perfect, and beyond all doubt, the finest two-decker in the world, Of course, you have already heard all I could tell you about her sailing, working, steering, &c.; but all the officers seem most sincere and hearty in their praises of her, and so end all the cabals against you and her. I am also delighted with the Iris. * * * * If I had my way I should commission the Vanguard immediately, and try her with the Albion, as the fastest two-decker in the navy."
He would say a word with respect to another subject touched on by the gallant Officer—the proposed alteration of the Board of Admiralty. If officers were placed at the head of the different departments, he did not see what improvement that would be on the present system.
316
The fact was, that there were now officers placed at the head of, and responsible for, the different offices of Somerset House. The hon. and gallant Officer said, that when a change of Administration took place, the new Members who came in were ignorant of the duties of their office, and depended for information on the principal persons employed under them. This, however, was an objection that applied to every change of office, it was one of the necessary evils of our system of Government. He could not see what additional responsibility would be obtained by the proposed change; in point of fact there was now a complete responsibility. The hon. Gentleman was wrong in thinking, that the Board of Admiralty stayed almost exclusively in Whitehall; the gallant Officer near him was constantly at Somerset House, and so were the secretaries, in the discharge of their official duties, acting on their responsibility. Before a great change in the construction of an Official Board took place, there ought to be proof that the existing system had failed. He could say for himself, that before he became a Member of the Admiralty Board he had had his doubts as to the working of the system, but the experience he had had enabled him to say that it worked very well. The hon. anti gallant Officer said there was too much work for the Board to do; he did not think there was; there was a fair day's work for each person, but not more. If war were to break out, and continue for any length of time, it might be necessary to increase the official force. He was one of those who thought that the measures taken by the right hon. Member for Cumberland during his tenure of office were much required, though, like all new measures, they might work with difficulty at first. They had now stood the test of ten years, and three Administrations, and having heard no complaint of their inefficiency, or seen any of those contrarieties or embarrassments which beset the former system, he thought there was no case made out to induce him to consent to a change in the composition of the Board, which, after all, would be little else than nominal.
Captain Pechellwas not actuated by any party feeling; but he was of opinion, with his gallant Friend below him, that the constitution of the Board of Admiralty did not work well. The gallant Officer

317
had shown that there was no responsibility whatever at that Board, and it was well known that no junior Officer could venture to state and maintain his opinion. Sir Joseph Yorke once said in that. House, when at the Board of Admiralty, that if he presumed to differ from the Secretary or the First Lord, the sooner he turned his stern to the Admiralty the better. Hon. Members would recollect the case of Captain Berkeley, who endeavoured to induce the Admiralty to increase the ships' complements to an efficient number. That gallant Officer thought he had gained over a majority of the Board to his opinion; but after a short absence he found that this was all reversed, and that what had been brought forward in the Board-room could be upset in private. The Secretary for the Admiralty had not at all succeeded in refuting the statements of the gallant Officer opposite. He did not give Government any credit for the manner in which they dealt with the steam navy and steam machinery. When they saw the formidable steam ships which France was now building, he thought great blame was to be imputed to them for their backwardness in augmenting this part of our force. He wished to know why the great improvement of the Archimedean screw, which had been completely successful in the French and American vessels in which it was tried, had not been adopted. He did not find fault with the experiment that had been made in the case of the Penelope, but thought the service for which she was best adapted was the transport of troops. He did not approve of the Navy being employed in the collection of Poor-rates in Ireland. He felt the disgrace of Naval Officers being employed in such a service, and of bringing a man-of-war with her forty-eight pounders to bear on the next farm-house, where a paltry sum for Poor-rates might be due. To the hon. and gallant Officer opposite was due the honour and glory of employing the Navy of the country in such a service. He must complain that such a scanty share of promotion or reward fell to the lot of the officers and men employed in the fatiguing and harassing service of the Coast Guard, which was confined to those who distinguished themselves in saving life in cases of shipwreck. He wished the Admiralty would send a good ship-of-war to protect the fishery on the coast of Sussex, not one of the ten-gun brigs. He would take this
318
opportunity of asking how many of these diabolical vessels, for so they might well be called, were left in Her Majesty's service? He believed there was one now employed on the coast of Africa, he supposed for the purpose of wearing it out; and he heartily commiserated the crew of it, for they would be worn out too.
Dr. Bowingregretted that some general method was not observed with regard to the estimates of expenditure laid before the House. He saw no reason why all the departments should not adopt the same form; yet from year to year the accounts were brought in from each of them in a different shape. At present the department of expenditure was also made the department of receipt. He contended that the gross revenue in every shape, and from every quarter, ought to be paid into the Exchequer, and that no payments should be made by any department, except by Treasury warrant. The principle had been recognized by the noble Lord the Member for London, and other hon. Members, and until it was carried into effect these accounts would never be satisfactory.
Captain Plumridgesaid, the masters of the Navy complained, first, that they only ranked as Lieutenants; secondly, that, while Paymasters and Pursers could obtain 8s. 6d. a day on half-pay, they could only obtain 7s.; and thirdly, that after an action the only promotion the Master of a fleet could obtain was that of Lieutenant, whilst he ought to be eligible to be made a Captain.
House in Committee.
Mr. S. Herbertsaid, that having taken up some time of the House already, and as he wished to get as far in the estimates as he could, he should confine his statement merely to those points in which alterations had been made, and hoped that others would follow his example. Upon the first vote for the wages of Seamen and Marines, it would be seen that there was a very considerable reduction. The hon. Member for Coventry had alluded to that reduction as imprudent. He thought when they recollected the state of our relations with China, where war had been lately concluded, and the very large commerce which was necessary to be protected in the Indian seas, and the disturbed state of some of the coasts, the House would admit that the vote had been reduced as low as possible. The hon. Member ex-

319
plained at some length the various items of the Estimates and the alterations made in them, and concluded by saying, on the whole, though the diminution of the gross Estimates was not so large as the diminution of the number of men would appear to warrant, yet he thought the Committee would admit that the Estimates were drawn up so as to be conducive to the ultimate efficiency of the Navy. He begged the House to observe, that a great reduction had also been made on the preceding year. He did not think that a greater reduction could with safety be made. He begged to propose, as the first Vote, that 36,000 Seamen be employed, 10,500 Royal Marines, and 2,000 boys.
Mr. W. Williamsadmitted that the power and greatness of the country mainly depended upon that branch of the public service comprised by these Estimates. The Estimates of 1833 were less by 1,600,000 l. than those of the present year, and at another period they were 2,000,000 l. less. He called upon the hon. Gentleman the Secretary of the Admiralty to explain the circumstances of the country which required this additional expense. He should object to that portion of this Vote which referred to the Marines employed on shore, and upon it he should take the opinion of the Committee. Those Marines formed, in fact, part of the Standing Army of this country, and he saw no reason why their number should be greater than in preceding years, as was the case. The number of Marines, serving on shore, proposed for the present year, was 6,000 men; whereas, if they took the last ten years, they would find that the number had never exceeded 4,500 men. He should propose, unless he received a satisfactory answer, that the number should be reduced by 2,500 men. He would not move that reduction until he had heard the explanations given by Her Majesty's Government; but, if they were not satisfactory, he certainly should divide the Committee on the subject. It appeared to him that by means of the Marines they were increasing the standing army.
Sir G. Cockburnsaid, the estimated number of Marines was felt to be necessary. They were a most valuable force. They were as useful on shore in guarding dockyards and other duty of that kind as soldiers, and, in the event of a sudden war, they were at once available. It was
320
of the utmost importance that every possible facility should exist for having ships readily manned; and the Marines were always ready to put into ships, in the event of any sudden emergency. The hon. Member should know that when the smaller number of Marines were voted, to which the allusion had been made, foreign nations were not endeavouring to cope with our Navy. But now they were making great efforts in that direction, and their facilities of manning their fleets were greater than any we possessed. It was absolutely necessary that we should have a fleet to command the Channel in the event of war being declared. Two-thirds of our seamen were abroad in foreign parts; and, in the case of a war with France, all those seamen we depended on might be carried to French prisons, instead of coming here to man our ships. The only security we had for manning our ships in such an emergency was this vote of Marines.
Sir C. Napierbore testimony to the efficiency and available character of the Marine force, and hoped his hon. Friend would not propose any reduction in the number of men. The Marines ought rather to be increased than diminished. The Government were the best judges what number of men they ought to keep up; and, as a naval man, he was anxious to see the number as well kept up as possible. The chief thing was, how they should be disposed of. Under the late Administration they had three guard ships, with scarcely sufficient men to keep them clean. In his opinion, those guard ships should be kept fully manned, and with the most efficient officers fit for active service, instead of old decrepit men as hitherto, who, when sent to sea, were found totally incapable of performing their duties. He hoped the gallant Admiral would explain what was the intention with reference to those guard-ships. With respect to powder magazines, he had tried various experiments in the Powerful, but they had been overruled when it came home, on the idea that they should be made bomb-proof, which, he thought, perfectly impossible. Our officers, he was afraid, had not sufficient opportunities for practice, and from what he had seen on foreign stations, he should say that our fleet might not on a sudden emergency be found so efficient in manœuvring as would be desirable.
Admiral Dundasobserved, that we had 1,000 merchant steamers, 250 of which were capable of carrying 32-pounders; a force which would overcome the combined fleets of the rest of the world.
Sir G. Cockburnremarked, that some experimental alterations, made by the gallant Officer, the Member for Marylebone, on board the Powerful, had been disapproved of by a Board of Inquiry, composed of Sir E. Codrington, Admiral Parker, and Sir T. Hastings. With respect to the Penelope, the report of her captain had been one of approval, and her services would be found peculiarly valuable on the coast of Africa, which she could closely blockade against slavers, the currents preventing sailing vessels from keeping their stations. He alluded to the extensive commerce enjoyed by this country all over the world, and the consequent demand for ships of war, which, without the aid of steamers, the Admiralty could not, unless by great increase of the Estimates, afford.
Vote agreed to, as was also a resolution "that 1,170,476 l. be granted to Her Majesty to defray the wages of Seamen and Marines for the year ensuing."
House resumed, Committee to sit again.

QUI TAM ACTIONS—HORSE-RACING PENALTIES.
The Report on the Horse Racing Penalties Bill was further considered.
Mr. Craven Berkeleymoved the addition of a Clause, to the effect, "that it shall not he lawful for the space of three Calendar Months from the passing of this Act, to lay any information for the recovery of penalties against parties engaged in certain popular sports mentioned in the Acts of 5 and 6 Will. III. c. 59, s. 3, and 2 and 3 Vict. c. 47, s. 47." He thought that persons subject to informations under these Acts, might claim the protection of the House with quite as much justice as the Noblemen and Gentlemen for whose benefit the Bill now under consideration had been introduced. By the expiration of the time for which he proposed to suspend these penalties, the Committee now inquiring into the subject of Gaining would have delivered their report, and it would then be for the House to determine whether the sports to which his clause referred, should be prohibited or allowed. In his opinion no Legislation was so had as that which they were unable to enforce.
322
There was a weekly publication in this metropolis, issued every Sunday, which contained allusions to no less than between forty and fifty games and sports, which were rendered illegal by the Acts mentioned in the Clause he now proposed. Why, he asked, did not they re-erect the turnpike gates which had been destroyed in South Wales? Why did they not endeavour to put in force the Clauses of these Acts in the Counties of Cumberland, Northumberland, and Durham? Because they knew they would be unable to do so without the aid of their Metropolitan Police Force. He must say, that if they did not suspend the informations which might be laid under the Acts of Parliament mentioned in this Clause, they would show, in agreeing to the Bill of the hon. and learned Gentleman opposite, that they were legislating for a particular class of persons, and for that class only; and, whatever might be the sentiments of the majority of Members of that House, he could assure them, that that opinion was very generally entertained out of doors.
Question put that the Clause be brought up.
Dr. Bowringseconded the Motion. They offered a premium to persons who assisted in giving effect to the laws which they made, and then, when persons availed themselves of the inducements held out, they turned round and loaded them with opprobrium, merely because they put the law in force against opulent and influential men. If they could find other means of giving effect to their Legislation, they ought not to encourage men in this course; but, if they acknowledged such co-operation, certainly they ought not to repudiate it when it was exerted against the noble and the great. Informers had been acting against the poor and the feeble for years, and that House had not interfered to restrain their proceedings; but now, as they had selected the rich as their prey, hon. Gentlemen were ready to make them the objects of public opprobrium, Though he disapproved of the Bill of the hon. Gentleman opposite, as well as of the Amendment of the hon. Member near him, he felt bound to show that he was desirous of protecting the weak as well as the strong, by supporting the Clause of his hon. Friend.
Clause brought up on the Question that it he read a second time.
Mr. James Stuart Wortleysaid, the

323
hon. Gentleman had not informed the House what was the nature of the Games to which his Amendment referred. He believed the hon. Gentleman would find that his Clause would afford protection to sports which had received the highest aristocratic protection, as cock-fighting, and other similar games. He objected that this Clause had nothing whatever to do with the present Bill. The object of the Bill was to suspend, for a certain time, actions which had been brought against individuals for penalties to a very large amount—to an extent far greater than was commensurate with the nature of the offence; while the Games to which the Clause of the hon. Member referred, were punishable by criminal proceedings. He protested against the ground which had been taken by the hon. Member for Bolton (Dr. Bowring). He was perfectly satisfied that if the persons to whom this Bill was designed to afford protection, had not been Gentlemen of rank and aristocratic connections, this outcry and opposition would not have been raised against it. Hon. Gentlemen on the other side were jealous, and properly jealous, of the rights and privileges of the people; and they imagined, because there were some aristocratic names among the persons whom this Bill was intended to protect, that it was owing to that circumstance the Measure had been proposed. He begged to remind the House, that, within a few years past, similar protection had been afforded to printers; and, very recently, the hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. T. Duncombe) obtained the same protection for poor players. Last Session, also, an Act of a similar nature had been passed. Persons had been in the habit of sending coal from the North of England, which were sold under the beet market names, while they had not been obtained at the Collieries from which it was professed they came. An Act of Parliament was passed, requiring a specification of the names of the Collieries from which coals were obtained. In some cases the requirements of this Act were not observed; actions were brought against offenders for penalties to a large amount, and a Bill was passed to suspend, not to stop, those actions. The law was considered so beneficial that it remained unaltered; and he (Mr. Wortley) had since conducted a Prosecution against parties for the recovery of penalties under the Act. All they
324
asked for by the Bill now before the House was the suspension of the pending Actions until an inquiry had been instituted on the subject by a Committee upstairs.
Captain Pechellsaid, that he had been referred to as having supported the Solicitor General, in 1835, in protecting the Printers of Newspapers from Actions brought against them; but he could not agree that that case was analogous to the present. Several Country Newspaper Proprietors, as well as some Metropolitan Printers, had omitted to state their places of residence in the Newspapers, and they had become liable to penalties. That, however, was an affair of regulation with the Stamp Office; they had not omitted their names, but merely their places of residence. On the Plaintiffs in the Actions sought to be affected by this Bill the utmost opprobrium had been cast—they had been called the foulest names. Whether hon. Gentlemen opposite had associated with these scoundrels, as they had been designated, he did not know, but at all events, they must have made bets with them or others, or they could not have been brought into contact. With, however, the array of the Members of the Jockey Club on the other side, backed by two Secretaries of State and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, he supposed the Bill would pass. He must protest against the Measure, and deny that it bore any analogy to the Bill relating to Newspapers which had received his support, as stated by the hon. and learned Gentleman opposite.
Mr. C. Berkeleysaid, he would not give the House the trouble of dividing, as, with such a formidable array as he saw assembled on the opposite side of the House, he knew it would be useless; but he would ask his hon. and learned Friend opposite, as he had talked of cockfighting, whether he thought cockfighting more cruel than stag-hunting or fishing, or any of those sports which were legalized, and which had received the sanction of the highest persons in the realm? He was sure the hon. and learned Member would not give way to such cant.
Motion that the clause be read a second time negatived without a division, Report received, Bill to be read a third time.
House adjourned at a quarter to 1 o'clock.