Commons Sitting of 31 July 1855

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1° Public Health Act (1854) Continuance and Amendment; Nuisances Removal, &c., and Police of Towns (Scotland); Diseases Prevention.
3° Passengers Act Amendment; Turkish Loan; Customs Laws Consolidation.

COMMISSARIAT SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES.
MR. LABOUCHEREsaid, he wished to call attention to the fact that the Supplementary Estimates for the Commissariat for the ensuing year amounted to 2,500,000 l. The department had been recently transferred from the Treasury to the War Department, and he begged to ask his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer if papers would be submitted to the House to enable them to judge of the system under which the money would be expended? In voting so immense a sum, the House ought to see, as far as they were able, how it was to be appropriated. He was not without apprehension, the Treasury having been deprived of the control of the expenditure of that sum, that the money might be expended without any proper system being devised for its application. He was aware of the impropriety of pushing the system of routine too far, but, on the other hand, he could not allow a lax system of expenditure in a distant country to prevail without having due control over it. It would be satisfactory to him to hear from his right hon. Friend that his attention had been directed to such an important subject, and he hoped that if his right hon. Friend could not give them the information he sought for, documents would be laid on the table to show them the nature of the system

1559
on which they were proceeding. If that could not be done before they came to vote the sum in Committee of Supply, it would be a satisfaction to him to hear from one so competent to express an opinion as his right hon. Friend that he had been consulted, and was satisfied that the expenditure would be made in a manner that would afford the public every security that there would be no lavish expenditure, and that the accounts would be conducted in a proper manner.
MR. STAFFORDsaid, he was glad the right hon. Gentleman had called the attention of the Government to so important a subject. As long ago as the 18th of May last, Lord Ellenborough, in another place, made precisely the same statement, and uttered the same complaint which the right hon. Gentleman had now made; the noble Lord deplored that Parliament and the country were without information as to the manner in which the Commissariat was to be administered, and said he apprehended that at present no one stood between the Minister of War and the chief clerk of the Commissariat Department. He (Mr. Stafford) deeply regretted that Parliament had arrived so near the termination of the Session without having had a statement laid before it with regard to the organisation of the War Department. More than a year since the Secretaryship for the Colonies was separated from the Secretaryship for War, or rather a fourth Secretary of State was appointed; and from that period to the present all they knew of the organisation of that important department was derived from the statements of the Duke of Newcastle and Mr. Sidney Herbert before the Sebastopol Committee, both of whom declared that they knew nothing of the arrangements, and that during their tenure of office they had gone on, notwithstanding the warning of the noble Lord the Member for London (Lord J. Russell) without organising any plan; in fact, although Parliament had voted the money for carrying on, the war with unsparing liberality, they were still in utter ignorance with regard to the arrangements that had been made for conducting that department. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) would say when the Government would be able to give an ample and explicit statement of the changes which had been effected in the War Department, especially with regard to the financial position of the Secretary for the War Department.
COLONEL DUNNEsaid, that some time ago he had taken the liberty to ask for information as to the re-organisation of the War Department; and it appeared that there was a department called the "Army and Civil Department;" and anybody could see that such an arrangement would not work. He felt assured that he expressed the feeling of all men in his profession when he said that there was an utter disorganisation in the military departments; there had been a transfer of almost all the military departments, where military knowledge was necessary to civilians; and he predicted that from such a system there must come failure. They suffered under the great disadvantage, that they never could get a satisfactory answer to anything in the military way; and in the organisation, they had no definition of what was intended to be military and what civil. He saw many Gentlemen opposite who talked of Administrative Reform, and if they were sincere, they would pay attention to those Estimates and the re-organisation of the military departments, and force the matter on the attention of the Government.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, it was his wish, and he believed generally the wish of the Government, to give the fullest information and satisfaction to the House with respect to the changes recently made in the War Department. One of those changes consisted, as his right hon. Friend (Mr. Labouchcre) had correctly stated, in transferring the Commissariat from the Treasury to the office of the Secretary for War. He was necessarily himself personally ignorant of the expenses of the Commissariat, the whole duty of the Treasury now being that the funds should be sufficient to meet the demands of the different military departments. The demands of the Admiralty and War Departments and the whole of their detailed expenditure were under the control of those departments. The Estimates of the anticipated expenditure were sent to the Treasury for approbation before they were submitted to Parliament, but the expenditure was wholly conducted on the responsibility of the War Department, and it was merely the duty of the Treasury to see that the funds were in existence to defray the drafts on the Exchequer. With regard to what his right hon. Friend had observed as to the extent of the Commissariat expenditure, he would merely make one remark, that undoubtedly

1561
that expenditure was large; but the House should bear in mind that up to a very recent date, and even at the present time, the great jealousy of the public and of the House, was that all the wants of the army should be adequately supplied, even though those wants should be supplied at a great pecuniary sacrifice. No pains or expenses had been spared to supply all the wants of the army, both with respect to the supply of food and by making provision for the attendance of the sick on the field, and also in the hospitals that were remote from the scene of contest. The expenses were incurred at a distance, and were necessarily controlled with less efficiency than they could be in a time of peace. It must be anticipated that those expenses would be somewhat large; that was always the case in former wars, and was the necessary condition on which war was carried on. He had every reason to believe that all securities had been taken for controlling the expenditure of the Commissariat; but the transition from the control of one department to that of another must create some imperfection of arrangement, which it would take time and experience to remedy. The attention of skilled and experienced persons was now constantly directed to the subject; and if any information existed in a written form, it should be laid before the House. He was not, however, aware at that moment that there was any Report of the Commissariat, except of a nature that would give no information on the subject to which his right hon. Friend had referred.
SIR FRANCIS BARINGsaid, with regard to the general constitution of the War Office, that was a subject which he conceived had better be deferred till next Session; but with respect to the transfer of the Commissariat to the War Department, he had some observations to make on that particular subject. It was his fortune to call attention to the subject at an early period of the Session. He then felt that the arrangement which had been made was deficient and would require further consideration. He considered that the Treasury, in transferring the Commissariat to the War Department, had transferred more than they ought to have done. The Commissariat did not relate to war expenses only, but to other expenses which had nothing whatever to do with the war The Government, therefore, ought to have drawn a distinction between the two, and ought to have kept that portion of the
1562
Commissariat which had no relation to the war within their own hands. The War Department would have quite enough to do without superintending an expenditure which had no relation with the war. In that respect, therefore, the Chancellor of the Exchequer ought to revise the Minute by which that transfer of duty was made. In his mind that Minute betrayed a good deal of haste, and, no doubt, was considered the easiest way of getting rid of an onerous department. But let the right hon. Gentleman take a committee of persons accustomed to accounts. It was a mistake to suppose that it was a mere army arrangement. There ought to be some one employed who was capable of acting as a real check in keeping those accounts. No doubt there had been considerable difficulty in making the arrangements. They were unavoidable in the case of a change from a state of peace to a state of war. He was afraid, however, that they would get into still greater difficulties unless they instituted an inquiry into the matter. He would suggest that persons connected with the Commissariat and the army, should be employed to make arrangements, confining the department entirely to the Commissariat for the army, and he had no doubt that before next year they would get the department into the very best order. If something of that nature should not be done, his right hon. Friend was little aware of the difficulties in which he would get involved.
MR. HENLEYsaid, the House and the country must be greatly obliged to the right hon. Member for Taunton (Mr. Labouchere) for calling attention to such an important matter. They were about to have before them large Supplementary Estimates, and most of the discussion had turned upon the desirableness of having a sufficient check upon the expenditure of the money; but there was another point of still more importance that had not been referred to, which was, that unless there was a good and sufficient system in operation for supplying the wants of the army they would be expending enormous sums of money uselessly, and leave the wants of the army unsupplied. If a good system were adopted there would be no difficulty in keeping the accounts in a manner easily to be understood; whereas, if they proceeded hand over head, so that no man could foresee what might be needed or knew what was to be done, they would attempt to apply the system of checking

1563
vain. It would be an incumbrance rather than a help in the supply of necessaries to the army, and would very probably do considerable mischief. The statement o the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer was not of a very consoling character. So far as the War Department was concerned, it appeared that the Estimates were submitted to the Treasury before they came down to the House but how far the sanction of those Estimates by a department that was not versed in the details could be regarded as of any value, he (Mr. Henley) could not so easily comprehend. It did not betoken a very accurate view of things when large Supplementary Estimates were required. We were not more at war now than we were four months ago, and he really thought that the whole amount might have been taken then. It was, however, impossible to discuss those matters at that period of the Session; and he confessed he was not without some apprehension, seeing that such large sums were to be voted without at the same time having any knowledge of the manner in which they were to be applied.
MR. MACARTNEYsaid, that since the issue of the Supplementary Estimates for the Commissariat some anxiety had been evinced to know whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer was in such a position as not to be under the necessity of asking the House, in Committee of Ways and Means, to provide for the additional 5,000,000 l. It would be satisfactory to ascertain whether the right hon. Gentleman proposed, in Committee of Ways and Means, to provide for that amount, or whether he conceived that he had a sufficient margin from the Ways and Means voted for the financial year to enable the Government to carry on the war, until the next meeting of Parliament.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, he thought that upon the whole it was not desirable to anticipate the discussion which would come on when the Supplementary Estimates were before the House, and when ample explanation would be given by the Gentlemen representing the several departments with regard to the details. As to the question of the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Macartney), if it should please the House to agree to the Supplementary Estimates, it would then become his (the Chancellor of the Exchequer's) duty to show that there was sufficient Ways and Means to meet them, for he
1564
need hardly say that it was perfectly useless for the House to vote Supplies unless they also provided the means of, defraying the expenses. It was, therefore, a matter of absolute necessity that the Government should show that means were provided for meeting the Votes that might be agreed to. Without going into details he might add that, in submitting his annual financial statement to the House he allowed a margin of rather more than 3,500,000 l. That margin, would not, however, be sufficient to cover the entire Supplementary Estimates; but at the time of proposing a vote of credit to cover the remaining portion of the Ways and Means he would state in what manner he proposed that the remnant of the Supplementary Estimates should be covered.
Motion agreed to.
House in Committee.

SUPPLY—MISCELLANEOUS ESTIMATES.
(1.) Motion made, and Question proposed—
"That a sum, not exceeding 100,000 l., be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the charge of Civil Contingencies, to the 31st day of March, 1856."
MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, the expenditure under the Vote now before the Committee had not for several years past exceeded 70,000 l.; and, considering the abuses which had previously taken place, he felt bound to move that the Vote be reduced by 30,000 l. The Vote included 1,200 l. for the Scotch Episcopalian clergy—an item which he considered very objectionable, especially as the Episcopal Church of Scotland numbered among its members many of the principal nobility of Scotland. Then there was also an item of 74 l. 11 s. 8d. for conveying bishops of the Established Church in the West Indies to and from different islands. He should move the omission of those two items, and another of small amount, in addition to the reduction of the entire Vote by 30,000 l.
Motion made, and Question put—
"That a sum, not exceeding 67,969 l., be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the charge of Civil Contingencies, to the 31st day of March, 1856."
MR. WISEsaid, he wished to call attention to the fees charged in the Estimates on the appointment of the Duke of Newcastle and some other individuals to State offices, and likewise to the fees charged on making knights, and did not

1565
see why the country should be called upon to pay those fees. He perceived there was a sum of 6,638 l. put down in the Votes as compensation for Her Majesty's Minister at St. Petersburg, the Secretary of Legation, and Consuls and Vice Consuls for their sudden removal from their posts, and he wished to know if that were to be given in consequence of the extreme inconvenience arising from the sudden and compulsory removal, or was the sum given in consideration of the loss of their emoluments, or had their salaries been continued since their removal from St. Petersburg? He would also call attention to a charge of 904 l. for defraying the expense of the Commission of Inquiry into the state of the Corporation of London. Was he to understand that that was to be a national charge?
MR. WILSONsaid, that with regard to the fees paid on appointments to offices of State, it was customary for the person who was appointed to a patent office to pay for the patent himself; but when he was moved from one patent office to another the charge for the second patent was paid for him. As to the fees charged on the creation of knights the explanation was as follows:—when a person was created a knight, or had an honour conferred upon him for services in the field or elsewhere, it was deemed a fit and proper thing that the value of that honour should not be diminished by having any pecuniary charge attached to it. With respect to the compensation to the British Minister and other officers in Russia, they had been obliged to sell off everything they had at a moment's notice, and with great difficulty had escaped safely through the country. Of course a consul who was appointed to a situation which he expected to be for life had every reason to make his arrangements of a permanent kind; and when, upon the outbreak of war, he was disturbed in the possession of his office, and subjected to enormous sacrifices by the sale of his household furniture, carriages, and other things necessary for his office, the Government thought it was only fair that the person so situated should be reimbursed his losses and extraordinary expenditure. The Commission of Inquiry into the Corporation of London was a Crown Commission, hostile to the Corporation, and the expenses of such Commissions were always borne by the public.
MR. FERGUSsaid, he did not think there was a single item in the whole Vote that was open to greater objection than
1566
the grant of 1000 l. to the Episcopal Clergy in Scotland. Now, in Scotland the Episcopalians were Dissenters, and as such were no more entitled to a Vote of public money than any other religious sect. There was a further objection to the Vote, that although in number they were very few, and their ministers the worst paid, the Scotch Episcopalians were the richest sect in the country, embracing three-fourths of the whole of the landed aristocracy.
MR. MACARTNEYsaid, he wished to call attention to No. 4 in the Estimates, stating sums paid to Commissions. It appeared to him that that was a very objectionable mode of expending the public money. It afforded facilities for providing for certain Friends of the Treasury.
MR. MULLINGSsaid, that he had acted on Commissions, but had never received any portion of sums mentioned in the Votes. He wished that the Secretary for the Treasury would make it generally known that the Commissioners were not paid.
MR. WILSONsaid, that the hon. Member for Cirencester was perfectly right, for in the case of all Commissions issued by the Crown the Commissioners were not only not paid, but they incurred considerable expense from having to come up to town to attend those Commissions, the only paid officer of which was the secretary attached to each.
MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, he would withdraw his Amendment, but he trusted, as there was a strong feeling against the Vote for the Episcopalian Clergy of Scotland, that the Government would take the subject into consideration.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that he would give his attention to the subject, with a view of making some other provision for the Episcopalian Clergy of Scotland.
Motion, by leave, withdrawn; Vote agreed to: as was also
(2.) 10,945 l., General Board of Health.
(3.) 3,498 l. Ecclesiastical Commissioners for England.
MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, he had felt it his duty to object to the Vote in former years, and should on the present occasion
take the sense of the Committee against it.
Motion made, and Question put—
"That a sum, not exceeding 3,498 l., be granted to Her Majesty, to defray a portion of the Expenses of the Ecclesiastical Commissioners for England, to the 31st day of March, 1856."
The Committee divided:—Ayes 53; Noes 33: Majority 20.
Vote agreed to.
(4.) 12,390 l. Charity Commission.
MR. MITCHELLsaid, that the sum mentioned in the Vote now before the Committee was almost thrown away, because the Charity Commissioners had not sufficient power to interfere with the nefarious doings of the Court of Chancery with regard to all the charities of the kingdom.
THE ATTORNEY GENERALsaid, he fully concurred with the hon. Member in thinking that the powers of the Charity Commissioners were not sufficiently extensive. That, however, was not the fault of the Government, for the provisions of the Bill having for its object the extension of the powers of the Commissioners were altered in the other House of Parliament, and the Government were obliged to accept the Bill with those alterations. He believed that until the power which the Court of Chancery posessed over those charities were withdrawn from that Court, and vested in the Charity Commissioners, the charities of the country would never be satisfactorily conducted.
MR. HENLEYsaid, he regretted that no provision was made in the Estimates for the salaries of the inspectors of charities, which he thought ought to be paid out of the public taxes, and not thrown upon the funds of the charities.
MR. W. WILLIAMSdiffered from the right hon. Member for Oxfordshire, and thought that the salaries of the inspectors ought not to be paid out of the public taxes.
Vote agreed to, as were also the following Votes.
(5.) 1,053 l., Professors at Cambridge.
(6.) 22,572 l., Patent Law Amendment Act (Expenses).
(7.) 15,480 l., Incumbered Estates Commission (Ireland).
(8.) 900 l., Brehon Law Commission (Ireland).
(9.) 9,000 l., Process Servers (Ireland).
(10.) 2,270 l., Joint-Stock Companies Registration.
(11.) 69,115 l., Merchant Seamen's Fund.
(12.) 25,500 l. Park at Battersea.
MR. MICHELLsaid, he was opposed to the system of granting money out of the public taxes for the construction of public parks, which tended greatly to benefit and raise the value of the private
1568
property in the neighbourhood. It was owing to the power of the metropolitan Members in that House that those jobs were carried on, and if he had felt assured that he could have induced the Committee to support him, he would have endeavoured, by dividing against the present Vote, to put a stop to this system.
MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, he must defend the Vote, and he thought that if the hon. Member had acquainted himself with the facts of the case he would not have made the assertion he had.
MR. WISEsaid, he was one of those who thought that the tax-payers of the country were fully justified in complaining of the present Vote. They had to bear their own local burdens, and were asked also to contribute towards a park for the benefit and improvement of the metropolis. He felt that so great a principle was involved in the Vote that he should take the sense of the Committee upon it.
MR. SPOONERsaid, he should support the Vote, as he had done on a former occasion, not because he approved its principle, but because he considered that if he were to vote against the completion of the park he should practically entail a greater burden on the country than the sum now required would be.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, he considered that the hon. Member for Bodmin (Mr. Michell) was not justified in accusing the metropolitan Members of sanctioning or carrying out jobs, as the hon. Member had termed them. It ought to be remembered that the Bill introduced by the right hon. Member for Marylebone, the late President of the Board of Health, sanctioned the principle of levying an exclusive rate on the metropolis for metropolitan works, and if the Bill passed it would carry out the principle which hon. Members were desirous of having enforced.
Motion made, and Question put—
"That a sum, not exceeding 25,500 l., be granted to Her Majesty, towards defraying the Expense of forming a Park at Battersea, to the 31st day of March, 1856."
The Committee divided:—Ayes 75; Noes 17: Majority 58.
Vote agreed to; as were also the following Votes.
(13.) 17,696 l., National Gallery.
(14.) 25,000 l., Chelsea Embankment.
(15.) 10,700 l., Lighthouses.
(16.) 1,811 l., Cholera (West Indies).
(17.) 10,300 l. Agricultural Statistics.
MR. STAFFORDsaid, he wished to inquire whether a portion only of the Agricultural Statistics in England was to be taken, while in Scotland and Ireland they were collected in a complete form.
MR. BOUVERIEsaid, that when the estimates were framed it was in contemplation to adopt some such course as that followed last year with regard to some parts of the country; that was, that it should be tested whether the system of inspection under the Poor Law might not be made available for the collection of agricultural statistics. That experiment, however, had not been successful, and a Committee of the House of Lords had recommended a plan which would require a legislative enactment in a future Session. Consequently, with regard to England, nothing would be done during the present year, and no expense would be incurred. As to Scotland, the plan resorted to last year had been eminently successful, and it would be continued; and also with regard to Ireland, the existing system, which was satisfactory in its results, would be adhered to.
MR. THORNELYsaid, that if the object was to ascertain the amount of corn produced, with a view to judge of the quantity required to be imported, he thought the corn merchants would take care to ascertain it. He did not, however, deny the utility of collecting agricultural statistics.
MR. ALCOCKsaid, he observed that in Scotland and Ireland the system adopted for collection of those statistics effected the object, and he thought that it was a disgrace to the country that a perfect system could not be devised for England, especially as in France, the acreage of which country was much larger, the collection of agricultural statistics down to the most minute articles of produce was admirably accomplished.
MR. STAFFORDsaid, that one reason why those statistics were so readily collected in Ireland was, that there they had the advantage of the services of the constabulary for the purpose.
MR. BOUVERIEsaid, he thought that the Estimate was reasonably framed, supposing the course pursued last year were continued. One reason of the collection being made complete in Scotland was, that the farmers themselves had rendered valuable assistance.
Vote agreed to; as was the next Vote
(18.) 2,000 l., Trustees of Manufactures (Scotland).
(19.) 14,000 l., Fishery Board (Scotland).
MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, he considered the continuance of the proposed Vote in the Estimates a gross job. The plea upon which it was first brought forward, viz., distress in the Highlands and islands of Scotlands, no longer existed; and how places of commercial importance and wealth like Leith, Glasgow, and Greenock could have the face to come upon the public taxes for money to promote their fisheries he could not understand.
MR. WILSONsaid, he must admit that the subject was one that deserved consideration, and he would promise that the attention of the Government should be directed to it. He thought it would not be desirable to withdraw the money altogether from Scotland, but he conceived that it might be applied to a more useful purpose.
MR. LABOUCHEREsaid, he must protest against the doctrine of the Secretary for the Treasury, that if the money was not wanted for the object for which it was originally granted, namely, the promotion of the Scotch fisheries, that it must be necessarily voted and applied to some other purpose for the benefit of Scotland.
MR. DUNCANsaid, he quite admitted that the trade of Scotland should stand on its own footing, and was satisfied that it would not be injured if the Vote was withdrawn.
SIR JAMES ANDERSONsaid, he fully agreed that an entire stop ought to be put to the present system. It was discreditable to Scotland to be receiving money in such a form, under the pretext of promoting manufacturies and fisheries.
MR. JAMES MACGREGORsaid, he must express his feelings of indignation that money should be given to Scotland which could not be fully explained or accounted for.
VISCOUNT PALMERSTONsaid, that the Vote was necessary for carrying on the service of the Board, which could not otherwise be continued; but his hon. Friend the Secretary of the Treasury had announced that the subject would receive the attention of Government with a view to a change of system.
MR. GLADSTONEsaid, he also must protest against the idea expressed by the Secretary of the Treasury, that any vested interest in money on the part of Scotland could be recognised—a notion which had been disclaimed by several of the Scottish representatives to their great honour.
LORD JOHN MANNERSsaid, he begged to point out that the application of the Vote, and the distribution of the money, was fully and minutely explained in a Report of great interest, annually presented to the House.
Vote agreed to.
(20.) 5,000 l., Commissioners of Highland Roads and Bridges.
MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, it was absurd to have such a Board. With regard to Highland Roads and Bridges, the Government ought to pledge themselves to consider the Vote, along with the preceding, with a view to its discontinuance.
MR. BLACKBURNsaid, he did not see why such Votes should be objected for Scotland, when they had similar ones for England, for they had just passed one for Chelsea Bridge. At the same time he wanted to see the whole of them done away.
MR. F. SCULLYsaid, if such Votes were granted to Scotland, why were they not granted to Ireland? He should like some explanation on the subject.
MR. WILSONsaid that the origin of the Vote was the formation of military and other roads in the Highlands for public purposes. The hon. Member (Mr. Scully) seemed to forget the large sums which had been spent on the road to Holyhead and on the Menai Bridge, to facilitate communication with Ireland. The Vote was for the purpose of maintaining roads in the Highlands, which would not otherwise be kept up, and which were often useful for public purposes. Any new roads were made and kept up by the counties.
Vote agreed to.
(21.) 12,000 l., Bounties on Slaves.
SIR GEORGE PECHELLsaid, a recommendation had been made by the Committee for a strict blockade of Cuba, and the First Lord of the Admiralty had promised fine things; but having obtained a return of the force employed in those waters for the suppression of the Slave Trade, he (Sir G. Pechell) found there were only a few a small steamers sailing about in shallow waters only, and of no practical use in suppressing the traffic in slaves. He wished the right hon. Gentleman to state whether the present Captain General of Cuba was as sincere in his desire and as favourable to the suppression of the Slave Trade as reported? He had been informed that a cargo of slaves had been landed at the Moro Port at a time when the Commodore on the station was
1572
enjoying the hospitality of the Captain General. Seeing that we had secured the cordial co-operation of the Brazils, and that nothing was wanting but the same co-operation on the part of the Spanish Government, he did hope that the Government would see the necessity for vigorous effort to obtain that consideration. He wished to know whether there was any foundation for the report that great delay took place in handing over the bounty to captors of slavers? He had devoted himself to the subject of those bounties, and his earnest wish was to see them placed on an intelligible and just footing.
VISCOUNT PALMERSTONsaid, that his noble Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs was in constant communication with the Spanish Government on the subject of the Slave Trade in Cuba, and was exerting all the influence of our own Government with that of Spain to induce them to give the most stringent orders to the Captain General of that Colony for the suppression of that traffic. When he was asked to answer for the sincerity of the Captain General of Cuba, he could not do that. He could only answer for the sincerity of Her Majesty's Government, who were doing all they could to suppress the traffic.
MR. LABOUCHEREsaid, he wished to ask the noble Lord if that traffic had increased or diminished during the last year?
VISCOUNT PALMERSTONsaid, he thought the traffic of last year, as compared with that which used formerly to be carried on, had greatly diminished. If his right hon. Friend meant to institute a comparison between the last year and the year before, he was scarcely able to speak confidently on that point; he believed there had been a cargo or two more in the last year; but the present traffic in slaves was comparatively very small.
Vote agreed to, as were also the two following.
(22.) 68,500 l., Dues under Treaties of Reciprocity.
(23.) 17,850 l., Revising Barristers (England and Wales).
(24.) 3,800 l., Inspectors of Corn Returns.
MR. WISEsaid, every gentleman connected with the provinces must be aware what an immense amount of corn was sold without being included in any Returns. Those Returns as now made were delusive, and of very little advantage to the public,

1573
and he wished to ask whether the Board of Trade intended to adopt effective measures to get more correct and extended Returns.
MR. BOUVERIEsaid, he must admit that the present system of Returns was very unsatisfactory, much corn being sold without being returned, and a good deal being returned twice over. The Report of the House of Lords on the subject of Agricultural Statistics had, as had previously been stated, alluded to the matter, and one of the proposals contained in that Report was for making those returns more complete.
Vote agreed to, as were also the two following.
(25.) 3,600 l., Quarantine Arrangements.
(26.) 5,752 l., British Consulate Buildings, Constantinople.
(27.) 4,578 l., British Ambassador's Residences at Constantinople and Therapia.
MR. WISEsaid, he considered that the Vote required some explanation. The balance left after the Estimate last year was only 3,301 l., and he wished to know why it had been increased. He understood that it was originally calculated that the expense of the new house would be 30,000 l., but after that had been voted and expended various further sums were voted, till it amounted to no less than 86,650 l.; and he thought that something approaching 14,000 l., had been voted for furniture. However, it seemed useless to oppose that sort of Votes, for they seemed to pass as a matter of course, and he should rest satisfied with protesting, and expressing a hope that the present was the last Vote for the Embassy house at Constantinople. The Committee would remember the description of the disgusting state of the seamen's hospital at Constantinople by the late Lord Dudley Stuart, and he wished to know if it had been improved, and if the merchantmen paid tonnage towards the expense of the hospital?
COLONEL DUNNEsaid, that it was in 1839 that the Ambassador's house at Constantinople was burnt down, and every year since there had been some demand of money for that building.
MR. WILSONsaid, he well remembered Lord Dudley Stuart's account of the Hospital at Constantinople, and the readiness with which the Committee voted the money for a new one. An arrangement was made that before the Treasury acted the Foreign Office should arrange that all merchant shipping, foreign as well as British, should pay tonnage at Constantinople towards the support of the hospital.
1574
Since that time it had been represented, that the hospital was too small and an additional story was required, which accounted for the increase in the estimate.
MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, he wished to inquire how it was that the ambassador had two residences, when he used only to have one?
MR. STAFFORDsaid, that the summer residence had been given by the father of the present Sultan to the British embassy.
MR. WILSONsaid, he believed that this would be the last Vote of the same kind for the embassy houses. One of the houses had been burned down twice within a few years; and now it was thought fit, as a matter of prudence and economy, to engage workmen, whose special business it was to protect the building from fire.
Vote agreed to; as were also the following Votes.
(28.) 1,550 l., Building Courts of Law, Isle of Man.
(29.) 9,000 l., Public Records Repository, Iron Doors.
(30.) Motion made, and Question proposed—
"That a sum, not exceeding 90,000 l., be granted to Her Majesty, for the Purchase of a Site, and for the erection of a new Office for the Department of the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, in the year ending the 31st day of March, 1856."
MR. BELLsaid, the proposed Vote was the first instalment of a sum of 585,000 l. which appeared to be the total estimated cost of the contemplated new offices in Downing-street and Fludyer-street. He wished to know if the Government considered themselves bound by the plan adopted at the first short sitting of the Committee appointed to consider the matter, and before any detailed plan had been laid before them?
MR. APSLEY PELLATTsaid, he also wished to ask if the Government had considered a plan submitted to them by an independent architect? If adopted, it would require an increased outlay of fifty per cent., but it would give considerably more than double the amount of accommodation provided by the plan which had been adopted.
SIR WILLIAM MOLESWORTHsaid, that, in consequence of the very dilapidated state of the buildings in Downing Street, he had considered it his duty to request the architect to examine into the state of the public offices situated there. Acting upon the opinion of the architect, the Government

1575
had come to the conclusion that it was expedient to rebuild the whole of Downing Street, and plans had been prepared in the Office of the Board of Works for that purpose. The Foreign Office was at present in a very dilapidated and dangerous state, and required to be propped up in every direction. The plan which had been adopted was a general scheme for rebuilding the whole of Downing Street, and for providing new offices for the various public departments. The scheme referred to by the hon. Member for Southwark (Mr. A. Pellatt) was a scheme of a much larger description, and would cost a much larger sum than the hon. Gentleman seemed to think, without more completely answering the purpose of providing adequate accommodation for the public offices. He might state that the Committee to which reference had already been made had not pledged themselves to the plan laid before them, but had merely considered the quantity of land which it would be requisite to take for the purpose of rebuilding Downing Street.
MR. BANKESsaid, he thought that 90,000 l. was a larger sum than ought to be voted by the Committee, under existing circumstances, for such a purpose. It was true that the buildings occupied as the Foreign Office were in a very dilapidated condition, but they might be placed in tenantable repair for a far less amount than was now required. He was aware that the demand was made with reference to an extensive scheme for the erection of new official buildings, under which it was intended to provide magnificent apartments for the Cabinet Ministers, in which they might entertain foreign visitors and their friends. It was well known that Cabinet Ministers had generally very handsome houses of their own, which were thrown open most generously for the reception of their friends and of foreigners of distinction, and he thought it was desirable that that custom should be continued, instead of following the example of some Foreign States, and allotting to ministers magnificent apartments in the Public Offices.
SIR FRANCIS BARINGsaid, he would not object to that part of the Vote which was necessary to secure the ground, for he believed it would be requisite hereafter to erect considerable buildings which it was advisable should be on that spot. But though he did not object to the grant for the land, yet he had the strongest objection to grant the amount required for the buildings for the current year. He did
1576
not quite understand whether they were to be committed to the plan or not, but it was quite clear that if they began to build, it must be upon some plan, and they could not shift it afterwards. He also did not agree in the necessity for these State apartments. He had met many foreigners who thought that we ought to be proud of the simple manner in which we carried on the State business, and he had an old-fashioned notion of the same kind himself. He saw that there were to be additional buildings for the Board of Trade, but he thought that if the Council Office were looked sharper into, they might find rooms which were not constantly in use, and which might be appropriated by the Board of Trade. He was not much in favour of official houses, but he thought that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the First Lord of the Admiralty, and more particularly, the Minister of War, should have one, as telegraphic messages were coming every hour. He should like to have the plans adopted by the Government, and a Committee of that House to inquire into the necessity and expediency of the scheme. They were asked for 500,000 l., but he suspected it would be nearer 1,000,000 l. before they were done with it. All he asked was, that the building should be postponed until they should have an opportunity to examine and express an opinion upon the matter. He thought that they had a right to complain that the Estimates were delivered only on the 27th July, and they were called on so soon to vote them. If the hon. Gentleman would say that a Vote of 30,000 l. was necessary to obtain the land, he would not object to that amount, but he proposed to the Committee not to grant the additional 60,000 l.
VISCOUNT PALMERSTONsaid, that the building in which the business of the Foreign Office was at present conducted consisted of four small old houses in the worst possible condition. The floors were propped up, the houses were really in a very dangerous state, it was necessary to keep in the kitchens and cellars books which ought to be accessible in the upper rooms, and very great inconvenience was experienced every day in consequence of the dilapidated condition of the building. It was, therefore, a matter of emergency, that suitable accommodation should be provided for the Foreign Office. He believed also, that better accommodation was required by several other Public Offices. The right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Bankes) seemed to imagine that one object of the plan

1577
adopted by the Government was to provide magnificent State apartments for the Cabinet Ministers. No such plan was contemplated, but it was proposed that two rooms of considerable size should be built, which might be available when it was necessary for the Minister for Foreign Affairs or other Ministers, to entertain large parties at dinner. The right hon. Gentleman had intimated that Ministers could find room enough for these purposes in their own houses, but any one acquainted with the average size of London houses must know that few of them afforded accommodation for the reception of such a number of guests as must be entertained on the occasions to which he referred. Those rooms, it must be remembered, would also be available for other purposes connected with the transaction of public business. There was a good deal of weight in what the right hon. Member had said respecting the necessity for a full consideration of the plans to be adopted. He thought the plan proposed by his right hon. Friend (Sir F. Baring) was a good one, and would be substantially adopted; but, at the same time, when plans of considerable magnitude were to be carried out, it was right, and would be for the advantage of the Government to accept Parliamentary Partnership, and themselves have limited liability on account of those plans. He was ready to adopt the suggestion of his right hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth, with a slight modification—namely, that, in addition to the 30,000 l. for the purchase of the land, a sum of 10,000 l. should be voted to provide for such incidental repairs to the existing buildings as might be absolutely necessary. When Parliament met again a Committee could be appointed to whom the general plans would be submitted, and the Government would then have the benefit of sharing their responsibility with the House, both upon matters of taste and matters of expense. He would therefore propose to reduce the Vote to 40,000 l.
MR. BANKESsaid, he wished to explain that in the Estimates there was an item for State apartments for the use of all the Ministers on the first story, and the cost was put down at 95,000 l. The noble Lord was the only Minister who could require such accommodation, for no one had so many friends, but the Committee was well aware that no rooms were better filled or better provided than the ample space afforded by the noble Lord's own house.
Motion made, and Question put, and agreed to.
"That a sum, not exceeding 40,000 l., be granted to Her Majesty, for the Purchase of a Site, and for the Erection of a new Office for the Department of the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, in the year ending the 31st day of March, 1856."
The following Vote was then agreed to.
(31.) 9,000 l., Census Expenses (Ireland).
(32.) 52,500 l., Army and Navy Medals.
MR. STAFFORDsaid, he hoped that arrangements would be made for a speedy distribution of medals among the soldiers returned from the Crimea. He knew many cases in which soldiers had been obliged to return to their homes without receiving their medals. He would also ask how it could be that the 72,000 medals were charged in the estimate at 10 s. each, when
the intrinsic value of the silver in those medals did not exceed 4s. 6d. or 5s.
MR. WILSONsaid, he had no doubt the figures were correct, but would make inquiry.
VISCOUNT PALMERSTONsaid, he would make inquiries into the best means for a speedy distribution of medals.
CAPTAIN SCOBELLsaid, he found some medals charged for were for the Kafir war, now ended three years since. He thought it was a great pity that the grant of medals should be delayed so long that the boon lost its value. He also found 1,000 medals for distinguished services, which he assumed were connected with the new Order of Merit.
ADMIRAL WALCOTTsaid, the particular medals referred to were granted to soldiers and sailors for distinguished services.
Vote agreed to; as were also the following Votes:—
(33.) 68,131 l., United States Claimants.
(34.) 54,218 l., Townley's Escheat.
(35.) 17,000 l., British Seamen Abroad.
(36.) 3,000 l., National Gallery (Ireland).
(37.) 9,927 l., Metropolis Interment Acts.
MR. APSLEY PELLATTsaid, he felt bound to complain of the manner in which the Act had been carried out, whereby a large number of grave-yards in the east of London had been closed, while only seven new burial-grounds had been opened. The consequence was, that those in crowded districts which had not been closed had become literally gorged. He thought some explanation was required on this point.
MR. BLACKBURNsaid, he wished to know why it was that the country was

1579
called upon to pay for the working of an Act affecting the metropolis alone?
MR. WILSONsaid, that the object of the Government had been to close crowded metropolitan burial-grounds and provide the means of opening others. For that purpose rates were originally intended to be levied, but they had been given up, and now the Government were obliged from time to time to come to Parliament for the money which had been expended under the Act.
In reply to a question from Mr. I. BUTT,
VISCOUNT PALMERSTONsaid, that the inspectors whose salaries formed a portion of the Vote examined and reported upon the state of burial-grounds recommended to be closed, and also as to the applicability of such new ground as it was proposed should be devoted to the purposes of interment.
MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, he wished to point out that, though beneficial to the health of the neighbourhood, the closing of the burial-grounds was not always pecuniarily of advantage to parishes.
SIR JAMES ANDERSONsaid, he also must object to the whole country being taxed for expenses required in the improvement of a locality. What advantage was it to Scotland that a burial-ground in London should be closed?
VISCOUNT PALMERSTONsaid, he would remind the hon. Member that the locality itself was put to great expense to provide a new burial-ground. No doubt Scotch burial-grounds would have to be inspected before they were closed, and then the services of the inspectors would be apparent.
Vote agreed to; as was also
(38.) 5,000 l., Galleries of Art (Edinburgh).
(39.) 40,000 l., Cape of Good Hope.
MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, he objected to the Vote on the ground that the colonists ought to be left to take care of their own affairs.
SIR WILLIAM MOLESWORTHsaid, he was willing to admit that the Vote was an experiment for the purpose of trying whether by the expenditure of a comparatively small sum of money annually we might not be able to put an end to the Kafir wars and the great military expenditure in South Africa. He estimated that our military expenditure in that country amounted to between 400,000 l. and 500,000 l. a year; and, in addition to that, every now and then a Kafir war broke put which cost, upon the average
1580
of the last war, about 1,000,000 l. a year. Sir G. Grey, who had recommended the proposed plan, had formerly been Governor of New Zealand, where he had displayed great skill, tact, and ability, in dealing with the native tribes. He had been extremely successful there in inducing the natives to abandon their warlike pursuits, and to adopt habits of peaceful industry; and, having been appointed to the Governorship of the Cape of Good Hope, it was hoped that he might display equal skill in the management of the Kafir tribes, and might induce them also to abandon their warlike habits in favour of more peaceful occupations. Sir G. Grey had proceeded to the Eastern frontier of the Cape of Good Hope, where he had studied the habits of the Kafir tribes, and, after making himself acquainted with their habits, tastes, and feelings, he had sketched out the following plan. Sir G. Grey said in one of his despatches—
"The plan I propose to pursue with a view to the general adjustment of these questions is to attempt to gain an influence over all the tribes included between the present north-eastern boundary of this colony and Natal, by employing them upon public works which will tend to open up their country; by establishing institutions for the education of their children and the relief of their sick; by introducing among them institutions of a civil character suited to their present condition; and by these and other like means to attempt gradually to win them to civilisation and Christianity, and thus to change by degrees our at present unconquered, and apparently irreclaimable, foes into friends who may have common interests with ourselves."
He also added—
"To accomplish this will require a considerable immediate expenditure of money and some lengthened period of time; but I feel little doubt that, within eight or ten years from the present date, the work might be so far accomplished that no further assistance would be required from any extraneous source, and that Great Britain might look to be relieved shortly, to a great extent, from all further care and expense connected with this colony. In the meantime it is to the British Parliament alone that assistance can be looked for to carry out such a plan. Its cost, I estimate, will be for the present 45,000 l. per annum, of which 40,000 l. would require to be furnished by Great Britain."
When it was remembered that 40,000 l. was only 4 per cent upon the expenditure of a single year of Kafir war, and that it was but one-tenth of what we had to pay every year for the military expenses of the Cape of Good Hope, he thought that the Committee ought to agree to the proposed Vote. After the most careful and deliberate consideration which he could give to the subject, he believed this to be

1581
an experiment which was well worth trying.
MR. HINDLEYsaid, he had no objection to test the experiment, but he had no hope of its success, unless Englishmen in that part of the country would be honest. It was vain to talk of bringing the Kafirs to civilisation and Christianity when we allowed our colonists to take possession of the land of the natives.
MR. BLACKBURNsaid, he was afraid that the proposed Vote would be but the commencement of a perpetual annual charge.
SIR WILLIAM MOLESWORTHsaid, that the Vote now under consideration was not the commencement of a new system, for, unfortunately, we had long been engaged in protecting the country against the Kafirs.
MR. R. PHILLIMOREsaid, he regarded the proposition as a wise, safe, and Christianlike experiment. If he thought that he was binding himself to vote 40,00 l. a year, he might think twice before he gave his consent; but he was persuaded, after the speech of his right hon. Friend the Secretary for the Colonies, that it was a reasonable Vote.
MR. HINDLEYsaid, he wished to know whether the colonists were to be protected if they went into the Kafir country and took possession of the natives' land?
SIR WILLIAM MOLESWORTH: Certainly not; because, if they go into the Kafir country and take possession of the natives' land, they would be out of the British territory.
MR. ALCOCKsaid, he remembered that the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for the Colonies, in a most able speech which he made about seven years ago, advocated the principle of the Colonies being self-supporting, and he much regretted that the first step taken by that right hon. Gentleman, after accepting his present position, should be to propose a Vote like the present.
MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, that the cost of our American colonies previous to the declaration of independence had been only 64,000 l. per annum, and he saw no reason why the colonists at the Cape should not he called upon to pay the expenses connected with their own maintenance.
MR. OTWAYsaid, he rose to move that the Chairman report progress, in order that he might have an opportunity of calling the attention of the Committee to a point which concerned every hon.
1582
Member who was anxious to take part in the discussion upon the Estimates. A Vote had been proposed having reference to the National Gallery, and had been postponed. It had been his intention to make some observations with regard to that Vote, and he had communicated that intention to the hon. Gentleman the Secretary of the Treasury, and not for the first time, but certainly for the last, he had been deceived by the statement of that hon. Gentleman as to the course which he intended to pursue. He had that morning told the Secretary to the Treasury that it was his intention to object to a certain sum of money in the Vote for the National Gallery, and that hon. Gentleman then informed him that that Vote would be brought forward the first thing in the evening, and in consequence of that statement he had left the House, and then the Vote had been quietly smuggled through. He had thus for the time been deprived of the opportunity of making the remarks which he had intended to make, and, therefore, he was compelled to defer them until the Report was brought up; but he thought that it was necessary to make these remarks, in order that no other hon. Member might be deceived, as he had been, by the statements of the Secretary of the Treasury.
MR. WILSONsaid, that the hon. Member had, as was not seldom the case, been somewhat rash in bringing forward a charge against him. It was perfectly true that he had told the hon. Gentleman that it was his intention to bring on the Vote connected with the National Gallery the first thing at the evening sitting, and that Vote had been brought forward at six o'clock when the hon. Member might have objected to it if he had been in his place.
MR. OTWAYcould only say that he had entered the House at a few minutes after six o'clock, and had not quitted his place; and that Vote must have been proposed in so quiet a tone that no one had heard it.
MR. WILSONsaid, that, on the contrary, the Vote had attracted particular attention, and one or two hon. Members had risen in their places and asked what Vote was being taken, and he himself had answered their inquiries.
Motion withdrawn; Vote agreed to, as was also—
(40.) 5,800 l., Pall Mall to Green Park Continuation.
(41.) 3,000 l. Inverness Bridge.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (in reply to Mr. W. Williams)said, that some years ago the old bridge at Inverness was destroyed by an extraordinary flood, which was supposed to have been caused by works at a lock for which the Government were considered partly responsible. The matter was fully considered at the time, and the result was that an agreement was come to that one-half the expense of building a new bridge should be borne by the public, and one-half by the counties in the neighbourhood of Inverness. A Bill was introduced into Parliament giving effect to that agreement, and the necessary money was voted. In consequence, however, of unforeseen difficulties in the construction of the bridge, the estimate had been exceeded, and it would be only fair that half the excess of 6,000 l. should be borne by the public.
MR. F. SCULLYsaid, he was surprised that the Committee could go on voting money year after year for roads and bridges in Scotland, while in England and Ireland the counties were called on to pay for such works. He should certainly move that the Vote be disallowed.
MR. BLACKBURNsaid, he did not defend the Vote, except on the consideration that it was only carrying out an arrangement which had been entered into some time since. He should not originally have been in favour of that expenditure.
MR. I. BUTTsaid, it was not right to say they had never had national assistance in Ireland towards making roads. If the hon. Member divided the Committee, he should feel bound to support the Vote.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, he thought the Committee ought to take into consideration the peculiar difficulty of maintaining roads in a mountainous country. For instance, the local resources of the Alps would be entirely insufficient to support a road over the Simplon, and it required all the resources of the French Empire to make and maintain one. He would also remind the Committee that the population of the Highlands of Scotland being very thin, and the surface of the country very unequal, it came to this, that bridges, costing a great deal of money, had to be erected in very poor districts; some extraneous assistance, therefore, was not unnaturally required for the purpose.
MR. OTWAYsaid, he hoped that his hon. Friend (Mr. F. Scully) would not
1584
divide the Committee on the Vote, but that the Government would consent to devote a portion of the 14,000 l. which had been asked for for Scotch fisheries to the completion of the bridge. Before he sat down he wished to state, in reference to what had passed that evening that the observations which he had made had been founded upon erroneous information, and he was therefore anxious to withdraw them. At the same time, be might say that he had taken his seat in the House at half-past six o'clock, and that, as he had never moved from his place during the evening, it appeared to him unaccountable how the Vote could have passed without his knowledge.
MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, he objected to the Vote, and wished the Committee to compare the present application from Scotland with the case of South Wales, where, last winter, some eighty or ninety bridges had been washed away by the floods, and yet not a single sixpence had been asked of the country at large to defray the expense of their restoration. He thought the Committee ought to set its face against all grants for local purposes.
MR. WILSONsaid, he hoped that his hon. Friend would not divide the Committee. The Committee ought to think themselves well off in not having to pay the whole of the expense of the bridge instead of a part, inasmuch as the accident had been caused by certain works executed by the Government.
MR. DUNCANsaid, it was a question whether, if the case had gone into a Court of Law, the Government would not have had to pay every shilling of the expense for rebuilding the bridge.
MR. F. SCULLYsaid, that after what had taken place, he would not divide the Committee upon the Vote.
Vote agreed to.
(42.) 11,000 l., Buckingham House, Pall Mall.
MR. BANKESsaid, that Buckingham House stood upon one of the best sites in the metropolis, and he considered that it was incurring a very great expense and a consequent loss to the public to select such a situation for a Public Office. He wished to know in what manner it was proposed to adapt Buckingham House to the public service, and whether it was intended to be permanently used as a Public Office?
VISCOUNT PALMERSTONsaid, the right hon. Gentleman was aware that several of the Ordnance Departments had

1585
recently been brought under the immediate direction of the Secretary of State for War. Every one would admit that business was much more efficiently and rapidly conducted when the different departments, under the control of the same chief, were brought under his immediate observation, and it was with the view of concentrating the departments that the remaining term of the lease of Buckingham House had been purchased. He was not quite certain what branches of the Ordnance Department might be transferred to Buckingham House, but he knew that great inconvenience had resulted from some important branches of that department having been continued at Woolwich, in consequence of the impossibility of providing accommodation for them in London. It was quite true, as the right hon. Gentleman had said, that Buckingham House, which was to be converted into Public Offices, occupied a situation where private residences were in great request, and that a building for such Offices might have been obtained at less expense in some other part of London; but it must be recollected that nothing was more conducive to the efficiency of the public service than that the branches of the various departments should be in the closest possible proximity to the chiefs of those departments, and that Buckingham House was within a short distance of the Ordnance Office.
MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, as Buckingham House was Crown property, he wished to know what was the amount of ground-rent paid, and what period of the lease was unexpired?
MR. WILSONsaid, he believed that thirty years of the Crown lease were yet unexpired, but was not aware what was the amount of the ground-rent.
In reply to Colonel DUNNE,
MR. MONSELLsaid, that one of the departments which it was intended to remove from Woolwich was that of the Director General of Artillery.
COLONEL DUNNEsaid, it was his opinion that the Director General of Artillery ought to remain at Woolwich.
Vote agreed to; as was also
(43.) 3,718 l., Windsor Improvements.
(44.) 10,000 l., Arctic Discoveries (Rewards.)
ADMIRAL WALCOTTsaid, as a Member of the Committee which had recommended the Vote, he wished to say they were unanimously of opinion that the
1586
greatest skill and zeal had been displayed by Captain M'Clure, and that the officers; and crew under his command deserved the highest credit for the courage and fortitude with which they had faced the dangers and endured the privations they had had to encounter. The Committee had recommended that 5,000 l. should be granted to Captain M'Clure, and that 5,000 l. should be distributed among the officers and crew of the ship under his command. He wished, also, to express the sympathy and condolence of the Committee with those whose relatives and friends had been lost in the expedition under the command of the high-souled Sir John Franklyn. The Committee entertained a very high opinion of the manner in which all the officers and men had discharged their duties during a service of great danger and severe privation, and they had recommended that a medal should be granted to each officer and man engaged in the expeditions. He regretted that no estimate was proposed for that purpose, and wished to know why the recommendation of the Committee had not been adopted?
MR. OTWAYsaid, he would suggest, in order to make the matter clear, that the Vote should be taken in the following form:—5,000 l. to Captain M'Clure, and 5,000 l. more to be distributed by the Board of Admiralty among the other officers and the crew of Her Majesty's ship Investigator.
CAPTAIN SCOBELLsaid, it might be asked why so large a sum was awarded by the Committee to Captain M'Clure. It should be remembered, however, that that distinguished officer had exhibited the highest qualities, not amid the temporary excitement of a battle-field, but throughout the whole four years during which he and his companions were in the ice. By his indomitable bravery and consummate seamanship in penetrating as far as Percy Bay, he had achieved one of the most extraordinary enterprises that could ever be attempted in the Arctic Seas; and the people of England would not grudge him the reward that was now to be offered to him for his eminent exertions, He had felt that the services of Captain Collinson and Captain Kellett were beyond all praise; but had the Committee entered upon their claims, it would have been impossible to know where to stop, as there were many others whose services were almost equally entitled to recognition. The Committee, therefore, had decided upon recommending a reward only in the case

1587
of the actual discoverer of the north-west passage.
MR. I. BUTTsaid, that the Committee had unanimously decided that Captain M'Clure was deserving of the proposed reward, because to him belonged the distinguished honour of discovering the northwest passage. It was impossible to eulogise too highly the heroic daring, the extraordinary skill, and the undaunted resolution shown by that gallant officer in taking up the enterprise at the point where Sir Edward Parry and other explorers had left it, and in bringing it to a successful completion. His wonderful efforts in navigating his ship round the western coast of Behring's-land, and in braving the dangers of a rocky ironbound coast on the one hand, and the fearful perils of the ice on the other, were altogether unparalleled; and nothing had ever more impressed his (Mr. Butt's) imagination or riveted his interest than the details of that remarkble achievement. On entering Parry's Sound, Captain M'Clure came to the conclusion that the land lying to the westward was an island, and by resolutely acting upon that opinion, and sailing round that island, he ultimately set at rest that long uncertain question—the existence of a north-west passage.
MR. F. SCULLYsaid, he wished to inquire why Captain M'Clure was not to receive the sum of 20,000 l. originally offered for the discovery of a north-west passage, instead of only 5,000 l.?
MR. I. BUTTsaid, that the sum of 20,000 l. was offered before any part of this passage was discovered, and the persons entitled to it were not only required to discover the passage, but to bring a ship through. Captain M'Clure had not brought his vessel through, but he had demonstrated that the passage was impracticable. The sum of 5,000 l. was not intended as an adequate recompense for his services, but merely as some acknowledgment by the nation of their value.
ADMIRAL WALCOTTsaid, he wished to explain that 5,000 l. had been voted to Sir Edward Parry, and 5,000 l. to Sir John Ross; and the present Vote of l0,000 l. therefore, exhausted the entire 20,000 l. which had been alluded to.
MR. HEYWOODsaid, he would take that opportunity of asking why a grant of 1,000 l. to the Royal Society for scientific objects had been recently withdrawn by the Government?
VISCOUNT PALMERSTONreplied, that
1588
a few years ago the grant was asked for by the Royal Society as a temporary assistance for a specific purpose. Those who applied for it represented that it was wanted for a particular year, and that, if l,000 l. were advanced, probably the whole of that amount would not be required, in which case the remainder would be returned. An advance of 1,000 l. was accordingly made from a fund not strictly applicable for such an object, but intended for a charitable purpose. The grant was, however, given a second time, and in the third year the Society applied for another l,000 l.., "as usual." He felt obliged to reply that he did not consider it a proper application of the fund in question, and that he must decline to continue it. No doubt, however, a grant of that sort for scientific purposes would be a very fitting one for Parliament to take into its consideration.
Vote agreed to.
(45.) 800 l., Monument to Sir John Franklyn.
SIR CHARLES WOODsaid, that the proposed Vote was one of a very melancholy description. It was unnecessary for him to say anything in praise of the exertions of Sir John Franklyn in the cause of Arctic discovery, and now that his fate and that of his brave companions had become, unfortunately, too certain, there was nothing left for the country to do but to testify its sense of their services by erecting some suitable monument to their memory. After consultation with Lord Ellesmere, and others, it had been determined to intrust the execution of it to Mr. Westmacott, but, as that gentleman had been absent in Paris, it was only within the last few days that his design had been received. It was proposed that the monument should be erected at Greenwich, where already there was a memorial erected to the memory of the gallant Lieutenant Bellot, who had met with an early death in the same cause. It was there, too—and this had weighed very much with the Government in selecting the site—that another great Arctic discoverer, Sir Edward Parry, had resided as Lieutenant Governor of the Hospital until very lately, when he had fallen a victim to a disease contracted in the course of his numerous and lengthened voyages. It was proposed that on the monument to be erected should be inscribed the names of Sir Edward Parry, and of all the officers and men who had fallen victims in that service.
Vote agreed to

SUPPLY—SUPPLEMENTARY NAVAL ESTIMATE.
(46.) 10,000 l., Wages to Artificers, &c., in Her Majesty's Establishments at Home.
SIR CHARLES WOOD: Mr. FitzRoy, I now beg to move the Supplementary Naval Estimate for the year 1855ndash;56 (amounting to 1,141,168 l.) With one great exception, this Supplementary Estimate consists of additions to the different heads of expenditure, entirely caused by the demands of the war in which we are at present engaged. The first item, which is for the wages of artificers in Her Majesty's establishments at home, is rendered necessary by the increased drain on the stock of our dockyards in this country; and, the second item, which is classed under the head of wages to artificers abroad, is taken for the purpose of enabling us to establish a small dockyard at Constantinople, where our ships may be repaired without being obliged to go on to Malta. In the third Vote the largest items are for copper and hemp. Formerly our largest supply of this latter article was derived from Russia, but since the war other sources have been opened to us which promise to be exceedingly abundant, and which hereafter, I have little doubt, may compete with Russia. The Italian spring seed has, I believe, turned out very favourably, and a considerable supply from Hungary has lately been offered to us. There is a large item under the head of what are called standing contracts—for the supply of ordinary articles used in fitting out ships. With so large a fleet at sea the demand for anchors and things of that sort has been, of course, greatly increased; indeed, in twelve great articles which come under the head of "standing contracts" the expenditure for the last three months is higher than it was for the six months ending September last. There is a small sum for medical stores, which, perhaps, may not all be wanted, but which we have thought better to ask for in order to be prepared for all the wants which may arise; and there is also a small sum for rewards to seamen for the destruction of four Chinese pirates and of a Russian ship of war. The largest item of expenditure is for the purpose of enabling us to build an additional number of gunboats. When the war commenced, I believe we had not a single vessel of this description, but the right hon. Gentleman (Sir J. Graham) who preceded me, in the last year built six gunboats, which have been of the greatest possible service in the
1590
Black Sea and in the Sea of Azoff, particularly at the capture of Kertch. I had the greatest pleasure the other day in promoting two officers who had distinguished themselves in command of these boats in that quarter. Other vessels of the same description have been despatched to the Baltic, and one of them has already enabled a very deserving mate to earn his promotion. But, notwithstanding the progress we have made in building vessels of this description, their number is still very inadequate, and it is proposed to double that number at least, as soon as possible; in fact, I do not think we can have too many of them. The nature of the seas in which our naval warfare is being carried on requires that we should have a large number of vessels of small draught, but capable of carrying large guns; indeed, some naval officers say, that in all future naval wars gunboats will take a much more prominent position than has hitherto been the case. The demand, however, at present is for, boats of this description; we are building them as fast as we can, and it is for the purpose of constructing these boats and for their machinery that we now propose to take a sum of 526,000 l.
MR. FRENCHsaid, he wished to know why the resources of science were not employed to a greater extent in the present war? He should like to receive further information than had already been given as to the intentions of the Government respecting the proposals of the Earl of Dundonald. The plans of that gallant Nobleman were not new; more than forty years ago they were submitted to the scrutiny of Lord Exmouth and Lord Keith, who were impressed with a conviction of the terrific efficiency of the plans, but suggested that for the sake of the human race they should remain unknown. Those plans had slept for forty years, and were only brought forward now when the position of the country required every man's aid. The Government had referred those plans to a joint Commission composed of several scientific men and two admirals. Although a considerable time had now elapsed, no answer had yet been returned to the noble and gallant Earl. It had been said that, however ingenious the plans, there existed doubts as to the expediency of carrying them into effect. Lately those plans had been submitted to Sir Charles Napier, who pledged his professional reputation that Lord Dundonald could by them accomplish all he had undertaken to do. The noble

1591
and gallant Earl had undertaken, if permitted to carry out his plans, that, within a month of his arrival in the Baltic, every Russian fort should be demolished, and the entire expense should be less than 200,000 l. The right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Admiralty appeared to think the noble Lord's plans were impracticable, but it had been well observed by a leading journal that the life of that noble Lord had been spent in executing what the right hon. Gentleman would consider to be impossibilities. He (Mr. French) believed the country would not have begrudged an additional 200,000 l. to carry out those plans, and if the Government did not avail itself of all the scientific discoveries of the age, the country would not fail to doubt its sincerity in the conduct of the war.
SIR GEORGE PECHELLsaid, he thought if the plans of Lord Dundonald were so tremendous as they were stated to be, the only reason why they were not adopted must be that they were more dangerous to the parties employing them than to the enemy against whom they were used. With respect to the particular Vote before the Committee, he could only say he was glad to find that the Government was providing a sufficient fleet of gunboats, for there was little doubt but that vessels of that class with steam power would hereafter play conspicuous parts in war. When the House was discussing the question of the limitation of the naval power of Russia by restricting her to so many line-of-battle ships and frigates, it had not occurred to any one that Russia might, under these circumstances, create a fleet of small vessels of the gunboat class, which would be sufficient to enable her to carry out her daring projects. His only fear was on account of the mortar vessels we had sent out, each of which, he imagined, would require a larger vessel to attend on her. It must be remembered that the Russian force of gunboats at Cronstadt was fully equal to our own, and therefore the admirals in the Baltic must be on their guard against any surprises which might be attempted by vessels of that class. Another subject which inspired him with some anxiety was the Russian squadron in the Pacific. The House was aware that last year we had failed in reaching a portion of that squadron, and he believed that now there were in the Pacific, under Russian colours, six ships and one steamer. These vessels had all kept together, and it was not impossible that,
1592
evading our Pacific squadrons, they might some day appear in the Channel, or even make a descent upon the town which he (Sir G. Pechell) represented, and, after doing as much damage as possible, take refuge in the Scheldt. He thought it right to express these views, but felt bound at the same time to state his belief that the Admiralty had done its duty in the present war, and the hon. and gallant Member for Gloucester (Admiral Berkeley) especially had merited for his services in manning the navy, the honours with which his Sovereign had recently distinguished him.
CAPTAIN SCOBELLsaid, that as they were called upon to vote the large sum of 1,141,168 l. for the purposes of the navy, he considered that it was a fitting opportunity to make a few observations upon the conduct of the war as respected the employment of the navy. They were engaged in a great contest, in conjunction with an ally who could bring a much larger number of troops into the field than this country, but our success depended mainly upon possessing command of the sea. The most important question, therefore was, whether they had the right ships in the right places. In the Baltic we had sixty-one English vessels, and in the Black Sea seventy-three, besides the French and Turkish fleets, while the fleet of Russia in the Black Sea had been very considerably reduced in number. The great preponderance of naval power, therefore, was upon the side of the allies. The navigation of the Baltic, as he could speak from his own experience, was full of danger, especially in the autumn, and what was wanted there was a number of small vessels of war, capable, from their light draught, of moving about in places where it would be dangerous for large ships to venture. The course, however, which, had been taken was to send thither some of the largest and most magnificent line-of-battle ships in the world. In this respect, therefore, they would seem to have gone helter-skelter into the war. Floating batteries had not been sent out, although they might have proved formidable if they could have been got into proper positions, because there was some doubt whether they would float or not. An instance of what might be done by vessels of light draught had been afforded by the recent operations in the Sea of Azoff; but, although those operations had been so successful, they had not been seconded by attacks upon the forts at the mouth of the Danube, or upon Odessa

1593
or Perekop, commercial ports of great importance, where there were probably large stores of grain. Nothing, indeed, had been done upon any part of that coast, though the results would probably have justified the attempt, and have proved equally, if not more advantageous than the operations in the Sea of Azoff. In the course of the present war reference had been made more than once to Lord Dundonald's plan. He was not going to dwell upon that subject, but he would take the opportunity of saying that he had known that noble Lord when in the service, and, so far from being a rash man, he was one of the coolest officers—while he possessed what was termed dash—that he had known. During the operations of the last war he had never moved but with consummate judgment, had conducted himself with great bravery, and had accomplished the services required of him with less loss than almost any other officer. The Government ought not to be scrupulous as to the means offered them of conducting the operations of the war successfully, and Lord Dundonald had stated that the adoption of his plan would save life, and that the operations of the attacking party might be conducted with the most perfect safety. A distinguished officer, high in the service, had expressed his opinion that the plan of Lord Dundonald, if adopted, could not fail of success. He wished particularly to call the attention of the Committee to the essential services performed in the Sea of Azoff, by the Nancy raft, which was composed of a few spars fastened together, having guns mounted upon it, and which from its light draught had been able to reach places which were accessible to no ship of war. He had received a letter from a gallant Officer suggesting the employment in the Baltic of a number of such rafts, mounted with guns, about 100 of which could be constructed for the sum expended on the construction of a large gunboat. They could be prepared within three weeks of the present time, whereas gunboats, unless nearly completed, could not perform any essential service during the present season. They would be difficult either to sink or burn, nor could they be easily hit. Such a description of floating battery could obtain access to any place on the coast which it was determined to attack, and from its perfectly horizontal fire the balls would not ricochet. Such a plan seemed highly deserving
1594
of consideration. He was very glad to observe that some of the transports were at length coming home, because he thought that it was necessary, even if they came home empty, that they should be constantly working backwards and forwards with something like the regularity of the packet service. For some time we had been giving as much as 50 s. per ton per month for the use of those transports, and he believed that in another year we should have paid about as much as would have bought the whole of them. In conclusion, he would beg to urge the advisability of giving sailors a bounty, which would be the only effectual means of securing really good men. He gave great credit to the senior Naval Lord of the Admiralty, because he had done much, and the greater portion of it well.
MR. LINDSAYsaid, he was glad to hear that it was intended to continue the construction of gunboats; he should very much like to have a pledge from the Government that they would cease to spend more money in the building of enormous vessels, which were nearly useless in modern warfare. He wished to know what had been the cost to the country of the floating batteries, when it might be expected that those batteries would proceed to sea, and whether it was really and seriously supposed by the Admiralty that they would be effective for the purpose for which they had been devised? He wished to inquire also, perceiving the large items which were set down in the subsequent Vote for the steam factory and the purchase of house and premises at Constantinople, whether it was intended to have a permanent establishment there?
MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, he did not intend to make any comment upon the proposed Vote, because the country was in such a position that it must place necessarily very great reliance upon the Board of Admiralty. The navy had never disappointed the country, and the people naturally looked up to it for the accomplishment of important measures. He hoped, therefore, that some scheme was now in embryo which would redound to the honour and credit of that important arm of the service. He would point out, at the same time, that there was a strong feeling throughout the country in favour of testing the plan of Lord Dundonald.
ADMIRAL BERKELEYsaid, he must

1595
beg to thank his hon. and gallant Friends the Member for Bath (Captain Scobell), and the hon. and gallant Member for Brighton (Sir G. Pechell), for the compliment which they had paid him, which was extremely gratifying from brother officers; and he could assure the hon. Member below the gangway (Mr. Lindsay) that if upon any former occasion he had been betrayed into warmth of expression, the hon. Member must attribute it to himself for having accused him (Admiral Berkeley) of the grossest incapacity. As regarded the building of large ships, he could only say that, unless they had been built, gunboats could not have penetrated into seas containing large fleets of the enemy; and he might also mention that those vessels which had done such good service in the Sea of Azoff had been built by the direction of the right hon. Baronet the late First Lord of the Admiralty.
Vote agreed to, as was also
(47.) 3,00 l. Wages to Artificers, &c., in Her Majesty's Establishments Abroad.
(48.) 1,063,655 l. Naval Stores, &c., for the Building and Repair of Ships, &c.
SIR GEORGE TYLERsaid, he wished to know if the right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Admiralty considered the floating batteries which had been constructed to be efficient for the purpose for which they had been built, because if they were so, they might, he thought, be sent to places where they would prove of greater utility than they were at present?
ADMIRAL WALCOTTsaid, he would also like to know what had been the cost of those batteries?
SIR CHARLES WOODsaid, that the cost had been about 50,000 l. a piece. As regarded their efficiency, that question was not so easy to answer. He could only say that the project of constructing them had originated with the French Government, and also that, as regarded their power of resistance to shot, the experiments which had been tried had given a satisfactory result. He had no doubt that in shoal water they would be found to answer perfectly well, but whether they would do so in deep water was a question which he was unable to decide.
MR. OTWAYsaid, he thought that some assurance ought to be given by the Government as to the class of vessels which they intended to construct. A very large ship, the Marlborough, had that day been launched, or rather an attempt to launch
1596
her had been made, and, in his opinion, if the labour which had been employed upon that ship had been employed upon vessels of a different description, that labour would have been much better bestowed.
Vote agreed to.
(49.) 61,503 l. New Works Improvements and Repairs in the Yards, &c.
SIR CHARLES WOODsaid, that the object of purchasing the premises at Constantinople was to save the public money, and also to centralise the naval establishments in that part of the world, which were at present scattered. At present the country was at the expense of hiring buildings, and if the purchase of those buildings were effected, they could, it was estimated, be sold without loss when they were no longer required.
MR. STAFFORDsaid, he thought that there would have been a saving of expense if those premises had been purchased at an earlier period. He hoped that among them a coaling place was included.
In answer to Sir WILLIAM JOLLIFFE.
SIR CHARLES WOODsaid, that there was no intention to have a permanent dockyard or naval establishment at Constantinople, although so long as our ships were employed in the Black Sea it was, of course, necessary to provide on the spot the means of repairing them.
MR. LINDSAYsaid, he should be glad if the right hon. Gentleman the First Lord of the Admiralty would afford them any information relative to the attempt to launch the Marlborough that day which had been stated to have been unsuccessful, and, if so, whether that vessel had sustained any considerable damage? He would also be glad to know if it was not the intention of the Government to employ their artificers and the funds at their command upon vessels more adapted to the requirements of the war?
SIR CHARLES WOODsaid, it was true that the Marlborough, after having got part of the way into the sea, had stopped short and could be moved no further. He could not account for what had occurred, but since he had been in the House a telegraphic despatch had been received stating that the tide had reached its lowest point, and that the vessel did not appear to have been injured or to have strained herself in the slightest degree. Upon the other point alluded to by the hon. Gentleman, they must remember that they ought not to confine their view wholly to the demand for small vessels. It was indispensably

1597
necessary to have ships of a size which would enable them to cope with those possessed by the enemy. Such ships as the Twelve Apostles could not be dealt with except by ships of equal size, and there must be a reserve force of large ships to meet a possible attack by the enemy, while the other operations of war were executed by those smaller vessels.
Mr. OTWAYsaid, that on reference to the Navy List it would be seen that we had five line-of-battle ships to one possessed by Russia, and the latter were all sailing vessels, while we had something like twenty-seven steam men-of-war. Now, at the moment when a particular class of vessel was necessary to carry on the war the right hon. Gentleman put the artificers of the dockyard on the construction of large vessels not adapted for the purpose required.
Vote agreed to.
(50.) 2,000 l. Medicines and Medical Stores.
MR. STAFFORDsaid, he wished to ask whether there was any truth in the report that the Government were about to establish a civil naval hospital somewhere in the Bosphorus? He should be glad to see some such statistics of the hospital at Therapia as had been furnished to the House relative to the hospital on the other side of the Bosphorus. The position of the hospital at Therapia had been, and was still, he believed, very unsatisfactory; but it would be well if some returns could be furnished giving the proportion of deaths to cures there, with any other information that could be given.
SIR CHARLES WOODsaid, he would inquire whether any such statistical accounts as those desired by the hon. Gentleman could be produced. He had not the least objection to furnish any such accounts.
Vote agreed to; as was also
(51.) 1,000 l., Miscellaneous Services.
(52.) 1,584,803 l., Transport Service.
SIR CHARLES WOODsaid, the Vote new before the Committee was certainly one of a very large amount, but the reason of the increase was mainly to be found in the additional services they had been called upon to perform. Since the passing of the last Estimates the Government had, under various arrangements with our allies, undertaken to convey troops, horses, and stores to an extent far beyond what was then contemplated. The Committee was aware that a treaty had been entered into with Sardinia, by which we had engaged
1598
to convey the Sardinian troops to the Black Sea, and to provide a passage for such reinforcements as were required. That service had been satisfactorily completed, and the communications had been kept up. In like manner they had received from their ally the Emperor of the French a proposal which was fair and reasonable enough. It was said by the French Government—
"We are a military nation; we have men whom we are willing to send to the Crimea. You, on the other hand, are a great naval nation, and if we send troops, horses, and stores, we ask your assistance to convey them."
That was a most liberal offer, and one to which Her Majesty's Government at once acceded. As soon as the demand was made they conveyed in about a fortnight 10,000 French troops to the Crimea, and they had since been aiding our allies to a large extent, they having also done a great deal for themselves in that way. The Government had, moreover, supplied the means of moving upwards of 40,000 of the Turkish army from Varna to Eupatoria. On a former occasion he had stated that something like 2,500 horses had been so conveyed, but this was far below the mark, for he had since received an official document from which it appeared that the actual number of horses transported was 11,000 and of that large number only one was lost in the transit. He mentioned that fact because it was most creditable to the officers on the spot who had been charged with the embarkation and the landing. Since that time numerous transports had been engaged in the conveyance of the Turkish Contingent, and the other day the French Government, being desirous to send a considerable reinforcement to their army in the Crimea, Her Majesty's Government were enabled to announce to them that all the transport vessels they required would be ready at the time they desired. In his opinion it would be the worst economy in the world not to have always in readiness ample means for the conveyance of horses, guns, stores, and men to the seat of war. The total number of men removed in transports since the beginning of the war was very much larger than hon. Members would suppose. Since the commencement of the war there had been removed from one place to another 246,000 English, French, Sardinian, and Turkish troops, and 32,000 horses, besides guns and stores. It had been found necessary in the course of the present year to reconstitute the Transport Board,

1599
and though some confusion had been caused in the first instance by the transference of the duties of one department to another in the middle of the operations of the war, he was glad to state that the business of the Transport Board was now conducted with much greater regularity and order. The arrangements which had been made by the Government bid fair to reduce to a considerable extent the expense of the transport service. According to the reports which had been received, there had not been that unity of control at the seat of war that there ought to have been; but his noble Friend the Secretary of State for the War Department had now sent out an Admiral to Balaklava who would have the whole of the transport service placed under his control. He believed himself that the first step in the way of improving the transport service was to place it under the control of one supreme authority, and he had been confirmed in that opinion by the reports of Sir John M'Neill, and of other gentlemen who had recently left the Crimea.
MR. H. BROWNsaid, he wished to call the attention of the Committee to the reckless manner in which the public money was expended in that particular branch of the service. Some time ago a complaint was made that a large steamship had been loaded by three different departments, acting in no concert whatever, and that when she was in the Thames she had to be surveyed in order to decide whether she was seaworthy, and fit to proceed to sea. That vessel was the Candia, and it appeared from the Government returns that since the 26th of December she had cost the State no less than 25,000 l. But the transport service would always continue to be a source of great expense and disappointment to the country unless a different principle were introduced into the mode in which it was conducted. The real root of the evil was that we paid for time instead of for service, whereas the French acted on a system entirely different, and had consequently their transport service performed in a manner much superior. If such a system were adopted, we should find that goods were delivered at their proper destinations in time for the purposes for which they were wanted, and without any confusion between Balaklava and Constantinople. The French transports were taken up in the same manner as our emigration vessels, for the service to be performed, and they, besides, offered a bounty to the captain as well as the owner for making
1600
the passage in a certain number of days. The right hon. Baronet the First Lord of the Admiralty boasted that 246,000 men had been conveyed to the Crimea, but had he taken the trouble to ascertain the cost per man of transporting that number of troops a distance of 3,000 miles? He (Mr. Brown) believed that the money voted by Parliament for the transport service would have taken the same number of men, together with stores and ammunition, to Australia and back again twice, according to the scale laid down by the Emigration Commissioners. Thus there was nothing to boast of in the manner in which the transport service had been conducted. On the contrary, a great want of arrangement and management had been displayed, and it was seldom known at the right time when a ship would be required, and when her cargo would be placed on board. Some short time ago a vessel sailed from Liverpool with three officers, seventeen men, and some officers' horses belonging to a regiment which had been shipped in other vessels, and the total cost of transporting them to the Crimea amounted to no less a sum than 5,456 l. That was only one among numerous instances in which gross mismanagement had been displayed. He acknowledged that the officer at the head of the service stood pre-eminently high in the public service, but, however good a man he might be, it was impossible for him to make a bad system work well. For his own part, he would rather have a bad man with a good system than a bad system with a good man. He could assure the right hon. Baronet that great discontent existed in the country with regard to the management of the transport service. The right hon. Baronet at the head of the Admiralty had stated, at an early period of the Session, that the complaints which were made against that service were unfounded, and asked hon. Members to mention particular cases of mismanagement, when the hon. Member for Linlithgowshire (Mr. Dundas) stated that some of the heavy siege artillery which had been sent out to Balaklava were then in Portsmouth harbour, having been brought back in the transport in which it had been shipped. They had heard of a vessel having been sent to Newcastle to take on board cylinders which were intended to blow up the obstructions at the mouth of the harbour of Sebastopol, but the right hon. Baronet had not told the Committee that those cylinders were never landed, but that the ship in which they were embarked had

1601
been employed for two or three months in the conveyance of troops with the cylinders in her hold. It had been stated that the Prince was lost in consequence of her cables having been run out in a gale without being clinched, but the First Naval Lord of the Admiralty said that, though the cables of that ship were not clinched, they were lashed. It had, however, been stated by the officer in charge of the port of Balaklava, that the Prince went into Balaklava Roads with only one anchor and one cable on board, and the harbour-master of the port had remonstrated on three several occasions against the ship's being allowed to remain in the Roads under such circumstances. He found that, in another place, Lord Panmure, the Secretary at War, had stated, in answer to a taunt from Lord Ellenborough, that he was happy to inform the noble Lord that, under the new arrangements, the War Department was working most satisfactorily, and was in weekly communication with the Admiralty. Why, persons possessing any commercial experience would laugh at the idea of a weekly communication taking place between those two great public departments. He regretted that, so far as he was aware, no improvement whatever was perceptible in the management of the transport service.
ADMIRAL BERKELEYsaid, he wished to say that he had never made any statement, either in that House or elsewhere, as to the number of cables and anchors on board the Prince at the time she was lost. He had merely stated, on the authority of the affidavits of the riggers who had been employed, that the cables were lashed. He regretted that the hon. Member for Tewkesbury (Mr. Brown) had not made the speech he had just delivered to the Sebastopol Committee, who might then, perhaps, have come to a different conclusion with reference to the case of the Prince.
MR. H. BROWNsaid, he had not been invited to give evidence before the Sebastopol Committee, and therefore he did not attend that Committee.
MR. LINDSAYsaid, it was his belief that very little improvement had taken place in the transport department. He was convinced that one Gentleman, responsible to the Admiralty, would manage the business better than any Board. Until that was the case they could never fix the responsibility. Looking at the number of men and horses conveyed, the work appeared
1602
enormous; but a large number of those troops were conveyed, not from this country, but from Varna or Malta, or some short distance. The actual work done was very far short of what ought to have been done for the money. The evidence before the Sebastopol Committee showed that valuable steam-ships had been kept for months lying idle as store-ships at Balaklava. He was glad to find that merchant ships were to be employed, in preference to war-ships, as transports. He was convinced that the number now employed was amply sufficient for anything that could be required. Our Government ought, like the French, to look at the capacity of the vessels, also to pay a premium to the captains for voyages performed under a certain time. He hoped that before the Session closed an amended Return would be laid before the House of the services actually performed by the transports; for the Return already given was full of errors.
MR. STAFFORDsaid, that having paid great attention to the state of the transport service in the East, he had come to the conclusion that it was impossible to arrive at a correct knowledge of the real amount of service performed, and losses sustained by mismanagement and delay, for the simple reason that those most concerned in it and who best knew the facts, were precisely the persons who had the greatest interest in concealing them. He thought the Committee ought to be informed how far the Transport Board was independent of the Admiralty, and what was the precise nature of the relations which existed between those departments. It would be recollected that in June, 1854, the Duke of Newcastle stated that the department in which the greatest failures had occurred was the transport service, and the noble Duke expressed his opinion before the Sebastopol Committee, that the transport system would not work satisfactorily in such a contest as that in which the country was now engaged unless it were placed under the control of the Minister of War. He wished to know whether the First Lord of the Admiralty concurred in the opinion of the noble Duke, or whether he still thought that the transport service could be properly conducted under the superintendence of the Board of Admiralty? With regard to the statement of the hon. Member for Tewkesbury (Mr. H. Brown) that there was a weekly communication between the War Department

1603
and the Board of Admiralty, he thought there must be some mistake, for he was satisfied that at least a daily communication took place between such important departments of the public service. He wished also to ask whether the First Lord of the Admiralty could give the Committee any information with regard to the arrangements made for the transport of our sick soldiers from the shores of the Black Sea? Perhaps the right hon. Baronet could state how many ships were engaged in that service, and whether they were fitted in such a manner as to insure the comfort of the unfortunate persons for whose passage they were employed. Certainly the condition of the wounded and invalided soldiers who had recently arrived here from the Crimea was not such as to justify him in saying that the transport system was not capable of improvement.
SIR CHARLES WOODsaid, he had not the least hesitation in telling the hon. Gentleman that he did not agree in the opinion of the Duke of Newcastle that the transport service ought to be placed under the control of the Secretary for War. The late First Lord of the Admiralty (Sir J. Graham) expressed an opinion in which he (Sir C. Wood) entirely concurred, that the management of the naval transport service would be conducted much more satisfactorily under the control of the Board of Admiralty than by the Secretary for War. He might observe that the communication between the War Department and the Board of Admiralty was not weekly, or even daily, but almost hourly. With regard to the hospital ships, to which the hon. Member for North Northamptonshire (Mr. Stafford) had referred, he might state that there were now four vessels employed in conveying the sick and wounded from the Crimea to Scutari, and taking back convalescents, and he believed they were properly fitted, and perfectly efficient for the service in which they were engaged. He regretted to hear the statement of the hon. Gentleman with regard to the condition of the invalids who had recently arrived from the Black Sea, but he could only say that no complaints had reached him on the subject.
SIR GEORGE TYLERsaid, that from what he had seen of the present Transport Board, and the mode in which it performed its business, he had no hesitation in saying that Captain Milne, who was at the head of that Board, was most admirably adapted
1604
for the discharge of his duties. He thought there was now no reason to complain of the mode in which the business of the Transport Board was conducted. He believed that there were two ships in that service in which the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Lindsay) was interested, and he should like to ask if he would be satisfied with a lower rate of freight than was given for other vessels.
MR. LINDSAYsaid, he believed the superintendent of the department to be a most efficient officer. Make him the one responsible party, and the others under him, and he should be satisfied. The hon. Gentleman had made allusion to two ships that he (Mr. Lindsay) once was interested in. He believed that those two ships were the lowest in the list.
Vote agreed to; as was also
(53.) 755,239 l., Packet Service.
House resumed.

FISHERIES (BRITISH ISLANDS AND FRANCE) BILL.
Order for Committee read.
Motion made, and Question proposed—"That Mr. Speaker do now leave the chair."
SIR GEORGE PECHELLsaid, he should move as an Amendment that the Bill be referred to a Select Committee. It was a question of great importance to the maritime population of the coasts of Suffolk, Kent, and Sussex, that no disadvantage should be inflicted upon English fishermen, as compared with those of France. The quarrels which took place in 1839, between the fishermen of the two countries made it necessary that the matter should become a subject of negotiation between the noble Lord now at the head of the Government and Marshal Soult, and a Bill was passed in 1843, by which three miles from the coast of England, and three miles from the coast of France, were fixed as the limits of the exclusive claim to the fisheries; but certain exceptions were made as to the oyster fisheries in the neighbourhood of Granville, and of the isles of Guernsey and Jersey. The effect of that Bill, however, would be to give up more than the French Government claimed, and to exclude English fishermen from a bank which had been discovered within the last four or five years outside the limits of each shore fishery, and, as it were, in the midst of the Channel. The complaints made by Count Walewski in 1852 were,

1605
that the English boats pursued fishing on the French coast in the prohibited months, June and July, when the oysters were not wholesome; that the vessels were not marked and numbered, according to the regulations; and that in cases where an English boat had been captured and its crew charged before the Commissary of Marine with illegal fishing, the English Consuls at French ports refused to attest the evidence that was there taken, so that the men could not be sent to England for trial. It would be quite satisfactory to the French if our Government would only give directions to the Consuls abroad and collectors of customs in our ports to look after the subject. He computed that by the Brighton and South Coast Railway and by the South Western Railway during the months of May, June, July, and August, in which oysters were not considered wholesome, not less than 16,224 tons, or upwards of 600,000 bushels of oysters were sent up; and that this was a very serious matter, and ought to be attended to.
MR. BERESFORDseconded the Amendment. He trusted that the House would do nothing to impede the oyster fishery trade, and that, at any rate, an inquiry would be instituted before the law was altered. In the deep sea wholesome oysters might be obtained between April and September.
Amendment proposed, to leave out from the word "That" to the end of the Question, in order to add the Words "the Bill be committed to a Select Committee," instead thereof.
MR. BOUVERIEsaid, that the sole object of the Bill was to carry into effect a treaty with France. The hon. and gallant Member for Brighton really represented in the matter a great poaching interest. Oysters were taken at forbidden times, and the French Government complained of the infraction of the law, and demanded that we should enforce our engagement with them. He hoped, in spite of his hon. and gallant Friend and his poaching constituents, that the House would pass the Bill.
Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question."
The House divided:—Ayes 66; Noes 17: Majority 49.
Main Question put, and agreed to.
Bill considered in Committee.
The House resumed.
Bill reported as amended.

SALE OF BEER BILL.
Order for Committee read.
Motion made, and Question proposed "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the chair."
THE MARQUESS OF BLANDFORDsaid, he should oppose the Motion. The Bill was brought in, not upon the responsibility of the Government, but upon that of a private Member only. It had been brought in on the 27th of July, was read a second time immediately afterwards, and it was now proposed to go into Committee, He objected to such hurry in the case of a measure which upon all hands must be admitted to be viewed with very different feelings by different parties. The only evidence which was taken by the Select Committee which had sat on the subject was in favour of the views of those who supported the Bill, and there was, no doubt, a large mass of evidence which might have been given on the other side had it been called for. The Committee had reported that they had not time to go into further evidence, but even the evidence which had been taken had not yet been put into the hands of Members, and hence, without expressing any opinion upon the measure, he should move that the Committee be adjourned to that day three months.
MR. FREWENseconded the Motion. He contended that the Act of last year had not had sufficient time for its effect to be tried.
Amendment proposed, to leave out from the word "That" to the end of the Question, in order to add the words "this House will, upon this day three months, resolve itself into the said Committee," instead thereof.
Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question."
MR. ALCOCKsaid, that the present was admitted by the public at large, and must be known to every Member as a most exceptional case. Every one knew that the matter pressed for legislative interference, and it was in the recollection of all that that House itself had been put in a very false, not to say dangerous, position, through the feelings excited by the Act of last year. He had it in contemplation to move as an Amendment that public-houses be allowed to be open on Sundays from six o'clock to twelve at night. He hoped to have an opportunity of taking the sense of the House upon that proposal.
MR. H. BERKELEYsaid, that the

1607
Committee, acting in what they considered a spirit of the utmost fairness and impartiality, had themselves selected the witnesses who were called before them, and after hearing the evidence of sixteen magistrates and two Commissioners of Police, they had come to the opinion that a sufficient case had been made out to justify the immediate interference of Parliament.
MR. KINNAIRDsaid, that there were many persons who had watched the working of the Act of last year who were not examined before the Committee on the Bill. Setting aside, however, any objections upon that ground, he certainly thought the evidence which was taken ought to be in the hands of Members before the Bill went into Committee.
SIR JOHN SHELLEYsaid, he thought there was some reason in the objection that the evidence was not in the hands of hon. Members; but a postponement of the Committee for three days instead of three months would be sufficient to get out of the difficulty. He would move that the debate be now adjourned, in order to give an opportunity to hon. Members to have the evidence before them.
MR. NAPIERsaid, he was of opinion that the subject of the Bill was not one in which the House should lightly interfere; but, at the same time, he thought it would not be worthy of the House to repeal in one Session an Act passed in the preceding Session.
THE MARQUESS OF BLANDFORDsaid, he had no objection to amend his Motion by moving that the Committee be taken that day week.
SIR JOHN DUCKWORTHsaid, he believed that the objection of the noble Lord (the Marquess of Blandford) was to the principle of the Bill, and hence he thought that he ought to take a division upon the third reading, and not throw obstacles in the way of going into Committee.
SIR WILLIAM JOLLIFFEsaid, he trusted that the House would pause before rejecting the Motion for going into Committee. He believed if the Motion were rejected, great agitation and discontent would be the result through the whole country.
SIR JOHN SHELLEYsaid, he would not press his Motion for the adjournment of the debate.
MR. GLADSTONEsaid, he thought that Bills ought not to be passed which were based upon the Reports of Select
1608
Committees until the evidence in support of those Reports was in the hands of hon. Members. At the same time the present measure was a very exceptional one, and one which deserved careful consideration at the hands of the House. He certainly thought that some expression of opinion ought to be given by the Government, for upon that, he must confess, his vote would mainly depend.
VISCOUNT PALMERSTONsaid, that there could be no doubt but that the question was one with which hon. Gentlemen were well acquainted, and, as it appeared to him, it was also one upon which all could form a judgment, even without the assistance of the evidence taken before the Select Committee. The House had delegated an inquiry to a Committee; that Committee, chosen with much care, had come to a decision without much difference of opinion. Now, considering the necessity and simplicity of the subject—for it was by no means a matter of complexity—considering the lateness of the Session, and also bearing in mind the feeling of the country upon the question, he would submit that it would be the better course to go into Committee upon the Bill rather than wait for the evidence taken before the Select Committee; the more especially as the latter course might imperil the passing of the measure in the present Session of Parliament.
MR. VILLIERSsaid, that the principal change made in the law was an extension of the time of closing from ten to eleven at night. As one of the friends of the Bill of last year he thought the change now proposed the best thing that could be done, and he did not look upon it at all in the light of a repeal of the Act.
Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question."
The House divided:—Ayes 62; Noes 10: Majority 52.
Main Question put, and agreed to.
Bill considered in Committee.
House resumed.
Bill reported as amended.
The House adjourned at half-after Two o'clock.