Sitting of 2 June 1819

NAVY ESTIMATES.
The House having resolved itself into a Committee of Supply, to which the Navy Estimates were referred,
Sir G. Warrenderrose to move the Navy Estimates. Upon this subject the hon. baronet said he should think it unnecessary, if not presumptuous on his part, to make any speech, or to enter into any detail, as the question had already been so amply discussed, while all the details connected with it were so perspicuously stated, in the report of the finance committee; therefore, he felt that it rather became him to wait for. any observations which might be made on the other side of the House, and to which he would endeavour to submit a satisfactory reply. The hon. baronet, after stating, that at no former period was our navy in a condition of
824
greater efficiency than at the present moment, concluded with moving, "That a sum not exceeding 2,483,013 l. 12 s. 7d. be granted to his majesty for the ordinary establishment of the navy for the year 1819."
Mr. Calcraftexpressed his surprise at the course pursued by the hon. baronet, particularly in referring to, and wholly relying upon, the statements of the finance committee. Was it, from the observation. of the hon. baronet, to be taken for granted that he adopted the recommendation of the finance committee? That committee: had recommended the suppression of the Naval Asylum; and was it to be understood,; that the; hon. baronet and his colleagues meant to act upon that suggestion? He was sorry the hon. baronet, had. declined to favour the House with any explanation on this, as well as on every other point of: detail; for he was one of those who thoughts so highly of the utility and character of the Naval Asylum, that he could not, without pain and astonishment, contemplate the idea of suppressing such a meritorious institution. While, indeed, the Military Asylum was so liberally provided for, without any objection or comment on the part of the finance committee, the recommendation of that committee, to suppress the Naval Asylum, must surprise the judgment and revolt the feeling; of every considerate man in the country. He trusted, therefore, that ministers would not attempt to carry that recommendation into effect, notwithstanding their extreme dispositions to economy, with regard to every thing that related to the navy. This was no doubt a branch of the public service in which ministers evinced a readiness to practise the most niggardly economy—to pare down and; reduce in every direction; But that was a description of economy or parsimony of which he could by no means approve; on the contrary, he would rather be an advocate for the vote of a greater number of men for the service of the navy than was at present proposed. According to this proposition, only 20,000 men, it seemed, were to be voted altogether; that is, 14,000 seamen, and 6,000 marines; and considering the number voted in former years of peace, he was of opinion that this number was much too small; for it was his desire to maintain the navy in; its proper rank and elevation, and therefore he witnessed with great regret the disposition manifested of late years to destroy the

825
due equality and relation between our military and naval force. At other periods of peace, the number of men voted for the army and navy were in general pretty nearly on a par, the superiority being mostly on the side of the navy. But how very materially different was the case at present, when no less than 100,000 men were voted for the army, while only 20,000 were voted for the navy! This was a departure from our long established policy which he most sincerely deplored, as it implied a disposition to abandon our old system of defence, and rather to look for protection through the power of an army, than to rely upon those good old wooden walls, which had for ages proved our best and safest guardian. There were many points, as well as that respecting the Naval Asylum, with regard to which he was surprised to find that the hon. baronet had offered no explanation. Nothing was said as to retrenchment in the official expenses of the Admiralty, or in any other department. Upon the much called for reduction of the two lay, and unnecessary, lords of the Admiralty, he did not then mean to make any comment, as he understood it to be the intention of his hon. friend (sir M. W. Ridley) again to bring that subject before the House. But as the present was an occasion upon which it was quite proper to advert to the general state of our finances, he must express his surprise, that while it was said that new taxes were about to be proposed, not a word was heard about reduction or retrenchment in any quarter. Every useless place, every dispensable appointment should be set aside, and every practicable retrenchment should be made, before any new impost whatever was brought forward. Before, indeed, any additional tax was even talked of, it was the duty of parliament and government to show that they duly considered the principles, the feelings, and the purses of the people [Hear, hear!]. The people were universally anxious for the support and encouragement of the navy; but a very different disposition was known to prevail elsewhere; for while every degree of protection and favour was afforded to the army—while every possible mark of distinction and advantageous mode of promotion were conferred upon the members of that body, the navy was slighted, nay, almost frowned upon. This system he regarded as a most unfortunate omen for the country, while it was decidedly in contradiction to the ancient practice of
826
our government.—But to return to the state and conduct of our finances: he begged to repeat his determined objection to the idea of imposing any new tax to meet a large loan, or any other purpose, until every possible redaction was made in the public expenditure; and he could discover the means of making various reductions in sundry accounts now before the House. These accounts, then, ought to be most minutely scrutinized by the House; and among other items, it would be seen that there was a great disproportion between the expense of managing the collection of the revenue in different departments. He was told, that a proposition had been made to the chancellor of the exchequer, for correcting that disproportion to a considerable extent. This proposition proceeded, as he understood, from the board of excise, by which the revenue of that department was collected, at the rate of 5l. 15 s. 6d. per cent, while-the collection of that of the customs cost no less than 11 l. 13 s. 9d. per cent; and, according to his information, the board of excise suggested the means of reducing the expense of the latter to their own standard. By the adoption of this plan, he was assured that a saving of no less than half a million annually would accrue to the nation. He would ask, then, whether such a plan had been proposed to the right hon. gentleman, and whether it was meant to carry it into effect? But if so great a disproportion could be corrected in the collection of the revenue in England, what was to be thought of applying the principle to Ireland, where the revenue of the customs was collected at an expense of no less than 21 l. 18 s. per cent? The saving, then, which would result from the application of such a plan to Ireland must be very considerable indeed. He trusted, therefore, that this plan would be fully investigated, and that measures would be taken to carry it into effect. There were many other points of detail, into which he did not mean to enter on this occasion, as he had an opportunity of discussing them in a committee elsewhere, and as he should probably bring the subject again before the House.
Sir G. Warrenderadverting to the complaint of the hon. gentleman as to his abstinence from details which were already before the House in the report of the finance committee, observed, that the hon. gentleman was in error, if he supposed that there was any intention whatever to

827
suppress the Naval Asylum. On the contrary, the sum of 14,000 l. for the support of that institution, was included in the proposition then before the committee; therefore that establishment was to be maintained, whatever modification of its management, or reduction of its expense might be made, pursuant to the recommendation of the finance committee. The hon. gentleman had also complained of the amount of the vote now proposed for the service of the navy; but to this complaint he should answer, that those at the head of the naval department, and who were responsible for its proper management, were of opinion that the number of men proposed were quite sufficient, and he could add, for the satisfaction of the House and the country, that the navy, so far from being allowed to go into any thing like decay under its present direction, was in such a state, that upon any occasion it might be promptly put into a condition of the utmost vigour and efficiency. As to the relative amount of the navy and army, it should be recollected, that the case of each was very materially different, as the former could be so expeditiously and easily raised to any amount required, while to recruit and discipline the latter would necessarily be attended with great difficulty and delay. Besides, it was to be considered) that with respect to the navy there was no analogy between the present and any former peace, as the fleets of all Europe were now so reduced in consequence of the gallant conduct of our navy The necessity of a large vote for the navy was also diminished at present, in consequence of the various improvements made in our ports and dock-yards, as well as in our roadsteads, during the late war. But the main point was that of which he could confidently assure the House, and for which the Admiralty was fully responsible, namely, that in the event of any new war, the navy could be speedily put in a state for vigorous and efficient action.
Sir M. W. Ridleyagreed with the hon. baronet, that the lords of the admiralty were responsible for the condition of the navy, and he was truly glad to learn, that it was not intended to act upon the recommendation of the finance committee by putting down the Naval Asylum, as he firmly believed that there was no establishment in the country, which the people, whatever might be the slate of their circumstances, would be more
828
ready to support. It would, indeed, be surprising, if, while 39,000 l. were voted for the Military Asylum, any man of consideration or common feeling could be found to object to the grant of 14,000 l. for the support of such an establishment. Therefore, the recommendation of the finance committee to suppress this institution was really matter of astonishment. But there were some observations in the report of that committee upon this subject, which were truly ludicrous, and particularly those recommending the dismissal of the French teachers from the Asylum, lest, forsooth, the knowledge of a foreign language should dispose the pupils to quit the service of their country. Adverting to the slate of our finances, the hon. baronet observed, that if every useless office were done away, and every practicable retrenchment made in the public expenditure, he would be one of the last to oppose any new taxes that might be required for the public service. But until such proofs of economy were afforded by government, he should feel it his duty to resist the imposition of a single shilling of additional taxation. Before he could consent to such taxation, he must, for instance, call for the abolition of those totally useless offices, the two lay lords of the Admiralty. He also thought there was no occasion, in time of peace, for the maintenance of two secretaries at the board of admiralty. The services of the hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Croker) being unnecessary in that House, as was evident from his absence for a great part of the session, he might entirely direct his time to the business of the admiralty office, and thus relieve the public from the expense of another secretary. But there were many other points in which reduction might be made in the expenditure of the Admiralty. The aggregate of the saving from which, he estimated at 200,000 l.; and, therefore, he should now conclude by moving, as an amendment, that the amount of the proposed grant should be 2,283,013 l. 12 s. 7d., being a diminution of the sum originally proposed, to the extent of 200,000 l.
Lord Comptonspoke against the amendment. He differed from the hon. mover of it, with respect to the propriety of maintaining the two lay lords of the Admiralty; upon which question, indeed, the House, after ample discussion, had already decided. It was very true, that it was

829
competent to any gentleman to bring the same question again under the consideration of the House; but then the House, in consistency, could not fail to maintain its own decision. But he also objected to the hon. member's proposition, because it had very much the complexion of a party question. He did not mean to impute any improper motive to the hon. baronet; but he must deprecate any proceeding which had a tendency to embarrass the operations of government. He concurred with the hon. baronet, that it was the duty of government to make every practicable retrenchment, and he had no doubt that ministers would discharge that duty by diligently applying their minds to the consideration of the subject, especially during the approaching recess. The noble lord concluded with observing, that he could not express any opinion upon the subject of the proposed reduction of the expense in the collection of the revenue, as he had no knowledge of the merits of the plan alluded to by the hon. gentleman who, spoke second in the debate.
The Hon. F. Douglasanimadverted upon the reference of the noble lord to a former decision of the House with respect to the junior lords of the Admiralty, and expressed his satisfaction to think that it was competent to the House to revise that decision: for it was known that the House was rather surprised into that decision by the statement of an hon. officer (sir G. Cockburn), that the existence of such appointments was somewhat conducive to the public service. But as the House was now called upon to look at those, appointments upon a reconsidered view of retrenchment, with a large loan, and new and extraordinary taxes in contemplation, something more than such a statement was necessary to reconcile the House and the country to the toleration of such offices. It was manifest, that the new principles of finance which had been recently and wisely determined upon in consequence of the report of the Bank committee, would create a great alteration in the financial system of the country; that this alteration would be productive of considerable uncertainty and risk; that their adoption would, in fact, operate as a new tax upon the public, and be likely to lead to considerable difficulty and distress. The measure alluded to was, in his judgment, evidently wise and necessary, although sonic public embar-
830
rassment must follow each an important change; but that was not the only embarrassment which the country had to apprehend; for it was known, that we were on the eve of having a considerable amount of new taxes proposed, among which he was surprised to learn there was one which the chancellor of the exchequer had himself voluntarily abandoned, from a consideration of its peculiar pressure upon the middle and lower orders of the people, namely, the malt tax. It was then obviously necessary to make every practicable retrenchment. As to the two lay lords of the Admiralty, he was not so anxious for their suppression from any consideration of the amount of the saving that would result from the measure, as with a view to satisfy the people of the resolution of the House to promote economy. He was, perhaps, desirous for economy on a larger scale than even any of the gentlemen on his side of the House; for he was of opinion, that as the expense of the last exceeded considerably any former war, so the reduction in the present peace should, in the same proportion, exceed that of any former peace whatever. The House was told by the gallant officer to whom he had already alluded, that the maintenance of the two lay lords of the Admiralty was necessary to the public convenience, and to afford other lords of the Admiralty some opportunities for personal relaxation. Such an argument for the support of such offices might, perhaps, be admissible in ordinary times; but, in the present circumstances of the country, he could not allow that it was entitled to any attention. The gallant officer had, as well as other gentlemen, referred to former periods for precedents in support of the resolution to maintain those lay lords; but what period in our history had any analogy to the present circumstances of the country, loaded as it was with an enormous debt and enormous taxation? He did not seek for retrenchment, so much from any consideration of the amount to which that retrenchment could be practicably made, as with a view to reconcile the people to bear their burthens with patience, by showing the anxiety of parliament to grant them every possible relief. It was on that ground that he approached this question, and was solicitous for the suppression of the unnecessary offices alluded to. In venturing to call those offices unnecessary, he would take the liberty of

831
asking the gallant admiral, whose professional reputation stood so very high, and whose private honor was in every respect so unquestionable, whether, in the face of his country and of his profession, he could consistently declare that the maintenance of the two junior lords was actually indispensable to the performance of the business of the Admiralty? For himself, he must say, that he could not possibly think them so, as it was notorious, that one of these junior lords spent no less than five months of the last year in Bedfordshire, while the other was nearly half the year among his constituents. The allusion of the hon. mover to the finance committee, he really heard with surprise, for he supposed that committee so completely damned in public estimation, that no one would be found to quote their authority [Hear, hear!]. Whatever reduction might be meditated or recommended by that committee, it was clear that nothing would be attempted at all likely to interfere with the parliamentary influence of ministers: for any place held by any member of that House, or by any of his immediate connexions, was held sacred, however useless or unnecessary such place might be. To this tenacity he ascribed the support of those two junior lords of the Admiralty, notwithstanding the proofs which had appeared that they were totally unnecessary. Adverting to the different treatment which the navy and army had experienced from government, he observed, that the utmost prodigality was shown to support the wishes and inclinations of the Crown, while the interests and desires of the people were totally slighted. Therefore, the army was raised to an unparalleled height in peace, while the navy was comparatively overlooked, and when he heard an attempt made to justify this novel system, on the ground that all the continental powers also maintained large armies in peace, he would say, let us maintain our navy in its due rank and power as the old as well as the best means of defence against such armies. But the attempt to justify an increased military force upon any reference to the conduct of other powers, he regarded as a maxim drawn from that continental school into which this country had been degraded by the principles and proceedings of the noble secretary for foreign affairs [Hear, hear!].
Sir G. Cockburnsaid, that as he had been called on in so personal a manner
832
by the hon. gentleman, he had no hesitation in stating, and in staking his private as well as his public character on the statement, that it was necessary for the safety of the country that the admiralty board should remain constituted as it was at present. It was his firm conviction that the board could not be better constituted than it then was; and that if the House reduced it, they would deprive the country of the benefit which was at present derived from it. With respect to what had been said by an hon. member on the subject of the difference between the state of the soldiers and sailors, ail he should say was, that the seaman had a certain comparative advantage; for, when the soldier was discharged, he had no occupation open to him, whereas the sailor had the merchant service ready to give him employment; and the fact at present was, that there was a great difficulty in getting the few ships in commission manned. In war time, merchantmen were mostly worked by foreigners: since the peace, these persons bad returned home, and merchants, of course, took advantage of the discharged men from the king's ships, so that some of the latter were now six weeks or two months endeavouring to make up their complement. This was a sufficient proof that there was at present no distress among seamen for want of employment.
Mr. F. Douglassaid, he had not inquired whether the navy board, as at present constituted, was useful to the public service, but whether the gallant admiral could state that the two lay lords were absolutely necessary. To this inquiry the gallant admiral had in fact made no reply.
The committee then divided on the original resolution: Ayes, 164; Noes, 97; Majority 67.

List of the Minority.

Abercromby, hon. J.

Carter, John

Althorp, visct.

Cavendish, H.

Burrell, sir C.

Clifton, lord

Bankes, Henry

Coffin, sir I.

Barham, J.

Colborne, N. R.

Becher, W. W.

Concannon, L.

Bernal, R.

Crompton, S.

Bennet, hon. H.

Davies, T. H.

Benyon, B.

Denman, Thos.

Birch, J.

Douglas, hon. F. S.

Calcraft, John

Duncannon, visc.

Calvert, C.

Dundas, hon. G.

Calvert, N.

Dundas, Thos.

Carhamnton, earl of

Ebrington, visc.

Campbell, hon. J.

Ellice, Ed.

833

Euston, earl of

Onslow, A.

Fazakerley, Nic.

O'Callaghan, J.

Fellowes, N.

Ord, Wm.

Fergusson, sir R. C.

Osborne, lord F.

Folkestone, visc.

Palmer, C. F.

Gordon, Robt.

Pavnell, sir H.

Graham, Sandford

Pelham, hon. C. A.

Grenfell, Pascoe

Philips, Geo.

Gaskell, B.

Philips, Geo. jun.

Griffiths, J. W.

Primrose, hon. F.

Guise, sir W.

Protheroe, Ed.

Gurney, R. H.

Powlett, hon. W.

Harcourt, J.

Ricardo, David

Hamilton, lord A.

Rowley, sir W.

Harvey, D. W.

Russell, lord John

Hill, lord A.

Russell, R. G.

Hume, Jos.

Smith, John

Hutchinson, hon. C. H.

Smith, W.

Lamb, hon. W.

Smyth, John H.

Lamb, hon. G.

Spencer, lord R.

Lambton, J. G.

Stewart, Wm.

Le Fevre, C. S.

Stuart, lord J.

Lemon, sir W.

Symonds, T. P.

Lubbock, sir John

Shelley, sir John

Mackintosh, sir J.

Tavistock, marq. of

Wilton, visc.

Taylor, M. A.

Maxwell, John

Thorp, ald.

Merest, J. W. D.

Tierney, rt. hon. G.

Mills, G.

Waithman, ald.

Monck, sir C.

Williams, sir Rt.

Moore, Peter

Wilson, sir R.

Morpeth, visc.

Wood, ald.

Newport, rt. hon. sir J.

TELLER.

Newman, R. W.

Ridley, sir M. W.

North, Dudley

Sir G. Warrendernext moved, "That a sum, not exceeding 1,631,628 l., be granted to his majesty, for defraying the charge of what may be necessary for the building, rebuilding, and repairs of ships of war in his majesty's and the merchants' yards, and other extra works, over and above what is proposed to be done upon the heads of wear and tear, and ordinary, for the year 1819."
Mr. Humesaid, that taking it for granted, on the word of the hon. baronet, that the report of the finance committee was to be considered his speech on the grant before the House, he should beg to know, whether it was intended to adopt the suggestion of the committee respecting the Naval Asylum. He thought the House should not vote this grant till estimates of all the naval works had been produced. The committee had voted 15,000 l. for the works in Harlbowline Island, and in that case there was an estimate of the expense; but they had also voted 20,000 l. for Bermuda, 15,000 l. for Jamaica, and 20,000 l. for Trincomalee, although they had no estimate of the sums that would be required to complete the works in those
834
islands. He would suggest that the amount of these votes be deducted from the grant, till the estimates of the expense were laid before the House. They could not do better, he conceived, than to follow in this instance the directions of the finance committee, who recommended that no vote should be granted till an estimate of the expense was put in. He should also like to know whether the grant to the board of longitude was intended for the present occasion, or was it to be an annual vote? He agreed with the committee in thinking, that the establishment should be suited to the circumstances of the country. He certainly thought that reductions should be made rather in the army than in the navy estimates; but at the same time he hoped, that his majesty's ministers would attend to the suggestions of the committee, and carry into effect all the reductions recommended, whether in the army or in the navy. He trusted that in every branch of the expenditure, ministers would endeavour to make the estimates approximate to the scale by which they were regulated before the war. When it was considered that every expense had been increased by the system of a paper currency, he hoped they would now, when about to revert to a metallic circulation, reduce all the salaries of public officers to what they were in 1797, when the restriction was first imposed on cash-payments. He repeated, that the House would do well to reduce every salary that had increased since 1797, to the scale of that day; and in that case, he would venture to say, that no additional taxes would be necessary. He should shortly submit a motion to the House, the object of which would be to ascertain the amount of salaries paid to public officers in the year 1797, and also the amount of those paid at present, in order to see how they should now be reduced; and he was confident that, if the House would entertain that motion, it would be productive of the greatest benefit. The civil list had increased enormously during the last twenty-two years, and he was confident that if it, as well as all the salaries paid by government, were reduced to the scale on which they were in 1797, there would be no need for any additional taxes. He should conclude by proposing, that the sum of 55,000 l. being the allowance for works in Bermuda, Jamaica, and Trincomalee, be deducted from the proposed grant.
Mr. Crokerobserved, that the recommendation of the finance report was, that no new works should be commenced, without the estimates being first produced. To that recommendation the Admiralty had strictly attended. The works alluded to, had been some time in progress, and it was impossible to state what the precise expense would be. If the hon. member looked at the estimates of preceding years, he would see that the grants now proposed were considerably lower in amount. That was, in his judgment, the true progress of economy, to diminish the scale of expense gradually, so as not to effect the public security, but to have it in their power to be prepared for any exertion which a public exigence might require. With respect to the grant to the board of longitude, that was at present 4,000 l., while the grant in preceding estimates was 10,000 l. He sincerely hoped that every farthing of it might be expended. The hon. member then defended the grant to the Naval Asylum. It was to be recollected that it was originally a private charity, with funds to the amount of 100,000 l. When the government took it, with its funds, under its superintendence, it was bound to make adequate provision for its support.
The amendment was then negatived without a division, and the original resolution carried. Sir G. Warrender next moved, "That a sum not exceeding 419,319 l., be granted to his majesty, for the purchase of provisions for troops and garrisons on foreign stations, and the value of rations for troops, to be embarked on board ships of war and transports, for the year 1819."
Sir M. W. Ridleytook that opportunity to put some questions respecting the works going on in some of the public docks and yards. He would begin with the works at the Deptford yard, the grant for which, in 1818, was 34,468 l. The estimate now called for to complete the work was 27,000 l. making an excess, on a comparison with the original estimate when the first grant was made, of not less than 20,000 l. He next desired explanation respecting the works at Woolwich dock-yard. In 1818, a sum of 25,000 l. was granted for those works—the estimate now called for was 26,450 l. and it was said 11,000 l. would be wanted to complete them. In Chatham also, in 1818, 10,940 l. was voted to roof in the dock, and 5,500 l. was now wanted to
836
complete it. With respect to the works carrying on at Sheerness dock-yards, 433,800 l. had been the first estimate; last year 170,000 l. was granted on account; and 555,800 l. was the estimate now made out to complete the works, making a total of more than 700,000 l. and an excess of 277,000 l. over the original estimate. In Plymouth, and other public depots, a similar excess of the first estimate would also be found.
Mr. Crokertrusted he could give a satisfactory explanation to the inquiries of the hon. baronet. As to the works at Deptford, the excess of expense had arisen from the foundation of the wharf-wall of the victualling department having been discovered to be in a considerably worse state than was at first imagined. It was some hundreds of years old, and on closer examination, patching up was deemed insufficient, as the piles were quite rotten, and it was obliged to be rebuilt. The augmentation of the expense of the estimate at Woolwich had been occasioned by the discovery of Mr. Rennie, that, by a change of the line of the wharf-wall, the enormous expense (sometimes 20,000 l. a year) of removing the mud which accumulated in the front of the dock might be saved. This saving was effected by altering in a small degree the line of the water, an alteration which, while it greatly diminished the public expense, deepened also the bed of the river. The vast improvements now carrying on at Sheerness, had baffled all attempts at an adequate estimate before hand, from the difficulties interposed by the nature of the ground in the progress of the work. The expenditure under this head was now under revision in all its branches, and he had no doubt would in future be carefully examined in detail.
The resolution was agreed to. Sir G. Warrender next moved, "That 284,321 l. be granted, for the expense of the Transport Service, for the year 1819."
Sir M. W. Ridleybegged to take that opportunity of again calling the attention of government to the state of the unemployed pursers of the navy, and their present situation, as contrasted with their previous rank and emoluments. Of clerks who had passed seven years service, and also passed their examination as acting pursers, there were, he believed, about 25 or 26 excluded from their allowance by the regulation of the order in council of 1814; and when it was considered that

837
12 or 1300 l. would give a sort of pittance to such persons, he strongly urged that the Prince Regent should be advised to rescind this order as affecting them. He barely threw out this suggestion, the adoption of which would prevent him from making it on a future day the subject of a specific motion.
Sir G. Cockburnlamented that he could not concur in any recommendation which would tend to augment the half pay list; nor could he consent to any addition whatever to the list, except in cases of vacancies.
Mr. Crokersaid, that the hon. baronet's appeal was part mixed up in his compassion for the situation of some of these individuals, and part in his idea of the justice of their claims. With respect to the compassionate part of the appeal, he could assure the hon. baronet, that he lamented as much as any man that he could not, with a due sense of economy, give the sought-for relief. The justice of the claim he was not so easily prepared to admit. The state of the case was this —according to the old plan, there were exactly as many pursers as there were ships in commission; and when a ship was lost or broken up, no new purser was appointed until another ship was built or put in commission. This was considered very hard upon the pursers thrown out of employment in this manner, and a custom grew up of bearing pursers on what was called the check of the yard, with an allowance of 1s. 2d. or 1s. 3d. each per day, until the new ship was put in commission. During the late war, an alteration in this plan took place, and so rapid from a variety of causes, was the appointment of pursers, that there were at one time actually 1,000 pursers, though there were only 500 ships in commission. In 1814, the board of admiralty regulated the number, and adopted the system of half-pay; and it was then resolved, that no more pursers should be appointed until the number existing was reduced to the number of ships in commission. The expense of the old plan was 33,800 l., of the new plan 54,800 l.; so that by the latter the pursers were gainers of upwards of 20,000 l.
The resolution was agreed to.

ORDNANCE ESTIMATES.
Mr. Robert Wardthen, in pursuance of his notice, brought on the Ordnance Estimates. He commenced by giving a brief statement
838
of the amount of the ordnance expenditure, according to the estimates for the current year. From the necessity which had arisen of making retiring provisions in a number of cases after the peace, there had been a considerable excess in the half-pay and superannuated branch, of this department of the expenditure, which amounted to about 43,000 l.; but in every other branch of the department the utmost retrenchment was adopted, and the saving this year amounted to 50,000 l. 2s. 9d. The reduction in point of numbers since the peace amounted to 1,824 officers and men in the Sappers and Miners corps. The number of men in this branch was, last year, 9,759; it was this year 7,939. And the board of ordnance, acting strictly up to the recommendations of the committee of finance, had reduced their expenditure from four millions and upwards to about 100,000 l. The hon. member then moved, "That a sum not exceeding 386,222 l. 3s. 11 d. be granted to his majesty, in full, for the charge of the office of ordnance, for land service, for Great Britain, for the year 1819."
Mr. Humewished to ask the hon. gentleman, why the manufacture of gunpowder was so extensively continued, as it was an article that, in the event of its being required by war, could be made with great speed? One of the items under that head was 10,500 l. He was also desirous to know in what manner government intended to fill up the vacancies in the staff of the ordnance? He understood that an arrangement had been made by the present master-general, to fill up every other vacancy either from the cadets at Woolwich, or from the half pay. He trusted that that arrangement would be made a general one in the army. To fill up vacancies by other means would be a double injustice. It would be an injustice to the public to saddle them with the expense of new commissions, and it would be an injustice to the brave men on half pay, who had so gallantly served their country. Many of the proposed estimates, in his opinion, required consideration. There was on the table of the House a report from a committee (the committee of finance), which was attended to by his majesty's ministers whenever it suited their purpose to attend to it, and neglected whenever it did not. In that report it was recommended that the newly acquired colonies of Ceylon, the Mauritius, the

839
Cape of Good Hope, Malta, and the Ionian Islands, should pay the expenses of their own military establishments; and yet there were separate items for those colonies, amounting in the whole to 26,000 l. On this and on every other point of public expenditure, government would do well, under the present exigency, to suspend a proposition for voting a single shilling, until the indispensable necessity for doing so should be established;.
Mr. R. Wardobserved, that with respect to the manufacture of gunpowder, it must be evident that a great and an economical alteration must have taken place, when the manufacture for the use of government was reduced from 30,000 barrels annually to 1,000. It was, however, essential to preserve the existence of a manufactory which had, beyond all doubt, carried the article it produced to such a degree of perfection, as to exceed, in point of excellence, that made in any other part of the world. Besides, the continuance of the manufacture in the reduced rate at which the work was going on, kept in employment those old servants who must otherwise be provided for by pensions. With regard to the hon. gentleman's wish to know whether or not it was intended to fill up the vacancies in the staff from the half-pay, he had only to reply, that there was no artillery staff. As to the observation respecting the newly acquired colonies, the recommendation in the report of the finance committee, to which the hon. gentleman alluded, was a consideration of great national policy, on which his majesty's government had not yet determined; until which determination, it was of course his duty to propose to parliament that they should be protected in the usual way.
The resolution was then agreed to. On a resolution for granting 10,000 l. for defraying the expense of the reduction of the Ordnance Military Corps,
Mr. Humeagain adverted to the manufacture of gunpowder, and said, that unless it was made of a better quality in the royal mills than in mills belonging to private individuals, the reason assigned by the hon. gentleman for the continuance of that expense to the public was nugatory; and that at any rate the charge of 7,000 l. for 1,000 barrels, appeared to be enormous. He wished to ask the hon. gentleman how it happened that the ordnance accounts for 1814 were not all delivered?
Mr. Wardreplied, that there was great difficulty in making up and procuring the accounts adverted to by the hon. gentleman, in consequence of the officers on whom that devolved being dispersed in all parts of the world. Every diligence was used by the ordnance department to procure them as speedily as possible; and in some instances, they have been under the necessity of resorting to prosecutions for-that purpose.
The resolution was then agreed to.

EXCHEQUER BILLS.
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, that he had five distinct grants to propose to the consideration of the committee. The first was, "That a sum not exceeding 8,599,600 l. be granted to his majesty, to pay off and discharge Exchequer. Bills charged upon the supplies of the year 1819, unprovided for."
Mr. Grenfellsaid, he was not desirous at the present moment of reviving the discussion on the sinking fund, but as government were now on the eve of raising a large sum of money by loan, he appealed to the right hon. gentleman, he implored the House to consider the contents of the paper which, on his motion, had been laid on the table of the House, and which exhibited at one view what would have been the practical effects of the adoption, with reference to the last four loans, of the recommendation which he had so frequently pressed on government. By that paper, it appeared, that if the system he had recommended had been acted upon on the occasion of the last four loans, viz.—the loan for 27 millions in June 1813; the loan for 22 millions in November 1813; the loan for 24 millions in the beginning of 1814; and the loan for 36 millions in 1815, the practical effect would have been the saving to the commissioners for the reduction of the national debt, and consequently to the country of no less a sum than six millions, producing annually 268,000 l., a sum more than equivalent to the produce of that odious and abominable mode of raising revenue—the lottery. We were now on the eve of another, and if rumour were to be believed, of a large loan. The present amount of the sinking fund was between 15 and 16 millions. Supposing the intended loan was to be 30 millions, he left it to the House to determine what would, be the effect of the junction, of loan-contractors, which a loan for so large a sum

841
would necessarily occasion, and which would deprive the public of the benefit of competition; which effect might be avoided by taking the sinking fund, or a part of it, in diminution of the loan. He in treated the House to take this important subject into serious consideration, and he trusted that the right hon. gentleman would not commit himself upon it, until that serious consideration had taken place. This led him to another observation. A rumour was very prevalent to day, which he conceived was nothing but a calumny on the right hon. gentleman, and should continue so to conceive it, unless he had the right hon. gentleman's own authority for believing it. It was a rumour, however, which every body had heard, namely, that the right hon. gentleman had communicated to certain loan-contractors, and to them alone, the amount of the loan which it was his intention to negociate. It must be perfectly unnecessary for him to observe, that if this rumour was true, the right hon. gentleman had given to those persons an undue advantage. It was most unquestionably the right hon. gentleman's duty, when he made such a communication, to make it to the stock exchange, to the public—to make it general. It would have been the right hon. gentleman's duty to have made it in his place in the House on Thursday last; or at least not to have made it in a partial manner, by which of course only the few to whom it was made could derive any benefit. He repeated, however, that he believed the rumour was an unfounded calumny; but he thought it right to state it, that the right hon. gentleman might have the opportunity of which he trusted he would be able to avail himself, of denying its accuracy.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerobserved, that the subjects to which the hon. gentleman had just drawn his attention and that of the committee, were of considerable importance. And first with respect to the sinking fund, the hon. gentleman had DO right to assume that the advantages which would have been gained, by the adoption, with reference to the four last loans of his recommendation, would have been such as he described; because he had no right to assume, that if the sinking fund had been taken in aid of the first of those loans, the terms on which the other loans would have been raised, would have been so advantageous to the public as they had been. He said
842
this, not for the purpose of expressing any decided opinion at the present moment on the merits of the plan itself; but merely to show that the benefits of it were not so extensive as the hon. gentleman supposed. With respect to making use of the sinking fund for the service of the present year, all he would say was, that he had not entered into any stipulation which would prevent the public from having the advantage of the application of that fund, if it should be thought expedient so to apply it. In the mean while the power of so applying it was one of the means possessed by the treasury to protect the public from the injurious effects of the combination alluded to by the hon. gentleman. In answering that first point, he thought he had in a great degree replied to the second observation which fell from the hon. gentleman. In the conversations which he had held with a number of persons on the nature of the financial measures which it might be most expedient to adopt, he had of course spoken on a great many points connected with those measures; but he denied having made any secret or private communication of his intentions, of which any unfair advantage could be taken.
Mr. Ricardohad heard a statement which set forth, whether correctly or not he could not say, all the particulars of the intended loan, the sum to be borrowed, and the days on which the several payments were to be made. These he understood had been made known to others by the chancellor of the exchequer, but not to him or to any one with whom he was connected. The usual course had been for the chancellor of the exchequer to give notice to the parties likely to subscribe to the loan, that on such a day he would expect them, and then when they attended him, to unfold his plan to them. To communicate his intentions to one party alone, was to give that party a great and manifest advantage over all the others. Whether such a communication had been made he did not know; but the rumour was so general, that he could not doubt the fact of some communication from the right hon. gentleman having been made.
The Chancellor of the Exchequeragain denied that he had made any communication of the nature alluded to, except in the conversations which he had already mentioned. They were only such communications as he should be very happy

843
to make to the hon. gentleman who had just spoken, and to receive his advice with respect to them.
Mr. Grenfellexpressed his regret to find, that the right hon. gentleman had really done that which he before believed was attributed to him only by calumny. The right hon. gentleman had allowed, that he had made a communication of his financial plan. But were loan-contractors the persons whom the right hon. gentleman ought to consult on such subjects? He was now compelled to believe the rumour that the right hon. gentleman had communicated to certain persons, his intention of raising a loan of 30 millions: and from what the right hon. gentleman had said, or rather from what the right hon. gentleman had abstained from saying, he believed another rumour, namely, that the right hon. gentleman had declared to the same persons, that he did not mean to apply any part of the sinking fund to the service of the current year. The right hon. gentleman had merely said, that the power of so applying the sinking fund was one of the means which the Treasury possessed of preventing any combination or attempt at combination on the part of the monied interest, and to the disadvantage of the public. But what he (Mr. Grenfell) wanted was, not that it should be so held in terrorem; but, that it should be actually used, and the apprehended combination be thereby prevented. If the sinking fund were rendered available to the service of the year, the loan contractors would not be driven to unite in furnishing what might be further required. What single contractor could grapple with such a loan as 30 millions? But it it were reduced to 15 millions, there would be two, three, or four competitors. He repeated, that the communication which had been made to the individuals in question was giving them a decided and an unfair advantage over all the rest of the monied interest in the city. The right hon. gentleman had almost tacitly acknowledged that he had done this. Was he even how prepared to give to the House and to the public the information which he had communicated to the loan-contractors? He was sorry to find that he had entertained a more favourable opinion of the right hon. gentleman than he appeared to be entitled to but he was now completely satisfied that all the rumours which were afloat that very morning were but too well founded.
§
The Chancellor of the Exchequerexpressed his perfect readiness to state in the House whatever he might have stated elsewhere on the subject; and which had been so stated by him only in the course of the conversations which he had held for the purpose of ascertaining, whether it would be more expedient for the public service to raise a large loan, sufficient for the present and the next year, or only a smaller one to cover the necessities of the present year; as also, whether it would be expedient to take the sinking fund, or any part of it, for the same service.
Mr. Barnettobserved, that in his opinion, if the right hon. gentleman had declared to the individuals in question, his intention to abstain from touching the sinking fund, the House ought to interfere to prevent the conclusion of a negotiation on such an understanding.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerreplied that he had already said he had made no stipulation with respect to the sinking; fund, which was of a binding or conclusive nature.
Lord Miltoncensured the course which had been adopted by the right hon. gentleman, and which would deprive the public of the benefit to be derived from a competition for the loan. The right hon. gentleman had admitted, that he had made a communication to some persons respecting his intentions; for as to the assertion of the right hon. gentleman, that he had merely asked them questions with regard to the expediency of various financial plans, it was not difficult to conceive, that a chancellor of the exchequer might ask such questions in a way which would be very clearly indicative of his own purposes.
The Chancellor of the Exchequerrepeated, that he had merely made inquiries to ascertain what plan promised to be the most efficient.
Mr. Grenfellobserved, that if the right hon. gentleman had put his questions only to obtain information, he would not have been culpable; but if he had communicated his own opinion to the loan contractors, he had not discharged his duty. He ridiculed the idea of asking those persons whether it would be expedient to contract for a large or a small loan. Experience had sufficiently shown, that in such cases they had always declared una voce for the former.
The resolution was then agreed to, as were also the following: 2. "That 3,000,000 l.

845
be granted to his majesty to pay off exchequer bills issued pursuant to act 48 Geo. 3, c. 3, continued by an act of the 55th Geo. 3, c. 16, and further continued by an act of 56th Geo. 3, c. 7, intituled, 'An Act to continue until the 5th day of 'April 1818, and amend an act of the '48th year of his present majesty, for 'empowering the governor and com-'pany of the Bank of England to advance 'the sum of three millions towards the 'supply for the service of the year 1808, outstanding and unprovided for. 3. That 1,570,000 l., be granted to his majesty, for discharging interest on exchequer bills, Irish treasury bills, and Mint notes. 4. That 430,000 l. being the one hundredth part of 43,000,000 l. of exchequer bills, authorised in the last session of parliament to be issued and charged upon the aids granted in the present session, be granted to his majesty to be issued and paid by equal quarterly payments to the governor and company of the Bank of England, to be by them placed to the account of the commissioners for the reduction of the national debt, for the year ending the 1st day of February 1819. 5. That 4,400,000 l. be granted to his majesty to pay off and discharge treasury bills, issued for the service of Ireland pursuant to acts 57 Geo. 3, c. 81, and 58 Geo. 3, c. 87, outstanding and unprovided for on the 5th day of January 1819, in British currency.

COURT OF CHANCERY IN IRELAND.
Mr. C. Grantobserved, that in bringing in a bill to regulate the Fees in the Court of Chancery in Ireland, he had to claim the indulgence of the House, as this was a matter of great importance to the sister country. Some years since commissioners were appointed to inquire into the fees paid in the courts of chancery and exchequer in Ireland; those fees had long been a matter of complaint, and were carried so far as, in many instances, to impede the ends of justice. On inquiry, it was found that a scale of fees had existed in 1734, and had been acted upon up to 1767. Since that period the expenses had greatly increased, in some instances so much as 50 per cent. The right hon. member proceeded to state instances of the abuses found to exist. One was, that of charging the stamp duty on a sheet containing 72 words, instead of 90 as was formerly done. The next was fictitious attendances. A master in chancery had the power of
846
issuing summonses to bring parties before him in taxing costs, but the fourth summons only was compulsory. By constructive attendances, however, the party was charged with the fees of the three first summonses, as if he bad been examined each time; and not only was there a charge by the master in chancery for each constructive attendance, but also by the solicitor and six clerks; so that the party had in fact to pay three sets of fees for three several attendances which had never taken place. In one case a six clerk had made a charge of 1297 constructive attendances. He did not mean to cast imputation on the masters in chancery, but he thought no officer should be allowed to regulate the fees in which he was himself a participator. There were two remedies which might be applied to this evil—one was by the orders of the Court, and the other by an act of the legislature. The lord chancellor and the master of the rolls agreed with the commissioners in the principle of their report, but they differed as to the remedy to be applied. The commissioners advised that the taxing bills of costs should be removed altogether from the masters in chancery, and vested in two officers appointed for the purpose with fixed salaries, but without any profits arising from their office. The lord chancellor and the master of the rolls advised that the masters should still continue to tax bills of cost, but with a fixed salary for this particular duty; instead of the fees which they now receive. The only question for the House was, which of those plans was the better calculated to remedy the grievance allowed on all hands to exist. The commissioners were entitled to the attention of parliament, and so were the opinions of the law officers immediately connected with this court. By the bill he was about to introduce, the recommendation of the latter was adopted. One object of the bill was, to compel those words which can be expressed by figures to be so written, and not allow them to be spun out for the purpose of increasing the number of sheets. Another was, to make a sheet consist of 90 instead of 72 words. The present mode of examining witnesses was, by commissioners, two being appointed by each party. Those commissioners, who were generally solicitors, generally managed to have a number of examinations to make in the same place, which, however, did not lessen the expenses of their clients.

847
His bill vested in the lord chancellor the power of appointing twelve barristers to act as commissioners on such occasions, at a fixed rate of charge. It might be urged, that this bill would go to injure the gentlemen who now derived profit from those fees, and who accepted, or perhaps purchased, their situations under the impression of such fees being continued. His intention was, to propose, that the parties should have a compensation for the difference between the salary to be given for the discharge of this duty, and the sums to which they would be entitled by the existing regulation. Here the hon. member quoted the opinions of lord Hardwicke and Mr. Justice Willes in support of this part of the bill. The amount of this compensation might be regulated on ascertaining what the business done by the masters or tax clerk would produce, if the existing regulations were still in force. The commissioners were of opinion, that a moderate stamp duty on bills of costs would make good this compensation. He proposed that the salaries of the masters in chancery should be 800 l. a year each, which would make no more in the whole than 3,200 l. a year. The additional expense on the bills of cost would be freely paid by the parties when they found themselves relieved from the much greater charge of the present system. He was the more anxious to press this, in order to show those connected with the administration of justice in Ireland, that the eyes of parliament were upon them, and that it was intended to follow this up, by a series of measures for reforming the minor courts of justice in that country. He concluded by moving, "That leave be given to bring in a Bill for the easier and better Administration of Justice in the Court of Chancery in Ireland."
Mr. Martin, of Galway, seconded the motion, though he would have preferred adopting the plan recommended by the commissioners.
The Earl of Carhamptondisapproved of the principle adopted with regard to compensation.
Sir J. Newportfelt happy in being able to say that the commission appointed to inquire into courts of justice, had been productive of the most beneficial effects. The labours of the Irish commissioners had indeed been productive of the most valuable results to the public. They had had to contend with every thing which official prejudice could suggest to
848
thwart them, and every thing which interest could put in practice against them. It might be instructive to look at the different manners in which the inquiry was conducted in the three kingdoms. The address which he moved, was carried by one vote on the 28th June 1814, and the commissioners were appointed in March 1815; and he was sorry to say that two masters in chancery were appointed among the English commissioners for inquiry into abuses, many of which were alleged to exist in the offices of the masters in chancery. Six valuable reports had been received from the Irish commissioners, and the results which were of the utmost importance to all who had at heart the due administration of justice, were in possession of every member of the House. The Scotch commissioners had given in five reports, containing in many parts very useful suggestions, and why these suggestions had not been proceeded on, it remained for his majesty's ministers to account to the House. From the English commissioners, however, two reports had only been received in five years. The right hon. baronet proceeded to detail some of the reductions of expense which had been effected, and complained of the unjust principle on which the allowances to the different officers had been augmented, in consequence of which the Six Clerks, who, in England, had not more than 300 l. per annum each, derived in Ireland from 400 l. to upwards of 1,100 l. per annum. It was evident, that if this inquiry had not been gone into, the doors of justice would have been shut to a great part of the public. He congratulated himself therefore on having brought forward this subject, and he had to thank the House for the support which they gave him. To show the enormous nature of the fees in the court of chancery, he might mention that in one case the fees for docketing, enrolling, exemplifying, and registering a decree, amounted to upwards of 800 l. If compensation was afforded at all to the various officers, it ought only to be for fees established by such a length of practice, as to remove all suspicion of the party receiving the compensation being himself accessory to any addition to the fees, officers ought not to derive advantage from their own misinterpretation of Statutes to the injury of the public.
Mr. Leslie Foster, as one of the Irish commissioners, entered into a statement of several of the reforms recommended by

849
them. By the present bill, nearly one-half of the time and money formerly spent by suitors in the court of chancery would be saved. With respect to compensation to the various officers, he had to observe, that many of the officers of the Irish court of chancery were purchasers of their offices under existing laws for valuable considerations, and if any thing ought to be the subject of compensation, it struck him that these offices ought. Scarcely any difference of opinion had existed between the commissioners and the lord chancellor, except on one subject. The commissioners recommended two additional masters in chancery for the business of taxation alone, on the general principle, that officers connected with the business of the court ought to have nothing to do with the taxation. The lord chancellor, however, conceived that taxation might be more beneficially entrusted to an officer previously acquainted with the history of the cause. He still retained his former opinion, but he bowed to superior authority; and he hoped the House would be disposed to receive the benefit as it was, standing as it did, on the recommendation of the lord chancellor and the commissioners, and would not endeavour to enter into the details of the business, with which they could not grapple. The present bill would effect a greater improvement in the court of chancery in Ireland than had ever, he believed, been effected at one in any court of justice.
Mr. Valentine Blakethought the remedy proposed worse than the disease. Vested rights were those of all others which that House protected. He was fearful that sufficient time would not be afforded for the consideration of the measure in question; and as to the report alluded to, what it principally recommended was, the assimilation of the proceedings in the Irish court of Chancery to those of the English Chancery court.
Mr. V. Fitzgeraldsaid, in despite of the gloomy anticipations of the hon. gentleman, he hoped the House would not postpone the bill. Were they to understand, that the lord chancellor and master of the rolls in Ireland wished the bill to be postponed? This bill came before the House with their recommendation, and it was known that they were anxious the bill should now be proceeded in.
Leave was given to bring in the bill.

CHARGE AGAINST BARON M'LELLAN FOR BREACH OF JUDICIAL DUTY.
Mr. Martin, of Galway, said, that in rising to bring forward a substantive charge against a judge, he was well aware of the difficult task he had undertaken. He was sensible, that the House should visit in the severest manner any man who should be daring or wicked enough to bring forward any unfounded charge or calumny against a judge. From the first moment he had heard that all the allegations which he had brought before the House had been flatly traversed by the learned judge whom they regarded, he had treated that contradiction with all the deference due to assertions coming from such a quarter. But he was now determined to prove his own truth and integrity in making those charges; all of which he had reduced to a written one. What would be said of a naval officer who should bring forward an unfounded accusation against a military one; or of a military officer who should' act so in regard to his superior? Why, he believed that the court-martial, whether naval or military, would dismiss the person making such false charge. What would be the House's opinion of him, himself, for he would not shrink from saying so, should he adduce false charges and groundless calumnies against the learned judge? They ought to expel him from their assembly; but what would they say when he told them that he had in the gallery seven or eight witnesses, who were ready not merely to substantiate his averments, but to prove them to be altogether true? The first charge which he had to make against the learned judge was, that he had thought proper to send an armed body of men into the court, by whom all were cleared out of it, with the exception of one hon. gentleman (Mr. V. Blake) who, by some stratagem or other, had the good fortune to hide himself under one of the benches. Not contented with this most unusual and unjustifiable proceeding, he placed sentinels at all the avenues to prevent access to the court. Was this, he asked, conduct to be tolerated in a judge whose bounden duty it was to administer justice with impartiality? But this was not all. A jury which was, at the time when his (Mr. Martin's) trial came on, deliberating upon its verdict in a previous case, was not allowed to deliver that verdict until his cause was decided. The jury was not allowed admittance into the court; and in answer to the second application made

851
for that purpose, M. Baron M'Lellan told the gentlemen, that he would not allow them to be liberated until his (Mr. M.'s) case was decided. He added, "If you knock again, I will commit you." In making the charge against the learned judge, he begged to disclaim all feelings of animosity towards that individual. But it had been said, that this was a motion which was trifling, unfounded, out of time, an attempt to throw obloquy and reproach upon a respectable character, and an unworthy attack upon an excellent judge. In answer to all this he had only to say, that he was most confident that every syllable he had uttered was true. As a friend to the learned judge, he should recommend a strict inquiry; and, as far as respected himself, he was most anxious that an investigation should be made into the whole transaction. The ground upon which the learned judge had refused to postpone the trial was, that there was not a sufficient affidavit produced. But what could have been more satisfactory than the affidavit of Dr. Crampton, the professional gentleman who attended his principal witness, Mr. Coneys, in his illness, and who swore that Mr. Coneys was unable to attend in consequence of severe indisposition? This affidavit was actually sworn, and given to the proper officer of the court. But even supposing that this affidavit had not been made, he was prepared to contend, that the affidavit of a medical gentleman was not necessary upon such an occasion. There was, however, one fact which rendered the conduct of the learned judge inexcusable, namely, that he had access to the information upon which the indictment was founded, and from that document Mr. Baron M'Lellan must have known that the evidence of Mr. Coneys was of the utmost consequence. After some further remarks, he concluded by submitting a charge drawn up in form against the hon. James M'Lellan, and moving, that this House will resolve itself into a committee of the whole House, to take the said Article of Charge into consideration, upon this day fortnight."
Lord Castlereaghobjected to the motion, principally on the ground that the House had no right to interfere in a question of pure practice in the court in which Baron M'Lellan presided. In considering this question, he was actuated by no feelings but those which belonged to the justness of the case; but, be felt quite
852
convinced that the learned judge whose conduct had been thus arraigned was wholly incapable of prostituting the high power with which he had been vested, to answer any private end which he might be supposed to have in view; and he confessed that he saw nothing in the statement which had been made, which could in any manner justify this serious charge against the learned judge. The real question to be considered was, whether there was any rational ground to impute such corruption to baron M'Lellan as to justify the inquiry? And first, he wished the House to recollect, that five years had been suffered to elapse before any steps were taken in parliament upon this subject; and although at that time the country had not the benefit of Mr. Martin's talents as a representative, yet as an individual he might have laid his case before the legislature. With respect to the interference of the military, he was fully aware that it was not customary in this country to introduce soldiers into courts of justice; but in Ireland the practice was totally different, and troops were frequently called in for the preservation of order. With respect to this individual instance, he certainly was not acquainted with the particular circumstances under which the learned judge had thought proper to call in the military; but this did not alter the view he had taken of the case, for it still resolved itself into a question of practice only, with which this House ought not to interfere. The hon. member had wished to advocate his own cause, and to examine his own witnesses; but this, it appeared, was in direct violation of all the rules of practice; and however competent the hon. member might be, and he had no doubt from the proof of his great abilities in this House, that he was most, competent to conduct his own cause, yet, as it was against all practice, it was most proper that he should have been interrupted in that proceeding. The hon. member was certainly competent to lay the charge upon the table, but he should advise him to withdraw the complaint altogether. If the object of the hon. member was, to exculpate himself in some measure, he could assure him (and in saying so he was sure he spoke the sentiments of the House), that, as far as the hon. member was concerned, there was not the slightest occasion for the proceeding, as the hon. member had not subjected himself to the animadversions or imputa-

853
tions of any one by the line of conduct be had pursued.
Mr. Martinsaid, it was utterly impossible for the noble lord, on any occasion, to make a request to him in vain; and since, in the opinion of the noble lord, and he trusted of the House, there was nothing that tended to compromise his veracity, he had no objection to acquiesce in the noble lord's suggestion. He was therefore quite satisfied to let the article lie on the table, and not appoint any specific day for taking it into consideration.
Lord Castlereaghsaid, if the hon. member thought of leaving the article on the table, it must, of course, be entered on the Journals, and to prevent that, the House must proceed to some determination. If the hon. member would consent to withdraw the article, it would relieve the House from the necessity of any further proceedings.
Mr. Martinsaid, be had no objection to the removal of the article, but he could not be the person to move the withdrawing of his own motion.
The Speakerobserved, that he understood from the hon. member he would at least withdraw his motion for the House resolving itself into a committee on this day fortnight, to take the article of charge into consideration.
Mr. Brownlowthought, as the charge was of so very serious a nature, and affected the credit and character of a learned judge, it ought not, having been formally laid on the table, to be withdrawn, until the friends 'of the learned judge had an opportunity of delivering their sentiments, If his suggestion were favourably received by the House, he was ready to state What had come to his knowledge on thesubject—[Cries of "Go on, go on"]
The Speakersaid, the proper course was, to name some day when this charge should be taken into consideration: The hon. mover, in obedience to the pleasure of the House, had withdrawn his substantive motion. The charge was now laid on the table of the House, and it must be got rid of somehow or other. It might either be expunged from the Journals, or rejected. If it were otherwise dealt with, it must necessarily appear on the Journals.
Sir J. Stewartcensured the introduction of such a charge against the learned judge, after a lapse of five years, as a most unkind thing. "The only crime imputed to the learned judge was, that he
854
had refused a most improper application. When the hon. member sought to be heard in his own defence, after he had employed counsel, he requested that which he must have known could not be conceded to him, and which was in direct opposition to the principles on which the courts of law, both in this country and in Ireland, uniformly acted. The judges had examined the statement made by the hon. gentleman, that the witness, on whose account he wished the trial to be postponed, was a material one; and they decided that he was not. When five years were suffered to pass away, before their decision was questioned, the House were bound to believe that the decision was a correct one. The conduct of the learned judge he considered to be quite irreproachable. During the last four years, he had established so high a character in Ireland, that no attack which might be made on it here, could shake the general respect which his integrity, his diligence, and his profound knowledge of the law had created. The hon. baronet then moved, "That the said Article of Charge be rejected."
Mr. Martinsaid, he had already stated, that he was willing to adopt any course that the noble lord might point out. Rut when it was expected that he should withdraw a charge which he himself had made, he found that he was incompetent to do it.
Mr. Crawfordobserved, that he was acquainted with the learned judge, and a more upright man never sat on the bench. But he left his character to the gentlemen of the Irish bar, to those who best knew the dignity and humanity with which he had always conducted himself in his exalted situation. He therefore cheerfully supported the motion for rejecting the charge.
The said Article of Charge was then rejected.

INSOLVENT DEBTORS BILL.
Lord Althorp Lord Althorp moved the second reading of this bill.
Mr. Waithmandeclared, he was sorry to trespass at that late hour on the patience of the House, but the present subject; being one to which he had devoted much time and attention, he felt it his duty to submit a few observations respecting it. In the principles upon which the bill now before the House was framed, he entirely concurred, but there there some

855
parts of the evidence annexed to the report which seemed to him to call for animadversion Although the question was not of a popular or attractive nature, it was of the most general importance, not only as it affected the trading classes, but every branch of the community. Within the last four years persons had been discharged under the Insolvent debtors act, the aggregate amount of whose debts was upwards of 10,000,000 l. The Tight hon. the chancellor of the exchequer had expressed his astonishment, that the trading classes could have sustained and borne up under losses to this amount. But many of them had not been able to bear up against, but had sunk under them. The amount of dividends upon this 10,000,000 l. of debt was but 60,600 l. There was another class of insolvents who had come to arrangements with their creditors, and the amount of their debts, independently of the former class, was 5,000,000 l. The act had failed of accomplishing any one of the objects for which it was passed. It was but fair on this occasion to vindicate the character of the petitioners, who had been represented as a set of men desirous of immuring the bodies of those who were destitute of the means of paying their debts. The petitioners were actuated by no such feelings; they complained only of the defects of the existing law. The commissioner had, indeed, contended, that the act had this advantage over the bankrupt laws, that it made the property acquired subsequently by an insolvent, liable for his debts, and this had been called the polar star of the act. He would, however, venture to state, that a creditor might as well attempt to reach the polar star, as avail himself of such an advantage under the provisions of this act. There had been a few cases in which money had been received after his discharge, from the debtor, but it was not to be ascribed to the force of the measure he was considering. The salary of the commissioner, who sat only 74 days in the year, was 2,000 l., and to this is added fees which had never been received by his predecessor. Those fees were established soon after the appointment of the present commissioner, and the amount of what he had himself received, for the years 1817 and 1818, the only period for which any account had been delivered, was upwards of 1,400 l. The chief clerk, who had a salary of 400 l., had received more than 1,800 l. and the receiver of the
856
court, his own son, more than 1,000 l. The whole amount of the money collected by the latter, was 15,229 l. 2s. 4d., upon which he enjoyed a per-centage, having at the same time a balance in his hands of 5,753 l., the interest on which he also received. The result of all the accounts was to show, that the fees and balances in hand were equal to the whole sum paid into the receiver. It was a cruel thing that fees should be extorted from distressed persons going out into the world, after having surrendered their all. The unfortunate debtor was often compelled to surrender his last shilling. Having stated thus much, he should only add, that if these things were not facts, they must bring him into disrepute with the House; and if they were facts, they must convince the House and the public that a system of oppression and exaction had been preying on the industry of the country. He agreed with the principle of this measure, and hoped that such a bill would be produced as would give satisfaction to the debtor, and security to the creditor.
Mr. Calcraft, having been a member of the committee, although he had not been present when the report was drawn up, hoped that the House would indulge him for a few minutes. He certainly had not been prepared for the turn which the debate had taken, as he did not expect that the worthy alderman would have expressed his sentiments on the propriety of the present bill, by launching into violent abuse of the former act. He could not help remarking, that a spirit of crimination seemed to have actuated the whole of the worthy alderman's conduct in the discussion of the subject. The worthy alderman had complained that the petitioners against the bill had been represented as unfeeling and heard-hearted; but he was not aware that any person had quarrelled with the petitioners on account of their opinions. He had certainly differed in opinion from those who petitioned against the principle of the act, but he had not quarrelled with them on that account, nor had he accused them of being unfeeling. He was glad to say, however, that many of those who had formerly been hostile to the measure were now satisfied with it, and had declared that if such provisions were introduced, into the bill as had been introduced, that was all they wanted. As to the commissioners taking fees, he certainly did not approve of the practice; but at the

857
same time, if you do not give them fees, they must be paid in some other manner; for it was not to be supposed that any gentleman would devote his time and labour to this duty without an adequate remuneration. The chief clerk, who was obliged to devote the whole of his time to the duties of his office, had a salary of only 400 l., and he believed that the whole of his income, fees and all, did not exceed 1,200 l. The worthy alderman had represented as an enormous grievance, that out of 10,000,000 l. of debts, the assets had amounted only to 60,000 l.; but if people were insolvent, and had no property, why blame the court because there were no assets? The fact was, that most of the persons who took the benefit of the Insolvent Debtors act were of the very poorest description, and it was impossible, by any process, to make good dividends out of their property. He certainly did not approve of the clause which appointed three commissioners in the place of one; but he should reserve his objections to this provision, as well as to the fees of the commissioners, till the details of the bill came to be discussed in the committee.
Mr. John Smithsupported the bill. It was true, as had been stated by the hon. gentleman who spoke last, that most of the persons who took the benefit of the Insolvent act were of the poorest class; and even if they were not, he believed there was little chance of the creditor being benefited by a commission of bankruptcy. He believed that if the present measure were carried into effect, it would be productive of the greatest benefit.
The bill was read a second time.

CASH PAYMENTS BILL.
Mr. Peel Mr. Peel moved the second reading of this bill.
Mr. Ellicesaid, that when the bill was in the committee, he meant to move, that, instead of the enactment, that the Bank should pay their notes, on the 1st of February, 1820, in gold, at 4l. 1s. per ounce, and, on the 1st of October 1820, in gold, at 3l. 19 s. 6d. per ounce, there should be inserted a clause, directing, that, from the 1st of October 1820, the Bank should pay their notes in gold at the rate of 3l. 17 s. 10½d. per ounce, or else in the current coin of the realm.
Mr. Grenfellsaid, there was one point in the speech delivered by the noble lord on a former occasion, which he wished to understand perfectly. The noble lord
858
was stated to have said, that the period for the resumption of payment in gold was not fixed at a time prior to the 1st of February next, because, if any reason arose for altering or interrupting the progress of the present measure, as parliament would be then sitting, there would be a full opportunity for effecting any change that might be deemed necessary. As this seemed to favour an idea that some doubts were entertained of the stability of the plan, he thought it was important for the public to know what the noble lord did really say on the subject.
Lord Castlereaghthought it was quite impossible for any person, who attended to what he had said, to misunderstand him. He had stated particularly, that the committee had recommended the 1st of February rather than the 1st of March, or the 1st of April, or the 1st of May, because no further legislative enactment was contemplated. The only objection which he thought could be raised against the plan recommended by the committee, had no reference to the present state of the exchange or other matters connected with it, but pointed to so extreme a case, as could only be the offspring of the utmost necessity, and, therefore, ought not to be admitted as an argument in opposition to the new plan. The 1st of February was mentioned for the purpose of destroying all delusion on the subject; for parliament met so late in January, that, unless a new measure were formed in twenty four-hours, no alteration in the then existing enactment could take place.
Mr. Grenfellthanked the noble lord for having re-stated what he had before said. It was a matter of considerable importance.
The bill was then read a second time.