Sitting of 4 March 1842

MINUTES.
BILLS. Public.—1°. Copyright: Corn Importation; Forged Exchequer Bills.
2°. West India Clergy.
Private.—1°. Holywell Roads; Newgate Gaol (Dublin). 2°. Weston-super-Mare Improvement; Boston Harbour; Edinburgh and Glasgow Railway; Cheltenham and Great Western Union Railway; St. Pancras Improvement; Duke of Bedford's Estate; St. Austell's Market.
PETITIONS PRESENTED. By Mr. Marsland, from Manchester, Mr. Busfeild, from the same place, Lord Duncan, from
42
St. Marylebone, and other places, and other hon. Members, from a considerable nnmber of places, for the Repeal of the Corn-laws.—By Sir D. Roche, from Millers of Limerick, and an hon. Member from Millers of Gloucestershire, to Encourage the Importation of Wheat in preference to Flour.—By an hon. Member, from Corn-law Inspectors, for Compensation.—By Mr. F. T. Baring, from Portsmouth, for Permitting Foreign Corn in Bond to be Ground for Exportation.—By Mr. Cavendish, from Youghall, against such Permission.—By Mr. Ainsworth, from Little Bolton, and Lord G. Bentinck, from Lynn, against the Borough Improvements and Buildings Regulations Bills.—By Colonel Conolly, from Letterkenny, for the Abolition of Church Patronage.—By Mr. J. Young, from Bailiborow, and other places (Ireland), for Legalizing certain Marriages by Dissenters.—By an hon. Member, from Haverfordwest, against making Bristol the point of communication with Ireland.—By an hon. Member from Tiverton, for Facilitating the Appointment of Trustees for Charitable Objects.—By Mr. Mitcalfe, from Tynemouth, to Exempt Literary and Scientific Institutions from Taxation.—By Mr. Tennyson D'Eyncourt, from Old and New Kent Roads, for the Redemption of Tolls on the Metropolitan Bridges; and from Lambeth, for a Share in any Grant made for Metropolitan Improvements.—By Mr. Litton, from Aughaulor, for an Alteration of the System of Education (Ireland).—By an hon. Member, from Keiss, for the Better Observance of the Sabbath.—By Sir D. Roche, from Limerick, for Amendment of the Municipal Corporations (Ireland) Act; and from Licensed Victuallers of Limerick, for placing those of Ireland and England on the same footing.—By Mr. T. Duncombe, from Myton, for an Alteration of the Poor-law.—By Mr. O'Connell, from Warrington, for a Repeal of the Union.—By Sir Charles Douglas, from Liverpool, and Bridgewater, in favour of the Municipal Corporations Bill.—By an hon. Member, from Alnwick, for Reconsideration of the Taxes on Land.

IMPORTATION OF CORN FROM AMERICA.
Sir R. Peelsaid, that the hon. and gallant Officer opposite had the other evening given notice of a motion for information respecting the time occupied by vessels laden with corn in their passage from the various parts of the United States to Liverpool. He had since ascertained that there were no means of gaining official information on this point directly from the Customs at Liverpool; but he had obtained a statement from the American consul at that place, which would perhaps answer the hon. and gallant Officer's purpose, and if so, the hon. and gallant Gentleman could, if he pleased, now move for this return.
Sir C. Napiersaid, that he did not want to go to the American consul for the information in request. He should have imagined that the proper quarter whence to obtain it was the Packet-office, and he was only sorry to find that the accounts at that office were kept in so extraordinary a manner.
Sir R. Peelsaid, the information he had proffered was the best he had been able to obtain.
Sir C. Napiersaid, that if the right hon. Gentleman was satisfied with going to the

43
American consul for information, he had no objection himself; and the hon. and gallant Officer then moved that there be laid on the Table a return of the number of vessels laden with corn which, between January 1, 1841, and January 1, 1842, arrived at Liverpool from the various ports of the United States, and the number of days occupied by each vessel on the voyage.
Sir R. Peellaid the return on the Table.
Sir C. Napiersaid, that the return included the vessels laden with flour, information as to which he had not asked for.
Sir R. Peelsaid, that the vessel of which the hon. and gallant Officer spoke in the first instance was laden with 1,000 barrels of flour.
Sir C. Napiersaid, the flour did not come from him, but from an hon. and gallant Officer opposite.
Subject at an end.

LOSSES AT PORTENDIC.
An hon. Memberbegged to ask the right hon. Baronet at the head of the Government whether any, and if any, what progress had been made in the negotiation with France, in relation to the indemnity claimed by certain British subjects, for losses sustained in trade at Portendic, in Africa, from the conduct of the French authorities.
Sir R. Peelsaid, that some time ago, he believed in April, 1840, a joint commission was appointed by the Governments of this country and France, for the purpose of inquiring into the claims on account of the Portendic affair, and in the hope of coming to some satisfactory settlement. There had been frequent delays in the proceedings of the commission, but very recently the English commissioner had returned to Paris, and the proceedings were renewed. Without being able to convey a distinct impression to the House, he entertained the hope that the commissioner woud be able to come to some satisfactory conclusion. If that hope should be disappointed, and the commissioners be unable to come to any satisfactory conclusion, he would take the earliest opportunity of giving notice of the interruption.

EFFECT OF CORN AVERAGES ON TITHES.
Mr. Milner Gibsonwished to know from the right hon. Baronet at the head of the Government whether any communication on the part of certain dig-
44
nitaries and clergy of the Established Church, had taken place with any Member of her Majesty's Government, relative to the new system of taking the corn averages, and expressing a fear, on the part of the Church, that drawing the averages from an increased number of towns would have an unfavourable effect on the tithe-rent charge; also praying the Government to adhere to the existing system of averages, on account of that apprehension.
Sir R. Peelsaid, he was in the habit of receiving forty or fifty letters every day on the subject of the Corn-laws, and he could not undertake to speak as to the contents of them all. He had seen some letters on the subject to which the hon. Member referred, drawing exactly opposite conclusions. He was not aware of any formal communication, such as he supposed the hon. Member referred to, at least he had received none. He had no communication on the subject referred to, except individual letters, and those in no great number, and no formal communication from any body of men.

CORN AVERAGES—ADDITIONAL TOWNS.
Lord J. Russellsaid, he had understood from the Vice-President of the Board of Trade, that before the House went into committee on the Corn-Bill, the list of new towns would undergo re-investigation, with a view of seeing whether any had been improperly selected, or any which should be left out. He had received several letters on this part of the subject, stating, that there were places in some particular counties where there was a regular corn trade excluded, and some where very little corn was sold left in the list. He did not mean to say, that there had been any partiality, but he wished to know whether, at any time, there would be a statement of the reasons for deciding on the particular towns which had been selected.
Sir R. Peel:Let me bring up the bill, and I will answer the question.

CORN-LAWS — MINISTERIAL PLAN — (FIRST READING OF THE BILL).
The Bill brought in and read a first time. On the motion for fixing the second reading,
Sir R. Peelsaid, he would take that opportunity of answering the question which the noble Lord had just put. This bill had been drawn up in conformity with

45
the resolutions which had passed through committee, and assented to by the House. It had been drawn up in general conformity with the explanation which he had made on the part of her Majesty's Government on moving for leave to bring it in. There were one or two points which it might be convenient now to state with respect to it. In the first place, with respect to the present inspectors, he had received a great many communications, representing the hardship of immediately removing them, and that removal would give ground for claims for compensation, which he was certainly very anxious to avoid, when it could be done consistently with the due performance of the public service. The arrangement which he proposed to make with respect to inspectors was this—in all new towns to place the averages under the Excise-officers, acting under the authority of the Board of Excise. In existing towns to continue in office those inspectors who might be perfectly efficient for the performance of their duties, and to place them under the control of the Board of Excise. Power was to be given to the Treasury, acting in concurrence with the Board of Trade, if they deemed it advisable, to grant superannuation allowances to inspectors removed from office, where, from length of service and good conduct, they might be entitled to retiring allowance. The whole duty would be performed by the Excise without expense, or at a very small additional expense to that attending their other functions. There would, therefore, be a saving of the chief part of the present expense of taking the averages. With regard to the period at which he proposed, that his bill should come into operation—a point on which a question was put to him the other night—as the bill was, in every instance, a relaxation or remission of existing duties, it appeared to him desirable (and he trusted all would concur in this) that when the bill received the assent of the Legislature, it should come into operation as speedily as possible. Its practical operation might be postponed until the new system of averages could be applied to the regulation of the duties, or the new duties might be regulated for a short period by the present system of averages. He thought, upon the whole, that it was for the public interest that the bill should come into operation as soon as possible, and therefore be did not propose that it should wait for the new system of averages. The bill, therefore, upon passing
46
into a law, would come immediately into effect. The new duties would be regulated by the old averages at first, and, at the termination of the first six weeks, the new averages would take effect. With respect to the noble Lord's question, the revision in the list of towns which had been promised had taken place. He had stated from the first, that in extending the area from which the returns were collected, his object was to have more accurate means of judging of the quantity of corn sold, and of the price of that corn, and also to take additional precaution against fraudulent combinations for the purpose of affecting the averages. He had uniformly stated, at the same time, that in adding to the list of towns, he had no design to affect indirectly the amount of protection to domestic produce. He did not wish to diminish the average price, or raise the duty by increasing the number of towns. The noble Lord asked on what principle the towns had been selected. It was exceedingly difficult to act on any very satisfactory principles in the selection. It was not very easy in towns in which there were no inspectors to ascertain their relative importance, or the quantity of corn sold. It was evidently very difficult to determine the importance of the markets in towns so circumstanced. But in the revision of the list of towns, they had acted on this principle, which appeared to him a fair one. At present, there were 150, or perhaps 151 towns, in which averages were collected by means of inspectors, and of these a certain number were in the midst of agricultural districts, and a certain number were chiefly of a manufacturing and commercial character. They took first the manufacturing and commercial towns which were not now included in the list, and added them to the existing number. They then made a selection of towns in agricultural districts, and attempted to maintain the same ratio between them and the manufacturing towns added, which existed between the agricultural and manufacturing towns of the existing list. That was the principle on which they attempted to proceed. The noble Lord would have an opportunity of seeing the list, and of course of showing omissions in it if there should be any. Some gentlemen might have local information, which he (Sir R. Peel) had not the means of procuring. There might be errors in the list of towns, and some which were omitted might be of greater importance than some which were selected. He could

47
only say, that he had taken all the means in his power to collect the most important towns, and if any one could point out an error, it would be a subject for discussion when the bill was in committee. It was his wish—subject of course to the pleasure of the House—that as the sense of the House had been marked with respect to the resolutions, the measure should be framed as rapidly as it could, consistently with that degree of deliberation which the House might think fit to give to its details. He would, therefore, propose to fix the second reading for Monday next. If it should be desired again to debate the measure upon the principle, and if other business should prevent there being time for considering it—of course, he would not bring it forward at an hour unsuitable for that discussion. If the sense of the House was in favour of the bill, as an improvement of the existing law, he would do all in his power to bring it into speedy operation—not pressing it on unduly against the wish of those who might be inclined to take part in the discussion of it. He believed the bill would be printed to-morrow. He should fix Monday for the second reading, with the understanding that, if the business of supply should occupy the attention of the House until a late period on that evening, the second reading should be fixed for a future day.
Bill to be read a second time on Monday. It was ultimately fixed for Wednesday.

THE MANUFACTURERS—THE TRUCK SYSTEM.
Mr. Cobdenhad to claim the indulgence of the House in a matter personal to himself. It would be in the recollection of the House, that a week ago, an hon. Member had stated some facts referring to him. It was stated, that while he was complaining of the operation of the Corn-laws, he was working his mills night and day, by which cruel means he had amassed a large fortune. The facts not being then within his knowledge, he did not think proper to answer this statement; but he had written into the country for the fullest and most precise information, that he might meet the charges with statements of facts. He might first mention, that the concern in which he was interested, employed 600 persons, and during the last eighteen months they had employed at night twenty men. Of these, ten were employed from the 31st of July to the 4th of September, and during the long interval
48
he had mentioned, eighteen months, ten were employed casually in finishing up particular dressings, work which the business occasionally required. Now, the charge of cruelty towards himself of course implied, that the same men were employed night and day. He might, therefore, be allowed by the House to explain that they had furnished work by night to hands who were out of work, and who would have had nothing else to do, if they had not employed them. He would read an extract from the letter he had received on this point. It was as follows:—
"I only wish we could employ 500 extra hands at night at the present time; we could have 5,000 if we required them, and very glad the poor fellows would be to get to work at at night. The working men were never so badly off as they are at the present time since I can remember."
Now he might mention, with regard to the cotton-printing business, as the House did not seem to have a very clear knowledge of the distinction between a cotton mill and a print work, that cotton printing, like some other branches of trade, had its seasons, and to prevent a cotton printer from occasionally employing half a score men at night, in particular seasons, would be like interdicting the printing of magazines, which were required once a month, or of newspapers, or any other work which was required to be performed in a very short period. He mentioned this, in order that hon. Gentlemen might know, that there was a distinction between a cotton print work and a spinning mill. He hoped that the two had not been confounded, from a desire of fixing upon him that peculiar odium which seemed to be attached to the cotton-mill. Between the two there was, in fact, no more analogy than between a cotton-mill and that House. The hon. Gentleman opposite had made a sweeping charge against the Anti-Corn-law League, stating that the manufacturers who belonged to that body paid their wages upon the truck system. Now, that as a violation of the law, or at best an evasion of the law, was a very serious charge; and as he was proud to avow himself a very conspicuous member of the Anti-Corn-law League, he hoped he might be allowed to state, as far as he was interested, how far that charge was deserved. He would read another extract from the letter to which he had referred:—
"You are aware, that our wages are paid every Saturday morning, and our rule is, that

49
every person on the works shall be paid by eight o'clock with money, so that they can lay out their money to the best advantage, when and where they please."
Now, nothing could possibly be more futile than for a person like himself to stand up there and to disclaim the truck system if he practised it; for he could assure them that the shopkeepers in the neighbourhood of any large establishment were exceedingly jealous, and very acute in perceiving who were the parties who paid in money and who were not. He, therefore, begged to say, in answer to the hon. Gentleman opposite, that he had paid 20,000 l. a year for wages for some years, and that he had never either directly or indirectly, been concerned in keeping any shop about the establishment; every farthing had been paid in money. That fact was notorious to every one in the neighbourhood of the establishment to which he belonged. And now he must be allowed to state, that the hon. Gentleman opposite, when he made his charge so broadly, without excepting him, was aware at the time, from an hon. Gentleman opposed to him in politics, who lived near to his establishment, and who had told the hon. Member, that as far as he was concerned, that charge was unfounded. He now called on the hon. Member for Wigan, though an opponent in politics, to state whether every word he had now alleged was not the truth. As he had said a week ago, he would however repeat, that he considered this to be a very undignified occupation for that House, and he might be allowed to state, that in future he hoped he should not be expected to come forth and occupy the time of the House in refuting charges of this kind from the same quarter. If any hon. Gentleman should condescend to take the slightest interest in his personal character, he would refer him to his neighbours and to his work-people. He would refer him directly to them, and if any hon. Gentleman in that House or out of it, should take upon himself to speak as to his character, he should wish to observe towards that person the golden rule of "doing unto others as he would have others do unto him," and institute inquiries as to his character in his own neighbourhood. Before sitting down, he might be allowed to state, that an hon. Gentleman, in that House had been entrusted with a declaration from a large body of individuals in Lancashire, who had requested him to lay before that House a distinct
50
denial of the charges so broadly made against the members of the Anti-Corn-law League. He was much obliged to the House for the patience with which they had heard him.
Mr. Villierssaid, that as he was the person that his hon. Friend the Member for Stockport had referred to, as having in his possession certain statements made by persons who had been charged by the hon. Member for Knaresborough, the House would, perhaps, allow him at this moment to call their attention to their contents. The House would remember the circum-stances under which those charges were made; it was on the occasion of the motion which he had made on the Corn-laws, and upon the Member for Knaresborough speaking upon the question, and resting his argument against it upon certain things which he imputed to those manufacturers who had contributed to the Corn-law League. Those charges were of so serious a character, and appeared to produce so striking an effect on the opposite side of the House, that he was induced to observe, in his reply, that the matter could not rest where the hon. Member had left it, and that he thought that the Member who had so assailed the character of these persons, as well as those who, by their cheers, marked their belief in his statements, were bound to take some steps to substantiate them. What passed, however, in the House that night having become matter of notoriety out of the House, many of the persons whose characters were thus impugned, were advised, as far as those charges were of a specific character, so far to notice them as would satisfy the public of their incorrectness. What he held then in his hand, was a document which had been forwarded to him that morning, containing the extract from the hon. Gentleman's speech, with a declaration under it, signed by seventy-two among the principal manufacturers in Lancashire, who were chief contributors to the Corn-law League, and which, with the leave of the House, he would then read. It begins with the passage in the hon. Gentleman's speech, which was as follows:
"When detailing the other night the misery, the oppression, the plunder and robbery, committed on the poor by the Anti-Corn-law League manufacturers, I brought under the notice of the House the evils of the truck system. I have since received some further information upon that subject. But before I

51
read to the House a statement which will make it stand aghast, which will freeze its blood with horror, I wish particularly to re-assert, in the presence of the House, that I do not charge the whole of the manufacturers of England with being parties to this nefarious system. I positively declare, that I charge only the Anti-Corn-law League manufacturers. I have been told by many manufacturers in my own neighbourhood—as honourable men as ever lived, and of whose society I am proud—I have been told by them, time after time, that they cannot compete with the Anti-Corn-law League manufacturers, because it was their practice to pay their men in money, and not in goods.….The manner in which the law was evaded was thus described. On Saturday the people went into a room to receive their wages. They were paid at the time in money, but instead of retiring by the door through which they entered, they had to pass into another room, in which sat a person who kept the books of the truck shop, and to whom the workmen had to pay every farthing that they had expended during the previous week in buying goods and clothing; and if it were proved that any one of the men had purchased one single farthing's worth of goods from any other shop than that which belonged to his master, he was, without one word of explanation, discharged.…. It is a notorious fact, that the master manufacturers clear 25 per cent. by the goods they sell to their workmen."
He had taken the liberty of stating at the time that he thought these charges ought not to rest there, and that those who cheered the hon. Member, were bound to see that he established his charges against the persons whose characters were attacked. The manufacturers having considered his statement, had, in a formal and deliberate manner, drawn up the following denial of the charges:—
"We, the undersigned manufacturers, and others, engaged in and connected with the cotton trade, being subscribers to the Anti-Corn-law League, having read with feelings of disgust and indignation the above extracts from Mr. Ferrand's speech, do hereby repudiate, in the most unequivocal manner, the charges therein contained, and do declare that, as far as we are concerned, they are utterly destitute of truth; that we keep no truck shops, and that we do not pay our work-people in any other way than in the current coin of the realm.
"Signed by seventy-two Members of the Anti-Corn-law League."
This, Sir, is what these persons said to the charges brought against them in this House by the hon. Gentleman; he had read their names to the House, and he was perfectly ready to furnish that Gen-
52
tleman with the list, with their residences appended; and he thought now that the House would say, that that hon. Gentleman was bound to justify or retract what he had stated.
Mr. Ferrand:first of all, in reply to the hon. Member for Stockport, I beg leave most distinctly (to state that I did not charge him with cruelty to his workmen. The hon. Member has not given me notice of this, but so far as I can recollect at the moment, I shall state what I said. I said that the hon. Member for Stockport, whilst night after night he was proclaiming that the Corn-laws were the cause of the distress of the country, was working his mills both day and night. I never used such an expression as "abominable cruelty," and I never referred to ill-treatment of his towards his workmen. The hon. Member said, that I charged him with practising the truck-system. I never did charge him with that. If it was my intention to charge the hon. Member with practising the truck system, I should have plainly told him so in his presence. An hon. Member, as he has stated to the House, had previously told me that the hon. Member for Stockport was not guilty of the truck system, that he paid his workmen in money. I hope I have said sufficient to satisfy the hon. Member that I did not charge him with the truck system. With regard to what the hon. Member for Wolverhampton has stated, I beg leave to assert that I am prepared to prove, by credible witnesses, before a committee of this House, that members of the Anti-Corn-law League paid their workmen's wages in goods. [An hon. Member, "You charged the whole of them."] I did not say all. I never used the word "all." But now I again assert that I am prepared to prove, on the oath of magistrates, of clergymen, of gentlemen of high standing, of manufacturers, of tradesmen, and of workpeople, who have given me their names since I brought this question before the House, and who have declared, not only that they are ready to come forward before a committee to prove what I have asserted, but what an hon. Member of the other side of the House said he was ready to do, they are prepared to prove every word I have stated, and ten times more.
Mr. Villiersrose and said, I must repeat as distinctly and unequivocally as I can, that the hon. Gentleman did charge

53
all the manufacturers. ["Cries of order."]
The Chancellor of the Exchequerrose to order. He would suggest that when an hon. Member declared positively that he did not use certain words, it was not consistent with the usage of Parliament for another hon. Gentlemen to rise immediately and positively deny that statement.
Mr. Labouchererose also to order. He did not understand his hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton to assert that the hon. Gentleman opposite charged all the manufacturers, but that the hon. Gentleman had charged, as he certainly understood the hon. Member for Knaresborough to do, the bulk of the manufacturers of the Anti-Corn-law League with paying their men by the truck system.
Mr. Villierssaid, I trust the House will allow me to state what did take place on a former evening. Hon. Gentlemen present can bear me out in the correctness of the statement. I did misapprehend the hon. Member for Knaresborough in one respect. In my reply I said he charged all the manufacturers. That led to a disclaimer on the other side of the House, and at the same time some one reminded me of what the hon. Gentleman had said. I then said, "I understand the hon. Gentleman limited his charge to all the manufacturers who contributed to the association of the Anti-Corn-law League." The hon. Gentleman touched his hat, and said, "Decidedly." I do not say that the hon. Gentleman used the word "all," but that he included in his charge every manufacturer who had contributed to the Anti-Corn-League.
The Speakersaid, it was contrary to order to repeat a statement to which a positive denial had been given by the hon. Member for Knaresborough. When any hon. Member made a statement in his place, it could not be questioned, by the rules of the House by any other hon. Member.
Mr. Villierssaid, then if I misapprehended the hon. Member, I am ready to receive his explanation that, instead of all the manufacturers of the Anti-Corn-law League, he alluded only to some individuals.
Sir B. Hallsaid, the hon. Member for Salford had a motion for Tuesday next for returns relative to the truck system, upon which the hon. Member for Knaresborough had given notice of an amend-
54
ment to extend it. Supposing the information could be obtained, and he feared it would be difficult to get it, would the hon. Member for Salford propose an inquiry into the truck system? He hoped he would do so, for knowing as he did, that the truck system existed to a great extent in the part of the kingdom with which be was immediately connected, after the statements which had been made, he thought it was utterly impossible for the matter to rest in its present stage. He did not believe it was in the power of the Legislature to put down the truck system completely, but by inquiry into it, and making public the result, it might be much checked.
Mr. Brothertonintended to move for a return of the cotton, woollen, hose, and silk mills, in which the truck system existed, because those mills were regulated by Act of Parliament, and the inspectors could furnish the returns. With respect to factories not subject to inspection, he did not see how the information could be obtained. His object was not to show the extent to which the truck system existed, for he believed, that it was not practised by any factories subject to inspection by law. He had made inquiry on the subject, and had ascertained that the inspector could make the return.
Lord John Russellsaid, before he made any observation concerning the second reading of the bill before the House, he thought it important that the House should understand the manner in which the question rested with respect to accusations brought against certain of the manufacturers of this country. He certainly did not understand any allegation to have been made positively of all the manufacturers belonging to the Anti-Corn-law League. He understood the accusation to have been made with the explanation that it did not apply to all the manufacturers of England, but only to those belonging to the Anti-Corn-law League. Certainly, the impression with which he went away—he did not know the precise words used—was, that the accusations were applied to the great hulk, the great majority of those manufacturers; that the general description of the manufacturers belonging to the Anti-Corn-law League was, that they were guilty, first, of fraudulent practices with regard to their manufactures, and, in the second place, of actually cheating their workmen, by paying them in goods worth 25 per cent. less than were charged. It now appeared, as he

55
understood the explanation of the hon. Member for Knaresborough, that what he meant was only that some of the manufacturers of the Anti-Corn-law League were guilty of these practices, and that, to that extent, he was ready to prove his statement. That certainly was not in contradiction with the declaration read by his hon. Friend. There might be manufacturers belonging to the Anti-Corn-law League who had been guilty of these practices, as there might be manufacturers in favour of the Corn-law who were guilty of the same. In like manner, charges might be brought against farmers. Some cases might be found of farmers paying the wages of their labourers in a very narrow and oppressive manner. What was to be avoided, if possible, was bringing forward charges of this kind in such a manner as to produce the impression that any great body of our countrymen, whether engaged in manufactures or in agriculture, were guilty of fraudulent practices. It was much to be regretted that when the hon. Member made an accusation so limited and so confined, that he did not express himself more cautiously, and much more guardedly; and above all, that those who listened to him should not have instantly come to the conclusion, which it seemed to him they had now arrived at, that the hon. Member had directed his charges against all the manufacturers who were members of the Anti-Corn-law League. The hon. Gentleman had, on further explanation, stated, that he had the means of bringing charges against certain persons, and no doubt he would have the opportunity of doing so. That was the way in which the case rested at present. He, for his part, had heard with pain the speech of the hon. Member. He had seen with very great pain, likewise, the charges that were to be found in many speeches made not in that House, but out of that House, by those who belonged to the Anti Corn-law League. There were charges imputing to those who were for maintaining the Corn-laws, that they wished to maintain them, and were animated with the wish so to maintain them, in order that they might enjoy a revenue at the expense of the people. He did not think that anybody would deny that such charges had been made. Whatever a person's occupation might be, that mode of occupation might bias the person's views as to what were the views of the national interest; but then it was not to be supposed that any part of their
56
fellow-countrymen were really influenced by sordid views and selfish interests solely, either in maintaining, altering, or repealing any code of laws. Charges so unfounded ought not to be brought forward by any one. With respect to the motion of the right hon. Gentleman, as to the reading of this bill a second time, he must say, from the communications that had been made to him, he believed it was the intention to take a debate upon the principle in question—whether or not it should be made the settlement of a question that had been so long debated. That, then, being the case, he did not say that the question could be brought on on Monday, and that they could debate and divide on the question; but if it were brought on after the estimates, it would be impossible for them, with any effect, to enter upon the second reading. He hoped, then, the right hon. Gentleman would not bring on this bill after the estimates, for it could not lead to a satisfactory termination. It certainly was the intention to take the debate and sense of the House with regard to the principle of the bill.
Mr. Ferrandhad, he said, asserted that there were frauds perpetrated in manufactured goods in this country, and it prevailed to a very great and frightful extent. Not only that, but the truck system was daily on the increase; and what would be the end of it for the working people he knew not.
Mr. Villiersbegged, as far as his recollection differed from that of the House, to read just one line of the speech made.
The Speakerconceived that the hon Member must be perfectly aware, that to read the report of a speech, in the Session of Parliament in which that speech was spoken, was decidedly irregular.
Mr. M. Philipswished to ask a question of the right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government, as well as the Vice-President of the Board of Trade. It was with reference to a portion of the speech delivered by the hon. Member for Knaresborough. It was in his recollection that the hon. Member, in discussing the truck system, had made a sweeping charge, particularly against those whom he had the honour to represent—those engaged in the manufacture of cotton. It had been stated by the hon. Member, that their foreign trade had suffered from that which was described as a certain practice of using flour to fill up the substance of

57
the goods. Now, he wished to know from either of the right hon. Gentlemen opposite, if they had heard of any diminution in their foreign trade in this article, from the mode in which the cotton goods were prepared?
Sir Robert Peelstated he could only give his opinion upon facts that had been represented to him. He had no recollection of having seen any representation of that description.
Subject at an end.

FINANCIAL STATEMENT.
Sir R. Peel,in answer to the question put to him by the noble Lord (Lord John Russell), wished to state that his motive for naming Monday for the second reading of the Corn-law Bill was solely in reference to the public interest and the general convenience. He wished it should be known that what he was about to say, in answer to the noble Lord, was as to the course that he was desirous to pursue, and then he must depend entirely on what might be the pleasure of the House. He received daily communications which urged upon him the advantage of taking the earliest opportunity of stating what were the views of her Majesty's Government with respect to financial matters, and the commercial affairs of this country. He felt that there was much justice and force in these representations, and therefore it was, that he had given notice for voting the estimates that night for the navy and army in a committee of supply. Wednesday being the 23rd of March, they were to recollect that the following Friday was a day on which they could not meet. On the 24th, Thursday, there would then be a necessary interruption to their attention to Parliamentary business. He proposed, then, that the estimates for the army and navy should make such progress in committee of supply as would justify him in explaining the intentions of her Majesty's Government, both as to their financial and commercial affairs. Under all the circumstances in which they were placed, he was most anxious not to postpone his statement beyond that day week. Because, if he did, there might be a difficulty in the House coming to a definite judgment, with regard to his statement, before its separation. With reference to himself, he had no personal convenience to consult; but seeing the interruption that necessarily took place in commercial transactions, and that it must continue until all doubts were solved with respect to the intentions of Government, he should
58
be most anxious for the public convenience, and the public convenience alone, to m his statement that day week. He should not insist that the whole of the army and navy estimates should be voted before he made his statement. He wished to avail himself of no pretext for postponing it; but he thought it was of great importance that the House should pronounce an opinion on the main branches of the naval and military service, and whether the general views of the country coincided with what the Government deemed to be the necessary demand to be made upon it. It was of importance that the House should declare its opinion as to the amount of force to be kept up both in the navy and army. When the House had determined what they considered would be necessary for the maintenance of the navy, the number of its seamen, and for the upholding the military force—when votes for these purposes were reported, he should feel himself justified in proposing that the House resolve itself into a Committee of Ways and Means, and on the foundation of the votes then passed, explain the views and intentions of her Majesty's Government. As he had said before, it was his own impression that the public convenience should be consulted by adopting the plan that he proposed. He earnestly hoped, then, that the House would affirm the proposal of the Government with regard to the amount of force necessary for the purposes of the country, and that he thus might be in a condition on Friday next of explaining the views of the Government, both as to their finances and commerce. If it were intended, however, to take a discussion on the principle of the bill, he could hardly hope the matter would be disposed of on Monday. It was, however, he deemed, better for him not to relinquish the hope of disposing of it on Monday, but if he were not able to bring on the bill early on Monday, and he would not propose it unless he could do so at an early hour, then he should name Wednesday next for the second reading. He did not mean, he repeated it, to propose the second reading on Monday unless he could bring it forward at such an early hour that it could be fully discussed.
Lord John Russellconsidered it probable, that the navy estimates might be disposed of that evening, or early on Monday. After the statement of the right hon. Gentleman, that he was about to bring forward that which was of so much importance to the country at this moment,

59
he had a request to make of his hon. and gallant Friend (Sir A. L. Hay), who sat near him, and who had given notice of a very important question for that evening. However important the question was—and it was, he admitted, of very great importance—still it was not of such importance as to justify his hon. and gallant Friend in preventing, under present circumstances, their proceeding with a Committee of Supply. He hoped, then, that his hon. and gallant Friend would be induced to postpone his motion, when there was not such a pressure, and allow them to have the financial statement of the Government before them.
Sir A. Leith Hayfelt very anxious to bring forward the question of which he had given notice; but as a wish had been expressed by his noble Friend, and as the statement of the right hon. Baronet, the First Minister of the Crown, was about to be made, he should, in no way; throw an impediment in that which was of such paramount importance to the country.
Viscount Howickconsidered, that it would be most desirable that they should not hurry forward with the corn bill, even though the right hon. Gentleman did pro-raise them to make his financial statement. If the bill were printed to-morrow, there would be very little time for considering its details. It would be of great advantage, in his opinion, when they knew what was to be the policy as to their trade and commerce—it would be of advantage when they had the financial statement of the Government, to have this bill before them, as it might materially affect the question as to what sort of corn bill they ought to have. If the statement were made on so early a day as Friday, there would be no inconvenience in having the debate on the question of the Corn-law Bill postponed until they had the other measures before them.
Subject at an end.
The Order of the Day for the House to resolve itself into a Committee of Supply was read.
On the motion that the Speaker leave the Chair,

CATHOLIC SAILORS AND SOLDIERS.
Mr. O'Connelldid not wish to detain the House on the subject, of which he had given notice—religious instruction in the navy and army; but it was of vital importance connected with the subject of voting
60
the sums necessary for supply of the navy and army, that some effective inquiry should be made as to the religious instruction of those in the service of the Queen. They ought to remember, that a considerable portion of these troops were of the Roman Catholic religion. The portion of them employed in the navy was not so great as in the army. Ireland, however, supplied them with one class, for whom the late Lord Collingwood felt particularly interested. Ireland did not supply as many seamen as England; but there were a great number of boys procured from Ireland, who were found to be amongst the very best employed in that service. It being certain, that a considerable number of seamen were Roman Catholics, it must be admitted as a fact, that no provision was made for religious worship, or for any instruction in their religion. Not one single shilling was allocated for that purpose in the navy. The seamen had no communication with clergymen of their own persuasion, and they had no religious instruction. This fact was undoubted, and he submitted that something ought to be done to remedy the destitution. Not only were they left with out religious instruction, but from communications he had received, he found that in some—not all—but comparatively in many of the vessels, the seamen were compelled to attend a religious worship in which they could not conscientiously coincide. That was an evil that ought to be remedied. Then, with relation to the coast guard in Ireland, he had to observe, that several of the coast guard in that country took an active part in controversies in that country. There was one portion of the Achill island which had been much subjected to discussions of this description. This unhappy spirit of dissension had been attributed to some of the officers of the coast guard, who alleged as their excuse an order from the Admiralty, which compelled the reading of prayers to the men by the officer commanding at the station. If such an instruction existed, it ought to be produced; if it were denied, then it must be known how unjustifiable was the conduct referred to. He wanted to know whether such instructions had been given, and if they had, what objection there could be to their being produced? He now contented himself with merely calling notice to the utter destitution of religious instruction

61
for Roman Catholics in the naval service by clergymen of their own persuasion. The hon. Member concluded, by moving for a copy of the instructions given to the water guard in Ireland respecting Divine service, and the reading of prayers to the men.
Sir R. Peelhad not, he said, made an inquiry as to whether there were such instructions; but if there were he had no objection to their production. As to the other matters to which his attention was called, he considered the subject of too much importance to enter upon it when not fully prepared to discuss it. To the motion, he begged to say, that he made no objection.
Motion agreed to. Question again put.

INVASION OF SPAIN.
Viscount Palmerstonwished, before the Speaker left the Chair, to ask a question of the right hon. Baronet the head of her Majesty's Government. As the subject on which he wished to make an inquiry was one to which the attention of the right hon. Baronet had been drawn some time since by his hon. Friend, the Member for the Tower Ham-lets, and as he was sure, that it was one to which the deep and earnest attention of her majesty's Government must have been given, he trusted, that he should be excused for not having given notice of his intention to ask the question, and he was convinced, that the Government would be able at once to give an answer to it—the subject to which it related was the present state of affairs in Spain, the tranquillity of that country being threatened by an irruption from France. Since the time when his hon. Friend had asked a question on this subject, reports had become still more prevalent of an organization going on in France—of enlistments being made, of dépôts being formed out of the Carlist refugees, and of an organization of a very extensive character, and necessarily involving the expenditure of large sums of money. That these things were now going on in France was a matter notorious to all the world; and it was also known that these things were done for the avowed purpose of an irruption into Spain—of an irruption into Spain, for the purpose of forwarding the views of the Carlist party. He could not then doubt, under such circumstances, but that her Majesty's Government had made a strong representation on these matters to the government of
62
France. The right hon. Baronet had stated on a former occasion the general interest which the Government of England took in the present established order of things in Spain, and upon that ground alone such representations would be justifiable. But the Quadruple Treaty constituted still stronger grounds; for although it might be contended that that treaty had been so far worked out that it could not longer be appealed to for the purpose of calling upon the contracting parties to take active measures in pursuance of its stipulations, yet considering that the spirit of that treaty ought to animate and guide the councils both of France and England, that treaty would not only justify, but seemed absolutely to require, that the strongest representations should in the present state of things be made to the French government on the danger now threatened to Spain, originating in proceedings from France, and which the government of France had the power to prevent. Therefore it was, that he could not doubt but that the English Government had made strong representations to the government of France on this subject. Moreover, he took for granted, that the government of France must have given to the English Government assurances that they would use every means within their power to prevent the combination which was now going on in that country from taking effect. He could not believe, that the French government, owing its origin as it did to the popular will—founded as it was upon popular institutions—would lend itself to any conspiracy that was avowedly and notoriously organised for the purpose of controlling the will of the people of Spain in regard to their own institutions, and for setting up an absolute despotism, or that which nearly approximated to despotism, in Spain. But the experience they had had of the power of the French government, to control transactions of this kind within its own territory, must expose it to the imputation of connivance with the transaction to which he referred, if nothing were done by it to prevent the bursting forth of the conspiracy that was now going on. He wished, then, to ask the right hon. Gentleman, whether, besides the assurances to this effect, which he took for granted had been received by her Majesty's Government from the government of France, that all should be done which it was in the power of that government to do, to prevent the

63
conspiracy from taking effect upon Spain. He asked, then, whether her Majesty's Government were aware that the French government had taken any effectual steps for the purpose of carrying those assurances into execution, and for preventing an irruption into Spain for the purpose of promoting the interests of the Carlist party?
Sir R. Peel:The hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for the Tower Hamlets(Colonel Fox) asked me a question the other night with reference to the reports which prevailed that there was a system of active combination and conspiracy directed against the internal tranquillity of Spain. He stated also, that he had heard rumours, to which he was disposed to give credit, that an active partisan in the late civil war in Spain, General Cabrera, was then in Paris, and actually engaged in organizing a conspiracy. I stated that I had no positive information whatever on that point, that I had heard the report before, but that of course it was impossible for me to answer for a fact of that nature, namely, whether General Cabrera were in Paris or not. It has been supposed that 1 made an assertion to the effect that he was. The hon. Gentleman will recollect that I made no assertion on that point, but I stated merely that I had heard the circumstance mentioned. The noble Lord must excuse me, if the only answer which I can at present consider myself justified in giving to his questions is, that we have maintained since our accession to power the most friendly relations with the existing government of Spain; that we have done all a friendly Government could do to consolidate that government, and by counsel and advice, where such counsel and advice could with propriety be given, to confirm its authority, from a sincere conviction that during its existence Spain has made as rapid a progress in the restoration of peace and the revival of prosperity as could be expected from a country torn so recently by civil dissensions. Sir, that friendly interest in the affairs of Spain, and in the stability of its present government, still continues. That government, I believe, will be the first to acknowledge the cordial interest we have taken in its stability. We have continually done so; and we certainly have made representations to the Court of France upon the subject to which the noble Lord has referred. But he must
64
excuse me if I decline, from a sense of duty, from entering into any further details. I may take this opportunity of expressing a hope that the Spanish people will rally round the Spanish government; that they will forget their party disputes and internal divisions; and, if they have reason to credit the existence of those conspiracies, that they will feel this to be a time when not the influence of foreign governments, but when their own exertions must be directed to maintain the government which rules over them. And, if they do rally round that government, my belief is, that they will be enabled to defy the combinations and conspiracies which are said to be directed against them. Sir, with my opinions in respect to active interference in the domestic dissensions of other nations, I cannot promise more than the sympathy and cordial goodwill of England. But if the Spanish people are animated by that spirit by which a people struggling for independence ought to be animated, they may depend upon it that they will have, on the part of this country, not active intervention, perhaps, but that sympathy and warm interest in their exertions which will enable them to confirm their independence, and to carry their government triumphant through any struggle to which it may be exposed.
Lord J. Russell:Sir, it is most gratifying to find, from the answer of the right hon. Gentleman, that there is but one wish among all parties in England. Both the right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Government, and, I am sure, the people of this country, desire that Spain should be strong and independent. Neither the Government nor the people of England wish any exclusive power or influence in Spain. All that we desire is, that her power and her institutions may be consolidated, and that she may take her place with that influence which ought to belong to the heroic spirit of her people among the nations of Europe. With respect to the measures which the right hon. Gentleman may think fit to take, after what he has said, I cannot ask him to go into any further explanations at present. Whether the policy of this country should be confined to sympathy—whether, after representations have been made, further steps should be taken, must, of course, very much depend on what is actually done by the government of France. If

65
any troubles that may take place in Spain should bear merely the character of civil war, nothing can be more unwise than to mix in those disturbances; but if it should hereafter appear that any incursion that may be made into Spain is made with the money, the arms, and the resources of any foreign Government, then a different result would follow, and then, I think, a different policy may be pursued by the Government of this country.
Mr. O'Connellsaid, he had understood the right hon. Baronet opposite to declare a general approbation of the conduct of the present government of Spain. One part of that conduct, however, be did not think the right hon. Baronet would be prepared to approve, and that was the cruel persecution which the government was now carrying on against the clergy of that country—not only clergymen who might be supposed to participate in Carlist opinions, and against whom he would not complain that the law should be put in force, but clergymen who had favoured the cause of the Queen, the legitimate Queen, and who had in some instances been lately appointed to high offices,—he would mention one, the Archbishop of Toledo,—persecution was directed against these, as well as others, and the utmost cruelty was exhibited in the mode of the persecution. The law for the seizure of the temporalities of the church, and providing an annual stipend for the clergy, had been carried into effect as far as related to the church property, but the provision had been totally forgotten. He did not complain of that; it was a matter of internal regulation; but he complained that the clergy were required to join in the conveyance of that property. Having stated that they would not resist the law, but leave the officers of Government to seize the property according to law, they were required to take an active part in the conveyance of the property, and he believed that thousands had been immured in prison, suffering the severest privations and the most cruel treatment, merely because they refused to join actively in a measure to which they were willing to submit passively. The matter, indeed, was still worse, for when brought before the courts of justice no counsel were allowed to plead for them; and in one instance where counsel had the courage to appear, the trial was not allowed to proceed, and he was punished for his teme-
66
rity. He did not wish to trespass further on the attention of the House, but this he was entitled to say, that if the present were a case in which he could call for a committee he should be enabled to prove the most unrelenting cruelty existed in these respects under the present government in Spain. If this were a revolution for the purpose of abandoning the religion now professed there and adopting another form of faith he should have nothing to say; but the whole proceeding was precisely that which was pursued by the Jacobinical party of the French National Assembly. It was the subversion of the church, not for the substitution of another, but to turn the ecclesiastical property into the hands of the military, accompanied with the greatest cruelties towards its former possessors. He was quite sure, if the right hon. Baronet were in the possession of these facts, his approbation of the Spanish government would not have gone the length of sanctioning such proceedings. It was in vain for the right hon. Baronet, or any one else, to appeal to the people of Spain to rally around their present government, if the statement he had made of its proceedings were founded in fact. He trusted, on the contrary, the Spanish people would not rally around a government that could perpetrate such enormities.
Sir R. Peeldid not express any opinion whatever with respect to particular acts. Nothing, in his opinion, could be so dangerous; nothing could be so presumptuous, as for a Minister of England to undertake to canvass the acts of any foreign government. The very principle of such an interference with the domestic concerns of other countries he would be the first to repudiate. He had expressed no approbation of the individual acts of the Spanish government, regarding this as a question, not of particular acts, but of national interests. Soon after coming into office they found a conspiracy directed against a government with which this country was maintaining amicable and friendly relations. The first overt act of that conspiracy was to make an attack, in the dead of the night, on the palace of the Queen—to attempt by military force to seize on the person of the Queen; and if it had succeeded, be believed the life of that Queen would have been placed in jeopardy—the success of the first attack most probably would have led to the loss

67
of the Queen's life. Her Majesty's Ministers had, therefore, felt they were acting not merely in conformity with the law of nations, but with all the duties imposed on governments maintaining mutual friendly relations, in doing everything that lay in their power to discountenance such wicked efforts, and the possible renewal of such scenes as then took place. They had, therefore, considered it their duty to discourage to the utmost every such attempt, and with this view, to give every aid they could to a friendly government. But with respect to particular acts of any foreign power, he altogether disclaimed the expression of any approbation or disapprobation. Indeed, he felt he should have altogether exceeded his duty if he implied any opinion on such a subject.
Mr. Borthwicksaid, from the part which, in former Parliaments, he had taken in respect to this question, he might perhaps be allowed to say two words before the House went into committee. He was greatly relieved, he confessed, by the answer which the right hon. Baronet had given to the question put by the hon. and learned Gentleman opposite, because it appeared from that answer that we should have no more interference with the internal affairs of foreign nations. It might perhaps relieve, in some degree, the anxiety of the noble Lord opposite, when he assured him that General Cabrera had not been at Paris at all, much less for the purpose which the noble Lord had attributed to him; and for Don Carlos himself, it was now pretty generally known that he had published his determination to repudiate individually, and to command his generals to refuse, on his behalf, all participation in any scheme of union between Carlists and Christinos for the purpose of upsetting the present government and placing any other in its stead. For his part, he trusted that neither in the spirit of any extinct treaty—nor of any new convention to be established in imitation of it, would England ever again commit herself by taking any part with a faction or political sect in Spain, or in any other country. He would not, however tempting the occasion might be, obtrude upon the House quotations from speeches which he had made in Parliament some years ago, but he would protest now, as he had protested then, against all interference by this country, in questions which, from their peculiar and domestic nature; were limited by the bounds of the country
68
which they immediately concerned. The natural wealth of Spain was almost without limit. Her moral power, arising from the noble character of her population, was also inestimable. That natural wealth and that moral energy would long ere now, but for the mischievous interference of this country, have developed themselves, to the great advancement of Spanish greatness—of European, of human prosperity. Let England now, in holding out the hand of friendly alliance to that great country, do so in the spirit of a liberal and becoming generosity; let her limit her friendship by no conditions of faction or of party, and he was satisfied that the prophecy of the right hon. Baronet would speedily be fulfilled, in Spanish tranquillity, and, to that extent, European prosperity. It was not often that he had the good fortune to agree with the hon. and learned Gentleman the Member for Cork, but he would be glad to see the English Government exerting whatever influence she possessed with that of Spain, for the purpose of sparing the further infliction of cruel persecutions upon the clergy of that country. [" That's interference."] Yes, that's interference if you will; but it is not an interference with domestic faction to set aside legitimate succession, it is the interference of friendly advice against notorious injustice, committed by the existing government against a class of men who, Protestant as he was, be could not help admitting had, for the last fifty years, been exemplary in the discharge of their duties and most useful to their country.
Colonel Foxwas satisfied that the statements of the hon. and learned Member for Cork respecting the clergy in Spain were greatly exaggerated. There had been no massacre of the clergy, as had been said, under the present government. Ha should like to know a single instance in which that government had acted like the Jacobinical General Assembly, With the exception of one, he believed that none of the clergy had been shut up in prison, and he strongly protested against the statement that any of them had been slaughtered by the Spanish government.
Mr. O'Connellsaid, his objection was still unanswered, and his statements not impugned. The Spanish government had acted like the Jacobinical Assembly in regard to the church property, and he had proofs that several clergymen had been murdered.
Lord J. Mannersobserved, that the statements respecting the murder of the Spanish clergy were unfortunately but too true, as in one instance, it was well known that no less than thirty of them had been thrown over the bridge of the Manzanares. He had heard with great satisfaction the principle laid down by the right hon. Baronet in regard to non-interference, and he trusted that the country would have no more quadruple alliances of the concoction of the noble Lord opposite, and no more British legions.
Mr. C. Bullerthought the House of Commons had nothing whatever to say to what Espartero did with the Spanish clergy.
The Speakerleft the Chair, and the House resolved itself into a committee of

SUPPLY—NAVY ESTIMATES.
Mr. Sidney Herbert,in rising to bring forward the Estimates for the Navy for the ensuing year, would ask the committee, without any affectation, to bear with him while he stated as concisely as he could, the items he should propose, and grant him their indulgence on the occasion of this, his first official statement. He believed that he should consult the convenience of the House by not going into every detail of that estimate at present, but by merely giving to the House a general view of the differences which appeared upon a comparison of the estimate for the present year with that for the last, and by explaining the cause of increase or decrease under any particular head, reserving the minor alterations for observation, as they came before the House in the committee. As to the first head, the vote for the number of seamen for the year, the House would see that it was not proposed by her Majesty's Government to make any alteration in the number of men, which they thought requisite for this year's service. As to the appropriation of those men, however, there would be some alteration; because, in pursuance of the opinion of many eminent officers, it had been resolved that no ships should leave this country, except with a full complement of men. But, as only the same number of men were to be employed, it necessarily followed that there must' be a smaller number of ships. However, he felt confident that the reduction in the number of the ships, there being no reduction in the number of the men, would not render the navy less efficient. It was
70
generally believed that the result of that alteration would be, that those ships which we sent out in that efficient state to preserve peace in the world would render war more dangerous for our enemies than before, when we had a greater number of ships less efficiently manned. As to the second head, which was "Victuals for Seamen and Marines," there was a small diminution, owing to the decrease in the price of provisions. It was not worth while to enumerate to the House the decrease in the particular items of provisions; the result was, that the estimate for the present year under that head was 34,774 l. less than the vote for the last year. On the Admiralty-office there was no further alteration than necessarily arose from the fluctuations in the superannuated allowances, or from promotions and increased salaries. Those alterations produced this year a small decrease of 395 l. As to the Registry-office there was no difference at all; but when they came to that head in the committee, he should be enabled to give the House some information which it would receive with satisfaction as to the increase of our mercantile marine, showing that the increase in her Majesty's service, though that must, in a great measure, depend upon our mercantile navy, had, nevertheless, not been made at the expense of the mercantile navy, but that there had been a large collateral increase in both. There was a small increase of 2,347 l. in the next head; the scientific department, which was caused by additional surveys required at home and on foreign stations; by the great increase in the expense of chronometers, and by considerable additional expense incurred in printing scientific works, and copies of observations at Greenwich, and the Cape of Good Hope; and from what he had observed of the treatment which that head of the estimates had generally met with in that House, he was inclined to think that the House of Commons would never begrudge a trifling increase of expenditure for the purpose of advancing scientific objects; but instead of quarrelling with such increase of expenditure, would rejoice at such an employment of the public money. In the establishments at home there was a small decrease; but the separate items in which that decrease occurred were so minute and trifling as to be quite unimportant, except when they were going through the estimates in detail. For the establishments abroad there was an increase in the present estimate of about 1,000 l.

71
At Malta there had been a considerable increase of expense owing to the formation of a new dock, which had been considered desirable, in order to exempt the fleet from the inconvenience, delay, and expense of sending all ships in the Mediterranean home for repairs. With regard to the next head, that of wages at home, there was a decrease in the present estimate, compared with that of last year, of about 8,000 l.; and for wages in her Majesty's establishments abroad there was an increase of 4,030 l.; one item of which increase was a sum of 1,900 l., occasioned by buildings which had been carried on in the naval yards in Canada. Under the head of naval stores there was a slight decrease, not from any diminution in the quantity of stores, but from the diminution in the price of certain articles coming under that head; and he might safely say, that there never had been a year when the navy was so well supplied with stores at the same expenditure; and, in so saying, he was not arrogating any merit to the present Government; for when the present Government came into power, they had found the naval stores, timber, &c., in a more complete state of supply than had existed for some years previously. On the item under that head for the purchase and repair of steam machinery, there was an apparent diminution; but the cause was, that of the amount taken for repairs last year a large sum had remained unexpended, and not that there had been any diminution in the demand for steam machinery for the navy; on the contrary, tenders had been recently accepted for six pair of first class engines. The next head on which he had any remark to make was that of new works, in which there was very little difference between the estimates of this year and that of last year; but the principal items on which the difference arose were these; for the completion of a new basin at Woolwich, which should allow steam vessels to come alongside the wharf, a very considerable expenditure was necessary, no less than 16,775 l.; there was also a large sum requisite for the purpose of providing better means to prevent fire in our dockyards; and the sum contained in that estimate on that account was 15,000 l. In aid of the same object there was also on the storekeeper's estimate 10,000 l.; and the Government had taken upon themselves, after consultation, on their own responsibility, to employ 10,000 l. of the surplus remaining unexpended out of the vote of last year
72
for steam machinery, for the purpose of providing means for the more speedy extinction of fires in our dockyards. That object had occasioned the necessity for laying down pipes, and erecting tanks to hold several tons of water, the expense of which was great, but the Government had thought that such expenditure was good economy. Having had recently the warning of two fires in their dockyards, though one of them; was speedily suppressed; and having also had the experience of great public losses elsewhere occasioned by fire, they felt that they ought not to allow our dockyards, full of combustible materials, to remain any longer in an insecure state. From the great rarity of such an occurrence, a feeling of neglect on that subject had been engendered, and the keepers of the dockyards I had almost forgotten where the cocks and water pipes were. If a fire had occurred under such a state of things, it would probably have destroyed everything before the cocks and the water pipes could have been disencumbered from the stacks of timber which had been piled against them. The whole expense would amount to 15,000 l.; but though the expenditure was large at the moment, he was sure that the House would consider the Government not only justified in proposing a large estimate, but in having already, on their own responsibility, applied a surplus unexpended in their hands to that purpose. Further, there was a large sum required for additional anchor-fires, and there was an additional slip to be built at Portsmouth, which involved considerable expense, because the soil had been gradually forcing the sea-wall out of the perpendicular, and it became necessary that that should be repaired. He was sure that the House would gladly accede to such a vote, because it was the decided opinion of those who were best acquainted with the matter, that ships would last much longer if they were left on the slips than if they were allowed to remain in stagnant water; and he proposed, therefore, if the House would allow him, to multiply these slips, in order that the vessels of this country might be kept in a state of efficiency until they were required. There was a small increase under the head of the medical department, amounting to 5,150 l., which was explained by the great expenditure occasioned by the treatment of the sick in China. The estimate was vague, because they could not have full information from China on that subject; and it was large, because they had

73
to pay not only for the year they were about to meet, but for a portion of that which had passed; and in China a great quantity of medical stores had been consumed. On the miscellaneous services for this year there was a decrease of about 7,000 l., occasioned by the fluctuations necessarily occurring under that head. Under the head of half-pay, there was a decrease of 11,824.; under that of freight on account of the Army and Ordnance Departments an increase of 44,138 l. No. 19 was a new head, "The Post Office Department (Contract Packet Service)." It had been thought by the Board of Admiralty, that it was better, when any item of expenditure became large, that it should stand out as a distinct head for the information of the public. Under that head there was an increase of 20,000 l. on the Halifax mail contract; that vote had been sanctioned by the last Government, and was highly approved by the present; indeed, it was impossible to observe the manner in which that contract had been carried out by Mr. Cunard without seeing that it must be attended with great benefit. The only other material difference under that head related to the contract for the conveyance of mails by steam-vessels to and from the West Indies, as to which they proposed a vote of 240,000 l. instead of 80,000 l., the estimate of last year. Nothing could be more satisfactory than the manner in which that contract had been executed; the contract came into force, not on the 1st of December last, but on the 1st of January this year. He did not pretend to say that the present routes were certainly the best, it was at present quite an experiment; and he thought that the Government was justified in giving to persons who carried on the plan in so spirited a manner every indulgence and encouragement. They had not, therefore, restricted those parties to the strict letter of their contract. A few months experience would show what ports were the best to touch at, and the routes of the steam-vessels would be regulated accordingly. From the manner in which that contract had been hitherto conducted, he entertained a sanguine expectation that it would be productive of the most beneficial effects, both to the colonies and the mother country. He was sure that no expense had been, or would be, spared to carry out the scheme. Indeed, he had almost said that the expenditure had been reckless. That concluded the heads of the estimate for the present year, and he would
74
not trouble the House with much further observation; but he thought it right to point out to them how much of what was voted in the navy estimates was voted for other departments of the public service. He thought it right that public attention should be called to the fact, that though they were called upon, in point of form, to vote 6,739,318 l. for the service of the navy, yet they were not voting that entirely for the navy, but a portion of it for other branches of the public service. He had had a return of the whole expenditure to which the naval service was subjected on account of the other departments of the Government. The expenditure on account of the Post-office was, last year, nearly 640,000 l.; on account of the army and ordnance, 270,000 l.; on account of the Home Department, 109,000 l. He would now only say, in conclusion, that the estimates had been framed studiously with a view to the greatest economy which the efficiency of the public service would permit; and injustice to their predecessors in office he would most candidly say, that they had found nothing of any moment which could possibly be reduced. At the same time, he trusted that that feeling of economy which sometimes prevailed so strongly in that House would not lead it to object to an estimate which was certainly large at a time when, excepting in India, this country was at peace. He looked with confidence to no objection being made to these estimates, because he had observed that that house had always shown great favour towards any proposition which was calculated to increase that branch of our service, as the great national arm of our strength. The hon. Member then proposed the first resolution:—
"That 43,000 men be employed in the naval service of her Majesty for the year 1842–43—including 10,500 Royal Marines."
Sir Charles Napiersaid, that he had no intention of opposing the estimates they had just heard. He trusted that the grounds on which Government had determined to reduce the number of ships in commission would prove to be good, but he rejoiced that the Admiralty had at last determined that no ship of war should leave a British port without her full complement of men; and then, let there come what service there might, there would be no fear of their being found unprepared or unfit for it. It had been the opinion of many officers that five sail of the line not fully manned were pre-

75
ferable to four sail with a full complement. In this opinion he did not agree. In such cases, if any sudden emergency should arise, it would be impossible to man the ships fully in time to meet it. Last year, on the coast of Syria, they had an example of what might have been the consequences of the system of partially manned vessels. There was then every prospect of a war with France. The ships were ill-manned, and it would have been impossible for Government, in the event of hostilities actually taking place, to send out men to make up efficient complements. Under these circumstances, if a well-manned French fleet had appeared, it was difficult to say what the consequences might have been; but if, in addition to this, a hostile fleet had made its appearance when the partial complements were weakened still more by sickness, it was most probable that defeat would have ensued; he trusted, however, that they had now seen the last days of half-manned ships. It had been stated that the French had twenty sail of the line in commission, eight at sea, eight in harbour, and four in the different roads. He did not know what the system might be with regard to the complements of the vessels in harbour, but the twelve sail of the line kept at sea and in roadsteads were well-manned and most efficiently disciplined. As to the proposed reduction of six sail of the line, it was to be done on Government responsibility. With respect to the Admiralty-office, it was an establishment which he did not much like, but when it came before the House regularly he would explain his views with regard to it. With respect to the officers employed in the navy, it was well known that a great proportion of them had attained such a great age as to render them only fit for superannuation. With respect to admirals, the greater part if sent to sea, would require nurses to take care of them. As to rear-admirals, the case was as bad, they were nearly all upwards of seventy years of age. And although his gallant Friend, who was now proceeding to the Mediterranean, and who was upwards of seventy-two years of age, might be competent to serve in time of peace, yet he thought that it was a physical impossibility that he could do the same good service in the event of a war. Of the captains promoted at the last promotion, only half a dozen were under sixty years of age. Was that a proper system? He took this opportunity of making some observations on the injustice done to the navy at the last promotion. He did not wish to bring down
76
the army to the level of the navy, but to raise the navy to the level of the army. The hon. and gallant Member compared the number of promotions in the two services, and complained that the promotions in the navy were small as compared with those in the army. He was at a loss to understand the reason of this difference. It was generally supposed that the expense of an admiral was greater than that of a general, but he would show that this notion was erroneous. The cost to the country of a colonel becoming a general was 199 l. 15 s., that being the difference of pay. The difference of cost occasioned by a captain being promoted to admiral was 191 l. 12 s. 6d. Before the last promotion, the expense occasioned to the country on account of the flag-officers was 95,000 l. a year; and after the promotion 105,000 l. The expense of generals before the promotion was 85,000 l., and 98,000 l. a year after. But this was not all the cost of the generals} for each general was supposed to have 1,000 l. as colonel of a regiment, and, reckoning 130 regiments, an additional expense was thereby incurred of 130,000 l. He would now endeavour to show that the employment of old admirals had never succeeded. On going back to Rodney, he found that he was seventy years old when he fought his action, which was not considered a good one. At that time he was labouring under a fit of the gout, and was consequently incapable of any great activity. When Lord Howe fought the action of the 1st of June, he was sixty-eight or seventy years of age, and had been three days and nights subjected to the greatest bodily fatigue and mental excitement. In that action eight or ten ships escaped under sprit-sails when it was not renewed. Sir R. Calder was an old man when he was engaged in action, and only two sail of the line, instead of fifteen, were taken. With respect to Lord Hotham, he thought his actions had been bungling because they were fought by an old man. With regard to Nelson, he was of opinion that the country was indebted for his gallant deeds more to his youth than his particular ability; and if all our admirals had been as young, they would have given the same account of the enemy. Lord Nelson was an admiral when thirty-six or thirty-seven years old; he fought the battle of the Nile when he was thirty-nine, the action of Copenhagen when forty-two; and he was killed when forty-seven years old. He had the authority of Sir T. Hardy for

77
saying that had Nelson been sixty years old when he fought the battle of the Nile, and sixty-six when he fought the battle of Trafalgar, neither of those actions would have been fought in the manner they were. Lord Duncan, after commanding a mutinous fleet, attacked the enemy, and gained a glorious victory. Lord Duncan was sixty-eight years old, but he proved an exception to the rule, that age unfitted men for active and daring enterprizes. Sir J. Saumarez was sent, when forty-two or forty-three years of age, to Gibraltar, with a small squadron. He attacked the French fleet in a strong position, and was defeated. It was rather a new occurrence for a British naval officer to suffer defeat. In five days his fleet was refitted for service, and he sailed out, leaving one ship in port under repair. He fell in with a Spanish fleet of double his force. He attacked it. Two of the enemy's vessels were blown up, one was taken, and the rest beaten. This activity and success was attributable to his youth. He would state the remedy he proposed for the evils of the British navy; and now he supposed it would be necessary for the Chancellor of the Exchequer to use his smelling bottle. His remedy he believed would do an infinity of good, at little cost to the country. He would tell the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that it would not cost more than 10,000 l. a year. He proposed, that when a captain of the navy came within a hundred of the top of the list, and was sixty years old, he should be allowed 100 l. a year beside his pay, as an out-pensioner of Greenwich Hospital. He believed it would be satisfactory to the country to have an effective and non-effective list. He also proposed, that first lieutenants, who had been serving for a number of years, and bringing up the suckling babies of the aristocracy, and made commanders, should be gratified by the rank of captain, and offered 6d. a-day. He next proposed, that promotions should be made half by seniority and half by choice; or if the Admiralty were not satisfied with this, the promotions by choice might be two to one by seniority. The list of mates had been somewhat reduced, but still there was a great number, and keeping them so long in that position made them generally indolent, careless, and totally disgusted with the service. But the effect upon young men was extraordinary. He recollected the time when young men who had volunteered into the service were unwilling to
78
quit it, but now he saw nothing but disappointment among them, they looked at the condition of the old mates and became disheartened. Even if the mates were promoted as they ought to be, at the end of six years servitude, as such they would not complain; but having served six years, after passing their examination, it was very hard that they should still wait for promotion. He must next refer to the working petty officers. When they looked to the difficulty there had been for some time in getting men for the navy, as an instance of which he could say, that he had lately seen at Spithead an eighty gun ship which had been waiting for nine months for men, and the Queen had been at that moment six months waiting from the same cause, and had not yet sailed, they must see the absolute necessity, that something more should be done to induce men to enter the navy. He believed, that every gallant Officer, and indeed every hon. Gentleman, in that House, knew that the working petty officers were the most unfortunate class, for the difference of pay between able seamen and that class was not sufficient to induce the former to aspire to it. There were two classes. The second class had 2s. or 3s. a month more than an able seamen, the first class had 2s. or 3s. more than the second; but when the Duke of Clarence was First Lord of the Admiralty, and put a patch upon their arms and made officers of them, he did much good. If, however, he had put a patch upon their pay to buy that patch upon the arm, it would have done them more still. In his opinion the pay of the working petty officers of the second class should be 3l. per month, and the first clase 4l., and they should calculate twelve months to the year instead of thirteen as at present. The present mode of calculating a seamen's pay was made on a bad principle, for taking thirteen months to the year, not one sailor in fifty knew what it meant. When he was abroad, not long ago, a sailor came up and asked him whether there were more than eight months in the year; his answer was, there were thirteen: to which the sailor replied, "I can't understand it" That system, therefore, ought to be changed; and if it were, they would find greater facility in manning the navy with able-bodied men than had ever been the case before. He would then go to the right hon. Baronet's bill for manning the navy—the only thing, indeed, that had been done respecting that point for the last

79
thirty years. He highly approved of it, though it did not go far enough. It ought to go further, because, if he understood it right, in the event of a war, British seamen would be called upon to come forward and serve, three or four days' choice being allowed them to act voluntarily or submit to be pressed. We ought to make men understand that the British navy was a good profession, but at that moment British merchant seamen had the greatest horror of her Majesty's service. It was extremely difficult to propose a measure that would be effectual, but a beginning must be made. Now, there was an old act of Queen Anne, which enabled overseers of the poor to apprentice parish boys to merchant ships. He believed, that that act had never been in actual operation, but he thought it might be acted upon, and if it were, he would wish to extend it further, so that all parish boys, after serving four years in the merchant service, should be obliged to go for three years into the navy, to make a return to the country for their food, raiment, and clothing. And if the Poor-law Bill were discussed again in that House, use might be made of it, not only to assist the poor, but to provide the navy with seamen. Another article which was done by the present Government, and of which he highly approved, was restoring to the seamen their pensions, or rather allowing them to remain in the service retaining their pensions. It was, however, almost too much, and it would better if, instead of giving them pay and pension, they had raised their pay from 18 l. to 30 l. and called that full pay. He then came to pensioned officers, and he must say, that it was very extraordinary that an officer when he went to sea should lose his pension, for they all knew, that when he went to sea he fitted out his ship at an enormous expense, and if it were a small vessel, he absolutely got less than his half pay. Pensions for wounds were also worthy of the attention of the Government. By the Queen's regulation, when an officer received a wound equally prejudicial to the body as loss of limb, her Majesty was authorised to grant him higher pay, and her Majesty also reserved to herself power to grant any officer an annual pension if his wounds and services were deserving of it. But what had the Admiralty done? About 150 or 160 years ago, he believed in the year 1660, the Board of Admiralty made a regulation, that no officer should receive an annual pension unless his wound
80
was equal to loss of limb. Then came out the Queen's regulation, but he had never heard that the Board of Admiralty had changed their rule. He wished to make one observation to the hon. Gentleman, the Secretary to the Admiralty. That hon. Gentleman stated, that in reducing six sail of the line they had still to man ships which required the same number of men, but he should have thought, that as four sail of the line cost less than five in matériel, there ought to be some reduction in matériel. Then again, the Government had several ships on slips, and that he thought was the best thing they had done. If there were more, it would be better and more economical for the country at large, but it was most extraordinary, that living at peace for twenty-six years they had not discovered before, that such a thing was necessary. One attempt had been made, he believed, at Deptford, and there, for what he knew, the ship remained still. There was another point to which he wished to advert. In 1835, a report got abroad, that all the masts of the British navy were rotten. A survey was made in 1836, and they were reported to be unserviceable. They were all taken out and put in the different departments; but that proved, that there must have been some very bad management somewhere. Then, again, as to the construction of ships. That belonged to the surveyor's department, and if they happened to have good surveyors, then they would generally build good ships; but if they happened to be bad, as had happened before now, then the country would have indifferent ships. The whole power was vested in one man, instead of being extended to the dock-yards and according to the talents and qualifications of that individual would be the ships which he constructed. He had often, too, a fleet of his own. Now, Sir R. Seppings had disfigured the whole of the navy under the sanction of the Board of Admiralty, for he had put to his ships the most ridiculous sterns that were ever made, and he did that in the face of the handsomest sterns that were ever seen. Instead of having eight, ten, or twelve guns able to be pointed right aft, Sir R. Seppings, having seen some Dutch dogger, he supposed, had made the ugliest sterns he ever saw, with galleries and Heaven knew what, all of which must be taken away before they could bring their guns to bear aft, and yet, notwithstanding that, handsome and useful sterns might be seen at the Admiralty

81
rooms they still went on disfiguring the British navy. In a number of ships the sterns were raked; and at that moment if they took a plumb line from the poop to the keel of the Queen they would find she was thirty-six feet longer at the taffrail than she was at the keel. It was impossible if she were chased for her to use her stern guns. He believed, however, that those sterns had been condemned, and great credit was due to the Government for ordering them to be altered. He thanked the House for their indulgence, and concluded by expressing his fear that he had detained them too long.
Captain Roussaid,٭ Sir, before I commence a discussion on the navy estimates, may I be permitted to express the deep sense of gratitude which all naval officers feel for that uniform kindness and anxiety to serve their interests, which this House has so invariably expressed. My mind has been impressed with that idea from my boyhood to the present hour; and I have remarked, that every exertion on your part to ameliorate our condition has been constantly frustrated by our own Admiralty officers, under every administration. Let me hope for better days. The right hon. Baronet at the head of her Majesty's Government has selected four officers whom the navy hold in great respect, and he could not have made a happier choice than when he chose the hon. Member for the County Tyrone, and the hon. Secretary; although the noble first Lord must be perfectly ignorant of everything relating to the navy, still he has one qualification, a wish to benefit the profession. Sir, I have paid these unusual compliments because it is my intention to find fault with their measures before I conclude my statement. I have commanded her Majesty's ships for ten years between 1817 to 1837, it is therefore in my power to put the House in possession of facts from which they may draw their own inferences, and I think they will agree with me, that no service could have been more neglected than the navy since 1815. The first topic I shall broach is the state and condition of her Majesty's ships. From 1815 to 1827, they continued to build the ten gun brigs, called coffins; miserable corvettes, twenty-eight gun donkey frigates, and a description of small seventy-four gun ships, happily designated Forty Thieves—luckily for the country, certain
*From a corrected Report.
82
noblemen belonging to the Yacht Club interested themselves and persuaded the Admiralty to turn their thoughts to improvement, and the Duke of Portland, Lord Yarborough, and others, got leave for Sir William Symonds, Mr. Inman, and Admiral Hayes, to build experimental ships to compete with the surveyor, Sir John Seppings; the result was, Sir W. Symond's brigs were superior to the others, and he superseded Sir J. Seppings (who was a good shipwright, and a wretched architect), as surveyor in 1832, under the naval administration of the present right hon. Secretary for the Home Department, Sir James Graham, who distinguished himself by the abolition of the navy board. Sir W. Symonds is no doubt a good sea-man, an excellent officer, with a great genius for naval architecture, but his models were exactly those of the Greek brigs and schooners, built at Hydra and Spitzia, in the Archipelago, with great breadth of beam, and a triangular midship section; and his theory was, that these models were adapted to vessels of all sizes from a brig to a three-decker, that they should fit one class into another, like a Chinese puzzle, that was the expression (for it made a great impression on my mind). It is very competent for every person to understand, that as you increase the top weight, or the number and weight of your guns, or the size of your ship, so you must proportion ably increase the flatness of the floor below to give ease and buoyancy. The first frigates Sir W. Symonds built were the Vernon and Pique on the models of his brigs, and the principle failed, they had no flat floor to sit upon, with a fine entrance forward, and a short bluff bow, they failed against a head sea. I first commissioned the Pique in December, 1834; by the builder's calculation she was to carry above sixty tons ballast, but with four months water and provisions on board she floated a foot deeper than the builder's calculation, consequently she was uneasy, a bad sea boat, and not a good ship at her anchors; but from her great beam, an extraordinary ship to stand up under canvas; now she carries no ballast at all. In our first cruise in the Bay of Biscay, when she was in the builder's trim carrying sail against a head sea, she shipped the body of a sea which washed away her head rails, and put four feel water into her main deck, but after I lightened the

83
ship and got her two feet by the stern she was dry and easy, but this trim was not approved of by Sir W. Symonds. When the Vanguard was laid down, the eyes of the architect were opened, and he gave her a comparatively longer bow and a flatter floor, which makes her an extremely good ship when she is not overloaded. But, Sir, the greatest misfortune to the navy is the failure of many of the steam vessels. I name the Gorgon for instance, intended to carry fourteen heavy guns, and to convey 1,200 troops—if that vessel, when thus laden, should be caught in a heavy gale in the Bay, she would be swamped, and I fear, there are at least, six more vessels of the same description and class, and altogether the men-of-war steam vessels are very inferior to those built at Bristol and Liverpool. This House will naturally enquire why a large sum of money was invested in vessels not fit for her Majesty's service, without proper enquiries and precautions. I will explain it, there are many naval officers who persuade themselves that the ships they command are very superior to any others, and when a man of this description is appointed to an experimental ship, he invariably overlooks her bad qualities. In the old trials, when the Admiralty had no particular interest in the result, they were impartial, but in 1835 and 1836, it was different, because the Admiralty had sanctioned the building of ships by Sir W. Symonds to an enormous amount. In the summer of 1835, I was officially informed, that the Admiralty wished to try the merits of Castor, Pique, and Inconstant, and it was declared that the best ship of the three would be the future model for frigates of that class, this was good sense; but what happened? Before the Inconstant was launched, six more sister Piques were ordered to be built, but no more Castors or Inconstants; thus, the Admiralty, instead of being independent judges, so identified themselves with Sir W. Symonds, that they decided the race before the horses were saddled, and when the real trial came off, Inconstant won cleverly. This will explain to the House the utter impossibility of their obtaining proper information respecting the merits of ships, when the Admiralty shares the responsibility of the builder. Now, Sir, the state of the officers of her Majesty's navy is as follows:—scarcely any midshipmen; upwards of 400 mates,
84
some of whom have served nearly twenty years, and "hope deferred hath made the heart sick;" with respect to the lieutenants, commanders, captains, and admirals, the list is equally superannuated, all in their respective grades. The Admiralty has always acted upon the system of employing old officers, and the newspapers have eulogised it as a most meritorious plan; but how does it Work? You promote an active young captain, but you will not employ him because he must take his turn on the shelf; you take an old officer in his place, who has been deteriorating on shore for ten or fifteen years; in nineteen cases out of twenty this man has fogotten almost all his naval knowledge; but if you want a captain for an eighty gun ship, and 700 men, you pick out a man who has not been at sea for twenty years, who could not find his way from Portsmouth to Ushant. Now, Sir, I may talk to any sensible Gentleman in this House, of the extreme folly of fancying a man fit for a command who has been a quarter of a century on shore, and you will at once subscribe to the axiom. But there is nothing very extraordinary in old officers desiring to be employed, when you consider they have been starved and impoverished all their lives; when the pay of a captain of a British frigate is only two-thirds that of a French captain of a frigate, and one-half of that of an American captain, throwing in the advantages of outfit and table money. Captains of British frigates must spend double their income, as I can answer for from my own experience. Is it to be wondered at, that they crawl out at an advanced age, to provide for their destitute families? When the great military commission sat, in 1839, it was expected that some benefit would accrue to the navy; the junior officers certainly did receive some benefit; for lieutenants and masters, who were receiving 1s. 6d. per day, for active service, or the difference between 5s. and 6s. 6d., their pay was increased 10 s. per day; but was it not a disreputable circumstance, that no Lord of the Admiralty dared to mention the fact, for I have no doubt, from my slight knowledge of the feeling of this House, you would have at once assented to have paid these officers proper and just wages. This military commission did nothing to improve the condition of the superior officers, their excuse was, that the list of officers was

85
in such a superannuated state, that they dared not meddle with it, so they merely transferred sixty yellow admirals to the active list; in order, I presume, to make that list more active; and I charge these highly distinguished officers, who formed the military commission, that they, for the first time in their lives when a serious obstacle was to be removed, turned their backs and were afraid to face the difficulty. Now, Sir, I will explain the effect of employing superannuated officers—look to your Mediterranean fleet, are they in a high state of discipline? No. Are they in the habit of manœuvring their ships together? No. Sir, I am obliged to hear, that the midshipmen of a line-of-battle ship in the Mediterranean, hoisted a flag in their boat, with a negro chained to a post, by way of explaining to the fleet, that they were not allowed to go on shore, owing to some alleged neglect of duty. And with respect to Mr. Elton, I am told that he was dismissed from a ship, commanded by my hon. and gallant Friend, the Member for Gloucester, in which Commander Williams was first lieutenant, and this at once accounts for his asking for a boat to take his friend to the packet, being considered an impertinence. After the letter amounting to a challenge was sent, did not Mr. Elton refuse to make the apology which was dictated by his superior officers. It has been stated, that his apology arrived too late to suspend the court-martial; Sir, in my opinion, if his expressions of regret and repentance had been received at the eleventh hour, I would have accepted it; for what else have we to trust to in this world or in the next, but regret and repentance? But Mr. Elton was tried; it was known he must be dismissed the service, the mates and midshipmen prepared a festival to do honour to him;—the court-martial, to prevent so great a scandal, sentenced him to six months' Imprisonment. On his passage home, on board a man-of-war, owing to some expression made use of by the. captain, he followed the aged chief on the quarter-deck—that sacred places the quarter deck—and called him a liar in the most opprobrious terms. On the arrival of this ship in England, when Mr. Elton would have been released, this additional outrage caused him to be sent to the Marshalsea, but he was relieved at the end of five weeks, because the right hon. and gallant Admiral, Sir George Cockburn,
86
said the unfortunate gentleman had suffered enough. If a plain uneducated seaman had made use of that language, or if anything could have been construed into a challenge to a superior officer, he would have been at this moment bound to a penal settlement for life, or swinging at the yard-arm,—so much for even-handed justice. I declare to you, Sir, that with all the respect I entertain for this honourable House, and no man has greater, that if I was placed in the situation of first Lord, and there was a case of this kind in which a House of Commons chose to interfere, that if any doubt existed in my mind as to the severity of the sentence, instead of giving the prisoner the benefit of the doubt, I would throw that doubt into the opposite scale, and prefer to punish an individual with rigour, rather than that the discipline of her Majesty's navy should not remain intact. Do not, Sir, from this language, set me down as a great Martinet, for no man in the navy ever lived on more, intimate terms with his midshipmen; but they always knew the difference of atmosphere between the cabin and the quarter-deck. I never commanded a ship which was not full of supernumerary mid-shipmen, some older men than myself, and for ten years they never gave me any trouble, or did I ever try an officer by a court-martial in my life} but, Sir, I have a right to be proud of my midshipmen, for amongst many officers who have distinguished themselves, I will name the hon. and gallant Member for Durham, who is a better seaman and officer than his old captain. In justification of those mates and midshipmen whom I have attacked, as they may have no defenders in this House, I will extenuate their conduct. They have been ill treated, we are all governed by rewards and punishment, but to them no rewards are held out, and consequently to them punishment has no sting. Now, Sir, I have given the House the dark side of the picture, and I will throw in the rays of light. On the important art of gunnery, the navy, is efficient, to. this we are indebted, to the boa. and gallant Member for Liverpool, and to Sir John Pechell, whose views were supported by his late Majesty, and carried into effect by Sir Thomas Hastings; and you will hardly believe that Sir John Pechell was thwarted in his plans for a period of four years. If an officer had in 1812, stood up in this House and stated

87
that not one ship out of fifteen in her Majesty's service was fit to go into action, he would be denounced as the most gross libeller. Yet it was a positive fact, and when at the commencement of the American war, the wise naval authorities were explaining to this House the impossibility of a frigate mounting 18lb guns, fighting a frigate carrying 24lb guns; they were not aware that on every station, some one or two British frigates would have captured other British frigates of the same calibre in a quarter of an hour; merely because some ship's companies knew how to fight their guns, and the others were perfectly ignorant. Now, Sir, for an example, in November, 1811, I was a midshipman of an eighty gun ship, cruising off Brest, we chased the Chlorinde, a French frigate, outsailed her, fired a whole broadside at her, not a shot struck, and she escaped, owing to our main top mast being carried away, in this ship which had distinguished herself in the battle of Trafalgar with the same ship's company (and a finer crew of seamen never step a deck), not a man knew how to point a gun, because, as the gunner informed us, not a shot had been fired in practice, or in anger, since Trafalgar, or from October, 1805 to November, 1811. The next war will be very different, and I cannot pay a better compliment to British seamen, than by stating when a war was expected to take place last year, between the United States and this country, that our seamen serving on board the American men-of-war, refused to pull a trigger against their own countrymen. Now, Sir, all the evils I have enumerated may be remedied—employ naval architects to build steamers, who have already distinguished themselves, and do not throw away millions on ships until the models have been approved by competent naval architects. But, Sir, any nation can build ships, and very few can turn out good officers and seamen; the vitality of the navy depends upon improving the condition of the officers; on employing men in the vigour of life, not those whose years have been spun out beyond the ordinary age of man. I tread on sacred ground, and nothing but an imperious duty forces me to inform this House, that the Mediterranean fleet requires an active, efficient, vigorous chief. Who are you about to send to restore her Majesty's fleet to their pristine discipline? An aged Admiral, who has been nearly
88
sixty years in the navy; Sir, twenty or thirty years ago, no officer would have commanded a fleet more brilliantly. Is it not a cruel thing to force a man full of years and honour, to fill the most important command? To manœuvre the only fleet we possess? When he has a right to enjoy in private life, a comfortable retirement for his few remaining days. The excuse which the Admiralty will make is, that it is necessary for the British Admiral in the Mediterranean to be of high rank; that in cases of co-operation with a foreign flag he may assume the supreme command. It is an idle childish excuse— for an Order in Council, at any time, can give temporary or permanent rank in the event of such a co-operation being contemplated. But does the Admiralty conceive that the virtue lies in the flag, or in the vigour of the chief whose rank it proclaims. When that flag flutters in the breeze will it quicken the circulation in the veins of the aged officer? No, but in the dead calm when the flag drops, clinging to the mast, it is a sad emblem of our mortality, or when in the blast of the gale it flits aloft, it is still the same emblem that the spirit is about to flee to a better and a purer world. Sir, the responsibility of that appointment rests with the first Lord of the Admiralty. He might have been advised not to place a massive building on a ruined arch, although that arch be entwined with ivy, and crowned with laurel—it is indeed to me a most painful subject, and I mention it to impress upon this House the urgent necessity of placing our officers on a sounder footing. This is the plan I propose:—
" The Government to apply a sum of money annually, as a fund for purchasing out officers, to which will be added the proceeds from the following sources:
"Every commander promoted before he has served three years in a sea-going ship as commander,

If under 4 years' standing on the list, to pay

£1200

If under 5 years' standing on the list, to pay

800

If under 6 years' standing on the list, to pay

550

If under 7 years' standing on the list, to pay

350

If under 8 years' standing on the list, to pay

200

Above 8 years to pay nothing.
" Every lieutenant promoted before he has served three years in a sea-going ship as a lieutenant,

89

If under 5 years' standing in that rank, to pay

£800

If under 6 years' standing in that rank, to pay

450

If under 7 years' standing in that rank, to pay

250

If under 8 years' standing in that rank, to pay

150

Above 8 years to pay nothing.
"Every mate promoted before be has completed one years' service in a sea-going ship as a mate, to pay

£ 600

Under 2 years

400

Under 3 Years

150

Under 4 Years

100

Above 4 years to pay nothing.
"These regulations not to affect officers promoted for distinguished services.
"Officers having been promoted by purchase, not to claim any ulterior benefit.
"Officers who have sold out to retain their rank.
"Captains, commanders, and lieutenants who have served more than eighteen years in any one rank, or whose total length of service exceeds forty years, to be allowed to retire on a certain allowance to be fixed by Government."
Sir, the effect of this plan will be to tax the sons of those men of high rank and influence, who must and will be promoted over the heads of hundreds, and I pledge myself that no objection will be made by officers who have solely their own merit to depend upon, because they cannot be worse off than they are at present; but, in the event of my proposal being brought into operation, their chances of promotion will be doubled, and I hope the Admiralty will not continue to make the same mistakes about old officers, but will calculate their experience by the number of years they have been actually at sea as first lieutenants, and not by the time they have remained on shore. Let me remind the right hon. Baronet, the head of her Majesty's Government, that last September, when he proposed a retiring pension of 3,500 l. per annum, to a retired Vice-Chancellor, he dwelt upon the sound policy of drawing an aged judge from the bench, by a comfortable remuneration, in order that the public might be served by a younger mart. I was so struck with the argument that I was induced to vote for the larger sum, although the proposed alteration of 3,000 l. per annum appeared to me on the first impression to be sufficiently adequate, but that argument ought to be in stronger force when applied to old captains and admirals, inasmuch as bodily decay generally precedes the decline of mental vigour. In naval chiefs you require a strong con-
90
stitution, vigorous nerves, and a clear head, but you reverse the principle, for we bribe old admirals to go to sea, when you bribe judges to retire into private life; but the Admiralty, always lukewarm in promoting our interests, are afraid of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, or of the expense; do not say that this country, you proudly boast of being the Queen of the Seas, cannot afford to pay her naval officers their just claims, for you can afford to do what is right, and you cannot afford to do what is wrong; you pay one-fifth of the rental of the land to the clergy, and magnificent salaries to your ambassadors, crown officers, and great lawyers. But in the event of war who do you rely upon? Is it on the prayers of the priests to charm the bullets? Or on the special pleading of the lawyer? No, Sir, you will again depend upon the strong arm of the soldier, and on the supple limb of the sailor, on those men who have conquered kingdoms in every part of the world, and who have brought this little island to the highest pitch of glory that any empire ever attained; the gallant chiefs who led them to victory, have, in their turns succumbed to old age and death. My object is to replace them with efficient men, who can follow in their glorious track; which object the Admiralty has not the moral courage to attempt. Sir, I am well aware that the task I have undertaken is most invidious, and that the shafts of calumny will fly round my head;—let them fly; they will pass unheeded, they will be forgotten, but the good deed may be remembered. I shall finish in the words of the old song,—
"Then oh! protect the British tar, Be mindful of his merit;
And when again you're plung'd in war, He'll show his daring spirit."
Sir G. Cockburnsupposed it might be deemed a bold measure for him as one of the old officers alluded to by the young officer who had last addressed the House, with whose statements and observations though he concurred with some few of them, he far more generally dissented from, to rise for the purpose of replying to them. The hon. and gallant Member had referred particularly to the case of Mr. Elton, he should begin therefore by saying a few words upon that matter. But what he was about to say was forced from him, in consequence of the allusion

91
to the case. When the sentence of the court-martial was read at the Admiralty, there was not an officer at the Board here who did not say that he considered it a severe one. The Admiralty conceived that the court-martial must have had good grounds for the decision to which they had come, but at the same time they considered it a heavy sentence, and they made up their minds that, when the young gentleman should come home, they would not send him to prison. When, however, they heard of his improper conduct on board the Hastings, they determined not to interfere in his behalf, and he was sent to the Marshalsea to undergo his term of imprisonment. Whilst in the Marshalsea, Mr. Elton wrote a letter to the captain of the Hastings, apologising for his conduct. The Captain, in consequence, came to the Admiralty, and begged as a personal favour to himself that the remainder of Mr. Elton's punishment might be remitted. The Admiralty did not comply at once with that request, but informed the Captain that after he had undergone a month's imprisonment, the Admiralty considering that he had been dismissed from the service, also the lengthened confinement he had undergone between his sentence being pronounced and his arrest in England, also the severity of that sentence, and his month's confinement in the Marshalsea, were of opinion enough would have been done to maintain the discipline of the service, and that to have kept him longer in prison would, under the circumstances, have appeared vindictive, rather than tend to the benefit of the service. He could not concur in the observations which the hon. and gallant Officer had made upon the recent appointment to the command of the Mediterranean fleet. The gallant Admiral who had been placed in command of that station, was one of the most distinguished officers in the service. He was possessed of considerable talent, was particularly well informed upon all points bearing upon the duties of managing a fleet. It was not every young man who could manage a fleet, though, no doubt, every young man thought he could do so. Considerable knowledge and experience, and a great deal of talent were requisite for the management of a fleet. Sir E. Owen was known to possess those qualifications, and as long as he felt himself strong and fit for duty, it would ill become the Admiralty to set him aside, and tell him that he was
92
not able to act. He (Sir G. Cockburn) could not take that course, because he knew that the gallant Admiral was quite efficient, and believed that he would manage the fleet as well as any man who being much younger thought himself much more clever. If any insubordination existed in the fleet in the Mediterranean, he was persuaded that the gallant Admiral would set matters to rights there. His hon. and gallant Friend opposite, had earnestly urged the expediency of giving such allowances to old officers as would induce them to quit the service, and make room for others less under the weight of years. Upon that point, he wished to recall to the mind of a noble Lord on the other side of the House, that a suggestion of this nature had been made in the naval and military commission, and that it had been well considered, and carefully argued. It certainly was a subject that deserved consideration, but then he thought it might fairly be doubted whether the course recommended by his hon. and gallant Friend was the best that could be adopted; this was a topic, however, upon which he would not now dilate; but if there was to be any increase of the pay of the seamen, the pay of the officers ought to be advanced in a similar proportion. It had been suggested, that the pay of the seamen ought to be advanced to the extent of 12s. a month; such an advance would compel the merchant service to raise the wages of seamen higher; as much as often stated of the unpopularity of the navy, Gentlemen might depend upon it, that whatever was the pay given in the navy, the merchants service will be obliged to give more to obtain men; the question, therefore, became one of great importance—one which not only concerned the defence of the country, but the whole commerce of the country, and on that ground, if not upon any other, he thought that it well became the responsible advisers of the Crown to look at the matter very seriously, and pause before they took a step which involved consequences of the most important character. In the course of the present discussion, reference had been also made to the number of boys employed in the navy; that, as well as the other topics opened upon this occasion, formed in itself another very large question. He believed there could be no doubt that both in the merchant service and in the navy, there were more boys than were absolutely necessary; and at all times there were more boys ready to

93
go to sea than were required or could be provided for, and it was useless to bring forward more seamen than could find employment in the naval and mercantile marine, this country will always have as many seamen as you will give bread to, but with the exception of a few over for relief you will have no more, for seamen must eat like all other working men. At the close of the last war upwards of 100,000 seamen were turned adrift upon the wide world, and they were of necessity reduced to a most distressing condition; some of them became labourers in the country and some entered into foreign service; and he was sure hon. Members would agree with him when he said, that nothing should be done calculated to produce a repetition of occurrences so painful, and in all respects so disadvantageous to the public service and to the great interests of the country. Subsequently, the naval establishment was reduced to 13,000 men. It had now again, in consequence of the alarm which prevailed last year, been raised to 32,500 men. He need hardly observe that a seaman could not be called into existence at a moment's notice, and therefore it was not all at once that such an addition could be made to a force, which for some time previously had been neglected and allowed to fall into decay, and which of a sudden the nation called upon the Government to augment. [Sir C. Napier, it had been increased gradually.] Not very gradually. There had been certainly of late difficulty in obtaining men from the causes I have stated, but they have now been obtained. That object then having been accomplished, there would, as a matter of course, be a glut in the market, and the usual supply of boys would prove sufficient to keep up the establishment. He quite concurred with those who thought that there was a strong necessity for keeping up at least the number of men now employed, for, of course, in proportion to the number of men maintained during peace in the navy, would be reduced the necessity of reverting to impressment on the breaking out of war, and thereby distressing the merchant service. As to the pay of the officers, it was not fur him to make objections to any increase of their pay which the House of Commons might think advisable; but as some reference had been made to the comparative pay of the army and the navy, he must be permitted to ob-
94
serve, that the pay of a captain of a first rate in the navy amounted to 800 l. a-year, while the pay of a colonel in the army did not exceed 310 l.; but he did not then propose to argue the question. There was a point, however, to which he wished to direct attention. The point to which he alluded related to the petty officers of the navy, he thought them a class of men who could not be too much encouraged; they were much attached to the service, and they frequently moved about from ship to ship; they formed a very valuable and useful class, and he thought it highly desirable that they should, in all cases where promotion was deserved, be raised to the rank of warrant officers. Much had been said by other hon. Members as to the importance of having our fleets commanded by young officers; on that subject he would only observe that the House would probably recollect, that some of our most decisive naval victories had been achieved under the command of admirals for advanced in life. The next subject that he would advert to was, that of the "good service pensions," which it had been argued ought to be continued, whether the officers holding them were employed or not, but the recommendation of the Committee of the House of Commons, and the Order in Council expressly stated they should only be held whilst the officers were on half-pay, unless when held by officers whose distinguished services placed them out of all rule, such for instance as had lately been rendered by the hon. and gallant Member for Marylebonne, but if it were the opinion of the House, such persons should be held with the full pay generally, there could be no difficulty in procuring an alteration of the Order in Council to that effect. As regarded retirement, it would certainly be a valuable improvement, that all officers after a certain age should be allowed to retire on 20 s. a day. One gallant officer had also spoken on the subject of enabling officers to sell their commissions. That was an old proposition of his own, but when he brought forward the proposition, the House did not seem to like the idea, and therefore he dropped it. He brought the question forward again before the military and naval commission, but he met with no disposition to encourage any plan to intro-duce into the navy the principle of buying and selling commissions. As the subject, however, had again been mentioned in the House, he thought he might again be al-

95
lowed to refer to it. In every service, and under every Government, there could be no doubt, a certain degree of interest must prevail. A man with great parliamentary interest came to a public board, and it was not always easy to resist his application. Nor was this evil without some accompanying advantages, for he felt bound to say, that it was of great advantage to the service now and then to bring forward young officers. Now, if sales of commissions were allowed, it had struck him there would be this advantage in it. There were two hundred captains on the list who were scarcely fit for service any longer, yet it would be a great expense to the country to remove them by giving them increased pay; but it would still be much to the good of the service if they could be comfortably removed from it. The management of this ought, of course, to be left entirely to the responsibility of the Admiralty. Suppose, then, a gentleman with great parliamentary interest came to the first Lord of the Admiralty, and applied to have his son or his nephew promoted. the first Lord might tell him in reply that he would put the son or nephew's name on the list for purchase, he knew of a certain number of officers desirous of going out of the service, and a sum, say of 4,000 l. would prove a tempting and comfortable provision for the retiring officer to be furnished by the young officer whose parents might be able and willing so to press him forward in the service. Under such a system when an old officer of thirty years' service might be made on the same day with a comparatively young officer, the old officer would have the satisfaction of knowing that he owed his rank only to his services, while the young officer had sacrificed a large sum of money to obtain the same rank. Such a reflection would act as a balm of consolation to the old officer, rather than otherwise. As the subject had been brought forward again, he had been unable to resist the inclination of stating his views on it. As it was certainly desirable, that means should be found of providing for the promotion of younger officers, by the retirement of those who were past the period of service. And it appeared to him, that there were only two ways in which this could be done. The first was, to provide for the retirement of old officers by a grant from the Exchequer, by allowing them to retire on 20 s. a day instead of 14 s. The second was,
96
to allow some arrangement to be made to renovate the service by permitting the purchase of commissions. With regard to one point more which had been adverted to by the former Secretary of the Admiralty the Member for Halifax, he begged to say that there being a considerable want of petty officers that could be depended upon. Since the sudden augmentation of the navy, and the reasons which operated to prevent seamen having pensions from joining the navy no longer prevailing, the Admiralty deemed it advisable to admit of their again serving in it retaining their pensions, which has quickly supplied the required number of excellent and trustworthy petty officers, and as he had been informed given great and general satisfaction both to officers and men. Pensions to seamen are only granted under the immediate supervision of one of the Lords of the Admiralty, and when a man has earned one, he is almost sure to be a good and trustworthy man, and therefore a most valuable acquisition as a petty officer to guide and lead those who have more recently come into the service, which he trusted would fully justify what had been done on that point, notwithstanding the adverse remarks relating to it, of the hon. Member opposite.
Captain Berkeleysaid, he was not going to find fault with the Board of Admiralty for the clemency shown to Mr. Elton. The answer which he had received the other night had perfectly satisfied him, inasmuch as it had cleared the character of Captain Williams, and of the officers who formed the court before which Mr. Elton had been tried, from the imputations so lavishly poured out upon them by the public press. Mr. Elton, it was quite true, had served in a ship under his command, and had plumed himself very much on a certificate from him. But the young man's friends had been too cautious to produce his certificate, slating the reasons why Mr. Elton was removed from the Thunderer. Those reasons were very well known to Captain Williams. The feeling out of doors had been so strong on this matter, that he was glad to have it in his power to clear the character of the officers concerned in it. It was at his suggestion that Captain Williams had been promoted by the late Board of Admiralty, and he was an officer every way deserving of the distinction. The gallant Officer had spoken of the circumstance of a boat with a black

97
flag having been rowed round the harbour by the mates of the Mediterranean fleet. He was convinced no such case had ever occurred. He was anxious to clear Sir R. Stop-ford's character against the supposition that such an occurrence could have taken place in a fleet under his command. He was sorry at all times to draw comparisons between the officers of the navy and those of the army, but as the remark had been made that the pay of a captain in the navy was larger than that of a colonel in the army, it ought to be remembered that a colonel had only his mess to pay, while a captain in command of a ship could not properly carry on the service without keeping an expensive table. A colonel, too, had many allowances in addition to his pay, while the pay had to cover everything with the captain in the navy. The gallant Admiral who had just sat down, had been promoted at a time when the list was not so large as it was now. It was absolutely necessary that the list should be relieved, and that younger officers should be placed upon it. Let them take his case. What was his chance, even if he were to have a very long life, of ever rising to the rank of rear-admiral? He was made in 1814, and there were now 269 officers on the list before him: he knew of no chance that any brevet, during his time, was likely to reach down so low as 1814. Much had been said on the subject of pensions, and the gallant Admiral had said that the Order in Council was a bar to officers receiving those pensions while on active service. Would the gallant Admiral take it upon himself to urge upon the Admiralty the injustice of such a course? Before sitting down he must congratulate the country and the service on the great boon conferred on the navy by manning the ships in the way in which they were now manned. He had quitted the late Board of Admiralty on account of his strong feeling of the great injustice done to the service, by allowing the navy to remain with ships manned as they then were. He was glad the gallant commodore, and the gallant Member for Westminster had addressed the House in the way they had done. The more the circumstances of the navy were discussed, the better it would be. The army always had a man at the head of it, who had the feelings of a brother officer, but the navy was almost invariably under the control of one who could have none of those feelings. It was a
98
delicate subject on which he was now going to touch, and in what he was going to say he wished to advance nothing disrespectful to either of the two noblemen to whom he was about to refer, nor did he wish to imply that either of them was not fully deserving of the promotion he had obtained. He alluded to the two last officers who had been raised to the dignity of the peerage. Now, when he saw two military officers selected for such a distinction, he could not help thinking of the services of such a man as Sir Robert Stop-ford, who had commenced his career in one of the most brilliant actions on record —had been in almost every general action since then, and had wound up his naval career by the reduction of St. Jean d'Acre. The result of Sir Robert Stopford's last achievement had been to secure the peace of Europe, and, without blaming the distinctions conferred on the army, he did think that similar rewards ought not to be withheld from the navy.
Lord Ingestresaid, he hoped that naval men would always hang together. He hoped the honour of a peerage would be conferred on Sir R. Stopford. The present Board of Admiralty were entitled to the gratitude of the country for giving full complements to the ships. He wished to press upon the House the necessity of devising some plan for maintaining a constant stream of promotion, to fill up the places of those who became old and unfit for service. His hon. and gallant Friend, the Member for Ripon, (Sir G. Cockburn) was a splendid instance of a man preserving his powers after such a long course of service; but such cases must always be rare. It was to be hoped that some plan of retirement would be found. With respect to the pay, the navy were not generally dissatisfied, as there are several circumstances such as pensions, a power of allotting part of their pay which compensate for a less amount of pay to be obtained in the merchant service. But petty officers ought to have better pay, and their pay ought not to be reduced when serving in small vessels. In small brigs there was often much more work for the petty officers than on board of line-of-battle-ships, and therefore it was much to be desired that they should be paid according to their rank in the service, and not according to the rating of the vessels on board of which they served. He was glad to see that a committee of shipwrights had been appointed at Woolwich to consider of the best mode of construction. Three years

99
ago, he had had the honour of moving for returns of the trials of three ships, the Pique, the Inconstant and the Castor in which the Inconstant, built by his lamented friend, Captain Hayes, had fully proved her superiority in sailing, besides having cost 3,000 l. less than the Pique. He (Lord Ingestre) wished to know whether it was the intention of the Admiralty to construct any more ships on the plan of the Inconstant, also to lay down a line of battle-ships on the lines of Captain Hayes, which he was understood to have left to his family, and which he (Lord Ingestre) hoped would prove a great benefit to the country. He thought we had not a sufficient number of large frigates. When he saw how many vessels of that description France had, he did not think England was prepared, in case of an emergency, to maintain her superiority in this respect. Another question which he wished to put, related to the disastrous expedition to the Niger. Shortly before that expedition left this country, he thought it his duty to call the attention of Parliament to the calamitous con sequences likely to result from the ill-judged time at which the expedition sailed for Africa. What he wished to know was, whether there was any intention of renewing that expedition? One thing he wished to press was, the inadequacy of the pay of a captain when in command of a ship. A captain must necessarily incur a great outlay of money if he observed the common hospitality which he was bound to how. It was considered part of the duty of a captain to show that hospitality; it was of material benefit to the service, but many officers were giving that hospitality to the country for nothing, and he would therefore recommend some allowance in the nature of table money.
Sir George Cockburnsaid, that a commission of all the master shipwrights was now sitting at Woolwich. Their report had not yet been received, but he hoped the result of their deliberations would be to obtain the best possible mode of building ships, and also how to place as many guns as could be fought consistently with strength, not forgetting the more important point of sailing against hear seas and off lee shores. The Inconstant he believed to be the best ship of her class in the navy. On the last occasion on which she was tried, she went over the water like a duck, while her competitor was ploughing the waves with her bowsprit.
Lord Stanleysaid, that it properly devolved upon him to return an answer to the second question, which related to the probability of the renewal of an expedition to the Niger. That expedition was undertaken on the most humane motives. There had been a desire to ascertain whether it was not possible to improve the interior of Africa through the agency of commerce, and whether by that means a stop might not be put to the encouragement of the slave-trade. It was impossible to deny that to a certain lamentable extent the expedition had proved a failure. Yet it had been not altogether a failure. It had shown that it was the wish of the inhabitants of the interior of Africa to avail themselves of every opportunity to enter into commercial relations with the people of this country. A system of regular government existed among those tribes, and if the climate did not prevent it, there was evidently nothing in the way of an active commerce between the people of this country and those of the interior of Africa. The lamentable result of the expedition had been owing to the baneful nature of the climate along the river, and that climate had not improved in proportion as the expedition got to a greater distance from the sea. The effects of the climate had been so deadly on all the Europeans, that her Majesty's Government felt they would not be justified, even by the importance of the object to be attained, if they were again to risk the lives of a number of white men on a similar expedition. So far, therefore, as an expedition of white men was concerned, her Majesty's Government had no intention of renewing the expedition to the Niger. But one result of the expedition had been to form on the river an establishment of negroes, who, by a long commerce with Europeans, had been enabled to carry into the interior of Africa no small part of our civilization and religion. On the part of her Majesty's Government it was his wish to disclaim all intention of occupying territory, or of asserting any rights of sovereignty, or of offering protection which the country could not afterwards efficiently extend. Negroes going into the interior of Africa must not suppose that they settled there under British sovereignty, but must subject themselves to the laws of the country where they went to reside. Still it might be matter of doubt whether the settlement

101
referred to ought to be altogether abandoned. It might be found possible to send a steamer up the Niger, with a crew composed wholly of negroes, for the climate had not been found to affect the negroes of the expedition. It might, therefore, be a fair matter of consideration, whether Government might not give to that settlement the protection which it might derive from the occasional appearance of a steamer under British colours on the river. At all events, it might be as well not to deprive themselves of the power of sending up the river to remove the persons composing that establishment, should such be their wish, and, therefore, it was possible that a small estimate for that purpose might be called for. After the loss of life, however, that had occurred in the late expedition, Government had no intention of repeating it on anything like a similar scale.
Mr. Charles Woodsaid, he had heard the statement made by the noble Lord with great satisfaction. With regard, however, to the good service pensions, he (Mr. C. Wood) might observe that the answer given by the right hon. Gentleman apposite, was precisely that which had been formerly given by him (Mr. C. Wood) when he had the honour of a seat at the Admiralty, and yet that answer had given greater satisfaction to the right hon. Gentleman's Friends behind him, than he had 06 the former occasion been able to impart. The Secretary to the Admiralty had announced, there had been a reduction of six sail of the line, which was more than he (Mr. C. Wood) had expected, although he thought that some reduction had been effected. He intended to offer no objection with respect to the number of men, that being a question which ought to be settled by the executive Government. He had no fault to find with the estimates; indeed it would be strange if he had, for they were as nearly as possible the same as those of last year—another signal proof that the present Government had not succeeded in acting much better than their predecessors. He did not intend to offer any objections to the course pursued by the Government with regard to manning the ships with full complements. Indeed, in the present state of the country, and of her foreign relations, in the state of the world at large, he admitted that for the last two years it would have been better
102
if larger complements had been maintained. Nevertheless, the Admiralty had gone to work somewhat hastily, and some of their proceedings were not founded upon very intelligible principles. Some time ago a scheme had been proposed by several experienced officers for settling the complements of men by the number of guns and the weight of metal they carried. The calculation had been made with great care, and although not carried out, the scheme had been left in the Admiralty by the late Government. He did not mean to say that the numbers in the estimates were the same as those in the draft proposal he had alluded to. On the contrary, the new full complement for second class first rates was 950 men, whereas, according to the plan agreed upon, it was only 850, the plan adopted being 100 more; and he wished to know the reason of that increase. If it was determined that, at the present time, ships should go to sea under all circumstances, and whatever might be the state of our foreign relations or the nature of the service, with what was considered a full war complement, he should be glad to know what reasons had induced the Admiralty to reverse what had been the uniform practice of all the Boards of Admiralty up to the present time, a practice that had been approved of by Lords Howe and St. Vincent—namely, that in time of peace a reduced complement should be maintained. The right hon. Gentleman opposite had sat at the Admiralty Board in times not less critical than the present, when the battles of Navarino and Algiers had been fought with reduced complements, and he did not understand why the Admiralty had thought it right to depart from that course. Another subject to which he wished to direct the attention of the House, was the practice of allowing certain seamen to receive pensions with their pay. The present Government had made a general order that persons receiving pensions might receive pay also. He knew instances of two men who had served on board the Formidable; one was attacked with gout, and the other laboured under some bodily ailment. Both these men, although only temporarily disabled, received pensions and pay simultaneously. The case was reported to the Admiralty, and instead of stopping the pension the men were discharged. Thus, two able seamen, only suffering from a trifling

103
temporary illness, were placed for life on the pension list. The Government, indeed, had reconsidered their determination, and had confined the system to those only who received the good service pension, but he concurred in what had fallen from the hon. and gallant Member for Marylebone, that the system was one that ought not to be continued in its present form. The principle was contrary to that recognised in every other branch of the public service. He thought the proper mode of effecting the object would be to give increased rate of pay to those who had served a certain number of years, say twenty, and were willing to remain, but that such increased pay should not go under the name of pension, and should be calculated in some proportion to the value of past services. Under the present system it might happen that persons enjoying both pay and pension would be in the receipt of a greater amount than the petty officers about them. At present there was no difficulty in keeping up the number of men once obtained, without resorting to the measures usually had recourse to in time of war, but the difficulty always had been, and would be, to make a sudden increase in the number. While ships were kept an eighth or tenth short of full complement, and the measure was resorted to of allowing pensioners to come into the service in time of war, the facility of increasing the force was greatly increased. In the same manner whatever number of pensioners were serving in merchant ships formed a reserve not used in time of peace, but available on the breaking out of war. The change of the system was moreover destroying what was a great advantage in the navy—the keeping up an intercourse with the merchant service. He objected to the alteration proposed by the Board of Admiralty, because it was calculated to make the Queen's marine like the army, an exclusive and peculiar service, and he thought the services ought to be viewed altogether upon broad and comprehensive principles of equality. He would then come to the estimate for the materials requisite for the maintenance of the navy. After the many—the repeated attacks, made upon the late Board of Admiralty for niggardliness, he confessed that he had not expected to see any reduction in the estimates of the present Government under that head. At that time those
104
attacks were made he knew them to be false, and he did not think they were believed in at the time. Nor did he then imagine, that in the reduction the Government had made they had any intention of sacrificing the navy. He did not think the scheme of work left in the office by the late Government would be finished in the present year; indeed, the navy had been neglected, too few ships had been replaced; for, necessarily, after a lapse of fifteen years, many would be little better than unserviceable. It was only within the last two years that enough of building had been done in order to the due supply of line of battle ships, and the first class of steamers. The right hon. Baronet opposite (Sir J. Graham), when he presided at the Admiralty, carried out the reductions recommended by his predecessor, and certainly he had every right to think him quite capable of forming a just opinion, but he would say that the right hon. Baronet did carry them further than he would have done had he remained a short time longer in the office. Before 1830 an average of seven years gave them a consumption of 21,600 loads of timber, while an average of the four years up to 1836 gave only 9,600 loads, which was a reduction of more than one-half. Subsequently, they raised the consumption to 12,000 loads, but still in his opinion that was not enough. In 1834, when he went into office at the Admiralty, no knowledge of the state of things in the yards could be obtained without much trouble and great loss of time—indeed, it was years before they properly knew the real facts. In 1837, when an accurate survey was made, many of the stores, which certainly looked well upon paper, were found to be rotten; and it was found that there was not a supply available for more than six months. But the Government thought it better not to come down to the House and make an exposure of their affairs, which must inevitably reach the knowledge of foreign nations—they thought it better to take the means within their power to improve their condition silently, and rather suffer all the obloquy that was poured upon them, than make an exposure that might have proved so prejudicial to the interests of the country. The gradual but determined manner in which they had proceeded in that respect would be seen from the increased votes taken from year to year for the wages and stores of the dockyards. In 1835

105
the vote for wages was 300,000 l.; for stores, 383,000 l. In 1836,wages298,000 l., stores 424,000 l.; in 1837, wages 350,000 l., stores575,000 l.;in 1838, wages 384,000 l., stores 593,000 l.: in 1339, wages 400,000 l., stores 951,000 l.; in 1840, wages 460,000 l., stores 1094,000 l.; in 1841 wages 505,000 l., stores 1,337,000 l. The proposod vote for the present year diminished the amount in both respects—the sum asked being, for wages 495,000 l., and for stores 1,310,000 l. He hoped that the present Government would be as fully sensible as their predecessors of keeping up (his department of the service, and that the efficiency of the dockyards would be narrowly and carefully looked into. Then with regard to steamers, the reduction proposed was 50,000 l.—certainly a large reduction, considering the extreme and rising importance of steam navigation, and the demand for steam-vessels, and their exceeding usefulness in all operations along the coast: still, considering all these things, he trusted the Admiralty would expend sufficient upon steam enginery, and continue to build a sufficient number of steam-vessels. Then with regard to the packet service, he thought that item was important enough to be put into a separate vote. He was happy to find that Cunard's Halifax line had answered its purposes so well. The contract price was certainly a large one; but, although the Government had been so much found fault with, still it had been found necessary to make a further allowance. They had done well; but he was happy to see that the West India line had answered even better up to the present time. They were fine and powerful vessels which were employed, and he hoped they would continue to promote the intercourse and peaceable relations between this country and those to which they plied. They did not get one farthing more than they deserved, and, although the charge was high, he believed every shilling of the expense was now received by the Post-office.
Sir George Cockburnwas understood to defend the proposition of the Government, to complete the complement of men in ships under commission. When it was found that France and America were manning their ships to the utmost, it became the duty of England not to be behind hand upon so vital a point of naval efficiency. He did not mean to say that a ship under-manned might not be navi-
106
gated; but he mantained that it would not be in such a state as a British man-of-war ought to be to face an enemy. Seeing what other nations were doing in this respect, it was the bounden duty of the British Government to provide for the proper manning of its navy, The gallant Admiral then proceeded to defend the course which Government proposed to pursue with respect to pensions, upon the ground that pensions granted in the manner proposed would have the effect of preventing desertion, and improving the class of petty officers.
Sir R. H. Inglissaid, he wished to make a few observations with reference to the remarks of some Gentlemen on that (the Ministerial) side of the House, who had expressed their disapproval of the recent expedition to the Niger. He felt that in alluding to this subject he was discharging a duty which he owed to men who were exceeded in gallantry by none who were engaged in the service of their country. He was anxious to express his grateful acknowledgements to the Members of the late Administration, as well as to her Majesty's present advisers, for the course they had pursued with regard to the Niger expedition. Hon. Gentlemen were remarkably sensitive with respect to the loss of human life in cases where the object was one of pure unmixed benevolence. God forbid that he should undervalue the sacrifice of human life which had been incurred during the progress of the expedition to which he alluded. He grieved for it as much, he trusted, as any individual in or out of that House. But when he considered the loss of life which had attended expeditions conducted for the single and sordid object of gain—when he reflected on the sacrifice of human life which had been incurred in carrying on the slave-trade, and when he compared it with the loss which had attended this expedition for suppressing that trade, he did not envy the sensitiveness of hon. Gentlemen who could bear to hear of the loss of one-fourth of the crews of all the vessels engaged in the Guinea trade—2,500 out of 10,000 individuals—and who censured her Majesty's Government for sending out an expedition to accomplish an object of the most pure and disinterested benevolence, in which forty-two individuals had perished. The result of the expedition of Oldfield and, Laird had been much more disastrous. He thought the results of the expedition to the Niger did not justify the language

107
which had been used by some hon. Gentlemen as to the policy which dictated the undertaking, and he was satisfied that the general principles of that policy would still be carried out. The question of the expediency of pursuing the objects of the expedition might hereafter come before the House; and it was only necessary for him to say that, in his opinion, nothing had transpired to justify the condemnation of her Majesty's late advisers, or of the present Government, for having countenanced and supported the undertaking.
Viscount Ingestre, in explanation, said that he had made no comment upon the propriety or impropriety of the Niger expedition, but had merely asked whether it were to be renewed.
Captain Berkeleyapproved of the policy which dictated our enlargement of the ships' complement of men. On his return from the Mediterranean, he had put the Admiralty in possession of a body of facts showing the necessity for such a course. In the month of August the Mediterranean fleet, very inefficiently manned, was warned that it was likely to come in contact with the French fleet. To meet such a contingency, it was imperatively necessary that the ships' crews should be increased; but it was not till the month of January following that a single additional seaman was supplied to the fleet. Nothing, in his estimation, could justify the impolicy and injustice of leaving a British fleet in a position of so much hazard.
Captain Pechelladmitted the able and courteous manner in which the hon. Gentleman the Secretary to the Admiralty (Mr. Sidney Herbert) had submitted the Estimates to the consideration of the House; but was still of opinion that so important a duty should be performed by one of the higher officers connected with that department. He admitted the advantage which the service would derive from some of the alterations proposed by the present Administration, and was only surprised that the estimates, as prepared by them, were not for a much larger amount. To have been consistent with the expression of former fears, as to the unguarded state of our shores, the Members of the present Government should have asked for such a sum as would have enabled them to place a fleet at the Nore, at Portsmouth, and at Plymouth, and he was surprised that they had not
108
increased the estimates to carry their own projects into effect. The right hon. Baronet, the Member for Dorchester, (Sir J. Graham), in a speech addressed a few months ago to his constituents, declared that such was the confidence of France in the pacific intentions of the present Government of England that she had disbanded 90,000 men of her army, and reduced her fleet by six sail of the line. M. Guizot, however, had since declared in the French Chamber, that the Government of which he was the head, had no intention of adopting any such course; and the Minister of Marine, in the same debate, announced that no disarmament was contemplated, and that the fleet would be kept up to the same extent as it had been since 1840. It was true, that six sail-of-the line were to leave the Mediterranean; but instead of being put out of commission, they were to be stationed at Brest. He (Captain Pechell) conceived, therefore, that the danger of foreign aggression was infinitely greater now than it was at the time that the hon. Gentlemen opposite were so full of alarm, and that it was more the duty of the present than of the late Government to maintain the British fleet in its full force and efficiency. Looking at the estimates as now proposed, he could not but admit that he was perfectly satisfied with them. He thought that the Government acted wisely in giving increased complements to the ships in commission. They were the first to reduce them, and he was now glad that to find they were sensible of their error.
Mr. W. Williamssaid, it was not his intention to offer any objection to the vote, but be thought some explanation was necessary in regard to the Post-office department, and particularly in regard to the increased allowance to Mr. Cunard, for the conveyance of the mail between the country and North America.
Dr. Bowringcomplained of the mode in which the accounts were kept. Some time ago he had called the attention of the House to one cause of the great errors in the public accounts, growing out of the department for expenditure being also the department for receipt. He had suggested an alteration for the transferring the department for receipt to the Treasury, and he believed that the principle of the alteration was that on which every other Government acted.

109
The noble Lord the Member for London stated at (he time that he concurred in the alteration, and his (Dr. Bowring's) object in rising was to express a hope that the present Government would take the point into consideration.
Mr. F. T. Baringrose merely to notice the observation of his hon. Friend behind him (Mr. Williams), in regard to the additional allowance to Mr. Cunard. That addition had been made in consequence of its having been found necessary to have two additional boats in the service of the Post-office department between this country and America. The allowance, however, had not been increased until the matter had been referred to two Government agents conversant with the subject, and it was upon their representation that the increase had been made, which in his own opinion Mr. Cunard was justly entitled to.
Vote agreed to, as was also the vote of 747,264 l to defray the charges of victuals for seamen and marines,
On the vote of 121,449 l. for defraying the salaries of the Lord Commissioners, and the contingent expenses of the Admiralty being proposed —
Sir C. Napiersaid, he wished to make a few observations regarding the manner in which the Board of Admiralty was constituted. It was at present composed of a first Lord, who was a civilian, and who received a salary of 4,500 l., of four Lords, at a salary of 1,000 l. a year each, and one with a salary of 1,200 l. Now, in the whole course of his service of forty years, he could not find out why it was that the navy in this country should be ruled by a civilian, who, perhaps, had never been on board ship in his life. The First Lord of the Admiralty must make a choice of a naval officer to assist him in his duties, and he should be glad to know whether it were not natural to suppose that that officer might have followers of his own, whom he would be as anxious to serve as those of the First Lord of the Admiralty, who was placed in the position of not being able to judge between right and wrong, and who could not tell whether it was advisable or not to act upon the suggestions of his assistant. Looking to the manner in which our navy was ruled, so far back as the year 872, he found that the sovereigns of those days were Lord High Admirals. From the time of Henry 3rd to Henry 8th, there were "admirals of the seas," admirals, as
110
they were called, of the North Seas, and of the South Seas. Next came "the kings of the seas." Edward 3rd was king of the seas. In the reigns of Edward 6th, Mary, Elizabeth, James 1st, Charles 1st, and down to Charles 2nd, there were Lord High Admirals. In that reign the navy began to have princes Lord High Admirals. The Duke of York was Lord High Admiral, and shortly after, in the reign of Queen Anne, Prince George of Denmark was Lord High Admiral. He was succeeded by the Earl of Pembroke, and since then the navy had been governed by a Board of Admiralty. For what reason, he should like to know? The fact was, that the Minister of the day, in looking round him to form his cabinet, generally selected Gentlemen who had great influence and interest in the State, and as it seldom happened that naval officers were possessed of that kind of influence and interest, they being, in most cases, the youngest sons of noblemen and gentlemen, it also rarely happened that they were marked out for those high offices. That was one reason why the navy was ruled by a civilian. It might be very useful for a Minister, to have the patronage of the navy under his control, particularly when parties were pretty equally balanced. At present the balance was all on one side, which was so much the better for his argument. This was no new view of his. He had urged his idea on Lord Melville so far back as 1816, when he had brought under his notice the state of the navy, and he pointed out the necessity of appointing a naval commander-in-chief. His principal reference in his letter to Lord Melville, however, was not to a a first Lord, but was to something even worse than that, to a cornet of Dragoons. He had pointed out the absurdity of selecting the Marquess of Worcester, who was a military man, to superintend a part of the naval service. Why, they might as well have appointed, a post-captain commander-in-chief to give instructions to the Duke of Wellington. He had followed up his views when the hon. Member for Dorchester (Sir James Graham) was at the Admiralty, in 1832, and had also addressed a letter to the right hon. Baronet (Sir R. Peel), when he came into power in 1835. What he wanted was a naval commander-in-chief of the British fleet, and he owned he could hot see anything more ridiculous in that proposition than in placing a military commander-in-chief at the head of the army. At the Horse Guards they had a

111
military adjutant-general, a military quartermaster-general, and a military secretary, and why, he should like to know, should they not have at the Admiralty a naval commander-in-chief of the fleet, one admiral at the head of the dock-yards, another at the head of the hospital and victualling departments, a captain of the fleet and a civilian at the finance under his orders with two secretaries, one a naval-officer, and the other civilian? It seemed to him that there were many good reasons why it should he so. When a First Lord came into power, he was generally extremly ignorant, hut after he had been there a little time, he began to fancy that he knew a great deal, and had become a thorough sailor. This was very much the case with the late First Lord (the Earl of Minto), who, after he had been at the Admiralty some time, assumed a great deal more power than he ever ought to have assumed. He had always understood that where there was a Board the responsibility was divided between the members of that Board. Now, the late First Lord had, in one instance at least, assumed the power of acting in opposition to the express desire of every other member of the Board. An hon. Friend of his had informed him that when the subject of manning the navy was under the consideration of the naval Lords, a scheme was, after a great deal of trouble, agreed to, which met the views of every naval member of the Board. Among other things it was agreed, after long consideration and much discussion, to reduce the complement of men by one-eighth. One or two Lords were opposed to this reduction, but they yielded their views in order to secure unanimity, and, at last, the scheme was assented to by every naval Lord, and received, in addition, the concurrence of Lord Dalmeny. The result was communicated to Lord Minto, who put the document in his pocket, and nothing more was, for some time, heard of it. At length it was returned to the Board, and it was then discovered that Lord Minto had assumed the power of reducing the complement of men not by one-eighth but by one-fifth. Now, he asked, was that a proper state of things to continue? Was it right that a man who knew little or nothing of the navy should assume such a power as this, contrary to the opinion of the naval Lords of the Board? Similar instances were on record. It was said, that during Lord Chatham's Administration, a paper, ousting Lord Bridport from office, was sent
112
down to the Lords of the Admiralty. Admiral Young and the other naval Lords refused to sign it, when the First Lord of the day pushed it down to the lay Lords at the bottom of the table, and said, "Sign the paper, or this Board shall no longer exist." It was also said, that Lord Spencer, when he was at the Admiralty, sent down to the Civil Lords papers requiring to be signed by several Lords, and that they were in the habit of signing them without looking at them. Only a day or two ago he (Sir C. Napier) had read in the Levant correspondence a private letter addressed by Lord Minto to Sir Robert Stopford, ordering him to proceed off Cyprus, and there to wait orders from the Admiralty. This, be it remembered, was a private order, and he asked, was it to be endured that such a power should be assumed? The remedy he proposed was a very simple one. There were an admiral and a vice-admiral of Great Britain at the present time. Why not make the office (instead of being a sinecure) useful in the administration of the affairs of the navy? Let them place the vice-admiral at the head of the dockyards, and he would answer for it that the moment they got a practical man who was responsible in that department they would not find such mistakes committed as had constantly taken place for a number of years past. It would not have happened that the masts of from 160 to 170 vessels of war were quite unfit for service. If they had a responsible naval chief too, they would not find that the navy was manned as it had been of late, for he would naturally say—"I will not take the responsibility attending an inefficient manning of the ships of war." He would be very naturally thinking of where his head would be if any misadventure occurred, but at present no such fear was entertained, for the Lords could shift about the responsibility from one to another, and, as the House knew, it was impossible to hang the whole Board. [An hon. Member: You can hang the secretary.] [Laughter, which increased as Mr. C. Wood, a late secretary, was observed to nod to Mr. S. Herbert, the present secretary, and pass his finger across his throat.] He understood that when Lord Auckland came into the Admiralty, it was found that the navy was reduced to the lowest possible scale, and that all the ships were on paper, that there were few stores, and that what there were required replenishment in every department. As to the argument about favouritism, why, favour and affection in

113
the way of promotion went through every branch of the service at present. The right hon. Baronet, when he came into office had, greatly to his credit, pledged himself that merit, and merit alone, should be considered a stepping-stone to advancement, and certainly he had commenced his career well, for he had destroyed the Navy Board and the Victualling Board, which might have been destroyed with great advantage even at an earlier period. He only wished that when the right hon. Baronet destroyed those Boards he had gone a little further, and destroyed the Admiralty Board along with them. As far as the personal appointments at the Admiralty went, it was almost needless for him to say he had no objection to them. For Lord Haddington, as far as he knew him, he had every possible respect. He believed him to be a conscientious man, and he also believed that he would job as little as any of his predecessors. He had no objection to him, and if the Government wished to have a civilian for a commander-in-chief, he should not offer any very strong objection, even to his retaining his present position. Having made these remarks he would not trouble the House any further.
Captain Carnegiecordially concurred in the views of the gallant Officer who had just sat down, and felt assured that the appointment of naval Lords would prove in every way a most satisfactory one to the service. If it were said that they must have a statesman for a first Lord, he would reply, that it was not requisite that those who presided over the naval service of the country should know any other state secrets than the secrets of the state of our marine. They did not want a politician for a first Lord: there were no politics under the pennant. The navy had prospered well under naval Lords, and if they wanted an example he would refer them to its condition under the administration of Lord St. Vincent. Had the admirals who signalized themselves by naval exploits shown any lack of judgment or prudence in civil affairs? Was it not Sir G. Cotton, who commanded the fleet on the coast of Portugal, that refused to the last moment to sign the Convention of Cintra? Had not Sir Richard Keats shown the most consummate skill throughout the transactions attending the embarkation of the marquess of Romana's army, on the coast of Sweden. Did not Sir T. Hardy nurse into vigour the infant states of South America? And
114
in still more recent times, did not the address and perseverance of Lord J. Hay mitigate the ferocity of the disgraceful conflict which devastated the Basque provinces of Spain? He did not think the genius of these men would have shone to less advantage had their sphere of action been more enlarged. But, whatever might be determined with respect to the highest office in the navy, he hoped that Government would see the necessity of bestowing some of the offices that fell in their gift connected with the civil department of the navy on naval officers. He might instance those of the second secretary of the navy, now so ably filled by Sir J. Barrow, the Store-keeper General, and the Controller of the Victualling-office, now filled by civilians; and he hoped that Government would hereafter at least take into consideration the propriety of making naval men commissioners of Greenwich Hospital. He should like to see some of those innumerable situations of doorkeepers, porters, messengers and others of that sort, of which the Admiralty had the patronage, bestowed on deserving petty officers. He hoped that for the future some selection of persons to fill such posts might be made from the naval profession. He was most anxious not to be a party to any unseemly agitation on this subject, as he thought such a proceeding would not be consistent with the dignity of the navy; but he felt that he had only done his duty in making those remarks. He must add in justice to the right hon. Baronet, that if they were to have a civilian at the head of the navy, the right hon. Baronet could not have fixed on a person whose appointment could be more gratifying to the profession at large than that of the noble Lord who now presided over the Admiralty.
Viscount Horvickthought, the topics brought under the consideration of the House by the gallant Officer who had just spoken of great and serious importance to the country. Could he suppose for a moment, that there was an assumption in any quarter that, among naval officers there was not to be found sufficient ability for civil affairs, the appearance which those gallant Officers had made, would of itself be sufficient to overthrow that assumption. Although, however, it might appear more natural to place a naval man at the head of the profession, still he had no hesitation

115
whatever in giving a preference to the existing arrangement, because that, as he understood, it by no means excluded naval men from the situation of first Lord. The form of our Government, the nature of representative institutions, would render it extremely inconvenient that an invariable rule should be laid down that naval persons should be selected to fill the office of first Lord. Every man who had experience in political affairs must see cases in which great difficulty would be experienced from such a regulation. With respect to the objections brought against the authority exercised by the first Lord, which was complained of as excessive, he had himself, in the situation in which he had the honour to fill, witnessed the difficulties, the serious detriment, which arose to the public service from the division of authority between different and independent offices, in the administration of the army. He had seen the impossibility of effecting that co-operation and vigorous action of Government so necessary in the ordering of military affairs. The evils which sprang out of the existing system were so striking, and productive of such injurious consequences to the army, that if the House was in the slightest degree made aware of them, they never would entertain the notion of introducing this system into the management of the navy. On a future opportunity he should be prepared to show, in the administration of the army, under all the Governments of the last thirty-five years—even when so great a man as the Duke of Wellington filled the situations of Master-General of the Ordnance and Commander-in-Chief—and when he himself (Viscount Howick) filled the situations of Secretary at War, such a series of mismanagement and blunders, affecting the lives and welfare of British soldiers, by which in the course of a few years, thousands of lives and hundreds of thousands of pounds were lost to the country—he pledged himself, on a fitting opportunity to show such a case of inconvenience and mischief, arising from the existing management of the army, that the same system ought not to be followed in the navy. He firmly believed it was not individuals who were to blame for this, but the system. When the hon. and gallant Officer near him mentioned, with disapprobation, several instances of the first Lord almost acting for himself, without reference to his colleagues, he did not quite agree with the gallant Officer. Parliament and the country looked chiefly to the first Lord, and considered him re-
116
sponsible for the good management of the navy, and he thought it an advantage resulting from the present constitution of the Board that the first Lord could not carry on the service, unless he could prevail on officers of high rank and standing to join him in his measures. If affairs were not managed by him in the manner they considered proper, their duty was plain, and their retirement from the Board was a strong check upon the proceedings of the first Lord, and a security to the public for the proper conduct of the public business. He deprecated the reading of such letters as that which had been read by the gallant Commodore, and thought, that the question whether a civilian or a naval man ought to be at the head of the Admiralty would be better entertained on a future and more fitting occasion.
Sir H. Hardingeagreed with the noble Lord, that the Lord, that the question of whether there should be a civilian or a naval man at the head of the Admiralty had better be reserved for a more appropriate time. A report on that subject, which had received the signature of the noble Lord, contained, however, opinions totally different from the evidence on which it professed to be based. That report had reference to the administration of the army being Conducted by a civilian, and the evidence of the Duke of Wellington, Lord Vivian, and other military officers went directly to assert that the mode proposed of superseding the Commander-in-Chief would be most disastrous to the army. He (Sir H. Hardinge) would never consent to the abrogation of the functions of the Commander-in-Chief.
Captain Berkeleysaid, that the letter of his which had been read by his hon. and gallant Friend gave a simple statement of facts, and he considered that in it he was guilty of no breach of confidence whatever. He had not been the first person to publish a statement with reference to the management of the navy; his publication, and that for which he left the board, was in answer to a publication of the second secretary of that board, who was present at all their deliberations, who knew his strong opinions on the subject who knew that there was a difference of opinion between him and the first Lord on that subject; he published a defence of the system; he was rewarded by the first Lord of the Admiralty by the purchase of his book, while he (Captain

117
Berkeley), because he stood up for his profession, found it necessary, without any ill-will to the first Lord or to his Colleagues; and finding no fault with them, except that of not managing the navy as he thought they ought, he had found it necessary to resign. The letter which had been read was simply a statement, he thought it necessary in consequence of various misconstructions which had gone abroad as to his reasons for quitting the board, one of which reasons was said to be that he had changed his politics, and gone over to the other side, and he therefore deemed it essential to his character, to lay before the public, the grounds on which he had resigned his situation. If his hon. and gallant Friend thought proper to move that the salary of the first Lord, when a civilian, should be reduced to the sum that was on the paper, he would vote with him.
Mr. C. Woodregretted that the gallant Commodore should have read the letter. [Sir C. Napier: I was authorised to do it.] He was very sorry that his hon. and gallant Friend had given that authority. His hon. and gallant Friend, in alluding to the circumstance under which he had left the Admiralty, bad scarcely done justice to Sir John Barrow, whose statement had been published without the concurrence of any member of the Admiralty. His hon. and gallant Friend was also mistaken in supposing that Sir John Barrow was present at the deliberations on the subject. The first intimation the members of the Admiralty had of that publication was its receipt from Sir John Barrow in a printed form.
Captain Berkeleyexplained, reiterating his former statement, and referring to a letter he bad received while in the country from his hon. Friend himself (Mr. C. Wood) in corroboration of it.
Sir Robert Peelwished to say a few words on the main question, whether the committee should come to a decision that a naval officer should always, and necessarily, be at the head of the Board of Admiralty. He should be extremely sorry to pronounce any opinion against the qualifications of naval officers; but he should exceedingly deprecate on the part of the House of Commons, any resolution which should disturb the constitution under which the naval affairs of this country had for so long a period been conducted. Since 1797, there were only two
118
instances in which naval men had been placed at the head of the Board of Admiralty; and looking to the general satisfaction which civilians presiding over the board had given to the service, and the great naval exploits achieved under their presidency, he could not help thinking it would be most unwise indeed for that House to establish a rule which would exclude civilians from holding such an office. The arguments which had been urged against the propriety of a civilian being first Lord would tell with equal, if not greater force, against a civilian being secretary. He very much doubted whether a naval man, with all his professional biases, prejudices, and predilections, most natural and laudable as they might be, could make the necessary reforms in the service with the same facility as a civilian. The rule did not exclude the appointment of a naval man, while it permitted that of a civilian as first Lord; and his decided opinion was, that the 'present constitution of the board, under a civilian of high standing, with no professional bias, prejudice, or predilection, acting under the advice of some of the most eminent men of the profession, who would necessarily influence him in all naval matters, but enabled to counteract professional prejudice by the influence of his character, his position as a Cabinet Minister, and his large view of other political affair, was greatly superior to the plan proposed by the hon. and gallant Gentleman, and be again said, he should be exceedingly sorry, if the House were to disturb such a state of things.
Sir C. Napierwas far from thinking, that the present constitution of the Board of Admiralty bad given satisfaction to the naval service. The changes of the Members of the Board of Admiralty entailed considerable expense on the country, for no sooner was a new body of men installed, than they changed most of the regulations of their predecessors. As an instance of the bad effects of the administration of the navy by a Board of Admiralty presided over by a civilian, he would state, that at the end of the last war, the guns were in such a bad state, that when fired, they would scarcely hit an enemy. He might also mention, that during the latter period of the American war, a secret order was issued, that British ships of war should not engage American frigates, because the former were in such an efficient state. One

119
captain, after the receipt of this order, on coming in contact with an American frigate, turned up his crew, and told them, that he had directions not to fight, for he was determined not to keep the order secret. As for himself, when he got the secret order, he put it in the only place fit to receive it—the quarter-gallery. He would state an instance, to show that under a system like the present, distinguished service was not always sure to be noticed. An officer, whom he knew well, had distinguished himself in the East-Indies, and was recommended for promotion by the Governor-general; but he found that his claims were disregarded by the Admiralty. He advised him to write a letter to the late King, when Lord High Admiral, stating his case, and in ten days afterwards he was made a Captain. Everything connected with the administration of the navy was in disorder, until William 4th was appointed Lord High Admiral. Every commander then felt, an interest in putting his ship in order, for he felt convinced, that merit would not pass unrewarded. Under the present system, it was impossible that the navy could be properly managed. He had seen the British navy in risk of being disgraced, in consequence of inefficient manning, had a hostile fleet made its appearance off the coast of Syria. When the crews got sickly, if the French fleet had come down upon them, they must have been defeated. These were his reasons for thinking, that the navy should be ruled by a naval officer, and he should divide the committee on his motion. He moved for the purpose of carrying his views into effect, that the vote be reduced by 4,500 l.
Captain Pechellshould be sorry to imply by any vote disapprobation of the present first Lord of the Admiralty. He also considered the right hon. Baronet opposite entitled to praise for the appointment of Earl de Grey in 1835 as first Lord of the Admiralty, but he did certainly think that it would be desirable to select some one connected and conversant with naval affairs for this situation. The conduct of the late Sovereign when Lord High Admiral proved the truth of this observation. He was accessible at all times to officers of every rank, from the highest to the lowest, and it was well known that it was their services, and not parliamentary interest, which recommended them to his notice. It had been observed so late as in the year 1839, that services on the hustings
120
were preferred at the Admiralty to services on the quarter deck. This observation was made by the right hon. Baronet, the present Secretary for the Home Department, who must be acquainted with the fact. In the case of the present first Lord of the Admiralty, Parliamentary influence had not been forgotten; in the appointment to China, too, it had not been forgotten; nor in the appointment of the hon. and gallant Officer opposite. Still the appointment to China, and those to Woolwich, and Deal, and perhaps to Cork, were good ones, and it was difficult for a board to resist Parliamentary influence; but if the charge was applied to the late Government, it was equally applicable to the present Government. He should support the motion to mark the sense of the principle, but not as against Lord Haddington.
The question was then put that a sum not exceeding 117,949 l. be granted to her Majesty for defraying the expenses of the Admiralty-office for the ensuing financial year, which having been amended, negatived, [vote as proposed agreed to; as was a vote of 716,799 l. for half-pay, with the understanding that any discussion on the subject should be taken on the next vote of "Military Pensions and Allowances."
The House resumed. Committee to sit again.
House adjourned.

MINUTES.
BILLS. Public.—1a. Marriages (Ireland).
PETITIONS PRESENTED. By the Marquess of Headfort, from Strabane, and other places in the North of Ireland, to Legalize certain Marriages by Dissenters.—By a noble Lord, from Millers of Armagh, against the Importation of Flour and Oatmeal into Ireland.—By a noble Lord, from Millers of Todmorden, and Hebden-bridge, to Encourage the Importation of Grain in Preference to that of Flour.—By the Earl of Clarendon, from Earlstown, and Arbroath, for the Repeal of the Corn-laws.—By a noble Lord, from Watton, against any further Grant to Maynooth.—From Ellon, for the Better Observance of the Sabbath.

INVASION OF SPAIN.
The Earl of Clarendonwished to take that opportunity of putting a question to the noble Earl the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, on a subject of considerable public interest; namely, with respect to the preparations now being carried on in France for a new invasion of the Spanish territory. These preparations had been so extensively made, and had been carried on with such publicity, that they had excited the greatest attention in the minds of the public, and they no doubt had not escaped the attention of the Government. He knew full well the diffi-
2
culty and delicacy of interference on the part of her Majesty's Government; but he had no doubt that communications had taken place between the noble Earl and the Minister for Foreign Affairs in France on the subject of those preparations. He had no doubt, also, that the noble Earl had received assurances on the part of the French government that they had not afforded any encouragement to these attempts, and that with such assurances the noble Earl probably meant to rest satisfied, but he knew also that in the preparations which Spain on her side was making to resist foreign aggression—for such it really was—it would be a great satisfaction and encouragement to the people of that country, to learn that the real interests of Spain are not viewed with indifference by us. That they will not now as on former occasions be treated as party questions, and that her Majesty's Government are determined to uphold the present government of Spain as the best possible under the present circumstances of the country, and that the complete independence of Spain was a matter of deep interest and importance to England. This was the reason

3
why he wished to ask the noble Earl, as to the communications which had passed on this subject between himself and the French government. If any such communications had passed, they could not be very satisfactory, for it was well known that an agent of the prime minister of France, Marshal Soult, had some weeks ago been sent to Bourges, to Don Carlos, and he had seen it stated in the papers of that morning, that he was there now. It had also been openly stated, that an army for the invasion of Spain was, at the present time, being recruited and organized in the south of France, and that it was placed under the orders of Christino and Carlist officers. It was notorious that such officers had been allowed to leave the towns in which they had been appointed to reside, in the interior of France, and that many of them had passed through Lyons on their way to the southern provinces on the borders of Spain. It was also well known, that certain civil functionaries who had been engaged in the insurrection in last September, had been allowed to take up their residence in Bayonne, having large sums of money in their possession, which they openly alleged they intended to expend in paying Spanish soldiers who would desert from their allegiance. Most of these persons declared that they acted, not only with the cognizance, but with the direct approval of the French government; to this, however, he attached no importance, for the parties who made such declarations, did so probably with the view only of justifying their proceedings and of obtaining support. He believed also, that whatever might be the policy of the French government, it was far too prudent to place any proofs of its connivance in the hands of such parties. He felt bound, however, to declare that nothing of what he had been alluding to could have taken place, if the French government had chosen to interfere with the view of preventing it. He said this with perfect confidence, when he recollected that, with the system of passports existing in France, no persons could move from spot to spot in the way these Spanish agents had done, if means had been taken to stop them. Again, it should also be recollected that these Spanish refugees were under the surveillance of the French police, and every body knew how easily the French government could have interfered with this state of things if it chose. This was obvious from what occurred in 1839,
4
when it became the policy of the French government, which was then presided over by M. Thiers, to come to the aid of the conquering party in Spain, and put a stop to the carriage across the Pyrenees of ammunition and other muniments of war, which it had allowed for the five preceding years, and which was the main cause for the keeping up the war for the long period which it lasted. If, then, the French government could with such facility prevent the passage of troops and ammunition across such a long line of mountainous frontier, full of passes, how much more easily could it prevent the free passage of these persons from the interior of France to the southern frontier. If, therefore, the French government did not encourage this state of things, it did not appear to look with disfavour or dissatisfaction on the projected invasion of Spain, and yet the principles which France laid down and was prepared to act upon in an analogous case were sufficiently notorious, for it would be in the recollection of noble Lords that France marched an army to the borders of Switzerland, and threatened to invade it, because that country refused to eject from its territories Louis Napoleon, after his mad attempt to invade France, and she insisted that Switzerland should refuse an asylum to that individual. There was nothing more mad or iniquitous in the plot of Louis Napoleon, than there was in this attempt now meditated against the tranquility of Spain, for there was no great principle of government involved in the matter; there was no question as to Don Carlos, for his prospects had long since been completely extinguished; and there was no question as to Queen Christina, for she had voluntarily abdicated her regency, notwithstanding the remonstrances of General Espartero and the ministry whose oaths of office she had just received, and she had since disavowed all connection with the revolution of last September, or the proceedings of the general who occupied Pampeluna in her name. The present conspiracy had no other object in view than revolution and disorder, and it was not for him to say how far this might be intended as a means to pave the way for intervention in the affairs of Spain. There, however, were points which deserved the serious attention of every one who wished well to that country. He rejoiced in the conviction that no foreign intervention in Spain could be of the least avail if opposed to the wishes of the people, nor could anything

5
new deprive Spaniards of a constitutional government. Spain had experienced the benefits of that form of government, and was determined to adhere to it. It was chiefly from the circumstance that the present Regent of Spain, who was well known and esteemed in his own country as a brave soldier and an upright and honest man, was determined to uphold the institutions of his country, that he was indebted for his great power and popularity. Since that distinguished man occupied his present post, Spain had made prodigious progress in the establishment of order, and he was perfectly convinced, that if she could but enjoy a few years of peace and tranquillity, or rather he would say, freedom from foreign intrigue, she would consolidate her independence and regain that place among the nations of Europe, which it is so much for the interests of this country that she should occupy. In conclusion, he trusted that he need not apologise to the noble Earl, or to the House, for having introduced this matter respecting a country in the affairs of which it was only natural that he should feel a deep interest. He then merely wished to ask the noble Lord whether he was aware of the preparations which were now making in France, whether any communications had passed with the French government upon the subject, and whether, in the event of an insurrection taking place, it was the intention' of Government to send any ships-of-war to the ports of Spain, for the protection of British interests and to co-operate with the Spanish authorities.
The Earl of Aberdeenwas not surprised, that the noble Earl should take a deep interest in the state and prospects of Spain, and should be anxious to express his sympathies with that country in which he had so long represented her Majesty. He must object, however, to one observation of the noble Earl, for he contended, that the question of independence had never been a party question in that House, for he believed if there was one subject more than another on which men of all parties and all classes in this country were united, it was in a desire and in the conviction of the necessity of maintaining the independence of Spain—the real independence' of Spain,—the peace, the happiness, and prosperity of Spain. He apprehended, that this had ever been the policy of this country. It was the policy which led to the glorious triumphs in the Peninsula of his noble Friend near him—it was the
6
same policy which dictated the quadruple treaty, and the measures growing out of it, to the noble Lords opposite. It was also the same policy which influenced her Majesty's present Government. He was prepared to admit, on the part of the Government, that this was the principle of their policy, and that this would be their principle, whether Spain were under a king, a regent, or the cortes. He was also ready to admit, that the present Government of Spain, for the last year particularly, deserved the support of her Majesty's Ministers; for it had done more for the improvement of the country and for the advancement of the best interests of that nation than any preceding government since the death of Ferdinand 7th. He was aware of the plot which was now in progress—a plot which seemed from its very nature to assist in its frustration more than any one that he had ever been aware of, for all the proceedings of the conspirators were known to the Spanish government, and they were perfectly prepared to resist the invasion with every prospect of success. No doubt, there were many Spaniards on the French frontiers who were engaged in this attempt to produce revolution in Spain. Representations had been made to the French government on the subject alluded to by the noble Earl, and her Majesty's Ministers had received from the French government the most positive assurances that every measure would be taken, and every attempt would be made, to check and frustrate this movement by the removal from the frontier of all persons who were pointed out to be suspicious, and by the greatest care being taken in the delivery of passports to suspected persons. It was quite true, that hitherto they had only obtained these assurances, but he had every reason to place dependence on them. They would, however, continue to watch the progress of events, and if it was in the power of her Majesty's Government to assist the Spanish government, either as regarded the proceedings on the French frontier, or on the coast, or in any other manner that could be pointed out, the noble Earl might rely upon it, that her Majesty's Government would do everything to assist the present Spanish government in resisting any attacks that might be made on it. He thought, that the apprehensions of the noble Earl with respect to another part of the subject were erroneous. He did not believe, that any union between Don

7
Carlos and the Queen Dowager of Spain was likely to take place. He knew, that no such union had hitherto taken place between the Carlists and Christinos, for he knew that the Prince he had just named had strenuously resisted any such propositions. Indeed, it was only that day that he had received despatches in which he was informed, that several of the most influential persons in the Basque provinces denied that they ever intended to take any part in such a union. It had been stated, that Cabrera had been sent by Don Carlos to Paris, but it turned out that he had not been in that capital—that Don Carlos had refused him leave to visit that place, and that officer had also publicly disowned having any connection with the conspiracy. This, then, was decisive in his mind. Although, then, these parties might make an attempt to disturb the peace of Spain, he did not believe, that it would be of that formidable character which had been supposed. This being the case, and as the Spanish government were prepared to meet the plot, and as they were fully aware of the feeling that existed in the country, he thought, that they could safely resist any attacks of the kind alluded to. As to the question put to him by the noble Earl, whether it were the intention of her Majesty's Government to send out ships of war to the ports of Spain, for the purpose of protecting the interests of her Majesty's subjects in that country, he would say, that no doubt that and every other means which their duty pointed out would be resorted to, not only for affording due protection to British subjects in Spain, but also in assisting and supporting the Spanish government itself. In aiding Spain—as an old ally, and as a country in whose prosperity we were deeply interested — her Majesty's Government would be disposed to use every means which could be fairly asked of them.
Subject at an end.

SIR ROBERT KENNEDY.
Lord Broughambegged leave to call the attention of their Lordships, and more particularly of his noble Friends opposite, the Members of her Majesty's Government, to a subject which he considered of so much importance, that if he should not find the attention of Government particularly directed to it, he should feel it his duty to bring it formally before the House in a very few days. He felt very strongly the course which the Crown had been advised to take; he felt it
8
as a friend to justice and he must be permitted to add, as a friend to the monarchical constitution of this country. By the sixth section of the 2nd of the Queen, it was provided, that certain portions of the public funds should be at the disposal of the Crown, for the reward of meritorious public services, as set forth in the preamble to that act. Those who had read the most able despatches and letters of his noble Friend, the gallant Duke opposite, and there was as much in that invaluable collection to inform the statesman as the soldier, would find in many of them most honourable mention made of the late Sir Robert Kennedy, a man than whom, for probity and purity of character, in addition to his long and efficient public services, none stood higher, if, indeed, any in the same branch stood as high. That lamented gentleman had long been at the head of the Commissariat Department in the Peninsula, and his great services, and strict integrity in the discharge of his duties, were further illustrated by the fact that he died poor. Dying, then, in that poverty, so honourable to him, a poverty far more illustrious in the judgment of reflecting minds, than wealth which was dazzling only to the eyes, it would be easily imagined that his family upon whom his honour was reflected, were also poor. But he (Lord Brougham) was enabled to gather from a return which had been made to the other House of Parliament, that those two ladies had obtained out of the fund, set apart to reward those who had meritoriously served their country, the sum of 50 l. a-year each. This, he presumed, was the measure of the estimate in which the eminent services of their father was held. He would not say a word of the list of pensions by which this pittance of 100 l. a-year between those two ladies was surrounded, and by which the limited sum was exhausted, if he got an assurance from his noble Friends opposite that the attention of the Government would be immediately directed to the subject. If he did not get that assurance, he now gave notice that he would bring the matter more fully to the notice of their Lordships in a few days. He would, however, now read the entry in the return to which he had alluded—setting forth the grounds on which the pension of 50 l. a-year each had been set apart to
"Elizabeth Devereux Kennedy, and Anne Maria Kennedy, daughters of Sir Robert Kennedy, late Commissary-general, in con-

9
sideration of his long and arduous service of thirty-eight years, in various parts of the continent of Europe, during which he was ship-wrecked and taken prisoner; and the uniform accuracy with which the immense amount of money passing through his hands was accounted for."
This return was made amongst a list of pensions between the 20th of June, 1840, and June, 1841. He would not offer further comment on the subject at present.
The Duke of Wellingtonsaid, he begged to offer to his noble and learned Friend his sincere thanks for having brought this subject under his notice. He could state, from his own knowledge of the fact, that there was no individual whom he had known, whose services deserved better of his country, than the late Sir Robert Kennedy. His services were performed through a long period of years, and at the end of that time, he most accurately accounted for the immense sums which had passed through his hands—a sum which he was almost afraid to name, but it was not less than 54,000,000 l. or 55,000,000 l., and his accounts had passed to the most perfect satisfaction of the audit-office, and of the Treasury. He felt ashamed, and deeply regretted, that he had not adverted to this subject; but he assured the noble and learned Lord that he should give his immediate attention to it, with the view of seeing whether something could not be done for those ladies more worthy of the country, and. of the services which their late respected father had rendered to it.
Lord Broughamsaid, that this assurance on the part of the noble Duke was perfectly satisfactory, and would save him the necessity of again adverting to it.
The Duke of Wellingtonregretted, that the noble and learned Lord had not made him acquainted with the fact sooner.
Lord Broughamsaid, that it was only a few minutes before he entered the House in the morning, that he had seen the return in question.
Subject dropped.

FORGERY OF EXCHEQUER BILLS.
Lord Monteaglerose in consequence of the notice which he had given; and he trusted that the proposition which he was about to make would not be prejudiced in any respect by the delay which had occurred —a delay of which he did not complain, but which the noble Duke (Duke of Wel-
10
lington) would do him the justice to admit was one for which he was not responsible; for at the very earliest period of the Session, consistent with the forms of the House, namely, on the second day of the meeting of Parliament, in accordance with a communication he had made to the Government, in the previous month of November, he gave notice that it was his desire to bring this subject under the consideration of the House. His motion had been, from time to time, and from various circumstances, postponed by the desire of the noble Duke, and undoubtedly on the last occasion, the night previous, when it had been again put off, in order to permit the discussion elsewhere upon the same subject, he had not the least notion what the proposition was, which was about to be made by the Government, nor did he know what it would be until he learnt it, in common with the whole public, from the ordinary channels of information. Had he known before-hand the nature of that proposition, he should then have hesitated with respect to the further postponement of his motion. He only prefaced the observations which he had to make by these remarks, for the purpose of appealing to their Lordships and to the noble Duke, not to allow the proposition which he was about to bring forward to be prejudiced in any degree by that debate, but to consider the question as if he now stood in the very same position as that in which he would have been placed, had he been permitted to address the House upon the day for which he had originally given him notice. In undertaking to bring this question before their Lordships, he desired to separate it altogether from the case of those parties who were the unfortunate holders of the forged Exchequer bills. With their case he did not wish that the present proposition should be mixed up; as their Lordships knew that their case was to be inquired into in another manner, according to the provisions of a bill now under the consideration of the other House of Parliament, he did not seek by his argument to prejudge or in any way to affect their claims, whatever they might be. The proposition which he felt it his duty to submit to their Lordships was for an inquiry, with a view to other circumstances. Their Lordships were aware that the office which he had the honour to hold was one of a very peculiar nature— it was an office, of great and serious re-

11
sponsibility—a responsibility of which the public at the present moment had lost sight. He was not surprised that when a casualty happened of the description which had recently occurred, or a crime had been committed, for so it might more properly be called, the public attention should be directed to those functions of his office which were connected with the Exchequer-bill department. But the duty of making out and issuing Exchequer-bills was by no means the principal, and still less was it the only duty which the Comptroller-general was called upon to perform. Entrusted to him were functions much more serious and important in their constituted character; because in him was invested the absolute power and discretion, and responsibility, of judging of the legality of all money payments out of the Exchequer for the public service, as well as of the legality of the receipts which came into the Exchequer. He was appointed to the discharge of those functions altogether independently of the Government of the day; his office was consequently granted during good behaviour, and only subject to removal by the Crown, in case of abuse, in pursuance of an Address agreed upon by both Houses of Parliament. He was therefore most peculiarly an officer responsible to Parliament; and it was essential that this should be understood to be not a barren and nominal responsibility, but that it should be felt to be a responsibility actually enforced whenever any causes should call for inquiry, or should excite the suspicion of either House of Parliament. He had pressed this part of the subject upon their Lordships' attention, for the purpose of showing, that in inviting the House to the consideration of this question, he was not bringing under their consideration the conduct of an officer responsible to the Crown only, and removable at her Majesty's will and pleasure, but he was asking them to institute an inquiry into the conduct of a public officer, who was exclusively responsible to Parliament, if guilty of any neglect or oversight, or of any act which was in itself censurable. The proposition which he saw, by the votes of the other House of Parliament, had been last night carried, was that a parliamentary commission should be appointed to enquire as to the issue, receipt, circulation, and possession of certain forged Exchequer-bills. The proper time
12
to discuss the subjects involved in the inquiry by this commission would be undoubtedly when the bill, by which the views of the House of Commons were to be carried into effect, was introduced into their Lordships' House; but he could not even allude to it in passing, without stating that he thought that the course taken by the Government was not only the best and most expedient, but that it was the only course of which the nature of a most difficult case admitted. The Government was not only perfectly justified in adopting it, but he thought that it was the course which was the best calculated to sift to the bottom the justice of those claims made upon the Government by the holders of the repudiated bills, and to show how far they ought to be admitted or refused. But he doubted very much,—and it was to this point that he wished to draw the attention of the noble Duke,—he doubted whether this commission, wise and just as it was, would attain the object which he confessed he had most in view by the present motion. If it were only a commission to examine into the cases of the owners and holders of forged Exchequer-bills, and to decide what, in each of these cases, it might behove the Government to recommend, and Parliament to carry into effect, it was an admirable course to take. It was appropriate and complete in respect to the special matter of inquiry; but what he asked their Lordships to do, was to inquire not into the claims of the holders of these forged bills, but to consider the question which he had put on the Notice Paper of the House, to decide the issue which he had pledged himself to bring to trial, and which he had endeavoured to bring before their Lordships, long before the motion of the previous night had been agreed to in the House of Commons. That issue was, not whether they would pay these Exchequer-bills, but whether there was any neglect—any misfeasance, attributable to himself or to the administration of the office of which he was the head: that was the question he asked of their Lordships, and he asked it in the name of that responsibility which was created in him by statute, and which, as a public officer, he was entitled to invoke. He wished, therefore, to state, that if his object could be attained in a manner more convenient, but equally certain, with that which he proposed; if he could secure a

13
strict inquiry into the conduct of his office; if the question whether the frauds and forgeries which had taken place were in any respect attributable to the neglect or misfeasance of those at the head of the Comptroller General's department, that office could be better determined than by a Committee of their Lordships— if the noble Duke told him that it was more expedient and convenient that the inquiry should take place, in any way rather than in the way which he proposed, he should be ready to leave it in the hands of the noble Duke, prepared to await the event. He would now proceed to present to their Lordships, as shortly as he could, the view which he took of this case. He feared that in defending himself at all he might expose himself to the imputation, of needlessly putting himself on his trial; but he cared nothing for that. Though he had found none among their Lordships, who, with the facts before them in the Report of the Commissioners, had brought forward any charge of neglect against him, there yet had been busy tongues and busy pens elsewhere, to which he should not reply in that House in which he had the honour of a seat, but whose statements and insinuations rendered it necessary to the public interest that this question should be discussed and disposed of. Millions of money, in the shape of the public securities of the country, passed through his hands; public confidence in those securities depended upon the confidence which was felt in the correct performance of those duties which regulated the issuing of those securities, and unless it were generally and fully believed that there had been no relaxation on his part of the ancient rules of the Exchequer, unless it were believed that the bills issued from his office were carefully signed and regularly issued to the public, the value of those securities might be endangered, and the greatest inconvenience felt by the commercial world. He took it upon himself to assert, and to invite any contradiction, that there had been no change whatever—no relaxation in any one of the rules which had been laid down for the management of the office of Comptroller-general, whether those rules depended on usage, statute, or Treasury minute. He had heard much of the supposed carelessness with which the stationery of the office and the forms of Exchequer-bills were kept. Nothing, perhaps, could be
14
easier, when any particular fraud was discovered, than by giving attention to that fraud, to devise a very excellent remedy against its recurrence. But he took it upon himself to say, that in this instanee there had been no deviation from the course which had been always invariably adopted with respect to these articles of public property. Confidence had been always placed in the senior clerk of the Comptroller-general's office, and full powers were confided to him for the custody of those materials out of which the public securities were manufactured. Undoubtedly, as the commissioners stated, it was unfortunate that a remedy was not found for the evil which exhibited itself in this case in sufficient time to prevent its occurrence. But he could not help thinking, that whatever care might have been taken, it was still possible where the principal officer failed in integrity, that these frauds might have been still committed. He begged the attention of their Lordships to this supposed relaxation of the rule, or carelessness as it was more indulgently called; if there had been such a relaxation, some degree of culpable carelessness must be presumed to be implied. This relaxation, must, of course, be taken to mean a relaxation of rules which existed antecedently, and it must be taken as a relaxation alleged to be of recent date. This is wholly untrue. There was not one of the rules of practice in the Exchequer which had not been repeatedly the subject of Parliamentary notice, of reports made to the Treasury, and to officers of the very highest distinction, there was not one of these rules so complained of which was not of a date anterior to the last century. He hoped that their Lordships had taken the trouble to refer to this point, as stated in the Report of the Commissioners: he might say, that the same degree of confidence reposed in the senior clerk of the Exchequer-bill office from 1696 down to the Administration of Lord Grenville. The whole subject was brought under the inquiry of the commission of accounts which originated in Mr. Burke's celebrated speech upon Economical Reform. It was again brought before the Finance Committee in 1797. It was once more brought before Lord Granville Somerset's commission in 1829, and before that which was presided over by his noble Friend, whom he did not now see present (Lord Congleton), then Sir H. Parnell. It was brought

15
before the Treasury upon several other occasions, and the result of the whole was the system which was given to the Comptroller-general to administer. Upon the construction of the office of Comptroller-general in 1834, the Legislature had before it all the information upon the subject; but no alteration was made or recommended in the practice of the department. Both Houses had before them all the circumstances under which Exchequer-bills were issued; they knew the degree of confidence placed in the senior clerk of the office. The Treasury, proceeding to carry into effect the act which had then passed, directed the Comptroller-general to adhere to the practice of his department, and to report further on the subject to the Treasury at the end of twelve months. That report was made, and was favourable to the continuance of the usages of the office; that report specifically stated the trust and confidence placed in the chief clerk. The Treasury acquiesced in the suggestion then made in favour of which the continuance of the existing system. He must say, even after late events, that he did not think that the Treasury was to blame for this judgment; because they had before them an unbroken chain of evidence demonstrating the success of the existing system, in a practice of 140 years, during which there had been no mistake, no fraud, no inaccuracy of any kind, he did not think, therefore, that the Treasury were bound, to vary a practice which had been so long successful. He must call the attention of their Lordships to the establishment of the office of Comptroller-general, and to the steps taken subsequently to the passing, of the act by which that office was constituted. It might, perhaps, be said, that if all that was required, was to carry on the business of an old office, the Treasury might be considered right in adhering to the old rules of practice; but that where a new office was established, with new officers to perform new duties, such inexperienced persons could not safely be trusted, but that new and more stringent regulations ought to have been determined on and enforced. But no new officers were so appointed. In making a selection of the persons who were to act in this department, the Government selected the clerks, not from persons without experience, but from the ancient officers of the ancient Exchequer-office, and solely on
16
reference to their acknowledged services, Mr. Arthur Eden, who had been appointed Assistant-comptroller of the Exchequer, at the time of his nomination to that office had been thirty years in the public service; and he might say, from his own experience, that a more cautious, a more anxious, or a more experienced or able public servant could not be found. All the clerks were selected from their age and services; with one single exception; in the case of a young man, chosen in deference to the recommendation of Lord Camden, a nobleman who, from the splendid pecuniary sacrifices which he had made on behalf of his country, might well be deemed by the first lord of the Treasury, to be entitled to introduce a gentleman to such a situation. In respect to Mr. Beaumont Smith, he had been for many years at the head of this very department, he had first been appointed, and afterwards had been entrusted by Lord Grenville with the same duties, which he performed to the time of his detection. He was a man of a high, honourable, and distinguished family, a nephew of the late gallant Sir Sidney Smith, and a relation, he believed, of Lady Grenville. At the time of his selection in 1834, he had been twenty-five years in the public service— he continued in the discharge of the same duties which he had before performed—those duties remained unaltered, and no greater trust was reposed in him in 1834, than had always been confided to him and his predecessors. He might be allowed to say, in passing, that the change in the law, with respect to the Exchequer, was productive of very great benefit to the country, and secured great simplicity of arrangement. It was contemplated by the Government of the noble Duke, and had been carried into effect by that Government, of which he had had the honour to be a Member. Undoubtedly he should hardly have felt very much surprise, had a change so great as that which was effected in 1834 produced some degree of irregularity, or had some want of precision arisen on its first application to the purposes for which it was designed. The effect of the change was to substitute one single office in which there were twenty-three persons engaged, including the very messengers and watchmen maintained, at an expense of 8000 l. per annum, for six offices, consisting of eighty-one persons maintained, at an expense of 45,600 l.; thus effecting

17
a saving of upwards of 30,000 l. per annum. But no irregularities took place, with the exception of the frauds of Smith, and the whole course of the administration of the duties of the reduced office had been as regular under the new system as under that more expensive administration which had formerly existed. He would now advert to the fraud itself. He had no knowledge at all, either of the fraud or of any circumstances of suspicion relating to the department, until the morning of Monday, the 25th October. Whatever suspicion might have arisen in other quarters, it had not been communicated to him. On the day which he had named he had been early to his office, but finding that there was no business pressing, he had quitted it intending to return in a few hours. In the course of the day he received a communication from the Chancellor of the Exchequer, requesting his immediate attendance, and when, in obedience to this call, he arrived in Downing-street, he found that the issuing-clerk was in custody, charged with forgery. The officers of the Government placed every confidence in the Comptroller-general; they sought his assistance; they sked his opinion, and he hoped the noble Duke had learned from his colleagues that his aid was earnestly given, and that whatever assistance was required at his hands had been tendered with zeal and readiness. In such a situation, any party differences would have been unworthy of him, or of those individuals with whom, as members of the Government, he was called upon to act. They had one common public duty to per-form, and he believed that it was discharged both by him and by those who were associated with him with earnestness, and with a desire to promote the public interest. He mentioned this, incidentally, because he had seen, and he must confess that he had seen—with some astonishment and indignation—he had seen it proclaimed to the world, that he was called up by the Government to be "roundly rated"—to be cross-questioned and subjected-to all manner of disrespect, from those very gentlemen who had asked for his advice and counsel, and who had taken that advice and approved of it. Upon the discovery of the fraud Mr. Beaumont Smith's keys were lpaced in his hands, and he was desired to open the places of deposit which belonged to him, and to make an inventory of what he found. In
18
the execution of these duties, very few things had given him more pain, than, on opening the desk of this unfortunate man, to find that the very first object which presented itself to his notice was the sword of Sir Sidney Smith, bequeathed by that gallant individual to the man who was then in custody upon a criminal charge. This sword was a proof of the trust and confidence which his gallant relative placed in him, and the affection which he considered him to merit. He mentioned this, not merely as a circumstance calculated to produce sympathy and commiseration, but as showing how highly the character of this unfortunate prisoner was estimated by his deceased relative, it was not then surprising, and did not argue any carelessness on the part of those in office, that their confidence was given to this man after twenty-nine years' service, without suspicion or reproach The next step was the examination of the bills. The Government required that all the bills should be examined by the Comptroller-General. It was a work in which the energies of those gentlemen who were employed under his authority were called for, and they had exhibited the most successful zeal in the discharge of their difficult and responsible duties. It was gratifying to him to think that securities to the amount of 18,900,000 l. should have passed through the office, and should have been examined, stamped, returned, or accounted for to the owners, without a delay of a single day, or an irregularity of any sort whatever. Pending the inquiry, he had been directed to withhold from the parties the forged and fraudulent bills produced before him. The Government had been much censured for adopting this course, and he had had his full share of the abuse. So far as it was necessary, he was willing to undergo his portion of the responsibility, because if ever there was an act called for by the circumstances of the case, it was the retention of these bills. This resolution was one which it was the duty of the Government to adopt, to save the public from the consequences of these frauds, and to prevent the holders of these spurious bills from passing them off as genuine documents upon the more credulous part of the community. But, at the same time that the bills were withheld from their owners, not

19
only was no objection raised at any time to giving the parties the use of them for the purposes of justice, but an obligation was entered into by the Government that the bills should be at all times forthcoming for the purpose of enabling any innocent holders to recover upon them from those persons from whom the forgeries had been received. Mr. Beaumont Smith, upon being placed upon his trial, pleaded guilty, and his accomplice Rapallo was admitted Queen's evidence. With the conduct of the trial he had had nothing to do; but he had no doubt that the Crown had acted under the advice of its legal officers. He repeated, that with this part of the case he had no possible connection; and up to the very morning of the trial, though summoned as a witness, he was neither aware of the probability of Mr. Smith's pleading guilty, nor of the fact that Rapallo had been received as Queen's evidence. Why did he say this? Because it had been stated, again and again, that Mr. Beaumont Smith had pleaded guilty in consequence of consultations repeatedly had between him (Lord Monteagle), and Sir Thomas Wilde, who was Mr. Smith's legal adviser. Anything so absurd and so derogatory to the character of Sir T. Wilde, as well as to his own, could hardly be thought of; but at the same time, these were assertions which, however false, were calculated to make some impression in the public mind; and he, therefore, felt bound to state, that with Sir T. Wilde he had never had any communication upon this case, and that until the morning of the trial he had had no suspicion of the course about to be taken. Upon the close of this trial, the Government had taken a course which he thought was a very wise one. They undoubtedly had notice from him that he intended to bring the case before Parliament, but on that account they bad not relaxed any exertions of their own in reference to the question, but they bad issued a commission, the report of which he now held in his hand. The selection of the gentlemen who formed that commission was characterised by the same discretion which had been apparent in the resolution to issue the commission itself; he did not think that four men could have been chosen who, for their independence and impartiality, were more fitting for the office conferred upon them. In all essential matters he considered that the report of the commission would very
20
much supersede the necessity of his motion, but there were a few points left in doubt, to which it was necessary to call their Lordships' attention. The whole case had been submitted to these gentlemen, and they went into it with energy, and acted on the principles of justice and impartiality. If they had erred on one or two points—in which he thought that he should be able to show that they had fallen into some mistake—he could only refer it to a want of experience, not to a want of care; and in the comments which he should offer upon their report, he begged their Lordships to believe that he meant no disrespect to them, nor did he at all undervalue the result of their labours. After going through the whole of the evidence with respect to his office, and stating the changes which had occurred, the commissioners said,
" We have been unable to trace, during the progress of these changes, or within the last fifty years, the relaxation of any precaution which had been previously enforced, or the departure from any useful practice which had formerly existed, except in five instances."
This, then, was the report of the commissioners, and if he should be able to show their Lordships, as he thought he could do so, that the distinction drawn with reference to these five excepted cases was unfounded, as far as he was concerned, he should, he thought, make out his assertion, that there had been no relaxation at all of the ancient practice of the Exchequer. The commissioners also said in reference to the alleged defects in the internal arrangements of the office, that they had
"For nearly a century escaped observation and correction, and had led to no injury to the public. It is not then very surprising, though it is much to be regretted, that these defects should not have been noticed and supplied at the re-modelling of the Exchequer."
He would apply himself now to the five excepted cases to which he had adverted, because if he was able to convince their Lordships that there had been no departure from anterior usage, and no mismanagement in the office of which he was the head; no blame and no responsibility could then attach to him, and the object of his motion would then be fully answered. The first of these five cases is stated to be,

21
"The abandonment, about the beginning of the present century, of a second counterfoil, which was deposited with the Bank of England."
He should explain that the duplicate of an Exchequer bill was called the counterfoil; and that formerly two of these had been always retained, one for the Exchequer-office, and the other for the Bank of England; but that now only one of these, for the Exchequer-office, was kept. The change spoken of took place upwards of forty years ago, but it could only have been done under the orders of the Board of the Treasury, and the alteration in the system in this respect was in no degree connected with his office, nor with the act of 1834. The second point was,
"The neglect of comparing their bills with their counterfoils at the Paymaster's office, at the exchanging, paying off, or funding of the bills."
No doubt, the precaution thus neglected, was more necessary and important than the last, and undoubtedly it had been neglected in the Paymaster's office; but that office was not under the authority of the Comptroller-general; he was not responsible for it, and had now no power to issue any orders for regulating its administration. He would pass over to the fifth point, which was,
"The destruction of the counterfoils, without the authority of the Treasury."

Now, if this is to be considered a neglect in his office, it has dated from the year 1828, since which time the present system has been constantly pursued. But in practising this, no precaution has been omitted of any importance whatever. There may have been a slight official irregularity, but no more. When Exchequer bills are paid off, the counterfoils are sent back to the Exchequer, and on the final payment of the bills, and the audit of the Paymaster's accounts, these counterfoils are directed to be destroyed by Treasury warrant. The omission in this case had been the neglect of procuring the Treasury warrant. Counterfoils had been destroyed without Treasury warrant, but the destruction of the counterfoils after the payment of the bilk and the close of the accounts could not be the cause of loss or inconvenience to the public The irregularity, however, such as it was, commenced in the year 1828, long before he was Comptroller-general, and even before the forma-
22
tion of the office. The third relaxation complained of was,
"The signing of bills of the same issue by more than one person, and the omission of a notification in the Gazette when any person other than the principal was authorised to sign."
As to the signing of the Exchequer bills by more than one person, he admitted that when Lord Grenville was Comptroller-general no one signed but him and his attorney. Sir John Newport, signed but 5,000 bills out of 240,000; more than one half of these had, however, been of the same issue with those signed at the same time by Mr. Eden. In his own time the work had been more equally distributed, and if there had been any irregularity on his (Lord Monteagle's) part, it consisted in his desire to discharge the duties of his office. He had undertaken a larger portion of labour, and had signed a larger portion of bills than Mr. Eden and Mr. Perceval combined. But the commissioners seemed to infer that this was not consonant to the act of Parliament. In this they were wholly mistaken. He knew that a case upon this point had been submitted to the principal law-officers of the Crown, and as the noble Duke was aware, they had given an opinion that the practice of the Exchequer had been strictly conformable to the act of Parliament. The next point was the notification in the Gazette. This was not required by the present act; there had been an alteration made in the law as it now stood, as compared with the former law. Lord Grenville was required to give notice in the Gazette because he signed by his deputy or his attorney, but neither Mr. Eden nor Mr. Perceval was the deputy or attorney for the comptroller. They were both appointed by the Treasury, and, therefore, the law did not require the notice. What was put down as the fourth charge by the commissioners, which he had reserved for the last, was
"The occasional signature of bills, without the presence of a clerk, or of the signing-book, elsewhere than in the office."
He confessed that he might be liable to some censure on the part of their Lord-ships upon this point for some disrespect to them (but he did not think that he was censurable on any other ground. It was true that, whilst attending their Lordships' House upon a Scotch appeal, he was guilty,

23
of the grievous disrespect towards their Lordships whilst acting in their judicial capacity, of believing that his attendance was merely formal; his mind not being very profitably engaged by the learned arguments carried on at the bar, he had been vain and foolish enough to think that his time in the interval might be turned to good account in transacting the public business. He had, therefore, sent for the regular messenger of the office, who had brought the unsigned bills in a box carefully locked up. He had signed those at their Lordships' Table, and had returned them by the same messenger, still locked in a box, to the Exchequer, where they were duly counted by the proper officer, who gave a receipt either that night, or at latest, the next morning. He might thus, he admitted, have been guilty of some disrespect to their Lordships, but he was satisfied that he could not be considered to have grievously violated the duties of his office. He believed that in two other cases he had signed bills in committees of their Lordships' House, and once also when attending the committee of the Privy Council. In 12 out of the 137 days, after discharging the duties of his office, because he had never omitted to attend at the office on those days, he had signed bills out of it. He was now talking in the presence of persons well acquainted with official duties, and of long experience, and he would ask them what would have become of the public business of the great departments of the state, if public documents were never signed except within the four walls of the public offices? Public business could not be carried on for a week if this rule were strictly observed. He had not neglected to attend at the public office on any one of the twelve days referred to, but when there had been a pressure of business he had devoted a portion of his extra official time to his public duties elsewhere than in the office. Of the five excepted cases this was the only one which remained after the explanation he had given, and he did not suspect that for this over zeal in the public service their Lord-ships could attach any blame to him. An impression had gone abroad that the business of his department had been carelessly conducted, and that there had been a relaxation of the ancient practice observed there. It was on this ground that he now asked their Lordships to institute an inquiry into the conduct of that
24
office. He might be told that a commission was about to issue. If the noble Duke might, perhaps, tell him that the inquiries before this parliamentary commission would embrace his proposition, and that the commissioners would, as a distinct proposition, inquire whether there had been any relaxation of the rules of his office, he would be content. But a mere collateral examination would not satisfy him. He wished the public to be informed distinctly, aye or no, whether these charges were true or false. Before he sat down he wished to correct a mistake, which had crept into his evidence as given in the report of the commission, and which had given pain to two persons for whom he entertained sincere regard. In the 74th page of the report, where he had given an account of certain changes he had made, and which were changes all made for the better, referring to his predecessors in office, the following sentence appeared:
"The next change was, that when any treasury authority of an important character is brought before the Comptroller-general, he does not act upon it without considering its legality. It is now initialed by him as evidence of this consideration."
The correction of this was very slight, but it was material, because it affected the character of the officers who preceded him in the Exchequer. The inference drawn from these words was, that Sir John Newport and Mr. Eden had never considered the legality of any order sent to them from the Treasury, and, therefore, that their duty in controlling the Treasury had been neglected; and that he had acted with more strictness and propriety. One word ought to have been inserted, and the sentence ought to have stood—"The next change was, that 'as' whenever any Treasury authority of an important character is brought before the Comptroller-general, he does not act upon it without first considering its legality, it is now initialed by him as evidence of this consideration." He did not mean to say, that the consideration of the legality of a warrant had been a practice first introduced by him; but the record of that consideration by evidence was the change referred to. He wished to state distinctly, that in the evidence he gave, nothing was more foreign to his thought than to attribute any neglect of duty to the late Comptroller-general, or to Mr. Eden. He now trusted, that their Lord-

25
ships would offer no objection to the appointment of the committee, unless the substantial object he aimed at could be obtained by some other means. He must take the liberty of saying, that painful as it was to speak of himself, or to occupy their Lordships' attention with any matters relating to himself, it would not have been fitting or proper, to have omitted bringing this question forward. It was essential to his own authority and weight in performing his functions hereafter. How could he have been permitted to stop a treasury warrant on the ground of its legality, and thus to exercise a control over the executive Government if he had rested contented and had remained silent under the many imputations that had been cast upon him. He must add, that nothing was further from his intention or wish to be upon the committee himself; of course their Lordships would not acquiesce in such a proposal, even if he had had the foolishness and temerity to make it. If he proposed the appointment of a committee, he wished the enquiry to be both stringent and effectual; therefore he thought that the nomination ought to rest with the noble Duke, than whom no one was better qualified to make the selection. He wished to redeem the pledge he had given to the government, that if no one else asked for an inquiry, he would; he had done it at the earliest possible moment, he had asked it with all sincerity, and he also asked it with all earnestness. He desired to have the question determined in the most solemn manner whether there had been any neglect in his discharge of official duties, and he, therefore, moved that a
"Select Committee be appointed to inquire into the late forgeries of Exchequer-bills; the mode in which the preparing, making out, signing, and issuing Exchequer-bills, are now and have been heretofore conducted; and to report whether there has been any neglect or violation of the established usage of the Exchequer, which either produced or facilitated forgery or other fraud."
Lord Broughamwas sure that their Lordships would think no part of the clear, candid, and satisfactory statement of his noble Friend at all superfluous or liable to exception, save the apology for detaining their Lordships upon the subject. Placed in the position in which the noble Lord was; exposed to attacks which, without thinking lightly of their malignity, he (Lord Brougham) held to le still more
26
ridiculous than malignant; standing in a predicament and occupying a post in which the anxious attention of the public was unavoidably directed towards him, he could not do otherwise than take the course which he had taken, at the earliest convenient opportunity of bringing the matter before the House, and of calling for the most searching inquiry. His noble Friend's object was, to call for the appointment of a committee of that House, having a power not possessed by the other House, of examining all persons upon oath touching the whole matter under investigation. It was also a part of his noble Friend's plan not to place himself upon this committee, and not to suggest the names of its members or be a party to the suggestion. His intention was to leave to the noble Duke the suggestion of the committee. Nothing could be more candid, and nothing more honourable or fair than the proposal of his noble Friend, but he might be permitted to say, that the course taken by the Government was more satisfactory; for it was not liable to the objection of pursuing in that House an investigation which might possibly lead to charges of a criminal nature against some parties, and to proceedings of a civil nature against others, so that their Lordships might ultimately be called upon to sit in judgment [upon the questions raised. This, he thought, was a sufficient reason why the House should not conduct the inquiry, which might be carried on by other persons invested by statute with the same powers. When he talked of criminal proceedings, be did not at all contemplate the possibility that they would affect any party now connected with the office of the Comptroller-general. One person connected with that office had been found guilty, having entirely forfeited the high character which it appeared he had formerly enjoyed. There was, however, no reason to apprehend that any others in the office were implicated in his proceedings, though other parties in other quarters of this great city might be so implicated. Proceedings against them were at all events possible, and the possibility of charges being made, and the proceedings coming in the end before their Lordships as a court of justice required them to abstain from instituting the inquiry proposed by his noble Friend. His noble Friend had referred to the statements made against him, which, if unrebutted, appeared extremely trifling, light; but the greater part of the charges had been fully ex-

27
plained by his noble Friend; and the explanation given had justified all his noble Friend's proceedings except one deviation from the practice of the office, and from the course prescribed by the law. His noble Friend admitted that the course of regularly signing the Exchequer-bills in the public office had been departed from; but on examination, this appeared as slight a deviation in point of importance as could well be imagined. His noble Friend had referred to the statement that he had upon several occasions signed Exchequer-bills in other places than in his office: he had signed them in that House, he had signed them in a committee, and he had signed them in the Privy Council. The noble Lord had said, however, either in his evidence or in a letter laid upon the Table of the other House, that Sir J. Newport had upon one or two occasions, when absent from indisposition, signed the bills at his own house. He had a great anxiety to defend Sir John Newport from any imputation brought against him even by inference, and he was sure that his noble Friend did not intend to make any directly, but in Sir John Newport's absence he felt a reluctance to leaving any one thing unexplained from which an inference, painful to that excellent individual might be drawn. His noble Friend would permit him to say, that there was a great difference between signing those bills away from the office which Sir John Newport had signed, and those which his noble Friend had signed. The bills signed by Sir John Newport were deficiency bills, and none others. The bills which the Comptroller-general had lately signed were supply bills. The deficiency bills, he must remind their Lordships, were Exchequer-bills issued, payable out of the growing surplus of the consolidated fund. The supply bills were issued payable to the bearer, the deficiency bills payable only to the Governor and Company of the Bank of England, or their order. Let them observe the material difference. The deficiency bills, if they miscarried on their way between the place where they were signed and the Exchequer, on their return from the place of signature, which act made them complete instruments, would be utterly and absolutely useless to the person into whose hands they might fall, because they were only payable to the Governor and Company of the Bank of England, or their order, and unless the person could get the forged indorsement of the Governor and Company of the Bank of
28
England, the bills could not be used. Besides the deficiency bills were for 40,000l l. 20,000 l, and 10,000 l.; there were hardly any lower than 10,000 l., unless there happened to be a balance; in which case perhaps one bill of an issue might be for a fractional sum; but the bulk of the bills were for sums of a large amount. Therefore, from the large amount, even if they were payable to bearer, it was almost impossible, if they were seized, or fraudulently got hold of, they could be turned by the parties to their own use or profit. Not so with the supply bills. The supply bills were, in the first place, payable to the bearer, so that any person without forgery could receive payment as the holder. In the next place, the bills were drawn for sums of 100 l., 200 l., 500 l., and 1,000 l. The consequence was, that the person who got hold of a supply bill, when completed, had the power, but for the circumstances to which he was about to refer, of making use of the bill and instantly obtaing payment. Suppose that all possible care were taken by locks and keys, with his noble Friend signing in the House, though he might have signed the book, yet let the box be ever so well locked, let the bills be ever so well counted, let the bills be ever so duly entered in a book, let the clerks in the Exchequer be ever so ready to count them immediately they received the book, let the locks be ever so numerous, still the proceeding Was liable to the objection that, in the interval between the signing and the arrival at the Exchequer, the messenger, instead of going along from Charing-cross to the Exchequer-office, might turn along the Strand into the City; he might not even take the trouble to unlock the box; he might break it open; he might abstract the million of bills; and getting ten thousand pounds, or fifty thousand pounds, or one hundred thousand pounds in the City, he might step into a boat and sail away for Calais. That was the state, as it appeared to be left by the report of the commissioners; but when you examined the matter more closely, it turned out that there was not this danger in fact, for it was impossible that one bill could be put in circulation except among persons who did not look at the date, because all the bills were completed before the date of the issue, so that all the possible risk the public could really run was very small; the door which seemed to give the widest possible aperture, left only the

29
smallest chink; in reality the risk run was the least possible. Some persons might take a few bills for a few hundreds or thousands, if they did not look at the date; but the public service ran no risk, because till the day for the issue came— say the 16th of March—the bills were never issued, and the moment the messenger deviated from the right course, payment of the bills would be stopped before the date of the issue. Although, however, there was the smallest possible risk, he hoped his noble Friend would see that it was better not to incur even that. Yet, slight as the risk was in his noble Friend's case, it did not exist at all in the case of Sir John Newport. His noble Friend had done away with one part of the evidence, which, if left unexplained, would have cast an imputation on Sir John Newport. The evidence as published stood thus:—
"The new charge was, that whenever any Treasury authority of an important character is brought before the Comptroller-General, he does not act upon it without first considering its legality. It is now initialed by him."
The word "now" was used as if the consideration were now given for the first time, and as if Sir John Newport did not do the only thing of any importance which was required of him — compare the orders brought to him from the Treasury with the statutory authority for their issue. It appeared that the evidence, by leaving out the word "as" at the beginning, and making a pause after the word "legality," and then beginning a new sentence, in so many words made a distinct charge that his venerable friend had never once discharged the only important duty for which he was appointed. His noble Friend merely meant to say, that whereas no part of the duty had previously been omitted, yet that his noble Friend had made an addition;— which he valued at more than it was worth, as persons who were the authors of inventions set greater store by them than he (Lord Brougham) might be disposed to do; in addition to comparing the Treasury orders with the statutory authorities, it seems he put his initials, as a test that he had made the comparison, as a memorandum that the duty had been performed, and that all that was required had been done. That Sir John Newport, when he made the comparison, did not put his initials on the warrant or order was of no kind of importance, nor was it even a portion of his duty.
30
nor could the operation give the least additional security to the public. The explanation given was therefore compleat. It showed that the statement of Lord Monteagle had been totally altered as much as if a "not" had been omitted. But his noble Friend ought to have gone on to give some such contradiction to what next followed, which he (Lord Brougham) held to make a charge against Sir John Newport that required explanation, or, as he would say, retractation. As no explanation, and at all events, no retractation, had been made, it became his duty to give to the charge a peremptory contradiction, and to accompany it with such an explanation as would satisfy their Lordships that there was not the shadow of pretence for any such charge against Sir John Newport. No one would suppose that his noble Friend intended to make a charge against Sir John Newport; he had wished only to defend himself, and not to attack any one else; nevertheless his statement of his own improvements did convey a serious charge. In giving an account of his new changes the noble Lord made the same indirect charge against his predecessor as he had done in the first point of the passage which he had so satisfactorily explained, and which arose from a misprint, and was as real an alteration of his evidence as if the word "not" had been put in where he had left it out, or as if they had left out the word "not" where he had put it in. This other charge, which still stood as a charge by implication against Sir John Newport, amounted to this: the Comptroller-general now initials the documents as evidence of his having considered the authorities, and then another use of the initials pointed out, when it is added:—
"It also prevents the possibility of a fraud taking place by producing the same document twice over. It would have been possible previously to this regulation, if there had bean a fraudulent chief clerk, to bring the same Treasury authority twice over, and get a double issue made; but that cannot now take place."
That is to say, the business of Sir John Newport had been carried on in so slovenly, so bungling, and so negligent a way, that there had been no care taken to prevent the most facile of all frauds, a party bringing an order one day, getting the money for it, and the next day bringing the same order and getting the money over again. When he (Lord Brougham) saw this he was quite astonished; he said to himself, "Can it be possible that business is thus carelessly conducted?" It was

31
exactly like a banker's clerk paying a check without crossing it, giving it up to the party he paid, and then another person coming the next day with the same check, and, unless the clerk recollected the payment, procuring a second payment, or procuring that payment from another clerk. That was the state of the charge as it there stood, and as if that were not sufficient, what followed made it impossible for any one who was responsible for the passing of the act, or for the appointment of Sir John Newport—and he (Lord Brougham) was jointly responsible as well for the act as for the appointment with his noble Friend, and the noble Viscount near him (Lord Melbourne)—not to feel the greatest anxiety till there was an explanation, and not to wonder that no greater fraud had, before this, been committed. The noble Lord (Lord Monteagle) said,
"This improvement was introduced by me about two years ago, and I have thus guarded the issue of public money against a fraud somewhat analogous to that of Mr. Smith."
In justice to the department, in justice to those who had appointed Sir John Newport, in justice to those who passed the act under which he was appointed, and in justice to the Treasury by which the act was worked, he was bound at once to destroy, as he could in an instant destroy the whole of this strange accusation. He should be able to show, first, that no order or warrant could be issued twice by any fraudulent clerk; and, secondly, that to put initials upon a paper in the way that his noble Friend had done could give no security. He was prepared to establish the first of these propositions, not by any official inquiry, though he had made such, not by any inference to be drawn in favour of himself or others who had appointed Sir John Newport, but by the very words of the statute, the 4 and 5 William 4th, cap. 15, sections 10, 11, 12, and 13. He grounded himself upon each and all of these sections, and required no extrinsic evidence, no official learning, no result of private inquiry; and by these sections of the act he pledged himself utterly to destroy the foundation of any charge to be inferred against Sir John Newport from the statement of his noble Friend. To show that the statement made by his noble Friend could not be supported, he regarded as due both to Sir J. Newport and the Government who had framed the act under which the office of Comptroller-
32
general was created, and who were responsible for Sir J. Newport's appointment. Now, the effect of these clauses, which embraced the whole subject of the issue of money to the different departments of the public service, was, that this money, when issued from the Exchequer, was to be issued for a given and specified purpose; that there should be a royal order, passed under the sign manual, and delivered to the Comptroller-general; that next there should be a treasury order or warrant, countersigned by three of the commissioners of the Treasury, also delivered to the Comptroller-general, as his authority for the issue. This was in the case of all sums granted to the Crown by act of Parliament, or vote of the House of Commons; but if the money were charged on the consolidated fund, then the treasury warrant only was wanted, and not the royal order; but whether the issue were of money granted by act or vote requiring a royal order and treasury warrant, or whether it were to come out of the consolidated fund under the 13th section, which required a treasury warrant only, in either case there was a treasury letter also, without which no order or warrant for the issue of whatever sum of money, for whatever service, found its way to the Comptroller-General of the Exchequer, that Treasury letter containing what were called the directions of the Lords of the Treasury to that officer. Now, observe, the person who could be in a condition, and alone able, to avail himself of this order, or warrant, accompanied by this treasury letter, would be some one of the paymasters—suppose the Paymaster of the Civil Service; this was according to the supposition contained in the evidence of his noble Friend before the commissioners; but the fact was, that these orders were never, and never had been, issued either to the Paymaster of the Civil Service, or to the Paymaster of the Ordnance, or to the Paymaster of the Navy or the Paymaster of the Forces—all which three, by the by, were now consolidated—without both the order under the sign manual and the treasury warrant, specifying the paymaster to whom they were to be issued, and for what purpose; then the letters of the Lords of the Treasury specified how much of the sum on the order, or warrant, was to be issued to the paymaster, and notified this to the Comptroller-general. But, after all this, not only was the money not paid by the Comptroller-general upon this warrant and order, as in the case of a check, as the evidence of his noble Friend would leave to be inferred, but all the Comp-

33
troller could do was to send his warrant to the Bank of England, calling upon the Bank to transfer a credit to the account of the specified paymaster for the given sum, and all the Bank did was to obey the warrant and put the proper credit to the account of the proper paymaster. And what did the paymaster do? He operated on the credit so transferred to his account, and he obtained money by so operating. In fact, he drew checks on that credit. But how did he do that? At the same time that the treasury letter was issued to the Comptroller-general, another treasury letter went to the paymaster, notifying to him the proceeding which had previously taken place, and warning the paymaster that the order, or warrant, and treasury letter, had gone to the Comptroller-general's office, and that a credit to the given amount would be passed to his account by the Bank of England. Upon this the paymaster drew his check by virtue of that authority. But then there was another point. The first thing done with the treasury letter at the paymaster's office was to record it in the books of the office; moreover, every check issued from the paymaster's office was signed by the paymaster himself, then countersigned by the cashier, and presented by the accountant, and unless both names were found by the Bank to be signed to a check, it was altogether unavailable with them—it was a barren and fruitless document, and it was impossible by means of it to obtain a farthing of the money from the Bank, even when backed by the authority of the warrant of the Comptroller-general. Their Lordships would see, therefore, how many persons must concur—what a complication of fraudulent intentions must take place before, under the practice of the office as carried on in Sir John Newport's time, the public could have been damnified to the amount of one farthing. It appeared, then, that not only the chief clerk, as his noble Friend in his evidence stated, but a number of other persons, and even the paymaster himself, must have concurred to commit the fraud of which his noble Friend spoke in that evidence. Nor was this all, but there must be, in addition, the treasury letter to the Comptroller-general forged; nor was this all, for there must be another forgery of the treasury letter to the paymaster, in order to afford the means of committing the fraud in question; so that, in fact, the Treasury, or some one there, must be accomplices in the crime and take a part in the fraud. Then another felony must be committed by the Paymaster of Civil
34
Services, another by his cashier, and another by his accountant. These parties must all concur in the fraud before the public could be injured, and this was what his noble Friend in his evidence called "a fraud somewhat analogous to that of Mr. Smith," and spoke of it as being not impossible to occur! Why, this was the fraud of Smith —that he, without co-operation, without a human being helping him, could, and did, obtain money to almost any amount. The charge was, that whereas in that office great and salutary precautions had been taken in all other departments, yet in the department of the senior clerk there was a chink left unstopped, through which it was possible to commit a fraud to the amount of 400,000 l. or 500,000 l But there was another branch of the subject, on which a great deal had been said. All the paper intended for the Exchequer-bills was intrusted to the care and custody of Smith, and that he had nothing to do, if he was fraudulently disposed, but to open the chest and take out the quantity of paper he wanted. But he had no accomplices, it was said. Why, who would have said there was any harm in the mode in which business was conducted in the Comptroller-general's office, if Smith could not have compassed this fraud without the assistance of accomplices out of it? Nobody would have said so; because all the security that man has in the ordinary business of life was less than that involved in the process he had described, to commit a fraud, in spite of which not only the paymaster and two other persons in the paymaster's office, but also some one in the Treasury, must conspire. There must be a league between them all; yet this was what his noble Friend, in his zeal to defend the office of which he was the head, or rather, in his desire to extol his own improvements, had ventured to call, in his evidence, "a fraud somewhat analogous to that of Mr. Smith;" to which he would say that, so far from being analogous, it stood contrasted and opposed in the strongest forms of contrast and opposition. But now as to the effect of placing the initials on these documents, which, as his noble Friend said, had not been done by Sir J. Newport; he would let their Lord-ships see how far the second proposition which he had stated was borne out, namely, that not only had the placing the initials no effect to prevent fraud, but that they had not even a tendency to prevent it; that they were put on the wrong paper. For what was the noble Lord's course? He put

35
his initials on the orders and Treasury war-ants to prevent, as he said, the money being drawn upon them a second time. But he (Lord Brougham) contended, and he should show, that this placing of initials had no effect at all; because, by the act of Parliament, these orders and Treasury warrants must be kept in the Comptroller-general's office, and must be used again and again until the sum mentioned in them was exhausted by repeated letters from the Lords of the Treasury, directing the issue of such sums from time to time. The only effect of putting the initials must be to prevent the document being brought a second time before his noble Friend. Striking the pen through a banker's check was analogous in this point of view, though the banker generally took the precaution to keep the check besides. But these orders and warrants were what are called running orders for money, and the effect of them was this:— Suppose the order was for 5,000 l., but the Treasury letter said that only 1,000 l. was to be issued upon it at that time, then there could only be got upon it 1,000 l., but the order itself remained on the Comptroller's office as his warrant for the issue of the next 1,000 l., or whatever sum might be contained in the successive Treasury letters, until the whole amount in the order was exhausted; and it was obvious that whether such warrants or orders were marked with the initials "J. N." or not was of no importance, inasmuch as they were meant to remain in the Comptroller-general's office. But it was very far different with the Treasury letter. His noble Friend did not put his initials on that document; no, he put his initials on the running orders, on which it was useless to put them; and he did not put them on the Treasury letter, on which alone, if the initials could be of any use at all, it was desirable to put them; but whether they were placed on the Treasury letter or not was quite immaterial, because as the act of Parliament proved, there were so many individuals who must conspire in different offices before a fraud could be committed, many of whom could have no interest in conspiring, that it was next to an impossibility that any fraud should take place in the way he had described. In point of fact, he believed that the letter of the Lords of the Treasury had sometimes had "considered" written upon it in Sir John Newport's time: but whether it had that or the initials was immaterial, since, as he had shown, at this stage of the pro-
36
ceedings relative to the issue of Exchequer-bills, fraud was next to impossible. However, he perfectly agreed with his noble Friend that no blame was attributable to the department on the ground that the quires of Exchequer-bill paper had been left with the chief clerk. His noble Friend had justly said that all his predecessors, for upwards of a century, had adopted the same practice; but not only had his noble Friend's predecessors been aware of and sanctioned the practice (for that would be no great excuse), but the Legislature and the Government, and the public, had been aware of the state of the case. The subject, and particularly this part of it, had been again and again brought most fully under public notice: first, in the report of Sir A. Pigott's commission of public accounts in 1782; then in the report of the finance committee, presided over by Mr. Abbott, afterwards Lord Colchester, in 1797; then in Lord Grenville's able report to the Treasury in 1823; next in Lord Granville Somerset's report of evidence in 1830; again by those who framed the act of 1834, to which he had referred; and, lastly, the matter was brought forward by Sir John Newport himself, in a communication which he made to the Treasury, and which it was but justice to his right hon. Friend to refer to particularly. When Sir John Newport was appointed Comptroller-general, the Treasury, most properly, as he (Lord Brougham) thought, instead of proceeding immediately to exercise the powers vested in them under the act, of making rules for the greater security of the public, determined to delay for a time until they should have a report from the office what was fittest to be done. The act called upon them to take such steps with respect to the regulation of the new office under their warrant as might be thought most effectual for the further convenience and security of the public; but they thought it better to wait until they got a report from the head of the office as to what alterations ought to be made in it. Accordingly they directed Sir John Newport to report to them, at the end of twelve months, on the subject of his office, and the mode of transacting business in it. Well, that report was made, and their Lordships would find distinctly stated in it at that time—it was dated the 10th of October, 1835—that the senior clerk had the custody of the paper, and kept a regular account of its consumption. Now, what was meant by paper was Exchequer-bills, stamped, and in all respects but signature

37
ready for issue. Hence the Treasury knew at this time—namely, in 1835, that the custody of the paper was in the senior clerk, and that he, if he liked to commit a fraud, had ample opportunity. Such was Sir J. Newport's report, but Sir J. Newport had no power to alter the course of the office; his noble Friend (Lord Monteagle) had no power to do so, but only to suggest to the Treasury, No doubt, if either Sir J. Newport or his noble Friend had entertained an idea that anything of the sort was likely to take place, they would have mentioned the matter more in detail to the Treasury, and he quite agreed with his noble Friend, that after the lapse of 150 years, during which succeeding auditors and Comptrollers-general had filled the office, it was most natural and a venial error in his noble Friend, as it was in Lord Grenville, to be unsuspicious that any fraud could take place in this process. Experience had not then shown the risk that was run, and it was quite sufficient to suggest the means of amendment when they saw that the long course of proceeding adopted in the office had led to the perpetration of this crime. He should say that it was a very slight charge to have overlooked what so accurate and practical a man of business as Sir J. Newport had overlooked, with the scrupulous exactness with which he always reviewed all that was done by his subordinates, or by himself, in reference to the authorities under which he was acting, and the terms of the Treasury orders and warrants, and with the scrupulous and extreme care which he used in comparing his authorities with the statute, and what Lord Grenville himself overlooked, Lord Grenville, of all men of business the most accurate, he should say, the most punctiliously accurate, who was much more likely to err from over-scrupulous care than from anything approaching to negligence. He (Lord Brougham) did think that it was a want of common candour and fairness to charge his noble Friend with negligence for not having attended more accurately, more punctiliously, more over-scrupulously to business than his right hon. Friend Sir John Newport and than Lord Grenville. He therefore must say, that nothing could be more triumphant than the vindication his noble Friend had offered to the charges made against him, and he hoped he had satisfied their Lordships that the vindication of his right hon. Friend Sir J. Newport—against charges not brought by his noble Friend, but which appeared in
38
the report by implication and inference— had been equally satisfactory. That vindication, however, had become absolutely necessary. Next to integrity, which no one dreamt of questioning either on Sir J. Newport's part or that of his noble Friend, there was nothing so important as accuracy in a department having such momentous interests confided to its cares; and dishonesty itself could hardly do worse mischief than might be the result of neglect.
Lord Monteaglerose for the purpose of disclaiming entirely any intention of making the slightest imputation against his right hon. friend Sir John Newport. His noble and learned Friend who had just sat down had anticipated this assertion on his part, by saying that the imputation rested upon inferences to be drawn from a sentence contained in the report now lying on their Lordships' Table. If there was a single living being to whom he was under the greatest personal obligation, that being was his right hon. Friend Sir John Newport. He had known him from a child; indeed, he had been, as it were, the child of his political adoption, and he had acted with him for twenty years, and he had been during that long period under indescribable obligations to him in the House of Commons. However, all that he had asserted was, that he had taken a little additional precaution—that of initiating the papers brought to him — a course which had not before been practised The object of this was to prevent the same paper being laid before him twice without his at once discovering it. His noble and learned Friend had gone with minute accuracy through all the details of the Comptroller-general's office, and had said that a fraud could not be practised, except by an extensive conspiracy among many parties. All he had done had been put in force for the protection of the public, and if it had not turned out as well as he expected, he was sure his right hon. Friend {Sir J. Newport) would be the last man in the world who would ever dream, that under any personal circumstance, either as a witness, as a Member of Parliament, or as a private individual, it could have entered into his brain to throw any imputation upon him. His whole defence was, that Sir John Newport had done right, and that he also had done right.
Lord Broughamsaid, he too was sure that if Sir John Newport had seen the evidence, he would not consider the imputation to have been intended, but merely

39
the effect of inference, such as he (Lord Brougham) had stated.
The Duke of Wellingtonwas glad his noble and learned Friend opposite had made the speech he had just delivered in defence of Sir John Newport, because it must have shown the noble Lord who had brought forward the present motion that while he, through inadvertence, had made a charge against an individual for whom he entertained the highest respect and regard, the noble Lord and the House would remember that by a similar inadvertence a charge had been brought against the noble Lord himself, though the commissioners had never intended to make any such charge at all. He stated this for the satisfaction of the mind of the noble Lord, convinced as he was that no such thing had ever been intended, and, most particularly, not on the part of her Majesty's Government. He was not at all surprised that the noble Lord should have been anxious to bring the question forward with a view to his own justification. The matter now stood in a situation which rendered a discussion upon it necessary, that the whole matter should be sifted to the bottom, and it was seen whether or not blame did attach to the office at the head of which the noble Lord was placed. But he (the Duke of Wellington) must say again, that he had never heard of any blame charged against the noble Lord by any authority. Nothing of the kind had ever passed in their Lordships' House or in another place, and under these circumstances be had felt from the commencement of the Session it would be better to postpone any motion for inquiry until some steps were taken in the other House of Parliament (where such an inquiry ought properly to originate), and until the Government came forward with some measure upon the subject. Such a measure had been submitted to Parliament, and of that measure the noble Lord himself had expressed his approval, but said he was desirous that the inquiry which that measure would put in motion should be extended, and in a more pointed manner directed to his own department. He did not know whether in this House it would be possible for the noble Lord to move an amendment to the bill to extend the inquiry when it came up from the Commons. Probably not; but the noble Lord, of course, must have friends in the other House who could there make such a motion; but if the noble Lord would be kind enough to put down on paper what he
40
wished to be done, and furnish it to him (the Duke of Wellington) to-morrow, he would between this and Monday speak to others on the subject and give the noble Lord a distinct answer upon it. It appeared that these frauds had been in the course of being carried on since the month of April, 1836, and that several persons had a knowledge of them; some amounting only to suspicion—some with a supposed guilty knowledge, and it was supposed, that although there were many innocent sufferers from the effects of these frauds, yet a great number of the holders of these fraudulent Exchequer bills were believed to have a knowledge that they had been issued under fraudulent circumstances. In this state of things it was absolutely necessary that the Government should make a searching inquiry into the matter, in order to do justice between the parties and the State—to protect the fair holders of the bills, and to support the credit of those securities for the future. With these views, he trusted their Lord-ships would approve of the measure introduced elsewhere, when it came before them, and that in the meantime they would not attempt to interrupt or throw any impediment in its way, by establishing an inquiry in that House, which after all would be liable to objections, some of which had been pointed out by his noble and learned Friend opposite—namely, that from the inquiry to be carried on by commissioners under the operation of the bill which had been proposed by his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and which the Government hoped to have passed, various questions of law might arise, which might come by way of appeal or writs of error before their Lordships, sitting in their judicial capacity. Under such circumstances, he was always desirous that no movement should be made in that House which might be avoided, until it regularly came up in the shape of a legislative measure, or by way of appeal to its judicial character. Until that happened, he was anxious their Lordships should take no step, and, above all, that they should not pledge themselves to anything. He had read the report with great attention, and he agreed in much that had been stated by his noble and learned Friend, that there was no charge made against the Comptroller-general's office— though there might be many things in it which required amendment, especially under the act of William 4th, which did not ap-

41
pear to him a very wise arrangement. On the contrary, he thought the former arrangement better. However, he did not wish to give any further opinion at present, because he felt it would be his duty to sustain matters as they were until the existing evils were brought to a close, until it was settled what was to become of the holders of these fraudulent securities, and then to amend the system, and take care that such a misfortune should not happen again. He need scarcely repeat, that he should wish the noble Lord to withdraw his motion; and if he would be so kind as to send him in writing the words he wished to have inserted in the bill now before the other House, he would let him know between this and Monday what could be done.
Lord Monteaglesaid, their Lordships would easily imagine the course he should follow on the present occasion. His noble and learned Friend lent his countenance to the proposition that there should be brought before the commissioners the effects of any amendments in the Comptroller-general's office. That was entirely his object, but he should be most ungrateful were he to sit down without expressing his acknowledgments that, except for the little by-matter between his noble and learned Friend and himself, he had been led to know that on his part, as well as on the part of the noble Duke, there was no charge on the face of the documents against the conduct of the Comptroller-general's office. With respect to his own feelings, such an expression of these opinions would be sufficient; but this was a matter which concerned the public, and would survive the noble Duke and all who now heard him, and therefore it was proper all doubts should be solved by the inquiry about to be instituted. Thanking their Lordships for the extent of the indulgence they had shown him, he begged to withdraw his motion.
Motion withdrawn.
Adjourned.