Sitting of 7 March 1842

Preamble
MINUTES] BILLS. Public.—1° Salmon Fisheries (Scotland)
2° Forged Exchequer Bills; Newgate Gaol (Dublin);
Rivers (Ireland); Southwark Improvement (No. 2).
Private.—1° Equitable Gas Company; Leeds and Wakefield Road; Tadcaster and Otley Road.
2° West Stirlingshire Roads (No. 1); Nottingham Gas (No. 1); Castlerigg and Derwentwater Inclosure Ormesby Inclosure; Glasgow, Paisley, Kilmarnock, and Ayr Railway.
PETITIONS PRESENTED. By Mr. Walker, from Bury, Mr. Duncan, from places in Scotland, Mr. S. Crawford, from Rochdale, Dr. Bowling, from various places in Kent, Sir G. de H. Larpent, from Blackwall, and Limehouse, and other hon. Members, from various places, for the Repeal of the Corn-laws.—By Mr. Neville, from Inspectors of Corn Returns in Berks, to be Continued in Office.—By Sir Edward Coote, from Millers of Queen's County, Mr. Redington, Mr. Christmas, Mr. Reade, and Sir Valentine Blake, from various places in Ireland, and Mr. S. Wortley, from Millers of Huddersfield, and Halifax, to Encourage the Importation of Grain instead of Flour.—By Viscount Newry, from Newry, against the Corn Importation Bill.—By an hon. Member, from the Ayr Railway Company, to Select Ardrossan as the Mail Packet Station for Scotland.—By Mr. T. Duncombe, from Individuals of Marylebone, to Inquire into the Operation of the Anatomy Act—By Samuel Gordon, for Inquiry into the Abstraction of a Petition from the Court of Chancery (Ireland); from Manchester, for the Remission of the Sentence on Frost, Williams, and Jones; from Old Brompton, for the Redemption of the Metropolitan Bridge Tolls; from certain Mechanics Institutions, to Exempt them from Rates and Taxes; and from Wm. H. Clarke, against the Queen's Bench Prison Bill.—By Mr. E. Tennent, and Mr. Grogan, from places in Ireland, to Legalize the Marriages of certain Dissenters.—From the Chairman of a Meeting of the People of the United Kingdon, for the adoption of Universal Suffrage.—From Cambridge, for an Act for County Courts.

OPERATION OF THE NEW CORN BILL.
Mr. Mastermanwished to put a question to the right hon. Baronet at the head of the Government, relative to the time at which the new Corn Bill would come into operation. Considerable anxiety was felt on the point in the corn markets, in consequence of the newspapers having given different versions of the reply to a question on the subject a few nights ago. A doubt was entertained whether it were intended that the new scale of duties should come into operation on the first Thursday after the new Corn Bill received the royal assent, or not until after six weeks' averages had been taken. He thought it desirable that this point should be cleared up.
Sir R. Peelthought, that if the hon. Gentleman had referred to the bill, he would have found the intentions of the Government clearly expressed. He had no hesitation, however, in again stating the course he proposed to pursue. It was certainly his intention that his low scale of duties should attach to the averages as soon as possible after the bill had received the royal assent, and for this purpose he proposed to enact, that the averages of the

137
six weeks declared on the Thursday, subsequent to the bill receiving the royal assent, should determine the new duty. The new scale would thus be brought into operation as soon as possible.

RETIRING PENSIONS TO NAVAL OFFICERS.
Sir C. Napierwished to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in consideration of the services of certain old captains in the navy, the Government proposed to introduce a small additional grant into the navy estimates for the purpose of giving retiring pensions to some of those old officers?
The Chancellor of the Exchequersaid, no questions of the sort had been brought under the notice of his department.
Sir C. Napierthen put the question to the Secretary for the Admiralty.
Mr. S. Herbertmust be excused replying to a question with respect to which he really had no voice.

POSSESSION OF ALGIERS.
Sir R. Peelthen said, that the hon. Member for Tipperary had given notice of a motion for the production of a despatch written by his noble Friend, the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs on the subject of a conversation with the French Ambassador relative to the affairs of Algiers. He thought it might perhaps be convenient for the House if he at once stated, that he should lay that despatch on the Table. He had two reasons for pursuing this course. It was his wish, in the first place, as far as possible to check debates having reference to proceedings or speeches in the French Chambers; and secondly, as in the event of any discussion arising upon the subject the despatch might be referred to, he thought it would be more convenient that they should have the despatch before them, than that mangled extracts should be quoted from it. It was, of course, within the power of the right hon. Gentleman to found any motion he might please upon the subject of the despatch. If the right hon. Gentleman did so, he was quite prepared to meet the right hon. Gentleman. If there had been any misapprehension on this subject, he thought it was his duty at once to acquit the Count de St. Aulaire, the French ambassador. Every one who knew the character and high honour of that distinguished functionary, must be perfectly satisfied that if there had been any misapprehension on
138
the part of the Count de St. Aulaire, it had been entirely unintentional, and he was sure the hon. Gentleman opposite would be the first to acquit that nobleman of any error which was at all intentional.
The despatch was laid on the Table.

BANKING.
On the order of the day for going into a Committee of Supply being read,
Mr. C. Woodwished, before the House resolved itself into a committee, to put a question to the right hon. Gentleman opposite, in order that he might ascertain what were the intentions of the Government on a subject of very great importance, and that had excited great interest in the country. The House was perfectly-aware that for the last two Sessions a parliamentary committee had been sitting of which he (Mr. Wood) was the chairman, having for its object to inquire into the effects produced by banks of issue upon the country. The events which had occurred in the middle of the last Session of the last Parliament had brought the Session suddenly to a close, and interrupted the sittings of the committee, which was then inquiring into this subject. There was barely time to pass an act of Parliament providing for a more accurate and general publication of the amount of bank-notes put in circulation, but it was impossible for the committee to come to any conclusion or make any report to the House. Since Parliament had met many inquiries had been made of him, and he had received a great many communications from different parts of the country, owing to his having been chairman of that committee, requesting him to ascertain what were the intentions of the Government with respect to the question. Some time since he had mentioned the circumstance to the right hon. Baronet, in order that he might have time to consider the matter, and to confer with his Colleagues as to the course the Government might think advisable to adopt. He was quite aware that there would be considerable difficulty in reappointing the committee, from the circumstance that many of its efficient and active members had not seats in the present House of Commons. He, therefore, wished to ask what course the Government intended to pursue on a subject that had excited great interest in many parts of the kingdom?
Sir R. Peelsaid, he had given his best

139
consideration to this important subject, and, certainly looking at the time bestowed upon the question by the committee of last Session, the application with which they had devoted themselves to it, and more especially to the attention and ability with which the hon. Gentleman had conducted its deliberations, he was disposed to regret that the committee had separated without agreeing upon some distinct report. The question, as now presented, was certainly a difficult one. To reappoint the committee of inquiry would, he thought, be almost useless. For three Sessions an inquiry had been conducted by a committee of that House With reference to the joint-stock bank system. That committee had exhausted the subject, or, at least, if they had not, it was because the subject was not to be exhausted. On the termination of that inquiry, an hon. Gentleman had proposed the appointment of the committee which had been already referred to. That committee had sat two Sessions, so that altogether there had been committees on the subject of banking during five consecutive Sessions of Parliament. To renew this committee, therefore, for the purposes of inquiry, would he thought be useless; but then the question occurred, shall we reappoint the committee in order that it may report? Now, on this point of the subject, it must be taken into consideration, that no less than eight Members of the late committee were without seats in the present Parliament; and of those eight, he must say, that some of them were the most regular and the most active Members upon the committee. He could not but think, therefore, that any report agreed upon by the committee now would be imperfect; and, in addition to this consideration, he really thought that the question was one of so much importance that it ought to be dealt with rather by the executive Government than by a committee. With regard to the course the Government would pursue, he could not, at present, give any express statement of what would be done. The subject was one for consideration, and as soon as it was possible to give it the careful deliberation it required, the Government would not fail to entertain it, and to make known the result to the House.
Mr. C. Woodentirely concurred in what had fallen from the right hon. Gentleman. He had asked the question merely because
140
he wished to know what was to be done, and that the answer might go forth. The answer given by the right hon. Gentleman was, in his opinion, the only one that it was in his power to give. He was sure that it was one that would satisfy all parties; as the subject was one that must be dealt with by the executive Government.
On the question that the Speaker do leave the Chair,

THE MASTER MANUFACTURERS.
Mr. Ferrandsaid, that having on Friday night been charged with having made assertions which were not facts, and with having used expressions that he had not used, he trusted that when it was considered that he stood there as the advocate of the cause of the working classes of the North of England, he should not be considered to be deviating from the strict rules of the House if he occupied a short space of its time in adverting to the charges brought against him. Since Friday evening he had had an opportunity of looking at what he had said, and he found that he had never used the word "all," and that he had never charged the hon. Member for Stockport with "abominable cruelty," but that this was another lapsus lingœ of the hon. Member akin to that concerning his mills and printworks. The hon. Member had said, that during the last eighteen years only twenty men had been employed at his works during night. He was sure, however, the hon. Member Would be glad of the opportunity of explaining a point to which Mr. Leonard Horner had referred in one of his reports. Mr. Horner had said that no one could work in any printworks without | being assisted by a child, who put on the colours, and assisted the men generally. He said,—
"The employment of children is to prepare the smooth surface of colouring matter on which the carved block is pressed, and to take up the colour that is to be transferred to the cloth. There is a circular frame like the side of a sieve, upon which a fine woollen cloth is stretched, and on this the colour is spread. These pots stand by the side, and a child, who assists the man who prints, transfers the colour from the pot to the sieve, spreading it over the cloth with a flat brush to make a smooth surface. This is called 'tearing,' and the child who performs the operation, whether male or female, is called a 'tearboy.' Every printer has a table and a 'tearboy.' When any printing is going on the 'tearboy' must

141
be there, and they perform their work standing. The temperature of the room should not be less than seventy degrees, and the air should be rather humid."
Now he would take leave to ask the hon. Member whether, during the eighteen years his men had worked between six in the evening and eight o'clock in the morning, these tearboys had not also been working in his factory? And he asked this, as he said before, that the hon. Member might have an opportunity of explaining whether he was correct in the representations he had made, or whether Mr. Leonard Horner was correct in his report. The hon. Member for Wolverhampton had read in the House a declaration, signed by seventy-two cotton-spinners, and had forwarded to him a copy of that declaration, to which were annexed two extracts from his speech. The hon. Member was about to read the declaration, when
The Speakerintimated that it was out of order to refer to anything that was said out of the House on the subject of what had taken place within its walls, and therefore the hon. Member must not read the statement.
Mr. Ferrand:These people said, that they kept no truck-shops, and that they paid all their workpeople in the current coin of the realm. But he did ask, did they not hand the key to their workmen; did they not make them rent their cottages? Did they know nothing of the flour paste; nothing of the shoddy trade; nothing of the old rags and the devil's dust? They asserted that they kept no truck-shops, and that they paid in no other way but in the current coin of the realm; but he (Mr. Ferrand) had never charged them with doing these things. ["Oh, oh !"] He had never charged them with keeping truck-shops. What he had said was, that they evaded the law by letting their relatives keep truck-shops, and that, although they might pay their men in the current coin of the realm, yet they stopped a great part of it on its way home. But suppose he admitted all that the subscribers to this requisition urged— suppose he allowed that they were the seventy-two just men of the league—did the hon. Member mean to say that these were the whole of the subscribers to that association? Why, he thought that they boasted of having extended their ramifications through every part of the country? He thought they said that this was a na-
142
tional league—that it had branches in every part of England, Ireland, Scotland, and Wales? How happened it, then, that these men undertook by a quibble to deny and repudiate the system of their fellows throughout the nation? But he turned the page of this declaration and he found a circular addressed by the agitators at Manchester to their correspondents; it ran thus:—
"Manchester Anti-Corn-law League.— You will oblige the council by affixing your name to the declaration and returning it at the earliest possible moment."
Now, in the declaration as read, there was not the name of one single Yorkshire manufacturer; of the seventy-two parties subscribing the declaration there was not one who did not live in Manchester or some other large town where they dared not carry on the truck system for fear of the shopkeepers. It was in secret—it was in dark corners that this infamy was perpetrated. It was where there were none to rise up and explain the nefarious system as he had done. [Laughter.] Oh, their interruptions would not put him down. He stood there to speak the truth, and those who rose for that purpose were not to be silenced by clamour. It was in the name of the working classes of England that he addressed that House, and he recommended them to follow the advice of the hon. Member for Oldham and leave him alone. The hon. Member for Oldham had told them that they had better let this matter drop. When the representative for Wolverhampton had said that these charges should not rest there, the hon. Member for Oldham had said to him, "You had better let the matter rest, for I can undertake to prove all Mr. Ferrand has said—and ten times worse." He challenged the hon. Member for Wolverhampton, then, to move for his select committee. Let them institute an inquiry into those charges—let them examine and see who was right. To-night he would undertake to state the charges which he had to make against the dishonest part of the manufacturers, and if hon. Members opposite denied the truth of his allegations, he would drive them to the course of asking for a select committee of inquiry. The letter he was about to read was from a poor man in a manufacturing town in Lancashire, and he did trust that hon. Members opposite, if they would not lis-

143
ten to him, would at least listen to a poor man. Members opposite boasted that they were the champions of the poor man, and that they came to the House of Commons to ask for a repeal of the Corn-laws for the sake of the poor man. Let them listen for a moment to the words of a poor man.—
"Bolton, March 1.
"My dear Sir,—It is with the greatest pleasure I read your speech of last Thursday. It was one of the sort that has long been wanted; but, Sir, though it appears to have struck such a panic amongst them as they (the Anti-Corn-law League) little expected, you did not positively more than half do it. I wish some one on the Conservative side of the House would move for a committee of inquiry. I feel confident it would strike such an awe over them as they would not be guilty of such practices. On Monday evening, the 21st ult., a meeting of the Anti-Corn-law League was held in the Temperance-hall, when—was called to the chair. Now, Sir, this is a spinning-master, and occupies a large mill in— street. He lives about a mile out of town in a splendid mansion on the—road, near which is a farm which keeps about twenty cows. Mind, Sir, he was not worth a suit of clothes when he came to Bolton at the first, but a poor Irish lad, all rags and tatters. This man now, Sir, not only compels his spinners to have cottages, but also reelers (girls sixteen years of age) must pay rent from 2s. 6d. to 4s. 6d. per week, or they must have no work. They must also have a quart of milk a day, whether they can drink it or not. Dear Sir, the houses are of the worst description, and are re-let by the workpeople from a shilling to half-a-crown a-week. and very often not let at all, and then, of course, they lose all the rent. The master stops it out of their wages, if they have not a penny to take home. Most of the spinning-masters compel their spinners to have cottages, but none except they of the Anti Corn-law League make girls. These gentlemen are always screwing and oppressing. I will tell you of another rascally trick of—. He makes a practice of running his mill from Monday until Saturday, and because Saturday is a short day, on which we work only nine hours, he stops at noon, and only pays the hands for five days and a half. 1 wish you would just give him a touch in the House of Commons on this point, I think it would stop him, and you would confer a blessing on hundreds of poor helpless factory people (helpless, I say, because too many of us, owing to the coupling of wheels, &c.)
"I am yours, &c.,
"—, Lancashire.
"To — Ferrand, Esq., London."
This was a poor labouring man, who had not got the education that many
144
other people had, and he, therefore, trusted the House would excuse the plainness of his language. [Mr. W. Williams: "Name, name."] I will give it, said Mr. Ferrand, to the hon. Member, if he pleases, as soon as I sit down, and if he leaves the House for that purpose, I will follow him. But, let me tell him, the poor working men have suffered too much for attempting to expose the tyranny of their masters, and if a select committee should be granted by the House these poor wretches will never dare to come forward and give evidence unless they receive the protection of the Government of the country. He knew his statements on this subject, he continued, to be true, and he would tell the House that the working classes themselves asserted them to be true, and of that he would convince the House before he sat down. He had given them an instance of the tyranny practised in Lancashire; he would now give them another which occurred in Yorkshire, in his own neighbourhood, and again he said he was prepared to give up his authority to any hon. Member who required him to do so:—
"A poor weaver, residing in the township of —, with a wife and family of small children, has been for some time employed by a wealthy worsted, yarn, and stuff manufacturer, who has practised the abominable system of having a retail shop on his premises, where his work people well understood that they are to expend their hard-earned pittance in the purchase of shop goods. This poor man incurred a trifling debt, of about 10 s. 6d. at this said shop, which he agreed to liquidate by allowing a deduction of 1s. weekly from his wages. But, alas! poor man, though he had not food for a day's sustenance for his family, when he carried in his work on the taking-in day, at the close of the week ending on the 19th of February instant, this wealthy millocrat deducted the 10 s. 6d., which was the full amount of his wages due, and sent him away penniless, and refused to give him further employment. In this state of distress he applied to a magistrate on Monday morning, the 21st instant, for a summons for his wages, 10 s. 6d., which he obtained (and I am glad to say, that the clerk gave him credit for his fee); but, what do you think? The tyrant shrank, for fear of the exposure, and compromised the affair with his injured slave, and thus ended the investigation of the case by a magistrate."
These were the Anti-Corn-law League men! He had scores upon scores of such cases in his possession, which he was prepared to prove before a select committee —ay, not only that, but he would tell the

145
House that the working classes of England were rising up in defence of their cause, and were prepared to prove every word he had said. What would hon. Members opposite say, when he told them, that in spite of all the calumnies which might be heaped on his head by interested parties out of doors, the working classes of Birmingham had assembled in public meeting, and had unanimously passed a vote of thanks to him for exposing the conduct of their hard-hearted taskmasters? Here was the notice:—
"At a meeting of the working classes, convened at the King's Head Inn, Dudley-street, Birmingham, a vote of thanks was unanimously passed to Mr. Ferrand, the patriotic representative of Knaresborough, for his philanthropic defence of the operatives of England; his fearless exposure of the fraudulent designs of the Anti-Corn-law League, and the oppression and tyranny of Whig-Radical millocrats."
He would tell the House that at that meeting the working men stood forward and justified everything he had said within those walls, and declared themselves ready to prove his statements by evidence. Let it no longer be said that the weight of the charges he had made lay on his own head. Again, he challenged hon. Members opposite to move for a select committee, and if they would not do it, he would. He must now allude to what was said by the noble Lord, the Member for the City of London, on a previous evening. That noble Lord stated that he (the noble Lord) understood he had only charged a limited number of manufacturers with the frauds which he had brought under the notice of the House. When the noble Lord sat down, he rose and told him he had brought the charge to a great extent against the bulk of the manufacturers, and that he was also ready to prove it. He had thought it his duty on Saturday last, in deference to the high position which that noble Lord held, not only in that House, but also in the estimation of the public out of doors, to send the noble Lord a sample of the common sort of cloth sold in Lancashire to the working classes. He had also sent a sample to the Prime Minister, for he was determined that his proceedings should not be carried on in the dark, and they should have ocular demonstration of what he had asserted, and what he was prepared to prove. Was there any hon. Member who would deny
146
that the common sort of manufactures were daubed over with flour paste? He had a sample of the cloth in his hand, and he asked the noble Lord, the Member for the City of London, who knew a good deal of the affairs of the world, if he ever in his life saw such plunder as that to which the working men were exposed by this means. It was dreadful to contemplate; it was horrible to behold. Yes, the shirting which was sold to the poor people of Lancashire was completely daubed over with flour paste. [Laughter."] He asked hon. Members who laughed, whether an inquiry ought not to be made into what he said, if it were true, and if it were untrue, whether such an opportunity of contradicting it had ever been offered to opponents? If what he asserted were true, did they by their smiles and derisive cheers hope to put it down? If the poor were robbed, as he said they were, was it not the duty of the Legislature to protect them? They came and asked the protection of that House. Did he ask anything unfair? Did he say anything in their behalf at which the House should shrink? If he did, fairly and with heartfelt gratitude would he give place to any hon. Member who would stand up and defend their cause within those walls. He was doing what he could for the poor, and, therefore, let not the Members of that House sneer at him. He felt that he was acting conscientiously; his own heart guided him in what he did, and if he erred in the slightest degree let the blame fall upon his own head, but let not the cause of the poor suffer. He asked the noble Lord opposite if he was not convinced from what he (Mr. Ferrand) had shown, that it was the duty of the Legislature to step in and prevent the robbery committed upon the poor, through the frauds which he (Mr. Ferrand) had exposed to the House? He would now read a letter published on the 1st of December last in the Manchester Guardian, a newspaper considered the organ of the Anti-Corn-law League, which would throw some light on the fraudulent practices to which he had alluded, and their effects:—
"The Corn-laws.—To the Editor of the Manchester Guardian."
"Sir,—A power-loom manufacturer, working 1,000 looms is now paying more by 15 l. per week, or upwards of 750 l. per annum, for the flour used in his manufactory in the process of dressing, than he did for the same quantity in 1835. The present duty on corn

147
gives the foreign manufacturer an advantage of several hundreds a year in such an establishment over the English one in the single article of sizing flour. The Corn-laws, by limiting the demand for goods at home and abroad, cause ruinous prices, heavy stocks, and general stagnation and depression, such as we are now suffering under. While these exist the manufacturer, in his efforts to save himself, endeavours to reduce the cost of production, and if he pays more for flour, he must pay less for labour. Thus wages are reduced, and this is one way in which the workpeople suffer from the high price of grain. A complete spinning and Weaving establishment consumes as much flour in the process of dressing as the workpeople employed in it eat; and if flour was at the same price now as it was in 1835, the manufacturer could as well afford to give his hands nearly half as many loaves as they consume, in addition to their present wages, as he can now afford to pay them the latter. —I am, Sir, yours,
A MANUFACTURER."
"Stockport, Nov. 30,1841."
Would hon. Members opposite now deny that flour paste was used in the making of calico? When he said that 100,000 quarters of wheat were consumed in the manufacture of such articles, under a system most baneful to the public, he spoke within bounds. He had thought it his duty on Thursday last to inform the noble Lord, the Member for the City of London, that he should find it necessary, in defending himself from the charges brought against him by an hon. Member opposite, to refer to the correspondence which took place between the noble Lord and Mr. Baker, superintendent of factories, ordered by the House of Commons, to be printed, June 21, 1836, when the noble Lord was Secretary for the Home Department. He did not blame the noble Lord for not understanding the manufacture of shoddy cloth, for at that time there was scarcely a man living in the South of England who knew anything about it. The letter of the superintendent was as follows:—
"My Lord,—In the case of Taylor, Ibbotson, and Co., I took the evidence from the mouths of the boys themselves. They stated to me they commenced working on Friday morning, the 27th of May last, at six o'clock, a. m., and that, with the exception of meal hours and one hour at midnight extra, they did not cease working till four o'clock on Saturday evening having been two days and a night thus engaged."
This would sufficiently show the horrid cruelties inflicted on the poor by their
148
pretended friends; and he begged the House to recollect that these men, Taylor, Ibbotson, and Co., were great Anti-Corn-law men. This was the true character of the members of the League, who felt so much for the sufferings of the poor, and who were so anxious to repeal the Corn-laws for the benefit of the poor man, and not for their own. Another working man wrote to him as follows:—
"I am employed in the shoddy trade in Batley, near Dewsbury. I have not seen your last speech on the Corn-law debate, but I hear you made some reference to the use of shoddy; but that is not the worst part of the business. In every piece made, there is 3lb. and upwards of the best of flour used as stiffening, to deceive the wearer, and eventually ruin the trade. In the parish of Batley, there are some hundreds of pecks of the very best flour used in this way in the year. Batley Carr, another village a mile distant from Batley, used to have a very good trade in the manufacture of paddings and druggets, but they carried this shoddy and stiffening to such a length that trade is lost, all the village ruined, and but a few masters retired independent. In the stiffening of druggets and paddings there were used from 5lb, to 6lb. per piece."
Let hon. Members listen for a few more moments, and he would show them how the trade of the country had declined. It was the frauds practised in the manufacture which had ruined the trade of many districts, and not the effects of the Corn-laws. He had given them testimony to this, out of the mouths of the working men, and now he would read them the account which a manufacturer residing at Witney, in Oxfordshire, gave of some of those frauds. This person wrote to him:
"Witney, February 26,1842.
Sir, If you want further corroboration about the rags, &c, used by some of the northern manufacturers, and would not mind inquiring of Messrs Lightfoot and Morris, the Government inspectors at Deptford dockyard, they could give you some very good proofs of it as used up in the jackets for our sailors, and technically called 'shoddy.' It is composed of old coarse woollens, such as blankets torn up after they are comparatively worn out. There is no' staple left to the wool, and, however nicely got up to please the eye, cloth made of such stuff, when it comes to be exposed to the wind and rain, will rot in a very little time. Ask them if the blue flushing made here last season, (in consequence of the complaints made of the cloth used for the sailor's jackets and trousers), did not give every satisfaction, as it was

149
made of long English wool. It was in consequence of the many complaints on this score, that the navy board last year substituted the old Witney pattern of cloth again, after having laid it aside for ten years in consequence of the Yorkshire people always underselling them through the use of 'shoddy' or 'devil's dust.' I will give you further information, for, although a Whig and a manufacturer, I am an enemy to all trickery, and some of your remarks are bitingly true.—Z."
He asked hon. Members opposite to do him as much justice as this manufacturer. If they were anxious to serve their country and the working people, they would not allow politics to stand in the way. He called on the hon. Member for Salford to come forward and lend his aid in the prosecution of this inquiry, and he was most ready to bear witness to the noble, manly, and generous exertions of that hon. Member in the cause of the factory children. Though, on this question, the hon. Member and himself might be at daggers drawn, still he hoped the day was not far distant when they should join hand and heart together in the attempt to rescue the poor factory children from the state of degradation to which they were now reduced. He had trespassed on the time of the House, in order to defend himself from the charges brought against him on Friday last. He felt that he had only done his duty; he could prove every word he had said, and, while standing there in defence of the working classes of England, he was forti6ed and strengthened by receiving with every post scores and scores of letters from those poor working men, as well as others from every grade and class of society, begging him not to be confounded and put down by any opposition in that House, and imploring him to make the truth known. It was with that intention he had come into the House; on that ground he took his stand, and was determined never to be put down. In the name of the working classes of England he challenged hon. Members opposite, he implored them, to ask for a select committee.
Mr. C. P. Villiersheld in his hand the names of thirty other manufacturers who wished to add them to the declaration he had read to the House on Friday night, conveying their indignant denial of the charges made by the hon. Member for Knaresborough. He should think any man might be astonished by hearing the hon. Member calling on Gentlemen on
150
that side of the House to ask for a select committee. The hon. Member had made the charges himself, and it was his duty to substantiate them. It was his duty to move for an instant inquiry into them. Not a single Member on that side of the House would oppose him. Any manufacturer would, he was sure, be glad to second a motion for inquiry, and then they would be ready to vindicate themselves from the charges brought against them.
Mr. J. Fieldenbelieved there was a great deal of truth in what had been advanced by the hon. Member for Knaresborough. If a committee of the House were granted there would be such a developement of the proceedings of a great many manufacturers as would call for the application of an effectual remedy of some kind or other. It was asserted that the poor were now suffering grievous oppression in a variety of ways. The quantity of the persons employed was increasing, and the oppression of the poor increased in the same proportion. He should be very willing to second a motion for a select committee to examine the accuracy of the statements which had been set forth. He thought it would be found that the same oppressive proceedings were in many instances chargeable on the cultivators of the soil. He would read to the House a statement which appeared two or three weeks ago in the public newspapers. The proceeding to which it referred took place in a county magistrates' office on Monday, Feb. 14, when there were present Messrs. H. S. Olivier, W. Hughes, and T. H. Grubbe. The hon. Member read the following paragraph from the Wiltshire Independent:—
"Jeffry Dowse, a labouring man, was charged with damaging a maiden oak tree, the property of the trustees of the late Mr. Watson Taylor, at Urchfont. A policeman slated that he saw the defendant go from his house to a tree, into which he climbed and cut wood with a billhook. He then went to him and stopped him, and took away the hook. This was before six o'clock in the morning. It was bright moonlight. Mr. New said that the damage was 1s. Dowse, in his defence, said, 'I was driven to do this by distress, to get something to make a fire to wash clothes for my family. I've a wife and five children; and no week this winter have I earned more than 7s. Last week I only earned 6s. 3d.; and out of that I paid 1s. l0½d. rent, and 9d. for firing, and what was left (3s. 7½d.) was all we had to keep seven persons. One of the Magistrates. —You need not have married; besides, your

151
distressed condition did not authorise you to steal. Dowse.—No, Sir; but distress drives one to do what you would not at another time. If I go to prison, I shall have some victuals to eat, that's one comfort. A Magistrate.— You have an honest face; it is a pity you should do such things. You look honest. (A more respectable-looking labouring man we have seldom seen.) In answer to one of the magistrates, Dowse said that he had been digging for Mr. John Snook, and before that for Mr. Weeks. Fined 10 s. including costs. Dowse.—I could not pay 10 d., much less 10 s I must go to prison, I suppose. He was committed for fourteen days."
If the House would set about devising a remedy for such a state of things they must look to the poverty which overspread the people both in the rural and manufacturing districts. While this poverty existed they must expect to have such complaints urged upon them again and again; and however discreditable to the House and the country the statements might be which had been made by the hon. Member for Knaresborough, he was glad they had been brought forward, and he hoped the hon. Member would insist on their being fully investigated.
Mr. Lambton,as the representative of a northern constituency in some degree affected by the statements of the hon. Member for Knaresborough, expressed a hope that he would move for a committee forthwith.
Mr. Ferrandsaid, he had brought forward these charges in reply to hon. Gentlemen opposite. The hon. Member for Wolverhampton told him a few nights ago that the matter should not be allowed to rest where it was, and he thought the hon. Member would instantly have moved for a select committee to enable him to prove the charges he had made. He was prepared that instant to produce his authorities to the House, or before a select committee, whenever it should be appointed; and he had made up his mind himself to move before Easter for a committee to investigate the whole matter, unless some other hon. Member should do so before Friday next.
Mr. Villierssaid he had not allowed the matter to rest, having produced to the House the names of upwards of 100 manufacturers who broadly and most unequivocally denied the charge.
Subject at an end.

PARTY CRIMES—(IRELAND.)
Mr. O'Connellwould take that opportunity of noticing a misrepresentation of his speech on the conduct of General Espartero towards the Spanish clergy, imputing to him the sentiment, that if the cruelties of which he had complained had been visited upon Carlist priests he should care nothing about the matter. He had reprobated the conduct of the present Spanish government equally as applied to the Carlist and Christino clergy as a religious persecution; but he had said that he should not have complained had any Carlist priests been punished according to law for their political offences. He would then proceed in pursuance of the notice he had given, to move for a return of the names, numbers, and descriptions of persons who had registered arms in the county of Down, Ireland. He was induced to make this motion in consequence of a most deplorable event that had occurred in that county, and which must equally be lamented by both sides of the House. He meant the murder of a young man of the name of M'Ardle—one of the most cruel atrocities ever committed. The circumstances of the case were these;—An exceedingly fine youth six feet three inches in stature, and proportionably well made, of most excellent conduct and temper, having been, on Christmas evening, with a friend called M'Kevron. at a public-house at Ballyrany, kept by a man named Copes, a quarrel arose between M'Kevron and an Orangeman, who was also one of the company. M'Ardle interfered, put an end to the quarrel, and took his friend out of the house. A person named Thomas Scott, one of the accused, left Cope's house about the same time as M'Kevron, and proceeded to another public-house three quarters of a mile off, where were assembled a number of young men who were armed, and had been practising with ball cartridge in the neighbourhood. These fellows, who had assumed the ridiculous name of "Yellow Tulips," were drinking in a barn, their arms being piled up in a corner, and when a messenger arrived they took their arms, proceeded to the house where M'Kevron had been, and demanded that he should be turned out. On being informed he was gone, they proceeded to search the house, firing into it, breaking all the doors and windows, and making an indiscriminate attack on such within as were known to be Roman Catholics. M'Ardle, however, escaped to a house

153
distant about a mile, and owned by a man named Ward. Thither they pursued him, and attacked the house where he had taken shelter. He again effected his escape, but before he got a mile further he was overtaken, lying near a lime-kiln, and shot dead. The trial for the murder took place at the last Down assizes, and the result was an immediate acquittal of the parties accused. He did not impute blame where blame did not lie; but that blame rested somewhere was perfectly evident. When the verdict was delivered there was a shout in court, "To hell with the Pope," the usual Orange cry. Although the Attorney-general prosecuted, and the judge charged for conviction strongly, the jury, without hesitation, acquitted the accused; another jury having convicted the very same men of a riot, on the very same occasion. There had been another murder since at Ballyrony, and he had received several letters requesting to know what the people were to do—whether they were to be obliged to protect themselves. He should not dwell one moment on these melancholy facts; but what he complained of was, that the magistrates did not at once prevent such a party from spending Christmas-day in firing ball-cartridges. It was altogether a most indecent occupation. He also complained of the shout in court immediately after the acquittal of the accused; but, without at all entering into these questions, he contented himself now with moving for the return above mentioned.
Lord Eliotwished to make a few observations with reference to the lamentable occurrence brought under the attention of the House by the right hon. and learned Gentleman. It was no light matter to impugn the verdict of a jury, especially when the life of a fellow-creature depended upon it; but he did feel himself bound to say, looking at the evidence adduced, the declarations made by the Attorney-general, and the charge of the learned judge, that he was at a loss to conceive on what grounds the prisoner had been acquitted. He could assure the right hon. and learned Gentleman, as well as the House, that his noble Friend at the head of the Irish government had felt the deepest pain on this occasion, not only with respect to the death of this unfortunate man, M'Ardle, but also as the occurrence indicated a continuance of that hateful spirit of party and religious animosity which the Irish
154
Government had hoped was rapidly beginning to subside. He also felt that the result in this case would tend to shake that confidence in the power of the law to punish crime, which it was so essential should prevail among all classes of the country. The right hon. and learned Gentleman had done justice to the Government. So anxious was his noble Friend that the ends of justice should not be frustrated that he directed the principal law-officer of the Crown to proceed to the assizes and conduct the prosecution; and he believed he was justified in saying that his hon. and learned Friend had displayed all that ability, skill, and legal knowledge which so eminently characterised him, at the trial. If the ends of justice, therefore, had been frustrated, the guilt did not lie with the Irish Government. His only hope was, that the jury had taken up some mistaken view of the nature of the evidence brought forward. He entirely agreed with the right hon. and learned Gentleman, that the practice of meeting in large numbers to practice ball-cartridge was extremely reprehensible; but he was not sufficiently acquainted with the law to say whether it were illegal. Of course, if it were so, it might be put down at once; but no doubt it was extremely reprehensible. With regard to the shout which had been uttered in court, he did not know in what way the judge could have interfered to prevent it. All he could do was to proclaim silence, which he had done immediately, and the cry was not repeated. He did not say so with any disrespect to the right hon. and learned Gentleman, or to those who professed his religion and politics, but he believed the fact was, the melancholy occurrence to which he had adverted arose out of a cry raised by a Roman Catholic in the room, "To hell with King William." At the same time, he greatly lamented that the same feeling prevailed to such an extent on both sides.
Mr. O'Connellfelt bound to say, that the noble Lord was right in stating, tha the murder originated in the exclamation "To hell with King William;" but M'Ardle had silenced the cry and sent the man who uttered it out of the house. The worst of the matter was, that the Orangemen were armed with deadly weapons, while the Catholics were not. He did not know whether they would remain so.
Lord Eliotwished further to state, as

155
some objection had been taken to the jury, as entirely composed of Protestants, that the counsel employed by the next of kin made no objection to them whatever when empannelled.
Mr. O'Connellsaid, he had not at all intended to impeach the jury.
Lord Eliothad seen the objection to which he had alluded in a newspaper. He had no objection to the motion of the right hon. and learned Gentleman.
The Speaker, however, intimated that it was irregular to bring on such a motion by way of amendment to his leaving the chair.
Motion withdrawn, to be renewed after the House should have resumed.
The House resolved itself into a Committee of

SUPPLY—ARMY ESTIMATES.
Sir H. Hardingesaid, in presenting the army estimates to the committee, he should proceed to make a general statement of the differences which appeared in the estimates of the present year, as compared with the last; and he should not think it necessary to detain the committee any length of time, because there did not exist many material differences. The number of officers, non-commissioned officers, and rank and file which it was proposed to maintain for the service of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland(exclusive of the troops employed in the East Indies) for the ensuing year was 95,628. The number employed in the East Indies, and paid by the East India Company, was 26,940; so that the total amount of force for the ensuing year would be 122,568 men. This number was composed of 108,086 rank and file, 5,808 officers, and 8,674 non-commissioned officers. There was, therefore, an addition to the force for this year as compared with last year of 1,447 men. This increase was accounted for in the following manner:— The Royal Canadian regiment amounted to 1,100 men, the St. Helena corps to 430, and there had also been an augmentation of the 3d West India regiment amounting to 230, making a total of 1,760 men in addition to the estimate of last year; but, after deducting about 600 men, which decrease would arise from the working of the dépôts, as explained in the second page of the votes, the real increase appeared to be about 1,100 men. The Royal Canadian regiment, formed in last autumn, consisted of eleven companies, raised by volunteers from different regiments in Canada,
156
and every man had served for fifteen years. The St. Helena corps consisted of five companies, and the men were also enlisted for local service. At the same time precautions had been taken to enlist them for general purposes, in case any necessity should arise to render the transfer of their services desirable. He was not an advocate, generally speaking, for a system by which local corps, formed of Europeans from this country, should be placed on a different footing from other corps in her Majesty's service, but in this instance there were peculiar circumstances which rendered an increase of force necessary, and made a departure from this principle justifiable; and he trusted that these two corps would realize by their services the expectations which had led to their organization. The addition to the 3rd West India regiment was made on a different principle. The 1st and 2nd regiment consisted of ten companies, and were 1,000 men strong. The 3rd only consisted of eight companies. In consequence of this difference, it was thought necessary to increase the latter force, and to make it equal to the others; and it now consisted of ten companies and was 1,000 men strong. The three regiments would equally contribute to send detachments to the western coast of Africa, and while there the companies would recruit for men. It was proposed to augment the number of the officers of each of the three corps by two supernumerary companies; for though the health of the men, when on service on the western coast of Africa, and in their own country, was not liable to be deteriorated, yet the constitution of Europeans was more readily affected. The noble Lord, the Secretary for the Colonial Department, had been impressed with the humanity and policy of making such an addition as was proposed, and the commander-in-chief had acquiesced in it. The effect of the arrangement would be this: that whenever an officer had served eighteen months on the western coast of Africa, he would, before his return to the West Indies, be allowed a year's leave of absence, in England to recruit his constitution. The greater portion of these three West India regiments remaining in the West Indies would supply the garrisons as far as their numbers would allow. In Jamaica it was intended that 800 men belonging to them should be stationed, occupying the barracks in the lower parts of the island; and two battalions only of British troops would for the future remain in that island. Arrangements, which were in

157
progress while the noble Lord the late Secretary for the Colonial Department was in office, were now made, according to which a battalion of six companies would be kept at Newcastle, in the mountains overhanging Kingston. This would tend greatly to benefit the health of the troops, who would always be available to march to the scene of action, should unfortunately any necessity arise for their services in that way. In future, therefore, the black troops, who did not suffer from being stationed on the low ground, would occupy all the posts on the coasts, which were the least healthy, and the European regiments would be placed in more healthy positions. The next point to which he wished to call the attention of the committee was the memorandum inserted in the second page of the estimates. It was proposed to add to each of six dépôts of regiments, consisting at present of four companies, two companies of officers, by which the dépÔts would be increased to six companies each, and 600 men rank and file, and be of the same strength as the six service companies. The force of the army he had already stated to be 122,000 men. In 1830, when he last presented the army estimates to the House, it was much under this number. Lord Grey raised the force to the full establishment, which was again reduced in 1834 under Lord Melbourne, and in 1838 it was again raised. He mentioned these facts for the purpose of observing that there had been an augmentation of the force for the last four years, without an increase of officers. The pressure on the troops for the last four years had been such, that he thought it necessary that means should be devised for relieving them. There were fifty battalions of infantry abroad, in addition to twenty-eight in New South Wales, in India, and in China. The total number was 103, including only twenty-five at home. It was impossible that the twenty-five at home could carry on the relief of the seventy-eight abroad, forty-two of which were serving in tropical climates. When the revolution in Canada broke out, in 1837, there were only nine battalions, 4,500 men strong, in North America, and now nineteen were there, exclusive of two battalions of Guards, and the Royal Canadian regiment, 1,000 men strong. In India, New South Wales, and China, there were now twenty-eight battalions instead of twenty-five, This was an increase of fourteen battalions more than existed four years ago. Looking, therefore, to the state of reliefs, the com-
158
mittee would, doubtless, be of opinion, that it was necessary by some expedient to remedy this state of things. He, therefore, proposed to the Government that six of the dépôts should be increased to six companies of 100 men each, and that they should be sent abroad to six healthy stations; for instance—to Gibraltar, Bermuda, Halifax, or Quebec, or the Mediterranean, and that there they should take the garrison duty, the same as the service companies. A battalion of that kind, performing garrison duty, would in a short time he as efficient as any other. He therefore proposed that six of these dépôts should be converted into second battalions, and sent to foreign stations, where they might relieve regiments which had been abroad for a period exceeding ten years. The effect of this arrangement would be, that instead of there being only twenty-five battalions at home in the ensuing year, there would be thirty-one; and in case of any demand arising for the services of the six battalions at home, which were the first on the list for foreign service, they would he found in a perfect state of discipline, and ready for duty. The expense of this arrangement was estimated at 63,000 l.; and in order to meet that expenditure, it was proposed that fifty other battalions not employed either in the East Indies or North America, should be reduced by six men a company. This would occasion a reduction of 3,000 men from the other battalions, and a diminution in expense of 61,000 l. There would thus remain a balance of expence of 2,000 l. or 3,000 l. To meet, however, the expense which was generally incurred at the first working of a new system, it was proposed to take a vote of 9,000 l. for the present year. The total amount of the charge for 95,628 men in the present year, for which a vote was asked, was 3,581,575 l. This was an increase, as compared with the last year, of upwards of 70,000 l., but was accounted for by the fact of the organisation of the Royal Canadian regiment, the St. Helena corps, the augmentation of the 3rd West-India regiment, and the augmentation of the dépôt companies. The amount required to cover the money payable for good conduct amounted to 10,067 l. There were 4,648 men in the receipt of this money, and he was glad to say, that the number was progressive. In addition to these, there were 7,000 men receiving marks for good conduct, making the total number receiving additional pay or wages for good conduct,

159
12,000. The vote for libraries was 2,550 l. The soldiers subscribed 1d. a month to them, and their establishment had occasioned the greatest possible good both at home and abroad. The amount of subscriptions was 500 l., and fifty libraries had been established. The total amount required for the staff was 166,922 l., being a decrease of 527 l., on account of the deputy-adjutant and quarter-master-general in Dublin having ceased to receive certain emoluments. On the head of "Public Departments," there was an increase of 2,652 l., 1,140 l. being owing to length of service, and the rest to postage. The charge for the Royal Military College was 18,000 l., but the whole expense of that establishment did not fall on the public, inasmuch as the relations of the students contributed to their education. 530 l. were required in consequence of some damage done to the building. The vote for the Royal Asylum at Chelsea and the Hibernian School amounted to 15,606 l. The number of boys at the asylum amounted to 370. In the vote for the volunteer corps there was an increase of 192 l., and the increase in the whole effective service amounted to upwards of 70,000 l. The next division of the estimates related to the non-effective service. The first vote was for distinguished services, and amounted to 15,280 l. There was a decrease on this head of 500 l. The vote for the army pay of general officers amounted to 98,000 l. There was a large increase over the vote of last year under this head, of 13,000 l., which was occasioned by the late brevet. 61 colonels had been promoted to major-generals. He did not know whether it was necessary for him to enter into details with respect to this matter. In 1815 the number of general officers, including colonels of regiments, amounted to 555, and their pay to 191,000 l. In 1842 the number of general officers was 370, and the charge to the country 98,000 l., being a decrease, as compared with 1815, of 185 general officers, and of 93,000 l. a-year in expense. The vote for retired allowances was 66,000 l., being a decrease on the vote of last year of 1,500 l. The next vote was for half-pay and military allowances, 477,618 l.; the number 4,299. Last year the sum for this purpose was 497,000 l., and the number 4,500—showing a diminution this year, as compared with the last, in the number of 201; and also a decrease of 19,382 l. The next vote was for foreign half-pay. The number this
160
year was 501, last year 524—being a diminution this year in the number of 23. This year the sum required was 58,433 l.; last year it was 60,608 l.—being a diminution this year of 2,175 l. The next vote was for widows' pensions, 141,817 l. Last year the sum required for this purpose was 141,372 l.—being an increase this year of 445 l. The next vote was for compassionate allowances. The amount required this year was 120,500 l. Last year the sum required was 124,000 l., being a diminution this year to the amount of 3,500 l. At page 83 of the estimates would be found an item of 10,000 l. which was required this year, as it had been last year, to enable the War-office to make some different arrangements with respect to the organization and payment of the out-pensioners. This arrangement was to be tried first in Scotland, and if it succeeded, then it would be carried into effect in England and Ireland. The sum of 1,259,104 l. would be required for the in-pensioners of Chelsea and Kilmainham hospitals, and for the out-pensioners of Chelsea Hospital. The number was this year 74,709. Last year the sum appropriated to this purpose was 1,286,465 l., and the number 76,120, showing a diminution this year, as compared with last, in the number of 1,411, and also a diminution in amount to the extent of 27,361 l. The next vote was for superannuation allowances. The sum required this year was 41,455 l. Last year it was 43,345 l., showing a diminution this year, as compared with last, to the amount of 1,890 l. The total amount for effective services required this year was, 4,887,700 l. Last year it was 4,870,476 l., showing an increase this year, compared with last, of 17,224 l. He thought it unnecessary to enter into any further explanations. He assured the House that every regard to economy had been had in the preparation of the estimates, and he hoped the committee would agree to the votes which had been proposed. At the same time that he mentioned that the Government had paid every regard to economy, he begged to be understood as meaning a really judicious economy; for he thought, and he believed the House would think so too, that efficiency was true economy. Under these circumstances, then, he trusted that the House would agree to the vote, that a number of men not exceeding 95,628 be granted to her Majesty's service.
Viscount Horvickfelt no objection to the vote which had been proposed. On

161
the contrary, he thought the amount required was quite necessary. He should make but few observations, for he had not had an opportunity of examining the report so carefully as he should have done. There were, however, one or two points in the statement of the right hon. and gallant Member on which he would offer some remark. First, the right hon. and gallant Officer had detailed some particulars with reference to the organization of local corps. The right hon. and gallant Officer had admitted, that he entertained an objection to the organization of men for merely local service, and in this opinion he concurred. At the same time he thought with the right hon. and gallant Officer, that the case of the Canadian and St. Helena corps formed just exceptions. The arrangements which had been proposed with respect to the East-Indian regiments, had given him great pleasure. He had no doubt such an arrangement would be found to be consistent with good policy, and that it would have a tendency to arrest that frightful mortality which had so long prevailed among our East-Indian troops. The increased number of officers which the right hon. and gallant Officer proposed, would admit of a longer leave of absence being granted to the officers of regiments stationed in those parts. He begged to ask the right hon. and gallant Officer, whether any plan had been resolved on with a view to the improvement of the barracks in our other East-Indian settlements. The right hon. and gallant Officer, was fully cognizant of the subject on which he asked for information. The right hon. and gallant Officer had truly said, efficiency in military matters was true economy, and he hoped that no feelings of false economy would induce the House to perpetuate those miseries among our brave soldiers, which they had endured during the last thirty-five years from defective barracks. He would next ask a question, and would by no means affect to discuss the question, with respect to the proposition made by the right hon. and gallant Officer as to the increase of six battalions and the reduction of other branches. He wished to know whether, in consequence of these reductions, the emoluments of all the colonels were to be increased, or whether the off-reckonings were to go entirely to some half-dozen favoured colonels. He would avoid going into the question as to the policy of keeping up what was known as the dépôt system, because he thought
162
this subject could be with greater propriety dealt with by the whole House. The right hon. and gallant Officer had observed, that fifty libraries had been established, an announcement which he was most happy to hear. He believed, also, that the right hon. and gallant Officer had said, that the soldiers had generally shown a disposition to avail themselves of this scheme. There was one inconvenience which he hoped endeavours would be made to remedy, which was extremely unpopular in the army, and that was the liability of the soldiers to barrack damages. There was only one other point on which he would detain the attention of the House, and that was with reference to the new system of paying the Chelsea pensioners. Some attempt to effect an improvement he was glad to find had been thought necessary, and he agreed with the right hon. and gallant Officer that it was expedient to try the scheme first in Scotland, and if it should succeed there, then that it should be carried out in England and Ireland. He was of opinion that the vote proposed was satisfactory, and he thought the House ought not to object to it.
Lord A.Lennoxwas glad that an increase had taken place in the number of men proposed in the present estimate; and he only had to regret that the increase had not been more extensive. Whether he considered our affairs in China, the present unsettled state of France, or whether he viewed the aspect of America, he thought the country would not long enjoy the blessing of peace. He felt on this account, therefore, an objection to the lowness of the present estimate; and another reason he had for considering the estimate too low was, that he believed that the different corps would not be relieved so often as the right hon. and gallant Officer had imagined. On the subject of retiring pensions he had an observation to offer. He need not remind the House, that by the existing warrant, a man must be enlisted twenty-five years before he could receive a retiring pension of 6d. a-day. He put it, therefore, to the House and to the right hon. and gallant Officer, whether it was likely that good men would enlist, when it was necessary that they should have served for so long a period, probably exposed to the influence of unwholesome climates during much of that period, before they could receive the miserable pittance of 3s. 6d. a week. It

163
should also be recollected that these men became, from causes which operated on them in their military career, quite unable to gain their livelihood in any other way. He would, however, leave the matter in the hands of the gallant Officer, satisfied that so distinguished a Member of the same profession would do justice to the claims he had endeavoured to advocate. There was only one more question he had to ask, and that was, what was to become of the 400 sets of accoutrements which the new regulations would throw out of use. He begged, in conclusion, to suggest, whether some increase might not take place in the pay of the lance corporals and the lance serjeants. It was well known that these non-commissioned officers received no more pay than the common men, though the serjeants had to make reports, which occasioned them an outlay for different articles of stationery in order to prepare those reports. He suggested that 1d. a-day should be added to the pay of the lance corporals and 3d. a-day to the pay of the lance Serjeants. He begged to thank the House for the attention they bad given him while making these remarks.
Mr. Macaulayobjected to the arrangements which were proposed to be made in reference to the colonels of these six regiments, by which their present rate of emoluments would be greatly increased. After what the right hon. Gentleman (Sir H. Hardinge) and his noble Friend (Lord Howick) had said, he (Mr. Macaulay) had scarcely anything to add, except that he did not agree in his noble Friend's prognostication with respect to Canada. He did not mean to assert that he was confident of success, but that' he conceived they had a better chance under the present system than with a corps composed of men half soldiers half civilians, whom he thought must be found bad soldiers. He had another question to ask, which he thought of great importance. At the time, he (Mr. Macaulay) left the board, he was engaged in attempting to effect some change with respect to the lunatic asylum at Chatham, which he believed was in a state disgraceful to the country, and absolutely shocking to humanity. He felt assured that the right hon. Gentleman had not forgotten the subject, but it would be a great satisfaction to him to be informed so by the right hon. Gentleman. With respect to the Chelsea pensions, it appeared to him that
164
a complete re-organization was necessary, but he was quite satisfied with the observations of the right hon. Gentleman, and thought that in first trying the experiment in Scotland, he (Sir H. Hardinge) was exercising a sound discretion.
Sir H. Hardingeassured the right hon. Gentleman, that the subject of the Lunatic Asylum at Chatham had not escaped his observation. In consequence of having read the reports upon the subject, he requested the quarter-master-general to go down and inspect the asylum, and to take with him all the preceding reports; and he was sorry to say, that, the quarter-master-general's report entirely confirmed all preceding reports on the state of the institution. He, therefore, entirely concurred in the necessity of making, as soon as possible, an entire change in the state of those unfortunate individuals, among whom were gentlemen as well as private soldiers. With regard to other observations, he wished that, when the proposed arrangement regarding the augmentation of the dépôts was carried into effect it had been possible to make any other arrangement with respect to the emoluments of the colonels. The uniform custom, upon reducing a regiment on its return from India to England, was proportionably to diminish the emoluments of the colonels; but this being a case in which the number of men was augmented for the public convenience, the emoluments could not fairly be reduced in proportion. The arrangement had been made for the purpose of meeting the extra service now going on in the colonies, but he hoped that the number of men in the East Indies and North America might in a short time be diminished, and the service carried on as in 1825, for he maintained that the ordinary peace establishment of 1825, under the Duke of Wellington, of 103 battalions, was a sufficient force for the ordinary circumstances of the country in time of peace. He was persuaded, that by this arrangement they would be able, if necessary, to send more than six battalions in the most perfect state of discipline to any part of the globe, as often as they might be required. The noble Viscount (Viscount Howick) had hinted that his plan of dépôts would have answered all the purposes of the present plan, but he (Sir H. Hardinge) did not think it would have had the same effect, in affording relief. That plan had been fairly laid before the Government of which the noble Lord had been a Member,

165
and referred by them to the Duke of Wellington, who also differed from the noble Lord respecting it, in which opinion he believed the noble Lord (Lord J. Russell), and the Commander-in-Chief concurred. The noble Lord had also adverted to what he termed the disgraceful state of the barracks in the West Indies. He would rather that expression had been made to the committee at the time the Ordnance estimates were before them; but he must remind the noble Lord, that in 1840, in consequence of the noble Lord having moved for papers on the subject, he had asked the present Lord Vivian, then Master-general of the Ordnance, whether there was any foundation for that report, and that the Master-general of the Ordnance stated in his place in that House, that the barracks were in an admirable state, and that he was ready to meet the noble Lord upon the subject whenever he thought proper. The noble Lord did not recur to the subject in 1841, when Lord Vivian was present, but he could assure the House that all he had said upon the subject was directly opposed to the description of the noble Lord. With respect to the observation of the noble Lord (Lord A. Lennox) respecting the accoutrements of the battalions, he had only to say they would be disposed of in the same manner as those of regiments returning from India.
Lord J. Russellsaid, he did not object in any way to the vote proposed by the right hon. Gentleman, and should confine his observations simply to one or two points. With respect to the greatest novelty in the estimates of this year, namely, that of having two additional battalions, the plan of Lord Vivian was communicated to the Duke of Wellington, who stated that they would lose by it the advantage of depot companies, which, by keeping a certain portion of officers and recruits to be drilled, was of greater advantage than keeping regiments abroad and sending out recruits to them. This statement being made by such eminent authority, he bowed to it, however superior, to his own mind, a different plan might be; but then the plan of the right hon. Gentleman abandoned the system of dépôt companies, and whatever advantage there might be in it, he thought it could not be denied, that with respect to this arrangement, it was entirely disregarded. He would not enter into a controversy which plan would be the best, feeling sure, that
166
on a question of this nature the opinion of the right hon. Gentleman was entitled to have great authority. He was glad to hear that there was to be only two battalions in Jamaica, and that they were to have a new barracks there, being decidedly of opinion that nothing was more advisable in every respect than that the troops should be placed in the healthiest situation possible. On the whole, he considered these estimates had been communicated to the House with all the ability and information that might have been expected from so distinguished an officer as the right hon. Gentleman.
Sir H. Hardingesaid, that he understood the opinion of the Duke of Wellington and the Commander-in-Chief to be, that these dépôts could be kept up by the introduction of men at home and abroad, but that, if necessary, these troops might be further augmented so as to become second battalions.
Viscount Howicksaid, that the Duke of Wellington referred only to a time of war.
Mr. Williamswished to know how far the China contingencies were included in these estimates?
Sir H. Hardingesaid, they were not at all in the present estimates, but would, under the head of "Army Extraordinaries," be hereafter matter of arrangement.
Mr. Williamswould like to have a rough estimate of their probable amount.
Sir H. Hardinge:it was impossible to give any such calculation.
Mr. Williamsthought, that the unanimity prevailing between the two great parties on the subject of estimates was not by any means matter for congratulation or of credit. He was strongly persuaded that the ways and means ought to be settled prior to the proposal of the estimates. Were this plan adopted, expenses would not so often exceed the revenue. Last year the expenditure exceeded the receipts by 2,500,000 l. nearly. The numbers on the home army establishment were, by some thousands, greater at the present period than they had been some years ago. Looking at the vast increase of the army, as compared with former years, he felt bound to say, that he saw nothing in the present circumstances of the country to warrant the vast increase which her Majesty's Government had proposed, and, acting under the influence of this strong conviction, he should move that the number of 95,600 men be reduced to 84,000,

167
unless he received an assurance that some portion of that force was to be employed in the Chinese war. No doubt that war was an event much to be deplored, but, being engaged in it, he thought that the more efficiently it was carried on, the sooner it would be brought to a close; if, therefore, he received the information to which he had just alluded, he should not persist in his opposition to the present vote. He thought the House had reason to complain not only of the number of men composing the army, but of the amount of the half-pay, which came to no less a sum than 2,264,000 l. Now, it was rather hard, after twenty-four years of peace, that the half-pay and allowances,— namely, the whole retired list, should have cost the country such a sum as he had just mentioned. In the half-pay he thought the officers the most objectionable portion. There were 5,880 officers; if they took from that number 385 officers, who from one cause or other remained on full pay, and 504 foreign officers, it would bring the officers on full and on half-pay to pretty nearly equal numbers. The captains on half-pay were 1,187,the lieutenants on full pay were 1,868, while those on half-pay were 1,461, and it was well known, that a large portion of the captains had served but a short time. Then he could not help calling the attention of the House to the late promotions, which advanced so many to the rank of general officers without any imaginable necessity for laying upon the country such a burden—no recent occurrences appeared to render it at all necessary. There were 452 general officers on the list, which was in the proportion of four general officers to one regiment of the line, and leaving some to spare. To him it appeared that so many general officers were not necessary for the command of the army. The United States of America possessed an army of 12,500 men, but they had only three general officers, one major-general, and two brigadiers. On the pension-list there were 1,209 widows; respecting them he wished to know whether their pensions were granted them on special representations being made, or whether the widows of officers received their pensions according to the ranks of their deceased husbands; but, at all events, he thought that the number of widows' pensions could not be justified upon any principle. Those widows cost the country 371,000 l., a sum
168
far exceeding what he thought the necessity of the case required. He was quite aware that this was an unpleasant topic to Gentle-men belonging to the army, of whom there were many in that House—indeed, he regretted that they were so numerous. With regard to the estimates generally he should say, that if anything like economy had been practised, a great reduction might have been effected without injury to the public service. It was quite unnecessary, for example, that so many officers should be allowed to retire on half-pay at so early an age as was the practice of the British army. The fact was, that the army had been made too desirable a profession, and if stricter economy were observed, men who now went into the army would find occupation for themselves in other pursuits. The next portion of these estimates to which he thought it necessary to direct attention was the expense of the household troops—most properly called household troops, for they were purely an appendage of royalty; but the country felt them to be a very costly appendage. The Horse Guards cost the country at the rate of 85,000 l., which was 24,000 l. more than any other regiments cost. Then the Foot Guards cost 39,818 l. more than any equal portion of the army. On the whole, then, those household troops cost 63,918 l. more than any other body of soldiers equal in number; and it was worthy of observation, that those troops never left the country to serve abroad, except in the year 1815. [An hon. Member:"They served in Spain."] That was before 1815; since 1815 they had never served abroad. This portion of the army had three colonels, at 1,800 l. each, while twelve other regiments in the service had their colonels at 900 l. The pay of the Horse Guards was 1s. ll½d., that of the Foot Guards was 1s. 1d. while other regiments of cavalry received only 1s. 3d., and other infantry only 1s. There was one other vote of which he wished more particularly to complain—it was a sum of 82,458 l. for the yeomanry. There was now no danger of invasion, and no force could be more objectionable for quelling disturbances than were the yeomanry. In Ireland the disuse of that force had greatly tended to tranquillise the country. In conclusion, he said he should divide the House, unless he received an assurance that a considerable portion of the force was to be employed in China.
Sir H. Douglassaid, he was not surprised that hon. Members on the other side of the House had raised no objection to the votes proposed by his right hon. Friend, for that which he did the late Ministry ought to have done on a much larger scale. Our military force ought to have been increased when the war broke out in Canada, and it ought to have been further increased when those hostilities commenced in the East, the issue of which they had yet to learn. At the breaking out of the Canadian rebellion, two regiments were removed from the Ionian Islands, to the great inconvenience of the public service. Looking to the Chinese war, and to what had taken place in the East since its commencement, he must say, that for many years past, and most particularly from the time of the Canadian rebellion, the strength of the British army had never been equal to the work it had to perform. It had been utterly insufficient, not only for ordinary relief, but to enable officers abroad to carry on warlike operations in a proper manner; and it was now utterly insufficient to retrieve any great disaster that might happen, which God forbid ! For want of a sufficient force, the officers engaged in Affghanistan had been prevented from carrying on the war as they would have done; otherwise they would not have undertaken great operations along an immense line of country without making good that progress step by step, and establishing dépôts in every important part, for the purposes of conveying intelligence and supplies, and of making all safe and secure in case of any unforeseen disaster, so that the forces could retreat from the first post to the second, and so on as far as necessary, falling back, not upon weakness, but upon strength. He charged that insufficiency upon those whose duty it was at the time to make ample provision for every contingency, and not to have left officers exposed to defeat, and to the necessity of deviating from the first rules of the service. He therefore thanked his right hon. Friend for having increased her Majesty's forces. But that ought to have been done long ago. It was now imperatively necessary to look well to our extended empire, and to increase our forces, not by expedients, but by large and regular means. Look at India! The Queen's troops there were reckoned at twenty-two battalions, at the very moment when some
170
were called away to China, and others to Affghanistan! What were twenty-two battalions for India proper? And where were they now? Nine and a half only were in India; some were sent to Affghanistan, some to Cabul, and some to Jellalabad. He trusted, that no new disaster would befal the British troops in those parts; but, should such an event take place, not only would the physical results be most distressing, but the moral effect must be most mischievous to the honour and welfare of this country; and here again, he must cast all the responsibility of such a state of things upon those who, when it was their duty to prepare the necessary supplies, failed to do so. Returning now to that degree of comfort which ought to be provided for the British soldier, he would state, that when he arrived at the Ionian Islands, he found but one military chaplain there; and on visiting the hospitals, he heard the dying soldiers calling for spiritual aid and comfort in their last moments. He applied to the noble Lord, the Member for Sunderland, who was then Secretary at War, and the noble Lord appointed another chaplain, and also three Roman Catholic chaplains, though he had recommended the noble Lord to appoint four. An alteration for the better was visible amongst the military; many of them were to be seen sitting in the guard-rooms reading, and he knew, from observation, that those who took to their books forsook baneful habits and pursuits, and became moral men, and consequently orderly and good soldiers. He wished his right hon: Friend would take another step with a view to introduce into the army those institutions which had proved so beneficial among civilians—he meant saving-banks. When he was Governor of New Brunswick, many years ago, he established saving-banks, in which the military deposited their savings, not as soldiers, but as private persons, and in a very short time, their deposits amounted to 500 l., while provident habits and temperance and general good conduct prevailed more extensively amongst the men. In the course of service, however, the regiment was called elsewhere; there being no mode of remitting deposits, it was necessary to return the men their money, and the consequence was, that, though some gave their savings to superior officers, or the paymaster, to take care of for them, others

171
fell into great irregularities, spending their money foolishly, and courts-martial followed their misconduct. Thus they were thrown back in the path of good behaviour, merely through the absence of a regimental saving-bank. His experience in this matter was similar in the Ionian Isles. The gallant Commodore, the Member for Marylebone, after having pleaded so warmly the other night against the reduction of the complement of men in the naval service, would surely support the same view of the case of the army, and not wish to decrease the comforts or injure the health of the soldier. He quite agreed with the gallant Commodore in what he had said upon that subject, though he would not follow him to the length of saying that, in consequence of the deficiency in the complement of men for the Mediterranean fleet, if the French had come down upon the British, they would have been defeated. He thought the practice of the gallant Commodore would in such a case have been directly at variance with his observations in that House and that he would have shown the enemy from the quarter-deck of the Powerful, that he was not acting under the influence of the opinions he had expressed here. Indeed, he was firmly of opinion, considering the skill of the British, not only in regard to seamanship, but in gunnery, and their dauntless courage, that even had the fleet been diminished still more in its complement of men, the French would not have beaten them, had they tried.
Sir C. Napierdid not wish it to go forth to the whole country, that he had led the hon. and gallant Gentleman, or that House, or the world, to believe that the British navy would not have done their duty, and have done it well, had they been brought into action with an enemy. But he would tell the House of Commons again, and he would have the whole country know it, that he most conscientiously and firmly believed that if the British navy had come into contact with the French after they began their operations in Syria, and got sickly, and that if they had done their duty to the utmost of their power, they would have been defeated. It was not right nor proper to despise an enemy too much. The French had made such progress in gunnery, and equipment, and seamanship, that they commanded respect. They ought to remember that America
172
was once despised, and that at a time when there was a civilian at the head of the navy an inefficient fleet was sent out, and the result was, that the British flag was tarnished. He warned the Government against pursuing a like course in these days.
Sir E. Troubridgeregretted much to hear the observations which had been just made by the gallant Commodore in respect to a question understood to be the same that had been discussed on a former evening—namely, as to whether or not the British fleet in the Mediterranean would have been defeated had it encountered the French under the circumstances described. Now, he never could concur in the idea entertained by the gallant Commodore, and he would boldly say, that the commander-in-chief of that fleet never did concur in any such idea. He knew that at the time there were in the Mediterranean 750 supernumerary marines, who would have been on shipboard had it been considered necessary; and he would further say boldly, and without fear of contradiction, that the result of an action with the French fleet would have been quite different from that stated by the gallant Commodore. He had not expected to speak on this subject; he was sorry that he was out of the House just at the commencement of the present discussion; but he could not come in and hear even the few sentences he had heard from his gallant Friend—for he was sure that he might venture to call him so—without rising to say that his notion of a British fleet being defeated was most extraordinary. He was grievously sorry the other night when he heard so many British officers in that House not upholding the service, but doing the very reverse. He should have spoken on that occasion, but he gave way to some hon. Gentlemen, and he must say now, that he should never regret having taken no part in that debate, for it did no credit to the British navy. Many observations that were made were doubtless well meant, but they were both ill-judged and ill-timed. He felt that to go into the question, whether a civilian or a naval man should be first Lord of the Admiralty, would be out of place now, and he would leave that and other points which had been touched upon until a future opportunity.
Sir C. Napierrose to explain. The gallant Officer was mistaken. When he

173
was in command at Sidon they received 250 marines only, and they were not enough to make up the deficiency caused by sickness. They were 100 men short of their complement, and had 134 sick. He maintained, that if the French fleet with 800 or 900 men had come down upon them, to such a pitch had they carried gunnery, that at the first broadside 100 men would have been knocked off, and where would the British have been then? The gallant Officer did not know what it was to be beaten, but he did. He fought a French ship once in the West Indies, and had his leg broken, and his mainmast knocked away; and had the enemy stuck to him, he should have been a dead man.
Captain Layardthought 6d. a day after twenty-five years' hard service not a sufficient pension for soldiers, but he believed that the right hon. Gentleman, who was a friend to soldiers, would increase it, were he able. He wished, however, to ask the right hon. Gentleman, if there was an intention of altering the system under which soldiers obtained their discharge. According to the present regulations the prices paid for a discharge were as follows:—

Cavalry.

Infantry.

Service

£

£

Under 7 years

30

25

10

25

13

11

21

15

12

15

10

14

12

5

15

6

Free.

He believed, that if the prices of a discharge were diminished, men would be less reluctant to enter the army, and the friends of many would be willing to let them remain for a time before they bought them off, in order that they might enjoy the advantageous results of a course of discipline which was calculated to reclaim the idle and dissolute, and make them eventually good members of society. He thought the present regulations unjust to the old subalterns, and put it to gallant Gentlemen in the House whether there was a class of men more deserving of consideration. He agreed with what had fallen from the hon. and gallant Officer with respect to the necessity of increasing our troops in India; but he should have mentioned the Burmese, who, if any fresh disaster should happen to the British, which God forbid! would, he believed, also attack them.
Sir H. Hardingewished to say, in reply to the observations of the gallant Officer opposite (Captain Layard) upon the subject of discharges, that in 1829 he introduced the system of allowing soldiers to obtain their discharge at a price in proportion to their length of service; and although it was feared by many officers that the plan would very much disturb the regiments of the line, it was found to operate most beneficially. Questions like that under the consideration of the House ought to be considered in connexion with the finances of the country. Speaking from the experience of the last ten years, he must confess, that he agreed with the gallant Officer, that perhaps a shorter period of service might be advantageously introduced. The question was deserving of the consideration of her Majesty's Government. With reference to what had been stated on the subject of the warrant of 1829, he must observe, that he still adhered to the opinion which he had repeatedly urged to the House on that subject. When he brought forward that warrant in 1829, it was submitted to the Duke of Wellington's Government, and it received his approbation, as well as the approval of distinguished military authorities. The hon. Member for Coventry stated to the House, that it was not his wish to press his motion to a division, provided the Government assured the hon. Gentleman that a large portion of the force was destined for service in China, and the East-Indies. There was already a very large British force in that country, a larger force than had been there at any previous period—seven battalions alone were destined for that part of the country. With regard to the half-pay of the army, a considerable reduction had been made since the period to which the hon. Member referred. The reduction had been 6,000 out of 17,426 on the half-pay list. He could, if it were necessary, go through the individual items and figures to which the attention of the hon. Member for Coventry had been directed, and answer satisfactorily any objections which he had brought against them; but, were he to do so, much of the valuable time of the House would be unnecessarily occupied. There had been considerable reduction in the number of half-pay lieutenants; great difficulty was experienced in inducing lieutenants who had been on half-pay to return to active duty, as nearly

175
half a century had elapsed since the last war. Since that period 6,709 officers had paid the debt of nature, and were no longer a charge upon the public. He thought that this statement ought to sufficiently satisfy the economical appetite of the hon. Member for Coventry. It should also be recollected that many regiments had served fifteen, seventeen, and twenty years in India.
Viscount Howickwas pleased to hear the hon. and gallant Officer state, that a question of this character ought to be viewed in relation to the financial condition of the country. He was glad to perceive, since the hon. and gallant Officer had left that (the Opposition) side of the House, that his views on such subjects had undergone some modification, and that he now thought it necessary to view, in connexion with them, the state of the public finances. He wished to refer to the state of the barrack department in the West Indies. During last year no discussion on this subject took place when the Ordnance estimates were under the consideration of the House. He had not anticipated that Lord Vivian would cease to belong to the House, for he had intended to bring the subject connected with the state of the barracks in the West Indies before the attention of Parliament, but was prevented by circumstances, which it was not necessary for him to explain, from doing so. He had no wish to cast imputation on Lord Vivian, for the question to which he had alluded was one of many years standing.
Sir H. Hardinge, in explanation, staled, that the noble Lord who had just addressed the House had misunderstood what he had said. His opinions had not, as the noble Lord had represented, undergone any alteration since he had arrived at that (the Ministerial) side of the House. According to the warrant of 1829 the pension was to be 6d. per day, the period of service was to be twenty-five instead of twenty-one years, and that arrangement was submitted to the highest authorities, and had been approved of. He was satisfied that a great modification must take place in the existing warrant; and, although he was not then prepared to state what he considered ought to be the alteration, he hoped that before the next year's estimates were laid upon the Table, he would be able to submit to the House a motion on the subject which would be satisfactory to the noble Lord.
Lord J. Russellobserved, that he hoped hon. Members would not fall into the error of believing that the soldier after twenty years service was entitled to a pension. He had received several letters from colonels in the command of regiments in which complaints were made that a proper distinction was not made between deserving and undeserving soldiers, and that the latter often received as much pension as the former.
Mr. O'Connellwished to detain the House for one moment. He was pleased to hear what fell from the hon. and gallant Officer opposite, with reference to the administration of religious instruction to the troops stationed at the Ionian Islands during the period the hon. and gallant Member held an official appointment there. He understood that after an application to the noble Lord (Lord Howick), three Catholic chaplains were sent from this country to the Ionian Islands, and he could not but compliment the noble Lord on the promptitude with which he had complied with the hon. and gallant Officer's request. It was his intention to bring the subject connected with the communication of religious instruction to the Catholic soldiers serving in her Majesty's forces in other parts of the country under the notice of Parliament. The hon. Member then proceeded to make some allusions to the influence of party spirit in the army, and stated, that during the late disturbances in Canada he was pleased to perceive the absence of all such feelings. As he was informed that there was to be no recruiting in Canada, and that the officers were to be sent from this country, he would not occupy the time of the House by any additional observations on that part of the subject.
Vote agreed to.
On the question, that the sum of 3,581,575 l. be granted for her Majesty's land forces at home and abroad, exclusive of India,
Mr. Williamsmoved as an amendment that the vote should be reduced 63,580l being the difference between the sums paid to an equal number of soldiers of the line, and of the Guards.
Sir H. Hardingesaid, that question had been discussed for twenty years by committees of the House of Commons; framed upon what were termed liberal principles, and it had been found that this corps, in addition to the duty of attending

177
the Sovereign, performed the general duties of the metropolis in a superior manner. A residence in London was more expensive than one in country quarters, and there were various circumstances that should be taken into consideration, and which rendered it necessary that those troops should have some additional pay. He had heard with surprise the assertion that the officers were highly paid, when it was notorious that the junior officers gave their services to the public almost for nothing. There was no body of troops who had performed their duty better than the guards. Two battalions of them were now in Canada, and there was scarcely any European service, requiring highly efficient performance, for which the Horse-guards would not employ her Majesty's guards.
Colonel Rawdonsaid, the difference between an ensign's pay in the guards and one in the line was only 3d. a-day. When an officer lived in London in lodgings, at his own cost, and was without the advantage of a mess, his expenses were greater, and he was sure the committee would not think the difference too great when all circumstances were taken into consideration. He believed that the lieutenants in the guards received a difference of l0 d. a-day as compared with the pay of lieutenants in the line; but the same remarks applied to the lieutenants as to the ensigns of the guards; and in his estimation, considering the circumstances he had mentioned, the additional pay of officers in this branch of the service was by no means too great.
Colonel Thomas Woodconcurred with the gallant Officer who had just spoken. Whatever advantages the officers and men of the guards might possess, they were well earned and well deserved. It would not become him to institute a comparison between the guards and other regiments of the service; but this he might remark, that her Majesty's household troops were as good (and that was saying much) and as efficient as any branch of the British army.
Mr. Williamshad offered no opinion as to whether the pay of the guards was too much or too little. He had merely pointed out the difference in their pay as compared with the rest of the army, and conceiving that there was no sufficient ground for such a difference, he felt it his duty to take the sense of the committee upon it.
The committee divided on the amendment:—Ayes, 12; Noes, 144:—Majority, 132.

List of the AYES.

Blewitt, R. J.

O'Connell, J.

Brotherton, J.

Villiers, hn. C. P.

Buller, C.

Wawn, J. T.

Cobden, R.

Wood, B.

Curteis, H. B.

Fielden, J.

TELLERS.

Morris, D.

Bowring, Dr.

O'Connell, D.

Williams, W.

List of the NOES.

Acland, T. D.

Forbes, W.

Acton, Col.

Forester, hn. G. C. W.

Antrobus, E.

Forster, M.

Arkwright, G.

Fuller, A. E.

Bailey, J., jun.

Gaskell, J. Milnes

Baird, W.

Gladstone. rt. hn. W.E.

Baring, hon. W. B.

Gordon, hon. Capt.

Barneby, J.

Goulburn, rt. hon. H.

Baskerville, T. B. M.

Graham, rt. hn. Sir J.

Bateson, Sir R.

Greenall, P.

Beckett, W.

Grogan, E.

Bentinck, Lord G.

Halford, H.

Berkeley, hon. C.

Hamilton, W. J.

Bernard, Visct.

Hardinge, rt. hn. SirH.

Boldero, H. G.

Harris, J. Q.

Botfield, B.

Hepburn, Sir T. B.

Bramston, T. W.

Herbert, hon. S.

Broadley, II.

Hodgson, R.

Browne, hon. W.

Hope, hon. C.

Bruce, Lord E.

Hope, A.

Buller, Sir J. Y.

Hope, G. W.

Busfield, W.

Howard, hn. C. W. G.

Campbell, A.

Humphery, Mr. Ald.

Carnegie, hon. Capt.

Irton, S.

Chelsea, Visct.

James, Sir W. C.

Chetwode, Sir J.

Jermyn, Earl

Childers, J. W.

Johnson, W. G.

Clerk, Sir G.

Johnstone, A.

Cockburn, rt. hn. SirG.

Johnstone, Sir J.

Colebrooke, Sir T. E.

Jones, Capt.

Coote, Sir C. H.

Kemble, H.

Copeland, Mr. Ald.

Knatchbull, right hon.

Corry, rt. hon. H.

Sir E.

Cripps, W.

Knight, F. W.

Dawnay, hon. W. H.

Langston, J. W.

Denison, E. B.

Law, hon. C. E.

Dickinson, F. H.

Lawson, A.

Dodd, G.

Layard, Capt.

Douglas, Sir H.

Leicester, Earl of

Douglas, Sir C. E.

Lennox, Lord A.

Douglas, J. D. S.

Lincoln, Earl of

Drummond, H. H.

Lockhart, W.

Egerton, W. T.

Lygon, hon. General

Eliot, Lord

Mackenzie, T.

Escott, B.

Mackenzie, W. F.

Estcourt, T. G.B.

Mahon, Visct.

Ferguson, Sir R. A.

Mainwaring, T.

Ferrand, W. B.

Marsham, Visct.

Filmer, Sir E.

Martin, C. W.

Fitzalan, Lord

Martyn, C. C.

Fitzroy, Capt.

Masterman, J.

Ffolliott, J.

Morgan, O.

179

Mundy, E. M.

Somerset, Lord G.

Napier, Sir C.

Stanley, Lord

Nicholl, rt. hon. J.

Staunton, Sir G. T.

Paget, Lord W.

Stewart, J.

Patten, J. W.

Stuart, W. V.

Peel, rt. hon. Sir R.

Stuart, H.

Peel, J.

Sutton, hon. H. M

Plumridge, Capt.

Taylor, T. E.

Pollock, Sir F.

Tennent, J. E.

Praed, W. T.

Trotter, J.

Pringle, A.

Troubridge, Sir E. T.

Pusey, P.

Vere, Sir C. B.

Rae, rt. hn. Sir W.

Villiers, Visct.

Reade, W. M.

Vivian, J. E.

Rennie, G.

Wood, Col. T.

Round, C. G.

Wortley, hon. J. S.

Russell, Lord J.

Wyndham, Col.

Russell, J. D. W.

Young, J.

Scott, hon. F.

Young, Sir W.

Shaw, right hon. F.

TELLERS.

Sibthorp, Col.

Fremantle, Sir T.

Smollett, A.

Baring, H.

Vote agreed to.
Several other resolutions were agreed to.
On the question that 82,458 l. be granted to defray the charge of the volunteer corps,
Mr. Williamsconceiving that this force was not at all necessary, felt it his duty to take the sense of the committee upon the vote.
The committee divided:—Ayes 133; Noes 17:—Majority 116.

List of the AYES.

Acland, T. D.

Corry, right hon. H.

Acton, Col.

Courtenay, Visct.

Anson, hon. Col.

Cripps, W.

Antrobus, E.

Dawnay, hon. W. H.

Arkwright, G.

Denison, E. B.

Bailey, J., jun.

Dickinson, F. H.

Baird, W.

Dodd, G.

Baring, hon. W. B.

Douglas, Sir H.

Barneby, J.

Douglas, Sir C. E.

Baskerville, T. B. M.

Douglas, J. D. S.

Bateson, Sir R.

Drummond, H. H.

Beckett, W.

Duncombe, hon. A.

Bentinck, Lord G.

East, J. B.

Boldero, H. G.

Eaton, R. J.

Botfield, B.

Egerton, W. T.

Bramston, T. W.

Eliot, Lord

Broadley, H.

Escott, B.

Browne, hon. W.

Estcourt, T. G. B.

Bruce, Lord E.

Ferrand, W. B.

Buller, Sir J. Y.

Filmer, Sir E.

Campbell, A.

Fitzalan, Lord

Carnegie, hn. Capt.

Fitzroy, Captain

Chelsea, Visct.

Ffolliott, J.

Chetwode, Sir J.

Forbes, W.

Childers, J. W.

Forester, hon. G.C.W.

Clerk, Sir G.

Forster, M.

Cockburn, rt. h. Sir G.

Fuller, A. E.

Coote, Sir C. H.

Gaskell, J. Milnes

Copeland, Mr. Aid.

Gladstone, rt. hn. W.E.

180

Gordon, hon. Capt.

Masterman, J.

Graham, rt. hon. Sir J.

Morgan, O.

Greenall, P.

Mundy, E. M.

Grogan, E.

Nicholl, rt. hon. J.

Halford, H.

Paget, Lord W.

Hamilton, W. J.

Patten, J. W.

Hardinge, rt. hn. SirH.

Peel, rt. hon. Sir R.

Hepburn, Sir T. B.

Peel, J.

Herbert, hon. S.

Pollock, Sir F.

Hodgson, It.

Pringle, A.

Hope, hon. C.

Pusey, P.

Hope, A.

Rae, rt. hon. Sir W.

Hope, G. W.

Rawdon, Col.

Humphery, Mr. Ald.

Reade, W. M.

Irton, S.

Round, C. G.

James, Sir W. C.

Scott, hon. F.

Jermyn, Earl

Shaw, rt. hn. F.

Johnson, W. G.

Sibthorp, Col.

Johnstone, A.

Smollett, A.

Johnstone, Sir J.

Somerset, Lord G.

Jones, Capt.

Stanley, Lord

Kemble, H.

Staunton, Sir G. T.

Knatchbull, right. hon.

Stewart, J.

Sir E.

Stuart, W. V.

Langston, J. W.

Stuart, H.

Law, hon. C. E.

Sutton, hon. H. M.

Lawson, A.

Taylor, T. E.

Leicester, Earl of

Tennent, J. E.

Lennox, Lord A.

Trotter, J.

Lincoln, Earl of

Vere, Sir C. B.

Lockhart, W.

Villiers, Visct.

Lygon, hon. General

Vivian, J. E.

Mackenzie, T.

Wortley, hon. J. S.

Mackenzie, W. F.

Wyndham, Col.

Mahon, Visct.

Young, J.

Mainwaring, T.

Young, Sir W.

Marsham, Visct.

TELLERS.

Martin, C. W.

Fremantle, Sir T.

Martyn, C.C.

Baring, H.

List of the NOES.

Berkeley, hon. Capt.

Martin, J.

Blewitt, R. J.

Morris, D.

Brotherton, J.

Napier, Sir C.

Bu

Powell, C.

Busfie-W.

Villiers, hon. C. P.

Cobden, R.

Wawn, J. T.

Curteis, H. B.

Wood, B.

Feilden, J.

TELLEBS.

Harford, S.

Bowring, Dr.

Howard, hn. C. W. G.

Williams, W.

Vote agreed to, as was several other resolutions.
On the question that 141,493 l. be granted for the charge of pensions to widows of officers,
Mr. Williamsbegged to know upon what principle these pensions were granted; and whether they were paid to the widows of officers who died after retirement from the service, as well as to the widows of officers who died in actual service.
Sir H. Hardingereplied, that the wi-

181
dow of no officer who had retired on half-pay, unless he did so from woundsor other infirmities contracted in the service, was entitled to a pension. Neither was any pension given to any widow unless her husband had been ten years in the service. The widow of no officer who married after sixty years of age was entitled to a pension.
Vote agreed to. The other votes also agreed to.
On the question that 41,000 l. be granted for allowances, compensation and emoluments, in the nature of superannuation or retired allowances to persons formerly belonging to the several public military departments,
Mr. Williamsexpressed his disapprobation of what appeared to him to be the very large amount of retired allowances made in the case of clerks who had served in the Ordnance department.
Sir H. Hardingeexplained, that the allowances to which the hon. Gentleman referred were made to the senior officers of what during the war was a very large department. These officers, during the time that their services were required, received very high salaries, and upon their retirement received a compensation correspondingly high.
Vote agreed to.

SUPPLY — NAVY ESTIMATES—CASE OF MR. ELTON.
On the question that 2,980 l. be granted for the salaries of officers and contingent expenses in the office of Registry of Merchant Seamen,
Mr. Curteisrose to bring under the notice of the House a question of some importance, involving the character of a young man formerly employed in her Majesty's naval service. For the express purpose of performing this duty he (Mr. Curteis)had that day travelled upwards of sixty miles (not upon a railroad), and at great personal inconvenience to himself. Wishing to act in a perfectly open and straightforward manner in the matter he had undertaken, the first thing he did on entering the House was to go to the gallant Captain (Captain Rous) opposite, and to tell him that he (Mr. Curteis) intended to take the very first opportunity of referring to what he (Captain Rous) had stated in the House the other night; and to assert that, according to what had been stated to him (Mr. Curteis), the statement then made by the gallant Captain was most incorrect.
182
He gave the gallant Captain every credit for wishing only to elicit the truth; and entertaining no other wish himself, he placed a certain channel of information — the Morning Chronicle — in the gallant Captain's hand, and said, "Will you do me the favour to look over the report, that I may know whether it is a just and fair account of what fell from you the other evening?" The gallant Captain said he was going to dinner; upon which he (Mr. Curteis) observed, that he would wait till ten o'clock before he endeavoured to say a word upon the subject. It was now past that hour, and he accordingly felt himself at liberty to open the matter to the House. He must, in the first place, say, that he differed very materially from the gallant Captain when he (the gallant Captain) said, that the Admiralty had not properly supported the discipline of the navy by remitting the remaining portion of the sentence passed by the court martial upon Mr. Elton; for, he would boldly say, that he was speaking the sentiments of society generally, and of the world at large, when he said that the Admiralty, in remitting the remainder of the sentence, had acted justly and properly. Society in general, and the world at large, considered that the sentence originally passed on Mr. Elton was an unnecessarily severe one. Though an opponent of the Government, he would say, that he thought the Admiralty had exercised a sound discretion in extending their clemency to Mr. Elton. He was not aware that he was at issue with those hon. Members, captains in the navy, on the point of the want of etiquette, but he begged to remind them that the application was made from a midshipman to a gentleman who had been but recently made a captain, and who had been serving in another ship as lieutenant. The application was not as the hon. Member for Westminster said, for the boat, in order to put a friend of Mr. Elton's ashore, but merely that the boat, after stopping at Captain Williams's ship, might be allowed to go on to the coast of Syria to land Mr. Elton's friend, which might occupy a quarter of an hour or twenty minutes more. No answer was given to the young officer, but as a proof that the request was not unreasonable, one of the lieutenants actually put the same request to Captain Williams. He was not surprised that the midshipmen had expressed such marked

183
sympathy for Mr. Elton, when they found such distinctions made between them and those in command. He need not remind the House that midshipmen had the same feelings as their superior officers, and that they were, generally speaking, their equals in birth and education; and he thought it hard that a midshipman was not allowed in polite terms to prefer a request to his superior officer in the way Mr. Elton had done. The favour was nothing, and though there might be, as the gallant Captain, the Member for Westminster said, a want of etiquette in preferring such a request, he could not understand how it could amount to a breach of discipline, and he would consider it very ungracious in any captain to refuse so humble a request. He thought that Captain Williams erred in this respect. He did not wish to say one word to the prejudice of any of the parties, and although he had seen Mr. Elton on the subject, he could assure the House that he had only taken it up on public grounds. He now came to the point on which he did not hesitate to say, that he considered Mr. Elton to be in the wrong. He did not stand there to defend the letter which Mr. Elton had written, in a moment of irritation and anger, to Captain Williams. He did not hesitate to say, that he thought Mr. Elton almost deserved to be dismissed from the service for that imprudent letter, but did he not afterwards offer an apology? He believed that he was correct in saying, that Mr. Elton had taken the first opportunity to offer an apology? But what did Captain Williams demand? Not only an apology for the second letter, but likewise an apology for the original letter, requesting the favour to be allowed to put a friend ashore. Now, for the second letter, no doubt an apology was required, and ought to have been promptly given. After this, Mr. Elton was brought to a court-martial, and although he did not mean to say, that there had been any culpable irregularity in this proceeding, yet there did appear to him to have been some very unusual circumstances connected with that court-martial. He believed it was an indisputable fact, that one of the officers sitting as a judge on that occasion was called forward to give his testimony as a witness for the prosecution. He believed that the same officer had likewise been, examined on the part of the defendant; but this only made the proceeding the
184
more irregular. He believed that it seemed a strange thing, not only to professional men, but to the world, that a person should be first broke, dismissed the service, and afterwards when he no belonged to the service, committed to prison for an almost indefinite time—indefinite, inasmuch as the sentence was, that his imprisonment was not to commence until after his arrival in England. The consequence was, that Mr. Elton, for three or four months before the period of his imprisonment, was in a state of close arrest, and in the condition of a prisoner. He thought the Admiralty had only done an act of justice in shortening the term of imprisonment. The hon. Member for Westminster (Captain Rous) had asserted that the additional punishment had been inflicted because the young midshipmen, not only of the ship, but of the fleet, intended to give their comrade, Mr. Elton, a triumphant dinner [An hon. Member: "A blow out"]; and for this the young man was sentenced to receive six months' additional imprisonment. The gallant Admiral opposite shook his head; but he appealed to the hon. Member for Westminster himself if he had not asserted this to be the case. On the present occasion he (Mr. Curteis) was rather taking the Admiralty under his shelter and protection, than imputing any blame to them; he not only approved of what they had done, but he thought they had exercised a sound discretion, and that they had shown an independent feeling in not allowing themselves to be shackled by others on this question. This was his own opinion, and he believed it would be reechoed by all without that House. He believed that the Admiralty would have remitted Mr. Elton's sentence altogether on his return to this country, if he had not by some fatality or other, again got himself into a scrape. He accused the hon. Member for Westminster, not for his having asserted that Mr. Elton gave the lie to the commander of the ship in which he was brought home, but for his not having stated the extenuating circumstances. He would read to the House the information which had been given to him, and which he thought would fully show that he had not brought forward any trifling or frivolous accusation. He had visited Mr. Elton at the Marshalsea, and, showing him the document which he was about to read, he asked him if it was correct in every particular. Mr. Elton stated that

185
it was. Although two gentlemen were present on that occasion, Mr. Elton did not feel altogether satisfied with the assurance he had then given, but called on him (Mr. Curteis) at his lodgings, and put the paper into his hands, which he read distinctly, telling Mr. Elton to point out any thing that appeared to be incorrect. The only particular mentioned by Mr. Elton as incorrect was the use of the word bailiff in designating the messenger of the Admiralty who accompanied him to London. He also said that the statement was not at all exaggerated, but rather the contrary. Now he (Mr. Curteis) did not defend the conduct of Mr. Elton towards Captain Lawrence, but he asserted that there were extenuating circumstances, and to suppose that Mr. Elton gave the lie to Captain Lawrence without any provocation, would only be to suppose that the young man was half cracked. He, with the permission of the House, would read the statement of Mr. Elton, which, as he had stated, he was assured by that person was correct in all particulars. It was as follows:—
"After the very extraordinary and unusually severe sentence had been passed on Mr. Elton, he was conveyed on board the flagship Howe, where he remained for nearly five weeks, confined in a cock-pit cabin with a sentry over him, with permission to take exercise upon the poop or middle deck, but no officer in the ship allowed to speak to him. He was then sent on board the Prometheus steamer to Gibraltar."
He felt bound to say, that the commander of that ship had acted in the most feeling manner towards the prisoner he permitted him every favour he could, and allowed him to associate with the officers of the ship. He did not know the name of the commander, but he felt bound to say that such conduct was much to his credit.
"At Gibraltar he was put on board the Hastings, Captain Lawrence, in which ship he was again placed in close confinement in a cock-pit cabin, allowed to walk only on the forecastle, and the starboard side of the main deck among the men—nobody on board the ship being permitted to speak to him, with the exception of the servant who brought his meals. He was not allowed the use of wine or spirits—some of these restrictions were taken off when the Hastings arrived at the Helens. Mr. Elton was on board this ship nearly a month. He was then taken from the Hastings in the custody of two messengers,
186
and conducted to London seated between those two men in a second class carriage, on the Southampton railroad, like a common felon, exposed to the gaze of everybody—and taken to the Marshalsea prison. This does appear harsh treatment for a young man nineteen years of age, born and educated as a gentleman, a member of an old and a highly respected family, his father the eldest son of Sir Abraham Elton, Bart, of Clevedon Court, Somerset. Before Mr. Elton's arrival in England, his family were given to understand that the 'Imprisonment' would be remitted, but in consequence of a complaint having been forwarded to the Admiralty by Captain Lawrence, it has been decided that the sentence should be carried into effect."
He begged to call the attention of the House to the facts of this part of the case, for he thought it would show that Mr. Elton had received provocation for stating what he had done, and that he conceived himself no longer amenable to martial-law, because he no longer belonged to the service. ["Oh, oh!"] He certainly had been dismissed the service, and no longer wore the uniform. The statement of this part of the case was as follows:—
"Mr. Elton was put on board the Hastings, and was waiting on the quarter-deck for orders, and was talking to one of the mates of the ship, when Captain Lawrence rushed out of his cabin, and in a very loud and angry tone upbraided the mate for daring to speak to a man who was disgraced, and was a disgrace to the service; and, turning to Mr. Elton, said,' How dare you, Sir, speak to one of my officers?—a person who is disgraced,' and other language to that effect. This unfortunate young man, being goaded to desperation by the apparently never-ceasing persecution to which he was subjected, under the impression he was no longer in the navy, was induced so far to forget himself as to tell Captain Lawrence that 'If he said he was disgraced, he told a lie, and was a liar.' He afterwards repented having made use of these strong expressions, and made an apology to Captain Lawrence, which he accepted."
He thought that this made out a case of considerable provocation. He believed that he was correct in saying, that if Mr. Elton in his anger had struck Captain Lawrence he would have been amenable to the civil and not to the military law. Greatly to the praise of Captain Lawrence, he (Mr. Curteis) believed that he had exerted himself to obtain a remission of the sentence on Mr. Elton. He did not wish to impute to Captain Williams anything beyond a want of courtesy, and he would admit that Mr. Elton was deservedly

187
dismissed; but if the additional term of imprisonment was imposed in consequence of the dinner proposed to be given to Mr. Elton by his brother midshipmen, he thought there could be no justification for such severity. He did think that Captain Lawrence had given Mr. Elton provocation; but though he would not defend the language made use of by the young man to that officer, he wished the House to remember that Mr. Elton conceived that he was not in the navy at the time, nor was he. He accused Captain Lawrence of nothing save a haughtiness in his manner, and of forgetting himself in his passion, which all men occasionally did. Nor did he wish to bring any charge against Captain Williams, who he believed was highly esteemed as a good and efficient officer. He saw that the gallant Captain below him (Captain Berkeley), was about to bring down on him all the terrors of the Thunderer. He could assure that gallant Captain, and the gallant Captain the Member for Westminster, that he would not have mooted the question if they had allowed it to rest. The gallant Captain (Captain Berkeley) had told the House that he could have obtained Mr. Elton's dismissal from the service for his conduct while under his command. He believed the real charge which the gallant Captain bad against the young man was, that he had exceeded his leave of absence by ten or twelve days. This, no doubt, was a great irregularity, and since the gallant Captain had not followed it up, he had no hesitation in saying that the young man was under great obligations to him; but he did not think that the fault was of that fatal magnitude which the gallant Member supposed it to be. He had brought this subject forward as an independent Member, and he conscientiously believed that he had asserted nothing which could not in every tittle be borne out by facts. No one could feel more indignant than he should feel, if it should turnout that he had been deceived in any of the statements he had made; but he believed he stated nothing but the truth, and all that he could say in conclusion was, that he entirely approved of the conduct of the Admiralty, in remitting the sentence passed by the court-martial on Mr. Elton.
Captain Berkeleywould not begin in the same strain as the hon. Member for Rye, although that hon. Member had, in
188
the conclusion of his speech, attempted to qualify his remarks by an admission that he (Captain Berkeley) had acted with mercy towards Mr. Elton. He rejected the praise of the hon. Member, for he felt that if he had properly discharged his duty towards Mr. Elton, neither the House nor the public would ever have heard of his name, for he would have been turned out of the service without one word being said upon the matter. He spoke this with confidence, as neither Mr. Elton nor his Friends were unknown to him, as they were to the hon. Member; nor was Captain Williams unknown to him, as he was to the hon. Member. Mr. Elton's Friends happened to be political supporters of a relative of his, who at the present time had a seat in the House of Commons; therefore, if he had any feelings towards Mr. Elton, they would naturally be favourable and friendly rather than adverse. Mr. Elton joined the Hercules when he had the command of that ship, and when Captain Williams was lieutenant of the ship. It was on his recommendation that Lieutenant Williams was promoted to be a captain on the occasion of the coronation brevet, and that recommendation was grounded on the excellent temper and good feeling which Lieutenant Williams had uniformly displayed. It was true that Mr. Elton had received from him a certificate on leaving the Hercules, but it was well known that such a certificate was merely an official document given to a party to enable him to carry out his time. It was by no means a mark of approval of the conduct of the individual to whom it was given. Mr. Elton was but a very few months the shipmate of Lieutenant (afterwards Captain) Williams. Upon joining the Thunderer, he wrote to Mr. Elton's father, saying that if he wished to have a provision for his son, he thought he could name him to his ship. Mr. Williams had at that time left the Hercules and become a commander, and was appointed to the Thunderer. He could not take upon himself to say whether, at the time of" Mr. Elton's delinquencies, he was in the Thunderer with Captain Williams or not, but at all events Captain Williams was in full possession of a complete knowledge of all the misconduct of which Mr. Elton had been guilty up to the time the ship left Plymouth sound. There were no delinquencies on Mr. Elton's part which were not known to Captain Williams. As

189
far as he was concerned, this question would never have been again mooted. He would have been the last person to have adverted to it; for he was perfectly satisfied with the answer which he had received from the hon. and gallant Admiral opposite (Sir George Cockburn) when he (Captain Berkeley) had expressed a hope that the obloquy which had been thrown upon the officers whom he had left in the Mediterranean, and which had also been thrown upon Captain Williams, who had been promoted through his means, would be removed. The answer given by the gallant Admiral was so satisfactory, that he had entertained the belief that it would have set the question at rest, and that neither the House nor the country would have heard another word about Mr. Elton or the court-martial. This, however, had not been the case. The hon. Member for Rye had said, that he (Captain Berkeley) had mooted the question. He had done no such thing. He was thoroughly satisfied with the answer he had got from the administration at the Board of Admiralty. When he had first joined the ship to which Mr. Elton belonged several complaints were made against him, such as going on shore when he pleased, without authority. Of course, it became necessary to put a stop to this; but immediately he did so Mr. Elton deserted. Now, he would put it to the House whether, if any seaman under his command had taken upon himself to act in that manner he could have maintained the discipline of his ship and the honour and character of a British man-of-war, without giving that man three dozen at the gangway. Then, was he to be told that a mere boy of eighteen or nineteen, who conducted himself in that way, and who was guilty of desertion from his ship, was to be put upon the same footing with any other young man whose character was unimpeached, and who had not misconducted himself. Was it to be said that a young man like Mr. Elton was to desert—not for a week, not for ten days, as had been said—but for such a period, that if he had not returned within a very few days, the mark of a deserter would have been placed against his name upon the ship's books? And how did he return? Not voluntarily, but he was brought back by his brother; and if he had not been so brought back, the mark would have been entered against his name, and it would not have been in his power to have saved him. This was
190
the sort of gentleman on whose behalf the hon. Member for Rye stood up, professing at the same time the greatest interest for the service of the navy ! The elder brother, with feelings which did him great credit, made an appeal to him to look over this young man's faults. Interested as he acknowledged himself to have been in the young man's welfare, and knowing the respectability of his family, still his reply was, that it was impossible for the young man to remain in his ship; such an example to others would be most prejudicial; but he would allow him (Mr. Elton) to join any other ship if he could find a captain who was willing, after being told of his having deserted, and of his general conduct, to take him. Captain Barnard agreed to take Mr. Elton into the Cambridge being acquainted with the reasons for his quitting the Thunderer; but he at the same time said to Captain Barnard, "Although the certificate he was about to give to Mr. Elton was merely an official document to carry him through his time in the Thunderer, yet he would not give the certificate to Mr. Elton, but would give it to Captain Barnard, who should retain it for twelve months; and if, at the end of that time, Captain Barnard should approve of Mr. Elton's conduct, he was then at liberty to give the certificate to him." Under all the circumstances, he (Captain Berkeley) felt, that the clemency he had shown to-wards Mr. Elton had been most incautiously exercised. If he had not shown that clemency, he might have escaped the animadversions that had been passed upon him, and he should not now have had occasion to trouble the House upon the subject. Then, with respect to the conduct of Mr. Elton towards Captain Williams, on board the Cambridge. In the first place, Captain Williams's ship (being a steamer) might have been four or five miles distant from the Cambridge, which was a line-of-battle ship. While on board, Mr. Elton, a subaltern, took upon himself to ask Captain Williams the use of his boat. Now this was of itself one of the greatest pieces of impertinence that a mate could have been guilty of towards a Captain; and when it was considered that Captain Williams knew the whole of Mr. Elton's previous conduct, the offensiveness of the act was considerably aggravated. He would appeal to any hon. Member in the House belonging to the army upon this subject. It was a fact thoroughly well

191
known that a naval captain's boat was of as much importance to him, when waiting by the side of a ship, as the Duke of Wellington's charger was to his Grace when standing at his door. And for a junior officer in the navy to ask a captain to be permitted to use his boat would have been no more justifiable than for a junior officer in the army to ask the Duke of Wellington to lend him his charger to ride five miles. [The hon. Member for Rye cried "Hear, hear."] The hon. Member might not understand the nature of the service, but Mr. Elton did. He knew that no commander, no lieutenant, would have asked Captain Williams for the use of his boat. That was the etiquette. The etiquette might be wrong; but the hon. Member might not be aware that there might have been five or six men employed in that boat, for many hours, by the captain. He might not know that the captain might not choose to have those men employed in rowing the boat four or five miles to the shore, and four or five miles back again, to please a subaltern; he might not choose that his men should go on shore, and into a town, where liquor might be had in plenty. All these things might not be Known to the hon. Gentleman; they might not be know to civilians, but they were well known to officers in the navy; and therefore it was, that they did not blame, in the wholesale manner in which the hon. Member for Rye had done, those who took the part of Captain Williams at the court-martial. He might have gone farther, and said, that if they had taken Captain Williams's boat to the shore— that if the boat was what was called "down in the water," a watch must have remained up in order to hoist up the boat. All these circumstances taken into consideration, he considered the conduct of Captain Williams to have been perfectly proper, who, on receipt of Mr. Elton's note, said, "Tell him there is no answer." And upon his honour and word, if Mr. Elton, knowing as he did that young man's character, as Captain Williams also knew it, had asked him for the use of his boat, he should have sent for him, and had him up on the quarter deck, and have reprimanded him for his impertinence. ["Hear, hear !"] Hon. Gentlemen might say "hear, hear," and might think him to be using harsh language. But, thank God, he had been brought up in a school of strict discipline, and he was proud to say, that he had never yet left a ship with-
192
out the hearty cheers of the crew, and he might say, without blessings being poured upon his head by every man and officer on board. If the hon. Gentleman, the Member for Rye, wished to be convinced of this, let him ask those who were connected with the ship which he (Captain Berkeley) lately commanded, and where he was supposed to exercise such harshness; let him inquire what was the scene which took place at Gibraltar, when he gave up the command of that ship to which the hon. Gentleman had so often and so pointedly alluded—the Thunderer. He believed that he had now said enough on this subject;—he certainly had said enough to prove that Mr. Elton was a dangerous character to be in the navy; he thought he had also said enough to prove that Captain Williams was perfectly right in refusing to answer an application from Mr. Elton, which, if it had been stringently construed, might have been treated as a very serious act of insubordination; and he certainly thought he had said quite enough to show, that the court-martial was right in the sentence they had pronounced. Before he sat down, he begged leave to tell the hon. Gentleman, the Member for Rye, that he did not believe that there was any tribunal where more justice was done, or more leniency shown, than in a naval court-martial, and that the practice invariably was, when a person was sent to be tried before a naval court-martial, to take the previous character of the individual into consideration, and to give it its due and proper weight.
Captain Roussaid there was a great difference between the hon. Member for Rye and himself upon the subject, and he had no doubt when the hon. Member had commanded a ship as long as he (the hon. Member) had, he would be a better and probably a wiser man. Captain Williams knew that Elton was a discarded midshipman from the Thunderer, and therefore, for Elton to ask Captain Williams for the use of his boat was a great piece of impertinence, which he never could have been guilty of. What happened? An apology was dictated to Mr. Elton by two superior officers, who would never have recommended him to have signed what they would not have signed themselves; but Elton refused to sign it—he, a young man of eighteen, refused to do so. Some time after, indeed, he sent the apology,

193
but it was then too late. A court-martial took place; it sentenced him to dismissal from the service, and to six months' imprisonment. If the young man had been in the French or American service, he would, in all probability, have been considered in the light of a felon, for it would have been regarded in those services as a very grave offence. Well, this young officer being about to be discharged, was considered by himself and others as an ovation, if not a triumph. If he had been on the court-martial, he would, for that offence alone, have sentenced him to six months' imprisonment in some prison in England. Then as to his conduct towards Captain Lawrence, what happened? Being a prisoner, Elton came on board in plain clothes, and walked on the quarter-deck. Captain Lawrence saw him in familiar conversation with one of his officers. Captain Lawrence reprimanded his own officer for holding intercourse with Elton, and most justly so; saying that he was a disgrace to the service. What was the behaviour of this youth? He a boy of eighteen, said to a man of sixty, "You tell a lie; you are a liar." If he had been in Captain Lawrence's position, he would have put Mr. Elton, with both legs in irons, and have put a gag in his mouth. He knew nothing of Mr. Elton; he did not care about Mr. Elton: it was a case where the discipline of the service was concerned; and he felt that the service would come to ruin, if, when a young man called a captain a liar, and a court-martial sentenced him to six months' imprisonment, the Admiralty remitted five months out of that six. Was that discipline? If any seaman had done what young Elton had done, he would have been hanged. If this was to be the state of the service, then he would at once say that the service was going to the dogs. Either the gallant admiral (Sir G. Cock-burn) had stultified the officers who sat on the court-martial, or he had stultified the Admiralty. If the court-martial was right, why, when the young man had doubled his crime, was his sentence remitted? Because, said the hon. Member for Rye, he was a member of an old and honourable family. He would say, so much the worse. He would have given him ten times as much punishment. Why was Mr. Elton to be the first to disgrace his family. Had this Elton been one of his nearest and dearest relations, he would rather have
194
lost his right hand than have gone to the Admiralty, and have asked the remittance of one day of his sentence. This he said for the sake of the service. He would have said to him, "You have behaved like a madman and like a fool; go to prison for six months, and thank God it is no worse; go to prison; improve your mind, and you will come out a better and a wiser man." He would say, in the words of Horace—
"Ira furor brevis est. Animum rege, qui nisi paret,
Imperat; hunc frænis, hunc tu compesce catenâ."
Captain Pechellwished to have some explanation as to the operation of the act for the registration of merchant seamen. He understood that the registration office was of no use or importance. When apprentices were bound to merchant ships it was the prerogative of the Admiralty, if any frauds were discovered in the indentures, to enlist them in the Navy. Officers were, therefore, appointed at the different rendezvous to enter the apprentices, and if the slightest fraud was found to exist in their indentures, they were taken out of the merchant ship, to the great distress of the owners, before the voyage was completed. It was not a proper policy in any way to distress the merchant marine, and that it so was considered appeared from the fact of pensioners of the navy being excused from serving, because they were allowed to enter the merchant service for the purpose of encouraging it, and contributing to man it. He knew that apprentices had been taken from trading vessels at Shoreham.
Sir Sidney Herbertsaid, that the strictest orders had been given by the Admiralty not to interfere with the merchant service; and if an apprentice deserted to the Queen's service, and was claimed by his master, he was always discharged from the Queen's service. In one instance it was true an apprentice had left the merchant service for the Queen's; and upon his being claimed by his master, the indentures were produced, and found to be invalid. No advantage was taken of that; but the young man, being of age, positively refused to go back, and his master knowing that the indentures were invalid, declined taking him before a magistrate. No blame, he thought, could attach to the Queen's service under such circum-

195
stances. He would now give to the House some information showing the beneficial operation of the act of his right hon. Friend for the registration of seamen. Since the passing of that act in 1835 there had been an increase in the Queen's service of 15,000 men, and in the merchant service of 30,000 men; making a total of about 45,000 men, that return excluded the last year, in which it was supposed that the numbers had increased in about the same rate as during the year before, when there was an increase of 10,000 men. The wages of seamen had risen 20 per cent. The apprentices who had entered since that act were, in addition to 50,000, the number at that time upwards of 39,000; so that there was under that act a steady supply for the merchant service, and of course for the Queen's service. The whole number of registered seamen at present was 258,000; and there were, besides them, engaged in boat-craft, and using vessels not licensed, about 180,000 men. It had been said that the introduction of steamers would diminish the use of sailing vessels, and, consequently, the demand for a supply of seamen; but since 1814 there had been an increase of 934 steamers, and by the side of that a concurrent increase of 3,610 sailing vessels! the total increase of vessels being thus 4,544. There were, however, unquestionably objections to the register established by that act; for there was no register of what number of men died, or what number deserted. [Mr. C. Wood asked the total number of registered seamen in France at the present moment?] The total number appeared to be 98,700, including men from eighteen years old to fifty, and of the mousses, or boys, 31,000; then they deducted one-twelfth for sickness, and 10,000 as deserters, making the net total of about 70,000; and the gross total of the French navy less by 5,000 than it was in 1795. Now, to show to the House how completely the French merchant service had been drained to supply its navy, he could inform the House that it was stated by parties engaged in the French fisheries, that in consequence of the number of persons taken by impressment a great number of their ships were laid up on the coast, because they were unable to man them; and that so far from a great navy fostering and encouraging the merchant service, it was like killing the goose,
196
which laid the golden egg; it had nearly destroyed the merchant service; and for supplying the navy itself, recourse was obliged to be had to the military conscripts. It appeared from the report of the American minister of the navy, that there the same difficulties existed, and that their plan of getting apprentices from the interior had not had the effect of affording them a good and steady supply, Here, on the contrary, since last September, we had fitted out fifty-four sail of one sort and another, all fully manned, and now either gone to their stations, or at Spithead, ready to sail. An example of the increased rapidity with which vessels were now fitted out, was given in the case of the Agincourt, which had been fitted out in fifteen days.
Sir C. Napierwas very glad to hear that no difficulty had been experienced in manning fifty-four ships, which the present Government had put in commission since September last. [Sir S. Herbert: The present Government found the ships in commission.] He wished to be informed how many ships had been put into commission since the hon. Member came into office. He admitted the excellence of the registration system introduced by the right hon. Baronet (Sir J. Graham); it did great credit to its author, and would be of essential service to the navy. In general, merchant seamen had great reluctance to enter the royal navy, but, he believed, the feeling was decreasing, and that in this respect registration was useful. It would, however, be an improvement, if every seaman were furnished with a copy of his register, which he might produce when necessary; at present, if a seaman were registered at Liverpool, he might proceed upon a voyage to the West Indies, return to Bristol, and again be registered there. Thus many might be registered twice over, and as long as this was the case, the number could not be accurately ascertained. He would recommend to the Admiralty, that different places in the dockyards, such as rope-makers, carpenters, smiths, sail-makers, &c., should be filled by men who could be well recommended from different ships. Such was not the case at present, and he believed that there was a good deal of jobbing in the dockyard appointments, to the neglect of the claims of the navy. The navy ought to be a stepping-stone to the dockyard; then men would be glad enough to

197
come into the service. The reason was, that the gentlemen on the Treasury Bench docked all those appointments. Six thousand a-year was spent for messengers; now was there one old soldier, sailor, or marine who got any of that 6,000 l. He would mention a case merely by way of illustration. The office of head-porter at the Admiralty became vacant, and he had asked the second porter whether he was likely to obtain the place. "No, Sir, (was the answer), for I have no interest with the first Lord." On inquiring who was likely to be appointed, the reply of the second porter was, that he believed it would be given to Lord Duncannon's butler, who had for some time kept company with Lady Minto's maid. The hon. and gallant Member proceeded to remark upon the fact that of the first 200 captains on the list seventy-six were above seventy years old, forty-nine between sixty-five and seventy, sixty-six between fifty-five and sixty-five, and only nine of less age than fifty-five years. If only 10,000 l. were added to the estimates, this evil might be removed; and he was confident that the country and the other branches of the public service would not grudge the money.
Resolution agreed to.
The next vote proposed was for the grant of 34,982 l. for the scientific department of the royal navy.
Mr. Cowperput a question respecting the admission of government inspectors into the schools of Greenwich Hospital. He wished to know whether they would be allowed to examine the state of the schools as formerly, and whether the regulations hitherto existing in those establishments would be preserved?
Sir Sidney Herbertanswered, that the present Board of Admiralty had paid all due attention to the important subject, and added, that the annual inspection would take place as usual. Some modifications in matters of detail had been introduced; but the system of instruction for the boys would be continued as at present. The discipline had been found rather defective, and that increased authority would be given to the masters.
Captain Fitzroyrose to express an earnest wish that a larger sum should be devoted to the scientific department of the navy. He believed that the case was different abroad; but at home the officers of the hydrographical department were exceedingly ill-paid. Captain Beaufort,
198
whose character was so well and so widely known, the House would be surprised to hear, only obtained a salary of 500 l. a year. It was true that he was allowed 300 l. a year additional for a house, but still the reward was very inadequate to the duty. Junior officers in other departments were paid 800 l. per annum, besides being provided with residences. [Captain Pechell, the hydrographer of the navy, has also his half-pay.] The Lords of the Admiralty had also their half-pay. He wished the House to compare the hydrographical department of the navy in this country with that in France, where the building set apart to it was as large as the whole of our Admiralty. The hon. Member for Halifax, on a former night, had made a self-congratulatory speech, in which he had taken credit to himself and his friends, for the present condition of the navy in this kingdom, when, in fact, its improved state of efficiency was in a great degree owing to the suggestions which had been published in the letters of a flag-officer. Before he sat down, he would say a few words with reference to the West-India mail steamers. This line of communication had been referred to by the hon. Member as if it was satisfactorily arranged; but he begged leave to caution the Government against putting any faith in the arrangements made, either with regard to the line chalked out for the vessels to take, or the time in which they were intended to perform their work. He had made inquiries, and he found that; they could not follow the track marked out for them, and that they would be unable to perform their present undertaking unless the Government came forward to give them much larger sums of money than they were now paid. The size of the vessels plying between the islands was quite inconsistent with the object to which they were devoted. Their size was exactly the same as that of the vessels on the line out and home from and to England; he knew that they had been required to be of that size, with a view to their carrying guns in case of need; but they were now found to be unfit for that purpose, and too large for the business in which they were engaged.
Mr. C. Woodsaid, that with regard to the hydrographer, all he could say was, that he was most happy on this, as on every other occasion, to bear his testimony to the great merit of that officer. He was aware how confined the space was to which

199
that Gentleman was confined in the discharge of his duties, but he was also aware how impossible it was, in the present state of the Admiralty, to afford him increased accommodation. With regard to the other observations of the hon. and gallant Member, he hardly thought, that the discussion of a vote for the payment of the expenses of the hydrographical department of the navy afforded a very favourable opportunity for reference to what he had said on another evening upon other subjects; but he could not help referring to a statement of the hon. and gallant Officer with respect to the supposed influence which the recommendations of a flag-officer had had upon the late navy board. He would take leave to observe on this point, that the suggestions of a flag-officer were made in the year 1838, while the improvements in the navy for which credit was claimed to him, had been made in the previous years, 1836 and 1837. He could hardly see, therefore, how the hon. and gallant Member could reconcile his argument with this fact. With reference to the statements made by the flag-officer, he would now repeat what he had said upon a former occasion, that statements so inaccurate as those advanced by him it had never fallen to his lot to observe; and that the inaccuracies were the less excusable because they might have been avoided by reference to documents open to him and the world. He could not help observing, that the same means of information were open to the hon. and gallant Member, as well as the report of what had fallen from him upon a former occasion, if he had chosen to take the trouble to refer to them. He should not now say anything upon the subject of the packet boats to the West Indies, but should defer the discussion of that subject until the vote was proposed.
Vote agreed to.
On the proposal of a vote of 124,449 l. for the salaries of officers and the expenses of the naval establishment at home,
Mr. C. Woodbegged to call the attention of the officers of the Government to the case of Mr. Elliott, who, by the alteration of the transport service, had been deprived of a situation of 500 l. a-year, to which he had been recently appointed, and which he had taken at considerable expense to himself. He ventured to express a hope, that in the event of a fair opportunity presenting itself, the exceedingly meritorious services of this officer, who had not confined his exertions to the particular
200
department of the navy to which he was attached, but had frequently volunteered into services of considerable risk and danger, would not be overlooked.
Sir G. Cockburnsaid, that the case of the gentleman in question would not be overlooked, but was already under the notice of the Admiralty.
Vote agreed to.
The question that 567,027 l. be granted for the payment of wages of artificers in the naval establishment at home,
Mr. C. Woodbegged to inquire what steps had been taken with regard to the abolition or retention of first-class men in the dockyards? It was a subject which had been considerably agitated, and his own opinion was rather in favour of the continuance of the existing plan.
Sir G. Cockburnsaid, that the subject was one upon which various opinions were entertained; and two Lords of the Admiralty were about to proceed upon an inquiry as to the proper course to be taken.
Mr. Tuffnellinquired, whether there was any intention on the part of the Board of Admiralty of raising the pensions of the ropemakers in the dockyard to an equality with those of the shipwrights, as had been lately done in the case of the caulkers? The ropemakers were a most zealous and laborious body of men, and deserved every consideration.
Sir G. Cockburnreplied, that the question was under the consideration of the Admiralty.
Mr. Tuffnellbegged to ask the Secretary of the Admiralty whether any steps were in contemplation to establish schools in the dockyards for the apprentices and sons of artificers? The late Board of Admiralty had, he understood, made arrangements to carry this scheme into execution, and the artificers of the yard, than whom a more meritorious class of public servants could not be found, had been led to expect, that a privilege of this nature might be granted to them. He trusted, that this expectation might not be disappointed.
Sir Sidney Herbertreplied that the measure alluded to by the hon. Member was likely to be carried into effect.
Vote agreed to.
On the question that 1,253,735 l. for naval stores, machinery, building and repairing store-houses, being proposed,
Dr. Bowringthought that the question of the naval stores of this country was in a very unsatisfactory state, and that the mode in which these votes were proposed,

201
embodying in one line a vote of so large a sum as was in this case demanded by the Government without any more minute explanation than was afforded by the general description of its purpose, was extremely inconvenient. With regard to the naval stores, he believed that if an account were required of them, none could be given; but he thought that it was a subject upon which the House ought to be furnished with some information.
Sir James Grahambegged to assure the hon. Gentleman that he laboured under an erroneous impression if he believed that it was not in the power of the naval administration of the country to render a most accurate statement of the exact position of the naval stores of the country. He held in his hand an aggregate statement of the quantities of all the principal articles from the year 1829 to 1841, and he had received that statement in consequence of a statement which had been made upon a former evening. It was true that that account had not been laid before the House by the Government, but he thought that they had exercised a wise discretion in abstaining from doing so. First, it would be observed that great inconvenience might arise from the production of such a statement, the purchase of naval stores being effected by tender and contract; and, secondly, he did not think that the condition of the public stores ought to be disclosed even during the time of peace. For these reasons, he thought that the House could not complain of the absence of information on this point.
Dr. Bowringinquired when an account had been last taken of the stores?
Sir J. Graham: In 1841.
Captain Pechellinquired on what grounds a naval officer superintending the dock-yard at Deal, had been removed, and his duties left to be performed by a clerk in charge.
Sir G. Cockburnsaid, the duties did not require a naval officer, and were efficiently performed by the clerk.
Sir Thomas Troubridgecould not agree with the gallant Admiral that the duties were properly performed by a clerk. It was necessary to carry out anchors and hawsers to vessels in distress, and to attend to the embarkation and debarkation of troops, and he did not think that a clerk was a fit person to perform such duties.
Sir C. Napiersaid, that this case really
202
required some explanation. Mr. Elliot had been removed from his situation in the Transport Department at Cove, and the ground assigned was, that the Government considered it desirable to place naval officers in such situations. But here, in a case almost exactly similar, they had removed a naval officer, and appointed a civilian, in direct violation of their own principle. This really required explanation.
Vote agreed to. The House res med. The committee to sit again.
Adjourned.

Preamble
MINOTES.] BILLS. Public—2a Duchy of Cornwall. Private.—1a Bunson's Naturalization.
PETITIONS PRESENTED. By Lord Redesdale, from Millers of Newry, against the Importation of Flour.—By a noble Lord, from Wigan, to Extend certain Provisions of the Metropolis Police Act to Rural and Trading Districts.— By Lord Campbell, Lord Brougham, the Marquess of Clanricarde, and Viscount Melbourne, from several places in Ireland, for Legalizing certain Marriages by Dissenters.—By the Bishop of London, from Inhabitants of the Metropolis, against Burial Grounds in Populous places; and from Otter Belchamp, against Voting Money for Maynooth.—From Galashiels, for the Repeal of the Corn and Provision Laws.

BANKRUPTCY LAWS — ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS.
Lord Campbellsaid, that in the Speech from the Throne, delivered on the 3rd of February, it was intimated that measures would be submitted to Parliament for amending the laws relating to bankruptcy, and for the improvement of the Ecclesiastical Courts in England and

121
Wales. They had now arrived at the 7th of March, and no such measures had been brought forward. Had the Government any such in contemplation?
The Lord Chancellorsaid, that a bill had been prepared for the amendment of the bankruptcy laws, which he should submit to the House on Friday next. The bill in reference to the Ecclesiastical Courts was under the care of the Secretary of State, and would be brought forward in the other House as soon as it was ready.

POSSESSION OF ALGIERS.
The Marquess of Clanricardehad a question to put to the noble Lord at the head of Foreign Affairs, upon a point of considerable interest and importance. There had appeared in the newspapers of Paris and this country reports of a conversation between the French ambassador at this court and the noble Earl opposite, respecting the occupation of Algiers by the French. He was well aware of the delicacy and importance of the subject, and he should not, therefore, express any opinion on it, in order to avoid the possibility of giving offence in any quarter. There could be no doubt that the best possible understanding ought always to be maintained between this nation and France; and there was no person more alive to the dangers and inconveniences that must arise to both countries, and to Europe in general, from even the slightest temporary estrangement between the two countries; but, at the same time, as between individuals, so between governments, a clear understanding on all matters on which any discussion may have arisen, was most conducive to harmony and good feeling; and Parliament, in this matter, he thought, was bound to ascertain the facts; a matter of so much importance to the public having been mooted, Parliament, he would repeat, was bound to ascertain whether it were true that Government had committed this country to the extent to which, according to one report, it would appear that this country had been committed. There had been two different versions of the conversation in question. He should not quote the words, or enter into any examination of the expressions attributed to the noble Earl; but it had also been reported by the press of this country that the First Minister of the Crown of England" had stated that there was no substantial difference between the two reports. Now, if the right hon. Baronet had expressed
122
such an opinion, he (Lord Clanricarde) had the misfortune to differ from him, for, in his view of the matter, the two versions of the conversation differed widely in their meaning and import. The first version conveyed to his mind the impression that when the French Ambassador entered into conversation on the subject, the noble Earl rather avoided the matter, and declined to express, on the part of his Government, any feeling or opinion on the matter at the present moment, and under existing circumstances. But the other version made the noble Earl state that Great Britain gave her distinct and positive acquiescence in the permanent occupation by France, and in that government's assertion of the sovereignty of Algiers and the country around it, now overrun by the French troops. He did not credit this latter version, because he did not think it probable that her Majesty's Ministers would so commit this country, lightly and gratuitously; and he further thought it quite impossible that these ministers could have taken such a step without making communication to Parliament. The question, then, which he wished to put to the noble Earl was, whether he had made, on the part of his Government, any communication to the French ambassador affecting the government and sovereignty of Algiers and the country about it now occupied by France.
The Earl of Aberdeensaid, that the noble Marquess having had the courtesy to give him notice of this question that morning, he was prepared to answer it. Noble Lords might recollect, that at the period of the French expedition to Algiers, he (the Earl of Aberdeen) then held the same office which he had now the honour to fill. The noble Marquess at that time asked him, he believed, some questions respecting negotiations which were going on on the subject, to which he had furnished replies. In 1833, he believed it was, in consequence of something that had taken place elsewhere, he found himself under the necessity of moving for the production of the papers which afforded an explanation of what had taken place at the period of the French expedition to Africa, and the noble Lord then at the head of the Government not only made no objection to the production of these papers, but expressed himself highly satisfied with the manner in which he had moved for their production. From that day to this he had never returned to this subject. He had thought it incumbent

123
on him at that time, for his own honour and veracity, to require the production of that correspondence, but, from that time to the present, he had left the Matter entirely in the hands of the late Government. He had felt that any interference would only embarrass them, and do no good to the public service, and he had therefore abstained from saying a Word on the subject. When her Majesty, some months ago, was pleased to call him to the office which he how held, he naturally felt that among the various subjects which must engage his attention, and form the subject of discussion, the occupation of Algiers would be very likely to do so; and considering the part he had taken, and the office he had filled, and again occupied, he felt that the language he might hold on the subject might be a matter of some importance to the French government and to this country, and he felt that he had but One course to pursue; he felt that whatever he might have conceived himself called upon to do, had he been appointed to office in 1831, that coming into office in the year 1841, after ten years of silence, it was not his business to take any new course, other than that which had been followed by those who preceded him. He had, therefore, had no hesitation in making up his mind what course to pursue; and this was, retaining all the opinions he had before held and expressed on the Subject of Algiers, to give no opinion on the subject unless called upon to do so, The conversation to which the noble Marquess referred was altogether an incidental one, not arising out of any proposition made to him (the Earl of Aberdeen) by the French ambassador—a conversation, in short, of quite a confidential and familiar nature, though very properly reported, no doubt, by the French ambassador to his government. There was no communication of any official correspondence or instructions, but there was, no doubt, matter which the Count St. Aulaire thought of some interest to his government. He had not the slightest doubt that M. de St. Aulaire was convinced that he had made a perfectly correct report of the conversation; for he might take this opportunity of declaring, and most explicitly, that it had never happened to him to have to deal with a more honourable and high-minded man than the present French ambassador, and it was a most fortunate thing for both
124
countries that France was so represented in this country. But when he (the Earl of Aberdeen) saw the report of this conversation, as given in the French Chamber of Deputies, it certainly did occur to him that it was liable to erroneous inferences, and, in point of fact, he perceived that erroneous inferences had been drawn from it; and he therefore thought it incumbent on him, without delay, to rectify the error into which the French ambassador had inadvertently fallen. He therefore at once wrote to our ambassador at Paris, and he would read to their Lordships the contents of the despatch, and afterwards lay it on the Table. The despatch was dated January 28, and rah thus:—
"Foreign Office, Jan. 28, 1842.
"My LORD—My attention has been directed to a report in the Moniteur, of a speech delivered in the Chamber of Deputies, by M. Guizot, on the 20th inst. On that occasion his Excellency read in the tribune an account of a conversation between the Count St. Aulaire and myself, which had reference to the French possession in Africa, and which had been transmitted by the ambassador to the French minister.
"In this relation the Count St. Aulaire observes, 'I began by asserting that the security of our African possessions was for us an interest of the highest importance, Which we could not allow to give way before any consideration; and Lord Aberdeen, after having listened to me attentively, said, I am very glad to be able to explain myself distinctly to you upon this point. I was minister in 1830. If I were to go back to that time, I should have much to say; but I take affairs as they were in 1841, and in the state in which they have been left by preceding Cabinets. I, therefore, look upon your position in Africa as a fail accompli, against Which I have no further objection to make.'
"Now, I readily subscribe to the accuracy of this statement, with the exception of the last sentence. I never said that I had now no objection to make to the establishment of the French in Algiers, but that I had now no observation to make on the subject, and that it was my intention to be silent. The context shows that such was my meaning, and, in fact, this decision was the result of mature reflection. I felt that after ten years of acquiescence any objections at the present moment would have been misplaced, and that the course which it would have been impossible for me formerly to have adopted had now become entirely consistent with propriety and duty. It does not follow, however, that objections, although not expressed, may not be entertained.
"I have explained to the French ambassador the misapprehension into which he had fallen, and the erroneous statement which, in

125
consequence, he had made to his government.
"With the same object in view, your Excellency will have the goodness to read this despatch to Monsieur Guizot. I am, &c.
(Signed) "ABERDEEN."
This was the despatch which he had sent to Lord Cowley. Lord Cowley obeyed his instructions, and there the matter ended. He had only now, by command of her Majesty, to lay the copy of the despatch on their Lordships' Table.
Despatch laid on the Table.

THE LATE ADMIRALTY.
The Earl of Mintowished to call the attention of their Lordships to a matter personal to himself. He was sensible of the great inconvenience of referring in that House to matters which had passed in the other House of Parliament, but there were occasions on which it was improper to allow extremely false impressions to go forth without explanation, and when he had read the passage from the newspapers which induced him to address the House, he thought their Lordships would agree with him, that the present was such an occasion. The passage to which he referred occurred in what purported to be the report of the speech of a gallant Member of the other House on Friday night, the object of that gallant Officer being to recommend to the notice of the House of Commons what he (Lord Minto) could not but consider a somewhat fanciful scheme of naval administration—a scheme which had been repeatedly suggested by him to the Admiralty, and was as often rejected. In pointing out the incompetence of civilians to fill the office of first Lord of the Admiralty, the gallant Member made the following observations:—
"When a first Lord came into power he was generally extremely ignorant, but 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 (Sir C. Napier) 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
126
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 lime 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."
Now, before he (Earl Minto) went further, he Would endeavour, in a few words —confining himself to the charge—to make their Lordships, if possible, understand what actually did take place on the occasion alluded to. He would not enter into the controversy as to the peace and war complements of our ships of war. He believed it to be a question of circumstances. In a time of profound peace he thought that it might be wise to have a large number of ships afloat with a smaller complement of men than would be required in time of war. But when the state of our foreign relations was at all menacing, it was necessary to increase the complement; and he thought that the present First Lord of the Admiralty was perfectly right in putting the full complement of men to all ships on foreign stations. He had said that he begged leave to call their Lordships' attention to the charge against himself personally, Which was, that certain complements were re" commended to him by the naval Lords of the Admiralty, which he took upon him. self to reject, substituting a scale of complements of his own. In order to make himself intelligible, it may be proper that he should first explain in what manner the complements had been determined which he found established in the navy. Under the presidency of the late King as Lord High Admiral, a commission had been appointed composed of able and scientific officers, in which Sir Thomas Hardy presided, to consider and report upon this subject. After much careful inquiry and consideration, a report was made recommending a certain scale of complements for such

127
class of ships—and this when he came to the Admiralty was understood to form the recognised scale of complements for war— from which the peace complements had been derived by the deduction of he thought one-eighth. Now this in certain classes of ships undoubtedly produced a low peace complement. And a commission subsequently appointed by him in which Sir Pulteney Malcolm presided, recommended a partial small increase of complements. When he came into office he found much complaint of the want of sufficient complements in some classes of ships. Many new classes of ships have been introduced into the service since the former scale of complements was settled, and a new and more powerful armament had been recently established for the fleet. These circumstances seemed to require that the whole scale of complements should be revived, and in the autumn of 1838 the members of the Board of Admiralty occupied themselves with looking carefully into the subject, and many schemes were proposed; at length, when it was thought that sufficient progress had been made in the investigation to enable every one to form his judgment, a special meeting of the board was held, at which Sir William Symonds and Sir Thomas Hastings were present; the board had a long sitting, and took the case of one of each class of ships into consideration. At this sitting no doubt there were differences of opinion on details, but ultimately a scale of complements for war was agreed on unanimously, and he believed that Captain Berkely was present and took part in the proceedings. Some technical difficulties occurred to prevent the immediate promulgation of this scale of complements, but undoubtedly the scale was unanimously adopted by the whole board, and this was the scale which he (Earl Minto) had established in the navy for war complements. Then came the question of a peace complement: under the previous system, the peace complement had been reduced from the war complement by a reduction of one-eighth of the whole number of the crew. Instead of this, it was proposed to have a reduction of either a fifth or a sixth of the number of men appropriated to the guns—indeed both those propositions were made. Mr. Wood drew up one of his extremely clear and able minutes, which he laid before the board, in which he described the principle on which the board had proceeded as to the war complement, and a scale of peace complements was then brought
128
before the board, which, after some discussion, was approved of by all the members of the board. This scale it was, that he (Earl Minto) was charged with having put into his pocket, proposing another scale of his own, in opposition to the opinions of all the naval members of the board. But that was not the case. When the scale was produced, he said,
"This is a great and serious question, involving a very large addition of expense, and requiring very careful consideration and inquiry, and one which cannot be disposed of off hand; I am bound, sitting here, to look after the public interests; I am bound to see that there is good reason for what is proposed, and that professional zeal or bias does not involve the country in more expense than is necessary; and I am bound to see that the former scale determined upon, after mature deliberation, by some of the ablest men in the service, is not lightly overturned; and I must therefore take time fully to consider this matter."
This was all that passed on the occasion, and the course which he thus took was so obvious and natural, that no one seemed to think it strange that he (Earl Minto) should adopt it. He had gone very minutely into the case, but he had all along stated to the board, that he thought the question one so purely professional, that he should feel bound to adopt what should turn out to be their real opinion, after a full and careful consideration. It very soon appeared that the principle on which they attempted to form complements for manning the ships was inapplicable to the case. To establish any one proportion between the peace and war complement for all descriptions of ships was found to be impossible, for it would give too large an allowance for one class of ships, and too small for another, and the whole scheme turned out to be arrant nonsense although it appeared very well on paper. It was therefore determined to take each case separately; accordingly one ship of each class was selected, and the board carefully went into the whole matter. A scale of peace complements was devised, and the proportionate complement in each ship was made greater in most cases and smaller in others than was formerly the case. The proposed scale of manning was first agreed to by the four naval lords. He then took the papers into his consideration, and he consulted the best counsellors that he could refer to on the subject, as to the most advisable course to take, namely the two senior naval lords, in both of whom he placed the most implicit confidence. After some

129
suggestions had been made by Mr. Wood some slight change was made in the plan, and a new minute was drawn up and at last agreed to by the board. He admitted that Captain Berkeley was no party to this arrangement, but this was no fault of his, as that gallant Officer had left town; but he should have been very glad to discuss the matter with that Gentleman, who had undoubtedly paid very great attention to the subject. He trusted that he had said enough to show that he did not reverse the decision of the board at his own whim and pleasure. He might, however, observe, before he sat down, that he thought that the scale went too far in some respects, and as he at the time thought there was an error in there being too great an excess in manning ships, he sent down a minute desiring to know if the scheme of complements in question was recommended to him by the two senior naval Lords of the Admiralty, namely, Sir C. Adam, and Sir W. Parker. The messenger shortly after returned with the paper, marked— yes; signed "C. A.," "W. P." He hoped that he had thus succeeded in exonerating himself from the observations which had been made upon him elsewhere. He had no desire to bandy words between the House of Lords and the House of Commons as to the proper complements for ships in the navy, and still less did he wish to occupy the time of Parliament with matters which might appear personal to himself; he trusted, however, that the House would feel that he was called upon to make some explanation on the subject. He would only detain the House with adverting to one other point. Another charge brought against him was, that he had been guilty of an undue exercise of authority in sending out orders to the Admiral in the Mediterranean without the knowledge of the board. Sir Charles Napier said
"He would mention another instance in which he thought Earl Minto had assumed a great deal. He had read in a letter the other day, that that noble Lord had addressed a letter to Sir Robert Stop ford, desiring him to proceed to Candia, and there wait for further orders. Was it to be endured that such power should be assumed by the First Lord of the Admiralty."
It was well known to noble Lords opposite that a Cabinet Minister in the situation which he held must often make confiden-
130
tial communications to the naval commander in chief of a fleet, and must sometimes even direct his movements. Now, the Members of the late Government, as well as himself, reposed the most entire confidence in Sir Robert Stopford, and he might be permitted to add, that Sir Robert Stopford had showed that he was most deserving of it. This was not a singular instance of his writing a letter to that gallant Admiral; for he could refer to fifty instances in which he sent letters to Sir Robert Stopford, to explain to that gallant officer the views of the Government. He did not give that gallant officer orders, but as the organ of the Government in this department he had communicated the views of Government, which could not be well discussed openly at a board. He begged to call their Lord ship's attention to a letter which he had that day received from Sir Robert Stopford. It was in these terms:—
"Royal Hospital, Greenwich, 6th March, 1842
My dear Lord,
With reference to Sir C. Napier's assertion in the House of Commons, that it was in consequence of a private letter from your Lordship, I proceeded off Candia to establish the authority of the Sultan in that island, I find upon reference to my papers, that an order to that effect proceeded from the Board of Admiralty, dated 22nd of Oct., 1840, transmitting instructions from Lord Palmerston, dated 19th October. But as I could not procure Turkish troops which I demanded to carry this order into execution, and considering the marines insufficient for that object, I never did proceed to Candia.
"I am quite certain that I never received any private communication from your Lordship upon that subject.—Believe me, my dear Lord, very faithfully yours,
"ROBERT STOPFORD."
Thus, although these assumed orders had not been issued regarding Candia, he found on referring to the Levant papers, the following letter referring to a wish expressed by him for the assembly of the squadron at Cyprus.
"Princess Royal, off the South End of Cyprus, July 11, 1839.
"I have the honour to inform your Excellency with my arrival here, with the squadron

131
under my command, in pursuance of a private intimation from Lord Minto, signifying his wish for the squadron to assemble in this neighbourhood, and to await further orders.
"As the accounts of the Sultan's death, and the defeat of his army, which reached me this morning from Candia, and have been confirmed by the Rhadamanthus from Alexandria, may render it necessary for the squadron to take up another position, I have to request your Excellency will be pleased to favour me with such information for my further guidance as you may judge fit to give me under those altered circumstances.—I have, &c.,
"ROBERT STOPFORD."
This was the most complete answer to the statement of which he complained, sufficiently proving that Sir Robert Stopford did not consider the communication made to him in the light of an order which he was hound to observe. He had now, he thought, sufficiently replied to the charges made against him by the gallant Officer. He was aware of the extreme inconvenience of debating in that House matters which had been discussed in the other House of Parliament, and the propriety of avoiding anything which might tend to handy controversy between them. He had, therefore, carefully abstained from all discussion on the question as to what was or was not the proper peace complement, and he hoped their Lordships would feel that he wag justified in calling their attention to the attack which had been personally made upon him, and that he had not exceeded the hounds which he had endeavoured to lay down for himself in replying to it. He felt that it was extremely inconvenient to make observations in one House as to what passed in the other; hut he hoped that he had abstained from all observations that were at all calculated to give rise to further discussions of the same kind.
Lord Colchesterbelieved that it was contrary to the orders of the House that such discussions should take place, and certainly they could be attended with no public advantage. As the matter had been broached, however, he felt called upon to make one or two remarks on some observations made by the noble Earl. The noble Earl had alluded to what had occurred after the minute respecting the complements that ships of war should have in times of peace, which had been agreed
132
to by the Board of Admiralty. The noble Earl said that this minute, drawn up by Mr. Wood, embodied the opinions of the four naval Lords. But it appeared that the noble Earl, from his own statement, got the two senior naval Lords with him to discuss the subject, and, no doubt, by the influence of his authority induced them to alter their opinion. The noble Earl added that this might be a very proper regulation as to the manning of ships, but for other political objects, such as the expense, &c, it was inexpedient to adopt the proposition. He did not say the change was made at the dictation of the noble Lord, but he thought he should have given his reasons to the whole Board, instead of referring the matter to only two members of it and himself. With regard to the other charge—that of issuing a private order, he thought the letter of Sir Robert Stopford which had been read to the House by the noble Earl sufficient evidence. He understood from that letter that the gallant officer went to Cyprus by order of the noble Earl, but that upon arriving there he found a new set of circumstances, which rendered it necessary for him to refer to the ambassador for such commands as he might deem fit. Indeed it appeared to him (Lord Colchester) impossible for any one to read that document and not come to the conclusion that the noble Earl did send a private communication to Sir Robert Stopford to proceed to Cyprus, and there await further orders. He, therefore, did not think that the gallant Officer who had alluded to the subject in the other House of Parliament could be fairly accused of having made an erroneous statement. That hon. and gallant Officer had told him that he had read the letter he had just quoted in a public paper. He did not wish to enter into any general discussion of the question, but he certainly thought that the hon. and gallant Officer who was supposed to have addressed the other House of Parliament, was in no degree open to the charge of having misstated facts. He must be permitted to add, that he thought her Majesty's present Government had acted with great prudence in increasing the former establishment, and he offered them his best thanks for having done so.
The Duke of Richmondsaid, that nothing could be more inconvenient than that a noble Lord should make observations on a speech delivered in the other House

133
of Parliament, which he had not heard, but which he had only seen in the newspapers of the day. It was contrary to the orders of their Lordships' House. He was, however, unwilling to prevent his noble Friend from rising on the present occasion. His noble Friend had made a statement to-day in reference to something which had fallen from Captain Berkeley. He considered the charge made by the noble Earl against that gallant Officer a very serious one. He charged him with making, in his place in Parliament, a statement which was not true. Of course, the gallant Officer could not wish that charge to go forth uncontradicted, and, therefore he would get some Peer to rise in his place, and to make a statement for him; and without being a prophet, it was extremely likely when the Navy Estimates came before the House of Commons, that both these Gentlemen (Sir C. Napier and Captain Berkeley) would again defend themselves, and then the noble Earl would have to make another statement in reply. Could anything be more inconvenient than such proceedings? His noble Friend had read an extract from a report in a newspaper. That report did not give correctly the extract from Captain Berkeley's letter which Sir Charles Napier read. He would read to the House what Captain Berkeley really did write, and what Sir Charles Napier really did read. Captain Berkeley, after quitting the Admiralty, wrote a letter, from which this was an extract:—
"Let there be no mistake as to my reasons for quitting the Admiralty. After mature deliberation, a scheme for the complement of each ship was agreed on, and approved of by all my Colleagues, and acceeded to by Lord Dalmeny. One-eighth was to be struck off for the peace establishment, and to this I consented—though disapproving of all reduction—for the sake of unanimity."
This, which he considered a boon to the service, was approved of, and laid before the Board by the Secretary, and Lord Minto put it in his pocket; and then Captain Berkeley received a letter from Mr. Wood, who said that it was to be not one-eighth, but one-fifth. The matter was not again brought before the Board of Admiralty. The whole of the naval Lords at that Board agreed to one-eighth, but
134
the noble Earl said that it must be one-fifth, without even again consulting them. His noble Friend said that he did consult the two senior naval Lords, and that he sent a memorandum to that effect, and that they put their initials to the bottom of it with the word "Yes." But that, he said, was not placing it before the Board of Admiralty. The noble Earl admitted that he did not bring it before that Board, because, if he had, he would have heard from different members of it their disapprobation of the change. Under such circumstances he thought that Captain Berkeley would not have acted properly if he had not at once quitted the Board of Admiralty. With regard to the general question, he must say that his opinion was that ships should never leave port unless they were fully manned. He would rather that we had only two ships afloat well-manned, than that we had a dozen inefficiently manned. His noble Friend had also referred to the opinion of Sir Thomas Hardy. He knew that that gallant Officer stated over and over again to Captain Berkeley that he was one of the old-fashioned men, who thought that our ships ought not to go to sea unless properly manned. He thought the extract which he had read showed the inconvenience of discussing questions where the facts were disputed.
The Earl of Mintodenied that he had brought any charge against the two gallant officers referred to; all that he wished to show was, that these gallant officers had imagined, in one case, that a state of things had occurred which never had happened; and in the other, he had endeavoured to show that he was justified in the course which he had taken. His noble Friend said, that the matter had never been brought before the board as to the complement on board men-of-war for a peace establishment. This was not so; the two senior naval officers at the board, after they had deliberated and fully discussed the subject, somewhat altered their opinions, and their final decision was equally assented to and sanctioned at the Board.
Lord Fitzgeraldexpressed his regret that the House had been drawn into this irregularity, and which, irregular as their proceedings had often been, could find no example. Anxious as the noble Earl naturally was to make a statement in vindication of his conduct as First Lord of the Admiralty, and disposed as every one was

135
to do the noble Earl justice for his anxiety, yet he could but remark upon the danger of replying in that House to speeches delivered in the other House of Parliament, and not only stating the general substance, but quoting the very language, and naming the persons by whom they were spoken. He regretted that the noble Earl had not pursued the more regular course of moving for papers, instead of replying to speeches made by gallant Officers in the House of Commons, without any question before the House.
The Earl of Mintosaid, it had been his intention to have made a motion, but the habitual violation of the rules of the House would, he thought, justify his not doing so. He hoped, however, that noble Lords would give him credit for abstaining from making a reply to anything that had passed in another place, except upon the points which personally affected himself, and for not imputing blame to any of the Gentlemen who had spoken elsewhere.
Lord Fitzgeraldremarked, that the noble Earl's own reference to the habitual violation of the rules of the House fully justified the remark he had made.
The Earl of Mintohad often thought that the Lord Chancellor should be expected to interfere and prevent these irregularities.
The Duke of Richmondthought, that if this were the case his noble Friend on the Woolsack would have no sinecure. They should recollect that the Speaker of the House of Commons was elected by the House, whilst the Speaker of that House was chosen by the Crown. This made a great distinction, and he hoped the House would never give up the power of regulating their own proceedings. At any rate, he knew very well that no Lord Chancellor could do it.
Four or five noble Lords rose together, but gave way to
The Lord Chancellor,who amidst great laughter, gave notice that he would tomorrow lay upon the Table a bill for altering and amending the law with respect to proceedings in lunacy.
Subject at an end.
Adjourned.