Sitting of 31 May 1849

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1o Joint Stock Companies Act (1848) Amendment; Highways (Annual Returns); General and Quarter Sessions.
Reported.—Defects in Leases; Passengers; Clergy Relief.
PKTITIONS PRKSKNTED. By Mr. Buck, from Crediton, Devonshire, against the Parliamentary Oaths Bill.—By Mr. Cobden, from Rhos Llanerchrugog, Denbighshire, for Repeal of the Septennial Act; and from Navenby, Lincolnshire, for the Clergy Relief Bill.—By Lord Dudley Stuart, from Marylebone, for the Adoption of Universal Suffrage.—By Mr. Fuller, from Ninfield, Sussex, against the Marriages Bill.—By Lord Charles Manners, from Melton Mowbray, against the Alienation of Tithes.—By Mr. Mathew Wilson, from Clitheroe, respecting the Lancashire County Expenditure.—By Mr. Cowan, from Edinburgh, against the Lunatics (Scotland) Bill.—By Mr. Cockburn, from Southampton, respecting the Payment of Magistrates Clerks—By Sir Alexander Hood, from the Guardians of the Williton Union, for an Alteration of the Poor Law.—By Mr. Chaplin, from the Warminster Union, for a Superannuation Fund for Poor Law Officers.—By Mr. Broadley, from the Guardians of the Driffield Union, for an Alteration of the Poor Removal Act.—By Mr. S. Martin, from several Wesleyan Congregations in Yorkshire, for the Suppression of Promiscuous Intercourse—By Sir G. Clerk, from Edinburgh, against the Public Health (Scotland) Bill—By Admiral Gordon, from Cruden, Aberdeenshire, against the Registering Births, &c. (Scotland) Bill, and Marriage (Scotland) Bill.—By Mr. Heyworth, from Sowerby, for an Alteration of the Sale of Beer Act—By Mr. Mostyn, from Llanrwst, for an Alteration of the Small Debts Act.—By Mr. Barnard, from Greenwich, against, and by Mr. Christopher, from the City of London, in favour of, the Removal of Smithfield Market.

CANADA—THE "TIMES" NEWSPAPER.
MR. CHRISTOPHER, seeing the hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary for the Colonics in his place, wished to put a question to him. The papers relating to Canada which were placed in the hands of hon. Members only in the course of yesterday, had appeared in the Times newspaper of Saturday last. His question was, whether any person connected with the Colonial Office had received permission to communicate the documents in question to the Times, before they were placed in the hands of Members of this House? He was induced to put this question also by the fact that on a previous occasion papers of a similar character had appeared in the Times newspaper before they were presented to Members of the House.
MR. HAWESwas much obliged to the hon. Gentleman for putting the question. The papers relating to Canada—he spoke now of the first set—had been laid before the House in a printed state, and had been delivered to hon. Members next morning. On the second occasion it was intended that the same course should be pursued; but, upon inquiry, he found that the papers had not the next day been delivered to hon.

1009
Members, wholly and solely on account of the intervention of the holidays. Hon. Members knew that after any papers had been laid by the Colonial Office before the House, all control over them was lost by by the department in question. He had only to add, that no instructions had been given to favour any particular newspaper. On the first occasion several applications had been made to him after the papers had been laid before the House by parties representing the press for copies. It was of essential importance that the contents of the documents should be made known to the public as soon as possible, and therefore the request was in every instance granted. One application only had not been complied with, simply because it had been made at so late an hour of the evening that it was out of his (Mr. Hawes') power to comply with the request. On occasions of this kind in question, he believed that it was greatly for the advantage of any Government that the public should be made acquainted, through the press, with the contents of official despatches. Subject dropped.
Subject dropped.

PUBLIC PARKS.
MR. SLANEYobserved, that, some years ago, 10,000 l had been voted by Parliament to promote the opening of Public Parks in the vicinity of large towns, and be wished to know in what way that money had been appropriated?
MR. HAYTERsaid, the sum of 10,000 l had been voted in 1841 for the purposes stated by the hon. Member. Between 4,400 l and 5,000 l. of that money had already been appropriated for the purpose of promoting the formation of public parks, and applications were now before the Treasury to the amount of 3,000 l. The regulations under which these advances were made, were, that the parties applying were to raise a sum at least equal in amount to that which they required to be advanced. The principal towns which had already obtained assistance from the grant were Dun-doe, Arbroath, Manchester, Portsmouth, and Preston; and the places from which applications were now pending were Leicester, Harrogate, Stockport, Sunderland, and Oldham.
Subject dropped.

SUPPLY—NAVY ESTIMATES.
The report of the Committee of Supply on Navy Estimates having been brought up, the further consideration of the postponed
1010
vote of May 25th (Wages to Artificers) was proceeded with.
SIR H. WILLOUGHBYrose and said, he observed that there were numerous petitions upon the table of the House, calling for a reduction of taxation. He believed that there was but one way of accomplishing it, however, and that was by reducing the public expenditure; and if any attempt of the kind were to be made, this House was the place in which to make it; he had, therefore, entered into an examination of this vote, and he thought he was able to make out a strong prima facie case for considerably reducing it. Last year the Government demanded 850,000 l. on this vote; but, upon the recommendation of the Committee which sat to investigate the expenditure of the Navy, it was reduced by 40,000 l., in consequence of which, the estimate was made to stand at 810,000 l The amount of the present estimate was 764,000 l., being 46,000 l. less than the sum voted last year; and his (Sir H. Willoughby's) proposition was to further reduce it, by the sum of 50,000 l. He found that the Committee, to which he had alluded, stated, in their report, that the establishment of the naval yards should be revised; that after ascertaining the number of workmen that were actually required, the number should be fixed by an Order in Council, and that every part of the establishment so fixed should be reported to the House of Commons at the commencement of the ensuing Session, or before the estimates were voted. The sum now demanded was enormous, and much greater than had been asked for any year, with the exception of the last, during fifteen years. With regard to the number of artificers employed, he found by an Admiralty order, that, as far back as the year 1833, 6,000 artificers were considered to be enough. In 1837, the number was 7,000; in 1842, 9,000; in 1844, 10,000; in 1845, 11,000; in 1846, 13,000; in 1847, 13,000; and in 1848, 13,278—not including convicts. He should like to know, therefore, how far the recommendations of the Committee had been complied with; and if they had not been acted upon, why such vast sums of money was continued to be expended for this purpose. The late Secretary to the Admiralty (Mr. Ward), in giving his evidence before the Committee, admitted that the question of dockyard expenditure required grave consideration. He (Sir H. Willoughby) quite agreed in the necessity of having an efficient

1011
Navy; and we had an efficient Navy; hence arose the question, what were the grounds for maintaining all this expenditure? Within a certain number of years the steam navy had advanced from 5,000 to 50,000 horse-power, and the increase was still going on. There must, eventually, he some limit imposed; and he wished to know where it was intended to stop. He admitted that there might he danger of war; but there was another danger—that of disgusting the people of this country at the enormous amount of taxation; and he thought no Member would be bold enough to got up in his place and say which of these two evils was the greater. The moment that the navigation laws were repealed, they ought to put the British shipowner in an improved position by the remission of the timber duties; but they would not be able to do so unless they took large items of expenditure, such as this, into their consideration. The hon. Gentleman concluded by moving a reduction of 50,000 l. in the vote for the wages of artificers.
MR. COBDBNseconded the Motion.
MR. F. T. BARINGsaid, that in order to possess an efficient navy, it was requisite to keep up, at a considerable expense, stores of naval supplies in proportion. As to the steam navy, he admitted that it was very expensive, but he did not see how we could do without it; and if the hon. Gentleman looked to the steam navy of France, he would not think that our own was by any means too formidable. The hon. Gentleman had compared the expenditure of the present with that of former years. He (Sir F. Baring) admitted that the present vote was large; but it ought to be recollected that in various departments of the Navy, a higher and more skilled, and, therefore, a better paid, class of workmen were now required, than that which had formerly been employed. Reductions, however, had been made to the extent of upwards of 86,500L from the amount of the vote as it stood last year. Other measures of economic reform recommended by the Committee were gradually being carried out, more particularly in the case of our foreign dockyards; but they could not well be brought at once and immediately into play.
MR. HENLEYthought that every one would agree in the principle just laid down by the right hon. Gentleman the First Lord of the Admiralty with respect to practising every economy that was consistent
1012
with the efficiency of the public service; but, as on the face of the documents before the House, this principle did not appear to be carried out in practice, he confessed he was very much disposed to agree in the Motion proposed by the hon. Baronet the Member for Eversham. For the last ten years the expenditure on the dockyards had been regularly and steadily increasing; while although the number of men employed there had been nearly the same during the last five years of that period as during the first five years, the wages had risen from 552,000 l. to 680,000 l.; and there had been a corresponding increase of expenditure on stores from 804,000 l. to 896,000 l.; so that there was an average expenditure of 220,000 l. or 230,000 l. altogether during the last five years beyond the average expenditure of the preceding five years, although the number of men had not been increased. He could not, therefore, arrive at the conclusion which had on a former occasion been expressed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that the greatest economy had been observed which was consistent with the public service.
CAPTAIN PECHELLthought that at present Government steamers were often used unnecessarily, and that by the adoption of a different system a considerable saving might be effected. He strongly urged the introduction of improvements in caulking, and recommended the use of "Jeffery's Marine Glue," on the ground of its superior qualities as well as of the economy which would attend its adoption.
SIR F. T. BARINGobserved that Mr. Jeffery's invention had been brought under his observation, and that inquiries were now going on with a view to some settlement with that gentleman. He (Sir F. Baring) feared that the Admiralty did not value the invention so highly as did the inventor himself, but that was not at all an unusual occurrence.
SIR H. WILLOUGHBYdeclined to press his Amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
Resolution agreed to.

SUPPLY—ARMY ESTIMATES.
On the Motion for bringing up this Report,
MR. SCULLYmoved that the case of Mrs. Uniacke should be taken into consideration by the Secretary at War. The lady in question was widow of the late Colonel Uniacke, and had received all

1013
arrears of pay up to the day of his death, but since that time she had in vain made repeated applications to the War Office for a pension. She was now much embarrassed, and had intrusted him with a petition which the rules of the House forbade him to lay before them in any other than the present shape.
MR. F. MAULEobserved that the complaint was one of old standing at the War Office, dating from the time when the noble Lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs was Secretary at War, and running down through his successors in office to the present. By that noble Lord the claim had been fully investigated, and, in his (Mr. F. Maule's) opinion, adjudicated on principles of right and justice. The fact was, the marriage of Colonel Uniacke took place in 1820, at which time he was seventy years of age; and it was a rule at the War Office not to grant pensions to the widows of half-pay officers who married after sixty years, as an inducement would be held out to officers in the last stage of existence to marry ladies in order to secure them pensions.
Resolutions reported.

SUPPLY—CIVIL CONTINGENCIES.
Motion made, and Question proposed—
"That a sum, not exceeding 50,000 l.—being part of a sum of 100,000 l., of which 50,000 l. has been granted on account—be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge for Civil Contingencies, to the 31st day of March, 1850."
MR. B. OSBORNEsaid, that great expectations, in which, however, he had not joined, had been formed last year in consequence of the appointment of the Committee; but he certainly thought that neither the House nor the country had any reason to congratulate themselves on the altering or cutting down of these miscellaneous estimates. In one or two instances the report of the Committee had been attended to, but there had been a total absence of an principle on which to act. Indeed, he maintained that no Committee of that House could effect a reform in those estimates, and that the Executive Government alone had the opportunity or knowledge which would enable them to establish a fixed principle. He looked upon the Committee as an excuse to get rid of the question out of the House. As compared with 1848, there was a saving in the present estimate of 20,000 l., partly effected by a material reduction in the vote for the new
1014
Houses of Parliament, which he thought a most questionable economy; but, as compared with 1847, there was an increase of 5,000 l. He regretted that these miscellaneous estimates were furnished in their present detached form. It would be much better to classify them under the heads of civil, colonial, and public buildings; and if they wished for civil contingencies, they might call them miscellaneous estimates. The first item to which he wished to call attention, but not with a view to reduction, for the money was already paid, and if they reduced it he knew not from what source the deficiency could be supplied—was the sum of 306 l in the vote before the House on account of expenses incurred in the exploration and survey of the undetermined boundary between the British colonies in North America and the United States, pursuant to the Treaty of Washington. Every year, since 1845, there had been a charge on account of that treaty, and he should be glad to know how long it was to be in existence, and what the entire cost was to be. In the same vote was the item of 2,000 l. on account of the expenses of Earl Minto. He did not notice this item in order to take any exception to the mission, because the noble Lord the Secretary for Foreign Affairs last year had made a most able defence of it. Indeed, had never heard anything from the noble Lord in that House more satisfactory of his policy, and he referred to it only for the purpose of pointing out that there was last year also a charge of 2,000 l. for the same mission, and he wished to know what the total expense was to be. The next item was 595 l. on account of the expenses of Colonel Wylde whilst on a special mission to Portugal; last year it was 1,500 l. He should be glad to know what was the whole expense of Colonel Wylde, and whether they had now done with it. He would congratulate the Committee on the very small item for the passages of bishops to the colonies, 176 l. 13 s. 4d., which, last year, had been 1,209 l. There was an item of 1,100 l. for the outfit and equipage of Mr. Southern, on his proceeding to Buenos Ayes. In 1846 there was a similar charge of 4,783 l.; and some explanation ought to be given, to show whether the negotiations going on at Buenos Ayres warranted the outlay of these sums. There was a sum of 100 l. to Mr. Roberts, the President of Liberia. He was not sufficiently a geographer to know where Liberia was; he had looked for it in a map, and could

1015
not find it. [An Hon. MEMBER: It is on the coast of Africa.] He was not aware, at all events, that we had established a republic there. In No. 3 were some very curious items. The charge for attendance of watermen at the House of Lords had dwindled down from 203 l. to two guineas. Such items as these ought never to have been introduced; he hoped they would be distinctly explained. Then there was 445 l. for what was called triennial allowances to trumpeters; but though the trumpeters might be triennial, the vote was annual. Last year there had been a charge of 183L for silver trumpets, and this year it was 445 l. for "triennial and other allowances to the sergeant trumpeter and to the household trumpeters, and for new silver trumpets and kettle drums, &c." No Ministry ought to come down to ask the House for these paltry sums, which, however, were annual, and soon amounted to several thousands. There was an item of 500 l. far "travelling expenses of the King and Queen of the Belgians, the Duke of Saxe Coburg, and the Prince of Prussia, during their visits to this country." That was a bad precedent, and Royal personages ought to be ashamed to send in a bill to that House after visiting their Royal relatives in this country. The first vote under the head No. 4 was very extraordinary: 500 l. for "the Commission appointed to settle the claims of British subjects in the Portuguese army and navy during the war of liberation in Portugal." This Commission had cost 11,306 l since 1843; and they had not finally adjudicated to this moment. This, if not a job, was a most prodigal expenditure of the public money. Then there was 865 l. for "the Commission appointed for the purpose of inquiring whether advantage might not be taken of the rebuilding of the Houses of Parliament for the purpose of promoting and encouraging the fine arts." Already 6,000 l. had been expended on this Commission; he said nothing of the frescoes—every one could judge of those; but the expenditure was going on every year, He wanted to know what were the expenses of these men of taste, and how they had come to lay out 6,000 l. Then 860 l. was put down for the Commission for metropolitan improvements; last year it was 924 l But the most expensive thing was the Commission on the health of the metropolis, which was 1,800 l. this year, and 300 l last year. Then there was "the Commission for inquiring into the conditions
1016
to be observed in the application of iron to railway structures," 2,500 l. this year; 500 l. last year. What did this Commission mean, and what was to be its ultimate cost? There was an item of 2,500 l. 17 s. for the Commission for inquiring into the constitution and management of the Royal Mint. There was a charge of 500 l. "for preparing a digest of the evidence taken before the Commission appointed to inquire into the tenure of land in Ireland." So, after they had paid for the big blue hooks, which nobody read, there was a charge of 500 l. for reducing it to a blue book in duodecimo. The sum of 50 l. was charged as the "expense incurred in preparing casts of the Phygalian marbles, and sending them to Athens as a present to the King of Greece." If we were in the humour for making presents, much better would it be to make some outlay on that deserving traveller Mr. Layard. There were two sums of 610 l. and 400 l. for accounts of turnpike trusts and highways—he supposed connected with that Bill which had fallen to the ground. The next was a very curious item. It appeared that when any gentleman took a peculiarly evangelical fit, the country had to pay for it. Last year 580 l. had been charged as expenses connected with the public thanksgiving for deliverance from famine; and now there was an item of 462 l. 14 s. for sending by post copies of Orders in Council, and forms of prayer and thanksgiving. There was an item of 60 l. for "repayment to ordnance services of the value of arms, ammunition, &c. presented to the Sultan of Johanna." Would any hon. Gentleman inform him who that individual was? There was a payment of 500 l. to the Electric Telegraph Company: this might be a fair bill, but might not some arrangement be made by contract? Under the head No. 5, "services in Ireland," were some curious items. The first was 221 l. 10 s. for the rent of a public coal-yard, which was stated last year to have been purchased. There were also the following:—" The Hon. P. Plunket, second Commissioner of Bankruptcy in Ireland, on account of salary, l,44 l.;" "W. T. Hamilton, second Remembrancer of the Court of Exchequer in Ireland, deficiency of fees in his department, 585 l. 17 s." It had been stated last year that these two items were in future to be provided for from the Consolidated Fund; why, then, were they again put into the estimates? On looking into these items, hon. Members

1017
would perceive that they were such as no Committee could deal with; and unless they adopted some broad principle of retrenchment, it would be totally impossible to lighten the burdens of the country.
COLONEL SIBTHORPsaid, after the closest examination of these estimates, he had been unable to unravel the mysteries of some of them. In the miscellaneous estimates for civil services, other matters were mixed up which had no right to appear there. One was the item for the railway department. Whether railway companies flourished or not, he thought they ought to pay all their own expenses. Then there was an item of 2,000 l for the special expenses abroad of Lord Minto. This was a round sum, which, in addition to the 2,000 l. of last year, made 4,000 l. He should like to know how it happened that these expenses came to even thousands. After his Motion with respect to the Lords of the Admiralty, he despaired of effecting any reduction in those estimates, but thought it his duty to bring these matters forward.
MR. F. FRENCHalso asked for explanation of the 221 l. for rent of a coal-yard in Ireland. The item for holding an investigation in a gaol was improperly introduced, as the charge ought to have been borne by the officers of the gaol. The sum of 500 l. payable to the Secretary for Ireland in respect of an additional office as auditor of grand-jury accounts, was wholly unnecessary, as the duties might be performed by a clerk for 200 l. a year.
MR. GLADSTONEthought it his duty to remark on one item, that of 2,500 l. for a commission of inquiry into the constitution and management of the Royal Mint. He had protested against this expense last Session as wholly unnecessary, believing that the Master of the Mint himself was perfectly competent to conduct such inquiry. He was a high officer of State, receiving a largo salary, a privy councillor, with very small ordinary duties; and the only ground for separating this office from the Board of Trade was that the Master of the Mint might undertake an inquiry into the management of the institution. The appointment of commissions generally divided and diminished responsibility. Were the duties performed by the heads of the departments, they would be responsible to that House. He believed that the commission was wholly unnecessary, and that the Master of the Mint, with the assistance of such men as Mr. Cotton and Colonel
1018
Forbes, would have performed these duties in a perfectly satisfactory manner. He knew that Colonel Forbes entertained the peculiar view that coinage ought not to be paid for by contract, but by salaries. This was directly opposed to the practice of the Mint, whose officers were only hoard as witnesses; and thus Colonel Forbes was enabled, as it were, to dictate his own views to the commission. Had the inquiry been conducted by the Master of the Mint, it would have been more impartial. It was remarkable that there were no fewer than nine commissions, each costing about 2,500?. He was at a loss to conceive how the Mint Commission could have spent any such sum. Colonel Forbes was a salaried officer in the East India Company's Mint, and certainly Mr. Cotton would not receive remuneration for his services. The secretary, of course, would receive remuneration. He believed it had been intimated to him that that remuneration would be proportioned to the amount of materials he might collect in the inquiry; and it certainly appeared that a great portion of the blue book consisted of the lucubrations of the secretary.
The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid the commission had been appointed to inquire whether the Mint might not be rendered much less expensive to the country; and the only object of the Government was to appoint persons most competent to conduct the inquiry. He did not think that a more proper person than Mr. Cotton could have been appointed; for many years he had given very particular attention to the subject of coinage. Colonel Forbes was a person of the greatest possible experience in this mater. After spending some time in visiting the principal Mints of Europe, he had been appointed head of the Mint in Calcutta, which he had conducted with the greatest success, and which paid its own expenses. The Government had, therefore, thought it very desirable to send for Colonel Forbes to this country, to have the benefit of his experience and knowledge. Sir Edward Coffin, another member of the commission, was a commissariat officer; he had been a considerable time in Mexico, and large quantities of coin had passed through his hands in that country; also in Scotland and Ireland. The result of the inquiry had satisfied the Government that they had made a good selection. As to the expense of the commission, it was well known that Mr. Cotton was not paid; the principal expense

1019
was the payment of Colonel Forbes, who, being a highly-paid officer of the East India Company, could not have been fairly called over to this country without the Government taking on them the same payment as had been made to him by the Company. Nearly the whole expense arose from paying to Colonel Forbes, for conducting the inquiry here, what he would have received had he remained in India. Out of the 2,500 l., 1,800 l was for payment due to Colonel Forbes. The salary of the secretary had certainly not been determined, as the right hon. Gentleman supposed, by the extent of his labours. The secretaries to these commissions were generally paid three rates of salary, according to the light or onerous nature of the duties, 300 l., 500 l, or 700 l.; and on the results of this inquiry the Treasury had decided that the secretary was entitled to the larger amount.
SIR J. TYRELLbegged to say a few words with regard to the mode in which the secretary of the commission was to be remunerated. It appeared that the secretary was to be rewarded in proportion to his labours, and he thought such a mode of paying his salary was a premium for swelling of blue books. There had been commission after commission to inquire into the subject, and blue book after blue book; but it was not shown that any improvement had taken place, notwithstanding the expense that had been incurred. He would be glad to know in detail how this sum of 2,500 l. was made up; and he also called attention to a statement that had been made, from which it would appear that a relative of the hon. Gentleman the Member of the city of Dublin had been a recipient of the drippings of sweet oil from the Treasury.
SIR G. CLERKhad no fault to find with the commission for endeavouring to avail themselves of all the means in their power of acquiring information; but what he did complain of was, that evidence was received from persons not having any intimate connexion with the Mint. It appeared that the commission never communicated, either directly or indirectly, to the officers against whom charges were preferred, that any such charges were brought against them. Those persons were subsequently called before the commissioners, and examined as to the duties of their office, but not a hint was given to them that any charge of incompetence was preferred against them from any quarter. Those
1020
gentlemen, seeing that the charges were made, applied to the proper quarter for redress, and what was the answer they received? That the commission was closed, having discharged all its duties, and that it was impossible for any further inquiry to be made.
MR. SHEILsaid, he supposed the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the University of Oxford referred to a document furnished by Mr. Pistrucci, the chief medalist, and inserted in the report. He (Mr. Shell) had already expressed to Mr. Brande his regret that certain phrases should have been employed; but the commissioners had not stated that any of the officers accused were guilty of the charges brought against them. He thought Mr. Brande was too sensitive on the subject. The first allegation of Mr. Pistrucci, with regard to Mr. Brande, was, that though a chemist of the first eminence, he was not a good mechanist; the second allegation was, that Mr. Brande having an official control over the moneyers, his own son had been apprenticed to them, and that the salary thus insured to the son tended to create a partiality in favour of the moneyers on the part of Mr. Brande himself. There was a third allegation, to the effect that Mr. Brande did not work with his own hands. Now, the commissioners did not conceive that these charges amounted to a crimination of Mr. Brande; and, therefore, they had not called upon him for explanation. He had forgotten to state, that Mr. Pistrucci had also alleged that Mr. Brande was not skilled in the hardening of the dies, and that Mr. Wyon, the chief engraver, had alleged that a vast expenditure was unnecessarily incurred at the Mint on that account. It was the duty of the commissioners to suggest such alterations as would, in their opinion, prevent the recurrence of the evils mentioned by Mr. Pistrucci; but, in doing so, they had not said one word reflecting on Mr. Brande or any other officer of the Mint. Mr. Brande had written to him (Mr. Shell) in somewhat caustic terms, calling for investigation; but when asked, in reply, to point out what particular allegation he wished to have made the subject of inquiry, he stated that what he wanted was a general investigation. A general investigation would, under the circumstances, have been preposterous. It had been said, that the labours of the commission had not been productive of any public benefit. His answer was, that if the recommendations of the report

1021
were adopted, the result would be a saving of from 14,000 l to 15,000 l. a year. There was one recommendation which was especially important—namely, that of the substitution of salaries for contracts. A commission, which sat in 1837, had that question under its consideration; and he thought the right hon. Gentleman opposite, the Member for the University of Oxford, would have done well had he directed his eminent faculties to that question when Master of the Mint. It appeared that the profits of the moneyers amounted to 5,000 l. a year; and the commissioners who had recently investigated the subject, conceiving that that was too much, recommended the substitution of salaries for contracts. In order to ascertain what contracts should be entered into, the commissioners asked the moneyers what waste was incurred in the coining of a million of sovereigns. They refused to answer the question; but Colonel Forbes, having been at the head of the Mint in India, was enabled to state that the loss amounted to 700 l.; and he believed that if the advice of that gentleman were followed, a saving of from 8,000 l to 10,000 l. per annum would be effected. The hon. Member for Essex had adverted to the fact that a son of the hon. Member for the city of Dublin had received an appointment. He would explain under what circumstances the appointment had taken place. The office of Solicitor to the Mint became vacant. The salary was 800 l. a year. The right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer determined to put a stop to a job, it being well known that nothing had ever been done for the money. Accordingly, he consolidated the office of Solicitor to the Mint and Solicitor to the Treasury, and thereby effected a saving of 800 l. annually. Mr. Powell, having held the office of assistant solicitor for thirty years, was, on the recommendation of the Attorney General, appointed first assistant, at a salary of 600 l., the fees being abolished; and the son of the hon. Member for Dublin, who had passed five years in an attorney's office, and was recommended by the Irish Attorney General, was appointed to succeed Mr. Powell, with a salary of 320 l. per annum. Such was the flagitious violation of all decency which had been so eloquently denounced. He would only add, that being, as Master of the Mint, in the enjoyment of considerable patronage, he had concurred in the recommendation of the commissioners,
1022
that the whole of that patronage should be transferred to the Treasury.
MR. GOULBURNthought the question before them had reference solely to the propriety of appointing a commission to discharge the duties which those commissioners had been directed to perform. His complaint was, that the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer had consoled himself for disturbing one job by making another—by making the office of the right hon. Gentleman opposite a sinecure, by giving him three commissioners to do what the right hon. Gentleman should do himself. When the right hon. Gentleman appointed a Master of the Mint, without any additional office, the public had a right to expect that his undivided attention would be given to the affairs of the Mint, and that he would have conducted an inquiry which he (Mr. Goulburn) did not deny was required. He must say that to send to India for a commissioner to place him in a situation of that kind in this country, appeared to him to be a degree of extravagance for which he could not account.
MR. LABOUCHERE, having had the honour to be connected for some time with the Mint, felt it due to the officers of that establishment to express his conviction, that both in skill and integrity they were altogether deserving of the confidence that had been placed in them. As he had stated to the House on a former occasion, the system on which the Mint was conducted required improvement. It was one extravagant to the country and cumbrous in its operations; but it was quite consistent with the expression of that opinion to declare that, so far at he was aware, no blame could attach to the individuals engaged in that establishment. It was impossible for any gentleman in the position of his right hon. Friend, without the assistance of others having a practical knowledge of the operations of the Mint, to conduct the inquiry in a manner satisfactory to himself, or likely to be productive of satisfactory results to the public.
MR. GLADSTONEwished to offer a remark with reference to an observation made by the right hon. Gentleman opposite, the Master of the Mint. The right hon. Gentleman had expressed a hope that the Government would speedily act upon the recommendation of the commission. With regard to that part of the recommendation that had reference to the constitution of the Mint, he (Mr. Gladstone)

1023
had no objection to offer; but he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would consider whether the coinage of the country was to he executed by contract or by salary. He (Mr. Gladstone) believed there was a fallacy on the subject. The right hon. Gentleman said that a saving of 14,000 l. or 15,000 l would be effected by adopting the suggestion of the commissioners; but was the present system extravagant merely because it was a system of contract, or was it extravagant because it was a bad system of contract? He regretted that they had not compared the system of salary with a system of contract frugally administered; and he hoped that the question would be maturely considered before a decision was come to.
SIR J. TYRELLsaid, that from what he could learn, all the information which Colonel Forbes possessed on the subject had been obtained from the Mint at home, and not from any similar establishment in other places. With regard to the Indian coinage, he believed that the people of this country would never be satisfied with coinage of so imperfect a character as that which was in circulation in India.
MR. MANGLESdefended the appointment of Colonel Forbes, and said that, in his opinion, there was no man in this or any other country who possessed so great a knowledge of the subject as that gentleman.
COLONEL SIBTHORPwished to know—with respect to an item of 506 l. 2s. 3d. for travelling expenses of the King and Queen of the Belgians, the Duke of Saxe Coburg, and the Prince of Prussia during their visits to this country—from what quarter this money was to come, by whose authority the expense had been incurred, and how it had been ascertained that this exact amount of expense had been incurred?
The CHANCELLOR OR THE EXCHEQUERstated, that such charges as these were formerly paid from the civil list of the Sovereign of the country. A Committee, however, which had been appointed to inquire into the Civil List, recommended—and its recommendation was adopted by the House—that it should be confined to merely personal expenses, and that other charges, though not of great amount, should be defrayed by the public as before, though in a different shape.
MR. B. OSBORNEsaid, that the vote with regard to the expenses of the commission for inquiry into the management of the Mint had degenerated into a skirmish
1024
between the Master of the Mint out, and the Master of the Mint in. He did not consider that the fault with respect to this commission lay so much with the Government, as with the system unfairly adopted of appointing these commissions without any estimate of their probable expense. There was a sum required on account of the expenses of Colonel Wylde to Portugal—on account of the expenses of the Earl of Minto's expedition—on account of expenses connected with the North American boundary—on account of expenses connected with the mission of Mr. Southern to Buenos Ayres—also a sum of 100 l on account of expenses of Mr. Roberts, President of Liberia. He should like to know how much more would be likely to be required for those services. There were several other charges of which he had to complain, among others, of a sum of 575 l. to the Commissioners of Greenwich Hospital for light-dues on transport vessels, which had accrued during the late war. When the vote of 100,000 l. to defray expenses to be incurred under the head of Civil Contingencies for the year ending March, 1850, came under consideration, he would propose that the sum be reduced to 80,000 l.
The CHAIRMANstated that the vote was for a sum of 50,000 l. to complete a former vote.
MR. B. OSBORNEsaid that No. 3 was for a sum of 100,000 l., and he wished when that came under the consideration of the Committee to move that it be reduced to 80,000 l.
The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERrepeated, that the present vote was for 50,000 l. to make good and complete a sum that Parliament had already voted. It appeared to him rather hard, after the Government had used their best endeavours to proceed as economically as possible, that objections of this kind should be made. It had been usual to vote the sum of 100,000 l. as a round sum every year for civil contingencies. In some years that amount was exceeded, in others, the expenditure was not so much. He thought that the better course would be to take some round sum, and they might rest assured that the Government would not spend more of it than would be actually required. During the past year, the Government had expended only 73,000 l. out of the 100,000 l. voted.
VISCOUST PALMERSTONsaid, that as the sum proposed on account of the expenses

1025
of the Earl of Minto, whilst on a special mission, was a round one, and not, as some others preceding and following that item, containing odd shillings and pence, he presumed that that sum would not be a final payment on that score. With regard to the expenses of Colonel Wylde, in connexion with the Portuguese commission, it would be remembered that a commission was appointed several years since to inquire into the claims of persons who had served in the army and navy of that country. The labours of that commission were so nearly brought to a close, that he believed they would cease entirely about the end of the present month. With respect to the expenses connected with Mr. Southern's mission to Buenos Ayres, he was not at liberty to state precisely the condition in which the negotiation between this country and Buenos Ayres at present stood; but he had the satisfaction of assuring his hon. Friend and the House, that the last accounts which he had received from Mr. Southern gave very reasonable grounds for hoping, that that long-pending affair would at last be settled in a perfectly satisfactory manner.
MR. B. OSBOENEwished to have some explanation with respect to a sum of 2,500 l., charged on account of the expenses of a commission to inquire into the conditions to be observed in the application of iron to railway structures.
The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that in consequence of a fearful accident, attended with considerable loss of life, which had happened a short time since, occasioned by the falling in of a bridge over the river Dee, near Chester, it had been earnestly pressed upon the Government that some measures should be taken by the Government to ascertain precisely the strength of iron, not as regarded weight merely, but with respect to the concussion of such a body as a railway train passing over an iron bridge. A commission was accordingly appointed; and, after some investigation, they reported that it would be necessary to make some experiments upon a large scale, for the purpose of testing the power of iron in bearing strains in every direction. As it was necessary to have this question correctly ascertained, those experiments had been ordered to be made.
MR. WYLDcomplained of the present arrangements of the British Museum, and the manner in which the map and chart department was conducted; and he would
1026
be glad to know when the report of the commission of the British Museum might be expected?
The LORD ADVOCATE, as one of the commissioners, stated that the report was already in a forward state, and would shortly be laid upon the table of the House.
MR. COBDENwanted to know what we had to do with the President of Liberia, that the country was to give him 100 l.? Secondly, he wanted to know what was the meaning of the sum put down as expenses of the King of Mosquito and suite on a visit to Jamaica?
VISCOUNT PALMERSTONstated, that when a passage was given on board a ship of war, certain expenses were necessarily incurred for the maintenance of the party, and in such cases when a passage was given as a matter of courtesy, it was not usual for the captain of the vessel to send in his bill for the entertainments to the person so conveyed. The King of Mosquito was conveyed in a ship of war to Jamaica, where it was usual for the kings of that country to be crowned, and then sent back to their own territory. The expense charged was for so conveying the King of Mosquito.
MR. COBDENsaid, that as to the King of Mosquito, the United States regarded with jealousy any setting up of monarchical States on the coast of North America; and he considered it extremely injudicious on our part to be putting ourselves forward in such prominent connexion with this aboriginal savage as to fetch him over to Jamaica, crown him there, and then carry him back again, and instal him in his kingdom. There was another item for the charge of maintaining certain Mosquito Indians; were we to keep the subjects of the King of Mosquito as well as the king himself? There was an item for the payment of some advances or other to Moorish chiefs at Portendic, and another for arms, &c., given to the Sultan of Johanna. It appeared to him most improper to be expending the public money in arming these obscure savages.
VISCOUNT PALMERSTONsaid, that as the Mosquito State had been under the protection of Great Britain for nearly two centuries, it was very unreasonable for the United States, whose origin was certainly not of the same antiquity, to find fault with the relations which had existed between the kingdom of Mosquito and this country for so many years before the

1027
United States themselves became an independent country. With respect to the charge for presents to the Mosquito Indians, he rather thought that this would be the last time that such an item would appear in the accounts; he hoped, therefore, that that answer would prove satisfactory. With regard to presents to the Moorish chiefs of Portendic, there was a considerable gum trade carried on on the coast of Africa, and it was usual to make certain presents to the chiefs of the various tribes, in order to induce them to bring the gum down to exchange with the merchants of this country. This charge was for the value of presents made to the chiefs engaged in that trade. With regard to the Sultan of Johanna, he supposed that some small presents had been made to that chief, with the view of binding him in closer alliance with us.
MR. COBDENobserved, that there was a very large amount, namely, 4,875 l. for expenses defrayed by the British Consul at Monte Video, for the relief of distressed British subjects, not seamen. He should be glad to have some explanation respecting this item.
VISCOUNT PALMERSTONreplied, that this was one of the charges which arose out of that interference which began with the last Government. It was for sums issued by our Minister at Monte Video, for the relief of British subjects who had been reduced by the contest carried on there to a state of destitution.
MR. B. OSBORNEmoved that the vote be reduced to 30,000l.
Motion made and Question put—
That a sum, not exceeding 30,000 l., (being part of a sum of 100,000 l., of which 50,000 l. has been granted on account) be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the charge for Civil Contingencies, to the 31st day of March, 1850."
The Committee divided:—Ayes 15; Noes 47: Majority 32.

List of the AYES.

Bouverie, hon. E. P.

Pechell, Capt.

Cobden, R.

Salwey, Col.

Duncan, G.

Sidney, Ald.

Fagan, W.

Thompson, Col.

Fox, W. J.

Walmsley, Sir J.

Greene, J.

Wyld, J.

Lacy, H. C.

TELLERS.

Lushington, C.

Osborne, B.

Molesworth, Sir W.

Sibthorp, Col.

List of the NOES.

Abdy, T. N.

Barnard, E. G.

Armstrong, R. B.

Bellow, R. M.

Baines, M. T.

Berkeley, hon. Capt.

1028

Boyle, hon. Col.

Lewis, G. C.

Brown, W.

M'Gregor, J.

Colebrooke, Sir T. E.

Magan, W. H.

Cowper, hon. W. F.

Maitland, T.

Craig, W. G.

Mangles, R. D.

Dundas, Adm.

Milnes, R. M.

Dunne, F. P.

Morison, Sir W.

Ebrington, Visct.

Paget, Lord A.

Elliot, hon. J. E.

Palmerston, Visct.

Estcourt, J. B. B.

Parker, J.

Fordyee, A. D.

Romilly, Sir J.

Forster, M.

Rutherfurd, A.

French, F.

Sheil, rt. hon. R. L.

Grey, rt. hon. Sir G.

Somerville, rt. hn. Sir W.

Grey, R. W.

Thornely, T.

Hawes, B.

Verney, Sir H.

Hay, Lord J.

Wellesley, Lord C.

Hayter, rt. hon. W. G.

Wilson, J.

Hobhouse, rt. hon. Sir J.

Wood, rt. hon. Sir C.

Howard, Lord E.

TELLERS.

Ker, R.

Tufnell, H.

Lascelles, hon. W. S.

Hill, Lord M.

Original Question put, and agreed to. Resolution to be reported To-morrow: Committee to sit again To-morrow.

CLERGY RELIEF BILL.
The House resolved itself into Committee on this Bill. The remaining clauses were agreed to, with some Amendments.
MR. LACYthen proposed that the following proviso be added to the 7th Clause:—
"And be it enacted. That it shall not be lawful for any archbishop or bishop of the United Church of England and Ireland to re-ordain, grant letters of orders to, or again admit to holy orders, any person so having been relieved by sentence of deposition from holy orders, as aforesaid."
MR. BOUVERIEobjected to it as being altogether unnecessary. According to the ecclesiastical law there could not be a second ordination. A person might be restored as a clergyman without being re-ordained. All that the Bill did was to allow the suspension of a clergyman from the performance of his functions.
After a few observations from MR. LACY, the clause was withdrawn.
The House resumed. Bill reported.
The House adjourned at a quarter after Nine o'clock.