The Press. — London, England, 1858-04-17 00:00:00

THE PRESS, APRIL 17, 1858. 376 margin which should consist of non-continuone service men , with whom we may deal without producing the bad effect which the step taken last year unquestionably did produce. Beyond that margin the present Government is decidedly of opinion that the entire farce of seamen should consist of men entered fur continuous service, and this very day I have given directions that every means shoald be used to increase the number of men so entered as fast as possible np to a given amount. It was the opinion of the Government, also, that the country ought never to be without a Channel fleet. It was not consistent with our position, our dignity, or our safety, that we should be without a Channel fleet, not only for the protection of our shores, but for the practice and efficiency of our officers and men . We have an example before us set by our opposite neighbcurs in Prance, which we cannot with prudence neglect. They do not allow their coasts to be left defence- less, nor do they allow their officers and sailors to remain without opportunities for practice. On the contrary, with great prudence, and with his usual sagacity, the Emperor of the French has assembled at Toulon a force which will form a squadron of evolution, and I hope before the pre sent summer has passed away that we shall see in oar own Channel a squadron worthy of England and her naval reputation assembled for the same praiseworthy object. (Hear, hear.) "I hope," said Sir John Pakington, "that the policy of this country will ever be, while adapting its force to the varying circumstances of the time, to maintain the navy in an effective condition, to keep up an afflictive Channel squadron, and further to have a reserve of available seamen to man our ships upon an emergency without the recurrence of so humilia ting and unsatisfactory a state of things as we have lately witnessed in our ports." (Hear, hear.) The practice of putting ships out of commission after a brief term of service, dismantling the vessels and disbanding the crews, when in the highest state of efficiency, was, he thought, most injurious and ex travagant, and he intimated that a different system would be adopted in Altura If we were to adopt permanently the system of com missioning b..;7): for fou; years —my own feeling would be for five years—Lit'. at any rate, if we were to allow the rale of commissioning ships for a longer time than at present, one of the results would necessarily be to pro. &lee * material effect on the position and prospects of the officers of the navy. (Hear, hear.) The number of officers distributed among the ships would be diminished in proportion to the extension of the period of commis sion, and this raises a question which we are bound seriously to consider. lam not prepared definitely to announce the intentions of the Government on the sub ject, bat I think it is unquestionably one of those questions connected with the administration of the which we are called consider, it will receive - We grave e navy on to . and I may say that oar best attention. de are bound to take care, not only of the pay and position of the officers but also of their efficiency, and to promote their efficiency it is desirable that they should be able to go to sea for a fair term of service. We think a longer period of ser vice than at present should be established, but, at the same time, we see the difficulty arising from the position of the officers. We hope, however, to be able at no distant time to effect the improvement we desire in such way as to promote ecouomy without injoting the pro specie of those gallant officers whose best interests ire Are aiWsys bound to keep in view. (Hear.) Sir John Pakington then discussed the different votes in detail, giving explanations upon the several items. Between votes 2 and 8 the Government pro posed to make no change. Upon vote 8 without wishing to imply censure upon the late Administra tion, he was under the impression that onr dockyards were not conducted with that strict regard to economy that is consistent with efficiency. In vote 8 the late Government proposed to increase the dockyard artificers from 10,850 to 12,190 men. It was the intention of the present Government to ask only for 10,850 men, and for a vote of 50,0001. to be spent on hired labour and extra time, being a reduction of 50,0001. on vote 8 ; on vote 10, for naval stores, the Government proposed a redaction of 75,0001.; od vote 11, for new works, the Government proposed reduction of 108,0001.; and on vote 17, for the trans port service, Government proposed a reduction of 85,0001.—in all a reduction, as comfpared with the estimates of the late Government, of 318,7561.: I bare now (said Sir John Pakington in conclusion) staled the general results at which her Majesty's Govern ment have arrived re clearly and concisely as I could, with out any appearance, I hope, of censuring the views of the late Government, but solely with the object of explaining to the committee what I conscientiously believe to be re quired by the service of the country. ( Hear, hear.) In the office which I have the honour to hold I am 6seteted by some of the ablest and most distinguished naval officers, and I may say for them, as well as for myself, that we have but one object in view, to Secure economy, to avoid tnnecessary expenditure, but, above all, to maintain the Naval force of England at the point which is required for the honour, dignity, and safety of the country. (Hear, hear.) The hon. baronet concluded by moving the first vote, that the naval force for tho year 1858 be 59,380 men and boys. The usual miscellaneous discussion ensued neon this vote, and extended, in point of fact, to the whole of the votes on the paper. In the oonrsa of the dis• cussion, Sir Charles Napier, Sir (.1 - . Pealell, Ur. Bon• tinek, and Sir J. Elphinstone paid a high compliment to Sir John Pakington for the clearness and con cision with which ho had moved the estimates before the house. Sir CHARLES NAPIER entered into a brief com parison between the French and English navies, mil trusted that there would be no relaxation on our part in the building and repairing screw-ships. Sir Cussus WOOD vindicated the conduct of his administration of the Admiralty, and censured the Government for proposing to reduce the expenditure upon shipbuilding and stores. Mr. CORRY explained that the Government were not about to relax the labours of our dockyards, but that they were not prepared without further expe rience to sanction an increased expenditure. If at the end of six months more money was required, a supplementary vote could be taken. Mr. Corry also stated that our line-of-battle ships, which at the close of the past French war amounted to 118 in number, had been reduced to 00 afloat and 10 building, the actual number at the present moment. Mr. DRUNIOND pointedly enforced the necessity of our always having the command of the Channel. Lord PALMERSTON agreed that the insular position of this country rendered naval protection essential to its security; but In considering what should be the application of the funds voted for naval purposes, preference, he thought, should to given to the pre paration of materials, the building of ships, and the augmentation of dockyards and Stores, rather than having a greater number of men actually employed. The reductions and retrenchments proposed by the present Government in his opinion were not wise or prudent. Sir J. PsialloTolv ' in reply, observed that Lord Palmerston had fallen into an error in supposing that the present Government were about to stop shipbuilding. They had no such intention. Mr. HORSEAN insisted that, although a war with France was highly improbable, we should be secured against accidents and possible contingencies. There was no cause for alarm, but great reason for pre caution. The vote, and oertain money votes to complete the estimates, were agreed to, when the chairman wall ordered to report progress. The Customs Duties Bill passed through com mittee. The Trustees Relief Rill was read a second time. The Oaths Bill was read a third time and passed. Some further business was disposed of, and the house adjourned at a quarter to one o'clock. HOUSE OF LORDS-TuESDAI. LIBEL BILL. Lord CAMPBELL moved the second reading of the Libel Bill. The measure, he said, consisted only of three clauses, one relating to the immunity from actions for libel to be given to the publication of the debates of Parliament; the other two clauses de fined the protection to be extended to reports of ordinary public meetings. At present the law gave such a protection only to the published proceedings of the courts of justice; this immunity the bill proposed to extend. Ile quoted an opinion of the late Lord Denman, advocating the fullest publicity of reports of the courts of law and the proceedings of the Legislature as most advantageous to the public. The measure would not in the remotest degree intelfere with the privileges of Parliament. He contended that both houses, by providing separate galleries for the reporters, had formally sanctioned the publication of their proceedings, and the bill would make no change whatever in their orders on 'the subject. But the proprietors of newspapers were still liable to prosecution for publishing words spoken in Parliament if they were libellous. If the same mattter transpired in a court of law the pub lisher would not be liable to any action for record ir.g it if done faithftilly and without malice. Why should he not have an equal degree of immunity for reporting the debates of the Houses of Legisla tion? Tho third clause of the bill defined the pub lic meetings to which he wished to see the same principle applied. On the question that the bill be read a second time, The Earl of DERBY rose and read to the house the telegram the Government had just received from Alexandria, announcing the tall of Lucknow on tha 19th of March, the capture of 117 guns from the rebel force, the retreat of the main body of the sepoys, and the submission of the native proprietors. The communication was read amid cheers from both sides of the house. Lord LYNDITURST_ resumed the discussion on the Libel Bill; he condemned it as inade9uate, and particularly objected to the attempt to define, in the third clause, what should be considered lawful meet hips. The Houses of Parliament were omitted from the definition, and, according to the bill, might be considered unlawful assemblies. There were Inany purposes for which public meetings were called—of a religious, ecient3Bo, and social character. They Were attended by such quiet and orderly men as the right rev. prelates ; yet those meetinge were excluded from the definitions of the clause. Were they to be considered unlawful ? Lord Lyndhurst excited considerable hilarity by the manner in which he criticised this part of the measure. He suggested that the third clause should be struck out altogether, leaving the bill to apply, if enacted, to all meetings called for a lawful purpose, without any attempt to define them. He would not oppose th e second reading, as he wished the bill to go to a select corn. mittee for amendment. Lord WENSLEYDALE strongly objected to the bill, and moved that it be read a second time that day six months. The Loan CHANCELLOR opposed the bill, and Lord CRANWORTH supported it. Lora CAMPBELL replied, and the house divided. The numbers were— For the second reading— Contents 7 Non-Contents .... Mikiority against the second reading -:28 Their lordships then adjourned. HOUSE OF COMMONS-TUESDAY. INDIAN TELEGRAPHS. The CruNon.Lon of the EXCHEQUER, in reply to Mr. Crawford, stated that no arrangements had yet been concluded to effect the object of extending the Mediterranean system of telegraphs to Alexandria, and for bringing India into telegraphic communica tion with this country, but he hoped that in a very short time arrangements embracing that object would take place. He added (in answer to an in quiry by Mr. Wyld) that arrangements were pending between the Austrian Government and the Govern. went of her Majesty upon the subject, but that the giving of a monopoly to the Austrian Government did not form part of those arrangements. THE BRITISH ENVOY 4. - T TURIN. Mr. WISE asked the Under• Secretary for Foreign Affairs whether Sir James Hudson was to remain at Turin as her Majesty's Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary, and whether it was intended to recall the Secretary of Legation, Mr. Erskine, from the same mission. The CEULECILLOR of the EXCHEQUER : In reply to that question, I have to inform the hon. gentleman that there is no intention of recalling Sir James Hudson from Turin. (Hear, hear.) Great services are not cancelled by an set of carelessness, however it may be regretted for the moment. (Cheers.) With respect to Mr. Erskine, he has been recalled to this country in order to explain his conduct, and he has been suspended. (Cheers.) STRAITS OF MALACCA. Lord BURT called attention to the condition of the settlements in the Straits of Malacca—viz., Penang, Singapore, and Matacos, commonly called the Straits Settlements ; and, after referring to the allegations contained in a petition from Singapore, and to the expediency of placing these settlements under the immediate control of the Secretary of State for the Colonies, moved for copies of any correspondence on the subject. Mr. 13sturz briefly replied, and the motion was agreed to. THE STLDE DUES. Mr. J. L. RICARDO moved an address to her Ma jesty, representing the injury to British commerce inflicted by the tax levied by Hanover on merchan dise and shipping ascending the River Elbe under the denomination of the Stade Dues, and praying that her Majesty will be pleased to give notice of the termination of the treaty between the United King dom and Hanover of the 22nd of July, 1844, accord ing to the terms of the eighth article. He described the delays, vexations, and annoyances attendant upon this tax, which, he contended, offered a great obstacle and impediment to our trade. He com plained that the tax really increased the cost of pro- duction of our commodities, that it subjected our ships to a differential duty, and that it tended to divert the course of British trade from a natural to an unnatural channel. The eighth clause of the treaty, he thought, evidently contemplated that a time would arrive when the people of England would no longer tolerate this tyranny, arbitrarily exercised by the kingdom of Hanover, which, he said, was a disgrace to the civilized vrorlo. The motion was seconded by Mr. BRAMLEY hi °Az. Mr. HENLEY admitted that a turnpike-gate was always a great nuisance, and he believed that Mr. Ricardo had truly stated that the payment of this toll was accompanied by circumstances that aggra vated the tax, which he should Ibe glad to see pro perly got rid of. But both Mr. Ricardo and Mr. Moore had directly raised the broad question of the legality of the payment, and this question was not so simple as Mr. Ricardo seemed to suppose; tt was, on the contrary, surrounded by considerable diffieulties. Before the house compelled the Govern ment to give notice of the termination of the treaty, the more prudent oonrse, in his opinion, was to have the matter investigated, as in the case of the , Sound dues, by a oommittee of that h ouse, and it 2dr. Itioardo would adopt that warn, he (Mr. k, cusiiion, Sir Chance Napier, Sir Pechell, Ur. Dew as the right rev. prelates, yet those wieetinge were 2dr. Ilioardo would adopt that come, " L"" 11" 1 "!+ 6 immommimmimm