The Sun. — London, England, 1859-03-12 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT. HOTJSE OF LORDS-(YESTERDAY). The Lel , AD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack at five o'cl .ock. THE lONIAN ISLANDS. Earl (TREY said, in consequence of a cbmmunication he had received from the noble earl opposite (Derby), he should withdraw his motion upon the subject of the lonian Islands. His opinionremained the same, although the noble earl said that injury would be done to the public service by a discussion of the subject. The Earl of DERBY—I must express my sincere ac knowledgments to the noble earl for the very frank manner in which he has acquiesced in the suggestion I took the liberty of making to him; and I am the more indebted to him, because he has taken this course in opposition to his Own judgment. I hope it is unnecessary for me to assure your lordships that in offering that suggestion I was actu ated by nothing but a sense of what was really for the in terest of the public service. Since the noble earl first placed this motion on the paper, I have been exam i n i ng carefully the voluminous documents con nected with the recent history of the lonian Islands, and while I felt that this discussion could not have been adequately conducted without a full knowledge of those voluminous documents, of the events which led to Mr. Gladstone's mission, and of the results which attended it, I found from an examination of those papers that it was almost impossible to give extracts from them, and equally impossible to lay the whole of the correspondence before your lordships, especially those parts relating to some of the proposed resolutions, without producing a vast number of documents which would have involved recurrence to facts which had much better be buried in oblivion, and which could have but cast considerable censure on some persons who would not be in a position to give any answer. I took upon myself the liberty of requesting the noble earl to forego the exercise of his own judgment in bringing for ward this motion, but I assure your lordships that I would not have taken that course if I had not been very strongly confirmed in my views by a conversation which I have had with Mr. Gladstone since his return, and also by the strong expression of Sir H. Storks, who, in writing, has stated the great anxiety with which he looked to the probable effect of any discussion whatever in Parliament on the minds of the lonian people. I think I should not do justice to my own opinion if I abstained from taking this opportunity of expressing my strong sense of the public spirit and patrio tism which induced Mr. Gladstone, at great personal incon venience, to undertake a very laborious, a very invidious, and a very thankless task, and to expose himself, as he naturally must, to much misrepresentation and misunder standing. (Hear, hear.) I think it right to take this opportunity of saying with regard to Mr . .. Gladstone that not only did he undertake that task at the request of a Government with which he had no connexion whatever, but that one condition attended the acceptance of the office, and that he made a sine qua non—namely, that beyond the payment of his actual expenses he should receive no remu neration in any shape or manner for his services. (Hear, hear.) Mr. Gladstone's mission has had no positive results, but I cannot say that I regret it, for, although it has not led to any changes by legislation, whether desirable or not, it has had the effect of "placing this country with regard to the lonian Islands in a right position. It has shown to the lonian Islands, to Europe, and to the world at large, that she is not the oppressor, but the protectress of those islands, and that she is perfectly prepared to give them an ample measure of free institutions—larger, perhaps, than some persons think desirable, yet, at all events, so large as bona fide to constitute them that free and independent Republic , under the protectorate o f thi s country, w hi c h was declar ed by the treaty assigning the protectorate. I have only again to return my thanks to the noble earl for having acquiesced in the request which I ventured to make to him. I am sure in so doing he will best consult the public interests, and give great satisfaction to the present High Commissioner, whose position is one of considerable difficulty, and to whom in such a position it must be the wish of your lordships to show every consideration and afford every moral support in your power. (Cheers.) _ THE DANUBIAN PRINCIPALITIES In reply to a question from Earl ST.GERWAXs, The Earl of MALMESBURY said he had no official information respectingcertain.proclamationsreferring to the Hospodar of Wallacha which had appeared in the public prints. A conference would shortly sit at Paris on the subject, and the subject would be taken into the fullest consideration. DEBTOR AND CREDITOR BILL. On bringing up the report of the amendments to this bill, The LORD CHANCELLOR said he had prepared one or two clauses which he felt it necessary to introduce in this bill. As the right of imprisoning a debtor was to be taken away, he had prepared a penal clause, having reference to judgment debtors who kept out of the way, and applying also to cases of concealment of property, to fraudulent and fictitious losses, and making false representations. By one of the elausesfii the Bankr - upt Act ti . landlord was entitled to receive twelve months' rent out of the estate of his bank rapt creditor. In the bill before the house that term was altered to six months. Objections had, however, been made to that change, and he proposed to continue the landlord's right to•twelve months' rent. Lord WENSLEYDALE was of opinion that a case which had lately come before one of the courts showed the neces sity for a clause such as he had proposed in committee, to guard against the fraudulent transfer of property by an in solvent to his wife or daughter. The LORD CHANCELLOR said that he presumed the case alluded to by his noble and learned friend was that of " Steevens v. The Eastern Banking Corporation ;" but his noble and learned friend seemed to be misinformed as to the facts of the case. The party who made the settlement did so at a time when there was no reason to suspect that he would be an insolvent. Afterwards the trust money was dealt with in transactions with the bank; and on the insolvency of the bank the creditors_ filed a bill to make the trust Property available for their debts. It was decided by the Court of Chancery that, though there was an im proper dealing with the trust money, that could not affect the trust settlement, the validity of which the Court up held. He did not know of any cases of grievance that called for such a clause as his noble and learned friend pro posed. _ _ Lord ST. LEONARDS observed that several clergymen were in the habit of contracting debts and sequestrating the income of the parish, and also effecting insurances on their lives as security for the repayment of the loan. The incumbent of Camberwell had done so, and left the country to avoid the payment of his debts, leaving a curate at a small stipend to perform his duties. He (Lord St. Leonards) wished to introduce a clause in the bill which 'would have the effect of enabling the bishop of the diocese (in cases where the clergyman's conduct did not render him unworthy of occupying the put pit) t o allow him the same income that he, if absent, would pay a curate for perform ing Divine service, and appropriate the remainder of his income to the discharge of his pecuniary liabilities. The Bishop of LONDON said he did not rise to oppose the clause, but it appeared to him an d hi s r i g h t rev. bre thren, th a t there was something rotte n i n pr i nc i p l e i n it. T hey l thought that the spiritual .interests of the cure were the objects that should be specially attended to. If the bishop of the diocese were to be empowered to assign a stipend to the indebted clergyman, it should be such a one as would be adequate for the decent maintenance of his family. Now, as the object of giving this power to the bishop—although that was not distinctly brought out by the noble and learned lord—was to enable him to provide for the spiritual good of the people of the parish, it would be better that the bishop should have the power of assign ing such portion of the revenues of the parish to a person who would perform the duties, whether that person was the incumbent or not. The state of the parish alluded to by the noble and learned lord might not be paralleled, but he (the Bishop of London) feared there were many cases of a similar character, and he thought it desirable that some legislative measure should be introduced to remedy the evil. It was hardly wise, however, to do anything that would have the effect of encouraging a young clergyman to con sider that he was not liable to the same responsibility for the payment of his debts as other people. He hoped the noble and learned lord would bring forward such a measure as would settle the whole question. The LORD CHANCELLOR said his bill was for a totally different object, and he therefore must object to the introduction of the clause. If, however, the noble and learned lord brought in a bill on the subject, he (the Lord Chancellor) would give it his best consideration. The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH said he should support his noble and learned friend, if he pressed his amendment to a division, conceiving that it was far better, when a cler gyman fell into difficulties, that his property should be divided fairly b e t ween the honest creditors in the parish, than that it sh ou ld b e shared by two or three rogues . The house th en di v id ed, and there appeared Contents (for the clause) Non -contents .............. Majority, non con t ent The amendment was therefore lost, and the house imme diately agreed to the report. The bill was then ordered to be read a third time on Thursday. OCCASIONAL FORMS OF PRAYER. This bill was read a third time and p asse d . CHURCH RATES. The Duke of MARLBOROUGH moved for leave to bring in a bill to amend the law relating to church rates. The p r oposal of the bill was, that every p erson who already had a place of wor ship should, upon making a declaration to that effect, be exempted from payment of church rates. The motion was agreed t o, and the bill was brought in and read a first time. The house then adjourned shortly after six o'clock. • HOUSE OF COMIVIONS-(YESTERDAY.) The SPEAKER took the chair at four o'clock. PRIVATE BUSINESS. The following bills were read a third time and passed : Banff, Macduff, and Turriff Junction Railway; Formartine and Buchan Railway ; Leominster and Kington Railway ; and Swansea Vale Railway. The Red Sea Telegraph Company Bill went through committee and was ordered for third reading. PETITIONS. Several petitions were presented, praying that the Mini sterial Reform Bill might be rejected on the second reading as totally inadequate to meet the requirements, and an in sult to the common sense, of the community; against the Highways Bill ; for the introduction of vote by ballot in any measure of Parliamentary Reform ; for the admission of Dissenters to the same rights as members of the Established Church ; and for inquiry into the subject of the Newfoundland fisheries. BELFAST LUNATIC ASYLUM. Mr. DAVISON moved for a copy of the correspondence which passed between the lord lieutenant of Ireland and the governor of the Belfast district lunatic asylum, re lating to certain a lleged errors in the report of the commis sioners of inquiry into the state of the lunatic asylums of Ireland regarding the Belfast asylum —Agreed to. • DWELLING H OUSES (SCOTLAND. Mr. BAX_TEB, moved, for an add ress f or re t urn from each burgh in Scotland showing, from the valuation roll under the Lands Valuation Act, the number of dwelling houses of £lO real rent and upwards occupied by male householders • also the number occupi e d b y male house holders at £B, and under £lO ; the number at £6, and under 18 ; the number at £5, and under £6 ; the Lumbere at " an d under 15; the number at £3, and unde r s A ; th num ber at £2, and under £3 ; and the number under £2, ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE (EAST INDIES AND CEYLON). Mr. GROGAN moved for a return of the names, sala. ries, date of appointment, and nature of office of j u di c i al officers, law 0 cers of the Crown, and other principal officers connected with the administration of justice in the East Indian possessions of the Crown and in Ceylon; and apeoifyin g suc h officers as shall have belonged to the legal profession in England, Ireland, and Scotland respectively. —Agreed to. FIRE INSURANCE. On the motion of Mr. GREER, the fol wing was ordered :—Return of all sums paid into the Inl_t d Revenue Office in Great Britain and Ireland, for duty n insurance against fire, for the quarters ending sever, By the 25th March, 24th June, 29th September, and VII December, 1858 (in continuation of Parliamentary pact r, No. 365, of Session 1858). REFORMATORIES, SCHOOLS, &c. Mr. BLACK moved for an address for return showing the amounts of grants which have been made by the com mittee of her Majesty's Privy Council on Education, to reformatories, ragged industrial schools, or any other institutions, under whatever designation, in England and Scotland, in accordance with the minute dated the 2d day of June, 1856, from that date to the 31st day of December, 1857 :-1. The name and character of the school or institution, and where situated ; 2d. The number in each school respectively on account of whom the grants have been made ; 3d. Ihe amount for capitation grant of 60s. ; 4th. Amount in aid of teachers' salaries ; sth. Amount in aid of rent ; 6th. Amount in aid of purchase of tools and raw materials for labour ; 7th. Average amount for each 1 pupil; Bth. Amount in aid of building.—Agreed to. THE FRANCHISE. Lord VANE TEMPEST gave notice that on the motion for the second reading of the Ministerial Parliamentary Reform Bill, he would move that persons who had £2O in the savings bank, and other persons not included in the present bill, should be admitted to the exercise of the franchise. THE BALLOT. Mr. H. BERKELEY gave notice that when Lord J. Russell's amendment to the Government Reform Bill was brought forward he would avail himself of that opportunity to bring forward the question of the ballot, in order that it might receive full discussion.. ALLEGED PARTICIPATION IN THE PROFITS OF PIRACY. In reply to Mr. RIDLEY, into the charges against Mr. Caldwell Sir E. B. LYTTON said that a commission had been e m . the profits of piracy at Hong Kong, appointed to anticipation o p in ati q o uir n and the despatch which . had been received fully acquitted that gentleman. During the trial of the Queen v. William Tarrant, which took place at Hong Kong, i n which it was sworn that certain papers im plicating Mr. Caldwell had been destroyed by order of Dr. Bridges, something had transpired that induced the Government to suvend Mr. Chisholm Anstey, the Attor ney-General of the colony. D r . B r id ges was no t in the colonial service at present, and therefore Government had no control over him, Sir John Bowring' s tenure of office had expired, and he had given directions to his successor to in stitute an inquiry into the conduct of the government officials at Hong Kong, amongst whom it appeared that there was a great laxity in the discharge of their duty. THE NEW RIFLED CANNON. Sir DE LACY EVANS asked the Secretary of State for War, whether it was the fact that only 250 of the ap proved new rifled cannon were at present ordered or expected to be constructed within the current year ; and, if so, whether this arrangement wasnotinadequate to the pre sent wants of the Army and Navy and to the present aspect of European affairs ; and whether it would not be practica ble and more advisable for the Government to afford Sir William Armstrong greater proportional means of con struction, whereby he might be enabled to provide the country, within a short period, with a far greater number of these national defences ? The SECRETARY for WAR not being present no answer was returned to the question. THE MAGISTRACY OF THE COUNTY OF HUNTINGDON. On the motion that the house on its rising do adjourn until Monday, Mr. T. DUNCOMBE asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he could explain the cause of the recent large additionto themagistracy of the county ofHuntingdon. It appeared that there were more magistrates in that county than policemen. Recently there had been added to the list of the magistrates in Huntingdon no less than six, of whom two were civilians and four clergymen. In the selection several gentlemen of liberal politics and high respectability had been passed over, and persons who did not occupy the same position appointed. One of the gentlemen was a brewer who had public-houses in every village of the county, and a question might arise as to whether he was an eligible per son to sit on the bench when questions relating to licenses were brought before the consideration of the magistrates. Some were of opinion that these appointments were made on political grounds, and it was desirable that information should be afforded to the public on the subject. Mr. S. ESTCOURT said that he had not been able to obtain information from the lord lieutenant of the county with respect to these appointments, but he had applied to the Lord Chancellor, and, so far as he could understand, the gentlemen were very well qualified to fill the office of magistrate, both from position and local knowledge. The hon. member was incorrect in his state ment with reference to the last six appointments, for they included three laymen. It was natural for the lord lieutenant of the county to give the preference to persons of his own political sentiments in his selection for the magistracy, a practice that prevailed in every part of the kingdom. He did not know whether the magistrates in Huntingdon exceeded the number of police men in the locality, but if they did it was not an unusual circumstance. The magistrates for the county were 33 in number, and he believed that all their services were required. With regard to one of the gentleman being a brewer, any improper influence on his part with reference to licensing was provided against by act of Parliament, as he was not entitled to take a part in the magesterial proceedings where his business interests were concerned. After a few remarks from General PEEL and Mr. FEL- Lowms, who vindicated the appointments in question, and denied that they all took part against the Liberal candi dates, Sir J. WALSH denied the accuracy of the statement of the right hon. gentleman (Mr. S. Estcourt) that lord lieu tenants throughout the country were influenced in the magisterial appointments by political motives. After a few words from Sir J. PAKINGTON the subject dropped. BURNING CHAPELS AT TRAVANCORE. Sir ANDREW AGNEW, put a question to the Secre tary of State for India with respect to the burning of Mis sion Chapels; the ill-treatment of missionaries and native converts - the interruption of low caste funerals by men of high caste • and the alleged conduct of the British resident. Lord STANLEY said that no official information had been received on the subject, and in the absence of such he did not think it would be right to enter into any explana tion in reference to the matter. He trusted the house would suspend judgment until the arrival of the necessary information in this country. CHURCH RATES (ABOLITION) 81LL... Mr. SCHNEIDER said 'he trusted the Chancellor of the Exchequer would appoint a day for the second reading of this bill. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER ex pressed his willingness to accede to the request of the hon. member. He could not, however, appoint any evening sitting for the second reading of the bill, but would name Tuesday next for that purpose. LANDED ESTATES COURT (IRELAND.) Mr. JOHN FITZGERALD asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whether it was the intention of Government to recommend the appointment of a third judge of the Landed Estates Court (Ireland), in the room of Judge Martley, lately deceased. THE PHENIX CLUB PRISONERS. Mr. DEASY asked the Chief Secretary for Ireland whe ther there was any foundation for the statement which appeared in the Times, that letters from the persons accused of political offences in Ireland to their professional agent had been intercepted or delayed by the Government? Lord NAAS said, with reference to the last question, from inquiry he had ascertained that the practice alluded to prevailed throughout England. But, on the representation of Mr. Macarthy Downing, the professional gentleman acting on behalf of the prisoners in question, he bad given instruc • tions that any communications in writing between them and him should not be opened. As related to the first question he was in favour of there being a third judge in the court mentioned, and the subject was under the consideration of the Government. HIGH COURT OF ADMIRALTY. Mr. HADFIELD asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Government intends to bring in a bill to enable serjeants, barristers at law, attornies, and solicitors to prac tise in the High Court of Admiralty, without compensation to proctors ; and whether the yearly compensation to proctors and other officers of the late ecclesiastical courts, made and to be made underthe late act had been ascertained, and if so, the probable yearly amount thereof, and what yearly amount had been received by way of contribution, in fees or otherwise, in diminution of such compensation to proctors and other officers of the new Court of Probate, from suitors and parties proving wills and taking out ad ministrations ; and what may be the probable yearly amount of the expenses of the said Court of Probate, and of the compensation to proctors and other officers. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied that it was not his intention to introduce any bill to enable sergeants, barristers, attorneys, or solicitors to practise in the Court of Admiralty, and the time to consider the ques tion would be when it was brought forward. With regard to the proctors, the question of compensation to them was referred to commissioners, who fixed their remuneration. The hon. gentleman seemed to consider that no exaggerated statement could be made with respect to the amount of compensation. An estimate was given to him of the amount shortly after he came into office—a sort of rough sum which amounted to £250,000. He felt it his duty to refer it tothe commissioners, namely, his right hon. friend the Judge- Advocate, and his hon. friend now Secretary to the Trea sury, but who was not then a member of the house. They sat in the beginning of April, and at the end of July his right hon. friend informed the house that the amountnow would not - exceed £176,000 a-year. It was diminution npgay the expenses , h e owever, brought nearly to a conclusion, as very atooun f t w may clai b m e s tak r e e n ma a in t remained, anmdereththeanagxgrengo,aooteo a-year. annual It was but investigation tofromhi justice to the commissioners to say that the country was very much indebted to them for the searching thell every claim was subjected. They got great aid wreerfoeunpudt vrinhfoorrernroae n co y rds of the Income-tax Office. Claims e thousands a-year, and gentle menineLirtees dhemselves as having been in possession of large indeed, on referring to their having t very different incomes for the income tax. t r e e :Lon that circumstance. (Laughter). So much had income tax, that he thought it right to mention been said against the With 1 of original o a f r d the t o claims,n f r e o e o s t proctors' and rs w (A hi l e a h ug w h a . s ) x2s l' They o reduced ' l 130 , 00 0 1 - 55 0 00 a year: and the stamps, that will be applied_ as a di balanceclaims. of the Probate Court. tha t tarmeomunainteeddt°wo"uldellre a o p r pli e d to MATRONS IN EMIGRANT SHIPS. Mr. EWART asked the Secretary of Stat e for the Colonies whether, in cases of emigration b y fem ales, due care is or will be taken that the fem ale emigrents are placed under the charge of a matron duly appointed or selected by the Government. Sir E. BULWER LYTTON said he was aware the sub h y t e regu.. j ect, to which the question of the hon . member related, was one of great interest, and he would state that, b lotions, matrons were appointed, who had charge of single females in all emigrant ships sent out by the Emigration Commissioners, but not in ordinary ships. The right hon. gentleman was understood to add that the matrons had a free passage home from Australia. Mr. KINNAIRD said he believed the matrons had only a free passage home from Sydney. What he thought his hon. friend (Mr. Ewart) wanted to know was w h e ther the matrons were properly paid, as they sometimes had the care of from 300 to 400 women. _ __ VACCINATION. In answer to Mr. DilossELL, Mr. ADDERLEY said it was quite true the law had been very inadequately enforced, but the Government was exercisin g all the powers conferred on it in setting the local authorities in motion. With respect to the power of issuing regulations to raise the qualification of vaccinators, THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY EVENING, MARCH 12, 1859., they were now issuing such as would be enforced without delay by the Poor-law Board, and in that way would have the assistance of the Medical Registration. One cause for the delay that had occurred was, that the Privy Council thought they could carry out the •regulations through the Medical Council, but they found they could not do so. He had only, in c onclusion, to say that all that would be done would be re ported to Parliament, and he hoped it would give satisfaction. The motion for the adjournment of the house, at its rising, till Monday . , was then agreed to , - RIFLED CANNON. _ The order of the day for going into committee of supply having been read, Sir DE LACY EVANS asked the Secretary for War whether it was the fact that only 250 of the approved new rifled cannon were at present ordered or expected to be con structed within the current year; and if so, whether this arrangement was adequate to the 'Present wants of the army and navy ; and whether it would be practicabie to afford Sir William Armstrong greater proportional means of con struction. General PEEL said he did not think it would be quite prudent to state how many of Armstrong's guns were ex pected to be constructed during the present year. (Hear, h e ar.) He had upon a previous occasion informed the house that the Government would have those guns made as quickly as possible, and that it was their intention to esta blish a manufactory for them at Woolwich. of the plant in the dockyards, which of course would fairly enter into the price of a ship, and the cost also of superin tendence. In vote 8, for the wages of artificers and labourers employed in her Majesty's establishments at home, exclu sive of those employed in the steam factories, civil police, medical department, &c., Parliament had voted in the 11 years £6,968,844. That represented the sum actually voted for shipwright labour in that time at home. In vote 9 £389,752 had been voted in the 11 years for' the artificers in the yards abroad ; and in vote 10 there had been voted for the purchase of timber, masts, deals and other stores, exclusive of the purchase of coal and other fuel, and of the purchase and repair of steam machines, £10,180,194. Be sides this, there had been expended—how, of course, they were not permitted to know—what was called an excess of £1,861,154. This, however, might not be altogether on ac count of ship building,. and he should be glad to hear that it was not so. Thus, in the 11 years, on these heads there had been voted £19,399,944, against £14,000,000 on the other side, leaving a deficit of £5,000,000 to be accounted for. (Hear.) He wished to state before proceeding fur ther that he had no notion there had been any malversa tion. Far from it. He was personally acquainted with most of the officers in the dockyards. He knew them to be good, honest, and zealous servants, and he had no intention of attacking any one of them. (Hear, hear.) It was the system, and the system only, which he assailed—(hear ,hear) —but he was bound to say that the figures he had read had appalled him, and he hoped the First Lord would be able to prove them incorrect. Meanwhile, however, they showed the miserable system which prevailed in naval affairs and the result was that, while we were left in utter darkness for a time, all of a sudden the world was informed that after spending million upon million in the creation of a navy we were vastly inferior to the French in the number and quality of our ships. (Hear, hear.) But he did not share the alarm of the First Lord of the Admiralty upon that head. The statement of the right hon. gentleman the other night, though truth and nothing but truth, was not the whole truth. He hoped he might say that without offence. It was a very able statement ; no doubt well calcu lated to effect the two main objects which the First Lord had in view —first s to make an attack upon the right hon. baronet the member for Halifax; secondly, to induce the house to grant a large sum of money to increase our line-of battle ships—but what he meant to say was, that it tended to create an alarm which he, for one, did not share. (Hear.) The FirsilLord, for example, did not tell the house of an ad mirable class of vessels which we possessed in immense superiority over the French—a superiority measured, ac cording to the right hon. member for Halifax, by 200 excel lent small ships. He was not going to enter into a discus.. sion upon the comparative merits of line-of-battle ships and gunboats. If he had the choice he would prefer, not gun boats exclusively, but certainly small vessels. However, without stopping to discuss that point, he would proceed to state how the enormous sum which he had mentioned had been spent, how it was we had so little to show for it, and how it happened that after an expenditure of £19,500,000 we had a fleet which, according to the First Lord, required "reconstruction." The money had been spent in reckless and extravagant alterations. (Hear.) He did not think the house had the smallest notion of what had been going on in our dockyards in the way of tinkering vessels, amputating them, performing all sorts of surgical operations upon them. (Hear.) Their heads and tails were cut off—(a laugh)— they were sawn asunder, they were maltreated in every pos sible way. (Laughter.) Ships built 10 years ago by . Sir William Symonds were not in fashion at the present day, and nobody coull blame the Admiralty for lengthening and altering them, because as originally constructed they were not fit to go to sea ; but he wished to speak of the reckless alteration of new snips. Their name was legion, almost every ship was altered. (Hear, hear.) Take the case of a three-decker, the Howe, 121 guns. She was laid down only last year or the winter before, but the dockyard people were now pulling her down to put a new bow upon her. Had any great improvement been made in the bows of ships within the last two years ? (Hear, hear.) Nothing of the kind had taken place. Another case was that of the Immortalite, a 51-gun frigate, now being built at Pembroke. That unfortunate ship had gone through a great deal of trouble. (A laugh.) She was first of all lengthened amid ships. Last year orders went down from the Admiralty to lengthen her five feet by the bow. Certain parties—he did not know who, but he had no doubt persons at Pembroke— thought that to lengthen a frigate five feet by the bow would be to make an imperceptible alteration, and would have no effect whatever. (Hear, hear.) We lengthened yachts 14 or 20 feet by the bow. (Hear, hear.) But the authorities were inexorable, their orders were reiterated, and the poor ship was lengthened five feet by the bow. The result was, as might be naturally supposed, that either the First Lord himself, with his fine nautical eye—(a laugh)— or some other member, of the Admiralty Board, saw upon visiting her that she was not fit to go to sea, and ordered her to be pulled down again and lengthened 15 feet. (Hear.) Such instances of official blundering would be amusing if they were not so costly. (Hear, hear.) The Orlando, the Mersey, and indeed almost all that class of ships, had been treated in a similar manner ; but, not to detain the house, he would now ask their attention to a case which was almost incredible. Some time ago a frigate, the San Fio renzo, was being built either at Deptford or Woolwich. She was a great favourite with the London folks, who used to visit her in large numbers, and a beautiful model she was. Sir J. PAKINGTON—Where is she now? Lord C. PAGET—The First Lord asked where she was now. Why, she had vanished into thin air—gone, he hoped, to another and a better world. (Great laughter.) He would not trouble the house with any more of these cases. (Cries of "Go on," and cheers.) The Lyra, the Racer, and other noble vessels began life at 450 tons, but they gradually grew in size until they arrived at 750 tons, when they were launched. (Hear, hear.) Was not that a reckless expenditure of money ? (Cheers.) The fact was that scarcely a ship went to sea without costing far more than the sum fixed by the original estimates. (Hear, hear.) His object on the present occasion was to put an end to so reckless and extravagant a system. If his motion were carried, the Admiralty would no longerhave the power to pull a ship down without their intention becoming known to that house. Nothing could have induced him to sub mit such a resolution if he had thought or suspected that it would impair the efficiency of the service, but he had no such fear. (Hear, hear.) Let the house recollect that the £5,000,000 which had been thrown away as he had de scribed would have sufficed to turn out no fewer than 22 line-of-battle ships, armaments included. (Hear, hear.) The Royal Commission on Manning the Navy proposed that they should have a large reserve at a cost of something like £500,000 a-year, and they had the money for that reserve if something like economy were introduced. (Hear, hear.) They had heard a great deal lately about recon struction, and he was fast coming round to the opinion of the hon. member for Norfolk, that they wanted a little re construction at the Admiralty. (Hear, hear.) The noble lord concluded by moving his resolution. Mr. LINDSAY seconded the motion. Sir J. PAKINGTON said—l am sure that every one who has listened to the speech of the noble and gallant lord must appreciate the difficult task which I have to perform in answering it, inasmuch as it consisted throughout of details of the most minute character. Let me do the noble lord at the outset the justice to say that he has addressed the house both with that ability and in that tone of mode- ration which he has shown on many former occasions. (Hear, hear.) I am also perfectly confident that the object of my noble and gallant friend is most patriotic. I entirely accept his statement that his object is solely the benefit of the service. (Hear, hear.) But recognizing the spirit of the noble and gallant officer to this extent, I must add that I have heard this speech with the deepest regret, and that my belief is, that had he wished to do injury to the public service, he could not have taken a surer mode than by the speech which he has just addressed to us. (" Oh I oh I") I assure hon. gentlemen that I intend to meet the speech of the noble lord as fairly as I can, and I will presently give reasons for the opinions which I have just stated. (Hear.) This is no ordinary moment with regard to the affairs of our navy. I stated the other night, with a fairness and can dour, which has been recognized by the noble lord, as I felt it my bounden duty to state openly, the exact position in which we stand. I told the house in what respects our navy had became inferior to other navies. I pointed out the duty of her Majesty's Government to ask Parliament to grant an unusual sum of mony to efface that inferiority and to restore our supremacy. My noble and gallant friend comes and makes a speech which, if it has any effect at all with the world, can only have the effect of shaking all con fidence in the shipbuilding department of the Admiralty— (hear, hear)—and making the public believe that at a mo ment of great importance, when we are bound to make a great effort, those by whom alone this effort can be made are not to be trusted with the expenditure of the money which Parliament grants. (Hear, hear.) Lord C. PAGET—I did not say that. Sir J. PAKINGTON—I do not say that the noble and gallant lord said it, but ,that is the inevitable result of the speech which he has made. (Hear, hear.) He told us that he was not making any attack, but from the beginning to the end his speech was one of the severest attacks on the shipbuilding department which any man could possibly deliver against any public department. (Hear, hear.) The obvious tendency of the speech was such that, instead of moving the future adoption of a particular form of the estimates, he ought to have concluded with a resolution that Sir B. Walker and the shipbuilding department of the navy are unworthy of public confidence. (Cheers.) I am not called upon, except from a sense of justice, to be the champion either of Sir B. Walker or of the right hon. gentleman who preceded me at the Admiralty, or of the right hon. baronet the member for Carlisle, who preceded him, and during whose administration, if there be cause for blame, it must have arisen. For everything which I have done during the last 12 months, I have given the best explanation which I can ; and it is clear the censure of my noble and gallant friend applies to a state of things which existed long before I had anything to do with the Admiralty. (Cheers.) My noble and gallant friend says he wants to see something like decent economy. (Hear, hear.) Will the house allow me to state how far I have endeavoured to promote decent economy, and bear this statement in mind, when another motion comes before them to-night, for referring the Navy Estimates to a select committee. I stated to the house last year that I intended to appoint a committee to investi gate the state of the steamships. I stated the other night that I had appointed such a committee, and that they had reported. I also stated that L had appointed a committee to inquire into the dockyard expenditure with the view of seeing that the public money was spent with the greatest advantage, and that the public had full value for their money. I told the house at that time that the Dockyard Committee had not yet presented their report, nor have I received that report, but I am daily expecting it ; and what I wish to state to the house now is, that as soon as that report is in my possession, it is my mtention to lay it and the report of the Steamships Committee on the table of the house for their information. (Hear.) I am bound to add that Sir B. Walker has sub mitted a reply to the Steamships Committee, and it is only an act of justice also to give that answer with the report. (Hear, i hear.) Impressed with a deep sense of our responsi bility n the proposals which it became my duty to submit for the increase of the navy, and impressed also with the conviction that the house had a right to expect the fullest possible explanation of the rapid increase during late years of the expenditure for the navy, her Majesty's Govern ment thought it desirable in the early part of the winter to appoint a confidential committee, consisting of certain members of the Government, in order to investigate what were the causes of that great increase. The years selected for examination were the financial year, 1852-53, and the now current financial year, 1858-59. The inquiry was in trusted to four most competent persons. The first was my right hon. friend Secretary for the Admiralty (Mr. Barry), and I cannot revert to the part which he took without re cording my gratitude and my sense of the great zeal and extraordinary ability with which he has assisted me in my arduous duties at the Admiralty. Another member of that committee, whose name is enough to prove his efficient y, was the present Accountant-General of the Navy Sir Bromley. The other two members were Mr. W. G. Ander son, and Mr. George Hamilton, of the Treasury. Those four e g a e us nt e le e m f an the w in e e n r t ee t s h e o e ro f u e g x hl e y n E t t e t , h a e nd qu t e h st e io e n th as er to t causesthe w hich made it the duty o f d the Government to propose to Parliament a large increase of ,the navy. The house will understand there are portions of that report which it will not be my duty to submit to Parliament, but every part of it which relates to financial matters and the increase of expen diture in the navy it is my intention to lay on the table for the further information of the house. (Hear.) I hope this statement will convince the house and my noble and gallant friend that on the part of her Majesty's Government there is no desire to evade the duty which rests on them to pro mote to the utmost judicious economy. (Cheers.) Then my noble and gallant friend talks of the extravagant ex penditure of the shipbuilding department of the Admiralty. Now, I cannot help saying that, looking to the inevitable tendency of his speeeh, it is very much to be regretted that the noble and gallant officer should make any statements to this house of such a nature without having gone into those statements in such a manner as to satisfy himself of their certain accuracy. These statements were calculated to shake public confidence. (Hear, hear.) Now, to shake public confidence unnecessarily is a great misfortune. (A cry of " No, no 1" and a laugh.) If the noble and gallant officer would listen to me he would not seriously dispute that assertion. To shake public confidence unnecessarily is a misfortune. (Hear.) That is my proposition, and I think he will be willing to concede it. It is my firm belief —of course I speak under correction—that my noble and gallant friend has not taken the pains that he ought to have done to verify his assertions, and that, perhaps from inabi lity to obtain better information, his statements cannot in substance and in fact be borne out. The noble and gallant officer took a period of 11 years, and he lumped together a number of line-of-battle ships, a number of 74's, and a number of frigates ; and then assumed the cost of each. Lord C. PAGET-begged to explain .that he had taken the mean of the two classes of line-of-battle ships as the cost of a line-of-battle ship, and that he had estimated the frigates and corvettes in the same way. Sir J. PAKINGTON—My belief is that, in calculating in this way the noble lord inevitably arrives at an errone ous conclusion. The other day I took three 50-gun frigates, of which the Shannon is one, built at three different periods of 10 years. The first cost £51,000, the second £71,000, and the third between £90,000 and £lOO,OOO. This shows that in dealing with figures of the cost of ship building it is very dangerous to take a mean. I believe that varying in cost as ships do according to their size and scantling, it is necessary to ascertain the cost ship by ship, and not to take so fallacious an estimate as the mean cost. The noble and gallant officer assumed the mean number of line-of-battle ships to be 30. That was the number during the Russian war, but the number at that time was much greater than at any other, because after the war many were paid off. In a case where accuracy is essential it cannot be arrived at by assuming the number in this way. Then, my noble and gallant friend arrived at the conclusion that the total cost of building ships during 11 years had been £6,000,000. The whole cost of building, converting, and maintaining ships during 11 years my noble and gallant friend estimated at £13,000,000, or, with excess of stores and continencies, £14,000,000. But has my hon. and gal -1 lant friend in his calculation excluded machinery ? Lord C. PAGET—Yes. Sir J. PAKINGTON—If I rightly understand thenoble lord, although he may have excluded machinery in his esti mate of £14,000,000, he has not deducted the cost of machi nery from his estimate of stores. Lord C. PAGET—I excluded machinery on both sides. Sir J. PAKINGT ON—The noble lordthen told the house that the deficiency of £5,000,000 had been spent in reckless extravagance. If such a statement is not true, or even if it cannot be substantiated, it ought never to have been made. I think that it is a very harsh charge, and that it does not rest on proof. I will not follow the noble lord through the 11 years ; but, as he told me the nature of the observations he intended to make, I thought it my duty to communicate with Sir B. Walker, the surveyor-general of the navy. Lord C. PAGET—I said nothing against individuals. Sir J. PAKINGTON—I hold in my hand some figures which do not travel over 11 years, but which accu rately give the expenditure of the years between 1852-3 and 1857-8. I have here the cost of shipbuilding, convert ing ships, steam machinery, repairing, fitting for sea, and in commission, troop-ships, yachts, tenders, &c., fitting for steam ordinary, maintaining in ordinary, huks, taking ships to pieces, and incidental expenses. The greatest items are shipbuilding, steam machinery, and the third, the heaviest item of all, to which the noble and gallant officer never alluded, is the labour devoted to fitting ships for sea, and the cost incurred upon them in commission. (Hear.) The aggregate is £12,286,517. The item for shipbuilding is £2,821,406, The cost of steam machinery is £3,423,023. The expenditure under the head " fitting for sea and com mission," during these six years, was £3,825,922. So that the heaviest item of the whole my noble and gallant friend took no account of, and this runs away with the greatest portion of the labour of our dockyards—the theory of our dockyard expenditure, that you can launch every year three line-of-battle ships, three frigates, six sloops, and smaller vessels. The rest of dockyard labour is devoted to fitting ships and incidental expenditure. The right hon. gentleman the member for Halifax knows that during the time he held office at the Admiralty immense sums were spent upon these incidental expenses to which the noble lord hardly ad verted at all. The noble lord said, in my speech on bringing forward thenavy estimates, I attacked my predecessor, and omitted all reference to the smaller vessels which he had constructed. I know that my noble and gallant friend was prevented from being in his place on that occasion, but if he had read what I said, he would have found that both accusations are unjust. I said— ... " It will be seen that during the time that that right hon. gentleman was at the Board of Admiralty considerable ad ditions to the smaller vessels were made, such as corvettes, sloops, and, above all, gunboats. I am not sure whether the addition of gunboats had not commenced in the time of the right hon. baronet the member for Carlisle; but our present gunboats were chiefly added by the right hon. baronet the member for Halifax, and I do not think a more valuable ad dition has ever been made to the navy than those gun boats." I 114 e that, after reading that passage, the noble lord will acknowledge that he was not justified in saying that I had not done justice to my predecessor, and that I had not made re ference to the small vessels. On the contrary, I fully ad mitted, whatever might be our position with regard to large vessels, our position with regard to small vessels was very satisfactory. I have endeavoured to follow the noble lord through his statement, and the paper to which I have re ferred, and which I shall be happy to hand the noble lord, shows that, instead of there being a balance of £5,000,000 on account, there is no balance whatever on account. (Hear.) Then, the noble lord spoke of reckless expenditure. With respect to the San Fiorenzo frigate, I can make no answer, for I never heard of her before, and the noble lord says she has gone to some better place. I really know nothing about her. However, of the Immortalite I have heard. She was lengthened in the bows. lam not bound to defend every thing done by the Admiralty during the last 11 years, or to explain any mistake in shipbuilding which the depart ment has at any time made ; but this I may say, that the change in naval architecture in consequence of the intro duction of steam power has been very apparent of late years. It takes several years to complete a ship, and if the Surveyor of the Navy finds, in consequence of the more advanced state of science, that he can, before it is too late, improve the sailing power of a vessel, alter its lines for the bettor, and give it higher bows, it is his duty to do so, and the duty of the Board of Admiralty to sanction the alteration. (Hear.) How is it that we have acquired our great naval superiority and reputation P Has it not been from the spirit and liberality with which at all times Parliament has voted whatever money , has been necessary to effect and carry out these improvements ? (Hear.) The noble lord has made charges of a grave and painful application to those who have to bear them. lam not the man who has to bear them, and therefore I can speak impartially. The noble lord has spoken of reckless extravagance. I believe that such a charge is not just, and that the noble lord will regret the language he has used. Those who are re sponsible for the efficiency of the British navy ought not to be blamed for making changes rendered necessary by cir cumstances and groundless fears, if excited, have only a tendency to paralyse the hands of those who are endeavour ing to make our ships efficient, and to prevent them from carrying out improvements. (Hear, hear.) Then comes the question whether the motion of the noble lord will readily cure the evil of which he complains. My deliberate opinion is that it will not. The noble lord says that if the form he prescribes were once adopted, there would no longer exist the power to indulge in all this expense. Ido not believe that it would have the slightest effect whatever in prevent ing any such expenditure as the noble lord has adverted to, if it were desirable that that expenditure should be made. Indeed, I should be sorry if the effect of the present motion were to prevent any expenditure for the improvement of our ships ; but my first objection to the motion is, that it would tend to delude the house. The noble lord requires that on the commencement of the building of any ships we should give the names-of the:ships, the tonnage, and a great many other particulars, and the noble lord says that thereby the house would know what at the end of each year would be accomplished. Now, I gave proof to the house, in my state ment the other evening, that for 10 years previously the plans of the Admiralty had never been earned out. And why ? Not because there had not been a bona fide intention to carry them out, but because, on account of the exigen cies of the public service, the labour had been diverted to other objects. The right hon. baronet the member for Halifax will correct me if I am wrong, but I refer to the year 1855 or 1836, as affording a remarkable instance of this fact. At that period, in consequence of the pressure of the Russian war, the labour of the dockyards, instead of being devoted to the construction and preparation of line-of battle ships and frigates, was devoted to the preparation of smaller vessels adapted to the peculiar nature of that war. The current year affords another remarkable instance of the same kind. Supposing that such a rule as the noble lord suggests had been laid down last year, what would have been the result ? There would have been a complete delusion in the house, for no such programme could have been carried out, because, when August arrived, what we discovered wifh respect to the navy of foreign Powers induced us to divert all the men in the dockyards from that labour which, under the form of the noble lord, would have been going on, and to employ them in the conversion of line-of-battle ships into steamships. (Hear, hear.) The proper course of proceeding is for the house to look to the Navy Minister of the day. When the naval statement is made he should frankly state what money he wants, and how he proposes to spend it. That is a safer way than tying down the hands of the Admiralty by a form like the one proposed, which I do not think could be adhered to, and which should be retrospective rather than prospective. I trust, therefore, that the noble lord will not press his motion. If he intended to make a charge of reck less extravagance, he should have done so by a direct motion ; but I think the noble lord has failed in proving his charge. (Hear, hear.) Sir C. NAPIER did not think the house was at all satis fied by the statement of the right hon. baronet that there had been no reckless expenditure. The noble lord had no intention of treating Sir Baldwin Walker with disrespect. That gentleman had no power whatever. He must do what ever the Admiralty pleased. If the noble lord should have changed his motion at all, he should have moved to dismiss the Board of Admiralty,, who were the cause of all the evil. Whenever a Ministry was changed the Board of Admiralty changed also, and a new set of men came in, with new ideas about ship building. This led to alte rations which involved unnecessary expenditure iu the construction of vessels. When a ship was laid down, and run up to a certain extent, there were alterations made. They lengthened her either at midships, bow, or stern. He knew one ship that had her magazine changed nine times while she was in course of construction. This led to ener •mous expense. Lord Auckland was of opinion that when you commenced building a ship you should finish her, and then, if you did not approve of her, , build another. The noble lord said, "Let bygones be bygones; let us begin a f res h, and curtail, as far as we can, the expenses of the country." (Hear.) He only asked that, before new esti mates were brought in, an account should be rendered by the First Lord of the Admiralty of what had been done with the money voted. The First Lord of the Admiralty did give such an account, but it was the first ever given. But he might be soon leaving office. (Laughter.) He (Sir C. Napier) did not wish him to remain, nor would he say he wished him to leave. (Laughter.) He thought the right hon. gentleman was going on tolerably well, indeed much better than could be expected; considering that he knew nothing whatever about the business. (Laughter.) He (Sir C. Napier) thought the First Lord of the Admi ralty should be a naval officer who would have the power of appointing all his subordinates, subject to the veto of the Secretary of State, and that the business of the department should by trauncied iu ono place, iwitewl of beilig, .0 8 at DOCKYARD EXPENDITURE. Lord C. PAGET moved as a resolution, " That, in con formity with the practice of public departments of laying before the house detailed estimates for works costing above £l,OOO, it is desirable that a statement showing the pro posed expenditure in the construction and conversion of her Majesty's ships be annually laid before this house with the Navy Estimates." He believed his resolution was founded both in reason and good policy. If the rule that applied to all other public works were adopted with regardto the building of ships of war, the country would not be liable to those periodical panics that now frightened the public from its propriety. With respect to all other works, such as docks, warehouses, or piers, if the Minister thought them necessary he told the House of Commons what he proposed to do, and asked for the money to do it. The expenditure for great works of this kind was generally spread over seve ral years, and the House of Commons had year by year, and most wisely, become more jealous of any tampering with those estimates. If any additional votes of money were asked for on account of these works they were always met with some inquiry in the house ; but if the works to be con structed were vessels of war the house knew nothing about them. In the present Navy Estimates more than £2,100,000 was asked for on account, they were told, of the cost of materials for shipbuilding ; but they were not told whether it was to be used for building frigates, fine-of-battle ships, or corvettes. They were asked for the gross sum, but they had no means of judging whether the money would be wisely laid out, or whether it had been wisely laid out in former years. He admitted that the First Lord of the Admiralty had this year to some extent broken through the old routine and reserve ; he had actually told the house what he wanted to do, and consequently they were ready to vote him the money he required. But at the Admi ralty they were all aghast at the innovation ; they could not believe there that the First Lord had told the House of Commons what he was going to build—what, in fact, he was going to do with the public money. The object of his mo tion - was to oblige—not the right hon. gentleman, who, he believed, would be quite ready to do it, but his successors —(laughter)—to adopt the same course. (Hear, hear.) He wished to have it placed on record as a rule not to be broken through, that the House of Commons should have the same control over shipbuilding as over the construction of docks and barracks. The expense of those works could not always be estimated ; their cost was liable to be increased by un foreseen circumstances—an irruption of water, or defective foundations. But the cost of ships of war could always be exactly calculated ; and he wished the house to have, every year, a list of the ships the Admiralty was going to build, of those it had built m the past year, and of those it in tended to build in the year following. Me believed the state ment the right hon. gentleman (Sir J. Pakington) made on a former night had created a most painful sensation out of doors. After laying, out £20,000,000 on a steam navy, simply for the construction of the ships, and exclusive of the cost of their engines and machinery, there was nothing to show that the public had got 20s. in the pound for the money. There was another reason, and a very strong one, that induced him to propose this resolution. There had been a system of extravagant expenditure pursued by the ship building department of the Admiralty, which, he main tained, ought to be thoroughly looked into. (Hear.) In the statement he was about to make the figures he should have to quote to the house really appalled him. (Hear.) If the right hon. gentleman could correct or controvert them no one would be more pleased than himself. He had last year brought this subject under the attention of the house during the discussion of the Navy Estimates ; the Government was then asked why it did not furnish some detailed state ment of this expenditure for its own credit. He had looked with some anxiety for this year's estimates, hoping that the right hon. gentleman, in deference to the opinion of several members who spoke last year, would have given some little information in those estimates as to what ships he was going to build. He had looked carefully through the estimates, and only in vote No. 10 could he see anything to show what the Admiralty was building. The only item for ships in course of construction was for two dredging machines and some mud barges—(hear, hear, and laughter) —that was all there was to show what was being done for £2,000,000 of money. (Hear; hear.) The item really looked like a derision. He had been requested to go into an examinatiou of the expenditure under this head, and he had done so. He had taken the expenditure of four years, and he had gone through the dockyards to see what the public had got for its money. The right hon. gentleman the member for Halifax (Sir C. Wood) had moved for a re turn of the number of steam vessels added to the navy since 1848, or during a period of 11 years. The result from this return was that we had during those 11 years built in the dockyards 24 line-of-battle ships, 21 frigates, 36 cor vettes and sloops, one floating battery, two gun vessels, 14 gunboats, two troopships, two tenders, and one yacht. During the same period, we had converted from sailing ships to screw-steamers nine line-of-battle ships, seven blockships, four mortar ships, and one troop and store ship, and we had also purchased a great many vessels. By the courtesy of the First Lord of the Admiralty he had obtained from the Surveyor's-office a statement of the cost of build ing these vessels. The line-of-battle ships were as to cost divided into two classes, represented by the Duke of Wellington, which cost, for the hull, £106,291, masts, yards, rigging, sails, and stores, £19,224 ; total, £125,515 ; and the Agamemnon, which cost for hull, masts, and yards, £106,000. Taking the mean between these two sums (which was rather favourable to the Admiralty)—viz., £116,000 — the cost of the 24 line-of battle ships would be £2,784,000. Of the frigates, the Shannon cost £91,000. There had been 21 ships built called frigates, most of which were much smaller than this vessel ; but as the Mersey, Orlando, and one or two others were larger, he had taken the cost of all at that amount, which would make the expenditure upon frigates £1,911,000. Of corvettes the surveyor reported that there were three classes, the Pearl class, the Hazier class, and the Swallow class. The Pearl cost £46,850; and it was worthy the attention of the First Lord of the Admi ralty that, while this ship cost that sum for labour and materials alone, exclusive of the charge for plant and stock, a similar ship with the same scantling, only longer in the bow, of 1,524 tons builder's measurement, and surveyed by the surveying officers of the dockyards, was built for the Portuguese Government for £40,624. The 35 corvettes were built at a cost of £1,050,000 ; the floating battery, the iron plates for which were taken from the vessel which was burned in Mr. Scott Russell's yard, £30,000 (this amount he got, not from the Surveyor of the Navy, but from a pri vate yard where one of these vessels was built) ; two gun vessels, £26,000 each, £52,000 ; 14 gun-bo a t s , £B,OOO eac h, taking the mean cost of the different classes, £112,000 ; two tenders, £2,000 each; and one yacht, the Victoria and Al bert, £50,000—£54,000. The whole amount paid for build ing during the 11 years was therefore £5,993,000, or in round numbers, six millions. These votes, Nos. 8,9, and 10, comprised three several businesses of the Admiralty— viz., building, converting, and maintaining (including re fitting, and repairing). He now came to the conversions. During the 11 years we had converted in the dockyards 9 ships of the line, 7 blockships, 1 troopship, and 4 mortar ships, making a total of 21 ships. The right hon. baronet stated the other evening that the cost of converting these ships ranged from £lO,OOO to £40,000. He had taken the average at £30,000, which he believed was much above the real cost, but in whichpie intended to include masts and sails. That gave a total forthe2l ships of £630,000. He now approached a part of the subject in which he was sure that no practical commercial man would have any difficulty in following him ; but which perhaps the right hon. baronet at the head of the Admiralty , not being a practi :Al sailor, might not so well understand, viz., the cost of the maintenance of ships. He could, however, assure the right hon. baronet that he had not arrived at the results which he was about to state to the louse without consulting . practical men both in the Government dockyards and in private establishments. He was ashamed to trouble the house with these details— (hear, hear)—but he was convinced that unless theyonce for all went into details upon this subject, some day or other there would be a catastrophe. (Hear, hear.) The House of Commons and the country would willingly give to the Go vernment any amount of money which might be required, if it could only be assured that it was spent with decent eco nomy ; but it was right to look into these matters, and re quire the Government to give them a proper debtor and cre ditor statement. (Hear, hear.) In arriving at the cost of ships in commission, he had been obliged to resort to the system of average. He had obtained from the Admiralty a list of the ships in commission on the Ist of January, 1848, Ist of January, 1855 (at the height of the war), and the Ist January, 1869: The line-of-battle ships in commission were, in 1848, 17 ' in 1855, 35 ; and in 1859, 25 ; the blockships in 1848, 1 ; in 1855, 4 ; and in 1859, 9 ; making the total line of-battle ships (because he wished rather to err for than against the Admiralty, and would therefore count all these vessels as of that class) in 1848, 18 ; in 1855, 39 ; and in 1859, 34. The mean of these numbers was 30, and that he had taken as the average number of line-of-battle ships in commission. The question was the per centage of wear and tear which occurred to one of her Majesty's ships when in commission. Upon that point he had consulted men who had nothing to do with the Admiralty, and also men who had a great deal to do with it, and he believed he was as near the truth as possible when he stated that wear and tear at 6 per cent. The mean number of line-of-battle ships in commission during the last 11 years was 30 ; the average cost of each was £116,000, and 6 per cent. on this would be about £7,000, which would represent the annual wear and tear of each of the 30 line-of-battle ships. This was exclusive altogether of the machinery, for the subject was so great that to mix up the inquiry into those two heads would be to spoil the in quiry in both. If he met with any encouragement from the house he would undertake to investigate into the steam de partment, where things were much worse, he believed, than in the shipwrights' department. (Hear, hear.) This gave a total of £2,310,000 wear and tear of the 30 line-of-battle ships in the 11 years. The mean number of frigates during the 11 years was 18; the wear and tear of them for 11 years would be £1,089,000. Of corvettes and other vessels of the smaller classes, the mean number was 192, and the wear and tear of them in the 11 years was £2,530,000, making total of wear and tear of the 240 ships in commission during these 11 years of £5,929,000. We had now about 500 old ships in ordinary, each of which cost something a-year, say £lOO, which would give £550,000 for the 11 years. main taininghis gave a gran d tota l o f b u ildi ng, conver ti ng , an d main taining ships for t the 1 might be sletyrieagrhst ; f of X o l r 3, i l t o w 2, as ooo hi . s T d h e is si d r o e cu th m a c t n a t he h- shown to a g rea t man y p eo pl e , i n order that any errors in it tn perfectly f a ith ful statement might be laid before the public. The only point which had been suggested to him was, that there might be an excess of stores over the year 1848, which might amount, perhaps, to x w i h which o m ,o ig oo ht i l n ia r v o e un be d en nu b m uil be t lowed £500,000 on that £300,000. However, he had head,al- lowed and £400,000 for sailing ships forrs in thi t s h t e ina ll e' y m ea akin rs. g T a h t a o t ta Za o s f the creditor Sie, and now for the debtor side. The money wh i c h had been voted by Parliament during that time to build and maintain these ships was contained in votes 8,9, and 10 ; at least he only took these votes, because he wished only to reckon the material and the labour em ployed on it, leaving out of eight altogether the percentage -~.,:.._ present, partly carried on at ,'Whitehall, and partly at Somerset-house. (Hear, hear.) Mr. B. OSBORNE hoped the house would pause before it did an act of injustice to an absent man, Sir Baldwin Walker, who, on account of his valuable services in the departmenti over which he presided, had been made a baronet and a K.C.B. had been charged with living created a deficit of 4000,000 in eleven years. These figures of the noble lord were well-considered, and it was impossible to answer then; off-hand ; but he merely rose in defence of Sir Baldwin Walker. (Hear, hear.) He was a permanent officer of the navy, and in jus tice to him and to former Boards of Admiralty, he ought to call for a select committee. (Hear, hear.) As to the remarks of the gallant admiral, let him move for a select committee, and he should have his cordial support. Mr. BENTINCK said that the object of the, noble lord did not appear to him to be intended for a n attack upon the Surveyor of the Navy. Neither did he think the noble lord intended to attack the present First Lord of the Ad - miralty, who had donehis duty in a department ,about which he previously knew nothing, , with great ability. (Hear.) The noble lord did not attack any person, but he attacked 'the system. He was inclined to think, however, that the form of this motion would not tend to obtain the object he had in view, which was to insure the careful expenditure of the sums voted for the naval service. He would, how ever, co-operate with any member who would propose a system of careful and guarded expenditure. He thought that, under the present constitution of the Board of Ad miralty, efficiency and economy were impossible. (Hear.) He had taken a deep interest in this question, and he had inquired in private yards whether if they were to carryon their business in the way her Majesty's dockyards were carried on, what would be the result, and the answer was —lf they were to act upon that system, even with the Bank of England to back them, they would be ruined. (Hear.) He contended that, under the present system, efficiency and economy were impossible. The reductions of the late First Lord of the Admiralty were more in accordance with the requirements of the Chancellor of the Exchequer than the maintenance of the maritime supremacy of the country. The Admiralty was now made a political jobbing horse. If they were to place a civilian at the head of the army it would be monstrous. The First Lord of the Admiralty was the most important of all the departments, and they selected men to fill the office without asking whether he knew the difference between a steamship and a jolly-boat. Was that the way in which this important service ought to be dealt with ? They ought to appoint a naval man at the head of the navy, and if any man in that house would propose it, he would support him. Now, a man was selected for the office without reference to his antecedents, but merely for political convenience. It was said the heads of that de partment were guided, in cases of difficulty, by the naval lords. Well, what was the consequence ? Why, that the responsibility was really not with them, but with the First Lord, who was guided by them. He must conclude by again saying that the efficiency of the navy involved the very existence of the country, but he thought the present system defective in many important respects, and he, for one, was prepared to support any inquiry which would have the effect of putting a stop to any malversation of the funds of the country. Sir F. BARING said, that if the noble lord really be lieved there was waste and reckless expenditure in the administration of the navy, he was quite right in bringing the subject forward. What he blamed the noble lord for was, that he did not adopt the only mode in which his pro - fessed object could be gained, namely, that of moving for a committee of inquiry. The house ought to proceed in this inquiry like men of business, not by examining the estimates of one year, but of several; and by doing so he was confident that a great public object would be gained. Sir G. PECHELL, thought that great credit was due to the noble lord for the motion he had made, and though he was persuaded of the efficiency of the Surveyor of the Navy, he augured much good from the figures and statements which he had communicated to the house. He felt the highest esteem for the character, ability, and services of Str Baldwin Walker ; he was a most excellent public servant, and he could not allow the occasion to pass by without paying his humble tribute to his merits. Sir J. ELPHINSTON believed that the inquiry moved for by the noble lord would be unproductive of good, and therefore could not vote for it. Mr. M. GIBSON suggested that the noble lord should not press his motion, but that a committee of inquiry should be appointed with reference to the figures and statements he had made. When the block-ships were first introduced into this country, they were thought to be so formidable that Baron Dupin was directed to inquire into the subject, and he made a report to the French Chambers, that it was indispensably necessary for France to have a force of the same description ; and yet those were the very ships that were now described as useless. He believed these very block-ships were now courted in the French navy. (Cries of "No, no.") He would suggest to the noble lord to withdraw his motion as regarded the supplies for the navy, and move that part which related to the naval expenditure. Lord J. HAY was of opinion that the inquiry ought to be limited to the naval expenditure. )Ir. W. S. LINDSAY thought the noble lord who brought forward the motion rendered essential service to the navy and the public. His noble friend intimated a few days ago the nature of his motion to the right hon. gentleman the First Lord of the Admiralty, so that he should be prepared to contravene his statements, but he had not done so. He. produced a statement from the Sur veyor of the Navy, but he had not accounted for the five millions which his noble friend said was entirely unac counted for. His noble friend asked what was done with it, but no answer was given. His hon. friend the member for Portsmouth filled the office of First Lord of the Ad miralty for some years, and ought to be able to give an explanation, but he did not do so, Ho would suggest to his noble friend to withdraw his present motion, and to move for a committee to inquire, not into the naval adminis tration, but the expenditure, and he trusted the right hon. gentleman would not oppose it. There was another reason why this expenditure should be inquired into, because there was a very strong feeling out of doors that they were too lavish of the public money. He hoped, therefore, his noble friend would adopt the suggestion, and that the house would agree to it. Sir CHARLES WOOD congratulated 'the noble lord on the able manner in which he had brought forward this question. He denied that he had been insensible to the necessity of placing this country on a proper footing as regarded its naval power, and he hoped to be able, when the proper time came to satisfy the house that every attention had been paid to the building of the larger class of ships, as well as those of the smaller kind. (Hear, hear.) Mr. CORRY heard with regret the statement that his right hon. friend (Sir J. Pakington) had not defended Sir Baldwin Walker. His right hon. friend did defend Sir Baldwin, and he (Mr. Corry) would say that Sir Baldwin Walker was not to be accused of any extravagance. He could, on his own part, and on that of every membefof the Admiralty, bear the highest testimony to the conduct of that gentleman. He denied that the annual charge for the wear and tear of ships in commission was so small as the noble and gallant lord had estimated, namely 6 per cent. In reality, the maintaining rate of those ships was fully 81 per cent. Lord J. RUSSELL considered the question was not at present in a satisfactory condition. There "were two matters before the house. The motion of his noble and gallant friend, and the statement he had made in withdrawing it. With regard to the motion, it might not be satisfactory to the house, with its present imperfect state of information as to the details of their shipbuilding expenditure, that a par ticular form of plan should be prescribed with regard to the construction or conversion of their line-of-battle ships • but on the other hand it was most u nsa ti s f ac t or y th a t the ships; of his noble and gallant friend, the result of personal inquiry and evidently of great research, should be entirely set aside, because it was said that all his calculations might be wrong, and that inquiry was therefore unnecessary. The statement made by his noble and gallant friend, corrobo rated as it had been by the statement of the hon. and gallant admiral (Sir C. Napier), certainly left the im pression on his (Lord John Russell's) mind that further inquiry was necessary, and when he said so, he was not supporting an unusual course, for in the years 1818, 1828, 1838, and 1848, there had been select committees on their naval and military expenditure, but there had not been any in 1858, though his right hon. friend the member for Portsmouth had stated that with re ference to the navy he intended to move the appointment of such a committee. The statements of his noble and gallant friend, and of the hon. and gallant admiral certainly re quired some answer by way of inquiry. Sir Baldwin Walker was no doubt a very able officer, deserving of the confidence reposed in him by the Admiralty, but the house was not acquainted with the fact respecting the degree in which he ordered the extensive alterations of our vessels of war. What he wished to know was, did the Admiralty ever in terfere with Sir Baldwin Walker, or was he allowed the free, absolute, and uncontrolled exercise of his own will and judgment. If the alterations so constantly made in our vessels were required on scientific principles and by reason of the progress of science, then that state of facts would be an answer to the demand for inquiry ; but it was not satis factory to go on increasing our naval estimates, and neces sarily increasing them, and voting large sums of money without inquiring whether that money was properly ex pended, and whether the utmost economy was exercised in the building of these ships. In saying this he did not wish to lay blame on any particular persons. He should be un willing to vote on the motion as it stood, but rather than allow the statement of his noble and gallant friend to be passed over, he must record his vote for the proposition un less the Government agreed to some kind of inquiry which could easily be arranged. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that, as a general rule, the Government had no objection what ever to inquiry being made into every branch of the public expenditure ; but let the proposal be fairly made, let time be given for its consideration, and let the house not be hurried into the sanction of an inquiry until, at all events, it was clearly shown and ascertained that valid grounds existed for taking such a course. He was quite surprised that the noble lord the member for the city of London should in so inconsiderate a manner urge the Government to accede to the motion for inquiry. The Go vernment had already inquired. There had been three in quiries by competent professional commissions into the state of their dockyards, the condition of their steamships, and the general expenditure of the navy. They were con ducted by men of the greatest ability, and with a devotion of time, earnestness, and intelligence than which nothing could be more praiseworthy. His right hon. friend the First Lord of the Admiralty had undertaken to lay the re sults of those inquiries before the house, and until the in formation so promised was placed in the hands of members, so that they might have ample materials wherewith to form a correct opinion, no further inquiry ought to be sanctioned, inasmuch as it would be premature. The proposition of the noble lord (Lord J. Russell) was not founded on reason, and he trusted that the house would not agree to the request. Mr. T. G. `BARING argued that Lord Clarence Paget's 'calculations as to an unaccounted-for expenditure of five millions was incorrect, inasmuch as he had omitted to in clude surpluses to the extent of £780,000, which ought to have been placed to the credit of ship-building, and had calculated at least £500,000 of excesses on steam machinery. Instead of five millions, there had only, in reality been £2,800,000 unaccounted for; and, if investigation were made, it might be found that many of the noble and gallant lord's calculations with regard to that sum were also inac curate. Mr. J. LOCKE thought the noble lord had been very badly treated, and should he divide tho house, he should certainly vote in support of his motion, for that which ought to be conceded—a strict inquiry into those matters. (Hear.) The house then divided, and the numbers were— For going i n t o committee ...... . ... 117 For Lord Clarence Paget 's amendment.. 97 Majority for going into committee —2O Mr. WILLIAMS submitted that the estimates ought t) be referred to a select committee before any more money was voted away, and with that view he objected to any votes being taken at that late hour, and should move that the house do now adjourn. Sir J. PAKINGTON expressed a hope that the hon. gentleman would allow one vote to be taken that night for the wages of the navy and marines. Mr. WILLIAMS, after cries of " Divide," " Withdraw the motion," and "Agreed," consented to withdraw his motion. The house then went into committee. OA the propoal that a slim not oxceocliDg• 095,647 bo granted to her Majesty towards defraying the wages of the navy and marines, Mr. CARDWELL said he wished to ask the right hon. baronet two questions ; first,. whether the recommendation of the report of the commissioners, in relation to the im provement of the condition of tile sailors in her Majesty's navy, was about to be carried out; and, secondly, whether th e ir recommendation to establish a connection in future between the royal navy and the mercantile marine was approved of, and if so, whether it was being carried out. Sir J. PAKINGTON, in reply, said in relation to the question of his right hon. friend, No. 1, that the recom mendation of the commissioners for the inwrovement of the condition of seamen would be carried out; and with regard to the second question, relating to the reco.mmendation of the commissioners to establish a connection between the royal navy and the mercantile marine, he begg . cd, in answer to his right hon. friend, to say that the Board oi Admiralty had adopted every one of the recommendations Of the com missioners, and had considered them seriatim; but he thought his right hon. friend would admit that it Ryas fair that the Government, before they made up their minds to act upon the plan, ought to give due consideration to it. That was a principle which he was sure his right hon. friend would recognise. (Hear, hear.) Mr. LINDSAY said the right hon. baronet was aware that the first part of the report involved a very considerable sum of money, namely, £lOO,OOO. He (Mr. Lindsay)Held very strong opinions upon this subject ; and in his opr aion it was not very difficult, as some supposed, for them to man the navy at present without incurring any such expense. (Hear.) Sir C. NAPIER hoped that the new regulations which affected the men would be made known as soon as possible. Sir J. PAKINGTON said the regulations would be promulgated as soon as possible, but some) details must be first arranged. The vote was agreed to.. • WAYS AND MEANS. The house went into committee on ways and means.. The first vote was £1,222,383 18s. 9d. . Sir H. WILLOUGHBY asked whether the. Chancellor of the Exchequer intended to introduce any measure in reference to the issue of public money. . The CHANCELLOR of the • EXCHEQUER said h mentioned the other night that there were three bills which had been prepared, and one of them referred to the subject, alluded to. The vote was agreed to, as was alio one for the grant of £11,000,000. The house resumed. EAST INDIA LOAN BILL. In clause 1 it was proposed to fill up a blank by inserting the sum of £7,000,000. Mr. CRAWFORD asked whether it was likely that the whole sum of £7,000,000 would be required at once. Lord STANLEY said nearly the whole amount would be required for the home expenses of the Indian Govern ment. He could not give any more definite information. The amendment was agreed to. The remaining clauses were then agreed to. The Superannuation Bill; the Marine Mutiny Bill, and the Sale of Poisons Bill were postponed. COUNTY COURTS BILL. This bill passed through a second reading. RECREATION GROUNDS. This bill passed through committee. The house adjourned at twenty minutes to one o'clock. COUNTRY MARKBTR. LIVERPOOL—MARCH 11. There was a small supply of all kinds of grain at market this morning, with a thin attendance, and the demand for both wheat and flour was on a very limited scale. Prices, however, remain in a great measure at late rates ; even the fact of a cargo of French wheat being taken yesterday for shipment to the United States had no perceptible influence on the market. In Indian cern a slow retail business pass ing, and no further quotable alteration occurred in value. Oats and oatmeal in limited request. Egyptian beans ad vanced ld to 2d per cental. Barley and peas had a fair inquiry, and previous currencies were maintained. The general tone of the market was firm, but quiet. KNARESBOROUGH—MA.ncn 9. There was a liberal supply of grain to-day, and a dull business at the annexed prices :—White wheat, from 5s Od to 5s 9d per bushel; red, 58 Od to 58 6d; beans 4s 9d to 5s 3d ; barley, 28s to 34s Od per qr. ; oats, 216 to 266. WAKEFIELD-Ml=lr 11. Moderate arrivals of grain from the coast and by railwa7 this week. The wheat trade is slow to-day, and the busi ness is limited, at is under last week's prices. Factors, however,. were not inclined to make this concession for good dry qualities. Fine barley in better request ; other sorts a slow sale. Beans rather lower. In oats and shelling there is no alteration. Wheat, per qr. of 8 bushels 601 b., Essex, Suffolk, and Kent, white, old, 47s to 50s ; new, 46s to 49s ; ditto, red, old, 40s to 43s ; new, 40s to 42s ; Lincolnshire and York shire white, new, 40s to 45s ; red, 37s to 398. . . Averages for the week : Wheat 3,624 qrs., at 42s 11 id 8ar1ey......... 633 „ 3ss 8d Oats — •• ...— s Od Rye --. If Beans l3B „ 43s. 4 1 4 Peas --115 Od ••• • )1 RIP ON—MARcu 10. There has been a good supply of grain at market to-dap --White wheat, 5s Od to 5s 9d per bushel; red, 5s Od to 6a 3d; beans, 5s Od to 5s 9d; barley, 28s Od to 345; oats, 18s to 24s Od per qr. EXETER—MARca 11. Au average attendance. Many of the samples were in better condition, and at an improvement in prices. Wheat, white.. 5s Od to 5s 2d Barley.. 4s Od to 4s 3d I Ditto red 4s 9d to 5s Od Oats • 2s 10d to 3s Od Flour, fine, 28s to 29s ; seconds, 27s to 28s per sack. CATTLE—The market was fairly supplied with stock. The attendance of farmers small. Pork carcases a mode rate supply. I Fat beef, p score,los6d to lls Ewes, per lb .... — d to 7d Pork carcases, do 7s3d to 8s 3d Wethers, do .7d toBd Lambs, per lb. ._.. Od to Od Fat calves,. d0....6d told Rough fal 44d per Ib. BRISTOL SUGAR--MARcH 11. We have still to report a want of animation in the de mand for both raw and refined • and, with the exception of a few brands of low crystallisedDemerara, which have been taken by the refiners, we are not aware of any transactions since our last, either in landed parcels or floating cargoes. Refiners' produce very dull of sale, and prices are again ra ther lower. Nothing doing in rum. [ADVERTISEMENT.] --- SIGHT . AND HEARING. SPEC- , TACLES.—POWERFUL TELESCOPES..---OPERA, RACE, AND PERSPECTIVE GLASSES. Messrs. S. and B. Solomon, opticians, 39, Albermarle-Street, Piccadilly. Observe — opposite the York Hotel, W.—Opera, Race-course, Field, and general Out-door Day and Night Perspective Glasses, very small, for the -waistcoat pocket, each containing 12 and 18 lenses, constructed of German glass. Will show dis tinctly a person to know them at two-and-a-half and three miles, and an object from eight to ten miles distant. Her Majesty's Coast Guards are making use of them as day and night glasses in preference to all others ; they are also pre ferred for deer-stalking by sportsmen, gentlemen, and gamekeepers. Telescopes 3i inches long, by which a per son may be clearly seen and known at 31 miles' and an object at 12 to 14 miles' distance; and with an extra astro nomical eye-piece, Jupiter's moons, Saturn's rings, and the double stars are distmaly seen. All the above can be had of larger and all sizes, with increasing powers, and are secured 'by her Majesty's Royal Letters Patent. The Royal Exhibition, 1851. A valuable, newly invented, very small, powerful Waistcoat -pocket Glass, the size of a walnut, by which a person can be seen and known one and a half mile distant. They answer every purpose on the Race-course and at the Opera - houses. Country scenery and ships are clearly seen at four to six miles. They are invaluable for shooting, deer-stalking, yachting, to sportsmen, gentlemen, game keepers, and tourists. Price 30s.—Spectacle Lenses of the greatest transparent power. The great advantage derived from this invention is, that vision becoming impaired is preserved and strengthened, and very aged persons are enabled to employ their sight at the most minute occupation —can see with those lenses of a much less magnifying power, and they do not require the frequent changes to the dangerous effects of further powerful assistance. Persons can be suited at the most remote part of the world by send ing one of the glasses out of their specta,cles in a letter, and stating the distance from the eyes they can read small print with it, and those who have not made use of spectacles by stating their age. Deafness.—New Discove7. —The Organic Vibrator, an extraordinarily powerful small iv ewly-invented instrument for Deafness, entirely different from all others, surpasses anything of the kind that has been, or probably ever can be, produced. Being of the same colour as the skin, is not perceptible. It enables deaf persons to hear distinctly at church and at public assemblies ; the unplea sant sensation of singing noises in the ears is entirely re moved, and it affords all the assistance that possibly could be desired.-39, Albemarle-street, Piccadilly. Observe— opposite the York Hotel, W. BIRTHS. COOPER.—On the Bth inst., at Penlee Villas, Stoke Devon port, the wife of Lieut.- Colonel Charles Cooper, H.M.'s Indian. Military Forces, of a son. CROFT.—On the 10th inst., at Kirton Rectory, the wife of the Rev. Percy Croft, of a daughter. LOVELESS.—On the 11th inst., at Vanbrugh-fields, Black heath, the wife of Charles Mikes Loveless, Esq., of son. BLACKBURN-MAZE.—On the 10th inst., at the residence of her father, Peter Maze, Esq., 12, Portland-place, the wife of William Ireland Blackbiume-Maze, Esq., o f a daughter. MARRIAGES HErBum—ERIGSTOCKE.—On the Bth inst., at St. James's, Piccadilly, Li e utenant-Colonel H. P. Hepburn, Scots Fusilier Guards, to Emily Margaret, daughter of the late W. e P rs . etsh ßri i g r:. tocke, Esq., M.P., o f Bi r d eom b e C our t, s KEMP—SAUNDERB.-011 the 10th inst., at St. Giles's, Camberwell, the Rev. Sir William Robert Kemp, Bart., Gissing, Norfolk, to Mary, fifth daughter of the late C. Saunders, Esq., of the same place. DEATHS. ALGEO.—On the 10th inst., Colonel Jas. Algeo, unattached, late 77th Regt. BARBER. —On the 9th inst., at Portland-place, Hammer smith, John Barber, Esq., aged 82. Bnooxs.—On the 9th inst., at Southampton, Mrs. Char lotte Brooks, aged 66. BETTRIDGE.—On the 28th ult., at Edgbaston, near Bir mingham, Mr. Bettridge, of the firm of Bettridge, Jen nens, and Son, aged 70. CoeKs.—On the 10th inst., at 47, Harley-street, Thos. S. Cocks, Esq., aged 78. CORISETT.- 7 011 the 11th inst., at 2, Stockwell park-road, Miss Corbett. LAWS.—On the 9th inst., at New-cross, Mr. John Laws, of 51, Cornhill, aged 42. SANDERS.—On the 10th inst., Samuel Sanders, Esq., of Fernhill, 1.W., aged 81. LONDON : Printed and Published by MURDO YOUNG, of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, No. 1129 - Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the county 0 Middlesex, Saturday March 12, 1859, I i 7 i I i E x tl it h tc a , 1 B it br stp it Tl SI 24i Dc Ia bli hi] Sc his tlcs.