The Sun. — London, England, 1830-03-02 00:00:00

A not howl' for be hid tbere for )n had been canvass for might have are been able rhich ease be with some ! fallen from ohms on hi 6 to deal with adroit an ex n. Colchester of gross ex 'ndividnal to that was the 'any eireum - The quota been unfairly pricuiple of to the iuha e Hon. Gen- Ineholy." If, tire apologies , there were pear valid if ' L Hear, hear, a mere uo4 ie would net of represent ood opinion h.)—He had wn and the d he would measures on idler) should 7 had heard ided to, and its termina been made =bored that it' contained nr of a mere try different ch the Duke During hie ple opportu vu not de he knew of lo vote, be -And whY the Duke :thening his e Person It e which re- The Duke, allied mind, t him to the ins. If the 's influence , ated in the F there ivy' rrupt, there a borough' I continued , aose of se" He, there' weastle, 1 14 whether it [dice of Oa had stated ater ;16'0' Tie took the mot ion 3• ") it the floe• the Noble tetly where of the flu°• that llun• setting uP y confessed Newcastle , 1g there ill The Hon• lad avowed lan tell the er of Par ") k the Hon kteotion.)--• tasiou, that , and wag it. The :ad—that n rjected, A e ; Sup licient to nee of 1119 not been, Ly With o it would have been better That he bad never put pen to Paper. If such - conduct was permitted in his Grace, if he -Were allowed to commit acts contrary to the Resolutions of that House, then it would be better to tear up those • Resolutions, and not leave them on their journals. There were other parallel cases. A Peer of Parliament, a Bi hop, • in 1701, Lad chosen to interfere in sending a Mend er to tl.at House. He had said to his eech•siustical to ants, that he would not renew their leases, unless they voted for the person he nominated. The ease was brought before the House of Commons by Sir John Packingtnn, a. d the Bishop was L'oyd, a very good man, and one of the seven • Bishops. The case was heard at the bar of that House, • and an account of it was to be found in Howell's State Trials, vol. 14. After an examination at the bar, it Was • referred to a Committee, and the Committee reported to the House that there had been an in terference with their privileges, and the House re solved that an Address should he presented to the Crown, praying that the Bishop might be deprived of his Almoner's place, which was the only way he could be punished. And what was the answer of Queen Anne? In her answer the Queen slid, " I am sorry that there:is occasion for this Address against the Bishop of Worcester ; I shall order and direct, that he shall no longer continue to supply the place of Almoner, but I will .put another in his loom to perform that office." The Bishop therefore was dismissed. This decency was ob served, and he did not think it possible that a case of that kind could be brought before the House of Comnsons with out the House coining to some determination. There Were other instances. In 1747 Mr. Pitt, who was after- Werds called. the celebrated Mr. Pitt, and was then Pay master of the Forces, was petitioned against by the people 'Of Seaford, in Sussex, as having been returned by the in terference of a Peer, who at a certain dinner had used his influence with some persons, and had appeared on the hus tings. The Parliamentary record in which this was con tained went on to say that Mr. Pitt made a juke of the whole matter, and treated it with contempt, as the matter Was passed over without further inquiry. That Noble plan was a Duke of Newcastle. He did not know if all • 'Juk es of. Newcastle were the same, but there was one of the Pelbams who bad tried to influence the return of a ' Member to that House. Unluckily Mr. Pitt was not then le great a patriot as he afterwards became, and as he re 'Presented, the Milne Minister, a very swill minority only voted for the examination, He could find another strong ea*. The Duke of Chandos had interfered with the ' th etion of Southampton, when Lord Lieutenant of the county ; in consequence of which a strong Resolution was Placed on their books. The Noble Lord was deeply im • plicated, and the House resolved that it should be examined ' i n a Conatnittee; but when the Committee made a report, Which Was, that the Duke of Chandos hail interfered, the • .11ouse, in consequence of a facetious speech of Lord Nu gent, passed to the order of the day. The case then before - -them was of more importance; and he would say if these things were not examined with a serious assurance of remedying them, the country would look with aver sion on their proceedings. What objection could there be to sending for the individual who was said to have been the Duke's agent. The House of Commons was bound to send for Mr. Talents, and call on hint to explain how it was that that Hon. Member's letter was sent to him under the cover of his Grace the Duke of Newcastle. The alle gation had been made that this agent had desired certain freemen to vote for a particular person, and what pi e vented the House from ascertaining if that allegation was true? If they did not do this, they would reduce the people of England to regard that which ought to be their greatest blessing as a curse, and that which should be a . badge of freedom would become a chain of dependence and ar sign of servility.—(Hear, hear.)—lt would be far better not to allow them to have votes, than having votes to com pel them to vote against their will. They wet e sold when they were made to vote against their wishes and their con science. The Hon. Gent. had said on one occasion, that he hoped nobody would be harmed on his account. Did he not, say that ? He believed he did ; and if he did, was that freedom of election ? The House had been told by the Hon. Member that only a rabble was concerned ; that Wall speaking of the people in a most unwarrantable and arrogant tone and manner. —(No, no.)—The Hon. Mem .her asserted that the honest men w h o h a d f e l t h ow dear to them were their rights as Englishmen, and who saw those rights exclaimed against, frittered sway, and tram pled on—(No, no, and cheers)—it was so-he asserted they were composed only of rabble _(No, no.)—That was the word the Learned Gentleman used ; he said rabble. . --(Hear, and no, no.)--If only the lowest rabble had the sense to petition and take care of their rights, for his part he thought such rabble as muds deserving attention as the proudest and best amongst themselves.—(Hear, hear.)—lt was a little too much—(A laugh)— that the House was to be composed of representatives of Peers. He for one should always speak.strongly on this point. The question was, whether they were to be considered as the independent representatives of- the people,. or whether they were to allow theinselve to be the creatures of..certain Peers.. 'The very. lineation was a disgrace. There might-yet be some• doubt of it in the House--out of the House it was only a matter of history. He held in his hand.a petition from -the. friends of the people, which would show Hon. Gen . tletnen that he was quite impartial and that he was justified in being-vehement.—(A laugh. )—The petition represented the opini, as of the country, and showed that the people had sufficent grounds for their assertions. Hon. Metnbers laughed, but he was sent there to be vehement on such occasions. —(Hear, hear.)—He mentioned that to show . that he was in perfect good humour, and that lie had no feeling against the Hon. Member for Newark. The peti tioners he bad referred to stated that they were ready to prove at the Bar of the House their assertions. The petition was presented to the House by the father of the Noble Lord behind him (Lord Howick), and it stated . what lie would then read-- .I.‘,,eThey apirm that 70 of y our H onourable Members ,re re d by .35 places, where the right of voting is veste d i" in Burgage and oth er tenures of a similar description ; an d Which it would be to trifle with whatever, the elections the of your H o n oura bl e t House to menti on any number of er • • at the pla ces a l luded to being notorious ly mere matter of form. And this your petitioners - are re a d y to prove. "They affirmthat, in addition to the 70 Hono ura bl e M embers • So chosen, 90 mo re o f your Honoura bleMembers are ele c ted by ' 46 places i I n none of which the num ber of voters exceeds 50. .And this your petitioners are ready to prove, . " They Honourable_ r o attirm that, in addition to the 160 elected, 37 more of your Members a e re c by 19aces, in none of which the numbef voters x eeds elected 100. An d this your pe titioners are ready to prove." . He w ou ld ask the Hon. Member for Newark, could he approve of such a system ?—did lie think that the Com - mons' House of Parliament should contain a certain num . her of nominees of Peers? The people were p er f ec tly set _ 11,Lbile:t_latail this was a farce and a che a t ; th a t th e H ouse 3 " o l " ns, M w l rep r esent liw the people, h u t a certain number of per ho a u p c p e of the c appropriated the franchi se o f the country. As to th i nfluence not forgo e tc on . , that wa s a p o i n t h e h a d cur of th By Act of P ar li ament , t h e smaller offi- Cro An Exci se offiwcan were not allow e d t o i n t er f ere at e l ect i ons . do so, was ltable r, or a C us t om -h ouse Offi cer, who should Crownnfamy and to be fined 1001., and to he punished pwe;sroen i mprisonment. If the Officers of the that g not i allow e d to interfere, was it to be suffered Noble BDiu3kkee,nhu:intog property under the Crown, like the employ it for that purpose ? The deprive all the their ownta.; 011,cert aust not do that with his own which would freemen of Newark of what ought to be must h not think so to deal with his pro : secured to him the . perty as row and destroy the Constitution, which enjoyment of his ll'Pessession of his property, and even the proved ,• and if the proved--if it ref used The allegations in the petitions could the House did not allow them to be . the prayer of the petition—if it did bottetw,taitk:otuhide petttion into consideration—he did not see ever err SADLE again punish any corrupt boroughs. 4 had never denied that Peers might exert influence oyer some of the Members of that House ; but itialnenaelnleegeaoti:_n_ th at . the Noble Duke in question had exerted titt_letnber, Sir It M ei l r L h r , 112 positively denied. ON supported the petition. The Hon. said s no coercion had been used ; but if that were ironc4Se. met t b s e v r c h a a m e he to be Member for Newark ? The d written a book from which a quotation hapaditeualprtlyet been made ; b u t one was to be found equally a great dramatic writer— . • ' "You! it,, c . m aye among you many a purchased slave, , ice I n ike your asses, and your dogs and mules, 4titaabj ect and in slavish parts, them. Shall I say to you This er n be fre,4 e mu stl3l4e wt-slitieha:iti4l:ae:l.; if the Duke heti bpught slaves hey under bunions ? Let their beds H "cotton e d . yours, and let their palates ferred toliacui.ottr .inquirYs Ile would inn, with such viands." had been air them all treated alike; and as punishment view to "dY inflicted for corruption, lie hoped, with that this petition would be re- Mr. Secret nutte e , pin cu a ki n ., it Y PEEL meant to decide the question with - of 4 .491 ;5 ie n e politi cal question. He had read the letters Prefe at i on of . th u a keL and he saw no reason w h y, f rom t h e • be favourably di . ' 4 4 l e Puke's political tenets, lie should aatiltifr he same tiinePn'ed t thnwards h" ; lint he saw no reavon etem. .. . why e etition should be considered in go to yo._ t•from other p simila r petitions, and he should ehoreen Jlveoprinciples of common sense and rea o'h e a nr to _ w i questions involved in the petition slithe other,• tO r the interference of Parliament ; been made out Puwn la nds —one, whether a case had an d ference of the Duke;ee' after establishing the inter toptet to the cruwia Jed tak e any other step ; and with the case was, he thought, tt complete failure. The Hon. Member who had said he was e . vehement because be represented a populous place, had ad-: B witted that he had found all the Commissioners of Woods, a and Forests courteous and at taitive—(Being civil people, said 3 Mr. Hobhouse)—Well, civil and attentive to the interests , of his constituents when he had occasion to call on them. , The Hon. Member who spoke last, and represented , the borough of Southwark must know that the r Crown had a considerable property in that borough. and yet it bad not interfered with the election. H. would say the same of Dover. If the I-lonourab!e L Metriber who pr, vented the petition, and represented dist , place, had found any such interference, he would, in doubt, in a parenthesis, have managed to inform the House of it. He had found no disposition to exert the influence of the Crown in his election. So much for the influence of . the Crown over elections. With respect to the property the . Duke of Newcastle held under the Crown, he had received the lease in 1306, and it was to run for thirty year. At the period of granting the lease, it was not said that any larger tender than that offered by the Noble Duke had been made. It was not said, that the Crown required less of the Duke than it could obtain from other persons. When the lease ' ' was renewed, the sum was raised to x 2,0001. Lord Grenville I was then First Lord of the Treasury, and as he was opposed to the Noble Duke in politics, the House might be certain that no favour was shown him, and that the lease was not renewed but at its full value. The lease was granted in 1306, and it was granted in the interest of the Govern meat. It was the duty of the Commissioners to attend to that. hi fact, the Crown was quite unfettered, except as to the duration of the lease, and it had been granted on the same principle as governed the granting of all similar leases. He could say also, that there were no negociations pending for the renewal of the lease—no en gagement had been entered into, and there was no implied engagement between the Crown and the Duke. His Noble Friend had also stated, that it was the duty of the depart trent over which he presided to consult the interest of the Crown, and let the Crown lands to the greatestadvantage. If, for example, the ground could be built on so as to yield a larger sum than that given by the Noble Duke, it would ' be the duty of the Beard to let the ground on a building lease. There would be no difficulty in such a case, he be lieved ; but that the House of Commons should address the Crown to affix a brand and stigma on the Duke of New castle, to say that he is not to have the lease of these lands, was what he could not consent to. The Duke was in this respect entitled to the canoe privileges as others, and must be left capable of taking lands from the Crown like any other person. He apprehended that the property of which the Duke had a lease for3o years could notbe distinguished from his other property, and it was no breach of the privi lege of that House for him to use the influence which that property gave him. It was impossible to preserve any dis. tinction between the property leased from the Crown and other property. The Duke might let it to tenants at will, or for a term of years, and might deal with that as with ' any other property belonging to bins. There was on this ground no reason for the House of Commons to interfere. Then it was said that seven individuals had received notice to leave their houses.—(Forty ! several voices called out.)—No ;he begged leave, to say only seven. What had been proved to show that the Duke made any im proper use of the property held under the Crown? The petition went to pray that, having made an improper use of this land, his lease might not be renewed. He believed that the House would not think it necessary that he should make any excuses for the privileges which were derived from property over which the Crown had no con troul, and which were exercised in the same way. The Duke of Newcastle had a right to use his property, whether hired from the Crown, or derived from any other souree t as he liked.--The Hon. Member (Mr. P. Thomson) founded his argument for the interference of the House on the ground that these personas were dispossessed because they had refused to vote for their landlord ; but he did not see that there was any proof of that—nor was theme any proof that menace had been employed in order to make them vote for the Duke of Newcastle. The Hon. Gent. had, however, assumed that there was some menace, and that they were required to vote; for if it was not so, why, he asked, were they dispossessed ? Now, supposing that such was the state of the case, and that the Duke of Newcastle had used im proper and unconstitutional means to procure the return of the Member he fancied, was it not the duty of those who felt aggrieved by such conduct to proceed in that course which had been provided by the House for such grievances. Was it not their duty to present a petition arid complain of an undue return at the election ? If they had adopted that course, then the whole expense of the petition would have justly and properly devolved on the parties who had an interest in the question which the Committee were called on to decide.—(Hear.)—But what would be the consequence of the adoption of that motion brought for ward by the Hon. Gent. ? Why by applying to Parlia ment at this late period for the appointment of a Select Committee to inquire into the merits of the petition, the whole of. the expenses of these parties would be thrown on the public.—(Hear.) ---If the House was prepared to maintain the in v i o l a bili ty o f t h at j urisdiction on the sub ject of election petitions which he thought admirably qua lified for the accomplishment of all the purposes it had in view, he was of opinion they should scrupulously abstain from any interference, or, at all events, that they should be . well satisfied of the imperative necessity of putting these disappointed parties in possession of such a power, after so long a time has elapsed, and after they have abstained from having recourse to the measure which Parliament has provided for such complaints.—(Hear, hear.)—He would beg the House to observe the peculiar distinction between the two courses to which he had alluded. If the parties had appealed by the ordinary method of petition, Parliament has provided a tribunal before which the merits of that pe ition are tried, and the parties examined to the truth of all allegations on their oath. But then, on the other hand, he would beg them to look at the conse quences of adopting the motion for a Select Committee to inquire into the men its of the petition. The consequence would be, that they would send the facts to be inquired into before a tribunal where the evidence could not be taken on oath, and where the whole of the proceedings were likely, therefore, to be subject to great objections, if they consented to adopt such a course at tire present mo ment ; and in such a case they at the same time went far to supersede that peculiar jurisdiction which, in his opi nion, the House ought, by every means in its power, to fortify and defend. He was not prepared, with the limited information he possessed, to say, whether the Duke of Newcastle had, or had not, dispossemed any of his tenants in the manner which the Honourable Member had been induced to state. That the Duke had treated his tenants in that manner, he repeated, he was not prepared to admit or deny, although, perhaps, from the fact of there lacing several untenanted houses, it might be presumed that those who had occupied them were ejected by their land lord. He confessed, however, that there was a question connected with that subject which appeared to him even more important than anything connected with the privi leges of the House. The right of property in every man, whether a Peer or a Commoner, was to be held sacred.— (Hear, hear.)—There was, he repeated, no proof of any menace being used—none that those persons were dis possessed because they refused to rote for their landlord. Seven tenants were, he believd, the whole number who had been deprived of their houses out of seventy. But passing over that, if the House was prepared to say that those who exercised on such occasions their just right of property were to be subjected to the interference of Parliament, whenever it pleased the parties to come before it, they would place themselves in a situation equally em barrassing and inconvenient, and lay the foundation of a very dangerous precedent.—(Hear, hear.)—He would say, they could not do any thing more dangerous or prejudicial than to leave it to be inferred, that a tenaut who refuses to vote for his landlord has a right to remain in possession of that landlord's property in defiance of his wishes. llence forward every tenant who chose to vote against his land lord, would answer when he was called on to leave that landlord's property, " Oh, you wish to make me a martyr to your party prejudices in this case. I recollect that was done in the case of -the Duke of Newcastle and the people of Newark, and I shall bring you before the House of Commons."—(Hear, hear.)—So far, therefore, from pro tecting a good tenant and maintaining the purity of elec tion, they would be giving ti premium to a bad tenant to retain possession of his landlord's property, and yet controul and thwart his wishes whenever it might suit his prejudice or iraprice to do so. While he alluded to this matter with reference to its effects on the right of property, he begged it to be understood that he did not see any material differs ence, in application, between a Peer of the realm and any great landed proprietor. The Hon. Gent. had rererred them to a Resolutiou of the House ; but if a tenant owed an obligation to a landlord he was bound to repay it; and if the Hon. Gent. hoped, by any means he could devise, to exclude the duty owed by the tenant to the landlord from operating in the disposal of his vote, he was confi dent ire Would be disappointed—(Hear, hear)—and he, (Mr. Peel) standing in his place in that House, was not eiehained to avow that he hoped he would be disappointed. —(Hear, hear.)—He thought that property, whatever might be the nature or extent of the constitutional part of the question, ought to have a due influence in the estate, whether the possessor was a peer or a commoner ; and be could not bring himself to believe that the resolution the Hon. Gent. had alluded to was intended to exclude that species of influence. In conclusion, the Right Hon. (lent. observed, that he was not prepared to girt iris I'9le for a Committee which never could ,properly determine the it would be difficult or impossible for artificers to question at issue, indep t n l e nt of all the objections which get employment elsewhere. But the present opportu might be taken to its appointment.—(Hear, hear.) nity had been taken to do away with an abuse which The petition was then brought tip and read. formerly existed, in permitting the men to carry ase,:y Mr, P. THOMSON, i n mov ing that it be referred to with them, eve!). evening when their work was done, a Select Committee, s h ou ld no t, a f te r the discussion the a great quantity of chips. It had been found that during subject had already un d ergone , t re spass fir any time on the latter part of the day, the men employed themselves the House. He h a d h ear d b ut one w ord which could in- in making the chips which they afterwards were to cart y duce him to thi n k the mot i., n m i g ht he spared ; but on away as perquisites. Au allowance bad been substitut. d consideration he did not think eve n that word would prove in lieu of this old perquisite, and sixpence a day was' sufficient. The Noble Lord (Lowther) and the Right now granted to shipwright., and four pence or fivepence Hon. Gentleman (Mr. P ee l) b a d assured the House that to artificers. The men had gratefully accepted this de; the Government had no i n t ent i on a t present to renew the duction. Four hundred and fifty men had been discharged Crown leases granted t o t h e D u k e of Newcastle. He from the body of artificers, and 79,000/. was saved on this thanked them for the announcement, and rejoiced at it; expenditure under the head of Repairs of Ship.. Under b u t it did not give any seeerity to the people of Newark. the head of Foreign Yards, there was an apparent increase The present Government might be determined not to re- of 14,000/., but this was a mere transfer from other heads. new the leases, but the Duke of Newcastle was at the head On the wages of men in ordinary there 'was a saving of of a considerable party in the State—he might come into 40,000/. Under the head of Half Pay there was a saving power, and, by means of that power, procure to himself a of 19,0001. a year. There was no promotion in any rank grant of the leases which the present Government might except in the . proportion of one to three vacancies. Adini be inclined to withhold. The Right Hon. Gentleman rals on foreign stations might fill up vacancies, but they said the Committee w ou ld b e a c omm ittee appointed to could not fill up the chasms made by promoting inferior inquire into motives. He (Mr. Thomson) would say, it officers to higher rank. If a Captain died, his place was was a Committee to inquire into facts. It, as he thought, filled by the promotion of a Lieutenant; but that Lieu most truly it would prov e th ese f ac t s were correct, then tenant's vacancy was not to be supplied. Under the head this House was bound to interfere—not to punish the of Superannuation there was a considerable apparent in- Duke of Newcastle, however oppressive might have crease to the widows of officers, but this arose from the been his conduct; not to shake the last election; but mode of making the provision. Formerly upon every to prevent the renewal of leases which have proved ship's books were borne a number of fictitious names, injurious to the properties of those who live under called Widows' Men, whose amount of wages and victuals them, and which are calculated to support a violation was handed over to the Widows' Fund; but this was now of the spirit of the Constitution.—(Hear, hear.) done away with, and the whole sum to the Fund was The question to be tri e d was, h e repeated, one voted direct. But the number of claimants had increased, simply of facts ; and one of two results must follow for in this year the number of deaths had been three from the inquiry into these facts : either the charges times as great as in any other year. In the charge must be proved to be true, and a remedy applied to the for provisions a very great saving bad been effected, owing evil; or they must be declared false, and the character of to the cheapness of the articles. He would call the the Duke of Newcastle would then be relieved from impute- attention of the Committee to the extent of reductions in dons which must continue to attach to it until that inquiry the last nine years, although the Honourable Member fur took place. The Right Hon. Gent. said the leases were Montrose argued that they had made no deductions at all. granted in 1806 ; but the fact was, that although the old In salaries alone, since 1821, there bad been a reduction of lease expired in 1806, it was renewed as early as 1801. fourteen persons, with' salaries of 7000/, whilst in the He had one word more to add en this measure. The Right Navy Pay branch there had been a reduction of twenty- Pion. Gent. says the people of Newark had received little four persons, with a saving of salaries to the extent of injury, because only seven were ejected. He should think 10,0001. Including the Dock-yards, there were not fewer one too many; but the only reason for the number not being than 468 officers reduced, effecting a saving of 88,650/. in greater was that a great many persons, through the fear of eight years. The reductions had been in the foreign yards consequences, refrained from voting. The Right Hon. Gent. twenty-nine persons, and 13,000/. ; in the Victualling had asked why the parties did not present an election petie Office 48 persons, and 8,5001. ; in the Victualling Yards titan ? He could tell the House why they had not. It was 37 persons, and 5,280/. ; in the Medical Establishments possible that menace and a number of indirect means might eight persons, and 3,600/. ; making in all 150,240/. If be brought into operation, to influence the disposal of votes, the Committee considered that this was out of the Civil although nothing direct could be effectually proved to the Establishment of the Navy, they would find that out of the House. That was the reason why they did not petition. total amount of 450,0001., a reduction of one-third. He In many cases, however, there was no need of menace, be. would now come to the question of the number of men in cause the tenants had the example of the elections of 1786 the Navy. Last year the number voted was 30,000 for and 1816 in their recollection, when numbers were dispos- the Naval Service alone. In the last autumn the situation sessed of their holdings, because they presumed to give a of Europe rendered it expedient that this country should vote contrary to the wishes of the Duke of Newcastle. The increase its Naval force in the Mediterranean, and three Hon. Member having concluded, by expressing adetermina- large line-of-battle ships were fitted out and dispatched to tion to pt., as the motion, the House divided— that station. The consequence was, that the total amount For the Committee Against it 194 in consequence of what had since taken place, that force Majority 133 had been again reduced to 29,000 men, below which the SUPPLY. average number of men could not be brought. The wages On the motion that the House resolve itself into a Com- of the men were taken at the same rate as the last year. mittee of Supply, He should now move a vote that 29,000 men should be Sir J. GRAHAM, in consequence of an intimation that employed for the service of the year ending the Ist of Ja some reductions had been made in the salary of the Tree. nuary, 1831, including 9,000 marines. surer of the Navy, withdrew his motion on that subject for Sir J. GRAHAM had listened with great attention to the present, but reserved to himself the right to bring the the Hon. Baronet, but it did not appear to him that he question before the House when they came to consider the had made out satisfactorily the extent of the reductions amount of the vote to be granted for that department. he had stated. The Hon. Baronet bad stated that it was Mr. HUME in connection with the subject of reduction the intention to maintain both the Treasurership and the mentioned by the Hon. Baronet, thought that a fit oppor- Paymastersitip of the Navy. until some opportunity should tunity to allude to the amount required for the collection occur of providing for the Paymaster, and this appeared of the Customs and Excise. He believed it was nearly four to hint to be a distinct admission that both officers were not millions; and as its expenditure was wholly under the necessary. The Treasurership of the Navy might have patronage and cnntroul of Government, and beyond the been attached to some other officer of the Privy Council, cognisance of the House, he thought the subject well worth and the entire sa'ary of the office might have been saved, attention. as, by attaching the office of President of the Board of NAVY ESTIMATES. The House then resolved itself into a Committee of Supply. Sir GEORGE CLERK should proceed to go through the items of the Estimate, and explain as briefly as he could the various reductions which had taken place in the present Estimate as compared with that of last year. With regard to the office of Treasurer of the N ivy, he had now to announce to the House that the salary had been reduced one thousand pounds a year, leaving it just one half of what it was in 1797—the year, to the standard of Trade to the Mastership of the Mint, had proved that these two offices might be discharged by one person. One Gen tleman (Mr. Vesey Fitzgerald) had proved that the duties of the President of the Board of Trade, and the Treasurer of the Navy might have been conducted together, and therefore the Treasurership of the Navy might have been referred to some other office, even the Woods and Forests, and the whole salary of the Treasurer of the Navy might have beers saved. This, however, was not the moment for going at any length into the question, and all that he should do was, to point out the view he took of it, after a hasty consideration of what had fallen from the Hon. Baronet. Having stated the view he was disposed to take of the question, he should merely add, that if, after consulting his friends, and taking the opinions of other Members, he should fine that he was likely to be supported, he should think it his duty to move his resolution respecting the Treasurership of the Navy, in the subsequent passage of the vote through through the House. Mr. HUME complained that the lion. Bart., though he had gone into the items, had not stated the aggregate amount of this year's vote. Sir G. CLERK said, that the aggregate amount would be 5,595,000/., which would show a saving in wages and victuals of 64,0001. and a total saving of 282,9391. Mr. HUME thought the whole Establishment most ex traordinary, and, considering the ch:rnges that had been made, the estimates appeared to him nearly the same as last year, and the deductions were upon the large items. The Hon. Bart. had said that deductions had taken place since the war, but he (Mr. Hume) asked, were they not to ex pect deductions as soon as the country was in a state of peace ? Notwithstanding the great credit which Alinisters took to themselves for their economy, the Home was called upon to vote estimates exceeding, by 400,000/., that which was voted in 1821 and in 1822. They would never bate down the 6,000,0001. of pensions, unless they came to a resolution of allowing no pensions at all except to disabled persons. Could the antipathy of all classes to the system of pensions be wondered at, when, in the paper he held in his hand, there appeared such names as Dundas and Ba thurst palmed on the country for pensions of 5001. a year? —(Hear, and cheere.)—Was not this enough to make the poor rise and say, " No more of this—we are starving !" Admiral Shield and Admiral Cunningham had double pension's of 450/. anti 500/. each. Sir G. CLERK—No, no. Mr. HUME—" No, no ;" he could show the Hon. Baronet that this was the ease.—(Here Mr. Hume read the printed paper corroborating his' statement.)—He now came to consider the vote in the Chairman's hands. In his opinion Ministers had no reason to congratulate them selves on the reductions in these Estimates. As large a sum was charged for the superintendants of the workmen as for time workmen themselves. Nothing could be wore extravagant. What he wished to ask was, whether we were at peace or at war? Let that question be distinctly answered, and he should understand what we were about. In 1821 and 1822 the number of seamen and marines voted for the service of the year was 21,000. In one subsequent year 1,000 men were added, on the pretence of the state of South America ; in another year another 1,000 men, on the ground of the Burmese war ; and so the estimate went on increasing until 1827, when it amounted to 30,000. It was then asserted that when the causes of the increase had ceased it would be re duced. What prevented the estimate now from being carried back to the state in which it was in 1821 and 1822 ? Was there any thing in the condition of South America to prevent it? Was there any Burmese war to prevent it? In 1792 the whole number of men voted for the naval service was only 16,471, including 4,000 marines, so that the number of seamen was little more than 12,000. At present the number proposed was 29,000, being 13,000 men more than in 1792 ; and yet let the Committee con sider what the situation of England was in 1792 with re gard to other naval powers, when compared with her si tuation at present. In 1792 the naval power of Fiance, of Spain, of Holland, was much more formidable than at present. The only naval power that had risen since that period was the United States of America. According to the opinion of a most competent judge whom he had con sulted on the subject, one thousand seamen and marines would be amply sufficient for the West Indies (where wo had now 2,347) ; 1,000 for South America ; 685 for the Cape of Good Hope ; 765 for Africa ; 800 for North America ; 6,750 for Home Service ; 2,672 for the Blockade ; 600 for the Mediterranean, &c. &c. making in the whole 20,750. Why not throw in another thousand, and reduce the proposed number to that amount ? Why (lid we keep up 5,000 more marines than were necessary . The marines at present employed were 9,000 ; in fin Mer times they were only 4,200. At 1( a-t a reduction of 4,000 might be made with great advantage ; 'file expense of the officers nearly amottnted to a third of the expense of the roen ; the charge for the former being 71,0001.—that for the latter, 245;000/. The pay of the superior officers of the marines was enormous. That of a General was 1,7281. ; that of a Lieut.-General was 1,303/. ; that of 'a Major- General, 1,0371. Now as all these individuals were naval officers, and had other appointments and eroc t iumentA he would ask why might not their pay as officers of marines be redurTd ? houlti, be told that the corn iniesiona in question were given to meritorious persons ; but he would repeat that those persons had other things to depend upon. As to the officers of marines, prcmper,ly so called, God k new t h at t h e i r promot i on was very sthw, and ilmat their advantaies were . Very limited. They appeared which an Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Hume) wished to reduce all the establishments. This was a smaller sum than that enjoyed by any person who ever held the office. It would be recollected, when the subject was last under discuSsion, that a motion had been made in 1826, to raise the salary of the President of the Board of Trade to 5,0001. a year. That proposition was rejected, and it was suggested that it would be more expedient to give 2,0001. a year to the Board of Trade, and td add to it the office of Treasurer of the Navy. Great objections were also taken to that pro— position, principally on the ground of the inefficient 'na ture of the services of the Treasurer of the Navy, but it should 'Mao be recollected, that the proposition was adopted on the recommendation of Mr. Tierney, a gentle man who, having held the office himself, was aware of the important nature of its duties, and who was not 'very likely to lend himself to any waste of the public money in unnecessary offices. In the debate on that occasion Mr. Tierney said, " he could by no means concur with those who thought that the office of Trea surer of the Navy should be abolished. It was an office of very old standing, of considerable public importance, and of great personal responsibility to the holder. He had held the office, and speaking from the recollection of twenty-three years back, he could assure the Committee it was by no means a sinecure." This was the language of Mr. Tierney, and even the Member for Montrose was so convinced of the importance of the office, that he merely moved for an inquiry to ascertain what alteration could be made in its salary and duties..._. The office was ; however, then united with that of Presi dent of the Board of Trade, as he had described ; and if it had continued to be so, and if' they had proposed to confer the same office lately held by the Right Hon. Gent. (Mr. V. Fitzgerald) on some other person, no objection would probably have been made. He was prepared now to show that a considerable saving had been made in the office within a very short period. In 1817, the Finance Committee finding 5,000/. paid to the Treasurer of the Navy, and only 2,0001. to the Paymaster of the Forces, objected to the sum as too • large, and recommend e d a re duction. When Lord Goderich was appointad President of the Board of Trade the salary of the Treasurer of the Navy was accordingly reduced to 3,000/., and it was now further reduced by 1,0001., being left at the same amount as that paid to the Paymaster of the Forces. It was said that the Treasurer of the Navy had no duties to perform, except the payment of orders on the Navy Pay Office; but the truth was, he had business to transact which must occupy a great deal of the time of any man. He had to take charge of and investigate the whole of the seamen's wills, and to administer all powers of attorney, as well as to perform many other duties of the same kind. There were two Acts of Parliament that pressed much upon the Treasurer of the Nary. By the first, the management of Greenwich Hospital was imposed upon him, and it was extremely necessary to have a responsible public officer presiding over the payment of pensions. Last year an Act of Parliament, the House would reatember, had com pletely altered the constitution of Greenwich Hospital. It was now under a Commission,, at the head of which was placed the Treasurer of the Navy as a Privy Coun cillor. The next Commissioner was the person who, for the time being, was at the head of the Woods and Forests. These two acted in this capacity without any salaries, whilst the remaining three Commissioners received their regular salaries. The scale of expenditure in this parti cular was still more necessary now thso in 1826. As soon as an opportunity should occur of adequately provid ing for the Gallant Officer who new held the situation of Paymaster of the Navy, it was the intention of Govern ment not to fill up the appointment, and thus a saving of 1,200/. a year would be effected in favour of the public. Thus, by throwing upon the Treasurer of the Navy such arduous duties, there would be an irmnediste Paving of 1,000/. a year, and a further saving of 1,200/. a year. In the Admiralty Office, in the department of Widows' Charity, the Secretaryship had been abolished, and the duty of the office transferred to the Commis sioners of the Navy, whilst the constitution of the Navy Office itself had undergane a change. The places of two of the Commissioners of that Board were reduced. In the establishments of the Dock-yards, in the salaries of the Officers, there was a saving of 8,00 C!. compared to the last year. This was owing to the reduction of Dlitford yard, which was no longer a building yard, but 414 merely for the reception of old stoma. Ait arrangement was making with respect to Plymouth Dock-yard, by which it was hoped to effect a considerable saving, amount ing to between 10,0001. and 12,000!. a year. With respect to the wages of artificers, the amount was leas than the last year; 440,000/. was now charged for artificers, but this included all persons employed in email craft and nav y transports, all of whose expenses were farir t ierly c l ass ed under the head of the Expenses o f Ships in Ordinvy. A reduction had been avoided by throw ins 441 0 ye; of epploy at the present mopleut, wbgti to be utterly neglected by Government, and the only prias in their profession to which they might aspire were given to naval Men, who had nothing to do with the marines.— T se were all matters which demanded revision stud re duction. On the whole, he repeated his conTicti,an that the number of marines might be advantageously reduced by 4,000 men. Ile c“old show from the evidence of an Hon. and Gallant Officer opposite to him, given before the Finance Committee, that the naval establishment in the time of peace might be reduced to 21,000 or 22,000 men. That number would be 6,000 more than we had in 1792, and would be (Null to what see bad in 1921. He w,s anxious to hear what reasons could be sssigned for not reducing the number to that amount.—(Something was arid across the table, which we (lid not hear.)---If his Mil• jesty's Government were engaged in considering bow to make further reductions, he would give them the oppor tunity of doing so, by merely moving as an amendment, that the number of men proposed should be voted, t.ot front the Ist of January, 1830, to the lit of January, 1831, but from the Ist of January, 1830, to the 30th of June, 1830. Sir G. COCKBURN, as his evidence had been referred to by the Hon. 'Wernher (Mr. Hume) beggefl to Sae a few words. The House must recollect that the Hon. Member had sai I the same thing last year ; and he (Sir G. Cork burn) had said then, as he said now, that it was an unfair mode of stating that evidence. The question put to him wzv, what would be a proper peace establishment for the Navy ? He had replied, that it was almost impossible to give an answer to the question, for it depended upon ►o many circumstances. He was then pressed ay an Hon. Member on the Committee to say something on the sub ject. He (Sir G. Cockburn) then said, he must know the exact state of things ; that if we were at perfect peace without the slightest prospect or chance of war, and nothing interfering with our commerce or any chance of it, he did not think we ought to have a man-of war on the sea. The remark was, that that was not a proper thing ; aml then, at the request of the Committee, he had stated what be had thought was the lowest establishment for each station. That was the manlier in which the evidence had been drawn front him ; and he again said that it was unfaii to use it as the Hon. Member had done.—(Hear.) —Looking around, the Committee could not consider the country in the State in' which his answer had supposed it. War had just closed between Rio Janeiro and Buenos Ayres, which had interfered with our merchants, who were still applying for a force, for the South American station ; and although the Burmese war had indeed closed, there were rising settlements in Ncw Holland. With re spect to doing away with half of our marine force, he (Sir G. Cockburn) had never argued that the number of marines now voted was absolutely required. But it was a most valuable corps, and it was desirable to have such a body ready for duty in case of war, instead of taking raw inen, who would he sea-sick. Sir G. WARRENDER, even on the principle of eco• nomy, could not concur with the Hon. Member (Mr. Hume) in his proposition for reducing the marines, al though there were other points in the Estimates on which he should agree with him in voting for a reduction. With respect to the Treasurership of the Navy, after a resolution pissed by the House on the 12th of February, that it is the opinion of this House, that in all the establishments of the country, civil and military, every saving ought to be made that can be effected," he had not expected to see that office separated from other duties, for the first time, when a new writ was moved for Radnor a few days after. When he (Sir George Warrender) first came to the House, the Treasurership of the Navy was filled by Mr. Rose, who, though he disbursed 19,000,0001. of the public mo ney, executed also the office of Vice-President of the Board of Trade; and any person recollecting that period, must remember the activity of Mr. Rose. The duties of these two offices might easily be executed by one individual with a saving of 3,0001. to the country. He (Sir G. Warrender) concurred with the Hon. Member (Mr. Hume) in what he said with respect to the pensions to young gentlemen after three or four years' service. With respect to a young friend of his (Mr. Dundas), he had been an efficient member of the Navy Board, and it was proper he sheu!d be restored on a vacancy. But with re spect to Commissioners Shield and Cunningham, they had been long in the public service, and no pensions were more properly bestowed. With respect to the vote before the Committee, he was of opinion that, on grounds of eco nomy, and on all the other grounds assigned by the Gallant Officer (Sir . G. Cockburn), it was a wise measure to main tain a large proportion of marines. Mr. LABOUCHERE could not go so far as the Hon. Member (Mr. Hume) in contending that no pensions should be granted to public servants. He was not sur prised at the proposition, considering the principles acted on by the Government ; but he could not join hina in The lion. Member concluded by expressing his intention to support the amendment of the Hon. Member fur Aberdeen. Mr. MABERLY thought his Hon. Friend the Mem ber for Aberdeen fully justified in the motion be had pro posed, as to the period for which the grants were to be voted. When we came to deal with numbers, it belonged to Ministers to say in what state the country was,—whe ther we were at war or peace. As yet, we had had no- . thing but an incidental statement from the gallant officer opposite, who was not a responsible person in such mat ters ; no Cabinet Minister had made any statement as to what wis the real situation of the country ; yet we were called upon to vote 29,000 seatnen and marines, in the ab sence of all information calculated to enable us to judge of the number actually necessary. His Hon. Friend only pledged the House by his amendment to suspend its vote till some Cabinet Minister came down and made out a case calling for a particular amount of force. In 1817 the Finance Committee recommended 19,000 seamen and marines as a proper force : what were the circumstances which required that 10,000 more should now be kept tip ? lion. Gent'emen opposite could not make out that more than 3,000 or 4,000 additional men were necessary be yond the estimate of 1817. Allowing the correc'nese of their reasoning, that addition to the force of 1817 would make 23,000, yet we were asked to-night to vote 29,000 men. if we talked of marines, the Gallant Officer oppo site said, " Oh, we must have marines, for soldiers will be se t-sick and useless." Well, if Government chose to keep up a large force of marines, why not make them more available to the army and reduce the army? No doubt we should be told that the numbers now proposed were necessary; but he asked why require 10,000 men more than were recommended by the Finance Committee of 1S;7? Till that question was answered, he should be justified in voting for a reduction in the force now pro posed ; but without going so far he supported his Hon. Friend's amendment, which he considered an extremely proper one. Mr. PEEL always felt pleasure in communicating any , information he could, consistently with the proper per formance of his public duty as a Minister of the Crown. The Hon. Gent, who had just sat down wished Govern ment to make out a case for the increase in the number of men in the naval service in 1830, as compared with the number in 1817. It would he admitted that it might not be consistent with the interests of the country for M inisters to state in detail the particular reasons of a given increase in a particular year. Was it not obvious that there might exist reasons connected with our naval power, which would justify an increase in that department, and at the same time dictate silence on the subject? However, so far as his daty permitted, he would give the information required, The Hon. Member took 1817, and asked why in 1830 should our naval force amount to 29,000 men, when in 1817 it was fixed at 19,000 ? This question imposed upon Government the task of accounting far an increase of 10,000 men. In 1830 we had 3,000 marines more than in 1817. The House had discussed the policy of keeping up all effective Marine establishment, and it appeared to be admitted that there was something so peculiar in the con stitution and character of that force, that it was necessary to keep it up its present state, if we wished to have an effective Marine.—(Hear, hear )—The Marines gt present amounted to 9,000 men, of whom 4,500 were afloat, and 4,500 on shore. These divisions alternately replaced each other, and thus became qualified for the full discharge of the peculiar duties of a Marine force. The 4,500 who re mained at home were occupied in mixed naval and mi litary duties; and it appeared that even those who were. ashore were only two nights out of three in bed: oo that thtic duties were not trifling. He felt the lull force of observing principles of economy i ‘ n tine of peace as far as , was consistent with the pul,lic safety; Uut ht aslte4 whether we weie got adopting a large. anit txkm erunomy, and attiling tP, the chapces of contigued panes, by keeping the naval power of the ciagntry in a good and effective state?—Hear t hgar.„),,,Without saying any thing of the jealousy of other powers, and giving them full credit for peaceful intentions, he declared his opinion that the e t r n C a sciousness of a country's' strength would be to 3;ixala and opponents the best incentive to neacc,-,-.-(fTear.)—W e Were called upon to adopt a , decidea tone in our foreign so, except we were prepared to ar n necessary. If a a p c o t:a cy ,e s . : ly i \v,s.:s:iottnel v\i(if:;n:t .e'evssena necessary ennacrae.v. and be pre paredouatry were callc',l, ukon suddenly to build and man inte ships fee war, it was . admitted that two years !mud pass, ariacncie to o f i te o a k c e e, v w ig e o a r h o o o u s ld d l e ;L ial:.ti(lis (and those the most valuable and invellaat years in a naval contest,) before she with effect floin sole to defend he t se lf '4.govous adversary, or to attack an mo,nev 4 ; wisll ad v antage.--(Cheere.)—Und er the bea4 marines, he had accounted for . an increase of $,OOO nen in our naval force of the present year as compared with 1817. He might here observe, that since 1817 events had occurred in the Mediterranean which were i.ot foreseen at that period, and which einsequently were not then provided for. lie would add, that our naval force must partly depend urn that of ether Powers : and that last summer Russia had six sail ef the line, France or seven, and England eielit sail of the line in the Mediterranean. Surely our proportion was not too much for a gre t maritime lower to maintain under such cir cumstances. It wes not too much when it was considered that Russia had assumed a belrgereut aspect towards Tu'rkey.—(llear.)—But Government had taken the earliest opportunity of reducing its force, as far as it could consistently with the public interest and safety. In the last summer (although we had asked for only 30,000 men fur the navy) necessity required that we should hare 32,000. Thus the actual reduction of men in the present estimate was not merely a reduction of 29,000 from a pre vious force of 30,000, but of 29,000 from 32,000, giv ing an actual reduction of 3,000 men in the department of the navy. The squadron in the Mediterranean would ac count for an addition of 5.300 meta upon the force of 1817, 5,300 being employed in the Mediterranean is the summer more than at the beginning of the year. Adding this in creased force of 5,300 to the 3,000 marines, we accounted for an increase of 8,300 in 1830 above the estimate of 1817. Then came the whole of the coast blockade, wilidt did not exist in 1817. It was perfectly true that the coast blockade was not to be considered as merely belonging to the navy—it was a guard against smuggling, and was pre pared to perform a double service in case necessity re quired ; in such a case we coeld call them to mail out guard-ships.—(Hear.) —The coast blockade accounted for an increase of 2,200 men ! which, added to the preceding items, gave an addition of 10,500 (so accounted for) upon the force of 1817. It only remained to mention the packet service, which was, however, merely a transfer from the Post-office to the Admiralty. It accounted for an increase of 700 teen in ' the navy. We had thus an increase in the present year, as com pared with 1817, of 11,200 men fully and satis factorily accounted for; and GovernMent might have fairly added to the navy by that amount; but so great an increase had not been made; a reduction o f 1,200 men was made in some o th er reepeets, so that the total increase of 1830 upon 1827, aritotanted 'the naval department to 10,000 men : the difference between 29,000 at the pre sent, and 19,000 at the former tieriod. Looking at the events of the last two years--at the station which we ought to hold as a maritime power—at the oecurr..nces in the Mediterranean—at the dimensions in South America, as by possibility affecting our colonies--seeing the colli sions between South American vessels and our own—. looking at the war between Brazil and Buenos Ayres—at the fact of the new States of America not always adhering very scrupulously to the legitimate laws of warfare of which they Were partly ignorant, to which they were, perhaps, partially indifferent--looking at the nature of the warfare carried on there--considering all these things, it did seem necessary to have a strong naval force to eon trout excesses in one quarter and observe the issue of events in another.—(Hear, )+ear.) if gentlemen were aware of the repeated complaints made at the Admiralty, they would think that an increase in the navy was less to be deprecated than a decrease, which would not afford sufli cnent protection to our trade and commerce. All these circumstances made out a prima fade vase for an increase of our naval force. He trusted that the Hon. Baronet would persist in his vote of trenettre upon Ministers, of which he had twice given notiee, in order that they might have the sense of the House upon it. They should then see if Government deserved public reprobation for making an immediate saving of 1,0001. a year, by separating the officee of President td the Board of Trade and Treasurer of the Navy, acid for arranging a prospective saving by those means of 2,2001., by doing away with the contingent advantage of Paymaster of the Nivy.—(Hear.)—He could not refer to the alteration without regretting the opportunity that gave Ike to it, It increased the attachment and regret which he felt fur his Right Hon. Friend the late President of the Board of Trade, when he recollected that it was by his assiduous attention to the discharge of his public duties and labours that his health became unfortunately reduced to that state which rendered it impossible for him to continu e longer in office. A man of his experience, activity, and talents, found himself by the tenure of these two offices (of Pre sident of the Board of Trade and Treasurer of the Navy), such a victim to over-exertion and anxiety arising out of his attention to the duties of them, that he was obliged to press upon his colleagues, against the will of every one of ould , at. c e n t w , excessive them, the necessity of his retirement, 11e could not con public to ceive a more powerful proof of the necessity. of separating those two •officea, as GovernMent hod done. Nothing could have been more easy for Ministers than' to ill up the offices as before. If they had dope so, there, would not have been one word of complaint, but they'Separated the offices because the joint labour wao, too great, and be cause they wished to effect a public saving. He hoped when the House came to the consideration of y .the tiHibb liberal Honourable last a af b ne l dw e Baronetseynelaarsr:eenlarged subjectingvimotion,view they b would recollect what . been the sonseqweeees;;Aie labour and exertion.—(Hear, hear.)—Aa a pool' of the spirit of ecanomy which actuated the Government, he should mention that the Comptrollership of Army ac counts bad become vacant by death, and instead of show ing a wish to appoint any body to the office, Alinistets, allowed it to remain vacant, thus effecting a considerable saving for the public. He night also take this occasion to state a circumstance which reflected infinite honour upon the present Lord-Lieutenant of Ireland, That Noble person, taking into consideration the amount of the salary of his high office (27,000/.), and that it had been raised since 1797, as he a turned, in consequence of the in creased pi ice of articles of consumption and the dimiuished value of money, of his own accord submitted a proposition to Government to reduce his alloWance from 27,0001. to 20,0001. a year, making a reduction of 7,0001 per annum upon the sa'ary of one office alone.—(Hear, hoar. )--U n d er such circumstances b e t ruste d, w h en the House came to dispose of the vote of censure upon Government to be pro posed, and which had been twice postponed, by the Hots. Baronet, that they would hear in mind the reductions that had been made--the whole course of policy Adopted by Minieters—and above all, that they would not forget, whatever was the amount of expenditure of the present year, that Government had manifeated no disposition to retain any part of the expenditure connected with patro nage.—(Cbeers.) Sir J. GRAHAM said the Right Hon. Gent, seemed disposed to taunt him for postponing his motion he would shortly state his reasons for its postponement. Wben ho first heard of the appointment of lifr. F. Lewis, he was forcibly struck by the discrepancy between the resolution proposed and carried by Ministers as au amendment on Ilia own motion, and their conduct in disposing of the Trea surership of the Navy. The resolution of :Ministers was, "that it is the opinion of this House that in every esta blishment of the state every saving ought to be made con sistently with the due performance of the, public service, and without the violation of existing engagements;" thi s " existing engagements" h etween Go- Right HOD. Memb er f ar R adnorshire, was agreed to on time 12th of F e br uar y, and on rho 15th ebtishnieoplace on the 12th o f F e b ruary, which the appointment sf Mr. F. Lewis to o k pl ace . It was clear have been if h e h a d i t sea newly appointed ifv t io l ee t rr a con t z t u l v l iw e du r ta e ns w aoint e nd r Treasurer of the Navy, earl voted on the motion. As, to the public service, Ile denied that it would be Wise-. fitted by the change, 'the question was, could ant a public saving have been effected by adding the Treaestrership of the Navy to the office of Chancellor of the Duely of Lan caster, to that of First Commissioner of Woods and Forests, or to the Vice-Presidency of that sand of Trade? t( vote of censure" 'upon Ministers, —(Hear.)—Again, he said the Woks Hata. Secretary taunted him with postponing hie 'lotion, -the sibjeet he assured the Right Hon ; Ca'ent/erean (notwithstanding the explanation offered on the subject) he pledged biarself that the sense of the House should be taken oat the ' gum _ in to, do was, to bring forward a tion. The night Hons tient/mina might be je, st if ied calliu Qu, bin) to bring forward his motion l'.filtt he should I n i y ha h t a i v ie e pa c . a o Lle(l ise i d % resolu tion t4cen3emnatory of the mode *.n 'which the office of Gentleman woold Tree.renser of the Navy had reee'atly been filled tsp." 11, a do that (move a vote of did not say that he was prepeseei propose a .. vote of the time Was near, but should not take the mode of doing it.--(HeN.,).— ‘e c rnve e ini n ltes s nui t: erri censure ' :n:,;4 r ui t id i 4ih e le% R u4egs i , g vh.s i t : 44fi i t i ),l l7 ,li z taups h iso, i i, Right Honourable Gentletnatea advice as to the time or Oansidering that the Bos phorus and Dardene;tes werein the possession of Russia, that France ve t s erns mg in the Ibteiterranean and the Chtbmek,.- r that, the. fate of th ministry of Prince Polignao veal now upon the balance,--thet it wits supposed t o I tv tettering' to its fall,---And that it was a cabinet whieh was generally auppo,:4(right ex wrong) to have emanal4 hone the influence (4 Ole ttri,tish Government,—viewin all these cireutnetances, and looking at our-foreign polity and rely tipn,s, he was not prepared to vote for a reduction of seen in the navy ; but was nevertheless for voting the pseseamt estimates only for six; months, by which time be laeped that, according to the favourite phrase, all the clouds that rakes , overhung , Ow !aor4on might be dissipated, mei when (eat ;AWN ct our foreign kolich new e t e di eee t y wimice3