The Sun. — London, England, 1821-04-14 00:00:00

'taken possession of the Country Ballks. The Bak of England had "alwaYs been sollcitous-to consult the interest and: convenience ofthe Liu* tic, - and to afford all the accommodation in their porter. In confirination of this, he aught allude to the respectable authority of the late Mr.llor- • iler in 1810.—(lIere the lion. Director read an extract from the bullion report.)—The Bank, it was there stated, had, in the judgment of the Committee, exercised a very great degree of for bearance and discretion in not. 'Converting to their own profit the means placed at their disposal, and had fully justified the confidence reposed in them by the public.—(Hear !)—lle was not a: re that any - thing had subsequently occurred, which ought to change this opinion of their Con duct.--('The remainder of the lion. Gentleman's observations were utterly inaudible in the gallery. Mr. GRENPELL explained. Mr.MoNcx. stated that the Bank of England had, in the- year 1817, not less than 30,000,000/. in circulation. This single fact, he thonght; ,af foided a' satisfactory measure of their forbear- 1 anoe. For his own part he looked upon the Bank as alone, responsible for all the misfortunes with - which the country had' been afflicted since , the fatal monient when they entered into a sort of partnership with Government. The evil, he be lieved,-. ould ultimately fall upon the Bank hut -it was undeniable that . itsexcessive isklo - had led to t depreciation of more than 25 per - cent. in the value of nioney. In his ()Pinion the Ricardo system, as it was called, was nothing else than a fraud and cheat upon the country—a mere trick, and his main objection to t was, that instead , of leading, as it professed, to the resitinp tion of cash payments, it was likely to be a bar to- that step. Mr. CALCROT defended the, conduct of the Bank of England. .The restriction was. a mea• sure, sought for by that body. The House ought to recollect that by the. Report of the Committee of 1819, they-had been given to understand that the Restriction Act in 1797 had been forced upon the Bank.—(ll.ear D- 2 —lle also maintained that it was not for the sake of the Bank, but for the exigencies of the Government, and the accom modation of the country,that the circulation of notes had been increased. T. WILSON had been anticipated. in. most of the remarks•he intended to make by the lion. Gentleman who had just sat down. Besides the reasons already• assigned for the Bank's increas ing -its issues from 9,000,0001. to 36,000,0001. another was the disappearing of the coin and the consequent demand of• the public for a larger circulatiOn. He had no hesitation in affirming it to be his opinion that the restriction was the -wisest measure that could have been resorted to under the circumstances of the time at which it took place. . Mr. HEYGATE observed • that great alarm was felt by the' country banks lest they should want small . notes;•and therefore he would ask if it was intended to: withdraw all the one-pound notes from cirCtilation; Whether the Bank was prepared Nvitha sufficient quantity of gold to supply- the place of their Own notes, and also a great portion of the Oteletlnd noteS , pfthe country banks? It was impossible to . peruse the.correspondence be tween theGovkrumentandthe tank,and not to.see that the restriction was not-the act of the 'Bank : it was: a.SCaterneasure ; and the blame of it ought not -t6 'attach - to the Bank. JNI ()NCI( explained. Mr. -FtrcAnno should not have blamed the Bank if they had only increased their issues to an,amount sufficient to replace the gold coin that had been removed from the country ; but they had extended their issues far beyond what was necessary for that purpose, and to this increase of circulation he ascribed all the depreciation which bad followed. the Bill was then read a third time. Mr. ELLICE brought up a clause for compell ing the Bank to , give in exchange for their.large notes either 1/. notes, or legal coin of the realm. This chi* hiving been reacta first and second time, was added to the bill by way of rider, and the bill so amended- was passed. The Bank‘ l cash payments (Ireland) Bill was also read a third time and 'passed ; a similar clause to that brought up by Mr. Ellice having been added to it ? on the motion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The CUPSCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER' MOVed the .order 'of the.day for the House going into a Cornmittee of Supply. Mr, Gonnbzi begged to call the.attention of te House to' of order of the 24th February, by which the Treasury directed an increase or salary to the commissioners of customs, excise, and- stamps. A motion .was brought forifatd, by 4n Ifon ) .,Friend of his (Mr. Gordon's) to prevent that increase -from being granted ; -but Ministers, by the :powerful argument' of a large ,majority, proved the - necessity for the augmentation. He did not-- know whether a. - substantive motion tife : hest mode'tif blitaining,thp 'reduc tion of these salaries, to*what they had been be fore this increase was granted • but he could Ministers. themselves s hould hate the n.erit of proposing that reduction. 'Sir C. 146:41.1: !Anted that "the Board' of Inquiry had made no recommendatiOn for the fe diiction of the salaries of these-commissioners, under the impression . that that question, 'ag'well as a, reduction.of salaries in all the other depart ments of the: public . service, was under the con sideration of government. , Mr. T. WILSON thought the country' was under great obligations , to this Board of Inquiry- for its effortsoind,that the great increase - Of duty 'dos a very good reason for not , reducing the salaries of the commissioners. Mr: 'HUMS had been informed that the Trea sury had sent letters' .to the heads of all the de partments, -desiring them. to report on the practi cability of reducing the salaries of the officers in -their respective establishments ; and he wished to know froin the Right Hon. Gentleman if this was the case. Sir C. LONG could only say that he had him self received a letter to the effect stated by the lion. Gentleman, and that the subject certainly was under the consideration of Government.— (Hear !) After a few wOrds—frorg Sir 11. PAaNpf.4. awl Sir C. LONG, the House went into a Committee. Col. Divirs wished to know if it was the in tentitili of goVertnnent to -keep n li the - present SCaff,Establishment in the islands of Jersey and Guernsey. From the information he had recelV ed he inferred that no steps had been taken to reduce one of the two - Major-Generals on the Stntf.there, though the'Noble - Lord'had said oda former occasion that there was to be only one Major-General kept on the Staff. Lord PALNEitS.rox said, that if the lion... Ge ntleman took the trouble of looking, he would find that one of these Major-Generals stood on the reduced list for June, 1821. Mr. GORDON . observed, that in Jersey-there were two Staff Officers „and only one private. ARMY ESTIMATES. Lord PALgEttSTON moved for 14,4741. 15s„5d. to defray the charge of allowances to the Com mander-in-Chief and his personal staff, secreta ries, assistant-secretarie, and Clerks. Mr. liumE rose to propose a reduction of 2,0001. on this, vote: In 1807 the salary of the commander-in-Chief was • 3,4571., or .9 guineas a day ; and so it continued till 1815, when it was. raised to 16 guineas:a : day. -- 'Then there ;was a principal Military Secretary. with a. salary -of 2,0001. a year, with which he should not meddle', though be thought' ,it greaterthan the duty re, quired. •IBut . he found a private Secretary with 3651 a year, and in assistant private Secretary With A. a year ; and , the latter of these he would abOlish altogether. In 1807 the first. Clerk had a salary of 3701., and now he was al lowed the double of that Sum. The established Clerks in 1807 had 1904 another 1601. and an other 1201. ; and now they were all •as high as 4001. The junior Clerks, who'in 1807 had 801. and 90/..,- were now allowed 2001. The esta blishment altogether in 1807, taking the Military' Staff of the Commander-in,Chief and the. Whole contingencies, cost only-12,0751.; so that in the estimate of this year there was an increase of 2,400/. He was unwilling to fix the reduCtion on any partiCular part of the establishment ; but he should propose a diminution-of 2,0001. on the whole vote, and leave it . to the' Commander-in- Chief to distribute the remaining 12,474/. as he pleased. The Honourable Gentleman conclud ed by moving that the . sum of 12,4741. Iss. sd. be substituted • in the resolution for the. sum origi nally propos - ea:: • • -•- Lord PAL KERSTON understood the Hon. Gent. to propose a reductiOn of 2,0001. a year in the allowances and e•tablishment of his Royal High ness the Duke of York, - as compared with 1807. On whatever principle.this motion was meant to be, founded, he (Lord'Palmerston) should main tain that there was no ground for any such re duction ; but that with reference to the great re sponsibility of the office, the salary could not be considered as being too" high. The question to be considered was, whether au officer, at the head of the - ariny; Who had all the patronage connected with so extensive a trust, should not be in the re ceipt of so large an income as he at present was. Now, supposing for a moment, fOr the sake of argument only, that an officer could abuse such a trust, surely the very factor there being vested in him so -delicate a responsibility, afforded the stronaer reason why his pay should be a large and an adequate one. And so much for the military allowance of the Commander-in-chief. Now With respect to his civil establishment,. if the' Honourable Gentleman would look back at' former estimates, he would find that the charge for this department was, in 1807, 7,5601., and in 'lB2l, 7,6661. ; leavin an in crease of 1061. only in the estimated charge of-the present year.—(Hear, hear !)—Therefore, on the lion. Gentleman's own showing—referring to the general-principle upon which he contended for the propriety of various reductions in the public expenditere, namely, the great proportion In which it had been enlarged=—on his own show ing.there could be no very good ground adduced for the present motion. As for the duties of the Secretary of the Commander in Chief, there was, perhaps, no situation in the whole range of public offices of a more laborious nature. They occu pied him, generally, for eight hours every day, not even excepting Sundayi; One of his principal duties consisted in interviews. Three days in every week were devoted regularly to them ; and on each of these days he had to communicate with no less than 60 officers. Besides this be had to advise and consult upon, and forward petitions, and to maintain 'an extensive correspondence with ' the staff for instance, .upon foreign stations, and, in short, with every department of the army.— Nobody, he thought, upon consideration, would maintain that the ialary attached to such an office was too large, The Asiistant Secretary, hOw ever trwch the Hon. Gentleman had chosen to cavil with .. the name, had also a great deal of bu siness to perforrri. Among other things he had to manage the details of that correspon dence which• the 'Military SOcretary had afterr wards to dispose of. . With regard to the Chap. lain, 014 was ••an appoiattnerit generally ,given to the • Chaplain-general,; and _it formed a part of his.- emoluments;.'imOunting in the whole to about 3001. a. year ; at_wilicli sum his salary (of which this appointment:Wis contemplated as forming a part) had been, on a former occasion, regularly.settled. ,The Vouse would perceive, then, when they were called upon to make a re. , duction in this establishrneht, that there•was a . difference - in the charge - of it, between the - year 1807 and the year 1821, of 1001. only.—(hear.) • Mr.BERNAL did not consider that to be the ; question for the If onse. The vote which they were called upon to pass was for a sum of 14,470/. .What the country desired to know was ,this — Why was not this. estimate a great deal less ? . (Hear.) —Why was the- same vote always to be . brought forward with6nt regard to existing cir . cumstances ?—(Hear.). I Lord PA-EmEasToN explained. The argument I of the Hon. Gentleman Ai.* not perfectly' cor, ; rect. The charge for. this I:stablishment, far from being of the fixed nature taentioned by the • Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Bernal), tild varied after this ratio : In 1815 it was . 1818 . lal7 1818 . 1819' . 1820 . And now in 1321 . . £1x.207 • 9,v0 • B , B NO . 7,5(k • /3,000 • 7,700 , • 7,66,6.7 It was never meant to effect no reduction in any of these estimates as Circumstances might render it practicable ; on the contrary, this statement would prove that the Estimates were always made out with regard to the necessities of the current year.—(Hear.) 'Col. bAvtEs contended that in the statement which had just been made to the Houn_,_, the No ble Lord had forgotten to -allow for,a great re duction of officers, clerks, and salaries, which had, at different times out of the period which it embraced, been effected in this department ; and which, being added to the , several sums men tioned in that statement, would bring them to very nearly the same amount as the amount of the vote proposed. Mr. SYKES thought the present a very ungrate ful subject to address the House upon ; for, whatever was the objection to be offered, and however it might be supported, it was always met by some ingenious theory intended to ac count for any. item in question. Yet he would confess that it did exceed his ingenuity to imagine how this department could equal, much more ex ceed, in its charge for the present year, the charge of 1807, when we had been for some years at war, and had many thousands of men under arms.—(H ear, hear, hear !)—According to the principle upod which the Noble Lord would justify the rise of salaries, the Commander in Chief himself ought, in 1807, a time of war and busy application, to have had just three times as 'large 'a salary as he had now.—(Cheers ana laughter.)—At a time of general distres's like the present, their table loaded with petitions, the .country earnestly soliciting relief from the bur dens which pressed so heavily upon her, every . lion.. Member ought to consider that economy was, of all others, a most sacred and most impe rative duty. Generai . ,,GASCOYNE bore testimony to the severe duties of the.office of Military Secretary to the Commander-in-Chief, and could not think it was overpaid. He believed the present holder of that important office had been there so early as the year 1793 ; and surely the same principle of remuneration which prevailed in the arrange ment of -every other public office, might very reasonably be applied to the office of Comman der-in-Chief. The Hon. Gentleman (Mr.llume) having proposed in this particular department, a saving, seemed to leave it to the Commander-in- Chief to decide in what quarter of it the saving was to be effected ; for . the. Hon. Gentleman seemed to be indifferentiwhether it were to be derived from the salary:of that illustrious indi vidual, or of his Military Secretary. When the Duke of York was . firA nominated to be Com mander-in-Chief, his salary and allowances were lower Than at present, because his own rank was then lower. When the Duke of Wellington was made Field Marshal, he insisted upon his full pay for - the -SituatiOn as well as for his rank.— (Hear, hear!) , Lord . PALitEas'ros begged to correct a slight inaccuracy:which kid just fallen from the Hon. andlGallant General. It was due both to the Duke of York, and to the Duke of Wellington', to say, that so far 'from the Duke of Welling.: 'ton's hating insisted upon his full pay for his situation and his rank, that arrangement . was made without an previous communication what ever to or with his Grace, by the Government at , home, as • a testimony of the sense - which-they entertained of his eminent services. —(Hear !) Mr. DENNIS BROWNE made one or two obsev. vations, which we could not possibly hear in the Gallery.—General GAscoYNE explained. Mr. Alderman WOOD, though he should cer tainly support the Amendment, differed very much in one particular from what seemed to be the intention of his Hon. Friend. If the 2,0001. proposed to be reduced were left to be a scramble perhaps the reduction would fall' upon those humblen htlividuals Who could least afford to be come the objects of its operation. He would rather that it should be effected on the salaries and emoluments of those Noble Persons who were so much better qualified to sustain such a reduction. LORD MILTON never could hear in that House a proposition to give the same salaries ❑ow as in former years, _however large their amount. He must repeat,-over and over again if necessary, that the situation of the country was very much altered from what it had been when those sala ries were first allotted. His Lordship contended that it behoved Parliament to look into the diffe rent statutes by which increased allowances had been made to the Royal Families, the salaries of the judges, and so on ; and into all the other acts passed during the Grenville administration ) at a time when the state of the currency and the rise of prices made -such provisions necessary.— He called upon the landed gentlemen in that House, particularly, not to lose sight of this very important duty. They could not collect their rents; the farmer could not dispose of his pro; dace ; and almost every class of men had to de plore the same overwhelming depreciatiOn. -He therefore saw no reason why persons in pUblic offices, and they who were annuitants upon the public, should be exempted alone from any de eiease of means or fluctuation of property. Mr.'GounivaN contended that the principle of the Noble Lord was not applicable to tht present case. If he complained that persons Li public offices were more exempt than others fiorn the operation of those circumstances which caused a depreciation of income, he (Mr. Goulburn) would refer' him to the case of the fundholders ; who, as compared with the landed proprietors, enjoyed at least equal advantages. . Lord MILTON and Mr. GOULBURN mutually explained. Mr; ABERCROMBY was afraid so much extra neous matter had been mixed up in this debate, that the question was not likely to Pe fairly dis cussed. lie certainly thought that, under the peculiar circumstances of the times, the establish ment of all public offices ought to be revised, and the salaries of all clerks employed in them to be reconsidered. • Mr. MONCK thought that the argument of the Secretary. for the Colonial Department bore no analogy whatever to_ the present case. He felt himself boundsto support the amendment.. Sir li. PARNELL was of opinion that the same _ . . . p4inciple of remur.ertiori..couLl.np •po3sibly.w iili now, whichmight have been ex.pc.. , nt.enough at a former period. Many very . 0 , „ - iL8;Si and important reductions might he. eqsect“t_ salaries of public officers, and,. undec ttii inipres sion, he was inclined to vote fnrithe Sir C. LOVG opposed the Mr. HUME informed the Gallant General (Gs. • coyne (that Mr. Dighton now received 7001. haV ing had only 1501. in 1198,.4.heir he euiered on office : there wei=e others in a similar sctuation. As the Hon. General admitted that the chaplain ship to the Duke of York's staff was Merely an honorary office, he must vote for the red uction-, The Hon. Gentleman expressed his entire concurrence in what had fallen from the Hon. Alderman. He required that the Commander-in-Chief should begin the reduction, and not the ininnr clerks. The Committee then divided on .the .motion for reduc ing the expences of the Commander-in-Chief's office from 14,4741. 15s. 5d., t010,4741.155.5d., when there mere-- Ayes, 23 I Noes, 94 I Majority against the motion, 71. It was then proposed to reduce them to 12,4741. 15s. 5d., when the numbers were— Ayes, 27 1 Noes, 91 Majority against the motion, 83. The next motion, it was understood, was to redne.the euti. mates to 13,8741. 15s. 5d., when there were— - Ayes, 401 Noes, 125 1 Majorityagainst the motion, 85. On re=entering the gallery we-.. found Lord PALMERSTON moving that ,a sun? ,not,exceeCting 6501. shOuld be - granted - to his Majes a ty for de fraying the expences of Deputy Judge 'Advocate ot- Scotland.:--The , grant, was: 'opposed on. the ground that the otficewa.s unnecessary, consider ing the large salary paid to,, and, the small ser-1 vices perforated by, the - Advocath-Geheral. It was-also, objected to, on, th 4 ground, of its being nothing else than a Scot,ch,job, which ;hlciorigin ally been devised as a job, and was in future to be 'voted as a job. 'The grant was defended upon the plea of. necessity and expediency.—The fol lowing gentlemen took a share in,the discussion:: —Mr. Bennet, Captain 'O'Grady, Mr. Sykes, Mr. Beckett, Mr. l ßernal, Mr: Htnbe, Mr. Gipps, Mr. Hutchinson (who said that he had long since seen that Ministers had been rednced.to-their,last shift)., but that he did-not-know till the present debate that they were left without a rag.to cover their nakedness—(laughter)—the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Sir Ronald Fergusson, Mr. Ellice, and Mr. Goulburn. The gallery was then_cleared for a division, when_ there appeared For the motion, 111 I Against it, 7:2 I Majority, 39. On being re-admitted to the Gallery, we found Colonel DAVIES opposing the grant of 12,6421. to the Comptrollers of Army Accounts. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, in op posing the amendment, contended that the duties of Comptrollers of Army Accounts were three times as great, at present as they were formerly. Mr. BANKES was in favour , of the original mo tion. Mr. CREEVEY, in support of the amendment, observed, that as on a former evening he had said he should like to see one of those clerks who liad 1,400/. a year called to th'i.)ar to make good his claim to that sum, so on "the present occasion he should like to see one off' the Comp trcillers of Army Accounts make good leis claim to the sum of 2,000/. a year ; and then he shonld be glad to compare that claim with that of some brave officer who, having purchased his commis sion in the first instance, bad fought up his way to' honour and promotion, and having at length for his service beeu called to the Peerage, re ceived only 2,0001. a year, as compensation for his services and to support his dignity as a Peer. lie should be glad to learn what' comparison could be made between the services of the two Sir It. FERGUSSON observed, that as his Hon. Friend (Mr. Creevey) had mentioned the case of Officers in the army, he could not 'avoid com- iitaining. of the condUct of Government to Ge neral Officers of a particular clasS..; . By a foriner regulation, an allowance was rhad4 tbuGeneral Officers without regiments. 110 would not say whether that regulation was wise or not; but it was now withdrawn, and thereby' he 'considered that the public faith was broken - with those Of ficers. At the close.of the war it. was determin ed that only a certain number of General Of ficers sho d uld be kept up ; and those who were reduced had only a claim to the halipay of that rank which they had held in the 'arts y before their iiromotion'as General Officers. This, he conceived, was a great injustice to the very many meritorious General Officers, some 'of whom had spent 30 years—the best of 'their lives—in the service. Many General Officers,' who, before the termination of the war, and before their pro motion, might have made `a considerable sum by the sale - of their commission's', were - now living (some of them with large farnilieS) Upon their half-pay as Majors. This he conside - red as not fair . and just treatment to Strdese'ithig a clasS of men. Major-Generals were deprived of all pay; except the half-pay which they tict before they had been promoted. Ite knew many who were without any pay but the'half-pay of Majors only. lie. thought they ought.to be paid according to their services. Sir H - . PARNELL spoke at .some length - against the ex. pehces of Comptrollers according 'to the present steivii.• Air, HUSKISSON defended the mode of controlling and auditing as 'necessary, 'where'such large sums Or money were conveyed through the Bands of a i imblic officer. .._. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER sUpported the motion, and entered. into several details to show the fitness of the existing system. Sir R. FERGUYSON explained. • Mr. HUME _spoke at some length cf the comparative amount of the Army EStimates, th6.tiiientit of midit ing at different periods, and contended . that the, reduction in the Controlling of Army Accounts ought to 'keep pace with' the re duction of-the Army itself. • ' • Mr. HUSKISSON again explained. The Committee then divided, when the•numbers were— For the amendment, 45 Against it, 105 1 Majority, 60. e The House resumed, and the Report w as or. dered to be received on Monday next.. - REVENUE LAWS. Mr. LUSIIINGTON moved for leave to bring in a Bill for the consolidation and amendment of the Irish Revenue Laws. Mr. BERNAL was much disiatisfied with the system of revenue protection at present acted upon in this country. . Mr. lioimousE requested the attention of the House to the alarming state of danger and dis turbance into which the whole ,coastof England was thrown by the operation, of . the existing sys tem. The late case of England, Who, after being found guilty of murder by 'a - Jury, 'had'been re.; commetcled to mercy by , aJudgeir had-.produced such an effect at Hastings, that the fishermen had, . . . . . actually dra7n-up,...their,... boats and teasedf - their trade; and unless Some convincing proof were at once given that conduct,like.,England's was dis countenanced by Gorernmen,t, the whol e c oas t o f Sussex would into a state of actual.. %rap», faie, He (Mr,Hobb . :)use . ). by no means intended Ito interfe.re . conduct . ,Of. the .judge. rgho Nit thed England ; 1114 he doubted whether the caS.l ought - not-to be laktformally before Parlia ment.. he .present System called for imrneatate reformation, for no newer th an eighteen persons had fallen on the Sussex Coast within the.last months in frays bet Wee n. smugglers, or_ supposed sniuggleis, and 'persons .eMployed in` what . was called the protection .of the revenue. The CHANCELLOR of the E , Rj. in .a.& verting to the case of England, declared that a judge would be unworthy of : his Seat who should fail to exert him Self for the preseivationof a man's life, when that lifts was endangered by the prejudices of a jury. The frequent 'disputes al luded to by the . Hon. Member opposite: (Mr. Hobhouse) went chiefly to prove the unhappy propensity of the SuSsek men 'for smuggling.- - It was equally the wish as th e d u t y o f Government to prevent, as far 0' PO6sible„ such unfortunate occurrences ; but 'the law Must not be infringed, nor the revenue defrauded,. withitnpunity.:•. Mr. R. GORDON joined *with 'the Hon.'nein•- berfor Westminster in deprecating the existing state, of the - Reyenue Laws-, and assured:. the House that the coast of Dorsetsiiire and 'Devon shire mere in a state, quite7.as disturberfaa.the coast . i,f:Sussex: cpultl: . peSsi ofr . be. • Sir G. COCKBURN ' defeii&O the conduct of England, and asserted that, however the resul of the quarrel was to be'deplored, that indiviilual had merely.acted in his ,owtidefence. Unfortu nately smuggling was a crime to which nearly the Whole population of the.,Sussex: coast was_ more or less addicted. He (sir G. COekburn) had . particularly ,wished to protect the:fishing-boat:l, from search, and had catned inquiries to-be : made-. us to the feasibility of such an exemption. The effect, however, of, his examination had been to discover that there were belonging- to Hastings alone, sixty fishing-boats in which run goods had at different times been found, and that almost all the fishermen were either smugglers on their own account, or . leagued with those who were smug glers Ziy_profes7.ion. Mr. H. G. BENNET thought that so long as high duties were continued, and prohibited goods eagerly purchased, no degree of vigilance could put a stop to smuggling. The Hon. Member then commented upon the immense military force employed upon the revenue service in Ireland, and declared that, under the cloak of protecting the revenue in that country, such scenes had been acted as could only be equalled by the transac-, tions in La Vendee during the French Revolution. Sir G. COCKIIURN said that when smugglers appeared in bodies of one or two hundred strong. mere revenue 'officers could do nothing against them. Mr. F. PALMER disapproved of the p re sent system. . _ Mr. F. ROBINSON believed that a good deal 'et the present rag'e 'for sionggrling arose out of 'the operation of the prohibitory system--a system to which he (Mr. F. R.) bad always been adverse. After a few words from Mr. Alderman HEY - GATE, the House went into a Committee, and leave was given to-bring in• the Bill. . The other Orders of the Day were then dis posed of,.and the House adjourned at HALF-F.4o' ONE. O'CLOCK. • MAJORITY AND MINORITY AGAINST MR. HUME ' S MOTION FOR LEAVE TO BRING IN A Ernu - , DISQUALIFY CIVIL OFFICERS OF .THE ORDNANCE FROM VO/ r., AT ELECTIONS FOR MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT. . _ MAJORI'f Y. ' ' 1. A'Court Doraville, Sir C. Nightingale, Sir ' 1 , Banker, G. • Dr ummond, "J. Oilslow, A. ' I3ankes, H. Dowdeswell, J. E. Osborne, Lord Bathurst, C. Ellis, C. 11. Pole, Rt. Hon. ‘ S'' ' Beckett, J. R. EFllticootuAti,o'nr.. G . W. Paget, B. Beresford, Sir J. P. Browne, J. ' Finch, G. Browne, I). ' Fleming, J. Pitt, y W. Browne, P. Forbes; C. - Perc , Hon H. • Bruce, It. Graves, Lord P e arce, J. Bernard, Visc. Grosett, J. It. Penruddocke , J . Brydges, Mr. All Gladstone, J. Prendergast, W. -(-1' Brandling, C, J. Gordon, It. Phipps, Hon. E. Brogden,J. - Grant, A. C. Robinson, F. , . Burgh, Sir U. Ilardinge, Sir H. Rae, Sir W. ' Buchanan . Hare, Hon: R. Russell, J. W. -' Calvert, J. Hart, W. Ricketts, C. i . Courtenay, W. Holford, G. Palmerston, Lord .n, Rocksava,ge, Lai' Courtenay, T. P. Hotham, Lord Somerset, Id. G. Clerk, Sir G. Holmes, W. Scott, H. J. Copley, Sir J. . Bill, Sir, G. Shiffner, Sr G.. Clive, H. • Iluskisson, W. Strutt, J. G. Collett, E. Inaes,.Sir H. Stewart, W. Cheer; E. M. . Irving, J. - Sotheron, F. Cholnieley, Sir M. Lester,'l3: Shaw, It. Cooper, B. - , , Lewis, %V, . Suttie, Sir.J. Cooper, Ei S. " Long, Sir C. Sneyd, N. Cumming, G. : :Loclaiart, , E. . - . Twiss, H. : ' ' Clements, J. Lushington, S. R. T o wnshend, —"'' l, 4' , t Canning, : Luttrell,: H. : • Vansittart, Iti G. F. Calthorpe, . Martin, Sir B. . Hi.?l. N. .- cat, W. - "Martin,R.(Gilway) Wallace, T. Cost, E. --, ~- • Marryat; J. ' . Wemysao. Coin, P. . , .:. Monteith, kJ. G, Walker, J. • . Corbett, P. Money, W. T. Wyndham, ''S,''. Cranborne, Lord Macnaughten, E. A. Ward, J. W- Cockbur.n, Sir G. Metcalfe ; .H..J. : Wetherell, C. Congreve, Sir W. Musgrav, Sir J. Dent, J. Nolan, M. Varinotith, UK" Dobson, J. TELLEa:i.—}-1. Goulburn and R. Ward.. . MINORITY. • , . • S`r n'' Allan, J. H. • Grant, J. P. Parnell, I „ j (.7 Alfhorri, Visc. - • Haldimand, W.-- Ramsden, ' -d., Barratt, S. M. . Hamilton, Lord A. Ricardo, pa `C. Nc. Bennet, Hon. H. G. neron, Sir B. ' Ridley, Sir ''''.-c Benett, John '' • ' Iloblunise; J: C. • -Robarts,-/".,.• Birch, J. . ...,,, Ilornhy-,. E. , ~_ , 1 - 1 , , , Bright, EL Hurst, ,Itobt. _ Roberts, Itunibold, .V . Bury, Visct : : IlutchinsOn, 'Hon. Rickford, ' Cavendish, Henry C.. 11. .Searlett......L . Chetwynd, G. ' James, W. Smith, w-,_ Colburne, N. It. Jervoise, - O. P. Sniith, J.05 1 ' 17 .• Crespigny, Sir W.D. Johnson; Col. Smith, Don- '''' Davies, I'. H. . Lambton, J. G. Stewart, W• ~.. Denman, Thos. Lennard, 'l'. 13. Stuart, Lord .1 DunCanlloll , Visct. A iVl ia a i. c t it in intoiLSir . 3 . , , S i. ) 3 , k y e lo i r , ,/. .i. 1.1. 0. Ellice, Ed. Fergnsson, Sir R.C.. Majorb'anks, S. 'fierneY, n'' -. O. 'Whitbread, NV ~,.. Gordon, Itobt. - Monck, J. B. Whitbread, S. (..,' Grattan, J. Moore; Peter Graham, Sandford • Palmer, C. F. Williams, W. Pares, Thomas Guise, Sir W. Pares, Thomas NVyvill, Al• TELLEILS.It. Bernal and J. Hnme. b iß3 F ee ar T iu i n ' . LIST 00 THE MINORITY • E- l ilo n: Y t t 4 , I T T p u h . R I ,R :, ' O;' : '1 ; 1 1- 11: 5 i r s s e r Q : U S: t i s t r ) :: ° V . s . sA LA III. • O F THE, COMMAND2X-IN•CHIET.),-4 11:3•1)ritycanTitiri.l.rE. Ord, .Wm. 11. • Rennet, Hon. G. Ilarhord, Hon. E. Parneoll,. Sl , i" Benyon, B. • Hume, Joseph . Pryset Pryse Ricardo, P. Carter, John Johnston, Otlonel SYktss L i * I Denman, T.• - Milton 'Lord • Wood, AldertrZ Gorton ; R. , . : Mona, J.. B. • Wptilli Al. ':•• ''' • Grattan, J. .1. ,, i ug . evt , Lord