The Sun. — London, England, 1822-03-23 00:00:00

*tire, but to prosecutions of the Crown, and surely the people had a right to comp la in of that. " Ile-hoped Honourable Gen tlemen would tvithara:w their opposition to this Petition lying on the table. Mr. LAMBT()N,. in answer to the objections stated against . the Petition he had - presented, begged in the first place to ob serve; that it did not pretend to be any thing else than the pe tition of the undersigned. The reason why public notice had not been given was, because there was not time for it, as it was desired that the petition should be presented to that House before the motion of the Hon. Member for Westminster was made. Another reason was, that there were generally so many Obstacles thrown in the way of things done by public meetings, that it was thought advisable not to take that course. Hon. Gentlemen opposite did not think that there was any ira pediment to a full and fair expression of sentiment in private petitions, during the 01136 of the hole-and - -corner addresses. lie did justice to the consistency of the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Wynn) who was in the habit of op posing all petitions containing words that might not suit e delicate fanay or squeamish taste of Honourable Gentlemen opposite. As to the charge of corruption, he had himself heard a Noble Lord (Lord Cochrane) state in that House the market price of a seat 5,0001. he believed but he was not called to order. When the people of England therefore knew of the existence of avowed and notorious corruption, they ought to be allowed to express it. He hoped the House would not refuse to allow the petition to lie on the table. He believed in his conscience that the object of the petitioners was not to insult the House, but merely to obtain a liberation of .Mr. Hunt from prison. Mr. PEEL said he had not been present at the reading of the petition, but from the copy he had seen of some of the expres sions contained it, he could not come to the conclusion of the, Hon. Member, that there was no intention to insult the House (Hear, hear !)—He was ready to admit that it would be a most imprudent course in that House to reject on all occasions the free expression of the sentiments of the people ; but he was sate the Hon. Gentleman would in candour allow, that there must be some limits to such expression, even leaving out of the question the dignity of the House. This was not a question of dignity ; for it was imperative on the House, in discharge of the important trusts confided to them, not to sanction the abuse of the important right =of petitioning the Legisla ture—(Hear.)—To permit such license of expression as this petition exhibited was prejudicial to that right. It was plain, then, that some line must be drawn, and the languagF of this petition came,within that line ? It was not, in his opinion, lan guage that ought to be addressed to or received by that House; it was a studied attempt to throw insult upon it. A slur was thrown upon the administration of justice in this country, which was charged with inflicting a vindictive punishment on Mr. Hunt, because he made an attempt to bring about a re form in Parliament. Again, that House was told that it ex isted by notorious corruption. If they allowed such language to be addressed to them, what course would they have left to pursue if other petitioners, availing themselves of the prece dent thus established, should approach the House in a more decided tone ? Thinking that it they received this petition, a precedent would be established, not only derogatory from the dignity of that House, but also dangerous to the valuable privi lege of petitioning, posseised by the people of this country, he felt himself called upon to reject the petition.--(llear, hear !) After a few words from Mr. Doti - Gras, in explanation, and Mr. Moalcir, the House divided on the motion that the Peti tion lie on the table. For the Motion - - - '22 Against it - - 123 Majority against it - - —lOl Mr. HUME presented a Petition from the Inhabitants of Paisley, praying that the House would interfere to procure the immediate liberation of Mr. Hunt. The Hon. Member b _egged to say that he was not aware of any one expression in the Petition to raise any objection to its being received by the House. He concurred in the sentiments contained in it re specting the severity of Mr. Hunt's sentence and treatment.— Read and ordered to be printed. MR. HOOK. Mr. BENNET adverted to a motion he had made on the 21st of Febivary, for a return from the Auditor's Office of the state of Mr. Theodore Hook's Accounts. That return had not been made, and he therefore moved that it be made forthwith. —Ordered. SCOTCH BURGHS. The LORD ADVOCATE moved the reading of the Order of the Day for the second reading of the-Royal Burghs' Amend ment Bill, for the purpose of postponement. Lord A. HAMILTON protested against the continual post ponement of this measure. He supposed it was to make way tor the Committee of Supply ; and here he begged leave to ask whether it was to be considered as a rule that the Orders of the Day for these Committees were to take precedence of other Orders and of Motions ? The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that it was considered advisable, for the convenience of the House, that the Committee of Supply should be gone into as early as possible on Estimate nights. The LORD ADVOCATE said, that it was intended to have the Bill printed after the second reading, and a copy had already been sent to all the Royal. Burghs.- - The Bill was then ordered to be read a second time on Thursday next. Lord NUGENT moved for Returns of all Official Appoint ments in the Leeward, West India, and Caribee Islands, with the amount of salary and emoluments attached to each ; and also of the Solicitors and Attorney-Generals—Ordered. Mr. tr. BRIGHT presented a Petition from the Dean and Chapter of the Cathedral Church at Bristol, praying to be heard by Counsel against the Bristol Port Bill.—Ordered to le on the table. _ COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY. Oirthe motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EXCII E QUER, that the House should resolve itself into a Committee of Supply, Mr. HUME suggested the expediency of proceeding with some of the Bills before the House in the early part of the evening, and thought it might be well not to devote the whole night to Supply. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER briefly ex plained the course which, in his judgment, it would be most convenient to take with the Superannuation Bill, and said that it was not intended to press the Receiver General's Bill at a late hour of the night. Mr. BENNET had intended, when the report of the Com mittee of Supply was brought up on the preceding day, to have objected to the amount of the salaries of the first Lord of the Admiralty; and to that of the Secretary. Having been absent when the report was brought up, he could not do so now, but he took this opportunity of protesting against their present amount. The House then resolved itself into the Committee. NAVY ESTIMATES. Sir J. OSBORN reminded the Committee, that the resolu tion he had now to propose was. that which had been brought forward on a former night. He moved the following grant : For defraying the expence of improving the Dock-yards for the year 1822, 154,2001. Mr. HUME thought no more money ought to be voted for the works now in progress, till information had been obtained that should prove the propriety of their being continued. It would be in the recollection of the House, / that in the year 1814, when the great works at Sheerness Dock-yard were be gun, the estimate of the whole expence was 844,9001: Now after an expence of 1,355,0001. had „already been incurred, being half a million over the original estimate, and exclusive of the vote called for in the present year, they were given to understand that the sunk of 618,0001. would be wanting to com plete the undertaking, making with the 56,0001. now required for Sheerness a total exceeding2,ooo,oool. Under these circum stances, he objected to a further vote till some inquiry had taken place. When the work was begun, there were doubts which would be the better place, Purfieet or Sheerness. The latter had been preferred, but it should lie remembered that we had means now at our command, of.. which we were not then possessed, and that by means of steam-boats, ships of the line could now be carried up and down the river without diffi culty. He had been informed that at Purfleet or Northfieet the works required could haVe been made and carried to any depth with safety. At Sheerness, accident after.accident bad occurred, and in January, 1820, a large part of what had been done had been carried away by an irruption of the sea, and the damage thus done was not repaired but at a great expence to the country. He had seen a statement put forth, that if the works at Sheerness were to be discontinued, and a similar un dertaking entered upon elsewhere, the new one migTit be com pletely executed for a smaller sum than would be necessary to finish that which was now advancing towards completion. At present he believed it was doubtful whether the works which had cost the country so much could be finished at alt ; and reduced as our Navy was now from what it had been when this plan was formed, and possessing the means to which he had before alluded, which we had not in 1814. it was doUbtful whether the works were now necessary. He then would pro pose to diminish the amount of the grant now before them, in tending afterwards to move for a Committee to inquire into the state of le case, and determine - whether or not it would be pro per to proceed. He should therefore call on the. Committee to take 50,0001., on account of Sheerness, from the sum named in the r.•solution. In the vote for this year, he found a consi derabl: sum taken from the usual grant for the Breakwater in Plymouth Sound. Sir J. YORKE suggested that it would be more regular to take the sense of the House, in the first instance, as to the re -tion which the Hon. Gentleman intended to propose with ..pect to the grant for Sheerness. • Mr. HUME said that he could not pursue that course, 'be eaune.there'was but one vote for Sheerness and Plymouth. In the las'. year there was a large vote for Plymouth ; for the pre sent year the vote was small—it was but 25,0001. He thought it would be a better course to vote a large syin, so that the works might be completed in a shorter time ; by that means the expence of keeping up a large establishment for superin tending these works'would be avoided. The expence of that establishment stood at 6,4001. a-year •it would, therefore, he submitted, be better, by passing a large grant, to have the work completed in two years, than by passing small grants to keep it going on for ten years ; for the longer the work was in hands, the longer, of course, would the country be saddled with the expend of the superintending establishment. The Hon. Gentleman next called the attention of the House to the very great expence attending the different dock-yards. Sinee the year 1811, the expence amounted to 4,500,0001. ; and if the present Estimates were carried, it would exceed five millions. Having expended to much, they would pause before they pro ceeded farther, whether, in the embarrassed state of the Fi nances of the country, it would be wise to lay out additional sums of money, on works that might ultimately turn out to be useless ? The Hon. Gentleman, after repeating his wish for the appointment of a Committee to inquire into the state of the works at Sheerness, and the propriety of proceeding any fur ther with the same, concluded by moving as an Amendment, that a sum of 104,0001. should be substituted for the sum of 154,0001. Sir JOHN OSBORN said that the grant now asked for was necessary ; nor could he for a moment think that the statement of the Hon. Gentleman would prevent the House from-agree ing to the vote. Of the sum stated in the grant, 50,0001. were all that was necessary for the new works-15,0001. of which were for completing the smithery; the remainder of the grant was to be expended on the different yards. With respect to the works at the Breakwater, he could not agree with the Hon. Gentleman as to the propriety of the course which he sug gested. The Hon. Gentleman, by means of large grants, would wish to have the works completed in two or three years. He was convinced that if that course were followed, it would occasion, not a saving, but an increase of expence. Sir J. YORKE contended, that the Works at Sheerness were undertaken under the immediate direction of most able and ex perienced men. He had only to mention the names of Mr. Watt, Mr. Hudder, and Mr. Jessop. The work, notwith standing the observations that had been made, would stand' the test of severe criticism. Of this expenditure it was to be ob served, that every shilling was spent in the country, and in ,some way or other found its way back into the Exchequer; and the Honourable Member for Aberdeen should recollect, that his constituents were not a little benefitted, as the Aberdeen granite was much employed.—(a laugh.)—When they recol lected the various- instances of unprofitable expenditure—the - twenty millions spent in St. Domingo—the twenty millions lost in the Austrian loan—(hear, hear !)—when they cast their eyes to the course of the Medway, and observed a certain hill, on which a lazaretto was erected, at an expence of one million, of which not a vestige remained, the whole having been sold for ten thousand pounds,he really thought thelion. Member had pitched upon one of the least objectionable parts of the Mini sterial expenditure—(Here.)--Before the improvements were undertaken, there was scarcely a dock in Sheerness and Chat ham fit for a ship of the line ; and as for Chatham, the river below was so shoal and intricate, that even when ships_had been repaired and were fit for sea, they had grounded on their moorings and were obliged to be returned to Dock.—The works were now completed, and the sum proposed was merely to erect a wall to seperate the great basin from what was known by the facetious name of Powder-monkey Bay, without which it was supposed the water could not be let in without danger of a blow up. It was true there had been eight accidents in the course of the work, but none except one were at all serious.-- That accident had added 70001. or 80001. to the expence ; but even on that occasion there was not the least settling of the work. - The great basin had now 27 feet at the mouth, and would now admit a first-rate with all her guns and stores. As to Plymouth Breakwater, it had already been found to be of the greatest service. He had had a letter from the Superin tendant of the works there, which stated,- that during the late heavy gales, there were seldom less than twenty sail of out ward bound merchantmen in the Sound ; and that Catwater (a small harbour within the Sound) was full of them ; and that the whole were so secure, that but for the culpable negligence of the commander of a French vessel that went to pieces on Drake's Island, not five pounds worth of damage was done.— Every other anchorage on the coast was locked in an easterly wind, but a vessel could always go in and out of the Sound. Mr. RENNET trusted that the Gentlemen who were so learned in these matters, were more accurate in their estimate of the utility of the Sheerness works than they had been as to their expence. The estimate of their expence originally wasloo,oool. double that sum had already been expended, and before they were finished, it was probable that the expense would turn two millions. The establishments of the Dock-yards, in ge neral, were _very fit to be examined, and he should suggest it for consideration, whether the establishments at Chatham and Sheerness could both be necessary ? He was glad, how ever' to hear that one part of the works had been completed, and he hoped - that the rest would sot be commenced hastily ; that is to say, without the fullest estimate before the House of the expence. Sir G. CLERK observed, that the work just begun had been finished within the expence estimated ; but that the excess had afterwards arisen by an alteration of the plan of the Docks, which had been intended for third-rates, and were afterwards enlarged to admit first-rates. It was to be recollected that the estimated expense of the Arsenal at Nordifleet was ten millions, and it was at the same time said, that it would be still necessary to preserve the old works at Sheernms, which would have had to be repaired at an expence of a million ; so that the compari son should be made between the two millions which might be expended at Sheerness under the present plan, with the eleven millions which would have been expended if the Northfleet Ar serial had been proceeded with. Mr. BERN AL said that an expenditure which was neces sary might yet be excessive. As to the conduct of the works at Sheerness there had been considerable doubts. But he wished now more particularly to point out the case of the Bermudas, which could not be under the immediate superintendance of the Government. Pown to the last year inclusive, 253,0001. had been expended there on the Arsenal, and the estimate of the ex pence to finish it was 290,0001.—50 large an expenditure, so far from the immediate inspection of the Admiralty, could not be too vigilantly watched, or we might be plunged in a gulf of expense which it was impossible to fathom. Sir G. COCKBURN said, the Admiralty had proceeded with all possible caution, and had recently sent out Mr. Jessep to report whether the best place had been pitched upon, who had reported in the affirmative. The arsenal was finished , but the anchorage was not occulted, and the sum which remained to be expended was for a breakwater. Mr. Jessop, who had no in terest whatever in the matter, had made a careful estimate, and though it was impossible to say that an estimate would prove exactly correct, there was no reason to suppose that the expence would be more or less. After a few words from Sir I. COFFIN in favour of the Works at Sheerness, Mr. BRIGHT spoke strongly in favour of the Works at Bermudas,_ as important for the protection of the West Indies. Sir J. _YORKE, Sir I. COFFINOIrId Sir G. COCKBURN, explained. Mi. HUME said, the explanation that had been given as to the Works at Sheerness had been in some measure satisfactory. As to the works at Bermudas, he thought it was hardly safe to trust the judgment of a single engineer, _as it was known that the late Mr. Rennie had been very widely mistaken in many of the estimates of works that had been begun by his advice, and if other opinions had been taken, the Caledonian Canal would never have been undertaken. He had mentioned last Session that there were very different opinions respecting the works at Bermudas. Sir„G. COCKBURN said, that it was to decide between these conflicting opinions that Mr. Jessop had been sent out. Lord J. RUSSELL said, the House would be satisfied that a great degree of vigilance had been exercised, and he should agree to vote the v(hole estimate. He hoped, ho;vever, the Ministers would not hesitate in bringing forward any vote that might be necessary for the completion of great national works. They would ill understand the call for economy, which was so powerful in the country, if they omitted any expenditure ne cessary to the security of the possessions of the country at home or abroad. The Amendment was withdrawn, and the original motion agreed to. ARMY ESTIMATES. Lord PALMERSTON moved the following grants : To cover the Charge for the Pay of General Officers in Great Britain, not being Colonels of Regiments - £108,522 To cover the Pay of General Officers not being Co lonels of Regiments in Ireland , - - 1,903 To defray the Charges for Garrisons at home and abroad - - - - - - - 28,894 Mr. HUME hoped many of the offices held by persons who did not perform the duties of them would be abolished on the deaths of those individuals. He did not think the charge for garrisons ought to be so large, and unless he heard that which induced him to 'change his opinion, he should submit a motion to the Committee for deducting something from it.— He particularly noticed the establishments in the islands of Guernsey and Jersey, and the charge for the Militia, which he understood was hardly called out oftener than once a year. He also offered a few remarks on the taxes raised in Gibraltar, and on the charge which it threw on these estimates. He wish ed to know if it could not be lessened. He thought a Grant of 22,0091. more than ought to be demaded for Garrisons in England. Lord PALMERSTON stated the islands of Guernsey and Jersey to throw no expense on this country beyond that for the Staff, the remainder being paid out of the revenues of the Islands. The Hon. Gentleman was misinformed with respect to the Militia. Instead (of being called out but once a year, it was called ont once a fortnight,. and the inspector had reported them to be a most efficient body of men. With re spect to the charge for Gibraltar, it was less than formerly by three or four thousand pounds. When asked, if some diminu tion of expence could notbe effected there, he did not feel him self at liberty to hold out any expectation of that kind. Some offices in the garrisons, on the extinctions of the interest in them, had not been filled up ; but with respect to the Gover nors, so far as his influence extended, he would endeavour to prevail on the House not to diminish the number of such ap pointments. These had been considered the honourable re wards for military services--they had been bestowed in a way . which the country must approve, and in the present holders of them, they would recognise many of the most distinguished or naments of their country. These Offices had been approved by successive Committees of that House, and therefore he did not feel it to be his duty to propose that any of them should be abolished. Colonel GOSSETT explained the cause of a small increase of 6951. which appeared in the present Resolutions. Mr. R. SMITH remarked, there was a charge for clothing the Militia. Lord PALMERSTON briefly replied, but was not dis tinctly heard in the gallery. Colonel GOSSETT said, the Guernsey Militia were clothed at the public expense once in seven years. Colonel DAVIES objected to Governments being kept up merely to reward military worth ; wishing those who distin guished themselves to be duly requited for their services, he thought that it would be better that they should receive that reward at the hands of Parliament. Mr. HUME could not receive the assertion of the Noble Lord with respect to the Militia, unless he could say of his own knowledge, that they had been called out oftener than he, (Mr. Hume), had stated. He understood that the Guernsey Militia had not been called out for six months. The whole system of that islanli wanted revision. The people must be the happiest in the world ; they paid no taxes to any body, and they received all the protection that England could give. He wished to know whence, and from whom, the Governor and Lieutenant-Governor received their pay ? Mr. GOSSET said, Lord Beresford had reported the mili tia to be a very different body of men. It was true that the people of Guernsey paid no taxes, but in lieu of taxes they had to maintain a militia 6,000 strong, whose pay did not cost this country a single fraction. Mr. G. BENNET said, that the question was, whether the House would allow a certain number of offices which were perfect sinecures, and of no use whatever ? It had been the custom to refer to the characters of persons who held useless offices, in order to' sustain them ; but they ought to look at the utility of the offices themselves. He thought a Town Major and Town Serjeant of no use, and that a Surgeon alone was necessary. Mr. W. SMITH said, that last year there was a Governor of the Isle of Wight, who never held any other military ap pointment. The Governor of Dartmouth was also a Gentle man, formerly a Member of that House, who had no other mi. litary connection whatever. He did not know to what extent suchinstances might avail, but he held them to be improper. Lord PAL3IERSTON said that it was quite true that the late Governor of the Isle of Wight, the Earl of Malmesbury, who held the reversion of a pension granted to his father for eminent services rendered to the public, had never been in the army. But the circumstances under which he held the Gover norship were, his having accepted .it upon giving up his life interest in the pension. By that arrangement a considerable saving had been effected, because the pension was 10001. a year, and he believed the salary of the office to be not more than eleven or twelve hundred. It was in contemplation to abolish the situation, and he was not certain whether the Go vernorship of Dartmouth was not also to be reduced. He was entirely at issue with what had fallen from the Honour able Gentlemen opposite, as to the unconstitutional doc trines which they had that night advanced upon the pro priety of making . Parliament the distributors of military re wards. The principle was most unconstitutional, and must lead to the worst consequences. It had always been held, that for preserving the just balance of the Constitution, -it was necessary that the Crown should not only have the com mand of the Army, but the distribution of rewards and hon ours for exemplary services. He was quite convinced that if ever Parliament should allow the arguments which had come from the other side to be successful, and such power to be wrest ed from the Crown; that moment they would strike the death blow of the Constitution. , Colonel DAVIES contended that the doctrine of the Noble Lord would lead to the principle that Parliament should exer cise no controul over the public money. This was such a doc trine as he had never heard before, and hoped never to hear again. Mr. C. WYNN said, that if it was a new doctrine that the Crown was the fountain of honour and the fountain of reward, it was one which was to be found in all the most valuable writers on the Constitution. He contended that Parliament had never done more than to recommend the King to grant re wards ; and the moment it assumedla further power, the mo narchy would be at an end, and a republic would be established. If the army were to look to that House, those who at first peti tioned might easily go a step further and command. If they looked to the history of the country they would see how these effects had been realised with regard to the Parliamentary army in the reign of Charles the First. Another material objection which he entertained towards the principle contended for was, that it would lead to the most extravagant military expenditure that had ever been known in the service. This would be the consequence of the favour in which applicants to Parliament were held, or other circumstances which naturally presented themselves out of such , a state of things. They might see by , the cases of private Claims that a rate of remuneration infinite ly higher than any yet known would be then established. Colonel DAVIES and Mr. WYNN explained. Mr. G. BENNET said, that it had never been argued that the Crown was to be limited in its power of bestowing honours or rewards. Mr. HUME said, that his object was to see whether the House would consent to cut down useless offices and sinecures, and leave that juA and legitimate influence to the support of the monarchy which it was the intention of the constitution that it should possess. He had never heard, until within the last week, that the keeping up of sinecures was necessary , to the influence of the Crown. He would always maintain that that Crown did not deserve to be supported, which could not stand upon the legitimate influence to be derived from the patronage of so vast an expenditure as that which was in curred by the Government of this country. He wished to ask the Noble Lord, whether a Committee of that House had not recommended the reduction of Fort William and Fort Au gustus ? He concluded by moving a reduction upon the esti mate of 12,3441. Lord PALMERSTON said, that the Hon. Member had asked him a question which he might have answered himself , by taking the trouble of walking up stairs to the library. The fact was, that the reduction of these forts was recommended, but that it was afterwards found advisable to retain them. Mr. It. SMITH was of opinion, that for all practical pur poses the House possessed.a due controul over the power of the Crown. With regard to the proposed amendment, he could not vote for general reductions of such a nature. Mr. W. SMITH thought the Crown was more properly the fountain of honour than of reward. A short conversation then ensued, in which The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER observed, that the two forts which had been alluded to were at one time intended to be reduced, but that they were held to be of some impottance by the Master of the Ordnance, and in conse quence of that the subject had been left open to further consi deration. Mr. HUME mentioned the offices and charges which he had erased as being useless and complete sinecures. There was the garrisoning of the Cape of Good Hope, which he had struck out, as the colony was able to pay for itself, and the gover nors and Deputy Governors of Hull, Chester, and other places, at which these officers were not known. Their salaries amounted to the sum he_ proposed to reduce. The Committee then divided— For the Amendment - - - 21 Against it - - 80 Majority for the Resolution - —59 The next resolution was for a sum of 137,2971. to be granted for the full pax of unattached officers-of the army. Mr. HUME called the attention of the Committee to what he conceived to be a great abuse in, this part of the service. A new system hid been introduced by the Noble Lord, by which Officers were appointed to the Veteran Corps who had scarcely served at all, and then immediately afterwards placed on full pay. There were 247 Officers who had been thus transferred, and the effect was, that as soon as the Veteran Corps were dis banded, they retired upon full pay. The consequence which followed from this course was, that 13,8701. a-year was saddled upon the public for the life of these Officers. He conceived that these appointments were against the Act, inasmuch as it was expressly provided that no person should be allowed to re tire to the Veteran Corps until disabled from actual service. He could instance many cases where these appointments had taken place with scarcely any service. There was one Officer named Pritchard, who, although he had been in four services, had only seen one year of active service in the waggon train. He remained from 1797 upon half-pay until 1821, when he was appointed to the Veteran Corps. Every one of these indivi. duals ought to be put back upon half-pay, and he should there fore move a reduction of 13,8701., being the amount of the difference. Lord PALMERSTON said, the House would be aware that the ground upon which the disbanded Officers of the Veteran Battalions were allowed full pay was, that they were com pelled to forego all promotion in the army. As a compensa tion for this disadvantage, they were allowed the full pay of their rank. It should be borne in mind, that the dif ference of half and full pay in most ranks, was not as two to four, but as two to three. The Honourable Member had mistaken the meaning of the Act, when he conceived it necessary that an officer shoulel be disabled before he could' be eligible to an appointment in the veteran corps. If an offi cer claimed to be placed upon the retired list, then it was re quired that he should produce medical certificates of disability. But the two cases were most distinctly different. With regard to the case of Mr. Pritchard, he had rendered material service to the army in Flanders, in 1795, where he then resided. Ow ing to the part he took he was afterwards obliged to fly his dwelling, and his property was confiscated. He was then ap. pointed to the waggon tram, and afterwards retired upon half pay up to 1821, at which period the Commander-in-Chief ap pointed him to the veteran battalion, as a compensation for his losses and services. Mr. HUME said, there was not only one case but many which he could instance, of improper appointments of this na ture. If what the Noble Lord said with regard to the case of Mr. Pritchard were correct, it appeared that he had been used very ill in not being compensated at an earlier date. Lord PALMERSTON said, that the Hon. Member first complained that Mr. Pritchard had been used too well and then that he had not been treated well enough. It reminded him of the controversy upon the digitalis between the physi cians and the biographer of a great man. The physicians were accused by this Gentleman of having killed their patient by givin& him digitalis. They maintained, however, that :hey had given him no digitalis. " Then," replied the biographer, " why didn't you give him digitalis ?" The Hon. Member's case appeared to him to be exactly parallel. Mr. HUME shortly explained; and after an observation from a Member and Lord PALMERSTON, the Resolution was carried. _ _ A vote of 7,9371., for the full pay of retired Officers in Ire land was then agreed to unanimously. The next Resolution proposed was for granting the sum of 824,3931.95. for the half-pay and military allowances. A few observations upon the subject of the relations of June, 1814, passed between Colonel DAviEs and Lord PAL MERSTON. Mr. HUME begged the attention of the Committee to the Report of the Finance Committee of 1817, upon the subject of the present vote. They found the half-pay of that year to amount to six hundred and forty-seven thousand pounds, and thought that it might be reduced in years to come, 5 or 7 per cent. Instead of that, it had been progressively increasing year by year, until it had arrived at the sum now proposed.—(Hear, hear.)—He was aware that the reason he should have given for the increase was, that many had been put upon full pay.— Ile was willing to give the Noble Lord credit for having filled up more vacancies from the half-pay this year than upon any former one ; but still he thought he had not carried the principle far enough. He only differed with him in the degree, and if the Noble Lord would continue to act upon it, the country and the service would be satisfied with that part of his system. There was a measure of finance connected with this subject, which he was anxious to suggest. When Officers retired from the service, instead of paying them in annuities at 13 or 14 per cent. let them be paid off altogether with money borrowed at 3 per cent. and a great saving might be created. He thought officers of the army ought not to be allowed to retire on half pay until they had served a certain time. • Naval officers could not retire upon half-pay until after six years service.— He trusted Government would attend to this subject, or he should, bring it substantively before the House. Sir H. HARDINGE said, that however frequently he dif fered from the opinion of the Hon. Member for Aberdeen in military matters, he perfectly agreed with him in respect to the wisdom of taking officers from the half-pay list to active service. There was a statement of that Honourable Member to which he was desirous of calling the attention of the House.— It was one which he had repeatedly made in that House and elsewhere, and particularly at the end of the last Session, when he moved an Address to the Crown, requesting a third investigation into all the departments of the State, and more especially in the military department. It was also repeat ed at Hereford and at various county and other meetings. This statement was, that during a period of five years, there had been in the army 2,553 appointments—(" promotions," from Mr.Hume.)--Well,promotions ; and that if these had been made from the half-pay list, there would have been a saving of 200,0001. annually to the country, and of two millions and a half eventually, allowing the annuities to continue twelve years. He was surprised at the largeness of this number, and was consequently led to examine into it, when he found that so far from their having been 2,553 appointments-4" promotions" from Mr. 'Hume)— ' promotions the Hon. Member now called them, but he would shew that he made his calculations upon appointments ; but' the whole number of actual vacancies which occurred in the five years was 663.—(Hear, hear, hear !)1 —So that he had actually overstatedl,B9o in the number of ap-1 pointments, and 1,800,0001. in the saving which would have arisen by filling them up from the half-pay list.--plear, hear !) —He knew it was not easy to make calculations in figures ap pear clear in a discussion of that sort, but with the permission of the House, he would explain how the Hon. Member had com mitted a gross error, which was made up of the most inconceiv able collection of errors altogether that ever any one man com mitted. He had made his calculations upon this principle : If a Lieutenant-Colonel retired, his rank was filled by a Major, the Majority by a Captain, the Captain's by a Lieutenant, and s the Lieutenant's by an Ensign. This of course was only one vacancy to be filled from the half-pay : but strange to say, the Hon. Member had taken and calculated upon five, and thus he made his over-statement of 1890 in numbers, and to over state 1,800,0001. in expense.--(Cheers.)—And this too he had stated openly in the face of the country—he had placed it upon the Journals of that House, and stated it at Hereford, and in almost all the public meetings which had taken place in this country.—(Cheers.)--The effect .of this must have been to pre judice a great portion of the people against the manner in which the Army is administered, and against the valuable services of the Commander in Chief. The actual number of appoint ments in the specified time he had found to be as follows :-31 Lieut.-Colonels, 34 Majors, 140 Captains, 297 Lieutenants, and 161 Ensigns and Comets, making in the whole 663. This error of the Hon. Member was a sufficient test of his general mode of calculation. He thought it very invidious to endea vour to place the Commander in Chief in such a point of view. With respect to the Half-pay List, there were but two modes of relieving it, by either deaths or casualties.-- There were 600 reductions last year, and the whole which could be reduced so as to bring in an actual saving to the pub lic, was about 30 Commissions ; was it, he asked, advisable tointerfere with the Half-pay List, for the value of 30 Com missions; to take away hope and - honourable ambition, and disgust the army . ?—(llear, hear !)—What substantial saving would there be in taking away from the Commander in Chief a fair source of patronage,: which in point of fact was a part of the constitutional influence of the Crown ?—( Hear.) Mr. HUME said he had not expressed any wish to take from the Crown the power of appointing officers. All that he con tended for was, that a reduction of these objectionable ap pointments would be a real service to the army. He admitted that the Hon. and Gallant Officer had shewn that he (Mr. H.) had made a mistake in his statement upon a former occasion.— (Hear, hear, hear !)--But he submitted that it was the only mistake, in point of statement, he had ever committed in that House.—(Cheers and laughter.)—He had discovered the mis take afterwards, and mentioned it to his Hon. Friend the 31em berfor Shrewsbury, who recommended him to correct the mis take the first favourable opportunity, and this he had resolved to do. With respect to the Hon. and Gallant Member's re marks upon County Meetings, he begged to say, that to the best of his recollection he had attended but one County Meet ing since the time of his making that statement. If Hon. Alembers would look at the number of calculations and state ments he had brought before the House, it would be matter of Surprise that they were generally so correct. He thought if one in three were accurate to the letter, it was as much as could be fairly expected ; but he was persuaded that the Hon. Members opposite would sleep soundly now they had discovered one mis take.—(Hea ,r hear !) Lord PALMERSTON said it appeared the Hon. Mem ber's calculations and statements were made upon the-prin ciple adopted in venturing a smuggler's cargo. If - one in were safe, there was still a profit.—(A laugh.)—The mis take of the Hon. Member had now been admitted, but the Hon. Member, though he had discovered it, could sleep upon it at least until December last ; and had then availed himself of the generosity of the worthy citizens of Hereford ; their generous liquor, and their handsome vase. Surely, the Hon. Member would now return it.--(Hear, hear, and a laugh.)— The mistake of the Hon. Member was, however, not one of arithmetic Merely ; it was one of reasoning, and that reason ing, too,' upon documents in his own possession. The Hon. Member had called for a Return, distinguishing Commissions purchased from those not purchased ; and he, therefore, must have seen the number and distinction of promotions. In 1812, the Half-pay List had become so reduced, that an Act of Par liament was passed to authorise the putting Officers pn half pay without a previous exchange. In the year 1812, 2224 had been put on the'list, in consequence of this Act; and the total on the list, in the year 1816, including exchanges, was 4661. Since 1816, the number of applications of persons on the list to be called into service was 3600 ' and of these 2347 had been gradually called. This sheaved that the applica tions had not been neglected.—(Hear, hear, hear !)—The ap pointments by purchase should, he conceived,. be placed en tirely out of the question ; for the Commander-in-Chief had no power over an Officer's property in his Commission. He trusted the Houle would see that the Commander-in-Chief had paid every attention to the half-pay list. The total of the number of first commissions in the year 1821 was 209 ; of these 107 had been purchased; 34 had been given on the recommend ation of Officers who had claims on the Army ; .20 on the re commendation of the Marquis of Has'tings„ as 'Governor-Ge neral of India; 25 on that of Gentlemen in Civil Departments, and' 23 had been taken from the Half-pay List. The twci last were the remaining aointments occasioned by patronage mid it was a demonsUnble fact,,,that the public had sustained no loss by the exchange. After a few observations from Colonel DAVIES, Mr. BENNET said his Hon. Friend had certainly men tioned the mistake in question to him ; and he had recommend ed him to set himself right in the House on the subject. The Hon. Members opposite were certainly welcome to make the most of the mistake. They reminded him of the Lady in the " School for Scandal," who appeared to be rejoiced at the dis covery of errors in others from which she thought she was free herself. ' Sir H. HARDINGE explained. Mr. T. WILSON concurred in the Hon. Member's sugges tion for paying off the Officers on the half-pay list, and saving 14 per cent. The Resolution was then agreed to. The following sums were then voted, viz.:— For Half-pay in respect of the Forces in Ireland - V 4,764 For Allowances to reduced Officers - - - 60,193: On the question for voting 114,8701. for Half-pay of reduced' Foreign Officers in the English service, their Widows, and Orphans, Colonel DAVIES said, that an English Officer, on receiving, his halfpay, was compelled to sign a certificate, verified by affidavit, that he held no military situation under any foreign power. This regulation was enforced by the Foreig n Enlist ment Bill, which deprived Officers of their commissions if they entered into military service against the provisions of the Bill. But Foreig ners in this respect had an advantage' over English - men ; for there were many instances of the former holding commissions under this Government while they were in foreign service. There was one case of an officer who held an English commission, and was at the same time a Sub-Prefect of France. The Gallant Colonel here read a letter from an English Officer in France stating that two Foreign O ffi cers in military ser vice abro ad had been allowed to draw their half-pay under their English commissions. He thought some regulation, should be adopted to prevent this. A certificate from the Go vernment under which the Officer resided might answer the purpose. Lord PALMERSTON said. every possible attention was paid to prevent the practice alluded to. If the Gallant Officer would give him the names of the two individuals, he would inquire into the circumstance, and should the statement prove , correct, they would deserve the punishment which they cer tainly would receive. Similar instances had been mentioned to him ' • but, on inquiry, he had always found that the o ffi cers alluded to had not drawn their half-pay. The German Legion were paid under an Act of Parliament passed to recompense their services, and their case therefore stood on different grounds. Col. DAVIES said that his suggestion was for a regulation to prevent the abuse. Sir C. LONG said there could be no better regulation than calling for the affidavit of the officer. Statements similar to that of the Gallant Member had sometimes been made to him; but on inquiry he had always found them incorrect. Sir H. HARDINGE said he had himself applied ineffectu ally, on behalf of a foreign officer, for a relaxation of the rule. Mr. HUME wished to know why the German Legion re. ceived half-pay, in addition to their full pay, in foreign service ? Lord PALMERSTON said, he had already stated they re ceived it under an Act of Parliament passed for rewarding their services in the Peninsula. Half-pay was considered as much a retaining fee for future, as a reward for past services. Colonel Davits and Lord PALMERSTON explained. - Mr. HUME said, that as it appeared from the Noble Lord that half-pay was a retaining fee for future services, he called upon that Noble Lord to make some regulation respecting the Clergymen who had found their way into the army as officers. No return had been made of the number of these officers, ale though the House had made an order on the subject. He con ceived that the order could be complied with, by calling upon officers to add to the usual statement a declaration that they were not in holy orders. Lord PALMERSTON said, he had stated that the half-pay was of a mixed nature—for services partly prospective and partly retrospective. Sir C. LONG said it was impossible to make the Return alluded to by the Hon. Member ; for he had no right, as Pay master, to call upon any officer to declare whether or not he was in orders. The officer might refuse to answer the ques tion. He did not believe there were more than twenty such officers, though the subject was a good topic for a speech at a ptiblic meeting. Mr. HUSIE said there should have been a clause inserted in the Mutiny Act, giving power to call for the declaratiOn in question. Sir C. LONG said, -that if the Hon. Member thought so he might have proposed the clause himself. Mr. GOULBURN said, the calling for such a . declaration at present would be a tyrannical as well as an illegal act. It ' was compelling a man to disclose his resources, without any t law to warrant the compulsion. , Lord NORMANBY said,he hoped the subject would be attended to on the passing of the next Mutiny Bill. GOULBURN said, it would be better to pass a Bill to prevent Bishops from ordaining officers, as there was no law to prevent a Clergyman from becoming an officer in the army. —(A laugh.) After ,a conversation between Mr. HuSIE, Mr. GOULBERN, and Lord PALMERSTON, the Resolution was agreed to. The following Resolutions were then agreed to without any material observation, viz. :-35,6751. for In-Pensioners of Chelsea :-16,2471. for those of Kilmainham Hospital :- 975,4531. for Out-Pensioners of Chelsea; and 214,0001. for those of Kilmainham. On the Resolution for 26,3001. for the Royal Military Asylum. Mr. HUME wished to know whether the number of chil dren admitted into this Hospital was to be reduced ? Lord PALMERSTON said, a reduction was contemplated, but it must be obvious that it would be a work of time, consi dering the number of claimants arising out of the services of the army during the last war. After a few words from Mr. BENNET and Lord PALMER STON, the Resolution was then agreed to. The following Resolutions were then agreed to, viz.:- 102,8271. for Widows' Pensions, and 21,4491. for those of Ireland. , • On the Resolution being put for 179,2501. for the Compas sionate List, Mr. HUME wished to know whether there was any inten tion to revise the present system under this Fund. He believed pensions had been obtained under a false representation that the objects of them had received wounds. Lord PALMERSTON said, there would shortly be a Re -turn laid before the House, which would give every informa tion on the subject. He should be happy to receive informa tion from any person respecting any supposed abuse, and would give every attention to it. After a few words from Mr. Truett and Lord PALMERSTON . in explanation, the Resolution was then agreed to. The following sums were then voted, Viz.-36,9321. for the Superannuation List; and 7,6061. for that of Ireland. On the Resolution for 32,0001. for Exchequer Fees, Col. DAVIES - asked what was meant by this Resolution ? Lord PALMERSTON said, the sum was a Fund paid into the Exchequer, partly for certain of its Officers, and the re mainder for the Consolidated Fund. After a short conversation between Mr. Hume, Lord Palmer ston, Sir C. Long, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Resolution was agreed le. A Vote was then passed for 2,690 men for the Irish Veteran Battalions ; and another for 83,1761. for paying them. The House then resumed, and the Report of the Committee was ordered to be received on Tuesday. WAYS AND MEANS. On the motion of the CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER, it - was ordered that, on Monday next, the House should resolve itself into a Committee of Ways and Means. "'ORDNANCE ESTIMATES. - Mr. R. WARD gavenotice that, on Monday:next, he should move the Ordnance Estimates. The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of ; and at ELEVEN O'CLOCK the House adjourned. LIST OF VIE MINORITY OF 22, WHO VOTED FOR RECEIVING THE NEWCASTLE - PETITION IN FAVOUR OF MR. HUNT. Barrett, S. B. N. Hobhouse, J. C. Robarts, Colonel Birch, J. Hume, J. ,„ Robinson, Sir Geo. Bernal, R. James, W. Wood, Alderman Bury, Viscount Maberly, J. Wilson, Sir R. Calvert, N. Malik, Hon. W. Creevey, T. Nugent, Lord TELEERS. Ellice, Ed. Monck, J., B. Bennet, Hon. H. G. Fergusson, SirR.C. Ricardo, Davit' Lambton, J. G. Gaskell, Ben. Palmer, C. F. BIRTHS. The Lady of Wm. Smith, Esq., of his Majesty's Hon. -Band of Gentlemen Pensioners, of a son. On the 15th inst. ' in Gloucester-row, Weymouth, the Lady of the Rev. C. B. Cookes, of a sin. y DIED. Yesterday morning, at her house in Devonshire-street, Port land-place, Mrs. Nicholl, after a short illness. On Wednesday, the 20th inst., at Dorfold, Cheshire, Henry Tomkinson, Esq., aged 80. Yesterday, 6 - Russell-place, Catherine, the wife of Robert John Harper, Esq., eldest daughter of the late Thomas Hinck ley, Esq., of Lichfield. Printed and Published, for the PROPRIETORS, at the StIX• OFFICE, 112, Strand, by J. B. CAASTAISS. .