The Express.
London, England, 1862-07-22 00:00:00

SUPPLY.

The house then went into committee of supply, and the
following votes were agreed to :
13,864/.' for the Fishery Board, Scotland.
2.0001., for the trustees of manufactures, Scotland.
115,8771., for local dues on shipping under treaties of
reciprocity.
3,500/., for inspectors of corn returns.
1,0001., for boundary survey, Ireland.
34,6504, for census of the population.
3,0001., for telegraph companies' subsidies.
2,6471., for Malta and Alexandria telegraph.
Upon the vote of 4,6431. for miscellaneous charges on
civil contingencies,
Mr. D. GRIFFITH asked whether the item relating to
orders and decorations comprised all orders including the
star, and whether it relieved the recipients from all charges
for badges, collars, and decorations.
. .

Mr. PEEL said the vote referred to the robe. and collars
of the different orders, but that the decorations themselves
were always returned on the death of the knight, and that
therefore there was no charge on the public for them.
The vote was then agreed to, u were also the following :-
6,5001. for the officers of the yeomanry cavalry, and
750.980/. fordisambodied militia.

-The next vote was 2,8271. far junior attaches.
Mr. DODSON, in moving the omission of the vote, said
be did not wish to cast any slur upon that branch of the
diplomatic service, but this vote was opening up an entirely
new channel of expenditure, which was not 'moaners.
Mr. LAYARD thought that this subject had been ex.
haunted by the discussion which took place a short time ago,
on the motion of the hoc. member for Honiton (Mr.
Cochrane). The facts of the case were—The committee
which considered this subject made several recommenda-
tions, of which the Foreign-office only proposed to carry out
one—one which had been very strongly recommended by
every witness who bad been examined before the oommittee—
and that was, to pay the unpaid attaches after four
years of gratuitous public service. His own opinion was,
that they should be paid at an earlier period.
He did not think the liberal party were acting
wisely in trying to cut down the salaries of public servants.
(Ironical cheers.) It was made a complaint that none but
the relatives of the aristocracy and rich persons were ap-
pointed to the diplomatic service ; but by keeping down the
salaries of those who were appointed, they made it impossi-
ble for any but comparatively rich persons to enter it.
(Hear.) The object of the vote was to pay the unpaid
attaches after four years' service. Whilst the expenditure
in other branches of the public service had almost doubled
within the last :10 years, there was not only no increase in
the 180,0001. allowed out of the consolidated fund
for the diplomatic service, but the salaries of
the oonsul-generalships in South America bad been
paid out of that sum. It was true that there was
a surplus of 10,0001. paid back to the Foreign-office ; but it
was considered that that sum of 10,000/. should be kept in
hand to meet extraordinary expenses. That was one reason
why this vote of 2,800/. was not taken from the surplus of
10,00111. Another raison was that this vote involved a new
principle to • certain extent— (hear, hear)—and it was coo-
sidered that the assent of the house should be asked for it.
There had been no increase in the expense of the diplomatic
service, and there was no prospect of au increase, and under
these circumstances he hoped the committee would agree to
this very moderate grant.
Mr. HANKEY said that, as a member of 'the committee
which considered this subject, he must say that the mem-
bars were almost unanimous, that it was not desirable to
matinee the present system, which they considered to be
inconvenient and objectionable. Instead of having • ten-
dency to promote jobbery, he believed that the present pro- '
position would rather counteract it ; for at present none
but persons who had a certain amount of property could be
appointed to the position of unpaid attach/v. A large
number of persons who wished to see life is foreign courts,
and who had a fortune of their own to the amount of
4004 or 5001. a year, were nomioated unpaid attaches, and
in the course of time thrse became claimants on the govern-
meet. It was considered by the committee that this was
very objectionable. It was considered a further ground of
objection to the system that the ministers had not as strict
a hold on the unpaid attaches as they would have if they
were paid.
Lord H. VANE quite agreed that it was reasonable that
persons who had served for some years as unpaid attaches
should receive some payment. He thought it, however, by
no means desirable that the number of unpaid attaches
should be increased. The diplomatic service was necessarily
• clam service. Ho hoped it would always continue so.
Mr. WHITE said this was not • mere question of 2.8001.
per annum, 'out an important principle was involved in it.
He knew a good maay young mac who could speak French
fluently, and could dance waltzes, who would be very glad
to be in the position of attaché, and who would not require
1501. a year.
Sir F. GOLDSMID said it was not denied that there was
no difficulty at the present time io getting young men to
act es attaches without pay. It followed, conclusively, that
to pay them was • waste of public mousy, and though a
small waste in itself it was likely to lead toe larger waste in
future years, sod he should therefore support the
amendment.

---------
Mr. FREELAND supported the amendment and trusted
that before the house consented to the introduction of any
change as regarded the diplomatic service it would insist
that all charges for that service should he annually sub-
mitted to parliament in the shape of estimates, and that the
system of qualification for persona intending to enter that
service should undergo revision.
Lord PALMERSTON said be thought the house did not
treat its committees very well. (Hear, bear.) A motion
was made to inquire into part of the public service, allega-
Hoes were made that it was over paid, or that it was too
numerous and should be reduced in amount or in allowances,
then a committee inquired into the facts and found that
the previous impressions were erroneous -that the num-
bers were not too great, or, as in the case of the consular or
diplomatic service, that they were too small—and that the
bon. gentleman who moved for the committee came
forward and said the cooclnsion to which the com-
mittee had arrived was wrong. It reminded him of
the sailer who wee going to be married, and when he was
required to take his wife for better or worse, said that she
might become se much better as she liked, but that if she
became worse he would have nothing to do with her. (A
laugh.) So these boo. gentlemen said if the committee
agreed with them, its methanol:is we-e wise ones; but if
it differed from their precouceived opinions, though it con-
sisted of official men, people who knew something about the
matter, sod were competent to judge, they would throw the
report over, and have nothing to do with the reoom-
mendatiooa. With respect to the particular question.
be (Lord Palmerston) thought the committee were perfectly
right. It had been a great grievance that there were in the
diplomatic service a great number of young men doing their
duty admirably, but without any remuneration whatever.
(Hear.) It was said there were always plenty of candidates
for the service, but it did not follow that the service would
be well performed so long as the government had not that
hold upon theee.young men which consisted in giving them
• fair remuneration for their services. Thee it was lasted
the number of attachis was unlimited, but the amount wan
sot unlimited, and it was • mistake of his hoe. Mend (Mr.
White) to suppose that this house would abdicate its func-
tions, and abandon its control over the vote in future yeas.
It must be remembered further, that the attaches were in
• different position than formerly. (Hese, bear.) They
now liad‘o submit to • very strict eaarnina-lon, and conse-
quently there was not the same arbitrary
°power as for-
merly existed of making appointments. His hoe. friend
had
_also shown that this sum of 180,0001. would not be
wholly sat—part of it would be retained to the Exche-
quer, making • saving more than equivalent to the sum now
objected to. If the diplomatic service of the present day
were compared with that of past years it would be found
that it was lase essay. whilst from experience he could say

it was much better performed. There was no diplomatic
orrice in the world better performed—he might say so
well performed —as the British. They collected informa-
tion better, and kept their government better informed as
to what was passing, than any other. He hoped the house
would not be carried away by the apprehensions of his boo.
friend, but would adopt this recommendation of the com-
mittee.

Mr. HENLEY said he thought the noble lord hardly
treated the house fairly when he said that it did not pay
due respect to its committees. What had the go-
vernment dorm? (Hear, hear.) This committee made
several recommendations ; the government threw them
all over except one—(No, no) and this was
brought forward, he supposed, to save some credit
to the committee. If the government.mistrusted so many
recommendations he did not see that the house had not a
right to mistrust one. (Hear, hear.) The hon. gentleman
the Under-Secretary said they had more money than they
wanted, then why come sod ask the House of Commons for
more? The next argument rather staggered him (Mr. Hen-
ley). It was that these gentlemen should be placed on the
permaneht list, in order that they might become entitled to
pensions. But if they had moregentlemen than they wanted,
why should they te placed on the permanent list ? The
noble lord did not say that the strictness of the examination
had canoed any diminution in the number of candidates. If
there was no diffiailty in getting men he thought the house
had no right to pledge the country to this extent (Hear.)
Mr. LAYARD said the right hon. gentleman could not
have been present the other night when he explained that
it was the intention of the government to carry out all the
resolutions of the committee ; and that they had simply
adopted this one first. The examination which these young
men had to go through was a very severe one—so much so,
that he had known many rejected who had claims on the
country through the service* of their relations. These
young men, he submitted, ought to be paid. They might
lave paid this sum out of surplus, and the
house have been none the wiser, but the go-
vernment bad thought it the most straightforward
course to come down and ask the house to sanction
the expenditure. (Hear, hear.) It was the wish of the
Foreign-office to diminish rather than to increase the num-
ber of employes, and be sincerely hoped the house would
secede to this vote.
Mr. SCLATER BOOTH hoped that the hon. member
would press his amendment to a division, and said it should
receive his hearty support.
Mr. CLAY thought the unfortunate attaches were a fair
specimen
of a clam of whom they had occasionally heard,
namely, who got " more kicks than halfpence." He
had had considerable experience with regard to diplomatic
services, but he knew of none where the attachés were paid
to little or were worked so much as in our own.
The committee divided—
Ayes 73
Noes 6O-13
So the item was retained.
The last vote was 5,5871. to cover deficiencies in the
postal packet monies last year.
Thu was agreed to, amidst loud cheering.

The house then mimed.
FORTIFICATIONS (PROVISION FOR EICPENSFI3)

BILL

The report of amendmaTts was considered.
Sir G. LEWIS moved a proviso on clause 2.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY complained that if the pro-
viso were passed, the schedule appended to the Lill
would become a mere nullity.
Sir G. LEWIS mid that the proviso now stood in exactly
the form to which the hon. baronet assented. If, however,
the Lon. baronet thought it unsatisfactory he had no wish
to insist upon it, bat bad introduced it in accordance with
what he understood to be the wish of the hones.

The proviso was then put and agreed to.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY proposed an amendment on
clause 20, requiring that the account of the expenditure
should be made up and submitted to parliament in the
month of April, instead of the month of July, which was
agreed to.
Some verbal amendments having been introduced by Sir
G. Lawin in the schedule,
Sir F. SMITH urged some objections to the form of the
schedule, ea not being sufficiently precise as to the mode in
which the accounts were required to be made up. The
sum which the house was asked to vote in each year, it
must be borne in mind, bad to be multiplied by seven or
eight times to get at the aggregate. He contended that the
whole of the 87,0001. required for the mortar batteries at
St. Helen's would be money thrown away, for it would be
perfectly ineffectual. The same might be said as to the
works at Portadown.hill and Plymouth. He proposed to
reduce the schedule by 12,0001. under the head of Isle of
Wight, Bt. Helen's, and Portpool batteries. 12,0001. was
the amount now required, but the total amount involved
was 87,(X)01.
Sir J. FEBOUSSON differed from the hat speaker as to
the effeeds of mortar fire, adding that any person who,
like himself, had been exposed to it would naturally have a
very wholesome dread of its disagreeableness.
.(A laugh.)
Colonel DUNNE said that mortar fire was ineffectual at
a distance of 1,000 yard..
Mr. A. SMITH suggested that the government, instead
of going on with • number of works at the same time,
should begin and finish one at • time.
Sir G. LEWIS remarked that it was impossible to my
that one particular work was more needed than another,
the fact being that all formed part of one plan, which had
been well considered and approved, and all bearing equally
upon the others they were all equally necessary.
The house then divided :
For the motion
Against 44-29

The suin was then agreed to.
Mr. C. BERKELEY called attention to the schedule,
and said there were great discrepancies in the figures ; either
the government had taken 70,000 too much, or 80,000 too
little ; and be thought this matter required some expla-
nation,

Sir a. C. LEWIS thought there wu oo reel discrepancy
in the figures. The statement of accounta wee perfectly
correct. . .

Mr. B. OSBORNE said that some further explanation
was necessary. Ate dinner recently given to 'H. Reuther,
at Willis's Rooms, cabinet ministers declared that pesos
with France rested on a sound foundation, and yet the
government asked for an enormous sum for fortifications.
Lord PALMERSTON thought the confuaion as to the
schedule had been created by the hon. member who had
brought forward the subject. (A laugh.) His right bon.
friend had given the true account, vie., that the amount
shown in the schedule was just right. (A laugh.) As to
his bon. friend who spoke List, and who had a sort of mania
on the subject, he was not more satisfied now, after
his repeated defeats, than he was at first, and the
house and the country would be able to appreciate his argu-
ment. Having stated that the country ought to have a
powerful fleet, and feeling, as be must do—for he presumed
be had reflected upon the matter—that we could sot main-
tain a fleet without dockyards, he arrived at the strange
conclusion that we should leave our dockyard' undefended.
(Hear, hear.)
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said the matter was not to be
joked away. (Hear, hear.) There was clearly an error to
a large amount in the schedule.
Sir G. C. LEWIS contended that there was no diem-
palmy in the schedule. With respect to the site of the
arsenal referred to, it was asked why the sum taken for it
was not repeated ? It was voted under the original act ;
the money was still in the power of the government., and
no Dew sum having been taken for the purpose in the present
year, it did not reappear in the schedule.
Sir F. SMITH said that the schedule was not correct,
and he hoped it would be set right. The right hon. baronet
was not responsible for the error, as it was evi-
dently the work of the clerk who prepared the
account. With respect to the forts on Portsdown.
bill he had hoped that the government would not proceed
with at least two of them. He would not, however, re-
open that subject, but would move the reduction of Ihe
amount estimated for the Elsie Line Forts—namely,
20,0004
Mr. AYRTON observed that the schedule was manifestly
erroneous in the particulars pointed out.
Sir G. C. LEWIS repeated that the schedule was per-
fectly correct.
The amendment was then negatived.
Mr. A. SMITH moved to leave out " Plymouth, north-
eastern defences, 10,0001."
Sir G. C. LEWIS said that the course which had been
adopted was very incoovenient—first to discuss all these
items in committee, and then to re-discnn them over
again on bringing up the report.
Mr. A. Sbl ITH said that the works at Plymouth had not
been discussed ice committee.
Sir G. C. LEWIS said that certainly there had been •
great deal of discussioo about the works at Portsmouth,
and he thought at Plymouth also. He was not able to
discuss this scheme critically, and he must leave the ques-
tion to the decision of the committee. (Hear, bear.) It
certainly bad happened that io some instances the estimate
for the purchase of lands by government had been ex.
ceeded.
Lord A. V. TEMPEST said that the right hon. baronet
himself bad urged that the details of this bill might be
considered in committee. He thought the noble lard
at the head of the government did sot treat those who op-
posed these fortifications with fairness when be said they
aid not want a navy. What they said was that they ought
to have an efficient navy, and not to expend the money on
useless fortifications. . . . .

The reWrisitaailMo received, and the bill ordered to be
read a third time this day at 12 o'clock.
WEIGHTS AND MEASURES (IRELAND) ACT (1860)