Northern Times.
Liverpool, Merseyside, England, 1859-03-12 00:00:00

PUBLIC HEALTH,

Mr. Monsell put a question to the Vice-president at the
Committee of Privy Council of Education with reference to
the exercise of the powers vested in the Privy Council for
the protection of the public health ; and asked what use the
Government had made of the powers given them b 7 the act
of last session in regard to vaccination ?
Mr. Adderley said that all powers obtained under the act
of last year had been exercised by the Council, and we're

now issuing regulations respecting public vaccination, anti
instructions for the better performance of vaccination.
The motion for adjournment till Monday was then

agreed to.
On the motion that the house go into committee of supply,
General Peel made some explanations respecting papers

referring to military matters

Lord Clarence Paget made a motion for a more formal
statement for the future, respecting proposed expenditure in
the construction and conversion of Her Majesty's ships.
Hitherto that expenditure had been most wasteful, and it
was needful that more regular information on the subject
should be laid before parliament by the ' admiralty. He
pointed out a series of errors and mistakes committed in the
building, and yet more in the alterations of ships, whereby
au enormous and useless increase was caused of the cost
,over the original estimates. Those vessels recently con-
structed and which cost £19,000,000, now only represented
£14,000,000 of public property, £5,000,000 being wasted
on injudicious changes.

Sir J. Pakington complained warmly of these attacks as
calculated to injure the public service. If the statements
were true, the whole board ought to have mooted

a direct censure on Sir Baldwin Walker,
and the shipbuilding department of the navy. He himself
had appointed a committee to inquire into the state of our
dockyards, and would lay its report on the table as soon as
it could be got ready, together withithe remarks of Sir B.
Walker. A confidential inquiry had been further directed
into the causes of the increase, of late years, in the navy
All the results of that inquiry which bore upon
the subject would likewise be laid upon the table. He com-
plained of the inaccuracy of the statement of Lord C. Paget,
which he examined and controverted in detail, declaring that
so far from £5,000,000 being unaccounted for,
nothing was unaccounted for, the change in naval
architecture, consequent on the introduction o
steam, rendered alterations necessary, which it was their
duty to adopt. As to the motion, he did not think it would
be of any service. The real remedy would be for the House
to require from the First Lord of the Admiralty, every year,
t full statement of the naval operations then in progress.

estimates

Sir C. Napier said that Sir B. Walker was not in fault.
He had no power, and the entire responsibility lay with the
Admiralty. The right motion ought to have been for an
inquiry into the construction of the Board of Admiralty.
The political changes were at the bottom of all this waste
and extravagance. He •reprobated the loss and expense
consequent on the alteration of vessels.
Mr. B. Osborne characterised the speech of Lord Paget
as a direct attack upon Sir B. Walker, seeing that his
strictures were confined to the time when that gentleman
held the surveyorship of the navy. If the noble lord
believed his own statements, he should have made a motion

for inquiry.
Mr. Bentinck defended Lord C. Paget, who had attacked
the system, but no individual. Under the present arrange-
ments. neither economy nor efficiency would be obtained in
the dockyards. He believed, however, that the motion
could not attain the desired end.

Sir F. Baring suggested that the noble lord should
move for a committee rather than a mere formal return,
which would not prevent maladministration in the con-