The Sun.
London, England, 1855-03-24 00:00:00

lowed to enter the schools, nor that the children who at-
tended them should be permitted to enterinto religious an-
tagonism with each other, and that too at a time when they
were incapable of understanding the groundsupon which the
differences of opinion wore founded. These were really the
two great points of advantage which the plan now before
the house possessed over the plan proposed by the other
side. He trusted from what had passed this evening in
the course of the discussion, that whatever differences
might exist as to the details of the plan, that when the
second reading of the bill was proposed the house would
come to the discussion with the same tone and temper
which had pervaded the debates that evening, and that
both English and Scotch members would feel that this was
an object of great national importance, and would give the
bill their best consideration. (Hear.)
Mr. ELLIOT contended that there was in reality no dif-
ference, as had been suggested by the hon. member for
Midhurst, between the religious opinions of the rural dis-
tricts and the larger towns of Scotland, and that if they
admitted the principle that the bill was applicable to the
large towns, he would contend that it was equally appli-
cable to the rural districts, and ought therefore to be al-
lowed to become law. (Hear.)
Mr. JOHNSTONE drew the attention of the house to
two deficiencies in the bill, one of which was the total
omission of all provision with respect to the education of
girls ; and the other the absence of all provision for the
training and education of schoolmasters. (Hear.)
Mr. DUNLOP expresso :I a hope that, in the arrange.
ments of the house, more justice would bo done to this
bill than had been accorded to it last year.
Mr. KINNAIRD expressed his decided approval of the
bill.
Mr. Sergeant SFIEE could not conceive that there would
be any difficulty in providing a complete system of educa-
tion for Scotland, but trusted that some arr,ng,ements
would be made by which those who represented the Ito-
man Catholic minority of Scotland would be enabled to
give their support to the bill. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. A. HA.STIE hoped that the education board would
not be touched by the bill. Ho congratulated Scotland on
the probability that the measure would receive the general
concurrence of the house. He thought that a large body of
the people of Scotland would receive the bill with more
favour than they did the bill of last year.
The LORD ADVOCATE replied, and leave was given
to brinc, in the bill.
bring in
IN SCOTLAND BILL.

The LORD ADVOCATE postponed till Monday his
motion for leave to bring in a bill to consolidate and amend
the laws relating to bankruptcy in Scotland.
INTRAMURAL BURIALS (IRELAND) BILL.

On the motion for the third reading of this

LordNAA.S said he feared that gruel injusti(.6 might be
done under this bill, as there was no power given to any
body to procure new burial grounds in cases where it
might be found that old burial grounds were prejudicial to
health. _ _ _

Mr. HORSMAN said there was a power given by the
bill to representative boards, where burial grounds were
shut up, to provide new ones.
Mr. VANCE moved the addition of a clause providing
for compensating clerks, sextons, anti beadles for the
loss of fees and sums now received in respect of in-
terments.

Lord PALMERSTON said that the honourable member
was mistaken in supposing that in England compensation
was given to those persons. Parliament gave compensation
when this matter was first proposed ; but, in a subsequent
session, Parliament reconsidered the question, and it was
withdrawn ; and the noble lord (Lord Naas) in his bill'had
not proposed to give any compensation.
The clause was then withdrawn, and the bill was read a
third time and passed.
THE TRANSPORT SERVICE.
On the motion for going into committee of supply,
Mr. W. LINDSAY called the attention of the house to
our administrative system. In doing so, he said he would
endeavour to avoid all points with which the house had
lately become so familiar, and he would not say a word
with respect to what passed in the committee of inquiry
which was sitting up stairs, much less attempt to antici-
pate the decision at which they would arrive. He would
likewise avoid all personality, and endeavour to be just,
even to be generous, to those whose conduct he was about
to impugn. The case of our transport ships the house could
not fail to consider most important, when they remembered
that in two votes they had assigned 8,833,090/. for that
service. It would bo necessary to preface the observations
he was about to make on this service b'y referring to some
remarks reported to have been made by a noble earl in an-
other place, who was supposed to be a great authority on
maritime questions. That noble earl had used extraordi-
narily
strong language in speaking of the transport service.
He said that there could not have been a greater degree of ex-
travagance, of carelessness, and of ignorance in the making
of contracts than had been displayed by the Admiralty;
that there was confusion in the management of the trans-
ports from their departure to their arrival in this country ;
and that when the Government might have ships in
abundance on their own terms they had neglected to
avail themselves of the offers that wore made to them.
Part of the statements made by the noble earl were
correct, but other parts were not so. When he stated
that ships had come feirward in such abundance that
the Admiralty might have had them on their own
conditions he made a sad mistake.. When the Admiralty
first called for tenders they received few offers of suitable
vessels. By the statement of the noble earl he would lead
the public to understand that the owners of ships had ten-
dered their vessels on the smaller tonnage, and that the Gra-
vernment had paid them on the larger tonnage. Such was
not the case. The owners had sent their offers on the gross
tonnage, and the noble earl was mistaken in supposing that
the Admiralty could have obtained the vessels some on the
larger and some on the smaller. In fact, the country could
not have been benefited by taking these ships on the
smaller tonnage. There was less chance of fraud on the
larger than on the smaller tonnage. It was necessary for
him (Mr. Lindsay) to premise by making these remarks, as
ho wished to be just to all parties. He thought, too, that
the noble earl had done the greatest injustice, although he
, had not named the gentleman, to Captain Milne, one of
the lords of the Admiralty, under whom the charge of the
transports principally came. A more indefatigable and
I zealous servaet the Crown had not than Captain Milne,
he and therefore he was anxious to express the opinion which
entei tallied of his services. (Hear.) Ho would only say
a few words in.,re respecting a recommendation ma.do by
the noble earl to whom he had referred. He had stated
that the surest and safest plan for the Admiralty would
have been to'have made the contracts with the owners, they
contracting for the price of coals. He was surprised that the
noble earl should make any such proposition. The Govern-
ment adopted. the course which they thought the cheapest,
they courted vessels from all quarters; and he thought they
adopted the wise course in agreeing to supply them with
coals, for if they had called ou the owners to supply the coals
they would have required a higher price. If the owners had
been called on to supply these steamers with coals they would
not have done it on the same advantageous terms as the
Admiralty haddone, and the country would have had to pay
more for their ships. (Hear.) With respect to one ship,
which it was said was engaged to carry out coffee, she was
tendered to the Admiralty five or six times and declined,
for she was :onsidered toe deep. She was then engaged for
a special purpose, running with despatches to Constanti-
nople and other places in the Black Sea. Tho Commander-
in-Chief was anxious to have such a vessel, and because
Capt. Milne had been using his best endeavours to study
, economy, he had been censured. He (Mr. Lindsay) could
not lay the case fairly before the house unless he was just
to all parties. Having said so much in justice to the Ad-
miralty, he feared thst he could say little more in favour
of their conduct. In order to place before the house what
might bo done for these transports, it would be necessary
to state the amount of tonnage engaged. By a return
made the 22d of January, it appeared that there were up
to that time 123,320 tons of steamers engaged, and there
had been since thou about 26,680 tons, making altogether
about 150,000 tons of steamers. On the 22d of Jan. there
were 91,410 tons of sailing vessels engaged, and since that
time there were 8,510, thus making the tonnage of sailing
vessels engaged 100,000. Ile was he thought under the
mark in statieg the amount as being at present engaged.
That is, we hail about 250,000 tons of transports, steamers
and sailing vessels, employed. Ho carne next to a point
on which he had to make a serious complaint—to a matter
in which the money of the country had been sacrificed.
He had shown that the steamers could not have been ob-
tained at lower prices by the Admiralty, but then there
was an enormous amount of money sacrificed by delay.
He would endeavour to show the house what might have
been done with this enormous fleet of transports. A steam-
vessel should make six voyages per annum between this
countryand the C rimea,so that, allowing two registered tons
, foreach man, the 150,000 tons of steam-transport now in the
service of the Government might have conveyed 75,000
, soldiers per voyage, or 450,000 per annum to the Crimea.
Then we had 100,000 tons of sailing transports, which, al-
lowing only two voyages per annum to the Crimea and
back might have readily conveyed 100,000 men per annum.
Then as to cavalry, the steam transports could have readily
convoyed 00,000 per annum, and the sailing vessels 20,004
per annum. So that we had here a fleet of transports ca-
pable of conveyingfrom the shores ef England to the Crimea
550,000 infantry and 110,000 cavalry in the course of one
year. Had those 250,000 tons of steam and sailing trans-
ports been kept plying between Constantinople and the
Crimea, they might have takenl6o,ooo infantry and 25,000
cavalry per voyage, or 1,992,000 infantry and 300,000 ca-
valry in the year. Then, besides these transports, it mast
be recollected that a large number of vessels were engaged
in conveying stores to the East, that we hat an immense
fleet carrying coals, and that almost all the men-of-war
which went out took a large amount of stores with them.
In order to show the delay that took place, and the valu-
able time which was thus lost, ho might trace the progress
of ode vessel—taken quite promiscuously—the Golden
Fleece, a steamer of 2,000 tons, which cost the country
about 7,0001. per month. This vessel which left Leith Roads 1
on the 11th of March, 1854, was subject to delays both at
Malta and Gallipoli, and then, after lying idle six weeks '
at Scutari, she was in June last ordered home by Admiral
Boxer, having at the time on board a large quantity of
provisions, which the captain could get no order to de-
liver, and also a large quantity of valuable space taken
up by empty provision c isles, which the commander
conld obtain no authority to doltroy or land. Another
ship actually arrived off the Alma the day after the battle,
but although the captain reported that he had a num-
ber of surgeons en board, their assistance was not availed
of at a time when surgeons were so much wanted, until
twenty-four hours after her arrival. (Hear, hear.) Why,
at this very moment two large steamers, the Germania
and the Hermes, which cost the country 12,0001. oper
month, had been lying idle at Deptford for three weeks.
What had they been doing there? Why, they were said
to have been fitting up berths for soldiers, a thing which
could have been easily done in two days. He believed
that out of the eight millions voted for this serviee, about
two millions had been totally lest through unnecessary
delays. Now, what had been the cause of this? He was
not prepared to say that the fault rested with the Admi-
ralty. He believed it rested with the whole system, which
required a thorough reform. When the Commissariat
wanted to send stores they wrote to the Admiralty to take
up a ship. The ship was sent to Deptford, but very fre-
quently the stores were not ready. When they were,
however, each department sent a separate officer to super-
intend the stowage of their own stores, and the result was
that the greatest possible amount of wrangling and confu-
sion took piece, resulting in those extraordinary cases of
ill-stowages which had been brought before the public.
Trio remedy for this was for the Admiralty to receive and
stow the goods and be responsible fur their delivery in the
Crimea. He WAS aware they had taken steps to remedy
the evil by instituting a transport board. Bat he had no
faith in boards. What they wanted was a single officer
to undertake the whole duty of a carrier with respect to
the goods sent, and to bo responsible to the Secretary-at-
-War. (Hear, hear.) Another important defect was, as
to the manner in which accounts were passed at the Ad-
miralty. • The honourable gentleman then entered into
some minute details with rsspect to the delays which a
mercantile firm with whom ho was acquainted had en-
countered in passing an account at the Admiralty, and
Paqticularly in coilsequeuce of An in:portant pontiott bean
_. .