The Sun.
London, England, 1830-03-23 00:00:00

INDIA.

Mr. STEWART WORTLEY moved for Returns
relative to the Finance Department of India, and an Corder
issued by the Directors on the 11 th March, 1830.
Mr. 1115AIE wished to know whether the rumour was
true that the Government of India at home had issued a
prohibition to Lord W. lientinck's facilitating the settle-
ment of Curopeans in India, by which that country was
likely to be so much impyoyed?
Mr. S. WORTLEY said, that last year a notice had
appeared in a Periodical Publication upon the subject, and
all the Court of Directors had done was merely to send a
letter explaining the nature of Lord Amherst's regulation
of i 824, relatiye to the cultivation of certain produce in
India. It would be laid before the Committee up stairs.

COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY.

The CHANCELI.OI4 91 the EXCIILQULB moved

the Order of the Day, for the House resolving itself into
a Committee of Supply.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL put a question relative to
Greece, which was inaudible in the Gallery ; but to
which
Mr. PEEL replied, that the papers on the subject were
not yet prepared, and that they would be laid before the
House at an early period.
The Marquis of BLANDFORD put a question relative
to the non-production of certain returns fur which he had
moved, relative to the Electors of the United Kingdom.
Mr. PEEL said that it might he possible to make a re-
turn of the numbers that had voted on any specific election ;
but that the return moved for would be dangerous to the
Returning Officers.
After a few words from Mr. HUME, Mr. O'CoNNELL,
and Lord NuGENT,

Mr. HUME wished to know before the House went into
a Committee, whether the advanced estimates were to be
voted before the Navy Votes were concluded ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that
the intention was to take a vote of 200,0001. on account.
Lord ALTHORP wished to know what was the nature
of the Colonial Commission of Inquiry ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said,
that it was not intended that the Commission should
meddle with the Constitution of the Colonies ; but that
it should confine its inquiries to expenditure, with a view
to effect every saving consistent with public welfare. The
proceedings of the Commission would be a matter of
record, and would be laid before the House.
Mr. HUME said, that one million had been spent in
the last twenty years upon commissions of this sort, and it
was doubtful if any good had resulted from them.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said,
that the Commissioners were selected so that no expence
should be imposed upon the public.
Sir ROBERT WILSON wished to know if the inquiry
of the Commissioners would extend to the Canadas?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER answered
in the affirmative.

After a few words from Mr. MABERLY and Mr.
BRIGHT, imperfectly caught in the gallery, the House re-
solved itself into a Committee of the whole House.

Mr. PERCEVAL moved that a sum, not exceeding
200,0001, be granted to his Majesty towards defraying the
expences of the Royal Regiments of Artillery in Great
Britain and the Colonies for 1830.—Granted.

Sir GEORGE CLERK should now move the Navy
Estimates, and the first vote woule, be for the Civil De-
partments at London. The reduction upon the Victual-
ling Department, compared to last year, was 7101., and the
reason of its being so small was, the office of Treasury of
the Navy had a large establishment at Greenwich, relative
to prizes, that would soon he abolished. He should move
that 180,017/. be granted for the salaries and contingent
expences of the Admiralty, Victualling, Navy, and Navy
Pay Offices, for 1830.
Mr. HUME objected to the votes being passed altoge-
ther. They ought to be separate.
Sir GEORGE CLERK bad exactly pursued the course
of former years. Prior to 1822 the whole of the Ord-
nance and Navy was voted i❑ one sum, amounting to
many millions. The same course was pursued respecting
the Army Estimates.
Mr. HUME should move to report progress until se-
parate grants were proposed.

Lord HOWICK concurred in the views of the Hon.
Member for Aberdeen.

Sir GEORGE CLERK had no objection to separate
the votes, if the Committee really wished it. He would
move that 52,2161. be granted for the salaries and con-
tingencies of the Admiralty Office.
Mr. HUNIE thought, upon the simple principle that
there should be no division in the administration of the
same species of affairs, that the Marines ought to be
brought under the Paymaster of the Navy. He had
moved a few days ago for the Contracts of the Navy,
Army, and Ordnance, with the view of showing how the
present system worked. Some few years ago it had been the I
practice for each Commissioner to draw the money for his I
own department ; and under the direction of the Master of
the Mint an end had been put to this plan, and it had been
decided that one individual Commissioner (as for instance
the Commissioner for Jamaica) should draw the whole
sum of money, and that all the others should receive their
appointed portions from him. This he thought was at
once a wise and economical regulation. Now he found
from a paper he held in his hand, that there were 74 con-
tracts made by the Paymaster of the Marines for supplying
coals, candles, water, &c.—bricklayers and materials—
carpenters and materials, and God only knew what other
articles beside ; he would therefore ask this question—
whether, since the Army was provided for by one depart-
ment, the Navy might not be managed after the same man-
ner ? He wished that a statement of the separate expendi-
ture of the Marines should be put in the Navy Estimates.
He. saw from a paper in his hand, that there were
71,0001. for officers, 215,000/. for non-cemmissioned
officers and privates, and 40,0001. for barrack and other
expenses. Now, he begged to know how it came to pass,
that after the transferring of the Barrack Department for
the Army to the Ordnance Department, these barracks
for marines should be retained under the superintendence
of the Paymaster of the Marines? He was decidedly of
opinion, that the Barrack, Pay, and Clothing Departments,
ought to be added—the first to the Ordnance, and the re-
mainder to the Navy. He hoped the House would sup-
port him in the amendment he proposed.
Mr. CHOKER said, the Hon. Member had observed,
that the office of Paymaster of the Marines was expensive
and unnecessary; the first, it confessedly was; but as to
the second, it appeared from the Hon. Gent.'s own admis-
sion, that these duties, which, he contended, might be
transferred to another department, were numerous and im-
portant. Now, his strong impression was, that there
could be no more sure way of creating confusion in the
public service, and imposing on the country an increased
expence, than that of uniting the Marine Barrack Depart-
ment with the Ordnance.—(Hear.)—The Paymaster of the
Marines did a great deal of duty in his double capacity; for
lie way not only a Pay-officer, but an officer of inspection
and controul: he was Paymaster and Inspector-General of
the Marines. Now, the Hon. Member, in the first place,
asked why the Marine Barracks were not brought under
the superintendence of the Board of Ordnance. But, in
fact, there was an essential difference between the manage-
ment of the Army Barracks and those for Marines. In the
first, there was a constant change of inmates ; one regi..
ment marched out—another supplied its place; but the
other barracks were constantly occupied by marines, and
therefore the accounts must necessarily be kept in a very
different manner. The attention of the House had been
called to the state of these barracks at different times;
and, he believed, it must be admitted on all hands,
that the expenditure, under the superintendence of the
Paymaster of Marines, had been diminished in as great a
degree as it could have been under any other Administra-
tion. The numbers in the barracks were invariably the
same, and the average amount of expenditure for the seven
years previous to the appointment of this Paymaster was
16,800/., while the average for the fourteen years subse-
quent had been brought down to 9,400/. And after the
change bad taken place, Mr. Tierney rose in his place and
moved a compensation to each of the officers previously en- '
gaged in the department, amounting to 3 or 400/. a-year,
in consequence, as he stated, of the new system, which
was so economical that the country could well afford to
pay the ten or twelve hundred pounds ; and so it had
proved, f. a- there was a saving of nearly one-half in the
expenditure. A similar improvement bad likewise taken
place in another more trifling article. The average ex-
penditure on the Infirmary, for the seven years previous
to the appointment of the Paymaster, was 1,2711. ; it had
been since reduced to 1921. If the Hon. Gentleman were
to abolish the office of Paymaster of the Marines, the
duties of the office should go on elsewhere, but these could
not he carried on without additional hands ; and if there
were persons unemployed in any office it would be for the
Hon. Gwntleman to show it, that they might be at once
reduced ; but for himself he must say, he did not know
the office when the addition of such important duties
should not be attended with a proportional increase of
hands. The Hon. Gentleman said that there might be
one general Payboard for the country, and this, un-
doubtedly, was the case ; but he believed there was no
mem e sure way of creating confusion and expence than
that of mixing up heterogeneous matters for the superin-
tendence of the same department. The Right Hon. Gen-
tleman then proceeded to praise the zeal, talents, and
efficiency, of the present Paymaster of Marines, and con-
cluded by stating, that he and the Hon. Member were
directly at issue respecting the question of retaining this
office.

Sir H. PARNELL would support the amendment of
the Hon, Member.
Mr. 111ABERLY said the question to be decided was,
if that office were necessary. He contended that it was
not. The Paymaster of the Navy might pay the 10,000
marines in addition to the 19,000 seamen ; and the duties
of inspection might be performed by the General, Lieu-
tenant-General, Major-General, or some of the other
officers of the Marines who were so highly paid.
Sir G. CLERK defended the propriety of the arrange-
ments now made in the department, and contended that no
alteration of the sort proposed could he anything but in-
jurious. In his opinion the department, as now consti-
tuted, was most economically managed, and considering
what its duties were, he did not think that the sum of
3,0001. alear, now paid for them, could be considered

any great charge upon the public. The duties of the
office had been increased of late years, for by an order of
the Lord High Admiral, the clothing department of the
Marines was now added to its other labours. That
alteration had only been effected a short time since, hut
during that short time it had proved to be a great public
improvement. The Hon. Member opposite had alluded
to the General, Lieutenant- General, and Major-General of
Marines, and had spoken as if these could be dispensed
with. He begged to observe, in reply, that these were
offices given as rewards to naval men who had served
their country in a distinguished manner, and he was sure
that the country would not grudge them these rewards.
He was sure that the duties of the Paymaster of Marines
were now well discharged, and that the consolidation or
distribution proposed by the Hon. Member was not likely
to be profitable.
Lord HOWICK trusted that the Hon. Member for
Aberdeen would either move a resolution to consolidate
the offices now, or one which should pledge the House to
adopt some step of that kind in the early part of the next
Session.

Mr. HUME said that his object was to reduce the
grant by one-half, and he proposed a vote which would
have the effect of producing that end now, if at all. As
to any resolution that pledged the House for its conduct
next Session, he feared little good would come of it.--
There were now four Colonels-Commandant and nine
Lieutenant-Colonels-Commandant saddled upon the coun •
try, at an expense of 13,000/. a year, which did not seem
to him at all necessary. He was certain that no inconve-
nience would follow from this motion being carried ; and
he, therefore, persisted in his intention of dividing the
House upon it. The Hon. Member then moved, as an
amendment, that the sum of 50,696/. be inserted in the
grant, and that the vote should be for the half-year only,
in order to give the Ministers the opportunity of making
the change he desired.
Mr. PORTMAN could not refrain from saying that
these offices were defended in a manner in which there
was more of fallacy and sophistry than he had ever before
heard. He thought it necessary that the Committee
should express their opinion strongly on the subject, for if
not, the Government would not come down as they ought
to do next Session, and make the reduction which was so
absolutely required. He called, therefore, on the Com-
mittee to mark their sense of this vote, and in that manner
tc s•rengthen that portion of the Government which was
really favourable to the reduction of the public burthens.
He approved of the plan of giving the vote for six months,
for that would allow the Government sufficient time to
make the proposed arrangements.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER pro-
tested against the doctrine which some Members seemed
inclined to inculcate, that any particular vote of which
they happened to disapprove, showed the Government not
to be sincere in their wish to diminish the public burdens.
The question was, whether the business of the office now
under discussion could be more cheaply or efficiently per-
formed ? On his side of the House they answered that
question in the negative ; while, on the other side, it was
answered in the affirmative---on consideration, at least,
that the business was transferred to other departments.
The consolidation of business in the manner recommended
might be carried too far. If it went beyond a certain
extent he did not think it would much conduce to the ad-
vancement of public economy. As to the old and worn-
out excuses which the Hon. Member had spoken of, he
would only observe, that it was impossible on such a sub-
ject as this to bring forward anything but old and worn-out
arguments, especially after the discussions which had re-
cently taken place upon it. He could not but think that
the alterations proposed would rather complicate than
simplify the business of these offices, and increase instead
of diminishing their expeuce.

Lord ALTHORP could not conceive how the proposed
distribution of duties could complicate the business of the
office, when it was recollected that at this moment the
Paymaster of Marines was a Military Paymaster, an In-
spector of Marines, and a contractor for their clothing all
at the same time, and that the alteration suggested was to
divide these " complicated duties" among different depart-
ments. He should vote for the amendment.

Mr. BRIGHT should support the amendment, for he
saw no reason for keeping up such an extensive establish-
ment for the superintendence of only 5,000 men.
The House then divided, when the numbers were—
For the original Motion 130
For the Amendment 00
Majority 4O

Motion agreed to. - -
On our re-admission we found Sir GEO. CLERK ad-
dressing the Committee, but from the noise every where
prevailing he was inaudible.
Mr. PORTMAN had had the intention of taking the
sense of the House upon making certain deductions from
the salaries of the Officers in the Admiralty. His plan
would be to effect a deduction of 15 per cent., from the
salaries of the higher officers, 10 per cent. from those of a
lower class, and 5 per cent. from the lowest. He thought
it fair that those officers should not be the only persons to
escape the effects of the change which had taken place in
the currency ; circumstances, however, had arisen which
induced him to postpone that proposition for the present.
The next vote was 32,0331. Is. 6d. for the salaries of
officers and contingent expences of the Navy Pay Office
for the current year.
Mr. VERNON SMITH addressed the Committee, for
the purpose of moving are amendment. His proposition
was to the effect that a reduction of 1,2001. be made in
the salary of Treasurer of the Navy. The large salary
which that officer possessed could not be defended, he con-
tended, on the ground of any weighty responsibility to
which he was exposed ; for in the event of there being any
default, indemnity was scarcely ever refused. Whenever a
subordinate officer happened to become a defaulter, applica-
tion was immediately made to that House on his behalf ;
and as gentlemen they always felt bound to let the public
suffer rather than the individual. Honourable Gentlemen
were sure to get up in their places, and say, that the
principal officer was the most worthy and honourable
person in existence ; and that he should not upon any
account he allowed to suffer for the default of his sub-
ordinate ; so that it was a mere pretence to say that the
high salary was maintained on account of the responsi-
bility. Again, there could be no pretext for maintaining
the salary up to its present amount, on account of any
change made in the nature and circumstances of the office
—no new duties had been attached to it. He desired to
see a reduction in the present vote of 1,200/. He
was perfectly ready to acknowledge that a reduction of
12,000,0001. would not afford the relief which the neces-
' sities of the country required ; but he wished, by even
cutting down 1,200/., to show a suffering people that some
sympathy was felt for their sufferings by the body who re-
presented
them. As an amendment, he moved that " The '
vote be 30,833/."
Sir GEORGE WARRENDER could not consent to
the proposed reduction. The estimates had been cut down
as low as possible; and, as to the particular salary in
question, it had been approved by the Finance Committee,
after due deliberation ; and he fully believed that, without
serious disadvantages, the emoluments of that office could
not be dimini►hed. The reductions of salary were per-
fectly distinct from the matter brought under the conside-
ration of the House by the Hon. Member for Cumberland.
Whatever votes might have been given upon that question,
none of them implied any pledge with respect to the pre-
sent. It was likewise of importance to be remembered,
that neither the Right Hon. Member for Liverpool, nor
any other gentlemen who held the office, had ever said that
the salary admitted of reduction, or that the office could be
dispensed with. The amendment he certainly should op-
pose, for he was altogether of opinion that Ministers had
made all practicable reductions, and he thought they were
entitled to the confidence of the House.
Mr. BANKES would support reduction, but not ex-
actly in the form in which it was then proposed to the
House. He admitted to the last speaker that the object of
the Hon. Member for Cumberland was not the same as
that of the Hon. Gent. by whom the present amendment
had been moved. The true way for his Majesty's Govern-
ment to prove the sincerity of their professions with re-
spect to economy would be to chew, in questions of this
nature, that they regarded the public interest more than
the interest of the individual. His experience of all dis-
cussions of this nature was, that the interest of the public
was looked upon as nothing, while that of the individual
was looked upon as everything. It was perfectly vain and
futile to talk or think of economy so long as the interest of
the public was postponed to that of every individual which
might happen to be opposed to it.
__ _ _

Mr. LABOUCHERE concurred with the Hon. 11Iern-
her for Corfe Castle.

Mr. C. WOOD supported the amendment of the Hon,
Member opposite (Mr. V. Smith).

Sir G. CLERK—If the salary were to be reduced to
SOU a year, it would be better to put the office down
altogether. The present grant, as proposed, was only for
six months ; and it was the firm intention of Government
to provide for the gallant officer who held the place in some
other way as soon as possible.
Mr. BAN KES—He understood the Government, on the
previous debate on this subject, to have pledged itself that
the office should be immediately got rid of.
Sir G. CLERK—No such pledge had been given by
him, or with his knowledge, He always understood that it

had rested upon the contingency of Government being able
to find some other suitable office for the present occupier.
Mr. Alderman WAITHMAN—He should vote for the
amendment of the Hon. Member for Dorsetshire.

Mr. T. BARING—He had lately heard of 70 seamen
being dismissed at Portsmouth; but he was not told that
Government waited till they could provide those poor fel-
lows with some other employment, before they dismissed
them.---(Cheers.)—But, however, it appeared that while
these men, who had actively served their country, might
be sent to the parish for relief, one of his Majesty's ser-
vants must be made a burthen to the public, till a pension
could be found to suit him.—(Loud cheers.)—After this,
let them hear no more about a desire to relieve a suffering
people. After this, let there be nothing said about plans
of retrenchment and economy.-.•(Cheers.)
Sir G. CLERK--If the Hon. Member had but looked
a few pages further in the Estimates he would have seen
that there was an ample vote to enable Government to
reward those seamen who had served their country. But,
if he was not mistaken, the persons to which the Hon.
Member had alluded were men in ordinary at Portsmouth,
and who had been snugly housed there during the war.
Mr. MABERLY—It appeared on all hands that the
office was a sinecure; and yet it was the sinecure officer
that was to be preserved, and the other that was to be
dismissed.

Mr. PEEL—Out of the five speeches that had been
made against the item, four of diem contained different
and distinct propositions as to the two offices. The Es-
timates had been for some time in the hands of the Mem-
bers, and therefore it could not fairly be urged that the
House was not aware that the vote was to be proposed.
Neither was it just to insinuate that the Government
were taking this step for the purpose of keeping up its
patronage ; because in this case they were providing for
a❑ individual who had voted against them on this very
question, the object of which vote, had it been success-
ful, would have been to have turned them out of office.
(Hear, hear.)—The Government, therefore, might be
wrong in judgment ; but was it possible to say that they
were acting from any corrupt motive? He would give
the House this assurance—that the office of the Paymas-
ter of the Navy should never again appear in an Estimate.
—(Hear, hear.)—They had never contemplated its ap-
pearance there; but when the motion was made the other
night, he did expect that Parliament would make the pro-
vision for one year. If within two months an opportu-
nity of a ♦acancy should occur, the Government would
take advantage of it, and in preference to any political
claim would give the preference to this.—( Hear, hear.)But it was possible that no such vacancy would occur,
and he therefore trusted that the House would not compel
them to turn this individual out of office without any pro-
vision whatever.

Lord HOWICK thought there was a sufficient number
of Me-nbers of Government in the house already. The
effect would be to make the Paymaster of the Navy a po-
litical office, dependent upon the continuance of Ministers
in their places.
Mr. TRAIT supported the amendment, in order to
compel Ministers to immediate economy.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY called upon the Member for
Radnor to state his opinion and wishes upon the subject,
and whether he was willing to hold the office of Honorary
Treasurer of the Navy until the Paymaster of the Navy
was otherwise provided?
Mr. F. LEWIS had no wish to accept or treat the
office as a sinecure ; at the same time he could not decide
that he would discharge the duties for nothing. He
ought not to be called upon to determine in what way the
House should pay the office that he held : whatever were
the decision of the House, he would either discharge the
duties of the office, or in his place state the reasons why
he could not.
Mr. HUME hoped that the House would not consent
to any compromise, but decide the question upon prin-
ciple. He did not see in what respect the King could be
said to want patronage.—(Order, order, order.)—He
supposed that the cry must proceed from some very new
and young Member, who had never heard the Minister
talk of the King's patronage, and of the patronage of the
Crown. His ears must be extraordinarily delicate to be
offended at what he had ■aid.

Mr. PEEL lamented that his argument had not pene-
trated the understanding of the Hon. Member, who must
be extremely pugnacious if he were disposed to quarrel
with the very modest proposal of Ministers. The experi-
ment he wished to try was, whether the office of Deputy
could not be abolished—the principal being required to
discharge the duties. If it should turn out that the ex-
periment failed, he would undertake that in the estimates
of next year only 2000/. should be taken for the salary.
After a few inaudible words from Mr. F. SMITH, the
Committee divided—.

For the amendment
For the original motion 155

Majority -86
On our re-admission we found the House still in the
Committee.

In answer to a question from Mr. HUME,
Mr. F. LEWIS said, that it was found the most econo-
mical mode to send part of the money for the payment of
the Navy to the outports by the Mail, under the care of a
special superintendent, and not by an artillery waggon and
guard of soldiery.
Sir HENRY PARNELL expressed his doubts as to
whether the cheapest mode were employed to send money
to the outports.
_ _ _

Mr. F. LEWIS stated that the money was conveyed
at a less charge than the Bank, or any other body would
send it.

Mr. HUME contended that the bankers at the outports
would supply the money that was wanted.

Mr. F. LEWIS would undertake to examine the sub-
ject, and if he could find a better means of conveying the
money than that now employed he would adopt it.
Sir M. WHITE RIDLEY was disposed to give his
Hon. Friend credit for his exertions ; but he believed that
the bankers at the outports must conduct their business ott
different principles from other bankers, if they could not
advance what money would be required.
The sum of 32,300/. was then voted for the Expenceo
of the Navy Pay Office, and the Chairman was ordered
to report progress.
The House then resumed, and the Report was ordered
to be received this day (Tuesday.)
The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of,
and the House adjourned at One o'clock.