The Sun.
London, England, 1830-03-13 00:00:00

~,.. . #.-,
.a

and otter adbcilvents, as warrants for payments by the
Treasuier. The present system of tracing accounts is de-
scribed by Mr. Abbot as being altogether disjointed, made
up of many elaborate branches, but without a trunk to
which to unite them. The abstracts, which are formed
at the expence of much labour, do not carry with them
any criterion for the proving of their correctness as would
satisfy any professional mercantile accountant. In the
Navy Pay Office, where the payments made by the Trea-
surer now employ three cashiers and about thirty clerks—
three sub-cashiers and three subordinate clerks would be
sufficient. Mr. Abbot says, that in the wages branch of
the Navy Office, twelve books, which are now kept to
check the Treasurer's payments, might be discontinued.
He proposes the consolidation of the wages branch with
the ticket and allotment branches; and says that the ad-
vantages to be derived from it would be the simplification
of the accounts and the reduction of labour, by keeping
one copy of many accounts instead of two. At present,
the payment of officers' and seamen's wages is made in the
presence of four clerks, in order to have three clerks check-
ing the accuracy of every sum paid by the fourth. As
these clerks are selected from different branches, and as
each keeps a book, so many books are kept in triplicate
that no less than 1,580 supernumerary books are annually,
kept. Mr. Abbot observes generally on the present sys-
tem of Navy Accounts, that there is a great variation of
record without a distinction cf purpose ; that the whole
of the business of the Accountant's department is so en-
tirely devoid of system, that no sound repairs can be ma le
of it; and he adds, the annual payments are at present so
limited in number and amount, that there would be no dif-
ficulty in writing them all into one cash-book, and trans...
ferring every item in detail to the journal, preparatory to
forming the ledger." Messrs. Brooksbank and Belton, in
their joint Report on the Public Accounts, agree in several
of the statements made by Mr. Abbott on the subject of
the Navy Accounts, with respect to the want of arrange-
ment and the scattered and detailed methods of keeping
the books. Now, as the object of the Bill to be introduced
by the Treasurer of the Navy must be to simplify the ac-
counts, and thereby reduce the labour required in inspect-
ing them, it follows, as a matter of course, that if one
hour a day was sufficient to perform those duties before,
half an hour a day must from henceforward be sufficient,
By a late arrangement the Treasurer of the Navy had the'
duty of a Commissioner of Greenwich Hospital added to
those which were required from him in the Navy Office.
Now, considering that there were already three-well-paid
Commissioners to discharge the duties of the Hospital, be
thought the appointment wholly unnecessary, and calcu-
lated to add to the apparent duties of the Treasurer, with-
out conferring any real benefit on the public. There were
first—the Hon. Member for Dumfries (Mr. Douglas), a
man of great experience and knowledge of business, a
Member of that Board. Then there was the Noble Lord
(Lord Auckland) the Auditor, a man also of experience;
the Secretary (Mr. Locker) well acquainted with the duties
of his office; and, last of all, they had the Noble Lord at
the head of the Woods and Forests Department, as Chair-
man (Lord Lowther), than whom there could not be found
a more efficient; more experienced, or more zealous man
of business. He thought, therefore, the arrangement
which made the Treasdrer a Commissioner was exceed-
ingly unnecessary, and when it was considered that the
Treasurer of the Navy might draw a bill in the one ca-
pacity which he might be called on to pay in the other, he
thought he might also declare the appointment impolitic.
Returiug now to the question of the late appointment, he
thought he might take leave to suppose that when the
Mastership of the Mint was offered to the Noble Marquis,
the Member for the County of Bedford (Lord Chandos),
it was the intention of his Majesty's Ministers to continue
the former arrangement. Either the Government, there-
fore, were of opinion, up to the meeting of Parliament,
that there was not such a press of business in the
office of the Treasmer of the Navy as would render it
necessary to disunite the two offices, or they contemplated
the addition of another placeman to a band already much
too numerous for the advantage of the public in that
House. One of these courses must have been determined
on at the time they offered to the Noble Marquis
the place of Master of the Mint. In considering to
what office the duty of the Treasurer of the Navy might be
attached, there were several which presented themselves
to him, as offering a much better arrangement without
any inconvenience to the public service. The Chan-
cellor of the Duchy of Lancaster might have had
it. He knew of no duties that officer had to perform
which would prevent his taking on him all the responsi-
bility of the Treasurership of the Navy. There were
other offices to which it might be attached, but in his
opinion none seemed so eligible for the purpose as the
Vice-Presidency of the Board of Trade. This would the
more easily be effected as the Ministers had, with all their
professions of economy, carved out a new place in that
office, only second in importance to that held by the
Master of the Mint, as President of the Board. This
was the office conferred on Mr. Hume, who, in reality,
executed the most important duties of the Board of Trade.
This officer had a salary of 1,5001. a year, but although
he bad watched the public accounts with the utmost at-
tention for the last two years, he had not been able to
discover in what manner that salary was paid. Either he
had been remiss in his duty, or the money was voted under
some other head, for he had not as yet in any of the public
accounts seen any specific charge made on account of the
salary of this officer. This, however, was beside the
question before the House. His argument was, that as
Ministers had called to their assistance another officer in
the Board of Trade, they had afforded a fair opportunity
to make a slight addition to the ditties of the Vice-Prisi-
dent, who must be so materially relieved by the appoint.
ment. He thought he should, on the present occasion,
command the votes of some, even of the Right Hon.
Gentlemen on the opposite Benches. He did not see the
Attorney-General in his place, and he regretted that he
did not, because the Right Hon. Gentleman who voted
with so much zeal for the union of the office of Treasurer
of the Navy with that of the Board of Trade, could
scarcely now refuse his consent to add to it that of Vice-
President. That was a suit to which the Right Hon.
Gentleman could not demur.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.)
Then be thought the Right Hon. Gentleman, the Pay-
master of the Forces (Mr. Calcraft), could scarcely refuse
him his vote, when he considered bow strenuously that
Right Hon. Gentleman had, in 1826, opposed the at.

tempt to increase the salary of the President of the
Board of Trade, and make the Treasurership of the
Navy a separate office. If the House would permit
him, he would read to them a speech such as they
did not often now hear--a speech marked with the
features of the good old times, and distinguished by all
that fine foaming patriotism which marked the genuine
Whig.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.)—The language of this
speech was in fact so pithy and conveyed so forcibly, and
yet so laconically—the arguments which he could have
wished to use on this subject—that he thought, if the
House would permit him, he could not better convey
what he wished to express than by reading a few extracts
from it. The Right Hon. Gentleman commenced by ob-
serving in his speech, and in reply to some of the argu-
ments of his opponents, that " The Right Hon. Gentle-
man opposite had a peculiar talent of magnifying the

importance of their espective offices. One would be in.

dined to suppose from the extreme diffidence of those

Right Hon. Gentlemen in speaking of their own exertions,
and the manner in which they spoke of the great labours
attached to their situations, that they had been forced
against their inclinations to accept of their present appoint-
ments."—(Hear hear, and laughter.)—Speaking, then,
with a metaphorical language which, from its military
character, bore the appearance of prophecy, the Right
Hon. Gentleman went on to observe, " He apprehended,
however, that neither the Chancellor of the Exchequer
nor the Noble Earl at the head of his Majesty's Councils
was even obliged to beat up for recruits and to offer a
bounty for the acceptance of a place."—(Cheers and
laughter.)—He contended that one of the main motives

which influenced Government in
_bringing forward the

_
present question, was to throw additional patronage into
their bands and secure another Member to fill their own

ranks.—(Hear.)--The Treasurer of the Navy might be
exulted in consequence of this new measure, and he might
be made a Member of that House, along with the rest
of the Ministers ; but if the House was of his opinion,
they would be cautious how they admitted another place-
man within the walls of Parliament. This was not the

time to add to the pecuniary burthens of the public for
the sake of diminishing the official burthens of the servants
of the public.—(A laugh and cheers.)—lt was idle
to contend that the two offices could not be managed by
the same individual. Ministers, he knew, were besieged
with applications fur places; and it was the duty of the
House to interfere between Ministers and the applicants,
and say the offices were neither to be made nor had.—

(Loucllaugliter and cheers.)--You, Sir (said Sir James
Graham addressing the Speaker), felt so much impressed,
in common with the House, by the force of the arguments
contained in this speech, that you appointed the Right
lion. Gentleman a Teller in the Divi,ion that followed.—

I hope to see you adopt the same coune now ; and with
my Right lion. Friend m a colleague, and with the benefit
f his vote, I look forward with confidence to carry my
motion by a triumphant majority.—( Hear, and laughter.)
—lf the separation of these offices went to place a poli-
tical Atlas on the Treasury Bench, and to relieve the
Right Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Peel) from a portion of
that burthen which even his superior abilities—and supe-
rior he had always:maintained theta to be--could hardly

'~-

- -
sustain them, there might be some reason for the eha.nge;
but when it was nothing more than an attempt. to increase
the number of make-weights which give the Government
a predominant influence in the Committee above stair's,: be
confessed he could not look on it with anything but feel'
ings of hostility. These were already seventy placeniee
in that House. In two Committees latelv.appointeal,thert
were to be found in one seven members of the Gayer/nal°
and three East India Directors—in the other, there were
six members of the Government, so that there. were twelrs
or thirteen placemen in two Committees, one of twenty=eae
and the;other of twenty-five members. He confessed he felt
jealousy of this. He thought the Government was already'
much too strong in that House. When they looked at the
close and steady phalanx of placemen, and the skirmisher.
under the denomination of Directors, Military and Civil
Officers, Members of the Household, and all those cOanect•
ed in some degree with this or any Administration, he con-
fessed lie saw a body capable of carrying any or all men'
sures in that House which the Government required..--
(Hear, and a laugh. )—Many circumstances prevented hint
from alluding farther or more personally to the members
of this body, but he would remind the members of that
House that their constituents had their eyes on the pro..
ceedings of this evening. A question of the creation of s
new placeman was before them; and if they desired to
show that there remained any desire to relieve the burtheos
of the people, and that any controul remained in their
hands upon the measures of Government, he implored theel
to prove that there still was some spirit and independence
in the country. The present time presented features
which were to any mind alarming. That House was ra-
pidly sinking- in the opinions of the people, and it was
most important to retrieve their character in the eyes of
those who sent them there. If one spark of that Are
which animated the bosoms of their forefathers, and which
yielded but for an hour to the iron hand of Cromwell him-
self, yet remained ; if they were prepared to demand that
pledges now broken should be maintained good ; if they
were prepared to demand the
.fulfilment of the promise
made by the Government at the commencement of the
Session, that the most rigid economy should be observed
in all the public offices—a promise broken by the present
appointment to the Treasurership of the Navy before the
ink in which that promise was written had dried upon the
piper—(llear, hear)—this then was the opportunity for
that purpose. Let the House prove to the Duke of Wel'
lington himself that it is not baulked—(Hear, hear)---
that promises, although lightly made, were not to be
lightly broken—(H,ar, hear)—and that there was still
spirit enough in its members to vindicate its dignity, out-
raged by such a violation of engagements, and to make the
opinions and feelings of the people available through the
poser of the Parliament.—(Cheers.)—The Hon. Baronet
concluded by Moving a Resolution, as an Amendment,
" That it is the opinion of this House the late vacancy in
the office of Treasurer of the Navy afforded an opportunity
to save the sum of 3,0001. a year, without any vio'ation
of existing engagements, and without any detriment to the
public service."—(Loud cheers.)
Sir GEORGE CLERK said, that the speech of the
Hon. Baronet seemed to be founded on what took place in
1826 ; but he did not seem to understand that the debate
on that occasion took place on the qiiestion of giving
5,000/. a year to the President of the Board of Trade,
and not on the question of dissolving the office of Trea-
surer of the Navy. The lion. Baronet in the course of
his arguments hail also attempted to show that the Pay-
master was responsible—it was possible, as far as respon-
sibility was concerned the Treasurer might be got rid of
altogether. The Paymaster, however, was appointed by
the Treasurer, and under the controul of the Treasurer,
and fur his acts the Treasurer was responsible. As to
the duties of the Paymaster, they might, perhaps, he best
collected from the declaration of the Right Hon. Gent.,
the Member for Liverpool (Mr. Iluskisson) when he held
the office of Treasurer. The Right Hon. Gent. declared
that the duties required from the Treasurer were so nu-
merous, and Lis responsibility so great, that if he did not
possess the valuable assistance of his friend the Par
matter, and if he bad not unbounded confidence in laiirrs
he could not retain the office. The Bill to be introduc"t
by his Right Hon. Friend would make great and import-
ant alterations, but it would not relieve the Treasurer
from his present responsibility. After observing that the
Hon. Baronet might have spared his observations with
respect to Greenwich Hospital, for the Treasurer of the
Navy was one of the Commissioners ex-officio, the Hon.
Member went on to contend that they were bound to fill
up the office of Treasurer of the Navy, because the office
of Paymaster, being in the appointment of the Treasurer,
would be vacated, under the express terms of an Act of
Parliament, within a month, if a Treasurer was not ap-
pointed ; and whatever might be done with regard to the
Paymaster hereafter, it would be very inconvenient to
have no officer acquainted with the duties at the time a
.new Treasurer was appointed, who, as a stranger, must
he held as yet unacquainted with the duties of the office.
It was from no desire to increase the patronage of the
Crown, but from a conviction of the strict demands of the
public service that the appointment was made. From
1782 to the present time the office had been held by many
Gentlemen with other offices and without them. It had
been held, before 1807, without other offices, by Mr.
Canning, Mr. Sheridan, Mr. Tierney, and Mr. Bathurst.
It had from 1807 to 1812 been held by Mr. Rose with.
another office; and from 1812 to 1818 without any
other; and he believed that no one could deny the great
benefit the country had derived from the undivided ex-
ertions of that Right Hon. Gent., during the six years of
that service. Great as had been the Right Hon. Gent's.
talents, when Vice-President of the Beard of Trade, he
had found it impossible to devote sufficient time to the
office of Treasurer of the Navy. On all these grounds he,
should oppose the motion of the Hon. Baronet.
Mr. CALCRAFT observed, that the allusion which the
Hon. Baronet had made to him was rather flattering tolls
vanity. All that he had to do to secure the approbation of
the Hon. Baronet was to reconcile the vote which he in-

I tended to give that night with the speeeh which be made'
in 1822: a task of by no means difficult performance.
The proposition in 1822 was to make the salary of the
President of the Board of Trade, then held by his Right
Hon. Friend, the Member for Liverpool, an office of im.
portance, and a Cabinet office, the salary of which was only
; 2,0001. a-year, 5,0001. He (Mr. Calcrift) concurred
with the whole House that there could be no objection to
such a proposition. The office was filled by his Right
Hon. Friend with great alility ; and, as a Cabinet office,
it deserved greater remuneration. The only difficulty was,
how the object was to be attained. It was to be considered
(and in that opinion also he perfectly concurred) that by
adding the office of Treasurer of the Navy to that of Presi-
dent of the Board of Trade, his Right Hen. Friend would
take 5,0001. a-year, without any addition being made to'
the burdens of the country. That was the proposition of
1822. The present proposition was, to reduce the salary
of the Treasurer of the Navy; to make it an effective and
laborious office with a salary of 2,0001., by which • the
public would save at once 1,0001. a-year ; and prosper-,
tively to abolish the office of Paymaster of the Navy, hav-
ing a salary of 1,200/. a year, thereby making the ultimate
saving 2,2001. a-year. Thus it was proposed that a high
Public office, of considerable public duty, should be com-
petently filled for 2,000/. a-year less than a sinecure office
was formerly held. The Hon. Baronet had been pleased
to dwell at some length on the circumstance of his (Mr.
Calerafes) junction with his Msjesty'a present Ministers.
Would any man say that his acceptance of office had any,
thing improper in it? He owned that he held it the;
highest honour of his life that he had been asked by the,
Duke of Wellington to accept an office in his Government.-
He had, however, not acceded to it in haste. He had ac-
ceeded to it on mature deliberation. And, having acceded
to it, he defied any men to say thit in his conduct he had
exhibited any dereliction of his former principles.—(Hear,'
hear.)—He was proud of having joined the Administration
of the Duke of Wellington and his Right Hon. Friend near
him ; and every moment that had elapse-I since his con-
nexion with his Right Hon. Friend, every opportunity
which be had had of cultivating his Right Hon. Friend'e,
acquaintance, and he hoped he might add of acquiring his
confidence, had convinced him that he could not have taken
a better or a morejudicious step.—(A langli.)—The Hon.
Baronet had charged him with having formerly been a,
great advocate for the reduction of offices. Now he would
ask by what administration had so much patronage, in the'
shape of offices, been given up, as by the Administration
in which he held a subordinate station ?—(Hear,
There was no instance of similar disinterestedness. Let the
HOuse look at his Right Hon. Friend's reform of the law ;
and not at his reform of the law merely, but at the curtail-
ment of Ministerial patronage by which that reform was
accompanied. If the Hon. Baronet wished to bring forward
any charge against him, he wished he would do so in a
manner that would admit of a more definite answer. The
Hon. Bart. talked of what he was pleased to call ‘. make-
weights" in Committees of that House. If •the Hon.

Bari. disliked the constitution of those Committees, why
did he not complain of it when they were formed? Of
one of those Committees he (Mr. Calcraft)was Chairman,
and he was very sorry that the Hon. Baronet was not a
Member of that Committee (he would propose him if be
had no objection), that he might see with what fairness
and impartiality the business before the Committee was
conducted. For himeelf he begged to say, that be would
never he the tool or the makeweight of any Administra-
tion. He disliked talking so much of himself; but the ob-
servations of the Hon. Baronet had left hin► no alternative.
The proposition on which the House Were now called upon

0 decio
servan

surer o

6ousa;
'House
"he did
Lord
'night
Friend'
had fall
Barone

perienc

fact hei
to that

made a
fairy (
• howeve

portant
nell), ii
stated t
longer,
various
Pregent
the 2I
know h
the opp
bituatio

portuni
The pr

Was, th

he must
the spec
Bay u yr

njon of

a class
to the p
of his
When tl
2,0001.
affairs o
whal it
to refus

Treasu;
to be ab
other of
proposii

motion,
fectly
• rather c
Lord
their op
• to the ti
upon hi
one asst

argue al
The Ho
Treasur
pity, hi
and the:
did all
ought ti
Noble I
public II
app,
Treakur

Sir GI

any
great
.d ex-
ars of
le, he
) the
ids he,

pity
ad's.
his
ken

•
° decide was, whether or not they would have effective,
servants is important offices of the Crown. If the Trea-
surer of the Navy was to be an effective office, was two
thousand pounds a year too much for his salary? it the
—Rouse thought so, they would reduce it, but for himself
he did not think so. •
Lord HOWICK. observed, that any doubt whieh .he
might- have entertained of the expediency of his Hon.
Friend's motion would have been entirely removed by what
had fallen from the Hon. Baronet opposite. The Hon.
Ilaronet said that it was necessary to have a person of ex-
perience in the office of the Treasurer of the Nays ; the
fact being that the Hon. Gent. who had been appointed
to that office could not possibly know any thing of its du-
ties. It would have been a much better course to have
` made an effective deputy the principal, and have saved the
&eery of the latter. It was not merely to the expense,
• however, to which he objected. There was another im-
portant point. His Hon. Friend near him (Sir H. Par-
• nell), in the able work which he had recently published,
• Stated that if the lae Committee of Finance had sat a little
longer, they would have proposed to consoialate ell the
various offices for the payment of the public money. At
present there was a Payinsster of the Navy, Paymaster of
the Marines, Paymaster of the Forces, and he did not
know how many other Paymasters. It was contended, on
the opposite side, that the individuals who possessed these
Situations could not he dispossessed of them until some op-
portunity offered of giving these equivalent situations.
The principle that was thus established and acted upon
was, that if once a man wee quartered upon the public,
he must continue to be so. There was one more point in
the speech of the Hon. Baronet on which lie wished to
8-iy a word. The Hon. Baronet had adverted to an opi-
nion of a Right Hon. Gent., that it was important to have
a class of public servants who could devote their attention
to the general affairs of the country. Reilly the opponents
of his Hon. Friend's proposition must be at a great lose
when they mere driven to such an argument as that-
-2,0001. a year for devoting their attention to the general
affairs of the country ! When he (Lord Howick) heard
what thole affairs were, he might then perhaps be induced
to refuse to vote with his Hon. Friend. The admission,
however, of the -Hon. Baronet, that the two offices of
Treasurer and Paymaster were not necessary, was quite
sufficient for hint.
Mr. BROKER said, that although the Noble Lord con-
e4led by expressing his determination to vote for the mo-
tion of the Hon. Baronet, there was not a single word in
his Speech which was not in contradiction to the principles
and statements of the Hon. Baronet. The Hon. Baronet
set out with stating that the office of Treasurer of the
was not a sinecure, and that it ought not to be
a's"ed, but argued that it should be annexed to some
other office. The Noble Lord, who supported the Hon.
Baronet's motion, began by asserting that the office of
• Treasurer of the Nary was a sinecure, an:l that it ought'
to be abolished, and denied that it should be united to any
other office. So that after having contradicted the three
propositions on which the Hon. Baronet had founded his
motion, the Noble Lord nevertheless declared that he per-
fectly agreed with the Hon. Baronet. But what was
rather curious was, that the Hon. Baronet and the Noble
Lord were completely at variance with one another in
their opinions, and yet ueither of them made any approach
•to the truth and justice of the case. It was a little hard
upon him (Mr. Croker) that lie must first argue against
one assertion by the Hon. Baronet, and then by and bye
argue against a contradictory assertion by the Noble Lord.
The Hon. Baronet began by admitting that the office of
Treasurer of the Navy ought to be maintained in its dig-
nity, but that it ought to be annexed to some other office,
and then the Noble Lord contended that the Paymaster
did all the duty, and that the office of the Treasurer
ought to be reduced. During the time, however, that the
Noble Lord's father so ably and so advantageously to the
Public held the situation of First Lord of the Admiralty,
lie, appointed a Right Hon. Gentleman to the office of
Treasurer of the Navy, as a separate and substantive office,
with a salary of 4,000/. a year; and he did right in doing
so. The system of amalgamating offices was, in his (Mr.
Croker s) opinion, a great abuse. No one could deny that
the duties of the Treasurer of the Navy were great and
important. As to the supposition that Mr. Tierney bad
said, that an hour a day was eufficient for the performance
of those duties, he had never said any such thing. It had
been attributed to him, but he had always laughed at it.
He could bring in evidence all the Ex-Treasurers of the
Navy living, to prove that the duties of the office were
extensive and important. When the Hon. Baronet read
the extract from Mr. Tierney's speech, stating that in his
time the duties of the office were not great, he ought not
to have stopped there, but ought to have gone on with
what Mr. Tierney further stated;—namely, that his at-
tendance was required every day ; and that he understood
that, since his time, a considerable increase had taken place
in the duties of the office. [Mr. Croker here read an ex-
tract from Mr. Tierney's speech to the above effect.] The
Paymaster of the Navy had arduous 'and constant duties
to perform. He was always chained to the desk. lie was
the attorney to the Treasurer of the Navy. The Noble
Lord had asked, " why not make the Deputy the Princi-
pal?" That was to say, in other words, " why not make
a Treasurer of the Navy with a salary of 1,2001. a year ?"
—(Hear, hear.)—That was the whole question, as stated
by the Noble Lord; and in that the Noble Lord differed
from the Hon. Baronet, who wished to maintain the
dignity of the office. The reason why a Treasurer of the
Navy ought not to be made with a salary of 1,200/. a year
van this that it was absolutely necessary to have in that
House a person of sufficient rank to manage the great and
important concerns which would now devolve on the
office. But if' it were thought desirable that there should
be a Treasurer of the Navy with only 1,2001. a-year, let
that be moved when the Ettimates came to be debated.
The present was a Resolution condemnatory of the ap-
polntinent of a Treasurer of the Navy. He might be al-
lowed, however, to inquire why an officer, who was now a
deputy, should be subjected to greater duties and heavier
responsibility on the same salary as that which he now en-
Joyed. At present, the deputy, with 1,2001. a-year, had
endresponsibility; lie was the attorney of the principal,
could be turned out of office at the pleasure of the
Principal, Would the Paymaster accept the trust which
thlt was proposed to vest in him? He did not know. Could
e Paymaster find proper securities for the faithful dis-
charge of that trust? He could not tell. But of this he
Was sure, the individual who possessed so extensive a con-
ultroaunl over large sums of the public money ought to be a
of rank and dignity, whose station in that House
would enable him advantageously to perform the functions
of his office. The House had occasionally heard of great
defalcations in that office ; they had heard that cashiers
i broke, that clerks had run away, that public money
hadbeen lost. It was a curious fact, however, that every
defalcation which had taken place since 1782, had taken
wplace during the Treasureiships of Treasurers who were
ading other offices at the time; and whose attention
it s, therefore, to a certain degree, called away from what
see would term their natural duties. In 1800, when the
se
of the Navy performed his proper functions of
Only
ae 5,Q131. a-year. When in 1801, the union of the
oft Treasurer of the Navy with another great office
teirezeil_tt.l,Blroeowl.new and important duties on the Payrnas-
aeyear (the salary of the Treasurer being
master ter 4e0001.) In 1819, the duties of the Pay-
MI he got
beezioisneeprerao:tecring, everybody felt that his salary ought to
1,20(711 2001. more. In 1326, the same
gether a further increase of 200 L, making alto-
'Peet ti, a Which was its present amount.—With re-
e Committee of Finance, the only recommenda.
and thate subject was contained in the Report of 1817 ;
surer of recommended the fixing of the salary of the Tree-
oivie
rthe Navy at the same standard' as the Paymaster
vernal ° 3,0001. a-year. He had stated that Go-
ent had acted in perfect accordance to the only Re-
Nil . eaaa, _ Finance Committee on this subject. They had
alitssattpon it to the letter. They had not only done that,
Hon, had afterwards deferred to the opinion of the
they b ember for Aberdeen. He trusted, therefore, that
than! have the rote that night of the Hon. Gentle-
Cs'hY the 00. Gentleman had said, that be saw no rea-
the. duties e Treasurer of the Navy should not perform all
Thatpothat office for a salary of 2,0001. a-year.
H The Hon. 14°n his Majesty's Government had accepted.
ttilolent
ailld
tiouwes ember had accompanied it by observing,
arapedient to inquire if any or what altera-
the Navy. "e made in the salary of the Treasurer of
Sir J. GRARA
inquired into b M observed, that that subject bad been
Y the Mr. CR 0
Government.
Notlaid'
last Finance Committee.
port of the last T'iing respecting
that it had been inquired into by
ever, in the
hew • Finance 'it appeared in the Re-
Committee. They were told,
Waq a body cpamphlet of an H n at, that there
of evidence taken obs.fore that Committee,
semewhere in the archives of the House, from which any
Wit fbe ight picked
L. it tsucy mightout at pleasure, giving what tongue
opinionC
of the irdsulee omgaest, and declarinthe Report g that it was
that
as the
Office of TreseuirerPersatkii
Committee, be
er
suppo
quoted se t
2 nothing appeared respecting the
of the Navy. 'llse Hon. Baronet had
Gallant Friend bet • Ilia argument, the evidence of his
his Gallant Fririd'in'-
iia,l been opneeeenefeitlhreasipp,intNevertheless, time evidence of
and was was-ilant'rongly in favour of the office,
ingfouizlations of the course which
lition of the Office or syinaster----
With reg ird to the abe-
Sir GEORGE
skla
RENDER (as we understood)

spoke to Order. The Resolution before the House related
to the Treasurer, not to the Paymaster of the Navy.
Mr. CROKER observed that he had never heaid so ad-
'mirable a specimen of " Order" as his Hon. Friend had
just exhibited, How could it come into his Hon. Friend's
I head, that, after what had been said in his speech by the
Hon. Baronet, that he (Mr. Croker) was to be precluded
!from adverting to the Paymaster of the Navy, because that
'officer was not mentioned in the resolution t The only
w4y in which he could understand his Hon. Friend's con-
duct was, that his feelings of the force of his (Mr. C.'s)
argument got the better of his personal regard for himself.
—(A laugh.)—He had shown that there was no recom-
menda'ion of any abolition of the office contained in any
Report of the Finance Committee. He deplored the too
necessary absence on this discussion of a Right Hon. Gen-
tleman, whose absence, however, was a proof of the int-
port trice of the duties attached to the office of Treasurer of
the Navy. There was every reason to believe that the ill-
ness of that Right Hon. Gentleman proceeded from the
anxiety of mind which those duties occasioned. They had
prevented him from enjoying any relaxation during the
last summer; his actual presence at the office having been
required every day for many weeks. In 1327, a Right
Hon. Friend of his who had given as much attention to his
civil station in the Navy as he had formerly done to his
brilliant services on the seas, went to Ministers, and told
them that the office of Treasurer of the Navy had grown
to such a magnitude and importance that it ought to he
separated from every other. When it appeared to the
Government that the office of Master of the Mint might
be united with that of President of the 13..ard of Trade,
instead of with the office of Treasurer of the Navy, the
Government at once took the opportunity of following the
advice which the Committee of Finance in 1317 hail
given, and which the House had then adopted, and which
had been subsequently confirmed by a Resolution proposed
by the lion. Member for Aberdeen in 1819. He was
afraid that he had detained the House too long already;
but feeling convinced, as he did, that the present arrange-
ment cf ate offices was such as necessity required, and fur-
ther, that it had been aloi.t.cl at the recommendation of
the House, he had been unable to let the subject pass by
without offering a few observations upon it.
Lord HOWICK had been misunderstood. He had not
proposed to abolish the office of Treasurer of the Navy,
but only to make that saving immediate which the Right
Hon. Gentleman admitted might be prospective, anti to
appoint at once an efficient officer, with a salary of 2,0001.
a year, without quartering upon the public another and a
non-efficient officer, at an additional salary of 1,2001. a
year.

- Mr. CROKER must certainly have totally misunder-
stood the Noble Lord. He was glad to hear this expla-
nation of. the Noble Lord's meaning, and nothing would
be mere agreeable to bins thin to put the question on the
footing on which the Noble Lord had just put it.
Mr. KEITH DOUGLAS opposed the motion.
Mr. HUSKISSON felt called upon to make a few ob-
servations on the subject, the more especially as he was
the only Member of the House now present, who had held
far any considerable time the office of Treasurer of the
Navy, jointly with that of President of the Board of Trade.
He owned that he should have been glad to have been
spared this discussion, for he did not feel much taste for
any question in which the discussion of a public matter
was mixed up with considerations of a private nature.
The present was a discussion of that mixed nature ; hut if
it hail been purely a question of a personal kind, he should
have been the first to do justice to the ability, zeal, and in-
dustry of the present Treasurer of the Navy ; he should
have been anxious to acknowledge that that Right Hon.
Gentleman was not only competent to perform the duties
of the office, but that he was also fully competent to
the performance of duties of a much higher kind. But
the House could not look at this question with reference to
individual claims or individual znerits—it was a public
question, and only as a public question would he treat it.
His Majesty's Ministers were placed under the necessity of
deciding on it as a public question, and almost without
consideration on their part must it be decided. The Mem-
bers of that Hou,e were placed in this alternative : if the
House wished to protect themselves in public opinion—if
they did not wish that the resolution they had adopted, and
that Government themselves bad recommended for their
adoption, should be considered as nothing but a mere delu-
sion, they had no means of guarding themselves against such
a delusion other than that of adopting the resolution now
proposed. Why did he state this to be his view of the case?
First, because jhe resolution declaratory of the necessity of
retrenchment -bad immediately preceded the appointment
to thin office ; secondly, because, in contradiction to what
the Right Hon. Baronet, the Member for Edinburgh, had
stated, he would say, that Parliament, in 1826, did re-
cognise and lay down the principle that this office ought
to be annexed to that of the Board of Trade. The ques-
tion then was, whether a substantive office should or not
be annexed to this office; and for the information of the
House he would read the conclusion of the proceedings on
that occasion. " The House divided on the question pro-
posed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether a sub-
stantive and independent salary should go with the office
of President of the Board distinct from that of Treasurer
of the Navy, and on the division the ayes were eighty-
seven, the noes were seventy-six, leaving a majority of
only eleven." Upon that majority having been announced,
Mr. Canning, then the organ of the Government in that
House, expressed himself to the following effect:—" He
regretted that the smallness of the majority would prevent
him from persevering in the course which, as a matter of
principle, he had conscientiously supported ; but which, as
a matter of expediency, he now felt himself bound, under
all the circumstances of the case, to abandon. The ex-
pression of opinion had undoubtedly, been very strong ;
and his Majesty's Government would not further press the
measure. As it seemed to be the wish of the House, they
would consent to the union of the ancient office of Trea-
surer of the Navy with that of President of the Board of
Trade." He was of opinion that that declaration, followed
immediately on the part of the Government with a
performance of its promise, did announce on their part a
Resolution to abide by the rule which the opinion of the
House had then laid down. It was not ou the judgment of
individuals, but on that of the House, that the union of these
two offices had taken place. Since they had been adminis-
tered together, no evil effects appeared to have arisen from
their union ; and on that point the silence of Ministers
confirmed the judgment of the House. The Gallant Admiral,
who, in 1827, was the official adviser of the Government
on matters relating to the navy, and indeed said that the
office of Treasurer of the Navy was a special and substan-
tive office ; but there had been three appointments since
that time, and the Gallant Admiral's opinions had not
been acted on. The Government must have felt that 'he
sense of Parliament, thus expressed, was imperative upon
them with respect to these offices ; but he would go
further, and assert without the fear of contradiction that
but fur that Resolution the two offices would have been
continued in the same state as that in which they before
existed. When he heard, for the first time, that the offices
were not to be separated, be said he considered that Reso-
lution as preparatory for the downfall of the Treasurer of
the Navy. But it was supposed that circumstances had
arisen since 1826, which induced the Government to over-
ride the then declared judgment of Parliament, and to de-
part from the rule which Parliament had then laid down.
He had certainly heard the statement of the Hon. Baronet,
the Lord of the Admiralty, that new and important duties
had been annexed to the office of Treasurer of the
Navy, by that Act of the last Session which regu-
lated the affairs of Greenwich Hospital. He had care-
fully looked through that Act, and he did not find any-
thing added to the specific duties of the Treasurer of the
Navy, except one ;—he meant at least that nothing had
been added which could not be performed by any other'
Member of the Commissioners of Greenwich Hospital,
except in one instance. One of the clauses of that Act
statad that the payment of no sums of money, standing in
the names of the said Commissioners, that had been paid,
nor the receipt of any dividends or funds standing in their
names, should be authorised, unless the First Commissioner
of the Woods and Forests, or the Treasurer of the Navy,
should be present at the signature of the order by which the
said sum was paid or received. He would ask any Gent.
who knew anything of business, whether, if there were
five persous named as Commissioners, three of whom were
specially appointed to perform certain duties as such, and
the other two were Commissioners ex-ojficios, the parti-
cular duty he had mentioned could be considered as such
an augmentation of duty as would justify the House in ac-
ceding to the proposition to separate the two offices, and
to give them two distinct salaries ? It had been said, too,
that a part of the'duty of the Treasurer of the Navy was
to perform part of the duties of the Paymaster of the Navy.
He would assert from his knowledge of the office, and he
challenged any one to contradict him, that it was net pos-
sible for the Treasurer of the Navy to do the duties of Pay-
master of the Navy. The latter office was one of the most
laborious kind, one that required the most continued and
assiduous attention to business of any in which the officer
was entrusted with the management of part of the public
funds. The Paymaster of the Navy could not be absent a
single day from his office except the Treasurer of the Navy
eras there. All the bills to be paid must pass through his
hands, and it was not at intervals, but day by day, that he was
obliged to attendfto the duties of his department. The Pay-
tpaster of the Navy must instruct each Treasurer of the Navy
in the duties be would be called on to perform ; and when the
(louse reflected that within the last three years there had
lieen four appointments of Treasurer of the Navy, he thought

he could ask them, with confidence, w•l.ether it was not a
strong case upon the crrstion of the security of public pro_
perty that among so many and such frequently occurring
i changes of the Treasurers, there should still he one efficient
lofficer conversant with his duties, and able to instruct
others in theirs, who should not be changed every tax
I months. His Right Hon. Friend had said that it Wits a
I remarkable fact, that during a long period the several de-
-1 falcations that had taken pl.ce had all occurred when the
Treasurer of the Navy had Other duties to perform. If his
Right lion. Friend had said that all the discussions upon
this subject took place at the time of the full Moon, he
would have spoken just as much to the purpose. If there
was any merit in that argument, no doubt it could be ap-
plied with equal force to other officers of responsibility.
Within a short time a fraud upon the Mint had been dis-
covered ; but yet unfortunately for his Right lion.
Friend's argument, the office of Master of the Mint was
not then united to that of the President of the Board of
Trade. Yet if the argument were good for anyth:ng, it
must be as good in one case as another—or at least one
must be allowed as a set off to the other. He would
ask any gentleman whether, if, as a private man, he
was engaged in concerns in which millions passed
through his hands, lie should think his business likely
to be better conducted, or his concerns better attended
to, if he changed his cashier every six months ? They
might abolish the name and designation of Paymaster of
the Navy, but re would
predict that the Treasurer of the
Navy never would do the duty of its Paymaster. The
latter was a deputy that performed those duties which
the principal would never perform in person. Let them
call .the officer by what name they pleased, but they
would be deceiving themselves if they thought they could
get rid of the office itself. Ira that way, at least, he was
convinced they could not save 2,200/. a-year. They
might save the 1,0001. a-year by the proposed reduction
of the salary, but not by the abolition of the 'office. lie
knew he might be told that the office was one which ex-
' isted merely during the pleasure of the Treasurer of the
Navy. It was so, but he would ask whether there
would not be greater difficulties attending the frequent
change of the Paymaster than of the Treasurer of the
Navy, since the business was performed by the former ?
If they were to make a new arrangement of the offices,
the Treasurer of the Navy must be as it was said the
Paymaster of the Navy had been, chained to his desk, and
compelled to perform all those duties which, were now dis-
charged by the Paymaster of the Navy. His ii;ght Hon.
Friend had adverted to the authority of Mr. Tierney, who,
he stated, had said that at one time the duties had been
discharged by an attendance of one hour a day, but that
they had been much increased since his time. He would read
the summing up of the speech of that Right Hon. Gent.,
who said that be thought the duties of the two offices (Pre-
sident of the Board of Trade and Treasurer of the Navy)
could be efficiently performed by the Right Hon. Gent.
who then held them. So that if he said the duties had
been increased, he still was of opinion that a person so in-
competent as himself (Mr. Huskisson) was still competent
enough to perform the duties of both; and so thought and
so decided the House, and the Government felt themselves
bound by the decision. So much for the authority of Mr.
Tierney. If his own opinion was to be quoted upon the
present occasion, he (Mr. Huskisson) was neither the pro-
moter nor the suggester of the arrangement with respect
to the Board of Trade—it was an arrangement that came
from gentlemen on the other side of the House—from gen-
tletnen not connected with the Governtstent. He would,
however, state that he should have been glad to be relieved
from the office of Treasurer of the Navy, from his dislike
to the pecuniary responsibility attached to it ; but when
in office in the Board of Trade, whatever might have been
his faults, whatever the character of the measures he re-
commended, whether good or evil, he trusted he might
claim this merit at least, that his was not a department of
idleness.—(Hear, hear. )—At the same time that he held
that office, he was in the situation of one of the confiden-
tial servants of his Majesty—he was not only engaged at
the office of Treasurer of the Navy, and as a member of
tile Board of Trade, but as President of that Board he
haul important duties to perform. He had to manage
affairs with foreign states of a commercial kind, affecting
their maritime rights, relating to the slave trade, and to
the intercouse between the United States and the West
India Islands. He hoped, too, he might claim the merit
of having been ready on every occasion to take his full
share in the performance of those general and desultory
duties which did not belong specifically to his depart-
went, but which must be performed by some Member
of the Government.—(Hear, hear.)—He might aleo,say,
without presumption, that, in the general business of that
House, both as a Member of Parliament and as a Meal-
,' ber of the Government, he had always taken his share,
and he had very frequently been employed upon the va-
rious Committees which had sat during the 31 years in
which he had had a seat in Parliament. He did not state
these things with any vain or improper feeling; but he
had once possessed the favourable opinion of that House,
which he trusted he had done nothing to forfeit ; and he
would take that opportunity of saying that he had always
deeply felt that the manner in which the discussion he had
referred to had been conducted with regard to himself was
one of the greatest rewards he could have had, and one
of the highest gratifications he had received during the
course of his whole public life.—(Hear, hear.) fie now
thought that if at that time, when the same proposition as
that now submitted to the House was under discussion,
the Government had found it necessary to defer to Par-
liament, they were under the same necessity now. He
would ask the House of Commons whether they would not
now assert their former decision and vindicate their former
judgment, and whether they would not compel the Go-
vernment to carry into effect the resolution they them-
selves had proposed in making this office one that should
be annexed to some other efficient department ? It was
impossible to deny that the comparatively minor duties of
the Vice-President of the Board of Trade might be an-
nexed to those of the Treasurer of the Navy. That was
the whole queStion before the House. The office of Pre-
sident of the Board was now annexed to that of Master
of the Mint, and it was for the House to say whether
the same course might not be adopted with regard to
the Treasurership of the Navy and the office of Vice-.
President of the Board of Trade. They had been told
of days in which these were substantive and dis-
tinct offices ; but for the last 23 years (which were
of more value in such a calculation than all the an-
tecedent periods) the present appointment was the
first in which the office of Treasurer of the Navy was
severed from another and more efficient office. In 1807,
Mr. Rose was appointed Treasurer of the Navy, and at
the same time lie held the office of President of the Board
of Trade. Lord Goderich was appointed Vice-President
of the Board of Trade whilst be was a Junior Lord of the
Treasury. Afterwards be held the office of
_Vice-Presi.
dent conjointly with the Paymaster of the Forces, and
after that, jointly with the office of Treasurer of the Navy,
and so the two offices had gone on ever since. No ap-
pointment to the latter office had taken place which was
not connected with other duties. If any credit were to
lie given to the persons who had held this employment, he
would say to every gentleman that was to give a vote this
evening, " Dismiss from your minds any apprehension that
if the offices were to be filled by the same person, any de-
triment could accrue to the public service." Some little
embarrassment might be occasioned to the heads of the
Government who filled up these offices, but this woul I
not be of a very serious nature. Such an embarrassment
would remind him of the often quoted words of an old song,

.6 How happy could I be with eithcr.
Were t'other dear charmer away."

(A laugh.)—This would he the subet ince of all the diffi-
culties which would attend the success of the Hon. Ba-
ronet's motion this evening. He was surprised, that
when Ministers had expressed a wish to abridge the enor-
mous amount of the public expences, they had not asked
themselves how they could reconcile this appointment to
the decision of Parliament upon this subject in 1826, or
to the Resolution that they had themselves passed in the
present Parliament. Was there no sage Nestor amongst
them to whisper in their ear that this appointment was
altogether inexpedient? Lord Bathurst, from 1807 to
1812, was Master of the Mint and President of the
Board of Trade, whilst Mr George Rose was Treasurer
of the Navy and Vice-President of the 'Board of Trade;
and therefore there had been precisely the same state of
things in this period, which was one of great importance
and of much greater business than at present. The Trea-
surer of the Navy was then fifty times what it was now.
There was now but one more observation which he would
wish to make, and with that lie would not trouble the
arouse long. He was glad of the reductions which Mi-
nisters had made in several branches of the public service,
and he hoped they would continue those reductions when-
ever they could be undertaken without palpable injury to
the public service. But when the Paymaster-General of
the Forces asserted that more numerous and greater reduc-
tions had been made by the Duke of Wellington than by
all his predecessors, he (Mr. Huskisson) could not hesitate
to say that the observation had no foundation whatever in
truth. The reductions and reforms made by Mr. Pitt,
the offices lie had abolished between 1783 and 1786, were
fifty-fold what bad been abolished by the Duke of Welling-
toe,—(Hear, hear.)—Mr. Pitt's reductions were of offices
of very great emolument and of influence, both within and
out of that House, and Mr. Pitt had reduced them with-
out any boast, for he had thought it his duty to do so.
Further reductions had been made even in consequence of
the motions of the Hon, Member for DJrsetshire (Mr.

Banks) ; re.ln which greatly exceeded those made by
the present First ord of the Treasury. Upon a recent
occasion Um). Heathers were talking of reductions in the
De Al Weight ; but the House had now the means of sey
ing three theusand a-year, in conformity with their own
recent resolutions, as well as the resolutions of 1826, and
he must despair of any improvement if this measure were
not carried. In consequence of such despair, he would
not propose measures which he saw it would be perfectly
usekss to suggest.—(Herr, hear. )—Let the country judge-
of what. had been assigned that night for the continuance
of this office.—(Cheers.)—Let the country, he said, judge'
between such pretences and the reasons upon which he
thought, that whether upon the score of precedent, upon
the score of authority, and upon that of principle, the office
ought to have been annexed to that of Vice-President of
the Board of Trade.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir GEORGE COCKBURN said, that attaching the
,office of President of the Navy with that of the Boat d of
Trade hail always in his opinion ken improper, and he
was now confirmed in that opinion by all that had fallen
from his Right Hon. Friend who had just sat down. His
Right Hon. Friend's talents were universally acknow-
ledged, and it was equally well know❑ that he was accus-
tomed to business ; and, therefore, it might be reasonably
supposed that he was likely to have looked into details, and
to have made himself well acquainted with the office of
which he was speaking ; hut so far from this, the Right
Hon. Gent. had clearly shown that he knew nothing
whatever of the subject upon which he had been speaking.
(A laugh.)—Hon. Members might laugh, if they pleased ;
but he (Sir G. Cockburn) would prove that his Right
Hun. Friend was totally unacquainted .with the details anti
the duties of the office upon which he had been making
an attempt to enlighten the House. His Right lion.
Friend was mistaken, when he said he was the only per-
son then in that House who had ever filled the office of
Treasurer of the Navy; and he would now show the
House, to their utter surprise, that his Right Hon. Friend
knew nothing of the subject. First his Right Hon.
Friend hail told the House that the Paymaster of the
Navy was obliged to attend constantly at his office, because
he had the cheques to sign for the many millions that passed
through his hands. Would the House believe it possible,
that the Paymaster of the Navy never had been allowed
to draw one single cheque.—(Tumultuous cheers from the
Treasury Benches.)—The Paymaster could not draw one
single shilling out of the Bank of England in virtue of
his office.

Mr. HUSKISSON here interrupted the Gallant Offi-
cer. He stated that the Galant Officer was either totally
mistaken; or he was condescending to take advantage of a
play upon a word. The duty of the Paymaster was to
sign cheques, which in the language of the office were
called " Writes Off." These Writes Off were orders to
transfer out of the money standing in the Bank of Eng-
land in the name of the Treasurer of the Navy, large
sums to the different sub-cashiers.—(Hear, hear.)
Sir G. COCKBURN—The 'Paymaster never drew a
single shilling—he found no security—he was no public
accountant. He had no command of the public money,
excapt the power of makieg these Writes Off to pay, per-
haps, 20,0001. to his cashier, and 20,0001. to another.—
(Hear, hear.)—Gentlemen might say " Hear, hear ;" but
he would maintain that he had made a complete answer to
his Right Hon. Friend.—(A groan.)—Gentlemen might
groan if they pleased, but it was true.—(A laugh.)—The
ditties of a Paymaster of the Navy might be done with a
very small degree of labour. He might write off in one
evening the several balances, and even that duty was only
a very late arrangement. He examined balances and
made returns to the Navy Office ; this was all that the
Paymaster of the Navy did, and this was done with much
case. The present Right Hon. Gentleman appointed
Treasurer of the Navy might, without the slightest diffi-
culty, perform this duty; but they could not turn off the
Gallant Officer who now filled the office of Paymaster-
General to the Navy until an opportunity occurred of other-
wise providing feu• him. The debate of 1826 had turned
not upon these points, but upon a question of economy ;
and he verily believed the 1-louse would have agreed to a
separation of the Presidency of the Board of Trade from
the Treasurership of the Navy, had the motion then under
discussion been one of money. The late Greenwich
Hospital Bill and the Oat-pension Bill put great and im-
portant duties on the Treasurer of the Navy, and as long
as the Treasurer was attached to any other office, his
services never could be commanded in the Navy Office.
He would maintain, that by the present arrangement, a
sum of 2,200/. would be saved to the public, whilst the
country would obtain an efficient person to fill the office.
Mr. HUSKISSON hoped that he might be allowed to
offer himself in explanation to the House, after the un-
founded imputations which the Gallant Officer had im-
puted to him. He might at least be allowed to show that
he really did know the A B Cof the office he had filled.—
He had been charged with talking of cheques, when, in
point of fact, the Paymaster had not power to draw
cheques. The balance in the Bank of England stood in
the names of the Treasurer and Paymaster of the Navy.—
The Paymaster, under the power of attorney from the
Treasurer, was authorised to draw out all that balance,
and which, in fact, he did. These drafts were not in the
common form of:a banker's cheque, but they were drawn
in the following words—" Front the balance standing in
the name of the Treasurer of his Majesty's Navy, write off
so many thousand pounds to the Cashier of the Al-
lotments, to the Cashier of the Pay Branch, or to the Ca-
shier of the Victualling Branch," and so on. This
" Write off" was as much an imperative command to pay
the money as if it were a common banker's cheque.—
(Cheers.)—But it had been said that the Paymaster might
go away from his office for a week.

Sir GEORGE COCKBURN—I never said any such
a thing.

Mr: HUSKISSON—WeII, the Gallant Officer, at
least, said for two or three days.—(A laugh.)—Documents
came every day for the Paymaster to examine and sign.
To-day there might be an account of 100,0001. Navy Bills
due, and 70,000/. to-morrow. Suppose the Paymaster to
write off the 170,000/. at once, and to go out of town.—
Now, in the present course of business, and at the present
value of money, these bills, or Many of them, were not
presented for several days ; and the Paymaster ought not,
therefore, to write off these large sums all at once, but to do
so as the sums became due. The Gallant Admiral had been
pleased to admit that the Paymaster's duty compelled him
to halance al the hooks of the different heads of service ;
and he would appeal to the House whether this admission
did not amount to what he had stated, that the Gentleman
who tilled the office of Treasurer of the Navy must be
chained to his dedr.—(Hear, hear.)

. . ,
- Mr. HUME sail, the question was, bad Ministers ia
this appointment acted with due attention to the economy
which they acknowledged to be essential, and which they
had pledged themselves and made the King pledge h;rn-
self to observe ? The country had now to pay a charge
of 2,9201. to the Paymaster of Marinas, 23,033/. for the
Pay-office of the Navy ; and Ministers acknowledged that
when they could get rid of or provide for the present
Paymaster of the Navy, they would make the Treasurer
of the Navy do the duty of his office. What was this but
an admission of a violation of their pledges of economy?
The Secretary cf the Treasury said, that in 1800, the
salary of the Paymaster of the Navy was only 5001. per
annum.--2001. snore were soon added, and then 2001
more, until at last the salary was made to amount to 1,200/,
per atuNtn. If the Paymaster well performed his duties,
they were totally incompatible with his services as a Mem-
ber of Parliament. The Paymaster, for instance, might be
chosen a Member of the Wexford Committee, which might
sit for two months, and then what became of the duties of
the Paymaster ?---(From the Treasury Bench :—He may
swear off.)--Mr. Hume continued. This would be
improver—a neglect of duty; and it only proved what
he had stated, that the duties were so incompatible, that
when they clashed the Member was obliged to swear off
from one of them. The only way was, to get rid of that
solid band of pensioners out of Parliament ; for in the pre-
sent Session the Government majorities had been corn-
posed 'of persons in the pay of Ministers in offices removable
at will.—(Cheers.)—The House had had examples of such
removals ; and every man knew that the Duke of Wel-
lington was of so decided a temper, that he always got rid
of those who, in that House, disputed any of his questions.
The Paymaster of the land forces had spoken of his con-
scientious and independent votes ; and if his votes out of
office had not been the reverse of his votes in office, he
would not say much for them. The Secretary of the
Admiralty had totally misquoted and misapplied what he
had said upon the Navy Department in 1822. He had
maintained, and he still maintained, that the whole duties
of offices might be performed for 8,0001. a year,
if thethe Nwy
system' were properly arranged. It was true that
the Paymaster of the Navy had not a shilling in his
hands. Every department of the state was overloaded
with double and treble cheques, as if a gentleman giving an
order upon his hanker found it necessary to pass it also
through the hands of two or three clerks. Ile hoped that
Hon. Members would, by their votes this night, support
the consistency of the House, and show their sense of the
manner in which the present Government had violated its
pledge of economy, and had shown an utter disregard of
the expenditure of the public money.
Mr. PEEL rose amidst loud cries of " Question." The
Right Hon. Gent. said, that before the House disposed
of this question it was not immaterial that their attention
should be called to the real nature of it. It was not a
motion to reduce an excessive estimate ; it was not a pro-
'position to diminish a vote which many might think greater

than the public service required : but it was a proposal
that the Douse should visit with condemnation and with
censure, those by whom the appointment had been made.
was not a question of mere policy on which the House
were now called upon to leads, t;er considerations of equity
and of jestice were involved in it. He might say that
the ihiuse ou this qu stion was sieing in a judicial and
nut in a politieal cliaraittsr; awl, bewsver high party feel-
Ing might be carried, sure he was that on such an occa-
sion, few Members would refuse, before they gave their
verdict, to listen to the grounds on which the Government
protest tigainst a verdict of condeematinn—to the groends
on which the Government rested their defence.—(Hear.)
They were bound to consider tite animus in which this
appointment had been made, before they censured the
Government ; and he begged leave to assert at the outset
t'iat which he would beer out by evidence—namely, than
if the House should adopt the proposition before them, it
would not be the discharge of an imperative duty, but an
aet of gross injustice.—(Cheers.)—ln 1828, when a
schism--to which he could never allude without feelings
of regret—took place between some Members of the
Government, and rendered alterations necessary—a Right
Hon. Friend of his (Mr. Vesey FitzseeraldYwas appointed
to the offices of President of the Board of Trade and
Treasurer of the Navy. At that time Lord Melville
prat steel against tbe choice, but his Noble Friend at
the head of the Admiralty had no other view then to
provide for the efficiency of the naval service. His
Right Hon. Friend behind him concurred in the view
which his Noble Friend (Lord Melville) expressed upon
this subject, and the question was taken into deliberate
consideration. Adverting, however, to what had passed
on the subject in that House, and considering it to be the
expressed wish of the House that the offices of Treasurer
of the Navy and President of the Board of Trade should
be united—the individual hulling them having a salary of
5,0001. a year—his Noble Friend Lord Melville was told
that his objections must he overruled, and the appoint-
ment be made in obedience to the views of the House. Sc
mstters continued until the health of his Right Hon.
Friend Mr. Vesey Fitzgerald broke down under the labour
of the united offices.—(Hear, hear.)—When the Govern-
ment saw that his Right Hon. Friend, whose acuteness in
business, and whose official experience every body must
have observed, had sunk beneath the burdensome duties
of these two offices, they did feel that it was high time to
depart from the intention of Parliament, if that departure
could he effected consisterely with the preservation of those
views of economy which he must be allowed to say were
ever present to the minds of his Majesty's Ministers. If
the Government had not consulted both the efficiency of
the public service and the saving of public expence,
if they had wished only to make out a specious case for the
Parliament, instead of throwing themselves upon the jus-
tice and upon the equity of that House—what course
would they have adopted? Why, certainly, the easy,
obvious course of retaining the Master of the Mint, and
continuing the offices of President of the Board of Trade
and Treasurer of the Navy as they found them, placing
hie Right Hun. Friend (Mr. Herries) in those offices like
his predecessors. If this course had been followed, he
would venture to say that not one word would have been
said about it; but when they had adopted another and
better course, by which they had saved the country 2,2001.
a year—(Hear)—bis Right Hon. Friend (Mr. Huskis-
son), who called so loudly for retrenchment and economy,
complained of it.—(Hear, hear.)—Did his Right Hon.
Friend call this encouragement to Ministers to save where
they saw the possibility of saving? His Right Hon. Friend
seemed to dissent ; but begging his Right Hon. Friend's
pardon, he (Mr. Iluskisson) did assuredly say that
Parliament had declared that these offices should be
united, and that therefore they ought not to hove been se-
porated. No doubt they ought ; but not when it was found
that one of the most diligent, awl talented, and acute public
,servants sunk under the burden of the two offices, and
when the Government saw that they could save the country
2,200/. a year by disuniting the offices.—(Hear, hear.)
-But above all, he would ask whether it was equitable or
just to censure and condemn Ministers for effecting such a
saving when they had not hesitated to give up patronage in
order that they might be able to effect it ?—(Cheers. )
The opinion of the Government was, that under all these
circumstances they were justified in reviewing these two
offices. They haul been guided by a sense of duty in what
they had done ; and whether that might have been done
in some other or better day, still they did not slesei ve the
censure of the House. Their motives ought not to be
condemned ; and perhaps the House would pause before
they condemned the result of those motives, when they
' found that among the accusers of the Government on this
subject no two agreed as to what comae ought to have been
adopted.—(Hear, hear.)—One of them bad said, " How
could we expect that a Treasurer of the Navy could per-
form the duties of his office and attend also the Wexford
committee ?" But, let him ask in reply, whether it WAS
not still more unreasonable to expect that an individual,
who was both Treasurer of the Navy and President of the
Board of Trade, could perform the duties of those two
offices and attend the Wexford Committee besides.—
(Hear.)—He implored the House before they Caine to a
vote on this subject, to listen to the opinions which had
been expressed upon it by committers of their own. From
1781, to the present time, there bad been various inquiries
by means of commissioners and committees, into this
office. No one of those commissions or committees
had ever recommended the abolition of the office.—
Many had complained of the ditties of the office
being performed by deputy, and recommended that
it should be made a separate and substantive office ;
that one individual might attend exclusively to the
duties of it. In 1918, the Finance Committee reported
that they thought the salary too large; they recommended
that it should be reduced on future appointments, and
placed, as to emoluments, on a level with the Paymaster
of the Forc..e. The same Committee intimated that the
salary mielat be reduced to 3,000/. a year. Now what
had the Goverment done on the present occasion? Had
they adopted the recommendation of this Committee?
No, they had gone fir beyond it ; and, instead of reducing
the salary to 3,0001. a-year, they had reduced it to 2,000/.
a-year, and they had placed the office on the same footing
with that of Paymaster of the Forces.—(Cheers.)—Now
the House might think this salary too great,—they might
reduce it,—but a sense of equity and justice must prevent
the imposition of the censure now proposed.—(Hear.)—
If not, these reports of Committees were not beacons to
warn a Government from danger, but they were false
lights that lured them to their ruin.—(cheers.)—Away,
then, with Reports of Committees; let us have no more
if such were to be the consequences of them.—(Chetrs.)
—Reports of Committees, however, had hitherto i etet
reckoned the highest authorities they had. Let bins now
look to lesser authorities : and here, allow him to sly,
that, though he haul had some reason to expect opposition
from his Right Hon. Friend (Mr. Huskisson), the count,
which hie Right Hos. Friend had taken upon the present
occasion had filled him with astonishment. His Right
Hon. Friend had told them that the offices ought to he
still united, and hail blamed the Government for attend-
ing to the opinions of Lord Bathurst, whom his Right
Hon. 'Friend called the Nestor of the Cabinet ; and to
the opinions of Mr. Rose, which opinions were given in
1807. But, with the leave of his Right Hon. Friend,
he would refer to later authorities. His Right Hon.
Friend had said that he was the only Member of the
House who had held the two offices of President of the
Board of Trade and Treasurer of the Navy ; and that the
House, he was sure, had too much confidence in him to
suppose that lie would have held two offices which were
inminpatible with each other. Now this it was which
astonished him (Mr. Peel); for it happened to be upon
a dilate on this very subject that his Right Hon. Friend
haul appeared in the character of Captain Macheath,
saying--
__ _ 1

" How happy could I be with either
" Were t'other dear charmer away !"

. •
—(Hear and laughter.)—Ou the 7th of April, I Sa, Mr.
Huskisson said—[Here the Right Hon. Gentleman read
the following extracts : •
" He also was reliev from the necessity of saying any thing
relative to what some gentlemen called an useless office,—the
Treasurership of the Navy. After what had been stated by his
Right Hon. Frießd near him, and by the Right Hon. Gentleman
opposite, it was scarcely necessary to add that the business of
that department hail very considerably increased, as well as the
importance of the duties Connected with it, since the transfer to
it of the management of seamen's wills. It was quite erroneous
to suppose that the business of that offiee was a mere matter of
paying money. So far from that, the Treasurer of the Navy was
called on to exercise his discretion in the instance of every de-
mand made on him for money. He was obliged. to sift the grounds
of each claim, and to decide on the merits of the applicant.—
With so many branches of public duty to be'performed, the Rank
could not be expected to execute them, or to exercise any disCre,
tion on the different cases submitted to the consideration of who,
ever might be placed in the superintendence of that department.
Whether from nis not having that capacity of mind which ilia
discharge of such duties undoubtedly required, or from what- '
ever othercause, he confessed he did feel considerable hardship
arising out of the union of the two offices of President of the
Board of Trade and Treasurer of the Navy. He felt not only
the difficulty attendant upon a due discharge of the duties of
both, but the anxiety wh:ch proceeded from the great pecuniary
responsibility which attached to one of those offices; the weight
of which was, in no considerable degree, augmented by, the
duties wising from the frequent complaints from she Navy_
office, the Victualling-office,
and other departments of the public
service connected with it. He declared that, united as those
offices were in him, he could not satisfy his mind that the duties
of the Treasurershipof the Navy were, so far as lie was
whatcon_
crrn
fsad fallen from the Right lion. Gentleman,
with refercence to whether or not he had time enotich to discharge
the duties of both employments, he certainly Judd not reply
that he had not time enough ; but he could most truly declare
ed
answerdul y
taon c 1 adequately performed." • ♦ • •
th
withat whatevert:,hich h thiocua ;islet
eitvenr-i:
codwuitnygo,performed.
Beyond ought to notb
the duties of both effices with that satisfaction to his own feelings
Beyond question, the country was fully ent:tled to his best set

vices, and to all his services ; but, so long as he remained unable
to nivest himself of the feelings to which he had adverted, he
was convinced that it was any thing rather than a public service
to continue in possession of both offices without being able ade-
quately to discharge the duties attached to them." • • a
" The Right Hon. Gentleman opposite had told the Committee,
that when he held that office he contrived to do other duties of a
public nature. Doubtless, a man ofhis powers and diligence was
capable of holding such an employment with advantage to the
public, and also to discharge other duties of importance ; but
this could not be accepted as a proof that the burdensome duties
at the Board of Trade-were compatible with those at th 4avy-
office The further consideration of this question he would now
leave in the hands of the House, so far as he was personally con-
cz,rned."—Crhese passages were received with cries of" Hear,"
and laughter.)

Now it was from a sincere belief that this was a correct
account of the two offices, and the confirmation of this be-
lief by what had happened to his Right Hon. Friend, Mt..
V. Fitzgerald, that the Government had thought it better
to unite the offs 'es of Matter of the Mint with that of Pre-
sident of the Board of Trade, and make the Treasurer of
the Navy a separate office. They thought further that as
his Right Hon. Friend (Mr. Ilerries) near him was le reed
in the duties of Master of the Mint, such a measure wound
not be liable to the objection of putting the labour of two
new offices upon one individual.--(Hear, hear.)—But his
Right Hon. Friend (Mr. Huskisson) had proceeded upon
the mistaken supposition that what the Government had
done on this subject was the same which it was proposed to
do in 1826, when the House thought that the two officea
should be continued in one person. What seas proposed
in 1826 nil, to add 3,000/. a-year to the public saps uses ;
what the Government had done now was to save the public
2,200/. a-year—(hear)—and though still it might be ar-
gued that the House had expressed the opinion that the
two offices should not he separated, yet it must not be for-
gotten that the opinion was founded on eonsideratiens of
economy, and only on considerations of economy.—( I Tear,
hear.)—These considerations, far from bein'i lost sight of
in the present arrangement, bed been strictly observed, and
he could not bring himself to believe that the House would
censure Ministers for departing from . the views of the
House, when those views were founded only on motives of
economy, and when, by so departing from those views of
the House, the Government had saved the country 2,200/.
a-year. As to the details connected with this office of
Treasurer of the Navy, he respectfully but decidedly refused
to enter into them. The House was to judge of the mo-
tives of the Government, and whstever might be the poli-
tical feelings and political resentments of Hon. Members,
sure he was that both must yield to the dictates of equity
and justice. What had been the general conduct of this Go-
vernment, of the Duke of Wellington's Government, upon
oththe
detonation like the present ? Why, they haul heard from
eSCUGbiOeVeetrilorftf eretrenchmentbaenydi
visited
, that
the great advocate of economy, the Hon. Member for
cteodn owiniyth ei t;) f ofe oanl-i
Montruse (Mr. Hume), that this Government ICA shown
a greater desire to economise than any Government he had
ever seen. He (Mr. Hume) had thought, indeed, that
the present Government did not go far enough, but such
was the opinion which he had expressed of this Govern-
ment in reference to preceding Government.. With
such a character from a political opponent, and from
such a political opponent, how could any one support the
justice to the Han. Member for Montrose, because posterity
present proposition? He believed that posterity would do
would judge of that Hun. Member's motives; and, how-
ever persevering and annoying his opposition might be, no
one would doubt them. The Hon. Bart. opposite (the Mem-
ber fur Westminster) had told them that it was expedient to
reduce the influence of Government in that House. Upon
this point the Hon. Baronet had no doubt a right to argue
upon his own views of what the amount of that influence
ought to be, but when the Hon. Baronet talked of other
and better times in which that influence was less, it was
material to see how the fact stood. The House hid lately
called for information on this subject. They had called
for is return of the number of Members of Parliament who
held offices, places, or pensions, in the first Sessions of the
reign of George the First, George the Second, mid George
the Fourth. Now he would take the Hon. Baronet to
have stated fairly that there were fifty or sixty Members of
that House at present holding offices under the Cz,:trn, aed
from which they were removable at will ; but let the
House hear how it was situated in this respect in those
" happier days" of less influence, to which he lend
In the first Session of the reign of George I. the number
of Members in the House holding offices at the pleasure of
the Crown was 271. In the first Session of the reign of
George 11., there were 257 Members holding such officee.
Now, it might probably be said, that there was at that.
time some skilful division of offices, by which the business
or emoluments of one might have been divided between
three or four Members, but no such thing. Besidee pros
viding for that number, the Government, it wouthl scum,
had offices to spare, for he found that, in the persons of
some Members several offices were united, and that, too,
in a manner which required some dexterity in the party to
show his competency to fill them. For instance, Ile proved,
one gentleman held at the same time the offices of Vice-
Treasurer of Ireland, Lord Warden of the Stannaries, Comp-
troller of the Household, and Governor of St. Mawes. He
found another gentleman in that Parliament, Mr. Crag,ga,
who united in his person the offices of Secretary of State,
Secretary at War, Clerk of the Ordnance Deliveries, and
a Lord of Trade. Another gentleman held at the same time
the offices of a Secretary of State, a Lord of the Treasury, a
Comptroller of the Household, and Ambassador to Spain.—
(Hear, and a laugh.)—This too, be it recollected, was at
a time when there were oqy 558 members, so that the
number of placemen bore at that time a much larger pro-
m-
portion to the other members of the House than they
would have done at present, there being now 658 me
hers. The Ir:ttli Parliament was then a separate body,
and it was fair to infer that there was a proportionate
number of officers to create a considerable influence there
also. In the comparison therefore of the influence of the
Crown in the House at those periods and at the present
day, it was quite clear that the balance was, beyond all
question, greater in those happier times to which the Hon.
Baronet had looked back as days of little Government in-
fluence in the House. But that was less to the question
than the conduct of the Duke of Wellington's Government
as to reductions in the present day. It was but justice to
his Noble Friend te state, that no Minister lead ever up.
plied himself more assiduously to tire work cf economy Etta
reduction, wherever it could be fairly effected. His (Mr.
Peel's) Hon. Friend, the Secretary to the Treasury, hal
stated on a former evening what were the reductions
which haul been made in the several public departmunti.
The whole of the last summer had been employed by
Ministers in this way. Into every department of the State
in every office held by a person hearing the rank of a gentle.
man, an inquiry was made to see how far reductions could
be made, and they were made as far as was practicable.
So that, in fact, it might be said that Government had
mortgaged its patronage for several years to come, But
he would ask whether his Noble Friend at the head of the
Government had supplied this diminution of patronage by
any lavish expenditure of public homnara Upon inquiry it
would be found, that in no one mate had he conferred any
civil honours since his accession to office. In the days of
Mr. Pitt, perhaps, a different course might have been
found necessary. Bit he was mistaken in saying "in no
one instance ;' there were some few execrations—.one or
two perhaps—but they were not cases in which any in-
fluence could be exercised over that House. His Nohlo
Friend had, with those excentiuna, never felt it necessary
to recommend the exercise of the prerogative of the Cruwa
in that respect; not that he undervalued that patronage,
but that he had not found it necessary for the purposes of
Government as it was in former adnainistrations. The
present administration looked for support to public opinion
—(Cheers)—and they felt that relying open that, and
steadily pursuing that coertue which, they considered toast
likely to deserve it, the influence of such patronage might
be dispensed with,—,(Cheera.)—Greatly indeed should he
be disappointed if the vote of that evening should convince
biro that they were mistaken in such reliance, and that
they required such influenee. Tits House would nu doubt;
exercise its own discretion as to filet motion before it, and
if, after what they had alreedy done, it should think pro-
per to adopt the protensitrou of the Hon. Baronet, he
would bow with eulomesion, but they would still have the
satisfaction of thinking that they had not deserved the
cesuenre.—(Hear, hear.)—But he roust observe that if
they passed a censure on that Government which luei
done most in the way of ecateame and retrenchment, they
would hold out to teeie successors the fully of relying on
public opinions, in lieu of that patronage which other ade
ministrations had so profusely exercised.—(Cheers.)
Sir GEQ. WARRENDER rose amidst cries of " Ques-
tion," which rendered his few remarks very inaudible in
the gallery. Ha was understood to support the ,notion.,
Mr. LABOUCHERE said that he could not support a
motion which implied a censure upon Ministers who, ho
adm,ttFd, hard dome much in the way of reduction; at the
same tune he admitted that a more economical coulee, might
abe adopted. They were going on in extravagance whick
ought to ho checked, atel he would show hie sense of this
will et they came to discuss the Navy Estimates.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM did not reply.
Tic House then divided, when there appeared—.
Furon theou
rr erseoltttittt n
to, 900,e I
GalleryA gain Against
\v iet ,
foundlBB the uMajority,lse OdBi
s.
posing of die Mutiny Bill and Marine Mutiny Bill, which
were read a third time and passed.
On the motion of Lord Viscount aostrEnt, a Sleet
Conunittee wa* appointed to inquire into the state of the
roads between London and Edinburgh, and London and
Portpet rick.

The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and
tai; Hou94 a(V)urn4•4l at 14 Quarter tq Two osciock.

THE ODDINGLEY MURDERS.

(Concluded from The Sun of yesterday.)

[At the conclusion of the Rev. Mr. Clifton's evidence.
the confession of Clewes was put in and read. As thi.
has already appeared in the columns of The Sun, we
have not thought it necessary to republish it.]
John Collins—l lire at Bradely, in this county; I
lived with Mr. Clewes on the 24th June, 1806, at Nether-
wood Farm. [l.lere he identified the prisoner.] Ire-
member the death of Mr. Parker ; I knew Richard Hem-
ming; the last day I saw him with Clewes was on the
Sunday morning before Mr. Parker was killed ; Mr.
Parker.was killed on Tuesday; they were talking in the
Trench wood, on a pathway; when I first saw them the
were standing still ; I walked towards them, and the
move I away; I saw Clewes about an hour and a half
after, near the house; I saw Hemming at the farm a time
or two before, during the preceding fourteen days ; Hem-
ming did not work for Clewes; I remember that about
nine days after Mr. Parker's murder, some merle was put
into the barn ; there are two bays in the barn ; the mule
was put on the bay near which there was a small pool ; I
got the merle ; it was by the direction of Clewes I got the
marls; it was Clewes drew it away; besides myself, there
were—John Clewes, Thomas Hardinge, and Wm. Smith,
upon the farm ; the two first were employed at plough
the day I drew the merle to the barn ; I do not know
where the other was; we drew the merle in two carts;
Thomas Clewes drove one of them ; the reason he gave
me for drawing the marle was, that he wanted to make
the barn and the court-fold level.
William Low—ln 1815, I was at the White Horse
public-house, Silver-street, Worcester ; Clewes, to the
best of my belief, was in company with me there, but he
is considerably altered ; I went with a friend at dinner
time there; we had souse beer, and Clewes drank with
us ; we afterwards had some wine ; our conversation
turned upon the landing of Bonaparte from Elba ; and I
and my friend went out to meet the London mail ; con-
sequently the conversation was very general, about the
landing of Bonaparte ; Clewes said he liked our conversa-
tion. and would join us drinking ; some one observed that
there would be terrible slaughter again between the con-
tending armies ; Clewes remarked that there would not
be half so much fuss about that as there was about the
death of a parson ; some little time before, my friend fell
ioto conversation with him relative to the death of Parker;

it was a very long conversation, and much of it very
painted ; Clewes said more than he was asked, which led
my friend (Fennell) to wink to me to go out, which I
did ; we then went back again, and the conversation was
renewed, and a remark was made th it wherever Flem-
ming might be, sooner or later he would be discovered,
and brought to justice, and hanged for the murder of Mr.
Parker: Clewes's answer was, that he knew better than
that—Hemming would never come to be hanged, for he
was safe enough ; I am sure that I have repeated the con-
tereation as accurately as I can remember.
Croes.examined—l understand that Mr. Fennel is
dead ; I volunteered this conversation by writing to the
Mayor of Worcester; I had never seen Clewes before.
Mr. CUILWOOD announced that this was the case for the
prosecution.
Mr. Serjeant LUDLOW—The case for the prosecution
being finished, he had to submit to his Lordship that tak-
ing every word of the evidence to be true, Clewes was en-
ded to his acquittal. Notwithstanding the anxiety of the
law of England to keep felonies in all criminal prosecutions
from being intermixed, still there were some cases in which
it was impossible to prevent more than one being involved.
This bad been the case in this instance, so that he might
say that Clewes kid not only been tried for the murder of
Hemming, with which the indictment charged him, but
also the murder of Mr. Parker, which otherwise ought
not to have been heard of in this case. What he had now
to contend was, that on the evidence, as it stood, Clewes
was entitled to his acquittal.
Mr, Justice LITTLEDALE—Is not that, now, a question
for the Jury alone to decide?
Mr. Serjeant Lunsow—lf the prosecution had been
able by evidence to contradict the confession of Clewes, no
doubt he might have been convicted; but instead of con-
tradicting it, they had confirmed it ; and he therefore con-
tended for Clewes's acquittal. In points of law, before a
man could be made one of the principals in a charge of
murder, it must be proved that he was present aiding,
comforting, and abetting others to do the deed ; though,
at the same time, there was such a thing as a constructive
presence, as in the case where while one man was com-
mitting a murder, another stood outside the door to keep
watch. In the book which he held in his hand, it was
laid down that if A happened to be present at a murder,
taking no part in it, but at the same time making no at-
tempt to prevent it, or to raise the hue and cry after the
murderer, he was, though highly culpable, not open to the
charge of being a principal in the murder; the authorities
cited in support of this point were Foster, p. 350, and
Hale, 439. MI that Clewes had done, according to the
confession, did not constitute him an eider and abettor;
and if he was not that, then neither could he be a prin.
cipal. In all charges of so grave a nature as the present
it rested with the prosecution to prove every point; and
therefore they were bound to prove that Clewes was
present aiding and abetting. Now what one single tittle
of evidence was there which went to show that, fact?
If they chose to take the case exclusive of Clewes's
confession, there was nothing from which the in-
ference could be raised that he was even present at
the scene. The most that the remainder of the evi-
dence went to chew was that there had been some vague
expressions made use of by Clewes, which might throw
some slight sort of suspicion upon him. What did the
confession go to show? Why that Clewes was exactly in
the state contemplated by the Law Authorities that he had
cited. He was present, it was true, when the murder of
Hemming took place; but so far from being an eider and
abettor, he haul been inveigled by Captain Evans into being
present at all ; and certainly, when he bad resolved to com-
ply with that wish, he had not in the least contemplated
the catastrophe that had been forced upon him. He (Mr.
Serjeant Ludlow) therefore thought that the circumstances
of this case were exactly parallel to those contemplated by
Mr. Justice Fowler and Lord Hale; and he therefore con-
fidently applied to his Lordship to direct an acquittal.
Mr. Justice .LITTLICDALE decided that the case ought to
go to a Jury without hearing Counsel in reply.
The prisoner declined saying anything in his own de-
fence. He would leave all to his Counsel.
His &minitr then proceeded to charge the Jury. He
said the evidence in this case is now closed. It is a charge
of wilful murder against Thomas Clewes, the prisoner at
the bar. He is accused of having been present, aiding,
abetting, and assisting Samuel Evans and Joseph Teylor
in the murder of one Richard Hemming. The circum-
stances of this case, Gentlemen, have strongly excited the
public attention. The discovery of this murder, so long
concealed, and now so strangely brought to light, is one of
those extraordinary incidents which now and then occur
in human affairs. I do not, therefore, wonder that it
should have excited a strong sensation amongst all ranks
and classes in this county. Gentlemen, in the course of
the trial, a great deal of evidence has been given about the
death of Mr. Parker. It appeared he was not upon the
best terms with his parishioners. Several of them were
heard to use expressions of deadly hatred towards him.—
Amongst those was the prisoner at the bar, who, it is to
be observed, has been proved to have 4:id, on the very
day of Mr. Parker's death, that lie hoped to find a dead
parson at home before him, Now the death of Mr. Per
ker has been inquired into, because it has something to
do with that of Hemming. But you have only to con-
cern yourselves with as much of these details as bear
upon the question respecting the guilt or innocence
of Clewes. There is certainly a clear case of the
murder of Parker, and there is a very great proba-
bility that Hemming was the murderer. But you
will naturally ask what has this to do with . Hem-
ming being murdered by somebody else ? Well, Gentlemen,
it is connected with it after this manner :—There
strong presumption that Hemming was hired by some
persons to murder Mr. Parker ; and as there was immee
diately a hue and cry raised against the maxi, it certainly
was of vital importance to these persons to get h;ria out of
the way, since, if he were arrested, he might in all proba-
bility he led to inform, and their lives would be compro-
mised. But, Gentlemen, we have in the first place to in-
quire if Hemming was murdered at all. Of this I think
there can be no doubt, We find that in the December of
1829 a barn was pulled down, in which human bones were
discovered. A regular search way in consequence made,
and you have heard Mr, Pierpoint, the sorgeon, state, that
be found the bones of a'perfezt skeleton-e-lie discovered
the height of this skeleton, and found with the body a
knife, a rule, 4 pair of shoes, and several other things,
which were produced. Some of these articles were re,
atackable, and were identified by his wife. His skull was
fractured—battered is pieces; therefore, there can be no
doubt that he was murdered. Now, that Clewes was
desirous that some mischief should bp done to Mr.
Parker is certain, and that he entertained thia feeling
in common with Captain Evans, is, I.think, equally
clear ; but even though I should own that Clewes
was an accessary before the fact, in the murder of
Mr. Parker, it does not follow that because Captain
Era!l wished to murder Hemming, I should allow that
(;Mitts participated in this desire. You will observe
that, in the evidence before you, the confession of Clewes
terms the leading feature. In this he confesses himaelf. a

criminal amenable to the law—he confesses himself an
accessary after the fact ; but it does not seem that he
knew any thing of the intention of murdering Hemming
until the fatal blow was struck ; and, gentlemen, the rule
id law is, that when you take a criminal's confession, you
must take the whole as it stands, unless you have evidence
to contradict any part of it, or evidence to supply its de-
ficiencies. Gentlemen, it would hardly appear to me, by
the words of this confession, that there was any participa-
-6(11 upon the part of Clewes in the design of Captain
Evans to murder Hemming. In order to arrive at this
conclusion, you must supply some evidence ; but where
is it to be procured? It is said that some male was
brought by Clewes to this barn, iu which the body was
buried. This, gentlemen, would be good evidence to make
him an accessary before the fact; but it is not sufficient
to implicate him as a pr.ucip.,l. With respect to the con-
fession, yi,u will remark that it was made with great de-
liberati tn. He, in the first instaece, made a confession
to Mr. Clifton, of which we know nothing—of which
the particulars never were divulged; and after this, Mr.
Clifton wrote in his behalf to the Secretary of State, and
receiving an unfavourable answer, he afterwards told limo
in the strongest language he could use, that there was no
hope of any pardon, or favour, or mercy towards him
from his Majesty's Government. Still, notwithstand-
ing this, lie (Clewes) sends for the Coroner, and
makes another t onfession; and therefore it is to be con-

eluded this confession was voluntary; and it ought to be

accepted in evidence. Now, gentlemen, though we have
very decisive proof that Clewes was an accessary after the
fact, in the murder of Hemming, we have not, perhaps,
sufficient evidence to show that he was engaged in it as a
principal. Parker was murdered—there is considerable
reason to think—by Hemming. The prisoner was aware
that something wicked was going on with respect to
Parker—he was also cognizant of the murder of Hem-
ming—and his statement, thAt " Hemming was safe
enough, and would never come to be hanged," was only
confirmatory of what he said in his confession. Clewes
knewa greatdeal about Mr. Parker's murder—this is quite
clear ; but you have nothing to do with this farther than
it bears upon the case before you. You are to presume
that there was no participation in the actual murder on
the part of Clewes, as there is no evidence to ccntradict
his confession and prove that he was in any degree court-
selling or assisting. Gentlemen of the Jury, the case is
before you. If you think he was present at the murder
of Hemming, aiding, abetting and assisting the man-who
struck the blow, you will, of course, find him guilty of
the charge on which he is indicted ; but, remember, you
are to take the evidence altogether, and dismiss from your
minds everything you may have heard upon the subject,
before this day, and come to a conclusion as if you had
never previously thought upon it. The whole question
rests upon the confession. There are not, in my opinion,
sufficient grounds fur thinking that Clewes has made a
false statement.

The Jury then retired for a few moments, and brough
a verdict of Guilty as accessory after the fact,

The Juncz informed them this verdict could not be re-
ceived, as the prisoner was indicted not as accessary after
the fact, but as principal.
The Jury again retired, and almost immediately returned
a verdict of Not Guilty. It was received with some shout-
ing and clapping of hands from the hall where the popu-
lace were assembled.

Mr. CAMPBELL said, that as he had heard from his
Learned Friends who conducted the prosecution that it
was not their intention to offer any evidence against the
parties to be arraigned on the Coroner's Inquisition, he
would not of course trouble the Court with what he had
to offer in opposition to this indictment.
Banks, Barnett, and Clewes, were then arraigned upon
the indictment to which we have alluded, and no evidence
being offered against them, they were all three declared
Not Guilty.

Mr. CAMPBELL then applied for the prisoners' discharge
from the consequences of the first indictment (that touch-
ing the murder of Mr. Parker), to which it will be re-
membered they refused to plead, and a discussion took
place between his Lordship and the Counsel for the pri-
soners, as to the mode in which this could be effected.
The prisoners could not be discharged by proclamation;
and his Lordship objected to quashing the indictment,
stating that it was too summary a proceeding, and that
the regular practice would be for the prisoners to
demur to the indictment, if it were faulty upon the face
of it. Mr. Campbell thought, that though it was in the
power of the Judge to make the prisoners declare their
option of pleading or not pleading to the indictment, yet
that he had not the right of inflicting the peine forte et
dare on them, of leaving the consequences of this indict-
ment hanging over their heads from Assize to Assize. It
was finally determined by his Lordship that the prisoners
should be discharged on the following morning, by a spe-
cial order of the Court, declaring that the prisoners
should not be brought again before it, except by a Judge's
order. He sugge-ted that an application might be made
to quash the indictment next Assizes. The case was a
new one ; and he might, meantime, consult the other
Judges, as to the manner in which the prisoners were to
be freed from the consequences of the indictment.
As an instance of the strange way in which the human
feelings will be sometimes affected by the slightest ills,
after sustaining the most terrible, we may remark that
Banks, who had borne himself all day with an air of en-
tire firmness, now, when he learned that his liberation was
to be delayed for a few hours, burst into tears.
A strange revulsion, by the bye, seemed to have taken
place in popular feelings on this subject. The acquittal
of Cleves was received, as we have said, with applause;
and Banks and Barnett, who were persons of a far higher
order, might to all appearance have counted a friend or
wellwisher in the person of every second man in Court.

FURTHER PARTICULARS.-....FRIDAY AFTERNOON.

At the close of the trial the parties accused of being
concerned in the Oddingley murders were re-conveyed to
prison, but with an understanding that they were to be
discharged the following morning. Annexed is a copy of
the record made in this case :

" Thomas Clewes, John Barnett, and George Banks,
standing indicted as accessories to a murder, but the prin-
cipal felon not having been tried, and being now dead,
and the prisoners therefore declining to plead, they are to
be discharged."
It will be seen from the above that the circumstances
under which they are liberated are peculiar. The in-
dictment charging the offence still exists, and the charge
may at any time be brought to trial should they see fit to
come forward and challenge inquiry by pleading " Not
guilty." This, however, they are not likely to do, and
without it they are sheltered by the forms of law.

Banks and Barnett, after an interview with several of
the magistrates, in which they were advised to quit the
town quietly, and as early as they could, were discharged
about eleven o'clock this morning. They had to pass out
of the prison through the gateway, above which the gallows
was then fixed on which Michael Toll was about to suffer
fcr murder. Several friends attended to receive them, in
whose ccroppy it was generally understood they imme-
diately left the town.
Clewes, at his own request, as he did not like to face the
crowd which was then collecting to witness the approach-
ing execution, was allowed to remain till the evening.

EXECUTION OF MICHAEL TOLL, FOR MURDER.

On Friday, at noon, the dreadful sentenceof the law was
carried into effect on the top of the platform of the gate-
way
of Worcester gaol, on the body of Michael Toll, con-
victaa of murdering a woman named Ann Cook with whom
he cohabited, by throwing her down a coal-pit.
The demeanour of the man since his conviction, was
becoming, neither displaying excess of timidity, not un-
becoming confidence; he looked forward to his approaching
fate with calmness, and declared to his attendants that lie
was perfectly happy—that he was never happier in his
life. He stated hunasli to be a native of Newry, in Ireland,
and that his friends were respectable. Ile was a Roman
,catholic, and consequently declined receiving spiritual
&Isla-epee from the chaplain of the gaol, but was attended
by the Rev. air. Trimmer.
On the arrival or the fatal hour being intimated to him,
he walked forward with a firm step, and ou reaching the
foot of the gallows, remained for nearly tcn minutes joining
in the prayers read by the Rev. Mr. Trimmer. He then
quietly rescgned himself into the hands of the executioner,
and having been pinioned, ascended the seaffold. The
arrangements there being completed, the drop fell, and in
less than a minute life was extinct.
It does nut appear that he made any conf‘ssion beyond
the simple declaration to a fellow prisoner, that his sentence
was a just one. Whatever ccinmunication he may have
made to the Rev. Mr. Trimmer must remain unknown, as
that Rev. Gentleman states it to be against the canons of
hir ,church to disclose the secrets of the confessional.
According to the custom of the gaol, the prisoners were
drawn up in the yard: farming the gallows, that they might
witness the execution. liGvi fa; such a practice is likely
to be productive of good may be fairly questioned,
There was a considerable crowd, as is usual upon these
ocpsions, collected.

THE VACAIIT SERJ4ANTCY.-Mr. NORTH
is to be the new Serjeant, and in consiNuence of his ac-
ceptance of the office, the Learned Gentleman vacates his
seat for Melbourne Port. Mr. GooLo, as a matter of
course, is now First Serjeant.—Dublin Morn. Register

COVENT-GARDEN THEATRICAL FUND

feelings, would excuse him from making further observa-
tion.—Mr. Kenible delivered this speech with visible emo-
tion, which was properly appreciated by the company, and
at its conclusion enthusiastically applauded.

Duet—Messrs. Stansbury and Bedford—" Little Pigs."
Toast—" The Arts snd Sciences."

Mr. Sum in a neat speech, eulogised the memory of
the late Sir Thomas Lawrence, whose loss, he said, had
left a chasm in the arts not to be supplied ; but not only
in the pictorial art, he was the friend of the drama,
and po.s.;ssed extraordinary histrionic talent.; and
if he had directed his energies to that profession he would
have been as prominent on the stage as he was at the Royal
Academy. Participating in the feelings he evinced for
the stage, it would be his pride to follow him.
Song, Mr. Sinclair—" Hey the bonny breast knots."—Sweetly
sung and encored.
After paying a high compliment to the talents of Mr.
Shee, his Royal HighneAs proposed " The French
Drama," two of the most talented members of which
were then in the room, MM. Potier and Laporte.
M. LAPORTE, in returning thanks, remarked, that two
great nations, divided by war and national prejudices, had
been united by the Arts. This argued much in fa-
vour of the Drama. He would avail himself of an
expression used by the Royal Chairman, that theatrical
representations were highly useful in a civilized country,
and it was extremely gratifying that the mutual intercourse
between two countries was greatly facilitated by the inter-
course of talent in that profession of which be was a
humble member. He would not take up any more of their
time, which he knew would be much more pleasantly em-
ployed than in hearing an English oration from him. He
begged, on behalf of himself and his Gallic friends, to re-
turn thanks for the great kindness they had experienced
from the British public.
_ _

On the health of the Stewards being proposed, Mr.
ABBOTT returned thanks in a clever speech, and about
half-past eleven his Royal Highness quitted the chair,
leaving a numerous party to prolong the pleasures of this
very agreeable evening.