The Sun.
London, England, 1830-05-04 00:00:00

WATERLOO-BRIDGE.

Sir J. YORKE, as he saw the Noble Lord who
acteel as Chief Commissioner of Woods and Forests
in iris place, and as he was willing to give that
Noble Lord every information in his power, would
now give notice that on Thursday next he would
present a petition, praying the House to give every
facility to the Waterloo-bridge Committee to make
a road from the north abutment of Waterloo-bridge
to Tottenham-court-road.

Sir E. KNATCHBULL presented a petition from
Higher Orton, and seven other parishes in Kent,
complaining of distress.
Sir E. KNATCHBULL presented a petition
from the licensed victuallers of Ashford, and two
other places, against the Beer Bill.
Colonel BRAMSTON presented two petitions
from Licensed Victuallers in Essex, against the
Beer Bill,
Mr. PORTMAN asked whether it was the in-
tention of Government to prevent beer sold by per-
sons who might take out excise licences under the
provisions of the Bill before the House from being
drank on the premises where it was sold ?
Mr. DAWSON said, that in the absence of some
of his colleagues who could more properly have
answered the question of the Honourable Member,
he had no hesitation in declaring that it certainly
was the intention of Government to act upon the
recommendation of the Committee, and to permit
beer to be co►►sumed on the premises where it should
be sold.—(Cheers.)
After a few words from Mr. HEATTICOTE, Mr.
JJENETT, Mr. DAWSON, and Mr. PORTMAN,
Mr. BRIGHT said that lie wished to know
whether it was the intention of Government to
introduce a separate Bill to repeal the beer duty.
Mr. DAWSON said that such was the intention
of Government.

Captain NVEMYSS presented five petitions from
the county of Forfar, against the proposed increase
of the duty on British spirits.

&Turin MAITLANii presented a petition, of a
similar natnre, from the county of Haddington, and
Mr.W.DUNDAS four others, to the like effect,
from the city of Edinburgh.
Mr. BA STAR I ) presented a petition from Stone.
house against the Beer Bill.
Mr. BURRELL presented a similar petition from
certain victuallers at Brighton.
Lerd STANLEY presented several petitions from
victuallers in various parts of Lancashire, against
the Beer Bill. He also presented a petition from
Ashton-under-Line, against the truck-system.
Mr. BRIGHT supported the petition.
After a few words from Mr. HU➢IE, Mr. CAREW,
and Mr.o' CONNELL, the petition was laid on the table.
Lord STANLEY presented a petition from cer-
tain owners of stage-coaches, calling on Parliament
either to repeal the Act by which licenses are required
to be taken out by stage-coach proprietors, or to ex-
tend its provisions to carriages carrying passengers

or goods for hire, and moved by steam. He wished
to know whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer
intended to introduce any provision with respect to
this subject ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
said, that it was his intention to propose a measure
by which stage-coaches, whether drawn by horses or
impelled by steam, would be placed on an equality.
The petition was ordered to be printed.

Mr. MUNDY presented d petition from many
respectable persons residing in the county of Derby
on the subject of the beer trade. They prayed the
House to adopt some means of preventing what
they feared would be the effect of passing one of the
clauses of the Beer Bill in the state in which it now
stood; namely, the unlimited tippling of beer in
every house where it was sold.
Mr. EGERTON presented a petition from Stock-
port, in the county palatine of Chester, expressing
their disapprobation of the proposed abolition of the
civil jurisdiction of the local courts in that county.
They stated that the subject did not seem to be
fully understood, and they prayed for an inquiry be-

fore any alteration was made. The Hon. Member
stated that the opinion of the county was strongly
opposed to the alterations now contemplated.
Mr. EGERTON presented a petition from the
same place, against the East India monopoly.
Mr. CUR I'EIS presented a petition from certain
proprietors of public-houses in the county of Kent
against the Beer Bill.
Mr. HODSON presented a petition from the in-
habitants of Wigan, in Lancashire, praying for the
repeal of the duties on beer.
Mr. LIDDELL presented a petition from New-
castle-uplu-Tyne, praying for a repeal of that duty
known by the name of the Richmond Shilling,which
were only levied on coals shipped in the Tyne. On
the motion of the Hon. Member, the petition was
referred to the Committee on the Coal Bill.

Mr. LII)DELL presented a petition from North
Shields agaimt that part of the present Bill rela!ing
to the laws on forgery which retained, in some cases,
the punishment of death—a provision, which, in
their opinion would only tend to the increase of
crime.

Sir J. MACINTOSH believed, indeed he knew,
that that petition would be followed by many others,
expressing the same opinion, and he now begged
leave to give notice, that if the Forgery Bill should
be read a second time that day se'nnight, he or
some one of his friends would move on that occa-
sion, that it be an instruction to the Committee to
receive such mitigatory amendments as would bring
the Bill nearer the standard of efficient justice. As
lie was then in possession of the House, lie would
take the opportunity of observing that he had not
received any information authorising him to post-
pone the motion respecting Madras, of which he
had given notice for Wednesday. If he could be
allowed two or three hours for that discussion on
any other night in the week, he should be most
happy to avail himself of the opportunity of then
discussing it ; but unless that short time could be
afforded him, he must, however unpopular the day
was, bring it before the House on Wednesday.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER

was in such a situation as not to be able to pro-
nounce any opinion as to the possibility of affording
the Right Hon. Gentleman the time required. He
would, however, take the opportunity of considering
the matter, and of giving the Right Hon. Gentle-
man some information in the course of the evening.
Mr. HUME moved for returns relating to the
number of Professors at the Royal Military Aca-
demy at Woolwich, and for other information con-
nected with the same subject.

Mr. HUNIE moved for returns of articles im-
ported into this country from places eastward of the
Cape of Good Hope.
Mr. HUME moved for returns relative to the
Courts of Scotland.

Mr. lIUME presented a petition from the ship-
owners, merchants, and other inhabitants of Aber-
deen, complaining of the proposed removal of the
Courts of Admiralty in Scotland, and praying that
the House would not destroy any of the local juris-
dictions in that country.
Mr. HUNIE presented a petition from two indi-
viduals, George and William Avery, praying for the
removal of the duty on beer.
Mr. DENISON presented a petition from Epsom,
against that part of the Beer Bill which allowed of
unlimited consumption of beer without respect to
the character of the house in which it was con-
sumed, and praying that the House would prevent
the consumption of beer on the premises on which
it was sold, without some restrictions of the kind
now existing.
Sir W. GUISE presented a petition from the
proprietors of public-houses in Stroud, against the
New Licensing Bill.
Mr. SLANEY could not let this petition pass
without observing, that if the principles it advocated
were adopted, a great part of the advantages pro-
posed by the new regulations would be lost.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
had intended to leave the trade free, at least to leave

it without restrictions as to drinking beer on the
premises. He should be glad, however, when the
Bill was in Committee, to hear any mode by which
he could make his Bill palatable to the opinions,
providing that these did not infringe the general
p inciples of the measure.
Lord MILTON thought that the Right Hon.
Gentleman was desirous of the taking one step with-
out maturely considering what might be the result
of it.

Sir W. GUISE presented two petitions on the
law against forgery—one from Stroud, and the other
from Nailsworth. Also, a petition from a place in
Gloucestershire, complaining of distress.
Mr. LITTLETON presented a petition from the
licensed victuallers of Huntingdon, and from thefree-
holders of the same town, against the Beer Bill.
Also, petitions from Colebrook Dale, Wellington,
and the mining district of Shropshire, against the
truck system.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
expressed his hope that, as it was now considerably
past seven o'clock, the further presentation of peti-
tions might be postponed, in order that the House
might resole 9 itself into a Committee of Supply.
Mr. WYNN and Mr. S. RICE concurred in this
suggestion.
Sir J. NEWPORT hoped to be allowed to give
notice that, Ns h en e ver the subject of taxes was
brought forward, he should move for the total re-
peal of the legacy duty, as applied to the nearest
of kin, and for the repeal of half the duty in cer-
tain other cases. In order to counterbalance the
loss thus occasioned to the Revenue, he should pro-
pose to increase the tax upon powers of attorney for
the receipt of dividends and rents, regulated by the
amount, and to make it necessary to renew them at
the end of three years.
Mr. BRIGHT wished to withdraw his pending
motion regarding the French claims.
Mr. HUSKISSON adverted to the arrear of
business, and to his motion standing for to-morrow,
wnich he was anxious to submit on as early a day as
possible.
Mr. O'CONNELL was willing to defer his mo-
tion, so as not to stand in the way of the Right
Hon. Gentleman; at the same time he could not
avoid expressing his regret at the decided sentiment
prevailing in the House, to vote supplies without
listening first to the complaints and grievances of
the people. He alluded particularly to the inten-
tion of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to increase

1 taxation on that impot-e.;sl-0,(1 country—lreland.
lie gave notice that on Weduesday next he would
move for the depositions of the Judge's notes on
the trial of the Doneraile Conspiracy, and the trial
of Edmund Connors.
After a few observat;ons frora the CHANCELLOR
of the EXCHEQUER, Mr. LECH KECK, and Mr.
HuslussoN, it was agreed that the further pre-
‘entution of petitions should be postponed till to-
morrow, on the understanding that those Members
whose names were down on the Speaker's list should
have precedence.
Mr. R. GRANT, up to Saturday morning, had
supposed that he should have been able _to bring on
the second reading of the Bill for the Relief of tha
Jews this night. He was sorry for the necessity of
postponing it, and he wished to know, as matters of
Supply were now to be brought on, whether the
Chancellor of the Exchequer, in the absence of his
Right Hon. Friend, could -name a day certain for
the consideration of the Jew Relief B;ll ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER,
after expressing his disposition to accommodate,
natned Monday, the 17th inst.
Mr. R. GRANT accepted this proposal, and
subsequently fixed the second reading of the Bill for
t hat day.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
would do his best to obtain a day for the discussion
of the motion of the Right Hou. Gentleman (Mr.
Ilushisson) as soon as his Right Hon. Friend (Mr.
Peel) returned to his place.
Mr. HUSKISSON expressed his regret at the
delay and at the cause of it, but he did not fix any
day for his motion.
On the motion of Sir J. NEWPORT, certain ac-
counts were ordered of the sums paid by Arch-
bishops, Bishops, and other Church Dignitaries, for
First Fruits and Tenths.
COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY.

The CHANCELLOR of tke EXCHEQUER
moved that the House resolve itself into a Com-
mittee of Supply.
The question was put that the Speaker leave the
Chair.

Mr. R. GORDON requested those who heard
him to consider whether it would not be a much
wiser course to refer the Estimates to a Select Com.
mittee, by which they might be deliberately eta.
mined, if necessary, with the assistance and explanae
tion of oral evidence. As it might be required of
him to state some case, in order to show the neces-
sity of such a proceeding, he would notice a few of
the items in the Estimates; not because he would
say, ex hi: disce omnes, but because he wished to
show that there was some ground for further inquiry.
He would take the first item of the first page of the
Miscellaneous Estimates—" Public Works"—for
which 32,0001. wire now required, when only
28,0004 were aske(Flast year. Thus, in this happy
year of retrenchment, economy, and relief from
taxation, four thousand pounds more were demanded
than last year. This was not a time to consider what
was advantageous or even what was useful, but
what was necessary ; and the point of absolute ne•
cessity ought always to be established before a single
shilling was voted. An account had been laid
before the Finance Committee of the charge for Public
WTorks for three years-1803, 1827, and 1828.
In 1803 it was £40,000
In 1827 .. 27,000
In 1828 28,000
and yet at this moment the sum was swelled to
32,0001. This was one item on which explanation
ought to be given before a Committee. Another
circumstance deserved notice; a return bad been
made of all houses or apartments occupied at the
public expence us the residences of public officers,
&c., and it amounted to no less a sum than 152,688/.
There was another item, which he thonght the
people would not be grievously dissatisfied to see
explained. Reverting to the head of public work,
he might remark, that our national buildings were
not remarkable for their good taste; it could not be
said that they were ornamental as well as expensive;
in fact, there was not a city of the world which
was so disgraced as the metropolis of this country,
both by the edifices themselves, and the silly cost
at which deformity was purchased. Passing over
the estimates for the Harbours of Portpatrick, Don-
aghadee, and George IV., he would refer briefly to
the expenditure for Windsor Castle. The repairs
had been commenced when what was called a God-
send had been received from Austria, and Ministers
really did not know what to do with the money.
It was resolved, however, to apply part to the build-
ing of churches, and part to the repair of palaces;
and three hundred thousand pounds were set apart
for Windsor Castle. It was more than h;nted that
more than that sum might be expended ; and Lord
Goderich, then Chancellor of the Exchequer, had
said that" nothing that could reasonably be contem•
plated would render a larger sum necessary." When
Lord Farnborough, then Sir C. Long, was asked
how it was possible to controul the outlay, he had
replied that nothing was more easy, as it would be
the duty of the architect to bring his estimate within
a specified sum. What was the result ? The
original estimate of 300,0004 was first increased to
500,0001., and afterwards to 644,0001.; and in
1828, the present Chancellor of the Exchequer had
observed that .50,001. more would be necessary
to complete the undertaking. In 1829, Parlia-
ment was called upon to vote 800,0001. for
the furniture and improvements of Windsor
Castle. They were now called on for 900,0001.,
which was triple the original estimate, though Lord

Goderich told them at the time he made his mqtion
in that House upon the subject that he could not
contemplate the possibility of increase. Did not
that then supply ground for minute and instant in-
quiry by a Committee up stairs ? He believed there
were not many Members in that house who allowed
themselves to think who did not feel the necessity
of an inquiry. He would now come to the third
point—the building of churches in the West Indies.
In 1827, 8,0001. was voted. 1828—annus mire-
bilis—only 2,500/.; in 1829, 5,0001. was granted,
and in 1830, 6,0001. wait proposed to be granted:
that was another case which he conceived called for
inquiry. He now proposed to come to No. 2—the
chficiency of fees. His Hon. Friend the Member
for Aberdeen had often called the attention of the
House to the subject, and the Finance Committee
had also done something, bet not enough In
1827 the fees of the Home Office amounted to
2,oool.—the Foreign Office amounted to 8,000/.—
those of the Colonial to 3,7001.: these items were
also added together and the sum divided. Now, he
thought that an unfair and unjust arrangement, and
one which he conceived required revision, and ought
to come under the consideration of a Committee.
With No. 3 he would allow the Government to do
as they pleased, with one exception—the Refuge
for the Destitute; the charge for that had gradually
increased from 3,0001. to 4,0001. and .5,0001. He
did not quarrel with the Institution, but he objected
to its being supported at the expence of Govern-
ment. The fourth contained a list, not one item of
which ought to be passed over; they were every
one of them deserving of the most serious attention.
lie could not go through all the particulars; dig he
attempt to do so he should only weary the House ;
but he thought that very circumstance afforded
the strongest evidence that a Committee of In-
quiry was demanded. There were the ex-
pellees of captured negroes, and there were the ex-
pellees of Consuls to the new States of South Ame-
rica: to that he should only allude generally; that
system was now placed won a new footing; instead
of being paid as heretofore, by fees, salaries were
given to them—a sum of 30,0001. was demanded.—
Up to 1826 the total amount for Consuls was
49,0001.; it had since been increased, and it was
now three times that amount. How long that sys-
tem would go on it was not for him to determiNe;
but lie thought the statement of the fact, added to
the reasons he had already urged, in favour of a
Committee of Inquiry. He now came to the last
paper; he rejoiced that he bad done-so, and he had
no doubt that the House would rejoice at that cir-
cumstance too.—(Hear, hear.)—No. 5 involved the
question how far the colonies ought to pay their
own expenses; he, therefore, wished rather to dc-

cline entering into that discussion; but tote reasons
of his doing so were the very reasons why a Com-
mittee should be granted. The next point he
should come to was the grant to the Society for
Propagating the Gospel. In 1814 the grant was
3,6001., and from that period to the present it had
gradually increased until the grant now before the
House amounted to 16,182/., and the whole sum
paid during a period of 16 years was not less than
200,000/. for the propagation of Christian know-
ledge:in the colonies. Looking through the whole
of those items it was not to be questioned that they
were such as demanded a Committee of Inquiry.—
Were they without precedents ? On the contrary,
numerous precedents might be found for such a
course. A Committee had been appointed on the
Irish Estimates—why not on the English ? The
case was as strong for the one as for the other. This
he knew, that when the Committee did go into the
Irish Estimates, jobs were discovered of which the
Ministers themselves had not` the slightest notion.
It had been suggested to him not to take the division
on the general question of the appointment of a
Committee; neither did he propose to divide the
House affirmatively or negatively with respect to
particular votes, but when each in succession came
before the Committee he intended to move their
postponement, with a view to the whole being re-
ferred to a Committee up stairs. The Hon. Mem-
ber for Westminster had called the present a good
weak Government. But let it be good or
,let it be
weak on this occasion, he did not care a farthing for
the principle, so long as it came to the proposal he
had made.
Lord RANCLIFFE said a few words which
were inaudible in the gallery.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
said his Hon. Friend had gone so much into de-
tails, that he thought it would be better to answer
his observations on each item, as it came before the
Committee.
Lord ALTHORP agreed with the Hon. Gentle-
man, that such items as were objectionable ought to
be postponed for the purpose of being examined
into by a Committee up stairs.
Sir J. NEWPORT—The House had been re-
peatedly drawn into voting money, under the idea
of doing things by degrees ; and the consequence
had been that the extent of the work had turned
out much greater than the House had any right to
expect. Another strong ground of objection was,
that money was frequently disbursed before any
proposal whatever had been brought before Parlia-
ment. This had been very much the case with
respect to the works of Canada, which had been
carried on to an immense extent before Parliament
heard any thing about them.
Mr. O'CONNELL—It should be recollected,
that while the taxes had been diminished this year,
those of Ireland had been increased; and yet in
that country distress was daily accumulating; and
he did not believe that any one could now be found
hardy enough to deny it, The 300,000/. to he
voted for Canada was to be raised extra in Ireland
alone this year.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. HUME contended that a Committee of Sup-
ply was not the place for entering into the facts
of a case; one assertion was always met by another,
and nothing further could be got at. They were
now called upon to vote, tinder the first five heads,
no less a sum than 1,626,000/. It had been said
by the Noble Lord, that all the objectionable items
ought to be reserved for a Select Committee;' in
that case he should vote for all being reserved, for
lie did not believe that there was one single item
that was not objectionable. Last year the Miscella-
neous Estimates had amounted to two millions and
a half, which before the French war would have
covered half the expenses of the country, with the
exception of the interest of the debt. The Civil
Estimates appeared to him as extravagant as the
Military, and he therefore thought that the whole
ought to go to a Committee up stairs. In his opi-
nion the whole Estimates ought to be divivided into
sixteen or twenty parts, for as many Committees, in
order that the House might have the benefit of their
inquiries. At present the whole ceremony was a
perfect farce, and it was a mere mockery to say that
money was conscientiously voted. On occasions
when such enormous sums were voted, it was diffi-
cult to obtain as many County Members as were
present that evening, to vote about a mere private
Harbour Bill. As ere long they must have a new
election—(Order, order !)-1-1e did not know what
the Hon. Member meant by crying " Order," but
as this was the fifth year of this Parliament, and six
was its natural age, he did not see what there was
out of order in what he said. He m ould say—
come when an election might (which perhaps might
please the Hon. Member better), he hoped that
those who had to vote for county Members would
remember how seldom their representatives had at-
tended when these weighty money matters were to
be disposed of. For two years Ministers had ob-
tained the votes of that House on the pledge that
the Finance Committee should examine into affairs;
but, in spite of the existence of that Committee,
they had never come under examination further than
calling for returns, which were now on the table.
Sir M. W. RIDLEY could not accede to the
principle of the whole estimates being referred to a
select Committee.
Colonel DAVIES wished to ask the Hon. Mem-
ber one question. Would he point out any thing
like a practical responsibility of the Ministers ?
(Hear, hear.) They had seen their Ministry doing
acts for which they deserved impeachment—the
whole of their foreign and domestic policy was re-
gardless of the interests of the country; and then
they came to that House, proposed whatever they
pleased, and were sure to carry it. Let them only
look at the Lieutenant-Geneialcy of the Ordnance.
Twice had a Committee recommended the abolition
of that office, and still was it kept up, though he
bad no hesitation in pronouncing it a most gross job.
The question was then put by the Speaker for
his leaving the Chair, and it was carried without
opposition.
The House then went into a Committee.
Mr.' G. DAWSON objected to the principle of
referring estimates to Committees up stairs; It was
the duty of Government to propose such estimates
as were necessary on the responsibility of the whole
House of Commons. If he had any doubt on the
subject, his experience of Committees up stairs
would confirm him; for he had never left a Com-
mittee-room without being convinced that the safest
way was for Ministers to come down and propose
to the House those measures which they thought
necessary. With respect to the statements made by
his Hon. Friend, they had been made with much
confidence as to truth ; but when he came to refer
to the documents, he found, that, in the very first
item he had stated to the House, he was mistaken.
—Since his Right Hon. Friend had been Chancellor
of the Exchequer, not a single public work had
been undertaken without the whole estimate of its
expense being previously laid before him. The
amount of the Miscellaneous estimates had been
gradually decreased from 1824, and it was less for
the present year than for 1829, by 310,000/. The
Hon. Gentleman concluded by moving, that a sum
not exceeding 32,.575/. be granted to his Majesty to
defray the probable amount that would be required
for repairs, &c. of public buildings, for furniture,
&c. for the various public offices and departments,
and for certain charges for lighting, watching, &c.
to be defrayed by the Office of Works for 1830.
Mr. GORDON repeated his former statements;
only observing (as we understood the Hon. Gentle-
man), that he ought to have made his comparisons
with 1828 instead of 1829.
Mr. DAWSON stated that 12,000/. had been
saved to the public last year in the furnishing of
putilic buildings.
HOBHOUSE wished to ask the Right
f,
-1-Vtis. Gent. opposite whether it was the intention
oe/his Majesty's Government to grant the public
1 '2'646 St. James's-park by Waterloo-place? He
k bad on a former occasion stated that, if they do not
dOc so, he should feel it his duty to move an Address
to the Crown. That would be improper now. He
perfectly agreed with his Hon. Friend the Member

for Cricklade, that all public works ought to be
subject to public inspection. It was absurd and un-
justifiable that Government should have the power
of ordering and executing public works without con-
trout or supervision; and he perfectly agreed with
his Hon. Friend the Member for Cricklade that the
subject ought to be submitted to the consideration
of a Select Committee. Seeing the Chief Commis-
sioner of his Majesty's Woods and Forests in the
House, he wished to ask him if it were really deter-
mined that the public should not have the access to
St. James's-park to which he had already alluded.
Since he had last addressed the House on the sub-
ject, he had been looking at what the Noble Lord
and others had said respecting him on former occa-
sion, and he had consulted other Hon. Gentlemen
who were present on the occasion; and the result
was a perfect conviction on his mind that his Ma-
jesty's Government did originally intend, and did
promise, that the public should have the access in
question. Bnt even supposing that such a promise
had not been given, still the public hsd a right to
the access required.--(Hear, hear.)—He was will-
ing to allow that the parks added dignity to the
palace of the King ; but they also added a great
source of enjoyment to the metropolis of the king-
dom over which he reigned. To him it ap-
peared extraordinary that even a hint of the
public feeling on the subject had not been
sufficient to produce the desired concession.—
(Hear.)—Even supposing we had among us an in-
dividual of strange and capricious taste, who was con-
stantly pulling down square Palaces, and building
round ones in 'their stead ; " Diruit, adyfcat, mutat
quadrata rolundis ;" was such a person to be allowed,
on such a point as this, to interfere with the legiti-
mate wishes of the people? The Parks of the me-
tropolis belonged to the people of the metropolis.
By courtesy they were attached to the Crown ; but
they belonged to the people who granted them—to
the people who paid for them. Could any thing be
more absurd than the way in which that part of the
metropolis had been treated ? Many thousands of
cartloads of rubbish had been deposited in order to
make a hill, from which the trees in St. James's
Park looked like gooseberry bushes. He would
state one fact to the House to show the gross injus-
tice of the reports on the subject. It had been said
that the gentlemen who had purchased houses on
the terrace were all exerting themselves to prevent
access to the Park. That was not true. He would
not name the parties, but he had received letters
from several of the individuals to whom he alluded,
informing him that, so far from being averse to granting
the public access to the Park, they were anxious that
it should be granted. The fault, therefore, did not
lie with them. It lay with some individual whose
name ought to be known to the country ; and when-
ever the time should arrive when, without impro-
priety, he might move an Address to the Crown on
the subject, he pledged himself to do so. The diffi-
culty that was experienced on the subject reminded
him of what was said in former times, when the
shutting of the gateway into the Park was agitated,
namely, " that the shutting of that gateway would
cost only three crowns." The thing was wished
for by the people, and as it was wished for, it ought
to he given. -
Mr. GORDON contended, as before, that this
vote ought to be referred to the consideration of a
Select Committee before it was agreed to.
Mr. HUME urged the expediency of postponing
its further consideration.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
contended that the question ought to be aye or no
upon the motion ; and no third proposition could be
admitted.
Sir J. NEWPORT was at a loss to know on
what principle the wish to postpone the adoption
of the resolution until further information was ob-
tained could be opposed. He for one was not pre-
pared to vote for the question, but he was prepared
to vote for inquiry. Why not postpone this reso-
lution on 'the principle upon which the preamble of
a Bill was frequently opposed ?

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
observed that the present case, and that of the pre-
amble of a Bill, were not at all similar. The pre-
amble of a Bill was postponed for the purpose of
passing it after the clauses of the Bill had been dis-
cussed and agreed to ; but no other opportunity
might be afforded for passing a resolution in the
Committee of Supply, if it were once passed over,
Adverting to the vote itself, as compared with that
of 1829, he maintained that the arrangements which
had been made by Government had been produc-
tive of a large saving of the public money, amount-
ing to above five thousand pounds. The alterations
of the Parks had been made with a view to the
benefit of the public; but he would defer his ob-
servations till the Hon. Member for Westminster
brought the subject distinctly before the House.
Mr. GORDON maintained, that as the public
paid for the improvements, they were entitled to all
the advantages. _

Mr. ARiiUTHNOT had attempted to obtain for
the public all the benefits he could, but he had never
promised to open the Park.
Sir M. W. RIDLEY, as far as he was concerned,
had no objection to the opening.
Mr. HUME objected to the many private dwel-
lings allowed to public officers.
Mr. PROTHEROE thought that some place
ought to he provided for the public records.
Lord MILTON thought that the Crown had no
right to exclude the public from property that no
longer was the source of its revenue.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER and Lord
MILTON explained.

Mr.HOB HOUSE said that the arches now blocked
up were once open, and if he had a majority the
public would find them again opened.
The Committee then divided—
For the vote 139
For postponing the vote 123
Majority
7,00/. was voted for defraying the expence of
works at Portpatrick Harbour.
8,000/. was then voted for the works at Donagha-
dee Harbour.

20,0001. was voted for the works at Kingstown
harbour.

100,0001. was then proposed to defray the ex-
penses of the alterations and improvements at Wind-
sor Castle.

Mr. R. GORDON opposed the vote ; he com-
plained that the original estimate submitted to the
House had been 300,0001. It was subsequently
raised to 640,0001.; and in 1828, the Chancellor of
Exchequer said, that in candour he was obliged to
state that 50,000/. more would be wanted to com-
plete the works, making thus in all 900,0001. Still
8,000/. was voted last year ; and now it was pro-
posed, without any inquiry or investigation, to grant
9,000/., and this too without any pledge that the
present demand would be the last—( Hear, hear)—
or, that, in fact, three or four hundred thousand
pounds more would not be wanted. Encouraged
then by the division on the last question, he would
now move that the sum of 100,000/. be granted to
his Majesty for the purposes of defraying the expenses
of the alterations and improvements of Windsor
Castle.—( Hear, and continued laughter.)
Mr. O'CONNELL here observed, that many
Hon. Members who lied Irish constituents, voted
for this last grant, and this at a moment when the
Chancellor of the Exchequer had in contemplation
to impose 300,0001. of additional taxes upon Ireland.
He now called upon those gentlemen to oppose this
vote, for if they did so successfully, there might be
100,0001. of taxation spared to Ireland.—(Hear,
and laughter.)—lt might be very ridiculous, but
he was most happy to say that the opposition to
the Chancellor of the Exchequer's scheme of taxa-
tion was progressing in that country amongst persons
of all parties and persuasions.—(Hear and laughter.)
On this ground, if he had no other, he would vote
against the grant. The circumstance, however, of
the original estimate of 300,000/. having beets so
greatly exceeded, afforded abundant reason for op-
posing such profligate expenditure.
1115 CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
said that the measure of repairing and improving

the ancient seat of the Kings of England was, when
first proposed, popular, not only in Parliament, but
throughout the country. He stated that the causes
which had led to the estimates being exceeded had
been frequently detailed to the House; and he ob-
served that there was infinitely more difficulty in
calculating the expences required for repairing an
old building than in deciding upon those which
might be necessary for the erection of a new. He
could declare that many unexpected difficulties had
arisen in the progress of the works ; and, in conclu-
sion, submitted to the House, that the only question
to decide was, whether the building should be suf
fered to remain unfinished, a disgrace to the coun-
try, or whether they would consent to the grant
just proposed.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. BROUGHAM—I rise with unfeigned re-
luctance to express my opinions on this subject. For
reasons to which I will not now more particularly
allude, there is no time at which I would more will-
ingly find it possible, if it were consistent with my
public duty, not to say one word upon the question.
But I cannot do so, and I shall, therefore, briefly
and simply as possible, state the reasons why I, for
one, shall vote for the motion of my Hon. Friend.
If I could think that the question now submitted to
this Committee was what the Right Hon. Gentle-
man has once and again stated it to be, I would
vote for him. If it were put to me, " Shall the
present buildings at Windsor Castle, with all the
improvements which have been undertaken and are
in part executed on this ancient and magnificent
structure —the residence of our Kings—be com-
pleted, or shall they stop short where they now
are ?" I say, if the question put to me were
merely this, I should not hesitate before I said that
these buildings should not be completed. But I
take that not to be the question. I take the ques-
tion to be, whether we shall vote 100,0001. in ad-
dition to the 800,0001. already voted, before we
ascertain how that 800,0001. has already been be-
stowed—(Cheers)—before we ascertain whether
the 100,0001. now required in addition to the
800,0001. shall be found sufficient to complete the
structure ; nay, before even any one man has stood
up in this !louse and stated that the 100,0001. now
required will be sufficient to complete these works.
Let any one tell me that this sum will be sufficient—
that it will do to finish the buildings, and I may then
be disposed to vote it, though in the present state of
the country I might grudge the expenditure of such
a sum. But I am called on to vote this money
without the prospect,nay, without the hope, that this
will be enough; and the next time that a Commit-
tee of Supply sits in this House, I may be told that
the structure is still unfinished, and I may again be
asked whether I will allow i t, for want of 100,000/.
more, to remain unfinished.—(Hear, hear.)—l
differ, Sir, from the Right lion. Gentleman, in the
view he has taken of the feeling of this Howse and
of this country on this subject. He has said that
the measure was popular in this House and the
country. Why ? Because this House and the
country have held most justly, and I concur with
them, that we ought to wish to see the Monarchy
provided for with a dignity that is becoming, and
even a splendour which is befitting and decent; and
when 300,000/. were stated to be fit to be bestowed
on the repairing the palace of our Kings, though
the sum was considerable, there was no objection
made to the vote. But did it at all follow that the
House and the country should be satisfied to vote
900,0001.—n0t for farther repairs, but foe
very different object—that this measure should
still continue popular when it was no longer
what it hath been, but was totally changed ?
At this moment we are not told that 900,000/.
will be enough, and, for aught I know, half a mil-
lion more may yet be demanded. This is the plain
view of the matter as opposed to that taken by the
Right Hon. Gentleman. I, for one, should be ready
to agree that his 'Majesty should have that Palace
repaired, or even extended, with which so many
associations of the history of this country and of the
for Mer times of the Monarchy are connected. It
is a reasonable and natural wish ; but we do. not put
the matter fairly, if we state that we are only called
on to make these rotes for one Palace, for while nine
hundred thousand pounds have been required for
Windsor, we have voted 500,0001. and more—not
for repairing a Palace of his Majesty, but for build-
ing a new Palace, on the site, not of an old Palace,
but of a modern residence, which of itself was, in
my opinion, sufficient for the purposes of a Court.
Even that I should not be disposed to grudge the
Monarch, if I could only see an end, but (and I for
one disclaim all invidious observations, and at the
present am more than ever anxious to avoid them)
I must say that these expences we can soon begin ;
but, even when one million and four hundred
thousand pounds have been voted and dispended,
even at this hour, I can see no end to them. I say,
therefore, as a Member of this House, bound on the
one hand, to act with a view to the just protection
of the Monarch, and on the other to watch for the
advantage and the interests of the people, that I
feel it to be my imperious duty to vote against this
grant, in the circumstances under which it is now
proposed,
Sir J. SEBRIGHT thought there was no limit
to the extravagance that had been committed. He
should be much surprised if the Hon. Member did
not obtain a majority.
Mr. R. GORDON said his object was not to
refuse the vote, but to refer it, to a Committee of
Inquiry, and as 10,0001. had been voted on the last
vote on account, he thought it would be more de-
corous to come to the same vote now.

Mr. BARBER was of opinion that some com-
petent person should give the House an estimate of
the sum really wanted.
After a few words from Sir M. W. RIDLEY,
Mr. HOBIIOUSE believed that the case in fa-
vour of his Hon. Friend's amendment was made
much stronger by the Hon. Member, one of the
Commissioners for these works, who had just
spoken. Like the Chancellor of the Exchequer,
that Hon. Commissioner was quite unable to answer
for the future demands that might be made on this
subject—an inability which in itself was the strongest
reason for the proposed inquiry.—(Hear, hear.)—
The Right Hon. Gentleman opposite had spoken
of the responsibility imposed on Ministers in affairs
of this sort. Let him consent to this Committee,
and they would be relived from it. The Right Hon.
Gentleman was mistaken in supposing that the
people of England were interested in these works,
though it might possibly be true that they would
have been interested in the works, if they had
been merely confined to the reparation of the old
Castle. He was convinced the public would
not be satisfied if this vote were given without
inquiry.

Lord
L SANDON was understood to support the
grant.
Sir THOMAS ACLAND should vote for the
amendment ; but he thought it would be more
worthy the House, and more satisfactory to his
Hon. Friend, if the Government would do what it
ought, if a more distinct explanation of the whole
case was brought forward before this vote was pro-
posed.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
agreed with those Hon. Members who said, that
there were circumstances at the present moment,
which made this discussion peculiarly painful. For
his own part, he felt a great anxiety that the House
should have the means of judging of the whole ex-
pence, and he thought he should not be showing
any undue deference to the opposition made to
this vote, if he did consent to the appointment of
a Committee, for the purpose of ascertaining what
would be the ultimate expence of these works.—
(Hear, hear.)—He did so with considerable pain—
(Hear, hear)—but he had a firm conviction that,
in the circumstances under which he was now
placed, his doing so would prevent a painful dis-
cussion, and he was sure that it would be found
that the recommendation which he made to the
Committee was justified by the necessity in which
they were placed of carrying on the works. At
the same time he had no objection that the House
should haVe every means of judging of the expendi-

ture. He had no objection under these circumstances
to withdraw his motion, and to agree to the Com-
mittee for the purpose of seeing what would be the
whole expence.
Mr. GORDON thought the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman's object would be equally attained by ac-
ceding to his proposal. If the Right Hon. Gentle-
man withdrew his motion, he would be the person
to form the Committee, and with all respect for
him it would be acknowledged on that side of the
House, that he was not happy in forming Corn-
mittees.—(Hear, and a laugh.)—Having said thus
much, he should leave the matter in the hands of
the Right Hon. Gentleman.
Mr. BROUGHAM did not think the deference
paid by the Right Hon. Gentleman to the opposi-
tion in this case was at all too great. He always
wished to see great deference paid when the sense
of ihe House was distinctly expressed, arid that
sense was in unison with the opinion of the coun-
try. The Right Hon. Gentleman was now de-
sirous of laying information before the House. As
he could as well have done that before as after this
discussion, it must be taken for granted that he felt
he could no more pass the vote at this moment
than he could pass a vote of ten millions for the
same purpose.
After a few words from Mr. H. GURNEY, Mr.
GORDON withdrew his amendment, on the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer promising to move for a
Committee.

Mr. DAVISON next moved that 8,0001. be
granted for the erection and repair of churches in
the West Indies.

Mr. HUME moved that the Chairman report
progress, and ask leave to sit again.
The proposition was assented to, and the report
was brought up.—Et was ordered that the Com-
mittee of Supply should sit again on Wednesday.

Sir J. SCARLETT moved the re-commitment
of the Administration of Justice Bill, with a view
merely that certain blanks should be filled up, and
the Bill reprinted.
It was re-committed accordingly, after a few
words from Mr. Jones, Mr. Bright, Mr. J. Wood,
and Mr. P. Thomson.

The report was brought up, and it was ordered
that the Bill, as amended, should be printed.
Lord MORPETH postponed until the 18th inst.
his motion for the Repeal of the Act inflicting
banis:iment for the second offence in cases of libel.
Mr. F. LEWIS moved the Order of the Day
for the Committee on the Navy Pay Consolidation
Laws' Bill.

In answer to a question from Sir J. Graham, Mr.
F. LEWIS said that he might be obliged to employ
a person under him, as Paymaster of the Navy, not
being able with his own hands to discharge all the
duties of the situation; he, hovvever,should continue
responsible.
The Bill was then committed, and Mr. F.
LEWIS explained, that it repealed or omitted in
the consolidation of the laws relating to the pay of
the Navy, about twenty capital punishments.
The report was brought up, and ordered to be re-
ceived to-morrow.

Mr. HUME moved for leave to bring in a Bill
to prevent the necessity of renewing Commissions
on the demise of his present Majesty, or any other
King or Queen.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
suggested that motives of delicacy at present should
induce the Honourable Gentleman to postpone his
motion.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL supported this
recommendation.

Mr. O'CONNELL urged the necessity of such
a Bill.

Mr. WARBURTON strongly pressed the mo-
tion.

The House divided, when there being but twenty-
four Members present, the House adjourned at Two
o'clock.

yItICKS OF STOCKS THIS DAY AT ONI O'CLOCX.
B tri, stack
3 per Cent. Red. 91% % Old Annuities —
3 per cent. Cons. 92V2% New Ditto 9214
3 per Cent — Ex. Bills, £1,006 2d. 7$ '79 pm.
Ditto Red. 99 % Ditto lid. '76 79 pm.
4 per Cent. Ann.
Dittl, IS2F ' • Ditto ..... ~,...... lid. 78 '79 pm.
hank 1- Ann IS 15-16 19 Ditts Small 2B. 78 79 pro.
Ditto 30 cars lB 13-16 Ditto lid. 78 19 pm.
Ditto 30 years

India Strick

India for Account ...239S 40S

Ditty, Banda B3 St pm.

Cons. for May 25

FOREIGN EXCHANGES ON LONDON.
HAMBURG, APRIL 30.-13. lt—Two months. 13. 1214.
Cesarrriaxta, APRIL 21.—Three months, 6. 28
Letesic, APRIL 23.—Three months, 6. 20.
FIE awl. APRIL 27.—Three months. 7.01,8.
VIENNA, APRIL 24. —Three months, 10. 5.
STOCKHOLM, APRIL 23.—Seventy-five days. 12 23.
BREMEN, APRIL 27.—Two months, 618. 616.
FRANKFORT, APRIL 26.—Two months, 153%.
AUGSBURGH, APRIL 26.—One month, 20. 13.