The Sun.
London, England, 1862-02-18 00:00:00

J." 4
fHE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, FEBRUARY 18,

teniion of the COvernment to introduce any bill such as
that alluded to the hon. member.
APPROACH TO. THE INTERNATIONAL
EXHIBITION.
Mr. DAMER asked the First Commissioner of Works
'whether it would not be expedient to save the expense by
opening the road through Kensington-gardens from Bays-
water to the iron gates in Rotten. row, nearly opposite the
Exhibition building of 1862, to carriages, 'as it was to
equestrians during tha period of the Exhibition of 1851?

Air. CO WPER said the economy which had been sug •
gested by the hon. member would prove in the end to be
very expensive, and he was opposed to any mete temporary
roadway to the International Exhibition.

STIPENDIARY MAGISTRATES IN IRELAND.
hi reply to Mr. LONGFORD,

Sir R. PEEL said it was not the intention of the Govern-
ment to introduce any bill on this subject during the pre-
sent session.

MEXICAN AFFAIRS.
(Cord W. GRAHAM asked the Under Secretary of State
for Foreign Affairs whether the statement contained in
the Correspondence on Mexican Affairs," headed In-
closure No‘ 13," was correct, that L5OO was paid by the
English Government to a Mr. Newell, as compensation for
an illegal imprisonment by General Marquez : and, if so,
why it had been paid in his case and not in any other ?
Mr. LAYARD said that the compensation in question
had been paid to all parties that were entitled to receive it.

to the Government at Washington. Any man: in the world
I who had access to what is to be found on the shelves of the
Foreig,n-office must ha% been aware, when the
question came to be discussed as to the right to seize these
men, that whatever might be said as to the precedents cf
England, nothing could be said in favour of their seizure if
ye* adhered to American practice and American principles.
It was as clear as anything could be to any man who read
th 4 able speech of Mr. Sumner in the Senate of the United
States, in which he collected all the authorities on both sides
of the question, all of which were known to the Foreign-
office, that the American Government would have been
utterly unable -to resist the demand of the English Govern-
ment in accordance with their past practice and principles,
however courteous.and modest that demand might have been.
It vas well known, too, to those in Washington at the time
that the influence of these military preparations was felt, not
by the Government at Washington or the American people,
but by ministers who represented European powers in that
country. I know perfectly well that the ministers of Euro-
pean powers expressed their decided opinion that there was
an intention on the part of some section of the Government,
or of a powerful class in this country, if an opportunity
offered, to engage in a war with the United States. (No,
no.) The effect of such a statement of opinion was that
every man there who felt that he was aggrieved or humi-
liated by this, asked himself, 't Shall I gain anything by this
surrender ; shall I only have to wait for some other oppor-
tunity for the action or the hostility which is now only ap-
parent ?" I don't bring this charge against her Majesty's
Government. Ido not say they intended war, but I am quite
sure that very many persons in this country were led to that
conclusion. It is very likely that the noble lord at the head
of the Government, bringing down his traditions from the
times of past wars when law and justice were little regarded
by most of the civilised nations of Europe, thought probably
that the only mode of securing what he wished was by this.
(Hear, hear.) Now, I believe that on that question, as well
as on some others, but on that more than any, there is no
other powerful Government in the world which has uni-
formly been so much disposed to abide, as far a possible, by
known and defined laws as the Government of the United
States ; and when I heard that this demand was made of
them, with a consciousness of their previous course with
respect to this question, I had no doubt whatever that the
matter would be amicably settled. except that menaces on
this side might render it difficult for them to make conces-
sions. With regard to the effect of that course on English
interests I would say one word. I will not count up how
ranch the funds or railway stocks fell ; but I believe that
in one market in England-Lthe market of Liverpool—the
effect, not of what was done on board the Trent, or what
was said in the despatch from the Foreign-office, but of the
warlike preparations of the Government, was to reduce the
value of the stock of a single article by no less than three
millions sterling. Again, private letters from Bombay and
Calcutta state that on the day when the news arrived that
war between England and America was imminent, a
sudden paralysis occurred in the trade of those places, and
till the date of the last advises that paralysis continued,
and the persons concerned in the enormous commerce
between England and India have for some w eeks past been
suffering a great loss and great inconvenience. Doubtless,
also, when we hoar from Australia we shall find that
the moment they learnt that the war was possible or
likely not an ounce of gold more was shipped, lest the
vessel in which it was placed should be seized by an Ame-
rican ship of war or an American privateer, and that the
panic which seized the commerce of India had also seized
that of Australia; New these are things worth looking at.
Your people are employed by the operation of that com-
merce, and by the security of the capital which is employed
in it, and when any transaction like this—this unhappy
accident of the Trent—arises between the two countries.
(Laughter.) I do not know whether that laugh comes from
any member of the Treasury bench. I say it was an un-
happy accident. (Laughter from both sides of the house.)
It was an unhappy accident as regarded the United States
and our Government. It was nothing but an accident and
no one knew that better than the noble lord at the head of
the Government. When such an accident arises which may
possibly cause jarring between the nations and the Govern-
ments, it is the policy and duty of the Governments in the
first place to try all those moderate and courteous means
uhich it would liketo have tried with regard to itself, before
it had recourse to measures which would send a paralysis
throughout all the ramifications of the greatest commerce in
the world, and create an immense loss to almost all classes
of the people. I say with the utmost satisfaction, and the
utmost truth that the noble lord at the head of the
Government could not possibly be more pleased than I am
at the favourable termination of that untoward event. If the
noble lord believed there was no other course for preventing
the war than that he took, it would be very harsh and very
unfair for me to attack him for adopting that course ; but I
do think, knowing how much the United States Government
has been bound up and committed to the humane and mo-
derate principles of international maritime law, he might
have trusted more to that and less to the force he exhibited
against them.
Mr. BAXTER said that though entertaining the same
friendly feeling towards the Government of Washington as
that expressed by the hon. member for Birmingham, and
deprecating as much as he did the strong language used in
many newspapers in this country with reference to the
Northern States, he could not concur with him in his cen-
sure upon the measures taken byher Majesty's Government.
(Cheers.) He had no doubt the estimates would meet with
the unanimous concurrence of the house, as they formed
part and parcel of the policy with regard to the Trent, of
which the country heartily approved. (Hear.) It was no
part of his business, nor was it the business of her Majesty's
Government, to defend articles that appeared in newspapers,
but he so far concurred with his hon. friend that he thought
the language used by some of the newspapers of this coun-
try was quite as discreditable as that made use of by the
press of New York. But not only did he think that her Ma-
jesty's Ministers acted rightly when they took a decided
stand in the matter of the Trent—and he understood his
hon. friend the member for Birmingham to take the same
view—but he went further, and believed that her Majesty's
Ministers were perfectly right when they backed that de •
mend by a display of energy and strength on the part of
this country that showed that Great Britain was in earnest.
(Hear, hear.) He wished to ask her Majesty's Govern-
ment what representations they had made to the colonies,
or meant to make, asking them to contribute more largely
than they had hitherto done towards the maintenance of
largo military establishments in the colonies.
Lord PALMERSTON—I am not going to answer the
latter part of the speech of the hon. member who has just
sat down, because that may be more fittingly answered by
my noble friend who is about to address the house ; but I
was unwilling to' allow a longer time to pass without offering
some observations on what has fallen from my hon. friend
the member for Birmingham. I stated on a former occa-
sion that it was desirable in this house that we should not
only pass laws and vote estimates, but that we should be the
organs of the opinions of large masses of the community.
Igo further. I admit that it is right and useful that this
house should hear the opinions of individuals, singular
though they may be, and I think, with all deference to my
hon. friend, that the opinions be entertains and expresses
on the subject on which he has spoken • are as nearly as
possible confined to himself. {Hear, hear.) My hon. friend
does justice to the course which the ,Government pursued
in making that demand for redress from the American Go-
vernment. ,On that there is no difference of opinion. He
has done full justice to the courtesy and consideration with
which my noble friend the head 'of the Foreign Department
insi ructed Lord Lyons to make the communication, and the
delicacy and judgment and good taste with which Lord
Lyons followed those instructions. It is well to clear the
ground, therefore, of that preliminary point. But the hon.
gentleman thinks that we were wrong in those naval and
military preparations that we made, that we were wrong in
sending to Canada troops—according to him with ferocious
gesticulations. Ido not know to what particular circum-
stance he alludes. I think they went very. quietly. It was
very cold weather, and if there were any ferocious gestures
made by them, perhaps they used them when they were
attempting to warm their hands. (Laughter.) But the
point of my hon. friend's argument is this, if I rightly
understood him;, that the United States were bound, and
we ought to have known that they were bound, by
their interpretation of international law, to give up
the; e persons who. were taken from on board the Trent,
and that it was quite folly to think that their Government
was swayed by mob influence. My hon. friend says that
where everybody ca a voter there can be no mob. (Laugh-
ter.) Ido not qu ito agree in that theory ; but ho contends
that the• United t3ta.tes Government were bound by their
own principles to do that which we asked them, and that
they were quite fr. se from any control exercised upom them
from any other &Lasses of the community. Well, now I
would just ask hi in if the United States Government felt
all along that they were bound by their own principles to
disavow the act of Capt. Wilkes as being contrary to those
principles, and thett therefore they ought to afford redress;
if they felt this, w'try did they keep those four gentlemen in
prison ? Was it because, as he states, those gentlemen
happened to be the' objects of great hatred to the United
States Government? That is not a reason why an act of
injustice should be perpetrated, and why men should be
kept in prison, who by the acknowledged and established
principles of the Government were entitled to their freedom
from the first monsemt that they were taken. I say that is
a proof to my mind tb at the United States Government had
not come to the decision in the earlier stages that it was an
act which they ought to disavow, and that they were bound
to restore these persons to freedom. But then my hon. friend
says that n 0 compulsion was exercised upon the United
States Government, and that as to war, Mr. Seward and
Mr. Lincoln could not make war on their own authority.
We know that. We know that it requires the sanction of
the Senate. My hon. friend says that therefore it was
quite foolish, it was worse than foolish, it was criminal, in
us to ' take measures 'ostensibly for self-defence, but in
reality for the purpose of provoking a war with the United
States. 'Well, sir, had we no ground for thinking that it
was very doubtful whether our demand would be complied
with? al
the feeling, ear, hear)elng,i And will any man tell me who
remembers
the indignant feeling, that pre-
vailed' throughout the whole extent of the country,
at the instant that they heard that the outrage had been
committed—will any one tell me that any man in Great
Britain would tamely have submitted to a refusal to restore
those persons ? (Cheers.) Then, if that refusal had come,
we should have beep bound, to extort by tho usual MOB; as

1862:

far as we were able to do Bo,that compliance which had been
refused to our courteous application. Now what reason was
there to think that the refusal was likely ? Why, really
nay hon. friend cannot have forgotten transactions so re-
cent, and events so fresh in the memory of everyone.
What was the tone and temper of the Northern States? We
know that from the commencement Capt. Wilkes declared
that he had done this act of his own authority,and that the
United States Government were perfectly at liberty to dis-
avow it if they chose. Mr. Adams stated that to my noble
friend in a despatch that Ni e received, which went no fur-
ther than this, that the United States Government was free
to act as it pleased, and that their conduct might depend
somewhat on the conduct which the British Government
might think fit to follow. I do not know about that. How-
ever, Capt. Wilkes declared that he had done it without
authority or instructions. Well, did the public of the
United States hesitate as to whether what he had done was
right or wrong,did they wait to be informed whether it was
consistent or not with what my hon. friend states to be the
acknowledged, well• known, and international code ? Capt.
Wilkes was made a hero, and a hero for what ? He was
distinctly put forward for having had the courage to insult
the British Government. (Hear, hear.) He had a great
ovation at Boston, where, I believe, the persons holding offi-
cial situations, including the governor of the state, joined in
the general chorus of approbation. That, you may say, was
only a public meeting,and we have heard a great many foolish
speeches made at public meetings. (Hear, and laughter.) We
have heard a great many opinions there expressed which have
not been backed by the rest of the country. But it did not stop
there. Capt. Wilkes went to the theatre at New York,
and the whole audience rose as they would have done to a
great deliverer of the country. They rose in honour of
Captain Wilkes, and cheered him, I believe, for a consider-
able time. Well, then, was the Government entirely silent?
It is said in some governments that one department does not
know what another does, and it has been made a reproach
even to departments here that they were at cross purposes.
It may be the same in the United States, but the Naval De-
partment actually thanked Captain Wilkes, and approved of
what be had done, and only ventured to hint a fault--that
he had shown too great forbearance, and they expressed a
hope that that forbearance would not be drawn into a prece-
dent in future. Then let us go a step higher. If I mistake
not, the House of Representatives voted a vote of thanks
and approval of Captain Wilkes' conduct. Here was the
public—here
was the Government—here was a branch of
the Legislature, all approving of his conduct. With these
facts before us, should we have been justified in supposing
that a mere courteous application, " Have the goodness to
deliver these men," would have induced the American Go-
vernment at once to say, " Well, we were quite right in tak-
ing them; the whole country is with us; we have insulted
you, we are glad of it; but as you are good enough to ask
it as a favour, as a favour we will do it ?" Though, at the
same time, the hon. member says we were entitled to ask it,
and therefore they ought to have given it at the commence-
ment. Well, I say that we should have been really deserv-
ing of condemnation and censure, as short-sighted men, and
not constitutionally alive to the interests of the country, if
we had simply rested our case upon a demand. But then,
moreover, it was well known that in the public papers it was
said they would not deliver these men ; it was said, I believe,
by Americans here—though that is immaterial—but it was
said generally in Washington that they could not be deli-
vered up, and they should not be delivered up. But, then,
what was considered by the American Govern-
ment to be our weak point, and what was the circum-
stance which made the United States always more
difficult to be dealt with by England than by France ?
Why it was that because they thought Canada and
our North American provinces were defenceless, and
would fall before them. Then what was it our duty to do?
To strengthen that weak point—(hear)--to make the Ame-
ricans see that we were able to defend ourselves in that
point which they thought the most vulnerable and the most
easily accessible to them. Well, sir, that was "a ferocious
gesticulation." (Hear, hear.) It was simply a defensive
measure, simply strengthening that part which had been
weak and which might be attacked, and the knowledge of
the weakness of which and the facility of attacking
which might have induced the American Government to
maintain that position which they had taken by retaining
these gentlemen in prison, and refusing to comply with the
demand for their restoration. Well, sir, I say that so far
from condemning the Government, I think the Government
are deserving of commendation. (Hear.) It was no more than
their duty; but their duty was promptly and efficiently
performed, and so far, I think, they have met with the ap-
probation of the country at large. (Cheers.) I think, then,
that the censure of my hon. friend is not deserved. I think
that what we did was not at all calculated to provoke the
people and the Government of the United States ; it was
simply a measure which it was our bounden duty to take,
seeing the uncertainty of the communication which would
be made. Now, my hon. friend says that the course which
we have taken will engender ineradicable hatred between
the two countries. Well, I tell him what I think would
have been the result of the Government having submitted
to a declared and gross insult on the part of the United
States. The country might have submitted to it, might
perhaps have voted censure on the Government, but the
thing beingdonecould not have been undone. But the sense ,
of humiliation, the sense of degradation which this nation
would have felt at having been insulted in this gross man-
ner, with an avowed intention to insult us, would have per-
petuated in the minds of the present generation a feeling of
indignant resentment towards the United States which
would have been much more likely than anything else to
lead to acts of hostility. I think, on the contrary, agreeing
with my hon, friend who has just sat down, that the course
pursued was much better calculated to produce peace be-
tween the two nations. There is no doubt that all nations
are aggressive. It is the nature of mankind, and between
nations there start up from time to time conflicting interests
and antagonistic passions, which if not judiciously dealt
with produce the explosion of war. Well, if one country is
led to think that another country with whom these ques-
tions are likely to arise is afraid of it and will submit to any
amount of indignity and insult, why that is an encourage-
ment to hostile conduct; it is an encouragement to proceed
to extremities which would lead to war between the two
countries. There is no better security for peace between
two nations than a conviction on both sides that each must
respect the other; that each is capable of defending itself
against the other ; that no insult or injury can be com-
mitted by one towards the other which will not bo resented.
Between nations as between individuals, mutual respect is
the best security for mutual goodwill and mutual courtesies,
and therefore my opinion is that the course pursued by her
Majesty's Government is much more likely to have that
effect which my hon. friend has suggested, to secure the
continuance of peace and goodwill between the two coun-
tries. (Cheers.)
THE NAVAL SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES.
The house then went into committee of supply.
Lord C. PAGET said—lt will not be necessary for me to
trouble the committee at any great length in bringing under
consideration the supplementary estimates for the Navy,
the principal cause of which is pretty well known. It will
only be my daty to give a detailed explanation of the various
votes ; but previously to doing so I wish to answer the
question put to me by the hon. member for Evesham re-
garding the balances which are available for the naval ex-
penditure. The hon. member asks whether the sums now
to be voted are to be appropriated according to the esti-
mates laid before the house, or in aid of any other
votes than those mentioned in these estimates. I can
assure him that the intention of the Admiralty is
to deal bona fide with the expenditure in the manner
sot forth in the present Estimates. The hon. baronet asked
another question, as to the state of the balances remaining
after the expenditure of the present year, as provided for by
the Estimates for the, year. I believe I may say that if it
had not been for the late expedition to protect our North
American colonies it would not have been at all necessary
to came to the house for any excess whatever upon the ex-
penditure, and I rather think we should ,have had some
considerable surplus. With respect to the present Esti-
mates, the first charge is under No. 1, referring to seamen
and marines. This charge, I am bound to tell the com-
mittee, does not arise in consequence of the late preparations
for war. The Government had proposed a considerable re-
duction in Vote No. 1, in consequence of the cessation of
hostilities in China, the Admiralty thinking that they could
in the course of the present financial year greatly reduce
the number of men. The reduction has taken place, but it
did not take place so quickly as the Government anticipated.
In the first place, matters did' not settle down in China
quite so soon as we expected. There was, in the second
place, some delay in the return of the ships, while we had,
moreover, to deal principally with continuous-service men,
and it was, I think, a wise policy on the part of the Admi-
ralty rather to exceed the vote than to do anything which
would have the appearance of breaking faith with these sea-
men. We thought it right as the ships came home that they
should be paid off, and that such men as were not continuous
service men should be discharged. The only other reductions
which have taken place are, I may say, due b the common
casualties of the service. Thus much with respect to that
part of the vote which has reference to Vote No. 1; but
then there is an additional reason, and one which, I am
bound to tell the committee, cannot be regarded as alto-
gether satisfactory, why this sum is now asked. We have
taken a votein the Estimates for slop clothing for the navy.
That description of clothing is, as the committee is aware,
no source of ultimate loss to the public. The general rule is
that sailors purchase their clothes and repay the cost to the
nation. On the occasion of which I am speaking the supply
which was due in the course of the last financial year, and
which ought to have been brought in and paid for, was not
forthcoming, and consequently a considerable sum—indeed
£50,000, half of the sum for which I now ask—is due for
slop clothing which ought to have been paid for during the
last financial year. I have thus accounted for the sum of
£lOO,OOO asked for under Vote No. 1. Vote No. 2, which
relates to the provisions of the fleet, must, Of course, depend
as to its amount on the number of seamen we employ; and
the fact that that number has not been reduced quite so
quickly as we anticipated will, of course, account for the
larger sum which is asked for under this head. Both these
sums, we have every reason to believe, we have covered by
Vote 10—that is to say, the vote for shipbuilding purposes
taken last year. During the autumn the house granted the
sum of £250,000 for the purchase of iron-cased shins. That
sum has not been expended, and it was the intention of
the Admiralty—having, of course, in the first instance, ob-
tained the sanction of the Treasury—to apply the surplus

which remained on band to meeting the excess in the case
of the two items to which I have called attention. There
still remains Vote 17, for which we ask a sum of
£234,338. This demand is, as the committee is no
doubt aware, entirely due to our recent prepara-
tions for the defence of our North American colonies, and
it would, perhaps, be interesting to hon. members that I
should state the number of transpc rts which we engaged,
and the amount of stores and troops which we, forwarded
for that purpose. I may in the first place observe that in
the summer the Great Eastern and the Golden Gleece were
employed by the Government to take considerable reinforce-
ments to our North American colonies, and that the whole
cost of that expedition is included in the sum which I have
just mentioned. The number of steam troopships engaged
on monthly pay was, I may add, eight, while there were six
steam trool ships hired for the voyage, and six steam store •
ships. Besides these four contract mail packets were em-
ployed to convey as passengers for the voyage—not hired
for the purpose—large detachments of men. These vessels
took out the following force to British North America :
' 16 batteries of Royal Artillery, 4 companies of Royal Engi
neers, 11 battalions of Foot, a large body of the Military
Train, and also Staff and detachments ; making a total of
706 officers, 13,730 men, and 207 horses. The expedition
was, moreover, accompanied by 250 women and 360 chil-
dren. The stores which I am about to enumerate were
carried out on this occasion, and I am anxious to enter into
these details because I think the fact that so immense an
army could be despatched to its destination at a cost so
reasonable and a celerity so great reflects some credit on all
the parties connected with the matter. (Hear, hear.) Fifty
guns and their carriages were conveyed to our North Ame-
rican colonies, 91 ammunition and other waggons, and
9,707 tons of army stores, in addition to the baggage and
equipment of the troops, while the cost of the whole expe-
dition was as nearly as possible £l6 per head. (Hear.)
The Committee will, I think, on looking over the accounts,
be disposed to think that the steam shipping companies
have been very moderate in their charges, and that the
whole business has been conducted in a manner extremely
satisfactory. (Hear, hear.) I need not, I am sure, add a
single word to the statements which I have already made '
on this head, and I entertain no doubt that the Committee
will be disposed to agree to the Estimate I have laid before
them. I should therefore at once sit down but that I wish,
before doing so, to answer a question which was put to me
the other night by the hon, and gallant member for Portar-
lington (Colonel Dunne), and to which, although the subject
was to me a source of considerable anxiety, I was then un-
able to reply. The hon. and gallant gentleman stated, with
reference to the transports Adelaide and Victoria, that they
no sooner got to sea after leaving Queenstown than:it was
found there was a great leakage in their decks, and that, as
a consequence, the troops who were on board felt much dis-
comfort. Now, I have instituted very careful inquiry as
to whether diligent examination was made with respect to
that particular point before the vessels set out on their voy-
age, and the hon. and gallant gentleman will, I feel certain,
have no doubt on the matter when I tell him that I have
been informed that not only were both those vessels duly
inspected, but that their engines were repaired, and that
they were actually caulked on the fore and after decks in
order to prevent any possibility of a leak. That being so,
the committee will perceive that every precaution was taken
which could be adopted before our gallant troops embarked
to provide for their safety, and that if they experienced the
discomforts of which the hon. and gallant gentleman com-
plains, it is to be attributed to the fact that these vessels
encountered unusually heavy gales, which many vessels of
war are unable to resist without leakage. It only remains
for me, sir, to move the vote which I now place in your
hands. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. BENTINCK protested against therpractice of an-
nouncing reductions at this period of the session, for the
mere purpose of making the estimates look well. Such a
system was both a wasteful and an extravagant one, because
it was sure to be followed by a large and perfectly unneces-
sary expense for the purpose of repairing the mischief. He
trusted that it was not proposed to reduce the armaments
on board a certain class of vessels ; and that none would be
sent to sea without its complement both of men and guns.
He thought that a great saving might be effected by
having a larger number of troop-ships of the
Himalaya class. That vessel had paid for herself ten times
over. It was not only a question of the comfort of the
troops, but of loss of time, which time was valuable. 1f
they had troop-ships always ready the men might be put
on board in a couple of days; and there were occasions
when even a question of days might be of importance.
Besides, he had been told that a number of the hired
transports had been detained in the St. Lawrence ; and the
Government would have to pay for the use of them until
the breaking up of the ice released them and enabled them
to return home. If these vessels had been troop-ships
belonging to the Admiralty, that expense would have been
saved. (Hear, hear.)
Sir J. PAKINGTON wished to know whether this
£234,000 includes the whole expense that had been and
would be incurred on account of the reinforcements of our
North American colonies P If the vote had been even more
than it was he should have cheerfully supported her Ma-
jesty's Government; but if the sum would really cover the
whole charges ho must say ho congratulated the Government
on being able, at so cheap a rate and with such vigour, to
conduct an operation which had done them great credit,
which had received the unanimous, or almost unanimous
approbation of the country, and to which he believed we
wore mainly indebted for the concession the American
Government had made, and for averting the misfortune of
a war between the two countries. (Cheers.)
Sir J. ELPHINSTONE also congratulated the Govern-
ment on the reasonable cost at which they had been en-
abled to convey their reinforcements to Canada. He thought
that the house ought to take some notice of the manner in
which the captains of those vessels (and especially of the
Parana) had discharged their duties, under circumstances
of the very greatest difficulty. (Hear.)
Mr. LINDSAY said that since he had been in the house
he had never seen an estimate which pleased him more than
the one before the commit' ee. He was of opinion, and he
believed that the impression was general, that these four
men would have cost the country a million each ; and he
was glad to find that, in vindicating the honour of the
country so ably as the noble lord at the head of the Go-
vernment and the noble earl the Secretary for Foreign
Affairs had done, the cost had been so small, He was glad
to find that the cost, as far as the navy was concerned, was
not moro than £234,000, and that even that sum included
£25,800 for provisions and medical comforts of the troops
while on board ship, which would have been required
equally whether the men were at sea or on shore. The
actual cost, therefore, of sending out these troops seemed to
be little more than £200,000. They could not, of course,
with this estimate before them, arrive at the whole cost of
the expedition ; but it appeared that the charge for the
army was only £609,000, so that they might take the whole
expense at £1,000,000, or one quarter of what the country
supposed it would be. Therefore he for one was highly
satisfied with the result; and only hoped that when the
ordinary navy estimates appeared they would be as moderate
in proportion as these supplementary votes. The hon, mem-
ber for Norfolk (Mr. Bentinck) suggested the employment
of her Majesty's troop ships instead of hired transports in
such emergencies. The transport committee, of which he
for two sessionswas chairman, had, however, arrived at the
conclusion that it was much more economical for the country
to hire transports as they were required than to maintain
permanently a fleet of transports. The Secretary to the
Admiralty, a few days before the house met, addressing his
constituents, had expressed a similar opinion. and had
stated that he had the most implicit confidence in being able
to obtain from the merchant service all the ships that were
required for the transport of troops. It was to the resources
of the merchant service and to the right arm of the mer-
chant seamen that they must look in cases of emergency,
and they had no better proof that reliance might ho placed
upon the patriotism of that body than that the Naval Re-
serve, which before the threat of hostilities with America
numbered only 2,000, had increased, immediately it was
thought their services might be required by the country,
to 10,000. .
Admiral WALCOTT gave his full support to:the esti-
mate before the committee. They had been told by the
noble lora that he would have a surplus with regard to the
sum voted for the naval service in the year 1861-62, and he
suggested whether that surplus might not be applied in re-
duction of the supplementary vote now asked for. With
regard to the discharge of men from the navy, ho thought
that if any portion of them had been discharged without
having put to them the option of remaining as continuous-
service men, great injustice had been committed. By the
removal of guns from certain ships-of-war, of which the
hon. baronet the member for Portsmouth had spoken, he
hoped there was no intention of lowering the efficiency of
the navy.
Sir S. NORTHCOTE understood that the first vote of
£130,000 was independent altogether of the expedition to
Canada, and that if it had not been for the necessity of pre-
senting a supplementary estimate with regard to the other
items, the vote would not have appeared in its present form,
imismuch as there was an excess in the vote for the year for
iron ships amounting to £150,000, which would have been
available for this purpose. Ho wished to know whether this
surplus, seeing that it was not to be applied in the manner
to which the Secretary of the Admiralty had referred,
would be paid into the Exchequer or applied in any other
way.

Mr. BENTINCK observed that the hon, member oppo-
site (Mr. Lindsay) had spent a large amount of energy in
refuting assertions whioh he had never made. lie had
never impugned the energy or patriotism of the British
mercantile seaman, nor had he gone the length of saying that
the Government ought to be independent of the mercantile
marine in the transport of troops. All he said was that he
thought it would be more economical, and conduce more to
the comfort of the troops, if they had a large number of
troop ships of the Himalaya class in the royal navy.
Lord C. PAGET said with regard to the surplus of
£lOO,OOO, of which the hon. baronet (Sir S. Northcote) had
spoken, that sum would undoubtedly, at the end of the
year, be transferred to the Treasury and dealt with accord-
ing to the Appropriation Act. With regard to the question
of the right hon. baronet the member for Droitwich, he
intended to have 'stated that there would bo a further sum
of about £40,000 asked for, which would have to be paid
during the next year, on account of the Canadian expedi-
tion ; and this arose from the fact that the transpot is now
employed would not have keen paid off till after the Awn-

cial year had terminated. This vote would appear in the
next year's estimates. And this, in addition to fhe £234,000
now asked for, would represent the whole expenditure in
the transport of troops to the North American colonies.
With reference to continuous service, ho assured the hon.
and gallant member for Christchurch that the Admiralty
had not refused any man who desired upon his discharge to
enter as a continuous-service man. The reduction of arma-
ments of certain ships to which reference had been made
was not in consequence of the reduction of men; but the
effect of reducing the armaments would be to improve the
ships in many respects. It would give more stowage for
provisions and stores ; it would make them lighter and
handier, and they would make more way and labour less in
bad weather. With modern artillery there was no doubt
that these very large ships were overloaded with guns, and
the reason of the reduction that was taking place was, that
the introduction of the Armstrong guns provided a mare
powerful arm with a less weight of metal, and these ship
would be as powerful as they were before with the greater
number of guns. He joined in the expressions of admira-
tion of the manner in which the Naval Reserve had come
forward in the recent emergency; and since they were
giving credit where credit was due, he hoped the committee
would concur with him in praise of the dockyard officers,
who had got the ships ready for the expedition in so won-
derfully short a time.

After a few words from Mr. WTLLIAMS,
Sir F. SMITH wanted to know whether for the future
ships would be made smaller, to correspond with the dimi-
nished number of guns ?

Lord C. PAGET suggested that these questions might be
more conveniently discussed upon the Navy Estimates.

_
The following votes were agreed to :
MOO,OOO for wages of seamen and marines.

£30,000 for provisions; and
£234,338 for expenses of transport.
Sir G. C. LEWIS said the right hon. gentleman the
member for Bucks, when the Speaker was in the chair, had
asked him whether the charge in the first vote of the army
supplemental estimate for staff allowances, was limited to
the North American provinces or applied generally to the
army. His answer was, that with respect to this vote as
well as tc the remaining votes of the estimate, the charge&
were for tho expenses w hick had been incurred in cense.
quence of the reinforcements which had been lately sent tc
the North American provinces, and which would not have
been incurred if these reinforcements had not been sent out
He would state briefly the principal items of which this vote
consisted. He might first, however, mention that the num-
ber of men was in excess of the vote during the early months
of the year, and therefore it became necessary for the War
Department to take steps to reduce the army, so that the
number might be short of the vote at the latter period )f
the year. The consequence was, that the various regimens
were allowed to fall below their establishments, but whoa
the alarm of a rupture with the United States arose, tie
Government thought it necessary to revive the recruiting
for a short time, with a view of bringing the regiments is
North America up to their full strength. However, as soca
as they received intelligence that the Government of the
United States had decided to surrender the four men, the
suspension of recruiting was restored, and the number A
men recruited in the interval appeared to have been only
1,393. He thought the course taken by the Government
must satisfy the house that they were not in contemplation
of any war. (Hear.) This explanation applied to the first
vote. The whole of that extra sum was owing to the pro-
vision made, and to the extraordinary expenses of the coun-
try. There was also a considerable expense for medical
stores. The Government confidently anticipated that the
North American provinces would exert themselves to
the utmost for their own defence, in order to meet the
assistance received from the mother country. With refer-
ence to some observations which had been made by hon.
gentlemen that evening, he would say that the reinforce-
ments sent out were sent out strictly in a defensive eha.,
rooter, and without any aggressive purpose. If it had hap-
pened that England had no colonies beyond the Atlantic
unquestionably she would not have moved her troops. It
had been stated that the insult offered to our flag was an
unhappy accident. There could be no doubt that on the
part of the officer of the American ship it was a deliberate
act. Captain Wilkes said he did it in consequence of his
studies of international law. (Laughter.) But as far as the
Federal Government was concerned it was an unintentional
and accidental measure. (Hear.) Everybody must have
seen from the beginning that it was impossible that any
instructions could have been sent to Capt. Wilkes; indeed,
that officer never pretended he had any instructions from
his Government. Although, however, it was in one sense
an accident, still it was, on the part of an officer of the
United States navy, a deliberate affront offered to our flag,
and in consequence of that affront the North American
colonies became involved, and we should have shown an
utter absence of all honour and proper feeling if, having
drawn the people of Canada and New Brunswick into our
quarrel, we had left them to extricate themselves as they
best might. (Hear.) Fortunately our difficulty has been
overcome without the loss of a single life, so far as he was
informed; and although they might lament the necessity
for increasing their expenses, he thought the committee
would agree with him that the Government had no option
as to the course they were called upon to take. (Hear.)
With regard to the second vote, there was a considerable
charge for the purchase of horses, but it must be borne in
mind that there were six field batteries of artillery in North
America, with 564 horses. There was likewise an additional
expense for extra field allowances, and an increased charge
for wages, owing to extra hands being rut on during
the recent embarkation of troops. One of the principal
items was £178,000 for the purchase of extra warm
clothing for the troops in British North America to meet
the severity of that most inclement region. The amount of
cost incurred was £2 17s. 2d. for each man, and he felt sure
the committee would agree that it was a necessary precau-
tion to secure the health and comfort of the troops. (Hear.)
He might state that there was one article—long boots—of
which we had no supply in store in this country. They
were wanted in a hurry,:and the French Government, hear-
ing of our difficulty, undertook to supply 1,500 pairs of
boots, which came over from Paris in 48 hours. (Hear,
hear.) He mentioned that as a proof of the friendly spirit
by which the French Government were actuated. (Heart
hear.) The sum of £50,000 would be requit ed for extra pro-
visions, and the other principal items included warlike stores,
such as gunpowder, &c. The committee would see that
ample provision had been made by the Government to meet
every contingency and for conducting the war, if it had
broken out, in an effective manner. No waste was incurred,
and great care had been taken to observe economy even at
a time when great pressure was put upon the Government.
Upon a vote of X 11,785 for pay and allowances for our
land forces,

Mr. ADDERLEY said that no doubt it was true, as
statad by the right hon. baronet, that but for the existence
of the North American colonies not one of the regiments
lately despatched across the Atlantic would have been sent
out. For his own part, however, he could not see why those
colonies should enjoy all the advantages attending a con-
nexion with England, and yet bear none of the burdens in
cident to such connexion. He trusted the right hon. gen-
tleman would let the house know a little more about the.,
militia which he talked of as in procesiof formation bit
Canada, and he should like to know whether the colonists
wore going to pay anything towards the expenses of the
troops and stores of all sorts which had been sent out for
their benefit.
Sir G. C. LEWIS said the question raised by the right
honourable gentleman was one of considerable importance,
but it was not necessarily involved in the discussion of the
present estimate, which was made to meet an extraordinary
charge. It might have been wrong in their predecessors
not having adopted tho policy which the right hon. gentle-
man zecornmended, and required the colonies to spend a
large sum for their own military and naval defence, but in-
asmuch as that was not done, the Government had to deal
with the circumstances as they existed, and if they had not
sent out these reinforcements the frontier of British North
America might, perhaps, remain undefended. The present
system of the naval and military defence of the colonies no
doubt entailed a heavy tax upon the mother country ; but as
they were dependencies of the Crown, and were allowed no
option in regard to foreign relations, and as we involved
theni in allsour wars, it was not unnatural that they should
expect us to bear a very large portion of the expense of their
defence. Last session a committee of the house made an
interesting report upon the subject, and as the hon.member
for Taunton had given notice of his intention to move some
resolution raising the general question of colonial defence,
it would be better to reserve all discussion in regard to it
until that resolution came before the house. With respect
to the 18,000 troops now in Canada, ho could only say that
he did not contemplate the necessity of the force there being
kept up to that number for any length of time, but as to how
long that number would be maintained he could not under-
take to give any pledge. It was true that in Canada and
New Brunswick the militia was not in an effective state, but
the noble lord at the head of the Colonial department had
brought the matter under the attention of the governors
general of the provinces. Ho must say that the population
had responded to the Government with great spirit and
readiness, and-shown the utmost alacrity in assisting. the
troops and making provision :or them even at a pecuniary
sacrifice. Indeed, it was impossible for him to speak in too
strong terms of the excellent spirit which the entire popu-
lation of the North American provinces had shown on this
occasion. He believed that measures would be taken to
improve their system of militia; but Canada could never
keep up a large standing army.
After some further discussion the vote was agreed to; ee
were also—

£76,51C for land forces.
£ll,OOO for manufacturing departments and store esta-
blishments.

£27,275 for wages.
£178,500 for clothing.
£126,900 for provisions and forage.
Upon the vote of £177,077 for warlike stores,
Col. DUNNE alluded to the shameful and dangerous
conditions of the fortifications in Canada, and wished to
know under what vote money would be forwarded for their
repair ?
Sir G. C. LEWIS said that the construction of railway
in Canada had made a great change in the aspect of the (18
fences of the colony. The subject, however, had occupieu,
the attention of her Majesty's Government, and they had
instructed the governor to cause an linquiry to be made 191
able officers into the matter, and their repot t wouldiput the
Government in possession of all the facts as to the state of
those defences.

The vote was then agreed to, as was the vote for bar-
racks.

PAROCHIAL ASSESSMENTS BILL.
This bill was read a second time and ordered to be r°‘
Terred to a select commitee.
INDIA STOCKS TRANSFER (REMUNERATION)
committee.
BILL.
This bill passed through committee.
This bliNaDpaslAsedSThOroCulgihS (TRANSFER) BILL.
tThe house then adjourned. , •

LowooN : Printed and Published by AIIIRDO o
No. 112, Strand, Printer, at Tim SUN Office, No. 112,Stranu
in the Precinct of the Savoy fu tho County of 3fiddleacis
TliefidaYlFOhnlitrY 18, 1882.