The Sun.
London, England, 1854-07-18 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAME NT.

HOUSE OF LORDS—(YESTERDAY.)
The house met at five o'clock.
OCCUPATION OF THE DANUBIAN PRINCI-
PALITIES BY AUSTRIA.
The Earl of MALMESBURY postponed his motion
for copies of the correspondence between the English
Government and the Court of Vienna on the occupation
of the Danubian provinces by the Austrian army, from
Tuesday until a future day.
MERCHANT SHIPPING BILL.
The house went into committee upon this bill.
Several clauses having been agreed to, and others
postponed,
Lord WALSINGHAM proposed the omission of
clause 178, which enabled the commissioners for the re-
duction of the national debt to establish savings banks
in the principal ports of the kingdom for the saving of
sailors. He objected to the clause on the ground that
savings banks already existed in those places, and be-
cause it established a principle which had here re-
peatedly introduced into the Savings Batik Bill, and
as frequently rejected, v:z , giving the commissioners
power to appoint their own treasurer.
Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY saisl the object of
the clause was to pravide banks where sailors could int-
mecliatly deposit their money on landing, and to guard
them against those temptations which too frequently led
to their dissipation of their whole wages.
The amendment was then withdrawn, and the clause
was agreed to.
On clause 181,
Lord CAMPBELL intimated that it was his ititen-
tention to take the opinion of the house upon
this clause. It had been the law not only of
this country but of every other nation in the world,
that if a ship and her cargo were lost by the perils of the
sea, the crew should not be entitled to their wages. The
present clause would introduce a principle entirely sub-
versive of that universal law, and make our law different
to that of all other countries.
Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY did not think the
clause would effect so sweeping a change of the existing
law al had been mentioned. He defended the clause,
on the groUnd of justice to the sailor. It would be a
great hardship, in ,the event of a sailor being wrecked
on returning home after a voyage of two or three years,
to deprive him of his wages for the whole of that period.
So strongly had this been felt that most liberal and fair-
minded shipowers never refused to pay wages when a
vessel was lost.
After a few words from several noble lords, the house
divided on the question, that the clause be retained,
when there appeared—
Contents
Non-contents ..
Majority
—5l
The clause was therefore agreed to, as were also
clauses up to 218 inclusive.
On clause 219, providing for the survey of provisions
and water,
The Earl of ELLENBOROUGH said he had an
amendment to propose in this clause. The clause enabled
a seaman to complain to certain officers, who were men-
tioned, in the event of his having ground of complaint
on the subject of the quantity or quality of the provi-
sions or water. Now he (the Earl of Ellenborough)
wished to extend that power, so as to enable a seaman
to complain if he thought the ship was in an unseaworthy
state; and also to provide that the officer to whom such
a complaint was made should be permitted to order the
ship to be surveyed if he believed there were reasonable
grounds for supposing that the complaint was well founded,
but not otherwise. He thought there could be no objec-
tion to this amendment, which was not only necessary
for the safety of the crew's lives, but to produce content-
ment among them. He understood that last year a num-
ber of seamen were punished for refusing to embark in
ships, although their only ground of refusal was that the
ships were In an unfit condition for going to sea. The
noble earl concluded by moving his amendment accord-
ingly,
Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY said that no sea-
man was compelled to go on a voyage in a vessel that be
believed to be unseaworthy, and he did not think this
amendment necessary. It would besides cause great
inconvenience and expense to the owners, if a vessel
with a cargo on board was to be ordered at an timesto
be unloaded with the view of being surveyed. Y
After a few words from the Earl of ELLENBOROUGH
and the Earl of HARDWICK; the amendment was agreed
to, and the clause, together with clauses up to 239 In-
elusive, was ordered to stand part of the bill.
The remaining clauses and the various schedules were
then agreed to, and the bill was reported to the house.
PUBLIC REVENUE AND CONSOLIDATED
CHARGES BILL.
Earl GRANVILLE moved the third reading of the
Public Revenue and Consolidated Fund Charges Bill,
the objects of which he described as being twofold : one
was to bring into the Exchequer the gross revenue,
leaving the expenses of its collection to be defrayed by
the votes in Parliament ; and the other was to remove
from the Consolidated Fund certain salaries with which
it has been hitherto charged, and to place them on the
votes of supply.
Lord MONTEAGLE moved that the bill be referred
to a select committee. The object of the bill was to give
Government a control over certain charges which had
been purposely removed front it upon the grounds of
political expediency. The transfer of a salary from the
Consolidated Fund to the votes of supply subjected the
recipient to the caprice of either the Minister or the
House of Commons. By the operation of the bill, the
salaries of revising barristers would be placed under the
control of the House of Commons, which wee a return
to the system abolished by Sir R. Peel in 1343. The
noble lord then went on to argue against the impolicy as
well as the injustice of placing the salaries of the clerk
of the patent entirely dependent on an annual vote, and
he urged that the increased number of miscellaneous
votes, which this bill went to swell, would'almost double
the time now appropriated to financial purposes, and to
that extent lessen the time that could be applied to legis-
lative purposes. Designating the bill as anomalous in
character and unjust in principle, he prayed the house to
refer it to a select committee, in order that it might be
more fully considered.
After a few words from Lord BROUGHAM, who en-
tirely coincided with the reasoning of his noble friend
Lord Monteagle. -
The Duke of ARGYLE said that the whole argument
of the noble lord was founded upon the supposition that
it was the rule to charge salaries upon the Consolidated
Fund, and that it was the exception to vote them,
whereas the contrary was the fact. Having instanced
the fact that the Board of Health and the Poor-law
Board, as well as the Insolvent Commissioners, held
their offices dependent upon an annual vote, he main-
tained that the schedule of the bill was quite in the or-
dinary course. The reference to a select committee was
therefore unnecessary, and he deprecated the adoption
of such a proceeding as an unusual interference with the
ordinary course of business.
The Earl of DERBY said that the intention of the
Government of which he had been a member was to
bring under the control of the House of Commons, not
the mere net receipts of the customs and excise and other
sources of revenue, but to bring under its control the
gross amount of that revenue, and to let the house vote
the annual cost of collecting it. If the bill had only gone
thus far, lie would have supported it, but he objected to
placing under the control of the House of Com:nons judi-
cial or quasi judicial offices.
Lord CAMPBELL read a letter from Mr. Jardine,
setting forth the claims of himself and his colleagues to
be exempted from an annual discussion on their conduct
in the House of Commons.
Errl GRANVILLE, yielding to a strong expression
of opinion in the house, consented that the bill should be
referred to a select committee, upon the understanding
that the bill was not to be thrown over.
The motion to refer the bill having been agreed to, the
other orders of the day were disposed, and the house ad-
journed.

56
5

HOUSE OF COMMONS—(YESTERDAY.)
The SPICAKRIt took the chair at 4 o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.
The following bills were ordered to be considered and
read a third time :•—Great North of Scotland Railway,
Methwold Drainage, and South Devon and Tavistock
Railway Bill.
The Earl of Eglinton's Estate Bill and Stainforth's
Estate Bill were read a second time.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF MARRIED WOMEN,
Mr. PHINN asked the Solicitor-General whether

the attention of Government had been directed,to seri•
ous difficulties which had arisen from supposed errors
in taking the acknowledgment of married women under

-e Fines and Recoveries Act.

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said a bill for , this
purpose bad been laid upon the table of the Rouse of
Lords by the Lord Chancellor three or four da7s ago ;
it stood for a second reading this evening, and Would n
doubt come down in a short time to this house, °
THE WAR SUPPLIES.

Lord J. RUSSELL on moving that the speaker leave
the chair for the purpose of going into committee of sup-
ply, gave notice that some day next Week he, should
move a committee of the whole house for the purpose of
asking for a vote of credit to enable the Government to
carry on the war. He could not state now what the
amount of the credit would be, but an estimate of it
should be laid on the table before Thursday. -
Mr. WALPOLE wished to know whether a oininit-
tee of ways and means would be also moved with a view
of furnishing the means for raising this credit.
Lord J. RUSSELL replied in the negative.
CORE HARBOUR.
• Mr. MA.GIJIRE called the attention of the Govern-
ment to the necessity of providing a floating hospital for
Cork harbour. The hon. gentleman entered into a
variety of details of emigrant ships being driven into
Cork harbour, the passengers of which were suffering
from cholera and fever, and a vast number of deaths
occurred, owing to the want of a floating hospital to re-
ceive the sick and infected passengers.
Sir J. YOUNG said the people who ought to pay for
this floating hospital were the people of Cork, who de-
rived such important advantages from the visits of
foreign vessels trading to that port. In similar
cases which occurred at Belfast, the people of
that town had transferred the infected to hospitals on
shore, and thereby prevented the spread of the disease,
and he thought the people of Cork ought to do the same
Colonel DUNNE said the answer of the Secretary for
n
,
Ireland was the most extraordinary he ever heard,
he maintained that in such cases the cost oughtfall
g majorityto
on the general funds of the country, as
of the sick persons
driven into Corkhaarbloaurr
to England and Scotland, and not to Cork.
Mr. J. BALL said the conduct of the chief
trate ef Belfast was iwt justified in taking the

.........-.,-....
step held up for praise by the Secrerarylor Ireland, i
removing cholera patients from shipeintoihe town,
Mr. LIDDELL said the hon. niehlber for
.Dungar-
von Was perfectly justified in bringi this subject before
the house, and he could not but oft witkthe hon., - -
and gallant member (Col. Dunne) in apreseing. tris'er=.•::.
treune surprise and disappointment at theivnswerlWisigh --" the hon. Secretary for Ireland thought firo gireto thtl
application. At a time like this, when an outbreak of
cholera was imminent, if it had not already occurred,
were they to be told that at such a port as Cork, where
emigrant ships infected with that fatal disease, were con-
tinually being driven in ; provision to prevent its spread-
ing must be made by the people of Cork themselves,
when it was so eminently the duty of the Government.
Mr. LUCAS expressed surprise that no other mem-
ber of the Government, except the Secretary for Ireland,
had risen to state in whose department this subject lay.
The answer given was totally beside the question ; the
City of Cork benefitted nothing by those emigrant ships,
and it appeared that, as in the case of Belfast, no relief
cniild be provided by local means for those calamities,
except by breaking the law. (Hear, hear.)
Sir G. GREY" admitted it was a subject of great im-
portance to provide for such distressing cases, but it was
believed that a floating hospital was not the best for per-
sons attacked with cholera or fever. Some accommo-
dation ought to.be established on shore, and he believed
n hulk would not answer the purpose. He trusted
something tni,rlit be done on this important subject.
Mr. MAGUIRE said if the Government gave any
1 s would • ,
. notO Ili' I,
i'le,
gt !rut a ?yeym
tii6lotnilt-ieje thesubi
emaat.tte r up he should
Lord -J. RUSSELL said the matter should be in-
quired into, but he could give no specific promise on the
question.
Mr. MAGUIRE said, in that case he should onu a
future day bring on his motion.
The subject then dropped.
THE ENCLOSURE COMMISSIONERS' OFFICE.
Mr. AGLIONBY drew attention to the inexpediency
of removing this office and its valuable contents from its
present site in Whitehall-gardens, to make room for the
new Minister for War. -
Mr. WILSON said it was not till it was found im-
possible to procures fitting site fertile new department
of the Minister for War, that the Government had de-
termined tin 'removing the Enclosure Commissioners'
Office to St. James's-square, as it was desirable to have
the office of the War Minister near Downing street.
COUNT PAHLEN.
Mr. I. BUTT said he had a notice on the paper, but
as he understood that the house was anxious to go into
committee of supply, and as lie had been given to un-
derstand that if he did not press his motion now he
should have an opportunitrof bringing it on afterwards,
Under those circumstances he felt it would not be right
of him to occupy at present the time of the house.
(Hear, hear.)
MINISTER OF WAR.
The house having gone into committee of supply,
Lord J. RUSSELL said—Mr. Speaker, I am about to
3p
1l acest
il
to
anr tchh e,
11, Lb lse, tthoedeesftriamyatt
heefoerx
pethnesepgreseofnleyearsecreenditaryng
of State for the War Department; and in doing so I beg
to recall to the attention of the house what has passed on
previous evenings upon this subject. I think it was my
hon. friend the member for Montrose (Mr. Hume) who,
early in the session, stated his opinion—repeatedly ex-
pressed before—that the military departments in this
country ought to be brought together, and especially that
the Secretary of State for the War Department had not
sufficient control over these military departments. A right
hon, gentleman whom I see opposite (Sit' J. Pakington),
and who has been Secretary of State for" the Colonies,
added his opinfon that the , Secretarfof State for the
Colonies, although he was nominally Secretary of State
for War, had not the means in his department to carry
into effect those resolutions which he might think nesse.
nary for the public service. At a later period the hon.
member for Surrey asked me a question in reference to
this subject, and certainly received a very general assent
from the house when he said that he'hopecl there would be
a Minister of War. In answer to him, I stated that tie
subject was under the consideration of the Government.
A little later I said that the Government had determined
that the departments of Secretary of State for War and
Colonies should be divided, and that further arrangements
were in contemplation. I have now to give a general
outline of the changes that are in contemplation. In
the first place„ I beg to remind the house that two
questions come under consideration together, but are
of a very different character. The one is, whether in
time of war it is desirable to keep united the offices
of Secretary for War and for the Colonies ; and the other
is whether, with a view to public convenience in the
arrangements of the business of the departments, it is de-
sirable to make changes with regard to the military de-
partments, and to simplify and consolidate the business
which they have to transact. .With reference to the first
question, the house is aware that during the late war the
Secretary of State for War and the Colonies could devote
his time and attention to the business of the war—to the
fitting out of expeditions and the other military arrange-
ments—the colonial business at that time occupying only
a comparatively, small portion of his time. Since the
peace, and especially during the last twenty years, the
business of the Colonial Secretary has very greatly in-
creased. In almost every colony—even in some of the mi-
litary colonies—there have been discussions with revolt
to arrangements for the control of the public expenditure,
and many questions, some of the highest importance, have
I arisen in our several colonies. It, therefore, appeared to.
the Government that, considering that question alone, it
Iwas not desirable to keep these offices united, and that
altlictigh it was physically possible for ft person of great
decision, of great hashits of business, and of health which should ba uninterrupted, to go through the business of the
two departments, yet that it was desirable to separate
them for the sake of the efficient discharge of the duties of
each. The questions that would come before a minister
in each department might be of the utmost importance.
The fitting out of an expedition, the troops that are to corn-
pose it, the points to which it is to be directed, the means
that are to be employed, are all subjects involving ques-
tions that would require the sole and undivided attention
of a man of the greatest practice in public business. On the
other hand, although it might happen that the consideration
of colonial questions might often be postponed, still from
time to time there do arise questions that cannot be deferred
consistently with the order and with the setisfaction of the
colonies, and which require, both as to their principle and
details, the undivided attention of the Secretary of State.
On these grounds, therefore, seeing the great war in which
we are engaged, the Government thought that these depart-
ments should be divided. With reference to the other
question—which, as I said, is of a totally different nature
—it is one that has from time to time occupied the atten-
tion of former Governments. It was not long after Earl
Grey's Government was formed that the Duke of Rich.
mond represented to Lord Grey that it was very desirable
to inquire whether the military departments might not be
consolidated with advantage to the conduct of public busi-
ness. An inquiry was made into that subject by a com-
mission consisting, besides the Duke of Richmond, of the
hon. member for Coventry (Mr. Ellice), and of Sir James
Kemp. There was also employed, as secretary to the com-
mission, a man of considerable ability, Mr. John Biwa,
once Commissary-General iu the Peninsula. But although
the Duke of Richmond arrived at conclusions in which I was
ready 'to concur, the Government did not think fit to adopt
them, in consequence of the practical difficulty of putting
them in force. At a later period the present Earl Grey,
when Secretary at War, assisted by some of his colleagues,
made very extensive inquiries, and proposed a different
scheme of arrangements. To that scheme of arrangements,
which consisted chiefly in placing the Secretary-at-War in
the position,
of tab osizfrie
t‘avriyt with thef s taftue,n cttLicornes
,na.enrfel
sometlie propernbc.
attributes,
there were also other practical objections of _
the Duke of Wellington.b That
objec-
tions, arising from the nature of the depaamrtousietnfotr,niabnlde
nature which were stated by
plan was nut xdoptA, and Ido not knowthatauy an sequent
Government has proposed any inquiry into the
although from time to time, up ;:u tee present day, several
changes havebeen under consideration, no great or organic
subject. And
the depart-
has appeared to the o .
that, _
military
reviicil'esn'hitio' I,ia,nii,tni ogoofvlesr'n those departments change has been acdopvete;ml.inelnntteloiantsitflbeercibngierthiniscosnuvbajencite,neeit
several heads, there is no su-
init:rieeannitteisv
heelai,s beingv:
h, ti
gene-
rally, I have stated on former occasions that I do not
think it any fault that separate official persons should have
separate ditties, although they may belong generally to one
department. As on building this house, for instance, it. would be absurd to endeavour to consolidate and join the
departments of the mason, the carpenter, and the brick-
layer, but it would haequally absurd to liaVe three or four
ttghhhei
seen
revsetei•faevolw:c:otlinhsse, construction i ohne
itoLf
whothe building. What architects, who should give different opinions as to the
be aWblheattoistwakaentedintO
raenqduti roe moevnetrsa;
tahnedm. twhieth f dutiesfull ins
ine!
departments, wants,
i i
formation and with decision, and be able to come to a
final decision on the subjects which occupied his attention.
One of the departments which it is most obvious should
be placed under a Minister of War is the commissariat,
which is now a department of the Treasury. *There are
reasons for that arrangement, connected not so much with
the distribution, of provisions and supplies for the army,
as with the financial operations which the Treasury has to
perform in our ' different colonies. Now, although the
Treasury should have the general superintendence of the
financial concerns of the public, there does not seem any
convenience, bust the contrary, in an officer of the Treasury
having the regulation. of the pay and distribution of ra-
tions to the troops. That is business which does not pro-
perly belong to a department which has the general super-
Vision and 'control of the financies of the country ; it is an
executive function of itself, and therefore should bell
rather to an executive minister, such as a Secretary of Snit!
than to the department. of the Treasury. The Govesrntated
se
therefore, are of opinion that, besides what
b direction
mi-
nister Secretary of State for War should take
to the general direction of the operations of tlhehtaier
t to other
of the commissariat department: -With re
h havesP to be con-
sidered; questions, there are many changes w
13.':r that the Duke of
lii considering this subject, I reruernth;
Master-General of
Wellington gave the opinion that
officer who ought to be the
but few which can at once bhiccarried into effect.
t, that he should have a
military adviser of the Goverippen
Wants of the country,
the Ordnance was
of the military .
perfect knowledge
time to time to give the Cabinet,
and should be able from
ink
proper on military sepias.
properly the
such advice as he should think
may
be occasionally,
youl could find on ordinary cm-
seldom be practicably. it is obvious that .it can very
l who lied taken apoliticalpart and held
casions a genera
aB I
veryit al tghoooudg ha
ItTh,,i
as
gi
es , auleinpit.f
be in the prime of life, and his opinions
iasing him to. .
it would seem very ht, whether he were eld In
esteem,
inuPriegard, to military subjects very generally held
be called
the .Master-General of the Ordnance or by some other
name, that he should be the military adviser of the Go- •
vernment. But this is very seldom the case, and we gene.
rally find that the mode in .whiCh the office of Master-
General bite been supplied is this. You find a man of
great military distinction—Sir George Murray, or Sir
James Kemp, or the Marquis of Anglesey—appointed to
fill the office, who has won great honours in the field, and
who, therefore, is placed at the :head of the Ordnance de-
partment. But it is not, satisfactory that,, upon every
occasion, the Government should look to that officer for
the management of all the civil departments placed
under his care,. For observe that his office, instead
,_
of being, asitawap considered to be at ON 0001 "Y