The Sun.
London, England, 1854-08-01 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, AUGUST 1, 1854,,

watched, the fact being that the monuments had suffered
much more from the petty pilferings of the last century
than during the whole of the centuries preceeding. Mr.
Scott, in his able report, referred to the subject in the
following terms:" As the monuments have suffered
fully as much from spoliation as from decay, it is of
the utmost importance that the vigilant watch kept
over them should not in any degree be relaxed ; had
the present system been adopted a century earlier, the
atrocious pilfering and robbery, from which those invalu-
able works of art have so grievously suffered, would have
been in great measure prevented; far it is truly mor-
tifying to reflect that, though the church was exposed
during the great rebellion to the insults of the soldiery,
who were at one time quartered within its walls, and
though there was actually an order of Parliament (happily
never obeyed) for melting down the bronze, these monu-
ments actually suffered infinitely less during that turbu-
lent time than in the enlightened period intervening be-
t wean the middle of the last century and our own day, and
that their greatest spoliation has been suffered at the hands
of lhat intelligent public, who, one would have imagined,
wo!fid have been the guardians rather than the pilferers
of our national monuments." If, therefore, no fee were to
be levied on the pubic seeing these monuments, it would
be necessary that Parliament should vote a sum of money
for the payment of persons to show them. If Parliament
were prepared to do that, he would ask the consent of the
Lords of the Treasury to such a vote being proposed ; and
he had no doubt that if a general feeling in its favour were
expressed, the Lords of the Treasury would acquiesce in it.
He hoped, however, that if this were to be done, hon.
gentlemen would bear it in mind hereafter, because, gene-
rally speaking, when estimates of this kind were proposed,
ho found himself turned round upon and charged with
increasing the estimates, and told that these were matters
which the individuals and not the public ought to pay for.
Mr. M. MILNES expressed his great satisfaction at the
proposed restoration of the monuments ,• and sail it seemed
to him that the ground upon which a Parliamentary grant
for such a purpose might be fairly asked for was only to be
found in the fact that Westminster Abbey was our great
Pantheon—the depository of the monuments, not merely
of our kings, but of our statesmen, our poets, and our men
of letters. Some years ago, when the poet Campbell died,
men high in station in the country had felt themselves
honoured in accompanying his boas, to the grave. A sub-
scription for a fit monument had been afterwards cora-
l-nen:led, and the appeal had been so fully responded to,
that a monument, which he believed to be worthy of the
man, had been .uoW for geese time completed. It had only
not been completed, because the Dean and Chapter of
Westminster had asked the enormous sum of 20J1. for a
few square feet of ground on which to set it up. (Hear,
hear.) Now, if the abbey of Westminster stood in this
relation to the public, and if public monuments were not
to be admitted into it except in consideration of such
advantages, it could neither be the duty nor the interest
of Parliament to spend large sums of money in its decora-
ration, or in the restoration and repair of the monuments
already there. He trusted that the Government would
put themselves in communication with the Dean and
Chapter, and endeavour to remove this great scandal,
which, he felt, as an Englishman, was injurious to the
national character, and which was especially painful to
him as a Churchman, because he felt that matters of this
kind did more to injure the higher clergy of the English
Church than anything else could do.
Mr. JOHN BALL referred to certain pa titulars con-
nected with the proposed restoration, which persons who
were most competent to judge—without wishing for a rim-
merit to cast any doubt on the ability or competency of
Mr. Scott—consitlere I to be inexpedient, both in an ar-
chreological and artistic point of view. He hoped great
caution would be exercised, and the opinions of competent
persons taken on the subject.
Mr. BRADY bore testimony to the success which had
attended Mr. Scott's attempt at restoration in Ely Cathe-
dr .1. He did not think Westminster Abbey was a fit recep-
tacle for the monuments of ware iors—they ought to erect a
building for their reception, and not uesecrate an edifice
dedicated to God. He Would support any vote that would
allow the public to have free admission to the church.
Sir W. MOLES ‘VORTH said the greater portion of the
abbey was already open to the public. It was necessary
to clone the royal chapels, in order to stop the pilfering
which had done so much damage. He wished to say that
Mr. Scott's object was to preserve and not to renew the
monuments. With regard to the remark of the hon. mem-
ber for Pomfret (Mr. Milues), in relation to idle statue of
the poet Campbell, he would immediately pht himself in
communication with tare Dean and Chapter on the subjest,
and he had no doubt they would meet the views of the
house. (Hear, hear )
Mr. WILLIAMS thought that any sums paid for per-
mission to erect monuments ought to go towards the repairs
of the buildings.
Sir J. SHELLEY vindicated the public from the asper-
sion cast upon them. If confidence was placed in them
they would feel pride in the preservation of the objects
entrusted to them. •
Mr. EWART wished that the monuments were placed
entirely under the control of Government.
The vote was then agreed to.
On the next vote of 1,0001. for repairing the pedestal
and restoring the statue of Charles I. at Charing-cross,
Sir W. MOLES WORTH sail that last year an applica-
tion had been made by the Crystal Palace C nnpany for
permission to take a cast. During the work he had an
opportunity of observing the condition of the statue, and
he found it in such a dilapidated state that he had re-
quested Mr. Westmacott to give him a report on the sub-
ject. The report entered at length into the condition of
the statue, and it could not be restored for a less sum
than that now asked.
Mr. WISE thought the vote might be postponed for the
present. He would not wish the statue to be destroyed,
as it was one of the finest works of Le Sueur ; but Charles
I. was a king celebrated only for his violation of public
rights, and his memory was not so dear to them.
Mr. DISRAELI reminded the hon. gentleman that
whatever opinion he might have of the political character
of Charles 1., if he was a lover of the fine arts he must re-
vere his memory. He wished to call the attention of the
committee to the fact that this statue had once before dis-
appeared, in consequence, not of a vote, out of the temper
of the House of Commons. This—the chef d'oeuvre of Le
Sneer—was lost fora time. As it had been recovered, it
did not become the house to pass a vote which would again
endanger its existence.
The vote was then agreed to.
On the next vote of 13,0001, fur the expe':se of collecting
agricultural statistics,
Mr. GARD WELL said that a limited number of coun-
ties had been taken at first, as there was some opposition
to the proceedings, but the operations of the commissioners
were being gradually extended.
Mr. E. DENISON hoped that the returns for England
would show the average crop per acre. It was given in
the Scotch return.
Mr. CARD WELL said the information would be given
for those counties in which the statistics had been taken
last year, but the commissioners could not give it for the
new counties.
The vote was then agreed to.
On the next vote, 6,0001. for repairing breaches at Spurn
Point, on the river Humber,
Lord HOTH A NI said ha understood that a large portion
might have been avoided if there had been
any thisype se
resxopneinnauthurity oa the spot when the damage first
occurred ; but, the Government agent resided at a distance,
and so much time was lost in communicating with him,
that a large amount of injury was clone before any steps
were taken to remedy it, He hoped this would be guarded
against for the future.
Sir J. GRAHAM. said that a question had arisen as to
whether the Corporation of the Trinity House were not
bound to repair this breach, as it occurred in the imme-
diate vicinity of a lighthouse, but on consideration the
Admiralty decided they were not. A conservator for the
river Humber had been appointed, whose close and con-
stant attention would be given to the subject.
The vote was then agreed to.
On
the next vote,
i 3,370/. for works at Kingston Har-
bour,
Mr. WILSON said that the vote. had been postponed, to
enable some inquiries to be made. In consequence of the
it
had been ordered to make a
information they had received the works were now sus-
pended, and jur. enlell
report. He believed he might say the present plan would
not be proceeded with.
The vote was then agreed to.
On the next vote of
t
16,8891., for defraying the expense
of the new offices for the Duchy of Cornwall, at Pimlico,
Sir W. MOLES WORTH said that on moving the third
reading of the bill relating to this matter, he had promised
to make an explanatory statement. As the committee were
aware, the Duchy of Cornwall were now possessed of offices
at Somerset-house, which they held under the act of the
15th Geo. 111., c. 33, which vestedSomerset-housethe
king in
king for the use of the duchy and other offices. A short
time ago the whole of the Inland Revenue Department
had been consolidated at Somerset-house. To give
the increased accommodation required it was considered
advisable to obtain the offices now occupied by the duchy.
He had accordingly been directed to put himself in com-
munication with the council on the subject. They stated
they were very well satisfied with their present offices,
but if the public service required it, they would give them
up on being provided with equally suitable offices to be
held on the same title. Be then took steps to procure a
house for them. The first suggestion was Buckingham-
honse, Pall-mall, but he fountr3o,oool. was required for
its purchase, and it would take 5,000/. more to put it in
order, a much larger suns than be was prepared to give.
The next site suggested was the Irish Offices, in Birdcage-
walk, but on making inquiries he found that the pruprie
tors would not consent to part with the freehold. Ho then
proposed that the Duchy
of Cornwall should occupy new
offices, to be built in the new street in Pimlico, and the
buildings in which it was proposed should be of a superior
class. Plans were sent in, and approved of. Then came
the question of the comparative value between the old and
new offices. The Board of Works argued that, as the new
office would be of more value than the old office in So-
merset-house, the Duchy of Cornwall ought to pay a portion
of the expense. But the officers of the Duchy of Cornwall
contended on the other hand that, as they had no desire to
change, as they were very comfortable where they were,
and only consented to vacate their present offices for the
public convenience, it was not fair to call upon them to
pay a portion of the expense. He could not deny that
there was much force in this argument. Then arose a
question of the comparative value of the two offices,
and it was proposed that valuers should be appointed
by the Board of works and the Duchy respectively, who
were, as soon as the new office* was built, to determine the
relative value of that and the old office in Somerset-house,
and the difference of value, if any, on the new office over
the old one was to be divided into two equal parts, half of
which was to be paid by the Duchy and the other half by
the Government. As the office could not be built for two
years the officers of the Duchy would be put to great
inconvenience. The right honourable gentleman then
urged that the value put on the old offices should be viewed
with reference to the accommodation given to the public,
and that on the whole the public could make a fair bargain
by the arrangement proposed. A request had been made
to him to state the relative market value of the two pro-
perties ; but he thought it would be very unbusiness-like
when the matter was about to be submitted to arbitration,
to enter into such details. An estimate had been made
by the architect of the Board of Works, and according to
that estimate the difference of the market value between
the two offices would be 4,3001-s and of that half was to be
paid by the Duchy into the Consolidated Fund, and the
other half to be defrayed by the Government as a sort of
accommodation price. But the estimate of the architect
of the Duchy of Cornwall was entirely different, and left
no surplus or difference between the value of the two
offices. If the committee should not sanction the vote, the
Duchy of Cornwall would be very glad to remain where it
was, but great public inconvenience would be caused in
consequence of the want of accommodation for the Board
of Inland Revenue.
31r. W. WILLIAMS suggested that the Duchy of
Cornwall office should be removed to the house formerly
occupied by the Irish office. He complained that a sum
of 4117,0007.., including 150,0001., from the commissioners
of the Great Exhibition, had been appropriated for the
purchase of land, and the objects for which it was required
had never been stated.
Mr. DISIt.A.ELI explained that the complaint whits
- ...... , -

hear that one of them had availed himself—to escape from
justice.? (Hear, hear )
Lord PiILMERSTO.N. said that the reason why no de-
cision upon the report had been come to till now was the
extremely voluminous character of the proceedings, which
had required v. ry long and deliberate consideration. He
had referred the report of the commissioners to the law
officers of the Crown, and he had very recently -received
from them their report upon it. They recommended that
legal proceedings should be taken against the governor and
surgeon—(hear, hear)—and directions had been given to
institute those proceedings without a moment's delay.
(Cheers.)

the hon. member had made with regard to the voting of
nearly half a million sterling for the purchase of land for
public buildings, and yet that accommodation could not be
found for the officers of the Duchy of Cornwall was un-
founded, because a munificent sum of 150,0001. had been
given by the commissioners of the Great Exhibition, and a
sum of 200,0001. had been voted for the purchase of land
at Kensington, and a further sum of 150,000/. for the pur-
chase of Burlington House, yet it was not merely for the
building of public offices that these sums were voted for
the purchoec of land. It was impossible to give an equi-
valent to the Duchy of Cornwall for the loss of their offices,
and the country was bound to find the Duchy a proper
place for the translation of its business in return for those
they gave up for the public convenience.
Mr. W. WILLIAMS stated that what he said was, that
no explanation was given of the obj,ats for which this
467,0001., including the 150,000/. given by the commis-
sioners of the Great Exhibition, had been expended.
Mr. WISE observed that the act of 1775, which gave a
vested interest to the Duke of Cornwall in the otliees in
Somerset House, and which charge.' 100,0001. out of the
revenues for that purpose, was so contrary to Parliamentary
usage, that a oebsequent act repealed it ; and he doubted,
therefore, whether the Duchy really possessed any vested in-
terest in these offices. Then there was no guaa ante,: that
the expenditure contemplated in this vote would not be ex-
ceeded. - (" Yes, there ie") He was glad to hear that the
estimate was nut to be exceeded. They were always told tha
they could not interfere in matters connected with the
Duchy of Cornwall any more than they could interfere
with the private property of the Duke of Bedford and the
Marquis of Westminster, but if that was the position of
the Duchy of Cornwall, how was it that the public were
called upon to provide it with offices at 4? (Hear, hear.)
He thought an establishment having a revenue of 59,1531.
and a surplus of 25,0001. a year, might well pay for i 0
own offices. (Hear, hear.) He must enter his protest
against the vote.
The Marquis of CHA.NDOS defended the vote, and de-
nied that the Duchyof Cornwall were asking for any money
for their own accommodation. This grant was required not
for their convenience, but for the public convenience. All
the duchy desired was that they should be provided with
accommodation equivalent to that they now possessed, and
which, for the public convenience, they were asked to sur-
Tender. (Hear.)
Mr. K.ENDA.LL also supported the vote.
Mr. HADFIELD thought some further explanation was
necessary as to the disposal of these sites, which ought to
be appropriated to Government buildings. They had had
a conversation tne other night as to the renewal of the
lease of Montague house, Now that was, of all others, the
site which, according to all authority, was the beet adapted
to public offices, and though 8 JMO explanation had ueen
given by the right honourable gentleman (Mr. Disraeli)
of the accusation he made against the present Govern-
ment as to that renewal, the house ought to know
something more about it, and by what influence it
was that the public had been deprived of that
valuable site. (Hear, hear.) The Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer had promised to examine the papers, and give the
house full explanation on the subject, but he hail not
done so. He (Mr. Hadfield) thought it would be well if
those papers were produced, and also that the house should
he informed whether the renewed lease had been granted,
if not to a member of the late Government, whether it had
been at the instance of any member of that Government,
or in any way for party purposes? (Hear.)
Mr. DISIIAELI was perfectly ready to admit, as he had
admitted before, that he was the party who had renewed
the lease of Montague-house, and that be alone was the
person responsible for it. That lease was renewed to a dis-
tinguished nobleman, who was a member of neither the
present nor the late Government; and the transaction had
been uninflnenced by party feeling in the slightest degree.
But with regard to the general question, as to the renewal
of leases of crown property in the vicinity of the public
offices—when he gave his opinion on a previous evening
that such leases ought not to be renewed, but that the pro-
perty should be retained for the public service, that opinion
had no ref, rence to the accommodation required for the
offices of the Duchy of Cornwall. He believed had Mon-
tague House been retained for the purposes of the Duchy
of Corn wall, it would have been the most disastrous arrange-
ment for the public that could have been made. (Hear,
hear.) It was to a very superior class of service to which
he referred when he said Montague House should have been
retained for the public service. But he believed very equi-
table claims had been shown to exist for the renewal of the
lease, and for making this case an exception to the rule he
had laid down in reference to the renewal of the lease, of
crown property in such situations.
The CHA.NCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—The hon.
gentleman (Mr. Hadfield) having reminded him that he
had given something like a pledge to the house
in connexion with this subject, considered that he owed
a word or two of explanation. When he stated that his
recollection differed from that of the right hon. gentlemen,
but that the papers relating to the transaction were at the
Treasury, and he would examine them, be had the facts
pretty clearly in his mind, but did not consider it either
wise or just, seeing that the affair had taken place many
months ago, to speak positively without referring to the
docurneets. The right hon. gentleman had, however,
rendered any statement of his unnecessary by the explana-
tion he gave the other evening, and after that explanation
he thougt it hardly necessary to lay the papers upon the
the table. If, however, the hon. gentleman wished them
to be produced, and moved for them, 'he saw no reason
against it. (Hear, hear.) Althoughhe considered that
an error in judgment had been committed in renewing the
lease of Montague House, it was only due to the right
hon. gentleman to say that nothing that had occurred gave
the slightest justification that there had been anything
more than an error in judgment. (Hear, hear.)
Sir J. V. SHELLEY inquired whether it would be
stated in the papers to be produced how much more the
Duke of Bucclettch paid for Montague-house under the
new lease than under the old one?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Yes.
Sir W. MOLESWORTH, in reply to-a question from
an hon. member, stated that he was not aware that the
Act of Parliament referred to by Mr. Wise, by which a
vested interest was given to the Duchy inthe offices at
Somerset house, had been repealed.
The vote thee passed.
On the vote of 2.2731. for defraying the salaries of joint-
stock companies officers,
Mr. BRIGHT would take this opportunity of asking the
right hon. gentleman the President of the Board of Trade,
whether the important question of limited liability was
under the consideration of Government. He would say
that he was acting for an important mercantile class,
connected with Manchester and also with Liverpool, who
were desirous of establishing a steam-shipping company
under a charter of incorporation, and, on attempting tip
forward their views, he found it was not a very easy task
to get at the information he required. The resolution
passed recently by the house bore very strongly on this
question, and he hoped the right hon. gentleman would
state, for the advantage of the house and the country,
whether it was the intention of Government to do any-
thing
next session, and to bring in some measure upon the
subject ?

SIR B. HALL AND THE EARL OF SHAFTESBURY.
Sir B. HALL stated that he had received a letter from
the Earl of Shaftesbury denying that he had been a party
to the burial grounds regulations respeeting which he (Sir
B. Hall) had in a recent debate made some strong observa-
tions. Those regulations had been issued under the autho-
rity of the Secretary of State.
Viscount PALMERSTON said that the regulations did
not proceed from the Board of Health, nor had they been
intended as general regulations. They had only been sub-
mitted as recommendations with regard to a particular
burial ground.

goods. The only result of all this expense would be a
series of voluminous reports which nobody would read,
and for them Government was about to starve the useful
portion of the exhibition. It was true the French had
spent 68,0001., but then it should be remembered that in
France there were no manufacturers coming forward to
co-operate, whereas now the English manufacturers were
coming forward liberally, the subscriptions in Manchester
alone amounting to between 4,0001. and 5 0001.
Colonel SIBTHORP had opposed the Crystal Palace in
Hyde-park, and also its successor in Sydeuham. He would
continue his opposition to the present as tending to the en-
couragement of the foreigner at the expense of our own
countrymen.
Air. BROTHERTON said that he had received repre-
sentations fiom Salford similar to those which had been
read by the hon. member for Manchester. They did not
object to the whole amount, but to the mode of distribu-
tion. _ _

Mr. SCULLY complained of the small sum allowed for
the transport of goods.
Mr. RICH thought some information should be given to
the committee as to the officers under whom this sum of
money was to be expended.
Sir J. SHELLEY considered that the fact of the French
Government having granted a sum of money, was no rea-
son that England should do the same. He believed that,
if left to private enterprise, these matters would be much
better carried out. If the committee were divided, he
should vote against this vote.
Mr. SPOONER found that a portion of this sum was to
be expended in the completion of the decorations of the
Exhibition. He did not quite understand this.
Mr. CARD WELL said that the decorations referred to
were precisely similar to those which were executed by the
French in the Exhibition at Hyde-park—(hear)—and which
gave so marked and cheering a tone to the French courts
in Hyde-park. (Hear.) In addition to this there were ex-
penses to be provided for in furnishing cases for those raw
products of the United Kingdom which, although they fell
into no particular branch of English trade, yet ought to be
represented in Paris, and would therefore be exhibited by
the Government. He thought that no one would object to
proper decorations for the English department of the
French Exhibition, for if we were to exhibit at all, we
ought to do so in a proper manner. (Hear.)
Colonel SIBTHORP said that the country was now en-
couraging foreigners,. and he was quite sure that for dura-
bility and solidity English manufactures were unsurpassed.
(" Hear, hear," and laughter.) He warned hon. gentlemen
to beware of France and Austria. Let the committee tale
care of man-traps and spring-guns. (Laughter.)
Mr. LOCKE thought if the manufacturing int3rest had
been left to itself in this matter it would have been better.
If the Board of Trade had left the entire matter to private
parties the country would stand a chance of being better
represented than it did now.
The vote was then agreed to.
A vote of 100,0001. to defray the several charges under
the head of civil contingencies having been proposed,
Mr. W. WILLIAMS called attention to what he deemed
to be the objectionable character of several of the items.
He saw no reason why a sum of 2,0301. should be set down
in the estimates as an allowance to be made tp 'the Lord
Chancellor upon his appointment to the office ; nor did be
think that the sum proposed to be given to the Lcrd Lieu-
tenant of Ireland, under the title of equipage money, was
an expenditure which was justifiable.
Mr. PELLATT wished to know upon what ground a
sum for the purpose of defraying the expenses of the colo-
nial bishops for making tours through their dioceses was
placed upon the votes? It appeared to him to be an en-
tirely new charge upon the public funds.
Mr. WILSON said that for very many years the colonial
bishops had been obliged to pay periodical visits to various
portions of their dioceses: Several of these localities con-
sisted of islands in the West Indies, and in passing to those
districts they were usually afforded a passage in such of
her Majesty's ships as might happen to be at the particular
station, and were merely allowed the expenses of their
maintenance while on board the vessel. With respect to
the sum of 2,0001. paid to the Lord Chancellor upon his
appointment, he could only say that a similar sum had
been given to him from time immemorial; and he (Mr.
W.) believed it was entirely inadequate to defray his ex-
penses. To the Lord Lieutenant, also, who was a high
officer of state, he did not think that an unreasonable sum
was asked to be granted for the purpose of furnishing the
equipage becoming hie position.
Mr. PELLATT said that as he had received no sufficient
answer with respect to the amount alldwed to the colonial
clergy for the purpose of enabling them to make a tour
from one portion of their dioceses to another, he should
move that that amount be deducted from the vote.
Mr. PEEL stand that the allowar ce made to the colonial
bishops was so trifling as not to enable them to incur the
expense of paying visits to the remoter i.dands which came
within the limits of their dioceses. The island of Ber-

muda, for instance, was within t!ie diocese of Newfound-
land; but it was at so great a distance from the residence
of the bishop as to render a visit to it a matter of very
great expense. It was, therefore, only reasonable that
those expenses should b 3 paid out of the public fund, which
the salary of the bishop did not enable him to defray.
After a few words from Mr. MAGUIRE,
Mr. WILLIAMS said that if his hon. friend the mem-
ber for Southwark would divide the house, he (Mr. Wil-
liams) should move that t e sum of 1,2001. be paid to the
episcopal clergy in Scotland, as also the sum proposed to
be given to the commission appointed to inquire into the
condition of the collegiate churches in England and Wales,
should be deducted from the vote.

Mr. HADFIE LD should support the motion of the hon.
member for Southwark.
The vote was agreed to. •
On the question that 812,8261. be voted for the mail
packet service,
Mr. HORSFALL called attention to the irregularities
which attended the performance of the South African Ser-
vice, and which were inflicting great loss upon the trade
of the country.
Mr. COWPER said this was a very difficult service,
and there was no power in the Admiralty or any other de-
portment of the Government to prevant the delays which
the hon. member complained of. However, steps had be... 0
taken to diminish the delays as much as possible.
Mr. HORSFALL said the difficulties were purely ima-
ginary, but the real point of complaint was •this : the con-
tractors were paid for services which in point of fact they
did not perform, because they had sold some of the
steamers with which they had intended to complete their

contract.
Mr. J. FOSTER said some of the vessels had been with,

drawn to assist in carrying on the war in the East.
Mr. HORSFALL said that might be so, but there were
other vessels which might have been obtained for continu-
ing the service.
The vote was agreed to, as was also a sum of 993,0001.
for expenses of the embodied and disembodied militia of
Great Britain and Ireland.

In reply to questions from Colonel LINDSAY and Colonel
DUNNE,
Mr. S. HERBERT said that, with .respect to the
clothing, the alteration had become necessary, not because
the colonels of regiments had acted in any way unfairlyan
for, in point of fact, the great profit went into the.h hands
of the chithier, and not of the colonel. Still the principle
was objectionable. It was the intention to carizdohe
hail
arrangements recommended by the commission,
for
Cshorefe upondays btheeensiunbjceommunication with the
TheCommander-
in-Chief
er vs
cont e
fullof plaoy, OnyNa.
a,
then to d
aegfrraeyedthtce.charges of retiring
oThe house then resumed, and
The CHAIRMAN reported progress.
CUSTOMS ACTS.
The house then went iuto committee on the Customs
Acts.
Mr. DEEDES sathitel,nthheaylf-hpaadstbtewenelvsiettaitngnisgihntce; tawineilvaes
it being
tt'll'eelyoewkere to meet at twelve this day, he should move that
the chairman report progress. Such an important bill
should not be proceeded with at that hour.
Mr. HADFIELD seconded the proposition for reporting
progress.
Mr. WILSON hoped the hon. gentleman would not per-
severe with his motion, as there was only one item which
was not a mere alteration of terms. That item was hops,
and it was understood that it would come on.
Mr. M. SMITH said that the hon. member who objected
to the article of hops had left the house, and he must ob
ject to proceeding at that late hour.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said they
might be allowed to go until they arrived at that article,
and then the hon. gentleman might raise his objection to
proceeding. It was to be recollected that the hon. gentle-
man would have six other opportunities of stating his
views with respect to hops.
Mr. BOOKER said he thought it was distinctly under-
stood that no opposed business was to be taken after twelve
o'clock.

Air. CARDWELL said the resolution referred to the
principle of en commanclite, and did not apply to the
granting of charters to joint-stock companies. He believed
it was the general opinion, and no one more cordially
shared in that opinion than himself, that it was undesir-
able power of this kind should be exercised by a poiitical
official who was without the means of collecting evidence
on both sides. With respect to the commission, the
recommendations of the commissioners had received the
most careful attention of Government, and Government
would not fail to take these recommendations into con-
sideration.
Mr. BRIGHT wanted a more definite answer. He
wanted to know whether Government intended to take:
proceedings to place this department ou a more satisfactory
footing ?
Mr, CARDWELL would reply that Government were
acting in strict accordance with the recommendations of
the committee.
Mr. BRIGHT asked if the right hon. gentleman could
give a positive answer that he would do so ? The right
hon. gentleman said the difficulty was in having a political
officer applied to for a charter in a private room,
here he
was not in a condition to hear evidence. wishedHe to
know whether Government proposed to alter that state of
things, and to make such arrangements that parties apply-
ing for a charter would have their case heard and decided
without delay ?
Mr. CARDWELL—Considering
the
aoo committee
fraineof
i
that house, after examining into
th hoeusguhhtj itt, refrained
be
from coming to any conclusion,
highly unbecoming in him
to anticipate the conclusion to
which Government would arrive. The report hal only
been laid on the table a short time. When it was fully
considered then the determination of Government would
be known.
The vote was agreed to.
Upon the next vote, 50,0001. for the expense of the
British department of the Paris Industrial Exhibition of
1855,
Mr. BRIGHT said that his constituents were most
anxious that our textile fabrics should he properly repre-
sented in the Penis Exhibition, and to show that their
object was a public one had subscribed a large sum for the
purposes of the Exhibition, stipulating that on the goods
sent over no name of any particular manufacturer should
be inscribed. He had received a letter from the town
clerk of Manchester, containing some observations respect-
ing the disposition of the Government grant, which he
thought he could not do better than read to the house.
The writer stated that the manufactures of Manchester
gathered from Mr. Cole's letter that very little substantial
aid would be afforded to the Exhibition of British manu-
factures. Mr. Cole allotted to the subdividing of space STAMP DUTIES BILL.
upwards of 3,00, )1. ; expense of office in Paris about 3,000/. ; On the order of the day for the third reading of the
cleaning, &c., 5,000/. ; painting, decorating, &c., 3,0001. ; Stamp Duties Bill,
travelling and 'other expenses of jurors, etc., 11,003/. Mr. HADFIELD moved that the house adjourn.
(Hear, hear.) In the whole estimate there was only 9,7501. The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that
appropriated in aid, direct or indirect, of the objects at this period of the session it was usual to sit a little late,
of the exhibition, while the whole of the residue would he in order to accomplish the business of Parliament at any-
expended in matters which he believed would be amply thing like a reasonable period.
provided for by the French Government, or in entertain- The house was then cleared for a division, but none took
ing large staff of jurors and others sumptuously in Faris. place, lace, and the bill was read a third time.
He hoped that as he had now called the attention of Go-
On the question that the bill do pass,
vernment to the matter, the money would not be spent in Mr. HADFIELD moved the addition of the following
eating or drinking, or wasted in extravagant official man- clauses :—" And whereas doubts have arisen, whether,
agement. With respect to the large sum set down for under the provisions of the said act of the 13th and 14th
jurors, he thought that much, if not all of it, might be years of her present Majesty, chap. 97, leases, whereby
dispensed with. He did not know what the jurors in there is reserved a peppercorn or other nominal rent, are
France might do, but in England in 1851 the distribution subject to the stamp duty of 6d. by the said act imposed
of medals was so general, and indiscriminate that little or on leases where the rent shall not exceed 51., or to a stamp
no value was atteched to them by the recipients, (Hear.) of some other and greater amount, and it is expedient that
He did not wish to say a word against Mr. Cole individu- the said doubts should be set at rest, be it enacted,
ally, against the grant, or against its object. He'believed that where, by any lease, or tack of any lands,
that Ole French people were made acquainted with our tenements, or hereditanients, or heritable subjects, for any
manfactures much good might result, but if 9,0001. was term of years, there shall be reserved the rent of a pepper-
sufficient to be expended in their transmission, surely corn, or any other nominal rent, such lease or tack shall,
43,0001. was excessive for the other purposes indicated in in respect of such nominal rent, only be subject to the said
Mr. Cole's letter. stamp duty of 6d , and no more; be it enacted that where
Mr. CA ROWELL said that with regard to the distri- any conveyance of any lands, &c., &c., shall be made with-
lention of the sum it should ho recollected that expenses on out consideration money, other than a nominal considera-
occasions like the present were of two kinds. Those of tion, not exceeding 251., such conveyance shall be subject
which individual exhibitor felt the benefit, and those to a stamp duty of 28. 6,1., and no more."
which went in promotion of the general object. The hon. M'. WILSON opposed the introduction of the clauses,
member seemed to think the estimate for superintendence which were negatived without a division.
and clerical assistance too much, but they were based on Mr. HAMILTON, in the absence of Lord Naas, moved
the audits of 1851, and it was thought that what the the addition of the following clause :—" The stamp duties
French did for us then we should do for them in 1855. The now payable on matriculations, degrees, and certificates of money would be sneut under the control of an official :le- degrees, in each and every university in the United King- ,
countant, and must ultimately bo examined by the Board dom shall be abolished so soon as provision shall have been
of Thule, The „hole expanse would he mueeh less then made, to the satisfaction of the Lords Comu,i.isioners of
should tak hert MI ajesty's Treasury in lieu of any moneys heretofore DIED.
that of the French Government in 1851.
On the 29th ult., at an advanced age, the Hon. Char-
sea. uusvert
that opportunity of stating that the French Government 1
tvioese annually by Parliament for any of the i I i
Bedingfeld, relict of Sir Richard
igdteinngfee°lirig,ißnlrtL.a, col Oxburgh hall, Norfolk.
had made arrangements for the admission and • ' These taxes were taxes on education, and as such
even those whicPh. I were very objectionable. (Hear, hear.)
tion in France of all the British goods,
Esq., a magistrate and deputy-lieutenant
On the 28th ult , at Liscard, aged 64, John Dennil Mad"
were at presentprohibited at a maximum duty. of 20 per The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER hoped the '
.
for the
cent. His hon, friend might depend upon it that every , house would leave the matter in the hands of the Govern- dock,
effort would be made to economise, . and that the items went, as they had already commenced to deal with it. The county of Chester.
On the 27th lilt. at 29 Store-street,B ciford-square, in
her 94th year, Mary' Char,lo4e,onlyeitere o
consistently with the objects question, apparently, was very simple, but not at
u eastllioans
would be reduced, if Possib.le,
of the late Ed-
of the exhibition. i much so as hon. gentlemen might suppose- The e
Arms,
Mr. A. PELLATT thought
mole, Rector of Carshalton, in Surrey.
the item for glass fittings ran into very considerable branches of detail, and involved, mend Lodge Esq., K.H., Clarenceux King of
F.S.A., and daughter of the Rev. Edmund Lodge, for
excessive. consequently, a large amount of revenue.
' ins net to the vote Colonel DUNNE tl 1 h 'l-
- BRIGHT repeated his objectie
Ile/. ior , long it t e e ens
...—ea
but to th, distribution, especially 110., , jurors one, and should, therefore, support, it. .
'any jurois The clause wse ne •division.
.e a very reasonable
travelling expenses. lie wished to know hew
.1 . ,
large
.. . &awed without a
cIauseLONDON : Printed and Published by MITRDO YOUNG,
would be necessary. What he objected to was, the,' a
of No. 112, Strand, Printer, at The Sun Office, No., 112,
staff of jurors, officials, and clerks should live for wteks purpose of moving the
i Strand, in the Precinct of the Savoy, in the county °^
which was agreed to,
luxuriously in Paris, at the public expense, while so am 11 I Middlesex, Tuesday, August 1, 18540
insertion of an amended clause, '
a sum as 0,700 f, was allotted to the actual tranou*sioed i *re lUDE. IELP moved as aulodn2o3lt: with the object '

' Lord J. RUSSELL said it was unreasonable for any
hon. member to object to proceeding with this business at
a comparatively early 'hour of the night (twenty-five
minutes to one o'clock.)
Mr DEEDES said he would not stand in the way of
the business proceeding, and would withdraw his motion.
After some further conversation, the motion was
withdrawn.

Mr. NEWDEGATE inquired what the amount of the
new duty upon glass was to be?
Mr. WILSON said it was not intended to put a duty
upon common glass. There was no duty .at present. upon it.
At the request of Mr. FREWEN .and other hon.
members, the resolution respecting the hop duties was
postponed.

The other resolutions were then agreed to, and the house
resumed.