The Sun.
London, England, 1853-08-05 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, FRIDAY EVENING, AUGUST 5, 1853,

his, previous to his report, the late Government advised
certain repairs to be at once undertaken.
Mr. WILSON said that the estimate was originally for
9,2131. but the Treasury, foreseeing some discussion like
the present, had only estimated for the essential repairs.
Next year, a vote would be required for the remainder.
In answer to Mr. SPOONER,

Mr. WiESON said that if the hon. gentleman would
propose any form of return, it should, as far as possible,
be given by the government.
After some further conversation,
Mr. BOOKER suggested that the houses should be
hired from year to year. He thought the time was come
for taking into consideration the whole of the ambassa-
dors' salaries. _

Mr. LAING was willing to vote the 5,0001., if it would
put the building in substantial repair.
Mr. WILSON said it would be confined almost entirely
to substantial repairs.

After some conversation, the vote was agreed to.
The next vote was 25,7501. for shipping offices and local
marine boards.

Mr. HUME said this sum was entirely taken from sea-
men, and he thought they ought to be allowed to make
their own engagements.
Mr. CARDWELL said the only change had been to
bring the sum under the consideration of Parliament ;
before it was not so.

The vote was agreed to, as was the following :-70,6001.
for the pensions of masters and seamen in the merchant
service, and their widows and orphans.
On the next vote, 2,175/., rewards for certain services in
the slave trade,
Sir G. PECHELL asked for some explanation.
Col. SIBTHORP wished to know when there was to be
an end of this. As long as we encouraged slave-grown
sugar, the slave-trade would continue ; and he thought
that the ministers who had given their sanction to free
trade in sugar should be made to pay these 'expenses.
Mr. WILSON said the vote referred to circumstances
which occurred in 1848, 1849, and 1850, when Captain
Dunlop, of the ship Alert, discovered that a number of
slave-dealers had established themselves on the coast, in
connection with a number of native chiefs in the interior
for the purpose of carrying on the trade in slaves. It was
necessary to land the troops, and they succeeded in libe-
rating a large number of slaves.
Mr. HUME referred to a similar vote which had been
made some years ago for Captain Denman, and which he
disapproved of, and afterwards ascertained to be illegal.
From the correspondence that had taken place on this
matter, he believed that the execution of the two chiefs
was nothing less than murder. The law officers would
state that this vote was illegal.
Mr. BRIGHT hoped that all the information in posses-
sion of the Government would be given before the vote
was agreed to. He believed that most unjustifiable trans-
actions took place on the coast of Africa, and the votes in
reference to them would all be smuggled through the
house, were it not for Mr. Hume.

Mr. WILSON said he kad already given all the informa-
tion he possessed. Any correspondence that had passed,
and not yet published, would be laid before the house.
Mr. BRIGHT believed the law officers of the Crown had.
decided that votes for services rendered on land were ille-
gal. The effect was merely to encourage officers in under-
taking marauding expeditions.
Mr. WILSON said the vote had been before the house
three months, and if papers were required or any informa-
tion, they would readily have been furnished ; but he could
not to postpone the vote upon the ground that they had not
been produced.
_ _ _

Captain SCOBELL said that a doubt was thrown out,
whether it was a legal payment, and that should be shown
before the house was asked to assent to it.

Mr. HUME insisted upon the propriety, of postponing
the vote until the correspondence was produced.
Lord PALMERSTON said he presumed these men were
slaves in a slave barracoon, and on the same liberal prin-
ciple a bounty was offered for the capture of slaves afloat,
so, by a liberal construction of it, a reward was offered in
such a case as was now being considered.
Mr. BRIGHT thought the noble lord must have pre-
sumed very far on the credulity of the house, in endeav-
ouring to induce it, by such an argument, to pass this vote.
The case was not the same as where we had treaties with
civilised countries, and the facts had been ascertained in
courts of competent jurisdiction, for they were dealing
with people whose natural condition was war. He ob-
jected to the principle of giving a vote in every such case,
but still, if it were to be acted upon, let the manner of it
be properly settled by act of Parliament.
Lord PALMERSTON explained that this proceeding
had taken place under a treaty with the native chief. It
was the policy of this country to multiply such treaties,
and the chief in this case was bound by one of them.
Mr. F. PEEL observed that instead of provoking dis-
cussion the act of the gallant officer ought to receive the
approbation of the house. The Sing of Ashantee had
marched an army into the territory of a chief under our
protection. The inhabitants organised themselves for de-
fence, and it was owing to the tact and judgment of Major
Hall that a collision was avoided.
Mr. LAING said he must object to the application of
the principles to which the noble lord the Home Secretary
referred, to interfere by naval officers in the internal wars
of savage countries.
The committee then divided, and the numbers were—
For the vote
Against it
Majority for —92

The next was a vote of 30,0001. to defray the expenses of
the commissions appointed to inquire into corrupt prac-
tices at elections.

Mr. WALPOLE wished to ascertain the proportions in
which the money had been expended, with reference to the
several classes of charges which had been investigated. He
wished to know, also, whether any instructions had been
given to the commissioners, at the time of their appoint-
ment, as to the manner in which they wore to be paid,
whether by the day, or a stipulated sum ? There had been
five or six of these commissions, a large number of wit-
nesses had been examined by them, and a similar number
were likely to be examined yet ; whereas, if the inquiries
had been prosecuted by examining facts upon one or two
competent witnesses, they might have saved the examina-
tion, he would not say of dozens, but of hundreds of wit-
nesses.
Col. SIBTHORP—A more gross, vast ill, and mis-
chievous expenditure, I do not remember having met with.
(A laugh.) I always did set my face against commissions,
and I believe I may say that in 99 cases out of 100, com-
missions are gross frauds on the public—robberies of the
public in the enormous sums they have to pay. I have yet
to learn what are corrupt practices. I naturally put that
question, and I defy the noble lord, whatever may have
occurred in the city of London, and however it- may be
wrapped up in mystery—(laughter)—l defy him to prove
one single case in which the humble individual who ad-
dresses him has been guilty of corrupt practices. (Great
laughter.) I court inquiry. These commissions are used
for certain purposes—party purposes—to employ certain
hangers-on of Government—briefiess barristers—useful
men on those particular occasions, but who had no clients
to be useful to on others. (Hear, hear.) There have been
five or six of these commissions, and nothing done. Five
or six more will be appointed, and they will do nothing.
The gallant colonel then moved the postponement of the
vote.
Lord PALMERSTON said that the selection of these
commissioners had been left not to the Government, but
to the persons who had moved for the commission, also
those gentlemen in every respect fitted for the office, from
high legal attainments and position at the bar. They were
all circuit-going lawyers, and could not, therefore, afford
to relinquish their circuit, without a higher rate of remu-
neration than would be given under ordinary circumstances
Mr. FRENCH complained of the verdicts which had
been given by the select committees, and which had resulted
in the appointment of the commissions. He could put his
hand on several cases in which there was not a single shade
of plausibility for the decision come to by the committee,
and unless some reforms were introduced into this system
before the next election, he defied any member to retain
his seat, if there were inquiry into his election. It mat-
tered not how pure and cautious the conduct of himself and
of his agents might have been, after what they had seen of
these committees, his seat, on a petition, must inevitably
be sacrificed.
Lord J. RUSSELL said he could not believe that there
was any justice in the accusation which the hon.gentleman
had brought against these select committees. These com-
mittees were appointed under act of Parliament, and were
generally composed of gentlemen eminent for their great
knowledge of the law. He (Lord J. Russell) believed that
they had conscientiously discharged their duty, and he
thought that the house had every reason to be satisfied
with the conduct of those committees, and the pains they
had taken in the discharge of their duties. At all events,
it was not becoming in this house, without very great proof
indeed, to attempt to depreciate the authority of those
gentlemen. These commissioners had been appointed ac-
cording to act of Parliament, and on the nomination of
persons of various political opinions, and he believed that
the persons so appointed were various in their political
opinions, and could not, therefore, have been selected from
any party feelings or prejudices. (Hear, hear.) There
was a danger, he admitted, that the expenses under these
commissions might be excessive, and no doubt it would
be the duty of the Home-office to watch the conduct of
these Commissioners, and if they should find that the mode
pursued by them was likely to lead to any abuse, to alter
that mode, and endeavour to prevent any expense, beyond
that which was absolutely necessary for the purposes of
the investigations, being incurred. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. AGLIONBY referred to the unanimous opinion
expressed by the Plymouth committee that their inquiry
was an entire waste of time, and that these investigations
could be only properly conducted by a commission sitting
on the very spot. (Hear, hear.)
Colonel DUNNE suggested that in these cases the bo-
roughs which formed the subject of inquiry should bear
the whole of the expense, in consonance with an ancient
law in this country. (Hear, hear.) He considered it un-
fair that Ireland should have to pay its shafe of these ex-
penses when not one of its members had been charged
with these corrupt practices.
Mr. FRENCH inquired whether the sixteen places
which had been deprived of members by these committees
would remain unrepresented until the next session ?
Lord J. RUSSELL said that of course if the house did
not issue the writs for those places, the house must remain
without those members. _

The vote was then agreed to.
On the vote of 3,723/. to Dr. Reid, as the amount of com-
pensation awarded to him for his services in superintend.
ing the ventilation of the Houses of Parliament,
Col. SIBTHORP protested against the increased ex-
pense which had been incurred in doctoring up these
buildings. He wanted to know when it was likely that
this robbery would end ?
The vote was agreed to.
On a vote of 28,0001. to defray the fees, salaries, and
compensation under the Patent Law Amendment Act,
Mr. APSLEY PELLATT said that the real expense of
this department was only 4,0001., and that the rest of the
money was for fees and compensation for doing nothing.
Mr. WILSON explained that the fees were fixed by the
act. and had been very considerably reduced of late.
Mr. BRIGHT wished to know whether the 12,0001. were
more or less than were received before. He rembered Sir
John Jarvis stating that his emoluments of officewere 12,0001.
a year, and that the Solicitor-General's were 7,0001. a year.
Now, seeing that those gentleman had time to attend to
their own professional interest, he was anxious to be in-
formed respecting the grounds on which the sum of
12,0001. were phposed.
Mr. WILSON explained, and said that the expenses of
the law officers of the Crown would be 30,0001. less, taken
altogether, than they were before.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL, in answer to Mr. KIN-
NAIRD, said that the offices of the attorney and solicitor
were devoid, in connection with the office of patents, of
any salary whatever. When the law was altered, the
themselvesAttorney-General
in the
and
hands o f Solicitor-Generalth e Lord
Chancellor, at once
whoplaced
took
steps in the matter, and subsequently to their going out of
office the fees were remilated, and reduced one-fourth of
the original amount. The business, as anticipated, greatly
increased, and the law officers of the Crown had, conse-
quently, greatly increased business and emoluments. The
Lord Chancellor consequently reduced the fees. There