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

I AIPERIAL PARLIAMENT,

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 savings of
sailors. He objected to the clause on the ground that
savings banks already existed in those placft, and lie=
cause it established a principle which had been re-
peatedly introduced into the Savings Bank Bill, and
as frequently rejected, viz., giving the commissioners
power to appoint their own treasurer.
Lord STANLEY of A LDERLEY said the object of
the clause was to pravido banks where sailors could im•
mediatly 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The amendment was then withdrawn, and the clause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 inten-
tention to take the opinion of the house upon
this
this cicou ause
ntr .
but Itof eve had been the law not only of
y ry 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-
to that of all versive of th
other countries. at universal law, and make our law different ,
Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY did not think the
clause would effect so sweeping a change of the existing
law as 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
f)r 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.

56

Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY said that no sea-
man was compelled to go on a voyage in a vessel that he
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 any time to
be unloaded with the view of being surveyed.
After a few words from the Earl of ELLENBOROUGH
and the Earl of HARDIVICKE the amendment was agreed
to, and the clause, together with clauses up to 239 in-
clusive, 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. I
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 from 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
Icontrol of the House of Commons, which was a return
to the system abolished by Sir R. Peel in 1843. The
noble lord then went on to argue against the impolioy 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
Governincrt 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, hut 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, he would have supported it, but he objected to
placing under the control of the House of Commons 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.

HOUSE OF COMMONS—(YESTERDAY.)
The SPEAKER 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 Taviatock
Railway Bill.
The Earl of Eglinton's Estate Bill and Stainforth's

Mate 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

the Fine; and Recoveriei Act.
The SOLICITOR-GENERAL said a bill for this
purpose had been laid upon the table of the House of
Lords by the Lord Chancellor three or four days ago •
it stood for a second reading this evening, and would
doubt come down in a short time to this house. n°

step held up for praise by the Secretary for Ireland, in
removing cholera patients from ships into the town.
Mr. LIDDELL said the hon. member for Dungar-
von was perfectly justified in bringing this subject before
the house, and he could not but join with the hon.
tthreemheonsu.
sper in sr ee
taa nryd
fdoirs afrpe pel
ei
nn
dt mt ehno to
ga
ht t t
fih et
toots rig
iwyeer
towhich
the hon. Secretary for Ireland thought fit to give to this
application. At a time like this, when an outbreak of
and gallant member (Col. Dunne) in expressing his ex-
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
must h being
ed r i
raneev provision to prevent its spread-
ingeg in ;
yth e 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 eat, as in the case of Belfast, no relief
could .be provided by local means for those calamities,
eicept-liy breaking the law. (Hear, hear.)
Sir G. GREY admitted it was a subject of great im-
portance to provide for such distressing oases, 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
a hulk would not answer the purpose. He trusted
something might be done on this important subject.
Mr. MAGUIRE said if the Government gave any
promise that they would take the matter up he should
not bring on any motion on the subject.
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 on 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 itn-
I possible to procure a fitting site for the new department
of the Minister for War, that the Government had de-
termined -on removing the Enclosure Commissioners'
Office to St. James's-square, as it was desirable to hate
the offiabf the War Minister near Downing-street.
COUNT PAHLEN.
Mr. T. BUTT said he bad a notice on the paper, but
as he understood that the house was anxious to' go into
committee of supply, and as he had been given to un-
derstand that if be did not 'press his motion now he
should have an opportunity of 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.
Tha house having gone into committee of supply,
Lord J. RUSSELL said—Mr. Speaker, I am about to
place on the table the estimate for the present year ending
31st March, 1855, to defray the expenses of the Secretary
of State for the War Department; and in doing so I beg
to recall to the attention of the house what has passed ont
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 (Sir J. Pakington),
and who has been Secretary of State for the Colonies,
added his opinion that the Secretary of 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 neon.
nary for • the public service. At a later period the hone
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 hoped there would be
a Minister of War. In answer to him, I stated that the
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
wore in contemplation. I have now to give a general
outline of the changes that are in contemplation.
th 3 first place, I beg to remind the house that two
questions como under consideration together, but aro
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-
plrtments, 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 respect
to arrangements for the control of the public expenditure,
and many questions, some of the highest importance, have
arisen in our several colonies. It, therefore, appeared to
the Government that, considering that question alone, it
was not desirable to keep these offiees united, and that
falthough it was physically possible for a person of great
decision, of groat habits of business, and of health which
should be 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 com-
pose it, the points to which it is to be directed, the means
that are to be employed, aro 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 colJnial 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 Bissett,
once Commissary-General in the Peninsula. Ent 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, though with the functions and the proper
attributes, of a Secretary of State, there were some objec-
tions, arising from the nature of the department, and
there were also other practical objections of a most forcible
'That
plan which were stated by the Duke of Wellington. 1t
,101 t
plan was not ado' t and Ido not know Viet any s iect.gAnd
Government has proposed any inquiry into the subject.
day,.l
several
although from time to time, up to the present
chang .s have been umgreat
I,r consideration, no or organics
change has been adopted. In
considering this subject, it
hat th e chiinconvenience
that we haveef inconvenien has appeared to the Govern t
the military d t
to complain of is,•
that,
epar
meats being divn • led into several heads, there is no su-
preme head which should govern those departments gene-
rally, I have stated ou former occasions that I do not
think it any fault that separate official persons should have
separate duties, although they may belong generally to one
department. As ou 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 be equally absurd to have three or four
architects, who should give different opinions as to the
general construction of the building. What is wanted,
therefore, is, one head, who should be able to take into
his view the wants, the requirements, and the duties of
the several departments, and to govern them with full in-
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 arid 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, but 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 belong
rather to an executive minister, such as a Secretary of State,
than to the department of the Treasury. The Government,
therefore, are of opinion that, besides what I have statedeA
to the general direction of the operations of the war, the
mi-
nister Secretary of State for War should take the directione
t other
of the commissariat department. With respectie be
questions, there are many changes which have
effect.
con-
sidered ; but few which can at once be carried into
atthe Duke of
In considering this subject, I remember that
Master-General
of
Wellington gave the opinion that the
the Ordnance waswho
properly the officer ought to both*
military adviser of the Government, that he should have a
perfect knowledge of the military wants of the country,
to give the Cabinet
to time
and should be able from time
such advice as he should think properP on military topics.
and may be occasionally,
a very good arrangement,
But although this is apparently,
is ti
obvious that it can very
seldom be practicable,
if you could find on ordinary oc-
casions a general who had taken a political part and held
asthe members of the Government,
supposing him to
the same opinions betn
the
prime of life, and his opinions
in regard to militarysubjects very generally held in
esteem, it would seem vary
fit, whether ho were to 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-
ra
gene-
rally find that the mode in which the office of Master-
General has been supplied is this. You find a man of
great military distinction—Sir George Murioy, 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 d..
partment. But it is not eatiefactory 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, Et 4 it was coneidereti to be a 4 one tint% tag