The Sun.
London, England, 1849-07-17 00:00:00

robl°

Tye
ti to
d be
Idg
go°

a cO
,lip

‘•,:r JOHN'S HOSPITAL.
In answer to anoth,:r question from Mr. HUME,
Lord J. RUSSELL si,,as understood, to state. that with
regard to St. John's Hospital, hi; Learned Friend the
ITtnYney-Geueral would consida which way the inquiry
.14111 Lk, place.
INCUMBERED ESTATES BILL.
Mr. B. OSBORNE said that as the Incumbrnd
Estates Bill stood for to• night, he wished to know
Whether the Noble Lord would inform them who the
Coturnt •
ssioners were to be.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL could not at present state
the names of the Commissioners, because he had not re-
ceived the assent of the gentlemen to whom he had
Orered the offices. He was anxious that the persons
*llO were aointed to the post should be qualified in
41,JerY respect for the duties they were called upon to
uischargo.
REMUNERATION OF MEDICAL OFFICERS.
Mr. DISRAELI wished to know from the President
(1)f the Poor-law Board if the Pour-law Commissioners
come to any determination to increase the
remuneration of Poor-law medical officers in consequence
f
their increased duties in connexion with the Board of
health. He believed the President of the Poor-law
Commission had the power to make an order for
Increased remuneration. It would be very satisfactory
to the profession if the Hon. and Learned Gentleman
Would state the course he intended to pursue.
hlr. BARNES was understood to say that the quo's-
" was under the consideration of the board.
In reply to Mr. MACKII4NON,
Lord ASHLEY stated that the Bishop of London
had intimated that interments in his diocese would be
,
necessary,
if the President of the Board of Health deemed it
T,ressarY, and that no resumption of them would take
P 1 ace until it was deemed proper to do so.

INCUMBERED ESTATES BILL.
MONSELL asked what the Noble Lord in-
tended to do with respect to this Bill?
Lord J. RUSSELL hoped to be enabled to proceed
with it this evening; but if not, he intended to proceed
with it to. morrow.
Colonel DUNNE hoped the Noble L)rd would not
ate the Bill at twelve o'clock to-.morrow. The Irish
night,
tubers were desirous of confining the debate to one

Lord VAN COUVER'S ISLAND.
LINCOLN intimated that it was impossible,
841:391:ding to the rules of the House, that he could bring
° his motion on this subject again this session. He
therefore beggvd to withdraw it.
Mr. HORSMAN expressed a hope that the Noble
Lord (Lord J. Russell) would not ask the House to meet
4t,0-morrow morning, seeing it would be likely to inter-
'ere with the evening sitting, when he had a very im-
portant motion to bring forward, which he should like to
see brought on and finished.
Lord J. RUSSELL did not suppose that the early
meeting to-morrow would extend beyond three o'clock.
The Hon. Gentleman's motion might come on soon after
five, and be concluded that evening.
Sir W. CLAY and Mr. WALPOLE postponed their
Motions, the former respecting the expense of the new
Rouses of Parliament, and the latter with regard to the
case of Mr. Ryland.

Mr. HUME had on the paper a motion similar to that
of the Hon. Member for Oxfordshire, but did not intend
to bring it forward, as he would content himself with
supporting the motion of the Hon. Member.
REDUCTION OF PUBLIC SALARIES.
On the motion for the House resolving itself into a
Committee of Supply on the Ordnance estimates,
Mr. HENLEY rose, pursuant to notice, to move
!hat a reduction of 10 per cent. be made in all salaries
all the Ordnance department, and in all other depart-
Items of Government at home and abroad. He said he
did not wish to cast any imputation upon the officers
tinge!
the
ged iu the public service. He was anxious to seeld
parties engaged in the public departments should
perform 11111 Y qualified to discharge the duties they had to
Perform, and that they should be fnirly remunerated for
their services. He wished them to be as well off as
other Persons in similar situations. In fact he con-
asidered it the best mode to secure the efficient perform-
tileee ef the daties ot these fires He then referred to
for 1:11'Port of the
an Committee pded over by the Member
Northampton, That Committee did not recommend
eninrelnediate reduction of salaries, as they were of
tre,nu i°ll that it should form part of a general considers-
or
n(ift. the expenditure of the country. It was the duty
fine„ :,ns, as of individuals, to take a view of their
thin
• 'c'et affturs, to adjust them to an altered state of
*e% to
The last time there was a review of this subject
tie% :11,1931, under the Reform Government. At that
ofi- 1% ,ommittee was appointed to revise the salaries of
State'c, Particularly those in the higher departments of the
11_ and he should therefore call the attention of the
ao,use to the position ofthe country te en and now,the means
4117, resources to meet its liabilities and expenditure,
Iv a the prices of the various necessaries of life. He
he not inclined to trouble the House with figures, but
firstas Compelled on the present occasion to do so. The
hine
she should direct their attention to was the ex-
,leneiture, including the charges for collecting the re-
renue. in 1831 the expenditure was 51,700,0001.; in
sgurlcl numbers, in 1848, up to the 6th of January, it was
'"eo 000 e He ' ht be told, and no doubt he should
be t le' ' nig
° , that 8 great increase in the population had taken
Place in that period. The population in 1831 was
it '‘eo;o.'o,:4; in 1848, allowing for no increase in Ireland,
the oat the
While th t'
-- `8 927,000, being an increase of 18 per cent.,
so te e increase in the expenditure was 14 per cent.,
expenditure bore a ratio of 44 per cent. to
priel?oPulation.—(Hear.) Then if they took the average
g". ef corn for at least the first 14 years, they would
thamt it to be about 575. per quarter, and was down at
the 131°toent to 455. It was one of the reasons also why
the ratio of the present taxation was beyond the power of
ar
thethe in People to bear it, that crime had considerably
tv
House see the relation
-
Now let
Population bore with the number of they
VIM nal& In 1831 the population of England (he did
atnletto to carry Ireland into the comparison, in c0n-
'21,11:,,e e f the great distress in that country), bat in
veh' --`4 in 1831 it was 13,897,000; criminals, 19,647;
ta.fle ;
.12 1848, with a population of 17,497,000 the cri-
eritnals were 39,349, being an increase in the number of
Soyrail4lst He (Mr. Henley) did not attribute that to
f moralization on the part of the people, but to the
prt of existence of great distress and a want of ern-
437°Iente For his own part he never found any period
that n cheapness of provisions and employment combined,
Present
crime did not deteriorate; and believing that at the
Poe!!ii t moment there was cheapness of provisions and
!e diminution of crime, he believed it was solely from a
want of employment. For the last ten years the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer had deficient-
believed, although his Right and he
Friend, the present
Chancellor, threw a shade over his present year, he would not in the end statement for the
much better position than his predecesst
find himself in a
as he had said, were revised in 183', and .
ar reduction tsilort; on an
salaries,
Hen-
ley) would show, that since that time
average of 20 per cent, at least, took place in the articles
and necessaries of life. If that were so, then he thought
be was justified in asking a reduction of 10 per cent.
°n all salaries received from the Crown. In doing
pat, he begged to be distinctly understood as only re-
„erring to those who technically hold what were called
Places," and not those who derived what was called
w
agPe, such as tradesmen in their dock-yard.. Since
1846, Et great diminution had taken place in every article
except the ash stick—(A laugh)—for which sixpence.d
IfYlls still demanded ; and articles of consumption had
The from 15 t 20 and in some instances 50 per cent.
elue Right Hon oGenlleman the Chancellor of the Ex-
'eueepier said on a recent occasion that the fall of those
3,l43modities was equal to 25 per cent. in wages, which
ei 'tified him the more in asking by his motion a reduc-
-4 kof 10 per cent. The classes of public offices to
out of be meant to apply a reduction were those paid
lions, the public Exchequer, and amounted to five mil-
who • . There were the five heads of the revenue to
628,311n,eornes were paid of 1,200.000/ ; the Excise.
se oeee t Stamps and Taxes, 372 125/.; Post-office,
th, 001 ; Woods and Forests, 44.700/.; amounting in
to itt.gleregate to 2,644,0001. Then there was to be added I
iThr Se several items from the miscellaneous estimates,
tei"o‘,ne,reth, e head of civil service, law and justice, educe-
etiejet:',nies and consuls, boards of health, including a
Propeel:)ceanernissions, the expense of which were ira-
te to jeceueerged on the Consolidated Fund, and amount-
leene,tilleue)oo/., making altogether about 1,191,0001.
commis:re
at
ere the estimates for the Ordnance and
the entire ariat,
.810,0001.; diplomatic services, 140,0001.;
Lord ionlreitng 4,73 0001.
the Pay joitV''
.RUSSELL asked if he did not include
Mr, eeENatrtnY and navy?
the different
p ace.l tion
Y proceeded with the relative prices of
4.d taken
I,artieles of consumption, and what ret u c
to 15 Meat, according to him, had fallen 10
Per cents /7 Per Cent.; bread 25 per cent.; groceries 30
25 per cent.• and in
.; glass, hardware, Se e 20 per cent.; coils
C. &C.,
.1 h' te 90 to 30
Isheoves,
per cent. je
in beer, and in 1
cotton goods ane clot in - .
Tree same reductions took place in hosiery,
for.., en an omnibus took threepence a
elietance for vele' hlc he had formerly to TAY
a person now for
Th
.sixpence.
even 0c0,n0ti,,n...4A laugh)—
ere was no good reason why thatw large. class of per-
Eons who received fixed incomes from the Crown should
their salaries
not have
however humble,
hothereduced. For every employment,
lowered remuneration fwdoarslaabr:uars.s ofW chomenpethtletylonredTucheadt
the price of corn the
and now in scarce they
reaced the incomes of clergymen;
In every article harveststhe there could be no rise.
down, while thTehecserner's means of purchasing
onsu
producer's profit was cut
was reduced,
fe publlP
public credit must a y themselves to cut down the pay-
ments rom th 1 who wished to maintain the
He implored t
sider whether it he guardians
otreasury that could be cut down.
of the public honour to con-
concession of thisw kind.llBl be
wise to make a timely
another, and, perhaps, a moo might save an inquiry of
ectionable kind. To
buy in the cheapest musket ancithasiell in the dearest was
ctin
now the principle laid down for
g upon in every
in the people
class of society. There was a less
now to bear taxation. The state orr e:lr
anduwas alarm-
ing. The poor in that country were tr
between
ernogrufortable,
life and death, and a large class, hitsheurEtgo::
believed
were coming down to that condition,
made
efoire
that they could save they should do so. Every fharthing
this motion to be just and proper, and should therefore
move, " That a reduction of ten per cent, be
all salaries in the Ordnance Department, and in all other
departments of Government at home and abroad."
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER hoped
that the justice would be done him of supposing that he
should treat this question apart from all personal consi-
derations.—(Hear,) The Hon. Gentleman said that he
included all classes in the public service from the highest-
Paid functionaries down to the letter-carriers at 7s. 6d.
Per week.
Mr. HENLEY—The law excepted, and the army and
navy.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER—Oh,
thou, this is the first instalment.—(A. laugh.) The law
and the army and navy were to form another instalment.
eg Now, what was the motion?
hAtt-inassatteh as the prim of articles now Twerp about

tho same es. they ivere lier cc tl-nes Beek. Reste;etiee Aet
and befere the revolution of 1788, the salaries in the
pubic offices should be somewhere about what they
were at that period. The Hen. (71 esttlemen had referred
to a C leamittc c of that House in 1831; but that was at
e time when there was very great pressure from distress.
They went through ad tee offices, and after tatting all
the circumstances connected with the subject into their
consideration, they recommended certain reductions in
the ssliries of the highest functionaries of the State,
after which they did not recommend any further re-
duction, upon the principle stated in their report,
that to fill there offices the highest class cf intelli-
gence was required, and that economy, to deserve the
name, should be such as would not place these offices
beyond the reach of men of moderate fortune, who, by
the talent and industry which this situation oftener called
forth, were more fitted for these offices, which required
the entire attention of au individual to the exclusion of
his private affairs. Such men should not, by sudden
changes in political affairs, be in danger of being ruined;
and he suspected that if they examined the
annals of the country, they would find that
a large portion of these officers had been ruined,
That Committee had reduced the salaries of the highest
paid officers of the State, including the First Lord of the
Treasury, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, the Se-
cretaries of State, the First Lord of the Admiralty, the
President of the Beard of Control. The salaries of the
highest paid officers were reduced by a thousand per an-
num, and some public officers were entirely cut off. The
Committee compared the then salaries with what they
were before 1780, and after considering all circumstances,
fixed a permanent rate of salary. It should also be
taken into consideration that a further reduction had
been made in all salaries above 1501. per annum,
by the imposition of an income-tax. That tax made
a material reduction in the salaries of the great body of
persons who would be subject to the reduction proposed.
The general run of persons were paid lower in propor-
tion than persons employed in similar occupations in
private life. They had not refused to make any reduc-
tion in the number of persons employed in the public
service. In one department of the revenue alone a re-
duction of two thousand persons had been made, and
wherever it was possible they were making similar re-
ductions. He did not understand the •principle upon
which the Hon. Gentleman wished to proceed. Now, he
might observe that the low rate of pay exposed the
officers in the Revenue departments to great temptation.
—(Hear, hear.) Postmen and other persons similarly
employed should not be too much underpaid, as it ex-
posed them to temptations which it was desirable for the
public protection that they should not be exposed to.
He did not think that because purchases might be made
at a low rate that it would be desirable to reduce sala-
ries, because that would be laying down the principle of
fluctuation in the amount of salaries, and be making them
dependent upon the price of articles of consumption,
which he believed would be most prejudicial in practice,
injurious to the country, and in the end a more ex-
pensive system than that now in operation. He should
not, therefore, feel it necessary to follow the Hon. Gen-
tleman through his mass of figures, but upon these
grounds state that he felt it to be his duty to oppose the
motion.
Mr. NEWDEGATE said that he felt great pleasure in
supporting the motion of his Hon. Friend (Mr. Henley).
There had been a redaction in the price of labour in the
country, and in the price of articles of clothing and con-
sumption, and the difficulty of obtaining employment hail
increased, and therefore he thought that the hollers of
the high official situations under the Crown should not
continue to receive the same amount of salaries which
they did under another and better state of things. If
the change in the monetary and commercial policy of
the country had been a slight or temporary one, he could
have understood the argument of the Chancellor of the
Exchequer, but after the change in 1844, and that in
1846, both of which tended permanently to depress the
prices of a large interest, some great and decided reduc-
tion was absolutely required. It was said that salaries
had been definitely fixed in 1831. But had the reduc-
tions then made borne any proportion to the reductions
in prices during the same time ? With reference to the,
point, he must refer to what had recently
passed in the House on the subject of official
and declared value. The Right Hon. Gentleman the
Chancellor of the Exchequer had spoken of this as a
fanciful distinction, and the Right Him. Baronet (Sir R.
Peel) said, " Oh, that was Alderman Waithman's
view." Who Alderman Waithman was he did not
know; but the difference between fficial and declared
value was simply, that official value was fixed 150 years
ago, and had never varied since; it was simply a mea
sure of quantity, while the declared value was the market
price of the goods. In 1817 and 1818, the official and
the declared value were as nearly as possible at par, or,
in other words, the prices affixed to the goods, and that
realised were equal, but from that period an alteration
took place, a depreciation in market value began. In
1820 it amounted to 34 per cent. In the four years from
1829 to 1832, this discrepancy had increased, and the de-
precia ion amounted t) 41i per cent., while late returns
showed it to be 56} per cent., though, as he was prepared
to show from tables, the declared value was rated
even higher than the price actually realised, and the real
depreciation was 63 per cent. He therefore approved of
the principle in his Hon. Friend's motion, that a per-
centage should be taken from all salaries, in proportion
to the depreciation which had taken place in the value
of every other kind of labour.—(Hear, hear.) He indi-
vidually did not approve of the policy which had led to
the result—(Hear, hear)—on the contrary, he had op-
posed it ; but he did say this, that if the country as .a
whole was to be made poorer—if labour was to be paid
lower than before—let the principle apply to all and not
to few, or to any particular class.—(Hear, hear.) This
subject had been studiously ignored, and banished from
the House. Then, at best, men did not dare to touch
it, but it was well understood throughout the country,
and be was certain that ere long a monetary and a
commercial change would be forced upon them of a
character which few persons dreamed of in that
House. Their system was one of impoverishment. It
made the poor man poorer, and the rich richer. The
returns of the income-tax showed that the number of
persons possessing 15,0001. a year had been reduced by
1,481 since 1846.—(Hear.) He should cordially support
the motion.
Mr. V. SMITH said, as a Member of the Committee
referred to by the Honourable Member (Mr. Henley),
he could say that he had so far correctly stated the
views of the Committee, but he must add, that he indi-
vidually held that the House of Commons should urge
upon her Majesty's Ministers the propriety of making
not a sudden and sweeping reduction—(Hear, hear)—
but a careful revision of all the offices, and, having
done so, to cut down salaries wherever necessary and
just.—(Hear, hear.) In that way he thought very
great savings could have been effected—(Hear, hear)
—but the Honourable Gentleman shrunk from that
laborious process, and proposed summarily to deci-
mate the incomes of all persons, without reference
either to their services, or their incomes. Could any-
thing be ra,re unjust than such a course ?
(Hear, hear.) At the same time, he admitted there
were many grounds for such a motion. As an instance
of the anomalies which he thought existed, he might
mention the large salaries paid to the Secretaries of the
Treasury and Admiralty, 2,5001. a year, while other
officers more important in their duties, like that of Pre
silent of the Poor•law Commissioners, were much lower
paid.—(Hear, hear.) In that case, however, they had
gone into the market, and got the best talent they could
for so important an office, and it would be most unjust
now to cut down the salary they had agreed to give. As
to the Committee of 1831, the transactions of that period
took place under a very peculiar state of things; many
of the great Officers of State having in fact offered to
agree to reductions of their own salaries, lie must.
however, say, that in his opinion. the Hon. Gentleman
deserved the thanks of the House for le inging ferwera
the motion. Unfortunately, with all the boast of' eco-
nomy with whicn the session opened, there had been
fewer debates on these topics than in any other session
since he bad sat in Parliament. There had been many
recommendations made by the Select Committee oe
Miscellaneous Estimates, which had not been attended
to. For instance, he did not see why the expenses of the
Postmaster-General's office, and the Tithe Commission,
should n©t be brought before the House. With respect
to the salaries of the higher officers of state, the Hon.
Gentleman had quoted many facts as reasons for re-
ducing them which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had
not answered, because they were in fact unanswerable.
—(Hear.) These reductions in price had taken place,
they could not be denied. But then the settlement of
1831 was pointed to. Why, at that time the Right
Hon. Gentleman would have to run down to his
outknh tehr
iyssa
ioanuygs ettii
licunkse
eat f
Toecncht
teal e d
wr auainsld
cl
iafkol
ceuural ;an
tywe
dho,tehriectra whereas
oahunel,
dna now
count
ire
ft
nvoi
eue
rnwodeudst ooittth2e:r,
opdueiirrdeccebtuai
directions,
but 200 or 300 per cent. In nu-
allowance for the digniso;yuinfedft haet that subjectafte after was
making
ample r e -
high officer of the state,
the salaries now paid them were more valuable than in M
1831 ; and if the Honourable ember had confined his
motion to these salaries, he,
have been ready to give him hispofor one, should
p rt —(Elear.) But
he could not vote for a motion swuhich * I
state. There were laree numbers of them
indiscriminately
sought to reduce the incomes of all the servants e.
he thought,
hought,
too poorly paid considering the duty they had to e -
form.--(Hear, hear.) Besides, in order to lir,
obtain these
situations they had given up others, they had made all
their arrangements on the faith of the engagements
entered into with them by the Government. Many of
them had insured their lives, and in other modes still
further diminished their limited incomes, on the faith
that they would continued to be paid, and he for one
believed that the House of Commons, however econo-
mical it might be, would not be b 0 at the expense of a
laborious and useful body of public servants.—(Hear,
hear.) For these reasons, therefore, while he agreed
with the general object of the Hon. Member, and would
be happy to aid in effecting any practicable reductions,
be could not concur in voting for a motion which, from
various indications on the Opposition benches, he could
not help looking upon as meant to punish (if it were car-
ried) the Ministers for having been successful with a
commercial policy to which they were opposed.
Mr. ROEBUCK rose to say a very few words on the
motion, because he did not mean to vote upon it.—(A
laugh.), Why that was a very good reason for speaking.
—(A. laugh.) He objected to the motion that it was an
unjust one. It was what bad been called e a flash in
the pen," The Hon. Gentleman never meant it to be
carried. It was proposed, because certain measures
which had been carried in that House, such as the repeal
of the corn-laws, had made things cheap, and it was
thought that it would be a good blow at_Ministers in re-
taliation to cut down their salaries. He asked the House
if it could vote for such
the Hon.a motion? (Hear,
Gentleman hadand 'd here is a thing
come sat
that is u
he nnecessary, abolish it; here is a place overpaid,
hear.) If
WofasthneotGoveri
would have voted for
all salariei were him; but when he came and said
do so. Re
w to be reduced 10 per cent., he could not
Inuledntasokv,erwpearied?a-11(Htheearw, working servants
of
the me, would not the
,reduction of 10 per