The Sun.
London, England, 1836-04-12 00:00:00

AGRICULTURAL DISTRESS.

The Marquis of CHANDOS gave notice that on the
House going into a Committee of Supply on Friday, the
22d of April, he would call its attention to the distressed
state in which the Agricultural Interest of the country was
placed.
Captain BARCLAY presented a petition from an indi-
vidual in Gloucestershire, against the Gloucester Railway
Bill.

All the private business for the day having been disposed
of, and there being no petitions to present, the business
of the House was completely suspended from half-past four
to five o'clock, at which hour Lord John Russell took
his seat on the Treasury bench.
TITHES COMMUTATION BILL.

Lord J. RUSSELL said that in moving that the Order
of the Day for going into Committee on the Tithes Com-
mutation Bill be discharged, he would take that opportu-
nity of stating, with respect to this Bill, he did not intend
to propose to go into Committee pro fin•nta upon it this
evening ; but he moved that it be committed, pro forma, on
Wednesday next and be would then state the general
substance of the alterations he proposed to make when so
committed. The further consideration of the Bill in Com-
mittee, he proposed to take on Thursday, the 21st instant.
He merely moved that it be committed pro farina, in order
that it might be delivered as soon as possible in a printed
form.

Ngoßiu intoSE LaLcmoomvineditttehee
00frsdeurpopflythoeuDtahye,
ORDNANCE ESTIMATES.
for Lord
the ‘HouselOri
Ordnance
Estimates. The House then went into Committee, Mr. R. STUART
in the Chair.
Sir A. LEITH HAY said, in bringing the Ordnance
Estimates under the consideration of the Committee, it
would not be necessary to preface them by any lengthened
observations,and he would merely state that every expenditure
had been carefully examined, and every circumstance con-
nected with them looked into with a due regard to the
efficiency of the public service, and to economy
in every department. The vote for the present
year would be 52,610/. less than that of the last. This
saving was occasioned by various causes, which would be
seen by reference to the votes themselves ; but from this
there would be deducted a sum of 20,0001., by which it
was found necessary to encrease the vote for the store de-
partment, so that the actual reduction would be 32,6101.
The amount of the vote for stores last year was not so
20,000/,
gbureta
leiarsu'iprlpfrof amsreq4irnd
tthaast
wasthe tshuomagperroepgoasteedo
of the
ethis,
o‘lvel:iacuhdin it was was
in-
cluded a sum of 5,000/. for arM4? the sum required for arms
better description than those
coPsfluouee of the
necessitywhi eh i t w
oa
fs
fillingfo u n d
unecessarypth the
storesto i nwci rt
for the public service, of 4
hitherto used. The sum, therefore, of 70,0004 was by
5,0001. greater than the vote of last year ; but in it was in-
cluded
of stores.
nsiderably
cTluhdeetotmhetuviosstaerhiaetmeestnitutioanteeds foofr tihasetgyeenaer were
esrueppe

higher, in consequence of the high price of forage. There
would be this year a diminution of 19,666/. in that depart-
ment. In consequence of the removal of the stores in
'Cooley-street to the Tower, an increase had taken place.
The removal of the depot in Tooley-street had cost the
Government 8,705/. Of these premises the public held a
lease for an unexpired term of years, which had been sold for
10,150/.,fullycovering all the expenses incurred by the removal
of the depot, and leaving a residue of 1,4451. There would
likewise be a saving of 3,300/. annual rent to the public, by
reason 'of this change. There was another important
feature in the present estimates, viz., the ordnance survey
of Great Britain and Ireland. The amount of this
item last year was 10,500/. The sum proposed
for the present year was 13,000/., being an in-
crease of 2,500/. This work, however, when completed,
would be highly beneficial to the empire, and well worth
the money which had been expended on it. The amount for
the Irish survey was the same as last year, namely, 40,000/.
The whole was under the superintendence of Caleby,
whose name was a guarantee for the manner in which the
work would be conducted. In the Barrack department there
would be a saving of 22,940/., although upwards of 4,000/.
had been expended for repairs on barracks in the West Indies,
in consequence of damages sustained through the late hurri-
cane. He should now state to the House what would be suffi-
cient to show that that branch of the public service was carried
on with all possible attention to economy, while at the same
time the accommodation of the troops was amply provided
for, which would show that that establishment was on a
very different footing from what it was before it came under
the control of the Board of Ordnance. Previous to that
period the barrack expenditure for Great Britain amounted
to 143,809/., being at the rate of 5/. 1 ls. per man ; and in
1835 it only amounted to 64,118/., being at the rate of
3/. 9s. 4d. per man. In Ireland the barrack expenditure in
1821 amounted to 134,838/. being at the rate of 4/.lls. per
man, and in 1835 the expenditure was only 54,919/., being
at the rate of 2/. 10s. 9d. When it was recollected that
not less than 134,726 men were to be provided for out of
this expenditure, it could not be considered too much,
because it was of the greatest importance that it should be
kept in a state of efficiency. The House would, he believed,
admit that the sum now asked was as little as might rea-
sonably be supposed absolutely necessary for that par-
ticular branch. He had stated briefly some of the
items of the Ordnance Estimates, and he had also
stated that it was not necessary to trespass at any great
length ; but he would call the attention of the House to the
particular circumstance, which was the absolute necessity of
keeping the Ordnance establishment up to an efficient and
serviceable state. When the importance of that depart-
ment was considered, he trusted the House would on the
present, as on former occasions, support that branch of
the public service, and vote those supplies. It was of
the greatest moment, particularly in the event of a
war, that this establishment should be on an efficient foot-
ing, so as to meet the demands of the public service, and
reflect credit on the country to which it belonged. He
would conclude by moving that a sum not exceeding
67,096/. be granted to his Majesty for defraying the expense
of the Civil Department of the Ordnance Office—Granted;
as were also the following sums ;-8,1811. for the Civil
Establishment of Woolwich ; 13,890/. for defraying the
expense of the Home Stations ; 27,778/. for the stations in
Ireland and abroad ; 33,968/. for the Barrack Department.;
4,447/. for the payment of the Master Gunners' Depart-
ment in the islands of Jersey, Guernsey, &c. ; 73,321/. for
the payment of the Corps of Royal Engineers, Sappers and
Miners, in Ireland and the Colonies ; 274,496/. for the main-
tenance of the regiment of Royal Artillery ; 36,0451. for
the Royal Horse Artillery ; 602/. for the Royal Train ;
10,129/. for the payment of the Medical Department.
A sum of 29,240/. for defraying Ordnance Works ;
10,672/. for Storekeeper's Expenditure ; 29,240/. for Su-
perintendents of and repair of Barracks ; 53,526/.
for Building and Repair of Barracks in Great Britain and.
Ireland ; 57,753/. for Defraying Barrack-Master's Expen-
ditures and Allowances ; 131,113/. for Defraying the Mili-
tary, Civil, and Barrack Contingencies of Great Britain
and the Colonies ; a sum of 75,000/. for the Supply of
Small Arms and Stores. A sum of 20,000/. for the repairs
of foreign works, and for works in progress under the sanc-
tion of Parliament. A sum of 5,418/. for services performed
by the Office of Ordnance, not provided for by Parliament.
A sum of 159,617/. for military and civil superannuation al-
lowances, The Gallant Member said the last vote which
he had to propose was for the purpose of buying bread,
meat, forage, coals, candles, &c.—(A laugh.) Bfore he
moved this vote, he hoped that the House would take into
consideration that increased duties were imposed on the
Office of Ordnance, and he hoped they would believe that
however much it might ho represented that that Office had
nothing to do, they certainly had very considerable duties
to perform. He hoped that Honourable Members would
disabuse their minds of any false impression that there were
three or four gentlemen in that office who had nothing to
do. He proposed that 141,417/, be granted to defray the
expenses of buying bread, Itre,—Granted.
NEW HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT.

Sir ROBERT PEEL wished to ask the Chancellor
of the Exchequer a question connected with the ex-
hibition of the plans of the Now Houses of Parliament.
He had received several communications whiny lea him to
believe that great dissatisfaction prevailed on the part of
those who were not the successful competitors on two
grounds. One was that architects were specifically ex-
cluded from permission to sec the plans that were successful,
He had a letter from a very eminent gentleman who went
with a friend, and applied for permission to sea the four plans.
His friend was admitted, but he, being an artist, was told
that he wan specially excluded by order of the Woods and
Forests. There might be good reason for this, but it seemed
very ungracious to exclude all professional men. The
other point -was that the successful plans were not exhibited
in common with the others. One plan, the successful one,
there might be some reason for not exhibiting ; but he saw
no reason why the three others should not be exhibited.
He hoped that measures would be devised by which the
three selected plans should be exhibited with the others
according to the original intention. That was the first
point on which he wished for information ; and the
second question he had to ask was, why the architects
were excluded from a view of the three successful designs.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER was
not enabled to give any answer to one of the questions of
the Right Hon. Baronet ; but he hoped shortly to obtain
such information as would be quite satisfactory. He believed
that his Noble Friend did not feel justified in ordering that
the three successful designs should be sent along with the
others to the exhibition, till the Committee had come to some
final determination with respect to it ; for the determination
in favour of Mr. Barry's plan was as yet only provisional,
and under these circumstances the Noble Lord, perhaps,
felt that he had no right to allow the plans, Nos. 2,3, and
4, to pass out of his custody. He believed, however, that
'on Monday next the Committee would resume its sittings,
and he hoped in one or two days they would be able to eon,
elude the preliminary part of the inquiry, and thus by Tues-
day or Wednesday next he trusted the two plans and Mr.
Barry's also would be added to the collection. As to the
other question, he was not aware of the grounds for
excluding persons of the architectural profession from a
view of the successful designs. He knew that great alarm
was entertained by the artists themselves, lest any sketch or
unauthorized publication of their designs should be given
to the public ; and they felt that there was greater danger
from persons of their profession than from ordinary indi-
viduals.

Mr. HAWES intended to mention the circumstance
noticed by the Right Hon, Baronet, and he wished to
know why it was that not only the architects generally
were excluded, but some of them by name. It was, he
believed, in the power of the Committee to order
the plans to be exhibited ; and he was per-
fectly sure if the Chancellor of the Exchequer intimated
the wish of Government that they should be set before the
public, that wish would be complied with. He also wished
to know whether the engraved plan of Mr. Barry's design
would be according to the original, or that which it was
understood would be cut down to suit the estimate to be
moved for.
Mr. HUME could not understand why the plans should
not all be exhibited together. It appeared to him that
there was no just ground for the exclusion of the public
from the favoured one, and far less was there any for
the exclusion of the architects generally, or more par-
ticularly the unsuccessful ones. He hoped that even
Mr. Barry's plan would be exhibited in its original state,
and not as it was after it had been cut down in order to
suit the estimates—the public and the unsuccessful archi-
tects had a right to that.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
the Committee had not yet decided upon any of the plans,
and until they had he did not see that they could part with
them. If they did so they would defeat the very object
which the Committee had in view. Before the House
was called upon to acquiesce in any plan, they should be
publicly exhibited.
Sir JOHN SINCLAIR could see no reason why the
whole of the plans should not be exhibited. At all events,
it was clear that justice would not be done if the original
plan, as sent in by Mr. Barry, was not exhibited.
Mr. HAWES hoped, at any rate, Members of that
House might have the privilege of taking in one architect
along with him. A Noble Lord (a Member) had made the
attempt, and found that the architect was excluded by name.
No doubt there might be many more in the same way.
Sir R. PEEL said the matter was made of importance
merely by the exclusion.—(Hear, hear, hear.) Surely it
might be done away with now without fear. The Hon-
ourable P 41414 bpd Op No* 1-ord, as he
understood the Tithe commutation Bill was fixed for Wed.
nesday, whether it was his intention that the House should
go into Committee pro forma, or that the discussion should
take place on that evening.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL said, be did not anticipate

any objection to the course be proposed to go into Com-
mittee pro forma, at the same time it ►vas his intention to
state upon that occasion the alterations he intended to
propose.

Sir R. PEEL begged to know whether the Tithe Com-
mutation Bill would supersede the Mutiny Bill.
Lord JOHN RUSSELL replied in the negative. The
Mutiny Bill should be the first business of the evening.
Major FANCOURT gave notice that be would propose
on the introduction of the Mutiny Bill, that flogging in the
army ha abolished.
MARINE INSURANCES.

In reply to a question from Mr. ROBINSON,
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said he
would explain his views on the subject on the 29th inst.