The Sun.
London, England, 1822-03-02 00:00:00

SINKING FUND•

Mr. BANKES moved ii;;aeCotTnisof the Capital Stock re-
-deemed, of the Public Debt, with a calculation of the effect
that would be produced on the principal of the Debt in the
course of ten years, by the operation of a Sinking Fund' of
—5,000,0001. and other papers connected with the same subjects.
Mr—GRENFELL wished to put a question to the Right
llonourahle the Chancellor of the Exchequer, relative to the
-Sinking Fund. He wished to know whether it was the inten-
•tion of the Right Hon. Gentleman that the present amount of
live millions only should be applied to the liquidation of the
debt, or whether that sum was to be allowed to accumulate at
,compound interest for the sage object ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER replied that
it was his intention, ..as soon as the financial arrangements for
the present year were concluded, and the Budget opened, to
niove for the appointment of a Committee of Inquiry into the
-means of adopting a plan for the simplification of the public
.-accounts. He should then propose that the Sinking Fund
should be made a particular object of attention. It would be
for the House then to consider whether the accumulation by
-compound interest should be applied to the extinction of the
debt, or whether it should be left to the disposal of Parliament.
The question was one which would require great attention, be-
cause if they decided upon the latter course, it would be neces-
sary to repeal several acts• which now regulated the application
-of the Fund.

• Mr. TIERNE expressed his conviction, that the Noble
Marquis opposite, in stating his general plan to the House,
held it out, as the intention of Ministers, to reduce a million of
tae next year, and to proceed with reductions in the years
following. This was what country Gentlemen had understood
:from the Noble Marquis as well as himself, and now they found
lhat all the relief to be afforded was the reduction of one shil-
ling a quarter upon malt.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY denied that he had, in
point of fact, said that there would be any further repeals of
:taxes. What he stated was, that the House having pledged
itself, in 1819, to establish a Sinking Fund of five millions,
and that resolution being now accomplished, it would be left
,open to Parliament in what manner it should make use of any
accruing surplus therefrom. He distinctly stated the future
reduction of taxes to be dependent on the will of Parliament,
when it should have these farther sums at its disposal. lie left
it open to Parliament in this manner, and at the same time he
observed that the distress of the country appeared to him to
call for the relief. But if the agricultural interest should re-
vive before the period arrived, the House was not pledged to
any particular course with regard to the funds that would be
paced.at its disposal. He hoped, therefore, that it would be
borne in mmd, that he never did say that any surplus which
night arise sTiould of necessity be applied to the reduction of

Mr. TIERNEY contended that the interest of the Sinking
Furd was not, and could not be, at the disposal of Parliament,
as the Noble Marquis seemed to consider it. Without the re-
peal of several Acts, Parliament could not touch the com-
pound interest, growing out of the five millions. When the
Noble Lord said that such accumulations were at the disposi-
tion of Parliament, he announced that the Sinking Fund, upon
the principle of accumulating by compound interest, was at
.an end.

The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said, that what he
.spoke of was, any surplus that might accrue beyond the five
millions to be applied to the acceleration of the liquidation of
the debt.

Mr. TIERNEY expressed his astonishment at hearing the
Noble Lord speak of a 'surplus of five millions, when in fact
there was no such thing. lie could understand the present
manceuvra of the Noble Lord very well ; it was to destroy the
431t1 machinery of the Sinking Fund, for the purpose of getting
it into his own hands. lle contended, that the produce of the
Sinking Fund must be laid out at compound interest, as the
law now stood. •

Mr. ELLICE wished the Honourable Member for Corfe
Castle had brought forward his motion at a time when the sub•
ject of it could have been fully examined. He thougiit the
.subject should be discussed in all its branches, and hoped that
an ample debate would take place upon it at some future
opportunity.
MABERLY said, that he had understood from the
_Noble Marquis, that an annual reduction of taxes was to en-
-sue. It would be much better for the Noble Lord not to come
-down to the House to make statements which were to be con-
tradicted upon another occasion. The Finance Accounts
which he had presented to the House were also fallacious ; or
else the annual accounts were fallacious. They were, in fact,
.both fallacious ; some in one thing and some in another. He
,(Mr. I%I.) had been to the Treasury to inquire into some of the
contradictions, and to endeavour to get them explained. He
saw there a very intelligent Gentlem tn, Mr. Hill, but he was
quite unable to reconcile the aecoi n.s. As it was his intention
to submit a n °don to the Douse upon this subject, at sonic
future period, h should say no more at present.
The Marqu s of LONDONDERRY begged again to say
that he distinctly stated that it would be left open to Parlia-
zneut as to what they should do with any surplus which might
arise hereaft r. It was for them to decide whether it should be
Applied sol. ly to the reduction of taxes, or divided with any
other object ; whether the whole sum should accumulate at
:compound ..n..erest, or whether the whole surplus should be
taken or any part of it. That was the view he took of the

question, and that was the opinion which he expressed to the
House.

Lord ALVIORPE said that he had understood distinctly
that these prospective reductions were announced ; whereas
it now turned out that they were still to receive considers-
Lion.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER remarked
upon what had fallen from. an lion. Member relative to his ap-
plying at the Treasury for information respecting the public
accounts. The Lion. Gentleman had said that he learnt there
that those accounts weiv.erroneous. He would venture to say
that the Honourable Gentleman had mistaken what he had
heard. If the Gentleman to whom he had applied, Mr. Hill,
(than whom a more intelligent and valuable servant of the
public did not exist), were at the bar of that House, he would
reconcile all the public accounts of which the Hon. Me:nber
complained.
Mr.
-MARERLEY explained.
. _

Sir H. PARNELL said, that the simplification of accounts
ought to be extended to all the public departments.
Mr. HUME condemned the incorrectness of the various
public accounts. There were scarcely two Treasury accounts
laid on that table which agreed with each other • and this he
pledged himself to prove when they went into ;he Committee
upon the subject. He thought 31inisters ought to effect the
simplification of the accounts themselves, without calling upon
the House to do it. Were be in office, lie should not call upon
others to do that which he ought to do himself.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that he
had never expressed any intention of calling upon the House
for such a measure ; what lie said was, that he should
move for a Committee, to whom he should present a plan of
his own. The accounts, as they were made up at present,
came from different offices, and were made up with diffe-
rent views, and when they were brought into one focus, they
certainly did not present a perfectly clear idea of the general
account.

air. TIERNEY did not wish to raise a question upon this
motion ; but he would ask why they were to delay the Com-
mittee ? Unless it were appointed without loss of time, the
Report could not be received until after the •Budget. For the
satisfaction of all parties there, as well as out of doors, it
would be better for Ministers to state what construction they
put upon the Acts now in force with regard to the Sinking
Fund. Persons, whose interests were intimately connected
with the question, were not aware at this moment, whether
the Sinking -Fund %as to accumulate for the benefit of •the
stockholder, or for the relief of the country by reducing its
burdens.

Mr. P. MOORE said that the question was not whether the
country should be relieved, but whether it should be saved.—
The motion was then agreedto,_

SLAVE TRADE.

Mr. W. SMITH said that he moved last year for returns of
the Correspondence between Government and the Cruizers on
the African Coast relative to the Slave Trade. He now rose
to move, with the consent of the Noble Marquis opposite, for
similar returns from the date of the last downwards—Returns
ordered.
Colonel DAVIES moved for a return of the names of all
Officers dipnissed from the Army without trial by Court Mar-
tial since the year 1793.—Ordered.
. _

Mr. COURTENAY moved for the re-appointment of the
Committee to inquire into the laws relating to Prisons.—The
motion was agreed to.
SUPPLY.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved the
Order of the Day for the House resolving itself into a Com-
mittee to consider of the Supplies to be granted to his Majesty
for the service of the ensuing year.
Sir J. NEWPORT wished to ask the Right Hon. Gentle-
man what allowance was to be made to brewers and others for
stock in hand, upon the removal of the malt tat.
The CHANCELLOR of the HXCHEQLTER said, that the
best answer would be found in the printed resolutions of that
House.

Sir J. NEWPORT would be glad also to know whether any
such allowance was to be made to the maltsters.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that an
allowance was to be made upon the stock on hand.
Mr. WHITBREAD said, that the corn markets had been
lower on that day in consequence of the Right Hon. Gentle-
man not making an allowance upon the stock of malt on hand.
The price of wheat was four shillings a quarter lower, and that
of the best barley, from three or four shillings lower upon the
prices of Monday last. This must be in consequence of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer's determination, because the ar-
rivals of barley in the last week had been- smaller than in any
week since the harvest.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that
the fluctuation in the price of wheat as well as barley, proved
that it (lid not depend upon the cause to which it was attributed
by the Hon. Member.
Mr. WHITBREAD explained.
After a few words from Mr. Ooocn and Sir M. RIDLEY,
this conversation dropped.
Mr. HUME then rose to call upon the House once more,
not to vote the sum of 1,781,0001. without knowing to what it
was to be applied. If he understood the duty of that House, it
was to watch over and check the expenditure of the public re-
venue, and to see how it was appropriated. If the House, how-
ever, consented to this course, he could only protest. He di-
rected the attention of the House to the Report of the Finance
Committee of 1317, in which the Committee stated, that the
sum of 49,4001. for Ordnance for the Navy, would be reduced
in the years to come. Instead of that, however, in the year
1019, it was 91,0001. being double the former sum. In 1820,
it was 104,0001. • in the last year, 100,0001. ; and, in the pre-,
sent, 95,0001. flow this could be spent in powder and shot he
was at a loss to conceive. The House would not act as it ought,
if it did not call for inquiry upon this head. Ile should now
only do what he considered to be his duty. Majorities would
prevail, and he should only move, in order to express his own
sentiments upon the Journals of the House, " For Estimates
of the particular manner in which the sum of 95,0001. is to be
expended in Ordnance for the Navy. Also for similar Esti-
mates in regard to the suns of 650,0001. for the Wear and Tear
of the Navy." If there were any fear of disclosures by grant-
ing this motion, would the Government give particulars of the
last year's appropriation of these sums ?—(Hear, from Mr.
Croker.)—Hc was happy to hear that they would, and he would
consequently withdraw his motions. (After a short pause,
however, the lion Member persisted in moving them.)
Mr. CHOKER had before said, that the Committee was the
proper place where these points should be discussed. If the
Hon. Gentleman was not satisfied there, he would have the
power to call for further information.
Sir I. COFFIN thought he could give his Hon. Friend the
Member for Aberdeen a satisfactory answer with regard to the
Navy Ordnance in a minute. During the American war a
sloop was sunk by one of the enemy in twenty minutes—she
was of superior force to be sure. But it was afterwards ascer-
tained that the guns of the sloop had not been fired for twelve
months. It had therefore been ordered by the Admiralty, that
an additional quantity of powder arid shot should be fired off
in every month. If 95,0001: a year was too much for keep-
ing the British Navy ready for war in time of peace, the sooner
the whole fleet was blown up the better.
Mr. WA RD stated, that it was a great mistake to suppose
that the whole amount of this estimate was spent on powder
and shot. The Hon. Member went into an explanation to
shew that not one half of the sum was applied to that object.
Mr. G. BENNETT said, that the information which the
Hon. Member had given was all that was asked, so that it was
puttlown in figures.
Mr. WARD censented to the statements for the last year
being granted.
Sir I. COFFIN explained.
Mr. HUME withdrew his motions, and the House resolved
itself into a Committee.

The first Resolution for granting the sum of 500,0001. for
the wear and tear of ships for the year 1822 was then agreed to.
The next Resolution was that the sum of 81,9001. be granted
to his Majesty for the expenses of the Ordnance of the Sea
Service.

Mr. BERNAL asked what was the rate of reduction upon
this estimate ?

Sir J. OSBORNE said that it was one shilling per man.
Mr. HUME wished to know at what period any exception
might be taken to the number of marines ?
Mr. CROKER said, in the vote for the wages of the men.

Mr. HUME wished to reduce the sinecures which were
held by officers at the head of the marines. He should not
propose taking away the offices from the Earl Saint Vincent,
and those who now held them ; he only wished the House to
come to a resolution not, to keep up these seven sinecure of-
fices. It would be better to reward gallant officers for their
services in the more honourable way of granting them Parlia-
mentary pensions. Be should move for the reduction of these
sinecures when the report was brought up.
• Mr. CROKER suggested that the better way of discussing
the principle of the appointments would be to make them the
subject of a substantive motion.
The Resolution was then agreed to.
ORDINARY NAVAL ESTIMATES.

Sir .T. OSBORNE said that the House having disposed of
the estimates for the wear and tear of the navy, it now be-
came his duty to move those fOr the ordinary and extraor-
dinary supplies of the navy. Since the war every effort
had been made to reduce those estimates to as low a stand;
and as possible, and he was happy that the duty of bring-
ing them forward had devolved upon him at a time when they
were reduced to so diminished a scale. The remaining esti-
mates divided themselves under two heads—the Ordinaries and
Extraordinaries ; and under both these heads were considerable
reductions. The four principal offices—the Admiralty-office
the Navy Pay Office, the Navy Office, and the Victualling Of-
fice, had experienced reductions to the amount of 41,0001.; and

ith the reductions upon other items under the first division of
this estimate, amounting to 116,0001. But there was an in-
crease in the second part upon the superannuations and pensions
to officers' widows, and upon the widow's charity of 71,0001.
Also, upon the superannuation list, in consequence of the re-
duction of clerks,'ffiere was an increase of 21,0001. The re-
duction upon the building and repairing of ships was 411,2001.,
and upon the works at Sheerness there was also a reduction of
15,8001. The separate -votes which he should have to bring
forward .would put the House in possession of morti ample de-
tails, and he should therefore proceed to move the first Resolu-
tion for granting a sum not exceeding 57,6161. ss. Id. for the
salaries and contingent expenses of the Admiralty Office.
LORDS OF THE ADMIRALTY. •

Sir M. W. It IDLt Y said he rose for the purpose of proposing
a reduction in the proposed grant—a reduction which would
go to take off the salaries of two junior Lords of the Admi-
ralty. He felt that in bringing forward this motion for the
third time, he was imposing an unpleasant task both upon
the Committee and himself; but the necessities of the coun-
try, the absolute distress under which it was labouring, must
plead his excuse. When he had on a former occasion
brought forward a motion, he was met in the first instance by
the argument—" that the Admiralty Board from its original
formation consisted of the present number," and therefore it
was urged that a continuance of the same number of persons
was necessary. Now he denied the first part of this proposition.
It was well known that since the first formation of that Board,
it consisted of different numbers at different periods. In 1702,
Prince George of Denmark was at the head of the Admiralty, but
there were four Lords under him. In 1709 there were four Junior
Admiralty Lords; in 1714 there were five; in 1717 there were
five; and in Lord Sandwich's time there were five. This was
the last period at which the number of Admiralty Lords had
been five ; they had since been six, down to the present time.—
But surely so short a period of usage was not sufficient to esta-
blish the continuance of offices which had again and again
been proved to be useless. There might have existed, a few
years ago, good reasons for continuing the present number of
Lords of the Admiralty in their places; but when the situation
of the country was looked to—when the complaints of all classes
of society were beard, a good reason was furnished for their
reduction. Let the Committee consider the present esti-
mates. The number of ships to be employed was 120, the
number of seamen and marines 21,000. Perhaps, when we had
1,200 ships in Commission, and 140,000 seamen and marines
employed, six Lords of the Admiralty might be necessary
to fonduct the business of the navy—but who would say that
they were necessary now? Gentlemen might complain of
their distresses—they might petition for relief—but unless they
firtri:y determined to reduce every useless expenditure, then their
complaints andetitions were no more than a mockery.—(Hear,
hear, hear!)—here then was an expenditure, against which lie
called upon them to make a stand.—(llear !)—lt perhaps might
be urged, that the present Lords of the Admiralty had other
employment ; that they were laudibly engaged in assisting an
Honourable Secretary in detecting the errors or blunders in the
calculations of certain Members on his (Sir M. W. Ridley's) side
of the House.—(A laugh.)—Perhaps they had been assisting an
Hon. Baronet opposite in endeavouring to divine, by spirit of
prophecy, what would be the statements and objections of the
HonourableMernbersfor Aberdeen. This, it was true, might be
a very laborious employment, but surely it was not enough to
satisfy the country of the justness of their claims to their present
salarieS. The Gentlemen or their friends might urge that their
employments tended much to the benefit of the State but he
trusted the Committee would come to a different conclusion—
( Hear, hear !)—The Honourable Baronet here read to the
House an extract from the Report of the Finance Committee
of 1797, in which they stated, " that though it might be ad-
visable to continue Six Junior Lords of the Admiralty in time
of war, yet that such a reduction ought to take place in time
of peace. That the business of the Admiralty Board was
reduced, was evident from the discharge of a great number
of the Clerks, upon whom at all times the weight of the
business devolved ; they had been lopped off with an unspar-
ing hand, but the " Lords" had been continued, not because
there. still existed business, but because their offices afforded a
convenient source of patronage to Ministers—a patronage which
they were most anxious to maintain —(Hear, hear!)--It was not
for the mere purpose of saving 2,0001. a year that he made this
motion, lie was aware that such a saving would be but as a drop
in the ocean (although a saving of 2,000 shillings ought not to
be slighted). His main object was to remove a portion, at least,
of that undue patronage which Ministers enjoyed, and by which
they were enabled to continue the pressure that the country now
laboured under—(hear, hear !)—ln 1817 he made a motion si-
milar to-the present, and then he was met by the Noble Mar-
quess (then Lord Castlereagh), who said this is a subject
which will come under the consideration of the Finance Com-
mittee, who are now sitting, and therefore you are premature,"
and so his motion was negatived. Well, the Finance Committee
at length reported, and in that Report they said that the Resolu-
tion of the House (upon his motion) had taken the question re-
specting the Junior Lords of the Admiralty, so that both ways
the Lords of the Admiralty were safe. Another ground of de-
fence had been urged, which lie considered most ludicrous, but
coming from the Noble Marquis (Londonderry) it was worthy
of attention, if only to point out its fallacy. The Noble Mar-
quis said that the Admiralty was, in fact, a school for young
statesmen, who might be called upon at a future period to fill
efficient offices in the state. Now if there was any branch of
our service which required knowledge and experience it was
our navy. And were we to be told that that department was
to be managed by young inexperienced men, who were sent to
tint Board only for the purpose of learning their business ?
(Hear!)—The Hon. Baronet here expressed his regret that his
Hon. Friend (Sir G. Warrender, as was understood) should
have been removed from the Admiralty to the Board of Con-
troul. That Hon. Member had been a most efficient and
active member of the Board of Admiralty—Wear !)--He
would here relate to the House an anecdote of an Honourable
Friend of his, who had been appointed a Commissioner of the
Board of Controul. The gentleman to whom he alluded was
desirous to devote his time and talents to his new appointment;
but when he went down, he was informed that the Board was .
not sitting ; that the President was out of town. lie thought
it his duty to go down a second time, and not finding the
Board sitting, lie waited patiently, expecting it to assemble;
he was accosted by a person about the House, who told him
that.lie had no business there. "Oh yes," said he, " I
have business here ; lam a commissioner." " Well," said his
informant, " the Board is not sitting ; you will be sent for when
they are summoned." " But e: hen shall I receive the sum-
mons ?" asked his friend. The other said he could not tell
" But when was the last summons issued ?" " Oh," said the
person, who had addressed him, " the last summons issued
about three years ago, and it is impossible to tell when there
may be another."—(Hear, hear !)-He put it to the Commit-
tee, he put it to the Noble Marquis (Londonderry), who had
pledged himself to every practical economy, if the pesent mo-
tion was not one which was entitled to his support! But the
present situation of the Admiralty Board was such, that the
situations were now looked upon as interests vested in the pre-
sent holders. In proof of this he would read to the Commit-
tee a document which had lately reached his hands. It was a
circular from one of the most respectable mercantile houses in
London, and was written upon one of the firm having been
made a junior Lord of the Admiralty. It stated " that Mr.
W. R. Keith Douglas having been made a junior Lord of the
Admiralty, had retired and was no longer one of the firm"
and was signed " Douglas Anderson and Co."—(A laugh.)—lt
was certainly very proper that the Honourable Member should
retire from business upon receiving such an appointment, but if
the
.present motion was carried, he would lose not only his
business, but also his seat at the Board of Admiralty—(Hear,
and a laugh.)—ln the present distressed state of the country,
every possible reduction was necessary. The proceedings of
the last night must satisfy Ministers that even that House
thought a reduction of the expenses of the country was now a
grand and important point. He hoped that those Gentlemen
who supported the motion of his Honourable Friend last night,
would agree, not only in the necessity of a general reduction of
taxes, but also that every useless and unnecessary place ought
to be abolished—(hear, hear !)—The Ilonourable Baronet
concluded, by moving as an amendment that a sum of 55,6181:
ss. Id. should be inserted, instead of the sum stated in the
Resolution.

Sir J. SEBRIGHT rose to give his support to the motion,
and would take this opportunity of declaring his opinion that
the proposed reductions were far from corresponding with the
exigencies of the crisis.—(Hear, hear.)—So, too, he should con-
tinue to think, whilst there remained, under the present circum-
stances of the country, one useless office in existence. At the same
time he could assure the Committee, that he was most anxious
for the preservation of public credit, and should be sorry to find
the regular sinking fund so nicely balanced and adjusted as not
to produce any surplus over the 5,000,0001. But he called on
the Right Hon. Gent. to do what ought to be prelhninary to the
establishment of every sinking fund—he meant, to make all
possible reductions. If, acting on this principle, they did not
sueceed in creating an effective sinking fund, he knew not how
it was to be accomplished. With respect to the point imme-
diately before them, he had on former occasions voted for a pro-
position similar in effect to this amendment. It might be
said that the reduction was extremely trifling, but they were
now contending for a principle.—(Hear, hear.)—lt required
no sagacity to discover, but was in fact obvious to the whole
world, and he made the remark without any personal feeling,
that although the Lords of the Admiralty might receive com-
paratively little themselves, yet as Members of that House
they might vote away millions.—(Hear !) Were they not sub-
ject to some influence, in their character as guardians of the
public purse—of that purse, on which the continuance of their
own salaries depended ?—(Hear ! )—lf these offices were really and
truly necessary, let them remain ; but what man in his senses
could believe, that as many commissioners were now required
at the Admiralty, as during a period of active and successful

warfare?—(Hear !)—There was nothing that excited a stronger
feeling of discontent amongst his constituents, than the existence
of these little unnecessary places. Complaints of this kind reach-
ed him from all directions. He trusted•lllinisters would reflect,
how narrow an escape they had already experienced—that they
had been able to carry a most important tax only by a ma-
jority of four ' • and of those who voted with them, how many
must be regarded as judges in their own cause ?—( Loud cries of
hear !)—lt could hardly be imagined that they were disposed to
reduce or destroy a fund from which their own allowanceS
were derived. For these reasons, though no man could be more
anxious for the maintenance of public credit than himself, he
called upon the Committee to persevere in the work of retrench-
ment. So far from being actuated by any hostility to the
gentlemen opposite, lie rather wished them to retain their places.
Without any disrepect to them, he might say that it was natural
for them to aim at the preservation of their influence; but it
was the duty of the House to keep that patronage within bounds
and prove themselves to be, at a crisis like the present, the vigi-
lant and faithful guardians of the public purse.—( Hear !)'
Sir G. COCKBURN said that he thought the Board of
Admiralty was at present constituted on the best principles.
There was one peculiarity in that Board which was to be
found in no other—that of its being able to act separately,-
on which circumstance in a time of war the safety of the State
might depend. He thought any person who would only turn
his attention towards it, would see the great and important
duties which the Lords of the Admiralty had to perform.—
Speaking merely with reference to the businessin London,
would the Honourable Gentleman leave them but one Lay
Lord to perform sit, because it would be necessary that
three shouldhe at the out-posts ? Ile thought civilians much
better calculated to discharge the duties of these offices, than
those who had been brought up on another element ; they re-
quired persons of general knowledge and liberal education ; he
thought even a lawyer would be of great use amongst them.—
The Honourable Gentleman had said two thousand pounds
was no trifling sum to reduce ; that was quite immaterial to
his (Sir G.'s) argument ; he contended for the number on the
ground of necessity, and therefore the amount of the salary
was not connected with his question. He admitted that
there might have been more business in war, but he assured
the Hon. Gentleman there was still an ample Share remaining
quite sufficient to employ their time. He was ready to admit
the necessity of some naval officers for explanation of technical
terms, but they were by no means more necessary than laymen.
If he were asked which of the Lords of the Admiralty was-the
most useful and active, lie would say it was a Lay Lord. He
concluded by calling on the House not to be induced to lessen
the number, on the supposition that there was not sufficient to
occupy them, for lie could assure the House that they had no
want of employment.
Mr. BERNAL said it would appear from the statement of
the Honourable and Gallant Member that some of the Lords
were constantly absent at the outports. He (Mr. B.) never
understood this before ; but he was satisfied the reduction might
be made without injury to the public service. Last year there
was a very high office which it was considered almoSt sacrilege to
touch ; but the Ministers themselves had now abolished it.—
He alluded to the Vice-Admiralship of Scotland. The Gallant
Admiral had struck his flag. —(A laugh.)—The savings allud-
ed to by the Hon. Bait (Sir J. Osborne) he highly approved of,
except those caused by the 'dismissal of Clerks. It there were
less work for Clerks, there certainly must be less occasion for
the Lords. The Hon. and Gallant Member had spoken of the
necessity of having, a lawyer attached to the Board, but he (Mr.
B.) believed the Board had standing Counsel, whose opinions
were very often obtained at the public expense.
Admiral SOTHERON agreed with his non. and Gallant
Friend (Sir G. Cockburn) that the Board of Admiralty ought
to consist of Six Members.

Mr. MARRYAT could not admit that the same degree of
superintendance was necessary at the Board of Admiralty, now
that our navy consisted of 14,000, as when it included 140,000
seamen.—(llear, hear !)—The Gallant Admiral (Sir G. Cock-
burn) had spoken with effect, and, were his own services in
question, all would agree that they deserved somewhat more
than a pecuniary reward ; but the condition of the country Was
now such, that no public officer ought to be retained whose ser-
vices were not indispensable.—(Hear.)
Lord ALTIIORPE could not agree in the necessity of a se-
parated Board for the performance of the duties out of London.
He thought a Board of two in London would be quite suffici-
ent ; and he considered a difference of opinion between them
very improbable, awl that even if it occurred, it would not, in the
time of peace, be of a nature to require instant decision. On
the whole, he was persuaded that two Lords might be safely
reduced.

Sir ISAAC COFFIN said, there were many public officers
under the controul of the Board of Admiralty ; and that
the judicial power of the Board extended to even cases of
life and death. If he (Sir Isaac) were tried and found
guilty at Portsmouth of mutiny, it was only necessary for the
Board to say, by return of post, " Shoot that officer!"--(A
laugh.)--If the men at the Board were not efficient, " Why,"
said the Honourable and gallant Member, " out with them and
send them about their business."—(Laughter.)—But of the ne-
cessity of the Board, as at present constituted, he had no doubt.
He knew that Lord Hood and Lord Gardiner, when they be-
longed to the Admiralty, had been detained there six weeks,
without moving from it.
Admiral HARVEY said, the attendance of the two Noble-
men alluded to by his Hon. and Gallant Friend, was in time of
war. He (Admiral Harvey) would rather that only one Lord
should be reduced ; but rather than be without reduction he
should vote for the Amendment.

Mr. GIPPS asked a question of the Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer relating to the Superannuation Fund; but he could not
be distinctly heard in the Gallery.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said, that a
Bill would be brought in to settle the Superannuation Fund
by a deduction of 5 per cent. from the Salaries. It was thought
that this would be the most advisable course, as those from
whom the 5 per cent. was to be taken would know that it was
to provide a Fund for themselves. He should observe to the
House that some of the salaries of this department were not
provided for by annual vote but by perpetual acts, and could
not therefore be touched by the present amendment.
Mr. ELLIS spoke from under the Gallery, but in a tone of
voice perfectly inaudible. We believe he supported the
Amendment.

Sir C. COLE said he was devotedly attached to every thing
connected with his profession ; but fro►m a sense of duty to-
wards his constituents he should vote for the Amendment, as
he could not concur in the necessity of ►maintaining six junior
Lords in the time of peace.
Mr. FORBES spoke a few words ; but the confusion was
so great that he too could not be heard. We believe lie spoke
in favour of the Amendment.

Mr. LYTTLETON said he should vote for the amendment,
upon the principle of the Noble Marquis's own plan of eco-
nomy—(Hear, hear. !)—H e (Mr. L.) had voted against a similar
motion on a former occasion • but considering the altered state
of the country and the general prevalence of distress, he trusted
he should not be exposed to the charge of inconsistency by his
vote of that night.—(Hear, hear !)—He wished economy to be
enforced in the higher as well as the lower departments of the,
public service ; as the impression of the absolute necessity of
economy pervaded the minds of the most intelligent persons in
the country.
An HoN. IllEmilEn, whose name could not be learnt, spoke
in favour of the reduction, on the ground of a desire to support
public credit. •
Sir G. WA RRENDER said he should not do justice to
himself or his colleagues•if he did not state his opinion of the
duties of the offices in question, and in this statement he trusted
he should not be suspected of a desire to speak unnecessarily
of himself. The administering of the funds of Greenwich
Hospital always fell to the lot of one of the Lords, and
from his decision numerous appeals were made to the Board.
With respect to the general duties of the office, he should ob-
serve that in the first two years of the time lie had the honour
to be in office he was absent only. two months. During
the whole of the five years of his being in office he was com-
pelled to be in town during the months of July, August, Sep-
tember, and October. But finding the duties interfere with his
private arrangements, he was under the necessity of resigning
an office lie had held with so much satisfaction.—(A laugh)—lt
was his conscientious opinion that those who held the office and
discharged the duties of it, rendered an essential service to their
country.
Mr. GRENFELL said he should vote for the Amendment,
believing that the same number of Lords could not be necessary
in peace as in war.
Mr. GOOCH said he had come down to the House deter-
mined to support the Amendment of the Honourable Baronet,
unless the necessity of retaining the two Lords in question
should be proved to his satisfaction. Nothing that he had heard
convinced him, and lie should vote, for the Amendment.—
(Cheers from the Opposition.)
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said the question had
been so amply discussed upon former occasions, that it was
almost impossible to bring any new argument to bear upon it.
As he admitted the principle of economy, and objected only to
its application in the present instance, it was clue to the
House that he should state the reasons which had induced the
vote he should give upon the present question. The amend-
ment had been brought forward by the Honourable Baronet in
the fairest manner ; and if he (the Marquis) understood the
argument adduced in its support, it went, first, to the principle
of Economy ; and secondly, to that of the interest of the Crown.
Upon the first of these subjects he was free to confess, that the
sum, though moderate, ought not to be overlooked ; but the
House was called upon to balance 2,0001. against the probability
of interfering with the public service ; a probability which had
been strengthened by the opinion of his Hon. and Gallant Friend
(Sir G. Cockburn) whose character in his profession, and in
that House, stood too high to require any eulogium. The opi-

nion of his Hon. and Gallant Friend had been given as a
professional man and a man of honour, and he had no doubt it
would have its due weight with the House.—(Hear !)—The
Hon. Member for Rochester (Mr. Bernal) had noticed the
Vice.Admiralship of Scotland. That had always been
admittedly a sinecure, and had, as to income, been abo-
lished. At present it was merely an honorary office. The
Noble Nord (Althorp) could, he thought, scarcely deny the
necessity.of the separate Boards ; for it was impossible to ex-
pect that a man, even in a public situation, could be always
at his post. Some relaxation must he allowed for a Public
Officer as well as for individuals. He thought that without
the two Lords in question the Board would be incomplete in
itself and inefficient in its operation. His Honourable and Gal-
lant Friend was incapable of expressing the opinion-he had
given if he did not sincerely believe its correctness. The
question then was, whether, to save 20091. the House would
deprive the Admiralty of the means of discharging its duties
with energy ? The present had become a subject of so much
interest out of doors, that Ministers would gladly give up the
question if they could. It was his duty, and that of his col-
leagues, to economize wherever it could be done with safety,
but he was determined not to yield to clamour. The second
' branch of the argument of the Hon. Baronet referred to the
patronage and influence which was acquired by the appoint-
ment to these offices. He (the Marquis of Londonderry),
cautioned the House against looking at the question in the
way in which the Honourable Baronet wished them. If the
influence of the Crown were considered too great, why had not
• the Hon. Baronet followed the example of Mr. Dunning and
of Mr. Burke, and brought this subject forward in a distinct
and comprehensive point of view ? The course taken by Mr.
Dunning and Mr. Burke in this respect had been manly and
consistent. But the • principle of •the present question had
been often argued by those, who, from. the nature of their pur-
suits, were incompetent to understand the subject. Let it
not go forth that the Gentlemen on the other side of the
House were purity itself.—(Hear, hear !)—Let it not be sup-
' posed that nothing could occur to disturb the calm temper of
the understandings of Honourable Gentlemen opposite, or
betray them into an overstrained or unjust opinion of those
who sat on his side of the House. As to Honourable Mem-
bers in that House who were in office being actuated 13;,
' sordid motives, he protested against the doctrine. As mum
of sordid feelings entered into the conduct of the Honour-
able Gentlemen on the other side, in looking forward to
the situations, which in the days they lived in, were no great
• enjoyment.—(Hear.)—As to what had fallen from the Hon.
Member for Hertfordshire (Sir J. Sebright) on the subject, he
' would pass it over, but he must protest against the taunt
which he had indulged in against himself, and those who acted
with him. If the interest of the Crown !were, as had been
stated, too great, he was sure. there was virtue enough in that
House to keep it within due bounds. At no period hadthe
popular influence upon that House been greater than now.—
(Cheers.)—lle had no objection to the Hon. Baronet urging
his motion that night on the ground of public economy, but he
protested against its being supported on the pretence of di-
minishing the influence of the Crown. When a Noble Lord
(Lord A. Hamilton) induced the House to entertain his motion
on the subject of Scotch Burghs, he assured them that it was
not connected with Parliamentary Reform. When the subject
came to be discussed, however, it was obvious that the recom-
mendation of the Noble Lord would operate in that way.. It
' was this indirect way of attacking the constitution,which noone
had the boldness to propose openly, that lie objected to. He
had as sincere a desire as the :Noble Lord himself to effect Re-
form by all practicable means ; but he could not see any think*
in the present motion to induce him to assent to it, and espe-
cially as it was moved on the principle of indirectly curtailing
the influence of the Crown, he regarded it as a dangerous pre-
cedent.—(Cheers.)
Sir J. SEBRIGHT entreated the indulgence of the House
whilst he explained away the mistake which the Noble Mar-
quis scented to have made as to his sentiments. With respect
to the Noble Marquis himself, if there was one man whom he
could suspect of being less actuated by sordid motives than
another, it was the Noble Marquis himself.—(Hear, hear !)
—He could not conceive what he had said that night, or the
night before, to give the Noble Marquis ground for thinking
that he had so spoken of hint. He had merely said, that alt
administrations were backward in parting with their patron-
age.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said he understood the
Hon. Baronet to say, that persons in office would vote in their
own behalf ; and that the vote of last night was not given
from motives of the purest nature.
Sir J. NEBRIGHT admitted that be had said, that persons
bolding sinecure offices might support the Noble Marquis from
motives of a personal nature; but he never intended to al-
lude to any one individual. He attributed such motives to
the minor appointments, but least of all did he mean to point
at the Noble Marquis.
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY said, that however grate-
ful he might be to the Hun. Baronet, he really could not ac-
cept any compliments from him at the expense of his friends.
—(Hear).
Mr. S. WORTLEY contended, that the influence of the
Crown never was lower than at present; and if he was call-
ed upon to vote on the motion. before the House, on that
principle, he should vote against it. But if his vote was to
be a declaration of his opinion whether the business of the
Admiralty could he done with a less number of Lords than it
at present had, he should vote for the motion of the Hon.
Baronet (Sir M. Ridley.)—(Hear, hear !)—He believed it
could be thine with a lower number, and he believed the cir-
cumstances of the times made it imperative on him to vote
for the reduction of public establishments. He was bound
to support all economy consistent with -the safety of the
country. He thought the safety of the country would not
be affected by the reduction of one Lord of the Admiralty,
and therefore he was led to give his vote in favour of re-
trenchment.—(Hear, bear !)
Sir M. W. RIDLEY replied. Nothing had occurred in the
course of the debate to alter his opinion of the propriety of
Iris motion. He congratulated himself on the support he
was to have from the Honourable Member for Glamorgan-
shire (Sir C. Cole), who, crowned with the glories of his pro-
fession, was now ready to combat for the good of his country
at Ironic. The question was not, as had been stated, whetber
they should destroy the two Boards of Admiralty, but whe-
ther two Lords could do the business of the lower Board as
well as three.—(Hear:)

Che House then divided on the Amendment, when the
❑umbers were:—

For the Amendment 182
Against it.. l2B
Majority in favour of the Amendment --54
The next Resolution proposed was for a sum of 31,3041. !s-
-ad. to pay the Colonies, and defray the other expenses of the
Navy Pay-Office, for the year 1822. . _ .

Nil-. SLIME called the attention of the House to the fact,
that no reduction had been made in this department on the
principle of the Resolution passed at the end of last Session,
pledging them to a reduction throughout all the public de-
partments, proportionate to the increased value of money
and the diminished prices of all articles of consumption:-
The reductions that had been wade were merely of a few mi'
nor clerks, and no diminution whatever had been made in
the salaries of any of those remaining on the Establishment,
with the exception of the treasurer. He was extremely
anxious last Session to call the attention of the House to the
consideration of the nature of the duties of the Treasurer of
the Navy, and of the business of the Navy Office. He, on
that occasion, read to the House the Report of the Finance
Committee, which described the nature of the duties of that
office as differing little from the business of a banker. The
Report also remarked with surprise, that the establishinent
was the same in 1817 as in 1813, when there were so man),
millions less to pay. The reductions recommended were pro-
posed to be made with a regard to the amount of the business.
,If this were dune, the whole establishment of this office
would not amount to. mote than half a dozen clerks, to which
Standard he had endeavoured last year to persuade the House
to reduce it. All the business of the office and the Treasurer,
who received 30001. a year, was to give cheques upon
the Bank of England, fur the amount of the different sows
it became their duty to pay; and that was, as the Report
truly stated, the precise nature of the business of a Banker.
He knew they would be told of a Mr. Tweedie, who; it would
be stated, had left the country with a large sum of public;
money in his hand, to the amount of many thousands. But
he should like to know how that individual came to possess
power over such an amount of public money, especially con-
sidering the very simple nature of the routine of that office.
Instead of anveduction taking place, in compliance with the
recommendation of the Finance Committee, or in proportion
to the demands of the country, they had only a difference of
cost of 10001. for this office from what it was when doing
effective service. The only reduction of salary was in the
case of the Treasurer, and the rest was made out of the re'
mission of some pensions. All the salaries and charges, with
these exceptions, were kept up at the same rate as they were.
in 1813, although there was now a reduction in the prices 01
all articles of consumption, and an increased value of atone;
to the amount of 45 per cent. He (Mr. H.) only confendeo
for a reduction of salaries to the amount of 25 per cent. Ile
protested against the plan of the Chancellor of the Exchequer
to take five per cent. from small salaries, and 10 per cent'
from the large, which was to form a fund to pay Sopesannua"
lion out of. This was in fact no reduction at all; and,
stead of that plan, he proposed his own, of a reduction of
25
per cent. If he did what he thought was right, he wou'
move for the abolition of the office altogether. But he wentid.,.
content himself with moving, that the sum of 23,4781. be sou
&Wilted fur 31,3041., being a reduction of 7,8261., at the rate
of 25 pet cent.
Mr.F.ROBINSON felt much surprised at. the statement of
the Hon. Gentleman. The Hon. Gentleman bad last yea

I

-54

)41. 15.
of the

is fact,
)11 the
ession,

lie dc'
money
turn.--
ew nil-

ade in

[lntent,
remelt'
to the

tier 0

itendet,
t.
:hequer
N- cent.
annu"
nd, in-
!) of '25
would
e would
be sub-
pe

ment Of
st year