The Sun.
London, England, 1848-03-21 00:00:00

' BOURSE-PARIS, MONDAY, MARCH 20.

VIENNA.

SARDINIA.

ROME.

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, MARC II 21, 1846.

people. They might rest assured that if an arm was
stretched out to strike them in Ireland, another arm
would be stretched out to revenge them in England.
Several resolutions being passed, the meeting sepa-
rated. _ . .

There is no account of any outrages havng been
committed.

ELECTION COMMITTEES.
(THIS DAY.)
AYLESBURY.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)
Mr. ALEXANDER replied; after which the room was
cleared, and the Committee having consulted for a short
while strangers were admitted, when
The CHAIRMAN announced that the Committee had
come to the following resolutions:—
That Lord Nugent was duly elected to serve in the
present Parliament for the borough of Aylesbury.
" That J. P. Deering, Esq., was not duly elected to
serve in the present Parliament for the borough of
Aylesbury.
That the last election for the borough of Aylesbury
was a void election, so far as it related to the said J. P.
Deering, Esq.
" That the said J. P. Deering, Esq., was, by his
agents, guilty of treating the electors at the last elec-
tion, for the purpose of corruptly influencing them in
their votes."
This closed the labours of the Committee.

DERBY.
(Continued from our Afternoon Edition.)
Other freemen gave similar testimony, and their evi-
dence was put in to prove that on the Tuesday and
*Wednesday following the election Mr. Barber, the soli-
citor of the sitting Member, drew the two cheques upon
a Derby bank, one for 3001. in favour of Mr. Whittaker,
the party who paid the money to the voters at the com-
mittee-rooms; and the other for 2001. in favour of Mr.
Hawkridge, the other committeeman of Mr. Strutt.
The Committee then adjourned till to•morrow.

CROWN• OFFICE, MARCH 20.

MEMBERS RETURNED TO SERVE IN THE PRESENT

PARLIAMENT:

City of Carlisle—William Nicholson Hodson, Esq. ;
Philip Henry Howard, Esq., the last election for the
said city having been declared
sq
void.
Borough of Kinsale—Benjamin Hawes, E., of
Queen's square, Westminster, the last election for the
said borough having been declared void.
City of Lincoln—Thomas Benjamin Hobhouse, Esq.,
the last election for the said city having been declared
void.

Commissions by_ the Lord-Lieutenant of the County

Palatine of Lancashire.

The Hon. Edward Henry Stanley to be Deputy-
Lieutenant, March 17.

. _ .
Commission by the Lord Lieutenant of Somersetshire.
West Somerset Regiment of Yeomanry Cavalry—
The Reverend John Somerville Broderip, Clerk, to be
Chaplain, vice Parsons, resigned. March I__

_
BANKRUPTCY 'SUPERSEDED.
William Evans, linendraper, Piccadilly.
BANKRUPTS.

Benjamin M'Cliesh Chrees and John Boyd, silk ma-
nufacturers, Bow Churchyard, to surrender March 31,
at half- past two, and May 9, at twelve, at the Court of
Bankruptcy. Groom, official assignee, Abchurch-lane,
Lombard-street; Hudson, Bucklerabury.
Andrew Baldwin, licensed victualler, Bulstrode-street,
Saint Mary-le-bone, March 27, at two, and May 1, at
twelve, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Turquand, official
assignee, Guildhall-chambers; Piercy and Co., Three
Crown-court, Borough.
Charles Corbett Wilson, scrivener, Daventry, North-
ampton, March 30, at one, and May 4, at twelve, at the
Court of Bankruptcy. Bell, official assignee, Coleman-
street-buildings; A'Beckett, Son, and Sympson, Golden-
square ; Pell, jun., Welford, Northampton.
Charles Thomas Wood, licensed victualler, Drury--
lane, March 29, at one, and May 2, at twelve, at the
Court of Bankruptcy. Pennell, official assignee; Mar-
tineau' Raymond's-buildings. Gray's Inn.
David Le Boutillier, draper, Northumberland-place,
Commercial-road East, March 29, at half past one, and
May 2, at one, at the Court of Bankruptcy. Stanafeld,
official assignee; Ashurt and Son, Old Jewry.
John Cole Gwillim, cattle-dealer, Bishop's Frome,
Herefordshire, April 8, and May 2, at one, at the Bir-
mingham District Court. Whitmore, official assignee,
Birmingham; Gwillim. Hereford; Suckling, Birmingham.
William Pickup, brick maker, Blackburn, April 4 and
25, at eleven, at the Manchester District Court. Fraser,
official assignee, Manchester; Sale and Co., Manchester;
Wilkinson and Co., Blackburn; Wiglesworth and Co.,
Gray's Inn-square, London.
James Smith, contractor, Macclesfield, April 3 and
25, at twelve, at the Manchester District Court. Pott,
official assignee, Manchester; Sale and Co., Manchester;
Cowdell and Co., Hinckley, Leicestershire; Lewis and
Co., Ely-place, Holborn, London.
John 'hatable, silversmith, Frome Selwood, Somer-
setshire, April 6 and May 5, at twelve, at the Bristol
District Court. Miller, official assignee, Bristol; Miller,
Frome.

Joseph Isaac Isaacson, merchant, Liverpool, March 31
and April2o, at eleven, at the Liverpool District Court.
Cazenove, official assignee, Liverpool; Vincent and Co.,
Temple, London; Littledale and Co., Liverpool.
Edward Roberts, currier, Denbigh, April 4 and 28,
at twelve, at the Liverpool District Court. Turner,
official assignee, Liverpool; Few and Co. Henrietta-
street, London; Pears, Denbigh; Evans and Son, Liver-
pool.
James Wallbank, currier, Stockport, Cheshire, April
3 and 25, at twelve, at the Manchester District Court.
Fraser, official assignee, Manchester ; Toulmin and
Chester, Staple Inn, London; Oldham, Stockport.
Richard Smith and Milton Smith, calico printers,
Baxenden, Lancashire, April 5 and 27, at twelve, at the
Manchester District Court. Hobson, official assignee,
Manchester; Clarke, Gray, and Woodcock, Lincoln's
Inn-fields, London; Whitehead, Bury.
William Harding, ship-owner, Stobhouse, Durham,
April 3, at eleven, and May 4, at twelve, at the New-
castle-upon-Tyne District Court. Baker, official assignee,
Newcastle-upon-Tyne; Perkins, Regent-square, London;
Wilson and Faber, Stockton on Tees; Griffith and
Crighton, Newcastle-upon-Tyne.
William Anderson, draper, Clester-le-Street, Durham,
March 30, at eleven, and May 2, at ono, at the New-
castle-upon-Tyne Dictrict Court. Wakley, official
assignee, Newcastle-upon-Tyne; Steavenson, Darling-
ton; Burn, Doctor's-commons, London,
John Straker, brickmaker, Jarrow, Durham, March
30, at half-past ten, and May 4, at one, at the Newcastle-
upon-Tyne District Court. Baker, official assignee, New-
castle-upon-Tyne ; Philipson, Newcastle-upon-Tyne ;
Meggison, Pringle, Stevenson, and Shutn, King's-road,
Bedford-row, London.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

(THIS EVENING)

HOUSE OF LORDS.

The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the Wool-
sack at Five o'clock.

ADMINISTRATION OATHS (CHANCERY) BILL.

On the motion of the LORD CHANCELLOR the
Administration of Oaths (Chancery) Bill was read a
second time.

ENCUMBERED ESTATES BILL (IRELAND).
The Encumbered Estates Bill (Ireland) passed through
Committee, and the report was brought up.
REPRESENTATIVE PEERS OF SCOTLAND.

The Earl of EGLINTON, referring to the Act of
last session, regulating. the Election of Representative
Peers of Scotland, said that at the last election, Lord
Colville: had claimed to vote, and his claim had been
protested against by the greater number of Peers pre-
sent. He, therefore, moved that a copy of that pro-
test be laid before their Lordships, and that it be re-
ferred to a Select Committee of their Lordships' House
oil Tuesday, 11th April next, and that Lord Colville be
required to attend.—Agreed to.
AUDIT OF RAILWAY ACCOUNTS BILL.

On the: motion of Lord MONTEAGLE the House
resolved itself into Committee on the Audit of Railway
Accounts Bill.

After a desultory conversation, in which the Earls of
Malmesbury and Eglinton, and Lords Redesdale, Mont-
eagle, Stanley, Ashburton, and Granville took part, the
clauses were agreed to with several verbal amendments.
The Bill was then reported to the House, and their
Lordships adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.
The SPEAKER took the Chair shortly before Four
o'clock

DUNDALK ELECTION.

The Clerk of the Crown attended to amend the returns
for the Borough of Dundalk.
NEW MEMBERS.

Mr. M'CLTLLAGII took the oaths and his seat for
Dundalk.

The Marquis of BLANDTOZD took the oaths and his
seat for Woodstock.

Mr. HOSHOUSE took the oaths and his seat for Lin-
coln.

AYLESBURY ELECTION COMMITTEE.

This Committee obtained leave to sit during the
evening.
SECOND READINGS.

The following Railway Bills were read a second time
and ordered to be committed.

Bristol and Exeter (Branch from Bleadon to Wells,
Glastonbury, and Street).
Bristol and Exeter (Taunton and Castle Cary Branch).
Clarence and Leeds and Thirsk Amalgamation.
Exeter and Exmouth Railway Acts Amendment.

Exeter, Yeovil. and Dorchester Railway and Branches.
Fleetwood, Preston, and West Riding Junction (Burnley
and Colliery Branches). -
Glasgow, Paisley, and Greenock (Amendment and
Branches, &c).
Great Northern (Isle of Axholme Extension).
Great Western (Extension of the Berks and Hants Rail-
way from Hungerford to Westbury, with a Branch to
Devizes).
Leeds and Thirsk (Branch from Melmerby to North-
allerton and Junction with York and Newcastle

Railway).
Leeds and Thirsk (Harrogate and Pateley Branch).
Leeds Central Railway Station.
London and Blackwall Improvement and Branches to
the St. Katharine's and London Docks.
Londonderry and Coleraine (Deviation of Line and

Amendment of Act).
Manchester, Buxton, Matlock, and Midlands Junction.

Deviation and Branches.
Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire (Crossing of
Sheffield-street, in Manchester, &c.)
Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire (Junction with
the Midland Railway vie! Barnsley, and Branches

therefrom).
Manchester, Sheffield and Lincolnshire (Sheffield Canal

Purchase).
Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire (Station at
Sheffield, and Branch to the Sheffield Canal).
Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire
,(Station Ap-

proach in Manchester).
Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire (Ashton Canal

Purchase).
Midland (Gloucester and Stonehouse Junction).
Northern Counties Union Amendment and Deviation.
North-Western (Diversions at Skipton, Casterton, and

Sedbergh).
Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton (No. I—ln.

crease of Capital).
Oxford, Worcester, and Wolverhampton (No. 2—De-
viation of Line, and Power to Shrewsbury and Bir-
mingham, and Birmingham, Wolverhampton, and
Dudley Railway Companies to contribute aed meke
Arrangements).
Paisley, Barrhead, and Hurlet.
Salisbury and Yeovil.
Scottish Midland Junction (Amendment and Branch to

Laurencekirk).
South Yorkshire, Doncaster, and Goole Amendment
(Extension to Penistone and Alteration of Dodworth
Branch).
Strathtsy and Breadalbane Extension.
Taw Vale Railway and Dock.
Windsor, Staines, and South-Western Railway Act (No.

1), 1847 (Slough Extension and Deviations).
York, Newcastle, and Berwick, late York and Newcastle
(Main Line Improvement, &c.)
EXETER AND COWLEY-BRIDGE JUNCTION

• RAIL WAY.
Mr. CHAPLIN moved the second reading of this Bill.
It was but a mile and three-quarters in length, and what
he asked those who intended to oppose the Bill was this,
•to allow it to go with other schemes before a Com-
mittee up stairs. It would be on the narrow gauge,
and as it would possibly open up again a conflict be-
tween the broad and narrow gauges, he thought the
course he had pointed out was the most advisable to
adopt.

Sir T. ACKLAND moved that the Bill be read a
second time this day six months, on the ground that
the South-Western Company, by whom the Bill was

ppromoted, were making their way, by "force of gold,"
into a territory west of Exeter, in which the Legislature
had never consented tc the extension of the narrow gauge.
The intention of Parliament was clearly that the Exeter
and Creditor' Railway should remain a perfectly in-
dependent line. If the House should sanction the in-
troduction of the narrow gauge by means of this Bill,
they would be sanctioning the continuation of a small
piece of narrow gauge, at least sixty miles distant from
any other portion of narrow gauge railway. No harm
would result from refising the second reading of the
Bill for this session at least, and he trusted that the
House would not consent to allow the Bill to be read a
second time.
Sir J. Y. BULLER seconded the motion.

Sir J. DUCKWORTH trusted that the House would
not decide upon the merits of the Bill, upon its second
reading, but adopt the same manner as was always
adopted with respect to Bills of this nature, and send it
to a Committee to decide upon the merits. The Com-
mittee appointed by de House in the last session of
Parliament had decided upon sanctioning a narrow
gauge line from Salisbury to Exeter, and the House had
adopted that decision. It only rested now with the
House of Lords to give a final decision upon the subject.
Sir J. Y. BULLER trusted that the House would
adopt the proposition of Hs Hon. Friend (Sir T. Acland),
for he looked upon this question as a battle of tho
gauges, and nothing else.
Colonel SEYMER trusted that the House would allow
the Bill to go to a Committee up-stairs, and be decided
upon its merits.
Mr. STRUTT thought that a patient inquiry ought
to take place on the subject of this Bill before the House
decided upon its merits. He thought the Bill ought to
go before a Committee up stairs, and he trusted, there-
fore, the Hon. Baronet would withdraw his amendment.
Sir R. INGLIS thought that his Hoe. Friend the
Member for North Devon was justified in the course he
had pursued, and he shuld, therefore, support his
amendment.
After some observation; from Mr. SCOTT,
Strangers were ordered to withdraw, and the House
divided, when there appeared—
For the second reading lOB
Against it 56
Majority —s2
The Bill was then read a second timo and ordered to
be committed.

Lord PALMERSTON had not yet received the dis-
patch—when he did he would lay it on the table.
THE CASE OF MR. RAYSON.

Mr. M. MILNES then rose to bring under the
consideration of the House the injuries alleged to have
been suffered by Mr. Rayson, an English merchant, from
the Austrian authorities at Constantinople, and was
(LEFT SPEAKING.)

COURSE OF EXCH.
Amsterdam •• •• .• •• 12 5%
Ditto, at eight •• 12 2
Battcrdam •..... 12 6
Antwerp • • .• .• • • •• .•
ilAmburgh •• M.D. 13 t 4
kitona• • . ...... .......
Paris, 3 dayesight
Ditto, •• •• ••
Marseilles ••••••• • •• ••
.. 29
Frankfort oa Maine.... 121%
Peteraburgh, SU.
Iterlin•• •• •• •••••• ••
Vienna, effec. f 10......
Trieste, ditt0..........
Madrid • • • • •• •• ••
Cadiz • • • •• •• •• •• •• •• 48
Bilbao •••• •• • •••• • .
Barcelona •• .•
•• •••• •• •• •••.,

LNGE.-(THIS DAY.)
llbraltar.. •••••• • • • • • •
Leghera ••.. • •
Genoa ............ •... 26 80
.. • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Venice.. • • • • • • ***** • • •
Naples ...... •••• • • • •
Palermo, per oz .• ...• • •
Lisbon.... • • .... • • • • .•
Oporto • • .. • • .... • • .. • .

Itio Jaaeire ..
Bahia ................
Buenos Ayres .. • •
New York, 21 dayesight
Philadelphia ..........

TRIM or BULLION, TSB OS.
Foreign Gold lo baro...E3 :7 9
New Dollars .... •. 0 4 9%
Tortuga], Gold Coin •• 00 0
Spanish Doubloons .. 0 0 0
Aver in bars ......•• 0 4 11

SOUTHAMPTON, MARCH 21.—The Lady de Sau-
marez, Captain Wrightson, with nearly 200 passengers,
arrived here at eleven o'clock this morning, after
a very rough passage, from Havre, which place she
left last night at nine o'clock. She reports
that affairs wore still more gloomy aspect than
ever. At Havre, Rouen, and their neighbour-
hoods, the English workmen have met with shock-
ing treatment, being turned out of their houses,
their furniture being destroyed, and in some cases
they have been personally attacked and severely mal-
treated. A popular outbreak was feared last night at
Havre. It is reported that at Rouen the mob waited on
the authorities to ask permission to have two days'
pillage, and were only restrained by the prompt inter-
ference of the National Guards. The Lady de Saumares
brought passengers and despatches to the Washington,
which left for New York at twelve o'clock, with about
thirty-seven passengers, mail, and general cargo. The
Royal West India mail-ship Dee, from the West Indies,
is hourly expected.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.
HOUSE OF COMMONS, Mach 20.
Colonel SII3THORP presented a petition from
Lincoln, complaining of the unlicensed sale of game,
and
.praying for a remedy.
NAVY ESTIMATES. •

Mr. WARD, in rising to bring under the consi-
deration of the Committee, the naval policy which he
considered was the peculiar province of the Crown and
Parliament to pursue, trusted he should have the indul-
gence of the Committee for a few minutes, while he de-
tailed the number of men that would be necessary
for the service of 184$-49. He could not separate
from this point the whole naval policy of the coun-
try, because in the question of the number of men
to be voted for the year was involved the whole
subject of the navy estimates. He hoped they
would not grudge the means that were necessary
to place the navy in an efficient state. What
some Honourable Members called an extravagant
expenditure, be called a necessary and just one, and
before he concluded he should show that this was
so. He admitted that much of the moneys
voted might have been better spent, if those
entrusted with its expenditure had had more
time to consider how this might be done. If
the service was reduced some thousands it could not
fail to be impaired. The number of marines had been
constantly varying; but so satisfied was the House
of the necessity of keeping up the proper number,
that no division of the House had taken place on the
subject during the last 20 years.—(Hear, bear.)
The number had been always varying, and yet,
although Parliament and the country had always
demurred to this increasing expenditure, yet there
had been no division on the number. He found that
the lowest vote ever taken was for 19,000 men, in
1817. In 1819 that number was raised to 20,000 ;
and in 1823 to 25,000, without any apparent necessity
for the increase, In 1824 it was 29,000 ; in 1825,
30,000; and from 1826 to 1830 it was 27,000. In
1835 it was 26,000; and in 1836.7, 33,000; in
1837-8, 34,000.; in 1840-1, 39,000; and in 1841.2,
43,000, the same as this year. He might perhaps be
told there was always some political cause to be
assigned for the increase being granted without a
division ; such as the war in Syria or China, or that
some disturbance of the peace of Europe was
threatened, and that when peace was restored a re-
duction took place. In 1843-4 the force was 39,000
men, which in 1844-5 was reduced to 36,000 men.
The force of 36,000 men was then taken as the
standard of the proper peace establishment by the Right
lion. Baronet (Sir J. Graham), although it exceeded
by 10,000 men the standard of 1835. A single year's
experience, however, was enough to prove the insuf-
ficiency
,of his vote, and in 1846-6, having reduced
the force to 36,000 men, the Government increased it
to 40,000 men in a time of' profound peace. In 1846
a further addition of 1,500 marines was made, which
was followed by a further increase of 1,500 marines
in the present estimates, making the number of sea-
men and marines included in the present vote. Why
had there been this constant increase in the naval
estimates as proposed by successive Governments ?
There was no abstract love of taxation in the country,
but there had been a feeling that the increase did not
depend upon ourselves ; that one power could not
stand still while others progressed. Of all posi-
tions the most perilous for a country like this
was, that she should have the reputation abroad
of being at once wealthy and weak, that her
commerce should be spreading over every sea,
that her ports should be the depots of the
world's produce, and yet that she should have
no military or internal organbiation for her defence.
—(Hear.) He should perhaps be told how free trade
would bind all the nations of the world together.
That might be very well 100 years hence, but where
was the country with which we had such relations at
present as to justify the absence of all power of self-
defence ?—(lronical cheers from the Protectionist
benches.) Where could the Hon. Member for the
West Riding (Mr. Cobden) point to a foreign eoun-
try with which we were connected by such intimate
cmwoeomrcermatetoire
expenditure
eldia
institutions
again
tiestaoi as t
itfnu tttihho iensyso justify e
formo uunsttt a reduction in the naval
rhyleo
preservation
r e(t
soHe
re
vta
ahr
te,
ohs
npe ar
er
oa. h.) They
ffe
peace.
But if they looked to the past they found that the
most democratic states had been sometimes the most
ambitious and the most warlike.--(Hear, hear.) The
Republics of Carthage and Rome might vie with the
most despotic Governments in the wars they had
carried on, and if they looked to later times they
would find the principle called " annexation " in
full force.—(Hear, hear.) They were old enough
to recollect the annexation of Texas ; and the
war between the United States and Mexico
did not inspire him with faith in the morality or
peacefulness of the purest democracies.—(Cheers.)
Man was man, in whatever country he was placed;
and the only safety on which it was prudent for a
nation to rely was upon her own resources for her
self-defence, and not to trust to Utopian theories
about the mutual dependence of nations.—(Hear,
hear.) That principle of trusting to herself alone for
her own defence had been the principle adopted by
all the successive Governments of this country, and
it was a good, wholesome, practical principle, worth
a bushel of theories. Lord Hatherton, who was a
member of the Finance Committee of 1811, wrote
the other day to remind him that when Lord Castle-
reagh was examined before that Committee, and
asked what had been the policy of this country with
regard to the defences, he said that " our policy had
been to keep up a navy equal to any two navies be..
longing to other powers that could be brought against
us." The Finance Committee of 1817 reported upon
this subject :
"Esteeming the naval superiority of this country as
the principle on which its external power, Internal safety,
and general prosperity, in the highest degree depend,
your Committee are of opinion that the sense which they
entertain of the necessity for economy, cannot, with a
due regard to the interest of the State, be allowed to in-
terfere with,the support of such a maritime force as may
be deemed necessary in time of peace—(" Hear, hear,"
frq,m Mr. Hume)—nor with the preparations for its
adequate augmentation in the event of war. And as naval
expenditure) in time of peace is principally connected
with the purchase and preparation of materials for future
exigency, there is no part of the public service in which
an ill-judged temporary economy might be ultimately
productive of such considerable expense."
That was wise and wholesome advice, but it had re-
ference to a state of the world totally different from
what they saw now. The next great great t epoch
e
cwohnenne c
theted withitg Right
eHnoanv.a 1Bnexpenditure
(Sir was
Robert in
was in power, whose foreign policy inspired
the
Hon. Member for Montrose (Mr. Hume) with perfect
r rlBe4e4l),
faith in the preservation of peace. He believed there
never were two men more desirous of preserving the
peace of the world than the Right Hon. Baronet and
Lord Aberdeen. Their measures for securing that
object were crowned with perfect success, yet they
adopted as the basis of their policy a large increase in
the means of national self-defence. The Right Hon.
Baronet the Member for Ripon (Sir J. Graham), the
great naval economist of 1834, concurred in all these
measures, for which he was as much responsible as
for the estimates of 1834, and the force of
forty thousand men was established as the
proper peace establishment of 1845. The Right
spin
ua
rsays
passed
duf
opurpnlpedrmee
under
ant
rht aletr
iysoannestimate
eo
cf oft
et
dh 1e
withBLs ,
00rOdt0h:
e.o,
Hon. Baronet (Sir James Graham) also concurred
fswt
et hha iemc hTnry tae'vaay-s
for that year. The three individuals to whom he bad
referred, men of great sagacity and public experience,
had, in 1844, declared to be necessary every item of
naval expenditure which Honourable Members behind
him (Mr. Ward) now complained of. A large in-
crease of all the items of the naval expenditure took
place during the administration of the Right Hon.
Baronet the Member for Tamworth. The vote for
men in 1834 was 958,7611.; in 1845 it was

1,328,0531. The vote for yard wages in 1834 was
348,0121.; in 1845 it was 649,1041. The vote fur
stores in 1534 was 499,190/. ; in 1845 it was
1,273,7891., with a supplementary estimate of 185,0001.,
making nearly 1,500,0001. in all. In 1846-47 the
vote was taken for nearly the same amount-
-1,694,1521. This expenditure was adopted by the
Government from no thirst for war, no desire for in-
creased patronage; and it met with no opposition in
that House. Was it not unjust, then, to attack the
present Government for the amount of this expendi-
ture, just because it required a little moral courage on
the part of lion. Members to tell the truth to their
constituents?—(Hear, hear.) In 1884 there was a
consumption of 11,551 loads of timber in the dock-
yards ; in 1845, 27,136 loads. In 1834 the con-
sumption of hemp was 3,898 tons ; in 1845 it was
6,063 tons. The consumption of copper was 601
tuns in 1834, and 1,158 tons in 1845 ; of iron, 864
tons in 1834, and 2,897 tons in 1845. An overruling
necessity compelled the Government of that day to
take these steps. The Hon. Baronet the Member for
Southwark (Sir W. Molesworth) congratulated the
Right lion. Baronet (Sir J. Graham) on the mode-
rate amount of his naval estimates of 1834; but he
forgot that the last estimates of the Government
of which the Right Hon. Baronet was a member, and
for which he was just as much responsible as for those
of 1834, were the largest that this country had ever
known. The Right Hon. Baronet and the then Ad-
ministration saw steam navies growing up around
them in France, Russia, and the United States. They
saw a new element of warfare, with which sailing-
vessels were alone unfit to cope, and they saw that
changes were indispensable. What others did, we
must do also, and if we left our pace we must leave
our superiority also.—(Hear, hear.) The Hon.
Baronet (Sir W. Molesworth) said the increase was
totally uncalled for. The United States' ships were
meeting us in the Mediterranean, in China, and
everywhere ; yet the United States were said to have
a small navy, and one unable to cope with us. The
Hon. Baronet forgot that Great Britain was a
great colonial and commercial empire; and, although
there might be " new lights" upon these points,
yet the House appeared to adopt the views of his
Noble Friend (Lord John Russell), and consider
our colonies an important part of our commercial
strength and national pre-eminence.—(Hear, hear.)
The case was different with the United States, who
had no such extended colonial empire. The extent
of our colonial possessions was the cause of the mul-
tiplicity of our stations in different parts of the world,
and was the reason why we were forced to keep up
such an amount of naval strength as would enable us
to come into contact with the fleets of other nations
which we might meet there. In 1846 there was a
dispute between this country and the United States;
and, until it was settled, it was necessary to keep up
the amount of our naval force. Another reason for
the increase in the naval estimates was the false eco-
nomy w hich it was felt had been for a series of years
adopted, of not obtaining a sufficient amount of stores
to replace the consumption in the dockyards—of
living upon their capital, in fact, and so drawing upon
the stock of timber, hemp, and other important arti-
cles of naval stores, that if an aggressive attack had
been made we should not have been in a position
to resist it. What had been the reduction of some of
the principal articles of expenditure when this great
economy was practised? In 1832 there were 64,023 loads
of shipbuilding timber in store in the dockyards, which,
in 1839, was reduced to 46,295 loads. In 1832 there
were 7,827 tons of hemp, which were reduced to 4,673
tons in 1139. In 1832 there were 36,041 bolls of canvass,
and only 17,427 bolls in 1839. In 1832 there were 101
' sets of fitted rigging, which were reduced to 36 sets in
1839. The stores of sails, yarn, cables and cordage,
and lower masts were reduced in the same way, by not
making purchases each year to the full extent of what
had been used. The plan followed during those years
had been rightly described as " a spurious and bastard
economy," and could not be permanently adopted. It
might do very well to eke out the estimates of a particu-
lar year; but no wiser act was done by the Administra-
tion of the Right Hon. Baronet than the immense addi-
tions to our naval stores made by the late Government.
Was that system to be lightly altered ? The present
Government might have claimed credit and sought popu-
larity by abusing the naval estimates of their predeces-
sors as extravagant. But such a course would have
been as unwise as it was unworthy; it would have been
attended with ruinous consequences, and the country
would have been deprived of the benefit of all the very
considerable outlay that had been made. There had
been a large expenditure in all the principal dockyards
at Woolwich, Chatham, and Portsmouth, and this money
would have been thrown into the sea if the works had
been stopped. The present Government determined to
complete what their predecessors in office had begun,
and to carry on those works with vigour for another
year, when they expected to reap the legitimate fruits
of that expenditure, so as to be able to make a reduction
in the estimates of 1849-50. He would take the largest
vote of this year, 686,600/. for new works. A part of
this increase was apparent, and not real, as some items
having been charged under this head heretofore in-
cluded under others,
_ but it was, he admitted a large item.
Now, he thought he could undertake to come to the
'House in 11649-50 for a vote of 473,0004, being a saving
of 214,000/. in this item. When the Government pro-
posed an increase of the income-tax they intended to
have pushed on these new works, the execution of which
must now be spread over a larger number of years. He
thought it would have been better economy to have
finished the works at once, but the House had expressed
its opinion against the increase of the income-tax, and to
their opinion the Government must bow. The works at
Woolwich and Chatham had been finished, and the
works at Portsmouth, for which the Government took a
large vote, would be completed next year. At Malta the
Government had spread the expenditure over two years,
instead of completing the works at once. But the item
for new works would, he hoped, be reduced by 214,000/.
next year, and afterwards by 60,0001. or 70,000/. until
1854, when the whole of the works begun by their pre-
decessors would bo completed, and the expenditure
would be reduced to 120,0001. or 150,000/, the mere
cost of superintendence. The next item was steam
machinery, oae upon which there had been an im-
mense expenditure during the last ten years. The
vote for the current year was 280,000/.; but he hoped
that the vote which the Government would be able to
propose for 1849 and 1850 would be only 100,000/. Not
that the present amount was too large, for there were
some contracts yet to be fulfilled, and machinery to be
paid for; but the effect of this expenditure would be,
that on the let of April, 1849, this country would have
a steam navy of 45,000 horse power, and the naval force
at the beginning of that year would be 450 ships of dif-
ferent rates and classes, including 121 steamers With-
out pretending positively to fix the relation which the
number of sailing and steam-vessels ought to bear
towards each other, or that the force he had named was
the proper and efficient force for the country, under all
circumstances, he was warranted in saying that
there was a probability of a considerable reduction
in the building establishments and stores after the
programme for the ensuing year had been car-
ried out. The article of such machinery as saw-mills,
:sc., was very costly, and the public had a right
to expect a corresponding reduction of the manual
labour ensployed, but the Government were anxious to
make such reduction in a way that should not fall
heavily on the men employed in the yards. The Govern-
ment did not desire to swell the amount of unemployed
labour, and he wished to meet the necessity for some
reduction by limiting the number of apprentices to be
taken, and similar precautions, rather than by having
recourse to dismissals. He had put together with great
care the probable results which he could hold out for
the estimates of 1849 and 1850, and he would state them
to the Hoase; observing that he made the statement
with the approbation of Lord Auckland and other mem-
bers of the Admiralty Board. In the new works (No.
11) there would be a saving of 214,643/. In the steam
machinery (No. 10) a saving of 180,000/. ; in iron
steamers, the contracts for which were complete,
25,0001. ; in ships building at Bombay, where the
Government intended to discontinue the establish.
ment, 25,000/. ; in steam guard ships, the contracts
for which were complete, 8,5001. ; and in a schooner
for Bermuda, built by contract, 3,7101. •, making
altogether, 456,853/. If to that sum be added the
reductions under Nos. 8 and 10 for labour and stores,
amounting to 150,0001., it would give a total saving
upon the naval estimates for 1849 and 1850 of 606,853/.
In this anticipated saving, however, an ample margin
was left for all the important heads of navel expendi-
ture ; for there would be 100,000/. for new steam ma-
chinery, 135,000/ for repairs and factory wages,
476,000/. for new works, and 1,747,0151. for dockyard
wages and stores. With these reductions, it was thought
possible to combine a navy in a most thoroughly efficient
state, and, provided that object was secured, the country
had a right to expect a return for its enormous outlay
during the last six years. The outlay on steam ma-
chinery since 1835 had been 2,689,000/. ; fur iron
steam-vessels, 503,798/. ; for stores, since, 1644,
without steam machinery, 4,444,938/. ; and for
works, also without steam machinery, 2,794,7421.;
making a total outlay of 10,432,478/. upon those
four items up to the close of the year.—(llear, hear.)
,
Surely, after !tech an expenditure as that, the time hail
arrived when a return was to be.: looked for
and he thought the House would be of opinion that, by
persevering in the course he had stated, the Government
had succeeded in placing.) those great establishments,
upon which the security of the country so much de-
pended, in a most efficient and available condition. About
the beginning of the year England would have a steam
navy of nearly 50,000 horse-power, while in 1835 she
had 4,153 horse-power. Those two great establishments
at Portsmouth and Woolwich were in a perfectly effi-
cient state for undertaking all steam repairs. At Ports-
mouth, although it was not the intention of the present
board to proceed with those larger plans which had been
proposed by their predecessors, yet the whole space
marked out had been surrounded by a sea wall, and was
available ct any future time, should it be required. The
great steams -tasin at Portsmouth was one of the most
magnificent N. orks of modern times—(Hear, hear)—and
it would open during the ensuing month. The works at
Malta would be complete in the course of next year, and
Bermuda, after twenty years of neglect, was now
likely to become a station worthy of a great naval
power. When these facts were taken into account, and
when it was remembered that these works had
been effected under a system begun in 1844, and perse-
vered in up to the present tune, it might be safely
asserted that the naval establishments of the country
had never been in a more efficient state, and that England
was never in a better position to preserve peace in
Europe, because she had never been in a position in
which she would be mere formidable in war.—(Llear.)