The Sun.
London, England, 1846-01-26 00:00:00

THE NAVAL RETIREMENT.

Admiral DUNDAS wished to know what had been
done by the Government with respect to the number of
naval captains who were anxious to retire from service ?
Mr. CORRY, the Secretary to the Admiralty, said
that the number of captains who had applied to be dis-
charged did not justify the Government in carrying out
the intentions which they had held on this head, but
satisfactory arrangements would be entered into as soon
tut possible.

COMMITTEE OF SUPPLY.
Mr. CARI)WELL moved that the whole House re-
solve itself into a Committee of Supply.
Sir THOMAS FREMANTLE moved that a grant of
50,0001 be made for the purposes of carrying out public
works in Ireland.

Sir H. W. BARRON said that such a sum would be
for the purpose but as a drop of water was to the ocean.
Sir T. FREMANTLE said that that sum would not
be expended unless a similar sum was levied to meet
and further the same objects.
Mr. WILLIAMS wished to ask the Right lion. Ba-
ronet whether they would take the usual securities for
the repayment of sums raised for the purposes of
public works in Ireland.
Sir THOMAS FREMANTLE observed that the
present sum was to be an absolute grant, but that there
were other sums which would be lent upon loan. The
Irish loans had always been very punctually paid.
The Government were willing to afford every facility
j for the carrying out of these works.
Colonel SIBTHORP said he did not wish things to
be done in the dark. How was this money to be applied?
Was it to be given for the furtherance of that job of all
jobs, the Shannon Harbour ? He should like to know
whether the 50,0001. now proposed was to be in addi-
tion to the sum which was already granted.
Sir T.FREMANTLE replied that the sum now pro-
posed was in addition to what was already granted. The
former grants were nearly exhausted, and it became neces-
sary to vote the present amount to carry the works on. It was
necessary, however, for Honourable Members not to in-
clude sums which were loans with these which were
grants.
Mr. HUME wished to ask the Right Hon. Baronet at
the head of the Government whether it was to bo re-
cognised as a principle that the public money was to be
given away for the employ ment of the people? The question
at present for their consideration was, for what purpose
the money was to be applied ? He doubted whether any
good had ever resulted from any former grants which
had. been voted for a similar purpose. He decidedly
protested, therefore, against any money being given
for the employment of the poor, when other
causes were allowed to exist which prevented that
employment. In England and Scotland every man was
employed, and there was no necessity for votes of public
money; but in Ireland this was not the case. He could
attribute such a state of things to nothing else but
bad legislation and misgovernment. He really feared
that by granting the money without inquiry into
the causes which led to the want of employment, they
would be lending themselves to perpetuate that state of
tdohhtiadi
dnegtrhs
be weyehnei ceht a arosepmpleikde , outgraa ofnedt s tthheee i rstprotestede
e k.misgovernment.port again Paisley,st Why
.thande
Imperial h plae e s.
Parliament_ l e di dn o
voting
okt
innogw howthi3 the former
money ts
_ah
out inquiring ibto the eriiiileesr,f of the want
gofraneltnoPnki"thinatt'atgroullude;P'f"otr"hteed.'consid'
pwl ohye mr
where
ni
it
d district rgi eat
considered it
rinstldthbee I
affirming a pernicious principle, unless it watswtohuought
at
Coto
lae
woany everya su
m occasionot.
money of a scarcityfor t
he
dtoesviro
existed.

1,1 t