The Sun.
London, England, 1834-07-26 00:00:00

HOUSE OF COMMONS, July► 25.

The SPEAKRR resumed the chair at ten minutes past Ave..
A message from the Lords announced that their Lordship.
had agreed to the Greenwich Annuities Bill.

NEW WRIT.

On the motion of Lord GRANVILLE SOMERSET a
New Writ was ordered for the Eastern Division of Gloucester.
shire, in the room of Sir W. Guise, Bart., deceased.
Mr. PRESTON, from the East India House, presentesi
resolutions of the Court of Directors, which were ordered to
lie on the table.

Mr. CHRISTMAS presented a petition from the Mayor
and Magistrates of Waterford, praying that copies of the se-
veral Acts of Parliament should be forwarded to the Maps-
trates.

onNtlhre.
sßalEeßofNcAorLn. brought up the Report of the_C _Committee
_ommitt

te re complaining
ilefofln of.
mitStiereMon.
t\hire.
TRelaDDLuEtiYes. brought up the report of the Com.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL presented a petition from
tpersons
adjournmentconfined ino thef th c King'semtnßi
se,
inecehe
r 8
Prison,
for
e
the
solvent Debtors.
Mr. M. PHILLIPS presented a petition from the Chamber
of Commerce of Manchester, praying for a repeal of tho duty
upon raw cotton.
A messenger from their Lordships summoned the SMICIS
and the House to hear his Majesty's assent given by tom-
mission to several bills, for which see Lords' report. =
The SPEAKER, on bis return, announced that the Royal As-
sent had been given to several bills.
Mr. M. PHILLIPS said he had another petition to present
from Manchester on the subject of the repeal of the duty on raw
tchoettlocn: l‘om rJAmAitltßeeSupon OS\pVubArc broughtLiDpetition.
s up the elst report of
BREACH of PRIVILEGE—WARWICK ELECTION.
Sir H. HARDINGE said that hnrished to call the atten-
tion of the House to the circumstance,. of-the Hon. Mem-
ber for Boarnin, having given notice of a motion,

relative to the Earl of Warwick interfering at the election
of Members for that borough. This notice had been
postponed from time to time, and he now found that there
was a double notice upon the orders of the House, for the
purpose of having the matter taken into consideration next
session; and he ( Sir H. Hardinge) wished to know what the
Hon. Member's intentions were.
After a short discussion, Mr. PETER consented to with-
draw his motion altogether.
Colonel PERCE VAL said he had a question to put to the
Right Hon. the Secretary for Ireland, relative to the trial of
two policemen who were charged with murder in an affray
which took place at Frome, in the county of Limerick, and
who had been acquitted.—( Hear, hear.) He wished to know
from the Right lion. Gentleman whether he had any objection
to the production of the Judge's notes before whom the trial
had taken place. He would not pledge himself to the accu-
racy of the statements contained in the public papers relative
to that trial, .but-they were of a very extraordinary nature.—
( Cries of Read, read.") He wished to know whether or
not Government was prepared to call upon the Judge for
his notes of the trial ?

Mr. LITTLETON said he had read the reports alluded
to, and had no doubt but they were accurately reported, but
at the same time he knew nothing of their accuracy, and
he had sufficient experience of the extreme inaccuracies
of the Irish papers to prevent him from placing confidence in
them.

SUPPRESSION OF DISTURBANCES (IRELAND)

BILL

Lord ALTHORP moved that the report of the Committee
upon this Bill should be brought up.
Mr. HE RRI ES wished to know whether the Budget was
to come on that evening, and whether the Supplies would be
brought forward on Monday?
Lord ALTHORP said that after the present subject was
disposed of, he would bring forward the Budget. The Noble
Lord, as we understood, said that he would rather not bring
forward the Supplies on Monday, but would fix an early day.
Mr. O'CONNELL wished to know whether the Indemnity
Clause was to be, preserved?
Lord ALTHORP said he did not think, after the best
consideration, that it would be proper to abandon this clause.
Mr. O'CONN"ELL'said, that when the Bill came on for
the third reading, he would move, as we understood, the in-
sertion of two new clauses.

The.. ATTORNEY-GENERAL gave notice that
he wvld,move the insertion of a clause to the effect of direct-
ing the Lord Lieutenants of counties, and the Chief Magis-
trates of cities and counties, to post up in the most public
places of the district copies of proclamations of the Lord
Lieutenant of Ireland, revoking any former proclamation.

INCREASE OF PUBLIC OIFICES.
Mr. GOULBO URN said that early in the Session he had
moved for returns of the increase or diminution of the number
of public offices that had taken place within the year. The
return that had been laid upon the table was of a very unsatis-
factory nature, and gave by no means the required informa-
tion., He would confine himself to the year 1833, dur-
ing ,which time no less than ten Commissioners had
been issued. There was a statement made in that return, that
thenumber of, offices reduced amounted to 221, and the num-
ber increased was 128, leaving a balance of 93 in favour of
reduction. What would the House say when he (Mr. G.)
informed them that the actual number of offices increased
amounted to three hundred and twenty-two, thus giving
a large.addition of patronage to the Government.—( Hear.)
It was stated in the same return that the amount saved by re-
ductions during the year was 30.0001. ; but the fact was, that
there was an increase of 85,0001. in th expenses of the State,
and the patronage of the Government.—( Hear, hear.) He
would take the liberty of reading an abstract of the offices
created during the year, and the nature of them. On looking
over-them, he found them no less than 425.—( Hear.) Of
these there were the following rates of salary :
Offices of 6,000/. a-year, and upwards, one.—( He did not
include the appointment of Mr. Macauley.)
Offices of 3,0001. and under
2,000
1,000
800
600 81)0 4
400 6OO 8
' 200 4OO 141
200 -- 231

Total

These offices cost the country 125,000/.--( Hear, hear.) This
was a subject to which the House ought to give its most serious
attention, especially as they were offices over which the House
had no control, and patronage was important to every Govern-
ment. Would the manner in which some of the appointments were
made, prove that they were made for the benefit of the
country ? Without going into all, he would take one
case. Last Session one million was voted to the assist-
ance of the clergy of Ireland. The benefices there were
about 1,200, and the number of parishes 2,500 ; therefore the
applications must have been numerous. Now, had ten or
twelve extra clerks been appointed for that distribution,
it would have been enough, but 120 persons had been en-
gaged, and a new office, called the Tithe-owners Relief Office,
had been created. Of the number of persons-74 were clerks.
Comparing this with the Secretary of State's Office in Ire-
land, and the War Office in England, it appeared that the
new office employed twice the number of persons.—( Hear. )
There were in Ireland 32 barristers, and one would suppose
that one assistant would have been enough for each : but what
< was the fact ? Why, no less than 40 assistant-barristers had
been appointed under this Tithe Million Act. To distribute a
sum of twenty millions over the whole of our colonial posses-
sions, and to all the slave proprietors only sixty appointments
had been made, while to distribute one million in Ireland to
the tithe-owners, no less than 40 assistant barristers, and 74
clerks, had been employed.—( Hear.) He thought that in
this case the Right lion. Gentleman had been guilty of some
indiscretion.—( Oh !) He was aware that the House had been

• very anxious about the Budget, but he thought the subject
he had brought forward was sufficiently important, and he had
no other opportunity of bringing it before the House. If they
were to watch the public patronage of tEe Government, they
should be doubly vigilant in watching over the disposal of funds
over which the House had comparatively but little control.
Mr. LITTLETON said that the Barristers and Clerks
under the Tithe Owners Relief Bill fund, had used extra-
taordinary labour. Not less than 2,000 schedules were
received and answered. It was a matter of the greatest
importance that the business should be got through,
with as much expedition as possible, and they, therefore,
thought it better to employ a great number of men, as the
same amount of money would be expended, whether the wort
was done in ten years or in ten days.—.(Hear, hear. )
this was the reason why 40 barristers were employed.
" With respect to the clerks, Sir W. Gosset had calculated
that it would take one man not less than 58 years to
go through the whole work, but it was necessary that the
whole, should be done by the end of September, and they
therefore employed that number of men that was necessary to
complete the work. He hoped this explanation would be
satisfactory.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. H. GRATTAN complained of the Right Hon. Mem-
ber (Mr. Ceulburn) objecting to this commission, after he had
sanctioned the measure under which it was issued. The
Right Hon. Gentleman had been in Ireland, and why
did he not instruct the clerks to do their business better ?
( Hear.) He must only infer that the Right Hon. Gentle-
man was a bad instructor, and he hoped he would not instruct
him (Mr. G.), and he hoped he would not instruct that
House.
Mr. F. BARING said that the Right Hon. Gentleman spoke
as if he wished to have it understood that these appointments
- were resorted to as a convenient mode of patronage. He would
not animadvert upon the Right Hon. Gentleman's political
charity, but would merely ask him whether these Commissions
• were new ? Whether there was not one appointed of which
the Right Hon. Gentleman's brother was the head, and of
which he (Mr. Baring) was ready to admit that it had done its
duty satisfactorily? The balance of offices against the public,
on which the Right Hon. Gentleman had laid so much stress,
was not correctly calculated. There was not sufficient infor-
mation.before the House, to show the extent of the reductions
which were made. By a bill which was brought in last year,
thirty offices have been abolished, and those were not returned ;
and amongst others were the clerks of the Pipe and of the
Pelts. The Right Hon. Gentleman had observed upon the
appointment of Commissions, but he challenged him to point
out one which that House would be inclined to look upon as use-
less, or of which it could be fairly said that the subjects which they
had to investigate were not deserving of inquiry. Whose
fault was it that these investigations were rendered so neces-
sary ?—( Cheers.) If, during the fifty years in which the party
of the Right lion. Gentleman was in office, they had gradually
but constantly applied themselves to a temperate application
of measures of useful reform, there would not now be occa-
sion for the number of Commissions which it was found neces-
sary to appoint.—( Cheers.) He need hardly tell the House
that in many instances where these Commissions had been
issued, it was not so much the work of the Government as of
the House pressing them upon the Government ; and if any
blame attached, it fell as much on the House which had im-
., pressed the necessity upon the Government. The Right
Honourable Gentleman had run through a detail of offices,
and described them as suitinr, all tastes and fancies, from
• 6,0001. a year downward. The Right Honourable Gentleman
, might have known, from long experience, that those who
were desirous of making place for the purpose of patron-
. age, wished to render it as attractive as possible, and that,
,- for this purpose, they well understood the difference between
those offices which were permanent and those which were only
temporary. Lot the House call to mind how many of the
•
offices created by these Commissions were only temporary,
and that would be the best reply to the charge of patronage.
'—( Hear, hear.) He was sorry to intrude upon the House
with details, but as the Government had been distinctly ac-
cused of creating offices for the purpose of patronage, he
would take leave to lay before the House a few facts,
which would show what had been done by the present Govern
ment. For this purpose he would contrast the reductions
made in thrde years of the present Government, with those
made in three years of the Government which preceded it.
In the preceding Government, during the years 1828, 1829,
and 1830, the number of offices abolished was 909, and the
amount of salary 106,1771. In the years 1831, 1832, and
1833, the offices abolished were 1,358, and the amount of
salary 259,2231. Of the reductions made by the present
Government, many of the salaries were of high amount,
which served to show that—to use a metaphor from the
other side they were not hawking at the small game,
whilst the latter were suffered to escape. To show that
this red had taken place in the higher offices, he
had bi to t sia_(if., 161 of these situations amounted in salary
to 4*416h
,l is statement, it therefore appeared that
. thd:Yeductions matt,e, the present Government, in-an average
that which preceded it in the number
ofhree years, ex - •
• oFofflceS abolished, b 1449, and in the amount of salary by
020464-4 Cheera, Frhe average annual value of offices

~~ 1.
J~

-7‘
)e".

reduced, was by the preceding Government 1171., and by the
present 1901. The annual average of reduction by the former
Government was 303 offices, with salaries amounting to
35,392/., and that of the present Government was 453 offices,
with salaries to the amount of 86,408/. In addition to the re-
ductionof the last three years, there was reduction made in the
colonies, .which raised, the gross sum to 473,416/. The Right
Hon. Gentleman had confined himself to the year 1833, out of
which many items were omitted. The Hon. Gentleman con-
cluded by saying, that he hoped the statement he had made
was sufficient to show the increased economy of the present
Government.—( Cheers.)
Mr. HUME said it was a trite saying, that when rogues fall
out, honest men come by their own ; so. when Whigs and To-
ries come in opposition, certain things leaked out which it was
well the public should be acquainted with. He certainly ap-
preciated the difference between temporary and permanent em-
ployments, and wished to know whether the eleven appoint-
ments under the courtsmartial clauses of the Coercion Bill
were to be abolished.
Mr. RlCE—Certainly._
. .
•

Mr. HUME was, satisfied with this, and as most of the
other offices were merely temporary, and appointed for neces-
sary purposes, he thought they were such as could not be_
objected to, provided there was no compensation afterwards.
With regard to the case of Mr. Macaulay, to which allusion
had been made, he thought it a most abominable abuse. He
had made a call for returns of the accounts of the Suitors'
Fund, and he hoped that in this and similar returns Govern-
ment would be above-board, for if there was anything he could
impress upon them more than another, it was the necessity of
being clear in their accounts, as it would always be found that
the more perspicuity there—was, the less trouble would be given,
for it was only where the House was kept in the dark that
inquiry and recrimination ensued.
Mr. PEEL felt satisfied that no one could question the
justice or propriety of his Right Hon. Friend in bringing the
question before the House, who had heard that seventy-four
clerks and forty barristers were employed in the distribution
of a fund of one million. Nobody who heard the circumstance
could draw any other inference than that it was a matter in
which explanation was requisite, and the Right Hon. Gentle-
man would have neglected his duty, if having called for the
documents, he had not directed the attention of the House to
the numerous appointments which they presented. The docu-
ments to which the attention of the House had been called
evidently required explanation, if not justification, as there
never was an instance of so limited a sum requiring so large a
number of persons for its management. But as the expla-
nation was given, if, in point of fact, the business was expe-
dited by the number of appointments, and that the expense
was not increased ; if there was no further claim made, the
arrangement could not be pronounced a bad one. Still as
the appearances were suspicious, the opportunity of explana-
nation should rather be sought than avoided, and he wondered
that a Reformed House was not inclined to view it in that
way. The circumstances were such as made a prima facia
case of inquiry, and all must admit that explanation was ne-
cessary. Neither could it be denied that Commissions, though
sometimes necessary, and, even admitting that they were not
issued for corrupt purposes, very frequently afforded oppor-
tunities of patronage. No doubt in many cases, especially
where local inquiries were to be made, commissions were
absolutely necessary. It was impossible to draw the line.
But it was to be carefully guarded against, lest the habit of
issuing Commissions too frequently should induce the House
to throw upon others the burden of these details which more
properly they ought to take upon themselves. The ap-
pointment of Commissions should therefore be viewed with
great jealousy, not out of any apprehension of corrupt motives,
but lest it should induce them to throw off their own
shoulders those duties which though, probably irksome,
were still essential to enable them properly to discuss the
various subjects which came under consideration. But
without imputing any blame it was quite impossible to deny
the fact that if Government had the power of bestowing 104
appointments under Commission on members of the Bar, it
must necessarily exercise .a considerable influence over the
legal profession. It was most unjust to impute any blame to
his Right Hon. Friend for making inquiry on this subject ;
on the contrary, the Government should thank him for giving
them an opportunity of making a satisfactory explanation ; and
the reformed House of Commons ought to applaud the watch-
ful_vigilance which he had so fairly exercised.

Mr: SPRING RICE did not -impute blame to his Right
Hon. Friend for bringing this question forward, but he thought
he had reason to complain of the speech which he had made ;
for if the Government had contented itself with simply ex-
plaining the fresh appointments, with which explanation the
House appeared to be satisfied—(Hear)—there would have
been, no doubt, an inference drawn without doors, that infer-
ence arising from the tenor of the Right Hon. Gentleman's
observations, that the present Government had in relation to
this matter acted disingenuously, and that many parts of its
proceedings it was anxious to conceal. Now the Government
was quite ready to render every account that would be re-
quired of them ; but surely it was not fair to impute disinge-
nuousness to them, because they made a return, as that return
was required by the Act.
Mr. GOULBURN—I did not say so.
Mr. SPRING RICE—No, but that was the inference
obviously to be drawn from it.—(Na, from Mr. Goulburn.)
Well, then, he was glad to find that even his Right Hon.
Friend admitted that he had no imputation to cast on the Go-
vernment. But if the accounts of /the Commissioners were
excluded from these returns now, so had they been excluded
in former years ; and when Gentlemen talked of the expenses
now incurred under Commissions, they should remember the
expenses of Commissions in former times. He had now a paper
before him, by which it appeared that from 1807 to 1829 the
expense of Commissions was 956,885/., and the amount in
some single years of that period exceeded the total expense of
the Commissions issued by the present Government. He had
not the precise amount, but in some of those years the ex-
penses were as high as 90,000/. He did not mention this to
blame former Governments, but to justify the present.—( Hear,
hear.) It was quite true that Commissions had lately in-
creased in number ; but they had been grappling with nume-
rous and most important questions, on which it was desirable
to procure the fullest possible information.—( Hear.) Take
the case of the most expensive one ; for instance, that relating
to the Poor Laws. Would the Right Hon. Gentleman have
been satisfied, would the House have been satisfied, to
legislate on that subject, without the most complete in-
vestigation ?—( Hear, hear.) How would they have been
twitted with legislating in the dark, if they had not taken such
a preliminary 1 and how unfair, then, was it to make that a
matter of charge and complaint against them !—( Cheers.)
With regard to the appointment of Lord Napier at Canton,
it would be found, on comparing the expense of the Govern-
ment establishment with that kept up by the East India Com-
pany, that the former was infinitely less than the latter. The
Hon. Member for Middlesex had objected to the 10,0001. per
annum paid to Mr. Macaulay. No one would regret that ap-
pointment in one sense more than he did • for it deprived the
country of a wise and learned legislator, and that House of one
of its brightest ornaments.--( Hear.) But with regard to the
salary, the simple answer was, that it was the amount fixed by
the Act of Parliament. Many expenses, too, were necessarily
incurred under the Reform Bill. Amongst others there were
the Boundary Commission and the Municipal Commission,
the utility of which would not be denied. Doubtless, all
Commissions were expensive ; but the question was, whether
the expense was more than necessary, and whether it was not
inevitably incurred for the purpose of carrying forward those
reforms which the country and that House demanded at their
hands.—( Hear, hear.) He repeated, that he found no fault
with his Right Hon. Friend for bringing the matter forward ;
he only found fault with those inferences which it was calcu-
lated to raise.

being

Supplies

Mr. SHE IL said, with regard to the establishment at Can-
ton, the Americans contrived to do their business for a much
less sum than we did. He was surprised to find that a chap-
lain was appointed there at a salary of 1,0001. a year. He did
not object to the issuing of Commissions, but he objected to
the delay of their reports. Why had not the Irish Corpora-
tion Commission, which, he believed, had concluded its la-
bours (and was to have made its report in the beginning of the
year), made its report yet ? As for the grant of a million to
the Irish clergy, the necessity for that grant arose in the de-
lay of settling the Irish Church. Had the bill of 1832 been
passed, that million would have been saved. Still when the
distribution of one million required 40 barristers and 70 clerks,
he was happy to have to thank the Government for one act
of economy. The Commission of Public Instruction had to
extend its labours over the whole of Ireland, yet it consisted
of but ten Commissioners and four clerks, and each Commis-
sioner would have to visit about 500 parishes. He wished
seriously to ask of the Right Hon. Gentleman opposite, whe-
ther it was not intended to increase the numbers of this Com-
mission ; at present it must of necessity be ineffective.
Mr. LITTLETON said the subject had recently been
under consideration, and he believed the numbers would be in-
creased.

Mr. GROTE said that the only way of preparing proper
remedies and reforms for the various abuses of the State, was,
by Commissions of Inquiry, composed of fit and competent
men. He did not think Government earried economy quite
so far as they ought, but there was no grant which he would
more cheerfully vote for than one for remunerating useful and
efficient Commissioners. In every important reform which had
been made, the House had acquired all its information from
Commissioners. Witness the reforms in the law, all of which
sprung from the reports of the Law Commissioners' Reports,
which were exceedingly instructive, and contained the views
of the opponents of the reforms as well as those of their pro-
moters. So also with the report of the Poor Law Commis-
sioners, the most useful of all. No report was like it.—( Hear. )
With regard to Mr. Macauley's salary, he differed from the
Right Hon. Secretary.—( Hear.) He thought it was rather
too much to bestow such an appointment upon a gentleman so
young in years, with such a salary as 10,0001.—a salary
which the superior servants of the Company did not obtain
till after years of experience and toil.—( Hear, hear.)
Mr. C OBBE TT disagreed with the Hon. Member who
spoke last as to the value of the Poor Law Commission, and
indeed of Commissions generally. If a commission was is-
sued, the Ministers selected the Commissioners, and they, of
course, selected men who thought with themselves on the sub-
ject which they were going to inquire into.—(A laugh) Such
Commissioners would take very good care not to make a re-
port disagreeable to their employers. Then came down the
Minister with the report to the House. God knows Minis-
ters were not too feeble already; but when they came backed
with the report of a Commission in support of their favourite
measures, who could withstand them ?—( Hear.) They had
all that advantage on the Poor Law question. The Hon.
Member for London had praised that celebrated report;
and said that it was unlike any that had ever come from
the press. In that he agreed with him. But unfortunately
they had to pass the Bill without having read the report.
These voluminous reports, which had cost the country 60,000/.;
were not wholly laid on the table till after the Bill had been
read a second time, nor some of them till some time after it

had been in committee. Some of these volumes he was sure
the Noble Lord (Althorp) had never read. He was sure of
it, because in one volume alone there were seventy distinct
libels against him (Mr. Cobbett) personally—( Great laughter)
—and of course the Noble Lord, had he read a work which
contained seventy libels against a Member of that House,
would have felt himself bound to notice them.—( A laugh.)
Something should be done to prevent Hon. Members of that
House from being libelled in papers put forward under the
sanction of that House. Some years ago Lord Kenyon had
laid it down as a rule that there was no remedy for a libel if
reprinted or republished from any publication made by order of
that House. Therefore any person might, if he pleased, re-
publish these libels against him, and he could not even indict
them—no, he could not even indict the Noble Lord opposite
( Althorp) if he were to republish the libels.—( A laugh.) In
the Beer Bill report last year, two persons were grossly
libelled ; they were a man and woman, and were pointed out
by name and address as guilty of adultery. He saw no reason
why his name should be mentioned in the report of these hired
and falsehood-retaining Commissioners.
Mr. SHAW said that as to the million advanced to the Irish
Clergy, its necessity was not owing to the delay of the Irish
Church Bill, as had been stated by the Hon. Member for Tip-
perary, but to the declaration made by the Noble Lord last
Session. He noticed this now, because he was apprehensive
that Ministers meant to do the same thing again. After the
shuffling in the Bill introduced as far back as February last,, he
was afraid Ministers would find themselves in the same difficulty
as before ; that they would resort to the same vulgar expedient
of putting their hands into the people's purse, to get out of it.
For his part, he would never consent to such a proposition.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL said the Hon. Member
for Oldham was mistaken in his law. Lord Kenyon's rule only
applied to a criminal information, which he refused to grant ;
but the remedy by civil action or by indictment was open to
every individual who felt himself aggrieved by any such papers.
Mr. YOUNG wished to ask the Right Hon. Bart., late
First Lord of the Admiralty, whether it was his intention to
proceed with the Merchant Seamens' Registration Bill this
Session ?

Sir JAMES GRAHAM did not, at this advanced period of
the Session, mean to press the Bill, but he did not doubt that
the Government would, next Session, feel the propriety of in-
troducing some similar measure.
Lord ALTHORP said it could not be in better hands,
and that the principle of the present measure seemed to be
satisfactory.

THE BUDGET.
On the motion of Lord ALTHORP, the Order of the day
for going into a Committee of Ways and Means was read.
Lord ALTHORP then rose, and said he had now to ad-
dress the committee, in order to lay before them tfie financial
statements of the year, and a sketch of the prospects which it
appeared to him might be fairly anticipated. Under existing
circumstances, it was unnecessary for him to detain them by
any preliminary observations ; but he would at once go into
the' question, and state to the House the plans which he in-
tended to submit to them. . He should begin by stating what
was the amount of income and expenditure of the year ending
the sth July last. The receipts of that year were ... £46,914,586
Whilst the payments during the same period were.... 44,737,556

Leaving a surplus of income over expenditure of £2,177,030
( Hear, hear.) He was happy at being enabled to state to the
Committee, that this surplus of income over expenditure was
larger than any which he had hitherto had the satisfaction of
laying before the House.—(l-Tear.) He would compare it
with the receipt and expenditure of a similar period of the
preceding year :—The surplus of the year ending 5 July,
1834, was _ _ _ £2,117,030

The surplus of the year ending 5 July, 1833 1,502,000
The increased balance in favour of the present year

£675,030

The receipts of the present year were, as he had already
stated, 46,914,586/. ; last year, 46,895,0071. It appeared,
therefore, that the receipts of this year had somewhat increased
upon the receipts of last year, although, during that period,
taxes to the amount of 1,500,0001. were taken off, whilst the
expenditure had been diminished upwards of 650,000/.
( Hear.) He thought this statement with regard to the re-
venue of the country a most satisfactory one, as it proved
there was an elasticity which would enable them still farther
to reduce taxation, without any injury to the
.permanent
revenue of the country. Having made this preliminary state-
ment as to the gross revenue and expenditure of the country,
he would proceed to state what was to be provided for during
the ensuing year. The State charge on the Consolidated Fund
for the year ending April, 1835, was 30,500,000/. The esti-
mates for the supplies during the same period, were,

.
For the An-n.) .,7
.
£6,497,903
Navy
Ordnance
Miscellaneous 2,228,387

Making a total for supplies of £14,471,213
This then would give for the total charge next year :
Consolidated Fund £30,500,000

14,471,213

Total £44,971,213
which was the sum to be provided for. It would, perhaps,
be as -well for a moment to compare this amount with the Sup-
plies of last year :
The Supplies for 1834 were £14,620,487
For 1835 14,471,213

Being a diminution of £149,274
The Committee would, probably, remember, that when he
made his financial statement at the commencement of the ses-
sion, he calculated that the diminution upon the supplies this
year would amount to 500,000/. It was necessary for him now
to show why it was the diminution had fallen short of that
amount. That circumstance was to be accounted for by the grant
of various sums which, at the time, he had not calculated
upon, and which he could not have contemplated. The first
item on the list was a payment to the East India Company,
pursuant to an arrangement 'which had been entered into with
them, of 125,000/. The next was the expenditure of the Island
of St. Helena, which had just been taken into the hands of the
Government. This establishment was now on the magnificent
scale of the East India Company, whereas, next year, it would be
reduced to the economical one of the Government : 99,0001. was
certainly an extravagant expenditure—( Hear)--and one which
be was quite sure his Hon. Friend next him ( Mr. Secretary
Rice) would take care should be materially diminished.—
( Hear.) Then there was 60,0001. for compensation to the
parties engaged in the action of Navarino, and 20,0001. for the
purpose of investigating into, and experimenting on, the pos-
sibility of steam navigation to India. The First Lord of the
Admiralty had also obtained a vote anticipating for one year
the payment of the Navy, paying the men immediately, instead
of suffering them to wait, as formerly.—( Hear.) , These va-
rious items mounted up :
Payment to East India Company £125,000
St. Helena
Navarino
Steam Navigation to India 20,000
Payment to Navy lOO,OOO

£404,000
In addition to these, he had laid upon the table, a few days
since, papers relating to a grant proposed to be made for
the British Museum of 1,3001. for the purchase of fossil re-
mains, and 7,0001. for establishing a prison at Dartmoor,
for making experiments on secondary punishments. This
would much more than account for the difference between
his present and original calculation ; and it was to be re-
marked, that none of those payments would recur ; and the
grant to the navy was only in anticipation of future payments.
(" Captain Ross")—Captain Ross's grant was included in the
Miscellaneous Estimates. He might, however, have mentioned
it. (" The Danish Claims")--No, as for the Danish claims,
they must first of all be investigated before they were paid.
(" The Poles")—The grant to the Poles was included in the
Miscellaneous Estimates. These sums, however, all accounted
for the difference, and the prompting he had received proved
that he had by no means endeavoured to overtsate his
case. He wished to show that he had not been extravagantly
wrong in his calculations. The question now was, how was
he to provide for 44,971,2131., the amount to be raised.
He should, in the first instance, assume the income of last
year as the probable income of the ensuing year, and if no al-
teration were made by 'the votes of Parliament, he saw no
reason to expect any diminution of income. Unless arising
from diminution of taxation, he did not anticipate any falling off
in the revenue. The next year's income, taking it as that
of last year, would be £46,914,586
Deduet charge to be provided for

Leaving a surplus of £1943,373
Now, the committee would see that this surplus was less
than the surplus which he had quoted from the balance-
sheet to which he had referred, but which was accounted
for by the difference between the charge and expenditure
of last year.
The charge being £44,920,000
The expenditure

Being a saving of
He was now speaking of the year ending sth April last, and
273,3801. was the difference between the expenditure and the
estimates, and the comparison of the income of last year, taken
as the probable income of this year, with the estimate, reduced
the surplus to 1,943,3731. This was, however, all on the sup-
position that no reduction or alteration would be made in taxa-
tion. But there was a large sum to be provided for, and
added to the charge, which would occasion a considerable
increase of expenditure, viz., the interest of the 20,000,000/.
granted by Parliament to the West India planters, which
would constitute a permanent charge of 750,000/. It was
true that the money was not payable till the next session. It
would be some time in the month of April next that the first
portion of the money would be called for ; but the Committee
was aware that it bore interest from the Ist day of August
next, and consequently that they were now bound to provide
for it. In round numbers, then, it stood thus :
Charge for ensuing year £44,971,000
Interest on West India grant

£45,721,000
which was the actual charge to be provided for, reducing in
round numbers the actual surplus to 1,200,0001. But from
this 'charge there was a deduction to be made of 120,0001., to
be received from the Bank of England ; and also 50,000/.,
the amount saved by the reduction of the 4 per cents., which
would have to be added to the 1,200,0001. surplus, and de-
ducted from the charge. Then he calculated, also, on an in-
crease in the tea duty ; but he knew that he was calculating
on that of which he had no experience, and he had no doubt
whatever that in the beginning of the session he had consider-
ably overrated the probable increase on this head.---( Hear.)
But he believed that he did not at present overrate fair expec-

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY, JULY 26, 1834,