The Sun.
London, England, 1860-07-20 00:00:00

FRIDAY i:TVENING, JULY -20, 'lB6O,

the Council for India. He was sorry to state that when they 1
had to deal with the Secretary of State for India they were
not met—he would not say with courtesy, but with that
fairness and plain dealing which they had a right to expect
from a gentleman and a minister of the crown. Upon
those matters members were obliged to get information in
an indirect way, fur the purpose of correcting the informa-
tion received by them from the Secretary of State for India.
He charged the right hon. gentleman with withholding in-
formation, misleading the house, and endeavouring to press
bills through the house at a time when the house was not
in possession of sufficient information. The day before

from seats in that house, as questions affecting India could
be much better discussed in their presence. (Hear.)
Mr. HORSMAN, in reply to the observations of Lord
J. Russell, said he saw the Secretary of State fur War and
the Secretary of State for India in the house shortly before
he addressed the house. (Hear.)
Mr. DISRAELI said he did not believe that the right
hon. gentleman came down to the house to make any
charge of a personal character on the supposition that the
Indian minister would not be in his place. It was true in
theory that members of Parliament should be always in
their places, but the Ministers of the Crown should be gene-
rally present in practice. - (Hear.) The right hen. gentle-
man the Secretary for India must have known that the
Bankruptcy Bill was to be withdrawn, and as the next
notice had reference to India, right hon. gentlemen who
were members of the Government should have been in
their places. (Hear.) They were not, however, in their
places, although they had been in the house shortly before
the right hon. gentleman had made his statement. (Hear.)
If the right hon. gentleman had postponed his statement
till to-morrow, it would have had much less effect than if
he made it that day ; because whatever time might have
been lost in personal recriminations, the Government
would not have considered it consistent with their dig-
nity to withdraw an order of the day of which they had
given notice. He thought the Government had acted wisely
in not pressing the measure to •morrow. The state of affairs
with regard to Indian administration was not so satisfac-
tory as could be wished. (Hear, hear.) Since the act of
1858 the responsibility of Parliament in the administration
of India had much increased, and it was, therefore, the duty
of the Government that India bills should be introduced at
an early period of the session, so thi-tt they might be amply
and sufficiently discussed, and that the discussions should
be preceded by ample and adequate information. (Hear.)
The Government, therefore, ought not to be surprised that
some impatience and jealousy was manifested by persons in-
terested in Indian affairs when they saw bills of great im-
portance relating to India introduced at a late period of the
session, when they could not be considered and dealt with
in a satisfactory manner. (Hear, hear.) With regard to the
statement of the right hon. gentleman, he formed from it
no opinion unfavourable to the two right hon. gentlemen
referred to, because he knew how misconceptions might
arise. He should therefore wait for their explanations,
whiih he trusted and believed would be quite satisfactory.
(Hear.)

yesterday, having ascertained the dates of the letters be

had referred to, he asked if there would be any objection
to their being given as a re4urn, and being told that there
would not, he had yesterday moved for those letters. He
had since received the following letter from the right hon.
gentleman :—" Sir Charles Wood presents his compliments
to Mr. Horsman—(laughter)—and begs to inform him that

he has found in his office the correspondence between the
Secretary of State for the War Department and the Secre-
tary of State for India and the other letters for the produc-
tion of which Mr. Horsman has given notice. Mr. Hors-
man will recollect asking Sir Charles Wood if he had any
objection to the production of those letters, when Sir Cl:Arles
stated that there was no such correspondence in existence.
Sir Charles only became aware of the existence of those
papers yesterday, and loses no time in apprising Mr. Hors-
man that there will be no objection to their production if
moved for as an unopposed return." A week before that he
(Mr. Horsman) had furnished the right hon. gentleman
with all the dates of the different correspondence ; and c n-
sidering that the right hon. gentleman had received that
information from himself, and that this was the second time
a similar mistake had occurred with reference to papers, this
was certainly rather a cool letter. (nor, hear.) He wrote in
answer, presenting his compliments fo Sir Charles Wood—
(a laugh)—and informing him that he had already made the
motion for the papers. He complained of the very careless
and inconsiderate manner in which Sir Charles dealt with
members of the house with regard to papers that were abso-
lutely necessary to enable them to discuss the questions
coming before them. Had those papers been given when
first asked for they would now have been in the hands of
members. The bills introduced by the right hon. gentleman
at that late period of the session involved the consideration
of the position of the Indian Council, which Sir Charles ap-
peared to have reduced to an insignificance never contem-
plated by the act of 185$. (Hear, hear.) The Cabinet was
sitting when he sent that letter, and he hoped that it had
been submitted to the noble lord. He subsequently received
a short answer from Sir Charles merely correcting a mis-
statement on a former occasion, which was not material.
He must now appeal to the noble lord and the house
whether, having asked for those papers on the 28th of June,
and been put off from day to day—having at last convinced
the right hon. gentleman of the existence of those papers,
and got an order of the house for their production—the
noble lord was justified in asking the house to go into com-
mittee to-morrow on the India Forces Bill ? Two bon.
members had declared their intention to oppose the bull by
every possible means, and he appealed to the house if that
was not a fit occasion ? This was not a question as to the
merits of the bill, but whether members should be allowed
the opportunity of fairly considering the measures before
them. It was now the 19th of July ; Government was set-
ting aside or dropping those bills which they felt at that
period of the session were too important to be passed with-
out distinction. The very earliest period when the house
could rise would be late in August ; but what were the Go-
vernment now doing? At the very time that they were
dropping important bills for want of time to discuss them,
they were introducing others infinitely more important.
One bill placed the administration of the Indian army in
the Horse Guards ; but what was to be done with the civil
service ?
The SPEAKER said it was not competent for the hon.
member to discuss other bills which were on the table of
the house, on the motion now before them.
Mr. HORSMAN said the bill he referred to had not yet
been introduced ; but the right hon. gentleman had a notice
on the paper to move its introduction that night. But surely
when they were discussing what bills should be withdrawn,
it was a favourable occasion to remonstrate against the in-
troduction of new measures. The bills of the right hon.
gentleman were the very bills which the house ought to
press on the Government the propriety and policy of post-
poning. Instead of one Secretary of State being allowed to
overbear the opinion and outweigk the authority of 15 mem-
bers of his council, the house would probably think that one
member of council ought to outweigh 15 Secretaries of
State, even of the calibre of the right hon. gentleman.
(Laughter.) He again charged the right hon. gentleman
with having kept back information which the house ought
to have had, and which was necessary to enable there to do
their duty.
Sir G. GREY said there was not the slightest objection
to the right hon. gentleman calling the attention of the
house to the state of the business; but he ought not to take
that opportunity, without any notice to Sir C. Wood, to
make an attack upon that right hon. gentleman—having
himself come down prepared with documents—an attack
which was not a fair criticism on public conduct, but an
attack upon the private character and honour of the right
hon. gentleman, and couched in terms that the house was
not in the habit of hearing aidressed to any of its members.
His right hon. friend (Sir C. Wood) had taken the oppor-
tunity of stating, at the earliest moment, how the facts
stood ; and the house was satisfied with tie statement he
then made. He was sorry that the right hon. gentleman
had thought it necessary to renew the subject. He had also
gone on to bring new charges against Sir C. Wood, of
which he (Sir G. Grey) and his colleagues had never
heard before. He had thought fit to come down to the
house, armed with correspondence and documents, and
had endeavoured, but in vain, owing to the good sense
of the house, to depreciate the character of Charles
Wood. (Hear, hear.) With regard to the question
that had been raised as to the progress of those
bills, if they were now to do any business at
all they had better confine their attention td the business
immediately before them, and not anticipate the discussion
of other matters. Objection had been made by the hon.
member for Hertford against twonew bills being introduced
late at night. He (Sir G. Grey) did not know the con-
tents of those bills, but suggested that it would be prema-
ture to anticipate the discussion that might arise. When
his right hon. friend made the motion which stood in his
name be would state the grounds which made those mea-
sures desirable.
An HON. MEMBER-At what hour? (Hear, hear.)
Sir G. GREY could not state the hour; but when his
right hon. friend had the opportunity of bringing on the
bills he would do so ; and, after hearing his reasons, it
would be for the house to decide whether the bills should
be introduced or not. Even if the bills were not proceeded
with, it might be an advantage that they should be intro-
duced. When the proper time came the house might de-
' ermine whether the bill should proceed or not. So with

Lord PALMERSTON said he did not state that it was
the duty of every member of the house to be present on
every occasion. He did not think it would be right to lay
such a tax upon them. What he said was, that those who
intended to take a part in regard to orders of the day which
stood upon the notice paper ought to come down to the
house, because they could not be sure that the orders of the
preceding night might not go off from the absence of the
members who had charge of them, or from some other
cause.
The conversation then dropped.

GREENWICH HOSPITAL.
On the motion that the house go into a committee ol
supply,

he bill for the amalgamation of the two armies in India

if the right hon gentleman thought that there were papers
which it was essential the house should have before going
into committee on the bill he might state his reasons to the
house, and the house had power to prevent the further pro-
gress of the bill. He hoped that the house would not b•
involved in a discussion as to the relative powers of the
Secretary of State for India and his council. He believed
that his right hon. friend (Sir C. Wood) had acted strictly
in accordance with the law ; and had he had the slightest
intimation that this matter was to be brought forward, he
would have been present 10 state hie own views.
Mr. BARING said there was not the slightest wish to
withhold any papers or information from the House of
Commons. There were papers, he might say, ad nauseam
on the subject of India in the library. 'With regard to
the particular papers referred to by the right hon. gen-
tleman, a mass of papers were ordered to be printed ; the
proofs came from time to time to the office for correction ;
some delay in that operation took place, but the moment
it was discovered the cause of the delay was removed.
The Secretary of State for India had no knowledge of these

particular papers, as they were with the military secretary,
Colonel Baker. In fact, there was but a small quantity of
these proofs in the India Office. It should be borne in
mind that this correspondence was between departments and
took place when the present Secretary of State for India
was notin office. If the house thought these papers so im-
portant that further time was required, the India Bill
would not be proceeded with to-morrow.
Sir JAMES FERGUSSON said that the right hon.
gentleman the member for Stroud was fully justified in
the course he had pursued.

Lord J. RUSSELL thought that there rept be some
Fart of the correspondence which the right hon. gentleman
omitted to read. He thought for instance that there must
have been a letter to this effect : Mr. Horsman presents
his compliments to Sir C. Wood, and begs to inform him
that he intends to bring a personal charge against him on
the motion for renewing the discussion on the India Army
Bill. (Hear, hear.) He thought there must have been
another letter to this effect : Mr. Horsman presents his
compliments to Mr. S. Herbert, and begs to inform him
that he intends to make reference to private conversations

which he had with him. (Hear, hear.) It was much to

be regretted that the right hon: gentleman did not read

these lettefs because the right hon. gentleman could not

have omitted so asual and necessary aformality. (Hear.)

The reproaches which had been cast upon hi; right hon:

friend were wholly undeserved. His right horl friend,
when great questions of Indian policy had to be considered,

had not merely to form his own opinion, but to get the
. .

opinicn of her Majesty's confidential advisers. The right
hon. gentleman the member for Huntingdon had very
candidly stated that with respect to the organisation of
the Indian army thu opinion of officers was very much
divided on the one aide and on the other; and hisright hon.
friend having to decide on that point, the question was
whether he was right in consulting the members of the
Cabinet separately, and ultimately placing the matter
before the whole Cabinet for decision, or whether
he should have only consulted the Indian Council, and
having got their opinions he should proceed to carry out
their views, no matter what might have been the views of
the Cabinet on a pestion affepting pot only India but the
general interests of the empire. (Hear.)
Mr. MILNES hoped this important question would not
be embarrassed by personal considerations. He regretted
that the reerabers of the Indian Council had been.elieNcieg

of the model lodging-houses, and other questions that re-
quired an act of Parliament.

Sir M. SEYMOUR said the report had failed to take
care that the suggesticns should be in accordance with the
real objects for which the hospital was founded. There
were grounds therefore for considering and reconsidering
the report brought before the house. He approved of the
objects of the gallant admiral, and had great pleasure in
giving them his cordial support.

Mr. BRISCOE could not refrain from offering his
humble tribute of thanks to the gallant admiral and to the
commissioners who had prepared the report. It was cha-
racterised by great ability and singleness of purpose, and
it should be read and studied by every member of that
house an I every man out of it in the very critical times
in which they were now living. The commissioners
said nothing of the great misapplication of the funds, and
to which the serious attention of the house should be di-
rected. The assertion of the noble lord was that it would
require an act of Parliament to carry out the recommenda-
tions of the commissioners, but the intention of the motion
was not that they should do so at once, but honestly and
fairly do so hereafter. The revenue of the hospital was
V -6,000 al ear, and as there was an actual surplus of
£28,000 a-year, there could be no difficulty in improving
the condition of the pensioners. He should most cordially
give the motion his support, and trusted the house would
affirm it.

Lord J. RUSSELL observed that the report of the com-
mission was the act of the Board of Admiralty, for they
appointed the commissioners, and it was their intention to
consider it with a view of carrying its recommendations
into effect. It was not intended that all the details of that
report should be carried out, nor did the house require it,
and he could therefore see no objection which could be
urged against the course taken by the Admiralty. His
noble friend the Secretary for the Admiralty stated that an
act of Parliament was necessary, and if, as had been urged
by his hon. friend who had just sat down, it was not re-
quired, then the law officers of the Crown must be con-
sulted, and their opinion taken, Another objection to the
adoption of the report of the commissioners was, that a
considerable grant of money would be required to carry out
their recommendations, and he did not think the House of
Commons would be disposed to vote it at that period of the
year. His noble friend said he had only just received the
report ; that he would consider it ; and under these circum-
stances he did not think it would be wise in them to say by
their vote that all the recommendations of the commis-

sioners were to be carried into effect. His noble friend was
perfect reasonable, and he hoped his suggestions would be
adopted and carried into effect.
Alderman SALOMONS thought the proposition of his
noble friend a very fair one, because, of course, it would be
impossible to adopt all the recommendations of the
commissioners. There were, however, some things in the
hospital which required some amendments, such, for ex-
ample, as compelling petty officers to mess with common
sailors. Then, again, sailors and marines were classed to-

gether, which was felt to be a great grievance, and there
was great difficulty thrown in the way of persons who en-
deavoured to obtain an admission. He hoped, however, his
hon. and gallant friend would not divide the house, but that
he would be content with the assurance given by the noble
lord the Secretary for the Admiralty.
Sir J. PAKINGTON hoped the hon, and gallant officer
would not divide en his motion, though he admitted the
condition of the hospital was anything but satisfactory. He
thought, however, the assurance given by the noble lord
ought to be considered as satisfactory. He promised that
the report would be taken into consideration, and that in
the course of the next session means would be taken to
effect the desired improvements. He hoped they would
also consider the question of pensions, and the condition of
the wives, many of whom were obliged to go into the work-
houses. Now, that was a disgraceful state of things, and
should not be tolerated any longer.
Mr. LINDSAY hoped his hon. and gallant friend would
not press his motion to a division, especially as it, pledged
the Government to all the details of the report made by the

Sir CHARLES NAPIER moved " That —it was the
opinion of the house that the recommendation of the Royal
Commission respecting Greenwich Hospital should be
carried into effect." When it was founded by William
111., at the request of his Queen, a Royal charter was
given, and terrain rules for its guidance and government.
It provided lodgings, food, and clothing for seamen who had
served their country in the navy and the widows of men
killed or drowned in the service. It also provided for the
wives of seamen, and also their children. In 1705 there
were 100 seamen admitted, in 1706 another 100; and of
course during the wars that followed their numbers greatly
increased. In 1814 a pension of a shilling a day was given
to seamen who had served 20 years, and ninepence to those
of 15 years ; and the funds of Greenwich Hospital were used
down to 1829 to pay the charge, amounting to two millions.
It was then discovered that the Government had appro-
priated the money, and, as the act was illegal, an act of
Parliament was passed to indemnify them. 'What proved
beyond all doubt that the hospital was badly administered,
was the fact that there were now only 1,124 persons there.
Would any one say that if it were properly managed that
would be the case ? The commissioners said in their report
that there was an unwillingness on the part of old seamen
to enter the hospital. No attention had been paid to this
institution, by various Governments and Boards of Ad-
miralty for the last 70 or 80 years ; and thus it was that
great neglect was the consequence. Seamen were scattered
through the country, and they had no moans of coming
up to London except by begging; but it was only due to
the Government to say that when they did arrive they were
taken great care of and sent home if rejected. He thought
they were all greatly indebted to the hon. member for Gates-
head and his brother commissioners for their very able re-
port. As to the education of the children, it appeared from
the report to which he had already referred, that the pen-
sioners' children had been much neglected. LThe hon.
and gallant admiral read extracts from the blue book, to
show that this had been the case.] The treatment of pen-
sioners was a matter worthy of consideration. If a man
went into Greenwich Hospital he should enjoy his full
pension, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer had no right
whatever to interfere. If the whole of the funds of Green-
wich Hospital were laid hold of, and divided among the
men, they would be much better off than at present. If that
institution were properly conducted it would be a blessing
to those men who had served their country on the seas
and an encouragement to others to do likewise. As
to the Hospital Commissioners they were altogether
unacquainted with what occurred at the hospital. The
female schools had been closed, and the consequence was
that the daughters of the men who had fought for their
country were left destitute, and thrown upon the streets for
a livelihood. 'Was not that a scandalous and shameful
state of things ? The commission, which had carefully
examined every portion of the subject, had clearly shown
that the reforms they proposed would keep up the whole
number of the pensioners, and give them a larger money
allowance than at present; but in addition to that they SUPPLY.The house then went into committee of supply.
would enable the women and children of the pensioners also
to be admitted into the hospital, and thus remove the cry-
RETIREMENT OF NAVAL OFFICERS,
ing evils to which he had referred, and which were not to On the motion than a sum of money should be granted
to her Majesty to enable Lord Clarence Paget to carry out
be borne. With respect to the boys' school, he would give
all of them in the lower school a good plain education, such his proposed scheme for the retirement of naval officers,
as was fit for a sailor; but, among a great number of boys, Sir CHARLES NAPIER took exception to the scheme
some must be cleverer than others, and whenever they of the noble lord. The retired list since the time of Sir
found a clever lad he would remove him to the upper Francis Baring had been very much increased. In the first
Place school, and give him a superior education, so as to give himlace the list of admirals had been increased upwards of 00.
The hon. and gallant member, after entering into some of
the chance of serving as an officer. Many of these lads
the details of the plan, said that it seemed to him to be
might in that way become captains in the navy. He had
felt it to be his duty to bring this subject before the house, wholly uncalled for. The last plan of retirement, so far,
because all the plans that had been tried to induce men to was working very well for the public service. If ever
enter the navy had failed. That was a disgrace to the they again arrived at a point when they could not get an
country, but it was a still greater disgrace to thosa who
admiral under 60 years of age, it would be quite proper to
rule us. If the noble lord who was at the head of the
devise some new scheme of retirement, but under the pre-
Government would stand up in his place and say he had sent plan they could get plenty of admirals under 40 years
•
heard with pain and shame of the mismanagement of Green-
of age, and he saw no necessity whatever for any
new
wich Hospital, and that in future he was determined to scheme. There was this additional reason why the
make that hospital what it was intended to be, a comfortable scheme should not be persisted in. The whole of the naval
home for the naval pensioners and their families, he believed profession was totally and entirely dissatisfied with the
plan, and he felt it to be his duty to give it his most stree
that it would do more to encourage the entry of seamen
into the navy than anything they had heretofore done, nuous opposition.
The hen. and gallant gentleman concluded by moving in Sir J. ELPHINSTONE said he opposed this new plan
terms of his notice.
of retirement on three grounds. First, he objected to cut-
tine off the time served as mates. He could not understand
Admiral WALCOTT seconded the motion. He was why the time served in that capacity should not count in
glad to be able to bear his testimony to the admirable reckoning the time of an officer's service. It was equiva - manner in which the commissioners had discharged their lent to cutting off the time served as second-lieutenants
duties, and he thought the gallant admiral had performed and adjutants in the army, and he asked if such a proposi-
a most praiseworthy act in bringing the question before the tion were made whether it would not be immediately
house. It was impossible to condemn too strongly the
scouted. (Hear.) He had received many letters from
mismanagement which has existed heretofore, and he
commanders and captains in the navy, pointing out the
trusted the Government would not allow a single hour to injustice which the plan would lead to if it were adopted in
pass by uanecessarily without making arrangements to this respect. In the second place he objected to cutting off
give effect to the recommendations of the commissioners, the time served in the coast
quard. No ()facer in that Lord CLARENCE PA GET said, with reference to the branch of the service ought to have his time cut off. It
statement that had been made of a sailor having been dis- was the most irksome, and in many cases the most dan-
charged without a pension, after the loss of an arm, or with gerous to which an officer could be attached. At a time
an insufficient pension, he was not surprised that a sailor when there was no fighting abroad, many of our officers
should be uninformed as to the rules of the Admiralty in choose service at what were called the " fighting stations"
such cases ; but he was surprised that an officer of the long of the coast-guard, such as Hastings, and at these sta-
standing and great experience of the gallant admiral should tions skirmishes frequently occurred equal to little battles,
be unaware of the fact, that in the first instance the pension in which officers received severe wounds. Besides, in all
was fixed conditionally, in order to ascertain how far the cases they were liable to fall down pits and subject to nu-
pensioner was able to assist in his own maintenance, and merous other casualties, and he must, therefore, oppose a
was increased in proportion to his inability to do so. He plan which took no account of the time thus spent. His
regretted also to find that fault had been found with the third objection was with regard to the officers on the re
Admiralty for not having themselves introduced changes in served list, who had a bargain with the Admiralty for their
the management of Greenwich Hospital without any pre- succcession to appointmentsnccording to their length of ser-
vious inquiry. The hon. end gallant officer must have a vice, and the mode in which they were dealt with in the
very curious idea of the Admiralty if he thought it could estimates was a complete breach of that bargain. He had
undertake to make changes in a large institution like Green- received letters from officers thus affected by the new regu •
wich Hospital without having careful and well-sifted infer- lation, complaining in strong terms of the treatment to
mation before them. They thought that the much wiser and which they were subjected, though the Admiralty had
practical course was to appoint a commission to investigate always considered them to be on the active list. The Ad-
en the facts connected with the management, and to sub- miralty had, nevertheless, reduced some of those officers to
mit to the Government the improvements that such an in- the rank of commander, and refused them the increase of
vestigation had suggested to their minds. It was impossi_ pay to which they were entitled under a solemn bargain,
ble for him to allude to the commission without offering his besides forbidding there fro accepting any civil em-
thanks and the thanks of his colleagues to the hon gentle- ployment. Several of theses officers had served at Tra •
man the member for Gateshead (Mr. Hutt), who presided falgar and the Nile, yet, while the Admiralty squandered
over the commission, and to his colleagues for their very able millions of money in waste every year, they withheld from
and valuable report, and for the great pains and care they those deserving men the pittance to which they were en-
had shown during the inquiry. (Hear, hear.) With re- titled, and which for the whole list would not exceed £5 a
spect to the motion of the hon. and gallant member he was da.y. He agreed with the right hon. gentleman the mem--
not prepared to agree to it as it at present stood, and he ber for Droitwich, that the subject ought to be referred to
must say that in th's course of his speech tho gallant ad- a select committee. At present a, great amount of dis-
miral bad given the best reasons why he should not content existed among officers of the service, who felt that
agree to the motion, because he had himself dissented from they were improperly dealt with, and unless the matter
and disapproved of several of the recommendations of the were promptly considered, it must seriously interfere with
commission, and if the motion was agreed to these recom- discipline,
mendations would have to be carried out. He should be Sir M. SE YMOUR said he thought the treatmentbi,r to
happy to agree to a motion the gallant officer put on the which those officers were subjected wasooouflsdo arbitrary
see wyh a
paper two days ago as to the school, and if he would alter character as to be positively unjust.
He
his motion to the effect that the report should be considered the Admiralty should bring forwardaplan Npheieth.ohospesneltyy.
with a view to carry it out, he would agree to it. The school ignored length of service, in
opposition
to the
royal
in its details required attention, and various alterations were tlement of the question under the
authority of avr
coni-
necessary. The report of the commission leave a too mission. He hoped the noble lord would not press his plan
favourable view of the revenues ef the hospital, and some on the house.
recommendations founded upon that supposition must be Sir a, PAKINGTON thosuenehe-thetwhaatdhs erneocdetiisaNc,geurashesseihaohnoiwesethdoottahvneaydt
reconsidered. if they were all carried out, a sum must ho that the plan of theTOhoevleertntemr
annually voted by Parliament. Many of the suggestion" side of the house.
satla didp houseeneo et vaenr
were very valuable, but in some of them he emeld not agree, the plan was unworthy of the
theA
Td Admiralty
Governmentrarl
ot sp-
d d
and they required very careful ieteenaidevatiou, and some not sanction
of them could not it
;`e I)l(°.lawrh, why did
cskereed out without an act of Parlia- in pronmet,iN4 . .
„
of els condition* named
Ine4t, -Purin the recess they would take up the questigh 07.fir4 4;Vr by the Government, He
. • -

commissioners.

Mr. HENLEY thought the report disclosed a most ex-
traordinary state of things which required instant remedy.
He would, however, be sorry to give any vote which would
pledge the Government to carry out all the details of the
report, but there was no doubt that the funds were misap-
plied, and that tke expense of management was greater than
it should be. It was, in point of fact, out of all proportion,
and great injustice was done the poor seamen in the way in
whict, things were conducted in that establishment. He
thought, however, it was better at present to leave the
matter in the hands of the Government, and upon them be
the responsibility.

Lord PALMERSTON said the right hon. gentleman
who had just addressed the house expressed really good
sense on the matter, and therefore hd thought the house
ought now to go into committee. The case was not one of
the kind described by the gallant admiral, and he thought
it was not one in which the house would interpose be-
tween the Government and the responsibility which rested
upon them.

Lord LOVAINE quite agreed in what had fallen from
the noble lord. His object in rising in reference to the sug-
gestions of the gallant admiral was, that the pensions to be
given to sailors should be considered pari passe with those
to be given to soldiers in the army.
Admiral DUN CO MBE considered the motion of the hon.
and gallant admiral was one of great importance, but he
nevertheless thought it desirable for him not to press it on
the present occasion. With regard to the model lodging-
houses, he hoped the Admiralty would carry them out upon
a judicious principle, and if the experiment were to be fur-
ther carried out, it would be in a limited manner and at a
limited expense.

Sir CHARLES NAPIER, after a few words from Sir
James Elphins tone, consented to withdraw his motion, and
subsequently a modified motion, which he was permitted by
the house to submit as a substituted motion, was negatived
without a division.