The Sun.
London, England, 1860-07-11 00:00:00

tion the One'

was put on the Government of Sardinia by that of France
to induce the former to enter into an alliance with the

Government of Naples.
NAVY (CHINA).
Mr. COCHRANE moved that the house resolve itself

.nto a committee to consider of an humble address to be pre•

seated to her Majesty, praying that her Majesty would be

graciously pleasod to place the officers, marines, and sea-

men of the fleet serving in China on the same footing as her
Majesty's troops, with respect to extra pay and allowances;
and to assure her Majesty that this house will make good
the same. They were now beginning a new war, when it

was of the utmost importance that both services should be
united, and he hoped, therefore, the house would accede to

his motion.

Sir MICHAEL SEYMOUR seconded the motion. At
the close of the different wars in China and of the Bur-
mese war, gratuities had been given to the seamen and
marines who served, and at the close of the operations of
the fleet which he had the honour to command, he applied
to the Admiralty for a similar grant, but they refused to ac-

cede to his application. In the Canton river the seamen gar-

risoned the forts, and were subjected to much wear and tear,
especially of clothes, and if gratuities could not be given, or
additional pay, he would recommend their getting good ser-
vice rewards, or that the time should be allowed them in cal-

culating their term for a pension.
Admiral WALC orr could not understand for the life of
him why any difference should be made between the two
services. In his opinion it must engeruler heart-burnings
between the two services. Tie believed the gallant admiral

who had just sat down did the navy every justice, but there
was Eto ground whatever for keeping up a system which gave
compensation to the soldiers, and refused it to the seamen.
Lord C. PAGET thought the navy was greatly indebted
to his hon. fr end who brought forward the motion, the more
especially as he was not connected with the service. He
had not, however, done justice to the authorities of the day,
during the former wars which took place in India and
China. The sailors at that period had extra allowances given
them in the shape of batta, but to pay them as the resolu-
tion of his hon. friend proposed was utterly impossible. The
resolution was not practicable. Now what were the extra
allowances given to soldiers ? They received batta money,
and it was given to them while serving in the field, and far
removed from their quarters. That was what they called
field allewances ; but sailors never took the field. While sol-
diers were serving at a great distance from their quarters,
and in the open air too often, sailors had their ships to go
to. Those in the navy had not to suffer the privations of an
army. Danger they certainly incurred, but not privations,
and, therefore, these allowances should not be given them.
The allowance to the army was simply the doing away
with stoppages. In their ordinary quarters provisions
were stopped from them; but it was not so in the field.
Sailors received their provisions without any stoppages at
all, and therefore could not be put on the same footing as
soldiers. They had two questions to deal with—one the
future, and the other the past. If those engaged in the
present expedition to China received the allowance to
which the resolution referred; then those who served under
his hon. and gallant friend during the last war—and there
was no officer in the navy whose gallantry was so highly
appreciated at the Admiralty as that of his hon. and gal-
lant friend—must be also paid. The resolution of his hon.
friend only referred to the future ; but believing that the
House of Commons would deal generously with them, her
Majesty's Government were preparing estimates for the
services of the officers and seamen engaged in the late war,
which ended in the Treaty of Tien-tsin, and he would
have the honour to lay them before the house. lie would
give no pledge, but ample justice would be done. They
were on the eve of distributing what were called the Canton
prizes, in which both the army and navy would partici-
pate. Ho was about in a few days to propose the estimate
to the house, and he would then enter into details of the
principles on which the amount of batta and donations
would be given to the officers and men. He hoped that
with this assurance his hon. friend would not press his
motion.

Colonel NORTH bore his testimony, as a military man,
to the gallant manner in wh;.ch the sailors and marines had
performed their duty, and expressed an opinion that they
should be treated in an equally liberal manner as the army.
Sir CHARLES NAPIER said that the batta money in
India was granted in former days by the East India Com-
pany to the officers and men serving there. Ho did not
know why the officers and men of the navy should not re-
ceive the same batta in similar cases. What made it still
more unjust towards the seamen was that the officers of
the navy serving in India in former days, when the East
India Government gave the grant, received it, but the sea-
men and marines embarked in tho same ships, who had
laboured and done their work as well as the officers, re-
ceived no batta at all. lle could not understand why such
distinctions should be made between officers and men.
Complaint was made that men would not enter the navy.
How could it be expected that they would do so when they
saw perfectly well that they were treated differently from
their brethren in arms in the military service ? The gallant
officer (Lord C. Paget) had stated that two years after the
services he had alluded to had been performed, tho Admi-
ralty was at last going to consider what reward was to be
granted for them. A recompence deferred for two years was
no recompence at all. If the recompence were given as it
ought to be, the work would be, if not better, certainly
more cheerfully done. What recompence had Admiral
Hope and his gallant followers who performed one of the
most distinguished, although unsuccessful, services on re-
cord, received from the Government ? The hon. and gal-
lant admiral called attention to a letter which ho had re-
ceived, stating that a seaman, who lost his arm during the
late fight at the Peiho, had a pension of only £lB granted
to him for one year only. lie expressed a hope that such a
case would not be true, although he had received it from a
trustworthy source. He complained of the manner in
which the seamen were treated, and urged that the army
and navy should move together in peace and in war.
Sir J. ELPIIINSTONE said that the country had been
in a normal state of war for the last 20 years with China,
and it was time the Admiralty should have some distinct
plan upon which allowances would be granted for the ex-
peditions which wore likely frequently to occur, so as to
prevent the heart-burnings and the complaints too justly
made, because of the partial way in which rewards were at
present distributed.
Mr. S. HERBERT, without giving an opinion on the
question brought forward, which was not in his department,
said that the subject was ono which required very great care
to decide upon, inasmuch as the troops did not, as a matter
of course and in all cases, obtain the Indian allowances
when in China, For instance, at one time they had a
garrison in Canton, together saith native troops, and the
Eurcpears being brigaded together with the Indian soldiers
received the Indian allowances. But a few miles off, at
Hong Kong, there being no native troops there, the Bri-
tish troops only received Hong Kong or colonial pay, which
was less than the Indian allowence. The gallant admiral
(Sir C. Napier) spoke of the impropriety of allowing sailors
to retied that they were not receiving as much pay as sol-
diers in the army.
Sir C. NAPlER—Additional pay.
Mr. S. HERBERT said the word "additional' was very
important. The pay which the army received was not very
mush more than half that given to the navy. Sailors got
clothing at first, but a large deduction was made from the
soldier for his food, whereas he believed the rations were
free rations on board ship.
Mr. B. COCHRANE consented to wi hdraw his motion,
Ball a hope that a full and ample amount of recompense
would be granted to the sailors. He reserved to himself the
right of renewing the question before the close of the ses-
sion, unless upon the estimates an ample amount for the
past and a guarantee for the future were given.
The motion was then withdrawn.
DANISH CLAIMS.

Mr. MACAT_TLAY postponed until next session his mo•
lion on the subject of Danish claims by British merchants,
VOTES AT ELECTIONS.

Mr. WYLD moved. for leave to bring in a bill to alter
and amend the law and practice relating to the taking of
votes at elections for members to serve in Parliament.
The system which he proposed might be either open or
secret. It was agreed
,on both sides of the house that
some steps should be taken for removing from English
elections the stigma which now attached to them. The
bill which he propose I c ntained two important features.
At the polling booth, when an elector presented himself,
the officer, being sath.fiA d of his identity, should hand him
a printed paper, with a number corresponding to the
elector's number on the register. On this paper were the
names of the candidates, and having struck out the names
for which he did not vote, the elector should hand it back
to the °Seer. This might be done openly or in private.
An Hon. MEMBER here moved that the house should
be counted, but there being 40 members present when the
count took place,
Mr. WYLD proceeded to say that his object was not
so much to give au explanation of the bill as to lay it on
the table in order that it might be considered, and, perhaps,
at some future time incorporated in a great Government
measure. The system which he proposed was somewhat
similar to the Australian ballot system. It might be said
that they ought not to receive suggestions from Australia,
but he took the liberty of saying that any suggestion was
worthy of attention, no matter from what part of the world
it came, provided it came from those who had tried our
legislative system. He begged to move for leave to bring
in a bill to alter and amend the law and practice in taking
votes at elections.
Sir G. C. LEWIS understood that the bill had mainly for
its object the introduction of a system of voting papers as
practised in our colonies. That system was, in fact, en-
grafted on the bill which was proposed by her Majesty's
late Government, and which was under the eonsideration of
the house last session. As that was the case, there was no
objection to the repetition of the proposition in the bill of
the hon. member. (Hear, hear.)
Lord PALMERSTON said that in assenting to the in-
troduction of the bill it was not to be supposed that the
Government assented to the principle, as it might contain
within it the nucleus of the ballot. (A laugh.)
Leave was then given to bring in the bill.
Upon the motion of Sir C. WOOD, leave was given to
bring in a bill to provide for the transfer and management
of East India Stock at and by the Bank of England.