The Sun.
London, England, 1832-02-14 00:00:00

1:"`

fyi

fr-1470T. )4'
that head,' which was also applicable to the Per-
il vice of the present year. The other head was the
1., Victualling Estimate, and it had been calculated by the
last Government that it would be covered by the sum of
55,0001. To his great regret and surprise, he had found
not only that 55,0001 were necessary, but that an addi-
tion of not less than 60,0001. would be required. The
two sums together would cover the debt which had been
contracted by the former Government. He was not aware
that it was necessary to trouble the Committee further,
and would therefore move the first resolution--" That
32,000 men be employed for the sea service front the Ist
Jan. to the 31st March, 1832, including 10,000 marines."
Sir G CLERK observed, the Hon. Baronet seemed to
have confounded ways and means with supply, in what be
bad said respecting the precedent set by Lord Bexley. It
appeared that the Hon. Baronet had formed his estimates
so as to a single penny to exhaust the sum in hand, as if
en exact distribution lard been made without inquiry into
the wants of any particular department. He wished for
some explanation of the sum taken for the payment of
services performed in a distant part of the world, and of
which no distinct estima'e could be made.
Sir J. GRAHAM observed, that 114,0001. bad been
taken to cover charges in theVictualling department up t
the 31st March. The calculation could not be accurate,
but it was as near as it could be made. There was a si-
milar estimate for the Navy Board, and by the balance
sheet it appeared to be 1,207,5611., but that was not the
balance declared by the Navy Board at the Treasury.
Sir G. CLERK complained that the account was
not clear.
Sir J. GRAHAM added, that he bad endeavoured to
introduce an important alteration into the department by
the substitution of prompt payment for bills at sixty days'
date. The use of bills made it always difficult to strike a
balance on any particular day. From the Ist of January last
all payments had been made in ready money.—(Cheerer.}
Mr. CROKER referred to the contracts usually entered
rat° in October of every year, hut we could not catch in
what way he made them bear upon the question. He
contended that it was of great importance that the sums
voted for each year should be kept distinct, for unless that
were done, the sum expended in any one year could never
he ascertained. He highly approved of the change made
from payments by bills at sixty days' date to prompt pay-
ments; but he complained that the statement of wages
due to ships on foreign stations was not clear : it varied
usually between 300,000/. and 600,0001.
Mr. HUME admitted that the present was a mneh-im-
proved way of doing business. He wished to know whe-
ther the thirty-two thousand men were to be kept up
for three whole months ? He had understood that, in
consequence of the discontinuance of the Coast Blockade,
two thousand men less would be necessary. An addi-
tional expence had been incurred on this account in the
Customs department, and somewhere a saving ought to
be made.
Sir J. GRAHAM said, that the transfer of the duty of
the Coast Blockade took place last year, and that the
32,000 men had been subsequently voted by Parliament.
He was informed that the Customs could perform the duty
at about half the expence. A large number of men were
now on their way home from foreign stations to be paid
off, and for their wages a larger sum than usual was re-
quired.
Sir G. CLERK hoped that the account for which he
had moved, regarding the expenses of the Coast Blockade,
would soon be laid upon the table.
Mr. S. RICE was understood to say, that it would pro.
bably be presented in the course of this week.
Mr. BERRIES remarked, that since the abolition of
the Coast Biockade, a greater quantity of foreign manu-
factured goods had been smuggled into the country.
Mr. S. RICE contended that the smuggling, such as it
was in amount, was not of manufactured goods, nor was
any increase of smuggling fairly attributable to the change
of system.
Mr. G. ROBINSON considered the existence of smug-
gling to a great extent, and of foreign manufactured good',
clearly established by the quantity sold compared with the
quantity on which duty was paid. Nothing could check
the contraband trade but total prohibition.
The resolution was agreed to ; as well as the two fol-
lowing, proposed by Sir J. GRAHAM.
270,400/. for the wages of 32,000 seamen and marines,
to the 31st March.
18,000/. for the wages of officers, ship-keepers, &c., be-
longing to vessels in ordinary.
The next resolution was for 9,817/. Is. 91., for the
salaries and contingent expences of the Admiralty-office ;
upon which,
Mr. HUME took occasion to remark that he felt war-
ranted, under the circumstances, in postponing any general
observations upon the Navy Estimates, although he must
repeat, that the general scale of the establishment was too
large —The resolution was agreed to.
Sir J. GRAHAM also moved that 7,9391. 3s. Id., be
granted for salaries, &c., of the Navy Pay-office.
In answer to a question from Mr. CROICER,
Sir J. GRAHAM said, that the growing burden of
superannuation bad early arrested his attention, and that
he was endeavouring to reduce the amount.
Sir G. CLERK observed, that an addition had been
made to the expence of the Navy Pay-office by the appoint-
ment of a clerk, with a salary of from 600/. to 800/. per

#_~:

annum.
Mr. R. GORDON took that opportunity to ask his
Right Hon. Friend the First Lord of the Admiralty.
whether any measures had been adopted towards the ful.
filtnent of the recommendation that the duties of the
Treasurer of the Navy, the Treasurer of the Ordnance,
and the Paymaster of the Forces, should be performed by
the same person ?
Sir JAMES GRAHAM said, that in compliance with
the recommendation of the Committee, of which his Right
Hon. Friend the Member for Queen's county (Sir H.
Parnell) was Chairman, the Government had under their
eunsideration the means of removing from the Treasurer-
ship of the Ordnance all responsibility with respect to the
other duties, so as to leave the Treasurer merely the hanker
of the department, and pave the way for the union of the
three offices, the Treasurer of the Navy, of the Ordnance,
and the Paymaster of the Forces, in the same person.
The vote was then agreed to.
The following votes were then agreed to :
A sum of 12,0321. 13s. 2d. for the expences of the
Navy Office.
5,2681. 19a. 3d. for the charge of the scientific branch
of the Navy.
20,581/. to defray the contingent expences and the
salaries of the officers of his Majesty's dock-yards at home.
4,6821. la. for the expences of the yards abroad.
121,100/. 13s. 4d. to pay the wages to artificers and
labourers employed in his 'Majesty's yards at home and
abroad, and to crews of navy transports.
15 4,2001. for the expence of timber and other materials
used for ships and in the docks, &c.
On the vote of 17,5001. for repairs and improvements
in his Majesty's yards at home and abroad,
Mr. LEADER complained that the Government yards
and Offices in Ireland, and particularly in Cork, were
allowed to go to decay.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM, in reply, observed, that al-
though some stores might have been withdrawn from the
yards in Ireland, there never had been the slightest inten-
tion to do away with the establishments ; and he believed
there was at the present moment a larger naval force on
the coast of Ireland than we had stationed there for many
years, certainly for the last five years.
The vote was then agreed to.
A vote of 12,0321. 10s. for pilotage, and other con-
tingencies, and of 5,6851. 14s. 9d, for the transport esta-
blishment and freight of naval stores was then agreed to.
On the vote of 1,630/. for the expence of hired packets,
Mr. HUME protested against the system of employing
ships of war to carry mails, instead of hiring vessels fur
that purpose, or leaving the whole of the arratagements
under the management of the Post-office. Until the sp.,
tern was altered, he should never cease to protest against
the vote.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM admitted that before he came
into office, he was of the same opinion as his Hon. Friend
on this subject. Sir Pulteney Malcolm had, however,
been expressly directed to make a report to the Govern-
ment on the state of the packet-service in the Mediterra-
nean, and he (Sir James Graham) now begged his Hon.
Friend to allow the present vote to pass, and to suspend
his judgment until the report was laid on the table.
Mr. ROBERT GORDON directed the attention of the
Secretary for the Treasury to the twenty-second section of
the Finance Report, in which he would find it stated that
a loss of 300,0001. had been suffered by the country, in
consequence of the Government maintaining a packet esta-
blishment of its own, instead of hiring packets when they
were required.
Mr. S. RICE said, that it was the anxious desire of the
Government to practise economy in the packet service ;
but many of these who had at one time offered to carry
the mails free of expence, bad afterwards withdrawn that
offer. The improvement of the packet-service was, how-
ever, an object of the attention of the Government.
Sir ROBERT BATESON said, that there could not
be a more false economy than that which would go to
diminish the estimate for steam-packets, and thereforre
render less effective so important a branch of the public

service.
Lord ALTHORP said a few words which were 001
audible in the gallery.
Mr. SHAW obstrved, that since the introduction 0,

steam-vessels, there never bad been so much delay in the
passage of the packets as during the present season.
Mr. STANLEY thought the prevalence of bad weather
sufficient to account for the circionstance ; and he was
enabled to state, that during the whole season, the Holy-
head packets kept nearer to their ordinary time than those
belonging to Liverpool.
Mr. GOULBURN remarked that the shortness of the
distance explained the apparent superiority of the Holy-
head packets ; besides which, he understood much of the
inferiority of the Holyhead packets was attributable to
their not being well found.
Mr. RICE assured the House there was every disposi-
tion on the part of the Government to facilitate the quick
passage of those vessels; and, at the same time, to prac-
tise as strict an economy as would he consistent with the
efficient service of the country; but he could not, he con-
fessed, see what this discussion had to do with the navy
estimates.
The vote was then agreed to.
The next was 192,800/. for the half-pay officers of the
navy.
Mr. HUME expressed his intention of bringing the
question of naval promotions formally under the conside-
ration of the House. The country was now under an
expense amounting to little less than half a million, to de-
fray the charges of moil half-pay, and that, too, in time
of peace, and when almost all the workmen were dis-
charged from the Dock-yards. The number of officers
now employed did not much exceed 600, while those un-
employed were upwards of 5,000.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM said, that unless those pro-
motions went on as heretofore, the spirit of the nary
would be destroyed, anti upon the importance of that
branch of the public service it would be superfluous fur
to insist ; but this he would say, that no reduction
could advantageously be made upon the promotions. The
rule laid down with respect to them was, that there
should be one promotion for every three deaths, and he
mentioned this the more readily, as his predecessors bad
all the credit of the measure ; it was one which had his
most cordial support, and he thought that a departure
from it could not fail to be attended with the worst effects
upon the character and spirit of the service. He had
further to add, that in the present year a saving of
20 0001. was effected through an observance of that rule.
Mr. HUME replied, that if the public required it, the
naval promotions must, and ought to stop —(Cries of
"Oh ! oh.") Yes, he was well aware that that opinion
could not be very popular in that House, for most of the
Members were connected with officers in the navy, but
he called upon all the Members who valued the rights and
property of their constituents to stand forward and put
an end to the power which enabled the First Lord of the
Admiralty to extend almost without limitation the ad-
vancement of officers in the n ivy. Thus, he thought,
that the promotions ought to be stopped for a certain
time—say a year, by way of experiment. The fact was,
the State had, at its command, ten times the number of
men it had any occasion for.
After a few words from Mr. R. Gordon, Sir G. Cock-
burn, Mr. Hunt, and Mr. Croker, the vote was agreed to.
The next was 72,605/. for Pensions to Officers of the
Navy, their widows, and relatives.
1,300/. for Bounty to Chaplains.
65,000/. for the Out-pensioners to Greenwich Hospital.
Mr. HUME called the attention of the House to the
tax levied on the commercial shipping for the maintenance
of those pensioners.
Sir M. W. RIDLEY expressed, as we understood, his
intention of bringing forward the Bill which be formerly
announced upon the subject.
Sir J. GRAHAM, in reference to the question then
before the House, said it was intended to dispose of some
portion of the Derwentwater Estate.—Vote agreed to.
It was followed by one for 37,6291., superannuation
allowances to Commissioners, Secretary, Clerks, and other
Officers belonging to the Civil Establishment of the Navy.
The next were-
-31,4001. for ships employed in the removal of troops.
3001. for the freight of vessels employed in the convey-
ance of passengers and stores for the Colonial Department.
22,125/. for the transport of convicts to New South
Wales.
150,000/. for victualling '32,000, at the rate of 1/. 9s.
per man per month.
7,500/. for the salaries of Officers in the Victualling
Department.
15,738/. for the salaries of Officers in the different Yards.
6,044/. for the salaries of Officers connected with the
Navy Medical Establishment.
7,5001. for medical stores and hospital provisions.
7,950/. to defray the charges for ships laid up in ordinary.
52,0001. for works, including bakehouses and brew-
houses, at Sheerness, Portsmouth, and Plymouth.
After some conversation on this vote,
Sir JAMES GRAHAM sad that the necessity of it
had arisen from the system which had hitherto been pur-
sued in the Admiralty; but to alter which he intended to
introduce a measure. According to the present system,
the heads of Subordinate Boards held verbal communica-
tion with the First Lord of the Admiralty, and his assent
was sufficient to authorise the undertaking of such works
as these ; the consequence of which was, that there were
no documents whatever to refer to on the subject. The
present works had been undertaken under the direction of
the Victualling Board ; and he was further bound to state
that it had been done by private contract, the contractor
being the brother, and he believed the partner, of Sir John
Rennie, the Commissioner. He certainly had felt some
difficulty as to proposing this vote to Parliament ; but as
the works had proceeded so far, and as a further sum of
60,000/. would complete them, he had come to the conclu-
sion that it would he a greater saving now to the country
to cause them to be completed.
Sir G. CLERK complained of the Right Hon. Baronet's
having insinuated an accusation against the parties con-
cerned in the execution of this transaction.
Mr. ROBINSON said, that after what he had heard
concerning this vote, he should certainly move for the post-
ponement of it, until further inquiry could he instituted.
The CHAIRMAN said that the Hon. Member could
not move a postponement. He could not do other than
move a negative.
Mr. ROBINSON was not prepared to negative the vote.
Sir G. CLERK said, that after what had passed, he
would request the Right Hon. Baronet to consent to with-
draw the vote, in order that further investigation might
take place.
Sir J. GRAHAM said, that in the first place he had to
deny that had insinuated any charge against the persons
concerned in these buildings. When he had a charge to
make, he made it openly.—(Hear, hear.) What he had
done was to find fault with the system, which he thought
was a very bad one. With respect to the vote before the
House, he was quite ready to withdraw it at the request of
the Right Hon. Gentleman, in order that a fuller investi-
gation might be made.
Sir R. PEEL was glad that there was to be an inquiry ;
for, after what had passed, he certainly could not consent
to vote till that investigation should have taken place ; and
he was convinced, from the character of the parties con-
cerned (though he had heard nothing whatever of the
transaction before that evening), that a most satisfactory
explanation could he given.
CIVIL CONTINGENCIES.
Mr. SPRING RICE moved that a sum not exceeding
200,000/. be granted to his Majesty, to defray the ex-
pence under the head of civil contingencies, for the one
quarter, from Ist January to Slat Marsh, 1832 ; and for
one year, from let April, 1832, to 31st March, 1833.
Mr. GOULBURN, referring to the item of 1,000/.
"to Mr. Telford, to defray expencea already incurred in
his survey for supplying the metropolis with pure water,
and to em.ble him to proceed with the same," wished for
some explanation on the subject, observing that the ex-
pence of the survey ought; to he borne by the Water Com-
panLieosr,dan,.trLi
obyßtphestpauteib,lict.he
circurn.tan4,eB
under which
the Committee to take into consideration the best neaps
of supplying the metropolis with water had been ap-
pointed. In the Arst instance, he had taken the same
view of the subject as the Right Hon. Gentleman, and
had conceived that the Water Companies ought to pay
the expence ; and the Chairman of the Committee, the
Hon. Poaronet, the Member for Westminster, did certainly
answer for the ezpence not coming upon the public. it
turned out, however, that there was no chance of per-
suading the Companies to pay the money, and it was then
furnished by the Treasury. He could not :,-i.gree with the
Right Hon. Gentleman that the public should never
be called upon to contribute to such purposes; and in his
opinion, the present was an advance which it was proper
to make.
Sir ROBERT PEEL denied that it was the province
of the Government of this country to undertake any public
works. They could only succeed when they were under-
taken by Cornoanies ; and if they did succeed, why were
the Companies not to ilea:- all the expences attending
them ? This item of I,oooi. was, it appeared, only a pre-
liminaey expence. He wished to know what was the
estimate of the whole expence? To him it appecred that
the case would afford a dangerous precedent.
Lord ALTHORP explained, and stated that the whole
expence was estimated at 5,0001.
A MEMBER, whose name we could not learn, but who
stated that be was a Member of the Committee to which
the inquiry as to the hest mode of supplying pure water to
the metropolis had been referred, said, that when it was
proposed that Mr. Telford should male a survey with re-

ftlence to the means of securing the object in view, the
Hon. Baronet, the Member for Westminster, who was the
Chairman of the Committee, said that be would pay the
expence. What had occasioned the change in that respect
he knew not. In his opinion, of the result of that survey
there could be no doubt. Mr. Telford would make a very
extensive survey, and subsequently a very magnificent pro-
posal, so ex pensive that no private Committee would be able
to adopt it, and the matter would remain just where it was.
He was of opinion that if the Bill had been allowed to
proceed, the inhabitants of the metropolis would now have
had a good and adequate supply of pure water from the
river Colne.

Sir R. PEEL said, that that was the consequence of
Government interference. It prevented the Companies
from acting on their own account. It appeared that a
Company would have undertaken to bring pure water
from the river Colne, if Government had not stepped in
with a magnificent plan which could never be realised.
He would move to reduce the proposed vote by 10001.
He would read the minutes of the Treasury on the subject,
which bad been laid on the table of the House on the Itith
of March, 1831, and then appeal to the Committee if his
amendment was without foundation. The Right Hon.
Baronet proceeded to read the Minute of the Treasury,
dated March 15, 1831, in which it was stated that the
Lords of the Treasury having been informed by Sir
Francis Burdett that Mr. Telford was ready to undertake
a survey for the purpose of ascertaining the best means of
supplying the metropolis with water, and that Sir Francis
Burdett be responsible f•r the expence, desired that Mr.
Telford and Sir Francis Burdett should be waitten to, to
communicate their Lordship's acquiescence, on the stipu-
lation that Sir Francis Burdett would secure the public
against being called upon to incur any ezpence. In a
subsequent communication it was stated that the responsi-
bility rested on Sir F. Burdett, " who priposed himself
to confer this advantage on the public."—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. HUNT said, that this attempt to impose upon the
public this piece of assurance—this piece of impudence—
(A laugh)—was the most impudent attempt to impose on
the House of Commons that he had known since he came
into it. It was to ask a grant of money, taken out of the
pockets of the spinners and weavers of Manchester, in
order to save the Hon. Baronet, the Member for West-

minster, from paying a sum for which he bad rendered
himself responsible. He remembered the occurrence ;
and when it was said that the pledge which the Hon.
Baronet had given was a cheap way of getting returned
again for Westminster. Who had brought forward the
scheme of thus supplying the metropolis with water? One
of the Hon. Baronet's own constituents, a Mr. Wright,
who had written several pamphlets on the subject. He
was glad that the expence had fallen o❑ one who was so
able to pay it ; and he was sure that the Hon. Baronet
would feel himself disgraced if he were to allow the public
to pay the money after the pledge he had given.
Mr. S. RICE thought that, in the absence of the Hon.
Baronet (the Member for Westminster), and admitting
the accuracy of the Right Hon. Baronet's quotation from
the Treasury Minutes, it would be best to withdraw this
particular vote until the House should be in full posses-
sion of all the information necessary to qualify them to
form a judgment respecting it. He wished, however, to
remove a mistaken impression of the Right Hon. Baronet.
Government had never entertained so absurd and indefen-
sible a notion as that of undertaking to supply the metro—
polis with water. The only question was, whether they
could not obtain the knowledge necessary for the Compa-
nies to act upon. They never thought of assuming func-
tions which were wholly foreign to those belonging to them.
Sir R. PEEL acquiesced is the proposition to withdraw
the vote.

Sir R. HERON was sure that, in the absence of the
Hon. Baronet from severe indisposition, the Corninittte
would agree to suspend the further consideration of the
subject.
Sir JOHN HOBHOUSE expressed the conviction
that, whatever engagements his Hon. Friend and Col-
league had entered into he would perform. The trans-
action had been made a great deal of; and he had beard
much that had fallen from Hon. Members with astonish-
ment. The facts were strictly these : the Right Hon.
Baronet opposite had always discouraged the interference of
Government in public works, and had recommended their
being invariably left to individuals. But there were per-
sons who did not agree with the Right Hon. Baronet,
and who were of opinion that there were objects which
ought not to be left to private competition, and which
could never be accomplished if they were. And now
that it was proposed to vote 1,0001. for one of these
purposes, they were told that it was a juggle. The facts,
as they respected kis Hon. Friend, he perfectly recollected.
After a reference in the Committee to the subject, his
Hon. Friend being told that there would be some diffi-
culty in finding the money for the survey, said in con-
versation with him (Sir John Ilebhouse), " I would give
the money out of my own pocket rather than it should
not be done." He advised his Hon. Friend to make the
offer, and the offer was made. He was confident, that
whatever claim there might be on his Hon. Friend, he
would answer it.
Mr. GORDON observed, that the item was one not of
estimate but of account. Too much time had been wasted
on it. He thought that the whole subject of the Civil
Contingencies ought to be referred to a Select Committee.
Some of the items were of a singular description. For
instance, there was the sum of 849/. 6s. lid. for removing
the records belong to the Court of Common Pleas from
Westminster-hall to the Old Mews; and the sum of 2,0001.
to Mr. I3abliage, to enable him to proceed in constructing
a machine for the calculation of various tables. He like-
wise objected to the grant of 923/. to Lord Plunkett as an
outfit, when he had only to remove from the Court of Ex-
chequer to the Woolsack, and was consequently not put to
any expense which could afford the slightest possible pre-
tence fur such a grant.
Mr. S. RICE remarked that his Hon. Friend, perhaps,
feeling that his talent did not lie in panegyric, had for-
borne to speak about the diplomatic expenditure. If he
had, he could hardly fail to give Government praise for
doing away with diplomatic presents, and thus putting an
end to the periodical jokes upon thi+ subject. Lord Aber-
deen had already made a reduction in the diplomatic de-
partment to the amount of 11,0001. The present Go-
vernment hoped to extend this reduction next year to
15,0001. The Right Hon. Gentleman explained also,
that the charge of 8001. was not simply for ri moving the
records, but for placing them in their new position and
making arrangements for their security. He likewise ex-
plained that the sum of 2,0001. paid to Mr. Babbage, was
simply to enable hint to finish a most useful machine which
he had given to the public. He advised the Honourable
Member to constitute himself into a Committee of Inquiry,
and go and see the machine; lie would then be enabled to
judge of its utility. He also remarked, that it was very odd
that so ardent a supporter of Reiman should object to pay
ing for that information which was necessary to ficilitate
the progress of the Bill. Ira reply to the objection re-
specting the outfit of the Lord Chancellor of Ireland, he
moreover stated, that it had been always the custom to
grant an outfit to the Chancellors both of England and
Ireland. Lord Eldon, Lord Lyndhurst, and Lord
Brougham had grants for an outfit in this country ; so had
Mr, Ponsonhy, Sir Anthony Hart, and all other Chan-
cellors in Ireland. The reduction of the salary in Lord
Plunkett's time surely aiThrtied no reason for making an
exception with respect to him.
Mr. R. GORDON said that it would be time enough
to praise when the reductions were effected. Meantime
he had no objection to give him credit for good intentions.
He observed, that Lord Brougham himself had led him
into the error respecting the Lord Chancellor's outfit, for
he (Lard B.) had stated before the Committee that he
had only as then received 4001. on account of his office.
Besides, 2,0001. for his outfit was not among the Civil
contingences for last year ; and certainly, when the Com-
mittee were fixing the salaries of the Lord Chancellors
for England and Ireland, they never contemplated these
outfits.
Mr. P. COURTENAY, ailing to the grant of 5001. to
Mr. Marshall, asked the reason of this payment. Mr.
Marshall, he believed, was a friend of the lion. Member
for Middlesex. Was it for assisting that Hon. Member in
his calculations.—( Hear, and laughter.)
Mr. HUME explained, that the grant was to enable
Mr. Marshall to complete very valuable and statistical
tables.—(Hear,) When the Right Hon. Gentleman saw
the tables, he would approve of the grant.
Mr. GOULBURN asked the Hon. Gentleman if this
5001. was to be the total of the whole expense incurred
on account of his friend ?
Mr. RiCE was understood to say, he knew of no en,-
gagements for the future.
Sir R. PEEL was better satisfied with the other items
that with that which the Hon. Member for Middlesex
toot under his care. He did not see the reason why Mr,
Marshall zhnuld receive from the Government 5001. for
the comptlation of hie statistical tables when they were
prepared with a view to publication, and had been in fact
very far advanced, before the Government undertook to
give him the gratuity now proposed.
Mr. RICE said that this grant was not intended as a
gratuity, brit was merely payment for copies of Mr. Mar-
shall's tables furn;slied to the public offices.
Mr. HUNT had been in no mall degree surprised by
the conversations which passed between the eight Hon.
Gentleman opposite and the Hon. Member for Middlesex.
He remembered well the admiration with which he used
to read that gentleman's speeches, storming the House—