The Sun.
London, England, 1861-03-06 00:00:00

result will be I be presentation of a r :Tort which it will be
impossible to ea try into effect. The recommendations of
the committee all be rejected, and you will break the
hearts of many m Ulcers. Such are the reasons which induce
me to entreat the house not to agree to the motion now be-
fore us. (Hoar, hear.)
Lord J. MANZ TERS, who rose amid eries of" Divide,"
said that the very excited speech which the house had just
he'Ard from his nol do friend rendered it necessary that some
remaelcs should be made upon it. He had listened with
the greatest surprise to the declaration made by his noble
friend of his' views an the subject of ex-Ministerial respon-
sibility. Ace 'ordirv; to that declaration it would seem that
any hon. gentlOnan who had ever been in office was bound
in all time coming` to t: old his tongue whenever any question
was brought before the' house affecting the particular de-
pertinent with which he I.:,ad been connected. (Hear, hear,
and a laugh.) Rememben.tg what the conduct and lan-
guage of his noble friend had been before he entered upon
office, he could only hope that Lis noble friend would not
pies which he had laid
act in his own case upon. the princ.
down to-night. When his noble friend was out of office
there was no man more outspoken or more severe in his
comments upon the mans gginent of the Admiral::v, and he
trusted the house was net to understand that if ever his
noble friend should chance to be out of office his tongue
was to he hermetically sealed. (Cheers and laughter.) .Nis
noble friend had asked the house whether it was prepared to,
sanction an increased expenditure of £50,000 or £60,040 a.
year upon the navy. He thought that if the house appoinled
a committee of inquiry, and if that committee found that.
injustice was done to the officers of the navy, the house
would not hesitate to rectify that injustice, even though it
were to cost £50,000 or £60,000 a-year. (Hear, hear.) The
noble lord had himself acknowledged that the officers of the
navy were underpaid, and that their position was in many
respects undeserved.
Lord C. PAGET—I said nothing about their position. I
simply expressed the opinion that they were underpaid.
Lord J. MANNERS accepted the language of his noble:
friend that the officers of tho navy were underpaid. When
a Secretary of the Admiralty made a statement of that
ku2d 1w had no right to resist inquiry. His noble friend.
mighi; without inconsistency, have risen in his place, and
apool at- declaration that the officers of the navy were not
under-114cl, and that their claims were not well founded,
have called
;ipon the house to reject the motion of the hon.
and gallant no.,
9mber for Portsmouth ; but since he had
chosen, as a nay., 1 officer and as a responsible member of
the Government, to admit all that had been said in favour
of that motion, he ha,-
no right to throw any obstacle in
the way of its adoption. (Hear.)
Lord PALMERSTON—The noble lord has totally mis-
represented the argumei2t of my noble friend. (Hear.)
What my noble frier d said was, that he was sorry to see a
distinguished member of this house like the right hon.
baronet opposite, who had °cult, ied the responsible situation
of First Lord of the Admiralty- not having, when in office,
carried into operation the opinion s he now proclaims—wait-
ing till he was out of office in order tc, express them strongly,
and knowing, as he must do, that unless those opinions
were shared by those who have the, power to carry them
out, he was running the risk of crea tivg dissatisfaction in.
the service, which it was desirable to avoid. (Hear.) My
noble friend stated that in his opinion ffie officers of the
navy were underpaid. I should be disposed to generalize
that assertion, and I should not be going too iitr if I were
to say that all the services of the country were underpaid.
(Cheers.) lam convinced that if you were to measure sim-
ply the rewards allotted in this country to public servants
by the services performed and the merits of the officers,
you might go through the army and the navy and the civil
service, and you would find that all had claims to an in
crease of pay. You might appoint a committee and go
through all the establishments of the country to see whether
each officer and each clerk received as much as the generosity
of tlw country would be disposed to allow him if the funds
would permit it; the result would be a great increase in.
the expenditure of the country in every department. This
motion is confined to the navy, but you could not confine
the principle to that service only. You must extend it to
the army, and if you extend it to the army you must in
justice extend it to the civil service. I would, therefore,
warn the house against going blindfold into an inquiry of
which they cannot foresee the consequences. (Hear, hear.)

Sir J. El XIIINSTONE pointed out that the pay of a
tidewaiter was just that of a commander in the navy. (Rear.)
The house .di,vided. The numbers were—
For the /motion
Against it
jor ity —s
The committee was therefore agreed to amid loud cheers.