The Sun.
London, England, 1850-04-13 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, SATURDAY , EVENING, APRIL 13, 1850.

from his own patronage. It would be a painful thing
for a Minister to reduce the salaries of all the public

servant.; appointed by him. He would never be free from
the suspicion of bias and partiality. No charge of that
kind could be made against a Committee. He thought,
therefor; that the course of the Government was con-
stitutional and politic. Precedent was in its favour.
To act otherwise the Government would be usurping the

constitutional functions of that House. Did tlie oimo-
siticn to this course rest upon a sincere wish to reduce

the public expenditure ? He very much doubted it; but
perhaps, Hon. Gentlemen opposnte would rise and tell
them their real motives. He believed that this amend-
ment proposed was with a view to " overtrump" the Go-
vernment; and being opposed to action upon any but
bona fida intentions of reduction of the public expendi-
ture, he should oppo!e the amendment, and cordially

support the motion of the Noble Lord, which he b .!lieved
to be the most expedient and the best course to pursue,

under the circumstances, for the diminution of the sa-
laries and emoluments of the public servants of the

state.—(Cheers, and loud cries oi " Divide.") In the

midst of which

Mr. HERRIES rose and said, that the caution mani-
fested by the Noble Lord in proposing the Committee
was observable. Ho did not give them the slightest
clue to the amount of reduction which he was prepared
to make. Toat, had somewhat ahaken his confidence in

the Noble Lord's disposition to make reductions. The
working of Committees appointed by the Govern-
ment was not to be admired. They were so constructed
and composed that the opinions of Government should
come out of them. But it was not only that, but it was,
that after what had taken place there would bo a sus-
picion in the public mind that they had not received all
that they had a right to expect from the predominating
influence of tho Government, which give them a majo-
rity in the Committee. lie thought the House would
receive with more confldsnce and impartiality a propo-
sition coming from the Government. ile, for his part,

should say, that he felt no doulr, whatever that the Go-
vernment was iu possession of all means requisit fur the

reduction of those salarfei alluded to in the motion,

and he should add, that he was fully assured
that the House had all the necessary information relative
to those salaries, and, under these circumstances, what
need was there of a Committee? Ho did not ece why it
should be objected to by the Hon. Member opposite (Mr.
Cockburn) that Government should not place themselves
in the invidious;position of reducing the salaries of those
under their patronage ; and to that he should say that
such reductions might be proposed by the Noble Lord
(Lord J. Russell) to which no prudent man, in any
Ministerial situation, could object, particularly as it was
the wish of that House. However, he should say that
he had that confidence in those gentlemen on the
Ministerial benches that they would make every reduc-
tion consistent with the public interest; but, at the
same time, he felt bound to remark that he wa3 at a loss
to know why such caution was observed by the Noble
Lord in his attempt to develop his views, for whe❑ he
(Lord J. Russell) alluded to the reductions of the three
branches he did not then state what that reduction would
be. And he, therefore, considered that it was the duty

of the House to consider which of the two propositions
was worthy of their approval—whether that which was
most immediate and less expensive', or that which was
dilatory and more expensive, and, in consequence of his
approval of the proposition of the Hon. Member (Mr.
Disraeli), he had no hesitation to give him his support.
Mr. BIiIGHT said that, from the opinion he had
necessarily formed of Committees of the House on all
previous occasions of importance, as such Committees
were merely a sham, he felt disposed, at the first brush,
to support the motion of the Hon. Member (Mr. Disraeli),
but seeing that he had not on this occasion recommended
any specific reductions which the public interests re-
quired, and also seeing that, on reference to his former
votes, his present course was inconsistent and anoma-
lous, particularly when he recollected his former attacks
on his Hon. Friend (Mr. Cobden), particularly when he
stated that no plan of his Hon. Friend's was either phi-
losophical or practical. Now, he would ask, could there
be a stronger proof of the utility of his Hon. Friend's
plans than that both sides of the House were vicing with
each other to see who could best pursue the course pointed
out by him (Mr. Cobden). Yes, it was his Hon. Friend
that showed the House and the country that many un-
necessary expenses had been created through false alarm,
such as the Oregon question and the defence against the
invasion of France; but when the groundwork of those
alarms was totally removed, he (Mr. Cobden) advocated
the reduction of expenses raised through means of such
a phantom. He was completely at a loss to account for
the new lia;ht that seemed to illume the understandings
of many Hon. Gentlemen on the opposite side, and parti-
cularly the Right Lion. Gentleman (Mr. Herries), who
had been frequently a member of the Committee cn
miscellaneous estimates, and who was never known to bo
in a minority when the economical interests of the
country were argued. Nay, he would go farther, and
say that he had never known that Right lion. Member,
since he had the honour of a seat in that House, to have
voted in favour of a reduction of the national expenses.
—(Hear, hear.), He considered that the present
question might be reduced to the following form :
Shall the Government
_make such a reduction as

they think proper, or shall it be left to a Committee of
the House to enter into arrangements for the ne-
cessary reductions. His opinion was that if the Com-
mittee was; fairly appointed much more good; would
be effected than that the Government should take the
matter to themselves, for in the latter case much dizsa-
ti&Fiction:would be created by those in the Ministerial
employ, in consequence of such an interference by those
from whom they should least expect it. But if the Noble
Lord (Lord J. Russell) should appoint such Committee
as he ha l frequently seen appointed in that House, con -
sisting of Members ©f the House who held Government
situations or pensions, then he would raise his voice
against such a Committe. and proclaim to the country
that the true interests of the people were slighted and
neglected by those who should be their protectors. Yet
from the interest that must be created in the public
mind by that night's debate, ho hoped that there was
no ground for the anticipation of such a packing of a
Committee, and should therefore support the motion of
the Noble Lord.—(Hear, hear.)
Mr. HENRY DRUMMOND observed, that if the
proposal of the Noble Lord bad borne the smallest re-
semblance to the picture drawn of it by the Hon. Mem-
ber for Manchester (Mr. Bright)—if there bad been in
it the slightest indication of the remotest intention on the
part of the Government to do anything more than to in-
quire, most unquestionably he would have voted for that
motion. The Noble Lord, with great naiveté, asked the
House to inquire. To inquire of whom ? They could
only inquire of the Noble Lord himself, who possessed
twenty times more information on the subject than any
one else.—(A. laugh.) This, thee, was the motion—the
true pledge of the economical intentions of the Govern-
. .

mene—for which all the Financial Reformers were to

vote to-night.—(Hear, and a laugh.) It was not the
province of the Committee to reduce ono fraction; it was
not a Committee to do any single thing beyond making
an inquiry.—(Hear, hear.) It was notorious that this
motion would never have seen made but for the proposal
which had on a former occasion been submitted to the

House by the Hon. Member for Oxfordshire—(Hear,
hear)—aud the intention of this motion was to trip up
the heels of that Hon. Gentleman. He must say he
thought the House was somewhat indebted to the Noble
Lord for shortening considerably the future labours of
the session; for, if this motion should be carried, it
would be utterly useless to entertain any other question,
of financial reform.—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) An
amusing book had lately been published in Fraece--the
life of a certain Jerome Paturot in search of a soe'.al po-
sition. The hero was, if he remembered rie;ntly,
cotton nightcap manufacturer.—( A laugh.) Now, if
any gentleman was in search of a social position in this
country, there was not one that he could so well turn
to good account as that a of a fivar.eial reformer,—..
(Laughter.) The financial reformer began by jobbing
and getting into Parliament, where, he continued to as-
sail the Noble Lord and the rest, of them in office, very
muoh to his own profit; he always voted for all impossible
motions, and when ho event back to his constituents he
said, " Oh, was I not one of the three who went into the
lobby on sueh a question?—(Laughter.) Was I not one
of that small miuo city that never effected anything, and
never meant to 'effect anything?"—(Renewed laughter.)
The Government, after playing one party against the
other, had lat,ely resorted to a new " dodge."—(A laugh.)
They had a aid, "If we are to be in a minority we will
go out of office;" or else, " Oh, this motion is only a
masked battery. and the intention is to supplant the Go-
vernment." Now, if a formal motion were brought for-
ward ors that subject, he (Mr. Drummond) would give
the Noble Lord his vote against all competitors; for he
believed nothing could be so detrimental to the country
as losing the ser vices of that Noble Lord on the Treasury
bench. But he Mr. (Drummond) would never submit
to ho bullied by any Minister who turned sulky and
threatened to run away from his place—(Leughter)—
leaving the country in confusion. He felt quite satisfied
'that this motion would lead to no result.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER had
listened with great attention to the discussion, but ho
thought there had been a total lack of argument in the
speeches of the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire and
those Hun. Gentlemen by whom his views had been
supported. The motion of his Noble Friend bad been
characterised as one that was proposed for purposes of
delay, and it had been said that no conclusion could be
arrived at by the Committee during the present session.
The Honourable Member for Montrose (Mr. Hume)
found fault with the motion because it did not go far
enough, complaining that it was confined to three or
four subjects, and that they ought to have instituted
an inquiry into fifty other departments of expendi-
ture. Ho (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) entirely
agreed, however, with the Honourable Member for
Oxfordshire, that if the Government were to concur
in the suggestions of the Honourable Member for Mont-
rose and the Honourable Member for Marylebone, they
might be justly charged with endeavouring to avoid a
practical conclusion. The inquiry now proposed by 'Ms
Noble Friend could not occupy any hug time, and would
be terminated long before the close of the session. The
Honourable Member fur Montrose (Mr. Hume) then
said that a Committee never did the slightest good—
that the recommendations of a Committee were never
carried into effect. Why, he must have forgotten the
Committee which sat upon this very subject in 1831—a
Committee for which Lord Al;horp moved, to inquire
into the subject of official salaries—and which reported
upon all the principal salaries ; every recommendation
was carried into effect.—([Tear, hour.) Take the Com-
mittee on the navy expenditure wliich had been referred
to; that suggestion of this Counnittec which had not
been carried into eff.ct—as to the number of admirals—
had been alluded to; but nine out of ten of its recom-
mendations had been adopted. Let the Honour:.ble
Member only recollect the case of those Committees
on which he had himself sat. The Import Duties
Committee did not it 3 report lay the founda-
tion of measures since carried ?—(Hear, hear.)
the 11.(alou:7ablo MQ;l2'.),r
shire (Mr. Disraeli) said that the course pro-
posed by the Government was unworthy of
them ; that their opinics4 ought to have been fast

pressed to the House ; that the House should have
had the embodied opinion of the Governieeot deve-
loped in papers on the table. But had the lion. Mem-
ber looked into the practice of the House? The Com-
mittee for which Lord Althorp moved, for instance, was
not moved for upon estimates on the ttable. There
were other cases of the same kind—the Committee to
inquire into the administration of the law, with the view
to ascertain the proper number of judges; another with
regard to the salaries of the judges; another with regard
to the emolument of the judges of the Prerogative
Court. The Hon. Gentleman should refer to the case
the Noble Lord had himself mentioned—the 27th report
of the Committee in 1798. The Hon. Gentleman said
the Government out to take upon themselves the respon-
sibility of dealing with the public establishments. They
had never shrunk from that responsibility; and the
Noble Lord (Lord J. Russell) had reminded the House
that they had dealt very largely with the public estab-
lishments with a view to the reduction cf the expendi-
ture. The principle upon which they had proceeded had
not indeed been that of a general reduction of salaries—
it would be the worst policy to underpay the public ser •
rants—but rather that of reducing the number of per-
sons employed. (Hear, hear.) Nothing could be
more unjust or unwise than the general reduction of
salaries proposed by the Hon. Member for Oxfordshire
(Mr. Henley) without regard to the circumstances of
each case, the merits of the individual, or the amount of
work he might be called upon to perform. The Hon.
Member would make the public servants a whole army
of martyrs.—(A laugh.) The first branch of the in-
quiry was therefore not proposed to be extended to
those with respect to whom the Government fully ad-
mitted that the responsibility rested with itself and was
conducting an investigation by officers of its own, in-
quiring into their duties and their salaries, and the
proportion borne by the work to the remuneration.
With regard to the salaries of members of the Govern-
ment,,he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) did not
differ very much from those who said that Ministers of
the Crown ought not to be altogether led by feelings cf
delicacy to abstain from expressing an opinion; but no
one could say that they were as impartial judges on the
question of their own salaries, as of the salaries of
others, and surely it would be infinitely better and far
more satisfactory to the country that an opinion upon
the amount of these should emanate from an impartially
constituted Committee.—(Hear.) Then, with regard to
the next branch of the inquiry—namely, judicial
officers—it was desirable that those who filled
these places should not be in the slightest degree de-
pendent, with regard to their emoluments, upon the Ex-
ecutive; and it would be far better that these should be
inquired into by a Committee than that the opinion
merely of the Government should be had. It had been
said that these functionaries could not be summoned
before a Committee to give evidence. Why, the Lord
Chancellor appeared before Lord Althorp's Committee
in 1831.—(Hear, hear.) As the Hon. and Learned
Member for Southampton (Mr. Cockburn) had said,
there could be no obstacle on the ground of delicacy in
getting a statement with regard to legal emoluments.--
(Hear, hear.) A strange objection was made to the
proposed inquiry into the diplomatic establishments. It
was a mistake to say that the salaries could not be
altered without an Act of Parliament. Tho whole sum
applicable to the service was fixed by statute, but not
the salary of each person. The Hon. Member (Mr.
Disraeli) supposed that the reference of the diplomatic
establishments to a Committee was devised to prejudice
his bringing on his motion upon that department; but
would it suit him better, in bringing forward such a
motion, to be without the information which
the investigation of the Committee would supply?
Was not the want of information a difficulty which
he would have to encounter?—(Hear, hear.) The Hon.
Member for Surrey (Mr. Drummond) had stated that
not a word was said about reduction; ho could not have
attended to what fell from the Noble Lord.— [Mr.
DRUMMOND—" I said there was nothing about it in the
motion."] The Noble Lord stated that, abstaining
(which the Hon. Gentleman might, perhaps, attribute
to a false delicacy) from giving any opinion on the sub-
ject of official salaries, and wishing to leave it to the
Committee, he was of opinion that reductions might be
made in the other departments—the diplomatic and
judicial. Ono Hon. Gentleman thought it exceedingly
wrong that the Noble Lord did not state the amount
of reductions he was of opinion might be made ; why,
if he had, it would have been said that it was useless
to move for a Committee when the Government had
made up their minds, and openly stated the extent of
reduction they intended to agree to. It would have
been unfair to a Committee of Inquiry, and inconsis-
tent with the object of its appointment, for the Gc-
vernment to say beforehand what they considered
the result of the inquiry ought to be.—(Hear,
hear.) The Hon. Member (Mr. Israeli) in part of
his speech, used language that might well surprise one.
He spoke of the House of Commons as the guardian of
the public purse, butof the Government as the obnoxious
instrument of fiscal extortion. Gentlemen opposite
might take the admonition which they had themselves
given, and consider not merely their present position,
but that which they might possibly occupy.—(Hear,
hear.) The expressions in which the Government of
the country had thus been characterised were surely not
wisely used.—(Hear, hear.) The Right Hon. Member
for Stamford (leir. [terries) had stated that the House
was only asked to choose between two modes of effect-
ing the same object, ard that the amendment would lead
to the more extensive and speedy reduction of the ex-
penditure and relief to the country. But surely the
amendment was one of those vague resolutions which
did not necessarily lead to any reductisee or any practisal
conclusion; the origual motion was for a definite in-
quiry, which was much more likely to lead to a practical
result.—(Hear.) The amendment, indeed, had been put
by Gentlemen opposite upon the ground of its being a
complimentary expression of confidence in the Govern-
ment as prepared and disposed to carry out reduction;
but, if Gentlemen thought the matter should be left in
the hands of the Government, why had one Hon. Mem-
ber (Mr. Disraeli) given notice of motion with a view to
a reduction in the diplomatic and consular expenditure,
and another (Mr. Henley) of a motion for a general re-
vision of all salaries with a view to reductions ?—(Hear,
hear.) Those notices did not indicate the confidence
which was now professed.—(Hear.) As already stated,
the Noble Lord had declared that in two branches of
the inquiry he looked for reduction of the expenditure;
he abstained from pronouncing any opinion as to one
branch, because he thought it decent and proper that he
should not do so at this stage, but one member of the
Government at least would be on the Committee, and
would state the opinion of the Government unhesitat-
ingly in Committee on the proper occasion. Gentlemen
who talked of the relief from taxation to be offeetei by
the reduction in the salaries of the great officers, or even
of the establishments, must remember that it was impos-
sible so to deal with parties who had held their situations
for a length of time as to give any such great relief at
once, whatever reduction there might be in the course
of years. The Noble Lord had stated the reductions
made in the last year or two; these were going on from
day to day. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) did
not think any great reduction could be effected (as we
understood) in the higher offices which the Committee
would have to consider; but, whether that was SD or not,
the Government thought it better to obtain the opinion
of a tribunal which might take a more impartial view
than perhaps any persons would take with regard to their
own salaries.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord J. MANNERS was tempted to ask, when the
Right Hon. Gentleman seemed a little indignant at any
suspicion that the Noble Lord's motion was caused by
the notice given by the Hon. Member for Oxfordshire
(Mr. Henley), why was it that the Government did not
bring forward their motion at the commencement of the
session?—(Hear, hear.) The Honourable and Learned
Member for Southampton (Mr. Cockburn) bad based
his argument considerably upon the impropriety
and indelicacy of calling upon the members of the
Government to come forward and state what was a
fair remuneration for the services they were per-
forming; but if the water was to be submitted to a
Committee, those very persons must be summoned be-
fore it, and asked their opinions, and their evidence
reported to the House.—(Hear.) And what would fol-
low ? Suppose the Committee constituted in the very
free and liberal spirit indicated by the Hon. Member for
Manchester (Mr. Bright)—though every one knew it
would be constituted in a very different manner; then it
would be almost certain that some salaries of members
of the Government would be reduced by such a Com-
mittee below what the Noble Lord charged with the
responsibility of the Government thought a proper remu-
neration, and the Noble Lord would have to come before
-the House appealing from the Committee as to the salary
of his successor.—(Hear, hear.) As for the Hon. Mem-
ber for Manchester (Mr. Bright), seeing the practical
inconsistency in which he was involving himself, the
Hon. Member, towards the conclusion of his speech, said
that if he thought the Committee was to be constituted
as every Committee had been before or since he (Lord
J. Manners) had sat in the House, and was to be com-
posed of Noble Lords and Right Hon. Gentlemen who
belonged to the present or any former Government, and
of officers of the army and navy, he would not eminent
to vote for it. What pledge to that effect had he received
from the Noble Lord? Had he seen the least symptom
f-a tecl iin suchof a
tform
Ex-
chequer? Nothing of theas
htheatdtehsierSominmtihteteeswpeoeuclhd
ofbe t ct obnas i
Chancellor
kind,
thatNotwithstandingif n
o the
speech of the Hon. MOmber, it was yet time for him
to mend his vote, and, no one could doubt con-
cessione was made aa to the appointment of the Committee,
they would have a report containing various recomreen..
dations just as usual, some of which would be adopted if
they met ttee views of the Government, said the others
quietly F,,eelved. Such would be the Committee for
which the tribune of the people—the man who bad no
confidence in any Gerettiment—was about to vote.—
ctlear, hear.) The Lion. Baronet (Sir R. Hall) spoke
of the amendment as a deliberate party movement, but
if they went on attacking every motion as a question of
party they never would arrive at any end they desired.
He (Lord John Manners) hoped the advice:of him
whom he might term the Nestor of financial reformers
(Mr. Hume) would be taken into serious considera-
tion by the younger financial reformers in the House,
though he could scarcely hope to see them carry it
into effect. The House would have to decide on two
propositions, one of which placed before them without
delay the means of effecting the retrenchments which,
in the opinion of the Government and of the House, the
public service would amply allow; the other of which
was to take a course which, in his conscience, he believed
could have the Effect of throwing over the whole ques-
tion, not only for the present, but for the ensuing session
—a proposition to which he saw no end, and he could
not conclude without calling on all Hon. Members,
whether they thought the country, though prospering,
could not afford extravagant salaries, or that the real
distress of the community was the cause of this pas-
sionate demand fur economy, to support the amend-
met-IL—(geer, hear.)
Losd J. RUSSELL--The objections viLieli :lave
made to the motion proposed to the House certainly will
nos require very much answer from me, because They;

have been met, and most of them disposed of, by the op-
ponents of the motion themselves. The Hon. Baronet
(Sir B. Hall) who spoke immediaeoly ',fur the amend-
ment of the Hon. Member for Buckinghamshire, and
some others, said it was not a sufficient inquiry, because
it did not go beyond the three particular classes into
which the inquiry was to be confined. To that the
Honourable Member for Oxford (Mr. Henley) an-
swered, and I think very concltritely, that if all
offices were to be included, the inquiry would last
so long that we should not obtain any practical
result from the Committee. These are the grounds which
I think will be sufficient for the appointment of the
Committee. Therefore the Hon. Member for Oxford
has disposed of one objection. Then the Hon. Member
for Montrose (Mr. Hume), somewhat to my surprise—
(A laugh)—objected to a Committee for the first time
that I remernLer during a long period of years, and said
the: it would do no good; but in the course of his speech
he admitted he hal urged on the Government the ap-
pointment of a Committee on the army, navy, and ord-
nance, and thet the Committees had sat fur some time
with considerable advantage to the public. But then the
Hon. Geet'ernan goes on and sues the effect is, if you
hare a Committ( e a great many facts will become known
which otherwise we should not have before us, and thus
the Hon. Gentleman has answered his own objection. I
cannot accuse him of wishing to conceal the truth, but
we know there are many delusive ideas on the public
miud on this subject, and the lion. Gentleman seemed
to entertain some alarm as to certain facts becoming
known to them. But we find the Hon. Member always
inquiring—we find him always moving for returns, and
probably the expense of this information and of these
returns would be equal to the salaries of two or three
Lords of the Treasury.—(" [fear, hear," and a laugh.)
Well, they have been exceedingly useful, and have
thrown a great deal of light and information on many
questions, and for my part I think them well worth the
cost.—(Hear, hear.) But, if that is, the case, lam the
more surprised that now, for the first time, he could
say the House of Commons should not inquire into those
facts by a Select Committee. But we have all heard
" evil communications corrupt good manners," and the
Hon. Member for Buckingham (Mr. Disraeli) told us
to-night, in the course of his speech, that some three
weeks ago he had held a communition with the Hon.
Member.—(Loud laughter.) He certainly does seem
(the Noble Lord turned towards Mr. Hume) to have
deserted the opinions to which he has se long adhered.
—(Hear, hear, and a laugh.) ;The Hon Member for
Surrey (Mr. Drummond) observed, nothing had been
said on this subject of reduction by Government. I cer-
tainly said it would be useless to appoint any such Com-
mittee unless we believed that reduction and economy
will be the consequence. I declined to give any opinion
as to the salaries received by official persona being
Members of Parliament, but I stated that I proposed
some reductions, and that I saw the force of the objec-
tion that if we proposed the reduction of one
official office, it would be well to revise our es-
tablishments altogeteer. (Hear, bear.) Let me
show the practical effect of the proposed inquiry. We
are told we are in possession of all the information that
can be had as far as our own salaries are concerned.
That is no doubt the case with respect to our own
offices, but when I proposed a reduction in the salary of
the Chief Justice of the Common Pleas I was told it was
very insufficient. At that these Hon. Gentlemen opposite
seemed to think a Select Committee a very desirable
thing.—(A laugh.) For a whole night I was badgered
for not consenting to it. I was told the receipts of bar-
risters were nothing like what they were 20 years ago,
and that therefore a great reduction should take place
in the judges' salaries. Well, then, it is right we
should know something of the facts, became it had been
always stated, and stated truly, that if you wish to have
good and efficient judges—men who will command the
respect of the public, and insure confidence for the ad-
ministration of the laws—you had better not place
them at a salary much below that which persons at the
bar might expect to receive for their exertions. If that
is to be the test it becomes of importance to know what
are the usual receipts of men in considerable practice, and
that is a fact on which Government, as well as Mem-
bers of the House, might form an opinion. It appears
to me the proposition I put is a fair practical proposition
for an inquiry by a Select Committee. It is supported
by precedent from 1798, when Mr. Pitt thought it neces-
sary to refer the question of official salaries to a Select
Committee; and I have not heard any sufficient objec-
tion to the proposal, or to this particular mode of pro-
ceeding. I certainly must thank the Right Hon. Mem-
ber for Stamford, and the Hon. Member for Bucking-
hamshire, for proposing a vote of confidence in Govern-
ment.—(Laughter.) It would be a very strong Govern-
ment that could repudiate such a mark of approbation
from their political opponents—(Laughter)—but I think
it will be the better course, and more for the public
service, to appoint the Select Committee of Inquiry.
The House then divided, when there appeared—
For Mr. Disraeli's amendment ... 159
Against it ... 250
Majority against it ... —9l
The original motion for the appointment of the Com-
mittee was then agreed to.
Mr. HORSMAN then moved, as an addition to Lord
J. Russell's motion on salaries, that the inquiry be ex-
tended to the incomes of ecclesiastical dignitaries. lie
thought he could in a few word,' show the propriety of
his motion, by comparing the incomes of the dignitaries
with the incomes received in our other great establish-
meats. Let him compare the case of the Lord Chief
Justice with that of a dignitary of the Church. The
former was selected from the most eminent of his pro-
fession, for an office of great toil and responsibility, and
when be ceased to be efficient he ceased to be a judge.
But in the Church the faculties of a dignitary might
desert him and yet his Effie° remained, and he was
also the dispenser of large patronage. The Chief Jus-
tice had 8,000/. a year, and had to provide himself
with a residence. The Archbishop of Cant-rbury had
15,000/. and a palace provided for him—(Hear, hear)—
and yet they would in the former case institute an
inquiry because they thought 8,0001. too:chigh, but
would pass by the 15,0001. of the Archbishop with-
out a word of comment.—(Hear, hear,) Let him
take the case of the Ministers of State, of the Prime
Minister. Was his office one of less state or dignity than
that of a prelate? He held his office at the sacrifice of
health and strength, and sometimes of life, and yet his
official income was only one-third that of the Arch-
bishop, one-half that of the Bishop of London, and con-
siderably below that of the Rishop of Durham or Bishop
of Winchester. The Hon. Member far Oxfordshire
last year proposed to take off ten per cent. of the income
of the Prime Minister, but would he not touch that of
the ecclesiastical dignitaries ? The enormous dispro-
portion between those incomes justified inquiry. Now
let them take the Board of Admiralty; it consisted of a
First Lord and five junior Lords; they were charged with
the administration of one of our most important depart=
meats, and yet their united salaries did not equal the
official income of a single primate, Let them also take
the Customs and Excise. They had two beards ; one
with a chairman and eight eommissioners, and yet the
united salaries of both boards did not equal the income
of two prelates. He would take another branch
into which the Noble Lord proposed inquiry—"
that of foreign ambassadors and micisters. They
represented our Sovereign in all courts and coun-
tries with which we had to dea'. There were 93, and
commencing with the highest in Paris, who received
10,0001. a year, to the lowest Chargd d'Affaires, their
salaries together did not come within 50 per cent. of that
amount, which was annually divided amongst the Bench
of Bishops. He would take another service—the go-
vernors of colonies; they were 43 in number, and from
the highest in Canada, who received 7,000/. a year, to
the lowest, the governor of the Falkland Isles, who re-
ceived 4001, the whole expense did not come near the
amount annually divided amongst the bishops. He now
took the salaries of the judges—an establishment upon
which they looked every day as that upon which the in-
stitutions and government of the country depended, and
he believed he might say, that of all our functiofiaries
none were more reverenced than the judges.—(Hear.)
In the Court of Queen's Bench there were a chief jus-
tice and four judges; there Was a similar number in the
Common Pleas, and also in the Exchequer. In
Chancery there were the Lord Chancellor, three
Vice-Chancellors, and the Master of the Rolls;
and yet the united salaries of all those judges
were under the Parliamentary salaries of one
class of our ecclesiastical dignitaries. With the judges
in Scotland the whole number was 8d; and yet their
united salariee did not equal the incomes of the 27 pre-
later:. The highest Scot judge had a salary below the
Parliamentary income ofch
a Welsh prelate, and the whole
of the Sewell judges had not salaries equal to the amount
of income of four prelates. Then he came to Members
of that and the other 1101130 holding office during plea-
sure. The number was 48; their time and strength
were devoted to the public, and yet their united salaries
did not equal the amount of income of' the 27 prelates.
Hear.) They, like the judges, were paid for work
except the Lord
Chancellor, not one had a salary exceeding the income
of the Bishop of London, or two-thirds that of the Arch-
bishop of Canterbury. lie would not detain the House
—(Hear, hear)—except to mention one further fact. It
was said the other night there wore few instances of
public men becoming richer by public life. An instance
of a Minister of State becoming richer from office of
late yore was, ho believed, unknown, and the reason
assigned for it was that the duties of their office obliged
them to neglect their private affairs. That was not
the case with the prelates. He had a return of the
personal property lett by 29 prelates since 1828. It
amounted to I,soo,oool.—(Hear, hear.) Prelates were
generally advanced in life when they were consecrated;
they were generally poor been before, and vet in what
other profession or country in the world could they find
29 members of a profession leaving fortunes averaging
50,000/. a piece, accumulated after they had passed
middle age?—(Hear, bear.) The prelates certainly had
duties to perform, but the deans and canons had none;
and yet at that moment they divided amongst them
annually a greater amount of lucerne than the salaries
of the functionaries in all the departments of the public
service included in the motion of the Noble Lord. A
Bill had been proposed to reduce the incomes of deans
to 1,0001. a year ; but the Noble Lord stated, on a
former evening, that the Bishop of Salisbury had said
that if the income of the Dean of Salisbury were re-
duced to that amount, no one could be found to take it.
l
Lord J. RUSSELL expeined—The Bishop said that
the person taking it must have a private fortune.
Mr. HORSMAN continued—So that of the hard-
worked, underpaid clergymen of England, with their
prolific families, there was not one man to be found to
take 1,0001. a-year for doing nothing—(A laugh)—to
sell himself to a sinecure under 1,500/.!—(Laughter.)
The Noble Lord said he should make the experiment,
and perhaps in the Committee he would tell them
whether the experiment had succeeded. and perhaps the
Biehop of Sali.'oury would also expound the reason that
would prevent a poor man from accepting an office with
1,0001. a year. Was it right that a prelate should re.

ceive more than three times the Salary of a Minister of
State, while poor clergymen were receiving, not more
than the wages of the prelate's coachman? Was it wise,
or safe, or seemly, that when they were instituting a
gent.ral inquiry into all other high offices of state they
should make this odious and unpopular distinction in
favour of oue particular establishment, of which no one
could say the duties were more onerous than those of
some of those offices into which they were about to insti-
tute an inquiry ? The Hon. Member for Oxfordshire
made his motion because the people were overtaxed.
He (Mr. Horman) made this because they were un-
dertaught. He Appealed to those who felt the great-
est attachment for the Church Establishment, and
asked how, when we. endeavoured to bring all other
public institutions intt; harmony with the public
feeling, we could reconci
Le it with our sense of
duty to act cn an opposite prin.liple with respect to the
Church? Why should we cheris::
in our ecclesiastical
establishment alone an eyesore and a.
reproach ? What
did we gain by that course ? Did we e,-elt religion or
strengthen the episcopate? His proposition was so rea-
sonable that he trusted the House would not reject it,
for ail history and experience told us that by re.; 'cting
reasonable propositions we rendered the success of the
unreasonable ones more certain and more speedy.— '

(Cheers.) The Hon Member concluded by making his
motion.

Si: G. GREY remarked that the Hon. Member was
nut doing justice to the object which he bad in view by
mixing it up with the inquiry proposed by. his Noble
Friend.—(hear, hear.) It was not his intention to deny
the ri7ht of the House to inquire into the episcopal re-
venues. That course was taken in 1835, and at a sub-
sequent period. Neither did he mean to contend that
the question was to be looked upon as finally settled by
what was done on those ccersions. If a case could be
made out to justify it, there might be fresh inquiry and
fresh legislation. The incomes attached to the
offices which were to be inquired into by his No-
ble Friend's Committee were derived from taxation,
but the incomes of persons holding episcopal and
capitular offices stood upon a different footing, and
were derived from a different source.—(Hear, hear.)
The Honourable Member had called upon the House
not to appoint a suspected Committee, and he (Sir
George Grey) asked the m not to appoint an impractic-
able one.—(Hear, hear.) If the House should adopt the
Hon. Member's amendment, it would be impossible fur
the Committee to conclude their labours during the pre-
sent session. _ _

Mr. HENLEY acknowledged himself unable to per-
ceive the drift of the Honourable 'Member for Cocker-
mouth's amendment, or of the arguments by which it
had been supported. The Honourable Member had
acted somewhat unfairly in leading the House to sup-
pose that bishops could accumulate the same amount of
property now of which some of their predecessors had
died possessed. Thu changes which had been made of
late years rendered that impossible, and that the
Honourable Member knew perfectly well. The Hon.
Member ought to rest his proposition on its own grounds
instead of bringing it forward in the invidious way be
had done, as if his object was merely to raise a cry
against the Church.
Mr. AGLIONBY said that whenever a Member pro-
posed the reform of an abuse in that House be was sure
to be told that he had selected the wrong timo fur effect-
ing his object. It was not correct to assert that the
bishops derived their incomes from their own property;
they derived them from the property of the country,
which was vested in them for the performance of certain
duties.—(llear, hear.) He called upon his Hon. Col-
league not to withdraw his motion unless Ministers would
pledge themselves to support a separatt; motion for in-
quiry into the subject.
Mr. NEWDEGATF complained that the Km Mem-
ber for Cockermouth bad made a most .unfair aitack on
the Church.—(Hear, and No.) Though the Honoaiable
Member was constantly boosting of his attachment to
the Church, he lost no opportunity of vilifying it. The
tone of his speech showed that the Hon. Member was in
spirit hostile to the Church of England.—(Hear, and Oh.)
Mr. WOOD denied that the Hon. Member for Cocker-
mouth was obnoxious to the censure which had just
been passed upon him. Although he could not sympa-
thise with all that Hon. Member's observations, he en-

tirely concurred in the substance of them—namely, that
it was desirable for the Church of England herself that
this grave question should some time or other be looked
seriously in the face.—(Hear, hear.) No doubt could
be entertained as to the right of the House to inquire
into the distribution of church property. Indeed, Par-
liament had a right to inquire into the property of any
private individual in the country if a public good could
be shown fur doing it.—(Murmurs.) Parliament ;inter-
fered with private property by every railway Bill which
it passed. The Committee best fitted for inquiry into
judicial and diplomatic salaries would not be the best
fitted for the inquiry now proposed. The time would
come, and that speedily, when it would be necessary to
have a revision of the incomes paid to the dignitaries of
the Church; and, when an inquiry did take place, it
would be desirable to consider whether provision ought
not to be made fur further episcopal superintendence,
though with a different scale of salaries.
Mr. HORSMAN stated that he had made no allu-
sion to the tenure of the property in question. Ho had
given no opinion on the point whether it was of a public
or a private character. The incomes of the bishops had
been regulated by Act of Parliament, and he only asked
Parliament to do what it did in 1836. He meant to
reflect no more on the manner iu which the bishops per-
formed their duties than on the manner in which other
. .

functionaries discharged theirs.
Mr. GOULBURN observed that the Hon. Gentleman
had only walked in the course he bad taken on former
occasions. He had distinctly recorded the opinion that
capitular bodies were altogether useless. He had taken
every occasion in that House to disparage in public es-
timation the office of bishop.—(Hoar, bear.) He pro-
fessed to be a member of the Church of England, an
essential element of which was the episcopal authority
controlling the inferior clergy. When he drew invidious
comparisons which had no just application, it was im-
possible not to suppose that his views as to the episco-
pacy were low indeed. The arguments of the Hon.
Gentleman who described the bishops as receiving
salaries for doing nothing, were of the class at all times
addressed to those at the bottom of the scale against
those who were at the top of it. This was not an oc-
casion on which it was necessary to enter on the ques-
tion whether the arrangements made with the consent
of the Church itself had been carried to the extent
which might be expedient for the welfare of the Church.
Mr. HORSMAN assured the Right lion. Gentleman
that he did not say the bishops had nothing to do. He
had said the bishops had duties to perform, and the deans
had none.
Mr. GOULBURN reminded the Hon. Gentleman that
he had compared bishops with judges, intimating that
the former were appointed without and the other with
qualifications—that the latter worked, and the former
did not.
Mr. HORSMAN begged to assure the Hon. Gentle-
man that he was wrong.
Colonel SIBTHORP remarked that the censure of one
man was the best praise Ibr another.
Mr. MANGLES had never heard a more unjust at-
tack than that made by the Right Hon. Member for the
University of Cambridge. W hen the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman charged the lion. Member for Cockermouth with
stirring the inferior members of the Church against
'night be reminded that the parties to
red no stirring up; and whoever
thewh osmu pheer,
alludeder e
re
eneficed clergymen even, not
aware that they largely
hadtospee°atilev oerfsPodomr cuuchratweist,hnfUs t
shared that feeling.
For Mr. Hersman's addition I-- 95
The HOMO divided, when there i2Reared
Against it ... ..‘ 208
Majority against it —;.13
PUBLIC HEALTH (SCOTLAND) BILL.
The LORD-ADVOCATE moved that this Bill be
read a second time.
After one or two ineffectual attempts on the part of
Mr. C. BRUCE and Mr. Sco-rii to have the second read •
ing postponed on account of the lateness of the hour,
Mr. OSWALD said one of the changes made in the
Bill by the Select Committee of last year was, that all
preliminary inquiries should be submitted to the con-
sideration and direction of the sheriffs of the counties;
he therefore could not see the slightest use of appointing
a secretary under the Bill, or of subjecting it to the gene-
ral control of a board in England.
Mr. FORBES, and other lion. Gentlemen, renewed
their efforts to have the Bill postponed, but ultimately
it was read a second time, on the understanding that
the future stages should be taken at an earlier hour.
The Police and Improvement (Scotland) Bill was also
read a second time on the same terms.
The Process and Practice (Ireland) Bill was recom-
' mitted, and certain amendments, proposed by the
Solicitor-General, were inserted.
The Fees (Court of Common Pleas) Bill went through
Committee.
The Estate Leasing (Ireland) Bill was read a third
time and passed.
The Indemnity Bill was read a second time; and
The House adjourned at a quarter-past Twelve o'clock
until Monday next.

Mr. C. P. VILLIERS paired off in favour of Lord
John Russell's motion for a Committee on salaries, 860.
with the Marquis of BLANDronn, against.

--- ---
RAILWAY SHARE MARKETS.
BRISTOL, Arm. 12.
STOCK EXCLIANGE.—Our share market was better to-day,
but the only deviations from last quotations were—Great
isa_ndliNidolarnthd-,
Western, Quarters, 121A—Taff Vale, % P.
LIVERPOOL,
STOCK EXCUANCIR.—Business on our Stock Exchange
WAS dull today, and prices had a tendency downwards,
except for North Unions. The transactions were as follow :
Lancashire and Yorkshire, Consol., 311 A—Ditto, Fifths, 10%
APs•itiLLl2n..,y,dond
dviris.es—teDrnit,tol,o2l.
c.—Ditto,
12
New
Quarters,
3414—Ditto, Halves, 27% dis.—North Union (A), guaran-
teed jointly by London and North-Western and Lancashire
and Yorkshire, 235—Ditto (B), 16434—Shrewsbury. Os-
vestry, and Chester, 15—South-Eastern and Dover, 12%
1 MANCEIESTER, APRIL 12. *

STOCK EXCHANGE.—The share market was rather better
tc-day, but the amount of business dcne was limited. The
transactions were as follow :—East Lancashire, 6% —Lan-
cashire and Yorkshire, Fifths, 10 9-16 dis.—Ditto, 32/. (late
Extension), 12% dis.—Ditto, West Riding Union (201), 9
dis.—Manchester, Sheffield, and Lincolnshire, Preference,
6 13-16—North Staffordshire, 10 11-16 dis.—South-Eastern
and Dover, Old (No. 1), 121's—Ditto, (10/.), Thirds (No.
4), PA.
BIRMINGHAM, APRIL 12.
STOCK EXCHANGE.—The share market continues ex-
tremely dull. The only transactions to-day were—Shrews
bury and Birmingham (B), 61. 18s. 9d. dis.— South Stafford-
shire, dis.
YORK, APRIL 11.
Srocx EXCHANGE.—The transactions to-day were as fol.
low :—York, Newcastle, and Berwick, 1214—&dland, 35
York and North Midland, 15%.

In the Insolvent Court yesterday, Major Richard
Henry Tolson was discharged by order of Mr. CoramiskPuer
LW; after ilitYin been eight= ma Pin.

SPORTING INTELLIGENCE.
EPSOM STEEPLECHASES.-FRIDAY.

Notwithstanding the discouraging state of the wea-
ther during the whole of the day, there was an immense
assemblage yesterday on Epson-common to witness the
first essay of a steeplechase meeting in that part cf the
county, an essay which, to a certain extent, must be al-
lowed to have been eminently successful. That it failed
to realise our notions of steeplechasing must be attri-
buted as much to the country as to a want of experi-
ence in the parties concerned in the "getting up." For
the accommodation of those to whom 53. was "no ob-
ject," Barnard's stands were erected in a position com-
manding a good view of the running, and extra pains
taken to prevent the possibility of an accident; owing,
perhaps, more to the frequent showers and the muddy
state of the ground than to a forgetfulness of the melan-
choly occurrence of the preceding day, and which we
regret to find has terminated fatally in one instance;
both were crowded to excess; so also was the enclo-
sure, in which we observed nearly all the " operatives"
of the ring. If we repeat that the issue of the experi-
ment as a matter of pounds, shillings, and pence, was
favourable, and add that the sport, of its kind, was
excellent, we shall say no more than is literally true;
but it is not less true that the line run over was not at
,11 adapted for steeplechasing; it might, in fact, from the
cha,:acter of the fences—mostly artificial ones—hare been
prope,. IY called a hurdle race-course. We subjoin a brief
r elan o: the sport:—
The Surre)" aunt Steeplechase of 5 sovs. each, with 25
added, 12st each; the winner to be sold for 200 so“.
if demanded; if entered to be sold for 150 sovs. al-
lowed Sib; for ;00 sovs., 71b; for 80 sous., 10lb; for
60 80V,3.. 141 b; fog 40 sovs., 201 b; and for 20 sovs.,
281 b. Once round and a distance, about two miles.

(10 Subs.)
Mr. H. Bird's The Hero, Bst 71b (Archer) 1
Mr. Carew's Grimaldi, lOst (W. Butler) 2
Mr. Tait's Gulnare, lOst 81b (J. Mason) 0
Mr. Follitt's Zsnga, 1 Ist ....., (Ablett) 0
Mr. Johnson's Saran Sykes, list (Frisby) 0
Mr. Miller's Neapolitan, 10A (Rackley) 0
Mr. Boyton's Roweint„ list
Mr. Rowth's Recruit, 11st 41b.. (Reid) 0
Betting-7 to 4 agst Gulnare, Bto 1 agst Sarah Sykes,
and 4 to 1 egst Recruit.
A remarkably fine race from the distance between
The Hero and Grimaldi, ending in favour of The Hero
by a very short head; Gulnare a bad third; and Recruit
fourth; Sarah Sykes fell.
The Aristocratic Steeplechase of 10 sus. each, with
25 added, list 71b each; winners once in 1849 or 1850
to carry 71b; twice or more, 101 b extra. Three milee.

(4 Subs.)
Mr. Anson, s Johnny Oaks, 12st, 71b extra (Barlow) 1
Mr. Carew's b g by Laurel, 12st, including 7lb
extra
Captain Green's The Treasurer, 12st ...(W Morris) 0
Betting-5 to 4 agst Treasurer, 6to 4 agst Johnny
Oaks, and 5 to 2 agst Laurel gelding.
Won in a common canter, the Laurel gelding, who
made most of the running, having tired about halt a mile
from home. The Treasurer refused the fence above the
stand, and was not persevered with.
The Great Metropolitan Steeplechase of 15 soya. each,
10 ft, and 5 only if declares, &c., with 100 added. A
winner of 100 soya. clear, after the publication of the
weights, to carry 71b; twice, 121 b extra; the second to
save his stake; the winner to pay 20 sovs. towards ex-
penses. Twice round and a distance, about four mileF.
(25 Subs., 7 of whom declared.)
Mr. Stafford's Fugitive, aged, 10st 81b...(H. Bradley) 1
Mr. Treadgold's Maria Day, aged, lOst. , (Frisby) 2
Mr. Skipworth's Rachel, 6 yrs, lOst (Taylor) 3
Air. Elmore's The British Yeoman, aged ... (Archer) 0
Mr. H. Bird's Sir Peter Laurie, aged (W. Goodman) 0
Mr. T. Mason's Proceed, 10st 101 b (Mason) 0
Mr. Hughes's Miss Collingwood, aged (Tacker) 0
Mr. Cartwright's Thurgarton (h-b) aged (7lb ex.) 0
Captain Knight's Leo, aged 9st 10th (Bosail) 0
3/Zr. Dixon's Falcon, aged, 9st 101 b . (Bretton) 0
Mr. Yettifor'a The Last Forrester, 9st 61b (Eackley) 0
Mr. Sy ponds' Ploughboy, 9st 61b (Boyce) 0
Mr. M. Stubbs' Skim, 9st 61b, carried 9st 91b ( Webster) 0
Mr. Molony's Molly, 6 yrs, 9st 41b
Betting-3 to 1 agst British Yeoman, 4to 1 agst Sir
Peter Laurie, 5 ,to 1 agst Proceed, 7 to 1 agst Maria
Day, 10 to 1 agst Thurgarton, 12 to 1 agst Fugitive,
and 12 to 1 agst Rachel.
An extraordinary fine race between the first three ended
in favour of Fugitive by half a length, Maria Day
beating Rachel by nearly two lengths. Everything else
beaten off. An objection was made against Fugitive by
the rider of Maria Day on the ground of a cross, but
was afterwards withdrawn.
The Scramble Steeplechase of 3 sou. each, with 25
added, list 71b each; the winner to be sold for 100
soya. if demanded, &c. If entered to be sold for 80
sow., allowed 31b; for 60 soya., 71b; for 40 soya., 12lb;
for 30 soya, 171 b; and for 20 sovs., 241 b. Once round

and a distance.
Mr. O'Key's Morris Daley, aged, llst (Boyce) 1
Mr. Suit's Refugee, aged, lOst 41b (Suit) 2
Mr. Bain's Frank, lOst 91b (Bums) 3
Mr. Parker's My Precious Betsy, 5 yrs...(Lowcock) 0
Mr. Knowles' Outcast, aged, list (J. Mason) 0
Mr. Thrift's Wireworm, 9st 111 b (Thrift) 0
Mr. Hargreave na Chintz Print; aged, lOst 41b ( Brook) 0
Mr. Carew's Herbert Lacy, 9st I Ilb (Archer) 0
Captain Gambier's Stilts, aged, 9st Illb ...(Rackley) 0
Captain Thomas's Southdown, I Ist (Wix) 0
Mr. Mytton's The Unlucky One, 9st 1110, carried
9st 121 b (Reed) 0
Mr. Bishop's The Clipper, 96t llb ...(Bishop) 0
Mr. Clark's Cerberus, 9sl 111 b (Higgins) 0
Betting-2 to I agst Outcast, and 4to 1 asst Herbett
Lacy. Won by a length ; Frank a bad third.
BETTING AT MANCHESTER.—FRIDAY.
NEWMARKET HANDICAP.-4 to 1 agst Checerful (t),
7 to 1 p?„st Chantry (t), 8 to 1 agst Strongbow (taken
freely), 12 to 1 agst Herbert (t). Very little done, ex-
cept on Strongbow, who was backed for all the money
that could he got, at 7 and 8 to 1.
CHESTER CUP.-12 to 1 agst Cossack (offers to take),
12 to 1 agst Peep o' Day Boy (offers to take)), 12 to 1
agst Miss. Ann, 15 to 1 apt (llama, 20 to 1 agst Re-
land (t), 20 to 1 agst Ellerdale (t), 10 to 1 agst Moun-
seer, 20 to 1 agst Chantry, 50 to 1 agst The Knout.
DERBY.-6 to 1 agst Bolingbroke, 7 to 1 agst
Ghillie Callum, 9 to 1 agst Mayors (offers to take), 12
to 1 agstThe Nigger (t), 14 to 1 agst Voltigeur (t), 15
to I agst The Italian, 20 to 1 agst Cyprus (t.), 20 to 1
agst Clincher, 25 to 1 agst Mildew, 1,000 to 20 agst Sir
Charles (t)' I,oooeto 10 apt Charley (t).
HUNTING APPOINTMENTS.

Mr. Farquharson's hds, Mon., Short Wood; Tues.,
Knoyle.
8.V.H., Tues,, Houghton Wood (roe deer).
Tiverton Hs., Mon., Dulverton town; Thurs., King's-
brompton village-10 .
Worcestershire hds., Mon., Ham-bridge; Wed., Hanar -
ton Court; Fri., Radford-gate.
Durham County lids., Mon., Wilton Gilbert.

NAVAL INTELLIGENCE.

-
We regret to stata that Rear-Admiral the Hon. M. F.
F. Berkeley, C. 8., M.P., has been severely indisposed
during the past week.
Commodore-Superintendent Lord John Hay, C. 8.,
has taken possession of his official residence at Devon-
port Dockyard.
Prince L. Kamehamehe and Prince Liholiho, of the
Sandwich Islands (two fine young men), in company
with Vice-Admiral Thomas, visited Devonport Dock-
yard, on Thursday; the gallant Admiral having formed
an acquaint ince with them when he was commander-in-
chief in the Pacific. Mr. Judd, his Hanoverian Majesty's
special commissioner and plenipotentiary extraordinary,
visited Devonport Dockyard on Thursday.
PORTSMOUTH, FRIDAY.—The Bulldog steam•sloop,
Commander A. C. Key, is stripping alongside the jetty,
and will be paid off on Tuesday.
The Sprightly steam-tender, Master-Commander
Allen, sailed this evening for Plymouth with seamen and
marines.
The Niger screw steam-sloop is to be fitted with a new
eliding funnel.
The column to the late Earl of Yarborough, on Bem-
completed within the past week.
bridge Down, has been
The y,cetieg swan (VeDEI with every prospect of a
most animated " run." The various craft laid up in these
waters are now showing signs pf activity in fitting out.
The Earl of Ellesmere's Ermina will be ready to start
for foreign service next week.
APPOINTMENTS.
WOOLWICH, Aor
PRIL 12.—Lieutenant Peorge A. E.
Ridge to the Archer steam-sloop at Devonptth.
Loan-
Midshipman Lord Francis Conynghana to .
der, 50-gun frigate, at Lisbon.
Naval Cadet Frederick Robinson to the Superb, I), at
Devonport.
Boatswain Nicholas White to the Terrible stein:-
frigate, at Lisboa-
The Rosamond steam-sloop, Commander Foote, was
paid off to-day at this port.
CAPTAIN AUiTIN S ARCTIC EXPEDITION.
The exertions of Captain Austin, C. 8., of the
Resolute; Captain Erasmus Ommanney, of the Assist-
ance; Lieutenant• Commander Sherard Osborn, of the
Pioneer; and Lieutenant-Commander John BertieCator,
of the Intrepid, and the almoet uninterrupted fine wea-
ther whieL‘ has prevailed since the work on these vessels
was commenod at Woolwich and Blackwell, have so ac-
celerated their );:egress that the gallant commander of
the expedition auticiptes being able to leave Woolwich
on Thursday, the 25th and Groanhithe on Saturday,
the 27th, for the Arctic reeio2s. The Resolute and the
Assistance are at present afong,i,:_e the wharf wall of the
basin, for the convenience of work:.tlg on both sides of
them at the same time, the stores frog: the dockyard
being put on board from the wharf wall, aid the provi-
sions and other stores from Deptford from ligh:ers lying
alongside the vessels in the river. Among the stores
supplied to-day were, one large and one small rancho" of
Porter's patent, to the Resolute; and two similar to the
Assistance, these anchors having given great satisfaction
when used in the Enterprise and Investigator, in Cap-
tain Sir James Clarke Ross's expedition. The Pioneer
has also been supplied with one of Porter's anchors, and
one large anchor of Rodger's patent has been supplied
to the Resolute and one to the Assistance. The Pionee_r
is nearly completed, and took on board today, althougilei
still in dock, 100 tons of patent fuel. She also to:7
the
board her screw-propeller to-day. It is mat
a'
pitch
best gun metal, and is eight feet in diameter, Is
In case of
of eight feet and an angle of 45 degrecF.
same
accident a duplicate screw-propeller of th
and pitch is to be supplied made ofmalleable diameter
malleableble iron. The
Intrepid, in the adjoining dock, is also in an advanced
state. although she was so late in being handed over to
the Government. The whole of her bottom from her
gunwales to her keel has been doubled, an
widths e tim-
bers caulked, and she is to be suppliedgun
metal and a malleable iron screw-proi,eller of the same
- • hare been put on board the Pioneer.
dimeils'-^rsMr. Hum v • -
-Under tteo direction of p c,s, chief engineer,
the engines cf both the Pioneer and,lntrepid have been
made to fit each other, that in the event of any accident
to one of the vessels the various tarts of the engines
may be wade available, ihetlid their ilerfices be required

at a subsequent period, in the other. Eight boats have
been brought down the river from Mr. Thompson s
building yard at Rotherhithe, four large and four small.
These boats appear admirably constructed, and although
apparently light, and the smallest easily carried on the
shoulders of two men, they are very strong and well
adapted for the service in which they are to be employed.
A number of naval officers visited the vessels and their
boats to-day.
CHATHAM, APRIL 12.—The Columbine, 16 guns,
Captain J. C. 1). Hay, which arrived here on Monday
last, is nearly stripped of her rigging. Her guns and
stores are returned to the Dockyard, and she is to be
paid off on Monday next, the 15th inst. She was built in
182 G at Plymouth.
The Magicienne steam-ship will be taken into dock
the next spring tide, to be fitted for sea; she will oc-
cupy the dock to be vacated by the Childers.
At the court-martial that assembled on the 10th inst.
on board the flag-ship Ocean at Sheerness for the trial
of Assistant-Surgeon James Campbell, on the book of
the Wellington, ordinary guard-ship at Sheerness, for
drunkenness when on duty on the 20th of March last,
he was found guilty, and dismissed the service. Admiral
George Elliott, Commander-in-Chief at the Nore, was
president of the Court, and the evidence of the several
wit:e3ses was so clear that the Court could not have
done otherwise. Mr. W. Hayward was the solicitor for
the Admiralty. and Mr. Richard Prall, of Rochester, soli-
citor, appeared on belied/ of the prisoner.
The 72d Highlanders Four-Company Depot, for
some months doing duty at the garrison at Sheerness,
removes to Bristol; the first division marches this day,
Ind the second on Monday next—the strength being,
16 sergeants, 6 drummers, and 250 rank and file, under
command of Captain John Frith. with Captain A. O.
Lord, Captain G. B. I'erceval, Captain J. Mackenzie'
DI•Ot-Adjutart •' Lieutenant W. B. 0. Campbell,
Lieutenant C. J. W. Norman, Depot Paymaster; Ensign
Cecil Rice and Ensign Charles Hunter. The 72d are to
be replaced by the Four-Company DepOt of the 15th
Regiment from Brecon.