The Sun.
London, England, 1844-04-18 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT

[Price.

10'7
315(
65

934
32
675
141

1200
155
100
117
300

365
5G2%
40

72%
19%
6x
16

Government—not content with adding seven stipendiary
magistrates in these three months—in the last
gasp of an expiring Government—they appointed one
magistrate on the very day they left office."
The Home Secretary's imputation rested upon a non-
entity. The returns now produced showed that the
document, to which Sir James Graham appealed in
attestation of the charge against Lord Fortescue, had no
existence ; the returns further proved that there had
been no departure from the rule laid down and enforced
by Lord Normanby, and invariably acted upon by Lord
Fortescue, of not appointing a stipendiary magistrate to
any district without having the special circumstances
under which the application from the district for suchan
appointment was made, closely investigated, and fully
substantiated. The number ofspecial magistrates appointed
by Lord Fortescue within the time stated, and under the
circumstances alleged by Sir James Graham, was repre-
sented as seven ; the facts showed that they amounted to
two • and these, after urgent applications, the rejection
of which would have involved a disregard to the safety
of person and property within the districts to which
these stipendiary magistrates were appointed, had they
been withheld. Yet these discrepancies between the
statements and the facts are " slight inaccuracies !"
Mr. Labouchere set the whole question before the
House in its true light. The Right Hon. Gentleman
said :—" He could not admit that the question before
them depended upon any difference, or any small error
in the account which had been referred to—it was,
whether the charge made by the Right Honourable
Baronet against the late Lord Lieutenant of Ireland,
of having prostituted his patronage, was true or not -
(Cheers)—and that was a question of some conse•
quence.

He now ap

Pealed to every Member present whether that charge
had not completely broken down?—(Cheers.) He
could understand the Right Hon. Gentleman in the
hurry of debate speaking under. false impressions; but
it would have done him more credit had he avowed the
error, instead of endeavouring to bear out the colour
which he had put upon the matter, and to attempt to de-
fend his statements by such trumpery arguments as he
had used to-night. The question was not whether the
late Government were right in appointing stipen-
diary magistrates to the extent they did, but whether
there was any case before the House to warrant them in
saying that Lord.; Fortescue made the appointments
improperly during the last few months of his adminis-
tration. The Noble Lord thought it was no matter
whether these appointments were made between
February and August, or June and August ; but
that was the very gravamen of his charge ; and if
it should appear that not seven but two only were
appointed during the last three months, the charge
was lost." Lord Stanley, and subsequently Sir R. Peel,
came to the rescue- of their chap-fallen colleague. They
effected making in his favour ; for they failed to shake
one of the facts on which Lord Ebrington rested the
vindication of his Noble parent. These facts were upon
the table of the House—returns from the department
of which Sir James Graham is the head. The Secre-
tary for the Colonies and the Right Hon. Baronet at
the head of the Government did, however, prove
themselves worthy of having Sir James Graham for
a colleague. By endeavouring to extenuate, if not
to justify his " inaccuracies"—on which he rested his
imputations against Lord Fortescue—they at least raise
a presumption against themselves. It may be now
fairly inferred that Lord Stanley and Sir Robert Peel
would have made the same groundless accusations
against Lord Fortescue. The discredit, indeed, attaches
to Sir James Graham as the author ; but to them also
as approvers of the now-confuted " inaccuracies," as
Sir James Graham mildly designates them. Beyond the
walls of Parliament they will be generally described by
another and a shorter yord.
STANDARD.—Mr. Wyse's motion for the names
and birth-places of 22,000 persons employed in the
public service was of course rejected. It is worthy of
remark that Mr. Hume, who a few years ago proposed
and carried a similar motion with respect to the soldiers
in the army, opposed Mr. Wyse last night specially on
the ground of the invidiousness of such a motion ; the
fact, we imagine, being, that Mr. Hume was not much
gratified by the result of his own experiment, and
doubted whether Mr. Wyse might not be exposed
to a similar disappointment. It was, no doubt,
quite right to reject Mr. Wyse's motion upon
principle, but we regret that the return sought
for was not made, for we are persuaded that it would
exhibit a very undue proportion of Irishmen (if
anything can be undue in the matter) in the
public service, respect being had to the numbers quali-
fied by education and character in the respective divi-
sions of the United Kingdom. Nobody will say that
the savages who howled round Mr. O'Connell at the
monster meetings are either qualified by educa-
tion, or entitled by their conduct, to be intro-
duced into the Queen's service ; yet these, if we
are to believe the Conciliation Hall reports, are more
than commensurate with the whole Irish population.
Where, then, was the present Government, or the
Whig-Radicalfitted Gfnorvneffirricme
?ent,from Somehow
orlB3o other,
thleB:
hl ,
nwtoevfienrd,
Irishmen

a goodly number of Irishmen have found their way
into the public service, as any one may satisfy himself by
looking to the tide waiters on the Thames. There is
hardly a foreign vessel comes into London that does not
bring an Irishman, more often two or three, from Graves-
end, and so we believe it is everywhere, and in all the
public departments. The " Irish Members" did not lose
the opportunity while their Whig-Radical servants were
in office.

THE ARMY.
RETIRING ALLOWANCE TO PAYMASTERS.
We have been anxiously looking for the appearance of a
new warrant respecting the retiring allowance to the old and
faithful paymasters of the army—indeed we ought properly
to designate them " the old and gallant veterans"—as most
of them have in times past, and before they filled their pro.
sent situations, often fought and bled in the service of their
country. We say we have been looking anxiously for this
warrant, as we are fully aware that the present Secretary
at-War has one in contemplation ; and his only difficulty,
we believe, is to arrive at the conclusion of its being a final
measure, so as to give satisfaction to the service at large, and
prevent any further demands on the part of the present or
future officers who may fill this responsible situation.
As we have, from time to time, received numerous com-
munications, both personal and by letter, from nearly all
the old officers who now fill the situation of paymaster, we
can vouch for their being perfectly satisfied with the present
system of full pay, and that what they now only require is
to be put on a par with all the other branches of the service,
as to being permitted to retire on full-pay after a great length of
service—namely, not less than thirty-five years actually on full-
pay (twenty-five of which as paymaster), and then only by two
having the option of doing so yearly ; and which is allowed
to the old officers in the Artillery, Marines, and Line, after a
service of thirty years. This is the boon they ask for as a
final measure.

It should be considered that paymasters are not now, as
formerly, civilians, and that upon appointment their half-pay
is stopped altogether (this being the only staff situation in
the whole service where such a stoppage takes place); that
they forfeit all prospect of future rank in the army ; that
the price of their former commission is for ever lost to them ;
and that they have no other prospect in the world to look for-
ward to, but being allowed, after. an extremely long length of
service (most probably in all climates) to retire, in their old
age, on a sufficient competency to keep themselves and their
families from actual want? And what is the amount of the
said retirement? Merely an advance of 3s. per diem, for the
short period so old a veteran may have to live, and, on an
average, lie would at least have completed sixty years of age.
To prove this we shall mention that the full-pay of a pay-
master of thirty-five yea6' service is 11. 2s. 6d:; his suc-
cessor would only receive 12s. 6d. ' • and if we count the saving
of half-pay of a captain 75., and snaking together 19s. 6d.,
the cost in reality would only be 35., leaving out 'altogether
the consideration of the very large sum already saved to the
public by the stoppage of the half-pay for twenty-five years
of the old paymaster whilst with his regiment. It is also to
be borne in mind that the old officers in the other branches
of the service being allowed to retire on full-pay, after thirty
years' service, is entirely a dead weight, as their places must
be filled up by others with equal rank and pay ; nor is there
any saving whatever of half-pay ; consequently, the argu-
ments we have used on this subject, as regards paymasters,
ought to have a ten-fold effect in inducing the present hu-
mane and benevolent Secretary at War to at once follow up
his excellent intentions, which would be most gratefully re-
ceived by the army at large, and applauded by the whole
country, as a measure administering impartial justice to de-
serving old soldiers, and thereby giving encouragement to
officers of higher ranks to accept of paymasterships, by
which a greater saving would accrue to the public from the
half-pay list than at present exists.—Naval and Military
Gazette.

LLOYD'S.—At a special general meeting of the
members of Lloyd's, held at the temporary establish-
ment, in the rooms of the South Sea House, Thread-
needle-street, yesterday, the following vote was proposed
and unanimously passed, viz.:—" 5/. to three coast-
guard men and pilot, for saving the survivors of the crew
of the sloop Ruby, of Aberdeen, wrecked near Wick
during a gale on the 24th February."

HOUSE OF COMMONS, April 17.
There being only thirty-eight Members present at
Four o'Clock, the House did not sit this evening.

SPIRIT of the PUBLIC J OURNALS.
irROX TUE EVENING PAPERS OF YESTERDAY.

GLOBE.—The speech which Sir James Graham de-
livered in reply to Lord John Russell, in the course of
. the debate on the Irish State prosecutions, contained a
slashing attack on Lord Fortescue, as the Lord Lieute-
nant of Ireland under Lord Melbourne's Administra-
tion. Among other imputations, it was especially
attributed to Lord Fortescue, that he had made extra
and unnecessary appointments of stipendiary magistrates
on the very eve of resigning the Lord Lieutenantcy,
in consequence of the resignation of their offices
by the Cabinet under which he held office. That
charge was met and confuted by Lord For-
tescue in the House of Lords shortly after it was
made. Last night the subject was introduced to the
House of Commons by Lord Ebrington, the son of the
Noble Lord whose administration had been thus assailed
by Sir James Graham. Pursuant to notice, Lord
Ebrington moved for returns connected with the ap-
pointment of stipendiary magistrates in Ireland betwc,en
the 2d of March and the 15th of April, 1841. We
refer to the complete answer which was supplied
to the unworthy and groundless attack upon Lord
Fortescue. The subdued tone and apologetical
matter of Sir James Graham's speech, in reply to
the clear, full, and circumstantial disproof of the accu-
sation, showed that, for once, the Home Secretary was
confounded, if not ashamed. His shuffling, however,
sufficiently showed the reluctance with which he ad-
mitted the " inaccuracies" he could no longer assert.
" With regard to the ground of complaint of the Noble
Lord, it certainly appeared to be true that, in a few slight
particulars, he (Sir J. Graham) had been inaccurate in
his former statement on the subject of these appoint-
ments." The " slight particulars," with respect to which
the Right Hon. Baronet now admitted" inaccuracy," con-
stituted the gravamen of the accusation he had brought
against Lord Fortescue. The substance of the charge
which Sir James Graham alleged against Lord Fortes-
cue, was, that " after the Government was a condemned