The Sun.
London, England, 1844-07-23 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, ;ILLY" 23, 1844.

, Mr. M. MILNES said he was glad that the Noble
Lord did not view with any great apprehension the pre-
sent state of affairs in Morocco.
Lord J. RUSSELL said what he stated was, that he
was not without apprehension.
Mr. M. MILNES—He did understand the Noble Lord
to say that he did not regard with any immediate fear
the present state of the relations between France and
Morocco ; he, therefore, thought that he had rested
rather too strongly on what he thought the culpability
of her Majesty's Government as to the amount of the
naval force. The Noble Lord appeared somewhat too
anxious to have the navy put upon a war footing, but he
(Mr. Manes) believed that whatever might be the aspect
of affairs at present, the Noble Secretary of State for Fo-
reign affairs would be so far equal to his predecessor in
the art of " protocolising," as to be able to defer that
unfortunate event for a considerable period. He con-
fessed he had seen the notice of the present motion with
great pain, because he thought its purpose might be mis-
understood. It should be remembered that there was a
considerable war party in France, and it was necessary
for this country to act with some caution, so as not to
excite that party, and thus increase the difficulties of the
French Government. He referred to the occupation of
Algeria by the French, and stated his convic-
tion that it entailed a great loss on the French
people. With regard to the present operations,
though he should be the last to treat with
disregard the sovereign virtues, and the religious en-
thusiasm of the native population, yet he felt that the
time was come when they must receive the advantages
of civilization, even if they should obtain it at the hard
price of war. He thought that it was impossible that
the whole of the African coast, bordering on the Medi-
terranean, could any longer be abandoned to these hordes
of barbarians. He hoped, however, that the Right Hon.
Baronet would see that the best course he could adopt
would be to withdraw the motion. And in doing so it
would be well if he would reiterate to the House in the
strongest terms his assertion that he had not brought it
forward from any hostile feeling towards France but
from anxiety for the honour of this country, combined
with a spirit of good-will towards our great and generous
neighbour.
Mr. HUME said he was at first afraid that the Liberal
party on that side of the House were about to play the
game that had been pursued on former occasions, of
urging the Government into hostilities, but
he was glad to hear from the Right Hon.
Gentlemen that his motion was not so intended.
It appeared to him that the motion, as taken up
by the Right Hon. Baronet, involved two questions :
first, how much they were to expend on their naval
force, and, secondly, how far the House was to interfere
in negotiations with respect to the first question, about
which the Right Hon. Baronet felt rather toe sensitive.
He thought the more the Parliament knew about the des-
tination and disposal of the navy the better. He thought
the Right Hon. Baronet deserved the thanks of the
country for the reductions he had made, and wisely
made, in the naval establishment. There was a power-
ful war party in France, and a very mischievous one.
Every act of the English Government was turned by
that party to the purposes of excitement. And what was
more likely to create that spirit than unnecessary arma-
ment on the part of England? He was always for keep-
ing up a proper force ; but there was this consideration,
that when England armed, all the rest of the world armed
also—when England increased her fleet, France in-
creased her's also. They would not believe that Eng-
land did it in mere self-defence, but would attribute it to
some aggressive motive. With respect to the motion for
a Committee, he would ask how this country would have
regarded a Committee of the French Chamber, appointed
to inquire into our right to occupy Sinde or the
island of Hong-Kong ?—(Hear, hear.) He thought
England had been too sensitive, and too much disposed
to intermeddle in the affairs of other nations. He be-
lieved the Goverment of France felt the danger of en-
tering upon a war, and with the declaration it had made
that it had no intention of encroaching upon the domi-
nions of Morocco he thought they ought to be satisfied.
He was glad to understand that it was not the intention
of the motion to increase the feeling in favour of a war;
and that, beyond the necessity of keeping up a sufficient
force to maintain the dignity of the country, the Hon. and
Learned Member was not desirous of going.

Mr. MACKINNON said, as he did not wish to detain
the House from going into Committee, he should ad-
dress to it a very few words, and those would refer
chiefly to the occupation of Algiers by the French. In
this country, even if there were a feeling in favour of a
war, he believed that feeling would be kept down by the
force of the Government. But in France that was not
the case. There there was an immense population, a
large mase of whom had everything to gain and nothing
to lose ;by engaging in a war, and who were ready to
rush into one at any time, and for any reason. Under
these circumstances, he considered the occupation of Al-
giers by the French as a good thing for this country.
It acted as a safety valve, which carried off the more
unquiet spirits of France. It served as an outlet for the
discontented portion of the troops of France, which
were exchanged for others more inclined to support the
Government. France was in that position in which she
must have external war or internal discontent. Under
these circumstances, he believed that the occupation of
Algiers was of the greatest advantage to the a hole of
Europe.

Sir C. NAPIER could not agree with the Hon.
Gentleman that the occupation of Algiers by France
would be beneficial to this country. He thought the
occupation had, and was likely still further to lead, to
disadvantageous results to this country. France had
repeatedly declared that it was not her intention to
occupy Algiers, but merely to punish the Dey for having
offered an insult to France. This promise, although
often repeated, the Government of this country had
never demanded should be reduced to writing. We
ought never to have permitted France to take pos-
session of Algiers, far less Morocco, which was
of ten thousand times more importance to us. Perhaps
at the very moment at which he was speaking the Prince
de Joinville was bombarding Tangiers. He thought,
therefore, that they had a right to call upon the Govern-
ment to take steps for the protection of British interests.
The Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government
always became very sensitive when allusion was made
to the state of the navy. The present state of the navy
had not been equalled for ten or fifteen years past. He
remembered in the year 1839 the then Government being
attacked in consequence of the navy being in an ineffi-
cient state. The attack was commenced by Lord Col-
chester, and seconded by Lord Ilardwick. Now what
was the state of the navy in 1839 ? We had then 34,165
seamen, boys, and marines, and 21 sail of the line.
What did Lord Melville, who was a very good authority,
then say ? He certainly did not join in the attack on
the Government, but he pointed out the necessity of
keeping up a large peace establishment—much larger
than we were accustomed to do in consequence
of the extensive use of steam power, which,
to a certain extent, had destroyed our coast-
ing trade, and thereby rendered it more difficult to
obtain seamen for the navy. The Duke of Wellington
on that occasion said, "Here we have warm America, and
war in Asia, with an establishment that is not even ade-
quate for the wants of peace." The Right Hon. Baronet
himself said that it was impossible to see the exertions
which were being made by France and Russia without
apprehension • it was impossible to exclude those mari-
time Powers from the consideration of the House. He
(Sir Charles Napier) would quote one other passage
from the Right Hon. Baronet's speech, which was a
strange contrast with the opinions which he held now.
The Right Hon. Gentleman said " that if it was then ne-
cessary to have eleven sail of the line in the Mediterra-
nean, and two ships at Lisbon, all he could say was that
seven sail of the line was very inadequate to protect the
coasts of this country." Yet the language of the Right
Hon. Gentleman was very different now. In 1841
there were twenty-six sail of the line, with
a naval estimate for 43,000 men. In 1843 the Right
Honourable Baronet reduced the naval force to
39,000 men, and the fleet in the Mediterranean to six or
seven ships. In 1844, the force was further reduced to
36,000 men ; and that was what it remained at the pre-
sent moment. The Right Hon. Gentleman said it was
not men at all, but ships that constituted the nary.
Why, the Right Hon. Gentleman might just as well say
that fine barracks constituted an army. He depre-
cated the system of manning ships with marines, as had
been done lately with respect to the Caledonia. He
asked, whether it was a fit state for the navy to be in,
when they found a ninety-two gun ship sent out with
750 men, which was only the complement of an eighty-
four gun ship ? There was but one line-of-battle ship
to guard the coasts of this country, and that was the
Queen, which was fitting at Plymouth. It had taken this
ship three months to fit—she being at present fitting for
a flag ship. It had been said that we could fit[out a fleet in
six months. Now, in answer to this, he would just refer
to what had taken place in 1840, when it was found to
be of the utmost importance to get a fleet ready of
the Mediterranean. The Vanguard was commis-
sioned in February, and that ship did not arrive
in the Mediterranean until the middle of November.
The Calcutta was fitted out at the same time, but did
not arrive until December, and the remaining ships in-
tended for the station never arrived at all. Now, he
would ask, whether they could confide in the statement
of the Right Hon. Baronet, when he said he could do
what no other Government had yet been able to accom-
plish—viz., fit out a fleet in six months? The French
at the present moment had eight sail of the line in corn-
mision in- the Mediterranean—they had also ships which
were called commission de rode. These ships were well
officered and manned. The French, too, had fifty-three
sail of the line on the stocks, which was just as good as
their being in the water. He had always held, and he
held it still, that the system of commissioning and pay-
ing our ships off was neither wise, politic, nor economi-
cal. The expense of commissioning a ship and paying
her off was very great. A ship was commissioned for a short
time, as occasion might require, and when the necessity had
passed away, she was immediately paid off, and she re-
mained in ordinary until another occasion arose, when
they were obliged to go through the same course over
again. Now, under such a system as this, how was it
possible for young officers—our lieutenants and mates—
in the navy to learn anything of seamanship ? They
could not do it unless they were kept constantly at sea.
One ship had lately returned from the Mediterranean,
where she had been for three years, having
been stationed at Malta during that time.
Now could the officers on board such a ship as
that learn anything of seamanship ? As far as the
gunnery went no doubt they excelled, but of seaman-
ship they knew very little. The Board of Admiralty
had lately built six experimental brigs. He had hoped
to see those brigs sent out in which young officers had
been placed, in order to acquire some experience in their
profession. This, however, had not been the case. He
hoped and trusted that the Right Hon. Baronet, who
seemed to be a good deal influenced by obstinacy—
(Laughter)—would yet honestly come to Parliament
and ask for more men for the navy.
Lord INGESTRE could not agree with the Hon.
Member for Montrose in saying that it was essential
that our establishment should be reduced to the least

possible standard, for if they were to do so they would
abolish the school in which our officers and seamen at-
tained their experience. When the Hon. and Gallant
Gentleman who spoke last alluded to the attack
which was made upon the Government in 1839,
he must have forgotten that at that time
great fears were entertained of a Turkish war.
The ships were now fully and efficiently manned, but a
very different state of things prevailed in 1838. He
maintained that the change in this respect was one of
great importance -to the honour and interest of this
country. Complaints were made in 1838 of the want of
ships at home. It was of the greatest importance that
we should be ready for every exigency, and that the
officers and seamen should be kept in a proper state of
discipline by cruising in the Channel. One reason why
he had always maintained that ships should be suffi-
ciently manned was, that in case of necessity the men
might be made into two companies, and the deficiency
supplied by landsmen.
Sir G. COCKBURN said he was of opinion that they
should always keep up the number of officers and sea-
men, but, at the same time, it was usual to lower the
armaments in time of peace, and it was for the Cabinet
to decide, upon a calculation of the chances of war, whe-
the it was necessary to have a large fleet, or
only a small one.—(Hear.) Every officer in the navy
stated that the greatest inconvenience arose from having
the ships undermanned. He had always thought that it
was better to have one ship efficiently manned than two
imperfectly.—(Hear, hear.) With reference to the
observations of the Noble Lord the Member for the City
of London, he must say that although the force was not
a large one, it was respectable, and, as he had already
said, it was for the Cabinet to judge whether there was
any chance of war or not, and to act accordingly. The
Gallant Commodore had referred to the sending out of
marines in the Caledonia. The marines having been
used to the great guns were quite as competent to man
them as the seamen, and therefore they had taken 150
of each. All their ships now carried very much
heavier guns than they did formerly, and it
was very necessary that they should be efficiently
manned. With very few exceptions the reports made
to the Admiralty :in reference to the ships which had re-
turned home, were perfectly satisfactory. They had
taken the engines out of the larger steam-vessels, and
put them into smaller ones, while for the former larger
engines had been provided. The Gallant Officer com-
plained of the want of experience on. the part of the lieu-
tenants of the navy. Why, almost every captain, on re-
turning home, told the Admiralty that there had never
been such good officers.—(Hear, hear.) He (Sir George
Cockburn) firmly believed that both ships and officers
were in good condition. They had a very considerable
force on every station, although, as they had the interest
of the British merchant to look to in every part of the
world, their force was much subdivided. It was true that
France had fifteen sail of the line in the Mediterranean,
but England had more ships ready for sea than France
had both on the stocks and at sea. With regard to the
long time which it took to man vessels, he begged to ob-
serve that the officers were very careful in their selection
of seamen, refusing as many as they received, in order to
secure an efficient force. He believed that if they had a
war with France, or any other maritime power, they had
quite force enough for that purpose.
Mr. MORE O'FERRALL was exceedingly surprised
at the manner in which the Right Hon Gentleman had
treated the remarks of his Right Hon. Friend. Nothing
could be more natural than that having been connected
with the late Government, as he had been, he should
take an interest in such a question..—(Hear, hear.) The
year 1838 had been particularly referred to, and he
begged to refer to the opinion, of the Right Hon.
Gentleman (Sir R. Peel) expressed at that time. The
Right Hon. Gentleman complained at that time that
there was but one brig in the vicinity of the French
fleet at the time when it was in 'the neighbourhood of
Mexico. Four ships were on their way at that very
time, and they were only detained by adverse winds,
over which the Government had no control. A state of
things now existed as regarded. the Mediterranean
which was very similar to that in question.—(Hear,
hear.) The Gallant Officer who had just addressed the
House had compared the complement of men in 1838.
Hewes prepared to show that the war complement fixed
by the present Board of Admiralty was less that that
fixed by the late one. Take the example of two ships,
the Collingwood of 80 and the Rodney of 92. What was
the number of men fixed by the present regulations for
those two ships? Why precisely the same under the
late Admiralty for ships of 80 and of 92 guns-759 men.
He denied that the larger class e ships were so well
manned now as they were under -the late Government.
After all the results were the things to be looked at.
Now, he would first state to the Rouse what were the
complaints of men in some of the great naval actions. In
Lord St. Vincent's action there were five 74-gun ships,
with an average of 575 men. In Lord Duncan's action, the
average was 554 to every 74. In the action at Trafal-
gar, Lord Nelson had sixteen third-rates, with an average
of 563 men each. Now a great deal had been
said of the wretched way in which the Mediterranean
fleet had been manned under the late Government,
and yet it appeared from the. returns that, in 1840, the
the third-rates in the Mediterranean averaged 628 men
each, while French ships of the same class had only 598
men. Now he would ask if the calumnies which had
been uttered against the late Admiralty were fair or just?
Another accusation which had been brought against the
late Government was that they did not keep up a suffi-
cient force at home. The Right Hon. Baronet had said
that seven sail of the line was too small a force to de-
fend our own ports; yet at present there was no flag ship
at Sheerness.—(Hear, hear.) It was stated, in the debate
of 1839, that Sheerness might be burned, and the Admi-
ralty aroused from their slumbers by the appearance of a
hostile fleet on our coast—that our liberties and our exis-
tence were in danger. It fact it was almost impossible
to over state all the nonsense that was uttered upon the
subject, and he trusted that no Opposition would hereafter
be guilty of conduct so disgraceful. Be had no hesitation
in saying that he apprehended no more danger to
Sheerness, from there being no flag-ship there, than he
should be for the old palace of St. James's if the cap-
tain's guard were withdrawn. It had been an old cus-
tom to maintain a flag-ship at our naval arsenals,
and a captain's guard at our palaces—not that any danger
was apprehended ; but what opinion would they enter-
tain of a Commander-in-Chief if he had so reduced:our
forces as not to be able to afford a captain's guard to
her Majesty's palaces, or a sentinel at the dock-yard
gates? Yet that was what the Ministry had done at the
present moment, when it was apparent from the cautious
manner of the Right Hon. Gentleman that our foreign
relations were not so satisfactory as could have been
wished. The late Government had also been charged
with neglecting the building of ships. If the present
Government had thought the statements they made
when out of office correct, why did they not remedy the
error when they came into office ? Almost the first
thing they did was to reduce the estimates. The late
Ministry left twenty-six sail of the line at sea, and all
the yards at full work. A programme was laid down,
by which each shipwright was required to produce a
certain quantity of work in the year. In that year it
had been calculated that eight steamers would be
built. Three had been launched, two were ready
for launching, and three were on the stocks, and
would have been launched during the course
of the financial year. They had taken a large
vote for steam, and the present tiovernment had diverted
10,000/. of it to another object—the pioviding, means to
extinguish fires in dock-yards, which might have been
provided for by a separate vote in the following year.
There was a deficiency of two-deckers in the navy, and
down,p but the Gallant Officer opposite
set a three-decker up, which was
pulledn onet whaa dn thatt beened,oan
nes
de t
n uo
now, at the end of three years that
three-decker was not more advanced than the two-decker
was when it was pulled down. The Gallant Officer said
that they had produced fifteen steamers, and he recol-
lected among them a frigate, which had been converted
into a steamer, an experiment which had failed; in
fact, the Gallant Officer wished to turn everything
into the system of thirty years ago. A great deal had
been said on the subject of their employing pensioners
on board ship. At the present moment there were &Ora
twenty to thirty decrepid old pensiOners on board' the
St. Vincent.

Mr. S. HERBERT—No, no.
Mr. MORE O'FERRALL was glad to hear it.
All he could say was that he. had his informa-
tion from a gentleman,
who stated that he had con-
versed with one of these decrepid oid men, who
had stated to his informant that he had been at sea 40
years. He hoped he had not offended any foreign
power by his observations. It was not necessary to
make any boast of our force; there was no boast so
powerful as telling the truth. He had observed with
surprise an article on this subject in a Government
newspaper, which could not have proceeded from the
pen of a newspaper editor, and which, he hoped, had not
proceeded from that of a Government official, giving a
list of ships. Now, surely it was not necessary, in order
to make a show, to put in our list the names of sheer
hulks, and vessels avowedly useless. Our real force was
about 56 sail of the line, which could be got ready for
seaforce
e in five or six
othermonths t
two
o most
countries.
at
But his Hon. and
; and that was double
Gallant Friend asked what was the use of ships, if we
had had not men? Under the late Government the
Perseus was moored off the Tower for the purpose of re-
ceiving men, but the present Board of Admiralty had
entirely got rid of her.—(Marks of dissent from Sir
George Cockburn.) He was very glad to find such was
not the case. There was a Bill before the House for the
registration of seamen—a most useful measure, although
he feared its provisions were too complicated. He should
like to see sailors homes in all our great ports under
the protection of the Government.—(Hear, hear.) Every
sailor was liable to impressment, and consequently had
a claim upon the public ; and if they provided him with
a home in every part when he was ashore, they would
be conferring a great benefit upon him, and doing that
which might be of great advantage to the naval service
of the country.
Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT said the circumstances
were different in 1839 from what they wero at present.
We were then at the commencement of those diff'erences
which led to the Syrian war ; and the argument of his
Right Hon. Friend had beefs-that if it were necessary to
keep up such a large fleet in the Mediterranean, it was
also necessary to keep up a proper force at home. The
Hon. Gentleman had alluded to the manning of the Col-
lingwood. Now he could state, on the authority of the
captain of the Collingwood, that his difficulty was not in
procuring, but in selecting men. The Noble Lord, the
Member for London, had asked him about the ships
building. Now, during the two years in which they had
been in office, they had put thirty ships of the line in a
state of efficiency.
Sir C. NAPlER—That's not ship-building.
Mr. SIDNEY HERBERT—No ; but it was equiva-
lent to building new ships. With regard to the state-
ment of the Hon. Gentleman as to the state of our steam
navy, he would observe that when the present Ministry
came into power the steam navy consisted of 14,000
horse power, and it now consisted of 28,000 horse power.
They had also increased the number of 50-gun frigates.

Among other improvements which the present Govern-
ment had introduced, was the making a marine corps of
artillery.—(Cheers.) The men of this corps were effec-
tive and vigorous men, and were in addition to the usual
complement of marines allowed to each ship. The flag-
ships were sent out every year fully manned. The lion.
Gentleman had said that, according to the plan of the
last Government, none of these ships ought to sail with-
out a complement of 800 men. Now he could under-
take to say, that no ship under the late Government
had ever sailed with that full complement, and it did
not signify what she ought to have had, but what she
actually had. The present Government had increased
the actual complement. There were three ships more in
commission, and 2,000 men more employed, than in
1839. He thought the motion unnecessary, and should
oppose it.

Captain PECHELL exclaimed against the mode of
building war-ships—the present war steamers were
awkward and unmanageable, and the most efficient of
them had been employed in Ireland collecting poor-
rates.

Mr. ROSS said a few words ; after which,
Lord PALMERSTON said the House was much in

debted to the Right Hon. Gentleman for the motion he
had made. He did not think, after all, that it was open
to the objections which the Right Hon. Baronet at the
head of the Governmen had made against it. In fact,
the Right Hon. Baronet in the commencement of his
speech confined his critical observations not to the mo-
tion which had been made, but to the motion which had
not been made. The motion of which his Right Hon.
Friend had given notice had not even been put on the
books. Ile was willing to admit that the present motion
was preferable to the former ; but he did not
think the former motion deserved the censure the Right
Hon. Baronet had cast upon it. The Right Hon. Gen-
tleman said it was a motion to inquire into the manner
in which the French became possessed of Algiers, and
added, that a motion in the French Chambers to inquire
how the British became possessed of Hong-Kong would
be a legitimate course. Now, he (Lord Palmerston)
thought there would be the greatest possible difference
b etweenthose two motions. It should be recollected, that
if a motion were made to inquire into the mode in which
the French became possessed of Algiers, it would be for
the purpose of ascertaining the conduct, not of the
French, but of the English Government. No such
grounds existed with respect to Hong-Kong, and, there-
fore, Zhe held the cases to be entirely different. His
Right Hon. Friend had been found fault with by some
for starting a question of such a delicate nature as this
while negotiations were still going on between England
and France; and it was said by the Hon. Member for
Lymington, that, considering there was a party in
France who were anxious for war with England, who
were likely to overpower the Government of France,
and compel that country to go into a war
with England. That being the case, it was very
inexpedient in that House to discuss our foreign
interests, or to inquire whether our naval establish-
ment was in a position to meet any sudden emergency.
He (Lord Palmerston) utterly denied the force of that
argument, and on the contrary, if such an argument
were propounded on the fact of the existence of such a
party in any other country, that argument would rather
lead to the opposite conclusion than that which had
been drawn from it; for, assuming that in France or any
other country, there was a party likely to overpower the
Government of that country, and to compel that country
to commence war with England—so far from that being
a reason for this country being silent on the subject, he
thought it was a reason for additional vigilance on the
part of the Government in securing the means of meeting
such an emergency. He discarded from him the considera-
tion of such acircumstance. He thought that House ought
not to permit itself to be debarred from looking to the
interests of this country, whether those interests con-
sisted of foreign commercial relations, or the means of
military defence, by any consideration as to the feelings
of persons in any foreign country. He hoped they would
always abstain from unnecessarily wounding the feelings
of any party or any country, or unnecessarily producing
irritation in our own; but he held that the interest of
England ought to be a paramount consideration; and it
was not becoming in that House to be deterred
from entering into the consideration of the conduct
of a Government by speculations as to how
it might agree with the feelings of this or that Govern-
ment, or the opinions of this or that party in any coun-
try. His (Lord Palmerston's) Right Hon. Friend had
taken a course which was perfectly legitimate. The
Right Hon. Gentleman opposite chose to assume that
his Right Hon. Friend had argued that the present Go-
vernment or the late Government ought to have called
upon France to evacuate Algiers. His Right Hon.
Friend had used no such argument. His argument was,
that looking at the negociations which had taken place
in 1830 between the British Government and the Go-
vernment of France, with respect to Algiers, looking to
those negotiations, tke Government of that day had not
properly performed their duty in getting security from
the Government of France; and, therefore, confidence
could not be placed in the energy and the vigilance of
the Government with regard to those negotiations. He
thought that argument a perfectly fair one, and if any
body would take the trouble of reading those papers
which were laid before Parliament in the year 1839,
which were very short on the negotiations respecting
Algiers ; they would see that this country had failed
entirely in extracting from the Government of France
those engagements which were important to be obtained.
He thought they had a right to require
from the Government of France engagements,
formal, official, written engagements that, in
the event of the overthrow of the Regency
of Algiers, the French should not obtain any permanent
internal advantages or aggrandisements in Africa. As-
surances were given verbally, and everybody knew that
verbal assurances went for nothing, and were binding
upon nobody but the man that made them. The Go-
vernment of this country pressed the Government of
France to give written assurances, and that Government
wrote a dispatch to their Ambassador here, in which
they stated that, in the event of success, they would
make their views subservient to the wishes of their allies
with regard to the arrangement of the affairs of the ex-
isting Regency. The Government of this country still
pressed for written and specific declarations, but nothing
more re e received ds a
iflreodm withoutthe
any Governmentsp;fic and of
written France,
declarationeftcni dfi specific was
theas
expedition
being made. That expedition was
successful, and upon hearing of this, what did our Am-
bassador at Paris do ? On hearing of the success of the
expedition, he waited on Prince Polignac, and
sl
congratulated him upon the event, and expressed
a hope that now they had succeeded in their
expedition they would not fly from those as-
surances which they had given before the
expedition sailed. Was that the language which ought
to have been used by our Ambassador ? Prince Polignac
assured them that France had no inclination to depart
from her promises. If proper negotiations had been
entered into before the expedition sailed this would not
have been the language used by either party. It might
be said that the Government of that day were actuated
by a desire to keep in office the Ministry of Prince
Polignac, and by a desire to do something useful to the
dynasty then reigning. But everybody knew long before
the change took place which overthrew that dynasty
that it was inevitable. In the January preceding there
was no man who walked the streets of Paris who did not
well know what was about to happen ; but the existing
Government in this country did not attempt to obtain
any specific declaration in the four months succeeding
the change. Was it for them (the late Government),
when they came into office in 1830, to take up a question
that bad been left in that state by those who had gone
before them? Considering the existing state of Europe,
they did not think it was consistent with the interests of
this country that they should call upon France to eva-
cuate a country which they had lately conquered,
and conquered without any interference on the part of
the preceding Government. But the Right Hon. Gentle-
man himself had said that he did not impute any blame
to the late Government, and, therefore, it was not neces-
sary for him to defend himself or his colleagues in any
way on that point. He quite agreed with the Right
Hon. Gentleman that it was not expedient to go into
any details upon this question, as he knew how expres-
sions which fell from persons in office were caught at and
used injuriously to the public interest. lie ab•
stained from entering into that question. It was,
however, one of great importance.—(Hear, hear.)
Much had been said with respect to the state of the
navy, the result of which was this :—The Gentlemen on
the other side when they sat on this were perpetually
taunting the late Government with neglecting the navy
of the country, by keeping it at so low an ebb as to
render it impossible to be effective. Why, at that time
they had twenty sail of the line, and yet at the present
moment, when by their own admission grave and serious
matters, which might lead to unpleasant results, were
under negotiation, they had only nine sail of the line,
three of which were in distant countries, so that
they had in fact only six sail of the line
in England. The present Government had not
carried out in office those principles of national
protection which they loudly called for when out of
office. Gentlemen on the other side of the Howse en-
deavoured to explain why this country had so few ships
of the line by stating that several were in China, but
that was no excuse for the navy being in the state it was
at the present moment. Then it was said that if there
were not so many ships as there should be, they were
full of men. Why, they had been told that in some small
ships they had so many men that they could not work.
This, he thought, showed that the present Administration
was not of a very judicious character. The late Go-
vernment had left the present a force larger than
they could want, and their business was to let
that force down to what they thought proper, but
that they had not done. A proper naval force was, in
his opinion, the best economy for England, because the
time might arise when it would be necessary. What, he
would ask, was better calculated to prevent other coun-
tries from treating England with insult, than the keep-
ing up of a sufficient naval force ? He trusted that what
had passed that evening, and the observations that had
been made on a former occasion, would lead the Govern-
ment to take a different view with respect to these mat-
ters, and that in future they would have a naval force,
such as would be considered proper for a peace estab-
lishment. Such an establishment could not be consi-
dered as a defiance to any country in the world,—it
was simply a defensive system of policy. Such an es-
tablishment was necessary, in order to keep up a good
understanding with every other country in the world.
Whether his Right Hon. Friend would press his mo-
tion to a division he knew not, but he thought his object
had been attained by the discussion that had taken
place. He must deprecate the imputations that had been
cast against his Right Hon. Friend of endeavouring to
prevent a good understanding between this country
and France ; he was sure that all who knew him must
be well aware that he had no such object in view.
The amendment of Mr. Sheil was then withdrawn.

COMMERCIAL RELATIONS WITH PRUSSIA.
Lord J. RUSSELL said that he had some time since
given notice of his intention to move for the correspond-
ence that had taken place between the Prussian Govern-

ment and England relative to our commercial relations ;
he wished now to know whether the Right Hon.
Gentleman would be enabled to lay them on the table
before the end of the session ?
Mr. GLADSTONE said he was afraid he could not
produce them before the end of the session.
ROYAL ACADEMY.

Mr. lIUME then moved for an humble Address to
her Majesty, " That, as patroness and comptroller of
the Royal Academy of Arts, she will be graciously
pleased to take into consideration the laws and regula-
tions of that institution, with a view of rendering it
more conducive to the advancement of the fine arts,
better suited to the spirit and circumstances of
the present age, and more consonant with the original
intention of its royal founder, George the Third."
In bringing forward this motion he wished it to be
shown that there was a desire to promote the fine arts
in this country. The Royal Academy had, in his
opinion, abused the patronage of the Crown. George
the Third intended that it should be open to all, but
that intention had been altered by time. The trial that
had been given to the artists for decorations for the
New Houses of Parliament had done more for the arts
in this country than the Royal Academy ever since its
institution. It was founded on an erroneous principle,
as being self-elected, and gave no chance to rising artists.
He referred again to the original institution of the
Academy, and contended that it was meant to be open
to the public; lie expressed his deep regret that this
state of things should continue, and concluded by moving
his resolution, leaving the House to deal with it as it
thought fit.

Sir: ROBERT PEEL much regretted that the
Honourable Gentleman had not had the opportunity
of bringing forward his motion at an earlier period,
he (Sir R. Peel) might have been able more fully to
have expressed his strong sense of the obligations under
which this country was to the institution of which the
Hon. Member had spoken so unjustly. The Hon.
Member had mentioned the audacity of the President of
the institution in having given an opinion as to the
exclusion of the public. Now the Hon. Member ought
not to have spoken in those terms of the delivery of an
opinion by an honourable iaan, perfectly independent of
the Hon. Members of this House, who received no salary
for the duties he performed, and who devoted the whole
of his time to the performance of those public duties ;
and all who were acquainted with the manner in which
Sir Martin Arthur Shee discharged those duties must be
aware of his ability and zeal. The lion. Member said
there had been a departure of the Royal Academy from
the original conditions on which it had been founded.
Now he held in his hand the original charter, granted
by George 111. in 1768, in which the number of the
members of the Academy was prescribed at forty,
having the power to elect their successors, there being a
provision for the public exhibition of paintings;
and by the 17th article it was evident that that
exhibition was not to be gratuitous, since it
was provided that the profits arising from that
exhibition should be applied to the purposes of the Aca-
demy, after deducting 200 L for indigent artists and their
families. He affirmed that it was to the Royal Academy,
and not to the House of Commons, that the country was
indebted for a national school of art. The whole con-
nexion which the Legislature had with the Royal
Academy was the adhering to the original charter, by
providing the Academy with apartments. George 111.
granted it apartments in Somerset House, and they con-
tinued there till the Government appropriated Somerset
House for another purpose. Earl Grey gave them apart-
ments in the building, part of which was appropriated to
the National Gallery. They did not ask for those rooms—
they did not petition for them ; they merely received
what had been secured to them by sixty years' usage ;
and this did not give any Member of that House a right
to visit them with that annoyance which the Hon. Gen-
tleman had done. The Academy had spent no less than
300,0001. in the promotion of art. The Academy, from
its own means, provided a professor of painting, of sculp-
ture, and anatomy—not for their own purposes, but for
the general advantage of the arts. It gave gratuitous
admission to its lectures to all who chose to attend them,
and at its own expense it educated no less than 2,000
artists men who earned their money by the
hardest labour, commenced at the earliest period
of their existence. Having done all this, it was
too much for the Honourable Gentleman to turn
round upon them and call them monopolists,
and visit them with such censure merely because the
House provided them with the accommodation of certain
rooms. But the Academy also provided pensions for
decayed artists. From whom did Wilson receive sup-
port in the decline of his life ? Not from the public
who supported the widow of Hogarth and the widow of
the celebrated engraver Woollet. Not from the Crown.
Not from the Civil List. Not from Parliament. But
from those funds which were appropriated to this pur-
pose. He would tell the Hon. Gentleman what would

be the consequence if they carried their interference too
far. They would have no man, like Sir Francis Chantrey,
making a bequest, which was really a national
one, though given to the Academy, because
he felt it was a body independent of Parlia-
ment, and not subjected to continual interference.
Even the expense of an annual dinner was borne out
of the funds. If they might judge of the institution,
not merely by the eminence of the men who belonged to
it, but by their moral character, he thought he could
not speak of it in too high terms. He had been brought
much into intercourse with the members, and he knew
the difficulties with which they had to contend in un-
prosperous times. He saw them always exhibiting the
feelings and maintaining the independence of gentle-
men, and he did not know any class which ought to
stand higher in public opinion. He did hope that that
House would not sanction the:assault made upon the
Royal Academy by the Hon. Gentleman. The Royal
Academy entertained great respect for that House; but
they would infinitely rather sever all connection with:Par-
liament and with the Government, if they could only re-
tain their present apartments on the condition of
being subject to constant interference. He saw Gen-
tlemen opposed to him in politics, who had had
as frequent opportunities of judging of the merits of this
institution as himself, and he trusted that they would
join with him in deprecating this annual interference—
that they would permit the Royal Academy to pursue
the honourable tenour of its way, and not risk the evil
consequences which he believed would arise to art in
this country if they undertook to carry too far the prin-
ciple of interference with that institution.—(hear.)
Lord J. RUSSELL said that, after what the Right
Hon. Gentleman had so well said, he would only address
a few words to the House on the subject. He really
thought the Hon. Gentleman had no case whatever, un-
less he could show that the public had contributed
largely to the support of this institution, and even if
that were the case, it would be impossible to give a more
satisfactory answer to the Hon. Gentleman than he
had received from the Right Hon. Baronet. The Hon.
Gentleman said that two-thirds of the pictures in this
exhibition were contributed by those who did not belong
to the Academy. Why, if they asked those who visited
the Academy which pictures attracted most attention,
they would find that they were generally the pictures of
those who either were, or soon became, members of the
Academy.—(Hear, hear.) He was really surprised that
the Hon. Gentleman would go on agitating this question.
He hoped that those who were so deserving of the
public respect would not feel hurt at the manner in
which this question was being continually discussed.
He was sure the great majority of that House wished to
see them continue in the same honourable course which
they had hitherto pursued.—(Hear, hear.)
Lord PALMERSTON said there was no country
which was provided with such an admirable school for
art without any expense, nor was there nny country in
which the Government, as a Government, contributed,
so little to art. Any one who bad been to see the exhi-
bition now taking place in Westminster-hall, must have
been struck with the great quantity of talent in sculpture
which that exhibition displayed ; and, on the other
hand, any one who went to Trafalgar-square must per-
ceive how inadequate was the space provided there for
the splendid models which required to be exhibited.—
(Hear, hear.) Everybody was aware of the • lively in-
terest which the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the
Government felt in works of art, and he hoped that be-
tween that period and next year he would devise some
means by which this opportunity for the display of
public works would be greatly enlarged.—(Hear.)
Mr. HUME then read a document of the Royal
Academy, stating that up to the 12th exhibition nothing
was charged for admission. He could give a very
different account of the institution and of the advantages
derived from it from that which the House had heard ;
but he would not trespass on the attention of the House.
Sir R. PEEL wished to explain the circumstances to
which the Hon. Gentleman had referred. George the
Third, seeing that the public would give nothing to this
institution for several years after it commenced gave to
it 5,0001. a year ; and that was continued until the Aca-
demy informed his Majesty that they could support
themselves by means of the exhibition.
The motion was then negatived without a division.
SUPPLY.
The House then went into Committee of Supply.
On the motion for granting 4,4111. for the schools of
design,
Mr. WILLIAMS expressed his approbation of the vote.
Mr. HUME complained that two Members of that
House had been refused admission to the Royal Aca-
demy. He thought that was the height of impudence.
Sir R. PEEL said the Hon. Gentleman was so good a
judge of impudence, that he would not dispute with him
on that point.—(Laughter.)
Mr. HUME said he would not be deterred by any ob-
servations of that kind from continuing to pursue that
course which he conceived to be right.
Mr. WYSE would remind the Right Hon. Baronet of
what had passed on a former occasion, as to the pro-
priety of opening a gallery for the exhibition of casts
from sculpture. He had received two petitions for pre-
sentation on that subject, one from the society in Dublin,
and one from London. He believed that with the sub-
scriptions and the donations which would be received, a
very small sum would be sufficient to form such a
gallery.—The vote was then agreed to.
A vote of 2,006/. for the salaries of certain professors
in the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge was then
agreed to.
On a vote of 2,345/. being proposed for the salaries of
professors in Scotch Universities,
Mr. HUME said that he approved of this vote, because
an account was furnished as to the manner in which the
money was expended, which was not the case with the
vote to Oxford and Cambridge, and of that vote, there-
fore, he disapproved.—The vote was then agreed to.
A vote of 5,5001. was proposed for the Port Patrick
Harbour.

Mr. HUME thought the vote of last year was to have
completed the work.
Sir GEORGE CLERK explained that this was the
balance which last year it had been stated would be
necessary to complete the work.
Lord NEWRY asked if the Hon. Gentleman had seen
a report of Sir John Rennie's on this subject.
Sir GEORGE CLERK had seen such a report, but
the Government had been proceeding upon the report of
Mr. Walker.—The vote was then agreed to.

A vote of 6,0001. for the repair of the colleges of the
University of St. Andrews's was agreed to after a few
words from Captain LOCKHART.
A vote of 8,0001. was then proposed for the comple-
tion of the Nelson monument in Trafalgar-square. The
announcement of this vote by Sir G. Clerk was re-
ceived with loud cheers from all parts of the House.
Mr. WYSE wished to ask whether a proposition had
not been some time since made by au artist, named
Clarke, to complete the monument without charge ?
Sir it PEEL said that certainly such an offer had
been made by that artist, but the Government reserved
to itself the right of considering the subject. He begged
to be understood as not intending to say a word in dis-
paragement of the artist ; but, in general, nothing cauld
be so unwise as to accept these voluntary offers on the
part of artists.
Mr. WYSE agreed entirely in what had been stated
by the Right lion. Baronet ; but at the time the offer
was made the Government had not come forward to
complete the work. There was a deficiency of funds for
the completion of the column. _ _

Mr. DALLY KNIGHT hoped that the base would
be made in proportion to the height. The column had
been shortened some twenty or thirty feet, and the base
was out of proportion. When he saw such a statue,
with such a cocked hat—(A laugh) —he could not help
wishing that some more appropriate desig❑ had been
adopted of showing our veneration for the memory of
our great naval hero. Many persons had taken the
figure for that of Napoleon, and this instance of what they
considered our national generosity had had a great
effect in allaying the irritation against us in France.—
(A laugh.) He wished to know whether the lion and
the other emblems, with which it was intended to adorn
the base, were to be reduced in proportion to the re-
duced size of the column ?

Sir R. PEEL begged to state to his Hon. Friend, that
the size of the lion was an open question.—(A laugh.)
The Government had not yet decided on the subject.
Mr. B. COCIIRANE said a report was prevalent
that the Emperor of Russia had, whilst in this country,
subscribed 500 Z towards the Nelson monument ; he
wished to know if that were correct? Nothing could
be more disgraceful than that a national monument of
this sort should be indebted for its completion to foreign
aid. He understood that the column had been curtailed
twenty or thirty feet from the inability of the Com-
mittee to obtain funds. In fact, this, as well as many
other public works recently undertaken, showed the ne-
cessity of a Minister of Public Works in this country.
Sir R. PEEL would call upon the House to bear in
mind that the erection of this monument was originally
a private affair. It had been proposed to erect a monu-
ment to Nelson on the same principle as the two monu-
ments to the Duke of Wellington, which had been re-
cently agreed to, by private subscription. One of these
monuments was in the City, the other at the West-end.
He could not help thinking that a spontaneous subscrip-
tion would be much more agreeable to the distinguished
objects of it than a Parliamentary grant.—(Hear, hear.)
About 20,1001. had been originally subscribed to
the Nelson monument, but it was found to be in-
sufficient. The shaft of the monument was certainly
curtailed from that which was originally proposed, but
it was in accordance with the opinions of Sir R. Smirlee
and Mr. Walker, who thought there would be danger in
case of a hurricane, and the fall of such a monument in
so crowded a thoroughfare might be productive of in-
convenience.— (Laughter.) Regarding the other ques-
tion, the donation of the Emperor of Russia, he could
only reply that it had been made before the Government
had control over the monument. It was then in the
hands of a private Committee. His Imperial Majesty,
wishing to mark his sense of the kind reception he had
in this country and to express his admiration of one of
her most distinguished heroes, presented the donation
of 5001., which the Committee, considering the slender
condition of their funds, did not think they should be
justified in returning.—(A laugh.) The gift was made
when the column was under private management.
After a few words from Mr. B. COCHRANE,
A vote of 7,5541. was proposed for the purchase of
ancient pictures for the National Gallery.
The vote was then agreed to.
6,900/. was then proposed to enable the trustees of the
British Museum to purchase certain books, manuscripts,
coins, &c.
Colonel RAWDON said there were enough manu-
scripts in Dublin to form memoirs of all the counties,
except two in Ireland. He hoped the Right Hon. Gen-
tleman, at the head of the Government, would give
some assurance that the publication of these memoirs,
would speedily take place.
Sir R. PEEL said there was every wish on the part
of Government to deal liberally with this subject.
It was, however, their duty well to consider whether the
demand for these memoirs would justify their publica-
tion.

After a few observations from Mr. WYSE, the vote
was agreed to.
A vote of 80,0001. was agreed to for the purpose of de-
fraying the expense of the British settlement and esta-
blishment at Hong-Kong.
A vote of 149,000/. for the disembodied militia in Ire-
land was also agreed to.
On the vote of 19,0001. for the repair of damage done
to the gunpowder manufactory at Waltham Abbey by
the explosion,

Captain PECIIELL asked what precautions had been
taken against Captain Warner in the new buildings ?
After what they hadseen in the papers to-day there really
seemed to be no safety. Captain Warner had gone
to Brighton—he wished he had gone anywhere else—for
the sunken vessel would cause great damage to the nets
of the fishermen. The Gallant Officer opposite was
there—a party to the transaction—and he wished to
know if the Government would remedy the mischief it
had caused.

Captain BOLDERO said he was there among forty.
thousand, as an amateur. He saw the vessel blown up,
but how it was done he could not tell.

The resolutions were then agreed to, and the report
ordered to be received this day.
SOUTH SEA COMPANY BILL.
The South Sea Company Bill went through Com-
mittee, and the report was ordered to be brought up
this day.

LAND-TAX COMMISSIONERS NAMES BILL.
On the motion for the third reading of the Lend-taw
Commissioners Names Bill,
Lord WORSLEY said he objected to clergymen being
placed on the list, and he therefore begged tq move, to
omit the following names for the division of Horncastle
and llill, in the coumty of Lincoln:—The Rev. George
Thackeray, Hemingby ; the Rev. Edward Walter,
Langton by Horncastle ; the Rev. Charles Tetrott.
Wispington ; the Rev. John Fawsett, llorncastie; the
Rev. Francis Pickford, Hagworthingham ; the Rev.
Edward Price, Hagworthingliarn ; the Rev. John
Thomas Maine, Harrington Hall ; the Rev. Henry
Salmonby.
Sir G. CLERIC said this was a most unusual course.
The Noble Lord had been requested to draw up a list
for the northern division of Lincolnshire, and in doing
so he had omitted the names of clergymen. 'The Noble
Lord's colleague, who did not entertain the same objec-
tions, had likewise rent in a list containing the names of
clergymen. If they were not qualified for serving they
could not act without rendering themselves liable to a
penalty.
Mr. lIUME objected to clergymen acting at all, and
would support the motion of the Noble Lord.
After a few Words from the CHANCELLOR of the
EXCHEQUER and Lord WORSLEY, strangers were
ordered to withdraw, and the House divided, when
there appeared—
For the motion
Against it 34
Majority against the motion —2l
The Bill was then read a third time and passed.
GILBERT UNIONS.

Mr. BARNABY then, rose to move that three be a
quorum on the Committee on the Gilbert Unions.
Mr. BROTHERTON said this motion would lead to
discussion, and he should therefore move that the House
do adjourn.
The House divided, when there appeared—
For the adjournment 6
Against it..
Majority
Mr. BARNABY then proposed his motion.
Captain PECHELL opposed the motion as one that
was quite unprecedented. He thought it was a reflec-
tion on the Committee, as it implied neglect on their
part. He should certainly take every possible mode of
resisting the motion. He concluded by moving the ad•
journment of the debate.

Mr. WAKLEY thought the debate had better be ad-
journed.

~_
After some short discussion, the motion was with-
drawn. _ . .

Lord ELIOT obtained leave to bring in a Bill to con-
tinue so much of an Act of the second and third years
of her present Majesty as enables justices to grant war-
rants for entering places in which spirits are sold, with-
out license, in Ireland.
Sir G. CLERK brought in a Bill to transfer the col-
lection of the duty on licenses to let horses for hire in
Ireland from the Commissioners of Stamps to the Com-
missioners of Excise.