The Sun.
London, England, 1845-05-06 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON, TUESDAY EVENING, MAY 6, 1845.

-
a million and a half paid for the building of churches. There
was a million for tithes in Ireland. And he begged to say that
that measure came upon the public surreptitiously. It was
said that most effectual means would be taken to get the money
back, but when the Bill passed, they were told it was impos-
sible to collect the amount. Then, again, since 1826, there
were 400,0001. taken from the taxes for the support of religion
in the West Indies, and a sum of 11,6001. was voted for the
clergy in Canada. The Hon. Baronet the Member for Oxford
opposed this measure in an open and fair way, but he begged
to ask him this question. He begged to know from the Hon.
Baronet why he did not object to the payment of 1,0001. a
year to the Roman Catholic Bishop of Quebec, and of 7001. a
year to the Roman Catholic Bishop of Newfoundland. When he
(Mr. Williams) divided the House upon the whole grant,
he had not the honour of the Hon. Baronet's support. Why
so ? Why, because of the 11,6001. no less a sum than
10,0001. was paid to the support of the Established Church,
and the Hon. Baronet, because he got so much for the
bishops and clergy of his own Church, was not over anxious
to object to the small sum which was given to others.
If this was not the reason he should like to know what
was. He found that 1091. was paid out of the taxes to
which the Roman Catholics and the Dissenters contributed for
the expenses of a journey made by the Bishop of Gibraltar, to
Lisbon, in a steam-vessel, and that 3101. was voted to the same
Bishop for journeys to Cadis and Palermo last year. He had no
doubt those were very pleasant excursions, but the Roman Ca-
tholics and the Dissenters contributed to pay for them, and that
ought to be taken into account. The Bishop of Antigua had
received 1471. for similar expenses, and the Bishop of Barba-
does, who had 4,0001. a year, received 1801. for his travelling
expenses.—(Hears hear.) Now he should like to know
how any person could justify the taxing of the Ro-
man Catholics and Dissenters for purposes like these.
13,0801. had been last year given to the Scotch Universities.
The revenues of the Scotch Church were only 17,3001. a year,
whilst three academies in the North of Ireland received
27,0001. a year. He did not see how honest men could tax
Roman Catholics so heavily, and yet refuse to allow so small a
sum for the maintenance and education of those designed to be
religious teachers of the great body of the Irish people. The
opposition to the measure was unjust, uncharitable, and bawd
on a bad principle. A sum of 5,600/. was annually paid to
the dissenting clergymen in the North of Ireland, and why had
not those who now so valorously, and ow such a pretended as-
sumption of principle opposed the Maynooth grant, on the
voluntary principle opposed those other grants he had enume-
rated in previous years ? He supported this measure with
pain, because he acted in opposition to the opinion of many of
his warmest supporters amongst the dissenting body. He
could not conceive why this question of voluntary principle
should now be so warmly espoused when it had been for so
many years suffered to lie dormant. It certainly showed a bad
and an unkind feeling towards Roman Catholics. He would
give his conscientious support to the measure.—(Cheers.)
Sir R. INGLIS said the Hon. Member for Coventry had
asked him how he could consistently vote for taxing his Roman
Catholic and Dissenting fellow-subjects for pecuniary advantage
to the Established Church, or why he should tax other sects to
maintain one sect. Now it was because he did not believe the
Church of England to be a sect, but the great depository of the
religion of the State that he had supported, and would always
support it. He would support the Establishment of the Church
of England at home and abroad. He would not follow
the Hon. Member through all his statements, but would say
that, with respect to the visitations to which the Hon. Member
had referred as matters of expense, that the visitors could de-
rive no other pleasure from them but just that which men who
felt gratified in the discharge of their laborious and onerous
duties could derive. The Hon. Member for Rochdale was
dealing with property the oldest and most sacred in the king-
dom—the property of God and of his Church. The general
c.bject of the Hon. Member was the destruction of all established
religion., but was more particularly aimed at the Church of
England. If that motion shoold ever succeed, the poor, to
whom the blessings of religion were most important, could never
hope to receive them. This was the chief reason why he had
opposed, aad should always oppose, such a proposition as that of
the Hon. Member for Rochdale.
Dr. BOWRING said he considered the position of the Hon.
Baronet the Member for the University of Oxford as unenviable
as it was infatuated. The Hon. Baronet said, my doctrines
are the true doctrines, all others are false, and no money shall
be appropriated to any other ; mine shall be endowed, and no
other shall get a farthing. He would vote against the amend-
ment, and did not think it a proper season to bring it forward.
After much consideration he had, though at the sacrifice of
the support of many of his firmest friends, who warned
him not to do so, supported the grant. He thought
the measure a just one, and that it would tend to
conciliate Ireland. He thought it a se p in the right
direr lion, and was grieved that it had been met
with such bitter :opposition, and that it had been connected
with the question of State Church endowments. He felt de-
lighted to hear the Right Hon. Baronet say that Ireland was to
be conciliated by kindness, and not to be ruled by force. He
was distressed to witness the feelings which this measure had
given rise to—thousands of men banded together from hatred
of Popery and hat' ed of Papists—but he trusted this feeling
would speedily subside, and that a better feeling would spring
up between the people of both countries.
11:r. HUNIE stated that he expressed his opinion before in
that House, that this was merely an educational grant, and
not an endowment of the Catholic Church. It was on that
ground he supported the measure. They voted away annually
a sum of money to make up the sa'aries of clergyman in Scot-
land whose means were under 1501. a year ; and in the same
manner they voted money to the bishops, deans, and all
grades of clergymen of the Established Church. There was
not, however, in the Bill before the House a single word to
endow the clergy of the Catholic Church. There was one
point to which he would now allude. He should like
to see a mixture of all classes—clergy and laity—
in that establishment—( Hear)—and he thought it would
be of great importance if that could be effected. He thought,
that as they expected allegiance from all classes, they were
bound to extend to all the advantages of a moral and reli-
gious education. He regretted that some of his constituents
differed with him. He had received communications from the
Wesleyan Methodists and other Dissenters, remonstrating with
him on the line of conduct he had adopted on that question,
but he had received none from the members of the Established
Church. He thought this the more strange on the part of the
Dissenters, for at the time the Test and Corporation Acts were
under consideration, the Roman Catholics came forward to
assist them to obtain that liberty of conscience for which they
were then contending. He regretted therefore to see those very
persons who had so much benefited by those exertions now
come forward to exhibit so much ingratitude. He thought the
Honourable Baronet (Sir Robert Inglis) who had headed the
Opposition to this measure, and of those who followed him,
would have the tendency to call public attention to the enor-
mous wealth of the Establishment, and to the necessity of de-
voting it to educating the people at large. He would giv 3 his
most cordial support to the measure through all its stages.
Sir ROBERT PEEL apprehended that there was nothing
in the former acts relating to Maynooth, imposing on the State
the necessity of providing exclusive religious education ' • and if
there had been, the Catholics were not responsible for it, for when
in 1795 a proposal was made to establish a college, Mr.
Grattan presented a petition from the Roman Catholics against
its exclusive character—that it should be an institution for
the education of Protestants as well as Catholics—but the Go-
vernment expressly stated that it should be devoted solely to
the education of the Catholic priesthood. There was no de-
sire, therefore, on the part of the Catholics to make it an
exclusive institution, and there was nothing in the Acts
relating to it to make it so ; but he was bound to say that, in
point of fact, it had become so. But before they should con-
demn it on this account, he begged them to read a letter of
Mr. Burke'sjvritten by that gentleman in 1795.—(The Right
Hon. Gentleman then read the letter, in which the writer
stated his conviction that the institution should be exclusively
confined to the education of the priesthood.) Now that was
the opinion of Mr. Burke, who was for making it an exclusive
institution, not only so far as regarded Catholics, but also the
priesthood of that body. As he stated before, there was no-
thing new now proposed. There was nothing in the Acts
which necessarily made it an exclusive institution ; but he
must own, on reading the opinion of Mr. Burke in its favour,
he thought that his opinions were entitled to every respect.
Mr. HINDLEY repelled the charge of ingratitude made
against the Dissenters on this occasion, for the very year
after the time alluded to by the Hon. Gentleman (Mr. Hume),
they manfully came forward to assist in removing the Catholic
disabilities. But their opposition to this measure was based
on very different grounds. They considered it—and he must
say that it was his opinion also—that it was the initiative
step in the endowment of the Catholic Church, and to this
alone was to be attributed their opposition. They had one
Church already endowed, and he wished to know why they en-
dowed it. Was it because it possessed the truth 3 If they
had a secular power to tell what was truth and what was not,
he would bow to its authority.. But he wished to know where
this power resided, Was it in the Lord High Chancellor of
England, or in the Archbishop of Canterbury? If that was
not the reason why they endowed it, perhaps they did so
because it was the Church of the majority. If that were the
reason, why did they not apply that principle in Ireland ?
The Honourable Gentleman then proceeded to show the
superiority of the voluntary principle, and stated, that
in the case of the London Missionary Society for the
conversion of the heathen, there was subscribed during the first
10 years of its existence no less a sum than 47,000/. ; in the
second 10 years, 87,0001, ; in the third 10 years, 280,000/. ;
in the fourth 10 years, 407,000/. ; in the fifth 10 years,
800,000/. ; and during the last year the Wesleyan Methodists
subscribed for the same purpose 105,000/. ; and of that sum
1,2001. was subscribed by the emancipated slaves in Jamaica.
—( Hear.) He might go through a great deal of statistics on
the subject, but as the House had indulged him so much, he
world not detain them any longer.—(Cries of " Divide,
divide.")
Tne House then divided, when there appeared—
For the amendment ..... ...... . 2
Against it
Majority . 139
THE BLOCKADE OF THE PORTENDIC.
On our being admitted to the gallery, we found
Lord PALMERSTON on his legs, addressing the House
with reference to the blockade of Portendic. Lie wished to
ask the Right Hon. Baronet at the head of the Government,
whether it was intended to lay before the House the papers re-
lating
R. E
to
p that
PEEL had subject?ha
Sir
no objection to lay all the papers and
correspondence referring to this subject before the House,
shortly after the recess.
CASE OF LIEUTENANT BRIDGE.

(Hear, hear.) The present Government, he was sorry
to find, had taken a different view of the metier, as he
could see from a dispatch by the Earl of AberJeen t.,a the
Commissioner, to this effect—that the Government had under-
stood that certain negroes from Barbadoes were held in slavery
in Surinam ' • but that it was the opinion of the Queen's
vocate that Her Majesty's Government were not called on to
take steps in regard to those negroes, as they clearly were not
freemen, either by birth or by the benefits of the Act of
Emancipation. If such bad beers the ease, then indeed it
would have been incumbent on the ciovernment to have used
its -strenuous endeavours to procure their freedom. But no
doubt existed that these persons had been removed from the
British possessions before the Act of Emancipation had come
into effect. He found another dispatch to the Commissioners
at the Havannah laying down the very same doctrines. He
did not wish to dispute the authority of the Queen's Advocate,
but he must remind the House that there was another Bill
passed before that period, in the year 1806 and 1807, making
the removal of slaves for the purposes of sale illegal. Surely
under these circumstances the British Government was
justified in demanding the freedom of those slaves.
The Commissioner stated that in some of the plan-
tations in the island of Cuba, the British language
was spoken, a clear proof, he conceived, that the persons doing
so had been brought from British colonies. He hoped that
the Queen's Advocate would reconsider his opinion, and that
Government would see fit to interest themselves in this {mat.
ter. There were other persons also who had occupied some
share ofthe late Government's attention, he meant the slaves
captured in slave vessels, and disposed of under the authority of
the Mixed Commission. Government, on pretence of finding
them employment, hired them out to certain masters for a sum
of money and for a period of five years. At the expiration of
that period they still remained in the same condition, but in-
finitely worse treated than the real slaves. He very much
feared that the present Governor of Cuba, General O'Donnel,
was not like the Governor who had preceded him, General
Valdez. He (Lord Palmerston) greatly feared that he
encouraged, instead of discouraging a traffic in slaves,
for his own private purposes—(Cries of " Hear, hear.")
With regard to Cuba, the law was not repudiated by the Go •
vernment, nor was it repudiated by the Spanish, for in Cuba
General Valdez stated that a very great number of negroes had
been landed under that very law. Now it would be remem-
bered that they applied to the Government of Spain to sign a
convention, the purport of which was that the mixed commis-
sion at the Havannah should be authorised to inquire into the
condition of the negroes, and to ascertain what ought to be done
under the circumstances. The Spanish autnorities took no
notice of that communication until 1841, and at the end of 1841
the Spanish Government sent a very lengthy note, refusing
compliance with the proposal ; and, eventually, the British
Government acquiesced in the denial, and expressed themselves
satisfied with an additional clause in the Act of Treaty, pro-
viding a punishment for persons concerned in the slave trade.
Now, unless that law were acted upon, no Act which the
Spanish Government might hereafter pass, could be of
any service. Indeed, if that law was not carried into execution,
no other was, and be did think the British Government rather
lightly acquiesced in the refusal of the Spanish Ministry.
With regard to negroes now in Cuba, they were as much en-
titled to their liberty as any of the panish peasantry in that
island; and certainly, in his opinion, the mixed commission
ought to be invested with power to decide in the cases of
negroes that might hereafter be brought into Cuba. It was very
well for Government to say, it was a question of honour to
Spain, and that a foreign authority had no right to mix
itself up with their own internal—it was all very well
for them to make that objection, but they must remember that
they had all established a foreign jurisdiction by their treaty
with this country, and it was impossible that the
proposal which was afterwards made to them could extend that
jurisdiction much further. It was impossible for him to rely upon
the Governor of Cuba in carrying out the treaty. He wanted
some British authority to see that the law was put into execu-
tion. What was the course pursued now in Cuba ? The au-
thorities there said, that a man brought from the wilds of
Africa where he had subsisted in his native state was not fit
for society, and therefore he was compelled to undergo what
was called an apprenticeship before he was emancipated. Now,
what was his apprenticeship ? Why the female slaves were let
out to respectable householders to act as domestic servants, but
no security was taken to prevent them from always being kept
in a sta`e of servitude. The male slaves were employed in
lighting the streets for a number of years, but the Government
would give no undertaking, that they should be released
from tin it bondage at the expiration of their term of servitude,
nor was there any power to compel them to do so. Every report
which came to this country dwelt upon this disgusting and dis-
graceful traffic ; and he must say, of all the measures which had
been brought forward to suppress it, the most effectual was the
extension of the right of search. With regard to that there
was a report from the Commissioners at Rio, which showed
the importance of the treaty with France being fully carried
out. The Commissioners stated that the French vessels were
daily getting more and more employed in the slave trade with
Africa and Brazil. This was in consequence of an impression
which was beginning to arise that the British cruisers had been
ordered not to intercept or molest vessels sailing under the flag
of France. The returns evinced the efficacy of the right
of search in suppressing this horrible traffic; but there
was another measure which had been exceedingly effective in
its operation. He alluded to the destruction of baracoons on
the coast of Africa. In 1842 the slave trade diminished very
much, and that diminution was attributed to three causes,
but the principal one was the destruction of the baracoons.
When the present Government, however, came into office,
the first thing they did was to write a letter to the commanding
officers, prohibiting the destruction of these baracooes stating
that it was against the law of nations. Now, he
really thought that was a most extraordinary act
on the part of her Majesty's Government.—( Hear. )
He thought that if the two Governments were to concur in a
sincere and honest determination to suppress the slave-trade,
they could effect it. If they concurred in measures for sweep-
ing the whole of the coast, all debate about the right of search
would cease. With respect to the " Razzias ' in the terri-
tory of Muscat, there was quite evidence enough that if Portu-
gal had co-operated with the Government of this country,
those robberies of human beings would have ceased long ago.
He did not wish to go into the subject with any asperity, but
he would wish the Right Hon. Baronet opposite to take into
full and careful consideration the condition of British subjects
in Cuba and Surinam.—(Hear, hear.) He was satisfied that
if the Governments of France and England were to co-operate
faithfully and sincerely, the slave-trade could and would be
suppressed.
Sir ROBERT PEEL, who was throughout very indis-
tinctly heard, said that he must do the Noble Lord the
justic to say, that he usually gave notice to the Government
of any intention to bring forward a motion, or to put a
question involving the general or particular policy of
her Majesty's Ministers. But he ( Sir Robert Peel)
did not expect so important a question its this
to be put upon an order of the day for the navy estimates.
He ( Sir R. Peel) had not expected that such an advantage
should be taken, and he thought that some time ought to
have been atlowed to him before he was required to give
grave and deliberate answers to so many questions upon so
h;imandbeifforane,yheparhtadofdhonise
take We ha
careen
tqhuaet s t itohnes a umphoin
those matters had been put to .
many and such important subujledcts.
s
ex-
With respect to the negroes
gpb
leuasintt
ya tot
os
hmn
oawuklades he
bigmea
verol
efccuatini,fideehdre.s t owom
rod
at Surinam, he could not hesitate for a moment to
declare that if any
the officer of the Crown had neglected his
duty, in that case, slave, or rather the injured person,
should not be prejudiced by anything already done. He en-
tirely concurred in the sentiment that there should be a per-
fect cordiality between this country and France, and that any
arrangement should be most faithfully worked out.—( Hear,
hear. ) He believed that the slave trade upon the eastern
coast of Africa was carried on to a great extent. There had
Withthe navalr respect epcotw
e tor
powers
the
were bacroarcri
anusy , h
to
e
been within the last few months a great increase of the cap-
ture of slave ships. With respect to Cuba, he was not at pre-
sentres of slaves might be suppressed,
prepared to go into the details, but he would admit, that
under the government of Valdez, the facilities for slave impor-
catwaonat
;Lis
oo
willing
that
ahrl
atai
tnde
much
beenuttochho admit,s
ti
those
towards
reae depositaries
the eiadt
ta
extinction of the trade might be
.
if
gained by their suppression. If the Noble Lord had given
notice that it was his intention to seek for this information, he
(Sirl,e hßiPeel) might be enabled to enter into a full explanation.
(Lord Palmerston) point out the way in which the
information might be furnished so as to support the credit of the
House, and it would no doubt be supplied.
Lord PALMERSTON wished to say a few words in ex-
planation. It was suite true that he hcd not given any notice
of asking for this infor.mation ; but the statements of the Right
Honourable Baronet would lead him to think that ht
was glad that no notice had been given whereby he was
enabled to avoid entering upon matters -in which altrigle-vicirit
too much might involve the credit of the Government. His
(Lord Palmerston s) object was to draw the attention of the
Government to these points. It was not his intehtion to bring
on a discussion. He meant to say that the course suggested by
the Right Hon. Baronet was the best, and was practicable in
every case—namely, that they should hold out inducements
t which would enable them to do so with great facility. He
;could only say that the return contained very imperfect in-
formation.
Mrs. HUME was sorry to be obliged to differ from the Noble
Lord who had just sat down. He agreed with him that it was
desirable to put down the slave trade, and he could say that no
person could have exerted himself more strenuously to obtain
that object. He (Mr. Flume), however, thought that he had
been carrying on great expense, and in a great range, without
trade remained as rife as it was when he began his operations.
being able to effect his motives. He was of opinion that the
by holding It was not perfectly clear that they had not added even to the
evils- which they tried to suppress. They could not suppress it
out inducements, for the trade was carried on for
their •ofit and advantage; an d as long as that was to be de-
'rived it would be impossible to cause even a decrease in the
trade. ThtlY might destroy their btu-racoons, and drive them from
but the trade would continue. If half the money
place to place,
and half the t..ouble were devoted to increase free labour in
their colonies, he believed they would have done much more
towards putting an end to the slave trade.
Mr. WARBUNTON stated that the paper to which the
Noble Lord made veference gave the following result. It ap-
' peered in the course of the years from 1815 to 1843, the num-
ber of slaves trans/it:este& from Africa to Cuba, and the Braails,
amounted to 639,145 'mils, and according to the notice which
was appended to that return, in order to obtain the real
amount, they were direded to multiply that number by two
which would make it 1,280,000 souls. During that time the
number liberated were 1.8,042. One-and-a-half per cent. was
all that they liberated of the slaves that were shipped from
Africa. Were they not. to look to the past for the purpose of
guiding their conduct iii. future. They were told that if Eng-
land and France joined t suppress the slave-trae t best re-
sults wissild follow. To that be would reply in the the
he mode of a
Spartan—if they will cordially unite to put it down. If,
then, they- looked at their experence from 1815 to 1843, and
considered text the next thirty years would give adifferept re-
sult, then he mioht think that they
that this persever.an ce would soon have its end, for by it they
might suppress it. He hoped
were exciting more tttachment to the
,slave-trade.
d that the Hon.
Lord PALMERSTON in explanation .se'
aves that had been
thousand who were lam led at
Member had only stet ed- the number of
or seventy
libseriartecdHanAdßlLanEdesdNinA
.FA
jrnEeßrica, there were sixty
there.
said, he agreed with the Hon.
Lord who had just
Sierra Leone and had settled
Member for Kendal, a lid with the
to Y En—
(taughter)—that "if " the French could be got join
slave trade, it could indeed
land in an effort to put d town the
eat down, and with • the Right HNone.bleßaronet o posite
be very easily put down. --(Laughter.) But that they never
need expect to see ; for the French were at that moment en.
deavourint. to pat down the right of search question. But
if the Rig t Hon. Baron et at the head of Her Majesty's Go.
vernment would give up all the humbug about freeing ,
that he had heard of la te—(laughter)—
and embark 2,000 of
the West Intlia black tro cp in ships, and send them along the
saves
sea shore and destroy all the forts along the Barbary coast,
to —( Hear, hear, and
slave trade would soon b e put an eni •
without any regard to the law of nations—(laughter )—the
laughter). Until that wtas done, there would be no use in
making the aittempt.
Capt. PEtCHEZ,L diffe red from the Hon. Member for Mon-
trace as to the mod eof putting clown this nefarious traffic.—
(Hear, hear.) e ships now built for the purpose were
much better caleulat ed to carryon chi traded stets
were taken,ly
in use ; and, therefor •e, unless some decp
it would go on at a g Teeter rate than ever.
They did not see former
the fine old seamen th tt used to man
the decks of their ships
in war time. What had become of all those fine men woo
ad gone through that excellent establishment, the gunnery
ship at Portsmouth ? •
Sir GEORGE COC lc BURN said he had great pleasure in
h

Captain PECHELL wished to call the attention of the Gal-
lant Admiral opposite to a circumstance which had appeared in
the public prints, and which was viewed with considerable in-
terest in the profession to which he had thu honour to belong.
Lieut. Bridge, of the Cormorant, it was alleged, had violated
the 23d article of war, which related to disrespect to the supe-
rior officer, and he was tried by Court-martial for the offence,
the captain appearing as a member of that court. He wished
to know whether the Admiralty considered these proceedings
regular, and if they did not, whether any steps had been taken
to compensate Lieut. Bridge for his undeserved calamities?
Admiral COCKBURN, who spoke in so low a tone as to be
heard with difficulty, was understood to saythat the Admiralty
had yet taken no steps, but that the great probability was, that
that officer would again be, restored to the service of his
country.
Captain PECHELL said the Gallant Admiral had not yet
answered his question. He wished to know*if the proceedings
of that Court-martial were considered regular by the Board of
Admiralty ?
Admiral COCKBURN—Perfectly regular.
NAVY ESTIMATES.
The House then went into Committee on the Navy Es-
timates.
Mr. CORRY proposed a vote of 610,5451. for the victualling,
&c., of the navy during the current year.
ENSLAVEMENT OF BRITISH SUBJECTS.
Lord PALMERSTON wished to notice certain returns,
boob, and papers for the years 1835, 1836, 1839, and 1841,
and reat,ng to the landing of slaves in the Havannah, in
Cuba, and in other of the islands and on the coast of South
America. lie saw by reports from Cuba, the Brazils, and the
coat of Afriea that the slave-trade was undoubtedly on the
increase. That was the distinct statement from these places.
in Cuba and jn Surinam there were considerable numbers of
negroes who had been at different periods brought from the
theye whereas
ehr have British colones to .Surinam and other parts of the Dutch pos-
stehssions, and sold as slaves.
it was which t
duty
yd
They had been brought off before
tof Emancipation had been passed. They were now in
slabileetnheiynlcllaufdl
included
deeinn let inhe
Actthe
of
Emancipation. British colonies
ec
to
s brought under the consideration of the Go-
oPfalmtheerston)belonged. They
thou ,t
d.iayintr Lto Government to en-
proeure the liberty of those parti

being enabled to state, that during the Isso year the most effi-
,-;ient service had been rendered by the ou the coast of
Africa. Prom the returns whiele had t,e , seeele it sppesred
that three out of every four of the vessels which had sailed fi
the coast of Africa did not contain slaves. No stronger proof
of the efficiency of the force on the coast could be adduced.
Since the present squadron had been on the coast of Africa the
price of slaves had very much increase in the colonies. With
respect to the observations of the Hon. and Gallant Officer as
to the seamen in the navy, he could only say, that the navy
never contained finer men than it did at present. They were
in a high state of discipline, and were very efficient. When ho
commanded the squadron in the West Indies he had seen ships
come in in which there were no returns of punishment of the
men. The ships were as well disciplined and as effic•ent as in
the time of war. From those circumstances, it appeared to
him that men were not difficult to obtain.
Captain BERKELEY said that he could give very cogent
reasons why the fleet was not manned, :could not be
manned, and would not be manned. The entries for a parti-
cular ship—and he should like to ask the Lion. and Gallant
Admiral why there was such discontent among the men who
engaged under Captain Lockyer in the Albion ? Why did
they send a ship's company to sea with an inefficient supply,
and especially in an experimental squadron. But they dis-
gusted the men with the experimental squadron—and why?
Because the men see that they have work to do, which en-
tirely precluded them from anything like rest. What was the
reason there was so much apprehension about the conduct of
the men, in the event of any war with America, but because
they were about to send ships to sea with a miserably bad
establishment, and from which, from the experience of the last
war they never could expect anything like success.
Sir G. COCKBURN, in explanation, observed that there
was no intention to restrict the complement of sea-going ships ;
but with regard to the experimental squadron, the object was
not so much to try the men as the ships, and he could assure
the Gallant Officer (Captain Pechell) that so long as he re-
mained in office, he should take care that no ship went to sea
without being well manned.
Captain BERKELEY asked the Gallant Admiral (Sir G.
Cockburn) how the men were disposed of who left the
Albion ?
Sir G. COCKBURN could not say in what way the men
were disposed of, but he believed that the mon were entered
into other ships.
Sir C. NAPIER was not satisfied with the reply of the
Gallant Admiral, for he believed that ships ought to be well
manned ; and when he saw a cloud rising in the west, he
thought that ships ought to go to sea well manned. He would
rather that seven ships should go to sea well manned, than eight
ships ill manned. In coming up the other day with an officer
of the Superb, who could have no possible reason for misre-
presenting the circumstances, he had heard that in that ship
there were not more than forty able seamen. The men, it was
true, were well behaved, but they knew nothing of naval
affairs. And so it was with most of the ships of the line. The
men were all anxious to do their duty, but the crews were of
inferior quality; and whilst they could command, as they could
if they chose to command, seamen equal to any duty, he knew
not why they should be content to send ships to dangerous
and important services inefficiently manned and equipped.
He thought they ought to build another Seaman's Home at
Sheerness, to protect the seamen from the robbers by whom
they were surrounded when they came on shore. Seamen
were perfect children, and no matter where they concealed
their money—whether they put it in their pockets, or in their
hats, or anywhere else—they were sure to get robbed of half
of it, before twelve hours: after they came on shore. Then,
again, how were they treated when they were induced to go
on service abroad ? During the China war, men were induced
to go to a bad climate because the prospect of prize money was
held out to them as an inducemete to go. But when the
navy and army were just on the point of taking Canton, the
civil functionary interfered and prevented them from sacking
the town. They thus lost the prize money which they ex-
pected, and got but a year's batty instead. Again, how were
the men who served in the war in Syria treated?
Why, when they came home, they got 101., and were dismissed
being told to call again in a fortnight, but, of course, they were
disgusted with the treatment they received, and did not come
back any more. He would read to the Committee Lord Nei-
son's opinion with regard to the mode in which ships ought to
be manned. (The Hon. and Gallant Officer then read the
opinion of Lord Nelson.) He (Sir C. Napier) considered that
the Registration Act of last year had been of the greatest ser-
vice, but be thought that an improvement might be made in
the Enlistment Act. At present, the Government were at, a'd
to issue a proclamation for men to come forward in the proba-
bility of a war, because they would have to pay 10/. bounty, and
as there should be 40,0110 men in the Navy, that would amount
to 400,000/., which the Chancellor of the Exchequer would
not much like to pay out of the Exchequer. Now, he did not
think that the men themselves would expect that,
but if the war were actually to take place, then
that they should get the same bounty.—( Hear, hear.)
He felt satisfied that if the Government came forward in a
liberal manner they would have no difficulty in obtaining sea-
men. A paper had been recently laid before the American
Congress showing that out of 115,000 men in the American
naval service 100,1100 were foreigners, and he (Sir C. Napier)
believed that 90,000 of these were Englishmen, who, in case of
war, would leave that service, and come into the English; pro-
vided a proper remuneration were held out, and that the slavish
mode of impressment was not resorted to.—( Hear, hear.)
But bold manly sailers would not leave the American service to
join one in which impressment prevailed. Offer the men good
bounty, an improved pay—( Hear, hear)—and by such means
the assistance of able seamen would be secured, but the system
of compulsion was only calculated to drive away able seamen
from them, and to damage the character of their fleet.—( Hear. )
Mr. C. WOOD was not at all surprised at the difficulty of
obtaining seamen, which was always great at this season of the
year, when merchant vessels were fitted out for short voyages.
The late Government were constantly assailed by Hon. Gen-
tlemen opposite for the inefficient state of the fleet, but never,
he would assert, since the year 1835, was the fleet of the
country in such a weakened anddefenceless state as during the
last year. He was convinced they could not restore the navy
to a proper state unless they came down to that House and
asked for an additional supply of men.
Mr. BROTH ERTON then moved that the Chairman do
report progress. But before the Chairman did so,
Mr. S. HERBERT wished to disabuse the minds of
Hon. Gentlemen opposite in supposing that our foreign coun-
tries were not amply supplied with men, and to assure the
House that Government had power to increase the number of
men employed on the home stations whenever they pleased.
The fact, however, was, Government did not think there was
any necessity at present for adding to the number of men em-
ployed on the home service. With regard to the statement
of the Hon. Member. that the coast was never so unprotected
in a time of danger since 1835 than it was last year, now he
could tell the Hon. Member that in 1840, and 1841, a time of
great danger, the coust was much more unprotected than it
was in 1835.
Captain BER KELEY did not think it was so easy to man the
navy in the present day, as it was formerly, and before the esti-
mates were got through, he should take an opportunity of stat-
ing his reason for entertaining that opinion.
Lord PALMERSTON denied that there was so much danger
of a rupture between this country and France in 1840 and
1841 as there was in the last year. He admitted that some
danger did exist in 1840 and 1841, but that danger ceased on a
change taking place in the French Government.
Lord IN GESTRE did not dispute that there were less ships
in port last year than there were in 1835 ; but he complained
that the Cornwallis and another ship were sent out in the latter
year without either a full complement of arms, men, or guns.
After a few words from Mr. Corry, Sir C. Napier, and
Captain Pechell,
Admiral BOWLES took occasion to state that he could as-
sure the House that there never was a time when the seamen
or men-of-war were in a better condition than at the present
time.
Sir CHARLES NAPIER said that at the time the Gallant
Admiral spoke of them, there were only four ships of the line
in commission, and the vessels at Portsmouth and Plymouth not
forty efficient men in them.
The vote of 10,575/. aas then agreed to, after which the
House resumed.
The Scotch Flanks Bill was read a second time, as also the
Lands Clauses Consolidation Bill.
Mr. TURNER brought on his motion for a return of a
copy of the coronation oath, and of the oaths of Ministers on
assuming office, and of Members on taking seats in the House
of Commons, should be laid on the table ; but on the observa-
tion of Sir James Graham, that the violation of these oaths
would subject the several persons alluded to, as well as to the
very lowest members of the community to severe penalties, the
t motion was withdrawn and the House adjourned.
ie