The Sun.
London, England, 1828-03-13 00:00:00

IRISH PAUPERS.

Lord STANLEY rose for the purpose of calling the at-
tentien of the House to a subject of which he had given
notice* namely, the expence incurred by this country in
passing paupers to Ireland, and as the county which he
was most connected with was duly let into to a very great
portion of that charge, 1w begged to call the particular
attention of the House to a document which he held in his
hand, and from which it appeared that the number of Irish
paupers sent from Liverpool to Ireland the last 13 years,
were as follows
1815 3,847
1816 6,820
1817 6,052
1818 6,614
1819 6,138
1820 3,958
1821 2,789
1822 1,17S
1823 1,337
124 5,013
1825 3,358
1626 ......... 4,747
From June 26 to July 17, the numbers were 7968,
and the wane incurred in sending then to Ire-

land from Liverpool (luring the latter period was 3,600/.
With these facts he would leave the question to the md-
__

deration of the Hone. If they granted him a Committee,
it was his intention that the Committee should ineet on

come early day, in a pro forma sort of manner, for the pur-
pose of considering what returns they would Wish to have
from the different counties, and *hen thiS infOrMation fives
furnished theM, the 'Would lie eiasVel he apply themselves
fa Ore.': to the question itself. The motion was then put
from the Chair and agreed to.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY moved for returns of the num-
ber of causes reserved to the Masters in the Court of Ex-

chequer within the last six years, ending March, 1828,
distinguishing the number then remaining undisposed of.
An non.En whose name we could not ascertain,
recommended that the motion should be withdrawn, in
order that it might be so amended as to procure more ac-
curate iitforrnatidn on the subject to which it related.
Mr. D. W. HARVEY, in consequence of this sugges-
lion, withdrew his motion.
Mr. FIUME then moved for a continuation of the Re-
turns already laid before 'the hlouse, respecting the number
of Officers who had been allowed to sell out their full and
half pay commissions, under the Order issued from the
Horse-GUards in 1f3.5.
PROMOTIONS IN THE ARMY.

lIPME rose to call the attention of the House to
flit novel, and as it appeared to him, the injudicious and
ruinous mode of proceeding at present adopted in the ar-
rangements of the army. The House was aware that up
to the tad of May, 1125, officers were not permitted to sell
their half-pay, but at that period a change had taken
place, by which officers were enabled to do so; and in
1826 he had called for a return of the officers who had
availed themselves of the permission to sell. But in addi •
tion to the order to which he had already alluded, the Com-
mander-in-Chief had issued another on the 25th of April,
1826, allowing officers to sell their half-pay commission'
to officers of an inferior rank on the full-pay. On moving
for a return of the officers who had availed themselves of
this privilege, he had obtained returns which would show
the great loss sustained by the country under the new
arrangement.--He would now ask whether any public
officer ought to have the power of putting the public
to such an expence as appeared on the face of those
statements, which he extracted from the official returns,
—an expense of not less than a million and a half.
Those who did so, ought to be made accountable by that
House , for if such a system was permitted to go on, there
was no calculating the expence that might be entailed
upon the country. He thought the Noble Lord (Palmer-
ston), whose plan he believed it was, would have much to
answer for, when the whole account came to be made up.
perhaps a loss to the public of not less than 2,000,0001.
They might be told, and indeed they had been told on a
former occasion, as a set off against that statement, that
the numbers who had purchased were half-pay officers.—
But that was not enough, feu• many of these had since re-
turned to the half-pay at a higher rank, and consequently
with an increased allowance. His own opinion was, that
the House would be obliged to appoint a special committee
to investigate the subject. It was unreasonable to think
of throwing the burthen of every inquiry of the kind upon
the Finance Committee, who had already enough to do.—
He had made out a ease which called for a distinct com-
mittee, for it was clear that the half-pay could never be
reduced if it was permitted to go on in this way.—
The House or the Committee would find, if they took the
trouble to enquire into the state of the half of the
French army, that notwithstanding the immense
armies employed by that country, their half-pay
amounted to a small pittance indeed as compared
with the enormous list which at present burdened England.
He had asked, upon a former occasion, what decrease might
be expected to take place in the half-pay, and he was told
a decrease of about five per cent. on the average. But
although the Noble Lord had taken credit for relieving the
country to that extent, the fact, as appeared from the
documents, was as he had stated it. The House ought
not only to call for the continuance of those returns, but to
appoint a special inquiry, when he was sure they would
come to this conclusion—that the effect of the present
system was to promote young men, but not to provide for
those who had grown grey in the service, as they were
originally taught to expect. Such, „be would contend for
it, was the result of the system upon the service.—Hear.—
He had consulted many officers on the subject, who agreed
with him in that opinion. At all events, he had done
his duty in bringing the subject before the House.—(Hear,
hear.)—How they would deal with it hereafter, it would
he for themselves to determine ; but for the present he
would content himself with moving for similar returns to
those which had been granted last year relating to promo,
Lions in the army, from the 25th of January, 1827, down
to the latest period. The Hon. Member concluded by
moving for a variety of voluminous returns relative to the
tale of half-pay by officers in the army, the artillery, and
the marines.

Sir J. GRAHAM said, that his object in rising was
merely to ask the Noble Lord opposite to give a negative,
as be hoped the Noble Lord could, to questions which he
was going to ask him relative to two particular circum-
stances. • He had been given to understand, and from the
quarter from which he received his information he believed
that he had been given to understand correctly, that a cer-
tain officer in the army, who had been employed in the
civil service of the country for the last 18 years, and so
employed that he was not allowed by the rules of the mili-
tary service toreceive his half-pay, had been allowed, after a
lapse of 15 years, in which he never received a farthing in
virtue of his military commission, to dispose of his half-
pay. By that arrangement, a charge, which had had no
existence for the last 15 years, had been thrown upon the
public. The question which he wished to ask respecting
it was this—Did the gentleman to whom he alluded still
continue in his civil employment ? The other question
which he had to ask related to a similar transaction in

Ireland, where he understood that a military officer, who
had been in the Ciril Service for the last 18 years, and
whose half-pay had consequently been suspended during
that time, had also been allowed to sell his half-pay. He
wished to know. whether the facts were as be had stated
them, or no. He wculd conclude by expressing his hopes
that, if the statement of the Hon. Member for Montrose did
net meet with a direct negative from the Noble Lord oppo-
site, some Member would move that a Committee be ap-
pointed to examine into the matters to which it referred,
distinct from the Finance Committee.
Lord PALMERSTON, in the first place, would proceed
to state that which he believed the House would expect to
hear from him—namely, that he had no objection to grant
the returns for which the Hon. Member for Montrose had
moved. In the next place he would proceed to express his
surprise that the Hon. Member for Montrose should seize
the present opportunity for going into such details and cal-
culations as he had just opened to the House ; for he should
have thought that matters of that sort, connected as they
were with the army estimates, would have been
deemed sufficiently important to be referred to that
Committee of Finance of which the Honourable Gen-
tleman was himself a Member. He would leave it to
the Honourable Gentlemen who formed that Committee,
to deal as they thought proper with the opinion which the
Honourable Member for Montrose had expressed of them—
if not in words, at least by inference,—an opinion which
went the length of telling the country that they were not
likely persons to inquire with advantage into such transac-
tions. Whether the Hon. Member for Montrose thought
that it would answer his object better to make an inflamed
statement to the House on this subject, before he referred
his papers to a Committee, he (Lord Palmerston) could
not pretend to say, but this Le thought that he might ven-
ture to say, that the Finance Committee had sent for papers
connected with it, in order to obtain the means of coining
to a satisfactory conclusion upon it. What reasons led the
Hon. Member for Montrose to be so impatient to make his
statement to the House before he had ascertained the cor-
rectness of the facts on which he rested it, the Hon. Mem-
ber for Montrose could best explain himself. He would
shortly explain the nature of the arrangement of which
the Hon. Member for Montrose complained, as.he thought
that such a proceeding would be the easiest way to show
how unfounded the conclusions of the Honourable
Member were, net only in the sense which he sup-
posed that the Honourable Member put upon theta
himself, but also in the only sense in which they
could by any possibility be intelligible to any gentle-
man who had the good fortune to hear them. Every
person who heard the speech of the Hon. Member for
Montrose, would suppose that by that arrangement the
public had incurred a loss of 2,000,0001. ; but whether
the Hon. Member meant that it had incurred a less of
2,00043,0001. capital, or of 2,000,00001. a year, he defied
any person who heard him to understand. The nature
of the arrangement was shortly this :—At the conclusion
of the war a reduction of the army necessarily took place,
a great many officers were placed on half-pay, and the
situations in the army which became vacant on the full
pay, were regularly filled up by officers from the half-pay.
That system went on progressively till the commencement
of 1827. It was then found that it had an effect of
stopping promotion in regiments, and of continuing officers
in situations for which their increasing age was every day
rendering them more unfit. The army had become as it
were stagnant, aid it was found that it was necessary that
some additional scope should be given to promotion. The
arrangement proposed for that purpose was this :—Certain
officers of certain rank were allowed for a certain period to
, sell their half-pay commissions to officers of an inferior rank
• 6 on full pay, who might be inclined to purchase them, The

consequence of it was to remove old officers from their I
regiments, and to give a scope to preferment amongst
the younger officers, who remained behind. As
young Captains on full pay, in many instances, bought
the commission of old Majors on half pay; the charge
pit the. half pay list, he admitted, increased. The
loss to the public teas incuired iK this manner—. 4 Major
who might live 15 years, was succeeded by another 'Major
who might live 25 years, and thus the public was saddled
with an annuity which was likely to continue for a longer
time. The period had not, however, yet arrived in which
the Hon. Member for Montrose could affirm that any loss

had been hitherto sustained by the public; for as yet the
public had only to pay the same half-pay as before ; and it
would not be till the expiration of the ten years that the
public would have to pay the annuity exclusively to the
younger life. He admitted that if there were no other
check besides those which he had already mentioned on
this arrangement, the public would be pledged to the pay-
Anent of these annuities beyond the time to which they
were originally designed to extend. But he had stated on
a former occasion to the House that the arrangement did
not stop here. Who were the persons who purchased
these annuities? Those officers who were well provided
With money. Was it to be supposed that an officer of for-
tune would buy a commission which would place him on a
half-pay, if hehad no other chance than that of being shelfed
by such a proceeding? No; the object for which men of
fortune invested their capital in these annuities was plain
—it was to obtain promotion. Let the House look not
merely to what was the probability, but also to what was
the fact on this subject. A Major who had a half-pay corn.
mission, sold it to a Captain on full pay; the Captain then
became a Major on half-pay, and wishing- for employment
looked out immediately for a full-pay Major, with whom he
might effectuate an exchange : so that by an intermediate
change it often happened that one old Major on the half-pay
list was succeeded at one remove by another Major equally
advanced in years. Ile would therefore recommend to the
Hon. Member for Montrose to alter the nature of his mo-,
tint], and to make it embrace a return of those officers who
had bought half-pay, and had afterwards exchanged into
full pay. He would now ask the House to consider what
was the result of this arrangement, even upon the showing
of the Hon. Member for Montrose himself. The sellers
obtained the old price for their commissions, and the pur-
chasers paid the new : and it appeared that in that manner
the public had already received a sum of 72,0001. Against
this gain on the part of the public was to be set the loss,
which he admitted that it had incurred by having to pay a
certain number of annuities which would commence 10 years
hence, and would last ten years after they had commenced.
Now he would ask, what annuity to begin at the end of 10
years, and to last for 10 years afterwards, could you pur-
chase for the sum of 72,0001. ? He should suppose a very
large annuity indeed. Therefore, if that second exchange,
of which he had just spoken, had not taken place, the cal-
culation on the amount of the number of pounds lost
to the public would not rest entirely upon the probable du-
ration of the lives of those who purchased the half-pay
being greater than that of those who sold it. If, how-
ever, the House would take into consideration the effects of
the second exchange, it would see, that in all probability
no pecuniary loss at all would be suffered by the public.—
But leaving the question of loss to the public out of consi-

deration, he would now ask what effect had this arrange-
ment produced upon the army? It had given the army
an active establishment,—it had provided it with efficient
officers,—it had given it a character for activity bud
efficiency, which was of the utmost advantage to the
public service. It was on that ground that he had
originally proposed the arrangement to Parliament.—
It was not propounded by him as a measure of pecu-
niary advantage, but as a measure which was likely to
conduce, and which he would now say had conduced,
to the efficiency of the aekvice. He would here observe
that the Honourable Member for Montrose had pushed his
argument so far in one direction that night, that he did not
perceive how far he had strengthened the arguments which
it had been his (Lord Palmerston's) duty to address to
the Hon. Member's understanding upon former occasions.
The Hon. Member for Montrose had frequently reproached
those who had the disposal of the patronage of the army,
with not having filled up the vacancies which occurred on
the full pay with officers taken from the half-pay. On
those occasions he had as frequently said, that though
there were many officers on the half-pay who would be
willing enough to serve, the House deceived itself if it sup-
posed that those officers were therefore fit and competent
for service. He had said that there were not only Colonels
and Majors, but Ensigns and Lieutenants, who, from their
length of service, could not be again brought with any
useful effect into active service. The statements which he
had then made, were received by the Hon. Member for
Montrose with a degree of incredulity which it would have
been difficult to account for in any other Member. Now,
what turned out to be the fact, even on the Honourable
Member's own showing ? That the lion. Member
when he reads through the half-pay list, finds that there
are not only Colonels and Majors, but even Lieute-
nants and Ensigns, who have been on the half-pay for 80
or 40 years. Ought such men as those to be put upon full
pay, and to be called into active service ? He said, with
_ _ .

considerable pride and satisfaction, that the Hon. Member
fur Montrose had furnished him with the most favourable
corroboration to the arguments which he had formerly
used, in answer to the censures which the Hon. Member
for Montrose was so fond of flinging upon those who were
intrusted with the patronage of the army. The Hon.
Member for Montrose then asks, " Is it not unjust to
allow persons who had been so long on the half-pay to sell
their commissions at all ?" To this he answered, that so
leng as those persons lived, they must remain a burden on
the public. Was it not, therefore, an advantage to enable
them to retire and supply their places with officers who, in
case of emergency, could be called into active service with-
out danger to the interests of the country? So far was he
from thinking that the statements which the Hon. Mem-
ber for Montrose had that night made conveyed any
censure upon the Administrstion, that be thought them most
serviceable in showing the expediency of weeding out
of the half-pay list those individuals who could not,
by any possibility, perform anv efficient service to
their country. They received their commissions under
the rules of the service ; and under those rules they
were undoubtedly entitled to their half-pay for life ; and
the question for the consideration of the House then was,
whether they would allow them to withdraw from the ser-
vice entirely, and to fill up their places with officers who
were desirous of exchanging with them. He would not
pretend to follow the Hon. Member for Montrose through
all the cases of individuals which he had that night men-
tioned to the House. Nothing in his opinion could be
worse than to bring the names, of individuals into debate
on a motion like the present. The question which it
involved ought to he decided upon principle and upon prin-
ciple alone. If the principle were wrong), it would not be
made worse by mixing it up with individual cases; and
if it were right, he would take his stand upon it at once.
He would now proceed to answer the questions winch had
been put to him by an Hon. Baronet on the other side of
the I:1ou•e. The Honourable Baronet had asked him whe-
ther there were not two cases in which military offi-
cers, who had been long employed in the civil service,
hand not been allowed to sell their half-pay. He would
reply, that of the case in Ireland which the Hon. Baronet
had mentioned last, he knew nothing,—he had never heard
of it before. There was, however, a case, in which the
circumstances of which the Hon. Bart. complained had
taken place in England. And here he would observe, that
he objected generally to allowing half-pay to be sold by any
person who held a civil office. But there was one case, the
case to which allusion had been made, in which the party
on entering upon his civil employment, had received an
assurance from the head of the department under which he
served, that he should he allowed to dispose of his half-pay.
That assurance, was given under the erroneous impres-
sion that commissions of that sort might he sold according
to the ordinary rules of the service. That party subse-
quently satisfied the Treasury which examined into the
transaction, that he had incurred, in consequence of that
assurance, certain expences which he would not otherwise
have incurred. It was upon that ground, and upon that
ground alone, that he had been permitted to sell his half-
pay. It was an exception, which stood upon its own
grounds, and which did not at all affect the general principle
laid down at the War-office for these cases. He was not
prepared to say that there were not some cases in which a
sale of half-pay might not have taken place before he learnt
that the party held a civil employment; for the House must
be aware that he had no means of learning how every mili-
tary officer in the empire was employed. It had undoubtedly
happened that individuals had sent in applications to be al-
lowed to dispose of their half-pay, and that those appli-
cations had been agreed to before it was discovered that
they ought to have been refused. In one of the cases to
which he alluded, he had ordered the sale to he stopped,
but unfortunately his order was given too late. He would,
however, say, that in all cases in which he had learnt that
the pariy who applied to sell his half-pay held a civil op-
' pointment, he had decidedly objected to permit the sale.—
An Hon. Friend of his, whom he then saw in the House,
could speak to one case, in which he had felt himself
bound to deal out hard justice to a meritorious officer, to
whom, on his own account, he should be happy to have ex-
! tended the utmost indulgence. To return, however, to
the statements of the Hon. Member for Montrose, of
which he recollected that two or three had still received no
: answer. The Hon. Member had stated that this arrange-
! ;UM was the me why the half-pay list had apt at all di-

minished since 1917. The Hon. Member, when he made
that statement ought to have recollected that since that year
large reductions had taken place in the army ; and that it
was one objection to a change of system, that reductions
in one department of your expenditure always become a
source of increased expense in some other department of it.
The officers who were taken from the full-pay, were of
course placed upon the half-pay ; and hence it happened,
that as the amount of full pay diminished, that of half-pay
increased. He thought it only just to the memory of the
illustrious individual who lately filled the office of Com-
mander-in•chief—he meant the Duke of York—to state

that when a great augmentation to the army took place a
few years ago, he filled up all the commissions which it
became necessary to grant, with names of officers taken
from the half-pay. The Hon. Member for Montrose . had
said, that the total number of officers on the half-pay list
had increased of late years. He did not know from what
data the Hon. Member spoke upon that point. The Hon.
Member had moved for a return of the number of officers
on the half-pay list on two different occasions; first, in
1823, and afterwards, he believed in 1826. Now he would
state that the latter of these two returns was defective in
some respects, for it omitted an account of some officers
which ought to have been included in such a return, and
did not give a fall view of the department into which the
Hon. Member %vas anxious to inquire. It sometimes
happened that when emotions were shown to gentlemen
connected with Government, they conld give instructions
upon them to the gentlemen who were making them,
which were calculated to advance the object they had in
view. The Hon. Member had not made such application
to the people in office, and the result was, that in conse-
quence of his motion having been imperfectly worded, an
imperfect return had been made to it. He would satisfy
the Hon. Member for Montrose, that there had been a di-

minution in the number of officers on the half-pay list a'
the two periods.

Mr. HUME—No, an increase.

Lord PALMERSTON begged the Hon. Member's par-
don—it was a diminution. His surprise had been excited
at the time, as to the manner in which 60 great a dimi-
nution could have taken place. He was convinced that
there must be some mistake regarding it ; and he had set
some of the persons employed in his Office at work to
detect it. It was then discovered that the words of the
motion of the Hon. Member for Montrose were not as
general as they should have been, and that in consequence
some officers had not been included in the return, whom

it was evidently the intention of the Hon. Member to have
embraced in his motion. lie had no doubt that. the
Honourable Member, when he saw the return on Friday
morning—it had already been ordered to be produ-
ced in the Finance Committee—would be convinced of
the unintentional error into which he had formerly

fallen. The Honourable Member had then said that this
arrangement was made for the purpose of enabling large
establishments to be kept up in the office of the Com-
mander-in-Chief and of the Secretary at War. Lie was •
quite certain that he should not ask for another clerk in
his office, to transact the additional business cast upon it,
by the sale of half-pay ; and he (lid not expect that much
stress would be laid on the additional trouble which it oc-
casioned in the office of the Commander-in-Chief. He
had now stated to the House the grounds upon which the
arrangement had been made. The expense of it, he ro-
peated, was distant and reversionary, and they had to set
against it the large sum of money which had already been
paid down as the price of the commissions. He did not
think that the public would be losers by it ; but even if
they were losers by it in point of pecuniary expense, they
would be gainers by it in point of the greater efficiency
which it had already given to the army.
Mr. HUME—The Noble Lord rests his argument on

this motion upon reasons which will not bear.him out.
He says that it is necessary to weed the old officers out of
the army. If they had been going on actual service, I
could have seen some show of reason in what the Noble
Lord says. But as they are only annuitants on the public
the case is quite altered, and the sooner they die off the
better.—(A laugh.)—The Hon. Member then proceeded
to justify his former statements.
Lord PALMERSTON said, that the Government could
not deal with its old officers exactly in the manner recom-
mended by the Hon. Member for Montrose. It could not
say to them, " You must either sell or die"----it could only
say, " You must either sell or stay on the half-pay list."
Mr. MABERLY recommended the House to refer this
matter to the consideration of the Finance Committee,
which he had no doubt would investigate it satisfactorily.
Sir J. GRAHAM wished to know whether the Noble
Lord meant to say that the system to which he had alluded
was at an end, and was never to be revived again ?
Lord PALMERSTON.--I can only say, that, m far as
I am concerned, the system of allowing military officers,
who hold civil appointments, to sell their half pay, is at an
end. I cannot answer for others. I cannot say that it
will not be revived again. Under the present administra-
tion I believe it will not.
Mr. CALCRAPT approved of the efficiency which this
arrangement had given to the army: The arrangement,
instead of being prejudicial, was, he thought, of the greatest
benefit to the country ; and though he (Mr. Caleraft)Vas
as anxious for economy as any Hon. Member could be,lyet
be was often almost put out of humour with it; by the per-
verse taste of his Hen. Friend (Mr. Hume), who wished to
beggar the service he wanted to reform.
After a few words from Mr. BAILING and Sir H.
HARDING, Mr. Hume's motion was agreed to, as well as
another,\to show the number of commissions which had
become vacant since January, 1827, and the manner in
which they had been filled up.
LIFE ANNUITY ACT.

On the motion of the CHANCELLOR, of the EXCHEQUER,
the House went into a Committee upon the Life Annuity
Act, when the Right Hon. Gentleman moved an .instruc-
tion for leave to bring in a bill to give effeot to the recom-
mendation of the Finance Committee, by regulating in
future the operation of the Annuities.
Lord ALTHORP approved of the motion, and remarked.
that it had been shown by Mr. Finlayson, the actuary, that
by the present plan the public had lost 95,0001. within the
last three months, and were now losing 8,000/. a week.—
He also stated, that after be had made the calculations,
the actuary apprized both Lord Bexley and Lord Gode-
rich of the prejudicial tendency of the present arrangement.
In the very first year of the working of it, there were 540 •
annuities, making 58,0001. a•year, 228 of which were un-
expired, making now 23,0001. a-year unexpired also, and
that those who had purchased these annuities had already
received back the whole of their advances, with the addi-
tion of 10,000/.3 per cent. per annum, and what re-
mained to be paid to them would be every shilling of it
clear gain. He believed to the amount of 610,000/. a-
year had been sold in this prejudicial manner for the
public. Mr. Finlayson had stated, that so far back as
1819, he had informed Lord Bexley of this inevitable con-
sequence. It was much to be regretted that no attempt
had been made before this time to save the public from the
consequences of so ruinous a bargain.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER expressed
his belief that the loss would not be found anything like
what had been stated. The original plan had been founded
in 1806 npon the Northampton Tables, and with reference
to the price of the funds being 80. Whenever the price of
the funds exceeded 80, the public were pro tanto gainers.
The following resolution was then put : •
" Resolved—That it is expedient that a Bill be intro-
duced to repeal so much of the general Acts as empower
the Commissioners of the National Debt to grant life annui-
- ties."
After a few words from Mr. CALCRATT and Mr. Hume,
the resolution was agreed to.
The House then resumed, the resolution was reported,
and, on the motion of Mr. V. FITZGERALD, leave was
given to bring in a Bill for that purpose.
VESTRY BILL (IRELAND). . .

Mr. HUME gave notice, that on to-morrow (this day)
he would present a petition from the Catholics of Ireland
against the Vestry Bill.
On the motion of Sir JAMES GRAIZAM, an account WAS
ordered of the number of wine and spirit licences issued in
England and Wales in the years 1810, 1819, 1820, and
1527.

The House then adjourned at ten minutes past seven
o'clock.

Falkirk is generally supposed to have been
the site of one of those military stations on the Roman
Wall, known by the nillrle of the Forts of Agricola—hence
a number of the relics of the Roman people have been
found from time to time in that place and the neighbour-
hood. About 30 years ago there were discovered at Park-
house, about a quarter of a mile to the north-west of Fal-
kirk, two urns containing human bones, which bore evi-
dent marks of having been subjected to the action of fire;
these must have been Roman, for no other people ever
possessed this country with whom incremation was a cus-
tomary practice. About ten or twelve years ago a number
of fragment's of earthenware were dug up in a garden in the
Pleasance of Falkirk, and among them one vessel, round
the margin of which the word " Nocturna" was legible ;
they were generally unglazed, of a white or brown colour,
and some ornamented with raised figures on the outer sur-
face. A piece of ornamental brass that apparently had
been used as the top of a flag-staff, was also discovered near
Camelon, by workmen employed in digging the founda-
tions of a distillery there last summer.—
Caledonian
Mercury.

MR. WHITMORE'S NEW SALMON

FISHERY BILL.

(FROM A CORRESPONDINT.)
This Bill appears to be far less objectionable dim
its immediate predecessor. The clause in the former:
sill, permitting the use of stake nets, for whichsutli
a struggle was made, is now abandoned, se, that the
prohibitions of the existing law will continue in fall
operation against these mischievous engines, de
toleration and increase of which would not one
annihilate the grown fish, but prove infinitely more,
destructive to the fry than all the other injuries to.
which they are exposed.
The present Bill, however, contains one clause
which will assuredly encounter powerful, and I trust
successful, opposition.
It appoints that the fence months or close time
shall be the same in every fishing station in Great
Britain and Ireland, and shall commence on the
16th Sept. and terminate on the 14th Fehi in each year.
This strange regulation is founded on the erroneous
assumption that precisely the same period will slit
for fishing every river in the United Kingdom.
There cannot possibly be a grosser de Vision.
—ln Ireland it has been satisfactorily promeol
that there is the greatest variance in this re-
spect, the fishing season actually commencing
in some rivers at the very time that it closes in
others; and in Scotland several rivers are fished to
the greatest advantage in the months of November,
December, January, and February ; of these we
may instance the NeSs, the Couon, the Thurso, the
Shinn, and the Lewes. Other rivers again are much
later; and in short, so far from being uniform, the
fishing periods of these rivers exhibit the most re-
markable disagreement. Now, as salmon are clean
in each river only during its own proper and pecu-
liar season, the consequence of assigning the same
fence months, or close time, to every river without
exception, would be to render the taking of clean
fish illegal, and to insure the destruction of foul
fish. This result, though not contemplated by
Whitmore, would soon become apparent in the Lea-
don market.

If any general close time were fixed, the period.
between the 16th of August and the 16th of January.
would be the least inconvenient for the whole ern..
pire. But salmon will not obey the Legislature, and,
it is vain to attempt to regulate what cannot be con-
trouled. The safest course would be to appoint,
under a Parliamentary commission, certain indivi-
duals of science and experience, to examine the dif-
ferent ricers, and to report on them respectively.
This would produce a body of valuable information,
on which the Legislature might found a new law,
completely adapted to the exigencies of the subject.
It would be a great improvement if salmon were
declared the private property of the owners of fishe-
ries; and poachers should be punished as thieves.—
At all events, the penalties should be greatly in-
creased; and the appointment of Water Bailiffs to
enforce the provisions of the statute, (instead of
being left discretionary), should be made imperative
on the proprietors.

PARLIAMENTARY PAPERS.

EXPENCE OF PRINTING.

Returns to an Order of the Home of Commons, dated the
6th of March, 182 S, for an Account of the Expence of
Printing the Appendix to the Votes of the House of
Commons, tor• the years 1825, 1626, and 1827:
Session 1825.—The number• of Petitions
printed in the Appendix was 1,111,
making 790 pages; the Charge for Print-
ing amounted to £1,277 7 0
Session 1826.—The number of Petitions
printed in the Appendix was 862, making
602 pages ; the Charge for Printing
amounted to £965 12 3
Session 1827.—The number of Petitions
printed in the Appendix was 1,959,
making 1,420 pages; the Charge for
Printing amounted to £2,262 7 6
J. II NICHOLS.
Parliament-street, March 8, 1828.

Account of the Expence of preparing the Appendix to the
Votes for the Printer in the years 1825, 1626, and
1827 :
In Session 1825—The Charge for Copying
for the Press, examining the Copy and
the Proofs, amounted to £2l4 12 10
In Session 1826—The Charge for Copying
for the Press, examining the Copy and
the Proofs, amounted to £l9o 16 2
In session 1827—The Charge for Copying
for the Press, examining the Copy and
the Proofs, amounted to £427 t 1
J. H. LEY.

An Account of the Expence of Printing the following

Papers :

On the subject of the Vagrant Laws,
printed May, 1824
The Nanias of Special Juries—March,