The Sun.
London, England, 1845-07-19 00:00:00

originally proposed had been awarded. He thought
that the present motion was perfectly juctifiable. There were
feelings of duty which might sometimes overawe the liberal
feelings of the Government ; but he could assure the Right
Hon. Gentleman opposite that the Ministry had not exercised
the liberalit3 of the Crown to a sufficicat extent. It was all
very well to say that sailors and soldiers were led to acts of
bnivi.-ry out of pure patriotism ; at the same time there was
no doubt that the expectation of prize-money added a very
great zeal to their actions, and they looked forward to it as
their particular reward. There were certain instances of
suffering and severity of service which were not rewarded by
prize-money—such as disease in a foreign climate. But
when in actual battle the sailor or soldier exerted himself,
he did coasider that he was entitled to some remuneration.
The Crown had admitted that in this case there existed an
actual right to remuneration. The Chancellor of the Ex-
chequer had explained that batta was employed as a reward
because part of the forces employed were engaged in the Indian
service. But if he was not mistaken, in the ease of Rangoon,
where Indian troops had been employed, batta prize-money
also had been given. In the present case sufficient remune-
ration had not been given. The payment of the petty officers,
as compared with those paid after the battle of Navarino, had
been small. It had been one instruction to the officer in com-
mand to keep the junks in port, but they were found so nume-
rous that there was nothing to be done with them after they
had been taken, and therefore their value could not be added to
the prize-money of the force. The original instructions of the
Government were, that the value of the opium was to be
ascertained, the debt of the Hong merchants to be found out,
and the expenses of the war, to be sent into the
Chinese Government for defraying. Sir Henry Pottinger sug-
gested that he should demand one round sum for all these
items. He proposed 5,000,0001., and he (Lord Palmerston)
approved of it. The sum which was obtained was not pro-
portioned to the expenses of the war when the treaty was
signed. If the Government accepted a sum, although some-
what shaft of the sum originally demanded, it was no answer
to the demand of His Hon. Friend for sufficient remuneration
for the forces employed. The sum of 420,0001. was large,
but sums were large or small according to the object for which
they might be employed. He believed that Lord Stanley
wrote a letter in January, 1843, in which he said, that al-
though the reward for services of this nature would be reserved,
great evil arose from the too frequent interference of this House
on matters of this kind. The great moral effect which had been
promoted in the Chinese empire had arisen from the good re-
gulation and order of the military and navy employee. This
war had led to great commercial advantages, and it did seem
to him that the Government would be justified in making some
extra allowance. He thought that the Government were
making a niggardly allowance, and, from experience„ he would
say that it was the best way, in every case, to
give a fair and liberal allowance for services rendered.
There was in the public of this empire a generous feeling to do
ample justice to all who had well served their country. They
opposed a wasteful expenditure of the public money, but they
were not niggardly towards those who had done the State good
service. He hoped the subject would command the most seri-
ous attention of the Government.
Captain HARRIS said that no doubt the duty imposed was
a most unirateful one, when questions of this kind were consi-
dered. As a justification of the conduct of the Government
at the close of the Chinese war, in withholding due reward to the
troops that had beers engaged in it, he might state that at that
time there was a deficiency of 2,000,0001. in the Exchequer.
At the present time there was a surplus, and he hoped the Go-
vernment would now take the claims of these men into their
serious consideration.
Captain PLUAIRIDGE briefly defended the officers who
had been engaged in the Chinese war, from the attacks which,
he alleged, had been made upon them, in reference to the
prize money.
Sir J. DUKE deplored the mercenary character which had
been attributed to the troops and seamen who had been en-
gaged in the war, by several Gallant Officers who had taken
part in the debate. He believed that the forces of this country
required no such stimulus to action. He had been in the ser-
vice himself, and stood and fought by Lord Exmouth, and he
always found the glory and honour of England sufficient to en-
courage the seamen to do their duty.—( Hear, hear.) He would
oppose the motion.
The gallery was then cleared for a division, and the House
divided, when there appeared—
For Captain Berkeley's motion
Against it
. .

Majority against the motion.. ...... —4l
IRISH CHURCH PROPERTY.
Mr. EVELYN DENISON proceeded to call the attention
of the House to the management and disposal of that part of the
property of the Irish Church vested in the hands of the Irish
Ecclesiastical Commissioners.
Sir THOMAS FREMANTLE was not prepared to give
any answer beyond the fact that the funds which had passed
into the hands of the Irish Church Commission had been ap-
plied in the most unobjectionable manner. To satisfy Hon.
Members, however, he had no objection that further inquiry
should be made as to the particular manner in which the money
raised had been applied.
Mr. HENLEY said that some years ago the church pro-
perty was stated to be at a certain amount, but since then,
some how or other, it had nearly all disappeared. The party
opposite had put their hands upon it, and it vanished ; and he
feared what remained would disappear in the same way.
Lord BERNARD said he could speak from personal expe-
rience that many of the churches of the county in which he re-
sided were• in a most disgraceful state ; and he also knew that
in that united diocese, Divine service was performed in school-
houses for want of churches.
Mr. M. J. O'CONNELL said there were so many discre-
pancies as to the result of the sale of the reversions of the church
lands that had been sold, that he did think the matter should
be altogether revised. But, unfortunately, from the manner in
which such things were managed in Ireland, he could expect
no other result, at least as regarded the arrangement of church
property in Ireland.
Sir T. FREMANTLE begged to assure Hon. Members
opposite that, so far from this matter having been regarded
with indifference in Ireland, he could assure Hon. Members
that it had been regarded with very great anxiety. He wished
to make this observation before the discussion on the question
closed.
Mr. GROGAN said, he knew of an instance of a church
in the neighbourhood of Dublin having been taken down, under
the impression that it would be rebuilt; but though the church
had been down for the last six years, up to this day it had
never been rebuilt.
The House thee went into Committee of Supply.
On 32,300/. being proposed for law expenses,
Mr. WILLIAMS said that he should wish to know why
there should be seven lawyers connected with any Bill ? He
thought also that their salaries were much too high. He
wished to know what their duties were to be.
Mr. CARDWELL said that when their responsibilities were
understood by the Honourable Gentleman, he would not think
that their remuneration was too great.
The vote was then carried.
The sum of 30,0001. Has then proposed to defray the salaries
of the officers connected with the Insolvent Debtor's Court.
The vote was agreed to.
The sum of 18,0001. was proposed for the expenses incurred
by the reform of juvenile offenders in the Isle of Wight.
Agreed to.
The next vote was for a grant of a sum not less than 16,0001.
nor more than 18,0001. for the expenses of the Model Prison at
Pentonville.
Mr. WILLIAMS complained of the excessive charge of the
maintenance of the prisoners, which amounted to 331. per head
per annum.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM said that the Hon. Member was
mistaken; the expense was no more than three shillings per
head per week, and not only had there been a great improve-
ment in the eventual effects of punishment, but in point of
economy the public had gained considerably. The expense of
maintaining the prisoners was far less than that cf transporta-
tion, and the convicts came out of prison much improved and
better members of society.
Mr. WILLIAMS had no objection that the morals of the
prisoners should be attended to, but he questioned the pro.
priety of giving them such trades as shoemakers, &c. He
considered that it would be much better to teach them agricul-
tural occupations.
HINDLEY wished to know what was the amount of
salary received by the chaplain and medical officer ?
Mr. CARDWELL said that the chaplain received 4001
per year ; the assistant chaplain 2001. ; the medical officer
3001. ; and the resident surgeon 1001.
Mr. HINDLEY thought this monstrous.—(A laugh.) At
that rate the chaplain had 1/. a head for every inmate.
After a few words from Mr. Hawes, Mr. Ewart, Sir James
Graham, and Mr. Wakley, the vote was agreed to.
28,118/. was proposed to defray the expenses of Milbank
Penitentiary.
Mr. WILLIAMS objected to this vote, unless an explana-
tion were given of the sum exceeding the amount acceded last
year.
Sir J. GRAHAM said that the excess was caused by the ap-
pointment of inspectors of the Penitentiary, instead of unpaid
commissioners, and no one could doubt that the addition of
2001. a year to the salary of each would ensure better officers.
Mr. HINDLEY said he never had been in prisons ge-
nerally, but had been often in Milbank Penitentiary—(Loud
laughter)—and could testify to the admirable system adopted
there; he wished, however, to ask the reason of the vote ex-
ceeding its predecessor, oven after the sum allotted to the
inspectors.
Sir .1. GRAHAM replied that the remaining sum was re-
quired for the purchase of books.
The vote with the following were then agreed to :-
4,02'1 for criminal lunatics.
8,1 7 21. for the prisons and prison hoards in Scotland.
12,8101. to defray the law expenses in Scotland
69,1091. to defray the expenses •f criminal prosecutions and
other law charges in Ireland.
OR the next vote, which was 33,000/. to defray the charges
of the Dublin police force,
Mr. HINDLEY complained that this vote had increased
annually.

After a short discussion the ♦ote was agreed to ; as also
were 74671. for defraying the expenses of the convict depot
in Dublin ; 6,0001. for erecting a prison for criminal lunatics
in Dublin ; 62,3501. f,4r defraying the expenses of convict
hulks at home and abroad; and 250,0001. for defraying the
expenses and superintendence of convicts in New S9uth Wales.
Mr. WILLIAMS would like to know what description of
convicts they were that cost the public so large a sum.
Eir JAMES GRAHAM said the labour of convicts of the

worst class was mostly unproductive. Many of them worked

in chains. There wig another class of convicts more indus•

rious and well-conducted, and which did not cost the country

so much.

Mr. EWART said the free people of Van Dieman's Land
were indignant at the mode in which that colony had been
treated, and which had disseminated the seeds of vice and

anarchy throughout that island. The inhabitants were now
preparing a petition against the rotation system, as it was called
—a system, in truth, of probationary vice.
Sir J. GRAHAM said, if the interests of the colony were
alone consulted, he could net say that the present system was a
good one, but it was quite plain they could not, in this country,
accommodate the 5,000 convicts who were, on an average,
annually transported, in the same manner as the prisoners in
the Pentonviile prison, which was only capable of admitting
300 or thereabouts.

The vote was then agreed to.
75,0001. was next proposed to defray the expenses of public
education in Great Britain for 1845, which was postponed after
a short discussion.

2,0061. was next proposed to defray the salaries of professors
in Oxford and Cambridge, which was agreed to.
4,54d1. was proposed to be applied to the support of the Lon-
don University.
Mr. WAKLEY advocated the establishment of a school of
chemistry worthy of the country. He referred to the opinions
of Professor Leibig on the subject, who had stated that the
science of chemistry in this country was in a miserable con-
dition.

Sir R. PEEL considered that there was no necessity for the
establishment of such a school, in addition to those already in
existence. In the Universities of London and Edinburgh
sufficient provision was made for giving efficient instruction
in the science.

3The
l vote
awas
nest then
proposed
agreed to.
and agreed to for the Irish
Academy.
7,350/. was agreed to for the Scotch Universities
3001. was agreed to for the London Hibernian Ac.ademy.
5,550/, was proposed and agreed to for the Royal Dublin
Society.
2,1101. was proposed for the Royal Belfast Institution, but
after a short discussion it was withdrawn.
52,3201. was next proposed to defray the expense of re-
British Muutuu.
buijding sad Autameuting thg