Star.
London, England, 1830-03-10 00:00:00

those gentlemen for the candid manner In which they admitted the
benefit of the course adopted by the government.
Mr. ROBINSON said a few word., which were not heard in the

gaile
Mr. LITTLETON observed that there was no branch of the
manufacturing interests which felt more severely the pressure of the
existing distress than the iron trade. Their difficulties were unpre-
cedented within his memory.
The petition was referred to the committee on the East India
Charter.

-171;:lITTLETON presented a petition from the Inhabitants of
Hanley and other places in the neighbourhood of the Staffordshire ,
pteriee, praying for the abolition of West India Slavery.
Lord LEVESON GOWER brought in a bill for the better re-
gulation of the Office of Sheriffs of Counties in Ireland, which was
read a first time.—To be printed, and read a second time on Thurs-
day, the 29th inst.
Lod F. L. BOWER then brought in a bill to enable the corn.
miseioners of Ardglass Harbour, in Ireland, to enter into contracts
and to borrow money for the improvement of the harbour.--Read a
first time.

Ordered to be printed, and read a second time on Tuesday next.
Mr. WESTERN presented a petition from the Owners and
Occupiers of land in the parish of Weathenfield, in Essex, com.
plaining of distress, and praying for a reduction of the duties on
malt and beer. _ _ _ . . _ . .

TRAI;IT moved for a oopy of the Commission of inquiry
into the state of the Ecclesiastical courts in England and Wales.—
Ordered.

liir. COURTENAY presented a ktetition from the merchants,
shipowners, and traders at the Cape of Good Hope. against the mo-
nopoly of the East India Company.—Refined to the committee on
the East India Charter.

SUPPLY.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved that the
Report of the Committee of Supply be received.
Mr. R. GORDON rose to move a resolution on the subject of
half-pay. He wanted to establish some principle--he did not bring
it forward on personal grounds ; he wanted to prevent partiality and
unfair play. His resolution was, " That it is the opinion of this
house, that as certain regulations are in force by which half-pay
officers of the navy army, ordnance, or marines, are prevented from
receiving the whole, or part of their half-pay, during the period
they may enjoy the emoluments of any civil offices, it is expedient
and just that the same regulations shall extend to all officers of the
army, navy, ordnance, or marines, in the receipt of full pay or of
profit, from naval or military allowances, or from emoluments from
naval or military appointments." Some on accepting service In
dull departments lost their half-pray, while others retained it.
That was the case with the Secretary to the Colonies, and the Se-
cretary at War—one lost the half-pay, the other continued to receive.
He thought when civil office was accepted, the half-pay ought to
cease, and on the civil service ceasing that the half pay should be
resumed; he did not want to withdraw any honours; lie only was
against partiality. Why should a colonel having civil office remain
on full pay, and others having only half pay, not be allowed a civil
office ? A lord of the admiralty might receive half pay as an ad.
miral, and full pay at a general ; ought these different arrangements
to continue? The condition of many of the half pay was most de.
plowable; but if the stem arrangements were continued regarding
them, he should have a right to complain, if it were not extended
to all classes of pay (Hear.) He concluded with moving the reso-
lution given as shove.
Sir H. HARDINGE was of opinion that the batter way would
be to allow the half-pay officer to accept of civil Ace widely& the
forfeiture of half-pay. There were only three AIM that balmy
of upon full pay, who were allowed to hold civil odiese, and deers
were under peculiar circumstances. He thought it would not be
advisable to apply the rule strictly to those who had retired on full
pay, after a life spent in the service of their country. The symms
at present adopted was that, in fact, which had been at all times psi.
sued. It appeared to him that the argument of the hon. member
amounted to this, that because they had always acted harshly is.
wards the half-pay officers, they should extend now a similar Web
proceeding towards the full-pay officers.
Sir. F. /3URDETT said that he thought the half-pay Amin
were not properly requited. And he had doubt but they might be
employed in many offices without the slightest detriment to dm
public. On the contrary, he thought the advantage would be ma.
teal—to the country as well as to the officers themselves.
Mr. FERGUSON recommended that his honourable friend
would withdraw his motion, for he felt that the present system
was a gross injustice to the half-pay officers, and one which ought
not to be extended to the full-pay officers.
Lord ALTHORP said it was painful, no doubt, to the govern.
'sent to extend principles of economy too closely, and it was elm
very painful to gentlemen not connected with the government to re.
commend retrenchment in individual aces—(hear, hear ;)—but it
was necessary to do so.--(Hear, hear, hear.) It had been said that
the half-pay officers ought to be placed on the same footing in this
respect as officers on full pay, but with what consistency could they
n government thus to add to the expenses of the coosinlei ye
sil
eanril:2:
same time press retrenchment upon them? (Chem.
He should, with this view of the case, vote for the motion,
the question be pressed to a division. (Cheers.)
Mr. HUSKISSON said, he entertained views very similar to
those of the noble iced who had just sat down, but he thought the',
better way would be to withdraw the motion, which was incon.l
venient, coming as it did incidentally before the house upon a night
fixed for discussion upon the difficulties of the country. He must gay,
however, that he could see no good reason for not reducing the ful.
pay officers to the situation of those on half-pay, with respect to the
acceptance of civil offices. The only reason assigned by his right
hon. Mend for the distinction was, that it had been the custom that
one class should enjoy the privilege. and another not. (Cheers.)...
There was no Fincisloeu; present applied to the system of retired
allowances, and he ht it requisite that some principle should
be adopted, and he wou.d, on a future occasion, bring the whole
subject before the house. The alterations and retrenchments were
forced upon the government, and it was surprising with how much
facility they were made when government found itself armed with a
positive resolution of the house in their support. (Cheers.)
Mr. GORDON replied, and said, that after all he had heard he
melsesed that he could see no just reason whatever for the distinction
beams officers on full and half-pay in this respect. Why should
en diest Naive his pay as such when appointed to an office with
mask Webs pay attached to it ? He . should not, however, after
what had farm from the house, pens has resolution to such a com-
mittee. upon the understanding that the right hon. gen-
thman2-• (Mr. Huskisson)—intended to bring the whole sub.
jest of retired allowances before the house, and if he also should
receive an intimation that a committee of inquiry would be agreed
to when the right honourable gentleman Auld bring forward that
motion.
Mr. Secretary PEEL said, that it was impartible that ministers
could say what steps they would be disposed to take in reference to
a motion which was not only not before the knee, but for the die.
cussion of which notice had not been given. At the same time, to
show the intentions of Government, his right hon. friend (the Chan-
cellor of the Exchequer) bad, last Session, moved for leave to bring
in a bill to regulate retired allowances, and it was at present under
consideration to bring that bill forward again.
Mr. HUSKISSON said, that he had not pledged himself to bring
forward any specific motion upon the subject, though he thought ft
ought to be done, and most likely it would be done by the Chan.
1 'r of the Exchequer.
Mr. PEEL said, that his right hon. friend had actually acted on
the principle of the bill of last session, though that bill had not
, and had deducted for the pay of officers for the purpose of
SLoI
for them a retired allowance.
HOWICK hoped that his hon. friend would not withdraw
his resolution, without receiving something like a distinct pledge '
that a committee of inquiry should be mr.. to. lie thought that
full half pay officers ought to be pia •-• upon an equality, but in
what way that equality should be effected should be left for the de-
aden of a committee of inquiry. He could not help feeling stir.
prise that the hon. member for Westminster should in this instance
beopposed
eilliEßLiztchtLeungtht government would lend themselves to
ally inquiry, but that house always opposed the wishes of govern.
mast, when the government itself were desirous of retrenchment.
This he felt necessary to say in mere justice to the government.
The house was in fault, and not the government.
Mr. PEEL hoped the house would not force him to pledge him.
self SO II notice of the terms, of which be was wholly ignorant.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer was to bring forward his estimate
of the expenditure on Monday next. That expenditure was eleven
millions, half of which, or more than half—six millions—wm for
retired allowances, and was it likely that such a subject would net
be dwelt upon in that statement ? (Chan.)
Lord Homes and Sir H. Kennesaw explained.
Mr. HUME thought the better way would be to postpone the
consideration of the ronendment until after the intenders& of the
Chancellor of the Exchequer should be before the house.
Mr. GORDON said he understood the hon. member for Liver.
pool to say, that if no one else would bring forward the subject, be
would (cheers.)
Mr. HUSKI/3SON said that he had said so.
Mr. GORDON said, that he would in that ease withdraw his re-
solution, trusting that the right honourable gentleman would not
wait for any gentleman on his (Mr. Gordon's) side of the house to
bring it forward, as It would be much more ably dealt with on his
own (hear hare)
The resolution was then withdrawn.
The report of the Committee of Supply was then brought up,
end several resolutioU were agreed to.
Mr. HUME said he thought it very desirable that no vacancy
should be filled up until after the result of the inquiry they were
about to make was before the house. He undertood the Chief of '
the Tontine was dead, and he trusted the office would not be filled
up until after the Inquiry.