The Sun.
London, England, 1842-05-21 00:00:00

THE SUN, LONDON. SATURDAY EVENING, MAY 2l, 1842

stopping the train much more difficult to be, exe-
cuted. It 'is not on account of security,. idds the
letter,--that six-wheeled—carriTies were introduced,
Thut in order to gain' more power. In fact,they are
rejected at present by avast number of engineers. If an
estimate were to be made of the accidents which have
occurred on the various railroads where one or the
other system is adopted, the conclusion would be come
to that the number is much less on the London and
Birmingham Railroad, where four-wheeled car-
riages are alone used, than on all the rest. The
number of passengers on this railway amounts, for
ten years, to some millions. During that time
there have been 120 or 140 grave accidents, of which
about the sixtieth part were fatal. " I should
have wished," says M. Delessert's correspondent,
in conclusion, " to prohibit the use of locomotives
joined together, for there is no doubt that the danger
' is increased when two machines are attached to a large
train. ,
,But it has been found impossible to adhere to
this measure, the wants of the service requiring more
waggons than could he drawn by a single locomotive.
The passengers, however, are constantly separated
from the steam-engine by a waggon filled with
parcels and goods." After the reading of this letter,
M. Perdonnet, formerly an engineer of the Versailles
and Meudon Railway, and who is said to have been
recently charged with the re-organization of the
service, and the adoption of all possible precautionary
measures to prevent the recurrence of accident, was
permitted to read a long paper on the points under
consideration by the Academy. In this paper M.
Perdonnet, after a preamble which is only of in-
terest to scientific men, says—" Four-wheeled loco-
motives are much less subject to get off the rail in
curves, which must be considered a great advantage.
When the front axletree breaks, as occurred the other
day, the locomotive with four wheels falls, and gets
off the rail ; but the six-wheeled engine, in a similar
case, does the very same, and arises from the circum-
stance of the portion f the weight of the machine
which rests on the axletree being almost always pre-
ponderant. What proves .how little Stephenson, the
ablest locomotive manufacturer in England, reckons
on the middle and hind axletrees in a six-wheeled lo-
comotive to support the machine in case of the front
axletree's breaking, is, that he suppresses the ledge of
the wheels of the middle axletree, and thus renders
the !getting off the rails inevitable should the front
axletree break. Six-wheeled locomotives, in cer-
tain cases, when the rails are curved, can rest
on only four wheels, the two others being, as it were,
suspended in the air. In this case they often break
the rails by their enormous weight, which, in its turn,
becomes a new cause for getting off the rails. Four-
wheeled locomotives always rest on four, or at least
on three points, and, as they are much less ponderous,
the pressure on the rail is less. And, therefore, it is
generally acknowledged that the breaking of the
axletree is more frequent in six-wheeled locomotives
than in those with four. A proof of this is, that on
the London and Birmingham Railroad, where four-
wheeled locomotives are exclusively employed, and on
the Manchester and Liverpool line, where both sorts
are used, accidents are neither more frequent nor
more disastrous than where six-wheeled locomotives
alone are made use of. If, therefore, some engineers
prefer six-wheeled locomotives, it is not by any
means because they are attended with less danger.
It is because they are more powerful, and, on that
account, more suitable, in certain cases, such as steep
ascents. Also, because engineers consider them as
requiring less repairs and less fuel." On the question
of connecting two locomotives, as was the case on the
Meudon and Versailles line, by placing the weaker
one, with four wheels, in front, M. Perdonnet says :
" Admitting that four-wheeled locomotives are quite
as safe as those with six wheels, and allowing them,
above all, the advantage of being less dangerous in
the curves, it was natural that on the left-bank line,
where curves are frequent, the four-wheeled loco-
motive should be placed most undoubtedly in front,
in order that the train might be guided more
safely. This was recommended by. George him-
self, who was a clever engineer, and the reason which
we have just assigned, powerful as it is to justify this
mode of placing the locomotives, is not the only
one that may be assigned. The effort at the moment
of departure ought to be gradual, weak at first, in
order to stretch the chains which unite the waggons,
and greater afterwards to drag on the train. It is
proper, therefore, that the locomotive in front should
be the weaker one." On the important question, as
or whether large or small trains ought to be pre-
fer ed, M. Perdonnet adds :—" The use of several
locomotives to draw large trains is general on a great
number of railroads, and I am not aware that, up to
the present time, any grave inconveniences have been
felt from the practice. We must allow, first of all, that
the momentum of a large train is greater than that of a
smaller one, and therefore an accident, in the first case,
is more grave than in the other. But the question
must not be examined in a single point of view. If large
trains are in this respect more dangerous, there are
cases in which they offer more security. On the
railroads in the neighbourhood of Paris, the use of
small trains following at short intervals would, on
fete-days, be nearly impossible, for time would be
wanting to execute the shifting at the stations. Be-
sides this sort of service would increase the chances
of accident. • On the Versailles line large trains
leave every half hour, so that small ones should set
out every quarter. If any delay occurred in the
progress of one of those trains, that which followed
might. overtake it. An accident sufficiently grave
occurred in this way on the St. Germain line, at the
Asnieres station, in consequence of the trains starting
every quarter of an hour. Considered in another point of
view, large trains appear to be .attended with less
danger than the small ones. For, suppose that a train
of thirty waggons be drawn by three locomotives,
should the axle-tree of the second or third break, it is
possible that the first might continue to drag on the
two others, and the passengers would have merely to
sustain a shock. If on the other hand the great train
be divided into three each, drawn by one locomotive,
should an accident occur to the machine, a certain
number of passengers must necessarily suffer from it.
M. Elie de Beaumont has asserted, that with double
locomotives, there are double causes of accident.
Undoubtedly there are double causes, but there are
also twice the number of waggons pulled on, and
the passengers on the one-half of the train placed
behind run no danger whatever in case of the loco-
motive getting offthe rails. If the train were divided
and the locomotives separated, there would be for
the second half of the train, separated from the first,
and drawn by the second locomotive, just as much
danger as for the first. That learned person has also
stated that it is difficult to make two locomotives
work
,in unison. But a perfect harmony is not ne-
cessary, and, besides, if, as M. de Beaumont says, ma-
chines are not intelligent, engineers are, and they
regulate and control their machines better than pos-
tilions govern their horses. A second machine could,
however, in certain cases, I confess, impede the
motions of the first, but in other cases it gives assist-
ance. Suppose, for instance, that an obstacle were
suddenly seen on the road, it would be more easy to
stop the train with two locomotives than with one, for
a double force is at the engineer's disposal. The im-
pulsion of a train might be mastered by two machines,
though one might be ineffectual. In conclusion, I
declare, that four-wheeled locomotives are not more
dangerous than with six, and that they are more
steady in their mode of going; that, when a six-
wheeled and four-wheeled locomotive are used toge-
ther, the latter ought to be placed in front; and that
large trains do not expose passengers to greater danger
than small ones multiplied, but their speed ought to
be moderated." The remaining part of the paper read
by M. Perdonnet is devoted to an inquiry as to the pre'
cautions necessary to prevent accidents. It is of less in-
terest than the portion, which we have given above ;
for in that distinct assertions are made, which, al-
though they may be controverted by other engineers,
are important in themselves, whereas, in the second
portion of the paper, the author deals more in gene-
ralities. M. Perdonnet notices three points, which
had already been discussed by the Academy-Ist.
The use of a sort of hook or drag to impede the
motion, and, in case of accident, unconnect the train ;
2d, the propriety of rendering the wood of the car-
riages incombustible ; and 3d, the addition of wag-
gons without passengers, and filled with inert matter,
before and behind the train. The first two points
are but slightly glanced at ; on the third, M. Per-
donnet says—" Such a measure would be very one-
rous for Railway Proprietors who have to convey mer-
chandise, and where the railway declinations exceed
certain limits. In such case the practice would augment
beyond measure the dead weight." The objection of
M. Perdonnet is founded on the expense to railroad
companies of carrying a dead weight; but it strikes
us also that a dead weight would increase the momen-
tum of a train on a descent, and would therefore be
dangerous to passengers with an otherwise heavy
train. Such danger can only be avoided by having
short trains. After the reading of this paper, M.
Bosquillon made some observations on the changes•
which malleable iron undergoes by use and
time. He stated that after a certain period it
becomes crystallised and brittle, more especially
when exposed to sudden shocks and the influence
of vibration. It has been frequently remarked (he
said) that the axletrees of locomotives which have
been a considerable time in use suddenly snap and
show a crystalline appearance, similar to cast-iron.
He therefore proposes that the axletrees should be
carefully examined from time to time, in order to
ascertain the molecular change of the internal parts of
the metal. The business terminated with the reading
of a letter by M. Arago, from Mr. Manby, the Eng-
lish engineer, corroborating many of the facts and
inferences alluded to above. The other business
before the Academy was without importance.
•111=1,0111.
A letter f be A

cep .tom Pisa, in the Augsburg Gazette,
says : —The University of that place has been closed in conse-
quence of an attack committed by some of the students on Pro-
fessor del Rosso, for having proposed to exclude from the lec-
tures some of the youth, who have been guilty of unpardonable
excesses. The Government is said to have ordered a revision
of the University statutes.

SIR .1 WALSH'S MOTION.
TO THE EDITOR OP THE St7N.

28, Berkeley-squai-e, -May 21, 1824.
Sir,—My attention having fiee'n directed to an ar-
ticle in the Times tif this morning, in which my
conduct is much aniinadyerted upon, for not having
brought forward a motion Of which I had given no-
tice with reference to Mr. Roebuck's Committee, I
beg your, insertion of the following explanation, which
I am unwilling to defer a day : •
I had in the first instance conceived that my mo-
tion would have been entitled to .precedence as a mat-
ter of privilege, in which case I could have brought.
it before a full House, at the commencement of the
public business. I subsequently ascertained that I
was mistaken in this supposition. "The Speaker over-
ruled Mr. Charles Buller's attempt to bring forward
the Bridport case upon the same ground. As on
Fridays orders of the day have precedence of notices
of motion, and as I found I could prefer no claim of
privilege, my motion was necessarily postponed until
a very numerous list of orders of the day was, dis-
posed of. .•

With every wish to take the sense of the House
upon a question which I consider of great constitu-
tional importance, I must still think that I exercised
a sound discretion in not attempting to bring the
subjects under its consideration at a late hour, and
when there was a very thin attendance of Members.
Those who are familiar with Parliamentary proceed-
ings will be aware that such a course would have been
most unusual, and calculated to prejudice the ques-
tion. No full discussion or deliberate decision of the
House could, under such circumstances, have been
obtained.

I have the strongest conviction that no fair oppor-
tunity of bringing this matter forward has been lost
by me, and I shall be most anxious to do so at the
earliest period the forms of the House will allow.
I have the honour to be, Sir,
Your most obedient servant,
JOHN WALSH.

FROM LAST NIGHT'S GAZETTE.

DIVIDENDS.
At the Court of Bankruptcy, Basitighall-street.
A. Clugston and C. P. Chapman, brokers, Thames-street,
June 10, at half-past eleven—B. Baker, distiller, St. John-
street, Cleikenwell, June 10, at twelve—G. Woodcott, builder,
Brownlow-mews, Gray's Inn-lane, June 15, at two—O.
Thomson, coal merchant, Hackney, June 13, at two—A.
Dixon and W. Taylor, merchants, Huddersfield, ;Yorkshire,
June 13, at half-past one—M. Parkes, printseller, Golden.
square, June 11, at one—J. Bowers, grocer, Chipstead, Kent
—E. and C. C. Manning, drapers, High-street, Aldgate, Juno
11, at twelve.

In the Country.
T. and D. M'Burnie, dyers, Huddersfield, Yorkshire, June
10, at one, at the Pack Horse Inn, Huddersfield—W. Iredale,
merchant, Almondbury, Yorkshire, June 13, at four, at the
George Inn, Huddersfield—G. Jackson, timber merchant, Bir-
mingham, June 23, at two, at the Waterloo-rooms, Birming-
ham—J. Carter, woolstapler' Bristol, June 13, at one, at the
Commissioners'-rooms, Leeds—J. R. Henderson, wine mer-
chant, Leicester, June 13, at ene, at the Blue Lion, Leicester
—R. Banks, ship-builder, Boston, Lincolnshire, une 14, at
two, at the Peacock Inn, Boston—W., H., and J. S. Green-
wood,
cloth manufacturers, Calverley Mills, Yorkshire, June
15, at ten, at the Commissioners'-rooms, Leeds—D. Hughes,
lime burner, Welchpool, Montgomeryshire, June 18, at one, at
the Royal Oak Inn, Welchpool—R. Goolden, carrier, Welch-
pool, Montgomeryshire, June 18, at twelve, at the Royal Oak
Inn, Welchpool—H. underland and G. Wrigge, dealers iu
cotton warps, Huddersfield, Yorkshire, June 13, at eleven, at
the White Swan Inn, Huddersfield—J. and J. S. Tolson, fancy
cloth manufacturers, Huddersfield, Jan. 13, at three, at the
George Hotel, Huddersfield—E. Harper, grocer, Steeple
Cleydon, Buckinghamshire, June 13, at twelve, at the George
Inn, Aylesbury—S. Belt and J. Whitfield, merchants, Winla-
ton, Durham, June 6, at twelve, at the Commission-room, New-
castle .upon-Tyne—C. Pain, hat manufacturer, Liverpool, June
IS, at twelve, at the Clarendon-rooms, Liverpool—J. Brooks,
grocer, Manchester, June 17, at eleven, at the Commissioners'-
roam, Manchester:—J. Shand, victualler, Liverpool, June 16,
at one, at the Clarendon-rooms, Liverpool.
CERTIFICATES—JUNE 10.

J. H. Arnold and W. H. Woollett, ship and insurance
agents, Clement's-lane, London—T. F. Balls, coach proprietor,
Vassal .road. Brixton—R. Brownlow, silk dresser, White-street,
Finsbury—W. Marshall and H. Rodgers, ironfounders, Liver-
pool—W. Routledge, wine merchant, Liverpool—J. Dickin-
son, !drysalter, Bramley, Yorkshire—R. Tovey, pawnbroker,
Bristol.

STRANGE PROCEEDINGS IN THE
GLASGOW UNIVERSITY.
(From the Glasgow Argus.)
The re-election of Lord Dunfermline, as Dean of Fa-
culties in the University of Glasgow, took place, a
few days ago, under circumstances of an extraordinary
and unprecedented character. For the better under.
standing of the curious matter we are about to deal
with, let us first state some preliminary facts.
There is an office in the University termed " Dean of
Faculties," of an honorary kind, like the Rector, and,
like him, elected every year, only the electors are the
Senate, or whole body of Professors, instead of the stu-
dents, as in the latter case. This officer possesses im-
portant powers ; he has a vote in the election of those
Professors who are nominated by the College, and he is
one of a Court, now nearly obsolete, which is authorised,
by the old charters of the University, to inspect and
pass the University accounts. As a matter of course,
the party which has so long ruled in the University
made a point of selecting a Dean to their e. who
would object to none of their purposes—but last year a
great change had come over the state of things.
It so happened, that by the institution of new Profes-
sorships, and other causes, the majority was found to
have passed from the old party in the Senate, and the
other gentlemen, although by no means agreeing on all
points, agreed in the act of electing, as Dean:of Faculties,
the Hon. Lord Dunfermline. This act was accompanied
by protests on the part of the Principal and others against
the votes of three of the Professors, who were said to
have neglected to subscribe the Confession of Faith, As
regards at least one of the gentlemen, the proceeding
was of the most frivolous and captious description.
After receiving his appointment, he went to the Presby-
tery of Edinburgh and signed the Confession, but
it was maintained, under some old statute, that this
ought to have been done before the Presbytery of
the bounds within which the University is situated.
Well, nothing occurred to call especially for Lord Dun-
fermline's installation, and his year of nominal office
wore away. His Lordship, however, desired to be pre-
sent at the distribution of prizes on the 30th of April—
the day preceding the expiry of his year in office, and
expressed his wish to be installed—to which the Senate
agreed; the Principal, of course, reserving his protests.
The installation, therefore, proceeded, and would have
passed off, as it really was, very much as a matter of form,
but for the following significant occurrence. On the Pro-
fessors standing up in the usual manner to witness the
administration of the oaths, the ceremony was inter-
rupted as follows:
Dr. FLEMING.—Stop ! I have now a question to put.
By an Act of Parliament the officers of the Scottish
Universities ought to have subscribed the Confession of
Faith, and to conform to the Church of Scotland. I
beg to ask Lord Dunfermline if he possesses this qua-
lification ?
Lord DUNFERMLINE.—Before answering this ques-
tion, which I consider an invidious one, I beg to ask the
Senate, first, if it is a usual question; and, secondly, if it
is the Senate's pleasure that I shall answer it ?
A discussion ensued, in the course of which it ap-
peared that the statute had never been enforced in re-
gard to the honorary officers of the University, and Dr.
Fleming was asked why he had remained silent when
Lord Stanley, Sir Robert Peel, Sir James Graham, and
others, had been installed. The Senate resolved that
Lord Dunfermline should be requested not to answer
the question. Upon proceeding to consider the form in
which the minutes should be recorded, the discussion
was renewed.
Dr. FLEMING—Minute the question, and that Lord
Dunfermline declines to answer it !
Another PROFESSOR—No ! Minute the question, and
that the Senate request Lord Dunfermline not to answer
it !

The Senate resolved that the minute should run in the
latter form.
Will the Universities of Scotland be pleased to ponder
over this ? Will the friends of education throughout the
country be good enough to mark well whereunto all this
tends ? Will it be observed also, in the most emphatic
manner, that the offence came, not from red-hot Non-
Intrusionists, but from one of the mouth-pieces of Prin-
cipal Macfarlan ? On the taste of such interference
it is needless to remark. Lord Dunfermline might
well term it invidious, for it is notorious that the
party who now ventured to push forward such a
question, and to revive an absolete Act, is the very one
by which the triumphs of Toryism, by the election of
Peel, Stanley, and Graham, to an office in all respects
similar, were rung through the whole country. So
much for consistency—so much for fairness—so much
for the real character of certain members of the Church
party, who, in their late manifestations against Non-In-
trusionists, affected to be free from that thirst after
priestly power with which they taxed their opponents.
We come now to the second part of our curious history.
Lord Dunfermline's year of office terminated two clays
after his installation, but it has been the immemorial
practice to extend the Dean's term of office to two years,
in the same manner as the Rector's, by a pro forma
election the second time. The protests of the Principal
too had fallen, because the three Professors formerly
objected to could not now be challenged, and the majority
in favour of Lord Dunfermline was augmented by
several votes, in consequence of other changes in
the Senate. No one in these circumstances en-
tertained a doubt of his Lordship's harmonious
re-election ; but mark the sequel. Little did those
confiding persons understand the length of the
line of 1)r. Fleming and Principal Macfarlan. It so
happened, that, in consequence of the illness of some of
the Professors, and the absence of others, those favour-
able to Lord Dunfermline, and also a majority of the
whole present, did not, at the meeting held on the 30th
of April, constitute an absolute majority of the whole
Senate, and therefore a legal quorum ; and while, al-
though the rule of courtesy was to re-elect Lord Dun-
fermline,—while, though they knew that his Lordship's
re-election was according to the wish of the majority of
their colleagues, absent and present,—while, though it
was also the election for which their Lord Rector
had last year given his express vote—all this—
nay, ten times more, availed nothing with the Very
Reverend Principal, who, with his tail, marched off at
the conclusion of the distribution of the prizes, and ren-
dered a legal meeting impossible. This act, in itself so
utterly discourteous, was done, too, in the worst possible
manner. It seems it has been the invariable custom that
the Professors drink a farewell glass of wine together,
after the close of the Session, in the Senate-room. It
was quite open to the Principal, after he had done this
usual courtesy, to state, that he and his friends had
reasons to decline attending any meeting on that day.
But no ! Lord Dunfermline, and all his colleagues who
did not choose to vote with him, had to be scouted, and
even a glass of wine was not to be drunk. Really, if
all this were not so ludicrous, it would be absolutely
lamentable ; nor is it possible it can appear otherwise, to
any one whose moral perceptions have not been de-
stroyed by familiarity with the lowest trick of party.
The deserted gentlemen called another meeting for
Monday, the 2d of May, and took care to ensure a
quorum; although several of them had in consequence to
depart from arrangements which called them to a dis-
tance from Glasgow. At the hour on Monday—still no
Principal—no Dr. Fleming—no Dr. Hill—no nobody.
The man whom even Sir Robert Peel declared to be one
of the fittest men in the House of Commons for the dig-
nity of its .President, was unworthy even of a courteous
reception from Principal Macfarlan, as the Dean of Fa-
culties in the University of Glasgow The election of
course proceeded, and Lord Dunfermline was unani-
mously re-elected. A few circumstances occurred at the
meeting which merit attention, both from their intrinsic
value and the lesson they read. It was moved by
Professor Ramsay, and seconded by Professor Lushing-
ton, that the thanks of the Senate be given to Lord Dun-
fermline for his refusal at last meeting to give any coun-
tenance to the attempt made to revive the enforcement
on the honorary officers of the University of the pro-
visions of an Act now in disuse ; and Dr. William
Thomson tabled some resolutions for discussion at the
first meeting of next session, which must open the whole
question.
We have no remarks to add to this narrative, which
speaks for itself, farther then to deplore the lamentable
want of dignity—of anything like what is owing to
University—so manifest in proceedings like these ; . and
to state our often-repeated conviction that neither Tory
nor Whig Government will long shield from thorough
reform an Institution in which such proceedings can exist.

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.
HOUSE OF COMMONS, Mau 20,
The SPEAKER took the Chair at Four o'Clock.
PRIVATE BILLS.
The Report on the Holy well Roads Bill was brought
up and received. The Bill was ordered to be engrossed.
The Aberdeenshire Roads Bill was read a third time,
and passed. -
Mr. BECKETT presented several petitions from Leeds,
against the Leeds' Improvement Bill.

SUPPLY.
The House then went into Committee of Supply.
ORDNANCE ESTIMATES.
Captain BOLDER() rose to bring the Ordnance
Estimates before the Committee, but owing to
the noise in the House, was for some time very
indistinctly heard in the gallery. We under-
stood him to say, that a reduction of
59,0001. had taken place in the expenditure
since last year. A new source of expenditure had,
however, arisen since then, as it was necessary that
whatever steps might be taken by our opponents, we
should be enabled to adopt corresponding measures
to ensure success. It was his duty to call the attention
of the Committee to the unfortunate, melan-
choly, and disastrous intelligence that had
reached us from India. In consequence of that
intelligence, great additional expenditure had been
thrown upon the Ordnance department which had been
unlooked for, unexpected, and therefore unprovided for.
It was, therefore, his unpleasant duty to ask for
additional advances to cover the expenditure
necessary to meet the exigencies of the ease.
In consequence of an event that occurred during the past
year, an event over which they had no control, he alluded
to the conflagration in the Tower, a heavy amount
was classed under the head of small arms.
By a vote of that House, it had been agreed
that the weapon placed in the hands of the
soldier, should be changed from flint to percussion ; the
vote then taken amounted to 130,000/, a larger sum
than had been voted under that head by Par-
liament, from 1816 to 1840. Large as that stain
was, they were obliged now to ask an additional sum of
50,000/., or a sum in the whole of 180,000/. Had it not
been for the fire in the Tower, they should not
have had to ask for more than half of
the 50,000/. As he had touched upon the
fire in the Tower, lie thought this would be a favour-
able opportunity for disabusing the public mind of the
erroneous impressions that had prevailed as to the amount
of the loss. He had seen it stated at various sums,
from half a million to 250,0001. Perhaps it would be
some satisfaction to the Committee if he stated that the
whole amount of the loss to be provided for
by the public, scarcely exceeded the half of the
last sum he had mentioned, or 128,000/. At the
time of the fire, there were in the tower 94,520 stand of
arms ; about 4,000 were saved, and 12,000 were, before
the fire, in a useless state ; the number consumed was
78,500. The building was in such a state previous to the
fire, that it would not have been prudent to repair it ;
the weight of the small arms in the upper story had
made the walls swerve from the perpendicular, so that a
new building would have been preferable to repairing the
old one ; the value of the building, therefore, was
not put down at all. On the whole, that fire had thrown
an extra 50,000/. upon them. In the Commissariat De-
partment he asked 64,000 L, which was double the
amount of last year, in consequence of the usual
vote not being enough to cover the expenditure.
An item of 7,0001. was put down in consequence of the
birth of an heir to the Throne, which caused a Brevet in
the Army and Navy. This was estimated for seven-
teen months, and he calculated that next year it
would be but 5,000/. The remaining votes were
divided into ten heads, and under three only was
there an increase, amounting only to 3,0001. on the three.
In the civil service there was an increase amounting to
2,1691., but that increase arose from 1,3251., which was for
salaries on foreign stations, which had not hitherto been
borne in the estimate. The whole increase on the esti-
mate was 8001., which was caused by the increased
salaries for the civil service, in consequence of
length of time. The next vote was No. 4 ;
on that vote there was an increase, but the
actual increase was only 86/., that was caused
by the barrack-masters and servants at the Colo-
nial Barracks in Jamaica ; this vote was now
included for the first in the Ordnance estimates.
In the next vote, which was No. 9, there:was an increase,
but in all the items he had mentioned, there was not
a greater increase than 7,000/., and the diminution
in all the other estimates covered the increase by 50,0001.
In the vote for the Royal Engineers and Sappers and
Miners there• was a diminution of 4111. In the next
vote for the Royal Artillery there was a decrease of 3,70 G/.
Although the effective force was the same as last year,
that diminution had arisen in consequence of the dif-
ferent arrangements he had made in pay and clothing.
The expense of the Artillery academy at Woolwich had for-
merly been voted under four or five different heads, but it had
appeared to him mueh better that they should all be included
in one. The whole expense of the establishment was 1a,082/.
There were contributions amounting to 14,585/, leaving to be
voted by Parliament the sum of 1,497/., less by 3,756/. than
the amount voted last year. On vote 5 there was a diminu-
tion of 7,616/. The diminution would have been 17,160/,
had they not taken 9,000/. for the repair of the barracks in
Jamaica and in the Mauritius. In the 6th vote there was a
diminution of 16,714/.' arising from the survey of Ireland
being nearly completed, and a less sum being required for
that object. In the 7th vote, which was a very important
one, they had taken less for stores in the Tower 8,0001., less
for shot and shells, 24,000/. ; less for perishable articles,
such as bedding and furniture, 8,0001. ; less for great coats
and other articles, 10,000/, making a diminution, so
far, of 50,184/. Then there was an increase in
small sums of 50,000/., which would leave a balance
of 184/. in favour of the public. The vote No. 8 was
what was called an unprovided item. It was for '2,7881. for
the service of the Artillery. In this there was an increase of
7511. over the estimate of last year. In No. 10 there was
also an increase, and the whole amount of the item was 29.4814
for the service of the Commissariat. He had now gone
through all the votes in that department, and then he came to
(as we understood) the estimates for buildings and other
works, connected with the Ordnance, at home anti in the
colonies. The House was already acquainted with
all the circumstances of every item but one, and that
was the vote of 8,000/. for the two barracks in Jamaica, which
were thought necessary for the lodging of the men with their
wives, and for the protection of their health. There was also
an item of 3,953/. for the Artillery barracks at Kingston,
Upper Canada, which the Government thought it right to sanc-
tion on account of the unhealthy situation of the former bar-
racks. The next item regarded certain proposed improvements
for the gunnery practice at Woolwich, the space between the
batteries and the river at present being wholly inadequate, as it
gave no more than a range of 1,225 yards for the trial of gaps
which were capable of ll:vowing shells a distance of three miles.
The sole object he had in view was to promote and advance the
science of gunnery, and to render more effective this distin-
guished corps, which was the admiration of foreigners; at the
same time that they were envied by all who had the good for-
tune to witness their evolutions. He should, therefore, move
that a sum of 121,000/. be voted for the service of her Majesty
for the civil establishments in the Tower and Pall. mall.
Mr. W. WILLI AM S thought it would be more satisfactory
to the Committee if the Hon. and Gallant Officer would state
what he thought would be the additional amount he should re-
quire for the service of his department, as extraordinary esti-
mates, so that some i ea might be formed as to the probable
total expenditure for the year for the Ordnance Department.
He thought a great reduction might be made in the barrack
department. There were 87 barrack-masters and 17 deputy
storekeepers. Now he could not discover the utility of these
17 deputy storekeepers ; their salaries amount to 6,290/. ; and
he thought the whole of that sum might be saved. At Devon-
port there was one storekeeper and two deputies, while there
were only 5 clerks for these three officers to superintend. At
Sydney, New South Wales, there was a storekeeper, a deputy-
storekeeper, and also at Hobart Town. He was sure, from the
amount of stores at those places, that these deputy storekeepers
were unnecessary. He could not see why the barrack-masters
should not perform the duty of deputy storekeeper. A great
saving would be effected, and no insecurity or inconvenience
result to the public service from adopting such a course. The
cost of the barracks in the colonies appeared to him extraordi-
nary, and to require investigation. By returns laid on the
table of the House, he found that from the year 1826, to the
present time, a sum of 1,528,000/. had been expended
on the barracks in the colonies. That was for a period of
between 15 and 16 years at the rate of 100,000/. a year, and
that, too, independent of barrack masters' expenses. Although
great importance was attached to our trade with the colonies,
he was sure so large was the expenditure they entailed on us,
that were we to make the colonies a present of all the mer-
chandise that we send them, he doubted if we would be losers
by it, if they were to defray their own expenses. The Go-
vernment of Canada was infinitely cheaper than the United
States Government, because we entirely paid their expenses of
Government. Now he thought that instead of thus being sad-
dled on the industry of this country, that they ought to main-
tain themselves, especially considering the monopoly that was
given to their produce. There was one item to which the
Hon. and Gallant Member had referred, upon which he (Mr.
Williams) wished some explanation, and this was respecting
the barracks at Manchester. No less than 62,000/. was wanted
for this item. He wished to know what the probable estimated
expenses of these barracks would be.
Capt. BOLDERO said, the Hon. Gentleman had alluded
to several items, but he ( Capt. Boldero) would confine him-
self to the observations connected with the deputy store-
keepers. He would explain why the deputy storekeepers had
been appointed, and under what circumstances. They had
at present seventeen deputy store-keepers in the home and
colonial service—three in the home service, and fourteen in the
colonies. In the year 1821, in the various situations now held
by deputy storekeepers, there were two individuals doing duty,
and the appellation applied to them was clerk of the survey and
clerk of the check. It was thought in that year, that it
was desirable to abolish the office of clerk of the survey, and
clerk of the check, and to appoint in the place of these two,
one individual to do the duty of both. The duty per-
formed by the clerk of the check, was to attend to the
muster of the men and to see that they attended drill.
The duty of the clerk of the survey, was to examine all the
stores brought into the department, and to superintend the
issuing of the same ; these two gentlemen in this station, caused
an expenditure to the public of 7,5601. a-year. By the change
a saving of 2,560/. a-year, was effected, and, in fact, the saying
was increased to the amount of 1,0001. a-year more, in conse-
quence of there being attached to the office the additional sta-
twris of Hobart Town, Sydney, and Sierra Leone. As to the
expense of tee war in which they were engaged, he believed
the man was not born who could calculate what that expense
would be. •
Lord A. LENNOX, wished to call the attention of his
Hon. and Gallant Friend, and of the Master-General
of the Ordnance, to a grievance which, though it
might appear trifling in itself, was yet felt as a considerable
grievance by those who suffered from it. His Hon. and Gal-
lant Friend must be aware that officers in the army were al,
lowed a certain quantity of fuel—coals and candies weekly,
but married men, who were obliged to live out of barracks-
were not entitled to draw those rations. Now he ( Lord A.
Lennox) could not conceive on what principle that course was
pursued. He was sure his Hon. and. Gallant Friend would not
say it was to prevent young officers marrying, or that, if it
was given to officers who were married, it would be expected
by the men ? He wished to know what course had been taken
with respect to libraries, fives courts, and cricket grounds for
the amusement of soldiers, because he knew that many of the
men under him, for want of some relaxation, did nothing but
lie on the grass.
Captain BOLDERO said that the Board of Ordnance were
not responsible for issuing the orders•by which fuel was given
to officers; all they had to do was to obey the orders that
were given. The object of • the order was to prevent
officers living out of barracks ; :end if they deviated from
the rule in respect to officers, there would be no reason why
the married soldier should not have the same privilege. If they
were to a:low one species of barrack stores, where were tk