The Sun.
London, England, 1842-07-15 00:00:00

MOTIONS:

Mr. HUME said that he had made two efforts before for
this return, which appeared to him to be reasonable, and also
to the Commission appointed by her Majesty's Government, or
it would not have sanctioned the amount paid to officers on
half-pay, which was very great. He believed that a young
midshipman might be promoted at the age of twenty, and
from that moment become eligible for a pension, and in two
years from that time might be made a Commander. Of 1,584
Lieutenants there were 536 who had never served a single day
as Lieutenants. The Navy List was made a com-
plete Pension List for the aristocracy.—(Cries of " Oh,
oh.") He maintained that this was the fact. Promotion
was given that they might
Lieutenants, the average retire on the pension without ser-
vice. Of two thousand period since
they last were employed was fourteen years and seven months.
What finances could sustain this? Though the individual
amount of half-pay was a small pittance to maintain a man, yet
in the aggregate it was a great burden. The aggregate service
amount of the Captains was little more than two years each ; the
average period since they were last employed was 12 years,
and some of them had received 55 years of half-pay for two
years' service. The history of the Admirals was no better.
His complaint was against the system, and not against this or
any preceding Admiralty. It was on the plea that justice was
not done to the officer who really did serve his country, and he
ished to have the returns, in order to support his statements.
He contended that the intention of a Brevet promotion was
violated by the manner in which it was made—taking the first
names of each list, which of course included good and
bad alike. It was against that system he cried
out. Five years ago he had lifted up his voice against it.
The Hon. Member concluded by moving for "a copy of the
late patent constituting the Commission for executing the office
of Lord High Admiral, with a return of the names and rank of
the persons constituting that Commission, and the pay and
allowances of each ; and whether they occupy the houses ap-
propriated
for them by Government. Return of the names
and present rank of the Naval Lords of the Admiralty, stating
their age at the time of their entry into the service, and the
date of such entry ; the date and where they passed their exa-
mination for Lieutenant, and copy of certificate of such exami-
nation. The dates of their promotion to each rank, and the
number of officers passed over by such promotions, stating
the period which each has served in commission
in each rank. Return showing the services of all
flag-officers in the Navy, promoted since the 29th day of June,
1838, stating the date of entry of each officer into
the service, and the date of the several commissions which
they have obtained, distinguishing the period passed in com-
mission in their respective ranks, the period on half-pay in each
rank, and the total period on full and half-pay, and showing also
the period when and in what ship each was last employed, and
the age of each officer at the date of last promotion (in continua.
lion of the Returns No. VI. of Appendix in the Report of the
Commission of Naval Inquiry in 1840).
Sir G. COCKBURN said that he should have no objection
to grant a copy of the patent of the Lords of the Admiralty,
and a copy of the last promotions ; but he could not consent to
call on parties to produce their certificates and other vexatious
returns. _ _ _ _

•
Mr. HUME acknowledged that his motion referred to some
matters of trifling detail, which he should not then insist upon.
To the first return of the patent of the Lords of the Admi-
ralty, there was no objection. The second paragraph he would
not pre,s ; but he would press for a return of the services of
flag officers.
The motion for a return of the patent of the Lords of the
Admiralty was then agreed to.
On the question be►ng put for a return of the services of the
flag-officers,
Sir G. COCKBURN said he would only consent to a return of
the services of those who had been reade flag-officers since 1838.
Captain PECHELL thought the late promotion had been a
very fair and proper one. He trusted the Admiralty would pro-
mote all officers who had served three years on the coast of
Africa, and he thought that, as in the French service, those
officers ought to have double pay. He complained that the in-
tentions of the Naval and Military Commiss►on had not been
carried into effect as regarded Masters and Pursers.
Sir G. COCKBURN said the case of these officers was under
consideration.
Sir R. PEEL, in reply to a question which the Gallant Of-
ficer had asked the other evening, begged to state that it was
his ( Sir R. Peel's) intention to bring in a Bill to settle the
application of the proceeds arising from slave prizes taken on
the coast of Africa.

On the question being put for the return of flag-officers pro-
moted since 1838, _

Mr. HUME said that that return would not suit his purpose
at all ; he must have the return as he had originally moved
for it, and he would divide the House on the question.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the House
divided, when there appeared—
For Mr. Hume's motion 23
Against it. 99
Majority against the motion. —77
POOR-LAWS.

On the motion of Mr. FERRAND various returns con-
nected with the administration of the Poor -laws, were ordered.

LAW COURTS (IRELAND).
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved for
leave to bring in a: Bill to regulate and diminish the
expenses attending the Law Courts in Ireland. The
Bill was introduced to carry out the Report of the Com-
mission which had been appointed to investigate the subject,
and which Report had been laid on the table. The Bill,
which would save a large sum of money to the public, would add
to the efficiency of the several Courts. The Bill had been
submitted to the Irish Judges, and many alterations had been
made in it in accordance with the directions.
After a few words from Sir V. BLAKE, leave was given
to bring in the Bill.
COURT OF EXCHEQUER.

The CHA NCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER moved for
leave to bring in a Bill for abolishing certain offices on the
revenue side of the Court of Exchequer in England, and for
regulating the office of her Majesty's Remembrancer in that
Court.—Agreed to.
STAMPS AND TAXES ACTS.

On reading the Order of the Day for going into Com-
mittee on the Stamps and Assessed Taxes Acts,
Mr. JOHN O'CONNELL moved as an amendment, that
in consequence of the unjust burden of taxation now
pressing upon Ireland, it is not expedient to in-
crease the stamp duties in that country. He contended that
Ireland had always been promised certain exemptions from
taxation, on account of making herself responsible for the
National Debt of England. England had been saved6,ooo,ooo/.
by the consolidation of the two countries, and what advantage
was obtained by Ireland ? It was said that the markets of
Englar.d were opened to her. They had been opened to her
i n a great measure before the Union, and if that were an advan-
tage to Ireland, England derived a corresponding advantage by
the admission of her manufactures into Ireland. A
great deal had been said of the Irish Parliament, but it
was certain the Imperial Parliament had not done
much to restore her manufactures. Ireland was a poor
country ; and it was not fair to impose upon her the same bur-
to
balance of payments
g
bur-
dens as on England. The people of Ireland depended almost
entirely upon agriculture for support ; and such wlarsetlahnedruaisnhouad
been ruinous
competition, that in one part of the country with which he was
acquainted, wages were only 3s. 6d. a week. He denied that
gwEranesgaolt aernr re
n dtpr
let; hie eiase sdefi
odfmrteoead omf de; t
hlsoeruneelhtah remissionn
eed , neoowromht
rioolaufertiyaEnation than Ireland had done. t payments
re
had derived much
England
Ireland also had repaid more of the money which had been
advanced to her than England had done, and it should be borne
in mind that the sums advanced to Ireland had all borne a large
interest, while many of the advances made to England bore no
interest at all. It would not be contended that Ireland was
well able to bear these increased burdens; the contrary was the
fact. With regard to the commerce of Ireland the tonnage
returns could not be relied upon, and the imports had all
decreased. They had every proof of the inability to bear taxa-
tion. Her trade was declining, and when it was at all spoken
of, the only branch at all prospering was the linen trade. But
that did not form sufficient ground for throwing this additional
and they
taxation on Ireland, which it was totally unable to bear.
'The promises made at the Union had not been borne out :
tt,eshouldexpenditure
it was time for them to remonstrate. He threw out the ques-
oo forced
to of
contribute G re t
Britain
m o more
e wasand increasing,
ore
, andm he thought
ques-
tion now in order to draw public at attention to it.
Mr. BROTHERTON had not had the least expectation,
that when the Hon. Member rose at twelve o'clock, he would
have detained the House for an hour and a half; as it was
iet-
possible any answer could be given to it to-night, and as the
Government had encouraged the delay, he should move that
the debate be adjourned.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER hoped the
Hon. Gentleman would allow the discussion to be closed to-
night, as the object of going into Committee was to relieve the
railways from certain duties which pressed very inconveniently
upon them. With respect to the speech of the Hon. Gentle-
man, he did not think it bore upon the points of the question.
The motion was withdrawn, and the House went into Com-
mittee, and several resolutions, exempting travellers by stage
carriages going on railways from duty, were agreed to.
The House then resumed, and the Report was ordered to be
received this day.
The other Orders of the Day having been dispOsell of, the
House adjourned at Two e!Clook.