Star.
London, England, 1830-02-23 00:00:00

ways the most perfect confidence in the honour and integrity of Mr.
Sergeant (hear, hear), but the facility which he stated to exist with
respect to the drawing of money in the Treasury it was necessary to
put an end to, for the general security.
SirJ. BECKETT said, the hon. member for Aberdeen was in.
correct in his statement as so the salary of the office which he (Sir
J. Beckett) filled—that of Advocate.GeneraL So far from that
salary having been increased, it was lower now than it was in 1822
it was then 5,4001. This year the salary was but 4,400/. It should
be recollected, that his deputy in Ireland wan paid out of the sum
given in the estimate. The offi:e of Judge Advocate was regu-
lated as it at present stood in 1806. The salary up to that period
had depended upon certain fees and emoluments attached to the
office; but Lords Grenville and Spencer, justly thinking that a
judical officer should not be paid in end: a manner, made the sa-
lary a fixed one, and it was than settled (he meant the mere salary,
exclusive of the other allowances) at 2,5001. at which amount It
remained to the present day. That amount was chosen as equl-
relent to the salary of a pulse judge then ; but though the salaries
of puisne judges bad been. since incret.sed, that of the Judge-Ad.
vocate remained the same. Since that time, too, reductions had
been made in the officers attached to the court, by which a saving
accrued to the public of 1,000/. per annum. A saving of OK
a year had been also effected by the reduction of the office of
Judge-Advocate in Ireland, and saving 5001. a year by the aim.
lition of a similar office in Noah Britain. By the reduction of
an assistant deputy in this country another saving had been made
of 0001. and in the colonies, by the reductions of offices similar se
those attached to the court in this country, a saving of 1,0001.
a year had been made. Thus a saving to about the extent
3,700/. had been made for the public. The duties of all those
offices had devolved upon the Judge-Advocate in London, and not
a sixpence had been added to his salary.
Mr. HUME contended that his statement was correct. In 1728
Sir C. Morgan did all the duties of the office for 1,0311. a year.
The salary was raised in 1807 to 2,500/. in consequence of the
great number of cases that came before that court, owing to the great
army we had on foot; but as that reason no longer existed, they
should reduce the salary to its former amount. The right honour.
able gentleman opposite (Mr. Calcraft) had said that he had never
given a vote in opposition to the opinions which he now ex-
asiin support of the office of paymaster of the forces. Now the
was, that when, in the year 1822, he (Mr. Hume) moved an
address to his Majesty for the reduction of that and various other
establishments, for the purpose of effecting a saving for the public to
the amount of 4,000,0001, the right hon. gentleman spoke and
voted in favour of that motion. (Hear, hear.) He did not mean
in stating that, to charge the right hon. gentleman with inconeist-
ency ; for when he supported his (Mr. Hume's) motion, he sat on
that side of the house; but it was now his duty, sitting on the
opposite side, to oppose the reduction of this office.
Mr. CALCRAFT said if he had, upon the occasion alluded
to by the hon. member, voted for the reduction of this office,
it must have happened from its being lumped together in one
sweeping motion with several others, so as to escape his atten-
tion ; but even when he sat on the other side of the house he had
uniformly supported the maintenance of the present military esta-
blishments of the country, which he considered to be on as low a
scale as the public service would admit.
Mr. HUME said, before they proceeded to divide he wished to
observe that the right hon. baronet below him (Sir H. Parnell) bad
said that there were two establishments, one of which this was,
costing 90,0001. and that 40,0001. might be saved from the estimate
for them. Now he (Mr. Hume) did not go so far as that : he only
asked for a saving of 15.0001. out of 106,5301.
The committee then divided, when the numbers were—
For the amendment
Against it
_ _

Majority against the amendment —7B
The original resolution was then put and carried.

The next resolution was 14,4201. for the charge of medicines and
surgical materials for his majesty's land forces, and of certain hos-
pital contingencies for the year 1830.
Mr. MABERLY took that opportunity to refer the committee to
the evidence of Mr. Satjeont before the finance committee, which he
had since procured, and in which the witness stated that he could
draw 200,0001. or 230,000 out of the treasury without the chance of
a discovery probably for a week, when the accounts would be laid
before the inspector. That showed that he (Mr. Moberly) had
made no random assertion on the subject.
Mr. G. DA SON maintained that the check which the inspec-
tion of the accounts afforded in that case had been left out of sight
,in the former statement of the hon. member.

Mr. HUME said, the finance committee had been of opinion
that reductions ought to be effected In the medical departments of
the army ; and if their recommendation had been attended to, re-
ductions might certainly have been effected in that portion of our
military expenditure. He conceived it injurious that each branch
of the public service should have its medicines contracted for in a
separate way. He was convinced that by such a plan the House
left the public open to great expence. Such was the opinion of the
finance committee. Every branch of the public service should be
supplied with medical stores in one uniform manner. He had no
objection to the vote this year; but he thought that it was one
which required the immediate attention of Government.
The vote was then agreed to.
On the resolution to grant 80,8121. Bs. Id. to defray the charge
for volunteers in England and Ireland, for the year 1890.
Mr. O'CONNELL rose to object to the vote, so far as related to
Ireland. He thought that the army in Ireland, during what he might,
perhaps, be permitted to call the late civil commotions of that country,
had performed its duty, from the highest officer down to the lowest so.
baltern, in the most exemplary and praiseworthy manner. He sug-
gested to the right hon. gent. opposite that it was necessary to recol.
leer that a large portion of that army had been employed in the
north of Ireland torpurposcs into which he would not enter. The
conduct of the yeomanry in that part of the country he could
not praise. It was supposed to have been kept up for purposes not
of protection, but of oppression. lie submitted that it was a de.l
scription of force which might be well spared. In the province ofl
Connaught, where the population was almost entirely Catholic, the
amount of yeomanry was but an unit. In the province of Munster
it was only a decimal : in the province of Leinster it was a hun-
dted ; but in the province of Ulster, where the population was
chiefly Presbyterian, it was a thousand. If the yeomanry were di.
minished there, the army might be diminished too ; for the pre. I
seam of the army was wanted for no other, object than to protect the
people from their outrage. For these reasons be should more that
this vote be reduced to 50,8121. Bs. ld.
Sir G. HILL said, that if the yeomanry force could be spared, he
should hive no objection to the proposed reduction. He could not,
however, submit to the insinuation of the hon. and learned member
for Clare, that disturbances had originated in Ireland from the con.
duct of the yeomanry corps. As a proof that the yeomanry corps in
the north of Ireland had merited well of their country, he would
merely state that:the insurrection act had travelled through every
county in Ireland, save the nine counties in the province of Ulster.
air. S. RICE supported the amendment, on the ground of eco.
nomy, and of the internal tranquillity of Ireland. He believed
that the existence of the constabulary force, which was in itself a
military force, was sufficient to justify a diminution of the yeomanry
force.

Lord F. L. GOWER mid, that it was only doing bare justice to
the hon. and learned member for Clare to declare, that be had
touched upon the subject of the Irish yeomanry with a moderation
which must be highly serviceable to his view of the question. He
wu of opinion that any inconsiderate meddling with that body at
the present moment would produce an irritation of feeling in Ire.
land, which it was desirable to avoid. He admitted that the time
had at last arrived when this question ought to be looked at. He
should be sorry if the boa member for Clare pressed his amend.
meat, for he had no objection to take the object matter of it into
immediate sonsideration.

dlr. RICE said, that after such an admission from the organ of
the Irish government, he should suggest to his hon. and learned
friend the propriety of leaving the reduction in the hands of the
minlstr
Mr. BROWNLOW could not intend any thing disrespectful to
the yeomanry, in whose tanks be had had the honour of serving,
but be thought that the time had at length arrived when, in point
of economy, it ouzht to be disbanded.
Mr. O'CONNELL was most ready to withdraw his amendment
and would prefer the reposition for the reduction of the y
coming from the other eide of the house rashes than from 4=
Ile denied every intention to traduce the yeomanry of Ireland. • He'
hoped that nothing which had fallen from him that night would
have the slightest tendency to embitter the queen& between• the two
parties in the north of Ireland.
Jr. TRANT desired the government to be. nations •how they
'reduced a force in Ireland which had rendered.such inestimable per.
vices to the country.
lilt HUME submitted eb the eight bon. Secretary for the' Home
Doper anent the propriety of Wain, the amount of the English
yeomanry'. Let them either be disbanded, or continued at their own
expense.
Mr. PEEL mid, that in the speech which the bonosuable mem-
ber •for Aberdeen hag dehvesed on a former evening, •be -bad
accused him of noting in commotion to the ale which Lord
Lansdowne had laid down for the redaction of the. yeomanry
corps. He appealed to his hanrable friend the member for
Limerick. whether he had not strictly foliated up the rub
whiehled been lett In theallite of his noble predenenta .. Whets
is.Lutil •Lanstionie lift ,oilion,She.expense of the yeoman" fern
amountedito 46,0001., and it was now redueed 10.peT ecnt. TIN*
were only 22 corps, in the Matmfacitering (Haulm. lietheti
*de la eulogize • the yeemanry.'worpe • in :Ordtantk• wid‘ itentionek
I.as a putout! their: spay:than in 1814.whenanmenmer NereA
)Rohr Elks,. Elks,. hadmolua ssaal thebterudens, *".l
P. otemants, to any pan of Ireland. The right henp=enso.
eluded with expressing his readiness to make inquiry into elsepsta
prissy of reducing d e yeomanry of Ireland, as bad hem dose in