Star.
London, England, 1830-04-03 00:00:00

SUPPLY.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER having moved the
order of the day for the Committee of Supply,
Alr. P. THOMPSON said that it was his intention to take an
early opportunity of calling the attention of the house to an import.
ant subject, namely the moving for a Committee to inquire into the
charge and collection of the revenue. He wished to hear whether any
steps had been taken to appoint a commission for the purpose.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that, on
making his financial statement, he had said it was the intention of
the government to appoint unpaid commissioners to inquire into
this subject.

ORDNANCE ESTIMATES.
On the question that 8,933 L be granted for the salaries of the
officers at Woolwich,
Mr. HUME complained of the want of reduction in the ordnance
department. What in 1796 cost only 18,7001. now cost 71,0001.
The four lords of the admiralty cost but 4,0001 a year, while the
officers of the ordnance department were most numerous and ex-
pensive.
Mr. S. PERCEVAL believed it would not be respectful towards
the hon. member to pass over his statement without notice; but the
hon. member would himself candidly admit that he had made a ge.l
neral and sweeping attack upon the amount voted fur the establish.
meat of the ordnance. He ought to be aware that the services, com.
pared with what had been performed in 1796, had much increased,
and therefore any comparison with that period was no ground for'
passing either censure or commendation.
Mr. P. THOAISON adverted to the circumstances of four clerks
receiving salaries of 8501 and six clerks receiving salaries varying
from 3001. to 6001.

Mr. LENNARD said that, as to removing the clerks from the
Tower, the whole question was one of expense. The right hon.
gentleman had objected that it would not be inconvenient, but would
be expensive.
Mr. MABERLY said it was most inconvenient that two este.
blishments should be kept up. The committee did not take it up
on the score of saving, but on the score of principle. It might as
well be said that one portion of the Treasury should sit at Pall.
mall, and the other portion at the Tower. The fact was, that the
persons at the Tower had official residences, and they were afraid
that if they removed they would not be remunerated. The gentlemen
at Pall-mall had the same feeling. Would any man say that there
was not sufficient room at Pall-mall for the persons at the Tower ?
There was more than sufficient to accommodate all the clerks in the
Tower. The Tower was originally a store department. It was
now entirely a garrison, except for the storing of small arms. There
had been no recommendation to remove the small arms.
Sir HENRY VANE said that no small part of his business was
the auditing of public accounts of various departments. The num-
ber of clerks was 323. It would not be contended that they should
be removed, with all the detail of furniture, beds, bedding, and
other things. There was not a more meritorious officer than his
principal clerk. He had been above 80 years in his situation If
that was not sufficient to give a man a claim to a salary, he knew
not what was sufficient.

Mr. HUifiEs;iiilliat there were many general officers who had
not one-third of the salary ; therefore the hon. member either over.
rated the one, or underrated the other. There were many majors,
in fact who had seen much service who had not one-third of the
salary. He wished to know how many clerks belonging to this
department were at Pall-mall, and how many at the Tower ? and
he also wished to know what was the calculation, which the hon.
member had alluded to, of the expense of removal ?
Sir H. VANE said that if all the clerks at the Tower were re-
moved it would be a great convenience to every member of the Board
oft rdnance. The offices at the Tower were admirably suited to
their purposes.
Mr. /JUNI E recommended, in that case, all•the gentlemenshould
go to the Tower.
Mr. PERCEVAL said that the expense of dwellings was 2,2001.
per annum. There were 11 rooms occupied as offices in the Tower
—lO rooms by the clerks of the Ordnance—seven by the treaeurer ;
making 28 rooms in all..

CortiIBTHORP 'raid there was no less than a sum of 44,1381.
voted to clerks ; and incomes of WOOL and 1,0001. a year were en-
joyed by persons who did their business by deputies, whilst they
themselves, no doubt, drank their champegne, and drove about in
their carriages.
Mr. LENHARD was anxious that the salaries of great officers
should be reduced, and not the salarierof the clerks in the various
offices.

Mr. MADERLY said he thought there was sufficient room in
Pall-mall for all the business to be transacted, and he saw no rea-
son why theie should be two separate establishments ; but the fact.
woo, the gentlemen of the Tower did not like to go to Pall-mall,
and the gentlemen at Pall.mall did not wish to go to the Tower.—
(A laugh.)
Sir OHORGE CLERK was not anxious to prolong the present
discussion ; but the real question under the consideration of the
house was the policy of removing the establishment at the Tower
to Pall.mall, or the one at •Pall.roall to the Tower. Now, he lees
of opinion that it was not worth while to enlarge the buildings of
Other one or the other, which must be done if the establishments
were consolidated, and that would cost the country from twenty to
thirty thousand pounds, to effect a saving of, perhaps, four or, fipia
hundt. pounds per year. •
Mr. HUM is thought' no answer whatever had' been given; he
thought 14,0001. might have been saved in the management of the
Ordnance drtmeht.
Colonel ?ESL was anxious. to Induce the salaries of some move.
important officers than ordnance clerks. Hon. members rivalif
must be more enosietent in their Mies before he could eve them' his
suppmt.
.r Mr. HUME said be did not ask for ihe support of the bon.
member for Norwich (Colonel Peel); he did nbt ekiveet it; neither
did he wish for it--(a lough). lie did not wish to see ltimatit so
inconsistent as to vote for reduction—(laughter). lle Hqine),,
however, should wish, before the vote was agreW to, to ask'wheffier
the office of inspector of gunpowder, at Faversham, was to.'be DOD.
, tinued ?
Mr. PERCEVAL said it was the opinion ofjejLrment 'that
drat office could, before long, he done r
The 8,9301. • defraying, ti oft
rho -,othen

a further amendment, fiat a sum not exceeding 18,7/81. he voted
for the purpose specified.
Mr. PERCEVAL maintained that it it was necessary to keep up
the establishment referred to, in order that government might at an
times be furnished with a sufficient supply of arms. It appeared
that upon 1,946,259 gan.barrels which had been made since the
year 1812, when the establishment was first formed, there was a
saving of 98,6581.
Dlr. LITTLETON. knew of a manufactory which, during the
late war, was known tohave turned oat a musket a minute, to such
a pitch was oanapedtion carried by private individuals. It was ru
argument whatever to my that the Governmest establishment had
the effect of diminishing the price, for be would put to the house
whether every article in the iron and brass trade was not consi-
derably reduced in price for several years put ?
Mr. Alderman THOMPSON supported the amendment, on the
ground that government ought not to take upon itself any manu-
facture when it could be supplied so much cheaper by private

Mr. lIIABERLV concurred in the same view, and thought it
well worth the attention of government whether they ought not to
dispense with all such establishments.
Mr. W. WHITMORE opposed the motion as improvident.
Sir H. HARDINGE said that government manufactured but ,t
few articles for the purpose of keeping down the combinations from
which they had sulFered during the war.
Sir J. IVROTTESLEY thought that the right boo. gentleman's
views respecting combination would be defeated, for. in the event ot.
any, sudden demand, the workmen themselves would combine.
After a few words from Mr. PERCEVAL, Mr. Hosts, and Sir R.
FERGUSON, the committee divided
For the Amendment ....
For the original Vote ..
Majority in favour of the Vote ..
The next resolution was for 17,4321. tc delbay the expenses of
the civil establishment of the Ordnance on the home stations.
The rest resolution was for 28.7441. to defray the salaries of the
civil establishment of the Ordnance abroad and in Ireland.
Mr. JEPHSON wished to know whether it was not possible to
consolidate some of the offices included under this vote. He found.
that there were a great number of storekeepers on different stations
more than could be necessary. In Cork, for instance, and its
neighbourhood, there were no less than three.
Mr. PERCEVAL said that the different storekeepers on these
stations were under two different departments, the Ordnance and
the Navy Office, and therefore could not conveniently be consolidated.
Mr. HUME could not believe but that out of 92 stations some
reduction might be made. The finance committee had recommended
the subject to the consideration of the ordnance, under an impres.
sion that some consolidation might be effected. He saw no reason
why one man should not take charge of naval as well as ordnatic-
stores at the same time.

Sir H. 11A HD' NGE reminded the hon. gentleman that the re-
commendation of the committee was general, and that they had ex.
pressed no opinion on the subject, having examined the Duke of
Wellington and himself, who had both given evidence as to the in-
convenience of consolidating the naval and ordnance departments.
Mr. bIABERLY thought that a considerable saving might h.!
made, if the recommendation of the finarct, committee had b4:en at
tended to.

Mr. GORDON did not see why three separate storekeepers
should be kept up in Cork and its neighbourhood.
Sir H. HARDING'S observed that Coik was the largest naval
station In Ireland, and that the three storekeepers were sufficiently
employed, to render consolidation impracticable.
The vote was then agreed to.
The next vote, for 3190/. for defraying the expenses of 4, master
colours" in the various garrisons abroad, was agreed to. •
41,388. was also agreed to for the barrack-masttn.
The house then resumed, and the report was ordered to be le-
ceived on Monday.

BEER TRADE.
Mr. GORDON, seeing the Chancellor of the Exchequer in his
place, wished to ask if his majesty's government had come to any
determination upon the subject of several memorials which had been
presented by persons in the trader The question was, whether these
was any intention of allowing persons to brew beer between this and
the 10th of October, and allowing the same to remain in bond, so
that it might be brought into the market upon fair terms with other
beer after the 10th of October ? Many of his constituents, who were
deeply interested in this bill, requested him to ask this question.
'Fhe CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said that he was
willing to give all the information lie could upon this subject. He
agreed that a great inconvenience would be produced if all the beer
to be brewed between chi and the 10th of October was to be sub-
ject to duty, as it would come into unfair competition with all
other beer after that period. Ile proposed, therefore, to suffer beer
Ito be brewed between this and October to remain in bond till then ;
and this, he believed, would answer all the objects of the parties.—
(hear.)
The Four per Cents Bill was read a second time, and committed
for Monday.
Mr. COURTENAY brought up the third report from the com-
mittee on East India affairs.—Lid on the table.
Mr. HUME moved for various returns connected with the here.
ditary revenues of the crown.—Ordered.
The other Orders of the Day were then disposed of, and the
house adjourned at One o'clock.