Star.
London, England, 1822-03-23 00:00:00

„

be 1 Mr. HUMS said that ivea to/Seeable' as the vat
liras for one sum; but if dittmte wasdivided int:
heads, he had no objection to divide

p:

{•.~

r

Me ,
t, the ,

ofstide,tgwaould I este- ,
cm" 41:111".0 .tconbey. afferent
_ ....a reason to lament. It_ upon
imake to the vote asked
this year for the) lymouth Breakwater. Up to last
each.. He had objections to
rtaitem ent to license the dieowing ati of allftesaraint
1 alla decorum in the Petitions to that House, end at
year there bad been expended 702,0001. upon this
last lead to more open km% He shotild conclude .
work, but for the present year only 25,000 L was
then by exhorting the house to maintain n asked. This he considered bad policy. He wouldot only its I
dignity, but to preserve the great privilege of Peti-
rather that a larger sum bad been asked that ttle
tion from the indiscreet abuse of it—(Hear):
wark might be sooner finished. One great reason fr,t
t,
After a few words from Mr. MONCK, the House di-
vided on the question that the Petition be laid on the
hastening ii I
__
table. T superintendng establishment, which was kept up to a close was the ;teat expense of
he numbers were— a yearly expense of 5,0001. The superintendant had
Oh

yes,.
1,0001. a year; besides house and _ .towances. With
such an expense, then, he conceived it would be bet.
ter to move for 60,0001. this year, the same as last
year, and bring the work sooner to a close. Either
do that, or reduce the Staff. If a grant similar
last year watmade now, the work would be
in two years, but with grants of only 25,000/. a year,
would be seven or eight years before it was perk
He had also heard that some jobbing was going cr.
in the way of the vessels employed. f nem were t 7
kinds of craft engaged in the work, one of which IA
longed to Government, and the other was paid fv
by contract. He had heard that the Goveriatent
craft were dismissed, whilst the contract vessels v.,,;
retained. Against this jobbing he protested. Instead
of the way in which the work must now proceeo, h,
would recommend, as in the case of the Caledow.ll
Canal, to take a vote of two years in advance, and
by that means the expense of the superintending ev..,
blishment would be saved. But he wished it to '„e
understood, that in proposing this amendment, !
had no wish to put a stop to the work. There h.tr2
however,been a great deal of money expended up(
dock-yards within these few years back. Since 1811
the expense had been from three to four
and when the expense of this Estimate was added,
would be altogether 5,400,0001. Tkere were some
works he would put a stop to altogether, such al
those at Trincomalee and Jamaica. His principal
objection, however, was to Sheerness. He wou!,
again recommend that no more money should bee/
pended there until the House saw the'r way beta
Ile concluded by moving an amendment
original vote be reduced to 104,0001.
Sir JOHN OSBORN said he should make but
few observations in reply to the statement of the II,)-
nourable Member. With regard to S:ieerfiess, fifty
thousand pounds would finish the new yard. IT
smithery, which was in the old yard, was not in
eluded, and the cost was 15,0001. With regard ti
the utility of these works, he thought by this tine
could be no longer questioned. The Hon. MeniL
had talked of placing the works at Purfleet. IL
(Sir John Osborn) supposed he meant Northfleet ;
the expense would be quadruple that of Sheerness.
With regard to the Plymouth Br eakwater, he did set
agree with the Hon. Member in the policy of taking
votes in advance, fur the expense cf the superi;:tenc-
ing establishment was very small. Tl.e Hon. Mer
ber might know that it was the vessels employs
upon the works which made the great expense. Or,
ders had bean given to discontinue the expense by
degrees. Perhaps it would take four or five years ti
finish it; but, in the present circumstances, it v:.;
more desirable to adhere to an economical syltm.
Upon these grounds he was bound to support tl.:
original vote.
Sir .1. YOItKE said, that the question of the v•rl:3
at Sheerness divided itself into three parts—l st,
ther it was expedient or politic to have under:A:a
them at all ; 2dly, Whether there was a prob.sbi.ity
that they would repay the public the sums expended
on them ; and, lastly, whether, having gone so far, we
should not go on and perfect them ? With regari
to the first point, he should say, that there never was
a public work undertaken more advisedly, or sanc-
tioned by greater authority, than the Dock-yards cf
Sheerness. They were suggested and approved et
by Mr. Watts, Captain Huddart, and Mr. Jes o:,
the engineer. They were also approved by a Com-
mittee of the Navy Board. Mr. Rennie and Mr.
Whitby had been employed to superintend them. It
was under the sanction of these great names that thi:
was undertaken, which would now stand the test of
criticism—(Hear, hear).—He did not think that a
Committee of that House could much improve upon
the plans of the Gentlemen he had mentioned. tia
much for the propriety of commencing the works.—
As to the second point, he had no hesitation in say-
ing, that these works already made a large return,
by the number of persons employed upon them ; and
to the Hon. Member for Aberdeen he would say, that
they served his constituents considerably by the use
of Aberdeen granite—(Hear, hear).—He admitted, '
with the Hon. Member, that money had been la-
vished upon unnecessary works; but this work a:
Sheerness promised to be of lasting utility. Uprqt
the third point, he argued that the necessity of con-
tinning these works was strongly called for. There I
was not at this time a dock at Chatham fit to receive
a line-of-battle ship. Nay, even an ordinary vessel
could not be safe there without running aground.—
As to vessels being towed by steam-boats, it was true
that there was an objection to Northfleet, which this
partly removed; but the situation of Sheerness was
still preferable. The main expense at Sheerness had
been incurred by building a wall, to separate what
was called Powder-Monkey Bay from the Great
Basin ; and the danger was, that if the water broke
into the basin, what was called a blow might happen.
The lion. Member was nt.t incorrect in stating that,
during the progress of the work, some accidents oc-
curred ; but there was only one of a serious nature.
An additional expense of 70001. was incurred, in con-
sequence of that accident ; but no settlement came in
the work from the sand-bank. As to the Ply mouth
Breakwater, it was, in fact, already completed for all
useful purposes. There was now 37 feet of water al
the entrance-gates, a depth sufficient to take in the
largest ship of war in Europe, with all her stores—
(Hear).—If this was nothing, then might the lion.
Member say, indeed, that our money was thrown
away. He wished that this great structure was com-
pleted, but as the useful part of it was already finished,
he was friendly to the smaller vote for reasons of co-
nomy. The Breakwater at this time afforded shelter
and protection to a great number of merchant vessels.
The Hon. Member here read a letter which he had
received from the superintendant of the Breakwater,
in which it was stated, that during the heavy gales
there had been no less than twenty merchant vessels
saved in the Sound last year. If it bad not been for
a French ship which broke her cable, he believed the

Ayes - 22
Noes - 123
Majority against the Petition - —lOl
Mr. HUME presented a Petition of a similar no-
tore, so far as regarded the liberation of Mr. Hunt,
from the Burgesses of Paisley.— Ordered to be printed.
COMMITTIOI OF SUPPLY.
The CH ANCELLORof the EXCII EQUER moved
the Order of the Day for the House ping into a Com-
mittee of Supply.—Upon the question being put,
Mr. IIUME rose to ask whether it was not intended
to bring on the Superannuation Bill, and the Re-
ceiver-General's Bill, this night ? It appeared to him
that if the House went into the Committee of Supply,
as that would occupy the whole night, a fair discus-
sion of the two other Bills could not be expected.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said
that it wai not the intention to bring on the first of the
Bills alluded to by the Hon. Member, until the sche-
dules were completed. These were not yet in so for-
ward a state as to be brought before the House. With
regard to the other Bill, he wished to state that it
would not be brought forward to-night, and the Hon.
Member might be assured there was no indisposition
in Ministers to submit it to the fullest discussion.
Mr. BENNET said that it was his intention, upon
a former night, to have opposed the amount of salary
paid to the First Lord of the Admiralty and the Chief
Clerk, but as the Report was brought up in his ab-
sence he had lost the opportunity or so doing. Indeed
he had intended to take the sense of the House upon
these two officers. He rose now for the purpose of
entering his protest against these salaries, that he
might not be taken as assenting to them.
NAVY ESTIMATES.
The House then went into the Committee.
Sir JOHN OSBORN moved a vote of 151,200/.
for defraying the expense of improvements in his
Majesty's D..ck-yards for the year 1822.
Mr. HUME said, that when these Estimates were
last laid before the House, a good deal of discussion
arose upon this item. He would take the liberty of
reminding the House of the grounds upon whiCh he
then stated his objections to the vote now called for.
Ills principal objection was to the large sum required
for perfecting-the works at Sheerness. He would still
contend that no more money ought to be voted for
these works, until the House had better information
as to the propriety of continuing them. In 1814, it
was stated that a sum not exceeding 824,9921. would
be sufficient to complete the works at Sheerness, but,
like all other great public works, after expending
1,355,000/. which was 530,1081. more than the origi-
nal estimate, a considerable sum was still wanted to
finish them. By the calculations which he made, the
whole sum expended for these works, IA hen finished,
would be no less than 2,100,0001. Now, under these
circumstances, when so large a sum was required, it
would be wise not to spend another pound until the
House had better information as to the propriety of
proceeding further. The greatest difference of opi-
nion prevailed, when these works were first proposed,
as to whether Sheerness was the fittest place for the
Dock-yards, and in the opinion of many Purfleet was
thought a better place. But a difficulty then existed
as to Purfleet which had been since removed. By the
application of steam-boats to the towing of ships of
war, the largest vessels were towed down from Dept-
ford and Ar% oolwich, against wind and tide; and
therefore the objection to Purfleet in that respect was
removed. Purfleet had also the advantage in other
respects, and more particularly in the ground, which
was of a firmer nature than at Sheerness. Accident
after accident happened every year at Sheerness, for
the works were built upon piles driven into the quick-
sands. In 1820 several thousands were spent in re-
pairing damage occasioned by an irruption of the sea.
He had seen a statement, but could not vouch fur its
correctness, that if the works at Sheerness were now
put a stop to, and new works begun at Purfleet, it
would actually take less to get up these latter, than
to finish the former ones. Besides which it was un-
certain whether the works at Sheerness could be ever
completed. But was it not advisable, in the present
distie,sed state of the country, to weigh well the ne-
cessity of these works, before going to more expense?
What was the necessity for so much dry dock ?
When the Navy was building it might be necessary,
but when it was now complete, and there appeared no
immediate occasion for enlarging it, he would sug-
gest that these works might be given up for the pre-
sent. The whole sum to be expended upon these
works at Sheerness, when completed, would amount
to 2,100,0001. He had a great distrust of Govern-
ment as to conducting public works. It too often
happened that millions were spent upon works, and
then they were left unfinished. He contended that
the care of these works ought not to be entrusted to
any single Board, but that a Committee of this
House should take cognizance of them. He would
have this Committee call engineers and examine
them—not only the engineers employed by Govern-
ment, but all others who were most capable of
forming an opinion upon the works. With this view
it was his intention to vote only 20,0001. for carrying
on the works this year, at least until the Committee,
he had spoken of had made their Report. And to
this Committee he did not see how an objection could
be made. Sorely if the Report was favourable to the
work, it would but accelerate its progress; and if it
was unfavourable, it was well that the inexpediency
of proceeding further was discovered without loss of
time. He should therefore propose to seduce this
vote by 50,0001. as to Sheerness, and upon a future
occasion he would move for the Committee which
he alluded to.
Mr. BROODEN was about to put the question
upon this amendment, but
Mr. HUME said he had yet some observations to
make upon the Breakwater at Plymouth.
Sir JOSEPH YORKE suggested that it would be
well to divide upon the amendment which had ken
already proposed.

nilar to
finished
a year, • ~111
erfectec I
going cr. • -
were L'AG
•hiclt b!. 111
paid frx
,etiimemt
sets
Instead
Keeo,
nce, and
ling
1
it to
Tient, !
ere h•id„
led upon
1
ncelSll
mi;lions,
added, it
ere some
such :vs
principq 1
Ie woutd
ild be ex-
ty better.
that the
ke hat a.
ness, fifty
IS 110 t irr
time it
. Member
feet.
ifteet;
Sheerness.
he did set
of taking
peri;:tenc.
on. Clem.
employed
!.rise.
Epense by
re years t
es, it
al sylte7:.
ippnrt