said, he rose to draw the attention of the House to a petition of a person of the name of George Crook, late a seaman on board one of his majesty's ships, complaining of severe oppression. The allegations contained in the petition called into question the conduct of a very gallant officer in the naval service, and, at the same time, disclosed circumstances which were of infinite importance to the rights and interests of every man in the navy—since all those who were connected with that service, were liable to receive the same description of treatment as that of which the petitioner complained unless he procured redress. He had the petition for some time in his hands, and would have presented it much sooner, but he was desirous, in the first instance, to have some conversation with sir William Hoste, the gallant officer to whom it referred—but he understood that he was out of the kingdom, and was not expected to return for some time. The statement of the petitioner lay in a very narrow compass, although the points which it contained were of the most important nature. He conceived it right to state, that having had much conversation with the petitioner, the impression on his mind was, that he was not a person of bad character—a conclusion which was borne out by the certificates of several respectable individuals, under some of whom he had served in the navy, who spoke of him as a correct and well-behaved man; but, whatever the character of the individual might be, whether good or bad, it had nothing to do with the justice of the case. He stated, that, without any charge being exhibited against him, he was confined on board the Mutine, the ship in which he was serving, for five or six weeks; and that, when the vessel touched at Malta, he was ordered to receive six dozen of lashes by sir W. Hoste, without any court martial having been held on him. After this, he and another man were put ashore, and left to shift for themselves as they could. It was worthy of consideration, that the petitioner was a pressed man; and, having served for a considerable time, pay and prize money were due to him, to the amount of 550l. when he was forcibly driven from the ship, and marked in the books as a deserter, which destroyed his claim to that which he had fairly earned. Immediately after that occurrence, he had been taken into the service of an English gentleman travelling on the continent, of the name of Dowdswell, and since that period, of several others, all of whom were ready to bear testimony to the goodness of his conduct. Whatever his fault might have been, it was extremely hard that he should be deprived of his wages. He understood it was a general rule, where a seaman deserted from the service, to stop his pay and prize-money. It appeared to him to be a very severe rule, that a man, who had been forced into the service, and had remained there for many years, should be deprived of the money he had earned, because he left his ship without leave. The petitioner, however, stated that he did not desert, but was sent from the ship. On what ground, then, could his pay and prize-money be withheld, as it was at the present moment? He hoped steps would be taken, in the proper department, to explain this transaction, or he should -be obliged to institute some proceedings on the subject. He should now move "That this petition be brought up." He had a second petition, signed by many respectable persons, who knew the petitioner, commiserated his situation, and called on the House to attend to his statement and grant him relief.

said, that this petition had been put into his hands, a few days ago, by an honourable alderman, but he refused to have any thing to do with it, because he understood that the petitioner had been detected in some improper practices with a person of the name of Grimaldi, when on board the Mutine, which occasioned his desertion. Seventeen years had elapsed since the conduct he now complained of had taken place, and, during that long period, this man had never laid his case before the admiralty. Doubtless he had considered himself well off not to have been hanged for the offence he had committed.

said, it was very true the petition had been placed in his hands, but he did not think he was justified in presenting it. He made many inquiries on the subject from the gallant officer opposite, and from him he understood that a correspondence had passed between the admiralty and different officers under whom the petitioner had served, and also that sir W. Hoste was likely to return to England very speedily. As he knew that the petitioner could bring his action against sir William, when he returned to this country—as his petition was in the hands of a respectable solicitor who would do every thing in his power to serve him—and as the man with whom the petitioner went away stood in a very suspicious situation—he conceived it better to give up the petition, as he did not think he could render the petitioner any service.

observed, that the subsequent testimonies to this man's character, which the hon. baronet alluded to, had nothing to do with the antecedent offence.

said, the practice regularly adopted in the navy was this:—the ship's company were mustered in the presence of the officers once in every week; the names of those who did not appear were dotted;—and, if three dots were affixed to a sailor's name, it was distinguished by the letter R., signifying that he had run from the ship. After this, he would not be paid his wages without an order from the Admiralty, and his prize-money became the property of Chelsea hospital. That hospital having a vested right in such prize-money, it would be the height of injustice in the Admiralty to attempt to take it away. Now, it was must extraordinary that the petitioner, who was described to be a needy man, having this large sum due to him, never applied to the Admiralty from the year 1801 until 1817. The hon. baronet endeavoured to account for this delay, by stating that he was travelling on the continent with his master. It was not, however, to be supposed that he had been travelling for sixteen years. When he applied at the Admiralty to have the R. removed from his name in the year 1817, captain Hoste was referred to. Captain Hoste's answer, which he then held in his hand, was couched in these terms:—"I have to acquaint you, that I perfectly remember Crook's desertion from the ship at Naples or Malta, and I recollect also the desertion of the other man who was found in the hammock with him." The petitioner stated, that this man had received his wages. In consequence, the Admiralty caused inquiries to be made at the navy board, and they discovered that Grimaldi had also run—that he had not received his wages—and that, in fact, he had not applied for them. Crook, finding he could make nothing of this proceeding in 1817, waited till sir W. Hoste was out of the way, and made the present application to the House. He had, it appeared got the lieutenant to say that he did not run, but was turned out of the ship. Captain Hoste, however, would, he had no doubt, persist in his statement that he had deserted. Unfortunately the other 16 signing officers were dead. Looking to all the circumstances, he was inclined to attach more credit to the statement of the captain than to that of the lieutenant. The circumstances, taken together, made strongly against the petitioner; and, after considering them, it would be for the House to say, whether the petition should or should not be brought up.

inquired whether any proof of a criminality had been adduced against the petitioner. If there was not, it was not right that he should be deprived of his wages.

answered, that the officer who had been applied to, said the petitioner was found in an indecent situation with another man, and had in consequence been turned ashore. The argument seemed to be, that he must have his wages, although his character could not be restored.

said, the petitioner's statement was, that a drunken man came to his hammock in the night, swearing that it was his own. The petitioner resisted, and the intruder cut him down, by which he was severely wounded in the head. There never was a charge of the kind now insinuated brought against him; much less was any inquiry instituted with respect to it. Added to this, many persons came forward to give him a good character, amongst whom were several officers under whom he had served. He did not think the gallant admiral was treating the petition with fairness or candour, when he met it with an unsupported allegation of this kind. It was a base insinuation to throw out against any man; and such a course of proceeding rendered it more particularly necessary for the House to examine the merits of the case. The lieutenant said, the petitioner was put on shore—that he was compelled to quit the service. If he had committed any crime, that was not the mode which ought to have been pursued with respect to him. He should have been punished, instead of being forcibly obliged to leave the ship in a state of distress and indigence. Afterwards, in order to cover an act improper in every point of view, the letter R. was affixed to his name. The memory of capt. Hoste, whom he respected as a gallant officer, did not, at all times, appear to be equally clear on this subject, He had seen letters of his, written to the petitioner in 1816, in which he did not speak positively, but said, "if you have been marked R. on the books of the Mutine as you say, I presume it is so." This was at best a doubtful evidence as to the fact of the petitioner's having deserted.

said, the accusation against the petitioner did not rest on mere surmise. The letter said, that Grimaldi was seen coming out of the petitioner's hammock. There was no mention made of the hammock having been cut down. Though an officer might, at a considerable distance of time, suppose that the petitioner was sent out of the ship, the probabilities were, putting all the circumstances together, that he had deserted.

said, he knew not from what source the hon. baronet had drawn he expression of indignation which he had directed towards his hon. friend and kinsman, because he stood forward to rebut the serious charge that had been brought against a gallant officer. He did not know that gallant officer; but he certainly felt very strong indignation, when he beheld the character of an honourable man attacked on the slight and unsupported surmises of an infamous person, for such he considered the petitioner to be. The hon. baronet complained, that the petitioner had not been brought to trial; now, as the petitioner had deserted, what opportunity was there for trying him? But, in a case of this kind, was it not more prudent in the commander of one of his majesty's ships to punish the individual, and not to notice the fact farther, instead of proclaiming it to all the world? If the petitioner had not been conscious that he was charged with some offence too scandalous to bear the light, would he not have brought the matter to issue, in some way or other, during a period of sixteen years? Now, the circumstance was brought forward, when, of necessity, the best evidence that could be adduced must be defective. The worthy alderman, to whom the petition was first intrusted, appeared to have formed a proper estimate of it, and had acted very properly in rejecting it. It would much better become the hon. baronet, if, before he presented petitions, he would inquire into the verity of the facts they contained, instead of coining down at once, without the smallest particle of conclusive evidence, and indulging in declamatory statements about justice, when there was no proof whatever that any injustice had been committed.

said, the accusation levelled at the petitioner's character was not gratuitously introduced. It was stated by sir William Hoste, that this man, to whom a large sum of money was said to be due, had run away. It was asked, "Why did he desert—it is not likely he would do so, when so much wages and prize-money were due to him?" The answer was, because he was detected in indecent practices. It was necessary to sir W. Hoste's case that he should show some paramount and overwhelming reason in the case of this man, to account for his conduct. He could not agree that this petition should be received. It was not in the power of the House to grant to the petitioner his wages. He had his action at law; he might bring an action against sir W. Hoste for having cast scandalous imputations on his character, or for improperly causing the letter R. to be affixed to his name, by which he had lost his wages. Unless by law he established his character, or showed that the R. was improperly placed against his name, he could not get the money which he claimed. When the courts of justice were open to him, to them the petitioner ought to apply. It would be a bad precedent to receive such a petition as the present.

defended the conduct of sir W. Hoste.

wished to mention two or three of the testimonials to the character of Crook [A cry of spoke! spoke!]. If the House were in such a state of impatience as to prevent it from doing mere justice to an oppressed man, he was quite willing to drop this and every other subject. Admiral Hardy bore testimony to the good conduct of the petitioner while on board the Mutine, and this was confirmed by the lieutenant; independent of which, the surgeon spoke to the propriety and regularity of his general deportment. The real question was, whether the House was not bound to inquire into the abuses of power by naval officers of high rank? The subject could no where be taken into consideration so well as before a committee: if it was there discerned that the petitioner had no claim, the decision would be satisfactory to the country; but at present the House had no information on which it could act in putting a negative upon the demand.

said, it was most extraordinary, that the hon. baronet, in the different interviews he had had with the petitioner, should never think it necessary to ask him why he had suffered 17 years to elapse before he made his complaint? The hon. baronet had produced testimonials in favour of the petitioner's character, dated in 1797, 1798, and 1801. Was it OR evidence such as this that the House were to be called on to assail the character of sir W. Hoste? The silence of the petitioner for the last 17 years was evidence that his claim was not a just one. Were he alone in the division, he would oppose the reception of a petition, assailing on such grounds the character of such an officer as sir W. Hoste.

said, that every one knew sir W. Hoste's public achievements; and he would add, that of all men with whom he ever had had the slightest intimacy, that gallant officer appeared to him to be the most unlikely to commit an arbitrary act of power.

said, he felt very much encouraged to bring forward the motion he was about to submit to the House, by the spirit shown in the House last night. He should be sorry, indeed, if there prevailed any disposition in the House to encourage or to protect such disgraceful corruption as that to which he was about to call their attention. By the general spirit shown last night, it was evident there was no such disposition in the House; on the contrary, he was convinced that the House entertained a strong desire to free its character, and the character of the country, from the stain which unchecked corruption would attach to it. He did not mean to throw the least slight on the judgment of the election committee which tried this case, nor was it his wish to question the decision of that committee. But convictions in courts of law were grounds for proceeding on in that House, as well as the decisions of election committees. It was well known that convictions in courts of law often induced the House to expel its members, and to institute other proceedings, as well as the decisions of election committees. The noble lord then proceeded to state to the House the proceedings at, and previous, to the late elections for Grampound and Barnstaple, and of the convictions of sir Manasseh Lopez and several electors of those boroughs, at the assizes for Devon and Cornwall. No practice was more to be reprobated than that of men who employed their property like sir M. Lopez, in going from borough to borough, for the purpose of purchasing the voters, and afterwards disposing of their influence. It was no doubt easier for a member to acquire consequence in that House by supplying an administration, pressed with difficulties, with five or six votes, than by distinguishing himself by studying the laws and institutions of his country. It would appear that this individual had been long engaged in the purchasing of boroughs in the counties of Devon and Cornwall; he was every where carrying on a vast and extended campaign against the English constitution. It appeared that sir M. Lopez, and the voters convicted along with him, were not yet brought up for judgment. It was competent to the House to direct the attorney-general to take steps that these persons be brought up for judgment, and then they might proceed on the convictions to order an investigation into the state of the borough of Grampound. He wished that the question should be taken up in some shape or other, and he brought the subject now before them, in order that they might determine as to the most advisable course of proceeding. The country would be justly indignant if a subject of this nature were passed over without notice. If they did not endeavour to wipe away every such blot on the constitution, they would assist the efforts of those obscure and miserable men who were endeavouring to destroy our constitution. The noble lord concluded with moving for the production of the records of the conviction of sir Manasseh Lopez for bribery at the late assizes for Devon and Cornwall, and of the conviction for bribery of a number of individuals concerned in the elections for Barnstaple and Grampound.

said, the records of the convictions would be voluminous documents, and suggested, that it might be adviseable to obtain the necessary information respecting them in a more convenient shape for the House.

suggested that it might be sufficient if the clerk of the assizes or of the Crown sent extracts of the material parts of the proceedings.

observed, that it was competent for the House at once to enter into an inquiry into this subject, without being delayed by the proceedings of courts of raw.

said, that he happened to know that at present the record had been taken out of the hands of the associate by the attornies for the party, Messrs. Lamb and Hawke, by whom it should have been lodged in the Crown office. They had, however, not done this, and he feared the motion of the noble lord would thus not be productive of the end proposed. He suggested the calling to the bar the associate.

said, the order of the House would of course be imperative on any public officer.

said, the misfortune was, that the record of the conviction was not in the hand of any public officer.

said, that if the record had been delivered by the public officer to any private person as a receipt, the House must still consider the document to be legally in the custody of the officer. There would of necessity be some officer whose duty it was to preserve it.

observed, that the associate was obliged to deliver the record to the attorney, who had to return it to the Crown office.

said, the original must have been kept in the Crown office. A copy called the nisi prius record was sent down to the assizes, which was lodged with the associate to be returned with the postea. Copies of the material part of the original might therefore be obtained at the Crown office, and the fact of the conviction, if not obtainable from the nisi prius record, might be ascertained by examination of witnesses.

thought the House could only receive information of the conviction regularly through the nisi prius record.

considered, that it would be enough for the House to issue its order to be served on the proper officer. If that officer made a return, that he had delivered the record to another, the House could take steps to obtain it. It was not their business to anticipate a difficulty. Lord John Russell consented to withdraw his motion, and shortly after moved for extracts of the material parts of the several indictments, whereon sir M. Lopez, and several other persons, were tried and found guilty of bribery, at the late assizes for Devon and Cornwall; which motions were agreed to.

said, that if the motion which they had just heard was calculated to maintain the constitution in its strength, by maintaining the purity of that House, he had now to make a motion, which would not be less beneficial, by throwing lustre on the body of its nobility. His motion was for a bill to enable the public to accept the magnificent sacrifice of the marquis Camden. The right hon. gentleman then entered into a summary of the origin and nature of the office of tellers of the exchequer, the causes of the increase of their emoluments, and the measures taken in 1780 for restricting them after the death of the then existing holders as reversioners, to 2,700l. a year. The marquis of Buckingham and the marquis Camden, the holders of the unreduced tellerships in 1813, when these offices produced to each of them, on account of the large public expenditure, as much as 17 or 18,000l. a year, voluntarily gave up to the public service, during the remainder of the war, all the surplus beyond the income regulated by Mr. Burke's bill. The public was soon after deprived of the services of the marquis of Buckingham by death but from the donation of the marquis Camden in this shape, as well as former contributions from his, office and his private fortune, the country had derived 45,000l. After the conclusion of the war, the marquis Camden made a farther sacrifice of the surplus, which the public was enabled to accept by an act which passed to authorise contributions on the part of his majesty's ministers and other public officers. That act bad ex- pired, and the noble marquis was now desirous to be enabled to give up to the public, for the remainder of his life, the surplus of his official income beyond the sum paid to the tellers more recently appointed under Mr. Burke's bill. This surplus, in years of peace, amounted to about 9,000l. a year. Doubts had arisen whether this contribution would not be considered illegal as a benevolence, and whether, therefore, it could be accepted by the exchequer, unless it were authorised by parliament. Whether these doubts were or were not well founded, there was no question that the proceeding by an act of parliament was the more proper and more dignified way, and he had no doubt but that the House would receive the proposal with the honour and attention which so signal an instance of patriotic munificence merited at their hands. [Hear, hear!]. He then moved for leave to bring in a bill "to authorize the Receipt and Appropriation of certain Fees arising there from."

observed, that his object in rising to second the motion of his right hon. friend, was simply to give expression to what he was sure must be the feeling that pervaded the House in contemplating this transaction. The extent and nature of the sacrifice made by the noble marquis had been already stated. It was right, however, that the House should be apprized, that during the three years previous to the peace of Amiens, he had sacrificed to the public no less a sum than 24,000l.., which added to the sum of 18,527l. during the last two years of the war, and what had been since contributed on the reduced scale, raised the sum total already relinquished to 61,740l. He made this great sacrifice, out of deference to the feeling with which, it appeared to him, the last unregulated office was regarded. The effect of this present offer was to surrender for the term of his future life, a sum which in time of war exceeded 18,000l. per annum, and was during peace not less than 9,000l. It was not claiming too much credit for such an act voluntarily performed under all the Circumstances which attended it, to say, that a more splendid sacrifice of private right to the public service was never heard of in any state. As a patent office, it might fairly be considered a legal estate, and had been always so considered by that House. It should be remembered also, that it was an office which had not been conferred as an act of grace or favour on the noble marquis himself, but which he had inherited from his father, to whom it had been granted, by way of compensation for giving up the high and dignified appointment of chief justice of the Common pleas, in order to enter into the political service of the country.

professed the most sincere satisfaction in contemplating the occasion which had been afforded for the present discussion. He had always felt, and frequently expressed, his regret, that the conduct of marquis Camden in this instance should be passed over with so little public observation. He could assure the House, that he wanted words to express his admiration of this princely sacrifice of private fortune. It was a magnificent donation to the country, made under circumstances which greatly enhanced its character of nobleness and generosity. The House had a few years since, on occasion of a motion brought forward by an hon. friend of his (Mr. Creevey), recognized the principle, that the emoluments of the office in question were private property. To that principle he had given his support, conceiving it to be founded in reason and justice. Were he now to mention the nobleman who in his opinion stood the highest in this country, he should certainly name Lord Camden, whose attachment to his country must be truly strong, to induce him to abandon what had been earned for him by his illustrious father [Hear, hear]. He trusted that a motion would be made for placing some memorial on the journals of the House of so singular an example of disinterestedness. There were precedents for such a proceeding, and no occasion could be fitter for recording the sense of parliament than this great pecuniary sacrifice [Hear].

could not accede to the proposition, that the grants of the Crown were equivalent to fee-simple property, and could not be re-modelled by parliament. With regard to the case under consideration, he highly admired the generosity of the noble marquis.

explained. He had only meant to say, that there was a vested interest which could not be forfeited except by abuse of the office, and had never contended that to correct this was beyond the competency of parliament.

concurred in the principle as laid down by the right hon. gentleman. The noble marquis had an interest, which, although not equal to a fee-simple, amounted to a legal estate for life.

agreed, that patent offices were in the nature of freehold property. With respect to the case before them, he believed that no previous example of such munificence could be found. The admiration which it had called forth ought to be expressed amplissimis verbis, in the preamble of the bill they were about to pass. The office in question was derived from a father equally distinguished for talents and integrity, a man venerable as one of the most learned and constitutional lawyers that ever adorned the seat of justice. The present marquis was one of his earliest private friends, and he hoped the House would allow him to suggest the words by which their sense of his magnanimous conduct should be testified to posterity.

wished also to bear testimony to this zealous and noble instance of disinterestedness and public virtue, and to join in that tribute of respect which had been so handsomely rendered by the right hon. gentleman on the floor. He regretted with him, that the sacrifice already made should have been hitherto suffered to pass with so little notice, and he felt himself bound to declare, that the manner in which it was made indicated a truly generous and noble mind.

bore testimony to the cheerful and unostentatious manner in which the noble marquis had performed this act of munificence.

said he should propose the insertion of the words he had mentioned after the second reading.

, of Galway, said it was the duty of the county to meet this generous proposition with something as magnanimous, and he should propose that they should refuse the gift [A laugh]. Gentlemen of narrow incomes might put their circumstances en gene by following so dazzling an example.

rose, pursuant to notice, to move for certain papers relative to the expense of the Ophthalmic hospital and contingencies, now introduced into the army estimates for the first time. He brought this motion forward, because the expense appeared to him perfectly of a novel nature, in order that it might be ascertained whether such expense was necessary or not. The noble lord connected with the war department having said he should have no objection to give every information on the subject, he was much surprised to learn, on laying his motion before him, that the papers it called for were such as the noble lord declined to grant. From the information which he (Mr. J. P. Grant) had received, the case was this. The ophthalmia having prevailed to a considerable extent in our army, an hospital had, during the war, been established at Bognor for the cure of that disorder; great cures of it had been effected; and the disease was found of late years to have happily abated in the army. Notwithstanding this, in a time of peace, and at a moment when public economy was so much talked of, not only a new establishment was formed, but a gentleman (Sir W. Adams) was placed at the head of it, who never had been in the army; and who had therefore no claim to military patronage; who was in fact, an oculist of this town, and who, though he was not even now in the army, was placed over the heads of many eminent men who had devoted their lives to the service of their country, and who were now receiving half-pay. The services of these men might, it appeared to him, have been very properly called for when such an institution was thought necessary. Of the professional talents of the gentleman who had thus received the appointment, he knew nothing, he had heard that they were very respectable, and he believed it; but however that might be, he could not see why any gentleman, no matter how able in his profession, should have been selected in preference to many skilful and meritorious military men. The formation of the new establishment might be a right or a wrong measure; and, as to ascertain that was his only object, he should avoid unnecessarily entering into minute details. The hon. member concluded by moving for copies of all letters or communications that had passed between the Commander in Chief, the Secretary at war, and the army Medical Board, relative to the soldiers or Chelsea pensioners affected with the Ophthalmia, since the appointment of the present director of army hospitals. He also moved for copies of all reports or representations made from Chelsea college respecting Chelsea pen- sioners under the care of sir W. Adams; and for various other papers connected with the same subject.

rose and said, he was far from being sorry that this opportunity had been afforded to him for explaining the nature of the Ophthalmic institution; and he hoped, he should be able, before he sat down, to convince the House that it was not one undeserving the support of the government. During the war, the ophthalmia had made an alarming progress in the army; an hospital for the treatment of the disease had, in consequence, been established; but the practice there certainly did not turn out so successful as could have been wished. He said this without meaning at all to reflect on the head of that establishment (Dr. Vetch), from whom, he believed, the hon. gentleman had received most of his information on this subject, and who, he understood, had been of opinion that he ought to have been made the superintendant of the new establishment, instead of sir W. Adams. It was the anxious wish of his royal highness the commander in chief to ascertain the best mode of treating ophthalmia. Sir W. Adams was said to have introduced a new and improved system. To make a certain trial of its effects, a number of pensioners afflicted with the disorder were placed under his care, and the result was, that a rapid and important improvement was observed to take place among them. The treatment of these poor people gave the highest satisfaction.—Sir W. Adams succeeded in rescuing many of them from a state of utter hopelessness and misery, and enabling them to become useful to themselves and to society [Hear! hear!]. This was not all, for in 1814, sir William's practice received the decided sanction and approbation of a number of medical gentlemen expressly appointed by government to examine its merits. To show the weight to which their opinions were entitled, he had only to mention the names of Sir H. Halford, Dr. Baillie, and Messrs. Home, Cline, A. Cooper, and Abernethy. The noble lord then quoted the following passages from the opinion of Dr. Baillie:—" I think he has the merit of introducing a practice which is likely to be highly useful in a particular chronic state of ophthalmia." And again—" His mode of operating by a knife of his own invention promises to be much more efficient, and to be more expeditious in accomplishing the cure, than that of Mr. Saunders, and likely to preserve the eyes of many individuals, which would otherwise have been lost." He also read extracts from the opinions of some of the other gentlemen alluded to, which were of a similar purport. Accordingly, the foundation of a new institution for the exclusive treatment of pensioners belonging to the several departments of the public service was resolved upon. But the new mode of treatment had been invariably opposed by the army medical practitioners, so that it was useless to think of associating Sir W. Adams with them; and the only way of rendering his system generally available was, to place himself at the head of the establishment.—In 1817, a part of York hospital was appropriated to the purpose with two medical officers assigned to act under sir W. Adams, and up to this time, the establishment had continued on this footing. The York hospital being found inconvenient, and moreover in the way of some improvements which lord Grosvenor, to whom the ground belonged, was about to make, an arrangement was made with an architect, who engaged to take a lease of some crown lands in the Marylebone fields, adjoining the Regent's park, and to build an hospital at his own expense, on condition that the public should rent it for seven years. The rent then of the building was the only expense that would fall on the public, while a tenant was secured till the expiration of the lease. It was due to sir Wm. Adams to state, that he stipulated for no compensation whatever for his services; that he had been on the establishment now for a year and a half, attending with the utmost zeal and assiduity, without having received any remuneration whatever; leaving that to the consideration of government, to be estimated according to the success of his system.—What he had now said was in part an answer to the objection on the score of expense, because, if any military man had been appointed to preside over the new institution, he would have expected to be paid in proportion to his trouble and responsibility; and therefore the proposition being assumed, that an hospital for the treatment of ophthalmia and its effects, ought to have been erected, his statement showed, that, as to expense for medical assistance, it had been established on the most saving plan. It would be tedious to go through the various objections successively raised against sir William Adams's practice. First, it was said not to have been successful—but that objection was overcome by the success attendant on repeated public experiments. Then it was alleged that the ophthalmia had been eradicated; while it appeared, on incontrovertible evidence, that at the very time whole regiments were labouring under a most severe inflammation in the eyes, which, let it be called what it might, terminated in blindness. Next it was urged, that if the disease were not extinguished, the surgeons of the army were as competent to cure it as sir W. Adams. To which the latter replied, "it may be so, but your competency appears five years after you have availed yourself of the improvements which I introduced." [Hear, hear.]—This indeed was the fact, for sir W. Adams had cured many persons who had been under the care of the army surgeons without obtaining any benefit. He (lord Palmerston) had himself inspected a number of the cases treated in the new institution, and he could assure the House, that never in the course of his life had he enjoyed a greater gratification. He had found that, in various instances, relief had been afforded to the patients to a degree that he could not have thought possible—[Hear.] He should not trespass much longer on the time of the House—but he should beg leave to describe one or two of the cases with which he was acquainted from his own personal knowledge. Wm. Hill, a soldier in the 63rd regiment, was admitted into the hospital in July, 1817; his eye-lids were villous with opacity and vascularity of both cornea; Hill himself described his state of vision at that time to be such, that he could not distinguish a post or a tree. He was discharged in January last, the villosity of the lids and opacity and vascularity of the cornea having been removed, and the opacity of the left cornea nearly so. With the right eye Hill could read the smallest print of a newspaper fluently; with his left he could read moderately sized print, tell the minute and second marks on a watch-dial; and he said he could, on a clear day, discern large objects at the distance of a mile. Charles Smith said, that on his admission in June, 1818, he could not see his fin- gers at arm's length; he was discharged in January last, at which period he could read very small print, write, and work at his trade of a shoemaker, having, in fact, worked several weeks at the hospital previous to his discharge. Gavine Young, on his admission, could only distinguish light from darkness. He was admitted in July, 1818, and discharged in Jan. 1819, being able to walk any where with perfect ease and security, read small print, and tell the hour by a watch. Another pensioner, who had been 30 years afflicted with disease in his eyes, and describing himself as unable to distinguish one object from another, left the hospital in a condition to resume his trade as a goldsmith.—Me begged pardon for going into these details, and should mention but one case more. It was that of John Silver, a soldier of the 89th regiment, who was forty-eight years of age, and who for the preceding seventeen years, was so much afflicted, as to be able merely to distinguish light from darkness. This man, within less than four months, after being placed under the care of sir W. Adams, could walk any where alone, and by the assistance of a glass, could tell the hour by a watch. Having himself examined this as well as the other cases, he could testify to the facts he had stated, and to the accuracy of the late report from the Ophthalmic hospital. Nothing could exceed the delight and gratitude with which these poor soldiers described the benefits they had received from sir Wm. Adams's treatment; and it was one of the most pleasing sights that had ever fallen to his lot, to witness the gratifying effects of that treatment.—He had already stated, that there was a great opposition and prejudice against sir W. Adams among the medical gentlemen of the army. He should now produce a remarkable instance of it, but was unwilling to mention names. Two men of the 64th regiment were taken from Chatham and put under the care of sir W. Adams in the Ophthalmic institution. After undergoing treatment there, they were inspected by the Staff surgeon of York hospital, and considered so far recovered as to be reported to be fit for foreign service, and they were ordered, as a preparatory step, to the Isle of Wight. The surgeon at that place disagreed with the Staff-surgeon, and pronounced the men unfit for foreign service. Accordingly they were kept at the York hospital, doing garrison duty from September till November, and then sent back to Chatham. Among the other charges against the new practice was this, that persons supposed to be cured of the effects of ophthalmia were liable to a relapse, and of this it was thought, these two men would furnish an example. With a view to produce such an example, a medical officer in town had written a letter, a copy of which he begged leave to read to the House. This letter was dated, London, 18th February, 1819:—"My dear—;I was much disappointed at the two men of the 64th regiment not having been sent to the last Chelsea board, as I had arranged matters in such a manner that they were to have gone to the board, and the Attention of the commissioners was to have been directed towards the state of their eyes; and all this was done quietly, without any person connected with sir W. A. knowing any thing concerning the business. I would recommend you not to mention their names in any correspondence you may have here, at all events till they are snugly lodged in the York hospital. I hope you have not meddled with their occhi, and that you will not prevent their getting drunk, so that they may have proper vascular cornea. I this morning saw two of my old patients from Chatham, who had passed the Chelsea board about a fortnight ago, and who were taken, with several others, into the Knight's hospital; Gorden and M'Gee. The former has already been dismissed from the hospital without any thing having been done to his eyes, and the poor fellow complains of having been prevented going home and detained here. The latter, M'Gee, did himself the honour, as he termed it, to call upon me to-day to pay his respects, and to thank me for my attention to him when he was under my care. I examined his eyes minutely, and everted the lids, not however with the elevator, as I do not carry such an instrument (although I am informed that you do). His eyes are looking remarkably well, and the linings are perfectly smooth. I cautioned him particularly against drinking lest he should induce a relapse, and he promised faithfully to obey my injunction I also saw Burton of the 86th regiment, one of the same batch whom be had taken into the hospital. I take it for granted you recollect the man's case perfectly. He was likewise an old friend of mine. There was, when I saw him (about a week ago) a large vessel running from above downwards, over the cornea of the right eye. The left appeared to be very well. I had not an opportunity of examining him particularly, but I shall take an early opportunity of doing so, which I shall the more readily accomplish as I have just heard that the poor knight fell from his horse yesterday, and received a severe injury of the knee, but I have not learnt the particulars." This letter having been addressed "On the public service," and sent from the medical board, it was attempted to forward it free through the War-office. But the examining clerk, whose duty it was to read all letters before they were franked, lest the privilege of the office should be abused, discovering that this was a private letter of a peculiar nature, very properly submitted it to his (lord P.'s) view, and he felt it his duty to take notice of it. Letters sent to the War-office to be franked were usually sent open, as this letter was, but although the office had by law the power to examine such letters before they were for warded, he (lord P.) had reason to believe, that it was pretty generally supposed in the army this power was rarely if ever exercised. This, however, was a great mistake, as, to his knowledge, for some years that duty was regularly executed according to law; a clerk being specially appointed for the purpose. Whether this duty was neglected, and the public revenue defrauded through an abuse of the privilege of the office at other times, he could not pretend to say; but since his accession to the appointment which he had the honour to hold, he had taken special care that no such neglect or fraud should take place, and that the prescriptions of the law should be strictly enforced. It would be seen from this insidious letter, that while the writer was anxious that the patients of sir Wm. Adams should be allowed to get drunk, in order that they might have a relapse, or, as he so classically termed it, "a proper vascular cornea," he very particularly enjoins his own patients not to get drunk, lest they should induce a relapse. But what would the House think of the disposition and principles of this writer, when informed, that at the very time he wrote this letter, he was making the strongest professions of friendship for sir William Adams, when he was soliciting for an appointment in the new establishment, and, that sir William was actually endeavouring to promote his views? The House had, he admitted, a right to decide whether the establishment ought or not to be kept in existence; but he deprecated its making, itself a party in the contest on the pretensions of professional adversaries. He wished those he addressed, to visit the institution—to examine it in every part, and on the decision they might then come to, as to its value, he would cheerfully risk its fate. But he had only to entreat that they would at the same time recollect the magnitude of the privation, and the extent of the calamity it was instituted to alleviate. The whole expense would not exceed 1,500l. a year, and if it restored even a few veterans to that degree of vision, that they would be less a burden to themselves, and be enabled to spend the evening of their days with a greater degree of comfort, he could not believe the House would withhold this valuable relief from the poor disabled soldier or sailor when purchased on such easy terms [Hear, hear]. He said again, that he was willing to stake the existence of the hospital on a personal inspection of its visible and actual effects. Let gentlemen go there and judge of it by questioning the men themselves: let them ask them what was their state on entering it, and see their state previous to being discharged; but he could not consent to the production of the papers, as he thought they would not contribute to real information, or lead to useful discussion. It would indeed be obviously improper to make that House an arena for medical controversy, which would be much better carried on through the press, and more properly left to the judgment of the public.

remarked, that the noble lord had said the papers ought not to be laid before the House, as they would only make it acquainted with one side of the question. But the noble lord spoke on one side of the question; why then object to let the House be made acquainted with the other? The noble lord said, the merits of the parties opposed to each other on this occasion ought to be left to the discernment of the public. Right! He would agree to this, but the expense of the new establishment ought also to be left to be decided on by the discernment of the public. The House owed it to that justice due to the medical officers of the army, a body of men who had distinguished themselves as much as any other part of the service during the war; and who in the judgment of all Europe had contributed eminently to the advancement of their art, to institute the fullest inquiry into the reasons of their being superseded on this occasion by an individual not connected with the army at all. They could not but feel hurt at being passed over in this manner. The noble lord had dwelt much on the letter he had read; now that letter had been produced either as a specimen of the general conduct of the army practitioners, or as an exception, to it. If the latter, it all came to nothing; but if it were exhibited in the former view, the noble lord ought in fairness to have given, and he now called upon him to give, the name of the writer, that it might be disavowed, and that a whole body of respectable men might not suffer in character for the act of an individual. The true question was, whether there was any such superiority in the gentleman appointed, as to justify the putting him above all medical officers at the end of a protracted and arduous war, in the course of which they had rendered the greatest services to their country. He wished to ask the noble lord, if, since the Report in favour of sir William Adams, which he had mentioned as having been made in 1814, one of a different nature had not appeared? If he were not grossly misinformed, some of the greatest medical men in the world were decidedly adverse to the system of sir William Adams. To visit the establishment, as recommended by the noble lord, would be useless, unless those who did so had an opportunity of comparing the patients under the care of sir Wm. Adams, with the same number of similar cases under the care of the medical officers of the army. He did not mean absolutely to affirm, that he differed in opinion with the noble lord, that the gentleman in question was not properly selected, or that the course pursued was wrong or unjust,—but he did say, that what was due to a large body of gentlemen, required that their opinions, stating the grounds on which they differed from that individual, should be laid before the House. The very circumstance of his treatment being made a secret had something suspicious in it, and was completely opposite to the uniform practice of enlightened men. [The hon. and learned gentleman was here interrupted by lord Palmerston, who declared he had not said a syllable of sir Wm. Adams's practice being kept secret, that practice being, on the contrary, made completely public]. He should sit down expressing his decided opinion, that the House would not deal fairly, if they did not cause the papers to be produced.

said, that the noble lord was entitled to great praise for his exertions to eradicate one of the most painful and afflicting of disorders. It had been his lot, from circumstances not necessary to detail to the House, to see many an example of the melancholy and grievous effects of ophthalmia, and from all he saw and knew on the subject, he thought it well worthy the attention of the noble lord to make every effort, and institute ever experiment with a view to eradicate that disorder. Would to God that it were eradicated, but melancholy and convincing proofs to the contrary were too easily discovered! The hon. and learned gentleman who opened this debate had laid two grounds in support of his motion: first, that the disease was already eradicated; secondly, that the new institution was putting the country to an unnecessary expense. As to the first, no one would rejoice at such a consummation more than himself; but it was a truth not to be disguised, that cases of the existence of ophthalmia were of every day's occurrence, not only among the military, but in civil life—and it behoved the House to guard itself from being led astray by such a delusion. With respect to the expense, he thought 1,500l. a year, the estimated charge of the new establishment, very properly laid out, even on an experiment for the eradication of ophthalmia. The hon. and learned gentleman who had spoken last, had made a most invidious statement as to the implied superiority of sir W. Adams over the medical officers of the army. He was ready to acknowledge that they were a class of men who had performed distinguished services to the nation, and to whom it was very deeply indebted; but, on the other hand, he thought that if the noble lord (Palmerston) had discovered, or thought he had discovered, any thing attended with greater success in the mode of treatment observed by the gentleman he had mentioned (a gentleman the most celebrated as an oculist, and of whose astonishing success and wonderful cures every member who heard him must have known instances), he was fully justified in availing himself of his assistance. It appeared that previous to his employment at the head of the institu- tion, patients had been placed under his care who had already been treated in vain by the army surgeons. He had produced many cases from these where a total cure, or material benefit, was effected by his practice; and this made a very strong case in his favour [Hear]. He wished sir W. Adams to have a fair and full trial, and if his practice should realise the hopes entertained in founding the institution, it would be more than an ample return for all the charge incurred. Such expense was indeed quite insignificant when put in competition with the object it was meant to accomplish. The noble lord, in his opinion, was right in refusing the papers. He was always ready to support any motion for inquiry upon proper grounds, but he could not consent to load the table of that House with voluminous documents containing ex parte statements, all indeed presenting the mere effusions of professional jealousy or private pique against the character and conduct of an individual. On the whole, he conceived that the grounds taken by his hon. friends near him did not bear them out in the remarks which they had offered on the motion, which they pressed.

thought the noble lord fully justified in withholding his consent for the production of the papers, and that for two reasons; first, because they were not necessary to enable members to form an opinion on the merits of the new institution, as, if the hon. gentlemen who supported the motion had taken the trouble to make inquiries, they would have found that there were other documents easily obtained, which were fully sufficient for that purpose, without having recourse to any others; and, secondly, because the papers moved for were not fit to be produced, and would be of little use, unless the House were prepared to go into the whole of the contest. His hon. and learned friend, the mover, had been misinformed if he thought that the ophthalmia had totally disappeared in this country; for but two years ago thousands of our soldiers were labouring under it—and at this moment the country was paying pensions to 5,000 persons totally blind from its effects, the aggregate of those pensions amounting to 92,000l. The question was, would the good likely to be effected by the institution overbalance the expense of supporting it? To consider, this, by a reference to facts, what was-the good done by it in the last thirteen months? He held in his hand the first annual medical report of the cases treated in the ophthalmic institution, York hospital, from which it appeared, that a number of soldiers who had been pronounced incurable by army medical officers, and therefore allowed pensions, were completely cured and restored to perfect vision under the skilful care of sir W. Adams. Such were the results of the establishment in the last year! The total expense of the hospital, independently of the charge of building and other items, which ought not properly to be included, was not more than 331l. during the same space of time; so that making a calculation on die number cured last year, it appeared, the average expense of restoring a blind man to sight was only 4l. 10s. [Hear], The generosity of the country would not take away the pensions already granted; but if in future only two soldiers were to be restored to sight annually, this institution (putting all considerations of national gratitude and humanity to the defenders of her rights and liberties out of the question for the present) would actually effect a saving to the nation. The pension allowed a blind man was 20l. a year; taking the average value of this at twelve years purchase, as many of the pensioners were young men, two such pensions cost the country 480l.; so that if only two patients were saved from blindness every year at the hospital, that would effect an annual retrenchment to the public of above 100l. [Hear]. If the controversial papers between the two parties were laid on the table, probably the House would be less able to form a correct estimate of the merits of the institution than before. Unquestionably, so much heat, violence, and injustice, arising out of professional jealousy, had mixed itself with the subject under consideration, that if the House were to examine what had been written, they would, be both grieved and surprised; and he did not wish to inflict on himself the disgusting task of disentangling the truth from such a weight of partiality and prejudice. Sir W. Adams had, in the outset, made a very fair proposition to the army surgeons: he had said "give me some of those patients whom you have given up as incurable, and let me try what I can do with them." This was rejected, and he was obliged to apply to the commander in chief. After encountering an infinity of trouble and opposition, his proposal was at length acceded to—several men were taken from the depot at Bognor, where they had been undergoing treatment by the medical officers without deriving any sort of benefit, and transferred to the care of sir W. Adams. Of these some had no eyes to admit of cure; but of the rest, a large proportion were either perfectly cured, or materially benefited, and were now walking about, and attending to their business [Hear]. He had himself performed the very useless duty (a laugh; of visiting the ophthalmic institution at York hospital; he had gone there with his noble friend behind (lord Ebrington) very recently, and he could assure the House, that never had he derived a more pure gratification from any spectacle. He had found fifty or sixty patients there; on asking them what their state was when they came to the hospital, he was informed by some of them that they could scarcely distinguish light from darkness, and by most of them that they had been led up by a guide. And to his inquiries respecting their then state of vision, they replied, that they could walk without a guide, or work at their trades, or read [Hear]. "How long," continued Mr. 13arha:n, "had you been afflicted with disorders in the eyes?" The answer was "eight, nine, nay, eighteen years" "Had you undergone medical treatment before?" "Oh yes" [Hear]. He therefore besought gentlemen who doubted of the utility of the hospital, to go and. judge of its effects with their own eyes. Something had been said by one hon. and learned gentleman about secresy in sir W. Adams's practice. He did not know what could have given rise to such an opinion, because, in point of fact, from first to last, that gentleman had offered to disclose all his discoveries and improvements to the profession at large; discoveries and improvements, he must insist, he had made; for if the army surgeons had possessed as much skill, why, he asked, had they not cured those pensioners who were now recovering under the care of sir W. Adams? He should not trouble the House any farther except to observe, that he thought the noble lord (Palmerston) deserved the greatest credit for resisting the cabal raised by a body of men against a meritorious individual.

said, he wished to take that opportunity of declaring what came within his own knowledge and observation concerning the institution under the superintendence of sir W. Adams. He should not do justice to his own feelings did he not express in his place his decided conviction of its merits. The gentleman at the head of it he had not known, indeed he had never seen, till within the last few days. He thought the noble lord (Palmerston) also entitled to praise for the laudable perseverance he had displayed, in supporting so humane and well-conducted an establishment, in opposition to the prejudices that were endeavoured to be excited against it. In consequence of a report of the cases treated in the institution having been put into his hands, he had resolved on convincing himself of its effects by ocular evidence; and never had any sight afforded him greater pleasure and satisfaction. He saw a variety of patients, some totally blind, many incapable of distinguishing light from darkness when they had been admitted, and having nearly all been led up.—advancing in different degrees to a recovery—enabled by sir W. Adams's treatment to walk about alone, to perceive objects distinctly, or even to read very small print [Hear]. Under these circumstances, though he should be the last person there to resist putting the House in possession of useful information, or to screen any ministerial abuse; he could not vote for the production of the reports of the medical board (of whom he wished to speak with respect) because he did not think the House would gain much knowledge by examining the opinions of men, who, it was known, had opposed the commencement and progress of the ophthalmic institution throughout.

thought the hon. and learned gentleman who brought forward this motion, sought to lead the House of Commons out of its peculiar province, which was the exertion of a due vigilance on the expenditure of public money into an interference with the executive in the exercise of one of its prerogatives, namely, the appointment of officers in a military department. He might as well propose at once, that the House should take the control of all military appointments. But he (lord C.) thought the good sense of the House would hardly allow them to adopt such a principle. But it was obvious, from the sentiments of gentlemen on the opposite side of the House, that this was a question not very generally thought fit for discussion. Two hon. and learned gentlemen were strenuous for the production of documents, and disposed to resist the establishment in question, while two other gentlemen, usually in the habit of voting with them, were of a different opinion, and highly approved the institution, and bore testimony to its utility. He had no doubt, therefore, that? the House would see the propriety of supporting his noble friend.

said, he had merely proposed investigation upon a subject on which he could obtain no authentic information by any other mode. The institution was mentioned amongst other incidental charges in the army estimates, stated altogether at a sum of 9,000l. He, therefore, felt it necessary to inquire what part of this charge was appropriated to the ophthalmic institution. He disclaimed any motive of partiality for or against sir W. Adams, or in favour of the gentleman at the head of the military medical board, Dr. M'Gregor, whom he now understood to be his countryman; but he thought the noble lord should have named the author of the letter he had produced, and sincerely hoped, whoever was the author, that he should no longer be attached to his Majesty's service, of which, whoever he was, he had proved himself wholly unworthy.

said, that in rising to bring forward his motion on the war in Ceylon, he was aware the House did not wish to enter into a long discussion; but he hoped a feeling of humanity would procure him their attention for a few moments. He wished the question had been taken up by the other side of the House; but as it had not, he felt it his duty to institute an inquiry into it. The affairs of Ceylon were not, he feared, well known in this country, but it was well known that the late king of Candy was of a most cruel and sanguinary disposition, and that his severity was such as to cause his subjects to revolt against him. His first minister having deserted, his family was murdered by order of this tyrant. This induced the minister to apply to the British governor of Ceylon, and after some delay he was allowed the assistance of the British forces, who, assisted by the Candians, succeeded in dethroning the king. On this occasion a treaty was signed by the British authorities on the one hand, and the chief officers and ministers of Candy on the other, by which the latter were vested with the civil government of the country. This treaty, however, had been violated, and the "conduct of the British authorities, in appointing a particular class of persons, detested by the Candians, to fill civil offices, disgusted them so much as to cause them to revolt against our government in that island, and the consequence had been a protracted, sanguinary, and expensive war. The British army, in their several marches, obliged the natives to carry their baggage, and to hold flambeaux before their palanquins and horses. The disgust excited by this conduct was such as to induce the governor to desist from it, but it was too late, the blow was struck, and it would be difficult to describe the scene of misery and wretchedness which followed. He wished to ask one question of the hon. member opposite, relative to the minister of whom he had already spoken, and who he understood had been beheaded. If this was true, he wished to know whether he had been previously tried by a court of justice or a court martial? It was the duty of parliament to see that the law was duly administered in all countries under our protection. He concluded by moving, for a "Copy of Proclamation by his Excellency General Robert Brownrigg in Council, given at Columbo, 11th January, 1815; also, Proclamation and Treaty in the Palace of Candy, March 2nd, 1815, between his Excellency General Robert Brownrigg on the one part, and the Adigars, Dessaves, and other principal Chiefs of the Candian Provinces, on behalf of the inhabitants."

did not mean to oppose the motion, but the hon. baronet would find, on the production of the papers, that his information was not exactly correct on this subject. In answer to the question which had been put to him, he could assure the hon. baronet, that the adigar, or minister, about whom he inquired so solicitously, was, according to the: last accounts from Ceylon, enjoying a perfectly sound state of health [a laugh]. The mistake arose, he supposed, from the similarity of this minister's name to that of another officer, who had revolted, and who having been taken in arms, was tried and sentenced to be executed.

was sorry to see the motion treated with so little attention. Ceylon had for a considerable time been a scene of warfare and destruction, and it was surely worth the attention of the House to inquire into the cause of this war. If the Candians were left to themselves, we should have some chance of retaining possession of the sea coast; but we could never expect to keep quiet possession of Candia. We might do so for a few weeks or for a few months, but when the sickly season set in, it would be found impossible. This war had cost England immense sums of money, and a great number of lives: so great was the mortality, that one regiment had lost 400 men. This surely was sufficient to call for the investigation of parliament.