presented a Petition from William Martin, grocer, of Seven Oaks in Kent, complaining of the conduct of a Country Banker. The petitioner stated, that, a short time ago, he carried eighteen one pound, and two five pound notes, of the issue of the Bank in Seven Oaks, to the banking house of Beeching and Sons, and demanded payment. Instead, however, of receiving that payment in gold the banker handed him Bank of England notes; and, upon his complaining that he ought to be paid in gold, absolutely refused to do so. The petitioner then went to a justice of the peace, and requested him to summon the banker, and require him to make the payment in gold, or state the reasons for his refusal; but the magistrate declared he had no power to interfere. On the next day, the banker sent twenty-eight sovereigns to the petitioner's house, in payment of the said notes. Mr. Hume said, he had ascertained the truth of this statement, which the banker did not deny, but said it was an ill-natured proceeding on the part of the petitioner. This, however, had nothing to do with the question. The House ought to say whether his majesty's subjects were to be placed in a situation by the country bankers, in which they could not have the local notes convertible into gold when they pleased. The petitioner stated, that four years ago a bank at Tunbridge-wells stopped, by which great distress was occasioned in the neighbourhood, and the demands on which bank had not yet been paid in full. The petitioner therefore prayed that some security might be provided by the House against the recurrence of such accidents. He found, by a return on the table, that 150 banks had stopped payment since 1816, and he therefore thought that the prayer of the petitioner was an extremely reasonable one.

said, that if it were intended to continue the small notes of country bankers, something might be said to the petition; but as they were to be called in, he thought any measure upon the subject unnecessary.

said, that in this case it was not pretended by the petitioner that he had sustained any injury, but it was brought forward merely to try the question as to the bankers right to refuse gold in payment of his own notes, when demanded. He did not see the expediency of pressing an immediate return to a gold currency. To meddle at all with the currency was not an advisable measure at that moment; and the manner in which it would affect all classes of society, had not been sufficiently considered.

said, it was quite impossible for the most active legislation to meet every possible case. The petitioner appeared to him to have, in reality, nothing to complain of. On presenting his notes at the banker's he was offered Bank of England notes, which were convertible in a moment into gold, and on the following day he was sent the gold itself. Now, he did not think that any summary process required to be introduced by the hon. member for Montrose would have given Martin the power of procuring the money quicker than within twenty-four hours after his demand.

said, that as the man gained all he required, it was evident his only object was to make a case for presenting a petition.

presented a Petition from the weavers of Pollock-shaws, praying for an alteration of the Corn-laws. The hon. member observed, that while the wages of weavers were 5s. a week, and even little or no work to be had at that price, it was monstrous to continue the present system of the Corn-laws. Of all taxes the people paid, the Corn-laws were the worst. It was a bread tax, by which a limited class, the cultivators of the soil, were alone said to be benefitted. He, however, contended that they were not benefitted. Every class would equally share the advantages of the cheapness of that necessary of life.

said, that if it was not for the Corn-laws, he would be glad to know how the nation could pay the interest of the debt, the poor-laws, the taxes, or any other of the great public burthens. If no laws protected the grower of corn, he apprehended they would find some difficulty in finding a market for their manufactures. The agricultural interest formed the bank upon which they drew for every burthen imposed upon the people. If they got rid of those laws which supported that class, they might get, rid, at the same time, of the national debt, and every other tax which pressed upon the country.

, in presenting a petition from the ladies shoemakers of Westminster, against the Corn laws, observed, that he liked to hear the subject discussed in that House, because these discussions were a means both of disseminating information and removing prejudice. At the same time, he considered all language of asperity or reproach towards the landlords, as highly reprehensible; for he believed the landlords of England to be as generous and benevolent a class of men as any other in the kingdom. There were some of them who considered, however, any attempt to approach the Corn-laws, as almost equal to the opening of Pandora's box, from the ills which were to be spread by that event over the country. The hon. member for Wiltshire considered any interference with the Corn-laws as likely to put an end to all payments of the national debt, or the other obligations of the country. He had no such apprehensions; but when he saw corn as high as it was during the war, and the wages of manufacturers, which were then 20s. or 30s. a week, now reduced to 4s. or 5s., with bread at two-pence or two-pence half-penny per lb., he thought it was high time to apply some remedy to the evil under which those classes were suffering. He did not object to the landlord or his tenant having a fair remunerating price; but when he said fair, he meant a relatively fair price, in the present fictitious state of the country, If the landlords, instead of preserving rents at the high rate they bad been during the war were to lower them, and permit a free trade in corn, as well as in other produce the whole community would be benefited. He wished to see the manufacturing classes have a rate of wages sufficient for their subsistence; and as one who voted for free trade, with the understanding that a change in the Corn-laws was to form a portion of the system, he now called upon all who had so voted to give their vote for a change in the Corn-laws.

the petition was from the boot and shoemakers. Now, of all those, who approached that House with a petition upon the subject, he considered them perhaps the least entitled to complain. It was notorious that a gentleman could not purchase a pair of boots and spurs under the price which he procured for a quarter of his best wheat. As long as the manufacturers continued to demand such prices, their profits must be as large or larger then the corn-grower's; and they could therefore afford to pay the price. They could not have corn cheap, and the other articles of life relatively dear. His hon. friend had talked of bread as being very high in price; there was no analogy between the price of bread and corn. Whether it, was the miller or the baker, he knew not; but the price of corn was very different from the price of bread. He would fee willing to apply the principles of free trade to corn, as well as to every other, article; but in the present sophisticated of the country, they could only approach to the principles of that trade.

wished to know who were those lucky landlords from whose rent-rolls their rents had not been reduced. He could assure the petitioners, that if the Promissory-Note bill passed, it would not be long before the price of corn was as low as they could wish; and then they would find wages decrease also. He was sorry to see that gentlemen could not present petitions without, by a sort of side-wind, throwing out unjust and illiberal imputations upon the landlords.

said, that if the country gentlemen would oppose the enormous estimates which were presented to the House take place, which would render the bur- then of the Corn-laws so much lighter, that they would not be felt; but while he saw them day after day, supporting the extravagant expenditure of ministers, he was neither surprised nor sorry to hear the Corn-laws complained of.

was desirous that the Corn-laws should be revised, but objected to any alteration which would deprive the landed proprietor of a fair remuneration.

most positively denied the assertion, that rents had not been reduced. He also wished to state that the price of corn, instead of being 60s. was 58s. He did not think that any alteration in the Corn-laws would be beneficial or justifiable at this time. Much delusion prevailed upon this subject; which, he trusted, would be corrected by the discussions in that House.

was disposed to extend every fair protection to the agricultural interest; but he must say, that the manufacturing and mercantile interests, from the changes which had been introduced into our commercial policy, had some claims upon the agricultural interests.

said, he thought that much error and much prejudice prevailed upon the subject on which a discussion had now arisen. Perhaps it would be better that such a discussion should take place when the question was brought fairly before the House, than to have it introduced in the present irregular way, on the presentation of a petition, as many hon. gentlemen representing the landed interest, whose opinions were upon this subject the most important, might feel it irksome, without some previous intimation, to deliver their sentiments. This was a natural feeling for those to entertain who were not in the habit of frequently expressing their opinions in that House. Much delusion, in his opinion, prevailed upon this subject, and he was, therefore, desirous that it should come fully and fairly before the House, with a view of dissipating that delusion. As to the particular distress of shoemakers, or of any other class of persons, it was a thing certainly to be regretted that distress existed amongst them; but that distress, whatever they might think, was quite disconnected with the present question. The distressed situation of the labouring classes was governed by principles totally distinct from those upon which the question of the Corn-laws de-pended. The working classes laboured under a mistake When they raised the cry for cheap bread. It was certainly Very natural for them to do so in their distressed state; but what he complained of was, that gentlemen who ought to be much better informed, should encourage the delusion under which those persons laboured, in supposing that, with cheaper bread, they would still have the same rate of Wages as they now received. The manufacturers, who expressed so much compassion for the state of their workmen, in the next breath stated, that they expected to derive a benefit from a reduction of the rate of wages, in consequence of a reduction of the price of corn. The manufacturers expected that a reduction of the rate of wages would be beneficial to them in this way—that it would enable them to come into the market with the foreign manufacturers on fairer terms than at present. On that point, also, he believed that the manufacturers would find themselves totally mistaken. But what, then, became of their compassion for their unfortunate workmen? He really believed, that when the subject came to be fairly and properly discussed, delusion and misrepresentation would be found at the bottom of all the statements which were put forth respecting the operation of the Corn-laws upon the working classes. It was to be lamented, that any class of persons in this country, or in any part of the king's dominions, should be unable to maintain themselves in comfort by the exercise of their honest industry; but it was not fair to charge such a state of things upon the Corn-laws, for the purpose of enlisting the feelings of sympathy against that system. Every man in that House must wish that his poorer countrymen were well off, comfortable, and happy—that every one of them had a fowl to put in his pot, not on a Sunday alone, but every day in the week. But if that object could not be obtained, and if a distress which they all deplored prevailed, it was idle and mischievous to hope, or to attempt to remedy it, by setting one part of the community in opposition to another, and creating an animosity between the manufacturing and agricultural interests. Those interests would both flourish best when they were most united. It was impossible that the landed interest should be poor, and the other interests of the country great and flourishing. This it was an easy matter to prove, and he trusted that much light would be thrown upon the subject in the forthcoming discussions, to refute the erroneous notion Which same entertained, that the advancement of one interest was at variance with the support of another. In the mean time, he deprecated the attempt that was made, by partial and unjust representations, and by irregular discussion, to perpetuate those errors, and to foment prejudices in this public mind against the landlords. He knew the character of that particular body, of which he had himself the good fortune to be a member, and he would not hesitate to say, that throughout Europe, throughout the world, and even in that portion of the new world which We were disposed to regard with a favourable eye, on account of its liberal institutions, there was not a Set of men to be found who could be compared with the landed proprietors of England, for the Exercise of all the virtues—and most important ones they were—connected with their situation [cheers]. When the question came to be discussed, he should be prepared to support the propriety of a free trade in corn—not because he thought the measure would depress the landed interest—he believed it would have no such effect; if he thought that it would, he would adopt a different line of conduct, for he held it to be necessary that the landed interest, which was the foundation and support of all the other interests of the country, should, if need be, be up-held. He would support a free trade in corn, because he was friendly to the principle of free trade on all subjects of commercial policy: and, if he regretted any thing at the present time, it Was that that part of his majesty's government, Who advocated the principles of free trade, had not been able to carry their liberal principles to such an extent as was to be desired. He was for a free trade, not only in corn, but in every other commodity; and, in the first place, he was desirous to see a free communication established between every part of his majesty's dominions. When the time should arrive, he would endeavour to show that the landed interest were in error, in supposing that they would suffer any injury from a free trade in corn, as the commercial interest were in supposing that they could be in a flourishing condition while the landed interest was depressed. He hoped they would be prepared to give up the protecting duties, and that when a particular trade was thrown open, they would not overwhelm ministers by complaints of the distress it occasioned them. With reference to the discussion the other night as to the silk trade, what he complained of was, that the right hon. gentleman at the head of the Board of Trade, did not carry the principle into effect. The right hon. gentleman had proved, as clear as day-light, that he could afford no more protection than a duty of 30 per cent; that by giving more, he would in fact, be giving less, because he would be letting in the smuggler, and subjecting the trade to all the inconveniencies which were before attendant upon it. A protecting duty of any kind ought to be allowed with great caution; for it had the effect of obliging the consumer to buy an inferior article, at a price beyond its real value, besides its injurious effects upon the judicious employment of capital. If the trade were worth embarking in, it ought to be open to competition, and not be fettered with a protecting duty; and if it were not, it would be better that the capital of the country should be laid out in some more profitable pursuit. He had a further objection to it. If the free principles were to be acted upon, it was expedient and wise to act upon them fully. When they changed the commercial policy of the country, they ought to have followed up the principles of that change entirely. It were better not to have entered upon the change at all, than, after having entered upon it, only to follow it up a little way. When they departed from a course which they had long followed, they ought to depart from it altogether, and enter upon their, new line of policy, by acting in all things upon the principle by which it was recommended. It was for this reason that he was favourable to a free trade in corn as in every thing else; and he did not think that the landed interests had any real grounds to justify the apprehensions which they; entertained, from the trade in corn following the general rule of free trade adopted towards other articles.

asked whether all the young men educated at the establishment obtained commissions?

said, that the number of students furnished with cadetships during the last two years was 113. Of these 46 were by purchase, and 67 by gift.

objected to the appointment of new officers in the present distressed state of the country, whilst there were many meritorious officers on half-pay who would be glad to obtain employment. He also objected to the high salaries which the staff officers of the college received.

said, that officers, to be of service to their country, should be well educated. If they were to be instructed in that kind of knowledge which would be useful to them in their profession, it was right that the instructors should be paid for their trouble. All the officers educated at the college had distinguished themselves; a proof that the expense of the establishment had not been thrown away.

objected to the sons of gentlemen being educated at the public expense. He wished to know how many days, during the last year, the governor of the college, whose salary was 1,500l. had attended at the institution?

said, that he was the governor of the college. He obtained leave of absence for two months, during the last year, upon urgent private business; but his attention was not withdrawn from the establishment. The situation was an arduous one; and, so far from being an object of desire, he had resigned it for the situation which he formerly held, the salary of which was only 400l. He now only continued in it until sir E. Paget, should arrive in this country. The salary was not too much, considering the liberal conduct which the governor was compelled to display towards foreigners visiting the college, and to the society in the neighbourhood. He had held the situation for ten years, but had not grown sixpence the richer, in consequence. The establishment had been maturely considered by government, and was thought not to be too extensive.

said, that the example of the Americans had been referred to; but they had a military college, as well as this country.

remarked, that the expense of the American army was only 500,000l., whilst that of ours was 6,000,000l. He complained of the large and expensive staff maintained to superintend the education of 216 young men.

said, that in the American college there were 268 cadets, who cost more than he was aware of.

said, he would ask, whether 24,000l., the amount of the subscriptions of the cadets, was not enough for the college? The government had no right to teach at the public expense what those boys could learn at other seminaries. If they were to be taught every thing at the college, why not teach them their letters? Here were three French masters, two German masters, three masters of history and classics, and a drawing master; he contended that these nine masters should be dispensed with, or that the pupils should pay them themselves. He would move as an amendment, to reduce the vote 3,000l., making the sum voted for the whole expense of the college 10,135l.

considered the estimate not beyond the amount required. Whilst he was upon his legs, he wished to say a few words upon a matter introduced to the notice of the House by an hon. baronet (sir F. Burdett) whom he was sorry he did not see in his place. He referred to a paragraph which had appeared in the newspapers respecting a transaction in the 10th Hussars. When it was first mentioned, he had stated, that he had no doubt the affair would turn out to have arisen from a desire to abstain from the infliction of corporal punishment. He thought that such subjects as these should not be brought before the House, because they tended to create prejudices towards a certain quarter, though he was quite sure the hon. baronet had no improper object in bringing this matter forward. He had stated, that the transaction had been exaggerated, and he held in his hand a report from the commanding officer of the 10th, which fully confirmed his statement. The man had behaved extremely ill, and recourse was had to the usual punishment of drill; he lay down, refused to move, and two Serjeants were directed to force him along. He afterwards was confined; and subsequently expressed contrition for his offence. The officer consented to overlook it, but insisted upon his performing two days' drill. The only point of the officer's conduct upon which the commander-in-chief had felt any dissatisfaction was, his not bring- ing the man before a court-martial and having him punished. He had also received a communication from the mayor of Exeter, in which they declared their decided opinion, that the 10th were the best-conducted regiment that ever entered their city. He had had the immediate command of them for a considerable time, and he owed it to them to state, that he never met with officers more attentive to their duty, or more competent to the discharge of it. The office of adjutant was one of great trouble and difficulty, yet every one of the officers, including the son of the hon. baronet (sir F. Burdett) had filled it in their turn. The officer who held it at present was a son of one of the most distinguished families in the land. He was aware, that there existed among them a sort of esprit de corps, which might have been very proper in itself, but had been improperly directed on one occasion; but he was convinced, that the general prejudice against them was most undeserved.

thought that much of the charge might be dispensed with. There was no reason why these gentlemen should be educated at the public expense. If we were to have a metallic currency and low prices, we must have low taxes.

observed, that the hon. member for Aberdeen had recommended that persons educated at the college should pay the expense out of their own pocket, except officers' sons, who should be educated at the public expense. Now, the case was exactly so. Where the individuals were not officers' sons, they paid for their education.

said, that if the charge of defraying the expenses of this college were taken from the public, it became a private seminary; and at private seminaries pupils learnt nothing. Noblemen's and gentlemen's sons came away from those schools without learning any thing but extravagance and swindling.

replied, that his object was, not to allow the sons of officers to be educated at the public expense. He was satisfied the gallant admiral would not grudge to pay 125l. per annum for his son's education. He believed the college was a good school, but the public ought not to be forced to pay for the education of other persons. He thought it hard that the people of England should be taxed to educate the children of the rich.

thought, that great misunderstanding prevailed upon the subject of this vote. Take all the seminaries of the country together, and it would he found that such an education as was given at the military college could not be obtained elsewhere at as cheap a rate. It had been objected that the cadets should pay the expense of their own education; and so they did in part. But there were the sons of distinguished officers, who could not pay the whole expense of their education; and, would the hon. member exclude them from rising to the height pf their profession? So long as we had, an army, the officers of it should be well educated.

objected that, in a variety of cases, governors and lieutenant-governors were kept up whose appointments were merely nominal. Some never resided at all; and in many places the garrisons were only kept up for the purpose of placing a certain number of sinecures at the disposal of government.

said, that many of the posts were not sinecures, and that such as were, were rewards given to meritorious officers for services performed.

wished to know why Fort Augustus and Fort William, two places which the military commission had recommended for reduction, were not given up? and why there was an increase in the estimate? He understood that, they were still maintained at the desire of the duke of Wellington.

said, that if they had been demolished, the officers attached to them would have retained their pay during life; so that nothing would have been gained. The trifling increase in the estimate, arose from some addition, of pay given, to non-commissioned officers. The question came shortly to this—whether the Crown ought, or ought not to have, it in its power to reward long services?

was afraid that the favoured officers, and those of influence, got more of this reward than the meritorious ones. Who, for instance, was the governor of Hull, with a sinecure of more than 800l. a-year?

objected to the term sinecure, as applied to the appointments in question, which were invariably the hard-earned rewards of long service. In the course of a war, during which 500 meritorious individuals had risen to the rank of general officer, there were but forty-four of these little governments to distribute amongst them; and these were the same as had existed in the British army for upwards of a hundred years. They were, in fact, the only reward in the power of the Crown to bestow upon officers who had become distinguished, wounded, or worn out in the service of their country. The hon. member could not point out one individual who had obtained his appointment from mere favour. The individual alluded to was general Hill one of the duke of Wellington's aide-de-camps.

said, that he had changed his opinion since last year upon this point. He thought that the Crown ought to have the power, of providing for officers; and that a place was better than a pension, because there was something of honour attached to it. Still he could not understand why Fort Agustus and Fort William had not been demolished.

said, that since the Caledonian canal had been constructed, one, of these forts stood at the very entrance of it; and if it were not for it, any privateer with a couple of, guns might come up to the lock gates and blow them off. As for the other fort, it was, used as a barrack, and was wanted in that part of the country. Besides, he believed, that the maintenance of these forts was part of the act of Union with Scotland.

said, the forts were not built till after the Union. The canal alluded to was itself useless, and it was too much to pay 1,000l. for a fort to protect it. He thought the garrisons, in the colonies, ought to be paid for by the colonies themselves. He was sure, with reference to Canada, that that colony would be happy to defray the whole expense of its own government, if they would only give them a good government and British laws. Why should not Gibraltar pay for its own garrison? So long as the revenues of Gibraltar went into the pocket of the king, the House ought not to grant a shilling for its support. Again with respect to the Cape of Good Hope, if his majesty's government would only give the people of that colony a good governor, and English laws, they would be ready to pay all their own expenses. But how was the fact? Lord Charles Somerset was a man whom every body detested.

felt himself called upon to interfere, when he heard a gallant officer spoken of in so disrespectful a manner in his absence. He really thought it altogether unfair to take this course.

contended for his right to allude to the conduct of public officers. How else were they to be brought to justice? And how was it in this very case? Lord Charles Somerset could not be got over to this country, although they had been led to expect that he would be here to take his trial long ago.

thought the hon. member misunderstood the grounds on which he had been called to order. It was not because the hon. member was bringing charges, but because he was using unguarded expressions. His whole argument, however, was foreign to the purpose, because not a halfpenny of the governor of the Cape's salary was paid out of the present vote.

said, that his argument was quite to the purpose. He said, that if the Cape had another governor, it might be made to pay all its own expenses. In saying that lord Charles Somerset was detested by every body, he meant every body, at the Cape; and as far as his knowledge went it was so. [Cries of "Order."]

.—A man under accusation!

.—Under accusation! Why that was just What he said—under serious accusations—for which he ought to be brought to justice.

was disposed to believe that the hon. member for Montrose had exceeded the instructions of his constituents of the colonies, and that he had pledged them more extensively than they were willing to redeem. He had undertaken to say, that the inhabitants of the Cape were willing to pay all the civil and military expenses of the colony, if lord Charles Somerset was removed from the governorship. It was to be wished that the hon. member had stated his authority for that assertion, which at present rested entirely upon his assumption. As to that noble lord's not coming home to answer the charges, it should be recollected, that he could not leave his charge till a successor was appointed. A highly honourable and intelligent officer had been sent out in that capacity, and the immediate return of lord Charles might be calculated upon. The hon. member was, without doubt, warranted in commenting upon the character of every public man in that House, and not to do so, if he thought there was reason, would be a dereliction of duty; but in God's name, let every man have a fair trial! With respect to Canada, the hon. gentleman was pleased to say, that upon certain conditions, named by him, the people there would be most happy to pay their own expenses. Now, on the part of the people of Canada, he begged leave to say that they would be happy to do no such thing. Instead of bringing forward these doctrines about our colonies in this desultory manner, on a question of estimate, why did not the hon. member bring the whole subject fairly under the consideration of the House? He would undertake to say, he would not find twenty persons in Canada, to sign a petition to pay their own expenses. The question was, whether the colonies were or were not to be preserved? If they were worth preserving, expenses must necessarily be incurred in their maintenance. As to the administration of the money, he could only say that it was disposed of in the most economical manner, through the hands of a responsible body.

condemned the whole management of the colonies as the most infamous system of jobbing on the face of the globe. The expense of keeping every colony was greater now than it had been while they were in the hands of the power from which it had been taken. Under the Dutch the Cape of Good Hope paid all its expenses. His object in rising was, that his hon. friend should not be hunted down.

, in allusion to the complaints against lord C. Somerset, took oc- casion to eulogize general Bourke, who had been sent out to supersede him.

said, that the hon. member might as well have eulogized the character of sir Peregrine Pickle. What had that officer's character to do with the present question? In a time like this, every shilling that could be saved ought to be saved. Why should individuals in this country be called on to pay for the garrisons of Canada or the Cape of Good Hope, any more than for the troops employed in Jamaica? If the colonies were worth being defended, surely they ought to pay for that defence. In his opinion, the 5,900l. charged for those garrisons ought to be deducted. He would therefore move, that the resolution be reduced by the sum of 5,900l.

defended the propriety of the vote. It was very true that the power of taxation, to meet the expense of the garrison—and every other expense with respect to the Cape of Good Hope—rested with the government. The question, then, was, whether the colony was able to support the necessary expense? There was nothing analogous between the situation of the Cape of Good Hope and that of Jamaica. The hon. member talked of introducing British laws, and even the British language, in the former place. But it was deceiving the House to say that such objects could be effected in so easy a manner. Every thing possible had been done for the amelioration of that colony.

said, that when he was at the Cape, a Dutch officer, who had been governor there, informed him, that he had been always able to levy sufficient in the colony, for the maintenance of the garrison, &c, without calling for a shilling from the mother country. He did not understand why that should no longer be the case.

inquired, whether those foreign officers were allowed to sell their half-pay?

said, that they were permitted to sell their half-pay, in precisely the same way as British officers, but that commissions did not bear the same price according to the rank. The instances, however, were few in which this permission had been taken advantage of.

said, that if old men whose incumbrance on the public would be determined by a few years, were allowed to substitute younger men in their places, he could not see where the system would stop.

said, the hon. member had adopted a mistaken view of this matter. The half-pay was by no means a perpetual arrangement, as he seemed to suppose; nor were the individuals who remained on the list a whit more immortal than those who sold out. The advantage of the system was this, that those foreign half-pay officers formed a class of men who could not be employed, without a special act of parliament; but, by allowing them to sell out, instead of supporting a body of officers from whom we could derive no service, we procured the assistance of British officers whose services were at once available. This arrangement did not substitute young lives for old ones. It was most advantageous to the country, and to the persons immediately concerned, by giving a scope to the preferment of meritorious officers. This was a most desirable object. Since the peace, officers were growing gray in the service, who, in consequence of this arrangement, were enabled to get forward.

said, there was no man more anxious than he was to provide for those individuals who had served their country in the field; but he could not conceive why this expense should go on increasing. In 1821, the sum charged was 940,000l.; in 1822, 966,000l.; in 1823, 1,224,000l.; in 1824, 1,229,000l.; in 1825,1,240,000l.; and now it was 1,285,000l. He should like to know what reason could be assigned for the increase.

said, the vote was required to requite those soldiers who had served for a given period, or who had within that period been disabled in the service of the country, and had thus become entitled to pensions. It was not for those who administered the regulation to dictate what number of men should present themselves for admission; it was only when those claims were made, that the duty of the officers of that establishment commenced, by investigating the nature of those claims. Considering the large amount of the army during the war, there must have arisen a greater number of claims from those who had been partially disabled, than could have been supposed to have been reduced in consequence of deaths. He felt confident that the House would not apply an ill-judged economy to the pittance of the soldier who had been disabled in the service of his country.

recollected the noble lord folding forth in 1817 and 1818, that most of those on the pension list were men who must have suffered from the war, and that a great reduction might naturally be expected to take place; but if instead of 800,000l., the expense was found to amount now to 1,200,000l., it must be evident that there was something wrong. He had heard that much of this increase arose from some deficiency in the personal appearance of the men—from their want of whiskers, or some equally important matter, and that those who were thus deficient, had received a hint to be off, in order to make room for younger and better looking men. He suspected also that there was something wrong in regard to the officers on half-pay. After the reduction of the army in 1816, the amount of half-pay and allowances amounted to 460,000l. We were then told by the finance committee, that a great decrease might naturally be anticipated; but, instead of that, the amount had regularly increased till 1822, and even now was more than in 1817. In that year it had been 647,000l.; in 1818, 651,000l.; in 1819, 737,000l.; in 1820, 783,000l.; in 1821, 765,000l.; in 1822, 818,965l.; and now for 1826, it was 770,530l. There had, therefore, from 1816 to 1822, been a regular and large increase, after it had been supposed that the amount had reached a maximum. If, at the peace, every officer in the army had been put on half-pay, the total amount, he believed, would not have exceeded 400,000l. or 500,000l. He felt certain, that the increase boded something wrong and rotten, and that it ought to be strictly investigated.

said, that the hon. member had not taken notice of the fact, that in 1822 the out-pensions of Kilmainham had been, incorporated with those of Chelsea. He admitted, however, that the position taken by the hon. gentleman was one in which he himself had been placed. He had looked for a diminution under this head; but instead of it, he was surprised by an increase. He had also found the utmost difficulty in accounting for it. He knew that it could be accounted for, in part, by the reduction of veteran battalions, and in part by the recalling of troops from the East and West Indies. But these two modes were not enough to account for a gradual and progressive increase. He thought it wrong decidedly, and had sent persons into various parts of England to detect fraud and imposition, if they existed. None had been detected. He had sent parties into Ireland upon the same errand. But as yet he had no satisfactory returns. He could not say where the fault lay. Certainly, the government was not blameable. They could not refuse the pensions. The increase was probably owing chiefly to the service-pension list existing under Mr. Windham's system, adopted when the House and country did not seem to have the least idea of the extent to which the expense might be carried. He had opposed that service-pension plan at the time it was proposed, and he was now clearly convinced that it ought never to have been carried into effect. But that regulation had been subsequently altered, and its provisions confined to those who had enlisted under that system. The rest were under a different regulation, and not entitled to a service-pension until they had served twety-years. Under the former system, it was competent, in many instances, for persons to retire on service-pensions, whose ages only amounted to about thirty. The hon. member must therefore complain of Mr. Windham's law. But he hoped we had now reached the acme of the effects of that system. The resolution was agreed to. On the question, that the chairman report these resolutions to the House,

complained of the hardships suffered under the commission for army arrears. He held m his hands the case of a gentleman, whose father had been in the service of government for fifty years, and having taken the agency of two fencible regiments in 1794, had delivered in his accounts to the War-office in 1800, had received his quietus in 1807, and in 1824 his son and executor had been brought into the court of Exchequer, and there remained under process.

believed the hon. member could not name any ease in which the person called on was not liable to pay. Still it did not follow, because an individual was called on to pay money in this manner, that any doubt was cast on his honesty; for it might happen that too great a sum was originally issued by government to the individual) and then it night, properly and fairly, remain in his hands till he was called on Co repay the balance Of that which he had received On the other hand, the delay of the government in thus calling on an individual was no imputation on them; for they might not be able to make up their accounts immediately. In all these cases, in which the parties had resisted the claim of government, their resistance had been found illegal.

, before be proceeded to propose any vote, begged to make a few observations relative to the Ordnance Estimates for this year. It would be seen at once that an increase bad taken place in the amount of the whole sum to be voted. That increase was, however, no actual increase of the expense of the Ordnance department, but arose from the transfer of certain items from the army extra ordinaries and navy estimates. From the army extra ordinaries the sum of 210,260l., far the repair of works and buildings, &c. had been transferred to the Ordnance estimates, and would have the effect of not only cawing a diminution of expense, but of placing the item within the control of a corps that had the best means of executing the duty. There would also be an advantage in having various expenses, which were formerly scattered and separated, collected under one head; and of placing every thing connected with works and buildings in the engineer department in one estimate; so that hon. members would in future be enabled to see the increase or diminution at a glance, and to propose any curtailment winch might tie deemed proper. Another transfer had also taken place from the naval department, Which would swell the Ordnance estimate beyond what it would otherwise have been, to the extent of 98,133l. The total amount of these transfers was 318,393l., which made the whole estimate amount to 1,754,403l., of which 1,436,110l. only was for the ordnance. The excess of the estimate for the present year over the last was 45,495l. but it was much smaller than during any of the thirty years preceding 1825. One part of this increase, amounting to 22,500l. arose from an addition to be made to the royal artillery regiment. It was proposed to make up each company to seventy men. Formerly there was a driving company, which was now borne upon the artillery, and, therefore, comparing the present with the last year, it would be found that there was only an increase of 350 men. This increase did not arise from any dread of foreign war, or internal discord; for if there were any dread of either, it was evident that such an increase would be productive of little advantage. It arose, in fact, from the condition of the artillery regiments, which, as they were at present composed, were found inadequate to the duty which they had to perform. With regard to the number required for the colonies, it had been found absolutely necessary to have five companies more than there were last year, as it was impossible for the service to be performed with less than forty companies, a great number of them being generally sick; at one time there were no less than 500 invalided. It might be asked why more were required to carry on the service this year than for the last four years? He should answer, that circumstances were different now from what they were three years since. The colonial troops were then relieved by veterans who were able to bear up against the climate. The troops they then sent were mostly what had composed the army of occupation in France. These men were now entitled to return, and those sent out to supply theft places were mostly recruits, who would not be so well able to endure the change of climate, and the other consequences of the service. It had therefore been at first thought proper to ask that the number of men in a company should be increased from 70 to 80; but on account of the present difficulties of the country, that design was abandoned, although, undoubtedly, such an increase would be required next year. During the war, the proportion of artillery-men to soldiers of the line was as one to nine, but now that proportion did not exceed one to fifteen. The proportion of dismissals was this—four out of five artillery men were dismissed, and the fifth was kept up; while in the- line, two out of three were dismissed, and the third was kept up. The proportion of artillery men had been lowered, since the peace, beyond that of any other men in the, service. The present measure was, therefore, one of absolute necessity; and he hoped it would not be received with the worse grace, because it happened to be made at a most unfortunate period. He wished to add, that the augmentation of the companies had taken place without any augmentation of officers. He would now refer to the item of cadets. The number of cadets at Woolwich was 146, in the year 1821; they now only amounted to 40; but in the estimate they were stated at 80, because it was supposed that the artillery corps could not be supplied with skilful officers, unless that number of students was kept up, and it was therefore necessary to provide the means of maintaining that number.—The extra ordinaries, formed but a small item in the present estimates; and an increase of 16,919l. of those to be voted for Ireland, was attributable, partly to the expenses of the Irish survey, partly to the difference occasioned by the payments being made in British instead of Irish currency, and also to some expenses incurred in repairs. Perhaps he ought to take that opportunity, of saying, that the Irish survey was in a state of great progress. It was going on as rapidly as such a work could be carried forward. The corps of sappers and miners were employed upon it, and by that means, much labour and expense had been saved to the country. The Irish country gentlemen had called for the survey, which they expected would be productive of the greatest benefit. Maps had been drawn, allowing six inches for a mile, as the scale of measurement, in. order to afford the fullest means, of information on the subject. The barracks were the next item to which he wished to call the attention of the House. The sum required for the barracks in England was 165,087l.; in Ireland it was 135,703l., the expense in Ireland being 6,898l. less than last, years. The increase in England was caused; principally by the alterations which had lately taken place in the King's Mews, and which amounted to 25,000l. The barracks had been removed from the front to the rear of the King's Mews, in order to make way for the new buildings intended to form the front of that place. There had been a great diminution of barrack accommodation in this country. The number of men formerly capable of being accommodated in barracks amounted to 170,000 in England, and to 80,000 in Ireland, making a total of 250,000 men. At present, barrack accommodation could only be afforded to 76,000 men in England and to 42,000 in Ireland, and this reduction had taken place since the peace. In the military store branch there was a diminution of 11,309l.; and he begged to observe, that the military and civil stores-had been divided into two branches, in order to meet the suggestions of the hon. member for Aberdeen. He had now come to the supplementary estimates. A great number of military works had been dismantled and taken down. This was In consequence of the reports of the commissioners appointed to examine into the whole system of our military defence. The commissioners had found many useless forts, but they had also found places of defence which it was absolutely necessary to repair. They had examined into, the dimensions of the buildings, the materials, &c., and when what they had pointed out as necessary had been done, there would be a great saving. There had been barracks built at Sierra Leone, which had cost 27,000l. He would not enter upon the question of the expediency of that measure, but should observe, that as long as it was desirable to keep that colony, so long would it be desirable to preserve the lives of the soldiers. Every soldier was worth from 100l. to 150l., so that, looking at it merely in an economical point of view, the country would gain by the erection of these barracks. He concluded, by moving, "That 52,349l. be granted for defraying the salaries to the master-general, the principal officers and clerks belonging to the office of' Ordnance, at the Tower and Pall Mall, for the year 1826."

said, that having just got through the Army Estimates the Ordnance Estimates were now to be considered. In both of these branches-of expenditure he could find no diminution, but, on the contrary, a considerable increase. He could not conceive why the army, navy, and ordnance estimates, should amount to such enormous sums. Those statements were the precursors of the budget, the opening of which was so anxiously looked for. He could not forbear expressing a fear, that the chancellor of the Exchequer would not find sufficient sums to meet the heavy expenditure which the House was called upon to support. Night after night immense sums had been voted for various purposes. No show of retrenchment had appeared. It was painful to observe the lavish manner in which the public purse was squandered at a time when the country was suffering from the effects of a deep and heavy shock. Was the right hon. gentleman aware that the Customs must fall short? How, then, were those increased expenses to be satisfied? That was a question which he hoped and trusted the right hon. gentleman would be enabled to answer when called upon to give his promised but prolonged statement. We were told we must have 89,000 men and a large navy; but, was the right hon. gentleman prepared to say that he would be enabled to satisfy all those expenses? He sincerely hoped he would; but it could not be denied that there were gloomy reports abroad respecting the decrease in the Customs, and those reports when coupled with the general feeling of despondency caused by recent events, and the apprehension that other disasters were about to happen, could not fail to create alarm. He hoped that the predictions of the desponding might prove groundless; but he felt it his duty to call upon the right hon. gentleman to explain why the opening of the budget was postponed.

said, that the particular circumstances which had taken place in the course of the session had hitherto precluded him, without any fault, and certainly without any desire of his own, from presenting to the consideration of the House those statements to which they might look for the means of giving effect to the measures already agreed upon, as well as to that at present under discussion. He would, however, now undertake to promise, that on that night sunlight, he would certainly submit to the House the view of his majesty's government upon the actual state of the finances of the country; and he entertained no doubt that, making allowance for any reasonable defalcation which the revenue might have sustained from the peculiar position of commercial affairs, it would be found fully adequate to all the measures which were proposed for the sanction of the House.

said, he had expected, after all the promises held out of the consolidation of offices, that the country would have had the benefit of reduction; instead of which, he was sorry to observe an increase of expenditure in every item. He had already shown that the department of the army was going on in a progressive ratio of expense. The same, it now appeared, was to be the case with the Ordnance, until at length the country would be destroyed by a load of taxation to support all those enormous establishments. The Artillery were now to be augmented to seventy men each company, and next year they were to be increased to eighty. The hon. member said, that thirty-five companies of Artillery could not be dispensed with, but he really believed that ten companies were quite sufficient. We were not in a state of war: the colonies needed no defence; the twenty companies required for their relief were altogether superfluous. He regretted very much to observe the disposition in his majesty's ministers to extravagance. In 1792 the whole amount of the expense for the Artillery was only 445,000l. There was no occasion for having two establishments, one at Pall-mall, the other at the Tower. The salary of the treasurer had been increased, without any reason, from 1,200l. to 1,500l.; and the secretary to the Master-general had also had his salary increased from 1,100l. to 1,400l. It was quite hopeless to expect that any reductions would be made; but he had done his duty in protesting against the extravagance.

defended the present scale upon which the Ordnance estimate was framed; and said, that so far from its showing an increasing expense in the particular department alluded to, there was a reduction of 67,000l. as compared with the estimates of 1820, and of 193,000l as compared with those of 1821. He also insisted that a system of economy was apparent in the details.

said, that with reference to the reduction in this branch of the public expenditure under Mr. Pitt's government in 1792, he must say that the great pilot who weathered the storm, never made a greater yaw (to use a nautical phrase) than he had done on that occasion; for it afterwards exposed this country to the necessity of sending the duke of York, with a mere corporal's guard, to the continent, to protect England from insult. He would rather at once cut away the dead weight, of which he formed himself a distinguished part, than diminish in these times one single effective man of the army or navy.

said, that there was no branch of our force which it was so necessary to keep up as the Artillery. It was very expensive to raise such a corps, and, therefore, it ought to be kept efficient. The British Artillery was one of the best arms of the country.

said, that his object was, to show that the Artillery had been augmented merely because the infantry had been augmented; and for this augmentation no good reason whatever had been given. If ministers would go on at this extravagant rate, and the House would allow them, he could only say, let them do it in God's name, for he could not prevent them.

regretted to find that it was intended to retain a battalion of the guards in the Mews at Charing-cross. It would be much more becoming, constitutional, and seemly to the eyes of Englishmen, if the present opportunity of local improvement on the spot, carrying on under the eyes of sir Charles Long, the Vitruvius of the present day, were taken, to get rid of this infringement of a long-established constitutional principle. It was highly improper to keep a large body of troops close to the houses of parliament, close to the king's palace, close to the courts of law. It might be said, this four or five hundred men could not overawe Westminster. But it was fitting that the military should be removed out of sight; and especially as there was an abundance of barracks in which they might be stationed. Such was the feeling of some of his constituents; and, in compliance with that feeling, he had waited on the duke of York, who received him as his royal highness received every body, but who had told him that it was determined on that the troops should be kept there. God forbid that he should object to men in a red coat. He had as much respect for soldiers as any man, in their proper places; but it was not a fit thing that the military should be obtruded upon the people in places where they had tint been accustomed. It was from such small beginnings that the citizens of free countries had become accustomed to military domination. Though he knew what would be the fate of any motion of his, yet he would make one more effort to remove the military from the heart of the metropolis, where they had the chance of overawing those with whom the free counsels of the nation ought to abide. The gentlemen on the other side stated it as a merit in the government, that they had only barracks for 76,000 men. What would those who went before us have said to this? Did the hon. gentleman who stated that, know what the amount of force was which controlled the counsels of the nation, at a time when the spirit of freedom was at least as strong abroad as at present? Did he know, that with 30,000 men, in the time of the usurper, England, Scotland, and Ireland, were governed?

said, that the hon. member's objection divided itself into two heads—the architectural and the constitutional objection. On the first point, he could not conceive what offence it was against good taste, that human beings should be put in a place where horses had hitherto been kept. Neither could he tell on what the constitutional objection was founded. He should be prepared to contend, when the hon. member brought the subject forward, that it was the more constitutional course to lodge the men in barracks than to quarter them on the citizens. At least in the time of Charles 1st the cry was, that "the soldiers should not sojourn with the free citizens of the country against their will." As to the usage, the hon. member should recollect, that from 1754 to 1776, it was the practice to keep a battalion of guards at the Savoy, and when the Savoy was burned in 1776, the buildings in Somerset-house were appropriated for the same number of troops, from that period to 1789. As a general proposition too, he should be prepared to show, that it was more conducive to the efficiency of the troops, to lodge them in barracks, than to quarter them on the publicans, where they necessarily mingled with characters of the worst description. What the effect of quartering on the publicans was, he would show by a single instance; at that moment there were soldiers quartered at Chalk Farm, and yet it was required of them that they should attend their duty in the Bird-Cage Walk clean and neat in their appearance. There were others quartered in Mary-le-bone, and at Camden Town; and what advantage the country could derive from such quartering in public-houses, he thought it would be a difficult task for the hon. member to make out. But what he objected to was, not so much the inconvenience of the distance, as the ill effect of exposing soldiers in private quarters to the danger of being mixed up with the worst members of society—a danger from which they would, in a great degree, be exempted in barracks.

thought there could be no question as to the preferableness of keeping the soldiers in barracks, instead of suffering them to live in public-houses, associating with the most dissolute of the populace.

agreed, that troops were much easier kept in subordination in barracks, than if quartered in public-houses; but the situation of the new barracks was what his hon. friend was opposed to. They would stand in the heart of Westminster, than which he could conceive nothing more objectionable.

said, that if he was in error as to his constitutional law, he erred with very respectable authority. Blackstone had written in strong terms against the practice of separating the soldiers from the people. It was said that they were thereby better subjected to military discipline. But he would rather that they should be a little worse soldiers, than be cut off from all community of feeling with the people.

said, that if the House wished to have the soldiers in good order, they must be kept in barracks. In his own regiment it frequently happened, that men were quartered out for want of room; but they generally complained of being billeted among the blackguards with whom they were obliged to mix in the public-houses. The army would soon run to confusion and disorder if the barrack system were abolished.