proposed, as an amendment, that in every borough in which the mayor shall not have been elected before the passing of the Act, the council shall, on the 21st day after passing of this Act, proceed to elect a mayor; and in case of an equality of votes, in any election of mayor, the Alderman who shall have been elected by the greatest number of votes, shall have a second or casting vote.

objected to the amendment, on the ground that the constituency of a place had not in contemplation, when they voted for a particular councillor, the intrusting him with such power. The clause, as it stood in the Bill, would be only applicable to the boroughs of Newport and Rochester.

wished to have the words, exempting the expense of removing trans- ported felons from the provisions of the 55th of Geo: 3rd., which it was proposed to repeal, omitted. It was an expense he did not consider the counties were fairly entitled to and one which he felt ought not to be retained. It was comparatively of recent date in Ireland; one of those numerous compulsory levies by which the grand jury rates had been swelled, and for which so many charges of extravagant expenditure had been made against the gentry of that country. Up to 1815, the charge for removing convicted felons from the gaols to the seaports for transportation had been borne by the general government in that year, chiefly on the plea of assimilating the practice in both countries. This expense was thrown exclusively on the Irish counties. This reason, however, could not now be urged; it no longer existed. Last year the English counties had been relieved from this burden, and he trusted a similar course would be pursued towards Ireland. Let the expenses, up to conviction, be borne by counties; after conviction, by the nation at large, although the expenses of removal fell heavily on the counties distant from the place of embarkation. It had reached as high as 12l. a man in the county he had the honour to represent, and in the adjoining county. It could be carried into effect at a trifling, if any expense, to Government, with so large a force at their disposal in Ireland. Twice a year, after each assizes, an arrangement might be made, by which the convicts from the different gaols could be transmitted across the island under a military guard. He threw out this suggestion for the consideration of his Majesty's Government.

admitted the force of what fell from the hon. Member for Roscommon, and assured him it should be attended to. Under these circumstances, he trusted the amendment would not be pressed.

objected to the principle of issuing money for such purposes out of the consolidated fund. He conceived there was no control over the expenditure, and he should next year move that the estimates for the police be laid before the House, and a vote taken for them as was done with the army and navy.

agreed with everything that fell from the hon. Member for Middlesex, but if his principle were good for anything next year he ought to apply it at present. He could not help calling the attention of the House to the great increase of expenditure created by the Bill over that of last year. The Inspector-General, under this Bill, was to have 1,500l. a-year, whereas last year it was only 1,000l. He could only account for this from the fact of the appointment being about to be conferred on an Englishman. Government seemed systematically to exclude Irishmen from every appointment. He instanced the Secretary for Ireland—the Under-Secretary—the Archbishop of Dublin—the Chairman of the Board of Works, and now the Chief of Police.

thought there was no reason for national jealousy on such a subject, as the heads of police in London were Irishmen.

agreed with the hon. Member for Limerick that the expense would be considerably increased, and called upon the noble Lord to give some estimate of what the expense would be under this Bill.

said, that the expense would not be increased by the Bill.

considered this as the most objectionable clause in the Bill. Not only was the constitutional mode of appointing the constables departed from, but an unlimited power of augmentation, and, as far as the counties were concerned, an unlimited power of taxation was placed in the hands of the Lord-lieutenant. Hitherto the exercise of this power had been limited; it depended on a requisition signed by a certain number of Magistrates—the augmented force was paid for by the inhabitants of the disturbed district, and was reduced when tranquillity was restored; but by this Bill, as it at present stood, those parts of the country where no disturbance had taken place were to be saddled with a portion of the expense, and the augmented force was to remain a permanent charge on the country. To remedy his he proposed an amendment clause.

was perfectly willing to adopt that portion of the amendment of his hon. Friend which related to the apportioning the expense of any extra force on the districts for which it was required, and would be prepared to add words to that effect to the 22d Clause, which was the one settling how the expenses of this body were to be defrayed; but he could not agree to that part of the amendment which limited the power of the Lord Lieutenant to act, save authorized by a requisition signed by a certain number of Magistrates. He felt it was contrary to the principle of this measure, that it would have the effect of creating a divided responsibility between the Lord Lieutenant and Magistrates, which was by no means desirable.

wished to know what the scientific men did, and he should like to see a detached Report of the manner in which this sum was to be expended.

there had been excellent charts made of various parts of the coast of England and America, from actual surveys; a long series also of observations on the tides had been instituted, the Observatory at Greenwich was included, and many improvements which had been made in navigation; experiments also had been made to secure timber from the dry rot, and various other objects of importance were paid for by this vote though it was impracticable to lay a detailed account of them before the House.

explained that a portion of this sum was allotted for the half-pay of pursers, but the sum proposed to give them would be saved by an improved method of victualling the navy.

thought it was a great injustice to put officers of the rank of purser, who sat at the table of the admiral, on the half-pay of only 3s. a-day. The pursers of the navy were ill-requited for their services. Formerly, they had ships to live in, with provisions for themselves and a servant, instead of being obliged to procure board and lodging. Formerly, pursers of twenty-six years' servitude got 5s. a-day; it now requires thirty-five years' servitude to entitle a purser to that sum. In 1814, a purser of ten years' servitude received 4s. now it could not be ob- tained under twenty-six years; and every day augmented the difference, so that those now on the four-shilling list must have served forty years to obtain 5s. When, in order to extend to this class some show of favour, the pensions to their widows were increased 10l.; a direct refusal was given to extend it to the widows of those whose husbands had died during the war. He must take that opportunity to make some observations on the half-pay of naval officers generally. There was no department under Government of which the clerks did not retire, though upon half the number of years' services, with double the sum of retirement allowance given to the most eminent officers of the navy. He would not mention names unnecessarily, because that might appear invidious; but to quote one example, a gentleman, who was collector of the Customs at Barbadoes, after fourteen years' servitude, has retired with 1,000l. a-year. The oldest and most distinguished admirals, who had been from fifty-five to sixty-five years in his Majesty's navy, on retiring, received only 766l. 10s, a-year. A judge-advocate-general, or first clerk to the Treasury, for fifty years' servitude, received a sum nearly equal to that received by the oldest admirals and vice-admirals on the Navy-List. The former retired with 900l. a-year. A vice-admiral (the rank he held) received only 593l. 2s. 6d. He would mention by name one individual, hoping the case would make its due impression on the House. Sir Robert Barlow, one of the most zealous, most distinguished, and, I will say, one of the most brilliant officers of his Majesty's navy, in consequence of having a large family, accepted the situation of a Commissioner of the Navy, and for that office received 1,000l. He had a House to live in, with the other advantages. At the end of sixteen years he retired, and he received 106l. a year more than he would have received had he remained those sixteen years in the active and dangerous service of his profession. He would allude to another gentleman, who was a Commissioner of the Navy, and who had held that situation thirty-three years, during which time he had always lived in a government house, and had received 33,000l. of the public money, as salary. He is now retired, with an income of 750l. a year, which is more than an admiral can possibly receive after a life of servitude. A Vice-admiral receives only 593l., and a Rear-admiral only 456l., though he may have been in active service all his life. A gentleman, forty-nine years clerk of the certificates in the Customs, retired with 700l. a-year. A chief clerk in the Alien-office had 600l. a-year retiring allowance. The same sum was allotted to the secretary of the Victualling Board; and in the department of Stamps, he found 600l. a-year given as a retiring allowance, after twelve years' service. A senior clerk in the Treasury, after fifteen years' service, received 525l. The oldest captain of the navy had but 264l. The junior post-captain only 228l., and that was exceeded by what was given to a clerk of the Navy-office, after twenty-three years' service. A clerk in the Colonial-office, for only fourteen years' servitude, received 300l.a-year; another gentleman, for ten years' services as accountant-general of the Post-office, had 276l. 18s. 8d. A landing waiter in Ireland, after thirteen years' service, retired upon 313l. 17s. a-year. An individual who had been thirteen years a clerk in the delivery-office of the Ordnance, retired with 171l. a-year—that being a situation to which pursers in the navy would be equally well adapted. He would observe that the oldest purser in the navy now received, after fifty-six years' service, 95l. 5s. per annum. After twenty-six years in the service as pursers, the half-pay was limited to the paltry pittance of 3s. per day, or 56l. 15s. a-year. The surgeons in the navy were worse off as to half-pay than assistant-surgeons in the army, the latter having more half-pay, after twenty-five years' service, than surgeons of the navy after twenty-nine years. Since 1815, 100 medical officers of the army had been promoted to ranks higher than regimental surgeons, entitling them to higher half-pay, while only one surgeon of the navy had been promoted to any higher rank, giving him any increased half-pay. The army assistant-surgeon got 7s. a-day, after twenty five years' service; the navy assistant-surgeon, if he serve fifty-years had only 3s. a-day. The second class attendant masters of dockyards were equally hardly dealt with. The full pay of these officer's was but 220l. a-year. It was no wonder that men of enterprising spirit felt a reluctance to enter the navy, when so many instances of unrewarded merit and inadequate provision could be referred to. He was astonished that the naval service of such vast and national importance, should have been so unjustly treated. If hon. Gentlemen would look narrowly into the service, they would find, that in spite of its popularity, there was increasing discontent amongst the members of the profession. He was well aware that the gallant Officers opposite, who now formed a part of the Board of Admiralty, would be very glad to see justice done to their brethren, if they had the opportunity. They felt that those who had served with them deserved the consideration of the country.

being one of the representatives of Durham, he trusted the House would permit him to offer a few words on a subject in which he and his constituents were so deeply concerned. He hoped this Bill would do nothing to lower the dignity of the Church. He was persuaded, that neither the noble Lord nor the right hon. the Chancellor of the Exchequer could have, personally, any such intention; but such would be the consequence if they narrowed the income of the Bishop of Durham to 9,000l.—a sum totally inadequate to meet the calls made on that prelate. The right reverend Gentleman who lately presided over that See, by his admirable conduct and acquirements, was not only an honour and an ornament to his diocese and the county, but to the Church in general and the world at large. The other hon. Members for that county and city, though differing from Mm on points of politics, would, if present, heartily concur with him in that tribute, and in protesting against a reduction which would make the revenues of the dicoese totally inadequate to the calls upon them. The late Bishop gave not less than 2,000l. a-year out of his income towards the support of an infant institution in Durham. And besides many other such donations, he contributed largely to several charitable houses throughout the North of England, and even in London. He might safely say, that if the reductions proposed in the Bill were effected, so great would the disproportion he between the episcopal revenue and the expenses of the See, that in a few years it would be impossible to find a worthy divine ready to enter into the latter. Taking into consideration the numerous claims on his munificence which the late Bishop had to meet, and which his successor would be expected to act up to, 8,000l. or 9,000l. a-year,—however ample an allowance for a private gentleman,—would he found far short of what would be sufficient to support the honour or even the usefulness of the See.