rose and said, that he proposed, in redemption of the engagement which he made at an early period of the Session, to call the attention of the House to various subjects connected with the mercantile marine of this country. He felt persuaded that it was wholly unnecessary for him to detain the House by any prefatory statement of the immense importance of the subject to which he invited its attention. He need not dwell either upon the vast amount of capital invested in the merchant service, the large and valuable portion of the population employed in it, or the immense mercantile and commercial interests connected therewith. It was his duty at a former period of the Session to call the attention of the House to a subject intimately connected with the interests of the merchant service, namely, the repeal of the navigation laws. On that occasion, in bringing forward the measure which he felt it to be his duty to propose, he encountered, as he anticipated, the opposition of a great and powerful party, to whose opinions he was aware the principle of that Bill was altogether contrary; and he did not feel any surprise, nor did he express any surprise, at the strenuous opposition which that measure encountered. But he entertained a hope that, with regard to the class of subjects to which he now invited the attention of the House, no such party fooling would be excited, but, on the contrary, that they would be able, in the most calm and dispassionate manner, to turn their attention to this subject; and, by united counsels, to dispose of it in the best manner possible with regard to the great interests concerned. He had already adverted to the change which Parliament had agreed to make in the navigation laws. Now, in any measures for the improvement of the mercan- tile marine, or its relief, he could not, consistently with the arguments he had used in favour of the repeal of the navigation laws, recommend these measures as a sort of compensation for any injury inflicted on the merchant service by the repeal of the navigation laws. If he did so, that would be inconsistent with the arguments he had used in asking the House to agree to the repeal of the navigation laws. If he had believed that an injury would be inflicted upon the mercantile marine of this country by that measure, no consideration would have induced him to propose it to the House. He trusted and believed that the evils which had been anticipated from that measure would not ensue. But while he did not propose any measures which, either now or hereafter, might be brought forward by the Government as beneficial to the merchant service in the light of compensation, yet he could not conceal from himself the fact that the attention of the merchant service would now be directed to all grievances under which they considered themselves to labour with a more quickened attention than when they were—some hon. Members might say "protected," but he said overwhelmed and injured by the navigation laws. And this was an additional reason why the House should attentively consider this class of questions. He did not by any means propose on the present occasion to take a general and complete view of all the questions affecting the merchant service, which indeed would be impossible in any single statement. But there were several questions of great importance to which he had turned his attention; on some of which he would be able to propose measures of relief and improvement, and on others upon which he should be unable to propose any measures that the House could consider as maturely as they deserved, so as to pass them into a law during the present Session, but on which nevertheless he was anxious to place the views of the Government in the shape of a Bill on the table of the House, in order that the House, the public, and the interests more especially concerned, might have an opportunity during the recess of giving to their proposal that attention which the importance of the subject deserved. The statement he had to make referred to several subjects which would be best comprised in a single statement, and he would at once advert to those points to which he intended to invite the consideration of the Committee, The first was the subject of the light-dues paid by the mercantile marine of this country The burden of the light-dues upon the mercantile marine had been long and justly complained of with respect to their weight, their unequal distribution, and many other reasons connected with the system on which they were founded. In other countries the lights were maintained at the public expense, and from the public treasury. In this country they were maintained by tolls on shipping, under the management, not, as in other countries, of some general board responsible to the Government, but ancient corporations, which in England, Scotland, and Ire laud exercised separate jurisdictions, under a general control of a most imperfect and inconvenient kind, which was rested in Her Majesty's Privy Council. That was the general system on which the light-dues were conducted in this country. He had on former occasions declared his opinion to be, that there was much in that system that required amendment; and although he thought it impossible to deal with this question as if they had a mere tabula rasa before them, and as if no such bodies and institutions existed, yet, on the other hand, he considered it to be the duty of the Legislature to improve this system, and make it more in harmony with the wishes of the mercantile marine, and the general principles on which the Government of this country was conducted. He would not on the present occasion retract any of these opinions. He had embodied the views which he entertained in a Bill that he introduced into Parliament last Session. The general principle of that Bill was to substitute for the inadequate and imperfect control of the Privy Council over these several bodies in England, Scotland, and Ireland, an efficient control by a Government board of management, and also to commute the present payments for a tonnage duty imposed upon the shipping at large. To the principles of that measure he still adhered; and if he had considered it advisable to lay upon the table another Bill of a like character, it would be founded upon the same principle, although he believed that the mode of carrying out the details might be materially improved. But inasmuch as any measure that he could introduce upon this subject would have no chance of passing into a law during the present Session, and as it must lie over until next year, he had come to the conclusion that it would not be desirable that he should lay any Bill upon the table in the hope that it would pass during the present Session of Parliament. But, although he did not propose to introduce a Bill thereupon, he had turned his attention to that which he was most desirous of securing for the mercantile marine—namely, the possibility of obtaining for them a considerable and immediate relief from the burdens of the present light-dues. In consequence of this desire, he had put himself in communication with the Trinity-house of London, in whom the management of the English light-dues was vested; and he was bound to state to the House, that he had found, on the part of that corporation, an anxious and ready desire to co operate with Her Majesty's Government on this important question. He was the more bound to make this statement, as he had often stated to the House, that, in his opinion, there was much in the system of the management of the lights by the Trinity-house that required revision and amendment. He had, however, found a ready acquiescence on the part of that body in the desire expressed by the Government to give immediate and substantial relief to the shipping interest in the matter of light-dues. With respect to the finances of the Trinity-house, hon. Members were aware that a great portion of the burden now laid upon the merchant service, arose from a debt contracted by the Trinity-house in buying up certain private lights, for which they had paid about 1,000,000l of money—an operation undertaken in consequence of the representations of the merchant service, who were much aggrieved by the tolls demanded by the owners of these private lights. The Trinity-house, with the sanction of the Government, bought these private lights, and bad paid off a portion of the debt by instalments; so that, at present, a little more than 500,000l. remained yet unpaid. The arrangement made with the Bank of England was, that the rest of the debt should be paid off at the rate of 50,000l. a year; and any material reduction in the tolls could only be effected by spreading the repayment of this debt over a greater number of years. He thought the time had come when the merchant service had a right to this relief. He could also say, that the Trinity-house had turned their attention to an improved economy in the management of their lights. The hon. Member for Montrose had frequently referred to the extravagant system of not employing rape oil in the light-houses. whereby a great loss was yearly incurred. He was glad to be able to state to the hon. Member, that he was informed the other day by the Trinity-house that they had already made the change he recommended on this subject. He believed that the Trinity-house were quite justified in giving this immediate relief to the shipping interest by the proposed economy in their system of management, and also by spreading the payment of the debt over a great number of years. The total gross receipt for light-dues received by the Trinity-house in 1847—he referred to English lights, because he did not believe that there was the same cause of complaint respecting the amount of dues for Scotch and Irish lights—was 318,000l. Of the above sum, the amount received from coasters was 145,000l., and from over-sea traders, 173,000l The Trinity-house proposed to reduce the burden of 318,000l., now levied on the shipping, by no less than 97,000l. a year that was to say, about one-third of that amount. This was the amount of reduction which, after due consideration, they were disposed to make; and they had communicated with the Government as to the mode in which the reduction should be carried out. If, therefore, the mode in which the relief was given should be objected to, he would take that responsibility upon himself. When he came to consider the manner in which the dues as at present levied were felt by the mercantile marine, he found that they were greater and more unequal with respect to vessels engaged in the coasting trade than those engaged in the over-sea trade. The old principle was, that every ship should pay for lights as they had used them; and that seemed fair; but it was only equitable if the light-dues were solely applied to the maintenance of the lights. But when it was considered that a portion of the income from light-dues was applied to charitable purposes, the principle was seen to act unequally to the coasting trade with relation to the foreign trade. He was also of opinion that the value of the cargo constituted a question in the amount of dues to be paid, as well as the tonnage of the vessel; and he need not remind the House that the cargoes of foreign vessels were much more valuable than the cargoes of our collieries, and other vessels engaged in the coasting trade. All these considerations induced them to believe that, having this sum to apply to the relief of shipping, it would be only just to give the larger share of this relief to the coasting trade. Accordingly, of this sum of 97,101l., the amount of the proposed reduction, they intended to apply 70,000l to the reduction of duos now paid by coasting vessels, that being nearly 50 per cent of the whole amount paid by this class of vessels. As it was intended that this altered scale of duties should come into effect from the 1st of October next, an immediate relief would thus be given, amounting to nearly one-half the sum now paid by the coasting trade. He would confine himself on the present occasion to a general statement, rather than enter upon any details; but there was a class of light-dues with respect to which it was proposed to make an immediate alteration. There were some lights on which double tolls were now paid; for vessels not only paid once, but also when they repassed those lights on their return from port. On that class of lights it was proposed to abolish the double tolls. The amount of reduction from over-sea traders in consequence of this exemption, was about 27,000l., making a reduction of 16 per cent upon the whole amount of light-duos now paid by that class of vessels. It was not proposed to add anything to the light-dues; and this reduction of 50 per cent on the whole amount paid by coasters, and 16 per cent on that paid by over-sea traders, was, he trusted the House would be of opinion, a great and substantial relief to the shipowners. This relief, too, was given by no improper interference with the arrangement made between the Trinity-house and the Bank, and it was one which the mercantile service had a right to expect, and from which they would largely benefit. It was an arrangement made, too, at no sacrifice or compromise of any opinion which he had ever expressed as to the necessity of any revision of the principle on which the lights were at present managed; and the House were still as free to deal with that question as before. He should be glad if Parliament were able to deal with this subject next Session; but as he had not been able to propose a Bill with any prospect of its passing this year, he had thought it better to let it stand over for the pro-sent. He thought the shipping interest owed a debt of gratitude to that great corporation the Trinity-house for the manner in which they had met the just demands and wishes of that interest. [Sir J. GRAHAM: Is any Act of Parliament required?] No; the proposed arrangement could be effected by the Trinity-house, with the consent of the Privy Council, under the former Act. He should now come to the other question, which was one of very great importance, namely, the arrangements necessary to be made with respect to pilotage. This subject, as the House must be aware, was not a new one. Formerly—some years ago—when he was President of the Board of Trade, his attention was frequently called to this subject; and the right hon. Gentleman opposite, the Member for the University of Oxford, more than once urged upon him the necessity of dealing with the question of pilotage. When that right hon. Gentleman himself once more tool; his place at the Board of Trade, he (Mr. Labouchere) returned the compliment by calling upon the right hon. Gentleman to deal with that very pressing and important subject. No doubt, both had good reasons for the language which they held upon those occasions respectively; for there could be no doubt that the matter was one which deserved their best attention. Such, certainly, was the opinion of his lamented friend, the late Lord Sydenham, who, with great industry and talent, had devoted himself most assiduously to the pilotage question; and after much consideration and labour, had brought in a Bill, hoping by that measure to carry his views into practical operation. But he (Mr. Labouchere) was sorry to say that at that time local interests were too strong, and public interests too weakly represented, to leave him any chance of legislating on the affair of pilotage with any prospect of eventual success, or to afford a well-founded hope of introducing and carrying any efficient measure on that subject. Although he thought it necessary to make these few observations, he wished it at the same time to be understood that he was not coming forward with any great or general scheme, such as that which Lord Sydenham contemplated; and if he had such an object in view, he certainly should not have thought of bringing it forward at that period of the Session; but even now, though late, he had turned his attention to the matter, with a view to endeavour to introduce some practical amendments without delay into the present system. The system of pilotage in this country was under three jurisdictions—that of the Trinity-house, that of the Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports, while in some of the great cities and seaports of the kingdom, it was under the direction of certain local authorities and special jurisdictions. Tints, for example, the North Foreland, and that district relating chiefly to the port of London, was under the direction and authority of the Trinity-house; and when he called the attention of that corporation to the subject of pilotage, as well as to that of lights and to the state generally of our mercantile marine, and the whole shipping interest of the country, he was hound most fully to acknowledge the cordial spirit of co-operation with which he was met; and he was therefore enabled to state to the House, that there was a fair prospect of great and practical alteration upon the existing system of pilotage, as it affected an important portion of our mercantile marine. At present, as some hon. Members no doubt were aware, the coasting trade enjoyed an exemption from the system of pilotage; from that burden the coasting trade had some years ago been exempted; but vessels engaged in the foreign trade—the over-sea trade—were still obliged to take in pilots; though the master and mate might both be excellent pilots and well acquainted with the harbours to which they traded, they must nevertheless take in pilots, or at least pay for them. Nothing could be more obvious than that such a practice operated as a severe burden upon the foreign trade. At the time that such a rule was established, there doubtless were very good reasons for it. When the foundations of the present system were laid, he presumed it was considered necessary to make those provisions for the purpose of encouraging the local pilots. But, though that might, at the time to which he was referring, have been all very well, and though it may not now be expedient altogether to abolish the existing system of pilotage, yet he conceived that the time had arrived when it certainly ought to undergo very material modification. He would give an example:—A vessel trading between Liverpool and Dublin had no necessity to take in pilots at either of those ports; but if that vessel in any respect changed her destination—if touching at Dublin she went on to Brest, then she must have a pilot wherever she went; however competent might be her master and mate—however well acquainted with the port, they must take a pilot on board before they entered Dublin. The statement of that instance seemed to him pretty nearly sufficient; he thought that he need not multiply instances; and, having made the point, as he hoped, clear to hon. Members, it now only remained for him to have the satisfaction of saying he was enabled to state, that the corporation of the Trinity-house were perfectly willing—under certain restrictions which were reasonable as to over-sea vessels, to dispense with the use of pilots. Of course those restrictions or regulations would relate to the competency of the masters and mates of those vessels to discharge the duties of pilots in the cases required. It would be merely necessary that the Trinity-house should be satisfied that the masters and mates possessed the requisite qualifications. Upon this subject he admitted that it would be requisite to introduce a Bill; but the measure would be merely permissive; it would enable all bodies at present possessing jurisdiction to allow—if they so thought fit, and were satisfied of the qualifications of masters and mates—to allow them to exercise and discharge the functions of pilots. The pilots at present had a vested interest in their offices, and neither the Trinity-house nor any other body could interfere with that without subjecting themselves to the consequences of an action. [Mr. GLADSTONE requested to be informed whether the knowledge and qualification of the masters and mates in such cases were to be general or local.] It was to be more particularly local knowledge. This Bill would enable also the Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports, and the local jurisdictions at the provincial seaports, to exercise that power in such manner as they may think expedient for the benefit of our mercantile marine. He was not authorised by any of these parties to give any assurance to the House on this subject; but he ventured to indulge a hope that they would not be indisposed to follow the example, wholly or in part, that had been set them by the Trinity house. It appeared to him that a great point would be gained by establishing the principle that in certain cases pilots might be dispensed with; that vessels should not be under the necessity of taking licensed pilots on board; and that in cases wherein masters and mates were ascertained to be competent to the task, the duty of pilotage should devolve upon them—that was in all cases where they were regularly authorised by the Trinity-house, or by any such sufficient authority. Again, however, he begged to remind the House that the Bill which he proposed to introduce would be permissive; and that its provisions would be so simple and obvious that there could be no difficulty in passing it through even during the remaining portion of the present Session of Parliament. If such a Bill, though permissive, should pass—of which he saw no reason to doubt—he had the satisfaction of being able to say that there was no just reason for apprehending that it would remain a dead letter; as with regard, at least, to the Trinity-house, he had every reason to be satisfied that it would be brought fairly into operation. That was the only measure that he proposed to carry through during the present Session. But there was another matter of very great importance; it was, however, one which he did not mean to submit to Parliament at present; still, although he did not at that moment propose to take the judgment of the House on such a measure, he nevertheless did not despair of inducing hon. Members to give it that degree of consideration which he was most anxious that they should give it, while he was himself desirous of laying on the table of the House the views which he entertained on the subject, in the hope that it would receive from the House and the country, during the ensuing vacation, that attention which its importance demanded, and which the general condition of the mercantile marine most especially required at their hands, He desired emphatically to ask the consideration of the House to the condition of our mercantile marine, especially as regarded the character and qualifications of the masters and mates, the discipline of the crew, and the general wellbeing of the whole service. There had been, as the House must recollect, some discussion on this matter during the debates on the navigation laws. He desired now to revive this controversy no further than to say that truth, and a sense of duty, compelled him to state his opinion, founded on much inquiry, which was this, that the present state of the qualifications of the masters and the mates, the present state of the discipline of the crews, and the general condition of the mercantile navy of England, demanded the serious attention of Parliament. He believed that he spoke the sentiments entertained by all well-informed men—he believed that he should not be contradicted by any mercantile man of eminence, or by any naval captain of experience, when he said that, as regarded qualifications, professional and scientific, the mercantile marine of this country did not stand so high as could be wished; he believed there was no one would contradict him when he said it was most desirable that Parliament should devote to that subject their most serious attention, with a view to considering whether some measure could not be introduced which would be calculated to put a stop to evils of an alarming magnitude—evils which, if not arrested, threatened the prosperity and welfare of that which was considered to be in England a most vital and tender point. On this subject, however, he gave way to no feelings of despondency. In England we had that which constituted the staple of a great mercantile marine—namely, the largest and hardiest seafaring population in the world. But this alone was not enough to make our mercantile marine what it should be. He should not trouble the House by going at any length into evidence for the purpose of proving the position which he had been laying down; but be could not help referring to the reports of our foreign consuls on the state of our mercantile marine, copies of which had been laid on the table of the House. There had been much discussion on the subject of those reports, and an opinion respecting them had been given in another place, to which he could not with regularity more particularly refer. That opinion, to which he attached considerable importance, had been given by Lord Ellenborough, who had bestowed on the subject much attention, and who was an excellent judge of the point on which he had pronounced an opinion. Lord Ellenborough said, that though the consuls might be influenced by a bias in favour of a particular conclusion, and though, in particular cases, they had drawn highly coloured pictures, yet on the whole there was great trust to be reposed In their accounts, and no one could doubt that their descriptions were fair and true. But there were two or three witnesses whoso testimony he could not help calling to his aid, and who certainly could not be suspected of any bias. The first of these whom he should mention was Mr. M. Wigram, who stated, as was the fact, that the captains of merchant vessels engaged in the China and Indian trades were men of a higher order than those usually employed in English vessels trading to ports of Europe, and to that class of offcers his observations did not by any means apply. Mr. Wigram gave the following answer to this question:—

"Are your cptains in general as well educated and as trustworthy men as the American captains?—Yes, I believe they are; but I do not mean to apply that to the European trade generally; the reports of the consuls on the Continent are too authentic to leave a doubt on that point.

"Have you seen the reports from the consuls?—I have not read them attentively; but I know their general character, and I am afraid that they are too correct. I dare not challenge their accuracy as respects the continental trade."

Mr. Wigram's ships were principally engaged in the East India and China trades. He should next call the attention of the House to the evidence of Mr. Richmond, who delivered his testimony as follows:—

"If I were to say the English captains had improved, I think I should state that which was not the fact; for the last twenty-five years respectable people hardly ever send a boy to sea, and the consequence has been that we have had to take the captains of our merchant ships from rather a less educated class of men than they used to be fifty or sixty years ago. I do not think their seamanship is one iota impaired, but perhaps their manners may be a little less refined."

They had, in the third place, the evidence of Mr. Gr. F. Young, who said—

"That though he thought a too indiscriminate censure had been thrown upon the commanders of British ships, and not sufficient allowance made for the very large numbers we require, he believed, that taking the whole course of our trade, the captains of many foreign ships are a better class than many in our ships."

He should next quote from a book of no inconsiderable authority, the title of which was A Glance at Revolutionized Italy, by Charles Macfarlane, who addressed himself to this subject in the following words:—

"It wounded my national pride to see the general run of our skippers cut so mean a figure, not only in dress but in manners, when compared with these smart Italian captains. No further back than twenty years ago, the Italian skipper was mostly a coarse dirty fellow, in an ill-cut weather jacket or greco, with a greasy hat and a very empty head under it. The change is prodigious. It seemed to me that, if there had been any change in the masters of our own common merchant vessels, it had been a change for the worse. This is matter of serious consideration, and especially now that hazardous changes are contemplated in our navigation laws."

It was to be remembered that the author of that work was a Protectionist.

"Statists may make their tables, and bewilder us with returns and long arrays of figures, and treat men as ciphers; but if the condition of the merchant captain is getting worse instead of better, it must he seriously doubted whether our mercantile navy is improving; and without that nursery and treasury, what is to become of our national navy? Twenty-five years ago, in every part of the Mediterranean the preference was given to English bottoms, wherever they could be procured, and the rate of insurance was increased upon goods shipped in country vessels. There is no such preference now, nor, as I believe, any difference made in insurances."

There were other documents to which he might call the attention of the House, and amongst the number was a statement contained in a memorial from the Chamber of Commerce at Bombay, in the year 1842. In that document the writer spoke in very strong terms of the want of discipline on board of mercantile vessels, and, generally speaking, the incompetency of the captains and other officers; but that he did not impute so much to a want of scientific knowledge as to their low moral character, and, though frequently the captains might possess the necessary amount of knowledge, yet the mates were extremely ignorant and incompetent. Such were the opinions of the members of the Chamber of Commerce at Bombay; and though he had not the document with him, and could not quote the exact words, yet he ventured to say that he had faithfully stated their general purport. Further, he believed that there was a great want of proper regulations, and very imperfect discipline, in force amongst the crews of merchant vessels, much of which, no doubt, might be attributed to want of proper qualifications on the part of the masters themselves: when they were unqualified, it was too much to expect that any thing like satisfactory discipline could be maintained amongst the crews. Unless they proceeded, in the first instance, to render the masters respectable in the eyes of the crews, they could not by legislative enactment venture to strengthen the reins of discipline. He felt it unnecessary to weary the House with any further quotation from the evidence given before Committees, or from the reports of consuls, for he felt that he could appeal to the experience of all Members present in confirmation of the assertion that there prevailed in our mercantile marine a great and lamentable want of discipline; and he thought himself warranted in saying, with respect to the whale fishery, that we have altogether lost it on account of that want of discipline, and that it passed from our hands into that of our American rivals by reason of the superior discipline of the American crews, as compared with those of Great Britain. Having disposed of the first two subjects which he had thought it necessary to bring under the notice of the House, he should now enter upon the third point, and that was, the general condition of the sailors engaged in the merchant service. It was with the utmost regret he was bound to acknowledge, such was the condition of our mercantile marine, that as many as 14,000 sailors had deserted from British merchant vessels in the course of one year. That statement he made on the best information that he could obtain from the office of the Registrar General of Merchant Seamen. There was one subject connected with the condition of the mercantile marine, and more especially with that of England, which he thought, in a peculiar degree, demanded the attention of Parliament, and that was the agreements entered into between the merchant seamen and those who employed them. In every mercantile country there were regulations respecting those agreements; they were not left, as other agreements between employers and employed, to be arranged according to the will and convenience of the parties principally interested. In other trades and businesses, it was usual to leave parties to themselves; in the merchant service, the practice of interference had "always been recognised; and on that point he should quote an opinion expressed—not by an Englishman—but by a person of high authority in the United States of America; it was that of Chancellor Kent, who, in his great work, said—

"We come next to treat of the laws applicable to seamen; and it will appear, for obvious reasons, that in the codes of all commercial nations they are the objects of great solicitude and of paternal care. They are usually a heedless, ignorant, audacious, but most useful class of men, exposed to constant hardships, perils, and oppression. From the nature of their employment, and their 'home on the deep,' they are necessarily excluded, in a great degree, from the benefits of civilisation, and the comforts and charities of domestic life. Upon their native element they are habitually buffeted by winds and waves, and wrestling with tempests; and in time of war they are exposed to the still fiercer elements of the human passions. In port, they are the ready and the dreadful victims of temptation, fraud, and vice. It becomes, therefore, a very interesting topic of inquiry to see what protection the laws have thrown around such a houseless and helpless race of beings, and what special provision has been made for their security and indemnity."

After having called their attention thus to the accurate and eloquent description which Chancellor Kent gave of the ill-advised and mischievous policy which would leave the agreements of the mercantile sailors to mere chance, he thought he had done all that could be considered necessary for inducing the House to adopt, at no distant time, measures for the protection of the British sailor. In proposing an improved system, he hoped the House would understand that he had no intention of proposing any new principles, but merely of laying a ground for obtaining the sanction of the Legislature to that which every one must admit to be necessary, and which indeed the existing law sanctioned in principle, although it did not effect it in practice—the principle of obtaining trustworthy agents in the negotiation and settlement of agreements. Every one acquainted with the subject was ready to admit that nothing really important could be accomplished, unless they began by securing the respectability of the agents employed in negotiating agreements. The case as it at present stood, left the sailor open to the greatest frauds. In America those agreements were usually arranged through the instrumentality of notaries public; but in this country there Was no person of corresponding rank to a notary public to undertake that duty; the broker would not take it, and the unavoidable result was, that it came to be left in the hands of the crimp. Dining the last Administration measures had been taken, by the Admiralty, he believed, for abating the evil, that department insisting that agreements should be made by none but licensed agents, and no man was thenceforward allowed to undertake that species of agency unless he obtained a license; but unfortunately that system fell very far short of what was necessary. The Board of Trade, no doubt, did what they could to select respectable agents, and to exclude from the privilege of licenses all lodging-house-keepers; but still the employment of crimps remained absolutely unavoidable. But from the class of persons so employed, they made it a point to exclude slopsellers; and, without bringing any sweeping charges against any class of men, he might say, that the present state of the law did not afford adequate protection for the sailor. If they wished to effect an improvement in the conduct of the sailors, they must make that class of men satisfied with the contracts into which they entered. If they wished to improve the condition of the mercantile seamen, they must manage to have their contracts with their employers concluded through the instrumentality of a very different set of officers from those who were at present engaged in it. It was also necessary to make a beginning in the way of sanitary reform as regarded the condition of our mercantile shipping. No man who read the report of the Board of Health could for a moment doubt that a very ma- terial change in the sanitary condition of the sailor had become indispensable. It was indisputable that in our mercantile vessels the sailors were stowed away in a manner that could not fail to generate disease, and often even death itself. It was an evil of which no one denied the importance, and, although permanent and extensive improvement could only he accomplished by enlightening the minds of the seamen, and reforming their habits, it still was desirable that something should be done. Thus far, however, he had contented himself with a mere outline. When a Bill upon the subject came to be laid on the table of the House, hon. Members would be enabled to judge for themselves respecting the details which might be comprehended in such a measure. There were three subjects on which it was important that they should legislate. The first related to the proposed practice of the duties of pilots being performed by masters and mates; the second to discipline; and the third to the general condition of the seamen engaged in the merchant service. He had given an outline of the measures that he contemplated; he now committed those plans to the attention of the House, and invited to them the careful and deliberate consideration of hon. Members during the ensuing vacation. He could sincerely assure any one who heard him that he should willingly attend to any suggestions with which he might be favoured on these important subjects; and early in the next Session he hoped that he should be able to introduce the measures to which he had that day called the attention of the House. It unfortunately happened that at present no department of the Government was in any degree responsible for the condition of our mercantile marine. The Admiralty and the Board of Trade—whether with or without professional advisers—were under no responsibility whatever. He proposed to give in this matter authority to the Board of Trade, and with authority responsibility; but, in order to effect all the objects that he had in view, it would be necessary to create or derive from the Board of Trade a department—not a board—but a Department of Mercantile Marine. He proposed that there should be attached to that Department of Mercantile Marine two persons who had been captains in the merchant service of the country. He thought that if any office were to be constituted, possessing executive authority in many important respects over the mercantile marine, that marine had a right to expect that some members of their own body, cognisant of their feelings, and able to give advice on this class of subjects to the President of the Board of Trade, should be attached to such a department. He would now state what he proposed to do with respect to the first point to which he had referred—the qualifications of masters and mates in the merchant service. There was at present a system of voluntary examination for masters and mates. He believed that system had been carried out to a considerable extent, and that it had been generally beneficial to the merchant service; but he had no hesitation in saying, after some experience, that that voluntary system was not sufficient to meet the necessities of the case. He believed, that in some of the outports this examination was not quite what it ought to be. He did not wish to go into particulars, but he would only say, that from the general result of his inquiries he did not think the examinations were sufficiently strict, or that they were working in that uniform and satisfactory manner which was desirable. He proposed, therefore, that in future these examinations should be conducted under the direction of the Board of Trade, through the instrumentality of the Department of Mercantile Marine; that certificates should be given by the examiners, divided into three classes, with reference to the size of the vessels a person should be entitled to command; and that in future every master or mate, before he could be intrusted with the command of a vessel, should be obliged to pass the examination and obtain a certificate. He proposed that this system should be prospective, because he thought it would be inexpedient and unjust—indeed he might almost say impossible—to apply the system to those masters and mates who were already engaged in the merchant service. He conceived that it would be in the highest degree unjust and inexpedient to require men who had been brought up to that service, and whose prospects in life depended upon it, now to undergo an examination for which their previous studies might not have qualified them; but he would propose that all captains and mates who had already commanded merchant vessels should be required to go to the Department of Mercantile Marine, and obtain certificates, not of qualification, but merely of service—that they should be simply bound to prove that they had commanded merchant ships, that they had been masters in the Royal Navy, or that they had been in the service of the East India Company, and that they should then be entitled to command merchant vessels. He proposed also that, in future, if the master or mate of a merchant ship, whether holding a certificate upon examination, or merely a certificate of service, should in the discharge of his duty grossly misconduct himself—proving either a total want of that knowledge which was indispensable to the proper command of a merchant vessel, or that his moral conduct utterly unfitted him to be intrusted with the discipline and superintendence of a ship—such person should be deprived of his certificate. He thought there would be nothing unjust in this provision; but that, on the contrary, it would be attended with great advantage to the interests of those connected with the merchant service, and who were dependent on the skill and qualities of its officers. He might mention also that he proposed that, when a merchant captain was guilty of gross misconduct, attended with loss of life or property, such misconduct should constitute a misdemeanour, for which the offender might be tried before the ordinary tribunals. He believed, from the communications he had had with shipowners on the subject, that they would regard this provision as a very important guarantee against the misconduct and negligence of the persons who had charge of merchant vessels. The two other branches of this subject—the discipline of the crew, and the condition of the seamen—were so much intermixed that he would deal with them together. He had already said that a great deal depended upon the character of the agents employed to draw up contracts between sailors and their employers, and that a very material alteration and improvement of the existing system in this respect were absolutely necessary. He proposed to substitute for the present system of licensed agents shipping officers, to be public officers, established in the principal ports of the country, and through whose instrumentality these contracts should be formed. He was not altogether without precedent in proposing this change. He believed there was no port in the British dominions where, owing to particular circumstances, to which it was unnecessary for him now to advert, the evils attending the crimping system, and the mode of making these engagements between sailors and employers, were so rife and flagrant as in Quebec. This subject excited the greatest possible dissatisfaction and complaint among the mercantile interests of this country; desertions were very frequent; the crimps were bidding over one another for the sailors; the seamen became utterly undisciplined and demoralised; and the high wages they obtained fell into the hands of the crimps and slopsellers—the harpies by whom the sailor was induced to desert, and by whom he was pillaged. Representations had been made to him from nearly every port in England on this subject, and he had stated in reply that it appeared to him the remedy must come from the local legislature of the colony, for he did not see what could be done by Parliament or by the British Government. The local legislature at Quebec applied themselves to the question, and the Colonial Assembly passed an Act establishing a public shipping officer at Quebec, before whom it was required that the contracts between sailors and employers should be made, and who was responsible for their proper conduct and management. From the information which had reached him, that measure had been fully and completely successful; desertion had greatly diminished at Quebec; the complaints of merchants were much less frequent; the condition of the sailor had been improved; and the trade of that port was becoming regular and well conducted. This change was not effected without considerable opposition. Some very import ant interests in the port of Quebec felt themselves greatly aggrieved by the measure, and endeavoured to persuade the legislature to abandon the Act; but the legislature of Lower Canada was firm upon the subject, and adopted the Act, though by a very small majority. The Board of Trade and the Mercantile Board of Quebec were in favour of the alteration; and their wish was that the regulations should be made even more stringent than at present. He thought, then, that the success which had attended the measure in Quebec, afforded strong ground for believing that a similar measure applied to this country would go far to remedy the existing evils. He therefore proposed that shipping officers should be established in the ports of this country; and he believed those officers might be made instrumental at once in affording protection to the seamen and in improving their discipline. He proposed that all ships' agreements should be signed in the presence of the shipping officer, attested by him, and explained by Mm to the sailors; and that all agreements, in addition to the items required by the 7th and 8th of Victoria, chap. 112, should specify the nature and length of the voyage, the scale of provisions to be furnished to the men (such scale to be in accordance with any regulations made by the Board of Trade), and any regulations as to the conduct of the crew on board, and the fines for misconduct, which might be sanctioned by the Board of Trade, and to which the parties agreed. The last subject was altogether voluntary. He believed that on board all well-conducted ships articles of agreement were now entered into with regard to discipline; and he proposed that—suggestions being made by the Board of Trade for maintaining a proper system of discipline, and for imposing suitable fines as punishments for breaches of discipline—the seamen should be invited by the shipping officers to subscribe agreements embodying such suggestions, which would then, of course, be binding and obligatory upon them. The dietary, also, was to be compulsory upon the shipowners as well as upon the sailors. That was a provision intended for the protection of the seamen. He believed that, in the case of all well-conducted ships at present, a scale of dietary was agreed upon by the sailors and their employers; and he considered that it would be a most useful regulation to apply that plan to the merchant service generally. He understood that one-half the quarrels and disputes that arose between sailors and their employers turned upon the question of diet. He believed that in some ships the poor sailor was half starved, and very improperly treated; and he, therefore, thought a scale of dietary properly framed would be a very useful thing, and he did not anticipate any practical difficulty in carrying it out. He might also add, that a logbook, drawn up in proper form, would be supplied to every ship, and that it would be required that the fines levied under the regulations should be entered in that book, which would be a check upon the conduct of the master during the voyage. At present the logbooks of merchant ships were in most cases mere waste paper; but in future every merchant vessel would be required to keep a regular logbook according to the form furnished by the Government officer. He believed this plan would remove many causes of discontent and complaint on the part of the merchant seamen. and that the system of fines would tend to the better enforcement of discipline. He was so much impressed with the absolute necessity of strengthening the means of maintaining discipline on board merchant ships, that he proposed to give to captains having first-class certificates, and commanding vessels of a certain amount of tonnage, a power which he believed to be necessary for that purpose; and although he admitted it was a power against the abuse of which they ought to guard by all possible means, he thought it was one which ought to be intrusted to captains in some eases. He would propose that, for specified offences, they should possess the power of imprisoning on board ship for a limited period. He would require that an entry of the imprisonment should be made in the logbook; and he believed—looking at the evils produced in the merchant service from the want of discipline—that, when they had taken all possible precautions against the abuse of this power, it was for the benefit of the crew, and for the general interest of the mercantile marine, that the captains should be permitted to inflict such a punishment. A far more stringent system of discipline than would be established by this Bill was practised in the American merchant navy, where corporal punishment was very frequently resorted to. Public opinion in the United States supported the merchant captains in the enforcement of that punishment; and he believed the reason was, that those merchant captains were a class of persons in whose general character and conduct the American public placed great confidence. He mentioned this circumstance to show that in that free and mercantile country there was a general opinion that the merchant captains—after means had been taken to ascertain their trustworthiness—should possess great power for the maintenance of discipline. The circumstances of the trade of this empire bad undergone great alteration within the present century. During the war our merchant ships were almost always within reach of ships of the Royal Navy. At present that was not the case. To many of our distant stations in China and the Pacific, the visits of ships of the Royal Navy were few and far between. A merchant ship might be a year or two without coming near a ship of the Royal Navy; and he, therefore, considered it was absolutely necessary that captains of merchant vessels should have the power of enforcing proper discipline among the crews under their command. He proposed, also, that when a ship returned to port her crew should not be paid off on board, as was now the case, but in the presence of the shipping officer; that the shipping officer should then inspect the logbook; that he should hear anything the crow might have to say in the way of complaint; that, in the case of disputes between the captain and sailors, when the amount was under 40s., the shipping officer should have a summary power of adjudication; and that, with regard to disputes, when the amount was above 40s., the shipping officer should have the power of adjudication if both parties agreed to refer the matter to him; but if not, the dispute should be decided in the ordinary mode. This plan would establish a simple tribunal before which questions of that kind could be speedily settled, instead of leaving the sailor—as was at present frequently the case—to call in the aid of some low lawyer, and it would also obviate much of the squabbling and litigation which now took place on the return of ships to port. With regard to the point to which he had before adverted—the sanitary condition of ships—he would propose that a space of not less than eight feet should be appropriated to each seaman in that part of the vessel in which the cabins were placed. There was another respect in which he believed the new functions of the Board of Trade might be exercised with advantage—he meant with regard to the registry of seamen. He believed that the present system of registration of seamen had in a great degree disappointed the expectations of those by whom it was proposed. The system of tickets had been found on the one hand very grievous to the sailor, and on the other very ineffectual in preventing most extensive frauds. He found that forged registry tickets could be bought in Wapping to any extent; and certainly, if the present system, which was very burdensome and vexatious to the sailor, did not answer its purpose, it ought not to be continued. He believed the only point with respect to which the ticket system had any real and beneficial operation, was in the case of apprentices; and he thought, after the change which had been introduced by a recent Act, that no substantial reason now existed for keeping up the system of registry tickets. He wished to give the Board of Trade the power of abolishing the system of registry tickets; and he would propose to unite the registry office with the new department of the Board of Trade, for he thought all that was now done usefully and properly with regard to the registration of seamen, could be effected through the instrumentality of the shipping officers. He therefore proposed in the Bill to give the power of transferring the Registry Office to the jurisdiction of the Board of Trade, and of putting an end to the system of registry tickets. He ought to have stated before that he proposed that a small fee should be taken by the shipping officers upon the agreements between sailors and their employers, such fee not to be higher than that now paid to the licensed agent for performing the same duty. From the fees thus paid, and from the fines levied upon the seamen for breaches of discipline, a fund would be created. It was very difficult to form an estimate of what the amount of that fund would be; but he thought it would probably be about 40,000l. a year. He proposed that the expense of the shipping officers should be defrayed from this fund; but he did not calculate that the amount required for that purpose would be more than about 10,000l, and a considerable surplus would therefore remain. Now, he did not wish to define too closely in the Bill the objects to which that amount should be appropriated, but he thought it might be devoted to very useful purposes. In considering the manner in which that fund should be appropriated, they ought to bear in mind the sources from which it was derived. That part of the fund derived from the fees paid upon, agreements, would come in reality from the shipowners, while the other part of the fund arising from fines—which he apprehended and hoped would be the smaller portion—would come from the sailor; and he thought this difference of origin might fairly influence the application of the money. He had no matured scheme to lay before the House with regard to the disposition of these funds; but he proposed that they should be applied under the direction of the Board of Trade, He thought, that out of those funds good-service pensions might be given to masters and mates in the merchant service whose conduct had been meritorious. He considered that any improvement in the position of masters and mates in the merchant service, was the keystone to the general improvement of the mercantile marine. He attached great importance to that part of the Bill which tended to raise the qualifications of masters of merchant ships, and he had no doubt it would lead to their obtaining increased salaries. The rates of salary now given to the masters and mates in the merchant service were in many cases utterly inadequate and improperly low, and he would be very glad if the measure he now proposed operated in obliging shipowners to give higher wages to those in their employ who discharged the important duty of commanding merchant ships. He considered, then, that part of this fund, might be appropriately given, in gratuities and good-service pensions, to the most deserving masters and mates. He thought, also, that good might be done by giving captains in the merchant service who obtained first-class certificates the right to wear some badge of distinction which would give them a sort of authority in foreign ports, and which would no doubt he gratifying to them; for he believed the raising of the position of these masters in their own eatimation and in that of the public would be attended with very beneficial results. With regard to that portion of the fund arising from fines upon the seamen, he considered that money so derived should be applied to the benefit of the seamen themselves; and he thought means might be found, in conjunction with the Merchant Seamen's Fund, or in some other way, of devoting such money to some object bearing directly upon the well-being of the merchant seamen. There were some other points of a minor description in the Bill—such as an alteration in the system of advance notes—with which he would not now weary the House; for, as he did not press for legislation on the subject during the present Session, he had thought it better to confine himself to an outline of the main features of the measure. He regarded this as a subject of the greatest importance, and he was most anxious that it should obtain from the House and from the country that full consideration which, from its immense consequence to the highest interests of the empire, it amply merited. It was with this view that he had brought forward the present measure. He was very far from supposing that it was not susceptible of great improvement; but with regard to its main principles, he firmly believed that no measure would adequately meet the necessities of the case which was not directed to improve the character and qualifications of those to whom the command of merchant ships was intrusted, to strengthen the discipline of the crews, and, as far as possible, to improve the sanitary and moral condition, and to promote the contentment of the great seafaring body engaged in that mercantile marine which was intimately connected, not only with the wealth and prosperity, but also with, the security and national defence of the country.

"Moved—1. That the Chairman be directed to move the House, that leave be given to bring in a Bill to amend the Laws relating to Pilotage.

"2. That the Chairman be directed to move the House, that leave be given to bring in a Bill for improving the condition of Masters, Mates, and Seamen, in the Merchant Service."

said, that if the right hon. Gentleman felt that he had reason to thank the House for the attention with which it had listened to his statement, it appeared to him that the House and the country were not less indebted to the right hon. Gentleman for the very interesting and comprehensive view he had taken of a class of subjects to which was attached very little of popular or exterior attraction, but which were at the same time of the deepest and the most vital national importance. He would not attempt to follow the right hon. Gentleman throughout the greater portion of the details into which he had entered, or the plans he had suggessed. It was perfectly obvious that the particulars of those plans would require a far more detailed and prolonged consideration than could be given to them while listening to such a statement as that which they had just heard. He should therefore confine himself to a very few and cursory remarks on different portions of what had fallen from the right hon. Gentleman. Now with regard to the question of light-dues, with which the right hon. Gentleman had commenced his observations, he should state that he was exceedingly glad that the right hon. Gentleman had succeeded in obtaining for the mercantile marine of this country a very considerable remission of the burdens to which they were subjected by that class of payments; and he felt that those who were intrusted with the management of the corporation of the Trinity-house, whatever might be thought of the constitution of that body on abstract principles, deserved the distinct approbation of that House for the disposition they had shown to appreciate with an enlightened judgment the exigencies of the times, and to meet the reasonable demands of those who were peculiarly interested in that matter. He should only add, that he regretted that the right hon. Gentleman had not, simultaneously with the recognition of those demands on the part of the Trinity house, again laid on the table the Bill which he had formerly introduced; because, although the right hon. Gentleman had stated that, by accepting that arrangement with the Trinity house, parliament and the Government would not be precluded from entering into a larger consideration of the question of the light-dues, yet he (Mr. Gladstone) should say that he thought their liberty in that respect would be more clear and unquestioned if there had been some practical assertion, by laying that Bill on the table, of the necessity of a further consideration of the whole principle on which light-dues were at present raised, and on which the management of them was conducted. With respect to the regulations to which the right hon. Gentleman had referred, he took it for granted that the right hon. Gentleman had carefully considered the legality of the system which he proposed to establish. But he could not help saying that the duty of drawing a distinction between the various classes of vessels, and the various classes of voyages, with respect to light-dues, was a duty which it would be necessary to exercise with the utmost delicacy and discrimination. He believed the right hon. Gentleman had referred to only one particular description of remission of dues. The right hon. Gentleman said, as he had understood him, that ships which had sailed from a port at which they had paid the light-dues, should not again be subject to the payment of those dues on the homeward voyage.

said, that what he had stated was, that there were certain exceptional cases in which the light-dues were paid twice, and he proposed to do away with those exceptions.

was glad to receive that explanation from the right hon. Gentleman, as it appeared from it that he only meant to remove exceptions to the general practice at present in existence. With respect to the question of pilotage he would not enter into that subject farther than to say that he regretted to find that the right hon. Gentleman had taken such a view of the connexion between that question and the repeal of the navigation laws, as to have prevented his having submitted to the House the statement he had just made at an earlier period of the Session; because he (Mr. Gladstone) could not but apprehend that although the plan of the right hon. Gentleman with respect to pilotage appeared primâ facie to be one which it would be very desirable to carry into effect, if that could be done consistently with perfect justice, yet he could conceive that there might be parties who would consider that it would so far interfere with their rights that they would be entitled to ask the House not to proceed to legislate on the subject without a greater degree of consideration than they could then bestow upon it. He should, however, pass from that matter to an omission which he noticed in the statement of the right hon. Gentleman. He meant the omission of the right hon. Gentleman to give them his views upon a subject on which it appeared to him that an exposition of those views was necessary in order to make the statement of the right hon. Gentleman complete, namely, the Merchant Seamen's Fund. The right hon. Gentleman had told them that, under the measure which he proposed to introduce, there might be funds raised which would be available for strengthening the Merchant Seamen's Fund; but he (Mr. Gladstone) regretted to find that the right hon. Gentleman had not given them any specific exposition of his views upon that subject. Now, the general observation with which he (Mr. Gladstone) had set out, that those questions were both difficult and unattractive, and were, at the same time, of the greatest importance, and of pressing exigency, was eminently applicable to the question of the Merchant Seamen's Fluid. They had prevailing, with regard to that fund, the grossest inequalities, which had entailed great hardship and injustice on seamen. In raising that fund they subjected seamen to a tax of a very exceptional character, for no other labourers were liable to a tax on their wages; and the tax was, at the same time, one from which those men derived no corresponding advantage. It appeared to him that it was a very difficult question to decide whether the House ought to resolve on winding up the concerns of the Merchant Seamen's Fund altogether, and, at the same time, compensating those who had claims on it, or whether they ought to endeavour to put that fund on an improved basis. But it was perfectly clear that, in dependently of other objections to the present management of the fund, it was at present galloping towards insolvency, and in a few years they would be driven to legislate with respect to it, whether they should will it or not. He feared that the fund was insolvent at the present moment; but at all events it was perfectly clear that it was becoming every year more and more unable to meet the charges upon it. Under these circumstances, he certainly had hoped that the right hon. Gentleman, who had paid so much attention to these subjects, would have stated to them his views with respect to that fund; and he trusted that the right hon. Gentleman would at least hold himself bound to them thus far, that they were to understand that it was his intention to introduce a Bill for the definitive settlement of that question at an early period of the next Session. So far as he (Mr. Gladstone) was concerned, he could venture to promise the right hon. Gentleman that he would have his cooperation in endeavouring to effect such a settlement, and that he was so sensible of the extreme urgency of the case, that no objections on his part to any minor details of the plan of the right hon. Gentleman would prevent him from giving him his best support on the subject. He should next pass to the great and comprehensive scheme which the right hon. Gentleman had developed in the latter part of his speech. He emphatically agreed with the right hon. Gentleman in the principle that if they wished to make a real reform in the character and condition of our mercantile marine, they should first endeavour to improve the character of the masters and mates; and it was only by what they might achieve in respect to them that they could hope to succeed in their projects with respect to their crews. He believed that wherever they found a ship with a disorderly and disorganised crew, they would, in general, be as fully justified in ascribing the state of such a crew to the inefficiency, or the immorality, or the ignorance of the master, as they would be justified in ascribing the state of a disorderly and disorganised school to the incapacity of the schoolmaster. There could be no doubt but they ought to have such relations established between the master and his crew as would place in the hands of the former ample powers for ensuring order on board his ship; and with whose powers there should be a corresponding responsibility. He was, on the whole, glad to find that the right hon. Gentleman intended to propose a system of compulsory examination for masters and mates, and. at the same time, to make that system merely prospective, and not to attempt to apply it to those who were at present masters and mates. He was, indeed, so fully convinced of the necessity of not dealing harshly with those parties, that he had heard with some doubt and scruple the right hon. Gentleman announce, as part of his plan, that the certificates of service which might already have been obtained by masters and mates, were to be withdrawable in case of gross misconduct; not that he thought there was anything unfair in that principle, but because he could not help questioning the propriety of giving to a subordinate portion of an executive department a power of judging of the conduct of masters and mates, and entailing on them far more severe consequences than any to which an ordinary tribunal would subject them for any offence short of a crime, while they would not have the securities in their favour which a court of justice would afford them. He was glad, however, to find that the right hon. Gentleman meant to define certain cases of gross misconduct which would render masters liable to that penalty; and he trusted that the right hon. Gentleman would find no difficulty in the application of his principle. But he was sure that the right hon. Gentleman would not find fault with him for suggesting that the mode of proving a degree of misconduct, which was to be followed by the withdrawal of a certificate of service, was a matter that would require, in all its details, the most anxious and careful consideration. The right hon. Gentleman had told them that he intended to apply the principle of the compulsory intervention of the public officers in the formation of contracts of service between seamen and their employers. Now, into that, and into many other matters to which the right hon. Gentleman had referred, he should think it premature, at that moment, to enter. The right hon. Gentleman had great ends to attain; and that was not the time for considering the details of his plan. He concurred with the right hon. Gentleman in giving credit in general to the reports that had been made with respect to the deficient state of our mercantile marine. They were not there to disparage the noble qualities that belonged to the character of the British seaman. But that was not the question with which they had to deal; for they were not to be considered as decrying those qualities, or as denying that, on the whole, the mercantile marine of England should be considered the first, perhaps, in the world, because they said that where they found practical defects, they would endeavour to remedy them. But, at the same time, the matter involved so much interference with the free agency of individuals, that it was obviously one of the greatest difficulty, and he should wish to have before him the whole plan of the right hon. Gentleman before pronouncing any definitive opinion with respect to it he could not, however, help making another remark with respect to a particular clause in the Act which the right hon. Gentleman had lately succeeded in obtaining for a modification and almost for a repeal of our navigation laws. The right hon. Gentleman had found that the state of the British mercantile marine was, in very important respects, eminently defective, and he proposed to cure that defective state by a set of regulations involving great interference on the part of the Government, and involving a great complexity and minuteness of rules, and which would place the profession of a seaman, and still more the profession of the master of a merchant vessel, in a kind of pupilage. Now, he did not find fault with the right hon. Gentleman for having done those things; but, with the moderate faith that he had in the success of any merely mechanical set of rules, he was hound to ask himself whether there was no other measure of a larger, more vigorous, and, ultimately, of a more certain operation, which they ought to adopt for the improvement of the character of masters and sailors in the British mercantile marine. He thought there was; and that measure would be, to apply to the command of vessels, and to the manning of vessels, the principle of competition which they had applied to the carrying trade and to the building of vessels. He deeply lamented to find that the right hon. Gentleman had not applied that principle to the manning of ships. The right hon. Gentleman had deprived the shipowner of his monopoly; he had deprived the shipbuilder of his monopoly; but the monopoly of the sailor he still proposed to retain. Now, the right hon. Gentleman had always held—and he had repeated the opinion that day—that in taking away the monopoly of the shipbuilder and of the shipowner, he was not inflicting on them an injury, but conferring on them a great benefit; and he (Mr. Gladstone) could not understand why the right hon. Gentleman was not prepared to confer a similar benefit on our seamen. He was persuaded that every reason that went to show that they bad been right in repealing the navigation laws, would also prove that they ought to allow our shipowners to choose whatever seamen they might please. He was convinced that no system of sanitary regulations—that no system for the examination of masters and mates, however good such a system might be in itself, would enable them to attain the end they bad in view, unless they applied the healthy principle of competition to the system on which our ships were manned, as well as to the system on which they were built, or to the system on which they were employed in the carrying trade. He could assure the right hon. Gentleman that it was not from any wanton desire to revive the discussion on the navigation laws that be had made those observations, but it was because be wished to express his conscientious conviction that a similar relaxation of our laws in the present case lay at the root of any good system for improving the condition of our mercantile marine. He thought they had the most distinct reasons to believe that the repeal of the navigation laws was a safe measure as regarded our shipbuilding and our carrying trade; but he thought the evidence was still more demonstrative that the British sailor could compete with all the sailors in the world. It appeared to him that that fact was sufficiently established by the eagerness with which our sailors were sought after in foreign countries. It was a painful fact, and one which they ought to lay to heart, for the purpose of giving to it its true value, that in one year 14,000 sailors had deserted our merchant service; and no doubt many of those sailors were at present navigating American ships, under the strict discipline which prevailed in the American marine. Our present system did not, therefore, keep our sailors in our own service. On all those grounds he trusted that the right hon. Gentleman might be disposed, during the interval between this and the next Session of Parliament, to reconsider the view he had taken with regard to the manning of our ships since the repeal of the navigation laws. He, for one, was convinced that next Session would not pass over, and ought not to pass over, without an effort being made to give to the British shipowner the freedom to which he was entitled of manning his ships as he might think fit. But while he said that, he did not wish to disparage or to deprecate the importance of the efforts which the right hon. Gentleman had made for the improvement of our merchant service. On the contrary, he was ready to give him the highest credit for those efforts; and he felt most anxious that he should succeed in the difficult task he had undertaken to discharge.

would for the present abstain from offering any observations on the main statements of the right hon. Gentleman, as he proposed simply to lay his Bill on the table for the present Session; but he desired to offer a few remarks on the modification proposed of the light-dues, and with regard to the law proposed to be introduced as to pilotage. With regard to the light-dues, he was ready to concur with the right hon. Gentleman in reducing them to the lowest scale consistent with the safety of the trade on the coasts. He was glad the right hon. Gentleman was disposed to continue them, and only proposed to regulate that tax so as to make it press with more equality. With respect to the right hon. Gentleman's proposition to introduce a Bill, and pass it this Session, with respect to the pilotage, the Cinque Ports would be very materially affected by that Bill, and, as Member for Dover, he had no hesitation in saying he should protest against the passing of a Bill of this sort during the present Session. There were local interests which would be so deeply affected by this Bill as to make it highly important that there should be time to have it considered whether the measure would be acceptable to the shipping interests or not. It was generally understood that the present Session would be brought to a close in three weeks, and what time therefore was there for the consideration of such a measure as this? The right hon. Gentleman had stated that the measure of Lord Sydenham had been defeated by local interests; and did not that prove that local interests did exist which would have to be consulted? He thought he had some reason to complain that the right hon. Gentleman, if he had intended to pass this measure this Session, had not brought it on three months ago. It had nothing to do with the repeal of the navigation laws, and might just as well have been introduced in February last as now. What was the principle of the alteration proposed? He believed no person entertained a doubt that it was absolutely necessary for shipping interests, for the safety of property and life, that there should be upon the British coast a considerable body of experienced pilots who thoroughly understand the navigation of our difficult seas, and who were enabled, from their continual practice of sailing through them, to conduct vessels of the largest draught with safety, where less experienced hands would be liable to expose them to danger. If it were necessary to have them, and they were now to be interfered with in the way proposed, it would be requisite to raise a fund, out of which they would have to be paid to such an extent as would enable them to devote the whole of their time to their duties. Frequent inquiries had been made in reference to the pilotage; and it had been shown that neither the Trinity-house nor the Cinque-port pilots were excessive in number; and it had been stated by several witnesses that the income of the Cinque-port pilots was somewhere about 110l. to 120l. a year—no way an unreasonable sum for persons who were obliged to expose themselves to such imminent risks and dangers as they had to pass through. In order to raise the fund necessary for the payment of those pilots, the principle had been that every ship sailing along our seas was bound to take a pilot. If half of the ships were now to be exempted from that obligation—if this Bill was to make it optional whether a pilot should be taken or not, it would be perfectly manifest that to keep up the present number of pilots (the number could not be reduced) it would be absolutely necessary to call for a higher rate of pilotage from such vessels as did take pilots than they had to pay now. It might be easy enough, by reading a book on the subject, to pass an examination at the Trinity-house, so as to acquire a slight knowledge of the dangers of the Channel; but if such persons had not a practical knowledge on the point, and returned fifteen or eighteen months afterwards and ventured to pass along without a pilot, their theoretical knowledge would in all probability have passed away, and they might find themselves exposed to serious dangers. But what was to be done with respect to foreign vessels? Were foreigners, under all circumstances, to be compelled to take pilots? Would that be consistent with the principle of the present navigation laws? Why, if that were to be attempted, there would be a representation in London from the American Minister next day against it.

said, he should put foreign ships in the same situation as others.

But how were the masters of foreign ships to be examined?

By some person approved of by the Trinity-house.

could not suppose that the American Government would assent to that for one moment. They would not submit to have their captains examined by a set of commissioners appointed by us, they knowing that their captains were as competent to navigate our seas as our own. This was a most important measure, and he had no doubt the greatest opposition would be offered to it by all persons connected with the pilotage at Liverpool, the Cinque Ports, and everywhere else. He should, therefore, by all the means at his command, try to prevent this Bill from being prematurely discussed; he should oppose its second reading until it had been printed, circulated throughout the kingdom, and every opportunity afforded to all persons interested in it fully to consider it. He trusted, therefore, the right hon. Gentleman would be satisfied by simply laying the Bill on the table for this Session.

observed, that a pilot question never could be brought before Parliament without its always being thought necessary to introduce a clause to this effect, "Provided always, that nothing contained in this Bill shall affect the rights and privileges of the Cinque Ports." There was always some reservation of that sort conveyed in the intimation that they might do what they liked without interfering with the Cinque Ports. Now, it so happened that the Cinque Ports were the great grievances; they formed the subject of all the complaints; and if they were left out of the Bill, it would be like the play of Hamlet with the part of Hamlet omitted "by particular desire." The speech which they had just heard was not the speech of the right hon. Baronet the late President of the Board of Trade, but the speech of the right hon. Member for Dover; for, certainly, he did not collect from his right hon. Friend's observations that he intended to grapple with the Cinque Ports in a manner that would become him as a Minister of the Crown. From the speech of the right hon. Member for Dover, it appeared otherwise. This was not a question affecting the rights of a large body of individuals; and although there might have been a time when the necessities of the country required that large and exclusive privileges should be conferred on the Cinque Ports, that time had long since passed away, and instead of those privileges being a public convenience, they were a public nuisance; and he, therefore, called upon the right hon. Baronet the President of the Board of Trade to deal with these Cinque Ports with a bold hand. He did not believe that the distinguished person who was at the head of them, would throw any obstacle in the way of improvement, if proper representations were made to him. With regard to the pilot system itself, this was the way in which it worked—when ships did not want a pilot he was forced upon them, and when they did want a pilot they could not get one; and for this simple reason, that the system secured to the pilot a certainty of employment and of income in fine weather, which induced him not to take trouble and go to sea in bad weather. If the system secured him an income in fine weather, it was not likely that he would run the risk and danger and incur the wear and tear of encountering the sea in rough weather; and the consequence was, that very often at the South Foreland vessels which were compelled to submit to the charge of a pilot in fine weather, ran the risk of being lost through the neglect of the pilot to go to sea in rough weather. With regard to the corporation of the Trinity-house, he was one of those who had never joined in a tilt against them, because the evils of the light-dues had been occasioned by the acts of the Crown and of the Legislature.

said, if he understood the statement of the right hon. Gentleman the President of the Board of Trade, he had brought three questions before them, upon which he proposed to take the opinion of the House. The first of these was to give an important relief to the mercantile marine; and as that measure was not to be disposed of in the present Session, he should say nothing against it then. With regard to the second question—that of pilotage—the right hon. Gentleman proposed to bring in a Bill which he was anxious to pass in the present Session of Parliament. It was merely of a permissive nature, to enable those parties who had the control of the pilotage to make certain remissions in regard to taking pilots where it would be expedient; and at the first view, it certainly did appear a reasonable proposal, which he was not then prepared to object to. At the same time, however, he thought the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Manchester would feel, with him, that it was but reasonable that those parties whom it would affect should have time to consider its provisions; and he should, therefore, defer any observations upon the subject till the second reading, when he would have had an opportunity of communicating with the parties interested in the Bill. With regard to the third and by far the most important subject, the right hon. Gentleman had proposed a course which must be eminently satisfactory to the House. He proposed to lay before them in detail a comprehensive scheme with regard to the mercantile marine; and having done so, he proposed to give the country a full opportunity of considering the measure before any opinion of the House should be asked for. He would, therefore, be no party to raising any objection to this Bill at the present moment, nor did he think any of those obstacles suggested by the right hon. Gentleman would be thrown in his way. He promised the right hon. Gentleman to give his most deliberate attention to the proposition; and in the communication which it would be his duty to hold with those parties whose interests were most affected by it, he would endeavour to arrive at that solution of the question which it was the right hon. Gentleman's desire to attain—namely, the best means of raising the condition of the masters and seamen of the mercantile marine, and of promoting the social advantage and welfare of that class of the community. He had before him a statement of the existing law on the subject, which, did time permit, he should be glad to detail to the House; but, at all events, this he must be allowed to say, that the existing law gave a much larger control over the sailors of the mercantile marine than would be supposed by those who had listened to the statement of the right hon. Gentleman.

said, it now being three o'clock, he trusted the Committee would at once agree to the resolution, and postpone its consideration till the second reading of the Bill. Some doubt had been raised as to whether the Trinity-house had the power to carry out the arrangement in reference to the light-dues; but be had consulted with parties competent to give the best opinion on the subject, and they entertained not the least doubt upon the matter. Indeed, in the case of Scotland, some years ago, a remission was actually made in the same manner that he now proposed, namely, in conjunction with the Privy Council. He trusted that the Committee would now agree to the resolution, and he would fix the second reading for some day next week.

gave the right hon. Gentleman great credit for the measure he had brought before the House, which no doubt had been dictated by a desire to benefit the mercantile marine; but there was one point which he had heard with extreme regret, and that was that it was intended to do away with the registry certificate.

said, he thought it most unjust that the right hon. Gentleman should have made such wholesale charges against a whole class of men, as he had done, and than get up, saying it was three o'clock, and cut the discussion short, without giving any opportunity whatever of answering those charges.

wished to put a question to the right hon. Home Secretary relative to the sanitary state of London. Information had reached him (Mr. Bernal) that day that the disease termed "cholera" was certainly spreading its ravages in different parts of London. He was surprised that hon. Members could submit to the state of discomfort, increasing every day, caused by the nuisances round and about the house in which they were assembled from noon often until two o'clock the next morning. The smells, he was told, arising from the churchyard in the immediate neighbourhood and from the vaults of St. Margaret's Church, were found by persons in attendance on Committees to be so pungent and deleterious, that they were obliged to close the windows; and at the table where he often had to sit for some hours, he found odours arising of such a nature that he could not tell by what they were engendered, but this he could say, that such a state of things must infallibly act upon the health of Gentlemen who were discharging very onerous duties under such circumstances. But he would take the opportunity of inviting the attention of the right hon. Gentleman to the general condition of London. The sewers now were a perfect disgrace. With all the alterations of the commissioners of sewers, they were so bad in his neighbourhood, not a mile from the House, that at night he was obliged to close his chamber windows to prevent deleterious influences acting upon the inmates of his residence. Again, he had heard complaints from the neighbourhood of Ludgate Hill; he understood that persons there were dying, and it was not known to what the mortality was attributable, but it was believed that the drains were not attended to and scoured out; and many considered that, after all the talk and the efforts of the gentlemen who had applied themselves to the subject of the sanitary condition of this vast metropolis, we were worse off than throe or four years ago. Whether the blame lay with the commissioners of sewers, or the city authorities, or whom, he could not say, but the whole of London was in a state respecting which he would say that he was ashamed to think that a civilised people, in the year 1849, would submit to be in such a condition, surrounded with pestilence and disease.

quite agreed that this was a very important subject. He did not understand his hon. Friend to put a question to him, but to call his attention to this matter; and he could only say that, whenever a representation had been made to him of a nuisance of any kind existing in any neighbourhood, he had felt it his duty to call the attention of the Board of Health and the police to it. He had received no specific representation with regard to nuisances in that immediate neighbourhood; but certainly the statement of his hon. Friend, who had to attend in the House for so many hours, demanded inquiry. With regard to London generally, every power conferred upon the Board of Health or the police was, he believed, put in exercise with a view to prevent, as far as possible, the spread of disease. The prevalence of it probably arose partly from the state of the weather, and the drought.

, when in office, had to move a grant for the repair of St. Margaret's Church, and received a previous assurance from the authorities that they were then in treaty for a burial ground in the country in lieu of that which was close to the House. He was mainly induced to move the grant upon the faith of that arrangement; he wished to know whether it was being fulfilled?

would make inquiry.

, representing the Board of Health in that House, begged to state that they were utterly powerless in these matters. The Board of Health had no jurisdiction within the metropolis, except in cases where the cholera should have broken out, and then they could give certain directions, and have certain cleansings made; but those were surface cleansings. Privies were to be emptied, streets washed, and a system of house-visitation established, so long as cholera prevailed; but, with respect to the institution of effective measures for the removal of permanent sources of disease, the Board had no power. The hon. Gentleman the Member for Rochester had said that the state of the metropolis was much worse than before. He (Lord Ashley) could hardly concur in that. It was very bad, very unsuited to health and safety, but there had been a very great deal of cleansing, and he was happy to say there was a determination to go further in the adoption of such measures. The cholera was now spreading rapidly; and unless something were done it was impossible to say what would be the consequence.

begged to say that various nuisances had been removed by the operations of the commissioners of sewers, but in places the least likely to come under the notice of Members of that House, the endeavours of the commissioners having been first to cleanse the most miserable parts of the metropolis. Vast accumulations of deposits had been flushed away from the drains; and the drains under that House were clean and clear; but the pestilential exhalations of St. Margaret's churchyard, from the decomposing bodies there, it was not in the power of the commissioners of sewers to keep off. With reference to the imputations cast upon the body of which he was a member, he wished to observe that the state of the plans and maps bequeathed to them by their predecessors was such, that it was utterly impossible to take with confidence any steps founded upon them; and therefore a survey was ordered, which had only just been completed. Before that, nothing could be done without danger of wasting the money of the ratepayers in useless works.

, in reminding the House that they had been informed that the Board of Health had no power to abate a great and admitted evil, begged to ask the noble Lord at the head of the Government whether it was not in spite of earnest remon- strances in that House, that he, or those who represented the Government, exempted the metropolis from the Health of Towns Bill, which contained powers to deal with the great nuisance of pestilential churchyards?

answered, that it was thought by the noble Earl the First Commissioner of Woods and Forests, after inquiry, that it would be necessary to have a separate Bill for the metropolis; and it was on that ground that his noble Friend did not include the metropolis in that Bill. This year his noble Friend had considered that until the commissioners of sewers, appointed last year, had proceeded further with regard to the requisite alterations in the system of sewers, it would not be advisable to introduce a Bill.

rose to renew his Motion for an Address to Her Majesty on the subject of certain illegal ordinances or Acts of Council for the taxation of the people of Van Diemen's Land, and the attempts of Lieutenant Governor Sir William Denison to intimidate the Judges of the Supreme Court of that island. The hon. and learned Gentleman recapitulated what he had formerly stated to the House with respect to the conduct of the Governor—that Sir W. Denison was charged with having, by means of private solicitation, endeavoured to induce one of the Judges of the Supreme Court (the Chief Justice) to withdraw from his post, on leave of absence for eighteen months, in order that he might be enabled to appoint a successor who would give judgment on particular cases in favour of the Crown—that the Chief Justice having refused this degrading proposal, measures were taken to remove him, solely because, in the exercise of his judicial functions, he had declared an illegal Act of Council to be a violation of a British Act of Parliament—that this attempt was only prevented by the receipt of information from England, that the Governor had the power to call together another packed Council, who would bring in a Bill to change the existing law—that the Council was accordingly summoned, and by them a Bill was passed, rendering legal all those measures respecting local taxation which the courts of law had previously declared to be illegal. With this short statement he would leave the matter in the hands of the House.

said, he understood the charge against the Governor to be, that he had been instrumental in passing certain Acts of the Legislative Council illegally, those Acts being intended to appropriate particular taxes, not to local objects, but to imperial purposes; and, generally, that he was guilty of interfering with the due administration of justice in the colony. The question on which these accusations turned, arose entirely out of the construction of what was called Huskisson's Act, namely, the 9th of George IV., chap. 83. The question was, whether the proceedings which had taken place came under Mr. Huskisson's Act, which declared that the Acts of the Council should be registered in the Supreme Court within a limited time; but the Council might set aside this sanction in certain cases, and the Acts would be equally valid without it. In 1845, an Act was passed by the Council in Van Diemen's Land, by which a tax was imposed upon dogs, with the view of preventing their increase. This Act, however, was not registered in the Supreme Court; but within a certain period it was declared by the Governor to have become law. Some excitement was got up in the colony on the subject, and an appeal was made to the court, which decided that the proceeding was repugnant to the spirit of Mr. Huskisson's Act. The law officers of the Crown in Van Diemen's Land differed altogether with the Judges on the point, and stated that the time for taking objections to the law had gone by. As it was, nearly the whole revenue of the colony was perilled by this decision of the Judges, as most of the taxes had been imposed in the same way. Sir William Denison was thus placed in a situation of great difficulty. Many parties had informations lodged against them, and it was altogether found extremely difficult to carry on the government. In this state of matters. Sir W. Denison no doubt did propose to the Chief Justice that he should obtain leave of absence. That leave of absence, however, the Chief Justice refused to accept. Now, he was ready to admit that an error of judgment had been committed in this respect; but with the exception of that error of judgment, he must say that he saw nothing in the conduct of Sir W. Denison throughout these transactions that could derogate in any way from his character as an able and upright Governor. With that single exception, he had no fault to find with Sir W. Denison. The noble Lord the Secretary for the Colonies had expressed his disapprobation of the error which had been committed. An explanation had since been made by the Governor to the Chief Justice, which was received as duo reparation for the slight unintentionally cast upon him; and he believed that the best understanding now existed between the Governor and the Chief Justice. As to the question that had arisen respecting the bearing of the local Acts upon the existing law, he would only say that it was a point upon which lawyers differed, and that the Governor and the Legislative Council were guided in the opinions they formed by the law officers of the Crown. As to the case so far as regarded the Governor, he thought sufficient had been done by the expression of the Secretary of State's opinion, and that no necessity existed for proceeding further.

wished to know whether the Government had any objection to lay on the table of the House the despatch which the noble Lord the Secretary of State for the Colonies had written to Sir W. Denison, in which he reproved him for the illegal manner in which he bad attempted to intimidate the Judges in the performance of their public duties. Until the Government consented to produce that despatch, he thought the House ought not to allow this Motion to be withdrawn. Representations had been made to him by the inhabitants of the colony, strongly condemning the conduct of the Governor in this matter. What security had they for the protection of their property in England if justice were not purely administered? But of how much greater importance was it that in the colonies, which were so far removed from the means possessed by people living in England of obtaining redress, the administration of justice should be pure and free! Before redress could be obtained in the colonies, evils of the greatest magnitude might be committed, and it was therefore a matter of the highest importance that every care should be taken, not only that the judicial office was filled by able, independent, and upright men, but that not the slightest hindrance should be permitted to the free execution of their decrees. If conduct such as had been brought home to Sir W. Denison were permitted to take place amongst an independent population, the results might be of the most alarming and unsatisfactory character. He know that the people of Australia had been much exasperated by the conduct of the Governor, and he was therefore anxious that everything which could explain his conduct should be laid on the table of the House. He should also like to know the grounds on which the Chief Justice ventured to take the step which he did in reference to the ordinances in question. The House would no doubt be anxious to know whether the Attorney and Solicitor General's opinions had been allowed with the Governor to overrule the decision of the Chief Justice. It would no doubt astonish people in this country if the judgment of Lord Denman, for instance, were to be set aside by the opinion of a Solicitor or Attorney General. If such a course were allowed to be taken—if Attorney and Solicitor Generals were allowed to usurp the judicial office, and to become the judges of the law—all practical justice would be at an end. He trusted sincerely that Her Majesty's Government would consent to the production of every paper tending to justify the conduct of all parties concerned.

wished to induce the House not to call for the papers in this case, for such a proceeding would not he in conformity with the spirit in which hon. Gentlemen proceeded in a case of this kind. The calling for the papers alluded to by the hon. Member for Montrose, would add much to the censure convoyed in them. If the object of such a proceeding was the vindication of the character of chief Justice Pedder, it might be a valid reason for doing so, although it would press hard upon the Governor; but he understood there was an end to all disputes between the Governor and the Judge. He believed the Motion before the House did not go for the production of papers, but was only a suggestion of the hon. Member for Montrose. He had had some experience of the colonial system, and he could state, the relations between the governor and the judges and other authorities in a colony, were not the same as existed between the Government and similar parties in this country. Custom did not in the colonies give the same independence to the judges which they possessed here; and it was very often the duty of a governor to interfere with the judges, and even, under certain circumstances, to suspend or dismiss a judge, for which proceeding, of course, he was responsible. The question then was, as the Governor had not erred fundamentally, but had erred in the manner in which he had taken cognisance of the conduct of the Judges whether, after the error bad been corrected, and the conduct of the Governor disapproved of by the Secretary of State, it was expedient to go further into the case. There were two questions mixed up in this case. The first was as to the practice of colonial governors in general; the second was as to the character and conduct of the present Governor of Van Die-men's Land. He conceived the governors of colonies should have all the support which they could reasonably look for from the Home Government, for they were placed at a great distance, and they had often to discharge the most difficult duties; and they had not the same support of public opinion in the colonies as the Government had in this country. Under the circumstances of the colonial system, it was impossible to expect that errors of judgment would not occasionally occur. He thought also they should refer to the general character of Sir W. Denison. He (Mr. Gladstone) was responsible for the appointment of Sir W. Denison to the Vice-Governorship of Van Diemen's Land. That officer's appointment was confirmed by Earl Grey. This was not an appointment at haphazard or hastily, but after a full consideration of the affairs of the colony. He frankly avowed that his object was not only to send to Van Diemen's Land a governor of capacity, but the very best man who could be procured. At that time there existed a conflict between the Legislature and the Governor of the colony, as well as with the court of justice; and the state of the sys tem of transportation was such as to excite a feeling of horror in this country as well as in the colony. There was no instance of a governor being sent to a colony with a more difficult task to perform than that which was given to Sir W. Denison. He did not say that the Governor was right in this specific case; but he would appeal to Gentlemen in that House whether an individual case of error of judgment should be framed into a general condemnation of his conduct? Sir W. Denison was known in this country as one of the most able officers of that distinguished branch of the public service, the engineers. The affairs of the colony had prospered under his hands, and he had done everything in the power of man to put an end to the frightful state of the convict system which existed there when he arrived in the colony. Under these circumstances he had obtained a claim to public gratitude, and he trusted the House would not consent to go beyond the line which the Secretary of State thought should be adopted for the vindication of the conduct of the Chief Justice. The Governor had relied and proceeded on the opinion of the law officers of the Crown in the colony, where far greater authority was attached to their opinions than was the case at home. The relations also between the governments of the colonies and the judges was essentially different from those which existed between the Government and the Judges at home, for the independence of the judges did not exist in the colonies. The question before the House was, whether, after the letter of the Secretary for the Colonies to the Governor, and considering that no practical evil remained in the case to be removed, it was necessary to add the censure of the House to the disapproval which had been already expressed by the Government; and he should support the Ministers in their en deavour to persuade the House against the necessity for such a step.

said, that some of the observations just made by the right hon. Gentleman appeared to him of such serious import, both as regarded the honour and integrity of the profession to which he (Mr. Page Wood) had the honour to belong, and as regarded the position of our Government in the colonies, that he could not remain silent, knowing what he did of this case as a counsel therein. If the allegation made by a right hon. Gentleman who had once filled the high office of Secretary for the Colonies, that the interference of a colonial governor with the functions of a judge in the colony, was an act deserving only of mild censure, and of censure not to be made public in the colony, were to pass unquestioned; then the position of a judge in a colony was one of very doubtful character for any gentleman of honour to undertake. If this question were not held as one deserving of the greatest possible attention, and if the most complete reparation were not made in every respect, not only to Mr. Chief Justice Pedder, but to all who had been injuriously affected in the transaction, he should look hereafter with suspicion upon all who accepted the position of a colonial judge. The colonial judges were appointed under patent revocable by the Crown, but not by the colonial governors; and, except under a special Act of Parliament, they were not to be removed. He admitted the difficulty in which the Governor had been placed; but he was a military man, and on an average military Governors and Judges did not get on amicably together in the colonies for more than three years. The hon. and learned Gentleman here briefly recapitulated the circumstances of the case, as related by the hon. and learned Mover, and commented upon the conduct of the Governor, which he said was calculated to shake the confidence of the colony in its institutions. He would rather see the Governor in possession of all authority at once, and responsible for all, than that this sort of interference should be exercised. If the colony was in that infant state that the law could not be administered in the usual course, so as both to secure the authority of the Governor and the duo dispensation of justice to the people, then it would be better that the Governor should unite the judicial functions with his office, and that the military man should be governor, judge, and everything. With respect to the production and printing of these papers, he had no desire to do anything vindictive or harsh towards the Governor. Even as counsel, he (Mr. Wood) had not the slightest feeling on the subject towards him. But he felt strongly as regarded the character of the bench and the due administration of justice in the colony, that it was not sufficient there should be a private expression by the Government of disapprobation of the conduct of the Governor in this case, but that there ought to be something more marked and decided, such as printing these papers, so as to have a public acknowledgment of the reparation that had been made.

defended the conduct of Sir W. Denison, and expressed his regret at the animus which had been evinced against an officer standing high in his profession. He entreated the House not to form their judgment upon Sir W. Denison upon the speeches which they had heard.

observed, that in all the proceedings on the part of the Judges of Van Diemen's Land up to the time that they declared the ordinances to be illegal, everything had been done in the most regular manner. All was conducted in perfect accordance with the forms of the constitution. Who then was the first to depart from that course of regularity? The Governor himself, who in substance found fault with the Judges for their decision. What business had he so to do? It was beyond his duty and his power to interfere with a judicial determination. It was said that the Governor was a military officer, as nine out of ten of our governors wore. He agreed that the tone of mind acquired by men of the military profession was not the best suited to civil affairs, and that it in some degree disqualified them for discharging the duties of constitutional government. What was it, then, that Sir W. Denison did? He removed one of the Judges, and sent to another a letter submitting to him that it would be a wise thing for him to request eighteen months' leave of absence. What was the meaning of that? Was there any portion of Chief Justice Pedder's conduct to be found fault with except his decision in regard to the dog-tax? It was known that that learned Judge determined that the ordinance imposing that tax was illegal. Was it for this that he was recommended to absent himself for eighteen months from the discharge of his duty? Was it not an insult to the Judges, and an act calculated to degrade the judicial bench in the estimation of the inhabitants of the colony? There was no class in the community whose character and conduct were of so much importance to the general weal as those of the Judges by whom the law of the land was administered. What would be said of that Government which should write a letter to Lord Chief Justice Den man he having adjudicated in a matter which interested both the Government and the House of Commons, and having come to a decision centrary to a previous determination of the House—what, he asked, would be said of a Government who should write a letter to that noble Lord, and suggest to him that it would be for the benefit of his health if he would take an excursion into the country for eighteen months? What, if such a letter had been written after the Stockdale case? But, said the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the University of Oxford, the judges in the colonies were not like the Judges in England, they were a very different class of people. Let him, however, remind that right hon. Gentleman that those colonial judges were called upon to administer the law which concerned the property and the lives of the inhabitants of the country in which they lived, and that they were there placed by the imperial power of England so to administer that law. Did the right hon. Gentleman mean, therefore, to say that there was something about the character of a colonial judge which denuded him of those attributes that were a safeguard to the official dignity and purity of character which belonged to a judge in this country? If it were so, then he would say shame to the right hon. Gentleman, who, having been a Colonial Secretary, and seeing an evil so seriously affecting the character of the judges of the colonies, had failed to bring in a law to remedy that defect. If one thing more than another could be calculated to bind the colonies to this country, it should be the fact that the Government of the mother country watched vigilantly over the character of those to whom was intrusted the administration of the law, and took care that justice was rendered pure and undefiled never troubled by petty passions, or prejudiced by any littleness of professional hate. The right hon. Gentleman had made an appeal to the House as a species of argument ad misericordiam, by referring to the former services of the Governor of Van Diemen's Land. But that had nothing to do with the question. The House should confine itself to the single act before it, and not refer to the previous conduct of the Governor. They were not giving evidence of character after a verdict had been found, but they were asking whether upon this particular issue the party was guilty or not. From all the lights which were afforded to him, he believed that Sir W. Denison had been guilty of an offence of a most grievous nature; and, whether from pique or from passion he knew not, neither did he care, that he had most unwarrantably interfered with the pure administration of justice in one of our most important colonies. It became the noble Lord at the head of the Administration to watch with care over these derelictions; and if he failed in that his most sacred trust, he would deserve that condemnation which he was sure the feelings of the country would visit upon the man who, holding responsible power, was careless of those great interests of the State which were wrapped up with the well government of the colonial possessions of the empire.

Sir, it is with the greatest deference that I venture to say anything upon a question having reference to one who is closely connected with myself. I hope, however, I shall prove to the House that I am capable of overcoming any prepossessions I may he supposed to be influenced by when I at once join with hon. Gentlemen in expressing my deep regret for the act that was done with regard to Chief Justice Pedder. I shall not enter into the merits of this question on either side; it would not he becoming of me to do so; but I shall confine myself to one single point. The main question I believe is this—shall a certain despatch from the Secretary of State for the Colonial Department, animadverting upon the conduct of the Government of Van Diemen's Land, be produced before this House? Now, whatever may be the view taken of this subject by my hon. Friend the Under Secretary for the Colonies, I have that opinion of the sincerity and frankness of character of my relative to believe that it would not be his desire that any expression of opinion with regard to his conduct should be suppressed, or that what he had done should not undergo the fullest investigation by this House. I, for one, cannot join my hon. Friend in desiring that that despatch should be kept from the notice of the House. As far as I am concerned, I should desire that the despatch should be produced, and the fullest information given. I repeat that it would not be becoming in me to refer to the grounds upon which the selection of that officer was made, nor to say anything with respect to the value of his public services. They are before this House; and I hope not only that the House will exercise an impartial judgment upon them, but that the closest attention will be directed to the future conduct of that Gentleman; and I do not doubt that his disposition to discharge his duty will conduct him through the very important, laborious, and responsible situation in which he is placed in a manner honourable to himself.

then asked if there vas any objection on the part of the noble Lord to lay on the table a copy of Earl Grey's despatch wherein he censured and disapproved of Sir W. Denison's conduct?

said, that inasmuch as society in Van Diemen's Land was in a very disorganised state, and as he had stated expressly that Earl Grey had disapproved of and censured Sir W. Denison's conduct towards Mr. Justice Pedder, he did not think, considering the difficulties which the Governor of that colony had already to contend with, that any good would result from making public a document which might have the effect of lowering the Governor in the eyes of the colonists, and subjecting him to their criticism and censure. The better course, therefore, was not to lay the despatch on the table.

with reference to the remark of the noble Lord that the population of Van Diemen's Land were at present in a disorderly and disorganised state, begged to say that if under any circumstances a governor should be above all suspicion or imputation, it was where a population was in such circumstances as the noble Lord had described. There was an old saying—Omne ignotum pro magnifico; and he believed that, so long as this despatch remained unknown, it would be assumed to be of a far more sweeping and condemnatory character than it really was. The consequence would be that the Governor would never be able to put the law in force against any person, however bad or mischievous, and however deserving of blame and punishment. Indeed, he was bold enough to say, that if this despatch were not published, the Governor could not with safety remain in the colony.

appealed to the noble Lord the First Minister of the Crown to allow the Ordnance Estimates to stand over until Monday, to afford time to hon. Members to read the report of the Committee on that subject, which had not yet been issued to Members, although he was assured that it would be ready by Saturday.

begged to remind the House that they had met that day—the 12th of July, and at a very late period of the Session—for the purpose of considering the Ordnance Estimates proposed to be voted for the year from the 5th of April last to the 5th of April next. He had certainly been in hopes that some time ago the Committee which had sat on the Ordnance and Army Estimates would have been able to make some report, However, the evidence and the consideration of that evidence had taken till the present time. The question put by his hon. Friend was whether, that being the case, he would not agree to put off the Ordnance Estimates till Monday next. Now, he must say it appeared to him that if there was to be a postponement at all, that would not be a fair time to postpone it to, because there ought to be sufficient time to enable the Board of Ordnance and the Government to consider the report, and to mature their judgment upon the various points connected with it. Now, that might require till the end of the present month or sometime in August, perhaps towards September, He certainly thought that were the hon. Member for Montrose and the other Members of the Committee, who had had several months to consider the points involved in the report, to avail themselves of their knowledge to press objections upon the Government, without the Government having had time to consider the report, and without their being able, therefore, to enter upon its discussion—that would be an unfair mode of discussing the report. It seemed to him, therefore, that they should either proceed to the consideration of the Ordnance Estimates for the present year then—of course listening to any objections that might be stated to them by hon. Members, but deferring the consideration of the views propounded by the Committee with regard to the preparation of the estimates for next year—or else postpone the consideration of the estimates for not less than a fortnight from that time. He submitted, that to postpone the consideration of the estimates till August, when there would necessarily be a thin House, would be a very unsatisfactory mode of proceeding; and that the better mode would be to proceed now with the estimates, and leave the report of the Committee to be carefully considered during the recess, and discussed in detail next Session.

said, he was quite sensible that this was the 12th of July, and that the Session was far advanced; but the House was in this position—in the early part of the Session the estimates had been referred to a Select Committee, in order that they might guide the House to a correct decision thereupon. That Committee had fully considered the subject, but their report was not yet in the hands of Members; and it was in those circumstances that they were invited to come to a decision upon the Ordnance Estimates without the knowledge of the important advice which was given to the House by the Committee. He would gladly avoid delay in the consideration of the estimates; but, undoubtedly, the House would be placed under great disadvantage in coming to a decision upon them unless time was afforded to Members to become acquainted with the advice of the Committee. [Lord J. RUSSELL: Why not the Government?] The noble Lord has mentioned two parties—the Committee and the Government. But he had apparently forgotten a third party—namely, the House, which wanted the information which the Government possessed already. He felt the disadvantages of delay, but, at the same time, admitted the validity of the objections of the hon. Member for Montrose. In fact, the whole position of the affair exhibited strongly the evil of referring the estimates to Committees. Exactly the same thing happened last year, and, after all, the estimates were voted without their having the report before them. He would not, however, divide in favour of the postponement.

concurred with his hon. Friend the Member for Montrose in requesting that the noble Lord would not press the estimates that evening. The noble Lord surely could not have understood the case put by his hon. Friend, or he would not have answered as he had done. On Tuesday afternoon the Committee completed their report. It would be printed and in the hands of the House on Saturday; but between Tuesday and Saturday—that interval of three days in which it was impossible for the House to read that report, or to learn what the Committee had been doing for the last five months—was just the interval seized on by the noble Lord for bringing on these estimates. The noble Lord had assumed that his hon. Friend wished the estimates postponed till August; but he wished no such thing—all he asked was, that they should be postponed till Monday next, when the report, as amended, might be in the hands of Members: at present the amended report had not even been seen by the Members of the Committee. Under these circumstances he did not think that the House should consent to the proposal of the noble Lord to proceed with the estimates that evening.

said, the hon. Gentleman who last spoke had entirely misrepresented what he (Lord J. Russell) had stated. In the first place, he must correct the hon. Member, when he said he (Lord J. Russell) had taken the House by surprise in the interval between the report being announced as ready, and its delivery to hon. Members. The course he really took was to inform the noble Chairman of the Committee that there was a period when the Government would have to go on with the estimates—that the Session was becoming late—and that he (Lord J. Russell) could not delay the estimates later than the 12th of July; at the same time asking the noble Chairman if the House would be in possession of the report before that period. The noble Chairman told him that, in his opinion, it would be laid before the House considerably before that day; and, having heard that opinion, he (Lord J. Russell) fixed the Ordnance Estimates for July 12, not on the supposition that the House would have to vote them in ignorance of the report, but, on the contrary, that they would be in possession of it. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Stamford observed very fairly that it was not the Government nor the Committee that had to decide this question, but the House. At the same time, the right hon. Gentleman weuld not differ from him when he stated that the Government must be responsible for the proposition they made to the House, and that it would not do for them to say, "Here is a certain sum, but whether it is a proper amount, or whether it should be diminished or increased, we are unable to say." It was for that very reason he said the report would probably be delayed till August, because there must be time not only for the Government to consider the report, but the evidence on which it was founded, so that when any hon. Member objected to any vote, as excessive or otherwise, the Government should be able to say on what grounds it could be defended, and be prepared to stand by their own vote. It therefore was not enough for the Members of the Committee to be in possession of the report. The Government should have it likewise. It seemed to him a great inconvenience to postpone the vote to so late a period. He quite agreed with the right hon. Gentleman that it was an embarrassing position to be placed in; but the right hon. Gentleman knew well that if it were deferred so long, there were other steps consequent upon the vote, such as the Committee of Ways and Means, and the passing of the Appropriation Act, which would take up considerable time and necessarily protract the Session. Considering the great importance of obtaining votes such as would keep the service in a state of efficiency, and of not making any hasty retrenchments, he thought it bettor for the House not to make any alterations without due consideration, and not to postpone the votes any longer. He begged to remind them again, that the Government, which brought them forward, was alone responsible for the estimates.

quite agreed with the opinion expressed by the right hon. Member for Stamford, that it was not for the Committee or the Government, but for that House, to decide upon the estimates. He was very sorry his noble Friend the Chairman of the Committee was not present. Every Member of the Committee would bear testimony to his noble Friend's exertions; and he believed that those exertions had been so great as to render it necessary for him to leave England for a milder climate. As to the report, it had been presented—it was, in fact, then on the table of the House, and would be in the hands of Members by Saturday. On Friday last he had himself proposed that an intimation should be made to the House, that it would not be expedient to postpone the estimates until the report was laid before it. As the hon. Member for Montrose was not then present, nothing was done; but at that time there was not an immediate prospect of the report being concluded. On Monday last considerable progress was made with the report. He, however, now frankly said, that, considering the details of the various services on which advice had been tendered, and that the Government could not have sufficient time to consider those details, it would be fairer to go on with the estimates as they had been prepared up to April last, without losing time now in discussing details which neither the House nor the Government had an opportunity of considering. He thought that at the commencement of next Session, the Government, having in the recess weighed the recommendations contained in the report, and instituted the inquiries in distant colonies which were recommended by the Committee, should, upon their responsibility, lay the Ordnance Estimates upon the table in the amended form which they might think would pass. If they proceeded on Monday next to debate those estimates with reference to a report which would not be in the hands of Members until Saturday, and which could not be fully weighed without fully considering the evidence, which was very voluminous, he very much doubted that their debates here would be of much assistance in regard to the estimates of last year. If they proceeded with the debate on the estimates now, of course the Members of the Committee would be perfectly at liberty to avail themselves of all the information which they might have acquired during the deliberation of the Session. The Members of the Government would be present to answer any objections that might be urged. The House would have the opportunity of hearing the objections and weighing the answers; and he did not think that, in order to the fair discussion of the entire question, it would be necessary to await the presentation of the report on Saturday, for the purpose of discussing the details on the Monday; and that it would be quite impossible to read the evidence and the report in the interval; and without reading them, a fair judgment could not be arrived at. He was most anxious that Her Majesty's Government should give its attention to the recommendation in the report. He was of opinion that considerable savings of the public money might be effected, if those recommendations were received in the spirit in which he thought Government ought to receive them. He was quite sure, also, that those savings could be effected only by the Executive Government. To do this efficiently, time and consideration were absolutely necessary; and he was certain that it was only upon the responsibility of Government that savings to that extent could be safely and per manently made. On the whole, therefore, he was of opinion that there was no advantage in not proceeding at once.

contended, unless it were intended that the report of the Committee was to be a perfect farce, that they should not now proceed with the estimates. He had been detained in the House by the Scotch Bills, and he himself, though a Member of the Committee, actually did not know one of the conclusions to which they had come. The right hon. Baronet the Member for Ripon thought it better for them to discuss these estimates in ignorance than in knowledge. He (Mr. Hume) did not at all agree with that view of the case. There were forty-one orders of the day upon the Paper; there was, therefore, plenty of business for the House to proceed with, and he once more called upon them to postpone the estimates until Monday. He wanted to show the immense sums of money that were wasted in the Ordnance Department, but that he could not do without the report. If he possibly could, he should prevent their proceeding with the estimates at this time, and he begged to move, therefore, that the Committee report progress, and obtain leave to sit again.

said, that last Friday the impression in the Committee was, that the report would not be ready by the Tuesday, and under that impression he proposed to the Committee that they should inform the House of the position in which the business stood before them, in order that it might judge whether it was expedient any longer to suspend the consideration of the estimates. On the Monday, however, business made greater progress, and in consequence, the report would be ready by Saturday. He begged to remind hon. Members that the Navy Estimates were considered in Committee of Supply, in the same manner as it was proposed to consider the Ordnance Estimates; and there could be no better guarantee to the House with regard to the manner in which the Government were disposed to attend to the recommendations of the Committee, than the manner in which they dealt with the report on the Navy Estimates, and gave effect to it during the period that Parliament was adjourned. He believed the same course would be taken now as to the Ordnance Estimates. It was; there- fore, neither just to the House, which had no time to consider the evidence on which the report was founded, nor fair to the Government, who were as ignorant as any Members of the House could be of the proceedings of the Committee, longer to post pone the consideration of these estimates; for he confessed that, as a Member of the Government sitting upon the Committee, he had not thought it to be his duty to report to the Cabinet from day to day what was going on in the Committee, in order that they might keep pace with the proceedings therein.

was of opinion that the question really was whether by a postponement the House could be put in possession of the report and evidence, so as to become fully informed on the subject. But, to obtain due advantage from the labours of the Committee, sufficient time must be afforded to consider not only their recommendations, but the grounds on which these were based. Was it not the more advisable course to take the estimates on the responsibility of the Government, these estimates having been laid before the House, giving the Government an opportunity to avail themselves of the labours of the Committee by considering the report and evidence during the vacation, so that next Session they might be able to state what course they on their responsibility would be prepared to adopt? He agreed with his noble Friend, that reductions to be effectual must be made by the Executive Government after due deliberation. Before Monday, or any early day, they could not consider and digest the evidence, but they would have it in their power, early next Session, to state what were the reductions which, after due deliberation, they thought the circumstances of the country would enable them to adopt.

said, that one question of considerable importance, which had not been touched upon by the noble Lord or the right hon. Gentleman was this, were they to abandon all hope of effecting any reduction in the present year? If they were to be told by Government that notwithstanding the knowledge they possessed of what had been passing in the Committee, they were yet unprepared to adopt any of their suggestions, so as to effect in the current year any reduction of the estimates, then the House would know what conclusions to come to. But he understand that they were not prepared even now to say that they could not effect some reductions in consequence of the recommendations of the Committee. If that were so, and if it were the fact that the recommendations in the report were so clearly and distinctly stated that Government and the House might be able to avail themselves of those excellent suggestions, then he said the case did become rather strong in favour of hon. Members having before them the report at least, in order to be enabled to form a judgment whether they could or could not carry some of those useful suggestions into effect in the course of the present Session. If they could save some money to the public before the Session of 1850, it would be achieving something which would prove a highly satisfactory part of their duty. If, on the other hand, he was told that there was no chance of deriving any benefit from the labours of the Committee in the present year, then he should be disposed to ask himself why the Committee was appointed in the shape in which it had been appointed. In that case they might have taken the estimates early in the Session, and appointed a Committee with reference to future estimates. But the House had been waiting up to this time under the impression that even in the current year they might derive some advantage from the labours of the Committee. So that, taking the case as it was put by the Government, it seemed to be necessary that they should see the report.

said, the right hon. Gentleman had inquired whether they were to abandon all hope of effecting any reductions within the present year? His answer to that was, Certainly not. When the report of the Committee should be seen and considered, it might turn out upon investigation that there were some reductions and changes which might be made in a very short time; but he certainly was astonished that the right hon. Gentleman, with all his knowledge of the mode of carrying on the public business, should expect that on Monday next, there being perhaps a proposal for a reduction of 100,000l. in the service, the Government should at once say that it was prepared to make that reduction without any further consideration. Suppose, for example, a reduction were proposed in stores, he should certainly like to write to Sir T. Hastings before giving any answer to such a proposition. There was another course open to them, and that was to adopt the proposals of the Committee as absolute law. ["No, no!"] Well, if not, he could not see what advantage was to be gained by postponing the estimates from Saturday to Monday. How could the Government in that time make up their minds to any reductions that might be proposed? for, at the present moment, he must observe, that he had no knowledge of one single reduction that the Committee proposed. He was sure if the right hon. Gentleman were himself in the Government, he would scorn such a course, and would say that it was utterly impossible to adopt it.

said, the noble Lord had observed that there was not one single reduction proposed by the Committee of which he was aware. He could inform the noble Lord of some reductions proposed for military works in the colonies. The Committee had unanimously agreed that certain military works in Bermuda, the Mauritius, and the Ionian Islands, should be suspended until the Government should have full time to consider the propriety of continuing those works. If the House read that report they would see that reduction recommended upon such evidence—Earl Grey's and others—that they would insist on the Government postponing these estimates.

thought the right hon. Member for Stamford would agree with him that when once the House had sanctioned the amount of force, the expenditure had so far been determined. With respect to the Ordnance force, the House had already voted the number of men. The other branches of expenditure in that department immediately under control of the Executive Government with reference to economy were only two, stores and new works, which had each two subdivisions, according as they related to stores and new works at home, or stores and new works in the colonies. With respect to stores, it was hardly possible for the Government to come at once to a decision as to what for a peace establishment should be the permanent amount of stores to be maintained; and six months were not too much time to allow the Government to make up their minds on the subject. He had heard the evidence, and he should be sorry if any hasty decision were adopted. It was absolutely necessary that time should be given and taken. So also with respect to that most important and expensive branch, fortifications and works abroad, similar inquiry must be made; and the Committee pointed out different cases in which they thought such inquiry necessary, though it might occupy considerable time. The hon. Member for Southwark had referred to three cases in which the suspension of certain works was recommended till inquiry had been instituted. Nothing could be more reasonable than that the suspension of a vote of 30,000l. on which the Clerk of the Ordnance and a Colleague agreed with the Committee, should be anticipated. To that extent he (Sir J. Graham) should be perfectly willing to go; as he should on other points as they proceeded. But when the number of men had been voted for the year, the inquiry with respect to stores would lead to difficulties; and so with respect to fortifications and works, especially in the colonies, he did not think the report itself would be a safe guide. The value of that report depended on the evidence which it had occupied five months to take, which embraced 10,000 questions, and which involved considerations of extreme intricacy. The Ordnance Estimates were the most difficult to understand of those submitted to Parliament; and they, as well as the Government, would be misled if they came to an immediate decision. They must recollect that, in this matter, they were dealing with the defences of their own country, and of the colonies. He had made up his own mind; but it remained for the Government to consider what objections they had to the propositions of the Committee; and he was perfectly prepared, at the commencement of next Session, to weigh those objections. For the sake of the public service he entreated the House not rashly or prematurely to come to a decision even on those suggestions of the report which recommended an increase in certain cases.

said, the right hon. Baronet had warned the House not to be rash or hasty in making reductions; and for that reason they advocated the postponement of the estimates till Monday. That would surely he less rash than voting them then. Let the House avail itself of the result of the Committee's inquiry; lot hon. Members have the report in their hands, and they would be in a better position to vote the money than when in perfect ignorance of it. It was said the report would not be sufficient without the evidence. He believed very few Members would ever read the evidence; probably not a large number would ever open the book. The report was a digest of the evidence; for the noble Lord the Chairman of the Committee possessed a remarkable talent for giving a lucid summary of a vast mass of evidence. But if it were bad to go to the vote without reading the evidence, it must be still worse to do so without either the report or the evidence. The noble Lord at the head of the Government had placed the House in such a position that it would be impossible for them now to vote on these estimates. He said there were questions involved in the report on which they would be called on to decide; and the hon. Baronet the Member for Southwark said the report recommended the suspension of certain works in foreign stations. The right hon. Baronet the Member for Ripon said he was ready to vote for the suspension of those works; but the right hon. Gentleman was a Member of the Committee—he had for the last five months given these matters the most laborious attention, and had, therefore, great advantage over other hon. Members. If hon. Members would wait till Saturday, and would read the report, they would not only see the recommendations referred to, but the grounds on which they were made. They would see an extract from Earl Grey's evidence on the subject. If hon. Members proceeded now to vote this money, they would proclaim trumpet tongued to the country that which the country strongly suspected, that their voting of money was nothing but a farce, and that the House of Commons, instead of being the guardian of the public purse, was nothing but a screen for the Government.

agreed that the report was most ably drawn up; but as it contained references to the questions, hon. Members ought to be able to refer to the evidence also. He was extremely anxious there should be no further delay in passing these estimates, on account of the inconvenience which would thereby he caused, not only to the Ordnance Department, but to the public service generally. He hoped the hon. Member for Montrose would not persist in his Motion. Any objection that he might make to the votes, he (Col. Anson) was prepared to answer. As to the works at Mauritius, and other places, it would be extremely rash for the Government at once to say they would scratch these items out of the estimates. All they could do was to make the strictest inquiry, and to promote the views of the Committee, if, on due inquiry, they found it desirable to do so.

, in explanation, stated that the report had been finished on Tuesday, sooner than was expected; and he had rather the House had voted these estimates without the report at all, than that the Committee should have been hurried in their report, and it should then not be brought before the House. To avoid any detriment to the public service, if any such could arise by postponing these estimates till Monday, or if money was wanted for paying the men, let the Government take a vote on account.

should support the hon. Member for Montrose, if he pressed his Motion to a division. After this Committee had sat two years, the estimates ought certainly not to be voted, in ignorance of their report. It seemed to him most astonishing that the noble Lord at the head of the Government should be in utter ignorance of the recommendations of the Committee. Even in the absence of the evidence, the report would be some guide in discussing the estimates; and it would be monstrous, after waiting till Thursday, not to wait two days longer.

advocated the proceeding at once to the consideration of the estimates, when hon. Members might take the sense of the Committee on any item to which they objected.

said, if the Committee had been one in hostility to the Government, weight would have attached to the arguments of the noble Lord; but the Committee having been appointed by the Government, being in fact their own, it ought not to be assumed that their recommendations needed watching with so much suspicion. The Government having professed themselves ignorant of the Committee's recommendations, and being responsible for the estimates, they ought certainly to be made acquainted with this report of their own Committee before the estimates were discussed. It was not to be supposed that the House would be entirely led by the report of the Committee; hon. Members would doubtless exercise their own judgment. If the Committee had not suggested any great reductions, there was no harm in seeing the report; if it had, how should they stand with the country in thus slurring over the Committee's recommendations?

said, the essence of the proposal of the hon. Member for Montrose was, that the report being issued on Saturday, the estimates should be dis- cussed, and great reductions made on Monday. Last year the Committee had reported on the Navy Estimates; and this year there had been a reduction of 700,000l. or 800,000l. on those estimates. Such reductions ought always to be proposed after due consideration, not upon forty-eight hours' notice—with a view to the real interests of the country, and not for the sake of a good speech on the hustings.

said, he had never made use of the expression "large reductions to be made immediately." He had only stated, that a great increase had taken place in this department beyond what the resources of the country would justify. In his demand he considered he was reasonable in every point, and that Her Majesty's Government were unreasonable in every point.

said, he must vote against reporting progress. The question was, whether they would enter into those estimates now or on Monday, after the report was printed? They would only vote now, as they would do if the Committee had not sat at all. The report of the Committee referred to recommendations which they suggested should be taken into consideration during the recess, and it was absolutely impossible that they could be carried into practice now. There were only two votes which the Committee recommended to be suspended. With regard to these two, he hoped the Government would attend to the suggestions of the Committee. But with regard to the others, he thought that they might proceed with them now.

did not think the noble Lord at all justified in urging on the vote, when there was other business which might be proceeded with, and when the report of the Committee was not yet in the hands of Members, He hoped the noble Lord would accede to so reasonable a request as the postponement of the vote. If the noble Lord persisted in going on with it, he should move that the Chairman quit the chair.

had postponed this estimate from time to time, in the hope that the report would be presented to the House; but when the middle of July had nearly arrived, he felt it would be impossible for him longer to wait for the report before taking this estimate, and he had accordingly proposed last week to fix Supply for this day. There were, no doubt, thirty-seven orders on the Paper; but, as he had stated last Friday that he would take the Ordnance Estimates to-night, it would not be fair towards those Members who wished to discuss other measures on the Paper, to proceed with them before Supply. He hoped, therefore, the House would go on with the Ordnance Estimates, because, if they delayed doing so to-night, it would prolong the Session for a fortnight beyond the time anticipated for prorogation.

said, there were other estimates which might be taken that night, and, therefore, no time need be lost. He should leave it to the country to judge who was right and who was wrong. What reason was there for pressing forward those estimates before the information contained in the report of the Committee with respect to them was in the possession of hon. Members? A vote had been taken of 100,000l. for barracks; but that was only a third of the charge. He wished to place before the public the enormous expense of barracks, incurred for no other reason than because the Government acted on unconstitutional principles. It was full time that those estimates should be fully inquired into, and he should, therefore, vote in favour of postponing them till the report was in the hands of Members.

wished the hon. Member for Montrose to state whether there was in the report any objection to the vote before the House? If there was, he should vote for postponement.

was glad his hon. Friend had asked the question. He appealed to the right hon. Baronet the Member for Ripon whether he had not in the Committee objected to the great increase in the artillery, and whether the right hon. Baronet had not stated that it was for the House, and not for the Committee, to decide as to the number of men? In 1828 the number of men voted for the artillery was only 8,200; now it was between 14,000 and 15,000.

thought there was something unreasonable in the noble Lord pressing this vote against so respectable a minority as forty-three, many of whom were the usual supporters of Government. He would suggest the adjournment of the debate till Monday. It was true, the noble Lord had given notice that he would take these estimates tonight; but it was before he knew that the report would be so soon laid on the table.

was one of those who voted in the minority; but he was anxious not to offer any vexatious opposition to Her Majesty's Government. He had opposed the appointment of those Committees from the first; but he was now most ready to admit that they had been of great service. That upon the Navy had been conducted with the utmost fairness; and that being the case, their reports were valuable. He was decidedly in favour of postponing the discussion until the report was printed.

admitted that at an earlier period of the Session this would be a fair and reasonable request; but it was the opinion of the Government that without the evidence the House would not be able to form a fair opinion upon the report, the Members of the Committee having been divided. The mere possession of the report would not really and truly give the House any information which would aid it in forming a proper judgment. If a postponement until Monday took place, it would lengthen the Session by a week.

said, that that argument only went to prove that they ought to have the evidence as well as the report before they voted this money. The right hon. Gentleman talked of the Session being prolonged, as if hon. Members were not there to do the business of the country, and to do it properly. If they consented to take the report without the evidence, the Government ought to be the last to find fault with so short a postponement for that purpose. The Government was treating the House as if it were nothing, and saying, in effect, that the five months' labour of the Committee in collecting information was thrown away. Why, deducting the Members of the Government, who could not vote as they pleased, and one or two Members of the late Government, he had a majority in favour of postponement.

said, he would not vote for postponement a second time, feeling that he was bound by the decision to which the House had already come.

said, that the division which had just taken place showed clearly that it was the opinion of the House that they ought to go on with the estimates; and that the great majority of the House was against the vexatious opposition of the hon. Member for Montrose.

said, that the noble Lord had no right to complain of the House dividing. He should be glad to know why they were to pass these estimates in such a hurry? Why were these estimates not brought forward before? Because they were waiting for the report of the Committee. They only asked for a few days to have the report in their hands, and the noble Lord accused them of vexatious obstruction. He was not one of those who thought that this report, when it was laid upon the table of the House, could make any great alteration this year; but he did not think they ought to be called upon to come to a decision upon the estimates until some information, which was upon the table of the House, should be in their possession.

had observed the exultation of some hon. Members when the hon. Member said that the report did not recommend an alteration in the estimates this year. If there was one thing which was more established than another, it was this, that no estimate had ever been altered in the lifetime of any person present after it had been presented to the House. These estimates, when once printed, were always adopted; he never remembered a majority of this House varying an estimate. There had not been a vote since he had been in the House to disturb the items of an estimate. ["Hear, hear!"] He said advisedly that there had never been, during the eight years that he had been in the House, a vote to alter the estimates. With what hope did independent Members discuss them? With the hope that they might bring public opinion to hear upon them. How could they be discussed if there were not facts and figures on which to form a conclusion? To go to this discussion without this report, and to deprive hon. Members of the opportunity of benefiting from the five months' labours of the Committee, was a most monstrous piece of injustice, and most ridiculous management. He would not discuss the estimate; he would rather walk out of the House. If they had not facts or figures, and if they had not the report of the Committee, how could they go into a discussion of the estimates? If it were done purposely to defeat the time and labour of the House, it could not be done more systematically. He had not heard one statement why they should not go into a consideration of the report. He asked the noble Lord to give his reasons. All that the noble Lord had said in the shape of argument was, that they would lose a week, if they did not go into the estimates to night. He apprehended that to lose a week was to save the money of the country. He did not know what the Government were talking of. If any Members ought to give a week more to the Session, the Members who sat on that (the Treasury) bench should do so. He agreed that in a constitutional Government you must be governed by a majority; but there were forms of proceeding by which a minority in a deliberative assembly might be trampled on by brute force and in defiance of reason. If an attempt was made to trample upon him, by the force of a majority, on a question of gaining 24 hours to give time to discuss a question of importance to the country—he said that if ever there was an occasion on which he was justified in using the forms of the House to get delay—and it was only delay that was wanted—that was that occasion. If the hon. Gentleman the Member for Montrose persevered from this time to midnight, and renewed his Motion to-morrow, that the printer might have time to prepare his report, he would go on with his opposition.

The hon. Gentleman said that they were endeavouring to overcome opposition without reason, and by mere brute force. He thought they had given sufficient reasons. There were two important Members of the Committee who gave their reasons—the right hon. Member for Ripon, and the right hon. Member for Northampton—who both stated at some length their reasons, they being Members of the Committee, and having attended carefully to the Committee, being anxious for reduction and economy, that they ought to go into these estimates to-night, and not postpone them till Monday. The only Member who opposed this who had attended much to the Committee was the hon. Member for Yorkshire. The hon. Member for Montrose did not attend.

said, that he attended always until the last three days. The noble Lord was much in error in taking credit for the speeches of his two right hon. Friends. Their reasons were for delay, although their vote was against him. The reasons of the right hon. Gentlemen were such that any hon. Member would have expected that the noble Lord would have come to a different conclusion.

said, that he understood that all were agreed that these votes on the Ordnance Estimates, which were reported against unanimously by the Committee, should be postponed till the report of the Committee was before the House; but the noble Lord said, that if one single vote were postponed until after the report was printed—namely, till Monday next—they could not finish their supply on Friday, and another week was gone. There was no loss of time in postponing all the estimates beyond what would be lost in postponing one. Were they prepared to agree to a vote to-night, against which a Committee had unanimously reported? The right hon. Member for Ripon said, if he understood him correctly, that with regard to these particular votes, he thought there was ground for postponement, but they might go on with the rest. It appeared to him that the House had been proceeding upon something like a misunderstanding, because he was quite sure that the course which the majority of Members were willing to take was to postpone the votes which were reported against by the Committee. If it was not, there was no meaning in the question put by the hon. Member for Paisley. If the Government succeeded, the world would say that it was their generalship that got them through the estimates. It was the interest of all parties to have a useful consideration of the estimates; and he therefore hoped it would not be deemed a factious opposition. The first division showed that there was a large majority of independent Members, nearly all who were present, who were for postponement. He must remind the hon. Member for Surrey, when he said that it was the duty of a minority to submit to a majority, that he must consider how that majority was composed, and ought, therefore, to count all the Members of the Government only for one. If he took that view of the question, he would find that the majority of independent Members of the House were for the postponement of these votes. He did not like to embark in an opposition that was factious, or one which, by being abandoned, showed that it was ill considered when it was commenced; if he embarked in an opposition he was prepared to persevere in it, because he would not have taken the first step without it was founded in reason and justice. Two other divisions were then taken upon Question being put, "That the Chairman do now report progress, and ask leave to sit again:"—Ayes 20; Noes 113: Majority 93;—and Ayes 18; Noes 118: Majority 100.

protested against the course pursued by the Government. There were other estimates, such as the militia, on which no information was expected from the report, and with which the Committee might proceed, if the saving of time was an object. If Government had determined on the course they were now taking, why had they delayed their estimates so long? If they had brought them forward in ordinary course, the House might have discussed them item by item; but they had been delayed for this report, and now it was ready, the House was not to see it. If the Government had not intended to take the House by surprise, they would never have acted in such a manner. Last year they made large reductions without any report, and took credit for so doing, and their altered conduct on the present occasion proved that the economical course was to be followed no longer. He held in his hand a statement of the expenses of 1825, 1835, and 1848, and it afforded such a frightful picture of increase as fully to justify the House in refusing to pass the present estimates without the most ample discussion. He should be glad to see Gentlemen on that (the Ministerial) side transferred to the other. When there before they had supported him for six weeks against the Army Estimates, and none more strenuously than the noble Lord the present Secretary for Foreign Affairs. Why, in the worst of the boroughmongering times such a proceeding as the present could not have taken place. There were no estimates more requiring investigation than the Ordnance Votes—three millions of money to be taken from the public without inquiry! Again he protested against the course of the Government. All he asked was, that they might take the unopposed votes, and postpone the others until Monday. The House was not aware of the necessity there was for inquiry respecting the Ordnance. The Board acted merely as a blind to deceive the public. People might suppose that they consulted together; but the fact was, that each Member was uncontrolled in his own department, and expended the public money without any interference from his coadjutors. To expose this and other abuses, the time of hon. Members had been consumed; and the Committee, instead of touching the Army, had confined their inquiries to the Ordnance Estimates, and had ferretted out the whole system. They had prepared a report; but now, when the subject-matter of their inquiries came before the House, the report was not to be produced. It was not fair to the Committee, to him, or the House, to press on these estimates with such unseemly haste, and with such a determination to prevent any discussion likely to result in economy. The Ordnance Estimates rose from 1,035,000l. in 1835, to 3,078,000l. in 1849. Was not that a subject to be inquired into? He appealed to the noble Lord once more to give the House and the public time to examine these estimates and the report of the Committee, which, if time were given, they would, after this discussion, examine more closely than they had any other report. It was not he who was acting a factious part, it was the noble Lord, who persisted in refusing an opportunity of fairly examining these estimates. He felt bound to move that the Chairman now report progress.

did not think that the hon. Member for Montrose was taking the best mode of accomplishing the object he had in view. He had much rather that they had been allowed time to consider the report before being asked to come to a decision on the estimates; but he did not think that this constant distrust of the Government ought to be shown, especially as it was admitted that they had readily consented to the appointment of the Committee of Inquiry. He was disposed to give the Government credit for a desire to make retrenchments. If they voted the money, it did not follow that they were obliged to spend it. He had always voted for retrenchment; but he believed, in the present case, no good would result from delaying the Committee of Supply.

deprecated these fruitless divisions, and suggested that the hon. Gentleman the Member for Montrose, if he felt so strongly on the matter, should leave the House, and so protest against a course which he found he could not prevent.

confessed that the speeches of those hon. Members who had spoken in favour of the Government were not sufficient to induce him to vote against the Motion of the hon. Member for Montrose. The hon. Member for Salford was a firm ally of the Government, and sometimes he appeared in danger of forgetting the large number of persons he represented down in Lancashire. Personal partialities influenced many hon. Members at times, and those partialities at present seemed to have their effect upon the hon. Member for Salford. The case before the House was a very simple one. The Ordnance Estimates had been postponed for five months, and now the Government were refusing the delay of a day or two in order that the report might be printed and circulated. Now, he would ask the noble Lord at the head of the Government to recollect that within the last fortnight he had granted two days for the discussion of the hon. Member for Buckinghamshire's Motion on the state of the nation, and that there had been some evenings during the Session entirely lost. He believed that there had been less obstruction offered to Her Majesty's Government in the present Session than since the Government had assumed the reins of office. Take the debates. There had been a debate on the Motion of the hon. Member for the West Riding for going back to the expenditure of 1835. It was not discussed for more than a night, because the free-traders were desirous of not throwing any obstacle in the way of the Administration. Then, there was the Motion of the hon. Member for Montrose, for the reform of Parliament, which was also discussed only for a single night. The Irish Church question had also occupied only one night, and he, though anxious to address the House upon that subject, had forborne from offering any observations, simply in order to save time. He was fully justified, therefore, in asserting broadly that the Government had not, during the present Session, received obstructions from any section of the House. He feared hon. Members were too much in the habit of forgetting, when the estimates were before them, what an important item the voting of money was, and that they were sent there for the express purpose of seeing that the public funds were not voted away, without proper consideration, and that no more money was voted than was absolutely required. Now, they had had a most laborious Committee sitting for several months, presided over by a noble Lord, and they had made a report containing certain recommendations. What reason was there for allowing these recommendations to lie over for twelve months? The hon. Member for Salford seemed to think that if money was voted, it did not necessarily follow that it must therefore be spent. But he (Mr. Bright) was very much afraid that, if voted, it would be spent. He was also afraid that the noble Lord at the head of the Government would consider the present opposition as rather personal, particularly as he had already spoken of the opposition speeches as something in the nature of hustings' addresses. The noble Lord had some time since declared that those who knew a deal about the trade of the country were too narrow-minded to consider matters fairly which related to a great empire. If some hon. Members were too narrow-minded, it was a great pity they were in the House; but it did so happen that people in various parts of this country were of opinion that these narrow-minded persons should be in the House to defend the public interests, and to express the public opinions. But were men to be considered narrow-minded because on some occasions they considered their propositions quite as good as those of the noble Lord? He hoped the noble Lord would permit the report to be printed, and hereafter considered, assured that not a single objection would be made to the estimates which was not absolutely necessary, and which could not be defended on the strongest ground.

said, he had been for some time one of the constituents of the hon. Member for Salford, and that the general opinion in Salford was that he was an independent and consistent Member. He (Mr. Heywood) was in favour of retrenchment in the Ordnance Estimates, and he was sure the Government would attend to the recommendations of the Committee to reduce them.

said, that they were beside the question in introducing personalities. The hon. Member for Manchester had spoken in a kindly spirit to the Government and the hon. Member for Salford; and now he (Mr. Cobden) desired to recall attention to this point. They were going to vote 2,600,000l. with a report lying on the table; and the noble Lord at the head of the Government had distinctly stated that notwithstanding the recommendations contained in that report, he intended to take a vote for the money at once. How could the House judge whether the noble Lord was right in withdrawing money from the fortifications at Corfu without having the report printed? The sum of 456,000l. had been voted for Corfu since the Peace. The report states that according to Earl Grey, the works should never have been undertaken until the question was reconsidered. [Cheers.] The right hon. Baronet the Member for Ripon cheered him; but did he suppose that the Government had, in the words of the report, "reconsidered the subject?" Or were they to believe that the Government was likely to stop this expenditure? He denied that there had been any recommendation to stop those fortifications; and independent Members of that House should not trust the report of the Committee, but should read and consider for themselves. The most important item was that of stores. They had a stock of upwards of 6,000,000l. of ordnance stores here and in our colonies. The Committee, on the last day of meeting, recommended unanimously that the number of depots should be diminished, and that the expense of them should be saved by profiting by the present means of communication. Was it not right, therefore, that they should know the meaning of this report before they were forced to vote this money?

said, that as the hon. Member for the West Riding had referred to the Ionian Islands, he (Colonel Anson) must just point out to the House the very gross misrepresentation that he had made with respect to the money spent upon them. The total of the estimates for new works, Ordnance works, building and repairing barracks, &c., was undoubtedly 476,000l.; but the hon. Gentleman had concealed from the House that of that amount the Ionian Islands were to pay 332,316l., so that the actual charge to this country would be about 148,684l. The hon. Member for Montrose had challenged various statements which he (Colonel Anson) had made; in reply he would merely say that that hon. Gentleman's assertions were as erroneous as that of the hon. Member for the West Riding. Instead of the estimates for the year 1835 being only 1,035,000l., as the hon. Member for Montrose had stated, they were 1,497,000l.—and, instead of his (Colonel Anson's) asking this year for 3,000,000l. for the Ordnance Estimates, he only asked for 2,600,000l.

asked whether what he said was not that 450,000l. had been voted by that House? [Colonel ANSON: It was.] Then by what possible pretence did the hon. and gallant Member charge him with misrepresenting? The House of Commons voted that sum, and called on the Ionian Islands to pay their share. They even had it in evidence that there were arrears due by the Ionian Islands which would never be paid.

wished to know whether on a question of fortification the authority of a civilian could be put in competition with that of the most intelligent engineers serving under the British Queen. Neither the past nor the present Government had exacted from the Ionians the full amount that had been expended in fortifications, &c, in that country; they owed this country not less than 125,000l. He wished to point out to the House a very great inconvenience with regard to these estimates, which might be very easily avoided. A colony, for instance, might require a vote of 7,000l.; but when the vote came to be submitted to the Home Government, it might be reduced 4,500l. Not a shilling of that money was allowed to be expended until the colony was informed that the vote had received the sanction of Parliament. If Parliament sanctioned the expenditure of the money in the month of April instead of July, as at present, the works could be proceeded with three months earlier, and other great advantages would accrue to the colonies and to the mother country. He hoped that the report would be presented to-morrow, or Saturday, and that the consideration of estimates might be allowed to stand over until Monday next.

Mr. Bernal, I cannot allow this debate to close after the imputations which have been cast upon me by the hon. Gentleman the Member for Manchester, without making a few observations. The hon. Gentleman is exceedingly dissatisfied, it appears, with the hon. Member for Salford, because he says he speaks in a kindly manner of everybody, and is disposed to place confidence in the Government when they make statements in the House. Having postponed the matter until this time, I thought it was quite impossible fairly to consider the report of the Committee at present, and I proposed that the Ordnance Estimates should be taken; upon which the hon. Member for Manchester said that I must have a dishonest motive in so doing; and that my intention is to prevent the House of Commons from having the report in their hands, and fairly considering the recommendations of the Committee. Why, certainly, if in making my suggestions as to the course to be pursued on this question, I was influenced by a dishonest motive, I should be fairly liable to the imputation of acting in total disregard of my duty. But I certainly had not taken a very skilful mode of carrying out any dishonest intentions on this subject, because it would have been much easier to have said in the month of May or Juno, we had better not wait any longer, and the House could scarcely have refused to listen to that argument. But because I have postponed till the month of July to ask for this report, the hon. Gentleman makes these imputations against me, which I totally deny. I deny that I have acted so corruptly With respect to the dispute which has lasted all this night, the question simply turned on what the hon. Gentleman the Member for Montrose said as to the Committee deriving great advantage from having the report of the Select Committee before them; but we, on the other hand, contended that as that report could not be in the hands of Members till Saturday, the very short time intervening between the sitting of the House on Saturday and Monday—the report being voluminous—would not enable the House to gain sufficient information on the subject; and therefore it would be better not to discuss the various items, or to enter into any very large question of the reduction of the estimates till next year. Now I cannot say at present whether the hon. Member for Montrose was right, or whether we were right on that subject; but it did seem to me that it was a question that might be discussed between us without any personalities—and I should have thought it might be discussed without having resort to those very frequent divisions of the House which have already taken place. I was likewise fortified in the course I took by the opinion of two right hon. Gentlemen, Members of the Committee, who were known to have taken particular interest in these questions of reduction, who were well aware of the claims of the public service, and of the demands of economy, but who thought that the course that the Government took was a proper one for the House to adopt. I, therefore, think that I was fully justified in the course that I proposed to take. The hon. Gentleman the Member for Manchester seems to have supposed that I have made a charge against Members of the House generally, or against those with whom be acts, of having opposed obstructions in the way of public business during the present Session. Now, I made no such charge, and no such imputation against the Members of this House, or against any party. On the contrary, I am glad to be able to acknowledge that I think throughout the Session the Members of this House have shown a disposition to transact fairly the business before them, and that when certain business has been fixed by the Government for certain days, they have generally proceeded to consider that business with a view to expedite it. Therefore, I made no such imputation as the hon. Gentleman supposes. With regard to the Motion that now stands for to-night, I think that we have been right in the course that we have proposed, and that it is impossible, at this hour of the night—having taken up, in debates and divisions, the whole of the evening—to suppose that we could proceed with any effect with the consideration of the Ordnance Estimates tonight. Nor do I think that we should be able to go through the Ordnance Estimates, and the other estimates, in the course of to-morrow evening; therefore, I propose that we shall now report progress, and that we take the British Museum Es mates, and other estimates, to-morrow; and I shall propose to take the Ordnance Estimates on Monday. And I trust that the Committee will fairly consider those estimates, and avoid all unnecessary delay. We shall then be ready, as we were to- night, to state our views with respect to them.

disclaimed any factious opposition in the course he had pursued, and said he should regret if any thing personal had fallen from any hon. Member in the course of the debate.