had hitherto regulated its colonial policy. The effect of that principle was, in compensation for a monopoly of commerce, to maintain the civil and military establishments of the colonies. Whenever this branch of the subject should be brought forward, he trusted he should be able to show, that this system of retaining in our own hands the sources of commercial profit, was justified by sound policy, and ought not rashly to be abandoned. Another important point to which the honourable gentleman had adverted, was a supposed misappropriation of certain colonial revenues in Ceylon, the Mauritius, the Cape of Good Hope, and the Ionian islands. With regard to those belonging to the latter, the government of this country had no more control over them, than over those of a sovereign and independent state. The management of their finances had been secured to them by treaty, on condition only that the garrisons were to be supported. The reason why no deduction was made for the staff appointments in that quarter might be readily assigned. If there was any honourable member in the house who had at all turned his attention to the recent history of those islands, to the political changes they had undergone, and the successive spoliations which had been inflicted upon them, he must be fully aware of the state of want and destitution to which the inhabitants were reduced. This distress had been much aggravated, by the want of integrity in the conduct of persons to whom the financial administration had been intrusted. Amidst these unfavourable circumstances, some delay in raising the necessary revenues had taken place; but it was the anxious desire of the government to extricate itself from this difficulty, and its first object the maintenance of the mili

VOL. XII. PART I.

tary establishment. He could assure the house that there was no disposition on the part of his Majesty's Government to withhold any information which might be deemed conducive to a clear understanding of the subject; and that whenever a motion for such information should be made, he should be ready, not only to produce the documents required, but to enter into a detailed account of the whole system of our colonial administration.

Mr Hume, in explanation, denied that he had imputed blame to the Government; he had merely asserted that it was in the power of the Crown to make an improper application of the funds in question. It ap peared by a return before the house, that in 1815 the revenues of Malta were L. 114,000, and the whole charge upon them but L. 60,000; that there was a clear balance of L. 20,000 in the Ionian islands; and that in the Mauritius the amount of revenue was L. 266,000; that of the expenditure L. 219,000.

Mr Goulburn having remarked that there were many charges and allowances not included in these returns, L. 139,333 were reported for the public departments, and agreed to; as also L. 21,635 for medicines, and L.100,000 for volunteer corps, together with the several other sums voted in the committee.

On the 2d of June Sir G. Warrender laid before the house the Estimates for the Naval Service of the year. In laying these papers on the table, he said he conceived it to be incumbent on him, after the luminous exposition of all the details of this subject in the last report of the Finance Committee, to wait till he had heard such remarks as might be called forth, rather than occupy the time of the house with any preliminary observations. It would be un

F

justifiable in him to pursue any other course, and he should therefore content himself for the present, with assuring the house, that the navy never had been, with reference to its extent, in a state of greater efficiency than at this moment. He then moved that the sum of L.2,483,313: 12: 6 be voted for the ordinary establishment of the navy.

Mr Calcraft wished to draw the attention of the house on this occasion to the subject of the Naval Asylum, for suppressing which, in conformity to the recommendations of the committee, he could not conceive any reasonable cause. He knew of no institution more deserving of support, or the maintenance of which was more in unison with the general feelings of the country. There was no mention made of giving up our military colleges or asylums, but all the economy of his Majesty's Ministers was reserved for our naval establishment. The whole number of men retained for manning our fleets was 20,000, of whom 6,000 were marines. If they looked back to former periods, it would be seen that there never had been such a disproportion between our military and naval force. We had at present an army composed of 100,000 men, and a navy of 14,000. It seemed as if we had adopted a new principle of national policy as if our defence was in future to be intrusted to our land forces, and the wooden walls were no longer to be looked upon as our best bulwark. Examining the relative advantages of the two services, it could not be denied that an equal degree of encouragement and support had not been extended to the

naval branch.

With regard to the Naval Asylum, Sir G. Warrender said, that it was clear that there was no present intention of abolishing it, as the ex

pence of its maintenance was included in the vote immediately under consideration. The system upon which it was conducted might require modification, and admit of some reduction of expence; but he could assure the honourable gentleman that there was no disposition to put it down. Upon the subject of the extent of our naval establishment, it was considered adequate to the exigencies of the country, by those who were responsible for it; and it might, in the event of war, be speedily equipped in a force and efficiency that had not been surpassed. It had been compared to the state of our army; but it should be recollected that a navy was much sooner restored than an army, that the circumstances of Europe had been greatly altered, and that every country had, in a great measure, given up its fleets. The pensions which had been allowed, and the liberal grants for making secure road-steads, greatly increased the facility of extending at any time our naval establishment, and he could, therefore, see no reasonable foundation for complaining that it had been too much reduced.

Sir M. W. Ridley agreed with the honourable Baronet that the responsibility of the naval administration rested with the Lords of the Admiralty, and he rejoiced to find that no part of it was to be imposed on the Finance Committee. The Naval Asylum was an institution of the utmost importance; and if any expence, in our present embarrassments, could be justified, it was in this particular case. No objection had been raised by the Finance Committee to the Military Asylum, the annual expence of which was L.39,000. He should be the last man to refuse any measure of fair or necessary taxation; but he would protest against voting a single

shilling till reduction had been carried to the furthest point compatible with justice and the public security. It was clear to him, that a reduction of the number of Lords of the Admiralty ought to be made, and that one secretary might now be able to discharge the business of that office. The long absence of the honourable gentleman opposite (Mr Croker) proved that it was not necessary that a Secretary of the Admiralty should be in Parliament. He should now conclude by moving, as an amendment, that the amount of the proposed grant should be L. 2,283,313. 12s. 6d., being a diminution of the sum originally proposed, to the extent of L.200,000.

Mr F. Douglas, in adverting to the present number of Lords of the Admiralty, remarked, that the late vote of the house on that subject, (March 18th,) had been obtained in a great measure by the astonishment excited by the declaration of the gallant admiral opposite, (Sir G. Cockburn,) that the office of the two lay lords was by no means a sinecure. The house, however, had now a right to consider the propriety of abolishing these two offices, as a measure of retrenchment, before they entered into the general question of the amount to be voted. The house had been told the public officers should have some relaxation from their duties; and the honourable Secretary of the Admiralty had said that the two lay lords had always been continued in former times, in peace as well as in war. This was all very well; and a reference to the practice of former times would be to the point, if the honourable gentleman could produce an example of the country being, at any former time, so oppressed with burdens as it was at present. He would now call on the gallant admiral (Sir George Cockburn,) whose public and professional character

stood so high, to come forward, and say, on the credit of that character, that the services of these two Lords of the Admiralty were necessary to the country. The worthy Baronet who had moved these estimates had pleaded the sanction of the Committee of Finance, which he had hoped had been already sufficiently damned in the opinion of the country. The first reduction which they had proposed ought to have been the very last. Considering the objects for which the Naval Asylum was originally instituted, he was fully warranted in saying, that the supporting of that institution would be productive of more good to the country, than it was likely to derive from the services of two junior Lords of the Admiralty.

It was

Sir G. Cockburn said, that as he had been called on, in so personal a manner, he had no hesitation in stating, and in staking his private as well as his public character on the statement, that it was necessary for the safety of the country that the Admiralty-board should remain constituted as it was at present. his firm conviction that the board could not be better constituted than it then was; and that if the house reduced it, they would deprive the country of the benefit which was at present derived from it. With regard to the argument which had been urged against the reduction of our naval establishment at present, when it was alleged that employment could not be found for our seamen, the fact was, that seamen could not be procured to man the ships which were at that moment in commission. This was a sufficient proof that there was no distress among seamen for want of employment.

The house then divided, when the amendment was negatived by a majority of 67, and the original resolution put and carried.

The Chairman having proposed

the second resolution, namely, that the sum of L.1,631,628 be voted for defraying the expence of building, rebuilding, and repairing, ships of war, wear and tear, and various extra works; Mr Hume said, that taking it for granted, on the word of the honourable Baronet, that the report of the Finance Committee was to be considered his speech on the grant before the house, he should beg to know, whether it was intended to adopt the suggestion of the committee respecting the Naval Asylum. He thought the house should not vote this grant till estimates of all the naval works had been produced. The committee had voted L.15,000 for the works in Harlbowline Island, and in that case there was an estimate of the expence; but they had also voted L.20,000 for Bermuda, L.15,000 forJamaica, and L.20,000 for Trincomalee, although they had no estimates of the sums that would be required to complete the works in those islands. He would suggest that the amount of these votes be deducted from the grant, till the estimates of the expence were laid before the house. He should also like to know whether the grant to the Board of Longitude was intended for the present occasion, or was it to be an annual vote? He certainly thought that reductions should be made rather in the army than in the navy estimates; but at the same time he hoped that his Majesty's Ministers would attend to the suggestions of the committee, and carry into effect all the reductions recommended, whether in the army or in the navy. He repeated, that the house would do well to reduce every salary that had increased since 1797, to the scale of that day; and in that case, he would venture to say, that no additional taxes would be necessary. He concluded by proposing, as an amendment to the reso

lution, that the sum of L.65,000, being the allowance for works in Bermuda, Jamaica, and Trincomalee, be deducted from the proposed grant.

Mr Croker said, that last year and the year before it had been recommended and acceded to, that no new works should be commenced till the estimates were submitted to the House; and that, accordingly, no new works had been commenced. The works alluded to by the honourable gentleman had been in progress for years. The same objection might indeed have been made to the sum proposed for building ships at Malta. The expences of completing all those works were unknown, and no estimate could therefore have been submitted. He should be sorry that such a motion as that of the honourable gentleman should be carried, as no works were so important to the country as those to which it referred. It would be in the highest degree detrimental, if the utmost extent proposed for those works should not be attained. If the honourable gentleman should be in Parliament when the works should happen to be finished, he would do right then to ask for an explanation as to the amount of the expences. The expences were, however, less this year than usual. This was the proper course: small sums were laid out in several places, and works were thus continued in progress, and greater expences could afterwards be allowed to finish them. As to the question respecting the sum voted to the Longitude-board, he would observe, that L. 10,000 had been formerly voted, and now it was only L.4,000. None of the navy estimates was less objectionable, or would have every farthing of its amount more usefully expended. The honourable gentlemen must be aware that the Naval Asylum had been originally established by private chari

ty, and that Government expended L.100,000 upon it, having taken the charity and the money also into their own hands.

The amendment, that the sum should be L.1,576,000, was then negatived without a division, the original motion for the sum of L.1,631,000 agreed to, and the sum of L.419,319 for provisions for troops and garrisons on foreign stations, voted without any remark.

The sum of L.486,198 being moved for towards improvements in the yards, &c. Sir M. W. Ridley said, that the excess of money expended on many of these works, beyond the original estimate, required explanation. For the works at Deptford, the original estimate was L. 34,468. Last year L.27,000 had been voted, and now L. 27,000 were asked, making together L. 54,000, which exceeded the estimate by nearly L.20,000. The expences for repairing the wharf wall at Woolwich had been estimated at L. 39,000. The expences required last year had been stated as uncertain, but amounted to L.25,000. The estimated expences still necessary were now stated at L. 26,450, of which L. 13,000 were asked by the present motion. Here again was an addition of L. 12,000. A similar excess was charged for the works at Sheerness. The original estimate had been L.754,600. In the year 1818, L. 433,800, had been voted. The sum estimated to be still necessary was L. 553,800 of which L.170,000 were asked in the present motion. Here again was an excess of L.233,000 beyond the original estimate. In Plymouth, and at all the works, the same excess was to be found beyond the original estimate.

Mr Croker admitted that some explanation was required, and he trusted that he was able to give that explanation, so as to make any expla

At

nation in future unnecessary. Deptford the foundations of the wall were found to be a great deal worse than had been supposed, and it was therefore judged much better to build a new wall than to patch up the old, which had stood for more than a century. The works at Sheerness, which were of vast importance, were of such a nature that no accurate estimates could have been formed. Unless the honourable Baronet had had a personal inspection of the works, it was impossible for him to understand the nature of the difficulty. The nature of the ground was such as rendered it impossible to calculate the expences. With respect to the works at Woolwich, he had to say that L.20,000 had usually been voted for removing the mud from Woolwich-yard. It was thought that by changing the course of the river this sum might be saved. The channel of the river was now actually deeper than it had ever been.

The sum was then voted, as also L. 284,321 for the Transport Depart

ment.