topics, but with no little ingenuity had
left out of his consideration altogether the
What did his right
utility of this office.
hon. friend's speech consist of?-an in-
troduction of the four Finance reports-
an account of pensions and superannua-
tions,-an eulogium on the noble Duke at
the head of the Government, in the justice
of which he fully concurred-a panegyric
on the gallant feats of those distinguished
officers who held this office in the Ord-
nance, or to whom it was offered, and a
dissertation on the advantages of a united
cabinet.

return to the point from which his atten- | tion had been for a moment diverted: it had been said that this office was filled by men of great family and much parliamentary influence; but he thought it was rather a subject of congratulation that the best blood of England should have been shed in those fields of glory where its honour had been so bravely asserted; and if such men had so distinguished themselves, was the fact of their connexion with high and noble families to deprive them of their well-earned reward? Miserable, indeed, would be the fate of those hon. and gallant officers, if, after all their great services, his noble friend at the head of the Government were to say to such men as Lord Hopetoun, Lord Hill, Lord Somerset, and those others of his gallant companions in arms,--" "Tis true you have distinguished yourself by most heroic efforts in the service of your country, 'tis true you have, in times of peril, appeared as the intrepid assertors of her honour, 'tis true you are entitled to reward, and are eminently qualified to be placed in a situation where your country may derive still farther benefit by your military skill, but it is also true, that you are descended from great families, connected with much parliamentary influence, and I must not recommend you to an office of which you are every way so worthy, lest I should incur a sneer at having made the recommendation with a view to that influence." Such language would be unworthy of his noble friend, and unworthy of the country in whose ser-lington on this question. He (Mr. Grant) vice he and his gallant companions so honourably distinguished themselves. In conclusion, the right hon. Gentleman expressed a hope that the vote of that night would not have the effect of declaring that this office was kept, not as a reward for military merit, and he had not put it on that ground, but was retained for the purpose of the influence which might be gained by a single vote.

Mr. C. Grant said, that his right hon. friend (Mr. Peel) had himself fallen into the error of which he had accused his hon friend the Member for Cumberland, who brought forward this Motion. In the speech with which he had just favoured the House, his right hon. friend had drawn their attention to any thing rather than to the particular question on which they were to be called upon to vote. His right hon. friend had mixed up a great variety of

But if his right hon. friend found a united government so necessary as to feel warranted in dismissing a gallant officer from his situation, for an expression of an opinion opposed to that Government on one great measure, why had certain persons in civil situations been allowed to remain to struggle against that measure? He admitted the great and valuable services of those distinguished officers whose names had been mentioned in connexion with this situation; but he must say, that those illustrious names had not been fairly dealt with in coupling them with a useless place, and in exposing them to some share of the obloquy which must reflect on them from a connexion with such an office. He must protest against the tone which had been assumed in the course of this debate (he did not say by his right hon. friend, Mr. Peel), as if it were a matter of extravagant presumption in any man whose brows were not covered with laurels to dispute the authority of the Duke of Wel

had a very high respect for the authority of the noble Duke, and also for that of the hon. and gallant Secretary at War, but the House was called upon, in this case, to act for itself, and should not be influenced by the dictum of any man, however deservedly high his character. The noble Duke at the head of the Government could not do otherwise than submit the matter for the opinion of the House, and he hoped that opinion would be pronounced in resistance to that tone in which the House was addressed on the subject. It was in evidence before them, and no man had pretended to controvert the fact, that the business of the Ordnance might be performed by one assiduous person.

No doubt a Lieutenant-general was found useful when the head of the office was absent-when, for instance, the Duke of Marlborough was at Blenheim-when

country. It had forced considerable reductions of taxation on the Government; would it not be strange then, particularly after the memorable vote of Friday evening, that it should now refuse to do its duty where a similar principle was involved? Let him also remind the Members that they were in a short time to have under their consideration the superannuation. If, in the discharge of their duty, they should feel obliged to press hard upon a very valuable set of public servants,the clerks in public departments,—would it not be inconsistent to allow themselves on this night to be defeated by the influence which the Lieutenant-general of the Ordnance could throw round him. He called upon the House, therefore, not to nullify the vote which it had come to the other evening, but to follow up the career which it had then commenced.

He

Lord Cornwallis was acting as Lord Lieu- | able impression in the good opinion of the tenant of Ireland-the attention of a L'eutenant-general was required, and found very useful in the absence of the principal; and at the very time when the office was offered to Lord Hopetoun, the noble Duke at the head of the office was engaged on an important diplomatic mission abroad. They had, then, the authority of the Finance Committee, supported by that of the Military Commission of 1822, for saying that one person could discharge the business of the office; but they had, in addition, this important fact, that for fourteen months the gallant officer who held the office of Lieutenant-general, was engaged in the command of the army at Lisbon. What became during this time of that vast detail of important business which the Lieutenant was daily to superintend-of the thousands of pensions to be paid-of the 3,000 or 4,000 persons at Woolwich, and other places, whom he was obliged to know personally, and to be in daily communication with? What became of all these during that long period of absence? Why to vote, after these facts, that the office of Lieutenant-general of the Ordnance was necessary, would be as much in the face of common sense, and against the evidence of facts, as was the resolution which voted that a 17. note and 1s. were equal in value to a golden guinea, at a moment when every man in the country was convinced of the reverse. His right hon. friend had maintained, that the hon. Baronet's reference to the state of the country had nothing to do with the question. He was of a different opinion. He thought the state of the country gave great urgency to the necessity of adopting the hon. Baronet's proposition. The subject derived its importance, not from its nominal amount, but from the present situation of the country. They had heard much of public opinion. Never was there a time when it was more fully brought to bear upon that House. Such was the diffusion of knowledge, and the communication of intelligence, that scarcely was any vote of importance carried in that House, when it was discussed and canvassed in every part of the country,-not merely amongst the higher and those who were usually termed the enlightened, but amongst the lower and now not less enlightened classes of the community. But beyond this the House had already made for itself a favour

Colonel Wood contended, that his right hon. friend who spoke last had not proved that this office was unnecessary. complained of the right hon. the Secretary of State diverging from the subject before the House, but he had done the same thing himself. His right hon. friend, with many other Members, laid great stress upon the opinion of the Finance Committee, but as the evidence taken before that Committee had been printed, he could not see why the House at large was not as capable of forming a judgment on that evidence as the twenty-one hon. Members of whom the Committee had been composed. Now it should be recollected, that when this question was formerly brought under the consideration of the House, there was a majority of above 200 Members against a minority of about 92, negativing the recommendation of the Committee. Let it also be remarked, that that decision was come to the year before last. It was natural to suppose, therefore, that its justice was acquiesced in, as the hon. Member for Montrose would certainly not have passed it over last year, when the Estimates were under consideration. Indeed, the hon. Baronet, in bringing forward his present proposition, was, in his opinion, rather poaching upon the hon. Member for Montrose's manor. As to the distress on which so much had been said, he believed it was in a great measure going away. At that hour he would not open a new subject, but he would name one place highly interesting to the agricultural com

of the public. He would only allude to
one more topic. It had been said, that
he had cast slurs upon the Duke of Wel-
lington. He disclaimed the imputation,
and he only regretted that in every mea-
sure, as in that of the measure of Irish
pacification, he could not give the Govern-
ment of which the noble Duke was at the
head his cordial support. He repeated,
that he liked a strong government; but
for the government to be strong it must
pay deference to public opinion, and most
especially it must reform those abuses that
were connected with corrupt parliamentary
influence. He warned them that the time
was shortly coming when, if they did not
do their duty, the people would see abuses,
and would see nothing else: those abuses
they would correct, and it was notorious
that their correction was not always of
the sort which prudent men would most
desire; for of them it had been said, and
he believed not without reason, that ".
"they
abated the nuisance, but they pulled down
the House"

Mr. Peel utterly disclaimed having cheered any observation which tended to reflect on Gentlemen on the opposite side of the House for not having brought for

year given to the Government in a great | 1828, so as fully to justify this reduction, measure of liberality and pacification-a without the least danger to the interests support given when its usual supporters had left it, and when it became in consequence weak, nay powerless-he was sorry, he repeated, to imagine that this generous support had been turned against those who bestowed it, or that because the Members on that side of the House had forborne this Motion, that they were, by those whom they had supported, now to be taunted with their forbearance. It was, he confessed, a fact he was sorry to have witnessed, and he was glad to find that he had been in error, and that his allusion to it had afforded the right hon. Gentleman the opportunity of denying it. But to return to the cheer he had given respecting the punishment of General Clinton. It had been said, that they on that side of the House liked an united government. For himself, he did like it, and in that respect he differed from the hon. Member for Westminster, who seemed to like weak governments; and could he find a government that acted upon principles such as he deemed calculated to secure the happiness and prosperity of the people, he should give it his cordial, his generous, and universal support. But while he and those around him liked an united government, they liked also a go-ward this Motion last year. vernment that acted with boldness and with justice. He was sorry to say that was not the case with the present Government. They had cashiered General Clinton, because he had not voted on a certain question-they had cashiered the AttorneyGeneral, whose conduct was candid and manly; but they had overlooked the offences of others, because these latter offenders were powerfully connected. He would not disguise his meaning; it was his habit to speak out fairly, and he would at once state that he meant the Chief Commissioner of the Woods and Forests, the Judge Advocate, and the Secretary to the Board of Control. All had been more active than General Clinton, and fully as active as the Attorney-General, in their opposition to the measure then troduced, but they were not dismissed, or, if they were, had been afterwards readmitted to form a part, aye, and an essential part too, of his Majesty's Government. Upon the present question, one of his arguments was quite unanswered. The constitution of the Board of Ordnance had been changed since

in

Sir H. Hardinge denied that the constitution of the Board of Ordnance had been altered since 1828. The number of military officers belonging to it was the same now as before that period.

The House then divided, when there appeared-Against the Amendment 200; in its favour 124-Majority in favour of Ministers 76. The Resolution was then agreed to.

List of the Minority.

Althorp, Lord
Attwood, M.
Burrell, Sir C.
Burrell, W.

Baring, Sir T., Bart.
Baring, W. B.
Baring, F.
Beaumont, F. W.
Blandford, Marquis
Buck, L.
Benett, J.

Bernal, R.
Burdett, Sir F.
Brownlow, C.

Bentinck, Lord G.
Birch, J.
Bright, H.

Buxton, J. J.
Buxton, T. F.
Bankes, H.
Cave, O.
Cavendish, W.

Carter, J.

Calthorpe, Hon. A.

Canning, Rt. Hon. S.

Calvert, N.

Clifton, Lord

Colborne, N. R.

Davenport, E. D.

Clive, E.

Davies, Colonel

Dawson, A.

Denison, W. J.

Denison, J. E.