Commons Sitting of 22 March 1847

MINUTES.
NEW WRIT. For the Eastern Division of Somerset, v. Colonel Gore Langton, deceased.
NEW MEMBER SWORN. For Lewes, Robert Perfect, Esq.
PUBLIC BILLS.—2° Array Service.
Reported.—Prisons; Custody of Offenders.
3° General Register House (Edinburgh).
PETITIONS PRESENTED. By Mr. L. Bruges, from Melksham, for Better Observance of the Lord's Day.—By Mr. Hume, from Hanover (Jamaica), for the Abolition of Commercial Restrictions.—By Mr. Brotherton and other Hon. Members, from several places, against the Use of Grain in Breweries and Distilleries.—By Mr. Gaskell and other Hon. Members, from several places, in Favour of the Rating of Tenements (No. 2) Bill.—By Mr. Ferrand,

263
from Shipley, for Repeal of the Anatomy Act.—By Mr. Bright and other Hon. Members, from a great many places, against the Government Scheme of Education.—By Colonel Mure, from Paisley, and Mr. F. Scott, from Selkirk, against the Marriage (Scotland) Bill.—By Sir W. Clay, from London, for an Efficient Poor Law (Ireland).—By Mr. Blake and other Hon. Members, from several places, for Alteration of the Poor Relief (Ireland) Bill.—By Mr. Sotheron, from Guardians of the Swindon Union, and Mr. Trotter, from West Clandon (Surrey), for Repeal or Alteration of the Poor Removal Act.—By Mr. E. Ellice, from Queen's Ferry, and Mr. Hume, from Cowes, in Favour of the Ports, Harbours, &c. Bill (1846).—By Mr. E. Ellice, from the Edinburgh and Northern Railway Company, against the Railways Bill.—By Captain Bunbury, from Castlecomer, in Favour of the Railways (Ireland) Bill.—By Sir G. Clerk and other Hon. Members, from several places, against the Registering Births, &c. (Scotland) Bill.—By Mr. Forbes and other Hon. Members, from several places, against the Registering of Births, &c. (Scotland) Bill; and Marriage (Scotland) Bill.—By Sir G. Clerk and other Hon. Members, from a great many places, for Compensation relating to the Registering of Births, &c. (Scotland) Bill; and the Marriage (Scotland) Bill—By Dr. Bowring, from Great and Little Bolton, and Mr. Entwisle, from Halshaw Moor, for Alteration of the Law respecting the Sale of Beer.

GOVERNMENT EDUCATION.
MR. C. BERKELEYwished to put a question to the noble Lord of considerable importance, upon a subject which was creating great agitation and uneasiness in the country at this moment, namely, whether it were the intention of Her Majesty's Government to persevere in the system of education proposed in the Minutes of Council; and, if the answer of the noble Lord should be in the affirmative, when he would proceed with the Miscellaneous Estimates.
LORD J. RUSSELLsaid, it was the intention of the Government to persevere in the system laid down in the Minutes of Council; and that he could not bring forward the Miscellaneous Estimates before Easter.

STEAM NAVIGATION IN AUSTRALIA.
MR. F. SCOTTinquired of the hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, whether it was the intention of the Government to grant for the current year any, and what, sums of money to assist private enterprise in steam navigation in Australia and New Zealand?
MR. HAWESadmitted the importance of the subject to which the hon. Gentleman had referred; but all that he could at present say in answer to the question of the hon. Gentleman was, that several plans had been laid before the noble Lord the Secretary of State for the Colonial Department, but that his noble Friend was not prepared at the present moment to express any opinion in favour of any one or other of them. The subject had occupied the
264
attention of his noble Friend, and would continue to do so; but he was not yet prepared to propose the advance of any public money for the promotion of the object which the hon. Gentleman contemplated. He (Mr. Hawes) would take the present opportunity of observing, that if the parties themselves who were connected with the colonies of Australia and New Zealand should evince a disposition to promote that object, they would, in his opinion, very much facilitate the obtaining of a grant of public money for assisting the steam navigation with those colonies.

PUBLIC WORKS (IRELAND).
MR. W. S. O'BRIENbegged to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for Ireland whether the rule which had been established for discharging 20 per cent of the persons employed on the public relief works in Ireland was intended to apply to those parishes where the arrangements for the distribution of soup had not yet come into operation?
MR. LABOUCHEREreplied, that the hon. Gentleman had truly stated that a rule was laid down that the persons employed on public works in Ireland should be reduced in the ratio of 20 per cent; but the rule was not of necessity to apply equally to every parish in Ireland, without regard to the special circumstances of each locality. The meaning of the rule was, that the reduction of the persons employed should, on the whole, be adequate to a reduction of 20 per cent, but leaving it to the discretion of the Irish Government as to what parts of Ireland that rule should be applied.
MR. HINDLEYbegged to suggest that a week's wages in advance should be given to any man who wished to go from the public works to farm labour. It would be a great inducement to men to return to the cultivation of the land.

EXPORTATION OF CORN FROM RUSSIA.
LORD J. RUSSELLsaid, that he was asked by an hon. Member, some time ago, whether there was any truth in the report that the Emperor of Russia had prohibited the exportation of corn from that country. He now begged to inform that hon. Gentleman and the House, that a letter had been received from Lord Bloomfield, stating, that as soon as the report had come to his knowledge, he had a communication with the Minister of Finance at St. Peters-burgh on the subject, and that he had

265
been informed by the Russian Government that the report was without any foundation whatsoever; but that, on the contrary, the exportation of grain from the Russian ports would be facilitated by all possible means by the Government of that country.

POST OFFICE.
MR. MOFFATTbegged leave to ask the right hon. Baronet the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether any and what steps had been taken to prevent public servants employed in the Post Office being also employed in a private speculation called the Post Office London Directory? It would be in the recollection of the House, that in the last Session of Parliament a very grave charge was brought against the Post Office authorities, with regard to one of the principal officers of that establishment employing inferior persons belonging to the Post Office (the letter-carriers) in a private speculation of his own; and of evading his duty at the Post Office. There was also another charge of a very grave nature brought against the same superior officer. Those charges were, when first brought forward, but very faintly apologized for; and an inquiry was promised to be instituted. The result of that inquiry had not yet transpired; but he (Mr. Moffatt) had been informed that the system of employing public servants (the letter-carriers) to assist Mr. Kelly, the inspector, in getting up a work called the Post Office Directory, was still continued; and that the result of the inquiry would establish against Mr. Kelly the grave charge of his having made an inaccurate return to Parliament of the sum realized by him from the publication of the Directory. Mr. Kelly stated that the sum he received on account of that publication was 1,200 l. a year; whereas the statement of the hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. T. Duncombe) showed that Mr. Kelly made something like a sum of 2,500 l. a year from that source. Consequently, there had been a distinct inaccurate statement laid before the House of Commons by a public servant. He would not dwell upon the circumstance of the very high price charged to the public for the work in question, though there could be no doubt that Mr. Kelly demanded full 30 or 40 per cent more for the work than it could be profitably sold for by any other publisher. He would simply ask whether any and what steps had been taken to prevent public servants employed in the Post
266
Office being also employed in the manner he had described?
The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that the subject to which the question of the hon. Gentleman referred, was brought under the consideration of the Postmaster General and the Government in the course of last autumn; but considerable difficulties arose on the subject of the amount of compensation to be made to Mr. Kelly, in the event of the publication called the Post Office Directory being taken from him, with a view of its being published under the immediate authority of the Government. That Mr. Kelly's claim to compensation was valid to a certain extent, could not be denied. At that time it was necessary for the Government to come to some immediate decision, in order that the requisite preparations should be made for the publication of the Post Office Directory at the usual period; but the Government were certainly unwilling to accede to the proposal submitted by Mr. Kelly; and at length a communication was made to that gentleman, informing him that he should be permitted to continue to publish the Directory until such time as a decision should be come to. That decision had now been come to, and it was to this effect—that Mr. Kelly himself, who bought the concern from his predecessor in office, and who had spent a considerable sum of money in setting up a printing-office of his own, and erecting the machinery appertaining thereto, for the purpose of carrying on the Post Office Directory in partnership with his brother, who was not in any way connected with the Post Office, was to be permitted to continue the publication of the work, but without any compensation whatever from the public (so we understood the right hon. Baronet to say). Mr. Kelly was, however, prohibited from employing any person connected with the Post Office in the getting up of the Directory; and it was distinctly understood, that if he at any time should employ any public servant belonging to the Post Office to serve him in his private character as the publisher of the Post Office Directory, he would be subject to heavy penalties.
MR. T. DUNCOMBEwas of opinion that, so far from Mr. Kelly being entitled to compensation in consideration of the publishing of the Post Office Directory being taken from him, the public were justly entitled to restitution from Mr. Kelly for the large sums he had obtained by the publication of that work, which had been entirely got up

267
by the labours of the letter-carriers. Mr. Kelly made a return of his receipts, on account of the Directory, to the amount of 1,200 l. a year; whereas if a Committee of Inquiry were granted, he would undertake to prove that Mr. Kelly had made 12,000 l. a year out of the Post Office establishment. There was a question he wished to ask the right hon. Baronet the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He (Mr. Duncombe) understood that Mr. Rowland Hill had got employment in the Post Office, and that he was smothered in a small room, surrounded by three or four clerks. Now, what he wished exactly to know was, what were the duties which Mr. R. Hill had to perform, and what was the amount of salary he received? He was informed that Mr. Hill was perfectly powerless, and could not receive any assistance either from Mr. Kelly or from Mr. Bokenham; and a notice was publicly placarded in the Post Office, stating that any persons (meaning of course the letter-carriers) having any suggestions to offer to Mr. Rowland Hill for the improvement of the Post Office establishment, were to have the goodness to lay their suggestions before Mr. Rowland Hill through the heads of their respective offices. Now, the heads of the offices were Mr. Kelly and Mr. Bokenham. Was it not clear, that even if any of the letter-carriers were to make suggestions for the improvement of the Post Office establishment, or to make known any complaint against the working of that establishment, through the medium of those two gentlemen, no such suggestions or complaints would ever arrive at Mr. R. Hill's table? It was his decided opinion that every communication ought to go directly to Mr. Rowland Hill. To show how much Mr. Kelly and Mr. Bokenham respected Mr. Rowland Hill, he would just remind the House of what occurred when that gentleman left the Post Office in 1842. On that occasion a notice was stuck up to this effect:—
"Whereas Mr. Rowland Hill's connexion with the Post Office having ceased, notice is hereby given, that any officer belonging to this department (that is to say, the letter-carriers' department) holding communication with him, directly or indirectly, shall be dismissed the public service."
Under these circumstances, he should like to know what possible chance Mr. Rowland Hill had of receiving any suggestion for the public benefit through such parties as those who put that notice forward? He thought it therefore important, since the public were paying Mr. Rowland Hill and
268
two or three clerks, that the House should know exactly what was the salary Mr. Rowland Hill received, what were his duties, and what the chance of his receiving any communication for the improvement of the Post Office department through such channels as those?
The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERhad been misunderstood by the hon. Gentleman as to what he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had said in answer to the question put by the hon. Member for Dartmouth. He (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had admitted that, according to precedents, Mr. Kelly had a right to compensation to some extent; but that at present Mr. Kelly was permitted to carry on the work on his own account, being at the same time debarred from receiving the services of any person whatsoever employed in the Post Office, for the purpose of aiding him in such publication. But if the Post Office authorities were to take away the publication of the Directory from Mr. Kelly, then his claim for compensation would stand as at present. With regard to Mr. Rowland Hill, the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Duucombe) had stated what had been done by certain parties in 1842; and he had also mentioned the fact of a certain notice having been put up at the Post Office. Now, whether those gentlemen, whose names his hon. Friend mentioned, had so acted or not, he (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had had no opportunity of ascertaining; for no notice had been given to him that his hon. Friend intended to put any question respecting- Mr. Rowland Hill. It might be known to most hon. Gentlemen that the business of the Post Office had increased to a most enormous extent. A few days ago, he had received a return, showing that the number of letters passing through the Post Office in one week was now more than double the number that passed through it five years ago. For the particular week at the present time, the number of letters was upwards of 6,000,000; whereas five years ago the number for the week was only 3,000,000. This, of course, had very much increased the labours of the Post Office. This being so, it was thought desirable that additional assistance should be given to that department; and the Government were of opinion that no one in this country was so well qualified to give that assistance as Mr. Rowland Hill. That gentleman was accordingly appointed Secretary to the Postmaster General, with several clerks of

269
his own. The salary of Mr. Rowland Hill was 1,200 l. a year. [Mr. T. DUNCOMBE: What are the salaries of the clerks?] He could not exactly say what they were; and his hon. Friend must admit that it was not too much to say that he could not carry in his head the exact amount of the salaries of all the clerks. But the salary of Mr. R. Hill himself was, as he had stated, 1,200 l. a year; and he was happy to say, in relation to the services of that gentleman, that in a conversation which he had with his noble Friend the Postmaster General a few days ago, his noble Friend informed him that Mr. Rowland Hill had been the means of introducing very great reforms in the Post Office establishment.

TWO LATE EXECUTIONS.
MR. BRIGHTsaid, it appeared by the newspapers that the execution of two men took place at Morpeth on Wednesday last, when by the excessive bungling of the executioner, a most horrible scene occurred that greatly added to the barbarity of capital punishments. He wished to ask the right hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether he had made any inquiry into the circumstances, and whether he had taken any steps to prevent a similar occurrence in future? He also begged to ask the right hon. Baronet, whether he had received from any of the Judges an intimation that there was, and had been recently, an increasing indisposition on the part of juries to return a verdict of guilty in cases where capital punishment was likely to be inflicted? He asked this question in consequence of the recent acquittal of three men, for what was called the Barnard Castle Murder, and their subsequent conviction for robbing the person who was murdered.
SIR G. GREYhad received no information whatever respecting the circumstance alleged to have taken place at Morpeth; but he would make inquiry on the subject. Neither had he received any information from any of the Judges with regard to the indisposition of juries to convict in cases where capital punishment might be inflicted. But he observed, that in the Barnard Castle case, the learned Judge passed the severest punishment the law allowed on the persons convicted.

IRISH IMMIGRANTS.
SIR B. HALLwished to call the attention of the right hon. Baronet the Secret-
270
ary of State for the Home Department to a subject of great importance—the enormous immigration of Irish paupers into Liverpool and other parts of England. In a letter, written by a person in authority at Liverpool, it was stated that—
"Many reports were circulated of the cause of this influx of strangers—such as their being forced from Ireland, sent over by societies, and many other tales, which induced me to send, on the 19th of January, two experienced and intelligent police constables of the 'detective force' of this borough to Ireland, for the purpose of ascertaining, if possible, the real and ostensible cause of emigration. These officers travelled through the counties of Kildare, King's County, Westmeath, Roscommon, Galway, Mayo, and Sligo—mixing with people of different grades—and the result of their inquiries may be summed up thus. The landlord or his agent, perceiving their little stock vanishing, and no rent forthcoming, applied for a process of ejectment; the cottier and his family, without hesitation, put everything portable upon their backs, and make their way towards Dublin, or some other seaport, determined to reach England, where they all understand they will not be allowed to starve. The constables gave the names of certain landlords and their agents, who have been most pressing upon their tenants, which it would be unwise in me, perhaps, to promulgate; and I will merely say, that on one estate notices had been served on 1,400 tenants; that 1,100 processes were heard and determined in one week in one town, where 5,600 were said to be still pending; and that one attorney in the same barony had 3,000 defences in his hand at one time."
Thus much as regarded Liverpool, at which place no less than 30,000 Irish paupers arrived during the last month, the total number that had reached that town being upwards of 60,000. Then, as regarded Newport, in South Wales, he found the following statement:—
"Overwhelming Immigration of the Irish Poor to Newport.—The streets of our town present an alarming and lamentable appearance, being literally crowded with famishing and ball-naked strangers from the most distressed parts of Ireland, several shiploads of whom, amounting to many hundreds, have been huddled together in the holds of coal vessels for this country at the expense of local committees, to lessen the number of famishing creatures at home. Five of the perishing beings who were removed from the hold of that floating pest-house, the Wanderer, at the risk of the lives of charitable gentlemen, have since died; and, in another case, it is known that the captain of a vessel absolutely forced two poor women with children from on board, into the snow on shore, during the late severe weather, at half-past ten o'clock at night, below Pillgwenlly, who, from weakness, then lay down to perish, and would have sunk, were it not for the humanity of two poor men accidentally passing, and who carried them on their backs to a place of warmth and shelter for the night."
He wished to ask, whether the right hon. Gentleman (Sir G. Grey) had had his at-

271
tention called to this subject, and whether the first of the cases was a solitary instance of the kind or not?
SIR G. GREYreplied, that he had received information of the circumstance alluded to by the hon. Baronet. At the same time, he had been assured on authority which, he believed, could be relied upon, that there was a solitary instance in which there had been official interference for the removal of Irish paupers to England. This was the only case which rested on what he regarded as authentic evidence.

THE NEW HOUSE OF LORDS—ACCOMMODATION FOR THE COMMONS.
MR. HUMEwished to ask the noble Lord the First Commissioner of Woods and Forests a question which appeared to him very important, not only to that House, but to the country. That House was required to attend Her Majesty whenever summoned; and it was most desirous that the Speaker of the House should go up to the House of Lords with that decorum consistent with the high character which should attend every proceeding of that House. He might refer to past periods, not very far distant, when the House proceeded to the House of Lords, when summoned, in a way consistent with the high character which the House should maintain; but now the personal safety of hon. Members, especially as regarded their coats, was altogether neglected; for he had seen several injured in their progress to the Upper House. He did not allude to any part of the Speaker's habiliments; but it was perfectly well known that the House was greatly inconvenienced, and great risk attended those who accompanied the Speaker. It became then a matter of great importance that that House should meet with decent attention when summoned to the other House. He had put a question to the noble Lord at the head of the Woods and Forests on this subject on a former occasion, and since then he had been to see what accommodation would be afforded at the bar and in the gallery to the Members of that House wishing to be present at the debates in the other House. Taking the whole space under the bar, which was to be occupied by the Speaker and that House when summoned to the other, it would not hold one tithe of the number of Members; and he asked if they were to submit to be placed in such straitened circumstances? They must come to one of two conclusions—either not to go at
272
all, or to appoint a certain limited number to go; but, if a certain number went, they must be appointed by ballot, and that was an objectionable course for such a purpose; but one of these courses would be necessary, as the compartment could not contain more than twenty-two without considerable pressure. Mr. Barry admitted that the limits were narrow, and said that there was not much room at the bar, but then the gallery would afford sufficient accommodation. The gallery certainly might afford accommodation to those who wished to attend the debates in the other House; but he objected that the Commons of England, when summoned to the other House to attend Her Majesty, or for other purposes, had not proper accommodation below the bar. He considered it to be a just ground of complaint, that, after so much expense on this building, and after so long a delay, the place was not calculated to accommodate more than thirty Members. He thought that this was a matter of serious consequence; and he trusted that some steps would be taken to remedy the inconvenience, and that provision would be made in time for that purpose. This was a serious ground of complaint; and the persons who had neglected to provide proper accommodation for that House should be called to account. He, therefore, put the question to Her Majesty's Government, in the hope of getting a satisfactory explanation.
MAJOR LAYARDwished, before the noble Lord replied, to put another question to him, which was connected with this subject. In the present House of Lords there was a gallery appropriated to Members of that House, but strangers were constantly being placed in it. He wished to ask the noble Lord, whether, in the place intended for Members of that House in the House of Lords, provision should not be made to keep it exclusively for Members?
VISCOUNT MORPETHhad mentioned on a former occasion, that the accommodation to Members of the House of Commons would be on the same footing as at present; but it was on a larger scale in the New House. It was impossible to look for such a space before the bar of the House of Lords as would accommodate all the Members of that House, nor did he think that it would be advisable to attempt to provide it. It should be remembered that the new House was a room for the transaction of business, and must not be of an incon-

273
venient size. With respect to the question of the hon. and gallant Member for Carlow, he thought that it was a very proper question; and while the Members of that House had access to the bar of the other House, they should be separated from strangers. Besides the space below the bar, there would be a gallery provided with seats; and in the course to be pursued by the other House, he was sure that the House of Lords would show every complaisance to that House.
MR. HUMEthought that there should be a Committee appointed to superintend its arrangements, and that the Members should not appear there like a rabble, altogether inconsistent with the dignity of the House.

THE ARMY SERVICE BILL.
MR. FOX MAULEsaid that, in rising to move the second reading of this Bill, he deemed it incumbent on him, as the Bill was introduced without an explanation as to its nature, to make a statement as to its principles, and as to the motives which induced the Government to bring forward such a measure. They might have followed the precedent of 1806, and have introduced the change of the system of enlistment from unlimited to limited service, by simply altering the Schedule of the Mutiny Bill. It had, however, been the practice of late to remove as much as possible extraneous matter from the Mutiny Bill; and they had, year after year, removed much, from a fear that it was likely to excite discussion in that House, and make a clear and distinct law as applicable to the maintenance of the discipline of the Army. The discussions on subjects connected with the Army had been caused in that House chiefly on the Government proposing votes of supply. He thought that in adopting a principle of this nature, it would be better to adopt a special measure rather than take up and discuss the subject year by year; he had, therefore, preferred calling the special attention of the House to it, and asking them to legislate in a definite and formal manner on the subject. His object was, first, the alteration in the principle of the establishment of the Army, which, if adopted by the House, would not, as in the case of the change made by the Mutiny Bill, be repealed without due notice, and without sufficient experience of the principle. It would be in the recollection of the House, that two years after the former plan for a limited enlistment passed, it was repealed,
274
so that by means of it they had no experience of the value of the principle of limited enlistment for the Army. He believed that at the present day there was no one in that House that would start preliminary objections to a standing army in this country. He assumed that this was a matter which none would venture to dispute, and that all would admit that the great domestic interests of the country, its widely-extended colonies, and its position amongst the nations of the world, made it requisite that they should have a permanent Army. The question then was, how this Army should be constituted, and how it could most easily supply any deficiencies that arose in its ranks, and how it could be made to bear with most ease on the community. We could not, however, have recourse to the mode of recruiting the ranks of the Army, which existed abroad. In France they had a system of conscription; in Prussia they had a military instruction and a military law; but in this country the ranks of the Army were filled up on the principle that recruiting was a voluntary act; but in order to make the system a really voluntary and at the same time a really useful one, it ought to be differently regulated from what had been the case hitherto, and be made palatable to those ranks from which the recruits were selected. To understand what this voluntary principle was, the House must look to the manner in which it was carried out. When his hon. and gallant Friend (Major Layard) brought forward his Motion last year, his noble Friend at the head of the Government promised that the question should receive careful consideration during the recess of Parliament. It had been well considered, and it appeared to him that there was no system of enlistment that was really voluntary, except in name. By the practices resorted to, it was deprived of all the virtues of a voluntary enlistment. On looking into the matter, very serious doubts arose whether any one ever enlisted into the Army for the purpose of making it a regular profession for life. He found that there were some classes of their recruits who had readily gone into the ranks, not with any view to the future, but rather with a view of escaping present distress. Their ranks were very much recruited by the idle and the dissolute, who thought that in the life of a soldier they would find that idleness and dissipation congenial to their dispositions. It was too often the case, that the prodigal sought in

275
the Army a refuge from his improvidence; and lads who had got into disgrace, immediately had recourse to enlistment in order to avoid their masters. With that class voluntary enlistment was at an end. All the rest was voluntary only in name: it was in reality brought about by the artifices and promises of recruiting officers towards those who could hardly be said to be responsible for their own conduct. The result of the system was, that the great majority of our recruits entered the Army under circumstances most disadvantageous for the service itself. All kinds of baits were thrown out to catch the unwary, to induce them to become recruits. The place to which they adjourned was the public-house; and men were tempted to enlist by the promise of bounty-money when they knew not what they were doing, and too often found that in a moment of inebriety they had bartered their liberty for life. He did not mean that they became slaves; but they placed their own lives at the disposal of those who commanded them; and when a man found himself in this position, he often deserted in the first moment of disappointment. He was arrested, probably, in the course of a few days; and the man who had voluntarily joined the regiment, was brought back in custody, and involuntarily made a soldier. They had often heard, too, of men who had maimed themselves, under the influence of a dislike to the service. When they considered that a man was taken away altogether from his domestic ties—when he knew he had no hope of regaining his fireside, except under a high fine in the shape of purchase-money—they must conclude that the Army was not supplied with the men most proper for the service. It behoved the House to consider whether, when the Army was so much improved—and more was now done for it than formerly—they could, by revising the system of enlistment, remove many of those painful circumstances which he had described, and make the life of a soldier more acceptable than at present, and improve the character of the Army. He did not pretend to say that limited enlistment would cure all those evils; but it would have the effect of curing many. If accompanied by those other measures of improvement begun by the late Administration, and continued by the present Government, he believed that many of the evils of which they had now reason to complain, would be effectually cured. Many ob-
276
stacles which formerly existed to entering the Army, had been lately removed; the degrading punishment of the lash was now scarcely heard of, and he hoped to hear less of it every day; a system of education had been introduced in the regiments of the line and into garrisons; and there had been other improvements which would form inducements to persons of a higher class to enter the service; and the Government would hold out every means in their power to render the service acceptable to those from whose members it was recruited. What he proposed was, to adopt a system of limited service, and to alter the term of enlistment to ten years for the infantry, and to twelve years for the cavalry, artillery, and ordnance, as the first period for which a man should enter; after the expiration of those periods respectively, it would be at the option of the man to re-enlist, with the benefit of his former service, for eleven years in the infantry, and for twelve years in the cavalry, making the whole period twenty-one years in the infantry, and twenty-four years in the cavalry, which were the present periods required to entitle a man to a pension. He also should take a power by the Bill to provide for the contingency of men's period of service expiring while their regiment was abroad, in which case the officer in command should be empowered to keep the man in service for another year, the responsibility lying on him to show that it was necessary for the public service. And in the case of a state of actual warfare, the officers of regiments in active service should have the power of detaining the men for an additional period of two years. There was also another arrangement by which, if at the end of the terms of twenty-one years and twenty-four years, respectively, the men chose to remain in the service, he proposed to give a power to them to continue, with the consent of their commanding officers, three months' notice being required of them before they should subsequently quit the service. He might be asked why he made such a difference between the periods of service in the cavalry and infantry. The reason was, that the training of recruits for the cavalry, artillery, and ordnance, was much more difficult than for the infantry. It was a matter that required a much longer period of time, and the public was therefore entitled to a longer period of service in those branches of the Army than in the infantry. The Bill went on to provide that after the

277
first ten years of service a soldier should have the option of retiring, if he should think fit, from the Army altogether. But he (Mr. Fox Maule) did not propose to lose sight of him thereby. He thought that such a course would not be for the benefit of the country at large. But the soldier should have the option, if he should think fit to avail himself of the proposal, of enrolling himself again for a deferred pension; and during the time for which he should be enrolled for the deferred pension, he would have to serve, from time to time, twelve days in the year, on the same principle as the enrolled pensioners at present, under the provisions of the Acts passed in the years 6 and 7 and 9 and 10 Victoria. The pensions granted to soldiers at present, at the end of twenty-one years' service, being fixed from time to time at certain amounts by royal warrant, he proposed that those pensions should be fixed at the same amount as the lowest granted by the royal warrant. And if, after ten years' active service, the soldier should enrol himself for a deferred pension, he proposed that he should be enrolled for twenty-two years' service: that was to say, two years of enrolled were to be considered equivalent to one year of active service, to entitle to the deferred pension. The case of the soldier would then stand thus: he would enlist, suppose in the infantry, at eighteen years of age; his first period of service, ten years, would bring him up to twenty-eight years of age; and if at that age he chose to enrol himself for a deferred pension, his service of twenty-two years—twelve days' service in the year—would bring him up to fifty, at which age he would begin to receive a small deferred pension, of which he would be left in the uninterrupted enjoyment for the remainder of his life. That plan would answer a double object. It would induce many men to enter the Army with the full purpose of merely spending the first period of enlistment in its ranks. They would enter under the conviction that their discharge would take place whilst they would still be young — when they might be at the age, say, of twenty-eight—when they would be fitted to enter upon any other mode of life, either agricultural or manufacturing; and they would carry with them into society, after having quitted the Army, those habits of order and regularity which they would have acquired in the service from the very nature of its discipline. Whilst if they enrolled themselves for the deferred pensions, they would form a re-
278
served force for the service of the country, which would be of the highest utility, and would be found of the greatest importance, should this country ever be called upon to defend its shores. Those who combined good conduct with the most considerable proficiency, would be distinguished. The enrolled force would be regularly inspected by the general officers in whose districts they might reside. They would be called upon to do duty for twelve days in the year; and he (Mr. F. Maule) would take upon him to say that they would be found a most efficient force. For, judging by the reports of the general officers who had inspected the enrolled pensioners, it would appear that for all defensive purposes, especially behind walls, and where very active service on foot was not required, those men were as fit for service as when they carried their firelocks at Waterloo (and some of them had carried them in the field even before that period). Those would constitute the principal provisions of the Bill. There were many other matters of detail which it would not be necessary to settle in an Act of Parliament. The prerogative of the Crown could do much in these matters. By the royal prerogative, a soldier could be permitted to quit the service of the Crown whenever it should be deemed proper. But if he were asked why he did not extend the privileges which this Bill would afford to the present Army as constituted?—why he should make the objects of it prospective and not retrospective?—he must reply that it was not necessary for Parliament to interfere to do so. If it should be found necessary that every man of those at present, as of those to be hereafter enlisted, should be placed upon the same footing, it could be done by the prerogative of the Sovereign, and upon the responsibility of the Executive Government. But he was not, he confessed, prepared to recommend the adoption of such a course at present. For, however desirable it might appear, still common prudence would require that they should have some experience in its practical working, before such an extensive alteration could be made. Men in the ranks had not so much reason to complain now, as they had formerly, for his right hon. predecessor had given great encouragement to them. Amongst other improvements in the system, they had the power of obtaining their discharge at an earlier period than before. But let them see what the mode of obtaining discharges from the Army was at pre-

279
sent.After five years of actual service in the infantry, a man might obtain his discharge upon payment of 20 l. After five years service, with one mark for good conduct, he must pay 18 l.; after seven years actual service, with one distinguishing mark for good conduct, he would have to pay 15 l.; after ten years, with two distinguishing marks for good conduct, he might get his discharge for 5l.; and it was not until twenty years service that he could get his free discharge. After fourteen years, fifteen years, and sixteen years service, he became entitled to a deferred pension of 4d., 5d., and 6d. a day respectively. He did not think that those who might complain of the mode he was about to pursue, would have any broad footing to stand upon. But so far as it rested with him, if on the one hand he refused to soldiers at present in the ranks the right which he would give to the recruits ten years hence, he would on the other take care that the warrants which had emanated from his hon. Friend, should be strictly, literally, and honourably fulfilled. The provisions of the Bill he proposed would take effect as soon it could be brought into operation; and he thought it would make the service much more popular than at present in the country. There were not many subjects upon which they should legislate in a merely popular point of view. But if there was one case more than another in which the popular view should be regarded as a very large item, it was that of the Army, because it was from the masses of the country that the ranks of the Army were recruited; and unless the service could be made palatable to the people, it would be vain to expect voluntary recruits. It would be only some distinguished and favoured corps, such as the Horse Guards, the Life Guards, and some others, that would be sought after—corps, the ranks of which were entered at present by respectable persons. They should then make the service palatable. But in an economical point of view, it was also deserving of attention. The expenses of recruiting were, perhaps, little attended to, but they formed a very considerable item in the expenditure of the country. The recruiting service was spread over the whole of the United Kingdom, and there was a very large outlay incurred in the transmission of recruits backwards and forwards, all of which might be avoided by making the service popular, if they had places to which recruits might repair. Another ad-
280
vantage would also be gained by the officers at present scattered over the country, engaged in the recruiting service, being enabled to enter upon active duty, whilst the question of bounty would also be solved if the service could be made sufficiently attractive by the adoption of plans of limited enlistment, good education, and other means which might be adopted for rendering it popular. Mr. Wyndham had said that the Army could never be considered perfect until the whole system of bounties was abolished, and until the Army was sought for by young men, instead of having them bribed by large bounties to enter. He did not think the whole system could be brought into effect and full operation on the day after the passing of the Bill; but he did think that if they were to take advantage of a time of peace, they might improve the condition of the Army; they could attend to the moral training and the education of the men, so that those men should hereafter come out of the ranks well fitted for civil employment. He believed that they might soon attain a condition in which the State would be relieved from the expenses of paying high bounties; and if they allowed those men who chose to retire from the Army to go back to civil employments, well satisfied with the treatment they had received—if, after ten years service, they could send back into the community young men who had passed that time in the Army, with the habits of discipline and regularity which soldiers in the ranks acquired—if they could send such men back, trained, moreover, in good moral habits, and with good order instilled into their minds, how many additional recruits would it not send into the ranks? From such men, too, they would be enabled to select numbers who would be found most valuable in filling those branches of service, such as the prisons and the commissariat, that required trustworthy persons. But many reasons combined to show that a fair trial ought to be given to the plan which he had the honour to propose for their adoption. It was a system which would work well for the benefit of the Army at large; and he was quite sure credit would be given to him that he would not propose any such measure if he believed there existed any danger from it of injury in any way to that service, the interest of which, from what had been hitherto done by Her Majesty's Government, it would be judged they had most sincerely at heart. With

281
the hope that the House would give its approbation to the principle of limited enlistment, in order that he might proceed to embody it in the Mutiny Act of the present year, he begged to move that the Bill which he had the honour to propose be read a second time.
SIR H. DOUGLASrose to protest most strongly against this Bill. It was not, however, his intention to meet it by a direct negative, nor was he prepared with any Amendment. Her Majesty's Government assumes the responsibility of proposing this measure; the Commander-in-Chief, if he does not approve, acquiesces apparently; and he (Sir H. Douglas) felt that, under these circumstances, he will have done all that his duty imposes upon him, in thus recording his dissent, and requesting the permission of the House to state the reasons on which his objections are grounded. He lamented to see that restless spirit of change abroad, going about seeking what it could destroy. Laws, the wisest of all the commercial regulations of England, the basis of Britain's maritime power, are threatened, up stairs, with repeal or mutilation; and here we are engaged in tampering, as he thought, with the system and condition of an Army, in the highest state of efficiency—an Army, the most successful, the most victorious, the most renowned of any, in the times in which we have lived. He could not concur in what is stated in the preamble to this Bill, that it is expedient to limit the period of enlistment, as proposed. He thought it very inexpedient to do so. It was not called for by any necessity, professional, constitutional, political or economical. It was not justified by any experience, nor does it afford us any good grounds upon which to proceed. The first and greatest object is to provide for the Army, an abundant supply of able-bodied men, of a class which make the best soldiers. This we now have; the supply is in fact, greater than the demand. Had such an experiment been made twenty or thirty years ago, we might now have something to rely upon; but the aspect of the times is not favourable for making any such experiment. In the year ending March 1846, 11,420 men for cavalry and infantry were raised. The establishment of the Army has since been increased, and in the last year upwards of 24,000 men have been enlisted. In the last year, 1,441 men were enlisted for the artillery, and the establishment is complete. The late augmentation of 1,300
282
men will speedily be raised; and all this, as he had taken care to ascertain from the best authority, without an individual recruit having offered or stipulated for limited service, or making any objection to unlimited service. The British Army is complete in its establishment; in the most perfect state of efficiency—the discipline excellent—the moral and physical condition of the soldier improving—degrading punishments falling rapidly into disuse—education attended to—and the health and comfort of the troops meliorating—all this admitted by the right hon. the Secretary at War. His (Sir H. Douglas) negative propositions were, that this measure would not be advantageous to the soldier, nor to the class from which recruits are supplied, nor would it be beneficial to the service. It would be inconvenient and complicated in its working—extremely expensive for this insular and colonial empire—and it is very ill timed. Where then is the necessity for the measure? If, in the late protracted war, limited service had been the exclusive rule, that war could not have been conducted with the same vigour and success. But, if the measure were good, why should it not be carried out to the full extent? It was because there was a latent sense of danger somewhere, that this was not done; if so, it was inapplicable to the service, and ought not to be introduced at all. It had been said, that unlimited service was repugnant to the constitution, and derogatory to a free country; but his answer to that was, to refer to the annual Mutiny Act; and to observe that the Greek citizens served in the armies from the age of eighteen or twenty to forty; and at Rome, during the republic, the cavalry served ten, the infantry sixteen or twenty years. Then it was said, that unlimited service led to desertion. He did not hold that opinion; for he believed, and could show, that desertion was generally occasioned by some immediate cause, excitement, or dissatisfaction. At present six-tenths of our Army were made up of agricultural labourers—children of the soil; these were the best men in the service; and he did not believe that a limited period of enlistment would, of itself, induce better men to enter into it. Referring to the opinions which Dr. Jackson pronounced upon this subject, he certainly had made strong objections to an unlimited period of service as a general proposition, applied to Continental States. But his opinion had been erroneously adduced, to support the doctrine that a li-

283
mited period of service was best suited to the service and circumstances of this empire. Dr. Jackson says, limited service would work advantageously in a country surrounded by hostile States, and liable to frequent invasions. A nation so circumstanced was bound, in self-defence, to train up all its male inhabitants to the use of arms; for how otherwise could they protect the integrity of their soil? But the authority of Dr. Jackson was clearly against applying any such system to the case of Great Britain; because he justly held, that the sea by which she is surrounded would protect her from invasion, so long as she preserved her naval superiority. The following is the passage to which he (Sir H. Douglas) alluded:—
"Military service, limited or unlimited to time or place, bears a different character, and has a different value, according to differing conditions, in States or Kingdoms respectively. In States surrounded by other States which are hostile, or suspected of hostility, limited service, as serving to fill the country with men instructed in the use of arms, is in every point of view a desirable condition as a security against invasion. In this case, every native inhabitant is to be considered as a soldier; and, under the circumstances stated, he is a soldier trained and ready for defensive war at all times. In a country such as Great Britain, the approach to the shores of which will be difficult, if not impracticable, while the Navy maintains superiority at sea, and which is, moreover, guarded interiorly by a national and constitutional militia, the scheme of limited service, with a view to fill the country with men who had been trained to the use of arms, is comparatively little necessary as a measure of security; and, if not necessary on that account, the adoption of it is inconvenient on other accounts, particularly on account of service in foreign parts—a service which much encumbered the British military machinery. On this ground, perhaps, a stipulation as to the limit of service was not conceded to the British recruit until recent times, when, from urgent necessities, in want of voluntary materials, the scheme of temporary service was suggested as an expedient to lure the reluctant into the military ranks. It had some effect, but not much; the British peasant does not calculate or balance the difference of conditions with much care: he generally takes the direct bait. The condition of limited service did not, therefore, produce so great an accession to the strength of the army as was expected; and while it failed of the end that was contemplated, it became a cause of introducing a condition into the military ranks which tends to subvert the base of military organization; it thus did harm."
He (Sir H. Douglas) entirely concurred in this. Limited service, if not carried fully out to the whole Army, would make a dangerous discrimination; give great dissatisfaction to the old Army, and, if fully applied, disengage from the service a very large portion of the Army. It is now contended that it is derogatory to the character of a free
284
man, to enlist in the Army for an unlimited period. But if the party himself enter into that contract voluntarily, and with a full knowledge of its operation and effect, who could contend that there was any violation of personal liberty in allowing him to form such an engagement? It seemed to him the reverse. Then, if the period of service be limited to short periods, and successions of soldiers thrown back upon the country, without recompense for past service, might not an outcry be raised that England would become a military nation; and would not this be fraught with danger? Was not this so treated in the discussions of 1778 on the Militia Bill? It was the opinion of the noble Duke who commanded our forces on the Continent during the most important part of the late war, that one old soldier was worth three young ones; that though soldiers might be well drilled at the depôts, and the utmost care devoted, and successfully devoted, to the training and preparation of recruits; yet that every man who had seen service, well knew, that they were not, under any circumstances, comparable to men who had gone through even one campaign. When it was proposed to bring home certain tried cavalry regiments, the Duke of Wellington remonstrated against the project, and declared that, however reduced in numerical strength those regiments might be, he still preferred them to any new levies. He should now, with the permission of the House, read an extract from a letter to the Duke of York, dated Cadiz, 26th December, 1812:—
"Experience has shown us, in the Peninsula, that one soldier who has got through a campaign, is of more service than two, or even three, newly arrived from England; and this applies to the cavalry equally with every other description of troops. Under these circumstances, if it should meet with your Royal Highness's approbation, I should prefer to keep as many of the old regiments as I can with the army, reducing the establishments of those which could not mount more than two complete squadrons to that number, and to send home the officers and non-commissioned officers of the third squadron."
From the same high authority he begged to read the following extract:—
"In proportion as the success of the army may clear the country of the enemy's troops, and the inland traffic will revive, we must expect the desertion of this useful class of people, unless we can pay them a part of what we owe them, and their future hire more regularly than we have that which they have earned heretofore. Any desertion of them is very inconvenient, and a very large desertion would be fatal to us. I likewise beg to

285
draw your Lordship's attention to a new head of expense which has begun to occur, and only lately, that is, bounty on the re-enlistment of British soldiers. The demands on the military chest on this head alone, at this moment, are estimated at 800,000 dollars, which you are aware cannot be postponed without serious inconvenience to the service at large. Yet I am sure I do not know how I am to take the field the first week in May, and to defray this demand and all the others for Spanish and Portuguese service which exist on our military chest. I have brought this statement under your view, only because I hope, from what I have heard, that there exist now in England means of relieving our difficulties to a very great extent."
At that time, the pay of the army was six and eight months in arrear, and the hire of the muleteers was twenty-six. Now, he did not hesitate to say that if the great body of the British Army had been enlisted for a limited period, the expense and inconvenience would have been such that the war would not have been prosecuted with that vigour and sustained force, which brought it to so glorious a termination. He therefore implored the Government before it became too late, to reflect upon the probable consequences of the course which they proposed to pursue. Did Her Majesty's Government propose to extend this to the sappers and miners, and to the marines? If so, it would prove prejudicial, in the highest degree, to those corps, as indeed it would prove disastrous to the artillery corps in particular. Before he proceeded to one or two other topics, which he intended to notice, he should beg to call the attention of the House to one more extract from the despatches of the Duke of Wellington:—
"A great number of soldiers of this army having offered to re-enlist (the period of their service being nearly expired), since the proclamation of his Royal Highness the Prince Regent was made known to them, I beg to be informed if they are to be re-enlisted before the expiration of the three years which, by the proclamation they are bound to serve. I take this opportunity of transmitting to you a list of men in the Chasseurs Britanniques who have either completed their period of service, or are within two months of it, and who, as it appears by the enclosed letter from Major General Inglis, were enlisted without reference to any Act of Parliament as to their re-enlistment. I am, therefore, of opinion, that they ought to be discharged; and I will thank you to favour me with his Royal Highness the Commander-in-Chief's orders on the subject."
If, as a consequence of this measure, colonial corps are to be raised, to be substituted for regiments of the line, for the defence of the colonies, to obviate the manifest objection of the inconvenience and expense that must result from the in-
286
cessant changes, transfers, and reliefs under the proposed system, he thought this alternative the strongest objection, and the most convincing proof of the danger of the experiment. He protested against the perilous project of leaving the defence of the colonies, in any great degree, to colonial corps. It would be another step to separation, or loss. He had a very high opinion of some colonial corps, and thought these very serviceable in all colonies; but all sedentary corps deteriorate in the long run; and, without disparagement, he might say, that, upon political grounds, it would not be safe to resort more largely to colonial corps, for the defence of the outward possessions of the empire. No person could be more desirous than he, of opening, more widely, a career to colonists, in the military profession; and this, he thought, had been very imperfectly done. But whilst he had no objection to colonial corps to a limited extent, he thought it would be a wiser policy to encourage, unite, and mingle colonists, in the forces and establishments of the empire, in common with other British subjects; and that this would do more to unite and cement the bonds of empire, than can well be imagined. We have reduced very largely — far too largely — the establishment of British troops, in some of the colonies. It will be too late to strengthen them, when the centre of the empire is suddenly attacked. The security of the empire depends, not only upon the means of pure, absolute defence, possessed by each colony singly, but upon active mutual defence, with disposable forces, by which one colony or possession may assist another; and this can only be effected by troops of the line. When have we lost a colony? How shall we best preserve them? By enabling them to succour and support each other. It is the number and dispersion of these maritime and military stations, if adequately garrisoned, that gives security to British commerce, and stability to the British empire. It is because they are remote, that she is not vulnerable through any, or either. It is because they are distant from each other, that Britain, by command of the seas, can protect them with the disposable forces of the empire; and that they cannot be reduced, by any adversary. To blockade them is impossible, so long as we retain the command of the seas. To attack them, impracticable; to reduce them, hopeless. But, divest them of the means of mutual defence, by withdrawing the

287
disposable forces of the empire, entrusting their custody and defence in great part to sedentary corps, and you will be in a fair way of losing your possessions by thus tampering with the Army. As to combining the laborious undertakings of a settler with the habits and duties of a retired soldier, the attempt has often been tried, and as often proved unsuccessful. He had witnessed many sad proofs, seen painful monuments, of this; and he very much feared that this is a part of the measure which will not prove more successful. With respect to New Zealand, he would venture to advise Her Majesty's Government, not to rely on the experiment about to be made there, so far as to diminish, by one man, the regular force which it may have been intended to send thither. Entertaining this opinion, he could not forbear to adduce, a very pertinent and able passage, which he found in a recent number of a very able periodical:—
"If the pensioners became good settlers, they would form a better militia than settlers who had not been soldiers; but the 'if' is all in all. They will not become good settlers. Transplanted into a position for which they are pre-eminently unfit—in which the hopes of prosperity that have been held out to them are sure to be disappointed—in which their inevitable lot will be failure, poverty, and the contempt or dislike of their neighbours—those of them who do not die of despondency and drink, will in a few years become feeble vagabonds and beggars; far less valuable for purposes of defence than the citizen soldiers composing a colonial militia, who have to fight for happy homes and a hard-won prosperity."
In amending the laws and regulations for improving the military service, to attract to its ranks a better description of men, the great object should be, to induce the good soldiers to remain in the service, and to enable us to get rid of the bad. The effect of this Bill will be the reverse. No inducement is held out to the good soldier to remain, neither by reward at the end of his first period, nor by bounty on re-enlistment, nor by any reasonable or adequate provision, even at the end of the most protracted service. For, as to the deferred pension of 6d. a day to a soldier who, having first served ten years without recompence, shall thereafter perform twenty years' services with old pensioners, as proposed, when he shall have attained to fifty years of age, you might just as well tell him, that having taken the best ten years' service out of him, and enrolled him for twenty-one years more, you would engage in the end to pay his funeral expenses. The House might rest assured that no ad-
288
vantage would accrue to the service from this measure. That, without inducements of a pecuniary description, it will not attract to the service a superior description of men. That it will not be popular, and that do what you like with respect to the period of service, you will not render the service attractive, but by pecuniary reward and provision for old age. Restore the pension to what it was—revise your warrants—encourage the good soldier to remain in the service by the certainty of an adequate provision for him in his old age—continue to attend to his comfort, his physical, moral, and intellectual well-being, as you are now doing—lessen the rigour of foreign service, by more frequent reliefs, which can only be done by an increase of the military establishments; and you will do more to improve the composition, condition, and character of the service, and so make it attractive, than by any abridgment or limitation in the period of engagement; and nothing that you can do in this respect will avail, unless you do this. But this plan is the reverse; the great object of the measure, disguise it as you may, is, to get down the pension list: for this no inducement is held out to soldiers to re-enlist after ten years, neither by bounty, increased pension, nor by improved provision. He is, on the contrary, to be allured away from the active service; but by a prospect so remote, a provision so inadequate and really so pitiful, that it will neither attract better subjects to the Army, nor induce good men to remain in the active service. He would repeat, the Army is in a state of the most perfect efficiency; and the best guarantee the country can have, that it will be maintained in that high condition, is, to leave it to the management of that eminent man to whom, and his able and experienced assistant, it is confided—to that illustrious Commander, who formed and fashioned it to his great purpose, and who had led it in his brilliant career, from victory to victory, in that most righteous and retributive war, in which he laid prostrate that iron yoke under which for so many years Europe groaned. The time taken to try this experiment — for experiment it must be called—is most unfavourable and inauspicious. The effect of this Bill would be to make a dangerous change in the whole system of the Army; and it would prove detrimental to the public service.
COLONEL REIDhad listened with pro-

289
found attention to the statement of the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. F. Maule), and no one could possibly have a stronger conviction of the necessity for those benefits to the soldier which it was sought to accomplish. By improving the composition of the Army, he believed great results would be obtained, and we should draw nearer the period when it would be safe for the Legislature to abolish a species of punishment odious to the public, and unfairly injurious to the reputation of the service. At the same time he was not prepared to support a measure which he believed would be injurious to the discipline and efficiency of the Army, merely for the sake of conciliating a party in that House, who, in declaiming against the punishment referred to, were, no doubt, impelled by good feelings, but who did not possess one particle of practical knowledge. He objected to the measure on many grounds. He objected to it, first, because it would not accomplish the objects for which it was intended; next, because it was wholly unnecessary, and seriously injurious to the discipline of the Army; also because he thought it would impair and weaken the physical efficiency of the Army; and lastly, because it would produce discontent and jealousy in the breasts of soldiers who had enlisted for unlimited service. A measure precisely similar had been introduced by Mr. Wyndham, and it had not succeeded: it was very soon discovered by the civil as well as the military authorities, that it was likely to be injurious; and it was abandoned. At that time, in order to counteract the evils which were foreseen, the authorities were obliged to offer enormous premiums to induce men to enter the service for longer periods. A regulation similar to that of Lord Hardinge, giving facilities for discharge at any period of service, would render this plan unnecessary. Military discipline was of enormous importance. To the steady discipline of the Army this country owed much of its present power and greatness; and he reminded the House of a celebrated passage in one of the Duke of Wellington's despatches, where he said, speaking of a great battle, "I felt that I had my men in my hand; they performed every movement with the precision of a field day." It was a fundamental principle of discipline, that a commanding officer should have full and entire authority over his men; but by enabling them to claim or demand their discharge at a given period, the command-
290
ing officer was divested of the control he ought to possess. This was a principle which had been recognised by the greatest military authorities in the country, and in the various warrants of successive Secretaries at War. Thus one right hon. Gentleman in that department said, in a warrant, "A soldier enlisted for unlimited service has no claim for discharge either with or without a pension;" and the right hon. Baronet the President of the Board of Control (Sir J. C. Hobhouse), when Secretary at War, in 1833, said in one of his warrants, "A soldier enlisted for unlimited service cannot obtain his discharge as a matter of right; but his discharge will be granted as an indulgence upon certain conditions." He maintained that the discretionary power of granting discharges was essential to the efficiency of every commanding officer. There were men in the ranks who felt the necessity of obedience; but on the other hand there were others ill-disposed, of ungovernable temper, and sullen. A commanding officer had thus to deal with all sorts, and it was necessary he should be armed with the most stringent power over his men to ensure proper discipline. But this measure would deprive him of the most valuable power he possessed. In the Household Brigade—a regiment which he had had the honour to command—the commanding officer had from time immemorial possessed the power of granting discharges—a power most valuable in supporting discipline, for it was the power of rewarding the good soldier, and of punishing the bad. In many cases parents had written to him soliciting the discharge of their sons, who were serving under his orders. He invariably inquired into all applications of this nature. He first ascertained the character of the man in the regiment; next, whether the petition was certified by the clergyman of the parish whence it came, or by some other person of known respectability; and when he was satisfied the application was a proper one for him to entertain, he gave the man his discharge. Under the proposed system, a great number of men would be lost to the Army in a comparatively short period, and, in fact, after the lapse of ten years a whole regiment might be renewed, the tendency being thus to produce an army of boys. He had once had an opportunity of witnessing the exploits of an army of boys at the siege of Antwerp, of which he had been a spectator. He believed that two-thirds of the French army before Antwerp

291
who lined the trenches were not more than 24 years of age. The Dutch made but two sallies during the operations of that cold-blooded and disgusting siege; and the boys to whom they were opposed were panic-struck by those sallies, and ran away as fast as they could, leaving a small party of Dutchmen to upset the works which it took a fortnight to make. The most efficient men in an army were those of ten or twelve years service; and it was important that they should endeavour to retain old soldiers of good character, who were calculated by their example in barracks to maintain a good state of discipline. There was one way in which the character of the soldier might be greatly raised—and it was in his opinion the best way—namely, by raising the rate of pensions, which would be a very great inducement to men to enlist in our Army. If we adopted the theory of Mr. Windham as to limited periods of service, he was of opinion that we ought also to adopt his plan as regarded the increase of pensions. The pensions paid at present to soldiers were most discreditable to the system. What were they? The man who served faithfully for twenty-four years received, when he was worn out and no longer fit for service or for other employment, sixpence per day; and the non-commissioned officer, at the expiration of his period of service, received eightpence. It was true there was the good-conduct pay, but that was not part of the pension, and must have been earned before by the soldier. He hoped and trusted that this part of the subject would receive the attention of the Government, for it was one which was most important as regarded the condition of the Army. He would venture to suggest an arrangement which he thought would be found satisfactory—he would suggest that the pension of the soldier should be ninepence per day, and the pension of the non-commissioned officer one shilling a day, at the end of their periods of service; and he would also propose that the good-conduct pay should be added to this when the person becoming entitled to a pension was also entitled to good-conduct pay, with power to add twopence a day at the end of five years service of the non-commissioned officer, at the end of his service, with a minimum of one shilling a day, and that would make the pensions approach somewhat near the scale proposed by Mr. Windham. He thought that the measure before the House was calculated to be looked on with jealousy, and he would ear-
292
nestly suggest that the true way of improving the condition of the soldier would be to raise the pensions contemporaneously with the introduction of the measure. The only way, in his opinion, to reconcile the Army to the measure was to raise the pension to the Army generally. There was another safe and good way of improving the Army, namely, by improving the social and moral condition of the soldier. Much had been done of late years to improve the moral character of the soldier, amongst which the rewards for good conduct were to be included; but they ought to provide the soldier with proper comforts and with the decencies of life; they ought to make the soldier feel, by their treatment of him, that his country esteemed him and valued his services. It could not be forgotten that much of the grandeur and power of this vast empire had been gained by the valour and intrepidity of the British soldier; nor should it be forgotten that the health of the British soldier was frequently undermined by the vicissitudes of climates to which he was exposed, and by the trying duties which he was called upon to perform at all seasons and all hours; and recollecting those claims upon the country, he thought that the conduct of the Legislature ought not only to be just, but generous, when providing for the condition of the Army. He would briefly allude to the officers of the Army, upon whose conduct and example so much of the efficiency of our soldiers depended. He could bear the testimony of his experience to the kind and generous manner in which the officers of the British Army had always exerted themselves in proposing the good of the men. They were always happy to co-operate with the commanding officer in carrying out arrangements to promote the good of the soldier, and were always ready to promote the amusements of the men under them. He had given his views of the measure; but as he supposed it had received the sanction of the Commander-in-Chief he would not vote against it.
SIR DE L. EVANSsaid, the proposal of Mr. Wyndham was for seven years' service. At present our term of service was for twenty-one years; but all the other Powers of Europe raised their army for eight or nine years; and the Bill proposed a term of two or three years more than those other Powers had found necessary. It was a mistake to suppose the Bill would affect the whole Army. There were 30,000 men in India, the greater part of whom

293
volunteered into other regiments when their own were ordered home. They would not be affected by the Bill; and the probability was, that if the men at home were in good quarters, and found their comforts well attended to, they would not desire to avail themselves of the ten years' service clause. He had so little fear on this score, that he wished to see the Bill come into operation immediately. There remained only 35,000 men in the colonies, who might avail themselves of the operation of the Bill. But in two of our colonial settlements we were at war—in the Cape of Good Hope and at New Zealand; and the term of service of these troops could consequently be prolonged for two years. He considered it no disgrace that the young French troops at Antwerp were driven out of their trenches. Their own veteran troops at St. Sebastian were frequently driven out of the trenches by the French; and the best men of both armies occasionally took to their heels in trenches. He believed that young regiments after three or four years were as good as any regiments they could get, perhaps better. They had it on the high authority of Major General Napier, that three years' military service were sufficient to perfect a soldier; and under the present Bill the term might be prolonged to twelve. The hon. and gallant Member for Windsor said that one-eighth of every regiment would have the power of retiring every year; but he must remember, that the number of deaths and of invalided men would not be so great as under a period of unlimited service. The hon. and gallant Member for Liverpool (Sir H. Douglas) had stated that he almost despaired of our having a well-conducted Army, because the whole mass of the population of this country was greatly demoralised. [Sir H. DOUGLAS had said that great immorality prevailed among the people.] The hon. and gallant Member had alluded to the conduct of the English troops in the field during the last war; but, if they referred to the despatches of the noble Duke who commanded the British Army, they would see what his estimate was of the morality and regularity of the soldiers. That noble Duke said, there was no army in Europe better capable of fighting; but it appeared from the noble Duke's despatches that no language could be too strong to describe their immoral and improper conduct. The hon. and gallant Officer (Sir H. Douglas) seemed to suppose that that Army was efficient in all its parts; but the very reverse
294
was the case. Two-fifths of the troops were constantly in the hospital; and the noble Duke in some of his despatches said, that the Army was little better than a moving hospital, owing to the irregularity and dissipation in which the men indulged. The noble Duke added, that he could not send out a detachment with any security that they would not rob, assassinate, and commit the most disgraceful outrages; and he believed the noble Duke went so far, in one instance, as to call them a band of robbers. He would ask, then, whether they ought not to endeavour to improve the condition of an Army of which such a description was given? And the best opportunity for effecting that improvement was afforded in a time of peace. The Army was, no doubt, in a very efficient state at present; but if they were taken into the field, he believed many imperfections would be discovered, although they might not exhibit the same extent of demoralisation which had prevailed in the Peninsular Army, in consequence of the improvement which had taken place in the moral character of the great mass of the population. It was clear, however, that unless they rendered the service more popular, they could only expect to get the worst portion of the population, whether from towns or from the rural districts, to enlist. He had entertained some hope that greater reliance might have been placed upon a system of voluntary enlistment, without resorting to bounties, or depending upon the artifices and seductions of recruiting sergeants for filling the ranks of the Army. He was surprised at the attack which had been made upon this Bill, because it had been admitted that the Commander-in-Chief of the Army acquiesced in it; and no one acquainted with that noble Duke could for a moment suppose that he would give his assent to a measure of which he did not approve. He considered that no argument had been brought forward to prove that a system of unlimited service, or of service for twenty-one years, had been in any degree the cause of our success in the last war; and he was satisfied that if it were wished to improve the character of the Army, they must do all in their power to render the service more popular among the people generally. He thought it was extremely desirable that an intimation should be given that the Government were disposed to allow the Bill to come into operation immediately on its being sanctioned by Parliament, and to give a certain pro-

295
portion of men the option of retiring from the service on the recommendation of commanding officers. The hon. and gallant Member for Liverpool seemed to think that he, as the representative of a popular constituency, would be likely to lose their favour by supporting any proposition for training the people to arms; but he believed that the people were desirous of such a measure, and that they would approve of the establishment of a national guard.
COLONEL T. WOODthought the hon. and gallant Member who had last spoken, had given an unfair representation of the Army in which he had served when he described it as a moving hospital; for he found that an impartial French author, M. C. Dupin, said, that while the French Army, during the last war, required an annual supply of 150,000 men to keep it in an effective condition, the English Army needed only 23,000 men every year, who not only sufficed to supply all losses, but increased the effective strength of the forces by about 7,000 men. The same author stated that when the endeavours of the English Government to supply all the wants of the soldiers, and the prudence of the commanders in not requiring the men to perform too fatiguing duties, were considered, there was no cause for surprise at the comparatively slight losses sustained by the British Army during the war. He was surprised that the Secretary at War, in proposing the measure, had not given them any data with reference to the recruiting service or to pensions. He thought it was essential that any measure they might adopt on this subject, should be of a permanent nature; but he did not consider that this measure was at all likely to be permanent. It appeared to him, indeed, to be a compromise between two principles; and if he were asked whether he would prefer to have the British Array conducted upon Mr. Windham's plan, or upon that of the present Secretary at War, he would at once declare himself in favour of Mr. Windham's plan. He wished to know what hold the Secretary at War expected to have upon those men who quitted the Army, and who were entitled to deferred pensions? They would be scattered over the whole country, and many of them would, no doubt, obtain lucrative employment. If it should be necessary to issue a warrant to call out the pensioners for service, these men might be unwilling to leave their employments for the shilling a
296
day which they would receive while they were on duty: and what would be the penalty for refusal? They would only lose the deferred pension of 6d. a day, which no man could receive till he was 50 years of age. He thought that the Government would be compelled to revise the system of pensions, for it was most improbable, when a soldier arrived at a period of life when his services were most valuable, that he would re-enlist unless some additional inducements in the way of pay and pension were held out to him. He was surprised that the Secretary at War had not made any statement to the House with reference to recruiting. The right hon. Gentleman had not even explained the number of men who would be required each Year to fill up the vacancies occasioned under his plan. He believed that the number of recruits required under the right hon. Gentleman's plan would be from 10,000 to 15,000 annually. The Government might suppose that they would have no difficulty in raising this number of men; but experience only could show whether their expectations were well founded.
COLONEL LINDSAYdid not believe that this measure held out sufficient inducement for a man to re-engage in the Army at the expiration of his first period of service, nor did he believe that it would at all remove the causes which led to the frequent cases of desertion which happened under the present system. He admitted that there was a feeling prevalent in the Army, he would not say of discontent, but a feeling that the period of service was too long—and that the pension was too small. The warrant which was issued in 1833, provided that soldiers of good character, having served twenty-five years in the infantry, or twenty-eight in the cavalry, might, at their own request, obtain their discharge and a pension, not of 6d. a day, but a pension not exceeding 6d. a day. This had filled the minds of the soldiers with distrust as to the intentions of the Government, as they were not certain whether they would get the full amount of the pension promised or not. There was, also, much ignorance prevailing as to the terms of service, so that it was difficult to persuade men that after a certain period of service they might obtain their discharge; and he therefore ventured to think that if some method were adopted of making the terms of enlistment better known to the public, they would accomplish great service. If the right hon. Gentleman, too, would also draw out his war-

297
rants, not in that twist-about sort of way which was used by legal gentlemen, but in a plain manner which soldiers could understand, it would be productive of much good. A great deal had been said about obtaining a better sort of men; but he thought that was rather theoretical. What did they mean by a better class? If they meant the half-gentlemen class, he must say that he would give no price for them whatever. He had no objection to their obtaining a better class of agriculturists or of operatives; but as to obtaining half-gentlemen or broken-down tradesmen, he thought the Army would not be benefited by obtaining their services. At the same time, he thought that the improved education of the country, with the severity of discipline in the British Army, which must be kept, because they could not afford that waste which might be tolerated in foreign armies where their ranks were supplied by conscription—these considerations, together with the high amount of pay in the police force, and the demand for labourers on railways, would operate to prevent their attaining a better class of soldiers than existed at present. He thought stronger inducements ought to be held out to induce re-enlistment; and if they were to give a man who had served them well for twenty-five years a pension of 10 d. or 1s. a day, he would become a useful coadjutor to their scheme, as people would see that he was happy and comfortable living upon the pension, and many young men around him would be ambitious of following his example, and would enter into the service.
COLONEL SIBTHORPsaid, the present appeared to be a time to alter everything, and to make a total change in the whole system. They had attacked the Church, they had attacked the law, they had attacked physic. All professions were undergoing a change; and even that assembly had changed, and was become the pure and reformed House of Commons, which could do nothing wrong. And what was the consequence? Were they more happy or more contented? Look to the state of Ireland, of Scotland, and of England, and they would see that it was the melancholy reverse. He thought the past services of the Army were sufficient to tell the country that it wanted no change—it was invincible—it was the envy and admiration of all surrounding countries—it wanted no change whatever. And who brought forward this change? He did not mean to
298
say one word against the right hon. Gentleman the present Secretary at War; but he knew there was a Secretary at War, now in another place, who scarcely knew the muzzle of a musket from its butt-end. He certainly was surprised to hear the right hon. Secretary speak as he had done of the unhappy men who were in the service. Now, he had served for sixteen years in Her Majesty's Dragoons before he came into this refined society, and he must say that he had met as good men there as he had ever met since, men of as high manners and of as pleasant society. He certainly was not detained there listening to long speeches, which he often wished he had not sat so long to hear; where, if he came in unlearned, he went out again ten times more unlearned than before. Then the right hon. Gentleman said he was not surprised that, under such circumstances, the men deserted. But he was. He was surprised, and he deeply regretted, that men who had once entered the service, should afterwards be induced to violate their oaths and desert the service. He had heard with the greatest delight what fell from the gallant and distinguished Officer the Member for Liverpool, who implored the right hon. Gentleman, from his own experience—and experience ought to make some people wise—to be cautious how he passed this measure. He had heard with the greatest delight what fell from the hon. and gallant Officer, and he coincided in every word he said; and therefore he would not detain the House any longer with any observations of his own.
MAJOR LAYARDfelt a deep interest in this subject, because from his first entering into the service, he felt that the bargain made between the country and the soldier was an unjust one; and he had determined, if ever he was in a position to bring about an alteration in that bargain, he would undertake the task. He was willing to make every allowance for the experience and long service of the hon. and gallant Member for Liverpool; but there were authorities as high as that of the gallant Officer, who were in favour of this measure. He might instance, among these, Lord Hardinge, who, when Secretary at War, stated in 1842—at which time he (Major Layard) had brought in a Bill on the subject—that the matter was well worthy the attention of Government. The Government did give their attention to it—the Secretary at War under the late Government took a step in advance; and the present Govern-

299
ment had expressed their sentiments by the present measure. He might also refer to the Military Commission, where they found such old experienced officers as Gen. Golin Campbell and Lord Lynedoch expressing their opinions in favour of limited enlistment. The House had been told of the probable difficulties in case of a long war; but no such difficulty was found to exist in the Continental armies, where enlistment was not for life; Austria had recently reduced the period from fifteen years to as low as eight. It was said, that the system now proposed to Parliament would be more expensive than that which at present existed: he begged to differ from that statement, though he did not rest his support of the measure on any desire for shabby economy. Then, again, it was said, that the Army was in a very happy state, and ought to be left as it was; but he would reply by pointing to 28,000 men in gaol in three years, and 3,500 men undergoing corporal punishment, and 8,000 deserting. Because the men dared not complain and petition, they were said to be happy! It was urged, too, that this was not the time for such a measure as the present; whereas it was always the right time to do justice. The hon. and gallant Officer opposite (Sir H. Douglas) might have seen that the matter could not rest with the change made by the late Government, and he should have opposed that, and not have waited till now to talk about "destroying the British Army." He believed the discipline of the Army would be greatly benefited by limited enlistment, and be was therefore anxious to do all in his power to promote it. It was said the young men would run away. Why, a great number of the regiment to which he belonged were young men, scarcely more than twenty-one in 1815; they were, in fact, considered too young for colonial service, but at the spur of the moment were sent to Waterloo. He should like to know if any of the "boys" ran away there. He believed not. A story was once told him of a soldier who was ordered to be imprisoned for some offence. The colonel of the regiment was asked for how long a period the man was to be imprisoned? whereupon the colonel replied, "For life." "That can't be," said the soldier, "for I was only enlisted for seven years." In 1842, if a man had asked him whether or no he should have enlisted in the Army, he should have felt bound to tell him of the disadvantages under which he would have laboured—that his fire-arms
300
were bad—that he might be sent to India for twenty-four years, and that it was fifty to one if he over returned—that he might be sent for a long period to those of our colonies where the mortality was immense, 21,421 of our soldiery having died in the Leeward Islands and Jamaica since 1817—that they were obliged to live on suit provisions five days in the week—that the old soldier who fought gallantly in the Peninsula got no medal or other mark of distinction—that five per cent of their hard-earned pension was deducted from them—that the number of those subjected to corporal punishment in three years was 4,000—that if he enlisted he was; bound for life—and that, in short, there was little to sweeten the hard lot of the common soldier. He thought that under such circumstances it would be hard to induce any man of common sense to take the shilling. He did not stand there to make the soldier discontented. On the contrary, he was now proud to say that he could honestly give; the man desirous to enlist a very different advice from that which he could conscientiously have given in 1842. He would now exhort him to enlist. The Army had now good muskets put into their hands; they never missed fire, and very seldom missed the target, which perhaps it might be useful for the enemy to know. The places in which soldiers were now confined for offences were not the squalid, damp, wretched dungeons they used to be, but places in which a man's health would be no longer injured, and from which it might be earnestly hoped he would come a better man. There were now also savings' banks, into which they might put their savings, and there were besides rewards for good conduct; whereas formerly, flogging was so customary that it brutalised men and hardened them in crime; but it was now a very rare occurrence. Besides this, through the liberality of the present Chancellor of die Exchequer, there was no longer the miserable deduction of 5 per cent from the pensioner; and, in short, as the present Bill attested, the Government were anxious to do all in their power to better the condition of the common soldier. There was me point to which he felt it his duty to refer on the present occasion. It had been said that the promotion at the Horse Guards was a one-sided promotion; and he must say that that was a view held by very influential parties, and one in which he perfectly concurred. In 1842, the noble Lord now at the head of the Government

301
put a question to the right hon. Gentleman (Sir R. Peel) with reference to the Duke of Wellington, a Cabinet Minister, being Commander-in-Chief; and on that occasion he quoted some remarks which had fallen from the noble Duke himself, in which he (the noble Duke) had distinctly stated that the office of a Commander-in-Chief and Cabinet Minister ought not to be held by the same individual. The right hon. Gentleman (Sir R. Peel), in answering the question, said, it was thought necessary that the Duke of Wellington, though Commander-in-Chief, should be a Cabinet Minister, but that this would make no difference as to promotions. Now, he (Major Layard) thought it had made a difference. There were many officers who maintained principles which till lately had not many supporters in the Army; and they all know how few officers on that side of the House had got promotion. He believed that he himself was the only officer, with the exception of the noble Lord the Member for Lichfield, on that (the Government) side of the House who was on full pay. Gentlemen had asked, why, in these circumstances, officers did not leave the Army? But that was not a course which any person would choose to follow, though much dissatisfaction might be experienced. When he saw, for example, a man of the same standing with himself receiving promotion while he was still a captain—[Laughter.] Gentlemen laughed; but he wanted to know why, if a man did his duty, he had not a right to expect that promotion would be open to him? He wanted to know if a man on that side of the House had been twenty-four years in the service, and one on the opposite side only half that time, why the former should not be first entitled to promotion? He could tell the House that when he brought forward his proposals for military reform, Gentlemen often said to him that they would give him their support, but that they had sons or brothers in the service, and that their doing so would militate against them. Now, he maintained, that officers deserving of promotion ought to obtain it whether they voted for or against the Government. It had been said that the Whigs had done nothing for the Army. He denied it. The Whigs had done more for the Army this Session than any previous Government had done for years. The hon. Member then read a letter from a private soldier, who said he was afraid to state his name. ["Oh, oh!"] Yes, it was a fact. Soldiers were afraid
302
to state their names; for, although most commanding officers would not take any unfair advantage of a soldier who had freely expressed his opinions, it could not be denied that there were some who would; and the fact was, they dared not mention their names. The letter was in favour of limited enlistment. Some regulations ought to be made regarding the social comfort of the soldier. They ought not to be debarred from marrying, neither ought they to be prevented from taking their wives and children with them. The parting between the soldier and his family, when he was ordered on foreign service, was heart-rending; and many hon. Members whom he now addressed, must have frequently witnessed such scenes with pain. Respecting the subject of education, he wished to see more efficient measures taken than now existed; for the soldier had sometimes contributed towards the advancement of literature. He saw the right hon. and gallant Gentleman opposite, the Recorder of Dublin, laughing. [Mr. SHAW: Not gallant.] If not gallant, he hoped at least grateful. Now, he should like to ask that right hon. Gentleman, who founded the Dublin Library? [Mr. SHAW: What has that to do with the matter?] He would tell the right hon. Gentleman. Was the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the University of Dublin actually ignorant of who was the founder of the Dublin Library? A party of soldiers, in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, having routed a party of Spanish volunteers at the battle of Kinsale, subscribed 1,800 l., which they did not apply to the sculptured marble or engraven brass; but they sent it to Archbishop Usher, who with that gift founded the Dublin Library, of which the learned Recorder knew nothing. The hon. and gallant Officer concluded by saying that he gave his cordial assent to the second reading of the Bill. The Government had begun well, but he hoped they would yet go on and go further.
Bill read a second time.

MORTALITY (IRELAND)—DEFECTIVE RETURNS.
On the Order of the Day being read, that the House go into Committee on this Bill,
LORD G. BENTINCKsaid: Sir, I take this opportunity of calling the attention of the House and the Government to a statement which was made a few nights ago by the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for

303
Ireland, in answer to a Motion I made for returns of the number of deaths in Ireland. It will be in the recollection of the House, that upon that occasion the right hon. Gentleman stated that he had no power to get correct returns in Ireland of the number of deaths that took place there, inasmuch as no such returns were made. It seems that the right hon. Gentleman was entirely mistaken on that head, for I have received various letters from clergymen in Ireland, who state that not only is this statement contrary to the fact, but that Protestant clergymen are obliged to keep a registry of the number of burials that take place, and on the 25th of March in each year to furnish to the register of the diocese accurate Parliamentary returns of the number of burials and marriages which take place in their respective churches and churchyards. In fact, this is part of the canon law that they should do so. I will not weary the House by reading many letters, but I think it is only right to read the following, which is from the rev. John C. Archdall, rector of Newtown Barry, in the county of Wexford, and honorary secretary to the relief committee there. The rev. gentleman likewise enclosed to me a form of the registry.
"The Parsonage, Newtown Barry, County Wexford, Ireland, March 17, 1847.
"My Lord—I have read with surprise the following statement of Mr. Labouchere, in answer to your Motion for a return of deaths in Ireland:—
"'Neither the Protestant nor the Roman Catholic clergyman was required to keep any list of the deaths which occurred in his parish; and if any clergyman should be found to have done it, the object would be found to be for some purpose of his own. Why were they to think that such registers were generally kept by the clergy in Ireland?
"Now, my Lord, Mr. Labouchere should have known that the clergy of the Church of Ireland obey the law, and that by one of the canons they are obliged to return on every 25th of March an accurate copy of the parish registry, of the baptisms, marriages, and deaths, to the registrar of the diocese; and the bishops regularly and periodically see that the duty is performed, and parchment books are furnished by the Ecclesiastical Commissioners to every clergyman, and uniformity in the registry adopted in every parish in Ireland. The difficulty is to find a clergyman who has neglected it.
"In this parish, where every care has been taken to provide labour, and much benevolence exerted, the mortality has been, on a comparison with the two preceding years, nearly fourfold:—

From 15th September to

15th March.

Deaths.

1844 to

1845

6

1845 to

1846

5

1845 to

1847

23

304
"I believe the increase this year has arisen more from an insufficiency than actual want of food. I know nothing of the mode of registry adopted by the Roman Catholic clergy; but I am confident, from my own observation, that the deaths have been more than threefold. A peculiar feature this year is, that the burials follow the day of death, a thing hitherto unknown in Ireland. You are at liberty to use this information as you please."
I have another letter from the county Galway, which runs thus:—
"Headford, County Galway, March 16, 1847.
"My Lord—In reference to your Lordship's Motion for a return of the deaths in Ireland for the three periods of six months each, from the 1st of September to 1st of March, from 1844 to 1847 inclusive, your Lordship will, I trust, permit me respectfully to suggest a mode of obtaining a faithful statement, which has most unaccountably been overlooked. In Ireland, it is quite true, as Mr. Labouchere has stated, that the parochial clergy keep no register of these matters; the Roman Catholic pauper population are in nineteen cases out of twenty consigned to the grave without even a funeral service, for in that communion when the rites of the Church for the sick and dying have been observed, but little stress is laid on the former one; indeed it would be perfectly impossible for the Roman Catholic clergy, in populous and scattered parishes, to perform this ceremony in every case, in seasons of epidemic visitations attended like the present with unusual mortality; for instance, we had in this union (of parishes) the other day sixteen bodies waiting for interment. With their other very heavy duties at this trying period, two clergymen could not possibly have performed the burial service over each in one day at different graveyards.
"There is a class of men in Ireland, amounting to some eight hundred, and to which there is nothing exactly similar in England; I allude to the medical officers of dispensaries. I believe there are but few nooks and corners in the land to which their labours do not extend, and with which, in their several localities, they are not intimately well acquainted. I should say that it was more particularly within their province to furnish the information which your Lordship seeks than in any other; and though it is quite true that no compulsory power exists with Government or elsewhere to oblige them to undertake this office, I am perfectly sure there is not one man among them who would not cheerfully take the trouble of the inquiry, and be flattered by being made the means of putting your Lordship into possession of the necessary information.
"The officers of the Irish medical charities, I may be allowed to say, have no great reason to be forward in volunteering their services, for while the ingenuity and research of the Government and their subordinates in the constitution of the relief committees have evidently been taxed to collect, without risk of omission, all parties throughout the country in any way entitled to confidence and respect to discharge this duty, physicians and surgeons alone are excluded. Gentry, clergy, justices, poor-law guardians, and highest ratepayers, with a staff of military and naval overseers, are relied on; while the surgeons of infirmaries, and the physicians of dispensaries

305
and fever hospitals and poorhouses are considered unfit. The profession in Ireland, which as a body claims an equal respectability with any of the other learned professions in this or any other country, certainly considered this omission as a studied slight (to use no stronger expression), and with how much justice, I leave to your Lordship to judge. We do not seek either Government patronage or pay; we do not require at their hands that any undue prominence should be awarded us, in helping to work out their measures for the relief of our suffering country; but we do feel that, closely connected as we are with the sick and destitute, and possessed of the information which the nature of our duties force upon us, the studied rejection of our services upon the present pressing occasion for the co-operation of an educated and respectable body of men, is most remarkable and unaccountable.
"I have the honour to remain with great respect, and with gratitude for your Lordship's talented exertions for the good of our country and people, your Lordship's most obedient humble servant,
"WILLIAM SWAYNE LITTLE, M.D.,
"Trinity College, Dublin, L.R.C.S. Ireland,
Physician to Headford Dispensary.
"P.S. We have on three or four occasions latterly had official letters of inquiry on subjects connected with our public duties from this and that commission; a similar requisition in the form of a printed circular, either to the physicians themselves or to the secretaries of the institutions they conduct, would be at once attended to."
I have received another letter from Mr. Henry Blake, of Clifden, on this subject:—
"Renvyll, Clifden, March 15, 1847.
"My Lord—It will be difficult, if not impossible, to obtain the returns of deaths your Lordship has asked for, as the police have been instructed to register those only who are found dead out of their houses, and there is no other regular account kept, and no coroner in very many districts in the west of Ireland; but, in the meantime, I can give you an idea of what is taking place. The population of my estate is about 4,500, and the usual average of deaths has always been below the general average, which I take to be 3 per cent, or 135 yearly. During the three weeks ending the 7th instant, 68 deaths have been reported to me as having been caused by distress, besides seven or eight old people in the usual course of nature; and this, notwithstanding considerable assistance received from the benevolence of private individuals, independent of the Government works.
"In the remainder of the parish, and in the island of Inch-Offin, the mortality has been so great that the clergy of both persuasions estimate the deaths altogether at above 100 per week on 10,000; and in the adjoining parishes of Omey and Ballindown, forming part of the union of Clifden, in a population of about 18,000, the loss, as reported to me on Saturday by the dispensary doctor, amounts to 15 to 16 per day (i. e. 105 per week). This, your Lordship will admit, is very frightful; but it is nothing to what is likely to occur as private funds are exhausted, and the money payments on the public works suspended. There are no large farmers, I may say, to employ the
306
people, and no means left to pay another rate, the one in progress of collection being, in fact, met from the payment of the labour on the roads; and all who have the means are emigrating.—I have the honour to remain, my Lord, your obedient servant, "HENRY BLAKE."
The noble Lord exhibited a tabular form of registry used in Ireland by clergymen of the. Established Church, comprehending the name, abode, age, and date of burial of the deceased, and by whom the funeral service was performed; and concluded by comparing the efforts made by the late Government in the way of introducing supplies of food into Ireland, with the policy of the present Government in refraining from interfering with the operations of private speculators, which the noble Lord said had done great injury to the people of Ireland.
MR. LABOUCHEREhoped that the House would not suppose, that he intended to follow the noble Lord into the subjects he had adverted to at the conclusion of his speech, and which had been so frequently under discussion in the House, namely, the policy which Her Majesty's Government had adopted with regard to the supply of food to Ireland, and the effects of that policy upon the supply. He only protested against the attempt of the noble Lord to produce an impression that the mortality in Ireland, which no one could more deeply lament than he did, was to be traced to the policy which had been pursued by the Government with respect to the supply of food. On the contrary, he (Mr. Labouchere) was daily more and more satisfied that it had been a wise and necessary policy on the part of the Government to abstain from interfering with the supply of food by the legitimate means of private enterprise. He was surprised that the noble Lord should have made these observations at a moment when, by the effect of private trade, enormous quantities of food were pouring into Ireland, and causing the fall of prices there; whereas, if the Government had adopted the opposite policy of discouraging private trade in corn, they would have aggravated the evil. He had had a letter that day which stated, that in the port of Cork there were 100 vessels with full cargoes of grain. The same was the case in Galway and Limerick, and other great ports of Ireland. He rejoiced that the Government had not yielded to the cry; and the result was, that at this period, when relief committees were established in Ireland to supply the destitute poor with food, we started with the Government de-

307
pôts supplied with a larger quantity of provisions than ever; whilst the granaries and storehouses of private merchants contained immense quantities of provisions for the people. With regard to the returns alluded to by the noble Lord, if he had objected to them, it was not because he was desirous of concealing from the House the impression that the mortality in Ireland had been owing to the distress occasioned by the different policy pursued by the Government this year and the last; it was not on that account he objected to the returns, but because he believed it would be difficult to obtain accurate information, and he objected to inaccurate information upon a subject of this description. Whenever the Government were in possession of accurate information, they never refused to furnish it. They had procured returns of coroners' inquests, and returns from the constabulary officers in the different districts, which were laid upon the Table of the House. When the noble Lord asked what was the difference between the mortality of this year and of last year, he (Mr. Labouchere) could only say, that having applied to many persons, and particularly to Irish gentlemen who were best able to give him information upon the subject, he had been assured by them that there did not exist materials in Ireland for giving a return of that nature with such a degree of accuracy as could be relied upon. The noble Lord had observed that the Protestant clergy were obliged to keep a registry of deaths within their own parish. He (Mr. Labouchere) believed that by the canon law there was such an obligation; but he was very much deceived if that law had been generally observed throughout Ireland. This, at least, he knew, that there was no penalty to enforce the observance of a canon law of that description. He had a copy of that canon law before him, and he found the only penalty to be this:—
"That if the minister should be negligent to perform anything therein contained as being required of him, it should be lawful for the bishop to proceed and declare such minister as being containable of this our constitution."
He believed that this penalty was not very efficacious to enforce the observance of the canon law. His objection to the Motion of the noble Lord on a former occasion entirely rested upon the fact that there existed no means by which any such returns as the noble Lord required could be accurately given.
MR. J. O'CONNELLwas willing to
308
give the Government every credit for the desire they felt to use all their exertions to relieve the extreme distress of the Irish people; but there prevailed an opinion in Ireland that the Government might have done much more than they had to provide food on the occurrence of such a dire calamity as the one which now afflicted that country. The people were without seed to sow their small holdings, and the loss of life that was still going on was excessive. He adjured the Government to come forward and arrest the hand of the destroyer, by using every possible means which the powers of government gave them, and not rest so much upon the exertions of individual charity. Let them at this crisis save the lives of the people, and then they might be justified in depending upon the interposition of private enterprise to ward off a similar calamity in future.
MR. SHAWwished to say one word in confirmation of a statement which had been made by the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for Ireland. His opinion was, that there could not be a correct statement made in Ireland of all persons who had been interred in the course of any one year; but still he was bound to say that, as regarded the obligation imposed upon the Protestant clergy by the canon law, he believed that it was well observed. The Ecclesiastical Commissioners issued a form to the clergy of the Church of England in Ireland, and according to that form the clergy gave a complete return of the number of burials of their own flock; but beyond that he believed no account could be furnished.
LORD J. RUSSELLwas anxious to make one or two remarks upon a statement which the noble Lord opposite (Lord G. Bentinck) had more than once made in the House, and which must have been made under a total misapprehension of what were the facts of the case. The noble Lord's statement was, that he (Lord J. Russell) had pledged himself to the speculators that he would not interfere with private trade for the supply of food for Ireland. The noble Lord then went on to say that certain provisions were made last year by the late Government, there being a scarcity, which were intended to make up for the deficiency; and the noble Lord thought that the present Government ought to have made a similar provision for this year. But he considered the noble Lord totally mistaken in his statement. In the first place, he gave no pledge to the corn spe-

309
culators not to interfere with private trade. But what Her Majesty's Government did was this: They took into consideration what was the host thing to be done in consequence of the failure of the potato crop in Ireland, in order to obtain a sufficient supply of food for the people of that country, and they came to the opinion that the best course for them to pursue was not to import food into Ireland, and not to compete with private enterprise in the markets of the world. He had given his opinion on a former occasion with regard to what was done by the late Government last year; but the noble Lord was quite mistaken when he supposed that the late Government made provision to supply food to meet the wants of the Irish people. What the late Government did was to order a certain amount of money to be issued from the Treasury for the purpose of purchasing Indian corn, that it might be introduced into Ireland, and be added to the common food of the people; and in so doing, he conceived that the late Government performed a great and important service. But the same thing could not be repeated, because it was obvious that, when once Indian corn had been introduced into Ireland, the speculators would immediately ask the Government whether it were their intention to compete with them in the supply of that article of food or not. The Government was necessarily bound to state what their course would be. He believed the purchases were made in order that a new article of food should be introduced into Ireland, and not with the notion that the Government should undertake to feed the people of that country. He never heard such a statement made, nor did he believe that the introduction of Indian corn was for that object. He would read to the House a letter which had been addressed to Mr. Trevelyan, Secretary to the Treasury, and which, he thought, would show that the course pursued by the Government had been the correct course:—
"Cork, March 19.
"Sir—Since my respects of the 12th inst., the arrivals of Indian corn at this port have been unprecedented. There are at present over 100 sail, containing an aggregate amount of breadstuff's not short of 20,000 tons, afloat in our harbour. As I before advised you, the stocks of dealers here have been largely accumulating for the last month, and it is now apparent that they have quite overshot the mark in speculation—maize, which a month since brought freely 18 l. per ton, being this day offered in small parcels at 15 l.; and I shall not be surprised to see it considerably lower, if any great proportion of the present arrivals be forced upon
310
the market, which is by no means improbable. Still, some parties here continue to hold out, and would have it appear that the depression is only temporary; I trust, sincerely, that they may be mistaken. I regret to add to this cheering intelligence that fever is spreading rapidly here amongst all classes; our fever hospitals are crowded to excess, and over 300 extra cases in the most populous part of the city cannot obtain admission from want of room.
"P.S. Since writing the foregoing, our special messenger has returned from the Cove of Cork, and reports the number of arrivals, chiefly within the last twenty-four hours, as even more numerous than I supposed; but, the weather being thick and stormy, it has not yet been possible accurately to ascertain the number."
His (Lord J. Russell's) belief was, that a much greater quantity of Indian corn had arrived and been secured in Ireland for supplying the wants of the people till the period of next harvest, than would have been introduced if the Government had undertaken to provide them with food.
LORD J. MANNERSsaid, that after what had been stated by the right hon. the Recorder of the city of Dublin, perhaps the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Labouchere) would have no objection to produce the returns of the mortality among the flocks of the Protestant clergy, whose registries the right hon. and learned Recorder said were accurately kept, although the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for Ireland had declared that there was no dependence to be placed on them.
MR. LABOUCHEREreplied, that what the noble Lord the Member for Lynn asked for, was a return of the mortality which had taken place among the people of Ireland, during this and the preceding year. Now, what the right hon. and learned Recorder stated, was, that the Protestant clergy did keep a registry, but it was only of the deaths of persons belonging to their own persuasion; that was not a very satisfactory answer to a request for a return of the deaths among the whole population. But, if the noble Lord thought it of any importance to have a comparative statement of the mortality among the members of the Church of England in Ireland during the two periods, he, if it could be given, should have no objection to produce it.
MR. V. STUARThad the fullest confidence in Her Majesty's Government that they would do everything they could to rescue the people of Ireland from starvation; but he apprehended the greatest danger would rise from the change that was now taking place by the discharging the people from the public works. Many would

311
be thereby rendered destitute of employment; and the severest distress, and even loss of life, would, he greatly feared, ensue from the system which Government had thought it their duty to adopt.
MR. J. COLLETTwished to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for Ireland a question. It had been stated in the papers, and was generally believed, that the Government had sent over M. Soyer to make soup for the Irish people, and that M. Soyer had engaged to assist them in that occupation and to distribute the soup to upwards of 100 men, and at a very considerable expense. He desired to know from the right hon. Gentleman if M. Soyer really had been sent over, if the attendant expense was incurred by the public, and whether there was any reason to believe that the experiment had answered?
MR. LABOUCHEREregretted that the hon. Gentleman had not given the customary notice that it was his intention to ask a question. [Mr. COLLETT: It is a matter of public notoriety.] M. Soyer had been sent over; he was in communication with the Relief Commissioners; and he conceived that the suggestion had proved extremely valuable. He was not quite sure, but his impression was, that the expenses of M. Soyer's first experiments were paid out of private subscriptions; and that that having been found perfectly successful, the suggestion was adopted by the Relief Commissioners. While upon his legs he would say one word in connexion with what fell from the hon. Gentleman (Mr. V. Stuart). He was quite aware that, do what they could, the transition state through which a great portion of the population would pass when employment could no longer be furnished to them on the public works, and before other occupation was provided, must be accompanied by great distress and severe hardship. All he could say was, that no exertion would be spared to alleviate that inevitable distress. The Relief Commissioners at Dulin were exerting themselves to the utmost to get the new system into operation as soon as possible. In terminating the employment on the public works, a large discretionary power was permitted, and that power would be exercised to avert, as far as practicable, those serious consequences which the hon. Gentleman supposed would ensue.
MR. DILLON BROWNEfeared that the results would be most disastrous, and doubted if the best measures were being taken to meet them. The people should
312
be at once employed in the cultivation of the soil. He was not in the habit of demanding from this country any unnecessary assistance; but he must now say, that in those cases where the seed was not provided by the landlords, it was the bounden duty of the Government to interfere. In this way only could they avoid the recurrence next year of that calamity with which Ireland had been afflicted this year. It would be a very sorry excuse for the Chancellor of the Exchequer in 1848, if he came down to ask for another grant to feed the people, to say that he had depended upon the landlords, and that having leaned upon a broken reed, he had been disappointed. The Government, no doubt, deserved great credit for the courage displayed in refusing to interfere with private enterprise; but this principle of action, under present circumstances, might be carried too far.
MR. DISRAELIhad one observation to make in reference to the statement of the right hon. Gentleman, in answer to the noble Lord the Member for Lynn. It was extremely advisable that it should be distinctly understood from the returns which had been laid on the Table, what were the facts, with regard to the supply of food, furnished by Her Majesty's Ministers to the service of the people of Ireland, and the means taken for the distribution of those supplies, in comparison with what had been done previous to the accesssion of the present Government to power. It appeared that, under the administration of the late Government, there were 93 depôts established, and that these had been reduced by the present Government to 24 depôts. It further appeared that, in November and December, under the present system, 638,932 lb. of meal had been distributed, and that, in the two months almost immediately previous, under the former system, there had been distributed so much as 23,257,000 lb. This was exactly the amount of the difference between the two systems. He would not discuss the policy of the one, or the impolicy of the other. He did not deny that many considerations must influence their view of the subject; but when Her Majesty's Ministers attempted to impress the country with the conviction, that instead of having diminished the means of distribution provided by the late Government, those means had been sustained and even increased, it was quite necessary it should be made known, that where there had formerly been 93

313
depôts, there were now only 24; and, that while in the months of June and July, 23,257,000 odd pounds of meal had been conveyed to Ireland, in the months of November and December only 68,650 1b. had been imported. It was very well for the noble Lord to tell them that the harbours of Ireland were crowded with corn-laden vessels, and that there were 100 sail of merchantmen bearing 20,000 tons of food to the people. That might be very true; but the question was whether, when the steed was stolen, they were not now taking that excessive care of the stable, which was proverbially unnecessary and unfruitful. The statement of his noble Friend the Member for Lynn was, that they had reduced the population by having lessened the number of the staff before employed to distribute the means of subsistence to the destitute; and when such a reply as that which they had heard was given, it was only right that the true state of the case should be understood. What was the inference to be drawn from these facts was quite another question; such were the facts, and no sufficient answer to them was to be found in the declaration of the noble Lord the First Minister, that supplies were fast arriving in Ireland. The moral of the story was apparent: the Government had trusted to those favourite principles of political economy which might be very efficient, but which had only been proved to be efficacious when they had reduced the population a million.
The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERthought that the hon. Gentleman had been arguing on a very obvious fallacy. The two months during which the large supply mentioned by the hon. Gentleman had been provided, were the months previous to the harvest, and before the potato crop was gathered; and the two subsequent months, when the supply was not so great, were those months when the natural resources of the country had become fully available in the alleviation of the prevalent distress. The circumstances marking the two periods were therefore very dissimilar; and the inference drawn by the hon. Gentleman was consequently altogether unfounded. The hon. Gentleman had also drawn a comparison unfavourable to the present Government between the measures taken by the late and the present Administration in reference to the number of depôts established throughout the country. If a little more trouble had been taken in the inquiry, it would have been found that very
314
opposite circumstances had been compared. The system pursued by the late Government was to establish not only the large reserve depôts, but smaller depôts, consisting sometimes of not more than a few sacks, in those districts where facilities were offered by the presence of coast-guard stations or barracks. These precautions were, originally, perhaps, necessary; but afterwards, when their utility ceased, the smaller depôts were abolished. And so far from any censure being deserved, he could assure the hon. Gentleman that the number of the large and important depôts had been more than doubled since the accession of the present Government to office. Comparing like with like, the hon. Gentleman would find that the number of depôts had been considerably increased. Either from private supplies, or the Government depôts, there was now no part of Ireland where food was not distributed. Since the beginning of January, 7,000,000 of rations had been served by the Government; and from the Government mills and the Government bakeries at present the people were fed daily at the rate of 266,000 persons. He had stated enough, he thought, to show the House how unfounded was the hon. Gentleman's complaint; but he would read a statement, showing the benefits of the system that had been pursued this year, contained in an extract from a letter of the Dean of Achonry, who said—
"I beg to take this opportunity of bearing my testimony to the justness of the views taken by the Commisary General in reference to the mode of providing food at the present emergency. I have had opportunities of witnessing the results of the different systems. In one instance, I know of 50 l. having been expended in selling meal at a loss below cost price; and no sooner was the fund exhausted than the retail dealers, who had been obliged in some instances to give up selling, recommenced at unusually high prices to make up for lost time; and in some cases the meal thus sold had been obtained at the cheap depôt while it continued open. Thus the poor were left in a worse case than if there had been no interference. In my own case, although I had doubts at first as to the expediency of the plan, I have seen the beneficial results of acting in accordance with the regulations of the Commissary General. I have sold at the house of a servant, on my land, meal to the amount of 200 l. (besides rice, cheese, and other provisions); and this has not cost me 1s. (except the inconvenience of keeping about 30 l. afloat). By adding 1l. per ton to the price paid at the mill (at a distance of ten miles), I have covered all expenses, and provided for a poor car-man (with a family of twelve), and for the person who weighs and sells the meal (with eight in family), wages to the amount of 4l. each within ten weeks. The advantage to the neighbourhood has been very great. For a mile in every direction

315
around me, the private dealers sell at a reasonable profit. If I had sold at a loss (supposing I could have afforded it), I should have stopped the private dealers, and thereby have limited the supply in the country; and if I had not sold at all, prices would have been higher in the neighbourhood, as they are in other parts of the district. I consider those facts conclusive on the subject now so much discussed."
MR. P. HOWARDwould suggest whether it was not possible to send biscuits to Ireland. In many parts of Ireland, as he had heard, they were actually using Indian corn without being dressed, which was likely to result in all kinds of diseases. They ought to have the salutary and portable food that biscuits supplied.
The CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERstated, that a very considerable quantity of biscuit was now sent by the Government to Ireland.

POOR RELIEF (IRELAND) BILL.
House went into Committe on the Poor Relief (Ireland) Bill. On
Clause 3 — Appointment of relieving officers.
MR. G. A. HAMILTONsaid, it was the object of the Amendment of which he had given notice, to vest the appointment of the relieving officer in the Poor Law Commissioners, instead of the board of guardians. He was free to confess that, generally, he was indisposed to divest the board of guardians of any authority, and vest it in the Commissioners; but it was to be borne in mind that they were entering upon a new experiment, which being one admitted to be fraught with danger, and to require in its trial the greatest caution, it was obvious that its success or failure would depend mainly on the relieving officer, who, it was proposed, should be invested with large powers; it was very desirable he should be free from local influences on either side—guardians might press upon him on the one side, and there might be a pressure from without on the other. It was, therefore, he thought, desirable that this office should be strictly Ministerial, and that he should be appointed and be removable by the Commissioners.
MR. W. S. O'BRIENhoped the Government would not assent to the Amendment proposed by his hon. Friend. He had a strong objection to any alteration which would render the appointment in a less degree popular, and increase the centralization which already was too prevalent.
SIR G. GREYcould not consent to the Amendment.
MR. DILLON BROWNEwas not surprised that such a proposition should come from the hon. Member. Any proposition likely to impair the utility of the Bill might well come from him, and those around him.
MR. SHAWsaid, it was the object of his Colleague to propose, subsequently, a clause which would sanction the appointment of a Committee for the purpose of administering out-door relief, and with this view to make the relieving officer merely Ministerial. It should not be forgotten that in Ireland, perhaps, in some places a relieving officer might be exposed to personal danger, if he refused to give relief to those who applied to him. He supported the Amendment of his hon. Friend.
MR. G. A. HAMILTONsaid, no hon. Member should provoke him to use a single word in the discussion on this Bill which might indicate any party feeling. He would not press his Amendment to a division.
Clause agreed to.
Clause 5 — Medical officers to be appointed.
MR. J. H. HAMILTONsaid, it would be very desirable that boards of guardians should be empowered to take ground near workhouses, of which to make burial grounds for the inmates—a fearful mortality had already taken place in some workhouses, and burials had taken place to a great extent within the precincts; this was very deplorable.
MR. LABOUCHEREintimated, that a measure was in contemplation for this purpose.
MR. G. A. HAMILTONsaid, provision should be made to guard the interests of dispensaries. He could not object that in unions or electoral districts, where there were no dispensaries, the Commissioners might have power to appoint medical officers; but the appointment should be confined to those districts, and the cost be imposed on them.
SIR G. GREYwould consider the suggestion, but thought the 13th Clause made provision for it.
Clause agreed to.
Clause 6—Relieving officers may give provisional relief.
MR. G. A. HAMILTONproposed an Amendment, constituting a Committee in each electoral division, consisting of the guardians and two of the highest rate-

317
payers.He proposed that they should meet once a week, or more frequently if necessary; that the relieving officer should be their servant; that all relief out of the workhouse in each electoral division should be given under their orders; that the Chairman should have charge of the funds, and that in case of sudden or urgent distress, the relieving officer might obtain an order from the Chairman or any two members of the Committee. He hoped the Government would not object to this Amendment.
MR. SMITH O'BRIENagreed to the principle of the clause, but not to its details.
SIR G. GREYcould not consent to it. The efficiency of the Bill would be impaired by it.
MR. G. A. HAMILTONcould only warn the House what they were doing. They were constituting an officer with almost unlimited power of giving relief—they were about to give him funds, and a discretion to give relief in what were called sudden and urgent cases; but who was to judge of the suddenness or urgency of those cases? Why, the relieving officer. He feared those cases would be more frequent and numerous than hon. Members supposed.
Amendment negatived.
On the Motion, that the Clause stand part of the Bill,
MR. POULETT SCROPEsaid, he thought the clause was not sufficiently compulsory on the relieving officer. As he would hold his appointment from the boards of guardians, it was likely that, in many cases, he might be inclined to neglect his duty. In England the overseer was bound by law to give relief in case of sudden emergency. The clause in the English Act, not only empowered but required the overseer to give relief in such cases; and if he did not do so, a justice of the peace could give an order for relief, and the overseer became liable to a penalty of 5l. for the first offence, 20 l. for the second offence, and to imprisonment with hard labour for the third offence. He would wish that after the words "Shall have power to give," they should insert the words "And shall give," in the tenth line of the clause.
SIR G. GREYsaid, that the 13th Clause of the Bill, which defined the duty of the overseers, would meet the objections of the hon. Member.
Clause agreed to.
On Clause 9,
MR. M. J. O'CONNELLsuggested, that it would be better to adjourn the Committee on so important a clause, as the hour was so late.
LORD J. RUSSELLwould consent to the Motion, in the hope that hon. Members who had notices on the Paper would postpone them, in order to enable the House to dispose of this Bill.
The House resumed.
Committee to sit again.

PUNISHMENT—TRANSPORTATION.
On the Motion for Reading the Orders of the Day,
MR. E. DENISON, referring to the Prisons Bill and the Custody of Offenders Bill, inquired, whether it was the intention of Her Majesty's Government to bring the question of transportation before the House?
SIR G. GREYreplied, that it was not his intention to bring the subject before the House; but the noble Lord the Member for Hertford (Viscount Mahon) had intimated to him that he should take an opportunity of introducing the whole subject. He (Sir G. Grey) proposed to go on with the Bills on Thursday.
LORD J. RUSSELL, in reply to another question, said, the question, as brought under the consideration of the House by these two Bills, would not commit the House.
SIR J. GRAHAMwas satisfied, from the experience of four years which he had had of transportation, there was an absolute necessity for some change. He was not aware, however, of any mode in which the question could be brought under the consideration of the House, if the advisers of the Crown should think fit to operate by the prerogative, excepting under one of these Bills. The prerogative of the Crown could effect all the changes in the system of transportation, saving only in the case of Irish convicts, for whom provision was to be made in one of the Bills now before the House. Unless the question could be raised directly in some other shape, he did not believe there would be any other opportunity of discussing the question except upon one of these two Bills.
MR. HENLEYthought some detailed stetement should be made before the House were asked to pass these Bills.
MR. FINCHasked, whether the Crown possessed the prerogative of altering the sentence of transportation?
SIR G. GREYreplied, there could not be a question of it.
SIR J. GRAHAMsaid he should mate no objection to these Bills if there was an understanding that the whole subject would be introduced in a distinct shape shortly after Easter.
SIR G. GREYhoped the question would be raised in a distinct shape; but there was no Bill before the House that would raise it, although the noble Lord (Lord Mahon) had intimated to him, privately, his intention of discussing the subject.
House adjourned at a quarter past One o'clock.