COLONEL HARCOURTsaid, he begged to ask the right hon. President of the Poor Law Board whether there was anything in the law as it now stood, or in the orders of the Poor Law Commissioners, to prevent the guardians of the poor from giving, if they thought fit, out-door relief to the destitute wife and child of any soldier, sailor, or marine in Her Majesty's service?
§ MR. BAINESbegged to say, that there was nothing in the law or in the orders of the Commissioners, as they now stood, to prevent any board of guardians from giving out-door relief to the destitute wife or children of any soldier or sailor on service. He would add that, in the opinion of the Poor Law Commissioners, the same prin- 170 ciple was applicable to the destitute wife or children of militiamen.
COLONEL HARCOURTsaid, he would now beg to ask the right hon. Secretary at War whether, six women per company being the number who with their families are by the regulation of the Army permitted to embark with their husbands on foreign service, the Government will object to grant to those of that number who have been prevented from going out on the present occasion by the exigencies of the service, the same allowance of half rations for the women, and quarter rations for the children, which they would have had if they had gone out?
§ MR. SIDNEY HERBERTsaid, he had to state that there was no instance in which any application had been made to continue the issue of half rations to wives of soldiers who had been prevented under these circumstances from going on foreign service. He was of opinion that the best course would be to leave it to the discretion of the commanding officers to say whether it would be for the advantage of the women in question that they should receive half rations, supposing the application to be made.
§ MR. FLOYERsaid, he wished to inquire whether the claim to out-door relief would be held good in the case of wives without children, as well as of those who had children?
§ MR. BAINESsaid the principle applied in both cases.