§ SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBYsaid, he understood that an Order in Council, dated the 5th of June, 1855, for regulating the civil establishments of the army, had been revoked by an Order in Council of a later date. The first order stated the duties of all the officers with some details, and prescribed how the civil departments of the army were to be carried on. It appeared, however, that it had been wholly revoked, and that there was now no document on the table to show how the civil establishments of the army were to be governed. Not only had the order been cancelled, but, as he understood, certain offices had been altogether abolished and a new system had been established. He, therefore, wished to ask the noble Lord at the head of the Government, whether he would explain to the House how those establishments were to be carried on for the future, whether there were any Order 26 in Council of which the House had no cognizance which gave the necessary detail, and, if there were, whether the noble Lord would lay it on the table?
§ VISCOUNT PALMERSTONsaid, that the Order in Council to which the hon. Baronet had referred had been revoked by another Order, which, however, did not substitute any new regulations for those contained in the revoked Order. It was his intention to confer with the War Department with respect to the propriety of issuing another Order.