Commons Sitting of 1 March 1880

MINUTES.
SELECT COMMITTEE—Sugar Industries, re-appointed and nominated.
SUPPLY—considered in Committee—ARMY ESTIMATES.
PRIVATE BILLS (by Order)—Second Reading—Loose Valley Railway*; Midland Railway*.
PUBLIC BILLS—Resolution in Committee—East India Loan (East Indian Railway Debentures).
Ordered—First Reading—Fraudulent Debtors (Scotland)* [94]; Road Debts on Entailed Estates (Scotland)* [95]; Epping Forest (No. 2)* [96].
Second Reading—General Police and Improvement (Scotland) Provisional Order (Broughty Ferry)* [83]; Post Office (Money Orders) 62], deferred; Volunteer Corps (Ireland) 25], put off.
Withdrawn—Epping Forest Act (1878) Continuance* [73].

QUESTIONS.

  AFGHANISTAN—REPORTED CORRESPONDENCE WITH RUSSIA.
  MR. ASHBURYasked the Under Secretary of State for India, Whether any of the secret Correspondence from the Russian Government or its agents to the late Ameer Shere Ali or others of influence in Afghanistan, found in Cabul or elsewhere, and believed to be prejudicial to the ultimate safety or interests of India, dated from or about the early part of 1873, or any dates prior to the Declaration of War by Russia against Turkey; and, if so, whether Her Majesty's Government, consequent on such discovery, has at any time required explanations from the Russian Government in reference to such Correspondence, having regard to the Memorandum of July 17/29, 1877, brought to this Country by Colonel Wellesley, and delivered to Lord Derby at the special request of the Emperor of Russia, of which the following are extracts:—
  "The Emperor has not the slightest wish or intention in any way to menace the interests of England either with regard to Constantinople, Egypt, the Suez Canal, or India."
  "With respect to India, His Majesty not only considers it impossible to do so, but an act of folly if practicable;"
  22
  whether, in the event of such explanations having been asked for, Her Majesty's Government can at the present time state if it would be in the public interest that the Correspondence should be laid upon the Table of the House to explain the apparent inconsistency of the Russian Emperor's most pacific messages of 1877 in the face of the Despatches or Correspondence from the Russian Government or its agents found in Afghanistan; and, whether the same were dated anterior or subsequent to the Declaration of War by Russia against Turkey?
  MR. E. STANHOPE: Sir, Her Majesty's Government have already on more than one occasion stated that they are not prepared to produce the Russian Correspondence found at Cabul. Under these circumstances, the House will understand that I am unable to give to my hon. Friend any information as to any of the contents of those documents, or of any action which may have been taken upon them.

  THE METROPOLITAN POLICE DISTRICT—CRIMINAL STATISTICS.
  MR. W. M. TORRENSasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, When the Criminal Statistics of the Metropolitan Police District for 1879 will be published; and if it is not a fact that they will show a considerable decrease in serious crime?
  MR. ASSHETON CROSS, in reply, said, the Returns referred to were prepared and brought down to the 31st December, 1879, and appeared in a sort of Appendix to the Commissioner's Report. That was not usually laid before Parliament for a few months; but he was glad to be able to state, in reference to the last part of the hon. Gentleman's Question, that when the Returns were laid on the Table it would be found that they showed a considerable decrease of serious crime in the Metropolitan district.

  MERCANTILE MARINE—CARRIAGE OF GOODS TO THE EAST.
  MR. HOPWOODasked the Postmaster General, Whether he is aware that a combination of the Peninsular and Oriental with other Steam Shipping Companies and Owners was some time since formed for the purpose of "regu-

  23
  lating" the freight and carriage of goods from England to China and Japan with the view to secure a monopoly of the carrying trade; and, whether the Government can exert any influence with the first named Company, drawing as it does a large annual subsidy from the Post Office for the carriage of Mails, to induce it to abstain from making an unfair use of its public employment and payment to the injury of trade generally, but especially of shipowners unassisted by national grants?
  LORD JOHN MANNERS: My attention was called last autumn by a firm in London to a Circular which had just been addressed to merchants and shippers interested in the China and Japan trade by certain shipowners, among whom was the Peninsular and Oriental Company, relative to the carriage of freight; but there is nothing in the mail contract between the Post Office and the Peninsular and Oriental Company which gives me any power to interfere with the proceedings of the Company in such a matter.

  EDUCATION (WALES)—LEGISLATION.
  MR. HUSSEY VIVIANasked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to introduce any measure this Session dealing with the question of Intermediate and Higher Education in Wales?
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: I am afraid it will not be possible to introduce any measure of that kind this Session.

  BULGARIA—DISMISSAL OF THE ASSEMBLY.
  SIR GEORGE CAMPBELLasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, If he has information of the circumstances under which the Prince of Bulgaria dismissed the Assembly, duly elected in accordance with the Constitution, before it had an opportunity of proceeding to business, and went off to visit the Emperor of Russia before calling together another Assembly; whether the new elections have been fairly conducted; and, whether any time is appointed for the meeting of the new Assembly and establishment of a Constitutional Government, or whether there
  24
  is any reason to suppose that the Prince is engaged in an attempt to subvert the Constitution?
  MR. BOURKE: According to the information we have received, the Assembly was dissolved in due course of law, and we have not heard of any irregularity in the conduct of the elections. Her Majesty's Government have not been informed of any intention on the part of the Prince of Bulgaria to attempt to subvert the Constitution of that Principality.
  SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL: Would the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs be so good as to answer a part of the Question which he overlooked—whether any time is appointed for the meeting of the New Assembly in place of the one dissolved?
  MR. BOURKE: We have not heard yet.

  EDUCATION DEPARTMENT—SCHOOL BOARD ELECTIONS.
  MR. A. MILLSasked the Vice President of the Council, Whether his attention has been called to the inconvenience and expense occasioned by the nomination of candidates for School Boards in their absence and without their consent, and to the evils thereby involved of useless contests at the cost of the ratepayers; and, whether it is in the power of the Education Department, under the provisions of the Act of 1870, to frame such regulations as might remedy this evil without further legislation?
  LORD GEORGE HAMILTON: There have been thousands of School Board elections held under the provisions of the Act of 1870, and in no case has the attention of the Education Department been directed to the inconvenience complained of by my hon. Friend. Until, therefore, we have some practical proof before us of the reality of this complaint we should not be disposed to alter the existing regulations.

  POST OFFICE (MONEY ORDERS) BILL.
  MR. W. BECKETT DENISONasked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether it is his intention to proceed with the Post Office (Money Orders) Bill either in its present shape or some other; if so, whether before proceeding with it he will lay upon the Table of the House the

  25
  form of Notes, in their respective denominations, in order to issue which he proposes to ask for the repeal of the Bank Charter Acts in favour of the Post Office; and, whether such Notes, if issued, being orders for the payment of money on demand, will not be liable to Stamp Duty; and, if so, whether he intends also to ask for the repeal of the Stamp Act in favour of the Post Office, in order to enable it to issue the Notes free of duty?
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON: It is the intention of the Government to proceed with the Bill. What I propose to do is to lay this evening on the Table of the House the proposed regulations to be made under the Bill, as well as the modifications I intend to make in the Bill in the shape of Amendments. Those Amendments will alter the 12 months to six; they will make the denominations of notes for sums of less than £1, and they will limit the power of the Postmaster General to pay expired notes. The Amendments will also contain the form of the money order, which I propose to place in a Schedule to the Bill. When that is done it will be unnecessary to repeal the Bank Charter Acts in favour of the Post Office, and that Schedule will be omitted. In answer to the last Question, as there may be a doubt whether the new orders would come under the exemption from stamp duty given to the original money orders, I propose to exempt them directly by a clause in the Bill.
  MR. DODSON: Does the hon. Member propose to proceed with the Bill tonight?
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON: No; I propose to defer it for a fortnight.

  PRIVILEGE (TOWER HIGH LEVEL BRIDGE (METROPOLIS) COMMITTEE) —MR. CHARLES EDMUND GRISSELL.
  MR. C. BECKETT DENISONasked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether he is about to submit any Motion with regard to Charles Edmund Grissell, who, on the 14th of August last,
  "was committed to Newgate for having evaded the execution of Mr. Speaker's warrant for taking him into the custody of the Serjeant at Arms, until the close of the Session,"
  and who was released on the following day, the 15th of August, by reason of the prorogation of Parliament?
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: Since my hon. Friend put his Question on the Paper I consulted the authorities as to the proper course to be taken. I have now to move that this case be taken into consideration tomorrow.
  Motion agreed to.
  Ordered, That the case of Charles Edmund Grissell be taken into consideration To-morrow.—(Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer.)

  NAVY—THE ROYAL MARINES.
  MR. ANDERSONasked the First Lord of the Admiralty, If his attention has been drawn to one or more Memorials which were sent in, during the recess, by Officers of the Royal Marines, complaining that they had been, improperly superseded; whether he is aware that, in reply to at least one of these, it was said that the Officer had been dealt with according to "existing Regulations," but when the Regulations were asked for they were not forthcoming; and, if the Regulations alluded to are in such form that they, and the Order in Council authorising them, can be referred to or produced?
  MR. W. H. SMITH: My attention has been given to some Memorials which have been addressed to the Board of Admiralty by officers of the Royal Marines during the Recess. In answer to one of those officers, Colonel Gwyn, that officer was informed that the promotion complained of was made in accordance with the existing Regulations. Those Regulations will be found in the Order in Council authorizing them.
  MR. ANDERSON: Where can they be referred to?
  MR. W. H. SMITH: They will be found in the Library.

  RELIEF OF DISTRESS (IRELAND).
  MR. ERRINGTONasked the Chief Secretary for Ireland, When the Returns ordered by the House on the 10th of February, as to how far the relief measures had taken effect in each of the distressed unions in Ireland up to the 7th of February, will be laid upon the Table?
  MR. J. LOWTHER: Sir, there has been a great pressure on the staff of the Board of Works in Ireland during the last few weeks, as the hon. Gentleman is no doubt aware, and I find that they

  27
  will not be able to send over these Returns until to-morrow night. Having been so long delayed, however, I would put it to the hon. Gentleman if it would not be the more convenient way to discharge the Order made on the 10th of February, which was for Returns only up to the 7th of February, and render the Returns complete by having them made up to the last day on which the notices could be given.

  VACCINATION—DURHAM BOARD OF GUARDIANS.
  MR. GOURLEYasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, If his attention has been called to the Reports of the vaccination officers of the Durham guardians for the year 1878, in which they state that out of 2,381 children born in the Western and St. Nicholas district, 305 died from the effects of vaccination, and during the first six months of last year the number of deaths in the same union were 141 from the same cause; and, what measures he intends adopting in order that this excessive death rate may be diminished?
  MR. SCLATER-BOOTH: I have caused the Returns of the vaccination officers of the Durham Guardians for 1878 and 1879 to be examined. They contain no information as to deaths caused by vaccination. What they do contain are statements in separate columns, showing in the one the total number of births, in the other the number of children who have died before vaccination. As the numbers thus given correspond very closely with the figures stated in the Question, I am driven to the conclusion that "the excessive mortality" shown is the mortality of children who died without being vaccinated at all. As I am unaware of any deaths having occurred from vaccination, it is impossible for me to adopt steps to prevent them.

  METROPOLIS (WATER SUPPLY) BILL.
  MR. FAWCETTasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, If he can inform the House when the Bill relating to the Water Supply of London will be introduced?
  MR. ASSHETON CROSS: Until today I should have been unable to answer the Question of the hon. Member for
  28
  Hackney. I beg to state that I am now in a position to introduce the Bill, and I think it right that I should ask leave to do so to-morrow evening. Although the matter may not be reached till late, I think it desirable that I should make a statement, but it will be comparatively short, and the Bill will be in the hands of Members on Wednesday morning.

  ROYAL SCHOOL OF MINES.
  SIR JOHN HAYasked the Vice President of the Council, Whether the instruction hitherto given at the Royal School of Mines in Jermyn Street is no longer to be given there, but entirely at South Kensington; and, whether he has considered how far such an arrangement will be equally advantageous for purposes of instruction, as the lectures will be delivered at such a distance from the museum which is intended to illustrate them?
  LORD GEORGE HAMILTON: It is proposed to move one of the Classes now at Jermyn Street to South Kensington; and, judging from the development and growth of the Classes already removed to South Kensington, I think we need have no fear that the removal will, in any degree, impair the efficiency of the education given.

  THE BALLOT ACT—CASES OF SCRUTINY.
  MR. W. E. FORSTER: There was a Return ordered last Session of the number of cases of scrutiny under the Ballot Act. I should like to know from the Secretary of State for the Home Department when that Return will be in the hands of Members?
  MR. ASSHETON CROSS: I believe the Return was laid on the Table on the 23rd of last month. The matter rests, therefore, with the printers, over whom, I am sorry to say, I have no authority. It will, no doubt, be ready before long.

  AFFAIRS OF AFGHANISTAN.
  MR. OTWAY: I wish to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer a Question of which I would have given him private Notice but from absence from town. There has appeared in some of the newspapers telegraphic news, copied from an Indian paper, supposed to possess

  29
  authentic sources of information—The Lahore Gazette—purporting to be the Government programme for the arrangement of affairs in Afghanistan. May I ask, whether the Government has received any official communication in accord with the alleged programme of The Lahore Gazette?
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: I think it would be more convenient if the hon. Gentleman would place a Notice of his Question on the Paper.

  PARLIAMENT—BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
  In reply to Mr. DILLWYN,
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid: I hope it may be in our power to make some progress with the Army Estimates, and finish the Civil Service Supplementary Estimates this evening. If that should be the case, we propose on Thursday to take the Civil Service Estimates, and on Monday next to take the Navy Estimates. I would also mention that on Thursday I propose to introduce the Bill, of which I have already spoken, for the allocation of the vacant seats.

ORDERS OF THE DAY.

  SUPPLY—COMMITTEE.
  Order for Committee read.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair."

PARLIAMENT—LORD CASTLEREAGH.

  PERSONAL EXPLANATIONS.
  MR. BIGGARrose to call the attention of the House to the criticisms of Dr. H. Quin on the conduct of the noble Lord the Member for County Down, with Minutes of the Council of the Ulster Home Government Association. The hon. Member said, that personally he did not think this matter was one of very great importance; but as it had given rise to a good deal of discussion in the public papers, he had thought it his duty to bring the subject before the House and before the noble Lord whose conduct was impugned. On reading the report of the speech which the noble
  30
  Lord made on a previous occasion, he (Mr. Biggar) wrote to parties in Belfast whom he thought might possibly know something of the facts of the case. He did not bring the matter forward in the slightest degree in the interests of either the Whig or the Tory Party; but simply to give the noble Lord an opportunity of setting himself right with the House, if he wished to do so. The noble Lord was reported to have said that he was never asked any questions on the subject of Home Rule in the County Down. He did not wish to bring any serious charge of want of accuracy against the noble Lord, because he was disposed to make allowance for a lapse of memory; or that, perhaps, in the excitement of a political contest, he might not have remembered all that took place. He could imagine that was so; and if it was, it should be a caution to gentlemen who cross-examined candidates at elections to have their communications in writing. The statement of the noble Lord was very explicit; but the statement of his (Mr. Biggar's) friend in Belfast, who was the hon. Secretary of the Home Government Association, was also equally explicit. Dr. Quin was a gentleman of high character, and his word was to be believed, and he was convinced the statement he was about to read to the House was thoroughly correct, although he repeated that he was not disposed to say that the noble Lord had been intentionally incorrect in his denial. In addition to the letter of Dr. Quin which he had received, there was the additional corroboration of members of the Association, which were taken immediately after the event had occurred; and, after reading these statements, he thought the House would arrive at the conclusion that the noble Lord really did pledge himself to abstain from voting on the question of Home Rule. Now, the words reported to have been used by the noble Lord in this House were that he had had no communication with the Home Rulers, and that he was never asked any questions on the subject of Home Rule in the County Down. Dr. Quin stated that he and a number of the Ulster Home Government Association were appointed a deputation to visit the candidates. Mr. Andrews, the Whig candidate, informed the deputation that he would vote against Home Rule, against University

  31
  Catholic Education, and against Mr. Butt's Land Bill. With regard to the noble Lord, Dr. Quin said that on the 10th of May, 1878, the deputation heard him address the electors in the Court House at Bangor. As soon as he came out of the Court House, the deputation addressed his Lordship in the street, and told him that they had been appointed by the Ulster Home Government Association to wait on the rival candidates for County Down, and ask them to abstain from voting on the Home Rule question, and his Lordship replied—"I will abstain." Dr. Quin thought he added—"Upon my honour I will abstain;" but was not quite certain about those words. He was, however, certain that his Lordship said point blank—"I will abstain." Dr. Quin thereupon observed—"You can easily abstain. Keep away hunting or shooting, and nobody will be any the wiser." The noble Lord again reiterated his neutral pledge. He (Mr. Biggar) had a letter from the Rev. Father Cahill, another member of the deputation, in which the reverend gentleman said, that the exigencies of Party must, indeed, be terrible to produce such havoc in the noble Lord's memory. Father Cahill's narrative was to the effect that he and Dr. Quin were appointed as a deputation to wait on Lord Castlereagh and Mr. Andrews with respect to the restoration of the Irish Parliament and Catholic Education. The Minute Book stated that on the 22nd of May an adjourned meeting of the Council was held, when the deputation were asked to give a verbatim report of the interview. Father Cahill said—
  "I introduced the deputation from this Council to the noble Lord. I then said—'If elected, will you oppose the Catholic Education Bill, or be neutral on that question?' He said—'I will be neutral on that question.' Dr. Quin then said—'If elected, will you oppose Home Rule, or consent to be neutral on the question?' Lord Castlereagh Baid—'I will be neutral.'"
  Now, in bringing this matter before the House, he had not attempted to push the case too much against the noble Lord; but he thought he had given sufficient evidence to show that the observations of the noble Lord, when the subject was before the House the other evening, were not a true statement of the facts; and, therefore, he hoped the noble Lord would say that the report was incorrect through the neglect of the reporters, or
  32
  that his memory had been defective in regard to what really took place.
  VISCOUNT CASTLEREAGH: Sir, the House may remember that a short time ago I ventured to offer a few words of explanation in regard to certain remarks made by the noble Lord the Leader of the Opposition concerning myself. Last Friday week, Sir, I received a letter from the hon. Member for Cavan, in which he informed me that he had received such a letter from a Dr. Quin, of Belfast, as justified him in contradicting the statement which I had made in the House. After receiving that letter I immediately communicated with my friends in the County Down in order to verify my recollection; and I am glad to say that the result of these inquiries is that I now strictly adhere to the statement I previously made. I find, on inquiry, that an interview did take place between Dr. Quin and myself; but as I did not know Dr. Quin, either by sight or by name, it is rather hard for me to be expected to remember that I met him among the very great number of people I met during the course of my candidature. I can assure the House that when I met Dr. Quin I had not the slightest idea that he came to me on behalf of the Ulster Home Rule Association. When he came to me I had just been addressing a great meeting in the town of Bangor, and I was accosted by two gentlemen in the public street. The interview took place in the presence of upwards of 100 people, many of whom are influential electors of the County Down, and there happened to be present the then Grand Master of the Orange Lodge of Belfast. During this interview not a word was said to lead me to suppose that those two gentlemen in any way represented the Home Rule Association; and hence I think I was perfectly justified in stating to the House that I had received no deputation from the Home Rule Association. I again distinctly state that during this interview I gave no promise, directly or indirectly, with regard to Home Rule. This statement is borne out by letters which I hold in my hand, and which were written by gentlemen who were present at the interview, and by others who were standing by; and, if necessary, I could bring forward evidence to fully endorse all I have said. On an ordinary occasion, Sir, I should con-

  33
  sider that I had already said quite sufficient; but, with the permission of the House, I shall venture to read an extract from an article that appeared in one of the most influential and most ably-conducted newspapers in the Province of Ulster. I venture to think that, after I have read it, the House will agree with me that there is no further need to prolong this discussion. The paper I refer to is The Ulster Examiner, which is the leading organ of the Home Rule Party in the North of Ireland, and the number from which I shall quote is dated 20th July, 1878, which the House will observe was only two months after the election. The extract is as follows:—
  "Our Gladstonian contemporaries are anxious to know what promises Lord Castlereagh gave to his Catholic supporters during the recent contest. We should be something like an authority upon this matter, and we will answer the question by stating that Lord Castlereagh gave no promise to vote for Home Rule. The alleged confederation between him and the Home Rulers is quite a myth. We trust our very Liberal contemporaries will be satisfied with this very Liberal announcement. The Home Rule pledge which our contemporaries allude to exists only in their imagination. It was never given by Lord Castlereagh; but other concessions were made by him. He pledged himself to support the education policy of the Government, and to stand by Lord Beaconsfield tooth and nail, and once for all allay the heartburnings of the Irish people. If the organ of the Corn Exchange wishes to know whether Lord Castlereagh pledged himself to the Home Rulers—well, we candidly answer, "He did not.'"
  MR. SULLIVANremarked, that the late Protestant Archbishop of Dublin, Dr. Whately, wrote an amusing little work, entitled Historic Doubt concerning the Existence of Napoleon Bonaparte. By a process similar to that which had been seen in the House to-night, the Archbishop showed that there were very contradictory statements as to anything which Napoleon had said or done, or whether he ever existed. The statements of the two gentlemen who had been quoted would be believed in Ulster as readily as, he would not say any more readily than, the statement of the noble Lord. They had the testimony of these two gentlemen declaring positively to an interview in the streets of Bangor; whereas the noble Lord declared that nothing of the kind occurred. ["No!"] At all events, the noble Lord denied what was alleged to have passed on the
  34
  occasion. If the matter rested there, there might be some doubt; but it was a most remarkable fact that when the noble Lord needed the aid in the County Down of the Home Rulers, his agent purchased 500 copies of a newspaper which contained a resolution stating that the noble Lord had given satisfactory pledges to the Home Rulers. Hon. Gentlemen opposite very intelligently drew a wide distinction between promising to vote for Home Rule and promising to be neutral; but they were quite unable to draw a distinction at Liverpool between voting for an inquiry and voting for Home Rule. This was so much of a personal matter that he (Mr. Sullivan) did not wish to go on with it. It simply meant this—that in future the Irish electors ought to be very careful as to the pledges they received from candidates standing for different constituencies, and also the pledges so readily given by their agents. It was very painful for Gentlemen to be bandying statements which were contradicted on the floor of that House. He knew that Conservative Gentlemen would not be likely to hold communications henceforth with Homo Rulers, because the period had passed for the present when they thought they might secure the Home Rule vote; and as grapes were sour when they could not be reached, there was no doubt that for some time to come they would hear no more of Conservative coquettings with Home Rule.
  THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON: Sir, as the involuntary cause of the trouble which has been given to the noble Lord, I desire to say one or two words as to the course I have taken in the matter. All I said, in referring to the subject a few days ago, was that there appeared to be some doubt as to the precise position of the noble Lord with regard to the Home Rule question, and, perhaps, I may be allowed to say a word in justification of the course I have taken. The House will recollect that what I said was that there appeared to be, or that I understood there was, some doubt as to the position the noble Lord held with regard to the Home Rule question, and that we ought to have the doubt cleared up. What has passed shows I was entirely justified in the statement which I made. The noble Lord has just made a statement which I accept, and which I am sure the whole House will accept, as

  35
  absolutely correct. At the same time, that does not in the least alter the fact that there does appear to have existed at the time of the election, and, indeed, up to the present moment, a great misapprehension in the County Down as to the position which the noble Lord held with regard to the Home Rule question. I must say that the deputation from the Home Rule Association took an extremely inconvenient mode of ascertaining his opinion. I am not in the least surprised that misapprehension should have arisen as to what occurred at an interview of that kind, and I entirely accept the noble Lord's statement with regard to it. Still I cannot acquit the noble Lord's supporters and friends of having taken advantage of what was evidently a total misapprehension for the purpose of promoting the noble Lord's election. It appears that a resolution was passed by the Home Rule League, in which they stated that the assurances received from the noble Lord were satisfactory. No doubt, that resolution did not come under the personal observation of the noble Lord, but it must have come under the observation of many of his supporters; and it was not fair that up to this time no steps were taken to correct an entirely erroneous statement, on the strength and presumed accuracy of which the noble Lord received the support of the Association, which was given under a total misapprehension of what the noble Lord had said upon the question. I am sorry that the House has been troubled with personal explanations of this character, and I am sorry that the noble Lord has been called upon to explain the exact position of affairs; but, at the same time, I cannot say that I can take the smallest blame to myself in the matter, because it was most desirable that a misapprehension so long existing should now at last be finally cleared up.
  MR. SPEAKER: The Motion before the House is the Motion to go into Committee of Supply. On a Motion of that character considerable latitude is usually allowed by the House; and the hon. Member for Cavan has been permitted to bring forward what he considers a grievance before the House goes into Committee of Supply. The House has also heard on a personal matter the noble Lord the Member for the County Down. I am bound to say, however, that if de-
  36
  bates are to arise on personal matters of this character, such a course will lead to grave inconvenience.
  Mr. PEASEsaid, that after what had fallen from the Speaker he desired to say only one word. He had had the honour of contesting an election with the noble Lord the Member for the County Down as his opponent. Party spirit then ran high, but he could state that the noble Lord never twisted one word of his or of his Colleagues; nor did the noble Lord deviate one iota, in order to gain that election, from the course of an honourable and an upright man. He could believe that Party spirit ran even higher in Ireland; but he could not believe, from the character of the noble Lord and his family in the county which he had the honour to represent, that the noble Lord would wilfully mislead the House, either as regarded half a promise or a whole promise.
  SIR THOMAS BATESON: Sir, I was in the County Down and knew a good deal about the elections of 1878. I am prepared to assert, and I have letters to prove, that the noble Lord neither directly nor indirectly either promised to be neutral or to abstain from voting on the question of Home Rule. That question was never put to him. The gentleman who accompanied Dr. Quin who has been mentioned has, on paper and in print, declared emphatically that the question never was put, and I think the noble Lord has amply vindicated his position. I hold in my hand a manifesto issued by the Home Rule Association at the election, in which Home Rule never was mentioned; nor, indeed, was it mentioned during the canvass of either of the candidates. I admit that a large number of the respectable Roman Catholics supported the noble Lord in that election, and perhaps hon. Gentlemen opposite would like to know the reason why? I will tell them the reason. It was because the respectable Roman Catholics of the County Down have learned to distrust, to suspect, and to dislike the Whigs, Whiggery, and Whig nominees, that they supported the noble Lord. And further, they held this language—
  "We, the Roman Catholics of the County Down, have hitherto been made hewers of wood and drawers of water for the democratic Presbyterians, and, therefore, we will support the son of one of the best landlords in Ireland."
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: I earnestly hope the House will bear in mind the few words which you, Sir, addressed to it a short time ago. We are perfectly well aware that there is nothing the House holds so dear as the honour of its Members; and, therefore, at whatever risk or inconvenience to our debates, we are always ready to give a hearing to those who wish to speak upon personal conduct. I have no doubt that the hon. Member for Cavan brought forward this question in order to clear up a matter on which he thought there was something to be said; and I am sure everyone who listened, to my noble Friend's answer was thoroughly satisfied—["No, no!"]—was thoroughly satisfied with the noble, straightforward, and frank manner in which he answered the questions put to him. ["No, no!"] I am extremely sorry if anybody can form a different impression from that which it has made upon me, and I believe upon the House generally. However, after these explanations have been given, and now that we have been informed by the noble Lord of what occurred, the time has, in my opinion, come for the matter to be allowed to drop. It was natural that the noble Lord opposite (the Marquess of Hartington) should have made the remarks he did in reference to what passed on a previous occasion; but I do think we should be committing a serious error if we allowed ourselves to be drawn into a discussion with respect to the politics of any particular part of the United Kingdom, or, indeed, of any matter further touching the question now before the House. I am sure there will be a general opinion that the noble Lord has acted Straightforwardly. ["No, no!"] Well, that will be the opinion of all who have listened candidly to what the noble Lord said. I hope your advice, Sir, will be taken, and that we may now be allowed to proceed with the Business of the evening.
  MR. CALLANsaid, he was sorry to intrude upon the House in connection with the present personal discussion, and he would not have done so but for the unfortunate remarks of the hon. Baronet the Member for Devizes (Sir Thomas Bateson). He was not surprised that the hon. Baronet should have made an attack upon the Whig Party, seeing that he had been expelled by them from
  38
  his seat in Ireland on a former occasion. The hon. Baronet had said that he knew everything that had happened at the County Down election. Well, at the present moment a matter of great interest was under discussion in the North of Ireland, and that was a statement by Mr. Finigan, who was present at this interview between the noble Lord and the deputation from the Home Rulers, that he had discovered the secret of how everyone had voted, notwithstanding the secrecy of the Ballot. But the hon. Baronet had said emphatically that there was not one word mentioned about Home Rule during the entire canvass of either of the candidates. In regard to this matter, the honour of the noble Lord was not alone at stake. The honour and political character of the Rev. Mr. Cahill, the recognized manager and editor of The Ulster Examiner, was also at stake, and that of the Secretary of the Home Rule Association of Ulster. He (Mr. Callan) had had some slight part in this matter, and he gave a hearty and thorough support to the candidature of the noble Lord for the County Down. He did so because of the express statement of the Home Rule Association, that the noble Lord had satisfied them upon one point; and they should recollect that what had occurred in the House in connection with this matter bore that statement out. The noble Lord had carefully avoided, on the present occasion, to reiterate or re-affirm the declaration which he made on the last occasion. The noble Lord then said he was asked no question on the subject of Home Rule in the county of Down. He had carefully avoided reaffirming that statement that day. He had again denied that he made any pledge whatever to support Home Rule; but that was not the charge that was made. The charge which was made, and which had not been denied, was that he gave a distinct pledge of neutrality on two points—namely, upon Catholic University Education and Home Rule. He was not at all surprised at the misapprehension and mystification which existed as to what pledge the noble Lord gave; for they knew that similar mystification existed as to the intrigue which was carried, and the pledge which was made, on behalf of the Whig Party at the Sheffield election.
  MR. FINIGAN: The question rests not on an alleged promise of the noble Lord to vote for Home Rule, but on his promise not to vote against it. I find in The Morning News, a Presbyterian organ of Ulster, this statement published on the 22nd of May, 1878—
  "The support of the Home Rulers was deliberately bargained for by Lord Castlereagh, and was purchased by a promise given by him not to vote against Home Rule."
  I am not surprised that the noble Lord should now deny in public what he secretly promised. I expected nothing else from the collateral descendant of the infamous Castlereagh of Union times. ["Oh, oh!"] I did not, and could not, expect anything else from the descendant of one of such infamous notoriety. ["Oh, oh!" "Order!"]

IRELAND—THE ENNISHOWEN FISHERY, COUNTY DONEGAL.

  RESOLUTION.
  MR. O'DONNELL, in rising to call attention to the urgent need of a fishery pier and harbour at Malin Head, Ennishowen, county Donegal, and to move—
  "That greater facilities than are now available should be granted to the distressed inhabitants for raising the sum of money required,"
  said, if he cared to occupy the time of the House, he could quote copious extracts to show the excessive distress prevailing at Ennishowen at the present time. But even in ordinary times the fishing interests of Ireland should be the object of a great deal of care on the part of the Government; and year after year the Irish Members had endeavoured to secure some attention and care in this respect from the Government. The whole coast of Donegal, especially that part of it lying between Lough Swilly and Lough Foyle, was exposed to the fury of the Atlantic gales; and there was great need, therefore, for some protection for the fishermen in plying their dangerous calling in that locality. The distress round Malin Head was now extremely severe; and he thought that the Government ought to take the opportunity of doing a work which would be not only of permanent benefit to the locality, but of the highest advantage in relieving and mitigating the prevalent severe distress. Some time ago all the leading persons in the
  40
  district, without distinction of politics or creed, joined in a Petition for a fishery pier and harbour being erected at Malin Head, and a local inquiry was in consequence held by Mr. Brady and Mr. Johnson, the Fishery Inspectors, who agreed that the circumstances were such that there was an urgent need for such a work being undertaken. There was a good case in favour of Government aid. The Board of Works laid it down that if one-quarter of the sum required was raised in the locality, the remainder would be advanced by them. In ordinary years the amount could be raised in the locality; but now all their energies were occupied in relieving the necessities of the country, and it was quite impossible that the sum required—about £1,000—could be raised. If the Government would hold out to the locality any hope that the entire sum would be advanced on such easy terms as money was advanced to landlords, they might set to work to construct the pier and harbour, and thereby relieve much misery and afford protection to the local fishing industry. He hoped the Government would in this case dispense with red-tapeism. If the money were advanced to the inhabitants on the same terms as to the landlords he did not think the Treasury would suffer, and a great benefit would be conferred on the district. It was literally impossible for any fishing industry to grow up on such exposed parts of the Irish coast until something was done, in the first place, by public authority and at the public expense. If fishing piers and harbours were constructed the fishermen could invite capital; fishing boats of an improved character would be employed in the trade, as they would be protected against stress of weather. Through the absolute want of such conveniences the fishermen could now only drag their boats up on the beach. There could be nothing but the most wretched sort of fishing on the coast of Ireland, especially in Donegal, until the Government afforded liberal assistance. The loss to the Treasury would be recouped in a little time, and there would result a great development of industry and prosperity.
  Amendment proposed,
  To leave out from the word "That" to the end of the Question, in order to add the words "greater facilities than are now available should

  41
  be granted to the distressed inhabitants of the county Donegal for raising a sum of money required for the erection of a fishery pier and harbour at Malin Head, Ennishowen,"—{Mr. O'Donnell,)
  —instead thereof.
  Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question."
  MR. O'CLERY, in supporting the Motion of the hon Member for Dungarvan, urged the desirability of a similar work being undertaken at Ross and Loop Head, at the mouth of the Shannon. Mr. Brady, one of the Commissioners of Fisheries in Ireland, had pointed out the desirability of establishing fishing piers there, and had clearly shown that for an expenditure of a few hundred pounds the fishing population of that one locality might realize £2,000 a-year. There could be no better way of helping the people than by such advances, and it was a question for the Government for a time to deal with.
  SIR HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, there was no question which of late had more pressed itself on the attention of the Government than the increase of facilities for the erection of piers to protect the fisheries. The Treasury regulations on the subject of loans had been relaxed; and in several cases where one-fourth of the cost had been provided by the districts concerned the Treasury had consented to provide the remaining three-fourths. Out of the list which had been recommended by the Fishery Inspectors five had been sanctioned by the Government; and three more in the County Donegal had since been sanctioned, at his instance, from representations which had been made to him by the noble Marquess the Member for Donegal (the Marquess of Hamilton). The endeavour of the Government had always been, not to lose sight of what he believed to be a sound principle—namely, that there should be some evidence of local interest in the erection of piers. He was quite aware that the harbour referred to by the hon. Member was also in the list of those which had been recommended by the Fishery Commissioners; but it was lower down, and it therefore appeared not to be so important. If the locality was much interested in its erection, application could be made under the Bill for the
  42
  Relief of Distress to the baronial sessions, and on a presentment contribution could be obtained from the Government on easier terms than those granted at ordinary times. Recognizing the fact that fishery piers and harbours were of material assistance to those who were dependent on the particular industry under consideration, he assured hon. Members that the question would always command his serious attention.
  GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOURsaid, he yielded to no Member in the desire to see additional harbours constructed and old harbours improved. To this end he had repeatedly appealed to the Treasury; but though at times success was likely to result by attention being given to his appeals, he was sorry to say that these hopes had hitherto not been realized. He had also obtained in 1876 an important Return of all public expenditure on harbours since the beginning of this autumn, and hon. Members would find that an outlay of nearly £10,000,000 had been incurred. Now, he would like to know how much, amongst the £10,000,000 spent on those works, had been spent for the benefit of the country? He would be glad if the Secretary to the Treasury could point out one harbour in 10 that was now of use to the country; and he would even ask how many of those upon which the money had been expended during the last six years in Ireland were successful? ["Oh!"] He would be glad to be corrected if he wore wrong. He quite agreed with his hon. Friend that by the expenditure of a small sum of money much good might, be done in improving the piers or harbours for fishery purposes; but, looking to what had been the result of their operations in Scotland, as well as in Ireland, he would recommend the Government, before they undertook to lay out more money on piers and harbours, to ascertain whether the engineers knew how to construct them. Judging from the many failures in the designing of new harbour works, he was fully justified in expressing the thought that their engineers did not know how to construct them. He had repeatedly urged that, before more public money was spent on these works, inquiries should be made by engineers, under the orders of the Government of the country, into all harbours, not only in the United Kingdom, but in foreign countries, as to

  43
  the state of harbours both as respected those that had been successful as well as failures. The cost of this investigation need not be large, because it would be easy to find men qualified to inquire and report thereon at moderate remuneration. On those reports, and with carefully-designed plans, obtained they would then acquire such ample knowledge as to have some guarantee for their engineers avoiding the mistakes made in the past, so that they might construct harbours in a manner that would reflect credit upon the country. Some of the harbours in Scotland had been enormous failures. They had been constructed on bad principles, and of bad material, and not one fraction of the money expended on them would ever come back. Whilst cautioning the Government against expending money on harbours which were from their ignorance most likely to be unsuccessful, he must add that he did not despair of improvement in this direction; but it could only be secured by proper means. The question would then not be raised as to money being furnished by Government, but as to obtaining permission to select sites where sea works could be allowed to be thrown up. The funds would be readily found by the public, because good harbours would so extend their fisheries as to insure supplies of fish more valuable than the land rental of the district.
  Question put, and agreed to.
  Main Question, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair," put, and agreed to.

SUPPLY—ARMY ESTIMATES.
  SUPPLY—considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)

  DEPARTMENTAL STATEMENT.
  COLONEL STANLEY: In rising to move the Army Estimates for the ensuing year, I feel, in comparison with the statements which it has been my duty, and that of other Ministers, to make on this occasion in previous years, that the Estimates of the ensuing year will, perhaps, present features of comparatively little interest to the Committee. It has been the custom ever since my right hon. Friend the late Secretary of State for War succeeded to his Office to endeavour to give to the House, and
  44
  through the House to the country, the largest possible amount of information with regard to the Army, by statistics and other records of various descriptions. Therefore, I feel that it is not of the highest necessity, and not being a matter of necessity, that it certainly is not advisable, that I should delay the Committee by venturing upon any detail into figures with which they already are familiar in another form, although, of course, when the time comes, I shall be fully ready to give explanations of the figures where they are required. There are, however, still certain points of interest which from time to time, as I proceed through the Estimates, I shall endeavour, I hope at no undue length, to bring before the notice of the Committee. At the same time, I am bound at once to express my regret that circumstances have made it impossible for me to carry out as I should have wished the promises that I made at this time last year. It will be in the recollection of some of those who take an interest in these matters that at the time when the Forces were proceeding to the Cape and to Zululand last year great attention was drawn to the mode in which, at the present time, battalions are made up for service in the field. That is a subject upon which I gave the House, to the best of my power, and in the frankest manner, all the information that came before me. I endeavoured, I hope without casting undue blame anywhere, to point out what I thought were the defects of the system under which we were then working. I also announced, although obliged to speak with some reserve, that we hoped to be able to take steps to remedy the defects which impeded the work of our existing system. A Committee, as many hon. Members are already aware, was appointed, consisting of officers of considerable experience and distinction in various branches of the Service, which, under the presidency of General Lord Airey, undertook to inquire into the working of the system of short service, of limited battalions, of brigade depots, and certain other matters, and to report in what details, or in what respects, that system was capable of being made more efficient, and to work more smoothly. Though it may be a matter of personal regret to myself that I have been unable to receive the Report of the Committee, yet

  45
  I am bound, on the other hand, to take the earliest opportunity of paying my tribute of acknowledgment to the extreme care and assiduity with which those Gentlemen have devoted themselves to the duties of the inquiry, and to state in the most public manner that, though I have been anxious to receive a Report from them, upon which I could recommend to the House the earliest action possible, yet, at the same time, I have felt that the subject was one of such vast importance that it would be unfair, and I may add even wrong, to press that Committee to come to a premature conclusion. For these reasons I am unable at present to discuss the matters with which that Committee has to deal, and I hope the Committee will also feel that there is no undue reticence on my part if I rather deprecate discussions on points on which I am unable to speak freely at the present time, and upon which it would be something more than inconvenient that I should express an ex parte or preconceived opinion. I would now rather suggest to the Committee, though I have no wish to "burke" discussion, that it will be for the convenience of themselves and of the House generally—as is felt, I know, by hon. Members who take an interest in such matters—that we should for the present defer any such discussion till a time when Lord Airey's Committee has presented its Report; then, if it be necessary on it to take legislative action, it will be my duty to bring the subject before the House; or, if it is not necessary, I will take care to offer such facilities in my power as will allow full opportunities for discussion of their proposals. I think, therefore, we shall do bettor to discuss the matter after we have seen what is the opinion of experts upon the matter. With these remarks, I propose, to that extent, to pass from the question of system and of organization. It may be a matter of interest to the Committee to know, before I pass to the question of the numbers of men enlisted during the past year, that the number of officers who have joined the Service since I last addressed the Committee amounts to 482; that the number of officers who have left amounts to 422; and, with regard to another matter—of which I can only speak generally—that at the present time 404 officers have put down their names to join the list of officers for the
  46
  Reserve, for service in the field or otherwise, if necessary. Now, of this Reserve of officers, the Committee may further like to know, of those who are liable upon their retirement to serve, there are 190; the retired officers in no way liable who applied for commissions amounts to 59; the officers of the Militia, Yeomanry Cavalry, and Volunteers are 149, not including certain applications which have been received from field officers; and there are, in addition to these, some few cases where officers have applied to join, but where they have to undergo the necessary examination. That makes a total of 404. The amount paid by the Army Purchase Commissioners as compensation to officers from the 1st of April, 1879, to the present date, as nearly as I can ascertain it, is £204,567; there is besides £12,083 paid to officers of the Indian Ordnance Corps under the Act of 1874–5; making a total of £216,550. There are also, of course, certain claims of other officers before the Commissioners upon which a final settlement has not yet been arrived at. With regard to explanations as to the causes of increase or decrease in the Infantry in the various accessory Papers issued, together with the Estimates, these will be found given as fully as possible. At the present time there are 5 battalions of Infantry temporarily detained in India. I battalion of Horse Artillery, I battery of Field Artillery, and 4 batteries of Garrison Artillery are also at this moment detained in India. The 15th Hussars are also detained there; but the normal force of Cavalry in the country is not exceeded, because the Queen's Dragoon Guards, who were to have gone to India, are in a temporary exigency detained at the Cape, and that leaves the Force at the number specified in the Estimates. I must make one exception with regard to the Staff which is taken in the Estimates for the Cape. It is stated in the Estimates as one Lieutenant General and one Colonel of the Staff. Communications have been going on between the Cape authorities and themselves as to the division of the Forces for greater convenience into a command of less dimensions at the Cape, and a separate command also of less dimensions united to a single command at Natal and in the Transvaal. Unfortunately, negotiations were still in progress by telegraph, when

  47
  an accident happened to the direct line of cable, and, consequently, our messages had to be transferred to the old line round by Madeira. That has caused the delay in the reply received from the Cape; and, therefore, the Committee will be kind enough to understand that the decision upon this point is not absolutely final. I think, at the same time, it is only fair, as the matter is placed in detail in the Estimates, that this should be fully stated. There is no essential alteration this year in the number of officers or of men from that intended to have taken place and explained in detail last year. The Committee will remember that it was my duty to explain that it had been intended to reduce the total amount of the Force by about 4,000 men, and that that decrease was suspended at the last moment by the unfortunate necessity of sending troops to the Cape. It was then too late to take the Estimates on that basis, and we were obliged to add an amount and a certain number of men en bloc to the Estimates. Estimates had been generally prepared before the announcement of the disaster of Isandlana came to hand, and it is on that basis that the present Estimates have been prepared. I have said that we have made no change as regards the number of officers. I think, Sir, while speaking of the officers, that I may, perhaps, be allowed to pay a tribute which I think is due to the regimental officers generally, for the manner in which they have tried to carry out their duties in the matters affecting their command. Last year it was my duty to show the Committee what was the result, to my mind, of the unfortunate necessity of bringing together men from different battalions. I am desirous, therefore, to pay my earliest tribute to the care and attention with which the regimental officers took over those large drafts and worked them into their regimental system. It is, we know, considered at all times by many, with our system of short service, a somewhat thankless task to do this; and, therefore, I am bound to say that the assiduity, and the care, and the ability with which the regimental officers have worked have left nothing to be desired so far as they were concerned. Now, as bearing on the question of the officers, I should like to say one word with regard to the Pay Department. That continues to offer an outlet to a
  48
  number of officers, which is not only not unacceptable to themselves, but is in many cases beneficial to the Public Service, allowing; as it does, officers to remain connected with the Service who otherwise would have been compelled, either from physical causes or from the necessity of retiring by the Compulsory Clause of the Royal Warrant, to disconnect themselves from the Service to which they are attached. The Accountant General, under whose able presidency this Department was formed, tells me that although the number of paymasters has been slightly reduced the advantages of the system continue to be appreciated, and that the experience of the Army Pay Department, as compared with the former system, continues to be very satisfactory. Its working on active service received fair trial during the recent operations at the Cape. It is stated that the testimony of general officers in command has been fully in favour of this principle, and it is believed that the Department will be of the greatest service to officers holding responsible commands. There continues to be no lack of candidates from the combatant branch to supply vacancies. Forty-five officers were gazetted to this branch last year, making 102 since the first introduction of the system, and 18 more are now awaiting the approbation of the Department; so that in less than two years this work may be said to have provided employment for no less than 120 officers. There are also now many candidates awaiting to be nominated. Besides the advantage of such an outlet, the efficiency of the Department appears to be all that is desired; and I think I am not otherwise than justified in claiming for the present Accountant General, and my hon. and gallant Friend the Financial Secretary, and those who have to carry out this system, the due meed of gratitude for such successful results. Passing from the question of the officers, and taking that point which is necessarily one of the main points of interest, I find that 25,927 men joined during the year 1879, as against 28,325 in the year 1878, and 28,728 in the year 1877. The falling-off is attributable partly to the high standard which has prevailed during the greater part of the year, and also, I am very glad to say, very much to the increased care which is exercised in passing recruits. Regulations are also now in

  49
  course of preparation embodying instructions which have been already issued with regard to the medical inspection of recruits, and providing in a still greater degree for even more careful medical examination, not only by officers of the Medical Department, but also by the civil medical practitioners employed in this duty. We have been using in the year just closed the same machinery for recruiting purposes as in previous years—namely, the sub-district organization, coupled with the London and Dublin sub-districts; and, thirdly, the headquarter recruiting. The number of recruits raised in the sub-districts was 15,900 odd in 1879, as against 17,181 in 1878, and 17,380 in 1877. This shows a slight decrease at the brigade depots, and in the number of men raised in the respective years. As regards Militiamen who have enlisted in the Army, there were 7,159 in 1878, against 7,748 in 1878, and 9,000 odd in 1877. Although the recruiting, as I have said, has slightly fallen off, the only corps below the establishment to any considerable extent during the year has been the Royal Artillery. That has arisen from the fact that during the greater part of the year the standard was very high. Now, we come to that point which is always considered of so much importance in connection with the recruiting, and is, perhaps, the least satisfactory part of this question—namely, the desertions. In 1879 there were 4,070 deserters in the ordinary or general sense in which that term is used, or 15 per cent of the recruits. In 1878 the numbers were 5,416, or 19 per cent of the recruits, while in 1877 the numbers were 5,000, or 17 per cent of the recruits. Therefore, in the year 1879, there was a decrease over both of the two preceding years. It may, perhaps, be of interest also to the Committee to learn that the percentage of deserters to recruits is smaller than it has been in any year since 1870; and that year, as persons know who are interested in the matter, was a year which, from various causes, was entirely exceptional. That was also in itself the smallest percentage of any year since the year 1861. The net loss from desertions was very much brought down by the number of men who rejoined their regiments after desertion, and which, amounted in the past year, to 2,254; so that though the decrease at first sight
  50
  looked large the net loss comes down to 1,816, though, of course, I do not say that oven that is not far too large. That, however, again is the smallest number since the year 1868. The number of discharges during the last three years has not materially varied. There were 15,209 in 1879, 15,198 in 1878, and 15,723 in 1877. That is, of course, a very large number; but it is brought about not only by temporary causes, but by the fact that the recruiting 20 or 21 years ago was exceptionally heavy. The discharges by purchase were in 1879 2,495, as compared with 2,058 in 1878, and 2,970 in 1877. It may, perhaps, be convenient that I should now tell the Committee, as far as I am aware of it, how the provisions of the Army Discipline and Regulation Act passed last year work in connection with recruits, especially as regards the right of the recruit to claim his discharge within a specified period. This is, however, a section as to which I cannot give full information, because it is hardly yet in operation, and has only been set in motion very recently. The Inspector General of Recruiting shares my belief that this finally will have the effect of diminishing the desertions in proportion to the recruits. It will be borne in mind, of course, that the number of desertions have no reference whatever to the number of recruits enlisted during the same period, although the figures are thus compared. It is very truly said that an ounce of practice is worth a pound of theory, and, perhaps, upon the strength of that proverb the Committee will allow me to read what I have only received myself this day—namely, the views of the Assistant Adjutant General of the London recruiting district, and also of one of the sergeants under him. Colonel Field, an officer of great experience writes, "that the new system of enlistment is a vast improvement on the old, the practice of enlisting for the sole purpose of getting the enlistment money and as many days' pay as possible, without any intention of joining the Army, being very much diminished, and that fewer bad characters now enter and re-enter the Army than formerly." I will not trouble the Committee with Sergeant Major Hunter's letter; but he says that desertions are much less frequent now than formerly, and that the enlistments have been 36 as against 7, and the payments £1 18 s. 9d. as against

  51
  £12 19 s. 10 d. That shows what the saving to the public is in the enlistment shilling and in the one or two days' pay which the men were formerly in the habit of drawing the moment they were enlisted. I have just given the leading points as concerns the men, and I now proceed to pass from Vote 1. It will be observed by the Committee that the Vote has, in some degree, been increased this year by the necessity for purchasing horses, which we were able to dispense with last year, as we kept on with those purchased under the Vote of Credit, and we have now, in consequence, to make rather larger purchases. There is also a small point in connection with the Veterinary Department, which, although its final form has not been altogether agreed to, I may, perhaps, touch upon. It has long been felt that there has been a great want of systematic instruction, both for veterinary surgeons and for the officers concerned in the management of horses; but I hope that in the course of the ensuing year, by beginning on modest dimensions with no expensive buildings nor staff, but using those which we already possess, we may be enabled to establish something in the nature of a Veterinary School at Aldershot, by which I think the Service will be greatly benefited; and I feel bound to express my sense of the manner in which a gallant officer, well known to many here present—Sir Frederick Fitz Wygram—has been good enough to give us his assistance in this matter. Upon Vote 2 I think there is hardly any remark which it is necessary for me to make. That is explained in the Paper showing the amount of variation, wherein it appears that there was a small increase under one head and a slight diminution under another. As regards Vote 3, that is also substantially unchanged. I may mention, however, that the Committee appointed, partly in consequence of the promise which I give here, and partly in consequence of what took place during the passing of the Army Discipline and Regulation Bill, is at present occupied in investigating as to the best mode of dealing with military prisoners, taken in connection with the Army Discipline and Regulation Act and with the Prisons Act of former times. That Committee, which, I believe, is presided over by Mr. Liddell, the Permanent Under Secretary of the Home Department,
  52
  and which numbers among its Members Sir Charles Du Cane and Mr. Knox, is engaged in practical researches; and I have every reason to hope that their Report, when received, will be such as can be promptly and efficiently acted upon. With regard to Vote 4, I am glad to say that it has assumed a different position this year from that in which it stood when the Estimates of last year were proposed. Since the Committee were last engaged upon this matter the Medical Warrant has been issued; and I am glad to say that, although I am fully aware no one in this world can please everybody, there is a great concurrence of opinion in favour of that Warrant as it now stands. I think it will be seen that through the liberality displayed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer the Government have shown an anxious desire to benefit the Medical Department; and I am glad to hear that their endeavours have not only been successful in attracting candidates, but that these are of a considerably better class than those brought to the work for years past. There seems to be a consensus of opinion that the Warrant is so far liberal that if it does not attract candidates to the Service nothing will. There have been two examinations of candidates since December last, when the Warrant was issued, at the first of which 72 candidates passed out of 76 who offered themselves for examination; on the second occasion, out of 42 candidates who competed, 35 fully came up to the required standard and were accepted; so that we have had, within the space of little more than two months, 107 successful candidates out of the 118 who presented themselves for examination. Both in South Africa and in Afghanistan the general officers in command have spoken in the highest terms of the efficiency, zeal, and self-devotion of all ranks of medical officers; and I am afraid that there is melancholy evidence in confirmation of this in the large number of men who have succumbed to the hard work which they had to undergo in the Indian Forces. Perhaps the Committee will forgive me for referring for one moment to the loss which the medical world and Medical Service have sustained by the death, at Sherpur, of Deputy Surgeon General Porter, an officer whose arrangements for all the medical duties of the cam-

  53
  paign left nothing to be desired, and who succumbed as certainly in the execution of his duty as if he had been killed in action. Both in the medical world and among his countrymen he loaves a reputation to which his friends may look back with satisfaction, and a memory dear to all those who knew him. There is another point in connection with the Medical Service to which I should like to call the attention of the Committee. During the recent attack on Sococoeni's camp, the "bearer companies" were, for the first time, fully organized; and it is satisfactory to know that this organization, under the direction of Surgeon Major Hector, was attended with the very best results. I consider it important that I should draw attention to this fact, because the establishment of "bearer companies" is in itself a very marked feature in field medical organization. I believe I am entitled to read a letter, although it was not written with that object, from Colonel Brackenbury to one of the Surgeon Generals, and which expresses more tersely than I can the advantages which arose from the establishment of this body. The letter contains the following passage:—
  "I do not think the best trained Aldershot bearer company could have done better. It was a sight to see, for I suppose it was the first action fought by our troops of which it can be said that not one single fighting man left the ranks to take wounded to the rear, although we had 49 officers and men killed and wounded. It was a trial, though on a small scale, and I am satisfied that the system is sound. I certainly hope Hector will receive the appreciation he deserves."
  A more official Report of the principal medical officer states—
  "In conclusion, I have much pleasure in saying that after an interview with Colonel Baker Russell, who led the main attack on Secocoeni's town, I can bear testimony to the excellent arrangement for the treatment of the wounded, and state that nothing was left to be desired in this respect, so efficiently and rapidly did the bearer companies, under Surgeon Major Hector, perform their duties, that no wounded European or Native was left two minutes on the ground before being removed to the dressing station. Everything that foresight could have devised was in readiness for the wounded."
  But I must not trespass unduly upon the time of the Committee in this matter. It will be observed by those who have the interest of medical officers at heart that two great points have been considered in the Medical Warrant recently
  54
  issued, one of which has been made clear and the other conceded. Subject to certain conditions, exchanges are now as absolutely free in this Department as in the combatant branch of the Service, no exchange being refused unless it is believed that an officer is exchanging to go out to India who has been very recently invalided from a sickly climate. With this exception, exchanges are now as free as in any other branch of the Service. Then there has been the concession of forage to surgeons, the granting of which has been treated by almost all of them as a genuine and welcome concession. We have also introduced a system under which half-pay payments are made at depots and other places where there is hardly work enough to employ an Army medical officer, but where work can be done by those who are willing to accept temporary occupation at a lower rate of pay. Under this system 21 medical officers on half-pay and six Militia medical officers have been appointed at the stationary posts. The health of the Army during the last year, I am glad to inform the Committee, has been satisfactory. The rates of admission into hospital has been 8·27 per 1,000, and the death rate 7·37, which, compared with the rates of previous years, gives a slightly higher rate of admissions. There has been an increase of sickness, however, at Gibraltar, Canada, Ceylon, Bombay, and in Bengal; but diminution of sickness in the West Indies, Mauritius, and other places. It is difficult to make any fair comparison, nor can any comparison be made, between the health of the combined Forces at the Cape of Good Hope and St. Helena owing to the Zulu War. The increase of the rate of admission to hospital in Bengal is stated to have been due to cholera which broke out amongst the troops on active service on their return, while the increase of sickness at Gibraltar is stated to have arisen from paroxysmal fevers contracted in Cyprus by the 42nd and 71st Regiments. With regard to Cyprus, I am glad to point out to the Committee that there has been a marked improvement in the health of the troops stationed in that island, the death rate having decreased to 25·14, and the last Report showed a marked diminution in the number of fever cases during the last year that I consider to be very satisfactory. I have a word

  55
  or two to say, in addition to the remarks which I made concerning the 42nd and 71st Regiments. I have made inquiry at the places were these regiments are now stationed, and I am informed that their health is good in all respects, and that they seemed to enjoy an entire immunity from malarious affections. Passing from the Medical Vote, I come to that for Militia Pay and Allowances. The number of men serving in the Militia is larger than in the previous year; and the Vote is further increased in consequence of the period of training being extended from 20 to 27 days. On the 1st of February of this year the number of men was 120,623, as against 114,603 on the establishment during the previous year. There is one point in connection with this Vote about which I should like to speak. It has been pointed out and freely admitted by those who know most of the matter that one of the weak points in our Militia system is the want of sufficient musketry instruction. In these days rifle instruction appears to us to be a matter of the greatest possible importance; and though it is unadvisable to ask the House, under ordinary circumstances, so far to extend the period of Militia training as to enable a full course of musketry instruction to be gone through, it has been thought desirable to take some steps in the matter. Arrangements are accordingly being made to take a certain number of Militia regiments at one time—say, in their fifth, sixth, or seventh training—which shall go not only through their imperfect course as hitherto, but also through the same perfect course of training given to soldiers in the Regular Army. This arrangement will not have the immediate effect of insuring for every man the training of the Regular Service; but it has recommended itself to the authorities as the best compromise, and we propose to apply it during the ensuing year to a certain number of regiments, within, of course, the period of 27 days' training. The number of men who enlisted in the Militia during the last year was 32,788, as against 39,375 in the year 1878, and 39,701 in the year 1877. This, of course, shows a decrease, which, however, must not be taken alone, for it is to be observed that there is also a considerable reduction in the number of desertions, so that the diminution in the total num-
  56
  ber of men is not so great as would at first sight appear. For instance, the number of deserters in the year 1877 was 15,000, in 1878 14,000, while in 1879 the number was reduced to 10,000—a very satisfactory and considerable decrease. It shows that the Enlistment Act, if proper care is taken with regard to its working, does tend to the results which were anticipated. I may express my opinion that no person is more competent to deal with the evil of desertion and to suggest a remedy for it than the present Inspector General of Recruiting, General Bulwer, who has under him the recruiting both of the Militia and of the Line. It was thought unadvisable to publish his Report on the subject of desertion as a separate Paper; but I will take care that this document relating to the working of the Act of 1870, and which is full of points of interest to the Committee, shall be presented in the ensuing year. I must add that the re-enrolments continue to be applied for in the different regiments; and although they have somewhat fallen off in numbers, their actual number is not an exact guide to the working of the system, nor is that system discredited by a falling-off due to well-known and not unsatisfactory causes. I now pass on to the Vote for the Yeomanry. With respect to that, it will be observed that we are once more taking the pay for their full training. I am much strengthened in my opinion as to the necessity and desirability of that Force by the confidential reports of commanding officers, who seem to consider that out of the Yeomanry as it now stands may be obtained the material for a most useful auxiliary local Force. It is, therefore, I think, my duty to encourage that Force within proper limits. There will be both recruit drills and troop drills during the present year; and the Committee will remember that last year it was thought advisable that the men should go out for troop drill alone. This year, however, we propose to take the full amount for the eight days' training. In certain districts where the farmers have suffered very considerably application has been made that the men should be called out for their full duty; and in those cases I have thought it right to allow them to go out, as on the last occasion, for four troop drills, receiving the pay they had last year. That, I think, is a plan which would give the

  57
  largest amount of elasticity; but it is intended to couple with the payment the reservation that the drill shall be conducted under inspection. I pass now to the Volunteer Corps Pay and Allowances. This Vote shows, even by its increase, that the Volunteer Force is in a prosperous condition. The increase in the Vote is due to the charge for capitation grants earned by a larger number of men who are returned as efficient. We have also taken a rather larger amount for the training of Volunteers in camp, respecting the desirability of which I think there can be but one opinion. However, although I am strongly in favour of this form of training, I am bound to warn my friends of the Volunteer Force that the money I can ask for from Parliament is not without limit; and they must not be surprised if, where there are many among them desirous of going under canvas, some choice has to be made between them. The Committee suggested that administrative regiments should be consolidated, and I am happy to say those regulations have been taken up in the best possible spirit. Twenty-one administrative regiments have been consolidated up to the present time; and 107 smaller corps, which, in the opinion of the Committee, were hardly able to exist conveniently by themselves, have been absorbed in those administrative regiments. Of course, as I said last year, the proposal is one that must be carried out carefully. We are endeavouring as far as possible to do so, with all due regard to the individual feelings of particular localities; and I am happy to say that, meeting them, I hope, in a fair spirit, and being met by them in the same spirit, we are in many cases able to carry out these administrative changes where at first it was thought that insuperable difficulties would have been raised. I hope that this process, which will undoubtedly be good for the Service, and also good in a financial and administrative point of view, will be carried further as due opportunity occurs. At the same time, it is not the wish, either of those who act with me, or of myself, to carry out these changes with undue disregard to the feelings even of the smallest corps. Well, the capitation grants and the certificates, and many other matters connected with the Volunteers, are known to the Committee from many other
  58
  sources; but I would just tell them that the number of efficients this year is 197,485, as against 194,191 last year, and the number of those who have earned certificates of proficiency is 17,411, as against 17,054 last year. Let me here say one word, although it is not a matter which immediately concerns the Estimates, with regard to a question which has been very often pressed upon mo; and I choose to speak of it here rather than in connection with Vote 12—and that is, the general issue of Martini rifles to the Volunteers. Well, now, that may be a matter very desirable in itself; but neither on economical, financial nor other grounds, could it be recommended without very considerable inquiry. The known danger is so very much greater with the Martini that many of those who have studied the matter most closely have come to the conclusion that if these rifles were generally issued many Volunteer ranges throughout the country would have to be unavoidably closed; and that in itself forms a reason for very carefully examining all those ranges and all the details of rifle practice before any general issue takes place. On the other hand, we think the men who have shown that they can not only hit the butt, but a small mark, are the men in whose hands the rifle may be trusted; and, therefore, there will be no objection to allowing, under the management of the National Rifle Association, a considerable number of Martinis to be still retained by the Volunteers. That is the position of the matter at the present moment. As regards the Army Reserves, the numbers are down in the Estimates. I am never willing to admit, and I do not admit, that the Military Service, or any other Service of this country, admits of any political difference; and I am sure it will not be accepted at all as being a political comment, if I call attention just in passing to a misapprehension in connection with the Reserves into which the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Greenwich appears to have fallen. In the course of some of his speeches, he spoke of the Reserves who were called out in 1878, apparently with the inference that they were created by my noble Friend and Predecessor, Lord Cardwell. Now, I am sure Lord Cardwell would be one of the last men to claim credit himself for anything that was not en-

  59
  tirely his due. I am bound to say I think he deserves warm praise for the creation of the Army Reserve at all; but I am sure, on the other hand, he would not wish that undue credit should be attached to him for the number of men who were brought out in 1878 under his scheme. The number of Reserves who were called out in 1878 was 34,749, taking the Army and Militia together; but of those 21,730 were Militia Reserve men who were called out, not under the Army Reserve Act of Lord Cardwell, but under the previous Act of General Peel, who was one of the earliest to call attention to the subject. I think it right to call attention to what was, of course, not an intentional inaccuracy—I do not think that for a moment—but I think it right that the Committee should see how the matter really stands. Then I pass on. But before leaving the Auxiliary Forces I may just state the numbers of those officers who attended the School of Instruction during the past year. Fifty-seven Militia officers passed through, and 41 were certificated; 126 Volunteer officers passed through, and 95 were certificated; and of 42 Yeomanry officers 38 were certificated. The number of Militia officers nominated for the Line was 240, of whom there were actually appointed 198. It will be observed that there is a decrease in Vote 9 for the Commissariat and Ordnance Stores Establishments; and that arises, as stated in the explanatory Paper, from the re-organization of the Commissariat and Ordnance Store Departments, under which the routine work will be performed by officers of lower grades. Of course, however, in consequence of the re-organization, there is a certain amount of expense thrown upon the Estimates for both Departments, by the retirement of superior officers. That, I think, has been a matter which has attracted a good deal of attention and been discussed on former occasions; and I insisted very fully last year upon the necessity of placing the Commissariat in the field under the management of officers of the combatant class, or quasi-combatants; and from the communications which I have had, both public and private, with my noble Friend Lord Chelmsford and my gallant Friend Sir Garnet Wolseley and others, I see no reason to doubt that the course which has been recommended is the one that will prove advisable. Of course,
  60
  those who are interested in the matter will have seen by the Warrant that the combatant officers serving under these military commissions will be supplemented by officers serving under other military commissions; they will hold their appointments for five years, and they will be seconded if upon half-pay. It will be necessary for them to have served five years in the Army, and to pass a special examination, unless they have passed through the Staff College. Of course, that is rather for the future than the present; but I am sorry to say we have been obliged to make a good, many retirements in order to carry out the re-organization, and, in some cases, to retire officers whom we would have been glad on general grounds to have kept. Still, believing, as I do, that this change was for the advantage of the Service, I thought it advisable to carry it out without delay; but, at the same time, we have taken advantage, as far as we could, of the retention in the Service of the existing officers, so as not to increase unduly the charge for superannuation, or to cause an entire change in the Department.
  GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOUR: We have not received copies of the Warrant in the Library.
  COLONEL STANLEY: I beg pardon, if that is so. Directions were given by me several days ago, and I understood that copies of the Warrant had been sent down. I will inquire as to the matter; but perhaps the omission is less important from the fact that the Warrant will appear in the course of a day or two in the Army Circulars, which are published with the monthly Army List As to Vote 10, there is a large decrease on provisions and forage. The chief causes of this are the reduction of the price of provisions at home, and the abolition of a special ration to the Army Hospital Corps. The Army Hospital Corps used to receive free rations; but they are now dealt with as other Departments, receiving Departmental pay but no rations, and, therefore, it will not come under this Vote. There is also a reduction for supplying the troops in South Africa. In spite of the bad harvest last year and the rise in the price of bread, the soldier's ration this year costs less than last year, and this is mainly owing to the low price of meat. Of course, it is a question how long this low

  61
  price will continue; but I am informed in the best quarters that I am entitled to take credit for a certain amount, and effect has been given in preparing the Estimates to the information which we could obtain from the best sources. Another thing is that we are reaping, to a certain extent, the advantage of some of the capital expenditure of 1878–9 under the Vote of Credit. Curiously enough, notwithstanding all our large expenses in seaward operations, we had not in this country any establishment for receiving and shipping supplies to an Army in the field. Shipments, for the most part, were made direct by the contractors, and I am sorry to say the results were not always satisfactory. When we had to deal with surplus stores, for want of accommodation they were either sold aboard, or at the ship's side on return to this country, and frequently they were sold at a considerable sacrifice, as, of course, is always to be expected in any forced sale. In 1878–9, however, a large establishment was constructed in Woolwich Dockyard, and there supplies are received from the contractors and carefully examined and put back in cases where there is no transport; and I am thankful to say that, owing to this place, we were enabled to despatch troops to Natal fully provisioned for a month, and they were able to march to Durban immediately on their arrival. At the close of the war those supplies which were not wanted, instead of being sacrificed, were returned into store and used for service here; and we were enabled to supply from our stores things which were sent back to the field for service in Afghanistan, of course on re-payment. Apart from these advantages, the savings on supplies, I have no doubt whatever, have repaid the original outlay many times over. [General Sir GEORGE BALFOUR: Hear, hear!] I hear the hon. and gallant General opposite cheers that. I believe he long was an advocate of this system, and I congratulate him upon seeing his former views carried out, as I may congratulate myself on the manner in which we have been able to carry them into effect. I now proceed to the Vote for Clothing. It is, I think, shown that on the ordinary Services there is a very considerable decrease; but there is a net increase on two heads. One is in consequence of the recommendation of the Committee, over which my noble
  62
  Friend Lord Bury presided, that Volunteer Corps should be given facilities for acquiring clothing under exceptional advantages. The proposal was roughly this—that the clothing should be issued from the Clothing Department as it were upon interest, and repaid by taking a certain amount from the capitation grant every year, not taking the whole of the re-payment the next year; but spreading the whole of that re-payment over three years. Of course, the Committee will see that that throws an absolute charge upon the Estimates the first year—that is, we shall only recover, during the next three years, a charge which will have been incurred in this. From that point of view, it is an apparent rather than a real increase, inasmuch as the Volunteer Corps, though they may take a longer time to do it, will repay the cost to which the Department has been put. We have taken the requirements of the Volunteers at £20,000. There is no possible means of estimating this amount at the present time. In future years we shall require Corps to send in requisitions during the November previous to the preparation of the Estimates, so that we shall be enabled to ascertain the figures with some accuracy. In the present year time did not admit of our dealing with it in that way; and, therefore, although we have taken what I hope is an amply sufficient Vote, it is one which must be regarded as, to a certain extent, speculative. There is a second source of increase, of which I think the Committee will approve, and that is a rule that the Army clothing, when worn out, shall become the property of the State. We shall, therefore, no longer be exposed to what was really a public scandal, of men going about in the public streets begging, with the uniform and number and badges of a regiment upon them. Hitherto, the uniforms were the property of the men on discharge, and we had no means of preventing such abuses, which I may say almost brought a blush to one's face sometimes, to see the way in which the Queen's uniform was made use of for purposes of mendicity. Now that cannot happen any longer. Clothing, on being worn out, will become the property of the State, and, in lieu, we give a suit of plain clothes which will be supplied, free of expense, to every soldier on discharge. We further give some compensation for the loss which it

  63
  is thought the soldier will sustain by giving up his right to the old clothing, by giving a further issue of forage-caps, probably annually. Well, this brings an increased charge on this head of £15,000; but the proceeds from the sale of clothing will more than cover the expense. That, however, will come under the head of an Exchequer receipt; so that, although the increase of the Vote is more than balanced, it will, apparently, make no difference under the present system upon which our accounts are made up. I am glad to say that we were able to frame our Estimates upon a series of successful purchases during the autumn of last year, and, therefore, before the present very great rise in all woollen and other materials had taken place. And here, again, I may mention that the reserve of clothing which was established by my noble Friend and Predecessor Lord Cranbrook has, in the course of the past year, proved invaluable. We keep a reserve of clothing and of necessaries sufficient to equip a considerable number of men. I do not think it necessary to state the numbers; but this reserve enabled the Department to keep the troops in South Africa well supplied with clothing, and also to render valuable assistance to India in the recent operations in Afghanistan. Although it really does not concern the Estimates, it may be of interest to the Committee to say that the Clothing Department supplied the following articles to India, or were instrumental in doing so:—111,000 pairs of boots, over 220,000 pairs of woollen socks, 89,000 pairs of woollen mitts. These were demanded from time to time by telegraph, and in all cases they were shipped in a few days, and sometimes in a few hours. No doubt, the reserve and the facilities for shipping them properly effected a considerable saving. We have always endeavoured to make the clothing add to the comfort of the soldier, and pea-jackets and forage-caps are now supplied from the public stores, instead of the soldier having, as formerly, to find them for himself. We have been trying experiments in the waterproofing of great coats; and I think it possible, although I do not speak of it with certainty, that, in the course of the year, we shall be able to make such arrangements as will enable a light waterproof cape to be served out
  64
  in place of the present capes. The waterproofing of great coats has been carried out with considerable success; but it is still under trial. I understand it adds little or nothing to the weight, and the coats are very much approved of by the men who have worn them. Turning to boots, we now give hobnailed boots instead of plain soles, which is stated to be very considerably to the advantage of the soldier. I am bound to say, per contra, it is by no means to the advantage of the barrack floors; but that, perhaps, is a minor matter. A slight change is going to be made as regards the issue of clothing to the Household Cavalry. Hitherto, they have had an arrangement by which they received an allowance and found their own, but an alteration in that system has been recommended to be made; and as soon as the accounts have been adjusted and articles in wear taken over from them at a specified rate, arrangements will be made for the future by which they will be clothed in a manner similar to that in which the rest of the Army are dealt with. I am glad to say that the temporary disquiet caused by the new arrangements in the clothing factory has now, as far as I can learn, passed away. I am indebted to my hon. Friend who usually sits opposite (the hon. Member for Oldham), and the other hon. Members of his Committee, for the efficient and assiduous manner in which they, at considerable inconvenience and sacrifice of their time, inquired into those matters. We thought it was right to have an entirely impartial Committee; and I am happy to say that their Report, which is in the possession of the House, practically exonerated the Department from all the charges that were made, and only pointed out certain other matters in which they thought there was room for improvement—most of which, my noble Friend informs me, have been attended to and carried out. It was quite clear that, comparing the wages paid at the factory with the wages paid elsewhere, we were not only justified, but positively right, in making deductions, painful as it might be, individually, to persons who had been working there a long time. On Vote 12, it will be seen there is a reduction of £145,000. This is estimated partly because, in the present state of matters, we are rather holding our hands as regards now ordnance;

  65
  and it also arises from the fact that we intend to supply practice ammunition for machine guns, which has hitherto been supplied from the private factories. Now, the machine guns take an exceedingly costly kind of ammunition, and it has been thought possible to substitute iron shot for steel for purposes of practice. Iron shot for practice gives very much the same result; and the expensive steel shot will, therefore, be kept for war purposes only. This is a matter upon which, in common with many I others, I am very much in the hands of my right hon. Friend the First Lord of the Admiralty, because we have to supply what the Admiralty demands; and I must bear my testimony to his desire to help me, as far as he reasonably can do, in making some diminution in these Estimates. Of course, I speak with that gratitude which is familiar to the Committee and to most people, as a sense not only of past favours, but of favours which I hope to derive in the future. Now, as regards the first matter of large ordnance, I think all persons who are interested in this matter will see that, from various causes, we have arrived at the time when the question of large ordnance requires to be carefully examined and considered. I am not here now to discuss, per se, the relative merits of muzzle-loading or breech-loading. When the Estimates have been submitted in previous years many very interesting discussions have been raised upon this question, but at times that were not opportune for dealing with it. I wish to state now, before going into the matter, that it is necessary to clear our minds of much that has been said as regards our present position in connection with large ordnance, and our aversion, in former years, to copy the system of breech-loading which had been adopted in foreign parts. So little was there any objection in the minds of many officers to breech-loading in itself as a system of heavy ordnance that I believe I am correct in stating that, so long ago as 1868, the principal Director of the Artillery Stores, General Campbell, then in charge of the gun factory, had prepared a design for a gun similar to the muzzle-loading 12-ton gun of that time, and which differed from it in respect only of the substitution of a breech-loading for a muzzle-loading arrangement. But at that time the powder was of a different character from that
  66
  which is used at the present time. Shorter guns altogether were in use. And then, again, I might say, without fear of contradiction, that we were not a little influenced by the demands which were made upon us by the Navy. I say nothing as to whether the authorities of the Navy were right or wrong; but there unquestionably was a dislike on the part of the Navy to the use of breech-loading ordnance. They were anxious, as long as they could, to keep to muzzle-loading guns. I do not say that the authorities in the Navy were unanimous upon the subject; but it was the view of those to whose opinion deference had to be paid. Twenty-five-ton guns were asked for and had to be introduced into the Navy; the advantage of the 28-ton gun was next recognized. It was soon replaced by the 35-ton gun; and in the course of time the 38-ton gun almost entirely supplanted the 35-ton gun in the Navy. At the present time, the 38-ton gun is the largest in practical use in the Navy. Now, I believe that in the case of most ships, when the gun comes home to the extreme of the recoil, there is something like 18 inches or 2 feet between the gun and the funnel casing, and the other obstacles which crowd the, ship's deck. If the length of the gun was to be increased it was quite clear it would not come home for loading; and, therefore, we must have regard to some other system than muzzle-loading. It, therefore, became clear that if a longer gun was a necessity, even if we could greatly increase the length of the rammer stays and the handling, we should have to increase the breadth of our ships, which, if advisable in itself, could only be a matter of years hence; or, on the other hand, we must adopt some other system of loading. In regard to the comparative merits of breech-loading and muzzle-loading facts are better than theories; and Sir William Armstrong has shown that with breech-loading and muzzle-loading guns similarly constructed, carrying the same charge, and mutatis mutandis, as nearly alike as possible, the results as to range and other matters are practically the same. Therefore, I venture to look upon breech-loading rather as a matter of convenience and arrangement than as one in itself involving an increase in the power of the gun. It is quite clear, on the other hand, that to have the full benefit of the charges of powder that

  67
  can now be burnt, it is necessary that the length of the gun and its calibre should be increased. And coming from the consideration of these two points, so long ago as November, 1878, the first orders were given by the noble Lord (Lord Eustace Cecil) and myself for the preparation of a design for a breech-loading gun. I had hoped that it would have been made by the present time; but after the unfortunate accident that happened on board the Thunderer, in January, it was felt that it would not be time lost if we endeavoured to have a scientific investigation into that unfortunate accident by a Committee, so as to be enabled to apply, as far as we could, any sound principles the inquiry might elicit to the manufacture of the gun of the future. At the present time it seems that the 42-ton breech-loading gun will soon take the place of the 38-ton breech-loading gun. It is not in a state of absolute completion at this moment, but considerable progress has been made with it; and I doubt not that before the close of the financial year we shall be in a position to be enabled, in explaining the Votes for the following year, to enter into the question in more detail, and to recommend some practical change. I have spoken of the difficulty of dealing with long guns on board ship; and the same thing, to a certain extent, applies to casemates, and, therefore, affects our land armaments. The hon. and gallant Member for Galway (Major Nolan) will recognize the importance of that point; and I have no doubt that he will agree with me that the consideration of breech-loading guns touches not the Navy only, but, in its results, affects some portion of the land armaments. At the same time, I am anxious not to let the Committee run away with the idea that, in speaking thus of breech-loading guns, it is at all necessary to condemn at once all the existing muzzle-loading guns which have been acquired at so much trouble and expense during past years. There are many places in our land armaments where, for all practical purposes, I may say, without fear of contradiction, the muzzle-loading gun will be as fully efficacious and as powerful as the breech-loading gun—which is the gun of the future. And as these guns are returned from the Navy they will be utilized, as far as possible, in the land armaments, which, in many places, are incomplete, so
  68
  as to prevent, to a certain extent, a waste of material. I may add that many of the Armstrong guns, by a slight adaptation, are able to throw shells, and can be brought in for land armaments as well as being utilized in other ways. In that respect it is right the Committee should understand, in estimating our future position, that what has already been done will not altogether be sacrificed; while, at the same time, we are able to place in the hands of the Navy the very best gun that science has yet produced for the country. I have been speaking so far of heavy guns. Although I do not wish to condemn the system on which we have been acting in past years, I cannot help feeling that the time has come when we must consider the position in which we stand with regard to the breech-loading field gun also, and exactly for the same reasons. If the Committee will allow me to trespass upon their time for a few minutes longer I will endeavour to make the conclusions we have arrived at clear to them. The 13-pounder gun is the last field gun introduced, and two batteries have been issued. No doubt, it is a very powerful gun. It is a gun of great weight, in its chambers it takes a large charge; and the hon. and gallant Member for Galway will corroborate me when I say that it is, for its size, an extremely powerful gun. Indeed, successful results have been obtained from this field gun even against the "Warrior" target, showing that it must possess considerable power. But the chambering, and the hollowing-out of the portion where the powder lies to a greater extent than was ever done before, does away with a great deal of the simplicity that formerly attached to the field gun. It is difficult to make the cartridge fully effective in the chamber, or to make it so that it can be easily carried about, and the technical difficulties of that kind in connection with the cartridge, together with other things, have done away with very much of the simplicity of the former muzzle-loading field gun. These are reasons which make us think that it is quite right that the question of breech-loading field guns should also be taken, to a certain extent, into consideration; and we have made arrangements by which, in the course of the, ensuing year, the 13-pounder guns, finished as breech-loading field guns, will be thoroughly inquired into. It is intended to complete 38 guns of the 13-

  69
  pounder class, and they have already been proceeded with up to a certain stage, which will admit of their completion either as muzzle-loading or breech-loading guns. That is our position now, both in regard to the field gun and the large gun. Our stock of gunpowder is satisfactory. Of course, the supply is increasing, owing to the large charges that are used for heavy guns. The necessities of the Service oblige us to have an increasing establishment at Waltham. I am glad to say that the investment of capital there has proved, not only economical, but very satisfactory, and that we are able to obtain large quantities of powder, to a certain extent rendering ourselves more independent of the trade, and, certainly, enabling us to manufacture powder that is more suitable and effective in connection with our own requirements. In regard to small arms, I need not take up the time of the Committee by going very fully into that matter. All I can say is that in regard to machine guns we are still investigating the subject. It is well known that a trial took place in the United States last year and the year before, in which every description of gun was fully tried. We are following up the same results with a Committee of our own, and I think that repeating arms may possibly come in to supplement the use of others, although I do not for one moment think the time has arrived when they will replace them. I stated last year that a change would be made in the material of the accoutrements. That change has been introduced, and it has been approved. Pipe clay leather for the future will be laid aside, and brown leather substituted. In the Works Vote, I would point out that there are no new works of any importance to be commenced. A Committee have inquired into another subject—namely, the kit, and it has been thought better to lighten it to the extent to which the men can fairly be called upon to carry it in the field. These are the chief points in connection with the Votes to which I need refer; but I may point out that but very few new works of any importance have been commenced. As regards the Miscellaneous Services, there is a slight change in connection with the pay of the permanent staff of the Channel Islands Militia. During last year there was a careful inquiry, conducted by my hon. and gallant Friend (Colonel Deedes), the Under Secretary
  70
  at the War Office, and other gentlemen connected with the War Office, into the constitution of the Channel Island Militia. The service is nominally compulsory to all; but, practically, exemption was obtained, and, in fact, the system did not work well. Speaking generally, the Militia system of the Channel Islands has been attempted to be simplified, and we are proceeding on the principle of allowing the men to find a system of training time more suitable to themselves, by instituting an arrangement for Militia service that shall be carried out fairly and without partiality, favour, or affection, and by improving the Staff under which that Militia is to be administered. I am afraid that I have gone at too great length into the points connected with the Service which are of principal interest. There are, however, many things which I have been obliged to leave unnoticed, and I am afraid that there are many sins of omission to which I may have to plead guilty. At the same time, the Estimates, although they are by no means ambitious, have been framed with a desire to avoid all unreasonable expenditure of the public money, and, on the other hand, to save that money without any undue detriment to the Public Service. I think I may conscientiously say that probably there is no Minister of War in any country who would not like to obtain more than he ventures to ask his country for; still, I am bound to say that these Estimates have been prepared without undue detriment to the Public Service, and I hope the necessities of the ensuing year may be such as to justify our foresight, and to secure that the provision we have made will be ample for the Public Service. I beg to move the number of men required for the Service of Her Majesty during the year.
  Motion made, and Question proposed,
  "That a number of Land Forces not exceeding 131,859, all ranks, be maintained for the Service of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, at Home and Abroad, excluding Her Majesty's Indian Possessions, during the year ending on the 31st day of March, 1881."—(Colonel Stanley.)
  MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMANsaid, that his right hon. and gallant Friend had begun by making an apology for the tame nature of the statement he was about to make. He felt sure that no such apology was necessary, for all present must acknowledge

  71
  that the statement just made to them was a most able one. There was no doubt, however, that the interest in the discussion had been taken away, inasmuch as the Committee which had been appointed to deal with matters which had created the greatest amount of feeling in that House had not yet sent in its Report. He hoped that when the Report was received the House would have ample opportunity of discussing it before any steps were taken upon it. The House of Commons stood in somewhat a peculiar position, and it was possible that the present Parliament might have completed its labours before the Report of that Committee was received. He trusted, however, for his part, that that Report would appear in time for the present Parliament to express its opinion upon the subject, because its Members had been accustomed during so many years to discuss the matters concerned in their details, and he thought it desirable that their voices should be heard before those questions were finally settled. The great feature in these Estimates was the reduction of the men on the establishment. He viewed that with peculiar satisfaction, not only on account of the reduction itself, but also because it indicated generally that the Estimates were those of a peace establishment. The Committee must know that although they had control over the total number of men in the Army, the Government arranged the mode in which the men were to be distributed among the different corps, and from the proposals of the Government with regard to the regimental establishments an indication could be obtained of the forecast they had made of the probable requirements of the year. Now, going back to the piping time of peace, there were only three battalions in the year 1873–4, and only two in 1874–5, maintained at home at the full war strength; that was considered enough to meet the ordinary requirements of Indian and Colonial reliefs. But when they came to 1876, the noble Lord who preceded the present Secretary of State for War proposed to raise the number to 18 battalions at the full war strength of 820. In that proposal he was supported by both sides of the House. In 1877–8, there were again 18. He thought that might be taken as an indication of the opinion of the Government as to the critical state of affairs, and the necessity of keeping that
  72
  number of battalions ready for war purposes. In 1878–9, singularly enough, the number was somewhat reduced; and last year the right hon. and gallant Gentleman (Colonel Stanley) proposed, although the intention was defeated by the fresh outbreak at the Cape, that the number to be kept at full war strength should be reduced to six. This year the proposal of the right hon. and gallant Gentleman seemed capable of being carried out, and now we were to have in this country 6 battalions at the strength of 800, 6 at 720, 6 at 640, 6 at 560, and 43 at 480. This latter was a lower strength than had ever before been proposed. He perfectly agreed with the policy of the right hon. and gallant Gentleman in this respect, because he thought that battalions on arriving home ought to be reduced to the lowest strength consistent with efficiency as drilling machines, and the numbers should be gradually increased until the time for going abroad again, when the battalions should be at full strength. He considered it eminently satisfactory that they had received in this way an assurance from the Government that, in view of the state of our foreign relations, they thought the regimental establishments which he had just quoted sufficient for the year 1880–1. The statements of the right hon. and gallant Gentleman with reference to recruiting, desertion, the Militia, Yeomanry, and Volunteers, he thought were also satisfactory. He was glad to be able to look back over the Reports of the last five or six years, and see that the three branches of the Service he had just mentioned fully maintained their position. The right hon. and gallant Gentleman the Secretary of State made a full statement, with reference to Vote 12, as to the important matter of breech-loading and muzzle-loading ordnance. That subject had been brought before the House on several occasions by the hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for Galway (Major Nolan). For his own part, he had never been a partizan of either system. He thought the Government had exercised a wise discretion in putting off any change as long as possible, although the course of events rendered it necessary that experiments should be made to try the relative values of the two kinds of ordnance. It was quite true, as the right hon. and gallant Gentleman pointed out, that the advantages of muzzle-loading had become more

  73
  open to doubt. He fully concurred in the necessity for experiments; but a thorough change was a most serious matter. He would direct the attention of the Committee to one point, which he was sure the Government kept in view; and that was this—they had to consider, not only the expense of making these enormous guns on a new system, but also the immense amount of our reserves now stored in all parts of the world; if a change were suddenly made in the guns these stores would be useless, and there would be a very heavy expenditure in bringing them home and replacing them; and also for some time the two systems of muzzle and breech-loading would have to exist together, and it would be obvious that this would lead to a vast deal of confusion. He trusted, therefore, that the Committee and the House and the country would pause before they took any steps in that matter, while fully prepared to keep pace with the development of scientific discovery. With regard to the general result of the Estimates, the expenditure was reduced by about £100,000; but it was to be observed that it was mainly in two items—Provisions and Supply Stores—that it took place; in fact, in most of the other items there was an increase, especially in the Auxiliary Forces. The reduction in provisions was, no doubt, due to accidental circumstances. Although he was glad to see a reduction on the whole, yet it appeared to him that there was a constant tendency on the part of the Public Expenditure to increase, and that tendency called for the most careful administration. He had no doubt that his right hon. and gallant Friend did exercise that necessary care; and he only wished that a larger reduction might have been shown.
  SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOThad also to thank his right hon. and gallant Friend for his clear and lucid statement. At the same time, he regretted that they had not before them the Report of Lord Airey's Committee, for it was the one thing that would enable them to discuss, and the country also to discuss, that important question as to whether or no the short-service system was one that could be carried on with advantage. He should say nothing of the past at that time, because the present was not a fair moment for considering what had been done some years since. He considered that, in view of the wars that had taken place at the
  74
  Cape and elsewhere, it was essential that there should be a certain proportion of old and experienced soldiers, and it was especially necessary they should have good and experienced non-commissioned officers; but, unless there were those non-commissioned officers and men of experience in the Army, he felt sure any system that might be proposed would fail. He thought that nobody could differ from him in that opinion. The remarks of the right hon. and gallant Gentleman upon the way in which the troops were sent out last year were both honest and candid. There was no doubt that the hurry in which men were sent away, or the fact that they were taken from one regiment and placed with another, and put under other officers, and sent out to do duty in a barbarous part of the country, showed the necessity for some staid men.
  Notice taken, that 40 Members were not present: Committee counted, and 40 Members being found present,
  SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOTsaid, that the count they had just had was one of those species of obstruction which was naturally most irritating to Members of that House. It was perfectly true that 40 Members were not present; but it was only on account of the dinner-hour. A few men who took an interest in the question before them were endeavouring to discuss it calmly, when an hon. Member entered, without taking the slightest interest in the proceedings, called attention to the fact that 40 Members were not present, and left the House again at once. He begged to say that that was obstruction pure and simple. He was, when interrupted, about to observe that his right hon. and gallant Friend had carefully and thoroughly considered the course to be pursued in drafting men from one regiment to another. He thought that the way in which those officers had handled the men taken over by them for the first time, amalgamated with the regiments serving at the Cape, was deserving of every commendation. It was but another portion of evidence that went to show that the British officer had always that determination to do his duty in whatever circumstances he was placed, and that the esprit de corps of the Service remained as it always had been, notwithstanding how much he was afraid he must say had been done to diminish it. The propor-

  75
  tion of officers killed in the late campaigns showed, also, how resolutely they led their men; and he felt sure that wherever good officers led the men were sure to follow. There was one point with reference to the campaign referred to by the right hon. and gallant Gentleman to which he should like to call attention for a moment. It was with reference to the statements made by an able Special Correspondent of certain papers. That Correspondent had written with much ability, and had given much information, not only during the Crimean War, but also during the Indian Mutiny. He would not go further into the matters which were alleged to have taken place. He felt sure that his right hon. and gallant Friend the Secretary of State would make the most careful inquiries into the matter, because, if not true, such a statement ought never to have been written; and if it was true, the matter ought certainly to be most thoroughly inquired into. He should like to know whether, if it was true, the Army Discipline and Regulation Act passed last year had anything to do with it; and he should further like to know how the Act was really working? He did not quite agree with the speech of the hon. Member for Stirling (Mr. Campbell-Bannerman). He had advocated the policy of keeping down nearly all the troops to a peace establishment, six battalions being all he thought necessary—as the Government proposed—to have on a war footing. For his own part, he thought that certain battalions ought always to be in readiness for an emergency. He was of opinion himself that 18 battalions were not too many; for those, together with three battalions of the Guards, would give a Force of 21 battalions, always ready for war purposes, and he thought that no country in such a position as England should possess less than that. He had mentioned last year, and he should again do so now, the delicate subject of the training at Aldershot. He held that that station should be used as a training place for both officers and men. There was plenty of room for Generals to show how they could handle troops there; and he felt sure that the Generals selected for that station should be those who would, in all probability, take the field in case of war. He was exceedingly glad to hear that the new Medical Warrant had been a success. They would now have, he
  76
  hoped, no difficulty in obtaining a sufficient number of medical officers for the service of the Army. He was not going to hark back upon the old regimental system; but he believed that the medical officers considered that they had not quite the status with regiments to which their position and education entitled them. He was also exceedingly glad to hear that there was to be a large veterinary establishment at Aldershot, for, in his opinion, it would be of very great service. He did not wish to go into the question of recruits, nor into that of desertion, because—through no fault of his right hon. and gallant Friend he was quite sure—the Returns had not yet been presented. At all events, he had not been able to get those Returns. There was one other point with regard to which he should like to say a few words, and that was as to the sale of old arms. If he was rightly informed, they were now sold in large numbers, and were sent to Ireland, to Zululand, and all over the world. They were sold for 3s. a-piece, or about that sum. As old iron they would be worth, if broken up, about 1s. 6d. each. He thought that instead of those arms being sold in the condition to be fit for use they ought to be broken up. He was quite sure a rich country like this had no right to sell these old stores. So clear and lucid a statement had been given to the Committee by his right hon. and gallant Friend upon the Army Estimates that there was really little to be said; but he hoped he would not prevent the House from having a full opportunity of discussing the Report of the Committee over which Lord Airey had presided, when such Report was presented. That Report would be one of the very greatest importance to the country, and upon it the future of our Army would, no doubt, very much depend. That Report would deal with the question of short service, and of the Army Reserve, and other matters of the gravest consequence to the Army; and any alterations proposed by Gentlemen of such authority as those who composed that Committee would, he was sure, receive from the House the most careful and candid consideration. He was quite sure that his right hon. and gallant Friend, without pressing too much on the Committee to hurry their Report, would take care that it should be presented as soon as possible, so that the House and the country might have an

  77
  opportunity of considering the subject in all its different aspects.
  GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOURsaid, that it was only just to the right hon. and gallant Gentleman the Secretary of State for War not to criticize the present items of the Army Estimates in any hostile spirit, for he thought they had been presented to the Committee in as fair a manner as possible, having regard to the important changes that ought or would be necessary when the Report of the Committee, of which Lord Airey was President, had been presented. With his usual fairness, the right hon. and gallant Gentleman had promised that when the Report of the Committee should be presented he would afford the House an opportunity of discussing the various details connected with the proposals made. He attached the utmost importance to the inquiries that were being conducted by the Committee, although he was not very sanguine as to the results that would flow from its Report. Owing to the faults in the original constitution and composition of that Committee, he believed it would not recommend the great changes in the constitution, composition, and organization of the several arms of the Force that he had long advocated as necessary for the efficiency of the Service. He hoped, however, that his anticipations of evil from the defects in the Report would not be realized. There was one point in connection with the explanatory details on the Estimates to which he wished particularly to allude. The statement of the right hon. and gallant Gentleman was a very interesting one, and reproduced numerous facts about the Army of great value; but it seemed to him that many of the spoken details, especially those containing figures, to which the right hon. and gallant Gentleman had referred, should be included in the Memorandum sent out every year with the Army Estimates. He did not mean that he wished the remarks of the Secretary of State to be abridged; but he thought that many of those numerous details which he had so clearly stated would be very well shown in the Memorandum. To his knowledge many hon. Members had long wished that much more of the viva voce statements made by Secretaries of State should be sent out to Members printed in the form he had stated. It would facilitate the Business of the House, and supply Members with the figured in-
  78
  formation so difficult to remember when spoken. It would assist the right hon. and gallant Gentleman the Secretary of State in bringing forward many other more important questions which he was not now able to deal with from want of time. With regard to the changes in the Clothing Store Vote, he heartily approved the change by which the Household Cavalry had been placed upon the same footing, in regard to their clothing and equipments, as the rest of the Cavalry—that was to say, instead of being supplied out of the money voted to the colonels, the articles in need would be furnished from the Government depots. It was a change which he had long wished to see take place. He hoped the Reports of the Committees which have inquired into the subject would be laid before the House. Indeed, he would take this opportunity of stating that whatever pay and allowances might be given to the Household troops, including therein the Foot Guards, should be regularly and specifically voted as pay and allowances and equipments. He did not wish to interfere with the pecuniary or other advantages of these troops; but he thought, as regarded clothing and money allowances, as well as recruiting and hospitals, they ought certainly to be put on the same defined footing as the rest of the Army. There was another matter to which he was glad to see some attention was paid. He had never ceased to complain of the money value of stores required for the Navy being thrown upon the Army Votes. They were then about to make another change from muzzle-loading ordnance to breech-loaders for the Navy. That was a very proper measure. Formerly, the Navy was so armed; but, owing to accidents in the working of these pieces, the breech-loaders were suddenly rejected, and muzzle-loaders at once demanded to replace the others. The expense incurred was great, and was all thrown on the Army Estimates. But they would never have so hastily departed from breechloaders for the Navy, if the Navy had had to pay for its own guns and ordnance stores. The naval authorities suddenly took the idea into their heads of defects in the naval guns, and, being without the responsibility for finding the money to replace the armaments, the Board of Admiralty, then freed accordingly from the fear of the House of Commons, decided that they would

  79
  no longer use breech-loading ordnance. They cast all their breechloaders and vast store of projectiles upon the Army, and said they wanted muzzle-loading ordnance, regardless of cost. He was sure that if the present Lord Hampton had remained in Office as Secretary of State for War he would have insisted upon the Admiralty taking upon their own Estimates the cost of those ordnance and stores. An hon. Member had made some observations about the changes in the 12-inch gun. But these changes had not all been mentioned; the gun of this calibre was originally only 20 tons, then increased to 23 tons, then increased to 25 tons, then to 35 tons, and now they had got the 38-ton gun. But, in his opinion, even this piece was too light, and not of sufficient length for the calibre. These various changes, with all the heavy attendant costs, in this description of gun were all caused by the Navy being able to spend the funds provided in the Army Estimates, and by their unwillingness to provide vessels suitable for the most efficient piece of ordnance. The Navy, in order to obtain a gun of a powerful description, should have stated to the Ordnance Department their requirements as to the best gun that could be turned out; but, instead, the Admiralty said—"No; we shall build our ships as we see fit, and you shall supply us with ordnance suitable for the ships which we choose to build." Nothing would induce them to depart from that condition, and hence the various changes in the inefficient guns, so costly to the country in providing guns for inefficient naval vessels. The obvious remedy was to let the Admiralty provide the funds in the Naval Estimates, and pay for their ordnance and stores as required. As to the question of Army transport charged on the Naval Estimates, he said distinctly there was a waste of money with regard to the use of transports for moving troops at the will of the War Office, all of which waste fell upon the Navy, as did the cost of guns and stores on the Army. Therefore it was that the two systems together worked a double evil—the Navy, by unnecessarily requiring guns and stores from the Army, and the Army, by requiring unnecessary transport from the Navy. By carrying out his suggestion, they would, each arm bearing its own charges, he was convinced, economise in
  80
  the matter of the movement of troops, and a great deal of economy in guns and stores would follow. Then the Secretary of State gave them a very satisfactory statement as to the Medical Department. He was glad to hear that the claims of the medical officers were at last satisfied, and that complaints would now cease. He had often urged that to keep the Medical Department of the Army in a chronic state of complaint was not satisfactory. Now, another change was in progress of trying to amalgamate the medical appointments in India of the two Services—Indian and Home. He was perfectly convinced that, however much it might be injurious to the Medical Department of India, the amalgamation of the appointments of the two Services would be a great advantage to the Medical Department of the Home Army. For them there would be many more openings and increased pay in various shapes, and these advantages could not fail to react on the Home Medical Service. But he earnestly hoped the two Secretaries of State would take care that no injustice was occasioned to the Indian Medical Department by the amalgamation of the two Services, and that both would see that justice and fair treatment were shown to the officers of the Indian Medical Department, now deprived of the advantages it had enjoyed for so many years. He might say that the arrangement made at Aldershot, by which Sir Frederick Fitz Wygram had been intrusted with the supervision of a School for Veterinary Subordinates——
  COLONEL STANLEYsaid, nothing had been done out of the due course, and the greatest advantage was expected from the advice of Sir Frederick Fitz Wygram.
  GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOURwas aware of the value of General Sir Frederick Fitz Wygram's advice. He was an officer who had given great attention to the subject of veterinary practice in the Army, and doubtless, useful results would follow from even minor supervision of this experienced officer. There was another matter to which he would call the Secretary of State's attention. It was in regard to the money receipts arising out of the Army Services. The Secretary of State knew he had it long in view to effect an alteration in the mode of paying these funds, as a part of the Civil receipts, into the miscellaneous receipts of the Treasury. They wore now about

  81
  to add thereto by first swelling the Clothing Vote by an additional expenditure on account of civil clothing to the men discharged from the Service, whereby this money was charged to the Army Votes; and, in addition, they now received advantage by the sale of the military clothing of the discharged soldiers that these men would have otherwise taken away. This money must then be paid over to the Treasury as Civil receipts. They, no doubt, acted wisely in providing civil clothing, instead of having men discharged with the regimental clothing upon them; but the funds derived from the sale of old regimentals ought to be made available for the Army. Now, the Secretary of State himself had long objected to the system by which these changes went to increase, on the one hand, the expenditure of the Army, and, on the other hand, that the money gained by the sale of military clothing had not been shown to the advantage of the Army, but made to swell the miscellaneous receipts of the country. These money receipts, of near £500,000, were so important that it became a question which ought not to be allowed to drop. The Secretary of State had made some remarks with regard to the usefulness of the Woolwich Dockyard, and had connected his name with that yard; but he must now, seeing the hon. and gallant Admiral (Admiral Sir William Edmonstone), bear testimony to his strong and valuable recommendation, made to him (General Sir George Balfour) when he officially, on behalf of the War Department, visited the Yard. At that date the hon. and gallant Admiral was Superintendent, and the advice given by him on that occasion was not to allow the Dockyard to be sold, because it was no longer of use to the Navy. He would venture to say that he recognized these sound views, and was too happy to listen to his advice and made his Report accordingly. It was with great satisfaction that he found that the Secretary of State for War attended to his recommendation; and still more that now, after 10 years, the recommendation of the hon. and gallant Admiral had been carried out, and that the use of the available share in the Dockyard had been found beneficial to the Service. The Secretary of State had mentioned that five additional battalions of Infantry and six batteries of Artillery had been kept in India; but in no part of the Esti-
  82
  mates could he find anything mentioned about those battalions. They were only indebted to the statement of the Secretary of State for the information. It would have been well if the fact of the battalions and batteries in question temporarily detached to India, and which were not available on the Home Establishment, had been mentioned in the explanatory Memorandum. At least, there ought to be a foot note explaining the matter in the detailed distribution of the Army. He had also to point out that up to the last two years they had a very useful detailed statement of all the regimental establishments in the Service at the end of the Army Estimates; but the House had been deprived of that useful statement during the past two years. It was of considerable use to officers to know what regiments were kept up to the full establishment and what were on the peace establishment. He hoped this statement would be restored, or rather that the annual establishments of regiments, when settled by Her Majesty, be supplied to the House. Having now said so much, by way of conclusion he would bear his willing testimony to the manner in which the Estimates were prepared. They were drawn out with great care; but the columns in which the details of charges for Home and the Colonies were shown were only partially filled in. These details were much needed to show the cost of many services for each locality. There was one other point he would notice before sitting down, and that was the expenditure with regard to Cyprus. He thought that £26,000 for the Army Staff included in these Estimates of that little Island was monstrous, seeing that there was only half a battalion of Infantry and one company of Engineers in the Island. But he found there were doctors, chaplains, and six surgeon-majors in that little Island, and no less than 20 of the Transport Department. They had got brigade majors and other people connected therewith sufficient for a Force of several thousand men, and then they had provisions and other kinds of stores—altogether, £26,000 for this wretched little place, exclusive of regimental pay. He could not but think this large Staff establishment was employed for other than military purposes; and he regretted that the heavily-weighted Army Estimates had this unfair burden thrown upon them—a bur-

  83
  den which belonged to, and ought to be borne by, the Civil Estimates if this Island was unable to bear the cost.
  MR. MARK STEWARTsaid, everyone who heard the statement of the right hon. and gallant Gentleman the Secretary of State for War would be of opinion that that statement was clear, conclusive, and comprehensive. There were one or two points, however, on which it occurred to several Members, as well as to himself, that it would be desirable a little more information should be given. It was well known that last year there was a certain movement to obtain Instruction Camps for Artillery Volunteers in Scotland. It did not reach him that other camps than those in existence had been arranged for. When they considered the immense distance which Volunteers had to travel to Shoeburyness, and the expenses to which commanding officers were put, he thought that it was of the highest importance that this movement ought to be encouraged. He thought that in Scotland and in the North of England they were entitled to some consideration at the hands of the Government to have Camps of Instruction established in Scotland; and he hoped the right hon. and gallant Gentleman, when he rose to reply, would give the Committee some information on this matter.
  MAJOR NOLANsaid, he should confine himself exclusively to one point, which he thought was of the highest importance to the country, and that was the complete change from muzzle-loading ordnance to breech-loading guns. It was a subject he had always taken the deepest interest in; and he congratulated the War Department in having pronounced, in such a decided manner as the Secretary of State for War had decided, in favour of the latter style of gun. Of course, there were certain limitations as to his statement. It was not settled that every muzzle-loader would at once be changed into a breech-loader. The right hon. and gallant Gentleman would very likely quarrel with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he attempted to do that; but, still, what the Secretary of State had said was extremely important, and foreshadowed enormous consequences. About the necessity of the change he had no doubt whatever. Since he last brought the subject before the House last year, he had had an opportunity of witnessing some experiments at Essen
  84
  with Krupp's guns; and he must say, while he did so, he felt quite ashamed of our guns as compared with some of Krupp's guns. Our 18-ton gun could not compare with the Krupp 18-ton gun; indeed the difference was extraordinary. Our 18-ton gun could penetrate only 14-inch armour; but the Krupp gun could penetrate an armour plate of 20 inches. This was a very superior force in favour of the foreign gun. The difference between a 14-inch piercing power and a 20-inch piercing power would make all the difference between winning and losing a naval engagement, or the taking or not taking of a naval fortress. In many other ways the Krupp guns had an enormous advantage. With respect to our 80-ton guns, he admitted they were very accurate; but they were not so accurate as the 70-ton Krupp. The accuracy was surprising. It never missed by more than one or two inches at the outside. In addition to this wonderful accuracy—an accuracy they could get only by breech-loading—this 70-ton gun was worked like a small gun. All the arrangements were excellent, and it could be worked by 15 or 16 men. We had never arrived at that stage before. Our 38-ton guns were worked by machinery, but the machinery broke down; and, in fact, it was impossible to work muzzle-loading guns except in turrets or some such places. With regard to the working of the 70-ton Krupp gun, everyone who witnessed it—and there were present Artillery officers from all countries in Europe—agreed that it was complete in all respects. He did not wish to exaggerate what he saw on the Continent. He did not wish to create the impression that the whole of the Continent, because they had got Krupp guns, were so much advanced beyond our Artillery. He believed there was a great difference between the guns possessed by the nations of Europe and the advanced guns which had been turned out last week or last month at Essen. There was a very great difference between the guns he had seen and the guns possessed on the Continent. He had, no doubt, seen the best guns made; but still the Continental guns were very much nearer the Krupp guns than our guns, and the former would be more easily assimilated to the advance type than the latter. Certainly the 5 or 6-ton guns of Sir William Armstrong were very fine weapons, and they could compete favourably with the Krupps of the same

  85
  size. The Secretary of State for War had touched upon the question of powder. Now, from the year 1866, we were well acquainted with the system adopted in Russia for the manufacture of slow-burning powder; and there was no reason why we should not have had since that time good powder, inasmuch as we perfectly well knew how to make it. Indeed, he believed that our powder was as good as any that could be found at that time on the Continent. The Secretary of State for War had said that one of the reasons for adopting breech-loading guns was that long guns were required on board ship. Now, without pretending to be very well acquainted with the question from a naval point of view, he would mention that the Naval Ordnance Department of the United States had reported that they must have breech-loading guns for the reason that it was impossible to get a vessel of moderate beam to carry a sufficiently long gun. The right hon. and gallant Gentleman was, therefore, fortified in his position by the opinion of the Ordnance Department of the only country which had been considered to be our equal in this respect. He was aware that the Secretary of State for War had delayed taking action, pending the result of the experiments in reference to the gun of the Thunderer, and he was not sorry that this was the case. He was glad that these experiments had been made on the Thunderer's gun; but it must always be remembered that the right hon. and gallant Gentleman was in this difficulty—he must always do what the naval authorities wanted, and several times during the last three years they had insisted upon having a particular class of guns, so that the Secretary of State for War had been, to a certain extent, obliged to follow them and make experiments, because the country always insisted that their guns should be of the very best description. The naval authorities were continually making mistakes in this respect, and the right hon. and gallant Gentleman was compelled to struggle with them as best he could, and make as few mistakes as possible. Although he was very much in favour of substituting breech-loading guns for muzzle-loaders, he did not want to press the Secretary of State for War to make this substitution under all circumstances. The expense would not allow him to do this. In a land fortress, for instance, one or two breech-loading
  86
  guns would be useful among a larger number of muzzle-loading weapons; and their usefulness would consist, to a great extent, in the terror with which they would inspire the officers of an invading Fleet, who would not know whether their vessels were about to be pierced by a breech-loading or muzzle-loading gun. But he would advise the right hon. and gallant Gentleman not to make one more muzzle-loader, because it was quite clear that there would be a large number of these guns to be taken over from the Navy; besides which we had already a great many more than was wanted, the present stock being valued at between £7,000,000 and £8,000,000. With regard to Continental nations, he pointed out that although they were possessed of breech-loaders their weapons were much inferior to the Armstrong guns. He believed that had we made a change at an earlier period in the character of the guns used in the Service we should have saved ourselves a great deal of trouble as well as expense, the change from any system of muzzle-loading to any system of breech-loading being extremely easy. Artillery officers did not like two systems, which were in themselves irreconcilable; and he thought that if the two systems were put into competition one would have a tendency to kill the other. The Secretary of State for War seemed—and rightly, in his opinion—to attack the present system of muzzle-loading at both ends. It was necessary that a change in the system should take place for many reasons, particularly as the cost of altering small guns was very inexpensive, and because the possession of the best kind of guns was a great advantage in battle. He considered the question to have been thoroughly solved and settled in favour of breech-loaders, and believed, for this reason, that experiments were no longer necessary. He had conversed with artillerists from every country, all of whom were in favour of breech-loading ordnance; and he hoped that steps would be taken to establish an uniform system in this country, the Military Department refraining in future from making muzzle-loading guns, except in cases of emergency.
  MR. CHARLEYsaid, that as a result of the deliberations of the Committee many views had been expressed in favour of the long service system. However much a system of short service might be

  87
  suited to countries where there was compulsory service, it was certainly not, in his opinion, suitable to this country, where there existed a voluntary system of enlistment.
  SIR ARTHUR HAYTERsaid, that he desired to express his thanks to the right hon. and gallant Gentleman the Secretary of State for War for the able and lucid way in which he had set forth the Army Estimates, and more especially for the promise which he had given that the Committee should, at a later time, have a further opportunity of discussion. He thought the interest attached to the Army Estimates had been diminished by the fact of their being introduced before the Report of Lord Airey's Committee had been presented to Parliament. There were four cardinal points which could not be discussed until that Report had been presented—namely, length of service, the depot system, the linking of regiments, and the question of calling out the Reserves. Each of these points was so essential in itself to our military system that any discussion at that moment which related thereto must be of a desultory character. He would like to ask the Secretary of State for War how it was that the first-class Army Reserve had only increased by 1,000 men, their numbers being only 23,000 as against 22,000 in last year? The right hon. and gallant Gentleman had, in his opinion, exercised a wise discretion in calling out the Militia and Yeomanry for their full period of training, because it was obvious that these Forces should receive the benefit of instruction during the whole time sanctioned by Parliament. He regretted, however, to see that the number of Militia present at the annual training was 24,000 below their authorized establishment; and he trusted that some steps would be taken to reduce that difference both in the case of the Militia and Yeomanry, which latter, also, appeared to be 4,000 below their proper complement. With regard to the Volunteers, nothing could be more satisfactory than the increase of their camp allowances from £10,000 to £20,000, because their attendance at camp conduced greatly to their efficiency. But the principal point of interest in connection with this corps was that the old Easter Monday Review was to be resumed this year; and, in reference to this subject, he begged to ask the right hon. and gallant Gentleman if he
  88
  proposed to send down an efficient staff of officers to conduct the manœuvres on this occasion; because, if a very large contingent came from the Metropolis, as would no doubt be the case, he thought that it should have afforded to it the best opportunity for drilling. He entirely approved of the suggestion thrown out by the right hon. and gallant Gentleman, that the control of the recruiting for both the Regular Army and the Militia should be given to the same general officer, for, undoubtedly, under a different system, there would be a probability of the two branches clashing upon this point. He thought that an explanation was due to the House with regard to another question; and he desired further to know what were the duties of officers serving on the Staff when their regiments were called out for service in the field? In one of the late engagements in Afghanistan the 9th Lancers had suffered very greatly; and there were, besides one officer who was killed and two who were severely wounded, three officers absent from the regiment. He thought that some regulations should be made with regard to officers holding a position on the Staff.
  COLONEL TREMAYNEsaid, he wished to ask the right hon. and gallant Gentleman the Secretary of State for War, whether it was intended to make any regulations with regard to officers serving on special duty at a considerable distance from their regiments? He could not help thinking that the present system was not a good one.
  MR. OTWAYsaid, there were two lines in the Estimates which appeared to him to be of a very striking character. He found that a sum of money was voted for the Army which amounted to nearly £15,000,000 sterling, and the number of men whose services were obtained for this sum was 123,791. Looking at these figures, the comparison drawn from them was of a very startling character. The contrast was so extraordinary that it might well be asked how it was that he obtained the services of only about 120,000 men for the expenditure of £15,000,000 sterling, while Germany, for the sum of £17,000,000 sterling, maintained an Army of 500,000 constantly on foot, and was able to place an Army of 1,000,000 men in the field at three weeks' notice? If hon. Members objected to this comparison with

  89
  the German Army, let them take the Armies of other countries, and they would meet with figures that were much more startling; they would find a number of men obtained for a similar sum of money greatly exceeding the number set down in the present Estimates. He made no accusation against the right hon. and gallant Gentleman, who, he considered, had added nothing to the Army Expenditure. But he complained of the system which, for £15,000,000 sterling, only produced 120,000 men. There could be no doubt that there was something wrong either in the expenditure, or in the military system, which required so large a sum of money for the production of so small a number of soldiers. He desired to ask the right hon. and gallant Gentleman whether the Government contemplated or had formed any plan for securing the continuance in the Service of the non-commissioned officers of the Army? When his hon. and learned Friend opposite (Mr. Charley) had said that short service had been tried and had been found to be unsuitable to this country he somewhat doubted that view, because the present Government had altogether accepted, so far as related to short service, the position taken by Lord Cardwell; besides which, short service seemed to have been generally accepted throughout the country. Lord Card-well's plan, however, had never been completed. But his intention was to demand an additional sum of money, in order to secure the retention of noncommissioned officers in the Army. There were so many inducements offered to these men in civil life that their retention in the Army would be almost an impossibility unless some greater advantages were held out to them. Anyone who took an interest in this subject would see that it was one which required great consideration. With regard to the system of linking regiments, he very much questioned whether, in the British Army, it was productive of good, inasmuch as it would certainly affect, if it did not destroy, that which the soldier considered of great value—namely, the prestige of corps, which the system of linked battalions would certainly weaken. They had lately seen a regiment entirely destroyed by the application of this principle. He had himself known of a regiment which was utterly annihilated by having all its efficient men taken
  90
  from it, and made to join regiments with which they had no affinity whatever. In the case to which he referred, the commanding officer found himself denuded of all his good men, and reduced to the command of a regiment utterly inefficient. He asked what would be the feelings of that officer, who found himself obliged to be continually training up boys, in order to make another regiment efficient? The existing system, under which all the efficient men were drafted out of one regiment into another, and the regiments linked together, was most injurious to the Service. One could understand two Highland regiments, or two regiments from Yorkshire, being linked together; indeed, they were aware that, in the case of Scotch regiments, this was a very valuable arrangement; but, under the present system, they were linking together regiments which had no kind of connection. This would probably lead to inconvenience, for just the same reason that the man who lived in a semidetached house—in his opinion, the most disagreeable kind of residence—was obliged either to love or to hate his neighbour. That seemed to have been the principle on which some of the English regiments had been brought together, and he thought it would be well that this point should receive consideration, and be dealt with by the Government; for he had it on the authority of commanding officers that if they did not retain the services of tried and experienced non-commissioned officers the efficiency of their regiments would be destroyed.
  SIR ALEXANDER GORDONwished to ask the same question that he had before put to the right hon. and gallant Gentleman, and to know why he had kept from the Estimates the detailed statement of the regimental establishments? In commencing his statement, the right hon. and gallant Gentleman had said that he was anxious to give every information in his power; and, therefore, it was difficult to understand why he withheld information which would be so useful to every Member who wished thoroughly to examine the Estimates. This was the only document by which they could test the working of the depot battalion system, and that was a very strong reason why it should be given to them. The right hon. and gallant Gentleman told him last year that if any Member wanted the

  91
  statement he could go into a shop and buy one of the Warrants where he could get it; but, for his own part, he thought that information should be published with the Estimates, and that hon. Members should not be put to the trouble to buy it, and the labour of comparing it with the figures supplied to them, when it might appear on a couple of pages with the Vote. He should be glad to know why the right hon. and gallant Gentleman had taken so much trouble to eliminate from this Vote what had always previously been given by his Predecessors?
  COLONEL STANLEY: I think, Sir, we have now discussed the Estimates fully, though I feel I have no right to complain either of the length of time which has been occupied or of the character of the discussion; in fact, I may say with truth that I have never seen the Committee more ready to approach these Estimates in what I may call a fair and satisfactory spirit. I will endeavour to reply to the multiplicity of questions asked me; and if any should escape my observation I will request hon. Gentlemen to correct me in regard to the various points. As respecting the last question, my answer must substantially be the same as it was last year, that we do not now think it desirable to attach what is necessarily an imperfect Paper to the Estimates, showing what the establishments may be. We prefer to give that fuller information later on, when it is complete, and when the establishments can really be satisfactorily good. We do not, as the hon. and gallant Baronet is no doubt aware, now print them for general use; and, indeed, they used to be considered, for what reason I do not know, a confidential Paper. The Adjutant General's Return, now placed in the Library, gives up to each month, not only the establishments, but what effectives there are. As to the question of printing the establishments with the Estimates, I do not know if I had clone so whether I should not have been open to censure, because it will be remembered that the House is now asked on this occasion to vote the establishments, and it might be said that it was wrong in giving them before the appropriation was voted. With refer-once to what the hon. Gentleman the Member for Chatham (Mr. Otway) has just said, I regret that that hon. Gentleman did not hear the whole of my open-
  92
  ing remarks, because if he had he would have known that in my opening statement I deprecated any discussion about short service, and definitely declined to be drawn into a conversation on the subject. I do not like expressing an opinion where that opinion might prejudice matters which are still sub judice; and I, therefore, deprecate any discussion, and must give that answer also to my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Salford (Mr. Charley). Here I must also join issue with the hon. Member. He used an argument which seems to me to divide itself into two parts, one of which contradicts the other. He first of all criticized, not unnaturally for a person outside this House, perhaps, though not so naturally for a Member inside, the expenditure of money on the Army in this country in comparison with the results attained in the way of recruits, and the number of men obtained by foreign service. But, surely, if a comparison is to be instituted with foreign Armies, you ought to count not only the Forces to whose services you can lay claim—you do not merely consider the Regular Army—but compare also the number of men whom you can put in arms. Besides the troops that we have in India at the present time we can now raise in this country some 423,000 men of all arms. Further than that, the hon. Gentleman does not require to be reminded that in a voluntary service you pay what is the market price for the article you wish to acquire; in other words, you do not get the men on your terms, but you get them on the terms at which they are willing to come. That is inherent to a voluntary system, and is what makes it more uncertain and more expensive. It is one of the points which the country, in weighing the advantages and disadvantages of voluntary service against compulsory service, must consider and determine for itself. Then, again, it is hardly fair, in making a comparison of that kind, to leave out of sight the fact that we have no conscription, and that we have foreign service. You can get men easily to serve at home; but when you have to take into account the exigencies of foreign service, then, undoubtedly, that raises the market price of the soldier, as you see by comparing the price of the Regular Service with the Militia or the other Services.
  MR. OTWAY: I admitted all these differences, and said that they ought to

  93
  be taken into consideration in making the comparison.
  COLONEL STANLEY: I am glad that the hon. Member went so far as to admit the difference, because if they are admitted they tend, I think, very much to weaken his argument, in making a comparison between our Army and those of foreign countries. Then it seemed to me that the hon. Gentleman used two arguments which were inconsistent. He spoke, in the first place, of the importance of getting good non-commissioned officers. There I am happy entirely to agree with him. As I said before, I cannot forecast what the recommendations of Lord Airey's Committee may be, for I cannot tell to what conclusions they may have come. But I have reason to believe that they have had very fully in their minds the advantage of securing, even though it may be at an increased cost, the services of good and efficient non-commissioned officers. I have spoken earlier this evening of the regimental officers as the soul and spirit of the Army. If they be so, the noncommissioned officers are in no less a degree the bone and framework of the regiment. Especially in these days of short service, you must regard the noncommissioned officer as being of far greater importance to the regiment even than he was in former times. [Cheers.] I hope I am not drawing a wrong inference from the cheers that I hear in concluding that if I should make a recommendation in that direction when I receive the Report of the Committee, and if I should find, on full consideration, that I am not able to deal with such Report within the Vote, that the House will give a candid consideration to any proposal I may have to make. I cannot say more, and I should not like to say less. With regard to the recommendations of the Committee itself, I think, perhaps, that I cannot say more than that I repeat what I said in the earlier part of this evening. I endeavoured, as far as I was able, to get that Committee to report before the Estimates were considered; but, for very valid reasons, they were unable to do so. I do not want to keep any matter back from the House. If legislative sanction should be required for any propositions in this Report, it will, undoubtedly, be my duty to bring the matter at once before the House; while, on the other hand, if the matter is not such as to
  94
  render it necessary for me to call the attention of hon. Members to it, then I will do the best in my power to facilitate any discussion on the subject. That is all I can say at present on the matter, and I hope that that will be so far clear. My hon. and gallant Friend the Member for West Sussex (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) called my attention to a matter as to which I would rather not say anything at the present moment. At all events, I believe we may find more fitting opportunities, and when, I may frankly confess for myself, I shall have better means of studying the whole question. I am referring to the question raised by the Correspondent of The Daily Telegraph in connection with the affairs of South Africa. Everyone, I am sure, who is acquainted with Dr. Russell, will give him credit for wishing to write what he believes to be, on the whole, for the advantage of the Service. On the other hand, I cannot but feel deeply that many of my brother officers, as I hope I may still continue to call them, do resent these questions being brought up and published without due evidence, as they think, being produced. As I have already previously said, the matter is still sub judice; and I would, therefore, rather prefer not to express an opinion. I was asked by my hon. and gallant Friend, very germanely to the subject, whether any of these complaints were to be attributed to any defect in the Army Discipline and Regulation Act; and the hon. and gallant Gentleman opposite, in the course of his remarks, also pointed out that there might have been some defects discovered in the working of the measure. All I can say is that, so far as I have been able to learn, that is not the case. On the contrary, I believe it is working very fairly—I do not say it is a perfectly correct Act in every point, and I do not say any large measure that has ever been passed ever is—but, on the whole, it is working very well. As to the troops in South Africa, I may remind hon. Members that the Act has only come into force in those parts of the world on this very day, so that whatever has happened there we cannot lay any blame upon the Act. Then the hon. and gallant Gentleman (General Sir George Balfour) went on to make many remarks in which in theory I agree. He pointed out very justly the difficulty which arises from the fact that the Naval Service orders guns, for in-

  95
  stance, and that we have to supply them. He observed that much greater simplicity would result if the Navy paid for its own guns, and each Department bore the expense of its transport services. This is all part of a very much larger question of account and re-payment, and I can only say that I was very much impressed with his view of the matter, and with the importance of the question; so much so that when I was at the Treasury I was instrumental in procuring a Commission to inquire into this question of extra receipts. I believe that Committee is still progressing in its labour; and although I am very much prepared to agree in theory with what he has said, still it will be found in a matter of account and detail of this kind that the matter is not by any means so simple or one-sided as it looks. I hope further inquiries will be made into the matter, and I know that my hon. Friend the Secretary to the Treasury, and my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, will give any recommendations which may be addressed to them very careful and prompt consideration. The hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for Galway (Major Nolan) has commented in a manner which I was very glad to hear on the statement which it was my duty to make in connection with the subject of breech-loading guns as compared with muzzle-loaders. That question we know has long interested him. He has brought it on several former occasions very ably before the House, and he must be glad to see that others are now coming round to the views he has advocated for some considerable time. He has so many arguments on his side that I am sure he will not wish to make use of any bad ones; and, therefore, I feel it desirable to remind him that the question of breech-loading guns has very much changed in its aspect within the last few years, and that the arguments which might have been used with a great deal of force a few years ago cannot be so used now, because circumstances have altered. It is not merely the question of the breech-loader, but of the long gun, which has brought up fresh difficulties, and has done away with many of the difficulties which formerly determined the balance in favour of the; muzzle-loaders. It is now, therefore, a question of the long gun and of the compressed powder which is forced upon
  96
  us, rather than the reversal of any wrong decision to which we came a few years ago. Indeed, if we had spent all the money which we spent on muzzle-loaders on breech-loaders, we should equally have had to come to a change of mind at the present time, owing to the greater propulsive power of the powder now used. My hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Bath (Sir Arthur Hayter) has asked a question with regard to the Staff at the Brighton Review. I believe that it is not yet quite arranged, but that it is intended that all the divisional officers at least shall be provided from the Regular Service; but I am not quite certain whether Regular officers are also to be found for the brigades. Some, I believe, will be officered by Regular officers, while some brigades will be provided for by officers of the Volunteer Service. I cannot speak with certainty on this point, for, as my hon. and gallant Friend is aware, the list was not closed till Saturday last, and I believe a very large number of applications came in at the very last moment, which will probably necessitate some slight change. Everything, however, will be done to make that Review as efficient as possible, and I may fairly hope that Volunteer officers—now that they have had longer experience—may overcome many of the difficulties experienced at former Reviews. I was also asked a question as to the number of officers drawn from their regiments for Staff employment, and reference was notably made to the 9th Lancers. That was, of course, a most unfortunate case to begin with; one must always expect in a Cavalry regiment, ex necessitate rei, to use an abnormal number of officers withdrawn for Staff employment; and undoubtedly the case of the 9th Lancers is one which, I am sure, the whole Service would deplore. It is, on the other hand, very difficult to lay down any hard-and-fast line as to where an officer is best employed. An officer is employed doing excellent service in South Africa, which service, at the moment that he was appointed, certainly seemed as if it was to be the only active service which any officer of his regiment would like to see. His regiment at that time was posted on the North West Frontier, and at the time when Major Bushman went to South Africa it did not appear likely to be called upon in active service. But I also do not think it is possible to lay

  97
  down a hard-and-fast line, because if we do it will inevitably lead us to the principle which we have never adopted, and which, I hope, we shall always be l0th to adopt—that principle which the French and German Armies have adopted of a separate Staff Corps. I think we all agree that a Staff officer is all the better for being acquainted with military duties generally, and for the experience he gains in his own regiment, and therefore I should be very sorry to lay down any hard-and-fast-line—we must be guided by what is thought best for the Service. Still, on the other hand, I do join in deprecating the withdrawal of regimental officers from their regiments; and I must remind the hon. and gallant Gentleman that a good deal of this will be avoided in the future, especially where many officers are wanted for lines of communication, by the Reserve of officers of which I spoke this evening. They will be volunteered for duties for which regimental officers have now to be withdrawn from their regiments. I was also asked a question in regard to a Camp of Instruction in the North for the Artillery. All I can say is, that the question has not been lost sight of. It was first of all examined with the view of ascertaining whether it was practical to establish a second Shoeburyness, where officers could receive instruction without having the trouble of going so long a distance to the South. That was not found practicable, and the point now under consideration is, whether or not an annual Camp of Instruction can be formed. Inquiries are still going on, and when that is done, and if the hon. and gallant Gentleman will repeat the question to me in the course of a few days, I shall be glad to give him some information on the subject, although I cannot speak more clearly now. Then, with regard to the sale of old arms, the hon. and gallant Gentleman opposite deprecated our selling them, observing that they were used for purposes which are not the best, and that they really brought in very little money to the Government. I quite concur in that remark, and, so far as my noble Friend (Lord Eustace Cecil) and myself are concerned, we stopped the sale of old arms last year, and what are now being offered are the accumulated stores which dealers bought from us some time ago, and are now retailing from time to time. Over these sales we have, of course, no
  98
  control, although I myself personally very much regret the practice in which these dealers indulge. At the same time, it must be borne in mind that there never was a time when there were so many old disused arms offering in Europe, and our small contribution in that direction will not tell very much one way or the other. The matter, however, was wrong in principle, and it seemed to me and my hon. Friend that it would be better to put up with the small loss and to stop the sale; and that, as I have said, was done last year. Again, I was asked as to the old clothes of the Volunteers. We no longer give soldiers on their discharge their old military clothes, but we give them a suit of private clothes instead. I do not know whether my hon. Friend the Member for Wigton (Mr. Mark Stewart) intended to suggest that we should do the same thing with the Volunteers, because, if he did, the case is not the same, as they have their private clothes in wear every day, and there is no reason why we should give them clothes in place of a uniform which very likely, from the very beginning, has been entirely their own. If he, however, merely means to suggest that we should give them facilities for disposing of their old uniforms, I think that is a fair question. It is quite possible to be able to get a better price for the old uniforms of the Volunteers than they are able to obtain for themselves. That is, however, a matter for examination hereafter. I have now gone over all the points as to each question which were put to me, and I hope it is not too much to ask the Committee to allow me to take the Vote asked for. Vote agreed to.
  (2.) £4,579,000, Pay and Allowances (Land Forces at Home and Abroad).
  GENTRAL SIR GEORGE BALFOURasked the Secretary of State, why they should not take the Vote for the number of men in each branch of the Service separately? That was the course followed in Franco. The French Court of Accounts invariably verified the numbers of the General Army, and by taking the different arms all chances of swelling the numbers of one arm, and reducing the numbers of the other arms, were thereby prevented, and he hoped that next year the Secretary of State for War would follow the same course. At all events, he did not see, when the verifi-

  99
  cation took place, why the number of men in each branch of the Service should not be examined. He had the same objection to offer with regard to the pay of all the Army. Nearly one-third of the whole Military Expenditure was voted in one Vote. It ought to be divided into the several Votes corresponding with the separate arms of the Service. The pay of the General Staff should also be shown under a distinct Vote. At present, the Auditor General merely verified the total pay of the whole Army and General Staff, instead of verifying the expenditure on account of each branch. This course was open to great objection, and he had felt for a considerable time that it was an objectionable course to take. He admitted that no abuse resulting from the practice had ever been made public; but hon. Members would see that it did offer great opportunities for abuse, because under this sweeping mode, for instance, a considerable increased number of Household Cavalry might be kept up, while the number of the Infantry would be diminished, and there would be nothing to show the change which had been made, because the verification of the Auditor General only extended to totals. They were now voting in one lump sum nearly £4,600,000, and it was a serious thing to think that that large amount should appear in their accounts in lump sums for all branches. If the Secretary of State should be in Office next year, as he hoped he might be [Loud cheers from Ministerial Benches]—yes, he said so advisedly—he knew the people always got more from the Conservatives than the Liberals, because, being generally weak in numbers, they were bound to comply with Liberal pressure; and after the Election, when the Ministerial majority had been reduced by at least 20 or 30, the Liberals in Opposition would be able to make the Conservative Government do whatever they pleased. He would, therefore, advise his right hon. and gallant Friend the Secretary of State for War to make as many reforms as possible, in order that the Liberal Opposition might have as little to do as possible when the Secretary of State found himself with a very weak majority in the next Parliament.
  COLONEL STANLEYsaid, that he could hardly give an opinion on the change suggested, as there were many considerations involved. He might say that at first sight he preferred the system
  100
  which long experience had justified as being the most convenient modes in which to prepare the Estimates. Practically, the House assented in the total number of men to be raised, and then, without limit, the distribution of men devolved upon the Secretary of State. Of course, there was an honourable understanding that, on the whole, the authorized establishment was not to be exceeded. With regard to the Comptroller and Auditor General, he might say that the authorities at the War Office and that gentleman were on the most frank and friendly footing. There was no wish on one side to withhold information, or on the other to unduly interfere with the conduct of business.
  MR. OTWAYsaid, that he wished to ask a question with respect to the Royal Malta Fencible Artillery. He had wished to raise the question at an earlier period, but was not aware that the Estimates would have been taken so soon. The best apology which he could make was by not continuing the discussion. He should like to know whether the same rules as to the retirement of officers prevailed in the Royal Malta Fencible Artillery as existed in Her Majesty's Army? He asked the question, because some time ago it came to his knowledge that there were in the Malta Fencibles some officers of extreme age.
  COLONEL STANLEYsaid, that at that moment he was unable to give an answer to the hon. Member. He was, however, under the impression that those officers were dealt with under a separate Warrant. If the hon. Member would put a Question to him on another occasion he should be happy to give him an answer.
  Vote agreed to.
  (3.) £50,700, Army (Divine Service).
  (4.) £29,800, Administration of Military Law.
  (5.) £308,400, Medical Establishments and Services.
  (6.) £552,900, Militia and Militia Reserve.
  (7.) £74,400, Yeomanry Cavalry.
  (8.) £539,600, Volunteer Corps.
  SIR ARTHUR HAYTERsaid, he should like to ask the right hon. and gallant Gentleman the Secretary of State for War whether it was intended to place Volunteer Corps upon a regimental roster with respect to attendance at Camps of

  101
  Instruction? He asked the question, because the right hon. and gallant Gentleman had stated that it was his intention to limit the number of regiments attending camp. The regiment he had the honour to command went into camp every year; and if a roster were adopted it would probably be excluded from camp.
  COLONEL STANLEYsaid, that the recommendations for the attendance of Volunteer Corps at Camps of Instruction were made by the general officers of the district in which they were situated. The authorities anticipated a largely-increased attendance at the Camps of Instruction; but they would require more knowledge and experience before making any scheme as to the mode in which regiments should be allowed to attend. He wished to express his gratification that there was such eagerness on the part of Volunteers to avail themselves of Camps of Instruction. Last year they decided to increase the grant for Camps of Instruction; but there was, of course, the difficulty that the grant would be exceeded if every regiment came forward at the same time. He, therefore, gave early warning that the War Office might make regiments take turn and turn again in some cases, if necessity should arise.
  MR. WHITWELLsaid, that he should like to know whether the Government intended to place any limit upon the numbers of the Volunteer Force? At one time it was suggested that 200,000 men should be the limit. In his opinion, it would be very undesirable to restrict the number of Volunteers, so long as the people were willing to enrol themselves in the Force. He, therefore, hoped that no hard-and-fast line would be laid down with regard to the maximum numbers. He might congratulate the right hon. and gallant Gentleman upon the process of consolidating administrative battalions which had been going on. He understood that 21 battalions had been already consolidated. With respect to the re-payment of advances for clothing, he doubted whether two years was not the proper period to be allowed for re-payment. Three years seemed too long. The clothing would be worn out before it was paid for. Regimental clothing would not last more than three years, and it should be provided for before the last year had begun. He certainly thought that it would be better to limit the period for re-payment to two years.
  SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOTsaid, that there was one point with regard to Volunteer Corps which seemed to him to be of great importance. Sergeant Instructors of Volunteers required occasional instruction, and it had been found necessary to send them once a-year to the depot centres. Under the present system, the Volunteers had to pay for sending them there. He wished to know whether any arrangement had yet been made by which the expense of sending those men to the depot centres would in future fall not on the Volunteers, but on the country?
  COLONEL STANLEYsaid, that with regard to the question of the hon. Member for Kendal (Mr. Whitwell), it would be observed that the establishment of Volunteers was shown by the Estimates. Formerly it was not the custom to show the number of men, but it had now been inserted in the Estimates. When it was desired to increase the number of a corps, it was formerly usual to consider the application on its merits at any time of the year. Sometimes it happened that an increase of establishment was given to corps which were not, from their character, likely to be permanent. At the present time, his hon. and gallant Friend the Under Secretary and the other authorities considered all applications for increase of establishment for the ensuing year at one particular time in the year. While, on the one hand, they were not prepared to say that the establishment of Volunteers should be entirely unlimited, yet the authorities held themselves free to deal with the Volunteer establishment for the forthcoming year at the period mentioned. Of course, it would be borne in mind that in some years the increase of the Volunteer Force had been in the ratio of the cost of a battalion of Infantry. When the increase was of that character, limitation of some sort had to be kept in view. With regard to the question of his hon. and gallant Friend (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) as to Sergeant Instructors, he could not at that moment give any definite answer. The question would be noted by the Under Secretary of State, who would give it all due consideration. At the present moment he did not wish to express any opinion concerning it.
  Vote agreed to.
  (9.) £208,800, Army Reserve.
  SIR ARTHUR HAYTERsaid, he should like to know the position of the Army Reserve. It did not seem to him that it had increased as much as could be wished. In Class I, it had increased from 22,000 to 23,000; but Class II. was stationary at 24,000.
  SIR ALEXANDER GORDONsaid, that with regard to the Reserve of officers, he should like to know whether they were included in this Vote or the Non-Effective Vote? Officers who had left the Army and had retired into private life might make good officers of a Reserve Force, but ought not to be eligible for Staff situations on the breaking out of a war in preference to officers who had been continuously doing regimental duty, and who would, therefore, be more efficient. He should like to know whether they were to be borne as Effectives or Non-Effectives?
  COLONEL STANLEYsaid, that with respect to the last question, it would be a very important consideration as to where the charge for Reserve officers should be shown. Practically, up to the present time there were 190 officers who were under a liability to serve from having retired on a pension. The question of efficiency of officers could not be passed over so lightly. The Reserve of officers was necessitated principally by reason of the number of officers required for subsidiary duties—such as keeping open lines of communication, and other matters, in war time. As regarded officers who had already had experience in the Army, their technical knowledge in the latest drill would be of less importance than their general knowledge as men of the world, and their experience as officers who had seen service in various parts of the world. They hoped by that means to get into the Service a number of officers who had served in India and other places, but who, unfortunately, had been compulsorily lost to the Service. It was a sad necessity that the country should have to part with them; but by these means their services would be utilized, if occasion should unhappily arise. As to the number of the Army Reserve, he was not able then to give detailed information. All he could say was, that it must be borne in mind that last year there was a great pressure, and the Reserve men were allowed to volunteer back
  104
  920 men so volunteered back into the Army, and were transferred for service at the Cape. 4,453 were passed last year, but the net increase was only 1,566, there being lost by death or discharge as many as 1,203. There certainly was a great deal of reason for disappointment as to the way in which the Reserves had fallen short of the numbers originally estimated. The chances of civil life and diseases contracted in civil employment, and other causes, had caused a large number of men discharged from the Army to be lost to the Reserve. He might say that it was a matter on which the Government might make proposals to the House.
  Vote agreed to.
  (10.) £386,700, Commissariat, Transport, and Ordnance Store Establishments, Wages, &c.
  GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOURsaid, that on a former occasion he had asked the right hon. and gallant Gentleman the Secretary of State for War if he would kindly insert in the Army Estimates the number of police employed. The sum of £23,368 was charged for Police Establishments, but the number of police should be stated. There was another point to which he wished to call attention. He was very sorry to see that the sum for the Commissary General was divided between Vote 15 and Vote 9. That division was, in his opinion, very much to be regretted. He thought, also, that the establishments at Cyprus were much too great.
  COLONEL STANLEYsaid, that there was a slight clerical error in the Estimates. With regard to what the hon. and gallant Gentleman had said, he might state that he was most anxious to give every possible information in the Estimates. On a future occasion, therefore, he would endeavour to give the number of police employed. It must be borne in mind that the establishment of the Store Department at Cyprus was not necessarily in the same ratio with the number of men employed, and, in his opinion, was not excessive.
  GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOURsaid, that there were two Paymasters at Cyprus and one aide-de-camp. There was also a charge for a surveyor and a servant, and he certainly looked upon that item with suspicion. Last year

  105
  the Government showed very great disinclination to any increased expense at Cyprus. He was quite sure that the right hon. and gallant Gentleman would not allow any establishments to be maintained in Cyprus for purposes which the House of Commons had not sanctioned. Considering the number of stores in Cyprus, he certainly thought that two Storekeepers would have been sufficient.
  COLONEL STANLEYsaid, that there was a good deal of misconception existing concerning the establishments at Cyprus. With regard to the general question raised by the hon. and gallant Gentleman as to the transfer of items from one Vote to another, if he remembered rightly the item on account of the Commissary General was transferred to Vote 15 from Vote 9, in consequence of a recommendation of Lord Northbrook's Committee. Subsequently it was said that the amount ought to be charged in Vote 9, and it was accordingly re-transferred.
  Vote agreed to.
  (11.) £2,790,000, Provisions, Forage, &c.
  MR. OTWAYsaid, he failed to see what economy was to be gained under this Vote, inasmuch as it comprised a large sum for the billeting and lodging of soldiers which was not charged to the same extent in previous Estimates.
  COLONEL STANLEYsaid, the complaint of the hon. Gentleman was easily capable of explanation, inasmuch as the Vote represented a decrease of £217,000, as compared with last year's Votes. This arose from a decrease in the price of provisions, and also from a decrease in the number of the Forces. As far as the lodging and furniture and allowances were concerned, the decrease arose mainly from the shortening of the period of training from 27 to 20 days. As far as billeting was concerned, the Government were making inquiries in order to ascertain the extent to which brigade depots could be utilized for this purpose. As far as the cost of transport was concerned, there had, undoubtedly, been an increased cost; but this was due in part to the fact that under the short-service system men had to frequently be moved in order to fill up the numbers at the depots. It had been found necessary this year to move large bodies of troops
  106
  in order to keep up the reliefs, and so the cost had been increased. There had also been an increase in the cost of the Auxiliary Force amounting to about £6,000, including allowances to the Colonial Forces. Additional allowances were made where it was found that the ordinary grant was not sufficient.
  MR. H. SAMUELSONsaid, that a short time back the attention of the Government was called to the bad condition of the camping ground at Horfield, which was not fit for the use of the Militia, and that if they were compelled to continue to use it, it would be difficult to maintain discipline in the ranks. At the time those representations were made, a promise was given that the camping ground should be inspected; and he should like to know what, if anything, had been done in this respect?
  COLONEL STANLEYsaid, inquiry was made at the time, and his impression was that, owing to unforseen circumstances, a large sum of money was spent upon the field in question. The whole matter, with reference alike to the training ground and the brigade depôts, was postponed until after the Report of General Airey's Committee was received, in the belief that some reference would be made to it in the Report. As far as he was personally concerned, he found it impossible to go down and inspect the camping ground at Horfield; but he might possibly be able to give further information if the question was repeated.
  MR. H. SAMUELSONsaid, he would repeat his question on the Report of Supply.
  GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOURasked for further information as to the Colonial allowances.
  COLONEL STANLEYsaid, he would consider very carefully the question which had been suggested by the hon. and gallant Baronet. At present he could give no information on the point which could be of practical value, for the reason that he had not inquired into it. He might state, in general terms, that the Colonial allowances, as compared with what the Colonies paid, produced an almost even balance.
  Vote agreed to.
  (12.) £825,100, Clothing Establishments, Services and Supplies.
  MAJOR NOLANpointed out that in former times the clothing of batteries of

  107
  Artillery devolved upon the Quartermasters, but now it fell upon one sergeant, to whom no allowance was made for the work which he had to do. He had already pointed out this fact to the Secretary of State for War, and had urged upon him that a larger rate of pay ought to be given to the sergeant upon whom this duty devolved, inasmuch as the duty was in itself an onerous one, and the sergeant had to pay money out of his own pocket to maintain the storekeeping department which was in his charge; or, if he did not actually find the money himself, the cost was borne by the officers in command of batteries.
  COLONEL LOYD LINDSAYsaid, he would make inquiry as to the question which had been raised by the hon. and gallant Member.
  MR. WHITWELLsaid, that when Mr. Gathorne Hardy—now Viscount Cranbrook—was at the head of the War Department, a considerable sum was devoted to the provision of stores; and he wished to know whether the supply of stores since served out for the troops in Afghanistan had been replaced, and whether the stock was as large as before that issue?
  LORD EUSTACE CECIL: Yes.
  Vote agreed to.
  (13.) £1,185,000, Warlike and other Stores.
  (14.) £853,000, Superintending Establishment of, and Expenditure for, Works, Buildings, and Repairs at Home, and Abroad.
  SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOTasked when the Militia depot would be removed from Eastbourne to Lewes?
  MR. H. SAMUELSONasked, whether there was not a power vested in the colonels of regiments to raise money for the benefit of the corps which they commanded upon property which by law belonged to them?
  COLONEL STANLEYreplied, that this would depend upon the position in which the commanding officers stood as trustees of the property belonging to the corps they commanded; and, as the circumstances differed in almost every case, he could not, in general terms, answer the question of the hon. Member.
  SIR ARTHUR HAYTERasked when, if ever, there was to be an altera-
  108
  tion made in the construction of the "huts" in which the Cavalry were now housed at Aldershot, in order that the men might have permanent structures in which to live?
  LORD EUSTACE CECILsaid, he hoped that by next August the huts would be replaced by buildings of a permanent character.
  MR. OTWAYsaid, that £7,000 were asked for the barracks at Exeter, and inquired whether the Government insured such buildings against damage by fire?
  COLONEL STANLEYsaid, it was not usual for a Government Department to insure buildings under its charge against fire.
  Vote agreed to.
  (15.) £162,200, Establishments for Military Education.
  (16.) £36,400,Miscellaneous Effective Services.
  (17.) £215,900, Administration of the Army.
  (18.) £33,900, Rewards for Distinguished Services, &c.
  (19.) £92,000, Pay of General Officers.
  (20.) £892,700, Retired Full Pay, Half Pay, Pensions and Gratuities, including Payments allowed by Army Purchase Commissioners.
  MAJOR NOLANasked for information as to the intentions of the Government in reference to the enforced retirement of captains after 20 years' service. Did they intend to proceed with that portion of the Retirement Scheme?
  COLONEL STANLEYreplied, that it was not possible to carry out the terms of the Royal Warrant on Retirement, which adhered strictly to the letter of the terms. The Warrant was drawn by persons who knew, perhaps, better than any others the circumstances which rendered it necessary; and it was, therefore, deemed necessary to carry it out in its entirety.
  MR. OTWAYwished to ask the right hon. and gallant Gentleman another question. When purchases were abolished, there could be no question that it was necessary to have compulsory retirement in order to obtain a proper flow of promotion; but the scheme adopted had resulted in producing great in-

  109
  equality, especially in certain regiments. He visited a regiment the other day of a most distinguished character, and he ascertained that the officers of that regiment found that they had no chance whatever of becoming field officers under the new system of compulsory retirement. As a consequence, they naturally took but little interest in the duties they had to perform, and were looking forward with regret to the day when they would become captains, because they were all satisfied that there was no chance of their rising any higher in rank. What was required, if this system of compulsory retirement Was to be maintained, was that some discretion should be given to the Meld Marshal, or to the Secretary of State for War, to transfer officers from regiments where promotion had been unfairly slow into those where it had been very rapid. The regiment of which he was speaking was linked with one where promotion had been singularly rapid; and if the right hon. and gallant Gentleman the Secretary of State for War, or the Field Marshal, had had power to transfer officers from a regiment where promotion was slow into a regiment linked with them where it was rapid the injustice to which he was calling attention would be done away with, and much dissatisfaction would be prevented. He was convinced that the abolition of purchase was a necessity; but, at the same time, he heard these matters very much discussed, as he travelled about the country, amongst a number of different persons, and he should be glad to see if some change of the kind he suggested could not be brought about.
  GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOURjoined heartily in this complaint as to the stagnation in the flow of promotion; but, at the same time, he hoped that no discretion would be given in the matter, either to the Field Marshal or to the Secretary of State for War. He quite admitted that there would be always discontent among officers on this forced retirement, and he did not himself at all like to see men of the ages of 37, 38, and 39 forced to leave the Army; but, on the other hand, to give the Secretary of State for War the power to prevent a man from being retired would be to place in his hands an authority which no man having Parliamentary responsibilities could possibly exercise for a moment.
  MR. OTWAYwished to correct an entire misapprehension as to his meaning. He had no desire to place any power in the hands of the Commander-in-Chief, or of the Secretary of State for War, to promote an officer out of his turn. But he suggested that where officers in one battalion had slow promotion, and promotion had been very rapid in the battalion which was linked with them, that officers might be transferred from the one battalion to the other, with the result of giving some men a step sooner than they would otherwise have got it without in any way showing favouritism to anybody. He merely proposed to transfer officers in due course of seniority from one linked battalion to another.
  COLONEL STANLEY: No doubt, this is a very important point. Unquestionably, officers who have joined the Service since 31st March, 1873, are liable to be transferred from one battalion to another; but, as a matter of fact, I think it will be granted that it would be an invidious thing to force an officer thus to accept promotion; and, undoubtedly, I am aware that officers do not apply to be so transferred. With regard to the question of the hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for Galway (Major Nolan), there is, undoubtedly, a great deal in what he said; but, at the same time, it is a very large question, and one upon which I should not be prepared to give an answer at the present moment. If, however, he will put a Question to me, or to my hon. and gallant Friend near me (Colonel Loyd Lindsay), on Thursday, or some day after that, I will endeavour to go into the question in the meantime with the proper financial authorities, and to meet what appears to me to be, so far as I understand the matter at present, a reasonable request. Of course, all actuarial calculations have to deal with matters of supposition rather than with matters of fact, as that is especially in the case of matters of this kind. Where retirements have to be calculated upon, there is no possible means of ascertaining what officers will take advantage of the scheme of retirement; and, therefore, these calculations, to a certain extent, must be hypothetical. With regard to the remarks of the hon. Gentleman the Member for Chatham (Mr. Otway), I do not understand that it is intended that the Secretary of State for War should

  111
  have power to transfer officers absolutely from one regiment to another. He did not propose that, and it would be an invidious power to exercise. Where, however, promotion is rapid in one regiment, and where, according to the custom of the Service, the senior subaltern of another regiment has no claim for immediate promotion, the utmost care is taken in selecting an officer to fill the vacancy in the regiment, so that the man may be chosen who has the longest service and is the most likely to be retired. There is one point not yet raised upon which I should like to make a statement. There are certainly regiments in which it has been that the colonels promoted before 1871 have a right to retain their places, and it seems to have been thought that they would not come under the operation of the five years' rule, but that they would be entitled to hold their places as long as they pleased. That is obviously very prejudicial to the claims of the officers under them, and very recently steps have been taken; and, in the course of next week, I shall be able to give an answer on the question very definitely—to intimate to those officers that they have not that absolute right to retard the promotion of everybody below them, however fit they may be—and I do not say they are otherwise—for the exercise of command. But that exercise cannot be given to them without some regard to the officers whose promotion they are retarding.
  Vote agreed to.
  (21.) £126,200, Widows' Pensions, &c.
  (22.) £16,500, Pensions for Wounds.
  (23.) £34,300, Chelsea and Kilmainham Hospitals, (In Pensions.)
  (24.) £1,312,000, (Out Pensions.)
  (25.) £196,500, Superannuation Allowances.
  MR. WHITWELLobserved, that there was a considerable increase in this Vote, and it was desirable that they should have some explanation on the subject. It was proposed to be accounted for by recent changes at the War Office. If that were so, he should like to be told whether it was not possible to find some employment for the clerks who had recently been put
  112
  on the Superannuation List? There was one gentleman retired at 30, another at 34, and so on. He found, also, that at that age one had a pension of £142, and another of £173, and so on. It was very probable that these clerks ought to be dispensed with; but, still, there was always a demand for officers in some Department or other of the Government; and when he saw something like 20 clerks, all of the ages of 40 to 43, superannuated at the cost of some £20,000 annually, he thought it was desirable to know whether these officials could not be engaged in some other Department of the Government?
  COLONEL STANLEYsaid, that the question was a very natural one. The hon. Gentleman had remembered that a re-organization had taken place in the War Office during the last two years, and, as a consequence, some of the gentlemen employed there had availed themselves of the opportunity to retire given them under the Admiralty and War Office Act two years ago. The terms of that Act were exceptionally liberal, though he did not say they were unduly liberal. As a consequence, some gentlemen had chosen to retire; and he was glad to say that those who had left were quite competent to undertake the duties of the Office, while, at the same time, they had substituted lower paid labour, in what was, after all, to a great extent, merely mechanical work. He had every reason to think that the result of the change was one which would be satisfactory in the Office, while it would be to the advantage of the public. With regard to the gentlemen superannuated, he knew that many of them had already obtained employment in other ways, and that the experience they had acquired in the Public Service was not altogether lost. The increase of this Vote must not be taken by itself, but in connection with the general Re-organization Scheme.
  Vote agreed to.
  (26.) £39,300, Militia, Yeomanry Cavalry, and Volunteer Corps.
  MR. OTWAYsaid, he should like, as this was the last Vote, to ask a question not directly pertinent to the subject now before them. They had got through the Estimates with unexampled rapidity, and he must say he thought a great deal of the credit for that

  113
  was due to the tone adopted by the right hon. and gallant Gentleman, and his willingness to answer all the questions that had been put to him. He wished to know, as the Estimates would be completed that night, when the Continuance Bill would be brought in?
  COLONEL STANLEYsaid, the question was still under discussion whether the Continuance Bill should be brought in before his right hon. Friend the First Lord of the Admiralty had taken the Vote for the Seamen and Marines. The point was not yet settled; but he would undertake not to bring in the Bill, if it could be introduced before the heavy Vote was adopted, without giving due Notice of his intention to do so.
  Vote agreed to.
  (27.) £1,100,000, Army, Indian Home Charges.
  GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOURsaid, that whilst strongly objecting to this heavy charge on India, yet he had no desire to obstruct the passing of this last Vote of the Army Estimates. He and his Friends on that side were only too willing to give the right hon. and gallant Gentleman the Secretary of State for War all the money for the Army Service. The Committee had, at one sitting, voted upwards of £16,000,000—an almost unprecedented proceeding—in order that Parliament might be dissolved as early as possible, so that the country might get a new one.
  COLONEL STANLEYdesired to compliment the hon. and gallant Gentleman on the frankness with which he had spoken, and for his readiness to explain the motives by which himself and his Friends around him were influenced. With regard to the kind compliment which had been paid him that evening, he had only to say that he regarded it as his duty to answer the questions to the very best of his power, and he could only thank the Committee for giving him so many opportunities for doing so. With regard to the settlement of Indian matters, at present we were at a standstill. A Committee had been appointed under the Presidency of Lord North-brook—than whom no man was more competent to deal with the matter—to settle the amount to be paid by India and by England for several years past, but the Committee had not yet been able to Report; and, therefore, the general de-
  114
  cision upon this point was for the present adjourned.
  Vote agreed to.
  House resumed.
  Resolutions to be reported To-morrow;
  Committee to sit again upon Wednesday

EAST INDIA LOAN (EAST INDIAN RAILWAY DEBENTURES).
Considered in Committee.
(In the Committee.)
MR. E. STANHOPEsaid, he was happy to inform the Committee that the purchase of the East Indian Railway had been concluded, and the railway had now passed into the hands of the State, although it remained under the management of the Company. The Committee was aware that in the Act of last year no arrangement was made for providing the money which would be required in the future. It was settled that the Government would have to come to the House for capital for the future enlargements of the line, and for power to pay off the existing debentures of the Company. Some of the debentures would fall due at the beginning of next year; and, therefore, the Government had thought it right to apply to Parliament for sufficient powers to raise money for the discharge of those debentures, which hon. Members would find included in the Schedule. The hon. Gentleman concluded by moving the following Resolution:—
"That it is expedient to authorise the Secretary of State in Council of India to raise the sum of £2,950,000, in the United Kingdom, for the purpose of paying off and redeeming Debentures of the East Indian Railway Company."
SIR GEORGE CAMPBELLsaid, that he accepted as reasonable the proposition of the Under Secretary of State for India to raise a sum of money for paying off the debentures of the Company falling due in the ensuing year. He was well pleased that arrangements had been concluded for taking the railway into the hands of the State; while, at the same time, he was obliged to say that, in his opinion, the wheels of the transaction had been too well oiled by the extremely liberal terms granted by the Government.
Resolution agreed to; to be reported To-morrow.

POST OFFICE (MONEY ORDERS) BILL.
(Sir Henry Selwin-Ibbetson, Lord John Manners.)
POST OFFICE (MONEY ORDERS) BILL.

  [BILL 62.] SECOND READING.
  Order for Second Reading read.
  SIE HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSONsaid, he would like to state to the House what he proposed to do with regard to this Bill. The Government proposed to place upon the Table of the House Papers by which hon. Members would see the Regulations under which the Post Office would practically carry out the Bill, and he had also laid on the Table Amendments to the Bill, which he himself proposed to move, and which would, to a certain extent, modify and alter its character, so far as it then stood in print. One of the Amendments was that the form of the Post Office Order proposed to be established under that Bill should appear in a Schedule to the Bill itself, instead of being left to the Regulations to be framed by the Post Office. The form of money order would be stereotyped in the Bill. He had thought also that probably objection might be raised in Scotland and Ireland, as well, perhaps, as in England, with regard to the issue of money orders for the sum of £1, and he, therefore, proposed to restrict the issue of denominations below £1, and in the denominations as put in the Regulations 15 s. would be the limit of the sum to be issued under these money orders. It had also been said that there was a fear of these orders issued to the public becoming too much of a paper circulation. To obviate that—although he was not prepared to admit that such would be the case, because, in fact, these orders would carry with them a poundage, which he thought would prevent any great issue—he proposed to reduce the time for which they were available from one year to six months. He had another Amendment, which provided that after six months, except under special circumstances which would have to be established, an order would be forfeited. He was prepared, when the time came, to argue that that issue would be an immense facility to the public generally, and a great advantage to the commercial world. He did not wish to enter upon that argument then; but he thought that the objections which had been taken to the Bill might as readily have been taken to the money
  116
  orders issued when they were first established, and when the Post Office authorities were allowed to give the facilities to the public, which had been long enjoyed, without any attempt on the part of the Post Office to interfere with the private business of bankers, who had themselves sanctioned and encouraged the money order system. As he was anxious that the House should be in full possession of the Regulations to be enforced, he would ask that the second reading of the Bill be postponed for a fortnight.
  Second Reading deferred till Monday 15th March.

VOLUNTEER CORPS (IRELAND) BILL.
(Mr. O'Clery, Lord Francis Conyngham, Major Nolan, Major O'Beirne, Colonel King-Harman, Colonel Colthurst, Major O' Gorman, Colonel The O'Gorman Mahon.)
VOLUNTEER CORPS (IRELAND) BILL.

  [BILL 25.] SECOND READING.
  Order for Second Reading read.
  MR. O'CLERY, in moving that the Bill be now read the second time, said, it had been brought before the House last Session with the general concurrence of hon. Members of all Parties, and he had reason to hope that it would receive that evening the same support which had been accorded to it on that occasion.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."—(Mr. O'Clery.)
  SIR JOHN LESLIEsaid, that the hon. Member for Wexford County was, in his opinion, mistaken if he thought that, in the social condition of Ireland at that moment, he had found a remedy for the existing state of things by the institution of a Volunteer Force in that country. He had thought last year, and thought still, that it was an over-straining of the conciliatory intentions of the Government to allow the Bill to pass that House. The Bill had appeared to him not to possess the authority requisite for so serious a change, and for so important an alteration in the affairs of the country as the institution of a new armed Force. Surely it would be obvious to everybody that the circumstances of Ireland were entirely different from what they had been six months previously. When the people came armed with barbarous weapons to platforms where speeches were uttered to them calling

  117
  upon them to lay aside the spade for the rifle; when they were told that every man should not only possess a rifle, but know how to use it; when they came to listen to a new code of civil law, which might be summed up in the words, "Boys, dishonesty is the best policy," he maintained that, under such circumstances, it was obvious that the social condition of the country had changed. But he would also remind the hon. Member for Wexford County that the Bill had not even last year earned the support of his own Party, the Leader of which, at all events, the hon. Member for Cork, spoke of it with the greatest indifference, as did also the hon. Baronet the Member for King's County (Sir Patrick O'Brien). Another of the hon. Member's political comrades, in an interesting and instructive correspondence on the purity of language, had denounced it as a sham, and had also proved to demonstration by that correspondence that true patriotism could only be found in connection with a fine Irish brogue. Moreover, in what the hon. Member himself had said, on first introducing the Bill, he must be considered to have condemned it, for he had excepted from its operation one of the Provinces of Ireland. He took it for granted that, in making this exception, the hon. Member did not intend to cast a stigma upon the Province of Ulster, for one of the principal reasons given in support of the measure was that the refusal of a Volunteer Force to Ireland cast a stigma upon that country. Now, he maintained that Ireland was already well represented in the Volunteer Forces of this country, among which the Irish regiments were second to none. He held, also, that England was the proper centre for the Volunteer Forces, which were only supposed to exist for the purpose of resisting invasion. There was no prospect of an invasion of our Irish coasts—they were more exposed to danger from within. He asserted, in answer to another of the arguments—namely, that of assimilation, which had been used in support of the Bill—that, as in Ireland the police were armed, and in England not, there could be no assimilation whatever between England and Ireland upon this question. He did not think it necessary to go any farther in urging his objection to the Bill, nor did he know what might be the intention of the Go-
  118
  vernment with regard to it; but he trusted that, under the altered circumstances of Ireland, hon. Members would see the inexpediency of introducing the Bill, and he, therefore, begged to move that it be read a second time this day six months.
  Amendment proposed, to leave out the word "now," and at the end of the Question to add the words "upon this day six months."—(Sir John Leslie.)
  Question proposed, "That the word 'now' stand part of the Question."
  MR. MACARTNEYsaid, he had been astonished at the facility with which the Bill passed through the House last year. He thought that had hon. Members who were present when the Bill was brought forward been better acquainted with the state of party feeling in Ireland, and with the danger of putting arms into the hands of those who were already inclined to fight without them, they would have hesitated to give the measure their support. Until the state of the country was changed it would, in his opinion, be a most dangerous thing to introduce into Ireland a fresh cause of discord and a fresh means of arming one portion of the country against the other. It never happened in England, nor in Scotland, as it did in Ireland, that thousands of men attacked each other, and fought battles in which there were killed and wounded on both sides. It was, he supposed, in the recollection of hon. Members, that in the district represented by an hon. Friend below him, a battle was fought not more than 10 years ago, in which firearms were used, and that it required a large force of Constabulary, and. three or four regiments of the Regular Forces, to put an end to the disturbance. His countrymen, whether the staid Northern or the fiery Southern, were all excitable, and he could not believe it would be for the peace or good of the country that the Bill should pass. He thoroughly agreed with what had fallen from the hon. Baronet the Member for Monaghan (Sir John Leslie), and hoped that the House would not read the Bill a second time.
  MR. P. MARTINsaid, that last year the Bill was read a second time, if not with the assent, certainly with the approval of Her Majesty's Government. He did regret that, on the present occasion, the Bill should be opposed by two

  119
  hon. Members from the North of Ireland. The speech of the hon. Baronet the Member for Monaghan ought to have ensured the passing of the Bill, for he admitted Irishmen in this country made excellent soldiers and admirable Volunteers. But it was true, after being thus compelled to praise those resident in this country, he said Irishmen at home could not be at this time entrusted with arms. Both Members had drawn vivid pictures of the scenes of disturbances and violences which, no doubt, did so frequently take place in the North of Ireland. But what was the reason why the North presented so dark a contrast with the South and Midland portions of Ireland? Because, at the present moment, there was in the North of Ireland a body called "Orangemen," whom the Government liked to encourage, and who, on certain occasions, were allowed to hold complete control of the North. Under those circumstances, it would be better for that body, as well as for others in the North of Ireland, that they should be placed under the control proposed by the Bill, and that the Government authorities should have power to regulate the use of arms in the North of Ireland as elsewhere. It was somewhat singular that the hon. Member for Tyrone (Mr. Macartney) should call attention in that House to the scenes that had disgraced the city represented by the hon. Member for Belfast. He fully agreed that there was no city in Ireland which had been the scene of more extreme disorder than the City of Belfast. In that respect, the observations of the hon. Member for Tyrone were perfectly right. If he thought that the refusal to read this Bill a second time would remove arms from the hands of the Orangemen in the North of Ireland, then he should certainly oppose the measure. But what would be the result? Arms would still remain in the hands of Orangemen in the North even if this Bill was rejected. Was it to be now gravely asserted that Irishmen in the Midland and Southern portions of Ireland were not to be allowed their Constitutional rights because the North of Ireland was disturbed? If there were any clauses in the Bill that would require consideration they could be considered, and, if necessary, amended in Committee; but he did think it would be a most unreasonable thing that mere declamation, such as they had heard from
  120
  the two hon. Members from Ulster Counties, should be a sufficient reason for the House refusing a second reading to a Bill substantially the same as that which had been sanctioned by and passed through the House last Session. So far as one could form a judgment from reports and the Charges of Judges, he thought the Government could not assert there was exceptional crime in Leinster or the South of Ireland. Notwithstanding the severe distress under which they wore suffering there was an absence of disorder in those places, and their sufferings were borne with unexampled tranquillity and moderation. It would be a very bad precedent if the House should refuse to give this Bill a second reading, merely on such arguments as they had listened to from the two hon. Members on the other side.
  MR. J. P. CORRYsaid, that the Orangemen in the North of Ireland were no more armed than the inhabitants of any other part of the country. As was well known, Belfast was under the Peace Preservation Act, and every arm, therefore, was licensed. No one carried arms except by authority. Unfortunately, in times past, they had been subjected to very serious disturbances in Belfast; but he was quite satisfied to contrast the loyalty of the North of Ireland against the disloyalty which had been manifested in other parts of the country within the last 12 months. He did not wish to detain the House; but he thought it right, as a Representative of Belfast, to make these observations in reply to the statements of the hon. Member for Kilkenny (Mr. P. Martin).
  MR. CALLANsaid, that he regretted very much that they had not had any expression of opinion from the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland in regard to this Bill. Last year, in consequence of the assistance of the Government, the Bill was carried through a second reading, and proceeded so far as to obtain a second sitting in Committee. They were aware that pressure had been brought to bear upon the Government since that time; and, perhaps, in obedience to orders submitted to them by some of the Representatives from the North of Ireland, the Bill, which in the last Session of Parliament received the sanction of Her Majesty's Government, was now to be opposed. Probably, Her Majesty's Government had consented to indulge

  121
  the Representatives of the North of Ireland, knowing that in the next Session they would be troubled with them no longer. He must compliment one of those Gentlemen who, he believed, had made his farewell speech in that House—namely, the hon. Baronet the Member for Monaghan (Sir John Leslie)—for the very able arguments he adduced in opposition to the Bill. But, as he did not consider that there was really anything in them, he had taken no note of them. The hon. Member for Tyrone (Mr. Macartney) had adopted his usual róle of attacking the Catholics in Ireland. He must say that he was as well acquainted with Ireland as the hon. Member for Tyrone, and he could deny the truth of every statement which he had made. He had said that every year in Ulster they had disturbances and unpleasant party fights. He was glad to find that the hon. Member characterized those disturbances as party fights; for, in the county which he represented, no one was credited with having lent a more willing and helping hand to the creation of bad party feeling than the hon. Member himself.
  MR. MACARTNEYrose to Order. He wished to know whether the hon. Member was in Order in accusing him of having created a bad party feeling?
  MR. CALLANsaid, that his statement was, that the hon. Member was credited in Ireland with having more than any other person created a bad party feeling in his county. One day, driving between Enniskillen and Londonderry, he was informed that there were no party fights in that part of the county excepting when the hon. Member was there. With regard to the observations of the hon. Member for Belfast (Mr. J. P. Corry), he had no doubt whatever that he had felt acutely the charges made by the hon. Member for Kilkenny (Mr. P. Martin), and he was right in standing up for his disorderly constituency. The hon. Member had further congratulated the North of Ireland on its loyalty, and compared it with the disloyalty that he said had prevailed in other parts during the past year. He presumed that the hon. Member alluded to the meetings of the Land Leagues. He would read to the House the substance of an account which he had found in a Conservative newspaper with respect to a meeting at Port-adown. The account stated that a land
  122
  meeting was summoned last Wednesday week, at which a gentleman named Shillington occupied the chair. Last month, he (Mr. Callan) was present at a meeting in County Louth, at which several Members of Parliament also attended, and there was an assemblage of about 8,000 people. They had bands and banners, and played "Cheer Boys Cheer," "Garry Owen," "St. Patrick's Day," and "God Save Ireland!" He made a most loyal speech, and they all went home quite sober. Not a single case was brought before the magistrates the next day. But at the meeting at Portadown there was present Sir William Verner, a gentleman who was anxious for Parliamentary honours, and who was going to stand in the tenant right interest. The meeting was interrupted by the strains of a band playing "Croppies Lie Down," "The Boyne Water," and other tunes. The loyal gentlemen whom the hon. Member for Belfast praised advanced upon the meeting, gave one wild cheer, and charged the platform. A scene of great confusion took place—chairs and anything else handy being used as weapons. Here, therefore, was an instance of the Loyalists of the North of Ireland charging down upon a meeting and disturbing the tenant righters and Home Rulers, and retiring to the triumphant strains of the "Boyne Water." He did not see how conduct of this kind was evidence of loyalty, or how the perpetrators of it could be praised for the observance of law and order. The Bill was surrounded with safeguards, and the Government had it in their power to prevent any harm being done. Last year the Government assisted the Bill in its passage through the House; and he hoped that, on the present occasion, they would show that they were not the tools of the Orangemen of the North of Ireland by allowing the Bill to pass.
  MR. J. LOWTHERsaid, that as the House had been reminded, this Bill last year was passed through a second reading in the House of Commons with the assent of Her Majesty's Government, but eventually failed to obtain the assent of Parliament. It became, therefore, the duty of Her Majesty's Government to consider the position of the Bill in the present Session. He must say that he was most anxious to see how far the condition of the country could permit him to

  123
  afford support to the measure. Having regard to the condition of Ireland at the present moment, it must be candidly admitted that they were bound to look very carefully at a proposal which put weapons into the hands of any portion of the population of Ireland. Hon. Members opposite had saved him from what would be an unpleasant task—namely, that of offering reasons why the measure should not become law. He was bound to say that the instances afforded by the hon. Member for Dundalk (Mr. Callan) were the most conclusive arguments against the Bill. What did the hon. Gentleman state, but that the most prosperous part of Ireland was frequently the scene of very great disorder. He did not suppose that it would be proposed to exclude Ulster from the Bill; and, certainly, the hon. Member had advanced very strong reasons why that Province should not be included. That was not the first time they had heard in that House of the late disturbances that took place at Portadown. He was not in a position officially to confirm the account; but he believed it to be true. The hon. Member had stated that there were two parties opposed to each other at that meeting, which could by no means be considered to consist of the residuum of the population, but of persons who might be considered to form the middle class. When they heard such scenes of disorder described, it was not encouraging to the House to place weapons of a more formidable character in the hands of those persons. Clause 2 of the Bill provided certain safeguards with regard to its administration, and enacted that it should be lawful for Her Majesty to accept the services of persons desiring to form Volunteer Corps whom the Lord Lieutenant should recommend. He must say, having regard to the present state of Ireland, that he should not feel himself justified in advising the Lord Lieutenant to sanction the formation of any corps. Without considering what might be the case in more favourable circumstances, yet, if at the present time the Lord Lieutenant were to recommend Her Majesty to permit the formation of Volunteer Corps, very serious remonstrances would arise from the neighbourhoods so favoured. Hon. Members who supported the Bill relied almost entirely upon the safeguards provided by Clause 2; and without that clause, no
  124
  doubt, they would not have ventured to submit the Bill to the House. He should, however, be guilty of recklessness if he allowed the Bill to pass, and did not advise the House that at the present moment he saw no practical opportunity of carrying it into effect. They could not at that time even contemplate the formation of armed bands sanctioned by Parliament. For his own part, he would gladly see the establishment of a state of affairs which would admit of the Bill being safely passed into law; but, having regard to the unfortunate condition of the country, both from a social and an economical point of view, and having regard to the other circumstances mentioned, he thought it would be unwise for the House to adopt any measure of this kind; and, therefore, he should support the Motion of the hon. Member for Monaghan.
  MR. O'DONNELLsaid, that he could hardly be supposed to be of the same opinion as the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland; but, on this occasion, he agreed with him in thinking that Ireland was not at present in a fit state to permit of this Bill being passed. Until it had enjoyed for some years the benefit of intelligent legislation, and been governed by an intelligent Administration with some idea of its wants, it would be a risk to authorize the present Government to arm any part of the Irish people, more especially those in the North, who, in former times, represented an armed foreign aggression. They might be perfectly certain that the greatest partiality and unfairness in the execution of the measure, more particularly in the choice of the officers of the proposed corps, would be shown by the present Government. He considered the Government to be the real obstacle to the passing of such a Bill as this. He thought the fact should be fully recognized, that the main obstacle to anything like progress being attained in Ireland was the present Government. To give Ireland such a measure as this, with the present Government in power, would be to inflict an unmitigated curse on the country. For these reasons, he could by no means condole with his hon. Friend the Member for Wexford upon the prospective rejection of the Bill. He rather congratulated him that his measure would be postponed till a time when a Government was in power which

  125
  would not seek to stir up class against class and nation against nation. When they had obtained a Government which ceased to do that, then his hon. Friend might attain his object, which would then tend to promote a real union between Great Britain and Ireland, formed upon solid reasons of mutual respect and equality, and cemented by the strong sense of nationality upon each side. The present Government simply regarded. Ireland from an electioneering point of view, and merely cared for what would serve their purposes.
  MR. O'CLERYsaid, that the House and the country generally would receive with surprise the announcements made to the House by the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland. He did not see that there were any more reasons why the Bill should be opposed by the Government in the present Session than in the last. In point of fact, the rows to which attention had been called had occurred between contending portions of the supporters of the Government. There had been many rows in England, but that was no reason why Volunteers should be denied to it. Englishmen ought to be ashamed, considering the fine Volunteer Force they had, to make it known that Ireland, which contributed £90,000 a-year in support of English and Scottish Volunteers, should not be allowed to have a Volunteer Force of its own. Perhaps some good might result from the rejection of the Bill, in this—that Ireland would be furnished with an argument why she should not be taxed for the payment of the English Volunteers. He thought that consideration should make Englishmen blush for the rejection of such a measure as this. Considering the way in which the Bill was received last Session, he certainly was surprised at its rejection on the present occasion. As regarded the remarks made upon that side of the House, he might say that the Bill was three months before the House last Session, and was in no way intended to further the interests of any political party in Ireland. If the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary had any objection to the measure, he ought to have made it last year. In his opinion, the rejection of the measure would be received in Ireland as a token of a covenant of the Government with the few Orange Representatives in the
  126
  House. They had been labouring for years to try and bring about a better state of feeling in Ireland; but it was perfectly evident that their efforts were futile, for the Orange Representatives were still masters of the country. The feelings of the majority of the Irish Members were entirely disregarded, and three or four Orangemen, by obtaining the ear of the Government, were masters of the situation. He thought it his duty to press the measure before the House; and he should also feel it his duty to enter his protest against the Vote for the English Volunteers when the Estimates came before the House upon Report. He did not wish to make any objection to the English Volunteers, for he considered the Force a great credit to the country; but he considered that he was bound to object to them so long as the spirit of fair play, of which Englishmen were so fond of boasting, was not extended to Ireland. It would, therefore, become his bounden duty to object to the English Volunteer Force, and he should persist in that objection until the second reading of this Bill was passed. Every Englishman should be proud of his country's Volunteers; but he did not think it was right to deny to Ireland the same right as that enjoyed by the Sister Country. He regretted very much that the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary had refused to allow the Bill to be read a second time.
  Question put.
  The House divided:—Ayes 12; Noes 81: Majority 69.—(Div. List, No. 30.)
  "Words added.
  Main Question, as amended, put, and agreed to.
  Second Reading put off for six months.

MOTIONS.

  SUGAR INDUSTRIES.
  Ordered, That the Select Committee be reappointed to inquire into the effects produced upon the Home and Colonial Sugar Industries of this Country by the systems of taxation, drawbacks, and bounties on the exportation of Sugar now in force in various Foreign Countries, and to report what steps, if any, it is desirable to take in order to obtain redress for any evils that may be found to exist:—That the Committee do consist of Seventeen Members:—Mr. BOURKE, Mr. ALEXANDER BROWN, Mr. SAMPSON LLOYD, Mr. BELL, Mr. THORNHILL, Mr.

  127
  JAMES STEWART, Mr. JAMES CORRY, Mr. NORWOOD, Mr. BALFOUR, Mr. COLLINS, Lord FREDERICK CAVENDISH, Sir JAMES M'GARELHOGG, Mr. ORR EWING, Mr. MORLEY, Mr. ONSLOW, Mr. COURTNEY, and Mr. RITCHIE:—Power to send for persons, papers, and records; Five to be the quorum.
  Ordered, That the Minutes of Evidence taken before the Select Committee on Sugar Industries of the Session 1878–9 be referred to the Select Committee on Sugar Industries.—(Mr. Ritchie.)

  FRAUDULENT DEBTORS (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  On Motion of The LORD ADVOCATE, Bill to provide for the better punishment of Fraudulent Debtors in Scotland, ordered to be brought in by The LORD ADVOCATE and Mr. Secretary CROSS.
  Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 94.]

  ROAD DEBTS ON ENTAILED ESTATES (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  On Motion of Colonel DRUMMOND MORAY, Bill to amend the Law in regard to charging Road Debts on Entailed Estates in Scotland, ordered to be brought in by Colonel DRUMMOND MORAY and Sir WILLIAM EDMONSTONE.
  Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 95.]

  EPPING FOREST BILL.
  Order for referring Bill to Examiners read, and discharged:—Bill withdrawn:—and leave given to bring in another Bill instead thereof.

  EPPING FOREST (NO. 2) BILL.
  On Motion of Sir HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON, Bill to continue for a limited period the powers of the Arbitrator under "The Epping Forest Act, 1878," and to provide for the record of the result of the Arbitration, and for the exchange of lands in Epping Forest, ordered to be brought in by Sir HENRY SELWIN-IBBETSON and Mr. GERARD NOEL.
  Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 96.]
  House adjourned at a quarter after One o'clock.