Commons Sitting of 7 August 1882

MINUTES.
SELECT COMMITTEE—Report—Contagious Diseases Acts [No. 340].
SUPPLY—considered in Committee—ARMY ESTIMATES, Votes 7 to 25; ARMY (INDIAN HOME CHARGES), £1,100,000; AFGHAN WAR (Grant in Aid), £500,000; CIVIL SERVICE ESTIMATES, Class III.—LAW AND JUSTICE, Votes 22 to 35.
PUBLIC BILLS—Second Reading—Prison Charities* [270]; Public Works Loans* [269];
952
Expiring Laws Continuance * [266]; Citation Amendment (Scotland) * [267].
Committee—Royal Irish Constabulary [264]—R. P.
Committee—Report—Revenue, Friendly Societies, and National Debt [260]; Government Annuities and Assurance* [190]; Merchant Shipping (Mercantile Marine Fund) [256]; Somersham Rectory * [222]; County Courts (Advocates' Costs) * [188].
Committee—Report—Third Reading—Pensions Commutation * [252], and passed.
Considered as amended—Third Reading—Artizans' Dwellings [255]; Intermediate Education (Ireland) * [258], and passed.
Withdrawn—Municipal Corporations (Unreformed) * [220].

QUESTIONS.

  THE MAGISTRACY (SCOTLAND)—THE PROVOST OF DINGWALL.
  MR. BIGGARasked the Lord Advocate, If his attention has been drawn to the fact that Mr. D. G. Ross, Provost of Dingwall, has been convicted and fined £1, with £3 3s. expenses, for travelling on a Railway without a ticket; and, whether, under the circumstances, he should not be removed from the magisterial bench?
  THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. J. B. BALFOUR): On inquiry, I find that in 1877 Mr. Ross, now Provost of Dingwall, pleaded guilty to a charge of travelling on a railway without a ticket, and that he was fined in the sum mentioned in the Question. It appears that he had had a season ticket, which had shortly before expired, and it was stated on his behalf that on the occasion referred to he had no intention to defraud. Since this occurrence Mr. Ross has been elected a member of the Town Council by his fellow-townsmen, and he has been by the Town Council unanimously elected Provost. The Government do not intend, therefore, to take any steps in the matter.

  PEACE PRESERVATION (IRELAND) ACT, 1881—ALLEGED SEARCHES FOR ARMS.
  MR. BIGGARasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether, on or about 21st July, Constable Young, of Ballyhaise, accompanied with a number of other policemen without producing any warrant, entered during the night, on the pretence of searching for arms, the houses of

  953
  James McCabe, Widow Ellen Reilly, Widow Ellen Corcoran, in the townland of Cullatra, parish of Drung, county Cavan, also of Pat Smyth, Cornegal, same parish; whether these policemen went into the sleeping apartments of the females of the different families; and, whether, for the time to come, he will punish any police who enter houses, on the pretence of searching for arms, without having legal warrant to do so?
  MR. TREVELYAN: Constable Young, accompanied by three sub-constables, entered the houses of the persons referred to in this Question, not under any pretence of searching for arms, but under warrant issued by the Resident Magistrate on the information of a summons-server to the effect that he had been assaulted and intimidated by a party of five men when serving summonses for poor rates. The police did not enter the sleeping apartments of the females. The police were in search of the perpetrators of this outrage. There was no pretence of searching for arms, and they had a legal warrant for their action.

  PROTECTION OF PERSON AND PROPERTY (IRELAND) ACT, 1881—DETENTION OF PERSONS ARRESTED UNDER THE ACT—PATRICK CURLEY AND OTHERS.
  MR. REDMOND (for Mr. T. P. O'CONNOR)asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If there be any reason for the further detention of Patrick Curley and his son John Curley, the one confined in Naas and the other in Kilmainham Gaol, since the 27th January; and, whether Patrick Curley is not an old man seventy years of age, and disabled?
  MR. TREVELYAN: The cases of both these men were considered on the 28th ultimo, when His Excellency decided that they should be detained, for the present. Patrick Curley is reported to be 50 years of age; I have no information about his being disabled.
  MR. REDMOND (for Mr. T. P. O'CONNOR)asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether the time has arrived for the release of Thomas and James Morrissey, who have now been subjected to a lengthened period of imprisonment?
  MR. TREVELYAN: There is no person named James Morrissey in custody.
  954
  Thomas and Patrick Morrissey are in custody on reasonable suspicion of being accessory to murder. Their cases will come up for reconsideration on the 15th instant, and meanwhile they cannot be released.
  MR. REDMOND (for Mr. T. P. O'CONNOR)asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If he will cause particular inquiry to be made into the case of James M'Dermott, now detained in Kilmainham Prison, and arrested with twenty-two others on the 4th of July in Loughrea; and, whether, Mr. M'Dermott, being a newspaper correspondent, there is any truth in the prevalent opinion in his district that he owes his arrest to his supposed exposure in the local press of police misconduct?
  MR. TREVELYAN: His Excellency the Lord Lieutenant examined into this case, and was satisfied that sufficient grounds existed for the arrest of James M'Dermott as being reasonably suspected of being accessory to murder. There is no ground for the idea that his arrest was in any way owing to the fact of his being a newspaper correspondent.

  FISHERIES OF THE UNITED KINGDOM—DIGEST OF STATUTES AND REGULATIONS OF FISHERY BOARDS, WITH INDEX.
  GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOUEasked the Lord Advocate, If he will cause a thoroughly good digest to be made in the ensuing Recess of all the many Laws and guiding regulations relating to all fisheries, sea and fresh water, also about the Fishery Board, with useful indexes by subjects and in alphabetical arrangement?
  THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. J. B. BALFOUR): I am afraid I cannot undertake to cause so large and important a literary work to be prepared in my own Department during the Recess. There already exists, in a convenient form, a compilation of the Herring and Sea Fishery Acts, prepared by the present Fishery Board, showing what Acts are repealed and what are still in force. If we are enabled to pass the Fishery Board Bill, and establish the new Board, that Board will naturally address itself to the preparation of such a digest of the Fishery Laws as my hon. and gallant Friend desires.
  GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOUE: I would ask, in the event of the Fishery

  955
  Board Bill not being passed, whether the right hon. and learned Gentleman will undertake to make a digest?
  THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. J. B. BALFOUR): We will consider that.

  COAL MINES—REPORTS OF THE RECENT EXPLOSIONS.
  MR. BURTasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, If he can state when the Reports of the special inquiries, which he authorised to be made, into the colliery explosions at Trimdon Grange, Tudhoe, West Stanley, and Whitehaven, will be in the hands of Members?
  SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT: In reference to the two first explosions to which my hon. Friend refers, the Reports will be delivered to Members this week. The other Reports are in a forward state of preparation.

  STATE OF IRELAND—ALLEGED MOLESTATION AT HILLYON, CO. MEATH.
  MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR (for Mr. SHEIL)asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether he will take care that Patrick Halpin and others, of Hillyon, in the county of Meath, are allowed to carry on their business unmolested?
  MR. TREVELYAN: I have drawn the attention of the local Constabulary to the Question of the hon. Member.

  PREVENTION OF CRIME (IRELAND) ACT—PROSECUTIONS UNDER THE ACT.
  MR. SEXTONasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether he has observed that in every one of the five prosecutions which have taken place in the King's County under the Crime Prevention Act the persons accused have been discharged by the magistrates; whether, in a case tried at Birr on Thursday last, in which the police accused two men, Michael Kenny and William Dorrley, the latter an "ex-suspect," with having been on the public road at eleven o'clock at night—
  "Under circumstances giving rise to a reasonable suspicion of their being about to commit a criminal act,"
  the magistrates discharged the prisoners, Mr. McSheehy, R. M. observing that—
  "The Legislature did not contemplate, in passing the Act, that it would be used to ter-
  956
  rorise the people, and he trusted those entrusted with the carrying of it out would use all due discretion in future;"
  and, whether, in view of this and similar cases since the passing of the Act, the Irish Executive will instruct the Police to use the power of arrest with more discretion?
  MR. TREYELYAN: There were two cases only tried under the Prevention of Crime Act in the King's County, and both of these were dismissed by the magistrates. Mr. M'Sheehy did not use the expression "terrorize" attributed to him in the second paragraph of the Question. He informs me that what he said was that it was not the intention of Government that the Act should be carried out oppressively. Attention will be called to the necessity of exercising discretion in making arrests under the Act.

  NAVY—THE MEDITERRANEAN FLEET—ROMAN CATHOLIC CLERGYMEN.
  MR. MOOREasked the Secretary to the Admiralty, What steps have been taken to carry out the Minute of 7th June 1878 in the Squadrons at Alexandria and Port Said; and, whether, in the event of ships being used for hospital purposes, he will take care that the sick and dying soldiers and sailors of the Roman Catholic Church are not left without consolation of religion?
  MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: Sir, I have been in communication with Dr. Virtue, Bishop of Portsmouth, and with my hon. Friend himself, on this subject. The result is, that as there is some doubt whether there is, especially on the Suez Canal, an adequate provision of Catholic clerymen for the seamen of the Fleet, the Admiralty have arranged with the War Office to send out an additional priest above the number to be sent for the Army—and the services of this additional priest will be available for the Fleet.

  EGYPT (MILITARY EXPEDITION)—SERVICES OF THE MARINES—TURKISH MILITARY INTERVENTION.
  MR. HOPWOODasked the Secretary to the Admiralty, Whether there has been any honourable mention made by Sir Beauchamp Seymour in his Despatches of the services of the Marines, who form a large proportion of the

  957
  fighting force under his command; and, whether the propriety of appointing a Brigadier and Staff to the Marine force in Egypt has been considered?
  MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: The despatches received from Sir Beau-champ Seymour refer only to the action of July 11 at Alexandria, and no special mention is made in them of the services of the Royal Marines, although the Admiral speaks most highly of all the officers and men—including, of course, the Marines—under his command. The second Question addressed to me by my hon. and learned Friend I have already on two occasions answered. The Marines now on active service are attached to the ships of the Fleet, and it is not thought necessary to appoint a special Brigadier General and Staff for the part of the Force serving on shore.
  MR. GORSTasked whether the Royal Marines and Royal Marine Artillery did not form at least one-half of the Naval Force engaged at the bombardment of Alexandria?
  MR. CAMPBELL-BANNERMAN: I have already stated that Sir Beau-champ Seymour's remarks, no doubt, applied to the Marines as much as to seamen; but they were then engaged in performing their duties on board ship. What the proportion of Marines to seamen was I cannot say.
  MR. ARTHUR ARNOLDasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether the Firman of August 1879, investing Tewfik Pasha with the Khediviat, which, before promulgation, was communicated to and accepted by the Governments of England and France, forms one of the "International engagements" of the Sultan; whether the Egyptian tribute of £T.750,000, payable to the Sultan, is fixed by that Firman; and, whether the Plenipotentiaries at Constantinople are taking measures to ascertain if the Sultan adheres to that engagement?
  SIR CHARLES W. DILKE: Yes, Sir; the Firman, as communicated by the Porte to the English and French Ambassadors, is an international engagement on the part of the Sultan. It fixes the tribute at £T.750,000. I am not aware that any measures have been taken by the Conference to ascertain if the Sultan adheres to that engagement. But it has been frequently referred to by Her Majesty's Government as one of
  958
  the international engagements which it is a part of their policy to maintain.
  MR. BOURKEasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether he will state what the conditions of the negotiations are respecting Turkish Military intervention in Egypt; if Turkish troops are to go to Egypt, what steps will be taken to secure unity of action on the part of the Military commanders; whether the Conference will control or interfere with the Military action of England; what flag is treated as the territorial flag at Suez and elsewhere when British troops are in occupation, and in whose name is civil authority exercised in those places; what is the nature of the agreement respecting the protectorate of the Suez Canal; and, has the neutralisation of the Suez Canal been discussed at the Conference, or between Her Majesty's Government and any other Foreign Power?
  SIR CHARLES W. DILKE: In reply to my right hon. Friend's first and second Questions, I have to state that the negotiations respecting Turkish military intervention have not reached a stage at which I can make any statement in regard to them. As regards his third Question, I have no reason to believe that the Conference "will control or interfere with" the military action of England. In reply to the fourth Question, Her Majesty's Government consider that the flag of the Khedive is the flag to be flown in Egypt when British troops are in occupation, and civil authority is exercised in the Khedive's name. In reply to the fifth and sixth Questions, I have to state that no agreement has been come to for any "protectorate of the Suez Canal." The only proposal that has been made is one for securing the safety of a free passage through the Canal by arrangements in which all the Powers should be invited to take part. Her Majesty's Ambassador has been instructed that any agreement at present for this purpose should be confined to temporary arrangements, having reference to existing circumstances.
  MR. BOURKE: Are we to understand that the Government has departed from the recent declaration of the Prime Minister that any questions relating to the Suez Canal are outside the purview of the Conference?
  SIR CHARLES W. DILKE: The Prime Minister has already stated in the

  959
  House that he never made that statement. The statement that I made, and which the Prime Minister repeated, was that the neutralization of the Canal was outside the purview of the Conference. The Prime Minister inserted guarded words in his remarks, to the report of which I may refer the right hon. Gentleman.
  MR. BOURKE: Perhaps the hon. Gentleman would inform the House whether there is any truth in the report which appears in one of the morning journals that an Ultimatum has been received by the Porte respecting the despatch of other troops?
  SIR CHARLES W. DILKE: No Ultimatum has been delivered to the Porte, and the statement to which the right hon. Gentleman refers is quite inaccurate in stating that there is any threat to withdraw our Ambassador from Constantinople.
  SIR WILFRID LAWSON: Will prisoners taken from the Egyptian Forces be treated as rebels or as belligerents?
  SIR CHARLES W. DILKE: That is a Question which should be addressed to the Secretary of State for War.
  MR. JOSEPH COWENasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, If any proposal has been submitted to the British Government, or to the Conference, for the neutralisation of the Suez Canal, or for placing it under the direction of a Commission appointed by the Great Powers?
  SIR CHARLES W. DILKE: I have already replied to my hon. Friend's Question in the answer which I have just given to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Lynn Regis.

  PREVENTION OF CRIME (IRELAND) ACT—THE MISSES BUCKLEY.
  MR. SEXTONasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether he has yet examined the circumstances connected with the trial and imprisonment of a number of persons at Gunsborough, county Kerry, under the Crime Prevention Act, on a charge of unlawful assembly and assault on the police; and, whether, under all the circumstances, the Government think it expedient, especially with regard to the three Misses Buckley, that the sentences inflicted in this case should be endured in full?
  MR. TREVELYAN: I have examined into the circumstances of the cases referred to in the Question; but I find no reason to recommend the Lord Lieutenant to interfere with the course of the law. The facts are briefly as follows:—The police at a neighbouring protection post received private information that two women who are living with a "Boycotted" woman near Guns-borough would be assaulted when returning from Listowel. Two sub-constables were consequently sent out on patrol duty, and on reaching the neighbourhood of Mr. Buckley's house they saw a crowd of 20 or 30 persons assembled, who hooted them, cheered for the Land League, and threw stones after them. The police, however, succeeded in getting the crowd to disperse, and returned to barracks; but later in the evening the two women for whose protection they had gone out were assaulted and struck with stones at the very same place. Seven men were convicted of having taken part in an unlawful assembly, and were sentenced by the magistrates to one month's imprisonment with hard labour, and the three girls, daughters of Mr. Lawrence Buckley, a farmer, were sentenced to a fortnight's imprisonment without hard labour. The "Boycotted" woman referred to has since been threatened, and is now under police protection.

  EGYPT (MILITARY AFFAIRS)—TURKISH MILITARY INTERVENTION.
  BARON HENRY DE WORMSasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether it is the fact, as stated in to-day's papers, that on the 3rd instant three Turkish transports with artillery and stores started for Alexandria; and, whether the Porte has yet proclaimed Arabi Pacha a rebel; if not, whether Her Majesty's Government have decided no longer to insist upon such proclamation as a condition precedent to the landing of Turkish troops in Egypt?
  SIR CHARLES W. DILKE: No Turkish troops have been despatched to Alexandria, and we have been informed by the Porte that the destination of those already embarked is Crete.
  BARON HENRY DE WORMS: The hon. Gentleman has not answered the last part of my Question.
  SIR CHARLES W. DILKE: I thought the last part of the Question depended on the answer to the first, which assumed the truth of the statement that troops were on their way to Egypt. Of course, Her Majesty's Government have not changed their position in regard to the issue of the Proclamation.
  SIR H. DRUMMOND WOLFFasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether the other Powers had asked us to proclaim Arabi, or whether the Conference had done so?
  SIR CHARLES W. DILKE: The statement I made had reference to the Conference.
  MR. HEALY: How far is Crete from Alexandria?
  SIR CHARLES W. DILKE: The hon. Member can see for himself if he looks at the map.

  LAW AND POLICE (IRELAND)—THE O'CONNELL STATUE—CIRCULAR TO THE POLICE.
  MR. SEXTONasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether the circular published in the "Freeman's Journal" of Saturday, purporting to be addressed by the Executive to County Inspectors of Constabulary in Ireland, is an authentic document; if so, why the Government have desired the inspectors to report whether large numbers of persons intend coming from their respective counties to Dublin on the occasion of the unveiling of the O'Connell statue and opening of the Irish Industrial Exhibition; what classes of persons so intend, and whether certain agitators and ex-suspects, whose names are given, may be expected in Dublin on the occasion; and, whether the Government have any intention of impeding the celebrations in Dublin on the 15th instant, or of interfering, in any particular cases, with the right of individuals in any part of Ireland to participate in those celebrations?
  MR. TREVELYAN: Confidential Circulars can only get abroad by a breach of confidence; and I cannot answer any Question about them in the House. The Government have no intention of impeding the celebrations in Dublin, or of interfering with the rights of any person who keeps within the law.

  LAW AND JUSTICE—CRIMINAL LUNATICS—REPORT OF THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE.
  MR. RAMSAYasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, When the Report of the Departmental Committee, appointed to consider and report as to the custody and treatment of criminal lunatics, will be laid before Parliament?
  SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT,in reply, said, he had received this Report only two days ago, and had not yet had time to study it. It would afterwards have to go to the Treasury. He would then consider whether it could properly be laid before Parliament.

  EGYPT (MILITARY OPERATIONS)—OCCUPATION OF THE SUEZ CANAL—PROTESTS OF M. DE LESSEPS.
  MR. GOURLEYasked the First Lord of the Treasury, If he will be good enough to inform the House, if his attention has been called to the protests alleged to have been lodged by M. de Lesseps against the landing of British Troops on the property of the Suez Canal Company; and, if the ownership of the Canal is subject to the Suzerain rights of the Porte; if so, whether it is the intention of Her Majesty's Government to negotiate for the purchase of the Sultan's monetary rights, with the intention eventually of arranging with the European Powers that the navigation of the Canal shall be that of an International Ocean-highway in times of peace as well as of war?
  MR. GLADSTONE: We are cognizant of the fact that certain protests, as they are called, have been made by M. de Lesseps on the subject of the landing of British troops; but M. de Lesseps does not, as we have ascertained, act in any way except as a private individual, and consequently we have not thought it necessary to take any steps with regard to these so-called protests. With respect to the question of the ownership of the Canal, and the intentions of the Government, it is our opinion that the only matter which can be considered with advantage at this moment is its present condition and the possibilities of its remaining open. The Canal is open, and therefore we are not disposed to raise any of these questions at the present moment.

  THE ROYAL IRISH CONSTABULARY—ALLEGED DISCONTENT.
  SIR R. ASSHETON CROSSsaid, he did not wish to press the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant; but it might be satisfactory to the country if the right hon. Gentleman could inform the House whether the reports with regard to the Constabulary were correct or exaggerated?
  MR. TREVELYAN: There are very long accounts in various papers, and some of them are considerably exaggerated. But the movement is strong in one part of the country. I believe the report with regard to Mr. Clifford Lloyd is, as far as I can gather from a comparison of papers and from the accounts of Colonel Bruce, has been greatly exaggerated. The most important rumour was that some of the police had refused to go on duty. That, I am glad to say, is not correct. Colonel Bruce, in a letter, said—
  "I am satisfied that the Constabulary are as perfectly loyal at this moment, and as ready to perform any duty required of them, as ever. The combination has undoubtedly spread more or less over the country."
  Further on he said—
  "I would again say I believe the spirit of the men is at present perfectly loyal and faithful; but it is true that they are smarting under the feeling of disappointment at the delay which has occurred in the distribution of the £180,000 promised to them."
  Full and mature inquiry will be made into the complaints of the men; but the Government will not entertain any representations as long as the present attitude exists, which is opposed to discipline, and seriously discredits the Force. That I know to be the intention of the Irish Government. I regret very much that the necessity of passing the Constabulary Bill, and the Vote of £180,000 mentioned in the Inspector General's Report, keeps me from going to Ireland to take part in the business.
  MR. T. P. O'CONNORasked whether it was a fact, as stated in some of the newspapers, that Mr. Clifford Lloyd had an interview with the police, which was, to say the least of it, of an unpleasant character, and the police declared that they would not parade again if called upon to do so by Mr. Clifford Lloyd; and whether Colonel Bruce, instead of Mr. Clifford Lloyd, was present at the parade?
  MR. TREVELYANsaid, he would want Notice of the Question, because he had got no information about it. All he could say was that the attitude of Mr. Clifford Lloyd had been extremely different from that ascribed to him in the newspapers, and he had seen several letters from him. He would obtain information on that point, however; but would use his own judgment in giving it to the House. Whatever the men did was done anterior to the interview with Mr. Clifford Lloyd.
  MR. T. P. O'CONNORsaid, the right hon. Gentleman had not answered the latter part of his Question.
  MR. SEXTON: I beg to give Notice that I will ask the right hon. Gentleman this Question to-morrow, when, perhaps, he will be able to answer it.
  MR. TREVELYAN: I shall certainly be able to answer it; but, so far as the action of Mr. Clifford Lloyd, is concerned, he simply endeavoured to bring the police to a proper sense of their duty.
  MR. CALLANsaid, he wished to ask the Chief Secretary a Question relating to a telegram which he had received from that "anonymous," but he thought very real body, the Royal Irish Constabulary. The telegram stated that the Head Constables seized the men's Memorial to-day and placed Constable Murphy under arrest, charged with having an illegal document in his possession, and requested him to ask the Chief Secretary a Question on this point. He wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether his attention had been directed to a paragraph which appeared in The Standard newspaper to-day from The Standard correspondent at Cork, stating that an extraordinary occurrence happened there to-day in connection with the police agitation. The paragraph he referred to contained the particulars relating to the seizure of the Memorial and the arrest of the constable having it in his possession. He wished to know whether that action had the approbation and sanction of the Chief Secretary; and whether he would be good enough to state under what Act or Rule of the Constabulary Code the Head Constable had acted; whether the right hon. Gentleman was still of opinion that the reports in the newspapers, with regard to this movement, were characterized by extraordinary exaggeration, and that the present agitation was

  965
  largely due to causes outside the Police Force; and whether he was now of opinion that it was due to internal causes in the Police Force; and whether the course taken by Colonel Bruce was not improper and unwise in the extreme?
  MR. TREVELYANsaid, he should require Notice of the Question.

  THE ROYAL IRISH CONSTABULARY—THE VOTE OF COMPENSATION.
  In reply to Mr. LEWIS,
  MR. TREVELYANsaid, that if the Army Estimates closed at a sufficiently early period of the evening, he proposed to proceed with the Constabulary Vote.
  MR. HEALY: I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, in addition to proceeding with the Constabulary Vote, he intends to go on with the Royal Irish Constabulary Bill? If so, I beg to give Notice that I will move to report Progress, as it is important that the country should understand that while the men are neglected it is proposed that the officers' pay should be increased.
  MR. TREVELYANventured to say that hon. Members opposite would meet the wishes of the Government half way. After getting some Votes in Committee he was disposed to go on with the Bill; but he would communicate with the hon. Member beforehand.

  CUSTOMS DEPARTMENT—OUT-DOOR OFFICERS.
  MR. EDWARD CLARKEasked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether the petition of the outport outdoor officers of Her Majesty's Customs has been considered; and, whether the Lords of the Treasury will take into consideration the period of service of outdoor officers of from ten to thirty years' standing, who are only in receipt of £66 10 s. per annum, whereas boatmen of less than 10 years' service are receiving £70 per annum?
  MR. COURTNEY: The Board of Customs have not recommended any modification in the new scale for Customs' out-door officers, and the Treasury have no reason for thinking that any change is required. I cannot admit comparisons between the rate of promotion in different branches of the Service, such as that suggested in the latter part of the Question.

  EGYPT (MILITARY OPERATIONS)—TREATMENT OF PRISONERS.
  SIR WILFRID LAWSONasked the Secretary of State for War, whether the prisoners who were taken from Arabi Pasha's Army would be treated as rebels or as prisoners of war?
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, he had got no Notice of the Question; but he had no doubt they would be treated as prisoners of war.
  SIR WILFRID LAWSONasked the Prime Minister whether a declaration of war had been made against anybody?
  MR. GLADSTONE: No.
  MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORasked whether Arabi Pasha, if captured, would be treated as a rebel or as a prisoner of war?
  [No answer was given.]
  MR. BOURKEsaid, as some of his Questions on military intervention in Egypt had not been answered, he would put them again on Thursday.

ORDERS OF THE DAY.

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

  ARMY (INDIA)—ROMAN CATHOLIC CHAPLAINS.—OBSERVATIONS.
  MR. MOORErose to draw attention to the inadequate remuneration of Roman Catholic chaplains ministering to the Imperial Forces in India. The hon. Member represented that in every way the remuneration was cut down to the very lowest possible point, it being limited to actual service with the troops, and no allowance being granted when passing from one point to another, and neither furlough, pension, nor passage home being granted. It was objected that they did not serve continuously; but to give some idea of their services he mentioned that four chaplains had served 20 years in Bengal, five had served 25 years, and three had served 30 years, or a period of service which, in nearly every other Department of the State, would be recognized by some remuneration which would place the recipient beyond dependence. If the argument was used that these chaplains would continue to

  967
  do the work whether paid or not, he would admit that that was the fact; but he did not think that an argument worthy of a great Government. In conclusion, he asked what provision had been made for the Roman Catholic soldiers in the Indian Contingent in Egypt?
  MR. BLAKEagreed with the hon. Member that the position of Roman Catholic chaplains in India was such as to call for improvement. When lately in India, he had devoted some time in investigating the grievances which the Catholic chaplains attached to the Army suffered under. In addition to communicating personally with a number of the chaplains, he had interviews on the subject with the Archbishop of Calcutta, the Bishops of Agra and Bombay, and the Vicar General of Madras. The complaints against the system might be classed under four heads—1. The absence of regular appointments, similar to the Protestant chaplains. 2. Inadequate pay. 3. No furloughs. 4. No pensions. Whilst the Catholic chaplains did, to say the least, fully as much work as the Protestant, there was not the same official recognition of them. The Protestants had often four times as much pay—never less than double—and were, besides, granted sick leave when they required it—and the usual periodic leave of absence, and, above all, were entitled to very liberal retiring pensions, after 17 years' service, amounting to £1 a-day—and for less service in proportion. The Catholic chaplain, out of his wretched allowance, if prevented by illness from attending temporarily to his duties, had to pay for a substitute, and was not allowed a day's leave of absence without his pay being stopped. No matter how long be served, how broken down he might be, and unfit for further clerical duties, no pension was granted to him. When he went into the field and served, as he often did, under fire, only half the "batta," or extra allowance, was granted to him that was granted to the Protestant chaplain. He (Mr. Blake) had seen some very aged Catholic chaplains, who had attended the troops for 30 years and upwards, who would be compelled, when unfit for further duty, to become the recipients of the charity of their Bishops. Fully half the European troops serving in India appeared to be Irish or of Irish parentage, and with few excep-
  968
  tions were Catholics. Numbers of them and their wives had strongly complained to him that many of their chaplains could hardly speak English—they were nearly all Italians, French, or Belgians, or occasionally Portuguese. This arose from the Bishops, and most of the governing ecclesiastics, belonging to the four nationalities—and they naturally gave preference to their own countrymen. Some of the Italian priests were glad to get away to avoid the conscription, which did not respect their holy office, and were content to live on the most scanty allowance. Some of the priests were of the mixed or Eurasian race, and could subsist on much less than English or Irish priests. But foreigners, as a rule, could not in the way of instruction, or when attending the dying, administer as satisfactorily as the soldiers' own countrymen, and it was difficult to obtain them unless they were more liberally dealt with. One reason assigned for the much smaller pay given to the Catholic chaplain was that, as they had neither wives nor children, and did not indulge in the gaieties of society, they did not require so much pay. No doubt there was something in that; but only giving them a fourth as much was making too large an allowance for the cost of wives and children, and other social enjoyments, which the Catholic chaplains refrained from. The noble Marquess would also probably say, as some of his Predecessors had said before him, that the Catholic chaplains were not so much under the control of the military authorities as the Protestant, and that, therefore, the Government could not be expected to deal with them in the same way. Now, this objection had no practical weight. It was true that the Bishops insisted on having the chaplains under their control; but that was all the better for ecclesiastical purposes; and he had the assurance of the Bishops having the greatest number of military cantonments in their diocese, that they always endeavoured to carry out the suggestions of commanding officers with regard to the chaplains, and attended to every reasonable complaint, and never allowed, when it was practicable, the Catholic military to be without spiritual aid—although often at extra cost—as whilst the Protestant chaplain was allowed a carteblanche as regarded expenses in attending out stations to perform Divine ser-

  969
  vice on Sundays, no matter how small the number of Protestant soldiers at them, the Catholic chaplain, if he attended, could only obtain his expenses if the soldiers attending Mass amounted to a certain number; and, rather than the soldiers should not have Mass, the priests frequently paid their expenses themselves. Apart from the extreme unfairness, it was most impolitic for the Government to allow the Catholic soldiers to see their clergy treated in an exceptionally unjust manner. England had to depend for the maintenance of her Indian Empire quite as much on the Catholic soldier as on the Protestant—indeed, rather more so, as the bulb of the Christian Native soldiers were Catholics. It was unworthy of the Government to try to escape paying the Catholic chaplains properly, and denying them the privileges given to the Protestant, as regarded furlough and pension, on the grounds usually advanced. As he had a strong belief in the sense of justice and the generous promptings of the present Secretary of State for India, he hoped to hear from him a more satisfactory reply to the hon. Member for Clonmel than those usually given by his Predecessors, when similar appeals had been made.
  THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON,in reply, said, there had been a considerable amount of official Correspondence between the Government of India and the Home Government and persons interested in the question, which Correspondence was laid on the Table and printed. In consequence of the attention which was called to the subject at various times from 1872 to 1876, the Government of India, in 1876, made certain suggestions for the improvement of the condition of Roman Catholic chaplains in India. These proposals involved an additional cost of 85,000 rupees, the former amount expended on Roman Catholic chaplains in India, exclusive of the Bishops, having been 1 lakh and 62,000 rupees, which was thus raised to 2 lakhs and 48,000 rupees. Those proposals were accepted in their entirety by the then Secretary of State for India (Lord Salisbury); and, so far as he (the Marquess of Hartington) was aware, from that time to this there had been no official representation, nor representation of any other character, on the subject. Therefore, he was of opinion
  970
  that what was done at that time had been considered fairly satisfactory to the Roman Catholic chaplains. He had not the slightest doubt, however, that any representations which might be made to the Government of India upon the subject would receive very careful consideration; and if they were of opinion that substantial injustice was being done, or hardship being inflicted, he thought they would not be indisposed to take steps with the view of effecting a remedy. The Government of India could hardly be expected to take the initiative, and to proceed to increase the salaries of these chaplains, until it was brought prominently and clearly before their notice that there was some grievance of which they were entitled to complain. The two hon. Members who had spoken had touched upon much the same points as were dwelt upon in the years to which he had referred. They had spoken of low pay, want of pension, and want of furlough, and had shown how, with respect to those three matters, the Roman Catholic chaplains were at a disadvantage when compared with Protestant chaplains. The fact was that there was no comparison whatever to be made between the Roman Catholic chaplains, who were not under the orders of the Government of India, and who only received a grant in aid, and the persons who were personally engaged by the Government, and were subject to its orders. The comparison could only fairly be made between two sets of chaplains serving under the same conditions. He did not understand that hon. Members were prepared to advocate putting Roman Catholic chaplains in the position of paid Government chaplains. Nor was he at all aware whether such a proposition would be acceptable to the heads of the Roman Catholic Church; but until that was done no comparison could be made as regarded pay and position between persons serving under totally different conditions. Supposing it were desired by the Roman Catholic authorities, the desirability of placing chaplains of that faith in the position of ordinary Government chaplains was certainly a fair subject for discussion. The right hon. Member for Montrose (Mr. Baxter) had called the attention of the Government of India on more than one occasion to what he considered was the excessive provision by the Government of India for the re-

  971
  ligious wants of Protestants, and the representations he had made were now under the consideration of the Government of India. They were considering whether it would not be possible to make some reduction in the establishment of Protestant chaplains, and perhaps the present was not, therefore, a favourable moment for opening the question of the creation of a new religious establishment. But, while no comparison between chaplains serving under totally different conditions could be made, it was a perfectly fair subject for discussion as to whether the remuneration given to the Roman Catholic chaplains by the grant in aid was sufficient for their proper maintenance. He was informed, as a matter of fact, that their remuneration did not compare unfavourably with that which was received by Roman Catholic clergy who were engaged in other duties. He thought, therefore, that there was no strong case made out for the increase of these grants; because no one could contend that it was the duty of the taxpayers of India to pay a larger price for the remuneration of the Roman Catholic chaplains than was sufficient to maintain the services of competent men when they were engaged on other duties. If it was suggested that this remuneration was absolutely inadequate, and if such suggestions were brought to his notice in any tangible form, he should be most happy to have these allegations examined into. He did not think that the Government of India could be accused of neglecting the subject, for no representations had hitherto been brought to their notice. The hon. Member for Clonmel had asked him if he could state what provision had been made for the religious necessities of Roman Catholic troops coming from India to Egypt? The only information the India Office had received was entirely telegraphic, and this was one of the details on which he was not yet able to give the House any information. He had no doubt, however, that it was a subject that had not been overlooked by the Government of India.
  COLONEL NOLANmaintained that the pay received by Roman Catholic clergymen ministering to the Forces in India was totally inadequate to keep them in the comfort necessary for their health in the climate of India. The fact was that the rate of pay for Roman Catholic
  972
  clergy in India was lowered by the existence of a Roman Catholic Portuguese Colony. Those men had become acclimatized, and were able to live on a lower rate of pay than persons coming direct from Europe. They ought not to be satisfied until the Roman Catholic clergy were on an equality with the Protestant clergy. The present state of things was due to the influence exercised by the Established Church.
  MR. MACFARLANEsaid, the Government of India knew that such was the zeal of the Roman Catholic clergymen that they would work for nothing rather than let their people be neglected, and the Government had taken advantage of that zeal. He hoped they would be dealt with fairly and honestly. If the Government were not disposed to grant them pensions, he would suggest that their pay should be increased, leaving the pensions to be provided by themselves.
  SIR GEORGE CAMPBELLsaid, he could bear testimony to the admirable manner in which the Roman Catholic chaplains discharged their duties. But he wished to point out that their salaries had of late years been very considerably raised. They were now, in his opinion, adequately paid, and he agreed with the noble Marquess that, as compared with other persons in similar positions, they were well paid. The real question, he thought, was not so much whether the salaries of the Roman Catholic chaplains should be increased, as whether the salaries of the Protestant chaplains should not be cut down.
  MR. SEXTONsaid, no one could complain of the general tone of the observations that had been made as to the manner in which the Roman Catholic chaplains discharged their duties, and he hoped their claims would receive due attention. Although they received only a quarter of the salary received by the Protestant chaplains, they had to perform the same duties. It was said that the Protestant chaplains were often married men, and, therefore, required larger salaries; but it seemed that they received the same salaries whether they were married or single. The objection that the Protestant chaplains were Government officials, whereas the Roman Catholics were not, was merely technical; and he hoped that the Government would not rely on such a technical plea as an

  973
  excuse for not placing all the chaplains on an equal footing as regards salary.

  ARMY—LONG AND SHORT SERVICE.

    OBSERVATIONS.
    SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL,who had given Notice of the following Motion:—
    "That experience shows that no system will provide adequately for the military requirements of the British Empire which does not provide for two distinct classes of soldiers, short service men to stay at home and form a reserve for defence, and long service men to form a professional army to serve in India and distant Foreign possessions,"
    said, that, in the present state of Business, he would not now attempt to raise so large a question. He only hoped the Secretary of State for War would take into consideration the question which his Notice raised. He quite admitted that the right hon. Gentleman had made changes which went somewhat in the direction indicated; and he hoped the right hon. Gentleman might go further some day. He did not think we would have a sufficient army in India until we allowed those who were suited by clime and taste to remain in India as long as they liked.

  EGYPT (MILITARY EXPEDITION)—OFFICERS HOLDING STAFF APPOINTMENTS.

    OBSERVATIONS.
    COLONEL ALEXANDERrose to call the attention of the House to the circumstances under which certain Officers proceeding with the Expeditionary Force to Egypt have been allowed to retain staff appointments at home. The hon. and gallant Gentleman said: It may be said, probably will be said, that the course which I am taking with respect to this question is somewhat exceptional and unusual. I admit, Sir, that it is unusual, and, perhaps, also inconvenient; but then the circumstances which induce me to take this course are also very exceptional and unusual. An Expeditionary Force is sent to Egypt, and no fewer than 16 of the officers composing that Force hold, at the same time, high appointments at home. That, perhaps, may not of itself be a very remarkable coincidence; but when I add that all the officers in question are allowed to retain those appointments, you have a state of things which, I venture to pronounce, is unique and unprecedented in the annals of the British
    974
    Army. Possibly the right hon. Gentleman may be able to point to one or two instances in which officers proceeding abroad have been allowed to retain appointments on the Staff at home; but of this I am quite sure—that never before has the practice been reduced to a system, never before has it been carried out in so wholesale and, I am bound to add, so audacious and unblushing a manner. If I might offer a suggestion to the right hon. Gentleman, it would be that he should inscribe in letters of gold over the portals of the War Office the words, Beati possidentes, for no motto could be more appropriate in a building where the Scriptural maxim is literally carried out—"To him that hath to him shall be given, and he shall have it more abundantly." Pluralities have disappeared from the Church; but the system, it would appear, is to be revived in the Army. Perhaps the House will allow me to relate an anecdote more familiar to men of the last than to those of this generation. During the Crimean War, Lord Panmure, then Secretary of State for War, anxious to promote the interests of his nephew, Major Dowbiggin, sent the following curt but significant message to Lord Eaglan—"Take care of Dowb." The phrase—"Take care of Dowb," has since passed into a proverb. The right hon. Gentleman has improved on the practice of his Predecessor, for he takes care, not of one, but of 16 Dowbs. It is curious to note the tendency of history to repeat itself, and to observe how, when Liberal Governments are in power, Dowbs multiply and abound. The right hon. Gentleman excuses his action in this matter on the assumption that the expedition will probably return three months hence; but on what grounds does the right hon. Gentleman base this assumption? On grounds probably as substantial as those which induced the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in 1854, to lay on the Table of the House an Estimate for taking the Guards to Malta and back. But, even assuming the prophecy of the right hon. Gentleman to be fulfilled, is that any reason why, during the next three months, all the Military Departments of the State should be undermanned and, in some cases, deprived of their responsible heads? The right hon. Gentleman will not deny that, during a great war, and especially at the outset of a great war, the labour devolving on those De-

    975
    partments is enormously increased; and yet this is precisely the time chosen by him for crippling and enfeebling their action. The right hon. Gentleman is in this dilemma. If the services of the Adjutant General and his Colleagues were required three months ago, à fortiori they are required now; and, if they can be dispensed with now, they can equally be dispensed with three months hence. The right hon. Gentleman told me the other day that he could not send General Feilding to Egypt because his services were required at Malta; but I would ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the services of the distinguished officer who now commands the troops which General Feilding trained were not equally required in the Intelligence Department at home? The right hon. Gentleman may possibly say that in many of these Departments there is an excellent locum tenens; but I need hardly remind the House that work performed by a locum tenens is never so satisfactory as work undertaken by a responsible head. I am told, although I can scarcely believe it, that the right hon. Gentleman defends the grace of three months accorded to these fortunate officers on the ground that a similar indulgence is granted to officers appointed to the Staff before being seconded from their regiments. There is, however, no analogy between the two cases—a period of three months is granted to an officer before being seconded in his regiment, to enable him to make choice between Regimental and Staff Service; but surely the right hon. Gentleman does not mean to apply this principle as between one Staff appointment and another—surely he does not mean to lay down the rule that a man, having accepted one Staff appointment, is to have three months in which to say whether he would not like another better. Besides, some of these officers have already been seconded from their regiments, and have had one period of grace given them; but now the right hon. Gentleman actually proposes to give them another. The right hon. Gentleman is departing from all the principles which he laid down last year when fixing the new Establishment of General Officers. On June 24, 1881, the right hon. Gentleman said—
    "We have fixed the number of General Officers at about double the average number
    976
    who will be employed in ordinary times, leaving, therefore, ample margin for times of great wars.… We have brought that number down to what is considered by those who advise me on this subject an efficient number with respect to the requirements of the Service."—[3 Hansard, cclxii. 1233.]
    When the right hon. Gentleman said this he could not have intended that one man should occupy two places, for in that case the number of General Officers proposed would be unnecessarily large. Sir, I have asked myself, over and over again, what do these favoured officers require? Is it not enough to be commissioned to sustain the honour of the country abroad—to receive, perhaps, the thanks of both Houses of Parliament—to be created, it may be, Lord Rosetta or Lord Damietta—to return home in a blaze of glory and constellations—is not all this enough, without requiring unfortunate officers at home to act as their warming-pans? These officers are well known in the Service as the "Mutual Admiration Society," from the mutual respect they entertain for each other's talents and abilities. Their doctrine is that—"Outside the Ashantee ring there is no salvation." If I might give advice to a young man entering the Army, it would be to cultivate the Ashantee ring—their favour is the via prima salutis, the only sure road to honour and preferment. They are more formidable than the most formidable Caucus, for they ruthlessly "Boycott" all who do not share the opinions they espouse. If they pronounce in favour of short service, you must carefully conceal your preference for long, otherwise you will be relegated to honourable banishment, like Sir Frederick Roberts, or hopelessly shelved, like Sir Lintorn Simmons. Let not the right hon. Gentleman deceive himself. Let him not think, because discipline prevents the expression of discontent, that no discontent exists. On the contrary, a feeling of profound dissatisfaction prevails with respect to a system which bars every road to promotion; which blocks every avenue to preferment; which foils the honourable ambition of an officer abroad; which disappoints his legitimate expectations at home; and which condemns him, while yet in the prime of life, to premature supersession, which he feels to be unmerited, and which he knows to be unjust.
    MR. CHILDERSsaid, that under cover of complaining of certain arrangements which had been made as to the temporary employment of certain officers, the hon. and gallant Gentleman (Colonel Alexander) had thought fit to make a violent attack upon Sir Garnet Wolseley, and had spoken of the "Ashantee ring;" and everybody who knew what the gossip of the Clubs was, knew that that only meant the distinguished officers who were classed with Sir Garnet Wolseley. He did not think the House would be led aside by the remarks of the hon. and gallant Gentleman to sanction any attack on one of the most distinguished officers of the present day. The hon. and gallant Member had asserted that Sir Frederick Roberts was relegated to honourable banishment; but the hon. and gallant Member knew perfectly well that Sir Frederick was offered the second best Staff office in the British Army, and that he preferred to retain the appointment which he now held at Madras. It was, therefore, the greatest act of injustice that the hon. and gallant Gentleman had done the Government and himself (Mr. Childers) in insinuating that he was unwilling to have to propose to Her Majesty that Sir Frederick Roberts' services should be at her disposal in this country, when he knew that he had been offered the second greatest post in this country. He thought he had reason to complain that the hon. and gallant Gentleman had, under cover of remarks on another subject, introduced this matter, and then made a statement with regard to Sir Frederick Roberts, the true facts of whose case were perfectly in his possession at the time. The hon. and gallant Gentleman said that on this occasion they had sanctioned a system under which a certain number of officers had been employed on an Expedition in Egypt, and that they, when they returned, would be allowed to go back to their Staff appointments. He had already very frankly stated to the House that, with respect to some of those officers, that was the case. It was not anticipated that the Expedition to Egypt would be a long one; and if it should prove such, the circumstances under which these officers had been allowed to expect to return to their offices would, of course, be reconsidered. It was only in consideration that the Expedition would be a short one that Sir Garnet Wolseley—who, of
    978
    course, was the object of the hon. and gallant Gentleman's attack—would be allowed to retain the office in question. The hon. and gallant Gentleman had asked him the other day why they had not employed General Feilding, and he had replied that that was not a matter which should be discussed in that House, and that General Feilding would have quite sufficient duty at Malta. The hon. and gallant Gentleman now asked how it was that Sir Archibald Alison had been allowed to retain the prospect of returning to the head of the Intelligence Department, although he had gone to Egypt. He had already explained that when Sir Archibald Alison ceased to hold that office, it would not be filled up, and that the Quartermaster General could very well superintend the Intelligence Department. The hon. and gallant Gentleman seemed to think that there was something very unusual in the present arrangements; but, without raising any question as between one Government and another, it would be found there was no reason for the suggestion on comparing what was done now with what had been done previously. When Sir Garnet Wolseley went out with the Ashantee Expedition he was allowed to retain his office at home; and the only difference was that he returned to a considerably higher office, and was made Inspector General of the Auxiliary Forces. In the same way his Predecessor allowed General Newdigate, on returning from South Africa, to revert to his former appointment.
    COLONEL ALEXANDERsaid, he did not say that instances could not be quoted. His contention was that these cases had never occurred in such a wholesale manner before.
    MR. CHILDERSsaid, he did not think that this time the numbers were by comparison excessive; but when the service abroad was expected to be a short one it was never understood that there was any objection to the arrangement. There seemed to be a misapprehension as to what had really been done. As in the case of the Zulu War, now, in every instance except one, a locum tenens had been appointed, and the officer abroad would receive only the emoluments of one office. He could not find anything approaching to the number suggested unless it were intended to include aides-de-camp and officers of that rank—

    979
    [Colonel ALEXANDER: No, no!]—to whom the epithet used could be applied. No doubt, Sir Archibald Alison was in Ashantee; but he belonged to a different Army school from Sir Garnet Wolseley. He did not think there was a single one of the General Officers who had been appointed who could be said to have been appointed under the influence which he thought the hon. and gallant Gentleman had qualified in a manner that was very unusual in this House. But this he wished to say distinctly, that if the Expedition to Egypt should last longer than they expected when they sent it out, the whole of those temporary arrangements would be reviewed, as they would have been reviewed, no doubt, in 1879, when similar arrangements were made. But he could not think it would be for the benefit of the Public Service if, in some of the highest places in the Army, those who were capable of administering those offices with the greatest success were compelled to resign until it was quite clear that the Expedition would not be the very short one that they at present anticipated. On these grounds, he hoped the House would allow that in the arrangements they had made they had done what was best for the Public Service.
    LORD EUSTACE CECILsaid, he did not wish to prolong the discussion of a painful subject; but he thought the right hon. Gentleman had been a little hard on the hon. and gallant Gentleman (Colonel Alexander), whose object was of a public and net of a private character, and who had no intention to reflect on any of the gallant officers sent out on high command in the Egyptian Expedition. If the hon. and gallant Member did mention the fact that a certain name had been given to the officers of the Ashantee Expedition, it was more with the idea of giving force to his argument on public grounds than with the view of making any reflection on these officers. Without saying a word against them individually or collectively, while there were many officers who had equal claims to service of this kind, it was right on public grounds that something should be said in regard to the extraordinary appointments of officers that had been made by the War Office. He had understood, from the reply to a Question he had put, that the officers were to receive the pay of two offices;
    980
    but he was glad to hear it was not so. Offices of the nature of Adjutant General and of Surveyor of Ordnance were very important in time of peace, and it was a hazardous thing to put them in commission when operations were going on. The precedent was one which could not be followed with advantage to the Public Service. The number of officers taken out of The Army List, and as they stood now at the War Office, were no less than six, and there were at least five or six more who had recently held appointments at the War Office. There were officers anxious to place their services at the will of the Government, and it was very hard that they should find themselves ousted out of these appointments by gentlemen, however gallant and capable, who already held at headquarters important offices, the duties of which, in time of war, it was most desirable they should discharge. When Lord Cardwell's scheme was under debate it was said that in the future appointments would be made by seniority tempered by selection, and it was replied that in practice the system might become stagnation tempered by jobbery. As regarded some of these appointments, they did seem to be within a measurable distance of jobbery. It was against the system, and not against the officers, that his remarks were directed. It was necessary, in the interests of the Army, that officers who had claims based on long and meritorious services should not be made to feel that the only avenue to promotion was through the War Office, where officers were brought under the immediate notice of the highest authorities.
    LORD ELCHOsaid, that two questions had been raised by his hon. and gallant Friend—the one a personal question, the other a question of principle. With regard to the first, he regretted that his hon. and gallant Friend, though, no doubt, in the public interest, had used expressions that possibly might be liable to misconstruction, for there was no doubt there was an ugly ring about the expressions he had used with regard to Sir Garnet Wolseley. No doubt, public opinion regarded Sir Garnet Wolseley as one of our best Generals; and when his hon. and gallant Friend talked of the "Ashantee Ring," that was merely bringing into that House expressions which he had often heard used

    981
    outside on the part of those who were not the friends, or who did not belong to the Staff of Sir Garnet Wolseley. He had often thought it unjust to accuse Sir Garnet Wolseley of having fostered around him a ring of officers who always went with him. What would a man naturally do? Even his hon. and gallant Friend, who, he was sure, would make a good General, would do the same. Sir Garnet Wolseley had found officers who, in Ashantee, had done their duty efficiently, and he naturally liked to have men whom he could trust around him, and not to have others thrust upon him. But, then, the question of principle was a very different matter, and that was whether officers who held most important posts, for which, presumably, they were the most fit that could be obtained at the time, should be taken away and sent to fill other more important posts. If Sir Garnet Wolseley and Sir John Adye were the most efficient men for the posts from which they were taken, it was more necessary now than at any other time that, instead of going to take the command of troops in the field, they should help at home in the management of the war.
    SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOTsaid, that his hon. and gallant Friend was led away by his soldierly feeling when he stated that some men received all the rewards, while others were left out in the cold. There was no doubt that officers in the Army felt strongly that men serving in the War Office had a very great pull over them, however good their service might be. If Sir Garnet Wolseley, Adjutant General; Sir John Adye, Surveyor General of Ordnance; and Sir Archibald Alison, head of the Intelligence Department, were so admirably fitted for these posts, why take them away in a time of war, when it must be far more necessary to work out all the details? But, then, the Secretary of State for War said they were the best men to send out to Egypt. Now, he had always advocated that men commanding forces in the field should be connected with those forces. He did not believe that one of those officers who had gone out to command had ever seen any of the men that would be under them. But officers who had commanded brigades, who knew the men, and whom the men had confidence in, were left at
    982
    home. A grave responsibility rested upon the Secretary of State for War, as he had got to consider, not only those about him and whom he knew personally, but all other officers whose claims were equally great and who were not brought personally under his notice. He had himself known many officers left, he might say, to perish in out-of-the-way places, though they were as capable as any others. He hoped that the right hon. Gentleman would endeavour to make his selections as fair and as much in the general interest of the Army as he was able.
    SIR ROBERT LOYD LINDSAYsaid, his hon. and gallant Friend (Colonel Alexander) felt strongly on this matter, and had been tempted to make use of expressions which he would probably regret when he saw them in to-morrow's report. What the Secretary of State for War had to do was to select the best men for the service; and although a man might have been at the Adjutant General's Department and fulfilled important duties there, it would be very wrong, in the interests of the country and the Army, to say that on that account he was not to be Commander-in-Chief of an expedition. To proceed on such a hard-and-fast rule would tie one's hands most unwisely. He did not say that there were not other Generals who might perform the important task of commanding our Armies in the East as well as Sir Garnet Wolseley. He might point to that gallant officer, Sir Daniel Lysons. But the rule in question would cut off Sir Daniel Lysons, who was now commanding at Aldershot. He thought it would be rather hard to say that immediately a man was sent on service he should be removed from the appointment he held. If the war went on it would be clearly impossible in a few months' time for these appointments still to be retained. He was unwilling to sit there, having himself been recently at the War Office and seen the very thing done which his hon. and gallant Friend had called attention to, without making those few remarks. He hoped his hon. and gallant Friend would explain that he did not mean anything personal to General Officers, such as Generals Alison, with whom he had served in the Crimea, Willis, and Adye, all of whom were, he believed, friends of his hon. and gallant Friend.
    COLONEL ALEXANDERdesired to withdraw any expression which might be considered offensive to Sir Garnet Wolseley, and he withdrew unreservedly the words "Ashantee Ring." He did not object to the appointment of Sir Garnet Wolseley as Commander of the Expedition; but that his place as Adjutant General should not be filled up at a time when the duties were more onerous than usual. With reference to what his hon. and gallant Friend (Sir Robert Loyd Lindsay) had said about Sir Archibald Alison, the last thing he should think of would, be to reflect upon the distinguished services of that officer.
    Question, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair," put, and agreed to.

  SUPPLY—ARMY ESTIMATES.
  SUPPLY—considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  (1.) £562,700, Volunteer Corps.
  (2.) £229,500, Army Reserve Force.
  SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOTsaid, that it was a very difficult thing, at this period of the Session, to go at any length into the story of the Army Reserve in the present state of the Army. It would be admitted, he thought, that on the 7th of August to have a Vote of such great importance brought before the Committee was a matter which deserved the serious consideration of any Government, be that Government what it might. If hon. Members would look round at the present condition of the Committee they would see that it was impossible for a person to make those remarks upon such a Vote as this which he would have been willing and anxious to make at an earlier period of the Session. But he was bound to say it appeared to him necessary, notwithstanding all the difficulty of the case, and notwithstanding his great desire to say nothing which might reflect in any way upon the present condition of the Army, that he should refer to one or two points. In doing so, however, he would avoid raising any of those great questions which, he would venture to say, could not be left to sleep very much longer, but would have to be raised, and raised in very strong terms, at some future time. He should like to point out for one moment that whereas Lord Cardwell—
  984
  then Mr. Cardwell—who first introduced the present system 12 years ago, had promised them that by this time they would have a very large Army Reserve—50,000, or, he rather thought, 60,000 men—[Lord ELCHO: 80,000.]—it appeared that they only had 26,000. The premises on which Mr. Cardwell started were very fallacious; but, be that as it might, Lord Cranbrook, who succeeded him, and the right hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for North Lancashire (Colonel Stanley), who was also Secretary of State for War in the last Parliament, most honestly, and, he (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) thought, too faithfully, carried out those provisions which Mr. Cardwell inaugurated in 1870. This was a question which they could talk about and deal with in no Party sense, because the right hon. Gentleman the present Secretary of State for War (Mr. Childers) had only steadily followed the same lines on which those who had preceded him had gone. If, however, hon. Members would look at the results as they had been attained up to the present time, they would not be able to say that they had been a great success. If they remembered what they were promised, and if they inquired what had been the result, they would naturally inquire why those promises had not been fulfilled. In the first place, he must state—and he did not suppose the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War would contradict him—that the right hon. Gentleman had the other day declared that nine-tenths of the Army at home must always be under one years' service. That was a very grave and serious statement for a War Minister to make. When the right hon. Gentleman told them he was going to form a First Army Corps, which corps was to be complete in all its details, and when they recollected that our system had been derived, more or less, from the German system, and when they remembered the Army the Germans mobilized in less than a fortnight, and when they saw the time it had taken the right hon. Gentleman to send out the present Army Corps to Egypt, they had, he thought, some reason to think that their system was not absolutely perfect. He remembered that the right hon. Gentleman stated that he had gradations of regiments which could be easily filled up; but he found that it took 10,000 men of

  985
  the Reserve—the very flower of the Reserve, as he understood it, because they were men who had been put in the Reserve since 1881—to complete the First Army Corps. The country might very well have expected that a First Army Corps could by this time have been sent abroad absolutely perfect, and that any vacancies could have been filled up without having recourse to the Reserve. What was the meaning of "Reserve?" Why, it meant that the men were in reservation, and not that they should be made the very first to be sent out in the First Army Corps. If this war in Egypt should turn out not to be the easy military promenade through the country that some people seemed to think it would be, and if they should have to send out another Army Corps, where, he would ask the Secretary of State for War, was that Army Corps? No doubt they had it on paper; but an Army Corps on paper was of no use to us as a nation. What they wanted to see was that a Second Army Corps was absolutely preparing; and he should say that if there was likely to be a difficulty, and if it was probable that the war would be of some duration, the rest of the Reserves ought at once to be called out, so that if it was absolutely necessary the Second Army Corps could be sent to Egypt without delay. If that Second Army Corps was to be—as it ought to be—formed, it should be formed at Aldershot, and placed under the officers who would have to command it in the field, so that the officers might know the troops they had to deal with, and the men might know the officers. There was another point on which he wished to speak, although he did not desire to go too closely into it. What bad the right hon. Gentleman been obliged to do in the Mediterranean? Had he been able to send out men who were 20 years of age—absolutely 20 years of age—and had be sent out none that were under that age? That was a question which be (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) thought he had a right to ask, because so much had been said on that point. If he were rightly informed—of course he was liable to err, but he bad taken every means in his power to test the accuracy of the information—it was the fact that if the men had had the proper chest-measurement, and had been absolutely
  986
  effective in other ways, their age had not been taken into account at all, and they bad been sent out as fit and proper soldiers, capable of doing soldier's duty. That was a point on which they ought to have some answer from the right hon. Gentleman. He did not raise the question because he feared that their men would not fight well. He was convinced they would fight well, and that they would do their duty well and properly; but it was their age that would be against them, and anyone who knew anything about a campaign would agree with him that in a climate like that of Egypt, with the quantity they would have to carry and the work they would have to perform, none but seasoned troops ought to be called upon. It might be, and he hoped it was, that these men were not at present to go beyond the stations of Gibraltar and Malta; but even if that were the case a time would probably come before long when they would have to be sent on to Egypt. Or be might put it this way—that it was not the intention of the right hon. Gentleman to send these young fellows beyond Gibraltar and Malta; but they might have to be sent on, and. then what would become of all the precautions that had been taken hitherto as to the age of these men? This was a very serious question, and one upon which he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would be able to say that the information which had been given to him (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) was inaccurate. Then they had a little reason to complain, he thought, of the number of men who bad been sent out in the regiments, because, as he understood it, it took four regiments to make a brigade instead of three. The meaning of that was that the regiments were not up to their strength, and that four had to be used where three only ought to be necessary. These were points which showed that they had not so many men to dispose of as they had formerly. He would not go into many of the details on which he bad informed himself, because, on the present occasion, his only desire, in the interest of the Service, was that they should know exactly that they had men fit to cope with all the difficulties and dangers in their way. It was not his desire to throw difficulties in the way of the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War. There was one thing

  987
  he could not point out too strongly. He had pointed it out often before, and he would venture to point it out again, and it was this—that much as the right hon. Gentleman had done—and he would give him credit for two important things—namely, re-enlistment of non-commissioned officers, and increasing the length of Service from six to eight years—he had not gone far enough in his modification of the short service system. He (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) was sure the right hon. Gentleman would have to increase the length of service to 10 years. He trusted the Committee would believe him when he said that in a Service such as ours, with duty to perform all over the world, the best men to perform that duty were men who stayed 10 years with the Colours and then five years with the Reserve. If such were the term of service they should have a real Army Reserve in time. They talked of drawing the Militia regiments close to the regiments of the Line; but he was at a loss to see how they were effecting it. He should recommend that they should send the men, after service in the Line, into the Militia battalions. He had also strongly urged before, and he would even do it now, that every Militiaman should be in the Militia Reserve. They would then have a real Reserve, and the man would, for a small annual allowance, be glad, should he be called upon, to serve in any part of the world to which he might be sent. A force composed of such men as these would be most reliable. The country would be able to depend on them; and, besides, this method of forming an Army Reserve would be simple and efficacious. At present, if they were engaged in a war of any duration, they could not be said to possess a Reserve at all. Then he had a word to say on the subject of Cavalry—especially the Cavalry horses. It had taken nearly two regiments to make one full regiment of Cavalry. The Government had never seemed to think of what would happen in war time. They had never had any Cavalry regiments prepared for war. They had had horses that were not fit to go on service. All the old horses, he understood, had been obliged to be got rid of, and they had had very nearly to denude one or two regiments that remained at home, in order to make up the com-
  988
  plement of horses for one regiment going abroad. Then, this was what he could not understand—he had the greatest admiration for the Life Guards, the Blues, and the 4th Dragoon Guards. Gallant they all knew they were—they all knew they would do their duty and serve their country to the best of their ability; but to send to a country like Egypt their biggest men and their finest horses was one of the most inexplicable things he ever heard of. What Cavalry was it expected that their men would have to contend with? They would have to pursue the Bedouins into the desert, and what was required was a camel corps, or some Native Indian regiments acclimatized and accustomed to this kind of warfare. Such men as they had sent out would, no doubt, have distinguished themselves admirably on the Continent of Europe, and so they would, no doubt, in an African desert; but at what a cost! There was the scheme for the re-organization of the Cavalry, which the right hon. Gentleman had said he did not mean to look at for a year. With regard to that, he (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) would now say what he thought, for if he waited until next year he might be too late. The scheme was, for the formation of a Cavalry Reserve, the most fallacious thing that could possibly be, for everyone knowing what a Cavalry soldier was, was aware that, unless a man rode every year, and had to go through the whole of his duties continuously, he would be of very little use as a Cavalry soldier. To brigade three Cavalry regiments together, as proposed, would mean that they were going to destroy the usefulness of nine Cavalry regiments in the Service, and it would assuredly be a blot on the escutcheon of anyone who brought about such a system. It might be decided to let a certain number of men go into the Cavalry Beserve—namely, called out every year—but do not let the individuality of each regiment be interfered with. If the right hon. Gentleman broke up the regiments, he would not only not have an efficient Reserve, but he would destroy that esprit de corps that had made the British Cavalry the finest in the world. He (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) had made these few remarks now because he would have no other opportunity, and because he considered it so important that our Army should be

  989
  in an efficient state—which he was sure was also the view of the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War.
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, that no one would for a moment dream of blaming the hon. and gallant Baronet if he had gone a little beyond the Vote before the Committee, for he had been prevented on a former occasion from expressing his views on the subjects to which he had adverted. Besides, hon. Members always listened with satisfaction to the remarks which fell from the hon. and gallant Baronet on these questions. The Committee would remember that though he (Mr. Childers) had laid on the Table a proposal with regard to the Cavalry, which had emanated from three of the most distinguished Cavalry officers, he was far from satisfied that the subject had been fully exhausted, and he had undertaken to look into it, and compare it with certain other proposals which had been alluded to before next year's Estimate. The hon. and gallant Baronet said they should not have a Cavalry Reserve; but with the short service system it appeared desirable, and unless they retained the short service system in some form—and as the hon. and gallant Baronet had, in justice to the Government, pointed out, it bad been somewhat extended—they would not get soldiers at all. If they did get soldiers, it was necessary to retain them, so that their services would be at their disposal after the men had left the Colours. He (Mr. Childers), therefore, would be no party to throwing away the chance of forming an efficient Reserve; but he had not yet thoroughly considered the matter, consequently he would leave it for the present. In the same way he would pass over the suggestion that some of the Cavalry sent to Egypt were too heavy. They had sent three regiments of Native Cavalry from India to be associated with our own Cavalry, so that some would be light and some heavy. He did not by any means think it was an unwise measure to send certain squadrons of the Household Cavalry to Egypt, and those who were only accustomed to see these troops and horses in all their trappings would be surprised if they were told how considerably their weight had been reduced before they were sent out. No doubt it was necessary that they should have some
  990
  light Cavalry in Egypt; but it was by no means inconsistent with other expeditions made in that country that they should have a certain proportion of heavy Cavalry. And now he would refer to what the hon. and gallant Baronet had said with regard to the Reserves. The hon. and gallant Baronet had not quite accurately quoted what he (Mr. Childers) had said with regard to the necessity, under the present system—and almost under any system—of their having in the regiments a large number of young soldiers. Let the Committee remember the great change in this matter which had been gradually effected during the last few years. Formerly the Government used to sent out regiments to India pretty much as they were made up, containing a large proportion of young soldiers. A great deal of pressure had been put on the Government in that House and in India not to send young soldiers there, and after considerable discussion it was decided that no soldier should go to India as a recruit who was under a year's service, or under 20 years of age. But it was obvious that as the strength of the Line in England and abroad was about the same, if they sent none of the young soldiers to India they would have double their proportion at home. If they had formerly in the Army one-fifth young soldiers, when they cut the Army in two, and said in one half there should be no young soldiers, in the other half there must be two-fifths young soldiers, or double the number that it ought to have. The proportion of young soldiers in the Army at home was not nine-tenths, but two-fifths. Then the hon. and gallant Baronet very rightly complained that the state of the First Army Corps was not now, in the middle of 1882, what he had said last year he would bring it up to. But he had explained distinctly—he could almost remember the words he had used—that they could only raise battalions 600 strong to 1,000 strong by volunteering from other regiments, or by adding a certain number of recruits; and it was evident that as they had only had eight or nine months to build up their First Class Army Corps, till next year there must be an undue proportion of young soldiers. Every month, however, that state of things would be improved—as the year went on the number of young soldiers in the regiments of the

  991
  First Army Corps steadily diminished, and by this time next year the regiments would have reached their normal satisfactory condition. Those regiments at the top would have no recruits, and those below only a small proportion. But they could not do that all at once, and as they had to add men to bring the regiments up to their proper strength it was inevitable that they must at this moment have somewhat more young soldiers in the regiments than they would have when the regiments reached their normal condition. Even now, however, they had been able to send out to Egypt a First Army Corps without by any means taking 10,000 men from the Second Corps. The number of men it had been necessary to send out to Egypt to strengthen the regiments of the First Army Corps was under 2,000, and not 6,000, so that they had 10,000 men to depend upon—and he was happy to say that they turned out 99 per cent of the whole number. They would be able to send out between 2,000 and 3,000 men—besides these 2,000 he had mentioned—to form a Reserve in the Mediterranean to fill up gaps in the regiments they had sent out. Therefore, of the 10,000 men they had called out they would have 5,000 to fill up the regiments that would constitute the next Army Corps, if it were found necessary to form and send out another. They had been carefully preparing for the formation of the Second Army Corps should it be found necessary to put another Division in the field, and they would be able, out of the 5,000 men, to entirely fill up the gaps in the regiments forming that Division, still leaving a number of Army Reserve men to fill up' any other Divisions that might have to be formed. They had called out about 10,000 men in the First Army Corps, which would be sufficient for their present purposes, leaving about 18,000 more for a Second Corps if it became necessary to embody two Army Corps and to send more troops to the East. In addition to these men there was the Militia Reserve. That Reserve had not yet been touched, and, of course, it would not be touched until the First Army Reserve had been exhausted. The Militia Reserve approached something like 10,000 men, available for filling up the ranks of the Line. That would give something like 30,000 men; and then there was the Militia itself, comprising something like
  992
  50,000. He quite agreed with his hon. and gallant Friend as to the Militia itself, and he believed they had done several things which were in the right direction. The Militia at the present moment was in a most satisfactory condition, and he regarded it as a very valuable Reserve indeed. As to the Vote itself, his hon. and gallant Friend said Lord Cardwell had promised that by the year 1882 the strength of the Reserves should be 80,000 men. He had heard similar statements made before, and he had searched all through Lord Cardwell's speeches to find any confirmation of it; but he had been unable to find that on any occasion Lord Cardwell had promised that there should be anything of the kind. And for the very best reason; it was contrary to the nature of the Reserve system. Under that system, as administered by Lord Cardwell, they had as yet hardly a single Reserve man from the Artillery, and hardly a single Reserve man from the Cavalry; and the Line alone, up to the present moment, had fed the Reserve. He was happy to say that they had now reached a substantial condition, and that the 28,000 men of the Reserve had enabled them to complete all the arrangements for the East with satisfaction. There was one word which fell from his hon. and gallant Friend which he felt bound to dispute. His hon. and gallant Friend spoke of the long time the Government had taken to call out the Reserves. Now, he would remind the Committee that, if he was not mistaken, it was only on that day fortnight that the Vote of Credit was proposed, and it would only be upon Wednesday fortnight that Her Majesty's Proclamation calling out the Reserves was issued. Therefore, within a fortnight a great deal had been done. Those who spoke of Germany and other great Continental nations forgot the fact that in those countries the conscription existed, and that it was not necessary to send out the troops by sea. Their mechanism was the simplest in the world; everybody was bound to serve; everybody's address was known, and an Army Corps could be got together at a very short notice. But in this country it was necessary to accumulate large stores to equip the men, and to hire transports. Sixty transports had been sent out and would be sent out to the East during last week and this, and it required a

  993
  very complicated machinery to move a fully-equipped army to such a country as Egypt, 3,000 miles away. That machinery involved difficulties which were absolutely unknown to any foreign country. He had no wish to make any invidious comparison; but it would be remembered that France experienced extreme difficulty in mobilizing a small force for the Tunis Expedition a year ago, and an immense outcry was raised from one end of France to the other. It ought to be admitted, therefore, that in this country the War Office, with all the disadvantages they had to contend with, had been able, without friction and without noise, and with considerable rapidity, to send out to the East such an expedition as the necessities of the case demanded. He hoped he would be allowed to add that the Reserves ought not by any means to be depreciated, for they had undoubted in a time of trial proved to be eminently successful. Notwithstanding the comparatively small extent of the force of Reserves, it had been steadily increasing year by year, and at the present time its condition was entirely satisfactory. He trusted that now he bad answered the questions which had been put to him by his hon. and gallant Friend the Committee would be allowed to proceed to the Vote.
  SIR HENRY TYLERdesired to say a word or two as to the strength of the Essex Rifles, a question in which his own constituents were very much interested. The head-quarters of the regiment had been moved from Colchester to Warley, 40 or 50 miles away. The consequence was that the officers had great difficulty in keeping up the strength of the regiment. In consequence of the barracks at Warley being at so great a distance from the homes of the men, they found themselves unable to get recruits as they formerly did, and they considered their prospects in the future very bad, so far as the keeping up of their strength was concerned. They feared that it might dwindle away to very small dimensions indeed. The strength of the regiment in 1879–80 was 793; in 1880–1 it was 753; and in 1881–2 it had fallen to 699. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman would take the question into consideration, and be able to arrange that the head-quarters of the regiment should be removed back again
  994
  from Warley to Colchester. He was satisfied that if that were done the regiment would soon recover its former strength. The men had always borne a most excellent character, and he certainly thought the case was one which was worthy of the attention of the right hon. Gentleman.
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, there was one question of his hon. and gallant Friend (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) which he had omitted to answer. His hon. and gallant Friend inquired whether the men who had been sent out to the Mediterranean for active service included men who were under 20 years of age? He was glad to be able to say that there was not a single instance of the kind, and the battalions equipped for service in the field had gone out without a man under 20 years of age. It was, however, the fact that, as formerly, men under 20 had been sent out for garrison duty in the Mediterranean, at Malta and Gibraltar. No men had been sent out for active service in the field who were not seasoned soldiers.
  GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOURsaid, he was sorry to hear his hon. and gallant Friend (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) complain of the manner in which the Expedition to the East had been sent out. Personally, he felt bound to say, on this occasion, that he did not remember any Expedition that had been fitted out with more rapidity and been carried out with more ability, more smoothness, more carefulness, and more general satisfaction than the present one. Considering the shortness of the time since the War Office received the first warning that it might be actually necessary to move an Expeditionary Force and the period at which the actual removal was ordered to be effected, the Government deserved the highest commendation for the promptness in carrying out the orders. For some time after the intimation was first conveyed that; it might be necessary to despatch troops to the Mediterranean, there was still the hope that the necessity for carrying out the Expedition would not arise, and that the steps which were being taken would prove to be sufficient as simply measures of a precautionary character; but, on this idea not being realized, the men and horses were forthwith despatched in a state of greater completeness than on

  995
  former occasions. The hon. and gallant Member opposite had made some detracting remarks in reference to the Reserves. Now, he was bound to admit that he was not one of those who had ever taken a sanguine view in favour of Lord Cardwell's proposition. He thought a better plan would have been to adapt the arrangements for forming an Army Reserve to one more closely approaching the German system, without really resorting to the conscription. He had never believed that the Reserves would be got together in the rapid manner some persons anticipated. At the same time, he was now bound to say that the Reserves were even more considerable than he had ever expected; and the country had certainly never previously possessed a Reserve of men available for filling up the ranks of the Army to such an extent as they now had found under the working of Lord Cardwell's scheme. He was, therefore, now of opinion that Lord Cardwell deserved credit for his proposals, and the least the House of Commons could do was to give him credit for their fitness, as the present emergency proved. But he did not think the Reserves would go on increasing at any very rapid rate. The number of the Reserves must depend on the existence of quiet, and facilities for sending men out of active service. He did not believe that the recent changes in the time of service, both in India and at home, would enable them to keep up the supply of Reserves that was desirable for the Regular Army, and it was now an important question to consider whether some plan could not be devised for filling up more efficiently the strength of battalions. Those were kept up in a very attenuated state, ready, no doubt, to be raised to their full established strength, if men could be found: The waste of cadres was now very great, for we had 141 battalions, divided into 1,410 companies, with only about 97,000 privates; and of those fully 14,000 are withdrawn for lance-corporals, hand, pioneers, and other employments, leaving only 83,000 privates, and of those there were many inefficient. He was informed, by the Army Estimates, that 48 of the battalions at present at home were under 560 privates in established strength; and out of that number 37 battalions had only an average of 410 privates. And so long as we main-
  996
  tained upwards of 70 battalions in India and the Colonies, it was absolutely necessary to keep up the battalions at home at a higher standard than that at present fixed for the 48 battalions. On that ground alone, he had always been in favour of temporarily adding a large number of men to the Army, because he knew that in battalions of only 560 and 410 men they could not count upon having more than 460 and 300 effective. He maintained that no battalion at home ought to be kept with fewer than 600 privates effective for guard duties, exclusive of employed men—band, pioneers, acting corporals, and others. Hence he was of opinion that it would be a wise policy on the part of the House of Commons to increase, even if only for one year, the number of men set down for the present ordinary year's supply. They ought not to regard the cost, because in the state of Europe none of them could say how soon the services of every man they could get for the Army might not be required. He further hoped that the Secretary of State would make ample provision for securing the health and comfort of the soldiers in the field, and to this end that followers be attached to regiments in the field by employiug men so readily obtainable in Egypt. By this means the waste of our costly soldiers from being saved from fatigue duties in the burning sun of Egypt would be prevented; and he must now conclude by stating that he had certainly no fault to find at present with the War Office in connection with the present arrangements. He had never seen an Expedition carried out with such regularity and order as the present one.
  LORD EUSTACE CECILsaid, there were parts of the speech of the Secretary of State for War which he had been very glad to listen to. He was glad to hear that the Army was in such an efficient state, and that it had been possible to bring together an Army Corps of 30,000 men with such expedition. He was also glad to hear that no man had been sent on active service who was under 20 years of age. That was a question in which he had taken special interest for some years, and he was much gratified at the announcement which had been made. At the same time, he felt bound to express the disappointment with which he had listened to one part of the

  997
  speech of the Secretary of State for War. The right hon. Gentleman told them the number of men who were about to go to Egypt, and the number of Reserve men who were to go into the Force; but he had not told them how the men who were sent to Egypt were to be replaced. It must be borne in mind that the men sent to Egypt were all men taken from the fighting strength of the country; and he wished to draw the attention of his right hon. Friend to the position in which the Army was in 1879, and that in which it was in 1881, and now. He did not know whether he had given these figures before; but he had placed them on paper with the intention of bringing them forward upon a Vote of this kind, either in regard to the Reserves or to the Militia. He found that the number of Militia in training in 1879 was 115,000; in 1881 it was only 89,000, showing a difference of 26,000 to the bad. The number of Reserve men in 1880–1 of the First Class was 23,000, and of Class 2, 24,000, making a total of 47,000; whereas, in 1881, the total number of both classes was only 35,600, showing a difference of 11,400 men to the bad as compared with 1879. It would thus be seen that, taking the Reserve men and the Militia together, our resources, so far as the fighting strength of the country was concerned, had been reduced, since 1879, by no less than 37,000 men. No doubt his right hon. Friend would say that the Irish Militia had something to do with this result. He knew perfectly well that the Irish Militia had not been called out and trained. He would not go into the reason why they had not been called out and trained; but, such being the fact, he thought Parliament was bound to have full regard to that fact; and now that they were sending out a Force to Egypt, and, possibly, might be beginning a war, although he hoped the necessity for actual war would not arise—still, they knew in regard to Ireland that the country was very much in the condition it was six months ago, to say nothing of the troubles with the Constabulary, which they had heard of that day, and which he sincerely trusted would not be of long continuance. Under all these circumstances, he certainly thought the Government were bound to take into careful consideration any step that would have the effect of diminishing the fighting
  998
  strength of the country. What he thought the Secretary of State for War should have told them was that the Government were about to take steps either to embody the Militia, or to call out some more of the Reserve men. He was quite aware that that was a question of pounds, shillings, and pence; but he was quite aware, also, that the sum of £2,300,000 which the Government had asked for was a small sum indeed to cover all the expenses he was afraid the country would be put to during the next three months. But, however that might be—however the calculations of the Government might have been made—there was one calculation which he thought was more necessary than any other, and that was whether they were in a position to hold their own at home and abroad. He was, therefore, somewhat disappointed that his right hon. Friend had not stated that he was prepared—indeed, that he had already made arrangements for calling out a certain number of Militia regiments. It might be that their services might not be wanted; but he thought that they should be prepared at all points, and it was not sufficient to be satisfied with what had already been done. They should not be satisfied unless they had another Army Corps ready to take the field. He should like to draw the attention of his right hon. Friend to a very remarkable article which appeared in The Times newspaper not very long ago. He did not propose to read the article, although he had extracts from it in his hand. It appeared in The Times on the 4th of July, and it stated with regard to the Second Army Corps that of the 13 regiments which were to compose the Corps there were not more than 200 effective men in each. Now, that was a very serious statement indeed; but there were a great many serious statements contained in the article, and it had evidently been written under the inspiration of somebody who knew something about the matter, and who desired to make a revelation as to the actual state of things. He only hoped that the information contained in the article would turn out not to be true. But, however that might be, what had occurred at home and abroad since then, and the position in which they found themselves at that moment, really necessitated some consideration of the difficulty they would ex-

  999
  perience if any further calls were made upon their fighting force. He trusted that either now or to-morrow, when his right hon. and gallant Friend the Member for North Lancashire (Colonel Stanley) put his Question on the subject of the Militia, his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for War would be prepared to make a statement which would satisfy everybody that, at all events, he was fully alive to the very critical position in which the country was placed.
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, he would reply to the questions of his noble Friend at once. In regard to the Militia, he would be able to give some facts in reply to the right hon. and gallant Member for North Lancashire (Colonel Stanley) tomorrow which would show how close they had at hand a force which they could at once embody in the case of necessity. With respect to the Army Reserve, he thought the noble Lord had forgotten what the rule now was. The Second Army Reserve consisted practically of the old enrolled pensioners, and they had run down in number very considerably of late years. They had been allowed to run down, because by law every pensioner was now liable to be called out; and it was, therefore, quite unnecessary to keep up a mere paper Second Class Reserve. On the other hand, the First Class Army Reserve had increased very considerably. Under the system which he had explained last year they were now sending into the Reserve a large number of men after four or five years' service who would not be eligible for service abroad. If it were necessary, the Government would not scruple to advise Her Majesty to call out both the Militia Reserve and the rest of the First Class Army Reserve, which would place at the disposal of the country some 40,000 to 50,000 men.
  SIR HARRY VERNEYremarked, that the country was now engaged in what might become a very serious war; and he was sure that everyone who was anxious for the welfare of the Army would give a careful consideration to every point of importance. The Medical Department of the Army had shown neglect, and ought to be carefully provided; and one of the most important subjects for consideration was that medical men should be attached to the regiments, and not to the stations. No-
  1000
  thing could be of higher importance to the welfare and health of the Army than to make some provision of that kind.
  THE CHAIRMAN: I must point out to the hon. Baronet that the Vote now before the Committee is that for the Army Reserve Force, and not the Medical Vote at all.
  SIR HARRY VERNEY: Then it would be irregular to raise any question in regard to the services of the Medical Staff upon this Vote?
  THE CHAIRMAN: Yes; we are not at present upon the Medical Vote.
  SIR ROBERT LOYD LINDSAYsaid, it was no doubt the fact, as had been pointed out by his hon. and gallant Friend behind him (Sir Walter B. Barttelot), that the Army Reserve did not grow up as fast as they had hoped it would. He had always contended, that this principle of having an Army Reserve was the right principle. In these days it was essential it should be placed upon such a footing that it could be rapidly expanded in the event of war. His own feeling in the matter was that in the course of a few years they ought to have an Army Reserve of at least 50,000 men. At one time he thought that that result was highly probable; but, unfortunately, the national emergency which had come upon them had dispelled his hopes. Carrying his recollection back to the time when troops were sent out to South Africa, he found that precisely the same thing happened then. The Army Reserves were called out, and again their hopes of seeing the Army Reserve grow were dispelled. The principle was, nevertheless, a sound principle, and he trusted that some mode would yet be adopted by which the Reserve might be further expanded. Before now, he had ventured, both inside and outside the House, to recommend that in the existing Volunteer Force a certain Reserve would be found which would be a most valuable force in the event of an emergency arising. Personally, he had the strongest conviction on the point; but he regretted to say that his brother Volunteer officers did not share in that feeling. Indeed, he knew that his noble Friend on his left (Lord Elcho) had taken a most unreasonable view of the matter. He regretted to say that many other Volunteer officers had followed his noble Friend, and he

  1001
  was obliged to confess that he had not received much support in the view he had put forward as to the Volunteers forming a Reserve. Therefore he would not enlarge further upon the matter now, but would wait until his noble Friend, and those who thought with him, became a little more sensible in regard to the matter. There was another question which he was also desirous of raising. The first source from which the Army Reserve was supplied was men who had served six or seven years with the Colours; the second source to which they looked for a Reserve was the Militia. To the Militia he should like to be able to add the Volunteers; but, not being able to do that, he asked the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War to consider whether it was not expedient to feed this Reserve from some other source, and, if so, then the source of which he might well avail himself was the open market. Let any man who could pass an examination in drill, who could show a good physique, and come up to a certain standard in drill, had a good constitution, and should show a good character, appear before any officer the Commander-in-Chief chose to name,—perhaps the colonels commanding the regimental districts—and if they could show that they had been fairly instructed and had a good physique, there was no reason whatever why they should not be included in the Army Reserve. They would draw, he presumed, the pay which an Army Reserve man had, of 6d. a-day, and such men would have the advantage of being able to carry on the ordinary businesses of life. Of course, it was essential that they should not take away men from their ordinary occupations to serve in the Army if there was any help for it. In this way he was quite satisfied that they would be able to get the services of a class of men whom it would be most useful in case of an emergency to pass into the Army. They had, all over the country, a most perfect system of drill instruction, with most intelligent men as colonels, and under them most able adjutants, and a large number of efficient non-commissioned officers, now engaged in instructing the Militia and instructing the Volunteers. If men of this kind were passed into the Army Reserve, they would soon have a very large force,
  1002
  and he believed there would be no difficulty in getting persons who were desirous of doing so to join the Army Reserve in the way he had suggested. There was one advantage in this system—namely, that if the right hon. Gentleman could only show a Reserve of 50,000 men, he would be able still further to extend the period of service, with the Colours. The service at present with the Colours was seven years, and by the adoption of this plan they would be able to add another year's service, which, he believed, would be hailed by a number of Members of that House, who were officers in the Army, as a great boon. As there were so many advantages to be derived from service with the Colours, he thought the Government might go one step further, and make the service with the Colours eight years instead of seven. He could see no drawback to the proposal. The only reason why it was found necessary to send men so early into the Reserve from the Colours was that they wanted the Reserves to grow up. If, however, they could obtain men for the Reserves from other sources, the necessity which now existed of sending men early into the Reserves would be done away with. He did not think it was creditable to their Army administration that, with the large expenditure of £.15,000,000 or £16,000,000 a-year upon the Army, it should require any great exertion to send out an Army Corps, properly equipped, for the war. No doubt, as the right hon. Gentleman said, the Second Army Corps was gradually coming forward, and might soon be in a condition to be sent out, and even a Second Army Corps would be but a very small proportion for the Army to be able to put in the field. He believed there was no more economical way of largely extending their Reserves, and not only was it the most economical way, but it was the most efficient. He was delighted to find that the Reserves were coming up as they were. The men came up most zealously, and in some cases men who had not even been called up had appeared. He thought this was a most encouraging fact; and, for his own part, he was pleased to see it. He must, however, admit that the Army Reserve grew up at an extremely slow pace, and unless something was done to feed it, it would never reach the strength it ought

  1003
  to be. The difficulty lay in the question of strengthening the Reserves, and he believed the plan he had mentioned would be found to work satisfactorily.
  LORD ELCHOremarked, that if he had not been referred to by his hon. and gallant Friend who had just sat down, and by the hon. and gallant Gentleman opposite (Sir George Balfour), he did not think he should have troubled the Committee with any remarks. He considered it necessary, however, to say a word in reference to what had fallen from them. In the first place, he thought the Committee were greatly indebted to his hon. and gallant Friend, behind him (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) for having brought these subjects before the Committee. As the Secretary of State said, the Committee were always glad to hear what his hon. and gallant Friend had to say in regard to the Army, because the remarks of his hon. and gallant Friend, as a rule, were most instructive. The first point raised by his hon. and gallant Friend was the question of the employment in Egypt of big horses; and he (Lord Elcho) had been glad to hear what the Secretary of State had to say about the Life Guards and Blues. The horses had been a subject of much comment, and even of a caricature in St. James Street along with other remarkable caricatures. He had heard men belonging to the Horse Artillery say that, owing to the stride of the horses and their strength, the Blues and Guards worked more quickly with the artillery than any other mounted regiments. Whether they would be able to do that in a climate so materially different from that of this country he did not pretend to say. They were large men and large horses; but the public must not run away with the idea that they were not active and not up to their work. The present discussion had turned upon the question of the Reserves. That really was the whole Army question at this moment. In the year 1870, when Lord Card well introduced his reforms, he practically, in a great measure, got rid of the first line with a view of forming a second line. He maintained that Lord Cardwell had promised them that in the year 1882 they should have a Reserve of 80,000 men. It might not be in Hansard, but he was as certain as he could be of anything that he had heard Lord
  1004
  Cardwell state in that House that the actuaries, by an actuarial calculation, which was a favourite term of Lord Cardwell, had clearly shown that by a certain year—and his impression was that it was the year in which he was now speaking, 1882, although he would not say it was not even 1880—they would have 80,000 men in the Reserves. But whether it was 80,000 or only half that number—namely, 40,000—the intentions of Lord Cardwell had been defeated, and the Reserves, so far as the numbers were concerned, were a signal failure. At the outside, they had only at this moment 26,000 or 28,000. [Mr. CHILDERS dissented.] The right hon. Gentleman shook his head; but they had heard that statement distinctly from the right hon. Gentleman himself, that the Reserves of the Army proper were 28,000. The reason why the scheme had not proved successful was because it had been begun on a wrong footing. If Lord Cardwell had wished the Army Reserves to grow rapidly, what was it he should have done? He should have filled up every existing regiment to its full normal complement, so as to have something from which the Reserves could grow; instead of which, the regiments had been cut down to 500 men as their greatest strength. They had not even been acting like the Irishman who cut off one end of his blanket in order to lengthen the other, for Lord Cardwell had cut off the numerical strength at one end and had not put it on the other. The hon. and gallant General opposite (Sir George Balfour) confessed that he had been somewhat disappointed in the result, and believed that the only satisfactory way would be to adopt the system of conscription. [Sir GEORGE BALFOUR: No.] Well, the hon. and gallant Gentleman referred to that result, and was understood to say that he (Lord Elcho) was in favour of conscription. Now, he wished to state that he had never said a word in that House at any time, although he had taken great interest in Army matters, in favour of conscription. He believed that conscription for the Army was utterly impossible, and was never to be thought of in connection with this country. What he had advocated, and still advocated, and what he believed to be the only sound basis of any system of

  1005
  Army Reserve, was not conscription, but the enforcement of the old military law of the country for home service in the Militia, accompanied by voluntary enlistment into the Army. Whatever they did as regards Army service, they must still look to the Militia as the real basis and backbone of the British Army, and service in the Militia should be made compulsory. Until the Secretary of State for War had the courage to come down to the House with a proposition to revive the old military law of compulsory service in the Militia, and until the ex-Secretary of State for War agreed not to oppose the right hon. Gentleman if he made that proposition, they never would have an efficient Army Reserve. His impression was that the old system was a just one, and that with an extensive Militia Reserve they would soon have an Army of sufficient magnitude for any purpose they could desire. He did not believe they would ever have a sound and sufficient Army Reserve until they adopted some such system. The right hon. Gentleman had promised to look into the whole question. Of course, a time of actual war was not the time for endeavouring to show where their system was not effective; but he hoped his right hon. Friend would carefully inquire into the subject whether he adopted the system of ballot or not. He believed the right hon. Gentleman would soon find that the Militia was the real Reserve for keeping up the strength of the Army, and in order to render it available they must keep it up to its full strength, which unquestionably it was not at the present moment. He had nothing further to say except to refer to what had been said by his hon. and gallant Friend on his right (Sir Robert Loyd Lindsay). There was no more gallant Officer or more efficient Volunteer, or one better acquainted with Volunteer matters than his hon. and gallant Friend; but upon this question of obtaining a Reserve for the Army by getting a certain number of Volunteers to inscribe their names either as regiments or individuals as willing to join the Army when occasion might require, he (Lord Elcho) entirely differed. He admitted that they might get together some 10,000 or 20,000; but they would run the risk of losing 200,000
  1006
  who were serving for home defence. He would greatly prefer that matters should stand as they did. His hon. and gallant Friend said that he did not propose at present to press this point, but that he would wait until his brother Volunteer officers became more reasonable on this question. He (Lord Elcho) did not think, as far as he knew their feeling, that the Volunteer officers were likely to come round to the view of his hon. and gallant Friend. At any rate, any hon. Member who took an interest in the question would find that it had been thoroughly threshed out before the Committee on which his hon. and gallant Friend sat; and lie (Lord Elcho), as he had been put through his facings by that Committee, was perfectly prepared to abide by the decision at which they had arrived.
  SIR ARTHUR HAYTERsaid, the hon. and gallant Member for Harwich (Sir Henry Tyler) had asked the reason of the transfer of the Essex Rifles from Colchester to Warley. The reason was that they should have the same depôt centre as their relief battalions, the 22nd and the 44th. The hon. and gallant Gentleman said that the transference had been injurious to the recruiting. No such result had been reported to the War Office by General Bulwer. It was found that out of the total number of recruits raised last year, about 58 per cent were raised in the territorial districts; and the reason was that the regiments which the recruits joined formed part of a territorial system, each regiment being identified with a particular district. The Report went on to state that it was intended to follow up the same system with regard to the Artillery and the Cavalry. It was found necessary, in order to complete the territorial system in Essex, to transfer the Essex Rifles from Colchester to Warley, in order to amalgamate the regimental head-quarters with their linked battalion. The transfer had been made in accordance with the recommendation of the Committee of 1872.
  SIR HENRY TYLERsaid, he quite understood that it was part of the general plan; but this particular regiment was practically raised from the Eastern Division of the county in which it had its head-quarters, but it had now been moved to the Western Division of

  1007
  the county, with which it had previously had no connection; and the result, he was informed, had been very injurious to the recruiting.
  MR. ONSLOWwished to put one question to the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War. He was sorry he was not in the House when the right hon. Gentleman made his speech; but he understood that the right hon. Gentleman had stated that 26,000 or 28,000 Reserves had been called out. [Mr. CHILDERS: No, no!] Was that the whole strength of the Reserves? [Mr. CHILDERS: Yes.] Then he should be glad to know how many of these 26,000 or 28,000 men would actually come out?
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, he had already stated the number who had responded to the call made upon them; and the response had been in the highest degree satisfactory.
  MR. ONSLOWcould only repeat that he was very sorry he was absent when the right hon. Gentleman made his speech.
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, the Government had called out the other day all those who had joined the Reserves since 1881, with the exception of certain men belonging to the Irish Constabulary, and a few others whom it would have been inconvenient to call upon. Out of the whole number called out, 11,300, or, to be strictly accurate, 11,297 had joined. A number of these would join the Colours in Egypt, and a certain number would be employed in making up the strength of other regiments left at home.
  MR. ONSLOWwished to ask the right hon. Gentleman if he could not see his way to require that more of the Army Reserve men should actually join the Colours for service abroad? It had come to his knowledge that many of those who had been called out in the Reserves would join the depots of their regiments, and would, in all probability, never he sent to Egypt or anywhere else. It appeared to him that they should get the best soldiers they could, and that they should not send young and inexperienced troops to the front. He would, therefore, ask the right hon. Gentleman if he would not provide that men who were being called out for the Army Reserve should not stop at home in this country
  1008
  with the depôts or go to Ireland, but should at once be sent out to join the Colours in Egypt. There was another thing it was also necessary he should mention. He happened to know, of his own personal knowledge, that many of those who had joined the Army Reserve fully believed that they were only going to join for 38, or, at the most, 56 days. How such a report had got spread abroad he could not make out; but it was a fact which he knew of his own knowledge. Many of the Reserve men believed that they were not to be called to the front at all, but that they would either have to join their regiment—it might be in Ireland or in some other part of the country—or have to stop with their depot. Now he maintained that it would be far better to send all the men of the Army Reserve, who were men of experience, to the front, and do away with some of the young soldiers. It would be most unfortunate if the country were deprived of the services and the inestimable value of men who had had ample training and were thoroughly seasoned soldiers. The young soldiers might be kept in this country for further training.
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, he could only repeat what he had expressly stated before, that no young soldiers would be sent for active service to Egypt. The battalions which were now going to Egypt had been very well constituted. Two thousand of the Reserves who had been called out would go to the Mediterranean at once. Of the rest, a considerable portion would go to their own county regiments, which was a very popular matter with the Reserve. There was nothing a Reserve man liked so much as to find himself in his own county regiment. All the details of the employment of the Reserves had been elaborated with great care, and everything had been done which would tend to popularize the calling out of the Reserves.
  MR. ANDERSONsaid, he had not intended to say anything in the course of the debate, and he should not have done so but for the remarks of the noble Lord opposite (Lord Elcho), who recommended the establishment of compulsory service for the Militia. He felt bound to enter his strongest protest against any such scheme as that. So far as he was acquainted with the working men of this

  1009
  country in the large constituencies, he knew very well that they would not tolerate anything of the kind. They were not only not enamoured of the principle of compulsory service, but he was satisfied they would never tolerate it; and if the time ever came, which he hoped it would not, when the services of the people were needed for coast defence, such a thing as compulsory service or conscription would not be at all necessary. In such an emergency working men would be quite ready to turn out, without being compelled to do so. He could not believe the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Childers) had any such idea, or that even the right hon. and gallant Gentleman opposite (Colonel Stanley) entertained such an idea; but he begged to say that if they had they would receive the most strenuous opposition from the working men of the country.
  COLONEL CARINGTONremarked, that he happened to go into the Post Office the other day, when he saw a Circular inviting the Reserve men to volunteer for the Colonies. Now, he thought that that was by no means a wise course, because, as far as he could make out, all the men who responded to the invitation would necessarily be taken from the Queen's Service and placed under the Colonial authorities. It rather sanctioned the belief, and there could be nothing more unfavourable for them, that the Reserve men experienced great difficulty in obtaining employment in civil life. Nothing, in his opinion, could be more injurious to the Service generally.
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, his answer to his hon. and gallant Friend was that the Circular referred to was sanctioned with a view of encouraging the Cape Colony in the very great sacrifices it was now making in regard to its military arrangements, towards the expense of which this country was not called upon to contribute one farthing. It was considered desirable that there should be a nucleus formed out of the Reserve for a local Force at the Cape. Three hundred men out of the 28,000 which constituted the Reserve were allowed to volunteer for service at the Cape, and leave had already been given to about 200.
  Vote agreed to.
  (3.) £394,300, Commissariat, Transport, and Ordnance Store Establishments.
  MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORsaid, he wished to put a question to the Secretary of State for War upon this Vote in connection with the present Expedition. In almost every one of the Expeditions of the last half century there had been, at first, at any rate, a breakdown in the Transport Service. In the first Afghan War, in the Afghan War of more recent occurrence, in the War at the Cape, in the Crimean War, and in almost every Expedition of any size, with the exception of the Red River Expedition and Lord Napier's advance upon Abyssinia, there had been a lamentable breakdown of the Transport Service. There could be no place in which the Transport Service was of more consequence than in Egypt, especially at this particular time of the year. So far the Service appeared to have performed its duty very well; but he was somewhat at a loss to ascertain how it could be known that the present Expedition was thoroughly equipped with everything necessary for an efficient Transport Service if the troops were to be left on the coast of the Mediterranean in the North of Egypt, with a large portion of the country flooded, it might be, by the action of the Egyptians? If such a thing occurred, they would find themselves detained in one of the most unhealthy places in the world, and many of them, in the end, would die in these Porbonian bogs. The present week or the next 10 days would be of the utmost consequence in the matter of transport, and he believed there were many officers in England at this moment who had evil forebodings as to the satisfactory working of the Transport Service which had been provided for the Army.
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, he thought it would be imprudent on his part to enter into any explanation of the steps which had been taken by the Government to secure the efficient working of the Transport Service, in the constitution of which peculiar difficulties were anticipated.
  GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOURsaid, he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would bear in mind the necessity of providing proper means of transport during the operations about to take place in

  1011
  Egypt. Those who were practically acquainted with that country would know perfectly well the great need there was of having a sufficient number of camels for transport purposes. All would remember the many thousands of camels which the Bedouin Tribes supplied for the transport of the goods and luggage before the Railway and Canal were opened. He therefore tendered the advice to the War Office that they should get early possession of a large number of those animals, by entering into timely contracts with the Chiefs of the Tribes, who, formerly, and he understood still, were most friendly to the English. Good rates paid for camels for use, and compensation money for deaths, would attract ample supplies of those useful animals.
  LORD EUSTACE CECILsaid, his experience always caused him a considerable amount of anxiety at times like the present, with regard to the Commissariat and Transport Departments. So much depended upon the wants of the Army in this respect being efficiently supplied that he trusted the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War would be able to make a satisfactory statement to the Committee as to the working of the new Commissariat system, under which, as it was decided a short time ago, Army officers were to be admitted to this branch of the Service. He desired to know whether, under that system, good and efficient Army officers were coming forward in the requisite numbers? The subject was an important one, for this reason—if they did not secure the services of a sufficient number of Army officers, that was to say, if Army officers did not come forward in sufficient numbers at a critical time like the present, through their services being required in the regiments to which they belonged, our Commissariat and Transport Services would run great risk of breaking down. He remembered that in the time of the Crimean War a great deal of difficulty arose from the fact that a number of officers who had been asked to serve in the Commissariat felt it their duty to resign their commissions in that branch and join their regiments, which were ordered to the front. He hoped that nothing of that kind would be allowed to occur again in any expedition in
  1012
  which we were engaged. He again expressed the hope that Army officers were coming forward in sufficient numbers for the Service, and that it was clearly understood they were to remain with the new Service they had elected to join instead of rejoining their old regiments.
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, he was able to assure the noble Lord opposite that the new Commissariat system was working very well. There was no difficulty whatever with regard to obtaining the services of an adequate number of Army officers for this branch; of course, on the understanding with the officers that they would not be allowed to change their minds, and go back to the regiments they had left.
  COLONEL NOLANsaid, the noble Lord the Member for West Essex (Lord Eustace Cecil) had drawn attention to an important point in connection with the officers of the Commissariat branch. The present Vote afforded also the opportunity of calling the attention of the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War to the position of another class of officers, who were very generally neglected by the authorities at the War Office. He referred to the officers of the Ordnance Store Establishment, a body of men having almost the same duties to perform as the officers of the Commissariat, the only difference being that the former were responsible for the supply of food, and the latter for the supply of ammunition and other matériel to the Army. There was no doubt that these officers had been very much neglected; and he believed the reason of this was that, unlike the Commissariat Establishment, who had a representative officer at the War Office, they had no officer to look after their interests. Everyone knew, and he had always found it to be the case in practice, that where a body of officers of any corps had a representative at the War Office, they were sure to get more consideration shown to them than officers who had no such representative. The subject to which he called attention was not a new one, and it had already been brought forward in that House, and the neglect complained of had extended over the last 21 years. In 1877 an inquiry had been instituted into the position of the Ordnance Store officers, and the Com-

  1013
  mittee reported strongly in favour of the redress of the grievance which was acknowledged to exist. He (Colonel Nolan) brought the matter before the House in 1879. At the time it was admitted by the Surveyor General that the officers had a reasonable ground of complaint; that a feeling of soreness had teen raised with respect to several matters, and that the authorities would remove the grievances of the officers as far as possible. A promise was actually made that the grievance, which consisted chiefly in the fact that the Ordnance Store officers received a less rate of pay and lower rank than the officers in the Commissariat, should be redressed. He admitted that the noble Lord (Lord Eustace Cecil) had taken some very considerable steps in that direction; but he was bound to say he had not gone far enough, and that he had left a great deal to be done by the present Secretary of State for War; and he thought that right hon. Gentleman should go thoroughly into the case of the officers in question, which had been looked after by the Surveyor General under the late Administration. The difficulty with regard to the Surveyor General's plan of dealing with the subject was that under it the men of the Service had to serve so long that they were in a lower position than the officers of the Commissariat Department; and, consequently, when he gave them the same rank as the Commissariat officers, they were still receiving much less pay than the latter. In May, 1882, there were 55 Commissariat officers of eight and a-half years' service as compared with 48 Ordnance Store officers; the number of officers of the equivalent rank of captain being pretty nearly equal. But at the next step a great change took place, and it appeared that there were in the Commissariat 43 officers having the equivalent rank of major, drawing 18 s. a-day, as compared with 27 officers only in the Ordnance Store Establishment of the same rank. Moreover, the latter had 27 years' service, as compared with 23 years in the case of the Commissariat officers. Then in the case of the equivalent rank of lieutenant colonel the disparity was enormous, because there were 18 officers of this rank in the Commissariat, and five only in the Ordnance Store branch. It was clear from this statement that it
  1014
  took the Ordnance Store officer a much longer time than it did the Commissariat officer to get to the ranks where he would be better paid. He acknowledged that this grievance would die out in about 20 years under the arrangement effected by the noble Lord opposite; but his point was that a very great disparity existed between the officers of the two Establishments at the present time, which, in his opinion, it was desirable in the interest of the Service to remove. Not only was the question of pay involved in these disparities, but the question of pensions also; and, as matters now stood, the officers in the Ordnance Department would be retired at a lower rank than the officers of the Commissariat, and would consequently receive smaller pensions. He had no desire unduly to occupy the time of the Committee in calling attention to this subject; but he regarded the grievance of the Ordnance Store officers as one of a special character, which should be brought before the Secretary of State for War in the hope that he would do something to remedy it. He admitted that when the country was at war it was not exactly the time to look into these matters; but, on the other hand, in times of peace, the interest of the soldier was very little thought about, so perhaps, after all, the moment was not inopportune for bringing forward this well-founded grievance. He trusted the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War would compare the conditions of service in the two corps, and consider whether, in respect of pay and promotion, they might not now be placed on an equal footing. As far as he was aware, there was no reason why any difference should exist to the disadvantage of the Ordnance Store officers, inasmuch as the stores they had to look after were, if anything, more important than those under the control of the officers of the Commissiariat Establishment.
  MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORsaid, his hon. and gallant Friend (Colonel Nolan) had called the attention of the Committee and the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War to a subject which he (Mr. Arthur O'Connor) had brought forward in Committee last year. On that occasion the Secretary of State for War promised that he would

  1015
  make inquiries and endeavour to secure the carrying out of the promises of the Surveyor General and the noble Lord on the Front Opposition Bench (Lord Eustace Cecil). He did not know whether anything had been done in that direction or not. But the grievances complained of were just as real and substantial now as they were when last brought forward; and on comparing the two branches, whose services were very much of the same kind, he found that the officers of the Commissariat who had only eight and a-half years' service were receiving as much pay as the officers of the Ordnance Store Establishment who had served considerably longer; that whereas Commissariat officers of 18 years' service were receiving 18 s. a-day, Ordnance Store officers who had served five years longer were only receiving the same rate of pay. Again, an officer of the Ordnance Store Department who had 27½ years' service did not get more than 22 s. a-day; but 27 years' service in the Commissariat branch would secure a man 30 s. a-day and the rank of lieutenant colonel, which was a grade higher than the same period of service would secure for an officer in the Ordnance Corps. It could not, he thought, be denied that these disparities constituted a great and substantial grievance, and called for attention and redress on the part of the authorities at the War Office. But there was another point as to which the Ordnance Store officers complained, and complained now with very great reason, seeing that the country was engaged in war—they complained that they were deprived of titular rank. As an outsider, he was, perhaps, not able to realize the amount of importance which a military man attached to a matter of that kind; but he believed the officers of the Ordnance branch were very sore from the refusal of the authorities to extend to them this titular as well as regimental rank. There were men of long military service in charge of most important branches of the Establishment—men of the rank of major in the Army, who, under the present system were allowed only the title of "Mr." Now, that must not only create a natural feeling of disappointment in the minds of the officers concerned, but, as many military officers, Sir Garnet Wolseley amongst others,
  1016
  concurred in stating, the system carried with it some serious disadvantages in connection with discipline. Soldiers did not recognize the title of "Mr.;" but they would recognize a title which showed at once that the possessor of it was a man of military rank. Having shown, following upon the speech of the hon. and gallant Member opposite (Colonel Nolan), that there still existed well-founded causes of complaint on the part of the Ordnance Store officers, he held that in both these respects they were entitled to demand some substantial fulfilment of the promises given by the late Surveyor General, and to this subject he invited the serious attention of the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War.
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, it was necessarily extremely difficult, in matters of this kind, to give complete satisfaction to those interested; but he had always taken care, where two branches of the Service were concerned whose duties were of a similar character, to see that the various ranks were fairly apportioned between the two Establishments. Now, it was precisely on that principle that the regulations with regard to the officers in the Commissariat and those in the Ordnance Store branch had been made, although he was obliged to admit that if any difference whatever existed between the two Corps in this respect, the officers in the Ordnance Store Establishment had rather the advantage. The pay was the same and the relative rank was the same in both Corps; and, that being so, he was unable to perceive what change could be made. No doubt there was this difficulty, that in adding to the Ordnance Corps older men presented themselves than in the case of the Commissariat Corps. But this was a matter of accident, which must be left to adjust itself. He could not agree to the principle that a higher rate of pay should be given in a Department because the officers engaged in it were older than the officers in another Department receiving the same amount of pay. If that were admitted, the authorities would be called upon to alter the rates of pay in other branches of the Service. He was bound to say, having given the subject due attention, that he could see no remedy for this portion of the complaints put forward by the hon.

  1017
  and gallant Member for Gal way (Colonel Nolan) and the hon. Member for Queen's County (Mr. Arthur O'Connor) that would not produce greater evil than it was intended to remove. With regard to the question of titular rank, although he knew that officers performing duties of this kind as a rule had no titular rank, the direction indicated by the hon. Member for Queen's County was not one in which he should like to move, because, speaking from recollection of what had taken place in the last 20 years, his impression was that already too much had been done in the way of applying military titles to civilians engaged in various branches of the Service.
  LORD EUSTACE CECILsaid, he had sympathized very much with the officers of the Ordnance Store Department, and under the late Administration a great portion of his time and that of gentlemen under him had been taken up in endeavouring to ascertain, and, if possible, to remedy the grievances in question. Now, with reference to the question of titular rank, there was a strong feeling at the time in the Army itself that gentlemen employed in civil duties ought not to possess military titles, and it was felt that if these titles were extended to persons employed in the Ordnance Store Department they must also be extended to other civil branches of the Army. For instance, there was no reason why, on this principle, doctors and chaplains in the Army should not have titular rank; if it was extended in one direction there was no reason why it should not be extended in another. He was entirely in favour of Army officers maintaining their military rank, and it was fully recognized under the late Administration that the titles which Army officers in the Ordnance Department possessed should not be taken away from them. But the case of pure civilians who had no such rank was entirely a different matter. It was felt—and his experience confirmed it—that neither in the British Army nor in any other Army could titular rank be held by civilians; and, therefore, the only thing that could be done under the circumstances was to confirm the relative rank.
  COLONEL ALEXANDERsaid, he had listened with interest to the arguments advanced for and against giving titular
  1018
  rank to officers in the Ordnance Store Department, and he was bound to say he was unable to agree with the view expressed by the noble Lord who had just spoken. On the other hand, he felt very much the truth of what had been said by the hon. Member for Queen's County (Mr. Arthur O'Connor). He believed that it was desirable in the interest of the Service that titular rank should be conferred in the case of officers who had duties to discharge of the kind which belonged to the officers of the Ordnance Store Department; and he had, moreover, been frequently assured by quartermasters that titular rank was regarded as even of more importance than increase of pay.
  LORD EUSTACE CECILsaid, the hon. and gallant Member for South Ayrshire (Colonel Alexander), in referring to quartermasters, was speaking of men who belonged to the Army. His statement was that in the case of civilians there was no reason for giving titular rank.
  COLONEL NOLANsaid, he wished to add one or two observations to the discussion before the Vote was finally put from the Chair. The right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War, in replying upon this question of the Ordnance Store officers, had stated that the number of men in the lower ranks of the Commissariat and Ordnance Departments being the same, the disparity of promotion as between the two Corps would in the course of time disappear. He quite agreed that this might be the case, and it was very desirable that the right hon. Gentleman's expectation should prove to be correct; but the prospect afforded little or no consolation to men who were now debarred from promotion by the causes he had pointed out. The figures he had quoted showed that the Ordnance Corps had only five men of the relative rank of lieutenant colonel as against 13 men of the same rank in the Commissariat; they were a conclusive proof that the Ordnance Store officers were very much in arrear at the present time in the matter of promotion, and consequently in respect of pay. He had shown that a feeling of soreness existed amongst the men, and that this arose partly from their being kept so long in inferior positions while changes were made above them. But, besides that, it had been the custom to bring into the Ordnance Corps a certain

  1019
  number of Army officers from other Corps and to place them in the higher ranks. For instance, three officers had been brought in from the Artillery at one time, and although he did not mean to say that it was not right to do so, yet the Committee would understand that the practice necessarily interfered with promotion so far as the other officers of the Corps were concerned. Now, nothing of that kind ever occurred in the Commissariat; all who joined that Corps went into the bottom ranks. This circumstance, taken in connection with the figures he had laid before the Committee, showed that the officers of the Ordnance Corps were very much in arrear in point of promotion and pay; and, therefore, he trusted the fact would not be lost sight of by the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War.
  Vote agreed to.
  (4.) £734,000, Clothing Establishments, Services, and Supplies.
  LORD ELCHObelieved he was correct in saying that the English troops sent to Egypt were clothed in red, but that if the authorities had had the material they would have been sent out in grey. If he remembered rightly, the troops that served in India were not dressed in red, but in a dust-coloured material called karkee; and he could not help thinking it would be desirable that the Ordnance Stores Department should keep a supply of this cloth for future use, so that when our troops were sent to hot climates they might be clothed in a manner suited to the country in which they had to serve.
  LORD EUSTACE CECILasked if there was any intention on the part of the War Office authorities to alter the colour of the Army dress?
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, the Committee which sat to consider the colour of the Army dress had not yet made their Report; and, therefore, no decision had been arrived at upon the question suggested by the noble Lord the Member for West Essex (Lord Eustace Cecil). With regard to the point raised by the noble Lord the Member for Haddingtonshire, the subject had not been overlooked, and he believed a large quantity of karkee had been sent out.
  LORD ELCHOsaid, he felt some anxiety also about the fit of the uniform. It was most desirable that a soldier
  1020
  should be able to move without splitting his clothes.
  MR. CHILDERSassured the noble Lord the uniform fitted much more loosely than it used to do.
  Vote agreed to.
  (5.) £1,289,500, Supply, Manufacture, and Repair of Warlike Stores.
  MR. W. H. SMITHdesired to have some information as to the supply of Naval guns provided for under this Vote. It would be in the recollection of the Committee that, at an earlier period of the Session, in the discussion which took place on the Army Estimates this matter had been very lightly touched upon, the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War merely remarking, with regard to the large sum for which provision was made in the Estimate, that it would hereafter be the subject of a statement to be made by the right hon. Gentleman the present Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant. As a matter of fact, the right hon. Gentleman left to the Chief Secretary the duty of explaining in detail the provision made in the Military Estimates for guns to be supplied to the Navy. But when the Navy Estimates came forward in Committee a few nights ago, the hon. Gentleman in charge of them, while stating that provision had been made for the Navy ordnance in the Army Estimates, could give him little or no information on the subject. It would be in the recollection of his right hon. Friend that provision was made last year for 119 guns, 103 of which were 6-inch guns, eight of 11½ tons, and eight of them guns of 18 tons. But he understood that out of the whole 119 only 32 had been delivered, and that these were 6-inch guns, none of the 11½-ton or 18 ton guns having been supplied. He regarded this as a most unfortunate circumstance, and he believed he was right in saying that not a single new gun had been placed on board any of the ships which had taken part in the late engagement with the forts at Alexandria. The country was, therefore, without what would have constituted a most valuable practical test of the efficiency of the guns in question, and he could not but feel that in this respect the Service had been very unfortunate. He would ask the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War whether the large provision made

  1021
  for ordnance in the Estimates before the Committee included an amount for other guns than those he had referred to, or whether it was, practically, a re-Vote of the money taken last year? Might the Committee calculate on the sum asked for in the present Estimates being actually expended, and the guns delivered to the Navy in the course of the current financial year? He need hardly say that this was a matter of great importance in view of the service expected from the Navy, and in view of their recent experience of the delay in obtaining guns for the Service. There was another matter to which he desired to call the attention of the Committee. When the late Administration left Office, a 43-ton gun was in hand; indeed, he might say that it had made considerable progress towards completion. He believed, however, that it had remained since then very much in an experimental condition. His right hon. Friend (Mr. Trevelyan) had stated in April last that three 43-ton guns would be supplied in December next for the Conqueror—that was to say, that two of these guns would be mounted on board the vessel in December, 1882, and that one would remain in store. They were also told by his right hon. Friend that two of these guns would be ready in March, and six more in July, 1883, so that the eight guns required for arming the Colossus and the other vessel for which they were intended were promised as soon as the ships were in a state to receive them. His right hon. Friend, moreover, said that 10 9-inch 18-ton guns would be ready in July next to be mounted in the turret of the Rupert and on board the Hercules. He sincerely trusted this would be the case; but he had some fear that the expectation of his right hon. Friend might not be realized. He was very anxious to know whether the final trials of the 43-ton gun had been completed, or if that gun was still only in the experimental stage; whether the engagement which was made in April last with regard to the delivery of three 43-ton guns for the Conqueror would be kept; whether the other guns promised would be ready for the Edinburgh and the Colossus; whether the 21 11½-ton guns which were promised for July last, and the 10 18-ton guns also promised for that month, were delivered and were complete; and, further, whether his right
  1022
  hon. Friend was satisfied that the other portion of his engagement with regard to Naval guns would be completed during the course of the present financial year? There was one other point to which he wished to allude. He referred to the carriages for these guns, the manufacture of which was undertaken also by the War Department, and the subject seemed to him to be of great importance. The Admiralty, he believed, were consulted, and had a great deal to say as to the pattern of the carriages to be used; but he was not quite satisfied that the very best carriage was fixed upon in every case, and although he understood that experiments were going on, yet he could not but feel it was a matter of regret that they should extend over such a long period of time. He had, on a former occasion, remarked that as the result of recent conditions the life of a gun at the present time was clearly ascertained to be shortened, and that owing to the heavy charges now in use it had really come to this—that they might wear out the guns they now had before they could get settled the type of the new guns that were to take their place. It was clear that these very large charges did effect a more rapid deterioration of the gun than formerly was thought probable, or even possible. They had. to face, not only the necessity for providing guns which were to be at least equal, if not superior, to those in use in the Navies of other countries—which would be at least equal to the guns that had been used by the Navies of the South American Republics during the last four years, but they had also to provide for the wear and tear of the guns, which would in future be very considerable. He urged these considerations upon the attention of Her Majesty's Government, because anyone of experience in these matters knew that the delay in the completion of ships, caused by the delay in the settlement, first of all, of the guns themselves, then of the charges to be put into them, and, finally, of the other details connected with them, was something almost beyond ordinary conception. His noble Friend the Member for Haddingtonshire (Lord Elcho) had mentioned that the delay in the production of guns was due to the appointment of a number of Committees to consider and report upon them. He (Mr. Smith) did not wish in the slightest degree to cast

  1023
  any reflection upon the labours of Committees whose Reports had, in many cases, been most serviceable and useful to the Governments who appointed thorn; but he confessed to feeling some alarm when his hon. Friend, two years ago, said he would constitute a new Committee to take charge of this important question, and advise the Government with reference to it. His apprehension was that the result of this decision would be that the new Committee would have to go through everything that had occurred before in connection with the question, and that further delay would follow. He was afraid that delay had resulted from the appointment of the Committee. Great as was the experience of its Members, fully entitled as they were to the confidence of the House and the Service, still he believed the kind of work they had to do, the duties thrown upon them, and the immense number of questions put to them, had resulted in delaying the attainment of the great object in view, which was to secure the best gun they could get in practice—not the best gun that could be conceived—and which, within a reasonable time, could be mounted on board Her Majesty's ships. He said it would be a great misfortune if their ships were delayed simply because the guns for which they were being constructed were not ready for them—because gentlemen, whose mechanical skill was very great, and whose experience entitled them to great respect, could not arrive at a decision on points as to which he believed a manufacturer, whose reputation depended on producing the best possible article, would have decided in his own mind long ago.
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, he was happy to say that Her Majesty's Government had largely increased the provision made in the Department, and the fact that the Vote had been raised was an earnest of what they intended to do in the matter of ordnance. He did not think it would have been possible to avoid appointing a Board to advise the Government on this subject. The whole question of gunnery during the last five or six years had gone through a process of transformation, and the result had been an endless controversy amongst the experts, inventors, and manufacturers; and he believed the Government would not have been able to deal with these movements, if he might
  1024
  call them so, coming from all parts of the scientific world, unless they had been able to avail themselves of the advice of the Board appointed two years ago. They had been obliged to listen to persons who made all sorts of proposals, and to examine their plans, which, as his right hon. Friend would know very well, was a matter of considerable difficulty. The examination of the merits of the Government gun as compared with the gun of the manufacturer had, no doubt, created some delay; but the work of the Board in this respect had been expedited by the introduction of two most able outside engineers, men of the greatest capacity, who could look at the question from the point of view of the manufacturer. On the whole, although he entirely agreed that time should not be unduly expended in deciding upon the type of our guns, he thought the period which had been occupied by the investigations had been more than compensated for by the advantages gained. He might mention to the Committee the great change that had taken place in the gun of the present day as compared with that of a few years ago. The necessity of having a longer gun made it necessary to use large powder and large chambers, and this, in its turn, made it necessary to load at the breech instead of the muzzle. The application of this principle had entirely revolutionized the form of construction of our guns. The consequence of all this was that pressure arose at different points which rendered experiments and a certain amount of delay unavoidable. It did not follow, even if the Estimates were largely increased, or even doubled, as in the present instance, that they could be quite worked up to. He would not go into the details of the question of carriages. His right hon. Friend knew the controversy that had been raised on this subject. It was a matter of dispute when his right hon. Friend presided at the Admiralty, and it had been so ever since, which Department should supply the gun carriages. That question still remained unsettled, and it was one that a good deal of difficulty surrounded. If the Admiralty made the carriages there might, perhaps, be greater speed in production; on the other hand, he did not think it by any means clear that the completion of the whole operation between the two

  1025
  Departments would be expedited. However that might be, he wished to be understood on that occasion not to commit himself to any opinion as to what might hereafter be done. Having made this statement with regard to a practical difficulty that had to be met, he would now reply to the general question of his right hon. Friend as to when the guns would be ready, merely remarking that he did not think that the Service had yet suffered by delay. He believed that by June, 1883, all the 6-inch guns and 8-inch guns that were included in the programme of this year and last year would be completed, and that in all probability the whole of the order for the 9-inch guns would be completed by the end of the financial year. With respect to the 43-ton gun, there were questions of the greatest importance both as to the construction and the carriage for the gun, and he did not think they were in a position to state that all the 43-ton guns that were promised would be completed within the financial year. On the other hand, he believed that the two guns which were promised for the Conqueror next year would be delivered in such time that the vessel would not be delayed. Taking the guns all round, the delay, he thought, had not been of a serious character, and he could assure his right hon. Friend that the arrear which existed had not been caused by any neglect on the part of the War Office, or any delay on the part of the Ordnance Select Committee. It was due solely to the necessity of proceeding with extreme care in the production of guns which were of novel construction; and so far as the guns were concerned, he thought there was every reason for congratulation at the results which had been arrived at.
  MR. W. H. SMITHsaid, he understood his right hon. Friend to say that the 18-ton guns and 11½-ton guns, which were to be delivered in July last, were not yet complete, but that he hoped to get them in June next year.
  MR. CHILDERSsignified assent.
  GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOURremarked that this was the second time within a few days that the question of the guns of the Navy had been brought forward in that House. Indeed, it was a resumption of the same discussion raised last year about the same guns, in number and calibre. Moreover, a dis-
  1026
  cussion upon the subject of Naval guns always took place when the Army Estimates were under consideration. Since he had been in Parliament he could not remember that any Session had passed without the supply of guns for the Navy being discussed, and invariably raised by Members who were usually most interested in the Navy. These repeated challenges proved the existence of a serious defect—that of having the Naval Department dependent on the War Office for their ordnance. When they considered the statement of the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. W. H. Smith), calling attention to the present state of affairs in respect to the failures of the War Office to provide guns for the Navy, he thought that all must feel a certain amount of anxiety with regard to the state of the armament of the Navy. The right hon. Gentleman had referred to guns which, although long promised, and on several occasions, yet had not been supplied, and to gun carriages, which were supposed to be made sometimes by the Admiralty, and sometimes by the War Office, but which were not yet ready for the ships. Now, the delay in respect of those carriages, his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for War said, was due to various causes. He would, however, take one cause not mentioned, which appeared to him to be at the bottom of the whole difficulty—namely, that the Admiralty looked to the War Office not only to make, but even to pay for, the guns and all equipments required in the Navy; and, no matter what the cost might be, or however urgent or vast the demand, yet the whole expenditure was thrown upon the Army Estimates, and the entire responsibility for prompt compliance with demands was placed on the Secretary of State. Now, he appealed to anyone who knew what the present cost of the Army was to say whether it was fair and just that the Army Estimates should be called upon to bear the expenditure incurred on account of the Navy for their guns, carriages, projectiles, and ammunition of all kinds, even including the new weapon—torpedoes? It was beyond the range of reasonable expectation that unlimited demands by one branch of the Service could be met and paid for by another branch. It was the old story of riding your neighbour's horse with your own spurs. No wonder, then, that there

  1027
  was delay in the production of the guns and all the vast war material for our ships. But the evil went further than this. This pernicious system, which had been so long in operation, had a tendency to render the officers of the Navy indifferent to certain questions of importance connected with the armament of the ships; it also prevented them giving that attention to the subject of the fitness of the guns for the ships, which was so necessary on the part both of officers and men For his own part, he maintained that it was impossible for any Military Department to be efficient unless the whole of the arrangements connected with the organization, the equipment, supplies, and cost of ordnance stores and ammunition were kept under the head of the Service, and unless the officers were qualified to say what was and what was not good work in the armament of stores. One of the results of this present system was a considerable deficiency of knowledge amongst Naval officers on the subject of guns, and their suitableness for the ships. His right hon. Friend would, no doubt, have had opportunities of knowing perfectly well that vessels had been planned without due consideration having been given to the kind of guns they would have to carry—in fact, guns had been made of lengths, dimensions, and form to suit the vessels, instead of the vessels being formed to receive the guns of the most efficient calibre. Further, so little did the two Departments work in harmony that the changes of construction found to be necessary when their armament was completed had cost the country considerable sums of money. With these views, he said it was impossible to have ffiecient armaments in the Navy so long as Naval officers went to the War Office for the guns for the Fleet, and had the accounting and auditing of stores, guns, &c, dependent on the War Office. With regard to the question of carriages, the right hon. Gentleman knew perfectly well that these also had been allowed to be built in the Dockyards of the Navy at the expense of the War Office, and the same remarks applied to them as applied to the guns, with this addition—that these same gun-carriages, planned and made up by the Navy, did not give satisfaction. He believed that neither with regard to pattern nor cost could any satisfactory gun - carriage be pro-
  1028
  vided for the Navy so long as this false system continued; and, therefore, he said, let the Navy supply themselves with guns and carriages—let them, by all means, as the late First Lord had suggested, go into the open market if they thought fit, and buy the whole of the Naval armaments; but let them, above all things, pay for their own guns and carriages, projectiles, ammunition, and stores. The sooner that system were adopted the better, and the House would then get rid of a dispute that had existed for 20 years as to the pattern of gun and carriage to be used. In this period four changes in the Naval armament had taken place in a sudden manner, and ordered to be carried out with a rapidity that no Supply Department could meet. They would then not only get efficiency, but economy, because he was sure, when the charge was put upon the Navy Estimates, and the cost of the Naval armaments for the first time fully known, then the Department would find it necessary to economize by looking after their stores in a far more efficient manner than they had hitherto done. Along with this change must follow the custody of the guns and stores by the Naval authorities. The warrant officers of the Navy would supply admirable storekeepers, of a far higher training for the duties than the War Office could obtain, so that no difficulties need be anticipated in the safe custody of the stores on shore.
  LORD EUSTACE CECILsaid, he should be glad enough to see the Navy finding its own guns; but he believed there were two difficulties to be overcome—first of all, there was the difficulty of uniformity, which could only be arranged by mutual understanding; and, secondly, there was another difficulty as regarded economy. Upon the latter question he had no desire to set up his own opinion against so high an authority as the hon. and gallant Member for Kincardineshire (Sir George Balfour); but if there were to be two arsenals instead of one he was afraid there would not be much economy. He had risen, however, principally to say that the Committee and the country generally were much indebted to his right hon. Friend sitting near him (Mr. W. H. Smith), and to his right hon. Friend opposite (Mr. Childers) for the interesting statements they had made in regard to the guns, and he hoped that progress might be reported,

  1029
  in another sense, before long. For some years this question of guns had been in hand, and he thought the time had arrived when they should come to some conclusion as to the sort of gun they ought to have, so that they might have it manufactured in sufficient quantities, not only to arm the ships, but to protect the land forts if necessary. His hon. and gallant Friend said that the existing guns were falling off. But that was a question of the powder supplied, and it was very much in consequence of the changes in the invention of powder that they were obliged to change the armament of their guns. He did not say this in any way on his own authority, but on that of Colonel Maitland, who delivered a lecture upon the subject before the Society of Arts a short time ago. Touching the question of powder, he should like the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War to state briefly what quantity of the new kind of powder they had for the operations of war. That was a very important matter at this moment, and it would, no doubt, be of much interest to the Committee to learn whether, in the opinion of the Government, they really had a sufficient store of the new kind of pebble powder for the operations of war. When the late Government left Office they left behind them no less than 310,000 barrels of gunpowder, and he hoped now that a good deal more was in store, and available if required. All he asked for was a general assurance from the right hon. Gentleman on this subject. He trusted, also, that something was being done in regard to the manufacture of Martini-Henry rifles. He knew that there had been a considerable issue of Martini-Henry rifles to the Militia, which, of course, would have diminished the number in store to a considerable extent; but he wanted to know if the manufactory at Woolwich was working extra time, in order to make up the deficiency and to turn out more rifles than were being supplied some weeks or months ago. In his opinion, it was most requisite that there should be an adequate supply of rifles, not only in store, but for defence purposes, and for actual wear-and-tear. Then, again, nothing had been said as to the Nordenfeldt and Gatling guns. He took it that, as a matter of fact, the Nordenfeldt gun had greatly superseded the Gatling gun. Whether it had
  1030
  superseded it for land purposes he could not say; but for Naval purposes, he believed, there was no doubt about the fact. He should, therefore, be glad to hear whether, as far as regarded Nordenfeldt guns, they were in a good position both in respect to their land as well as to their sea forces. His noble Friend below the Gangway (Lord Elcho) was very much interested in the question of rifled carbines. He did not know what number of rifled carbines they had in store, nor of any of the new patterns which had been lately introduced; but, perhaps, the right hon. Gentleman would kindly inform the Committee. He should also be glad to hear if anything had been done in regard to the magazine rifle, or whether the idea had been completely given up. He was told that a great many authorities differed on the point. Many supposed that the magazine rifle, however ingenious and clever it might be, was not a practical arm capable of being placed in the hands of the troops. Whether that was so or not he did not pretend to say. A Committee had been sitting upon it and upon other matters, and he should he glad to know what the nature of their Report had been. Indeed, he should he most glad to receive any information which the right hon. Gentleman could give on that and the other points to which he had called attention.
  LORD ELCHOsaid, he had listened with much interest to the remarks of his hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Kincardineshire (Sir George Balfour), who had questioned both the efficiency and economy of the system under which the Army manufactured guns for the Navy. Unquestionably, the British taxpayer believed that we were a great inventing and gun-making nation. He must feel that we ought to be at the head of the gun manufacture of the world, and that any gun that was used by our Navy or our Army should not be inferior to that of any other nation. Now such, unfortunately, was not the case. He (Lord Elcho) spoke with some knowledge upon the point, because the fact had been stated to him that the conclusion come to by some of our most experienced Naval officers of the Gunnery Department at the historical Concert held at Dulcigno, in reference to the guns of our Navy, was that of all the Naval Powers there representing the

  1031
  Concert of Europe, with one exception, the worst Naval guns were those of the British Fleet. He was, therefore, glad to hear from his right hon. Friend who once held the position of First Lord of the Admiralty (Mr. W. H. Smith) that one thing which had been elucidated was that there was some prospect of securing an improved gun for the Navy. When his right hon. Friend was speaking, he (Lord Elcho) had whispered the word "Committee." Now, he quite admitted the necessity of the Secretary of State for War being advised on such questions by a Departmental Committee; but he could not help expressing his opinion that the Committee system was being carried to far too large an extent in the Army. He believed he was right in saying that no other nation now adopted the muzzle-loading system, either in reference to the field gun or the gun for Naval warfare. Originally, we had ourselves adopted the breech - loading system; but a Departmental Committee recommended its absolute abandonment, and, notwithstanding that we had spent large sums of money on breech-loading guns, we returned to the muzzle-loading system. It was manifest in the case of the breech-loading guns that the men in charge of them were less exposed than men who were required to load a gun at the muzzle. If the guns were properly placed in the field, the muzzle only was visible, and a gunner charging a gun at the breech need expose his person hardly at all; whereas the gunner who loaded at the muzzle must necessarily expose his arms and his head, and there was, consequently, greater risk of the loss of life in the case of the muzzle-loading gun than of the breech-loader. Reference had been made to Committees appointed to advise the Secretary of State. He did not know what the result of the inquiries of the most recent Committee was; and he was unable to say whether the Secretary of State had decided that in the case of field-guns they were now to adopt the breech-loading system which other nations had adopted. To a certain extent there was considerable disadvantage in the private inquiries that were now made through the medium of official Committees. He was afraid that it was often the practice of the Secretary of State to appoint a Committee, where, by a little inquiry on his own part, and the exercise of the intelligence which fitted
  1032
  him for the position he held as Secretary of State at the head of the War Office, he would be able to form a judgment for himself. At any rate, in many cases great delay was occasioned by the appointment of a Committee, and much good work was thus prevented from being carried out which might otherwise have been more rapidly accomplished. He thought, also, that when a Committee was appointed, it ought either to be a secret Committee to advise the Secretary of State; or if it was to take evidence, and that evidence was afterwards to be submitted in the shape of a Blue Book, it should be wholly public. The facts should either be kept strictly private within the discretion of the Secretary of State, or should be published in their full entirety. God forbid that he should say the system had been maintained for the purpose of deception; but it would be seen at a glance that it was capable of the grossest abuse. The Secretary of State might appoint a Committee which was half a private and half a public Committee, and might give to the public only that part of the Report which suited his own purposes, keeping back whatever might not suit his own purposes. He did not mean to say that such a thing had ever been done; but he did say that this half-and-half system of public and private inquiry was capable of abuse, and was, therefore, a thing to be avoided. Before he went into the question of small arms, which had been touched upon by his noble Friend (Lord Eustace Cecil), who held the Office of Surveyor General in the late Government, he wished to say a word about gun-carriages. Those who had read the accounts of the bombardment of Alexandria must have observed that the batteries which best stood the heavy fire to which all the batteries were subjected were those which were mounted on the Moncreiff system. By that system the guns were elevated when they were fired, and the recoil brought them down afterwards to a position in which they were out of sight. The Committee would readily see that, if the system were sound, the guns worked in accordance with it possessed a great advantage in regard to the protection afforded to the men and the endurance of the batteries, over the ordinary system of mounting guns, whether in parapet or embrasure. They

  1033
  would all have read that the guns of the enemy which showed the most resistance and stood the longest were guns mounted on the Moncreiff system. He hoped that a complete Report of the result would be sent in by the Government, and that all the facts relating to the matter would be placed before Parliament and the country. He trusted that his right hon. Friend would fully appreciate the value of such a Report. And now with regard to small arms, and the various matters which related to them. His noble Friend who filled the Office of Surveyor General of the Ordnance in the late Government (Lord Eustace Cecil), had referred to the interest which he (Lord Elcho) had taken in rifled carbines. He was inclined to think that his noble Friend had made a mistake as to the nature of his interest in these carbines. He was afraid his noble Friend would think his interest was in having carbines manufactured. It was quite the reverse, because he had sat upon a Committee some years ago respecting this arm of the Service; and they came to the conclusion that it was desirable to have one arm, and one arm only, for the whole Service, whether for the Navy, the Army, the Artillery, or the Cavalry. They were further of opinion that the best arm would be a long rifle, and that it should be carried by the Cavalry instead of the carbine. He presumed that his right hon. and gallant Friend the late Secretary of State for War (Colonel Stanley) was of a different opinion, because when in Office he had spent £45,000 or £50,000 a-year in the manufacture of carbines. He would he sorry to say anything behind the back of his right hon. and gallant Friend which he would not say to his face; but he had already told his right hon. and gallant Friend often enough that to spend £45,000 in manufacturing carbines in the present day was very much like spending the same sum in the manufacture of bows and arrows; for, though accurate at 500 or even 800 yards, they were of no use at all at a distance of 2,000 yards. At long ranges the carbine was altogether useless; and it was, therefore, absurd to go on manufacturing carbines and arming our Cavalry with a useless weapon, when they might be armed and carry with great convenience another weapon which would be efficient at much longer ranges. He believed, if
  1034
  his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for War would make an inquiry, he would find that the opinion of competent persons who had considered the subject was that if our Cavalry were armed with a long rifle, similar to the ordinary Infantry rifle, it could be easily carried, and would give them a great advantage over an enemy's Cavalry, at long-range fire, who were only armed with carbines; and against Infantry they would also be better able to hold their own. Whenever they were dismounted they would be on an equality with the Infantry of the enemy; and mounted they would possess an advantage. If the War Office continued to arm our Cavalry with carbines, and some day we found ourselves opposed to Cavalry in the field armed with the long rifle, we should be placed at enormous disadvantage. Therefore, when they were constantly speaking of the good work done by Mounted Infantry, and were seeking to create more Mounted Infantry, it was ridiculous to continue the old system of arming the Cavalry with carbines—an antiquated and comparatively useless weapon. So much with reference to the matter of carbines. He saw in the Vote an item of which he was greatly inclined to move a reduction—namely, the item of £500 for small arms for experimental services. He was inclined to think that this item meant that another Committee had recommended a rifle of a different bore, a totally different rifle to the one which was now in the hands of the Army. He had been long interested in rifle shooting, and no one would accuse him of wishing to see their troops armed with an inferior rifle. He knew the value of the present arm; he knew what it could do. He knew they had been gradually manufacturing them till there was a hope of the present arm being the arm of all the Forces of the Crown—the arm of the Regulars, the Militia, the Volunteers, and the Reserve Forces. He could not conceive a greater waste of money than would take place in producing a new rifle. The new rifle that the Committee had recommended being of a different bore to the present one, new ammunition would be required. He would, therefore, in the strongest way he possibly could, make an appeal to his right hon. Friend to exercise his own judgment in this matter, and not

  1035
  be led astray by the recommendation of the Committee, which would land him and the House in an endless expenditure for an arm which was absolutely unnecessary, considering the excellence of the present weapon. Their present arm shot better than any foreign arm. The reason given for a new rifle was that if there was a smaller bore there would be a lighter bullet, and for the same weight the soldier would be able to carry a greater number of rounds. But the new rifle was to be four ounces heavier than the present arm—a great disadvantage. A further point already touched upon by his noble Friend (Lord Eustace Cecil) was that in reference to the magazine rifle. He believed the attention of the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War was being turned to this. He (Lord Elcho) had seen a magazine rifle, which appeared to be absolute perfection—so simple, expeditious, and unliable to get out of order. The Austrian Government were trying it with good results, and he hoped the experiment would be made by Her Majesty's Government, and that instead of wasting money on a new barrel they would spend 8s. per rifle on a magazine. He would like to ask his right hon. Friend what store they had of Martini-Henry rifles over and above those already in the hands of the troops? He would like to say one word more, and that was with reference to inventions. He could well understand how officials were pestered to death by inventors; but there were some inventions to which it would be well to lend a ready ear. One great difficulty in shooting was to judge distances, and apparently, from what they read in the papers, the means of judging distances were greatly wanted in Egypt at the present time. Now, an officer—Colonel Weldon—had been sent over to this country from India with an admirable range-finder, which was not larger than a watch. He had tested it, and he knew how effective it was in ascertaining the distance of any object in the field. This gentleman, who was a Colonel in the Madras Army, had been sent over by the Government of India to show the invention, so valuable they thought it. Colonel Weldon took it to the India Office, but he was sent to the War Office. After passing from one official to another at the War Office, he
  1036
  arrived at the proper Department, and when he showed his invention and gave his name, he was told—"Oh, we know all about that; your invention has been condemned already." Colonel Weldon replied that it must be rather difficult to condemn an invention which had not been seen, except by himself and the manufacturer. "Will you allow it to be tried by the troops?" asked Colonel Weldon. "No, certainly not; nobody shall try anything that has not been passed through this Department," was the reply. He mentioned this to show the difficulties inventors had to contend with, even when they were sent over here officially.
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, that whatever changes were made after inquiry by experts must be made on the authority of a responsible Minister, and he had never hesitated to take that responsibility where he believed it necessary to make any alterations. He would not go into the question of carbines as opposed to the long rifles used by the Cavalry. Experiments had been made, but he would rather not enlarge upon them at the present time. The noble Lord (Lord Elcho) had referred to magazine rifles, some of which, he said, had entirely succeeded. He (Mr. Childers) did not know that any one had absolutely succeeded; and he was bound to say that, up to this moment, he was not satisfied that any magazine rifle could be advantageously introduced into the Service. The noble Lord asked him of Martini-Henry rifles in stock. Martini-Henry's were now being issued to the Militia, and that had reduced the stock, which ought to be kept up to 300,000. At present there was a fair stock of arms, and more were being manufactured as circumstances required. There was not a large stock of powder, but it was sufficient for all reasonable purposes.
  LORD ELCHOsaid, the right hon. Gentleman had stated that there were now 300,000 stand of arms over and above those in the hands of the troops. He believed there was some number laid down, and, if he was not greatly mistaken, it was very far above the number named by the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War.
  MR. CHILDERSthought 300,000 was the number laid down. Last year there were 347,000 stand of arms in

  1037
  stock; but, in consequence of Martini Henry's being served out to the Militia, the stock had been reduced to 238,000.
  Vote agreed to.
  (6.) £715,700, Works, Buildings, &c. at Home and Abroad.
  SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOTsaid, it would be exceedingly convenient to the county of Sussex to know how soon the Government were prepared to give up the Militia storehouse at Lewes?
  GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOURinquired of the Secretary of State when the important military work at the extremity of the Admiralty Pier upon Dover Harbour was likely to be finished? He would also wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether this powerful battery would be affected by the new works which the Dover Harbour Board intended to make? It was proposed to extend the Admiralty Pier 550 feet from the place where the battery was.
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, he would look into the question of the Lewes Militia storehouse. He was not aware that it was intended by the proposed works at Dover to interfere with the battery. Certainly, if it was likely that the battery would be injured he should raise an objection.
  GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOURsaid, the most important portion of the defences at Dover was a powerful battery at the end of the Admiralty Pier; and as they now found the Dover Harbour Board desiring to make a great extension of that pier beyond the end where the battery was being formed, he had no hesitation in saying that the proposed extension would seriously endanger the safety of the fort.
  Vote agreed to.
  (7.) £127,500, Establishments for Military Education.
  SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOTwished to ask the right hon. Gentleman a question with regard to the vacancies in Cavalry regiments. He gathered from an answer to a question which the right hon. Gentleman made the other day that the War Office were considering whether they could not take some step with regard to men who passed a fair examination, but who had not come up to the mark that some of the other candidates had come up to.
  1038
  The examinations varied from time to time—for instance, at one time a man, who was certainly equal, and, perhaps, far better than many who had passed an examination, did not get his commission because there were at that particular moment that he went through an examination men who had passed a better examination than himself. Now, it had always struck him that if a man came up to a certain qualifying standard, his name ought to be retained on the list, and when there was a vacancy he ought to have a chance of filling it.
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, he answered this question only the other day. There had been no deficiency in the number of candidates for the Army generally, although the number of candidates for the Cavalry had been short. That had been remedied to a great extent by a change he had made with regard to Militia candidates. They were anxious, as he had previously said, to see whether in some way or other they could not secure a larger supply of Cavalry candidates; but, up to the present moment, he had not seen his way to do it. He, however, held himself entirely free to make proper arrangements with respect to the supply of Cavalry candidates.
  Vote agreed to.
  (8.) £36,400, Miscellaneous Effective Services.
  MR. FIRTHsaid, that, under Subhead "S," there was an item—"Appropriations in aid, £3,550," £3,400 of which represented the fees from visitors to the Tower Armouries. He would like to ask his right hon. Friend whether he saw any prospect of admission to the armouries being permitted free of charge?
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, the admission to the Tower was free on some days, but not on others. He thought the present system answered very well, and saw no reason at present to alter it.
  Vote agreed to.
  (9.) £238,200, War Office.
  LORD ELCHOsaid, he would like to know what was to be done about the military clerks?
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, he was Chairman of the Committee; but he did not think anything would be done this year.
  SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOTsaid, that the Vote was increased this year by a sum of £16,000. This was always a particularly heavy Vote; and when they saw the Services of the Army very often cut down to meet the requirements of the nation, as far as economy was concerned, they had never seen the War Office expenses cut down. It always struck him that this enormous expenditure in various ways in the War Office might be reduced to a certain extent; he did not say to any great extent, and in no way could it be better effected than had just been mentioned by his noble Friend, because he was satisfied there were many efficient non-commissioned officers who might be employed as clerks in the War Office, and who would consider the pay very excellent remuneration. Even old officers might be employed here with very good effect.
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, there was no increase on this Vote, but a decrease. The old pay of the War Office was shown, which used not to be the case.
  MR. SEXTONwished to make an inquiry of the right hon. Gentleman with respect to the position of supplementary clerks to the War Office. He found, on reference to the Estimates, that there were 70 of these gentlemen, and all but five were supplementary clerks of the first class, beginning at a salary of £180, and advancing by increments of £10 to a maximum salary of £300. In order to make plain the position which these gentlemen held, he would refer to the 21 principal clerks, who began at a salary of £700 a-year, and advanced by increments of £25 to £900; there were 45 senior clerks, who began at £450 a-year, and advanced by increments of £20 to £650; there were 65 clerks in the upper division, 63 of whom began at £150 a-year, and, by increments of £15, rose to £500, while the remaining two clerks began at £150, and, by increments of £37 10 s. triennially, rose to £400 a-year. It was quite plain, in comparison, that the supplementary clerks occupied a very disadvantageous place. The right hon. Gentleman would remember that these gentlemen were admitted upon the open competition system for Civil clerkships; and it was a curious fact that gentlemen who competed at these same examinations in 1870 and the year succeeding, and who were allotted to other Depart-
  1040
  ments of the Civil Service, had since, in consequence of re-organization, reached higher establishment in their respective Offices than these supplementary clerks occupied in their Departments. It was a very unfortunate fact for those gentlemen that were allotted to the War Office, because, had they been allotted to any other Office, they would have reaped considerably greater advantages. Many gentlemen who competed side by side with these clerks in the year 1870, and who failed in the examination, came up in subsequent years, took lower places, and were allotted to other Departments; but they had since reached a higher establishment than those gentlemen who had passed a better examination. There were 171 men clerks in the lower division, who, under the present regulations, would not be admissible to the higher establishment for four years more. He thought it was a reasonable suggestion that as the lower division clerks could not, for four years more, be admitted to the higher division, the higher establishment should in the meantime be thrown open to the supplementary clerks. It was not denied that the supplementary clerks performed their duties well. Many of them, in fact, performed precisely the same duties as the clerks on the higher establishment, who received a much more considerable salary. In point of fact, the present system came to this—that the higher establishment was reserved for new comers, who, it very often happened, were instructed in their duties By the supplementary clerks. He would like to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, since the re-organization of the War Office, two years ago, any vacancies had been filled up on the higher establishment of that Office; and, if so, if they had been filled up from the supplementary clerks—gentlemen already within the walls of the Office, and familiar with the duties of the Office—or whether the vacancies had been filled up by new comers; and, if so, why? Was it to be understood that these 70 gentlemen had to stagnate in this supplementary Department, while persons much their inferiors were admitted to higher salaries? These gentlemen could not regard their position with satisfaction; and if the right hon. Gentleman would say he would take into the higher establishment such of the supplementary

  1041
  clerks who might be proved by experience to be fitted for the higher establishment, he would do that which, while promoting the Departmental efficiency, would be an economy of the public funds.
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, the suggestion of the hon. Gentleman could not be acted upon. The supplementary clerks had only gone through an inferior examination as compared with the clerks on the higher establishment. He would, however, look into the matter with the view of seeing how far the position of the supplementary clerks could be improved.
  MR. SEXTONsaid, he hoped that the difficulty which the right hon. Gentleman had seen was not an insuperable one, because it seemed to have been got over in all the other Departments except the War Office; gentlemen admitted in the lower departments of the other Public Offices had reached higher establishment. He should not press the right hon. Gentleman further than to express the hope that any statement which the supplementary clerks might lay before him would receive his attention.
  Vote agreed to.
  (10.) £26,700, Rewards for Distinguished Services.
  SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOTsaid, it did seem unfair, unreasonable, and unjust, that a man who had received for distinguished services in the field or elsewhere a sum of £100 a-year should be treated in precisely the same way as a man who had, perhaps, in no way distinguished himself. He could not see on what plea that could take place, and he trusted the right hon. Gentleman would be able to afford some explanation.
  MR. CHILDERSpointed out that under the former system regiments received a fixed sum and distributed their distinguished service allowances; but now retired pay had been substituted for regimental allowances. If, in addition to the retired pay, officers were allowed to retain the equivalent of colonelcies there would be a very large increase of charge. Under the present system, as under former systems, colonels of regiments did not draw distinguished service money. He believed that officers
  1042
  under the present system were much better off than formerly.
  Vote agreed to.
  (11.) £95,000, Half Pay.
  MR. CAINEsaid, he had a Notice on the Paper last year to the effect that it was undesirable that Members of this House, who were officers of the Army, should any longer be Members of the House if they remained on full pay. When he put that Notice on the Paper there were 13 Members of the House in that position; now there were only five. Eight of them had either left the House or gone on half-pay, and he hoped that by this time next year the remaining five would have followed the example of the eight.
  SIR HENRY FLETCHERsaid, he hoped the hon. Gentleman who had just spoken, and who did everything he possibly could to upset everything connected with the Service in the way of canteens and other matters, would not be allowed to press his Motion. In his opinion, Gentlemen who were officers in the Army were quite able to do their duty as Members of the House.
  Vote agreed to.
  (12.) £1,116,100, Retired Pay, &c.
  MR. FIRTHnoticed an increase of £18,000 for retired Field Marshals; there were only three more retired Field Marshals this year than last, and therefore he thought this increase required some explanation.
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, that the increase was balanced by the reduction in the Pension List.
  MT. BIGGARsaid, he would like to ask the right hon. Gentleman a question similar to the one he asked last year; it was regarding Major General Tillot. Major General Tillot retired at a time when England was at war in the Crimea, and that was held by Regulations 54 and 55 to disqualify him from promotion. He (Mr. Biggar) was aware that he was entitled to a promotion in rank, but not to a rise in pay. He elected to continue to be aide-de-camp to the Commander-in-Chief, and get decent pay and forego his promotion in rank. As that gentleman applied to get on half-pay, the Committee were entitled to some explanation.
  SIR HENRY FLETCHERsaid, that, as an old Guards officer who had served

  1043
  during the Crimean War, he must ask the Committee to allow him to say a few words to refute the imputation cast by the hon. Member upon the honour of a brother officer, whose personal friendship he had had ever since the Crimean War. The hon. Member brought forward this question over and over again; it had been answered by the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War, and by other hon. Members in the House, and it was really quite past endurance that it should be brought up each Session of Parliament, in order that a reflection might be cast upon the character of a gallant gentleman. The right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War would bear him out in saying that this matter had nothing to do with the Vote before the House.
  Vote agreed to.
  (13.) £123,200, Widows' Pensions, &c, agreed to.
  (14. £15,500, Pensions for Wounds.
  SIR HENRY FLETCHERsaid, there was a question which he desired to ask the right hon. Gentleman which, he believed, had been laid before the War Office and also before himself. Was it true that if an officer received a wound when on picket duty he was not entitled to the same allowance as if he received a wound while in front of the enemy?
  MR. CHILDERSbelieved there was a distinction between a wound received in action and a wound received otherwise.
  SIR HENRY FLETCHERsaid, it was a very important question. Certainly an officer who had received a severe wound while on picket duty ought to be entitled to the same allowances as if he had received it in front of the enemy.
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, he would take the matter into consideration.
  Vote agreed to.
  (15.) £33,800, Chelsea and Kilmainham Hospitals.
  MR. DICK-PEDDIEsaid, that last year he had put a Question to the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War as to whether it was not the fact that Roman Catholic and Presbyterian pensioners were buried with the Service of the Church of England. He had not succeeded in getting a reply last year, and he now repeated the question, hoping that he might be more successful
  1044
  this year. Did the present payment include anything for Presbyterian chaplains?
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, he was not quite sure as to the latter point; but as to the former point it was quite true his attention had been called to the matter. There had been a case of a Presbyterian in which pressure had been applied to have the Service conducted according to the rites of the Church of England; but as soon as he heard of it he interfered and saw the matter put right.
  MR. CAINE: I see an item of £70 here for a Whitster—in addition to a pension of 2s. a-day. May I ask what is a Whitster?
  MR. CHILDERS: I believe he is a man-at-arms.
  Vote agreed to.
  (16.) £1,389,700, Out-Pensions.
  GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOURasked for information concerning the new system of paying pensions through the Post Office?
  SIR ARTHUR HAYTERsaid, he was glad some notice had been taken of the question of payment of pensions through the Post Office, because there was a friction when it was first established, although the mode of payment was thought very much better. Revised rules were issued, and the result was that the out-pensions in all the 66 districts, with the exception of the Liverpool district, had been paid by the end of the first week in July. The Secretary of State for War had officially recognized the exertions of the officers in the Pay Departments, and he (Sir Arthur Hayter) was glad to say that the new system was now working well.
  Vote agreed to.
  (17.) £197,700, Superannuation Allowances, agreed to.
  (18.) £51,800, Militia, Yeomanry Cavalry, and Volunteer Corps, agreed to.
  (19.) £1,100,000, Army (Indian Home Charges).
  MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORsaid, that on this Vote he wished to call the attention of the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for War to what he thought was a real grievance on the part of the soldiers. It was this—that when they were sent abroad they were obliged to pay for their sea-kits. Why, he would ask, was a soldier obliged to pay for

  1045
  that which was of no earthly use to him after the voyage was over?
  SIR HENRY HOLLANDinquired whether the Vote included non-effective charges?
  MR. CHILDERS: Yes.
  SIR HENRY HOLLANDsaid, he hoped the right hon. Gentleman would devote some attention to a question which had been brought several times before the Public Accounts Committee by the Comptroller and Auditor General, and that was the question of the payment of arrears for the Non-Effective Services. The matter had now been three years before the Committee, and a careful Report with regard to it had been made by the Comptroller and Auditor General.
  MR. CHILDERSsaid, he hoped before next year to be able to make some arrangement in the matter.
  Vote agreed to.
  (20.) £500,000, Afghan War (Grant in Aid), agreed to.

  CIVIL SERVICE ESTIMATES.

    CLASS III.—LAW AND JUSTICE.
    (21.) £26,383, to complete the sum for the Register House Department, Edinburgh.
    MR. DICK-PEDDIEsaid, he wished to call attention, for a few moments, to this Vote. Last year he directed attention to the position of different grades of clerks in the Sasine Office; but as the Vote came on at a late period of the Session, and about 2 or 3 o'clock in the morning, he had refrained, out of consideration for the time of the Committee, from entering fully into the question, and had contented himself with giving Notice of his intention to do so this year. He had had a Motion on the Paper this Session; but, owing to the condition of Business in the House, he had not moved it. He could not, however, now allow the Vote to pass without saying a few words upon it. He would state, shortly, his grounds for raising the question. The Staff of the Register House was reorganized last year under a Minute of the Treasury, and under that Minute the clerks in the Sasine Office were divided into three classes. The salaries of the eight first class clerks rose by annual increments of £10 from £250 to £305; the salaries of the second class clerks—12 in number—began at £170, and rose by annual increments of
    1046
    £15 to £240; while the third class clerks, who numbered 62, began with a salary of £90, which rose by increments of £5 to £160. This last-named class felt greatly aggrieved by this arrangement. They said, in the first place, that their salaries were too low when the qualifications required of them and the kind of work they had to do were considered. He would not detain the Committee by describing in detail the nature of the work performed by them; but he would state generally that it consisted in registering in the public records of a great variety of writs affecting landed property, and on the absolute correctness of this Register the validity of the titles to a great deal of property in Scotland rested. Professional knowledge of a very considerable kind was required by these clerks, as well as ability to pass the ordinary Civil Service examination; and they had to bring evidence that they had served a certain time in the office of a solicitor. In point of fact, a very large number of the present third class clerks had served full apprenticeships in lawyers' offices, had attended legal classes, and possessed very considerable legal knowledge. For men possessed of such qualifications, and requiring to do such work, he thought the Committee would agree with him that the remuneration was altogether inadequate. They also complained that their salaries were too low as compared with those of the other classes of clerks in the Sasine Office, the duties they had to do being exactly similar to those of the other clerks. There was hardly any work done by the first or second classes which was not also done by the third class. The third grievance was that the amount they received in salaries was very small when compared with that given to clerks in similar branches of the Public Service. He would especially refer to the Irish Registry of Deeds Office. The salaries paid to clerks in the Irish Registry of Deeds Office were very much greater than those given in the Edinburgh Office, although in the former the same amount of knowledge was not required as in the latter. In the Irish Office no knowledge of law was required, and the work given to the clerks was of the simplest kind. They had nothing to do with what was one of the most important duties of the clerks of the Sasine Office—namely, preparing the minutes of the deeds presented for registration.

    1047
    In Ireland those were prepared by the solicitors of the persons whose deeds were to be registered, and a large cost was thus incurred by the clients of those solicitors, which was entirely saved in the case of the Scotch Office. Then, as to their qualifications, the Irish clerks, he understood, had simply to pass the ordinary examination for the Civil Service Departments, and were not required to have any legal or professional training of any kind. It seemed, therefore, very inequitable that while they received salaries beginning at £90, and rising by £10 annually, the clerks in Edinburgh should begin at the same salary and rise only by £5. He wished to point out that the whole of the Register House in Edinburgh was very unfairly dealt with as compared with the Registry of Deeds Office in Ireland. In the Scotch Office there were 82 clerks altogether—first, second, and third classes—and they received in salaries £12,582, whilst in Ireland there were 62 clerks, who received £14,231. If the Scotch clerks were paid in the same proportion as the Irish they would receive £18,850, or about 50 per cent more than they actually received. That was an inequality that should require a great difference in the kind of work done; but, as a matter of fact, the work done in the Registry of Deeds Office in Ireland was of an inferior kind to that performed in the Scotch Sasine Office. He did not make any objections to the payment given to the Irish clerks. He did not regard it as at all excessive, and he merely compared the payment in the Irish Office with that of the Scotch, for the purpose of bringing out the injustice done to the clerks in the latter Office. The inequality appeared still greater when they looked at the profit yielded by the Scotch Office as compared with that derived from the Irish Office. In 1880–1 the Register House in Edinburgh cost the country £21,975; but there was received from stamps £25,977, so that there was a profit of £4,002. On the other hand, the Irish Office cost the country £18,255, and the stamp duties came to only £12,498, so that there was a loss on the Irish Office of £5,737. The Scotch Office, therefore, doing a great deal more work, and bringing in more revenue than the Irish Office, received less pay for its clerks. He might mention the English Registry of Deeds Office, where,
    1048
    on an expenditure of £5,400, there was a loss of £4,000. The grievance to which the most importance was attached was the unequal division of the classes; and they justly complained that the chances of promotion afforded them in consequence of the very large number of third class clerks, as compared with the numbers in the classes above, were very small. There were, as he had already shown, 12 clerks in the second class, and 62 in the third, so that they were as 5 to 1; and it must be evident to all that the chances of promotion to the higher classes were very small. In the Irish Office the third and lower class clerks were only about two and a-half times more numerous than the higher classes, so that their chances of promotion were double those of the Scotch clerks. He could not find in any Department of the Civil Service any such inequality as existed in the Sasine Office. He had very shortly and very hurriedly stated the position of the clerks in the Sasine Office; but he trusted he had said enough to show that they had good ground of complaint, and to induce his Eon. Friend the Financial Secretary to the Treasury to look favourably upon their claims, and to consider that some steps should be taken to do justice to them. He had now to state very shortly what it was the third class clerks asked. They asked, first, that the rate of increment of salaries should be increased; secondly, they asked a re-arrangement of the classes, so that their chances of promotion might be improved, and made more in accordance with what was almost invariably found in other branches of the Public Service. They did not object to classification, for they recognized that that was necessary in all public offices, to give advantages to seniority; but they thought that the arrangement in this Office was a very inequitable one. The third thing they asked for, failing the granting of the two former, was a public inquiry into the arrangements of the Office and the various classes in it, such as he understood had been granted some years ago in the Irish Office, and the result was highly satisfactory. He had no doubt that the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, to whom the subject might be new, would look into the facts, and would give just consideration to the claims of a most deserving class of clerks; and he trusted—at any rate next year, if not now—a satisfactory

    1049
    answer would be given by the Government.
    MR. SCLATER-BOOTHsaid, he looked on this as an illustration of what had fallen from the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister the other day as to the difficulties of the Treasury in encountering the demands made from all quarters for an increase of salary. He ventured to say that the fact that an Office in one part of the country was well administered, while another in another part of the country was better paid, ought not to be brought forward here as an argument that the salaries of the former Office ought to be raised. They ought not to hear that line of argument so frequently in the House of Commons; and, without entering into the merits of the question, he would simply say that the less that was said by the Representatives of the Government in the way of a promise to review the salaries of this Office in Edinburgh the better.
    MR. COURTNEYsaid, that at the outset he must thank the hon. Member for Kilmarnock (Mr. Dick-Peddie) for the brevity and moderation with which he had put his case. This was an example, as the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Sclater-Booth) had pointed out, of the applications that were repeatedly pressed upon the Treasury from all parts, and which, no doubt, tended to excite their sympathy. But he was obliged to place the other side of the question before the Committee. The work to be done in the Sasine Office at Edinburgh was not of a very elaborate character, or of a nature that required very great qualities of any kind whatever, while there was a constant supply of gentlemen ready to do the work on the present terms, and to do it well and faithfully. The character of the work was, for the most part, very simple, requiring rather fidelity and care than special qualifications. The hon. Gentleman had made three claims for consideration, and the first was on the ground of the nature of the work itself. The hon. Gentleman said the third class clerks were rather insufficiently paid compared with the second and first; but this was rather an assumption that the first and second class were paid according to an absolute standard of justice: It might be that they were all too highly paid, and, therefore, might be an argument against the hon. Member. He
    1050
    (Mr. Courtney) would not say whether that was the case or not; but it was an argument against the view of the hon. Gentleman. The hon. Gentleman said that the clerks in Scotland were not so well paid as the clerks in Ireland. His (Mr. Courtney's) answer to that was, that they were reducing the pay of the third class clerks in Ireland, and were bringing it down not merely to the level, but, in some instances, even below that of the clerks in the Sasine Office in Edinburgh. He was sorry to meet the case put forward in this uncompromising manner; but he was bound to say he did not see that any claim had been made out which the Government could entertain.
    SIR GEORGE CAMPBELLsaid, he felt very much what had been said on both sides of the House as to the disadvantage of pressing in this House the claims of various public servants; but this he would say—that if there was a case that ought to be treated liberally, it was that of the Register House in Edinburgh, because that Office had always been a source of income to the Treasury, the fees received having more than counterbalanced the expenditure. It seemed to him that this question was not so much one between the Scotch officers and the Treasury as between the officers who were paid for doing the work, and the Scotch people who had to pay the fees. It seemed to him that whatever surplus there was should be applied to the remission of fees. He thought the Secretary to the Treasury had taken away from the hon. Member for Kilmarnock the strongest argument he had brought forward—namely, the comparative proportion of the Irish salaries. It was very often necessary to meet Irish grievances by a liberal subvention from the Treasury, and he hoped the Treasury might succeed in this case in carrying out their intentions to reduce the salaries in question. He feared that in this instance the Treasury might propose, and the Irish Members dispose.
    SIR HENRY HOLLANDsaid, he agreed with what had fallen from the hon. Gentleman who had just spoken, but he did not think he had answered the question of the hon. Member for Kilmarnock, which was, whether there could not be an inquiry into the matter. It was very often found that the number of clerks was too great, and that by reducing it the salaries of those who

    1051
    remained could be increased. He hardly thought the Secretary to the Treasury could be averse to having a Committee of Inquiry, because it seemed very likely that, considering the number of third class clerks compared with those of the second class, the position of the former might be improved without difficulty.
    MR. DICK-PEDDIEsaid, he did not think he should prolong the discussion; but the Secretary to the Treasury had based his objections to granting any concessions to the third class clerks chiefly on the fact that their work was of a very simple description. He would ask the hon. Gentleman to lay upon the Table of the House a portion of the Report which had been presented to the Treasury in the beginning of last year, which stated in full detail the work done by those clerks, and the arrangements of the Office. He was willing to base his whole claim upon that Report. He believed he should be able to show next year that the work of these clerks required great skill. If the hon. Gentleman would not give an answer on the point now, he (Mr. Dick-Peddie) would put a Question on the subject on the Paper.
    Vote agreed to.
    (22.) Motion made, and Question proposed,
    "That a sum, not exceeding £36,396, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1883, of Criminal Prosecutions and other Law Charges in Ireland, including certain Allowances under the Act 15 and 16 Vic. c. 83."
    MR. SEXTONsaid, the most obvious point connected with the Vote was the amount of money asked for for 1882–3, which showed a large falling-off on the amount asked for in the previous year. That was a remarkable consideration, and was, no doubt, owing to the Irish Executive having had at its disposal an Act of Parliament enabling them to undertake judicial proceedings that rendered it unnecessary for them to examine witnesses in the ordinary way. The proceedings under the last Coercion Act were inexpensive, because they only involved a secret inquiry by the Lord Lieutenant, and the imprisonment in Kilmainham or some other gaol. One would imagine that after a year of such cheap and expeditious law, the expenses in connection with Law Charges and
    1052
    Criminal Prosecutions in Ireland would have considerably fallen off; yet the Committee would, be disappointed to find that, after having placed in the hands of the Irish Executive an exceedingly cheap and expeditious mode of justice, which had been largely indulged in, the lawyers' charges, putting aside the decrease for expenses of prosecutions and witnesses, were as heavy as ever. While the expenses of prosecutions and witnesses had fallen from £27,000 to £21,000—making a decrease of £6,000 on the year—the lawyers' charges had very considerably increased, and were at least £2,000 more than in the previous year, notwithstanding that there should be fewer cases, in consequence of the greater facilities in the hands of the Lord Lieutenant for committing people without trial. There was a still more remarkable feature in the Estimate under the head of fees to the Law Advisers. The Attorney General for Ireland and the other Law Advisers received a very large allowance, and yet they took between them £8,000, or £3,000 more than last year. It would be very interesting to know under what circumstances it had happened that the three learned Gentlemen concerned had received £3,000 more under the head of fees, in respect of the present year, than they received last year. He (Mr. Sexton) had to remark that under this head the Attorney General for Ireland did not seem to have spared his faculties in directing Crown prosecutions, because the fees in respect of them had reached a very considerable sum indeed; but Irish Members in the House had, during the present Session, used strong arguments to induce the right hon. and learned Gentleman to prosecute policemen whom they believed to have been concerned in attacks on the people, but without success. It was relevant upon this Vote to at least endeavour to elicit from the right hon. and learned Gentleman some explanation of the firmness, he supposed he must not say obstinacy, with which he had refused to prosecute such officers as Sub-Inspectors Ball, Allen, Rogers, and others whose conduct had brought about violent conflicts between the police and the people, resulting in deplorable loss of life. He (Mr. Sexton) hoped the right hon. and learned Gentleman would condescend to tell them why, when he had been so liberal in directing Crown prosecutions in other cases, he had been so

    1053
    reluctant to do so in these cases? He wished to draw attention to the Crown prosecutions, and to the course pursued by the Irish Legal Advisers of Her Majesty at Cork during the Winter Assizes—to the packing of juries and the refusal of the prosecutions to pay witnesses' expenses. During the next three years, of course, the use of juries would be done away with, and they had given the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General for Ireland the power of changing the venue and sending men from the North to the South, and men from the South to the North for trial—for instance, from Cork to Belfast, and from Belfast to Cork. At the last Cork Assizes there were 200 men on the jury panel, 50 Protestants and 150 respectable Catholics. What was the result? Why, that out of that 150 Catholics only 35 were called upon to serve, whilst in the case of the 50 Protestants 47 were called upon. Each Protestant juror was called upon to serve four times, and each Catholic juror only, in proportion, a quarter of a time—that was to say, the Protestants were called upon to do just 16 times the work of the Catholics. In order for the Committee to understand that proceeding he should say that the persons accused of crime were almost universally Catholics, and the persons supposed to be injured Protestants. He looked upon the conduct of the Crown in this matter as nothing but a mean and cunning appeal to religious bigotry. He would invite the Attorney General for Ireland to explain that remarkable practice, and to say why it was that the Crown Prosecutor, during these prosecutions, challenged from 35 to 45, and sometimes 50 jurors, the whole of them being, without exception, Catholics. It was almost the invariable rule that the person challenged was a Catholic, and the person put upon the jury was a Protestant. No doubt the Protestants who were put upon the juries would say to themselves—"We are considered better and more trustworthy than the Catholics, and, under the circumstances, we are bound to find verdicts in favour of the Crown where there is a possibility of doing so." In one instance the Crown did allow a Catholic jury to be empannelled; but in that instance the case was a bogus one, and was put before that jury with almost unconcealed mirth—it was a case where no verdict of "Guilty" was possible. With regard
    1054
    to the next point—namely, the refusal of the expenses of witnesses during the Winter Assizes to which he referred, prisoners and traversers who ought to have been tried in Limerick, Kerry, Clare, and other places were brought into Cork to be tried. And what did the Crown Solicitor do after having brought these poor people, who never had 10 s. to spare, scores of miles from their houses to a Court of Justice? Why, they had kept witnesses hanging about the Courts, without being called, week after week, until they had become destitute—so long, indeed, that their counsellors had eventually advised them to go to the poor-house. In more than one case in the county of Cork traversers who had been brought from Kerry and from Limerick had gone to the Crown Solicitor and said—"We are starving here, put us on our trial, or give us the means of living;" and he replied—"I cannot put you on your trial until after Christmas," and some of them were certainly waiting six weeks before they were tried. In one case, in consequence of these extraordinary proceedings, a prisoner, who had been nearly driven to the point of starvation, had pleaded "Guilty" rather than suffer the ordeal any longer. When the Government came forward and asked for such a sum as this for Law Charges and the support of witnesses, it was only natural that they, the Irish Members, should complain that people like these had not had their expenses paid. Who were the people who had had their expenses paid? Why, such people as Conolly, the most notorious official witness of recent days in Ireland. The Crown used that man to testify in "Moonlight," and some other political cases. It was notorious that he was a deserter from the Army, and had been in gaol, and had the brand of different infamies upon him, and was believed, indeed, by a great many people in Ireland, to have been guilty of murder itself. Would the right hon. and learned Gentleman tell the Committee whether he was aware of the name of the man whom Conolly was said to have murdered; and, if he was aware of it, and believed that a murder had taken place, did he propose to condone the crime, and to take Conolly's evidence in "Moonlight" cases? He should like to know whether the right hon. and learned Gentleman intended to put Conolly on his trial for the crime of murder, either

    1055
    now or some time in the future? It would be desirable that they should know, once for all, whether the Crown were inclined to condone even the capital crime for the obtaining a conviction in the case of a political offence. There was another person to whom part of this sum voted for the expenses of witnesses had, no doubt, been paid, and that was a youth of 17 years of age, named Molloy, who was examined at the Cork Winter Assizes in the case in which two brothers, Daniel and Edward Flannagan, were accused of having fired into the house of the father-in-law of the elder prisoner. The youth Molloy was the only witness who deposed to having seen the outrage occur; but he had allowed four hours to elapse before he stated that he knew the men who entered into the house. Let the Committee observe what Mr. Justice Fitzgerald had said on this case; he had said, in fact, that the whole case rested on the evidence of the boy Molloy; and he added that the case was a very important one—important to the public, and important to the two young men who were in the dock charged with the grave offence. The learned Judge spoke of the boy Molloy as excellent, clear, and courageous; and, on the evidence of that young fellow, these two men were convicted, one being sentenced to seven years' and the other to five years' penal servitude. Well, he (Mr. Sexton) had in his hand a statement from the parish priest, declaring that these two young men so sentenced were highly respectable, and of unblemished character. What had since happened? Why, this—that one of the prisoners, since his conviction, had been released; and when he (Mr. Sexton) had asked the reason of that release, he had been informed that it was on account of his ill-health. Did ever anyone hear of such a thing? A prisoner convicted of a serious crime released from prison on the score of ill-health. The other brother was still in prison suffering the term of seven years; but with regard to Molloy, after the Assizes were over, he was taken to the police barrack at Ennis, and that "clear and cool-headed boy," as he had been described by Mr. Justice Fitzgerald, there stole a policeman's watch, and, in proof of his "clear and cool-headedness," changed it for another, which he pawned. The authorities then thought the best thing they could do would be to get rid of him. It did not
    1056
    suggest itself to their minds that they should prosecute him for that theft. They provided him with an outfit and sent him to England—to London—in charge of a police constable, and probably the expense of that journey would come under the head to which he was drawing attention in the Estimates. Molloy and the police constable were seen together in London, and it was known that they went into a restaurant. At that place it appeared that Molloy's fancy was captivated by a gold-headed cane; he took possession of it and carried it away. The policeman discovered what he had done, brought back the cane, and restored it to its owner. The Government had found that this boy Molloy was a blackguard and an incorrigible thief; and, he presumed, discrediting his testimony, for that reason they had released one of the prisoners convicted upon his evidence. But why, he (Mr. Sexton) would ask, had they not released the other prisoner, who was sentenced to seven years' penal servitude? It was a singular thing that when persons like Conolly and Molloy were taken into the arms of the Government, and petted and pampered, and assisted to emigrate, innocent men should be allowed to suffer in consequence of their unsupported evidence. He trusted the Committee would hear that tardy justice was about to be done in the case of the second brother Flannagan.
    THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. W. M. JOHNSON)said, that some of the things which the hon. Member for Sligo (Mr. Sexton) had referred to were new, and made their appearance now for the first time in that House; but other of the points were old, having been gone over at least half-a-dozen times. One of the things which, to his certain knowledge, had been repeated again and again, and denied each time it was asserted, was that with regard to jurors. Upon that question the charge of the hon. Member had been met in a manner which he believed was perfectly satisfactory to the House. Then, the hon. Member very naturally asked a question which he (the Attorney General for Ireland) had himself asked, because he had been unable to enter into a personal inquiry, and desired to be in a position to answer any Question that might be put with regard to it. The hon. Member said that in 1881–2

    1057
    the charge for fees to the Law Officers of the Crown was £5,000, while in the present year it was £8,000. If the hon. Member would look at the first three items in the Account for 1882–3, he would see that all the items were given, and that the difference between the two amounts was owing to some new mode the Treasury had of arranging the accounts with which he (the Attorney General for Ireland) was not familiar. All he could say was that he was not to blame for it. The hon. Member asked whether the £5,000 was earned by not prosecuting; Sub-Inspectors of Constabulary who had rendered themselves amenable to the law? Well, it seemed to him (the Attorney General for Ireland) that everything had been done which could or ought to be done with reference to those Sub-Inspectors. Sub-Inspector Ball was not found "guilty" by a Coroner's Jury, although, notwithstanding, he (the Attorney General for Ireland) had considered it his duty to direct an information to be applied for in the regular way before the magistrates for manslaughter against the Sub-Inspector. He had discharged his duty in directing the prosecution, and he left it to the law, as he was bound to do, to then deal with the case. He did the same thing in the case of Sub-Inspector Stritch—that was to say, he directed the law to be put in motion against him. As to the case of Sub-Inspector Allen, he did not remember it; but the case of Sub-Inspector Rogers he did recollect, and in that the facts appeared to have been misconceived by the magistrates. With regard to the boy Molloy, he could assure the hon. Member that the convict, who, on Molloy's evidence, was convicted, had been released, because his health was breaking down. There was nothing more in the taking of the cane than there was in his losing a new silk umbrella in this House through some hon. Member taking it by mistake. Even the subsequent theft of the watch did not render Molloy incapable of identifying two men who fired into a house. With regard to the jury panel referred to, the fact was that 70 of the jurors so entirely miscarried at the previous Assizes, that every Crown case was withdrawn, and it was decided not to submit any other Crown cases in consequence of the erroneous verdicts given. The religious question, as he had satisfied
    1058
    the House when he spoke on this matter on a previous occasion, had nothing in the world to do with these cases, nor until the religious question was drawn into the matter in the House was it raised at all. He would, however, tell the Committee what was raised. A meeting of discontented jurors was convened in Cork, and they passed a series of resolutions, and the Chairman of the meeting, or at all events one of the principal jurors, stated that if he was empanneled as a juror, and the oath was administered to him, he would not take it, because he was satisfied that 75 per cent of the law being British law, it was so unjust that his conscience would not allow him to administer it. These discontented jurors were excluded from the pannel, and he thought quite properly, seeing that they would not administer the law. [Mr. SEXTON: One juror.] Not at all; the facts could not be denied, and anyone who would take the trouble to look at the papers would find all the particulars. [Mr. SEXTON: How many jurors were there at the meeting?] Eighteen or 19. It was a meeting of jurors who felt aggrieved, and their grievance found expression in what he had stated—that they would be bound to find according to their consciences, and their consciences would not allow them to administer the law. He believed, if the Crown Solicitor had not ordered them to stand aside, he would have neglected his duty, and he (the Attorney General for Ireland) should have had to call that officer to account, and he would have remained Crown Solicitor for Cork but a very short time after. As to the costs, if the facts were as stated by the hon. Member, the costs were most inexcusable. The Act of Parliament made provision for jurors to be dispensed with, and it was intended that the rules under the Act of Parliament should be bonâ fide carried out. His answer must be that which he had previously given—namely, that it was extraordinary, and to his mind utterly unreasonable, that such facts as those stated by the hon. Member should have occurred. If the Crown Solicitor had not acted rightly—he was a very kind-hearted man—an appeal on the spot by any person who had not got his expenses to any Judge in open Court, or a letter or telegram to him (the Attorney General for Ireland), would immediately have

    1059
    produced redress; and the only case brought forward in the House—namely, that of Constable Walsh—was redressed at once. It was inexcusable that people should make complaints of this kind without at once obtaining redress; and he quite agreed that such a case ought not to have existed at all. In order to prevent that sort of thing occurring, he had himself given express directions to the Crown Solicitor at the Winter Assizes that nothing of the kind should occur. On the same lines the hon. Member for Sligo did very considerable injustice in suggesting that he had used his privilege while Attorney General, or, rather, had exercised the duty imposed upon him by the Prevention of Crimes Bill. A more unjust implication could not have been made. [Mr. SEXTON: I only said you could do so.] He had changed the venue in eight cases. They had been removed to Dublin, and tried without the slightest religious element, and the only question was that there would not be an Assizes until September, and the men must have languished in gaol up to September if he had not had them tried in that way. There ought to be perfect fair-play in this matter, and he had taken care that justice should be done.
    MR. T. P. O'CONNORsaid, there was one remark which occurred to him on looking at this Estimate. Crime and outrage might be prejudicial to the general interests of the Irish and the English people; but they seemed to be rather a good thing for the Law Officers of the Crown, because the more outrage there was the more they received. In 1881 these Estimates amounted to £5,000, but for this year they were £8,000.
    THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. W. M. JOHNSON)said, he had explained several times that this difference was due to some way in which the Treasury made up its accounts.
    MR. T. P. O'CONNORsaid, he thought he need not apologize for not being able to understand that explanation, for the answers of the right hon. and learned Gentleman to the hon. Member for Sligo (Mr. Sexton) were of a most unsatisfactory character. Questions had been asked about the characters of these two persons—Connell and Molloy—and the right hon. and learned Gentle-
    1060
    man did not even attempt to answer the grave and serious charges made against those persons. Was Connell a murderer or not? If he was a murderer, how could the Government profess to be anxious to put down crime and retain unprosecuted and in their employment a man whom they ought to have hung if they could have got him convicted? He had gone into the case of these persons very closely, and they had sworn at the Cork Assizes that there was a conspiracy in Ireland to establish a real Irish Republic. The right hon. and learned Gentleman knew that any witness who went to a Court of Justice and testified to the existence of a real Irish Republic would be contradicting himself in so gross a manner as to expose himself to a charge of perjury. There was a man against whom a charge of murder was made—
    THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. W. M. JOHNSON): No charge of murder.
    MR. T. P. O'CONNORsaid, the charge of murder had been made against him in that House over and over again. He did not want to deal with technicalities; but the statement had been made over and over again that this man was guilty of murder, and he (Mr. O'Connor) would make that charge on the man's own evidence, and would challenge contradiction. In the face of these facts, the Government, instead of putting this man on trial, had got the liberties and lives of people sworn away. Any Government who made use of ex-murderers and proved perjurers to get convictions would be condemned in the eyes of all civilized men. Did this man commit the series of crimes charged against him by the hon. Member for Sligo? Was this the ruffian who, after he had got persons sentenced to penal servitude, stole a watch? Was he the man who could not go into a restaurant in London without stealing a gold-headed cane? The witness Molloy seemed to have been as faithful to the Crown Prosecutors as to the unfortunate young man convicted on his evidence in Cork. He did not know whether the Attorney General for Ireland would look back with any species of satisfaction to his career as Law Officer of the Crown; but he thought there was one thing which the right hon. and learned Gentleman would not forget; or, at all events, which other persons would not forget—namely, that

    1061
    he was the Law Officer who—he did not know whether on his own inspiration or under the malign influence of the late Chief Secretary—directed prosecutions in Ireland under a Statute of Edward III. He did not like to ask unfair questions; but he would ask if the right hon. and learned Gentleman could reflect without a blush on the fact that he was the first lawyer who directed persons to be prosecuted under that Statute? He hoped the day was passed when Irish Governments would have to go back three and four and six centuries in order to pick up some obsolete and wretched Act of Parliament to put men and women upon trial. His hon. Friend was quite within his right when he called attention to the large sum taken in this Vote for fees to witnesses employed by the Government. He was glad to see that for 1882–3 this amount would undergo a reduction. He did not know whether this item came under the same category as that to which the hon. Gentleman referred to—the system adopted by the Treasury; but he certainly thought this reduction ought to be called for. Finally, he thought the right hon. and learned Gentleman ought to ponder whether it was according to the principles of honour and conscience to employ wretches like Connell and Molloy to swear away the liberties of the people?
    MR. JUSTIN M'CARTHYsaid, he thought the explanation of the employment of men like Connell and Molloy was far from satisfactory. In his cross-examination Connell had admitted having been guilty of the most atrocious deeds, and the Judge spoke in the strongest language of his conduct. This man had deliberately stated that there was an organization for the formation of an Irish Republic, and that, in fact, the Republic was in operation; and he also stated that there had been a distribution of gold and silver and other metals as rewards of approved deeds in the service of the Irish Republic; and the jury, having heard stuff of that kind detailed, brought in a verdict of eleven to one. So far as his recollection went, this man Connell admitted in cross-examination that he had shot, at least, one person; and had told of many other crimes, perhaps not so bad as that, but more degrading than any murder could be. How he got into relations with the police did not appear; but some people were of opinion that he
    1062
    had started on his career as an assistant to the police. This man was "Captain Moonlight," of whom so much had been heard; but he had not gone long on the career of outrage and blood before he became an associate and ally of the police, and concocted many of those outrages in order to betray other men to the police. Unprosecuted for the offences he was stated to have committed, un-arraigned for the deeds of bloodshed he had admitted, this man was in the pay of the police, and was being retained for their prosecutions. He (Mr. M'Carthy) strongly objected to the whole system; he would rather run any risk than be guilty of such a degrading offence against public morals. As there was no other mode of entering a protest against such practices, he should move that the Vote be reduced by £600, the amount given for maintaining men like Connell and Molloy.
    Motion made, and Question proposed,
    "That a sum, not exceeding £35,796, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1883, of Criminal Prosecutions and other Law Charges in Ireland, including certain Allowances under the Act 15 & 16 Vic. c. 83."—(Mr. Justin M'Carthy.)
    MR. HEALYsaid, it should be known that it was this ruffian Connell, the Government assassin, who had just been brought over from Ireland, that was now being used in the trial of the man Walsh for treason-felony. This wretch would, no doubt, make his appearance to-morrow as a Crown witness at the Old Bailey to prove the existence of an Irish Republic; and next year, when the man now being prosecuted had been sentenced to penal servitude, a good round sum, by way of further pay, for the assassin Connell would probably be found in the Estimates. He was very anxious to know why it was that the Government maintained a man like this? How was it, seeing that they obtained an Act last year for the especial purpose of taking up scoundrels and midnight marauders, that this man was allowed to prowl about the country unchecked? How was it that the police allowed him on every occasion to get off scot-free, and that the magistrates never issued a warrant for his arrest? And after all this, too, the Government put £600 on, the Votes to pay him. Everyone in Ire-

    1063
    land believed that this man could never have gone on as he had done in Ireland for nine months without the police knowing it; and he had no doubt whatever that they knew perfectly well what he was doing, although they never interfered, and although they had an Act in force under which they could, if they liked, arrest every man, woman, and child of the population. It was impossible, under the circumstances, to avoid the conclusion that the police knew full well what Connell was doing—that he was in their pay, and was willing, of course, to earn their wages—because who were the persons he shot; who were the persons he punished? He attacked no landlords. The persons whom Connell attacked were members of the Land League—the men he assassinated, and whose ears he cut off, were Land Leaguers, and so the police did not interfere. And then he was brought up as a Crown witness, and he told his story about the double-barrelled gun, both barrels of which went off at the same time, and about the bullets which struck the corner of the house; all of which was contradicted. But this was the form which justice assumed in Irenad. The Government, having let Connell go on for nine months, proceeded to make use of him as a witness, and gave him £600, the taxpayers of England, Ireland, and Scotland being required not only to pay this amount, but to pay also the carriage of Connell from Ireland to the Old Bailey to give evidence at the trial of Walsh that would take place there to-morrow. The Government talked of preserving law and order in Ireland; but he told them that the people of Ireland despised their law so long as it was maintained by the aid of assassins like Connell. ["Oh, oh!"] Hon. Members cried "Oh!" but it was perfectly relevant to the question before the Committee to consider what was the effect of charging £600 in the Vote for Connell's support. But what was the result of using Connell in the way he had been made use of? Why, 25 young men had been kept in cells for nine months, and not allowed to speak to each other during that time. He was at the prison the other day, and picked out the individual that Connell swore was the captain of the band, and he was about to ask him some questions, but the man said they were not allowed to
    1064
    speak to anyone, the warder adding—"If you continue this interview, I shall have to terminate it; it is against the rules." Judge Barry, who conducted the trial of the accused persons in the most impartial manner, did not believe a word of the evidence given by this man Connell; he stopped taking notes at an early point in his evidence, which clearly proved that he did not believe what the creature was saying. But how did the matter end? Having kept these unfortunate wretches in prison for nine months in cells 6 feet by 4 feet, and subject to solitary confinement for 18 hours out of the 24, they were dismissed on their own recognizances. They were not even required to find bail; the case against them was considered to be so bad that they were not required to come up again. It was to pay the man who brought about all this that the Government put down £600 in the Estimates; and it was by acts such as this, he repeated, that they made British rule in Ireland detested and despised.
    DR. COMMINSsaid, it was simply disgraceful on the part of the Government to put down money in the Estimates for the payment of men like Connell. Anyone who had read the record of the trial, anyone who was acquainted with the administration of justice in civilized countries, must feel astonished that a country pretending to be civilized should make Use of such men in the administration of justice. But that was not the name given to these proceedings in Ireland; the people there looked upon them as the organization of injustice, perjury, and aggression against the principles of the law. One of those principles was that an informer who accused an accomplice of a capital offence and failed to convict him, was, as Blackstone said, "hanged upon his own confession." He should like to see men like Connell, confessed assassins, organizers of assassinations and treason, conspirators of the deepest dye, men whose lives were steeped in crime, who failed to make good their charges against others, punished for the crimes they themselves confessed to have committed. Was that the course taken by the Government? No; they hugged, the informer closer to their heart, and having failed in Ireland in making a charge successfully against certain persons on the evidence of this wretch, they im-

    1065
    ported him to England, where, in the case of the man Walsh, he had not the slightest doubt that by Connell's assistance they would be able to secure a verdict. With such things as this before their eyes it was no wonder that neither the Government nor the law was respected in Ireland. They all knew the old maxim, that "a man was known by his associates." It was equally true that Governments were known by their tools; and if they were found making use of men who first made their appearance, say, in the Militia, then disappeared through devious and dirty ways, and afterwards turned up to receive Government pay, how could the people conclude otherwise than that the Government were actually cognizant of the kind of person they made use of? They commenced the training of the tool in the Army or the Militia, and they finished it in the witness-box. Nothing had astonished him more than one of the explanations given by the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General for Ireland to the hon. Member for Sligo (Mr. Sexton). Here was a man committed for manslaughter, and the Attorney General for Ireland interposed to prevent the case going before the Grand Jury and the law taking its course. The right hon. and learned Gentleman, in fact, stopped a prosecution for manslaughter, and he (Dr. Commins) asked whether he could furnish an instance of this having been done by any Attorney General during the last 50 years? The right hon. and learned Gentleman had intervened on the part of the Government to prevent the man being put upon his trial for manslaughter; and he (Dr. Commins) said that the people of Ireland would look upon what he had done as an act of high-handed oppression, and that they would consider the lives of Irishmen were thought nothing of if they were only taken away by policemen in uniform. The act of the Attorney General for Ireland was an admission that the Government dared not trust to the ordinary course of law. Yet they could rely on Connell, the perjurer and organizer of conspiracy; and when he found that man, after his conspiracy, assassination, desertion, and perjury, still kept as a Government pensioner, he was bound to say that the Government pronounced its own condemnation, because it ad-
    1066
    mitted before mankind that it did not depend upon law and justice or the ordinary agents whom civilized Governments depended upon, and that it was obliged to descend to the lowest depths of society to find tools fitted to its purpose. If the Government had any respect for justice let them cease to employ such tools as these, and the Acts which gave them employment would then cease.
    THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. W. M. JOHNSON)said, he hoped the Committee would not concur in the opinion entertained by the hon. and learned Gentleman who had just sat down. He rose to state that there was no foundation whatever for the suggestion that any informer was found in connection with the Law Officers of the Crown in Ireland. Neither was there any foundation whatever for the suggestion that a man committed by the magistrates for manslaughter had been kept from trial by the intervention of the Attorney General for Ireland.
    MR. HEALYsaid, that while the trial of the persons accused by Connell was going on, Connell was kept outside the Court watching the witnesses, and when he saw anyone who could testify to the good conduct of the accused, he had him arrested. He asked the Attorney General for Ireland at whose instance the Court of Queen's Bench quashed the proceedings for manslaughter?
    THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. W. M. JOHNSON): At mine.
    Question put.
    The Committee divided:—Ayes 11; Noes 86: Majority 75.—(Div. List, No. 319.)
    Original Question put, and agreed to.
    (23.) £59,806, to complete the sum for the Supreme Court of Judicature in Ireland.
    MR. SEXTONsaid, he thought it desirable that the Government should inform the Committee how soon they intended to fill up the vacancies on the Judicial Bench in Ireland. At any rate, it was important for Irish Members to know whether the continued existence of vacancies was due to the difficulty of finding eligible persons to fill them, or to causes that were purely political.

    1067
    The Attorney General for Ireland must be aware that there were always numbers of gentlemen in Ireland fitted for the positions in question, and he was bound to say that an intelligent public curiosity had been aroused as to whether one of the vacancies would be filled by the right hon. and learned Gentleman himself. For some time past public opinion in Ireland had been expecting the translation of the right hon. and learned Gentleman to a sphere, if not more dignified, at any rate more serene than that which he at present adorned. This curiosity was very strongly developed amongst the people of Mallow. However, he trusted the right hon. and learned Gentleman would be able to say when it was intended to fill up the judicial vacancies now existing. The Coercion Act had imposed on the Judges duties of a very novel and extraordinary character, and he thought the time had come when the Government ought to be asked to give some explanation of the attitude taken up by the Judges with respect to the proposal by the Government to cast those duties upon them. At the time of the passage of the Coercion Act, the House was informed that the Judges had met and protested against being required to try prisoners in the place of jurors. He wished to know from the Government whether that was so before the Act was passed; and also whether the Judges protested a second time, and whether it was because of that second protest that the Government introduced important provisions, which were not in the Bill when it first came before the House, to enable the Government to supersede the ordinary Constitutional mode of trial by special juries, which would give the Crown a much greater advantage, and enable them to adopt the system of changing venues? These provisions were not contained in the scheme of the Bill as first laid before the House; and he wished to know whether those introductions were or were not due to the protest of the Judges, and, if they were, whether these proposals, throwing power into the hands of the Attorney General for Ireland, were made to relieve the Judges of those functions—in other words, if the Judges had definitely refused to accept the duties proposed to be imposed upon them, and if it was the intention of the Government to cast on
    1068
    the Judges the duty of trying prisoners, or to act upon the system of changing the venue? As to the resignation of Baron Fitzgerald, he should like to be informed whether that learned Judge's opinion of the Act was such, that rather than undertake such unconstitutional duties as had been proposed, he resigned the dignified position which he had so long held with credit to himself and to the Bench? Baron Fitzgerald was the only Judge who had reached the Irish Bench by the force of pure legal ability. He was pointed to by Irishmen as the solitary exception to that evil rule in Ireland which limited promotion in Ireland to gentlemen who, whether they had legal ability or not, had passed through political elections and given Party assistance to the Government.
    THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. W. M. JOHNSON)was understood to say that, in consequence of the Long Vacation, there was no immediate necessity for filling up the vacancies on the Bench. The theory of the hon. Member for Sligo, that because the Judges had refused the functions which it was proposed to intrust to them, therefore the Government had brought forward the provisions relating to special juries and the change of venue, however ingenious, was one entirely devoid of foundation.
    MR. CALLANasked why six months had been allowed to elapse from the death of Mr. Justice O'Brien before the vacancy was filled up, and whether Mr. Justice Lawson was intended to succeed Mr. Justice O'Brien or the present Lord Fitzgerald? The Queen's Bench, above all, ought to have been up to its full strength, especially during the period when extraordinary applications were made for redress of extraordinary grievances.
    THE ATTORNEY GENERAL FOR IRELAND (Mr. W. M. JOHNSON)was understood to say that Mr. Justice Lawson had succeeded Mr. Justice O'Brien.
    MR. HEALYthought it singular that, although Mr. Justice O'Brien died in December, the charges showed an increase instead of a decrease.
    Vote agreed to.
    (24.) £6,670, to complete the sum for the Court of Bankruptcy, Ireland.
    (25.) £580, to complete the sum for the Admiralty Court Registry, Ireland.
    (26.) £11,976, to complete the sum for the Registry of Deeds, Ireland.
    MR. SEXTONsaid, complaints had been made with regard to the allowances, salaries, and status of officers in this Department, and a Memorial had been presented to the Treasury; but the Treasury had replied, in February last, that they could not entertain that Memorial, considering that the position of the clerks in the Registry of Deeds Office was not worse than that of clerks in analogous offices. A very complete answer could, however, be given to that decision of the Treasury. The able gentleman who presided over this Office supported the complaints and Memorials of the clerks. He believed a Treasury Committee was presided over by the noble Lord the Member for Northumberland (Earl Percy), who advanced the claims of the clerks. It was, no doubt, true that in recent years the position of these clerks had been the subject of reorganization and improvement; but, in comparison with other Offices, their position was very bad indeed. The salaries of all the clerks in this Office were considerably less than the salaries of corresponding classes in other Offices. The annual increment by which these clerks advanced was much less than that in any other Office, and in other Offices the proportion of first and second and third classes was very much larger than the proportions in this Office. There were clerks who had been in the third class in this Office for 36 years, and could not reach the first class. He would like to know whether there was any reason why the able gentlemen who discharged the duties of this Office should be placed in a worse position than the clerks in any other Office in Ireland? There was no denying the importance of their duties or the facility with which they were performed. The Land Registry in Ireland was far more perfect than any to be found in Middlesex, or Yorkshire, or Edinburgh. Its machinery was complete, and the transactions of the Office in ordinary years affected land of the value of £3,000,000. Its clerks had to examine the papers and give legal interpretations of complicated legal terms, and they were liable to be brought before the Judges of the High Court and removed in case of mistake. They were in a worse position than the clerks in
    1070
    other Offices, and he thought their case was entitled to consideration when the Report of the Treasury Committee was finally considered by the Government. He hoped they would consider whether it would not be possible, with due regard to public economy, to place the lower class of clerks in this Office in as good a position with respect to promotion as those in the higher classes.
    MR. COURTNEYsaid, that re-arrangements of the positions of the clerks were under consideration.
    Vote agreed to.
    (27.) £1,507, to complete the sum for the Registry of Judgments, Ireland.
    Motion made, and Question proposed,
    "That a sum, not exceeding £52,552, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1883, for the Salaries and Expenses of the Office of the Irish Land Commission."
    MR. HEALYsaid, this was an extremely important Vote, and there was a variety of subjects to be raised under it. He was sure the Government would see the desirability of postponing it. Lord Donoughmore had obtained a Committee in the other House upon the Irish Land Bill; but his tenants had been treated in the most extraordinary manner, for when his tenants brought him into Court he refused to produce his own valuator. The matter was referred to another gentleman; but Lord Donoughmore refused to accept that reference, and it actually turned out, when the matter came before the Land Commission, that the tenants' valuator was willing to pay more to Lord Donoughmore than he had asked for. The noble Lord got a Committee in "another place," and kept the country in a state of turmoil and agitation. Then the action of the hon. Baronet the Member for Coleraine (Sir Hervey Bruce) was referred to as a typical case of injustice, and his action was very extraordinary. He did not see the hon. Baronet in his place, and he did not wish to refer to him; but there were facts in regard to that and other matters which it was desirable to bring out, and 1 o'clock in the morning was not the time at which these matters should be referred to. The whole tendency of the territorial class was this—they desired to intimidate the Commissioners by at-

    1071
    tacks in that House and in "another place." The territorial influence was supreme in "another place," and very potent in this House. On these accounts he strongly objected to the Vote being taken at this time of night, especially as there were very serious causes of complaint of the way in which the Sub-Commissioners were allocated. The whole of Ulster was swarming with Commissioners, and the hon. Gentleman opposite was getting his rents in Tyrone dealt with and lowered in the most frightful manner, while in Cork and in Kerry the Commission Courts were choked with applications; but nothing was done. It would be very unusual to allow the Government to get this Vote without reporting Progress; and, as a good many of the Votes following this were contentious Votes, Progress ought to be reported. Earlier in the evening the Chief Secretary had given a promise that he would communicate with the Irish Members as to the Royal Irish Constabulary Bill. He had expected some communication on that subject would have been made, and the Irish Members could not be expected to go on with this matter now. He therefore moved that Progress be reported.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."—(Mr. Healy.)
    MR. TREVELYANsaid, he had been watching with great care and interest the discussion of these Estimates. It was now the 7th of August, and the idea of what was a late hour was rather different at this period of the Session from what it would be earlier in the Session. With regard to the Royal Irish Constabulary Bill, it was certainly his intention to ask the House to resolve itself into Committee upon that measure; and, if Irish Members were willing, he should be perfectly ready to ask the House to go into the Bill. He gathered from the hon. Member opposite that his objection to passing this Vote at this moment was that hon. Gentlemen who brought charges against the Land Commission were not present to support them; but he thought they could hardly postpone the payment of the salaries under this Vote because charges had been made against the Commissioners. He would be glad if
    1072
    the hon. Member would accept his assurance that he would report Progress when he saw a desire to stop, and then he would proceed with the Committee on the Irish Constabulary Vote.
    MR. SEXTONsaid, he thought the declaration made by the Chief Secretary would facilitate progress. The Irish Members were endeavouring to see whether he intended to go into Committee on the Royal Irish Constabulary Bill. In addition to the several important questions raised in reference to the Land Commission, there was this further point—this Vote was for the salaries of public functionaries; but if the action of these people was to be taken into consideration, that must be done when the Vote was asked for. There were two non-contentious Votes to which the Irish Members had no objection, and he thought the Royal Irish Constabulary Bill might be dealt with.
    Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
    Original Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
    (28.) £46,308, to complete the sum for Reformatory and Industrial Schools, Ireland.
    (29.) £4,206, to complete the sum for Dundrum Criminal Lunatic Asylum, Ireland.
    House resumed.
    Resolutions to be reported To-morrow.
    Committee to sit again To-morrow.

  ROYAL IRISH CONSTABULARY BILL.
  (Mr. Trevelyan, Mr. Attorney General for Ireland.)
  ROYAL IRISH CONSTABULARY BILL.

    [BILL 264.] COMMITTEE.
    Order for Committee read.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair."—(Mr. Trevelyan.)
    MR. SEXTONsaid, the House was now asked to go into Committee on a Bill to amend the Acts regulating the pay of certain officers of the Royal Irish Constabulary Force, and for other purposes connected therewith. He thought the House would desire, before it went into Committee on this Bill, to hear from the Government whether they had any further statements to make respecting the unprecedented and dangerous state of affairs which appeared to prevail in Ireland among the men of the Constabulary Force. He (Mr. Sexton) and

    1073
    his hon. Friends had at former stages objected to this Bill, because it dealt in a favourable manner with that class of the Constabulary Force who had most exposed itself to popular aversion and criticism in that House, and also because it shut out of view the great body of the men of that Force. Every day which passed showed the state of affairs amongst the police in Ireland to be exceedingly critical, and the reports in the newspapers that morning were such as did not permit of a moment's delay in the matter of the explanation at the hands of the Government. They, on the Irish Benches, had received telegrams every day since last Friday, and he received two to-day which certainly made it his duty to appeal to the Government to tell them whether the proposals they had in view led them to have any reasonable hope that the proposals of the Government would be satisfactory to the men. He thought the House would agree with him that the moment had come when the Chief Secretary should state fully and frankly to the House what were the intentions of the Government. They had learned already from the statement of the right hon. Gentleman that the Government proposed to distribute £10,000 a-year by way of an increase of £30 a-year to each of the officers, and that the position of the men was to be improved at the rate of 25 s. per man per annum. But, whereas each officer had a right to have that increase, the men would not receive their increase of 25 s. all round, because it was made dependent and contingent upon the special and extra duty performed, so that the advantage would fall upon a small section of the officers. It was necessary, in order to understand the proposals of the Government, that they should consider what had taken place in Limerick of late. The city of Limerick, for a year or more, had had the advantage of the services of a gentleman who stood in high favour with the Irish Executive—Mr. Clifford Lloyd. They found that yesterday morning that magistrate paraded 80 men of the City Police Force before him, and that he told the men that they were acting in an unprecedented and disgraceful manner, and that if they were soldiers they would be liable to be shot. The situation immediately became such that Mr. Clifford Lloyd thought it the better part of valour to
    1074
    retire. The men returned to their barracks, and they made a joint declaration that, if they were called upon a second time to parade before Mr. Clifford Lloyd, they would not do so. Surely such a situation as that demanded the attention of the Government, and one might almost expect a statement from the Secretary of State for War on the subject. Four other parades were held that day, and although Mr. Clifford Lloyd had not the temerity to appear a second time before the men, the Inspector General met the men at the second and subsequent parades, and informed them they were engaged in a very disloyal movement. The men met, and unanimously decided that the language of Colonel Bruce conveyed an insult upon them, and they called upon him for an apology. The Inspector General thereupon apologized to the men, and told them that he had intended no insult. The upshot was, that the Inspector General called upon the men to give up their demands, and withdraw the Circular in which they had made their demands. They refused to do anything of the sort; and upon an expression of their determination to hold by their movement, the Inspector General left the city. The men demanded that their grievances should be settled in eight days, and stated that if they were not, there would be an open rupture. He had no desire to make any undue demand on the right hon. Gentleman when he asked him to state whether the Government had any reasonable hope that the proposals they had to make would have the effect of allaying the dissatisfaction that prevailed at the present moment amongst the Police Force of Ireland?
    MR. TREVELYANsaid, he did not admit in theory the justice of the hon. Member's assertion that on a Bill such as this it was necessary to make any statement with regard to the grave events passing in Ireland; but, at the same time, there was sufficient connection between the subject of this Bill and those events to make it natural for the hon. Member to put his question. He had explained more than once that this Bill was only part of a considerable scheme, which the Government determined on some time ago, for the purpose of bettering the position of the Constabulary in Ireland. He had ex-

    1075
    plained that while the officers gained, in the shape of allowances, £10,000 a-year by this scheme, the men got £17,000 a-year, a large part of which was paid to special men under special circumstances, but part of which was paid to all men under all circumstances. He had explained, likewise, that another part of the scheme referred, not to the annual advantage which men and officers got, but to a limited sum which was to be paid in consideration of the sufferings and sacrifices of the men during the last three years. The Government were prepared to grant a sum of £180,000, every penny of which was to go to the men. These benefits to the Constabulary Force the Government had determined on granting before there was any thought of discontent. With regard to any complaints that the Constabulary had outside the complaints which would be satisfied by this sum of money—£180,000—and the sums of money which would be granted annually—£17,000—whatever complaints there were, the men undoubtedly should have taken the course of applying to the Government through their officers, like every other body of organized public servants, whether they be civil or military. It was not the first time he had had to do with discontent in a public Office. He had known before this trusted Members of Parliament coming to him with a Petition from clerks in public Offices, or from workmen in Dockyards, asking him to improve the position of the men; and the answer that he had always given was the answer, in fact, which he should give now to the Irish Constabulary—namely, that the Government would listen to no Petition whatever that was not presented through the superior officers of the persons who desired to have their position improved. That was the course which the Constabulary of Ireland ought to have taken; but on the present occasion a portion of them, at any rate, had not taken that course. What the exact condition of the movement was, how far it had spread, how far it was legitimate, how far it had passed beyond legitimate bounds, in what parts of Ireland it had occurred, it was not very easy to ascertain; it was not very easy to ascertain this through the newspapers or through, he was sorry to say, a very much less authoritative and trustworthy source of evidence with
    1076
    which they were only too freely provided. There was a feature in this movement to which he once before referred, and which had now reached such a very alarming development that it was impossible not to say another word about it, and that was the use that had been made of the telegraph all over Ireland. From every quarter of Ireland he had got, and he had reason to believe many hon. Members had got, anonymous telegrams. ["No!"] He assured the House that all the telegrams he had received had been anonymous. They professed to come from a great body of men; but there was no reason to believe they came from any but a very few men, or, perhaps, from one man. Those men or that man they did not know. The other day he got a telegram, and as it was evidently sent for the purpose of being made public and exciting ill-feeling, there was no objection to his telling the House what it was. It professed to come from the pensioners of the Constabulary, and it was to the effect that these pensioners would be very glad to join by force of arms in putting down the Constabulary—he believed the words were—in revolt. Now, he did not believe for a single moment that the telegram came from the pensioners of the Constabulary. He believed it was sent from some mischievous person for the purpose of stirring up ill-feeling between the pensioners and the Constabulary, and inciting the Constabulary against the Government by conveying the impression that the Chief Secretary was in connection with the pensioners for the purpose of acting in a hostile manner against the Constabulary themselves. That was one specimen of the telegrams he had received. He got a telegram this morning purporting to come from the Royal Irish Constabulary in the county and city of Cork. He did not believe that it was in any sense a representative telegram. The message was—
    "Your speech to Parliament on Saturday has driven the Force to desperation by falsely representing its feeling by saying we were satisfied with the Government proposals. Most intense dissatisfaction prevails, and your closing words as to the qualifications for full pensions stings the men almost to distraction."
    He knew not by whom this telegram was sent; but it was obviously sent by some clever person who desired to stir up dis-

    1077
    satisfaction amongst the Constabulary at a time when they were in an excited state. He never said anything to the effect that the Constabulary were satisfied with the Government proposals; but he knew, on good authority, that one cause of the dissatisfaction of the police was that one of theGrovernmentproposals—that which gave £180,000—had not yet passed through the Committee of the House of Commons. As to the qualifications for pensions, he never said one word, good, bad, or indifferent. The Government proposed to give these boons to men and officers long before the recent events occurred. They proposed to give them still; and he earnestly hoped that the House and the Committee would enable them, as soon as possible, to carry those proposals into practice. The Government was not unwilling to consider the complaints of the men; full inquiry would be made into the complaints; but the Government would not entertain any representations as long as the present attitude on the part of any considerable part of the Constabulary existed. That attitude was opposed to discipline, and discreditable to the Force, and if the Government took any other line they would not be worthy to be called a Government. Full inquiry would be made into the condition of the Constabulary; but this movement, which was passing over a larger or smaller part of the country—this movement, which he believed to be very much exaggerated—must stop before that inquiry began. He felt the extreme difficulty that anyone was under who spoke upon such a matter of detail as this at a distance from the spot. He longed to be back in Ireland and to take his share in dealing with this movement in the manner in which he thought such movements should be dealt with—with thorough firmness, and, at the same time, with conciliation. He was, however, detained here until these measures, which the Government had so long promised, both to the men and officers, were passed. He intreated hon. Gentlemen to bring the Committee to a speedy conclusion.
    MR. O'SHAUGHNESSYsaid, he was glad to hear the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary hold out the hope that the demands of the men in this case would be considered. He could not blame the right hon. Gentleman for requiring that the grievances complained
    1078
    of should be put forward in the regular way through the officers of the Force; but, knowing the state of the Constabulary in Limerick, and the kind of work they had been doing for some time, he was bound to ask the right hon. Gentleman to take into consideration what the men had passed through. He had received a letter, only to-day, from the Mayor of Limerick, as loyal a man as any Government official who was employed in the town. His Worship said he did not wonder at the agitation, because all classes, civil and military, were disgusted by what had been going on there, and the sooner a change, and a radical change, in the present administration of the city took place the better it would be for all classes. He (Mr. O'Shaughnessy) had known the men of the Constabulary in Limerick for a good many years; he had known them thoroughly loyal, thoroughly active, and, above all, thoroughly patient in the discharge of very disagreeable duties. The other day the men were really provoked by language used by a gentleman who had no official position entitling him to hold such language. This gentleman—Mr. Clifford Lloyd—told the men he had been bearing the brunt of the discontent in the city for months, and if they were soldiers they would be liable to be shot. The men very properly told him they were not soldiers, and they reminded him what their agreement with the Government was. They assured Mr. Clifford Lloyd that they meant to carry out their agreement; they meant to protect the peace of the city, no matter what happened, and they had acted with perfect good faith. Great allowance was to be made for these men in Limerick and elsewhere. The testimony, not merely of persons in Limerick who shared his views, but of many Conservatives he had spoken to, was that these men had been overworked, and that their patience had been taxed in many ways. They had been put not only to hard work, but to needless and useless work, for what purpose it was difficult to say. They had been doing not merely ordinary police duty, but military duty, besides aiding the process of the civil law under circumstances which had hitherto been unusual, and they had been called upon to discharge military guard duties, which were very unsatisfactory. A great deal

    1079
    had been said about their disloyalty. He rejoiced that the Inspector General withdrew the word "disloyal." The men did not deserve the charge of disloyalty; if they were disloyal they would not have waited until there was peace in the country. They had waited until disturbance had passed, until their demands could do no harm; and it was only now, when just laws had been passed and the prospects of the country were brighter, that they were making their voice heard. He trusted that what had occurred would be forgotten; that they would be allowed an opportunity of presenting their claims in a regular way through their officers, and that those claims would receive the just consideration which their conduct in the past deserved, and which the right hon. Gentleman had promised.
    MR. T. P. O'CONNORsaid, that every hon. Member would agree that the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary should be allowed to go to Ireland and take up his duties there. Their desire to precipitate the action of the right hon. Gentleman in that direction, however, did not preclude them from the duty of stating their opinions as to the measure now before the House. He (Mr. O'Connor) was surprised to hear the statement coming from the Chief Secretary—that these telegrams were, as a rule, sent by one man. Some of them were long—one which had been received by the hon. Member for Sligo (Mr. Sexton) must have cost 2s. 3d. Several telegrams were received from the same place as the one to which he referred by Members of Parliament, and he must be a very strange man indeed who thought that the police who were complaining—and justly complaining—of their small salaries, had so much money that one single member of the Force could send a telegram like this to dozens of Members of Parliament. The telegrams might have been despatched by one man; but their numbers showed that there must have been a purse made up to defray the cost. He thought the speech of the Chief Secretary threw a deal of light upon what had happened in the district to which reference had been made. The hon. Member for Sligo had asked several very plain and distinct categorical questions as to the transactions of the men in the city of Limerick, and their parade
    1080
    under Mr. Clifford Lloyd. He had asked whether Mr. Clifford Lloyd had not told the men that if they were soldiers they would have been shot; and, if so, whether discontent was not likely to be increased by that? They had here the Member for the City of Limerick (Mr. O'Shaughnessy), whose obedience to the Government could not be questioned yet, and they saw him rising up and telling the Government distinctly that the cause of all this disturbance and discontent amongst the police of Limerick had been the novel and strange duties which had been cast on them. The men had been asked, as the hon. Member had said, to perform military as well as police duties. The hon. Member, out of excess of delicacy, had not carried his thought out to its full extent, and said that the men were discontented because their officers were removed from them, because their duties were enlarged, and, in other words, because Mr. Clifford Lloyd was amongst them. A movement like this must be met by a mingled spirit of firmness and conciliation, the right hon. Gentleman said. He (Mr. O'Connor) agreed with that; but how could they meet these men in a spirit of conciliation when they kept over them a man who had been the chief engenderer of the spirit of discontent that had arisen? The first thing they should do to make the police in Ireland contented was to send Mr. Clifford Lloyd back to Belfast, the place he had come from, or, when the Bill passed, give him the facility of taking advantage of the increased pensions. The Chief Secretary did not understand the position of the Irish Members with regard to this Bill. They were told these men were going to get £180,000. They knew that the annual sum in the shape of allowances was £17,000, and they were now told that an additional £180,000 was to be given in the form of a gratuity. What, however, the men asked for was something like a permanent increase to their salaries. When they were putting this case before the House last Saturday—and no one could say they had put it at exhaustive length or with any want of moderation—one of the main objections they raised against the Bill was that the men would see that the 13,000 privates were neglected, and the 300 officers were pampered and petted. That was a statement that one could make with nothing

    1081
    but a mere ordinary inference to go upon; but since that statement had been made he had had a Memorial sent to him by a body of these police, and he saw by that that those who had joined the Force since the 1st of August, 1866, were placed in a most unfair position as to pensions. Several matters of complaint were urged in the Memorial, and they asked for an additional 1s. a-day as remuneration for their services. Having stated their grievances, the Memorialists went on to say that a distinction was drawn between the officers and the men—that the pay and pensions of the officers were to be increased without at all taking into account the claims of the men who were the main workers, and whose duties were the more onerous. The men took the same view that the Irish Members took last Saturday, and contrasted the neglect of their interests with the tender care bestowed on the officers. He (Mr. O'Connor) must say that the Irish Executive appeared to him to be blundering in a most infatuate manner. On a famous occasion a Leader of the Opposition—he forgot whom—said to the Government—"Take back your Bill!" Well, he (Mr. O'Connor) ventured most respectfully to offer the same advice to the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland. He would say to him—"Take back your Bill!" [Mr. O'SHEA dissented.] He saw that the hon. Member for the County of Clare (Mr. O'Shea), who had been a gallant officer himself and might be allowed to have some sympathy with the Constabulary officers, objected to that suggestion; but it certainly seemed to him that it would be better for the tranquillity of Ireland and of the Force that they should postpone the measure. They certainly would lose nothing by delay, although they were likely to risk a great deal by dealing with this matter in a piecemeal fashion.
    MR. CALLANsaid, that on Friday last, when he asked the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary a Question as to the accuracy of the reports which were circulated in the newspapers with regard to the discontent existing amongst the Constabulary, the right hon. Gentleman characterized those reports as extraordinary exaggerations. That was the right hon. Gentleman's first statement; and it now turned out that it was made on the authority of the Constabulary offi-
    1082
    cers, and of others outside the Police Force. Was the right hon. Gentleman still of that opinion? Were the statements which appeared in the papers owing to the work of agitators, or to the legitimate grievances of men who had found where the shoe pinched? The right hon. Gentleman had gone on to say that nothing had occurred but what was consistent with the good order of this most loyal Force—as he (Mr. Callan) quite believed it to be. On Saturday, the right hon. Gentleman had quoted a paragraph from a letter written, he presumed, on the previous day by the Inspector General of Constabulary, in which the Inspector General said—
    "I do not believe there is any improper feeling existing in their ranks, although they, no doubt, feel disappointed at the non-receipt of their share of the £180,000, which they have long expected."
    That seemed to be the only matter—that £180,000—which had the right hon. Gentleman's attention. Had not the columns of The Freeman's Journal contained details as to the grievances of the men? No doubt; but, as the Government did not give its advertisements to that paper, they, of course, did not condescend to read it. The officers gave a very different account of what was taking place to that rendered by the men. The Report from the officers was received from the right hon. Gentleman on Saturday. The authorities were fond of letter-writing. A document, marked "Private and confidential," had been circulated by the Inspector General of Police. He (Mr. Callan) had obtained a copy of it. It was in these words—"Royal Irish Constabulary Office"—
    MR. TREVELYAN: Did I not understand the hon. Member to say it was marked "Private and confidential?"
    MR. CALLANsaid, it was one of those documents marked "Private and confidential;" but it would appear in tomorrow's newspapers, for he had sent a copy of it to Ireland for the information of the Constabulary. But, before he read the document in question, he would give the Committee some idea of what led up to it. He had always understood that the Royal Irish Constabulary was not a military body. It had often been denied in that House; and it was clear that it was not, for, like the letter-carriers, the constables could leave on giving a certain notice—he believed a

    1083
    month's notice. The following was some part of the text of the document which had caused so much commotion in official circles. It was addressed, "To the Right Hon. G. O. Trevelyan, Chief Secretary of Ireland," and commenced—
    "The Memorial of the Royal Irish Constabulary of the City and County of Cork. Your Memorialists beg to submit the following statement of grievances for your consideration, and what steps may be taken for the redress of the same."
    And it went on to say—
    "That the members of the Force who have joined since the 1st of August, 1866, are placed on a lower scale of pension than men who joined previous to that date. A sub-constable who is now in receipt of £62 a year, having joined since 1866, will, after 30 years' service, be only entitled to a pension of about £36, whereas, had he joined previous to that, he would, on retiring, be entitled to full pay."
    At the end of the second paragraph the Memorial said—
    "That the sum of at least 1s. per day added to the pay of each member of the Force would be but a slight recognition of the wants of the men."
    It was further complained—
    "That the married men of the Force are not allowed any extra pay."
    And that—
    "There is a hardship on those men who may be stationed where there is no accommodation or additional bedding. Additional outlay is thus incurred."
    Another paragraph set forth—
    "That a distinction is now being drawn between the men and officers, although the pay and pension of the entire Force was, since its embodiment, regulated by the same Statutes."
    The Memorial concluded with the words—
    "That the Force have always performed their duties with zeal and loyalty second to no servants of Her Majesty, and the slight recognition of their services now sought for ought not to be refused. Your Memorialists therefore pray that the foregoing grievances may be redressed, as in case of their being allowed to longer continue the members of the Force of the county and city of Cork will find it impossible to perform their duties in the efficient manner they have hitherto done."
    The Memorial was, throughout, couched in the most respectful terms; but the House would see it in the papers before long. There were two outrages committed on the men—one of them on Saturday. He (Mr. Callan) had received a telegram from Cork, requesting
    1084
    him to ask the Question of which he had given Notice to-day. The telegram was as follows:—
    "R. I. C., Cork City.
    "Head Constable Cantillon seized our Memorial to-day, placed Constable Murphy under arrest, charged with illegal documents in pos-session, though it was but our Memorial. Please question in House. Sincere thanks."
    On Saturday afternoon Policeman Murphy was arrested for being in possession of the Memorial—for having followed the very course of conduct that the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary had recommended. The policeman, it seemed, had gone to a brother constable, and had asked him to sign this document, and for so doing he was seized and imprisoned. Was Head Constable Cantillon to be blamed? Because while Constable Murphy was under arrest and the Memorial was seized, in the mail train that was then coming down there was this letter from Inspector General Bruce, dated August 4—
    "Royal Irish Constabulary Office,
    "Dublin Castle, 4th Aug., 1882.
    "I have this day learned with sincere pain and regret that grave discredit has been thrown upon the character and discipline of this Force, by a Circular, purporting to emanate from the Police of the City of Limerick setting forth certain claims"
    —"purporting" to come from the police and "setting forth certain claims;" a palpable misrepresentation of the Memorial he (Mr. Callan) had quoted from—
    "As to pay, &c, and addressed to their comrades in other parts of the country with the evident intention of obtaining a combination in support of those claims. I further learn with regret that the Circular has met with responses purporting to come from the police in several of the places to which it is addressed. I cannot too strongly reprobate such a course. I am unwilling to believe that it has been joined in or encouraged by any large number or by the older and more experienced members of the Force; but that they should have permitted it on the part of themselves, if such is the case, is a serious disgrace. I would have, on the contrary, expected that the recent large efforts made by the Government, by a liberal increase to the ordinary allowances and by an application to Parliament for £180,000 for distribution to recoup the men for extra expenses incurred during the late troubled times, would have inspired the Force with sufficient confidence in the Government and in the Inspector General to lead them to refrain from any course other than the legitimate and disciplined one for preferring claims laid down by Article 340 of the Code,"

    1085
    "The Code!" Where was that Code? The Irish Members had often asked for it, but had never been allowed to see it. Was there anything discreditable or disgraceful in it? If not, why refuse to let them see it? Why refuse to place it on the Table of the House? The document went on to say—
    "I have never before received any representation that the pay of the men was generally inadequate to the supply of necessaries; but I may state that some other of the matters referred to in the Circular have for some time past engaged my attention, but that I now feel that the undisciplined action referred to, especially if persevered in, must cause such a change of feeling as will certainly tend to retard rather than to advance all efforts made to improve the condition of the Force.
    (Signed) "R. BRUCE,
    "Inspector General."
    He (Mr. Callan) had received a large number of private telegrams and letters—to the extent of about a dozen at a time; but one which he had received that night showed that it had been tampered with, and this was the one containing this Memorial to which he had referred. As to the conduct of Mr. Clifford Lloyd, he would read what had appeared in a Limerick Conservative newspaper—
    "In accordance with the Statute one month's notice is required from members of the Constabulary Force before they can leave, and the men on strike are determined to comply strictly with the law, so that no imputation of disloyalty can be alleged against them. Mr. Clifford Lloyd, S. R. M., inspected the men this morning at William Street Barracks, and on parade addressed the men on the subject of their agitation. He said that, 'if you were soldiers, you would be shot for your misconduct.' On hearing this expression of opinion, a fierce shout of 'We are not soldiers,' went up from the men; and an intimation was subsequently conveyed to the Sub-Inspector (Mr. Wilton) that if Mr. Lloyd again inspected the men (he intimated that he would do so), they would, in consequence of his language, refuse to parade before him. It is stated that this information was at once conveyed to Mr. Lloyd, who did not make the second visit, but Colonel Bruce, the Inspector General of Royal Irish Constabulary, arrived in the city to-day, at 1 o'clock, and, at 2 o'clock this afternoon, inspected the men of William Street. After the inspection he addressed them, and said that he was ashamed of the conduct of the men; that the Government had altered the opinion which they previously had of the loyalty of the Force, and that the people of the country had lost their respect for them as a body."
    He (Mr. Callan) would ask the Chief Secretary—and before he sat down he would move the adjournment of the
    1086
    debate in order to enable the right hon. Gentleman to answer—whether Colonel Bruce was authorized by him to state that, in consequence of their conduct, the Government had altered the opinion which they previously had of the loyalty of the Force? That statement was made in Limerick on Saturday, at about the time the right hon. Gentleman was reiterating what he had said on the previous day as to the loyalty of the Royal Irish Constabulary. The report went on to say—
    "At hearing this language a perfect murmur of disapprobation passed through the ranks, and the perfect discipline of the men only prevented them from expressing their denial of the insinuation of disloyalty. The effect of this language has had a fearful effect on the morale of the men, and has provoked them very much indeed. We have it on good authority that if a kindly spirit were evinced towards them that the result would have been quite different. If the men carry out their intentions to resign, the condition of the peace of the country, which at present, need we say, is not in a very desirable state, will be most precarious."
    In another article it was said—
    "In spite of the solemn assurances of Mr. Trevelyan in the House of Commons last night—assurances made, it is true, in the usual flippant style which characterizes all the utterances of the present Ministry—the Royal Irish Constabulary question is assuming a most formidable aspect. On this evening week we published the initiative announcement with reference to the threatened resignation of the men stationed in the William Street Barracks. From that to the present the federation has rapidly spread, until it now forms a complete network extending all over the country, no one Constabulary station being excluded from the combination. That the Irish Chief Secretary, 'glad to have the opportunity of mentioning the subject,' as he smilingly stated, should pronounce that the matter, which from a local and, it must be allowed, a more accurate standpoint, we must emphatically affirm to be the most serious event which has taken place in this country for a series of years, was grossly exaggerated by the newspapers, was an inaccurate, no less than a monstrous assertion."
    He (Mr. Callan) had here a telegram sent from the Macroom Office by "The Royal Irish Constabulary at West Cork," in these words—
    "You are requested earnestly to question Clifford Lloyd's authority to interfere with our financial matters, and, in doing so, charge them with mutiny and disloyalty, thereby outraging their feelings."
    Was Mr. Clifford Lloyd authorized to make that charge, or was it a characteristic piece of presumption on his part? He had received a telegram from

    1087
    Belfast at 10 o'clock to-night; and in reading it he would ask, were the Government going to drive these men to extremities? The telegram said—
    "R. I. C.—Belfast,—Meeting of Belfast police, convened for this evening, prohibited by authorities. Three hundred men assembled in Town Hall. Town Inspector at length permitted conference in Barracks. Memorial setting forth grievances read to men, who marched from Town Hall to Queen Street Barrack. Great difficulties in our way. Free expression of our opinion suppressed."
    Was that the manner in which the men were to be quieted? A policeman who had lived some time in the county he (Mr. Callan) represented, a well educated man, had written to him to thank him for what he had done in the cause of the Constabulary, and, at the same time, to give him a few tips. This constable had informed him that the men were discontented and disappointed at the insult offered to them in the enormous increase of pay proposed to be given to the County and Sub-Inspectors, whilst the men were left in the lurch—to County and Sub-Inspectors, many of whom had been seen smoking cigars and drinking brandy at prohibited hours, when the men were out in the cold doing extra duty without extra pay. Here was another letter he had received—
    "Clonmel, August 5, 1882.
    "Dear Sir,—If you would ask on whose recommendation Mr. Colomb, A. J. G., was promoted over the heads of all the 1st class County Inspectors of the Royal Irish Constabulary, you would let a little light into the present discontent. Lord Kenmare was an old friend of Mr. Colomb, and when the Duke of Con-naught was at Killarney, he sent to Mayo for Mr. Colomb, and made him the Duke's fisherman for the time being; hence his rapid advancement. Such is the manner of doing business at the Castle, Dublin.—Yours, faithfully, D. IRELAND."
    This was the first Bill introduced into the House dealing with the Constabulary in sections, and not as a whole. Formerly, when any Bill was introduced in reference to any body of men, it dealt with the body altogether; but here was a Bill brought in to increase and mark still more the difference between the men and the officers of the Constabulary, giving £ 180,000 to the men for the past, and 25 s. increase yearly for the future. The men must have some increase, though probably not as much as they asked for, and for the 13,000 men some-
    1088
    thing like £234,000 a-year would be involved. Instead of 25 s. a-year, the increase ought to be something like £25 a-year if the Force was to be maintained. It had been said by some Liberals and Radicals below the Gangway that they would send Scotchmen and Englishmen to Ireland. But the Chief Secretary had received a legacy of discontent and hatred, and he (Mr. Callan) must say that he had great hopes, after six months' experience of the Chief Secretary, that the right hon. Gentleman, if he was not deluded by the Castle officials, would make his Office much more respectable, and would create a much kinder feeling than at present existed. He would ask the Chief Secretary to look matters plainly in the face. If this Police Force was undisciplined, let it be borne in mind that during the last five years no attention had been paid to its demands. There had been discontent growing in Ireland for the last 12 months among the Police; and yet the officials at Dublin Castle had had the temerity, for it was nothing but that, to write to the Chief Secretary to state that this discontent was merely an ebullition which had been much exaggerated. That was the advice the Chief Secretary received from the Inspector General; but he would urge the right hon. Gentleman to exercise his own good feeling in the matter, to see what these men had suffered in the last three years, to see how laborious had been their duties without any extra pay, and without any hope for the future, to examine into these matters and, despite some possible imprudences on the part of the men, take their case at once into consideration. Such a course would do far more to allay the discontent than any threats or private Circulars; and he hoped Mr. Clifford Lloyd would be relegated to some other position, and that it would be stated in the House that Mr. Clifford Lloyd had exceeded his duty. It was the universal belief in Limerick that Mr. Clifford Lloyd had irritated these men in order to make a great man of himself, and show how necessary it was to have him to quell the discontent, and that if he was dispensed with, the country would go to the dogs. He would move the adjournment of the debate to enable the Chief Secretary to throw out some hope to the Irish Police that he would judge their case by him-

    1089
    self, and not by Mr. Clifford Lloyd, or the blundering Inspector General.
    MR. HEALYseconded the Motion, and expressed surprise that in debates like this, when Mr. Clifford Lloyd was under discussion, the Government was not more often favoured with the assistance of the late Chief Secretary (Mr. W. E. Forster), who was responsible for appointing that gentleman. Whenever the Government was criticized with reference to its present difficulties, which were mainly owing to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Bradford, that right hon. Gentleman gave the House the benefit of his absence. The complaints which had been made against Mr. Clifford Lloyd in the last 12 months had terminated in this semi-revolt. The character of Mr. Clifford Lloyd had been impressed upon the Government years ago, and it was instructive now to find that the contention that he was a stirrer-up and a firebrand was proved to be correct, and that the statement that he was the preserver of the peace was incorrect. Mr. Clifford Lloyd was for some years a magistrate in the North of Ireland; then he was sent to Kilmallock, in the county of Limerick, and in that place there were more murders than in any other. Then he was sent to Limerick, and in a week there were riots in that city, and at this moment it was the only important city in which the Government had had to issue a proclamation under the "Curfew" Clause of the Coercion Act. The inhabitants were liable to arrest for being out after dark, and this was all owing to Mr. Clifford Lloyd. He (Mr. Healy) had recently received a letter from one of the unfortunate policemen in that district, who was serving under Mr. Clifford Lloyd, and he found there were 14 persons protecting Mr. Clifford Lloyd. What was he doing? He was very fond of smoking, and he kept one policeman occupied in rolling cigarettes for him, and if the unfortunate man relaxed in the duty of rolling cigarettes he was threatened with summary punishment by Mr. Clifford Lloyd. What was the history of Mr. Clifford Lloyd? He would like to give the House a short biographical sketch of Mr. Clifford Lloyd supplied by Dublin Castle. It was an extraordinary thing that in Dublin Castle they never kept anything to themselves, and he found that Mr. Clif-
    1090
    ford Lloyd obtained an appointment at Belfast by paying £300, and that circumstance could not be denied except by a falsehood. That amount was paid in half-yearly instalments. Mr. Clifford Lloyd was detested in his regiment by his brother officers and the men so much that, when his regiment was to be inspected, the men determined to break up the step in order to give the Inspector General the idea that the regiment was inefficient. He was formerly a cadet at Sandhurst, and after being expelled from Sandhurst for disgraceful conduct, he got employment in Burmah, through the influence of his father. On one occasion, last year, Mr. Clifford Lloyd hired a special train, and dashed from Dundalk to Drogheda with 30 or 40 police, and the men were in such a hurry to disperse a meeting that was being held that they left their mess-blankets in the mud, and charged at the double. He (Mr. Healy) was at that time addressing the meeting, and Mr. Clifford Lloyd gave orders for the dispersal of the meeting. It was an unpleasant thing to address a meeting with the muzzles of guns at one's head, and so orders were given to disperse the meeting; but Mr. Clifford Lloyd said if the people did not clear out he would order the men to fire upon them. That occurrence had been proved; but the late Chief Secretary refused to inquire into it. After he went to Limerick the murders increased, and now, owing to cigarette rolling and other amusements, this revolt had broken out. Mr. Clifford Lloyd had told the men that if they were soldiers they would have been shot. No doubt if he had charge of them they would have been shot. What was loyalty? Nobody was loyal to an abstraction; but these men had to be loyal for 1s. 6d. a-day, and they were loyal or disloyal according to the scale of their wages. He remembered the late Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster (Mr. John Bright) sneering at the British Army, and saying he could buy as much valour as was wished at 10 s. a-day. He (Mr. Healy) could buy as much loyalty as was wished at 1s. 6d. a-day; but in Limerick, in consequence of various circumstanoes, loyalty had gone up, and, while the men were loyal at 1s. 6d. a-day, they considered the market price should, be higher now, and had refused to serve Her Majesty without a corre-

    1091
    sponding increase in their pay. He could not understand a man saying he was loyal to an abstraction like the Crown; and, therefore, he maintained that, with regard to the loyalty of these men, they did protest too much. As to these men being treated better, they would be treated just as it suited the Chief Secretary. If it suited the Government to give them £100 a-year more they would get it; if not, they would not get it. These men would get just what the exigencies of the Government required, and nothing less or more. He did not think that they would resign, as was suggested; but that they would simply bluster. He would give the Chief Secretary a hint. Many of these men were on the way to pensions, having served five, 10, or 15 years. The greatest disposition to strike would be amongst the men who joined the Force yesterday or the day before; and the least disposed to strike would be those who were on the way to pensions. That was common sense, and the Chief Secretary would do well to divide the men into two classes—the men who had half served their time, because they would serve the remainder; and the men who had not served a sufficient time to establish a sinking fund. The latter would probably get some employment not so discreditable, and they might, perhaps, go to America. The Chief Secretary and the Home Secretary had laid great stress on the "Boycotting" Clause of the Coercion Act, which dealt with men leaving their employment. Here were the Constabulary threatening to throw the Queen's Government into confusion, and what was the Government going to do with regard to their case? A man leaving his employment might be sent to prison; but the Irish Constabulary could act in that way, and send out threatening Circulars, and the Government did not dare to touch them. That showed that Ireland was governed by expediency. The Chief Secretary had been at great pains to quote anonymous telegrams. That was quite right, for if the men sent their names they would be discharged individually. What did this measure, which was introduced with a view to increase the pay of the officers, do? For the sake of 300 officers the House was to be put to an enormous amount of trouble; and, after all, what was to be done? Three hundred officers got £30 per annum each. They were
    1092
    the cream of the Service; but the skim of the Service got 25 s. a man. This was said to be extraordinarily excellent treatment, and was put forward by Mr. Bruce, the head officer, to induce the men to keep quiet. He would remind the Government that upon this Constabulary Force their hold on Ireland depended. The police knew that that was the case, and they would drive their bargain accordingly; and the measure of their demand would be the measure of their usefulness to the Government, and the measure of their success would be the exigencies of the Government. If the English, having used these men in disgraceful acts, could now turn them off, they would throw them away like sucked oranges, and the men knew it. If the English Government thought they could not govern Ireland without these men they would keep them in their service, and these were the men by whom the country would be governed.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Debate be now adjourned."—(Mr. Callan.)
    MR. T. A. DICKSONsaid, he wished to express his sympathy with the Police Force in Ireland in their natural anxiety to have their grievances inquired into and redressed. Having come into contact with the police for many years as a magistrate, he felt bound to bear testimony to the way in which they had discharged their duties. No body of men in the employment of the Government or Her Majesty could discharge their duties with more zeal and ability, even under very tempting circumstances. The Chief Secretary had said the men could make their grievances known through officers. He could agree with that; but what encouragement did the men in Cork get, when, in the presence of their officers, they stated their grievances, and were told by Mr. Clifford Lloyd that if they were soldiers they would be shot, and by the Inspector General that they were disloyal men? In his opinion, Mr. Clifford Lloyd and Colonel Bruce had had a splendid opportunity of throwing oil on the troubled waters; but, by their recent action, they had done more to spread discontent among the Police Force in Ireland than anything that had occurred since this agitation commenced. Reference had been made to this £180,000. What had been the

    1093
    cause of the delay in the distribution of that amount? Why had it been so long kept from the Force? That was one of the grievances under which the men said they laboured. It had been stated in that House that the men were in revolt; but he did not believe anything of the kind. He believed the men were only anxious, and were afraid of this opportunity passing away without their grievances being inquired into. He remembered going both to the Castle at Dublin and to the Irish Office in London to state some of the grievances under which they were labouring. One of these had relation to the fines of, say, £1 or £2 imposed on the members of the Force in the earlier years of their service. Not only were they fined for drunkenness and other faults at the time, but at the end of their service a certain sum of money was taken off their retiring allowances. He did not believe in any expedient to redress the grievance under which they suffered, and which he had from the men themselves, that did not go to the root of this matter. The Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant had made what he regarded, and what he believed would be regarded by the men of the Constabulary, as a satisfactory statement, in saying that when he returned to Ireland the grievance of the police should be at once inquired into. He certainly did not think the Government could state anything further than that. The Government were not in a position to say that they would concede the demands of the police to-day or tomorrow, because time was obviously necessary for inquiring into the subject, and the right ton. Gentleman the Chief Secretary had stated that the condition of the Police Force should be fully inquired into. He believed, that announcement, when it was known in Ireland, would be, and ought to be, satisfactory to the Constabulary. When the right hon. Gentleman went to Dublin Castle he strongly advised him to confer with Lord Spencer as to the withdrawal of Mr. Clifford Lloyd, and to recommend his being sent from the South into the North of Ireland. As he had before remarked, Mr. Clifford Lloyd might inspire terror of the law, but not respect for it, in the minds of the Irish people; and he held the opinion that the sooner he was removed from his present position the better it would be for the Police Force.
    MR. ASHMEAD-BARTLETTsaid, that, personally, he had some sympathy with the police in this matter. No one could have watched the Force during the last two or three years without feeling that an excessive amount of labour had been placed on that body, and for the state of things which existed he did not think it possible too severely to blame Her Majesty's Government. There could be no doubt that the condition of disloyalty and disturbance reigning in Ireland owed its origin to the weakness of the present Administration, and it was that which had cast this extra work upon the Irish Constabulary. He did not know whether the hon. Member for Wexford (Mr. Healy) wished to be considered the champion of the Force; but, if so, he had no doubt that that very loyal and praiseworthy Force would repudiate the charge that their loyalty was to be estimated at 1s. 6d. a-day. With regard to Mr. Clifford Lloyd, the present occurrences offered the Irish Party a very convenient opportunity for an attack upon that officer. The newspaper reports of Saturday last from Limerick entirely failed to bear out the charge against Mr. Clifford Lloyd, who, it seemed, had addressed the men in a very moderate manner. The reports certainly did not justify the statement of the hon. Member for Wexford; and, moreover, he would point out that some 80 members of the Constabulary at Limerick replied to Mr. Clifford Lloyd in a very satisfied and thankful tone. They told him they had no fault to find with him; that they were satisfied with his kindly intentions towards the Force, and that they wished, as far as possible, to follow out his advice. Any exasperation which took place subsequently seemed to be due not to the address of Mr. Clifford Lloyd, but to the address of another officer. The hon. Member for Wexford transposed the characters of the two addresses. [Mr. HEALY: No!] He maintained his opinion upon that point. The hon. Member for Wexford had given the character of Colonel Bruce's speech to that of Mr. Clifford Lloyd, and did not fairly represent the character of Mr. Lloyd's speech. Now, as far as he had been able to follow Mr. Clifford Lloyd's public career, he thought he had proved himself to be a most efficient public servant; and, even if he had not, he should have been dis-

    1095
    posed to defend him, in view of the personal attacks which were constantly being made on him in that House. He was in great personal danger. [Mr. HEALY: He wears a coat of mail.] He (Mr. Ashmead-Bartlett) was quite sure if the hon. Member for Wexford was in the same position as Mr. Clifford Lloyd he would wear 10 coats of mail. Mr. Clifford Lloyd was in a portion of Ireland which had always been one of the most troubled districts; he was sent there to quell disturbance, and the moment he arrived at his post Irish Members on that side of the House below the Gangway lost no opportunity of attacking and vilifying his character. He trusted the Government would give every consideration they were able to afford to the grievances of the Irish Constabulary. The right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant had, he believed, promised to do so; but his own view was that a considerable extra remuneration was due to men who, like the Royal Irish Constabulary, had performed such arduous and dangerous labours during the last three years.
    MR. LEWISsaid, he regarded the particular subject which had caused him to place a Notice of Amendment on the Paper as typical of the way in which the Royal Irish Constabulary had been treated for many years past. He referred to the inequality of pensions granted. Under the Acts of 1847, 1866, and 1874, a man who retired on one day found himself only entitled to half that which a man of the same rank and length of service, who retired the day after, was entitled to. That, he repeated, was typical of the way in which the men, whether active or retired, had been treated by past Governments. Now, this question was an important one, and at half-past 2 in the morning it was not reasonable to suppose that justice could be done to it. Moreover, there were other questions dealt with in the Bill that ought to be considered very carefully. Under the circumstances, he should support the Motion for the adjournment of the debate.
    MR. TREVELYANsaid, the hon. Member for Louth (Mr. Callan) had moved the adjournment of the debate with the specific purpose, as far as he understood, of giving him the opportunity of stating whether or not he was responsible for having suggested to Mr.
    1096
    Clifford Lloyd or Colonel Bruce the words which they should use in addressing the Constabulary Force at Limerick. He (Mr. Trevelyan) always endeavoured to follow what, to him, appeared to be the usual course of action—that was to say, in all matters of Executive action which required a knowledge of what was passing, and in a state of circumstances liable to daily and hourly change, he had always considered it proper to leave absolute freedom to the administrative officers on the spot. Any other course than that, whether with regard to civil or military administration, could only, in his opinion, result in confusion, and possibly danger. He had not suggested, either to Mr. Clifford Lloyd or to Colonel Bruce, words which they should use in addressing the Constabulary; as a matter of fact, he was not aware that Mr. Clifford Lloyd was going to address the men at all. With regard to that officer, although, as the hon. Member opposite said, he was not responsible for his appointment, he should certainly not give up his share in the consequences of that appointment, although it would be nothing less than wasting the time of the House to enter into an elaborate defence of Mr. Clifford Lloyd every time he was attacked. But with regard to the remarks which had been made with regard to him on the present occasion, he would suggest that hon. Members should reserve their judgment until Mr. Lloyd's explanation was forthcoming. He knew what were that officer's feelings with reference to the Force in Limerick, because he had a Report from him dated the 4th of July, 1882, in which, after stating that two threatening letters had been received in the district, and that no other outrages were reported, went on to say that the officers and men had toiled with the most unwavering energy for the last six months, and that it was no exaggeration to say that—
    "Day after day, and night after night, in all weathers, they have patrolled every portion of the districts assigned to them; the same spirit influences them all; a more noble body of men never served their Sovereign."
    It was needless for him to comment upon this; he would, therefore, simply urge hon. Members to suspend their judgment until they were in possession of information as to what actually took place on Saturday afternoon. He felt

    1097
    some surprise that hon. Members should be unwilling that this stage of the Bill should be taken on that occasion. There had been already three debates upon the Bill, and throughout these he had noticed nothing that led him to believe that hon. Members were seriously anxious to alter the Bill in Committee.
    MR. HEALY: We have had no time to put down Amendments.
    MR. TREVELYANsaid, no observation or criticism upon the Bill had been put forward which led him to think there was any desire on the part of hon. Members seriously to object; and, under those circumstances, he appealed to the House to allow the Bill to go through Committee.
    Question put.
    The House divided:—Ayes 6; Noes 64: Majority 58.—(Div. List, No. 320.)
    Question again proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair."
    MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORsaid, the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant had informed the House that great inconvenience would result from the Bill being delayed; but it seemed to him that there would be much more inconvenience if it were hurried through the House. In the first place, Members who were interested in the maintenance of the Rules of Committee had not had an opportunity even of reading the Amendments to the Bill. He was informed that there were a number of Amendments which it was proposed to move; and it would, therefore, be of advantage that the House should be put in possession of those Amendments in their entirety. But there was another reason for deferring the Committee stage of the Bill. The measure would be considerably affected by the proposals which the Government might hereafter have to make in reference to the treatment of the Constabulary Force; and if they could come to some decision as to the way in which the claims of the Force were to be met, it would certainly be of great advantage in further considering the proposals in the Bill, because the Government might possibly find it desirable to introduce into a Bill of this kind certain provisions which at present it did not contain: whereas if the Bill were hurried
    1098
    through the House before the final decision of the Government was arrived at, it would not be possible to introduce another Bill that Session. For these reasons, and because it was now nearly 3 o'clock in the morning, he begged to move the adjournment of the House.
    MR. BIGGARbegged to second the Motion of the hon. Member for Queen's County. It was now 3 o'clock, and no one could reasonably ask to proceed in Committee with a Bill of this importance at that hour. To do so would be to preclude all reasonable discussion upon the important questions that were raised by the Bill. He thought that, out of consideration for themselves, and particularly those Members who wished their Amendments to be fairly discussed, the Motion of his hon. Friend should be agreed to.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—(Mr. Arthur O'Connor.)
    MR. TREVELYANadmitted that the arguments of hon. Members as to the lateness of the hour had a certain weight. They were, however, so close upon the end of the Session that none of the small portion of time at their disposal should be wasted; and, after the ample discussion which the Bill had undergone on previous occasions, he hoped the hon. Member for Queen's County would recognize the desirability of entering at least upon the Committee stage, and, when that was reached, the Government would be willing to postpone further discussion to another day.
    Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
    Original Question put, and agreed to.
    Bill considered in Committee; Committee report Progress; to sit again To-morrow.

  REVENUE, FRIENDLY SOCIETIES, AND NATIONAL DEBT BILL.— [Bill 260.]
  (Mr. Courtney, Mr. Herbert Gladstone.)
  REVENUE, FRIENDLY SOCIETIES, AND NATIONAL DEBT BILL.— [Bill 260.]

    Bill considered in Committee.
    (In the Committee.)
    Clause 1 agreed to.

  PART I.
    CUSTOMS AND EXCISE.
    Clauses 2 to 8, inclusive, agreed to.
  PART II.

    STAMPS.
    Clauses 9 to 12, inclusive, agreed to.
    Clause 13 (Power to Treasury to grant compensation for loss of fees under 44 & 45 Vict. c. 12, ss. 33 and 34).
    MR. J. A. CAMPBELLsaid, this clause gave power to the Treasury to grant compensation to holders of certain offices for the loss of fees under the Bill passed last year. There was one expression, however—"had suffered"—which had caused some doubt as to whether the clause might not be interpreted in a narrow sense, as if it was not to apply to losses which might be suffered in future. He moved that the words "or will suffer" be introduced.
    Amendment proposed, in page 4, line 40, after the word "suffered," to add the words "or will suffer."—(Mr. J. A. Campbell.)
    Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."
    MR. COURTNEYsaid, he hoped the Amendment would not be pressed, as it was quite unnecessary. The clause, as it stood, would give compensation for losses which officers had suffered. The losses they might have sustained would not be losses that might accrue from time past up to the time present, and the Amendment was not necessary.
    Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
    Clause agreed to.
    Clauses 14 to 17, inclusive, agreed to.
    Clause 18 (Provision for composition for stamp duty on certain Canadian loans).
    Amendment proposed, in page 7, line 3, to leave out the words "the like," and insert the words "a similar."—(Mr. Courtney.)
    Amendment agreed to.
    Amendment proposed, in page 7, line 4, to leave out the words "as was," and insert the words "to that."—(Mr. Courtney.)
    Amendment agreed to.
    Amendment proposed, in page 7, line 10, to leave out "eighty-three," and insert "eighty-six."—(Mr. Courtney.)
    Amendment agreed to.
    Clause, as amended, agreed to.

  PART III.

    NATIONAL DEBT AND MISCELLANEOUS.
    Clause 19 (Adjustment of account as regards accumulations of fractions of a penny on the dividends of the National Debt).
    MR. ARTHUR ARNOLDsaid, he was sure his hon. Friend would admit the justice of this money going to the National Debt Commissioners, and not being swept into the Exchequer. Fractions of a penny had never been paid over to the Exchequer. They now amounted to £120,000, and it was now proposed to transfer it to the Exchequer.
    MR. COURTNEYsaid, he could not in justice assent to the proposal. The money was not to be swept into the Exchequer, but was to be used for a partial remission of the Permanent Debt.
    Clause agreed to.
    Clause 20 (Quarterly payment of dividends on 2½ per cents).
    MR. R. N. FOWLERsaid, he supposed the Government could not help bringing on this Bill at this time of night; and, therefore, they could not complain that those who were interested in it should have something to say upon it. This was not a very large matter, but it involved considerable principles. The 2½ per cent Stock was a very small Stock, created by the present Chancellor of the Exchequer in 1852; but if this clause was agreed to it would be getting the thin end of the wedge in in reference to the larger Stocks. If this was applied to the Government Stocks, where would it end? Would Railway Companies have to pay dividends quarterly? He would move the omission of this clause.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause be omitted."—(Mr. R. N. Fowler.)
    MR. COURTNEYpointed out that the present system involved great loss and inconvenience to the Exchequer.
    Question put, and negatived.
    Clauses 21 and 22 agreed to.
    Clause 23 (Advance of money by National Debt Commissioners for payment of commutation under 41 & 42 Vict. c. 63).
    Amendment proposed, in page 12, line 15, to leave out the second "a," and insert "any."—(Mr. Courtney.)
    Amendment agreed to.
    Clause, as amended, agreed to.
    Clause 24 agreed to.
    Clause 25 (Removal of doubts as to Crown rights to escheats, fines, and recognisances within certain liberties of the Duchy of Lancaster).
    Amendment proposed, in page 14, line 18, after the word "Fund," to insert the words "or out of the growing produce thereof."—(Mr. Courtney.)
    Amendment agreed to.
    Remaining clauses agreed to.
    Schedules agreed to.
    House resumed.
    Bill reported; as amended, to be considered To-morrow.

  ARTIZANS' DWELLINGS BILL.
  (Mr. Shaw Lefevre, Secretary Sir William Harcourt.)
  ARTIZANS' DWELLINGS BILL.

    [BILL 255.] CONSIDERATION.
    Bill, as amended, considered.
    Clauses 1 to 7, inclusive, agreed to.
    Clause 8 (Power to local authority to purchase houses for opening alleys, &c.)
    Amendment proposed,
    In page 5, line 24, at end, add,—"Where, in the opinion of the arbitrator, the demolition of an obstructive building adds to the value of such other buildings as are in that behalf mentioned in this section, the arbitrator shall apportion so much of the compensation to be paid for the demolition of the obstructive building as may be equal to the increase in value of the other buildings amongst such other buildings respectively, and the amount apportioned to each such other building, in respect of its increase in value by reason of the demolition of such obstructive building, shall be deemed to be private improvement expenses incurred by the local authority in respect of such building, and such local authority may, for the purpose of defraying such expenses, make and levy improvement rates on the occupier of such premises accordingly, and the provisions of 'The Public Health Act, 1875,' relating to private improvement expenses and to private improvement rates shall, so far as circumstances admit, apply accordingly, in the same manner as if such provisions were incorporated in this Act, and the said provisions shall be deemed to extend to the City of London and to the Metropolis, and in the construction of the said provisions, as respects the City of London, the Commissioners of Sewers, and, as respects the Metropolis, the
    1102
    Metropolitan Board of Works shall be deemed to be the urban authority.
    "If any dispute arises between the owner or occupier of any building (to which any amount may be apportioned in respect of private improvement expenses) and the arbitrator by whom such apportionment is made, such dispute shall be settled by two justices in manner provided by 'The Lands Clauses Consolidation Act, 1845,' in cases where the compensation claimed in respect of lands does not exceed fifty pounds."—(Mr. Shaw Lefevre.)
    Question proposed, "That those words be there added."
    MR. WHITLEYsaid, it seemed to him that to introduce an Amendment of this kind in the Bill, when it was not applied to Improvement Bills, which were generally of a kind in which a clause of this description could be inserted, was very prejudicial to the interests of owners of property. This Bill would apply chiefly to very poor property and very poor localities, and, in all probability, the property would belong to very poor owners indeed; and to introduce a clause of this kind, without any notice to the community, or to those affected by it in the large towns, was not the best course to take. If this clause was to be introduced, he thought it ought to be introduced after notice had been given to those whom it affected. He was persuaded that this Amendment would meet with very much opposition in all the great towns of the United Kingdom, because it was a new kind of legislation, and only applied to a new kind of property, and did not apply to Public Improvement Acts. He thought it unwise, when no discussion had taken place in Committee on the Bill, at that moment to introduce this Amendment, and he should feel bound to oppose it.
    MR. SHAW LEFEVREsaid, he thought the hon. Member could hardly be aware that an Amendment similar to this now proposed had been on the Paper for many days in the name of the hon. Member for Oldham (Mr. Lyulph Stanley). The Amendment would not apply generally to all property or to general matters, but only to those houses which came under Clause 8 of the Bill, and were in an unsanitary condition. Therefore, the Amendment would have a very limited application; and, limited as it was, he had agreed to substitute for the Amendment of the hon. Member for Oldham the Amendment now before the House.
    MR. WARTONregarded this new Proviso as one of far too great importance to be dismissed in a cursory and cavalier style. This was a much more important Bill than any the House had been discussing for weeks past. It was all very well for the hon. Gentleman to speak of this proposal having been before the House for some days; but he himself had not seen it for more than a couple of days, though whether it had been before the House 10 days or two days did not alter the proposal. The fact was there was a difference of opinion as to what improvements of this kind should be charged upon. He thought the bright idea had struck the hon. Member for Oldham that he would make the holders of small properties pay for the improvements after all. It was very well to talk in an abstract manner about a house being improved; but it was unpleasant for a man to have to pay for the value, or supposed value, of improvements to which he was no party. A man had a right to enjoy his property without being subject to a constant demand to pay for improvements which somebody supposed increased the value of the house. The adoption of a provision of this kind would discourage the holders of property.
    SIR R. ASSHETON CROSSsaid, he must say he did not think the hon. and learned Gentleman who had just sat down understood the Amendment. He (Sir R. Assheton Cross) differed from the hon. and learned Member, and hoped the House would pass the clause.
    Question put, and agreed to.
    Clause, as amended, agreed to.
    Remaining clauses agreed to.
    Schedule agreed to.
    MR. SHAW LEFEVREsaid, he would move that the Bill be read a third time, and, in doing so, would take this opportunity of thanking the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Sir R. Assheton Cross), as Chairman of the Committee, for the assistance he had rendered him in passing the Bill.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill now be read the third time."—(Mr. Shaw Lefevre.)
    Motion agreed to.
    Bill read the third time, and passed.

  MERCHANT SHIPPING (MERCANTILE MARINE FUND) BILL.— [Bill 256.]
  (Mr. Chamberlain, Mr. John Holms.)
  MERCHANT SHIPPING (MERCANTILE MARINE FUND) BILL.— [Bill 256.]

    COMMITTEE.
    Bill considered in Committee.
    (In the Committee.)
    In reply to Mr. WHITLEY,
    MR. J. HOLMSsaid, that the boiler explosions charge came in the Bill as a matter of convenience. The increased expenditure in relation to the matter would be extremely small—it would only amount to the salary of an engineer, a surveyor, and a clerk.
    Bill reported; to be considered To-morrow.

    NAVY AND ARMY EXPENDITURE, 1880–81.
    Resolved, That this House will, To-morrow, resolve itself into a Committee to consider the Savings and Deficiencies upon the Grants for Navy and Army Services in the year ended on the 31st day of March 1881, and the temporary sanction obtained from the Treasury by the Navy and Army Departments to Expenditure not provided for in the Grants for that year.
    Ordered, That the Appropriation Accounts for the Navy and Army Departments, which were presented upon the 13th day of February last, be referred to the Committee.
    House adjourned at a quarter before Four o'clock in the morning.