§ EARL GREYmoved the first reading of this Bill, which was agreed to. His Lordship then moved that it should be read a second time on Tuesday next.
LORD STANLEYsaid, that the Bill was one which, although very much approved of by many, was likewise disapproved of by many officers of high standing in the Army. There was great doubt as to the utility and practicability of the measure, and such opinions had been expressed by high military authorities. He, therefore, thought that it would not be well to press the second reading of the Bill, when it ought to be discussed on its principle, within three days after its introduction into the House.
§ EARL GREYsaid, that it would be desirable that the discussion should take place as soon as possible. At the same time, he would not wish to press it on a particular day against the convenience of the noble Lord. But it would cause very serious inconvenience if not passed by that day week.
§ The DUKE of WELLINGTONthought that, as an alteration was proposed to be made in the Mutiny Act connected with the very objects of this Bill, it would be convenient that the discussion on both should take place simultaneously. If the second reading of this Bill was to be taken on Friday, the discussion on the main points of the Mutiny Bill ought to be taken on that day also.
LORD STANLEYobserved, that the Secretary at War, in bringing forward this measure, had given reasons why he had not proposed the change merely by the introduction of a clause in the Mutiny Act. This led to the belief that no alteration in that Act was intended; and now for the first time he (Lord Stanley) learned that provisions were introduced into the Mutiny Bill which required the decision of that House.
§ The DUKE of WELLINGTONbegged to state that the alteration referred to the schedule in the Mutiny Bill. He wished it to be observed, however, that the Mutiny Bill was, of course, only for this year, while the other Bill was proposed to be a permanent measure.
§ EARL GREYstated, that his right hon. Friend the Secretary at War had taken 870 credit to the Government, that the great change proposed was not effected, as it might have been, by merely introducing a clause into the annual Mutiny Bill; for if that had been done it would have thrown impediments in the way of the fair discussion of the principle of limited enlistment. His right hon. Friend had therefore introduced a distinct and permanent measure, which it was proposed to read a second time in that House on Monday week. It was a matter of importance, however, to make the schedule of the Mutiny Bill correspond with the measure now before the House. Therefore, as the Mutiny Bill stood for the present year, and for the present year only, it was as had been described. If, then, that House refused to pass the Army Service Bill, the Mutiny Bill could, on a future occasion, be returned to its former state. He could not conceive any objection to pass the Mutiny Bill as it stood, and the greatest inconvenience would occur if it were not passed without delay.
LORD STANLEYhoped that there would be no objection to print the present Mutiny Bill, so that they might see to what extent it differed from former Bills.
§ House adjourned.