Sitting of 19 June 1856

MINUTES.
NEW MEMBER SWORN.—For Leicester, John Biggs, esq.
PUBLIC BILL.—1° Church Building Commission; Corrupt Practices Prevention; Coatham Marriages Validity; Sardinian Loan.
2° Seamen's Savings Banks.
3° Stock-in-Trade Exemption.

UIVERSITY OF ABERDEEN—QUESTION.
MR. H. BAILLIEsaid, he would beg to ask the right hon. and learned Lord Advocate whether he intended, during the present Session, to press through all its stages his Bill for the union of the colleges of Aberdeen with the University, or whether he only purposed to lay the Bill on the table. It was a question in which his constituents took a great interest, and he thought it would be impossible for any Bill on the subject to receive due consideration at that late period of the Session.
THE LORD ADVOCATEsaid, it had been considered, as he had stated on a former occasion, that the subject had reached that point in which it was ripe for legislation. At the same time, if any material opposition should be offered to the measure being proceeded with, he certainly should not attempt to pass it this Session.

REGISTRATION OF VOTERS (SCOTLAND) BILL.
Order for Committee read.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the chair."
MR. G. DUNDASsaid, he objected to the further progress of the measure because there had been no discussion on the principle of the Bill. The Bill itself had been drawn up in a very hasty and clumsy manner; and, if it were passed into law, it would have a very pernicious and mischievous tendency. He entertained several objections to the Bill; first, as it affected the rights of parties to their property, in virtue of which they claimed to vote. It was an axiom in the Scotch law that no man could prove his ownership in property unless he could produce documentary evidence. But the Bill proposed entirely to do away with that requirement, and made the fact of a person's name appearing in the valuation of the county of a not less value than £10 to entitle such person to
1680
be on the registrar of voters. His second objection was, that the Bill imposed duties on the assessor which it would be impossible for him to discharge, while it afforded to the assessor facilities for striking out names from the list of voters, which he considered certainly ought to be retained. It would be most injudicious to place the assessor in a position in which improper actions might be attributed to him. His third objection to the Bill was, that a very great expense would be saddled on the counties. He thought, therefore, he was best consulting the interests of the public by moving that the Bill should be committed that day three months.
Amendment proposed, to leave out from the word "That" to the end of the Question, in order to add the words "this House will, upon this day three months, resolve itself into the said Committee," instead thereof.
THE LORD ADVOCATEsaid, that whatever weight the objections of his hon. Friend might be entiled to might be very properly considered when the House went into Committee; but his present course was neither usual nor convenient. The Bill had been referred to a Select Committee, composed of ten county Members and five borough Members, indifferently chosen from both sides of the House, and the Report of that Committee was unanimously adopted. The understanding, on referring the Bill to the Select Committee, was that it might save the necessity of any lengthened discussion in the Committee of the whole House. He was sorry to find, however, that it was not likely to effect that object. If he, for the present, declined entering into the criticisms of his hon. Friend, he begged it to be understood that it was because he thought the topics to which his hon. Friend had referred could be far better discussed in Committee.
MR. BLACKBURNsaid, that no explanation of the Bill had hitherto been given. The Bill was read a second time at a late hour of the night, without any discussion. For his own part, he was not aware why any such Bill should be passed at all. He did not deny that in Scotland the system of registration, especially in the boroughs, might be amended. The register certainly wanted purging; there was, however, no one sufficiently interested to see that the bad votes were struck off the list, and this Bill would not remedy

1681
that evil. Besides, it was impossible that the Bill could be made to apply this year to the counties.
SIR ARCHIBALD CAMPBELLsaid, the right hon. and learned Lord had complained of the course taken by the hon. Member for Linlithgowshire (Mr. G. Dundas) as being unusual and inconvenient; but he was sorry to say the right hon. and learned Lord was adopting a very unusual and inconvenient course, especially with regard to the Bill now under consideration; for, relying on the numerical strength of the borough Members behind him, he disdained to reply to any arguments that had been opposed to him. The fact was, this was a Reform Bill, and ought to be considered very carefully before it was passed. A measure on this subject ought not to be treated as a matter of theory or speculation, but as one that required a practical knowledge of the working of the registration system. The Bill would introduce great changes in the present law. It was likewise objectionable upon principle. By this Bill a voter might be objected to without any notice being given to him. The assessor would have the power of taking an objection to a voter, and of striking him off the list, unless the voter happened to see the objection and attend to support his vote. Again, the assessor would have the power of placing persons on the list, whether they claimed a right to vote or not. Another great change was, as regarded the title of the voter. Hitherto the voter had been obliged to sustain his own title by proof; but henceforth the mere fact of his name appearing on the valuation roll, which, for many purposes, was a very convenient system in Scotland, was to be taken as a proof of title. The next change proposed by the measure was the throwing of the expense of carrying out the Act upon the county assessment. There was also another great change which would be made by the Bill. At present, if a voter disposed of his property which constituted his qualification before an election, he might be objected to; but by this Bill he would retain a right to vote for a year after he had sold his property. Now, those were matters which ought not to be introduced into a Bill brought forward so late in the Session as the month of May, and to be carried into operation in the month of July. If the right hon. and learned Lord Advocate wished to go into Committee merely for the purpose of making the Bill
1682
as perfect as possible, in order that it might be introduced again next year, he would not oppose the Motion that Mr. Speaker leave the chair.
MAJOR CUMMING BRUCEsaid, he was desirous that a good registration for Scotland should be established, but he must say that the Bill had been introduced in a very hurried manner. If it were desired to make the Bill, as his hon. Friend who had just spoken had said, as perfect as possible, but not to pass it into a law till another Session, then he would not object to the House going into Committee.
MR. BLACKsaid, he could assure the House that a strong desire existed on the part of the people of Scotland that some such measure as the present should be passed. It would afford a great relief to the constituencies of Scotland, and he believed that the expense of registration would be reduced by one-half.
SIR JAMES FERGUSSONsaid, he was very anxious not to vote against the right hon. and learned Lord, but on this occasion he should feel himself obliged to do so. He thought the right hon. and learned Lord ought to give some answer to the very strong objections which had been made against the Bill. There was no such principle in England as that of giving a man a vote whether he wished it or not; but by this Bill the assessor would have the power in Scotland to do so. The valuation roll in Scotland was a matter of great convenience in many ways, but it was too much to say that the assessor should make up from that roll a list by which men should be entitled to vote at elections.
SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, he considered that all those questions might be much better discussed in Committee.
MR. W. LOCKHARTsaid, that the principle contended for was, that the English system of registration should be introduced into Scotland; but the Bill would not effect that object as far as the counties were concerned; he would, therefore, urge upon the right hon. and learned Lord Advocate to postpone the Bill to another Session.
MR. H. BAILLIEsaid, that as no opportunity had been afforded to discuss the Bill, the right hon. and learned Lord not having even condescended to explain its provisions, he was of opinion that it ought to be postponed.
SIR GRAHAM MONTGOMERYsaid, he fully concurred in the opinion expressed

1683
by the hon. Member for Inverness (Mr. Baillie), and hoped the Government would withdraw the Bill for the present Session.
MR. SMOLLETTsaid, he should not object to the Motion for going into Committee if the Government would consent that the Bill should not come into operation till next year.
Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question."
The House divided:—Ayes 102; Noes 49: Majority 53.
House in Committee; Mr. FITZROY in the chair.
Clause 1.
THE LORD ADVOCATEsaid, he would briefly explain the provisions of the Bill now before the Committee. The object of it was to remedy the evils which existed in Scotland in respect to the registration of voters. He most strongly denied that it was an ill-digested measure, or that it had been pressed forward with undue haste. Several meetings of the Scotch Members had been held for the purpose of discussing the Bill; and, at the suggestion of the county Members, various alterations had been made in its provisions. Under those circumstances he did not think he was justly chargeable with any discourtesy in declining to discuss the merits of the Bill on the question that Mr. Speaker do leave the chair. As doubts existed in the minds of certain hon. Members with respect to the possibility of carrying the Bill into operation in regard to the counties during the present year, he had no objection to limit it to the boroughs.
MR. ELIOTT LOCKHARTsaid, he was unwilling that there should be one law applicable to the counties and another to the boroughs, and would therefore suggest the propriety of postponing the operation of the Bill till next year.
MR. ALEXANDER HASTIEsaid, he believed the Bill would work equally well in counties as in boroughs, and he should be sorry that its operation should be postponed for one year even, especially with respect to the boroughs.
It was then moved that the word "counties" in the clause be omitted, which was agreed to, and the clause, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
The clauses up to Clause 54, as amended, by the omission of all that was in them relating to the counties, were then agreed to.
Clause 55 (Expenses of Annual Registrations—how to be defrayed).
MR. ELIOTT LOCKHARTsaid, he wished to move the insertion of the following proviso:—
"Provided always, That for the purposes of this Act no person shall be liable to be assessed whose property is not of sufficient amount of valuation to entitle him to be placed on the register of voters heretofore mentioned."
THE LORD ADVOCATEsaid, he must oppose the Amendment as being unnecessary.
Question put, "That those words be there inserted."
The Committee divided:—Ayes 59; Noes 103: Majority 44.
The remaining Clauses and Schedules were then agreed to.
The House resumed.
Bill reported with amended title.

PEACE PRESERVATION (IRELAND) BILL.
On the Order of the Day for the consideration of the Amendments in this Bill,
MR. I. BUTTsaid, that there was much difficulty in the form of the Bill, inasmuch as the measure, although a renewal of the Crime and Outrage Bill which was enacted in 1847, and which was continued by temporary measures up to the present time, had now, for the first time, omitted many of the provisions of the original measure. It was, therefore, he considered, necessary to recommit the Bill, with a view to the insertion of certain clauses, which he thought necessary to render the Bill intelligible in its present shape. If the right hon. Gentleman (the Home Secretary), would consent to this, he would pledge all the hon. Members for Ireland on his side of the House that no objection should be taken to any portion of the Bill in Committee. He should therefore move, that Mr. Speaker leave the chair.
SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, he did not at all dispute that the form in which the hon. and learned Gentleman proposed the Bill should be put would be the most convenient form; but at that late period of the Session, and considering it would only be continued for two years, he did not think it would be advisable to adopt the course suggested. It was true the hon. and learned Gentleman had pledged himself that no opposition would be offered to the Bill if it were re-committed; but it was impossible the hon. and learned Gentleman could be in a condition to give that guarantee. Besides, it would no longer be

1685
a Continuance Bill, but an entirely new Bill.
After a few words from Colonel DUNNE, MR. BLAND, and Mr. HORSMAN, the Motion for Mr. Speaker leaving the chair was withdrawn, and the Amendments to the Bill agreed to; and the Bill ordered to be read a third time To-morrow.

POSTAL COMMUNICATION WITH AUSTRALIA—QUESTION.
MR. T. CHAMBERSsaid, he wished to know whether there was any objection to lay the tenders for the conveyance of the mails to and from Australia, and which he understood had been opened on the previous day, before the House.
MR. WILSONreplied, that the tenders had reached him only just before he came down to the House, and would be examined by him in the course of the evening. There certainly were objections against laying them on the table, but the Government intended to accept the lowest in price and the shortest in time, and he would state the result to-morrow.

NATIONAL EDUCATION (IRELAND)— QUESTION.
MR. WALPOLE: I understand, Sir, that the noble Lord at the head of the Government made an announcement yesterday to the House, in answer to a question put to him by the hon. Member for Louth (Mr. C. Fortescue) that he considered that the Resolution to which the House came on Tuesday ought to be reversed, and that he would give up Monday, a Government Day, to the hon. Member to move a Resolution on the subject. That I think was the effect of the noble Lord's announcement. [Viscount PALMERSTON: Hear, hear.] Will the noble Lord permit me to ask him, supposing he sees no objection to putting the House now in possession of the information, whether he is prepared to state what course the Government proposed to take on Monday on the subject of National Education in Ireland.
VISCOUNT PALMERSTON: It is perfectly true, Sir, that my hon. Friend the Member for the county of Louth announced yesterday that it was his intention to propose to the House on an early day some Motion or Resolution tending to reverse the decision to which the House came on Tuesday, and begged to know what early day the Government would be prepared to give him for that purpose. I stated in answer that I thought the matter was so highly
1686
important, the decision to which the House had come so mischievous, and the urgency of reconsideration so great, that I would give him the earliest day the Government could place at his disposal for bringing the question forward, and that he should have precedence on Monday next.
MR. WALPOLE: The noble Lord will pardon me for saying that that is scarcely an answer to my question. It is important that Parliament should require—and it ought to require—to be informed what course Her Majesty's Government propose to take in reference to any Motion that may be made for rescinding the Address to the Crown which was voted on Tuesday last by the House of Commons on the subject of National Education in Ireland.
VISCOUNT PALMERSTON: I really can hardly suppose, Sir, after what I have already stated, that the right hon. Gentleman can entertain any doubt on the subject. Always assuming that the Motion of my hon. Friend (Mr. C. Fortescue) is unobjectionable in point of form, which I cannot doubt, Her Majesty's Government will feel it their duty to support it, or any Motion tending to reverse the decision of the House came to on Tuesday last.
LORD NAAS: When the hon. Member for Louth is in his place, I shall beg to ask him what is the form of the Motion he proposes to bring forward on the subject of National Education in Ireland.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.
MR. HANKEYsaid, he would beg to ask the right hon. Baronet the Secretary of State for the Home Department when he intended to take the discussion on the City of London Corporation Reform Bill?
SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, he had been desirous of finding a day in the course of the present week for the second reading of the London Corporation Bill. It now, however, seemed unlikely that it would come on during the week, but he would give his hon. Friend early notice when the Bill would be taken. It was proposed to take the National Gallery Site Bill and the Cambridge University Bill tomorrow, if possible.
VISCOUNT PALMERSTON(in reply to Mr. Newdegate) said, he hardly thought the Church Rates Bill would come on to-morrow, and as other business intervened to prevent the Wills and Administration Bill being proceeded with on Monday, as previously arranged, his hon. and learned Friend the Solicitor-General would bring

1687
it on on Thursday next. Of course the arrangements contemplated by his right hon. Friend (Sir G. Grey) depended upon getting through the Estimates. Otherwise the Government would begin to-morrow with the Estimates. The Agricultural Statistics Bill would be taken to-morrow if there were time.

STAFF OF THE ARMY.
On the Motion for going into Committee of Supply,
CAPTAIN LEICESTER VERNONsaid, he would beg to move as an Amendment, the Resolution of which he had given notice, having reference to the advantage it would be to the service to employ general officers from the scientific corps on the staff of the army. The House would probably remember that there had been a sort of promise that this should be done, but although we had been engaged for sixteen months in actual war, not one of those officers had ever been so employed, and the anticipations of the officers of the Artillery and Engineers to be employed on the staff had not yet been realised. To give an illustration of the manner in which the existing system was carried on, he would refer to a recent instance. When General Simpson was removed from Portsmouth, and went out to take a staff appointment in the Crimea, the command devolved upon a Major-general of Engineers: now, who so proper to command a fortress as a General of Engineers? but the appointment was not permanent, for the command was given to a general officer of the line, who was junior to the general officer of Engineers. That officer was then removed to Aldershot, the command at which camp would have been properly given to an officer of the scientific corps, because that camp was intended to be a school of instruction for the army. But this general officer of Engineers had no military duty to perform at the camp, and his scientific duty consisted in running up wooden sheds, making drains, and levelling and gravelling parades. He would now give an instance of an officer of the scientific corps on foreign service, and he would take the case of Sir John Burgoyne, who was second in command in the Crimea, and senior officer next to Lord Raglan, so that the command would have devolved upon him if anything had happened to Lord Raglan. Now that was not what the Horse Guards wished; but they could not have had a better man than Sir John Burgoyne
1688
to command at the siege of Sebastopol. Sir John Burgoyne was, however, removed. Lord Raglan died, and the command devolved upon General Simpson. If Sir John Burgoyne had succeeded to the command of the English army he would no doubt have demanded the right of attacking the Malakoff with a division of the English as well as the French army. It was admitted that he had pointed out the Malakoff as the weak point in the defence, and his attack on the Redan would have been a false attack. His words were, "When once the Malakoff is taken, the rest of the Russian defences will fall like a pack of cards," as they did. In the French service it was very different, for there the officers of the scientific corps, when they attained the rank of General, were placed in command equally with their comrades in the general service. Vauban, the defender of Lisle, who took part in fifty-five sieges, and 144 actions, was an officer of Engineers, and so also was Pichegru, the conqueror of Holland. Every one knew that the Emperor Napoleon I. was an officer of artillery, and that his fortunes were promoted by the perfect use which he made of that important and powerful arm. Marmont, Due de Raguse, was an officer of artillery, who originally served in the line, but who went into the artillery because the line did not afford sufficient scope for his abilities. Count D'Erlon, who commanded a division at Waterloo, was an officer of artillery; and, to come down to later times, Lamoriciere and Cavignac were considered of such remarkable eminence that the whole French army regretted that in consequence of their political opinions they could not be employed in the late war. They were considered far superior to Pélissier, Canrobert and St. Arnaud—who was superior to the other two—and they were officers of engineers. Bedaud was an officer of Artillery, and Marshal Vaillant, the Minister of War, was an officer of Engineers. In our own East India Company, they gave officers of Engineers commands, and if the advice of Sturt, a lieutenant of Engineers, had been listened to by Elphinstone, Cabul would not have fallen. The credit of the British arms after the disasters at Cabul had to be restored by another campaign, and that campaign was brought to a most triumphant issue by Sir George Pollock, who was an officer of Artillery. At the commencement of the Kafir war, a subaltern of Engineers—Tylden, who was afterwards

1689
killed at Sebastopol—being at the frontier with about six Sappers and Miners, it was expected he and his party would be cut off; but he assembled around him a force of 2,000 boers, and, by gallantry and scientific knowledge, did the State eminent service. When the Government wanted to raise a Turkish Contingent, they selected Major General Chesney, an officer of Artillery; and when they sent a Commissioner to Omar Pasha, they selected Simmonds, an officer of Engineers. And when they wished to defend Kars, did they not take General Williams, an officer of Artillery, whose right hand was Teesdale, also an officer of Artillery, and whose left hand, if he might be permitted to use the expression, was Lake, an officer of Engineers? He had now shown that, in the French army, officers belonging to the French scientific corps were placed not only in the command of divisions and brigades, but likewise of armies, and had therefore an opportunity of arriving at great distinction. As long as we remembered Sebastopol, so long must we remember the names of Dupuis, Dacres, and Williams, all generals of Artillery; and the names of Chapman and Gordon, colonels of Engineers, who commanded the right and left attacks on Sebastopol—men who would shortly be general officers; but if we persisted in our habit of not employing scientific officers—and unless the House of Commons made itself heard—the military talent of such men would he lost to the country for ever. He therefore asked the House to affirm his Resolution as a matter of justice to the officers of the scientific corps of the British army.
Amendment proposed, to leave out from the word "That" to the end of the Question, in order to add the words "it is the opinion of this House that it will be to the advantage of the Service to employ General Officers from the Scientific Corps on the Staff of the Army," instead thereof.
MR. FREDERICK PEELsaid, he entirely agreed in the principle of the Resolution of the hon. and gallant Gentleman; and he believed it would be an advantage to the Government to be able to employ generals of the scientific corps to command mixed bodies of troops; but the question, whether the Government should employ a particular officer in any particular command, such as Portsmouth or Aldershot, was a matter which ought always to be left to their discretion. By the warrant of 1854 power was given to employ not
1690
merely generals but colonels in commands; and he saw no reason why colonels who were officers in the scientific corps should not be selected for those commands, and if they gave satisfaction being confirmed in them. Colonel Chapman and Colonel Gordon, of whom the hon. and gallant Gentleman had spoken as commanding the right and left attacks at Sebastopol, who had attained brevet lieutenant colonelcies while on that service, when they had attained the rank of colonel would be perfectly eligible for the staff and the commands of districts. So also would be any colonel who while holding a command had given satisfaction to his superior officer. He could see no objection to the spirit of the Resolution, but he saw no advantage in its being adopted by the House; because he considered that the Government ought to be left free to decide when it was necessary to avail themselves of the advantage of drawing commanding officers from the scientific corps. It would be very inconvenient to adopt a Resolution which would imply that the Government should always employ officers of the scientific corps, either in a given ratio to their own corps, or in a given ratio to the whole army. There were reasons, of which, of course, the hon. and gallant Member for Chatham was aware, why, hitherto, general officers of the scientific corps were not selected for commands so frequently in proportion as officers of the line. Those general officers were usually advanced in years, because the Artillery and Engineers being seniority corps, had not the advantage of purchase to ensure the promotion of younger men, and, besides, their promotion to the rank of general was not made according to their standing in the army, but according to their regimental rank. For the future, however, the only question would be what promotions were best for the service of the country, and if any general of Artillery or Engineers should be selected to command a body of mixed troops, there could be no objection, and no jealousy felt as to what arm of the service he belonged. There had been hitherto a jealousy on that point, for it was only natural that the Horse Guards should not be anxious to employ officers who were under the command of the Master General of the Ordnance, and over whom they had comparatively no control; but now that these corps were transferred to the Horse Guards, there would be no interest felt there for employing one set of officers rather than another; and the Government

1691
would be able to select the best instruments for the command of troops wherever they could find them, without regard to what arm of the service they belonged.
MAJOR STUART KNOXsaid, the hon. Gentleman had stated that officers who had reached the rank of colonel, and were afterwards appointed to the command of brigades or divisions, would be continued in the commands if they gave satisfaction. It would seem, then, that the colonels who had commanded brigades, and, in one instance, a division, in the Crimea, had not given satisfaction, for they were to return to their respective regiments and were not to be made major generals.
Question, "That the word proposed to be left out stand part of the Question," put and agreed to.

SUPPLY—ARMY ESTIMATES.
House in Committee.
Mr. FITZROYin the Chair.
(1.) £10 in addition to £450,000 already voted, for Civil Establishments at home and abroad.
MR. MONSELLsaid, that a sum of £101,000 had been taken for the excess of expenditure in this department made necessary by the war; but it was now calculated at one-half. That sum would be amply sufficient for the purpose. A good many of the persons employed at the Bosphorus and in the Crimea had already returned home. It had, however, been found necessary to leave behind a staff sufficient to make up the accounts; and he had reason to expect that the whole of the accounts of the expenditure of the army of the East would be made up by the end of the present year. There was also a reduction of between £13,000 and £14,000 from the Vote for lodging and victualling allowances, and he considered, though he could not speak with certainty on the subject, there would be even a greater reduction than that. Taking all the various items of reduction into account, he believed he could say with confidence that the sum of £450,000, which had been voted for this service, would be amply sufficient to defray the whole of the expenditure that was likely to arise in the course of the year.
COLONEL DUNNEsaid, he would beg to inquire whether, now that the war had concluded, there was any intention of making any alteration in the War Department? War the establishment to be conducted
1692
by a War Minister at a great expense, or by a Secretary for War at less cost? He also wished to know whether the large establishments for providing the clothing and accoutrements of the army were to be kept up on an undiminished scale while the army itself was reduced?
MR. MONSELLsaid, he was fearful he could not hold out an expectation of any large reductions being made during the present year. He could inform the hon. and gallant Member for Portarlington that in some branches of the War Department it had been found necessary since the peace to appoint additional clerks, for in winding up the accounts the amount of labour was quite as great, perhaps, as during the expenditure of the money. With regard to another point referred to by the hon. and gallant Gentleman he had to state that undoubtedly the existing constitution of the War Department was to be kept up. Lord Panmure had under consideration the question whether certain reductions might be made, and probably reductions could be effected, though not to any great extent; but it was to be doubted whether during the present year any such advance could be made in the matter as would insure a large reduction of expenditure. He could assure the Committee that from the very moment peace was declared no industry had been omitted to discover every possible means of economy, and directions had been given to different heads of departments in Pall Mall and Woolwich to send in monthly returns of the reductions which it would be possible to effect. A very considerable reduction, which he should explain on the next Vote, had already been made at Woolwich, and the best exertions were being used to economise wherever it was possible to do so.
MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, that the Vote of above £500,000 required during the war was only reduced by £50,000, and it appeared to him extraordinary that so large an amount should be needed for a peace establishment. He would suggest that a short printed statement should be distributed to the Members of the House, pointing out the different items on which it was proposed to effect reductions.
MR. SPOONERsaid, he had asked the other night whether any workmen had been sent out to Belgium at the request of the Ordnance, and, if so, for what purpose; and whether any expense had been incurred, for no item on the subject appeared

1693
in the Estimates; and he was told that no workmen had been sent out to Belgium, and consequently no expense had been incurred. Now, he (Mr. Spooner) owned that he was astonished at that answer, having received information upon the subject from a quarter which he thought was entitled to credit. Subsequently he had made further inquiries, and found that workmen had been sent to Liege as viewers, for the purpose of instructing persons in the employment of the Ordnance department of Belgium in the art of viewing. Moreover, he was informed that those workmen were there at this moment, and that they received considerable wages, which were paid to them by some branch or other of our own Government. He now wished to know if that information were correct; and if so, how it was that in the answer returned to him by the Secretary of the Treasury he was told that no workmen had been sent out, and that, therefore, no expense had been incurred?
MR. MONSELLsaid, there could be no doubt that the answer of his hon. Friend (Mr. Wilson) arose from a misapprehension. It was true there had been cetain persons employed in Belgium during the past year in viewing arms. A deputation, he understood, of the hon. Gentleman's (Mr. Spooner's) constituents had also gone to Liege on their own account, for the purpose of seeing for themselves how the gun business was carried on there. These latter, to whom he supposed his hon. Friend (Mr. Wilson) to refer, were not paid by the Government, but they had received every assistance that the Government could give them, and yesterday he had the satisfaction of receiving a most interesting report from them as to what they had seen, with comments upon the manner in which business was transacted there.
MR. SPOONERsaid, he was still at a loss to discover how the Secretary to the Treasury could have made a mistake. It appeared now that viewers had been sent out, and of course they had been instructed as to the mode in which they should view, in order to enable the gunmakers of Liege to compete with the manufacturers at Birmingham and Enfield. These persons were sent out at the expense of this country; they certainly taught the Belgians how to view arms, and in so doing were, in fact, teaching them to compete with our own people.
MR. MONSELLsaid, the expense incurred
1694
for these viewers of course formed a portion of the cost of the arms which we got from Belgium, and was charged in the small arms Vote. The Government had obtained all the arms they could from Birmingham, and adopted every means in their power, by giving the most unlimited contracts, to satisfy the Birmingham people, who had since intimated to him over and over again that they were satisfied; but the supply from Birmingham being insufficient they were obliged to require certain arms also from Liege, and the viewers no doubt went there to instruct the workmen as to the character of the work which the English Government would receive. As far as that went, therefore, they had done what the hon. Gentleman said they had done.
MR. SPOONERsaid, the explanation of the hon. Gentleman was anything but satisfactory to him, and he was sure it would be equally unsatisfactory to the country.
MR. NEWDEGATEsaid, he had been himself to Liege, and seen the work for the English Government carried on there, and he must say that he was surprised the Committee were not made aware of the fact that a staff of the very best workmen had been sent out from Birmingham as viewers of arms, not only to Belgium, but also to the United States of America. The right hon. Gentleman the Clerk of the Ordnance justified the sending out these men as viewers upon the plea that there was a great necessity existing for arms last year and the year before, that arms could not be procured in sufficient quantity from the English trade, and that the Government were fully warranted in getting a supply wherever they could. It afterwards appeared, however, that the orders had been sent out from this country as long ago as October, 1854, and that the product of those orders was 14,000 guns from Liege—none of which, the Committee must understand, were delivered in time to be seviceable during the war, and only 100 from America, the whole of which were stranded on their way to this country, and so much damaged as to be utterly useless. Literally, therefore, the orders sent to foreign establishments and manufacturers had resulted in this, that not a single musket for the purposes of the war had been obtained from the foreign trade. That was a notorious fact. But from the English trade the Government had received more than 150,000 stand of arms, though the Government

1695
had declared to that House that the English trade was incompetent to furnish them with a supply. He was quite aware that viewers, as they were called, had been sent abroad last year; but he then refrained from mentioning the circumstance, because he knew it would have been said in reply that he represented the Birmingham trade, and that on their account he was so fearful of competition, and so careless of the great interests of the country, that he would prevent the Government from obtaining the supply of arms from abroad, for which they declared there was a necessity. He had reason to remember in the spring of last year that the House was in a hurry on this subject, and did not choose to attend to it farther than to vote whatever the Government proposed. These arguments, how-ever—excuses he might call them—could not be urged against him now, as the war was over; and he thought it only reasonable that the Committee should know what had been the result of the applications which had been made to foreign countries and foreign trades for arms. He had been at Liege, and he found, what he indeed knew before, that the Leige manufacturers there were regular manufacturers for the Russian Government. They had manufactured for the Russians for years, and still continued to supply them with arms, and of course gave their old regular customers a preference over the orders of the English Government, which they had every reason to think casual. Well, what had our Government done? Why they not only sent out the model pattern musket of 1853, which was the best in the world, and a great improvement upon the Minié rifle. True, they might say that that pattern might have been acquired without our Government sending it out, but they had sent out viewers as instructors in making muskets after this pattern. And had they not experienced at Enfield that the difficulty was to get workmen instructed in numbers sufficient to make a large number of that pattern? He confidently appealed to every person who had the least acquaintance with the subject to say if the difficulty was not to get the work done in sufficient quantity and with accuracy in the form requisite to project the ball the proper distance. It was one thing to get 1,000 muskets made in that way—it was another to get 100,000 or 200,000; inasmuch as they must have trained hands in
1696
proportion to the quantity required. The effect of sending the viewers to Belgium was this, that the manufacturers there who had contracted for the supply did not continue to work with the same hands whom the viewers first instructed, but were constantly replacing these men by others in succession; so that by retaining the staff of viewers in Liege we were gradually training a large body of Belgian workmen to supply, not only the Russian, but any of the Continental adversaries of this country with this superior arm. We were instructing a large body of foreign skilled workmen to make arms of the pattern which had been devised for ourselves, after they had declared that they could not make these arms without instruction. The Government, the representatives of England, are teaching the workmen regularly employed by the enemies of this country to make arms from that pattern which might hereafter be turned against ourselves. So far then with respect to Liege. Now, what was the case with regard to the United States? Not content with teaching the Belgians, the Government had apparently determined upon teaching the Americans also. Now, the Americans valued our Minié rifle, but they had great difficulty in making it. Although we were, for aught he knew, on the eve of a war with the United States, we were still maintaining a staff of instructors there, to teach the American workmen to make these formidable arms that might—no one could say how soon—be used against ourselves. Arms, which they confessed they could not make in any large quantity until they had been instructed. He held this to be at best a foolish and short-sighted policy, more especially as it had not resulted in producing as many as 15,000 stand of arms altogether in the course of two whole years, and not one single weapon for the use of our army during the war. He put it, therefore, to the Committee, whether it was sensible or prudent to maintain those staffs of viewers in Liege and the United States, for the purpose of educating foreign workmen in the manufacture of an improved musket which had been devised for the army of our own country? It was found from experience that the real difficulty was to obtain a sufficient number of skilled hands to make a large number of those muskets. The Government were instructing hundreds of foreigners while they were withdrawing their orders from the English trade. The question was one of a very

1697
serious nature. The subject had attracted the notice of the American press, who said that the gun trade of England was so totally wanting in skill that the English Government were obliged to have recourse to American manufacturers for the arms we required. The fact was, that we were doing very great damage to our gun trade, by allowing the conduct of our Government to afford grounds for these libels, and by giving our rivals instructions in the manufacture of these arms, at a moment when the pressure of the demand occasioned by the war had ceased. It was a hardship to spend the public money for the purpose of instructing the foreign rivals of our domestic industry. The Government would do well to consider whether the time had not arrived when those foreign contracts might be put an end to, seeing that they were taken advantage of to maintain a system of education for foreigners, and operated to the discouragement of a trade which the hon. Gentleman the Secretary for the Ordnance himself acknowledged had stood by the country manfully at a period of great emergency.
MR. STAFFORDsaid, he wished to inquire whether the Vote No. 8 included the expense of the surgeons of the civil hospitals; also whether a determination had been come to as to the pay of the civil surgeons, and whether it had been determined to draw a distinction between the pay to be granted to the assistant surgeons and the surgeons to the militia?
MR. FREDERICK PEELsaid, the hon. Gentleman must be aware that the pay of the civil surgeons was not under investigation.
MR. STAFFORDsaid, he thought there was an understanding as to the civil hospital surgeons, that they were to have three months' pay, and the assistant surgeons two months; whereas the militia surgeons were to receive a larger sum.
MR. FREDERICK PEELsaid, he must inform the hon. Gentleman that all the civil hospitals but one had been discontinued. No question had arisen as to the gratuities to be given to civil surgeons, but only as to the time at which their services were to be considered as being dispensed with. That question was at present under the consideration of the Government. No assistant army surgeons having yet been dismissed, no question had arisen as to the gratuities to be given to them.
MR. SPOONERsaid, he must beg to
1698
ask the right hon. Gentleman the Clerk of the Ordnance whether the staff of viewers in Belgium was still continued, and if so, at what expense, and whether there would be any objection to laying on the table an account of the expense.
MR. MONSELLreplied that the viewers would be kept up till the contract was completed. The expense was about 2s. a gun. He should not have the least objection to lay a statement of the expense on the table.
COLONEL DUNNEsaid, he believed that he was quite in order in referring to the former Votes, because there was an agreement with the noble Lord at the head of the Government that if they passed the Votes, they should have an opportunity of discussing them afterwards. He understood also that it was intended during peace to retain the office of the War Department on the same extravagant footing as at present. He also wished to know if the headquarter staff was to remain as it was now. Government determined to procure arms from America, but there were no manufacturers in America in a position to supply them, and they advanced a firm £20,000 to build a factory, and the rifles cost £5 each, which they were not worth. The same thing happened with regard to powder, for which they were paying 8s. or 9s. a barrel more than its value.
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, he wished to say a word in reference to the understanding alluded to by the hon. and gallant Member for Port-arlington as to the discussion on the Estimates. A portion of the Votes were taken definitively. In those cases it was understood that the discussion as well as the Vote was closed. There was another set of Votes which were taken on account, but if the Government found the amount already voted was sufficient for the year, there was to be a discussion on those Votes, and a mere nominal sum was taken in order that the Committee might have a fresh opportunity for discussing those Votes.
Vote agreed to.
(2.) £10, in addition to £450,000, already voted, for Wages of Artificers.
MR. MONTAGU CHAMBERSsaid, he wished to have an explicit understanding with the Government on the subject of the expense incurred by reason of the recent display of fireworks. He was credibly informed that it was intended to make out the account in such a manner as to induce the belief that the total cost would not exceed £8,000, whereas the true state

1699
of the case was that, independently of that sum, it was contemplated that the wages of all the workmen who had been employed in the manufacture of the fireworks at the Woolwich Arsenal should go into the ordinary expenses of the year. Now, certainly, if that were so the case was hopeless, and we should never arrive at a correct calculation of the expenditure. What he wanted to know was how and where he was to procure precise information as to the amount of wages paid to the artisans and workmen whose time and labour had been applied to the making of the fireworks? The expense of the whole pyrotechnic display should of course be classed under two heads—the first representing the material used, the second the labour employed. It was essential to know whether the £8,000 already alluded to was in respect of materials only, or whether it also included the enormous wages paid to the workmen engaged in the Arsenal. Possibly he had been wrongly informed, but he had been given to understand that the sum he had alluded to would be wholly inadequate to cover the cost of wages alone.
MR. MONSELLsaid, he believed that £6,000 would cover all the expenses except those incurred in the Arsenal at Woolwich. The latter were, of course, in addition to the sum of £6,000. He could not tell the hon. and learned Member what the total outlay would be, nor was he aware whether there were any means of discovering. If it would suit the hon. and learned Gentleman's purpose to ascertain the number of men employed in the Arsenal and the amount of wages paid to them, he might possibly obtain that information on application to the authorities at Woolwich, but for his own part he (Mr. Monsell) knew nothing about it.
MR. MONTAGU CHAMBERSsaid, he had been assured that the sum of £6,000, which the right hon. Gentleman had just named, was a mere drop of water in the sea of expense. It would appear from the statement of the Clerk of the Ordnance that that sum merely represented the expense incurred outside the walls of the Arsenal. The fireworks, it should be remembered, were made in the Arsenal. They were from six weeks to two months in process of manufacture, and various experiments had been made in the marshes of Woolwich, when, if he was correctly informed, there had been great waste on account of the number of pieces which did not burn effectively. What he
1700
wanted to know was, not the expense outside the Arsenal, but rather that incurred within—he meant, in the very place where the fireworks were manufactured; for there was a rumour current that the fireworks for the celebration of the Peace would cost the country upwards of £30,000.
MR. STAFFORDsaid, that if the gunpowder required for the manufacture of the fireworks had been taken from the stores designed to be spent upon the Russians, if the paper had been supplied from the Stationery Office, if the timber had been furnished by the Board of Works, and if the cost of labour was to be charged against the ordinary wages of the men employed in the Arsenal at Woolwich, he was utterly at a loss to understand to what purpose even the £6,000 was to be applied.
MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, that it was idle to ask any more questions on the subject. The cost of the fireworks would never be known to the public, and it was all nonsense hon. Members attempting to solve the mystery. He saw from the beginning that it was intended to make it a close affair.
MR. E. BALLsaid, he was of opinion that no money voted on account of the war had been half as well expended as that which was now the matter of such severe criticism. The money spent on the fireworks had been devoted to the vindication of the great principle, that peace was a matter for national rejoicing, that it was a good thing, and that the people had cause to rejoice when it came. It was worth all the money to see the millions of people who were brought together on the night of the illuminations, and to observe the harmony, goodwill, sobriety, and kind feeling which were everywhere exhibited. Go to what part of London you might on that evening everybody looked happy, contented, and gratified.
CAPTAIN LEICESTER VERNONsaid, he must beg to express a hope that the right hon. Gentleman the Clerk of the Ordnance would give an assurance that the expense of the fireworks would not be allowed to fall on that department. When the question was under discussion on a former occasion no one seemed to know who was to pay; but it was admitted on all hands that the Ordnance Department was not to pay.
LORD HOTHAMsaid, he would remind the hon. Member for Cambridgeshire (Mr. E. Ball) that no objection had been made

1701
to the fireworks. The hon. and learned Member for Greenwich (Mr. M. Chambers) did not object to the celebration of peace by means of fireworks; what he required was to be informed as to the cost of the pyrotechnic display. The Clerk to the Ordnance, from his observations, appeared to know nothing about the expenditure; but he was quite confident that the reason was simply that the right hon. Gentleman had taken especial pains not to inquire. If, however, he Went to Woolwich, and asked any person about the Arsenal what the probable cost would be, he would find that the general estimate was about £30,000, while many persons placed it even much higher. The amount expended would not be made known until next year, when the Vote of civil contingencies came under discussion; but he expected that when that time arrived, considering the pledge which the Chancellor of the Exchequer had given, that £8,000 would be about the amount expended, the right hon. Gentleman would feel himself bound to give to the House a full, clear, and honest account of the whole expenditure. The display was ordered by the Minister of War, and when questions were put to Members of the Government in that House, no one appeared to know anything about it, and were unable to give such explanations as that House had a right to demand.
MR. MICHELLsaid, he did not believe that the cost of the fireworks would not exceed £8,000, for he counted one night forty waggons, drawn by 120 horses, conveying the materials for the display. What he wished, however, to state was, that where he had stationed himself to view the fireworks a rocket one pound in weight had fallen on the head of a poor lad and killed him, and he thought that if a similar exhibition were to take place at any future period, the Clerk of the Ordnance should be especially careful that such large projectiles were not thrown into the air in such a way that they might fall on the heads of persons.
Vote agreed to.
(3.) £10, in addition to £4,000,000, already voted for Clothing, &c.
MR. MONSELLsaid, before he made any reference to the Vote now before the Committee, he would assure the noble Lord (Lord Hotham) that he was quite mistaken as to his having taken pains not to find out what the cost of the fireworks would be. He was willing to give any information that lay in his power with
1702
regard to the fireworks. One of the first directions that he gave to the officer at Woolwich was to keep the account as separate as possible, in order that if any hon. Member wished to have it, it might be forthcoming. He was willing, indeed anxious, to lay the whole account on the table. With regard to the present Vote, he was happy to be able to inform the Committee that although at the time the reduced Estimate Was framed it was considered it would be necessary to take a Vote of £500,000 in addition to the Vote already taken, they had now ascertained that they were able to dispense with that sum, and therefore this was one of the nominal Votes. The reason that the former calculation had been discovered to be erroneous was, that the troops had come more rapidly from the Crimea than had been originally anticipated. The first item in the Vote was for clothing. The original Estimate was £1,826,000. The Estimate now was £1,023,124. With regard to the Commissariat, the amount that was required, exclusive of the troops at the seat of war, was for provisions £571,764; forage, £385,000; fuel and light, £206,000. Of course, in those items there could be no reduction. It would appear at first sight that there would be an increase on account of the number of troops coming home, but that increase would be slight, because the disembodiment of the militia would reduce the number of troops to be provided for by the Commissariat. A sum of £328,000 was taken for provisions at the seat of war, instead of £1,600,000, as in the original Estimate. The original Estimate was calculated on the assumption that we should have 100,000 men at the seat of war throughout the year, and in point of fact, in the month of April, there were 106,000. For the article of forage at the seat of war the Vote was only for three months, making a sum of £486,000, instead of the enormous sum of somewhere about £4,500,000 asked for in the original Estimate. For fuel and light, instead of a sum of £222,000, only £53,000 was taken, making altogether in the Commissariat a reduction of £2,315,000, and leaving a margin, without taking an additional Vote, of somewhere about £400,000 for the purpose of meeting contingencies.
COLONEL DUNNEsaid, he must complain of the inconvenience of putting so many things into one Vote. He wished to know the intention of Government as respected the clothing of the army; and

1703
whether it was to be made by contract and sent to the army. If there was any real administrative reform in the country, that was a question which ought to be very closely looked to. There was no Army Clothing Board now, and the clothing of the army did not seem to be the business of any one. The cost of clothing the army was immense, and the clothing this year appeared even worse than it was last year. The Guards alone, consisting of about 7,600 men, cost £249,000 for the year for clothing, while an equal number of the line cost little more than £140,000. It was requisite, therefore, that the strictest economy should be practised consistent with the efficiency of the service.
MR. OTWAYsaid, that when he last saw the returns he remembered to have been amazingly struck with the price charged for the clothes of the bandsmen of the Guards. He should wish to see the whole army clothed as well as the Guards; but if one thing were more hideous than another, it was that unsoldierlike and gewgaw dress of the bandsmen of the Guards. It was a great disfigurement to those fine men, and the expense was enormous.
MR. MONSELLsaid, that the mode by which the army was now clothed had only come into operation on the 1st of April last, and he believed that the fatigue clothing for the Indian regiments was all that had yet been prepared under it. The whole of the material for making up the clothing was supplied by the clothing department, and the clothing for the Artillery, Guards, Engineers, Sappers and Miners, and Cavalry, was to be made up by those respective corps themselves. The clothing for the infantry was made by contract, which was managed by the clothing department. He thought that the former of those systems was the preferable one, and he should be glad to have all the clothing made up in depôts throughout the country. The new clothing would be made of what was called "drummer's cloth," which was an article infinitely superior to the cloth formerly in use; but the saving which would be effected by the new system would amply compensate for the increased cost of the cloth, and the army would be much better clothed, and certainly at no greater expense, than formerly.
COLONEL LINDSAYsaid, he wished, as bearing upon this subject, to draw attention to the sum charged to the soldier for his summer trousers. Formerly the garment would last some few seasons, but
1704
under the new regulations it had to be made out of a description of tweed which would not last more than two or three months, and yet the soldier was charged from 8s. to 9s. for each pair.
(4.) £10 in addition to £2,500,000 already voted for Stores.
SIR CHARLES NAPIERsaid, he would beg to ask, if the new Lancaster guns had been found to have a sufficient range, and likewise if proper measures had been taken to prevent the bursting of the guns now manufactured. It was notorious that both at Sebastopol and Sweaborg, all the mortars but one or two, which had been made in former years, had burst in a very short time. It had been said that this was due to the quickness of the firing, but artillery officers were of opinion that those mortars, whether fired quickly or not, would burst all the same. At the siege of Martinique, which was taken entirely by mortars, they were not fired more than once in a quarter of an hour, and scarcely a mortar burst. He could not therefore understand how some artillery officers could have expressed the opinion that quick firing made no difference. In the war previous to the one just concluded the bursting of a gun was very rare indeed. He would wish to inquire if Government would take steps to ascertain if quick firing was more liable than slow to cause the bursting of the guns.
MR. MONSELLsaid, that professional men had given their opinion that quick or slow firing made no difference. Experiments were now being made at Shoeburyness to decide the point, and the result would, in a short time, be made known. As to the Lancaster guns, it had been ascertained that they were better adapted for long range than others, but experiment had shown that they were not satisfactory in other respects.
SIR CHARLES NAPIERsaid, he wished to know whether he was to understand that artillery officers at Shoeburyness were of opinion that a mortar from which 1,000 rounds were fired in a week was quite as liable to burst as a mortar from which 1,000 rounds were fired in twenty-four hours?
MR. MONSELLsaid, he could only repeat that experiments were being made to test the fact. With regard to the particulars of reductions on the Vote now before the Committee, the original Estimate was for £4,371,165. Reductions would be made on the item of small arms,

1705
£200,000; on iron ordnance, shot, and shells, £381,655; on saltpetre, £25,000; on gunpowder, 120,000; on camp equipage, £123,334. In the items for miscellaneous stores, reductions would be made, on the Tower, £228,254; on the Royal Carriage Department, £79,019; on the Royal Laboratory, £368,239; on the storekeepers' department, £144,239; on the establishment at Enfield, £3,515. There would also be very large reductions on the item of timber, and the whole would amount to £1,871,155, which would reduce the original Estimate to £2,500,010. He could assure the Committee that the Government were taking means effectually to prevent any undue expenditure of stores. After the present year, in consequence of the large quantities of stores coming back from the East, the Vote would be much less, and the reductions would now have been greater but for the fact of large contracts, entered into when there was no reason to hope for the discontinuance of war, being still subsisting.
MR. PELLATTsaid, he wished to know how much of the reduction on the manufacture of small arms applied to the manufactory at Enfield, and on which the expense incurred had been entirely thrown away. He wished particularly to know what was the loss on the small arms which had been already manufactured there.
MR. MONSELLsaid, that that question opened up a fruitful field of controversy; but he could state that within the last few days he had seen arms turned out of the Enfield factory made in first-rate style, and admitted by the Birmingham gentlemen to be quite equal to any work made at a price which certainly astonished him. In fact, the saving in the cost of producing small arms would be such that in two or three years it would be enough to pay the expense of erecting the factory. Recently a meeting of the principal gun manufacturers of Birmingham was held, and at that meeting the majority decided on taking steps for the erection of similar machinery in their own establishments; but at all events, if they do not, they would soon find out that the Government could beat them at their work. However, every opportunity would be given them to see what was going on at Enfield, and he hoped they would take advantage of what they saw.
MR. MUNTZsaid, he was disposed to doubt whether a Government factory could beat Birmingham; however, he wished to
1706
have the whole of the expenses connected with the erection of the Enfield manufactory fairly before the House. When the amount was before the House he had no doubt that what he had previously predicted would turn out to be true. With respect to the defective mortars, Colonel Mitchell had recently assured him that the bursting arose from the want of due proofing, for the proof was with 20lb. of powder, while the practice was with 21lb. To be of any real use as a test of the serviceable quality of the mortars, the proof ought, of course, to be higher than the practice.
MR. MONTAGU CHAMBERSsaid, that, with regard to the manufacture of such arms, it had been suggested that a, large store of them should be laid in. Now, in former ages it had been the practice to lay in a large store, consisting of from 20,000 to even 100,000 stand of arms. Then certain inventions were discovered which rendered the whole of that stock useless. Besides which it would be imprudent to lay in a large store of arms, as such a course might tend to prevent the Government from availing itself of the latest improvements. There was a prospect of breech-loading arms alone being adopted, and in that case the formation of large stores of weapons upon the old plan would be unadvisable.
Vote agreed to.
(5.) £45,000, in addition to £1,794,069 already voted for Charge of Works, &c.
MR. MONSELLsaid, in answer to a question which had been put on the preceding Vote, he had to state that the Committee of Small Arms had instituted a series of experiments with respect to breech-loading firearms; but that no arm had as yet been found which was altogether satisfactory. Some 2,000 or 3,000 stand of breech-loading arms had been constructed, which was very serviceable and useful, but the discovery had not yet reached that degree of perfection which in the course of time might be expected. The Government had been availing themselves of the valuable assistance of Mr. Whitworth, of Manchester. He (Mr. Monsell) had not been present, but Lords Hardinge and Panmure had witnessed those experiments, and they thought the best course they could adopt would probably be to wait till the result of further trials were ascertained.
VISCOUNT BERNARDsaid, that until the last year we had not paid a proper attention to the wants of the army; but we had lately applied ourselves to the improvement

1707
of the barracks, and particularly of the cavalry barracks. Military stations had disappeared, and other improvements had been introduced. There still remained many deficiencies—one of which was the establishment of barracks on the side of hills, where they could get no water. That had been the case with the militia barracks near Cork. There was, moreover, a great defect in the absence of riding-schools at Ballincollig, in the vicinity of Cork. Major General Sir James Scarlett, Sir Edward Blakeney, and His Royal Highness the Duke of Cambridge had expressed themselves strongly in favour of the establishment of a riding school, and the want was generally acknowledged to exist by various other military authorities.
CAPTAIN LEICESTER VERNONsaid, he could second the appeal of the noble Lord. He had served in various military capacities in Ireland, and had had frequent opportunities of experiencing the want of such a school at Cork, which was both an artillery and a military station.
COLONEL LINDSAYsaid, he wished to bring to the notice of the Committee the question of the improvement of the condition of the soldier. The object of Government had been to raise the soldier in the social scale, so as to induce the people to enlist in the service of the Crown. Improvements had been made, not only for the sake of the service, but in order to let the nation know that when a citizen enlisted into the service he got into a higher social scale than had heretofore prevailed in the army. Twenty years ago there was much to alter, and since that period great improvements had from time to time been made. The criminal code of the army was very severe, that severity had, however, been reduced. In order to promote good behaviour Government established higher pay, libraries, and reading-rooms; but the reading rooms were too small, and one of the objects in wishing for improvement in barracks was to get those rooms enlarged, for certainly the one thing most wanted was a better mode in the barrack accommodation, and more means of amusement. The Government had also established savings banks, had reduced the term of service, altered the system of canteens, and established regimental schools. With the exception of two or three barracks in such localities as Preston, Sheffield, and Anglesea, the barracks were old. But in all the barracks the men were too much crowded, gas light was only partially introduced,
1708
and a tone of discomfort prevailed in the barracks, which naturally drove men to seek comfort out of the barracks. That state of things required to be ameliorated, and he hoped the subject would have immediate attention. The Committee of last year, who paid much attention to the subject, and to whom the officers ought to be much obliged, made various recommendations which had not yet been carried out, and he hoped Government would state how far they were disposed to enter into the views of the Committee. The Report of that Committee declared that the existing barracks were inadequate to the comfort and social condition of the soldier, and that the consideration of expense ought not to interfere with proper improvements for the moral and sanitary condition of the soldier. When so much money was spent on our goals for these purposes, it surely ought not to be grudged to our soldiers. Under those impressions, the Committee had made three recommendations. The first was that the space of the barracks should be enlarged; the second was that married men should not be allowed to occupy the same room with the single soldiers; and the third was that there should be a better system of canteens. Besides those things, it was essential to establish proper lavatories, so essential to the health and cleanliness of the soldier, and to provide places of amusement so that the men might believe themselves at home in their barracks. Many men would be prevented from going to the public-houses and getting drunk if they were permitted to play at bowls or quoits in barracks, and the moral condition of the soldier would be improved. Now, that he thought, was a most desirable object for the Government to consider. Then again, there should be proper kitchens. One of the witnesses before the Committee was asked if he would like to have Irish-stew every day for dinner. Of course he said no. But that was what the men had, while at a very small expense the means of boiling and roasting might be given them. Then again, light was an essential element to their comfort. Thus when the men were off guard, one man read the papers to the rest; it was the only thing they could now do in barracks—all they had to resort to when there was but one candle in a room. The Government had already done much, and he hoped that it would continue in its present course. The hon. Member for Lambeth (Mr. W. Williams) had found fault with the mode of

1709
heating the barracks, and said that the heat was more than was wanted. Now the fact was, that if the passages were not warmed, the whole place became cold and comfortless. The Committee in its Report had especially recommended that the passages should he warmed in an efficient manner. He would suggest the propriety of at once advancing a large sum out of the Consolidated Fund in order to carry out the great improvements at once rather than spread them over a number of years, as was proposed.
MR. MONSELLsaid, he entirely agreed with all that had fallen from the hon. and gallant Member for Wigan, and so far as those barracks which were about to be built, or which were in the course of erection, were concerned, all that the hon. and gallant Gentleman wished could be effected without entailing any such additional expense as would be likely to meet with opposition. The cost of building barracks for a thousand men on the old system would be about £70,000; the cost upon the proposed plan, giving one-fourth the number of cubic feet additional per man, separate quarters for married soldiers, additional rooms for staff-sergeants, a sufficient number of lavatories, and the like, would only be about £15,000 extra. With regard to the existing buildings, however, a much more serious question had arisen. It was now agreed, on all hands, that the principle on which alone the army could be satisfactorily organised, would be its concentration to as great an extent as possible. He assumed, therefore, that, with the exception of forts, and places where considerations other than mere housing of the troops were involved, it would be useless to keep up any barracks where there was not accommodation for at least one thousand men. The buildings of that magnitude, at present in existence in England, would accommodate 30,000 men, allowing to each the amount of space recommended by the Committee. In Scotland there was accommodation for about 3,000 men, and in Ireland for about 18,000 more, making altogether room for about 50,000 men. To put all those barracks in the condition for which the hon. and gallant Member (Colonel Lindsay) was contending would cost no less than '£500,000 or £600,000. Now it appeared to the Government that the best thing to do would be to devote a certain sum every year to that purpose; but he was quite prepared to admit that at the rate of only £40,000 a year it would
1710
take a long time to complete the entire work. If, however, they laid out that sum in the present instance, they would be able to come down to the House with more exact information and more detailed Estimates next year; so that, perhaps, after all, the plan proposed would be the most satisfactory. With respect to the riding school at Ballincollig, the noble Lord (Viscount Bernard) had adduced authorities more than sufficient to make out his case; and if the work was not begun this year an Estimate should be given for it next. The mistake had been in treating Ballincollig as an isolated district. If it had been dealt with as the country station of the Cork district, the application would have worn an entirely different aspect.
SIR JOSEPH PAXTONsaid, that as a Member of the Barrack Committee, he thought the argument of the right hon. Gentleman the Clerk of the Ordnance was rather against proceeding with the Vote at all. He agreed with the hon. and gallant Member (Colonel Lindsay) as to the necessity of making the improvements he had advocated in the existing barracks. The condition of the soldier had not been attended to as it deserved up to the present moment. From the evidence taken before the Barrack Committee it was evident, indeed, that the soldier was the worst-lodged person in Her Majesty's dominions. It was proved that the accommodation for each prisoner in our goals cost £150 per man, and, when they considered the importance of providing for the morals and comfort of the soldier, it could not be denied that he deserved at least as much consideration, and ought to be as well lodged as the criminals of the country. Instead of voting so insufficient a sum as £40,000, it would be far better that the Government should go into the whole question, and inquire how much barrack accommodation was wanted in the country. If the troops were to be moved in divisions and brigades, they must be housed and barrack accommodation must be provided for them. The barracks, too, must be near to each other, instead of being spread over the country. The existing barracks could not, therefore, without great expense, accord with the proposed plan. All the barracks in the country ought to be improved, not piecemeal, but simultaneously. Supposing they spent £40,000 in putting one barrack into a proper condition, the troops quartered in it must in due course be removed to one of the unimproved

1711
buildings, and he need not say how greatly aggravated would be the misery of men, who, for a time at least, had enjoyed the blessings of decency and comfort. A barrack ought not merely to contain the means of comfortably housing the troops, but it ought to have within its precincts everything necessary for fully instructing them in the art of war, and for teaching them how best to meet the exigencies of a campaign. It ought likewise to be so arranged that if a regiment received orders to march suddenly on to Salisbury plain, it should be able to set out at once, fully equipped. The great point, however, which they ought to have in view was to improve the social standing of the soldier. At present, if a person enlisted he was regarded by his friends almost in the light of a lost man. ["Oh, oh!"] He could assure hon. Members that such was really the general impression. A man who enlisted was regarded as one that had got himself into a dreadful position; whereas he would like to see that feeling exactly reversed. He should like to hear people say, when an unruly son entered the army, that he had placed himself in a position in which he would he so trained that when he came back he would be a better citizen than when he left his friends.
SIR CHARLES NAPIERsaid, he would recommend that all the military departments should be placed under one roof, and he believed it would be possible to accomplish that object by purchasing all the houses between the Ordnance Department and the House of the Duke of Buckingham at an expense of about £30,000. It had been proposed to pull down a stack of buildings in Parliament Street, and place all the Government Offices there; but, considering the time which had been occupied, and the enormous sums which had been expended in building the Houses of Parliament, it was not probable that any such plan would be carried out in less than twenty or thirty years. He had for the last twenty years urged the necessity of bringing together all the departments of the Admiralty under one roof, and he believed that the money which had been expended in enlarging Somerset House would, if properly applied, have been sufficient for that purpose; but the First Lord of the Admiralty would never consent to give up his house, and even the Junior Lord had not given up his without great difficulty.
SIR DE LACY EVANSsaid, he would beg to offer his thanks to the hon. and gallant Gentleman who had introduced the important subject which was under discussion. Hd sincerely respected the right hon. Gentleman who represented the Ordnance Department, but he was not quite satisfied with the right hon. Gentleman's answers to the questions that had been put to him upon that subject. The right hon. Gentleman stated that £40,000 would be expended in the course of the year in barrack improvements, but what would be the use of such a sum spread over the whole of the United Kingdom? The right hon. Gentleman said, "Don't hurry us, wait another year, until we can see what is clone." It would be very convenient to answer all suggestions in that manner, but the question under consideration was one of great importance, as it affected the class of men who entered the service, and ought to be attended to without delay. It had hitherto been supposed that only the lowest class of men entered the British army. He hoped and believed that that was not the case; but the reason for such an opinion being entertained was that the men were neglected. The statement of the hon. Gentleman behind him (Sir J. Paxton) had made a strong impression on his mind, and he was consequently very much dissatisfied with the manner in which the right hon. Gentleman had treated the question. He had the greatest respect for the noble Lord at the head of the War Department, but the noble Lord, he was sorry to say, had yielded very gradually and with much reluctance to the remonstrances which had been addressed to him as to the necessity of doing something to improve the moral and physical condition of the soldier, and when he at last consented to grant an additional penny a day it was announced by his supporters as a prodigious boon. The consequence of the reluctance of the Government to improve the condition of the soldier was, that when it became desirable to induce people to enter the service they found a great prejudice existing against it. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Monsell), or the noble Lord at the head of the War Department, would reconsider this subject. The arrangement for relieving the army from police duties, and maintaining it as a purely military force, was, undoubtedly, a very great improvement; but he thought still more comprehensive reforms were necessary, which did not appear to be contemplated

1713
by the Government, who, in his opinion, had not yet dealt with the question in a just, a politic, or a generous manner. The object seemed to have been to frame the Estimates in the most niggardly spirit, and he believed an idea had prevailed that, the greater the hardships which the soldier was compelled to endure in barracks in time of peace, the better fitted would he be to encounter the hardships of war. Now, he entertained a decidedly contrary opinion, for he believed that soldiers would be the better fitted for the privations and hardships of war if ample provision was made for promoting their health and comfort during peace. Some years ago the War Department sent out a Commission to inquire into the condition of barracks on the Continent, which in many cases was far superior to that of the barracks in this country. That Report had not been laid before the House, although he had repeatedly asked for its production, and he now ventured to express a hope that, as the views of the War Department had undergone a change on this subject, it would no longer be withheld.
MR. STAFFORDsaid, he did not think that the tone of complaint in which the hon. and gallant Member (Sir De L. Evans) had spoken of the Government was justified by the facts; for, in his opinion, a debt of gratitude was due from the country to the present Government for the wise and liberal measures which they had adopted for ameliorating the condition of our soldiers. If abuses existed in our military system, it was right that they should be exposed; but it must be remembered that, during the last twelve months, an enormous change for the better in the condition of the British army had been effected by the Government. He thought when that House pressed all possible economy upon the Government on one night, and the next night urged upon them an increase of expenditure, they were pursuing a somewhat inconsistent course. His right hon. Friend the Clerk to the Ordnance had stated that in the case of new barracks the Government were prepared to carry out the philanthropic and liberal principles he had explained, but that considerable difficulty existed with regard to the introduction of modern improvements into old barracks; and he (Mr. Stafford) did not think, therefore, there was any ground for complaining, in the present state of the public finances, that the Vote demanded for this purpose was somewhat smaller than the Committee
1714
might have been disposed to grant if they had taken the question more fully into consideration. The Government had tried numerous experiments abroad, with the view of promoting the comfort of the army, and they had done so most successfully. He understood the Government were about to recall an officer to whom he could not pay too high a tribute of praise, General Storks, the commandant at Scutari, who had not only had the control of the hospital there, but who had had under his command a considerable number of troops in barracks, and who, by providing for their employment and amusement, had successfully combated their tendency to vice and drunkenness. He therefore trusted that the experience which that officer had acquired abroad might be turned to good account in providing for the comfort and welfare of our troops at home. His hon. and gallant Friend (Colonel Lindsay), who had called attention to this subject, had always evinced the most earnest desire to improve the condition of the common soldier, and he had practically refuted the assertion that ameliorations in the condition of our soldiers could only be originated by civilians. He (Mr. Stafford) believed that the colonels of militia regiments would be able to afford very valuable suggestions to the Government on the subject of barracks. A colonel of militia had that day informed him that the hospitals and barracks at Gibraltar were in a state most detrimental to the health of the troops, and he hoped the attention of the Government would be directed to the condition of the military establishments at that garrison. He trusted that his noble Friend the Member for Marylebone (Viscount Ebrington) would have an opportunity of expressing his opinion on the subject under discussion, as he had devoted much time to the amelioration of the condition of the soldier, and there was hardly a hospital which he had not visited. His noble Friend was now prevented from attending the House, in consequence of a disease which he had caught in one of those hospitals. He (Mr. Stafford) had never found the Government wanting in readiness to support anything which they thought would tend to improve the condition of the soldier both at home and abroad, and he begged again publicly to tender them his thanks.
SIR DE LACY EVANSsaid, he was well aware that the hon. Member (Mr. Stafford) had undoubtedly rendered great

1715
personal services to our army in the East, and he agreed with the hon. Gentleman that the present Government had exerted themselves to promote the comfort of our troops, especially abroad. The hon. Gentleman was, however, a very new reformer with regard to military matters, and he ought to have a little consideration for old reformers, who had been struggling unsuccessfully for a quarter of a century or more to improve the condition of the soldier.
MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, he conceived that the best economy was to make every possible provision for the comfort of the soldier; but that, looking at the expenditure, our soldiers ought to be the most comfortable men in the kingdom. No less than £1,500,000 was included in this Vote for barracks; the amount exceeded £1,000,000 last year, being above £2,500,000 for the two years. The number of men for the home stations was 40,000, thus giving an average of £60 for barrack accommodation for each man. He believed that amongst the labouring classes £70 a year was about the average cost of each family for a year, being very little more than the amount paid for barracks for each soldier. The Barrack Committee had recommended that passages in barracks should be heated by hot water. But if we made exotics of our soldiers, how could they stand such exposure as they had had to endure in the Crimea? There were few gentlemen's houses where it was thought necessary to heat the passages: it was not done even in that House. Surely the soldiers might go along the passages in barracks without the risk of catching cold. He wished to see the soldiers comfortable, but he decidedly objected to a lavish expenditure.
COLONEL BOLDEROsaid, he regarded the erection of barracks as an expensive, but not as a wasteful operation. Experience showed that there was very little difference between the cost of barracks constructed by contractors and those constructed by the Government for themselves. As to overcrowding in existing barracks, the opinion of the late Duke of Wellington was taken as to the number of men to occupy each room, and that great authority decided on fourteen. If the number were excessive the fault lay, not with those who built the barracks, but with the authorities who forced too many inmates into each department. Defensive barracks situated on
1716
the coast ought to be provided with every requisite; but economy might be effected in regard to the accommodation furnished for the troops stationed in the inland districts.
MR. TITEsaid, he wished to inquire whether the Government intended to carry out the plans which had been approved for the construction of new cavalry and infantry barracks, and which had very properly been thrown open to the competition of the architects and engineers of the country? As to the item of £250,000 for huts, it was to be hoped that those buildings would be provided with substantial roofs. The huts at Aldershot might have been covered with slate instead of felt, without either loss of time or an increase in the expense. The item of £25,300 for the purchase of three houses in Pall Mall demanded explanation; as did also that of £33,000 for a site for barracks at Chelsea.
SIR JOSEPH PAXTONsaid, he wished to ask whether the recommendations of the Committee on Barracks were to be carried out at Aldershot? From the plans, it would appear that the buildings in that lucality would be far too close together. The accommodation designed for 6,000 men ought to be spread over a much larger space than the plans indicated.
MR. OTWAYsaid, that it might be supposed, from the observations of some hon. Members, that the House of Commons had shown a niggardliness in voting money to provide accommodation for the soldiers, but the fact was that, during the last and current years, the very large sum of £2,500,000 had been voted for barracks and huts, and yet they were told that the soldier was the worst-lodged individual in Her Majesty's dominions. He did not believe that the hon. Member for Lambeth (Mr. W. Williams) desired to curtail the proper comforts of the soldiers, but the Committee ought to know how that sum had been expended. A certain number of soldiers were married by leave of their commanding officers, and he should like to be informed whether fit accommodation was provided for them, or whether they were still huddled together in rooms with the other soldiers not married?
COLONEL DUNNEsaid, that the soldier must, of necessity, when he entered the army, be prepared to sacrifice much in the way of comfort, and to submit to occupy the same sleeping apartment with several of his comrades. He ought, of course, to be provided with all that was requisite

1717
for the purposes of health and ordinary convenience, but more than that he ought not to be encouraged to expect. He might also add that, in his opinion, the accommodation for married soldiers ought to be upon a very limited scale. The soldier now enlisted but for a limited period, and therefore there was not that hardship in calling upon him to live without a wife, which under other circumstances would be the case. The truth was, it was rather a misfortune for the soldier to get married while in the service. If barrack accommodation were provided for our troops upon the same scale as at Sheffield, great expense would be incurred, and no adequate result would, so far as he could see, be attained. He might also say that it would be better that our barracks and huts, instead of being made of wood, which was of an extremely perishable nature, should be built of some more durable material.
MR. MONSELLsaid, in reply to the inquiries of the hon. Member for Bath (Mr. Tite), that the plans for barracks were under the consideration of the Inspector General of Fortifications, with a view to certain reductions in the expense. With respect to the houses purchased in Pall Mall, near the old Ordnance Office, it appeared to the Government to be a matter of great importance to arrange the building so as to contain the whole staff of the new department, and the public would gain an equivalent for the expenditure in the efficient way in which the business would thereby be conducted. The scheme of erecting barracks at Chelsea had been abandoned, inasmuch as Battersea Park could not, as had been anticipated, he made available as exercise ground for the soldiers who might be stationed in that quarter. He might state, in answer to the hon. Member for Coventry (Sir J. Paxton), that the accommodation at Aldershot would be found amply sufficient in providing for the health and convenience of the soldiers, when it was 'taken into account that they had a large common at hand, by which means of exercise were afforded which did not exist in connection with other barracks. With respect to married soldiers, he might observe that the Government were extremely desirous to provide for them sufficient accommodation, and were prepared to take the necessary steps for that purpose. A considerable amount of expenditure with that view would of course be
1718
necessary, but then he believed that the moral effect in the case of the soldiers would be extremely beneficial.
Vote agreed to.
(6.) Motion made, and Question proposed—
" That a Bum, not exceeding £38,404, be granted to Her Majesty (in addition to the sum of £200,000 already voted on account), towards defraying the Charge of the Educational and Scientific Branches, which will come in course of payment from the 1st day of April, 1856, to the 31st day of March, 185Y, inclusive."
MR. E. ELLICEsaid, he wished for some explanation of the item of £50,000 for the Ordnance Survey of Scotland. The plan proposed by the Government, which had been approved by a Committee of that House, was to survey the whole of Scotland on the scale of twenty-five inches to the mile. Such a scale would give every landed proprietor in that country an accurate map of his estate, complete to the minutest details, with every road and even every ditch marked in, and the position of all the farm buildings laid down. No doubt that would be very pleasant for the landed proprietors, but not so pleasant for the landless tax-payers, at whose expense it was to be furnished. To justify such an expenditure, the benefit which was to be gained ought to be shown to be of a permanent nature, but it was manifest that the continual changes which would take place — the fresh sub-divisions of holdings, for instance, the construction of new farm buildings, and so on—would, in a very few years, make the map inaccurate and comparatively worthless. The Committee would be rather taken aback to learn that if it sanctioned this item of £50,000 it would commit itself to an expenditure of no less than £5,000,000. Sir Charles Trevelyan, who appeared before the Committee on behalf of the Government, to say all that could be said in favour of the scheme, boldly avowed that he contemplated the survey of England and Ireland on a similar scale, and allowed that the cost would amount to somewhere about the sum which he (Mr. E. Ellice) had just named. But, in addition to that, there would be the expense of a new department which it was in contemplation to establish, with surveyors in the principal towns to revise the plans periodically, so as to keep up their accuracy. Now, the Committee should remember that a survey on such a gigantic scale was as yet a mere experiment. The six-inch plan was condemned by every one

1719
but the Ordnance, and appeared to be kept up by them only as an engineering curiosity. As the survey for Scotland must be gone on with—he should suggest upon their one-inch scale—he did not think he should be justified in moving the rejection of the Vote. He should, therefore, to bring the matter to a point, move to reduce it by £8,000.
MR. MONSELLsaid, that no one could have supposed, from the speech of the hon. Gentleman, that this matter had been submitted to the careful consideration of the most eminent scientific men of the country, a vast majority of whom had decided in favour of the scale to which the hon. Gentleman was so much opposed. That plan had also been recommended by the Committee of which the hon. Member was himself a member, and was, at the time that it was temporarily departed from, petitioned for by large numbers of the people of Scotland. The six-inch scale would cost £700,000, the twenty-five-inch only £900,000, and it was, therefore, comparatively much the cheaper of the two. The hon. Gentleman had said that the surveying of the United Kingdom upon this scale would cost £5,000,000. Even if that were so—which he (Mr. Monsell) doubted—it must be borne in mind that this expenditure would be extended over a great number of years; and that the greater portion of the work was performed by that most valuable corps, the Sappers, which, if not employed upon these surveys, would have nothing to do, but which must be kept up to provide for the defence of the country and its preparation for war. Frequent changes of plan in this matter were most disastrous, prevented the proper conducting of the survey, and caused a lamentable waste of public money. He would, therefore, urge the Committee not to depart from a plan which had been recommended not only by the authorities to whom he had referred, but also by Colonel James, who was so ably conducting the survey, and to reject the Amendment of the hon. Member.
SIR THOMAS ACLANDsaid, he must express his regret that the map of England on the one-inch scale was still left incomplete.
SIR WILLIAM JOLLIFFEsaid, that while he had great difficulty in supporting the Amendment, he could not defend the system on which this survey had been carried on. He did not see why the survey
1720
of Scotland should have been commenced before that of England was completed. Why, too, should the Ordnance have surveyed thinly populated districts, where estates were large and maps little in demand, and have left unsurveyed others where there was a dense population, many large towns, and numerous manufactories; and where the demand for the maps would have been so great as almost to repay the expense of the survey? The six-inch map of Lancashire had been found exceedingly useful, and it was much to be regretted that Yorkshire, Staffordshire, and London had not been surveyed upon the same scale. It was absurd to delineate with such minute accuracy the mountainous regions of Ireland and Scotland, while there were many of the most populous districts of England which had not as yet been mapped.
MR. STEPHENSONsaid, he must admit that each scale had its peculiar advantages, yet at the same time he must contend that for practical references the one-inch map was the best of all. The habit which unfortunately prevailed in this country of continually changing the scale occasioned a profitless expenditure of the public money and endless confusion. The great desideratum was a map of Great Britain on a uniform scale. In Ireland the scale had been altered once or twice, and the result was most deplorable. He had frequently consulted the six-inch maps in that country, but invariably found them worse than useless for engineering purposes. It gave him nearly as much trouble to gather information from them as to realise it on the ground. What the engineers engaged in various parts of the United Kingdom had for years been endeavouring to obtain from Parliament was an assurance that the one-inch map would be completed before any other piece of surveying was taken in hand. If it were to be continually interrupted, as it had heretofore been, fifty or sixty years would elapse before it was perfected. At present there was no uniform map of England on which engineers could depend. In France and other countries through which he had travelled on professional business, he had never found any difficulty in procuring lucid and accurate maps; but such could not be said for England, though the English had probably spent on their surveys ten times as much as any other people in Europe. Over and over again the engineers of Great Britain had given

1721
the Government to understand that maps on the six, the twelve, or the twenty-five-inch scale were alike useless to them, but the Ordnance turned a deaf ear to all their protestations, and went on constructing maps which the engineers did not want and would never consult. He was in no degree responsible for the Report of the Committee of which he was a member. He disapproved every paragraph of it from the first to the last, and, suffering under a malady which rendered it undesirable that he should expose himself to excitement, he stayed away from the Committee for fear he might express himself too strongly on the subject.
VISCOUNT DUNCANsaid, that as chairman of the Committee he felt called upon to defend their Report, which had found favour with all the members of that body except two. The one-inch survey of England had been found useless for all purposes to which a national survey should be applied. The evidence of Colonel Dawson went to show that it was one of the most expensive scales that could be adopted, and that it would have been more economical to have constructed the maps originally on the twenty-five-inch system. A one-inch survey could not be enlarged to a twenty-five-inch survey, whereas a twenty-five-inch might easily be reduced to any smaller scale. He had heard it insinuated that the adoption of the twenty-five-inch scale was a job on the part of the Scotch proprietors—an attempt to thrust their hands to the very bottom of the pockets of the English people. [Mr. W. WILLIAMS: hear, hear!] He was not astonished to hear that cheer; but when grants were proposed for metropolitan police and metropolitan parks, who so ready to vote away the public money as the hon. Member for Lambeth? Let all parties share alike, and certain he was that the Scotch Members would not ask anything for themselves which they were not prepared to give to others. If he could not prove that the twenty-five-inch scale was the best that could be adopted, not only in Scotland, but in other parts of the country also, he would be the first to ask the hon. Member for Lambeth to vote against it. On probing the matter to the bottom, he had found that there was no truth in these insinuations against the landed proprietors of Scotland. It was not correct to say that the twenty-five-inch scale originated with them. When the people of France saw the mistakes into which England had
1722
fallen, they referred the whole subject to a Commission consisting of the most able men—Laplace and others—who could be found in that country. Those gentlemen sat for ten years on the subject (Laughter). He could inform hon. Members that they were not in the habit of rushing to a conclusion so rapidly as some hon. Gentlemen were. They took time to consider the subject, and if those who seemed to be so highly entertained by what he was saying would take the trouble to read the Report of the Committee of which he had the honour to be Chairman, and to glance over the labours of the French Commission, he thought they would hesitate before they pronounced so rashly upon so difficult and intricate a question as that of a national survey. Laplace and his colleagues, after their mature deliberation of ten years, made a Report to the Emperor Napoleon, no mean authority on such a subject, and upon their recommendation the Emperor adopted a twenty-five-inch scale. The survey upon that scale was so successful in France that it was executed in Austria, Bavaria, and almost every other country in Europe, except Great Britain. In Bavaria, as the Committee were told by M. Vignoles, the survey on the twenty-five-inch scale had been so successful that it had actually done away with the system of conveyancing. The same witness stated that there would be no difficulty in applying the same survey to Great Britain. And, then, high authority—the right. hon. and learned Lord Advocate for Scotland—told the Committee that, after the completion of such a survey, he was perfectly satisfied that, although conveyancers would, in all probability, keep up descriptions, as lawyers did for greater safety, especially in large estates under ancient titles, yet he thought the system would be gradually dispensed with. The Committee did not confine their attention to the production of a mere geographical map. Nobody denied that for such a map a one-inch scale would be sufficient; but, after inquiry, the Committee came to the conclusion that a national survey ought to subserve, among other purposes, the registration of titles, the simplifying and cheapening of conveyances of land, local valuation and assessments, adjustment of civil and ecclesiastical divisions, enclosure of waste lands, sanitary purposes, statistics, and geological and mineral surveys. A geographical map might be of use to travellers, but to the permanent residents

1723
in a country, to the people generally, it would be of comparatively small value. He had often heard in that House the name of "the public" taken in vain, but never more so than when it was said that the people wanted a mere geographical map. What was the fact? The one-inch scale was acted upon through all the southern counties of England, but in the northern districts it was found utterly impracticable to proceed with the survey upon that scale. There actually was not room to put down the names of the places, and the survey was given up in despair. It had been asked why should the survey of Scotland take precedence of that of England? He had no wish that it should; and, in point of fact, while the survey had been proceeding in Scotland it had also been carried on upon the large scale in Durham, York, and all the northern counties of England. It had been stated that a sum of £5,000,000 was about to be thrown away upon this survey. Now, to that assertion he gave an unqualified contradiction. The Estimates placed before the Committee led them to believe that the outside cost of the survey of Scotland, conducted upon the best possible principles, would not exceed £917,000, and the expenditure was not likely to amount even to that sum. Then it was declared that the survey had been begun, but would never end, whereas Colonel James, on the contrary, stated that it would be almost certain to be concluded in ten years. He had been intrusted by the Committee over which he had had the honour to preside with the task of drawing up the Report, and now stood there prepared to justify every word of it. In conclusion, he would call upon the Committee to support one of the most economical Votes it could possibly pass, and to allow the funds necessary to carry on this survey on something like a uniform and intelligible plan.
LORD ELCHOsaid, he regretted that the hon. Gentleman who had brought forward the Amendment had not given notice of his intention to submit it to the Committee. In 1851 the unanimous opinion of a Committee which had sat to inquire into this subject, of which Committee he was Chairman, had been in favour of the one-inch as compared with the six-inch scale, that being the only point upon which the Committee had to decide. The people of Scotland, however, objected to be bound by that decision, although almost all the
1724
Members of the Committee were Scotchmen, and they prayed for the adoption of the six-inch scale. Afterwards, when Lord Aberdeen was in office and he (Lord Elcho) was at the Treasury, the advice of men of attainments and experience was sought for on this question, and Colonel Dawson, among others, expressed a strong opinion that as the six-inch scale was not sufficient for property purposes, and as there was a feeling in favour of a larger scale, the twenty-inch cadastral survey should be carried out. Circulars were also sent to high authorities on the subject as well as to a number of scientific bodies, and the testimony appeared to be quite conclusive in favour of the larger scale of from twenty to twenty-five inches. While thirty-two replies were given in favour of the six-inch scale, 120 were for the larger scale of from twenty to twenty-five inches to the mile; and not only was there a large majority in point of numbers on the side of the larger scale, but the weight of authority was likewise clearly on the same side. There had been an understanding last year that no further steps should be taken on the subject until the question had been referred to a Select Committee, and that Committee had, with two exceptions, been in favour of the large scale. The work was one of great national importance, and he hoped the Committee would not be led away by the observations of the hon. Member (Mr. E. Ellice).
MR. W. LOCKHARTsaid, he fully concurred in what had fallen from the noble Lord who had just sat down, and in the recommendation made by the Committee.
VISCOUNT PALMERSTONsaid, he hoped the Committee would not agree to the Amendment of his hon. Friend the Member for St. Andrews. He could understand that Parliament should decide upon having no survey of any part of the country, because such a decision, although unwise, would at least be intelligible; but he could not understand Parliament deciding that a survey should be made, but that the survey should be an imperfect one. All other European nations had agreed that a survey should be made on a scale which was the one best adapted to combine all the purposes for which a survey was necessary, and the scale of twenty-five inches to the mile was considered to be the scale best calculated to record all the information which might be of practical utility. It had been said, "Let

1725
us have a map on the one-inch scale." Well, there would be such a map; but in order to have a map on that scale the survey must be made on a much larger scale, in order to obtain accuracy. If, therefore, it was necessary to make a survey on a larger scale, it became a question whether it might not be desirable to make it upon a scale large enough for all purposes. It was not proposed that the map on the twenty-five-inch scale should be published, but it would be a matter of record from which persons who required one might have a copy made at their own expense. His hon. Friend (Mr. E. Ellice) had complained of the expenditure which would be incurred, and he had stated that the principle, if agreed to, as far as Scotland was concerned, would have to be extended to England and Ireland, and that then an expense of £5,000,000 would be incurred. Now, that he considered was as strong an argument as could be advanced in favour of the present Vote, because, unless experience in the case of Scotland proved the advantage of the system, it could not be extended to England. He hoped that hon. Gentlemen would not be led away by the argument that England was now called upon to do for Scotland that which she had not done for herself, because that argument would apply equally to every scheme for local improvement. The whole question now was, whether the Committee would agree to apply to Scotland a principle which the highest authorities regarded as being likely to produce most beneficial results.
MR. E. ELLICEsaid, he thought that the publication of a map for the Highlands on the twenty-five-inch scale was a perfect absurdity, and he must remind the Committee that the present Vote included the publication of the map. As to the statement that the maps of other countries were on a large scale, he would beg to call the attention of the Committee to the evidence of Sir Roderick Murchison. That Gentleman said:—
"The largest scale on which any map of a foreign country has been published is that of Bavaria. It is a lithographed map, on the scale of about one and five-tenths of an inch to the mile. The maps of Austria are on the scale of seven-tenths of an inch to the mile. Those of France on the scale of nearly three-quarters of an inch to the mile. No great European country has published a general engraved map upon so large a scale as the one-inch map of Great Britain."
To complete the survey of Scotland on the one-inch scale would cost about £317,000,
1726
while the adoption of another scale would lead to an expenditure of £917,000.
MR. COWANsaid, that as one of the Committee of 1851, he should support the Amendment, though he would be much better pleased if the hon. Member would withdraw it. The execution of the large scale would be providing gentlemen with beautiful plans of their estates at the public expense.
THE LORD ADVOCATEsaid, he should support the larger scale, on the ground that a six-inch scale was too large for an ordinary map and too small for public purposes; and that the Committee had come to the unanimous conclusion that, upon the whole, it was the most economical and most advantageous scale that could be adopted.
LORD ELCHOsaid, that those who were conducting the survey proposed to publish it on the large scale; but that, by aid of the anastatic process, they would be enabled to produce the maps in so cheap a form that a sale of thirty-three copies would more than cover the cost of publication; but for that discovery the expense would have been enormous.
Motion made, and Question put—
"That a sum, not exceeding £30,404, be granted to Her Majesty (in addition to the sum of £200,000 already voted on account), towards defraying the Charge of the Educational and Scientific Branches, which will come in course of payment from the 1st day of April, 1856, to the 31st day of March, 1857, inclusive."
The Committee divided:—Ayes 69; Noes 160; Majority 91.
COLONEL LINDSAYsaid, before the Vote was passed, he wished, with the consent of the Secretary of State for the War Department, to put a question to the Chancellor of the Exchequer respecting an institution in the metropolis devoted to the advancement of naval and military science. This was the only country which did not support an institution for that special object. The House passed annually votes for the Royal and Geographical Societies, but no Vote for the advancement of naval and military science. At the Institution in question lectures were delivered and discussions took place on naval and military subjects. For example, there was last year a long discussion upon Mr. Fergusson's system of fortifications to which allusions were made in that House. The institution was well worthy the support of the Government, and he wished to ask whether the matter would receive consideration?
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, he believed the institution referred to might be considered as tending to promote those branches of knowledge which were interesting to the naval and military professions. Lord Panmure had mentioned to him his wish that the ground-rent should be defrayed at the public cost instead of assisting the institution by a Vote, and in his noble Friend's view that amount of public money would be usefully bestowed. He could only state at present that the matter was deserving and should receive the consideration of the Government.
Vote agreed to; as was also—
(7.) £1,500, Education of Cadets.
The House resumed.

AGRICULTURAL STATISTICS BILL.
Order for Second Reading read.
MR. BENTINCKsaid, he wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer when it was the intention of the Government to bring forward this measure? He had understood the right hon. Gentleman to say that it would not be brought on that night, and that there was no probability of the Bill being read a second time before that day week. Since that announcement was made the noble Lord at the head of the Government had stated that it would be brought on to-morrow. Now, as those two statements did not tally, he should like to know upon what the House might rely?
VISCOUNT PALMERSTONsaid, that hon. Gentlemen who attended to the business of the House must know how impossible it was to say at what time any particular measure would come on. Things arose suddenly which frequently threw over all previous arrangements. If it could be brought on to-morrow, at a time when it could be discussed, it should be proposed; but if that opportunity did not then occur, it would be postponed to some other time.
MR. BENTINCKagain rose, and was met with loud cries of "Spoke, spoke!" The hon. Gentleman said: Well, then, I move the adjournment of the House.
MR. SPEAKERinformed the hon. Gentleman that he had already spoken on the question, and was out of order in making such a Motion.
MR. E. BALLsaid, he would move the adjournment of the House. He might inform Her Majesty's Government that a good deal of excitement on this question prevailed in the agricultural districts, and
1728
he trusted that if the noble Lord did not intend to proceed with the measure he would at once say that the pressure of public business was so great that no time could be given to it.
MR. CAYLEYsaid, the matter could hardly come on to-morrow, as the Poor Law Amendment Bill stood for discussion, as well as the Militia and other Estimates.
MR. BENTINCKsaid, he would admit that it might be very difficult to determine generally what would occupy them on a particular day: hence the noble Lord was master of the situation, and it rested with him to determine when the Bill would be brought on. The noble Lord, however, had had no difficulty whatever in granting Monday to the hon. Member for Louth (Mr. Fortescue) to bring on his Motion.
VISCOUNT PALMERSTON: The instance quoted by the hon. Gentleman was one in support of the rule which he had laid down; namely, that when subjects of great importance intervened, everything else had to be postponed in order that an early opportunity might be allowed for their discussion. He must beg leave to say that it appeared very extraordinary that hon. Gentlemen, who by their votes and speeches, attached so much importance to the subject referred to in the discussion about to be raised by the hon. Member, should now dissent from that conclusion. With regard to the Agricultural Statistics Bill, if the Bill could not come on before ten o'clock, they would not press it for discussion if hon. Gentlemen did not wish. But the object of the Government was to have the Bill read a second time in order to refer it to a Select Committee.
The Motion for the adjournment of the House was then withdrawn, and the second reading of the Bill postponed.

COALWHIPPERS' (PORT OF LONDON) BILL.
Order for Second Reading read.
Motion made and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."
MR. LOWEsaid, the Bill was originally introduced by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the University of Oxford (Mr. Gladstone), and was intended to remedy the grievances of the coalwhippers of London, who were enslaved by the publicans in whose houses they were hired. The Act had had the desired effect. Those men were no longer hired in public-houses,

1729
but from a central office established for that purpose. It had, however, been represented by the coal trade of the north and by the shipowners that the Bill was no longer necessary, and the Government was willing to discharge the order for the second reading upon an undertaking being entered into—which had been privately done, and which he hoped would be renewed by the representatives of the coal trade and shipowners in that House—that they would establish an office for the engagement of coalwhippers which they would support, and that they would not hire men from nor pay them wages in any public-house, and that if those terms were broken in letter or in spirit they (the coal and shipowners) would not offer opposition to the renewal of the Act in the next Session. Upon these terms the Government being fully satisfied as to the honour and good intentions of those gentlemen, and being convinced that the undertaking would be fully carried out, thought that the matter was better in their hands than those of any public Board, and, therefore, was quite willing that the order for the second reading of the Bill be discharged.
MR. FENWICKsaid, he begged to express his gratification at the course adopted by the right hon. Gentleman. Had the Bill been persisted in he would have been prepared to prove that greater evils had been caused by the Bill than any it had remedied. He was, however, quite willing to abide by the conditions of the right hon. Gentleman, and if those conditions should be broken he would not offer any opposition to the re-introduction of the Bill.
MR. INGHAMsaid, he could inform the House that the sentiments expressed by the last speaker were shared in by all the coal-owners. They thought that the Act had now become superfluous, and measures had been taken by which the coalwhippers would not be subject to the impositions of the publicans. The agreement had been signed by the coal-owners of the Tyne and the Wear.
MR. GLADSTONEsaid, he had heard the statement of the hon. Member for Sunderland (Mr. Fenwick), that if the Bill was persevered with, he was prepared to show that much greater evils had arisen under it than those which it was intended to remedy, with great regret. Now what were the evils which the Bill was intended to remedy? Why that a body of 2,000 or 2,500 labourers, representing a population
1730
of something like 12,000 souls were reduced by the system with which their trade was conducted to a state of squalid poverty, and almost hopeless demoralisation. Special circumstances alone had justified the introduction of the Bill, but its moral objects had been completely achieved, and he was altogether at a loss to know what were the evils to which the hon. Gentleman referred as having counterbalanced those great results. He considered that a peculiar responsibility in regard to the Bill rested upon him since he had originally introduced the measure under the administration of Sir Robert Peel. His right hon. Friend (Mr. Lowe) had stated, that the Government, after full consideration, had arrived at the conclusion that the time had come when the renewal of the measure was unnecessary, and looking at the circumstances of the case he (Mr. Gladstone) was indisposed to dispute that conclusion. He would admit that the Bill was not intended to introduce into our law a permanent exception with respect to a particular class of labourers; and if the necessity out of which it sprung had ceased to exist, it was time that the Bill should cease to exist also. On that matter the Government were in a high, though not the highest, sense the proper and peculiar judges; for there was no power in that House with respect to a class of men, who were little in the public eye, which could possibly maintain or be responsible for the maintenance or operation of such a law except the Government. It followed that the judgment to which they might arrive ought to be all but conclusive as to the propriety of supporting the renewal of such a measure, and he felt sure that his right hon. Friend and the noble Lord at the head of the Government were fully conscious of the weight of the responsibility that rested upon them with respect to the condition of this class of labourers. If the time had really come, and they were right in their judgment, undoubtedly the House would give way to it. The House had, however, he apprehended, but very imperfect means at its command of forming an opinion on the subject. It must be led to act in the main on their recommendation, and in proportion to the imperfection of the means of judging given to the House would obviously be the responsibility under which his right hon. Friend the Vice President of the Board of Trade placed himself by the conclusion to which he had arrived. Placing, then, the

1731
fullest confidence in the assurances given by his right hon. Friend and by the hon. Gentleman who had last addressed the House, and the hon. Member for Sunderland, he for one thought it to be his duty to accept these assurances in the spirit in which they had been made. There was no class of labourers who had more claim on the consideration of that House than the coalwhippers. Their good conduct at a time of crisis to all interests had been the subject of eulogy in that House, and he was quite sure that would be liberally conceded to them which in justice was no more than their due. What he meant was this. The first announcement of his right hon. Friend's intention had been made that night, and he understood his conclusion had only been arrived at in the course of that very day. He thought, therefore, that it would be desirable both that they should give some notice to the persons immediately interested in the Bill of the course the Government intended to take, and likewise that they should take measures for placing on record the considerations which had induced the Government to adopt that course. The proceedings in both respects were plain. The declarations made in the House were perfectly satisfactory to him and were justly regarded as of the best authority; but out of doors they had not the convenience and certainty which attached to a document. He believed he was correct in saying that a written document, signed by persons whose names were a perfect guarantee of its validity, had been presented to the Board of Trade on the subject; but he believed that there was one point in which that document was less full than it was desirable that it should be, and having been signed by parties a portion of whom were absent from London, he thought there would be great inconvenience in attempting to refer afresh to the whole of those parties. If he were rightly informed however, the gentlemen who were now in London upon the business, or who sat in that House, were abundantly authorised to represent the wishes and intentions of the parties who had signed the document, and to declare and assure the Government that those wishes and intentions came fully up to the measure of what had been declared that night by his right hon. Friend (Mr. Lowe), and by Gentlemen who, answering to his appeal, had addressed the House. Those Gentlemen were, therefore, in a condition to supply anything that
1732
might happen to be wanting in fulness in the document presented to the Board of Trade. He would venture to propose, then, that either his right hon. Friend should lay upon the table of the House, or that he (Mr. Gladstone) or some hon. Member should be allowed to move to-morrow for the production of the important assurances which had been conveyed in writing on the part of the owners of coal and of shipowners in the coal trade, and which had led his right hon. Friend the Vice President of the Board of Trade to the conclusion at which he had arrived. It would be obviously improper to proceed to discharge the order for the second reading of the Bill that night; but, with the view of contributing to the harmonious settlement of the question, and showing that very meritorious class of labourers that the House took a serious view of the question, and was not disposed to deal with it in an off-handed manner, he would move, as an Amendment, that the Bill be read a second time that day fortnight.
Amendment proposed to leave out the word "now," and at the end of the Question to add the words "upon Friday the 4th day of July next."
MR. LIDDELLsaid, he willingly admitted the evils of the old system, and that the present law had, to a certain extent, corrected them; but whilst suppressing one set of evils, he regretted to say that the artificial system now in operation had created others in their stead. It had taught a body of labourers who were second to none in physical power or good conduct, to relinquish that which was the birthright of the British labourer—namely, self-reliance. Again, it was no small evil to have thrown upon an important branch of trade, exposed to severe competition, the sole cost of maintaining an artificial system of this description. Lastly, the system had failed to ensure that regular employment which every man in all other branches of labour enjoyed when left to seek employment in a market that was open to the world. While enumerating those evils, however, he granted that they were not to be compared for one moment to the moral evils which the Act had suppressed. But those moral evils having ceased to exist, and the Bill having perfectly accomplished its object, by rescuing the men from the state of degradation into which they had been permitted to fall, there was now, he considered, no necessity for sanctioning the continuance of a law

1733
which went to perpetuate a Trades Union, with all the evils which combinations of that kind necessarily produced.
MR. LOWEsaid, his right hon. Friend (Mr. Gladstone) had made two propositions—one, that the document presented to the Board of Trade should, for the satisfaction of the coalwhippers, be laid upon the table of the House; the other, that the second reading of the Bill should be adjourned for a fortnight. For his (Mr. Lowe's) own satisfaction neither of these measures was necessary. He was perfectly content with the assurances he bad received from hon. Gentlemen who had spoken that night, and he was satisfied that no document of any kind would bind them more firmly than the honourable understanding that had been come to upon the subject. He thought that there was no occasion to adjourn the debate for a fortnight; but he had no objection to do so if the House desired. It would be on the understanding, however, that no alteration would be made in the Bill in the meantime.
Question, "That the word 'now' stand part of the Question," put, and negatived.
Words added.
Main Question, as amended, put, and agreed to.
Second Reading deferred till Friday, 4th July.
The House adjourned at half after One o'clock.

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—1a Survey of Great Britain, &c.; Grand Juries; Oath of Abjuration Amendment.
2a West India Loans; Industrial and Provident Societies; Factories.
3a Sir William Fenwick Williams's Annuity.

OATH OF ABJURATION AMENDMENT BILL.
THE EARL OF DERBYpresented a Bill for amending the Oath of Abjuration. The noble Earl said, that his Amendment of the present Act was confined to striking out all the words which referred to the descendants of James II. He would not ask their Lordships to proceed further with the Bill until the result was known of the debate, which had been fixed for Monday next, on the abolition Bill brought up from the other House. If their Lordships should resolve to adopt the latter he would of course withdraw his Bill; if not, he would ask them to give it a second reading on an early day.
LORD CAMPBELLasked the noble Earl whether he intended to continue the words "upon the true faith of a Christian"?
THE EARL OF DERBYreplied, that his Bill was confined to the object he had stated—namely, the Amendment of the Oath of Abjuration by striking out the words referring to the Stuarts.
LORD CAMPBELLsuggested to the noble Earl that he might effect his object, which was a very laudable one, by moving an Amendment in Committee to the Bill which was about to come up from the other House.
THE EARL OF DERBYthanked the noble and learned Lord for his suggestion, but he did not think it would be either prudent or politic to adopt it.
Bill read 1a.

FACTORIES BILL.
THE EARL OF DERBYsaid, that, in asking their Lordships to give a second reading to this Bill, which had already passed the House of Commons, and which had there received the sanction of Her Majesty's Government—the more important clauses having, he believed, been framed under the direction of the Home Secretary—it would not be necessary for him to occupy much of their Lordships' time while, he explained the main principles of the measure. The main object of the Bill was to relieve the manufacturers from the inconveniences which would result from a construction recently put upon the Factory Amendment Act of 1844—a construction which, carried to its full extent, would in some cases render the operation of the Bill absolutely impracticable, and in others would involve an amount of expenditure, inconvenience, and annoyance for which no corresponding advantage could be derived. While, however, the Bill proposed to give effect to what he believed were the original intentions of the Act of 1844, and to place machinery and mill-gearing, which were now dealt with separately under that Act, precisely under the same conditions; it contained also, provisions which would, he thught, render some of the protective portions of that Act more available than they had hitherto been. He would remind their Lordships that the original Act of 1833 and the Amendment Act of 1844 were intended for the protection of children and young persons in factories. They were protected against over-work, over-hours, against being employed under a proper age, and against various hardships to which they were exposed. After the Act of 1833 came into operation, the factory inspectors continued to report upon the danger which these children ran owing to portions of the machinery not being properly fenced. Many of the manufacturers had of their own accord boxed off the upright shafts, and all those portions of the machinery likely to endanger children and young persons; and by the Act of 1844 that was made compulsory. There was another provision in the Act to this effect—that if the factory inspectors considered any portion of the machinery to be dangerous to the workmen they should give notice to the mill-owner, and the mill-owner, if he thought the requirement of the inspector was unjust, had the option of calling for an arbitration to decide whether or not the

1669
inspector's notice should be cancelled. In order to show that the manufacturers did not wish to make this provision a means of escape from the operation of the Bill, he might mention that arbitration had only been resorted to in seventeen instances, and in fourteen out of those seventeen cases a decision had been given against the manufacturer. Now, the same clause which required the fencing of all portions of the machinery with which young persons were likely to come into contact provided that all the mill-gearing should be fenced, and mill-gearing was, in point of fact, interpreted in the Act to mean all the motive power—that was to say, every shaft, every drum and pulley appertaining to the process of manufacture. It was clearly the intention of the framers of the Act that the same principle should be applied to mill-gearing as was applied to machinery—namely, that that with which the operatives came immediately into contact should be absolutely fenced, but that in cases where there was any doubt about the danger, manufacturers were to have the power of calling in arbitrators. By the terms of the Act, however, it was provided that all mill-gearing should be absolutely fenced. So far was this from being the construction put upon the Act by the manufacturers and inspectors that, in a case which was carried into one of the law courts, Mr. Justice Cresswell ruled that where a horizontal shaft, being part of the mill-gearing, was at the height of nine or ten feet from the ground, the very space between it and the heads of those employed below, amounted to the secure fencing required by the Act. The Court of Queen's Bench, however, decided that that was, in point of fact, repealing the Act of Parliament, and that, according to the Act, it was necessary for all the mill-gearing, whether in a dangerous position or not, to be securely fenced. In some cases such fencing was admitted by the factory inspectors to be impossible, and he might mention that there were cases in which the horizontal shafts extended for eight or nine miles, and at a height of nine or ten feet from the ground—a height which precluded the possibility of danger except from straps. Under such circumstances, he would ask their Lordships whether it was reasonable to enforce such an enormous expenditure as would be rendered necessary by the boxing off of that machinery. But the manufacturers did not ask Parliament to exempt this mill-gearing from
1670
being fenced. All they wished was, that mill-gearing should be put precisely on the same footing as machinery, namely—that where its position was a dangerous one to children and young persons there its fencing should be absolutely required, but that in other cases the arbitration applicable to machinery should be applicable to mill-gearing. That was, in point of fact, the whole object of the Bill so far as the protection of the manufacturer was concerned. But there was an omission in the Act of 1844 which this Bill was meant to supply. It was remarkable that, though that Act required all mill-gearing to be securely fenced, there was no specific penalty for the neglect of this precaution. There was a penalty of from £5 to £20 for neglect to enclose dangerous machinery, and there was also a penalty for neglect to enclose that portion to which the attention of the manufacturer had been specially directed by the factory inspector, in the event of an arbitration going against the mill-owner, but this was only after some accident had arisen from that neglect. The only clause which applied a penalty to the non-fencing oft he mill-gearing was a subsequent clause, by which it was enacted that, in the case of any offence left unprovided for in the former portion of the Act, a penalty of not less than £2 and not more than £5 was to be inflicted. Practically, therefore, the penalty attaching to the most important offence was the least in amount, and this penalty was only inflicted incidentally. The present Bill was intended to supply that omission. He had already stated that, unless some accident occurred from the neglect of the manufacturer to comply with the recommendations of the inspector after an arbitration had gone against him, no specific penalty was provided. By this Bill it would be enacted that if, within a reasonable time after the arbitration had gone against the manufacturer he failed to comply with the requirements of the inspector, no matter whether an accident had occurred or not, he should be liable to the same penalty as if an accident really had resulted from his neglect. These were the provisions proposed. The Bill in no way infringed upon the protection at present afforded to the operatives; on the contrary, it practically rendered that protection more efficient than before; but it released the manufacturer from a construction of the Act which the inspectors themselves admitted it would be impossible in all cases to act up to. He trusted that, after the

1671
explanations he had given, their Lordships would not hesitate to give the Bill a second reading.
LORD CAMPBELLsaid, the measure met with his entire approbation. The language in the Act of 1844, which the Court of Queen's Bench was called upon to interpret, as alluded to by the noble Earl, appeared to them so plain that they could entertain no doubt about it. The Court decided upon the meaning of the Legislature as contained in the Act, although he did not believe that was the meaning of the framers of the Act.
THE EARL OF SHAFTESBURYowned that it was most important that the question should be settled by the Legislature. He thought some of the clauses considerably limited the right of the operatives to obtain compensation for injuries which they might sustain from coming in contact with the machinery in factories. As he read the 6th clause of the Bill, it limited the operatives to obtaining any compensation for accidents caused by any portion of the machinery, except such portions of it as might be considered dangerous to children and young persons. Now, in the present Factory Act there was no such limitation. All these matters could, however, be discussed in Committee, and he certainly should not oppose the second reading of the Bill.
Bill read 2a, and committed to a Committee of the whole House on Tuesday next.

THE QUEEN'S MESSAGE—THE SAR DINIAN LOAN.
Order of the Day for considering Her Majesty's most gracious Message of Monday last read.
Message considered accordingly.
THE EARL OF CLARENDONsaid, in rising, my Lords, to ask your Lordships to agree to a humble Address to be presented to Her Majesty in reply to Her gracious Message, I have to state that the Convention which was laid upon your Lordships' table on Monday last had for its object to fulfil, not perhaps the letter, but certainly the spirit of the treaty concluded between Great Britain and Sardinia in 1855. With regard to that treaty, owing to an accident, for which the Sardinian Government was in no way responsible, a delay had taken place in the exchange of ratifications, and, consequently it was found impossible to bring in a Bill to give effect to it before the Easter of last year. A Bill
1672
was brought in after Easter, to which Her Majesty's assent was given on the 26th of April. The terms of that Convention were, that within twelve months the first instalment, £1,000,000, should be paid to Sardinia, and that, in the event of the war continuing, a like sum should be paid in the succeeding year. The first instalment of that loan was applied for on the 26th of April, and was paid on the 3rd of May. The treaty of peace with Russia was signed on the 27th of April—that is, a year and a day after the Royal assent was given to that Bill, and a year and a day after the first instalment had been applied for by the Sardinian Government. If, therefore, that instalment had been paid on the day upon which it was applied for, or if the treaty of peace had been signed two days later, the honour and good faith of this country would have been pledged by the letter of the treaty to pay the second sum of £1,000,000 as a matter of course; and as it is, I think, the country stands equally pledged to do so, if not according to the letter, at least according to the spirit of the treaty. Your Lordships are well aware that the loan was advanced to Sardinia for the sole and exclusive purpose of carrying on the war in which we were then engaged, and your Lordships also know well how great, and noble were the exertions made by that country. Sardinia had also made the necessary arrangements, and had incurred the expense of preparation for another campaign in the event of the continuance of the war. It was only the other day, in Paris, that Count Cavour, being desirous that there should be no disguise or concealment about the matter, but that full information should be afforded to Her Majesty's Government with regard to the application of this money, placed in my hands an official statement of the expense which had been incurred by Sardinia, and which amounted to 75,000,000f.—that is to say, to £1,000,000 more than this country will have advanced. I think, therefore, that I need say no more in order to induce your Lordships to ratify the spirit of the contract which we entered into with an Ally whose foreign and domestic policy has recommended itself to all classes, and has excited universal sympathy and admiration. The noble Earl concluded by moving an Address in answer to Her Majesty's gracious Message.
THE EARL OF DERBY: I rise, my Lords, to express my entire concurrence in

1673
the Address moved by the noble Earl. If it be the case—and it appears that it is the case—that, according to the letter of the engagement into which we have entered with Sardinia, we might escape the payment of this money, still I think that, under the circumstances of the case, it is perfectly clear that by the spirit of that, engagement the honour and good faith of the country are pledged to this advance. I quite concur with the noble Earl in thinking that if there is one country in the world with which we are bound more than with another to observe the most scrupulous good faith, it is a country which, at some risk to herself, came forward in the noble manner in which Sardinia did to take part in the struggle in which we have been engaged, and which, having thus come forward, behaved with the utmost loyalty and good faith and rendered most valuable service; nor is it her fault that those services were not rendered for a longer period. I must also say that, although such considerations ought not to actuate us in our foreign policy, it is impossible not to feel the deepest interest in the prosperity and well being of Sardinia. Situated in a position of great difficulty, she has known how to introduce a system of government hitherto unknown in Italy, and has established and sustained a representative system and a modified constitutional Government which stand out in bright and striking contrast with the despotism which prevails in some parts of Italy, and with the anarchy and revolutionary spirit in others. I should regret much to see added to the embarrassment of Sardinia a pecuniary embarrassment caused by the failure on the part of this country to discharge to the uttermost, and in the most extended spirit, any obligation into which we have entered.
Address agreed to, Nemine Dissentiente, and ordered to be presented to Her Majesty by the Lords with White Staves.

POLICE (COUNTIES AND BOROUGHS) BILL.
House in Committee according to order.
On Clause 1,
THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGHsaid, he trusted that the effect of the measure would be to establish a permanent and uniform system of police throughout the country. For many years he had impressed upon the Government the necessity of such a measure, and he had urged
1674
it more especially at the commencement of the late war; because he was confident that the establishment of a police of the description contemplated by the Bill and that of a militia force were two measures which ought to be considered together, and which, so considered, would afford the best source for the recruitment of the army.
LORD PANMUREsaid, that as far as the present Act had been extended, it had worked admirably, and it was desirable that a uniform system of police should be established throughout the country as soon as possible.
VISCOUNT DUNGANNONfully admitted that the diffusion of police under a uniform system throughout the country would confer the greatest benefit on the population at large; but if the law were not made compulsory, there was danger that it would not be put in force.
LORD CAMPBELL: The present Bill is compulsory. [Viscount DUNGANNON dissented.] It is, and the counties must obey it.
VISCOUNT DUNGANNON: No.
LORD CAMPBELL: The measure is compulsory and they must and shall obey it. Wherever the police had been fully established in counties, he could bear judicial testimony to the decrease of crime. On the first occasion on which he visited Huntingdonshire, which had formerly been considered almost immaculate, he was surprised to find such a very heavy calendar. On making inquiries he found that all the surrounding counties had established a rural police, but that in Huntingdonshire there was nothing of the kind, the consequence of which was that the thieves and burglars of that part of the country all congregated in Huntingdonshire as their head quarters, whence they sallied forth to the adjacent counties, to be brought back ultimately to Huntingdon. He remonstrated with the grand jury on the subject, and the result was the establishment of a rural police, which remedied the evil.
Clause agreed to.
Clauses 2 to 10 agreed to.
Clause 11 postponed, on Motion of Earl POWIS.
Clause 12 agreed to.
Clause 13, (Number of Police to be maintained in each district).
THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGHsaid, it was provided by the clause that inspectors

1675
should be appointed to inquire into the state and efficiency of the police in every county; but by another clause those inspectors were required to "report" whether the police had been maintained in a state of "sufficiency" in point of number and discipline. In the original Act one per 1,000 had been fixed upon as the proportion of police to population; but it was impossible to say what should be the actual number of police in any particular district without taking into account its position and circumstances. What the Government wanted was a "sufficient" police, and he would suggest that the clause should be so altered as to bring the subject-matter of inquiry into harmony with what the inspectors were required to report upon.
LORD PANMUREjustified the wording of the clause, the object of which was different from that of the 14th clause, which described under what circumstances grants on account of the borough and county police should be made from the public funds, and those grants were not to be made unless the Home Secretary was satisfied that the numbers of police maintained were sufficient for the requirements of the district.
After a few words from Earl FORTESCUE and the Earl of DERBY, the words "numbers and discipline" were inserted; and clause agreed to.
Clause 14, (Proportion of Expense to be contributed by the Treasury).
THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGHsaid, they had been told by a noble and learned Lord that this Bill was compulsory; but he should like to know in what manner counties could be compelled to carry it out. This clause did not appear to him to be compulsory, but held out an inducement. Did they expect that any county would incur a great expense merely on account of the inducement here held out of one-fourth being paid from another source? He did not think his county (Gloucestershire) would be tempted by the offer.
LORD CAMPBELL, in reply to the noble Earl, had only to say that if the justices neglected to do a certain act which they were commanded to do by Parliament, and if the noble Earl would apply to the Court of Queen's Bench on the subject, the Court would grant a mandamus, and if they disobeyed that, then it would send them all to Gloucester gaol.
THE EARL OF ELLENBOROUGH:
1676
You could compel them to form a police, but you could not compel them even by this bribe of one-fourth to make an efficient police.
The clause was then agreed to.
The other clauses agreed to.
Amendments made.
The Report thereof to be received on Tuesday next.

REFORMATORY AND INDUSTRIAL SCHOOLS BILL.
Amendments reported (according to Order).
THE BISHOP OF OXFORDmoved an Amendment to the fifth clause—a power to the magistrates to send the juvenile offenders to the schools without sending them to prison. The prison might be full, and at all events it seemed absurd to send the boys to the contamination of a gaol before commencing the process of reformation. The effect of the clause would be that the magistrates might commute the sentence of imprisonment in a gaol to confinement in the school.
LORD RAVENSWORTHsaid, he had had no notice of the Amendment, which was one of great importance. The main feature of the Bill was, that it abstained from introducing any new principle; and surely no new principle should be introduced without any notice, especially one so important. The question whether magistrates should have power to send boys at once to the schools, without sentencing them to imprisonment, had been much mooted.
THE BISHOP OF OXFORDsaid, he would move his Amendment on the third reading.
LORD RAVENSWORTHsaid, the question was certainly one of great interest, and well worthy of consideration.
Amendment (by leave of the House) withdrawn; and Bill to be read 3a on Thursday the 3rd of July next.

SIR W. FENWICK WILLIAMS'S ANNUITY BILL—DEATH OF CAPTAIN THOMPSON.
On the Order of the Day for the third reading of this Bill,
THE EARL OF MALMESBURY: My Lords, I wish to say a few words on a subject that will not, I am sure, be regarded as wholly alien to the Bill which is about to be passed with unanimity in this House and satisfaction to the country. I desire to draw your Lordships' attention to a lamentable

1677
event which has occurred within the last week. I allude to the death of one of the three gallant British officers who assisted General Williams in the ever-memorable defence of Kars—namely, Major Teesdale, Colonel Lake, and Captain Thompson. The last and youngest of these brave officers, Captain Thompson, after distinguishing himself in India, where he served for ten years, and was wounded in the Burmese war, repaired to Asia Minor, and, as we all know, afforded most material aid in the defence of Kars, and especially in the great victory of the 29th of September. His conduct on that occasion has been specially described by his commander General Williams and by Dr. Sandwith. On his release from captivity, he returned with Colonel Lake to this country about a week ago, expecting, doubtless, to reap those honours which his country is always ready to bestow, and to receive in the bosom of his family those proud congratulations which his fame could not fail to awaken. It did not, however, please the Almighty that he should be thus rewarded; for within four days of his arrival in London, he died in his mother's arms. My Lords, I think I never heard of a more afflicting misfortune than that which has befallen Mrs. Thompson. I believe that if that bereaved Lady could have had her choice, she would have preferred to hear that her brave son had fallen on the field of battle, rather than that he should have expired, as he has done, at the moment when her maternal pride and happiness were about to be consummated by his return to his native land. But, my Lords, it is not to ask you to deplore the loss of this lamented officer that I have risen to address you—indeed, I am not sure that an early and even a premature death need excite deep regret for the sake of the deceased himself, when such an event has closed a life of honour; but I have learnt with great concern, that his mother is not possessed of a fortune that can assure to her those comforts which all must desire that she should enjoy; and if your Lordships will excuse my reading a letter which I have received from an intimate friend of the family, it will explain in a few words the matter which I wish to bring under your notice. This gentleman writes to me as follows:—
"I feel convinced, knowing the straitened circumstances of his widowed mother, that at least one quarter of her annual income will be
1678
swallowed up in meeting the charges attendant upon the illness and funeral of her lamented son; and I can assure your Lordship that so fixed is her income, and so partitioned out to meet the yearly expenses of a large family, that it is with the utmost difficulty that funds can be provided to enable her to go to the seaside, immediately after her son's funeral (which takes place tomorrow), on the physician's recommendation, who says he will not answer for her life, so plunged in grief is she, if she does not get change of air and scene."
My Lords, I am not authorised to appeal to this House or to the Government for anything like charitable assistance for Mrs. Thompson—I do not even know whether or not such a thing would be acceptable to her or her family; but I could not refrain from taking this opportunity to apprise the Government of the circumstances in which this unfortunate lady is placed.
THE MARQUESS OF LANSDOWNE: In the absence of any previous knowledge of the circumstances to which my noble Friend had just adverted, I am not prepared on the part of the Government to give any assurance on the subject to which he has referred. At the same time, I am exceedingly sorry that such a statement should have been made to this House, in, terms so just and with a feeling so honourable as that evinced by my noble Friend, without its being possible to give to it an immediate response; neither I, nor those with whom I have the honour to act, being aware of the position of a lady whose affliction must elicit for her the lively sympathy of every one of your Lordships and of the public. My noble Friend has done justice on this sad occasion to the merits of that eminent man, General Williams. That brave officer has, under the peculiar circumstances in which he was placed, had the good fortune, and the glory, I may say, to found a military school. His assistants and pupils have all equally distinguished themselves in their short but brilliant career; and they are, therefore, entitled to the admiration and respect of the country, as well as to the favourable consideration of the Government; and none of these was more distinguished than the gallant officer whose loss we now deplore. Further than this, I cannot go now; and I can only undertake that the circumstances to which my noble Friend has directed attention shall be made known in the proper quarter.
Bill read 3a and pasted.
House adjourned to Monday next.