Sitting of 14 July 1859

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS.—2° Law Ascertainment Facilities.
3° Admiralty Court Bill.

SUBMARINE TELEGRAPH COMPANY.

  EXPLANATION.
  SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTEsaid, he would beg to trespass on the attention of the House for a few moments with reference to a statement he had made the other night in his speech on the Red Sea and India Telegraph Bill. On that occasion he had stated that certain conditions had been made by the Submarine Telegraph Company with the Government of France. He had since received a letter
  1200
  from the chairman of the Submarine Company, which he would take the liberty of reading to the House.
  MR. SPEAKERsaid, that the hon. Member could not read a letter relating to a former debate.
  SIR STAFFORD NORTHCOTEsaid, in that case he would confine himself to the statement, that he was in error in saying that the arrangement made by this Company with the French Government, gave to that Government a priority over the British Government, in the right of transmitting messages.

BARRACKMASTERS.—QUESTION.
MR. LANIGANsaid, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for War when the arrangement for improving the condition of Barrackmasters will be carried into effect?
MR. SIDNEY HERBERTsaid, that the scheme, if carried out, would be for the benefit of barrackmasters. They would be divided into classes, and would be promoted from one to another. The whole subject had received great attention from his predecessor in office, and he would announce the decision of the Government in a few days.

SHERIFF COURTS (SCOTLAND).
VISCOUNT DUNCANsaid, he rose to ask the Lord Advocate, whether it is the intention of the Government to include any provision in the Estimates of the present year for the Sheriff Courts in Scotland?
THE LORD ADVOCATEsaid, he understood that in the Estimates of the present year there was no such Vote, and without an Act of Parliament it would not be possible for the Government to include a sum in the Estimates for that purpose.

MUTINY COMPENSATION (INDIA).

  QUESTION.
  MR. W. VANSITTARTsaid, he wished to ask the Secretary of State for India, whether the Report from the Government of India respecting compensation for losses sustained during the late mutiny has been received; and, if so, whether it is his intention to lay such Report on the table of this House?
  SIR CHARLES WOODsaid, that Report from India had been received upon compensation for losses incurred during

  1201
  the mutiny, but it was not a final Report. The whole subject would have to come under the notice of the House, but he was not prepared at present to say, whether he should be able to lay the Report on the table, as he apprehended it might be necessary to communicate with the Government of India upon it.

VERIFICATION OF WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.—QUESTION.
MR. EDWIN JAMESsaid, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, whether any information has reached Her Majesty's Government to the effect that more than two-thirds of the provincial and local Standards of Weights and Measures have been used more than twenty years without reverification, and that the same are defective and unjust, and cannot be relied on as tests of accuracy; that such Standards nevertheless furnish the legal means and evidence by which the integrity and accuracy of the Weights and Measures used by the tradesmen for commercial purposes are ascertained and tested; that legal convictions take place and penalties are enforced for non-conformity to such Standards; and, if so, whether Her Majesty's Ministers intend to take any steps for the prevention of so great an injustice.
SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, that the Question of his hon. and learned Friend, was founded upon a Report of the Astronomer Royal which was laid before Parliament last session. That Report stated that besides the standards of weights and measures deposited in the Exchequer, under the custody of the Comptroller of the Exchequer, there were certain provincial and local standards of weights and measures, which might be called secondary standards, as to which there had been a deficiency of reverification of late years. The process had been very irregularly repeated; and, in answer to his hon. and learned Friend's question, he would beg to remark—first, that there was no need of the process of reverification being repeated very often, as the Standards, having been once verified, were subject to very little wear and tear and to little or no change; and, secondly that the law did not provide a fund for the payment of the costs of such reverification, which must fall either upon the public purse or upon some local fund.
MR. WALPOLEsaid, he wished to in-
1202
quire whether the Act of Parliament was not defective as to the subject of verifying these Weights and Measures; and, if so, whether the right hon. Gentleman intended to bring in a Bill to remedy the defect?
SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, he should have no objection to the introduction of a measure on the subject, if the question of how the expense of the reverification should be borne could be satisfactorily settled.

INDIAN FINANCIAL STATEMENT.

  QUESTION.
  MR. BRIGHTsaid, he wished to put again a question to the Secretary of State fur India which he had asked him a few nights ago, namely, whether he is able to inform the House when he will bring forward the question of Indian Finance, and whether he has any objection to lay upon the Table the latest despatches which he has received from India on that subject? The noble Lord (Lord Stanley), who filled the office before the right hon. Baronet, had followed that course, and the House had been given to understand that it would, be followed out in future.
  SIR CHARLES WOODsaid, that with regard to the latter part of the hon. Gentleman's Question he had laid upon the table within the last quarter of an hour the last despatches which he had received from India; and, with regard to the former part of the Question, he could not at present name the day on which he should be prepared to bring forward the subject of Indian Finance, as the general financial statement of his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer must take precedence; when his right hon. Friend had made his statement, he (Sir Charles Wood) would make his statement on Indian finance at the earliest possible moment.

LONDON CORPORATION REFORM.

  QUESTION.
  SIR JOHN SHELLEYsaid, he wished to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, if he thought it was right that the Bill for the reform of the Corporation should be brought forward at this period of the Session? Under the circumstances, he wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman if he intends to proceed with a measure which must call up much opposition?
  SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, he could

  1203
  only state that he had been led to understand that there would he no general opposition to the Bill. His present wish was to fix a day for the second reading of the Bill.

LEAVE OF ABSENCE TO MEMBERS.
On the Motion of Mr. BRAND, leave of absence for the remainder of the Session was given to the Earl of Gifford, on account of ill health.
SIR WILLIAM JOLLIFFE SIR WILLIAM JOLLIFFE moved that a fortnight's leave of absence be granted to Mr. Tottenham for a similar cause.
MR. WALPOLEsaid, he desired to have some further information on this subject. It was very important that leave of absence should not be unnecessarily extended at this period of the Session, otherwise there would be a very unequal pressure upon Members serving upon Election Committees. He thought that those who moved for leave of absence for other Members should ascertain whether the grounds were really such as to justify the indulgence.
SIR WILLIAM JOLLIFFEsaid, he could assure the right hon. Gentleman that he had ascertained the facts in this instance. Mr. Tottenham met with an accident a short time ago, and was suffering from a slight concussion of the brain, and he (Sir W. Jolliffe) had in his pocket a doctor's certificate upon the point.
Motion agreed to.

THE BUDGET.—QUESTION.
MR. HORSFALLsaid, he rose to ask whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer can now fix the day upon which he will make his financial statement?
THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER: Sir, I cannot, I am afraid, give an absolute answer to the question of the hon. Gentleman, as it is uncertain what time will be occupied by the Naval and Military Estimates; but if those Estimates should happily be concluded by to-morrow night—and perhaps the House will be disposed to sit a little later than usual in order to get through—in that case I will make the financial statement on Monday.

PUBLIC HEALTH BILL.—QUESTION.
MR. T. DUNCOMBEsaid, he wished to inquire whether it is intended to proceed with this Bill without giving an opportunity of discussing it? The Bill had only been in-
1204
troduced on the 4th of July, and stood for a third reading that evening.
SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, the reason why the Bill had been pressed on was, he believed, because the Commission would expire on the 1st of August, and if it was to be renewed, the Bill must be passed at once.
MR. T. DUNCOMBEsaid, he thought a continuance Bill for one year would be sufficient; so that the subject might be discussed next year.

Order of the Day for going into Committee of Supply,
INDIA.—ORGANIZATION OF THE INDIAN ARMY.

  REPORT OF COMMISSION. QUESTION.
  MR. H. BAILLIEsaid, he wished to make a few observations in reference to the Report of the Commission appointed to inquire into the Military Organization of our Indian Empire. He was aware that Her Majesty's Ministers, having been but a short time in office, had not, perhaps, had leisure to consider the subject; but, inasmuch as this was a question which involved not only the efficiency of Her Majesty's army in India, but also the efficiency of Her Majesty's army in this country, it was a question which ought to receive the attention and most careful consideration of that House, and in the present state of political affairs a settlement of it ought not to be much longer delayed. Now, in the Report of this Commission the opinion was expressed—and he believed it to have been the unanimous opinion of all the Members of the Commission—that henceforth an army of not less than 80,000 men should be permanently maintained in our Indian empire. He knew not, of course, what might be the opinion of Her Majesty's Ministers on this subject, but it would be very easy for that House to vote that number of men, or any number of men, because the House would not be called upon to pay them; but it would not be so easy to raise the men, more especially in time of war; and he very much feared that the Commission, in coming to this conclusion, had been influenced rather by what they conceived to be the necessities of our Indian empire, without a just appreciation of the wants and necessities of this country; now, this last consi-

  1205
  deration, in his opinion, was of far greater importance to the people of this country than even the stability and the maintenance of our Indian empire. The noble Lord now at the head of the Government had always had great credit given to him by his friends for the efficient manner in which he was supposed to have conducted our military affairs during the late Russian war. He (Mr. Baillie) was always one of those who presumed very humbly to differ from that opinion; and he did so, because he was aware that during the whole course of that war, the army of this country never was in a state of efficiency, if to be in a state of efficiency was to have the whole number of men that were voted by Parliament. So far from that being the case, during the whole course of that war the army of this country was from 40,000 to 50,000 below the number voted by Parliament. It was on that account that they had been obliged to raise foreign legions. There was a foreign legion raised in Germany, and another in Switzerland, and another in Italy, and there was nothing which so much lowered the character and reputation of this country in the eyes of foreigners as this exhibition of our apparent weakness. Now, he did not make this statement for the purpose of casting any blame or censure upon the noble Lord now at the head of the Government. Far from it—he was persuaded that no man in England would have used greater endeavours to promote the efficiency of the army; but he made this statement in order to show the House the great difficulty in this country in raising men in time of war, and also to point out the impossibility of our maintaining an army of 80,000 men in India, should we be engaged in a foreign war. He also wished to show that the House was in the habit of voting money for men which the Government were utterly unable to raise. Now, let them just consider what was the state and condition of the army at the present time. Her Majesty's forces now in India amounted to about 85,000 men; a number which did not include those who were formerly in the service of the East India Company. Now observe, this force of 85,000 men was not much larger than the Commission proposed should be permanently maintained in our Indian empire. Lot the House then see what had been the result during the last two years of their having maintained an army of 85,000 men in India as regarded the effect upon the Home Establishment.
  1206
  What had been the consequence, in spite of all the efforts made during the last two years? Why, the consequence had been that they had been unable to raise the number of men they wanted last year. The standard of the height of the men had been reduced to the lowest point, free kits had been given to the soldiers, and every inducement had been held out to enlistment; but in spite of all this, the army was 10,000 men below the number voted last year. But that was not all; the Government had been obliged to call out 23,000 militia to do the duty of the regular troops. Now, the militia was a force which ought to be their reserve in time of war; but they had been obliged to call the militia out in time of peace, and therefore, in point of fact, the army was really deficient 33,000 men, and not 10,000. His right hon. Friend the late Minister of War (General Peel) made a statement the other evening which had been very much cavilled at, but which was perfectly correct, as his statements always were; but on examining that statement, he did not think the House would think it quite so satisfactory as it appeared at first sight. In the first place, his right hon. Friend included among the 110,000 men he mentioned, the 23,000 militia to whom he had referred. Now, if they included their reserve in their efficient force, of course if they had a war they would have no reserve; and therefore he did not think the militia ought to be included in the regular forces of the country. His right hon. Friend had also included the depots of the regiments that were in India. The men in these depots consisted in a great part of raw recruits, and of men who were liable at any moment to be sent away from this country to join their regiments. They were a very large force, amounting in number to nearly 19,000 men, and they were all paid by the Indian Government. Now, it would be monstrous if that House was to regard the forces for which the Indian Government paid as among the available forces of this country. Well, then, deducting these 19,000 men, and deducting the militia, they would have to deduct upwards of 40,000 men from the numbers stated by his right hon. Friend, and that would leave only 70,000 men available; but then they must also deduct from those 70,000 men, the non-fighting corps. There were 1,800 men in the Waggon Train; there was the Medical Staff; and they must deduct the men who were not available when in hos-

  1207
  pital. In fact, he did not think it would be an unfair estimate when he said they must deduct 20 per cent from the force; and this would leave them with a force of somewhere about 58,000 men for the home service. Then, they would require for garrison of Ireland 25,000 men; so that for the defence of England and Scotland they would have an available force of somewhere about 40,000 men. Then they would have to place garrisons in all their arsenals. They might put militia in them; but they must have some regular troops; and when they had placed a sufficient number of men in Woolwich, Sheerness, Chatham, Dovor, Portsmouth, and Devonport, he should like to know what would be the amount of force left available. He thought they would be fortunate if they could bring 25,000 men into the field. It was for the House to decide whether that was a force which, under existing circumstances, it was safe to depend on for the maintenance of the honour and safety of the country. He would not at the present time enter into the question of Indian finance, although were he to do so he did not think he should have much difficulty in proving that, if the Indian Government were compelled to maintain permanently 80,000 European troops in India, which would cost as much as 160,000 in England, and if in addition the Indian Government had to maintain a Native army of twice that amount, he did not think the Secretary of State for India, with all his great financial ability, would find it easy to make an even balance between the expenditure and the revenue. That, however, was a question into which, however important, he would not enter. The question which for us at the present moment was a far more serious one was, could we with our present system of voluntary enlistment raise and maintain so large an army in this country as would not only furnish permanently 80,000 men in India, but would provide for the wants and necessities of all our numerous colonies, and at the same time keep up such an army in this country, as would give some security to the people that their hearths would not be invaded, and that in the event of war that they would be able to maintain the honour and defend the interests of the nation. Now, they had learned by the papers laid upon the table of the House that Her Majesty's late Government announced to the Powers of Germany that in the event of their going to war to maintain their interests England would be neutral, and that
  1208
  even in case their ports were blockaded England would not interfere. He thought that was a very unwise declaration, but that declaration had been repeated by the present Government, and in diplomatic circles it was rumoured to have been repeated in language which had given much offence to the German Powers. The statement, however, had been made, and we must abide the consequences. And what were the consequences? That in the event of our having the misfortune to be engaged in war with any great Power—with France for example—we must expect to have intimated to us that the German Powers intended to remain neutral, and that they would take good care that no legions were raised in Germany for English purposes. Under these circumstances it behoved the House to consider well what would be our position if the intense desire which now prevailed, amongst all classes to maintain a cordial alliance with France should be misinterpreted by our vivacious neighbours, and, unfortunately producing a contrary effect, should end in a war. He was one of those who thought that in the event of hostilities, if all means failed of raising by voluntary enlistment a force sufficient to defend the honour and interests of the country, the person as well as the purse ought to be available for the public welfare; nor did he see that there would be any more infringement of popular liberty in the one case than in the other. He might be told that any such plan would be impracticable, and that no Minister would venture to make such a proposition; but at all events let not the House of Commons and the country be deluded by the mere passing of votes for numbers of men—as they did during the Crimean war—whom they knew by past experience they should never be able to raise—thus teaching the public to believe that we had a force sufficient for all the requirements of the State, when in point of fact it was a force efficient only on paper, and at a period of difficulty and danger would not be forthcoming for the public service. They had, as he had stated, been obliged in a time of peace to call out 25,000 militia, to do the duty of regular troops whom it had been found impossible to raise, and he feared that the desire for peace which appeared to prevail among all classes in this country was attributable, not so much to any abstract love of peace as to the conviction that the present system of our military administration would not enable

  1209
  us to contend successfully against those systems which had been devised and adopted in modern times by the other great nations of the world, He would on the present occasion abstain from expressing any opinion as to what ought to be the amount of the European force employed in India, and he would defer any explanation of his views upon that point until the subject was brought before the House by the Government. He might say, however, that in his opinion the European force requisite for India would depend entirely upon the manner in which the Government of that vast dependency was conducted. If officials in India were to be allowed to set Her Majesty's Proclamation systematically at defiance, as they seemed inclined to do, not only would a very large force be necessary for India, but he did not know what amount of force which could be sent to that country would enable us to maintain tranquillity in our Indian empire. In conclusion, he wished to know whether it was the intention of the Government to bring this subject under the consideration of the House previously to the prorogation of Parliament.
  MR. W. VANSITTARTsaid, that he could not agree with his hon. Friend that this country was unable to maintain 80,000 European troops in India. We had already 85,000 men there, independently of the 25,000 which were maintained by the old East India Company, He had read with much interest the Report of the Commissioners on this subject, which he ventured to say was second to none in importance not only as regarded the power and welfare of India, but of the whole British empire. Happily, the Commissioners were unanimous on one point—namely, that India would require the presence of a large European force, not less than 80,000 men; 50,000 for Bengal, including the Punjab, and 15,000 for each of the minor Presidencies of Madras and Bombay. But there was a great diversity of opinion as to whether this force should be a local force, or whether it should form an integral portion of the British army, to be supplied in regular routine from the line. On carefully going through the evidence submitted to the Commissioners, he was of opinion that the force should be composed partly of troops of the line, taking India as part of the regular tour of service, and partly of troops raised for service in India only. There was no doubt that any one who had been in India could not
  1210
  fail to have been struck with the appearance of a line regiment recently arrived from England as contrasted with a local regiment. Both officers and men were better set up, smarter looking, and there must necessarily be a greater amount of vigour and fresh European notions and feelings, and consequently discipline, than in a local regiment, the officers and men of which lived on year after year in India with no prospect of revisiting their native country until they were completely worn out by the climate, sickness, or age. He was aware that symptoms of disaffection had appeared among the late East India Company's or local Europeans stationed at Meerut, Allahabad, Berhampore, and elsewhere; but it arose solely from the men understanding the noble Lord at the head of Her Majesty's Government to have said in his speech, in introducing his India Bill, on the 12th of February of last year, that their services were optional, and that if they objected to the change they were entitled to their discharge. As what the noble Viscount did say was very short, he would, with the permission of the House, read it. The noble Viscount, in speaking of the army, said,—
  "With regard to Queen's troops no change will be made. With regard to the others, they will be transferred to the Crown from the service of the Company, subject to the same conditions of service as those under which they were enlisted; and, if they dislike that change, I think, in common justice, they will he entitled to their discharge." [3 Hansard, cxlviii. 1287.]
  On this speech reaching Calcutta a pettifogging attorney, a sort of "needy knife grinder," took down those words and sent them up to Meerut, and they were freely discussed and as freely commented upon by the men. he thought at the time that the noble Lord was rather indiscreet; but it would have been unbecoming in so humble an individual as himself to correct the noble Lord. In regard to the recruiting of this force he (Mr. Vansittart) did not anticipate any difficulty, for it could be effected partly by volunteers from line regiments ordered home, as at present, and partly by recruiting separately for it in Great Britain. He thought the patronage might be placed at the disposal of the Horse Guards, because it would establish that prestige which was so dear to Englishmen, of bearing Her Majesty's commission direct from Her Majesty's Royal hands. This surely would be preferable to handing it over to the Secretary of State

  1211
  for India and his Council, to be distributed among his constituents, and among the relatives and friends of the councillors, who were already sufficiently well paid and by no means overworked. In regard to the Native portion of the army, he would reduce the proportion even below that recommended by the Commissioners of "two Natives to one European." He would make the proportion three Natives to two Europeans; and this would give us an army of 200,000 men for all India, consisting of 80,000 Europeans, and 120,000 Natives. Such was his opinion of the Sepoys that he was anxious to reduce that part of the army as much as practicable, and he was satisfied this force of 200,000 men would be amply sufficient to meet all requirements, and prove an economical measure; more especially if they carried out Sir Charles Trevelyan's suggestion to transfer some of the duties now performed by the military to a police. The police should be a civil force, localized and commanded by a European for each district; a portion of the men should be armed, not with the Minie or Enfield rifle, but with the common percussion musket, and to those who wore thus armed should be intrusted the duties of escorting treasure from district to district, of supplying guards for the gaols, and so forth. Sir Charles Trevelyan also recommended that the magazines should be deposited in places held by Europeans; that there should be as few detached posts as possible; and that at all the stations there should be a sort of fortification, within which the treasury, the military chest, the records, the stores, the magazines, women, and children might be placed. Now that the whole country was being disarmed, railways were being so rapidly constructed, and the annexation policy had been so fully carried out, there was every prospect of India enjoying a long period of repose and peace, and it was in such times as these that a Sepoy army was found to be not only worse than useless, but costly and troublesome. Well armed, well trained, and with nothing to do, they were left to brood in stagnation and listlessness in cantonments over imaginary fears, which probably terminated cither in their taking fright, or rushing once more, under the impulse of panic, into mutiny and murder, spreading ruin and desolation over the beautiful plains of Hindostan, and burning and massacring everything and everybody who fell in their way, without respect
  1212
  to sex or age; or else they had to be watched and guarded by our European troops. Under all these circumstances, he thought his hon. Friend had done well in bringing this important subject before the House; and it was to be hoped that the Secretary of State for India would give an assurance that he would take it into his earliest consideration.
  SIR CHARLES WOODsaid, that as he supposed it was the wish of the House to proceed with the business on the paper as speedily as possible, he would not follow the two hon. Gentlemen through many of the topics on which they had touched. He freely acknowledged the intimate connection between Indian finance and the all important question of the amount of military force which it was necessary to maintain in India. No doubt the strength of that force would require to be indefinitely increased if the Government of that country were to be conducted without regard to the feelings and sentiments of its people; but if India were governed properly, he believed the amount of European and Native troops which it would be requisite to keep up would not exceed that which the resources of the country could easily bear. With regard to the Report of the Commission on the organization of the Indian army, the present Government had hardly had sufficient time yet to consider hat question. Indeed, looking at the importance and difficulty of this subject, he was not surprised that the noble Lord who preceded him in his present office, with all his diligence and power of work, had not been able to bring into a more forward state the measures which were necessary on this subject. The question really required the greatest attention and care, nor could it be decided without information which was not enjoyed here. Opinions formed on the spot on such a matter must obviously be far more valuable than any that could be formed in this country. Moreover, events might at any time happen in India which would materially affect this question. While, as the hon. Gentleman had admitted, he had hardly had time since he acceded to office even to read all the papers relating to this subject, he could assure him that it would receive from him the most careful and impartial consideration, with a view to its being decided at the earliest practicable period; but he was wholly unable to mention the precise time when he would be able to make the statement required of him.
  GENERAL PEELsaid, that although his hon. Friend (Mr. H. Baillie) had concluded his remarks by asking a question of the Government, he had referred to a speech made by him in that House on a former occasion. As there ought to be no mistake as to the amount of force in this country and in India he was glad to avail himself of the present opportunity of entering into a short explanation, and of answering a letter which he had seen in that day's papers, which was written in so different a spirit from that which characterized many previous letters in the same journal, and which, though anonymous, were supposed to come from a source tolerably well-known, that he had the greatest possible pleasure in replying to it. The letter in question stated that he had made a great mistake in the statement he had made, and must have quoted from a return made at the War Office by clerks who did not know their business, and who had taken the number of men voted by Parliament instead of the number of men actually in this country. He begged to say that he had done no such thing. The document he had quoted from was the monthly returns made by the Horse Guards to the War Office, signed by the Adjutant General of the Forces, who was responsible for the accuracy of the figures he had explained to the House the condition of the British army on the 1st of June, 1859, and had read the line giving the total force at home. The only inaccuracy in the report of what he had said on a former evening was that he was represented as saying that he did not include the depots of regiments in India, whereas he had said nothing about them. What he said was that the numbers he had read did not include the Marines (one of the finest forces in the country), the pensioners, or the Irish constabulary. The return gave not only the exact number of men in the regiments, but also in the depots, and told where they were stationed. The number of men voted by Parliament last Session was, for the British establishment, 122,655; and for the Indian establishment, 106,902; making a total of 229,557. The number absolutely raised was 219,912. They were now distributed thus:—In India, 85,219; and there were ordered home, or on their return passage, 5,725. The latter were still on the Indian establishment and paid for by that establishment. There was at home, on the British establishment, 64,653; depots of regiments on the Indian
  1214
  establishment, 21,769; and in the Colonies, 42,546; making up the total already mentioned as having been actually raised and receiving pay, namely, 219,912. It was impossible, in considering the strength of the regiments, to leave the depots out of consideration. The regiments coming home from India, the instant they arrived were transferred with their depots to the British establishment, and were available for any purpose for which they might be called upon to give their service. Take the case of a single regiment, the 36th. The depôt consisted of 656 men. This regiment was on. its way home, and would be transferred with its depôt from the Indian to the British establishment. So far from having overstated the number of men available for home service, he did not include in his statement the depôt at Warley for the local force of India; these, being maintained at the expense of the Indian Government, were not included in the return from the Horse Guards. His hon. Friend had committed altogether, for cases of emergency, the embodied militia. No force in the British army at this moment was in a greater state of efficiency than the embodied militia. It had now been out two years, and it was impossible to make it more efficient. So, again, there were the pensioners, who would be of the greatest possible use in doing garrison duty in the event of our being attacked. He trusted the House would see that he had not overstated the case. He did not say that our force was sufficient for this country. That was a question to be determined in relation to what was passing at the time, and it now rested with Her Majesty's present Government. He held that, during the period they had been in office, the late Government had maintained in this country the largest force which it was their duty to call upon the public to pay for. he did not say that circumstances had not arisen making it expedient to increase the number of our troops, but while they were in office no such step was advisable. He thought it very undesirable to add to the number of regiments in the British establishment, involving, as it would do, the throwing of a burden on the country for half-pay. The number of regiments of the line was 131 battalions. Supposing fifty battalions were required for service in India, they must have twenty-five additional battalions in this country to form a relief for them. So, again, if they required forty-

  1215
  two battalions for the colonies, they wanted about twenty more at home for their relief. To have a sufficient number of regiments of the line to do duty in the Colonies and in India we did not need more than fifty battalions to be kept in England. It would therefore be very unwise to add to that number. He believed that his right hon. successor took the same view as to the number of regiments, and was not in favour of either increasing or diminishing the number of British regiments which existed when the seals of the War Office were handed over to him. The number of the embodied militia is 23,000.
  COLONEL HERBERTsaid, the number given for the home forces included the officers, sergeants, and drummers, whereas it was supposed to represent only rank and file. If a deduction were made on that account from the number stated, it would leave only 96,517 men, which was a material difference from the figures stated by the right hon. and gallant General. But they ought to speak of efficient serviceable men; and therefore, if they made account of sick men, men waiting for their discharge, and also recruits, whether instructed or uninstructed, and the recruiting staff, the deduction, according to good authority, on that ground would be 20 per cent from the 96,517 men. The embodied militia of 25,000 men were to servo as a reserve; and he did not think it satisfactory that the available forces of the country were at so low an ebb. But it must be admitted, while the numbers given by the gallant Officer might be true, they were calculated to lead to misapprehension. In the same way, when our forces were in the Crimea, it was stated by the Chancellor of the Exchequer that at a particular time they amounted to 27,000 or 28,000 men. This statement was scouted by the public, and it was stated by a correspondent of a public journal that Lord Raglan's army did not contain more than 12,000 available men. Both statements were true; but the latter included only the efficient serviceable men, rank and file, who were fit for duty. The other number was the gross number of men of all ranks; and that was, no doubt, the case also with the numbers given by the hon. and gallant Officer. Statements of gross totals such as those made by the right hon. General the late Secretary of War were likely to lead to misapprehension in the public mind, because they always included a large number of men not available for service in the field.
  LORD STANLEYsaid, that the subject of the organization of the Indian army was not one which could be properly discussed in a desultory conversation like the present; but as the question had been raised he wished to vindicate the Commissioners from the imputation of having fixed an arbitrary number for the European troops in India. That was a matter which obviously must depend upon both financial and political considerations, and the Commissioners carefully abstained from expressing a decided opinion on the subject, although they went the length of saying that the amount of European troops to be hereafter maintained in India should be greater than it was before the mutiny. He did not attach much importance to conjectural estimates in such a case; and the same observation applied to the proportion to be maintained between the European and Native forces. The solution of those questions would depend in some measure upon the success of the working of the military police now established on so large a scale in various parts in India, and he did not believe that either here or in Calcutta the Government could pronounce an accurate opinion upon them until they had seen how the police system worked over a considerable period of time. Upon only one point could he venture to record his opinion, and that was the question whether the European force in India should be a local force, or a part of the general army of the line. He believed that it was a matter not only of expediency, but almost of necessity, in the carrying on of the Indian Administration, that a considerable portion of the European army in India should remain as at present a local force. He should defend that view upon the ground of economy, because the expense of relief and transport would be saved; he should defend it also upon the ground of efficiency, because by that means we should have soldiers acclimatized and familiar with the country, for it was well known that a largo proportion of the mortality occurred in regiments newly arrived; and finally, he should support it on account of the local administration, because we could not expect officers of the line, who in India were mere birds of passage, to qualify themselves for Indian service in the same manner as those did to whom India was a homo for life. He did not indeed know how the civil and military administration of India was to be carried on if we

  1217
  deprived the Governor-General of the assistance which he now derived from the presence of sonic thousands of educated Englishmen, who knew the Natives and their language, and who intended to remain in the country for the working part of their lives. He trusted that the House would think he was using a wise discretion in declining to enter at the present moment into the other important questions raised by the Report of the Commissioners.
  COLONEL SYKESthought it was no object of the House to raise any discussion now on the Indian army, but only to elicit an assurance from the Government that the subject would be brought before the House. Such an assurance he received in February last, and he was perfectly satisfied that the assurance would be fulfilled. When it was so brought he would gladly state the result of his experience and in the meanwhile he would merely make one remark upon the amount of the military force to be maintained in India. He quite agreed that the number of European troops must depend upon the manner in which we governed India, and the manner in which the people were satisfied with our government. Before the mutiny broke out we had 45,000 European troops there, and the revenues of India were barely sufficient to pay that number. What would the House say to the payment of 131,000 European troops including the 20,000 at the depots in England? He was convinced that it was utterly impossible for the revenues of India to pay for more than 50,000 European troops, and he entreated the House to consider this well before they sanctioned the continued employment in India of such an overwhelming and unnecessary force. He was satisfied that 50,000 European soldiers would be quite sufficient for carrying on good government and ensuring the safety of the country.
  SIR DE LACY EVANSsaid, he fully concurred with the noble Lord (Lord Stanley) that it was indispensable to have a considerable local European force in India—especially of artillery—as it was most necessary that the army should become accustomed to the feelings and habits of the Natives.
  SIR EDWARD COLEBROOKEexpressed a hope that no action would be taken by the Government on the Report of the Commissioners without the House being afforded an opportunity of discussing the whole subject, inasmuch as no decision at which they might arrive would otherwise
  1218
  be likely to give satisfaction, He did not think that it would be found so difficult to maintain an army of 80,000 Europeans in India, but at the same time he thought great danger might result from maintaining too large an European army there, because the Government of this country, in case of an European war, might he led to withdraw a portion of the forces, and thus leave the country insufficiently protected.

THE SALE OF SLAVES.

  OBSERVATIONS.
  MR. DARBY GRIFFITHrose to call the attention of the House to the case of "Santos v. Illidge and Others," and to ask the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he thought that the 5th and 6th clauses of the Act 6 & 7 Vict., c. 98, authorizing the sale of Slaves by British Joint-Stock Companies, should be repealed. He said it was generally presumed that by the operation of the Acts of 1824 and 1833, the question of slavery, as regarded traffic in the sale and purchase of slaves by British subjects, had been completely put an end to. But in 1843 an Act, 6 & 7 Vict., c. 98, entituled "An Act for the more effectual suppression of the Slave Trade," was passed; and, in the course of the passage of that Bill through the House of Commons, two clauses were introduced which had tended in some degree to abrogate the provisions of the great Act of slave emancipation. The sixth section provided that "nothing in the Act contained should be held subject to any penalty, punishment, or forfeiture, any person transferring' or receiving any share in any joint-stock company established before the passing of the Act in respect of any slaves in the possession of such company." A company had been established before the passing of the Act for the working of mines in Brazil. They worked those mines in the usual way, namely, by slave labour, and an order had lately been made for winding up the company. The Lords Justices, before whom the question was brought by way of appeal, decided that their property in slaves, as well as in other matters, might be realized for the benefit of the company, and an order was accordingly issued to that effect. The law officers of the Crown, however, subsequently gave it as their opinion that this decision was not in accordance with the terms of the Act of 1843, and that though the slaves, who

  1219
  had been in the possession of the company at a period anterior to that date, might be disposed of, the children born of those slaves subsequently, could not he sold. The directors, feeling dissatisfied with these conflicting opinions, referred the matter to a court of law, and the Court of Common Please decided the other day that the case of these slaves did not come within the exceptional clauses of the Act of 1824, and that the possession of these slaves by the company had been illegal ab initio under that Act; and thus, as it were by a side blow, the sale of these slaves had been nullified altogether. The hon. Member contended that when three such totally opposite decisions had been given within a limited period, the case was one that ought legitimately to come under the consideration of Parliament. He did not expect the noble Lord at the head of the Foreign Department to be prepared to give a positive pledge, at this moment, to deal with the existing law; hut he hoped that it would be one that might attract his attention.
  LORD JOHN RUSSELL LORD JOHN RUSSELL, in reply to the question of the hon. Member for Devizes, whether he thought the 5th and 6th clauses of the Act 6 & 7 Vict., c. 98, authorizing the sale of slaves by British joint-stock companies, should be repealed, stated that there was no intention at present to bring in any measure for the repeal of the law.

LAND TRANSPORT CORPS.

  QUESTION.
  LORD ADOLPHUS VANE-TEMPEST, in rising to ask the Question of which he had given notice, respecting the claims to half-pay of certain officers of the Land Transport Corps, expressed his acknowledgments both to the gallant General lately at the head of the War Department, and to the right hon. Gentleman now occupying that post, for the courtesy which he had invariably experienced in his applications on this subject. The Secretary of State for War, he perceived, was absent, but possibly some Gentleman on the Treasury bench would be able to furnish him with the information he desired, namely, whether any, and if so what, decision had been come to by the Treasury on the subject of carrying out the recommendations of the Committee of last Session on the claims of the Land Transport Corps, with reference to granting permanent half-pay to that class of officers who entered the corps from the militia and civil employ.
  MR. LAINGstated that the Treasury entertained no objection to the recommendations of the Select Committee being carried out, providing that the Secretary of State for War was favourable to such a course.

DOVOR MAIL CONTRACT.

  QUESTION. OBSERVATIONS.
  MR. RICHsaid, he had given a notice on Monday night that he should move the postponement of any Vote which would have the effect of giving a Parliamentary affirmation to the contract which had been entered into on the 26th of April with regard to the transmission of mails from Dovor. By some accident the Notice which he had given did not appear upon the paper; but he wished to ask his noble Friend the Secretary to the Admiralty whether, considering that the question of the Dovor contract had already been made the subject of discussion in that House, and bearing in mind the fact that it was included in the scope of the reference to the Select Committee—which, he might observe, he could have wished had been composed of persons who would be more disposed to go independently into the matter;—remembering, moreover, that in consequence of a paragraph in the Dovor election petition, the whole question of this contract would have to be examined into upon oath—he put it to his noble Friend whether he did not think that a discussion with reference to the fulfilment of such contract would be premature. He trusted therefore that no such Vote would be proposed to-night, nor indeed at all at present. In the event of its being understood that no such Vote would be gone into, he was quite satisfied to let the matter rest for the present; but it would otherwise be his duty to enter into a full statement of what appeared to him to be the merits and demerits of that contract.
  SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBYexpressed a hope that the Navy Estimates might in future be introduced in a more intelligible form. In Votes 8, 9, and 10, involving an expenditure of £3,247,000, the items were lumped together in large sums which made it impossible to know how the money was really expended, and which were made ridiculous by the introduction, at intervals, of precise expenditure on such an insignificant object as a mud-punt. The country would have no objection to pay whatever amount was requisite for the

  1221
  maintenance of an efficient fleet—but it expected that intelligible accounts should be given of the outlay—as there was an impression abroad that the money was not properly, or at least not judiciously, applied.
  SIR JOHN PAKINGTONin reference to the Question of the hon. Member for Richmond (Mr. Rich) begged to state on the part of the late Administration, that it was a matter of indifference whether the consideration of the Dover contract was entered into then or at a later period. His Friend the late Secretary to the Admiralty was prevented, he was sorry to say by indisposition, from attending; but the hon. Member for Tewkesbury (Mr. Lygon), in whose department this matter lay, and the late Under Secretary to the Treasury, who were both congnizant of the details of the question, were in their places, and were prepared to give the fullest explanation either to the House or, if so desired, to the Members of the Select Committee. He had no doubt they would be able to establish that this contract had been entered into purely with a regard to the advantage of the public, and in accordance with the practice which had always hitherto been observed.
  LORD CLARENCE PAGETsaid, it was the intention of the Government to move the packet Vote, and it would then be open to any hon. Gentleman to move that the whole of that Vote, or any portion of it, should be struck out. He must say he thought that would be the proper course; and he thought it would be better that the right hon. Gentleman should reserve any observations with that object till the House was in Committee. In reply to the hon. Baronet opposite (Sir Henry Willoughby) he might state that Vote No. 9, which had been alluded to, referred merely to the wages of artificers abroad, as to which he did not think there would be any question. With reference to the others he would say that it was the earnest desire of the present Board of Admiralty to give every information in their power, and in particular to go very narrowly into the question of shipbuilding. He thought he had already given an earnest of his intention in that respect by laying before the House a statement of the tonnage built in each year. The hon. Baronet would see that this had enabled him to enter more largely into this expenditure than he had yet been able to do; and he should be very glad, if the present Government remained in office till next year, that something
  1222
  could be done to render the Estimates even more distinct than they were at present. It was the wish of the Board of Admiralty to make everything as full and intelligible as possible.
  SIR FRANCIS BARING, said, he had the himself more than once pressed upon noble Lord the propriety of postponing that part of the packet Vote which related to the contract at Dovor. There had been a Committee appointed to consider the whole question of postal contracts, including that recently made at Dovor. He would not say whether there were any grounds for the rumours that were afloat, but there certainly was an idea prevalent that the contract required looking into. He would urge upon his noble Friend that the House should not be called upon, by voting money, to give a sanction to that contract before the Committee recently appointed had reported.
  MR. WHITBREADsaid, that as the contract had been signed, he thought there would be a legal claim upon the Government. However, as it seemed to be the wish of the House that this portion of the Vote should be omitted, they would offer no opposition to the postponement.
  MR. LYGONremarked, that certain words were introduced into the contract signed on the 6th of April for Dovor, as had been done also in the case of Galway, providing that the contractors should be paid out of money to be voted by Parliament; thus, in fact, rendering the contract subject to ratification by the House.
  MR. ROEBUCKwished again to warn the House of the danger into which they were likely to fall. Upon the other side of the Atlantic there was a Congress, and also a place called a "Lobby," and all transactions concluded in the Congress were first decided in the "Lobby." If they introduced into that House the principle of canvassing every act of the Government, not merely as to their responsibility, but deciding upon the actual contracts themselves, they would soon bring in a "Lobby," here, and all the chicanery and corruption that now distinguished the "Lobby" of Congress. Even upon the present occasion he was told that the objections to the particular contracts were by persons who expected to derive a benefit if those contracts were broken; that there were hon. Gentlemen in that House who were directors of the company which was calling upon the House to dispute those contracts.
  MR. WILSONexplained, in reference to the statement of the hon. Member for Tewkesbury (Mr. Lygon), that the stipulation that the contracts should be paid out of money voted by Parliament was not new. Why, from what fund could they be paid, except money voted by Parliament? The words said to be a new introduction, and to involve a new principle of Parliamentary revision, had been in use, at all events, since 1854, and were mere surplusage, because the contracts could not be paid out of money unless it was money voted by Parliament. He did not object to the use of the words, but they should not be set up as proof of extraordinary vigilance. If the words had been "subject to the approval of Parliament" the case would have Been very different.
  Motion agreed to.

SUPPLY.—NAVY ESTIMATES.
House in Committee.
Mr. MASSEY in the Chair.
(In the Committee.)
(1.) £368,311, Reserved Half-pay, and Retirement to Officers of the Navy and Marines,
MR. LINDSAYpointed out the enormous number of officers on the active retired list. Out of 100 Admirals on that list there were 39 between 70 and 87 years of age. Why, he asked, should they continue to be rated as active? In like manner there were 315 Captains on the active list, of whom 41 were above 60, whilst only 90 were in active service. A similar proportion held good of the Commanders' list. So that we were retaining upon the active list a number of gentlemen who were not active or fit for service, and who themselves felt that they were not fit for service. Again, out of 2000 officers on the active list 214 were between the ages of 60 and 85, although, curious to say, upon the retired list there were not less than 290 below the age of 60. Now, the retired and reserved list was in a most unsatisfactory state. It cost the country upwards of £700,000 a year; and if it were unsatisfactory to the country it was not less so to the officers themselves—for they could not obtain active employment in consequence of their number being so great, and not obtaining active employment of course they could not get promotion. He knew that it was utterly impossible to employ them all in time of peace, and that it was necessary
1224
to retain a very large number to meet the exigencies of war; yet it happened that if we were now to engage in war we should be very far short of the number of officers requisite to man our ships. What he wished to impress upon the country was that there must be a complete change in the whole system; but to maintain sufficient officers for the emergency of war would increase the half-pay list to a still greater amount than its present cost; consequently we ought to look to some other source. Now, in the merchant service, and especially on board those magnificent steam-ships which belonged to the great navigation companies, there were a large number of active and intelligent officers. Since the passing of the Mercantile Marine Act those officers had been obliged to undergo an examination before public Boards with regard to their acquirements in seamanship and navigation quite as strict as that to which officers in the navy were subjected. And he thought that, by adding to that course of examination a further examination in gunnery, officers in the merchant service might make a very efficient body of men, who would be ready, willing, and able to serve the country in the hour of need. If ultimately it should be determined to form a reserve of merchant seamen these officers might be called out with them, and having undergone a month's drill annually with the men he had no doubt they would be found as valuable in fighting our ships as the permanent officers of the navy. The effect of such a measure would be that we should encounter no difficulty in finding reserves; we might reduce the number of naval officers, give them more employment, and at the same time diminish that heavy amount of taxation which we were annually called upon to vote for the half-pay list.
MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, that some of the lower grades of officers in the navy were in a very unsatisfactory state, the late First Lord having stated that mates and midshipmen were 400 short of the required number. On the other hand, there was quite a redundancy of Admirals. We had not less than 341 Admirals, of whom only eleven were employed in the fleet and three in the dockyards, making together fourteen. In his opinion the system of increasing the number of Admirals, which had been going on so long, ought to receive a check. It did not look well, to say the least of it, to have thirty times as many Admirals as were wanted, whilst they were short of the

1225
younger officers, whose services were so essential to the manning of the fleet.
SIR CHARLES NAPIERsaid, it could not be wondered at if, after a war of nearly forty years, the list of Admirals was very large. In fact, it could not be helped, though he admitted that the promotions had been too extensive. The reason of the list being in its present state was that successive Lords of the Admiralty had failed to carry out the intentions of Lord Melville. From 1815 to 1830 Lord Melville allowed the promotion to go on just in the same way as in time of war. It was evident, therefore, that there could have been no reduction in the list, and men did not die off so fast during peace as during war. But in 1830 Lord Melville, seeing the error he bad committed in making promotions on that scale, issued a Minute of the Admiralty restricting promotions to one in three. From 1830 to 1846, a period of sixteen years, there were various First Lords of the Admiralty, and one succeeded another with tolerable rapidity. The consequence was that the Minute of Lord Melville was ignored. From February, 1830 to September, 1846, 245 flag officers and 316 captains died; and there were altogether 909 removals from the list by death and promotion; but whilst, according to Lord Melville's Minute, the promotions ought to have been only one in three; instead of one promotion in three, almost as many were promoted as were removed. The case was just the same with the commanders and lieutenants. But the lists of admirals, captains, commanders, and lieutenants were now fixed, and that not too high, and he believed that in a short time they would be all reduced to a proper level. The evils of the system of promotion, from the age of the officers, became very great, and he suggested to the late Sir Robert Peel, who was then in office, a plan for removing a certain number of officers from the top of the list with their own consent. Some years afterwards Sir Robert Peel consented to give a retirement to a certain number of captains, who were allowed to take the rank of admirals at 60 years of age, and if that arrangement had not been interfered with the list would not have been in its present state. But succeeding Lords of the Admiralty had allowed junior officers to retire, and so the alteration had failed of its intention. They could not prevent officers from getting old and he was not prepared to deal with them in such a way as that they should feel hurt
1226
and degraded. If the list were only allowed to remain undisturbed it would be easily ascertained from an actuary within what period that list would be exhausted. With regard to the recommendation of the hon. Member for Sunderland (Mr. Lindsay) as to employing officers from the merchant service, that would never do. Their education, their manners, and the way in which they had been brought up quite unfitted them for the navy. He admitted that in the event of war, if we had not a sufficient number of officers, it would be absolutely necessary to draw upon the merchant service for a supply, with the understanding, however, that they were only taken up temporarily, though in cases where they distinguished themselves it should be open to them to remain in the navy.
SIR JOHN PAKINGTONsaid, he thought it would be admitted by every one that the Question which had been touched upon by the Members who had spoken since this Vote was put into the hands of the Chairman was one of the most important and difficult connected with the whole question of the efficiency of the naval service: and he could not allow the Vote to pass without expressing his anxious hope that the new Board of Admiralty would take into their consideration the present stagnation of promotion in the naval service, and that they will deal boldly and courageously with the subject. He thought he might venture to say that his eighteen months' experience in office had shown him that it was absolutely essential to the maintenance of efficiency in the Royal Navy that some measure comprising a comprehensive plan of retirement should be carried; but he had also seen enough to be satisfied that nothing could be done unless the Minister who attempted, to deal with the subject was prepared to approach it in a bold and determined spirit, not to be deterred by slight difficulties from effecting his purpose. The hon. and gallant Admiral the Member for Southwark (Sir Charles Napier) on a previous occasion had adverted in unfavourable terms to a plan he (Sir John Pakington) had conceived, while he was at the head of the Admiralty, for correcting the existing state of things. He thought he had good reason to complain that the gallant Admiral had chosen to make a paper, which in no sense had ever been made a public document, the subject of public comment. Those who heard that comment had never seen the paper, and were therefore quite unable to form any

1227
opinion as to the fairness or propriety of the hon. and gallant Admiral's remarks. Late in the evening the hon. Member for Sunderland (Mr. Lindsay) expressed a hope that I would take an opportunity of explaining what my plan of retirement was. Now, while he thought it would be very inconvenient that he should enter into details connected with a paper which had not been made public, and which therefore he could scarcely hope to make intelligible to hon. Members, he had nevertheless no objection to state that the principle of the plan he had prepared was this—that retirement should take place at a given age (not necessarily always at the same age), applicable to all ranks in the naval service, and at which officers would be compelled to retire, receiving as compensation for that compulsory retirement a step in rank and an amount of half-pay commensurate with the length of actual service they had given to the country. Then that there should be another age (of course some years younger than that fixed for the compulsory retirement) at which officers should be permitted to retire voluntarily with the same advantages. He would not further enter into the details of his plan. It was perfectly true that although he had never made this plan in any sense public, he had shown it to a very considerable number of officers with the view of ascertaining their opinions upon the matter. Among others he had shown it to the hon. and gallant Admiral himself. The hon. and gallant Admiral seemed to entertain a notion that the plan would bear hardly upon officers of his own rank. He would however say, that either in public or in private he (Sir John Pakington) was prepared to contend that there was nothing in his plan of retirement of which officers of the high and distinguished rank of Sir Charles Napier would have the least reason to complain. It was a difficult task to devise a new plan of retirement for the purpose of remedying the great evils that now pressed so heavily upon the navy; and he admitted that any one undertaking that task would fail in his duty if he did not show the utmost respect and the utmost possible regard to the high claims of such men as the gallant Admiral and others who had risen to their high position by their great services, by their gallantry, and a long and successful career in a noble profession. But, on the other hand, he felt with equal force, and he was glad to have that opportunity of stating it, that any man who volunteered to undertake that
1228
difficult task would fail in his duty equally if he limited his regard to those officers who had risen to high stations in the navy. The poor lieutenant was as much entitled to consideration as the Admiral; and he begged to state to the House that while he was at the Admiralty nothing was more painful to him than the cases that had come crowding before him of men who had served their country well, but who had failed in the difficult race for promotion merely from want of "interest." It was too true, and he must repeat it, that they failed only from want of interest—from want of that mode of getting advancement which everybody knew was necessary. In saying this, however, he did not impute blame to any one. Everybody knew the difficulties with which a Government was surrounded; they were compelled to make selections from largo bodies of men, and let them make those selections ever so honestly there must remain a large residuum unemployed and unpromoted. At this moment there were cases of men who had been lieutenants for years and years, until they had become old men, and who were now struggling to maintain themselves as officers and gentlemen upon pittances wholly inadequate. No man could hold the position he had held, as First Lord of the Admiralty, without having his feelings continually wounded by the sight of numberless such cases—they came crowding upon him. And he did think—and he said it with no disrespect—that it behoved men like the gallant Admiral, who had been more fortunate, who had risen to great distinction and obtained high positions, not to stand out with too much of punctilio about their own position, but to show some consideration towards their less fortunate brother officers, and be willing to make some sacrifices in order to relieve such men from the great difficulties and privations they had been for so long a time suffering. The plan of retirement he proposed had been so far developed that he had consulted his colleagues in the Cabinet concerning it; and it was most cordially and thoroughly adopted by them; and if he had remained at the Admiralty he would have exerted himself to the utmost to carry it into operation—of course with such modifications as fairness might suggest. Its details throughout were prepared with the most anxious desire on his part to avoid its bearing hardly upon any class of officers. But the gallant Admiral had said on a previous occasion that it was strongly

1229
opposed by many distinguished officers in the service, and further that the naval officers of his (Sir John Pakington's) own Board were also opposed to it. [Sir CHARLES NAPIER: Hear, hear!] He thought this was a very strong statement, and one that could not be passed without notice. But he would tell the hon. and gallant Admiral that so far as he knew, disapprobation of that plan was confined mainly—he would not say exclusively—to a very small number of officers at the head of the list—of the gallant Admiral's own rank—who took a view of the plan which he thought was a very mistaken one, and one that he deeply regretted to find was entertained. True it was that the professional members of the Board of Admiralty were divided upon the subject; but it was equally true that he did not limit his inquiries for opinions respecting it, either to the members of his own Board or to the distinguished men who stood at the head of the navy. He had consulted officers of all ranks, without knowing their previous bias, and solely regarding their competency to give a disinterested and a fair opinion upon the subject; and an overwhelming majority were most cordial and decided in their approbation, and he had received most urgent communications from naval officers of all ranks and in all directions, expressing their approval of the scheme, and their hopes that he would carry out the plan to a successful issue. As a proof that it was necessary to agree upon some alteration of the existing system he would mention that during the first twelve months, from April, 1858, to April, 1859, that he had held office, he was able to promote only five lieutenants to be commanders, and two commanders to be post captains. He excepted extraordinary cases of promotion in consequence of transactions in China, because they had nothing to do with the general accuracy of the statement he had made as to the very limited amount of ordinary promotion which occurred between April 1858, and April 1859. Was it to be supposed that in a great profession like the navy satisfaction or contentment could exist under such a system of stagnation? Was it likely that officers could be obtained of the right age, active and willing to perform their duties, if such stagnation in the system of promotion were allowed to continue? The gallant Admiral had alluded to the army, and had said that no evils of the kind existed there—that the general officers were not asked to re-
1230
tire at a certain age for the purpose of providing room for promotion for their younger brethren. But in using that argument the hon. and gallant Member clearly lost sight of the fact that the two professions were governed upon totally different principles. The General remaining in the army did not stop promotion; but the Admiral remaining in the navy did stop promotion. Every year there were numbers—he might without exaggeration say hundreds—of officers who left the army by sale of their commissions. Who left the navy? Nobody. Year after year young gentlemen were constantly pouring in; hitherto perhaps not to a sufficient extent, for he believed it was true, as had been stated, that the number of entries was so restricted that Her Majesty's ships in commission were short some 300 or 400 of the junior rank of officers. But while pouring in these young men at the bottom who was going out at the top? Nobody. The gallant Admiral (Sir Charles Napier) had talked about those of his own rank growing old. It really seemed as if our Admirals were immortal; they seemed to be always growing old, and never to get so, for such was their tenacity of life it really would appear that unless they happened to get knocked off by a cannon hall, they were exempted from the payment of that debt of nature to which it was the general belief that we were all liable. He hoped that the worthy Admiral would long enjoy his apparent exemption; but in any profession, if new members were constantly pouring in at the bottom, and none going out at the top, it could not be matter of surprise if stagnation were to result. That stagnation existed in the navy; and it certainly embarrassed, and he might almost say endangered, the naval service. Successive Boards of Admiralty, attempting to reduce the evil, had adopted new retiring lists until the alphabet itself was exhausted in supplying distinguishing initials. But those lists only relieved the system temporarily; in a few years it was again choked up; and it was impossible to devise any remedy that would prove effectual and lasting, unless it were made self-acting, clearing the way at the top as fresh blood was poured in at the bottom. By this means we should always have a due succession of officers who would not be discouraged by want of promotion, and who would reach the different branches of the navy at that time of life when they could do good service to their country. It was

1231
his anxious wish, by the adoption of a simple mode of retirement, with a fair compensation for the disadvantages it created, to afford a permanent remedy for the existing state of things. He hoped he should have been able to carry out his plan of retirement before he left office, because he believed the leading principles of that plan to be perfectly fair and sound, and that it would have effected the desired object. He had, however, left it to his successor. It was now in the hands of the Duke of Somerset, and he had implored the noble Duke to consider it impartially—not to view it as a question between one Admiralty Board and another, but as one deeply affecting the welfare of the British Navy. He should be glad to hear from his noble Friend opposite, the Secretary of the Admiralty (Lord Clarence Paget) that it would be taken into consideration, and that the new Board of Admiralty would devise some plan by which that great and growing evil—the existing stagnation of promotion—might be effectually remedied.
SIR CHARLES NAPIERsaid, he had hoped that after his explanation the right hon. Baronet would not again have found fault with him for having mentioned his plan of retirement. That plan was not furnished to him confidentially, and he appealed to the House to say whether a document which was handed round to almost every old Admiral resident in London, and which formed the subject of a petition to Her Majesty, could properly be called confidential. It was true that the petition to which he referred was not presented to the Queen, but the reason of that was that the right hon. Baronet left office before the requisite arrangements could be completed. The petition, however, was signed by himself and several other admirals, and one of those who attached their names to it took the liberty of tolling the right hon. Baronet that an experience of fifteen months at the head of the Admiralty did not seem to have taught him to respect the feelings of naval officers. It would be perfectly fair to offer compensation to the lower ranks of officers for voluntary retirement; but to force old officers to retire from the service was degrading; and he could never forget that the death of his own father, a captain in the navy, who had not had an opportunity of serving, was caused by his being passed over in promotion. He never held up his head after it. The truth was that the right hon. Baronet did not know, and never would know, what the feelings of
1232
naval officers were, and fortunate it was that he was driven from office before he could bring forward his nefarious system of retirement. It was, no doubt, true that the right hon. Baronet obtained the assent of a number of officers to his plan, but the probability was that those officers were young men who would profit by the change; at all events he could state with certainty that the plan was disapproved by the senior officers. His own first naval Lord disapproved of it. The first civil Lord might have approved of it, but he knew nothing about it. But the right hon. Baronet had not told the House all. In addition to the other objectionable features of his scheme, the right hon. Baronet actually wanted to take into his own hands, with the view of increasing the patronage at his disposal, the haul-down vacancies belonging to flag officers, as well as those special vacancies which were given to the Board of Admiralty for the purpose of rewarding officers for distinguished services. It was quite true that various Boards had made retirements. That was quite right; for it brought forward a sufficient number of young officers, and at the present moment there were more young Admirals in the service than there were during the war. But the proposal of the right hon. Baronet went much further, and he could only say that he hoped the present First Lord would find something better to do than going out of his way to hurt the feelings of old officers, and that the House of Commons would not vote a single shilling except for the purpose of assisting old commanders and lieutenants who had not sufficient interest to make their way in the service.
SIR JOHN PAKINGTONsaid, that the observations of the hon. and gallant Admiral afforded an additional exemplification of the inconvenience of discussing a plan the details of which were not before the House. Not one of these observations applied to the plan as it at present stood. The hon. and gallant Admiral complained of the cruelty of compelling old and distinguished officers to retire. Perhaps the House would be surprised to hear that his (Sir John Pakington's) plan did not compel any flag-officer to retire. It applied to officers in junior ranks, but it did not deprive any flag-officer of any privilege that he now possessed.
SIR CHARLES NAPIERsaid, he did not know how the plan stood now: his observations applied to the plan as it stood when he had cognizance of it.
SIR CHARLES WOODagreed in thinking it very inconvenient that a plan which was not before the House should form the subject of discussion. He thought, however, the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Sir John Pakington) had very considerably understated the effect of the plan of retirement proposed in the "confidential" document. He should certainly disapprove of any plan by which compulsory retirement at the age of sixty years would be enforced. If such a regulation had been in force, the country would have been deprived of the eminent services of the late Lord Lyons. There had certainly been a difficulty with regard to the tardy promotion of post captains to the higher rank; Lord Lyons himself had continued for thirty-six years in the rank of post captain, and he doubted not that there were other distinguished officers who had the same story to tell. But regulations had been adopted to meet this admitted evil shortly before he himself had quitted the Admiralty, and the beneficial effects of these, by which captains would become admirals, generally speaking, in less than twenty years, were only now beginning to be felt. He could not therefore agree with the right hon. Gentleman when he spoke of the utter stagnation of the service as regarded promotion; and he believed that since Lord Howe's time there had never been, comparatively speaking, so many young admirals in the service as at present. At the period when he succeeded to the office of First Lord of the Admiralty there were only nine admirals under sixty years of age, and from a Return which he held in his hand there were now upwards of thirty under that age upon the active list. This was certainly effected by the system of retirement to which he had alluded. He certainly did not believe that retirement by age would be an improvement of the present system. He thought every one would admit that Lord Lyons was one of the most efficient officers we had had for many years, and yet Lord Lyons would have been disqualified years ago if retirement at the age of sixty had been compulsory, for Lord Lyons, he believed, was seventy when he died. [Admiral Walcott: Sixty-eight.] He did not say that every man above or below sixty would be able to command a fleet, but he thought it would be a great mistake to debar themselves of the services of such a man as Lord Lyons because he was above sixty years of age. He said this without
1234
any reference to the plan of the right hon. Gentleman. The number of superior officers being much less than those of the inferior officers, it was impossible to hope that by any plan of retirement promotion could be given to all the inferior officers. Suppose that 1,200 lieutenants to be the number on the list, and that there were 350 captains and 450 commanders, it was obviously impossible that the whole number of lieutenants could be promoted to commanders. He was not in possession of the exact proportion of the commanders, but he was aware that the actual number exceeded the authorized limit; thereby showing that promotion to that rank had gone on more rapidly than in any other, and consequently the delay was not, as was supposed, in the grade of lieutenant. By increasing the retired list they removed officers who had attained an age which rendered it almost impossible for them to serve, and it was to the interest of the county that the list of officers in the lower rank should be relieved of such as are incapable of serving in that rank. He thought that the present rules of retirement had answered, to a great extent, the purpose for which they were instituted. No scheme that could be invented would be agreeable to all classes of persons.
ADMIRAL WALCOTTsaid, if the country and the House would only exercise a little patience these grey-headed officers would soon disappear from the reach of their bounty, or the hearing of their regrets; the broken spirit and the wounded heart will be beyond recall. The House had not, however, been made acquainted with the circumstance under which the large list had been produced. It owed its origin to the war, which lasted from 1792 to 1815, during which we had at one time nigh 1,000 pendants flying. There were at the same time no less than 147,000 seamen and marines in the service—we were at war with almost the whole world. Russia, Denmark, Holland, France, Spain, Turkey and lastly the United States of America; and it was absolutely necessary to have fleets blockading the ports of the enemy, and protecting the commerce of the country. The number of officers was consequently very large, and that was the cause, as he had always said, of the number of officers on those lists. If an actuary were applied to, he would tell them that officers of the navy did not live longer than other men; but the more favourable state of the public health of late years accounted for

1235
the average of life being greater. All the lists, whether of admirals, captains, commanders, or lieutenants, were crowded with old men, and they had only to exercise the little patience he had entreated of the House and they would see them thinned by the natural effect of time. In regard to the sum required it was a debt of honour, the fulfilment of an ancient and just engagement, upon the part of the country; these officers demanded only this moderate requital in their age and compulsory retirement for activity, energy, and fidelity, the aggregate of which ennobles the national history. Since 1815, appointments, promotions, and recommendations for marks of honour at the hand of the Sovereign had gone, in very many instances, by favour. Every First Lord had his own friends to provide for, and then he probably took the advice of the First Naval Lord, who knew certain officers with whom he had served, and naturally recommended them. It was impossible there could be any confidence in the service until the colleagues of the First Lord were made responsible with him for appointments, promotions and rewards. During forty years of peace the proportion of captains employed was 80 out of 600, and few therefore could rise to the rank of admiral on the active list without friends at the Admiralty. In peace a captain must have been six years, and in war four years, in command of a post ship, before he was entitled to rise to the rank of admiral on the active list—consequently, if he were not employed this list was barred to him; if he had no interest he could not get employed. There were ninety-nine admirals on the active list. They had more young admirals than they could employ or did employ. If an officer could not reach the ear of the First Lord he remained without employment, and was put upon the reserved list. He was one of those who was displaced when he had a fair right and title to be employed. he never could obtain employment sedulously as he had applied for it. Captains who had been six, nine, and ten years afloat were able to get ships, while other captains could not serve the time necessary to keep on the active list. When the experienced captains died the country lost their services, and in addition the advantage of the survivors having shared the experience. Until some great consideration was shown for merit the evil must continue. If it were known that the only road to employment, promotion, and recommendation
1236
for marks of honour at the hands of the Sovereign was by zeal, energy, and gallant good conduct, there would be a very different feeling in the service—officers who had no influence saw First Lord after First Lord succeed to office, and just when they expected that the First Lord had provided for his friends and could give encouragement to merit, a change, came, and with the change disappointment. They had rolled the stone up hill with the greatest difficulty when it fell and crushed them, and they had to begin over and over again. That was his case for thirty years, and hundreds of others who had spared no effort to get employment never could get a command. His heart had been almost broken, and he had been thrust upon the reserved list when he had energy and ability to have done his country some service. Officers who had not used every effort to get employment were unworthy of the profession, and should be thrust aside; but those who offered for any command and any station were entitled to some consideration. He was glad that the Admiralty had given some advantages to chaplains and surgeons, but the same was equally duo to masters and lieutenants. He suggested that to those lieutenants no longer available for active employment, the rank of commander and some small pecuniary consideration, probably an increase of a shilling a day, would remove discontent and afford encouragement to young officers who were just entering the navy.
SIR FRANCIS BARINGsaid, that he quite agreed with the hon. and gallant Member in the propriety of encouraging good and efficient men. In the year 1848 the average age of those officers whose names stood upon the admirals' list was seventy, and that there were only six of them whose age was under sixty, while there were at the present moment thirty- one admirals who were below that age. The complaint now was that we had too many young admirals rather than too many old ones on the list. The consequence of the state of things which formerly prevailed was that when he, being then at the head of the Admiralty, communicated with two gallant admirals, with the view of sending them out to take command of the East Indies, the answer he received was that they were too old to perform the service which was required at their hands, and he was eventually obliged to appoint an officer to the command whose age was seventy-two years. There were

1237
at the period to which he referred, about 100 officers in the captains' list who were incapable of service, and on that of the lieutenants', which embraced 2,300 names, about 1,000 in a similar position. Under these circumstances he found it impossible to leave matters as they were, and he therefore introduced a measure which, in conjunction with other measures in the same direction by which it was followed, brought about the present efficient state of the Navy list. There were on the list many gallant officers who were able and would be delighted to serve, and who would feel their removal from the active list as one of the greatest calamities that could befall them. The question of the ago of naval officers was one which had been over and over again taken into consideration at the Admiralty; but, however well any scheme for dealing with it might look upon paper, to strike distinguished and historic names, such, for instance, as that of the hon. and gallant Member for Southwark, off the list was by no means a pleasant task for a first Lord of the Admiralty to discharge. With regard to the complaints which were made by those officers who occupied the lower ranks in the service, he could only say that it was impossible to make every lieutenant an admiral—there must always be more subordinates than chiefs—and, in his opinion, the best mode of dealing with them would he to open a dour which would admit of their retirement from the service with honour and satisfaction to themselves. To deal with the lower grades in a liberal spirit would, be believed, be the truest economy. So far as the question of promotion was concerned he thought that, instead of promotion having been slow, there had been a considerable flow of it for the last few years.
SIR JAMES ELPHINSTONEsaid, it would be found on looking at the matter from a practical point of view that the number of junior officers was too small for the service, How was that difficulty best to be got over? The hon. Member for Sunderland (Mr. Lindsay) had recommended that the officers of the superior class of merchants' ships should be made available for the navy; but he should remind the Committee that it would not be easy to secure the services of such men. For his own part, he should not, when he was in the East India Company's service, have thought of entering the navy, in as much as the former service was much preferable on the score of pay, and in con-
1238
sequence of the rapidity with which promotion might he obtained. Those who served in the superior classes of merchant vessels were generally the sons of mercantile men who had the prospect before them of becoming partners in some mercantile house, or of settling down comfortably in some other capacity, and it was not therefore probable that many would be lured into the navy from that service. As to the manner in which the officers in the lower ranks of the navy might be provided for, he could only say that in his opinion the best mode of dealing with them would be cither to raise them to the rank of commanders or buy them out, as had been done in the East India Company's service, in which a man on leaving the service received a certain sum of money according to the rank which he filled, and a small premium. If a similar practice were to be adopted in the navy the lieutenant's list would soon be cleared. He might add that when a man had served as a midshipman for eight or nine years, and afterwards a lieutenant for thirteen or fourteen years, making in all a period of from twenty-one to twenty-three years' service, he generally became, owing to the wear and tear of constitution to which he was subjected, practically unfitted for duty as a quarter deck officer. What, then, under these circumstances, was to be done with him? He could not be made an admiral; but then he might have conferred upon him the privilege of writing Captain So-and-So on his door, together with a small addition to his pay if he remained in the service, and by that means the list might be cleared. There was at the present moment in the navy a largo number of officers who were discontented, because they saw, as it were, no daylight before them, and because their youth had passed away, leaving them to spend the rest of their days in the endeavour to live on a pittance which was a disgrace to the country, He might also observe that the navy, instead of being a cheap was in fact an expensive profession, and consequently it was only right that an officer in his old age should be entitled to receive something from his country for his past service. As to the admiral's list, he did not think it much mattered how many names stood upon it, as long as there was a power of selection.
MR. LYGONwished to remove a misconception which appeared in the speeches of the hon. and gallant Member for Christchurch (Admiral Walcott), and the right

1239
hon. Baronet the Member for Portsmouth (Sir F. Baring), in regard to the scheme that had been incidentally alluded to in the present discussion. There was no attempt made under that scheme to crush the feelings and break the hearts of any of the gallant men of the profession. The hon. and gallant Gentleman was quite under a misconception on that point. The intention of the scheme was to secure to every officer his fair chance of promotion without hurting the feelings of any one.
ADMIRAL DUNCOMBEsaid, it had been currently stated that the officers who were consulted by the late First Lord in this matter, one and all disapproved of the scheme. Surely, if such men as Lord Dundonald, Sir George Seymour, and others disapproved of the scheme, it could not be said to bear the construction just put upon it by the hon. Gentleman the Member for Tewkesbury (Mr. Lygon).
ADMIRAL WALCOTTdeclared, that to neglect old officers was not calculated to encourage the present or provide for the future, and that the scheme of the late First Lord of the Admiralty had given infinite pain to many old and gallant officers who were the pride and ornament of the navy, and whom every young officer might look up to as an example. The hon. Member for Tewkesbury, and the late First Lord of the Admiralty, had no fair knowledge of the profession, or they would not in intention have adopted any such system. True it was they had denied by their speeches any such infliction, but, nevertheless, by some unfortunate misunderstanding, it had been created, and the late First Lord must have been sensible this had been produced, because he admitted he had modified his first proposition. Naval officers should be encouraged to improve themselves in the various branches of their profession, and they should be made to feel that this was the only road to employment, to promotion, and honours. In the case of the gunnery officers, however, no such encouragement was held out, and he thought their case was really deserving of consideration.
SIR JOHN PAKINGTONsaid, the observations of the hon. and gallant Admiral (Admiral Duncombe), showed the extreme inconvenience of discussing a matter that was not actually before the House. From what had fallen from the hon. and gallant Of beer, it was evident that he did not hear the fieginning of the discussion. [Admiral DUN
1240
COMBE said, he was present all through the discussion.] The gallant Admiral has stated that which he (Sir J. Pakington) could understand if he were not in the House at the beginning of the discussion; but he certainly could not understand his observations when he said that he had been listening to the debate throughout. The hon. and gallant Admiral said, that all the officers in his (Sir J. Pakington's) confidence disapproved of the plan. Now, his gallant Friend, if he were present, must have heard him state that he thought it his duty to consult a great number of officers in the navy as to his scheme without any knowledge of their previous bias, and that an overwhelming majority had given a cordial assent to his proposition.
ADMIRAL DUNCOMBEhad referred to the old flag officers, all of whom objected to it.
LORD CLARENCE PAGETsaid, he had understood the right hon. Gentleman (Sir J. Pakington) to say, on the subject of the present rate of promotion, that he had only during one year the opportunity of promoting two commanders to be captains, and five lieutenants to be commanders. It was therefore, but fair, that he (Lord C. Paget) should state what the promotions in the year were during the year 1858; when the right hon. Gentleman was in office, there were nine admirals made from captains, twenty-two captains made from commanders, sixty-two commanders made from lieutenants, and fifty-one lieutenants made from mates. He (Lord C. Paget) did not say that even that was sufficient promotion, but it made up a very different figure from that which the right hon. Gentleman put before the Committee.
SIR JOHN PAKINGTONhad, in his previous observations referred to Board promotions only, and not to promotions from the retired list; and he repeated that in the first twelve months that he was at the Amiralty, he had only made two commanders and five lieutenants.
Vote agreed to, as were also—
(2.) £243,957, Military Pensions and Allowances.
(3.) £83,416, Civil Pensions and Allowances.
(4.) £175,000, Freight of Ships.
(5.) £704,008, Packet Service.
MR. LINDSAYsaid, he wished to direct the attention of the Committee to the scale of payment of seamen in the navy. He would be the last to oppose unnecessarily any increase of that pay, for he had been

1241
a sailor himself; but he asked if that increased pay—and a bounty was only increased pay in another form—was necessary, and, if so, would it effect the object in view? The right hon. Gentleman the late First Lord, in a time of peace, but taking alarm at rumours which had not the slightest foundation, thought it necessary to hurry on the work of manning the navy. It was extraordinary that, while the pay of the seaman and his position in the navy wore better than in the merchant service, while his work was less severe, and that he was not only provided for in sickness, but in old age—when we wanted men to enter the navy they could not be got. There must be something wrong to account for such a state of things. Excessive drill was alleged to be one reason, and flogging another. The hon. Gentleman the Member for Lambeth had told them that no less than 2,100 lashes had been inflicted in one Queen's ship in a single year. What a degrading position it was to strip a man and flog him before his shipmates, and that not after any trial, but from the mere impulse of the moment! It was so degrading that it was enough to deter men from entering the service. He (Mr. Lindsay) did not advocate the doing away with corporal punishment; it might be necessary; but let a man, before being punished, be tried by a court-martial composed of his officers, under the presidency of the Captain, and then if he was held to have deserved punishment let it be inflicted under the authority of that tribunal. He had heard also of excessive drill. A removal of these causes of complaint might induce seamen to enter the navy; but the bounty of £10, while it increased the pay of the Royal Navy, ended with increasing the pay of the merchant service from £2 10s. to £3 10s. per month; and yet, after saddling an important and depressed interest with a heavy additional burden, the bounty did not effect the object that the Government had in view. The shipping interest of this country were running a great ocean race with all the countries in the world, and anything that raised the rate of wages paid in British ships made the ship owner less able to run the race prescribed for him by the law. The £10 bounty created dissatisfaction among the old hands serving in the navy. The seamen asked why they should not get £10, as well as the men of the merchant service. Well, the Government now proposed to vote £5 to able seamen. Would that
1242
satisfy them? They would say that if it were just to give them £5 it was equally just to give them £10. He had no doubt it would be necessary to vote another £100,000, and still the Government would not be able to gain their object. He certainly thought the offer of a £10 bounty a mistake on the part of the late Government.
LORD CLARENCE PAGETsaid, he had always understood that it was the custom of the House to allow the mover of a Vote an opportunity of explaining it; but the hon. Gentleman was so anxious to speak that he had debarred him from that chance. He was now enabled to give an explanation of this Vote, which he was unable to do on Friday. At that time the Order in Council was not issued, and he preferred to wait until he was in a position to propose this Estimate. He wished to repeat the opinion he had before expressed, that nothing but the most urgent necessity could justify a recourse to bounties, especially to bounties of so large an amount as that lately offered. A system of bounties might be compared to those opium draughts which were common in Eastern countries: each dose must be stronger than the former. In like manner, if our seamen were taught to expect that at the least cloud in the west, or approach to a political difficulty, a bounty would be offered, the Admiralty would never be able to get a seaman without a bounty. The wisdom of giving a bounty ought therefore to be very carefully considered by any Government before they proposed it, and the bounty ought never, in his opinion, to be adopted without the sanction of the House of Commons. The bounty offered by the late Government had certainly rapidly increased our force of seamen. But another question then arose. The Government had to consider the position of those seamen who had been serving their country faithfully, who had learnt in the Royal Navy the whole of the duties of a seaman, and who had come to be efficient men-of-war's-men. Now extending a portion of this gratuity to men who had five years to serve or who were willing to continue in the service five years longer was a step he was perfectly prepared to defend. The gratuity proposed to be given to each such man was £5, or one half the bounty offered by the late Board to new entries. He did not mean to say that those men had any claim to any gratuity whatever; but he wished to bring this matter home to his right hon.

1243
Friend (Sir John Pakington) as a personal question. He would suppose that his right hon. Friend and himself were captains of line-of-battle ships, and that instead of a scarcity of seamen there was a scarcity of captains of line-of-battle ships. That had happened before, not in the English, but in the French service, for in France during the Revolution the captains of merchantmen were taken out of their ships and put in command of men-of-war. They wore the uniform and enjoyed all the privileges of captains of men-of-war. Now, suppose that some respectable merchant captain, who was a very good seaman, but utterly unacquainted with the duties of captain of a man-of-war, were put upon an equality with his right hon. Friend and himself. That would be unsatisfactory; but what would his right hon. Friend and himself say if this captain of a merchantman had given to him a large sum of money in hand beyond what they had received? If he obtained his epaulettes, sword, cocked hat, and all the paraphernalia of rank, and all the furniture of his cabin? Would his right hon. Friend and himself be satisfied that men, uneducated in the service, should thus come among them, with vast advantages over them in the shape of the rewards given to the new-comers for becoming captains in the navy? He thought they would not like it at all. But that was precisely the case of the seamen of the Royal Navy at the present moment. The bounty of £10 was nearly half a year's pay. Though the seamen in the Royal Navy had no legal claim to any participation in the bounty, their position was such that the Government had to consider how they ought to be treated. He must say for these men that, so far as he was aware, they had never uttered a word of complaint. But was that a reason for not considering their claims? If the Government thought they had a just demand for some consideration justice ought to be done at once and spontaneously, and without waiting for complaints. He thought it was best that the seamen already in the service should have no cause of complaint. Although one-half of the bounty was to be given to men already in the fleet, it was upon certain conditions that a man who had less than five years to serve should enter for an extension of that period to five years, and one month after the receipt of the Order in Council on board each ship should be allowed to the seamen to elect whether they would accept the gratuity or
1244
not upon those terms. Supposing that those conditions were accepted by a majority of the men, we should, as it were, have our fleet manned for five years to come. Under these circumstances he submitted that the Government was justified, upon grounds of public policy and fair consideration towards the men, in asking the Committee to vote this sum of money.
SIR JOHN PAKINGTONsaid, he was sorry to have to state that what had fallen from the noble Lord had not affected in the least degree the opinion he had expressed upon a former evening. He had heard nothing which he could call a reason for the extraordinary course proposed, which was a deviation from all precedent in the past, and establishing an embarrassing and inconvenient example for the future. He could only hope that by the immediate adoption of a better system of reserves we might escape being placed in the critical position in which the late Government were placed when they were compelled to resort to the system of a bounty. The hon. Member for Sunderland (Mr. Lindsay) and the noble Lord had both touched upon the general policy of a bounty; but that question was not now before the Committee, and, indeed, it was settled last week, when the House voted the sum necessary for that bounty. All he would say as to the general policy of the bounty was, that a great national object was at stake, and that object had been accomplished by it. The question before the Committee was a different one—whether, because Parliament had voted £31,000 to get seamen, it was right to spend £100,000 more in malting a voluntary gift to men who were already in the navy. He thought nothing could justify such wanton expenditure but the most urgent necessity. If any complaints had been made, if there had been any great exhibition of dissatisfaction in the fleet, that might have been an excuse for such a proposal, but nothing of the kind existed upon the noble Lord's own admission. The whole case of the Government turned on the possibility that there might be dissatisfaction amongst those men. He had said the other evening that if there were discontent upon that ground, it was a case in which the Government were bound for high reasons of high policy to take a bold attitude and declare the demand unreasonable. But, to the honour of the sailors it must be said, they manifestly saw the unreasonableness of the demand. The Committee must remember

1245
what had been done for those men recently. In the Supplementary Estimates they were now considering, in the first Vote, were three items to which he begged to call their attention. The first was to meet the increase of extra pay allowed to seamen gunners, £13,000; the next was to provide for good-conduct pay to petty officers for badges awarded to them after promotion to that rank, £7,657; and the third was for gratuitous issues of bedding and clothing to seamen and boys, £38,000. Those were boons just granted for the first time, and it was unreasonable that a bounty which was only granted upon an emergency to induce sailors to enter the Royal Navy, who would otherwise have remained in the merchant service, should be extended to all the men who were already in the service. Considering the increased pay and advantages enjoyed by men engaged for continuous service, there never was a moment when there was less excuse for dissatisfaction. Nothing had fallen from the noble Lord which would not have been applicable to the three former occasions upon which bounties had been granted, and which were not paid to men already serving. At some future time, not with standing all improvements, a day might come when the Government of this country would be embarrassed by this unreasonable proposal to throw away £100,000 just now, when, as the Chancellor of the Exchequer would probably soon tell the House, our national finances were in a condition in which it was peculiarly desirable that no unnecessary public expenditure should be incurred. He (Sir John Pakington) believed that there was no amount of money which the House would not vote and their constituents sanction if that money was to be judiciously and properly expended to secure our national defences. But, on the other hand, he was equally persuaded that public opinion ought to condemn and would condemn any gratuitous, unnecessary expenditure of the kind now proposed, which was not justified by past precedent nor existing facts, and which must prove most embarrassing and inconvenient for future Administrations. However, approval of the proposal was one thing, and opposing it when proposed was another, and while he disapproved of the proposition of the Government, he believed it would not now be possible for the House to refuse its sanction to the arrangement into which they had entered. Such a refusal would indeed be productive of discontent in the Royal Navy
1246
where two months ago there was none. The late Government attained their object, got the men they wanted, and there was not a whisper of discontent heard. The noble Lord had talked about the policy of treating the British sailor with generosity; and so he should be: but the fact was that never was the sailor treated with so much generosity and consideration as at the present time. Now, for some motive which he could not understand, and which the noble Lord had certainly not explained, he found the Government at a moment of financial difficulty embarking in this most unnecessary expenditure. Having protested against it on these grounds of public policy, he must leave the Government the responsibility of the course they had adopted, for they had embarrassed the question and placed it on a totally different footing from that on which it stood before.
MR. WHITBREADasked the House to consider, as the right hon. Baronet said the present Government had adopted an inconvenient precedent, whether it was not the late Government who had set the example of inconvenient precedents by giving a bounty to seamen on enlisting? Could any one hope that henceforward men would readily engage in the service without a similar inducement? The right hon. Baronet referred to the success of the bounty in obtaining a certain number of men, and said that a great national object was to be gained by it. So likewise it might be said of the recent act of the present Government, that a great national object was to be gained by it; and he thought that object would be accomplished by the prevention of any discontent arising among the seamen, as well as in securing the services of the flower of the fleet for many years to come. He believed, notwithstanding what had fallen from an hon. Member, that this gratuity would satisfy the seamen, for they knew that they had no legal claim to it, and they would be pleased and gratified by having it offered to them on a principle of justice. It was maintained by the right hon. Baronet that, as no discontent had been heard of hitherto, none was ever likely to arise, even if this gratuity had not been offered; but discontent did not arise in a moment. The men whom this question affected lived not like other people in the midst of society composed of all sorts of professions, but entirely in the company of persons like themselves. All their interests and feelings ran in one way; and was it not certain, when the propriety

1247
of the late Government's act was questioned in such an assembly as that House that it would be questioned by them? It was impossible to conceive, unless the present proposition were acceded to, that the seamen would not think that, having made a bargain with the country, the country had got the beat of it, and was determined to keep to it. He thought it might safely be maintained that by the step now taken the Government had not only secured to this country the services of the most efficient body of men for the fleet for five years to come, but had also impressed on the minds of those men—and this was a result of far more value than the money at present asked for—the conviction that they were dealing with a just and generous country.
SIR CHARLES NAPIERapproved of the bounty which had been given, inasmuch as it had obtained for the fleet a considerable number of men; and what could the country have done without them? He would remind the hon. Gentleman the Member for Sunderland, who so much disapproved of the bounty, that some years ago, when our fleet was in danger from the superiority of the French fleet in the Mediterranean, we had a fleet lying at Spithead for which the Admiralty could not procure seamen. Now by means of the bounty, we had got 6,000 out of 8,000 men voted. Was that nothing? The noble Lord said that ameliorations had taken place in the service. He knew that that was the case, but he did not thank the Admiralty for it, because, had it not been for the Motions brought forward by himself and others none of these ameliorations would have taken place. Corporal punishment had been alluded to; but he did not think that the men generally were averse to it, as they knew that the discipline of the navy could not be carried on without it. He should like, however, to see the men brought to a court-martial before punishment was inflicted. Such a course would give great satisfaction to the seamen, and would not destroy the discipline of the navy one iota. He gave the late First Lord of the Admiralty the greatest credit for offering the bounty, and he did not see that the present Government had a right to find fault with that measure, since it had proved successful. He believed the men would feel grateful for the gratuity granted to them. They knew that they were not legally entitled to it, and they would receive it all the more gratefully on that account.
1248
The late First Lord of the Admiralty said he had heard of no discontent among the men; but he (Sir Charles Napier) was often at Portsmouth, and heard loud expressions of discontent. If an experienced sailor got no gratuity and a man who had not experience equal to him got the bounty of £10, was there not likely to be discontent? Would the House like to see the fleet lying at Spithead in the present state of Europe without hands to man it? The war was said to be finished; but was it really finished? In the present position of affairs no effort should be spared to place the country in a state of safety. There was not a man in that House or a Peer in another place who did not read or hear with pleasure the speech of Lord Lyndhurst the other evening; he should like to see the same spirit that he displayed exhibited in that House. Let Gentlemen forget for a time that they had constituents, and let them boldly approve all that could be done for the defence of the country, so that they might be able to point to the British fleet and say. "There is our fleet, ready to do all that it ever did in former days."
SIR JAMES GRAHAM: Sir, I am very unwilling to prolong this discussion, and it is desirable that we should get through the Navy Estimates as soon as possible; but like the hon. and gallant Admiral who has just sat down, I have for a long period taken a deep interest in the question of the manning of the navy, and am therefore desirous of saying a very few words. I will not discuss questions that are not before the Committee—questions of peace or war, and of the state of Europe, the subject of corporal punishment, and other topics that have been introduced. The question of a gratuity consequent on the bounty that has been granted is the matter now in hand, and to that I shall address a few observations. On a former occasion I expressed at some length my decided opinion against a bounty in time of peace. I then stated my objection to it in detail, and to those objections I still adhere. I think they are conclusive against the precedent set for the first time by the late Board of Admiralty of offering a bounty in time of peace. I think that bounty ought to be the last resource of a Government in the last extremity of war, or when war is imminently pending, and I fear that to have had resort to this last resource now will be found to have established a precedent that will add to our diffi-

1249
culties in manning the navy in future in time of peace. But it is needless to argue that question at any length on this occasion, because the bounty has received the sanction of Parliament, and I must assume, therefore, that such a bounty was necessary. But if that be the case, I can have no doubt whatever with respect to the Vote now before the House. I think this gratuity is the inevitable consequence of the bounty which we have granted. The late First Lord of the Admiralty says, there has been no discontent on the part of the men now serving in the Royal Navy. There are two important occasions on which a bounty has been offered in this country. One of these was in 1793, at the commencement of the revolutionary war. We had then only about 14,000 seamen, and just one-half of the amount now offered in time of peace was offered as bounty by the Government. The effect was, that in six months the number of men rose from 14,000 to 60,000. The other occasion was in 1803, at the commencement of the second French war. A bounty was then offered of £5 for able seamen, and £2 10s. for ordinary seamen—or exactly half the amount of that now offered in time of peace. At that time there were about 20,000 men serving in the navy, and the effect of the bounty in six months was to raise the number again to 60,000. Now, what is the case on this occasion? If I mistake not, there are more than 30,000 men now serving. But, besides that, a new system has been adopted—namely, that of continuous service. I believe that is a system which ought to be cherished as the foundation of an effective navy, and as one likely at all times to ensure the service of disciplined men. It is a system which, either in peace or war, promises to be of the greatest benefit to the nation. The right hon. Gentleman says there is no discontent; but let the House reflect on what is the inevitable effect of this bounty. Supposing a ship arrives in port from a foreign station to be paid off. There are five continuous-service men on board and five non-continuous-service men. The five continuous-service men are obliged to go to the flagship, in order to be employed in some other ship. The non-continuous-service men can the next day take the bounty of £10 and enter into service in another ship; but the continuous-service men, though of equal merit in every respect, are bound to serve five years longer without any bounty whatever. But the
1250
advantage to the non-continuous-service man does not end there—he gets a suit of clothes, bidding, and kit, complete, worth £6, while the continuous-service man gets nothing.
SIR JOHN PAKINGTON: The continuous-service man has more than an equivalent for the bounty.
Sir JAMES GRAHAM: He will, at the end of ten years, have received an equivalent; but it will be doled out to him in small driblets, at each monthly pay; while the non-continuous man gets £10 in his hand and £6 worth in clothes.
SIR JOHN PAKINGTON: The non-continuance man will receive £40.
SIR JAMES GRAHAM: At the end of ten years he will have received £40 I admit; but still, when one man receives £10 in hand and clothes worth £6, and another gets £40 in small sums at the expiration of ten years, I appeal to the House whether the immediate effect is not likely to be discontent? Then the right hon. Gentleman says, no demand has been made for this gratuity. But can any doctrine be more dangerous than that? Why wait for demands? What was the cause of the mutiny at the Nore? The men made demands, but no attention was paid to them till those demands assumed a most dangerous and formidable shape; and then concessions were made in a manner most degrading to the State, and that produced no salutary effect. It is said this is great generosity on the part of the State. Let there be such generosity. I think the wisest possible course at the present moment is to treat our sailors with kindness, generosity, and due consideration. The hon. and gallant Admiral (Sir Charles Napier) takes to himself exclusively the merit of everything that has been done in favour of the sailor for the last thirty years; but, setting aside that claim, it has been the object of Governments for the last thirty years to improve the condition of our sailors, and the concessions of the late Government, founded as they were upon justice, seem to me to have been based upon sound policy. I think the question is not one of generosity, of discontent, or contentment, but of justice. The hon. and gallant Admiral referred to a measure which I introduced in 1832, when I had the advantage of the advice of the late Sir Thomas Hardy, who was better acquainted with the feelings, the habits, and the prejudices of sailors, and the motives by which they are actuated, than any officer I have

1251
ever known. With the view of averting the necessity of impressment I introduced that measure, giving Her Majesty, at the commencement of a war, or when war was imminent, or when invasion was expected, the power of issuing a Proclamation calling for the service of seafaring men within a short period—six or twelve days—and of offering to all men who volunteered within that limited time double bounty. By the advice of Sir Thomas Hardy I included in that Bill a provision which, after debate, received the sanction of this House, that a bounty being given to new-comers an equal bounty should be given to all men then serving in the fleet. The object of that Act was to abolish the system of impressment. The hon. and gallant Member for Southwark, in a pamphlet published in 1840, referred to circumstances which had occurred in the Mediterranean, and pointed out what appeared to him the disadvantages of the enactment. I thought, upon mature consideration, that the objections were well founded, and in 1853 I introduced a measure materially altering the Act of 1832, and enabling the Queen to issue a Proclamation, not to all seafaring men, but to classes between certain ages, and leaving the question of the gratuity to the advisers of the Crown. So the law now stands; but I am bound to say that upon every principle of equity, and upon every consideration of policy, I am convinced, in the first place, that no Proclamation for compulsory service can be issued without the concomitant offer of a bounty, though I think the offer of a bounty ought to be reserved for that great emergency; and secondly, that whenever a bounty is offered to new recruits a gratuity must be given, not perhaps of an equal amount, but of a considerable amount, to all men already serving in the fleet. I think you cannot avoid the risk of serious discontent without taking that step, and in my opinion it, is demanded by strict equity. I deny that it is impossible to man the fleet quickly without a bounty. On this occasion a bounty has been offered in a time of peace. It was my duty to man a fleet in time of war without a bounty, and I succeeded in doing it; not I, but an officer of the highest merit, who was associated with me—Sir Maurice Berkeley—who was entirely opposed to a bounty, and who, in the extremity of war, and amid all the difficulties of manning the fleet at that time, steadily resisted the offer of a bounty. The gallant Admiral (Sir Charles Napier) says, that the
1252
fleet on that occasion was manned by tinkers, tailors, and Lord Mayor's men. Well, Sir, there may have been tinkers, and there may have been tailors, in every ship on the station; but there were captains in that fleet who, satisfied with their crews, were ready to follow with their men into any action and into any danger in which the gallant Admiral was prepared to lead them. I can appeal to Sir Henry Keppel, who commanded the St. Jean d'Acre—to Admiral Elliot, who commanded a screw line-of-battle ship, and to the present Secretary to the Admiralty (Lord Clarence Paget), who commanded the Princess Royal, and I would ask them whether those "tinkers and tailors" were not men in whom they placed such confidence that they were ready to encounter any fleet that might have dared to engage them. So much, then, for the experience of manning the fleet without a bounty in time of war. I say, again, that in time of peace I consider the bounty to have been a rash and an inexpedient measure. I hold, however, the gratuity to be an inevitable concomitant to the offer of the bounty; and if the result should be to render future Governments more cautious in offering a bounty in time of peace, with reference to the inevitable expenditure occasioned in the shape of a gratuity, without which gratuity they would run the risk of creating discontent in the fleet, I, for one, shall be extremely glad that that salutary effect of greater caution has been produced. The bounty having been given, I cannot object to the necessity and prudence of voting the sum now demanded.
SIR CHARLES NAPIER: The right hon. Baronet says I took credit for all that has been done for the sailor during the last thirty years, I did no such thing. I say so distinctly. It is untrue. [Cries of "Order!"] What I took credit for was obtaining the appointment of the Committee which was the means of doing much that has lately been done for the good of the service. The right hon. Baronet says he manned the fleet. He man the fleet! Prettily the fleet was manned. There never was a fleet sent to sea in such a disgraceful state as the Baltic fleet. He refers to Sir Henry Keppel and to Admiral Elliot. Why does he not refer to other officers? He knows how the ships were manned as well as I do, and every officer in that fleet knows that it was shamefully and disgracefully manned. The fleet was a disgrace to the British Navy. And I will tell the right hon. Baronet further that if he will allow

1253
me to produce his own letters, and Sir Maurice Berkeley's private letters to me, referring to the way in which that fleet was manned the House will be astonished. I am not sure that I am doing my duty in not producing those letters; and I ask the right hon. Baronet now to let me come down to the House with them on another day, and they will show how the fleet was manned.
SIR JAMES GRAHAM: The gallant Admiral has already taken that liberty by producing my private letters without my consent.
SIR CHARLES NAPIER: Not all of them. Will the right hon. Baronet allow me to produce the rest of the letters?
MR. W. WILLIAMSexplained, that though the noble Lord the Secretary of the Admiralty commanded the Princess Royal in the Baltic, he was not captain of that ship when the abominable flogging of which he had complained took place.
Vote agreed to.

SUPPLY—ARMY ESTIMATES.
(7.) £410,000, Embodied Militia.
MR. SIDNEY HERBERT: At this late hour of the night I think that the Committee will be of opinion that the more I condense my statement in moving the Army Estimates the better it will be. There is the less necessity for my going into much detail because the greater part of the effective Votes for the army were taken in the last Session of Parliament. Only one Vote was taken on account, and only the non-effective ones remained to be voted. After the very frequent discussions which we have had during the last two or three days upon the subject of the force now in England I need not enter into particulars upon that question. My gallant Friend who preceded me in office (General Peel) has already in the course of the evening explained the exact amount of the military force in Great Britain, and my right hon. Friend has accurately stated that we have now in England, if we include the Indian depots, 110,000 men of all ranks. Of that number 23,000 men belong to the embodied militia. The hon. Member for Invernessshire (Mr. Baillie) objects that the militia ought not to form part of the permanent and first force of England; it was properly a reserve force; and that if it were necessary to make use of that reserve in time of peace we should have nothing to fall back upon in time of war. I
1254
entirely concur in that opinion; but then it must be remembered that my gallant Friend had to administer the army in times of singular difficulty. He had suddenly to raise our forces by several battalions, and to send to India, to meet an unprecedented emergency, all the troops upon whom he could lay his hands. Under these circumstances I think he acted wisely in calling upon the militia to afford by embodiment a substitute for the battalions of which England was necessarily denuded, and also in maintaining these regiments embodied until the return of a portion at least of these troops from India would enable him to dispense with their services. I am sorry to say that since the late Government determined to take a Supplemental Estimate for this purpose we have been prospectively deprived of the return of two or three of these battalions by the mutiny which has broken out in the local European army. In spite of that, however, there are coming from India six battalions of infantry, one regiment of cavalry, and a large portion of the military train which has been used as a cavalry force in that country. We have also a battalion coming home from Canada. It would not, however, I think, be advisable to disembody a corresponding force of militia upon the arrival of these troops. Next year, if we get a large force from India and can count a large army—a fair army—of regular troops in this country, it may be wise to disembody the regiments of militia, and to trust to that force as a reserve, and as a reserve alone; but before that is done it will be necessary for the Government to look most carefully and anxiously into the state of the disembodied militia. I do not wish to enter into that question now, because it must necessarily come under our consideration upon the Vote for the disembodied militia; but there is no doubt that at present that force to a great extent exists only upon paper, and that the training now coming on will show a lamentable deficiency in its ranks. I will not, therefore, at present allude to the measures which the Government may, with the sanction of the House, take to mitigate this evil, but I think it fair that the country should know what are its real resources, and should not rely upon that which upon paper may appear extremely formidable, but in reality is very weak. Our Ordnance force, small as it is, has of late years been admirably administered. We have now got what we never had be-

1255
fore, 180 guns completely horsed and equipped and ready for service, and, I think, 100 in reserve. This is a great improvement, for which we are, I believe, greatly indebted to the zeal and excellent administration of the gallant Officer who preceded me at the War Office. A few years ago there was a great deal of dissatisfaction in this House at the formation of the camp at Aldershot, and the Gentlemen who moved the Army Estimates had frequently great difficulty in obtaining the Votes which were required for carrying out that scheme. There were great complaints that it did not answer the purpose of a camp; and there is no doubt that the English army, admirable as it is as a combatant army, has for years been extremely deficient in those auxiliary services upon which the efficiency of an army depends. Until late in the Crimean war our commissariat, military train, and medical staff were exceedingly deficient. I believe that of late years great pains have been taken with these services, and a great improvement achieved, and that nothing has more contributed to this result than the establishment of the camp at Aldershot. Within the last few days I have read a report from the General commanding at that camp as to how the troops have been engaged during a certain period. He says that the drill is good, that the second battalions, consisting of course of young recruits, have made remarkable progress, and that the embodied militia is in a state of efficiency which has astonished military men. It used to be said that at this camp nothing was done which would enable the soldier really and practically to learn camp life. I believe that much has been done to answer that objection. Earthworks are now thrown up by unpaid military labour—a very wise arrangement—and the engineers are making fascines, and instructing others in their manufacture. The General says that brigades of infantry and artillery have been sent out to encamp at a distance of fifteen miles off, and that under the hot sun which we have experienced during the last month these marches have been effected without a single man falling out of the ranks; that the men show the greatest aptitude in encamping, erecting temporary ovens and so on; and that there is a marked improvement in the facility with which these operations are conducted. The commissariat corps has been practised in the field. It accompanies the troops and purchases animals, slaughter-houses are esta-
1256
blished under the management of the troops, and all the operations for victualling the force are conducted as they would be in war. I frankly admit that there are in this country facilities for purchasing food and conducting every operation which would not exist in the case of actual warfare; but you cannot create difficulties for the purpose of overcoming them, and, as far as possible, the commissariat corps is exercised in the duties which it is intended to perform. Lastly, I may mention that crime has greatly diminished at Aldershot. During the last few months there has been a marked diminution in the number of deserters from the army. It is also stated that the health of the troops at Aldershot is something unequalled in the annals of the British or any other army. I do not think that so much importance ought to be attached to this as we may at first sight be disposed to attribute to it, because it must be borne in mind that while the ages of many of the battalions at Aldershot range only from 18 to 25, those of the men in an army on actual service generally vary from 18 to 40. I have no doubt, however, that a great improvement has taken place in the sanitary arrangements of the camp. Having said thus much with regard to general questions, I will now proceed to explain the Votes to which it is my duty to ask the Committee to assent. For the purpose of keeping up the Embodied Militia we ask for a sum of £410,000. Vote 8, for Wages, amounts to £108,000. A great portion of this expenditure, it must be remembered, is not for purely military purposes. For example, there is taken for the Royal Laboratory a sum of £49,000 for a sup ply of shot and shell to put the garrisons in the Mediterranean in complete order for three years. There has been a revision of the armaments at Gibraltar and Malta, and it is also necessary to keep up a large stock at these places for the use of the fleet. This sum is to be partially employed in making a provision of shot and shell at those places for no less than 15 line-of-battle ships, 30 frigates, 30 sloops, and about 60 gun vessels and gunboats. The Vote for the Royal Gun Factories is £4,842, which is taken merely for the purpose of hastening work already ordered, and completing work required for putting our garrisons in a proper state of defence in as many weeks as it would otherwise occupy months. The Vote for the Royal Carriage Department includes ten new batteries of 18-pounders, to be employed as a

1257
moveable force along the coast. This was recommended by the secret Committee which sat to inquire into the national defences. Perhaps the House would like to know what are the probabilities with regard to the delivery of the guns in course of manufacture by Sir William Armstrong. If the new buildings and machinery should be completed by the 1st of October, then I believe we may expect to have the delivery of 100 guns by the end of the year, and I hope we shall have something like 200 more in the course of the present financial year. After that the delivery will continue at a rate which will I hope soon enable us to have, both on board ship and for our land defences, a very great number of these formidable instruments of war. The next Vote, No 9, is merely for the clothing of the embodied militia, which of course would not have been necessary had this force been disembodied. The items for provisions, forage, fuel, &c, are necessarily proportionate to the number of men you intend to maintain. Vote 11 is for warlike stores for land and sea ser vice. Under this head there are several large items. First there is a sum of £60,000 for the purchase and repair of small arms; then comes £61,000 for iron ordnance and for the shells and fuses requisite for the service of Sir William Armstrong's guns. I need hardly mention the other items, but there is one of £225,000 for miscellaneous stores, of which I was not aware till a gallant Officer told me that complaint had been made of so large an amount being asked with so little specification of details in the Estimate. Some of the particulars, however, I can state. Among the articles hero included are various kind of metals, comprising copper, iron, and other materials necessary for store. But I will endeavour, before the Vote is again passed, to have all the particulars printed on a separate sheet, In this way a large sum has accumulated, and before the Vote is again taken I shall ascertain whether more information cannot be afforded in reference to it. I next come to a Vote of a very important character, namely, £123,500 for fortifications. It is most essential that some of these works, which have been sanctioned after long deliberation and much criticism, should be pushed on as rapidly as possible, and on that account we ask for some additional sums with which to expedite them. I need not now explain the general plan of the fortifications at Devonport, because it is not new,
1258
and has often been discussed in this House. We only propose to expend a larger amount this year to hasten on those works of defence. It is clear that if they are to be executed at all, they should be executed as speedily as possible. I take it that if England were attacked an unfinished fortification would be a much worse thing for us than none at all, because it would not only be incapable of defence in itself, but if taken by an enemy it might, perhaps, be easily turned against us. Then there is the case of Alderney. The item for that is very small, great progress having already been made with the work, and all that has now to be done being to complete the payments on Fort Touraille, and also for scarping some part of the island, which is now accessible, and can be made inaccessible by a simple process. Again, we have Portsmouth, where there are very extensive defences which have been for some time in course of construction, and large sums for which have already been voted by Parliament. Under this head items are included for the citadel, the South sea line of defence, the Stokes Bay line between Fort Monkton and Fort Gomer, and also some additions on the eastern side of Portsmouth. By these works, and the additions to be made to them, which will be as much as the engineers are likely to get through during the year, we shall have at a future and I trust not distant period formidable means of defence. At Portland there is a necessity for carrying out works which have not yet stood upon the Estimates at all. Portland is one of the finest harbours in the world, and is at present utterly defenceless, and if an enemy were to take possession of the island of Portland, he would have facilities for establishing himself on that island, from which it would be extremely difficult to dislodge him. It so happens that the work there can now be executed very economically, and at a great advantage, because it is proposed to form a citadel on the island by scarping the rock, and the materials obtained in forming it will go at once into the sea, and will thus create part of the great breakwater. It is also proposed to guard the principal entrance into the harbour by a large tower at the end of the mole carrying eighty or ninety guns, with another similar battery on the south of Weymouth Point. Smaller batteries will also be constructed for the lesser entrances. These defences will be so strong as, I hope, to make it quite impossible that Portland should ever fall into

1259
the hands of an enemy. At Milford Haven it is only proposed to continue the works now in progress. Large guns are to be put on the principal islands within the haven, so as to guard the approach to the dockyard. At a future time it will be necessary there to build some works inland to the south of the harbour, in order to repel any attack that might be made on the land side at Tenby, or some other part of the coast; but that does not yet appear in the Estimates. There is one thing which I have omitted to state with regard to Portsmouth. It is, that the defences there are at the entrance of the Solent, while there are none at the entrance at Spithead, and there is a difficulty in making them. I wished to take a large sum to commence the works with at the Horse-shoal, as it is called, at Spithead, opposite St. Helen's; but it is impossible that any outlay can under present circumstances be made on this work. We have got a very accurate survey of the whole of this position, and experiments are now about to be made with regard to the nature of the soil. I believe Sir Charles Pox is to give his assistance, in order to ascertain where the best foundations are on which to place the batteries, or whether it will be more advisable to have recourse to floating defences. I attach the greatest importance to these works; but it is impossible to proceed with them until the ground has been most carefully and accurately examined. The next Vote is for civil buildings. This includes, first, the school of gunnery at Shoeburyness. The House will not, I am sure, grudge anything which improves the skill of the army, and renders that great arm, the artillery, more efficient; and this school is absolutely necessary to afford that branch of the service the means of practice. Then comes the Storekeeper's department at Woolwich; and here there is a new magazine to be built, which will be attended with great economy to the country. The powder is now kept in old men-of-war, which like all floating wooden structures are very expensive. The annual cost of the floating magazines at Woolwich is £3,092; but for a total outlay of £12,000 you will have a solid, substantial building, saving the charge for watchmen, &c, and obviating the inconvenience of conveying the powder backwards and forwards from the vessels. There are also some alterations to be made at Chatham, several rooms to be added to Fort Pitt, and the medical school at Chatham to be reconstituted.
1260
There is also a Vote for the salaries of the teachers of the last-named institution. The present practice in the Medical Department of the army is, when candidates are wanted for that service, to advertise for them, and those candidates are examined by three officers selected for the purpose, or as more frequently happens to be the case, by three officers who can most conveniently be obtained. Before the Royal Sanitary Commission, of which I had the honour to be chairman, we had the most clear evidence from Sir Benjamin Brodie and other men of the highest eminence that the existing system is entirely nugatory and theoretical; and so little confidence has the Medical Department reposed in its own examinations that it sends the successful candidates to Chatham to receive fresh instruction in the very branches of science in which they are supposed to have already proved their proficiency. We wish to improve the system, first of all by adopting the plan pursued with great success by the East India Company, of having practised examiners, and afterwards, when the candidates who have passed go to Chatham, by teaching them not those general branches of medical knowledge which they can acquire at the civil schools much better than in the army schools, but only the specialties of army medical practice. Thus you will get the best young general practitioners from the civil schools, and will convert them at Chatham into excellent army medical officers. There they will learn the habits of troops and the diseases to which they are more particularly liable; they will learn how to treat gun shot wounds and study all the precautions required by different climates, especially by that of India, against ill-health, besides many other things which I am sorry to say army practitioners have hitherto never been instructed in previously to having to deal with military patients. I have to thank my hon. and gallant Friend opposite (General Peel) for the manner in which he adopted the suggestions of the Royal Commission, and it only remains for me now to carry out the scheme, as the Committee see the Vote for this purpose is by no means extravagant. In Vote 14 a small sum is taken for contributions to a railway station, for the convenience of embarking and disembarking troops at Aldershot. There is also £1,500 for a rifle range at Hythe, and £17,000 for a rifle range at Chatham. The only other item is for the erection of huts in the Ionian Islands,

1261
which is rendered necessary by the inability of the barracks there to accommodate the increased garrison. Vote 15 relates to the subject which I have already explained—the Medical School. I have now gone through the whole of these Votes, and I trust have made them as clear to the House as I can. At the same time I must frankly confess that, most of the great manufacturing establishments to which I have had occasion to refer have come under the War Department since I was connected with it; the press of business has prevented me seeing them with my own eyes, and I am not so well acquainted with the details as I ought to be, and I have therefore to crave the indulgence of the House in this respect. I beg to conclude by moving the first Vote, £410,000 for the expenses of the embodied militia.
GENERAL PEEL: So far from having anything to complain of in the manner in which my right hon. Friend has introduced these Estimates, I have only to thank him for the very complimentary manner in which he spoke of my services in the War Department; and I should not have had a word to say, but that these Supplementary Estimates are almost precisely those which it would have been my duty to propose to the House had I remained in office. These Supplementary Estimates do not arise from any increase in the original Estimates which I had the honour of submitting at the early part of the year, but they are rendered necessary by the circumstances which have arisen since the original estimates were framed, and it is now in the power of the Committee, if they do not approve of the items, to disallow them. If, for instance, they do not think it necessary that the embodied militia should be retained, they have only to strike out that item, and the proposal will fall to the ground. I thought it was absolutely necessary to retain them, and I am glad to see the present Government are of the same opinion. I perfectly agree with my right hon. Friend that the embodied militia, as a general principle, ought to be counted only as part of our reserve; but, of course, they will be perfectly useless even' in that capacity, unless they are well drilled, and I think it would be of great advantage if arrangements were made by which a large portion should be embodied by turns, so that every regiment may get a year's training in every five years. In that way you would render them much more efficient
1262
than by calling them out for twenty-one days every year. It is impossible that regiments so trained should be so efficient as those which have been embodied, and it is now acknowledged by the general commanding at Aldershot that most of our embodied militia regiments who have gone through this training are equal in efficiency to any regiment of the line. I also agree with the right hon. Gentleman that the state of the disembodied militia is not satisfactory. I expressed that opinion when I came into office, and one of the first things I did was to appoint a Commission to inquire into the reasons. I have not seen the Report of that Commission, but I believe it will be found that most of the regiments of disembodied militia are deficient in strength by at least one-third. I concur altogether in the testimony which the right hon. Gentleman has borne to the advantages of Aldershot Camp, and, so far from complaining of the expense, I think the country has cause to look upon the money expended there as very well spent. For defensive purposes it is the most beneficial outlay that has yet been made. The greatest advantage has been conferred by it on our Commissariat, Military Train and Medical Staff, and the system which has been adopted there of making the soldiers do everything for themselves has had the most beneficial effect upon their health. With respect to the Vote for fortifications, I observe that my right hon. Friend has adopted the same course that I myself proposed; and I wish the hon. Member for Lambeth to understand that the Vote is not an increase, but simply an advance for this year of Votes already sanctioned by Parliament. The Inspector General of Fortifications informed the Government that it would be a great advantage if a certain sum of money could be spent this year, and I thought it my duty to ask Parliament for it. Most of these items of expenditure have been occasioned by circumstances which have occurred since the original Estimates were framed. The additional number of line-of-battle ships built, and increase of the armaments of our great garrisons have made it necessary to increase the manufacture of stores at Woolwich; and, as it was discovered that the ammunition served out to the troops in India had been injured, the heat and damp having so affected the lubricating matter in the cartridges that the ball would no longer fit the rifles, all that ammunition has had

1263
to be withdrawn and fresh manufactured and sent out. We have also had to manufacture ammunition for the new Armstrong gun, for without ammunition of course the guns, would be useless. There is also a sum for the gunnery school at Shoeburyness, which is rendered necessary by our new ordnance, for, of course, without trained men our new guns would be of comparatively little service to us. That school will, I believe, be found of the utmost benefit to the country.
COLONEL P. HERBERTwas of opinion that the only mode by which the occasional panic with which England was afflicted was to put the defences of the country into such a state as would inspire everybody with confidence. A little irritability with France now and then would be a small penalty to pay for putting our armaments into a perfect state of efficiency. It was no doubt very agreeable to find business was being transacted between the Secretary for War and the gallant General (General Peel) on such amicable terms. But he thought there could be no harm in questioning some of the very favourable statements that had been so pleasantly agreed on between them. One of these statements was that the number of men available for home service was 110,000. Now he had already shown that this force included recruits and many other men unavailable for the public service. On turning to the Votes already passed he found our infantry was put down at 62,200 rank and file, besides 5,600 Foot Guards, making a total of about 68,000 men. That 62,200 rank and file were, however, not in the country. They had to furnish all the garrisons from Hong Kong to Quebec, and from New Zealand to the Mediterranean. He believed he was within the mark in taking 30,000 men for these garrisons; which would leave only 38,000 for the defence of this country. The recruits at the Indian depôts might be added to that number, but they could not be relied upon to meet the disciplined troops of France; while it should be recollected that only a limited portion of the militia had been embodied for any considerable length of time. We had not the power, in fact, to bring a respectable force into the field, and he maintained that until we could do so, taking care always that at least one-half were troops of the line, justice would not be done either to the officers who commanded, to the troops themselves, or to the interests of a great country like this. He did not
1264
advocate extravagant Estimates, but he thought there was an increase wanted in the bone and sinew of the English army—the rank and file was the cheapest addition that could be made to the army. Again, as to the strength of individual regiments, he thought that the number of 950 men was sufficient neither for peace nor for war. It was expensive in peace, because the establishment of officers was out of proportion to the number of men; while in time of war each regiment could furnish only 800 men fit for duty. Even that number was exclusive of men employed on recruiting service. But, leaving it at 800 men, they could not be relied on to be sent abroad, as some portion of the men should be left at home to form a depot. It was often urged as a good thing to have "skeleton" regiments. Skeleton regiments might do very well on the Continent, where no difficulty was found in filling them up when an emergency occurred; but the case was different in this country. On this subject he would mention an anecdote he had heard in Italy a few days before. Shortly before the war an Austrian regiment stood at 3,000 men. That regiment got orders for service, and it became necessary to increase the men. Well, what was done? Within eight days the rank and file of that regiment was increased to 6,000 men, and it came down to the gates of Vienna, waiting in arms to know what part of the empire it was to go to. Those new men were not mere recruits, such as we were forced to pick up in our fairs and market towns; they were all of them men who had served their two or three years in the service, and who had been sent home until called on to finish their full time of service. That was the system which was adopted, and could only be adopted in despotic countries. But he was not aware of any means by which in this country men could be so sent to their homes, and obliged to wait until again called on for active service. Therefore, in his opinion, the skeleton system was not adapted to this country. He hoped also that recourse would not again be had to the stop-gap system which was adopted during the Russian war; he meant the system of volunteering from one regiment to another. The consequence of that system was that one regiment was gutted of its men in order to bring another up to a war establishment and that the recruits who were sent out to join their regiments in the Crimea did not in many cases know how to load their

1265
muskets. The objections to the present mode of reinforcing the infantry were equally applicable to the cavalry. The yearly expense of the regiments as they now stood, including all ranks, was £26 per head, but by adopting the system that he recommended they could add men to the rank and file at rather less than £20 per head. In the one case they could get for a given sum of money 14,000 men added to the army, but in the other case about 20,000. The system of expansion might be perfectly well provided for by dividing the regiments into two wings and throwing the recruits upon them. They could add to their army much more rapidly by dividing one regiment of 1,200 men into two wings and adding recruits to it, than by raising a 2nd battalion upon a weak depôt. The regiments should have twelve companies of never less than 100 men each. The expense of adding to all the regiments in the manner he suggested would be about £400,000. The hon. and gallant General (General Peel) had alluded to some remarks made by an hon. Member (Mr. Baillie) early in the evening with respect to the embodied militia. His hon. Friend however did not object to an embodied militia, but to that militia being allowed longer than absolute necessity required to be a substitute for regular soldiers. An embodied militia cost as much as new regiments of the line.
SIR HARRY VERNEYthought it was to be regretted that we lost many of our soldiers just at the time that they had become efficient, and suggested that with the view of inducing the ten years' service men to remain in the army a small addition should be made to their pay. Those soldiers were the most healthy who were the most employed in garrison, and less crime was committed in those garrisons in which the men were well employed than in those in which they were idle. In the barracks in France the men themselves made almost every article of clothing that they required. Why could not the men in our own barracks be similarly employed? In every French company so many men were employed to cook, others to purchase food or other duties. The French soldier was taught to do everything for himself. Why should not our men be taught to do the same as far as practicable?
SIR FREDERICK SMITHsaid, the clothing and accoutrements in the French service were not made by each man for himself, but a company in each Regiment was
1266
employed for that purpose. In his opinion, with reference to our coast defences, he thought we did not act in a business-like manner with respect to them. The Estimates for the defences at Devonport were £320,000, but only £10,000 had been asked for this year. That appeared to be trifling with a very great subject. If these works of defence were needed at all why were they not undertaken boldly and at once? It was more injurious than beneficial to deal in a paltry way with great works. Then when all these defensive works now in contemplation were completed he wanted to know where the garrisons were to come from? He thought that there ought to be a Commisson to settle what our defences ought to be, and to settle the matter once for all. There were two or three other items which he wished to notice. "For examination of sites of works of defence of St. Helen's passage." Now, he knew that five years ago Sir Charles Fox gave in a special plan for the foundation of the works, but what had been the cause of the delay he did not know. Then, as to Portland, the right hon. Gentleman had justly said that it was one of the finest harbours in the world, but it was a harbour without defence. Though he was not one of those who thought this country would be invaded by the French, he considered that they ought to put it in a state of defence. If they were to defend the country at all they ought not to leave a harbour like that without as much as a battery to protect it. No time was to be lost. It was the advanced post. It was opposite to Cherbourg, and it was the right wing of the navy as Dovor was the left. Large works were proposed at Dovor, and small sums were taken. No military man believed that if we were invaded it would be at Dovor. There were abundance of places which would be preferred by an enemy, and yet they were laying out hundreds of thousands of pounds upon Dovor, which would never be a point of attack. Having made these few observations, he should leave the Motion in the hands of the Committee.
GENERAL UPTONsaid, he understood the late Secretary for War to recommend that the regiments of militia should be embodied for one year, and that the training for twenty-one days should be dispensed with. His opinion was that no regiment of militia should be embodied for a less period than two years, and that the period of training of the disembodied mili-

1267
tia should be increased to at least one month. His reason for considering the period of one year too short was, that no regiment could so learn its duties in that time as not to forget them. In a military point of view two years was the least period which he should recommend. He also thought that with respect to the officers, who had given up other occupations, they should be kept together for at least two years.
COLONEL DUNNEsaid, there was a chorus of compliments to one another from Under Secretaries on the perfect state of defence and the perfect army which they asserted we possessed; but if they mixed, as he did, with military men, they would have a very different opinion. Every man would allow, at least in theory, that if we were to have an army we ought to have it at the least possible expense. But we paid more for our 110,000 men than any nation in the world for its whole military force, and far more than was necessary. The system of administration was faulty. Generally men were appointed to preside over the war departments who were not military men and who knew nothing about the army. They had lately had a general officer as Secretary for War, and praise was justly due to that gallant Gentleman; but if he possessed twice the powers of mind and twice the physical powers which he did he would defy him to perform all the duties which devolved upon him. He could not be responsible for half that was to be done. The Ordnance and half-a-dozen offices had been abolished, an admirable system had been broken up; it had not been replaced by any system whatever; a civilian, ignorant of military matters, was placed at the head of this confused and over-loaded Department, and the persons who assisted the Secretary knew nothing of soldiers' wants and requirements. There was a statement of the force on paper which every military man knew was not available. There was a great difference between the number of men on the muster roll and the number of men who could take the field. He believed that with all our expenditure of £10,000,000 or £11,000,000, it would be impossible to concentrate on any part of the island more than 30,000 men in case of emergency. He also thought it wrong that the military departments, beyond a limited extent, should become manufacturers. The system of small manufactories might be justified, but large es-
1268
tablishments were a great error in a country where the work could be equally well done by private enterprize. They had 28,000 militiamen effective, and they were a better class of men physically than even the men at present enlisted in the line. But they were obtained at the expense of the line, and the Secretary of State for War must know that there was a large number, from 4 to 6,000 wanting to complete the regiments of that service. They might vote as much money as they chose, but they did not get the men. Thus they were much under the nominal strength. And what were the line regiments recruited with, if not with boys not half formed? The system of recruiting was also, he thought, defective, because they had several different establishments for recruiting, which, by competition, defeated the object. They had the ordinary recruiting establishment, then the militia staff, and finally the pensioner staff, each bidding against one another for recruits and often in the same town. With respect to our fortifications, he should only say that the highest authorities pronounced them to be comparatively useless while left in the unfinished state they are at present. A work, which it was estimated would cost £200,000, was sometimes adopted by the House, while there was annually voted for its completion perhaps only £20,000, or even £10,000: what a time, then, must it take to finish such a work, and during that time it could not be considered a useful defence. Why not, if these defences were to be made, finish them at once? He found that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had not forgotten to extend the income tax to Ireland, but it seemed the Government did not attach much importance to the defence of that country or repose unbounded confidence in the loyalty and warlike ambition of the Irish, for he did not find in these Estimates a single shilling voted for Ireland, yet in Ireland many of the forts were fast going to decay. He should, therefore, recommend the Government seriously to direct their attention to the defences of the country. There were several other topics to which he should wish to advert, but at that late period of the night (a quarter to 12 o'clock) he should abstain from trespassing at greater length on the time of the Committee.
MR. MONSELLthought the observations of his hon. and Gallant Friend (Colonel Dunne) must apply to the state of things which prevailed when he had been

1269
connected with the Ordnance Office, rather than to that which at present existed. He had, at all events, made statements in reference to the manufacturing department, which by no means tallied with his (Mr. Monsell's) experience. He, under those circumstances, wished to ask his right hon. Friend the Secretary for War whether, in the principal manufacturing departments for small arms, only one stock arm—the Minie rifle—was made? and whether it was the fact that the influence of their manufacture on the trade generally was such that the Minie rifles made in the Enfield factory were purchased at a lower proportionate rate than those which were obtained by contract? If that were so, that disposed of some of the objections of the hon. and gallant Officer Colonel Dunne. Then, as to Alderney, after expending £190,000 upon the fortifications of Alderney, besides £10,000 upon the citadel, it had been said that there was a hill in the neighbourhood which commanded the works and he should like to hear if any statement had been made on the subject by any official personage. Again, it was said that much money had been expended on the works at Gibraltar and Malta, which, he believed, had been carried out through the recommendations of a Commission sent out by General Peel. He would further ask upon whose authority the right hon. Gentleman relied for the construction of fortresses? The Director General of Ordnance was formerly the official adviser in these matters; but that office had now been abolished, and it was therefore desirable to know on what authority the Government proceeded.
COLONEL GILPINsaid, he willingly bore testimony to the success by which the erection of a camp at Aldershot had been attended—a success which was, he must say, to a great extent attributable to the gallant officer who filled the post of commandant, notwithstanding that observations depreciatory of his merits had found their way into the public prints. It was owing to the exertions of that gallant officer that the raw levies which had been sent to the camp had been so soon transformed into well disciplined soldiers, and that the review which had taken place there a few days ago was as perfect as anything of the kind could be expected to he. His object in rising, however, was not so much to bear testimony to the success of Aldershot as to put a question to the Government with respect to the disallowance of forage to a
1270
certain extent to the officers of Militia and Staff generally. The sum originally allowed fur the keep of a horse to particular officers was 2s. a day, but that allowance had since been reduced to Is. 6d. Great complaint, however, was occasioned by the reduction, and the amount allowed had subsequently been raised to 1s. l0 d. Now, he believed the forage contract for the whole army was at the rate of Is. 9d. a day; and if that were so, he should like to know how the sum he had mentioned could be supposed to be adequate in the case of the officers to whom he referred?
MAJOR STUARTcomplained of the inadequate accommodation of the barracks at Dovor and the want of a school-house there?
GENERAL PEELhoped he would be allowed to answer the question put by the hon. and gallant Member for Bedfordshire (Colonel Gilpin) with respect to the forage for horses. There was 1s. 6d. a day allowed for forage, with the addition of 6d. for the stable to those officers who had no stables. Those who had stables had been, however, receiving 2s. a day likewise. Finding that the latter were receiving more than they were entitled to, the allowance to such officers was reduced to 1s. 6d. It having been represented to him that that sum was insufficient, he added 25 per cent to the contract price, which made it 1s. l0 d. Those who had not stables received 6d. in addition, which made the allowance to them 2s. 4d. In respect to the school near Dovor, the hon. Gentleman would find that there was a Vote taken for it in the general Estimates.
SIR MORTON PETOwished to call attention to the want of harmony in our military arrangements, which operated as a great impediment in the Administration of the War Department. During the Crimean war, when the attention of every one was directed to the efficiency of the service, he paid a visit to one of the camps in this country, and found that though the huts were erected the means of access to the camp by roads were quite neglected. The next thing which struck him was the fact that a regiment of cavalry was ordered there, although there was not a stable to receive the horses. Such an oversight could not arise if proper communication was maintained between the different departments. He paid a visit to the camp at Shorncliffe last week, and although it had been established four or five years there had been no drainage whatever, and

1271
it was only now that they were laving down pipe-drains, although any person with the slightest knowledge or foresight would have done so before he began to build. The House was now voting money without stint for the two services, but unless these practical questions were grappled with there would never be that efficient direction of affairs which would be necessary upon any emergency. Now, his engagements upon public works in Sardinia had led him to observe the admirable administration of the French army during the war just happily ended, and anything more opposite to our Crimean experiences he could not conceive. The reports of his agents and the result of his own observation showed that the administration of the French army was characterized by just that sort of conceit and forethought which would be displayed by any mercantile firm; and unless our military authorities would put aside the routine which only enabled them to walk in a certain track, and unless they would deal in a businesslike way with the questions which came before them, depend upon it when another time of crisis came there would be the same difficulties and the same disasters as were experienced in the Crimea. He recollected perfectly well that during the Russian war a member of the Government who went on board of one of the steamers going out to the East for the formation of the Balaklava railway inquired the use of a quantity of tarpauling that was on board. When told that it was quite impossible to have huts ready for the use of the large number of workmen directly on landing, and that the tarpauling was therefore allotted among them so that they might at once have shelter while their huts were building, it was thought an admirable arrangement, and he (Sir Morton Peto) was asked if it was possible to make the same provision for the army. His reply was that as his influence with the railway companies would give him the command of all their stores, he would undertake to provide any quantity during the next two or three days. Immediate application was accordingly made to the War and Ordnance Departments; but they were referred to the Tower, and it was found so impossible to get through the routine which was interposed that he went to the Duke of Newcastle and asked him to break through this routine, the result of which was that a great quantity of tarpaulings was sent out. In making these observations he did
1272
not intend to impeach the conduct of this or any Government, but there was evidently a great fault somewhere in our military organization, and he repealed that unless the authorities transacted their business in the simple and practical manner of mercantile firms, their administration, when another emergency arose, would be found as much wanting as it was in the Crimea.
COLONEL NORTHsaid, the hon. Baronet's praise of the French military organization was perfectly well deserved; but was not the perfection of that system due to the fact that the office of Minister of War was always held by one of their most distinguished military commanders. He did not refer to his right hon. Friend, because under no Administration had the army benefited more largely than under his. But according to our system the army, generally speaking, was in the hands of men who probably did not know whether a soldier wore his pouch over his left shoulder or his right. In this country, where the War Secretary must be in Parliament, it might be difficult to carry out such a system; but he believed that the reason the French and Sardinian armies were in so efficient a condition was because those armies were administered by officers of experience and distinction, and not as in England by civilians, who knew nothing of the feelings and the prejudices of the soldier.
SIR MORTON PETOsaid, that nothing could be more lamentable than the administration of the army during the Crimean war—the horses eating off each other's tails, while there was plenty of hay on board the ships in Balaclava harbour. He was sorry to see distinguished persons, who had served their country with great distinction, rising up in that House and making alarming speeches about the intentions of the Emperor of the French. He thought we should do well to imitate the administrative ability of our powerful neighbour, and put the country at once into an efficient state of defence without talking so much about it.
MR. SIDNEY HERBERTsaid, the gallant Officer opposite (Colonel Herbert), who observed that the whole of the force which the War Department enumerated as being in England was not directly available. He was ready to admit there was some truth in that statement, and that the men composing depots could not be reckoned on the same footing of efficiency as trained men serving in battalions of the line. As

1273
to the remark of the gallant Officer that the constitution of the battalions had been altered for the worse, there were now 950 men in the battalions, and nothing was so easy as to augment the number at a comparatively small cost, should circumstances render such an increase desirable. Again, it had been said we were losing the ten years' men. It was not, however, the fact that we were losing them from any unwillingness to re-enlist them. He might be permitted to say that some years ago, when in office, he proposed to constitute a reserve of such of those ten years' men as did not wish to continue in the service, by offering them some annual payment. Circumstances prevented that arrangement being carried out, and during the war the Government exercised the power of continuing the service of the men beyond the ten years. The result had been to give rather an additional inclination to the ten years men to leave the service than to continue in it. A measure, however, was now under consideration by which the Government hoped to be able to secure the services of those men. With respect to the complaint as to the number of manufactories carried on by the Government, he admitted that he himself had a bias against those establishments, for it was asserted that in many of the departments in which the Government were their own manufacturers they could get contracts from the trade at a cheaper rate, but at the same time no doubt that cheaper rate was obtained by the check which the Government manufactories had upon the private establishments. In particular branches of manufacture where there was no civil demand running concurrently with that of the Government it might be advantageous to have recourse to a Government establishment. He would remind the hon. and gallant Member for Queen's County (Colonel Dunne) with a view to correct a misapprehension he appeared to be under, that our army was scattered all over the world, that we had 90,000 in India, for instance; and, of course, there must be a certain interval between the creation and supply of vacancies, but there was not so great a deficiency in the number of effective men as the hon. and gallant Member seemed to suppose. The Parliamentary Vote was for 229,000 men in round numbers. We had got 220,000 as the number of effective men, and considering how large a part of the army was employed in our distant possessions, he did not think 9,000 men consti-
1274
tuted a very great deficiency. His hon. friend (Sir M. Peto) had referred the Committee to the Crimean war; but he thought it was not quite fair to refer for examples to a system excessively cumbrous in itself, and which had grown rusty, against one that had entirely supplanted it. The various departments of the army were not then under one head, and there was no doubt that the system was inapplicable to the purposes of war. It might be true that our existing system was faulty; but if it was faulty, he was ready to learn, and, having learnt, he should be ready to propose the necessary changes. He advised the Committee to lose no time in getting the best information they could from the most competent witnesses to enable them to come to a practical conclusion as to the best organization of the War Department. He had recently served on a Commission which had visited many of the barrack establishments in England and Ireland, and he might say he was almost appalled at the amount of work to be done in order to place them on a satisfactory footing. They were not only deserving but having the most earnest attention of the Government, and he hoped he might count upon the support and assistance of the House in carrying the work forward to completion. He trusted the Committee would now allow the first Vote to be taken.
CAPTAIN LEICESTER VERNONsaid, he wished to draw attention to one great fact—that they were about to vote £12,000,000 upon the Army Estimates, and out of that large sum only £3,500,000 went towards the fighting men. The whole of the rest went to the Staff and such like, and thus the mere fighting men only received l–27th of the whole. The home Staff cost £131,951; the foreign Staff, £180,326; the total Staff, £312,287. The department of the Secretary of Warcost £101,000; of the Commander-in-Chief, £185,000. The supplemental Staff cost £4,241 for services which could be just as well performed by the district Staff. He could point out a good many Staff appointments that were not very useful, and he trusted that the Secretary for War would look into this subject, and endeavour to reduce the enormous expenses of the Staff of the army.
vote agreed to, as were the following:—
(8.) £108,375. Wages of Artificers, Labourers, &c.
(9.) £300,000. Clothing and Necessaries.
(10.) £93,180. Provisions, Forage, &c. House resumed.
Resolutions to be reported To-morrow.

CRIMINAL JUSTICE, MIDDLESEX (ASSISTANT JUDGE) BILL.

  COMMITTEE.
  Order for Committee read.
  MR. CRAUFURD MR. CRAUFURD moved as an Instruction to the Committee that they should have power to extend the provisions of the Bill to all persons holding judicial appointments in the United Kingdom. His object was to raise the question generally of the advisability of all persons holding judicial appointments giving up their practice at the bar. The original proposal was, that the Government should pay this additional salary to the Assistant Judge, but now it was provided that it should be paid out of the county rates. It was the magistrates of the county who sought the increase of salary as long as it was paid out of the public funds; but now that it was proposed to pay the sum out of the funds of the county of Middlesex they objected, and sought to strike the clause out of the Bill. If that was done the Assistant Judge would be deprived of his practice, and only have the lower salary. He objected to legislation for this particular case. They ought to at once legislate on some broad and general principle, applicable to all persons holding similar judicial appointments.
  Motion made, and Question proposed,—
  "That it be an Instruction to the Committee that they have power to extend the provisions of the Bill to all persons holding judicial appointments in the United Kingdom."
  SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, that no practical benefit would arise from this Amendment. Under the late Judge inconvenience sometimes arose from his being at liberty at the same time to practise at the bar. It was now proposed that if the magistrates granted £300 additional to the salary of Assistant Judge, he should be debarred from private practice. The Bill was limited to the single object, of raising the salary of the Assistant Judge of Middlesex on the condition of his relinquishing his private practice, and the general question of relinquishment of private practice by judicial officers was not raised by it. The hon. and learned Gentleman sought to engraft upon the Bill a wholly new principle. Under such a regulation recorders in England, assistant barristers in Ireland, and sheriffs in Scotland would be prevented
  1276
  from practising as they at present could do. He hoped the House would not adopt the proposition of the hon. Gentleman.
  Motion put, and negatived.
  MR. CRAUFURD MR. CRAUFURD moved, that the Committee be postponed for three months, and, in reply to the observations of the Home Secretary, said, that County Court Judges were prohibited from private practice.
  No hon. Member having seconded the Amendment,
  House in Committee.
  Clause 1. (The Justices of Middlesex may grant £300 a year out of the County Rates as an addition to the Salary of the Assistant Judge.)
  MR. BYNG MR. BYNG moved the omission of the clause and stated that he did so in accordance with the views of the magistrates of Middlesex, who thought that the additional £300 proposed by the clause to be given to the Assistant Judge ought not to be paid out of the county rates.
  SIR GEORGE LEWISreminded the hon. Gentleman that the clause was permissive not compulsory. If the magistrates believed as they had represented to the Government, that it was an injury to the public that the Assistant Judge should be allowed to retain his private practice they would pay him the £300; but if on the other hand, they did not think so, then they would not pay it. It was for them to consider whether the evil arising from the Judge continuing to practise was or was not equivalent to £300 a year.
  MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, he did not oppose the Bill now as the additional salary was not to be charged upon the Consolidated Fund; but whenever any proposal should be made to the magistrates of Middlesex to increase the salary of the Assistant Judge he, as one of them, should oppose it.
  SIR JOHN SHELLEYthought the public interest was rather lost sight of. If it was an evil that the Judge should practise at the bar, that evil would continue if the magistrates did not choose to pay £300 a year from the county rates. He thought eligible persons could have been found to fill the office with the present salary and who would consent to give up their private practice.
  SIR WILLIAM JOLLIFFEobserved that the salary of the Assistant Judge had always been paid by the Government. It was admitted that his continuing to practise was a great public inconvenience, and

  1277
  the question was whether a salary of £1,200 a year was sufficient to obtain a competent man; if it was not, the Government ought to pay whatever was sufficient.
  SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, this was not a gratuitous proposition of his. The present holder of the office, Mr. Bodkin, accepted it on a distinct promise from the late Government that if debarred from private practice he should receive a salary of £1,500 a year.
  MR. CRAUFURDopposed the contract because it was entered into without the authority of the House.
  Question put, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."
  The Committee divided:—Ayes 167; Noes 33: Majority 134.
  Clause agreed to, as were the remaining clauses.
  MR. E. P. BOUVERIE, on the question that the Preamble he agreed to, moved a Clause.
  "That so soon as the present Assistant Judge shall cease to hold his office as such Judge, the 10th Section of the said Act shall be repealed so far as relates to the salary of any future Assistant Judge; and it shall then be lawful for the said Justices, in Sessions as aforesaid, to resolve that an annual salary of not less than £1,200 and not exceeding £1,500 in the whole, be paid to the Assistant Judge of the said Court; and thereafter such Judge shall not practise as a Barrister nor hold any other office, during his tenure of such Assistant Judgeship; and such salary shall be paid by equal quarterly payments out of the County Rates of the said County, with a due appointment thereof in the case of the death or resignation of the Assistant Judge for the time being during the currency of any quarter."
  Clause brought up and read 1°
  Question proposed "That the said Clause be read 2°"
  MR. BYNGsuggested that if the county paid, the county should have the power of appointing. At present the Government appointed.
  SIR GEORGE LEWISadmitted the justice of the proposal, but as the practice had been in existence some years, he felt some difficulty as to the course he should adopt. Middlesex stood in a peculiar position. First this court had a large share of criminal business; and secondly the Court of Quarter Sessions had concurrent jurisdiction with the Central Criminal Court. The Recorder and Common Serjeant received high salaries, and their time was not fully occupied; but if an arrangement between the Judges and the Assistant Judge of the Quarter Sessions for a better division of the business, and economising the time, could be made, it
  1278
  would be desirable. He hoped his right hon. Friend would not press his clause.
  MR. EDWIN JAMESthought it better that the Bill should be withdrawn. The Chairman of the Surrey Quarter Sessions, who had concurrent jurisdiction with the Central Criminal Court, tried almost as many cases as the Chairman of the Middlesex Court of Quarter Sessions, and yet he received no salary at all.
  VISCOUNT DUNCANhoped his hon. Friend would press the clause.
  MR. AYRTONsaid, the Bill was presented to the House in an extremely crude form, and he moved that the chairman report progress.
  LORD JOHN MANNERSsaid, the Bill proposed by the late Government on this subject was, at any rate, consistent and intelligible, but the present Bill did not seem to find favour with any section of the House. He, therefore, joined in the recommendation that it should be withdrawn.
  SIR GEORGE LEWISobserved, that the measure had been deemed so far satisfactory that it had been passed with almost unanimous consent, and the present discussion arose upon a clause proposed by the right hon. Member for Kilmarnock, which did not deal precisely with the subject-matter of the Bill, but which would have a prospective effect. If the House thought fit virtually to repeal the Act of 1844, by which the salary of £1,200 a year was charged upon the Consolidated Fund, he could have no objection.
  SIR WILLIAM JOLLIFFEthought the Bill ought to be withdrawn.
  MR. HENLEY, approving the first portion of the right hon. Gentleman's proposition, the object of which was to remove the charge of the salary from the Consolidated Fund, recommended him to withdraw the latter portion of the clause, and so confine the clause to the prospective repeal of the 10th clause of the Act.
  MR. E. P. BOUVERIEexpressed his readiness to assent to the suggestion.
  MR. AYRTONsaid, as the question was one of great importance, and could not be satisfactorily settled at that hour, he would press the Motion that the Chairman leave the Chair.
  Motion made, and Question put, "That the Chairman do now leave the Chair."
  The Committee divided:—Ayes 23; Noes 141: Majority 118.
  MR. AYRTONsaid, the House must either discuss the question or adjourn it.

  1279
  One course or the other must be taken. The question should be considered as one of justice to the whole country, and then it would be seen that it would not be just to transfer the charge from the Consolidated Fund to the county of Middlesex. He objected to this isolated metropolitan question being now determined; and he hoped the other measure connected with the metropolis would be withdrawn for the present, and that the whole broad subject would be fully considered in the next Session. He asked the House, was it a decent thing at that time of the night (past two after midnight) to persist in considering this subject piecemeal?
  Clause, as amended, agreed to.
  Preamble agreed to.
  House resumed.
  Bill reported.

POOR LAW BOARDS (PAYMENT OF DEBTS) BILL.—COMMITTEE.
Order for Committee read.
MR. C. P. VILLIERS MR. C. P. VILLIERS moved that this Bill be referred to a Select Committee.
Motion made and Question proposed, "That the Bill be committed to a Select Committee."
MR. WALTERsaid, it was too late at that hour (past two o'clock) to discuss this question, and if the Motion were pressed he should move the adjournment of the debate. If the measure was to be referred to a Select Committee, it was important to determine what parts of it were to be made the subject of inquiry. He decidedly objected to all the clauses which would have a retrospective action.
SIR GEORGE LEWISsaid, it would be in the power of the Select Committee to amend or even entirely to remodel the Bill.
MR. JOHN LOCKEcondemned the measure as vicious in principle, and opposed its being sent to a Select Committee.
MR. HENLEYthought the question ought to be discussed by the House, before they were asked to refer it to a Committee.
LORD JOHN MANNERSdid not oppose the measure, but to think of discussing it at that hour was absurd.
MR. EDWIN JAMESdenounced the second clause of the Bill.
VISCOUNT PALMERSTONassented to the adjournment of the Debate till tomorrow.
Debate adjourned till To-morrow.
The House adjourned at a quarter after Two o'clock.

MINUTES.
Sat First in Parliament.—The Duke of Leeds—after the Death of his Cousin; The Viscount Hood—after the Death of his Father.
PUBLIC BILLS.—2a Attorneys and Solicitors.

AFFAIRS OF ITALY.
  NOTICE OF MOTION WITHDRAWN.
  LORD STRATFORD DE REDCLIFFEsaid, that as he had lately postponed the Motion of which he had given notice on this subject in consequence of the receipt of the news of an armistice, he wished now to state that in consequence of the still more important news which had since been received the Motion would drop altogether. If at any future time it should be necessary to call attention to the correspondence laid on the table, it must be under a different form, and he would therefore now ask permission to withdraw the notice of Motion which he had placed on the table.
ATTORNEYS AND SOLICITORS BILL.

  SECOND READING.
  THE LORD CHANCELLOR, in moving the second reading of this Bill, said that its object was to improve the education of attorneys and solicitors. He would not dwell on the importance of that branch of the legal profession, or the confidence necessarily reposed in them in all the affairs of life. Although some amongst them, such as the late Mr. Roscoe, of Liverpool, had great literary acquirements, it was generally that they had not received a liberal education, being too much engrossed in early life by professional
  1188
  pursuits. This Bill was intended to facilitate and encourage literary studies in the case of young men designed for that profession—and for this purpose it offered certain advantages to those who should have taken a degree at Oxford or Cambridge, or at the Universities of Dublin, Durham or London, or in the Queen's University in Ireland. At present before a man could be admitted to practise as an attorney he must have served under articles for five years. It was now proposed that those who had taken University degrees should be admitted after serving three years in clerkship under articles. It was also proposed that any young man who had successfully passed the middle-class examination lately established throughout the country by the Universities of Oxford and Cambridge, should have his clerkship abridged by one year, so that it would only be necessary for him to serve under articles four years instead of five. Another clause extended the 6th and 7th Vic, c. 73, to persons articled for four years, one of which might be served with a barrister. Another clause of the Bill gave power to the Judges to form regulations by which, before an attorney entered into his clerkship, he should undergo an examination, and this examination should be reviewed before he was admitted to practice. These enactments were to extend to the attorneys of the counties palatine of Lancaster and Durham. It might be asked how these regulations would compare with those for the education of members of the bar. He was ashamed to say that this had been formerly in a very lamentable condition; but it was not necessary to introduce any legislative measure on the subject because the Inns of Court had abundant power in their hands to deal with it. A system had now been established, mainly through the exertions of his learned Friend Sir Richard Bethell, the present Attorney General, by which before any student was called to the bar by an Inn of Court, he must undergo an examination, or give proof of regular attendance at lectures. That system had already been productive of the best results, and it was to be hoped that the Bill now proposed would do as much to improve the education of the other branch of the profession.
  LORD BROUGHAMexpressed his approbation of the Bill.
  Bill read 2a and committed to a Committee of the whole House on Tuesday next.

HUDSON'S BAY COMPANY.

  QUESTION.
  THE EARL OF CARNARVONsaid, that before he put the Question of which he had given notice to the noble Duke opposite (the Duke of Newcastle) he would ask their Lordships' permission to make a few remarks upon the very important subject to which it referred. He wished to ask the noble Duke whether the Government proposed, during the present Session, to take any steps in reference to the North American Territories over which hitherto the Hudson's Bay Company have held an exclusive Licence of Trade with the Indians. Their Lordships were aware that the rights and claims of the Hudson's Bay Company to the territories which they now governed were of a two-fold character; first, that territory which they held round that great inland sea, the Hudson's Bay, and the rivers and streams that run into it, which they possesed by charter granted by Charles II.; and second, that vast district running inland to the base of the Rocky Mountains, and extending over nearly 1800 miles, which they held by virtue of an exclusive license to trade with the Indians. In 1821 an Act of Parliament was passed which empowered the Crown to issue licences for the occupation of this district, and advantage was immediately taken of it by the Hudson's Bay Company to obtain the occupation of the country. Those licences were renewed from time to time, and the last granted in 1838 for twenty-one years; they were now on the eve of expiring, and his right hon. Friend, who was lately at the head of the Colonial Office (Sir E. Bulwer Lytton), after the fullest consideration he could give to the subject, came to the opinion that it was inexpedient to renew the licence on the same terms as heretofore. Great changes were taking place, year after year, in that region of the world; British Columbia had risen to a very considerable position, and Canada itself had acquired a great augmentation of population and wealth. All these conditions were adverse to the renewal of the licence. There was a strong opinion, also, prevailing upon the subject both here and in Canada, adverse to the renewal of the licence. His right hon. Friend had therefore determined not to renew the licence. But as it was obviously a very dangerous policy to allow this extensive tract of country to remain altogether whithout a Government his right hon. Friend proposed to renew the Hud-
  1190
  son's Bay Company for one year, and afterwards he extended his offer to two years, to allow time for some other arrangement to be made for the government of the country; but the Hudson's Bay Company declined both offers. It was not for him to question the grounds on which they had come to that decision; but certainly, considering the long connection they had had with the district, the advantages they had hitherto derived from it, and the close relation in which they had hitherto been with the Indians, he thought they incurred a serious responsibility by their conduct. But he thought his right hon. Friend was justified in not offering to extend the renewal of the licence for more than two years, because in the course of that time they might expect great changes to take place over the whole northern portion of that continent. The rise of the colony of British Columbia had greatly fostered the growth of colonization there, and though it was not more than twelve months since that colony sprang into existence there was already a population there of 10,000 persons. In the course of the next two years, therefore, there was every reason to expect that arrangements would be made which would enable the Government to arrange for the government of this territory in a more satisfactory and permanent manner. As it was, the reasons which first formed the justification for granting the licences, and thus securing to the Hudson's Bay Company a practical monopoly of these hunting grounds, no longer existed. At the time when these licences were first granted there had been a feud between the Hudson's Bay Company and the North-West Company, in which blood was shed, and frequent atrocities committed, and it became necessary for the Government to interfere, at all hazards, to secure peace. At that time the Canadas and the other British North American provinces were in a very undeveloped state; questions of internal administration naturally occupied their attention, and diverted them from any connection with a district which geographically was then so far separated from them. If therefore those vast hunting grounds to the north-west, divided from Canada by lakes and rivers, and by an immense interval of space, had been placed under the Canadian jurisdiction, that jurisdiction would have been little more than nominal. On the other hand, to have abandoned the territory would have been to invite a recurrence of the old feuds.

  1191
  The exclusive licence was therefore bestowed on the Hudson's Bay Company. But now all these circumstances were materially modified. He certainly did not mean to argue the question of monopoly on general grounds, as he believed all their Lordships were convinced that a monopoly, except the most pressing necessity could be shown for its existence, was indefensible. But it was argued that there were such grounds to be urged in favour of the monopoly of the Hudson's Bay Company; and, first of all, it was said that their monopoly was essential to the welfare of the natives. Now, he was ready to admit that their rule over the natives had, been mild and on the whole beneficial; but they had kept them in the most absolute and child-like dependence on the Company not only for the luxuries and conveniences of life, but for the most common necessaries—for powder and shot, food and clothing. This state of things rendered it necessary to proceed with caution, lest the sudden withdrawal of that superintendence should prove destructive to the Indians; and therefore he trusted that the noble Duke, if he made any changes, would exercise the utmost vigilance as to their working, else the population of this district might be exposed to some serious catastrophe. Then it was said that this monopoly was the only means by which they could preserve the fur trade. Now, he was quite willing to admit the value of that trade, but surely it would not be maintained that it was the all-important subject for consideration in this House. He, for one, saw no difficulty in devoting a considerable portion of the territory—say the northern portion, which was most adapted for the purpose—to the fur trade; but the southern portion, which offered great facilities for colonization, ought no longer to be left waste for the purpose of stimulating the fur trade. The first object which the Government ought to have before them was as soon as possible to provide some provisional means by which persons might be authorized to dispense in a general way a rough sort of justice, or the power to decide cases of dispute both among the white settlers themselves and between the white men and the Indians; while all grave and serious offences might be sent to be tried at one or other of the neighbouring colonies—British Columbia on the Red River Settlement. Such a mode of administering justice ought to be sufficiently simple and elastic as to be capable of being adapt-
  1192
  ed to all the circumstances of the territory. It would not be necessary to have a large staff of magistrates for the purpose, but he would place them in much the same position that was occupied by the British vice consuls in the East. If they were at first well selected he was sure they would exercise great influence over the natives. There was one point more to which he wished to call the attention of the noble Duke. It was said that the country was impracticable for colonization. Now, he had already admitted that a considerable portion of the territory was so. But in the southern portion there were considerable tracts of good land. A Committee of the House of Commons had lately sat on this question, before whom witnesses were examined, who reported most favourably from personal experience of the capabilities of the country. They described it as abounding in wood and water. About two years ago an expedition started through the country, and they described the soil from the Red River Settlement to the base of the Rocky Mountains, and their testimony was to the same effect. This was the country where enormous herds of buffaloes were to be found, which, of course, argued something for the goodness of the pasture. He might add that the very same argument was used some years ago against the colonization of British Columbia, yet no one now denied that that country had in it all the elements of prosperity. It was true that gold had been the effectual means by which a population had been drawn to British Columbia and other new countries; but wherever nature afforded a fair prospect of reward to encourage the energy of man, there colonization might be expected to advance, if it were not precluded by impolitic restrictions. What he wished to impress upon the Government was, first of all, the necessity of establishing good communications between Canada and British Columbia; secondly, the formation of colonies—he did not care how small they were—which would indicate our title to the undivided sovereignty of the territory on the northern side of the boundary line; and, in the meantime, the establishment of a provisional system of government, and the appointment, as soon as possible, of magistrates, who might exercise more or less control and administer justice; above all, he would impress upon the Government that the privileges of a trading company ought not to he allowed to stand in the way of Imperial colonization. It was most

  1193
  important that no time should be lost in carrying these objects into effect, and he hoped that the noble Duke opposite would be in a position to state that steps would be taken immediately to do so.
  THE DUKE OF NEWCASTLEsaid, that the noble Lord had made so long and interesting a tour in North America, and travelled so far beyond the limits of the Question of which he had given notice that he was afraid that he might forget to answer all the points in detail. He recognized to its full extent the importance of this question, affecting the relationships of the Hudson's Bay Company with that immense tract of territory lying between the boundaries of Upper Canada on one side, and the higher portion of the Pacific Ocean on the other. He was not sure that, having so recently assumed the seals of the Colonial Office, he should, under ordinary circumstances, have been prepared to answer the question; but having paid a great deal of attention to the subject for some years, he could venture to do so without any fear of doing injustice either to the Hudson's Bay Company or the other important interests involved, inasmuch as twelve years since, as a private Member of the House of Commons, he brought the whole question of the relations of the Hudson's Bay Company with this territory before that House. The noble Earl, in the latter part of his observations, had travelled a good deal beyond the limits of what was termed the licence territory, and had encroached upon that portion of the country in which the Hudson's Bay Company exercised proprietary rights, and which was known as the charter district, from being held under a charter of Charles II. He had also touched upon negotiations which were still pending with the Hudson's Bay Company with respect to that charter, and therefore the noble Earl must excuse him if he did not follow him in detail upon that portion of the subject, and confined his observations to the licensed portion of the territory which lay between the Rocky Mountains and the ocean. The noble Earl asked whether the Government thought it was proper or not to advise Her Majesty to renew the licence of the Hudson's Bay Company, which, after having been in existence for forty two years, expired in May last. He so far differed with the noble Earl that he considered it was an extremely fortunate thing that the question had been left open, and that the Hudson's Bay Company did not ac-
  1194
  cept either of the offers made by the right hon. Baronet, after full consideration of the question, and, no doubt, with the best intentions towards them, for the extension of the licence for one or two years. He rejoiced that those offers were rejected, not only as they affected the interests of the Company, but the interests of other parties; because he was thoroughly convinced that it was far better that the question should be settled at once than that it should be delayed two or three years more, when, in consequence of the extension of colonization, the discovery of gold in British Columbia, and other circumstances, the settlement of the rights of the Hudson's Bay Company might have become an exceedingly difficult and embarrassing question. he would state at once to the noble Earl that it was not the intention of the Government to recommend Her Majesty to sanction a renewal of the licence to the Hudson's Bay Company for any time whatever; and therefore all that remained was to make such provisions for the government of that territory as were rendered necessary by the extinction of the power of the Company. No doubt it was desirable, as the noble Earl had said, that some provisions should also be made for the regulation of trade and securing the relation between the white settlers and the Indians, and for that purpose legislation would be necessary, but that legislation need not be of a very complicated character. Power would have to be taken to provide a magistracy for the settlement of disputes and the administratration of justice in all simple and ordinary cases, and in the course of a few days, the Government intended to introduce, either in their Lordships' House or the House of Commons, a measure authorizing the appointment of such magistrates. It would not be necessary in the first instance to go to any great expense in the matter by sending out magistrates from England; all that was required would be to select the most respectable and competent persons in the district, granting them power to deal summarily with small cases, but providing that in all cases of an aggravated description, the question of the amount of punishment should be awarded by a superior court; and therefore power would be given to remit such cases either to Canada or to British Columbia. Her Majesty's Government would also have to advise Her Majesty to lay down regulations of trade with the Indians, in order to prevent those excesses

  1195
  which unscrupulous traders would practise on the unhappy natives when all those restrictions were removed which were imposed by the Hudson's Bay Company, and the exclusive licences were done away with. He thought he had now answered succinctly all the questions of the noble Earl. But it appeared to him, that the main point to which the speech of the noble Earl was directed was the necessity of encouraging emigration as much as possible, in order to colonize the more southern portion of the late Hudson's Bay Company's licensed territory, and he also referred to that portion of the country on this side of the Rocky Mountains. Now he (the Duke of Newcastle) did not think it necessary that the Colonial Office should take any decided steps in the promotion of colonization. Of course it was their duty to give every facility to emigration, and remove all impediments in its way. At the same time, he thoroughly concurred with the noble Earl that at some future time this question might become one of great importance. Another point raised by the noble Earl was the necessity of some regular communication between the boundaries of Canada on one side, and the boundary of Vancouver's Island on the other, and he stated that a representation was made to the late Government to induce them to assist in establishing some such line of communication. He was aware that some scheme had been proposed for the construction of a railroad, and he was not one of those who looked upon it as visionary; but, on the contrary, anticipated that the day would come when railroad communication would be made the whole distance. The Government would be anxious to give every proper encouragement to any scheme proposed either by the proposed Company or any other, but they did not contemplate at present the extension of communications by means of subsidies, and if this question involved a demand for a very large subsidy it would be highly objectionable. At the same time he fully admitted the great national importance of a communication across the continent, and such a scheme might depend upon having the warm support of the Government.

ARMAMENT OF MERCHANT STEAM-VESSELS.—QUESTION.
THE EARL OF AIRLIErose to ask Her Majesty's Government whether they had taken into consideration the Expediency of
1196
entering into Arrangements with Persons or Companies owning Steam Vessels other than those which carry the Mails, for the purpose of rendering such steam vessels capable of carrying Armaments of heavy guns, if required? He said that it was well known that steamers which received Government subsidies to carry mails were under engagement the they should be so constructed as to be able to carry guns in case of necessity, and should be placed at the service of the Government for warlike purposes if required. But there was a very prevalent impression that the contract that these steam vessels should be so constructed as to be capable of being turned into armed vessels had been very imperfectly kept, and that in fact they were not capable of carrying any armament. If this were the case, it was time that the public should know the real fact, and that the contracts should be more rigorously enforced. But as the principle had been admitted that certain steamers—commercial steamers—should be so fitted as to be able to carry heavy guns, why should not the same arrangement be applied to other steam vessels as well as those which carried mails? The steamers which carried mails had a Government agent on board, but he did not know if it was his duty to see if the vessel was seaworthy; but under the Passengers' Act the Government had the power of ascertaining whether any steamer which carried passengers was seaworthy. The service of largo steamers carrying mails was of great importance to the public; it was important that the mails should be regularly transmitted, and the service liable to no interruption. A strong case, therefore, ought to be made out before the Government should take these vessels for warlike purposes. There had been lately published a pamphlet by a gentleman whose opinion was of great weight on all matters relating to steam navigation—Mr. Laird. That gentleman said that many steam vessels employed in the coasting trade of a smaller description might be used for warlike purposes, and be useful in defending the coast and the mouths of great rivers like the Mersey, which were now unprotected. Mr. Laird had made an estimate of the cost of fitting these vessels for warlike purposes. His scheme was that the vessels should be made so strong as to be capable of mounting heavy guns, and he proposed to fit out 200 of these vessels so as to serve as gunboats. Mr. Laird put the cost of building

1197
and fitting 200 gunboats at £1,900,000, and the annual charge for keeping them up he put at 10 per cent of the cost, or £190,000. The cost of fitting vessels already in existence as gunboats would, he calculated, be £200 each, or £40,000; and the annual charge for them at £100 each, or £20,000. The difference between the expense of regular gunboats and the fitting of the proposed vessels for the purpose of converting them into gunboats was, that the former would cost exactly eleven times as much as the latter. Mr. Laird, however, admitted that he did not expect that the vessels so fitted would be quite so well adapted as regularly built gunboats for warlike purposes. These vessels besides would be quite as quickly made available for service as the gunboats laid up in ordinary, especially considering the way in which those vessels had been treated. It was not for him to say whether Mr. Laird's scheme was a feasible one, and if it was carried out, in what manner it was to be carried out. Vessels of that description ought certainly to be manned in such a manner as not to interfere with the manning of the regular navy. Men might be got for that service beyond the age when they would be received into the navy for continual service. It was quite certain it was not possible to construct fortifications sufficient for the defence of the whole of our coasts, and if we could we should not be able to man them; while any fortifications, if they were so situated as not to be efficient, had better not be erected at all. Some such scheme as this was therefore necessary, but it was not necessary to go to any great expense at first, but to try it on a small scale in the first instance. He would not at that late hour enter, as he might have done earlier in the evening, into the general subject of our national defences, but he would content himself with putting the question of which he had given notice.
THE DUKE OF SOMERSETsaid, their Lordships were probably aware that for the last fifteen or sixteen years this subject had, at various times, been brought under the consideration of Parliament. For many years, indeed, it was part of the contract of those great companies which carried the West India and other mails that they should adapt their vessels for the purpose of carrying armaments. This went on for some time; until about 1852 a Committee, consisting of naval and military officers, was appointed to examine into
1198
this question. That Committee went into the subject with great care, and they surveyed almost all the steam vessels round the coast of England. The general result of their report was, that it was not expedient to attempt to render these vessels fit for war purposes; that, in fact, the attempt to make them fit for war purposes would render them very unfit for commercial vessels. In 1853 another inquiry was instituted, going still further into the matter: and that, probably, accounted for some little difference in the report. It was on that occasion admitted that by a considerable expenditure some of the steam vessels might be rendered fit to carry armaments, but not fit to cope with vessels of war; that they might be made fit to defend themselves, and thus be so much more fitted for the conveyance of troops; but even that the Commission, which looked into the matter with very great care, and which consisted entirely of professional men, did not recommend. At the same time they stated that some of these vessels, in the case of an emergency, might, at an expense of £3,000 or £4,000 each, be rendered available for defence. The proposal of Mr. Laird was much to this effect—that there were certain steam tugs and other small vessels, especially in the Mersey, which might be fitted up for the defence of that river. As soon as that question was brought before the Admiralty they sent down agents and had those vessels surveyed, that they might ascertain how far it was possible that some of them might be used for that purpose. He did not anticipate that very much would result from this inquiry; but at the same time it was desirable that they should know how far these vessels might be rendered fit for the defence of the river. He did not think that anybody now was of opinion that our large steamers which went round the coast or to our colonies could be rendered fit for war; and he believed that any attempt to make them so would only be throwing the money away. But there was no doubt that from the great resources of these Companies, they could, on any pressing emergency, rapidly turn out vessels which would be available for war, and they had the means of putting on board engines that would produce in a short time a very considerable steam navy. The late Government had tried this to some extent by making arrangements to build a certain number of corvettes by contract, a species of vessel which the commercial yards were

1199
peculiarly qualified to deal with, and if any sudden emergency should arise he should be inclined to deal with the matter in the same spirit. He would conclude by saying, in answer to the noble Earl, that the Government had considered the expediency of converting small steam tugs and other, vessels into ships of war, but they did not contemplate re-opening the question, which was thoroughly discussed in 1852 and 1853. The reports made on those occasions were printed, and could be referred to by anybody who wished to investigate the matter.
THE EARL OF HARDWICKEthought that this matter was of some importance, as bearing upon the defence of our shores. He did not think, unless an expensive system of investigation were set on foot in reference to the construction of merchant vessels, which would cause great expense, and very much interfere with trade, there was any likelihood of merchant vessels being very well suited for war. He therefore very much concurred with the noble Duke that anything of the kind proposed would waste the public money without any adequate result. With our immense power of production he believed that we could produce such a quantity of ships as would meet any emergency. He did not think it was necessary to rely on our mercantile marine for the purposes of war.
House adjourned at a quarter past Seven o'clock, till To-morrow, half-past Ten o'clock.