Sitting of 25 June 1863

MINUTES.
SUPPLY—considered in Committee—CIVIL SERVICE ESTIMATES.
PUBLIC BILLS—Resolution in Committee—Public Works (Manufacturing Districts) [Advances].
Ordered—Prisoners Removal (Scotland)*.
Second Reading—Augmentation of Benefices (Lords) * [Bill 134]; Police and Improvement (Scotland) (Provisional Order) * [Bill 184]; Costs Security * [Bill 126].
Committee—Newcastle upon Tyne (Saint Mary Magdalen Hospital) [Bill 182]; Howth Harbour*[Bill 176]; Stipendiary Magistrates, and re-comm. [Bill 189]; English Church Services in Wales (Lords) [Bill 190], on re-committal; Courts of the Church of Scotland (Lords)* [Bill 92], on re-committal.
Report—Newcastle upon Tyne (Saint Mary Magdalen Hospital) [Bill 162]; Howth Harbour* [Bill 175]; Stipendiary Magistrates [Bill 150]; English Church Services in Wales (Lords) [Bill 81]; Courts of the Church of Scotland (Lords) [Bill 92].
Considered as amended—Harwich Harbour*[Bill 176].
Third Reading—Sir Robert Hitcham's Charity* [Bill. 160]; Ruthin Charities * [Bill 161]; Walmer Vesting * [Bill 170]; Postmaster General (Sale of Land) *[Bill 174]; Port Erin. Harbour (Isle of Man)*[Bill 123]; and severally passed.
Withdrawn—Poor Removal (No. 2) [Bill 96].

FORTIFICATIONS—THE EXHIBITION BUILDING.
  NOTICE.
  SIR GEORGE GREY: Sir, my noble Friend at the bead of the Government, regrets that indisposition prevents him from being in his place this evening to bring on the subject of Fortifications, which is the first Order of the Day. He wishes to give notice that he will bring on that subject upon this day week, and he proposes, if time permits, to take the Vote for the purchase of the Exhibition Building at Kensington the same evening.
THE CHINESE INDEMNITY.

  QUESTION.
  COLONEL STAKESsaid, he rose to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, How it is intended to appropriate the balance of nearly half a million of dollars of the first Chinese indemnity remaining in the Treasury; and whether any rejected claims will be re-considered.
  MR. PEEL, in reply, said, the question of those claims had been adjudicated upon many years ago, and he did not consider it desirable that they should be re-opened. The balance of the fund was, as stated by the hon. and gallant Member, nearly half a million of dollars. He could not say precisely how it would be appropriated; but most probably it would be applied towards defraying the expenses of the war.

POOR LAW IN IRELAND—INNISHOWEN UNION.—QUESTION.
MR. HENNESSYsaid, he wished to ask the Chief. Secretary for Ireland, Whether the attention of the Poor Law Commission has been called to the conduct of the Board of Guardians of the Innishowen Union, in refusing to allow a sick inmate of the workhouse, named Bernard M'Laughlin, half a pound of
1432
bread, which had been ordered by the medical officer as extra diet?
SIR ROBERT PEELsaid, in reply, that the attention of the Poor Law Commissioners had been drawn to this case, and they had induced the Board of Guardians to supply the diet which the medical officer had required. When the medical officer first ordered this supply of extra food for this inmate of the workhouse, the Board of Guardians refused to supply it; but the matter coming under the notice of the Commissioners, they told the Board they would be labouring under a very heavy responsibility if they declined to acquiesce in the medical officer's order, and thereupon the extra diet was supplied.

EDUCATION IN SCOTLAND.

  QUESTION.
  MR. DUNLOPsaid, he would beg to ask the Lord Advocate, Whether it is the intention of the Government to issue a Commission of Inquiry into the state of Education in Scotland; and whether, if so, the putting of the Revised Code in operation in that part of the United Kingdom will be postponed till the result of such inquiry be reported?
  THE LORD ADVOCATEreplied, that he had made a communication to the Government with a view to the issuing of a Commission to inquire into this subject; but he was not able, to hold out any prospect of such a Commission being issued. If such a Commission were to be appointed, he could not hold out the anticipation that the Revised Code would not be applied to Scotland.

CASE OF MART ANNE WALKLEY.

  QUESTION.
  MR. DAWSONsaid, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether his attention has been drawn to the case of Mary Anne Walkley, deceased, and the wording of the verdict delivered by the Coronor's Inquest empannelled to investigate the circumstances of her death; and if it would not be desirable and humane to introduce legislation for the purposes of limiting and defining the hours of labour in Millinery and other establishments were Females are employed? He was perfectly aware that the right hon. Baronet had given the utmost consideration to this case, but his reply to the question which had been put

  1433
  to him the other evening had led to very general disappointment. He would therefore venture to ask the right hon. Baronet why these establishments should not be placed under proper regulations as to hours, and as to registration and inspection, as the law now provided in the case of Factories, Mines, and even of Bakehouses, with regard to which there was a Notice on the Paper that evening. He would further ask, whether, if the Government were not prepared to introduce legislation on this subject, they would give their sup port to a Bill for defining and limiting the hours of labour, and regulating and inspecting workrooms, alike in the interests of humanity as for the sake of sanitary precaution?
  MR. BAGWELLsaid, before the right hon. Baronet replied, he would beg to observe that a letter had lately appeared in the newspapers from a Mr. Isaacson, who it seems is the husband of Madame Elise, in which it is stated that this unfortunate young woman was an apprentice. He would therefore beg to ask the right hon. Baronet whether the Government are prepared to institute any proceedings with a view of punishing the guilty parties in this matter.
  SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, in reply, that the answer which he had given the other evening to a similar question was rather of an argumentative character, and he feared he must repeat it. He was asked to say whether it would not be possible to regulate establishments where the work was carried on in private buildings in the same manner as those in public buildings prepared for particular manufactures. Without expressing a positive opinion, he then stated, that however desirable it might be to take precautions for the prevention of evils such as had been disclosed in the present ease, he did not think it would be possible to establish a system of registration and inspection applicable to workrooms in private houses. The hon. Member for Londonderry (Mr. Dawson) now asked him whether the Government would support a Bill introduced by a private Member. Before answering that question it would be requisite that he should know what the provisions of the Bill were to be. If the hon. Gentleman himself asked leave to bring in a Bill, he would willingly acquiesce in its introduction. In reply to the question of the hon. Member for Clonmel (Mr. Bagwell), he did not know whether the girl upon whom
  1434
  the inquest had been held was, as stated in the newspapers, an apprentice. But supposing such to have been the case, the question arose whether there was sufficient evidence to go before a jury with any likelihood of obtaining a conviction. The words of the Act declared, that if any master or mistress, being liable to provide food, clothing, or lodging for any servant or apprentice, willfully neglected to do so, and danger to life or permanent injury to health resulted from such omission, the master or mistress so offending would be subjected, upon conviction, to severe punishment. The matter here would be entirely one of evidence, and he was not sufficiently acquainted with the facts to say whether there was enough to go before a jury with any reasonable prospect of a conviction.
  MR. BAGWELL: Will the right hon. Gentleman inquire?

RELIGIOUS ENDOWMENTS (IRELAND).

  QUESTION.
  THE O'DONOGHUEsaid, he wished to inquire, What course the hon. Member for Swansea means to take with reference to his Motion for inquiry on the subject of Religious Endowments in Ireland? His hon. Friend and other hon. Members had done all they could to induce the Government to give a day, but without success. He would suggest that the hon. Gentleman should withdraw his Motion, as the Motion of the hon. Member for Liskeard (Mr. Osborne) upon the Irish Church stood first on the Paper for to-morrow.
  MR. DILLWYNsaid, he should not allow his Motion to stand in the way of discussion, and he should therefore move that the Order for resuming the Adjourned Debate be discharged.
  Order discharged.

THE FOREIGN ENLISTMENT ACT.

  QUESTION.
  MR. COBDENsaid, he wished to ask the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether the Government will lay upon the table the Memorial which was presented last week from a respectable body of shipowners and Merchants in Liverpool, praying for an alteration in the Foreign Enlistment Act?
  MR. LAYARDsaid, he should be prepared to answer the Question if it were put to-morrow.

MUSEUM OF IRISH INDUSTRY.

  QUESTION.
  MR. COGANsaid, he wished to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Privy Council, Whether any Correspondence has taken place between the Irish Government and the Department of Science and Art, or the Treasury, on the proposed abolition of the Museum of Irish Industry in Dublin; if so, whether in that Correspondence an opinion hostile to the proposed abolition of that institution has been expressed on the part of the Irish Executive; and whether he will lay that Correspondence upon the table of the House? He also wished to ask when the Report of the Commissioners appointed to inquire into the Scientinc institutions in Dublin, in connection with the Department of Science and Art, will be laid upon the table; and if he can state by what authority that Report is at present in circulation in Dublin before it has been presented to Parliament?
  MR. PEELdid not think it would be expedient to lay the Correspondence on the table of the House. The Report of the Committee had already been laid on the table. He could not explain how the Report obtained circulation in Dublin before it was presented to the House.
  MR. COGANsaid, the Royal Dublin Society held a meeting that day for the purpose of considering the Report, although it had not been presented to the House. He would give notice that he should move, for the production of the Correspondence.

THE DISPUTE WITH BRAZIL.

  QUESTION.
  MR. BRIGHTsaid, he wished to know, Whether the Government will lay on the table the case submitted to the King of the Belgians in regard to the difference with Brazil, and also a Copy of the award which his Majesty has made?
  MR. LAYARDsaid, the award, was only received yesterday. It would be printed at once, and laid on the table.

THE SCOTTISH UNIVERSITIES.

  QUESTION.
  MR. STIRLINGsaid, he would beg to ask the Under Secretary of State for War, If he will state the steps which must be taken by the Universities of St. Andrews and Aberdeen, in order that candidates for
  1436
  direct commissions who have taken the degree of M.A. in these Universities may obtain the exemption from examination under Clause 4 of the New Regulations, which his Royal Highness the Commander-in-Chief has been pleased to grant to candidates who have taken similar degrees in the University of Edinburgh?
  THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON, in reply, said, the Universities to which the hon. Gentleman's Question referred, had only to make a formal and official application to the War Office, stating their case, in order to obtain the same privileges as the University of Edinburgh, and they would be granted.

UNEMPLOYED UNMARRIED WOMEN IN THE COTTON DISTRICTS.—QUESTION.
MR. FERRANDsaid, he rose to ask the President of the Poor Law Board, Whether he has yet received the Return of the number of unemployed unmarried women in the Cotton Factory districts of Lancashire and Cheshire?
MR. C. P. VILLIERSsaid, in reply, that the only way in which those persons were known was by seeking relief, and that relief was derived from two sources—one, the parishes; and the other, the Committees distributing voluntary relief. The only Returns which he (Mr. Villiers) could order would be from the parishes, but the only entry made in the parochial books was of unemployed women. There was none with respect to occupation. With respect to the Relief Committees—and there were 170 local Committees—the sex of the recipients was not entered in their books. The consequence was, that there would be great difficulty in getting the Return which the hon. Gentleman desired. He told the hon. Member on a former occasion that he would ascertain whether there was any possibility of obtaining that Return from the Voluntary Belief Committee; and, having made inquiries from the secretary, that gentleman said he would try, but the secretary informed him that up to Monday last he had not been able to get the Return asked for.

THE MALTA AND ALEXANDRIA TELEGRAPH CABLE.—QUESTION.
SIR WILLIAM GALLWEYsaid, he wished to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty, If directions have been sent to the Admiral in the Mediterranean to station a

1437
last Steamer between Benghazi and Alexandria, as the Malta and Alexandria Cable has ceased working?
LORD CLARENCE PAGETsaid, in reply, that the day before yesterday a telegram was received from the Commander in Chief in the Mediterranean to the effect that the cable between Benghazi and Alexandria had been broken, and that application had been made to him to station a steamer between those two points. The answer of the Admiralty was, that it would be highly inconvenient that a vessel should be appointed solely to carry telegrams between Alexandria and Benghazi, a distance of between 300 and 400 miles.

THE MHOW COURT MARTIAL.—COLONEL CRAWLEY'S CASE.—QUESTION.
MR. CONINGHAMsaid, he rose to ask the Under Secretary of State for War, Whether, subsequently to the Memorandum of the 18th of December, a second Memorandum or Letter embodying the opinion of the Commander-in-Chief on the Mhow Court Martial had not been issued; also, whether the proceedings alleged by Paymaster Smales to have taken place on his Court Martial were submitted to the Judge Advocate General in England for his opinion, and whether that opinion was obtained before the Paymaster was gazetted out of the service?
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, that in reply to the first part of the Question he had to state that no second memorandum or letter embodying the opinion of the Commander-in-Chief on the Mhow Court Martial had been issued; no public memorandum, at least. With regard to the second part of the hon. Member's Question, its terms were so extremely vague and indefinite that he did not think he should be justified in giving any answer. The hon. Member did not state to what "proceedings alleged by Paymaster Smales to have taken place" he referred. [Mr. CONINGHAM: The illegal proceedings.] The word "illegal," it would be observed, was not upon the paper. If the hon. Gentleman wished to have a specific answer to his Question, he must be good enough to state what the illegal proceedings were to which he referred, and how these bad been alleged by Paymaster Smales.
MR. BENTINCKsaid, he would beg to ask his noble Friend a question on the subject. It might be in the recollection of the House that a few days before he had
1438
asked his noble Friend if he was able to state whether there was any precedent for holding a Court Martial in this country upon proceedings which had taken place in India. His noble Friend said he was not aware of any precedent on the subject. He now wished to ask his noble Friend, whether he had in the interval discovered that any such precedent existed; and, if not, to state whether the proposed course of proceeding did not involve a reflection upon, if not an insult to, the officers of the Indian army?
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON: I am not aware at the present moment that there is any precedent for the action taken by the Government in this case. I certainly cannot state as a matter of fact, but I can give it as my opinion, that this course of proceeding will not involve either any reflection or any insult upon the Indian army.
SIR DE LACY EVANSobserved that the noble Lord had stated that no "public" memorandum subsequent to that of the 18th of December "had been issued." Was the House, then, to infer from that that possibly some communication or memorandum not of a public character had been issued, which had not been produced?
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON: The Commander-in-Chief may have written privately to Sir Hugh Rose on this subject; but, if so, the communication has been wholly of a private nature, and such as I am unable to produce.
MR. CONINGHAMsaid, he wished to ask whether he was to understand that, the noble Lord did not like the form of the question, or whether he declined to state whether the proceedings of the court martial were submitted for his opinion to the Judge Advocate General?
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, that before he answered the question he must beg the hon. Member to state what the proceedings were to which he referred—either to state what was their purport, or describe where they were to be found.
COLONEL NORTHsaid, that the question was not one of illegality. He begged to call the attention of his noble Friend to this, that two verdicts of these courts martial had been published. ["Order!"] He would beg, then, to move the adjournment of the House. The case was a very serious one. He had sat upon a great many courts martial; and be wished to ask bow it was possible, if the proposed court martial were held in England, to

1439
bring over from India all the evidence which they ought to have before them. It was a positive reflection upon the officers of the Indian service to suppose that there could not be found in India a sufficient number of officers whose honour could be depended upon to conduct the necessary inquiry fairly. It would be necessary to bring over Sir Hugh Hose and the other general officers concerned in the case. He did not know Colonel Crawley, but he must say, he thought the hon. Member for Brighton had behaved very unfairly towards that officer the other evening. The hon. Member for Brighton the other evening produced and read to the House—
MR. SPEAKERsaid, the hon. and gallant Member was out of order in referring to a past debate.
COLONEL NORTH: He would then merely state that there were two versions of the proceedings at the court martial on Paymaster Smales—one published at Poonah, the other from the Judge Advocate's notes. He wished to know which of these versions was to be laid on the table. He hoped, in fairness to Colonel Crawley and all concerned, that the proper official proceedings would be laid upon the table.
MR. HEADLAMsaid, that the original record of the proceedings was in his office, find he had no knowledge of any other copies. An official copy of that record would be laid on the table.
MR. CONINGHAM, in seconding the Motion for adjournment, said, he wished to observe, by way of exemplifying the sort of illegality of which Paymaster Smales complained, that when he was placed on his trial, his witnesses were impounded, and he was unable to have access to them for the purpose of preparing his defence. There were several instances, and he only mentioned that as one of them.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That this House do now adjourn."—(Colonel North.)
MR. DISRAELI: There is one point on which, I think, some explanations are due from the Government—I mean with regard to the expenses of this inquiry. I do not know whether Colonel Crawley is to be burdened with these expenses. But there is a more important consideration with regard to the administration of justice than even these expenses—with regard to the country itself—which I think ought to be considered. When these witnesses are brought over to this country, they will be in the presence of each other,
1440
and of many other persons. Probably the Commander-in-Chief in India and other officers in command will be required. This will cause an amount of expenditure of which the House has at present no idea. I will not say that the trial will last as long as that of Warren Hastings, but it will last much longer than hon. Members suppose. This is a consideration which I think ought not to be absent from the mind of the House.
SIR GEORGE GREY: The Commander-in-Chief has directed that the inquiry shall take place in England. I apprehend, that if any officer is ordered home by the military authorities from any part of the world, he is considered to be on duty and receives his pay.
SIR DE LACY EVANSsaid, he differed altogether from the opinion, that if the court martial were held in England, it would be necessary to summon the Commander-in-Chief from India. All that Sir Hugh Rose and General Farrell did was to make a written communication on the subject of the court martial. The Commander-in-Chief was not one of the actors or witnesses, and he saw no valid reason for requiring his presence in this country. But he felt sure the country would not be satisfied unless the trial took place in England. Nor was any considerable expense, in his opinion, likely to be incurred. He humbly thought that the Government ought to commence the matter by ordering the regiment home. The regiment was alleged to be in a bad state, its term of service in India was nearly expired, and the only consideration was the expense, which need not be very great?
MR. E. P. BOUVERIEsaid, he regretted that the discussion had been raised in so incidental a way. It would be much better if hon. Members would give notice of such questions, so that the House might have an opportunity of expressing an opinion. He wished to know distinctly, whether any communication had been addressed by the Commander-in-Chief to Sir Hugh Rose through the Adjutant General, the purport of which was to qualify the memorandum that had been laid on the table of the House?
MR. BENTINCK: said, the question before the House was more military than civil. The hon. and gallant Member (Sir De Lacy Evans) proposed that the regiment in question should be ordered home for the purpose of Carrying on the court martial. ["No!"] Then, for what other

1441
purpose? What would be the consequence? It would amount to a premium on misconduct. A regiment would only have to misconduct itself sufficiently to give occasion for a court martial, and then it would expect to be immediately ordered home, That would be a remarkable way of con ducting the affairs of the army. The hon. and gallant Member added that the people of this country would not be satisfied unless the court martial were held in Eng land. Now, as one of those who had the honour of a seat in that House as a representative of the people, he would express his belief that all that the people of this country had a right to require, and all that they would ask, was that justice should be done on both sides. He ventured to think it would be impossible for justice to be done if a tribunal were to try in this country proceedings that had occurred in India. It was obviously necessary that a hundred witnesses should be ordered home, and it would be impossible to do justice to both sides. Notwithstanding what had fallen from the noble Lord, it was quite impossible that, a course which appeared to be entirely without precedent should be adopted without offering a strong reflection, if not a positive insult, on the officers of the Indian army.
COLONEL DUNNEsaid, the 8th Regiment was the first to come home, but that only nine months would elapse between the return of the 8th Regiment and the Inniskillings. As the expense had been alluded to, he would remark, that if the Government would change the rota, and order home the Inniskillings instead of the 8th, there would be no difficulty in regard to expense. At the same time, that kind of interference with the discipline of the army was most prejudicial to the service. He know that some of the stories which had been circulated in regard to the conduct of Colonel Crawley had been extremely exaggerated. The House had been told that Seregant Major Lilley was confined to one room, and that a sentry was put in his room. He believed that the sergeant major had a house of four rooms, and that the sentry was placed in the verandah, because in India sentries could not be placed in the sun. He thought that Paymaster Smales had been most properly dismissed the service for writing a most insubordinate letter. It was not the practice, he was informed, for commanding officers of regiments to muster their regiments in India. An officer, now
1442
a Member of that House, who had served in India, stated that it was not the custom to do so. A great deal had been said by the public press on the matter, but the House ought to yield, not to the public voice, but to the voice of justice.
MR. HUNTsaid, he wished to ask whether it would be necessary to examine any native witnesses before the court martial; and, if so, whether any law existed which obliged them to come to this country for such a purpose against their will.
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONwas unable, without notice, to answer the question just addressed to him. It was impossible to say what course the court martial would take. If the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Bouverie) would put his notice on the paper, he would answer it another day. He apprehended, however, that he should be compelled to repeat the answer which he had given on a previous day, that there was no public or official memorandum in existence on the subject except that which had been published. The hon. Member for Brighton had stated one portion of the proceedings taken against Paymaster Smales which he alleged was illegal. If, however, he was expected to answer questions of that kind, he must request hon. Members to state distinctly on the Notice Paper what they wished to know. In his opinion what had taken place showed the extreme inconvenience of discussing topics in this manner. There were very few evenings lately on which the hon. Member for Brighton had not placed some question on the Paper; and considering that he had given notice of his intention to bring the subject forward on the Motion for Supply, and that the Government had promised to lay the proceedings of the court martial on the table, be could not see what advantage could arise from these small incidental discussions.
MR. D. FORTESCUEsaid, that what he had stated was, that Sergeant Major Lilley was at first confined to his own quarters, where he had several apartments; but that when he was ordered under confinement, he was removed from his proper quarters to others, where he was confined to a single room. It was in the single room that the sentry was posted. On that point he spoke from the testimony of two eye witnesses.
SIR FREDERIC SMITHsaid, he much regretted that his hon. and gallant Friend bad raised the question, as it was very inconvenient to discuss matters of the

1443
kind pending the investigation that was to take place. He was one of those old officers who rejoiced very much at the course which the Government were going to take in bringing home the persons who were to give evidence. The trial ought to take place in this country, otherwise public opinion would not be satisfied. Sometimes when out of England, and the army had not the advantage of the presence of the Judge Advocate, everything was done in an irregular manner. But in this country, where that high officer was present, matters were properly and legally conducted. He was sure, if his hon. and learned Friend had been in India, the case would not now have to be tried in England. But it was because the persons who were to conduct such proceedings abroad, and who might be very excellent officers, were not acquainted with the law, that the irregularities which were complained of occurred. While he agreed with his hon. and gallant Friend (Sir De Lacy Evans) that the trial ought to take place in England, he did not agree with him that the regiment ought to be brought home. No doubt, Colonel Crawley and other officers, and even Sir Hugh Rose, the Commander in Chief, if considered necessary witnesses, would be ordered home.
SIR JAMES FERGUSSONsaid, he should be sorry the discussion should close without noticing a remark which fell from the hon. and gallant Gentleman who had just sat down. If it were true that it would be impossible that a court-martial—[Sir FREDERIC SMITH: I did not say impossible]—well, if it were probable that a court martial could take place in India without a reasonable prospect of justice being done, might not public opinion call imperatively many times a year for the transfer from India to this country of persons whose evidence might be considered necessary? It might be that the habits and mode of life incidental to service in India might generate scandals and serious inconveniences which did not often occur in England; but the House would establish a very dangerous precedent if it tacitly assented to such a doctrine as that such cases should be brought home in order that public opinion might be brought to bear upon them. But the House would do no such thing. That House and the country had confidence in the honour of courts martial, and believed they would do justice.
Question put, and negatived.

THE MHOW COURT MARTIAL.—COLONEL CRAWLEY'S CASE.—QUESTION.

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

AFFAIRS OF POLAND.

  QUESTION.
  MR. HORSMANsaid, he wished to call the attention of the House to the delay in the presentation of the Papers on the Affairs of Poland, addressed for on the 15th of May; and to put a Question to the First Minister of the Crown as to the probable time of receiving and communicating to Parliament the Russian reply to the last proposals of the Three Powers?
  MR. LAYARDsaid, he was extremely sorry those papers had not been produced, but the delay was entirely owing to a strong pressure of business in the Government printing office. They were in type, however, and in a very short time would be laid upon the table.
  MR. HORSMANsaid, that the House had been told the other night that the notes of the three Powers had been sent to Russia, and the House was led to believe that they would be received and probably answered by the Russian Government at the same time. Since then he saw in a paragraph in The Times of the previous day the following telegram from St. Petersburg:—
  "St. Petersburg, June 23.
  "The English and French Notes upon the Polish question arrived here yesterday.
  "The Austrian Note on the same subject is not expected until Friday next."
  He wished to know whether the Government were aware of that paragraph; whether they could state what was the cause of the delay in the receipt of the Austrian note; and further, whether, as the Austrian note was not expected to be delivered until four days later than the French and English notes, and might not be replied to until four days later, such a circumstance would at all retard the communication to Parliament of the Russian answer to the English note?
  SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, that he did not know on what authority the statement rested to which the right hon. Gentleman bad referred. The note of the English Government was sent off on Wednesday, last week, and he believed that the French note was sent on the same day. The Government also understood that the despatch

  1445
  of the Austrian Government was sent off and received at the same time with the English and French notes, and it was not likely that there was an interval of four days before its arrival. He could give no assurance as to when the answer to the English note would be laid before the House until that answer was received.
  MR. HENNESSYsaid, that with reference to the recent statement of the noble Lord at the head of the Government that certain propositions had been submitted to the Russian Government, he wished to inquire when the paper containing those propositions would be laid en the table.
  SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, he understood his noble Friend to have said, that when the answer of the Russian Government was received, that paper would be laid before Parliament.
  SIR WILLIAM GALLWEYread the following paragraph from the French paper the Constitationnel:—
  "It should be understood, that as the question is a European one, it must be resolved by the common action of Europe. Should the assertion above alluded to mean that England, if, by some mischance, and against all probability, the intervention of the three Cabinets should remain without result, would refuse to proceed further, even if the two other Powers were prepared to march with her, then we must lower the praises given to a false enthusiasm, the consequence of which was to drive the unfortunate Poles to certain death."
  The article concluded as follows;—
  "We are convinced that England will dispel all equivocation. Her honour and the interests of Europe and humanity demand it."
  He wished to know, whether this country was to go on drifting into war?

EXHIBITION OF THE WELLINGTON FUNERAL CAR AT ST. PAUL'S.

  QUESTION.
  MR. CAVENDISH BENTINCKsaid, he wished to ask his right hon. Friend the Chief Commissioner of Works, or some other Member of the Government, to explain the circumstances under which the "Wellington Funeral Car," with wicker-work horses, trappings, &c., is exhibited to the public at 6d. a head by the vergers in St. Paul's Cathedral. He had no desire to make any complaint, either against the right hon. Gentleman, or the Dean and Chapter of St. Paul's, or the vergers, who he believed received no regular emolument; but he was anxious to know why the Funeral car, which cost the country £13,000, was handed over to the Church, and why
  1446
  the vergers were allowed to charge 6d. a head for permission to see it. During the Exhibition he understood that the vergers made from £120 to £150 a week by showing the car, part of which was to be appropriated to the decoration of the Cathedral by the Dean and Chapter. Through the Ecclesiastical Commissioners a large sum of money had been given to St. Paul's, and a portion of it could be properly applied to the payment of any expenses arising from the exhibition, which, in his humble judgment, was quite unsuited to a church, though it might be suited to Chelsea Hospital. He hoped, as the subject had been brought under the consideration of the Government, they would remove the car, because its exhibition on such terms was rather a scandal. The same thing had been once done in Westminster Abbey. He recollected, when he was at Westminster School, that there was an exhibition of wax-works in Westminster Abbey, but the Dean and Chapter afterwards shut up the exhibition, and he hoped the same thing would be done with regard to the exhibition of the car at St. Paul's.
  MR. COWPERbelieved that for a very long time the vergers had been in the habit of receiving payment for admitting and conducting persons below the Cathedral of St. Paul's into what was called the crypt. He did not mean to express any opinion as to whether the Dean and Chapter were right or not in authorising the vergers to receive 6d. a head for persons going into the crypt. He understood the son. Member to complain that some property belonging to the public had been placed in the crypt, and that money was exacted from those who saw it; but he, on the contrary, thought that the Government had reason to be obliged to the Dean and Chapter for having allowed the car to be placed in the crypt, where, in connection with the tombs of the Duke of Wellington and Lord Nelson, it was an object of much interest to the public. They had no cause to complain that the Dean and Chapter had maintained the ordinary regulations in respect to the crypt after the admission of the car in it which existed before. The hon. Member should remember that there were other attractions besides the car to induce the public to visit the crypt, and that no additional sum was charged for the car. The reason for levying a sum of money was, that it was necessary that the visitors who penetrated those dark subterranean passages should be accompanied by

  1447
  vergers. These guides, must, of course, be paid for their services; and as the outlay could not be thrown on the public purse, and as there were no Cathedral funds for the purpose, it was deemed fair and reasonable that those who availed themselves of the privilege of exploring the crypt should bear whatever expense was thereby incurred. His hon. Friend had taken the opportunity of criticising the ear. He would not, however, enter upon that controversy. Some thought the car was a work of decorative art, very creditable to its designers, while others took a different view. However, that might be, it was certain that, like all other relics of one of the greatest of English heroes, it possessed much interest for the public, who flocked to see it whenever it was exhibited. When the temporary structure at Marlborough House, in which the car was originally placed after the funeral, was no longer available, no place seemed more appropriate and fitting for its reception than the subterranean vaulted chamber in immediate contiguity to the tomb of the Duke of Wellington in St. Paul's. Not merely the car itself, but a large quantity of trappings, banners, and other furniture used at the lying in state were also deposited there, and gave a very good idea of the general decorations of the funeral pageant. Some of the trappings and other articles which were of less importance were disposed of, and the proceeds handed over to the Wellington College. The fee demanded was for admission to see the whole crypt, and there did not appear any necessity for placing one portion of it under a different arrangement from the other.
  MR. BERNAL OSBORNEsaid, he was very glad his hon. Friend opposite had called attention to the matter, for the answer which his question had elicited really showed to what depths "poor science and art" had fallen in this country. In that answer spoke the true genius of the Brompton boilers. He did not know whether this exhibition of the car, and what the right hon. Gentleman had very properly termed "other articles of furniture," included the celebrated wicker-work horses which the right hon. Gentleman had sedulously excluded from his explanation. He had been under the impression that that hideous article of upholstery called the Duke of Wellington's funeral car had long ago been sold off as old furniture; but now it turned up actually in the crypt of St.
  1448
  Paul's, with the trappings, flags, and other things which made up the raree show, at 6d. a head, on the interest of which the right hon. Gentleman had expatiated so enthusiastically. It was debasing the taste of the country to exhibit such articles. The whole affair was perfectly ridiculous. The right hon. Gentleman, while he was about it, might as well get a hurdy-gurdy and play it to the public who flocked to see the car. He had no doubt the right hon. Gentleman in his official uniform would draw immensely. If such absurdities were perpetrated, at least, it ought not to be in the name of science and art. He wished that the explanation which the right hon. Gentleman had given them in mumbling tones had been more explicit, and that he had told where the wicker work horses were to be seen.

ARMY EXPENDITURE.

  OBSERVATIONS.
  GENERAL PEELsaid, he rose to call attention to the account recently presented to Parliament, "of the Receipt and Expenditure for Army and Militia Services for the year ended 31st March 1862," and to the excess of expenditure on Vote 2, and the reasons assigned for it; to inquire whether this expenditure includes the Native Indian Troops employed in China during that year; and, if not, to ask in what account and in what shape that expenditure is brought under the notice of Parliament; and to ask whether the payment of those Troops during the present year is a matter of account between the Indian Government and the War Department, or the Indian Government and the Treasury? His object in directing attention to the subject was to show the total want of control on the part of the House of Commons over the expenditure of the country. Under the present system the House did not, in point of fact, receive any authentic information as to the prospective outlay. The Ministers who were responsible for the different Departments brought forward the Estimates for the coming year; and if by any adroit arrangement of the figures, they could show an apparent diminution as compared with the preceding year, they claimed great credit to the Government for economy. Being perfectly aware that the Estimates could not be brought to the test of actual results until a considerable period had elapsed—in the case of the Army Estimates about two

  1449
  years and a half—the Ministers of course had no hesitation in giving a bold denial to any criticism on the correctness of the Estimates. When the hon. Member for West Norfolk (Mr. Bentinck), some time back, complained that the functions of the Committee of Supply were a mere farce, the noble Lord at the head of the Government replied that the reason for the paucity of objections was, that the Estimates were framed with great care, the money laid out in the most economical manner, and such full and satisfactory explanations were asked for and given that no unreasonable Vote could be passed. How far that was true hon. Members could judge when they had heard his statement. In 1861, when the Army Es-Estimates were brought forward, he endeavoured to show that the apparent reduction of £180,000 in the Votes for the Army and Militia was a perfect fallacy He pointed out that it was produced, in the first instance, by the Vote for fortifications being provided for by a loan, and also by an insufficient sum being provided for the pay and allowances of the troops There was then in India a much larger number of men than was required, and it was almost certain that the Indian Government would not continue to pay for them during the whole year, but would return some of them on their hands Again, there was no estimate of the number of Indian troops in China. The Under Secretary, however, stated that the Secretary of State had paid the deepest attention to the subject, that the Estimates were quite right, and that he (General Peel) was quite wrong. Now the accounts were produced. He found that on Vote No. 2 alone there was an excess of expenditure of £361,000, and that excess was accounted for in the Return on precisely the same grounds as he had himself pointed out to the House. The regimental charges comprised in that excess, amounting to £311,000, arose from the return home from India of the 1st battery. 13th brigade of the Royal Artillery, and the 64th and 73rd Regiments, and the employment of certain other batteries of Artillery in China, for the subsistence of which Parliament made no provision; from the increased charge for good-conduct pay, the result of the operation of the Royal Warrant, dated 1st March 1860; from the continuance of batta and Indian allowances to the troops serving in China; and from the saving on the pay of men wanting to
  1450
  complete the establishments. If it had not been for the Votes of Credit for China, the attention of the House would have been called to the subject long ago. There had been three Votes of Credit. The first and second had been restricted by Act of Parliament to the expenditure of the financial year for which they were granted; but, unfortunately, that restriction had not been extended to the third Vote, and, consequently, the Government had been able to spend money without the sanction of Parliament. It appeared, from a Return for which he had himself moved in the present Session, that of these Votes of Credit there still remained in the Exchequer upwards of £500,000. He had asked in the simplicity what the Government intended to do with that sum, and was told in reply that in reality there was no money in the Exchequer, but simply an authority to spend so much without application to Parliament. Surely, however, the time had elapsed for these Votes of Credit. The House had been assured that the war with China was over, that five regiments had been brought home from China, and that a still further reduction would take place. That was neither the time nor the place to go into details and figures, but he wished to know whether any Member of the Government, or anybody else, could point to a Paper or Return, showing the number of Indian troops employed in China from 1858 up to the present moment, their charge, and how they had been paid. He had sought in vain for any such Return. Surely the House had a right to know bow these Indian troops had been paid. Perhaps they had been paid in a lump sum out of the Votes of Credit without the knowledge of Parliament; but, in that case, be need baldly say, there was an end to the control of that House over the expenditure. The last question he had to ask was, whether the Indian troops were to be paid that year by a direct account between the Indian Government and the War Office, or by an account between the Indian Government and the Treasury. If the troops were to be paid by the Indian Government, the account could not be rendered within the financial year, and the same results would follow as before. He observed, in the paper before him, that there were certain savings which might be used to meet excesses of expenditure; that was to say, the Government might spend a further sum of money without the authority of the House. The so-called savings were

  1451
  mainly on the Vote for Stores, and had been effected by the non-completion within the financial year of the contracts for guns, which, however, would have to be paid for next year.
  COLONEL SYKESsaid, the Secretary of the Treasury, in answering a question he had put to him that night, had said that half a million of dollars of Chinese compensation money which was in the Treasury in 1846 had been expended, he supposed, on the war in China. He (Colonel Sykes) wished to know how, when, and where it had been expended?
  MR. BENTINCKsaid, his right hon. and gallant Friend justly complained of the want of control of the House over the expenditure of the country, and in the course of his observations he adverted to a former discussion which had taken place on the subject, in the course of which he (Mr. Bentinck) had applied the word "farce" to the voting of the Estimates. He was not prepared to contend that "farce" was a strictly parliamentary word, but having used it he was prepared to abide by it. Indeed, there could be no broader farce than for a deliberative assembly to undertake to perform a most important duty without the slightest intention of going through with it. His right hon. and gallant Friend had given a case of what he considered to be a want of control over the expenditure, and he ascribed it to the manner in which the Estimates were framed and brought forward. But, without disputing that view of the case, he (Mr. Bentinck) was inclined to think there was another and far more powerful cause of the evil and grievance complained of. The real reason why the discussion of the Estimates was nothing but a farce arose from the fact that the House, when in Committee upon the Estimates, were never willing to deal with any matter brought before them upon general principles. Everything was pre-arranged, certain crotchets were put forward by individual Members, and there was a total absence of any independent action in the House. This arose from the desire of the occupants of the two front benches to check all independent action. The result was that they were able to force through the House Estimates of the most objectionable character. In making these remarks, he did not apply them more to one side of the House than to the other. The holders of office and the expectants of office were alike interested in keeping up the state of things to
  1452
  which he referred. His right hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Huntingdon (General Peel) was personally exempt from the charge, and, no doubt, wanted everything connected with the Estimates to be treated in the clearest and most straightforward manner, but he must pay the usual penalty attached to the keeping of bad company; and so long as he continued to sit on the front opposite bench, he must share with others the blame due to those who were responsible for the absence of independent action. Until the independent action of the House could be roused—until hon. Members ceased to be mere party hacks, hounded into the lobby, right or left, as the case might be—until hon. Members resumed their rightful position of free and independent representatives of the people, the system complained of would continue to prevail. The House had lately witnessed an attempt to exercise independent action in defiance of an arrangement which had been come to between the House and the noble Viscount, the leader of the House, whose absence they so much regretted. He (Mr. Bentinck) confessed he did not think this a happy mode of exercising independence; but if he might venture to hope that it was a premonitory symptom of a more independent course of action in the House, he should rejoice at what had occurred, for he did not think that any one would venture to argue that it was a creditable position for the representatives of a great country that they should, when the most important of all their duties was to be exercised by them, degenerate into a mere set of what he had justly termed party hacks, without independent action or will, and without zeal or energy to deliberate, or to defend the pockets of their constitutents. He trusted that what had fallen from his right hon. and gallant Friend, with the advantage of his great influence in the House, would be a warning to the House not to pursue the discreditable course which had been followed in voting the army Estimates, but that it would lead a large number of Members to exercise an independent control over those Estimates.
  SIR JAMES ELPHINSTONEsaid, he wished to know to what extent Parliament had any control over the government of India. The Government had lately substituted for the Indian navy that of Great Britain, and he should like to know how far they intended to proceed in that course, because he, for one, protested against the

  1453
  maintenance in India of armies and navies without the authority of Parliament.
  MR. T. G. BARINGsaid, he would remind the hon. Baronet that this year, for the first time, the whole expenditure for the depots of the Indian army in this country had been included in the Estimates; and also that no money could be spent upon the navy which had not been voted by that House. Against the remarks of the hon. Member for West Norfolk (Mr. Bentinck) it did not become him to de tend either the front bench opposite or the independent Members upon whom the hon. Gentleman reflected when he called the discussion of Estimates a farce But he remembered that when on one occasion he brought forward the Estimates for the War Department, he was subjected to a very rigid and painful examination upon all points, and that so far were independent Members from exhibiting any indifference that they showed a disposition to ask questions and call for explanations upon every matter that was involved in the Estimates. He also remembered that in the course of the discussion they had one or two very close divisions, proving that hon. Members were not so ready to follow the Government into the lobby as the hon. Member for West Norfolk seemed to suppose. He would suggest to that hon. Gentleman that he should himself study the Estimates, and bring his ability and experience to bear upon the discussion, rather than, after they were passed, try to bring the House of Commons into discredit with the country—a discredit which, from his experience, he could assert that it did not deserve to have cast upon it. The attack upon the leaders of the hon. Gentleman, if he might presume to call them his leaders, had been answered by the course which the right hon. and gallant Officer (General Peel) had pursued. He had never scrupled to comment upon the Estimates, or, what was still more valuable, upon the accounts which were afterwards presented to the House. With the remarks which the right hon. and gallant Office) had made upon the accounts for the year 1861, in which he had the honour to move the Estimates, he could only concur so far as most cordially to admit that he had no right to complain of the course which was taken when those Estimates were submitted to the House. The gallant General said upon that occasion that the Vote for men would not be sufficient to cover the expenditure. On several subsequent
  1454
  occasions he repeated that statement. He had now said that the accounts corroborated that assertion, and showed that £360,000 had been expended in excess of Vote 2 for the pay and allowance of the army, and he had implied rather than stated that that excess had been covered in some mysterious manner by the Vote of Credit for the expenses of the Chinese war. There was no doubt there was that excess upon Vote No. 2, that the main part of it was caused by the operations in China, and that it had been met to that extent out of the Vote of Credit. There had been no secret or mystification about the matter. On several occasions he had stated, in answer to questions put by the gallant General, that neither the Staff in China nor the troops which were retained in that country in excess of the ordinary establishment were included in the Estimates which he moved in 1861. The House must not, however, suppose that any money had been appropriated from the Vote of Credit otherwise than fairly and honestly, under the authority of Parliament, because the Appropriation Act of 1861 contained the following clause:—
  "Out of all or any of the aids or supplies aforesaid, there shall or may be used and applied any sum or sums of money not exceeding £1,000,000 to defray the expenses consequent on the naval and military operations in China beyond the ordinary grants for the army and navy services."
  Therefore there was a clear and distinct power to pay the expenses which he had always told the House were so to be paid. A list of those expenses was given at page 2 of the "Account of Receipts and Expenditure," and the total amount applicable to Vote 2 was £215,637. Therefore, the House would see that the main part of the apparent excess upon Vote 2 was not in reality an excess at all, because it was expenditure which was foreseen, and for which provision was made in a Vote of Credit distinct from the Estimates of the year. He did not mean to say that the Estimates for 1861 were completely accurate, but they were, as had been shown by the accounts, more accurate than any which had been presented within the few years preceding, including those of the gallant General himself. He himself bad nothing to do with their preparation, having gone to the War Department only a few weeks before they were laid upon the table. He was therefore a fair judge in the matter; and it was due to the reputation of Lord Herbert to say that no Secretary

  1455
  of State for War had ever introduced more improvements into the mode of preparing Estimates. Up to the autumn of 1860, the Estimates and the accounts were prepared in separate departments. It was evident that such a system must have led to great inaccuracies in the Estimates. That system was altered by Lord Herbert; the preparation of the Estimates was transferred to the Accountant General's Department; Mr. Whiffin, one of the assistant Accountants General—a very able officer—was engaged upon them, and they were made unusually accurate. The general result was, that including the supplemental Estimate, there was a saving of £217,430, which was restored to the Exchequer. To return for a moment to the question of men. The right hon. and gallant General knew that his whole argument depended upon the number of the regimental establishments. The regimental pay and allowances in the detailed account are separated from the rest of Vote No. 2. Taking regimental pay and allowances alone, there was inserted in the Estimates of 1861–2 the sum of £4,212,644 from which was to be deducted £127,597, for the pay of men "wanting to complete the establishment," leaving a total sum of £4,085,047 voted for regimental pay and allowances. The expenditure for regimental pay and allowances was £4,247,211, and contrasting this with the amount provided, an excess of £162,164 was shown. From that excess must be deducted the pay and allowances of the troops in excess of the establishment in China, which was provided for out of the Vote of Credit. That amounted, according to the best calculation he had been able to make, to £80,000, and left an excess, consequently, of £82,164. He was quite prepared to admit to the right hon. Gentleman that the expenditure for regimental pay and allowances, as compared with the Estimates, showed an excess of £80,000; but that amount was certainly not considerable out of a total Estimate of more than £4,000,000. The excess was accounted for in part by the unexpected return to this country of two regiments, which were sent home by the Indian Government early in the financial year, without notice, thereby disarranging all previous calculations. Recruiting was immediately stopped, in order that the number of men in the army might not rise above the proper limits; and that stoppage continued till the month of November 1862. In order to give the House an idea of the
  1456
  effect of stopping recruiting, he might state, that the number of recruits for infantry and cavalry of the line raised up to November in the year 1860–1, was 13,600; while in the year 1861–2 the recruits raised during the same months were only 1,730. Had the stoppage of recruiting continued, he asserted, without fear of contradiction, that under ordinary circumstances the army would have been brought down to very nearly the average for which provision was made in the Vote, and thus there would have been no excess whatever. But it became necessary to reinforce the troops in Canada, and accordingly recruiting was allowed again to proceed during the month of November. He did not think the sum of £6,000 taken in the Supplemental Estimate was quite sufficient to meet that addition to the army. He felt diffident in placing his own statements in opposition to those of so very high an authority as the right hon. Gentleman opposite, but he would read to the House an opinion expressed by the lamented Statesman who last filled the post of War Minister; and the House would feel confident that it was not a statement put forward to meet a difficulty or to make a point, but uttered because at the time he made it the right hon. Gentleman was convinced of its truth. Sir George Lewis, speaking on February 17, 1862, said—
  "The number of men was in excess of the Vote during the earlier months of the year, and therefore it became necessary for the Department to take steps for reducing it, in order that the number should be short of the Vote in the latter part of the year, and in that manner that a balance might be established. Accordingly, the recruiting of men was stopped in the summer, and the number was allowed to fall below the establishment." [3 Hansard, clxv. 404.]
  On the 3rd of March in the same year Sir George Lewis again said—
  "It so happened that the alarm of war supervened, and from this cause the number voted for the whole year might to some extent have been, exceeded. If the calculations had not been defeated by that accident the numbers voted by Parliament would have been strictly complied with." [3 Hansard, clxv. 974]
  That was a statement which he ventured to think fully equal in authority to that of the right hon. Gentleman himself. The Estimates impugned were more accurate than any which in recent years had been laid upon the table. So far from there having been any mystification in respect to the Vote of Credit, the increased expenditure in connection with the China

  1457
  war was distinctly within the cognizance of Parliament, and covered by a clause in the Appropriation Act. It was impossible, at the time, to foresee that security and confidence would be re-established in India so soon after the mutiny, that the Indian Government, without informing the Government at Home, should feel itself at liberty to send home two regiments more than had been estimated for. He need hardly say, that when Estimates were brought forward, it was impossible to tell precisely how many men there would be during every portion of the course of the whole year. Regiments returned sooner or later than was expected, and all that could be done was to obtain the nearest possible average. When the right hon. Gentleman himself was Secretary for War, he by no means observed that stringent accuracy with regard to numbers which he required from the present Government. He did not complain of that, for there had been changes in the system, and the right hon. Gentleman had not the same opportunities as those now charged with the preparation of the Estimates and the control of the expenditure.
  GENERAL PEELsaid, that during the whole year he never exceeded the prescribed number by a hundred men.
  MR. T. G. BARINGchallenged the right hon. Gentleman to deny that at one time the numbers were at least five thousand above the vote which was taken. In that computation, of course, he included the embodied militia. The House would understand that the remarks which he had offered were not in defence of any Estimates he himself had prepared; no blame attached to himself in the matter. But he felt bound to say, in defence of those who had been charged with the conduct of the Department, that he did not think the strictures of the right hon. Gentleman were at all borne out by the facts of the case.
  MR. PEELsaid, he did not agree with his right hon. and gallant Relative that the accounts of the military expenditure for 1861–62—considering that it was a year of war and the termination of a war—were altogether unsatisfactory. The sum spent exceeded the sum voted by about £260,000. But £270,000 of the expenditure of the year was directly traceable to the China war, and was therefore properly chargeable on the Vote of Credit taken in that very year. His hon. and gallant relative would hardly contend that it was in contemplation to include the whole expenses
  1458
  of the China war in the Estimates for 1861–62.
  GENERAL PEELobserved, that the war was over when the Estimates were framed.
  MR. PEELsaid, the sum of one million was expressly taken for the purpose of meeting the expenses of the China war. The question put by his hon. and gallant Relative whether the excess of expenditure on Vote 2 included the cost of the native Indian troops employed in China, he must answer in the negative. It was impossible when the Estimates were presented to form any probable conjecture as to the cost of the Indian native troops. Those troops were paid by the officers of the Indian Government, as would appear in the expenditure of the year when the accounts were ready. The only reason why a detailed statement had not been laid before Parliament was that an examination of the accounts for 1861–2 had not yet been completed. The money for the payment of the Indian troops was obtained from the Treasury chest in China. The Estimate for the native Indian troops was this year included in the Army Estimates; and, although the money was expended by the officers of the Indian Government yet the accounts would be presented to Parliament.
  SIR HENRY WILLOUGHBYsaid, he thought that his right hon. and gallant Friend had done good service in bringing the question before the House. It was important to find out how money voted was disposed of, and that could only be done by referring to the accounts, which were not produced until nearly two years after the money had been expended. He could not quite concur in the laudation the hon. Member for Penryn (Mr. Baring) had passed on those accounts; he found that there were blots in them; and he hoped that the House would be shy of voting money on credit, except under special circumstances, and then only for a limited period of time. They learned from the statement of the hon. Under Secretary that there was a discrepancy of £80,000 in the accounts, and he believed it was more. He should like to know from the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the matter was not so far altered that any excess of expenditure must be brought before the House in the shape of a separate estimate. He believed it was not in the power of a Department, except for a limited period of time, to take money from one Vote and expend it on another. If the case in question had occurred this year,

  1459
  he believed that under the change in the Appropriation Act it must have been brought before the House. He remembered perfectly well, that when the Estimates for 1861–2 were brought forward, a distinct allegation was made by his hon. and gallant Friend that the amount was not sufficient; and the Government had incurred a heavy responsibility in contending that the Vote was sufficient, when it was palpably clear, as events had proved, that it had not. In the detailed accounts there appeared payments that were not in the Estimates, and that was a most important matter. He should like to know by what authority £13,000 or £14,000 had been paid on account of the German settlers at the Cape. There was not a single atom of information relating to it in the Estimates, nor was there a Vote taken for it. It was a grave and serious matter when the chief of such an important department as the War Department had no seat in that House. What right had the War Office to spend the money without the authority of the House? Any attempt on the part of the War Office to spend army grants on civil purposes struck at the principle of the power of the House. He hoped that when such occasions arose, some severe censure would be passed by the House on those connected with the War Office, who ventured to exercise an authority so dangerous to every recognised constitutional principle. He, for one, was glad his right hon. and gallant Friend had brought the matter before the House, because it had been shown that Votes passed for one purpose were still applied to another.
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, that the House ought to be thankful to any hon. Gentleman who undertook the irksome task of challenging matters of account. He thought, however, that the right hon. and gallant Member for Huntingdon had taken rather a gloomy view of the subject, when he omitted to refer to the means which the House possessed of improving its control over the expenditure. He could assure the hon. Baronet (Sir H. Willoughby) of that which was matter of notoriety, that the Government had no longer any authority to sanction the transfer of a sum of money from one Vote for the purpose of meeting an excess in another direction. The demands of the public service were so vast and extensive that it was impossible the exact sum required in each case should always be demanded. There was,
  1460
  however, a temptation in every Department to call for large sums for services that were popular, and small sums for others that were not popular; and it was therefore desirable that the attention of the House should be directed de novo to any transfers and excesses of the kind when they occurred. The Treasury could provisionally give their sanction to such transfer, but a distinct application must be made to the House, and without a distinct Vote of the House no such transfer could be allowed.
  MR. DISRAELI: Sir, before the conversation terminates, perhaps I may be allowed to recall to the memory of the House the exact position which my right hon. and gallant Friend has taken on this subject. What he wanted was that the audited accounts for 1861–2 should be laid on the table, in order that it might be seen whether he was justified in the criticism he made on the Estimates of 1861, the justice of that criticism having been flatly denied or impugned by Her Majesty's Government; and I think my right hon. Friend has entirely succeeded in his object. I do not at all deny the truth of the statement made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer; and it is very satisfactory to the House that such alterations have been made in the manner of conducting the financial affairs of the country, but that is no answer to the point urged by my right hon. and gallant Friend. In fact, the hon. Under Secretary has admitted that there has been an excess, and he has alleged that there are extenuating circumstances; but those circumstances have really no weight in this instance, because all those points were anticipated by my right hon. and gallant Friend at the time, but were not acknowledged by the Under Secretary. For instance, the hon. Gentleman says the excess is not so great as it has been stated to be, and he reduces the excess by making a deduction for the extraordinary expenditure incurred in the return of regiments from India; but my right hon. and gallant Friend pressed on, the Government and the House at the time the Estimates were under consideration that a proper allowance had not been made for the inevitable return of these regiments and he was contradicted. Well, but, says the Under Secretary, we have done nothing with the Vote of Credit for China which we were not justified in doing under the provisions of the old Appropriation Act. No one for a moment pretended that the Government would deal

  1461
  with a Vote of Credit except in a legal and constitutional manner, but that is not the point which was urged at the time by my right hon. Friend. He called upon the Government and the House to consider that there were inevitable expenses which must be incurred on account of the proceedings in China, and what was the answer of the Government? It was, "Oh, no, nothing at all of the kind; the war in China is concluded." To-night also the right hon. and gallant Gentleman has reminded the House of the remarks he made at the commencement of 1861 upon the question of men, and the Under Secretary has questioned the accuracy of that statement. The Under Secretary says that—
  "The right hon. and gallant Member anticipated that there would be an excess of the numbers voted, and he founded his statement on the roll of numbers on the 1st of February last."
  That was exactly what my hon. and gallant Friend did two years ago—he anticipated an excess. Now, let the House observe the answer of the Government at the time. I read it, that the Under Secretary may not suppose I am colouring a statement. Mr. T. Baring could assure the Committee that—
  "The subject had received the careful consideration of Lord Herbert and the Commander-in-Chief, and no difficulty was anticipated in so regulating the numbers as to bring them within those for which provision had been made." [3 Hansard clxi. 1999.]
  To-night my right hon. and gallant Friend has shown that the criticisms he made in 1861, the accounts being now audited and laid on the table, were sound and just criticisms, and that the answer given this evening by the Under Secretary is unsatisfactory and beside the question. There is no occasion to vindicate the character of Lord Herbert, which nobody has impugned, or the general ability of the administration of the War Department under that eminent statesman. What we wanted was an answer to the statement, if its accuracy were questioned, of my right hon. and gallant Friend. He has really received no answer; and he has proved that the criticisms he made on the Estimates in 1861 were accurate, and were distinguished by that sagacity and foresight which mark the character of his mind.

SMALL ARMS.—OBSERVATIONS.
MR. HUSSEY VIVIANsaid, he wished to call the attention of the House to the Report of the Committee on Small Arms,
1462
and to ask Her Majesty's Government, what action they purpose to take thereon? He ventured two years ago, upon the ground that the arm purchased by the Government was not the best which could be had for the money, to bring the question of the Small Arms employed in the British army under the notice of the House, and the noble Lord at the head of the Government promised that the subject should be investigated. That pledge had been strictly fulfilled, and he wished to call attention to the Report of the Committee appointed to inquire into the matter. The reply of the Committee to the question whether the present Enfield rifle, 577 bore, was manufactured on the best possible principles, was that it was not. Now, it could hardly he considered a satisfactory position to have spent £3,000,000 on the purchase of arms, and not to have purchased the best. The course which the Committee had taken had been as follows. They had selected five ordinary service muskets; five muskets with five grooves instead of three; five with five grooves but with a sharper twist; and five with a still sharper twist. On experiment it was found not only that five-grooved pieces were better than three-grooved ones, but that the further they departed from the principle of rifling in the ordinary service musket, the better the rifle which they produced became. The elliptical system of rifling of Mr. Lancaster, proved itself superior not only to the ordinary service Enfield, but to the best of the rifles made on other improved principles. The Committee next proceeded to investigate the question of a different calibre, and they experimented on Mr. Whitworth's 451 bore, Mr. Lancaster's small bore, and the breech-loader of Mr. Westley Richards; and the con-elusion at which they arrived did at length that justice to Mr. Whitworth which had been so long deferred. Without urging its universal adoption in the army, they declared his rifle to be the best that had yet been invented, even as a military weapon. They also expressed an opinion that it was not probable there would be any material improvement upon it. The Committee arranged the small bore rifles in order of merit. The Whitworth came first, the Lancaster next, the Westley Richards next, and then the Enfield regulation rifle. It appeared then, that after the expenditure of large sums of money in the production of small arms, the Committee at last arrived at the conclusion which

1463
might have been easily come to before a great expense had been incurred, and he wished to know why the experiments which were ultimately: tried were not made sooner; He believed that the Ordnance Committee had no power to originate-experiments, but only to experiment in respect to matters referred to them; but he certainly thought, considering the simplicity of the experiments with regard to small arms, care should have been taken to institute them long since. The Committee on Small Arras very quickly established the fact that the rifle manufactured by the Government was the worst; and, consequently, it would be satisfactory if the Government could inform the House that some tribunal was about to be established, Which would consider these matters before the country was involved in a vast expenditure. With regard to the thinness of the barrel, the-Committee had not gone into that point; but it was evident, that in small arms of the same weight, the strength of those having the least-sized bore would be the; greatest, because, the metal would be thickest. The regulation rifle was a weak Weapon; the groovings were thin and easily worn down by the action of the ramrod, and after the firing of a comparatively few thousand rounds it became inefficient. That was not the case with the Whitworth or the Lancaster. But, in his opinion, the Committee had not sufficiently considered the question of the endurance of rifles likely to be subjected to much rough usage. The firing of 1,000 or 1,800 rounds could not be a sufficient test of endurance, and be should like to have seen the rifles exposed to the test of real hard usage, such as they were, likely to meet with: in the field. Considering that the Government were making a great number of these weapons every year, and that many were continually worn out by use in the course of years, if those weapons were replaced by a good arm, the error which had been fallen into would be retrieved. It had been said that the Westley Richards breech-loading rifle cost £9; but he had ascertained that if made in large numbers the Westley Richards breech-loading rifles could be manufactured for a sum not exceeding £5 each. Such an arm might be of great advantage in skirmishing. Another point to which the Committee had omitted to attach sufficient weight was that of penetration, which was increased by the greater hardness of the projectile. Defences used for field works
1464
were now made of a strength exactly sufficient to resist the ordinary rifle-ball; but if a hardened ball were employed, with a power of penetration three times greater, it was clear: that the strength of all those defences must be increased three times also. In conclusion, he would ask the Government what action they proposed to take in reference to the Report of the Committee on Small Arms.
MR. H. BERKELEYsaid, that the details which the hon. and gallant Member had brought forward were such as the House could scarcely deal with. He could not assent to the alleged perfection of either the Whitworth or Westley Richards rifle. There might be more correct weapons than the Enfield, but he believed that for all the practical purposes, of a campaign, a better rifle was not to be found. He wished however, to call attention to a rifle which had been in the hands of the10th Hussars for more than two years, and upon which the commanding officer had reported favourably. He alluded to Terry's breech-loading rifle. Before he (Mr. Berkeley) was aware of that debate, he had entered a question for the following evening with regard to that weapon. That instrument could be used with the Enfield barrel; it was very efficient in all respects, and it possessed this advantage over the Westley Richards, that it was half as cheap again. He was informed, that on a recent occasion, 1,500 rounds of ammunition had been fired from one of those rifles, and it was found to be perfectly clean afterwards. He wished to ask the noble Lord whether Terry's rifle had been referred to in the Report of the Committee.
THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, the House and the country were much indebted to the hon. and gallant Member for the pains which he had taken in investigating the subject, and for the Motion which he made two years ago, and which resulted in the Report of the Committee before them. He could not, however, admit that the Report showed that the Government of the day had taken a wrong course, or wasted public money in the manufacture of the Enfield rifle. That manufacture was commenced at a time when much alarm and anxiety prevailed throughout the country on account of their not being provided with a good rifle for the army. Under those circumstances, it was incumbent on the Government to adopt that rifle, which, although it might be open to some scientific objections, offered

1465
the greatest number of advantages for practical service in the field. The Report of the Committee distinctly stated that the Enfield rifle was introduced at a time when there was only limited experience in regard to elongated rifle bullets, and that the greatest credit was due to those who produced a weapon which was believed not only then, but still, to be superior to any arm adopted by other countries If that were the case, it could not be said that the Government had failed to do their duty in the matter. The hon. Gentleman had referred to the fact that the Committee had reported in favour of the Whitworth rifle, but it was most important for the House to bear in mind that the trials which were conducted by the Committee were entirely of a theoretical and not of a practical character. The results were, no doubt, sufficiently favourable to the Whitworth, and sufficiently unfavourable to the Enfield, to justify the Government in making further experiments in regard to these arms. Considering, however, that they were at that moment in possession of a weapon which the Ordnance Committee themselves declared to be superior to any possessed by other countries, it would obviously not be right for the Government to enter into a heavy expenditure, such as would be required in order suddenly to substitute another instrument for the Enfield as the rifle of the army, except on the fullest consideration and after the most complete practical experience. One difficulty of changing the Enfield for another rifle of smaller bore was, that if before the alteration was entirely concluded war broke out, they would have go many regiments armed with the one instrument and so many with the other; and two different sorts of ammunition would have to be served out That might lead to great confusion, and possibly even to the most disastrous consequences. It was therefore the intention of the Government not to desist from the use of the Enfield until they had ascertained, by the most thorough and conclusive trials, the superiority of the Whit worth. With the view of giving a complete practical trial to the Whitworth Rifle, they proposed to issue that arm to the eight battalions composing the Rifle Brigade and the 60th Rifles. That rifle would then be in the hands of expert soldiers in every part of our possessions, and would be subjected to every kind of usage or accident which could possibly happen to it. On the Report which was
1466
made of the performances of the Whitworth under these circumstances, the Government would decide what should be their course for the future. As to large bores, the Committee had reported more favourably of the Lancaster than the Enfield, and the former could be more easily substituted for the Enfield than the small bore to which he had referred. Mr. Whitworth did not provide a large bore rifle for trial, because he was aware that he could not obtain the same advantages with a large as with a small bore. The Government, in consideration of the recommendations of the Committee, had resolved to proceed as slowly as possible with the manufacture of the present service En-fields, and Mr. Whitworth had been requested to furnish a number of polygonal rifles of the large bore size, in order that they might undergo competition with the Lancasters. Whichever was found to be the best for practical purposes would gradually be introduced. There would not be the same difficulty in the substitution of an improved large bore for the En field as in the case of small bores, because the issue of different ammunition would not be required. The hon. and gallant Member who brought forward the Motion had gone, in his opinion, a little too far in stating that the Ordnance Select Committee reported that the Whitworth was absolutely the best rifle. As he had already mentioned, the trials were theoretical and not practical; but, moreover, the Committee themselves pointed out several defects in the Whitworth, such as breaking of hammers, and the inconvenience in some respects of the ammunition. These points, small as they might seem, were really of more importance than any question of extraordinary accuracy at long range. Most military men were agreed, that however useful a rifle possessing precision at a long range might be under certain circumstances, and in the hands of experienced men, the arm best fitted to be used by the general rank and file, was that which could most simply be managed, which was least liable to derangement, and which was generally most useful. There was, however, no such extraordinary difference between the Enfield and the Whitworth rifles for the purpose of actual service as would justify the assertion that the public money had been wasted on the manufactory at Enfield. [Mr. HUSSEY VIVIAN explained, that he had not said that the public money had been wasted] Neither

1467
had anything come out that would justify the Government in subjecting the army to the great inconvenience of suddenly changing the rifle used in the array. Only one other point remained. Among military men, great difference of opinion prevailed with respect to breech-loaders. No doubt, under certain circumstances, these rifles possessed great advantages; but some authorities believed that the extreme facility of loading would induce the men to fire away their ammunition with too great rapidity, which would counterbalance the advantages they possessed in other respects. The question of cost was also one of considerable importance. On the whole, then, the Government did not feel themselves justified in ordering breech-loaders to be issued to the troops for actual service; but, at the same time, the merits of the arm invented by Mr. Westley Richards were such as entitled it to a further practical trial, and the Government had consequently determined to place 2,000 in the hands of men scattered over all parts of the world, in order that the weapon might be thoroughly tested. Such were the decisions to which the Government had come, relative to small arms, and he hoped they would be satisfactory to the House. He should be happy to answer the question of the hon. Member behind him, on the following day. In conclusion, he would repeat that the House and country ought to feel obliged to the hon. Gentleman for having paid such attention to the subject.

ENGINEER OFFICERS' RETIRING ALLOWANCES.—OBSERVATIONS.
COLONEL DUNNEsaid, he thought that the answer given by the noble Lord the Under Secretary for War was highly satisfactory as to the course the Government had taken in regard to the subject which had been under discussion. There was, however, another subject upon which he wished to obtain some information—namely, with respect to the sum granted for the retirement of the officers of the Royal Engineer Corps and the manner of its application. A sum of £16,000 was voted every year for the retirement of Engineer officers; but since the Vote first appeared in the Estimates the corps had been largely increased by the amalgamation of the army of the East. What he complained of was that the whole of the £16,000 was not applied to the purpose for which it was
1468
voted. Certain Engineer officers accepted civil appointments. When the time arrived at which they would be entitled to military retiring pensions, they were obliged either to give up their civil appointments or to forego their retiring allowances. If they continued to serve the country in a civil capacity, their retiring pensions as Engineer officers were retained; and, for his own part, he did not know whether the money was returned to the Exchequer, or applied to some other purpose. All he knew was, that to that extent the sum voted by Parliament for the benefit of the Engineers was misapplied. The Commander-in Chief had endeavoured to obtain justice for the Engineer officers, but in vain; and hence the necessity for calling public attention to the subject.
MR. PEELsaid, there was a War Office warrant of 1858, which granted £48,000 for pensions to officers of the Artillery and Engineer corps, £32,000 for the Artillery, and £16,000 for the Engineers. The latter sum was to be divided between the officers of different ranks in the Engineers. The general officers were allowed to retire on full pay provided they had a prospect of the command of a battalion. Now, those general officers made a sacrifice when they consented to retire on the full pay list. Some of these retired full-pay officers were found available for civil service, and of course, when so employed by the Government, it was not possible that they should receive both their military full pay and their civil salaries. Consequently, a certain portion of the amount granted for the retired full-pay list was undrawn. The hon. and gallant Member did not wish to deprive the Government of the privilege of employing Engineer officers in civil situations in cases where they were likely to render service to the country. What he wanted was that the military full pay of officers engaged in civil employments should be assigned to other officers of the Engineers.
COLONEL DUNNEsaid, he did not refer to the full pay, but the undrawn retiring pensions, which were allowed to accumulate, instead of being distributed amongst the other officers. His object was that no part of the £16,000 voted by that House for Engineers should be intercepted because some of those officers took employment in the civil service.
CAPTAIN JERVISsaid, the complaint was that a certain sum was voted by Parliament

1469
to be applied in certain proportions so as to produce the greatest number of retirements among the Engineer officers, and thus prevent very old officers occupying the places of young and active men who could do the work; but that the Treasury would not allow it to be so expended. Not long since three senior Engineer officers were in civil appointments, when £600 fell vacant. Instead of the next Engineer officer getting this, the Treasury said that some of these three officers might some day retire from civil service; and, until they made up their minds, they would allow no one to have the money. One of these had since died, but still the money was retained. He hoped that the matter would be seriously considered, as the sum actually voted by Parliament was not distributed.

THE CASE OF PAYMASTER SMALES.

  OBSERVATIONS.
  MR. CONINGHAMsaid, after the discussions which had already taken place on the subject of Captain Smales' court martial, he thought he should best consult the convenience of the House by postponing his Motion until the evidence was printed. But as an hon. Gentleman opposite had stated that the verdict of the court martial was justified by the tone of insubordination that pervaded Captain Smales' letter, he (Mr. Coningham) felt himself called on to state that that letter was written under a feeling of great provocation and irritation. He wished also to make a remark upon the gross injustice towards Paymaster Smales of statements made in the memorandum of Sir Hugh Rose on the proceedings of the Mhow court martial. It was therein stated that Paymaster Smales had been convicted of falsehood and malice, whereas the fact was that he was not even charged with falsehood and malice; that the charge before the court martial was confined to insubordination. Falsehood and malice were moral offences which rendered a man who was guilty of them unworthy of society; but insubordination was not a moral offence at all. Paymaster Smales had been treated with grievous injustice, and had been made the object of special slander, and on these grounds he (Mr. Coningham) would hereafter appeal for justice on his behalf.
  Motion agreed to.

SUPPLY—CIVIL SERVICE ESTIMATES,
SUPPLY considered in Committee.
(In the Committee.)
(1.) Original Question again proposed,
"That a sum, not exceeding £236,016, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1864, for Public Education in Ireland, under the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland."
MR. HENNESSYsaid, that the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General for Ireland, in objecting to the introduction of the English system of education into Ireland on the ground that it would facilitate proselytism, by enabling wealthy Protestant landowners to establish schools where there were no children of their own denomination to attend them, bad entirely misunderstood the character of its system. According to a cardinal rule of the Privy Council, no one was allowed to receive a grant unless he could show that there were within the area of the proposed school a sufficient number of children and families of the labouring poor of the same religious denomination as himself; and in one case, to his knowledge, a grant was refused to a gentleman who desired to establish a Catholic school in a Protestant district, because he could not satisfy the requirements of the Privy Council in that respect. In short, the English system was carefully guarded against any attempt at proselytism, and no instance of its failure in that respect had come to his knowledge. The Attorney General dwelt very much upon the increase in the number of scholars, which had risen from 355,320 in 1843 to 812,000 in the present year, but he had not referred to the cost. In 1843, the sum voted by that House was £55,000. This year they were asked to vote £305,000. According to the rate of expenditure in 1843, that sum ought to educate not 812,000 but 2,000,000 pupils. In Ireland the grant had increased much faster than the number of children. In England, within the last year or two, the grant had declined, but the number of children attending the schools had increased, The decrease of the grant last year was £38,000, but there was an increase of 28,000 in the attendance. In Ireland there was an increase of 320 in the number of pupils and of £16,000 in the grant. The increase in the number of schools in Ireland was 180, or one for

1471
every two pupils; while in England, with an increase of 28,000 pupils, the increase in the number of schools was not more than 20 or 30. It might be asked why-Irish Members should complain, as long as their country derived the benefit of the excessive expenditure upon the system of national education. In a debate a few night previously, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, when asked for money to promote works of a practical character, such as arterial drainage and the improvement of inland navigation, replied that he had no money to spare for such purposes, as the nation already bestowed £300,000 a year upon Irish education. Clearly, therefore, it devolved upon Irish Members to show in what manner the money which the Government was willing to expend in Ireland could be most beneficially applied. In the comparatively deserted state of the House it would interfere with the progress of public business if he were to press to a division the Motion of which he had given notice for a reduction of the Vote by £100,000. He therefore begged to withdraw it; but he hoped the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary, before the Vote was agreed to, would let the House know whether he concurred with the views which his Colleague the Attorney General for Ireland had expressed.
MR. LONGFIELDsaid, he felt, that after the lengthened debate which had taken place on a previous evening, and in the present state of the attendance, the time was inopportune for bringing forward his Motion for such a relaxation of the rules of the National Board of Education in Ireland as should permit a number of schools now in existence and languishing for want of funds to partake in the benefits conferred by the grant. He begged to give notice of his intention to bring forward that subject early next Session.
SIR ROBERT PEELsaid, it was not for him to state whether he agreed with every word of the very full and able statement of his learned Colleague the Attorney General; but the general views expressed by that right hon. Gentleman on the subject of National Education received his entire concurrence. It was perfectly true that there was a small increase, about £16,000, over the Vote of the previous year; but that, as he had explained to the House when introducing the Vote, was principally owing to the natural increase in the salaries of teachers; and he was sure the Committee
1472
would feel that those public servants were not overpaid for the duties they discharged. He should be very glad to see money voted for the purpose of improving the arterial drainage of Ireland, or the agricultural system of that country generally, and all efforts in that direction would receive his cordial support; but he should be sorry to see the grants for education stopped in order to promote works of arterial drainage, on which undertakings large sums had been expended within the last thirty years. To educate the poor was to contribute in the best manner to the material improvement of the country in which they resided. After the ample discussion which had already taken place, he hoped there would be no objection to agree to the Vote.
SIR FREDERICK HEYGATEsaid, there were only three systems of education possible in Ireland—the voluntary, the denominational, and the mixed systems. The voluntary system might succeed in the case of the rich, but as regarded the poor it was not to be depended upon. The introduction of the denominational system into such a country as Ireland was exposed to the great drawback that it brought up children from their earliest infancy with feelings of hostility one towards the other, and taught them to view with suspicion and dislike those with whom necessarily they had to mingle in after life. The national system was by no means perfect, but in the present circumstances of Ireland no other system appeared to hold out commensurate advantages.
MR. LEFROYsaid, he disapproved the principle on which the grant was made, but he was not prepared to sacrifice the practical advantages which would be entailed by the adoption of a Motion such as that of the hon. Member for the King's County. He would, however, ask the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland to take into account the hardships which were inflicted on the great body of the Protestant clergy and laity in that country by excluding them from participation in the benefits of the grant. In self-defence they had been compelled to found at their own charges the Church Education Society, which proved its value by the increase in the number of its scholars and the amount of its funds. That the education it afforded was widely beneficial must be evident from the fact that in a single diocese 8,000 Dissenters and 1,600 Roman Catholics were included in the return of attendances. Young men with

1473
limited incomes and labourers from their scanty earnings contributed freely to the funds of the society, in order to perpetuate its valuable labours. He hoped a time would yet come when its exertions would receive, as they abundantly deserved, the recognition of the State.
MR. MONSELLsaid, that to give a portion of the grant to the Church Education Society would be to give a premium to proselytism. He wished, however, to call attention to a point connected with the increase in the salaries paid to masters In 1843 the amount voted for this purpose was £34,000; in 1863 it had increased to £205,000. In the year 1843 the amount paid for inspection was £5,000; in the present year it was £22,400. He wished to ask the right hon. Baronet why the convent schools were excluded from the benefit of the increase in the grant to other schools. That increase had risen from £10 to £42 in the female schools, or 400 per cent, while for the convent schools the amount remained the same. All the authorities agreed in affirming the value of the secular instruction given in the convent schools. He believed that no pupil teachers were allowed to be taken in the convent schools. Some relaxation of that rule was much required.
SIR ROBERT PEELsaid, the grant to convent schools was between £7,000 and £8,000. He could bear testimony to the admirable education given in these schools. The question of permitting pupil teachers of these schools to be teachers in other schools was, he believed, about to be discussed by the National Board. If the Board should determine that the convent schools should take pupil teachers, they would, of course, receive an increased allowance on that account.
MR. MONSELLsaid, he thought it hard, that while the allowances to other schools had increased 400 percent, there had been no increase to the convent schools.
MR. LEFROYsaid, that the only justification for excluding Church schools was that institutions like the convent schools were also shut out. They were, he believed, schools for Catholics exclusively. He must also deny that the Church Education Society was a proselytizing society. The religious teaching afforded in their schools was confined to the reading of the Scriptures. The charge of proselytism would be more applicable to the convent schools, if indeed they had any Protestant pupils.
MR. MONSELLsaid, he could assure the hon. Gentleman that very many Protestant children attended the convent schools, and that scrupulous care was taken against proselytism.
THE O'CONOR DONsaid, he wished to ask for an explanation of the Vote of £100 for a classical instructor for special class teachers.
MR. O'REILLYsaid, he wished for some explanation with respect to the model farm at Glasnevin. It appeared that for the farm steward an item of £150 was asked; for the ploughman, £31; for drainage, permanent live stock, manure, seeds, and plants, £500; for wages of servants, £80; and for rent, £723. The total agricultural expenditure—he omitted the expenditure for teaching—was £1,484, and the total probable amount of receipts was set down at £1,600, which would leave a probable profit of £116. Now, it was admitted that any reasonable agricultural returns would yield a profit equal to the rent. But if the whole net profit in that case was £116, and the rent £723, that model farm must be a model set up to be avoided.
MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, he considered the Vote altogether unsatisfactory. Whilst there had been a diminution of £38,117 in the education Vote for England, there had been an increase in the Vote for Ireland to the extent of £15,112. He objected to voting money taken from the taxes of the United Kingdom for high-class literary schools. Schools maintained at the public expense ought to be for the use of the children of the working classes. There were not less than nineteen agricultural schools in Ireland, for which it was proposed to vote £5,516. Those agricultural schools were of no benefit to the public, though they might be to the landlords in providing stewards for them. [A laugh.] His hon. Friend (Mr. Bagwell) laughed, but perhaps he would not think it unfair to put his hand in his pocket to pay for the education of his own steward. He begged to move the reduction of the Vote by £5,516 for agricultural schools.
Motion made, and Question proposed,
"That a sum, not exceeding £230,500, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1864, for Public Education in Ireland, under the Commissioners of National Education in Ireland."—(Mr. Williams.)
SIR ROBERT PEELsaid, he hoped that his hon. Friend would not press his Amendment. He was very glad his hon. Friend had been dining when they were discussing the point the other night. In that state of the House (about eighteen Members only were present) he was sure his hon. Friend would not like to gain his point. In answer to the question of the hon. Member for Roscommon (the O'Conor Don), he had to state that the classical teacher was required for a special class of pupil teachers and others, and on a former occasion had received the sanction of the Committee. As to the question raised by the hon. and gallant Member for Longford (Mr. O'Reilly), it was quite true that the agricultural school at Glasnevin had been rather an expensive establishment, but expensive only on account of the outlay necessary for the education of a vast number of persons who were trained there. It was well known that private gentlemen derived considerable advantage from the education which was given in those agricultural schools. The rent of the Glasnevin farm was rather high, because it was close to Dublin, but it grew excellent crops and instructed a large number of persons. He thought £50 a year was about the outside of the expenditure upon draining, which was done gradually year by year, for the purpose of instructing the pupils, who were made to do the work and understand it. Five acres were drained each year, and the whole of the draining and ploughing was done by the pupils. He had a Return of the occupations of those who had been educated in the agricultural model school at Glasnevin from 1858 to 1861; they were 175 in number, and it was not at all true, as stated on a former occasion by the hon. Member for Liskeard (Mr. Bernal Osborne), that they were all emigrating. Of the 175 pupils who had been educated between 1858 and 1861, 68 were farming their own land at home, 41 were land stewards or assistant land agents, 3 agricultural teachers, 9 garden assistants, 10 national school teachers, 9 had gone to Jamaica and Antigua, 14 were clerks in the offices of land agents, 5 had gone to the Cape of Good Hope and Australia, and only 16 had withdrawn from the establishment from delicate health and other causes. Glasnevin was rather expensive; but when they looked to the benefits derived, there was, he thought, no hon. Gentleman from Ireland, or from England either, who would wish to deprive
1476
the public of the advantages which unquestionably had flowed from the establishment of those schools. There had already been a diminution of £300 in the Vote in deference to the desire expressed last Session, and further reductions would be made in subsequent years. Besides, the system being now in good working trim, and no new agricultural buildings requiring to be erected, the Vote would of itself diminish.
MR. DAWSONsaid, he thought it of the utmost importance to the welfare of Ireland, as essentially an agricultural country, that the agricultural schools should be supported. There might be some faults connected with them, but they had produced very valuable results. The hon. and gallant Member for Longford the other evening had referred to some of the better classes in Ireland who had availed themselves of the schools supported by public grant for the education of their sons. With others of his class, he believed the late Mayor of Derry had done so, not to save his pocket, but from the knowledge that a very superior education was to be got there. He considered that a most laudable example in supporting a system which he believed would be abundantly productive of the greatest blessings to all classes in Ireland.
MR. HENNESSYsaid, it was alleged by those who supported the system of national education in Ireland that it was for the children of poor parents, but in truth the schools were resorted to by the children of mayors of towns, solicitors, and others, who were able to pay for their education. Such a system of education would not be tolerated in England for a moment. He believed, that if the case of a national school, similar to that just mentioned, had occurred in England, the Privy Council would have withdrawn their grant.
MR. O'REILLYsaid, he could assure the Committee he was as anxious as any one for the success of the agricultural schools. He had visited the Glasnevin school with great pleasure. But he must call attention to the fact of the absence of profit upon them. They could not be model farms if they did not show a reasonable profit. The fact was more remarkable in this instance, because the labour cost nothing.
MR. M'MAHONsaid, he thought that if any one part of the Irish system of education was defensible, it was that which related to the agricultural schools of the

1477
country, for there was in Ireland a great want of agricultural knowledge. He could not understand why the hon. Member for Lambeth (Mr. W. Williams) should have allowed £122,000 to be voted for science and art, and yet refused the grant for agricultural schools. If it was fit that cheap designers should be had from the schools of science and art, why should they not get cheap stewards from the agricultural schools in Ireland? In France there were agricultural schools in every district, and hence the great progress of agriculture in that country. In Ireland, till of late, they had been importing Scotch stewards; but these almost invariably ruined every gentleman who had employed them. Let them ask any English or Irish farmer if they ever knew of a Scotch steward who bad not always failed to attain his end. He trusted that the right hon. Baronet would not yield to clamour against the Tote for agricultural schools. With regard to the Hydrographical and Navigation schools, he thought that, instead of there being only seven of those institutions altogether, there ought to be one established in every principal seaport of the country.
MR. W. WILLIAMSsubmitted that there were no agricultural schools in England or Scotland supported by public grants, and did not see any cause for a distraction in favour of Ireland. If the Chief Secretary would promise to make a gradual reduction in the respect pointed out, he Would withdraw his Amendment, but not otherwise. He also wished to call attention to the item of £7,500 for mistresses to teach the higher branches of needlework, which he thought was very extravagant.
MAJOR HAMILTONsaid, that in answer to the Member for Wexford he had hitherto believed that a great boon was granted to Ireland by sending over to that country good Scotchmen with capital. The hon. and learned Member appeared, however, to think they had hitherto been sending Scotchmen there with no capital. He could tell the hon. and learned Member how that evil might easily be avoided. Let him vote with the hon. Member for Lambeth that no public money be voted for any purpose whatever in Ireland, and then he might be certain that no Scotchman without capital Would go there.
SIR ROBERT PEELsaid, he had so high an opinion of Irish talent that he had engaged an Irishman on his own estate instead of a Scotchman. With respect to the
1478
Vote for teachers of the higher branches of needlework—a matter which the hon. Member for Lambeth could not possibly understand—these teachers received only £10 a year each, an amount surely to which exception could hardly be taken fairly. If the hon. Member examined the Educational Votes for England, he would find items there for agricultural schools as well as for instruction in kitchen and laundry work.
Question put, and negatived.
Original Question put, and agreed to.
(2.) Motion made, and Question proposed,
"That a sum, not exceeding £12,028, be granted to Her Majesty to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1864, for the Expenses of the National Gallery, including the purchase of Pictures."
MR. CONINGHAMsaid, he rose to move that the Vote be reduced by £1,400 in the item of incidental and travelling expenses. He regarded the interference of the Government for the support of science and art as injurious rather than beneficial. The Vote for the National Gallery had been immortalized in Mr. May's able work on Constitutional History. Formerly an agent was employed, at a salary of £300, to travel over the Continent in order to purchase pictures for the National Gallery. A division was taken in that House against the item of £300 for that gentleman's salary, and the item was struck off. But an item of £600 remained on the Estimates for the payment of travelling expenses; and there was good reason to believe, that although that House had struck off the item for the German travelling agent, that agent was still employed by the authorities of the National Gallery, and remunerated out of the sum voted for travelling expense. That sum stood before at £600; but it had since risen to £2,000; and what he wished to know was, how that amount was made up, what proportion of it went for travelling expenses, and how much for incidental and other expenses. Unless he received a satisfactory explanation as to the mode in which the money was applied, it would be his duty to take the sense of the Committee on his Amendment. The authorities of the National Gallery were in the habit of lending pictures to other public institutions, but the pictures so lent were not of such a character as was likely to improve the public taste. In the conclude-

1479
ing paragraph of the Report appended to the Vote it was stated that a regulation had been introduced providing that "with the exception of dusting and wiping," no operation coming under the description of varnishing, cleaning, or restoring should be undertaken without the sanction of the trustees, to be communicated by the keeper. That regulation was the result of constant protests made in that House. He would move, as an Amendment, that the item be reduced by £1,400.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Item of £2,000, for Incidental Travelling Expenses, Agency, &c., be reduced by the sum of £1,000."—(Mr. Coningham.)
MR. PEELsaid, the sum of £2,000 was not intended merely for travelling expenses and agencies, but also for all the temporary and miscellaneous expenses connected with the National Gallery, such as the carriage and framing of the pictures; and the amount asked could not, therefore, be considered extravagant. With regard to travelling expenses and agencies, no larger sum than £650 was allowed, and the actual expenditure did not generally exceed £500.
MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, that the total Vote was larger by £4,075 than the Vote of last year, and the expenditure was principally for the purchase of pictures.
MR. AUGUSTUS SMITHsaid, he thanked the hon. Member for Brighton for calling attention to the item, because the expenditure ought to be more accurately explained in the Estimates. He conceived that the sum allowed to the travelling agent was too large, when considered in connection with the amount dispensed in the purchase of pictures.
MR. CONINGHAMsaid, that he originally objected to any sum being devoted to travelling expenses, for he thought it a perfect delusion to send all over Europe a travelling agent to purchase pictures. When the agent arrived in a continental town, it was said that the man with the purse of the British taxpayers was come to purchase pictures, and the pictures rose 100 to 200 per cent in value. He thought that the gentlemen in charge of the national pictures were utterly blind; at least, they never saw the merits of a picture until it got into the hands of some dealer, who asked 500 per cent for his bargain. For instance, a picture was purchased
1480
the other day at Christie's for £500 or £600, which was at the sale of the former proprietor knocked down for a trifling sum. Why did not the trustees of the National Gallery get the picture when it could be obtained cheap? Nevertheless, after the explanation given by the right hon. Gentleman, he should withdraw his Amendment.
MR. GREGORYsaid, he thought that his hon. Friend the Member for Brighton was too great a lover of art to make any serious objection to that particular item. It was perfectly clear, that as the vast majority of the Italian pictures would not come to the English, the English must go to the pictures, and the pictures could not be obtained except by means of agents. Sir Charles Eastlake, when he went abroad, did not raise the price of pictures. That gentleman visited all the galleries, ascertained the value of any pictures that it might be desirable to add to the national collection, and easily found an agent to purchase them whenever the opportunity occurred. He was thus enabled to make a good selection at a cheaper rate than by public competition. An example of that was afforded by the picture purchased at Christie's, to which the hon. Gentleman alluded. If the English agent had seen that picture in the gallery in Italy, he would probably have got it for the sum for which it was originally sold—he thought £200. If his hon. Friend went to the National Gallery, and saw two or three pictures there purchased by Sir Charles Eastlake last year, he would be satisfied that it was fortunate that the country had a person of so much tact, judgment, and knowledge to undertake the selection of the national pictures.
Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
MR. MITFORDsaid, he would recommend that greater facilities should be given to the public to see the national pictures. On the four public days in the week the Gallery was so crowded that it was impossible to see the paintings with any comfort or advantage, and he would suggest that on the two remaining days, devoted to students, such of the public as chose to pay sixpence or a shilling for admission should be allowed to enter. He thought the students would probably derive great advantage from such an arrangement, as many might succeed in finding purchasers for the copies they were engaged in making.
MR. COWPERsaid, he concurred with the hon. Gentleman in thinking it was desirable there should be some quiet days, when those who took a special interest in pictures might find themselves in the Gallery undisturbed by a crowd. He did not, however, believe that that advantage would be effected by exacting on certain days the payment of sixpence or a shilling, because he had observed that exhibitions at which such a payment was exacted were frequently very densely thronged. The matter, however, was one which the trustees might fairly take into their consideration.
MR. MITFORDsaid, those other exhibitions which the right hon. Gentleman referred to as being thronged, though money was paid for admission to them, were not open gratuitously four days in the week, as was the case with the National Gallery.
MR. CONINGHAMcontended, that it would be perfectly easy, taking the pictures at the National Gallery seriatim, to show that a very large number had been purchased by Sir Charles Eastlake, which ought never to have been bought for that institution, while others might have been purchased for a much more reasonable amount than the sums given for them. It was, however, to the credit of Sir Charles Eastlake that he seemed to have profited by the discussions on the subject of the National Gallery which had taken place in that House.
MR. HEYGATEsaid, he thought the rules which regulated the class of pictures to be bought for the National Gallery ought to be made somewhat more elastic, and that Sir Charles Eastlake ought to be permitted to buy from time to time pictures illustrative of cotemporary history possessing national interest and of intrinsic merit.
MR. PEELsaid, there was no rule precluding the purchase of modern pictures. Paintings, the work of Gainsborough and Sir J. Reynolds, had, for instance, been bought during the previous year.
Original Question put, and agreed to.
(3.) £1,500, British Historical Portrait Gallery.
MR. CONINGHAMcomplained of the absence of detailed explanation of the Vote. He knew of pictures of great interest being entirely overlooked within the last few months by the authorities of the Gallery. In his opinion, none but model
1482
works of the highest class should be purchased for the galleries of the nation.
MR. PEELpromised to consider whether fuller information could not be furnished.
MR. BRISCOEsaid, that it was, in his opinion, a complete misapplication of the public money to purchase works which were a disgrace to the gallery. Only works of the highest art out to be bought for such institutions.
MR. LOCKEsaid, it was in no degree the object for which the gallery was formed to elevate art. It would be utterly impossible to collect togeher portraits of all sorts of characters, of all sorts of appearances, possessing great artistic merit.
MR. BRISCOEsaid, his remarks referred as well to the previous Vote as to that immediately under discussion.
Vote agreed to; as were also the following:—
(4.) £3,141, to complete the sum for Magnetic and Meteorological Observations, &c.
(5.) £500, Royal Geographical Society.
(6.) £1,000, Royal Society.
(7.) £4,200, Bermudas.
(8.) £4,288, Ecclesiastical Establishment, British North American Provinces.
MR. AUGUSTUS SMITHsaid, he wanted to know whether the charge was in process of diminution, or whether vacancies were being filled up as they occurred.
MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUEstated that for many years past the Vote had been in course of diminution, the salaries only continuing for the lives of the present holders.
Vote agreed to; as was also—
(9.) £1,438, Indian Department, Canada.
(10.) £17,121, to complete the sum for British Columbia.
MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, he noticed that there was a reduction in the Vote of £9,000 for British Columbia that year. The colony, however, was highly prosperous, and therefore he thought it time that the whole was at an end.
MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUEsaid, that almost the whole of the Vote had been incurred in the first starting of the colony; and although only a young colony, the time had already arrived when

1483
she paid her own expenses. The Royal Engineers were about to be recalled.
MR. CAIRDsaid, he wished to ask whether it was intended to appoint; a separate resident Governor.
MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUEsaid, his noble Friend the Secretary of State was about to bring in a Bill for the Government of British Columbia, and he did not wish to anticipate the full statement of the intentions of the Government which would then be made,
Vote agreed to.
(11.) £2,500, Vancouver's Island,
MR. W. WILLIAMSasked whether the Vote was the last payment.
MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUEsaid, it included the last farthing which was to be paid to the Hudson's Bay Company. An item of £5,000 was in dispute, and, to avoid long and expensive legal proceedings, it had been arranged to divide the amount and pay one-half.
MR. ALDERMAN SALOMON'Sasked, whether Vancouver's Island was now the absolute property of the Crown.
MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUEsaid, it was so entirely.
Vote agreed to.
(12.) £21,745, to complete the sum for Governors, &c., West Indies, and other Colonies.
MR. M'MAHONsaid, he would suggest that some means might be provided to reduce the number of governorships in these small islands. They might as well pay the Chairmen of Vestries of large metropolitan parishes, which were of more importance than some of the Colonies.
MR. W. WILLIAMSasked for explanations as to the Governors of Jamaica.
MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUEsaid, that last year a very wise arrangement was made, by which a very old and bad debt due by Jamaica was converted into a fixed perpetual annuity, out of which, after next July, the whole salary of the Governors would be paid. As to reducing the number of Governors, however small and insignificant these islands were, they formed separate and distinct communities, and must each have some officer to administer their affairs.
Vote agreed to; as was also—
(18.) £9,000, Stipendiary Justices, West India Colonies.
(14.) Motion made, and Question proposed,
"That a sum, not exceeding £10,230, be granted to Her Majesty, to complete the sum necessary to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1864, for the Civil Establishments on the Western Coast of Africa."
SIR FRANCIS BARINGsaid, he wished for some explanation with regard to the Vote, seeing that £2,000 only appeared in the items as the cost of the civil establishments of Lagos. Lagos was a small island of no consequence in itself, but it was important from its position in, reference to the trade with Africa. If they were anxious to get rid of the iniquitous slave trade, the most effectual way was to encourage legitimate trade. They, however, had raised the taxation upon the trade of that port from £3,000 to £16,000, and this proceeding was, he thought, most hostile to the best interests of Africa, for it placed the trade at Lagos in a most uncomfortable position, and indeed trade was being driven from that place to another port. The governor of Lagos had since laid claim to the second port—for which claim, however, it appeared there was no foundation; but he could only speak from imperfect information upon, the matter, as the Government had refused to furnish the papers in reference to it. He also desired to express his disgust at learning that a portrait of the Queen had been presented by one of Her Majesty's agents to the King of Dahomey, the most notorious slave-dealer and murderer in Africa, at the very time that he was preparing for an attack on Abbeokuta. Other transactions of a most unfortunate character had taken place, which would lead the people to believe that we were favourable to the King of Dahomey and his barbarities. Our object on the coast of Africa was not territorial aggrandisement, but the spread of civilization and the stoppage of the slave trade. But grabbing at every hit of land was not the way to attain that object. Our policy ought to be to encourage the self-government of the Africans, to support those who were willing to make treaties with us to put an end to the slave trade, but not in any shape or in any way to exhibit an inclination to take possession of all the land we could lay our hands on. He concluded by moving the omission from the Vote of the item of £2,000 for the establishments at Lagos.
Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Item of £2,000, for the Civil

1485
Establishments at Lagos, be omitted from the proposed Vote."—(Sir Francis Baring.)
MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUEsaid, he fully admitted the right of the right hon. Gentleman to draw attention to a subject in which he had always shown so much real interest, but he hardly expected that he would have taken so much pains to object to so small a Vote in aid of an establishment which was only in its second year of existence, and which, if it were to extend at all, might fairly apply for some small assistance from Parliament. Lagos was required for the purpose of putting down the slave trade, and of establishing a legitimate commerce, and the Colonial Office was doing its best to administer its affairs in a satisfactory manner, but it was not surprising that the House of Commons should be asked for some small assistance in starting the settlement on its career. Hitherto, of course, the expenditure had been of an exceptional kind, and was not to be reckoned as the ordinary expenditure of the local Government. There was every reason to believe that from that time forward Lagos would be able to pay its own way. The accounts now received were of the most favourable kind, and there could be little doubt that both financially and commercially Lagos would turn out before long the most successful British settlement on the coast of Africa. The worst thing to be said of it was, that it would necessarily cause a considerable loss of European life; but he hoped that when money had been spent in paving and draining, the danger to health would be much diminished. He had no reason to think that the customs duties would be unfavourable to commerce. They were very moderate in amount, and they would be expended in promoting security to life and property, which were the very soul of trade. He regretted as much as the right hon. Baronet the collision that had occurred, but it arose in consequence of a dispute between the establishment and some traders who preferred the wild government of a chief who imposed no taxes to the government of the British and the imposition of moderate customs duties, which were expended to the signal advantage of the colony; and when a peaceful mission, consisting of eleven white soldiers and a handful of black policemen, was sent out, they were set upon by some of the native troops and several killed. That was followed up by a great destruction of property, and other warlike acts, which rendered it necessary for the Lagos authorities
1486
to take active steps against the chief in question, and make an example of him. From the time they had had possession they had shown the greatest moderation. The chiefs of the place, seeing their moderation, thought they would tolerate anything, but they found themselves mistaken. With respect to Abbeokuta, he thought his right hon. Friend's fears were exaggerated. The ports of this district were blockaded for a time; no lives were lost, and in the end Abbeokuta came round, and complied with the demands required of her. With respect to Dahomey, it was not a British Colony, and he hoped it never would be. But he had no such fears as his right hon. Friend had expressed, that the king of that settlement would not yield to the representations that had been made to him. On the contrary, he was inclined to suspect that the conciliatory conduct pursued by Commodore Wilmot would have a better effect than his right hon. Friend seemed to anticipate. He hoped the Committee would agree to the Vote.
LORD ALFRED CHURCHILLsaid, he considered that the Vote was a very fair one, and such as the Committee might very well agree to. The effect of the establishment of Lagos as a British Colony had been to put a decided check upon the slave trade on the West Coast of Africa, and he had no doubt that the financial results of the step would, before long, be very satisfactory, notwithstanding the establishment of a free port by the French at Porto Novo, and their rumoured advances into Dahomey. He was not at all disposed to look with jealousy upon the increase of French interests in that colony, as he thought it would, on the whole, have a beneficial and civilizing effect, although the slave trade undoubtedly was carried on under their auspices. He would add, that he thought that the missionaries at Abbeokuta were not altogether free from blame in reference to the differences between them and Governor Freeman.
MR. BUXTONsaid, it would be a great mistake to disallow the Vote, as the possession of Lagos would materially aid in stopping the slave trade. The unfortunate circumstances which had recently occurred with reference to their relations with Abbeokuta, he attributed almost, if not entirely, to the injudicious conduct of Governor Freeman, who, he hoped, would be recalled forthwith. He thought that Commodore Wilmot had acted rightly in adopting a conciliatory tone towards the

1487
King of Dahomey; but he could not approve the statement in that gallant officer's despatch, that it would never do for the King to abolish human sacrifices at one blow. He also thought his conduct was reprehensible, in assisting, apparently without any protest, at the so-called "human sacrifices" of Dahomey. He concurred with the noble Lord (Lord A. Churchill) in thinking it would be a mistake to view the French establishment with jealousy; but they must not forget that the Emperor of the French had constituted France one of the slave-trading Powers of the world by the free emigration scheme on the coast of Africa.
MR. CAVEsaid, the question was, whether any means of the kind adverted to by the hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary for the Colonies would really put an end to the slave trade. Nothing less would justify the sacrifice of European life entailed by that deadly climate. He considered that this was hopeless so long as, while attacking the slave trade with one hand, we gave it the greatest encouragement with the other. He believed that negotiations with savage chieftains was a a waste of time. Two envoys had been sent to the King of Dahomey, and one of those Gentlemen thought he had made a great impression by his statement of the value of the palm-oil trade in comparison with the slave trade. The King heard him very patiently, and then merely said that the slave trade was very profitable and that palm-trees took a long time to grow. Another envoy, who tried to induce the King to put an end to the barbarous massacre which every year took place, was promised a good position to see them. That was all the good done by these missions. With regard to the French settlements, he felt no jealousy of them, for there was room enough for all, but those settlements certainly did not conduce to the civilization of the people and the stoppage of the slave trade; for it was notorious that a virtual slave trade was carried on by the French themselves from both the West and East Coast of Africa. He should not oppose the Vote, for he thought that this small sum of money was well applied in teaching the natives the value of legitimate commerce and free labour; but as long as the price was sufficient to compensate for the risk run, it was not likely that the slave trade would be put down.
MR. LAYARDsaid, he regretted to hear the remarks made upon Commodore
1488
Wilmot, who was an officer of great humanity and of strong religious feeling, and no man could have a stronger detestation of the slave trade and of the horrible "customs" of the King of Dahomey. Commodore Wilmot was not under instructions from the Government when he visited the King of Dahomey; but being there, he availed himself of the opportunity to urge upon the King to- stop the slave trade, and put an end to the massacres. He was in a very difficult position, having either to withdraw from Dahomey, and thereby give the King great offence, or remain at the capital during the performance of these rites, without being an actual witness of them. He strongly reprobated what took place, but thought it advisable to remain, and told the King that the British Government, would, no doubt, enter into some alliance with him if he would abolish the slave trade, and put an end to these horrible customs. The Government intended to follow up that attempt by Commodore Wilmot, and send another envoy to try to accomplish these objects. As to the Abbeokutans, who, in defiance of treaty, had again, engaged in the slave trade, the Government had strong ground of complaint against them. But there existed at Abbeokuta an influence adverse to British interests there, and the British Consul who had been sent there was sent back, with considerable indignity. The Abbeokutans had plundered the people of Lagos, and Governor Freeman was compelled to blockade the place. That blockade had now been raised, but the effect had been good, and he trusted that the people of Abbeokuta would henceforth see the expediency of maintaining good relations with us.
SIR FRANCIS BARING, in reply, complained that not one word had been said in explanation of the expenditure at Lagos. As to the hostile influence said to exist at Abbeokuta, he presumed that the hon. Gentleman referred to the mission there, and he thought that in justice the defence made by the mission should be laid before Parliament. It was no wonder that the Consul was not graciously received by the Abbeokutans. They were well aware that Lagos was not taken possession of by our Government till after we had sent a Consul there; and they were afraid that if a Consul were allowed to remain in Abbeokuta, their fate would be like that of the people of Lagos.
MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUEexplained that the Vote was in general aid of

1489
the civil establishments at Lagos. The Bum asked was so small that there was little reason to object to the amount left at the disposal of the Governor.
MR. WHITEsaid, that the revenue from Lagos was £16,000, and he should like to know how that revenue was distributed.
MR. W. WILLIAMSsaid, he wished to know what was the meaning of an item of £2,000 for a steamer, when the whole salaries of the Governor, Judge, and two other officers were only £2,280.
MR. CHICHESTER FORTESCUEexplained, that the steamer was of essential service in the public service up the river.
Question put, and negatived.
Original Question put, and agreed to.
The following Votes were then agreed to:—
(15.) £5,602, St. Helena.
(16.) £700, Orange River Territory (Cape of Good Hope).
(17.) £5,000, British Kaffraria.
(18.) £960, Heligoland.
(19.) £4,286, Falkland Islands.
(20.) £4,850, to complete the sum for Labuan.
(21.) £300, Pitcaim's Islanders in Norfolk Island.
(22.) £26,622, Civil Establishment in New Zealand.
(23.) £5,000, Buildings at Cape York.
(24.) £6,720, to complete the sum for Emigration.
(25.) £116,543, to complete the sum for the Consular Establishments Abroad.
(26.) £71,054, to complete the sum for Establishments in China, Japan, and Siam.
(27.) £23,000, to complete the sum for Extraordinary Disbursements of Her Majesty's Embassies and Missions Abroad.
(28.) £30,000, to complete the sum for Special Missions, Diplomatic Outfits, &c., Colonial Officers and others.
(29.) £2,825, to complete the sum for Salaries of Third Secretaries at Her Majesty's Embassies and Missions Abroad.
MR. DODSONobserved, that in 1861 there were thirty-seven attaches paid out of the Consolidated Fund, and now the salaries of thirty-two others were asked for. He wished to know how many unpaid attaches there were, and where those others were attached. The Secretary of State had unlimited power to appoint unpaid attachés; and as long as the House was not called upon to vote money, it did not matter; but as they were called upon
1490
to grant Supply, they were entitled to information.
MR. LAYARDsaid, the Vote was the consequence of a recommendation of the Committee which sat upon the diplomatic service about three years since. The new system certainly appeared to have contributed to the public advantage. Unpaid services were not generally desirable, and, he thought, not economical. The object in view was to reduce the number of attaches and to bring diplomacy into a profession. That could only be done by paying the members of the diplomatic service; and it had been decided, on mature consideration, that after a period of four years' service a salary of £150 should be paid to attaches, if they succeeded in passing a certain examination. There would be no objection to furnish information as to the number of attaches and secretaries to each embassy.
MR. DARBY GRIFFITHsaid, he thought the value of the diplomatic service was very much reduced by the telegrams, which anticipated their despatches.
Vote agreed to.
(30.) £4,300, North American Boundary Commission.
MR. PEEL, in reply to Mr. W. WILLIAMS, stated that the Commission had returned to this country, but they had not yet made their final Report.
Vote agreed to.
House resumed.
Resolutions to be reported To-morrow; Committee to sit again To-morrow.

PUBLIC WORKS (MANUFACTURING DISTRICTS) [ADVANCES].

  COMMITTEE.
  Considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERrose to move the following Resolution:—
  "That the Commissioners of Her Majesty's Treasury be authorized to issue, out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, to an amount not exceeding £1,200,000, upon security of local rates, for facilitating the execution of public works in certain manufacturing districts."
  That Resolution was simply a formal supplement to the measure introduced by the President of the Poor Law Board for the purpose of making advances for the execution of public works in Lancashire. The provisions of the Bill had

  1491
  been severed, times discussed in the House, and he believed there was a general concurrence in the wisdom and policy of the proposals made by the Government on the subject. According to the best information which his right hon. Friend had been able to obtain, it was probable, that if the Lancashire distress should continue—if the number of unemployed operatives should remain as great as it then was, and the prospects of the coming winter should not he improved by a much larger accession to the supplies of cotton than there, was then reason to expect—the amount of public money likely to be required Within; the nest twelve months for useful works in Lancashire might rise as high as £2,000,000. But in a case pf that, kind it hardly ever happened that the full sum estimated to be spent within a certain time was actually spent within that time; and, moreover, long before the twelve months had elapsed. Parliament would be sitting, and the Government would be enabled to call its attention again to the matter. Therefore, without wishing unduly to stint the supply of money for the purpose, provided the security was good and the works were well considered, he did not think it desirable to ask the House at the present moment to vote a larger sum than was likely, as far as they could judge; to be required before Parliament should have an opportunity next Session of re-considering the question. Under the operation of Acts, in force, the Government had about £300,000 available for public works without any fresh legislation. With the addition of the £1,200,000, which they proposed to, vote, they would thus have the command of a million and a half, to be dispensed upon public works in the manufacturing districts. By the present Resolution, and his right hon. Friend's Bill, they did not propose to provide, any money, but only took authority to spend money supposed to be provided from other sources. The Exchequer balances on the last quarter-day Were, considerably beyond what was necessary for, the, ordinary public expenditure, and the, margin had been made use of in the present quarter for the discharge of a million of Exchequer bonds and something more than a million of Exchequer bills. They had obtained an Act during the present Session authorizing them to reissue, in case of need, that million of Exchequer bonds, while they had also statutory power to reissue within the
  1492
  financial year any Exchequer bills paid off within that year. Consequently, their power of replenishing the Consolidated Fund in case of need went beyond £2,000,000, and there would therefore be no difficulty in providing the £1,200,000 included in the Resolution which he now begged to move.
  MR. HENNESSYsaid, he was sure no one would object to the proposal of the Government, and certainly an Irish Member would be the last person to do so; but he wished to take that opportunity of thanking the right hon. Gentleman for what he had said the other night on the subject of public works in Ireland, and of expressing his satisfaction at the gratifying account just given of the state of the Exchequer balances. He also wished to direct the right hon. Gentleman's attention to a practical point connected with public works in Ireland. Mr. Bateman, an offices who had been employed by the Government had made a Report on the navigation of the Shannon. Certain works undertaken some years ago by the Government for improving the navigation of that river had, owing to the mistakes of the Government officers, interfered prejudicially with the navigation, and flooded the banks of the Shannon. Mr. Bateman calculated the loss thus inflicted on the owners of the adjacent property at £30,000 per annum, and suggested that the Government should take the matter up, and either complete these works or have them removed. He hoped the Government would give them an assurance that they would take action on Mr. Bateman's Report, and carry out the Chancellor of the Exchequer's remarks the other night—the only remarks made on the Treasury Bench for a long time which had gives satisfaction in Ireland.
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUERsaid, he, was glad if anything said by himself had given satisfaction in Ireland or elsewhere, because it was the lots of persons who held the office which he then had the honour to fill generally to give rise to dissatisfaction. The hon. Gentleman, however, would do him the justice to observe that what he said the other night had reference to a particular class of works. The navigation of the Shannon was not the subject before them; and if the. Government proceeded in that matter at all, it must be with relation rather to what had been done already than to any abstract principle. The history given by the hon. Gentleman himself of these works showed the necessity for great care and caution in such matters.
  Resolved,
  That the Commissioners of Her Majesty's Treasury be authorized, to issue, out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, to an amount not exceeding Twelve Hundred Thousand Pounds, upon security of Local Rates, for facilitating the execution of Public Works in certain Manufacturing Districts.
  House resumed.
  Resolution to be reported To-morrow, at Twelve of the Clock.

NEWCASTLE-UPON-TYNE (ST. MARY MAGDALEN HOSPITAL) BILL.

  [BILL 162.] COMMITTEE.
  Bill considered in Committee.
  (In the Committee.)
  Clauses 1 to 8 agreed to.
  Clause 9 (Sale of the Advowson).
  MR. LYGONsaid, that while he admitted that it might at times be desirable to sell an advowson in order to augment a living, he objected to the sale of the presentation to the new district to be created under the Bill out of the funds of the charity. He therefore moved an Amendment, providing that it should be placed in the gift of the Bishop of the diocese.
  MR. LIDDELLsaid, he must oppose the Amendment. The advowson was to be sold to augment the funds of the charity. That arrangement had been a matter of compromise, and he believed that the present scheme met with the general approbation of the town at large.
  MR. HEADLAMurged the Committee to make no material alteration in the Bill, which was the result of a compromise.
  MR. LOWEsaid, a municipal corporation was notoriously a bad patron. It was proposed to sell the advowson, and to apply the proceeds in aid of the medical charity. The Amendment of his hon. Friend would deprive the charity of that money.
  MR. COLLINSsaid, he believed that the patronage would be better placed in private hands than in those of the Bishop, but recommended his hon. Friend not to divide.
  MR. G. CUBITTcontended that the arrangement proposed in the Bill would introduce an entirely novel principle.
  MR. LOWEsaid, he did not think mere novelty mattered much if the step were right in itself.
  MR. LYGONsaid, he would withdraw his Amendment.
  Clause agreed to.
  Clauses 10 and 11 agreed to.
  Schedule.
  MR. LYGONsaid, he would then move the omission of section 12, which would give a sanction to the odious and improper system of pew rents.
  MR. LOWEsaid, there were in the chapel 100 free seats and 188 seats paying pew rents. The proposition was, in effect, that the revenue hitherto enjoyed from that source should be cut off.
  Amendment proposed, to leave out paragraph 12.—(Mr. Lygon.)
  Question put, "That paragraph 12 stand part of the Schedule."
  The Committee divided:—Ayes 59; Noes 11: Majority 48.
  House resumed.
  Bill reported; as amended, to be considered To-morrow.

STIPENDIARY MAGISTRATES BILL.

  [BILL 189.] COMMITTEE.
  Order for Committee read.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That Mr. Speaker do now leave the Chair."
  MR. H. B. SHERIDANmoved that the House go into Committee on this Bill.
  MR. LYGONmoved as an Amendment that the House go into Committee on that day three months.
  Amendment proposed,
  To leave out from the word "That" to the end of the Question, in order to add the words "this House will, upon this day three months, resolve itself into the said Committee,"—(Mr. Lygon,)—instead thereof.
  Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Question."
  MR. H. B. SHERIDANsaid, the Bill would apply only to places in which there were 25,000 inhabitants, and he hoped the Amendment would not be pressed.
  SIR GEORGE GREYsaid, he entertained certain objections to the Bill, and had prepared Amendments to meet those objections.
  MR. COLLINSsuggested that the Bill should be committed pro formâ, with a view to having the Amendments printed.
  MR. LYGONsaid, under those circumstances he should withdraw his Amendment.
  Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
  Main Question put, and agreed to.
  Bill considered in Committee.
  House resumed.
  Bill reported; to be printed, as amended [Bill 189]; re-committed for Tuesday next.

ENGLISH CHURCH SERVICES IN WALES
(re-committed) BILL (Lords)—[BILL 190.]
ENGLISH CHURCH SERVICES IN WALES

  COMMITTEE.
  Bill considered in Committee [Progress 22 nd June].
  (In the Committee.)
  COLONEL PENNANTmoved to omit Clause 2, and to insert the following Clause—
  (Provided, however, That in case the said incumbent shall fail or refuse to nominate a fit and proper person as minister to such chapel, Or in case any disagreement or dispute shall arise between the persons so applying and the incumbent, either in respect of the sufficiency of the said services, or of the, provision for the performance of such services, or for the minister, or in respect of the minister to be nominated, then the bishop of such diocese (after the expiration of three calendar mouths from the receipt of such application as aforesaid, due notice, of such application having been giving by the persons so applying to the, incumbent,) may signify in writing to the incumbent the name of the minister whom it is his intention to nominate as the officiating minister of such chapel; and in case the incumbent shall not, within fourteen days from such last notification, signify in writing his dissent to such nomination, it shall be lawful for the bishop to nominate and license, such minister: Provided, nevertheless, That in case the incumbent shall, within the same fourteen days, signify his dissent therefrom, such nomination shall be referred by the said bishop to the archbishop of the province in which such diocese shall be situated, and such licence shall not be granted without the approval in writing of the said archbishop;)—(Colonel Pennant,)—brought up, and read 1o; 2o.
  MR. LYGONsaid, he would propose, to insert in the new clause words which would have the effect; of making competency to perform the services in English the only thing that should be indispensable in the minister appointed.
  Amendment proposed, in line 6, after the word "nominated," to insert the words "to perform divine service in English."—(Mr. Lygon.)
  MR. H. A. BRUCEsaid, he must oppose the Amendment, on the ground that ability to perform the services in English was not sufficient; they should be performed in an intelligent manner.
  Question put, "That those words be there inserted."
  The Committee divided:—Ayes 6; Noes 46: Majority 40.
  House resumed.
  Bill reported, with Amendments; as amended, to be considered on Thursday next, and to be printed. [Bill 190.]

POOR REMOVAL (No. 2) BILL [MR. HERBERT].

  [BILL 96.] BILL WITHDRAW.
  Order for Committee read.
  MR. HERBERTsaid, the Amendment carried the other evening destroyed the Bill, and he should therefore move that the order be discharged.
  Order discharged.
  Bill withdrawn.

  PRISONERS REMOVAL (SCOTLAND) BILL.
  On Motion of The LORD ADVOCATE, Bill to remedy certain defects in tire Law relating to the Removal of Prisoners, in Scotland, ordered to be brought in by the Loan ADVOCATE and Sir GEORGE GREY.
  House adjourned at half after One o'clock.

MINUTES.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Land Drainage (Provisional Orders)* (No. 160); Inclosure (No. 2)* (No. 161); Thames Embankment (South Side) * (No. 162); Passengers Act Amendment* (No. 163); Pier and Harbour Orders Confirmation * (No. 164).
Second Reading—Waywardens' Contracts [H.L.] (No. 148).; Naval Medical Supplemental Fund Society Winding-up-Act, 1861, Amendment (No. 102); Sale of Mill Sites, &c. (Ireland)* (No. 105); Drainage and Improvement of Lands (Ireland) (No. 136), and referred to Select Committee.
Select Committee—Drainage and Improvement of Lands (Ireland) Bill (List of the Committee).
Committee—Leases and Sales of Settled Estates Act Amendment (No. 42 & 158); African Slave Trade Treaty* (No. 129); Volunteers (No. 140); Officers of Royal Naval Reserve* (No. 131); Inland Revenue* (No. 128); Militia Pay*.
Report—African Slave Trade Treaty*; Security from Violence* (No. 157); Inland Revenue*; Militia Pay*.
Third Reading—Thames Embankment (North Side)* (No. 151).

WAYWARDENS' CONTRACTS BILL [H.L.]

  (NO. 148) SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  LORD REDESDALE, in moving the second reading of this Bill, said, his object was to prevent way wardens from contracting for any works within their own districts, which were under the control of the Board of which they were members.
  Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a
  LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYsaid, he was informed by the Home Secretary that the Bill was entirely unnecessary, as the case was provided form the Highways Act, by which such contracts were prohibited under a penalty and the Highways Act of last Session provided that all qualifications and disqualifications of surveyors of highways, and waywardens which existed under the old law should continue in force.
  LORD REDESDALEwas perfectly convinced the Home Secretary was in error. The Highways Act provided that all powers, duties, rights, and incapacities which formerly attached to surveyors of highways should attach to the Highway Board, but it did not say that the incapacities should attach to each individual member of the Board; because, if so, the duties would also attach to each member,
  1424
  and the whole management would be thrown into utter confusion. At all events, the Bill could do no harm if it were passed, and it might accomplish what was intended but had not been effected.
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, there would be no objection to read the Bill a second time on the understanding that the opinion of the Law Officers should be obtained before the next stage.
  Motion agreed to: Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Monday next.

LEASES AND SALES OF SETTLED ESTATES ACT AMENDMENT BILL [H.L.]—(NO. 42.

  COMMITTEE.
  House in Committee (according to Order): The Lord Chancellor.
  LORD CHELMSFORDmoved the insertion of a short clause repealing the 21st section of the Act of 1856.
  After a few words from Lord EBURY, the Clause was agreed to.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORproposed a new Clause—
  "It shall be lawful for the Court of Chancery, at any time, and from time to time, by an order to be obtained On petition in a summary way, of any trustees or trustee, or other persons or person now or hereafter having authority, either by way of trust or power, or otherwise, to mortgage, sell, exchange, make partition of, or enfranchise any settled estate, to extend or vary such authority in such manner as, having regard to the local or other circumstances of the estate, and the permanent interests of all persons entitled and to be entitled to such settled estate, shall appear to the Court to be expedient, and so that the Court may appoint in lieu of such person or persons any other person or persons to exercise any such authority, or to receive the consideration money (if any) payable on any such mortgage, sale, exchange, partition, or enfranchisement, or any part of such money, and may make such orders for the investment, application, or disposition of such money as the Court shall think fit; and every order made as aforesaid shall enable the donee or donees of such authority to exercise the same, as so extended or varied, either with, or, if the Court shall think fit, without the approval or further sanction of the Court, and shall not prejudice the right to exercise such authority in its original form; and any such extension or variation as aforesaid may include the sale, or, if the Court shall approve, the gratuitous alienation of portions of the settled estate for the construction of railways by incorporated companies, and for the investment of any money received as aforesaid in subscribing for or purchasing any shares in railway companies; provided that such railways or railway shall in all cases be so situated, planned, or constructed as that the present

  1425
  or future existence thereof does or will considerably and permanently increase the value of such settled estate."
  LORD ST. LEONARDSsaid, he should oppose the clause. Everything in these days was to be done by the Court of Chancery. Now, this Court had its own duties to perform; and if business was transferred to it which was not properly within its province, great injury would be done to the administration of justice. The clause enabled the tenant for life, or any person having an interest in settled property, to go to the Court of Chancery, and ask the Court to appoint new trustees who might have the power to sell the settled estates. Where such property was sold, care was usually taken that the money should be laid out in the purchase of other estates of like qualities and settled to the like uses. But here the Court of Chancery was to be empowered, if it thought fit, to allow the trustees to sell, or to give the settled property to a railway company. Under such a power the interests of the remainderman might be seriously prejudiced, and he hoped therefore that the clause would not be agreed to.
  LORD CRANWORTHsaid, that experience of the working of the Act which had been passed while he held the Great Seal proved that the only danger to be guarded against was any possible injury to parties beyond the entail. The proposition of his noble and learned Friend (the Lord Chancellor) was simply, that if the Court of Chancery thought it would be for the benefit of the parties interested in the estate that railways should be made, power should be given to the person in possession to give or to sell a portion of land for the purposes of the railway, the proceeds of any sale to be invested in shares of the railway. Whether the power to give the land should be conferred might be questioned, but the amount would be so small that no injury could be done to the estate. In certain cases the power to assist the formation of railways would greatly tend to the benefit of the estate. He thought the clause would be very useful if modified a little, and more happily worded.
  LORD PORTMANobjected to the clause altogether. He thought that the interests of the remainderman were not sufficiently protected; and he saw no means by which it was possible for the Court of Chancery to ascertain how the value of an estate would be increased by a particular railway; and he objected to power being given to mortgage estates under such circumstances.
  1426
  If the matter were one which should be dealt with at all, it should certainly be dealt with by a general Bill regulating the way in which estates should be encumbered for various purposes besides making railways.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORdefended the clause, which had been drawn in accordance with the recommendation of the Select Committee.
  EARL GREYsaid, he was perfectly certain that the more this subject was considered, the more desirable it would be felt that the power proposed to be given should be granted. Experience showed that it was perfectly practicable to estimate the increased value given to land by the proximity of railways. There was so general an opinion entertained in the Select Committee that the object now proposed should be provided for by a public and not by a private Act, that he trusted their Lordships would affirm the principle of the proposed clause.
  EARL POWISthought the existing powers vested in trustees rendered snob, a clause as this unnecessary.
  LORD TAUNTONmade a few observations which were not audible, but was understood to support the clause.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that after the discussion which had taken place, he thought it would be advisable to withdraw the clause, in order, that an enactment having the same object might be brought forward in another Session in a better and more convenient form.
  Motion (by leave of the House) withdrawn.
  Report of the, Amendment to be received To-morrow; and Bill to be printed as amended (No. 158.)

NAVAL MEDICAL SUPPLEMENTAL FUND SOCIETY WINDING-UP ACT (1861) AMENDMENT BILL—(No. 102.)

  SECOND READING.
  Order of the Day for the Second Reading read.
  Moved, That the Bill be now read 2a: (The Duke of Somerset.)
  LORD CHELMSFORDsaid, it seemed somewhat unfair, there having been a trustee appointed two years ago in the interests of the annuitants of the fund, now to propose, that if the trustee happened to be removed in any way, the annuitants were not to have the power of appointing his successor, but that he

  1427
  Should be appointed by the Admiralty. Such a proposal Was, he thought, contrary to the understanding on the subject in 1861.
  THE DUKE OF SOMERSETSuggested that before the next stage of the Bill some arrangement might, perhaps, be entered into between the parties concerned which would obviate the objection of the noble and learned Lord.
  Motion agreed to: Bill read 2a accordingly, and committed to a Committee of the Whole House on Thursday next.

VOLUNTEERS BILL—(No. 140.)

  COMMITTEE.
  House in Committee (according to Order): (The Earl de Grey.)
  Clauses 1 to 34 agreed to.
  Clause 35 (8 & 9 Vict., cc. 18 & 19 incorporated).
  THE DUKE OF RICHMONDSaid, that in moving the rejection of this clause he did so without any feeling of hostility towards the great Volunteer movement. But if the movement was as popular as they were all bound to admit it was, a bad compliment: was paid to it by asking for compulsory powers in order that the various Volunteer corps might obtain practising grounds. For this purpose it was proposed to give Lords Lieutenant an arbitrary and unusual power, which few of their Lordships would be willing to have conferred upon them, and still fewer would be Willing to exercise. The Secretary for War might refer to the Defence Act; but it was not a parallel case, as it only related to the coast defences of the country. So far as he had heard, there was no ground for Coming to Parliament for such compulsory powers. It had not been shown that Volunteer corps were less efficient, or that any practical inconvenience had arisen from the want of them. With regard to the persons' whose property was to be taken, he did not think, that after the Lord Lieutenant had recommended the taking of the ground, and the Secretary for War had certified in its favour, the owner would have much chance of offering a successful opposition to the measure when it came before Parliament for its sanction. The clause provided that the ground should be selected with due regard to the "safety and convenience of the public;" but the owner, to whom the target practice might be very unsafe and inconvenient, was entirely
  1428
  overlooked. If there was any evil to remedy, which he doubted, it was so small that it did not warrant such an interference with the rights of private property, and he should therefore move the omission of the clause.
  EARL DE GREY AND RIPONsaid, he was not surprised that this clause should have attracted attention, but he thought the noble Duke was in error in supposing that the main responsibility would be thrown upon the Lord Lieutenant. The Lord Lieutenant's certificate was merely required with a view to provide additional security that no land should be taken unnecessarily. According to an Amendment which he had introduced, there was to be a certificate—
  "That a safe and convenient ground for shooting and drilling cannot be obtained by the corps, within a reasonable distance of the head-quarters of the corps, unless the land mentioned in that behalf in the certificate is taken compulsorily."
  After the certificate was given a Petition would be presented to the Secretary of State, who would make inquiry in the same way as, in the case of Provisional Orders under the Local Government Act. Having done that, he would make a Provisional Order, which would require the sanction of an Act of Parliament. The object of the clause was to render applications for private Acts unnecessary, and the question was whether the interests of the Volunteer corps required such legislation. No doubt, in country districts the necessity did not exist; but in the neighbourhood of large towns it certainly did. Thus, in the metropolis there were twenty-six corps whose practice range was the Government range at Woolwich, which they, of course, could only use when it was not wanted by the regular troops. The consequence was that these corps were debarred from proper opportunities of practice. Now, Volunteer corps ought to have special facilities for the practice of rifle shooting; for while Volunteers could not attain more than a certain amount of proficiency in drill, they were able, from their intelligence and the interest which most of them took in rifle practice, to acquire great proficiency with that weapon. So important was this proficiency considered that Parliament, on the recommendation of a Royal Commission, had lately decided that one-third of the grant—10 s. out of 30 s.—should be dependent on the Volunteers undergoing a considerable amount of musketry instruct-

  1429
  tion practice, involving the firing of a considerable number of rounds during the year. But in a great many cases in large towns it would be extremely difficult for Volunteers to obtain, this sum, and to satisfy the requirements of the Government, unless they had means which they did not now possess for obtaining practice ranges. Some time ago an Act was passed giving facilities to Volunteer corps to obtain ranges voluntarily, but it had not resulted in their obtaining them. It appeared, therefore, to the late Sir George Lewis, whose opinion would have great weight with their Lordships, that these clauses were justified by the needs of the Volunteers, and were almost a necessary corollary of the Vote of Parliament, which was made to depend on the efficiency of the men as shots. The rejection of these clauses would, he believed, be regarded with much regret by a considerable portion of the Volunteer force, who were situated as he had described, and would interfere with their attainment of efficiency in the use of the rifle. At the same time, if the general opinion of the House was adverse to these clauses, he should not be disposed to insist upon their retention.
  THE EARL OF DERBYhoped the noble Earl would consent to abandon the clauses. The powers asked for were unusual and extensive, and were an interference with the rights of private property of an extraordinary character which did not appear to be justified by any necessity. He would wish to know from the Secretary of State whether he expected that any great inconvenience to the Volunteer force would result from the abandonment of these clauses. If numerous cases could be shown in which it would be impossible for Volunteer corps to obtain practice grounds without the assistance of these clauses, then the House might be disposed to allow them to pass, objectionable as they were, even in their amended form. But if there was no absolute necessity for these clauses, he hoped they would be withdrawn, or at least postponed.
  EARL GRANVILLEthought the clauses would be very useful, and would remind the House that similar powers were possessed by the regular army. But he would suggest to his noble Friend the Secretary for War to calculate the respective forces on either side of the House, and under these circumstances he would suggest the withdrawal of the clauses, his noble Friend reserving to himself the right,
  1430
  if it should be found necessary, to reintroduce them at some future time.
  THE EARL OF DERBYsaid, he always had entertained a high opinion of the noble Earl's discretion, but he confessed he had never seen that discretion more remarkably exhibited than on the present occasion.
  EARL DE GREY AND RIPONsaid, he would not press the clauses, but would propose Amendments on bringing up the Report to preserve to the Volunteers the permissive powers of the existing Act.
  Clause struck out.
  Clause 36 (Mode in which Certificate of Lieutenant and Act of Parliament obtained) struck out.
  Remaining Clauses agreed to.
  Amendments made: The Report thereof to be received on Monday next; and Bill to be printed as amended. (No. 159.)

  OFFENCES (SOUTH AFRICA) BILL [H.L.]
  Commons' Amendments considered (according to Order), and agreed to.

  DRAINAGE AND IMPROVEMENT OF LANDS (IRELAND) BILL.
  Read 2a (according to Order); and referred to a Select Committee: The Lords following were named of the Committee; the Committee to meet on Monday next, at Two o'clock, and to appoint their own Chairman:—Ld. Steward, E. Lucan, E. Belmore, E. Bandon, E. Harrowby, E. Stradbroke, V. Hawarden, V. Hutchinson, L. Ponsonby, L. Wodehouse, L. Somerhill, L. Dartrey, L. Lyverden.
  House adjourned at half-past Eight o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter before Five o'clock.