Sitting of 5 May 1884

Preamble
MINUTES—SUPPLY—considered in Committee—ARMY ESTIMATES.
PUBLIC BILLS—Ordered—First Reading—Local Government (Ireland) Provisional Order (Bandon Waterworks) * [188]; Local Government (Ireland) Provisional Orders (Unions of North Dublin, &c) * [189]; Local Government Provisional Orders (No. 2) (Districts of Dorking and Hendon, &c.) * [190]; Local Government Provisional Orders (Poor Law) (No. 9) (Parishes of Ashen, &c.) * [191]; Local Government Provisional Orders (Poor Law) (No. 10) (Parishes of Charley, &c.) * [192].
First Reading—Tramways Provisional Orders (No. 2) * [193]; Tramways Provisional Orders (No. 3) * [194].
Second Reading—Redistribution of Seats [131] [House counted out].
Considered as amended—Contagious Diseases (Animals) * [120].
Third Reading—Fisheries (Ireland) * [27], and passed.
Withdrawn—Hyde Park Corner Improvements [136].

MOTIONS.

  LOCAL GOVERNMENT (IRELAND) PROVISIONAL ORDER (BANDON WATERWORKS) BILL.
  On Motion of Mr. SOLICITOR GENERAL for IRELAND, Bill to confirm a Provisional Order of the Local Government Board for Ireland relating to Waterworks in the town of Bandon, ordered to be brought in by Mr. SOLICITOR GENERAL for IRELAND and Mr. TREVELYAN.
  Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 188.]

  LOCAL GOVERNMENT (IRELAND) PROVISIONAL ORDERS BILL.
  On Motion of Mr. SOLICITOR GENERAL for IRELAND, Bill to confirm certain Provisional Orders of the Local Government Board for Ireland, under "The Labourers (Ireland) Act, 1883," relating to the Unions of North Dublin, Kells, Kilmallock, Mitchelstown, Rathdrum, Tralee, Trim, and Tulla, ordered to be brought in by Mr. SOLICITOR GENERAL for IRELAND and Mr. TREVELYAN.
  Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 189.]

  LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (NO. 2) BILL.
  On Motion of Mr. GEORGE RUSSELL, Bill to confirm certain Provisional Orders of the Local Government Board, relating to the Local Government Districts of Dorking and Hendon, the Rural Sanitary District of the Kingston Union, the Local Government District of Malvern, the Borough of Portsmouth, the City of Truro, and the Local Government Districts of Wimbledon and Ystradyfodwg, ordered to be brought in by Mr. GEORGE RUSSELL and Sir CHARLES DILKE.
  Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 190.]

  LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (POOR LAW) (NO. 9) BILL.
  On Motion of Mr. GEORGE RUSSELL, Bill to confirm certain Orders of the Local Government Board, under the provisions of "The Divided Parishes and Poor Law Amendment Act, 1876," as amended and extended by "The Poor Law Act, 1879," relating to the Parishes of Ashen, Birdbrook, Brockdish, Haverhill, Hundon, Little Wratting, Ovington, Peasenhall, Sibton, Steeple Bumpstead, Stoke-by-Clare, Stratton-Long-Saint-Mary, Sturmer, Thorpe Abbotts, Tilbury-juxta-Clare, Wacton Magna, Whixoe, and Withersfield, and to the Townships of Emswell-with-Kelleythorpe, Eskdaleside, Great Driffield, Little Driflield, and Ugglebarnby, ordered to be brought in by Mr. GEORGE RUSSELL and Sir CHARLES DILKE.
  Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 191.]

  LOCAL GOVERNMENT PROVISIONAL ORDERS (POOR LAW) (NO. 10) BILL.
  On Motion of Mr. GEORGE RUSSELL, Bill to confirm certain Orders of the Local Government Board, under the provisions of "The Divided Parishes and Poor Law Amendment Act, 1876," as amended and extended by "The Poor Law Act, 1879," and "The Divided Parishes and Poor Law Amendment Act, 1882," relating to the Parishes of Charley (two), Eddlesborough, Helmdon, Ivinghoe, Little Gaddesden, Markfield, Marston Saint Lawrence (two), Middleton Cheney, Newtown Linford, Slapton, Syresham, Thenford, and Whitfield, to the Townships of Marnham and South Clifton, and to the Hamlet of Astwell-with-Falcutt, ordered to be brought in by Mr. GEORGE RUSSELL and Sir CHARLES DILKE.
  Bill presented, and read the first time. [Bill 192.]

PRIVATE BUSINESS.
  LONDON, BRIGHTON, AND SOUTH COAST RAILWAY BILL.

    RESOLUTION.
    SIR ARTHUR OTWAY: The London, Brighton, and South Coast Railway Company have introduced a Bill into Parliament which has been referred to me in the usual manner as Chairman of Ways and Means, owing to the fact of its being unopposed. I have, however, thought it undesirable, in consequence of having been a Director for many years of that Railway Company, that the Bill should be adjudicated upon by me. I have, therefore, requested the Chairman of the Committee on Standing Orders to take my place, and he has consented to do so. I, therefore, beg to move that the Chairman of the Committee of Standing Orders be appointed Chairman of the said Committee on that Bill.
    Ordered, That the Chairman of the Committee of Standing Orders be appointed Chairman of the Committee on the said Bill.

NOTICE OF AMENDMENT.

  EGYPT (EVENTS IN THE SOUDAN)—GENERAL GORDON'S MISSION—THE VOTE OF CENSURE (SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH).
  SIR WILFRID LAWSONgave Notice that he will move the following Amendment to the Motion of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for East Gloucestershire (Sir Michael Hicks-Beach):—
  "That this House, while regretting that General Gordon has not yet succeeded in bring-
  1298
  ing to a successful conclusion the mission which he patriotically undertook, declines to censure Her Majesty's Government for not taking steps which would involve Military operations in connection with a mission which was distinctly and avowedly of a pacific nature."

QUESTIONS.

  HARBOURS OF REFUGE—CONVICT LABOUR.
  MR. MARJORIBANKSasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether he can now state what place on the East Coast of Scotland has been selected for the construction of a harbour of refuge by means of convict labour; and, whether, and, if so, when, the Report of, and Minutes of Evidence taken by, the Sub-Committee of the Committee on Convict Labour, which visited the East Coast of Scotland last autumn, will be presented to the House?
  MR. HIBBERT: In reply to my hon. Friend, I have to state that no place has yet been selected, the Report of the Sub-Committee not yet having been laid before the Home Secretary. My right hon. and learned Friend, however, hopes to have that Report laid before him in the course of a few days, and to be in a position to place it on the Table of the House.

  ARMY ACT, 1881—FRAUDULENT ENLISTMENT.
  MR. HOPWOODasked the Secretary of State for War, Whether any action has been taken in consequence of the amendment of Section 32 of "The Army Act, 1881," by which the power of a court martial to sentence to penal servitude for the offence of fraudulently enlisting after previous discharge with disgrace from any part of Her Majesty's forces was taken away; and, whether he has been able to advise the remission, or reconsideration of the 150 or more sentences of penal servitude passed in 1882, 1883, and 1884?
  THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON, in reply, said, the amendment of the Act had been promulgated to the officers in command, and this would prevent further penalties of penal servitude being passed for this offence. As regarded the men now undergoing sentences of penal servitude, their cases would be considered when they had served two

  1299
  years. He might mention that two years' hard labour was considered a more severe punishment than a similar term of penal servitude.

  LAW AND JUSTICE (ENGLAND)—PETER M'KNIGHT, A CONVICT LUNATIC.
  MR. BIGGARasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether Peter M'Knight was convicted of manslaughter at Belfast Summer Assizes in 1877, and sentenced to five years' penal servitude; whether he was discharged at the end of about four years, but taken prisoner in Liverpool on 21st June 1881, and lodged in a lunatic asylum, at Whittingham, Preston; if so, what were the grounds for his being sent to the asylum; and, what are the reasons for his present detention?
  SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT, in reply, said, he had inquired into the matter, and had received a Report from the medical officer that the man was quite unfit to be at large.

  ARMY (INDIA)—RE-ORGANIZATION.
  MR. E. STANHOPEasked the Under Secretary of State for India, Whether the Correspondence between the India Office and the Government of India, on the subject of the proposed changes in the Indian Army system, is approaching completion; and, if so, when he will be able to lay it upon the Table?
  MR. J. K. CROSS: The Correspondence in question is now practically complete; and if the hon. Member will move for it, there will be no objection to presenting it. I may suggest, with regard to the Report of the Commission and the Appendices, which are exceedingly voluminous, that it will be sufficient to place them in the Library without distributing copies.

  INDIA—THE KIRWEE PRIZE MONEY.
  SIR JOHN HAYasked the Under Secretary of State for India, Whether the sum of £276,000, and other sums, realised as proceeds of the moveable property of the Ex-Princes of Kirwee, and retained by the Indian Government, have been entered in the Returns presented to Parliament in 1876, in partial compliance with the Order of the House dated 23rd July 1874, which called for a Return of all the moveable property taken from those Chiefs; and, whether,
  1300
  and when, the Secretary of State proposes to complete the defective Return, so as to thoroughly fulfil the Order of Parliament?
  MR. J. K. CROSS: The Papers presented to Parliament in 1876, in compliance with the Order of the House of July 23, 1874, gave a complete Return of the amount of all moveable property of enemies or insurgents in the territories of Oude or Kirwee, or of the proceeds thereof, which passed into the possession of the authorities in India since the outbreak of the War in 1857. The promissory notes representing the sum referred to by the right hon. and gallant Member never at any time passed into the possession of Government. They are, therefore, not included in the Return. Where any such notes were captured, as at Lucknow, they are shown in the Return. As, therefore, the Return was prepared in strict accordance with the Orders of the House, there is no ground for supplementing it. I may add that full information concerning these promissory notes was submitted to the House in an earlier Return, No. 298, dated July 5, 1869.

  LAW AND POLICE (IRELAND)— INTERFERENCE OF THE POLICE AT CASTLESHANE.
  MR. SEXTON (for Mr. HEALY)asked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If it is the fact that, on Mr. Francis M'Kenna, of Annagap, county Monaghan, complaining to the Inspector General of Constabulary that he had been threatened by the police sergeant at Castleshane that, if he interfered in public meetings or took part in politics, he would have his gun licence revoked, he received the following reply:—
  "Dublin Castle, 4th April, 1884.
  "Francis M'Kenna is informed, with reference to his letter of the 31st ult., that, if he considers the sergeant exceeded his duty in the matter referred to, he should bring the case before the Magistrates at Petty Sessions."
  (Signed) R. F. N. FANNING,
  "Deputy Inspector General."
  Do the Government approve of this method of dealing with such a charge; is it the fact that no inquiry whatever was made to discover whether it was correct, or not; will he ascertain from Mr. Fanning under what Statute the "Magistrates at Petty Sessions"

  1301
  have power to deal with such a complaint; is he aware that Mr. M'Kenna's statement can be corroborated by four witnesses, in whose presence the threat was made; and, do the Government propose to deal with the case?
  MR. TREVELYAN: It is the fact that Francis M'Kenna made to the Inspector General the complaint mentioned in the Question, and that he received the reply referred to. Before the letter had been written, inquiry had been made into the matter, with the result that the Inspector General was informed that the complaint of Mr. M'Kenna was not well-founded, and the police sergeant denies having made any such statement as is imputed to him. The Statute referred to by Mr. Fanning is the 6 & 7 Will. IV. c. 13. I am not aware that Mr. M'Kenna's statement can be corroborated by four witnesses, and the letter of Mr. M'Kenna treats the communication from the constable as a private one. The Government do not intend to take any further action.

  PREVENTION OF CRIME (IRELAND) ACT, 1882—COMPENSATION FOR MALICIOUS BURNING—THE GRAND JURY OF FERMANAGH.
  MR. O'BRIENasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If it is the fact that the Fermanagh Grand Jury ignored the Bill sent up against a man named Beatty, whom the magistrates had returned for trial on a charge of having set fire to his house on December the 10th; that his landlord is now seeking compensation from the same grand jury for malicious injury to the house, and that, while the grand jurors would not allow the case to come before a court for investigation, they will now proceed to assess damages over a particular area; and, if he can say how this area will be arrived at?
  MR. TREVELYAN: Beatty was committed for trial on a charge of burning a house of which he was formerly tenant, but the Grand Jury ignored the Bill. The landlord is not seeking compensation for the malicious burning, the person who is seeking it is the person who succeeded Beatty under certain letters of administration. This case will come on before the Presentment Sessions on the 24th of the month, and it will not come before the Grand Jury unless the Sessions decide the burning was ma-
  1302
  licious. It is impossible in that event to say what will be the area on which the tax will be fixed; but the Grand Jury will, of course, consider the whole case when it comes before them.

  PRISONS (IRELAND)—MOUNTJOY PRISON—WARDERS.
  MR. O'BRIENasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If it is the fact that in filling up the vacancy for chief warder in Mountjoy Prison recently three principal warders were passed over, and an ordinary warder, their junior in the service, appointed; is it the fact that the latter is a Protestant, and that the three men passed over were Catholics; can he explain what were the superior qualifications possessed by the man who got the post, and in what the others were deficient; and, is it the case that in the Irish Convict Service Catholic principal warders are refused the supply of fuel and light for their houses, afforded to Protestants holding the same situations?
  MR. TREVELYAN, in reply, said, the man who was promoted was considered by the Prisons Board as the most suitably experienced. He was a Protestant, and was one of the men passed over. The appointment of a Protestant was considered desirable. The object was to equalize the number of Protestants and Roman Catholics in the higher grades, the Deputy Governor and senior chief warder being Catholics. As regards the last paragraph, no difference was made between Protestant and Roman Catholic warders in respect of fuel and light. The ground for that suggestion might be found in the fact that one of the principal warders who had been transferred to another position was entitled by the terms of his promotion to fire and light.
  MR. O'BRIEN: I invite the right hon. Gentleman's attention to the fact that of the 41 warders discharged from Spike Island 39 are Roman Catholics; and I would ask how he can explain that, whereas in every position open to fair competition Catholics are at least as well able to hold their own in every position where appointments is by favour or under official management, Protestants predominate almost invariably?
  [No reply was given.]

  ARMY (AUXILIARY FORCES)—THE 4TH LINCOLNSHIRE MILITIA.
  MR. ROUNDELLasked the Secretary of State for War, Whether it is the fact that, on. the 18th of April, Private Slater, of the 4th Lincolnshire Battalion of Militia, having spit whilst on parade, was ordered by the Adjutant, Captain Hodson, to fall out of the ranks; that thereupon the Adjutant ordered him an extra half-hour's drill with a stone in his mouth; that, in consequence of the refusal of Private Slater to submit to such an order, he was ordered by the Adjutant to be handcuffed, and was locked up for the night in a cell; that, on the following morning (Saturday, the 19th instant), Private Slater was brought before the Adjutant and charged with having refused to drill for half an hour with a stone in his mouth; that, in consequence, he was sentenced by the Adjutant to forty-eight hours in the cells with hard labour, which consisted of breaking stones for road-mending; and that this sentence was accordingly carried out; and, if the above is substantially accurate, whether the proceedings of the Adjutant are in accordance with the Regulations of the Queen?
  THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON: As a matter of fact, the man was not sentenced to drill with a stone in his mouth; but he was threatened with that punishment. The punishment actually inflicted was for gross insubordination in the ranks. The adjutant was wrong in threatening a punishment which is not authorized by the Regulations, and he would be reprimanded.

  LAW AND JUSTICE (IRELAND)—MR. CHARLES KELLY, Q. C., COUNTY COURT JUDGE FOR CLARE.
  MR. KENNYasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If Mr. Charles Kelly, Q. C., County Court Judge for Clare, is in the habit of adjourning cases for hearing from one division to another merely to suit his own convenience, and to the serious dissatisfaction of the public; if, in the case of a farmer named Michael Fitzpatrick, who sought to attach the salary of a process server named Griffin for the amount of a decree obtained against him (Griffin) at a former quarter sessions, the case was adjourned from Ennistymon to Ennis and back again without
  1304
  the slightest necessity for such a course; if it is possible to ascertain the number of similar instances in which litigants have been put to great expense in trivial cases by the action of Mr. Kelly; and, whether steps may not be taken to remedy the state of facts complained of?
  MR. TREVELYAN: County Court Judges are not responsible to the Executive Government for the manner in which they exercise their judicial functions; but I thought it right, as this Question was put on the Notice Paper, that its terms should be submitted to the Judge named, for any observations that he might desire to offer with regard to it. He writes as follows:—
  "Sir, although in strictness I ought not to make any statement to the Government with respect to the discharge of my judicial functions, I have no hesitation in saying that the imputations contained in the Parliamentary Notice enclosed in your letter are absolutely and entirely groundless. In justice to me I trust that this answer will he read in the House."

  CRIME (IRELAND)—FIRING AT THE PERSON—CASE OF THE BROTHERS DELAHUNTY.
  MR. KENNYasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If certain information has been conveyed to the Irish Government concerning the conviction of two brothers name Delahunty, who were sentenced, at the Cork Winter Assizes of 1882, to penal servitude for life, for the alleged crime of firing into the house of a person named Donnellan, near Feakle, county Clare; if the chief witness for the Crown (Slattery) has since made a dying declaration, in which it is set forth that these men have been wrongfully convicted, and prays for their release; if he will give the full terms of the said declaration, and if the case of the Delahuntys has been, or is under, the consideration of the Irish Government; and, if he can state either the result of such consideration, or the probable date at which it will be made known?
  MR. TREVELYAN: The evidence against the Delahuntys was comple and conclusive. The man Slattery, referred to in the Question, was not the chief witness for the Crown, and was not a witness in the case at all, nor is it a fact that he made a declaration that the Delahuntys were wrongfully convicted. What he stated in the declaration was that a witness was instigated by him to swear

  1305
  he saw the shot fired; and he further alleges that the police constable asked him to get a person to swear that he heard the shot fired. The evidence of Martin was unimportant; and the case was complete without him. The Government believe that no reliance is to be placed on Slattery's declaration, and do not, therefore, intend to interfere with the course of the law. As regards the declaration itself, I will furnish the hon. Member with a copy of it if he so desires; but I do not consider it necessary to lay it on the Table of the House.
  MR. KENNY: I would wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman, if this declaration does not also contain a statement to the effect that the case was concocted by a police constable, named Halloran, and a Resident Magistrate, Mr. Burke, who has since been dismissed?
  MR. TREVELYAN: The hon. Member will, perhaps, give Notice of the Question.

  PREVENTION OF CRIME (IRELAND) ACT, 1882—SEC. 18—EXTRA POLICE , CO. LONGFORD.
  MR. JUSTIN M'CARTHYasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, On what grounds the Irish Executive have given notice of their intention to send a police hut and an extra police force for the protection of Mr. John M'Guire, of Loran, in the county of Longford; and, whether any outrages whatever have been committed in the district which justify its subjection to this increase of taxation?
  MR. TREVELYAN: John M'Guire has been subjected to great annoyance and "Boycotting"—a bad feeling against him having been caused amongst some persons in the district in consequence, it is thought, of his father-in-law having taken an evicted farm. The police believed M'Guire to be in great danger, and two men were placed in his house for his protection. They are not chargeable to the district. The Government have not given any such notice as is stated in the Question of an intention to send a police hut and extra police to the district. But inquiry has been made as to whether a suitable site for a hut could be had, in the event of its being considered necessary to erect one.

  COURT OF BANKRUPTCY (IRELAND)— THE CHIEF CLERK IN INSOLVENCY.
  DR. LYONS (for Mr. FAY)asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, Whether it is the fact that the first clerk in insolvency at the Court of Bankruptcy has performed in Ireland the duties of chief clerk in insolvency since the death of that official in 1881 without having received any remuneration for such additional work?
  MR. COURTNEY: The statement is correct; but the duties in question are almost nominal. The clerk is adequately paid for all his duties.

  THE QUEEN'S COLLEGES (IRELAND)— THE PROFESSOR OF ANATOMY (QUEEN'S COLLEGE, CORK).
  MR. O'BRIENasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If it is a fact that the Professor of Anatomy in the Queen's College, Cork, has, for the past two or three sessions, introduced a new rule, whereby he engages two students simultaneously in dissecting each part; whether this professor is making a profit of over £100 a-year out of the subjects supplied to the Cork Medical School, which is not included in the Return of class fees presented to Parliament; whether this course is legal, and will be permitted to continue; is it a fact that, when the new rule was first introduced, a requisition, signed by a large number of students (including graduates) of every religious denomination, was presented to the President of the College, asking him to permit a meeting to be convened within the College, to discuss the matter privately; did he refuse to do so, and threaten a member of the deputation who waited on him that, if the matter were brought before Parliament, he would be held responsible; and, will the Royal Commission be empowered to inquire into the above matters; and, if not, what steps will he take to investigate the complaints of the students?
  MR. TREVELYAN: The Professor of Anatomy informs me that he has made no such rule; but that occasionally, as a matter of extreme necessity, the plan mentioned has been resorted to. The entire amount of the fees paid by students for attending at the Anatomical School is expended in connection with the support of the school, no portion

  1307
  whatever being retained by the Professor for his own use. These fees are not class fees, and, therefore, are not included in any Return of class fees. I have already stated, in reply to a former Question, that the reference to the Commission would include this subject. With regard to an alleged refusal on the part of the President to comply with a requisition, I have to point out that if the students have any matter of that kind to complain of, the College statutes provide them with a remedy by application to the Visitors.
  MR. O'BRIEN: Is there any official supervision over the administration of those fees?
  MR. TREVELYAN: There is the supervision of the authorities of the College. I have already said the subject is going before the Commission.

  POST OFFICE—TELEPHONE EXCHANGES.
  MR. GORST (for Sir H. DRUMMOND WOLFF)asked the Postmaster General, The number of telephone exchange wires now in use at Post Office Telephone Exchanges in the United Kingdom; the number of private telephone wires rented from the Post Office; the cost thereof respectively; the revenue derived there from respectively; and, the revenue which would be derivable there from respectively if erected and maintained by private companies at their own cost under Post Office licences, calculated at the average rate for royalties now charged by the Department to private companies.
  MR. FAWCETT: The Post Office, on the 31st of March last, had 783 subscribers to its systems of telephone exchanges for rentals, amounting to £16,983 per annum. As it would take much time to ascertain the number of private wires rented from the Post Office which are worked by telegraph and telephone apparatus respectively, I am sorry I am not able to answer the hon. Member's second Question. If the telephone exchange lines of the department were provided by the Private Telephone Companies at the same rentals, the royalty payable would be £1,698 per annum. No royalty is payable to the Post Office in respect of private wires—that is, wires used for private messages, as defined by the Act of 1869, erected and maintained by persons outside the
  1308
  Department. So far, therefore, as this business might be done by private individuals, no revenue would be received by the Post Office.
  DR. CAMERONasked the Postmaster General, The amount of royalties received by the Post Office last year from Telephone Companies for licences to such Companies to use their own instruments, at their own expense, for exchange and other purposes; the original rate of percentage for such royalties; whether the Department has recently increased the percentage in the ease of new or extended licences; and, whether in recent cases it has also sought to impose a minimum actual royalty, irrespective of reductions in the charges of the Companies to the public?
  MR. FAWCETT: The amount of royalties received by the Post Office in the year ended 31st December last from Telephone Companies for licences to carry on business which has been legally decided to be telegraphic was £15,556. The original rate of percentage was 10 per cent, increased in a few cases of extension of radius. In reply to my hon. Friend's last Question, I may say that in new licences the percentage is no greater; but a minimum royalty of £1 is payable.
  MR. GRAY: Would the right hon. Gentleman say why an extra charge is made in a licence for an extra radii?
  MR. FAWCETT: Because it is doing more business.
  MR. GRAY: Then the more business is done, the higher the percentage you pay.

  PARLIAMENTARY PAPERS—STATEMENT OF COST.
  MR. DALRYMPLEasked the Secretary to the Treasury, Whether he would consider the desirableness of adopting a custom, which is said to prevail in the Colony of Victoria, of giving on the first page of every Paper printed for Parliamentary use a statement of its cost, "expense of preparing this Paper, so much," "expense of printing, so much," so that not only honourable Members who are gluttons in respect of "Returns," but their constitutents also, may know what is the cost to the Country of the Returns moved by Members?
  MR. COURTNEY: I fully sympathize with the hon. Member's desire to check the growth of the costs of

  1309
  Parliamentary printing in respect of Returns; but I am afraid that the adoption of the custom said to prevail in Victoria would avail little. In 1875, on the Motion of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Westminster (Mr. W. H. Smith), a Return was presented giving the figures for that year and the sale of those Papers, showing also what cost each Member had entailed on the country; but no appreciable effect was produced; there has been an increase rather than a diminution of cost. The point shall, however, be brought under the attention of the Committee now engaged in considering the public expenditure in stationery and printing.

  THE MAGISTRACY (IRELAND)—WICKLOW CO.—APPOINTMENT OF MR. MARTIN LANGTON.
  MR. W. J. CORBETasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, If he is aware that a Memorial has been presented to the Earl of Meath, Lord Lieutenant and Custos Rotulorum of the county of Wicklow, signed by forty-five of the principal Roman Catholic inhabitants of Bray, including the Very Rev. Walter Lee, D. D., P. P., V. G., Dean of the Cathedral Chapter of Dublin, and the local Roman Catholic Clergy, recommending the name of Mr. Martin Langton as a fit and proper person to be appointed to the Commission of the Peace for the county; whether it was stated to Lord Meath, as a ground for the appointment, that—
  "Mr. Langton has taken a deep and active part in the cause of temperance …. he is a grand juror at the quarter sessions, and has acted frequently on special juries during the last twelve years;"
  whether, notwithstanding these qualifications, and the strength and character of the recommendations, Lord Meath replied—
  "I do not consider him in any way suited to the discharge of the duties;"
  whether he is aware that, out of the 104 magistrates for Wicklow, only five are Roman Catholics, and these not all residents in the county, and that there is no Catholic magistrate in Bray Petty Sessions district; and, whether, under these circumstances, he will bring the matter under the consideration of the Lord Chancellor with a view to Mr. Langton's appointment?
  MR. TREVELYAN: I believe that the statements in the Question are substantially accurate. With regard to the last paragraph, I may say that I understand that a Memorial embodying these statements is at present before the Lord Chancellor.

  PREVENTION OF CRIME (IRELAND) ACT, 1882—SUMMONSES AT NEWTOWNBARRY.
  MR. SMALLasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether, in the cases under the Prevention of Crime Act, against Peter Kehoe and James Kennedy, brought on at Newtownbarry, county Wexford, on the 23rd February last, the summonses were issued at the instance of the head constable without his having received any authority from his superior officers; whether the head constable afterwards went to the defendants and asked them to give back the copies of the summonses, informing them that the cases would not be heard; whether, notwithstanding this, the cases were called, and the district inspector then asked them to be adjourned so that he might prosecute; and, whether the Constabulary at Newtownbarry are in the habit of issuing summonses under the Prevention of Crime Act without authority, and whether any steps will be taken to prevent them doing so?
  MR. TREVELYAN: I am informed that although the head constable had not actually been ordered to serve the summonses in these cases, he had been instructed to have them ready for hearing at the Prevention of Crime Act Court on the 23rd of February. It was expected that the authority would be received previous to the holding of the Court; but when it was found that it could not be issued until after that date, the defendants were informed that their cases would not be proceeded with on the 23rd. This was done by direction of the District Inspector, and in order to save the defendants from being put to the inconvenience of attending the Court. They attended nevertheless, and the cases were called formally, merely for the purpose of adjourning them—the Constabulary paying costs. The cases were prosecuted on a later date. It is not the case that the Constabulary at Newtownbarry are in the habit of issuing summonses without authority.

  METROPOLITAN ASYLUMS BOARD—THE HOMERTON SMALL-POX HOSPITAL.
  LORD GEORGE HAMILTONasked the President of the Local Government Board, Whether he is aware that the Medical Officer of Health for Hackney has reported that the re-opening of the Homerton Hospital of the Metropolitan Asylums Board for small-pox patients is causing a spread of that disease in its vicinity; whether he is aware that the Diseases Prevention (Metropolis) Bill (by the alteration in the existing Law effected by Clauses 1 and 2) took away from the public the legal protection they hitherto possessed against the Asylums Board, or other similar authorities, so conducting their hospitals as to cause disease to spread therefrom; and, if so, if he could explain why no intimation was given to Parliament of a proceeding so seriously effecting the rights, and even the lives, of the public; whether, in any authority given by the Local Government Board to the Asylum Board for using their hospitals for small-pox or fever patients, he will stipulate that such user must be contingent on their being able to prevent disease spreading therefrom; and, whether, in the event of any application being made by Government to Parliament for an extension of the Diseases Prevention (Metropolis) Act beyond the 1st September next, he will undertake that there shall be no general power asked for which will deprive the public of the legal protection they previously had against hospitals proved to be so conducted as to spread disease?
  SIR CHARLES W. DILKE: The Local Government Board have no information as to the Report of the Medical Officer of Health for Hackney beyond that which has appeared in the public Press; but they learn from the Chairman of the Managers of the Metropolitan Asylums Board that that Report will be the subject of inquiry by the Managers. I may, however, say that the Managers are making special efforts to prevent any possible risk of the spread of small-pox from the hospital, not only by largely reducing the number of patients in the building, but by clearing adjacent properties, which have been purchased by the Managers for the purpose of securing a free space
  1312
  around the hospital. As regards the Act of last Session, Clause 1 merely gives the short title of the Act. As to Clause 2, it was not intended by that enactment to take away from the public any legal protection which they previously possessed against the Asylums Managers or any other Local Authority carrying on a hospital in such a manner as to cause the spread of disease; neither is it considered by the Board that such is the effect of the clause. The clause, in effect, provides that if the Diseases Prevention Act is put in force, and the Managers of the Asylum district are called upon to exercise powers as a Local Authority under that Act, they may utilize the buildings, &c., which they have provided for small-pox and fever cases for patients suffering from the epidemic disease which has led to the Statute being put in force. The Diseases Prevention Act never has been brought into operation in consequence of an epidemic either of fever or smallpox; and the Board have never contemplated its being put in force except in the case of an outbreak of cholera. The Board have always endeavoured to secure such arrangements in connection with the fever and small-pox hospitals of the Asylums Board as would prevent disease spreading therefrom; and they are fully satisfied that the Managers desire to take all due precautionary measures against such a result. The Board, for the reasons mentioned, do not consider that an extension of the Act will take away from the public any protection which they previously possessed.

  WAYS AND MEANS—THE FINANCIAL STATEMENT—THE GOLD COINAGE.
  LORD GEORGE HAMILTONasked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, If he has any Estimate to show what is the yearly loss from abrasion or wear and tear of the coined gold in circulation?
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. CHILDERS): The most trustworthy recent Estimate of the loss from the wear and tear of the gold coins in circulation is that each sovereign and half-sovereign loses more than four hundredths of a grain of its weight every year, the half-sovereign losing twice as much proportionately as the whole sovereign. It follows that to make good the yearly deficiency of the

  1313
  metal in the present standard of gold coinage, if, as is estimated, that consists of £90,000,000 in sovereigns and £20,000,000 in half-sovereigns, the cost would approach £50,000 a-year, exclusive of the cost of re-coinage, and this amount would be increased by an increased circulation. The noble Lord will find some interesting particulars in the Joint Report of Mr. Graham, late Master of the Mint, and of Colonel Smith, the Master of the Calcutta Mint, laid before Parliament in 1869.

  EGYPT—ENGAGEMENTS OF HER MAJESTY'S GOVERNMENT.
  MR. GORSTasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether the engagements earnestly to support the Government of the Khedive, which were made by the late Government on 19th September 1879 and by the present Government on 3rd March 1881 respectively, ought not to have been communicated to the Sultan of Turkey as the Suzerain; and, whether either of them was so communicated; and, if so, at what date?
  LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICE: Neither of these engagements were communicated to the Sultan. His Majesty was, however, aware of the position of England and France in regard to Tewfik Pasha, inasmuch as it was at their request that he issued the Firman to His Highness in August, 1879. The Papers upon the subject were laid before Parliament in 1880 (Egypt, No. 1).

  EGYPT (WAR IN THE SOUDAN)—VOTE OF THANKS TO THE OFFICERS AND MEN OF H. M. SEA AND LAND FORCES.
  MR. ONSLOWasked the Secretary of State for War, Whether he could now state if it is proposed to move a Vote of Thanks to Admiral Hewett and General Graham, and Officers and Men under their command, for the recent operations on the Red Sea littoral; and, what rewards, if any, are to be given to these Officers?
  THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON: Her Majesty's Government have very carefully considered the precedents bearing upon this question. The decision of whether or not the Thanks of Parliament should be given to troops engaged in military operations does not appear to have depended entirely on
  1314
  either the success of the campaign or on the severity of the fighting which occurred. Her Majesty's Government, and, I am sure, Parliament also, most entirely appreciate the ability which has been displayed by General Graham and Admiral Hewett in the conduct of these operations, and also the courage and high military qualities which have been exhibited by the officers and men under their command, as well as the success which they achieved. It would be a subject of very great regret to the Government if the answer I have to give to the Question of the hon. Member should be supposed for a moment to imply any doubt whatever on our part on that point; but it appears to us that to move a formal Vote of Thanks for that expedition, which cannot be considered as an independent operation, but rather as an incident in the military occupation of Egypt, would be to give an extension to the practice beyond former precedents, which we should not consider desirable. In answer to the last part of the Question, with regard to the rewards to be conferred on the officers and men in connection with the expedition, the subject is still under consideration, and the decision of the Government will shortly be announced.
  MR. ONSLOWasked whether the Government did not look upon the recent campaign in the Soudan as a separate transaction in no way connected with the operations undertaken by Lord Wolseley at the time of Tel-el-Kebir?
  THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON: That Question appears to raise a matter of argument.

  AFRICA (WEST COAST)—THE AFRICAN INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION.
  MR. A. H. BROWNasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, If it is true that the African International Association has recently concluded Treaties with the Native Chiefs in the Valley of the Congo and Keislu containing clauses excluding all traders except their own from those regions? He also wished to ask whether there was any truth in the report that negotiations were in progress whereby the French were to recognize the flag of the African International Association, and were to have the first offer to trade in the event of the present owners being willing to dispose of the same?
  LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICE: Yes, Sir. The Treaties will be laid before Parliament. The second Question relates to an important matter, and I would ask the hon. Member to give Notice.

  ARMY (AUXILIARY FORCES)—CATHOLIC CHAPLAIN FOR MILITIAMEN AT CARRICKFERGUS.
  MR. BIGGARasked the Secretary of State for War, Whether it is a fact that over 200 Roman Catholic militiamen, quartered at Carrickfergus, are without a chaplain; and, whether he is prepared to furnish sufficient funds to have the deficiency remedied?
  THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON: I can only repeat the answer I gave on the 21st of April—that it is not in my power to increase the allowance laid down by Regulation. That allowance is found to be adequate in other similar cases.

  INLAND REVENUE—THE LEGACY DUTY.
  MR. PERCY WYNDHAMasked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether the recent Act, which abolished Legacy Duty at one pound per cent., applies to legacies derived from Indian investments; and, if not, why this distinction has been enforced?
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. CHILDERS): The short answer to the hon. Member's Question would be that Legacy Duty at 1 per cent is only abolished by the Customs and Inland Revenue Act (44 Vict., c. 12) in cases where the estates are already subject to Probate Duty. Indian investments technically known as bona notabilia are liable to Probate Duty, and consequently exempt from 1 per cent Legacy Duty. Indian investments not liable to Probate Duty are liable to Legacy Duty if the deceased died domiciled in this country.

  THE MAGISTRACY (IRELAND)— DISQUALIFICATION OF LICENSED PUBLICANS (MR. MANGAN, HIGH SHERIFF OF DROGHEDA).
  COLONEL KING-HARMANasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, What steps the Government have taken in the case of Mr. Mangan, High Sheriff of Drogheda, who holds a
  1316
  retail beer and spirit licence contrary to the Statute?
  MR. SEXTONasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether Mr. Alderman Mangan, High Sheriff of Drogheda, whose tenure of the office of sheriff has been assailed because he is the holder of a retail licence, was also lately called to account as to the composition of the Grand Jury panel, which proved, in the result, to be unimpeachable; whether an unsuccessful attempt has been made to induce the Government to cause the removal of the assizes from the town of which Alderman Mangan is sheriff; whether a gentleman, Mr. Edward M'Donough, who held the office of High Sheriff of Drogheda in a recent year, was, during the year of his shrievalty, the holder of a retail licence for the sale of liquor to be consumed on the premises, and Mr. Nicholas Leech, T. C., High Sheriff of Drogheda in 1880, was, during the year of his shrievalty, the holder of two retail licences for the sale of liquor to be consumed on the premises; whether other cases have not likewise occurred in recent years, in which gentlemen holding the office of High Sheriff have not also held such licences; whether the Lord Lieutenant, in ratifying the nomination (by the Corporation of Drogheda) of Alderman Mangan to the office of High Sheriff, was not aware that Alderman Mangan was, at the time, the holder of the licence; whether the Statute of William the Fourth, referring to this matter, has become inoperative through disuse; and, whether the precedents cited are to be followed, or whether Alderman Mangan is to be treated in an exceptional manner?
  MR. TREVELYAN: The Government have not yet communicated with Mr. Mangan. I have been in consultation with the authorities in Dublin on the subject. I think the commission will go to Mr. Mangan to-morrow. The hon. Member for Sligo is aware that the constitution of the Grand Jury panel was the subject of a recent Question in this House, and the result should also be in his recollection. The hon. Member is also aware that the attention of the Government has been drawn to the suggestions which have, from time to time, been made as to the removal of the Assizes from the town of Drogheda, and that the Government have been ad-

  1317
  vised that the Assizes could not be abolished without legislation. It is the case that the gentlemen named by the hon. Member were licensed publicans when appointed to the office of High Sheriff, and continued to carry on their trade; and it is not unlikely that there have been other instances of the kind; but the case of Mr. Mangan is the first in which attention has been drawn to the manner in which the Statute of Will. IV. affects such cases. The holding of a licence is not a disqualification for the office of Sheriff, and it is for the consideration of any person seeking the office whether he will accept it with the condition annexed by law of giving up acting under his licence. I am advised that the Act is not inoperative through disuse. I have already said, in reply to the hon. and gallant Member for the County of Dublin (Colonel King-Harman), that the Government are considering the terms in which they will communicate with Mr. Mangan. He has been placed in this difficulty—that the attention of the Government was not called to it before his appointment.
  MR. SEXTON: If this practically obsolete Statute is put into force against Mr. Mangan, I shall call the Government to account.
  COLONEL KING-HARMAN: I shall ask the Solicitor General for Ireland tomorrow, Whether all licences in Ireland, and, indeed, in the United Kingdom, are not granted under this Act of Will. IV.?

  TURKEY—THE EUROPEAN PROVINCES —CHRISTIANS IN MACEDONIA.
  MR. BRYCEasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether it is true, as reported from Macedonia to The Manchester Guardian, that the Turkish authorities in Macedonia are again resorting to wholesale arrest and transportation of the more wealthy and respectable members of the Christian community; whether it is the fact that, during the last twelve months, a considerable number of innocent persons have been arrested in Macedonia by the Turks, and sent to prisons in Asia Minor; and, whether Her Majesty's Government have remonstrated, or will remonstrate, with the Porte
  1318
  against such proceedings, and again press upon its attention the 23rd Article of the Treaty of Berlin?
  LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICE: Information from a private source to the above effect has been received, and was forwarded to Lord Dufferin in the ordinary course. The internal condition of the Ottoman Empire in Europe has not been the subject of any very recent communications.
  MR. BRYCE: Is there any objection on the part of the Foreign Office to address an inquiry to Mr. Blunt, Her Majesty's Consul at Salonica?
  LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICE: Lord Dufferin will, no doubt, make the necessary inquiries.
  MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR: May I ask if similar inquiries have been made by other Governments as to whether similar proceedings were not perpetrated by Her Majesty's Government in Ireland?
  [No reply.]

  SCOTLAND—AGRICULTURAL TENANTS IN THE HIGHLANDS AND ISLANDS —NOTICES TO QUIT.
  MR. MACFARLANEasked the Lord Advocate, If his attention has been called to the issue of notices of removal being served upon tenants in the Highlands and Islands, whose holdings are yearly tenancies; if such notices have been served upon the old practice of forty days since the 1st of January 1884, in contravention of the following Clause in the Agricultural Holdings Act of 1883:—Clause 21, sub-section (b)—
  "In the case of leases from year to year, or for any period less than three years, not less than six months before the termination of the lease;"
  and if such notices of forty days are now legal?
  THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. J. B. BALFOUR): I understand it is the fact that since 1st January, 1884, certain, notices of removal have been served upon tenants in the Highlands and Islands, who hold as yearly tenants upon 40 days' warning prior to Whit Sunday. It is not usual, in answer to Questions in this House, to give legal opinions in regard to matters in difference between private persons; but as

  1319
  the point raised in the Question is of general interest, I have no objection to state my view with respect to it. In the case of a yearly lease which expires at Whit Sunday next, I do not think that a 40 days' notice is in contravention of Clause 28, sub-section 6, of the Agricultural Holdings Act, 1883. That Act only came into force on January 1, 1884, so that the six months' notice required by it in the case of yearly leases could not possibly be given between January 1 and Whit Sunday, and the Act is not declared to be retrospective. It therefore appears to me that until the Act has been at least six months in operation, so as to make a six months' notice under it possible, the former law as to notice must remain in force. Any other construction would involve the startling result that the Act would constitute a statutory and compulsory renewal for a year, against landlords and tenants alike, of all leases expiring at Whit Sunday next—a thing which was certainly never intended, and was not even suggested, when the Bill was before Parliament.
  MR. MACFARLANE: With reference to the answer of the right hon. and learned Gentleman, I wish to ask this further Question—If his attention has been called to the wording of the clause, as quoted in my Question, requiring six months' notice, not after the passing of the Act, but before the termination of the lease? Is there anything in this Act passed in August last year which would prevent a landlord from giving six months' notice last October? This Act is merely to prevent eviction, and not to prevent giving notice. If the right hon. and learned Gentleman does not answer the Question, I will put it on the Paper.
  THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. J. B. BALFOUR): I have answered it already. I am familiar with the Act irrespective of the Question; and I have already stated that, in my judgment, the Act is in no degree retrospective.
  MR. MACFARLANE: Does the right hon. and learned Gentleman say it would have been unlawful to have given notice in October last?
  THE LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. J. B. BALFOUR): That would not have been, in my judgment, a notice under the statute at all, because the statute had not come into operation.

  WAYS AND MEANS—THE FINANCIAL STATEMENT— THE GOLD COINAGE—MELTING FOR MANUFACTURING PURPOSES.
  MR. PULESTONasked Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether, in view of the extensive practice said to be adopted by jewellers of melting gold coin for manufacturing purposes, the effect of the issue of half-sovereigns below their nominal value will be to increase the use of sovereigns for the melting pots, and for which the new issues will be specially eligible; and, whether the only practical check on this practice of melting new coin is found in the brittleness which occasionally characterises Minted sovereigns; and, if so, whether the use of brittle copper as an alloy, or some similar method of counteracting the "toughness" of sovereigns alloyed with pure silver or copper could not be adopted, with a view to the discontinuance of such melting?
  THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER (Mr. CHILDERS): With respect to the first Question of the hon. Gentleman, we have no statistics of the comparative melting down by jewellers of sovereigns and half - sovereigns. But as to the second Question, I have consulted the Deputy Master of the Mint, who tells me that brittle bars are occasionally met with in coinage operations; but they give rise to great inconvenience. The deliberate production of such brittle metal would be to place obstacles in the way of the Mint just as much as in that of the jewellers, besides adding to the inconvenience of the public.

  ARMY (AUXILIARY FORCES)—THE YEOMANRY.
  MR. SIDNEY HERBERTasked the Secretary of State for War, If he would explain why the distance which entitles members of the Yeomanry Cavalry to an extra day's pay for the days of joining for and returning from permanent duty has been altered from twenty miles to thirty miles, as per Memorandum from the War Office of April 4th 1884; why the promised allowance of 3s. 6d. per diem for two troop drills has been stopped; and, whether he is aware that both the above alterations have given great dissatisfaction to the officers, noncommissioned officers, and men of the Force?
  THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON: Hitherto the Yeomanry Regulations have not fixed a limit of distance for the grant of marching money. As it was found that in some cases two days were charged for coming up to drill or going down from it when the distance was only 21 miles, it was considered right to fix the allowance at one day for any distance under 30 miles, and at two days for any greater distance. I am afraid that I must postpone any full answer to the other point in the hon. Member's Question until we come to the discussion of the Estimates. I do not think, however, that the allowance referred to has ever been actually promised, although it was undoubtedly intended that it should be given. When reference was made to the matter we were under the impression that there would be a considerable saving on the Yeomanry Vote. That Vote is now under my consideration, and I shall be anxious, if possible, to give the allowance referred to in the Question.

  THE STRAITS SETTLEMENTS—THE RAJAH OF TENOM—CREW OF THE "NISERO."
  MR. STOREYasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, If he can explain how it is that the crew of the Nisero, being in a state of destitution on the 31st March, the Pegasus did not sail with food until the 1st May; and, whether, since the men have now been captives nearly six months, and negotiations ineffective, the Government will take steps to secure their release by force?
  LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICE: As stated in a previous answer, a letter to Mr. Maxwell, dated the 10th of March, from the chief officer, Mr. Crichton, gave a list of the provisions received by the crew, and stated that they were all well in health. There was no reason, therefore, to apprehend that they would be short of provisions on the 81st of March. This announcement reached the Foreign Office on April 26. Telegraphic instructions were immediately sent to the Acting Governor of the Straits Settlements to make every effort to convey provisions to the crew, and the Pegasus left on the 1st of May with supplies for three months. It will be seen, therefore, that there has been no delay. As regards the second Ques-
  1322
  tion, Her Majesty's Government are waiting the reply of the Netherlands Government to their offer of mediation.
  MR. STOREYasked the noble Lord whether, as the men were in want of food on the 31st of March, and the news did not reach the Foreign Office until the 26th of April, there had not been neglect on the part of some official?
  LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICE: I do not understand that there has been any charge of neglect against any officer there; but I shall be glad to give any further information desired if my hon. Friend will ask me on Notice. My impression is that, considering the difficulty of communication in these parts, there has been no neglect of duty whatever.

  MALTA—CONSTITUTION AND ADMINISTRATION—MILITARY AND CIVIL GOVERNMENT.
  SIR HENRY HOLLANDasked the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, Whether he will lay upon the Table any correspondence relating to the change in the Civil duties of the Governor and Colonial Secretary at Malta, including any instructions to the new Governor upon this subject? He also asked whether, when Sir Lintorn Simmons was appointed, he had notice of the change that was to be made in his duties?
  MR. EVELYN ASHLEY, in reply, said, the Correspondence was prepared, and would shortly be laid upon the Table. As to the other Question of the hon. Member, the appointment of Governor of Malta was made by the Commander-in-Chief; but his (Mr. Evelyn Ashley's) impression was that Sir Lintorn Simmons was not informed of the changes.

  CONTAGIOUS DISEASES (ANIMALS) ACTS—FOOT-AND-MOUTH DISEASE —OUTBREAK AT FINCHLEY.
  MR. CAUSTONasked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, Whether information has reached him of the outbreak of cattle disease on a farm near Finchley, to or from which no cattle have been removed for upwards of six weeks; and, if so, whether he can account for the outbreak?
  MR. DODSON: The only case of foot-and-mouth disease near Finchley

  1323
  of which we have knowledge is one at Hendon, reported to us on the 26th of April, where six animals were found diseased. The Inspector of the Local Authority believed the introduction of the disease was due to animals recently bought. We ought to have received before now a further Report from the Inspector; but, not having done so, we have telegraphed to him to supply one.

  EGYPT (EVENTS IN THE SOUDAN)— GENERAL GORDON—THE TELEGRAMS.
  MR. W. E. FORSTERasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether he can inform the House which is the telegram described by Sir Evelyn Baring, in his telegraphic Despatch to Lord Granville of the 18th April, as the only one of his telegrams to General Gordon which, up to that date, he believes to have reached him; and, especially, whether it was the telegram which Sir Evelyn Baring, in his Despatch of 13th March, says he had sent, telling him to hold on to Khartoum, and on no account to proceed to the Bahr Gazelle and Equatorial provinces, or the telegram which, on 29th March, Sir Evelyn Baring says he has sent, conveying Lord Granville's instructions, leaving him full discretion to remain at Khartoum, if he thinks it necessary, or to retire by the Southern or any other route which may be found available; and, whether the Government have any reason to believe that any telegrams sent from Cairo since 18th April have reached General Gordon?
  LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICE: I shall best reply to my right hon. Friend's Question by reading the following letter, which I have received from Sir Evelyn Baring:—
  "Dear Lord Edmond,—The telegram which has been received by General Gordon is not either of those to which Mr. Forster alludes. It was a short cipher telegram, which, if I remember rightly, ran somewhat as follows:— Osman Digna's followers have been dispersed. There is no intention of sending troops from Suakin to Berber.' Allusion is made to this telegram in General Gordon's telegram of April 8 (which will be in the hands of Members to-day). It will be observed that General Gordon complains of the telegram as 'meagre,' and so it is, considered by itself. But it was only one of several telegrams, none of which, except this one, General Gordon received. In those telegrams I gave General Gordon news from Suakin, and I explained to him at length the
  1324
  views of Her Majesty's Government. The short telegram was only a repetition of what I had said before at greater length. I sent home all the telegrams I received from General Gordon; but there must be several which I sent to him, and which I did not think necessary to send home. They could, if necessary, easily be procured from Cairo; but they would not add any thing to the existing information, as they either contain news, or are a repetition of telegrams I received from Lord Granville.—Yours truly, E. BARING. May 5, 1884."
  In reply to my right hon. Friend's second Question, I may add that Her Majesty's Government have no information that any telegrams have reached General Gordon since April 18.
  MR. W. E. FORSTER: Would my noble Friend say after what date Sir Evelyn Baring believes that no telegrams reached General Gordon, saving that he mentioned? Perhaps I may be in Order in saying that my object in asking is to know in what position General Gordon in all probability feels himself to be now that he is isolated?
  LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICE: I do not think that Sir Evelyn Baring intended by this letter to do anything except to show that, in his opinion, it is not possible to state an exact date, and that it was a mere matter of opinion. All the information that bears upon that subject is before the House in the Blue Book which has been, presented.
  MR. W. E. FORSTER: I understand that in the letter of Sir Evelyn Baring he says that he believes that on the 18th of April only one of his telegrams had reached General Gordon. I do not quite gather from the noble Lord which of those telegrams it was.
  LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICE: The passage I read is this—
  "It was a short cipher telegram, which, if I remember rightly, ran somewhat as follows:— 'Osman Digna's followers have been dispersed. There is no intention of sending troops from Suakin to Berber.'"
  Sir Evelyn Baring does not add the exact date.
  MR. GIBSON: Does he add any date at all?
  LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICE: No. The words are—"If I remember rightly," and the purport of the telegram is given by Sir Evelyn Baring from memory.
  MR. GIBSON: Can the noble Lord give the House any clue at all as to the date?
  LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICE: If the right hon. and learned Gentleman will compare the telegrams before the House, as no doubt he will, he will see the dates within which these telegrams were sent to General Gordon; and this telegram, no doubt, came within those dates.

  POST OFFICE—GOVERNMENT SAVINGS BANKS—RATE OF INTEREST.
  MR. COLERIDGE KENNARDasked the Postmaster General, Whether he has come to any agreement with the Chancellor of the Exchequer as to the source from which the cost of management of the Government Savings Banks branches will be defrayed after the rate of interest on Consols shall have been reduced to the same rate as that allowed to depositors?
  MR. FAWCETT: The hon. Gentleman's Question appears to assume that Two-and-a-Half per Cent Stock will be at par, and that all Post Office Savings Bank moneys will be invested in Government Stocks. This is not the case, and I, therefore, think that the Question is premature.

  EGYPT (EVENTS IN THE SOUDAN)— FATE OF THE CAPTIVES AT SINKAT.
  MR. A. ROSSasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Whether, after the receipt of General Sir Gerald Graham's telegraphic despatch to the Secretary of State for War, dated 25th March 1884, stating that 150 women of Sinkat were alive in the mountains, any instructions have been sent to Consul Baker to attempt, through the mediation of the friendly tribes, either by ransom or otherwise, to obtain the release of these unfortunate women?
  MR. LABOUCHEREasked whether the noble Lord had received any information that these women desired to be released?
  LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICE: It has not been thought necessary to repeat the instructions conveyed in the telegram to General Graham of the 10th of March (Egypt, No. 12, page 157). The authorities at Suakin will, no doubt, use every endeavour to procure the release of the captives.

  STATE OF IRELAND—MEETINGS OF THE NATIONAL LEAGUE—INTRUSION OF THE POLICE AT KILROSENTY, CO. WATERFORD.
  MR. E. POWERasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether it is a fact that the police insist upon attending the meetings of the Kilrosenty Branch of the National League, in the county of Waterford; that they refused to withdraw when requested to do so, stating they were acting under the orders of Sub-Inspector Huggin; and, whether such orders have been given; and, if so, do the Government approve of them?
  MR. TREVELYAN: I am informed that a sergeant attended the meeting of this branch held on the 27th of last month. Some of the persons present wished him to leave; but upon this being put to the meeting only about eight out of 50 expressed an affirmative opinion; and as the owner of the house was not amongst those who asked the sergeant to go, he remained. He had no orders from his District Inspector to refuse to withdraw, nor did he say that he had. This case occurred before the issue of the recent instructions on the subject, of which I have already informed the House.
  MR. SEXTON: Are those instructions now in the hands of the police?
  MR. TREVELYAN: Yes, Sir.

  BURIAL ACTS—PAROCHIAL BURIAL PLACES.
  MR. RICHARDasked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether, in fulfilment of his promise at the close of last Session, the Government have considered the best mode of removing the practical difficulties experienced by burial authorities in providing new parochial burial places, under the existing Burial Acts; and, whether they will shortly introduce a measure for that purpose?
  SIR WILLIAM HARCOURT: In concert with my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Denbighshire (Mr. Osborne Morgan), I have considered this matter carefully, and have endeavoured to frame a measure. It is not the case, as the Question seems to imply, that I promised to introduce a Bill. I do not think I gave any pledge of that character. But if we are able to do so

  1327
  we shall be very glad; but my hon. Friend knows the difficulties we have to contend with in the matter.

  LAW AND JUSTICE (IRELAND)—JURIES —JUSTICES OF THE PEACE.
  MR. SEXTONasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether Mr. William J. Doherty, C.E., of Clonturk House, Drumcondra, Dublin, a justice of the peace for the county of Donegal and a special juror for Dublin, has represented to the Lord Chancellor of Ireland that he was summoned to serve as a juror in the Barbavilla conspiracy case, but, on answering to his name in Court, was ordered by the Crown to stand aside; and, what reply, if any, the Lord Chancellor has made, and what view he takes of the course pursued by counsel for the Crown in the case in question, in peremptorily challenging a justice of the peace who had been summoned to serve as a juror?
  MR. TREVELYAN: It is the fact that Mr. Doherty has made the representations mentioned to the Lord Chancellor, by letter dated the 25th of April last, and the Lord Chancellor sent a reply thereto on the 3rd instant, stating that he has no power whatever to interfere with the right of peremptorily directing a juror to stand aside, which is vested in the Crown; and that the circumstance that a juror so ordered to stand aside holding Her Majesty's Commission of the Peace makes no difference either in the power or duty of the Lord Chancellor.

  LANDLORD AND TENANT (IRELAND)— TENANTS' IMPROVEMENTS— "GEORGE M'CORD v. SIR RICHARD WALLACE."
  MR. SEXTONasked the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland, Whether his attention has been drawn to certain resolutions adopted at a meeting held on the 29th ult. by the Wallace (Lisburn) Tenants' Defence Association, in which resolutions the Association offer to produce credible witnesses who will, on oath, prove all the facts put forward in the Question recently addressed to him in reference to the case of George M'Cord, tenant, Sir Richard Wallace, landlord, and declare that the judicial rent, where land is held under the Ulster custom, should be arrived at by ascertaining separately the commercial value
  1328
  of the holding, and the value of the tenant's improvements, and his occupation right, and deducting the latter from the former, and that reasons for the decisions should be embodied in the findings; and urge upon the Government the necessity of watching lest the Land Act of 1881 should be rendered inoperative through the action of the Land Commission; whether he will state the source of the information by reason of which he referred to the former question as inaccurate and misleading, and will specify the particulars to which his statement especially referred; and, whether the Government will consider the suggestion and appeal submitted to them, as above, in the third and fourth resolutions adopted by the Tenants' Association?
  MR. TREVELYAN: These resolutions have been communicated to us; but the Government cannot interfere with the judicial decisions of the Land Commission in the course suggested by the hon. Member, nor can they take any legislative action. I did not intend to say, in answer to a former Question, that "the Question of the hon. Member was inaccurate and misleading." My recollection was that I had received information from another quarter protesting against it as "inaccurate and misleading;" and that this showed the inconvenience, and perhaps the injustice, which might result from hon. Members giving an ex parte view in a judicial matter in the shape of a Question.
  MR. SEXTON: On a future occasion I shall use the facilities of the debate to endeavour to extract from the right hon. Gentleman the particulars which he declines to give.
  MR. TREVELYAN: What particulars?
  MR. SEXTON: The particulars which rendered my Question "inaccurate and misleading."
  MR. TREVELYAN: I did not say it was inaccurate and misleading. I said the hon. Member gave a statement of a case which was the subject of a Civil Bill suit in a Question in the House of Commons. I said I had received a communication from another party complaining that this statement was inaccurate and misleading; and I argued from that that it was inconvenient to state the subject of Civil Bill suits in Questions in the House of Commons.
  MR. SEXTON: Will the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to say who was the other party?
  MR. TREVELYAN: No, Sir. I am not in the least bound to say it.

  METROPOLIS—IMPROVEMENTS AT HYDE PARK CORNER—THE ARCH ON CONSTITUTION HILL.
  MR. J. W. LOWTHERasked the First Commissioner of Works, Whether his attention has been called to the erection of an elongated zinc chimney pot on the arch at the top of Constitution Hill; and, whether he has received any Petition from the Royal Academicians, protesting against its position there as a violation of every principle of propriety and of every canon of proportion?
  MR. SHAW LEFEVRE: This chimney-pot was placed on the top of the Arch 40 years ago for the convenience of the police living in the place; and since that time, as far as I know, no one has thought it worth while to take up the time of the House by calling attention to it.
  MR. J. W. LOWTHERsaid, the right hon. Gentleman had not answered that part of the Question as to whether he had received a Petition from Royal Academicians on the subject?
  MR. SHAW LEFEVRE: I did not regard it as a serious Question.

  MADRAS—MYSORE GOLD MINES—CONCESSIONS TO BRITISH OFFICIALS.
  MR. JUSTIN M'CARTHYasked the Under Secretary of State for India, Whether the Madras Officials have up to date only paid the Mysore State £5,000 for the block of twenty square miles of gold mining land conceded them; and, whether certain speculators were prepared at the same time to pay one million sterling for the rights conceded to these officials; and, if so, whether pecuniary compensation will be made to the Rajah of Mysore, who was at the moment a minor and ward of the British Government?
  MR. J. K. CROSS: The Papers presented last year contain all the information we have respecting the amount paid to the Mysore State by the Kolar concessionaires. As is clearly shown on page 4 of those Papers, and as I explained to the hon. Gentleman on the 9th of April last year, the sum of 5,500 rupees was paid for one square mile
  1330
  only—not 20 square miles, as stated in his Question. I am entirely ignorant of the amount which certain speculators may have been prepared to pay.

  RAILWAY COMMISSIONERS—CONTINUATION OF POWERS—LEGISLATION.
  VISCOUNT FOLKESTONEasked the President of the Board of Trade, When he intends to introduce the Bill for continuing the powers of the Railway Commissioners?
  MR. CHAMBERLAIN: I am afraid I cannot give a positive reply to this Question. The House will agree with me that it is inexpedient, in view of the pressure upon the time of the Government, to introduce any further Bills, if they are likely, as this one is likely, to provoke any considerable discussion. Under these circumstances, I have endeavoured to secure something like an agreement among the parties chiefly concerned upon the principle of the Bill, and I am still hopeful that I shall succeed; in which case the Bill will very shortly be introduced.

  EGYPT (EVENTS IN THE SOUDAN)—GENERAL GORDON—RELIEF THROUGH ABYSSINIA.
  MR. STAVELEY HILLasked the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether our relations with King Johannes are such as to admit of an expedition for the relief of General Gordon being despatched from Abyssinia to Khartoum down the Blue Nile?
  MR. GLADSTONE: In answer to this Question I have to say that our relations with Abyssinia are quite satisfactory; and I do not think it would be desirable to say anything beyond that.

  PARLIAMENT—BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE—GENERAL GORDON'S MISSION—THE VOTE OF CENSURE (SIR M. HICKS-BEACH).
  SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH: I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Prime Minister what facilities he can afford me for bringing under the consideration of the House the Motion of which I have given Notice with respect to General Gordon?
  MR. GLADSTONE: In consequence of the verbal Notice given by the right hon. Gentleman on Friday, in conjunction with my Colleagues I have con-

  1331
  sidered the matter. We are desirous—I will not enter into any remarks on the Motion now—but we are desirous to give the right hon. Gentleman the earliest open day. The arrangements for to-day and Thursday having been made, the earliest open day will be Monday next. I may say that, looking to the limited scope of the Motion, confined as it is to the conduct of the Government in regard to the mission of General Gordon, we trust the debate will be brought to a close on that evening. Should it not be brought to a close on the same day, we could, although very reluctantly, place Tuesday morning at the disposal of the right hon. Gentleman for the purpose of continuing the debate. It would be for him to consider whether he should make any arrangements for the Tuesday evening. I may add that that is the maximum of time that can possibly be given up by the Government to the Motion.
  SIR MICHAEL HICKS-BEACH: I think it will be generally agreed that the House ought to have before it, before the debate, which, I understand, is to be commenced on Monday, all the information that Her Majesty's Government can possibly give in regard to the telegrams that have passed between General Gordon and Sir Evelyn Baring. I understood the noble Lord the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, in answer to a Question on Friday, to divide these telegrams into three classes. The telegram of April 18 from General Gordon, and the reply of Sir Evelyn Baring, and certain other telegrams in regard to the alleged intention of General Gordon to visit the Mahdi, the noble Lord said would be laid on the Table to-day. And he said there were other telegrams since the 25th of March from Sir Evelyn Baring which would be laid in due course. There was a third series which he said it would be injurious to the public interests to lay. I should like to ask whether he will not arrange that all telegrams which can be published consistently with the public interests shall be laid on the Table at once? If the presentation of telegrams from Sir Evelyn Baring since the 25th of March be postponed until they be published in due course, we shall not see them for two months to come. I think the House will be anxious to have them before the debate next Monday.
  MR. GLADSTONE: I quite agree with the right hon. Gentleman that it is desirable that the House should have these telegrams before the debate. When my noble Friend used the expression "in due course," he did not mean to say that their publication would be postponed for two months and reserved for another Blue Book. They will be laid on the Table during the present week, or at the earliest moment after.
  SIR ALEXANDER GORDON: I beg to give Notice that when the right hon. Gentleman the Member for East Gloucestershire brings forward his Motion I shall move, as an Amendment—
  "That this House continues to place confidence in the general conduct of Business by Her Majesty's Government."

  THE EGYPTIAN PAPERS—NO. 12, 1884.
  MR. CHAPLINasked the Under Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, in reference to the Despatch numbered 86, and dated Cairo, 14th February, 1884, in the Egyptian Papers, No. 12, 1884, Whether the statement which it contains, viz.—
  "Examination of archives shows that some telegrams passed between Sir Edward Malet and General Hicks besides those sent home; but they do not appear to add materially to the information in your Lordship's possession,"
  is substantially correct?
  LORD EDMOND FITZMAURICE: Yes; the statement is substantially correct. The Blue Book contains the despatches and telegrams in question, and at page 182 the views of Her Majesty's Government thereupon.

ORDERS OF THE DAY.
  SUPPLY—ARMY ESTIMATES.

    SUPPLY—considered in Committee.
    (In the Committee.)
    (1.) Motion made, and Question proposed,
    "That a sum, not exceeding £57,500, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge for Divine Service, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1885."
    COLONEL COLTHURSTwished to call attention to the inadequate arrangements for providing Roman Catholic priests on board the troopships proceeding annually to India between the months of September and April, some of which

    1333
    troopships brought home invalids. An arrangement had been entered into by the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War that a Roman Catholic priest should accompany every detachment of troops exceeding 300 in number. The arrangement, however, had not been found to work satisfactorily. It was manifest that a vessel leaving this country with 300 Roman Catholics on board might come back from India without any invalids at all; whereas another vessel leaving the country with only 50 or 100 might have to bring home invalids. He wished, therefore, to place before the noble Marquess, whose anxiety to settle the question he felt bound to bear testimony to, two alternative suggestions. One was, that the number of Roman Catholic chaplains should be increased by two or three, which would enable the service to be duly performed. If the noble Marquess did not think that it would be possible to increase the number of commissioned chaplains by two or three, he would ask him to consent to a priest going out on each voyage. And for this reason—it would be much easier for the ecclesiastical authorities to provide a priest for each voyage between September and April, than only when the number of Roman Catholic soldiers sent out amounted to 300, because, with the utmost goodwill on the part of the authorities at the Horse Guards, it was impossible to make up the details until within a week or 10 days of the time the vessel started; and it was then frequently found impossible to provide, even with the best intentions, the services of a clergyman at a few days' notice. He would ask the noble Marquess to give a definite answer now, because the Army Estimates had come on much sooner than was expected, and the noble Marquess had not received the Notices which those interested in this question intended to give him. All he asked the noble Marquess to do now was to admit the necessity of changing the present arrangements, and to promise to consider the two suggestions he had ventured to make.
    SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOTsaid, that, before the noble Marquess answered the question of his hon. and gallant Friend, he wished to put another question to him. When the Army Estimates were last taken, and the noble Marquess made his Statement, he
    1334
    distinctly stated that the House should have before Whitsuntide an opportunity of discussing it. It would now appear that the noble Marquess wished to take the Votes one after another without previously taking a discussion upon the Statement which he had made. He ventured to say that that would be a most inconvenient course as far as the Committee were concerned. They had certainly a right to expect, after what the noble Marquess had stated—in point of fact, after the distinct pledge and promise he had given—that the earliest opportunity for criticizing the noble Marquess's Statement would be afforded. If they were to proceed with the Votes in regular order, this general discussion could not be taken until they reached Vote 8, and there was no certainty as to when that Vote would be reached. He understood the object of the promise of the noble Marquess to be that, at the commencement of a Sitting like this, an opportunity should be given for going carefully into the consideration of the present state of the Army.
    THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, he was very sorry if there had been any misunderstanding upon the subject. He did not remember that any promise was made, except that an opportunity for discussion would be given before Whitsuntide; and he did not remember promising that the discussion should be given either upon Vote 8 or upon any other Vote. In fact, when the question was put to him the other day by an hon. Member, he had stated that he thought the most convenient course would be to proceed as usual, and take the Votes in their regular order. If, however, it was desired, as he thought it probably might be the case, to raise a general discussion on the state of the Army upon the recruiting question, it might be taken upon Vote 8 referred to by the hon. and gallant Member as the most convenient opportunity for doing so. If there was a desire on the part of the Committee to take that course, he would be quite ready to postpone Vote 8, in order that it might be taken as the first Vote on the next occasion the Army Estimates were reached. If necessary, the Army Estimates might be taken again shortly after Whitsuntide, and Vote 8 taken first.
    SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOTsaid, that in answer to what the noble

    1335
    Marquess had just stated, lie fancied that his right hon. and gallant Friend the Member for North Lancashire (Colonel Stanley) did make a statement of his wish to discuss the state of the Army, and asked when they were to have the Army Estimates gone into again. His right hon. and gallant Friend moved to report Progress, so that they might have some statement from the noble Marquess; because it was fully admitted that, a general Statement having been made by the noble Marquess, it was most inconvenient that the Committee should not have an opportunity of discussing it. He thought they were entitled to have the question discussed at the earliest possible period that night, and that it would be most objectionable to follow the course which was taken last year, and put it off until a late period of the Session, when they might have again to sit into Sunday and consider the Army Estimates at a period when it was altogether impossible to discuss the grave questions raised in them. The noble Marquess must be aware that the House had always treated these Army questions in a fair and impartial spirit, and had not converted them into Party questions. Certainly they had a right to have the question of the condition of the Army fairly raised; and he thought that it would be better to take Vote 8 at once, rather than to adopt the other alternative of getting as much money as was possible that night, and then put off the discussion of Vote 8 until a late and inconvenient period of the Session.
    SIR ALEXANDER GORDONsaid, that what occurred when the Army Estimates were introduced might be impressed upon the memory of the noble Marquess if he were to read what took place upon that occasion, and especially the remarks of the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
    SIR HERBERT MAXWELLrose to Order. He wished to know if the hon. and gallant Member would be in Order in reading extracts from a past debate in the present Session?
    SIR ALEXANDER GORDONsaid, the statement he was about to refer to formed part of the same debate now before the Committee.
    THE CHAIRMAN: I understand that the hon. and gallant Member is about to refer to a promise made by the Govern-
    1336
    ment, and he will be in Order in doing so.
    SIR ALEXANDER GORDONsaid, the promise made was this—the Chancellor of the Exchequer said he hoped the question of Army organization would be discussed on the second Vote, as it had been in previous years. The noble Marquess followed, and said, with great clearness, that the first Vote was merely to be granted to the Government as a Vote on Account, and that the general discussion would be postponed until another occasion. The noble Marquess added that last Session, at all events, the House had nothing to complain of, but had a full opportunity for discussing the Estimates. He (Sir Alexander Gordon) thought that statement clearly showed that it was the intention of the noble Marquess to have the general discussion taken on the next occasion.
    SIR HENRY FLETCHERsaid, he thought it was very desirable, if possible, to get on quickly with the Army Estimates that night, in order to reach the discussion upon the general organization of the Army, which, as it had been fairly put before the Committee by the noble Marquess, might be taken on Vote 8. The consideration of Vote 4 would probably take some time, seeing that it had reference to the Medical Department. Votes 3 and 4 would not require much discussion. They would pass then to Vote 5, which was for Militia Pay and Allowances; Vote 6 was for the Yeomanry Cavalry, and Vote 7 was the Volunteer Vote, upon which there was likely to be some discussion. If the noble Marquess would give an undertaking that he would go on with the Votes in their regular order until a certain hour, and then proceed with the discussion on Vote 8, he (Sir Henry Fletcher) thought that side of the House would be quite satisfied. It was most desirable that the discussion should take place that night, and that it should not be deferred until the month of July or August. He put this as a suggestion that unless the Vote were postponed until a very late hour of the night a general discussion should be taken upon it.
    THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, he should have no objection to arrange, as far as it was in his power, that Vote 8, dealing with the Army Reserve, should come on that night at a reasonable

    1337
    hour. He did not think, as far as he could see, that there was any intervening Vote which was likely to occupy much time in discussion. The first Vote was that for Divine Service, which was now under consideration; the next had reference to Martial Law; and the third bore upon the Medical Service. He did not think that these Votes would take up much time; and he was quite willing, as far as he was concerned, to postpone the Militia, the Yeomanry, and the Volunteer Votes in order to take Vote 8, dealing with the Army Reserve at an hour that would enable a general discussion to be raised. No doubt there were hon. Gentlemen present who were interested in the Militia, Yeomanry, and Volunteer discussions; and he would appeal to them, if they had come down prepared to take the discussion of those Votes that night, to assist him in postponing the consideration of them until the next occasion when the Army Estimates were reached.
    EARL PERCYconfessed that he was placed in a position of difficulty. It was certainly understood, as had been mentioned by the hon. and gallant Baronet the Member for West Sussex (Sir Walter B. Barttelot), that they were to have a general discussion on the Estimates that evening on some Vote which would enable it to be reached; but when he asked the noble Marquess privately what course he proposed to take, because he had been under the impression that a sort of undertaking had been given, the noble Marquess told him he intended to take the Votes seriatim. He should like to propose to the noble Marquess that he might take the Militia and Volunteer Votes, and omit the Medical Vote. He did not know that there were any hon. Members who were anxious to have the Medical Vote that evening; and he certainly thought the course he suggested—namely, of taking the Militia and Volunteer Votes, would be most conducive to the general convenience of the Committee.
    THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, he did not think the Medical Vote was likely to occupy a long time in discussion. He hoped the Committee would agree to the suggestion he had made. He thought it would be better for the Committee to accept that proposal, and thus avoid any further misunderstanding on the subject.
    EARL PERCYasked whether the noble Marquess could name an hour at which he would take Vote 8?
    THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, he did not think it would be possible to postpone a Vote when they were in the middle of the discussion of it.
    MAJOR GENERAL ALEXANDERsaid, he was of opinion that if the noble Marquess could not agree with the proposal of the hon. and gallant Baronet the Member for West Sussex (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) it would be much better to go on with the Votes in their regular order. It would be most objectionable to follow the course which was taken, last year. He had no doubt the noble Marquess intended to bring on the Army Estimates again soon after Whitsuntide if he could; but it was a matter in which the noble Marquess had no power whatever. He would remind the noble Marquess of what occurred last year. The Army Estimates were not brought on for discussion until Saturday the 18th of August. The House met on that day at 12 o'clock. The Army Estimates were not reached until a late hour, and they were not finished at 2 o'clock on Sunday morning. The result was that in the end, on his (Major General Alexander's) proposal, Supply was granted to Her Majesty without any adequate discussion of the Votes whatever, on the understanding that a discussion should be taken on the Report. Under these circumstances, he strongly deprecated any similar course being pursued on the present occasion. He hoped, if the noble Marquess could not agree to the proposal of the hon. and gallant Baronet the Member for West Sussex, that they would be allowed to take the Votes in their regular order.
    THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONremarked, that there were other discussions last year upon the Army Estimates than that which was referred to by the hon. and gallant Member for Ayrshire (Major General Alexander). Full opportunity for discussion was given at an early period of the Session.
    MAJOR GENERAL ALEXANDERsaid, that 19 Votes were passed on Saturday night and Sunday morning.
    THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, that certainly upon some of the Votes a full opportunity for a general discussion was given at a reasonable

    1339
    period of the Session. He understood that the hon. and gallant Member for West Sussex (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) would be satisfied to take the general discussion that evening after reasonable progress had been made with the Votes in their regular order.
    SIR HERBERT MAXWELLsaid, he should like to ask the opinion of the Chair as to how far a general discussion of the Army Estimates could be raised on a single Vote—Vote 8—after previous Votes had been passed? Would hon. Members be permitted to discuss the whole subject of Army organization upon that Vote? It certainly seemed to him that, after the Committee had voted the money required for the Militia and Volunteers, it would be open to any hon. Member to rise to Order, and question the propriety of discussing those branches of the Service on any subsequent Vote. He thought there ought to be no misunderstanding upon that point.
    COLONEL STANLEYsaid, that reference had been made to what he had said the other night. He quite agreed with what had been stated by his hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Ayrshire (Major General Alexander), that there would be a certain amount of inconvenience in postponing the consideration of important questions for an indefinite period. He also agreed with the remarks of the hon. Member for Wigtonshire (Sir Herbert Maxwell), that it would be inconvenient to raise a discussion upon questions relating to particular Services after the Votes for those Services had been passed. It was in consequence of that feeling that he had moved to report Progress on the last occasion; and he did so as a protest against the doctrine that having once passed a certain stage they could go back exactly to the same position they were in before. They could only, after a certain amount of inconvenience, discuss all the general questions connected with the organization and state of the Army upon the Vote for the Reserves; but he would point out that the Reserve Vote did contain in itself a reference to almost every subject connected with the state of the Array. Of course, the other Votes could be dealt with within due limits. He, therefore, thought that the proposal of the noble Marquess was a fair one—namely, that they should go
    1340
    forward with the Votes in their regular order until they reached the Militia Vote, and then go on with Vote 8. Of course, it would be impossible to please everyone; but, in taking the Votes consecutively up to a certain point, there would be a certain amount of give-and-take on the part of the Government which he regarded as satisfactory.
    THE CHAIRMAN: In answer to the question put to me by the hen. Baronet the Member for Wigtonshire (Sir Herbert Maxwell), I think that Vote 10 would have been the Vote upon which the general question could have been most legitimately raised. But the Committee will bear in mind that the general question was raised last year upon Vote 8; and I am not prepared to say that it was not open to the Committee to take that course. I, therefore, fortified by the custom that has prevailed, do not think that on the present occasion hon. Members would be precluded on Vote 8 from entering into a general discussion.
    MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORsaid, his experience induced him to believe that there was nothing which led to so much loss of time as a departure from well-recognized rules. These understandings and multiplied understandings, generally ending in a misunderstanding, occupied a considerable portion of the time of the House in every Session; and he was very much disposed to urge on the Committee the desirability of going on with the Votes in the order in which they appeared in the Estimates. If the Committee decided upon taking them in the order in which they appeared, and wished to select one for a general discussion, it seemed to him that they ought to select Vote 16, which referred to the payment of the salaries and miscellaneous charges in the War Office; and upon that Vote for the Office of the Secretary of State for War every question of policy connected with the Army might be legitimately raised. He wished to ask the Chairman if he (Mr. Arthur O'Connor) would be in Order in moving the reduction of a certain sum by which he had wished to reduce the Estimates on the last occasion? It would be in the recollection of the Committee that, practically, the first Vote in the Army Estimates was passed without the Committee having any option in the matter. He was told upon that occasion, both by the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the

    1341
    noble Marquess, that, whatever he might have to say, that Vote must be passed, and the consequence was that the discussion was greatly curtailed. He had wished to move the reduction of the Vote by some thousands of pounds on account of an item which seemed to him to be absolutely unnecessary—he alluded to the item for the Riding Establishment at Woolwich. The noble Marquess said that his attention had not been called to the matter, and that he was not in a position to offer any opinion upon it. He promised, however, to look into the subject. He (Mr. A. O'Connor) wanted to know whether the noble Marquess had found time since to inquire into the advisability of continuing that Establishment?
    THE CHAIRMAN: I must point out that that is not a question of Order. There is no Question now before the Committee in regard to the Riding Establishment at Woolwich.
    MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORsaid, he had only been desirous of eliciting that answer from the Chairman, because it enabled him now to adduce a direct illustration of the unsatisfactory manner in which the Estimates were discussed. The noble Marquess suggested that he should move the reduction upon Vote 2, which had reference to the provision for Divine Service. [The Marquess of HARTINGTON dissented.] The noble Marquess shook his head; but he (Mr. Arthur O'Connor) only wished to point out the utter incongruity of moving the reduction of a Vote for the Riding Establishment at Woolwich on a Vote which was to cover the provision for Divine Service. He wished, further, to point out that it would be futile to discuss that question upon Vote 8; and it therefore appeared to him, from the way in which the Votes were to be taken, that it would be altogether precluded from raising that question, because the Effective Vote had already been passed, and they were now on the Vote for Divine Service; and it was irregular to raise a discussion upon any branch of the Service covered by a Vote already agreed to. Under these circumstances, he hoped the Government would resolve not to have any more of these understandings and departures from their well-recognized rules; and he would urge the desirability of going through the Votes in a regular and straightforward manner.
    MR. RYLANDSappealed to the Committee that it would be a great saving of time, and also a most convenient course, if they adopted the suggestion of the hon. Gentleman, and carried out the views of the noble Marquess, by proceeding with the Votes in their regular order. After they had gone through several Votes they would be in a position to ascertain whether sufficient time was left for a general discussion or not; and an arrangement might then be made, if it was necessary, for having the general discussion upon some future occasion. His own impression was, that the best course would be to go on steadily with the Votes, on the understanding that the general discussion would take place at an early period, either on Vote 8, as suggested by the Government, or on Vote 10, as suggested by the Chairman.
    LORD EUSTACE CECILwished to point out that the Committee were wasting valuable time in a desultory discussion. They had already wasted 20 minutes. The noble Marquess had shown his readiness to meet the views of the Committee; and he thought the proposal which the noble Marquess had made found favour on both sides of the House. If they would take that course they would prevent not only a further waste of public time, but also a waste of public money. If they at once proceeded to Business, and went on with the Votes, they would probably reach Vote 8 in sufficient time to have the general discussion.
    MR. CAUSTONsaid, he was anxious to proceed to Business; but he thought there ought to be an understanding that hon. Members who wished to raise a discussion on Vote 1 should have an opportunity of doing so. Under the present regulations the Staff clerks considered that they were suffering under a grievance, and he had undertaken to bring their case before the House. He had been under the impression that upon Vote 1 they would have had a general discussion upon all Army matters; and before they proceeded to Business that evening he hoped there would be a definite promise from the noble Marquess that hon. Members would have a full opportunity of bringing the grievances they complained of, in connection with the Army, under the consideration of the Committee.
    EARL PERCYsaid, he would mate a suggestion, which he thought would meet the wishes of the Committee, or, at any rate, of hon. Members sitting on that side of the House, who were anxious to take the Militia Vote that night. He would suggest—and he hoped it would meet the views of the noble Marquess—that they should proceed with Votes 2, 3, and 4, and if they were concluded before 9 o'clock that they should then take Vote 5; but if they were not concluded before 9 o'clock, that then they should omit the other Votes and go on with Vote 8.
    SIR ALEXANDER GORDONsaid, he had come there for the purpose of considering every Army matter, including the Militia; and he, therefore, thought they ought to go straight forward with the Votes after they had taken the discussion which it was promised they should have upon Vote 2. That was, undoubtedly, the impression produced by the statement made by the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer when the Army Estimates were introduced. Now, looking at Vote 1, he found that the general Staff of the Army in 1872 cost the country £83,000 odd. It now cost the country £173,000, or double the amount within 11 years. He wished to have that matter fully explained to the Committee; and it was certainly impossible to obtain the explanation he derived upon the Vote for Divine Service, or upon any Vote except Vote 1. If he were to attempt to raise it on any other Vote, he would inevitably find himself stopped by the Chairman, and he would only be placed in a ridiculous position. If the Government could not show him a reason for the large increase in certain items, then, he contended, the Vote ought to be reduced; but to raise the important questions he wished to raise on any Vote except Vote 1 would necessarily, as he had stated, place him in a ridiculous position.
    SIR HERBERT MAXWELLremarked, that, in accordance with the ruling of the Chair, as to the propriety of raising the discussion upon the whole organization of the Army upon Vote 8, he wanted to know, on the same principle, why it could not be raised upon any other Vote—2, 3, or 4, for instance; and, if so, why not take it at once?
    THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, he had simply proposed to follow the course which had been taken on other occasions—namely, to dispose of the Vote for Divine Service, and similar Votes of minor importance, in order to raise the general question more properly upon Vote 8. He believed that all the questions affecting Army organization bearing upon the condition of the Army could be legitimately raised on Vote 8. There were, however, a certain number of minor questions referred to in the previous Votes which he did not suppose could be properly brought forward on Vote 8; but they might all of them be conveniently dealt with on the Vote for the administration of the Army. He thought there were very few questions of administration which the Committee would not be able to deal with upon that Vote. He would, therefore, adhere to the suggestion he had made in the first instance.
    THE CHAIRMAN: Perhaps the Committee will allow me to call their attention to what has occurred. A promise has been made that the general discussion should take place on Vote 8, which has to come on upon a future occasion. Under those circumstances, I do not think I should be acting unfairly to the Committee if I now say that the time has arrived for stopping the discussion, which is certainly not strictly in Order. As has been pointed out, Votes 8 and 10 are Votes which embrace the general policy of the organization and administration of the Army, and almost every question connected with the state of the Army can be raised upon them. The Question now before the Committee is Vote 2—
    "That a sum, not exceeding £57,500, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge for Divine Service, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1885."
    After what has been stated by the noble Marquess, I will again point out to the Committee that upon Vote 8 or Vote 10 it will be possible to enter into any question relating to the administration of the Army; but it will not be regular to enter into a discussion of any of the items included in Vote 1, and already passed. the conversation which has been proceeding for some time past has certainly not been directed to the Question before the Committee.
    DR. FARQUHARSONwished to point out that last year no proper opportunity was afforded for discussing the Medical Vote, on which Vote many important questions had now to be decided—questions affecting the entire organization of the Army Medical Department. If they were now going to enter upon Vote 8, that important question would be still further delayed.
    THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON: No; we propose to take it in its order.
    DR. FARQUHARSONsaid, he was glad to hear that announcement, and he hoped Her Majesty's Government would adhere to it.
    THE CHAIRMAN: I have already pointed out to the Committee that the Question before the Committee is Vote 2, and I am not quite sure that the discussion which has taken place is not altogether irregular. I must now call upon hon. Members to confine themselves to the Vote for Divine Service in connection with the Army, which is the Question now before the Committee.
    SIR GEORGE CAMPBELLsaid, he thought the most regular course would be to proceed at once with Vote 2. He would, therefore, move the reduction of the Vote of which he had given Notice—namely, that it be reduced by the sum of £4,103, made up as follows:—On account of troops stationed at Halifax, £838; ditto, in Jamaica, £509; ditto, in Windward and Leeward Islands, £642; ditto, in Cape Colony and Natal, £1,515; ditto, in Ceylon, £599.
    MR. CAUSTONrose to Order. His hon. Friend was, no doubt, anxious to proceed with the Business of the Committee; but he (Mr. Causton) wished clearly to understand what the arrangement that had been made was. Was it to be understood that after certain Votes had been passed the general discussion which had been alluded to would be allowed to take place?
    THE CHAIRMAN: May I ask what is the point of Order raised by the hon. Member?
    MR. CAUSTON: I think before the Amendment is moved to the Vote by my hon. Friend there should be a clear understanding with the noble Marquess.
    THE CHAIRMAN: That is not a point of Order, and I must call upon the hon. Member for Kirkcaldy to proceed.
    SIR GEORGE CAMPBELLsaid, if seemed to him that his hon. Friend was wholly out of Order; and if he desired to raise any question in reference to the Staff clerks he should have raised it on Vote 1. He (Sir George Campbell) took the opportunity, on Vote 2, which related to the Colonies, of raising the question of the tyranny exercised by the Colonies over the Mother Country in regard to fiscal matters. What had happened was this. We had really surrendered all our powers over the greater Colonies; and, whereas it was formerly said we tyrannized over the Colonies, the Colonies now tyrannized over us in the matter of military expenditure. Our Colonies paid nothing whatever for their naval protection, which was the great protection we gave to our Possessions beyond the seas. And as regards military expenditure, what we found was this—that wherever the British Colonists prevailed, and not dark races, the Colony paid nothing at all, or very little indeed. It seemed to him to be very hard that we should employ our Army and Navy in protecting the Colonies without the Colonies contributing one farthing to the expense incurred. At the present moment, almost the entire charge of several of these was paid by the taxpayers of this country without the smallest contribution from the Colonies. Why should we have a great Naval Station at Halifax, except that Canada was supposed to be a British Possession? No doubt, the military force stationed there was a small one; but its presence involved a certain risk. Why should the country bear the whole cost of the defence of the Island of Jamaica, or of the Windward or Leeward Islands? No one could say that those Possessions were of any great advantage to this country. Again, we retained the nucleus of a garrison at Cape Town, and a considerable force at Natal, and the consequence was that we were involved in nearly all the wars with the Natives. It was in that way that we found ourselves mixed up with the Transkei War, and we were obliged to send troops there at very great expense. Natal was the worst case of all. That Colony was strongly in favour of war, and the Colonists were continually urging upon us to make war on their behalf. We had, therefore, found it necessary to maintain a con-

    1347
    siderable military force in the Colony, which had cost us £250,000 per annum in quiet times, besides other expenses. But what was the contribution of the Colony towards our military expenditure? With a Revenue which amounted to £800,000 a-year, and which was constantly growing at our expense, the contribution of the Colony towards our military expenditure amounted to the paltry sum of £4,000, or not one-half per cent of the Revenue. Ceylon was the last Colony he would refer to. That was differently situated. There was a tax upon the food of the Natives there, and the Colony had hitherto paid the whole expense of the troops stationed there. The Colony was not very prosperous at this moment; but it was practically protected by the Indian Army in its immediate neighbourhood, and it required but a very small force in the Colony itself for its protection. Yet it was treated very differently from India. India had always been obliged to pay the uttermost farthing of its own military expense. In the case of Ceylon, having regard to the fact that it was not very prosperous at this moment, Her Majesty's Government had consented to remit about £20,000 of the charge which had hitherto been paid by Ceylon. The result was, that whereas in India one-third of the effective Revenue of the Empire was spent in its defence, and the Natives were charged at the rate of one rupee per head, in Ceylon only one-tenth of the Revenue was paid for defence, and the population only paid one-third of a rupee per head, or one-third of the amount that fell upon the poor Natives of India. And Her Majesty's Government were now remitting a portion of that payment. It was quite evident that Her Majesty's Government, in these arrangements, were not dealing equally with India and the Colonies. The present Vote was for Divine Service, and he confessed that he had not intended to go into that question beyond the general considerations he had mentioned; but, in regard to the Colony of Ceylon, there was one point touching the question of Divine Service to which he should like to allude. Bishops were generally good men, but some of those sent to the Colonies were "apt to play pranks before high Heaven," of which Her Majesty's Government did not approve; and, no doubt, although they
    1348
    had not always the courage or opportunity of doing so, Her Majesty's Government would like to bring about a change of arrangements. At one time the Colonial Office certainly did bring the Bishop of Ceylon to his bearings. He had abused his franking privileges, and they were taken away from him. Yet, he (Sir George Campbell) found, in the present year, while the Colony of Ceylon was not able to pay the chaplains furnished for Divine Service for the troops and came to this country for payment, they had repaid to the Bishop the equivalent of the sum we had taken away from him by the withdrawal of his privilege of franking. In moving the reduction of this Vote by the sum of £4,103, he desired only to express in general terms to the House the opinion that Her Majesty's Government should take care in future that more equal justice was done between the Colonies and the taxpayers of the Mother Country. Having said so much, he hoped it would not be necessary for him to intrude upon the Committee again that evening.
    THE CHAIRMAN: Does the hon. Member move the reduction of the Vote?
    SIR GEORGE CAMPBELL: Yes; by the sum of £4,103.
    Motion made, and Question proposed,
    "That a sum, not exceeding £53,397, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge for Divine Service, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1885."—(Sir George Campbell.)
    MR. EVELYN ASHLEYdesired to say a few words in reference to the Motion which had been made by his hon. Friend. It had struck him, in listening to the speech, that the sting of it was in the tail. His hon. Friend was concerned less because the Colonies were paying too little than be cause India was paying too much. He (Mr. Evelyn Ashley) did not intend to enter into the question whether India was paying too much or not; his business would be to address himself, as shortly as he could, to the remarks in regard to the payment by the Colonies. First of all, he would remind his hon. Friend, in reference to the large self-governed Colonies, that the Government of this country would not like, and would not think it right, even if it were possible, to obtain contributions from their Legislatures to-

    1349
    wards the cost of the Imperial troops that were stationed within their borders for Imperial purposes; because, if that were done, the Colonies would claim the right to employ those troops, and might interfere and try to influence our policy. Therefore, as far as the self-governed Colonies were concerned, it was not right to call upon them to contribute towards the payment of the Imperial troops. In the next place, when the hon. Member talked about contributing towards the defence of the United Empire, to a large extent Canada and the Cape, as also the Australias, did contribute already. They voted large sums of money for their own defence in maintaining local troops. He would run briefly through the instances which had been put down by his hon. Friend in his indictment. The first case was that of Halifax. Halifax was an Imperial station for our Navy; and, although the hon. Member seemed to think that Canada was in a position to defend herself, he would remind the hon. Member that the Naval Station at Halifax was useful for more than local defence, and that it was used for many other purposes beyond that of a mere local station. Therefore, there was no reason why we should expect a contribution in respect of it from the Colony. It was necessary that we should deal with each Colony by itself; and, in the first instance, we must consider its history before, we laid down any rule as to what contributions we ought to expect, because existing arrangements were, in some instances, explained by historical transactions. No doubt, there were some cases in which certain Colonies might be called upon to contribute more than they did. That he did not deny. But let them look at the history of Jamaica and the Windward Islands. He did not deny that the terms upon which the Imperial troops were maintained in those Colonies were a very liberal arrangement for the Colonies themselves. We contributed not only to the defence of those Colonies, but towards their civil establishments. That practice ought not to be continued. We paid the entire cost of the military establishments out there, and other things of that kind. It was impossible to say, at this moment, what change ought to be brought about; but he would remind the hon. Member that the arrangement with Jamaica dated from
    1350
    the time of the emancipation of the slaves. Although changing circumstances might justify the revision, of the arrangement in some cases, we could not break through the pledge which had been given on special grounds. An immense deal had been done, of late years, in the way of reducing our Colonial military expenditure, and there was no reason why something further should not be done. With regard to the Cape Colony, he would simply say this—that the Imperial forces now maintained in that Colony were entirely for Imperial purposes, and it was only a very few years ago that the barracks occupied by Imperial troops for Imperial purposes were handed over to the local Government. As for Natal, he was of opinion that in that case a larger contribution ought to be paid. He fully admitted that; but, at the same time, he would point out to his hon. Friend and the Committee that we had given Natal representative institutions, and we could not in a high-handed manner force the Colony to vote more money for our troops. Of course, it might be said that we had the remedy in our own hands, and that we could withdraw our troops; but as long as the Zulu border presented such dangers and difficulties, we could not hold a pistol to the head of Natal, and say—"If you do not do what we think you ought to do our troops shall be withdrawn." The financial arrangement under which Imperial troops were employed there was entered into in 1860—a good many years ago. The hon. Member said that Natal ought to contribute more. He (Mr. Evelyn Ashley) was of the same opinion; but he did not think it was to be done in the offhand way pointed out. He came, lastly, to the Colony of Ceylon. Up to the present time that Colony had paid every farthing of the expenditure for Imperial purposes, and we had recognized their present position by not asking them this year to continue to pay upon the same scale. His hon. Friend quite agreed that Ceylon had hitherto paid its full share; and he did not know why his hon. Friend should have dragged Ceylon in, except in reference to India, with which he (Mr. Evelyn Ashley) had nothing whatever to do. He thought he might say that, with

    1351
    the exception of Natal, there was a good answer in every case.
    SIR HERBERT MAXWELLsaid, he had no desire to impede the progress of Business; but, on the contrary, he was anxious that it should be proceeded with as fast as possible. Nevertheless, he had risen to move that the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again. The Chairman had already reproved the preliminary conversation which the Committee indulged in before entering into the present Vote, on the ground that it was irregular. He (Sir Herbert Maxwell) was sorry that it had been thought necessary to do so; because, at the time the conversation was stopped, the Committee were left in a state of absurd mist and uncertainty as to the order of Business that evening. The noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War had undoubtedly showed great anxiety to meet the views of all sides of the House; and this Motion to report Progress was made in order to give the noble Marquess an opportunity of explaining to the Committee, decidedly and clearly, what Votes were to be taken that night, and in what order.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."—(Sir Herbert Maxwell.)
    MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORasked if the noble Marquess would explain, at the same time, how the questions connected with the Army Pay Department and the continuation of the Riding Establishment at Woolwich stood?
    COLONEL WALRONDsaid, there was a very important Vote—Vote 7—which he hoped would be taken that evening. Last year it was not taken until the middle of August, at a period of the year which was much too late to allow many officers to be present. He hoped that Vote 7 would be taken that night, and that it would be taken in the order in which it stood in the Estimates.
    SIR HENRY FLETCHERsaid, he hoped the Committee would be able to agree with the suggestion of the noble Marquess, and would go straight on with the Votes. ["No, no!"] He had understood the noble Marquess to say that the best course would be to go on regularly with the Votes. Vote 7, which had been alluded to by his hon. and
    1352
    gallant Friend, was a very important one, and it would be highly unsatisfactory to have it delayed as it was last year.
    THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, the explanation the hon. and gallant Member had attributed to him was not the explanation he had himself given. The suggestion he had made, and which he understood to be generally accepted, was that the Militia and Volunteer Votes should be postponed until after they had disposed of Vote 8, and that the general discussion should be brought on upon Vote 8. If there were any objection to that course, it would be better, he thought, to go straight on with the Votes, and, if necessary, to postpone Vote 8 until a future period. He did not know whether it would be in Order to refer to the question which had been put to him by the hon. Member for Queen's County (Mr. A. O'Connor) as to the Hiding School at Woolwich, to which reference was made in Vote 1. That was a question that had not yet been fully considered; it was still under consideration. With regard to the question of the Army Pay Department, that was a matter which the hon. Gentleman might raise on the Vote for the administration of the War Office.
    VISCOUNT LEWISHAMsaid, he had certainly understood the noble Marquess to state that he intended to take the Votes in the order in which they stood. He should like to know if it was really intended to pursue that course? He had come down for the purpose of considering Vote 7; but if it was not to be taken that night, he should certainly go home to dinner.
    SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOTsaid, that his object had not been to detain the Committee, or to prevent them from going on with the consideration of the Votes. All he desired was that they should have a reasonable time for the discussion of the great question of Army Organization. He did not make any objection to the statement which the noble Marquess had made. He was perfectly satisfied with it; and all he desired was that the Committee should have some reasonable time for the discussion of Vote 8.
    SIR HERBERT MAXWELLsaid, that, with the leave of the House, he would withdraw his Motion.
    Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
    SIR GEORGE CAMPBELLsaid, he would also ask leave to withdraw his Motion. He only wished to say that he thought his hon. Friend the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies had misunderstood his object. His object had certainly not been to protest against India being required to pay the whole of the Imperial expenditure in connection with that country. He did not think that one Possession should be differently treated from any other Possession; and he certainly did not see why Ceylon, being practically a part of India, should not pay her fair proportion of the expenditure in the same way as the inhabitants of India did. So far as Natal was concerned, if the giving of representative institutions to a small minority of the population of a Colony—much less than one-tenth—was to have the effect of allowing them to tyrannize over the Mother Country, and refuse to pay their fair share of the military expenditure which Her Majesty' s Government thought they ought to pay, he certainly thought this country ought to object in future to confer representative institutions upon such Colonies. So far as Halifax was concerned, he hoped we should soon be able to withdraw from it altogether. He begged to withdraw the Motion he had made for the reduction of the Vote.
    MR. RYLANDSwished to say a word before the Amendment was withdrawn. He thought his hon. Friend had taken a most singular course. He had, upon a small Vote, availed himself of the opportunity of raising a most important question; a question which he (Mr. Rylands) had intended to raise, if he could have obtained an opportunity, on Vote 1; a question not merely confined to the payment of £4,000 for the clergy connected with another Establishment in the Colonies, but an expenditure of more than £2,000,000 a-year on account of Colonial Services generally. The manner in which the question had been introduced by his hon. Friend might induce people out-of-doors to suppose that it was one of small moment; whereas it was really one of very great moment. He ventured to submit to the Government that when they came into power in 1880 the policy which they then laid down was one based upon the principle of economy. He had understood that they intended, as far as possible, to keep down the expenditure for Colonial Services, especially in regard to the employ-
    1354
    ment of Imperial troops. We were now paying an enormous sum for military establishments in the Colonies. The total this year amounted to £1,750,000, and that was by no means the full extent of our expenditure. This sum of £1,750,000 only appeared under certain heads; but there were very heavy items not included in the expenditure given in the Return which he held in his hand. For instance, there was nothing included in regard to the Non-Effective Services. The Committee were fully aware that the Estimates were materially swelled in consequence of the services rendered by our Army in defence of our Colonies.
    THE CHAIRMAN: I must point out to the hon. Member that he is altogether exceeding the limits of this Vote by going into questions of our Colonial policy generally. The Question before the Committee is the Vote for Divine Service, and the hon. Member for Kirkcaldy (Sir George Campbell) has proposed to withdraw an Amendment he has moved for the diminution of that Vote. The present Question is that the Amendment, by leave, be withdrawn.
    MR. RYLANDSsaid, he had understood, from the manner in which the question had been raised by his hon. Friend, and also from the reply of the Under Secretary of State for the Colonies, that the Chairman would have allowed a little latitude in raising the question of Imperial contributions in. aid of Colonial expenditure. At the same time, there were other Votes upon which this principle might be introduced again. It would have been most properly discussed under Vote 1; and he had thought that it might be for the convenience of the Committee if the matter were discussed now. Still, at the same time, he was bound to say that it ought to be discussed on grounds much wider than the mere payment of £4,000 to the chaplains, and he should be glad if some opportunity could be afforded to the Committee for dealing more generally with this expenditure.
    LORD EUSTACE CECILsaid, he would suggest to the hon. Member that if he brought forward this question on Vote 13, where there was a considerable charge for expenditure on fortifications and on other matters connected with the Colonies, he would, no doubt, be perfectly in Order.
    MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORrose to Order. He wished to know whether it

    1355
    would be competent to hon. Members to discuss at a future time upon another Vote details of items in a previous Votes?
    THE CHAIRMANsaid, it would be his duty to decide questions of Order of the kind proposed by the hon. Member when they arose.
    Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
    Question again proposed,
    "That a sum, not exceeding £53,397, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge for Divine Service, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1885."
    THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, he desired to reply to the question put to him by the hon. and gallant Member for the County of Cork (Colonel Colthurst) with regard to the employment of Roman Catholic chaplains on board transports carrying troops between this country and India. The hon. and gallant Gentleman would be aware that efforts had been made to satisfy reasonable demands in this matter. Two years ago, an arrangement was entered into between the War Office, the Admiralty, and the India Office, that in all cases in which more than 300 Roman Catholic soldiers were on board a transport a Roman Catholic priest should be employed at a remuneration to be settled between the parties. That was the endeavour they wished to see carried out; but he was bound to say that the arrangement had not been found to give full satisfaction. In the first place, it was not very frequently the ease that so large a number of Roman Catholics as 300 were embarked in one transport; and, in the next place, although the matter was conducted with the assistance of the Roman Catholic Bishop of Southwark, it was not always possible to secure the services of priests. All he could say was that he would enter further into communication on this subject with the India Office, with whom it more particularly rested, because it was upon them that the expense would chiefly fall. He believed the hon. and gallant Member would see that what they had already done had been in the direction of meeting the wishes of Roman Catholics on this subject. If the Departments could see their way, improvements should be suggested. The suggestion had boon made that Roman Catholic priests should be placed on the establishment for the purpose; but that
    1356
    would involve considerable expense, nor was that the only difficulty. He would, however, communicate with the Admiralty and India Office on the subject, and he should be glad if they would meet the object of his hon. and gallant Friend.
    COLONEL COLTHURSTsaid, he desired to do full justice to the efforts of the noble Marquess; but he wished to point out that it would be impossible, under the present system, to insure what was asked for—namely, that Roman Catholic invalids coming from India should have the ministration of priests of their Church. He saw that six vessels from India had brought home Roman Catholic invalids; and it would have been necessary in that case that at least on six voyages priests should have been sent. If the Bishop of Southwark knew that he had to supply priests on every occasion, he would, no doubt, be able to do so. He attached no blame to the War Office in this matter, and was quite satisfied to leave it in the hands of the noble Marquess, with the hope that he would be able to carry out the suggestion that at least on the return voyages the services of Roman Catholic priests might be available for invalids.
    Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
    Original Question again proposed.
    MR. BIGGARsaid, he rose to call attention to what Irish Members looked upon as a grievance—namely, the absence of suitable provision for supplying religious ministration to the Militia at Carrickfergus. It seemed to him that the War Office treated the members of the Roman Catholic Church in that district in the most improper manner. Carrickfergus was a town of 10,000 inhabitants, only a limited proportion of whom were Roman Catholics. There was only one priest there, who had to officiate at two services on Sunday, and also to attend at the chapels in the adjacent rural districts for the same purpose. There was, therefore, no Roman Catholic ministration for the men who were locked up in barracks on Sundays to keep them out of mischief. He was disposed to think that even from the point of view of expediency that Roman Catholic chaplains should be attached to each Militia regiment when in training. The Government would say they gave 12 s. a-week to provide a chaplain for

    1357
    the regiment at Carrickfergus, the calculation being that the chaplain who performed the service, and who came from some distance, should get one day's pay at a rate nearly as low as the pay of a fourth-class chaplain, which was 10 s. 6d. a-day. There were not sufficient priests at Carrickfergus to meet the demands of the district; and how the noble Marquess could ask priests to come there from the South of Ireland for one day a-week at the lowest rate paid to any priest in the Service, he was at a loss to understand. Priests could, of course, be obtained if they were properly remunerated. The condition of things at Carrickfergus was different from that in other districts of Ireland. As he had already said, there should be a special chaplain for each Militia regiment, an arrangement which would be good from the point of view of economy, because the Militia, who were generally enlisted from the most disreputable class in the country, would be more under restraint, and behave themselves better than they did at present. He did not know what answer the noble Marquess would make to this; but certainly, taking all conditions into account, a more mean mode of saving money could not be imagined than the present arrangement. In order to give Irish Members an opportunity of expressing their views upon this subject, he would move the reduction of the Vote.
    Motion made, and Question proposed,
    "That a sum, not exceeding £57,000, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge for Divine Service, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1885."—(Mr. Biggar.)
    THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, that in the case referred to by the hon. Member for Cavan, the War Office had acted strictly in accordance with the Regulations; he might say that perhaps they had gone somewhat beyond them. The hon. Member said it would be proper to give a larger rate of remuneration to the priest at Carrickfergus; but he must be aware that that could not be done without extending the remuneration in ordinary cases. They had no power to alter the Regulations to meet a particular case. The usual rate of payment was one guinea where the number of men was 200, and 10 s. 6d. where it was under 200.
    MR. SEXTONsaid, he hoped that some modifications of the Regulations
    1358
    would take place. The noble Marquess thought this case of Carrickfergus was not exceptional; but he wished to impress upon him that it was really unique. The peculiarity of the case as regarded Carrickfergus was that the parish church was so small that it would only hold 230 persons, and the consequence was that the soldiers of the Line and the civil population filled it to the doors; there was no room for the Militia, and the Roman Catholic priest had to perform Divine Service at a country church miles away. It was sad to think that a priest should be expected to perform the duties of his office for a sum of money weekly, which, in a period of three months, would amount to only £10. He was sure there must be at the War Office an account for Sundries, as there was in other Departments, out of which a fitting remuneration could be given to a priest for the performance of Divine Service for the Militia at Carrickfergus; and he could not believe that it was out of the power of the noble Marquess to meet the necessities of the case. He thought the noble Marquess might say he would consider how the difficulty in his way might be overcome. It was impossible for the local priest to perform the service, because he had to attend elsewhere. The money provided by the Government was insufficient for the purpose intended; and all he and his hon. Friends asked was that the clergyman who should come from another place might be indemnified. He was bound to say that the beggarly treatment which the War Office extended to the Militia in the matter of Divine Service very ill accorded with the remarks of the hon. and gallant Gentleman opposite (Colonel Colthurst), to the effect that the noble Marquess was attentive to the requirements of Roman Catholics. This paltry and beggarly method of treating men in the Service of the Queen tended neither to the credit of the Department over which the noble Marquess presided nor to the welfare of the Militia.
    SIR JOSEPH M'KENNAsaid, the noble Marquess appeared to think that, if he made any exceptional arrangement with regard to the chaplain at Carrickfergus, it would oblige him to make similar arrangements in the case of other chaplains. But he was unable to see the cogency of that proposition. The

    1359
    case of Carrickfergus was in this matter peculiar and exceptional; and all that he and his hon. Friends asked of the noble Marquess was that the special circumstances should be taken into consideration within a short space of time by the War Office, and if they called for special treatment, that, without insisting upon an alteration of the Regulations, some remedy should be found for the admitted evils in this case. These services in Ireland were by no moans amply provided for; the scale of allowances was extremely moderate; and here was an instance in which the Catholic community of the place were obliged to trust to the ministration of one priest. The Government of the country choosing to increase the population during a period of two months by sending 200 or 300 Militiamen into the district, he could not understand why Her Majesty's Government thought it right to reply upon this question to Irish Members in the way they had, for they sought for no general alteration, they wanted nothing more than that which would indemnify the parish priest for the expenses if he provided this ministration; and because they asked under the circumstances described they were told that their request could not be granted, because it would render necessary similar alterations elsewhere. He trusted, however, that some words might come from the Treasury Bench which would assure them that the matter should be taken into consideration.
    MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORsaid, he would submit one consideration to the noble Marquess that might have escaped him. He presumed the noble Marquess was aware that it was incumbent upon all Roman Catholics to attend the celebration of Mass on Sundays. If by enlistment into a Militia regiment a man debarred himself from performing his religious duties, he was, by that very enlistment, committing an offence; and it was the duty of everyone who knew that enlistment in a Militia regiment involved the failure of attending Mass on Sunday to tell the recruit that he ought not so to enlist. That was the duty, not only of the parish priest, but of every man acquainted with the individual. Under those circumstances, it appeared to him that the noble Marquess, by meeting this question with a simple non possumus, was throwing a
    1360
    very important difficulty in the way of recruiting for the Militia regiment at Carrickfergus.
    THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, he did not know whether the circumstances detailed by the hon. Member for Sligo (Mr. Sexton) had been brought to the notice of the War Office. He believed they had; but he would undertake to look into the matter again. If he could find in the case any circumstances which could be regarded as exceptional, and if it were not necessary to make any alteration in the Regulations, he would see what could be done. However, he believed the subject had been under consideration more than once.
    MR. BIGGARsaid, he thought the noble Marquess should say something more definite on this subject. As had been pointed out by his hon. Friend the Member for Sligo (Mr. Sexton), the church at Carrickfergus would only contain the local population and the soldiers permanently located in the town. The noble Marquess entirely ignored the fact that there were other duties which devolved on a priest besides the duty of performing Divine Service on Sunday. A priest should be always at hand in case of sickness. He appealed to the noble Marquess to give a more explicit promise than he had given, such as that, he believed, on the merits of this case, something should be done. He thought the noble Marquess might state so much as his own personal opinion. There were other places in Ireland where the same difficulty presented itself, but in a less degree; and he knew of no place where it was felt so much as at Carrickfergus. There was a Roman Catholic population in Armagh; but in Carrickfergus there was no Roman Catholic population, and if the priest there was unable to spare time to perform the service he could not afford to employ a curate for the work. His contention was, that if a priest came from a distance he should be paid so much as would compensate him, not extravagantly, but reasonably, for his time and expense in ministering to the Militia at Carrickfergus.
    THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON: I have said I would look into the matter again, and that if it were possible the case should be met, if it could be done without alteration of the Regulations.
    MR. W. REDMONDsaid, unless some definite promise were given, he believed the answer of the noble Marquess would be taken by the people of Ireland, and particularly by those chiefly interested in the matter, as most unsatisfactory. The hon. Member for Sligo (Mr. Sexton) had stated certain exceptional circumstances in connection with the religious services at Carrickfergus, and the noble Marquess merely said he would make further inquiries with regard to the case in Ireland. It seemed to him that this way of treating the Representatives of Ireland in this House was anything but satisfactory, and highly calculated to inspire the people with discontent. The hon. Member for Sligo had stated, from his own knowledge, that there were exceptional circumstances surrounding this case which rendered it absolutely necessary that the clergyman going to Carrickfergus to perform Divine Service for the soldiers should be remunerated in an exceptional manner; and instead of taking the statements of the hon. Member as final and correct, they only had it from the noble Marquess that further inquiries should be made. Now, if the noble Marquess made further inquiries in Ireland, he hoped he would not inquire of the officials at the Castle in Dublin, who did not possess the confidence of the people. He thought it only reasonable for Irish Members to expect that their representations should be taken as correct by the occupants of the Treasury Bench. He did not think it was at all fair, or calculated to promote harmony of feeling in that House, that the representations of the Members for Ireland on matters like this should be disregarded; that they should be told that they were not sufficient, and that the noble Marquess would make inquiries of the officials at Dublin Castle. The hon. Member for Cavan (Mr. Biggar) had pointed out clearly, not only that the allowance made by Her Majesty's Government for the purpose of Divine Service on Sundays was insufficient, but that it was likewise insufficient for the other duties which a Roman Catholic minister had to perform. Where there was a large number of men, it was only reasonable to expect that the ministration of the priest who went on Sunday to say Mass at Carrickfergus would be required in other cases, and on other days. Would the noble
    1362
    Marquess say that the priest should be remunerated for those services? At present they had only an undertaking that the priest should be remunerated for going on Sunday to say Mass. As the case stood at present, only a paltry allowance was given, and the other great services of the priest were ignored. Unless some definite promise on this point were given, it would be regarded throughout Ireland as most unsatisfactory.
    MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORsaid, it was, perhaps, hardly fair to expect the noble Marquess to go further than he felt himself at liberty to go at that moment. The noble Marquess had said that the remarks of the hon. Member for Sligo (Mr. Sexton) had thrown new light upon this question, and that he was prepared to reconsider it. He (Mr. Arthur O'Connor) should not be disposed to press the noble Marquess any further; but he would ask whether he would consent to postpone the Report of the Vote until the War Office decision had been arrived at and communicated to Irish Members? If so, he would be willing to assent to the withdrawal of the Motion for the reduction of the Vote.
    THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, he should be glad to agree to the suggestion of the hon. Member who had just sat down, if it were in his power to do so. He was, however, afraid the matter was one which would take some time. The Vote was, as the hon. Member observed, a small one; but the official communications on the subject would pass through several hands. He would see if the Report of the Vote could be postponed; and, if not, he would answer the question on some other occasion.
    MR. BIGGARsaid, he thought the chaplin might be remunerated by a yearly salary, instead of being paid so much for performing one service. In the hope that the noble Marquess would be able before the Report to give a satisfactory answer to his appeal, he would ask leave to withdraw his Motion.
    Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
    Original Question put, and agreed to.
    (2.) £36,800, Administration of Military Law.
    GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOURsaid, he had last year asked a Question with regard to the condition of the Army in respect of crime and courts martial,

    1363
    and he should be glad of any further information which the Judge Advocate General could give the Committee upon that subject.
    THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL (Mr. OSBORNE MORGAN)said, that, as he had anticipated last year, the year 1883 had shown, an improvement in respect of Crime in the Army as compared with 1882. He was happy to say that the preliminary Return which had just been published fully bore out that expectation. The Return, as he had said, was but preliminary, and related only to the Home Army; the other Return would not be published for two months. He thought the proper course would be to compare the crimes stated in that Return with the crimes in the Home Army during the year 1882, and in so comparing them it would be found that there had been a distinct improvement during the year 1883. He should mention that the number of troops constituting the Home Army in 1883 was less than in 1882. In round numbers, there were in 1882, 90,000 men; whereas in 1883 the Home Army consisted of 86,000 men. Making allowance for the diminution of numbers, he was able to say that the year 1883 compared favourably with 1882; and with the permission of the Committee he would give some figures relating to those two years. In 1882 the number of courts martial in the Home Army was 8,472; in 1883 it was 7,526. The sentences passed in the Home Army were in 1882, 8,382, as against 7,392 in 1883. With regard to offences, he found that in 1882 there were 12,144; but in 1883 they only amounted to 10,703; while under every one of the 13 heads under which crimes in the Army were classed, except two, there was a diminution. There was a very remarkable diminution of crimes relating to enlistment, those in 1882 numbering 883, while in 1883 there were only 602. Another satisfactory decrease appeared in the number of offences arising out of drunkenness; the number of charges of drunkenness on duty which in 1882 numbered 982, was in 1883, 733. He might add that the number of men in the Home Army fined for drunkenness was at the rate of 150 per 1,000 in 1882, and it was satisfactory to observe that the rate had fallen in 1883 to 102 per 1,000. Notwithstanding that this Return was con-
    1364
    fined to the Home Army, he believed he should not be wrong in stating that as regards the Army abroad the same improvement would be found to have taken place. In Egypt the conduct of the Army had been especially good; during this year the number of courts martial held there was 90, there being only one general and 89 district courts martial.
    LORD EUSTACE CECILsaid, that the Returns quoted by the Judge Advocate General showed an undoubted decrease in the number of crimes, so far as the Forces at home were concerned; but he must express his regret that, although those Returns were tolerably full, they were not made a little fuller. he thought those very interesting figures which the right hon. and learned Gentleman had given the Committee, both as to last year and the present, might have been put into two columns in the Returns, because there was this disadvantage in the way they were presented—that although they could see very well what had happened in 1883, they could not see what had happened in 1882. They had, therefore, no means of comparing the two years with each other, and of seeing if there had been any improvement last year, or otherwise. He suggested that, when the Returns were brought up again, the figures relating to the previous year and the present year should be given in two columns.
    THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL (Mr. OSBORNE MORGAN): The noble Lord will find that is done in the Returns of 1882.
    LORD EUSTACE CECILsaid, that was, no doubt, the case in one sense; but it would be much more convenient, and of greater use, if it were given on the same page, as was the case with the ordinary Estimates, in which one could see at a glance any increase or decrease of the items. He did not doubt the accuracy of the statement of the Judge Advocate General with regard to the conduct of the Army, and the decrease in the number of courts martial; but he observed a large item under the term Miscellaneous. In the Cavalry and Line, for instance, the total number of courts martial was 685; 239, or more than one-third of these, being returned for miscellaneous offences alone. What those miscellaneous offences were was not stated; and, therefore, he thought it would be of great advantage to the

    1365
    Committee that some information should be forthcoming: on that point. He believed that a Member of the Committee last year drew attention to the same fact. The view he took was that as so much information was given in the Returns, the Committee might as well have a little more; and he quite agreed with his hon. and gallant Friend opposite (Sir George Balfour) that it was a good thing to give the Judge Advocate General an opportunity of making a further explanation. It was always satisfactory to hear anything good of the state of the Army; but, of course, it was much more so at the present time. When they had Forces abroad, as was the case now in Egypt, and when little expeditions were being sent into the interior of Africa, it would be well if there were some means of knowing how the men had conducted themselves under those circumstances. He did not understand from the Judge Advocate General, who stated that this Return applied only to the Home Service, that the men were really quartered in the United Kingdom. If the right hon. and learned Gentleman had a private Return, he should very much like it to be made public.
    THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL (Mr. OSBORNE MORGAN): It is only a partial Return.
    LORD EUSTACE CECIL: Quite so. He was only suggesting that, having so many troops just now in Egypt, and having sent little expeditions into the Soudan, it would be for the benefit of the Army itself, and for the convenience of the House, if a separate Return was given of the number of courts martial and crimes connected with the Expeditionary Forces, from which they might arrive at a conclusion, which he doubted not would be satisfactory, as to the way in which the men had conducted themselves. He asked this especially, because, during the last three years, as the Committee would be aware, changes had been made in the character of punishments in the Army. Corporal punishment had been abolished, and they knew that the late Secretary of State for War—the present Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr. Childers)—had created, or rather recommended, other punishments. He recollected the right hon. Gentleman mentioning a number of punishments which were not exactly approved either on that side of the House or the other—such as tying the
    1366
    men to trees, throwing pails of water over them, and so forth. There was nothing to show whether men had been sentenced to those punishments, either by commanding officers or by courts martial; and, therefore, it was desirable to know how far they had tended to the reduction or prevention of crime. Of course, they had been informed that the punishments were experimental; but if it were proved on trial that they were such as could not be inflicted in a practical way, he thought it would be well to admit the fact at once, so as to save further time, and let the House know the position in which they stood. Hon. Gentlemen on the Benches around him had always said that corporal punishment was a disagreeable necessity; and, at the same time, they believed there was nothing between it and the punishment of death. Of course, if it were proved that corporal punishment could be done away with altogether, without detriment to the discipline of the Army, he thought it was certainly a matter worth stating, and none would be more rejoiced at it than Gentlemen on those Benches. At the same time, they ought to have some statistics to show how far the punishment substituted had succeeded, or otherwise. With these few remarks he would conclude, as he began, by expressing his satisfaction at hearing that the state of the Army at home was so good; and he trusted that on another occasion they should be allowed to know a little more as to the state of the Army abroad.
    GENERAL SIR GEORGE BALFOURsaid, he thought the Committee and the country would be satisfied with the information obtained from the Judge Advocate General with regard to the diminution in the number of courts martial and in the crimes and punishments in the Home Army. The minor courts martial might appear to be numerous; but hon. Members would be aware that the offences tried by such courts martial were not of great importance. The general courts martial were of more importance; and he thought that a Return showing more fully the number abroad would be exceedingly valuable to the officers of the Army. On the whole, he regarded the explanations as satisfactory.
    MAJOR GENERAL ALEXANDERsaid, he had just one remark to make with reference to an article in The Times on the subject of courts martial. The article,

    1367
    commenting on the number of courts martial in the Infantry, said it was very hard that good regiments should be confounded with bad; and it was added that this would always be the case, because Her Majesty's Government refused to grant the Returns of the number of courts martial for each regiment. Now, he hoped Her Majesty's Government would continue to refuse such a Return, because he was sure it would be injurious and pernicious to the best interests of the Service. The effect of it would be to induce commanding officers to settle themselves questions that ought to be brought under the cognizance of courts martial. Those who, so to speak, were behind the scenes well knew that there were many ways of doing this; by taking crimes out of one category and placing them in another. Take the crime of insubordination, for instance. A commanding officer and his adjutant would lay their heads together, and, not wishing a court martial for insubordination to appear in the Return, they would agree to try the accused for using improper language instead of threatening language; the matter would then be settled by the commanding officer, who would sentence the individual to seven days' cell. That was an improper way of dealing with offences of the kind; but it was one which would be resorted to if the Returns, suggested in the article in The Times, were given by Her Majesty's Government. No doubt, courts martial were, to a certain extent, a criterion of the state of a regiment; but that was a matter to be settled by a confidential official Report, and not by the general public. He said that the Return would have the effect of deterring officers from doing their duty, and he trusted that Her Majesty's Government would resolutely refuse it.
    SIR ALEXANDER GORDONassured the Committee that oven the Returns which were now furnished, and which only went to the Horse Guards, were a great inducement to commanding officers to enter under one head crimes that ought to be placed under another. He had frequently drawn the attention of commanding officers to this. These were purely confidential Returns, which ought to go to the Commander-in-Chief, or to the Secretary of State for War alone, and he hoped the Government would not agree to furnish them.
    SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOTsaid, he had a question to ask with regard to the reduction to a lower grade of noncommissioned officers. Would the Judge Advocate General state how that matter stood as compared with last year? The number of reductions seemed to be very large; and he would like to know what were the crimes committed by the men who had been reduced? He did not coincide with all that had been said by his hon. and gallant Friend, but would not go further into that matter then. He simply asked his right hon. and learned Friend to give some information on the subject he had referred to. Then there was another point to which he had called attention on a former occasion. It related to the question of pensions in the case of non-commissioned officers who were reduced. He asked whether a non-commissioned officer, who had always done his duty and worked well for a number of years, and was then reduced for a small offence, would be allowed to remain on to complete his time, though reduced to the ranks, so as to earn a pension? Because it seemed to him a very hard thing that a man should, under the circumstances, lose his pension after having served almost all his time. He commended this matter to the noble Marquess as one deserving his serious attention.
    THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL (Mr. OSBORNE MORGAN)said, he would take a note of the various suggestions made by the noble Lord opposite (Lord Eustace Cecil). With regard to the statement of the hon. and gallant Gentleman (Major General Alexander), he did not find, as a general rule, that crimes in the Army were leniently dealt with by commanding officers. The hon. and gallant Member for West Sussex (Sir Walter B. Barttelot) had remarked that the number of reductions in 1883 was very considerable; but he would point out that the reduction was not always to the ranks—it was generally from the grade of colour sergeant to that of sergeant or lance corporal. The number of reductions, however, had fallen off considerably; they amounted in 1883 to l,183, and in 1882 to 1,290, the improvement being 12 per cent. With regard to corporal punishment, he could, of course, only state the results since its abolition, and those from the figures he

    1369
    had laid before the Committee were satisfactory.
    SIR ALEXANDER GORDONsaid, the reply of the Judge Advocate General only confirmed the statement that commanding officers were sometimes induced to deal with crimes in the Army in the manner described. The essence of the contention was that the crimes did not come forward under their correct headings, and the right hon. and learned Gentleman could not, therefore, be cognizant of their real character; he had no possible means of judging. The only persons acquainted with the facts were the officers on the Staff. The Judge Advocate General must take the cases as they came before him.
    THE JUDGE ADVOCATE GENERAL (Mr. OSBORNE MORGAN): I beg pardon; I see the whole of the evidence. I read it in all cases of court martial, to ascertain whether the crime charged against the individual is adapted to the actual offence committed.
    SIR ALEXANDER GORDONsaid, the Judge Advocate General expressed exactly what he had intended to convey. There were a vast number of men who were never brought to trial at all. The right hon. and learned Gentleman spoke of courts martial. The cases he (Sir Alexander Gordon) referred to were kept back from trial, in order that they might be excluded from the Return of the more serious offences.
    Vote agreed to.
    (3.) £303,000, Medical Establishment and Services.
    MR. GUY DAWNAYsaid, that he must apologize, as a civilian, for trespassing on the attention of the House in regard to a military subject; but he might say in excuse that he had had the working of the Medical Service in the field forced upon his notice on one or two occasions, and he had done all that lay in his power to promote inquiry into that subject, so far as it was connected with the Egyptian Campaign. He thought it a matter for regret that they had not had a discussion on the Report of Lord Morley's Committee last year, when the circumstances were fresh in mind. For his own part, he had done everything he could to obtain it, having tried throughout last Session, though in vain, to bring forward a Motion on the subject, while the discussion on the Vote
    1370
    itself was put off until a ridiculously late time in the Session—a Saturday Sitting at the latter end of August. He was glad that so early an opportunity of discussing the question had presented itself this year; and he wished now to refer to a few facts connected with the inquiry into the working of the Army Hospital Service; and, in the second place, to call attention to the inefficiency and non-economy of the present Unification or Departmental system, under which the medical officers of the Army were at present appointed. He did not think there could be any difference of opinion at all as to the general value of the inquiry which took place last year; and he was sure that, whenever another campaign was forced upon the country, the sick and wounded would owe no small debt of gratitude to the Committee over which Lord Morley presided, as well as to the outcry that called forth that Committee, if only the authorities would give effect to its recommendations; and it was to be hoped that when they received the details of the Suakin Campaign, they would find that already a good effect had been produced. No one on that Committee would deny that the evidence adduced showed an ample case for a searching inquiry into the organization of the Army Hospital Service, and the breakdown alleged to have taken place in the Egyptian Campaign. The most had been made of one or two exaggerated and unfounded statements which had found their way into the public Press; but, with those statements eliminated, the fact remained, upheld by the testimony of everyone connected with the Service—by officers and men alike—indirectly even by the medical officers themselves—by the nurses whose devotion was as usual the brightest spot in the Hospital history—supported also by the valuable testimony of Lord Wolseley—that owing to the inherent defects in the system of organization—the glaring defects in the method of selecting and training the Army Hospital Corps—and owing to the unwillingness of the medical authorities to assume proper authority and responsibility, a very considerable amount of needless suffering had been inflicted on our soldiers, and a large amount of wasted expenditure upon the nation. Some references had been made to alleged inconsistencies between Lord Wolseley's evidence before

    1371
    the Committee and the Report made by him during the campaign. He would express his satisfaction that Lord Wolseley had been able to corroborate with the great weight of his authority the evidence of those who served under him in the campaign; and he would point out that it was sufficiently clear that Lord Wolseley was prepared to pass over, without blame to the Department, any failures that could possibly be attributed to the sudden strain upon their resources at Ismailia; that he was satisfied, and justly satisfied, with their performance at Tel-el-Kebir; but that, with all his readiness to make allowance for the Department, and his appreciation of individual energy, he could not tolerate and pass over that Departmental apathy and want of organizing power which was forced upon his notice by the want of arrangements for the comfort of the sick and wounded in Cairo. It would be a very invidious task to attempt to apportion any blame to individuals; but he would like briefly to bear his testimony to the unflagging energy with which the surgeons at the front did their duty. It had been clearly acknowledged in the Report itself that, as regarded the administrative medical officers at Cairo and Ismailia, there was a lack of initiative and energetic supervision; but for the medical officers at the front there had been nothing but praise and commendations; indeed, he might say, in truth, there had been nothing but praise and commendation—for out of all the Orders and Decorations showered abroad in connection with the campaign, none had reached any one of those who bore the burden and heat of the day. He had come in contact more especially with the surgeons of the Life Guards and Blues and Foot Guards; and he could state that nothing could have exceeded the zealous and kindly care which they manifested throughout a campaign in which the numbers of sick, if not of wounded, certainly taxed their energies very severely. The want had been, not of professional care, but of Departmental organization. Attempts had been made to rebut this charge by pointing to the small death-rate in Egypt. No doubt, the death-rate was satisfactory; but the question still remained, did there, or did there not, exist a distinct amount of preventable suffering, and a distinct absence of procurable comfort?
    1372
    He was afraid that everyone who read the evidence contained in the Blue Book impartially must come to the conclusion that the question on both points could only be answered in the affirmative. The country was ready to pay any sum which might be demanded to lessen the sufferings of the troops; and he could not understand how it was that, with a harbour for a base, containing the finest fleet of transports ever collected for the conveyance of stores and troops, with the exceptional advantage of a commodious building ready for immediate use as a hospital, on the 10th day after landing, sick men were obliged to lie on bare boards instead of the palliasses, which were an essential part of ordinary field hospital equipment. It was in evidence also, and he would like to hear it explained, why, on board first-class transports, convalescents, to whom good food meant recovery and meant life, should have been kept so hungry that they had to beg bits of biscuit from the sailors? Neither could he understand why the bread, which was refused by commanders of regiments at Ismailia, should have been accepted and served out by the medical officers in the hospital after only verbal remonstrances. Officers in command of regiments at Ismailia not only condemned and refused the Commissariat bread, but forced the Commissariat officer to replace it with locally purchased bread; while in the far more important case of the sick and wounded in the hospital, the medical officers contented themselves with simple remonstrances and protests, and then served out to the wounded men in their charge this atrocious compound of unwholesome flour and indifferent water. There was a worse case still. It could not be understood why, on the very day that 400 wounded men came down from Tel-el-Kebir to Ismailia, three days after the fight, it was so arranged that two field hospitals were ordered up from Ismailia to the front, thereby denuding the hospitals at the base of their proper attendants, and rendering it necessary to supply their places with men taken from one of the regiments stationed there. He asked the Committee to picture the scene which was described by Miss Lloyd, in the Blue Book—the 400 wounded soldiers lying at Ismailia all night in their helplessness and pain, without any orderlies to attend to them, or, if order-

    1373
    lies were forthcoming, finding themselves not only at the mercy of men utterly ignorant and untrained as nurses, but brutally drunk in the bargain. Could the authorities excuse, or could the country permit, an organization which allowed such a disgraceful scene as that in the Ismailia hospital on the night in question? It had been said that a great part of the complaints made of the hospital treatment came from officers. As a matter of fact, he knew there were several officers who could have given very valuable evidence in condemnation of the Medical Department in the Egyptian Campaign; but they refused to volunteer their evidence, because they feared it might be said they were grumblers. That might be a feeling worthy of respect; but he would assert that no officer had come forward to give evidence, or would have wished to have done so, except on the far higher and more worthy grounds of the fulfilment of a public duty in exposing the faults and errors of the present system. Again, the men themselves were afraid to find fault, or to come before Lord Morley's Committee and give evidence. He hoped hon. Members would give him credit for not trying to make a long Blue Book speech. But, if he had thought it necessary, he could have corroborated by quotation from the Blue Book every point he had raised. Although during the consideration of the Army Estimates the attendance was not large, all who were present were acquainted with the subject; and he thought they would agree with him when he said there was ample evidence of the fact that the men themselves were afraid to give evidence. As to the only other means of information—the doctors—the doctors, of course, considered that the inquiry was a direct attack upon themselves. One of them said the cooking was "fairly good." Lord Wolseley said, "I have never seen such bad cooking." And another surgeon said he was "fairly satisfied with his orderlies." He thought that that gentleman's evidence would have little weight with those who had studied the rest of the evidence. Good could not fail to come of the inquiry with regard to hospital orderlies. They would learn discipline instead of drill; they would get some proper hard training; and he hoped that in the future there would be fewer cases of hospital orderlies stealing the medical comforts,
    1374
    and giving pills and applying mustard plaisters to the wrong patients, and still fewer cases of them using bad language and throats to the wounded and helpless soldiers. The recommendations of Lord Morley's Committee on these points were very valuable, as were also the recommendations with respect to field panniers; the abolition of the foolish rule under which, in non-dieted hospitals, a patient was subject to 24 hours' starvation; the provision for the proper cooking instruction of the Army Hospital Corps; and last, but by no means least, the recommendation as to the more general and recognized employment of nursing sisters. There was one recommendation, however, which seemed so entirely opposed to all the evidence which was given before the Committee, that one was astounded to find it included in the Report at all, and sanctioned by the signatures of any of the Committee—he meant the recommendation that the Army should not be allowed to return, as would have been expected from the evidence, to a modified form of the regimental system; but that the Medical Service of the Household Troops should be assimilated to that of the rest of the Army. Two Members of the Committee had dissented from that view; and he could not understand how any body of individuals could make such a recommendation after hearing the evidence. Without exception, every commanding officer who was examined before the Committee, besides the Duke of Cambridge, Lord Wolseley, and Sir Daniel Lysons, had condemned the present system, and advocated a return to a modified form of the regimental system—a system that should attach surgeons to regiments for periods, say, of five years. They had pointed out, in the clearest and most convincing manner, the disadvantage of a system which entailed constant changes of medical officers; the constant ignorance as to who was temporarily in charge of the men as medical officer. They had dwelt upon the waste of force that must necessarily ensue from this planetary system of medical supervision; they had dwelt upon the very great dislike which was entertained, both by the men and the married women, for these constant changes; and yet, in spite of this overwhelming testimony, in spite of the fact that the best medical officers themselves

    1375
    detested the shuttle-cock principle on which they were treated; in spite of this mass of evidence, the Committee arrived at a conclusion which was not only discreditable to their own common sense, but which was equally opposed to the best interests and wishes of the Army. If any hon. Member had not studied the question he (Mr. Guy Dawnay) asked him to refer to the evidence, given in the Index, under the head of "Regimental Medical System," and especially to the evidence of Colonel Nicholls, of the 3rd Battalion of the Rifle Brigade. Colonel Nicholls related how, in 14 months, at the Curragh his regiment had been under the charge of 13 different medical officers, and also referred to the case of a man. in the Rifle Brigade who, one cold morning, two years ago, when the regiment was starting for a march out, was sent by his colonel to hospital at Aldershot suffering from severe bronchitis. The man was at once sent back, as a malingerer. The commanding officer then sent him to his hut; and when the battalion returned from its march, the poor fellow, who but a few hours before had been turned away from the hospital as a shammer and malignerer, was found dead. The case against the present system was ably and clearly stated in the Appendix to the Report, which contained the dissent of Major General Hawley and Colonel Loyd Lindsay to the recommendations of the Committee. Those gallant officers said—
    "With reference to the above important question (namely, the distribution of medical officers), we are of opinion that the inconvenience to the Service (which the Report admits to be justly complained of in the Army) is due to defects inherent in the unification system itself, and not to faulty working of details which might he remedied. The two systems under which the Army Medical Service can he worked—namely, the unification and the regimental systems—are distinct both in principle and in practice. Under the first—namely, the unification system—the medical officers form a separate professional department. This system proceeds on the principle of detaching them from regiments, and from the duties that would there devolve upon them, and of attaching them to station hospitals. If medical officers were to drop the military character which has always attached to them, this system might be made to work fairly well in time of peace; but without great alteration in detail it could not be carried out efficiently in time of war …. Under the second—namely, the regimental system—medical officers are attached to regiments, the sanitation of which they have in charge,
    1376
    under the commanding officers, together with medical attendance on the wives and families of men belonging to the regiment. This is the system which officers in the Army, from the Commander-in-Chief downwards, are unanimously in favour of. Every branch of the Service—Engineers, Artillery, Cavalry, and Line—have given evidence in favour of it before this Committee; and the General Officer commanding at Aldershot has also, in his evidence, advocated the advantage of it. It is the system adopted in every Continental Army without exception; and it is the system to which our own Army reverts in time of war, when a medical officer is attached to every regiment proceeding on active service …. The system at present in force (and which the Army regards with so much objection) is a compromise. It wavers from side to side, inclining to a civil organization in time of peace, and to a regimental system in time of war—thereby necessitating a sudden change of system and of organization at the very moment when smooth working (which can only be attained by practice and experience) is of vital importance to the efficiency of the Medical Service during a campaign. For these reasons, we recommend a return to the regimental system, so far as it attaches a medical officer to each unit of the Service."
    That was very strong testimony; but he thought the matter was still more clearly stated in the Table of the comparative advantages and disadvantages of a return to the regimental system. Anyone who read that Table must see that the advantages of a return to the regimental system far outweighed the possible disadvantages. Now, what were the objections to a return to a modified form of the regimental system? In the first place, it was said—
    "It is undesirable to introduce changes until the present system had had a fair trial."
    The present system had had a long trial, and in the opinion of all military men it had completely broken down. Secondly, it was said that—
    "It would create considerable, though perhaps not insuperable, difficulties in the arrangement of the roster of medical officers for foreign service."
    In this case it was allowed that the difficulty was not insuperable. Thirdly, it was said that—
    "It is impossible to adminster the station hospitals with the two classes of medical officers without great friction;"
    This was one of those vague arguments which was, for that reason, difficult to answer; but he could not but think it a trivial point. Again, it was said that—
    "It would not provide for the medical attendance of detachments, which would be in the same position as at present."

    1377
    The experience of the Household Troops, however, proved conclusively that there was no force in this objection. Fifthly,
    "It would, in some cases, involve a waste of power and a probable deterioration in the professional competence of the medical officer so attached, owing to want of practice; and that at the larger stations the advantage of being able to distribute the medical afficers, so that special classes of cases may be dealt with by specially qualified surgeons, would be lost;"
    but under the system that had been suggested by the Duke of Cambridge and others—namely, that a medical officer should be attached to a regiment for five years, that would be entirely obviated, and there would be ample opportunity for proper practice. The sixth, and the last, objection was the real one. It wassaid—"It would entail additional expense." That expense had been put down by the authorities themselves at £22,500 a-year. He maintained that the present system sacrificed the efficiency and the comfort of the Army to an utterly false economy; that, in fact, it involved at critical times a far greater outlay than could possibly be saved in time of peace; it helped most materially to disgust the men whom already we found such difficulty in attracting as recruits to our Army, or in retaining when trained in the Army, and all that for the sake of saving, at the outside, £22,500 a-year, and for the sake of giving a further fair trial, as it was called, to a system which, in the opinion of every military expert, and every reliable authority, had already completely broken down. After what he had said, he did not think he need dwell on the proposal to assimilate the Medical Service of the Household Troops to that of the rest of the Army. If the beauties of uniformity were alone to justify such a proposal, he might point out that it could be attained as easily and with real advantage to the Service by assimilating the Medical Service of the rest of the Army to that of the Brigade of Guards, and by providing that, as in the Brigade, the regimental medical officers should do duty at the station hospital. He must point out, however, that if the proposed assimilation were carried out the grossest injustice would be done; because the medical officers of the Household Troops had joined that branch of the Service on the distinct understanding that they should
    1378
    be retained as medical officers in the Household Troops. They joined that branch of the Service, though well aware of any such disadvantages attaching to the position as those mentioned in Lord Morley's Report—namely, that they were excluded from advancement to the higher grades; and yet, with that knowledge, not only did they join willingly and gladly in the first instance, but now they were equally surprised and disgusted to find it was seriously proposed by Lord Morley's Committee to assimilate to the broken down and generally condemned medical system of the rest of the Army that system, under which their services were first engaged, and for which they had already resigned any participation in the chance of advancement to higher grades, to which a different choice in their profession at the first would have entitled them. He did not suppose, however, that this recommendation of the Committee would receive the serious attention of the authorities; and in any case he would leave the subject to others better qualified by their connection with the Guards to deal with the question. He regretted to have taken up so much of the time of the Committee as a civilian; but he had thought himself bound to allude to the results of that inquiry which he had done his utmost to promote, and he had, at least, had opportunities of forming an impartial opinion as to the absolute necessity of a return to a modified form of the regimental system. By the new Rules he was precluded from bringing forward at this stage of the Estimates a Motion; but he expressed the hope that the general judgment, not only of the House, but of the authorities, might agree with him, in the terms of a Motion which stood in his name on the Paper, that—
    "The present method of appointing Medical Officers in the Army according to the Unification System has not contributed either to the efficiency or economy of the Service, and that such economy and efficiency would be better secured by a return to a modified form of the Regimental System."
    DR. FARQUHARSONsaid, that, before he ventured to make a few remarks on the various questions touched on by his hon. Friend, he desired to congratulate the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War (the Marquess of Hartington) upon the saving of £600

    1379
    a-year which had been effected by the abolition of the post of Commandant at Netley. He had got, however, a slight suspicion that this long-standing grievance was not altogether dead yet. He did not want to accuse the noble Marquess of any desire to perpetuate the grievance in another form; but he thought the military authorities were very anxious to cling to this particular piece of patronage. He noticed that in "another place" military authorities had maintained that every military hospital ought to have a commandant of this kind attached to them. He should like to know whether Colonel Pell was now, in a modified form, Commandant at Netley; whether he was to be allowed to have access to the wards at all times, and inspect them as a field officer? Because, if that were so, the new state of things would be nothing more or less than a perpetuation of the old grievance. He hoped the noble Marquess would be able to assure the Committee that this officer would be entirely subordinate to the officer commanding the district. The gentleman could not, according to the Army Regulations, have anything to do with the school at Netley, which had a separate existence under the Secretary of State for War. He (Dr. Farquharson) should consider the gentleman's duties were merely extracted or filched from those of the officer commanding the district. He thought the Medical Department would hear with great satisfaction that there was a determination to amalgamate the Army Hospital Corps into one large Corps. He hoped it would succeed in attracting a better class of men to the Corps. The Army Hospital Corps were much complained of for their conduct in the recent campaign in Egypt. To a certain degree the hon. Gentleman's (Mr. Guy Dawnay's) accusations were borne out by the facts. It was said the men were intemperate, lazy, and dishonest. They certainly performed their duties of nursing badly; but it must be remembered they were never taught nursing. Many of them had never seen a sick man in bed before they went out to Egypt; therefore, it was not to be wondered at that many of them were unfit to discharge the difficult duties of nursing sick men. It was a fact that some of them had only three months' training at home prior to being sent out, and that a great part of the time was
    1380
    taken up with the ordinary drill of the soldier. Moreover, when they were out in Egypt they were greatly overworked. At Ismailia, owing to deficiency of transport, the men of the Army Hospital Corps had to work like beasts of burden, bringing up the stores to the hospitals. Their duties were hard and laborious, and they were very often disagreeable duties. There was, therefore, some excuse for the men; and the Committee must not be too hard upon them, considering the very few opportunities they had had beforehand of learning the work they were called upon to do. It was evident that in future the men of this Corps must have a long and special training. It was quite evident they must have at least two months' nursing experience, and that they must be taught cooking. They ought to be well paid; their prospects of promotion ought to be improved; and their characters, previous to entering the Service, ought to be more carefully sifted than they had been hitherto. Of course, it was quite evident also that it was best to recruit the men from civil life. A commanding officer would not give up his best men for hospital service; therefore, it was well the Army Hospital Corps should be recruited directly from civil life. It was desirable, too, that the Army Medical Department should have some opportunity of practising bearers and field hospital drill. It was important that an entire field hospital should occasionally be mobilized in this country, as was the case so often in Germany. As to the regimental system, they had been told that terrible results had followed the abandonment of the old regimental system. Personally, he was in favour of a return to some modified form of the regimental system, which, of course, was now quite dead, and could never be revived. It would be well if medical officers were appointed to a regiment for four or five years, and during that time had an opportunity of attending hospitals. He did not believe the regimental and hospital duties would clash at all; on the contrary, he was of opinion that the plan would work extremely well. The present system was an exceedingly bad one socially for the Medical Department; and it was otherwise an uncomfortable and disagreeable one, inasmuch as the doctors had no settled home. It was also a very inconvenient

    1381
    system to the regimental officers themselves. It was a bad system, because officers did not know to whom they should send in case of need; he knew that men had been attended by two or three different doctors. The hon. Gentleman (Mr. Guy Dawnay) had made what he (Dr. Farquharson) considered a very unjust attack upon the Medical Department during the recent campaign in Egypt. He gathered from the Blue Book that the Medical Department in that campaign was one of the most successful Departments, in a medical point of view, that had ever been known in this or in any other country. Those who were attached to the Department did their duty with zeal, efficiency, and skill; and the Report of Sir William M'Cormack in the Blue Book bore ample testimony to the difficulties which had to be encountered. There were great difficulties in connection with the character of the roads, and also in the absence of transport. The troops pushing rapidly to the front were without the means of transport; and, bearing in mind the nature of the difficulties, the medical results were far better than in any previous campaign. Sir William M'Cormack, a great authority upon such matters, expressed that opinion over and over again. During the period the Army were in the field, and afterwards those scourges to which the military were subject in hospital—such as gangrene, erysipelas, &c.—were almost unknown. Although ophthalmia constantly occurred early in the campaign, it was satisfactory to find that not a single man lost his sight. Everything was sent out that was required, or could be desired, for the comfort and ease of the Army in the field. The Medical Department were not responsible for the places which were used as hospitals. He knew that at Ismailia a disused palace was suddenly handed over, and at 48 hours' notice a large hospital had to be extemporized out of practically nothing, because, although it was a very large building, there was absolutely nothing in it when it was handed over. When the ships arrived the transport for the use of the Medical Department was taken away for military purposes and field hospitals. No. 2 and 3 had to be dragged up with great labour by the men of the Army Hospital Corps. It was opened on the 23rd of August; and when they were
    1382
    inspected on the 25th by Sir John Adye he said that they appeared to be comfortably arranged, and that everything had been done for the comfort of the men that could be done. Lord Wolseley visited the hospitals, and expressed himself satisfied with everything that was being done. Under these circumstances, what occurred afterwards in his Lordship's evidence before the Morley Committee came upon the Department like a thunder-bolt. He was sorry to detain the Committee so long, but these were very important points. On the 16th of September Lord Wolseley wrote—
    "The medical arrangements were all they could have been, and reflect the highest credit upon Surgeon-General Hanbury."
    On the 24th of the same month he wrote—
    "The Medical Department, under Surgeon General Hanbury, C.B., have done everything that could possibly be done for the care and comfort of the sick and wounded. The manner in which the wounded were removed from the fighting line by the Bearer Company was most satisfactory."
    And on the 30th Lord Wolseley telegraphed to Dr. Crawford, the Director General of the Army Medical Department, from Abdin—
    "Dr. Hanbury has shown me your telegram as to the alleged defects in medical arrangements. I have told him he need not answer, as full explanations go home by post. "We are all too busy here to reply to the false and malicious reports to which you refer. The Medical Department is working to my entire satisfaction."
    No wonder that the statements subsequently made came upon the Medical Department like a thunder-bolt. He found that most of the complaints in regard to the supply of food were made by men who had had no experience of warfare. The staff of cooks was certainly not composed of experienced men. It was impossible to keep meat there, and it was necessary to cook it quickly every night. When the men were asked why they asserted that they had nothing to eat, they said it was provided for them as medical comforts, not as food; but, at the same time, it must be borne in mind that, for medical reasons, the men were purposely kept low. As he had said, if they were to analyze the complaints they would find that they were made by inexperienced men, who had had no previous experience of war, and who were fretting in consequence of the restrictions upon

    1383
    their ease and comfort, which restrictions, however, were absolutely necessary. The complaints were principally complaints with regard to the food supply. They were made by one officer and six men of the Life Guards, by four men of the Royal Horse Guards, and by one or two of the Coldstream Guards and the Scots Guards. On the other hand, the Infantry generally expressed themselves satisfied with all that was done for them. As to the deficiency of beds, to which allusion had been made, it must be remembered that Ismailia was only a naval hospital.
    MR. GUY DAWNAYsaid, he had referred to the want of palliasses.
    DR. FARQUHARSONremarked that complaint had also been made of the deficiency of drugs, and especially of carbolic oil; but this was a clumsy way of using antiseptic treatment, and a far better plan was to make a lotion with water and carbolic acid, of which there was an ample supply. In regard to the complaints made against the Medical Department for abstaining from purchasing articles required in connection with the service in Egypt, he would simply remind the Committee of a paragraph in a letter from the War Office, dated August 5, 1882, and addressed to the General Officer commanding the troops in Egypt. This letter said—
    "It is essential that, except in the case of petty office or departmental purchases (which may he made by heads of department) there should he but one purchasing department in the local market, and all articles required should be provided by means of requisitions upon the Commissariat Department, which should give all the necessary information as to quantities and description, and the measures proposed for obtaining the supplies. The responsibility of making the purchases in the best possible manner will then rest with the senior Commissariat officer, subject to your orders."
    They were told that the bread was bad. No doubt the bread was bad, and it was reported against by the medical officer. At the earliest moment, and as soon as possible, better bread was issued. It was said—"Why did not the Medical Department buy broad for themselves?" It was impossible to do so, because there was not nearly enough bread in the market at the time to supply the hospitals. That fact was fully borne out by the evidence. Major Butler, who was the commandant, admitted that some of
    1384
    the officers at their own table were able to get excellent bread. Very likely that was the reason why the medical officers were not able to obtain it for the hospitals. What would have happened if the medical officers had decided on purchasing for themselves all the articles of which there was a deficiency? No doubt they were most anxious to have everything that was required; but if they had purchased without authority, would they have had any prospect of getting their money back again? A supply of mosquito curtains had been sent out; but when they were wanted they could not be found, and what could be bought were perfectly valueless, and neither the men nor the officers could use them—they considered it far more desirable to have plenty of fresh air. The fact was that the public mind had been contaminated, not only by the unfortunate evidence before the Morley Committee, which was all on one side of the question, but by the credulity of certain newspaper correspondents. He recollected a painful story which appeared in England about the amputation of a Life Guardsman's shoulder without the use of chloroform; but it was simply the vague floating gossip which was going about at the time, and which had been told in conversation to one of the newspaper correspondents, who, without taking the slightest pains to verify the story, sent it homo as a fact. Another similar instance of credulity was to be found in the story of a correspondent who pointed out that the officers in the Medical Department were in the habit of going round the hospitals and serving all the sick men with pills out of the same box. Now, the fact of the matter was that the pill pannier was divided into a large number of partitions; and this innocent newspaper correspondent, because the medical officer took the pills he wanted from the same pannier, jumped at the conclusion that he was giving to every man the same kind of drug. He desired to say a single word in reference to the question which had been introduced in reference to the Guards. As an old Guards' medical officer, he deprecated any interference with their ancient privileges. As long as they were retained as a special Corps, he did not see why they should not have specialities of their own; and he did not think any evidence had been adduced to

    1385
    show that any other system would work better. It would only entail extra expense to the medical officers, without effecting any public saving. The argument of Sir William M'Cormack was that a medical officer should be afforded an opportunity of coming to London, where he would have better facilities for study; but the Guards' medical work was not of an ordinary character, and it occupied a great deal of time. It would not be easy for a medical officer to do his duty thoroughly, and to be in attendance at barracks, if he were required to go away at 12 or 1 o'clock for attendance in the hospitals scattered about over the town. It must also be remembered that in many of the Provincial towns—such as Leeds, Liverpool, and Manchester —where the Guards were stationed, there were excellent medical hospitals and schools. At all events, if this change were to be made—if fiat had gone forth that the alteration was to be carried out, he hoped it would be distinctly understood that none of the medical officers now serving would be affected by it. He apologized once more for having detained the Committee so long.
    COLONEL STANLEYsaid, the question had been discussed with great ability; and he was sure the speeches that had been delivered had been listened to with great pleasure on both sides of the House. In regard to the speech of his hon. Friend behind him (Mr. Guy Dawnay), he thought his hon. Friend had brought to light in the very best taste, and in the very best way, the prominent points that were the subject of investigation by the Committee last year; and although it could not be considered that the medical discussion had sustained any injury in consequence of being postponed, still, at the same time, there might have been some advantage if it could have been raised when the matters were more freshly in the recollection of the House. The charge of inefficiency and want of care, brought at an early period against the medical officers, had now been entirely dropped; and it had become more and more clear that the Medical Department, as far as the professional requirements of the officers themselves were concerned, had come out of the inquiry, so to speak, with flying colours. No doubt, great defects had been brought to light in regard to
    1386
    medical matters in the Egyptian Campaign. No one, after reading the Blue Book, could for a moment doubt that fact; but that which seemed to him to underlay the whole was the fact, as Sir John Adye had said, that military necessities overruled everything else. There was a sudden, and, to a great extent, a secret change of plan. He did not know whether that was the right word; but, at any rate, a sudden change was made in pursuance of which secrecy was necessary, and there were not the same opportunities afforded which would have been afforded had the movement been made openly, and the ordinary arrangements made beforehand. The very basis on which the hospital equipment depended was not only shifted, but the means of transport necessary for the Medical Service were appropriated to other purposes instead of those for which they were originally intended. All that, undoubtedly, occasioned severe pressure, and produced results which no one could pretend to underrate, and which all must deplore. He thought, however, that Sir William M'Cormack, and others who supported him, were justified when they pointed out that the general results of the Egyptian Campaign, from a medical point of view, compared very favourably with those of any campaign on an extensive scale, which had been undertaken in times past. A good deal of these complaints seemed to have arisen from defects in the system of hospital orderlies; and he hoped the noble Marquess, when he rose to reply, would tell the Committee that he had not lost sight of that point, but would inform them what changes and further improvements he had introduced, and intended to introduce, into the hospital system. With regard to the bad bread, Lord Wolseley seemed to have given evidence, which, as the hon. Gentleman opposite (Dr. Farquharson) said, had fallen like a thunder-clap after the previous good Reports of the good working of the medical system; but he (Colonel Stanley) must say that, after those Reports, Lord Wolseley did not appear to have stinted himself in the use of forcible language; but there appeared to be a great deal that was entirely reconcilable between the first account of Lord Wolseley and his evidence before the Committee. What he understood Lord Wolseley to complain of, in the main, as one of the prin-

    1387
    cipal faults was that the initiative was not taken freely enough by the medical officers. He was bound to say, although he spoke with great respect as far as the financial point of view was concerned, that the medical officers would have been fully justified, under the circumstances of the case, in acting on their own account, as Lord Wolseley had said; and, perhaps, when things were not at hand and absolutely at their disposal for the immediate use of their patients, they might have risked a little more in assuming responsibility, and the authorities would not have failed to support them. He did not remember, speaking from memory, a single case in the South African Campaign where any charge was thrown upon a medical officer, where he had incurred it on his own responsibility, meaning to act for the good of the Service. He, therefore, thought a little more boldness would have prevented many of the things which were complained of in the Blue Book. When the mosquito curtains, which were said to have been purchased, were not at hand when they ought to have been, and the men were suffering from the want of them, and their suffering might have been avoided by a little expenditure and a little risk, he was satisfied the authorities and the public would have fully condoned the medical officers if they had taken steps to procure curtains, and the medical officers themselves would have obtained credit, and would not, in the end, have lost in pocket. Perhaps he might be allowed to say one or two words on a somewhat more delicate subject which cropped up in all these questions—namely, how far was it the fault not of the circumstances, but of the system? It seemed to him that a great deal was often laid at the door of the unification system, which was hardly fair towards it. Personally, he was able to speak without bias upon this point. He had been brought up under the system, which all liked very much, and which he believed had been found to work very well, certainly in peace times, and, with certain exceptions, it worked well in a time of war—he referred to the regimental system. With respect to that regimental system, he had come to the same conclusion as his noble Friend and Predecessor Lord Cardwell—that they could not revert to that system as it was. Nor was it entirely due
    1388
    to those who, for theoretical reasons, wanted to make the station hospital the unit rather than the regiment. The fact was that the change had been forced on Lord Cardwell by circumstances not from within, but from without the Department. Day by day the difficulties were found to be greater in obtaining for the benefit of the Medical Service such candidates as, in former times, would have been willing to enter; and although there was not in a great honoured and learned Profession, such as the Medical Profession, anything like Trade Unionism, still there was something like it in the way in which young men from the medical schools were drawn aside from the Army, and told that there was no prospect for them, and that they must not expect to rise as they would be able to do in Civil life. There was a great deal of truth in that. There were in the higher ranks of the Army Medical Service comparatively few advantages; and he believed it was merely on account of that that the medical schools—and he said it, he hoped, without offence— set their faces against candidates going into the Army. It was a very serious state of things. Lord Cardwell, among other things, attempted to deal with it by an increase of pay and position in the higher ranks; and in order to do that he endeavoured to meet the difficulty, first of all, by a diminution in the number of medical officers; and, secondly, by a system which would admit of the more free introduction and use of medical officers. Lord Cranbrook succeeded to that system; but it was not found to work well. The complaints were frequent; competition for entrance into the Department became rare; and there were often more places than competitors for them. One proposal after another was made; and to bring himself to a more recent date he believed the Warrant under which the Medical Service was now constituted was one which was passed at the time he had had the honour to be at the War Office. One of its immediate effects was to bring a number of candidates for ward, and there was actually competition for entrance into the Service. They were thus able to have a selection of the best men, where, up to that time, there had been comparatively no selection at all. First of all, it equalized the conditions of the Service, when they could be equalized

    1389
    in no other way; and, secondly, it gave the men entering the Service a better prospect in regard to their future lives. The men did not feel, in comparatively early years, that they had reached a point beyond which they could not go; but that there was a career, and not an ill-paid career, open to officers in the Medical Department, by which they had an opportunity of rising even to the very highest positions. He had never been able, himself, entirely to appreciate—perhaps it was part of the old leaven still remaining—the difficulty which seemed to have been felt, in officers, although they belonged to and were interchangeable in a Department, yet being attached to regiments for a considerable time, doing duty in those regiments, and yet doing joint duty with others in a station hospital. There never appeared to his mind much greater difficulty in that, although he did not say the cases were precisely analogous, than there was in the case of an officer doing regimental duty, and also garrison duty. There was one point on which, perhaps, undue stress had been laid in regard to the abolition of regimental medical officers. There was a tendency to exaggerate the difficulties that would arise to officers in discharging their regimental duties if they were also to perform duties at a station hospital. There was nothing in the Departmental system, as originally explained, to prevent the attachment of a medical officer to the battalion and to every regiment and battery in the Service, and the closer such a system were adhered to the better it would be for all persons concerned. But there were two difficulties; first of all, he would frankly say there was an influential Department of the State in charge of the public purse, which was supposed to take the views of the Secretary of State for War; but there was a still greater difficulty. It did not appear to the War Office in the years 1878, 1879, and 1880 to be desirable, just at the moment they had a good attendance, to re-introduce the system of selecting candidates by competition, when they had a chance, as it were for the moment, of raising the Medical Service of the Army to something beyond the point at which they were obliged to be contented to stop. It did not seem to them to be wise at that moment to provide more
    1390
    places than there were men to fill them, and thus to sweep away the advantage of the very competition which, on the other hand, they thought it desirable to re-introduce as essential for the good of the Service. That had a good deal to do with the question at the moment. There were also other subsidiary questions. A number of gentlemen, who were civil practitioners, had been specially engaged at the time, some of whom had gone out to South Africa, and elsewhere, at considerable inconvenience, and it would not be either right or wise to displace them. There were other points of that nature which required consideration; but what he wished to emphasize was that there was nothing in the Departmental system, as then constituted, which inherently prevented the attachment of a medical officer to each battalion and battery; and the longer, he ventured to say, that could be done, so long as the officer could be left without detriment to the Service, so much the better it would be for all parties concerned. A case occurred to him at that moment. A regiment was sent out on foreign service, the medical officer of which was also going out to the same destination; but he was taken away from the regiment and attached to another battalion, which was going to the same destination as his own proper battalion, but in another ship. Now, that seemed to him to be one of the many needless changes, which he did not mean to say were not justified, because if they had a roster it was necessary to adhere to it, but which showed the advantages of the regimental over the Departmental system. It seemed, to his mind, to be a case where a compromise between the regimental and the Departmental systems might have produced a better effect than was produced at the time. That was the light in which he read the assent to the system which had been given by his hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Berkshire (Sir Robert Lloyd Lindsay), whose absence at that moment he deeply regretted, and also of General Hawley, whom they all knew to be one of the best regimental officers in the Service. He did not think it followed as a corollary; but he shared the feeling of the hon. Member for West Aberdeen-shire (Dr. Farquharson), that this was not exactly the moment in which

    1391
    they could go out of their way to alter the system which prevailed in the Brigade of Guards. He waited with some anxiety to hear what the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War would have to say on that point; but it did appear to him that there were various points connected with the system which it would be wise to leave alone, provided the public generally did not suffer. A good deal had been made of the establishment of a general large hospital in London. It was said that the officers would gain by being interchanged with officers in other regiments now quartered out of London, and that officers out of London would gain by going up to London and being within reach of all the most refined appliances and the latest lessons of medical teaching. He doubted, however, from all he had hitherto heard, whether it would be a kindness to bring officers up to London every two or three years in this manner. It would be asking them to throw away a good deal of money, and to sacrifice many advantages which they at present enjoyed. Moreover, they would be initiating a system, which would certainly not be a very popular one, without enjoying any of those distinct advantages which an alteration of the medical system in other directions had produced. He hoped it was a sine quâ non that it would be understood that the changes in the Warrant would not apply to any of the existing officers without their own consent. As far as he remembered, the question was, to a certain extent, discussed in 1879; and he thought what was then arrived at as a compromise was that no medical officer should reach the higher branches of the Service unless he had been for a certain time actively employed abroad; but upon a medical officer giving up his chance of obtaining a higher post he was to be exempt from the necessity of going abroad and quitting the battalion to which he had been attached. That, at the time it was arrived at, was considered to be a fair compromise; and he believed that it was accepted by the Medical Service as such. He doubted, also, whether it would be found, unless they were prepared to give a higher rate of pay and increased allowances that there would, in point of fact, be any great kindness in bringing officers up to
    1392
    London to live here for two or three years in charge of hospitals, who had no particular connections in London, and who would necessarily have to set up establishments for themselves at no inconsiderable cost. He did not think the proposal would be accepted with such approval as seemed to be anticipated in some quarters. At the present moment, as far as he was aware, they had no large hospital in London which they could use, so that if they brought in a new system, after all they would only create one central staff for the purpose of sub-dividing it. For all these reasons, and without expressing at that moment an absolute and final opinion upon the point, he would ask the noble Marquess to hold his hand in the matter until it was proved that all parties concerned would benefit by the proposed change. It was perfectly certain that one result would be to sacrifice a good deal of the public money; and if it did not produce a better result than that which now existed, there would be a good deal of heartburning in consequence. As he had stated before, he spoke with a bias which he could not pretend had been wholly effaced; but he did think that these were common-sense points, which he hoped the noble Marquess would fully appreciate. He was sorry to have trespassed so long on the time of the Committee; but he had considered it his duty, having had to do with the Administration formerly, to make these remarks on the subject. He had pointed out the general principles within which they could act legitimately in connection with all that had been done before; and he hoped that the noble Marquess and his advisers, having regard to the wants of the Service, would look carefully through all the details, and see whether, by the careful working of them, they could not still bring those general principles, which most people considered to be absolutely necessary, into harmony with the general conditions of the Service.
    DR. LYONSsaid, he did not intend, nor, indeed, did he think it necessary, to enter at any length into the merits or demerits of the Medical Department in the late Egyptian Campaign. It was not necessary he should do so, because public opinion, as was usually the case when time was given it to form a correct

    1393
    estimate, had veered round in the right direction. He believed there was now no doubt in the mind of anyone who had inquired into all the circumstances, and informed themselves properly that the charges which were hastily, unwisely, and unjustly made against the Medical Department for the part they played in the Egyptian Campaign of 1882 had completely fallen to the ground. The House and the country could congratulate themselves upon the success of that campaign. If, in the future, the country found itself engaged in any other expeditions or wars, it would, indeed, be very fortunate if it had as little to complain of as it had in respect to the Egyptian War. No doubt, some of the success which was achieved was due to the singular rapidity with which the campaign was conducted. It must always be borne in mind that scenes of war were necessarily attended with more or less of human suffering; and that it was the object and desire of the Medical Profession, and of the Government who feel it its duty to throw an army into the field, to diminish the sufferings of humanity to the lowest possible point. He ventured to say that that point was almost reached during the campaign they were contemplating. His hon. Friend the Member for West Aberdeenshire (Dr. Farquharson) had entered at some length, and with considerable ability, into many very interesting subjects. It was not necessary he should follow his hon. Friend very closely into the subjects he had so effectively dealt with. One subject—namely, that of the bread supply to the troops in Egypt, had been incidentally touched upon. He was of opinion that it was utterly impossible for the medical officer on the spot to make any better arrangements, and that view of the case was fully borne out by the evidence. The question of the supply of food was always the most difficult one in connection with the movement of great masses of men. The question of the Army medical system had of late occupied a good deal of public attention. The treatment of regiments by their own medical officers, which was so popular for a long time in the country, was never likely to be revived again to its full extent; but those who had seen warlike operations must admit that some other means of dealing with wounded men
    1394
    than those recently adopted must in practice be found. It was always well that the medical officers should be personally known to the men; that they should be acquainted with the characters and constitutional history of the men of the regiment; and he could quite conceive that it would be possible that a medical officer might be attached to a regiment for a period of five years, and that after that time, or even during the five years, a certain portion of his time might be given up to dealing with disease and injury in hospital centres. There was another point on which he wished to say a word; he mentioned it on a former occasion. Nursing was, undoubtedly, one of the most difficult of all the practical questions that had to be dealt with in connection with large masses of men engaged in a campaign. He was of opinion that a solution of the question would be found in a very much enlarged nursing organization. They could not get men to discharge more than the mere routine duty of an hospital attendant. The more careful class of nurses must be looked for in females of good constitution and of superior education, and with a special vocation for nursing. Of course, it would be very difficult to get a good and efficient corps of female nurses; but if it could be formed he was persuaded the very greatest advantage would accrue. He disapproved of any kind of responsibility being attached to the medical officer for the errors and sins, either of omission or commission, of the nurses, no matter how carefully they might have been selected. In any future campaigns in which they might be engaged, he trusted there would be a more intimate relation between the Commander in the field and the Chief of the Medical Staff. The first medical officer ought to be in confidential communication with the Commander; indeed, he should hold some recognized position upon the Staff.
    THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON: I shall detain the Committee for a very short time with any reference to the remarks which were made by the hon. Member for the North Riding (Mr. Guy Dawnay) upon the Report of Lord Morley's Committee. Sir, I am inclined to agree generally in the reply given to the hon. Gentleman by the hon. Member for West Aberdeenshire (Dr. Farqu-

    1395
    harson). I do not think that the hon. Member (Mr. Guy Dawnay), notwithstanding all the care and attention which he told us he had bestowed on that inquiry, established any of the allegations which had been made now for more than a year and a-half, and which I am sorry to say the hon. Member has repeated in a general form, as to the breakdown of the medical administration in Egypt. In my opinion, it was sufficiently proved, by the investigation of Lord Morley's Committee, that there was nothing which could be called a breakdown in either the medical or in any of the other arrangements in Egypt. There was a certain amount of inconvenience; there was a certain amount of hardship; there was a certain amount of want of preparation at particular stages of that campaign; but I think it has been, conclusively proved by the Report of Lord Morley's Committee, and by the various discussions which have taken place upon it, that such inconveniences and such failures as did take place were owing either to the conditions of the campaign, or to the fact that there was a necessarily sudden military movement, which made it impossible for all the Departments to be as efficiently organized to perform their duties as they would have been had the campaign been conducted under other circumstances. To a great extent, anything that has been complained of was due to that circumstance. I do not say that everything was due to that circumstance. What took place at Cairo afterwards, so far as there was any reason for complaint, probably could not be attributed to Lord Wolseley's movements; but such complaints as are justified, and are not to be attributed to the causes which I have mentioned, are to be attributed to a failure, which we thoroughly acknowledge, to solve an admittedly most difficult problem likely to befall any military nation—the thorough organization of its Departments of supply to its Army in the field. We quite admit that our organization requires constant care, although we do not think it is altogether faulty. I have myself appointed, as I mentioned some time ago, a Departmental Committee to inquire into some of the conditions of that problem; and the House of Commons has also appointed a Committee, which is now sitting, to inquire into some of the questions which arose in
    1396
    connection with the campaign in Egypt. Under these circumstances, while I fully admit that the Report of Lord Morley's Committee will be productive of a great deal of good, and while I admit that good lessons may be learnt from a careful study of that Report, and of the evidence on which it is founded, I doubt whether there is anything gained by the introduction in this House of charges more or less vague, more or loss unsubstantiated, and which I must say the hon. Gentleman the Member for the North Riding (Mr. Guy Dawnay) did not support by his references to the Report of the Committee. The hon. Gentleman acknowledged that he did not make what is called a Blue Book speech, and that it would have been easy for him to do so. No doubt it would; but I must point out that although the hon. Member made a much more interesting and a much more effective speech by refraining from any lengthy reference to the Blue Book, he, at the same time, made it difficult to meet the somewhat vague allegations which he has repeatedly brought forward unless by reference to Blue Books. The greater part of the hon. Member's observations were directed to what is called the unification system, and to the modification of that system, which was proposed by the minority of Lord Morley's Committee. Now, Sir, the hon. Member supported his proposal for a modification of the present system by a reference to the military evidence which has been given before Lord Morley's Committee. But the hon. Member did not allege, and he could not allege, that the change which he advocated was supported by any of the medical witnesses who were examined before the Committee; and, in fact, he told the Committee that the medical witnesses appear to have been asked very few questions on the subject. Surely this is a matter on which a decision must be arrived at after hearing the medical as well as the military evidence. In my opinion, the military evidence, to which the hon. Gentleman has pointed, is not of that strong and conclusive character he would lead us to believe. He alluded, for instance, to the evidence of Colonel Nicholls. I have referred to that evidence, and no doubt Colonel Nicholls did relate an anecdote of a single case of hardship which might have occurred under any system. The rest of his

    1397
    evidence with regard to what is complained of is of a most inconclusive character. What does he say in answer to the second question put to him?—
    "Could you inform the Committee whether you have experienced, either here or at other stations at which you have been quartered at home, any difficulty or inconvenience in regard to obtaining medical attendance on your men, or on the officers of your battalion?—The married people always say that they have got great difficulty in finding the doctor."
    In further examination, he said, in answer to the question—
    "And there is no difficulty put in the way of regimental officers visiting him?—Not the least. The doctors are exactly the same as they were before in that respect; but it gives more trouble to find a man. And certainly the women of the regiment do not think that the present system is anything to compare with the old one; they look at the doctor now as their enemy, not as their friend. In old times he was quite their friend."
    Surely the medical administration of the Army is not to be decided by the women; and yet that is the main part of the evidence. The arguments for and against the present system are, as had been said, so fully stated in the Report of Lord Morley's Committee, and in the dissent of two Members from that Report, that I am afraid that anything I can say on the matter will not add very much to what may be gathered from a perusal of that Report. The majority of the Committee acknowledge that there is a reasonable complaint of there being too frequent changes in the medical officers in charge of the troops; and they think it will be possible to make arrangements by which these too frequent changes which have been complained of shall be, to a great extent, remedied. One of the great difficulties experienced is that it has not been found possible for the brigade surgeon, in charge of a considerable body of troops, to be accommodated with quarters in the camp, and he has been obliged to live in lodgings; but the War Office Committee have endeavoured to make arrangements for quarters in camp to be provided for the medical officers, so that they may be accessible at all times. There is considerable difficulty in this matter, because brigade surgeons are generally married men, and there is not sufficient accommodation for them in the married quarters; but we are doing what we can in the matter. Now, with regard to the proposition that, in all
    1398
    cases, medical officers should be attached to battalions, in the first place, the difficulty is one of a financial character. A few years ago, as has been stated, the position of the Army Medical Service was very deplorable. Candidates up to the standard could not be found for appointments in the Army Medical Department, and we were obliged to take them without competition; and, in consequence, the standard was not what it would have been under other circumstances. Great advantages were offered to, and great improvements have been made in the position of, medical officers, in regard to pay, prospects, and pensions. Those improvements could not be made without involving the expenditure of a considerable sum of money. The assent of the Treasury and of Parliament to those improvements in the position of the medical officers was distinctly obtained on the understanding that such economies as were consistent with the efficiency of the Service should be made; and one of the economies which, in the opinion of the principal medical authorities of the Army, could be made, not only without detriment to, but with actual improvement in, the efficiency of the Medical Service, was the substitution of a system of station hospitals for the system of regimental medical officers. It will, therefore, be a matter which will require very much consideration whether we should now go back to what would certainly be a more expensive system without having much stronger ground for it than has yet been brought forward. A Committee inquired into this and many other matters during the latter part of the administration of the right hon. and gallant Gentleman opposite (Colonel Stanley). That Committee reported that the attachment of medical officers to battalions would, under one contingency—that is to say, maintaining the principle of continuity of control in regard to the smaller hospitals—make it necessary to appoint 41 additional medical officers at an expense of over £22,000; or, if that principle were not insisted upon, then the increase of medical officers might be reduced to 21, at an expense of between £14,000 and £15,000 a-year. At the stations where single battalions are quartered, there would be practically no change. The hospital is now practically a regimental hospital, and the officer in charge is prac-

    1399
    tically attached to the regiment. Neither would there be any change in the smaller hospitals. The change that would take place would be at the camps and at the larger stations, where, in. my opinion, the change which was proposed would lead to a very great waste of power, and also to considerable friction. Then it is said that the officers attached to battalions might, in addition to their duties with the troops, also discharge duties in the station hospitals. No doubt that might be done; but that would almost certainly cause a considerable want of efficiency. The medical officers would be under the command of two different commanding officers; and that is a system which has never worked well under any circumstances. They would be under the command of one commanding officer in regard to their duties in the regiment, and under the principal medical officer in regard to their duties in respect to the hospitals; and, after all, unless at the expense of a great loss of efficiency, these officers, who are employed in the hospitals, would have nothing to do with the battalions to which they were attached. In order to secure the most efficient working and control over hospitals, particular officers must be told off to particular wards, and particular wards are devoted to particular diseases and ailments. Therefore, it would be a mere matter of chance whether a medical officer attached to a battalion, when performing duties in the hospital, would have anything to do with the men in his own regiment. Therefore, all the information which the medical officers could possess of the regiment and the men would be thrown away for those occasions when it would be of value. The argument as to their knowledge of the character and constitution of the men has, therefore, lost a great deal of force under the present circumstances. It may have had some force when a doctor had a chance of becoming acquainted with the men; but now, when men serve so short a time, and the change from home battalions to foreign battalions is so frequent, and the men pass from the care of one officer to another so rapidly, there is very little in that argument. Then it is said that the medical officers attached to battalions for a particular time would have an opportunity of acquiring habits of discipline in which they are now deficient. As to that
    1400
    argument, I have only to say that if a medical officer is to obtain the habits of discipline, it is necessary that he should do that at a very early period of his military career. If he is to acquire habits of discipline, that must be done when he enters the Service. If not, it is not likely that when he comes to be quartered with a battalion, he will be able to acquire any habits of discipline which he did not previously possess. But if a medical officer is to be attached to a battalion at the commencement of his military career, then the consequence will be that the officers and non-commissioned officers, and the men and their wives and families, will be condemned to receive permanently the medical attendance of the most inexperienced members of the Medical Profession. That would be a change which I do not think would be at all satisfactory; and, further, it would be a change which would be extremely injurious to the efficiency of the medical officers themselves. Instead of taking a position where they would gradually learn their profession, and have the fullest opportunity of obtaining that knowledge which is necessary, they would be placed, at the very outset of their career, in a position where they would have little practice, and comparatively little opportunity of improving their minds and increasing their knowledge. I believe that that is a change which would be altogether uncongenial to, and strongly deprecated by, the members of the Army Medical Department. During the last two and a-half years there had been 85 appointments made in the Army Medical Service, and for those there were 259 candidates; and it is easy to suppose that, under such circumstances, the quality of the Medical Service has gradually improved. Under these circumstances, I think it would be unwise to introduce changes which are altogether opposed to the feelings of the Medical Profession, and which have been rejected by a very large majority of very competent men examined before Lord Morley's Committee, who strongly recommended that the present system should be retained, with such modifications as might be thought desirable. For these reasons I cannot hold out any hope that we are likely to adopt a modified regimental system. There has been one other question raised, and that is as to establishing

    1401
    a properly organized general hospital in London. I believe the medical officers would be the last to deny, and I believe there is no doubt, that great advantage might be expected to accrue to the Medical Service and to the Army generally, and that arrangements more satisfactory to the Guards themselves would result, from the establishment of a properly organized general hospital in London. That would give the whole Army Medical Profession great opportunities of improving themselves, to which Army medical officers would look forward with considerable hope. But, as has been stated by the right hon. and gallant Gentleman opposite (Colonel Stanley), such a proposal would probably be a costly one, and that it is a proposal which cannot be entertained until the question of regimental medical officers has been disposed of. That is a question which has not yet been settled, and which may not be settled for some considerable time to come. Until it has been disposed of, we cannot entertain the idea of establishing a general hospital in London; and until that is done we do not think there would be any sufficient advantage in disturbing the present medical arrangements. I do not in the least wish to commit myself, or my Successors in the War Office, on this point, neither do I wish to preclude them from any course they may in future deem desirable. On this subject Lord Morley's Committee were unanimous. [Lord EUSTACE CECIL: Not unanimous.] The noble Lord is mistaken. Major General Hawley sent in a Paper, in which he objected to the decision of the majority that the present unification system should be maintained without modification; but that objection did not extend to the paragraph in the Committee's Report, which proposed that the medical system of the Guards should be amalgamated with that of the Army. It is not worth while arguing that point over now; and all I will say is that I do not wish to preclude either myself or my Successors from adopting, when circumstances make it desirable, what I believe to be the unanimous recommendation of the Committee. We do not, however, think that that recommendation could be carried into effect without full knowledge, and until it could be accompanied by a proposal for the formation of a general hospital in London; and therefore, until
    1402
    that scheme can be entertained, it would not be worth while to make any considerable change in the medical system of the Guards, which at present does, undoubtedly, give great satisfaction to the Army.
    COLONEL MILNE-HOMEsaid, he was sure it would give great pleasure to the medical officers of both the Guards and the Household Cavalry to hear that at present there would be no change made in the admirable system which had now existed for so many years; and he did not think he should have risen had he not thought it right, considering the part he had taken in the Egyptian Campaign, to pay his tribute of thanks to his noble Friend for what he had been good enough to say with reference to the regimental medical officers at the front. He was sure that, although no honours had been given them, amongst the many honours that had been flying about after the campaign, they would feel amply repaid by the remarks which the noble Marquess had made with reference to their services. In respect to those officers, he thought he ought to notice an error which had crept into the Report now before the Committee. In paragraph 120 it was stated that the Life Guards embarked on the Calabria without any supply of drugs, plaisters, or other medical paraphernalia; but, on inquiry, it was found that that was not the case. But the statement would have been quite true if it had been made with regard to the Holland, which took out the troops he had the honour to command. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer were present, he would support him when he stated that the Holland sailed without the necessary medical paraphernalia, although, just as she left the Docks, an order having been got from the Secretary of State for War, a case of medicines was put on board. She also sailed without any Army Hospital men whatever; and it was only because she touched at Cowes that those men were able to go on board. The statement was, therefore, true as to the Holland, though not as to the Calabria. But when the case was opened at sea the medicines were found to be utterly useless, because they did not include anything that was applicable for ordinary medical work. He should also like to say, with reference to the regimental

    1403
    officer who accompanied those troops on board the Holland, that he applied, before they started, to the Army Medical Department to know whether he was to make any request for medical stores for the campaign. He was told that he would find everything when he got to Alexandria; but when he arrived there he found nothing. It was the same at Ismailia; and the result was that the expedition, which started at cock-crow about the 28th of August from Ismailia, started with nothing but one field-companion, although the officer had been told that he would find everything he wanted there and at Alexandria before he started with the expedition. Some severe things had boon said in the evidence before Lord Morley's Committee with reference to the senior medical officer of the regiment to which he himself belonged—namely, Surgeon Major Hughes Pryse at Messana. The reason, for what had been stated was that that officer declined to abide by the rules of red tape which governed the Surgeon General in command at Ismailia, and improvised a hospital at Messana, which had done exceedingly good work, as would be seen by reference to the evidence of General Sir Drury Lowe. He thought it only fair that some tribute should be paid to that officer for the excellent work he did at Messana. He effected cures, and gave relief to unfortunate sufferers, who would not have been attended to at all if he had acted according to the red-tapeism of the Department. With all due respect and deference to the noble Marquess, he felt that the noble Marquess had, perhaps, done all he could to acquiesce in the opinions expressed by his hon. Friend below him (Mr. Guy Dawnay) and by Lord Morley's Committee. He began by stating that there had been no breakdown in the Medical Department in Egypt at all, although he had acknowledged that at Cairo there had been some inconvenience and failure, which, however, were amply accounted for. Then he went on to detract from the military evidence which had been adduced by his hon. Friend below him; but he would remind the Committee what that evidence was. The noble Marquess had only quoted the evidence of a certain colonel of Infantry; but his hon. Friend had adduced the evidence of the Duke of Cambridge and of
    1404
    the Commander-in-Chief in Egypt, Lord Wolseley. The Duke of Cambridge's evidence was rather in favour of the regimental system; but he would not quote it, because his hon. Friend had done so, although the noble Marquess had scolded his hon. Friend for not bringing more evidence forward. But the Duke of Cambridge's evidence was entirely in favour of his hon. Friend's contention; and as to Lord Wolseley's evidence, he should like to road to the Committee two answers which he gave to Lord Morley's Committee, inasmuch as the noble Marquess might like to hear them again. His Lordship said—
    "My orders were, if you cannot get good bread go out in the town and buy it. That is my complaint from the first day to the last day. The great complaint against the doctors was that they did not do everything that they could have done. I said to them, if you do not get anything that you can possibly want for your men go out into the town and buy it, no matter what you pay for it. I will pay you back; but they would not do it; they always went back to the Commissary, and that is what I complain about."
    The hon. Member for West Aberdeenshire (Dr. Farquharson) had said that if the officers had paid for these comforts they would not get their money back; yet here was Lord Wolseley saying- that he would pay them back. Then, in the following page, Lord Wolseley said: —
    "I then said to the doctor, 'Is it possible that up to this moment, although we have been five weeks in Cairo, not a man in your hospital has ever had a pudding or anything baked for him, or anything made for him, except what you can boil in a soldier's kettle?' And he said—'Yes; we have had nothing more.' I said—'It is very hard upon the men, considering that you have been here five weeks, and you might have bought any quantity of stores. If you had asked me for £1,000 for them. I would have authorized you to buy them; and yet you tell me now, at the end of five weeks, that you are still cooking for the hospital in those large trenches. In an hospital where there is an immense number of sick, and through which an immense number of sick are passing, you are now cooking for your sick patients in exactly the same way as soldiers out in a campaign would cook.'"
    That was the evidence that the noble Marquess thought nothing of. The hon. Member for West Aberdeenshire had alluded to the complaints that had been made by some of the regiments; and had said that amongst the Highlanders there were no complaints. Since the hon. Member made that statement he had not been able to examine the Blue Book on that

    1405
    point; but possibly the Highlanders might have been better attended to on a particular day than the Life Guards or the Blues. His hon. Friend below him (Mr. Guy Dawnay) had remarked that some soldiers were rather backward in making complaints, thinking it might do them harm afterwards; and, as a matter of fact, soldiers and officers in general could not be got to state their grievances unless forced to do so. He knew well, from experience in his own regiment, that it was only when great pressure had been brought to bear upon them, that they could be induced to state their experiences at Ismailia and elsewhere; but, it having been pointed out to them that it was not for their own benefit, but for the benefit of the whole Service in future, they were induced to come forward and state exactly what had happened to them at those places. His hon. Friend had likewise alluded to the complaint that there was no carbolic oil in the hospitals. He believed he said it was too bulky to carry; but Surgeon Pelly stated, in his evidence, that he would gladly have done without carbolic oil if he could have obtained some carbolic acid, which would have answered the purpose as well. Then as to the cost of the oil. He was sorry to have to allude to these small items, but his hon. Friend had referred to them; and although carbolic oil was, no doubt, a very bulky article, it was about the most useful that could be at hand in such a climate, and under such circumstances. Surgeon Pelly was asked—
    "Are you averse from the carbolic oil being used in the field owing to its great bulk?"
    And the reply was—
    "I think it beneficial to have a small quantity for cases in which it is especially useful. I gathered from persons in the country that it was very useful."
    From that he (Colonel Milne-Home) inferred that it was desirable to have some quantity of it, however bulky it might be. He had made these few observations because it seemed to him that he could not help rising to acknowledge the manner in which his hon. Friend had spoken of these regimental doctors; and to express his surprise, after the evidence which had been taken with reference to the excellent way in which their duties were performed, that they should have received absolutely nothing but general thanks. But he was further surprised that they were not to have a greater
    1406
    continuance of the regimental system in the Service. He agreed that it was necessary that young doctors should be found to learn their profession, and also that there should be depôts from which the men could be supplied to furnish surgeons for the Service. It seemed to him that a compromise might be effected here. It was requisite for the benefit of all regiments, especially a regiment on long service, that doctors should be appointed to them who might become acquainted with the men and their wives and families; but he did not see why they could not have from the depôts or stations assistant surgeons, who might come as apprentices as it were, and be drafted from regiment to regiment and station to station as occasion might require. The noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War had brought in regulations permitting long service, under certain circumstances, in the Household Cavalry and regiments of the Line in future; and, therefore, he thought that surgeons might be attached to regiments as regimental officers, in order that they might become thoroughly acquainted with the married men and their families, and look after them as family doctors. That regimental system in the Household Cavalry had worked very satisfactorily; and he trusted he should never see the day when their sick soldiers would be removed to a general hospital in London, over which their officers could have no control. At present the Household Cavalry had their own regimental hospitals; the officers could visit that hospital, and look after the patients there, and see that they were cared for; but if the sick were sent to a general hospital in London that necessary and desirable supervision could not take place. Again, if they were to make that hospital into a sort of school, where medical officers from the rest of the Service were to be sent, it appeared to him that that would be degrading the position of medical officers in the Army.
    MAJOR GENERAL ALEXANDERsaid, he did not intend to take up the time of the Committee, except for the purpose of thanking the noble Marquess for the concessions he had made, and to add that the medical officers of the Guards would be grateful for his not abolishing a system which had worked well. With reference to the speech of the hon.

    1407
    Member for the North Riding (Mr. Guy Dawnay), the noble Marquess had, in his reply, apparently forgotten that the hon. Gentleman had quoted Lord Wolseley in support of his allegation. He begged to remind the noble Marquess that Lord Wolseley said that one of the greatest evils with which they had to contend under the Departmental system was the system of malingering; that it could not exist under the regimental system, because every medical officer under that system knew his own men, and could, therefore, baffle any attempt at deception.
    Vote agreed to.
    (4.) Motion made, and Question proposed,
    "That a sum, not exceeding £524,000, lie granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge for the Pay and Allowances of a Force of Militia, not exceeding 136,806, including 30,000 Militia Reserve, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March 1885."
    SIR HERBERT MAXWELLsaid, in former years he had had occasion to call the attention of the Secretary of State for War to a vital point connected with the annual training of the Militia, which his experience, and the experience of the officers of the Militia, had shown to be absolutely unsatisfactory and useless. He referred to the money which was devoted to the annual training of the Militia in musketry. He had received repeated assurances from the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War and his Predecessors in Office that this point would be attended to. On his moving the reduction of this Vote on a former occasion by the sum of £20,000, which represented the money spent in the annual training of the Militia, the noble Marquess acknowledged that the question raised was one deserving of attention, and had pressed him not to divide the Committee on the Motion, giving him the assurance that before that time next year he would ascertain the opinion of the military authorities with regard to the question. He admitted that that was a sufficiently vague assurance; but he would like to hear from the noble Marquess whether the subject had met with that attention which it seemed to him to require from the Department? Nothing could be more vital to the efficiency of the soldier than that he should be able to shoot,
    1408
    except, perhaps, that he should be able to march; but the fact was that the present period of Militia training did not admit of anything like effective musketry instruction being given to the Militia. On former occasions suggestions had been made for the consideration of the Secretary of State for War, and three alternative courses were proposed. The first was, that the musketry training of disembodied Militia should be discontinued altogether; that the authorities should be content that the Militiaman should be taught to march and handle his arms, and not attempt to shoot. That, at least, would have the advantage of saving to the country £20,000 a-year, which, it was his impression, was absolutely wasted at the present time. The second course was that alternate trainings should be devoted to field exercise and to musketry instruction; and the third was that the Militia regiments should be had up in companies during the training-period, and instructed in musketry at headquarters. He was sure that the noble Marquess would not expect him to enter into details, which he had already frequently stated in that House, as to the inconsistency and unsatisfactory nature of the present system of training. Anyone acquainted with musketry instruction would know that it was, above all others, that kind of instruction which had to be carried on deliberately, and with the greatest possible nicety, and with careful consideration of wind and weather. All that was absolutely impossible in the limited period of 27 days, which was all that was allowed to the Militia. But the noble Marquess had assured him that, in accordance with the recommendation of the Committee appointed to consider the question of musketry instruction in the Service, more ammunition would be given to the Militia. What did that mean? It meant that their task was to be made more difficult; that whereas it was difficult for each man to fire away 40 rounds, which was the old allowance, in a very short time, it was now proposed to improve the instruction given by making him fire away 60 rounds in the same time. Why, that arrangement only complicated and aggravated the difficulty; and he was so convinced that the present system of musketry instruction in the Militia was loss of time, loss of money, and loss of energy, that he

    1409
    now proposed the reduction of the Vote by the sum of £20,000, the cost of ammunition expended annually by the Militia.
    Motion made, and Question proposed,
    "That a sum, not exceeding £504,000, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge for the Pay and Allowances of a Force of Militia, not exceeding 136,806, including 30,000 Militia Reserve, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the Slat day of March 1885."—(Sir Herbert Maxwell.)
    THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, the subject brought before the Committee last year by the hon. and gallant Member had been considered by the military authorities, whose duty it was to superintend the training of the Militia, and the Regulations for musketry instruction to that Force had been totally revised, and a new General Order had been issued. That Order was dated the 17th of April, 1884, and he was not sure whether it was generally known as yet; at any rate, he thought it could not have been known to the hon. and gallant Member, because he made no reference to it in his observations. The main feature of the Order was that no firing was required of the Militia beyond 300 yards, and this it was thought would so simplify matters as to enable every regiment to undergo instruction either by battalions or half-battalions. Hitherto the Regulations had been based upon practice at 600 yards, which, as had been explained by the hon. and gallant Member, greatly complicated the course of instruction, and which it was impossible for the regiment to undergo thoroughly in a short space of time. The Committee would perceive that by the revised Regulations a great deal of unnecessary complication had been done away with. Although it was impossible for him to say how far those revised Regulations would be successful for the object in view, he believed the Committee would see that he had not neglected the promise given to the hon. and gallant Member last year; that he had called the attention of the military authorities to this question, and that they had endeavoured so to simplify and reduce the theoretical requirements of the old Militia Regulations as to enable a course of musketry instruction to be gone through much more satisfactorily within a limited time. Without expressing any
    1410
    opinion as to how far the changes would meet the object in view, he might say that, at all events, they went in the direction of the hon. and gallant Member's wishes.
    EARL PERCYsaid, he was afraid that the answer of the noble Marquess would not be entirely satisfactory to his hon. and gallant Friend, because the new Rules did not make any considerable change in the system hitherto obtaining. The main difficulty was the reduction of the distance at which the Militia might shoot. The practice of striking off half-battalions in alternate years had long been in operation; and the now Rule, which laid down that two companies were to be struck off at the beginning of the training, would have the effect of reducing the other drill of the regiment almost to a dead-lock, because they would have men who had become, so to speak, rusty by a year's absence, drilling with men in the middle of their training—they would have men of all degrees of efficiency mixed up together. It had always been the practice not to strike off companies until they had had a certain amount of drill, and that he thought was better than the system now proposed. A good deal of un-necessary expenditure had been caused by the system of drilling recruits on enlistment. It was evident that, where there were few recruits at the depôt, the expenses attendant upon musketry instruction were thereby very much increased. He knew of a case where a Militia regiment had three recruits at headquarters, of whom one bought his discharge and another deserted, the result being that the remaining recruit had to be taken by rail a certain number of miles every day for musketry instruction, accompanied by a non-commissioned officer, buglers, and men, thereby causing a large and unnecessary expense to the country without any commensurate benefit resulting. He hoped the noble Marquess would not lose sight of the subject; and if his hon. and gallant Friend decided to take a Division on his Motion for the reduction of the Vote, he should feel it his duty to vote with him.
    SIR HERBERT MAXWELLsaid, he was not disposed to put the Committee to the trouble of a Division. He was aware that it was not possible to

    1411
    enter into all the details of the Regulations in Committee; but he trusted the noble Marquess would not forget that the assurances given to the Committee were far from meeting the case he had endeavoured to lay before him. He had been 20 years in the Militia, and never during that time, as far as he was aware, had any regiment been required to fire at a greater distance than 300 yards. The permanent Staff were required to fire at 600 yards; but not so the Militia. The now Rule, therefore, meant nothing at all, and the other details which the noble Marquess had mentioned were simply matters of regimental arrangement. However, he presumed he must be satisfied with having entered his protest against what seemed to him to be a lavish expenditure of public money, not only without adequate result, but with no result at all. He would ask leave to withdraw his Motion.
    Motion, by leave, withdrawn.
    Original Question again proposed.
    MR. CHESTER-MASTERdesired to make one or two remarks with reference to the withdrawal of the enlistment money, which the Committee would remember was taken away on the 1st of September last year. This was done, as hon. Members would probably be aware, because so many Militia recruits did not turn up at the time of their training at the depôts or places where the regiment was called out. Formerly, the amount given on enlistment was 20 s., which amount was some years ago reduced to 10 s., and then taken away altogether. He wished to point out the difficulty resulting from that arrangement in agricultural and mining districts. Speaking from his own experience in an agricultural district of Gloucestershire, extending over 20 years, he believed he should be right in saying that recruiting sergeants personally knew the addresses to within 6 per cent of the recruits whom they enlisted in rural districts. Before the last reduction, he believed the absentees from his own regiment had never been more than 5 per cent. The orderly clerk of the regiment was instructed to make out a return of the recruits who came forward for enlistment, and the answers they gave between September 1, 1883, and March 1,1884. Until then the North Gloucestershire as well as the South Gloucestershire regiment had never been below
    1412
    its strength, except by a small number; but this year they had recruited only 53 men. On the 1st of September they required 198 recruits, and on the 1st of March they had only obtained 53, of whom 17 elected to drill at the depôt near Bristol, and 13 elected to go out with the recruits. The answers of 81 men were all to this effect—"We feel the benefit of 10 s. in our hands," which in Gloucestershire was called "a dab in the fist;" and it meant that 10 s. were worth more in the winter, when no work was to be got, than 20 s. given at the end of the training. Their answer was, in fact—"No; we will not enlist, because we do not get anything on enlistment." The number of recruits in his regiment in former years had never fallen short of their number; but he had received a letter a few days ago to say that the regiment was more than 100 below its strength. He thought the noble Marquess should find some means of remedying this state of things. There was one other point to which he would like to draw the attention of the Committee, and it was this. The strength of the Militia was always taken from the day on which the inspecting officer inspected the regiment, and that was at the end of the training. He hoped he would not be accused of egotism if he again alluded to the Militia in his own locality. At the preliminary drill, or just before the preliminary drill commenced, in 1882 and 1883 the strength of the Gloucestershire regiment was, in 1882, 792 men, only eight below their strength; and in 1883 it was 799, being only one below its proper number; and yet, when the inspecting officer came at the end of the training, and sent in his return, their strength was, in 1882, only 680 men, and in 1883, 686 men. There were two or three reasons for this. In the first place, absentees from the regiment were not allowed to have their places filled up for three mouths; another reason was that men, temporarily discharged, were returned, on the strength of the regiment, but were not allowed to be counted as present at the inspection at the end of the training. Another reason was that all men who enlisted into the Regular Army could not have their places filled up before the inspection. Of course, he need hardly point out to the Committee that it was a feather in the cap of the Militia regiment who sent the greatest

    1413
    number of men from its ranks into the regiments of the Line. He was one of those who did his utmost to get men of his regiment to join the Regular Army; and he thought that, however much it might tell against the strength and the esprit de corps of the Militia, it was the duty of the colonels and officers of the Militia regiments to draft as many men as they could from their ranks to the Regular Forces. What, however, he should like to suggest, if the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War could possibly see his way to it, was this—that the Militia regiments should be allowed, at any time, to go on recruiting up to 10 per cent over their proper strength. As was well known, there were always some absentees; there were always a certain number of deserters; and there were always a certain number every year who enlisted into the Line; but when Militia regiments had recruited up to their full strength they were obliged to stop. He thought they ought to be allowed to recruit to the extent of 5 or 10 per cent over their strength. In that there would be no extra expense to the country; but Militia regiments would then have at the end of the training a far larger complement of men than they had at the present time. He had only spoken of the years 1882 and 1883, when the Gloucestershire regiment was in the one year 120 below its strength, and in the other year 117 below its strength, simply and solely for the reasons he had stated. In those years, until they had got a certain number of men struck off their rolls, they were unable to continue their recruiting. He had made these few observations in the hope that the noble Marquess might be able to do something to remedy this state of things.
    EARL PERCYsaid, he was very glad the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Chester-Master) had called attention to the subject of the withdrawal of the 10 s. bounty for enlistment, and he hoped the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War would give the Committee some information as to its effect upon the recruiting. He (Earl Percy) did not think the effect had been at all satisfactory. He held in his hand a Return he moved for some time ago, and which had been laid on the Table of the House, though it had not as yet been printed. That Return gave the number of recruits enlisted between
    1414
    the 1st of October, 1883, which was the date when the Order was issued, and the 1st of March, 1884, and it compared that number with the number enlisted between the 1st of October, 1882, and the 1st of March, 1883. The result shown was that in England and in Scotland the Artillery and the Engineers had fallen off to a large extent. The Infantry in England had slightly decreased, and the Infantry in Scotland had increased. He did not take Ireland, because that country was under peculiar conditions. The decrease in all arms in England had been from 11,022 to 10,940; but in Scotland, on the other hand, there had been an increase from l,390 to 1,868. That might not bethought altogether to be an unsatisfactory result; but he would like to point out to the noble Marquess that when they came to look at which regiments had decreased, and which had increased, they found the increase was only in the case of a very few regiments, comparatively speaking. He found that 46 regiments in the United Kingdom had increased less, between the 1st of October, 1883, and the 1st of March, 1884, than they did in the preceding corresponding period. [An hon. MEMBER: In the rural districts.] Well, as that had been said, and as his hon. Friend who had just spoken stated that the rural districts were affected in this matter to a different extent to mining districts and populous places, he (Earl Percy) would like to quote his own personal experience. In spite of the fact that in the North of England the times were bad and many men were out of work, his regiment had recruited but few more recruits than they did last year, notwithstanding all the efforts made to obtain recruits. He believed, too, that there were many more absentees from the regiment than there were last year under the old system. He could not pretend to say whether, on the whole, the new system answered better in rural districts than in the more populous districts; but certainly, speaking from his own experience, the new system had worked very unsatisfactorily in populous places. There was another matter to which he wished to draw the attention of the Committee, and it was this. It had been alleged that the effect of the new system might be felt more strongly in regiments that were trained at a distance from their headquarters

    1415
    rather than in regiments which were trained at headquarters. He confessed that he had never been, able to follow that argument; and, looking at the facts, he found that of the 46 regiments whose numbers had decreased in the course of the last six months, 29 were trained at their headquarters, and 17 were trained away from headquarters. It really came to this—that of the regiments which had been detrimentally affected by the operation of the new system, considerably more than half were trained at headquarters. He was quite aware there were some advantages to be gained by the system of withholding bounties; but certainly, as far as he could see, the system had failed in its main object, which was to prevent absenteeism, which in some regiments was found to be a great and growing evil. In his own case, so far from preventing absenteeism, he had more absentees this year than last. He was quite sure that the only plan upon which to manage the bounty question was the plan foreshadowed by the hon. Gentleman, who had just spoken—namely, that of making a difference between one district and another, leaving it to the discretion of the officer commanding a district, whether a bounty should be given and what amount should be given on enlistment, or whether the whole of the bounty should be withheld until the recruit came up for annual training. He was certain they never could make a hard-and-fast rule that would suit all parts of the country. The Return to which he had previously alluded only referred to the period from October last to the 1st of March in the present year; and he knew it had been alleged that a large influx of recruits had been effected just before the preliminary drill, that, in fact, there would be a larger number of recruits in future than there had been in former years. He had not found that to be so in the case of his own regiment; and he trusted the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War would be able to give some reassuring information to the Committee on this subject.
    SIR ALEXANDER GORDONwished to draw the attention of the Committee and the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War to what appeared to him to be a very unsatisfactory state of the Militia, both with regard to officers and
    1416
    men, at the present time. He would first deal with the case of the officers. He found by the last Return that there were no less than 648 wanting. He found that in 1880 there were only 307 officers wanting to complete the Establishment, so that now the number wanting was more than double what it was in that year. He should be glad if the noble Marquess could suggest a reason for this state of things. He wished to refer the Committee to a Return that was laid before the House a short time ago with regard to the number of appointments to and the number of retirements from the Militia. From that Return he found that in the course of the five years ending March, 1884, no less than 2,471 officers were appointed to the Militia, and that in the same period no less than 2,488 officers had left the Militia. Now, the total number of officers being 2,941, that showed that nearly the whole of the Militia Force were renewed every five years. It was a very curious state of things that the Militia officers should be renewed every five or five and a-half years; and the reason of it, as it appeared to him, was that the Militia was officered, as far as regarded the junior officers, on an entirely false basis. Young men were appointed to the Militia, not for the purpose of serving in the Militia permanently, but merely as a means of entering the Regular Army by the commissions which they obtained. Young men were appointed to the Militia, but remained in it only just as long as was necessary to fit them for the Army, and if they failed to get into the Army they left the Militia. Now-a-days, as a matter of fact, gentlemen merely joined the Militia as a stepping-stone to the Army. Now, that could not be a sound or workable system. He should like the noble Marquess to explain why there had been such variation in the number of commissions given to the Militia for the Army. In 1881 the number was the same as Lord Cardwell fixed it at. Sixty commissions were given to the officers of the Militia for the Army every half-year. Young men joined the Militia with the expectation of obtaining a commission in the Army; they knew there were a number of vacancies, and they took their chance of getting one of them. But in 1881 the commissions for the Army were reduced exactly

    1417
    one-half, and that caused a large number of young men to be disappointed. In March, 1882, the commissions were kept at one-half—namely, 30 every half-year; but in September, 1882, they were raised to 40 every half-year. In September of the following year they were increased to 70 in the half-year; and now this year they understood they were to be increased to 81 every half-year. Great injustice had already been done. Young men entered the Militia with the expectation of gaining an entrance to the Army; but the number of commissions given to them had been reduced, although subsequently they were raised to their original number, and now they were to be increased beyond that number. The uncertainty as to the number of commissions to be given had caused great hardship, and it was very desirable that there should be more regularity in the number of commissions given. Now, with regard to the men, he found by the last Return that no less than 42,745 men left the Militia every year. The total rank and file enrolled was only 99,440; therefore, nearly one-half of the Militia rank and file left last year. That, also, seemed to be a very singular state of things. The recruits last year were nearly 36,000, so that there was a deficiency of 6,000. The Militia would appear to be renewed every two years, so far as the rank and file were concerned. Now, if the Militia was to be really efficient in time of war that was a very alarming state of things. He wished also to point out that no less than 11,330 men deserted or were struck off the rolls of the Militia last year. He hoped the noble Marquess would be able to give some satisfactory explanation of these figures, because they led to the belief that the Militia was not in that satisfactory state that could be wished.
    SIR ROBERT CUNLIFFEsaid, he should like the noble Marquess to give his careful consideration to some points which had recently been put before him. He (Sir Robert Cunliffe) entirely agreed with what fell from the hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Chester-Master) as to the present condition of recruiting in the Militia. His own experience as a Colonel of 10 or 12 years' standing was that in consequence of the change in respect of bounty, Militia regiments did not re-
    1418
    cruit men as well as they formerly did. His own regiment was 220 men below its strength. The district was a purely mining and rural one, and the regiment was trained at headquarters; therefore, none of these special reasons assigned for the lack of recruits could be cited in his case. Some years ago his regiment was scarcely below its strength. He entirely agreed with what had been said with regard to the officers of the Militia. He thought those Gentleman who, like himself, had had a large experience in the Militia would agree that the present condition of things was not what they would desire. Anyone who had had charge of a regiment must feel that it was very desirable that there should be more stability in the elements of which officers were composed. His hon. and gallant Friend (Sir Alexander Gordon) had stated that a considerable number of young men simply joined the Militia for the sake of passing into the Line. Under present circumstances, it was only natural they should do so; but looking at the importance of the Militia, and to the work which could be got out of the Militia if required, it seemed to him (Sir Robert Cunliffe) that the members of the permanent Staff of the Militia ought to be obtained on a principle which would secure more stability than there was at present. The Committee would agree with him that if the officers of the permanent Staff knew their work and did it, they could obtain wonderful results from a Militia regiment in the course of the annual training. It was impossible to find a more willing or a more easily managed set of men than Militiamen; and if they were properly handled and looked after, grand results could be obtained. Under a system by which the officers of a regiment were constantly being changed it was impossible to get such good results as they might otherwise expect. It appeared to him that these were circumstances which deserved to have the serious consideration of the War Office. He had felt it his duty to bear his testimony to the fact that the defects which had been pointed out existed; and he hoped the noble Marquess would be able to look into the question, and that possibly before another year would make some Regulation which might be of service.
    MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORasked for a little information with regard to a point which appeared on the surface of the Votes. On page 35 he found that for bounty and expenses of enrolment there was almost a similar sum charged this year as last; last year the sum was £198,000, and this year it was £203,000. On page 37 he found there was a considerable change from the Vote which was submitted last year. The item for "levy money, attestation and medical fees, &c., on enrolment or re-enrolment," was, last year, £39,500. This year that item had sunk to the comparatively small sum of £9,000; whereas the item for "bounty payable on termination of training and on re-enrolment," had gone up from £128,500 to £164,000. Now, he presumed that that alteration in the figures was but a reflection of a very considerable alteration in the policy that had to be pursued with regard to the enlistment of Militiamen. He had waited for some time to hear any remarks which might throw light on that portion of the Vote; and he had no doubt the noble Marquess would have some clear explanation to offer. He assumed that the change had been brought about in order to secure a better attendance at training; and, under that impression, he sought for the figures which would show the payment made for provisions, and he was rather astonished to find that, whereas last year the amount was £299,400, this year it had sunk to £270,000, so that this theory which looked for increased attendance as an explanation for the change was hardly borne out by the charge for provisions.
    MAJOR GENERAL ALEXANDERsaid, that, before the Vote was put, he wished to remind the Committee that, in 1881, certain provisions were made by the Predecessor of the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War for the retirement of commanding officers of Militia' on account of age, and it was provided: that no commanding officer of Militia should serve after the age of 65, except in certain cases, where they might serve up to 67. He found, upon inquiry, that that Rule had never been made applicable to the Channel Islands Militia, over which the War Office, he understood, had no authority at all, that Militia being under the supervision and the control of the Go-
    1420
    vernor. Under the circumstances, there was no means of ascertaining the ages of the officers; and it was suggested to him that, as at least one of the officers was verging upon 70, he (Major General Alexander) should move for a Return of the names and ages of the officers commanding the Channel Islands Militia. That Return the noble Marquess was good enough to give him as an unopposed Return, but 'it had not yet been presented to the House, and he was, therefore, unable to act upon it upon the present occasion; but should he find, when it was printed, that there were officers in the Channel Islands Militia who were 70 years of age, or were approaching the age of 70, he begged leave to give Notice that next year, either in this Parliament or the next Parliament, he should move the reduction of the Vote by the amount required for the Channel Islands Militia.
    THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, that with regard to the observations of the hon. Member for Cirencester (Mr. Chester-Master), it was the fact that Militia regiments were, under the present system, allowed, in certain circumstances, to recruit above their strength. As to the distinction which had been recommended between Militia regiments in agricultural and urban districts, he was afraid it would be undesirable, if not impossible, to make any such distinction. The Inspector General of Recruiting had said in his Report—
    "As stated last year, there was strong objection urged against the existence of two different systems of enlisting recruits working side by side, one under which recruits of a brigade or battalion were receiving 10 s. on enlistment, the other under which they were receiving no bounty on enlistment."
    The distinction between the two systems of giving bounties had been abolished, because it was found to have a prejudicial effect upon the regiments which were at the headquarters at the regimental depôts; and he was afraid that exactly the same unfair result would be caused if distinctions were attempted to be drawn between regiments maintained in agricultural districts and those which were maintained in urban districts. The noble Earl (Earl Percy) had referred to the effect of the change which had been made in the matter of the preliminary drill, and that was also adverted to in

    1421
    the Report of the Inspector General, who said—
    "It was naturally to be expected that in the detached battalions, where 10 s. on enlistment had hitherto been given, and where the recruits had not the facility of drilling at the headquarters on enlistment, there would be a considerable falling off in the winter in consequence of this alteration. This has been the case, but the effect of the change can hardly he estimated fairly until after the coming training. Now that dates for the preliminary drill have been fixed and announced, those who are desirous of doing their preliminary drill and training together will come up at that time."
    The Inspector General was writing on the 28th of February; but now the dates of the preliminary drills had been fixed and announced. Since the beginning of the year the flow of men had been regular; and all that could now be said was that the effect of the change, which, as had been observed, could hardly be estimated as yet, should be very carefully watched, and if it was found necessary to make any further alteration, then they would have to consider what was to be done. Of the 32,049 troops which were raised last year, 19,434 were raised to be drilled on enlistment, and 12,615 were raised by brigades and battalions which were not drilled on enlistment; and he understood that out of every 800 men 600 elected to go through the preliminary drill on enlistment. The system appeared to be popular; and though it might suffer until it was thoroughly known, he did not think there was any reason to anticipate that it would suffer on the whole. So far as absentees were concerned, the new system appeared to be working well, and the percentage of absentees under the new system compared very favourably with the percentage of absentees under the old system. He did not think it was possible to go back, because if a 10 s. bounty were given to a Militia recruit, no recruit would join the Army without going to the Militia first. The hon. and gallant Member for East Aberdeenshire (Sir Alexander Gordon) had referred to the number of commissions in the Line given to Militia officers. That was a complaint of long standing; but he had not heard either the hon. and gallant Gentleman himself, nor any other Member who had addressed the Committee, make any practical suggestion for a change. It appeared to him (the
    1422
    Marquess of Hartington) that there was every reason for satisfaction, for, after all, the Militia was not a profession; and it was almost a matter of surprise to him that so many gentlemen should be found who were willing to devote a portion of their time to military duties of that nature, which must, to a very considerable extent, interfere with their other occupations. The hon. and gallant Gentleman complained of the system of passing from the Militia into the Line; but that he (the Marquess of Hartington) conceived to be a very great inducement to gentlemen to accept commissions in the Militia; and, if any change were made, it would not diminish, but would rather increase, the difficulty of finding officers to join the Militia. The hon. and gallant Gentleman referred to the large number of commissions in the Line recently given to Militia officers; but he (the Marquess of Hartington) endeavoured to explain, when he made his Statement in introducing the Estimates, what were the reasons which had made that necessary. A diminution in the number of commissions granted was made at a time when a considerable reduction in the number of regimental officers had been made, and when it was believed that fewer numbers would be required in future. But owing to causes which were then unforeseen—namely, that a great number of officers had accepted the terms of retirement which were now open to them—the number of vacancies in the Line had been much larger than was anticipated; and as Sandhurst could only supply a certain number of officers, there was no alternative but to accept a larger number of gentlemen who had served in the Militia, and who proved on examination to be qualified for commissions in the Line. Of course, it would be the object of the authorities, as soon as it was possible for them to ascertain what was the normal number of commissions in the Army likely to be required, to endeavour so to adjust the number of cadets at Sandhurst and the number of commissions offered to officers in the Militia as to provide that the number might be as established, and as little fluctuating as possible. With regard to the number of desertions from, the Militia last year—no less than 11,330—the largeness of that number

    1423
    was due to the large number of desertions from the Irish regiments, owing to the suspension of the training of the Irish Militia for three years. During that period of suspension there had been no means of knowing how many men had left the Force; and, therefore, against last year were placed the whole of the arrears for three years. Of course, in some cases the men had died, and the number, therefore, of desertions was uncertain; but the whole number of men unaccounted for were put down for last year.
    MR. ARTHUR O'CONNOR: They are not all real desertions, then?
    THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, they were not; but the number covered all the men who during the last three years should have appeared on the roll, and whose disappearance could not be officially accounted for. The hon. Member for Queen's County (Mr. A. O'Connor) had referred to some figures in the Estimate. He (the Marquess of Hartington) did not think he was quite able to follow the hon. Gentleman's observations; but the discrepancies which the hon. Gentleman had pointed out appeared to him to be due to the change in the system of enrolment, to which he had already referred, through the abolition of the 10 s. bounty on enrolment. If the hon. Gentleman would take the sum of the three columns included under the head E, on page 37, he would see that the total amount for the present year was £203,000, as against £198,000 for last year. The items were differently distributed in consequence of the change, and the sum taken for levy-money and attestation and medical fees on enrolment appeared to be greatly reduced, while the sum paid afterwards appeared as a portion of the increase. He was, however, very glad that the hon. Gentleman had called attention to this matter.
    COLONEL COLTHURSTsaid, there was one matter which had been referred to by the noble Earl the Member for North Northumberland (Earl Percy) with respect to the position of those officers who, being adjutants of Militia or Volunteers, had failed to qualify for the Army. He (Colonel Colthurst) hoped that matter would be taken into consideration, for it was of great importance to the officers themselves and to
    1424
    the discipline of the regiments. He did not know whether the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War would be able to say whether any relaxation of the arrangements could be made on behalf of those officers. It would be well if the noble Marquess would look into the examination for the rank of captain. A certain standard was now laid down with a certain number of subjects, and the minimum number of marks required in each subject. An officer might pass in each subject, and might then find that, although he had so passed and qualified in each subject, he yet had not passed the examination, owing to the aggregate of efficiency being greater than the number of marks required in each subject would reach.
    THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, this question did not really arise on the present Vote. The noble Earl was, however, going to call attention to the subject, and there would be an opportunity for making a statement upon it when it came on.
    MR. BIGGARwished to draw attention to a matter which related to the Antrim Militia. Some years ago there was some very loose conduct in that regiment, and a party of officers went into an hotel where another officer was staying and wrecked his room. He (Mr. Biggar) was informed last year, but never heard it until then, that one of the officers 'who was concerned in that attack—Major Johnson—based his defence before the Adjutant General in Dublin upon very different material to that on which he had based his defence to the War Office. When he was applied to by the War Office on the subject, Major Johnson denied point-blank that he had anything to do with the transaction; but that was not the ground which he (Mr. Biggar) understood him to have put forward before the Adjutant General. He could not, of course, ask the noble Marquess to discuss Major Johnson, because the noble Marquess had as yet only heard his (Mr. Biggar's) ex parte statement, and he (Mr. Biggar) only spoke from hearsay; but he thought that this was a matter in which the noble Marquess might undertake to make inquiry into the merits of the case. He did not think that the Statute of Limitations ought to run in a case of this sort. If Major Johnson had made a

    1425
    a statement of facts to the War Office or to the Adjutant General in Dublin last year relating to transactions which took place some years ago, there was no reason why he should now be let off because of the remoteness of those transactions. Still, under the circumstances, he (Mr. Biggar) could not ask the noble Marquess to do more than to make an inquiry; and if, after inquiry, it was found that there was any ground for the charge, then no doubt the noble Marquess would deal with the whole matter as it deserved. He (Mr. Biggar) had on previous occasions drawn attention to two cases which had occurred in this same regiment, and in both of those cases it was found that there were grounds for investigation. In one of them the colonel of the regiment retired rather than face the charges made; and in the other case, in which he (Mr. Biggar) drew the attention of the noble Marquess to the conduct of the adjutant, that officer was dismissed by the noble Marquess for the conduct complained of. Therefore, up to the present time, he (Mr. Biggar) had succeeded in making good the charge he raised as to the conduct of these officers; and all he asked in the case of Major Johnson was that the noble Marquess should undertake to make inquiries. He thought he was entitled to ask that from the noble Marquess.
    THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, it was perfectly true that, in consequence of some charge being made by the hon. Member for Cavan on a previous occasion, an inquiry was instituted by the War Office into the conduct of the adjutant of the Antrim Militia respecting some Returns. It was found, he regretted to say, that incorrect Returns had been made by the officer in question, and the result was that that officer was removed from his appointment. As to the case of Major Johnson, he really could not undertake to make any inquiry into it. It was said to have occurred 11 years ago, and he believed that Major Johnson's presence on the occasion was altogether denied. He believed that some time ago there was a good deal of practical joking in the regiment of the kind that had been referred to; but the officer who commanded the regiment then did not command it now, and he had no reason to believe that anything
    1426
    of the sort had taken place for a great number of years. No good purpose whatever would be served by entering upon an inquiry. If inquiry ought to have been made at all, it should have been made at the time.
    MR. BIGGARsaid, the matter was this Major Johnson was charged with having made one statement to the Adjutant General in Dublin, and quite a different one to the War Office. That was a much more serious matter than a practical joke occurring 10 or 11 years ago. Possibly, so far as the practical joke alone was concerned, the noble Marquess was not far wrong in saying that the Statute of Limitations ought to be allowed to run; but the other matter was much more serious, and perhaps upon that part of the case the noble Marquess would undertake to make some inquiry?
    Original Question put, and agreed to.
    (5.) Motion made, and Question proposed,
    "That a sum, not exceeding £69,000, be granted to Her Majesty, to defray the Charge for Yeomanry Cavalry Pay and Allowances, which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of March. 1885."
    COLONEL O'BEIRNE COLONEL O'BEIRNE moved that the Vote be reduced by the sum of £8,000—the sum which the Irish taxpayers had to contribute towards the support of the Yeomanry. He did not think it was just that they should be called on to support English Yeomanry, in which they were not concerned in any manner, directly or indirectly. Ireland was not allowed to have Volunteers of her own, and yet was called upon to contribute to the Volunteers of Great Britain; and that was unfair. Another reason why he objected to the Vote was that at the present moment some regiments of the Regular Cavalry of the Line were not fit to go upon active service in a campaign. They were utterly inefficient and useless for any military purpose whatever; and that was not a proper state of things. Before any money was granted for the Reserve forces, the first necessity was to put the Regular Cavalry of the Line into a really efficient condition, so that at least a certain portion of the regiments could be called on for a campaign. In the early part of the century the Yeomanry, Cavalry, and Volunteers were

    1427
    sent upon a campaign, and took part in the Peninsular War, and they did good service, and were mentioned by the Duke of Wellington in his despatches. If that were the state of things now he would admit that there would be good reason for the Vote; but the Yeomanry regiments that were now in existence certainly were never called upon to go on any foreign service whatever. He believed they were very good horsemen, and very intelligent men; but for military purposes they were of no use, and, therefore, such Votes as this were quite superfluous.
    MR. LABOUCHEREsaid, he hoped the hon. and gallant Gentleman would not persist in his intention to move the reduction of the Vote, but would rather join forces with him (Mr. Labouchcre) and take a Division against the whole of this outlay of £69,000. When these Army Estimates were voted, every year, these discussions always took place; and instead of any protest being made against the way in which the Estimates went on increasing year by year, military men got up to ask that more money should be spent. He knew they always explained that in some particular item they would be ready to cast off a halfpenny; but they generally finished by wanting a much larger expenditure somewhere else. He knew them of old. He had the greatest respect for the common sense of the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War when he was not trammelled by officialism; and he would ask him to tell the Committee of what real use this Yeomanry Force was. They were called out for eight days in the year; but everybody know that it required much more than eight days in a year to make either a Cavalry soldier or a Cavalry horse. He had asked an hon. Friend of his who sat on the other side of the House of what use was this Yeomanry Force, and what reason could be given for maintaining such an absurdity; and the reply he received was—"Well, you see, if a foreign Army were to come here, the Yeomanry would be useful in this way: they are recruited from the farmers, who know the country, and who know how to ride, and they would be able to show the way to the English General;"—but whether it was to retreat or to advance he did not know. They were asked, then, to spend £69,000 a-year for that. The gentleman whom he questioned on the subject belonged
    1428
    to a Midland county, where it was exceedingly improbable that any foreign Army would come; and he did not think there was much necessity for anybody to show an English General the road he wanted to go. At all events, they need not spend £69,000 a-year for such a purpose as that. In this case, as in many others, it was the poor man who suffered for the rich man's benefit. Each year the Vote grew more and more; the permanent Staff had increased; and of the 35 troops of which the Yeomanry Cavalry Force consisted each troop of 265 men had 18 officers. [An hon. MEMBER: Each regiment.] They might call it a regiment if they liked—they might even call each troop an army; but what he wanted to call attention to was that in a really genuine bonâ fide regiment where there were 550 men there were only 24 officers, so that a Yeomanry regiment had proportionately more officers than any of the Cavalry regiments of the Line. Were they really to take a serious view of these things, or were they to go on with this wasteful expenditure? Unless some case could be made out in favour of the Yeomanry they ought to do away with it, once for all. How was it managed? They knew there were a certain number of people who liked to swagger about with feathers and a sword by their side, and who came out on the horses which they had been hunting with to have eight days' drill and a Yeomanry ball, or something of that sort. That was the whole story. There was no sort of use in these relics of inedisevalism—of a past age—and he wanted some one to tell him what quid pro quo they got for this £69,000 a-year?
    MR. C. T. D. ACLAND, as an officer interested in the Yeomanry Force, was not prepared to say that they were of any more use than the Volunteers; indeed, he would not for a moment say that they were of so much use, because he quite admitted that farmers could not be got to devote so much time to acquiring military drill efficiently as tradesmen, to whom it was a positive recreation to come out and learn their drill. The hon. Member who had just sat down had, however, said that the Yeomanry were of no use at all, because they were never called on foreign service. It was true they were not so called on; but that was because we were never attacked by any foreign Army. It might

    1429
    just as well be said that the Volunteers were of no use; but not a single Member would agree with such an observation if it were made. If the Volunteers were of any use, he maintained that the Yeomanry in their sphere were of equal use. If an Infantry Volunteer could be made into an efficient Infantry soldier, so a good man and horse could be made useful in the same way and turned into a good Cavalry soldier. He would ask the hon. Member for Northampton to go and witness the Yeomanry Cavalry when they were at drill; and he would point out to him that those who were best qualified to judge as to the ability of the Yeomanry Reserve—the Inspectors General of the Yeomanry Force—had constantly testified to the ability and efficiency of the Yeomanry men. Probably, the hon. Member was not aware of it; but during the past 10 years there had been an efficient school for training auxiliary officers of the Cavalry at Aldershot. Every officer of the regiment had to go through this auxiliary Cavalry school. They did all go through it; and he had no doubt that if the hon. Gentleman would attend the school in order to see the officers of the Yeomanry regiments go through their work, he would be perfectly satisfied as to their efficiency and their knowledge of what they had to do. The officers who belonged to regiments before that school was instituted made use of it. He (Mr. Acland) did not suppose anyone desired to see this Vote increased, and he knew very well there was a prejudice against it in some quarters; but, still, it would be admitted by most people that those in authority were doing their very best to get the Service to which they belonged brought into an efficient state. Many Yeomanry officers were prepared to admit that in bygone days it was anything but efficient, and that the description which had been given by the hon. Member would apply very well to the condition of things which existed 20 or 30 years ago. His description, however, did not apply to the existing state of affairs. The actual cost to the country for the Yeomanry was something like £4 a man; while that of the Infantry Volunteers was something like £2 6s. 8d. Now, in order to get the Yeomanry Force together it was necessary to pay for horses as well as for men. He only wished they could get more training out of the men
    1430
    than they did; but considering the circumstances, and the difficulty they experienced in getting the men to train at all, he was sorry to say he did not see how, without giving a very much larger allowance for horses, the country could get any more service at all out of the Force. He was sorry to see that apparently the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War had not been able to grant the Yeomanry what they were promised last year—namely, a small allowance for extra troop drill; because it was exceedingly difficult to get men to bring their horses away from the work of the farms—to bring them sometimes 10 or 20 miles for a day's drill—without some extra compensation. But, be that as it might, he did not know what the argument of the hon. Member for Northampton was founded on; and he trusted the Committee would think twice before it consented to anything in the nature of doing away with a Force which could be made much more efficient than it was, and which he did not believe necessitated an extravagant expenditure of public money.
    MR. SIDNEY HERBERTsaid, he had asked a Question on the subject of the Yeomanry that day, and the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War had given him an answer which was not likely to be considered very satisfactory by the men of that Force. The hon. Member opposite (Mr. Acland) had alluded to the subject to which he was referring. A doubt seemed to be cast upon the fact whether any such promise as that alluded to had been made. Well, he was informed that a Memorial to the effect that additional grants would be made was last year sent to the different regiments; at any rate, there was no doubt in the world that the men had expected an increase. Another Question he had put had been as to the distance which entitled men to a day's pay in marching in. The distance was 20 miles; that was to say, if the men had to march in 20 miles they got an extra day's pay for it. But a new Memorial had been issued on the 4th of April this year, stating that the distance for which the day's pay would be granted would be increased from 20 to 30 miles. When they came to consider that this Force was not in any very great state of training at this period of the year, and that they would have to

    1431
    march 30 miles to their duty, which it would be admitted would give a horse a very hard week's work, or rather a hard nine days' work, as they were out nine days altogether, hon. Members would see that the effect would be to put a stop to a great deal of recruiting. As to what had fallen from the hon. Member for Northampton with regard to the Yeomanry, it was no doubt a fact, and hon. Members would agree with him, that great difficulty was experienced in getting employers of labour to avail themselves of the services of the Reserve men after they left the Colours. Employers had long been against such employment, their argument being that the men might be called away to serve at any time, and that, therefore, they could not be relied upon for any length of time. This, however, was not the case with regard to the Yeomanry. Employers belonging to that Force could be appealed to, and with success, to employ Reserve men, on the ground that being soldiers themselves they should employ soldiers. He was told that in very many instances this argument was used with good effect. The hon. Member for Northampton had given his version of the utility of the Yeomanry in the event of their active services being required; but the hon. Member could hardly be looked upon us an authority on such matters.
    THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTON: I think it scarcely necessary to reply at any great length to the observations of the hon. Member for Northampton, which I think are made annually either by himself or some other hon. Member. I feel the Committee is very much indebted to the hon. Member for having made his remarks with such brevity. With regard to the Yeomanry, I would only repeat what I stated in moving the Army Estimates—namely, that I think there is no branch of the Service in which greater improvement has been effected than in this Force. A few years ago, no doubt, the Yeomanry were very much open to criticism, for, as the hon. Member for Northampton pointed out, the duty performed by them was little more than a seven or eight days' outing in the county town. Recently, however, owing to the appointment of Inspecting Officers for Auxiliary Cavalry, and active and efficient Cavalry officers as Yeomanry adjutants, and owing further
    1432
    to the appointment of active non-commissioned Cavalry officers as troop sergeant-majors, the efficiency of the Force has been very greatly increased. I quoted to the Committee the other day from the Report of the Inspecting Officers for Auxiliary Cavalry, and I pointed out that he expressed himself as astonished at the efficiency exhibited by these regiments. In his Report, this officer commented upon the very great progress the Yeomanry had made in drill with the very limited opportunities at their disposal. I think there can be little doubt, as my hon. Friend behind me (Mr. Acland) says, that if there is a necessity for a Volunteer Infantry Force, there is also a necessity for the Yeomanry Force. As I have said, it is in a state of very fair efficiency at present; and I have no doubt that if, unhappily, any occasion should arise for its being called into active service, and it were embodied for any length of time, that its efficiency would very rapidly increase, and that it would become a most useful and important arm of the Service. I do not think the Committee will be in any way disposed to take the view of my hon. Friend the Member for Northampton; but it was true that there was considerable difficulty in asking the House this year for any considerable increase in this Vote. What we have endeavoured to do has been to increase the efficiency of the Force as far as possible without adding to the expense the country is now put to. It was, undoubtedly, the intention of the War Office, and I had hoped that it would have been in my power, to give the Yeomanry some small payments to assist them in having extra troop drills in the course of the year. As I stated originally, it would have been possible to make these payments without a large increase in the Vote, because it was found that during recent years the sum voted by Parliament had not been entirely spent. An examination of the accounts of last year, however, seemed to show that that would not be the case—that there would be no saving, in consequence of the improvement which had taken place in the officers and non-commissioned officers of the Force. This year, at all events, it would not be possible for us to make the grant; but I am still in hopes that it will be possible to save a small sum

    1433
    from the amount annually granted, from which the allowance might be made. Though it is true that no promise was ever made that the allowance would be granted, no doubt a Circular was issued leading the Force generally to expect that some such allowance would be forthcoming; and I am sure there must have been great disappointment experienced when it was found that nothing was to be given. I can only promise to do all in my power, consistently with the limits of the Vote and the efficiency of the Force, to find some way of making this increased payment.
    MR. C. T. D. ACLANDsaid, the noble Marquess had stated that he would cause further inquiries than those instituted last year to be made with reference to the power of the Yeomanry to carry a more efficient weapon than that with which they were served at present, and also as to whether any arrangement should be made by which non-commissioned officers from the Yeomanry ranks could be admitted to some share in the course of instruction at Aldershot. The non-commissioned officers could be afforded this instruction at a very slight cost; and if they could obtain it he was sure a great many of them would go in for it, if it took place at a time of the year when they were not engaged in getting in the harvest. He had no doubt in the world that such instruction would be of the greatest practical use.
    Question put.
    The Committee divided:— Ayes 103; Noes 25: Majority 78.—(Div. List, No. 84.)
    (6.) £568,500, Volunteer Corps.
    MR. A. F. EGERTONsaid, the Volunteer Force had to thank the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War for an issue of Martini-Henrys—especially that part of the Force which was represented by the National Rifle Association. He should like to ask, further, if there was not to be a further issue of these rifles? It was most important that the men should have them. Everybody knew what a bad arm was supplied at present, and how extremely necessary it was that it should be taken away and a better one given in its place. He understood that at the present moment the Government had in store upwards of 240,000 Martini-Henrys; and he hoped
    1434
    the noble Marquess was going to order the issue of a certain number of these to the Volunteer regiments. He should like to know whether that was the case; and, if so, he should like also to know whether the issue would be made pro ratê to the Force or by regiments? To his mind, the pro ratê system would not be so good as the regiment system. It was desirable to have each regiment homogeneously armed, rather than that there should be two kinds of arms in each.
    MR. GURDONwished to say just two words on the point alluded to by hon. Gentleman opposite, when, some time ago, he asked a Question as to the reduction in camp allowances to Volunteers. There was no doubt that the Volunteers felt this reduction very much indeed. They had not expected any such arrangement at the War Office. He could speak intimately of the battalions of Norfolk and Suffolk Volunteers, who had for the last seven or eight years been in the habit of having annual encampments. These battalions had almost every year received high praise from the inspecting officer, and they themselves believed that they deserved it. They knew perfectly well that all the praise they had received arose from their spending a short time in camp every year. The battalions were recruited from agricultural districts, and it would be impossible for the men, unless they went through a training of this kind, ever to arrive at a state of efficiency. When he first heard of the new Order he received, it with dismay, feeling that it was a real blow aimed at the Volunteers. There were always three courses open in this matter—Either to give up the encampments altogether—and that was the very last thing they would think of doing, because the adoption of such a course would be the deathblow of many of the Volunteer battalions in the East of England; or to call on the officers of the regiments to contribute; or that the whole cost should fall on the commanding officers. To his mind, he thought the second of those courses would have to be adopted. There was no difficulty in obtaining good men in the Service; they got the same excellent class that they had obtained from the first; but there was great difficulty in obtaining the right class of officers. Many, of course, were too busy; some were too idle; and others

    1435
    said they could not bear the expense. Many of the officers were in poor circumstances, and if they were to be asked for £5 or £10 towards the expense of the camp much, greater difficulty would be experienced than was felt now in getting them to consent to go into camp. He appealed, therefore, to the noble Marquess whether it was not a fair demand to make to ask that the camp allowance should be allowed to continue? How was it to be expected that men would accept commissions which involved all this trouble and expense? He hoped the noble Marquess would reconsider this question, and ask for a small Supplementary Estimate, or, at any rate, promise that this reduction should not be made next year.
    SIR HENRY FLETCHERreminded the noble Marquess that he had asked a Question on this subject a few days ago, and the noble Marquess promised to answer any Questions that might be brought forward upon the Estimates in Committee. He wished now to appeal to the noble Marquess to use his best efforts on behalf of the Volunteer Force, so that the whole number who had applied to go into camp this year might be allowed to do so. The Volunteer Force had now arrived at what he thought was a very efficient state; and he could speak from 25 years' experience of the Force. He had worked hard and long to bring that Force into a condition of efficiency; and he maintained that the great efficiency at which the Volunteers had now arrived was owing in a large degree to the regimental camps which had been carried out for many years past. There were now, he believed, something like 84,000 applicants to go into camp this year; and the Volunteers were most anxious, through what had taken place in past years, to prove their efficiency in years to come. That desire was owing to these camps. The sum of money proposed this year was only £34,000 for regimental camps for military instruction; but he hoped the noble Marquess would see his way to bringing in a Supplementary Vote, so that the whole of the men who had applied might be enabled to go into camp, for that was of the utmost importance to the efficiency of the Volunteer Force; and he thought they ought to receive a little more encouragement from Her Majesty's Government than they had received during
    1436
    the past 20 years. The commanding officers had worked hard to effect the present state of efficiency; but for many years during the early existence of the Force they had received no encouragement whatever from the Government. They had used their best efforts to produce efficiency; and these regimental camps had had a great deal to do with the present efficiency of the Force. There could be no doubt that discipline had been greatly promoted by these camps; and if only a small further sum of money was granted all the requirements of the Force might be attained; and he could not too strongly urge the noble Marquess to enable all the men who desired to go into camp this year to do so. But there was another consideration he wished to urge, and that was that, if not this year, in future years there should be a larger capitation grant. All through the past years the officers had put their hands into their pockets to bring up the efficiency of the Force; but he thought the Government ought now to do what was necessary to maintain the existing state of efficiency.
    MR. BRAND, in reply to the hon. Member opposite (Mr. A. F. Egerton) with regard to the issue of Martini-Henry rifles to the Volunteers, said, the present reserve was 250,000 stand of arms, and it was not thought desirable to reduce that any further until there had been a fresh manufacture of rifles. But, under present circumstances, it was not desirable to manufacture too freely, because there was a question under consideration with regard to providing the Army with a new rifle. That question had not yet been decided upon; but a Departmental Committee had made a Report, he believed, in favour of a new arm, and the matter would come before the Secretary of State for War in the course of a few days for his decision. With reference to the present issue of the Martini-Henry rifle to the Volunteers, 8,000 had been issued to them through the National Rifle Association upon loan from the Government. He had instructed the authorities to make inquiries in the different districts as to the number of rifles it would be necessary to issue to the Volunteers in order to bring them up to the 12 per cent point. With regard to the Wimbledon competitions, he understood that the National Rifle Association had decided

    1437
    that in future the competitions should not be carried on with the Snider rifle; and, therefore, it was desirable that the Volunteers should be able to compete with the superior rifle. As soon as the Returns were received from, the different districts, the War Office would be prepared to issue the number of rifles required to make up the 12 percent; the Volunteers, of course, retaining their Sniders until there had been a full issue of the Martini-Henry. The Secretary of State for War would answer the question as to an increased capitation grant.
    MR. A. F. EGERTONasked if he was to undersand that the question of making a further issue of a new rifle to the Volunteers would be considered as soon as the question had been decided between the Committee and the War Office?
    MR. BRAND: Yes; it will be considered then.
    VISCOUNT LEWISHAMsaid, he did not propose to detain the Committee any length of time; but with regard to the question of issuing the Martini-Henry, he wished to point out that it was now three years since Lord Morley, in distributing the prizes to a battalion of Volunteers in the county which he represented (West Kent), stated that the Martini-Henry would be issued to the Volunteers at an early date; but that had not yet been done. The hon. Gentleman (Mr. Brand) had now stated that a new rifle was to be distributed to the Army.
    MR. BRANDsaid, he had only stated that the question of a new rifle was now before the War Office, a Committee having reported upon it.
    VISCOUNT LEWISHAMsaid, that, in that case, his only suggestion was that this new rifle should be issued to the Volunteers as well as the Army as soon as possible. With regard to the proposal to reduce the camp allowance, he was sure that would be received with universal regret by everybody who was interested in the Volunteer Force. It was not necessary now to point out the advantages which the Volunteers who went into camp received from the camp instruction; but it was perfectly clear that in districts where the companies of battalions were scattered, and were at considerable distances apart, these camps were the only opportunity they had of meeting and joining in bat-
    1438
    talion drill two or three times a-day for five or six days. In that way they learned their work in camping with others; and everyone who understood the subject must admit that the lessons they thus received were of the utmost importance to them. He had recently had a conversation with a gentleman who for some years had been in command of one of the districts; and that officer had expressed the opinion that the great increase in efficiency which had recently been noticed in the Force was entirely owing to these camps of instruction. Speaking of one particular battalion, he said that before they went into camp they were practically useless; but after their first year in camp, such was their efficiency that he found he could do anything he pleased with them. He himself had had the honour of going into camp with Volunteers for something like 14 years; and he could answer for it that the advantages they had derived had been enormous; and when it was considered how small an increase in the Estimate was wanted to enable the 20 per cent extra to go into camp, he felt sure that the Government, when they thought the matter over, would agree that the expense ought to be borne by them, and not by the battalions themselves. If that was not done, either the officers of the battalions must bear the expense of taking the extra 20 per cent into camp; or if, as was often the case, the officers were not men who could bear that expense, they would be reduced to the invidious and unpopular position of having to select the 20 per cent who were not to go into camp. He thought that was a very serious matter, for this proposition meant either that 20 per cent would not be taken into camp at all, or the expenses would have to be borne by the funds of the battalions which were already so heavily burdened. He hoped Her Majesty's Government would see their way to a small extra grant which would enable the further 20 per cent to go into camp.
    MR. BULWERsaid, he had been a Volunteer for 25 years, and he wished to say a few words on this subject. When his hon. and gallant Friend (Sir Henry Fletcher) asked a Question upon this matter a few nights ago, he understood the answer to be that the original intentention of the Government was that each corps should be assisted to camp

    1439
    out once in three years. He had looked at the Volunteer Regulations to refresh his memory, for when that answer was given he could not remember that there was anything like an expressed intention in those Regulations to assist each corps to camp out only once in three years. He could not find that there was any such intention expressed in the Regulations; but, on the contrary, this camp allowance was held out as an inducement to Volunteers to go into camp and make themselves efficient. What had been the result? The Government having held out that inducement, year after year increasing numbers of men had gone into camp; and now, after the system had produced most satisfactory results, they were told that 20 per cent of those who had applied to go could not have the allowance. What would be the consequence of that? Either 20 per cent of the men would not be allowed the opportunity of making themselves efficient, and so lose the capitation grant, and the Force would be weakened to that extent; or they could only remain efficient by the officers bearing the expense. He thought it was a crying shame that the Government should, for the sake of a paltry economy of this kind, impose upon the officers the expense of keeping up the efficiency of the Force. Everyone knew what our Army was. Gallant fellows they all were; but if it were not for the Militia and the Volunteers, we should not be able to resist invasion. Everybody knew that, though everybody did not like to admit it. As to the effects of these camps, he -wished to supplement what had been said by the opinion of a higher authority than any of the hon. Gentlemen who had already spoken, and that was Lord Napier of Magdala. He (Mr. Bulwer) was intimately acquainted with the corps in question, and he was sorry that the noble Lord the Member for Winchester (Lord Daring), who held a command in the corps, was not at that moment present in the House. The corps to which he referred was the 1st Hampshire Volunteers, one of the first battalions to go into camp. They had gone into camp for 20 years, and originally almost the entire expense was borne by the officers, and that was the only mode in which they had been able to make themselves efficient. Last year they went into camp 900 strong; and
    1440
    Lord Napier of Magdala, happening to be residing in the neighbourhood, went out every day to watch their progress, and afterwards drew up a Memorandum, which he sent to the commanding officer; expressing the result of his observation of the men. From this Memorandum he would read a few sentences, with a view to impressing on the Committee the advantages which Volunteers derived from being in camp. These men were recruited from different districts in the county, and they only met occasionally for their company drills; while their only opportunity of learning their battalion drill and qualifying themselves to take their place in line with the Regular troops, or with any troops, was this annual week's practice. This they did very thoroughly. And with regard to cooking, he might mention that whole carcases of sheep were delivered in camp, and were cut up and distributed to the men just as would be done on actual service; and everything was done according to strict regulations. Lord Napier, after having watched them for one week, published this voluntary compliment to them—
    "I had frequent opportunities of seeing the 1st Hampshire Volunteers during their eight days' encampment at Camberley. They were steady at drill; Battalion movements smartly done, not entirely without mistakes, but with fewer than could possibly have been expected; the distances well preserved. The skirmishing was good, and I noticed the attention of the non-commissioned officers, and the willingness of the men to be taught. The camp was well pitched, and all its arrangements, camp kitchens, &c., very business-like and satisfactory. The conduct of the men in town was exemplary, and thoroughly won the goodwill of the inhabitants, who hope to see them again next year. The working of the Battalion showed that the company officers and the men had attended to their drill during the year, and thus they were able to appear in combined movements as if they had been embodied for a long time, and made it very difficult to realize that they had been together only a few days. On the whole, I consider the 1st Hampshire Volunteers a most serviceable and intelligent body of men, very creditable to their battalion, and to their officers and noncommissioned officers. I congratulate Colonel Sir W. Humphery on having brought the corps to such a highly creditable condition."
    That was entirely owing to their having been in camp every year for 20 years, the numbers going into camp having increased from 500 to 1,000. The Government proposed now that only 800 of those men should be assisted to go into camp; and as that was their only means

    1441
    of making themselves efficient 200 must be returned as non-efficient, or the officers must provide the money which the Government declined to give. He sincerely trusted that if the Committee of the House recognized the value of the Volunteers they would not sanction this parsimony. With regard to the issue of the Martini-Henry, he was not so anxious to encourage the practice of "pot-hunting" by the issue of this rifle for a fortnight. He thought it was of more importance to consider the general improvement in shooting by the Volunteers than the shooting of a few men at Wimbledon. He would rather have a few battalions shoot better than they now could, than have good shooting confined to a few particular men. He hoped the noble Marquess would have no hesitation in asking for a supplement to the Vote proposed, which was not sufficient to meet the wants of all the men who wished to go into camp this year, so that no Volunteers might be disappointed in receiving their allowance.
    MR. STAVELEY HILL, as almost the oldest Volunteer in the House, said, he would venture to say a few words on a question which was of such considerable interest as this. As he read the Order of 1881 in the Regulations, it was that 2s. a-day, for a period not exceeding six days annually, be allowed to Volunteer corps for each man, under the circumstances described in paragraph 999. That was the Regulation, distinctly laid down. Under those conditions camps of instruction had been formed which had been of very great use; and, speaking as one who had had the honour of entertaining one of these camps each. year in his own place, he could bear testimony to the advantage these camps had been, not only in bringing up the efficiency of the men, but in promoting their health and discipline. Under these circumstances, a letter had been issued, dated March 31, 1884, which, he thought, was unworthy of a Government which had any desire to promote the Military Service of the country. The reason given for reducing the allowance by 20 per cent was that the numbers of men applying to go into camp throughout the country being in excess of the amount provided for in the annual Estimate, it had become necessary to limit the amount sanctioned for each corps. So that simply because
    1442
    it was not thought fit to put a few hundred pounds on to this Vote—an amount which would never have been grudged by the House or by the country—it was deemed necessary to limit the amount granted. He would apply that to the one camp with which he was acquainted. The number of men who went into that camp was 1,150. Of those, there were 200 men for three days at 6s. per man, which would come to £60; 100 men for five days at 10 s. each—total, £50; 850 at 12 s. each—total, £510; making altogether £620 for these 1,150 men. What did the Government propose to do? To grant only £496 of that £620, and to put the officers or men to the expense of £124 to enable all the men to go into camp.
    COLONEL WALRONDsaid, he was glad the Government had taken this Vote thus early in the Session, instead of deferring it, as they did last year, to a later period. It was a very important Vote, more especially on account of the Memorandum which his hon. Friend had quoted. The question of camps of instruction was a very serious one to the Volunteer Force generally; but as it had been discussed so fully already, he would not say much upon it. But he wished to say that many battalions of Provincial Volunteers now looked entirely to these camps for their efficiency. They could not afford to have battalion drills in their own districts; and if they could not have this annual week in camp they would suffer serious loss. Therefore, he hoped the noble Marquess would see his way to making an increased grant. He was quite sure that the noble Marquess and his hon. Friends were ready to do this; but the Chancellor of the Exchequer turned a deaf ear to them. All the military authorities in the House and at the War Office were, he was sure, willing that the Volunteers should receive their fair measure of money. He was much disappointed by the statement of the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Brand) with regard to the Martini-Henry rifles; because he knew that the Council of the National Rifle Association understood that, in addition to the Martini-Henry rifles they now had, they were to receive 12,000. [Mr. BRAND dissented.] The hon. Member shook his head; but that was what was understood by the Council; and, as a member of that Council, he

    1443
    thought it his duty to mention that now. He had also hoped that there would be an additional number of rifles issued to the whole Force in the course of the year; and he thought it would be a disastrous policy to issue Martini-Henry rifles to the Volunteer Force on a percentage system, as proposed. He could imagine nothing so likely to promote the practice of "pot - hunting" as to issue a certain number of Martini-Henry's to the good shots; because there were men now armed with that rifle who had given up the Snider entirely, and only shot with the Martini-Henry. If there was only a percentage of Martini-Henry's issued, the men who had them would give up the Snider, and that would seriously interfere with class shooting. It was desirable that general shooting should be encouraged, rather than that attention should be directed to getting a certain number of good shots. There was an impression that the Volunteers could shoot better than the men in the Army; but although, no doubt, it was possible to pick out a certain number of Volunteers who would make good practice, his opinion was that, in general, the Volunteers were in this respect inferior to the Regular troops. He trusted that the question of rifles would receive the earnest attention of Her Majesty's Government. He had referred to that subject two or three weeks ago, and the reply was that 250,000 Martini-Henry rifles were in store. He could see no reason why those weapons should not be as safe in the armouries of Volunteer Corps as they were in the Tower of London; at any rate, he was certain they could be returned into store within a week if necessary; that they would be rather improved by a little practice being made with them; and that their issue would tend to increase the efficiency of the Volunteer Force. It was somewhat late (1 A.M.) to call attention to one or two points that he desired to refer to; but the present was the only opportunity that would present itself of discussing Volunteer questions during the Session. One point was as to whether it was desirable that there should be an increased capitation grant, because the present grant was, in the opinion of many persons, insufficient, and it was considered that an additional sum should be given. His own view was that, if any further grant were made, it should
    1444
    be done by means of re-arrangement of the class tiring; and he thought that if a scheme were drawn up to encourage the men to shoot, and thereby obtain an increased grant for efficiency with the rifle, it would do some good to the regiment. Then he wished to draw attention for one moment to the examination which Volunteer officers had to go through. He complained that the officers had to pay all their expenses in going to the place of examination, and that, when that examination was passed, they received as a grant 10 s. for the benefit of their regiments. He thought that when an officer had passed his examination, the grant might be increased from 10 s. to 50 s., or even more; and that would, no doubt, induce a larger number of officers to present themselves and do their best. So much had been said about the advantage of those examinations that he would not further refer to them. He thought it a subject for much congratulation that the Volunteer Force had increased in efficiency; and he was sure the Committee would be satisfied with the statement of the noble Marquess that during last year 1,390 Volunteers had enlisted in the Regular Army. It had always been his opinion that the Volunteer Force was a valuable addition to the Regular Army, not only in time of peace, but in time of war; and he was convinced that there was sufficient spirit amongst them to induce them to join the Army in the hour of need. He hoped Her Majesty's Government would be able to carry out the views he had recommended.
    COLONEL STANLEYsaid, he was anxious, after what had been said by hon. and gallant Gentlemen in different parts of the House, to ask the noble Marquess to consider, in the most favourable light that circumstances would allow, the applications made by Volunteers to camp out. He trusted the noble Marquess would not be compelled to baulk the desire of the Volunteers to go into camp. Recalling the Regulations, he believed there had always been some reservation as to the grant to be given. Paragraph 913 distinctly stated that the general expense would be covered by 2s. a-day; but there did not appear to be any limitation of the numbers. There were, of course, difficulties in the way—that was to say, the noble Marquess could not go to the country

    1445
    for an additional grant; he must wait until the exigencies of the Service pressed it upon him. But he could not help thinking that if the noble Marquess could see his way to allow a large proportion of the Volunteers applying to go into camp, it would go far to remove the feeling of discouragement which he understood was rather widely spread in consequence of the Regulation. With regard to the issue of Martini-Henry rifles, it appeared to him that a mistake had been made in issuing them by percentage, which would tend to mix up the arms of the regiment, and to complicate the arrangements for making and storing them; it would introduce two kinds of arms and ammunition, where it was never desirable or convenient to have more than one; and it would have a tendency to encourage the doctrine that the rifles in question were issued to assist a few men to shoot exceedingly well, rather than to bring up the whole regiment to a better average of shooting. It might be well if the rate of distribution were increased; and he thought the noble Marquess would be justified in keeping a lower reserve than, perhaps, would at other times be desirable. As had been pointed out, the arms would not be lost to the Army, and they would be always available in case of emergency. On the whole, he should be glad to see the abandonment of the percentage principle, which had been generally unacceptable, and was believed to be undesirable in itself.
    MR. TOMLINSONsaid, he hoped his right hon. and gallant Friend (Colonel Stanley) would not think he was going too far in saying that they ought not to be satisfied with less than the proper allowance for every Volunteer on going into camp. In Lancashire, which was at the head of all the counties in respect to the Volunteer Service, both in numbers and efficiency, it had become more and more the custom every year to go into camp; and he thought that the inclination to adopt what was really the best system of training ought to be encouraged in every possible way. But the diminution of the allowance must have a discouraging effect. He knew already of one very efficient Lancashire corps which had decided not to go into camp upon the reduced allowance offered this year. The officers did not feel themselves justified in putting their hands
    1446
    into their pockets to make up the difference between the grant and the amount actually required. His own experience was that the great benefit to be derived from camping out depended upon its continuity. Those Volunteers who had been into camp one year were in a much better condition to profit by their next year's duties, and so on with respect to other years. The corps to which he belonged had gone regularly into camp for several years; and, as an instance of the progress made from year to year, he might mention that three years ago the men undertook to do their own cooking. The first year they had the assistance of eight skilled cooks from one of the Regular regiments; the next year they only required four; and the following year only one. Now, cooking was essential to enable a regiment to march, and that was just the kind of instruction that was derived from going into camp; and he hoped the Government would not act so as to discourage this very hopeful means of bringing the Volunteer Service into a condition of efficiency. There was much in the Report issued this year which must be gratifying to those interested in the Volunteer Force. The efficiency of the Force had greatly increased; and yet they were sensible of the fact that much remained to be done to enable it, in case of need, to take the field. He thought the Government would not go too far if, in addition to the Martini - Henry rifles, they were to provide accoutrements of the most approved pattern, and also valises. As it was, Volunteers were obliged to march into camp with the old knapsack, which was the only means they had of making up their kits; and it would be obvious that no regiment could take the field with an equipment of that kind. Therefore, he hoped the authorities would take into consideration the question of supplying accoutrements and valises to those Volunteers who desired to make themselves efficient. Some distinguished military men thought the Government ought to provide the Force with great coats, and that also he commended to the attention of the noble Marquess. At that hour he would not go into any other matters connected with the Force, though there were several which he had wished to notice; and he would, therefore, conclude by saying that he did not think he could too

    1447
    strongly express the hope that Her Majesty's Government would yield to the desire, on the part of most Volunteers, that a sufficient grant should be made to enable those who desired it to go into camp.
    THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, the discussion which had taken place showed that a strong feeling existed amongst hon. Gentlemen who took an interest in the Volunteer Force with reference to camping out. He did not think that subject had been prominently before him until a Question was asked upon it a few days ago; and until that evening he was not aware that so strong a feeling existed in connection with it. It was quite clear that before next year the subject must, at all events, be thoroughly considered; either some increase in the provision must be made, or else some method of selection less objectionable than the present method of dealing with the grants must be adopted. He did not, however, think that amongst the Volunteers of North-West Lancashire any idea of breach of faith was associated with the Circular which had been issued.
    COLONEL STANLEY: I hope the noble Marquess will not think I said there was any breach of faith. I said it was wise to avoid the appearance of it.
    THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, he thought the Regulation must be held to be governed by the first paragraph relating to regimental camps, which said that a portion of the Volunteer Force would in each year be assisted to form camps for Volunteer exercise, and then went on to describe the Regulations as to Volunteers who wished to form camps. There was nothing whatever about a greater force being assisted to camp out every year. He had already stated that they should be allowed to camp out every third year. As he had stated the other day, the permission to receive this assistance was not at first very much taken advantage of; apparently but a small number of corps desired to camp out at all, and those who did received the allowance year after; year. The number, however, had continued rapidly to increase, and it was thought to be desirable and more agreeable to the position of the Volunteers themselves that, instead of making a selection of corps, a reduction of 20 per cent should be made on the number of
    1448
    men all round who were desirous of camping out. But, as he had said, the question must be considered before next year. If he could see his way to do so, he should be very glad to meet the suggestion of the right hon. and gallant Gentleman opposite (Colonel Stanley), to reconsider the matter at once; but considering the heavy expenses with which the Military Estimates were burdened this year, it was much more likely there would be a deficiency than a saving, and he could not, therefore, make any further provision by way of Supplementary Estimate this year. It was necessary that some control should be exercised over this and other expenditure on account of the Volunteer Force; although he was free to admit that up to the present time the Force had been an economical one, and he believed that its high popularity was largely due to that fact. He was somewhat sorry to hear that the exertions of the authorities to maintain that economy had been met with a request for an increased expenditure. The hon. and gallant Gentleman opposite (Colonel Walrond) was probably correct when he said that the House would cheerfully vote the sum required for an increased capitation grant. No doubt it would, and also a great many other items; but when hon. Members, on whichever side of the House they sat, came to consider the expenditure of the Government from a broader point of view, he did not see that there was any such unanimous acquiescence in the general increase of military expenditure; on the contrary, accusations of extravagance in military matters had proceeded with tolerable impartiality from both sides of the House. Under those circumstances—considering that it was desirable that strict economy should be exercised with regard to the Force; considering, also, that only a limited portion of the Force could encamp every year, and that the proposal would involve a sudden and unexpected increase of charge, it was impossible to hold out any hope that an alteration could be made before next year.
    MR. ALAN EGERTONsaid, that nothing appeared to have been done for the purpose of restoring to the Volunteers Wormwood Scrubbs as a shooting ground. It was very important that all Volunteers should become efficient in shooting in order to earn the capitation

    1449
    grant. At the same time, it was impossible for the working classes, who formed the great bulk of the London Volunteer regiments, to spend the time and money necessary for their going down to Ealing. The present arrangement meant that Volunteers must sacrifice half-a-day's wages in order to make themselves efficient; and he therefore trusted the hon. Gentleman the Surveyor General of Ordnance (Mr. Brand) would be able to give some assurance that Wormwood Scrubbs should be used for the purpose of Volunteer practice.
    MR. BULWERsaid, he hoped that the allowances would be made this year to the men who actually went into camp. A promise to that effect would enable commanding officers to make the necessary arrangements as soon as the number of men was known. The expense would not be very great, and the concession need not be drawn into a precedent; at the same time, early notice could be given next year which would allow commanding officers to make arrangements for a certain number of men to go into camp on the Regulation allowance.
    SIR HENRY FLETCHERremarked, that the establishment of the Volunteer Force in 1883–4 was 193,734, and that for the year 1884–5 it numbered 194,220—a very considerable increase, which showed that the Volunteers were desirous of making themselves efficient, which, of his own knowledge, they were perfectly able to accomplish. He hoped the noble Marquess would see his way this year to give the Volunteers the benefit of any alteration that could be made in the Regulations with regard to camping out; and he was sure they would be perfectly willing to submit to such further Regulations as the noble Marquess might bring forward.
    THE MARQUESS OF HARTINGTONsaid, he would give the best consideration he could; but it was impossible for him to do what was asked of him—namely, to bring in a Supplementary Estimate. It was occasionally necessary, at the commencement of a year, to bring in Supplementary Estimates; but such Estimates were for unforeseen expenses. He could not see his way to bring in a Supplementary Estimate to cover the expense of Volunteers going into camp.
    Vote agreed to.
    Resolutions to be reported To-morrow, at Two of the clock.
    Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Committee sit again upon Wednesday."
    SIR WALTER B. BARTTELOTsaid, that when the Vote for the Men was taken the Committee were promised faithfully that to-night, or the night the Estimates were brought forward again, hon. Members should have an ample opportunity of discussing the Vote; that was distinctly stated by the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer when the Vote was agreed to. They had not had the opportunity that was promised them; and therefore he begged to ask that Supply should be put down again upon a day that the Committee would have an opportunity of discussing the question of the present condition of the Army.
    MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORreminded the right lion. Gentleman on the Government Bench that the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War agreed in reference to one Vote—a Vote which had just been taken in Committee—that it should not be reported as early as the other Votes, but should be allowed to stand over until the War Office had made up their minds with regard to certain suggestions, emanating from Irish Members, as to the payment of chaplains for certain Militia regiments in Ireland. What he (Mr. Arthur O'Connor) wanted to ascertain was, whether it was distinctly understood that at the next Report of Supply the Vote for Divine Service would not be included?
    SIR ARTHUR HAYTERsaid, the Report of the whole of the Votes must be put down pro formâ but he would arrange with the noble Marquess the Secretary of State for War, who had given such an undertaking as the hon. Gentleman the Member for Queen's County (Mr. A. O'Connor) mentioned, that the Vote for Divine Service should be postponed. In reply to the remarks of the hon. and gallant Member for West Sussex (Sir Walter B. Barttelot), he had to say that the first Vote had been already reported; but there would be ample opportunity for discussing the question of the present condition of the Army upon the Reserve Vote, and that Vote could not long be postponed. He hoped that the introduction of that Vote would be considered by

    1451
    the hon. and gallant Baronet a fitting and convenient opportunity on which to bring on his Motion.
    SIR HENRY FLETCHERpointed out to his hon. and gallant Friend the Financial Secretary to the War Office (Sir Arthur Hayter) that the Committee understood from the Chancellor of the Exchequer that they should have an opportunity of discussing the whole Army question on Vote 8, and on some day between Easter and Whitsuntide. He hoped that another day would be given before Whitsuntide for the consideration of the Army Estimates.
    SIR CHARLES W. DILKEsaid, the Government promised that a day should be given for the Army Estimates, and another day for the Navy Estimates, before Whitsuntide. It was quite impossible to give a second day for the Army Estimates before Whitsuntide.
    Motion agreed to.

HYDEPARK CORNER IMPROVEMENTS BILL.— [BILL 136.]
(Mr. Shaw Lefevre, Mr. Courtney.)
HYDEPARK CORNER IMPROVEMENTS BILL.— [BILL 136.]

  SECOND READING. BILL WITHDRAWN.
  Order for Second Beading read.
  MR. SHAW LEFEVRE MR. SHAW LEFEVRE moved that the Order be discharged. He proposed to take this course so that the Bill might be introduced in the other House. He had failed to induce hon. Gentlemen, who opposed the Bill, to remove their blocks; and as it was absolutely necessary that the Bill should pass on an early day, in order that it might be referred to a Select Committee, he begged to move that the Order be discharged.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, ''That the Order for the Second Reading be discharged."—(Mr. Shaw Lefevre.)
  MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORasked if the Bill could be introduced in the House of Lords, inasmuch as it was a Money Bill?
  MR. WARTONbegged to move that the Order be not discharged.
  MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORrose to Order. He desired to ask whether the Bill could be introduced in the House of Lords without infringing the Privileges of the Commons?
  MR. SPEAKER: It is competent for the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Shaw
  1452
  Lefevre) to move that the Order be discharged.
  MR. ARTHUR O'CONNORpointed out that the right hon. Gentleman had explained that his object in moving that the Order be discharged was that the Bill might be introduced in the other House. Could such a reason be of any weight at all unless they knew that the Bill could be introduced in the House of Lords?
  MR. HICKSsaid, that, after the re marks which had fallen from the right hon. Gentleman the First Commissioner of Works, it might, perhaps, be well that the House should understand the reason why objection had been taken to proceeding with the Bill after half-past 12 o'clock at night. [Laughter.] He repeated, that, after the remarks which had fallen from the First Commissioner of Works, it was desirable the House should be acquainted with the objections which had been taken to passing the Bill in the early hours of the morning without any discussion; and he was not going to be debarred from narrating the facts by any interruption from Gentle men on the Front Treasury Bench. Hon. and right hon. Gentlemen opposite talked both in and out of the House about Obstruction; but he hoped the country would understand that the Obstruction came from those Gentlemen themselves, by interrupting independent Members of the House. Now, the objection to the Bill was that Her Majesty's Government asked the House——
  MR. SHAW LEFEVREasked whether it was competent for the hon. Gentleman to discuss the Bill?
  MR. SPEAKER: It is not competent for the hon. Gentleman to discuss the merits of the Bill, or the clauses of the Bill. He can only refer to the Question now before the House, which is that the Order be discharged.
  MR. HICKSsaid, it would be in the recollection of the Speaker that the First Commissioner of Works used words implying censure upon those who had objected to the Bill being passed without discussion; and if he (Mr. Hicks) was in Order——
  MR. SHAW LEFEVRE: I never implied any censure.
  MR. HICKS: Mr. Speaker, I am entirely in your hands.
  MR. SPEAKER: The Question is that the Order be discharged.
  Question put, and agreed to.
  Order discharged.
  Bill withdrawn.

REDISTRIBUTION OF SEATS BILL.
(Sir John Hay, Mr. James A. Campbell.)
REDISTRIBUTION OF SEATS BILL.

  [BILL 131.] SECOND READING.
  Order for Second Reading read.
  SIR JOHN HAY, in moving that the Bill be now read a second time, said he had no desire to detain the House at that hour (1·50) of the morning by making any statement in regard to the merits of the Bill. In the printing of the Bill a certain number of errors had been made, especially in regard to figures, and it was well the necessary Amendments should be printed on the Paper. This could not be done until the second reading had been agreed to. He hoped hon. Gentlemen would allow the second reading to be taken now.
  Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Bill be now read a second time."—(Sir John Hay.)
  MR. BUCHANANsaid, he did not think the House ought to allow a Bill of this kind to pass the second reading; and, therefore, he begged to move that the Bill be read a second time that day six months. The objections to the Bill were manifest. It would accentuate the difference between boroughs and counties to a degree that had never previously been suggested by any responsible politician, and to an extent that was absurd; and the House, he was sure, would not read a second time a Bill carrying out that principle in such a way.
  MR. A. R. D. ELLIOTseconded the Amendment.
  Amendment proposed, to leave out the word "now," and at the end of the Question to add the words "upon this day six months."—(Mr. Buchanan.)
  Question proposed, "That the word 'now' stand part of the Question."
  Notice taken, that 40 Members were not present; House counted, and 40 Members not being present,
  House adjourned at Two o'clock.

MINUTES.
SELECT COMMITTEE—Office of the Clerk of the Parliaments and Office of the Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod, appointed and nominated.
PUBLIC BILLS—First Reading—Marriages Legalisation * (76).
Committee—Report —Marriages Legalisation (Wood Green Congregational Church) * (66).

OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF THE PARLIAMENTS AND OFFICE OF THE GENTLEMAN USHER OF THE BLACK ROD.

  APPOINTMENT AND NOMINATION OF SELECT COMMITTEE.
  Select Committee appointed: The Lords following were named of the Committee:

  Ld. Chancellor.

  E. Granville.

  Ld. President.

  E. Kimberley.

  D. Richmond.

  E. Redesdale.

  D. Saint Albans.

  E. Lathom.

  D. Bedford.

  V. Hawarden.

  M. Lansdowne.

  V. Hardinge.

  M. Salisbury.

  V. Eversley.

  M. Bath.

  Ld. Chamberlain.

  Ld. Steward.

  L. Colville of Culross.

  E. Devon.

  L. Monson.

  E. Tankerville.

  L. Colchester.

  E. Carnarvon.

  L. Ker.

  E. Belmore.

  L. Aveland.

  E. Bradford.

  THE EARL OF LONGFORDsuggested that a portion of the "Royal Gallery" should be furnished as a writing room. The existing writing room adjoining the House was a mere passage. Interviews with Members of the House of Commons, or other persons on Public Business, must now be held in the corners of the Lobbies or Corridors. He hoped this Committee would take care that a convenient room should be found and properly furnished.
  THE EARL OF CARNARVONsaid, he thought there was reason to complain of the insufficiency of accommodation, especially on crowded nights. It was clear that little or no use was now made of the adjoining Gallery; and he thought it was a subject worthy of the attention of the Committee of the Black Rod.
  THE EARL OF REDESDALE (CHAIRMAN of COMMITTEES)said, that there
  1268
  was room in the Library, which was large enough for anyone, which could be used for the purposes mentioned.
  THE EARL OF LONGFORD, in renewing his complaint, said, that the Library was too distant; a more convenient room was required.
  THE EARL OF ROSEBERYsaid, that, as the subject of their wants was under discussion, he wished to call attention to the fact that there was a conspicuous absence of a Smoking Room in connection with the House. When the House was in a state of political excitement after the dinner hour, there was a sensible wandering of unattached Peers about the passages, asking where they could find a place to smoke. He did not know the question was coming up, or he would have prepared himself with statistics of those Members of the House who were, and were not, addicted to the fragrant vice. But whether Members of their Lordships' House were, or were not, addicted to that vice, they must feel it was most undesirable and undignified to be relegated to the hard benches of some stray Committee Room. He thought it would add much to the comfort and convenience of noble Lords if a Smoking Room could be provided, especially on nights when there were important debates.

  EGYPT (EVENTS IN THE SOUDAN)— GENERAL GORDON.—QUESTION.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURY: My Lords, I want to ask the noble Earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs a Question which is always of great interest to many persons, and of which I have given the noble Earl private Notice; I wish to know, whether any intelligence has reached the Government from General Gordon within the last few hours?
  EARL GRANVILLE: My Lords, I regret to say I must give an answer to the noble Marquess's Question in the negative.

  LUNACY LAWS.—RESOLUTION.
  THE EARL OF MILLTOWN, in rising to call attention to the observations made by Mr. Baron Huddleston in the case of "Weldon v. Winslow," and to move—

  1269
  "That in the opinion of this House the existing state of the Lunacy Laws is eminently unsatisfactory, and constitutes a serious danger to the liberty of the subject,"
  said, he would call their Lordships' attention to a summary of the facts of this ease published in The Times. He would abstain from commenting on the merits of a case which was still suit judice; but he might be permitted to quote the opinions of Judges on the present condition of our Lunacy Laws. The learned Judge he had referred to expressed his astonishment that a person could be confined in an asylum by anybody on the statement of anybody, provided certain formalities were gone through, and he also observed that it was positively shocking that such a state of things should exist. With regard to the matter itself, the Lunacy Laws of the country consisted chiefly of the Statutes 8 & 9 Vict.; c. 100, and 16 & 17 Vict., c. 96; and it was those Statutes which prescribed the manner in which a person might be committed to an asylum. Lunatics were in the eye of the law divided into two classes—paupers and non-paupers. The former class did not merely include paupers in the strict sense of the term; but a constable, or relieving officer, or overseer of the poor might arrest anyone found wandering abroad, and bring him before the Justice of the Peace, and on the certificate of one medical man, who might be entirely ignorant in such matters, and the warrant of Justices, for whose competence also there was no guarantee, such a person might be incarcerated for life. Thus any one of their Lordships might be confined for life in that manner as a pauper lunatic. This was a great hardship. But, if the lunatic was found to possess means, he was transferred to a licensed house. In the case of a non-pauper the certificate of two medical men was required. There were in this country 68,000 pauper lunatics, and 7,000 non-pauper lunatics. The state of the law on this subject was, indeed, positively startling. Any person who could obtain certificates from any two out of the 20,000 medical practitioners on the register could consign any other person to incarceration in an asylum, an hospital, or a licensed house, or to an unlicensed house, where not more than one person was taken; while no private person could obtain the release of such incarcerated individual
  1270
  without the consent either of the person who brought the incarceration about, or of the Lunacy Commissioners. Moreover, it was impossible, unless after considerable difficulty had been overcome, to see the incarcerated persons, and no criminal prosecution could be instituted for breach of the Lunacy Laws except by the Commissioners in Lunacy. All that was necessary to procure the detention of any person as a pauper lunatic was the certificate of one medical man, who might have no knowledge whatever of the patient regarding whom he gave the certificate, beyond seeing him for a few minutes be for signing the certificate, and from his decision there was practically no appeal. Therefore, with regard to the 7,000 non-pauper lunatics, it was absolutely essential that there should be two medical certificates. Cases of the grossest cruelties being perpetrated upon unhappy patients might, and often did, occur, without the slightest possibility of their being heard of by the outside world; and even when they were known the police could not interfere, because the order of the Commissioners was a sufficient warrant for everything that was done in the matter. With respect to those immured in private asylums, kept simply for profit, the whole system had been described by the noble Earl below him (the Earl of Shaftesbury) as utterly abominable and indefensible. The safeguards against wrong-doing were insufficient, and the time had come when that "abominable and indefensible" state of things should no longer be permitted, and it certainly was one which ought not to exist in this age and country. There were 7,000 of these houses, of which 1,394 were for the reception of pauper lunatics. The owners were all under the strongest inducement both to obtain and retain patients. The only safeguards were those provided by the Commissioners in Lunacy, of whom there were 11; six being paid, and five unpaid. Practically, the former did most of the work of the Commissioners. He trusted their Lordships would say that the time had come when an end would be put to the present intolerable state of things, for no one could dispute the fact that it should no longer be permitted to continue; and that in procuring its abrogation a most damning blot would be removed from the Statute Book. He would conclude by moving

  1271
  the Resolution of which he had given Notice.
  Moved to resolve, "That in the opinion of this House the existing state of the lunacy laws is eminently unsatisfactory, and constitutes a serious danger to the liberty of the subject."—(The Earl of Milltown.)
  THE EARL OF SHAFTESBURYsaid, their Lordships would at once perceive that his reply must be somewhat prolonged, so many were the details and charges made by the noble Earl who had just sat down (the Earl of Milltown). Had he (the Earl of Shaftesbury) not been on the Commission in Lunacy for more than 50 years, first as Acting Chairman, and since 1845 as Permanent Chairman, he would not have interposed; but he thought it necessary, and almost a point of duty, to explain the state of things and calm the public mind. The special case of Mrs. Weldon could not be then discussed, as the matter was still sub judice. The lady had moved for, and had obtained, a new trial; and nothing at present could be said on the question. He wished, however, to state that the affair had never come before the Commissioners—their jurisdiction did not begin until a patient had been lodged within the walls of some licensed house. Neither did he know anything of the case, except what he had gathered from the newspapers; but it certainly had struck him that, if the evidence had been no stronger on the certificate, had one been sent to their office, than that which appeared only in general rumour, he, at least, should have been disposed to set the lady at liberty. But the obiter dictum of Baron Huddleston might come under observation. It was as follows, and taken from The Standard, 19th March, 1884:—
  "Now, I say distinctly, I wish I could treat this case apart from all technicality; but I must express my astonishment that such a state of things can exist, that an order can be made by anybody on the statement of anybody, and that two gentlemen, if they have only obtained a diploma, provided they examine a patient separately, and are not related to keepers of a lunatic asylum, and that on this form being gone through, any person can be committed to a lunatic asylum. It is somewhat startling—it is positively shocking—that if a pauper, or, as Mrs. Weldon put it, a crossing-sweeper, should sign an order, and another crossing-sweeper should make a statement, and that then two medical men, who had never had a day's practice in their lives, should for a small sum of money grant their certificates, a person may be
  1272
  lodged in a private lunatic asylum, and that this order and the statement, and these certificates, are a perfect answer to any action."
  Now, he was certain that, if the learned Baron had known the law, or had read the Report of the Committee of the House of Commons printed in 1878, he would never have made such an observation. First, he spoke, after a very invidious fashion, of any two gentlemen who had obtained a diploma. His Lordship should have remembered that, by the amending Lunacy Act of 1862, the qualifications of those who were empowered to grant certificates were very stringent. It said that the term physician, surgeon, or apothecary, wherever used in the Lunacy Acts, should mean a person registered under the Medical Act of 1858; a person, therefore, of adequate professional fitness. He added, equally invidiously, that they might never have had a day's practice—possibly, though not probably—and, indeed, were practice in lunacy required as a qualification, we should not find one in 10,000 of the Medical Profession at present masters in the art. He closed by an assertion that these certificates were a perfect answer to any action. Where had the learned Baron found this law? Had lie never heard of the case tried in the Courts of "Hall v. Semple," in which Mr. Hall, a liberated patient, prosecuted Dr. Semple for negligence in framing the certificate, and obtained damages to the amount of £150? There was a similar power against the person who signed an order of admission. Three years ago, the case of "Noel v. Williams" had been tried in Court. Mr. Noel, a discharged patient, sued his brother-in-law, Mr. Williams, who had signed the order; and though Mr. Williams obtained a verdict on every point, he had to bear the expenses of his defence, a sum which amounted to not less than £3,000. As to the order he (the Earl of Shaftesbury) admitted that it was a weak point; theoretically, it was, no doubt, imperfect, though practically it had worked without any evil results. The history might be stated from his own evidence given in 1877—
  "With regard to the orders, I understood your Lordship to agree that it is in some respects undesirable that a person, a perfect stranger to a patient, should sign the order; do not you think that where there is a case, and no near relative is to be found to sign the order, it would be desirable that the order for admission

  1273
  should be signed by some public official? I believe I explained the reason of the state of the order to be this—In the year 1845, when we were framing the Bill, we were exceedingly puzzled as to what to do, so many cases had come before us of persons being suddenly seized in hotels, in lodging-houses, in mere apartments where there was nobody who knew whence they came or whither they were going; they were foreigners, Americans, medical students and law students, and all sorts and sizes of people, travellers only resting for a night, and we were obliged to leave it in that way that any person might sign the order for admission into any asylum. I have no doubt, but I do not recollect it, that we saw it was very imperfect, and that we intended to amend it, but we forgot it; and so little abuse arose upon it, and so very few bad cases came before us, that we totally forgot the matter."
  Here, again, the learned Baron had put the case most invidiously. A crossing-sweeper, he said, might be called to sign an order of admission into a lunatic asylum. Well, but there were things so utterly improbable as to amount almost to impossibilities. The Queen might make a crossing-sweeper a Duke, and give him a seat in their Lordships' House; but did any of their Lordships fear such an issue? It was a weak point, no doubt, and required amendment; but in nearly 40 years there had been no complaint, and probably not one in 500 orders had been signed by any but some relative or friend. All this was before the Committees of 1859 and 1877, and they had not taken the formidable view of the learned Baron. They had accepted many of the propositions of the Commissioners, and had added some of their own, which were then waiting for enactment. And here he might add, in reply to the assertion of the noble Earl opposite, that the order could inflict perpetual confinement; that the Commissioners could, if they saw fit, set aside the order. But let their Lordships then consider the ominous announcement of the noble Earl, that the state of the Lunacy Laws constituted a serious danger to the liberty of the subject. The two Committees of 1859 and 1877 had come to no such conclusion; on the contrary, they had rejoiced in the many and vast improvements. How could they have feared for the liberty of the subject in the face of such a statement as that he had made before them? From 1859 to 1877 there had passed through the Office of the Commissioners 185,000 certificates. Of these, some six or seven had demanded the attention of the Select Committee of the House of
  1274
  Commons; but all, upon investigation, were found to be just and good. During the same interval there had been 90,000 liberations, of which 22,000 were from licensed houses. The Returns up to the present day were equally satisfactory, a sufficient refutation of the common assertion that persons thrust into private asylums would never get out. There were, he believed, fewer cases of mistake in placing patients under care and treatment than of miscarriages of justice in Courts of Law. The noble Earl ought, in candour, to have quoted that part of the Report in which the Select Committee had spoken of the vast and beneficial progress made in the treatment of lunacy. It was as follows:—
  "The Committee cannot avoid observing here, that the jealousy with which the treatment of lunatics is watched at the present day, and the comparatively trifling nature of the abuses alleged, present a remarkable contrast to the horrible cruelty with which asylums were too frequently conducted less than half a century ago, to the apathy with which the exposure of such atrocities by successive Committees of this House was received, both by Parliament and the country, and to the difficulty with which remedial enactments were carried through the Legislature, while society viewed with indifference the probability of sane people being, in many cases, confined as lunatics, acquiesced in the treatment of lunatics as if they were outside the pale of humanity, and would have scarcely considered a proposal to substitute for chains and ill-usuage, the absence of restraint, the occupation and amusement, which may be said to be the universal characteristics of the system in this country at the present day."
  And, again, they said—
  "Assuming that the strongest cases against the present system were brought before them, allegations of mala fides were not substantiated."
  He could assure their Lordships, from long observation, dating back more than 50 years, that it would require much time, and much power of description, to set before them the state of degradation and suffering in which lunatics were found by the inquiry that commenced in 1828. Manacles and leg-locks were in universal use—many were chained to the wall, almost all in filth, disorder, and semi-starvation. He mentioned all this to show that great and good things had been done under the existing Lunacy Laws; and that some gratitude was due to God for having given the will and the power to raise them from such misery. Now, he did not mean to say that perfection had been reached—very far from it; but he urged their Lordships to pro-

  1275
  ceed with care and caution, following experience, and the discoveries of science, and not preceding them by hasty legislation, which might throw them back to the condition of half-a-century ago. But while they were considering, and jealously guarding the liberty of the subject, they must also consider the value and necessity of early treatment of insanity. On one point there was, it might be asserted, a consensus of opinion among all medical men, and, indeed, laymen, who had studied the question. Quotations of evidence to that effect might be multiplied, almost without limit. Dr. Sutherland maintained that if cases were taken at the very commencement of the disorder, full 85 per cent might be cured. Dr. Conolly stated certainly not less than 50 per cent; but the whole might be summed up in a most valuable extract from the Report of Mr. Ley, the Medical Superintendent of the great County Asylum at Prestwich, in Lancashire—
  "The total number," said Mr. Ley, speaking of a particular year, "of curable cases in the 446 admissions was 209; 113 of these have been sent out recovered, and, in all probability, 70 more will be discharged during the current year. Eighty-nine per cent of the total recoveries occurred in those who were admitted while the attack was yet recent; only 11 per cent are from those who were allowed to remain without proper treatment for a long time after the malady had declared itself. The duration of residence in these recoveries varied from four weeks to twelve years, the average duration being much augmented by the recovery of some few who had resided in the asylum above a year."
  This was his summing up, and this was the summing up of every medical man he knew.
  "These results," Mr. Ley continued, "prove what has so often been urged before, that insanity in its early stages is as curable a disease as any other in the catalogue of human disorders."
  The evidence from America was abundant and equally decided. Though he would not add anything to the law to give facilities for the shutting up of persons under the charge of insanity, so fearful was he of the possibility of error, he would do nothing to diminish them. He spoke in the interest of the patient, for whom a cure thus became comparatively easy, and in the interest of the world at large also, who had a deep concern in the abatement of that terrible disorder. The impediments were
  1276
  grave and numerous already—the reluctance of parents and relatives to see, and then believe, the first symptoms of a disturbed intellect; the serious step of consulting a medical man on the point, even though he were the physician of the family; the fear lest anything should transpire, and the public be admitted in any way to the sad secret; all these feelings postponed the final decision, until by long continuance the affection had become almost hopelessly confirmed. If, then, that repugnance existed under the present system, what would it amount to were the magistrate called in or a jury summoned, who never allowed anyone to be mad, unless he had committed some overt act whereby the disorder was proved to be nearly inveterate? Here the pauper had a great advantage over the class above him. He was taken to the asylum in the first stage of his affliction, and hence the public asylums claimed the superiority in the number of cures. Certainly, the tables showed that it was so, though, perhaps, by reason of the very early discharge, there were many cases of relapse. Too long detention after cure had been urged against the licensed houses. In former days it might have been so, but by no means always with a bad motive. He did not believe that many such cases could occur in the present day. He did not deny the difficulty—he might say the perilous difficulty—in attempting to undertake early treatment of discerning between a transient eccentricity of habit, manner, or temper and the slight symptoms of incipient mental disturbance. An error on either side was deeply injurious. The error which led to the confinement of the patient might inflict, though the patient was speedily removed, the taint of supposed insanity; but the error which denied the necessity of it might inflict a greater harm, and fix on the patient the malady for ever. It demanded almost superhuman sagacity, and showed how necessary it was to be cautious, to avoid hasty legislation, and await the further developments of that important branch of science. He feared that all the proposed enactments that tended to increase publicity, and render impossible that amount of privacy that was naturally and justifiably demanded in these delicate matters, would tend to a vastly extended system of clandestine confine-

  1277
  ment. Single patients, as they were called, were persons living alone under restraint, and committed to the charge of a doctor, a clergyman, or an attendant. Where two or more, being lunatics, resided under the same roof, the law required that a licence should be taken out; where only one, a certificate. There was great difficulty in the discovery of such cases; many of them were put out on the false plea that they were nervous, not lunatic, patients, and, therefore, not subject to the law. Evidence of their existence reached them in a variety of ways; and on such evidence, if sufficient, an application was made to the Lord Chancellor for a power to visit the house. The Commissioners, in 1862, had visited 161 single patients; but, in 1884, they had visited 449, an increase in 20 years of 288. How many more there might be he could not say, so secret were they, and so scattered over the whole country. It had been asked in the House of Commons whether it were not true that many were sent abroad? On that point the Commissioners could give no information. Now, the state of these single patients demanded the utmost thought and attention. Care and inspection, it was true, had greatly mitigated their lot; but the peculiarity of the circumstances exposed them, on the slightest relaxation of vigilance, to a return of all the evils and oppressions of former days. The condition of these sufferers had, in former days, been most deplorable; their treatment might have varied according to the position and character of those who had charge of them; but, in the great bulk of the cases, it was, beyond doubt, fearfully oppressive. He had it on the personal testimony of those who had endured the solitary incarceration. One lady asserted that she was frequently strapped down on her bed for 24 hours, while her nurse went out on a junket; a gentleman had assured him that he had endured the same, and showed the scars on his legs made by the cords wherewith he was confined. If visited, these poor people had then but small relief; they had none to bear witness to their testimony; and every statement they made was attributed by the attendant to mental wandering. Now, then, these patients were singularly unhappy; for, in houses where many patients were received, any one patient had the supporting evidence of
  1278
  his fellows; for, though the testimony of a patient in respect of himself was oftentimes very questionable, the testimony of patients in respect of others was very good, and had oftentimes been received in Courts of Justice. He had said more than once, and he repeated it, that were anyone of his own family visited by that sad affliction, he would infinitely prefer to consign him or her to a licensed establishment than to the care and treatment of a single custodian. Their Lordships would easily perceive that the temptations, the payments being oftentimes very high, and the facilities for long detention and delay of cure, must, under such a system, be very great. The last point on which the noble Earl opposite had commented was on the principle, character, and condition of private asylums, or, as they were properly denominated, licensed houses. The noble Earl had quoted some strong passages given in evidence by him (the Earl of Shaftesbury) before the Committee of the House of Commons in 1859. Now, he did not vary, in principle, one hair's breadth from what he stated at that period; and the noble Earl would have done well to have given his explanatory evidence in 1877. It was as follows:—
  "Your Lordship said, in answer to the honourable Member for Mid Surrey last Thursday, Question 11,449, that it was a notion prevailing in many minds that the principle of profit in regard to the treatment and maintenance of lunatics in private asylums should be eliminated.—Yes; it should be, if possible, no doubt. If I recollect the Question put to me by the Right Honourable Chairman, it was as to the establishment of hospitals, and I answered that I thought it would be a good principle to make the hospital system the basis of the system for the reception of patients of all kinds, but that I should be very sorry to do anything that should go to the total prohibition of licensed houses; because that, though I believed the operation of the hospital system might probably tend very much to reduce the number of licensed houses, I had strong conviction that those that survived would be of the very highest character. It is absolutely necessary we should have some licensed houses, because many have a particular taste that way, and because there is a form of treatment there that you never could have in any public asylum. You say you are ready to admit it is a notion that prevails in the minds of a great many people, but the sooner that is eliminated the better?—Yes, no doubt. That idea has grown up from evidence given to the public mind, and not from personal knowledge?—Yes; and I judge of it from conversation, and from what I read, and what I hear. I know that that feeling does prevail in the public mind, and naturally enough. I do not blame the public for it; and, indeed, I very

  1279
  much praise the public jealousy upon the subject. Perhaps your Lordship remembers the evidence you gave in 1859, in which you condemned the vicious principle of profit, as you called it, perhaps more strongly than anybody else?—Yes; I condemned it very strongly, and I condemn it nearly as strongly now; and, therefore, I want to put as great a limit upon it as I possibly can. Your Lordship has modified your views upon this subject?—Yes; to this extent—the licensed houses are in a far better condition than they were in every possible respect; but I have said, and I wish to repeat, that if we were to relax our vigilance the whole thing, in every form of establishment, would go back to its former level."
  The Committee of 1878 had reported that the permitted continuance or discontinuance of licensed houses must be left to public opinion; and it was certainly remarkable that, though there were perpetual expressions of dislike and fear of such receptacles, no steps were ever taken, or even proposed, to provide substitutes. Since 1859, hospitals had not increased in number; two had been added; but that was only apparently so, those two having come into separate existence by disconnection from the asylums of Gloucester and Nottingham. Nevertheless, the feeling of the country would continue, he doubted not, to prevail in favour of the public principle, which, when established, would require, he could assure their Lordships, no small amount of care and supervision. In illustration of what he had said, he might put before their Lordships the present state of private and hospital accommodation. The licensed houses amounted, in. all, to 97; 35 in the Metropolis, and 62 in the Provinces. The hospitals for lunatics proper were 13; for idiots, 2. The increase of licensed houses in the Metropolis since 1859 was 1; the decrease of provincial houses in same time, 15; but that might be accounted for by their greater size. The inmates in hospitals were 3,146; in licensed houses, 4,779; making a total of 7,925. Of that total, 1,398 were paupers, leaving thus, of paying patients, 6,527. He could not conclude without recalling their Lordships' attention to the vast, he might say the blessed, improvements, made in the custody and cure of the insane, an answer, in itself, to many reckless and ignorant charges. Let them only consider the present treatment of the pauper lunatic. They had often seen, no doubt, those palatial buildings, the public asylums,
  1280
  erected solely for the poor. Every mode of a physical or moral character was resorted to for the charge and cure of these unfortunate beings. Their diet, their apparel, their residential comforts, were of the best quality. Their amusements were not forgotten; and occupation, adapted to their line of life, was regarded as among the most remedial processes. The women were engaged in employments of all kinds suited to their sex, and agriculture was esteemed so beneficial to the men, that land to the extent of 200 or 300 acres was assigned to many of the provincial asylums. All was minutely and carefully visited by constituted authorities, as he would show by the statement which followed. It exhibited not the maximum, but the minimum, of the visitations—

  Public Asylums, County and Borough.

  Two or more of Committee of Visitors.

  Once at least every two months.

  Two Commissioners in Lunacy.

  Once a year at least.

  Hospital.

  Members of Committee of Management.

  Various — according to Regulations approved by Secretary of State—generally once a month.

  Two Commissioners.

  Once a year at least. Twice, of late years, by special Resolution of Board.

  Private rovincial Licensed House.

  Two Visitors at least, one to be Medical.

  Four times a year.

  One Visitor.

  Twice a year ("Single Visits").

  Two Commissioners.

  Twice a year.

  Metropolitan Licensed House.

  Two Professional Commissioners.

  Four times a year.

  Any one Commissioner.

  Twice a year.

  All this had been effected by degrees, by the results of observation, by the

  1281
  applications of experience. The contrast between 1828 and 1884 was well nigh incredible. All they required was care and caution, and that legislation should follow, and not precede, the guidance of practical science. But the appeal for such caution was met by hasty and nervous agitation. They had reason on their side, but it was encountered by nothing but expressions of fear. While of all the maladies that afflicted mankind, none were so intricate and appalling as those which disturbed his reasoning faculties, there were none upon which the public at large were more prompt to give an opinion, and enforce a remedy. He could only again and again implore the deepest and most serious consideration on such a subject. They were now in a far better state of hope for progress in scientific knowledge. A large Association of intelligent and right-hearted men had come into existence, formed of the superintendents of the great asylums and others who gave their time and their minds to that important study. They had their conferences, their meetings, their periodicals, and interchange of thought and inquiry. The services of these gentlemen were priceless—every day added something to the stock of facts, and on facts alone could treatment advance. He trusted that by investigation and patience they would be able, by God's blessing, to arrive at some alleviation, if not a full remedy, for the most mysterious affliction that had been permitted to fall on the human race.
  LORD COLERIDGEsaid, he had considerable reluctance in speaking on that occasion; but he would point out to their Lordships that the Resolution of the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Milltown) was of a somewhat abstract character, as to which it generally happened that, in that House, as well as "elsewhere," any debates arising were likely to be in some sense debates in the air. Nevertheless, because he had had a good deal of experience of cases connected with the subject, both at the Bar and on the Bench, and very much also in consequence of the speech of the noble Earl who had just spoken (the Earl of Shaftesbury), he would say a very few words. The Resolution had reference not to the profoundly interesting question of lunacy itself, but simply to the practical admininstration of the
  1282
  laws affecting the detention of persons supposed to be lunatics. It was quite true that the system administered in this country owed its origin to the noble Earl who had last sat down, and it was difficult for anyone who had not arrived at the time of life arrived at by the noble Earl to adequately comprehend the enormous improvement made by the measures of 1845 and 1853 in the system, if system it could be called, which was in existence before that time. For that great improvement, he (Lord Coleridge) believed they were mainly indebted to the noble Earl opposite, and it formed one of the many claims to gratitude which the noble Earl possessed, as regarded his contemporaries, for his various philanthropic labours. But 1853 was more than 30 years ago; and it was, therefore, no discredit to the noble Earl to say that the experience of 30 years might have taught us that in that system there was a good deal to be amended. In many cases the system, though excellent on paper, broke down in practice. In the great majority of cases it was absolutely clear to the intelligence of any ordinary person who was moderately acquainted with the matter that the individuals confined were insane; and, in another large class of cases, it was equally clear that the persons whom it was proposed to confine were not insane. Of course, where lunatics in confinement were properly treated, they would expect to find that a system on paper should be on the whole as successful as the present system was; but there was a class of cases—those cases in which there was a divided mind as to whether a person should or should not be incarcerated—it was in these cases that the real difficulty arose; and then the system, though excellent on paper, broke down. If we could, as in France, deal with a man's property by means of a family council, there would be very little to be said; but in this country no such system existed. For the reason that here it was a question of personal liberty, it was extremely important that care should be taken that the system by which persons were incarcerated should be watched with the severest jealousy. While quite agreeing with the noble Earl that Judges were fallible men, he could not help thinking that, at least, they were not averse to teaching each other that such was the

  1283
  case. Anyway, his noble Friend must have misunderstood the judgment of the learned Baron, for what he (Lord Coleridge) understood the learned Judge to mean was, that the certificates of medical practitioners were only a protection against the keepers of the asylums, and not a protection against others against whom proceedings might be taken for having set the doctors in action. The learned Baron was too well versed in the practice of his Profession to lay down, the certainly bad law that the certificates of doctors were a protection against others than the keepers of the asylums. He (Lord Coleridge) had himself known of ten or a dozen cases, at least, where the system had broken down in the sense of persons not having been confined who ought to have been incarcerated; of others who had been sent to lunatic asylums, with such a total disregard to the common forms even of decency, that it was with the greatest possible difficulty that juries had been prevented from giving verdicts which would have been wrong against those who set the law in motion. He recollected that, in a case that came before himself, it was shown that a person had been committed to a private lunatic asylum on certificates of medical men who were interested in the asylum, and that, although the man had been afterwards formally discharged under their certificates, he had been rearrested within 10 minutes afterwards on others. He had no doubt that in that case, however, the person confined was a fit subject for confinement. The jury who had tried the case were naturally indignant with a state of the law which allowed such proceedings. Then there was the question of private lunatic asylums; and he must say that his experience of these asylums was not a very happy one. He did not mean to say there were a good many amongst the keepers of private asylums, but he thought there were some in the Medical Profession, who, in all respects, were not the highest type of medical men; because it was, unfortunately, the case that medical men possessing the highest minds did not devote themselves to this particular class of disease, and, moreover, it was repugnant to such men to mix themselves up with a system which, after all was said and done, combined commerce and trade with their Profes-
  1284
  sion. In his opinion, it should never be the interest of the keepers of private lunatic asylums to retard the cure of patients. It was, unfortunately, the fact, as had been shown by the statistics referred to by the noble Earl, that the percentage of cures effected in the county lunatic asylums was far larger than that which was effected in private lunatic asylums. In the former, it was clear that it was not the interest or object of anyone to retain a patient longer than was absolutely necessary, because the maintenance of such a patient was a matter of cost, and not of profit; but that was not the case with regard to private asylums. That was not, however, a matter to be decided hastily, but as a matter of principle. Still, his painful experience had convinced him that it was not safe or wise to hold out inducements to the keepers of private lunatic asylums to retain their patients as long as they could. It had been said in reference to this class of disease, that a medical man would have just as much reason to effect a cure speedily as in the case of any other class of disease; but it must be remembered that the inducement was not the same, because such cases were not likely to be talked about among the friends of the patient. The fact, also, that few cases of abuse had been made public said little, for relatives were averse to bringing such cases forward.
  THE LORD CHANCELLORsaid, that the subject was an interesting one, though in some respects of a painful character; and if he asked their Lordships not to agree with the Motion of the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Milltown), it was not because he (the Lord Chancellor) thought that the Lunacy Laws were not capable of improvement or amendment, for such was not the opinion of the noble Earl at the head of the Lunacy Commission (the Earl of Shaftesbury), nor of those who had investigated the subject, but because he thought it would be very unwise, on a subject of so much importance and difficulty, to pass a Resolution which contained a wholesale condemnation of the existing state of the law, as being eminently unsatisfactory, together with some exaggeration with regard to the way in which the present law affected the liberty of the subject. He fully admitted that there were some things in their Lunacy Laws which were

  1285
  not as satisfactory as they might be; but he was sure that their Lordships would be most anxious to preserve an equally balanced mind in dealing with a subject of such difficulty and importance, and not run the risk of defeating a salutary object, for the sake of obviating conceivable and possible, but, in his opinion, chiefly theoretical, dangers. It must be remembered, in the first place, that the Lunacy Laws were meant for lunatics, and not for sane people; and that they must be such as might be calculated to deal wisely and properly with the lamentable fact that there were, at all times, a large number of persons requiring treatment for mental diseases. When the Commissioners made their Report in 1878 there were over 66,000 lunatics, and he feared it was probable that, at the present time, that number had considerably increased. These unhappy persons must be dealt with, not only for their own sakes, but for the sake of the community at large; they must be taken care of for their own sakes, in order that they might be cured., and might not become the prey of designing persons; and for the sake of the community, that they might not, being at large, become dangerous to other persons as well as to themselves. In these circumstances, wise and proper laws, humanely administered, were necessary as safeguards by which the safety of lunatics and of the community at large could alone be secured. Dealing with the objections which had been urged, he considered, first, the too great facilities which were said to exist for placing persons not lunatics in confinement; and he thought that it was a very exaggerated view of the case, to say that anyone in the street might demand that another person, a perfect stranger to him, should be dealt with as a lunatic, and that, upon the certificate of any two medical men, with certain exceptions, this person might be confined in an asylum. He maintained that no more risks were run in this direction than were incurred in other directions every day. Looking to the result of every public investigation under the existing law which this matter had received, and especially to the last careful examination in 1878, he thought it was not too much to say that the proportion of cases in which there was any reason to suppose that grave abuses took place was infinitesi-
  1286
  mally small, in comparison with the cases in which the law had been properly administered. It had also been said, and no doubt there was some degree of truth in the assertion, that, under the existing system, there was a temptation to persons who had an interest in doing so to retain persons in private establishments for the care of lunatics. There might be some persons who wished to shut up their relatives without sufficient grounds for doing so, and such persons might be able to find two medical practitioners to assist them, by giving certificates of lunacy. These were, undoubtedly, points in the law requiring careful attention, and as to which every safeguard, which did not go too far in the opposite direction, ought to be adopted. It should be remembered that some of the cases which had been referred to by the Lord Chief Justice were absolute breaches of the law, and no system of law, however good, would prevent all persons from committing a breach of it. It was well worth while, however, to consider whether it was not possible to amend the present law, and so diminish the possibility of dangers and risks in the abuse or evasion of it at present existing, without throwing impediments in the way of a proper administration on the subject generally. The Commissioners, in their Report of 1878, showed the system in operation in Scotland of what were called emergency certificates, and suggested an amendment in the law in that direction; and, without binding himself to those suggestions in every detail, he might say that he agreed entirely with what was there said as to the extreme importance, while providing reasonable and proper safeguards against abuse, of placing no impediments in the way of as speedy a means as possible of dealing with the first symptoms of disease. The evidence on all sides proved the absolute necessity there was in promptly dealing with the first symptoms of derangement; and then came the question, whether it was not necessary to run some risks in order not to diminish the chances of cure to a large number of persons? But, in the meantime, it must not be forgotten by their Lordships that there were important, and generally very efficient, checks and safeguards under the present system—medical certificates and visitations, both by the Lunacy Commissioners

  1287
  and by Visitors appointed by the Court of Chancery, none of whom had any personal or pecuniary interest in the cases which they had to visit and inquire into. Careful Reports were made; and in any case to which special attention was called, these Reports were followed up by further inquiries, and the consequences to medical practitioners of any malpractices with regard to dealing with lunatics were very serious indeed. He thought everything that could possibly be done was done by the visits of the Commissioners and the Visitors. He frequently received letters from unfortunate patients, in which they stated their own views of their own cases; and he always desired, where the matter justified it, special Reports to be made by the Visitors in such cases; but he was bound to say that the letters themselves generally contained internal evidence of some unsoundness of mind; and. in some cases, where they contained no such evidence, further inquiry showed that, although the unfortunate persons were capable of acting and writing like sane persons, yet, at other times, they were not only of unsound mind, but positively dangerous. As to private asylums, he had not sufficient knowledge to enable him to controvert the terms in which his noble Friend the Lord Chief Justice (Lord Coleridge) had spoken of the owners of these houses; but, at the same time, he was unable to corroborate him, for it was within his knowledge that there were some, and not a few, of these establishments which were conducted by men of the highest character and of great professional attainments. He was sure the noble Lord must feel that the subject was one of the most difficult branches of the Lunacy Laws, and it was one which was carefully considered by the Committee of 1878. The Report showed that it was a subject upon which there existed the greatest diversity of opinion, and the decision at which the Committee arrived was that the matter had better be left to the spontaneous action of the public. Some thought that these private asylums should be immediately abolished; but others thought that they met an acknowledged want. The matter was very much debated, and a Bill by Mr. Dillwyn, of a very moderate character, was passed in the other House; but it failed to pass through their Lordships'
  1288
  House. Another Member of the House of Commons afterwards moved a Resolution that all lunatics should be brought under the care of the State, and that was rejected by a large majority. Everyone must desire that lunatics should be treated as well as possible, and made as comfortable as circumstances would permit. Those lunatics who had considerable property were entitled to have their comfort provided for as far as possible. They must be put into the care of some persons, whether they kept licensed houses or not, to whom the expenditure must be entrusted. The inquiry which had been held by the Committee showed that no serious abuses existed, and that great improvements had taken place of late years in the administration of these laws. These improvements were partly begun before, and they had certainly made great progress under the administion of his noble Friend (the Earl of Shaftesbury) and his Colleagues on the Commission. He must say their Lordships owed to his noble Friend, as the Chairman of the Lunacy Commission, to his Colleagues, and to the Visitors also, their hearty thanks for their great and unceasing labours. In their humane and unquestionably disinterested administration they had the most effectual safeguards which could by any means be devised against the evils to which reference had been made. He would not dwell further on those safeguards; but the Committee of 1878 had recommended certain changes, amongst them, greater checks against possible abuses of the Lunacy Laws; and he would undertake, if the Government were still in Office next year, either that himself, or one of his Colleagues, would present to Parliament a Bill, the object of which would be the consolidation of the existing law, with such improvements as were recommended by the Commission of 1878, together with any other changes and amendments in the law which might commend themselves, after due consideration, to the Government. In the meantime, he hoped, under the circumstances, the noble Earl would not divide the House on his Motion.
  THE MARQUESS OF SALISBURYsaid, he hoped that, after the announcement just made by the noble and learned Earl upon the Woolsack, his noble Friend (the Earl of Milltown) would consider that the useful objects of his Motion

  1289
  had been attained, and would not press it to a Division. At the same time, he (the Marquess of Salisbury) felt that the debate to which the Motion had given rise was of a very valuable character, and he thought the existing Lunacy Laws would hardly survive the blow they had received from the speech of the noble and learned Lord opposite (Lord Coleridge). Everyone must admit that the subject was one of extreme difficulty, and that they could not make suggestions in any one direction without seeing evils arise in other directions; but, at the same time, all who had listened would agree that the securities for the liberty of the subject under the Lunacy Laws were very much less than were granted in any other part of the Law of England. The noble and learned Earl upon, the Woolsack said that they only made Lunacy Laws for lunatics; but the very gist of the complaint was that these laws were applied to sane people; and it was to avoid their being so applied, that their attention had been directed to the matter. There were, in these cases of illegal restraint, two classes of very obvious motives for abuses of the law. There were many people who, for the sake of property, which they wished to secure, had motives to get rid of relatives whom they might find inconvenient, and whose freedom they might desire to restrict. There were also domestic relations in which one of the parties might have very good reasons for desiring that the other party should no longer possess his or her freedom. Motives of that kind were familiar enough in fiction, and he was afraid they were not altogether strange to real life. On the other hand, there was a strong motive in the keeper of a private asylum to keep wealthy patients, who were showing a tendency to recover, on account of the rich harvest of profit which their maintenance in an asylum gave him. These were very strong and great influences. What facilities did the law give for their counteraction? As far as the initial stages of confining a lunatic were concerned, it seemed that the Law of England afforded absolutely no security for the liberty of the subject. Any person, no matter how deep an interest he might have in shutting you up, had a right to take any two doctors he could find, no matter how obscure, and get an order to shut you up. Who
  1290
  could say there was any security in the initial stages? The whole defence of the present system lay in the measures adopted at a later stage—in the inspection conducted by the Lunacy Commissioners, who had certainly acted with very great assiduity and success. He entirely agreed with the noble and learned Earl as to the great debt of gratitude they all owed to the noble Earl the Chairman of the Commission (the Earl of Shaftesbury) and those who worked with him—it was impossible to exaggerate the debt the country owed to them for having worked a very difficult and thorny part of the law in such a way that no real abuses had arisen; but he thought that the older guardians of English liberty would have been startled, if they had been told that the liberty of any free man was entirely dependent on the vigilance of a Department without any other security whatever. From the point of view of those who were concerned in maintaining freedom, the defect in the administration of these laws was in the utter absence of publicity. If the doctors and the men who signed the certificates had to go before magistrates, and, in open Court, to prove their case; or, if the inspection of the Commissioners was such a public inspection, that all who were concerned and might sympathize with the patient could be witnesses to what was done, there would undoubtedly be adequate security for that liberty which now entirely rested upon the high administrative and moral qualities shown by his noble Friend and his Colleagues. He hoped they might long continue to be at the service of the State; but, under these circumstances, no one would say that the state of the law was satisfactory when that was the sole defence for its present state, and the motive for abusing the law was sometimes so strong. It might, however, be said that if this publicity were insisted upon, the necessary result would be that the feelings of families would in many cases lead to clandestine imprisonments taking place. He considered that the noble Earl (the Earl of Milltown) had made out his case, and shown that the state of the law was not satisfactory. On the other hand, he thought the noble and learned Earl (the Lord Chancellor) had indicated the difficulties of dealing with this particular branch of the law. After his statement,

  1291
  and the promise that the law should be amended, he thought it would be a great mistake to go to Division on the Motion.
  LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYsaid, that he hoped the noble and learned Earl on the Woolsack would see his way to increasing the number of Chancery Visitors, and of extending their inspection beyond the Chancery lunatics. The emulation between them and the Commissioners' Visitors would be a good thing for the lunatics. It had been said that evening, that insanity could be more easily cured in its initial stage; that was true, but it was also true that the despair caused to the inmates of asylums, on finding themselves hopelessly locked up, often aggravated their disorder, and would increase a slight derangement into raving madness.
  THE EARL OF MILLTOWNsaid, that, in view of the proposal of the Government to introduce legislation at a future date, he would withdraw his Motion. His object had been more than gained by the very interesting discussion that had taken place, and by the promise he had obtained from the Government. He was still of opinion, however, that the arguments advanced in favour of his Motion had not been answered, and that, in fact, they were unanswerable.
  Motion (by leave of the House) withdrawn.

THE WESTERN PACIFIC—DEPORTATION OF FRENCH RECIDIVISTS.

  POSTPONEMENT OF MOTION.
  EARL GRANVILLE, in reference to a Motion on the Paper of the noble Earl (the Earl of Rosebery), who proposed to call attention to the proposed deportation of recidivists from France to the Western Pacific; and to move for Papers, said, he had already spoken to his noble Friend on the subject of the Motion of which he had given Notice. It was a subject of great importance; but he had urged on his noble Friend that, on the whole, it would be desirable that its discussion should be postponed.
  THE EARL OF ROSEBERYsaid, he tad little difficulty whatever in acceding to the request of his noble Friend to postpone his Motion for a time. At the same time, he wished to observe that there was nothing in the Motion, or in what he intended to say, that could, in
  1292
  any way, interfere with the negotiations which he understood were in progress, or wound the just susceptibilities of any neighbouring Power. He only agreed to postpone his Motion, because he thought the course suggested by the noble Earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs was the one best calculated to gain the object they all had at heart; and he did so more heartily, because he believed an early opportunity would occur when the subject could be fully and fairly discussed, and without prejudice, and when the feeling of the House might be elicited as to a proposition which could not fail to have the greatest effects.
  THE EARL OF CARNARVONsaid, the noble Earl the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs had not given the House the reasons which induced him to request his noble Friend to postpone the Motion. He hoped there was a substantial consideration for taking that course, and that it meant the very serious consideration of the subject by the Government, with a view of arriving at some definite and satisfactory understanding. He was aware that negotiations of an important character with the French Government were going on with the view of overcoming difficulties; and so long as those negotiations held out a reasonable promise of a successful issue, he should be sorry to offer any opposition. It was impossible to overrate the importance of the question—a question which, from a variety of reasons, ran the chance of not being fully appreciated in England. He trusted Her Majesty's Government were not blind to the extreme depth of feeling which existed upon the subject in Australia. If the postponement led to a regular understanding, he should not, in any degree, regret it; but, on the other hand, he hoped it was clearly understood that the matter was being entertained with a view to its settlement. He would be glad to know to what day the Motion was to be postponed?
  EARL GRANVILLEsaid, the noble Earl opposite (the Earl of Carnarvon) seemed to think he had a monopoly of the knowledge of the importance of the subject. That was not so. The Government very well knew, and were agreed, that it was one of the most important subjects with regard to the Colonies; and it was for that reason that Her Majesty's Government thought,

  1293
  in dealing with it, they ought to be as prudent as possible. On this account he desired that it should be postponed in order that Papers might be completed. The noble Earl had asked some time ago about the diplomatic Correspondence. As a matter of fact, the Papers were not complete. He had been promised an answer from the French Government, which had not yet been received. He had been looking the matter up; and he might mention that he found that, up to the 31st of March, he had, through Lord Lyons, made no fewer than eight representations to the French Government.
  THE EARL OF CARNARVONagain asked to what date the Motion was postponed?
  THE EARL OF ROSEBERY: To Monday fortnight.

EGYPT (WAR IN THE SOUDAN)—VOTE OF THANKS TO OFFICERS AND MEN OF H. M. SEA AND LAND FORCES.

  OBSERVATIONS. QUESTION.
  VISCOUNT ENFIELD: There have been some unfavourable rumours about the intention of the Government in regard to the Vote of Thanks to the Army in the Soudan; but it is generally advisable to assume that those with whom we have the honour to act are likely to act in a just and generous spirit whenever the Army and Navy are concerned. Considering the deep admiration, and respect we all entertain for the gallant services of the Army and Navy, it would be presumptuous on my part to allude to the campaign which has just passed—a campaign which has brought out the conspicuous gallantry of our troops. I will, therefore, content my self with asking Her Majesty's Government, If they can state when they propose moving a Vote of Thanks to the officers and men of Her Majesty's Sea and Land Forces who had taken so distinguished a part in the recent campaign near Suakin?
  LORD STANLEY OF ALDERLEYsaid, that it had always been understood that the noble Viscount (Viscount Enfield) was a firm supporter of Her Majesty's Ministers; and he (Lord Stanley of Alderley) was at a loss to understand why he put this Question, which might be embarrassing to them. The noble Viscount seemed to make no distinction between hostilities carried on in defence
  1294
  of the safety or honour of the country, and these at Suakin, for which there was no justification or reason. Did the noble Viscount ask for a Vote of Thanks for Admiral Hewett for his Proclamation, which had brought so much discredit on the country? He (Lord Stanley of Alderley) felt bound to say that Admiral Hewett had shown all the frankness of the Naval Profession in withdrawing this Proclamation, and in undoing the mischief he had done, as far as that was possible. No reason had been given for these hostilities. He would not do the Government the injustice to suppose that they were for show-off, and to prove that our troops, with all the resources of civilization, could beat men armed with rudimentary weapons, such as swords and spears. It was not to open the road to Berber, since, after these victories, the Government had refused to send on any Cavalry to Berber. It must have been to seize upon Osman Digna. Osman Digna had written a remarkable letter, which showed that he had much knowledge of the internal state of England, and of the fact that a leading portion of the Government had adopted and supported an Atheist openly professing Atheism on all occasions. He would quote the judgment of Milton on similar hostilities. Milton speaks of the Syrian King—
  "Who, to surprise one man, assassin-like, had levied war, War unproclaimed."
  He would always object to Votes of Thanks for hostilities that were piratical.
  THE EARL OF MORLEY: In reply to the noble Lord opposite (Lord Stanley of Alderley), I confess I do not see what bearing his remarks have upon the conduct of the troops. In respect to the Question put by my noble Friend behind me (Viscount Enfield), I have to say that Her Majesty's Government have most carefully inquired into and considered the precedents bearing on the point. The decision, whether the Thanks of Parliament should be given, or not, to troops engaged in military operations, does not appear to have depended entirely either on the success of the campaign, or on the severity of the fighting which has occurred. I can assure your Lordships that Her Majesty's Government, and, I am sure, Parliament also, most entirely appreciate the ability displayed by both General Graham and

  1295
  Admiral Hewett in the conduct of the recent operations, and also the great courage and conspicuous gallantry displayed by the troops themselves, and also the sailors who co-operated with them under circumstances which were quite sufficient to try the steadiness and gallantry of any troops. Parliament will also thoroughly appreciate the success which has attended both the ability of the Commanders and the gallantry of the troops. It will be a subject of great regret if the answer I am about to give were to imply any doubt or hesitation on that point; but the Government feel that to move a Vote of Thanks to those engaged in an undertaking which cannot be considered an independent operation, but rather as an incident in the Occupation of Egypt, would give an extension to the practice of voting Thanks which the Government do not think desirable. I may add that the question of the rewards to be conferred on the officers and men engaged is still under the consideration of the military authorities, and the result will shortly be announced.

  MARRIAGES LEGALIZATION BILL [H.L.]
  A Bill to remove doubts as to the effect of certain irregularities on the validity of marriages—Was presented by The LORD CHANCELLOR; read 1a. (No. 76.)
  House adjourned at half past Seven o'clock, till To-morrow, a quarter past Ten o'clock