, the Chairman of the Clitheroe Election Cammittee, appeared at the bar and reported, that the Committee had unanimously determined that Matthew Wilson, Esq., was not duly elected a Burgess to serve in the present Parliament for the Borough of Clitheroe; that the last Election for the said Borough was a void Election; and that the Committee had unanimously agreed, that the said Matthew Wilson, Esq., was, by his agents, guilty of bribery and treating, at the last Election for the Borough of Clitheroe, but that it was not proved that such bribery and treating had been committed with the consent or knowledge of the said Matthew Wilson, Esq. The Committee also reported that it appeared that extensive and systematic treating, together with other corrupt and illegal practices, prevailed at the last Election for the said Borough; that violent and tumultuous proceedings appear to have taken place at the said Election, and that hired bands of men, armed with sticks and bludgeons, were introduced into the said Borough for purposes of undue influence and intimidation.

, the Chairman of the Frome Election Committee, appeared at the bar and reported that the Committee had determined that Colonel the Hon. Robert Edward Boyle, having at the time of the last Election held an office of profit under the Crown, created since the 25th day of October, 1705, is not duly elected a Burgess to serve in this present Parliament for the Borough of Frome; that the Election for the Borough of Frome is a void Election.

, the Chairman of the Bridgenorth Election Committee, appeared at the bar and reported that the Committee had determined that Henry Whitmore, Esq., is duly elected a Burgess to serve in this present Parliament for the Borough of Bridgenorth; that Sir Robert Pigot, Bart., is not duly elected a Burgess to serve in this present Parliament for the Borough of Bridgenorth; that the last Election for the said Borough is a void Election, so far as regards the ret urn of the said Sir Robert Pigot; that Sir Robert Pigot was, by his agents, guilty of bribery at the last Election; that it was proved to the Committee that Joseph Mason was bribed with the payment of 10l., but that it was not proved that such bribery was committed with the knowledge or consent of Sir Robert Pigot; that the Committee have ordered that all costs and expenses incurred by reason of such unfounded allegations shall be paid by the petitioners and their sureties to the said Henry Whitmore, Esq.

said, he begged to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer what course he proposed to pursue with regard to loans issuable by the Exchequer Loan Commissioners Act, 57 Geo. III., cap. 24; also, whether any portion of the 633,000l!. which, from a return from these Commissioners, appears to be the amount of interest on the repayment of loans estimated as likely to accrue in 1852, will be applied to the liquidation of the public debt, in the event of a diminution or cessation of such loans?

said, that the question which had been put by the hon. Gentleman divided itself into two parts; the latter part of which, perhaps, he had better answer first. It was, "whether any portion of the 633,000l. which, by a return from these Commissioners, appears to be the amount of interest on, and repayment of, loans estimated as likely to accrue in 1852, will be applied to the liquidation of the public debt in the event of a diminution or cessation of such loans?" And the former part was, "what course the Government proposed to pursue generally on the subject of loans under the Exchequer Loan Fund Act?" In the first place, with regard to the application of the sum of 633,000Z., and of all the repayments of the Exchequer Loan Fund, as they might come in, the application of those sums was already provided for by Statute, and would go forward, independently of any intervention of that House, in the regular course. There was likewise a provision by Statute for the issue, subject to the discretion of the Government, of the sum of 75,000l. per quarter for the purposes of the Exchequer Loan Fund; and the idea upon which that sum was fixed was that it would balance the average repayments. The provision made, therefore, by law at present was this: that there was power to issue 300,000l. annually in four quarterly payments of 75,000l. each, for the purpose of new advances to be made by the Exchequer Loan Fund Commissioners; and there was also a provision for carrying the repayments of the Commissioners as they came into the account of Ways and Means for the year. The repayments were going on without any intervention on the part of the Government. But at the close of the last quarter, on examining the state of the account, it appeared that the coming demands on the fund were not likely to absorb the whole amount standing to its credit, and consequently he thought it his duty to stop the payment of the sum of 75,000l., which would have been carried to the credit of the fund for the last quarter. That was the only step of any kind that had been taken since he came into office with regard to the actual distribution of the fund. With regard to the general question, as to what course the Government proposed to take on the subject of the Exchequer Loan Fund, the course which he had pursued was this. It did not appear to him that the papers on the table of the House contained information sufficiently full and distinct to enable the House to form a satisfactory and final judgment on the expediency of continuing the system of the Exchequer Loan Fund; or, on the other hand, of abolishing it, as was proposed by the right hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Disraeli). The House was aware that the Exchequer Loan Fund Commission had been in the habit of discharging by one and the same machinery very different functions. It had been, firstly, in the habit of making loans on its own discretion exclusively, after inquiry into the merits of the applications submitted; and, secondly, it had also been used by Parliament as an organ for issuing money under compulsion for purposes which had been called loans, but which had rather been in the nature of gifts obtained under false pretences. It had likewise been in the habit of issuing money in various modes intermediate between those two, sometimes under positive order from the Treasury, and sometimes upon the recommendation of the Treasury. And, again, it had been in the habit of issuing money from special funds appropriated for particular purposes. Now, what he had desired to be done, and what he hoped soon would be accomplished, was this: that all the transactions under each of those heads should be carefully separated the one from the other; that a balance sheet should be prepared under each of those heads, in order that they might have the means of seeing what the Commissioners had done, whether as the organ of Parliament, or as the servants of the Treasury, or whether upon their own free discretion, or in any other capacity; and when they had obtained those returns, they would be able to see exactly the results of the transactions of the Exchequer Loan Fund up to the present time under each head. Then, he hoped the hon. Gentleman would agree with him that Parliament and the Government would be in a condition to form a judgment upon the question whether it was expedient that the system of loans by the Exchequer Loan Fund Commissioners should or should not be continued.

said, he wished to ask a question of the hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary for the Colonies, of which he had not given notice, and therefore, if it was inconvenient to answer it now, he would postpone it till to-morrow. But his question was with reference to the intelligence brought by the Indiana today from the seat of war in South Africa. He had lately put a question to the hon. Gentleman relating to the advance of troops against a fresh tribe, a very warlike one; and the hon. Gentleman informed him that the troops had advanced to their territory, but that he did not think it was likely to lead to hostilities. Now, he wished to know if there was any further information that the hon. Gentleman could communicate to the House which would in any way give a more satisfactory account of the hostilities than the one that had appeared in the public papers of that day; and if he would also inform the House whether the extension of the war into a fresh territory was intended to be progressive, and whether the constitution which he had understood from the hon. Gentleman was certainly to go out by the next mail, would leave the conduct of the war and the defence of the frontier, the recapture of cattle, and the retaliation of depredations, to the Colony itself to maintain?

, in reply, said, that though the hon. Member had not given him any notice of his intention, yet, anticipating that he might ask some such question, he had taken the precaution of looking at General Cathcart's despatches received that morning. The hon. Member was aware that General Cathcart went into the Orange River territory for the purpose of compelling Moshesh to pay a fine which had been imposed on him in the early part of last year by the two Assistant Commissioners (Major Hogg and Mr. Owen), in consequence of robberies of cattle and horses committed by his people. General Cathcart proceeded into the territory,, and on the 13th of December called on Moshesh to pay a certain fine, which Moshesh objected to do. On the non-payment of the fine, an advance took place on the part of our troops, which terminated in an encounter, the particulars of which were accurately published in the papers of that morning. The result of that encounter, although attended with considerable loss of life to the Queen's troops, and to the 12th Lancers in particular, was the complete submission of the chief Moshesh; and, as a proof of the sincerity of his submission and of its reality, he (Mr. Peel) might mention, that the week afterwards one of the Assistant Commissioners (Mr. Owen) had an interview with that chief, who assisted him in burying the officers and soldiers killed on that occasion. General Cathcart had returned to Graham's Town; and he would read what that officer said with regard to the state of the territory in question, and the prospect of peace being re-established along the whole frontier. In a despatch from General Cathcart, dated Graham's Town, Jan. 13th, he wrote—

"The Orange River Territory is at peace, as well as the whole extent of the frontier, 400 miles of which I have traversed on my return."

And, referring to certain terms he had offered to the chief Kreili beyond the Kei, General Cathcart added—

"These I have no doubt he will willingly subscribe to, and I think they will complete the final accomplishment of the task imposed on me when I assumed this command: that of the reduction of the rebellious Kafirs and Hottentots, their complete submission, and the restoration of permanent peace and security to the colonial frontiers."

said, in presenting a petition from Todmorden, complaining of the evasion of the provisions of the Factory Act by certain master manufacturers, he would avail himself of that opportunity to put to the noble Lord the Secretary of State for the Home Department the question of which he had given notice. The House would remember that they had been told on the passing of the Compromise Act, as it was called, in 1850, that that Act would be received by the manufacturers as a final settlement of the question, and that its provisions would be loyally and cheerfully carried out by them. He regretted, however, to see from the last half-yearly Report of the Factory Inspectors that the evasion of the law in some parts of Lancashire and Yorkshire had lately been most systematic; and, he regretted to add, with perfect impunity. Mr. Horner, in his Report, said—

"I regret to say that the offence of working young persons and women for a greater number of hours daily than is legal, long complained of, still prevails to a considerable extent in some parts of my district. In my last two reports I have dwelt at some length on this subject—on the wilful commission of the fraud by persons of large property—on the mean contrivances to which they have recourse in order to elude detection—and the obstacles which the Inspectors meet with, from the imperfect provisions of the Act, in their endeavours to put down an evil so great as a systematic violation of the law—one so justly complained of by millowners who are strictly obeying the Act. All that I have stated in these Reports is equally applicable to the last half-year and to the present time."

rose to order, because, if this question of the noble Lord's was to merge into a statement of the case, he should ask permission to be allowed to answer it. He had a strong opinion upon this subject, and he did not think it fair that a statement of this kind should be made without any opportunity of a reply being presented.

said, he understood the noble Lord to be only reading an extract from a report.

said, he was merely clearing the way so as to make the question intelligible. The extract he was about to read was this:—

"This illegal working of young persons and women will never be effectually put down without an amending Act, which shall take away the facilities for evading detection and punishment now existing, which shall make the occupier of the factory alone responsible, and which shall, moreover, inflict, as the lowest penalty, such a sum as will at least considerably diminish the gain by fraudulent working; for the shame of a prosecution appears to be no restraint on such men."

In a newspaper published in Manchester only on Saturday last, no less than seven distinct firms were reported as being charged with and convicted of evading the provisions of this Act. He begged, therefore, to ask the noble Lord the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether it was the intention of Her Majesty's Government to introduce any measure, or to take any steps whatever, for the preventing of such evasions for the future? On the part of the working people it was evident that these attempts to evade the provisions of the Act would lead to—["Order, order!"]

said, the Government would see that the present Act was duly enforced; and, if it should appear that there were difficulties in the way which prevented the proper execution of the laws, it would be their duty then to consider whether, perhaps, any and what amendment of that Act could be effected.

said, that in accordance with the notice he had given, he begged to ask the hon. and learned Attorney General whether the exposition of the law with regard to the duty of soldiers in riots or on emergencies, as set forth by Judge Perrin in his charge to the grand jury of the county of Clare on the subject of the Six-mile Bridge affair, was really the law, and whether it was in accordance with the opinions of Her Majesty's legal advisers?

said, that in answer to the question which the noble Lord bad done him the honour to put to him, he had only to say that he thought it was the duty of the Attorney General, as well as of other members of the profession to which he belonged, to take the law as it came from the Judges; and he hoped, therefore, the noble Lord would not think him inconsistent if he declined to pass any judgment upon the law as it fell from the learned Judge on the occasion referred to.

then gave notice that on Friday, March 4, on the Motion that the House go into Committee of Supply, he would move—"First, that the exposition of the law as set forth by Judge Perrin, with regard to the duty of soldiers employed for the suppression of riots, or on emergencies, is in direct contradiction to the instructions contained in Her Majesty's regulations for the Army, and antagonistic to the principles laid down in the Mutiny Act; second, that in the opinion of this House the soldiers of the 31st Regiment were fully justified in their conduct on the occasion of the riot at Six-mile Bridge, and are entitled to commendation for the discipline and forbearance they showed on that occasion."

said, in pursuance of notice he had given, he would now move for a Select Committee to inquire into the circumstances under which the petitions against the return of the sitting Members for the city of Norwich have been withdrawn; and that the petitions presented to this House upon the 24th day of February be referred to the said Committee.

said, he did not mean to oppose the Motion, but he wished to state, as one of the Members who had been petitioned against, that he had no acquaintance whatever with Mr. Brown, the Parliamentary agent, and was ignorant of the motives which had induced him to withdraw the petition; but he begged to state that no offer of a compromise was ever made to him, and that, had such an offer been made, it would have been most distinctly rejected.

said, he wished to call the attention of the House to one or two points respecting the administration of the Army, previous to Mr. Speaker leaving the Chair. In 1837 a Committee was appointed to consider the various Naval and Military sinecures, and the general pay to colonels of regiments, with a view, if possible, of putting an end to the outcries then being raised against colonels of regiments being tailors, and curtailing the vestments of the soldiers for their own profit. That Committee consisted of a great portion of the members of the present Government, and they recommended that the allowances to colonels of regiments of the line should not be less than 1,000l. But they made a distinction. They agreed that the regiment held by the Duke of Wellington should, in consideration of the great and glorious services rendered by his Grace, be exempt from the alteration proposed by them, and that no change should be made in the emoluments attaching to the colonelcy of the Grenadier Guards, so long as the Duke should hold the command. Agreeably to that recommendation, an exception was made in the case of that regiment and of the Coldstream and Fusileer Guards, and it was agreed that the colonelcies of those regiments should he retained as the reward of long and distinguished services. He complained, however, that the late Government had not attended to the recommendation of that Committee on the demise of the Duke of Wellington, but had conferred the command of the Grenadier and Fusileer regi- ments—the first valued at 3,000l., and the other at 2,000l. yearly—upon Prince Albert and the Duke of Cambridge respectively, without any reduction of the allowances. Now, although he was willing to give all possible credit to Prince Albert, and to acknowledge that he filled the position he now held with credit to himself and advantage to the country, he thought the appointment of his Royal Highness and of the Duke of Cambridge was an interference with the recommendations of the Committee, and that he was warranted, therefore, as a member of that Committee, and the person who had moved for it, to call the attention of Her Majesty's Ministers and the House to a proceeding which was an infraction of the recommendations of that Committee. The right hon. Member for Coventry (Mr. Ellice) well recollected those recommendations, and he appealed to the right hon. Gentleman to state his opinion of them. He begged also to call the attention of the Government to another important point. No one was more anxious than himself to produce efficiency in the Army, and he had therefore for many years pressed upon the House the advisability of removing an anomaly which existed in this country as regarded the civil administration of the Army. In 1837 a Commission was appointed, of which Earl Grey, then Lord Howick, the noble Lord the Member for Tiverton (Viscount Palmerston), the noble Lord the Member for the City of London (Lord John Russell), and Sir John Hobhouse, were members; and they recommended, in page 9 of their Report—

"1. That the greater part of the authority, with reference to the Army, which at present belongs to the Secretaries of State, should, for the future, be vested in the Secretary at War. 2. An alteration should be made in the form of the appointment of the Secretary at War:—First, that he should in future be always a member of the Cabinet, Second, that he should be the Minister by whom the advice of the Cabinet, as to the amount of the military establishments, should be laid before the King. Third, that he should be the person to consider and act on all points with the Commander-in-Chief on behalf of the Administration, and to be immediately responsible to Parliament for all the measures of the Government with reference to the Army. Fourth, that he should assume all the merely formal duties relating to the subject now performed by the Secretaries of State, such as the preparing and countersigning of military commissions, and the issuing of orders for the delivery of arms to the troops."

And at page 10 of the Report:—

"3. The Secretary of State, to whom the civil administration of our numerous colonies, with all their complicated interests, is intrusted, cannot possibly give the attention to the subject (amount and distribution of the Army) which it requires. 4. The Secretary at War, by whom the Army Estimates are now moved in the House of Commons, seems to us to be the person to whom the important duty of watching over the whole military administration of the country should properly be committed. 5. To give him (the Secretary at War) a direct control over those large branches of business relating to the military service of the country which are now managed by the Board of Ordnance and by the Commissariat department of the Treasury. 6. With respect to the Ordnance, we think this might best be accomplished by dividing the civil from the military duties of that department. First. The latter (the military duties) should be left, as at present, in charge of the Master General, who should exercise the same authority he now has in all matters of discipline, promotion, &c, subject only to the general orders of the Government, to be conveyed to him, as we have already explained, by the Secretary at War, instead of by the Secretary of State. Second. He should also retain under his immediate orders the Inspector General of Fortifications, and be charged with the duty of superintending the execution of all military works. 7. The civil business, on the other hand, should be brought under the more direct control of the Secretary at War, by making the board officers, by whom it is more immediately conducted, subordinate to him instead of the Master General and Board of Ordnance; so that their separate divisions of the business would become branches of the War Office, and the whole expenditure connected therewith would be provided for in the general Army estimates."

He wished to see a Minister of War who should be responsible for all matters connected with war and the defence of the country. The Ordnance expenditure amounted to no less than 3,000,000l per annum, and there would be both a reduction of expense and an increase of efficiency in bringing the present establishment in Pall-mall under the control of the Horse Guards. He thought it very objectionable that the Ordnance should be kept separate from the rest of the Army, and also that the function of deciding the number of troops to be voted by Parliament should be committed to the Secretary for the Colonies, instead of the Secretary at War. All these arrangements tended to inefficiency and expense. The Secretary for the Colonies had the charge of forty-two dependencies, any one of which would be sufficient to occupy the time and attention of an ordinary man, and he could not possibly have the leisure requisite for attending to the administration of the Army. He considered that the management of the Army wanted an entire change—responsibility, economy, concentration, and individual action, and that by judicious alterations an enormous saving of expense might be effected. He wished to know whether the Government meant to carry out the recommendations of the Committee, or whether they were prepared with any other suggestions on the subject?

said, in reference to the observations which his hon. Friend made on the question of fusing the Ordnance and Army administrations into one department, he would recall to the hon. Member's recollection that though a Committee had made recommendations tending' to that result, and though during the several years that had elapsed Members of that Committee, whose opinions were favourable to it and carried great weight with the House, had filled various posts in the Government, and yet had not attempted to enforce the views recommended by that Committee, as also by the Commission appointed to inquire into the administration of the Army. He believed that, with the experience they had since acquired, their views had been modified in respect to the expediency of carrying out the recommendations thus made. Supposing that a separate Ministry for the War Department solely were constituted, as his hon. Friend wished, he asked how the Minister could decide what amount of military force would be requisite either for this country or the Colonies, without first of all consulting the two Secretaries of State for the Home and Colonial Departments? That seemed to be rather a question of form, therefore, than substance. His hon. Friend differed essentially from the recommendations of the Committee in one particular, because he thought that the military administration both of the Army and Ordnance should be placed in the same hands, whereas the recommendations of the Committee applied to the civil branch of the administration only. He could not give his hon. Friend any assurance under these circumstances that the Government intended to carry out the recommendations of the Committee as given in their report: for whenever the subject came to be dealt with, those recommendations would require careful revision, and the whole subject to be reconsidered.

said, he wished to say, as his hon. Friend the Member for Montrose (Mr. Hume) had appealed to him, that when he accepted the office of Secretary at War, he had done so only on con-condition that a Committee should be appointed to inquire into all the emoluments of the Army. One of the reasons why he moved for that Committee was, that his hon. Friend (Mr. Hume), thelate Sir Henry Parnell, and other hon. Gentlemen, used to keep them four or five weeks discussing almost every item of the Estimates, stating from other official sources very different facts from those given by the persons in authority with reference to the accounts of Army expenditure. It did so happen, and it was a very great gratification to him, that during the whole of the sittings of that Committee, composed as it was of the most eminent Members on both sides of the House, the late Sir Robert Peel, the noble Lord the Member for London (Lord John Russell), the present Viscount Hardinge, and other important personages, it was not his misfortune to differ from his hon. Friend the Member for Montrose in respect to any of the questions which were submitted to the decision of the Committee. It was owing to the inquiries made by the Committee that they had been since enabled to pass the Army Estimates in a single night's discussion. In reference to the regiments of Guards, the Committee had recommended that the emoluments of the Duke of Wellington, as colonel of the Grenadier Guards, amounting to between 4.000l and 5.000l., should not be interfered with during the Duke's lifetime. It was also agreed that the allowance for the colonelcies of the three regiments of foot guards should be fixed at 3,000l. for the Grenadier Guards, and 2,000l. for each of the other two, and that they should be reserved as rewards to be given for distinguished military services. To that proposition he (Mr. Ellice) obtained his hon. Friend's vote, and the unanimous vote of the Committee. He could not sit down without expressing his great regret at the statement just made by his right hon. Friend the Secretary at War. He knew as well as his right hon. Friend, the great difficulty of approaching the question of amalgamation of the Army and Ordnance administrations; but he told the House that, unless the question was seriously taken up, and some measures adopted which would ensure responsible control over the Army expenditure in its various branches, the House need not expect to ensure economy in the future administration of the Army. He had sat last year on a Committee for Inquiry into the Commissariat, and he found that there was an immense expenditure intrusted to the civil officers of the two branches of the Ordnance and Commissariat. It appeared that the Ordnance officers in some colonies were doing the same duty as the Commissariat, and he believed that one officer might do the work of both departments. He could not understand why this country should be called upon to pay the expense of police in Canada; for no other purpose could small bodies of soldiers be kept up throughout that country. There was a great disposition on the part of the witnesses connected with the Army, Navy, Ordnance, or Commissariat, to defend their profession, and especially to defend the particular situations they held. But the duty of that House was to take care that the public service was carried on with as few employés as possible. But when they were told that no steps were to be taken to carry out the recommendations of the Committees, and that it would be impossible for the Secretary at War to know what the relative force at home and abroad ought to be, surely that individual, being a Member of the Cabinet, might concert with the Secretaries for the Home Department and the Colonies as to the forces necessary, and then it would be in his power to exercise a general control over the expenditure of the forces, which was all that he was wanted to do. But, if nothing was to be done to centralise or control the expenditure, it made him despair to find we were to go on without the least reform or additional economy in matters in which savings could be made. How was it possible for the Secretary for the Colonies to attend to the constitutional affairs of the Colonies, and at the same time to control their military expenditure? He had so much to do that he could not possibly find time for such matters.

said, he was afraid that some mistake might arise if he did not say a few words on what had fallen from his right hon. Friend. It seemed to him that the observations of his right hon. Friend the Secretary at War had not been altogether correctly apprehended by the right hon. Gentleman who had just sat down. His right hon. Friend had no intention whatever of saying that nothing whatever should be done with regard to the great question of consolidating the Army and Ordnance departments. All that his right hon. Friend said was, that it behoved the Government to observe a due and prudent reserve in any determination which they might adopt with reference to the subject. The right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Ellice), however, had travelled into a much larger subject—to one, which he agreed with him, was of vital importance. In his (Mr. Gladstone's) opinion, the main and principal hope which justified the House in looking forward to a reduction in the military expenditure was to he found in the course which our colonial policy might take. Certainly, he should be sorry at that, almost the first moment of their accession to office, if it went forth that Her Majesty's Government felt any indifference on such a subject; and he, therefore, should beg to assure his right hon. Friend that no such indifference existed. But his right hon. Friend would agree with him that it was impossible for those who acceded to office only at the commencement of January to have so framed the Ordnance Estimates of this year as to give adequate consideration to the subject: it was quite impossible to have made the necessary communication with the Colonies. But in the principle? which the right hon. Member for Coventry (Mr. Ellice) laid down, he most heartily concurred, though none did so more heartily than those who were charged with the destinies of our Colonial Empire. It was impossible, however, for his noble Friend the Secretary for the Colonies to take extensive measures with regard to the military posts in Canada until he had an opportunity of communicating with the Governor General, and it was impossible to put the Governor General in a condition to examine into a question so important in time to embody the result in the Estimates then upon the table of the House. One little crumb of comfort, however, he could give his right hon. Friend with regard to Canada; and, though the change effected was perhaps of not much value as far as regarded the amount of money in question, still it was important in principle. The House and his right hon. Friend were very conversant with the name of the Rideau Canal. It was very well known that enormous sums of British money were expended in its construction; in fact, it had swallowed up more hundreds of thousands of pounds than he cared to name, and without any commensurate benefit to the Home Treasury. Her Majesty's Government, however, were of opinion that the outlay on this account should be put an end to, and a correspondence on the subject had taken place between the Home and Colonial Government. The Colonial Government pleaded poverty, and though Her Majesty's Government did not return exactly a similar plea, they formed a very strong conviction that things ought to come to an issue. Demands had come from Canada on account of the repairs of certain locks on the Rideau Canal, and it was proposed to provide for them in the Ordnance Estimates for the year; but the Government, holding in mind the determination which had been formed, entirely declined to submit the matter to Parliament, and the charge was therefore struck out of the Estimates. The vote was of no great consequence—a few thousands; but it showed the view which the Government were inclined to take of the necessity of reducing our colonial expenditure as much as possible. He hoped his right hon. Friend would hold this to be indicative of what the feelings of Her Majesty's Government were on the subject he had referred to. There was, however, another portion of the Colonial Empire with regard to which a similar determination had been come—namely, with respect to the West India Islands. It appeared to the Government that nothing could be more ridiculous in a military point of view, or nothing could be more unnecessary in a social point of view, than the maintenance of a vast number of small Ordnance establishments in these islands. His noble Friend the Secretary for the Colonies had, therefore, determined to concentrate the Ordnance establishments in the principal West India colonies. He was unable to say that many of those charges were erased from the Estimates of the present year, but he was in a position to state that his noble Friend had come to the conclusion to diminish the number of those establishments. He hoped his right hon. Friend would feel satisfied with the explanations which he had given.

said, he only wished to observe, in reply, that he was the last person in the world to impugn the good intentions of Her Majesty's Ministers; and that if the observations of his right hon. Friend the Secretary at War had been as full and explanatory as those of the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, he should not have felt it necessary to have said anything.

said, he trusted he should be able to satisfy the Committee that the expenditure to be provided for in the present Estimates, though in excess of the previous year, could not be reduced without detriment to the public service. He might observe, that almost every recommendation made by the Committee of 1849 had been carried out in reference to the department. The duties of storekeeper and barrack-master had been combined in several additional instances, especially in the West India and other colonies; and, as the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer had just announced, it was the intention of the Government still further to reduce the colonial expenditure. With regard to stores, the Committee's recommendation had also been strictly followed, and with the most satisfactory results. The first vote was 807,507l. for pay, allowances, and contingencies for 17,598 officers, non-commissioned officers, and men composing the several Ordnance military corps. This vote was 12,642l. less than the vote of last year. The second vote was 373,217l. for commissariat and barrack supplies for Her Majesty's forces, great coats for the Army, clothing for the militia, &c. The increase in the number of the artillery had been made at the least possible expense: no new commissioned officers had been appointed; the additional strength which had been given to that arm of the service being confined to men and non-commissioned officers. With regard to the state of the artillery, it had never been more effective than at present; and some of the eminent foreign officers who had visited this country on the occasion of the Duke of Wellington's funeral, had, since their return home, expressed their high opinion of the organisation of our artillery, and of its merits as an effective force. He might add, that those improvements to which his right hon. Friend the Secretary at War had alluded on Friday night as having been carried out in regard to the general Army, had been adopted in the artillery also. The schools, which had been added to considerably, were flourishing; and, besides the ordinary schools, there was one at Woolwich in which geometry, mensuration, the theoretical knowledge of fortifications, and other branches of instruction connected with the artillery service, were taught. There were at the present time twenty-four non-commissioned officers in regular attendance at that school. There were also similar schools established in the Colonial and other stations. There were libraries at many of those stations, and at Woolwich. In the Woolwich library for non-commissioned officers there were 3,399 volumes, and it had 426 subscribers, the public contributing only 30l. a year to- wards it, the subscriptions paying the rest of the expense. In the gunners' library there were 4,000 volumes; the number of subscribers was 898, and the cost to the public only 41l. It was gratifying to know that there had been a considerable improvement within the last few years in the health of this force. In 1849–50 the mortality was at the rate of 17¼ in the 1,000. In 1850–51 it was 16| in the 1,000, and in the last year it was only 12½ to the 1,000. With regard to punishment, there had been a considerable diminution, he was happy to say, in the number of instances in which corporal punishment had been inflicted during the last two years. In 1849 the number of corporal punishments had been twenty-three, the average strength of the force being 10,000; in 1850 the number was only nine, the average strength being about 11,000; in 1851 it wag also nine, the strength being more than 11,000; and in 1852 the number was reduced to five, the average strength being 12,000 men. In the latter half of that year there had been no case of corporal punishment in the artillery in Great Britain. There was one point in regard to the practical education of the artillery, upon which, probably, the Committee might consider there was some reason to complain—that was, the absence of a sufficient practice ground at Woolwich. It was true there were practice grounds at Shoeburyness and Sheerness; but they could not be used by more than two companies each, and it was therefore impossible to give the men that practice which was necessary for their perfect efficiency. He adverted to this in order to afford the Committee an opportunity of expressing an opinion on the subject. In this vote there was an increase of 71,528l. over the vote of last year, which was occasioned by the forage of 1,000 extra horses, the increased price of rations, two months' forage for Ireland, which last year was provided for by the Commissariat department, the clothing for the militia, and an additional charge for great coats to make up the stock, which at the commencement of the year was lower than necessary. In the next vote, for Salaries and Contingencies of the Ordnance Office, there was a decrease of 1,611l., but it was occasioned chiefly by the transference of certain parts of that establishment to the Tower. In the fifth vote, Establishments at Home and in the Colonies, there was an excess over the amount granted last year of 3,344l., a portion of which was occasioned by the transfer of certain charges from other departments. For the establishments at home 4,644l. more was required than in the last year; but 1,300l. less would suffice for the establishments abroad, the increase at home being made up by the new charges for the establishment of the Tower. There was an extra charge for storekeepers consequent upon the establishment of a convict establishment at Perth, in Western Australia, which had rendered a military establishment necessary; but there was a reduction in the charge for barrack masters in Canada, Jamaica, Halifax, and Hobart Town. The next vote was for Wages, and the amount was 141,437l., while that of last year was but 124,346l., the excess being 17,091l., which arose principally from additional works at the various manufactories at Woolwich, the charge for which was over 19,000l. That amount, however, was reduced by about 2,000l. in the colonial charge, arising principally from the decision to which the Government had come, and to which his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer had alluded, namely, to at once terminate the expenditure, as far as this country was concerned, on account of the Rideau Canal. The next vote was for Stores; but before proceeding to that he would shortly refer to the course now pursued by the Ordnance department in regulating the stores at the various depots. It would be recollected that great dissatisfaction was expressed by the Committee of 1849 at the accumulation of obsolete and unserviceable stores, and the attention of the principal storekeeper was directed to the subject with a view to the removal of the anomalies that then existed. The Committee might not perhaps be aware that half-yearly returns were now required from all the establishments at home and in the colonies of the quantity and description of stores in stock, showing what were serviceable and what were not. But in addition to these, triennial returns—more elaborate and searching returns—were sent in, to test the manner in which the half-yearly returns were made out. The question, however, was, whether the system which had been established had succeeded or not? He believed it had, and he would state why. He had called frr returns of unserviceable and obsolete stores at Quebec, Gibraltar, and Dublin, and in each of these stations there were hardly any of that description. The unserviceable stores had either been sold on the spot, or, if worth the expense, sent home. He believed in the other colonies and stations the same results would be found, and that no stores were now in stock which were not serviceable; and a Committee, appointed by the Treasury last year, had reported that the system was now so complete that they did not think any improvement in the mode of keeping down surplus stores could be effected. That Committee deliberately stated that "it did not appear to them that any improvement can be made in the system under which the depots of Naval and Ordnance stores are at present maintained." One great item in the excess of this vote was the charge for arms consequent on the introduction of a more efficient description of small arms into the service. There was also an additional sum for guns, gun-carriages, and for 200 new shot furnaces. The vote required for works, buildings, and repairs was 695,655l., which was 246,627l. in excess of last year's vote. This excess was caused chiefly by fortifications. One of the principal items was connected with the fortification of our great naval arsenals, which at present were not safe against the assault of an enemy. It was hardly possible to conceive that any person could object to this expenditure; for, whatever difference of opinion might prevail as to the expediency of providing naval arsenals in the first instance, there could be none as to the necessity of maintaining them in a state of efficiency now that they were formed. It was perfectly obvious that in a few hours injury might be done to them, which, as a mere matter of money, putting aside national honour and means of naval defence, would be most serious. The average amount expended on works of defence since 1815 was very small. It would probably cause surprise when he stated that the country had spent on an average only 13,000l. a year in providing for defences. Even in the period since 1846, during which the attention of Parliament and the public had been more particularly directed to the subject, we had spent only at the rate of 32,000l. a year upon works. There were, he believed, few countries which had not during the same period expended larger sums upon single fortifications than we had done upon the whole of our defences. Under these circumstances, and considering that the attention of the country was now, for the first time, roused to the necessity of providing for its defences, the Committee would not be surprised that the sum required for fortifications was larger than munl. The total amount which would be required for fortifications was 85,904l., and for fortifying the arsenals, 57,472l. There was also 60,000l. required for improvements in the fortifications of the Channel Islands, and for barracks connected with those fortifications, 33,400l., amounting together to 236,776l. There was also an item of 7,100l. for the repurchase of a workhouse in Cork, which was originally erected as a barracks, but had been taken, in 1840, by the Poor Law Commissioners, for the purposes of the Poor Law. There was 3551l. for the purchase of the rent-charge of Richmond Barracks. There was a sum of 10,000l. for the purchase of ground for the increase of the Wellington Barracks, which had been rendered necessary by the lease of the Portman Barracks being about to expire. There was also a sum of 3,050l. for repairs of the Ordnance Office, and another of 7,868l. for converting the vacated part of the Ordnance Office at the Tower into a storehouse. It would be remembered that the storehouses were burnt down in 1841, and since then, in consequence of the accumulation of stores, many of which were kept in tents, and some were now suffering serious injury from exposure to the weather, it was essential that these works should be proceeded with without delay. With regard to the buildings abroad, the excess was mainly to be accounted for by the necessity of rebuilding barracks which had been destroyed by a disastrous fire in Quebec, and for which 3,206l. would be required. The Commit-tee was well aware of the fatal fever which had occurred at Barbadoes, and it was considered advisable to endeavour to improve the sanitary condition of the garrison by the building of a main drain at an outlay of 1,893l2. There were also sums of 1,485l. for works in Jamaica, and of 12,981l. for continuing the building of new barracks at Halifax, which were progressing rapidly. These were the principal items of excess, and the Committee would perceive that this excess had principally arisen out of the necessity which existed for placing the defences of the country in a respectable state. And here he might observe that if the different fortifications had not been suffered to fall into decay, the amounts required now would not have been so large. The next vote was for the scientific branch, on which there was an excess of 19,306l. Part of that excess would be found to be for the Ordnance survey, which the Government had thought it best and most economical to have it proceeded with, energetically and rapidly. There was an increase of 311l. at Chatham for the expense of giving instruction to the soldiers of the line in field works. There was also an increase for the Royal Military Academy of 573l. In the next vote, that for the non-effective department, there was a decrease on the last year's estimates of 1,141l. He had thus endeavoured to explain the different items of diminution and excess in the year's Estimates; and he would only add that he should be happy to answer any questions which might be put to him by hon. Members. He would now beg to propose the first vote for 17,598 Officers and Men.

said, that having already made some observations on the subject of the Ordnance on the Motion for going into Supply, and believing that there was no chance of doing anything to decrease these Estimates, he thought the best way would be to have the whole of these Votes read through by the Chairman, and agreed to at once. But he would only say, that if they went on spending money in this way, there could be no hope of any reduction of taxation. The amount of the present Estimates for the Ordnance was 3,053,567l., while from 1829 to 1834 the average was 1,700,000l. Since that time they had risen every year until last year, when they reached 2,529,821l.; and in this year they had increased to their present amount. He would also compare the number of men voted in the present year with that in 1834 and the subsequent years, and which showed a great increase. He must also protest against the expenditure on barracks. It seemed, however, that people were quite mad on the subject of defence, and so alarmed that no one in that House could attempt with success to curb this expenditure. The best course would be to put all the items into one vote, and not enter into any particulars. In 1828 the number of men in the Artillery was 8,682, and now they were 17,598. The increase had been going on from that time, and now we had arrived at the present state of things. Something had been said about the necessity of getting a quantity of great coats, and it was said that it would be difficult to get contractors for them when they were wanted. Did any one ever hear of contractors being wanted?

said, that it was not contractors that would be wanted, but that it would not be easy to get the work completed on a sudden emergency, and so the great coats were kept in store.

said, that this was the most objectionable part of the Ordnance. Why should there be three different contracts for the clothing of the Army and the Navy? The Ordnance supplied great coats to the Army, the rest of their clothing was supplied from another source, and the Navy was clothed by a third means of contract. Then, as to their fortifications, what was the use of all their Martello towers? They had built forts in those places which, if there was to be an invasion, would be avoided, and they left 500 places unprovided for. Amongst other things, he would refer to the absurd expenditure of 8,000,000l. during the last war in fortifying the heights of Dover; and he appealed to the hon. and gallant Member for Brighton (Sir George Pechell), for a confirmation of the inefficiency of such means of defence as were proposed for the coast of Sussex. As it was his belief that it was perfectly hopeless to oppose the Estimates as proposed with any chance of success, therefore they had better be passed at once.

hoped, that the Committee would take the advice of the hon. Member for Montrose, and vote the whole sum at once. Many of their fortifications were only objects of ridicule, particularly those in the neighbourhood of the Isle of Wight. If they wanted to have the country really defended, as it ought to be, it must be by the instrumentality of an efficient Navy, and not through brick and mortar. In 1849, when there was a demand for an increase in warlike stores, he asked for a return of the number of guns lying in the different arsenals of the country. After considerable delay and difficulty he procured that information, and he then discovered that they had 14.961 serviceable guns in the arsenals of Woolwich, Chatham, Portsmouth, Devonport, and Hull. In fact, they had in those four places 23,963 cannon, large and small. He observed an item of 8,000l. for gunpowder. He supposed that this increased demand for gnnpowder was in consequence of the quantity expended in firing over the graves of military men. There were also 50,000 for great coats for the militia; and 41,000l. for accoutrements, colours, &c, for the militia. The Committee were thus called on to vote 100,000l. for fitting out the militia, over and above the large sum they had voted before when the subject of the enrolment of the militia was under consideration; and of this the country had good cause to complain. He had no objection to their defensive measures in the Isle of Alderney, as they appeared to be so much afraid of the port of Cherbourg; but he altogether objected to the expenditure of the public money for fortifications above Rochester Bridge and at the Isle of Wight.

said, he would beg to ask the hon. and gallant Officer whether the report which was prevalent was true, namely, that the reason why the roll in Sussex for the militia force was not filled, was owing to what he must call, if the statement were correct, the extraordinary and improper conduct on the part of the large proprietors in that county, who held out the threat to young men anxious to serve in the militia, that if they did join that force they would never under such circumstances give them employment?

said, he could not answer for what took place in every part of a county nearly 100 miles long and 30 miles wide; but this he knew, that some landowners there had declared that 100,000 men were ready to march to Manchester or Birmingham. In his district everybody was employed and satisfied. The people no longer put any trust in Protectionist landlords, but relied on their own resources. They were not frightened by the threatened humbug of invasion, but would be ready to come forward when any foe dared to attack their hearths and firesides.

said, he had heard the hon. Member for Montrose suggest on a former occasion that it would be better to take the Estimates in a lump.

You never heard that before. Never—never since I have been in Parliament.

imagined that he had heard his hon. Friend say something very like it. He had at least heard him say that the Estimates were such a mass of confusion it was impossible to separate one item from another. He (Gen. Anson) had then pointed out to the House that unless they took the trouble of analysing the Estimates, and looking through them, it would be very difficult to understand them. The first thing was to separate them; and if his hon. Friend would do that, he was sure that his mind was clear enough to see them in quite a different form. He made these remarks because the speeches of his hon. Friend led to the inference that those items were improperly put together, and he was anxious it should not go forth to the public that there was wasteful extravagance in this department. The hon. Member (Mr. Hume) spoke of a large increase in the Artillery; but scarcely another Gentleman in the House but himself would object to an increase of that valuable force, upon which this country must in a great degree depend in case of emergency. He was glad to see that the expense of the Ordnance Office was constantly diminishing. In connexion with the vote for Stores, he was glad to hear from the Secretary at War that a decision had at length been come to by the Government with respect to the musket to be adopted, which he understood would be very nearly two pounds weight lighter, and still carry a ball as heavy as the old percussion musket. He trusted that now the British troops would have a musket not to be excelled by the arms borne by any troops in Europe. His hon. Friend had made some observations about gunpowder. It must not be supposed that they did not require an annual vote for gunpowder. It was constantly being used, and he remembered his hon. and gallant Friend behind him (Sir G. Pechell) making a demand for a quantity to be used on the Sussex coast in connexion with one of the Martello towers. The vote No. 7 was one of great importance, and had, no doubt, attracted the attention of the Committee. But upon such a subject there must be some degree of confidence placed in the Government which undertook measures for the defence of the country. In justice he must say that his noble Friend, who was at the Ordnance when he (Gen. Anson) was there, endeavoured as far as he could to induce the Government to carry out a great many of the works and measures of defence now proposed. Had his recommendations been followed, those works would now have been in a state of great forwardness. He (Gen. Anson) wished to know how it was that the sum for the survey of Scotland was increased from 25,000l., the amount last year, to 35.000l.? He did not in the least object to the increase to complete the survey, for the sooner it was done, provided it was done economically, the better.

said, the hon. and gallant General had thought proper to amuse the Committee by charging him with having been the cause of an expenditure of gunpowder, and he would therefore explain the circumstances to the Committee. The coast near Seaford was in danger from the inroads of the sea, the mouth of the harbour at Newhaven having changed, leaving a sort of driftway which would enable the sea to come behind this battery and the adjoining land, and do an enormous amount of mischief. A very patriotic gentleman resident in Brighton, having an interest in the neighbourhood, offered to pay the Ordnance a sum of money to assist in blowing up the cliff at Seaford, so as to form a groin, as had been done by the railway company at Dovor. The Ordnance undertook the task. A number of men were sent down, who made several galleries, and not one quarter of the gunpowder was ignited, so that the groin was not formed effectually, and the parties then demurred to paying the money. He believed the hon and gallant General might find some of his gunpowder still in the cliff at Seaford. That which was undertaken by the railway company had the proper effect, and that which was undertaken by the Ordnance had not.

said, the people of Scotland felt very great interest in the completion of the Ordnance survey in that part of the Kingdom, and he had no doubt they would agree with him that that object was now likely to be effected. He cordially approved of the Vote for that purpose.

said, that it was the conviction of Her Majesty's Government that if the Ordnance survey of Scotland was to go on, it ought to be pushed with rapidity and efficiency. At the same time, he was anxious that it should not be taken for granted that it would be carried out exactly on the same system as had heretofore prevailed. There were several counties in which the arrangements already made would be adhered to; but the Government thought it their duty to take a deliberate and comprehensive view of the whole subject, to make the best provisions in their power, and to press it forward with vigour, in order to place it on the best footing it was susceptible of, with reference to the interests of the Scottish counties, and indeed the country at large. They were considering, in fact, what improvements could be introduced in the manner in which the Ordnance survey had been hitherto carried on.

said, no man was more deserving of the gratitude of the country for his watchfulness in that House over the public money than his hon. Friend the Member for Montrose (Mr. Hume). The Committee should remember that these estimates were increased in the present year by a sum of from 400,000l. to 500,000l.; and that it was duo to those who had to supply the money that the fullest explanation should be furnished upon the subject by the Government. He (Capt. Scobell) approved of the increase of 5,000 men in the Navy when it was proposed last year, regarding that branch of the public service as the natural and proper defence of the country. On the same occasion, however, he objected to the increase in the number of the Artillery. He found in the present Estimates, under the head of "levy money" for the Artillery, a sum of 8,444l., and "marching money," 3,355l. Now, as the number of men raised was only 1,210, that would give an average bounty of about 9l. 15s. to each man, which was he believed far beyond that paid in the other branches of the service. Either this bounty was too high, or that for the line was too low; but in either case he thought the amounts ought to be equalised.

said, that at this moment, in the fortresses of Gibraltar and Malta, where he believed they had not a greater number of guns than were necessary, not more than one artilleryman would be found to a gun, and he understood that the same was the case in many other of our colonies. He was perfectly convinced there was no military force in this country which ought to be kept in a more efficient state than the Artillery. The principal question with him was, how we could best prevent the occurrence of an invasion at all; and he thought that any sum of money which that House could vote that would effect that object, would be a cheap sacrifice in the end. Of the corps of Artillery he had been an admirer from his earliest years. Year after year he had watched its increasing efficiency with the deepest and intensest interest. He was satisfied it was a most important branch of our military defences; and there was no assistance which that House could grant still further to augment its value that he would not gladly concur in. Upon the whole he was disposed to give the present Government credit for a determination to lay out the money which might be voted for the promotion of the best interests of the country; and until he saw that they took any other course he was willing to repose faith in thorn.

said, he begged to say in reply to the observations of the hon. and gallant Member for Bath (Captain Scobell), that the same sum was paid as bounty and travelling expenses for recruits in the Artillery as was paid in the case of recruits for the regiments of the line.

said, he agreed that the corps of Artillery was a most important arm of our military service; but he begged to remind the hon. and gallant Member (Admiral Walcott), that in the time of Pitt 4,846 men was the whole number of the Artillery establishment of Great Britain. And after the war, from 1815 to 1828, the number of men did not exceed 8,000. In his opinion the Artillery had been increased most immoderately since that period.

said, in reference to the Ordnance survey of Scotland, he begged to express a hope that the question of the cost of survey for towns would be reconsidered. In a sanitary point of view he deemed it of much importance.

said, he wished to draw attention to the present system of lighting barracks, which he considered a most objectionable one. The practice was to allow two candlesticks to a room, and if more were required the men were obliged to use ginger-beer bottles. An attempt had been made to light the barracks with gas; he wished to know whether it was the intention of the Government to adopt that mode of lighting? The existing mode of letting canteens, too, was not a good one. They were now let by tender, the highest bidder being usually accepted. The result was, that the canteen keepers screwed the soldiers to the greatest possible extent, and occasionally, as was the case not many days ago at Portsmouth, resorted to the use of false weights and measures. He thought a better system, and one more conducive to the comforts of the soldier, might be adopted; and he trusted the attention of the board would be directed to the subject.

said, in some cases gas had been introduced, but in many instances the introduction of it would be so much more expensive, that they had been obliged to forego it. With regard to canteens, it was a mistake to suppose that they always accepted the highest tender. They always inquired into the character of the party tendering.

said, he could assure the hon. and gallant Member (Colonel Lindsay) that the Government were disposed to do everything they could for the comfort of the soldiers. The use of gas in the barracks had been a subject of consideration; but there existed some difficulty as to that mode of lighting being adopted. He might also state, that he believed gas would be more expensive than candles. With regard to the letting of canteens, it was always the practice of the Government to inquire into the character of the person whose tender was accepted.

said, he did not consider the Government were entitled to derive a farthing from letting the canteens. The soldiers ought to be provided with reading and refreshment rooms similar to the coffee-shops, where they could have tea and coffee and read the newspapers, instead of being obliged to go to public-houses. Means of amusement, occupation, and instruction, should he afforded them.

said, he had to call the attention of the Committee to the great grievance under which his constituents at Portsmouth laboured, owing to the exemption of Government property from the poor-rates, the effect of which was, that the rates were much heavier on the inhabitants. The property in question was occupied by the Government for national purposes, and it was unfair to throw the burdens which it ought to bear on the locality. If the place was not occupied by the Government docks, no doubt it would he the scene of great private enterprise, which would contribute largely to local taxation. It had been proved by a return in 1840 that the poor-rate at Portsmouth amounted to 6s. in the pound on the average, while it was only 1s, 3d. in other places on a similar rating. The exemption of the Government property was not statutable, but arose from the absence of beneficial occupancy of the premises. ["Hear, hear!"] Yes, but the short an- swer to that argument was, that in the Portsmouth dockyard certain officers, such as the naval storekeeper, &c, were made rateable, and the same might be done for the poor-rates.

said, the question raised by the noble Lord was one of great difficulty, and could not be discussed incidentally in a Committee of Supply. Would the people of Portsmouth, if they complained of this exemption, consent to having all these great public establishments, which gave work to so many inhabitants, withdrawn, and the land left idle?

thought the same argument would apply quite as well to any private manufactory, or to the land occupied by any great private establishment.

said, he wished to inquire whether it was not the case that nearly half the new muskets served out to one regiment in the service had been returned to store, because the sights had not been put on properly? He was afraid the stores of another description served out sometimes were not very efficient, particularly the axes and billhooks. He knew an instance where two companies were set to clear a road through a wood, and the edges of all the axes and billhooks turned immediately.

said, he was not aware of any complaint against the axes and bill hooks, but he would inquire into the matter. He was sorry to say, however, that the statement of the hon. and gallant Officer respecting the sights on some muskets lately issued was too true. One-half of the muskets issued to a regiment of the Guards had been returned because they were not properly sighted. The Ordnance Board had at once given directions to their officers to inspect the guns, and had called in the assistance of two of the first gun-makers in London; but, as yet, they had not received any reply which would enable the Board to ascertain the quarter in which such culpable negligence existed.

wished to know if it was the intention of the Board of Ordnance to increase the quantity of practice ammunition, as it was, he understood, the intention of the authorities to hire ground for practice in small arms?

replied, it was a subject on which the Master General was extremely anxious, and that he had no doubt every means would be taken to improve the troops in the use of their arms.

said, he was not satisfied with the answer of the hon. Gentleman respecting the muskets returned as unfit for service. Why should the Government be obliged to apply to private gun-makers? It was rather hard upon the country to pay so high, and then not to have men who could tell whether the Government guns were fit for service or not, or in what department the mischief was done.

said, he must ask for an explanation of the extraordinary works going on at Alderney, for which a sum of 160,000l. was set down in the present Vote? Alderney was a little island with about 1,000 inhabitants in a most out-of-the-way place, and yet we were spending these enormous sums on it, while the amount to be voted against people supposed to be coming up the river to the metropolis was only 5,000l.

said, the right hon. Gentleman must surely be aware that works were going on at Alderney for a harbour of refuge, and that, considering the events which might occur at any time, it was necessary to protect that harbour. It was the opinion of the most eminent engineers and officers that at an inconsiderable expense Alderney might be made as strong as Gibraltar.

said, no man in his senses would ever think of taking refuge in Alderney in bad weather. No seaman would approach it, unless he sought destruction. It really appeared as if this expenditure was going on without due control or consideration, and he should like to know on whose advice it was taking place.

said, that certain officers had been sent to report on the state of our defences some time ago, and to indicate those points which were vulnerable. They had made a Report, but the Committee which was sitting at the time, for reasons which were obvious, did not think it advisable the Report should be published.

said, that was the humbug of the day. It was expedient to keep from the House that which any one might come over from the coast of France and see if he wished. All he wanted to know was, whether these officers had reported that the harbour of Guernsey would hold more than one frigate?

said, that without offering any opinion one way or the other respecting the harbour of refuge, he would beg to remind hon. Members that if they built a breakwater it would be necessary to protect it by fortifications.

said, he wished to inquire if any improvements had taken place in barrack accommodation for our troops? It was but too often the case that the way in which the men, and particularly the married soldiers, were provided for, was a disgrace to the country.

said, that efforts had been made to give the men as many comforts as possible in the new barracks; but he regretted to admit that, in the old barracks, there was still much to be done to make them fit for the proper accommodation of our troops.

said, we had laid out within the last ten years above 3,000,000l. in the erection of barracks in the United Kingdom alone. A Committee that sat on the subject, in 1849, reported that accommodation was then given to about 95,000 men in barracks. Since that year about 300,000l. had been expended in barrack building, and yet the accommodation to the soldiers was bad and inefficient. He did not begrudge the expenditure of large sums of money for public purposes, but he thought that the public should have the worth of their money; and that when large sums were laid out in the building of barracks, our soldiers should not have occasion to find fault with want of room and ventilation in them. He wanted to know if the new barracks contained sufficient space for the men, and were provided with canteens, to which they could retire without being expected to drink, and also if they had washhouses and baths?

observed that the complaints which had been made came from the old barracks, and not from the new. He could not say how many cubic inches of air were allowed to each man; but he knew that regulations had been issued providing for sufficient space, and that the Master General had taken care to give the men every possible comfort and convenience in the new barracks.

said, he willingly admitted that improvements had been carried to a great extent with respect to washing houses and baths, but still the soldiers had not sufficient accommodation.

said, he had never heard a word of complaint against the new barracks. He believed that they afforded proper and efficient accommodation to the soldiers lodged in them. The barracks erected in this country within the last ten years had cost not less than at the rate of 100l. for every soldier contained within them. Indeed, that erected at Woolwich had cost at the rate of 150l. for every soldier to whom it gave accommodation.

said, he hoped the Government would turn their attention to the drainage of barracks. He noticed that the sum of 2,000l. was required for the drainage of the cavalry barracks at Windsor. This was a large sum to be expended in that way.

said, the Windsor barracks were old barracks, the drainage of which had been conducted on the old system, and the alterations necessary were therefore extensive.

, in answer to an hon. Member, said, there was already a breakwater at Alderney, where men of war and other vessels could take shelter. The question now entertained was as to whether that breakwater should be extended further or not, so as to include a larger area of water. That question had not yet been determined.

said, he must regret that the right Hon. Baronet (Sir J. Graham) should intend putting a stop to the naval surveys, which were so necessary and important to this country. Vessels were coming from all parts of the world, and nothing but proper surveys, with the soundings of the coast, could give such ships a chance of safety. He hoped the right hon. Gentleman the First Lord of the Admiralty would reconsider the subject. The right hon. Gentleman said that he had a large number of surveys completed, and it was very desirable that they should be published forthwith. The evidence given before a Select Committee by a distinguished naval officer showed that the want of proper surveys of the west coast of Scotland, from Mull northwards, was most disgraceful.

said, he was not about to rediscuss the question of the naval surveys. He had already endeavoured repeatedly to express his opinion on that matter to the Committee. He would just say that he had no intention whatever of putting a stop to the surveys, but he had a very fixed intention of reducing the cost. He thought the sum that had been expended for the work done was extravagant; and he believed that the reduced vote that he had asked would be sufficient, while it would neither diminish the efficiency nor the number of the surveyors.

said, he was very happy to hear that explanation; hut if 15,000l. could be saved in the cost of the surveys now going on, he would urge that that sum should be applied in increasing the number.

said, he would beg to ask upon what scale the Ordnance survey in Scotland was proceeding, and when it was likely to be completed? Several of the surveys done in large populous districts were now found to be much inferior to those at present going on, and he thought it would be an economical thing to correct them. In populous districts there would be likely to be such a demand for those corrected surveys that they might cost the country little or nothing.

said, he had presented petitions from Forfarshire for the completion of the surveys there on the six-inch scale, and he would urge the necessity of complying with those requests, for the one or the two-inch scale surveys would be of little or no service.

said, he was quite aware that there had been many representations made to the Government on this subject from Scotch counties, and the whole question was now undergoing consideration. He was desirous of rigidly and faithfully carrying out all the promises made to the Scotch counties on this subject, and the whole matter would be recon sidered and fixed upon a firm basis, so that the survey might he finished with the least possible delay.

said, that the changes of opinion that had taken place on the subject of the Scotch surveys, made their proceedings look ridiculous. The Committee which sat upon the question was principally composed of Scotch Members, and they decided that the surveys should be made upon the one-inch scale, and that they should be completed in ten years, from an annual vote of 25,000l. As a member of that Committee himself, as being then connected with the Ordnance Department, he dissented from the decision of the majority, and was strougly in favour of the six-inch scale, and he was glad to find that the Members from Scotland were now coming round to his opinion.

said, that before these Votes were disposed of, there was one point to which he should like to call attention, and that was the enormous amount of powder wasted in firing salutes.

said, a very considerable decrease had been effected of late years in this item.

said, that he should move the postponement of this Resolution unless he received the assurance that Kilmainham Hospital should remain open for the reception of pensioners in the same way as Chelsea Hospital was open. In giving this opinion he was only expressing the interest his constituents felt in the subject. One representation from North Dublin Union, to which he alluded, made reference to a guarantee given by the Act of Union, which imported that this institution should be maintained. Some of his constituents stated that they had expected indulgence from the right hon. Secretary at War, who had large property connected with the city of Dublin. The late Chancellor of the Exchequer had said he looked on this subject as of the same nature as the continuance of the office of Lord Lieutenant, adding that the question was whether they were to have a system of centralised Government, or whether Ireland should retain its local institutions. A new light had broken in upon this country, which now saw the necessity of supporting the institutions of Ireland, and more particularly those in the metropolis of that country, because they thereby thought to stifle the cry formerly raised for the repeal of the Union, and to give satisfaction to a people very easily appeased by just and reasonable methods. He should therefore move that the Resolution be postponed.

, in seconding the Motion, said that this was not the first time this subject had given rise to debates in the House of Commons. In 1834, the House came to the determination that the hospital should not be abolished; and the late Sir Hussey Vivian had declared that Kilmainham was not only beneficial to the country, but could not be dispensed with without positive injury.

said, he could not allow the argument used with reference to that part of his property which lay in the city of Dublin to influence his conduct. On this particular case he was not called on to pronounce a decision, because he found that a decision had been taken on the subject with the recorded approbation of the House. A proposition had been made to transfer pensioners to Chelsea, with a view to the reduction of Kilmainham; whereupon it was urged that the reduction should not be immediately pressed, and it was decided that no new appointment should be made to Kilmainham, so that in time Kilmainham should cease to be. To that compromise he had adhered. It seemed to him a just and sound decision. The fact had been brought out in evidence before a Committee that there was no necessity for the maintenance of Kilmainham for the reception of pensioners; and he found that the pensioners at Kilmainham were not exclusively Irish pensioners, so that there were not any feelings of nationality on the part of the pensioners to be consulted; and there were also peculiar circumstances affecting the case—circumstances which the House would ultimately have to consider, in reference not only to the question whether they would have to maintain Kilmainham, but also to the question whether even they would have to maintain Chelsea. Being fully impressed with the wisdom of the decision that there should be no more nominations to Kilmainham, and believing that there was no national reason for maintaining that establishment, he should abide by that decision. He strongly recommended the hon. Member not to press the postponement of the Resolution, for the only consequence would be, not that the resources for the support of Kilmainham would be increased, but that the Hospital would die of starvation.

said, he would remind the right hon. Gentleman, who seemed to take an Imperial view of the question, that there was a strong national feeling in Ireland on this subject. Decisions of Committees were not always ratified by that House; and as far as the particular Committee to which this question was referred, he believed that only one Irish Member, (the late Member for Clare, he believed) served on it. He trusted that the feelings of the Irish people would be considered on the subject, and that one of the last vestiges of their nationality might be left to them.

said, he could assure the hon. Member that he entirely mistook the views of the Committee, and he believed that the two hon. Members would themselves, had they been members of it, have concurred in its recommendation.

would move, in page3, line 11, of Clause 2, to omit the first word "such." In moving this Amendment he wished to observe that the first Act passed to regulate pensions for retiring Examiners was the 5th Geo. III., by which they were entitled to 300l.; but the Chancery Relief Bill of last Session gave a salary of 1,500l. a year, allowing three-fourths of that sum as a retiring pension. He believed the rule adopted had been that no public servant should receive a retiring pension so long as he might hold another situation with larger emoluments. He would, however, demonstrate that the late Examiner (Mr. C. Villiers), who had retired from his office, and who was now in the receipt of a salary of much larger amount, might not only take the retiring pension, hut also the salary of his present office of Judge Advocate. He only asked that the retiring pension should be suspended while he was receiving the salary of his present office.

said, the retiring pension would not be given to such officers as held other appointments. In the ease of his right hon. Friend (Mr. C. Villiers), when he retired from the office of Examiner in Chancery, and accepted the office of Judge Advocate, he very honourably declined to accept the pension attaching to the position of a retired Chancery Examiner. The Amendment of the hon. and learned Gentleman would, if carried, interfere very much with the action of the Statute passed last Session, and would introduce the greatest possible confusion. The objects of the Act were entirely prospective, whereas the proposed Amendment attempted to annex to it the provisions of a former one, and thereby give it a retrospective character.

said, he was very happy to hear from the hon. and learned Solicitor General that it had never been the intention of the right hon. Member for Wolverhampton to receive his pension and hold an office under Government at the same time. That had been stated in language so unmistakeable as to give great satisfaction to both sides of the House; for he was sure neither party in that House would wish to see a gentleman permitted to retire upon a very handsome salary, and immediately afterwards accept another office under Government. The only point, then, which ought to beregarded was, whether the question ought to remain determined by the mere declaration of the right hon. Member for Wolverhampton; or was the House, now that the opportunity for so doing was before them, to make an explicit statement upon the point? The hon. and learned Solicitor General said, that whether the Act of Parliament allowed of the pension being paid or not, that the right hon. Gentleman did not intend to demand it. Now, he (Mr. Henley) ventured to opine that unless some such alteration as that suggested by his hon. Friend the Member for Cirencester (Mr. Mullings) were adopted, it would be competent for him to demand his pension. At all events he thought that the Crown ought to be-protected by a distinct provision in the Act from any claims which might hereafter be raised by the executors of the right hon Gentleman.

said, he begged to explain that the present Bill was confined to the cases of those Gentle men appointed to the office of Examiner since the passing of the Act of last Session, whereas the right hon. Member for Wolverhampton had been appointed twenty years ago.

said, he was quite at a loss to know why the hon. and learned Solicitor General opposed the insertion of the proposed words, as they would only have the effect of relieving the minds of hon. Members from an apprehension that it was possible for the right hon. Member for Wolverhampton to be in the receipt at the same time of the emoluments of an existing office and of his retiring pension besides.

said, he did not believe the matter was at all understood. Hon. Gentlemen opposite seemed to be under the impression that some benefit was to accrue to his right hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton under this Bill. Now, he would derive none whatever, for by the Bill of last Session the option was given to the right hon. Gentleman, as one of the Examiners of the Court of Chancery, to withdraw from his office, as its functions were materially altered. He did retire accordingly, and an order was made entitling him to the pension. A Bill was now brought in, altering the oath to be taken by Examiners appointed to the office as remodelled, and making provision with respect to their salaries and retiring pensions; and hon. Gentlemen opposite proposed to introduce a clause depriving the right hon. Gentleman of the advantages he had secured under the Act of last Session, and upon the faith of which he had resigned. That was not just. The right hon. Gentleman had declared that he should not take the pension while he held office, and the public would appreciate that liberality; but he ought not to be deprived of the merit of that concession by ex post facto legislation.

said, he should now move that twenty-five" should be inserted instead of "twenty." The object of this Motion was to prevent any one holding this office from becoming entitled to a pension until he had served for twenty-five years instead of twenty, as provided by the Bill.

said, that he was surprised to see the hon. Member for Montrose (Mr. Hume), the hon. Member for Salford (Mr. Brotherton), and, he believed, one, if not both, the hon. Members for Manchester (Mr. Gibson and Mr. Bright), voting to night for pensions, although on former occasions they had supported Motions for refusing them to those who had a better claim to them than the right hon. Member for Wolverhampton. When, however, the pensions were in the hands of their friends, there was no more talk of economy. When those who sat and acted with them were concerned, it was, "I scratch you, and you scratch me." When he saw men professing to support economy, but taking such a course, he was bound to say that he had no faith in them. Take off the mantle which covered them, and let them go forth to the public in their proper shape. "Man-traps and spring- guns, they will catch you when they can."

said, that the proper time to have inserted a proviso with respect to the receipt of the pension was last year, when the Act was passed, and not now. On that occasion, however, the hon. and gallant Colonel voted for the Act as it at present stood. That Act abolished the office which the right hon. Member for Wolverhampton held, and the present Bill created a new one. Notwithstanding, too, that he was entitled to a pension, the right hon. Member for Wolverhampton had declared his intention not to receive it while he held his present office, so that the public would not suffer any loss from the absence of the proviso which hon. Gentlemen opposite desired to introduce into the Bill.

said, that the late Government having been nearly defeated on Mr. Villiers's Motion, it was natural to expect that he would not be overlooked by his party when they came into office. ["Oh, oh!"] He did not blame them for it. Instead of an obscure office in the Rolls-yard, which was by no means commensurate with his reputation, and which the greater portion of the Members of the House probably did not know he held, he had received the office of Judge Advocate General with a salary of 2,000l. a year, with a seat at the Privy Council. He, nevertheless, held both offices for six weeks after the present Government came into power (so little confidence had he in their stability), and during that period the pension question was arranged, and then the right hon. Gentleman resigned his office of Examiner in Chancery. He was, therefore, a little surprised that the hon. Member for Montrose should have divided in favour of securing the right hon. Gentleman a pension for an office which was not abolished by the Act of last year; and which underwent no other alteration, except with respect to the mode in which the evidence in Chancery was in future to be taken by the Examiner; the salary being increased from 1,000l. to 1,500l. in consequence of the additional labour thus devolving upon him. The office of Judge Advocate General was a higher one than that of Examiner in Chancery, and no gentleman who accepted a higher office had a right to stipulate for a pension in consideration of resigning a lower one. He was astonished that none of the Gentlemen on the opposite side of the House, who talked so much about economy, should have raised their voices against a matter which he thought savoured somewhat of a job.

said, that in about seven hours and a half, that House had voted about 15,000,000l. of money for the Army, Navy, and Ordnance, or about 1,000,000l. for every half-hour that they were in Committee of Supply, and yet they had had less discussion, and that of a less vehement character, on any one of those Votes, than on this question, which did not involve the saving of a single shilling. The clause which had been proposed by the hon. Member for Cirencester (Mr. Mullings) would not deprive the right hon. Member for Wolverhampton (Mr. C. Villiers) of a pension; for if he understood the hon. Member correctly, he did not deny his right to a pension, provided he did not hold office under the Crown. Hon. Members wanted to insert a proviso in a Bill having no reference whatever to the case of the right hon. Member for Wolverhampton. Whatever opinion hon. Gentlemen opposite might entertain of his right hon. Friend (Mr. C. Villiers), he had every faith in his word. There certainly appeared to be something of a personal character in this persevering attack on his right hon. Friend. The public would not be mistaken in the matter. All that they wanted to compel him to do he had done last year of his own free will.

said, he thought that even law reform might be purchased too dearly if accompanied with arrangements such as this Bill contemplated. He protested against enabling a man of fifty years of age to retire on a pension amounting to three-fourths of his salary.

said, that although hon. Gentlemen opposite were now showing a sudden sensitiveness to jobs, if he was not mistaken, the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Dorsetshire held the office of Cursitor Baron of the Exchequer and Judge Advocate at the same time, receiving the salaries of both offices. He was glad to find the right hon. Gentleman had come to the conclusion that this was not a proper course to pursue.

said, that no one doubted the good faith of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Wolverhampton; but the question then was, whether it was not right that the law should regulate that matter for the future, instead of leaving it to the discretion of any individual. He had no difficulty in answering the personal observation made by the hon. Baronet with regard to himself. It was perfectly true that he had held the highly honourable office of Judge Advocate, and also another office, a patent office, and therefore one for life —that of Cursitor Baron. He had, however, never received the yearly salary for both offices. What he might have done at the end of the year he did not know, but he did not hold both offices for a year.

said, he thought that the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Bankes) must have rather had his own case, than his (Mr. Villiers') when he expressed such anxiety to have some general rule laid down in these matters, for his (Mr. Viliiers') case was one that was quite peculiar, and not likely to recur, while that of the right hon. Gentleman, holding two offices at the same time, as he had done, without the slightest intention of giving up either, if he could help it, was extremely likely to happen again As there seemed, however, to be some misconception with regard to the office which he had held, and some anxiety on the other side of the House to misconceive, he might be allowed to state very shortly the facts of the case. He had held the office of Examiner in the Court of Chancery for nineteen years and upwards. He was appointed to that office by Sir John Leach, the Master of the Rolls, in the latter end of 1833. There had just then been a change in the character of the office, and Sir John Leach was of opinion, as was also his predecessor, Sir Thomas Plumer, that the person who filled the office should have had a legal education—that he should have been called to the bar—which was not the case with those who had previously held the situation. There were, then, no great advantages to tempt any one to take the office, because the person who accepted it was precluded from taking other office. or even practising at the bar. It was an office that led to nothing, the duties of it were very irksome, and the salary was only 1,000l. a year. On the other hand, he (Mr. Villiers) knew that it was a freehold office—an office for life; that while he continued to perform the duties properly as he had undertaken to perform them, no one could remove him from it; and, as Members were already aware, it was compatible with a seat in Parliament, for it was not an office held under the Crown. After having held this office for about nineteen years, he found, in June last, that a Bill was passing through the House which proposed to change altogether the character of the office, by altering the mode of taking evidence in the Court of Chancery. That Bill altered altogether the character of the duties of the officer, and greatly enhanced his responsibility, while no mention whatever was made of the position of the officer. His attention was called to the subject. He did not suppose that the late Government had any intention to do injustice to him as one of the Examiners, because he was their political opponent, nor did he believe that they intended to act less liberally towards the person who held this particular office than to any other officers of the Court. He and his colleague were therefore advised to bring the matter under the attention of the right hon. Gentleman the late Home Secretary. They did so, and that right hon. Gentleman gave the subject that attentive consideration which every one had reason to expect from him; and he said, whilst he was in office, that if a clause was proposed to meet the justice of the case, he would not offer any opposition to it. The law officers of the Crown said the same thing. A clause was consequently proposed, which did not originate with the persons who then held the office of Examiners, but was taken from an Act of Parliament which reconstituted and placed the office of Examiner upon a different footing in the 50 Geo. III. The clause gave the option to the persons whose duties were so far altered either to retire or to resume the office with a higher salary; and the Bill passed with that clause. Now, so far from that Bill having been passed at 12 or 1 o'clock at night, as had been insinuated, it so happened that it was passed in the middle of the day, after due notice of the same being given in the Votes. The clause also was brought under the notice of the Lord Chancellor, who saw no objection to it. He (Mr. Villiers) thought the hon. Gentleman opposite (Mr. Mullings) wanted to fix upon him something like an interested object in the matter. ["No, no!"] Well, he thought so. There was surely an imputation that he wanted to get more than he ought to have; but in answer to that he begged to say that he was not at all anxious for that part of the reform in the Court of Chancery effected last year, and which altered the mode of taking evidence, and the character of the office of Examiner. He stated in that House at the time, although he saw his own advantage in the change, that he did not think the measure had been duly considered, and he had stated that opinion with great confidence, and expressed a hope that this change might be more fully considered; and he believed that he was fortified in that view by the opinion of the late Lord Chancellor and one of the most distinguished of the Vice-Chancellors. Well, the Act, with this clause in it, came into operation. His colleague elected to take the increased salary provided for him, and he (Mr. Villiers) elected to take the retirement. The hon. and learned Member for Wallingford (Mr. Malins) had made a statement which he could not have known was true. That hon. and learned Gentleman had stated as a fact that he (Mr. Villiers) had kept the office of Examiner—which implied that he had received the increased salary—until he ascertained the fate of the Government. The hon. Gentleman intimated as a fact that he (Mr. Villiers) had waited until he was remunerated for the part he had taken on the subject of Free Trade, and that the Government had been found willing to recognise his services, by providing him with a retiring pension. Now, if this statement required any denial, he might inform the House that in the summer he was in very bad health; that he had gone to the Continent in consequence, and that he had returned to London in November, before the resignation of the late Government, for the purpose of claiming his retirement from the office of Examiner. Before the accession of the present Ministry to power, he gave notice that he intended to retire, and that without the slightest intention—or he might say the slightest wish—of obtaining any other office. The delay in availing himself of the retiring clause was owing to totally different causes. He was surprised that the hon. and learned Gentleman should have made such a statement, about the accuracy of which he was bound to have made some inquiries. The hon. Member for Cirencester (Mr. Mullings) now proposed, certainly in a very insidious manner, not by an avowed intention to repeal the Act passed last year, but by inserting one word and omitting another, to render the clause of last year granting the retiring annuity wholly inoperative as it affected him (Mr. Villiers), though it was contained in a measure which had been deliberately adopted by Parliament, and had become, like any other Act, the law of the land. If he (Mr. Villiers) had been absent from the country, he might have been deprived of that to which he was entitled under the authority of an Act of Parliament, by the insidious means to which the hon. Member had had recourse. No man's place, no man's property, would be safe if clauses were to be inserted in this way to disturb that which had been settled by previous Acts of Parliament. However, he was not afraid of the Amendment when his attention was drawn to it, for he felt sure, that upon a question of honour and justice, a man might always feel safe in the hands of a majority in that House. He would not say a word himself in favour of the course which he had thought proper to take in this matter—that had been kindly done by others; but he might say this, that on the day he resigned his office he placed a document in the hands of the solicitor of the fund upon which his retirement was charged, that precluded him from receiving it while he held his office.

said, he could assure the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Wolverhampton that nothing was more distant from his mind than to say anything disrespectful of him. He could assure the right hon. Gentleman that the idea of his receiving at the time two salaries had never entered his mind. He thought the House would do him the justice to recollect that the position he contended for was this, that he was under the impression that from the death of Mr. Plummer, and the appointment of the right hon. Gentleman as Judge Advocate, they had only one Examiner, namely, Mr. Kenyon Parker, who was appointed to succeed Mr. Plummer, and that the gentleman who had been appointed to succeed the right hon. Gentleman was hanging, as it were, between heaven and earth.

said, he trusted they would now pass to the real subject of discussion, which was simply this, whether with regard to the period for retirement the Bill should contain the words "twenty -five years" or "twenty years." The office they were dealing with was undoubtedly of a judicial character, and he knew nothing more injurious in practice than fixing the retiring pension of a judicial officer at a very late period of life, because the result most likely would be that they would have men in the office who would be incompetent, either from ago or infirmities, to discharge the duties properly. His hon. Friend (Mr. Mullings) had pointed out the possibility, if they fixed the period at twenty years, of men who were appointed at a very early age being entitled to the retiring pension when they were still young men. He did not think such a circumstance was likely to occur; but to meet the objection, he pro-proposed to insert a proviso to the effect that no person should become entitled to the pension under the clause in question if he should be under sixty-five years of age, unless in case of permanent ill-health. It should be recollected that the patronage of the office was exercised by the Master of the Rolls, while the awarding of the pension was in the discretion of the Lord Chancellor, so the Lord Chancellor could not be supposed to have any wish to award the pension through the desire of having an opportunity to appoint a successor to the office. He trusted that his hon. Friend would be satisfied with this proviso, and withdraw his Amendment.

said, that he had not intended the slightest offence to the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Villiers) in making the proposition. The fact was, that, having met the right hon. Gentleman in the lobby of the House, he asked him to say whether he was really entitled to a retiring pension? when the right hon. Gentleman, in reply, said, "Leave it to my own discretion." He then told him that he would not sanction with any Government, the principle of granting to any gentleman a retiring pension at the same time he was receiving a salary as Judge Advocate. He would not press his Amedment.

said, that as soon as it was stated that the right hon. Gentleman had declined to draw his retiring salary while he filled the office of Judge Advocate General, they all felt that such a course was highly honourable to him. He (Mr. Newdegate) never for one moment doubted that right hon. Gentleman's word; but the party with whom he (Mr. Newdegate) acted thought it was a very unsound principle to admit that a matter of so serious a character should be left simply to the discretion of any hon. or right hon. Gentleman who happened to be placed in the situation of the right hon. Member for Wolverhampton.