said, he wished to ask the Chief. Secretary for Ireland, Whether the attention of the Poor Law Commission has been called to the conduct of the Board of Guardians of the Innishowen Union, in refusing to allow a sick inmate of the workhouse, named Bernard M'Laughlin, half a pound of bread, which had been ordered by the medical officer as extra diet?

said, in reply, that the attention of the Poor Law Commissioners had been drawn to this case, and they had induced the Board of Guardians to supply the diet which the medical officer had required. When the medical officer first ordered this supply of extra food for this inmate of the workhouse, the Board of Guardians refused to supply it; but the matter coming under the notice of the Commissioners, they told the Board they would be labouring under a very heavy responsibility if they declined to acquiesce in the medical officer's order, and thereupon the extra diet was supplied.

said, he rose to ask the President of the Poor Law Board, Whether he has yet received the Return of the number of unemployed unmarried women in the Cotton Factory districts of Lancashire and Cheshire?

said, in reply, that the only way in which those persons were known was by seeking relief, and that relief was derived from two sources—one, the parishes; and the other, the Committees distributing voluntary relief. The only Returns which he (Mr. Villiers) could order would be from the parishes, but the only entry made in the parochial books was of unemployed women. There was none with respect to occupation. With respect to the Relief Committees—and there were 170 local Committees—the sex of the recipients was not entered in their books. The consequence was, that there would be great difficulty in getting the Return which the hon. Gentleman desired. He told the hon. Member on a former occasion that he would ascertain whether there was any possibility of obtaining that Return from the Voluntary Belief Committee; and, having made inquiries from the secretary, that gentleman said he would try, but the secretary informed him that up to Monday last he had not been able to get the Return asked for.

said, he wished to ask the Secretary to the Admiralty, If directions have been sent to the Admiral in the Mediterranean to station a last Steamer between Benghazi and Alexandria, as the Malta and Alexandria Cable has ceased working?

said, in reply, that the day before yesterday a telegram was received from the Commander in Chief in the Mediterranean to the effect that the cable between Benghazi and Alexandria had been broken, and that application had been made to him to station a steamer between those two points. The answer of the Admiralty was, that it would be highly inconvenient that a vessel should be appointed solely to carry telegrams between Alexandria and Benghazi, a distance of between 300 and 400 miles.

said, he rose to ask the Under Secretary of State for War, Whether, subsequently to the Memorandum of the 18th of December, a second Memorandum or Letter embodying the opinion of the Commander-in-Chief on the Mhow Court Martial had not been issued; also, whether the proceedings alleged by Paymaster Smales to have taken place on his Court Martial were submitted to the Judge Advocate General in England for his opinion, and whether that opinion was obtained before the Paymaster was gazetted out of the service?

said, that in reply to the first part of the Question he had to state that no second memorandum or letter embodying the opinion of the Commander-in-Chief on the Mhow Court Martial had been issued; no public memorandum, at least. With regard to the second part of the hon. Member's Question, its terms were so extremely vague and indefinite that he did not think he should be justified in giving any answer. The hon. Member did not state to what "proceedings alleged by Paymaster Smales to have taken place" he referred. [Mr. CONINGHAM: The illegal proceedings.] The word "illegal," it would be observed, was not upon the paper. If the hon. Gentleman wished to have a specific answer to his Question, he must be good enough to state what the illegal proceedings were to which he referred, and how these bad been alleged by Paymaster Smales.

said, he would beg to ask his noble Friend a question on the subject. It might be in the recollection of the House that a few days before he had asked his noble Friend if he was able to state whether there was any precedent for holding a Court Martial in this country upon proceedings which had taken place in India. His noble Friend said he was not aware of any precedent on the subject. He now wished to ask his noble Friend, whether he had in the interval discovered that any such precedent existed; and, if not, to state whether the proposed course of proceeding did not involve a reflection upon, if not an insult to, the officers of the Indian army?

I am not aware at the present moment that there is any precedent for the action taken by the Government in this case. I certainly cannot state as a matter of fact, but I can give it as my opinion, that this course of proceeding will not involve either any reflection or any insult upon the Indian army.

observed that the noble Lord had stated that no "public" memorandum subsequent to that of the 18th of December "had been issued." Was the House, then, to infer from that that possibly some communication or memorandum not of a public character had been issued, which had not been produced?

The Commander-in-Chief may have written privately to Sir Hugh Rose on this subject; but, if so, the communication has been wholly of a private nature, and such as I am unable to produce.

said, he wished to ask whether he was to understand that, the noble Lord did not like the form of the question, or whether he declined to state whether the proceedings of the court martial were submitted for his opinion to the Judge Advocate General?

said, that before he answered the question he must beg the hon. Member to state what the proceedings were to which he referred—either to state what was their purport, or describe where they were to be found.

said, that the question was not one of illegality. He begged to call the attention of his noble Friend to this, that two verdicts of these courts martial had been published. ["Order!"] He would beg, then, to move the adjournment of the House. The case was a very serious one. He had sat upon a great many courts martial; and be wished to ask bow it was possible, if the proposed court martial were held in England, to bring over from India all the evidence which they ought to have before them. It was a positive reflection upon the officers of the Indian service to suppose that there could not be found in India a sufficient number of officers whose honour could be depended upon to conduct the necessary inquiry fairly. It would be necessary to bring over Sir Hugh Hose and the other general officers concerned in the case. He did not know Colonel Crawley, but he must say, he thought the hon. Member for Brighton had behaved very unfairly towards that officer the other evening. The hon. Member for Brighton the other evening produced and read to the House—

said, the hon. and gallant Member was out of order in referring to a past debate.

He would then merely state that there were two versions of the proceedings at the court martial on Paymaster Smales—one published at Poonah, the other from the Judge Advocate's notes. He wished to know which of these versions was to be laid on the table. He hoped, in fairness to Colonel Crawley and all concerned, that the proper official proceedings would be laid upon the table.

said, that the original record of the proceedings was in his office, find he had no knowledge of any other copies. An official copy of that record would be laid on the table.

, in seconding the Motion for adjournment, said, he wished to observe, by way of exemplifying the sort of illegality of which Paymaster Smales complained, that when he was placed on his trial, his witnesses were impounded, and he was unable to have access to them for the purpose of preparing his defence. There were several instances, and he only mentioned that as one of them.

There is one point on which, I think, some explanations are due from the Government—I mean with regard to the expenses of this inquiry. I do not know whether Colonel Crawley is to be burdened with these expenses. But there is a more important consideration with regard to the administration of justice than even these expenses—with regard to the country itself—which I think ought to be considered. When these witnesses are brought over to this country, they will be in the presence of each other, and of many other persons. Probably the Commander-in-Chief in India and other officers in command will be required. This will cause an amount of expenditure of which the House has at present no idea. I will not say that the trial will last as long as that of Warren Hastings, but it will last much longer than hon. Members suppose. This is a consideration which I think ought not to be absent from the mind of the House.

The Commander-in-Chief has directed that the inquiry shall take place in England. I apprehend, that if any officer is ordered home by the military authorities from any part of the world, he is considered to be on duty and receives his pay.

said, he differed altogether from the opinion, that if the court martial were held in England, it would be necessary to summon the Commander-in-Chief from India. All that Sir Hugh Rose and General Farrell did was to make a written communication on the subject of the court martial. The Commander-in-Chief was not one of the actors or witnesses, and he saw no valid reason for requiring his presence in this country. But he felt sure the country would not be satisfied unless the trial took place in England. Nor was any considerable expense, in his opinion, likely to be incurred. He humbly thought that the Government ought to commence the matter by ordering the regiment home. The regiment was alleged to be in a bad state, its term of service in India was nearly expired, and the only consideration was the expense, which need not be very great?

said, he regretted that the discussion had been raised in so incidental a way. It would be much better if hon. Members would give notice of such questions, so that the House might have an opportunity of expressing an opinion. He wished to know distinctly, whether any communication had been addressed by the Commander-in-Chief to Sir Hugh Rose through the Adjutant General, the purport of which was to qualify the memorandum that had been laid on the table of the House?

said, the question before the House was more military than civil. The hon. and gallant Member (Sir De Lacy Evans) proposed that the regiment in question should be ordered home for the purpose of Carrying on the court martial. ["No!"] Then, for what other purpose? What would be the consequence? It would amount to a premium on misconduct. A regiment would only have to misconduct itself sufficiently to give occasion for a court martial, and then it would expect to be immediately ordered home, That would be a remarkable way of con ducting the affairs of the army. The hon. and gallant Member added that the people of this country would not be satisfied unless the court martial were held in Eng land. Now, as one of those who had the honour of a seat in that House as a representative of the people, he would express his belief that all that the people of this country had a right to require, and all that they would ask, was that justice should be done on both sides. He ventured to think it would be impossible for justice to be done if a tribunal were to try in this country proceedings that had occurred in India. It was obviously necessary that a hundred witnesses should be ordered home, and it would be impossible to do justice to both sides. Notwithstanding what had fallen from the noble Lord, it was quite impossible that, a course which appeared to be entirely without precedent should be adopted without offering a strong reflection, if not a positive insult, on the officers of the Indian army.

said, the 8th Regiment was the first to come home, but that only nine months would elapse between the return of the 8th Regiment and the Inniskillings. As the expense had been alluded to, he would remark, that if the Government would change the rota, and order home the Inniskillings instead of the 8th, there would be no difficulty in regard to expense. At the same time, that kind of interference with the discipline of the army was most prejudicial to the service. He know that some of the stories which had been circulated in regard to the conduct of Colonel Crawley had been extremely exaggerated. The House had been told that Seregant Major Lilley was confined to one room, and that a sentry was put in his room. He believed that the sergeant major had a house of four rooms, and that the sentry was placed in the verandah, because in India sentries could not be placed in the sun. He thought that Paymaster Smales had been most properly dismissed the service for writing a most insubordinate letter. It was not the practice, he was informed, for commanding officers of regiments to muster their regiments in India. An officer, now a Member of that House, who had served in India, stated that it was not the custom to do so. A great deal had been said by the public press on the matter, but the House ought to yield, not to the public voice, but to the voice of justice.

said, he wished to ask whether it would be necessary to examine any native witnesses before the court martial; and, if so, whether any law existed which obliged them to come to this country for such a purpose against their will.

was unable, without notice, to answer the question just addressed to him. It was impossible to say what course the court martial would take. If the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Bouverie) would put his notice on the paper, he would answer it another day. He apprehended, however, that he should be compelled to repeat the answer which he had given on a previous day, that there was no public or official memorandum in existence on the subject except that which had been published. The hon. Member for Brighton had stated one portion of the proceedings taken against Paymaster Smales which he alleged was illegal. If, however, he was expected to answer questions of that kind, he must request hon. Members to state distinctly on the Notice Paper what they wished to know. In his opinion what had taken place showed the extreme inconvenience of discussing topics in this manner. There were very few evenings lately on which the hon. Member for Brighton had not placed some question on the Paper; and considering that he had given notice of his intention to bring the subject forward on the Motion for Supply, and that the Government had promised to lay the proceedings of the court martial on the table, be could not see what advantage could arise from these small incidental discussions.

said, that what he had stated was, that Sergeant Major Lilley was at first confined to his own quarters, where he had several apartments; but that when he was ordered under confinement, he was removed from his proper quarters to others, where he was confined to a single room. It was in the single room that the sentry was posted. On that point he spoke from the testimony of two eye witnesses.

said, he much regretted that his hon. and gallant Friend bad raised the question, as it was very inconvenient to discuss matters of the kind pending the investigation that was to take place. He was one of those old officers who rejoiced very much at the course which the Government were going to take in bringing home the persons who were to give evidence. The trial ought to take place in this country, otherwise public opinion would not be satisfied. Sometimes when out of England, and the army had not the advantage of the presence of the Judge Advocate, everything was done in an irregular manner. But in this country, where that high officer was present, matters were properly and legally conducted. He was sure, if his hon. and learned Friend had been in India, the case would not now have to be tried in England. But it was because the persons who were to conduct such proceedings abroad, and who might be very excellent officers, were not acquainted with the law, that the irregularities which were complained of occurred. While he agreed with his hon. and gallant Friend (Sir De Lacy Evans) that the trial ought to take place in England, he did not agree with him that the regiment ought to be brought home. No doubt, Colonel Crawley and other officers, and even Sir Hugh Rose, the Commander in Chief, if considered necessary witnesses, would be ordered home.

said, he should be sorry the discussion should close without noticing a remark which fell from the hon. and gallant Gentleman who had just sat down. If it were true that it would be impossible that a court-martial—[Sir FREDERIC SMITH: I did not say impossible]—well, if it were probable that a court martial could take place in India without a reasonable prospect of justice being done, might not public opinion call imperatively many times a year for the transfer from India to this country of persons whose evidence might be considered necessary? It might be that the habits and mode of life incidental to service in India might generate scandals and serious inconveniences which did not often occur in England; but the House would establish a very dangerous precedent if it tacitly assented to such a doctrine as that such cases should be brought home in order that public opinion might be brought to bear upon them. But the House would do no such thing. That House and the country had confidence in the honour of courts martial, and believed they would do justice.

said, he wished to call the attention of the House to the Report of the Committee on Small Arms, and to ask Her Majesty's Government, what action they purpose to take thereon? He ventured two years ago, upon the ground that the arm purchased by the Government was not the best which could be had for the money, to bring the question of the Small Arms employed in the British army under the notice of the House, and the noble Lord at the head of the Government promised that the subject should be investigated. That pledge had been strictly fulfilled, and he wished to call attention to the Report of the Committee appointed to inquire into the matter. The reply of the Committee to the question whether the present Enfield rifle, 577 bore, was manufactured on the best possible principles, was that it was not. Now, it could hardly he considered a satisfactory position to have spent £3,000,000 on the purchase of arms, and not to have purchased the best. The course which the Committee had taken had been as follows. They had selected five ordinary service muskets; five muskets with five grooves instead of three; five with five grooves but with a sharper twist; and five with a still sharper twist. On experiment it was found not only that five-grooved pieces were better than three-grooved ones, but that the further they departed from the principle of rifling in the ordinary service musket, the better the rifle which they produced became. The elliptical system of rifling of Mr. Lancaster, proved itself superior not only to the ordinary service Enfield, but to the best of the rifles made on other improved principles. The Committee next proceeded to investigate the question of a different calibre, and they experimented on Mr. Whitworth's 451 bore, Mr. Lancaster's small bore, and the breech-loader of Mr. Westley Richards; and the con-elusion at which they arrived did at length that justice to Mr. Whitworth which had been so long deferred. Without urging its universal adoption in the army, they declared his rifle to be the best that had yet been invented, even as a military weapon. They also expressed an opinion that it was not probable there would be any material improvement upon it. The Committee arranged the small bore rifles in order of merit. The Whitworth came first, the Lancaster next, the Westley Richards next, and then the Enfield regulation rifle. It appeared then, that after the expenditure of large sums of money in the production of small arms, the Committee at last arrived at the conclusion which might have been easily come to before a great expense had been incurred, and he wished to know why the experiments which were ultimately: tried were not made sooner; He believed that the Ordnance Committee had no power to originate-experiments, but only to experiment in respect to matters referred to them; but he certainly thought, considering the simplicity of the experiments with regard to small arms, care should have been taken to institute them long since. The Committee on Small Arras very quickly established the fact that the rifle manufactured by the Government was the worst; and, consequently, it would be satisfactory if the Government could inform the House that some tribunal was about to be established, Which would consider these matters before the country was involved in a vast expenditure. With regard to the thinness of the barrel, the-Committee had not gone into that point; but it was evident, that in small arms of the same weight, the strength of those having the least-sized bore would be the; greatest, because, the metal would be thickest. The regulation rifle was a weak Weapon; the groovings were thin and easily worn down by the action of the ramrod, and after the firing of a comparatively few thousand rounds it became inefficient. That was not the case with the Whitworth or the Lancaster. But, in his opinion, the Committee had not sufficiently considered the question of the endurance of rifles likely to be subjected to much rough usage. The firing of 1,000 or 1,800 rounds could not be a sufficient test of endurance, and be should like to have seen the rifles exposed to the test of real hard usage, such as they were, likely to meet with: in the field. Considering that the Government were making a great number of these weapons every year, and that many were continually worn out by use in the course of years, if those weapons were replaced by a good arm, the error which had been fallen into would be retrieved. It had been said that the Westley Richards breech-loading rifle cost £9; but he had ascertained that if made in large numbers the Westley Richards breech-loading rifles could be manufactured for a sum not exceeding £5 each. Such an arm might be of great advantage in skirmishing. Another point to which the Committee had omitted to attach sufficient weight was that of penetration, which was increased by the greater hardness of the projectile. Defences used for field works were now made of a strength exactly sufficient to resist the ordinary rifle-ball; but if a hardened ball were employed, with a power of penetration three times greater, it was clear: that the strength of all those defences must be increased three times also. In conclusion, he would ask the Government what action they proposed to take in reference to the Report of the Committee on Small Arms.

said, that the details which the hon. and gallant Member had brought forward were such as the House could scarcely deal with. He could not assent to the alleged perfection of either the Whitworth or Westley Richards rifle. There might be more correct weapons than the Enfield, but he believed that for all the practical purposes, of a campaign, a better rifle was not to be found. He wished however, to call attention to a rifle which had been in the hands of the10th Hussars for more than two years, and upon which the commanding officer had reported favourably. He alluded to Terry's breech-loading rifle. Before he (Mr. Berkeley) was aware of that debate, he had entered a question for the following evening with regard to that weapon. That instrument could be used with the Enfield barrel; it was very efficient in all respects, and it possessed this advantage over the Westley Richards, that it was half as cheap again. He was informed, that on a recent occasion, 1,500 rounds of ammunition had been fired from one of those rifles, and it was found to be perfectly clean afterwards. He wished to ask the noble Lord whether Terry's rifle had been referred to in the Report of the Committee.

said, the House and the country were much indebted to the hon. and gallant Member for the pains which he had taken in investigating the subject, and for the Motion which he made two years ago, and which resulted in the Report of the Committee before them. He could not, however, admit that the Report showed that the Government of the day had taken a wrong course, or wasted public money in the manufacture of the Enfield rifle. That manufacture was commenced at a time when much alarm and anxiety prevailed throughout the country on account of their not being provided with a good rifle for the army. Under those circumstances, it was incumbent on the Government to adopt that rifle, which, although it might be open to some scientific objections, offered the greatest number of advantages for practical service in the field. The Report of the Committee distinctly stated that the Enfield rifle was introduced at a time when there was only limited experience in regard to elongated rifle bullets, and that the greatest credit was due to those who produced a weapon which was believed not only then, but still, to be superior to any arm adopted by other countries If that were the case, it could not be said that the Government had failed to do their duty in the matter. The hon. Gentleman had referred to the fact that the Committee had reported in favour of the Whitworth rifle, but it was most important for the House to bear in mind that the trials which were conducted by the Committee were entirely of a theoretical and not of a practical character. The results were, no doubt, sufficiently favourable to the Whitworth, and sufficiently unfavourable to the Enfield, to justify the Government in making further experiments in regard to these arms. Considering, however, that they were at that moment in possession of a weapon which the Ordnance Committee themselves declared to be superior to any possessed by other countries, it would obviously not be right for the Government to enter into a heavy expenditure, such as would be required in order suddenly to substitute another instrument for the Enfield as the rifle of the army, except on the fullest consideration and after the most complete practical experience. One difficulty of changing the Enfield for another rifle of smaller bore was, that if before the alteration was entirely concluded war broke out, they would have go many regiments armed with the one instrument and so many with the other; and two different sorts of ammunition would have to be served out That might lead to great confusion, and possibly even to the most disastrous consequences. It was therefore the intention of the Government not to desist from the use of the Enfield until they had ascertained, by the most thorough and conclusive trials, the superiority of the Whit worth. With the view of giving a complete practical trial to the Whitworth Rifle, they proposed to issue that arm to the eight battalions composing the Rifle Brigade and the 60th Rifles. That rifle would then be in the hands of expert soldiers in every part of our possessions, and would be subjected to every kind of usage or accident which could possibly happen to it. On the Report which was made of the performances of the Whitworth under these circumstances, the Government would decide what should be their course for the future. As to large bores, the Committee had reported more favourably of the Lancaster than the Enfield, and the former could be more easily substituted for the Enfield than the small bore to which he had referred. Mr. Whitworth did not provide a large bore rifle for trial, because he was aware that he could not obtain the same advantages with a large as with a small bore. The Government, in consideration of the recommendations of the Committee, had resolved to proceed as slowly as possible with the manufacture of the present service En-fields, and Mr. Whitworth had been requested to furnish a number of polygonal rifles of the large bore size, in order that they might undergo competition with the Lancasters. Whichever was found to be the best for practical purposes would gradually be introduced. There would not be the same difficulty in the substitution of an improved large bore for the En field as in the case of small bores, because the issue of different ammunition would not be required. The hon. and gallant Member who brought forward the Motion had gone, in his opinion, a little too far in stating that the Ordnance Select Committee reported that the Whitworth was absolutely the best rifle. As he had already mentioned, the trials were theoretical and not practical; but, moreover, the Committee themselves pointed out several defects in the Whitworth, such as breaking of hammers, and the inconvenience in some respects of the ammunition. These points, small as they might seem, were really of more importance than any question of extraordinary accuracy at long range. Most military men were agreed, that however useful a rifle possessing precision at a long range might be under certain circumstances, and in the hands of experienced men, the arm best fitted to be used by the general rank and file, was that which could most simply be managed, which was least liable to derangement, and which was generally most useful. There was, however, no such extraordinary difference between the Enfield and the Whitworth rifles for the purpose of actual service as would justify the assertion that the public money had been wasted on the manufactory at Enfield. [Mr. HUSSEY VIVIAN explained, that he had not said that the public money had been wasted] Neither had anything come out that would justify the Government in subjecting the army to the great inconvenience of suddenly changing the rifle used in the array. Only one other point remained. Among military men, great difference of opinion prevailed with respect to breech-loaders. No doubt, under certain circumstances, these rifles possessed great advantages; but some authorities believed that the extreme facility of loading would induce the men to fire away their ammunition with too great rapidity, which would counterbalance the advantages they possessed in other respects. The question of cost was also one of considerable importance. On the whole, then, the Government did not feel themselves justified in ordering breech-loaders to be issued to the troops for actual service; but, at the same time, the merits of the arm invented by Mr. Westley Richards were such as entitled it to a further practical trial, and the Government had consequently determined to place 2,000 in the hands of men scattered over all parts of the world, in order that the weapon might be thoroughly tested. Such were the decisions to which the Government had come, relative to small arms, and he hoped they would be satisfactory to the House. He should be happy to answer the question of the hon. Member behind him, on the following day. In conclusion, he would repeat that the House and country ought to feel obliged to the hon. Gentleman for having paid such attention to the subject.

said, he thought that the answer given by the noble Lord the Under Secretary for War was highly satisfactory as to the course the Government had taken in regard to the subject which had been under discussion. There was, however, another subject upon which he wished to obtain some information—namely, with respect to the sum granted for the retirement of the officers of the Royal Engineer Corps and the manner of its application. A sum of £16,000 was voted every year for the retirement of Engineer officers; but since the Vote first appeared in the Estimates the corps had been largely increased by the amalgamation of the army of the East. What he complained of was that the whole of the £16,000 was not applied to the purpose for which it was voted. Certain Engineer officers accepted civil appointments. When the time arrived at which they would be entitled to military retiring pensions, they were obliged either to give up their civil appointments or to forego their retiring allowances. If they continued to serve the country in a civil capacity, their retiring pensions as Engineer officers were retained; and, for his own part, he did not know whether the money was returned to the Exchequer, or applied to some other purpose. All he knew was, that to that extent the sum voted by Parliament for the benefit of the Engineers was misapplied. The Commander-in Chief had endeavoured to obtain justice for the Engineer officers, but in vain; and hence the necessity for calling public attention to the subject.

said, there was a War Office warrant of 1858, which granted £48,000 for pensions to officers of the Artillery and Engineer corps, £32,000 for the Artillery, and £16,000 for the Engineers. The latter sum was to be divided between the officers of different ranks in the Engineers. The general officers were allowed to retire on full pay provided they had a prospect of the command of a battalion. Now, those general officers made a sacrifice when they consented to retire on the full pay list. Some of these retired full-pay officers were found available for civil service, and of course, when so employed by the Government, it was not possible that they should receive both their military full pay and their civil salaries. Consequently, a certain portion of the amount granted for the retired full-pay list was undrawn. The hon. and gallant Member did not wish to deprive the Government of the privilege of employing Engineer officers in civil situations in cases where they were likely to render service to the country. What he wanted was that the military full pay of officers engaged in civil employments should be assigned to other officers of the Engineers.

said, he did not refer to the full pay, but the undrawn retiring pensions, which were allowed to accumulate, instead of being distributed amongst the other officers. His object was that no part of the £16,000 voted by that House for Engineers should be intercepted because some of those officers took employment in the civil service.

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

said, that the right hon. and learned Gentleman the Attorney General for Ireland, in objecting to the introduction of the English system of education into Ireland on the ground that it would facilitate proselytism, by enabling wealthy Protestant landowners to establish schools where there were no children of their own denomination to attend them, bad entirely misunderstood the character of its system. According to a cardinal rule of the Privy Council, no one was allowed to receive a grant unless he could show that there were within the area of the proposed school a sufficient number of children and families of the labouring poor of the same religious denomination as himself; and in one case, to his knowledge, a grant was refused to a gentleman who desired to establish a Catholic school in a Protestant district, because he could not satisfy the requirements of the Privy Council in that respect. In short, the English system was carefully guarded against any attempt at proselytism, and no instance of its failure in that respect had come to his knowledge. The Attorney General dwelt very much upon the increase in the number of scholars, which had risen from 355,320 in 1843 to 812,000 in the present year, but he had not referred to the cost. In 1843, the sum voted by that House was £55,000. This year they were asked to vote £305,000. According to the rate of expenditure in 1843, that sum ought to educate not 812,000 but 2,000,000 pupils. In Ireland the grant had increased much faster than the number of children. In England, within the last year or two, the grant had declined, but the number of children attending the schools had increased, The decrease of the grant last year was £38,000, but there was an increase of 28,000 in the attendance. In Ireland there was an increase of 320 in the number of pupils and of £16,000 in the grant. The increase in the number of schools in Ireland was 180, or one for every two pupils; while in England, with an increase of 28,000 pupils, the increase in the number of schools was not more than 20 or 30. It might be asked why-Irish Members should complain, as long as their country derived the benefit of the excessive expenditure upon the system of national education. In a debate a few night previously, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, when asked for money to promote works of a practical character, such as arterial drainage and the improvement of inland navigation, replied that he had no money to spare for such purposes, as the nation already bestowed £300,000 a year upon Irish education. Clearly, therefore, it devolved upon Irish Members to show in what manner the money which the Government was willing to expend in Ireland could be most beneficially applied. In the comparatively deserted state of the House it would interfere with the progress of public business if he were to press to a division the Motion of which he had given notice for a reduction of the Vote by £100,000. He therefore begged to withdraw it; but he hoped the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary, before the Vote was agreed to, would let the House know whether he concurred with the views which his Colleague the Attorney General for Ireland had expressed.

said, he felt, that after the lengthened debate which had taken place on a previous evening, and in the present state of the attendance, the time was inopportune for bringing forward his Motion for such a relaxation of the rules of the National Board of Education in Ireland as should permit a number of schools now in existence and languishing for want of funds to partake in the benefits conferred by the grant. He begged to give notice of his intention to bring forward that subject early next Session.

said, it was not for him to state whether he agreed with every word of the very full and able statement of his learned Colleague the Attorney General; but the general views expressed by that right hon. Gentleman on the subject of National Education received his entire concurrence. It was perfectly true that there was a small increase, about £16,000, over the Vote of the previous year; but that, as he had explained to the House when introducing the Vote, was principally owing to the natural increase in the salaries of teachers; and he was sure the Committee would feel that those public servants were not overpaid for the duties they discharged. He should be very glad to see money voted for the purpose of improving the arterial drainage of Ireland, or the agricultural system of that country generally, and all efforts in that direction would receive his cordial support; but he should be sorry to see the grants for education stopped in order to promote works of arterial drainage, on which undertakings large sums had been expended within the last thirty years. To educate the poor was to contribute in the best manner to the material improvement of the country in which they resided. After the ample discussion which had already taken place, he hoped there would be no objection to agree to the Vote.

said, there were only three systems of education possible in Ireland—the voluntary, the denominational, and the mixed systems. The voluntary system might succeed in the case of the rich, but as regarded the poor it was not to be depended upon. The introduction of the denominational system into such a country as Ireland was exposed to the great drawback that it brought up children from their earliest infancy with feelings of hostility one towards the other, and taught them to view with suspicion and dislike those with whom necessarily they had to mingle in after life. The national system was by no means perfect, but in the present circumstances of Ireland no other system appeared to hold out commensurate advantages.

said, he disapproved the principle on which the grant was made, but he was not prepared to sacrifice the practical advantages which would be entailed by the adoption of a Motion such as that of the hon. Member for the King's County. He would, however, ask the right hon. Gentleman the Chief Secretary for Ireland to take into account the hardships which were inflicted on the great body of the Protestant clergy and laity in that country by excluding them from participation in the benefits of the grant. In self-defence they had been compelled to found at their own charges the Church Education Society, which proved its value by the increase in the number of its scholars and the amount of its funds. That the education it afforded was widely beneficial must be evident from the fact that in a single diocese 8,000 Dissenters and 1,600 Roman Catholics were included in the return of attendances. Young men with limited incomes and labourers from their scanty earnings contributed freely to the funds of the society, in order to perpetuate its valuable labours. He hoped a time would yet come when its exertions would receive, as they abundantly deserved, the recognition of the State.

said, that to give a portion of the grant to the Church Education Society would be to give a premium to proselytism. He wished, however, to call attention to a point connected with the increase in the salaries paid to masters In 1843 the amount voted for this purpose was £34,000; in 1863 it had increased to £205,000. In the year 1843 the amount paid for inspection was £5,000; in the present year it was £22,400. He wished to ask the right hon. Baronet why the convent schools were excluded from the benefit of the increase in the grant to other schools. That increase had risen from £10 to £42 in the female schools, or 400 per cent, while for the convent schools the amount remained the same. All the authorities agreed in affirming the value of the secular instruction given in the convent schools. He believed that no pupil teachers were allowed to be taken in the convent schools. Some relaxation of that rule was much required.

said, the grant to convent schools was between £7,000 and £8,000. He could bear testimony to the admirable education given in these schools. The question of permitting pupil teachers of these schools to be teachers in other schools was, he believed, about to be discussed by the National Board. If the Board should determine that the convent schools should take pupil teachers, they would, of course, receive an increased allowance on that account.

said, he thought it hard, that while the allowances to other schools had increased 400 percent, there had been no increase to the convent schools.

said, that the only justification for excluding Church schools was that institutions like the convent schools were also shut out. They were, he believed, schools for Catholics exclusively. He must also deny that the Church Education Society was a proselytizing society. The religious teaching afforded in their schools was confined to the reading of the Scriptures. The charge of proselytism would be more applicable to the convent schools, if indeed they had any Protestant pupils.

said, he could assure the hon. Gentleman that very many Protestant children attended the convent schools, and that scrupulous care was taken against proselytism.

said, he wished to ask for an explanation of the Vote of £100 for a classical instructor for special class teachers.

said, he wished for some explanation with respect to the model farm at Glasnevin. It appeared that for the farm steward an item of £150 was asked; for the ploughman, £31; for drainage, permanent live stock, manure, seeds, and plants, £500; for wages of servants, £80; and for rent, £723. The total agricultural expenditure—he omitted the expenditure for teaching—was £1,484, and the total probable amount of receipts was set down at £1,600, which would leave a probable profit of £116. Now, it was admitted that any reasonable agricultural returns would yield a profit equal to the rent. But if the whole net profit in that case was £116, and the rent £723, that model farm must be a model set up to be avoided.

said, he considered the Vote altogether unsatisfactory. Whilst there had been a diminution of £38,117 in the education Vote for England, there had been an increase in the Vote for Ireland to the extent of £15,112. He objected to voting money taken from the taxes of the United Kingdom for high-class literary schools. Schools maintained at the public expense ought to be for the use of the children of the working classes. There were not less than nineteen agricultural schools in Ireland, for which it was proposed to vote £5,516. Those agricultural schools were of no benefit to the public, though they might be to the landlords in providing stewards for them. [A laugh.] His hon. Friend (Mr. Bagwell) laughed, but perhaps he would not think it unfair to put his hand in his pocket to pay for the education of his own steward. He begged to move the reduction of the Vote by £5,516 for agricultural schools.

said, he hoped that his hon. Friend would not press his Amendment. He was very glad his hon. Friend had been dining when they were discussing the point the other night. In that state of the House (about eighteen Members only were present) he was sure his hon. Friend would not like to gain his point. In answer to the question of the hon. Member for Roscommon (the O'Conor Don), he had to state that the classical teacher was required for a special class of pupil teachers and others, and on a former occasion had received the sanction of the Committee. As to the question raised by the hon. and gallant Member for Longford (Mr. O'Reilly), it was quite true that the agricultural school at Glasnevin had been rather an expensive establishment, but expensive only on account of the outlay necessary for the education of a vast number of persons who were trained there. It was well known that private gentlemen derived considerable advantage from the education which was given in those agricultural schools. The rent of the Glasnevin farm was rather high, because it was close to Dublin, but it grew excellent crops and instructed a large number of persons. He thought £50 a year was about the outside of the expenditure upon draining, which was done gradually year by year, for the purpose of instructing the pupils, who were made to do the work and understand it. Five acres were drained each year, and the whole of the draining and ploughing was done by the pupils. He had a Return of the occupations of those who had been educated in the agricultural model school at Glasnevin from 1858 to 1861; they were 175 in number, and it was not at all true, as stated on a former occasion by the hon. Member for Liskeard (Mr. Bernal Osborne), that they were all emigrating. Of the 175 pupils who had been educated between 1858 and 1861, 68 were farming their own land at home, 41 were land stewards or assistant land agents, 3 agricultural teachers, 9 garden assistants, 10 national school teachers, 9 had gone to Jamaica and Antigua, 14 were clerks in the offices of land agents, 5 had gone to the Cape of Good Hope and Australia, and only 16 had withdrawn from the establishment from delicate health and other causes. Glasnevin was rather expensive; but when they looked to the benefits derived, there was, he thought, no hon. Gentleman from Ireland, or from England either, who would wish to deprive the public of the advantages which unquestionably had flowed from the establishment of those schools. There had already been a diminution of £300 in the Vote in deference to the desire expressed last Session, and further reductions would be made in subsequent years. Besides, the system being now in good working trim, and no new agricultural buildings requiring to be erected, the Vote would of itself diminish.

said, he thought it of the utmost importance to the welfare of Ireland, as essentially an agricultural country, that the agricultural schools should be supported. There might be some faults connected with them, but they had produced very valuable results. The hon. and gallant Member for Longford the other evening had referred to some of the better classes in Ireland who had availed themselves of the schools supported by public grant for the education of their sons. With others of his class, he believed the late Mayor of Derry had done so, not to save his pocket, but from the knowledge that a very superior education was to be got there. He considered that a most laudable example in supporting a system which he believed would be abundantly productive of the greatest blessings to all classes in Ireland.

said, it was alleged by those who supported the system of national education in Ireland that it was for the children of poor parents, but in truth the schools were resorted to by the children of mayors of towns, solicitors, and others, who were able to pay for their education. Such a system of education would not be tolerated in England for a moment. He believed, that if the case of a national school, similar to that just mentioned, had occurred in England, the Privy Council would have withdrawn their grant.

said, he could assure the Committee he was as anxious as any one for the success of the agricultural schools. He had visited the Glasnevin school with great pleasure. But he must call attention to the fact of the absence of profit upon them. They could not be model farms if they did not show a reasonable profit. The fact was more remarkable in this instance, because the labour cost nothing.

said, he thought that if any one part of the Irish system of education was defensible, it was that which related to the agricultural schools of the country, for there was in Ireland a great want of agricultural knowledge. He could not understand why the hon. Member for Lambeth (Mr. W. Williams) should have allowed £122,000 to be voted for science and art, and yet refused the grant for agricultural schools. If it was fit that cheap designers should be had from the schools of science and art, why should they not get cheap stewards from the agricultural schools in Ireland? In France there were agricultural schools in every district, and hence the great progress of agriculture in that country. In Ireland, till of late, they had been importing Scotch stewards; but these almost invariably ruined every gentleman who had employed them. Let them ask any English or Irish farmer if they ever knew of a Scotch steward who bad not always failed to attain his end. He trusted that the right hon. Baronet would not yield to clamour against the Tote for agricultural schools. With regard to the Hydrographical and Navigation schools, he thought that, instead of there being only seven of those institutions altogether, there ought to be one established in every principal seaport of the country.

submitted that there were no agricultural schools in England or Scotland supported by public grants, and did not see any cause for a distraction in favour of Ireland. If the Chief Secretary would promise to make a gradual reduction in the respect pointed out, he Would withdraw his Amendment, but not otherwise. He also wished to call attention to the item of £7,500 for mistresses to teach the higher branches of needlework, which he thought was very extravagant.

said, that in answer to the Member for Wexford he had hitherto believed that a great boon was granted to Ireland by sending over to that country good Scotchmen with capital. The hon. and learned Member appeared, however, to think they had hitherto been sending Scotchmen there with no capital. He could tell the hon. and learned Member how that evil might easily be avoided. Let him vote with the hon. Member for Lambeth that no public money be voted for any purpose whatever in Ireland, and then he might be certain that no Scotchman without capital Would go there.

said, he had so high an opinion of Irish talent that he had engaged an Irishman on his own estate instead of a Scotchman. With respect to the Vote for teachers of the higher branches of needlework—a matter which the hon. Member for Lambeth could not possibly understand—these teachers received only £10 a year each, an amount surely to which exception could hardly be taken fairly. If the hon. Member examined the Educational Votes for England, he would find items there for agricultural schools as well as for instruction in kitchen and laundry work.

said, he rose to move that the Vote be reduced by £1,400 in the item of incidental and travelling expenses. He regarded the interference of the Government for the support of science and art as injurious rather than beneficial. The Vote for the National Gallery had been immortalized in Mr. May's able work on Constitutional History. Formerly an agent was employed, at a salary of £300, to travel over the Continent in order to purchase pictures for the National Gallery. A division was taken in that House against the item of £300 for that gentleman's salary, and the item was struck off. But an item of £600 remained on the Estimates for the payment of travelling expenses; and there was good reason to believe, that although that House had struck off the item for the German travelling agent, that agent was still employed by the authorities of the National Gallery, and remunerated out of the sum voted for travelling expense. That sum stood before at £600; but it had since risen to £2,000; and what he wished to know was, how that amount was made up, what proportion of it went for travelling expenses, and how much for incidental and other expenses. Unless he received a satisfactory explanation as to the mode in which the money was applied, it would be his duty to take the sense of the Committee on his Amendment. The authorities of the National Gallery were in the habit of lending pictures to other public institutions, but the pictures so lent were not of such a character as was likely to improve the public taste. In the conclude- ing paragraph of the Report appended to the Vote it was stated that a regulation had been introduced providing that "with the exception of dusting and wiping," no operation coming under the description of varnishing, cleaning, or restoring should be undertaken without the sanction of the trustees, to be communicated by the keeper. That regulation was the result of constant protests made in that House. He would move, as an Amendment, that the item be reduced by £1,400.

said, the sum of £2,000 was not intended merely for travelling expenses and agencies, but also for all the temporary and miscellaneous expenses connected with the National Gallery, such as the carriage and framing of the pictures; and the amount asked could not, therefore, be considered extravagant. With regard to travelling expenses and agencies, no larger sum than £650 was allowed, and the actual expenditure did not generally exceed £500.

said, that the total Vote was larger by £4,075 than the Vote of last year, and the expenditure was principally for the purchase of pictures.

said, he thanked the hon. Member for Brighton for calling attention to the item, because the expenditure ought to be more accurately explained in the Estimates. He conceived that the sum allowed to the travelling agent was too large, when considered in connection with the amount dispensed in the purchase of pictures.

said, that he originally objected to any sum being devoted to travelling expenses, for he thought it a perfect delusion to send all over Europe a travelling agent to purchase pictures. When the agent arrived in a continental town, it was said that the man with the purse of the British taxpayers was come to purchase pictures, and the pictures rose 100 to 200 per cent in value. He thought that the gentlemen in charge of the national pictures were utterly blind; at least, they never saw the merits of a picture until it got into the hands of some dealer, who asked 500 per cent for his bargain. For instance, a picture was purchased the other day at Christie's for £500 or £600, which was at the sale of the former proprietor knocked down for a trifling sum. Why did not the trustees of the National Gallery get the picture when it could be obtained cheap? Nevertheless, after the explanation given by the right hon. Gentleman, he should withdraw his Amendment.

said, he thought that his hon. Friend the Member for Brighton was too great a lover of art to make any serious objection to that particular item. It was perfectly clear, that as the vast majority of the Italian pictures would not come to the English, the English must go to the pictures, and the pictures could not be obtained except by means of agents. Sir Charles Eastlake, when he went abroad, did not raise the price of pictures. That gentleman visited all the galleries, ascertained the value of any pictures that it might be desirable to add to the national collection, and easily found an agent to purchase them whenever the opportunity occurred. He was thus enabled to make a good selection at a cheaper rate than by public competition. An example of that was afforded by the picture purchased at Christie's, to which the hon. Gentleman alluded. If the English agent had seen that picture in the gallery in Italy, he would probably have got it for the sum for which it was originally sold—he thought £200. If his hon. Friend went to the National Gallery, and saw two or three pictures there purchased by Sir Charles Eastlake last year, he would be satisfied that it was fortunate that the country had a person of so much tact, judgment, and knowledge to undertake the selection of the national pictures.

said, he would recommend that greater facilities should be given to the public to see the national pictures. On the four public days in the week the Gallery was so crowded that it was impossible to see the paintings with any comfort or advantage, and he would suggest that on the two remaining days, devoted to students, such of the public as chose to pay sixpence or a shilling for admission should be allowed to enter. He thought the students would probably derive great advantage from such an arrangement, as many might succeed in finding purchasers for the copies they were engaged in making.

said, he concurred with the hon. Gentleman in thinking it was desirable there should be some quiet days, when those who took a special interest in pictures might find themselves in the Gallery undisturbed by a crowd. He did not, however, believe that that advantage would be effected by exacting on certain days the payment of sixpence or a shilling, because he had observed that exhibitions at which such a payment was exacted were frequently very densely thronged. The matter, however, was one which the trustees might fairly take into their consideration.

said, those other exhibitions which the right hon. Gentleman referred to as being thronged, though money was paid for admission to them, were not open gratuitously four days in the week, as was the case with the National Gallery.

contended, that it would be perfectly easy, taking the pictures at the National Gallery seriatim, to show that a very large number had been purchased by Sir Charles Eastlake, which ought never to have been bought for that institution, while others might have been purchased for a much more reasonable amount than the sums given for them. It was, however, to the credit of Sir Charles Eastlake that he seemed to have profited by the discussions on the subject of the National Gallery which had taken place in that House.

said, he thought the rules which regulated the class of pictures to be bought for the National Gallery ought to be made somewhat more elastic, and that Sir Charles Eastlake ought to be permitted to buy from time to time pictures illustrative of cotemporary history possessing national interest and of intrinsic merit.

said, there was no rule precluding the purchase of modern pictures. Paintings, the work of Gainsborough and Sir J. Reynolds, had, for instance, been bought during the previous year.

complained of the absence of detailed explanation of the Vote. He knew of pictures of great interest being entirely overlooked within the last few months by the authorities of the Gallery. In his opinion, none but model works of the highest class should be purchased for the galleries of the nation.

promised to consider whether fuller information could not be furnished.

said, that it was, in his opinion, a complete misapplication of the public money to purchase works which were a disgrace to the gallery. Only works of the highest art out to be bought for such institutions.

said, it was in no degree the object for which the gallery was formed to elevate art. It would be utterly impossible to collect togeher portraits of all sorts of characters, of all sorts of appearances, possessing great artistic merit.

said, his remarks referred as well to the previous Vote as to that immediately under discussion.

said, he wanted to know whether the charge was in process of diminution, or whether vacancies were being filled up as they occurred.

stated that for many years past the Vote had been in course of diminution, the salaries only continuing for the lives of the present holders.

said, he noticed that there was a reduction in the Vote of £9,000 for British Columbia that year. The colony, however, was highly prosperous, and therefore he thought it time that the whole was at an end.

said, that almost the whole of the Vote had been incurred in the first starting of the colony; and although only a young colony, the time had already arrived when she paid her own expenses. The Royal Engineers were about to be recalled.

said, he wished to ask whether it was intended to appoint; a separate resident Governor.

said, his noble Friend the Secretary of State was about to bring in a Bill for the Government of British Columbia, and he did not wish to anticipate the full statement of the intentions of the Government which would then be made,

asked whether the Vote was the last payment.

said, it included the last farthing which was to be paid to the Hudson's Bay Company. An item of £5,000 was in dispute, and, to avoid long and expensive legal proceedings, it had been arranged to divide the amount and pay one-half.

asked, whether Vancouver's Island was now the absolute property of the Crown.

said, it was so entirely.

said, he would suggest that some means might be provided to reduce the number of governorships in these small islands. They might as well pay the Chairmen of Vestries of large metropolitan parishes, which were of more importance than some of the Colonies.

asked for explanations as to the Governors of Jamaica.

said, that last year a very wise arrangement was made, by which a very old and bad debt due by Jamaica was converted into a fixed perpetual annuity, out of which, after next July, the whole salary of the Governors would be paid. As to reducing the number of Governors, however small and insignificant these islands were, they formed separate and distinct communities, and must each have some officer to administer their affairs.

said, he wished for some explanation with regard to the Vote, seeing that £2,000 only appeared in the items as the cost of the civil establishments of Lagos. Lagos was a small island of no consequence in itself, but it was important from its position in, reference to the trade with Africa. If they were anxious to get rid of the iniquitous slave trade, the most effectual way was to encourage legitimate trade. They, however, had raised the taxation upon the trade of that port from £3,000 to £16,000, and this proceeding was, he thought, most hostile to the best interests of Africa, for it placed the trade at Lagos in a most uncomfortable position, and indeed trade was being driven from that place to another port. The governor of Lagos had since laid claim to the second port—for which claim, however, it appeared there was no foundation; but he could only speak from imperfect information upon, the matter, as the Government had refused to furnish the papers in reference to it. He also desired to express his disgust at learning that a portrait of the Queen had been presented by one of Her Majesty's agents to the King of Dahomey, the most notorious slave-dealer and murderer in Africa, at the very time that he was preparing for an attack on Abbeokuta. Other transactions of a most unfortunate character had taken place, which would lead the people to believe that we were favourable to the King of Dahomey and his barbarities. Our object on the coast of Africa was not territorial aggrandisement, but the spread of civilization and the stoppage of the slave trade. But grabbing at every hit of land was not the way to attain that object. Our policy ought to be to encourage the self-government of the Africans, to support those who were willing to make treaties with us to put an end to the slave trade, but not in any shape or in any way to exhibit an inclination to take possession of all the land we could lay our hands on. He concluded by moving the omission from the Vote of the item of £2,000 for the establishments at Lagos.

said, he fully admitted the right of the right hon. Gentleman to draw attention to a subject in which he had always shown so much real interest, but he hardly expected that he would have taken so much pains to object to so small a Vote in aid of an establishment which was only in its second year of existence, and which, if it were to extend at all, might fairly apply for some small assistance from Parliament. Lagos was required for the purpose of putting down the slave trade, and of establishing a legitimate commerce, and the Colonial Office was doing its best to administer its affairs in a satisfactory manner, but it was not surprising that the House of Commons should be asked for some small assistance in starting the settlement on its career. Hitherto, of course, the expenditure had been of an exceptional kind, and was not to be reckoned as the ordinary expenditure of the local Government. There was every reason to believe that from that time forward Lagos would be able to pay its own way. The accounts now received were of the most favourable kind, and there could be little doubt that both financially and commercially Lagos would turn out before long the most successful British settlement on the coast of Africa. The worst thing to be said of it was, that it would necessarily cause a considerable loss of European life; but he hoped that when money had been spent in paving and draining, the danger to health would be much diminished. He had no reason to think that the customs duties would be unfavourable to commerce. They were very moderate in amount, and they would be expended in promoting security to life and property, which were the very soul of trade. He regretted as much as the right hon. Baronet the collision that had occurred, but it arose in consequence of a dispute between the establishment and some traders who preferred the wild government of a chief who imposed no taxes to the government of the British and the imposition of moderate customs duties, which were expended to the signal advantage of the colony; and when a peaceful mission, consisting of eleven white soldiers and a handful of black policemen, was sent out, they were set upon by some of the native troops and several killed. That was followed up by a great destruction of property, and other warlike acts, which rendered it necessary for the Lagos authorities to take active steps against the chief in question, and make an example of him. From the time they had had possession they had shown the greatest moderation. The chiefs of the place, seeing their moderation, thought they would tolerate anything, but they found themselves mistaken. With respect to Abbeokuta, he thought his right hon. Friend's fears were exaggerated. The ports of this district were blockaded for a time; no lives were lost, and in the end Abbeokuta came round, and complied with the demands required of her. With respect to Dahomey, it was not a British Colony, and he hoped it never would be. But he had no such fears as his right hon. Friend had expressed, that the king of that settlement would not yield to the representations that had been made to him. On the contrary, he was inclined to suspect that the conciliatory conduct pursued by Commodore Wilmot would have a better effect than his right hon. Friend seemed to anticipate. He hoped the Committee would agree to the Vote.

said, he considered that the Vote was a very fair one, and such as the Committee might very well agree to. The effect of the establishment of Lagos as a British Colony had been to put a decided check upon the slave trade on the West Coast of Africa, and he had no doubt that the financial results of the step would, before long, be very satisfactory, notwithstanding the establishment of a free port by the French at Porto Novo, and their rumoured advances into Dahomey. He was not at all disposed to look with jealousy upon the increase of French interests in that colony, as he thought it would, on the whole, have a beneficial and civilizing effect, although the slave trade undoubtedly was carried on under their auspices. He would add, that he thought that the missionaries at Abbeokuta were not altogether free from blame in reference to the differences between them and Governor Freeman.

said, it would be a great mistake to disallow the Vote, as the possession of Lagos would materially aid in stopping the slave trade. The unfortunate circumstances which had recently occurred with reference to their relations with Abbeokuta, he attributed almost, if not entirely, to the injudicious conduct of Governor Freeman, who, he hoped, would be recalled forthwith. He thought that Commodore Wilmot had acted rightly in adopting a conciliatory tone towards the King of Dahomey; but he could not approve the statement in that gallant officer's despatch, that it would never do for the King to abolish human sacrifices at one blow. He also thought his conduct was reprehensible, in assisting, apparently without any protest, at the so-called "human sacrifices" of Dahomey. He concurred with the noble Lord (Lord A. Churchill) in thinking it would be a mistake to view the French establishment with jealousy; but they must not forget that the Emperor of the French had constituted France one of the slave-trading Powers of the world by the free emigration scheme on the coast of Africa.

said, the question was, whether any means of the kind adverted to by the hon. Gentleman the Under Secretary for the Colonies would really put an end to the slave trade. Nothing less would justify the sacrifice of European life entailed by that deadly climate. He considered that this was hopeless so long as, while attacking the slave trade with one hand, we gave it the greatest encouragement with the other. He believed that negotiations with savage chieftains was a a waste of time. Two envoys had been sent to the King of Dahomey, and one of those Gentlemen thought he had made a great impression by his statement of the value of the palm-oil trade in comparison with the slave trade. The King heard him very patiently, and then merely said that the slave trade was very profitable and that palm-trees took a long time to grow. Another envoy, who tried to induce the King to put an end to the barbarous massacre which every year took place, was promised a good position to see them. That was all the good done by these missions. With regard to the French settlements, he felt no jealousy of them, for there was room enough for all, but those settlements certainly did not conduce to the civilization of the people and the stoppage of the slave trade; for it was notorious that a virtual slave trade was carried on by the French themselves from both the West and East Coast of Africa. He should not oppose the Vote, for he thought that this small sum of money was well applied in teaching the natives the value of legitimate commerce and free labour; but as long as the price was sufficient to compensate for the risk run, it was not likely that the slave trade would be put down.

said, he regretted to hear the remarks made upon Commodore Wilmot, who was an officer of great humanity and of strong religious feeling, and no man could have a stronger detestation of the slave trade and of the horrible "customs" of the King of Dahomey. Commodore Wilmot was not under instructions from the Government when he visited the King of Dahomey; but being there, he availed himself of the opportunity to urge upon the King to- stop the slave trade, and put an end to the massacres. He was in a very difficult position, having either to withdraw from Dahomey, and thereby give the King great offence, or remain at the capital during the performance of these rites, without being an actual witness of them. He strongly reprobated what took place, but thought it advisable to remain, and told the King that the British Government, would, no doubt, enter into some alliance with him if he would abolish the slave trade, and put an end to these horrible customs. The Government intended to follow up that attempt by Commodore Wilmot, and send another envoy to try to accomplish these objects. As to the Abbeokutans, who, in defiance of treaty, had again, engaged in the slave trade, the Government had strong ground of complaint against them. But there existed at Abbeokuta an influence adverse to British interests there, and the British Consul who had been sent there was sent back, with considerable indignity. The Abbeokutans had plundered the people of Lagos, and Governor Freeman was compelled to blockade the place. That blockade had now been raised, but the effect had been good, and he trusted that the people of Abbeokuta would henceforth see the expediency of maintaining good relations with us.

, in reply, complained that not one word had been said in explanation of the expenditure at Lagos. As to the hostile influence said to exist at Abbeokuta, he presumed that the hon. Gentleman referred to the mission there, and he thought that in justice the defence made by the mission should be laid before Parliament. It was no wonder that the Consul was not graciously received by the Abbeokutans. They were well aware that Lagos was not taken possession of by our Government till after we had sent a Consul there; and they were afraid that if a Consul were allowed to remain in Abbeokuta, their fate would be like that of the people of Lagos.

explained that the Vote was in general aid of the civil establishments at Lagos. The Bum asked was so small that there was little reason to object to the amount left at the disposal of the Governor.

said, that the revenue from Lagos was £16,000, and he should like to know how that revenue was distributed.

said, he wished to know what was the meaning of an item of £2,000 for a steamer, when the whole salaries of the Governor, Judge, and two other officers were only £2,280.

explained, that the steamer was of essential service in the public service up the river.

observed, that in 1861 there were thirty-seven attaches paid out of the Consolidated Fund, and now the salaries of thirty-two others were asked for. He wished to know how many unpaid attaches there were, and where those others were attached. The Secretary of State had unlimited power to appoint unpaid attachés; and as long as the House was not called upon to vote money, it did not matter; but as they were called upon to grant Supply, they were entitled to information.

said, the Vote was the consequence of a recommendation of the Committee which sat upon the diplomatic service about three years since. The new system certainly appeared to have contributed to the public advantage. Unpaid services were not generally desirable, and, he thought, not economical. The object in view was to reduce the number of attaches and to bring diplomacy into a profession. That could only be done by paying the members of the diplomatic service; and it had been decided, on mature consideration, that after a period of four years' service a salary of £150 should be paid to attaches, if they succeeded in passing a certain examination. There would be no objection to furnish information as to the number of attaches and secretaries to each embassy.

said, he thought the value of the diplomatic service was very much reduced by the telegrams, which anticipated their despatches.

, in reply to Mr. W. WILLIAMS, stated that the Commission had returned to this country, but they had not yet made their final Report.