said, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for India, When he will lay upon the table of the House the proposed plan for redressing the grievances of the Officers of the late Indian Army?

said, in reply, that much greater delay had occurred in this matter than he had expected. A great many minute details had to be considered; but he would take care that the interests of the Officers should not suffer. Last week His Royal Highness the Field Marshal Commanding-in-Chief, the Secretary of War, and himself had a meeting, at which they finally arranged what was to be done. The necessary Warrant would have to be submitted to the Queen, and that would take some time, at least a few days, and as soon as the Warrant was signed it should be laid upon the table. Not one moment should be lost more than was absolutely necessary.

said, he wished to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education, If the Minutes of May 19th, 1863, and March, 11th, 1864, on Endowed Schools, are to be withdrawn?

said, in reply, that as he was about to reply to the Question of Ma hon. Friend by a suggestion, which he should take the liberty of offering to his right hon. Friend the Member for North Staffordshire (Mr. Adderley), perhaps the House would have the kindness to allow him to preface that suggestion by a few remarks, the more especially as the position of the Government with respect to those Minutes was very peculiar and exceptional.

said, he rose to suggest that, if the right hon. Gentleman was going to make any statement, there should be an understanding that there would be a right to reply, in case anything should fall from him which would necessitate a reply.

said, he regretted the interruption of the noble Lord, for he (Mr. Bruce) could not but think that the House itself would have been much better satisfied if it had heard the short statement he had to make. However, he should refrain from making those observations now; and, in reply to his hon. Friend (Mr. Mitford), he would simply state that the hon. Member for Berkshire (Mr. Walter) had moved for a Return relating to the amount of endowments held by Endowed Schools assisted by the State, which would be laid on the table of the House in the course of the week. He would suggest, therefore, to his right hon. Friend (Mr. Adderley), that inasmuch as these Minutes would not come into operation till the 30th of June, and as the House would not be in a position to judge of the effect of the Minute of March 11th of this year, without having before them the Return that had been moved for, the discussion on his Motion should be postponed until that Return was before the House, the Government undertaking to give the right hon. Gentleman a day before the 30th of June for bringing forward his Motion.

Are the Minutes to be withdrawn or not?

They are certainly not to be withdrawn. As I have stated, they will not come into operation till the 30th of June, and before that time arrives the right hon. Gentleman the Member for North Staffordshire will have an opportunity of bringing forward his Motion.

said, he wished to observe that his Motion in relation to Endowed Schools could not possibly be affected by any statistical Return, as it was on principle that it disputed the application of private endowments in reduction of public grants. But if the Govern- ment asked him to postpone his Motion to another day he was bound to acquiesce, only stipulating that he should be put in as good a position as that which he was about to surrender out of courtesy to them, and that he should have, at least, a fortnight's notice of the day fixed.

Of course both those conditions will be complied with. The suggestion that I have made is quite as much for the convenience of the House as it is for that of the Government.

said, he wished to ask, Whether the Motion of the noble Lord the Prime Minister, for the appointment of a Committee upon the Reports of Education Inspectors will come on for discussion on Thursday, and what will be the order of the business of the evening?

said, in reply, that it was proposed first of all to take the Motion referred to by the right hon. Member, and a Motion would be made to postpone the Orders of the Day until it had been disposed of. The hon. Member for the King's County (Mr. Hennessy) has a Motion upon the paper for Thursday with reference to Poland. As he (Sir George Grey) understood that it was not the wish of the hon. Gentleman to bring forward his Motion until the noble Lord at the head of the Government was in his place, he should ask him to postpone it until the first evening after the holidays, when Supply was the first business to be brought forward, so that the hon. Member would then stand in the same position as he did now.

said, he would acquiesce in this arrangement.

said, he wished to ask Mr. Attorney General, To which of the Hong Kong Ordinances of January, 1855, "to enforce neutrality during the contest now existing in China," his answer to the Member for South Northumberland was intended to apply, that of the 15th January, 1855, or that of the 17th January, 1855, or to both.

was understood to say that his answer was intended to apply to the earlier and longer of the two Ordinances.

said, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether the Government will state what course they intend to take with regard to the Danish Question before the House adjourns for Whitsuntide?

Sir, the Question put to me by the hon. Gentleman is similar to that which was put to me the other day by the hon. Member for North Warwickshire (Mr. Newdegate). I then stated that the Conference was sitting, and that we hoped that its first result would be the establishment of an Armistice, and that the Government would continue, in concert with other Powers, to take those measures which were best calculated to conduce to the restoration of peace. I have now the satisfaction to inform the House that at its sitting to-day the Conference has agreed upon an Armistice for a month.

said, he would beg to ask, Whether the right hon. Baronet has any objection to communicate to the House the terms of the Armistice?

Sir, I am quite unable to communicate the terms of the Armistice at present, but there will be no difficulty of doing so at an early date.

said, he wished to ask Mr. Attorney General for Ireland, If he has directed his attention to the Petition filed by the Commissioners of Charitable Donations and Bequests in Ireland against the Attorney General and others in the matter of the "Fanning Charity, Water-ford," and to the Judgment pronounced thereon by the Lord Chancellor of Ireland on the 3rd May instant; and if it is his intention to introduce any measure to amend the Laws relating to Charitable Donations and Bequests in Ireland?

said, in reply, that his attention had been directed to the case in question, and that the Lord Chancellor had expressed some doubts as to his jurisdiction in certain matters of great importance relating to the Charities in Ireland. He had himself been in communication with the Commissioners of Charitable Donations, and he proposed to introduce a measure shortly after the recess which he hoped would set all these doubts at rest.

said, he would beg to ask the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education, Whether, in the absence of the Return of the Results of Experiments in Vaccinating Sheep, the question of Infection at the long range of 500 yards, as stated at p. 259 of the Fifth Report of the Medical Officers of the Privy Council, will be considered by the Select Committee on the Cattle Diseases Prevention and Cattle, &c. Importation Bills?

, in reply, said, he had no doubt the subject mentioned by his hon. Friend would be fully considered by the Committee.

said, he wished to inquire, Whether the attention of the right hon. Gentleman the Home Secretary has been directed to a statement in the papers describing the committal of a whole family for three weeks, with hard labour, for the offence of sleeping under a tent? The statement was to the effect that a family of gipsies—a mother with six children, the youngest being only eight years old—had been committed to gaol by the Rev. Uriah Tonkin, on the 25th or 26th of last month, at a place called Hale, in Cornwall. He also wished to ask, whether the right hon. Gentleman will not make inquiry into the circumstances, with a view to advise Her Majesty to remit the sentence, and whether he has any objection to lay on the table the depositions and conviction?

said, in reply, that he had received no information respecting the case referred to by the hon. Member. No application had been made to him by any of the parties concerned. If the hon. Gentleman would give him the particulars, he would make inquiries, but he could not give any intimation as to what the result of those inquiries would be. It was probable that the prisoners were convicted under the Vagrancy Act,

said, he thought that on a former occasion the noble Lord the Secretary to the Admiralty had spoken in very unhandsome terms of Sir William Snow Harris, stating that though he might be an authority upon lightning conductors, he was no authority upon a School of Naval Architecture, and that it was unfair to ask that his opinion on such a subject should be circulated at the expense of the country. In his (Mr. A. Smith's) opinion, Sir Snow Harris was a high authority on such a subject, and as the noble Lord was ready to produce a Report from the Institute of Naval Architects, of which the right hon. Baronet (Sir John Pakington) was President, he thought the cost of laying before Parliament this and other papers, would be money well laid out. One reason given by the noble Lord for placing this School at South Kensington was that there were rooms and lecturers to be had there; but he (Mr. A. Smith) was informed that there were neither suitable rooms nor competent lecturers at South Kensington. The scheme propounded by the noble Lord ought not to be adopted until it was thoroughly examined, so that the House might see whether it was likely to prove successful, and what the cost was likely to be. Unless they had the whole plan before them, he was convinced that hereafter they would be called upon for some enormous expenditure. There existed schools in the dockyards already; it was only necessary that the education given there should be carried a little further than at present. He understood that there would be no objection to produce the Report from the Institute of Naval Architects, and therefore he would only move for

"Copy of a Communication made to the Admiralty by Sir W. Snow Harris on the organization of the proposed School of Naval Architecture."

said, he must protest against the assertion that he had at any time said anything derogatory of Sir Snow Harris, or that there was anything offensive to Sir Snow Harris in declining to accede to the request that the pamphlet written by that gentleman should be laid upon the table. He said that he had the highest opinion of Sir Snow Harris as a man of science, to whom the navy owed a great debt of gratitude for his system of lightning conductors, which was now in general use. But he repeated that Sir Snow Harris was no authority on the education of naval architects, and, therefore, had no claim whatever to have his opinions published at the public expense, any more than other persons had who chose to write upon a subject of public interest. At the same time, if the House should be of opinion that the circulation of these opinions were of public interest, he would, of course, produce them. On the other hand, the Institute of Naval Architects was a very important establishment, the object of which was to improve the system of naval architecture and the education of naval architects, and it would, therefore, be for the interests of this House, that their opinions should be laid upon the table. He had never said that the rooms at South Kensington were ready for the School. On the contrary, he had asked the House for a Vote of money in order to appropriate certain rooms for the purpose, and he believed that the sum voted would entirely cover the expenditure for the fitting up of those rooms. He had before expressed his opinion that it was much to be regretted that the former School of Naval Architecture had ever been given up. The present dockyard schools were not of a sufficiently high class, and could not bring out and educate naval architects in the higher scientific branches required by them at the present day; nor did there exist in the dockyards the means of giving the lectures which were required. At South Kensington, however, there were capable lecturers. [Mr. AUGUSTUS SMITH: Who?] It was not necessary to name individuals, but there were eminent lecturers, who would be able to render great public service. The Government, therefore, decided that, upon the whole, South Kensington was the best place at which to establish the School. Upon the grounds he had stated, he should feel bound to oppose the Motion.

hoped his noble Friend the Secretary of the Admiralty would re-consider his determination, and not produce the papers on this subject until they were in a perfect state; because the papers which he had consented to produce would give a very imperfect view of the position in which this very interesting question now stood. He hoped his hon. Friend (Mr. Augustus Smith) would not press for their production at present.

complained that Captain Coles and other gentlemen who competed with the Constructor of the Navy were much obstructed by official obstacles, while the Constructor of the Navy was left to himself. The Royal Sovereign was nobody's child; yet if she should prove a failure, as very probably she would, the blame would be cast upon Captain Coles. He objected to the selection of South Kensington for the School. A naval school of architecture ought to be in a first-class port, where the whole process of construction would come under the eyes of the students.

said, that the Government wanted to send everything to South Kensington, where they believed perfection reigned; but by the country at large the proposal to send the School of Naval Architecture there was looked on as simply ridiculous.

said, that Sir William Snow Harris was competent to give an opinion on this subject, and that his letter ought to be laid before the House.

said, he would advise his hon. Friend to withdraw his Motion for the papers altogether, as the production of one portion of them was objected to by one side of the House, and the production of the remaining portion of them by the other side. As the Motion seemed to be considered premature at present, his hon. Friend could repeat it at a future time.

said, he would adopt the advice of his hon. and gallant Friend, and ask leave to withdraw his Motion.

I wish to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State, Whether the Government have received any information of a collision in the North Sea, off Heligoland, between the Austrian and Danish ships of war; and, if he has received any information, is it to the effect that the Austrians have got the worst of it?

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Colonies received a telegram this afternoon at four o'clock from the Governor of Heligoland, in these words—

"Two o'clock, p.m.—Austrian squadron, consisting of two frigates and three gunboats, just engaging Danish squadron, consisting of two frigates and one corvette, six miles east of Heligoland. Result later."

Since the House was sitting my right hon. Friend has received the following additional telegram from the Governor—

"Four o'clock, p.m.—Danes have won the action. One Austrian frigate is in flames, and she, together with the other Austrian frigate and gunboats, are making for Heligoland. They are almost in English water. The Aurora is here "

I understand that the conditions of the armistice have been communicated to another assembly. It seems to me that matters are not well managed or with due consideration to the House of Commons, if any other place is better informed than we are upon a matter of so much interest and importance as an armistice, and that we should be informed by the Government that they had no communication to make to us. I trust that in future we shall be as soon informed as another place upon matters of this importance. Perhaps by this time Her Majesty's Government may have it in their power to communicate to us what the conditions of the armistice are?

I stated all the information I had myself—which was that a suspension of hostilities, which is practically the same thing as an armistice, had been agreed upon for a month. That was all the information I had received at the time. My noble Friend the Secretary for Foreign Affairs was at the Conference, and sent that information to me. It was impossible for him at the moment to communicate to me the terms of the armistice. I only regret that I did not know them at the time; but, as I stated, there could be no difficulty in communicating them at a future time. I can assure the right hon. Gentleman that I withheld no information from the House.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of them now?

No, I am not.

, who was almost in audible, moved an Amendment with reference to the rates and taxes recently charged upon the officers resident in Chelsea Hospital in respect of houses therein officially occupied by them. The hon. and gallant Member was understood; to urge that the long and gallant services of these gentlemen entitled them to every consideration.

said, that the question brought forward by the hon. and gallant Gentleman was under consideration at the Treasury, in connection with the general question of the exemption of Government property from local taxation. He understood that no conclusion had been come to, but that the subject was still under the consideration of the Admiralty and War Office. The particular case of Chelsea Hospital had not been brought before the attention of the Treasury since 1858 The question whether official residences should be exempted or not from local rates was, of course, one of great importance to the parishes interested. There must be a beneficial occupation in order to render official residences liable to assessment; but it was not in his power to give a definition of what was to be considered a beneficial occupation. There was then the further question, whether the rates should be paid by the Government or the officers themselves, and a decision had been arrived at in favour of the latter course among other reasons, because it was deemed desirable that the emoluments of officers should be fixed and certain rather than be made up of such uncertain elements as free quarters, free from rates and local charges. The hon. and gallant Gentleman's Motion, moreover, went beyond the mere question of rates and applied to taxes. A similar question was raised in 1858, when an application was made to the Treasury on the subject of the House duty, and the decision arrived at in reference to that application was that, saving present appointments, the officers should pay the assessed taxes themselves. It appeared to him, indeed, that there was no better reason why the officers of Chelsea Hospital should not pay those taxes than why they should be exempt from the income tax, for the payment of which by them provision was made in the Act of Parliament.

said, that the residence of these officers in the Hospital was compulsory, and was necessary to the duty which was imposed upon them, and that they therefore ought not to be mulcted on that account. The argument, he observed, applied not only to Chelsea Hospital, but to every barrack in England. For his own part he did not think it right that, because the parish of Chelsea chose to levy high rates they ought to be thrown on those unfortunate officers, contrary to all right and justice. It was quite evident that the right hon. Gentleman knew nothing about the matter.

said, that the hon. and gallant Gentleman in saying that his right hon. Friend knew nothing about the matter, had gone somewhat beyond the ordinary licence of debate. The position of the officers in Chelsea Hospital did not appear to him to be precisely analogous to that of ordinary regimental officers residing in barracks. The former were rather to be regarded in the light of civil or public servants. Be that, however, as it might, the question involved in the discussion took a much wider scope than its bearing simply upon the Chelsea officers, and it appeared to him that the point of the liability of these gentlemen to pay rates ought to stand over for consideration until the general question had been brought to issue. If when that general question was decided, the hon. and gallant Gentleman still remained dissatisfied with the views of the Government, he would be in a position to ask the House to pronounce a judgment on the subject with greater advantage than at present.

said, the question was one in which the Government, and the Government alone, were concerned. It was impossible that a parish would tax any Institution like that of Chelsea Hospital without the consent of the Government. If the Government gave up their rights, and said they would not defend such Institutions, it was quite obvious that the parishes might do as they pleased. A similar question had arisen in the case of Hampton Court Palace. The Government refused to oppose the demand, and the persons residing there had to pay their own taxes, whereas, in the case of St. James's Palace they had interfered and expressed a determination that it should not be made liable to rates. The charge, therefore, against the Government was that they had not performed their duty in defending Chelsea Hospital, and he trusted that his hon. and gallant Friend would go to a division on the subject.

said, that the question was one which affected not only Chelsea Hospital but all the barracks in the Kingdom, and he hoped that his hon. Friend would press his Motion to a division. In Ireland a movement had been made to impose the rates upon barracks, and he understood that even the lodging money given to officers had been charged with income tax.

said, it appeared by the Returns that no general rule existed with regard to these assessments; he therefore desired to know whether, before the House came to those Votes in the Civil Service Estimates which provided for the payment of rates, the Government would state the conclusion at which they had arrived upon this rather important question?

said, that by law parishes had a right to rate all property which was beneficially occupied, and the Government could not prevent it from being rated. The residences of officers in Chelsea Hospital had been held to be property beneficially occupied, and therefore the parishes had a right to receive rates for them. The only question was, whether or not the Government should pay for the officers the rates which were legally due. The question was considered in 1858, and the Government then decided that all officers who were appointed after that date should pay their own rates, and that regulation had not been since departed from. As the whole subject was now under consideration, the hon. and gallant Gentleman had no reason to press his Motion.

said, that the hon. Member for Rochdale (Mr. Cobden) had stated that he intended to bring the subject of the Government manufacturing establishments under the consideration of; the House: he therefore desired to ask the hon. Member if he could state when he would carry that intention into effect, as he (Mr. Monsell) thought he would be able to show that the manufacturing establishments had been the means of saving large sums of money to the public?

begged to state, in answer to the Question put to him by his right hon. Friend, that it was his inten- tion to raise the whole question of Government manufacturing establishments, and he would bring it forward in such a form as to give his right hon. Friend an opportunity of showing that which he (Mr. Cobden) thought he would find it very difficult to do—namely, that these establishments had been a benefit to this country. He would try his chance by the ballot to-morrow, but at any rate would bring it forward at the earliest opportunity.

reminded the noble Marquess the Under Secretary of State for War, that on Thursday last he had called his attention to the dilapidated condition of the stables and other buildings in the North Camp at Aldershot, and asked for some information upon the subject, but that the Chairman had been directed to report Progress before he received an answer. He would now repeat his request for information. He would also ask for some explanation of an item in the Vote for a naval store at Bermuda, which appeared to him rather a matter for the Naval Estimates.

called the attention of the noble Marquess to the fact that there were in this Vote three items for the purchase of land, but no estimate of the cost was given. He also wished to know what were the powers possessed by the Secretary of State in respect to sales of land? The Committee would see that it was of great importance that no sale of public land should take place without being brought to the knowledge of the public by general advertisement. There had been a sale of land recently, of the site of the house and battery at Brighton, for £16,000, which was only made known through the Report of the Commissioners of Audit, to whose knowledge it came by accident, and of which sale there wag no record in the War Office accounts. It was a singular transaction, and required the attention of the Government. It appeared that the solicitor of the War Office had sold this land, and, as he presumed, by the order of the Secretary for War, to a company, the original intention being that it should be exchanged for land belonging to the Woods and Forests Department. These transactions ought not to be allowed to pass without the knowledge of the House. He hoped also that the noble Marquess would be able to afford the House some prospect of a diminution of the expenditure at Aldershot.

said, that in justice to those hon. Members who had not been present on a former occasion, he would again call attention to some discrepancies which were unaccounted for; though he thought that it was but fair to the noble Lord the Under Secretary for War to state that those errors had not arisen alone during the period in which he had been in office, but that the system had been going on for some time. The reason why these discrepancies had not previously been pointed out by any hon. Member was because of the extreme difficulty of perceiving any alteration upon the face of the Estimates. The first Estimate for the drainage of Cove Common at Aldershot of £4,300 was originally £2,000. In 1862 the sum had grown to £2,150; in 1863 to £3,150, without any explanation of the cause of the increase being given, nor did they know where it was likely to stop. The estimate of £5,200 for improving the water supply at the same camp had increased by £1,800, the estimate last year for the same work being £3,400. The proposed cost of the cavalry barracks at Colchester had made a stride of £30,000 in one year, the estimate last year being £80,000, and this year £110,000. The re-form of the eastern defences at the Tower had increased £1,500 during the year, and the hydraulic engine house by £700. The new barracks at Chelsea, for which £187,000 were voted, had actually risen £47,000, the original estimate being £140,000. The erection of a new hospital at Netley, which last year was to cost £315,541, had increased to £328,079. He found that in 1862 there was also a very great increase upon that work, but a note was placed in the margin calling attention to the fact, and stating the reason; and he thought that that plan should always be adopted. When the estimate for the work of levelling and planting the grounds of that hospital was first framed they were to cost £1,200. In 1861 the estimate had increased to £2,000, in 1862 it was also £2,000, in 1863 it reached £2,100, and now it actually amounted to £4,000. In the cost of the quarters and stabling required for a detachment of Military Train the original estimate of £1,500 had not been increased; but they had already voted that amount, and a demand for another £1,500 was now made upon the House. In the case of the new powder magazine at Newcastle-on-Tyne they had already voted the estimated expense of the work, and yet they were asked for a further sum of £2,000. The same system was perceptible abroad. At King William's Town the estimate for the building of store accommodation had not been increased, but the money applied for had been raised from £1,000 to £1,500. The extension of the commissariat establishment at Gibraltar was estimated last year at £6,800, while this year it had reached £11,000, the original estimate being only £4,000. The erection of huts at Gibraltar had increased by £1,600, and the magazine accommodation at Nova Scotia by £1,000. There were many other items which he might have referred to, but he would not detain the Committee by going through them; he would simply state that there was upon these items an aggregate excess of £25,000, for which no explanation had been given, and it was the sum thus in excess upon the original Estimates which he proposed to negative. He also asked the noble Marquess how it was that no total estimate was given in the case of many of the Votes asked for, so that the Committee were kept altogether ignorant what money would be required in future years?

desired to point out that many of the works mentioned in the Estimates—such as those for improved drainage—might be performed by the soldiers themselves, and in this way not only would economy be practised, but—and this was a still more important object—the character and well-being of the men would there by be improved. The greatest curse of our soldiers was the idleness in which they were kept; and he thought that after they had been taught their drill they ought to be employed in industrial capacities, thereby earning a little money for themselves, learning to perform duties with which foreign armies were perfectly familiar, and which would often save them from severe suffering in the field. With regard to Aldershot, he hoped the men would be removed as much as possible from that abominable village, where more injury was done to their morale than in any other place in Her Majesty's dominions. Unhappily barracks had been constructed close to the village; but during the summer a considerable number of soldiers might be removed from barracks and placed under canvas.

said, he could not agree with the hon. Baronet in what seemed to be his assumption — namely, that drill should be a secondary consideration.

said, he was aware that the proposal which the hon. Baronet had just made was a popular one; but he doubted whether it would meet with much favour from the soldiers themselves, who would feel that they had not enlisted for the purpose of performing such duties, He could not imagine what the Vote of £8,000 for removing the sewage from the Camp was for. He supposed that the farmers wanted the sewage, and, if so, let them take it away themselves. As to Aldershot, he deprecated the extraordinary outlay which had taken place there, and quite agreed that the soldiers ought to be removed. A regiment which had spent years in a foreign country was placed in one of these camps, where there was no amusement and where the men were exposed to horrible temptations. This was a great grievance, and the expenditure on these camps ought to be confined to the narrowest limits.

said, there was no army in the world in which military pride was stronger than in the French army, and there was none in which so many works were performed by the soldiers. The French soldiers were not only employed in constructing fortifications, but they hutted themselves and built their own barracks; even the Sepoys built their own huts; and if in this country such works were made, as they might easily be made, an honourable occupation, and, at the same time, a source of profit, our soldiers would emulate the French in their devotion to industrial works. He wished to know how and by whom these Estimates were verified, and who gave the final fiat for their adoption? The French system of estimate and check was, undoubtedly, worthy of inquiry, if not of adoption. As an instance of the slovenly way in which these Estimates were presented, he would refer to an item for the "purchase of land and erection of rifle range, huts, &c., for 700 men," at Gravesend. The total Estimate for this was given at £64,000; the total amount already voted, £73,800; the gross sum already expended, £54,252; so that about £19,000 remained in hand; and yet the House was now asked to vote £2,000 more, while it was stated that £6,177 would be required to complete the work. Surely there must be some blundering here.

said, the point raised by the hon. Baronet (Sir Harry Verney) was one of considerable importance, for it seemed absurd that they should have on the one hand bitter complaints because our soldiers had nothing to do, and on the other work suited to them done by contractors. As to the alleged unpopularity of this work, he believed that the men would be glad enough, in consideration of a little extra money, to be employed on works required in connection with the army. With regard to the Estimates, it seemed as if the Engineer Officers had fallen into the habit of making Estimates of about half or two-thirds the real sum; committing Parliament to their adoption, and then coming up to the House for supplementary Votes. Lord Hardinge had told him that, on taking office, he found an order of the Duke of Wellington to the effect that whenever a new building was erected there should be placed upon it a brass plate, stating the original estimate, the actual cost, the time in which it was completed, and the name of the officer who had designed it.

said, it would probably be found that the blame did not attach entirely to the Engineer Officers. Estimates of this kind were generally cut down at the War Office, the great object being to reduce them within a certain amount. He always impressed everybody at the War Office that the worst thing they could do was to attempt to deceive the House of Commons; but the root of the evil lay in the paring down of Estimates by the House of Commons, which necessitated subsequent augmentations. In regard to the circumstance that the sum named in the original Estimate for the purchase of land at Gravesend was £64,000, and the sum already voted was £73,000, he might explain that the money spent in the course of the financial year went back to the Exchequer. The gross sum actually expended was £54,000, and this was, no doubt, the cause of the discrepancy. He thought it would be better if there were a column to show in such cases the amount of the original estimate. He had always held that it was useless to compare the Estimates of one year with those of another unless they knew the actual expenditure.

said, he wished to urge upon the noble Lord most strongly that the system of giving employment to the soldiers should be adopted throughout the army. They had been set to work at Aldershot with the best results. The work was admirably done, and at no great cost, while the physical condition of the men was much improved. The best way of taking the soldier out of the way of the diseases of which they heard so much was by giving him constant and healthy employment. He believed that the experiment had been also successfully tried at Plymouth, and he trusted that it would be carried out with vigour.

quite agreed with the hon. Member who had just spoken. He regretted that in a Vote of more than £300,000 so small a sum as £5,000 only was set aside for "reading and recreation rooms." Most of the soldier's idle time was in the evening, and if his barrack rooms were made more comfortable and lit with gas he would not be so anxious to leave them. At present the Government gave two wretched candles to light a large room; and who would not prefer a gin palace to such a place? A young officer of artillery deserved great credit for having established a reading room for the troops at Gibraltar, at first at his own expense. The plan had been found most successful, and had been approved both by the late Lord Herbert and Sir George Lewis. He wished the Vote for reading and recreation were four or five times as large.

said, he would also have been glad to see a larger item for reading and recreation. Remembering how fond the French soldiers were of gardens, and how healthfully and innocently they were employed in taking care of them, he could not help wishing that the English soldier, too, could have his little garden at the camp. He was glad to see an item of £4,000 for gymnasia, and thought that these establishments might be extended greatly for the benefit of the army.

said, that the readiness with which the House voted everything the soldier did not want was remarkable. With regard to sales of land by the War Department, he had known some extraordinary proceedings to take place. When he was at the Ordnance, land could not be sold without the leave of the Treasury; but he had known that land had been sold very cheaply which the Government had to buy back a few years afterwards at three or four times its former price. It was time the House should be informed what was to be done with Aldershot. Was it to be a barrack for 15,000 or 30,000 men, or a camp of instruction, as it was originally intended to be? The wooden huts were becoming decayed, and it would soon be necessary either to renew them or replace them by something else. If huge barracks were to be built, the House ought to know how much was to be laid out upon them. The same questions might be put in regard to the Curragh. The drill ground at Aldershot was one vast mass of dust. No doubt the men might be set to work, and even had been; but their employment, for which they must be paid, would be frequently interrupted by the duties and drill of a camp of instruction. A soldier who had been out for four or five hours with 50lb. to 60lb. on his back would be in no condition for work. No one could oppose making the soldier more comfortable, but it must be recollected that a barrack was not a private house, and that he gave up many of the comforts of private life when he entered the army, and he doubted whether the House was not now running into too great an extreme in the direction advocated by hon. Members opposite. Many of the difficulties which the noble Marquess had to contend with arose, no doubt, from the mass of work to be transacted in his Department, and of which he was supposed to give explanations; in fact, he was astonished that the noble Lord should be able even to keep in his head so many subjects connected with a profession to which he had never been bred, though he could scarcely be expected to be able to give detailed answers about them; but, even at the risk of adding to his duties, he must request some explanation on the subject of fortifications, which seemed to be erected everywhere except in Ireland. In the present year, it seemed to be stated that £30,000 was to be spent there under that head out of a total Imperial expenditure of £2,500,000. The Defence Committee recommended that the fortifications of the south and south-west of Ireland should be put into a state of repair, and the Commander-in-Chief in Ireland had supported that recommendation; yet there was Bantry Bay, where, little more than sixty years since, the French attempted to land—a place which would also be very convenient for America if she took it into her head to attack us—left without any means whatever of resistance. Enormous sums were expended on small batteries in England, useless except for practising purposes; while in Ireland, through which this country could be just as successfully attacked, the existing fortifications were allowed to crumble to pieces. A nobleman (Lord Charles Clinton) who had purchased land in that country, and was interesting himself in this subject, forwarded to the Government extracts from the published opinions of the Defence Committee, and also a statement of the views entertained by General Sir George Brown as to the necessity of those defences, and the benefit that would arise to the people by the employment these repairs would give; but the answer he received, after repeated applications, was, that to carry out the works referred to would confer no real benefit on the people of Ireland, inasmuch as the Government would be obliged to employ skilled artificers. In the end, they employed neither skilled nor unskilled labourers, and the defences remain in their old condition. He protested against the doctrine that England, while levying money for these special objects of fortification, and refusing to spend any in Ireland, was entitled to tax Ireland for the purpose.

said, that since Thursday night he had made inquiries as to the state of the buildings in the North Camp at Aldershot, and was unable to find that any report had been received at all bearing out the description given the other night by the right hon. Baronet the Member for Petersfield (Sir Wm. Jolliffe) of their ruinous condition If the right hon. Gentleman would look at Part 3 of the present Vote, he would see that no Jess than £22,440 were taken for repairs of the camp at Aldershot. The huts were not by any means comfortable quarters — that did not admit of doubt—but their discomfort, he thought, was attributable to the situation and other causes, which no amount of money spent upon them would be able to remedy, rather than to their condition. He was not aware of any intention to alter existing arrangements there. The Government did not propose to take any sum of money for new buildings, except for stabling of a more permanent character; and the Vote for this purpose did not appear for the first time in the present Estimates, money having been taken in 1861–2 and 1862–3. Last year the works were temporarily suspended, but would now be resumed; and the importance of their completion had been shown by the disastrous fire which took place in one of the temporary stables, where, through the flimsy and dangerous character of the materials, a number of valuable horses were destroyed. Hon. Members would see that, in the Vote under consideration, an attempt had been made to give the House much fuller and more detailed information than usual; but it was impossible at all times to obtain precise information, and, therefore, the original Estimates were sometimes exceeded. The drainage of Cove Common had proved more costly than was expected, but the reason was because a larger quantity of ground had been drained than was at first contemplated. It might, perhaps, have been desirable to append a note stating that the Vote asked for would only cover a portion of the expense; but such a practice, if adopted, would necessitate very minute detail. In the formation of reservoirs, the nature of the ground and the extent of embankment could not be determined till the work was commenced, and he was assured that in such cases approximate estimates were seldom to be depended upon. He was afraid he could not give the hon. Baronet the Member for Evesham (Sir Henry Willoughby) any more distinct explanation of the circumstances connected with the transfer of the plot of ground at Brighton, than he had already received. An arrangement had been sanctioned by the Treasury under which the War Department were to exchange certain lands for others in the possession of the Woods and Forests, the value being in the first instance ascertained by a person mutually agreed on. The plot in question was valued at £9,000, and the War Department, thinking that estimate too low, made inquiries, and ascertained that a hotel company were willing to pay £16,000 for it. The Woods and Forests, being informed of this circumstance, replied that they were unwilling to give that amount, but if the War Department would negotiate the sale, offered to give a corresponding quantity of land, A certain sum of money was taken from the hotel company as security while the purchase was being completed, and was placed for a short time in the hands of the Accountant General at the War Office, by which means it was made to appear on the books of the department. He was not aware of anything irregular in the practice, which had been sanctioned by the Treasury. As regarded lands belonging to the Crown which could be devoted to purposes of defence, or used for purposes connected with the army, they were vested for the time being in the Secretary of State. The hon. Member for Gloucester (Mr. C. P. Berkeley) had repeated some of the observations he made the other evening with reference to the total estimates of cost having been exceeded in several items. He (the Marquess of Hartington) had given a short explanation when the subject was last under discussion, and he would not now follow the hon. Member through all the items he had mentioned. The most important item had reference to the cavalry barracks at Colchester, the estimates for which had been increased by a sum of from £20,000 to £30,000. This increase was owing to an alteration in the plan, and the great rise in the price of labour and materials. The barracks were made larger than had been at first contemplated, and higher prices on the new portion had to be paid than those on the first stage of the works. He admitted it would be very desirable that, either by marginal notes or some other mode, the Committee should have a more complete knowledge of the facts where original estimates were departed from, and the reasons which had led to that departure. He should be sorry to pledge himself to have the Estimates prepared in any particular form next year, but he would promise that the subject should be considered. He could assure the Committee that he quite agreed with the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Huntingdon (General Peel) who said that it was the worst policy in the world to attempt to deceive the House of Commons; first, because it was impossible to do so; and next, it was not desirable to do so even if it were possible. With reference to the purchase of land for a rifle range at Gravesend, it had been found that the land it was originally proposed to purchase was not of sufficient extent to render the rifle range safe; it therefore became absolutely necessary to purchase more land. With regard to Netley, the original estimate was £1,500; that sum had been already voted, but it had been spent on other works which were more urgent, and the same sum was now again asked this year. The increase in the hydraulic engine house at the Tower was occasioned by a slight alteration in the works, in order to provide rooms for the person in charge, which would save £20 a year in future. The alteration would also add to the ornamental character of the works. At Netley the increase was almost entirely owing to the changes which had taken place in the character of the building. When the plans and details of a building were materially altered the expense was naturally increased. If these things were fully explained in the Estimate he was afraid a large portion of it must be filled with marginal notes. The only sum for new works in the whole of this Estimate was £2,000 for the conversion of the barracks at Haslar into an hospital. With respect to the naval store at Bermuda, he had been asked why that should be provided for by the War Department. The War Department furnished the naval service with all warlike stores required, and not only were ships furnished with those stores, but the stations for providing accommodation for warlike stores of that description for the use of ships of war. With respect to the excess in the Vote for the works at Gibraltar, if there was any, it must be small, and could not be considered extravagant on so large a Vote as the original Estimate. It might also be accounted for by the fact, that when the Estimate was framed the Vote for the transport service connected with the works was undertaken by the Commissariat Department. No doubt it was quite true that sometimes in the War Office the estimates of the Engineers were cut down by striking out the charges for works which were not indispensably necessary; but the Engineers' estimate for that portion of the work which was to be carried out was invariably adhered to. The hon. Gentleman complained that no total was given of the sum which would be required in the future for regimental chapels, schools, &c.; but he thought the Committee would see that no total of the future expenditure could be given under this head. It would be impossible for the Secretary for War to say what he might have to ask in future years, as that must depend on circumstances. The same observation applied to the married soldiers' quarters. The Committee was aware that in the old barracks that kind of accommodation was extremely deficient; but it would be impossible to say at the present time to what extent improvement in that respect was to be carried. That must depend very much upon the temper of future Houses of Commons, and the amount of funds made avail- able for that purpose. As regarded reading and recreation rooms, in a great number of barracks such rooms had been built, or apartments had been appropriated to reading and recreation; and the £5,000 asked for in the present Estimates would go a long way in the matter. It would not, however, be well to act too hastily without further experience, and to at once set up reading and recreation rooms after one fashion in every barracks at home and abroad. With respect to the employment of soldiers at trades, there could be no doubt that such employment, where it could be carried out, was very useful to the soldier, and an experiment would be made as to its practicability; but it would be only as an experiment, because there was some apprehension that the discipline of the army might be imperilled by such a course. Last year a great many soldiers were employed at Aldershot in connection with water works, road making, and to some extent in building. He hoped they would be employed to a still greater extent, for it was beyond doubt most beneficial to the soldier that he should be employed. In some instances, too, a saving was effected by employing soldiers; but in some kinds of work engineers would tell them that military labour was not the most economical. However, employment at trades was decidedly most beneficial for the soldiers themselves, and, as fur as possible, it would be resorted to. With regard to the question put to him by the hon. and gallant Member (Colonel Dunne) on the subject of fortifications in Ireland, he would remind the Committee that the principle upon which our scheme of fortifications was to be carried out was not that of defending the whole coast of Great Britain and Ireland, but that of refusing the enemy access to those points which were considered vulnerable. Our dockyards and arsenals, and the harbours in which our ships of war would take ship ping, were the points to which the attention of our engineers was directed; but it never had been proposed to fortify the whole coast of the United Kingdom, so as to render it impossible that an enemy could ever attempt to land on our shores, A considerable sum of money had been expended upon the works at Spike Island, and other works were to be erected, he believed, at the mouth of Cork harbour. So far as Ireland was concerned, the recommendations of the Defence Committee were being entirely carried out.

congratulated the noble Lord on his explanation, and appealed to the hon. Member for Gloucester (Mr. C. P. F. Berkeley) to withdraw his Amendment. He, however, thought that there ought to be a statement in the Estimates as to where the money for sanitary purposes and for married soldiers' quarters was to be expended. He had to call the attention of the noble Lord to the disgraceful state of the Clarence Barracks at Portsmouth. They were not fit to put a regiment into, Formerly they were barracks for Marines; but they were condemned thirty or forty years ago by the Admiralty, and had been sold because they were unfit for the Marines; but they were now turned into permanent barracks for our soldiers. The officers' quarters and the men's rooms were both bad, and the place in which the meat was stored was placed in the immediate neighbourhood of the most offensive smells, and it would be impossible to keep the meat sweet for a day in Bummer. With regard to Aldershot, he knew the feeling of commanding officers to be that, while it was a very good thing to have troops there in summer, in winter it was a very bad place, both for their young officers and their men, and that there ought to be regular barracks for the winter months.

thought the first step towards any sound economy was that these accounts should be rendered in an accurate and distinct form to the House; but after the assurance given for the future on that point by the noble Lord, he would withdraw his Motion.

hoped that something would really be done in regard to the state of the Portsmouth barracks which had been alluded to.

thought the Committee must feel obliged to the noble Marquess for his able answers to the numerous questions put to him, and which might well embarrass any one. As to the sale of public property, however, the noble Marquess had overlooked the main point— namely, that so large a sum as £16,000 should have been received for public property, and yet that there should be no record of that expenditure in any authorized document. No Government Department ought to have the power of selling public property without first duly advertising the sale, and then accounting for it in some authentic public record.

complained that the accounts had not been satisfactorily explained yet; there was a mystification in them.

said, it was utterly impossible that the exact sum taken every year could be spent. For instance, there was a strike among the workmen engaged on a particular work, a portion of the money voted would have to be re-paid into the Exchequer. With regard to the large sum being spent in fortifying Halifax, Nova Scotia, the other day one of Her Majesty's ships was obliged to ask permission to go into a dry dock at Boston, because we had no dock of our own on that coast. It was absolutely necessary, especially in the present state of the world, that the money being laid out at Halifax should be made as available for its purpose as possible, and that proper means for refitting our ships should be provided in that quarter.

said, he did not think the explanation with regard to expenditure for the defences of Ireland was at all satisfactory. Large sums were voted for the defence of the Humber and other places in England, where there were no docks or arsenals, while the defence of the coast of Ireland was neglected. These commercial ports should contribute something towards the cost of their own defence. Bantry Bay was a most dangerous part of the Irish coast, and all the defence of Ireland ought not to be confined to Cork. Unless justice were done to Ireland in this matter he would formally bring the question before the House.

thought that some further explanation was required in reference to the Vote.

I am compelled, Sir, by the conduct of the Governors of the Royal Hibernian Military School, to bring before the Committee a subject which, whatever it may appear at the first glance, is one of very grave importance, not only to the Catholic people of Ireland, but to the public service. It is not my fault that this matter should be now brought before Parliament—it is the fault of those who have been appealed to in vain for redress. By the last census the population of Ireland consisted of 4,500,000 Catholics, and about 1,200,000 Protestants and Presbyterians. Now, it is well known that the great majority of those who enlist in the Queen's service in Ireland are Catholics— that for every single Protestant or Presbyterian who enters the British army, there are at least five Catholics. The reason is obvious. The Protestants, for instance, are not usually of the class who most readily yield to the seductions of the recruiting officer, while the Catholics form the bulk of the population, and are to a considerable extent of the class most liable to enlist. It is therefore strange and unaccountable that in the only establishment for the education and care of the orphan children of Irish soldiers, the proportion of Catholics and Protestants should stand thus:—By a Return dated the 27th of February, 1861, the boys in the school numbered 410, of whom 278 were Protestants and 132 were Catholics. Since then the disproportion has increased, for at present the school contains 283 Protestant boys, and only 127 Catholics. For a public institution in a Catholic country this is a most unjust and unsatisfactory state of things, and for which I find it impossible to account on any reasonable ground. Considering the class and creed from which the army is recruited in Ireland, the proportion between Catholic and Protestant children is most unfair. I cannot understand why the children of Catholic soldiers are not as much entitled to sympathy and protection as the children of Presbyterian or Protestant soldiers; for no one will deny that the Catholic soldiers are as brave and devoted as those of any other creed, or that they shed their blood as lavishly in defence of the flag under which they serve. In the name, then, of the Catholic people of Ireland, of the Catholic soldiers of the army, and of those who still look to Ireland as one of the most valuable recruiting grounds for the British army, I appeal to the House for a change in the constitution and management of this institution. The disproportion of less than one-third Catholics to two-thirds Protestants is bad enough, but it is by no means the worst. A greater injustice arises from the constitution of the teaching staff. In 1861, there were sixty-nine persons holding offices of various kinds in this establishment—these offices ranging from the very highest to the very lowest—from those of the greatest authority to those of the most inferior position. And of these sixty-nine persons, only one, holding anything like a position of authority or influence, was a Catholic—that was the Catholic clergyman. The dispenser of medicine was also a Catholic; but he could hardly be said to be one likely to have much control over the management of the institution. Thus out of sixty-nine persons holding office, but nine were Catholics, and of these nine but two—the officiating clergyman and the dispenser of medicines —held the position of a gentleman, the other seven filling the humblest offices in the household. The entire teaching staff was Protestant then, and is Protestant now, and this in an institution in which some one-third of the scholars are Catholics—the children of Catholic soldiers ! That teaching staff consists of four masters, four assistant masters, and ten monitors — all Protestants. The Protestant Chaplain is the resident, while the Officiating Catholic Clergyman is not. The one is always on the spot, the other is only permitted to attend on certain days, and for a limited time, as I will show. Now, not only is the Protestant Chaplain resident, but all the officers having authority and influence are likewise resident. The Protestant children are instructed in the Catechism of the Church of England daily; it is part of the duty of the masters to teach them that which is considered by each church to be the foundation of the belief of a Christian. The Protestant boy is carefully taught the principles of his religion; but the Catholic boy is necessarily neglected. The Protestant boy is taught his catechism daily; but the Catholic children can be instructed only three times a week in the truths of their religion. The Catholic clergyman lives three miles away from the school, and is only allowed to attend in it for an hour on Wednesday, two hours on Saturday, and two hours on Sunday—five hours altogether in the week! This surely is not a fair protection to the faith of the Catholic child, the orphan of the Catholic soldier. Here, then, is a school in which there are 127 Catholic boys of tender years, everything else is Protestant—the officers of rank, authority, and influence are Protestant, the teaching staff is Protestant, and the books are Protestant. The books— histories, for instance—are not those which are used in the National Schools of Ireland, or, in other words, in schools in which the mixed system is taught, and in which there are supposed to be children of different religious denominations. In the Session of 1861, I brought this matter before the House, and on that occasion two Members of the Government ex- pressed opinions unfavourable to the state of things then shown to exist, and which state of things continues to this hour. The present Colonial Secretary was then Secretary for Ireland, and he agreed with what fell from the then Under Secretary for "War (Mr. Baring), who "thought it was a pity that more Roman Catholics were not employed in the management of the school." The then Irish Secretary (Mr. Cardwell) used these words—

"The institution was now to be regarded as a public establishment maintained for the general benefit of the Queen's Irish subjects serving in the field."

And he added—

"He must express his cordial concurrence in the wish expressed by his hon. Friend the Under Secretary at War, that as vacancies occurred among the officers, they should be filled up solely with a view to the objects for which the school was supported, and that no selections should be made with the intention of favouring any one class in the community."

Some time ago I was distinctly promised that the next vacancy in the teaching staff should be filled up by a Roman Catholic. But how was that expectation, that promise realized? It was filled up by one who was the son of Catholic parents, who was registered as a Catholic, but who, having been given to one of the Protestant teachers as his servant, succumbed to the influences of the school, and became a Protestant. This lad was then sent to the military school at Athlone, and he was afterwards brought back, in the capacity of a master, to the school which he had entered as a Catholic, and in which he was induced to change his faith. What worse example than this could be set to a Catholic child? What more direct encouragement to proselytizing could have been afforded than by that appointment? If I am asked where are the evil consequences resulting from the character of the institution, the teaching staff, and the instruction, I point to the flagrant case I have mentioned as one proof; and I add to that the fact that in a few years, from 1851 to 1858, as many as 22 Catholic boys abandoned the faith of their parents and became Protestants. I said the books were not—some of them at least—such as the Government permitted to be used in the mixed schools in Ireland. Mr. Gleig's historical works, however suited for Protestant children, and not with standing their ability, are not the books I should place in the hands of a Catholic boy, unless I desired to destroy his respect for his faith and his church. It is not fair to use such books in a mixed school; but, as the Committee will see, works of a far different character are introduced into this asylum for the training and protection of the children of Irish soldiers. Tracts of the most aggressive and offensive character are allowed to be circulated, not only amongst Protestant but amongst Catholic boys. As many as 22 of these pestilent productions—some of them written by pious fools, perhaps more of them written by lying knaves—were found in the hands of Catholic boys; and not only do these tracts poison the minds of the Protestant boys against their fellow pupils of another faith—by whose side they might stand at some future day in deadly fight, and whom they should learn to love and not to hate—but they are attended with the most mischievous effects on the Catholic boys, and are even calculated to weaken, their belief in all revealed religion. Let the House judge of the character and influence of these tracts from a very few examples. One found in the hand of a Catholic boy, named George Fennell, contained the following: —"Popery is the most perfect contrivance of the devil for leading souls to hell." That, at least, is mild and tolerant. Another line —"Popery is as bitter an enemy to the truth as ever." Here is another passage—

"The people of Ephesus worshipped a goddess, whom they called Diana. The idolaters of Rome at the present day do the very same thing."

What can be thought of the officers of an institution supported by the State— supported out of taxes to which Catholics contribute their share—in which such works are circulated amongst young boys of different religious denominations, and who should be suffered to grow up together in amity? As a further indication of the character and tone of this school in which we find 127 helpless Catholic children, I may briefly refer to a case that occurred in the summer of 1861. An orderly sergeant named Harrison when on his deathbed desired to see the Catholic clergyman. Every possible obstruction was opposed to the wish of the dying man. Urged by Harrison's wife, the Rev. Mr. Leonard endeavoured to see him, but in vain. Having applied to several officials for an order of admission, he at length procured one from Sir George Brown; but, though possessing that order, he was kept at the door of the establish- ment for one hour and twenty minutes, and was not allowed to cross the threshold until Harrison breathed his last! It is only fair to say that the Lord Lieutenant, true to his character as a man of liberality and justice, wrote a minute in which the conduct of certain officials was rebuked. Lord Carlisle is not one who is likely to rebuke severely; but his opinion was pronounced with sufficient distinctness. He said "he considered the detention of the Rev. Mr. Leonard at the gate of the hospital as most unfortunate." That minute is important for this additional reason, that it pointed out to Mr. Leonard the course he should take for the future. It concludes with these words—

"The Rev. Mr. Leonard would, however, do well to bear in mind, that upon any future occasion, when he may see reason to complain of the conduct or proceedings of any officer of the institution, he should in the first instance apply for redress to the Governors of the School."

Let the Committee now see what the Rev, Mr. Leonard gained by following that proper advice. At the desire of his spiritual superior, the Most Rev. Dr. Cullen, he addressed a respectful and earnest statement and remonstrance to the Board, in which he urged the necessity for appointing a Catholic teacher for the Catholic boys, and which he fortified by the recorded opinions of Mr. Cardwell and Mr. Baring in its favour. The answer was in this sneering fashion—

"Adjutant General's Office, Royal Hospital,

Dublin, May 22nd, 1862.

"Sir,—I am directed by Sir George Brown to acknowledge the receipt (yesterday evening) of your letter of the 19th instant, in which you are pleased to favour the General with your opinion as to the most judicious mode of selecting teachers for the Royal Hibernian Military School.—I have the honour to be, sir, your obedient servant,

(Signed) "G. S. BROWNRIGG, Deputy.

"The Rev. John Leonard,

R. H. M. School, St. Bridget's Blanchardstown."

Mr. Leonard is a man not to be driven from his purpose by a sneer, and, like any one who has a good cause to defend, he determined to persevere. Not finding redress from the Governors he turned to the War Office. Nothing daunted by his rebuff from Sir George Brown, Mr. Leonard appealed to the late lamented Secretary for War, Sir George Lewis, than whom there was not an abler public servant or a juster man; but as the War Office has really no jurisdiction—and this is a point of great moment—he was referred back to the Governors, by whom he was treated with contempt. This was his answer from the War Office—

"War Office, 18th June, 1862.

"REV. SIR,—In reply to your letter of 29th ultimo, addressed to the Secretary to the Council of Military Education, I am directed by Secretary Sir George Lewis to acquaint you, that though the actual appointments alluded to in your letter are not precisely specified, it is assumed that they are such as are comprehended in the Charter granted to the Royal Hibernian School, dated 14th December, 1846, which vests the power of appointment to certain offices in the Governors of the institution. I am therefore to state, that your application should be made to the Governors, instead of the Council of Military Education.—I am, sir, your obedient servant,

(Signed) "EDWARD LUGARD,

"Rev. J. Leonard, St. Bridget's,

Blanchardstown, Dublin.

I confess, Sir, that my blood boiled when after reading the respectful, calm, full, and comprehensive statements and remonstrances of the Rev. Mr. Leonard, I observed the scornful and contemptuous manner in which that gentleman on all occasions was answered. At one time—in answer to grave statements and earnest appeals—he was told that he was going beyond his province; at another he was told that he was dictating to the Board; at another, he was threatened with suspension; and on all occasions the replies he received, whether written or oral, were contradictory, vacillating, and imperious. The last reply was given in the month of April this year; but no redress, or hope of redress, whatever. I have no hesitation in saying that the conduct thus wilfully pursued by the Governors of the Royal Hibernian Military School is pernicious in itself, bad as an example, and most prejudicial to the service of the Queen. Let it be known that Catholic children were proselytized in this school, that apostates from the Catholic faith have been selected in preference to Catholic teachers, that no protection is given to the orphan children of men who shed their blood in defence of this country, and the number of enlistments in Ireland, already very small, will speedily become much less. I believe the Lord Lieutenant and the Government are willing to do justice, but they are powerless in the matter. Parliament, however, is not so; and if the charter of the school does not give sufficient power to the Government, it can be altered. The House is asked this year to vote upwards of £11,000 for the support of the Hibernian School. The officials, therefore, are public servants, and should be amen- able to public control; and, if they wrap themselves up in their bigotry and folly, they must be made to feel that they cannot be allowed to stand in the way of the interests of the Empire and the service of Her Majesty. I hope the Under Secretary for War, who is a just and generous man, will give full and free expression to his opinion, so that an end may be put to an intolerable grievance; but if justice be not done before next Session, and if these gentlemen will not do that voluntarily which they will otherwise be compelled to do against their will, I, Sir, should no other Member propose it, will move for either a Commission or a Select Committee to consider the constitution of the school, and the necessity for altering its charter.

said, that the hon. Member for Dungarvan (Mr. Maguire) had moved this Session for some elaborate Returns connected with the Royal Hibernian School, In those Returns it was proposed to embrace statements as to the religion of the teachers and the boys at the school, as well as other minute particulars which he believed it was not in accordance with the practice of the House to have furnished. But, be that as it might, he had been awaiting the production of those papers, and had not for a moment supposed that the hon. Member would have substituted for them Returns of his own. [Mr. MAGUIRE: It is on Returns presented by order of this House that I mainly rely.] Yes; Returns for 1861, which were not at all the same as those for which the hon. Member had moved, and into the examination of which he had meant to enter during the Whitsuntide recess, not at all imagining that in their absence the subject would have been brought forward that evening. As, however, it had been brought forward, he might take that opportunity of saying that he knew the Governors of the institution in question, and that a more honourable or high-minded body of men did not exist. The school, he might add, was a military school; the boys in it were intended for the most part for Her Majesty's service; and if a conflict of opinion on sectarian matters were allowed to prevail there, a spirit of insubordination would be likely to be produced, not only among the teachers, but the taught. The school as it stood, he believed, was working admirably, and it would be dangerous to introduce novel experiments. He hoped that before the noble Lord the Under Secretary for War pledged himself to make any organic change in it he would take pains duly to inform himself whether the Governors, in the course which they had pursued, had not proceeded on just and proper grounds.

said, he had listened with the utmost surprise to the statements which had been made by the hon. Member for Dungarvan (Mr. Maguire). He took it for granted that the school was equally open to Roman. Catholics and to Protestants; and that being the case he could not understand how, in a country, the majority of the inhabitants of which were Roman Catholics, only one-third of the scholars should be Roman Catholics, and all the orderlies of one religion—the Protestant. During the time he served in the army, he had, for the most part, been connected with regiments which were composed chiefly of Roman Catholics, one of the last being the Royal Irish Fusiliers, in which, out of 1,000 men, there were not more than seventy or eighty Protestants; and he defied any man to point out an instance in which the Roman Catholic soldier in those regiments had not done his duty most nobly, led by Protestant officers, in the service of a Protestant Queen. It was, therefore, much to be regretted that in an institution like the Royal Hibernian School, any marked difference should be made between the members of the two persuasions.

said, that he had to thank the hon. Member for Dungarvan for the very temperate manner in which he had introduced the subject to the notice of the House, which was undoubtedly a very important one. The hon. Gentleman had very fairly stated that the Secretary of State had no power to interfere directly with the management of the institution in question. He was prepared, at the same time, to admit, that as a sum of £12,000 appeared in the Army Estimates for its support, it was but right that the representative of the War Department should be called upon to account for the expenditure of that money. Sir George Lewis, he might add, having inquired into the subject, had come to the conclusion indicated by the letter to which the hon. Member referred, and the charter of the institution set forth, in the most distinct terms, that the control of the school should be vested in certain Governors, who should have power to appoint the officers and teachers, the discretion vested in the Secretary of State having relation simply to the salary which those officers should receive. That being so, the hon. Member complained that not only were certain books made use of in the school for the purposes of education to which he, as a Roman Catholic, objected, but that religious tracts of a controversial character had been introduced, and were freely circulated among the boys. Now, into the character of the books employed in the educational course he would not enter; but he must say, that having looked over some of the extracts to which the hon. Gentleman alluded, he could not see that there was in them anything very objection, able. But, however that might be, it was for the Governors of the school, and not for the House of Commons, to determine what books should be used in the ordinary course of instruction. Then as to the charge that controversial tracts were freely circulated in the school, that, no doubt, was a very serious charge; but he felt bound to say that he did not think it had been substantiated. Earl De Grey and Lord Carlisle having heard what Colonel Wynyard, the commandant of the establishment—in whose veracity every one who knew him was aware the utmost reliance might be placed—had to say on the subject in reply to the appeal of Mr. Leonard, had come to the conclusion that the explanation was perfectly satisfactory. Colonel Wynyard stated that the rule of the institution was, that no boy should be permitted to give his Bible or religious books to any other boy who was not of the same persuasion, and it was posted up in the hospital that severe punishment would follow the breach of this regulation; and he distinctly stated that in the two years and a half during which he had been commandant, only two cases of such an exposure of tracts as Mr. Leonard alleged had taken place in twenty-two instances had been recorded, and that with those cases he had duly dealt. If, he might add, Mr. Leonard had discovered the tracts which he mentioned, was it not his duty, before advancing so grave a charge as he had done against Colonel Wynyard, to inform him that certain books had been found in the school, and to afford him an opportunity of inquiring how it was they had got there? Colonel Wynyard only knew of two cases, and in those Mr. Leonard brought the facts to his notice in such a manner that it was difficult to deal with, the offenders. Instead of taking the books to Colonel Wynyard, Mr. Leonard had sent them to Archbishop Cullen, and thus the Commandant had not the opportunity of ascertaining its real character. Nevertheless, in both cases, the order which he had just read was vindicated. Upon this explanation and other evidence, the Governors came to the conclusion that Colonel Wynyard had completely exonerated himself from the charges made against him, and Lord Carlisle had in a minute expressed himself satisfied. With many of the other remarks of the hon. Member he agreed, and he fully concurred in all that was said three years ago by the then Under Secretary for War and his right hon. Friend now Secretary of State for the Colonies. The explanation given by Sir George Brown of the absence of Roman Catholic teachers was, that the Governors never inquired into the religion of the candidates, but had in all cases appointed the man whom they thought best fitted for the appointment. He had no doubt that that explanation was perfectly true, but to him it was not satisfactory. He thought that the principle upon which the Governors had acted was an erroneous one. He thought that in a country like Ireland, where so many of the pupils were Roman Catholics, the Governors ought to inquire into the religion of the candidates, and to take care that a certain proportion of the teachers should be Roman Catholics. Earl De Grey held the same opinions as were expressed three years ago by Mr. Baring and his right hon. Friend the Secretary for the Colonies; and, indeed, he had caused Sir George Brown to be informed that, though the War Department had no power of interfering with the conduct of the institution, yet unless a fair and just course was pursued towards the Roman Catholic children, it would be impossible either for him to defend the institution or for him (the Marquess of Hartington), who was the representative of the Military Department in the House of Commons, and answerable for the expenditure of the money voted for the Department, to defend it there. Further than that it was impossible for the Secretary of State to go. It was possible that the Governors might refuse to take the advice which had been given to them, and in that case it would be competent to the hon. Member, or any of his Friends, to move for an inquiry into the system. He trusted and hoped, how- ever, that after it had been pointed out to Sir George Brown, who he was sure had in this instance, as in all others, no desire except to do his duty, that the principle upon which the Governors were acting was not a right one, and that they ought in fairness to consider the religion of Roman Catholics as a qualification for appointment as teachers, both he and the other Governors would act upon the suggestion, and that in future Roman Catholic parents would have no reason to fear for the faith of their children who belonged to this school.

said, that with every desire to give credit to the hon. Member for Dungarvan for honest zeal, he thought that it would have been better if he had told the Committee that although complaints had been made as to the introduction of controversial tracts into this school, they had not been substantiated, except in two isolated cases. He had heard with surprise the speech of the noble Lord opposite, and he must say that before the noble Lord went the length of inferring censure on Sir George Brown and the Governors of the Institution, he ought to have satisfied himself that there was sufficient reason for doing so. In justice to those who had the management of the school, it was only right to assume that if they had not acted upon the advice of the Government it was because they had good reasons for adhering to the old system. No one had cast the slightest doubt upon the efficiency, value, and excellence of the school. The school was popular with the army, and he had not heard of any complaints of its management having been made by those most interested in it. Why, then, should a change be made; and why should the masters be altered simply and solely that some of them might be Roman Catholics? Had the noble Lord fully considered the effect of such a change, and did he desire to introduce that principle in every instance? Did he desire to see the harmony of the school broken up by religious dissension between the boys, and—what was worse —between the teachers? The object of the attack of the hon. Member for Dungarvan was altogether a polemical one. [Mr. MAGUIRE: No, no!] That would be the opinion of every impartial person who had heard or might read it, and the proof that it was so was to be found in the stress which the hon. Gentleman had laid upon the appointment to a sub- ordinate office in the school of a young man who had, he presumed, from conscientious reasons, abandoned the Roman Catholic faith and become a Protestant. He had no authority to speak on behalf of this school. He had no communication from the Governors, but he had heard enough to convince him that this was simply and solely a sectarian and polemical attack, directed to the aggrandizement of the Roman Catholic Church. ["Oh, oh!"] There was no argument in "Oh, oh!" He repeated that that was the case, and it rested with the Government to say whether an institution which was working soundly and well, and training up loyal subjects and good soldiers, should be needlessly interfered with to conciliate the views of parties who had not always been distinguished for loyalty to the Crown.

said, it was no answer to his noble Friend to say that this was a sectarian and polemical attack. The real question was, whether the present state of things was just and desirable. No attack was made on the general character of the institution, of which he could, from personal knowledge, speak, in many respects, in the highest terms, nor on the distinguished General who had the command of the forces in Ireland, whom they all respected. Objection was taken only to the exclusive nature of the principal appointments in the institution. Was it wise or just that an institution intended for the orphans of soldiers who had served their Queen, should be under an exclusive management? The hon. and gallant Member for Oxfordshire (Colonel North), who had been in Ireland and knew the Irish soldiers, had told them what must be the feeling caused by so one-sided an arrangement. And by whom was this institution maintained? Principally by the Vote of this House, and was not a mere charity, but a mark of gratitude for services rendered to the country. Its primary object was not eleemosynary—its primary object was for the public education of orphans of soldiers, and, being for the education of all, it ought to be conducted in a manner in which it could be accepted by all. The hon. Member for Dublin, however, defended the institution on the very ground that it was exclusive. He (Mr. Cardwell) could not admit that argument, and ventured to adhere to the opinion which had been quoted, that not only good feeling towards those for whom the institution was intended, but motives of the highest public policy dictated that the institution should not be exclusive. He sincerely hoped that those who governed the institution, hearing of the opinions expressed on both sides the House, would act on the principle that there should be a just admixture of both religions, and that an institution which was intended for the benefit of all should be so constituted and so conducted as to command the confidence of all classes of the community.

held that an institution which was supported out of the taxation, of the whole kingdom, and was intended for the benefit of the army, without distinction as to religion, should not be allowed to assume an exclusive character. It was most unjust that only one-third of the scholars should be Catholic, while the number of Catholic soldiers was six to one. He, for one, would not allow of supremacy any longer, nor confess himself a less man than another because he professed the religion in which he was born. They were all equal, and he would assert the claim of the Catholic children to all the rights to which they were entitled in this institution. He believed that the speech of the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary for the Colonies would have a most beneficial effect in Ireland.

said, that the Hibernian Military School was not exclusively for the children of Irish soldiers, but was intended for the children of all soldiers in Ireland, and the proportion of Irish Catholic soldiers in Ireland, as compared with Protestant soldiers there, could not be so large as the hon. Member had just mentioned.

stated that he spoke of the children of Irish parents who enlisted in Ireland, and of these there were four or five Catholics to one Protestant.

said, that the speeches of the noble Lord the Under Secretary for "War, and of the right hon. Secretary for the Colonies, were only such as might have been expected from them, and rendered it almost unnecessary for him to make any additional observations on the subject before the House. The difficulty in respect to the Royal Hibernian Military School appeared to arise from the fact that its government was vested in certain Governors, and not in the responsible Government of the country. Nevertheless, that House found the necessary funds to the amount of £12,900. He would sug- gest a means by which the difficulties that at present existed might be avoided. If the Governors thought that their school would be spoiled by any admixture in the religious element, then let them send the Roman Catholic children to be taught in Roman Catholic schools, and let the Government pay to the managers of those schools the cost of the maintenance and education of these children at the Hibernian School, namely, £27 per head There would be no difficulty in such schools if it were thought desirable in adding military training to the other branches of education. With regard to the circulation of controversial tracts in the school, it was said that there was no proof of the general circulation of these tracts. That proof, however, it was almost impossible to give, though a number of individual instances might be adduced; and he put it to any hon. Gentleman whether tracts, simply abusing a religion different from that of the writer's, were in any degree necessary for the promotion of religious knowledge or charity among Protestant children. The evidence went to show that such tracts were frequently found in the institution. He would now advert to another subject. When he made a general statement the other evening with respect to the Army Estimates, he said he would draw attention in detail to those particular Votes on which he mentioned the expenditure to be most remarkable, and as the Education Vote was one of them he would briefly allude to it. His previous statement was chiefly founded on a comparison of the cost of the English and French services; and he thought the item of education was one in which a comparison might safely be instituted, and he would, therefore, call attention to the cost of some of the English military schools, not only compared with the French, but with the civil schools in their country. He would take first of all the Royal Military Academy. Any one might suppose that the great expenditure in English military schools was caused by the higher class of treatment which the lads received; but the cost for living was as much in France as it was in England, while the expense of superintendence was in England double its amount elsewhere. There were 250 pupils in the Royal Military Academy, and they cost on the average £161 each. That cost was divided in this way; teaching, £56; administration, £29; namely, £21 10s. for superior and £7 10s. for inferior administration; living and all other expenses, £76. If that was compared with the French Ecole Polytechnique, an institution not inferior, the results would be as follows:—number of pupils 260 (nearly the same as the number in the Royal Military Academy), cost £115 per pupil. The analysis of that expense was, for teaching and administration—for these items were not given separately—£40; living and other expenses, £75; total, £115. In the Royal Military Academy there were 45 teachers, or nearly 1 to every 5 pupils, and that was exclusive of officers. In the Ecole Polytechnique there were 42 teachers, or 1 to every 6 pupils. Then, in the Royal Military Academy there were 48 administrators, or 1 to every 5 pupils, and that arose from a peculiarity of our system, which was that we had not only an entire teaching staff, but also an entire military teaching staff. In foreign schools the two functions were combined, and there was no reason why the captain of a company should not be an efficient teacher. If we compared those items with the cost of civil schools, every one would admit that the expense was excessive. With regard to the Royal Military College for Cadets, the number of pupils was 296, and the cost for teaching was about £55 10s.; for staff £14 10s., and for living, &c., about £70, making a total of £140 per pupil. In the Ecole Impériale Spéciale Militaire, which might be compared with the Cadets College, the number of pupils was 600, the cost of teaching and staff was £34, and of living, &c., £48; total, £82. In the Cadets College there were 42 teachers, or 1 to every 7 pupils; the French found 17 teachers, or 1 to every 35 pupils, enough. To teach 296 pupils we had 8 professors of mathematics, 8 professors of fortifications, 8 professors of military drawing and surveying, 4 French masters, 2 German, 2 who were given as instructors in languages, but it was not said what languages, and 4 professors of landscape drawing. Now, he believed that everyone acquainted with teaching in this country would admit that the number of professors was far more than was necessary. He had nothing more to say upon the subject, but had made these remarks in fulfilment of a pledge which he had given on a former occasion.

said, the cost of military education last year was £172,201, or at the rate of £1 3s. 2½d. per head for the 148,000 men in our army, while in France it was only 7s. 1d. per head.

said, that the cost of education in the army must be compared with the cost of education in the country generally. Every one knew that just as good education might be got at Vienna, Berlin, or in various parts of Italy, for one-third of what it would cost in this country.

asked for some explanation of the fact that for twenty Queen's Cadets nominated by the Secretary of State for India, an item of £1,500 was set down, and at the bottom of page 58, it was stated in a note that the Indian Government contributed £3,000 per annum for the Education and Maintenance of twenty Queen's Cadets, nominated by the Secretary of State for India. In the Hospital Vote a sum was set down for pay and lodging allowance for forty-five probationers, to fill up vacancies in the medical department. He wanted to know whether there was any security that those probationers would enter the army medical department?

inquired whether any alteration would be made in the course set down for the competitive examination for the army? A more absurd system never existed. The French taught everything that the young officers ought to know, we taught them everything but what they ought to know. On the other hand we went to the most ridiculous extreme, and inquired into their acquirements in everything that could not be of the least possible use. The Professors themselves sought for questions merely to puzzle young men, and there was not a single one of those Professors, not with standing all their quibbling questions, who would be fit to enter the army.

said, the expense of the military colleges was, no doubt, high, but the explanation suggested by the hon. Baronet (Sir Harry Verney) was, no doubt, the correct one— that the expense of educational establishments of all kinds in this country was much higher than on the Continent. An immense number of Professors were certainly employed in our military colleges, and it would be for the Secretary of State for War to say whether any reduction could be made. As to the question asked by the gallant Colonel opposite (Colonel North) with respect to the twenty Cadets nominated by the Secretary for India, he was not at that time in a position to give an explanation. With respect to the probationers, they would not be compelled to enter the service, but of course it was their intention to do so, otherwise they would not have become probationers.

said, it had been stated that no one could be got to enter the medical department of the army, and, therefore, some security should be had that these persons who came to the army schools for medical education, should join the army medical service. He wished to know why a swimming master had not been appointed, as had been recommended by the Committee.

asked why the recommendations of the Committee on the Cadastral Survey, in 1862, were not carried out. He wished to urge on the Government the propriety of completing the survey on the 25-inch scale, such as had been adopted by most of the principal countries in Europe. A Government map on such a scale, accessible to every one, would be of immense advantage in an infinite number of cases, particularly in those connected with the sale and transfer of land, drainage, questions arising under the Parochial Assessment Acts, &c. It was shown before the Committee which investigated this subject that the larger the sum voted at the outset the cheaper the map would be in the end, as delays and difficulties inseparable from endless changes of plan would thereby be obviated.

suggested that the attention of the Director of the Cadastral Survey should be directed in the first instance to the mineral districts of the country.

considered that the department should first direct its attention to the survey of the populous districts, and where the country was greatly subdivided. He understood that maps of portions of Kent and the South Coast were in a very forward state, and nearly fit for publication. He suggested that these should be brought out at once, as the large sale they would be sure to command would greatly stimulate the progress of the rest of the survey. It was idle to go on publishing maps of distant and unimportant portions of the country to the neglect of fields so much more productive and inviting.

said, that the Government survey was being executed in the most expensive and costly manner. He believed that under proper management a great deal more work might have been executed for the £100,000 which had been for several years voted for the purpose, Scotland had great cause of complaint, because, although she contributed her share towards the Vote for the Ordnance Survey, she had suffered great neglect at the hands of the Director General of the Survey. Next Session he proposed, when this Vote was again before the House, to enter upon an analysis of the work, and to show how for the same expenditure a greater result might have been obtained.

said, that the spirit of the recommendation of the Committee had been carried out. The sum of £67,000 voted last year for the survey had been increased this year to £75,000. The Government were assailed from two opposite quarters on this matter, for while some hon. Members advised a diminution of the expenditure, others thought a largely increased expenditure would be beneficial. The Committee which sat for two years recommended that a sum of £90,000 should be devoted annually to complete the survey of Great Britain, and the late Sir George Lewis announced that this recommendation would be adopted by the Government and carried into effect. The history of the Ordnance Survey showed that the sums voted by Parliament had fluctuated to a degree that had paralyzed the survey. and caused a waste of £40,000. At first the survey was not conducted according to one uniform system of triaugulation, and when the results were put together, enormous discrepancies were observable. It was then resolved that there should be one uniform system of survey for the whole of the kingdom. A few years ago, however, it was determined to survey Ireland on the six-inch scale, and also some of the Northern counties. The whole survey was then suspended and referred to a Committee which reported in favour of the one-inch scale. The matter was then referred to a Royal Commission, which recommended the 25-inch survey. The House, on the Motion of Sir Denham Norreys, affirmed the principle of the 25-inch survey, but next year the hon. Member for St. Andrew's (Mr. E. Ellice) carried a Motion condemning the principle. By this means the operations of the department were paralyzed, and a loss of from £35,000 to £40,000 was sustained. Not less than fourteen blue-books had been published on this subject. It had been examined by a Royal Commission and three Committees. The last Committee, of which he was a member, recommended that a fixed annual sum should be voted, and that a 25-inch survey should be carried on because it contained within itself the elements of all the other surveys, and might be reduced to any other scale. The invention of photography and zincography had saved the country many thousands of pounds. Maps were formerly reduced by the slow process of the pentagraph; but now a map was placed upon a board in a room, and, by means of photography, was reduced in ten minutes to any scale that might be desired, and with perfect accuracy. He believed that the Survey Department was exceedingly well managed. The Committee went down to Southampton, investigated the means and appliances of the office, and were satisfied that the department was well organized. The triangulation over the whole of Great Britain was now completed. Certain portions of the kingdom, where works had been recommended by the Defence Commission, had been already surveyed on the 25-inch scale, and when the rest of the kingdom had been surveyed these portions would be brought in without additional survey to make a general map. It had been said by the hon. Member for Bodmin (Mr. Wyld) that the one-inch map should be completed before proceeding further with the 25-inch, but hon. Gentlemen should recollect that the greater contained the less. With respect to the progress of the Ordnance Survey, he could state that all England had been surveyed upon the one inch scale, and, with the exception of parts of Northumberland and Cumberland, the maps had been published. The hon. Member for Bodmin would recollect that the Committee recommended that the Highlands of Scotland should not be surveyed upon the larger scale. Upon the whole, he thought it would be found the survey had proceeded with tolerable rapidity.

observed, that in these discussions there always appeared to exist a confusion between surveys and maps. It was supposed that because a survey was on a certain scale, therefore the map must be on the same scale; but, in truth, if the survey was made, the question as to the scale upon which the map should be made was subordinate and should be decided independently. The great question was when would the survey be completed; and, therefore, he hoped the Committee would vote sums sufficient to allow of the survey being pressed with vigour and efficiency. When completed it would be of the utmost value. We were very far behind other countries in this matter, both as to the progress of the survey and the quality of the maps.

said, that if this Committee were as well inclined to economy as a former Committee had been, he should ask them to put an end to the publication of the series of maps upon a 25-inch scale for the whole country. Those maps had been invested with a degree of mystery by being styled cadastral surveys—which they really were not, because a cadastral survey would give an account of all the landed property of the country, the acreage and tenure of the land. If this minute style of mapping was to be truly and honestly carried out it could not be done for £1,400,000, but would cost nearer double that amount; and, after all, would be badly done, and would be of little value to anybody but the proprietors of landed estates. At present the Survey Department confined itself to maps upon the 1-inch scale, which were found to be very inaccurate. If that was the case with a 1-inch scale what would it be with maps upon a 25-inch scale. He believed that, for all practical purposes, the House was sanctioning a great and useless expense, because if gentlemen wanted their estates surveyed they should do it in their own way, and pay for the labour themselves.

said, that the extension of the survey was conducted mainly upon the principle advocated by the hon. Baronet opposite (Sir William Jolliffe); the chief towns of the kingdom had been completed to a great extent; and the maps sold to the amount of £12,000 a year, which very much more than compensated for the cost of publication. The suggestion of his hon. Friend the Member for Glamorganshire (Mr. Hussey Vivian) was, no doubt, worthy of consideration. Those parts of the country where fortifications already existed, or were about to be erected, required the earliest attention, and the utmost accuracy; but he promised his hon. Friend that attention would be paid to his suggestions in reference to the mining districts, if it could be done without adding very much to the cost. As to the obser- vations of the hon. Member for the Tower Hamlets (Mr. Ayrton), he could only say that the subject of the survey was one of a scientific nature, and the House had several times agreed to treat it as such, and to refer it to those who could enter upon it better than the House. The House last year accepted the recommendations of the Select Committee, on the suggestion of the late Sir George Cornewall Lewis, as it seemed to that right hon. Baronet that it would be a waste of money to be continually changing the scale of survey. If the country were to be surveyed at all, the whole of the country should be surveyed; and then no one could object to the publication of the maps, because as the publication was equally advantageous to individuals as it was to the public, the sale would return some compensation for the outlay.

said, he concurred with the noble Lord who presided over the Survey Committee (Viscount Bury) that the early surveys were inaccurate, though they referred to some of the most important districts of the country. The hon. Member for the Tower Hamlets (Mr. Ayrton) seemed to be carried away with strange notions as to the use of those maps. He seemed to think that they were only intended to point out the boundaries of gentlemen's estates. The parish authorities, however, wanted the correct boundaries; so did the Tithe Commutation Commissioners. All parties, in fact, required to have accurate maps with the view to the proper conveyance of land. He was anxious to see accurate maps, and he did not care about the expense of obtaining them.

thought that the Committee were entitled to know what was the time at which the ordnance and geological surveys would be completed. They had been voting, year after year, large sums of money, and they were now entitled to know when they would obtain the fruit of their labours.

said, it was calculated that £90,000 a year would be required for twenty years for the Ordnance Survey. The Geological Survey was not connected with the Ordnance Survey, and he was unable to answer in respect to it.

said, that the cost of the administration of the army had been frequently referred to as being the department of our public expenditure where a good deal of judicious paring could be exercised with advantage. The noble Lord who represented the Army Department had, on a previous occasion, when the subject was under discussion, made some little confusion between the general Staff and the administration of the army. The hon. and gallant Member for Queen's County (Colonel Dunne) had also expressed a hope that he would not press for any diminution of the general Staff of the army, But, in fact, that department was entirely different from the administration. In administration the French were certainly not inferior to ourselves. Our head department consisted of a Secretary of State and a Commander-in-Chief, the expense being £9,442, while the French managed with one Minister, to whom they, however, paid more, his salary being £5,200. The French officials—directeurs, chefs, et commis—equivalent to our officials from secretaries to clerks inclusive—were for the double-sized army only 501, whose salaries were £58,964, against 627 persons in our own departments, with £177,207 of salaries. The office-keepers and servants were in both the English departments 106 in number, at a cost of £4,999; the French were about the same, with £5,462 of salaries. The total cost of the English administration, deducting the Quartermaster General's department, was £1 7s. per man, while the French total, leaving out the Dépôt de la Guerre, which was equivalent to our Surveys and Topographical Department, was about 4s. 6d. per man. It was said that this difference arose from the different rate of pay and of salaries in the two countries. But this could not be, inasmuch as the average English salary was somewhat more than double that of the French, while the cost per man was eleven times as great. It had been said that what Members should do was, not to make comparisons between the cost of the two armies, but to point out how reductions could be effected. But it was idle to ex- pect that any Member could point out, for example, which of the 627 secretaries or clerks could be dispensed with. He should not conclude with any Motion, but in another year he thought that if the Government did not diminish the cost of army administration the House ought to enforce it upon them.

said, the French divided their administration into personnel and matériel, and his estimate did not differ substantially from that just given, for he made it 5s. 5d. per man, while in the English army it was £1 8s, 8d. per man.

asked for an explanation of the extraordinary charge of £973 for forage for the Commander-in-Chief.

said, it was in the civil administration of the army that reductions must take place, and pointed out that there was an increase of clerks simultaneously with a reduction of the army.

said, the forage allowance to the Commander-in-Chief was not a new charge; it was only that which the regulations sanctioned for a Field Marshal, and he did not think that the Committee should grudge this charge. As to the civil branches of the army, the Secretary for War was inquiring into this subject, with a view, if possible, to make reductions. He did not think it was quite fair to compare this with the corresponding French Vote, for a great part of the services which were performed in the War Department and in the Commander-in-Chief's department in this country were performed in France, as he understood, by the Intendance and the Etat Major, neither of which came into the coresponding French Vote.

said, he had made the requisite allowance for this in his calculation.

said, that, according to an estimate made in the War Office, the expenses of that office, of the Commander-in-Chief's office, and the Staff did not compare nearly so unfavourably as the hon. Member had stated with the expenses of the French War Office, the Intendance and the Etat Major. From this estimate it appeared that the relative cost of the two administrations maintained the same proportion as that of other branches of the service, the English costing about double that of the French.

called attention to the fact that the Topographical Department had recently published a plan of the fortifications of Fredericia, which gave the Germans information which they did not before possess. During the Italian war a somewhat similar incident took place. The Austrian Government had published some time previously a large map of the Austrian empire. When the war broke out they refused to supply it, and prohibited its sale. But our Topographical Department reproduced this map, and the French Government, who could not obtain it elsewhere, actually supplied themselves with copies thus taken.

said, the functions of the Topographical Department were to collect and preserve authentic maps of every part of the world respecting which it was for the interests of the service that we should have information. It was impossible that the plan of Fredericia, to which the hon. Member had alluded, could have been of any assistance to the Germans. In the first place, the original map had been obtained from the British Museum, where it was open for anybody's inspection; and, in the next place, it was by no means an accurate plan, having been published- before 1848, since which time he believed that new fortifications had been erected. The map in question was published simply for the purpose of rendering more intelligible the despatches of our Ministers which might be received during the progress of the war. It was impossible that its publication could give any information to either army which they were not in possession of before. At the same time, he quite agreed that great care should be taken as to the publication of maps under such circumstances.

said, no proper explanation had been given of the item of £973, the reduction of the allowance for forage to the Commander-in-Chief. He would move the reduction of that item by the sum of £473, and the reduction of the allowance for forage to the Adjutant General by the sum of £244.

asked for some explanation respecting the mode of pensioning; and called attention to the case of the barrack-masters, many of whom were of an age that almost unfitted them for the performance of their duty. He had also to call attention to the case of distinguished cavalry officers placed on half-pay without the Commander-in-Chief being able to give them active employment. It was most objectionable to place officers after long service in India on half-pay on their return. He was sure the House would readily vote the money to keep those officers in active service.

said, that the practice referred to had always existed; and, as far as he knew, there was no intention on the part of the Government to alter it.

said, the proposition of the hon. Gentleman was fully discussed on a former evening, and he would not repeat the arguments which were then used against it. However, he might observe that it would be just as reasonable for the hon. Gentleman to ask that every loan should be registered as to ask that loans under this Bill should be registered. The Amendment would be a serious detriment to the measure, and he hoped the House would not adopt it.

supported the Amendment. He should like to have some proof of the injury likely to be done by the insertion of the word. The word "limited," as at present applied to various undertakings, was not detrimental to the investment of capital therein. Surely when a partnership changed its character, and came under the operation of the Bill, the public were entitled to be acquainted of the fact.

, as a Mend of the Bill, would be glad to see a provision introduced to compel the announcement in the Gazette of an alteration in the constitution of a firm. That, he thought, would answer the purpose required.

supported the principle of giving the most complete publicity to the circumstances of these partnerships.

protested against the attempt to combine in the present Bill objects not compatible with its provisions. If such objects were desired, they might be made the subject of a special Bill, but ought not to be included in this. Hon. Gentlemen might depend upon it that they were taking care over much. People concerned with firms under the Bill were shrewd enough to take care of their own interests, if they only had perfect liberty to act. He could not help thinking that a great deal of the zeal shown by the hon. Baronet was opposed to the Bill itself. Years ago he was opposed to the principle of joint-stock liability, and predicted that disasters would result from it. But the change had been most successful. Freedom of commerce had been attended with enormous advantages here, as it had in every country where it had been adopted. He (Mr. Bright was satisfied that, if the Bill were passed without any of the endless irritating restrictions sought to be put on its free working, we should in a few years be as content with the working of the measure as we were with the working of that of limited liability.

saw no reason why, if these partnerships were to be registered, they should not say so plainly to all the world.

said, that if the Law Officers of the Crown were content to allow the clause to be passed in its present shape he would offer no further opposition to it.

moved the omission of the words "or contract to lend." His objection to the proposal for contracting to lend was, that all those who had advocated the measure did so on the ground that it would chiefly be of use in enabling young men to come forward in business, by their friends advancing them a loan without incurring the risk of a partnership. No doubt the advance of money to such young men was of the utmost importance, but it was quite a different thing to "contract to lend" and to actually advance money.

opposed the Amendment. He had never put the case which his hon. Friend had just put to the Committee. The Committee would surely not compel a limited partner to pay into a concern which did not want the money. The clause only carried out the principle of a company whose shares were not paid up in full.

remarked that in France and the United States the money must be actually paid to the firm. Supposing the person contracting to lend money should fail, what claim would the limited partnership have on the estate.

said, after the decisions of the Committee he thought it would be useless to proceed further with the Bill. He would, therefore, move "that the Chairman leave the Chair."

hoped the hon. Gentleman would not abandon the measure, as notwithstanding the alterations that had been made there was much good in it.

thought the principle involved in the measure was of far too great importance to be left in the hands of a private Member, and was of opinion that if it was to be dealt with at all it should be dealt with by the Government.

contended that the hon. Member for Birmingham had adopted the right course in withdrawing the Bill, and trusted the Government would bear in mind the fact that the commercial community would expect from them the introduction, with as little delay as possible, of a measure embodying the principle involved in the present proposal.

said, that his hon. Friend had, he thought, done wisely in withdrawing the Bill. As far as he could see, the Government appeared to have no decided opinion on the matter, inasmuch as some of its members had voted one way and some another in the divisions which had just taken place.

urged the expediency of having a Bill dealing with the law of partnership, if introduced at all, brought in on the authority of the Government, and under the auspices of the Law Officers of the Crown.

thought his hon. Friend the Member for Birmingham had a fair right to expect that his Bill would have received the support of the House, seeing that a similar measure had passed through the House, after having been referred to a Select Committee last Session. If exception were to be taken, as seemed to be the case, to every word in every clause, it would be impossible even for the Government to carry through such a measure. The Government, he might add, had several Sessions ago brought forward a proposal embodying the principle of enabling persons to lend money to prosecute a business without making themselves general partners, but the proposal had not met with much favour. He could only say, in conclusion, that he regretted his hon. Friend had been so discouraged as to be induced to give up the Bill.

, as a Member of the Select Committee to which reference had been made, wished to observe that they refused to hear any evidence. Were they a tribunal, then, he would ask, which ought to be looked to to inform the public as to the merits of the question?

trusted the hon. Member for Birmingham would re-consider his determination to abandon the Bill. Even with the Amendments which had been introduced into it, there still remained in it, he thought, no small amount of good.

wished to make a similar appeal to his hon. Friend, who, he was sure, was of too high a character to be influenced in the matter by mere feeling. If he were to take further time to consider the course which he should pursue, it was quite possible he might find in the Bill provisions still untouched which would render it worth his while to persevere with it. If, however, he should withdraw it, he had no doubt the Government would be quite ready to take into consideration the question, whether it was possible to frame a measure on the subject; while, at the same time, it was not, in his opinion, desirable to lay it down as a rule that all questions would be more advantageously dealt with by the Government than by a private Member.

said that, in compliance with the suggestions which had just been made to him, he should withdraw the Motion that the Chairman leave the Chair, and simply move that he report Progress, with the view of proceeding with the Bill after the Whitsuntide recess.

remarked that in the divisions which had just taken place the President of the Board of Trade had voted one way and the Attorney General another.

said, that by the vote which he gave he did not intend to take a step which would be prejudicial to the Bill, and he had heard with great regret his hon. Friend's announcement that he should abandon the measure. He was entirely favourable to the principle of the Bill, and had only voted to-night as he had voted last year. He thought that if a new class of partnerships were introduced and required to be registered, they ought to go into the world avowedly such as they were.

, in moving the appointment of a Select Committee to inquire as to the most suitable arrangements to be made respecting the Patent Office Library and Museum, said, that he had communicated with the noble Lord the Member for King's Lynn (Lord Stanley) the Chairman of the Patent Law Commission, who had informed him that he saw no objection to the appointment of this Committee before the Report of that Commission had been presented.

thought that it would be both inconvenient and disrespectful to the Patent Law Commission that this Committee should be appointed before their Report, which might shortly be expected, was received. He, therefore, could not assent to the Motion.

wished to hear further particulars from the Government, for the House ought to have more precise knowledge before deciding on the subject. He thought it would be well to wait for the Report of the Commission.

said, that as the noble Lord the Member for King's Lynn had stated that this Committee would not interfere with the proceedings of the Commission, the fact that that Commission had not yet reported was no reason for delaying its appointment.

said, that although the appointment of this Committee might not interfere with the proceedings of the Patent Law Commission, yet when that Commission reported there would be a great many subjects connected with patents which must necessarily be considered, and it would be convenient to consider them all together. It would, therefore, be better to postpone the appointment of this Committee.