said, he would beg to ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, Whether any Bills will be brought forward during the present Session to continue the following Acts, which will expire before the end of the year 1867—namely, the Extradition Treaties Act Amendment Act, the Dockyard Extensions Act, the Locomotives on Roads Act, the Survey of Great Britain Act, and the Episcopal and Capitular Estates Management Act?

said, that the Expiring Laws Bill would be introduced in the course of the night, and it would contain all the information which the hon. Member desired to have.

said, he would beg to ask the Vice President of the Council, Whether, with reference to a serious outbreak of Cattle Plague, which occurred in Essex last week, his attention has been drawn to the fact, as stated in a daily paper, that Cattle from Antwerp were landed at Harwich in the morning and inspected at night before they were sent up to the Metropolitan Market; and, if so, whether Orders have been issued that the inspection of all imported Cattle should for the future take place in the daytime?

said, that the outbreak was not so serious as was generally supposed. The only attacks during the present month in Essex were one beast, on the 12th of July, in East Ham Level, and six, on the 21st of July, in Barking Level. It was true that a great number of cattle were slaughtered by the owners on their own responsibility; only seventeen were slaughtered by order of the local authority. As to the cattle coming from Antwerp to Harwich, two calves and some sheep were brought over by the Ravensbourne; they were examined between eight and nine o'clock, and the certificate was granted twelve hours after landing.

By twilight then?

asked, whether the inspection took place after the twelve hours' quarantine; they were landed at half-past nine o'clock.

said, that the intention of the Order in Council was that the cattle should rest twelve hours before inspection, and that intention was acted on in Harwich, until it was learned that in London the practice was somewhat different, and that there the time of inspection was included within the twelve hours. The inspection began at eight o'clock in the evening and terminated at nine o'clock and the certificate was given at half-past nine o'clock; so that the inspection terminated at the expiration of twelve hours after the landing of the cattle.

wished to know whether any other maladies, to which cattle were subject, were reported to the noble Lord's department? He asked this question on the ground that there was a general supposition, as some hon. Members well knew, that many cases were said to be of cattle plague which were not so, that the price of meat in the country was unnecessarily sustained under this delusion, and in this way practically protection was established under the pretence of keeping out cattle which were diseased.

said, that cases of other diseases were reported, but not as cattle plague. They had reports of numerous cases of pleuro pneumonia, for instance. Wherever the inspector made an inspection and gave a certificate of cattle plague, whether it was cattle plague or not, they were bound to treat it as such, in accordance with an Act passed by the late Government in 1866, which made the certificate of the local inspector conclusive as to the occurrence of that cattle disease. The hon. Member for Birmingham was mistaken in his notion concerning a rise in the price of meat; during the worst time of the cattle plague the rise in the price of meat was scarcely perceptible, and during a portion of the time it actually fell in price.

asked the Vice President of the Committee of Council on Education, whether it be true that, under the authority of the Privy Council, liberty has been recently given to the port of Sunder- land to tranship cattle imported thither from abroad, and send them by sea to other ports; whether the cattle transhipment regulations of the port of Sunderland apply to all other ports of import in the United Kingdom; and, if not, why not; and if such cattle transhipment regulations be general throughout the Kingdom; what precautions the Government are prepared to take, by enactment or otherwise, to prevent the spread of cattle diseases imported from abroad?

replied, that an Order in Council was passed on 16th July, which permitted the landing of foreign cattle in an island at Sunderland, the only communication between the island and the main land being by means of a bridge, and, of course, no cattle were permitted to pass over it. Under that Order the cattle have to rest for twelve hours on that island, and were then inspected, and might be shipped to other ports, where they must be taken direct to the slaughterhouse. The Order only applied to Sunderland, because various local particulars prevented its application to other towns. Several requisitions had come from other ports, which were under consideration, and would be treated on their own merits. The Government so framed their orders that foreign cattle and home cattle should never meet together, except at the place where they were slaughtered.

said, he would beg to ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, Whether it is his intention to propose any Amendments to the District Prothonotaries Lancaster Bill; and, if so, when Notice of such Amendments will be given?

said, he had no Amendments to propose in this Bill, though he believed the Attorney General, who had charge of the measure, intended to propose some.

said, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether he intends to carry out the recommendations of the Committee on the Factory Act Extension Bill, that a Royal Commission should issue to inquire into the operation of the Bleaching, Dyeing, and Printworks Acts?

replied, that he had made inquiries, and he was not sure that it would be necessary to issue a Royal Commission, but it would probably be necessary to have some inquiry made by competent authority.

said, he would beg to ask the Vice President of the Board of Trade, Whether he intends to introduce a Bill next Session to amend the Carriers Act?

said, that the Royal Commission on Railways had reported that the enumeration of articles in the Carriers Act required revision; representations which had been from time to time made to the Board of Trade fully bore out that conclusion. This point must therefore must be considered in framing any general measure. Whether this would be done next Session was more than he could at present say. Legislation in reference to railway matters was not a very easy or a very hopeful task.

stated, that service in the Coastguard did not count for time in respect of promotion, except in the case of one annual promotion on the special recommendation of the Controller General of the Coastguard, and, consequently, did not qualify Captains on the Reserved List to take the benefit of the recent Order in Council. With this exception, it was necessary that Commanders should serve one entire year in one or more of Her Majesty's ships employed on active service before being entitled to promotion.

asked, Whether it was the intention of the Government to proceed with this Bill, seeing that it had been postponed so often?

said, he hoped to go on with the Bill; it had been postponed once on account of the illness of the hon. Member for Reading; a second time on account of the absence of the hon. Member for Scarborough who put the Question; a third time, in consequence of the unavoidable absence of the right hon. Member for Oxfordshire; and a fourth time, in consequence of the absence of the hon. and learned Member for Cambridge University, pending his re-election.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether there was any intention on the part of the Government to introduce an Indemnity Bill this year? The House had been given to understand last year that the Indemnity Bill then introduced would be the last that was required, and he wished to know whether any steps had been taken to pre- vent the recurrence of the necessity for introducing such a Bill during the present Session?

said, the legal Advisers of the Home Office had told him that it was necessary to have an Indemnity Bill again this Session, with a view to the protection of a limited number of persons holding civil and military offices or in the Queen's household, who might be liable to penalties under the Act Geo. III.

said, he rose to call attention to certain transactions which took place at the recent elections for the counties of Waterford and Tipperary, and to move a Resolution on the subject. At the beginning of the Session, two remarkable Petitions complaining of undue Elections had been brought before the House, but the Members petitioned against were seated. It appeared, therefore, to be recognized that in Ireland there might be any amount of riot, turmoil, and intimidation, and yet that the election would be held perfectly valid. He thought the time had come when in Ireland, as well as in England, men should be enabled to give their votes at an election without subjecting themselves to bad usage, and incurring the danger of being murdered. Every one who knew the country would admit the marvellous improvement that had occurred there within the last sixty years, and he must say that he could see no reason why election times should form so prominent an exception to the order and tranquillity that generally prevailed. In the first place, he desired to draw attention to the conduct of a portion of the Irish Roman Catholic clergy. It appeared that at the election for Tipperary the Roman Catholic clergy took one view and the landlords took another. The Roman Catholic clergy had, like other men, a perfect right at an election to exercise their social and political rights; they might meet together and agree to support a particular candidate. But they certainly ought, like any other body of clergy, to set an example of con- ducting the election in an orderly and peaceable manner. The Archbishop of Cashel had, it appeared, called together a meeting of his clergy to select a candidate at the last election for Tipperary. The meeting took place. A candidate was named. It was unanimously resolved to support him. The Archbishop then addressed his clergy, telling them they were to speak to their congregations both politically and as priests. As priests they were to point out to their congregations that they had a Christian duty to perform, and if they did not perform it there were certain penalties, both in this world and in the next, which they would have to undergo. Politically they were to address their parishioners in the churches and point out why they should vote for a particular candidate. What was the result? It was thus described by a witness, a Roman Catholic gentleman of some influence, to the Committee—

"That last resolution was passed on the 13th of October?—I believe so. On Sunday the 14th of October, did you attend Temple Derry Chapel?—Yes, I did. Were you there at mass?—I was. Was that on Sunday, the 11th?—It was the Sunday previous to the election. Who was the officiating clergyman on this occasion? — The Rev. Hugh Gleeson. Did he on that occasion Say anything about the approaching election; if so, what?—He spoke a good deal about it, and contrasted the qualities of the two candidates, and concluded by saying that any person voting for Mr. Waldron ought to be ducked in the river. Where was this said?—In the chapel. In the presence of the congregation?—Yes. It was part of the service?—Before mass was over. Had he his vestments on?—Yes, he had."

Mr. Robert Pratt heard a priest who had a whip in his hand in addressing his flock at Horsmore say, "A man who has gone to Thurles shall never come back alive." Mr. Thomas Butler, a magistrate in the commission of the peace for the county of Tipperary, and residing in the neighbourhood of Golden, gave the following evidence:—

"You are a Roman Catholic?—Yes. What is the name of the officiating clergyman there; were you at the Golden Chapel on the 14th of October?—I was at the Golden Chapel the Sunday before the last election for Tipperary. Do you know the Rev. Thomas O'Connell?—Yes. Was he the officiating clergyman at mass when you attended that day?—He was. Do you remember after mass the Rev. Mr. O'Connell addressing the congrgation?—Yes. Where was he standing when he addressed the congregation after mass?—On the altar steps in the chapel. How was he dressed at the time?—He was in a black soutane and a cap. Was it the cap worn by the clergymen of that church in the performance of their duty?—Yes, occasionally. Will you be good enough to state to me the substance of what you remember of that address to the congregation after mass?—It was principally in abuse of the neighbouring proprietors and supporters of Mr. Waldron, at the coming election. Will you tell us what he said, the words as well you remember, in reference to the election? He was aware that some parties in the neighbourhood had been canvassing for Mr. Waldron, and that they received promises from some of the electors to support him at the coming election; he then told the people that they were in no way bound to those promises, and that even if they had taken their solemn oaths to support Mr. Waldron they were bound to break them. Do you remember anything further that he said?—He told them that in voting for Mr. Waldron they would be voting against their conscience, their country, and their creed."

Was that the way to teach men to appreciate properly the position they would hold in future with regard to the political concerns of great Britain? He did not wish to say a word against the Roman Catholic clergy; doubtless there were good and bad among them, as there were in every other body of men. Many of them were men of experience and great learning—but what he wished to point out was that the effect of such conduct as that to which he referred was to excite the people of Ireland to act improperly at elections. Such exhortations as those he had quoted bore their fruit, as they were certain to do, in scenes of tumult and disaster. The evidence given before the Committee showed conclusively the extent of the rioting at the time of the election. Mr. Robert Shaw gave the following evidence:—

"You are a constable in the constabulary force in Ireland?—I am head constable. You remember the 20th of October, the polling day at Thurles?—I do. Were you there on duty on that day?—I was. How many men had you with you?—I had about thirty men at the front gate of the Court House. In the discharge of your duty, did you endeavour to make way for the persons to get to the polling-booth?—I did everything I could, as well as the men who were with me; I had only to keep the passage at the gate open. Did you find that an easy duty to perform?—We could not perform it except through the assistance of the dragoons; they rode up and down and dispersed the people. Were any of the men under your charge struck? — There were a good many of them; I was struck myself. In addition to these voters and the police you describe as being struck, do you remember any gentlemen of position?—I saw Mr. Gore Jones struck, a resident magistrate. The stipendiary magistrate?—Yes. You saw him struck?—Yes, I saw an old gentleman struck and knocked down, and I heard him say that he was Mr. Lanigan; they say that he had his eye knocked out. Did you see any person struck?—Yes, several. With what were they struck?—They were struck with stones and mud, and rotten eggs in some cases. Do you remember any of the men under your charge in particular in the Clare police; they are under your charge?—Yes. Do you remember anything in reference to them?—Many of them were badly cut in the head with stones and sticks, and they were obliged to be taken off duty. They were not able to continue their duty?—No."

If this sort of thing had taken place in England the Member returned would have been unseated. Why should there be a different rule for Ireland? Mr. William Spaight, residing at Derry Castle, and possessing considerable property in Tipperary, made the following statement:—

"Do you remember the last election in Tipperary?—I do. About how far is Derry Castle from Nenagh?—About nine-Irish miles. How did you travel from Deny to Nenagh on that day?—I drove in my own carriage. Do you know where the chapel of Portroe is?—Yes. As you were coming towards the chapel of Portroe, passing the quarries along the road, did anything strike you as remarkable?—It struck me that all the people were absent from their work, and all the quarries idle. When you got near Portroe Chapel did anything particularly attract your attention there?—I saw the people going up in twos and threes to the chapel, and collecting there; a great mob of the people were collected there and in the chapel yard. And when you got up there, did you see anything remarkable taking place or going on?—I did not go there; I went away from it; I avoided the village on purpose. Do you remember at any time seeing the curate of the parish of Portroe that morning?—Yes. Whereabouts did you see him; do you know his name?—I heard it was Gleeson; I am not sure. You know he was one of the curates of Portroe parish?—I believe he was. Whereabouts did you see this gentleman?—He was with a crowd of people at Baskerville's public house, half way from my place to Nenagh. What were the crowd of people doing; did you see this gentleman do anything?—I did. Will you describe it? As I came up, I was not looking particularly at him; I was astounded at seeing him lift a great big stick 'wheeling;' he twisted the stick over his head, and commenced jumping in a most extraordinary manner; I thought he was mad; he is a very active fellow; he was jumping the height of the table off the ground; he commenced hallooing for White, and hooting at me; I did not notice him till that began; I thought the man was demented. Did you see anything else going on at Baskerville's publichouse?—Yes, the front rank wheeled upon me; but there were two clergymen with jugs giving out whiskey to two regular lines in the rear, and they never stopped; they continued loading up the rear rank people with the whiskey; they never stopped; they went on giving the whiskey out of the jug; they gave it in glassses."

First the Roman Catholic clergy preached to the mob, and then they gave them whiskey; no doubt greatly to the increase of the subsequent disorder. Mr. Wood, an inspector of constabulary stationed at Dundrum, said that during the election there was a large force of cavalry and in- fantry, but not a large force of constabulary. He stated that Mr. Lowe was cut by the side of the nose by a missile, that Mr. Horne was also cut in the face by a stone, that Mr. Maguire, Mr. Baker, Mr. Arundel, Mr. Leech, and Mr. Smith were also injured by stones, and he himself and some of his men were much cut by stones. Colonel Purefoy was only saved from being murdered by another man being murdered in his stead. He would not weary the House by reading through page after page of similar evidence. The same scenes took place at the Waterford Election, in which case the agents of one of the candidates had to apply to the magistrates for assistance in order to enable the voters to come to the poll. A body of voters who had been collected and were being marched to the booth under the protection of an escort of dragoons were, by a clever strategy, attacked in the mountains, the cars smashed, and the heads of those who rode in them broken. At Dungarvan the military had to force the bridge leading into the town, amidst a perfect "hail of stones," the missiles being not what were called "two-year-olds," but large enough to break a man's skull, while the bludgeons were heavy enough to kill a man at a blow. He had brought these cases forward because he thought it was a serious thing in the present day, when they were about to bring in a Bill to lower the franchise in Ireland, if they had no guarantee that this sort of thing would not be heard of in future. He found no fault with the Roman Catholic clergy for endeavouring to carry oot their own political ideas in the best way in their power; but he found fault with them for having put all order at defiance, I and for having led these riots in the most open manner. It was utterly impossible that an election could be carried on properly under such circumstances. The House had been asked to assent to indignant resolutions against the military, because some loss of life occurred in these frays. He should be glad when the practice of calling out troops in Ireland could be discontinued, and order maintained by the constabulary alone. But he was anxious that, in cases like those to which he had alluded, where the voters were prevented from getting to the poll, the election should be declared null and void. When the Irish Reform Bill came before the House next Session he should move that some steps should be taken to render the Irish people free to exercise their votes without the aid of the military. He should do so because it was natural to the Irish disposition to get up a row if possible, and the fact that a body of men were being escorted by soldiers was sufficient to excite that disposition.

said, that he disputed the accuracy of the account given of the proceedings at Waterford. The fact was that the Conservative party had used the military as mere election agents to bring in voters against their will to vote for the Conservative candidate. The hon. and gallant Gentleman had opened a question of great constitutional importance, although he did not mean to do so. [Major JERVIS: Yes, he did.] The hon. and gallant Gentleman had alluded to cavalcades of voters coming in, escorted by dragoons. Now, what were the facts? The election took place on the 29th. On the previous day, whilst standing in the streets of Waterford, he (Mr. Esmonde), at three o'clock in the afternoon, heard the clash of arms and the trotting of horses. On looking round to see the cause he found that a body of tenants, who were coerced to support the Conservative candidate, were being escorted by dragoons and the resident magistrates. The men were escorted to an hotel, where they were kept until the next day; in consequence of their arrival not only was the ordinary business of the hotel suspended, but a circular was sent round to the frequenters of the billiard-room to say that it would be closed for that evening—a fact which created no slight sensation. A Liberal friend of his, who kept a china shop at Waterford, told him that 150 mugs had been ordered of him for the purpose of supplying drink. He should probably raise a question on another occasion as to whether those who employed the troops in escorting the voters on the day previous to the elec- tion to the hotel hired by the Conservative candidate, where they were illegally supplied with drink during the night, and on the day of the election itself escorting them from thence to the poll—were not guilty of conduct tending to bring the Prerogative of Her Majesty into collision with the privileges of Parliament. As to the attack made upon the soldiers it was favoured by those who were being escorted to the poll against their will. The voters wished a riot to be got up in order that they might be scattered and not compelled to vote, and amongst the assailants were servants and relatives of the "independent electors," who had recourse to this stratagem to relieve their friends from distress. The sitting Member did not think it at all necessary to call witnesses before the Committee, being of opinion that no case had been made out against him in Ireland. The law was that if an affidavit were made that violence was apprehended at an election so as to prevent a true return the poll could be adjourned until such a day as it was deemed probable the people would cease to be turbulent. If the election referred to was so interfered with as to make it probable the result would be altered through riot, the poll could have been adjourned. The reason it was not so adjourned was because an application should have been made, and an affidavit sworn which could not be sworn. In his own election in 1852, voters who had been collected together under the escort of the military, for the purpose of being brought in to vote for his opponent against their wish, actually sent word to some of his friends to stop them, and, if possible, to do so near a wood, so that they might not be recaptured when they had succeeded in making their escape. The fact was, that these riots as they are called, are stratagems used in self-defence by the voters themselves. As the hon. and gallant Member had intimated his intention of bringing forward the subject at greater length next Session, he would not now go further into the case; but he promised the House that when the time came he would be quite prepared to meet the hon. Member whenever he chose to renew the subject.

said, that as one of the Waterford Committee he rose to refute an erroneous impression which appeared to prevail. Without discussing the question as to whether undue influence on one side is excuse for violence on the other, he maintained that if a man voted from mo- tives of gratitude to a good landlord that man had as much right to protection as he who voted from motives of political partizanship. With regard to the allegations made, he desired distinctly to deny that any evidence was given of undue influence on the part of the landlords, of unnecessary action on the part of the military, or of collusion between the mob and the tenants. Hon. Members might have private information; but the case should be decided on sworn evidence before the Committee. If that private information did exist, why was it not produced not the proper time?

said, he could corroborate everything the hon. Member for the county of Waterford (Mr. Esmonde) had said from his personal experience of the last election for that county. It afforded a lamentable but striking instance of the tyranny of landlords, and the slavish position of the tenants. He had seen on the day before the polling long lines of cars filled with tenants of noble Lords and others of the landed Conservative gentry in the neigh bourhood of the city of Waterford, escorted by large bodies of dragoons with drawn sabres, looking more like convicts on their way to transportation than men going to exercise the franchise, brought in to register their votes against their conscience, their wishes, and, as they believed, their interests. Numbers of those unfortunate people had expressed to him their bitter regret that they dared not vote for Mr. De la Poer, the popular candidate, instead of the Tory one, Captain Talbot, and he had heard many of them pray to God that the man they were compelled to vote for would be defeated. Now, he characterized that as a melancholy and disgraceful state of things. It was enough to make those hapless victims of landlord coercion disaffected to see the Queen's troops employed to drag them to vote, contrary to what they wished. ["No, no!"] He repeated it, and he challenged contradiction; if the landlords had not the use of the troops to carry out their behests one of two thing would have happened—either that the tenants of the Conservative landlords would have voted as they wished for the Liberal candidate, or refrained from voting against, as they believed, the interests of their country. He did not make these observations on account of attaching much importance to political agitation; it had never done any good for Ireland, and probably never would; neither had he the slightest feeling against the landlords because they were Conserva- tives. He hated tyranny whatever side it came from, and would denounce Whig landlords just as readily if they deserved it. But gross tyranny had in the case they were dealing with been perpetrated by men professing Tory principles, and he therefore condemned their proceedings irrespective altogether of their politics.

said, that the hon. Member seemed to imagine that an unusual course was taken with regard to the military upon this occasion. The military were sent to the Waterford Election in consequence of a sworn information having been laid before the Government to the efiect that their presence was necessary for the preservation of the peace. As no Government in Ireland would feel justified in refusing such a demand, the military were sent and placed at the disposal of the local authorities. He believed they were employed with and exorcised the greatest discretion. The statement that they were used to coerce voters was totally without foundation. They conducted voters to the poll, and protected them from assault. When at the poll those electors were left to vote at discretion, without interference on the part of the military or magistrates. All that the military did was to prevent the voters from being maltreated. He regretted that the presence of the military was too often necessary on such occasions. But so long as large mobs, armed with bludgeons were employed to coerce voters in the interest of a candidate, it would be impossible for any Government, in the interests of peace, to refuse to take the course which every Government had hitherto been obliged to take. If the Government refused to interfere there would be riot and bloodshed to an enormous extent. From his own knowledge he could state that it was principally owing to the presence of the military, not only in the South but in the North of Ireland, that scenes of violence did not more frequently occur. If the people of Ireland would conduct their elections in the same manner as the people of this country they would find military interference quite unnecessary. The people of Ireland had the matter in their own hands.

said, that he had not intended to attach the least blame to the Government. They certainly could not have acted otherwise than they did.

said, he regretted that other Members of the Tipperary Election Committee besides himself were not present. They had waited for die question to come on so many times in vain that they had tired of continued postponement. If it had been the first time an Election Committee had had to interpret the wording of a now Act of Parliament, he, as a member of the Committee, would have given his decision in favour of rendering the election void. There were five polling-places where the disturbance was so great that the voters could not easily pass to the poll. But that Committee, like other tribunals, was bound by the general practice of courts of co-ordinate authority, and on looking back at the almost invariable practice of preceding Committees, it appeared to him that there was nothing in the late Tipperary election which rendered the disorder that prevailed there of a graver character than that which prevailed at other elections which had not been declared void. In the few extracts from the evidence which had been quoted by the hon. and gallant Member for Harwich he had brought forward cases some of which were afterwards satisfactorily disproved. There was one case of a priest who had made use of a whip, and who came before the Committee and explained the circumstances satisfactorily to his mind. A number of cars had been employed to bring up voters to the poll. The boys, who were not voters, having got upon the cars, that gentleman took a switch and used it in a paternal spirit towards them. The boys in question were not over forty years old, which was the age, it seemed, of some "boys" in Ireland. But small matters like these did not affect the general merits of the question. It would have been necessary, before declaring the election void, to have had it satisfactorily proved to the minds of the Committee that there had been a greater state of riot than had prevailed at previous elections. No doubt, many passages might be quoted from the evidence for the Petitioners to show that there had been a riot of a very serious nature; but the general tenour of the evidence from first to last went to substantiate the fact that that was an unusually quiet election for Ireland. There was a special reason why an unusual amount of irritation should have arisen. The Conservative candidate had originally come in by the votes of the Liberal party, and at a subsequent time he announced himself as a supporter of Lord Derby. He therefore thought the Government were justified in making unusual preparations for maintain- ing the peace of the county. Various kinds of witnesses were examined, some of whom were ardent partizans on either side. Without wishing to impugn their veracity, in a question of that sort every tribunal would prefer to take as the measure of what really happened the evidence of those witnesses who were there in an official capacity, and who could not be suspected of any leaning to either candidate. Stipendiary magistrates and inspectors and sub-inspectors of the constabulary were called before the Committee. Those witnesses, though they disagreed as to the amount of disturbance which prevailed, agreed that there had not been at all an unusual amount of disturbance for an Irish election. Some of them seemed to think there had been a much smaller amount than they were accustomed to see at Irish elections. Another fact which left a deep impression on his mind was that, although at each of the five polling-places such a large crowd had assembled as rendered it difficult for persons to pass through the streets, the voters that supported Mr. Waldron who were attacked were those who were brought up under military escort. Other gentlemen, who were known to be supporters of Mr. Waldron, deposed that they had no difficulty in getting to the poll except such as naturally arose from the large crowds in the streets. Among these latter were two clergymen who must therefore have been well known to the people. Moreover, the Petitioners failed to show that any considerable number of electors were unable to record their votes owing to the existence of these riots. Again, the Legislature had provided by a special Act of Parliament for the contingency of riots at Irish elections. In that case, and also at Waterford, no application was made to adjourn the poll. If the aggrieved person did not avail himself of the remedy specially afforded by the law, that fact must be assumed to weigh somewhat in the balance against him. As to the conduct of the Roman Catholic clergy, the whole of the evidence had left on his mind the impression that they had interfered with the course of the election in a manner which could not be approved; but there did not seem to have been exercised such an amount of undue spiritual influence as was sufficient to vitiate the election. They abstained from alluding at the altar to the election, though several had addressed their flocks from the chapel yards. Some- times politics were introduced in the pulpit of English Protestant churches. Though he should be glad to see the Roman Catholic clergy adopt a different course on the occasion of elections, there was nothing done in that instance to cause the election to be declared null and void. He thanked the hon. and gallant Member for Harwich for bringing the matter forward. He thought it hard on our soldiers to employ them in that kind of way. If any force was to be employed on those occasions, it should be the constabulary, not the soldiers. He had listened with indignation to the charges brought against the troops, who appeared to have behaved with the most admirable temper. There was nothing to justify the accusations made, either against them, or the constabulary, or the stipendiary magistrates. Being perfectly impartial between the two sides, the impression left on his mind was that if they could obtain by ballot, or in some other way, a free expression of the opinion of the electors in Tipperary as to whether they would prefer to retain or lose the elective franchise, they would prefer to be disfranchised. It was pitiable to see men vacillating between the persuasion of the priests, on the one hand, and that of the landlords, on the other. The best way of dealing with the question of Irish elections would be to show that riotous proceedings would not pay. How that was to be done he hardly knew; perhaps some Amendment might be made in the Irish election law. As things now stood, the Election Committees of that House were found adopting what, to the eye of common sense, and to those who did not understand how they were bound by precedent, seemed to be a very strange course of proceeding.

said, that as a Member of the Tipperary Committee he wished to say that he had felt compelled to differ in opinion from the hon. Gentleman who had just sat down, and also from the other Members of the Committee. He had thought the rioting was of such a character that the election ought to have been declared null and void, and he had therefore felt that the only course open to him was to record his vote singly against that of the Committee. The hon. Gentleman said riots were common at Irish elections; but he had not been governed by the precedents set by former Committees. A lawyer got up and told the Committee on which he sat of the precedent of the Waterford Election. But he had deemed himself bound not to look at that, but to be guided by the evidence adduced before him. Speaking from memory—for he had not the necessary documents by him—he believed it had been shown that more than thirty voters had been seriously injured while proceeding to record their votes. There were about twenty more who declared solemnly that they would have voted for Mr. Waldron if they had been allowed to reach the polling-place, but that they were afraid of their lives to record their votes for that gentleman. Many others would, he thought, have given similar evidence had they felt that they could freely speak their minds. His hon. Friend had said that where there were no soldiers no attack was made upon the voters. But two men—one of them, as well as he could recollect, named Givans—had attempted to go up to the polling-place alone. They were attacked by a mob of twenty or thirty people and prevented from voting. In another instance five or six men were seized and shut up in a room, from which they could not get away until the troops came to escort them. Some witnesses stated that in attempting to reach the polling-booth they had only been able to advance three-quarters of a mile in an hour and a-half, there being thirty barricades in the way. He was sorry that both elections had not been declared void, as it would have given respectable electors a chance of going to the poll without having their heads broken. Could an election be regarded as having been fairly conducted under those circumstances? He had no wish to say anything disrespectful of the members of any religious persuasion; but he was strongly impressed with the belief that the Roman Catholic clergy who had selected a candidate—although their interference might not have amounted to what was called undue influence — had sailed very near the wind. Judging from his experience of this, his first Election Committee, he was sorry the House had not thought fit to adopt the system of voting papers, by means of which quiet and respectable men would be enabled to tender their votes without running the risk of injury. On account of the violence which frequently occurred at Irish elections, it was, unfortunately, necessary to employ soldiers; but all could bear testimony that their conduct, under the greatest provocation, was uniformly temperate and forbearing. He had not much experience of Irish elections, but he once happened to be the unpopular candidate at an election in that country, and although many of the Roman Catholic party, as well as of the Protestants, were in his favour, he was glad to receive the assistance of a certain number of soldiers to enable those who intended to vote for him to go to the poll.

said, the hon. Member for Plymouth (Mr. Morrison) had raised a new issue. This was a most important Committee, where great constitutional interests were at stake, and yet the hon. Member for Plymouth, being a young Member, was put upon it. He had avowed the principle that one Committee was to be governed by the decisions, and, it might be, by the errors of another. The speeches delivered by the Roman Catholic priests from the altar during or after mass were at the bottom of the disturbances that had taken place. Voters were coerced to vote against their will, and Members were sent to that House and kept there for the purpose of defending the interests of the Romish priesthood. If the Roman Catholic voters were not free agents, what were their special claims to protection? Coercion was no strange thing in England. But the peculiarity of the Roman Catholic coerced voters was that they were coerced to return Members who voted not for the interests of the Empire, but for the interests of their own Church. Dr. Cullen had issued a missive desiring the Roman Catholics to return only those men who would vote for the interests of their Church; and those interests were known to be antagonistic to the principle of civil and religious liberty in every country in Europe. There was coercion by the priests as well as by the landowners, and it was the duty of the Government to investigate the whole matter. He had frequently brought before the House the way in which priestly influence was exercised, and he had lately called the Attorney General's attention to the fact that a Roman Catholic bishop had challenged the right of Her Majesty to occupy the Throne of this country. His efforts had hitherto been without effect. He had discharged his duty by again endeavouring to force the matter upon the attention of the House. He thanked the hon. and gallant Member for Harwich for bringing forward the question — and charged the Government with gross neglect of duty, because they had not taken notice of the matter.

I have to propose a Vote of £63,250 to defray the charge for the Increase of Pay to Non-Commissioned Officers and Men of the Militia. The Resolution I propose comprises the remaining portions of the Supplemental Estimate voted for the increase of the pay of the army at an earlier period of the Session. It embraces four points. First, the addition of 2d. a day to the noncommissioned officers of the permanent Staff of the Militia, which will amount to £14,000. Secondly, the addition of 2d. a day to the pay of the men called up to preliminary drill, amounting to £1,250. Thirdly, an addition of 2d. a day to the men called up for annual training, amounting to £18,000. These items are rendered necessary by the increase of the pay of the army, to which the House has consented, and, considering the increase in the price of provisions and of labour, I trust the Committee will not object to extend the same increase of pay to the militia force. The fourth point embraced by the Resolution relates to the larger and more important subject of the creation of an Army of Reserve for this country. It is now my duty to explain the nature of this very important proposal. But I must, in the first instance, express my very great regret on all grounds that the present statement is not made by my right hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Huntingdon (General Peel). With one exception, the plan I am about to state is entirely that of my right hon. and gallant Friend. The peculiar circumstances of the present Session have prevented this plan from being opened fully to the House and this Vote from being asked for at a much earlier period. Early in the month of March, before my right hon. and gallant Friend left the office in which I became his successor, he brought under the consideration of the House the Army Esti- mates for the year. In the course of the clear and able speech by which he introduced them, he explained the general nature of his plan for forming an Army of Reserve, and laid before the House an outline of the mode in which he proposed to carry out that important object. His statement was so clear and so complete that it would be presumption on my part to go over the same ground, had it not been for the long interval of time since elapsed. I will not dwell upon the causes which have led to a very general opinion that some Army of Reserve in this country has become necessary; that it behoves Parliament to provide the means of national defence, and the power of carrying on war in the event of any emergency arising, with greater rapidity than we have hitherto been able to do. The extraordinary revolution of late years in our naval power is one cause which evidently points to the necessity of taking fresh steps for the increase of our military power. In the event of any emergency arising, it would be difficult, if not impossible, from the limited number of our regular army, and the manner in which that army is dispersed throughout our immense dominions, in all quarters of the globe, to collect more than some 40,000 or 50,000 men in this country. This subject occupied the attention of the Royal Commission appointed to consider the best means of recruiting for the army. In the Report of that Commission I find this passage—

"Recent events, however, have taught us that we must not rely in future on having time for preparation. Wars will be sudden in their commencement and short in their duration, and woe to that country which is unprepared to defend itself against any contingency that may arise, or combination that may be formed against it! The first duty of those who preside over the administration of the army is to look to its constitution."

That is a very striking passage, the force, truth, and justice of which, no one will dispute. What is our position at this moment with regard to anything like a military Reserve? For the general purposes of war we have at this moment no Reserve at all. We have not a battalion of which we can speak as constituting a Reserve for the general purposes of war. For the purpose of home defence, I admit we have a very important Reserve. We have our militia force, now standing at 90,000 men, but the full quota of which, as I shall presently explain, would be one fourth more. That would make the militia Reserve 120,000. Then we have the results of that striking Volunteer movement which has excited so much attention and admiration in the country during the last few years. The Volunteer force amounts to 180,000. We may therefore consider that, for the purposes of home defence, we have in militia and Volunteers a force of 300,000 men. And I do not for myself feel a moment's doubt if any great emergency arose—if the country were threatened with any attempt at invasion—the same spirit which created that force of 180,000 Volunteers would enable us with great rapidity to double or treble that number of men. In support of that opinion I need only refer to the fact that when there was a similar apprehension in 1803, when we had so much smaller a population, the force of Volunteers amounted to between 400,000 and 500,000. In addition to the force of the militia and Volunteers we have, also, what I may call a special Reserve consisting of the enrolled pensioners, and a Reserve force created by Act of Parliament passed at the close of 1859, by Mr. Sydney Herbert, then Secretary of State for War. Our pensioner force was created by a succession of Acts of Parliament about twenty years ago, commencing with power to enrol 10,000 pensioners. Subsequently it was extended to 20,000, and then to 30,000. The law with regard to the enrolment of pensioners as it now stands gives us power to enroll 30,000; but up to this time that power has never been fully exercised. The number at this moment is 14,000, so that after the long period these Acts have been in operation we have not half the amount of force authorized by these Acts of Parliament. With regard to the other portion of the Reserve, that created in 1859, after the retirement of Lord Derby's Government, when Mr. Sydney Herbert succeeded my right hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Huntingdon as Secretary of Stale for War, power was taken by the Act of Parliament to enrol men who had served the whole period of ten years for which they had enlisted in a Reserve force not to exceed 20,000 men Therefore, the whole Reserve force authorized by these Acts of Parliament would amount to 50,000. But the Act of 1859 has been very unproductive of results, about 4,000 only having been enrolled under that Act. So that these three sources of military strength, which combined should have given 50,000 have, in fact, only given us 19,000 or 20,000 men. These forces, both the pen- sioners and the Army of Reserve created by Mr. Sidney Herbert, were limited to service at home. In neither case could they be employed for any service out of the country. I would again call attention to an important passage in the Report of the Recruiting Commission. They say—

"Under these circumstances we are not prepared to propose any plan as one that may be relied on to secure a large Army of Reserve; the object sought may, however, be accomplished to a small extent by increasing the enrolled pensioner force, which at present amounts to 14,000 men. To these might be added all men who decline to renew their engagements after their first period of service on such terms as might secure their service for a deferred pension. We would further suggest that all men permitted to purchase their discharge—with special exceptions, to be sanctioned by the Secretary of State for War—should be compelled to serve for five years with the above forces. All these sources of supply combined would, however, form but a small Reserve force, and we are of opinion, that it is to our militia we must look for the solid and constitutional Reserve of the country, and we would earnestly recommend that more attention should be given to its organization, that its numbers should be maintained up to the full legal quota, and that, so far as is possible, the period for drilling the recruits should be more extended."

As to the recommendation that men should purchase their discharge subject to the duty of serving in the Reserve, I am not able to state to the Committee any plan; but I think it is well worthy of consideration, and the War Office is now considering it. It was after due consideration of the Report of the Commission, and after due consideration of the circumstances to which I have called the attention of the Committee, that my right hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Huntingdon, prepared the plan which he wished to bring forward on this subject. That plan consisted of two portions. The first portion of it, founded upon the recommendations in the Report to which I have referred, relies upon the militia force for providing a considerable portion of the Reserve for the general purposes of war. The militia force now stands at 90,000 men, but by the present plan it is to be raised to its full quota of 120,000 men, of whom 30,000 are to be men enlisted and enrolled as militiamen upon the condition that they shall be ready at any moment in the event of war, or of war being imminent, to take service in the regular army. As an inducement to men to enlist in the militia upon these conditions, they are to receive a Government bounty of £12, or £2 8s. a year in the place of £6, or £1 5s. a year they now re- ceive for five years' service. In connection with that proposal, by the plan of my right hon. and gallant Friend, soldiers who by the New Enlistment Act have enlisted for twelve years are to be permitted, after serving two-thirds of that period, to commute the rest of their service by serving two years in the Army of Reserve for every one year of the term of their original enlistment unexpired. The plan further proposed that these men so commuting the remainder of their term of service in the regular army shall be added to the different regiments of militia in whatever locality they desired to be placed and should serve and drill with those regiments. This is the only point on which the proposal which I now venture to make to the Committee on behalf of the Government differs from that of my right hon. and gallant Friend. After consulting with many military men, I was induced to believe that it would be better that these men should not serve in the militia regiments, that they should be attached to the Army of Reserve, and that they should drill with the pensioners and others of the Reserve force which I have adverted to as being formed under the Act of 1859. I was unwilling to make any alterations in the plan of my right hon. and gallant Friend without first obtaining his consent to such a course. I made this change, having consulted him upon it under the full impression that he had concurred in its propriety, but I am afraid, from what I have since heard, that I was mistaken, and that he does not concur in the proposed alteration; I am, however, induced to support this alteration in the plan in consequence of the general opinion among military men, that considerable practical difficulties exist to those who have commuted their term of service being permitted to serve with the militia. The militia is a county force, whereas the soldiers serve under the Crown; and it would require a very extensive change in our military laws to give the militia officers a proper power over their men. I am not aware whether up to the present time my right hon. and gallant Friend has ever stated how many men he expected to raise by this portion of his plan. The plan I propose to the Committee is this—that the first Reserve shall consist of 30,000 militiamen, who, in consideration of the double bounty, will be ready at any moment during their period of service to join the regular army, and to serve wherever they might be required. The second portion of the first Reserve will consist of the men willing to commute a period of their enlistment, and, following the Act of Mr. Sydney Herbert, these men I propose to limit to 20,000. It is very doubtful whether for a considerable time we shall succeed in getting 20,000 men in this way. The Act of Mr. Sydney Herbert entirely failed, because it contemplated raising 10,000 men, and up to this time we have only 4,000. We must bear in mind, however, that the plan I have now to submit differs from that of Mr. Sydney Herbert in two or three important particulars. In the first place the plan of Mr. Sydney Herbert proposed to enlist men in this Army of Reserve only after the expiration of the whole period of their original enlistment, whereas in the present plan it is proposed to allow the men one-third of the term of their service in the regular army. Secondly, under Mr. Sydney Herbert's plan, the Army of Reserve was not to serve out of the kingdom; whereas that I am laying before the Committee those forming it will be liable to serve in any part of the world. The second portion of the Army of Reserve is to consist of 30,000 men, composed of pensioners and others enrolled under existing Acts, with any soldiers who have served the whole of their first period of enlistment, and who may be willing to enter the Army of Reserve, or who may be willing to commute the third of the period of their second term of enlistment for the sake of the pension for service in the regular army. We shall thus obtain an Army of Reserve numbering 80,000 men, of whom 50,000 will be available for service in any part of the world, and 30,000 for home service. Then, as to the cost of this Army of Reserve. The most costly as well as the most important part of the plan will be the double bounty to the 30,000 men proposed to be added to the militia. The militia bounty will average 24s. a year for five years; therefore that item will amout to £36,000. As it is contemplated to add those men to the Army of Resolve, it is fair to calculate that the whole amount of bounty due to those men will amount to £72,000. The pay of 30,000 will come to £70,875, so that the two sums together—the bounty and pay—will amount to £142,875. I should propose to pay those who get into the Reserve by commuting their period of service in the army the same double bounty, 48s. a year, as we propose to give to the Reserve portion of the militia force. I think it necessary to explain this because Mr. Sydney Herbert's Reserve force, under the Act of 1859, was paid at a higher rate. Mr. Sydney Herbert's proposal was to give to militiamen who entered the Army of Reserve £4 per annum as bounty, besides the regular pay given to the pensioners during the time they were serving. It appears to me, however, that £4 bounty for every year is a very large amount. It makes the force a very expensive one, and I am disposed to think that we may find £2 8s. per man quite sufficient to secure the service of these men, especially when we consider the boon held out to them of being released from one-third of the period which they have undertaken to serve in the regular army. Assuming that we find 20,000 willing to enter the Reserve force from the army on these terms the bounty will amount to £48,000, and the pay of these men for twelve days' training to £24,900. This portion of the force will therefore cost £72,900, and the total cost of the two portions of this first Reserve composed of the 30,000 militiamen and the 20,000 commuted men will amount to £215,775. This calculation, however, will not include the cost of their clothing, which I may, I think, fairly and safely assume at £15,000, so that the whole of this Reserve force would in round figures cost us £230,000. I have thus endeavoured to explain the nature of the proposal, and, in case the Committee approve it, the Bills which we have prepared on the subject will be proceeded with. The right hon. Gentleman concluded by moving the Vote for £63,250, Increase of Pay to Non-Commissioned Officers and Men of the Militia.

I wish, Sir, to make a few remarks upon the estimate, and upon the speech delivered by the right hon. Baronet. I must say, in the first place, that I think the proposal to increase by 2d. a day the pay of the militia ought not to pass without some consideration. Neither I nor any other Member on this side of the House made any objection when it was proposed to make an increase to the pay of the regular army, but I cannot see on what grounds it is proposed to extend that increase to the militia. The two services are differently situated. There is a great difficulty in obtaining recruits for the army, but we have frequently been assured that the same difficulty is not experienced in the case of the militia. The pay of the militia is very much superior to the pay of the Line for the short time during which they are in training. The militiaman not only receives 13d. a day during that period, but he receives also 24s. as bounty, as well as a pair of boots and other articles of clothing, which at the close of the training he is allowed to take away with him. An hon. Member has on these grounds estimated the pay of the militiaman during the period of training at no less than 3s. 2d. a day. The same objection does not apply to the permanent Staff, because they are employed all the year round, and are, therefore, fairly entitled to the same benefits as those which are to be conferred on non-commissioned officers in the regular service. With regard to the proposal to create different species of Reserve force I have little to say. I doubt, however, whether it is worth our while to call this an Army of Reserve. The right hon. Gentleman, in speaking to-night, alluded to the causes which had led the public to turn their attention, during the last year or two, to the subject of a Reserve Army. No doubt the war of last year, and events which have recently occurred, have called I our attention very forcibly to the subject. Still, the force which it is proposed to create cannot be named in the same day with the Reserve force of Prussia and other Continental nations, and the danger is, by bestowing such a name upon this force, the country may be led to believe that we are actually in possession of such an Army of Reserve. I cannot understand, after the explanations we have had, how the first class Army of Reserve can ever approach the estimated number of 20,000 men. As far as I can understand, the Reserve is to be formed from the difference between our foreign or colonial establishments and our peace establishments. We have about 50 regiments serving at home, and the difference would in the case of each regiment amount to 150 men. I do not, therefore, see how the number can exceed 50 times 150, or 7,500 men. This seems to me to be especially the case, considering what the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Huntingdon said — namely, that it was not intended to exact from the men entering the Reserve a double period of service; but only to require them to serve the number of years in the Reserve they would have done in the Line. The number cannot, therefore, as far as I can see, exceed 7,500 men, unless some means, which I confess I am unacquainted with, are taken to induce them to remain in the Army of Reserve after they are entitled to claim their discharge. If my calculation about the first class of the Army of Reserve be at all correct, I cannot see how the numbers of the second class are to exceed those of the first. The proposals with regard to the Reserve of militia are very good as far as they go. But it must be remembered that these 30,000 men which it is proposed to draft into the regular army in time of war can scarcely be called an Army of Reserve, because immediately war breaks out they will be absorbed, and from that time will disappear. Thus, they would not be a Reserve which should, properly speaking, be a last resort, but they would be a first resort, partaking scarcely more of the nature of a Reserve than the regular army itself. Although the right hon. Gentleman (Sir John Pakington) proposes to raise the Militia to the full quota of 120,000, he should remember that the present strength of 90,000 is only intended to serve for times of peace. The effect of his proposal in time of danger will be to take 30,000 men suddenly from the militia. We shall not only be obliged to employ all our energies in order to keep up the force of the regular army, but shall also have to set new machinery to work in order to recover the 30,000 men draughted from the militia to the Line. I admit that it is by no means a bad proposal, that these 30,000 men should be within reach. They would, no doubt, be very useful. Still, to call them a Reserve is a misnomer. I regret that the right hon. Gentleman had not before this put us in possession of the figures with regard to cost and numbers which he read to us. I understood that he had promised to do so, and if he laid them on the table we should have been able to discuss them now with more chance of ascertaining their accuracy, and generally with more advantage to the public service. I trust he will lay them on the table now, so that we may examine them before we again discuss the question, because it is impossible rightly to estimate figures as they fall from a speaker's lips. My present impression is, that if the first class of Reserve is really to amount to anything at all, it will be practically a shortening of the term of service in the army. But if the term of service in the army is to be shortened, a greater number of recruits will be required, and recruiting expenses and bounties will be increased in proportion. In this way I think the right hon. Gentleman will be found out in his calculations; but I would suggest that this matter should be postponed. The safety of the country will not be imperilled by postponement. This is a question which may, with great propriety, be left for a Parliament elected by a new constituency, which there is reason for believing will take a different view of military matters from that prevalent among the existing constituency. The reformed Parliament will probably take a much broader view of such questions than the present Parliament docs. There appears to be less reason for pressing the matter forward during this Session when we consider that, as the militia has been already out for training, it is impossible to carry out the really substantial part of the plan before next year.

The noble Marquess objects to the additional 2d. a day being extended to the militia; I, on the contrary have always endeavoured to make no distinction between the militia and the army in the amount of pay. In fact, if any difference be made between them, it should be in favour of the militia, who during the time of their training do more drill and more hard work than any other troops in the same period. There are no persons who have an opportunity of so readily comparing the difference between the pay of the army and the wages earned by labourers as the militia, who come fresh to the service from their ordinary work and pay; therefore I should say, if there was any necessity of raising the rate of pay in order to keep up the number, that it existed specially in their case. As to the Army of Reserve, I admit that the plan sketched out by the Secretary of State for War, so far as it goes, is mine, and that I am bound by it. It is said that the plan of an Army of Reserve is founded entirely on the Report of the Royal Commissioners on recruiting. It is true that one of the references to that Commission was the formation of an Army of Reserve. I will not read the strong remarks of the Commission on the necessity of an Army of Reserve. But they did not lay down any plan. When that Commission reported, I felt it to be my duty, in conjunction with the Commander-in-Chief, to consider the best means of forming an Army of Reserve. The noble Lord (Lord Elcho) has overlooked the fact that, by the plan before the Committee, there are two Armies of Reserve—one for foreign service, and the other for home defence. The noble Lord has complained of the Enlistment Bill, which has already passed this House, requiring twelve years' service. He also complains of the two other Bills which are to come before the House, the objects of which are, if possible, to relieve any hardship that might be inflicted by the first. But I consider the plan now proposed as one of the most beneficial measures for the soldier that has been brought forward for a considerable period. Though apparently small in itself it involves grout principles: first, that a man shall be able to commute a portion of his service in the Line for the Army of Reserve; and, secondly, that when a war takes place the man who so enlists in the first Reserve will only be called on to serve during the time of that war, without being necessarily a soldier all his life. My right hon. Friend is wrong when he supposes that I intended that those who wished to commute the remaining period of their services in the Line for a period in the first Reserve should serve a double portion. The original proposal was that a man who volunteered after serving two-thirds of his first engagement, should only be called on to serve the remainder of his time in the first Reserve, and that the man during the second period of his service should not be called on to serve two years for one with the pensioners to entitle him to his pension. The Royal Commission recommended that when a man had purchased his discharge he should be called upon to serve a certain time in the Army of Reserve: but if a man buys his discharge at the full price, what right have you to ask him to serve in the Army of Reserve? What I suggested was that if a man wished to purchase his discharge he should be permitted to pay a portion of the price only on condition of his serving a certain time in the Reserve. That, I think, would have been a great boon to the army. If the man had five years more to serve, I would tell him he might purchase his discharge at a certain rate. We should have a commuted price for the purchase of discharges—an arrangement which would, I believe, prove very beneficial. It is said that by the proposal of a first Army of Reserve we shall get very few men indeed; but I regarded it as tending to make the army popular, by offering a boon to the soldier, as well as securing an advantage to the State. I should be happy to see our best soldiers remaining in the army; but surely when a man can find other employment, and is willing to commute the re- mainder of his service in the Line for service in the Reserve, if a war broke out he is as available as any man in the service. Suppose we did not allow him to commute his service in the Line, and he had only three or four more years to serve, when those three or four years expired he would take his discharge just at the moment when we wanted him. My argument is intended to show that when a man who has served two-thirds of his period comes home he should have the opportunity of commuting the remainder of it. That would be a much better system than enlisting men compulsorily to serve a certain number of years in the Line, and afterwards to enter the Reserve. I cannot agree with what has fallen from my noble Friend (Lord Elcho) in respect to the difficulty of filling up the militia. If a war broke out we could always call up a portion of the first Reserve, and fill up the Reserve by volunteers from the militia. In case of war we might be called upon to fill up our regiments of the Line. There will be economy in that, because I propose to reduce the regiments of the Line to 600 men each, provided we have an Army of Reserve, by means of which, in the event of war, we could at once bring them up to a war standard. In future wars the hostilities would be over before we could raise our second battalions. My right hon. Friend proposes to attach the first Reserve to the pensioners; but I propose to attach them to the militia. This plan I would wish the militia officers to consider seriously. I am desirous that a closer connection should be formed between the militia and the Line. My impression is that the men commuting the remainder of their first period of service in the Line for service in the first Reserve would be just the kind of men that the militia would be glad to receive. What would be the result of attaching them to the pensioners? You will have the first Reserve divided between the pensioners and the militia. Their duty with the pensioners will give them no right to pensions, while the second Reserve will have to serve two years instead of one in order to obtain pensions. If yon attach the discharged soldiers to the pensioners you must have a great addition to the Staff Officers of the pensioners. We had much better place the pensioners under the Horse Guards at once. To give the money, which these additional Staff Officers would cost, to the militia would, I think, be a far better arrangement. The Army Reserve was not formed without the greatest consideration. The Commander-in-Chief and myself went most deeply into the question. You cannot compare our army organization with that of any other army in the world. In time of peace it has to perform duties which no other army is called on to perform. Other countries raise their troops by conscription, whereas ours are raised by voluntary enlistment. France and other States have in regard to their armies a power of expansion which is unlimited, whereas in our case there is comparatively no power of expansion; and if we went to war to morrow we should be obliged to have recourse to large bounties. It has been said "Look at America, which raised a million of men in a very short time, and why could we not do something similar?" But I should like to know what it has cost America to raise that million of men; it has been stated that she had to pay upwards of £110,000,000 in bounty money. And look at the difference between the old experienced class of soldiers and the raw levies obtained by bounties. I do not say that my proposal will give the best possible Army of Reserve. It is only an experiment and the expense of trying it will be moderate. If we do not pass this Bill, which enables soldiers to commute the remainder of their service in the Line for service in the proposed Army of Reserve, we shall be obliged to discharge them altogether, because the strength of the regiments coming home is to be reduced to 600. I hope the Committee will not adopt the recommendation of the noble Marquess and postpone for another year the creation of what I believe will be the most efficient Army of Reserve which we could establish.

said, the adoption of the proposed plan would involve a bounty of £5 per man to such militiamen as chose to accept it, and for that bounty the Government expected to obtain 30,000 trained men ready to march into the ranks at once on an emergency. These men, on accepting the bounty, were to engage to serve for five years, anywhere the Government required, either at home or abroad, and the success of the measure depended on the numbers that would accept the proffered bounty. It was possible that many would do so—perhaps many under the idea that they would never be called out; but it must be remembered that at this moment the militia force was deficient in numbers. According to the last Returns the number of men wanted to complete the regiments in England and Scotland was 27,000. In Ireland they could not tell the numbers wanting, because at the outbreak of Fenianism it was thought proper to stop recruiting there. As to the other part of the plan—that of commuting the service of men who had not served their first period—he would be very unwilling to abridge the term of twelve years to any great extent. They all knew that in the Peninsular war, after being six or seven years in the field, our soldiers were so good that the Duke of Wellington said he could do anything with them. Therefore he did not concur in the theory that mere boys enlisted at eighteen, or seventeen, or sixteen years of age, were the best soldiers after merely two years' service. We could have no troops so good as those who had been eight or ten years in the service. As to attaching the men, who were allowed to commute their service, to the pensioners, he could not conceive anything more objectionable. The pensioners might be of value in a fort or in the defence of towns; but they were generally men discharged for being incapable of active service, and many of them could not march three miles. But the intended force for a Reserve, consisting of men from the Line who had commuted their service, might, however, do a great deal of good to the militia if they joined them together. They were men probably not much older than the militiamen themselves, but they were more fully instructed. He trusted the project of attaching these men to the pensioners would be re-considered.

said, that with every respect for the versatile attainments of the present Secretary for War, he must express his regret at the retirement from that office of the right hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for Huntingdon, whose plan was simple, and involved no addition to the Staff and no increase of officers. The Secretary for War said he had adopted the proposals of his predecessor, adding, as if it were a matter of no importance, that he had made one slight change by attach the new Army of Reserve to the first Army of Reserve instead of the militia, That, however, was a very shadowy proposal. When inquiry was on one occasion made of the late Lord Herbert as to the numbers of our Army Reserve, and a Return on the subject was produced, it was found that they only amounted to 1,500, and that they never had been drilled. That another Army of Reserve should be added to that Army of Reserve for the purposes of drill appeared to him to be a somewhat visionary scheme. What was really meant was that a separate organization with a separate Staff and officers for the new Army of Reserve was to be established. This was proved by the fact that in the Bill was a proviso for the creation of whatever officers might be deemed desirable. That was a serious objection to the change. But there was another of still greater weight, which was that it would tend to widen rather than to diminish the connection between the militia and the Line — a connection which was recommended by Lord Strathnairn and other witnesses of the highest authority before the Commission, and which the plan of the right hon. and gallant Gentleman was calculated to promote. He thought that the proposals of the right hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for Huntingdon were fully authorized by the evidence given before the Committee, and that one of their principal advantages was that there would have been established a connection between the Line and the militia. Now, however, it was proposed not to engraft this Army of Reserve on one of the old organizations, but to establish another organization, and for what purpose he could not conceive, unless it was for the purpose of making more Staff officers. He expressed his approval of the proposals of the right hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for Huntingdon when they were first explained, and he saw no reason to change his opinion after consideration; but he considered that they had been so entirely perverted from their original purpose by the alterations introduced by the present Secretary of War and by the changes contemplated by the Bill, that he deemed them no longer deserving of support. He therefore concurred in the suggestion of the noble Lord that the consideration of the matter should be deferred to another year. The point evidently aimed at by those who framed the Bill was to set up a separate and distinct organization, not only for those who retired from the army, but for those who retired from the militia, and to a considerable extent to remove the militia Reserve from the militia. He wished to know whether the statement of the right hon. Baronet was correct that the present Army of Reserve amounted to 4,000. He rather thought, according to a Return made last Session, it was only 1,500. The Secretary at War had stated that in the event of invasion it would be impossible to collect more than 40,000 men; but on referring to the effective state of the Army, it would be found that on the 1st of May last year there were no fewer than 85,000 troops of all arms in the United Kingdom.

said, he had likened to the statement of the right hon. Baronet with feelings of the greatest possible disappointment. His proposal would not give an Army of Reserve that would at all benefit the country. It was absolutely necessary to have an Army of Reserve strong in numbers, in efficiency, in discipline, and, above all, with a perfect system, of regimental discipline. Instead of this a scheme was proposed surrounded with difficulties and complications. It multiplied organizations, and he could not, therefore, go so far as the noble Lord the Member for Lancashire, when he said that it would do no harm, but would do no good. He was afraid the scheme of the Government would only stand in the way of an efficient system. There would be 50,000 men of the militia and pensioners liable to general service, but he could see no reason why the Government should not at once propose to turn the militia into an Army of Reserve. Thus the unnecessary multiplying of organizations would be avoided, and they would have an Army of Reserve which would be well fitted to co-operate with the regular army, or replace it at need. He hoped the Government would withdraw the proposal with the view of preparing some scheme which would, in the event of an European war, enable us to maintain our national dignity.

said, he wished to remove a misapprehension which seemed to prevail with reference to the pay of the private militia soldier. It had been calculated, including bounty and clothing, to amount to 3s. 2d. a day. That statement was founded on the evidence of Colonel Pipon; but he believed it was inaccurate. It proceeded on the supposition that the militiaman served only twenty-one instead of forty-two days the first year, and twenty-seven days in every other year. He received, in fact, only 1s. 1d. for his daily duty; but when he was discharged did his liabilities end there? Far from it; he returned to his home, liable to be called out at a month's notice—to have to leave his family and his civil employment, and to be subject to all the rigour of the Mutiny Act. It was for this that he re- ceived his annual bounty, and he did not think that 24s. was an excessive retaining fee.

said, he considered the authority of the noble Lord the late Secretary of State for War (the Marquess of Hartington) a very sufficient authority for the statement he had made with reference to the pay of the militia. The principal point was whether the Army of Reserve should be attached to the pensioners or to the militia. If the pensioners were dissolved and added to the militia they would be a very valuable auxiliary in teaching to that force the good habits of the soldier; it would also be a great saving to the public. The Report of the Recruiting Commission disapproved of the practice of giving bounties, and recommended that they should not be increased. He had seen sufficient of the way in which bounties were dispensed to induce him to object to the system. If they were to be given, they should be given in a way to benefit the soldier himself and his family, not to be spent in drink. Another item in the Vote, the proposed addition of 2d. per day to the Staff Serjeants, had reference to the pay of the permanent Staff of the militia. No body of men in the service did more work for the money they received, or were more thoroughly deserving of any encouragement the House could afford them. But, while he gladly welcomed this addition to their pay, he would also like to see their duties increased. He wished to see the recruiting done to a great extent by the Staff of the militia during the ten months of the year when they remained idle. He agreed with the hon. Member opposite that the addition of 2d. a day to the pay of the militia was unnecessary, unless the service of the militia regiments was assimilated to that of the Line, when, of course, the pay should be the same as that of the Line. He hoped that the case of militia quartermasters would be taken into consideration. Their retiring pensions were most inadequate, and they received no lodging-money when their regiments were disembodied.

said, that the more the question was discussed, the more he was convinced that it should be postponed for another year. The militia had never been able to keep up the Line, even when it numbered 250,000 men. In this year 15,000 men would leave the ranks, next year 23,000, and in 1869, 19,000 men. They should look for their Reserve to the men who had served twelve years, and by adding them to the existing Reserve force they would soon obtain a Reserve force of 100,000 men, if proper inducements were offered. He would give as much as 6d. a day, and though that, no doubt, was a large sun), the country might recoup itself by reducing the regular army to the extent of 5, or at most 10 per cent. He did not think that short terms of service would answer for our army in consequence of the great distances our men had to be sent.

said, that he supported the suggestion that the measure should be postponed for a year. He was one of those old-fashioned politicians who regarded a standing army as a standing injury. Mature itself pointed out that a standing army was unsuited to our case for we had not the faculty of organizing one. It seemed to him that sufficient prominence had not been given to the Volunteer force, which he thought generally did not receive from the Government the encouragement it deserved.

said, he did not feel at all disposed to enter upon a discussion as to whether or not a standing army was a standing injury. He might, however, as a humble member of the Volunteer force, say that he differed very greatly from the hon. Member for Peterborough (Mr. Whalley), and that he felt grateful for the encouragement extended to that body both by the country and by the House. He had risen because, at an earlier period of the evening, he had been debarred from discussing the question raised by this Vote and by the two Bills on the Paper—a discussion on which he had entered because he had been under the impression that the whole subject was to be debated on going into Committee of Supply. Had he then been allowed to proceed, he had intended to suggest, as his noble Friend the Member for North Lancashire (the Marquess of Hartington) had done, that the subject should be postponed for another year. With his noble Friend, he believed that the scheme was not calculated to obtain for us an efficient Army of Reserve, while the country and the House might be betrayed into a delusive reliance upon a force which would in reality not be deserving the name bestowed upon it. The Commission on Recruiting stated in their Report that we could not at the present moment bring together more than 40,000 of our regular army. Our militia, which might perhaps be 120,000 strong, and which if the Act were enforced might be stronger by 60,000 men, would only give us 90,000, and our pensioners, who might be 30,000 strong, only half that number. In addition to that, our Army of Reserve, which had been a "standing" joke, would produce 2,500 men. His hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Queen's County (General Dunne) had said moreover that we must eliminate the body of pensioners altogether from our calculations. Now, what was the state in which we were to be placed according to the Army Reserve scheme as proposed by the Government? We were to have a first Army of Reserve, which it was hoped would number 20,000 men. His noble Friend the Member for North Lancashire, however had made a calculation showing that we could not rely upon more than fifty times 150, or 7,500 men. By the Reserve system we were to have 30,000 of the militia ready to be transferred at any moment into the Line. But he could not help thinking that, like the Irishman's blanket, we were cutting off the bottom what we added to the top, because by so doing we should at once reduce the strength of the militia by the 30,000 men who were to join the army. How was the plan to be carried out? It was proposed to get men to enlist on those terms by giving them double bounties, spreading over their pay what was equal to £12. During the Crimean war we had a system of feeding the army from the militia. In one year 10,000 men enlisted for the militia, and in another 8,000, and these men each received a bounty of £6 on enlistment. Did any man doubt that in case of war breaking out we should be able by offering a bounty of £12 to get the 30,000 men whom it was now proposed to place at disposal for service in the army? He did not think that this Army Reserve scheme as it at present stood deserved the consideration of the House. His right hon. and gallant Friend (General Peel) the father of the original scheme had found it so disfigured since it had passed into the hands of the right hon. Baronet that he now disowned it. He had felt in proposing the Motion which had come under discussion at an earlier period of the evening that he was leading a forlorn hope; but he believed that the only permanent basis upon which we could rely was a modified form of conscription. Lord Dalhousie had expressed a similar opinion on more than one occasion, and had, moreover, said, that if any Government were bold enough to put the compulsory system into operation, they would, in his belief, find themselves supported by the voice of the country. He could not help feeling that the scheme proposed was one which was utterly inefficient for the purpose for which it was intended, and he would, therefore, join his noble Friend (the Marquess of Hartington) in expressing a hope that it would not be pressed this Session.

said, he hoped the right hon. Gentleman (Sir John Pakington) would give his best attention to the whole subject, so as to put the country in a state of security against any emergency. He had always objected to the reduction of the Indian Army, which was one of the best in the world. He thought it would be well, considering the great Empire we had on the other side of the world, to maintain a separate army there, thus obviating the necessity of keeping up so large an army at home, and saving the great expense of sending regiments across the sea. With regard to providing for discharged soldiers, nothing was more painful than to see soldiers who had served for many years discharged with a small pension. It would be much better to instruct them in some trade and so save them from penury. He did not know whether there were any arrears of prize money yet undistributed, but the delay and mismanagement that had taken place in this department were much to be regretted. A system of military apprenticeship would be very advantageous, there being no reason why boys should not be trained for the army as well as for the navy. The increase of pay would give give general satisfaction, and everything should be done to bring a superior class of men into the army. Soldiers should not be mere machines, but should be taught so as to understand the object of every manœuvre. The way foreign armies were rendered so efficient was by giving instruction to the men. He trusted that by next year the right hon. Gentleman would be prepared with a scheme which would meet with the general support of the House, and would provide against any emergency that might arise on the continent.

said, he hoped this matter would not be postponed, for his principle had always been to take the best he could get. There was nothing to prevent the plan he had proposed from being adopted when the Bill got into Committee, and he earnestly trusted that the Government would not consent to a postponement for another year.

said, he could not accede to the suggestion of his noble Friend (Lord Elcho) and other Members to abandon the Bills which he had introduced with the view of carrying out this plan. Some hon. Members seemed to look on the plan as insufficient; but this was a strange reason for folding our hands and doing nothing. The prevalent opinion seemed to be that by securing the services of one-fourth of our whole militia force, and making them available for the general purposes of war, we should to, that extent, secure a very efficient Reserve. With regard to the proposal that a certain proportion of the army should be permitted to commute a portion of their service for service in the Reserve, and the question whether the drilling and training was to be in one way or another, these were matters of detail which could be settled in Committee. In common with his right hon. and gallant Friend (General Peel) he had little doubt it would then be easy to come to an agreement. He thought his noble Friend (Lord Elcho) had considerably under-rated the force that might be derived from commuted men, for he believed a considerable force might be thus obtained. The deficiency of our present resources being acknowledged, it could not be advisable to defer the matter. The regulations in which the important details of the scheme were to be arranged would be laid on the table. He hoped, therefore, the Vote would be passed.

said, that he would have to trouble the Committee with only a few words in proposing this Vote, which was rendered necessary by the increase in the pay of the army, which had been sanctioned by the House. It had always been the practice to assimilate the pay of the Marines to that of the army, and he had only to explain that it was impossible to provide for the cost of their increased pay in the original Estimates, because it was dependent upon the sanction of the House to the increased pay of the army, which had only recently been obtained.

said, that the increased pay of the army was granted in consequence of the recommendation of the Recruiting Committee to that effect. He did not offer the smallest objection to that increase, as it was proposed on the responsibility of the Government, and he doubted whether they could have done otherwise, with the recommendation of the Recruiting Commission before them. He wished, however, to know whether an increase of pay to the Royal Marines was required on account of any difficulty in recruiting, or whether it was only proposed because a similar Vote had been agreed to for the army?

said he thought that the Vote now proposed was the natural consequence of the Vote just agreed to for increasing the pay of the army. The men who served with the Marines were the seamen of the navy, who might think they also had a claim. He wished to know whether it was proposed to make any augmentation to the pay of the seamen of the fleet? He presumed that the Marines would receive arrears from the day on which the proposal was originally made. There were very few Members of the Government better acquainted with the working of their office than the right hon Gentleman (Mr. Corry), and be wished to know whether it was proposed to pay the arrears in, a lump sum, or spread over different periods of time? The increase was not a bit more than the Marines were entitled to.

said, that the Marines were a very popular force, and, speaking generally, there was no difficulty in keeping up the force to the number voted. If, however, they did not receive an augmentation corresponding to that given to the army it would not only lose its popularity, but great offence would be given, and a difficulty in obtaining recruits would be the probable consequence. The Marines were a branch of the army, and it would not be possible to withhold from them the advantage given to the rest of the army. There was, however, no reason why, because the House increased the pay of the Marines, they should also increase the pay of the seamen of the fleet. The wages of seamen had been increased at various times of late years, and they were content with their pay. The increase would date from the 1st of April. He thought it would be advisable to pay the arrears, not in a lump sum, but by instalments, but that would depend on what had been done in the case of the army.

moved—

"That towards providing a further sum for defraying the Expenses of the construction of Works for the Defence of the Royal Dockyards and Arsenals, and of the Ports of Mover and Portland, a sum not exceeding £800,000 be charged upon the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom, and that the Commissioners of Her Majesty's Treasury be authorized and empowered to raise the said sum by Annuities, for a term not exceeding thirty years, and that such Annuities shall be charged upon and be payable out of the said Consolidated Fund; that the said Commissioners of Her Majesty's Treasury be authorized to direct the payment to the Governor and Company of the bank of England, out of the said Consolidated Fund, of the sum of £800, for the Management of the Contributions to be received by the said Governor and Company in respect of the said Annuities."

He said, that £150,000 of the £800,000 would be devoted to the placing of iron shields on fortifications, a work which would be completed by the expenditure from time to time of £450,000. The balance of £650,000 to be devoted to general works, was similar to the amount which had been devoted annually for some time past.

said, he entirely approved of the object for which this Vote was asked. He did not know whether it was the intention of the late Government to have proposed this increase for the iron shields, but both himself and his predecessor at the War Office had been of opinion that this expenditure should be incurred.

said, he had heard that the iron shields or sheathing proposed to be used at Portsmouth were to be applied on a worse principle than the iron which was used for the same purpose at Cronstadt.

said, that the schields in this country would be applied in a different way, but it did not follow that they would prove inferior.

said, he thought that £450,000 was a large sum to expend for such a purpose, more espe- cially as they were not likely to prove stable, it being well known that salt water would corrode and cat away iron. He had some doubt as to whether the proper course to pursue was to pay for these fortifications by means of a loan, which involved the necessity of borrowing for works of a temporary character, while at the same time we were paying off a loan. He thought it would be better to pay the cost if possible, out of the revenue of the country. They might just as well pay for the sheathing of the ironclads by means of a loan.

said, that he had placed on the Paper a Motion for next Tuesday which would open up the whole question of our fortifications. He attached no blame with respect to the plans of fortification — which seemed to him to be altogether faulty in principle and utterly useless—to the Government, because they were the plans of the late Government. He had had great experience in the matter of fortification plates. Many good judges considered the plates used as quite inferior and erroneous in principle. He thought the best principle had not been adopted with regard to the subject of fortifications It was his intention next Tuesday to move a Resolution to suspend the further proceeding with the fortifications until some competent authority had fully considered the whole subject.

said, that though it was too late to discuss the general question of fortifications he believed that the greater part of them would turn out useless. Round forts with lines had been constructed which it was impossible for the defensive force of this country to man. He wished to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he had any information of the sinking of the foundations of two forts, one at Spithead and the other in the Medway?

had no reason to doubt the efficiency of our system of fortifications, on which the best talent in the country had been engaged. He had received no information as to the sinking of the foundations of a fort in the Medway, but one of the five forts which it had been intended to erect at Spithead had been abandoned owing to that cause. A second fort had been commenced on Ryde Sand; and he was informed a few days ago that the foundation was defective and that it would be wise to abandon it. Three other forts were being erected on the White Horse Sand, No Man's Land, and the Spit, and there was no reason to doubt their stability. The iron shield was likely to be permanent.

said, he had to move an Amendment with the view of renewing the Poor Law Board for five years only. He had on a previous occasion stated his objections to the Board being made permanent, and hoped that, to avoid a long discussion, the Amendment would be agreed to.

said, there was great objection in the metropolis to the Board being made permanent, and it was impossible to discuss the proposal properly at this period of the Session.

said he was sorry he could not agree to the proposal of the hon. and learned Member. The Poor Law Board had existed for a period of twenty years upon its present footing. It had been continued by various Acts of Parliament, and the time had come when the House was in a position to decide whether it should not be placed on a permanent footing. The Bill of 1846 placed the establishment on the footing which it held at present, and the clause which limited the duration of the Board to a period of five years was evidently added with the intention of being repealed if the experiment succeeded. There had been only two or three Petitions presented against the proposal to make the Board permanent. Considering the great powers which the House had intrusted to the Poor Law Board at the beginning of this Session, it would be rather inconsistent if they were now to say that it ought not to have a longer existence than five years. That period would not afford sufficient time for testing the operation of the Act. This department should be placed on the same footing as the rest.

said, he trusted that the Secretary to the Poor Law Board would re-consider his decision. He spoke the views of a great many Members who had the strongest objection to make the Board perpetual; there was no other department in the country which exercised such powers as the Poor Law Board. He hoped the Government would confine their demands this year to a Continuance Bill with a view to some measure of consolidation next year. There were no fewer than sixteen or eighteen Acts of Parliament, one after the other, enlarging, contracting, and altering in various ways, the powers of the Board. It was exceedingly difficulty to say what the powers of the Board really were.

said, that the fact that Parliament had in the beginning of the Session intrusted the Board with new powers was no reason whatever for making it permanent; rather the contrary. As those powers were new, extensive, and invidious, and as there was likely to be great difference of opinion as to their exercise, it was only proper that a limited existence should be given to the Board. No possible inconvenience could arise from a course which Parliament for twenty years had thought right to adopt.

said, that the hon. and learned Member seemed to forget what the Poor Law Board had been constantly doing in the country. If the Board was at one time unpopular, it was because it was not represented in the House, and had not the same opportunity of defending its acts which it afterwards obtained. A Committee over which the right hon. Gentleman (Mr. Villiers) presided, sat for three years on the subject, and they came to a unanimous resolution that the continuance of the central authority was essential, and that it would increase its efficiency if placed on a permanent footing. As for the statement that no notice had been given of what was to be done, in the beginning of this Session due notice had been given that the Poor Law Board would be made perpetual. The Board had great powers before; but when the House had so much confidence in it as to give it further powers this Session it seemed to him very extraordinary that it should be placed on a different footing from any other department in the State, and should be held in suspense for a period sometimes of three years, sometimes of five. Was the Board to suppose that it was distrusted by the House? If so it would be prevented from acting with the firmness and decision to be desired. He was perfectly convinced that the time had come when the House might fairly trust the Board. The Poor Law Board was placed in a most invidious position by being treated differently from other departments of the State.

said, that whenever he found metropolitan Members rising to oppose a measure, as they did upon that occasion, he could not help entertaining a strong suspicion that it was one which would promote the welfare of the country at large. He believed that the time had come when the central machine which regulated the whole administration of the Poor Law of the country should possess the prestige of permanence. A Board which was continued from year to year at the will of Parliament could not command that respect which it ought to possess. If the House were unwilling to make it absolutely perpetual, at least something approaching to permanence ought to be conferred on the central authority.

said, he could not agree with his hon. Friend who had just spoken. He presented the other day a Petition from the Poor Law Guardians of the borough which he represented, complaining bitterly of the law and of the manner in which they were treated, and especially directing the attention of the House to the propriety of discontinuing the power of the Board rather than giving it permanence. Every Act of Parliament had had for its object to increase the power of the Board and diminish that of the Guardians, so that he apprehended that by-and-by it would be found impossible to get persons of respectability to undertake that office. He trusted there would be no prolongation of the Board beyond the term of five years.

said, he thought five years a species of permanency which many people would be delighted to obtain, and a term quite sufficiently long to fix. Unfortunately, the metropolitan Members did not always act together; if they did, no doubt this country would be very much better governed than it was. The country districts, he believed, were in favour of a permanent Board, but the metropolitan ratepayers felt they could take care of their own interests, and did not want this perpetual direction. He should give his support to the Motion of the hon. and learned Member for the Tower Hamlets.

said, he thought the House and the country were greatly indebted to the right hon. Gentleman at the head of the Poor Law Board for the improvements that had been made in the administration. So far from feeling that it lowered the position of the Guardians to have the advice and assistance of the members of the Poor Law Board, he had always, as a Guardian, felt it a great advantage. He should give his most cordial support to the permanent continuance of the Board. He should be very sorry if, by imposing the limit of five years, the notion should be encouraged that its powers were still to be of a temporary nature.

was astonished that this proposal should have come from the hon. Gentleman (Mr. AYRTON), and should have been supported by the hon. and learned Member (Mr. Locke). Both his hon. Friends were Members of the Select Committee, and if this subject had not been discussed at length there, it was because there seemed at once to be something like unanimity in favour of the Board being made permanent. It was certainly the effect of the evidence—that for the due and uniform administration of the law for the relief of the poor a Central Board was necessary, and that with a view to its greater efficiency it should be made permanent. The Committee had been impartially chosen, it had made a patient inquiry, and he did not know that there was any ground for doubting its judgment. The objections that had been urged to the Poor Law Board applied equally to it when subject to periodical renewal, as they would, when rendered permanent. These arose from certain powers with which it was vested, and es- pecially those of issuing General Orders, of which the Committee had approved, though some people thought them unconstitutional. The House really never had any thought of abolishing the Board. The apprehension of being put an end to on the expiration of two, three, and five years, if it did not demoralize, alarmed, and intimidated, and had a very prejudicial effect upon those connected with the department. As the time for renewal approached, they were threatened with attack by local boards—not by those that were best managed, but by those that were irregular in their proceedings, and least careful in their attention to the poor. The best regulated unions, and those, generally, that treated the poor with the most real humanity, were those that acted most in harmony with the Board. It was evident it would be inconvenient to any department to be liable to be threatened with this kind of hostility if it would not make concessions that they believed to be unwise, or, waive its regulations; and so long as a department was responsible to the House of Commons there was no use in subjecting it to this kind of terrorism, which could only be prejudicial in its effect. It must cripple its usefulness if, under such circumstances, the Minister at its head was always to be advised in the department to keep quiet, and to abstain from initiating needed reforms. When he first entered the House there was a strong prejudice against the Board of Trade, and nearly as great with some people then as there is now against the Poor Law Board; and if it had been renewed periodically its usefulness would have been comparatively limited, and its importance under-rated. If the Poor Law Board required to be reformed, there was no reason why its constitution should not be amended when it had been made permanent; on the contrary, it would be an additional reason for its revision; but it was inconsistent to be constantly renewing the Board without the least intention to abolish it ultimately.