said, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether he objects to lay upon the Table of the House, a Return of the Military Knights of Windsor deceased since the appointment of the late and the present Governor, the date of their decease, the dates from which their successors received their pay, the amount of their deductions in pay, the mode in which the deductions were disposed of; also, a Return of all sums applied to the use of the late and present Governors of the Military Knights?

, in reply, said, it was difficult to deal with a Question such as this, as he did not know what were the reasons given for the production of the Returns. He was not prepared to lay them upon the table, as he did not know for what purpose they were required. He had that day received a document from the Knights of Windsor deprecating any interference with them, and stating they were perfectly content with the mode in which the funds were administered.

said, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, Whether he has reason to believe, from representations made to him by Factory Inspectors or otherwise, that local authorities fail to discharge the duty imposed upon them by Section 18 and other provisions of the Workshop Regulation Act, 1867, under which they are bound to enforce the Act; whether difficulties have arisen in cases where the local authority as described by the Act is "the Vestry or Select Vestry," and whether modifications of the Law are, in his judgment, there necessary, in order to invest the local authority with powers to carry out the Act and to raise the funds requisite for that purpose; and, if so, whether it be the intention of the Government to amend the Law during the present Session, with a view to render the local authority more efficient in these cases?

, in reply, said, he had not had any such applications made to him as his hon. Friend alluded to, nor had he received any notice of the existence of those difficulties, except from the hon. Member for Bradford (Mr. W. E. Forster), who had been kind enough to send him a letter that he had received on the subject. His attention had not been called to any defects in the present law; but the Inspectors in their next Reports would probably take notice of the matter.

said, he wished to know whether the Inspectors were instructed to report upon it?

said, that one of the Inspectors having been in town that day he had inquired of him, and he thought there would be Reports on the subject.

said, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, If his attention has been called to the following paragraph in the Hants Telegraph:—

"The steamer Princess of Wales, belonging to the Port of Portsmouth and Ryde Steam Packet Company, left Southsea Pier on Thursday morning, at half-past nine o'clock, on her passage to Ryde. When opposite Fort Monckton a shot passed between the foremast and the jib stay, causing considerable consternation among the passengers, many of whom were so frightened that they laid down upon the deck. This occurrence will serve to show the immense amount of danger resulting from the shot practice at this fort, for if the shots had struck the vessel beneath the water line, the probability is that she would have been sunk, and that many lives would have been sacrificed;"

and, if that statement be true, whether measures have been taken to prevent the recurrence of a practice so dangerous to the lives of Her Majesty's subjects?

said, in reply, that as soon as the statement to which the question referred appeared in the newspapers, a communication was sent to the Assistant Adjutant General at Portsmouth, desiring him to inquire into and report upon the facts; and he now held in his hand the answer returned by Lieutenant Colonel Peel, which was as follows:—.

"Portsmouth, July 1.

"Sir,—In accordance with instructions received in your telegram of this day's date, I have the honour to forward for the information of his Royal Highness Commanding-in-Chief the accompanying statements of Lieutenant Colonel Lovell, R.A., and Captain Girardot, R.A., the officers under whom the artillery practice from Fort Monckton was conducted on Thursday morning, the 25th of June, 1868. These officers both state most positively that no shot fired from Fort Monckton passed within 600 yards of any steamer during the practice. In consequence of the hour at which the telegram was received (5.20 p.m.) I have not been able to procure from the editor of the Hants Telegraph any information as to the source of the report contained in his newspaper, the office being closed. I understand that practice was also being carried on that morning from Her Majesty's ship Terrible, now laying at Spithead."

Lieutenant Colonel Lovell wrote—

"Fort Monckton, July 1, 1868.

"Sir,—In reply to your memorandum of this day's date, requesting a full report upon a statement contained in the Hants Telegraph that on Thursday, the 25th of June, that a shot from Fort Monckton passed between the foremast and jib-stay of a Ryde steamer, I have the honour to state that I was superintending the practice carried on by Captain Girardot, R.A.'s battery on that date, and no shot fired on that morning passed within 800 yards of a Ryde steamer or any other steamer, and I am at a loss to understand what could have caused any report to such effect. I beg to forward a statement of Captain Girardot, R.A., commanding the battery,"

Captain Girardot's statement was to this effect—

"I was in command of No. 7 Battery, 6th Brigade, Royal Artillery, during the hours of gun practice, from 9.30 a.m. to 11.30 a.m. on Thursday last, the 26th of June. The firing was conducted under the superintendence of Lieutenant Colonel Lovell, R.A. The greatest precautions were taken to observe the orders regarding the distance of vessels passing from the range, and I most confidently state that no shot was fired when any steamer was within 500 yards of the range."

He could not allow that question to rest where it was. If the statement in the Hants Telegraph was a true one it was quite intolerable that the public should be exposed to such a danger. He should therefore make further inquiries in order to have the matter thoroughly sifted.

said, he wished to say that he had a letter in his pocket from a passenger in the steamer—["Order!"]

said, he wished to ask the Secretary to the Treasury, The cause of the delay in presenting the Correspondence [ordered 12th May] between the West India and Pacific Company and the Treasury and Post Office, relative to the conveyance of Mails to the West Indies?

said, in reply, that the cause of the delay had been that parts of the Correspondence had to be furnished by the Treasury and other parts by the Post Office. The whole of it was now in the hands of the printer, and it would be distributed to hon. Members in a few days.

said, he would beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury, Not to displace the Ejectments Suspension (Ireland) Bill, which stands No. 1 on the Orders of the Day for the Evening Sitting of Tuesday the 7th instant?

said, he would not be unmindful of the hon. Gentleman's wish, but must frankly tell him that, desiring to bring the Business of the House forward at a reasonable time, he could not really pledge himself to comply with the hon. Gentleman's request.

said, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, Whether, referring to his opinion that it is desirable to give Government employment to deserving old soldiers, it is true that the custody of the Parks, hitherto under the park keepers, almost all old soldiers, is about to be taken from them and placed under the Metropolitan Police; and whether, if this alteration is considered necessary in Hyde Park, it must be carried out in the other Parks, where the park keepers have hitherto done their duty perfectly well, and the custody of which afforded employment, with a small remuneration, to many meritorious old soldiers?

said, in reply, that his hon. Friend had quite correctly expressed the views he had expressed with respect to the employment of old soldiers; but his regard for old soldiers did not give him any authority over the Parks. He must refer his hon. Friend to the First Commissioner of Works for any information as to the future custody of the Parks.

said, he would therefore put his Question to the First Commissioner of Works.

said, it had been thought highly expedient for the public service that old soldiers should no longer be appointed as park keepers, and he hoped that before long every Royal Park would be placed in the custody of the Metropolitan Police.

said, he would beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury, Whether, considering the repeated personal pledges he has given to the House and the Country to take every means to pass a Bill for the repression of Corrupt Practices at Elections, he does not think it desirable so to arrange the Business of the House as to give precedence to that Bill over others of an ordinary character, if he wishes to redeem the pledges he has made on the subject?

Sir, the hon. Gentleman has placed an argumentative Question on the Paper, which is a very inconvenient course, and one that might lead to discussion. He wishes to know if we intend to carry out our intentions. All I can say is, that if we had not intended to carry out our intentions we should not have placed the Bill on the Paper in the position we have done.

said, he would beg to ask the Secretary of State for War, If it is the intention of the Government to proceed with the Army Estimates on Monday, considering that the Papers connected with the Controller's Department have not been printed?

said, in reply, that he had promised the noble Lord the Member for North Lancashire (the Marquess of Hartington) that the Papers in question would be laid on the table in good time before Vote 18 was moved. The Papers had been laid on the table on Tuesday, but he was sorry to say it had been found impossible to complete the printing in time to allow them to be distributed to Members before Saturday next. He could not, therefore, bring on the Vote on Monday consistently with his promise to the noble Lord. Although, therefore, the Army Estimates might stand on the Paper for Monday, he should not, if it was the wish of the hon. Gentleman, proceed with them on that day.

said, he would beg to ask the First Lord of the Admiralty, Whether he will place upon the Table of the House the Case submitted in 1862 to the Law Officers of the Crown, with their Opinion thereon, upon the Claims of the Captains on the Reserved List?

said, that, in the unavoidable absence of his right hon. Friend the First Lord of the Admiralty, he would reply to the Question. He had to inform the hon. Gentleman that it would be contrary to all precedent to lay on the table Copies of the confidential communications which might have passed between the Law Officers of the Crown and the Heads of Public Departments. The case of those Reserved Captains had been carefully considered, as soon as the present Government came into Office. Nearly half of them, thirty-seven, had served one year at sea and so fulfilled the conditions which enabled the Board of Admiralty to grant the advantages for which they asked; but the rest of them had not served a year at sea, and the Admiralty were therefore unable to pursue a similar course in their case.

Mr. Speaker—I rise to move that the Thanks of this House be given to those who planned and accomplished one of the most remarkable military enterprizes of this century. When the invasion of Abyssinia was first mooted it was denounced as a rash enterprize, pregnant with certain peril and probable disaster. It was described, indeed, as one of the most rash undertakings which had ever been recommended by a Government to Parliament. The country was almost unknown to us, or known only as one difficult of access and very deficient in all those supplies which are necessary for an array. Indeed, the Commander of this Expedition had to commence his operations by forming his base on a desolate shore, and by a creating a road to the land he was invading through a wall of mountains. Availing himself for this purpose of the beds of exhausted torrents, he gradually reached a lofty table land—wild and for the most part barren—frequently intersected with mountain ranges of great elevation, occasionally breaking into ravines and gorges that were apparently unfathomable. Yet, over this country, for more than 300 miles, the Commander-in-Chief guided and sustained a numerous host, composed of many thousands of fighting men, as many camp followers, and vast caravans of animals, bearing supplies, more numerous than both. Over this land he guided cavalry and infantry, and—what is perhaps the most remarkable part of the Expedition—he led the elephants of Asia, bearing the artillery of Europe, over African passes which might have startled the trapper and appalled the hunter of the Alps. When he arrived at the base of this critical rendezvous, he encountered no inglorious foe; and if the manly qualities of the Abyssinians sank before the resources of our warlike science, our troops, even after that combat, had to scale a mountain fortress, of which the intrinsic strength was such that it may be fairly said it would have been impregnable to the whole world had it been defended by the man by whom it was assailed. But all these obstacles and all these difficulties and dangers were overcome by Sir Robert Napier, and that came to pass which ten years ago not one of us could have imagined even in his dreams, and which must, under all the circumstances, be an event of peculiar interest to an Englishman—the standard of St. George was hoisted on the mountains of Rasselas. If we turn from the conduct of the Expedition to the character of the person who commanded it, I think it must be acknowledged that rarely has an Expedition been planned with more providence and executed with more precision. In connection with it everything seems to have been foreseen and everything supplied. It would be presumptuous in me to dwell on the military qualities of the Commander; but all must recognize, and all may admire, the sagacity and the patience, the temper and the resource, invariably exhibited. I shall, however, perhaps be justified in calling attention to the rare union of diplomatic ability and military skill in the conduct of Sir Robert Napier. Indeed, I do not think a public man has ever shown more discretion than he has done. Had it not been for his management of men—not merely in the skilful handling of his troops on an exhausting march, but in the way in which he moulded the dispositions of the Native Princes—the result might have been different. And he moulded them to his purpose without involving his country in any perilous contract or engagement. Under these circumstances, I am sure the House will heartily offer and vote its Thanks to this distinguished man. It has been said by the greatest soldier who ever flourished—at least in modern times—that the Thanks of the House of Commons were a compliment the most appreciated by military men, and that, next to the favour of their Sovereign, the acknowledgment of their services by Parliament was the reward which they most valued. I have no doubt that Sir Robert Napier is influenced by those feelings; but the House of Commons at this moment will remember that this is not the first time, nor even the second, that it has offered to him its thanks. Happy is the man who has been thrice thanked by his country! By his splendid achievements in Abyssinia, Sir Robert Napier has only fulfilled the promise of the plains of India, and consummated his exploits on the Chinese field. It is, I may add, not the least interesting part of our business this evening to recognize the merits of another great branch of Her Majesty's forces. The army and navy have rarely acted together in the history of this country without successful results; but there have been, I think, few instances in which they have mutually assisted each other more effectually, and in which their combined exertions have been attended with greater success than in the Abyssinian Expedition. I need not remind the House how much depends on the skill and efficiency with which the transport of troops and stores is conducted in such an undertaking. But I may recall to the recollection of the House, in order that they may clearly understand them, the very great difficulties attending the Expedition in that respect, and the admirable manner in which those difficulties were surmounted. The number of vessels employed amounted to no fewer than 300, some of great tonnage, collected from all parts of Her Majesty's dominions, yet all brought at the right moment to the right place, under the superintendence of Commodore Heath. The exertions of the Navy were not, however, limited merely to this important branch of the public service. The unknown waters of Abyssinia were buoyed and lighted with a promptitude and certainty which cannot be too highly praised, and which were of the utmost importance; and it was mainly owing to the great exertions of the Navy that water, on which the success of the Expedition greatly depended, and the want of which for a moment threatened the successful accomplishment of the Expedition, was supplied. The building of the piers and the establishing of condensing machines were mainly owing to the exertions of the Navy, who on all occasions showed the utmost willingness to devote their labours to the success of this great enterprize. But it was not to the mere transport of troops, not to the mere buoying and lighting of Annesley Bay, nor the mere condensing of water that the duties and labours of the Navy were limited. They equipped and manned a most efficient corps, which took a very active part in the invasion of Abyssinia—the Rocket Brigade. They were present on that great march during which Sir Robert Napier handled his troops with so much dexterity—a march requiring so much endurance on the part of our forces—and they joined in that critical operation the scaling of the fortress of Magdala. Therefore, under these circumstances, the House will offer its most Cordial and grateful Thanks to Commodore Heath, who commanded the naval force. In acknowledging the great services of the distinguished man who was the chief Commander of the Expedition, and of the eminent officer who commanded the Navy, we must not be unmindful of the conduct of the men, both in the Army and the Navy. I think we may fairly say that the conduct of the troops and sailors was alike complete and admirable. There have been instances, no doubt, of rapid marches and triumphant fields, which have occasioned greater sensation at the moment, in the history of modern times; but if you look to the exhibition of military virtue, I doubt whether the qualities of patience, endurance, and good temper, manifested under the most trying circumstances, have over been more fully exemplified. I doubt whether the force of disciplined man was ever more successfully asserted. There was shown that gallantry on which we can always count, and which enables our forces to meet any dangers and difficulties; but what was most admirable was the endurance and docility which were exemplified by the troops, and which enhanced the glorious result of the operations. The House therefore will, I am sure, acknowledge in a manner most grateful to the men both of the Army and Navy its sense of their services, and will take means by which that sense shall be made known to them through their respective commanding officers, making mention to each regiment the opinion of the House with reference to their services and conduct. There are many distinguished officers whose services they must also shortly acknowledge, and whose names were inserted in the Resolution. Before concluding, I would venture also to congratulate the House, not on the conduct of the Expedition, of which I have already treated, but on its character. When it was first announced that England was about to embark on a most costly and perilous Expedition merely to vindicate the honour of our Sovereign and to rescue from an unjust but remote captivity a few of our fellow-subjects, the announcement was received in more than one country?with something like mocking incredulity. But we have asserted the purity of our purpose. In an age accused, and perhaps not unjustly, of selfishness and a too great regard for material interests, it is something, in so striking and significant a manner, for a great nation to have vindi- cated the higher principles of humanity. It is a privilege to belong to a country which has done such deeds. They will add lustre to the name of this nation, and will beneficially influence the future history of the world. The right hon. Gentleman concluded by proposing the Resolutions.

Sir, I believe it is my duty to second the Motion which has been made by the right hon. Gentleman and this is certainly an occasion on which the performance of such a duty must be regarded in the light also of a rare privilege. Indeed, Sir, if it were the custom of this House, as it is not, on any occasion to dispense with forms, and to give effect to its feelings, in the manner of some assemblies, by the method of acclamation, I believe that acclamation is perhaps the mode in which it would be most gratifying to us all to make known our decision on the Motion of the right hon. Gentleman. The right hon. Gentleman has described with great felicity of expression, and, so far as I can judge, without the smallest exaggeration, the general character of this Expedition, from which it derives its title to a place of no very common order in military history. I do not, of course, mean to claim for it—nor would it be wise to claim for those who have been engaged in it—precisely the same kind of fame as attaches to occasions in which desperate conflicts have been waged with equal or nearly equal force between nations or between armies alike possessed of all the resources of modern warfare. But we have lived into a time in which, if it cannot be said of the soldier, it must be said of the commander, that mere fighting, however arduous the task, mere tactics, and mere strategy have become, perhaps though still vital and essential, yet almost secondary parts of the qualities required to make a successful general. And it is in this department, which relates to the conflict that had to be carried on by Sir Robert Napier, with Nature, with distance, with climate, with all the diversities and difficulties presented by one of the most peculiar portions of the earth, with the civil government of the Army, with the provision made for every want, that this Expedition presents to our view a history alike complete and satisfactory. There is, indeed, something tame and feeble in the language of uniform and unbroken eulogy, and yet the occasion does not permit us to adopt any other language. We may look at what has occurred with reference to the Commander, with reference to the officers by whom he was so ably seconded, with reference to the soldiers who moved and acted under their orders, and lastly with reference to the Government at home. The right hon. Gentleman has abstained from claiming any peculiar praise for the Government at home; but I am bound to say that we are indebted to them for the wise choice of the Commander. We are indebted to them, and we are indebted to those with whom they may have taken counsel, for the unbounded confidence they reposed in the abilities of the object of their choice; for the unsparing liberality with which, on deciding the difficult question of facing these great risks, they made the whole resources of the country available for the purposes that wore in view; for the care and forethought with which, so far at least as I am able to judge, all the necessary provisions were made. Here it would not be more than justice, I think, to distinguish among the Members of the Government that Minister who necessarily must have been charged with the chief share of the responsibility and labours of the Expedition—I mean the Secretary of State for India; and lastly, we are indebted to the Government for the firmness and decision with which, from first to last, they persisted—acting therein, I must say, in accordance with public opinion and the enlightened mind of the nation—in confining the operations of this Expedition to its legitimate purpose, and in refusing to be led beyond the line of duty and wisdom by any visions, however flattering and seductive. We have been permitted to gain on this occasion what may be called an almost tearless victory. Perhaps I shall not be going too far from this subject if I uttter a word of regret for the fate of Colonel Dunne, the only field officer who lost his life, though not by direct military operations, and who proved in the deadly charge at Balaclava the courage with which he was endowed, who received from the hands of his Sovereign the Victoria Cross, who sought active service as commander of his gallant regiment, the 33rd, which made the assault on Magdala; and who found a grave in the country to which he accompanied the Expedition, and a place of honour in the recollections of his fellow-citizens. But, though we know that all have done their duty well from first to last, it is impossible not to dwell with a peculiar interest on this special occasion on the character of the man whose name first appears and most prominently in the Motion now made. Without him it might have been possible that great things might have been achieved; but there is a completeness in the work achieved that we cannot do otherwise than connect in a special manner with the special qualities of his mind and his capacity. Without him we scarcely could have hoped that this Expedition would stand upon record among those occasions when nations resort to the bloody arbitrament of war, as one in which not one drop was added to the cup of human suffering which any humane forethought could spare, and in which the severest critic, in reviewing the proceedings, will find nothing to except to in regard to the military, political, and moral aspect of the proceedings. No man can read the despatches of Sir Robert Napier, and especially the despatch circulated for our information to-day, without seeing that, after we have given him the praise of being a Commander apparently consummate in meeting every demand made on him for military qualities, there is something which remains beyond—there is the mind, firm of purpose, never losing for one moment its thorough balance, and among all anxiety and excitement, keeping an eye steadily fixed on moral aims, and remembering, under all circumstances, the duty of keeping and maintaining, untainted and in virgin purity, the honour and character of his country. Nor can anyone become acquainted with Sir Robert Napier—and we must all feel we become acquainted with him when we read his interesting, his manly, his simple, and his modest account—without feeling that we part from the consideration of the subject not only with gratitude and admiration of the General, but with respect, with regret—I would almost say, with affection—for the man. Sir, I reecho the statement made by the right hon. Gentleman, and I value highly the privilege that falls to me of seconding the Motion he has made.

Resolved, Nemine Contradicente, That the Thanks of this House be given to Lieutenant General Sir Robert Napier, G.C.B., G.C.S.I., for the exemplary skill with which tic planned, and the distinguished energy, courage, and perseverance with which he conducted the recent Expedition into Abyssinia, resulting in the detent, by Her Majesty's Forces, of the Army of King Theodore, and the vindication of the honour of the Country, by the rescue from Captivity of Her Majesty's Envoy and other British Subjects, and by the capture and destruction of the strong Fortress of Magdala.

Resolved, Nemine Contradicente, That the Thanks of this House be given to Commodore Heath, R.N., C.B., for the indefatigable zeal and great ability with which he conducted the Naval Operations connected with the Transport of the Troops and Stores, upon which the success of the Expedition materially depended.

Resolved, Nemine Contradicente, That the Thanks of this House be given to Major General Sir Charles Staveley, K.C.B., Major General G. Malcolm, C. B., Major General E. L,. Russell, Brigadier General W. Merewether, C.B., and the other Officers of the Navy and Army, for the energy, gallantry, and ability with which they have executed the various Services which they have been called on to perform throughout these arduous operations.

Resolved, Nemine Contradicente, That this House doth highly acknowledge and approve the discipline, gallantry, and endurance displayed by the Petty Officers, Non-commissioned Officers, and Men of the Navy and Army, both European and Native, during these operations; and that the same be signified to them by their respective Commanding Officers.

Ordered, That Mr. Speaker do communicate the said Resolutions to Lieutenant General Sir Robert Napier, and that he be requested by Mr. Speaker to signify the same to Commodore Heath, R.N, C.B., Major General Sir Charles Staveley, K.C.B., Major General G. Malcolm, C.B., Major General E. L. Russell, Brigadier General W Merewether, C.B., and to the several Officers of the Navy and Army who served in the said Expedition.—(Mr. Disraeli.)

rose to move for Copy of any further Despatches, Telegrams, and Letters between the Secretary of State in Council and the Government of India, respecting the proposed purchase of the works of the East India Irrigation Company, or the advance of funds for the works thereof since July 16, 1867. There were two Bills of an important character before the House relating to the Government of India, affecting the relations between the Home Government and the Indian Government, and the relations between the Secretary of State for India and the Council. The Papers he wished to obtain would, he anticipated, throw an important light upon these questions, and assist them materially in arriving at a sound conclusion, as to the proper mode in which these relations should be estab- lished. The House would remember that about two years ago there was a most fearful famine in the province of Bengal—one of the most frightful famines ever recorded in history. He was not about to dilate on the famine in Orissa; but it was necessary, in order to lay the ground for what he was going to urge, that he should state one or two circumstances connected with it; and he could not do better than read two extracts from papers now in the Library. There had been an inquiry in the province as to the nature and extent of the famine, and a great number of witnesses had been examined, from whose evidence he would select two passages almost at random:—The Rev. A. Miller, Balasore, said—

"I think the mortality was greater than was reported. Hundreds died in the fields and out-of the-way places, where no one knew them. If one chanced to cross the country one saw the bodies lying about, and the jackals eating them. I should say, to be within bounds, that about one quarter of the population of Orissa has died. In this neighbourhood, I think the mortality has been about one-third, but I believe in other parts of the province it has not been so severe. But, as respects the general misery and suffering, I do not think it has ever been fully described; it would almost be impossible to exaggerate it. The people bore their misery with extraordinary quiet and submission. Nothing that I have ever read has enabled me to conceive anything equal to this famine. I have known no instance of Hindoos eating dogs, or cats, or cows. But they did cat their own children, when they were dead. I heard a well-authenticated instance, in which a mother and son were found eating a dead child."

Abdool Ghunnee, zemindar, Balasore, said—

"There were 18,000 people on my estates; of these 4,700 have died during the famine."

He believed that the mortality occasioned by that great calamity was little short of 1,000,000. The inference he wished to draw from this deplorable state of things was that no effort they could make of an indirect kind should be spared, in order to avoid the recurrence of such a calamity as this. They were bound to do their best for the people they had undertaken to govern. Now, there was but one remedy that had ever been suggested, and which was admitted to be perfect against the recurrence of such calamities, and that was irrigation works. These calamities arose from the failure of water, owing to the great prevalence of drought, which would have been almost entirely obviated if those means of irrigation had been provided which engineers were perfectly able to supply, if they were furnished with the necessary funds. This was a matter of great importance to India, and the Papers he asked for would show that the present Government had not acted as they should have done in regard to it. A private company of adventurers, encouraged by Lord Canning, when he was Governor General of India, did undertake to provide irrigation works for the province. They made great progress with the works, and laid out a large amount of capital in forming dams, canals, and other engineering arrangements, with the object of providing the means of irrigating a large portion of this very province—arrangements which, if they had been completed, would have obviated this dreadful famine. There were two sets of opinions with regard to the construction of public works in India; there was one set that believed that these great undertakings should be carried on by private enterprize; and there was another, more associated with the old notions of Indian government, which imagined that the less private capital and enterprize had to do with India the better for India, and that works of this kind had better be executed by Government officers, and with public revenue. Lord Canning was in favour of private entcrprize, whilst Sir John Lawrence belonged to the school that believed that such works should be executed by Government. There was upon the table of the House a Paper presented this Session, signed by the Queen in Council, and by the Council, in which it was recommended that the Indian Government should purchase the works of this great Company at a certain stated price. That despatch was withheld by the Secretary of State for India for a considerable time from the House, and in doing no doubt what he considered his duty he committed an act not becoming the head of a great public Department. The right hon. Baronet adopted the policy recommended by the Governor General and his Council, but he kept back the despatch containing the terms which were proposed as just and fair by them, while he endeavoured to drive a hard bargain with the Company. It was not in his opinion consistent with the dignity of a great Department of the State to endeavour to make a very good bargain out of the special necessities of a private company; neither was it within the duty of the Secretary of State for India to dispute the authority of the Governor and Council in a matter which they were peculiarly fitted to determine. The right hon. Baronet having offered far less terms than Sir John Lawrence and his Council thought just, his offer was refused by the Company, and then the despatch was laid upon the table of the House, when the Company at once perceived that the Government had offered them less than the terms proposed by Sir John Lawrence. The Company, taking what appeared to him to be a reasonable step, offered the works to the Government on the terms mentioned in the despatch, but their offer was declined by the right hon. Baronet, no doubt for what he deemed very good reasons. It appeared to him essential that these great and beneficial works should be completed as early as possible, in order to prevent the recurrence of these dreadful famines, and if the right hon. Baronet refused to purchase them on the terms offered, he should lend all the assistance in his power, consistently with his public duty, to facilitate their completion, by which water, that great blessing and source of wealth in India, would be diffused throughout the province in question. This was not merely a question between a private company on the one hand and the Indian Government on the other, it was an illustration of the difficulties which beset all Indian financial questions. The Secretary of State had told them that in all matters of finance he was dependent upon his Council, who, by Act of Parliament, possessed the entire control of all matters relating to the expenditure of money in India; and that was the system which the right hon. Baronet proposed to continue. Instead of there being a Secretary of State in that House who was responsible for these matters, there was an irresponsible Council behind whom the Secretary of State could, if he were so inclined, always shelter himself. It had been his object to draw attention to that point, and having done so he begged to make the Motion of which he had gives Notice.

, in seconding the Motion, recommended that large basins or reservoirs, connected by canals, should be made in India for the purpose of storing the water and affording water communications throughout the country. Such works would be of immense importance to the development of the resources of the country, and would prevent a recurrence of that frightful calamity under which the district in question had recently suffered.

said, he had not expected that the Motion of the right hon. Gentleman, which was at the bottom of the list of Motions upon going into Committee of Supply, would have been reached at such an early hour, and therefore he had not obtained any special information upon the subject. He, however, was prepared to give a general answer to the observations of the right hon. Gentleman. In the first place, he had no objection to the production of all despatches and telegrams which had passed upon the subject. He regretted that the right hon. Gentleman should have thought it necessary to comment in the terms which he had employed on the fact that it had not been deemed right to communicate to the Directors of the Irrigation Company the despatch of the Governor General proposing certain terms for the purchase of the works of the Company. He believed the right hon. Gentleman would acknowledge that if it was the duty of the Council for India to offer less liberal terms than those mentioned in that despatch, it would certainly not have been their duty to have accompanied that proposal with a communication in which higher terms were mentioned, for the effect of such a course would simply have been to throw dirt on their own offer. The question really resolved itself into this—whether they ought to have at once acted upon the judgment of the Indian Government, or have exercised the right of judging for themselves? Now, Parliament had distinctly imposed upon the Secretary of State for India in Council the duty of superintending the expenditure of the revenue and finances of India, and as there was a difference of upwards of £100,000 in the terms mentioned in the despatch and the offer actually made, he did not think that he would have been justified in offering so large a sum above what he believed to be the real value of the works. But the Government of India not only suggested those terms as the extreme point to which the offer should be carried, but contemplated moreover their exercising their own discretion in the matter. But he must take exception to one of the statements made by the right hon. Gentleman. The right hon. Gentleman had said that an offer below the real value of the works had been made in order to gain an advantage over the Company, and to force them to enter into a bargain which would be advantageous for the Government, and that therefore the Company were purposely kept in the dark as to the recommendation which had been made by the Government of India. That was not the case. The Government of India were not at all anxious to purchase these works, but they were desirous of purchasing the Behar scheme, which the Company would scarcely at present have the means of completing with reference to the Orissa scheme, however, it was not thought advisable to deviate from the policy which had been adopted from the days of Lord Canning and even earlier—of allowing works of this nature to be undertaken by private individuals, and though the Orissa Company had for some little time been in difficulties, they could not blind their eyes to the fact that the Company had made great efforts to raise money, and had actually succeeded in raising something like £800,000, which had been expended in carrying on the work in a very creditable manner. In case the offer made should not prove acceptable, the Government further offered to assist the Company with a loan on terms which, they thought, were fair, and on the condition that the Company would hand over the Behar scheme to the Government, but that offer was also rejected by the Company. The view of the Council for India—a view in which he entirely concurred—was this They did not think it right to give anything in the nature of a guarantee for the capital required to carry on these works, or that the Government of India should in any way identify themselves with the scheme as shareholders. They were prepared to abide by the offer they had made, or to aid the Company by a loan on the security of the works. Upon the latter point there had been a difference of opinion between the Directors and the Government. The Directors stated that they were willing to accept the loan on the security of the works on this understanding, that when the Government had entered upon the works, in case of failure of payments, they should only retain possession until the advance with reasonable interest had been repaid. But to this plan—a plan which would give rise to vast and endless complications, and would be attended by very great inconvenience—the Government did not think that they could consent. As far as he was personally concerned, he had no ill-will towards the Company. He believed that they had done good service to the public, and he trusted that their labours would ultimately prove remunerative. He believed, however, that it would be for the advantage of the Company themselves as well as for that of the public that they should give up the Behar scheme. The Government had no arrière pensèe in this matter, and had not the slightest desire to get possession of these works by a side-wind. All they wished was to have a good security for their money. He was perfectly prepared to produce the documents for which the right hon. Gentleman asked, and would lay them upon the Table of the House.

took the opportunity of expressing his great regret that he was compelled to appear in the place of the First Lord of the Admiralty (Mr. Corry), who was laid up by a serious indisposition, which rendered it quite impossible for him to be in his place and to go on with the Estimates. It was thought better that the House should go into Supply, and that the Navy Estimates should be intrusted to him, and he should desire to give the same information to the Committee which his right hon. Friend would have done had he been present.

asked a question respecting the appointment of the Director General of the Ordnance, and also wished for information as to the enormous increase of the expenditure, especially in the Accountant General's Department? He trusted that the First Lord would endeavour to find situations at the Admiralty as messengers and porters for seamen who were discharged from the service with good characters. Some of the petty officers would be found quite fit for the smaller clerkships. The Secretary of State for War stated the other night that the experiment of employing non-commissioned officers and men whose terms of service had expired had succeeded very well in the army, and he believed it might be tried in a still greater degree for the navy.

said, the expenses of the Admiralty Office had gone on increasing ever since the year 1858, when they stood at £149,000. They had now reached the sum of £182,364, the net increase for the present year being £6,346. He objected to the large number of persons employed in the Admiralty Office, not to the amount of pay of each. Surely it was quite unnecessary that 489 persons should be employed in this Office. The noble Lord had stated that we should now require fewer ships, and consequently 2,500 fewer men. If they were decreasing their ships and men, how could they need a greater number of clerks? The Press, the public, and the House agreed in declaring that the navy cost too much for the results; and he did not see why the expenses of the Admiralty Office should go on increasing to this extent. If the naval expenditure became more and more in this way the burden would soon become intolerable. He moved that the Vote be reduced by the sum of £6,300.

said, he regretted to be obliged to oppose the reduction of the Vote, which had certainly increased during the last few years, nor could he see that that increase was likely to come to a close. The clerical labour connected with rendering the accounts of the Admiralty had more than quadrupled of late years. The staff at Somerset House was quite inadequate to meet the requirements of the service, and it was constantly necessary to employ the clerks for many extra hours in order to prevent the accounts from falling greatly into arrear. The correspondence connected with the Admiralty had also vastly increased. The proposed reduction of the Vote would therefore tend to diminish the clerical efficiency of the Department, and he trusted that it would not be pressed. The hon. Gentleman had done good service by calling attention to the progressive increase of the Vote, and it was to be hoped the clerks would be induced to write faster, so as to enable them to do with less staff. But the Amendment, if carried, would be most detrimental to the public service.

, in answer to the Question of the hon. and gallant Member for Montgomeryshire (Mr. Hanbury-Tracy) respecting the appointment of the Director General of Naval Ordnance, said, that in consequence of the great change that was taking place in our naval ordnance, the labours of the Director of Stores were so great that it was impossible for him to perform the duties of Director General of Naval Ordnance in addition to his own duties, and therefore it was found necessary to appoint Admiral Cooper Key to that Department. It was found necessary to continue the services of the gallant officer for another year; but it was hoped the day would come when our ordnance would all be of one pattern, and our ships have uniform armaments. He confessed he was afraid that day was distant, and in the meantime this additional labour must be discharged by some efficient officer.

explained, that an enormous increase had arisen in the work thrown on the Accountant General's Department by the Greenwich Hospital Act and by various other causes, and that it had been found necessary to divide that Department into two branches, with a deputy Accountant General to each.

commented on the increased charge for temporary clerks and writers this year as compared with previous years.

hoped the hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. Alderman Lusk) would not press his Motion to a division. The whole subject of the Admiralty ac- counts had been under the consideration of a Select Committee, presided over by the hon. Member for Lincoln (Mr. Seely), and it would be certain that their labours would result in changes which would improve the efficiency and at the same time reduce the expenditure of the central administration. This would be the last year of the present system, and it would, therefore, be inexpedient to incommode the Admiralty unnecessarily by cutting down the Vote in the manner now proposed. Nobody could believe that the existing division of business at the Admiralty could stand on its present basis; and with respect to the lower class of clerks and copyists he thought it would be possible to effect by degrees a great saving to the public in the number and character of the staff employed by substituting, in the performance of work of a merely mechanical description, persons of the class of writers for persons in the class of clerks. A change of that kind had been adopted in the Revenue Departments with satisfactory results.

said, that as several of the small dockyards must be reduced in a few years it must lead to a corresponding reduction of work at head-quarters. He had given notice of a Motion that would raise the question.

said, he should be prepared at the proper time to defend the continuance of some of these dockyards, and especially Sheerness.

said, a saving had already been effected in substituting writers for paymasters at one-fifth less the usual cost. The appointment of messengers was in the patronage of the First Lord of the Admiralty, and he would convey the hon. and gallant Member's (Mr. Hnnbury-Tracy's) wishes to him. Every precaution was taken that proper persons were appointed, for they had to undergo a Civil Service examination of so strict a character as officers in the army some years ago would have been hardly able to meet.

said, he considered that the examination referred to by the noble Lord, which the messengers had to undergo, went far beyond what such an examination should be. There was a tendency to increase the severity of the examinations beyond the position of those who had to undergo them.

said, what he meant to say was that the requirements of the present day would have puzzled gentle- men who entered the army before the days when Civil Service examinations were instituted. The examinations were of a character to ensure the efficiency of the persons who were appointed messengers to the Admiralty.

took exception to the word "patronage," as used by the noble Lord the Secretary to the Admiralty. It was an odious word, and there should be no such thing. He also complained that the Civil Lord was the only official of his grade who was not provided with a house.

said, that if the hon. and learned Gentleman would move an increase in the Vote for the purpose, the Civil Lord would support him.

said, he understood that it was not competent for any Member to increase a Vote.

said, the expenses went on from year to year increasing, and he did not understand why it should be so, considering the small number of ships which were in commission. He would not press his Motion.

said, that the sum for the Naval Reserve was in excess of what was required, and the Vote was going on gradually increasing. In this year there was an increase of £2,958 over the Vote of last year for nominally the same number of men. He observed that more deputy registrars and clerks were employed than during the previous year at a cost of £2,000, and the result was that only thirteen additional men were obtained. During the last three years £80,000 had been expended in matters analogous to this Vote which the House has not assented to. The Vote was not for the Naval Reserve at all. It was a kind of sponge, from which to squeeze money for purposes of which no one knew anything. He moved that the Vote be reduced by £20,000

said, he thought it right to explain that the excess referred to by the hon. and gallant Member had arisen in consequence of the system adopted ever since the institution of the Royal Naval Reserve. At first it was considered that the number of 16,000 men might reasonably be anticipated from the Mercantile Marine to form the Royal Naval Reserve; and the Estimate was always framed on the assumption that that number would be completed. At present the number was 15,156. The number enrolled had been 24,704; but 9,548 had to be deducted for discharges and failures to re-enlist. The official Return on the 30th June was, as he had stated, 15,156 men available for the public service, if at any moment hostilities should break out. There was a sudden reduction in the number in 1866, 3,000 men being found not fit for re-enlistment; but since then, by very great care in enlistment and judicious selection, the force had again been increased to 15,156. As he had stated, an excess of £20.000 had been taken on the assumption that the number of 16,000 men would be enlisted and drilled; but that number had not risen to that amount, and he was free to confess there had always been a considerable balance on the Vote. This arose from the great desire not to check enlistment or drill. But if the House thought it undesirable that the extra £20,000 should be voted, the Government would have no objection to the reduction proposed. Of course, it would still be their duty not to check enlistment or drill, and he felt assured if the Vote were exceeded, the House would make it good. He was glad to assure the House that in the Royal Naval Reserve the country had a most admirable force, which might be entirely relied on in case their services were required—a most valuable class of men, who had shown their readiness to serve, as well as their zeal and energy, on the occasion of the Trent affair.

said, he was glad the hon. and gallant Member had expressed his readiness to accept the reduction. This was a simple matter of account, and he be- lieved, after looking into the figures at the Public Accounts Committee, there would be a surplus of £10,000 after the reduction.

said, he believed the reduction would not interfere with the efficiency of the force. The commanders of the various drill ships bore the highest testimony to the intelligence and efficiency of the Reserve. They were considered the superiors of the same class of men in the navy. They had broken down the prejudice that formerly existed, and now formed a connecting link between the navy and the Mercantile Marine. If they had done nothing more than this they must be considered to have rendered valuable service to the country. The Reserve had been taken as the cream of the Mercantile Marine, and were highly-skilled men. He thought from ordinary seamen and those under the age and standard of efficiency, especially from the deep-sea fishery men, a second-class Reserve might be formed. The latter consisted of the finest class of men around our coasts, who would be ready to join the Reserve at perhaps £1 a head per annum, and he strongly advised that both of these classes should be utilized. After the Trent affair the seamen of the North volunteered into the service, without waiting for the Royal Proclamation inviting them to do so. These were facts which tended to show that the force, as a rule, could be relied upon in the event of emergencies arising. It must not be supposed that the force was inefficient because it did not fill up the Navy, the force was instituted for a totally different object—namely, to man our ships in cases of emergency—the very constitution of the force was in itself a sufficient guarantee that it should not interfere with the manning of the Mercantile Marine unless in cases of absolute necessity.

said, he was glad that the efficiency of the force had not been impugned. The question before the House was one merely of account, and the Government had assented to the reduction asked for. Owing to the judicious course which successive Governments had adopted, the feeling of distrust that formerly existed between the men in the Mercantile Marine had given place to one of cordiality. It was no small advantage to have a body of 15,000 or 16,000 men ready to turn out in defence of the country. The Act had passed only in 1859. At the time of the affair of the Trent the men enrolled in the Royal Naval Reserve, which at that time was scarcely formed, so far from standing on their strict rights, and refusing to serve except for the immediate defence of the coast, came forward and said that, knowing they were not bound to serve, they earnestly intreated that, nevertheless, they might be permitted to volunteer. So far they had provided for the defence of the country by sea, but the time was not distant when they would have to provide for its defence by land, and he hoped to-see men enlisted who, following other trades, were neither exclusively soldiers nor sailors, but who might yet be made available for the defence of the country. He should have been sorry if anything had been said to discourage the disposition of men to join this force. The hon. Member for Liverpool (Mr. Graves) had truly stated that the force as it was at present constituted was imperfect, because the plan of the Committee upon which it was based recommended that there should be two classes of Reserve, one receiving higher pay than the other, and that, out of the saving to be effected in the Navy Estimates, training ships should be established for the purpose of training boys from the beginning for the Navy and the merchant service. He trusted that the present or some succeeding Government would be enabled to effect such a saving upon these Estimates as would permit of funds being provided for this most useful purpose. The time was approaching when it would be necessary that a large proportion of the men, not only in the Navy, but also in the Army, should earn their own livelihood, and, nevertheless, be trained so as to be available when emergencies arose.

inquired whether the Admiralty had determined upon the amount of remuneration which the shipping masters were to receive for enrolling and watching the movements of the men of this force, seeing that upon their assistance the efficiency of the body greatly depended?

said, he objected to the time of the House being wasted and hon. Members being kept out of their beds in consequence of certain hon. Gentlemen persisting in delivering lectures to the House on this question after the Government had intimated their willingness to assent to the proposed reduction in the Vote.

asked whether any means existed for identifying the men enrolled in the force?

said, he was desirous that the Estimates should be prepared in greater detail.

held it to be highly unconstitutional to vote more than is superficially wanted.

said, he had to inform the hon. Member for Northumberland (Mr. Liddell) that there was one item of £2,000 for the purpose of remunerating the gentlemen to whom he had referred. The distribution of it was in the hands of the Board of Trade, and he had no doubt it would be distributed with justice. The officers selected for the coast batteries were supposed to thoroughly understand their duties, and the drilling of the men had been reported as very satisfactory. The men were most anxious to make themselves efficient, and as they were, doubtless, well known at their place of joining, it was not, he thought, at all necessary to watch them with policeman like vigilance, because he believed that their patriotism might safely be relied upon when their services were required by the State.

, in reference to the question of the hon. Member for Northumberland (Mr. Liddell) said, that the payment by the Board of Trade was made according to the work done. This was, as he had explained the year before, represented by marks bearing a money value. At the end of the year a Return was made by each registrar—the number of marks was then calculated, and payment made accordingly. If there was any surplus, it was distributed as an extra gratuity among those registrars who had shown most zeal in the service.

complained that the answers which had been given were based upon Returns which appeared to be fallacious, and which, he thought, betrayed great irregularities on the part of the public Departments with regard to the arrangement of the accounts.

said, that before asking the Committee to agree to this Vote, he thought it would be desirable for him to state the changes which had been made, and they were very few, since the introduction of the Estimates a few weeks since. At that time it had been pointed out that the programme anticipated last year had very nearly been carried out. The Estimate for iron-clad shipbuilding was 6,845 tons, the number of tons actually built were 6,829, and for unarmoured shipbuilding 16,699 tons, as against 16,427. During the Recess, the Government had come to the determination to reduce the amount for wages in the dockyards, and it appeared that there had been a reduction of £157,775 in wages, and 3,049 in the number of men. The Government were justified in making that reduction; but they had learned with regret that a great amount of distress existed in the dock-yards in consequence of the reduction. By the regulations made at the Treasury under which the hired men were employed, those who had served for twenty years were entitled to a gratuity on their discharge; but many of those thrown out of employment in consequence of the reduction had not served the prescribed time, and thus while oftentimes unable to obtain other employment, they also received nothing in the shape of a gratuity from the Government. He felt bound to state this circumstance, inasmuch as the Admiralty had received numerous applications on the subject. The Admiralty had reduced this item in consequence of the large amount of unarmoured ships which were not intended to be laid down this year. When the First Lord of the Admiralty moved the Estimates he stated that there would be built at Chatham two iron-clads—one of the Invincible class, and another of the Hercules class; and two other ships—one of the Monitor class, and another of the ram class, which were to be built by contract. The Government had so far uttered their programme on the suggestion of the hon. Member (Mr. Childers) as to build the Monitor ship in the Government dockyard, and the ship of the Invincible class by contract. The Osborne, that had been doing good service for twenty-six years, came to a sudden breakdown on her return from conveying the Prince and Princess of Wales to Germany. It was hoped that she might be patched up; but she had been found to be entirely rotten, and was obliged to be broken up. The vessel that would take the place of the Osborn would be ready in two years, by which time the Black Eagle would be worn out. It was not intended to re-place her, and there would thus be a saving of one ship in commission. When the Estimates were moved, his right hon. Friend stated that the present as well as the late Government had the matter of river dockyards under their consideration. When a sloop, which was now in course of construction, and which would be launched within the year, was finished, it was decided that Deptford as a building yard, should be closed. A Committee had been appointed on his Motion to consider the subject of reducing the dockyard craft. The Chairman, Sir Thomas Symonds, had consented to place himself in communication with the officers at Devonport, and he and the Admiralty Superintendent had come to an agreement by which all the recommendations of the Committee would be carried into effect. The remaining yards would be visited in turn, and he trusted that the valuable suggestions of the Committee would be carried out with an important saving of expense. When the Navy Estimates were moved, many criticisms were expended on the Constructive Department of the Admiralty, and the iron-clad ships designed by that Department, and the Notice Paper of to-night promised other hostile criticisms on the same subject. These Notices, however, referred to ships now afloat, and of which a trial had taken place. These criticisms had, he thought, taken the shape of an attack upon the Department rather than a criticism of the designs that had issued from it. His hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Eye (Captain Mackinnon) had been profuse in such criticism; but it should be remembered that we were in a transition state as regarded shipbuilding, and that every new ship built must be more or less the result of a series of compromises. Usually they heard nothing of the good points that had been gained; but of all the daring pieces of criticism he had ever heard that of the hon. and gallant Gentleman was the most daring. He had instituted a comparison between the Bellerophon and the Achilles, and stated that as an engine of war the latter was superior. The hon. and gallant Member said that while the Bellerophon required more power, the engines of the Achilles cost £69,117, and those of the Bellerophon, which he said was the smaller vessel, £88,612, being an excess of £19,000 in the cost of the engines of the smaller ship. But his hon. and gallant Friend forgot that while the hull of the Bellerophon cost £256,114, the hull of the Achilles cost £375,473, being a difference of £119,359. On the whole there was a balance of cheapness of cost of £100,000 in favour of the Bellerophon. The late Board of Admiralty charged the Chief Constructor of the Navy to solve the problem whether they could build a smaller and less costly ship, that should be more handy, and should carry armour-plates of greater thickness and an armament of greater power. The Chief Constructor obeyed those instructions, and the Bellerophon was the result. The armour of the Bellerophon was 6 inches thick, while the armour spread over the long lines of the Achilles was only 4½ inches. But his hon. and gallant Friend said, "Oh, but the Bellerophon is not a fast sailer." Now, the result of recent cruizes proved that she had always held a good position in the squadron in that respect. His hon. and gallant Friend said, "True, she went 14 knots, but that was all done with a favourable tide." There again he was obliged to contradict his hon. and gallant Friend. The Bellerophon kept up her speed at the second trial at the measured mile, and during six hours in the open sea she kept up that very high rate of speed. Again, he could refer his hon. and gallant Friend to the opinion of distinguished officers as to whether the Bellerophon was or was not likely to turn out a dangerous customer, even in comparison with the Achilles. The officers of the Construction Department were subjected to such constant criticism, and, from the very nature of their position, were denied the opportunity of explaining matters, that it was only an act of justice to them that he should state the case fairly before the Committee. Another of the complaints made against the Bellerophon certainly much astonished him. The Committee was aware that the balanced rudder, as fitted in the Bellerophon, was one of the novel inventions of science, and his hon. and gallant Friend made it a reproach to the Chief Constructor of the Navy that the reason why she turned so much quicker and handier than the Achilles was because these latest inventions were introduced in building her. Let him mention what occurred in the Channel squadron last year. The Minotaur and the Lord Warden, the first of which was 400 feet long and the second 280, had rudders alike; and yet at 10 knots the full circle was turned by the shorter ship in three minutes and forty-nine seconds, while the Minotaur required seven minutes and forty-five seconds to make a similar circle. That occurred during the cruize of the experimental squadron last year. The very name of the Constructor's Department seemed to act on his hon. and gallant Friend's nervous system as a sort of blister; and, not content with all those charges against the Bellerophon, he wound up with one which at first sight looked very formidable. His hon. and gallant Friend said she was deficient in coal supply. Now, the Minotaur carried 650 tons of coal, the Achilles 620, the Hercules 600, and the Bellerophon 520; but it should be remembered that the Hercules' engines, with super-heaters and surface condensers for economizing fuel, weighed nearly 300 tons more than ordinary engines of like nominal power; and the Bellerophon's nearly 200 tons more; so that their coal should really enable them to steam much further than either the Minotaur or the Achilles. There had therefore been an increase, not a decrease, of steaming power in the Bellerophon and the Hercules. Before passing from that subject he might mention, in reference to the opinions of certain critics of Admiralty ships, that when the same hand designed iron-clad ships for other Powers it was astonishing what a chorus of approbation rewarded the efforts of the Chief Constructor in that very same organ of public opinion which, perhaps, a very few days before had strongly decried him. The great leviathan of the Press hardly allowed a week to pass without giving the Admiralty a dressing. Now, it so happened that a very fine broadside ship was designed by the Chief Constructor of the British Navy, which was at first intended for the Government of Turkey; but she afterwards changed hands and became the property of the King of Prussia and was launched in the Thames. Her name was the König Wilhelm. That ship, being the design and handiwork of Mr. Reed, was thus spoken of on the 27th of April last—

"And when she rode securely on the Thames with her vast hull and beautiful lines, dwarfing to more pigmies the vessels around, there was none who saw her, except the Prussian visitors themselves, who did not regret that the Admiralty had allowed such a vessel to pass into the hands of any foreign Power."

He was commissioned by two of his gallant Colleagues, one of whom had the command of the Channel squadron in 1865, when he had two iron-clads under his control, to state that in their opinion iron-clads were excellent ships, and that the Bellerophon was one of the most powerful and useful sea-going ships of war that any country ever possessed. But, further, Admiral Yelverton, when Admiral of the Channel cruize, thus spoke of those two ships, a comparison between which had been made by his hon. and gallant Friend, and much to the detriment of the Bellerophon. Referring to the Achilles, Admiral Yelverton said—

"We must not lose sight of the fact that from the great length of the Achilles, with all her good qualities, she is most difficult to handle, and in action this defect might prove her ruin. I feel certain this ship might, and probably would, have to go out of action to turn round, thus exposing herself in almost a defenceless position to the fire of more than one of the enemy's ships."

Next, with regard to the Bellerophon, Admiral Yelverton said—

"I consider this ship to be a very successful specimen of our new ships."

And, comparing her with the Achilles, he added—

"I feel bound to award the first place to the Achilles. I am, however, of opinion that her great length is an insurmountable objection, and I have no hesitation in saying that ships of the Bellerophon class, from their size and general handiness particularly under steam, will prove more efficient and serviceable for war purposes."

What was the testimony of Captain Macdonald? Writing to his right hon. Friend (Mr. Corry) from on board the Bellerophon, in the Sound, on February 21, 1868, Captain Macdonald said—

"I hear various reports that this ship is a bad roller in a sea way; this I can with the greatest confidence contradict. I consider her a remarkably steady ship—so much so, indeed, as quite to surprise me after the Arethusa and other vessels I have served in. When she docs roll, which in an Atlantic swell must be the case, she goes so easy as rarely to upset furniture, &c., or to render it necessary to secure such. Coming home from Lisbon in December, with a heavy westerly swell, we undoubtedly rolled heavily—heavier than I ever saw her; but we were quite light, out of coals, provisions, and water. The Achilles is certainly steadier; but the difference between us and the Warrior, Lord Clyde, and Lord Warden is remarkable. I mentioned this to Mr. Reed the other day, and he thought you might like to have my opinion direct on the subject."

The next evidence which he would lay before the Committee was somewhat remarkable, because it was that of the cap- tain of the Achilles himself, Captain Vansittart, who said—

"The Bellerophon joined yesterday, as ever, the most sightly among us, and of a right powerful battery, too. If she keeps up 14 (or 14½?) knots, the Achilles' wings will be clipped; but even at 12 or 13 knots she will always prove a precious awkward customer."

In about a month or six weeks the Channel squadron left their quarters, and the Report of the gallant Admiral who was second in command was, to his mind, quite conclusive as to the excellence of the design of the Bellerophon. Admiral Ryder said—

"I was most agreeably surprised, therefore, to find that she had not only made good a speed of 13·8 knots on her late six hours' trial, but is a remarkably steady ship, as the recorded angles of the squadron will show. She is also a very handy ship under steam alone, and for her small sail power a very handy ship under sail alone. This comparative handiness when she is compared with long ships—Minotaur, 400 feet; Achilles, 380 feet; Bellerophon being only 300 feet—is no doubt due partly to her comparative shortness, and partly to her balanced rudder with its large surface, The Bellerophon's magnificent battery of ten 12-ton guns, protected, as is also the case with three-fourths of the water-line, by 6 inches—only a quarter of the belt being tapered to a loss thickness—makes her, in my opinion, as far as I can judge at present, the most successful plated seagoing cruizing line-of-battle ship that I have visited; and, as far as I know, 6he possesses, taking all difficulties and clashing qualifications into consideration, in a larger degree than any such ship that has yet been on active service, the greatest possible development of the greatest number of the numerous qualities required to make an efficient man-of-war, with one exception—namely, the quantity of coals she can carry in her bunkers—000 tons, but restricted at present by the Admiralty Orders to 500 tons. I should here observe that this limited quantity is made the most of by the use of surface-condensers and superheating apparatus, which now works satisfactorily, and in the opinion of the chief engineer effects a saving of 8 per cent, making 600 tons equal to about 650. After giving this question the closest consideration, I am driven irresistibly to the conclusion that the Bellerophon is of all the ships here present the only type to be followed; and in saying this I purposely throw aside all consideration of her comparative economy in first cost. The Bellerophon's handiness under steam, arising from the combined effects of comparative shortness and the large-surfaced balanced rudder, is so invaluable a quality that I have not recommended any material increase in her length although the great importance of the 700 tons of coal weighs much with me."

The next point to which he wished to draw the attention of the Committee was the very graphic language which had on a former occasion been urged by his hon. and gallant Friend, who said he thanked his stars that broadsides had come to an end. That was language which he was sure the hon. and gallant Gentleman would be disposed to recall when he informed him that the voyage of the Ocean was made from the Mediterranean to Batavia, touching at Rio, and thence shaping the course for Tristan d'Acunha. When within 150 miles of the latter place the ship was turned southward for some time, in consequence of the wind having shifted to the eastward. In a letter which was written on the 9th of October last one of the officers on the Ocean, wrote of her as follows:—

"I am sure, when we left the Mediterranean and it was known that our route was to be down to the southward of the Cape, among all the strong westerly gales that prevail there, that there were few on that fine-weather station who would have cared to belong to her, and perhaps not a few who thought we should not get there without going through loss of spars, accidents, and battening down of every sort; in fact, everyone seemed to think that every sea must wash clean over her—that she could never rise to them. Experience, however, has taught us that in both theories we are wrong, and from my own experience I can safely say, and so can 'all of us,' that if all iron-clads are like the Ocean there never could be better sea boats in heavy weather than they are… We have gone under sail alone 12 knots… We have been in three gales, the last one being a cyclone or circular storm of most terrific force, which we were obliged to run before under close-reefed fore and main topsails, and steaming, to make her steer easily. The other two gales, fortunately, both sprung up dead aft, so we were enabled to keep our course, merely steering to keep the sea from dead aft… It has always been our admiration in bad weather to see her so very buoyant and raising her stern so easily out of the water… Almost directly afterwards the wind sprung up foul from the eastward, so we made sail, standing to the southward, barometer falling rapidly, and every appearance of bad weather. Reef after reef followed in the night watches (I had all night in and the forenoon and first the next day), and at six the hands were turned up to reef, close reef topsails, and reef courses, at the same time steam being got up to make her steer easily."

Again—

"The sea, of course, was very heavy, and stove every boat we had at the davits; but, on the whole, I think we may congratulate ourselves that we made such excessively good weather as we did. No wooden ship could have gone through it better, and a good many worse."

His hon. and gallant Friend went on to condemn the new class of sloops as utterly unseaworthy. That statement could, however, hardly be reconciled with the facts of the case, for the trials of the new sloops, such as the Danaë and the Blanche, which had left, or were about to leave for foreign climes, had fulfilled, he believed, to the full the expectations of the Board of Admiralty. He was well aware that in that House whatever fell from the responsible Chief of a Department carried with it far greater weight than could attach to the words of one holding a subordinate position like himself; but his right hon. Friend at the head of the Admiralty was very anxious that it should be stated on behalf of his Department that, in their opinion, the Bellerophon fully carried out the requirements which had been laid down. The Admiralty, in short, were anxious to endorse the Minute which was made by the late First Lord before he retired from Office, which, he thought, bore the best testimony to the skill displayed in the Constructive Department. In that Minute the Admiralty expressed their high approval of the ability which Mr. Reed had displayed in the construction of the Bellerophon. On the same occasion to which he had just been referring another hon. Gentleman, the hon. Member for Tavistock (Mr. Samuda), made one or two remarks to which he wished briefly to advert. He stated that the Indian troop-ships had been a failure; but upon the part of the Admiralty and the India Office he must answer that statement by expressing it to be their opinion that they had been a great success. He was sure that the Committee would feel quite as much as the Admiralty for the misery which had fallen on many persons by the large reductions in the dockyards; but having determined to lay down no wooden ships this year, the Admiralty were bound to discharge those men, and to devote whatever money might be at their disposal in building iron-clads by contract.

wished to ask whether it was the intention of the Admiralty to continue the system of selling the old and useless ships by private tender with their rigging and stores complete, instead of having them broken up in the Dockyard at Sheerness? The loss upon these sales by private tender is very great. By a Return which had recently been printed, it appeared that thirteen ships were sold in the lump, and their estimated value to be broken up was £144,000. They were, in point of fact, sold by private tender for £87,000, and in re-purchasing stores out of these ships the Government paid £38,000; so that all they received for the ships was £49,000, making a loss of £94,000 on the estimated value of the ships. The same Return showed that no less than twenty ships had been re-sold by the Government, and afterwards the purchasers re-sold the stores to the Government at a loss that appeared perfectly astounding. The Raven was a ship of 180 tons, and the gross amount paid for her was £160; whilst the amount paid to the purchaser who resold stores to the Government was £214, so that the loss to the country was £54. The next ship was the Arrow, on which the loss by the same calculation was £75. He thought that it was very desirable that this mode of disposing of ships should be altered, and that the dockyards should be put to the use of breaking up these ships. He was informed that the cost of breaking up ships was about 6s. 6d. a ton, and therefore the cost of breaking up the Raven would have been about £35, and deducting this sum from the £214 there would have been a balance of £179 in favour of the Government, if they had broken her up, instead of a loss of £54. With regard to the Arrow also, there would, upon the same calculation, have been a gain to the Government, instead of a loss of £70. It is desirable that the men still engaged at the dockyards should be employed in this work, which would be a great saving to the country.

said, that he very much agreed with the observations just made by his hon. and learned Friend. As he understood the complaint made, it was not that the ships referred to were sold for "breaking up" with rigging and stores complete, but that they were sold for other service, and sold for considerably less than might be realized by breaking them up in our own dockyards. He would not occupy the time of the Committee by quoting instances in which these disadvantageous sales have been effected; but, if his information was correct, the sale of the timber alone would pay for the cost of breaking up these ships in the dockyards, and the engines would still be available for the purposes of the Government. He might add that at the dockyard into which he had specially enquired (Sheerness), there were ample means for disposing both of timber and metal, and if ships were there broken up, under the eye of responsible officers, much of the old material might be found available for re-use. He would also say, though he could not pretend to speak with authority upon the subject, that it would be a popular, as well as a wise movement, if the Admiralty would contract with the dockyard workmen for some of this work, whereby the men would be able to earn more, and the dockyard would be placed on a better footing in competing with private yards. The speech of his noble Friend (Lord Henry Lennox) had opened up a wider question, and there were two points to which he would allude—the reduction of the number of hired men, and the question of closing the smaller dockyards. He knew that there were some gentlemen, both in and out of that House, who looked with no favourable eye upon the Royal Establishments. He (Mr. Knatchbull-Hugessen) could not concur in such a view—although it is quite possible that there might be room for improvement in the internal arrangements of some of these dockyards, he confessed that it appeared to him that if the time should ever come when the Navy of England was entirely or mainly dependent upon private yards, great mischief would follow; these Royal Establishments, affording constant employment and the advantage of superannuation, must be able to command a certain regular supply of labour, not exposed to those different agencies—strikes, trades' unions, &c, &c.—which from time to time affected the operations of private yards, and it was most essential that the country should not be without that supply. But his immediate object was to elicit from Government an opinion favourable to the dockyard at Sheerness. He did so especially because there appeared to be some discrepancy between the words and the acts of Government, and, indeed, between their words at one time. and at another. A short time ago, when the hon. Member for Liverpool (Mr. Graves) attacked the smaller dockyards, he spoke out with characteristic boldness, and said that, in in his opinion, "Sheerness, from its proximity to Chatham, was almost useless." The First Lord of the Admiralty, at that time, could say no more than this—that—

"The proposal to abandon Sheerness was rather premature;" that "at present he thought it would be unwise, but that they would be able to form a sound opinion when the Chatham extension was completed."

But very shortly after this debate came the East Kent Election. Certain words of his hon. Friend the Member for Pontefract were made a great deal of, and the partisans of the hon. and learned Member (Mr. Pemberton) declared that the Liberals were agreed to abolish, and the present Government to preserve the smaller dockyards. Anxious to serve his Friends, the First Lord of the Admiralty thought it consistent with his high position to write a letter to the hon. and learned Gentleman (Mr. Pemberton) during that contest, which he might read to a public meeting at Sheerness. On that occasion the candidate said, speaking evidently with authority—

"He could only tell them that there was no intention on the part of the present Government of giving up or abandoning Sheerness Dockyard."

He then read an extract from a letter written to him by the present First Lord of the Admiralty, in which he said that—

"He had expressed it as his opinion in the House of Commons, that Sheerness Dockyard ought not to be given up, and that it would be very advantageous to the country in case of war."

He (Mr. Knatchbull-Hugessen) thought that the House would at once see the discrepancy between these two statements. The First Lord of the Admiralty had said that Sheerness would be very advantageous to the country in case of war. He (Mr. Knatchbull-Hugessen) had thought that the only argument against Sheerness was its exposed situation in case of war. But for that, without wishing to disparage Chatham, he believed that the vast expenditure there would never have been incurred whilst we had Sheerness eleven miles nearer the sea, with much greater depth of water, and in every way more convenient for dockyard purposes. But it was always said that if an enemy had command of the Channel, all your works at Sheerness would be destroyed with the greatest facility. He did not speak without knowing that he was supported by authority when he answered that if an enemy once had command of the mouth of the Thames and Medway, other things besides Sheerness would be destroyed with the greatest facility. Chatham would stand a bad chance, and the mischief would not stop there. The true policy of England was to make the Channel her main line of defence, and never allow an enemy to obtain such a position. He, (Mr. Knatchbull-Hugessen) was not urging the claims of Sheerness as against Chatham. The expenditure at Chatham had been commenced and must continue; but he argued that if Chatham was to be our great building yard, there was all the more reason why Sheer- ness should be maintained in full efficiency—and extended—as a fitting and repairing yard. If everything was done in one yard the mischief that might be caused by fire or other accident was incalculable, and the position of Sheerness pointed it out for every reason as the proper place for a large fitting and repairing yard in connection with Chatham. He (Mr. Knatchbull Hugessen) hoped that he should elicit from the Government an authoritative statement that they shared that opinion, that they had no intention of abandoning the dockyard; but that by maintaining and extending it, and further developing the advantages of the locality, they would be taking that course which would best add to the efficiency of the navy, and would be most conducive to the public interest.

said, the hon. Gentleman (Mr. Knatchbull-Hugessen) had committed two errors. No letter had been addressed by him to the First Lord of the Admiralty with reference to the dockyard at Sheerness, nor did the First Lord of the Admiralty make any communication whatever to him on the subject. But during the course of the election various statements were made as to the intentions of different Governments, and some gentleman, whose name he did not recollect, wrote to the First Lord, asking what the intention was. His recollection of that letter was simply this—it repeated what the First Lord had stated in the House, and that he thought it would be a very-great advantage to have a dockyard in the neighbourhood of the town for the re-fitting of ships. The gentleman to whom the letter was addressed was told that he was at liberty to make what use of it he pleased, and it had been placed in his hands. He had accordingly stated that he believed there was no intention of abandoning the dockyard of Sheerness. If the hon. Member had given him any intimation of his intention to refer to this matter, he would have endeavoured to obtain a copy of the letter; but he very much feared it was not now in existence. The other error which the hon. Member had committed was as to the question which most agitated the minds of electors at the last election; it was no doubt a question of disestablishment, but it was the disestablishment of the Irish Church, not of the dockyard.

explained that he had quoted from a local newspaper, which stated that the letter of the First Lord of the Admiralty had been addressed to his hon. and learned Friend; of course, after the statement of his hon. and learned Friend, he had no difficulty in admitting that it was not so.

said, the noble Lord (Lord Henry Lennox) had stated that there was a reduction on this Vote of £157,000 this year upon the corresponding Vote of last year. If this had been an absolute saving, no one would have rejoiced at the announcement more than he should have done; but, unfortunately, what was saved on one Vote was more than balanced by the increase of expenditure on other Votes. For instance, Vote 10 showed an increase of £250,000 over the corresponding Vote of last year, and thus upon shipbuilding and repairing there was a total increase of £100,000 over the expenditure of last year. The truth was, that the work, instead of being performed in the dockyards, was transferred to the yards of private contractors on the Tyne or at Liverpool. There was great hardship experienced in consequence of the reduction of the number of men usually employed in Portsmouth, because it was by no means easy for the men thus thrown out of employment to transfer themselves and their families to another part of the country. The Government had now adopted the policy urged upon them last year by the Opposition. The Government commenced last year to build fifty cut-and-run vessels, at a cost of about £1,000,000; they were to be used in cruizing, and not for the purposes of war. Of that number, thirty-seven were to be built in the dockyards, and thirteen by contract. He regretted the work was decided to be done in one year instead of two, because, instead of rendering the cession of these men's labour less sudden, the sudden change had fallen upon them with considerable hardship. At Portsmouth the number of shipwrights was 1,575 in March last, having been considerably increased during the winter, and it had since been gradually reduced, the contemplated number being only 938. A change of policy such as that which had been adopted in having vessels built in private yards ought to have been carried out gradually and with some consideration to the men employed in the dockyards. He thought also that so considerable a reduction having been made in the wages of artificers, the expenses of management and establishment charges should have been likewise reduced, but these had undergone little or no alteration. In 1858 artificers' wages in the dockyards amounted to £986,000, and this year they were £918,000, while the management charges were in 1858 £150,000, and were this year £209,000, so that they now bore a much greater proportion to wages. He could not but think that the Vote had been most carelessly prepared, and that it had been carried out without a due regard to the interests of the men or to the real economy of the dockyards.

said, the amount of work to be performed in the dockyards this year appeared to be very considerably less than it was last year. Instead of 23,500 tons of shipping to be built, there were only 14,400, being 9,000 tons less than last year. From the declarations of the First Lord of the Admiralty, it appeared that the Government were building two vessels of the Monitor class, of 500 and 600-horse-power respectively, from which they proposed to obtain 9 and 12 knots speed. There was a great similarity between the two vessels, and the difference in the horse power, one being 500 and the other 600-horse power, would only represent about half a knot. If the Admiralty could give a speed of 12 knots to one vessel, and he did not for a moment pretend to say that they could not, he thought that, when speed was a consideration of so much value in the present days of shipbuilding, it was extraordinary that the Admiralty should give no higher speed to the second vessel than 9 knots. On a former occasion allusion had been made to an observation of his with respect to the Indian transports. But, to the best of his recollection, what be had done on that occasion was merely to point out distinctly the failure of the application to the private firms for a competitive design. He now came to the proposal which he had put on the Paper, and which was a very reasonable one. The two vessels which he proposed to substitute were of similar tonnage to those which the Government designed to build; the size and material were similar. Now, there were serious reasons why the country should not commit itself to the extent to which the Admiralty seemed bent on committing it with regard to vessels of the class to which he referred. It would be recollected that during the whole time that the re-construction of the navy with iron-clad vessels had been in progress there had always been one main object which he had kept in view, and which, as far as he had been able, he had endeavoured to urge upon the Government, and that was that the ultimate aim of all their improvements should be to obtain a perfectly protected vessel. He had warned the Admiralty that it was useless to delude the country and to delude themselves—for none were so deluded as the Admiralty—by supposing that any vessel would become useful which had nothing but a patch of armour on a small portion of the hull, while all the rest of her was utterly at the mercy of any other vessel, however small. The Admiralty laid down as a condition for adoption at the time they were about to build their first iron-clad ships of the Warrior class that only the central part of the ship should be armoured. He gave the Admiralty full credit for this, that they believed the difficulties in the way of obtaining a perfectly armoured ship were too great to be overcome, and that they could not at the same time get a ship constructed of such a form as to give both a sufficient amount of displacement and that degree of speed which they justly looked on as indispensable. He felt at that time quite as strongly as he did now the impolicy of relying on a vessel so constructed and which he foresaw would be nothing but a log upon the water when the two ends were knocked away. In the proposal which he then sent to the Admiralty he had suggested that the ends should be protected. By continually pressing the same consideration upon them the Admiralty did by degrees depart from their original plan. In the vessels of the Valiant class they recognized the principle, though not to the full extent; but in the Minotaur class they covered with armour the entire vessel. They had then got something substantial, and if they had only applied themselves to decreasing the size and increasing the handiness of the vessel they would have arrived at a very useful and efficient class of vessel indeed. The hon. Member concluded by moving to omit the sums—

"For building two Iron-clad Vessels of the Audacious class (four of which are already building, though as yet none have been tried), and to suggest in substitution for them two Turret Ships of the competitive designs submitted to the Admiralty by private firms, and which were rejected on the recommendation of the Controller and Chief Constructor of the Navy in favour of their own official design."

said, he thought it would be much more convenient to take the decision of the question on Vote 10, where there was a distinct sum for new armour-plated ships. That was the next Vote on which the question arose, and respecting which the hon. Member for Lincoln (Sir. Seely) intended to address the House. He sympathized with his noble Friend (Lord Henry Lennox) in the difficulty in which, he was placed by the unfortunate illness of the First Lord of the Admiralty; but the Committee would admit that no one could have explained the question more clearly, or stated the policy of the Government more intelligibly than the noble Lord had done. As to the alteration proposed in the programme of the year, he thought his noble Friend had done thorough justice to the Controller and the Chief Constructor; and he rejoiced that the Vote had not been passed without the questions being raised and the answers stated as to the first change he had originally offered to the Committee—a proposition to build a broadside ship and one of novel construction by contract, and one of each in the dockyard, instead of two broadsides in the dockyard and two of novel construction out of it; and he therefore approved the altered programme announced, for novel ships in private yards involved heavy extras for experience gained as construction proceeded. It was also judicious to reduce the class of vessels for special purposes from four to three on the completion of the new yacht in substitution for the Osborne, and to close Deptford as a building yard, which he hoped was the first step towards closing it as a naval yard. But in saying this he could not help referring to the unwise conduct of the Admiralty in deciding last year to build a small fleet of wooden vessels, and in going beyond their original intentions during the year as to the number of men in the dockyards. So fickle was their policy that, during the course of the year, and in spite of the assurances given in the debate on the Estimates, at Portsmouth the strength of the establishment was raised from 1,233 men to 1,562, and a sudden reduction was made this year to 930 men. The result of that was that very great distress prevailed among the men, and similar consequences followed at Woolwich, where the number of shipwrights had been reduced from 1,021, which was the number in the month of October, to 525. That was the main fault to which he had to call the attention of the Committee in connection with those Estimates, for he looked upon the policy of the Admiralty in other respects as being, on the whole, sound. He hoped the Government would be able to get this Vote.

said, that what the country desired was to have the very best vessels constructed; and the country was disappointed at not having vessels of a light draught of water which, nevertheless, could carry heavy armour plates and guns. Every other maritime Power was building vessels different from those we were building. At Chatham the distress was not so severe as in other dockyards; but there was one class in the dockyard—the rope-makers—who had been rather hardly treated. He should like to ask his noble Friend why no provision was made for the workmen in Chatham Dockyard to dine comfortably? Surely some shed could be constructed in which the men could dine with some sort of comfort. With regard to superannuation allowances, he thought that if a man died just before he became entitled to superannuation allowance, his widow ought to receive some payment out of that fund to which her husband had so long contributed. Since the introduction of iron for shipbuilding the number of accidents had greatly increased, and great complaint was made that no accommodation existed for the men at the hospital, and that they had to contribute out of their own wages towards the expense of the hospital.

said, he hoped the Committee would allow this Vote to pass, in order that Progress might be reported, with a view to the Registration Bill being proceeded with.

suggested that the Vote now before the Committee should be postponed.

hoped that, as the feeling of the Committee evidently was in favour of passing the Vote and reporting Progress, the hon. and learned Gentleman would not offer any opposition to that course.

said, he would withdraw his Amendment.

said, he hoped the House would not think that he was going to offer a factious opposition to the Bill. It was not a party Bill, and it was not a Bill which could affect any individual Member; but it was simply a Bill to accelerate the registration of the voters in the country. But that was not the sole point for the House to consider. They were there to consider whether it was wise and prudent that a Bill of that kind should be passed for this specific year, and whether it would have the effect, which all wished, of placing on the register those whom they had admitted to the franchise. If the Bill was passed, it would prevent a large number of those whom they wished to enfranchise from getting that franchise, and there would be a universal cry when they met in December or January by those who were returned that their constituents were not fairly represented. The result would be that another election would loom in the distance, and he knew not if that was their wish. The Bill provided that the registration should be completed by the end of October. The elections were to take place in November, and they are to meet there in December. For what purpose? Simply to decide whether the Gentlemen opposite should sit on that side, and whether those who sat on that side shall go to the opposite Benches. Whether that was to take place time would show. If the registration was not complete it would matter little whether they met in January or December. Let them consider the complicated nature of the Bill. There was the compound-householder, a gentleman whom they thought dead and buried, but who, nevertheless would make alterations in the new registry necessary. There was also the lodger franchise, and he believed that in towns where 30,000 or 40,000 would be added to the register that register would not be complete. He knew something of the towns, and he ventured to say that November was a very bad month for the elections. He believed it would be altogether a false move if they were to hurry on the registrations now, simply to decide who was to sit on this and who on the other side of the House in November next.

said, if he thought that this Bill would in any way affect the rights of the electors by diminishing their chances of getting upon the register he would not have considered it his duty on the part of the Government to propose it. But those who sat on the Select Committee were satisfied that nothing would be taken away from the rights of voters. The only question was whether sufficient time was allowed for revision. Those who had most considered the question believed there was. He was himself satisfied there was, and therefore he hoped the House would go into Committee.

said, he had a few observations to make on the Bill, which he thought had been but little discussed in the House. He must describe this as a Bill designed to slur over the registration and to hurry on the General Election at the earliest possible period. He dared say that some Gentlemen in that House were anxious to bring on an election; but he had asked himself, and he had asked persons out of that House, what possible object could be gained by the new House of Commons meeting in December. The only answer he could get to the question was this—" If we accept this Bill, and hurry on the elections, the new House of Commons will he able to meet in December, in order to decide which of the two factions in this House shall carry on its Business next Session." That might be a very important matter for those who expected Office; but hon. Gentlemen who were "outsiders" and the public at large did not care one farthing which set of statesmen might conduct the Business of the country during the months of December and January. When Parliament had passed a Bill enabling very large numbers to get themselves placed on the electoral roll, commonsense and prudence would dictate that the registration should be conducted in the most effectual manner. This Bill came before the House with great recommendations. It professed to be a Ministerial Bill; but they all knew under what circumstances it had been brought forward. It had been brought forward under coercion. That was his opinion. There had been a threat made by Gentlemen sitting on the Opposition side that they would withhold the Supplies ["No!"]; but he believed that threat would not have been carried out. The Bill had been subjected to the ordeal of a select Committee. How was that Committee composed? Gentlemen connected with the present Administration served on it. That Administration had been for some time exposed to such taunts from the front Opposition Bench, and the House itself had been in such a state of chronic anarchy, that the retention of Office by its members was almost intolerable. It was on that account that he described the Bill as having been brought in under compulsion. There also sat upon the Committee a number of Gentlemen who had held Office under the late Administration, and who were not at all indisposed to hold Office under that which was coining. He dared say those Gentlemen would not think the drawing of their official salaries so irksome a task as the right hon. Gentleman (the Chancellor of the Exchequer) had considered it during the past few months. ["Question!"] He would not detain them many minutes; but what he had to say he must say out. There sat, then, on the Committee a number of Gentlemen who were very anxious to obtain Office at the very earliest period. Indeed, that anxiety was so great as to lead to the belief that something more than patriotism actuated them when they strove to obtain the meeting of Parliament in December next. Upon the decision of such a Committee he, for one, placed no reliance whatever, knowing, as he did, that there existed no desire at all in unofficial quarters, nor out-of-doors, that Parliament should assemble at so early a date. Now, why should any independent Member on either side of the House go an inch out of his way to bring about a change of Ministers in December instead of six weeks later, in the ordinary course of affairs? What reason had any independent Member to bridge more rapidly than need be the gulf which still yawned between the right hon. Member for South Lancashire and Office? What had kept the right hon. Gentleman out of Office for the last lour or five months? He would himself answer that question with the utmost possible candour. It had been the behest and desire of a very considerable number of Gentlemen on the Opposition side, of whom the right hon. Gentleman was the ostensible Leader. They probably thought, and with justice, that the intellect of the right hon. Gentleman matured much more rapidly in the winter of Opposition than in the summer heat of Office. The House had been in a very excited slate for the last four or five months. There had been in Office a Ministry which did not hold the reins of power. The Executive had been weak, not in ability, but in Parliamentary support. Then there had been a powerful Opposition, numbering at least 350 or 360 heads. If the Opposition had so willed it, they might in the early part of the Session have carried a Vote of Want of Confidence in the Ministry, and the result of such a Vote would have been to transfer the right hon. Gentleman the Member for South Lancashire and the satellites who surrounded him to the right hand of the Speaker's Chair. What had prevented this from being done, and why had 350 Gentlemen allowed 300 Gentlemen to hold the reins of Office during the whole of the present Session? He would give an explanation of the circumstances. In doing so be should violate no confidence, as he should merely repeat what was openly spoken of and discussed at the Bar, in the Lobbies, in all political coteries, and very probably even in the sacred precincts of Brookes's. It was a well-known fact that there were on the Opposition Benches a number of Gentlemen who were esteemed Members of the Liberal party; but who refused to support a Vote of Want of Confidence in the present Government. In other words, they refused to be parties to any Motion the direct effect of which would be to place the right hon. Member for Lancashire in high Office. ["Question!"] There were scores of Gentlemen opposite who knew what he had stated to be an absolute fact. Those Gentlemen did not deny that the right hon. Member for South Lancashire possessed great abilities; but they distrusted his political sagacity, and were very probably not enamoured of his versatility; they had no confidence in his tact and his power to keep a party together. If, then, the right hon. Gentleman and his Friends had been kept out of Office by the behest and at the dictation of a considerable portion of Her Majesty's Opposition, what possible object could they have in now coming forward and desiring that we should meet next December, in order to determine whether by the new elections the right hon. Gentleman can be placed in the position of First Minister of the Crown. Under these circumstances he should give his vote against the Bill, and if it went into Committee he trusted the House would have an opportunity of discussing it on its merits on the third reading.

said, the Bill would cause so much dissatisfaction that he must protest against it, and vote for the Amendment. For the last two years they had been discussing the desirability of making most important changes in the electoral system, and yet their labours were, after all, to have no fruition, as it were, because those whom it was sought to benefit, would receive no benefit at all, in consequence of the haste with which registration was to be slurred over. In the large towns and counties in the North great inconvenience would be caused, and he wished to point out that if the number of Revising Barristers were doubled, the number of election agents must be doubled also. The time at present allowed for registration was quite short enough, but it was proposed still further to shorten it, and as the Court of Common Pleas did not sit until some time on in the month of November, there would practically be no appeal from the decisions of the Revising Barristers. He did not like the idea of an election in November, for the reason that, as some two hours at least of the polling must take, place in partial, if not entire darkness, it would give great facilities for personations. The question put before the country was whether Catholicism or Protestantism was to have the superiority. ["Oh, oh!"] Members might object to that, so he would say it was whether Ireland was to be pacified or not. It was incumbent on them, therefore, to have a well-selected jury, and to commit the decision of the question to a respectable constituency.

said, he was of opinion that, on the whole, it was much better that this Bill should pass. It was possible that the Bill might be passed in a hurry; but then they would have the advantage of getting a Ministry established sooner. That difficulty even might be got over by the present Ministry resigning at once. The election gentry, et genus omne, might not, perhaps, have so much time to make up their books, and if an autumn Session were inconvenient they would all be there, and the Session would be a very short one. Commercial matters were very much depressed, and that depression would not cease until the General Election was over. It would be better to get the election over, so as to have a fair start again.

suggested, but did not move, the insertion of words binding the Revising Barristers to commence their operations on the 14th of September next at latest.

said, that although it had been inserted by the Select Committee, in the spirit of caution which they had very properly exercised in dealing with the measure, he found, on careful examination, that it was quite unnecessary, and might possibly lead to mischief if permitted to remain in the Bill. The clause proposed to make the 30th section of the 2 Will. IV., c. 45, and the 75th section of the Act of 6 & 7 of the Queen, c. 18, the principal Act, applicable "to all cases of occupancy creating a franchise" by last year's Reform Act. But the 56th section of last year's Act made all Registration Acts apply to its provisions, and he feared the retention of this 29th clause would derogate from the full power of that 56th section.

said, that the clause was well-considered by the Committee, and he hoped it would be retained.

thought it would be better to strike out the clause, and give the voters to which it applied the benefit of the general law.

said, it was necessary to omit the clause.

said, that the proposal might seem suitable to Birmingham, which was only one parish, but it would cause great confusion in places where a borough contained several parishes. The clause appeared to be framed in order to save the candidate the expense of making out canvassing books. The result of making the clause permissive would be that some overseers would make out the register on one plan and some on the other. He was told that the overseers in some parishes had made considerable progress in preparing the lists for the present year, and they were very anxious that the clause should not pass.

thought that the clause would not work unless it was made imperative, or was added as a power to the overseers in addition to the duty which was now imperative. It would not do to have a permissive clause in substitution of the present duty.

said, he did not think any great difficulty would arise by the overseer carrying out the plan proposed by the clause, or that any serious additional expense would be thrown upon parishes.

said, he thought it would be much easier and cheaper for the overseer to be allowed merely to copy the rate-book, than to be obliged to arrange the list of name3 in alphabetical order.

said, it was necessary at election times that they should be able with facility to turn to the names of the electors, and that could be done only when the list was arranged alphabetically. On the whole, if there was to be a choice between the two methods, it would be better to adhere to the present practice.

said, he thought the plan, if adopted at all, should only be adopted in those boroughs which consisted of one parish or township.

rose to move the following new clause:—

"Where in any Borough the overseers shall, after the twenty-ninth day of September, one thousand eight hundred and sixty-seven, have rated the owner instead of the occupier of any dwelling-house or other tenement, in contravention of 'The Representation of the People Act, 1867,' the occupier of such premises shall, upon duly paying or tendering on or before the twentieth day of July next, the difference, if any, between the amount of poor rate payable on or before the fifth day of January, one thousand eight hundred and sixty-eight, in respect of such premises by such owner, and that which would have been payable by an ordinary occupier thereof, be entitled to be registered as a voter, as fully as if he had been rated and paid all rates in pursuance of the third and seventh sections of the said Act."

The clause was very similar to the 30th section of the old Reform Act; and his object in proposing it was to do an act of justice towards a class of occupiers who were fully entitled to be put upon the register. In a parish in his own constituency (East Retford) several hundreds of such men had been omitted from the list, and it was fair to suppose that the same thing might have occurred in other places. His clause would remedy that state of things.

supported the clause proposed by his hon. Colleague, and read a letter from the overseer of Worksop, explaining the circumstances under which between 500 and 600 persons there would be practically disfranchised unless some such clause as that were adopted.

said, it was obvious that the clause was proposed to meet a particular case, and such legislation was always objectionable and dangerous. It was difficult to say whether it would meet that case, and still more difficult to say what its effect would be upon other cases. The persons whose names were said to have been improperly omitted by the overseer had a remedy at the time under the existing statutes, and if they had not then availed themselves of that remedy the passing of the proposed enactment in their favour would be giving them an unfair advantage.

said, that the persons to whom the clause referred ought not to be allowed to suffer from the wrongful act of others. He thought that a good deal was to be said for the proposition that when a man whose landlord paid the composition rate, and himself paid the difference, he should have a vote.

said, there could be no party feeling in this matter. He conceived that it would be injudicious to pass a clause for the sake of one particular borough, for its operations might extend to other cases to which it would be improper to apply it.

said, he thought it would be inconvenient to introduce the clause into the Bill, inasmuch as such a power was already given in the Local Government Act.

said, that the clause was not a fit one to be incorporated in the present Bill, though it might be a very proper one to be inserted in a rating Bill. This clause, besides, would have no operation in the present year with, respect to registration, as the lists were now practically commenced.

said, that it would materially interfere with the progress of the proceedings before the Revising Barristers to have a large number of lodgers brought to their Courts to wait and see whether anybody would start up and challenge their votes. As these persons were to have their names in the lists long before the Revising Barristers held their Courts, it was only reasonable that those who wished to challenge the votes of any lodgers should give them notice before the holding of the Registration Courts. He hoped the Home Secretary would consider the expediency of introducing a provision by which notice should be given to lodgers of objections to their claims, without which they should not be compelled to come to the Court.

said, he believed the lodgers were a much more respectable class of people than was at first supposed. He was certain that any clause which compelled the attendance of the lodger at the Court must be amended.

objected to the suggestion. The effect of it would be to repeal a section in the Act of last Session, which had been deliberately adopted after considerable discussion.

supported the clause.

said, he hoped the clause would not be pressed. The subject was deliberately considered and decided last year, and the hon. Member for Finsbury (Mr. M'Cullagh Torrens), who was much interested in the question, was then an assenting party to the decision then arrived at.