The Sun. — London, England, 1855-03-30 00:00:00

I AWE RIAL PAR LIAA their attention. He shouldn ,a ot in , therefore, ere b fo a r t e t , le f fo e llo ß w a t i h ak e i h m o ve n : again ' gentleman in fighting over but he would refer to two questions which required an an - They had heard a great deal of wh a t L or d R ag l an ' s HOUSE OF COMMONS—YESTERDAY. ' ae orde r. t did not mean, but lee was most anxious to hear- end THE CHARGE OF THE 'LIGHT BRIGADE AT a's yet he had not heard it clearly explained, either by Lord Raglan or any one else—what that order really did mean. B A.L AK LAVA. (Hear.) The way in which th e or d er was un d erstood by Mr. H. BERKELEY rose to move that an hu m bl e ad- Lord Lucan and the aide-de-camp was, that the cavalry dress should be presented to her Majesty, praying that she was ie , thet o gone. advance rapidlyheywere e t r o e the front, Would be graciously pleased to order that an inquiry b y ble, told, however, a English pog 5 i. - language in this case meant something else from what it usually did mean, and that it must be interpreted in a court-martial should be held on Lieutenant-General the Earl of Lucan for ordering a charge of the light cavalry at non-natural sense ;he wished, therefore, that some expla the battle-of Balaklava. He undertook the discharge of - nation should be given as to what the real meaning of the order was. It should be observed that Captain Nolan had this duty in consequence of the illness of a gallant relative, the misfortune shortly to fall—a fact which showed that who if he were present would then stand in the position ry were in a position where the slightest advance which he (Mr. H. Berkeley) occupied; _, . brought them immediately under the fire of the enemy's and, if any apology were necessary, that was his excuse for trespassing upon guns. Another matter as to which he wished for some in the attention of the hones. At the same time, he must atruction or information was this. They had heard Lord Lucan blamed for obeying th e or d er , an d b e i ng guided by say that he had met with ne military difficulties in thi s the interpretation of the aide-de-camp, and th e no bl e l or d ease which would prevent any civilian from perfectly cora was now here in disgrace. H e w i s h e d t o k now whether a more favouf a bl e have been no w i prehending it, and it was his intention to clear a wa y as Lord Lucan would much as possible the military technicalities surroundi ng i it. position—whether he w ou ld b e now n the Crimea, com - There never was a time whoa their soldiers w ore more - mending the cavalry—whether he would be looked up to In s a e n ne l fvorthy of all honour and esteem, if he had dis dear to the nation than at the present moment. Their bril aoheyed that order ? (Hear, hear.) As to Lor . d Lucan Rant gallantry, their patient endurance of suffering, the being afraid to take upon himself the responsnbility of high moral tone which beamed forth in the extensive cor- pausing, which, as a lieutenant -general commanding atdie respondence that was print e d, an d w hi c h h a d been written vision, ho was entitl e d t o d o , h e wis h e d to point out to h house that Lord Lucan w as n ot a man w h o shirked or by all grades of the army, en titl e d th em t o their respect, Was afraid of responsibility. Th e no bl e l or d h ad published their gratitude, and he should ' hope to th e i r p ro t ec ti on. Was it not their d u ty narrow l y t o wa t c h over ' the wel- t oe speech lately cielivered by him in the f orm o f a pamp hl e t , fare of that army ? Already h a d th e peop l e b y an over- .and in a note to it he m en ti one d th a t h e had mill teed in whelming majority of Chair rep r es en t a ti ves i n t h at h ouse nix speech to state that, on th e d ay a ft er t h e b attle•of demanded as inquiry i n to th e d es t ruc ti on o f t h ousands Alma, ho sent a message t o th e genera l commanding, ex- Of their gallant men by the withh o ldi ng f rom them pressing his hope that Lo r d R ag l an wou ld al l ow him to act of the absolute necessaries of life—f ue l, f oo d , raiment, ' on his own responsibility, as o ccas i on might offer, because otherwise opportunitie s o f ga i n i ng success an d i njuring the attendance. (Hear.) Th e l a t e Mi n i stry op en(l medical . 1 inquiry, and they not only lost their places, but poser that enemy wouldcertainly be lost. To th a t message L or d L ucan they lost caste with the country. A committee had . been said ho received no reply, an d h e h a d b een l e d to make thet appointed, and the inquiry was witnessed with satisfaction offer'in consequence o f h av i ng t a k en upon hi mself on he 3 by the nation, and liteq produced a' satisfactory eff ec t, P evious day to move hi s cava l ry an d ar till ery across th e (Hear, hear.) He (Hr. H. Berkeley) was th ere t o as k f or river in order to protect the infantry when ascending the au inquiry into' the destruction of 300 gallant men—as fine opposite heights,om o a» f d abcfcraeeusengheentcooinisidtheraetd occasion, e i if , h m e h o a r c e i a body of men as ever drew swor d or pu t f oot i n stirrup. fei t m himself tCheere.) Those men had been, it was admitted, uselessly, prisoners would have been taken. Again, in a action at converse wantonly sacrificed, in an attempt wh ere th ere was no pots sibility of succees, and where defeat was c er t a i n . (H ear. ) Balaklava, Lord Lucan expressed a hope' th a t orders less He was not able' o ask for a committ ee t o i n qu i re i nto t h at peremptory and leaving hire some discrecti on wou l d be sent to him, because if orders were sent mo re fit f or a subaltern loss, butte aske I to have the proper tribunal constit u t e d which was appointed for i nqu i r i es i n such matterti —a than for a general to receive, then es a su b a l tern he would court-martial. (Hear.) The l a t e Mi n i s t ry was disinclined to execute them, because he would n o t expose himself to be chareen with backwardness- or hesitati on in executive inquiry ; it appeared the authorities at the Horse Guards them. He (Lord Echo) had received a letter from his lett heti followed their example, and were equally disinclined to brother after the battle of Alma sin which he said. that inquiry, and it was to spur on their lazy virtue that hea Lord Lucan at a certain period Of the action ordered up brought' forward this motion. (Hear.) Why they should Log cavalry and artillery in support., which peoved so effect refuse inquiry, and why inquiry should not be most unto- , ral iu such a case, ho was at a loss to understand. A n e u e rt a - .. tire :ctrl or such sinnal service to the Hi blenders w h o h a d i.!st, charge.l the heights, that Sir Colin Campbell, 'with martial could be hpin on anybody. It could ha held an best tears in his eyes, 'amok him by the hand, and thanked couple of boys who pulled each other out of bed! . him for what he had done. (Hear, hear.) He did not each other with a candlestick ; but when they asked her intend tweispute or discuss the rerogative of the Crown Majesty's Government for an inquiry into the death of 310 to recell - Lerit Ltcan ; that wee is right which undoubtedly rir 1, they kn ~ Mee who were .thus wantonly eeisted, and which it was necessary for the efficiency et thing at all of the proceedings. {Hear, hear.) Th e .: nu ef life was peculiar to the o English people,'. and lee taro tee army that the Clown should exercise without question. passed for the punishment . f thosewito caused . de ' a s tl ' i l by r It , tuight indeed be questioned whether the exercise of the or incompetence. (Hear, hear.) n e at was just or necessary in this case, the only reason ignorance, cerelessuese, _ .Were not. the lives of their gallant soleiein as dear to them alleged that ne had writte n a l e tt er containing certain re ns the lines' of passenger s up o n a railway, or were they presentations to the general-ie.-chief, and that ho was on prepared, to say that when men put on tho military uni- bid terms with L or d R ag l an. I t might have been sup form they forfeit e d all their care and protection ? Were posed from this that the letter alluded to was intemperate 'they *pared to say that the charge of Balaklavit was to or disrespectful, but when it came to be read, that was not be a charge of fools, or that the Government - should nee , the impression ad/lct - 1 it made on the peopja of this eoune with respect to it the words of Falstaff— try. Again, as to the perional relation.; between the gene " I have l e d m y raggeunuff i us where they have been well ra!s e he had been inf o r me d by Lord, lowan that shortly peppered?" before his leaving th e C r i mea, G eneral Estcourt saw him and. decl Ind that be . expressed the feelings of the corn (Laughter.) Ho (Mr. IL Berkeley) asked for inquiry into mandenin-chief when he said that Lord Reglan ra the conduct of Lieut.-General the Earl of Lucan, because he gretted his recall, and could not understand why it had believed that, through inimonception of his orders, that taken place. If it were consideredeesentil that two such disaster at Balaklava had occurred by which 300 gallant officers should not to n ee d lllowe to remain on service in men wore slain—by which, though, a minor consideration, the same army, he wa to knew why they ahowe Ito the country lost 360 horses, wlich cbst the Government not Img a period to elapse betweca the date of the receipt ca less than .15',',/. each—and by which the bingade of lieht Lied Raelan's letter and the date of the recall of Lord cavalry was all but annihilated. Ho (Hr. H. Berkeley) Loran. 'Lord Itaglauh letter was written on the Lith Dec., Wad no personal feeling whatever in this matter; he had no I L or d wann ege n reply to tee reference made to him resp?ct enmity whatever to gratify; it was deeply painful to him ' ing that letter was dated 25th Jan., and the letter of recall to discharge the duty ho halt undertaken. He had no was dated 2d Feb., so that three weeks elapsed between charge to make against the honour or courage of Lord tee receipt of the, letter of Lord Raglan and the date Lucan ; but, on' the contrary, he e-as prepared to say that of the recall of Lord Lucan. He asked this becauso - he believed them both to he undoubted. But he had a 1 there might possibly have been—and the idea was no t his duty to perform, end was to beseech the house to own—a question as to which should be recalled at that throw the mantle of that eiotetion over the gallant men time; and there was, mon:ewer, a striking coincidence of who were in arms fur their country. The nation had placed • d tea between the recall of Lord Lucan and the notice of the army at the dieposal of the Crown, and it' the House of motion which had been pat on the' votes by tho hon. geu- Commons should decide that a C 330 of wrung had boon tlemen opposite respecting the battle 'of Balakleva. He had made out against any of the functionaries of 'the army, o f doubt himself that a clear explanation would be given whether high or low it was their duty to address her Ma- of these points by the Government; but as he had heard jesty that she should her command for a court-martial them mooted in society,'he thought it deeirable to call the to be held upon the otfemling party. hear.) He did attention of Ministers to . them. The letter of Lord Raglan not stand there to ask for a court-martial (Hear,or Lord Liman, brought against, Lord' Lucan charges of the gravest charac but he stood there to ask for a court-martial on Lora tsr. The production of that letter on the part of the Go ' Lucan. (Hear, hear ) It was necessary to mention a few eernmeet was, if he might be allowed to say su, a mistake, of the particulars of time battl e of Balakl ava to explai n the b.:caueo it entirely changed their position. As l ong as th ey facts connected w ith th e b r illi ant but disastrous charge kept, that letter w ithi n th e drewers of the Minister of War, of the light cavalry. Who Russi ans ad vance d with great they could take their stand on the prerogative of the forces, which wore estimated at 20,000 or 30,000 men. Crown, - and the right of the Government to recall any They drove in the Turks, who, as the house were aware, officer without assigning any reasons; bat when they pro ran away incontinently, and, satisfied with their easy vic- duced that letter they placed the matter on other grounds, tory over there, they advanced a portibn of their eavalrf and must stand or fall by the reasons contained in it. Lord against Sir Colin Campbell, who dispersed them with Lucan declared, in his letter appn lag for a court-martial, great ease with his gallant Highlanders. Another . body teat the letter of Lord Raglan contained the , gravest pos of Russian cavalry advanced against their heavy brigade, able imputations on his profeisional character —th a t Of ah -by whom they were charged and cut down, and they re- solute disobedience pf orders, superadded to that of gross treated in confusion. He begged the house to observe misconception suggested in the original despatch, and that that it was at a period of the day when the Russians were these charges could be cleared up by a professional investiga in retreat, and as Lord Raglan imagined were carrying off ; lion alone. In the letter a n d the court-martial nogron t he the guns taken from the Turks, that his lordship issued the I for refusal were assigned, and he must therefore look to the - following order—and nothing could be more clear and pre- 1 speeches made in another place by the noble lord the Mi chse than that order :—" Lord Raglan wishes the cavalry to 'lister of War and the Commander-in-Chief. He gathered advancer apidly to the front, follow the enemy, and try-t:a that there were in the main four grounds; first, that there prevent then carryingaway theguns ; a troop of horse artil- w as no precedent ; Second, that ,if a court-martial wore lery may accompany. The French cavalry is to the left. Im- granted to Lord Lucan, it must be granted to every officer mediate. (Signed)—AlßET." Lordßaglanissued that order arid private who thought his araigned ;tried ; t o Lord Lucanaead Lord Lucan,on the strength of that order that ther e would be a difficulty in conductingfram the charges ; charged with 610 light dragoons a Russian army of 20,000 and fourth, that Lord Lucan had done duty since the action men in position, and composed of lioree,foot, and artillery. of Balaklava, and that by military law he could not be put ' This order, which could only be interpreted as au order to inu his trial. First, as to there being no precedent. Now . charge and pursue a broken force, caused 670 dragoons to he thought that - ifjustice required that a particular course , charge an army of 20,000 men, horse, foot, and artillery. atiouhl be taken in a case which had not previously arisen, The more you dissected and examined that order, the more the fact that there was no precedent was not a valid reason clear did Lord Raglan's intention become. First, no order I why justice should not be done. Besides, there was a pre whatever was given to charge by Lord Raglan, but an or- cedent for the grant of a court-martial here. The case of der to follow and prevent the engine. from carrying away Lord G. Sackville, the commander of the English cavalry the guns, the mode of doing this being left entirely to at the battle of Minden in 1759, was, in its broad features, Lord Lncan. The implied impression to send a troop of analogous to that of Lord Lucan ; the only difference being horse artillery was conclusive in his mind as to Lord Rag- that Lord G. Sackville was tried and condemned for dis lan's intention ; for the idea that Lord Raglan could have obeying orders, while Lord Lucan was censured for obey contemplated sending a troop of light sixes to pound away beg them. In the general order issued by Prince Fordi at a large number of heavy guns in position was just as nand of Brunswick, the commander-in-chief of the allied absurd as that of sending 670 horsemen against the whole army, after the battle of Minden, he declared his opinion 1 body of the Russiau troops. Lord Lucan was ordered to that if the Marquis of Granby had commanded the cavalry ' do one thing, the necessity of which had passed away, and of the right wing instead of Lord George Saukville, the re he did another thing, - which was just the worst in the se of the day would. have been more brilliant, and went world be could have done. It was unintelligible what on t o say th a t h e w as desirous to impress on all his gene could have led to the misconception of on e o f the cleverest rale that when orders were brought to them by his aides orders ever given. They had heard a great deal of what de-camp they should be obeyed without delay. When Captain Nolan did and said, but if his evidenc e could be that general order was issued, Lord G. Sackville, taken, it would avail nothing whatever against Lord Rag- fe e ling himself aggrieved, obtained leave to return to Eng lanai written order, and, therefore, it was of no avail to land, when he demanded, and immediately obtained a talk of it. One of the greatest military authorities of the court-martial, by whom he was found guilty of disobedi day, the Duke of Richmond, f u lly agr ee d in the view once of orders. Re must in passing remark that the posi he took of the case, and it was not a small support tion of English general officers appeared to him somewhat to a humble civilian like himself to have such testi- unfortunate, for Lord G. Sackville was condemned for dis mony en his side. Lord Lucan said that Capt. Nolan obeying orders, and for exercising his own discretion—the obtruded his advice upon him in a way that ought not very thing which Lord Lucan was censured for not having to have been permitted ; but it was to be regretted done. He found, in turning over the pamphlets at the that the noble lord had not taken the Earl of Car- British Museum with reference to the case of Lord G. digan'e advice relative to the propriety of the charge. Seckville that amongst the officers by whom he was tried If he could have found anything is excuse or extenuation w c as one Arilliarn Eail of Penman. He hoped this might of the conduct of Lord Lucan he would most freely avow, ba regarded as at% rophetic omen, and that we should soon it, but he wished to show that the noble lord was fully have a warrant signed "Fox, Baron Panmure," ordering aware of the strength of the Russians against whom he a court-naartial upon Lord Lucan. He also found amongst was operating. When he received the order, he commanded these pamphlets one by the general who commanded the Lord Cardigan to advance. Now, if there were any man French cavalry at the battle of Minden, in which he tried in the British army to whom such an order could be more to console Lord GeSankville for hie disgrace by telling him grateful than another, that man was Lord Cardigan —one that the English were like the Carthaginians, for whenever so gallant and adventurous that he might well be termed a general was unsuccessful they immediately crucified h a Hotspur, and one who, like Hotspur, would pluck bright Then there were also the cases of Sir J. Norris and Ad ml honour - from the moon. Yet did that noble earl receive ral Sir IL Palliser, both of which were cited by MCArthur the order eiven him with joy and alacrity ? Far from it ; in his work on military law, to show that officers who he receive 4 it with great consternation, and he had the thought themselves aggrieved had aright todeznand ourt, moral courage to demur to it before he knew that Lord inertial. He now came to the second point to which ho had Lecan was aware of the desperate nature of the at on ad verted, and he should contend that there wad no.analogy which be sent him. The aids-de-camp was ordered to state whatever between the case of Lard Lump. and those with that the point was three-quarters of a mile distant, that which it was sought to confound it. Lard Lucan was con the flanks wore lined with Russian artillery, and the hills dammed because, being a lieutenant-general eorumanding a in front and around covered with infantry, yet Lord Liman division, he did not exercise any discretion, but simply still persisted in the order. Lord Cardigan himself re- ob wed the orders he received, as a private or any other peatod the statement to Lord Lucan, and then proceeded °Ricer Would have done. What proved that this was so at the head of his men ou a charge so desperate that it was . ass si, that although the Earl of Cardigan and the Earl of not too much to say there was not one amongst them, from Liman both disapproved of the order for the cavalry charge the general to the trumpeters, who did not believe they at Balaklava, were about to charge o n e t ern it y . N o language could be too both remon s t ra t e d a g a i ns t it, an d both obey eel it, the one received praise and honour, ' and the strongly laudatory for th e d escr i p ti on of this gallant charge. other censure and professional disgrace. (Hear.) Naw, It was a marvellous example of the powerof discipline, and he must contend that if they threw upon an officer like the showed, in the clearest manner, the glorious spirit of pa- Earl of Lucan greater responsibility, and called for the triotism which animated them, their loyalty to their exercise of more discretion from him, then they must con- Queen and devotion to their country. Lord Cardigan's cede to him a greater measure of grace and favour than name would be banded down to posterity as a belted earl, they did to a private or officer not in that positiea. With entitled to be ranked with the Bedfords, the Bohuns the regard to the third argument against this court-martial, he Chandoses, and the proudest of the olden time. A 'Bus- must say that he did not believe that the present Judge sian general who had sent his men on such a desperate Advocate would have found any greater difficulty in fram service, and led to sueh fearful sacrifice of life, would have ing a charge against the Earl of Lucan, With Lord Rag died under the knout, or would now have been digging in lann letters before him, than the Judge-Advocate:General the mines of Siberia. What had happened in our army ? of 1759 did in drawing up the charges against Lord George Nothing. Had any notice been taken of it ? None at all. Lord Lucan hi mse lf demanded a court-martial and He and in a Sackville. With regard to the fourth argument, he was most gallant s pi r it , h e was ready to declare. (Rear.) quite willing t o a d m it t h at i f au officer or soldier was put under arrest f or an o ff ence, and was afterwards released, did not stand th ere t o say anything of Lord Lucan which that olence was condon e d. B a t that was not the case h ere. could give pain or um b rage to his best friends, nor would ' Beeides,he b egge d the h ouse to recollect that thi s was a l aw he ref er t o hi s military knowledge ; but he could not shut his eyes to the fact of his haying been promoted over the intended for the benefit of the accused, and surely it ought heads of many gallant and distinguished men who had seen .not to be wrested to his disadvantage, as was now being done in the Earl of Lucan 's case. He must say that if Lord Rag service, he himself having seen none—such mon as IVynd or tne eentes lan believed the charges which he brought . against the Earl ham, Thackwell, Cavendish, and others, low° d' who were perfectly well qualified for such a post. He sub- of Lucan as no doubt he did, when ho wrote his letter, he milted to the house that he had at least made out a case was much' to blame in allowing. a general whom he be for inquiry, and it was re ins l l t to u our ' service that suc a lieved to have shown himself incompetent for command to transaction should 111:va iakeri u place without inquiry. He remain for two months longer at the head Of the cavalry, demanded a court-mart i,l o n E upon which the safety of the army mainly depended. A Lucan in justice to our army and in deference to the Wishes of the nation. He great ht deal has been said about this not being a fit subject, should t herefure move an address to her Majest house to relatezt t o a ma t ter of military discipline. But although consent to the motion, in the nalne o f the martyrs who had y, it was undoubtedly ono of the prerogatives of the Crown found a bloody grave on te e heights of Balaklava, in tho to comm an d th e arm that house had always been jealous "lathe of the survivors, in the name of the mothers, widows, of that power, and had always exercised a strong control, over the army by passing the Mutiny Bill only from year still nehting for all taat was dear to them• and fathers of the unfortunate men who had died, or of tn yeer, and by retaining in its hands the power of stop those who were . seconding the motion for the address, . ping tine supplies. Nay more, he found numerous instances Lord ELCHO, in in which motions having relation to the discipline of the • al,eltoek' could assure the house that he d id . his s i o n ni to est conduct. Y had been brought forward with the most beneficial As results tisane were made for addressing the Crown for Lord Lucan only courted inquiry Cour t - ma inl t 7 ia 4 l s; i n i n ? b e at c o a f s o c s ap o t f . N. A o d r m ri i s r , a i l n s Matthews t s h a r e s ye a a n r d ; the hon. gentleman had stated that he made this motion in that of Sir Hugh Palliser, durine the late war ; in that ner at the ottivenaeaolif°l4hge° from a sense of what was due to the gallant men to which 1 of Col. Qui t' '' distinguished themselves on L 1 Lucan, as well merville n in, in 1814; mind in the case of Alexander So who dßfor Reform B writing ia n a g i t l a e t t i te on r , tsorr.a Humenews th the memorable day it related, so also he said it was . as to these ene mloreitlietonewmitebmrbeespr respect t r H to u t dhl e e e rs r fi re e y ld ag o the tbe house in 1832. 'Why, only a gallant men, that an inquiry itnotohihsios own peel- E o. : unsihgfh. zsint. should be granted. One word with respect sintioprpooritgi3i7t tollaffaec43tpeineet tion, which was both painful and peculiar. It was at all had ,brought forwalard li n ritohuasny'st. h h i e c h d i n s c o i t p h li i n n g e times painful to defend the conduct of a relation which occa-for he said th t • was impugned, but it was doubly painful when the c ould e army, an injustice was done to' Mier; becaus e a antiha b d e sion was one on which he had the misfortune to lose a re- the private be soofficers. En 1838 arethoof them were not pro the still nearer and dearer. He said this not to excite met el to Woods and Forwsta, ia present Chief Com 'esioner of ging forward a the sympathy of the house, but with the object of showing DU Con for a committee to inluire into the conduct of the that, in supporting the motion of-the hon. gentleman, the motion ander-in-chief with respect to ai, appointment which events of thatday, in whatever light they were to be viewed, 1 C. . in calculated to injure discipline, insisted strongly were certainly not calculated to prejudice him in favour of he thought theeresponsibility 0 _ the r Aliniosterieleoaftnithe Crown to Lord Laconia. It was from a sense ofjustice, and from that . upon Pariiament for the administration f t trenched(Til til t' reply alone, that he supported the motion, force never was more those who urged that his motion_ l,w .1, e prero firmly convinced of anything in his life than of this—that to the Crown, he said : of "In eet within the ar ,Lorducaq_was a grossly wronged and iejured man. Lord g ofativ Fliat term ' prerogative' male use of w soino, Whose walla . Lucan courtiicl inquiry into his conduct, and it . was his ; h e ar I this haute, ' we may feel convinced thatabout to be made ditty to endeefentr to induce the house to grant him that . of tto be defeuded—son at tempt is Not , . which he thought he had a right to demand. He knew too ! aeon. e shrink from responsibility." relating - , well the value of thditicee of the house to occupy it with , to escape inquiry—Co often interfered in matters . 4 t _ any tueubratiOns of his own on military law, policy, or tae- I only - had Parliament .. but in many case . wl t tits, which, as those of a civilian, could have little claim on to the discipline of the army, rrn~r~ llorn ( tp - THE SUN, LONDON., FRIDAY ..frATENp 3 MARCH 30 , 1855 most beneficial result. It cou)4 not for inAterce, be de uteddhatthe griit 'diminution !Ada had %ken plaCe in the cases of flogging was mainly owing to the frequent dis cussions on mo' ions brought before that house. And the conduct of the army in the Crimea—which, although placed in the most trying situation that it was possible for troops to be placed in, was, as had been truly said, au army without crime—showed how beneficial this change had been. (Hear.) Lord Lucan courted inquiry because he felt his professional reputation was damaged by the charges which had been brought against him. It had in deed been said by the Minister at War, in another place, that Lord Lucian 's personal character and honour were uninapeached. But what consolation was that to a man who was labouring under professional disgrace? .11e could not think that the discipline of the army required the per petration of injustice, or that the public service could be prothoted by degrading as zealous, gillant, and efficient a soldier as we had in the service. The honourable gentle man opposite said that he would not impeach the hon our of Lord Liman, but he added that, if ho had been a Russian general, he would either have died under the knout or would be now exiled to Siberia. Lord-Lucan happily belonged to a free country, in which such extreme measures were not resorted to ; but the noble earl was now suffering from the Parliamentary censure of the hon. gen tleman opposite, and the Siberia to which he was banished was the professional disgrace in which ho remained, and which incapacitited him froth again holding a command in the service until these charges were disproved. Lord Lucan hail been examined before a committee of that house the other day, and when he had finished giving his evidence, an hon. member of the committee said to him (L or d El c h o ) , He has proved himself, by his evidence, to be an able and zealous officer, careful of his horses and men, and a thorough master of every detail connected with his divi sion." He (Lord Elcho) ask e d w h e th er a general so com petent in the camp should be totally iocompetent to com mend his division in the field ? In conclusion, the noble lord said that he hoped that housh would do his noble re lative the justice which had been denied him elsewhere, and would express their opinion in such e manner as might induce the noble lord at the head of the Government to recommend her Majesty, in the undoubted exereisonf her unquestioned prerogative, to grant that piofessional. In gnir which could alone vindicate the noble earl from the professional disgrace under which he now more or less laboured. ([leer, hear.) Mr. C. P. VILLIERS (Judge Advocate-General) said that he was not going to dispute many of the propositions laid down by hiS hon, friend the mover, and his noble friend the seconder, of this address, and particularly many of the ultra-Liberal propositions of the latter with respect to the right of that house to inquiry generally into all matters they thought proper, and to call the prerogative of the Crown particularly iu question. These were ques tions he should leave entirely to the house, and should con fine himself to the point whether they should or not agree to an address to the Crown to institute a court-martial for n 6 trial of the Earl of Lucan. Ile should take issue di rectly with the mover of the resolution upon whether Lord Lucan wes or was not entitled to an inquiry into this mat ter, and to have a court-martial. He might, however, first observe that this motion for inquiry was not brought for ward there as an original motion, but as an appeal from the decision of the Commander-in-Chief, the other house of Parliament, and the keel authorities who had been con , bathed on the subject; and also that his hon. friend had brought for Nerd a motion for precisely the same form of inquiry for which Lord Lucan had asked, and whiels be had already bean iefused for the reasons which had been as signed. Now, what were the precise facts of the 'case? On the 28th November Lord Lucan because aware of certain reports which Lard Riglen had made with respect to his court net on the 25th October; and he then expressed to Losd Raglan his displeasure at the manner in which his conil net on that occasion had been reported upon by his lordship. Lord Lucan called in question the veracity of Lord Raglan in his communication to the Minister, and thereupon there arose a series elcominunicatione between Lords Lucan and Raglan, the purport of which, on the part of the latter, was that the former should withdraw his communication, and should ream' n satisfied with the report Lord Raglan origi nally male. Lord Lue in was unwilling to do this, pertina ciously adhering to his •explanation of the events of the 25th of October at Balaklava. Lord Raglan felt himself bound, at the same time, in vindication of his own de spatch, to send his observations and comments upon Lord Lucan's iettor to him. Lord Raglan then entered more fully into his seasons for having determined upon express ing some disapprobation of Lord Lucan's conduct on that day, yet so far modified his mention of that conduct as that no slur should be cast on the noble earl's military re putetion, and that he should not be precluded from re ceis ing military honours and the thanks of bath houses of Parliament. It was upon Lord Raglan sending this cofn rutiacation to the Minister of War that that Minister dis covered there were essential differences between the lieu tenant-general of the cavalry and the commander of the forces, and upon that groan!, and that ground alone, for tified by the opinion of the commander-in chief in this c(,u itry, considering that such differences were highly pro jtaciel to the service, it was decided that the lieutenant retinal of the cavalry should bo recalled. Upon Lord Luc en's recall he applied immediately for an inquiry into the affair. He (Mr. Villiers) mentioned these things to show what it was that was submitted to the authorities, and what led them to decide that Lord Lucan was not en titled to the court-martial he demanded. That was what the house required to know. Lord Lucan had cl timed it as an unqualified right and privilege of every officer to have a court-martial to inquire into his conduct. The house had seen Lord Raglan's comments on his con duct ; they had since heard his request fur a court-martial. The request had been refused, as well as the demand he first made; and he mentioned these things to show that by law and usage Lord Lucan hart been already absolutely re fused the inquiry by court-martial he now asked of the house. He thought the noble earl, when he applied for a court-martial as his unquestionable right, was under a most erroneous impression. There was, indeed, no person, however humble the rank he held in the service, who did not know that th ere was no right whatever in any officer to call fora court-martial as a means of inquiry into his own conduct. Those who entered the service did so volun tarily, and they knew (as the most elementary works on military law taught) they did so on the condition that they might he dismissed the army without any reason assigned, and without any redress against the voluntary judgm en t of the Crown. It was useless to diecuss the matter. The question of that prerogative had been discussed in that house—the question whether such powers ought to bo en trusted to the Crown-s-even in that house there had been attempts made to limit that prerogative, but Parliament I had universally decided that it was wisely entrusted to the Crown. It had been so vested in the Crown for more than century, and it was, therefore, not difficult to answer the question whether or not Lord Lucan had an unquestionable right to a court-martial. But then there arose the question whether it was possibleto concede the inquiry he claimed. It became a question whether that inquiry could be conceded upon the facts as they were—viz., there being no offence proved, and, if there had been an offence proved or alleged' by the commander of the forces, it having been overlooked —for Lord Raglan had continued the employment t of Lord LIICae, after the offence had been completed. The noble lord (Lord Elcho) thought that the privilege, as he called it, was ono for the protectian of the complainant, and that whenever it was claimed it ought to be granted. Bat let him tell his noble friend that the laws and usages 1 1 in the military system were not to be so lightly dispensed with ; and there was no system that was so strongly inte rested in seeing that there.should be no capriceintroduceds (Hear.) There was that in military law which did not ex ist in the civil law—there was a written and an unwritten law, written rules and customary onus, which were applied as strongly and invariably as the others. That which was recognised as law had as much force as that which really was law. It was a usage he was now referring to, That usage was, that where an offence had been committed \either by an officer or by a soldier, which offence had been overlooked, aid the offending party continued in his em ployment or engaged in active service, that was a good idea in bar of tiny proceeding against him. There was no end to the cases that might be referr e d t o i n support of this usa g es Ho had observed that th e C ommander-in- Chief had referred in another place to the cam of a Cap tain Aschtleck, who, having placed a lean under arrest, led him afterwards into action upon a sudden emergency, and carried his sentence into execution when the action was over, was broken by the Duke of Wellington s for so doing. There was also the case of another man who had been guilty of using mutinous language, and of having struck his supeiior officer, yet whe had been released from arrest because ho had bean in action subsequently to the comulissicn of his offence. Thire was also the case of Col. gnintin, who was convicted of an offence, but whose judges refused to pass sentence on him because he had been re proved for his offence in the field by his commanding officer. It wax, therefore, an established law and usage that no man whose offence had been once overlooked could be subjected to a court-martial. Again, suppose a courts martial to be granted, there was no prosecutor. Lord Raglan, who was the appropriate person, could net ant as prosecutor—(hear) —not from any incapacity in himself, but because the offence had been obliterated and blotted set, Lord Lucan having remained in his employment sub sequent to its being committed. But, again, there was no. body to prefer charges. In former times, the Judge Ad, vocate-General used to prosecute, but it was now nearly thirty years since an alteration was made in the mutiny law in that matter. The Judge Advocate-General was no longer the prosecutor. It was his duty to advise the Crown as to the legality of the proceedings; and though he might be instructed to prefer charges, he could not advise the Crown to order a proceeding to the legality of which there existed objections. Again, when an officer against whom an offence was alleged, but which offence had been obli terated, when such an officer consented to waive the privi lege he had obtained by subsciquent employment, or being engaged in action, and to submit to a trial, if the sen tence pronounced ware unfavourable to him he might then legally plead the previous obliteration of his offence, and that plea would come in bar of the elocution of the sen tence of the tribunal by which be consented to be tried. Such had been the case of Lord G. Germain against whom sentence of death was pronounced, but whose plea of autre fois acquit was sufficient to nullify that sentence. There-. fore in the present matter this military tribunal could not bs granted even as a favour. There were also other ques tions of expediency that suggested themselves against it. The inquiry could not take place in England, for the pre sence of the commander of the forces could not be dis pensed with at it ; and witnesses could not be called home from the seat of war expressly to attend it. Nor could' the trial take place in the Crimea, for people could not be called upon to vindicate their conduct while their more active duties connected with the war called for their whole attention. I - lad he been Lord Lucan's friend at the time, he should have advised him to demand a court-mai tial ©n the spot, while the event was still fresh and the witnesses still alive. Let no man suppose that Lord Lucan had been reealled on account of his conduct on the 25th of October. Some people had that opinion, and they thought it an ad ditional injustice to refuse inquiry after depriving the noble earl of his command. Lord Raglan took a very con siderate view of the case, and never desired to have Lord Lucian recalled, but it was the opinion of the authorities at homo that it was unwise to allow nay difference to exist among such officers, and they, therefore, recalled Lord ',loan without any complaint of him having been made. The question, then, really came to be, whether or not Lord Raglan had exercieed his discretion wisely in commenting upon the conduct of Lord Lucan. Well, was the House of Commons to be considered as a fit judge of the manner in which Lord Raglan exercised his discretion in the field ? (Hear,) The view of the noble lard (Lord Elelio) was that the commander of the forces should not be trusted with any discretionary power of commenting upon the conduct of subordinates, and of praising or censuring them. The hon. member for Bristol says that Lord Raglan ought to have broken Lord Lncan at once. The house was asked to vote an address to the Queen, to remind her that she had already neglected her duty in not instituting an inquiry 4 t: liuo : n into the conduct of Lord Lucan. (Marks of disapproba tion.) He meant that th e y com pl a i ne d o f th e manner in which the Q osen had base advised to act i n th e matter. Ile considered, however, that th e qu estion o f th e di scret i on o commanderD of the f orces was ra i se d ; an d if th ey had a right to complain of hi s no t h av i ngcensure d th e conduct of i f o si they might equally complain that he had not bestowed sufficient praise on others. They must, however, i n %test t their.' commanders with • very larZei 4&clgtien ray powers when they entrusted them with their armies. It would, perhaps, be said, " Is it not monstrous that, men should have their characters reflected upon, and have no me me of redress ? That was not, however, the case. It was open to any one le prove that the commander of the farces had not acted wisely. Lord Lucan had hie tensely open to him. If lie could prove that Lord Raglan had acted un worthily or maliciously, the commander of the forces would be recalled. There were cases on record of subordi nate officers who complained in that way, and with success. It was therefore entirely a question between Lord Lucan and Lord Raglan. Let it be remembered that Lord Rag lan had previously noticed Lord Lucan in such a way that he received the thanks of both houses of Parliament. Lord Raglan hell all the while a private opinion upon Lord Lucan's conduct, and he had been forced by Lord Lucan himself to disclose it, in vindication of his own conduct. All that had been gait by Lord Raglan had been said in self-defence. Lord Raglan must be left to his full discre tion. There were cases of officers in the Peninsula who took upon them to exercise their discretion, and to disobey the orders of the Duke of Wellington, and who were never brought before courts-martial on that account. Probably the Duke thought they had acted wisely ; at all events there was plenty of precedent for exercising a discretion in the carrying out of orders. He left th e m a tt er i n th e hands of th house; it was for them to say whether or not a proper case had been made out, or one that called for in quiry. (Cheers ) Mr. FRENCH thought that it would not be easy to re ply to the statement of technical difficulties in the way of inquiry tint the house had just hoard. Lord Lucan, how ever, could not have demanded inquiry, immediate in quiry, on the spot, for he never dreamt that. a report would be made such as that which had been made. Indeed, he had been assured by General Airey and others that the report would be favourable to him ; and it was only when Lord Region's report came back to the Crimea that ,he learned what had been done. The hon. member for Bristol hail omitted to speak of the charge of the heavy brigade. That ch ar ge was execu t e d by Gneral Scerlett, but it was planned by Lord Lucan, who was therefore en titled to a share of the merit. The hon. member accused ! the noble earl of not having attendel to the first order ; but that was impossible, for redoubts could not be cap lured by cavalry alone. Lord Lucan was, therefore, obliged to wait for infantry, but it did not appear that any order for an advance of infantry was ever given. But the second order was so plain that it could not haft) been mistaken. Captain Nolan, who brought it, was an officer of great re pute, and he showed that ho had no doubt as to the mean ing of it by voiuutecring to show the way, and by riding a certain distance in front when ho received the shot by which he was uofortunate!y killed. The noble earl, there fore, had no diebrotion left him; had he sought to exorc i se any the day might h ave be en lost. That had been called a disastrous charge. He considered it one of the most glo rious charges that over was made by any body of cavalry. The dispositions made by the noble earl thet day were ernlicient to check the Russian advance, and he was him self wounded. He could conceive no iuj ustice greater than that which had been done to the noble earl. • Mr. J. G. PHILLIMORE said if Parliament were to sanctions precedent for interference in proceedings of this nature, there would not be any person Who would Lot call for the interpositionof Parliament to interfere with the Crown. There were cases in which Parliament, as the grand inquisi tion of the realm, ruieht exercise this duty. The case of Lord G. Sackvilla ' which bad been quoted, was diff erent to to this base. Lord George Sackville had been branded, and justly branded, in his opinion, as a coward by one of the that generals ef his ago, and the effect produced iu England was, that he was brought Immo and deprived of all his offices. The contrast in the present case was great, for Lord Lucan had been accused of misconceiving an order at a critieal moment, and under circumstances which male such a charge venial. His courage and zeal were unques tionable; be had been d e p r i ve d o f no offices, and every person had the highest respect for his conduct rend character during his service. Was this, then, a ease for Parliamen ilu.tirlictce-uartihaaarrttdi fe e cetni f l c o eo r i amid ,tißv the el eay. caseinA I principle t tary intsrference ? He did, not, however, think that the d man could waive a right which was fact of Lord Lucan having been since employed wares, rea sonnjt: t t '. r i n s o f e p di rr u u b c r tt f l n a u f es o p ei rurtgahhciaats pra t ctice a jn y which the Lionsiur of a soldier was concerned cuelit not to be go hough he could not assent to this argument, the other argument Mr. BE re i g ai rt u rtl .vr for said its own ift h r .l e ig la n w ity w , a a s n t t l o fur be appeared to hi m i rres i st ibl e, that no case had been made but in whi c h th e Hellas of Commons co u ld i n t er f ere with a proper the t adhered lignit to, ity of the Crown. was impossible to grant the inquiry as demanded. It was impossible for the house at the present time to judge be tween Lord Raglan and Lord Lucan ; and although the statement of the latter was a most able one, still the house could not f orm an opinion of the case from it as yet, for it was only the statement of one party. In his opinion Lord Lucan had as a soldier been hardly treated, and it was with the greatest regret' that he felt it his duty to vote against the motion. He felt it to be bit duty—for it was not right, after the Crown had exerted its prerogative, and deliberately declined to grant a court-martial, for the house to attempt to wring from the Crown what it had before refused to give. Colonel DUNNE said it must be excessively peinful for a military man to give an opinion on this case; be there fore' only wished to say a few words with respect to the very curious doctrine on military matters laid down by the Judge-Advocate. The Judge-Advocate said that it was not right to question what had already been decided, and, therefore, that a soldier had no right to question what had been decided by his superior authorities. In the abstract he agreed with this ; bat he thought that it was a subject for consideration whether the advice tendered to the Crown should not be condemned, or that alter a decision was made which the whole country thought wrong, this house was preeluded from giving an opinion. Instances had been mentioned in which the house had called on the Crown to grant a court-martial. The charges in this case appeared simple, but they were of serious import. In the first place, disobedience of an order in which Lord Lucan had exer cised hie discretion in not advancing, because the infantry were not sent. If hs had obeyed ho must ;lave advanced . without the infantry; and havin g exercised his discretion, he was accused of having disobeyed the order. In a short time the second order came, and be was accused of having obeyed that order; and further „for not having brou4 the heavy cavalry into the same :Wager as the light cavalry. He had spoken to many officers of all ranks, and they all agreed that if the Earl of Lucan had not made that ad vance he would have suffered very severely in character. By the rules of the service the order of the aide-de-camp was equal to that of the general. It was impossible to advance without coming into fire, when he must have ad vanced up to the guns, for Captain Nolan was killed directly, and the argument about the word "advance" was re mere play upon the word. Lord Lucan was informed that the French were on his left. If they had advanced they would have been lost, and a case had recently occurred where a movement had-failed because co-operation was im possible. It was clear that subsequent employment amounted to a condonation, but in this case it hardly did so. Lord Lucan was not aware of the charges which were brought against him until ho arrived in England, and there• fore there was no condonation of the disobedience of the first order. Ho would much object to see the house forced to a dividon, but he trusted that the noble lord at the head of her Majesty's Government would reconsider the ques tion; if he did not think it advisable to grant a court martial, he might grant a court of inquiry. He was sure that Lord Lucan stood before the country acquitted of any blame, and that he had discharged his duties with honour to himself and the service. Colonel SIBTHORP was understood to make some refer ence to a circular which had been sent from the War-office to the colonels of militia. The hon. and gallant member then proceeded, amidst the laughter of the house, to pass a high oulogium upon the efficiency of the Royal South Lin coln Militia. He stated, although he was not inclined to boast of what he had done, that he would shrink from nothing in his power, and that he would spend anything he could to maintain the regiment in that efficiency. In Radical times the militia had been crippled by a false economy, but he would do what he could, both in person and in pocket, to check the consequences; and if the time came—and it might come soon—when the militia would be called upon to maintain the cause of their Sovereign, their country, its religion, and its laws—when it did come, so humble an individual as himself should not be wanting, Mr. DISRA.ELI —Sir, I trust the question will not be put to a division. Having followed the debate, I entir e ly sympathise with the feelings uf a soldier like Lord Lucan, who has served hie Sovereign and his country with exem plary devotion and 1 courage—(hear, hear)—but I think the noble lord must have felt that in a free country like the one in which we have the happiness to live—where every man has the power of appareling to, public opinion, I think the noble lord must feel that the appeal which he has made to the selensn opinion of his countrymen has not been made without satisfaction. Sir, whatever may be our feelings with respect to the noble lord, and whatever we may sympathise • with his gallant behaviour under the diffi cult circumstances under which he was placed, we must with regard to our vote look at the nature of the motion. I do not wish to take a pedantic view of the nature or power of the royal prerogative • As it at present exists it is ex: tremely beneficial to her Majesty's subjects. lam not one of those who would at all hazards uphold the belief that the prerogative of the Croy,* is already too large. I would rather see the influence of that prerogative increased than dimi nished, but at the same tient" I cannot for a moment admit that there may not be circumstances in which, so far as the influence of the prerogative of the Crown is concerned, this house may not feel it its duty to interfere. It is the first duty of this house to redress the grievance of the people —and I suppose we are not arrived at that state of affairs when a nobleman may not enjoy the privilege of being accoonted one of the people—and one of the first .and greatest grievances which any man can suffer is a denial of justice. If it is our opinion that there has been a denial of justice to any subject, whether he be a patrician or a ploughboy, I maintain that it is the duty of the house to receive it, and if they believe the appeal to be just to sup port it. With these views however I cannot believe the pre sent case isone in Which we ought to sanction any interfera once with the prerogative of the Crown. I sympathise, and I believe a great majority of the country sympathise, with the peculiar position of Lord Lucan. We know that in a position of great difficulty the noble lord has shown great gallantry, and I believe, as I have heard from those who on this question ought to influence my opinion, that the noble lord has shown great energy and high qualities which entitle hire to public gratitude. I must also remember whet Lord Lucan has done as a landlord in Ireland in a time of groat difficulty, when tho affairs of that country wereplaced un der the consideration of the house. Sir, although the Judge- Advocate tells us 'Wet this is a personal affair between Lord Raglan and Lord Lucan, I cannot help eatertaiuine the conviction that, if the affair had been really loft - to ° Lord Raglan and Lord Lucan, there is nothing whatever in it which the country or Parliament would have been aware of. The comments which have been made on the conduct of Lerd Lucan by Lord Raglan ' and the rejoinder of Lord Lucan to Lord Raglan, a nd a ll that subsequently occurred as regards the Minister at War aro not of a character which rendered any public knowledge of the circumstances necs sary. It seems to me that all this has been occasioned by the recall of Lord Lucas), under the responsibility ef the Minister at War himself. What was the position of the Minister at War? Ho was a member of a Government which was in great distress and difficulty—against whom a great amount of public odium was excited—and the Minister at War apparently in my mind (although I may be' Mowing under re misconception), in a period of great difficulty, when a victim was necessary, thought that the recall of Lord Lucan, or of souse general officer, would in sown degree appease public opinion —(hear, hear)—and that vindictive craving which had seized on the public appetite. He fixes upon Lord Liman ; takes advantage of circumstances which were in his official possessioe, and as such are of official secrecy, recalls Lord Lucan—a distinguished and meritorious officer—and has led to all this discussion and debate. Notwithstanding all this, I cannot question—and will not fur a moment question—tire exercise of the royal prerogative in this case; but I think there is ono point in the question on which the Heuso of Lk: was has a iigh, to complain. It is on that account alone that I bare risen. I can readily believe that thin gallant °Neer, whose conduct has been now so impugned, labours under an infliction which must be most bitter to a man of generous anti high-spirited tlispositione I cermet. forget- that- this noble lord, in his capacity of a British general, was, only a brief time ago, marked out by her Majesty's Government for a great distinction—almost the greatest distinction which any Englishman can enjoy or receive. I remember *hen the noble lord, now absent, came forward, at the house ' to propose a vote of thanks of th e H ouse o f C oln- Mons to the generals who had distinguished themselves in those gallant victories which, whatever be the fate of this struggle, will remain for ever in the recollection of Eng lishmen. (Hear, hear.) I had the honour of seconding that propoeitien of the noble lord, and I need not tell the house that I was deeply impressed with the responsibility attached to the few words which I might utter on that Occasion. I consider that the thanks of the Parliament of England are the most inestimable reward which an Eng lishman can attain, and rank with those s y m b o l s o f t h e feelings with which sovereigns are wont to distinguish their subjects. Now I say that Government have at tempted to treat this as a mere ceremony and idle pageantry, when they asked in this solemn manner the House of Com mons to express their thanks to those general officers when they were in possession of facts which, in their opinion, justified them in recalling one-of these general officers disgrace from the scene of Isis achievements. (Hear, hear.) I do not think that. it is acting fairly by the House of Commons, and.it ie acting unjustly and unfairly to Lord Lucan, that, after havin g had this vote of thanks unanimously accorded by the House of Cumno7ns, he should be recalled with a slur upon his 'rep u t a ti on from the scene of his achievements. I think, -sir, this re quires some explanation from Government. It would be presuming in me to attempt to form an opinion as to the value of the professional services of Lord Lucan, but, as far as I can form en opinion from the discussions which have taken place, they have not injured the character of the noble lerd, although he may not re:eive the inquiry which he seeks for, perhaps not with deficient justifica tion, but with a spirit which all must respect. However that mey be, it must be tatiefactory, not only to the noble lord, but to the country, that a distinguished officer who has been engaged in the late struggle has been shown net unworthy of the confidence of the public, and I hope the result of the discussion will soothe the wounled spirit of Lord Lucan. (Hear, hear.) I caonot say that I - think the motion, either in the spirit in which it was brought forward or thb.spirit in "which it was seconded, is ono which the House of Commons can sanction, but Ido not wish it to boil:ironed that I at all join to this belief an opi nion respecting Lord Lucan which is adverse to his pro fessional reputation as a gallant and distinguished officer. Lord PALMERSTON—Sir, I must equally object to the motion, whether placed upon the grounds upon which it was moved for or placed on the grounds of my noble friend. I hope that nothing which has passed in the de bate will be considered us passing any imputation what ever on the military character of the noble lord who is the 'subject of the discussion. Nothing can be more painful to 'the house than diseuesions of this kind, involving as they do the feelings of individuals, and matters of personal conduct. (Hear, hear.) They must be topics, ,which, whatever be the subject and whatever be the occasion which gives rise to their, the house must always feel a dis position to avoid, unless forced by absolute necessity. I think they are to be peculiarly avoided when they relate to officers .in the army, and to matters of military dis cipline. It is quite natural in th e p resen t s t a t e o f thi ngs, when the attention ref the country has been so painfully oirccted to the military events of the war—it is quite nit tenet that the house should sympathise in this feeling, and hive its attention directed' to matters of this kind; but, at the same time, I think the house ought not to forget that the command of the armyis by the constitution vested in the Crown, and if the house—whose power I would not presume to limit or define—if the house takes up the habit of interfering .with the discipline of the army—takes to itself questions which, for the goOd of the service and the maintenance of good order in tire army, ought necosearily to be left to the Crown—it will do a greet injury to the country, the extent of which it is not easy to foresee. (Hear.) I think, ou the grounds which have been stated, that it is a case in which it is itepoesible to grant a court inartiel. I think the .examples which have been adduced as a justification for a court-martial go quite the other way. Lord George Germainiwae accused of not having done enough ; Lord Lucan is found fault with for having done too much. Nobody questions his courage or the ex emplary devotion which he exhibited for the public service throughout the whole period of the time in which he was employed in the Crimea. His case is precisely the reverse of that of Lord George Gez'main, because riot the slightest imputation is in his ease attached to those military qua lities which were said to be deficient in Lord George Ger main. (Hoar.) eir, I think, therefore,. that there are eufficient grounds why no court-inertial should be granted —grounds technical, grounds of expediency, and grounds Of general and particular consideration The right hon ourable gentleman (Slr. Disraeli) who had just sat down has adverted to circumstances which, I think, tell in a dif ferent manner to that in which he has applied them. He said that her Majesty's Government seemed to treat lightly the thanks of the House of Couonons, because they her recalled an officer—as ho says, in disgrace, which I utterly deny—because they bad recalled an officer to whom the thanks of the House of Commons had been given. As far as the military character of an officer is concerned, that motion for the thanks of the House of Commons is a proof that Lord Lucan well deserved the thanks of the House of Commons, and places his character in a position in which his best friends could wish to have it placed. But was he recalled for any reason at variance with that vote of thanks? Why the reason was simply this—that, qUestions of differ ence having arisen between him and his commanding officer--the Commander-in-Chief—those differences ap peared to place, both of them in relations to each other incompatible with the good of the service. In the opinion of her Majesty's Government, it was impos possible that these two officers could continue to act toge ther, and in consequence of that opinion Lord Lucan was brought home ; but he war not brought home in disgrace or with any reflection on his character. He was brought home on the ground of a personal difference with his supe rior officer, without any reflection on his character, and I should be the last-man in the world to saaetion the infer ence thus drawn. I therefore trust- that the house will negative this motion, as there are no expedient nor possi bid grounds for the house to grant it. (Hear, hc,7r.) Mr. E. DENISON sail if the debate ended at this point :there was one man who would have reason to complain of Course which it had taken. He meant Lord Raglan, must.protest against anything which would weaken or fritter away his authority. It would be unjust to him and detrimental to the .country. Lord ELCHO appealed to the hon. member for Bristol to withdraw the motion, as in the course of the debate the amplest testimony had been borne), ;lot only to the perso nal character and honour, but likendse to the miliiary ca pacity of his noble' relative. That= testimony, as well as the observations of his noble friend at the head of the Go vernment, was sati3factoryto himself, and no doubt would be equally so to his noble relative, Lord Lucan. Mr. H. BERKELEY consented to withdraw the motion, as, upon legal grounds, the inquiry it asked for seemed to be impossible. Mr. CARDWELL said, befofe this discussion entirely closed, he wished to observe upon one remark which it had called forth. The right hon. gentleman the member for Buckinghamshire had stated that in his opinion the feeling which actuated the late Government is recalling Lord Lucan was connected with the difficulties in which they were placed, and the demand of the public for vic tims. Now, that was an imputation of a character which ought not to be left in any degree of doubt, and he should be glad to know if he rightly understood his noble friend at the head of the Government as having stated that the ground of the recall was the incompatibility of Lord Lucan to discharge his duties when ho was at variance with the Commander-in-Chief. Lord PALMERSTON said his right hon. friend had rightly understood - what he meant to state. He stated that the recall of Lord Lucan turned entirely upen the dif ference which had arisen between him and .his superior officer, thereby negativing the imputation which had been cast upon the Duke of Newcastle. The recall was the act of the Government, for which he was as much responsible as the Duke of Newcastle. Mr. DISRAELI—I made no imputation against the Duke of Newcastle. I have on many, I nosy say on 'all occasions, avoided making imputations on individual Mi nisters. I-hold-the late Cabinet responsible for this suet tar, and therefore I m a d e no p er i ona li mpu t at i o h upon the Diakerof Newcastle, as distinguished from any other mem ber of the Cabinet to which he belongeLl; but with regard to this or any other matter of a like nature, I recognise no difference between the late Cabinet and the present. I look upon them both as the same Administration. (A laugh.) . The motion was then withdrawn. CHURCH RATES. Sir W. CLAY said that he rose pursuant to the notice which be had given to move for leave to introdue a bill for the abolition of church rates, and in doing !‘o it would not be necessary for him to trasspass for more than a few mo ments on the attention of the house. He believed that he could not better consult the convenience of the house than by avoiding all grounds which were likely to p rovo k e oppo sition. He should ecatine himself to a statement, is the fewest and simplest words, of the character and objects of the bill which he was about to ask leave to lay on the table 'of the house. The main element of the measure was the abo lition of church rates, and in that respect it, would be simi lar to the bill which he introduced last year on the same subject. He had felt that by the result of that abolition certain provisions might become necessary and expedient, and he had looked to the state of the law for the purpose of remedying any difficulties which might be found to arise from the abolition itself. Whilst he called on Parliament to abolish church rates, he was bound to remove all obstacles i which might steed in the way of membersuf the Established Church in making their free-will offerings for the sustenta lion of the fabtics of the churches, and for the decent mi nistration of Divine service. Tluabill 'would contain a pro vision for the maintenance of chnich rates, - Where,- under existing statutes, those rates had boon charged for the per potlei'erhich he had mentioned. The'first provision would wet: the condition of affairs which would exist after the abolition of church rates, by providing for the new relation in which churchwardens would be placed, and for the re lation of persons coming forward with voluntary contribu tions for the support of the fabric and ministration of ser vice. A provision would also he made for those eases in which churchwardens might be reluctant to undertake these functions, and for the application of voluntary rates. By another provision power would be given to the pa rishes, if they were disposed, to allot certain portions of the area of the church to pews, and to fix a rent to be ap plied to the legal pureeses to which the church rates might at present to applied ; a certain portion of the area would be set apart for the poor. In framing these pro visions, he had been actuated by a desire to alter the existing law as littl e as poss ib le. He did not propos e t o impair the priveleges of the church of the parishioners. The bill, be trusted, might be introduced as meeting the objection of many who agreed. with the necessity for a change, and that there could be no change but an entire abolition. The provisions of the bill would render the matter expedient and practicable. If the houso would so far indulge him as to allow him to introduce the bill and road it a first time, ho would take care that full notice should be given to members, so that they should have ample time to consider it, and would fix 'its second read ing so that they ehould have full opportunity to look into its deteile. Ho would open no discussion now, reserving it far the second reading. (Hear, hear.) Mr..MIALL seconded the motion. Kr. WIGRAM said that, as far as he could understand, the now provisions of the bill remained exactly' the same as those of last year. (Hear, hear.) In substance it was simply a bill to entirely abolish church rates. In ad dition to that, however, there wore provisions which en abled those who thought ,it to pay voluntarily in support of the Church, He thanked the lion, baronet for this -(laughter)—ae if they could not do that without the con sent of Parliament as they thought fit, With respect to the provision for the lotting of pews, that might all be very well in large t owns • but, in country parishes, it was im practicable. I n suc h parishes the peopl e w er e so poor that there would be groat difficulty in procuring, by voluntary subcoti, teen, stillicipt to etipport the Chtirc.h. Oa former occasions, it was demonstrated that no point of law or principle sanctioned the abolition of the rates. Those who had purchased the land were as ;ouch liable to it ao to any other ohligation. All the judges of the land had concur red in This view of the case. It was a common Lew obli getion ; and the present owners of the land having under taken it, were bound to keep to it. Neither was the bill to -be supported on the ground of expediency ; for, al though the Church might only be supported by part of the community, yet it was an institution for the rood of all—Dissenters as well as Churchmen. (Hear.) The bill, too, went further than the abolition of church rates. The only plea that had ever been brought forward for the abo lition of church rates was, that they interfered with the rights of oonscience, but the bill was allowed to interfere with all the other emoluments of the Church. (ffear,heer.) The late Government had said that they intended to bring forward a bill to amend the law of church rates ; but that was rendered unnecessary, for as the law now stood church rates could not be imposed without the consent of the ma jority of the vestry, and, cohsequently, there (scull now be DO reason for interfering with the law. Whee it was com petent that a rate could be raieed without this consent of the majority it was different; bat now a bill was wholly uneceasary. Mr. L. DA.VIES though the measure of the hon. baronet one of confiscation, and instead of tending at all to allay that strife and unpleasant feeling church rates might occasion, it would only increase them, and just ch ange t h e par ti es. With regard to th e letting ofpews, in his own locality, he ' believed, there was not a single pew that was paid for, and consequently that part of the schema would be 'an ut!er Mr. R. PHILLIIIORE was not inclined himself to offer any opposition to the first reading. The hon. baronet had told the house that he wished to introduce the measure is order that they should have an opportunity to examine its provisions, and he thought that should be granted before they decided that those provisions were adinissable. 13ut if the lion. bartnet thought he find gained favour with any Churchman by the proposition to let the area of churches out in pews he was mistaken. It was impossible to devise a more mischievous measure than that which proposed to convert the entirearoa of churches into pews, which were to be let out to the wealthiest bidder. (ilwir, hear.) Ho thought tho rights of couecienco with Dissenters should be relieved from the tax; but ha wished to ask. the hon. ba ronet if it was proposed to include Scotland? as he thought the right of conscience• with the:Dissenters of Scotland should be - considered as well as these of this country. Mr. BENTINCK protested against the measure being brought forward at a time when a full attendance of the '. house was impossible, and when they had no intimation of what course her Majesty's Governmentintended to take in the matter; but as there was no longer a Coalition Ministry on the Treasury benches, and es the noble lords .and right hon. gentlemen seated there were supposed to agree with etch other, it would be easy to determine the opinion of the Government on the matter by aecerteining the views of the particular members. The noble lord the member for the City of Lendon, when expressing himself on a former occa sion, bad said he did not think it Would be wise or consis tent with the position of the lideblishea Ca na l in this country to abolish church rotes • and as the m o ti on o f t h e bon. baronet did pr o p ose their total abolition, the house had aright to suppose the noble lord would himself oppose the motion ; and recollecting the high position he held in the Government, and the unanimity which prevailed through out of its ranks, he (Mr. Beet - hick) imagined that it wont,! also be opposed by those on the treasury benches. (Hear.) Lord STANLEY said that the proposition of the hon. bait., that the debate should be taken on the second read ing, was a More consistent course than discussing the mea sure at present, and he himself di-d not intend to stand in its way ; bats for all the bill contained—possessing as it did so few details, and evoluting so little of real principle—it mattered little whether th e i r views were expressed then or ou any other occasion. (Hear.) Ore remark he might make was, that every one agreed that the present state of the law was most unsatisfactory. (Hear.) From the Re form Bill of 1832 till the present time he had found no Go verument which kid asserted its s itisfaction with the pre sent state of things. Every Ministry had thought it wor thy of its notice, and every Minister had felt that it required anieudoretit, and if such an amendment could be proposed as would be satisfactory to the claims both of Nonconformists rued Churchmen, it ought to be supported. But no such satisfactory compro mise was proposed ; and in the absence of such a peeped hien, there was' no necessity to deal with the matter in the manner that it should otherwise be dealt with. There had been many Ministeaial measures tipen the subject within the last twenty yeara but no one of them had been found to receive the approbation of the house. (Hear.) One statement of the lion. baronet had been nsisnnclerstood ; • that which related to the power of receiving voluntary aid in the repeiriug of churches. By the law as it now stands, • the churchwarden is responsible for therofetir of the church, but as a churchwarden may decline to accept of voluntary eiti to carry out those repairs, it was proposed by the hon. baronet to alter the law in that respect. (Fleur-.) As to the question of paw rents, that was a matter of detail; but the hon. baronet did not intend, he (Lord Stanley) pre sumed, that the whole area of the church ehcull be so de voted as to be let out in hired pews butaao leave open the larger proportion of thenas (Hear, heat, from Sir W. Clay.) Bet the whole nuttier had not yet come to the time for full discussion ; still at present ho might say that he thought a fair trial should be awarded the proposal, in the absence of any other measure. (Cheers.) Mr. Di ITAIMOND thought that the hon. baronet had asked the house to give his assent to a revolutionary mea sure. The churches of England were national property. As soon as bon: members admitted that it wasenot a na tional obligation to uphold them, and to pay the ministers who performed Divine worship, they had better do what nine-tenths of the supporters of this measure desired to do. —pull down the Established Church altogether. (Hear.) And if that was the intention of the hen. baronet, why did he not manfully avow it? This was a class roeveneent. It was the middle class of people who had bought houses sub ject to the burden of church-rates, who called upon Par liament to pass this bill, and thereby rob the chureh, and by the pew system proposed by the hon. baronet, cheat the poor out of those churches into which they had a right to go. (Hear.) An HON. Maermsn—Divide, divide. Mr. DRUMMOND—Yes, you may divide, and I shall divide ag,,inst you. (Laughter.) The people of this coun try are as much bound to support the national Church as they are to support the Queen's palaces. SIBTHORP—Hear, hear, hear. (Laughter.) Mr. DRUMIIOND—The supporters of this measure al ways say that its object is to. maintain our institutions. Your Reform Bill was introduced to maintain our institu tions, and you bring in a bill to piill down the Church for the purpose of maintaining our institutions. But I say that your civil list and your national palaces stand. upon precisely the same ground as your national churches snd the payment of your ministers. (Cheers.) If you put down one, you must put down all, and do not,suppose that you are supporting any.institutions whatever by b inging in a dirty cowardly bill to pull down the Church. - Mr. E. BALL said the hon. gentleman who - had just sat down hail cast upon the hon. baronet the member for the Tower Hamlets imputations of a most ungenerous and un founded nature. The hon. member for th county of Nor folk had objected to the introduction of this measure, be cause the house was about to adjourn till after Easter; but he (Mr. E. Ball) thought that that was just the reason why the bill ought to ho introduced now, because in the Easter recess hon. gentleman would have an opportunity of considering it. The hon. and learned member for the University of Cambridge had said that the great objection, to this measure was, that, if it were passed, great difficul ties would be experienced in obtaining money to repair churches in country places. He (Mr. E. Ball) presumed that the poorer part of the population in those places were Dissenters, and yet they contrived to build and repair their chapels _and to support their ministers. (Hear.) You could scarcely find one country place throughout the whole of this magnificent kingdom, in which there were not Dissenting Chapels which were supported by the volun tary contributions of Dissenters. (Hear, hoar.) Why, then, should any fear be entertained that the wealthy part of our population would not support the Church of which they were members? If there was any ground for such a fear, he must suppose one of two things—either that they were unwilling to support their own Church, and did not hike so deep an interest in religion as Disceutere did, or that they objected to the principle of voluntary contribu tions. But he should be. very unwilling to impute either of those things to the rich members of• the Church of Eng land. But the hew, even as it stood at present, was not compulsory with regard to the repair of the fabric of the E teblished Church. Without the assent of the majority of the ratepayers, a church rata could not be imposed either in towns or in country places. And, gradually, the whole of the country would refine 'he give their asseut to the levying of church rates. Very little, therefore, was to be g a in e d by the .members of the Chur c h o f England succeeding in re sisting this bill. The hon. gentleman opposite (Mr. Drum mond), who was always ready to cast imputations upon the motives of those who differed hem him, had said that nine-tenths of the supporters of this bill aimed at the de struction of the Church. (Hear, hear.) He (Mr. E. Ball) denied that such was their intention. He was as sincerely attached to the Church as was the hon. gentleman himself. If the hon. gentleman was affectionately attached to the Church, why did he not propose to set her free from the odium which the levying of church rates and other mat ters brought upon her, whereby the affection of multitudes of the people of this country was alienated from her? "Dissenters were not unwilling to contribute voluntarily to the repair of the fabric of the church, and it ought to be the palicy of the Church to deal affectionately, and not harshly, towards them. The Dissenters were nearly, if not altogether, the majority of the people of this country. They were training 3,000,000 of children, the greater pa r t of whom were t aug ht, no t b y t h e catechism, but by the New Testament. Those children were the rising genera tion of the country, and it ought to be the policy of the Church of England not to insult, but to treat them affec tionately when they came to the age of maturity. Mr. MUNTZ said there was not a single large town in the country in which church rates were levied. The town which he had the honour of representing had not paid a church rate for the last 20 years, and the priucipl of oppo sition to the payment of church rates was spreading in the villages around that town. He subscribed to the Church as much as he would have had to r ay in the shape of church rates, but that was no reason why other people who were Dissenters,. should be called upon ho support the Church. It was absard. to say that the owners of the land of this country had bought their land subject to the burthen of church rates. • He was surprised that the members of the Church of England were not ashamed to ask Dissenters to support that Church—they might as well oskDisseeters to pay for their washing and - lodging. (Hear, and laughter.) There was no principle whatever in the matter. The ~nly principle, if there was any, was this—get what you can. The law was inetTicie.nt with regard to church rates, and it was discreditable to keep on the statute-book a law that you could not put in force. He believed that the Church was quite competent to support itself—(hear)—and if Church men were canvassed individually upon this question, he believed they would confess that they were ashamed of the church rate law. But, like the rest of mankiud, they ap proved collectively of what they were ashamed of indi vidually. Mr. PACKE was surprised that the noble lord at the head of Government had not risen to state what-course the Government intended to take, with reference to the bill of the hon. baronet. if Lord J. Russell had been in the house, he would have been the first to rise to oppose it. (Hear.) • He should certainly give the motion his un• qualified opposition. Colonel SIETHORP should oppose the bill of the hon. baronet. fie had heard with great satisfaction the speech of the hon. gentleman the member for East Surrey (Mr. Drummond—(laughter)— and for himself he should not shrink from his duty in supporting the Mother and Esta blished Church. The hon. baronet, bad brought this mea sure forward at a late period of the evening, when the house had no power of giving it due consideration and duo dis cussion. He had been taught and bred up, he was deter mined to die, in the straightforward course, right or .wrong, of expressing his opinion. (Laughter.) He op posed the motion, for it was an attempt b undermine the Church, as well as an endeavour to subvert the Govan- Lunt- He would tal7e, no dirty underhand moans of sub s•erting , tll , l he ntgret:thl that 9, measto: oi t},is llnpoit•L -- , oiti hay., 'brought forwoxd such a manner. Where was the country at the present moment, and where it had been on former occasions? This gold country was on the verge, ho hoped net of FltiPa it certainly was on the verge of danger. Hon. gentleman attacked the Church, the lew, and the naval and military departments. (Latighter.) Radicalism and the Reform /3111 had been the principal ruin of this country. (Laugh ter.) This was his honest opinion, and be had but one hope, one desire, and one wish. namely, to sacrifice his life if necessary in the service of his country. (Leughter.) Mr. FLOYER did not feel himself at all bound by the example of those hon. gentlemeh who rested their areu : ments upon the interests of our large towns. Ho thought the interests of laree towns, and large towns a lone, had been too much and too exclusively considered in that house —(hear, hear)- and that, if the interests of the country constituencies were to be.conei lereirat all, it was time hon. gentlemen should stand up and endeavour to make them .fielenowledged. There wan another consideration he wished to submit to the notice of the house They were often calied upon to rote censiderahle sums of money for the 1 11 -, int.Tnal:ce of groat institutions, eueli as the British Museum and the National Gallery, - which, being in towns, to souse extent showed the principle of the objection he had already urged. He -- begged to ask, what building was there—what institution was that—which could compare with the uhurches of this country in the advantages, the • comfort, and instruction that they offered to the poor man for the exercise of his religious aspirations ? If they were to give up church rates, he believed the greatest difficulty would be found in keeping up the fabries of our churches as they now existed. Mr. MO \VBRAY opposed the motion. The hon. mem ber for Birmingham had said, would they show him any great town where for some years past they had been able to enforce church rates ? A return had been obteinedfro m the house by the hon. member for Tavistock, which showed that, iu the large parishes of this metropolis, since the agi tation of the present question, church rates had been granted in a very great number of cases. He, therefore, de itied teat the popular feeling was as much against church neon as had been represented. Ile agreed in all that had been said on the present unsatisfactory state of the law, and everdn be ready at the proper time to listen to any reasonable change and compromise which might be pro poeed. He looked earnestly for such a proposition from her Majesty's Government, in redemption of the pledge which had been given by their predecessors in office. many of whom were members of the present Administration. Believing theie must be such a compromise, he would re cord his vote against the proposition.. Lord PALMERSTON—Sir, the question which the hon. member for the Tower - Hamlets has brought under the con sideration of the house is beset with g reat and serious diffi culties.. (Hear.) The difficulties are of two kiwis,. It is excee.tingly - difficult to maintain the law as it is; it is also exceedingly difficult to alter the law in a satisfactory manner. NoW, the difficulties surrounding e t he present .state of the L ew have long been felt. In the first p l ac e, it keeps up animosities b e tween different relig ious sects, ani mosities iu every w a y p re judicial to the i nterests of the Land, and, I should s psejedicial to the interests of reli giou—(hear) —end it 3suet tee admitted on all hands that, - if an arrangem e nt co uld b e mule for maintaining and re pairing chui - ch es without involving the question of religious controversy, it would be a great blessing. -• (Hear.) If , then, for a long time, the meintenance of lurches has de pended on the law, and if there had been differences in the construction of that law, we had a decision not long ago on the interpretation of the law which has mater illy . increased our difficulties. When it is stated by hon. gey ilernen opposite that the maintenance of the thbric of Me drareil . is pert of the established law of the hnd, they al - fool:1 bear in mind that, by a recent decision, there is ri,o s , such law to enforce--(hear, hear)—for the moment it is derided that the levying of church rates must depellcl.a the votes of the majority, - it is no - longer part of the w , of the land that the Church shall be maintained by ? l e e _ for it is optional to.levy them or not. lam sorry to n o on that antagonism which has been endeavoured to be raised between large towns and country parishes. That con iei te. ration if should not be mixed up with this question eve we come to that, in those very parishes which l e n r7Y be the largest, and in which the church f rom its eed'ye___ way . most need repair, the - majority mayb !Id r of .; to levying the rate, and the church may " dw it without any repair at ' all, I think we must allen that an alteration in the law is very desirable. (Hear' hear.) How that alteration is to be made is a very serious questi6n, and I would, therefore, bog to refrain, at tpe ti Pr o e _" 'suet mouleet, from pronouncing any decided opinion.roe. that point.. It is said that tl e bill which has beeric! wast duced by my hon. friend is identical with that wbl_elic_.. rejected last year. I don't. think that assertion is gull ( Th e ous, rect. (Hear, hear.) My hon. friend Lae shadooe.-heLb he indeed, he has explained very clearly, the. proposes to substitute for the simple r.bolitipolnanof Therefore, sir, rates which he brought forwardlest year. lorn to fullest free, while reserving to the Government the shall cer deal with this measure as proposed, I fur. wie (Cheers.) tainly not oppose the introduction of the bill. nroposition, church Mr. HENLEY said he would nut. discuss the , brit p but would teem a his vote against it as th 4 ., ‘. Mr. SPOONER, who rose amidst loud cries of ven by vide," begged to remind die house that the reason. tee _ mee the project—the total abolition of church !I 'n to: place in the noble lord (Viscount Palmerston) for entertaining this alteration in the law, whereas that alteratiteou to a ilar 1853 , awl the noble lord spoke in übjec proposition in 1854. that by her Majeaty's Mr. LUSHINGTCN expressed a hop reasonable measure. Government would set this question at rest is fair and The house then divided— . 155 For the 'noti o n ....... ........... ......... 76 Against it ................................... -7 9 Majority in favour of the motion... REFORMATORY SCHOOLS. s _ bring r nAaD billl E R 0 a L ti t s I s post ub j p e e c n t °nay after the Easter recess, he should introduce ap3 sure for the amendment, in - some minor respects, of the d an, h t i o s bs n e '° rv tl ed .on Juvenile Offenders Bill of last session. 'thfitotr, leave to AGRICULTURAL AVERAGES (IRELAND). e Mr. BLAND moved fur leave to bring a bill for the better taking of agricultural averages iu Ireland. Leave given. PLACES OF WORSHIP REGISTRATION BILL. Mr. PELLATr obtained leave to bring in a bill for the registration of places of religions worship. FREE SCHOOLS. Mr. M. GII3SON moved for leave to bring in a bill to establish free schools in England end. Wales. After a few words from Mr. MILES, Mr. WALPOLE expressed a hope that the Government would let the house understand whether they intended to brine forward the Education Bill of the noble lor d the member for the City of London on the day for which it was set. down on the votes—the 16th of April—or whether they contemplated a postponement ? Sir G. GREY replied that the bill in question would not be brought forward on the 16th of April, nor was it in tended to take any step in it until the return of the noble lord who had charge of it. Sir S. NORTHUOTE expressed a hope that measures would be taken for the establishment of industrial tolled% The great difficulty in the way of education was the em ployment of children at home. If, while children were being educated, they were also learnt the rudiments of agriculture, or of some trade, and enabled to emP l° Y,S a i r ) , of their time profitably, the scruples of parents woui , overcome, and the cause of education would be benefit a and not retarded. (Hear.) Mr. HADFIELD denied that there was such want. of education throughout the country as had been asser le No loss than 2,3U0, 000 children of the working classes wore taught every week iu the Sunday schools, and the nionae— r u the Government interfered by levying rates and ta b l a I° temaintenance of schools, the voluntary c ourse of , ul t in u e. tion, which was progressing so rapidly, would be diately stopped. After a few words from Mr. HENLEY an d Mr. lIBT' WOOD, leave was given to bring in the bill. SEATS OF MEMBERS. , On the motion of M r . MUETZ, was agree°. In a, sel d member having secu re d a sea t a t prayers should be entitle to retain the same until the rising of the lioasa. HOSIERY MANUFACTURE. .islet Mr. PACKE moved for a select committee to con. the stoppnga of wages in the hosiery Mr. Packe, Mr. Wickham, Mr. Cohbett, Sir Henry hob ford, Mr. ehoothana, Sir Joshua Walmsley, Mr. Ing Lord John Manners, Mr. Gardner, Mr. MandY, a nd „, rs Bigg be appointed, with PoWer to send for persons, Papers, manufacture— Ana records, and five to be the quorum. core - Mr. CRAUFURD opposed the appointment of mittee. lie trusted that if the committee were granted, an opportunity would be give n t o m: d re a f a ir appeiutwee were Mr. FREWEN" said that as only 11 hon. Inew be ": n to named, and as lo might be appointed, it vro uld be O P -- the hon. mern)Jer for Ayr to propose other netn° s • ted. SIr.PACICE thought the names had been fairly selecba. He felt surprised at the Apposition offered by the member for Ayr. a Mr. GA.RDSER was not opposed to the appointme hers a committee but he thought that the hen. m en ' I . the n° named were aecidedly of one view. Ho hoped nation would-be posiPoned. were Sir G. GREY thought it fair, that as the .11045".5 objected to, some day should be appointed for s ele c ting:: committee. It would be more satisfactory i f th° n°u'l I tion was pus - Coone:lT -- sition t o the aP: Mr. PACKS saw no very serious oppo pointm e nt o f th e committee, anti a s Easter was at hand he hoped it would be appointed to-aio•ht. Sir J. SHELLEY said it . was quite3cldear that the nani e3 selected would not be satisfactory, were here be h tpeuecl. hoed the committee would be pbs _ T.,,,i.r... • tisfactory , an After a few words from Sir H. HALFOED a nd .3.3 - • .7 the' CAN, a division was called far, b ut r,none took PM ; motion • being agreed to. • 'n a bill to Viscount DUNCAN obtained leave to bring i . as the holidays shorten the time of .I',.rli BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE. Alr. F.REWEN moved that on Thursday, the l9th day_ of April next, nnd every alternate Thursday till t end of :tmentary elections in Scotland. May, orders of tho day shall take p r ecedence ohs ners e : la nd that on Thursday, a of motions, without giving priority to Government° .. e .. ate Thursday till the month of Juno the Govern orders u o t ordersh of the day shall take precedence o' f other ortie ot. the 26th of April, and every alter and the day, and both shall have fence of n otices of ni , tion ; and that during the month of Juno. of the session, orders of the day shall bolls o net t ices of 'notion on Thursdays, and Government order of the day shall have priority over other orders' The motion was agreed to. The oth • business et on the paper was then diepo and the house adjourned. anpdro t c il e l de til nCe_ en o as t 8.182R5. OF A HON. Westmin ster, Oa the 29th inst., at 13, Victoria - str eet, the wife of G. B. Austen Lefroy, Esq• • OF A DACIGHTEIL. wife of On the 28th inst., at I*luat Radford , E XOtar, the Captain H. Lee, 15th King's-Hussars. MARRIED. On the 28th inst. , St. Nicholas, Brighton, the iZe v ;,;, H. Watson, Ma. of Pew. Col. Cam.. and of the AtteP"r, for the Deuf and I:ent-ro - a_,.? to Aura gg l a i T t i . b d o a r u o g l l i t h e . r o o a f ee i. , la ß o ilaigtiletoCuh.arles Becket, Esq., of 11, _ DIED. On March 23, Mr. Wiliam Lewis Fermi], aged 65, the Castle Tavern, Po, :u.; -street, Linc,le's - in n, regretted by a nutees.un ciic e oi fiends. Oa the 2Uth inst., John Martin, Esq., 2) 07CfOrd.ta race, Chelsea,aged 69. On the 27th inst., Mr. John Search, of Mount -place Walworth, aged 51., Oa the 20th inst., at Clifton, near Bath, Dora Scott, E s q., late of C.ylon Ci v il Service. of ;tt Strang?, in tho Atiddlean, Fri Dodo: burg Lice 4 ;"1;-(1 Tiv MITRD O VOIJNO , Lt.ad, print er, //We Sun Otii oe, No. 1 12, I „itt - matt Preciwt of the Savoy, tho of [day, aaycti 10.1 U TR. .atancii 101. j ..—....._ , r l{4 - oEs Ticket • 2d, an • Gen+ _ azn• 6 .50 and s, trai n dingto, atop, 4 ece'er t lO a ford, le For ........._ _ _ A Y" a i high The In Lon( throu,3l , Pro,/ up:). The iron). ii Charity Ihein Cairibrt 4180 t a i Ikwerfc kit of % t P . /0 N, AL Titel The Roo on ts (:) • of Offic e t uj Wipe t ll3 l Creditor Is:ingt(. l Month o , ; 11 aY of 'A ~, stoat. IT] Memo° eat'nz. Dated 80 :leitor. a nd liar defendar L ' , 3, 1 (1 '1• 111 Elio r :d7 ;be In , n I9 th day at the c be Peren Nondi n oon, at •og upon Dated CA GE War wit , 11 11A.V 9' Arnat Preparin by Vinc e ti} ial Dr 121, pall °rpha ns enti,, pr 24 QUAlii 4, and Six Tort, Adrnigsk interestit 6d., free ItO . On Nic LECTM a Splend TELL Thursda' II AM L E VIE WS CA., bA y, A ten's Ti j A G Latin the folio lure, D E ancl Mete Ai l'terrot the Ili 1 l'elkasg• earolin'a Dres, , T itiformai pilder tii Adolissi Yoh b a ia Terrttc; Piar O mni! ',Very q 4ItUNS Fen thurct Stree:: To or ft Bet,, (31. Q. wee BOA' Thr ee Paclzet ov. 'trlE lust pi Mato/7 success. € 4 YBte it d sting every eXe:sBSl tw 'ervoi are a d, Cantlot Qnd 01 the3c