The Express.
London, England, 1858-04-21 00:00:00

THE DISEMBODIED MILITIA.

Captain ()61.tiiitif.1;hilleZItoasiilWieeretary for
War whether it was the intention of her Majesty's govern-
ment to give any allowance to the medical officers and rub-
&kerns of the militia regiments which they intend to disem-
body ; whether it was the intention of her Majesty's go-
vernment to make any change in the relative rank of the
regimental captains, and of the adjutants of the militia regl.
memo, so as to affect the seniority of the former over the
latter, and deo, whether he would explain the reasons for
such a change.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said the
Secretary for War had just written to him to request that he
would answer the question. To each subaltern there would
be an allowance equal to six months' pay, and to the sur-
geons and assistant-surgeons an allowance equal to one year's
pay, from the date of disembodiment inclusive. The pay-
masters would be continued for three months after the dU-
embodiment, and would receive • gratuity equal to three
months pay on rendering their final &eremite. The case of
militia adjutants and captains had not yet been brought
under General Peer a notice.

THIs ARMY.
Colonel NORTH wished to know from the Secretary for
War whether the ai commission to take into considera-
tion the warrant of October, 1854, had yet been appointed ;
and if en, when they were likely to meet ?
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER begged to
inform his hon. friend that a royal oommiesionwas appointed,
and would meet on the following day for the dm time.

DUBLIN FORT DUTIES.

Mr. VANCEmo- vedio; a select committee on certain
duties on ships and other imposts leviable within the port of
Dublin.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER handed
to the los. mender the draft of a motion to which he could
.

Yr. VANCE withdrew hie motion, and moved instead
that a select committee be appointed to consider the Dublin
Post Duties, end to oonahr whether an equivalent could be
obtained.

THE SEPTENNIAL ACT.
Mr. COX moved for • bill to the act of the first year
of George 1., cep. 3fi, oomt oa y called the " Septennial
Act," and to limit the &unties ef parliament to three years.
He detailed at tome length the history of the duration of par-
liaments, and argued from it that the Septennial Act was
contrary to the principles of the coutitation. As a matter
of policy, be urged that more frequent intercom/ ought to
take place between members and their constituents.
Mr. HADFIELD seconded the emotion.
Mr. WALPOLE brought forward a variety of historical
facts to show that under the Tudors and the Stuarts the
duration of parliament was often five years. It was only
after the Revolution that the alteration took place, when per-
' barneat was ordered to be suroutoaed for three or seven years,

according to drourestesom. The constitutional argument,
therefore, failed; there remained the questa:mot policy. During
the drat year the members would have to learn their business
—dung the second they would be engaged in endeavouring
to legidate—and during the third they would be seeking to
pin popularity, in order to be in •poeition to meet their
mostitnents at the aid of the period. (Hear.) Such a state
of thing§ would be anything but advantageous to cautious
and wen considerd legislation, and would render the how
not the representative of the deliberate judgment and con-
viction of the sensible and thinking part of the community,
but the mare reflex of their more hasty comelnalom Freda-
and passions (Hear, hear.) These were the redone
which induced him to oppose • return to triennial parlia-
ments. The experiment had not answered, and he thought
it would be most unwise to try it again. But had the ex-
prima (Albs Septennial Act failed ? (" Hear, hear," end
" Yes.") He heed one hon. gentleman say " yes," sad
would beg to recall his attention to what had occurred in
peellament before the Septennial Act wood, end what
Mead taken place since. Who were the great go-
vendee of the country before the probe of that set ?
Did they sit principally in the Hous of Cods= ? If hon.
seembsre would loot over the names of the great ministers
of the country in former periods they would dodder Indus=
of the House of Commons nothing contrasted with that of
the How of Lords. Let them look at the Brirlefghs, the
Buckingham", the Shaftesburya, the Salisburya, the Sunder-
land', the Halifax's, the Godolphin', and at the time when
the change took plate Henry St. John, and Robert Harley
recommended their own transfer to the upper home, bemuse
Lteer woad Maw to nary on the govenumet of the dam
try more "Seise* there than in the lower holm. But what
had been the state of the lower home since the passing of
the Septennial Act The greatest number of the states-
men, and entebdy sem of the most important men who bad
podded over the asks of the country, lied been members
of the House of Commons, and not members of the other
hones He might name the author of that bill, one of the
best ministers that ever lived—• man whose love of peace
was only equalled by his love of incantational free-
dom—he meant Sir Robert Walpole. (Hear, end "Oh, oh.")
And what were the aunt now? Pelham, Grenville, end
Lard North ; end, greater than almost any minister that ever
loved and elevated the honour and dignity of this country,
OYES the first Mr. Pitt. Passing over the short reigns of
Rockingham and Shelburne, how was the next period of
history filled up ? By Mr. Pitt end Mr. Fox. And when
them two mighty chiefs were carried to their gram, where
they now sleep side by side, they were followed by • man to
whose memory he might allowed to pay a tribute of little
Vial
less than affection—Mr. Portend • end with the ex-
ception of the Doke of Wellington, Earl Grey Lord Mel-
bourne, and the premed prime minister, most of whom bad
risen to eminence through their conflicts In the House of
Commons, he would ask the house whether the greatest
names to wh'ck historians end posterity would hereafter
Mir would not be the names of the Commoner Canning—
(heir, hear)—the Commoner Peel—(bear, hear)--and per-
haps he might add, without being supposed guilty of Benny,
the Commoner Lord John Rmsell, and the Commoner
Lord Palmerston? (Hear hear.) Not only had the
character and position of the House of Commons been raised
during the existence of the Septennial Act, but legislation
had been improved. He did not attribute all this to the Sep
taunt.' Act, but he did attribute a great deal of the dignity,
power, ability, and authority which the house had examined
to that measure which the bon. member now asked the house
to repeal. He trusted that since the legislation of the country
had unproved under the Septennial Act--einoe the authority
of the house had in no respect been lowered—since it had
been kept in harmony with the other house, which he doubted
would have been the case under the Trimnisl Act—since eta-
bili ty,aud authority, and dignity had been added to the executive
government, and the house had held ita own free and inde-
pendent oouree—he hoped the house would pause long and
composedly before reverting to • measure which had failed
as a substitute for • measure which experience proved had
admirably succeeded. (Cheers.)
Mr. HADFIELD, amidst loud cries for a division, was
understood to object Nth, laudation of the most corrupt
minister that ever existed—Sir Robert Walpole—and of that
great apostate, Pitt. The hon. member endeavoured to
make some further remarks but wen unable to obtain •
hearing and resumed his seat.
The howls then divided. The numbers were :

-------
67
Against it
RAILWAYS IN INDIA.

Mr. LIDDELL then rose to call the attention of the
house to the delay that has occurred in the construction of
railways in India, and to move for a select committee to in-
quire into the causes that have led to this delay. The hon.
member said he believed there were certain defects in the
praseat system of construction of railways in India which bad
base productive of considerable difficulties, but the omen of
those difficulties were easy of solution and only required
careful examination and Mammalian I. insure their removal.
Mr. CRAWFORD seconded the motion. .
Mr. BAILLIE said that it would have been better if the
government had taken the construction of the railways upon
itself, and If the cheep American system had been adopted,
instead of the dear English system. He 'bowed at length
that no unnecessary obstruction bed been caused by the In-
terference of government. The East India Company had
guaratibmd a dividend of 5 per cent. on the capital, and was
therefore obliged to media some supervision and discretion
in sanctioning railway projects; vest operations were now
going on in India, at an enormous cost. He did not see any
advantage in submitting the question to the committee.
Mr. AYRTON said that much mischief had resulted from
the daily interference of the government officials with that,
of the railway companies. lie did not, however, think a
committee necessary, se they had a prospect of a new g3vern-
went of India.
Mr. ROSS MANGLES maintained that u much had been
done as was possible under the circumstance, under the
existing system. The establishment of electric telegraphs
was a proof of the energy of the Indian government. The
Indian railways would, upon the whole, cost lees in con-
structing than the American. He admitted that the control
of the home government caused much delay, and for that
reason he Gould supplrt the motion for a committee if pressed
to a division.

_
REFORMATORY SCHOOLS IN IRELAND.
Mr. Bejaia DEASY moved for leave to bring in a bill
promote and regulate reformatory schools for juvenile
Weeders in Ireland. His object was to secure for Ireland
the benefits of that reformatory school system which had
beau already established in England and Scotland. The
main object of the bill was that all juvenile offenders, under
16 years of age, convicted of any offence requiring or justify-
in` imprisonment, before either a judge of assize, the court
of quarter sessions, or a divisional justice of the
in Dublin, might be sent to a reformatory school,
the managers of which had qualified it under the
provisions of the bill. The English bill have the power of
sending the child to a school to two justices ; whereas he
proposed that it should in Ireland he possessed by one. The
house might differ from him on that point, but that was no
reason for refusing to allow him to introduce the bill. Care-
ful provision was made that no child should be sent to a
school which was not under the exclusive management of per-
sons of the same religious persuasion as the parents or guar-
dians ' • and he had thus guarded against these institutions
being used for the purpose of proselytising. As regarded
the machinery of the bill, he proposed that it
should be in the power of the Lord-Lieutenant,
through the medium of the Inspector-General of Prisons or '
of any other person appointed for that pnrpose, to subject re-
formatory schools to the most rigorous inspection, that a
certificate of such inspection should be a condition precedent
to their enjoyment of the benefits end privileges of the act.
With respect to schools which had obtained the approval of
the government, he proposed to empower grand juries in the
case of counties, and town councils in the case of towns, to
raise money in aid of voluntary contributions by means
of a rating saseesmest. In this respect he was
following the precedent of the Middlesex Industrial
Schools Act. He proposed also to confer on grand juries
and town councils power to contract with the managers of
reformatory schools for the maintenance of children • and he
further proposed to give the Treasury the power which they
pomessed under the English act of allowing a certain gum,
not exceeding 6e. a week, towards the expense of mainte-
nance. The bill provided also, in exactly the earns manner
that the English act did, for the recovery from parents of a
portion of the expense of maintaining their children in a
reformatory school. There was another; provision, which
was not contained in the English act, namely, a provision
for enabling the managers of a reformatory institution to
place a child before the period of discharge had arrived out at
service, if any person was willing to take him—en
arrangement which had worked very well in oonnexion
with the Mountjoy Prison in Dublin. There might be some
points of difference with regard to the details of the bill ;
but they must be all agreed as to the object, and be did not
think, therefore, the house could reject the motion.
GREER seconded the ration. He said that there
was now a greet deal of accommodation to spare in week-
bean's, and he thought that this accommodation should be
plead at the disposal of parties for the purposes of reforma-
tories. This would require a slight—and but a slight—
alteration in the machinery of the bill.
Lord NAAS said it was not the intention of the govern-
ment to offer any oppositionto this bill. The question was
surrounded with mazy difficulties ; but if the government
could see any way of getting over those difficulties it would
certainly do its best to forward the general object of this bill.
He might mention that the number of children convicted at
sessions was only 67. This would show that the evil was
not one of great Intent. (Hear, hear.) He merely said this
that the house might really know the state of the case, sad
not by we of opposition to the bill of the hon. member.
Mr. PALK thought there was reason to fear that this
scheme would not succeed in Ireland. Reformatory schools
were necessarily expensive if they were to be in any way
effective ; and it should be remembered that the county rates
in Ireland were already sufficiently large. He certainly
thought that it would have been better had the hon. member
waited until the result of the scheme in England was seen.
Mr. Ds tOT replied.
The motion was then agreed to.
REGISTRATION OF VOTERS (SCOTLAND.)
Bit Z. COLEBBOOKS awed for leave to briag in a bill