The Sun.
London, England, 1855-05-11 00:00:00

same causes that delayed the other bills operated also
with regard to it. (Hear.)
THE CANDIA TRANSPORT.

Mr. MOODY asked the Under-Secretary for War
the cause of the detention of the Caudle, and whether
demurrage was to be paid, and, if any, to what amount
per day, and from what date for such detention; also,
whether any special report as to her sea-worthiness had
been recently made, that the lives of those sent out in
her might not be endangered.
Mr. F. PEEL said that, according to the information
he had received, the detention of the vessel was caused
by an opinion expressed by the officers at Woolwich un-
favourable to the manner in which she had been fitted
up. In consequence of that opinion, the members of
the transport board inspected the vessel, and satisfied
themselves that there was no ground for apprehension
on that score, and accordingly the vessel had proceeded
to sea, after a detention of four or five days only. No
demurrage had been paid, as the vessel was a hired one.
THE CANTERBURY DUEL.
In reply to Mr. 0. STANL,IY,
TI-. F. PEEL said he believed an investigation was
now being made into the circumstances attending the
late tran,,actions at Canterbury, and the hostile meeting,
or " mock duel," as it had been termed, between two
officers of the Enniskillen Dragoons. As he had, how-
ever, no intimation that the hon. member would put
snob a question to-day, and was consequently not pre-
pared to answer it satisfactorily, he would beg its post-
ponement until to-morrow.
Mr. STANLEY said he would renew the question to-
morrow.

THE VIENNA NEGOTIATIONS.
Mr. BRIGHT said he wished to ale the noble lord
at the head of the Government a question arising out of
the protocols which had been laid upon the table of the
house. He observed in the last protocol that there was
a passage which gave the opinion of the Austrian Go-
vernment with regard to the Russian propositions for
pace. The Austrian minister stated that the propositions
seemed to him to admit of a practical application, that
it admitted, at all events, of discussion, and contained
all the elements out of which Austria would endeavour
to offer something which might lead to a settlement of
the question now at issue. He wished to ask the noble
lord whether Austria had submitted any proposition
since the 26th April, which was the date of the last pro-
tocol, and whether he would be able to lay that proposi-
tion before the house as distinctly as the other propositions
had been laid / He should like also to ask whether
any other proposition—and there was a strong rumour
of one having coma from Paris—had been received ;
and further, if they were to understand that the nego-
tiations were formally closed ? He did so, because he
should not like to bring forward any motion relative to
the negotiations if he thought they were not absolutely
terminated. (Hear, hear.)
Lord PALMERSTON said there had been no formal
or written proposal from Austria of the nature alluded
to by the hon. gentleman. Verbal communications had
passed between the representatives of the Austrian Go-
vernment and those of the English and French Govern.
ments, and also between the representatives of the
French and English Governments; but he was sure the hon,
gentleman would perceive that in the relations subsisting
between the two Governments it would not be at all
advantageous to give a detailed explanation with regard
to them. With respect to the question as to the nego-
tiations being entirely broken off, his answer would be
similar to that he had given on a former occasion—
namely, that there were the elements of a Conference
still at Vienna, in the persons of the Ministers of
Britain, France, Austria, and Turkey, and there-
fore, if at any time propositions should be made
by Russia directly, or by Austria on her behalf,
which appeared to alter the state of affairs, or to offer a
fair prospect of bringing the negotiations to a successful
termination—there were the means and elements for
receiving them still at Vienna.
Mr. BRIGHT wished to know whether the house was
to understand that the matter was in such a condition
that any motion with regard to those negotiations, and
the fullest discussion of them would not be opposed by
the Government as prejudicial to the public service.
Lord PALMERSTON said the hon. gentleman must
use his own discretion with regard to that point. If his
(Lord Palmerston's) opinion was asked, he did not think
any public advantage would arise, but he could
imagine that certain inconvenience might result
from the Government being compelled in the present
state of things to enter into a detailed discussion upon
what had passed. That was his own opinion, but he
did not presume to dictate to the hon. gentleman.
Lord J. RUSSELL gave notice on the part of her
Majesty's Government that it was his intention to in-
troduce two bills with reference to the constitution, &c.,
of Australia.
Mr. DISRAELI asked the noble lord at the head of
her Majesty's Government if he understood the noble
lord to say that the business of the house would com-
mence to-morrow with the adjourned debate on the
newspaper stamp, and the financial measures after
Lord PALMERSTON—Yes.
THE INDIAN ARMY.
Sir E. PERRY rose to move, in pursuance of notice, for
a select committee to consider and inquire how the army of
India may be made most available for the war in Europe,
and to inquire into the steps necessary to be taken if it
should be deemed expedient to constitute the army of the
East India Company a royal army. He said he had now to
bring forward a motion which had stood on the paper for
some weeks, and which the noble lord at the head of the
Government had thought of sufficient public interest to
warrant his allowing him to bring it on in preference to
the Government orders. As the motion had been in some
degree changed in its terms, he thought it desirable that
he should state, before he proceeded to speak of its merits,
what the motion actually was. His object being essen-
tially inquiry, he had asked several members of the house
what they considered the best method of obtaining an
impartial inquiry into the facts of the case, and
he found them unanimously of opinion, that for that pur-
pose there was nothing to be compared to the appoint-
ment of a select committee. He was also informed that
his subject being a military one, it would conduce to his
success to ask for a royal commission. He framed his mo-
tion in accordance with that view ; but when he came
down to the house on the evening on which the subject
was fixed for discussion, he found that her lifajesty's Go-
vernment were about to oppose his motion, on the ground
that what he asked for was a royal commission, and not the
more constitutional tribunal of a select committee of that
house. Accordingly, he re-changed the motion to its original
state, and he was confirmed in his opinion that that was the
best course, by the fact that the hon. and gallant member
for Westminster, who would second his motion thatevening,
considered that the royal commission which had sat upon
the army had proved utterly inadequate to the purposes in
view. He ought perhaps to apologise to the house for
introducing a subject which might perhaps in many re-
spects have been more adequately treated by a military
man ' • but his excuse for doing so was that in India
he had had opportunities of becoming practically ac-
quainted with the civil and military organisation of the
country. He assured the house that he had no other oh-
ject than that of developing the resources of the empire,
and strengthening the relations between England and In-
dia. He regarded the subject as one which was at the
present time peculiarly fit for inquiry. Even the answers
which they had heard that night to the questions put by
the hon. member for Manchester, confirmed him in the
impression that it became them all to brace up their minds
for a struggle from which it was impossible for them to
withdraw without disgrace. If this war was to last—
and that it would last was a possibility which everybody
was contemplating—he affirmed boldly that they must
look to the Indian army for reinforcements. It was
obvious that India was a country which had great
military resources • and unless the difficulties which
presented themselves were insuperable, they ought
to be employed in an emergency like the present. If
the house would allow him, he would enter into some
details as to the strength of the Indian army, and
as to its organisation and efficiency ; and he could
assure .the house that such details were by no means
within the reach of superficial inquirers. Even now, al-
though he had given his best attention to the subject for
many weeks past, he was not in a position to give an accu-
rate statement as to the total military force of India. The 1
late Sir Charles Napier, soon after accepting the post of
Commander-in-Chief in India, endeavoured to ascertain
what was the amount of force placed under his command,
and he (Sir E. Perry) heard him state that, after having
summed up the force to the amount of .400,000 men, he
found that there were still troops to be enumerated, and
gave up the task in despair. During the last few weeks he
had moved for a return with the view of obtaining accurate
information, but that return did not supply all the facts
which he desired to lay before the house. He had gone,
therefore, to Parliamentary returns which contained in-
formation here and there on this subject, and he would now
give as complete a statement as he could as to what the
military force at the disposal of the East India Company
really was. Taking the last return, which was laid before
the committee on Indian affairs in 1853, he found that the
Indian army, including the Queen's troops in the pay of
the East Indian Company, amounted to 289,529 men. This
force included about 30,000 Europeans in the service of
the Queen, and 20,000 in the service of the East India
Company. The contingents supplied by native princes
raised the total to 349,000 men ; and including 35 batta-
lions of militia, and other forces, the result at which he
arrived was, that there were altogether 457,000 men, and
; so thati the num-
ber officers, who were maintained at the expense of
20,596,000 L This exceeded the number and expense of I
exceeded that of
the French army in 1852. In that year the army of France
men, while the excess
numbered 377,000 men, and 19,601 officers, who were
-chief, and a separate
th e eFmaintained,retnhceh laanrtt
aynn ebaxyrpmne nye sa era
t.oyf
that2c,33loooto, OCi
time
ece hrg-igi- el
iefd chief
of
thenf her Majesty's
of cost was 8,000,000/. It is well known that the army
in India was divided into three distinct arms, each army
principle of the
the Company's
attention of the
y
the house to the remark which ho was about to make, as
regimentsah'traanhaving
wasaT
aei
pea al
also
iniedraaa. a id
commander-in-chief a-
commander-ineiPndb-
Government of India. The large army Was placed entirely
it would show what was the fundamental
under the control of the civil power; the Governor-Gene-
ral was supreme over it; all its movements rested exclu-
sively with him ; and, as the late Sir Charles Napier forci-
bly observed, the Commander-in-Chief in India was no-
thing more than a monstrous rdjutant-general. The house
would observe here an embodiment of the principle which
distinguished the governments of modern from those of
ancient times—the principle, namely, that the army should
be subservient to the civil authority in the State. Re had
now to touch upon the efficiency of the army which he had
described ; and in order to guard himself against the p re-
sumption of attempting to speak on a military topic ik
that, he trusted the house would allow him to read some
ime
short extracts which he had culled from Parliamentaryse
documents, and at the same time to state that he had been
esreful to select the opinions only of
_men _connected. with
her Majesty's service. The first extract which he
read was from a speech delivered in 1813 by themshould
Wellesley in the House of Lords i
The army arquim
rested too much on the footing of profit, without n India
reference
to honours at home. An army more full than th
India, of honour, loyalty, and valour, he had earmy
in
never
seen,
and ho could not have conceived that it would
authority have become otherwise. 314
it
any
did hap-
pen, somehow or other, that the officers of
the army in In-
dia were not held forward to public
vies. as much as other
-officers in Other parts of the world, and they felt .that ho-
nour...and. iliinctiones-vrerGconferretlioisei.,,i
not more
;U014%10118 pr ialportut Quit 11104 viva igra
or wore de: