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

THE SUN. LONDON. SATURDAY EVENING, MARCH 3, 1855.

member had alluded, that'either he or any other hon. mem-
ber should have brought the subject before the notice of
the house. So much misrepresentation had, however, ex-
isted with respect to his conduct, that he claimed the at-
tention of hon. members while ho explained what were the
real facts of the case so far as he was personally concerned.
First of all there was in the letter, as it appeared in the
public press, the words, " from the maintop of the Aga-
memnon." These words were not in the letter which hehad
written, they were a perfect myth. The letter was written
from the Agamemnon, the ship in which he had been stay-
ing.for some time ; he had previously been travelling with
a gentleman for six weeks on terms of the greatest inti-
macy. When -he left him at the Agamemnon, he (Mr.
Layard) agreed to write to him, and although that gentle-
man was a member of the press in London, he separated
him from his employment and profession, and having a
great personal esteem for him, he wrotetwo letters upea
ono occasion, which were sent off by the same post. One
letter contained a statement of various facts which might
have been published by any one, and the letter concluded
with the words, " You are at liberty to make use of the
facts, but do not print the letter." That letter contained no
reflection whatever upon Admiral Dundas, but there was
a private letter in which those remarks wore made which
had given offence to the gallant admiral. He had been ac-
cused, very unjustly, of betraying confidence by referring
to a private letter, with the contents of which he had been
made acquainted. But what were the facts connected with
the case? A captain in the navy brought a letter to a table
at which there were present some 15 or 20 persons, some
civilians, and others officers iri the army and navy.
That letter was read at the ' ble, and it contained; the ex-
pression which was made are of in his letter what had been
published. That expression wits to the effect that Admiral
Dundas rejoiced at the sinkiug of the Russian fleet. The
moment he (Mr.Layard) saw the private letter which he had
written had been published, ho want to see Admiral Lyons,
and to the captain who had read the letter at the table, and
apologised for the indiscretion of which he had been guilty,
and told them that the letter was a private one, and that it
was against his wishes that it had been published. With
Admiral Dundee he was not able to have any communica-
tion, as he was out at sea. He had not for a moment the
slightest notion of casting any imputation upon the private
character of the gallant admiral, or to insinuate that he did
not possess that courage which was shared by every Eng-
lishman in the army or in the navy. On the return of Ad-
miral Dundee to this country reports were spread about
that proceedings were about to be taken against him, and
he told all the friends of the gallant gentleman that he was
perfectly willing to explain away the• statement he had
made in any manner they might desire. When, therefore,
his hon. friend the member for West Surrey (Mr. Drum-
mond) °erne to him, he (Mr. Layard) said, whatever you
will dictate I will write and sign as a man of honour. The
letter which had recently been made public was written at
his hon. friend's dietetical, and Admiral Dundas had ad-
mitted that the explanation was perfectly satisfactory.
The gallant admiral stated that he did not rejoice that the
Russians had sunk their ships in any other sense exchpt that
by so doing they had saved him the trouble of doing it for
them. He (Mr. Layard) accepted the phrase as so inter-
preted, he had written the letter dictated by his hon.
friend, and thought that no hon. member would have
thought of bringing his conduct in this respect before the
house. He was perfectly ready to admit that he had acted
with indiscretion, but hoped that, at the same time, he had
acted afterwards as au honourable man in the affair. (Hear.)
Mr. H. HERBERT explained that it was not his inten-
tion to have charged the hon. member with having com-
mitted any breach of confidence, but had alluded to the
case with the view of showing the danger of those pro-
ceedings being conducted in private.
Sir B. Hall said that he had voted against the original
motion for inquiry, because he felt that if the committee
were granted, and a full and searching inquiry weremade, it
would lead to most serious and disastrous results, and might
perhaps cause disruption between ourselves and our only
ally, or rather, perhaps, our only sincere ally. If the house
did not really want the inquiry to be fully gone into, and
intended by the motion merely to remove the Government,
it would have been muck more honest, and would have
shown much greater moral courage and candoursifs it had
come boldly forward with a resolution declaringrits want
of confidence in the then existing Government. He felt
thankful that he had voted against the committee, for it
now appeared that, having granted it, the house had only
created a Frankenstein, which it found itself unable to
control. He objected to the proposal to have the commit-
tee a secret one ; and when the right hon. baronet the late
First Lord of the Admiralty stated that it would be diffi-
cult to keep the proceedings from the public press, and
said very truly that the press exerted a great moral in-
fluence in the country, and that it was unadvisaMe to in-
terfere rashly with that moral influence, he was certainly
surprised to hear the hon. member for Aylesbury charac-
terise the power of the press as "a popular prejudice."
(Hear.) Who was there in that home who indulged more
in that popular prejudice than the hon. member himself ?
(Hear, hear.) But the house had now received a message
from the House of Lords—and the right hon. baronet had
previously alluded to this fact--to the effect that a person
holding the highest rank in this country would be called
before the committee. If he (Sir B. Hall) were placed in
the position of the Deke of Newcastle, and if he had given
his coasont to appear before a select committee, and was
afterwards informed that it was to be a secret committee,
he would at once rise in his place and say that he would
, not go before that committee and allow five or six gentle-
, men to extract from his evidence whatever they might
please, and place it before the house perhaps in a very dif-
ferent light from that in which it should appear according
to the tenour of the whole evidence. It was impossible to
say what might happen as regarded the character of that
noble duke. Why was he to be called before tho com-
mittee, except iu order that he might tell the whole truth
as regarded the conduct of this war when he was Secre-
tary of State for the War Department? That noble duke
might feel it his duty to give such evidence in order to
exculpate himself as might place the blame very properly
upon other shoulders than ,his own. 'Why, then, should
his evidence be subject to be tampered with, and portions
of it struck out, by hon. members? He hoped that, the
house having granted the committee, the inquiry would
go on, and•that it might be a full and searching inquiry,
conducted in the face of the public. If hon. members
. who composed the committee were afraid of the duties
they had undertaken, and afraid of conducting the inquiry
in the face of the public, ho hoped they would have the
courage at once to come lown to the house and say so at
once, and let the inquiry be either proceeded with in rea-
lity or be given up altogether. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. G. M. BUTT was at a loss to understand how tho
proposed inquiry could be a satisfactory one unless con-
ducted in a public manner. Ho felt certain, indeed, that
the inquiry could never be fair or just, never could be
right, unless it were conducted in suck a manner as that
those who might be subjected to charges could know what
the charges were, by whom and in what form they were
made, so as to be able to give the evidence which might
be necessary for their defence or exculpation. With re-
spect to the original motion, he denial that he had given
his vote with anything like hostile feelings towards the
Duke of Newcastle. Ho gave his vote for the inquiry, be-
cause he really felt no confidence in the Government, all
the members of which were equally responsible for that
state of things which, in his opinion, had rendered in-
quiry necessary. (Hear, hear.)
Lord PALMERSTON said—l wish, sir, to state shortly
to the house the grounds upon which I am adverse to the
motion now before the house. When this motion was first
announced yesterday, I confess my own impression was
strongly against it, but at the same time I wished to hear
what reasons might be assigned, if any, for the course
which it was intended to adopt. I have listened with great
attention to everything which has passed in the course of
this discussion, and I am bound to say that I have heard
nothing which has in any degree altered the opinion
which at first sight I had formed on the subject. No doubt,
when this committee was first proposed, I felt and expressed
the same objections against its appointment which have now
been urged by the hon. and learned member for Sheffield
as a ground for making the committee a secret one. I felt
that it was possible—and I so stated it to the house—that
it was very likely the course of inquiry might lead to mat-
ters involving danger to the relations so happily subsisting
between us and our great ally. The house overruled that
consideration ; and this was urged not by one, but bymany
hon. members, that that was an evil which might arise
from the investigation. The house, however, with a full
knowledge of that possibility, notwithstanding determined
twice—nay, thrice—that the inquiry should be prosecuted.
I stated, when the question was as to naming the com-
mittee, that, in my own opinion, it was net desirable to
fetter the committee by any instructions. I thought that
if we submitted this inquiry to men of discretion and
judgment, it would be better not to fetter their investiga-
tions or their proceedings by any instructions from this
house. The same principle indaced rue to think that we
should not impose a restriction as to secrecy. There are
occasions when it might be necessary to impose the restric-
tion of secrecy. If you had to lay before the committee
documents which could not be made public without incon-
venience to the public service, or documents which might
involve danger to individuals, in that case it might be ne-
cessary to make your committee a secret one. There are
certain reasons which require a committee to be secret,
and there is a power to make it so. There are occasions
when witnesses have to be examined touching, their own
affairs, in which great delicacy must be observed, and who
may with much justice require that their evidence should
not be made public, and on those occasions you have a
secret committee. But here you are to examine witnesses
with respect to matters in which they have no private in-
terest whatever for requiring secrecy, and though members
may observe, and doubtless would observe, secrecy, you
could have no restraint on them whatever. They would
go home from the committee-room, and if they
printed the proceedingsyou mightstop them, but you would
have no power whatever to prevent them from stating in
conversation the matters they had hoard ; therefore the
secrecy you would impose on the committee would be of no
value whatever. Then there is this inconvenience beyond
what I have stated, that the public would never be satisfied
with an inquiry of which they did not know the result.
They would think it was a mere juggle. They would think
that the House of Commons was merely redeeming a pledge,
awl that the inquiry would be a proceeding replete with
injustice to many persons whose conduct would be made
the subject of the investigation. For these reasons I shat
certainly give my vote against making this a secret corn
nsittee. (Cheers.)

Mr. DISRAELI said—There is no doubt that the ap.
pointment of a secret committee is a proceeding which the
House of Commons should hesitate to sanction without a
clear necessity. There has been only one instance in which
a secret committee was appointed since I had the honour
of a seat in this house, and I felt it my duty to resist that
motion. It was a subject of great interest which it was then
proposed to investigate--the conduct of the Post-office in
opening the letters of foreign refugees. That subject was
brought bofore the house by the hon. member for Fins-
bury; and the conduct of the Government of Sir R. Peel,
I think in 1841, was called in question, and a select com-
mittee was proposed by the hon. member for Finsbury to
inquire into the circumstances, and into the state of the
law in reference to this matter. One of the most distin-
guished members of this house, a member of the Govern-
ment, and, I believe, himself responsible for the act in
question, although it was performed through a colleague—
the right hon. gentleman who has given us the information
to-night that he is now only a private member of Parlia-
ment—the right honourable member for Carlisle, then in-
structed the house as to the lino of conduct it ought to
take. lie stated that if it was to be a committee of in-
quiry, it should be a searching committee; and, if a
searching committee, that it should be a secret one; and
the right hon. gentleman moved an amendment to the
motion to the honourable member for Finsbury, to the
effect that the proposed committee of inquiry should ho
committee of secrecy, and the house adopted that amend-
ment. I do not say that that was an occasion in which I
could justify the appointment of a secret committee, but it
may be interestingtothe house to know that not one single
tittle of the evidence given before that committee has ever
transpired. I mention this as an answer to the observation
made by the righthon. gentleman that a committee cannot
t'P tecrete. There is a great authority, that if you desire

to make your inquiry a searching one, you should make it
secret, and it obtains confirmation from the right hon.
gentleman's speech. The right hon. gentleman is fond of
using a style of rhetoric, of whioh he is a great toaster,
which I may designate as the oratory of terror—(a laugh)—
and on this occasion he has indulged in that style of ora-
tory, and has accumulated every possible and impossible
danger which he says might arise from a secret committee,
in order to influence the house. I think that, should this
committee be secret or select, it will be beneficial ; and I
do not anticipate any of those dangers shadowed by the
right hon. gentleman. I hardly recollect an occasion of
importance on which the right hon. gentleman has not ap-
pealed to the mace on that table, and has not knocked
down the house with it. (Laughter.) Ther© is, however,
one circumstance in this discussion which excites in my
mind some suspicion, and which must have some influence
on the decision of the house—that every person who is op-
posed to a secret inquiry has also been opposed to the ori-
ginal inquiry. That circumstance makes me lock with
considerable suspicion on the proposal. I cannot admit
the arguments adduced by the right hon. gentleman, that
a court of justice should never be a secret one, for we have
precedents for inquiries of a secret nature by such tribu-
nals, as, for instance, that by the grand jury. Then again it
has been argued thatit is impossible to maintain that secrecy
which is the object of this motion. I cannot conceal from
myself that from the nature of this inquiry, from its being
of so multifarious and comprehensive a character, the cliff',
cultiee of netintaieiug sect ecy will ho proportionately great;
nor can I understand how you can draw a line between
the admission of the public and of members of this house.
You woulki probably have garbled accounts of the pro-
ceedings and evidence published. I cannot credit for a
moment that if this were to be a secret committee, the
secrecy would not be honourably kept. I would have,
confidence in the common sense and honour of the mem-
bers of title house, and I would [not believe that the
se-
crecy would -oe violated. I leslieve this, that practically,
by excludiig both the public and members, you might ob-
tain the olject of this motion ; but against that conveni-
ence thereis the great disadvantage that must be expe-
rienced if an inquiry of national interest, in which the
feelings ant honour of the country are centered, should
be carried on in a manner which would excite suspicion
and distrust. I think the balance is in favour of a public
inquiry.
,Hoar.) Ido not myself anticipate those disas-
trous consequences from this inquiry to the maintenance
of the friendship between ourselves and our ally which has
been so frequently and so needlessly referred to. I repeat
that I put my trust in the discretion and ability of those
whom we have appointed to inquire. Prudence and cau-
tion aro Use characteristics of a select committee of the
House of Commons. (Hear.) I do not pretend to say
(het there are nit end advantages of another
class to those I have mentioned, but I think the balance
of advantage is greatly in favour of an open inquiry. Al-
though it may be for the personal convenience of members
that the public should net be admitted, I think it would
be advantageous if, in this public inquiry, means could be
taken that the results of the inquiry should appear before
the public in a complete and impartial manner. If the
house determine that this shall not be a secret committee,
I trust that the committee will take care that the reports
of its proomdings shall be authentic. (Hear.)
Mr. H. DRUMMOND, as one of those stigmatised as an
inquisitor, hoped he would be permitted to make a few
remarks. He had not given a factious vote when the com-
mittee was appointed, for there was only one consideration
then present to his mind-- what would be the effect on the
minds of air soldiers should the House of Commons refuse
such an ineuicy. It was well known to what objects the
inquiry WAS to'be confined; and he saw no possible danger
that mill arise from inquiry why the house that day
should vete 4,000 horses to go to the Crimea when they
had not s morsel of bay there to-feed them. (A laugh.)
He had heard much use raade of those suspicious words, a
full and searching inquiry; and every one expressed a con-
viction that there was danger in it to our alliance. He
was not ernmeured of that alliance. He doubted that al-
liance, ant perhaps before the session was over he might
state his minion with respect to it. But it was not before
this comnattee that that question could arise. He thought
that the pdicy of the war, an of our national and military
proceeding+, should be altogether excluded from inquiry.
The right hon. gentleman had talked of the press, and he
(Mr. Drummond) knew that there were men who had a
cowardly 'ear of the press; and it was because he knew
that thesewere not the men who wielded that bauble, the
mace, against the House of Stead, that he thought there
was any dagger at the present moment. But the danger
was now free an opposite side ; and there was not a man
who dared to his duty against that danger. Of all the
cringing baseness that ever appeared in English hearts,
commend hill to the cringing conduct of Liberals to the
daily press.
Mr. ELLICE was in favour of a close committee, pub-
lishing its evidence from time to time, as certain portions
of it were completed.
Mr. ROCHE said they had better hand the matter over
to the Government, and abandon their idea of a committee,
for a majorty of the members appointed were already ap-
palled at tie task which they had undertaken.
After a few words from Mr. J. BALL and Mr. BENTINCK,
Mr. T. DTINCOMBE, in consequence of some observa-
tions made by the noble viscount the First Lord of the
Treasury, lad put a question to the hon. and learned mem-
ber for Selnffield, for the purpose of ascertaining if it were
his intenticn to press the inquiry. The hon. and learned
gentleman answered that ho was in earnest, and, come
what might, he would prosecute the inquiry. (Hear.) Not
one word was then said about a secret committee, though
secrecy was certainly advocated by many hon. and right
hon. gentlemen who opposed the appointment of any cone
mittee, and objected to any investigation at all. (Hear.)
When the right hon. baronet the member for Droitwich
was appointed on the committee, he was exceedingly can-
did. He sail he would act upon it on the condition that
there should be the moat searching inquiry ieto.the state
of the army, and he saw no danger, then, in the investiga-
tion. He never said a word about the committee being.
secret. That was not one of the conditions. He said, " I
shall be a sort of ferret on this inquiry ;" but he never
stated as one of the conditions on which be would consent
to serve that it should be a secret committee. The right
hon. gentleman, however, told them that evening that the
j condition on which the majority of the committee would
consent to servo would be secrecy. Then let them appoint
another committee. Nino other names could be got as
good as the nine who would only serve on that condition.
The committee was appointed in accordance with public
feeling, and that public feeling would nit allow that in-
quiry to be stifled, evaded, garbled, compromised, or mys-
tified. The objects of the committee would be more offec-
tively attained by publicity, and less injustice to indivi-
duals would be done by the committee being public.
(Hear, hear.) When the late Secretary-at-War opposed
the committee the other evening, he was ready to agree to
an inquiry into the conduct of those whose duty it was
to administer to the wants of the army in the Crimea. He
said he was quite ready that his cenduct should be inquired
into, and was it right that his vindication —if it should bo
a vindication—should not go forth to the public. (Hear,
hear.) He would say the same thing of the Duke of New-
castle. In the course of his experience, ho (Mr. Duncembe)
did not recollect any public man who was so loaded with
obloquy as the Duke of Newcastle, and was it quite right
that he should have no opportunity of coming before that
committee? (Hear, hear.) -Whatever his vindication
might be, it should be as public as the obloquy ; and if he
had no vindication to offer, let the obloquy rest upon him.
They must recollect the opinion that haul been given by
the noble lord the member for the city of London, and the
correspondence that had been read, from which it appeared
that great credit was due to the Duke of Newcastle for the
manner in which he had discharged his duty ; that it was
the fault of the system, and that he was controlled by
others. (Hear, hear.) The Duke of Newcastle made au-
other statement in another place, and the public generally
thought that the statement made by him was perfectly
satisfactory. Ho (Mr. Duncombe) had never heard that
statement controverted in that house. (Hear.) The noble
duke should go before the committee, and the committee
should publish the evidence they received, and the only
instruction to the committee should be that they should
report from day to day, and thereby any misrepresentation
on the part of the public press or any other person in the
room would be avoided. (Hear.) They were told that
they would in some way or other injure their alliance with
France; but they had appointed no committee to inquire
into anything connected with the French army, and the
committee would be justified in stopping any inquiry con-
nected with France. (Hear, boar.) The public wanted
to know what had become of the army that had been sent
to tho Crimea—who had starved them, who lead refused
them shelter, and why disease had overtaken them—
but they did net want to go into the policy of the war.
(Hear, hear.) Suppose the Duke of Newcastle, the First
Lord of the Admiralty, or the late Secretary-at-War
said they would only give their evidence on the condition
of the committee being secret, there would be cause for
the committee to come to that house, but at present they
had no cause to come there ; they had examined nu one .;
they were in no difficulty, but there was a little squabble
amongst themselves. (Hear.)
It was really time that
something should be clone with the committee. They
should have members on it who had some fortitude,
strength, and courage about them—(hear, hear)—and they
should not be troubled with such childishness. (Hear.)

The wrongs of which the people complained had been pa:
radecl in the face of the world, and they required that
those disasters and wrongs should be inquired into by the
light of day. (Rear.
Mr. NAPIER thought the tribunal appointed to inquire
into this matter was the beet
,oar ..f the natAle in which
the inquiry should be conducted. He felt that the com-
mittee were sincere in the opinion they had given ; and he
should, therefore, give his vote for the motion.
Mr. OROSSLEY said that if the committee were to sit
with closed doors, members only being allowed to enter,
reports of the proceedings would be published from day to
day in in incorrect manner. If they had a committee at
all, let It be public, and let every qutstion put and answer
given hi fully reported. He was satisfied the public would
soon pee that what had been referred to this committee
could never be done by it, and that if this war were to be
managed at all it must be managed by the executive
Government. (Hear, hear.)
Sir lI,WILLOTJGHBT thought it was the duty of the
house to take care that the inquiry should enter a safe
channel. It was quite clear that if they attempted to make
the committee secret, they would occasion evils of the
greatest magnitude, and he should, therefore, join with
the noble lord the member for Totness in resisting the
motion. (Hear.)
Mr. BOWYER understood that the proposition for a
secret committee was advocated because the committee
would thereby be enabled to erase such portions of the
evidence as in their opinion ought not to he published.
That, at first sight, might appear to be a specious argu-
ment ' • but unless the public were to hear not only the
truth but the whole truth they would not be satisfied.
Mr. ROEBUCK, in reply, said the proposal he had
made to the house was of an extraordinary nature, whilst
the instrument which ho had asked permission to employ
for the purpose of this inquiry was equally exceptional ;
but the Unequivocal expression of opinion which had been
pronounced against both wonld preclude his going to a di-
vision.
.(Hear.) He should yield to the almost unani-
mous opinion of the house in favour of publicity, and pro-
coed with the inquiry in the ordinary manner, resolving,
nevertheless, to have a thorough and searching investiga-
tion. (Rear, hear.) His colleagues wished for a thorough
and searching investigation, hut they thought it could only
be had through the means of a secret investigation. The
house, however, seemed to be of a different opinion; bat it
was somewhat strange that the great majority of the per-
sons who opposed secrecy were those very members who
were opposed to the appointment of a committee
altogether. To use the language of the hon. member for
Aylesbury, they considered this motion as a triumph on
their part; but to bring in aid a homely expression,
" what was sauce for the goose was sauce for the gander,"
and although lie (lid not mean to say that either he was
the one and the right hon. baronet the member for Car-
lisle was the other—(a laugh)—he must yet remind the
right hon. baronet and the house that, when it was pro-
posed in July, 1814, that a committee of inquiry should
be appointed into the conduct of the Post-offiee with
regard to opening letters, the right honourable baronet
was an advocate for secrecy, but he did not think the
matter could be fully investigated before a simple
select oorarnittee. (Hear, hear.) Now, that was pre.

cisely this case. There could not be a thorough and
searching investigation in a select committee, because
some of the witnesses might excuse themselves from giv-
ing evidence under the plea that disclosures would involve
the public safety, and the anxiety of the committee in a ek-
ing for secrecy was to do away with that excuse. The dif-
ficulties in the way of the committee were very great, but
neither he nor his colleagues were of the cowardly disposi-
tion attributed to them by the hon. member for Finsbury,
and believing the inquiry could yet be made " thorough
and searching," through the instrumentality of an ordinary
select committee, he should bow to the wish of the house,
and endeavour to devise the best means for obtaining a
satisfactory result. FRI believed this inquiry had already
dons-good—indeed the appointment of the committee had
spurred on the Government to make reforms in the army ;
and in withdrawing the present motion he must express a
confident hope that the labours of the committee were des-
tined to lead to still greater reforms. (Hear, hear.)
The motion was then withdrawn.
SUPPLY.

Ou the motion for going into a committee of supply,
Mr. RICH, who had the following notice on the paper,
said he should postpone it until a more convenient opportu-
nity, viz., On going into committee of supply of the army
estimates, to move " That it is expedient that measures be
taken for promoting the efficiency of our military academies
and other established provisions for preparing officers for
regimental and staff appointments."
Sir U. WILLOUGHBY wished to know if there would be
any further supplemental estimates in connection with the
army ?
Mr. PEEL replied in the negative, except the commissariat
estimates.
The house then went into committee of supply on the army
estimates, commencing with vote 10.
On the question that 64,0001. be voted to defray the charge
of the pay of general officers in her Majesty's forces not being
colonels of regiments, . _

Mr. WILLIAMS asked for some further information re-
specting the clothing of regiments. He gathered from what
fell from the hon. Under-Secretary the other night that it was
still to be left in the hands of the colonels, although they
would not pay for it. Now if that were so the saying to the
State would be nil.

Mr. PEEL said the colonels had superintended the clothing
for the ensuing year, but iu all future years it would be abso-
lutely undertaken by the Government themselves.
Mr. PHINN asked whether a general order had been issued
relative to the promotion of generaloffieers, and if so, whether
it contained a provision that any officer who had served six
years as equerry to her Majesty would be entitled to rank as a
general officer ?
Mr. PEEL said au order had been issued, but it contained
"''' 7'lh"eelivontre°wviasAsithen(aigiZi' hear.)e.dto,
as was also a vote for 55,000/.
to defray the charge of full pay of reduced and retired officers
in her Majesty's forces.
On the question that 318,000/. be voted to defray the
charge for half-pay and military allowances to reduced and
retired officers in her Majesty's land forces,
Mr. P. O'BRIEN took the opportunity of complaining that
officers on half-pay had been promoted in preference to
younger officers who had obtained distinction iu the Crimea
simply because they had not the means to purchase their pro-
motions.
Mr. WILLIAMS objected to the existing system of half-pay.
Officers ought to bo called into active service upon full pay,
or compelled to sell out. None but wounded and disabled
officers should be entitled to half-pay.
Col. NORTH was glad to hear this testimony of the hon.
member for Lambeth in favour of the purchase system.
Mr. S. KNOX said this remark only showed the hon. mem-
ber's ignorance of the service. Surely if one man sold out a
purchaser Came in, and how could that reduce the half-pay
list? The hon. member should inquire into these matters
before he ventured to lecture the house upon them.
After ~. few wwls from Mr. OTWAY and Lord LOVAINE,
Col. DUNNE tibserved that it had been stated that Govern-
' ment had sold commissions which had lapsed by death ; he
should be glad to know if that were so; and, if it was, what
became of the money ?
Mr. PEEL replied that such commissions had been sold,
and the money applied to the reduction of the half-pay list.
Col. NORTH entered into an explanation with regard to
the case.of the private in the 26th Regiment who was tried
and punished at Ness-castle-upon-Tyne for theft. The hon.
member for Lambeth had said the man was found guilty
by the officers of the regiment to gratify the commander ;
but, so far from that being the case, the man was tried,
not by a regimental court-martial, but by a district
court-martial, the offence being insubordination and robbery
from a comrade. The hon. member was also mistaken iu sup-
posing that corporal punishment only prevailed in the British
• army, because in the Prussian army it was much more strictly
enforced.
Mr. WILLIAMS said he had made the statement originally
on what he considered reliable authority, it having come to
him from a most respectable source. Ho objected entirely to
the punishment of flogging, the maintenance or abolition of
which depended in a great degree on the officers of the regi-
ment.
Captain BELLEW thought members were bound to make
more strict inquiry, before hazarding statements which sub-
sequently turned out groundless or exaggerated.
Mr. GILPIN strongly objected to the sale of commissions
by Government. The reasons alleged for tolerating the ex-
istence of the practice between private parties did not exist
in the case of the public.
Mr. PEEL would not wish to defend the principle of such
a method of filling up commissions under ordinary circum-
stances; but Government had thought themselves justified in
resorting to it in the emergency of the present crisis.
Mr. HENLEY inquired what became of the money received
from this sale of commissions by the public ?
Mr. PEEL said the sum realised was invested iu public
securities, and would be held for the purpose of reducing the
charge on the half-pay list which otherwise would arise when
the number of officers on active service wa.s reduced on the
termination of the present war.
Mr. lIENLEY wanted to know in what office the money
was lodged ?
Mr. F. PEEL said be imagined it was in the office of the
Commander-in-Chief. As to the names in which die money
was invested, ho could not say withont inquiry.
The vote was then agreed to.
15,707/. for half-pay reduced allowances to foreign troops,
and for pensions to wounded officers.
Colonel DUNNE asked whether the Government had ob-
tained those foreign troops
Mr. F. PEEL was understood to say that as it took 20
regiments to compose a legion, he should say that they were
certainly not in existence.
The vote was agreed to.
124,474/. for pensions to widows and officers..
Mr. MAGUIRE said he wished to allude to a subject of the
greatest importance. This vote was to provide pensions for
the widows and orppans of officers in the army ; but he could
not, for his part, understand why the widows and orphans of
the humble soldiers in the ranks should not be as much the
objects of the consideration of the state. (Hear.) The pro-
vision which existed for them was of a temporary and purely
eleemosynary kind ; and, great as was the amount raised by
the Patriotic Fund, it would not be long before it was the
duty of the state to provide for the emergency that would
then ensue.
Colonel KNOX confessed that he could not see the justice
of providing for one class and not for another. (Hear.) It
was most objectionable to be sending round the begging-box,
shutting up other • charitable institutions, and calling upon
the public to do that which it was the duty of the state to do.
In his opinion her Majesty's Government ought to make
some statement as to what were the intentions of the Royal
commission, with regard to the large sum they had at their
disposal. The Patriotic Fund of the last war was badly
managed, and he believed the balance, amounting to not
less than 80,00 J/., found its way to the National Debt
Office ; .at all events, if it were not there, it had never
been satisfactorily accounted for. . In the present case,
he trusted the Government would take on itself the
responsibility of making provision for the widows and
orphans of the soldiers, and not leave them to depend for
their subsistence on the uncertain charity of the public. Be-
dhionagot,o
who
(hear,allu
had so zealously and indefatigably assisted in providing for
wwtliht
towe
xdeo,l
if.ttswirocoot oislfdahoundno dwt theohdsasevoeof f
been
et-7rue egsnot
ana
rnt
vl dei
nmcghe
oi
ndwr
there
htnhe,
i
streets, or pining away their existence in the workhouses.
d
u
for
h
(Hear, hear.)
fores
oov scobi
efit of
ai osiniawides gallantn he
friend, could not
Major refrain
p o
wf from
Mr. S. ADAIR, as a member of the executive committee of
the Patriotic Fund, said he was confident that that fund
would be administered in the most judicious and efficient
manner. The first cases the committee had considered were
those of the widows and orphans of warrant officers, non-
_ . .

commissioned officers, private soldiers, sailors, and marines ;
and for these several classes they had agreed upon a scale
of allowances which took effect from the Ist instant. The
committee felt themselves debarred to a considerable extent
from contributing to the relief of those who might not come
within the terms of the Royal warrant, and whom there
desire would lead them to relieve, considering that the
families of non-commissioned officers, private soldiers, and
sailors were the first objects of their care. Nevertheless,
they thought that in cases of urgent necessity they might
give some relief—of course limited in its amount--to the
widows and families of officers who had also perished in
this war; and he had reason to believe, that if it were
known to the public generally that tho executive committee
were precluded from giving such relief as they could wish to
the widows and families of officers, the public would be dis-
posed to provide a special fund for that. purpose. (Hear.)
Re could_ assure the gallant officer, in conclusion, that the
utmost care and the most constant supervision were exer-
cised by the committee in the distribution of the fund.
Lord A. PAGET wished to know if there was any chance
of either the price of the commission, or compensation for
it, being given to the widow or orphans of the officers who fell
in tko Crimea ? At the battle of the Alma, at the famous
charge of cavalry at Balaklava, and again at the battle of
Inkerman, there was not a colonel of a regiment of whom it
might not be said that he had from 8,0001. to 10,0001. hang-
ing round his neck—that was to say, if he were killed in ac-
tion the whole of that money would be sacrificed. He had often
heard it stated that too much money was given for commis-
sions ; but they all knew that the officer who once refused to
give full price for a commission was afterwards looked upon
as a "black sheep," and his chance of promotion very much
retarded. (Hear, hear.) He had relations in the Crimea.
One of these was a younger brother, who had a wife and four
children at home ; it he had fallen in action his family would
have lost their all. Ho had also a very near and dear relative
in the cavalry charge at Balaklava—(hear, hear)—and if he
had been killed in the action he would have left his widow
with no more than 7,0001. or 8,0001. to subsist upon. (H ar,
hear.) Surely the price of the commission, or some compen-
sation for it, ought to be given in such cases.
Mr. F. PEEL reminded the committee of the unsatisfac-
tory alternative which was always presented to the Govern-
ment in dealing with these questions. In time of war,
when the patriotic feelings of this house and the country
were stirred to their utmost depths by the gallant deeds of
our soldiers and sailors, the Government had pressed upon
it every case of charity, and was called upon to be liberal,
and even profuse, in dealing with such cases. But, if it
yielded to all these applications, what was the consequence
As soon as the war terminated, then questions of economy
were taken up by the house, and in their turn pressed with
equal vigour upon the Government, who would probably be
charged with extravagance and forgetfulness of the principles
of economy in conducting the affairs of the nation. (Hear.)
It was said to-night that they were voting a large sum of
money as pensions for the widows and orphans of officers, and
declining to recognise the claims of the widows and orphans
of private soldiers. But was that the case ? Did they recog-
nise the claims of officers of the army who had their widows
and orphans pensioned by the country ? The fact was that the
Principle of this vote was compensation for the loss by the
families of the officers who died of the value of their commis-
sions. Ry the fifth vote a suns of 22,367/. was proposed ex-
clusively for the education and maintenance of the children of
common soldiers. By means of that vote no less a number of
boys than 800 or 900 were provided for, so that the proposal
was not so one-sided as the hon. gentleman opposite supposed.
Mr. MACARTNEY thought it was the duty of the
Government, when the country had been driven into a war
by the msmanagement of the late Prime Minister, to bring
forward some provision on a liberal scale for the wives and
children of officers who perished in the war. He was quite
sure that Parliament would not hesitate to provide for the

children of officers, as well as for those of private soldier'.
Mr. NEWD&CiATE could not help feeling that it was

very hard that the widows and children of officers who fell
in the war should lose the whole value of the officer's com-
mission. He deprecated the idea that the widows and
families of officers should partake of the Patriotic Fund,
because that fund was not subscribed for the officers of the
army, but for the widows and children of non-commissioned
officers and privates. At • the same time he thought that
the claims of officers who had purchased their commissions,
and Who had been killed in battle, should be taken into
consideration.

Colonel NORTH knew an instance of a gentleman who
had subscribed 5001. to the Patriotic Fund on the express
condition that officers' widows and children would be par-
takers of it, He should do everything in his power to sup-
port the claims of officers' •widows and children to a part of
that fund.
Mr. OTWAY called the attention of the Government to
the case of Colonel Moore, who had, withlhis regiment, em-
barked on board of a transport which had not a sufficient
number of boats, and who had perished with the vessel. He
believed.that the various steps in that officer's promotion had
cost him not less than 14,0001. or 15,000/. Now, 901. a year
was a poor compensation for the widow of that officer. He
thought the whole of the regulation price of the commission
should be returned to the widow in such cases.

Captain BELLEW was willing to provide for the widows of
soldiers who had been killed in the service. At the same
time he should like to see some measure for providing for the
families of soldiers who died either in battle, or from disease,
in the service of their country.
Mr. PEEL said that the Government did not contemplate
proposing any such provision.
Mr. WHITESIDE put the case of an officer killed 'after
having been two or three days in the trenches. Would
not his widow have the same claim iu that case as she would
have if her huAmnd had been killed in battle

Mr. PEEL said it was intended to place the widow of such
an officer on the same footing as if her husband had bees
killed in action.

Captain ARCHDALL reminded the committee that in ad-
dition to the allowance of 901. a-year to the widow of Colonel
Moore, 1001. had been granted by her Majesty out of her own
purse. (Hear.)
Lord PALMERSTON requested the committee to consider
whet had been suggested by the Under Secretary of War.
At the present moment, when operations were going on, and
when the generous feeling of the public were excited by tho
gallant deeds of our officers and soldiers, the national im-
pulse was Co deal liberally and generously in all those mat-
ters that concerned the families of the officers of the army.
Pensions for wounds, for widows, and provisions for or-
phans, were liberally made. But peace came, and then
committees were appointed to inquire into the amount of
the army estimates, and reports were made as to the
great and heavy amount of the charge. Government was
then urged to pare down and diminish the provisions made
in the moment of liberality, and the allowances made were
taken away on the plea of an economical prudence. The
house ought, therefore, to preserve the greatest caution
not to embark in grants which might be irksome to the
country afterwards to maintain, and which they could not,
in good faith or without causing disappointment, take away
or diminish. That applied especially to the proposition made
for pensions to the widows of soldiers. What had just hap-
pened was an instance how these grants would increase. The
first suggestion was to pension suitably the widows of sol-
diers killed in action. Then another motion proposed that
pensions ought to be given to the widows of all soldiers who
died of disease in the service of their country, whether ix
time of war or of, peace. He hoped these matters would be
left to the discretion of Government, because the house might
feel sure that the Government shared in those feelings of gra-
titude for the services of officers and men which the country
entertained. But it must be kept in mind that it was neither
wise nor prudent—that it was not really conferring a benefit
on any class to grant one day what on a future day they
would take away. In the last war there were a great many
grants given, and afterwards narrowed and cut sown by suc-
cessive committees and votes of that house. Of course that
created great disappointment to the class to which it was
applied. The grants to the upper classes might be so dimi-
nished, but if grants were made to the widows of soldiers,
and not permanently maintained, great injury would be done
to the service, and great disappointment would be created
among those classes from which the army was recruited.
After some further conversation the vote was agreed to ;
as was also a vote of 84000/. to defray the expenses of com-
passionate allowances.

A vote of 31,1671. for Kilmainbam Hospital having been
proposed,

- Colonel GREVILLE said that the hon. gentleman the
Under Secretary for the War Department had stated that
evening, in answer to a question which he had put to him,
that the rate of pay, in the case of the clergymen of the
Church of England and the Roman Catholic chaplains in
the Crimea, was somewhat in proportion to the scale of
living to which the clergymen of the two churches were
accustomed. Now he wished to ask the hon. gentleman
what his idea was of the scale of living of the Roman Catholic
chaplain to Kilmainham Hospital, for whom last year a salary
of 501. had been provided, but for whom no allowance was
set down in the estimates this year ? (Hear, hear.)
Mr. VANCE wished to know how it was that while there
was accommodation for 300 persons in Kilmainham Hospital,
provision was made for only 144 persons ?
Mr. PEEL said he was not aware why there had been an
omission in the estimates this year with reference to the salary
of the Roman Catholic chaplain at Kilmainham. If that cler-
gyman continuod to discharge the same duties as last year, he
saw no reason why he should not receive the same amount of
salary. (Hear, hear).
Mr. WHITESIDE said that the duties of the Protestant
clergyman at Kilmainham were of a much more onerous de-
scription than those of the Roman Catholic chaplain.
Mr. S. HERBERT observed, that while the Protestant
clergyman at Kilmainham had no other source of income than
that which he derived from the discharge of the duties con-
nected with his office there, the Roman Catholic chaplain
had, besides his salary, certain parochial dues. (Hear.)
Mr. BUTT wished to know if the rumour that it was
. _

the intention of the Goverhmsent to reduce the establishment
at Kilmainham was correct ? The warrant of 1845 ordered
that there should be four resident captains, and 700 in-door
pensioners, in that institution. The noble lord, the present
Secretary of War, had, however, undertaken, upon his own
responsibility, to make a reduction in that number some
years ago. That order of the noble lord had, however, beep
rescinded by a resolution of that house upon a motion
which he about two years since had had the honour
to propose. But the right hon. gentleman, the late Secretary
of War, had not acted in accordance with that resolution,
and the number of inmates in the hospital at Kilmainham had
continued at the number to which' it had been reduced by the
order of Lord Panmure. He thought the right hoe. gentle-
man might be considered to have committed a petty larceny
in that respect—(hear, hear,and laughter)—the original order
having been little short of downright robbery. (Renewed
laughter.)
_He wished, therefore' to learn what were the in-
tentions of the Government upon the subject ?
Colonel DUNNE said that the present was a time at which
instead of reducing the establishment at Kilmainham, -in-
creased accommodation should be provided. It was per-
fectly clear that there would be, during the war, a great num-
ber of wounded soldiers for whom such accommodation would
be found necessary.

Mr. PEEL said that it was not the intention of Government
to make any reduction in the establishment at Kilmainham
at present._ ,

Colonel GREVILLE contended that to give the Catholic
chaplain at Kilmainham only one-fifth of the salary which
was received by the Protestant clergyman was not placing
them in the same favourable position as that in which they
stood in the Crimea, where their salary was one-half,
Mr.. VANCE would ask what was the meaning of the sum
of 501. on a former vote if it was not for a Roman Catholic
chaplain ?

Mr. F. PEEL—That was for the widow of the Protestant
chaplain. (Laughter.)
The voto was then agreed to.
1,885,539/. to defray the charge of out-pensioners of Kil-
mainham.—Agreed to.

38,7001. for retiring allowances and out-pensioners.—
Agreed to.

The house resumed.
Mr. BOUVERIE brought up the report on the Customs
Act.

The Exchequer Bills (17,183,0001.) Bill went through
committee.

MEMBERS' QUALIFICATION.

_ .
Mr. MURROUGH hoped the house would allow him to
introduco a bill to abolish the property qualification for
members.

Mr. MACARTNEY objected to courtesy being shown to
hon. members who brought in bills at that late hour. He
should oppose its introduction on that ground.
Mr. HADFIELD thought that no property qualification
ought to be required, as it was A restraint on popular selec-
tion. If the provisions of the act were stringently enforced
it would exclude all the men of genius in the kingdom.
Mr. HENLEY said as this was part of a larger question)
he hoped the question would be allowed to stand over until
the larger question was ripe for discussion. He hoped the
hon. gentleman would withdraw his bill, and not distract the
house with, such questions when more important matters were
in existence.
Colonel SIBTHORP, so far from wishing to diminish the
property qualification, wished the qualification was ten times
as much, Talk of men of genius, why he thought that the
fact of a member possessing property of his own made him
more careful of the people's property. If the property quali-
fication wore abolished, the house would be nothing but tag-
rag and bobtail, without a shirt among them and any kind of
dirt would'find an entrance into the legislatt:re. (Laughter.)
He had-Been a Member of the House of COMMOUS for 26 years,
and was sorry to say that he found it going down, and sink-
ing lower iu respectability every session. Keep up the re-
spectability of the House of Commons by property men, and
the people at largo would be more satisfied that their true
interests were protected. (Hear, hear.)
Lord PALMERSTON said, as a matter of courtesy, it
was usual to allow an hon. member "to bring forward a bill
the contents of which were not known, and to explain the
bill to the house ; but this was not a case of that sort, for
all knew the nature of the measure. In Scotland, it was
true, there was no property qualification ; but that was ono
of the stipulations of the Act of Union. That was an
exception ; and it was contrary to true logic that the ex-
ception should form the rule. This was not a proper time
to enter into the reasons why it was not desirable that the
bill should be read a fit st time. He would take the broad
ground that the bill formed part of a projected system of
reform, which,' by arrangement and understanding, had
been postponed for the present, and therefore it ought not
to be proceeded with further.
After a short conversation,
Mr. MURROUGH said he did 'not mean to pledge any
member upon that occasion to support the bill in its future
stages ; but he hoped the courtesy would be extended to
him of allowing him to. introduce it to the consideration of
the house.

The house then divided :
For the motion
Against it
Majority against the introduction of the bill —1
-

Mr. J. BALL moved for a copy of any instructions issued
to postmasters in Ireland in regard to the reduced rates of
postage on letters addressed to France with the date at which
such instructions were issued.

Mr. WILSON did not object to the motion. The warrant
for the change in the rates of postage was not drawn up un-
til the 22d December in London; and some days necessarily
elapsed before instructions could be communicated to Ireland,
which was done on the 7th January.
In reply to an HoN. MEMBER,
Mr. WILSON said no steps had been taken to make four-
penny stamps ; but he would communicate with the Board of
Inland Revenue on the subject.
Return ordered. ,

INCOME TAX ON ECCLESIASTICAL PROPERTY.
On the motion of Mr. NAPIER, leave was given to bring
in a bill to amend the Act 3d and 4th Will. IV., c. 37, by
providing that the property or income tax payable in respect
of income from ecclesiastical property in Ireland shall be a
deduction in estimating the value of such property for the
purpose of taxation by the ecclesiastical commissioners.

THIRD SECRETARY OF STATE.
Lord PALMERSTON moved for leave to bring in a bill to
enable a Third Secretary and Under Secretary of State to sit
in the House of Commons.—Leave given.
The house adjourned at a quarter to one o'clock.

•
Mr. T. PHMTN, M.P. for Bath, paired, in favour of Lord
CiQderioh'oi motion, with Mr, rat ronel,

EM

. .