The Sun.
London, England, 1863-06-05 00:00:00

of the letter in which Mr. Hutchins had sent in his resig-
nation. When shown at the War-office, it was ordered that
Mr. Hutchins should be dismissed, and not be allowed to
resign.
Sir J. SIIELLEY supported the clause.

Mr. W, E. FORSTER also supported it. There must be
that power or a court-martial, for volunteers were men with
arms in their hands, and required somebody to take care of
them. It was evident that that power must be given to the
commanding officer or a court-martial. (Hear, hear, from
Mr. Cox.) The hon. gentleman said "Hear, hear," but he
could tell him that volunteer courts-martial would be most
unpopular institutions. It should be remembered that
pending the proceedings the volunteer must be placed under
arrest. (Hear, hear.) He believed that the feeling to which
the hon. member for Finsbury alluded was very much exag-
gerated ; and he could certainly say for the Yorkshire corps
that they had no wish to be governed by a committee instead
of by their commanding officer, neither did he think that the
power given by the clause was likely to be arbitrarily used,
because commanding officers knew very well that such con-
duct would diminish their corps. Besides, in case of any
abuse of the power, there were t•vo remedies—one by appeal
to the War. office, and another by a charge laid before the
lord lieutenant. He could only speak as a captain of volun-
teers, but he knew the feeling of the county from which he
came, and he believed the volunteers there were fully pre-
pared to submit to whatever might be necessary for the
maintenance of discipline.

Earl GROSVENOR said he had been so frequently at-
tacked by the press respecting the transaction alluded to by
the hon. baronet, that he trusted the house would allow
him to give some explanation. (No.) He would if it were
wished. (No. no.) With respect to the proposed clause,
it should be borne in mind that the commanding officer had
the power of dismissal by the old act, and the best guarantee
against a misuse of it was the fear that he would lose halt
his company. The force had now been in existence three
years, and yet he never knew of an arbitrary exercise of the
power of dismissal.

Sir DE LACY EVANS said that as an old soldier, he
could not help concurring that means should be established
for the preservation of discipline, He believed that tne
volunteer private had the power of resignation within
fourteen days, and therefore it was necessary that the
commanding cfficer should be provided with some sort of
compromise. He did not see how the house could refuse
the limited power asked for on the present occasion. He
was glad the noble lord (Earl Grosvenor) had not mentioned
the name of the person alluded to, and congratulated him on
the mode in which he had conducted his two battalions.
Col. SYKES supported the clause. The power, he con-
sidered, was necessary, but the difficulty was how it should
be exercised
Mr. CONINGHA.M said he was not surprised that vo-
lunteers were jealous of more power being given to com-
manding officers after the case in the papers of that day.
That was in the regular army.
Col. BARTTELOT rose to order. That case was quite
irrelevant,
Mr. CONINGHAM said that in that case, notwith-
standing the commanding officer had been censured, he was
going to be sent back to India to try his hand a second time
at his peculiar mismanagement.
Col. BARTTELOT deprecated the allusion to a gallant
officer serving his country in a foreign land. He contended
that there were very few cases in which commanding officers
had abused the powers entrusted to them. He hoped the
noble lord would maintain the clause as it stood.
Mr. W. T. EVANS said that in the corps to which he
belongded there had been very
few disputes of any sort. Ho
shoul su
pport the clause.
The committee then divided, when there appeared—
For the clause as it st d lOB
For the amendment "1
21
111aj orit y
The clause was then —B7
The remainin agreed to.
were agreed to g clauses, with certain verbal amendments,
The Marquis of HARTINGTON said that, as some dis-
ugh committee.
satisfaction had been expressed by the clerks of the War-
be
office relative to the new schedule of remuneration, it would
withdrawn and the old schedule substituted for it.
passed thru
The schedule, as amended, was agreed to, and the bill

To h 4 e t
hheo uvsoetet hoefn SUPPLY.
zws. e3n2t9ifnstro
scommitteeof housessu
Mr W I°
' • •• ILLIA.MS protested against the vote, and
how •
long the annual vote was to be taken for the re-
pairs, &c ,at P era. This year the vote was upwards of £3,000
Mr, CO ER said he was afraid the expense would con-
tinue so long as the Ottoman Empire existed,
Mr. KINNAIRD and Mr. DODSON objected to the vote,
papbira d,
supply.
asked
and called attention to the
vote for casual and ordinar growing increase of the annual
bander, and Lord PALM y repairs.
Palac ERSTON defended the vote, It was a good
ere, a
g• but conyenient residence; it was a substantial
pa, ad ad
expense every such residence involved an annual
, and the wear and tear of furniture had to be pro-
M w,r. ,
vided for.
WILLIAMS also complained of the charge for
the residence at Thera
Constantinople requiredi two n
resiske denceswhy en
ambassador at
Lord PALMERSTON said the second residence was re-
quired because all the Turkish Ministers went to Therapia
in the summer, in consequence of the heat at Constantino-
ple, and our ambassador had to reside there during that
period, to be able to communicate with them.
Englishman, l‘l r. C 0 W P PER
sera: dwtahseccolme clerk
sotfe the w
controlorkos
Mr. FERRAND asked if the architect at Constantinople
was an Englishman or a Turk, and if any control was ex-
ercised over him,
diture, because he had to send home his estimates for
approval before any work was done. The expense of living
large,in Turkey was very great, and the residence itself was very
Many things had to be sent fro England to Con-
m
stantinople.
In answer to a question,
a competent man to spend money,
Mr. COWPER said the Salary of the clerk of the works
was £4OO a-year, Which was included in the estimate.
Mvwerasthaereesxipdeenn-t
r. DODSON' said the clerk of the works was no doubt
understand how the Home Gov
diture at Constantinople. H ernment could check expen-
e hoped the vote would be less
next year.
Mr. COWPER said the vote
year the would be £l,OOO less next
the n this. The extra expense this year arose from
necessity of a new zinc roof and certain furniture that
was actually "squired. He was at a loss to
Sir B. LEIGHTON thought two residences unneces-
of SthireGv;
sary, as the two places were not far apart.
Col. SYKES said that if they got rid of the clerk of the
works they would save £2,000 a year.
Lord R. CECIL said it was a good suggestion, and moved
the reduction of the vote by £4OO,
Lord PALIIERSTON said that, if they dismissed him
oßrkOslV:asErfet
the result would be disadvantageous, as they world be
obliged to have a Turkish clerk ot works,
required, the
tahleozitdosuunedeebresitrgdfilhsyheadc.lerk
Mr, COWPER said if they dismissed him they must de-
pend on the ambassador employing Turkish people, and
there being no efficient control, the bills in all probability
would be higher than now.
Mr. v
..- ERRAND supported the amendment for the dis-
missal of the clerk of works.
Lord R. CECIL ridiculed the idea of the home Govern-
ment being able to check the expenditure under the clerk
of the works at Constantinople.
Mr' COWPER said they were enabled effectually to
check the expenditure, for the Board of Works had an
assistant
,Purveyor in the office who had been at Constan-
i"Pie. (Laughter.) The Board of Works knew as much
about the Control of expenditure at Constantinople as was
necessary. It was impossible to
get a respectable man to
go to Conettnti y
nople for less than £4OO a enr, on whom
they could rely to imposition. The Board of Works
prevent
had a
scale of prices paid in Coste, and were e-
abled by it to check
the expenditn urae.ntino Itpl would n not do to
trust to the Turks in those matters.
Sir G.
ought to defend the Turks from the aspersions that had
Works, their honesty by the First Commissioner of
Lord PALMERRI
---L'ON said no more was done here than
re wa
sides done
nce by every
gentleman in England who had a large
to cheek expenditure.
Mr. FERRAND
Said the grossest jobbery was practised
at our embassies.
Mr. HUBBARD
defended the continuance of the clerk
of the works ott the ground of economy.
After some discussion
Mr.
ctCHILDP.P ! follow the
the e
--S
said it would be better tosum
for praice of Prance, 'Min allocated annually a fixed mbassy houses. It would be well for the house to fix
a year, the expenditure on the Constantinople residences at
£2,000

Mr. CONVPE,„P
ing said this was an estimate for the ensu-
yearlf the , part o
being for di and part for special re-
atabassadorrn
was to, be his own clerk of the
works, he doubted if the work would be so economically
pairs.
done. Tie clerk of the works at Constantinople was a more
£lBO a
responsible man than the one at Paris, who was paid only
year.
The committee divided. The numbers were—
For the amendment_ • 71
The amend
Against it .... -
..............
Majority
then agreed to, naent
was carried, and the reduced vote was
The vote of £748 for the British Consulate at Constanti-
nople was then agreed to.
On the vote of £40,000 for the new Foreign-office,
Mr. A. SMITH said the
original estimate for this build-
ing was £200,000
g
the money already voted only
_
; £75,000 had been already voted, and
now £40,000 were asked for. A sum of £137,000 was still
to be Noted for completin the work.
Mr. CONVPER said, of
£18,868 had been expended, and the balance had been
paid
into the Exchequer. At present there had been no actuala
expenditure on the building, and before any was spent
complete and definite estimate would be had from the
architect.

Sir G. BOWYER was at a loss to understand why the
building should cost so much money. He advocated sim-
plicity and not ornanieutation in the ereotion,and he doubted