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

EXHIBITION.

Mr. C. BENTINCK asked the First Lord of the Trea-
sury whether his attention had been called to a design pre-
pared by Captain Fowke for the alteration or completion
of the Exhibition building ; whether her Majesty's Govern-
ment approved generally of such design; and, if so,
whether the cost of the same was included in the estimate
now laid upon the table of the house ?
Mr. GREGOfIY asked the First Lord of the Treasury
whether a detailed statement of the expense to be incurred
in altering, repairing, completing, and renlering beautiful
the International Exhibition building will be printed and
laid before the house, previous to a vote of £485,000 being
taken as the first expense connected with the purchase of
that building ?
Lord PALMERSTON replied that it was his intention
to enter into details when he submitted the proposition to
the house. No decision had yet been come to with respect
to the alteration of the original design.
Mr. GREGORY—ShaII we have the details before the
explanation ?
Sir R. PEEL intimated that the details would be laid on
the table to-morrow.
Sir S. NORTHCOTE asked when the noble lord would
make his explanation ?
Lord PALMERSTON replied on Monday week.
Mr. GREGORY intimated that he intended to move the
rejection of the proposed vote. (Hear, bear.)
SEIZURE OF THE WILL 0' THE WISP, &c.
Mr. CRAWFORD asked the Under Secretary of State
for Foreign Affairs if any claim had been made upon the
Government of the United States of America for com-
pensation to the owners of the schooner Will o' the Wisp,
seized in Mexican waters at Matamoras, by the United
States cruiser Montgomery, on the 3d day of June, 1862,
and afterwards released by decision of the Prize Court at
Key West, on the 19th day of July following, would there
be any objection to lay on the table the correspondence?
Mr. LAYARD explained that the case would, no doubt,
be shortly carried by the owners to the Supreme Court of
the United States. The original decision amounted
to this, that the vessel which had been seized in the
Mexican waters would be restored. (Hear.) The court
referred to decided that there were grounds of suspicion,
and, therefore, rt fused to give either damages or costs. Her
Majesty had pressed the United States to allow costs to the
captors, but they had refused. He would inquire whether
there was any objection to the production of the papers.
TRAWL NETS (SCOTLAND).
Mr. FINLAY asked the Lord Advocate whether he
intended to propose a measure for legalising the use of
trawl to seine nets for catching herrings in Scotland.
The LORD ADVOCATE replied in the negative.
BOLYNEAD HARBuUR.—OFFENSIVE LAN.
GI GE OF THE CHANCELLOR OF THE
EXCHEQUER.
Mr. TOLLEMACHE complained that on Monday
night when he happened to be unavoidably absent, tne
Chancellor of the Exchequer made some remarks on the
composition of the Holyhead committee appointedcomplaine on. he
preceding Friday. The right hon. gentleman
that the committee was not impartially constituted, and
would consequently carry no weight with the Government.
He declared that he had no personal interest in
the matters that would come before the committee,
nor,
indeed, any of his constitutents ; neither had
he
ramertyhrQui;htersen in the railway, though it
on this conamitte Sou h Cheshire. He had no desire to serve
that he be disc- and if his right hon. friend would move
motion. (Hear, and
from it he would cordially second the
he felt perfectly' aughter.) So far as he was concerned
decision. competent to arrive at a perfectly un-
biassed

Mr. D. PENNANT declared that he likewise had no
interest in Holyhead, and did not own an acre of land in
the Isle of Anglesey. He

was interested in Carnarvon,
and could recollect that 22 years ago there was a
great struggle between the two places as to which
ought to be the harbour. If he had any preference at all it
was for CarnarvolL

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER
hon. gentleman the member for South said' the
misinformed, as he had no recollection of Cheshire
haeddbee
sonal or offensive language. He certainlyhaving
'lcisi d pensay
that the committee was not impartially constituted,
and referred, in support of his statement, to publicv. de-
clarations of several of the members. It might by
to mention names, but he was satisfied that his twoidhious
friends would give an impartial consideration to the subject..
He never presumed to say that the decision of the commit-
tee would tie unworthy of the consideration of the
Govern-

went.
Mr. H. HERBERT looked upon the words of the Chan.
in: tilting and offensive. He
cellor of the Exchequer as
begged to move the adjournment of the house.
Air—HENNESSY seconded the motion.
The CHANCELLOR
g and offensive, of the EXCHEQUE
was tR
he saiduty of
d if his
remarks were " ltin" it
the hon. member to have called attention to them
should
at the
time they were made. (Hear.) The hon. member
quote his words.'
Mr. HERBERT was ready to do so.
The SPEAKER decided that the words should have been
quoted at the time; it was now too late to do so.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER again
disclaimed using nnparliamentary language.
Colonel FRENCH characterised the term, that the com-
mittee was not impartially constituted, as insulting and
offensive I Did it mean that the committee had no brains,
no knowledge, and would not be obedient I (Hear, hear.)
xr, DISRAELI said it was the duty of the tioverameut

not to assent to committees not, in their opinion, impartially
constituted. The Government ought to have opposed the
appoin' ment of the committee at the time.
Mr. HENNESSY rose to order.

Mr. BRIGHT said this discussion was ha'f Welsh and
half Irish. (Laughter.) He had often het:d it alleged in
that house that committees were not imp irtial, and did not
consider the language unparliamentary.
Lord J. MANNERS appealed to the Speaker for his
opinion.

The SPEAKER decided that the discussion must then
end, as it was contrary to the rules of the house. It was
6ompetent in the right hon. gentleman to state it as his
opinion, that a committee was not impartially constituted
if he thought so.
The subject then dropped.
VOLUNTEERS BILL.

On the motion for going into committee,
Mr. BAGWELL moved that, in the opinion of this house
it is impolitic any longer to exclude Ireland from the ope-
ration of the volunteer system, and unjust, should such
exclusion continue, to tax Ireland for the support of Eng-
lish volunteers.

The Marquis of HARTINGTON opposed the motion,
but in doing so did not wish to cast any doubt upon the
loyalty of the people of Ireland,
Lord PALMERSTON spoke highly of the loyalty of the
Irish people, Their unfortunate pugnacity and the
diversity of religious opinions that prevailed, rendered it
impolitic that a civil armed force should be created in that
country.
After a few words from several hon. members,

The house divided, when there appeared—
For the motion
Against it
--
Majority lll
The motion was consequ.ntly lost.
The house then went into committee.

Clauses 1 to 6 inclusive were agreed to.

On clause 7,
Mr, H. LE WIS said it was the opinion of many volun-
teers that this clause would not work well ; and he there-
fore proposed to substitute a clause which would render it
mare easy for the volunteer to obtain his discharge, and
would provide a court of inquiry in the event of any dispute.
Col. SYKES defended the clause as it stood, observing
that the commanding officer was required to give every
volunteer his discharge who claimed to be 'Amok oat of the
muster-roll of the corps.
The Marquis of HARTINGTON said he could not sae
any objection to the clause in its present form. There was
no intention of placing any obstacle in the way of a volun-
teer leaving his corps upon giving notice. He understood
the hon. member to say that the volunteers considered them-
selves aggrieved by the clause ; but the first part of the
clause gave volunteers the right of discharge—a right
which the commanding officer was bound to recognise.
Mr. H. LEWIS was not quite satisfied with the expla-
nation of the noble lord. As he understood the clause,
there was nothing which obliged the commanding officer to
give a volunteer his discharge.
Sir J. SHELLEY was rather surprised to hear that the
volunteers were dissatisfied with the clause, and that no
notice of an amendment had been given, With regard to a
court of inquiry, it would be hardly proper to refer a dis-
pute to a tribunal before which they could not compel the
attendance of volunteers, their being no control over volun-
teers except upon parade.
Major KNOX said, if the commanding officer had no
power of retaining a volunteer upon the roll, why not leave
out the latter part of the clause ?
Mr. HEADLAM said the clause declared that the volun-
teers were entitled to their discharge ; but in certain cases
some question might arise or delay take place, and it was
chiefly for the benefit of the volunteers that the clause was
framed in its present shape.
Mr. HENLEY called attention to the wording of the
clause, and suggested that the words "or any other ac-
count" were rather vague ; and, for his own part, if an ap-
peal should come before him, be would hardly be able to see
his way to a decision. He thought the meaning of the

clause should be more clearly expressed.
Mr. H. LEWIS, in deference to the general opinion of
the committee, withdrew his motion, and the clause in its
original form was agreed to, as was also clause 8.
C n clause 9,
Colonel W. PATTEN suggested an improvement in the
clause, for the purpose of preventing any jealousies between
the officers of volunteer corps and the militia whenever the
two forces were employed together, as he hoped they often
would be. (Hear.) In order to insure perfect co-operation

between the two forces, he would move that the words " or
militia" be inserted ; so that when they were both employed

together, in reviews or active service, the senior officer
should always command,
The Marquis of HARTINGTON said the clause did not
make any difference in the existing law ; the object of it
was to enable the Queen to appoint a general or field officer
to command the volunteers, either in active service or at
reviews.

Colonel KNOX said that many of the officers command- 1
ing the volunteers were men who had attained distinction
in the regular army, and he should be sorry to see them
placed in a false position. He wished to know whether it
was intended that under no circumstances a volunteer
officer should ever command.
Colonel SYKES observed that if it was intended to
give militia and volunteer officers their relative ranks
as in the army, the words suggested by the hon. and
gallant member opposite would have the effect of giving
precedence to the militia officers over the volunteers.
Col. W. PATTEN said his object was simply to prevent
confusion in the field if the two forces should be engaged
together.
Mr. HEADLAM did not interpret the clause in the same
light as the hon. and gallant member. The object of it
was only to empower her Majesty to appoint a field officer
of the army, but it did not interfere in any way with the
officers among themselvee.
Col. W. PATTEN expressed himself satisfied, and with-
drew the amendment.
Sir J. SHELLEY proposed to have the words "lieuten-
ant-colonel and colonel" added, but the hon. member not
pressing it, the clause as it originally stood was agreed to.
On clause 10,
Mr. BATHURST expressed his opinion that if the Go-
vernment assistance to volunteers was made to depend on
attendance at battalion drill, it would operate very injuri-
ously as regarded corps living at great distances apart. He
thought some provision should be made in the case of corps
at the distance of 10 or 20 miles asunder.
Mr. W. FORSTER said the suggestion of the hon. gen-
tleman was very important, and he thought it would be ex-
tremely prejudicial to the administration of the volunteers
if the corps were to be considered as separate corps.
Mr. HUMBERSTON said it would be impracticable in
many cases to bring scattered corps together for battalion
drill, and he begged to suggest for the consideration of the
noble lord the expediency of substituting additional drills
for battalion drill, in order to meet the case of scattered
corps who could not possibly attend for battalion drill.
Colonel NORTH saw no reason fcr altering the clause.
It was a matter for the discretion of the inspector whether
he would inspect the corps separately or in battalion.
The Marquis of HARTINGTON said the object was to
make the inspection as convenient as possible to the corps,
and he thought it would be better to leave the matter to the
discretion of the inspector.
The clause was then agreed to in its original form.
On clause 11,
The Marquis of HARTINGTON moved the following
addition : " The draft of any scheme to be from time to
time submitted to her Majesty in council for approval un-
der the present section, shall be laid before both houses of
Parliament one month at least before such scheme receives
the approval of her Majesty in council." The noble lord
also read the draft of the new standard of efficiency for
volunteer recruits, and the drills and other duties they will
be required to perform.
Mr. FORSTER admitted that the assistance granted by
the Government to the volunteers was very liberal, but he
simply rose to call the attention of the noble lord to the
position of some of the scattered corps in the country, who
were perfectly willing to attend any number of drills in
their respective localities, but who could not possibly
assemble at a distance for battalion drill. He hoped some-
thing might be done to meet this difficulty.
Lord ELCHO said he was very glad that he hon. mem-
ber for Bradford had brought the subject before the com-
mitteehad the
sayit w
honour to servea by h
proposedupon the
teere
00. m
mH Having
sviionn,
hemight
detached companies tog.,-
. bringing commission that 4s.f per head
should be allowed for pay-
ing the expense 0 h
ther for battalion drill, and thatthe
Governmenttheyah,l6 hadmeetin
threo
times a year. He believed that the
main partially adopted that suggestitoon,maenetd
tthhraete the
easda-
ministrative companies would have
yweaasr
laid for
downbatt battalion i o
inn drillthe
proposed
r; 0
pb
ou
st e atd
order
rhdee
rs aomfe time
il nc h,e 1.
n ithattea isni
et
of any corps not being able to assemble three times wh
the, twelve months, the Secretary of State had the power to
council,
alter the number of battalion drills, and that, he thought,
twouldain
members meet theofd,:altnyies whichwho
mhaigdhbteen started.
three battalion drills in the year,
Mr. HUMBERSTON, in order to meet the case of cer-
tain
good the deficiency
Mr. W. E.
promote battalion drill, that
inspectors to decide in what \
with.suggesnteodt be
thatab able
theyto attend
might
Foas aby attending extra company drills
confessed he was so anxious to
he preferred leaving it to the
canes it should be dispensed
___

theMere.rßtiflUcXatTe OofNemasckieendc,yfrtoomdawtbet
Tie Marquis of HARTINGt period of the year was
T ON said tha certificate of
service would b2ar relation to thet:welhremeondtrhafst porredteerdsinogi
the 30th of November in each
council would be laid before yer.
became law Parliament. as soon as til‘ bill
Clause 12 was then agreed to.
On clause 19,
Mr. HIBBERT moved the rejection of the clause, which
was a copy of the old clause in the old Act. There were no
doubt many bad precedehts in the legislation of the reign
of George 111., and assuredly this was one of them. It ap-
peared to him most objectionable that volunteers should
be called upon to suppress riots, particularly is counties
like Lancashire, where popular disturbances general 4
had reference to questions of labour and to the rates o
wages. One section of a corps might answer to a cal
made upon them to aid in the alippression of a riot while

another section might hold back; and infallibly that would
lead to the section that held back being regarded with sus-
picion by the authoeties. He thought that the being open
to such a contingency would very much detract from the
popularity of the volunteer force, and therefore he called on
the committee to strike out the clause.

Col. SYKES supported the omission of the clause.
Sir G. GREY said, if hon• members examined the clause,
they would see that volunteers could only be used for the
suppression of a riot subject to the sanction of the lord lieu-
tenant of the county and of the Secretary of State. He ad-
mitted the inexpediency of their being generally employed
fir such a purpose; but, subject to the restrictions men-
tioned, he believed the committee might very safely assent
to the retention of the clause.

Mr. BUXTON was persuaded the clause would work the
most serious evil, especially in the case of working men's
corps. It might be possible, in their case, that when called
out to act against the rioters some of the men would refuse
to act, and then the confusion would be aggravated tenfold.

Lord ELCHO said there was no doubt whatever of the
exceeding popularity of the volunteers, and that that popu•
larity had grown up under a law which authorised the em-
ployment of the force in the mode now deprecated, the only
difference between the old and the new law being, that pro-
vision was now made to ensure the volunteers being only
called out in the most extreme cases. He was by no means
persuaded that working men's corps, which he might ob-
serve were among the beat disciplined in the service, would
require to take part in the suppression of local disturbances
A groat deal of evidence had been laid befo, e the commis-
sion as to the effect of volunteering upon artisans ; and one
of the most remarkable of these effects was that it made men
much nacre sober, while it made loyal men of chartiws.
(Hear, hear.) The bill was drawn up on the quieta non
movere principle, and therefore it would be well not to re-
ject a provision found to exist in the old law.
Mr. AYRTON hoped the hon. member for Bradford
would persevere in his opposition to the clause, It was ob-
jectionable in principle, and peculiarly so because the vo-
lunteers were subjected to martial law. If they were em-
ployed as mere constables, the thing would be different. He
was very much surprised that the Government should have
thought of reviving such a clause.
Mr. A. EGERTON could not disapprove of the clause,
for it seemed to him that whatever force was employed to
suppress rioting should be as disciplined as possible; and
he reminded the committee that the yeomanry, who were
liable to be so e- gaged, were subject to martial law.
Mr. POTTER had a very distinct recollection of the
calling out of the yeomanry to suppress the rioting at Man-
chester, and of the dreadful consequences which followed.
He well remembered the odium which long attached to the
yeomanry for the part they were then called upon to take,
and he knew that a friend of his was unable to survive the
horrors of the occasion. (Hear.)
Mr. ROGERS hoped he might not live to see the day
when volunteers would be called out to suppress popular
tumults, but at the same time he must say he regarded the
force not only as a surety for peace abroad, but likewise at
home. (Hear.)
Mr. EVANS, speaking on behalf of the volunteers, was
quite certain that the great majority of them were not
aware that such a provision existed in the Volunteer Act.
Mr. SEL WYN reminded hon. members opposite that
it was not made compulsory upon volunteers to aid in the
suppression of riots ; the clause left it entirely optional
with members of a corps to do so ; and, though every one
admitted that, in all probability, no case would ever arise
for the exercise of the power, yet, in the interest of
peace and humanity, it might turn out of very great im-
portance. When they bore in mind the limited number of
her Majesty's troops, ar.d the effect which the presence of a
large military force had in checking bloodshed on the occa-
sion of popular tumults, he might well call upon the com-

mittee, in the interest of humanity, to support the clause.
Sir J. SHELLEY thought that, for the sake of peace
and humanity, the clause ought to be rejected. (Hear,
hear.) There was no doubt that a small body of soldiers
was most effectual for the suppression of a riot ; and if
volunteers were to be made useful in the same way, their
presence ought to be made obligatory, and not optional.
(Hear, hear.) He telieved the clause would have a very
bad effect upon the interests r f the volunteer force—and he
felt most strongly, as the commanding officer of a working
men's corps, that it was most impolitic to place volunteers
in the situation contemplated by the clause.
Mr. W. E. FORSTER should vote for the amendment
of the hon. member for Oldham. If the volunteers were to
be employed at all in the suppression of rioting, it would be
much better that their attendance as a body should be made
compulsory than that it should be left optional with mem-
bers to undertake the duty. Otherwise, in cases of extreme
emergency, it would be much better that the volunteers
should be called upon to act merely as special constables.
Mr. HEADLAM quite agreed as to the general inexpe-
diency of employing volunteers to disperse a mob. At the
same time, if the restrictions attaching to the exercise of the
powers enforced by the clause were taken into account, it
would be apparent that no danger could follow from it. He
could conceive circumstances in which it might be exceed-
ing desirable that such a power should exist. For example,
in the north of England, where there were many artillery
corps, it might be most useful to place such corps in strong
positions, leaving the regular troops free to act against the
mob. (Oh, oh.)
Earl GROSVENOR would very much prefer to see the

volunteers act as special constables. (Hear, hoar.) He

deprecated the responsibility which the clause threw upon
colonels of regiments, and it should receive his opposition.
(Hear, hear.)
Sir M. FARQUHAR likewise opposed the clause.

The Marquis of HARTINGTON then announced that,
as such appeared to be the general wi-h of the committee,
the Government were willing to withdraw the clause.
(:sheers, accompanied by cries of "No, no," from the Op-
position benches.)

The clause was accordingly negatived without a division.
On clause 21,
Sir It. CLIFTON proposed, in line 17, after " cause," to

leave out to and including " officer," in line 19, and insert
"such causes respectively to be committed to writing, and
communicated to the accused by the adjutant of such corps
and the existence and sufficiency of such causes respectively
to be judged of by a court to be summoned by the command•
ing officer, and to consist of one captain, two subaltern offi-
cers, and two non-commissioned officers or privates of the
same corps." The clause, as it stood, gave commanding
officers power to dismiss officers as well as privates of corps,
without any court of appeal being open to them. Ho trusted
the committee would show its sense of the gratitude due to
those gentlemen who came forward in the most patriotic
manner when the noble lord at the head of the Government
called "wolf," by opening to them a court of appeal against
what might be very arbitrary treatment.
Mr. H. LEW IS said he had received numerous commu-
nications from both officers and privates, one and all con-
demnatory of the clause as it stood. It was said that it did
not apply to officers, but, whether it did or not, it was equally
to be objected to, for it might have the effect of blighting the
prospects in life of private volunteers. (Hear, hear.) At
present the greatest harmony prevailed between officers and
privates ; but if such a power as this were given to com-
manding officers, that harmony would no longer prevail.
The Marquis of HARTINGTON hoped the committee
would retain the clause as it stood.
Lord ELCHO said it would be impossible to maintain
any discipline without that clause. If a volunteer desired
to leave his reg.ment, he had only to give 14 days' notice,
with an appeal to the Sovereign through the Secretary for
War in case of need. He regretted to have to remark that
printed papers had been sent round to various commanding
officers, referring to a dispute between the South Middlesex
and the Queen's, and also an extract from a speech of the
hon. member for Nottingham. He ventured to say that
that was not a proper step to take ; it had a tendency to
create ill-feeling, and the fact that it had not done so was
a proof of the healthy state of discipline of the volunteers
generally. He had also heard of some Volunteer Defence
Associat on, of which he believed the hon. member for
Finsbury was chairman.
Mr. COX said he had nothing whatever to do with that
,r any other association of the kind, though he would con-
fess that he was a " full private" in the volunteers.
Lord ELCHO said perhaps the hon, gentleman could
state whether there was an association cf that kind in
existence now or not.
Mr. COX said he did not know. lie had nothing to do
with it.
Lord ELCHO regretted he had been misinformed. He
had heard, however, that the very improper proceeding of
sending round printed papers had been adopted by certain
volunteers. One of those papers had reflected upon Lord
Ranelagh, who took proceedings against the parties, and
would no doubt have succeeded had not an apology been
offered and accepted. He thought, if a commanding officer
were fit to have any power at all, he was fit to be entrusted
with the power contained in the clause.
Sir DE LACY EVANS said he would support the
clause, not because he thought it was necessary, as the
power was already given by the old Act; but he thought
that that recognition of it might be useful. It should be
remembered that here there was an appeal to the Secretary
for -War, and the only object was to make that power
permanent.
Mr. BUXTON supported the clause. He thought there
was no alternative but to leave the power in the hands of the
commanding officer,
Mr, COX said he wished to say a few words, because he
had no doubt that immediately after the vote he was about
to give be should be dismissed from his position as a full
noble lords who came down to that home and charged a
private volunteer. (A laugh.) He had no sympathy with
private member of Parliament with being the chairman of
societies formed to bring about dissensions amongst the
volunteers. Very few of the volunteers knew that there
was any such arbitrary power of dismissal already in exis-
tence; and if the proposed clause were to be carried, half
the volunteers would leave at once. They would never sub-
mit to be dismissed at a moment's notice without warning
or explanation. (Hear, hear.) Petitions upon the subject
being Prepared throughout
volunteer he was pre:e
said a
notice and joinvolunteer could discharge himself at 14 days'
volunteer had gtirryteother corps; but he knew a case where a
dichitrgetahheicmo,untry, It had been
(Hear, and "Rime.") 11,-
the commanding muss notice, and before the 14 days expired
any]Dining
gnd
Lord ELCHO would liket7lunteer's name was Hutchins.
house to hear the language
ag
a h discharged
corps.