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

of the letter in which ➢lr. 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, SHELLEY 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 roust 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 vet y 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 two 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 kt ew the feeling of the county from which he
came, and ho believed the volunteers there were fully pre-
pared to submit to whatever might be necessary for the
maintenance of discipline.

the transaction alluded to by
Earl GROSVENOR said he had been so frequently at-
tackedPhecetitnrgusted the house would allow
xhrpalnation. (No.) He would if it were
With respect to the proposed clause,
hwthiimeshhetood
hen.
give
vb:
eNahresooo.npmnre press se:
it should be borne in mind than 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 half
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 the
volunteer private had the power of resignation within
fourteen days, and therefore it was necessary that the
commanding officer 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. CONINGHAM 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
belonged there had been very few disputes of any sort. He
should support the clause.
The committee then divided, when there appeared—
For the clause as it stood lOB
For the amendment
Majority ..............
The clause was then agreed to.
The remaining clauses, with certain verbal amendments,
were agreed to.
The Marquis of lIARTINGTON said that, as some dis-
satisfaction had been expressed by the clerks of the War-
office relative to the new schedule of remuneration, it would
be withdrawn and the old schedule substituted for it.
The schedule, as amended, was agreed to, and the bill
passed through committee.

SUPPLY.
The house then went into committee of supply.
On the vote of £5,329 for embassy houses abroad,
Mr. W. WILLIAMS protested against the vote, and
asked how long the annual vote was to be taken for the re-
pairs, &c ,at Fera. This year the vote was upwards of £3,000.
Mr, COWPER said he was afraid the expense would con-
tinue so long as the Ottoman Empire existed,
mr. KINNAIRD and 11Ir. DeDsox objected to the vote,
and called attention to the growing increase of the annual
vote for ca,ual and ordinary repairs.
Lord PALMERSTON defended the vote, It was a good
palace, and a conyenient residence ; it was a substantial
building, but every such residence involved an annual
expense, and the wear and tear of furniture had to be pro-
vided for.

Mr. W. WILLIAMS also complained of the charge for
the residence at Therapia, and asked why an ambassador at
Constantinople required two residences.
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 Constattino-
ple, and our ambassador had to reside there during that
ncdit:
hkob
because
earnean. piush:mT h R .he
Mr.uieu deis CO wrere said
ha
was
period, to be able to communicate with them.
Mr. FERRAND asked if the architect at Constantinople
was an Englishman or a Turk, and if any control was
theex-
a t
complete
clerkinsepni
aodt
ef
ht
control ho emworks
eh
asvwe e
Bra as r
aha
er
ace:mei
pen-
forsd en t
approval before any work was done. The expense of living
Turkey
in
was very great, and the residence itself was very
large. Many things had to be sent from England to Con-
stantinople.
In answer to a question,
Mr. COWPER said the salary of the clerk of the works
was £4OO a-year, which was included in the estimate.
a competent man
SmONanstaaidapthenedclerarkonoefyt.he
understand how the Home Government could check Rveaorwksaawaast naoldoessubtto
expen-
diture at Constantinople. He hoped the vote would be less
next year.
Mr. COWPER said the vote would be £l,OOO less next
year than this. The extra expense this year arose from
the necessity of a new zinc roof and certain furniture that
was actually required.
Sir B. LEIGHTON thought two residences unneces-
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 PALMERSTON said that if they dismissed him
the result would be disadvantageous, as they would be
obliged to have a Turkish clerk of works.
Sir G. BOWYER was at a loss to understand why a clerk
of the works was required, the residence being finished,
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. PERRAND supported the amendment for the die-
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
militant surveyor in the office who had been at Constan.
tinople. (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 Constantinople for less than £4OO a yew., on whom
they could rely to
prevent imposition. The Board of Works
had a scale of prices paid in Constantinople, and were en-
abled by it to check the expenditure. It would not do to
trust to the Turks in those matters.
Sir G. BOWYER thought the Under-Secretary of State
ought to defend
been cast on their honesty by the First Commissioner of
Works, the Turks from the aspersions that had
Lord PALMERSTON said no more was done here than
was done by every gentleman in England who had a large
residence to check expenditure.
Mr. FERRAND said the grossest jobbery
at our embassies.
Mr. HUBBARD defended the continuance of the clerk
ground of economy.
of the works on the was practised
After some discussion,
Mr. CHILDERS said it would be better to follow the
practice of France, who allocated annually a fixed sum for
the embassy houses. It would be well for the house to fix
the expenditure on the Constantinople residences at £2,000
a year.
Mr. COWPER said this was an estimate for the ensu-
ing year, part being for erdinary, and part for special re-
pairs. If the ambassador was to be his own clerk of the
works, he doubted if the work would be so economically
done. The clerk of the works at Constantinople was a more
responsible man than the one at Paris, who was paid only
£lBO a year.
The committee divided. The numbers were—
For the amendment 74
Against it .......
then agreed
yfajoiity
The amendment was carried, and the reduced vote was
to.
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;
45,000 had been already voted, and
now £40,000 were asked for. A sum of £137,000 was still
to be Noted for completing
Mr. COWPER said the work.
of the money already voted only
£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.
Was
Sir G. BOWYERwhy the
at a loss to understand
building should cost so much, money. He advocated sim-
plicity and not ornamentation in the erection,and he doubted