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, GREGORY asked the First Lord of the Treasury
whether a detailed statement of the expense to be incurred
in altering, repairing, completing, and ref:tiering 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, hear.)

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, refused 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 or seine nets for catching herrings in Scotland.
The LORD ADVOCATE replied in the negative.

----
HOLYHEAD HARBOUR.-OFFENSIVE LAN.
GUAGE OF THE CHANCELLOR OF THE

EXCHEQUER.
Mr. TOLLEMACHE complained that on Monday
night when he happened to be unavoidably absent, the
Chancellor of the Exchequer made some remarks on the
composition of the Holyhead committee appointed on the
preceding Friday. The right hon. gentleman complained
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,
he,
ail:teed, any of his constitutents ; neither had
vaue4:s:ro interest in the railway, though it
on tbul ugh. South Cheshire. He had no desire to serve
Toraittee, and if his '
that he be
i.ineotion. medischarged from it he would cordially second the
ia. felt perfectly laughter.) So far as he was concerned
biassed decision, competent to •
Mr I) 11. arrive at a perfectly un-
intere. -. Pti‘lA.Nl a
at in liolyivad',Taria-edilara ed that he likewise had no
the Isle of Atigl an acre of land in
and could recolealeecY: Ile'
11,r1,"ita:sereated in Carnarvon,
betweenthat
great struggle
tilifehathwaod places as to which
ought to be the harbour, If ,ago there was a
was for CarnarvonL
The CHANCELLOR of th
having t.addbeen
y preference at all it
hon. gentleman the member fore
(:,c) ecHtion of
misinformed, as he haidatinnao South Cheshirlte said the
•
rrecll
Fonal or offensive
that the committee was gnot i e certainly did per-
that
referred, in support of his statemmp
earttially constituted,
de-
clarations of several of the members. nit' to the public
to mention names, but he was satisfied that might be invidious
friends would give an impartial consideration to thsetwe hie°,,a;
He never presumed to say that the decision ,A the commit-
teesub"-
would be unworthy of the consideration of the Govern

men t.
Mr. H. HERBERT looked upon the words of the Chan.
cellor of the Exchequer as in,ulting and offensive, He
begged to move the adjournment of the house.
Mr. HENNESSY seconded the motion.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said if his
remarks were "insulting and offensive," it was the duty of
the hon. member to have called antio toembn themer shou l at the
e
time they tte
were made. (Hear.) The hon. m
quote his words.a
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 unparliamentary language.
_Colonel FRENCH characterised the term, that the corn-
Tnt was not impartially constituted as insulting and
t£e,
Kti lve l Did it mean that the committee had no brains,
no owledge, and would not be obedient I (Hear, bear'
Ilsitil.El.l said it wad the duty of the tieveruuleut

not to assent to committees not, in their opinion, impartially
constituted. The Government ought to have opposed the
appointment 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 he ird 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
competent 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 consequently 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 sti nck out 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, he viould 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.

On 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-
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 volunteez 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 themselves.
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. ITUMBERSTON said it would be impracticable in
many cases to bring scattered corps together for battalion
drill, and he begged to suggest for the cDnsideration 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 bo 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

als o read the draft of the new standard of efficiencyjo;
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-
mittee. Having had the honour to serve upon the volun-
teer commission, he might say it was proposed by the
commission that is. per head should be allowed for pay-
ing the expense of bringing detached companies tog:-
ther for battalion drill, and that they shoula meet three
times a year. lie believed that the Government had in the
main partially adopted that suggestion, and that the ad-
ministrative companies would have to meet three times a
year for battalion drill ; but at the same time he saw that it
was laid down in the proposed order of council, that:in case
of any corps not being able to assemble three times within
the twelve months, the Secretary of State had the power to
min members of
alter the number of battalion drills, and that, he thought,
(would meetn the difficulty which had been started.
, Mr. 13MBERSTON in order to sleet the case of cer-
romete battalion
three battalion drillscompanies
make good the
fin. in the year, suggested ' who might not be able to attend
that they might
with, Mr. W. B. FORSTER'leney by attending extra company drills
drill, that he preferred leaving it to the
nspectors toconfessed he was so anxious to
decide in what cases it should be dispensed
date '
certificateßllXl OofNeftlaCrieenAcy
the -. from %.,
' What period
The Mar • toof the year was
guts of HARTIN O'',l
service would bear relation « ~., -,:— said tla
the 30th of November
inton ..0 .ue melve raoust certificate of
council would be laid bef each
Year.
The 4 ha preceding
became law. ore Parliament as soraft orders of
on as
Clause 12 was then agreed to. the bill
On clause 19,
Mr. HIBBERT moved the rejection
of
was a copy of the old clause in the old Actthe clattse''9ll'lcl
doubt many bad precedehts in the legislation There
Were-
a —o
of George 111., and assuredly this was one of thethe mign
peered to him most objectionable that volunteer': . s
Iht ay,-
be called upon to suppress riots, particularly in counties
like Lancashire, where popular disturbances
generally
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 suppression of a riot while