The Sun.
London, England, 1862-02-26 00:00:00

ACCIDENTS COMPENSATION BILL.

The ATTORNEY GENERAL asked the member for
the Tower Hamlets whether he would have any objection
to defer the second reading of the Accidents Compensation
Bill until Wednesday, the 19th day of March ?
Mr. AYRTON said that he would postpone the bill in
accordance with the wishes of the right hon. gentleman,
but he trusted that the right hon. gentleman would be in his
place when the bill came on for the second reading, and
that in the meantime his views in reference to it under-
went a change. (Laughter.)
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

•••••••••
Mr. BENTIIiCIi moved the following alteration in the
57th paragraph of the rules, orders, and forms of proceeding
of the house :—" If it appear on notice being taken, at the
close of the speech of any member (such notice not
to be taken during the time that any member
is addressing the house), or on the report of a
division of the house by the Tellers, after four
o'clock, that 40 members are not present, Mr. Speaker do
adjourn the house without a question first put till the
next sitting day ; and the name of the member who has
taken such notice, and also the name of every member pre-
sent when the house Is counted, shall be taken downby the
clerk of the house, and published on the following day in
the votes and proceedings." Ho contended that under the
existing practice injustice was done to hon. members, and
the progress of public business was retarded.
Mr. KNIGHTLEY seconded the motion.
Sir G. GREY hoped the house would not accede to the
motion, and argued that every reasonable latitude was
afforded to private members to bring on their motions. He
drew attention to the fact that Government never placed a bill
on the paper for Wednesday, when it would interfere with
the bills of private members. (Hear, hear.) He thought
the effect of counting out was rather salutary, as it tended
to induce hon. members to compress their speeches into
reasonable limits.

Lord R. CECIL supported the motion, the object of
which he contended was merely to secure the courtesy to
every hon. member of having an opportunity to finish a
speech which he had commenced. He strongly deprecated
the practice of an honourable member being per-
mitted to move that the house should be counted
out, without due publicity being given to his
name. He thought such secrecy was injurious to public
business, and most unjust to private members.
Mr. PAULL opposed the motion, and he thought that
no hon. member would shrink from the responsibility
of placing his name to a motion for " counting
out," merely because he had the privilege of
going behind the Speaker's chair and making such motion.
He. for one would not feel disposed to avail himself of such
privilege as exercising the constitutional right of moving
that the house should be counted out when there were not
forty members present.
Mr. EWART supported the motion.

Mr. B. OSBORNE, on the part of the house, declared
that in a count-out there was no feeling of hostility towards
any member, and ho referred to his hon. friend (Mr. A.
Smith), who had been counted out five times in one
session, as an illustration of what he stated, so far
as his own personal feelings were concerned. He thought
the services rendered by the " counters out" were very
valuable—(laughter)—and he objected to that meritorious
body being dragged into publicity. (Great laughter.)
Mr. BENT.INCK replied,
The house divided, and the numbers were—
For the motion
Against 219
Majority —l76
The motion was accordingly negatived.
TRANSPORT SERVICE.
Mr. LINDSAY then brought forward his motion on
this subject, which we have given above. He contended that
that there was necessity for a great alteration inthe present
system. In the three years ending 1856, no less than
£16,000,000 had been expended by the Admi-
rally in • the service. He referred to the ad-
vantages which resulted to the country by the
establishment of an organised system in regard to this ser-
vice, by which £1,000,000 on the public expenditure was
saved He alluded to the Transport Board, which had been
the means of effecting this saving. Having analysed the
composition of the select committee which had been
coaprinted in 1860 to inquire into the Transport Service, he
ended that the house were bound to adopt the recom-
mendation d
T.dation of that committee.
SSir
SMITH seconded the motion.
vertrELC.wLEWIS said that there was a time when Go-
departments ere accused of too great a desire to create new
tons
of in aaci
depeaulnew boards, and when the principal furle-
d Goverrkraeutakent members were to restrain the appetite
by which its par: wasteful expenditure of that description
Now they had livendatgoa in new appointments was increased.
creation of new bz.auchsea a new state of things arise. The
quently recommended to of the Government was not unfre-
hers, and it not unfreqjen7mmittees and individual mem-
ment to decline the ereatio'Y fell to the lot of the Govern-
of thoee new branches. He
was himself in that positionn:
report of the committee of last quite quiteadmitted that the
dered report, and that its recoureinelir was a well consi-
theations were worthy of
consideration of the house, and.
at uft,,,tely of adoption
by the Government, but he was not
of once set on them.
position to say the Government would at moment in a
The hon. gentleman said that the result
dation would be that the work now done b 8 recommen-
dation
be done then by three. He thought it Ytn might Uhl.:
ne-
cessary to create a board, but he confessed that
enco of changes of that sort did not lead him to anticipate the services of the 15 other gentlemen who wereP„ate id
to be superseded would be dispensed with, and that a re..
duction of the different departments would take place to
that extent. He thought the house would expect that if
the new department were created some additional persons
would have to be appointed, and some additional expenses
incurred, although he did not dispute the conclusion of his
hon. friend that increased efficiency would be obtained, and
ultimately increased economy in the expenditure of the
public money. His experience of the late transmission of
troops to Canada had convinced him that our present
aYstem admitted of improvement, and that there were
tr.
recent confusion and a conflict of authority • which
the
°nail they had not led to any inconvenience during
dency to
proti teansmission of troops, still had a ten-
Ace errors in the shipment of 'gores sad

in the performance of the transport service. Therefore
with respect to the first part of the recommendation,
namely, that the transport service should be separated from
the victualling department of the Admiralty, under which
it was now placed, he thought it was, as a matter of prin-
ciple, good and sound, and so far he was gla I his hon. friend
had called attention to the report. The War Department and
the Admiralty were agreed on that portion of the recommen-
dation, and when the proper time arrived they would be
ready to adopt measures for carrying them into effect. But
there were two other departments concerned—the India-
offico and the Colonial-office. With respect to the India-
office, his right hon. friend at the head of that department
thought that for the present it was not advisable to make
the change proposed. He did not dispute that ultimately
it would be an advantageous one, but was of opinion that
the abandonment of the system of shipment of men and
stores from India under the separate management, and with
the facilities which now existed for it, was a measure to the
immediate adoption of which he could not agree. Then
there was the third question, with respect to the abolition
of the Emigration-office, and the transfer of all business
connected with emigration to the Colonial-office. Ho believed
it was the opinion of the noble duke at the head of the latter
office that the proposed change could not be adopted in
such a manner as to give satisfaction to the different colo-
nies. Though it was possible the recommendation might
be a wise one, still there might be, on further considera-
tion, serious objections to it. Under these circumstances
he trusted his hon. friend would be satisfied with the
assurance given, that the Government was on the whole
favourable to his ♦iews, and though not at present ready
to carry them into effect, they were nevertheless taking
steps for the purpose. They had further appointed a com-
mittee of members of the Admiralty and the War Depart-
ment to frame a plan in accordance with the views which
had been expressed. He believed his noble friend the
Secretary to the Admiralty had asked for a sum in the navy
estimates for the foundation of a board of that description.
He trusted, however, that the house would see that the
question was purely an executive one, and that the hon.
gentleman would consent not to press his motion to a divi-
sion, but leave it to the discretion of the Government.
Sir F. SMITH said that as a member of the committee
he could not but express his regret that two years should
have been allowed to elapse since the question had been
considered and reported upon, and before anything was
done with regard to it. He understood and believed that if
the recent American difficulty had not been removed a
transport board would have been established; but who knew
how soon they might be again under the same difficulty ?
He could not urge the subject too strongly on the attention
of the Government, for he need not say that if they did not
reform their establishments in a time of profound peace,
they would be sure to be thrown into confusion at the
breaking out of war. (Hear.)

Mr. KINNA.inD and Mr. JACKSON having advised the
hon. member for Sunderland not to press his motion,

Mr. CIIILDERS called the attention of the house to a
grave omission in the report, which demanded the conside-
ration of the Government. His hon. friend (Mr. Lindsay)
did not seem to be aware that a great part of the expense of
the Emigration-office was borne by the colonies. That be-
ing so, it became a serious question for them to determine
whether they would be prepared to transfer the Emigration-
office to another department having nothing to do with the
colonies, or to hand it ever to the colonies themselv96 He
hoped the Colonial-office would be careful, and consider
well what the effect of the proposed scheme would be, be -
fore they adopted entirely the recommendations in the re-
port of the committee.
Sir G. C. LEWIS said he thought he had stated that the
Colonial office objected to the amalgamation on colonial
considerations, for the reasons just stated by his hon.
friend. It was the opinion of the Colonial-office that the
union of the two functions was not expedient.
Mr. LINDSAY replied—The relations of the Colonial-
office with the colonies would remain the same if his pro-
posal were adopted as they were now. As the Government
admitted the principle, and intended to carry it out to some
extent, he should withdraw the motion.
The motion was then withdrawn.
CONSOLIDATION OF THE ECCLESIASTICAL