The Sun.
London, England, 1865-03-24 00:00:00

that such operations must, therefore, be limited to a few
summer months. We think we can by the plan now pro-
posed, assisted by Canada itself, put that counry in such a
state of defence as, with the assistance of our military
naval forces, will effectually defend it from attack. But my
right hon. friend has argued in a manner inconsistent with
himself. He says you cannot defend Canada because the
United States could bring so great an army into the country,
and therefore you must defend it elsewhere. According to
him, being unable to keep the United States from invading
Canada, in consequence of the numerical superiority of
their armies, we are to send an expedition to attack the
United States in their own homes, at the centre of their
own resources, and where they could bring a much larger
force to the ground. I say that if we could not resist the
United States in Canada we should have little cloaca,
of making an impression on them in their own seaboard
States. I really hope that the hon. member for Norfolk
will be satisfied with the amendment he has moved, and
will not think it necessary to dispute the unanimity of the
house, but allow us to pass on to the other votes on the
paper. (Hear, hear.)
Mr. BENTINCK said in reply that he differed, not from
the principle of Canadian defence, but as to the mesa°
which were being adopted for the purpose. He had been
anxious for a full discussion, but he admitted he saw n°
prospect of having the committee participate in his views.
He found that if he were to perseVere in the motion he
should be placed in two positions both of which he should
deprecate. In the first place, he should be giving a vote
which would be open to great misconstruction, because 110
should find himself in the lobby with a number of distin-
guished men with whose sentiments he had no sympathy
and in the second place, he should be getting the supicor
of hon. gentlemen under false pretences. (No, no.) yes'
yes; and he must beg to say that he declined to receive
their support under such circumstances, and if a division
took place he should take no part in it.
The committee then divided (Mr. Bentinck leaving the
house before the division took place)— •
For omitting the item
Against it
Majority; ---235

The CHAIRMAN then reported progress.
The report of ways and means was brought up :Ina
agreed to.
COURTS OF JUSTICE CONCENTRATION (SITE)

BILL.
On the motion to go into committee on this bill a dis-
cussion ensued, and finally the debate was adjourned.
THE QUALIFICATION FOR OFFICES ABOLITION

BILL.
Mr. HADFIELD accordingly moved the third readi
of the Qualification for Offices Abolition Bill. The boa.
member was greeted with loud cries of " Order !" and jot"
mediately resumed his seat.
Col. GREVILLE wished to know whether the Drainage
Bill had been read a second time.
Mr. HENNESSY again called upon the clerk to read the
bill a second time.
Sir G. GREY—I wish to ask you, sir, whether the order
for the Qualification for Offices Abolition Bill is not lierf
before the house, and whether an hon. member is in order
in discussing an Irish Drainage Bill. (Loud cries of Oh.)
The SPEAKER—It is perfectly true that the bill Was
read a second time, and that it was read a second time ill
the ordinary manner. There is no doubt an old usage."'
quite obsolete—of the clerk reading the bill, but the bi 4
has been read in the regular and usual manner according
to the forms of the house.
Col. DUNNE moved that the committee on the bill b°
fixed for that day six months. will
Viscount PALMERSTON—Perhaps the Speaker
state to the house the question that is now before it ?
The SPEAKER—I believe there is some milder'
standing in the house. The next order has been read 11
the clerk, though it may not have been heard by gentle'
!men who have not been exactly attending to what has be:
going on—(a laugh)—and that order is now before t
house.

Col. DITNNE moved the adjournment of the house.,„„
Mr. LYGON rose to order. (Renewed confusion.)
hon. gentleman the member for King's County (Mr.
nessy) had fairly raised a legitimate point of order,which '-
humbly submitted must first be disposed of. (Hear) ,he
The SPEAKER—According to all our usages a' "
present day the bill has been read a second time. tea
Several hon. members here rose at once amid repea
cries for "Hadfield!" but the .call to "Order, order In lit lir
sonorous tones of the Speaker soon replaced them ill tile
se at s. (Cries of "Adjourn !")
The house then divided upon the question of sai°lllll4
ment--

Ayes 72
Noes l4l

Majority against the adjournment 69 be
Tho SPEAKER then put the question that the bol
now read a third time.

After a few words from Mr. MOWBRAY,
rd
Mr. NEWDEGATE moved that the bill be read a thi
time on that day six months.
The house divided on tho question that the bill be 11°w
read a third time—
Ayes l3O
56

Noes..

Majority 74
The bill was then read a third time and passed.
The other orders were disposed of, and the house A'A
journed at two o'clock.