The Sun.
London, England, 1862-03-14 00:00:00

SUPPLY.

The house then went into a committee of supply on the
army estimates.

£677,055 for barracks, including the £10,787 for Sand-
hurst.

Mr. WILLIAMS wished to call attention to the enor-
mous outlay under this head. There was also a slum of
£550,000 for hospitals. He would not grudge any amount
that might be necessary for that purpose, but he could not
but think the sum a large one.

Sir G. C. LEWIS said the vote had already been dis-
cussed; and the only thing that had beau postponed was
the vote for Sandhurst. As to the item for barracks ho
could only say that the accommodation asked for had been
thought necessar3. A great diminution in the mortality of
our troops had been effected in the course of the last few
years, and that was, doubtless, owing to the improvement
which had taken place in our barracks. (Hear, hear.),
The vote was then agreed to.
On the vote of £296,283 for the education of the scientific
branch of the army.
Mr. SELWYN objected to the item of £12,700 for in-
creasing the accommodation at Sandhurst. Tho vote for
the building, it was generally considered, ought to be
allowed to pass, but the present vote raised a question of
principle. He believed that a notion prevailed in the
house that no division would take place on his motion.
He should, therefore, merely move it pro forma, reserving
to himself the liberty of dividing the house on the bringing
up of the report.
Sir G. C. LEWIS said that he had little further to add
to what he had said in :the (early part of the evening.
He would only say that if Oxford and Cambridge were al-
lowed to compete with Sandhurst, other universities, Dublin,
Edinburgh, Glasgow, Durham, and St. Bees, would claim
to be admitted ad enndum (hear, hear), so that the adran-
tage to Oxford and Cambridge would be greatly watered
down. With regard to this £12,000, ho had already stated
that the money of the eadets was paid into the Exchequer ;
and if the number amounted to 330, the receipts from them
would be about £30,000, which would more than cover the
amount of the vote. The vote of £12,000 was, therefore,
only an advance, for if not voted it would be only fair to
leave the £30,000 in the hands of the college. The whole
question, therefore, was one of account.
Mr. W ALP OLE was much astonished at the line of argu-
ment adopted by the right hon. gentleman. This was not
a question of advantage to any university, but whether all
persons who wished to enter the army without purrhaqA
should be obliged to pass through Sandhurst. (Hear, hear.)
He thought it very advantageous that there should be a
military college to which the sons of old officers could go for
their education at a small cost, and likewise that there
should be a kind of standard to which all persons who de-
sired to become officers should come up ; but he could not
for the life of him see why a person who came up to that
standard and pioved himself fit for a commission by a com-
petitive examination should be excluded because he had
received his education somewhere else than at Sandhurst.
(Hear, hear.) It had been said that Sandhurst might be
made self-supporting. Would it not be well to pause,
then, before they increased the vote, to ascertain whether
it could not be made self-supporting? It was a question
whether this matter of comls,titive examination should
be pushed to au extreme. Ile felt his right honourable
friend the Secretary at War had made out a strong
case for giving a vote fur the buildings, which vole was
agreed to last year; but with regard to the extension of
the amount to be given far the support of Sandhurst, he
thought it would be well of the Government to pause until
the plans had been more maturely con.idered. Ho there-
fore considered they ehould willtdraw this vote for one year

more.

Colonel NORTH did not believe that at the University of
Cambridge or at any other university, except, that of Dublin,
facilities would be offerod to otlicers to learn their profes-
sion properly. He should give his support to the Govern-
ment on this occasion.

Mr. FINLAY also supported the vote.
Sir W. RUSSELL trusted the Government would be in-
duced to endeavour to give a little practical training to the
cadets.

Lord STANLEY quite understood the Government say-
they would not take any one into the army without par.
-fiat-
chase who had not acquired a certain amount of qu—i-
tion ; but \svhat he did not understand was that it abould

PRICE..... -...4d.
STAMPED ....sd.

matter anything to the Government, provided the men
acquired knowledge, where they got that knowledge (Hear,
hear.) Instead of the system proposed, it would surely be
better to throw the education of persons intended for the
army open to the world. Let them receive it where they
would, and let whatever special military training might be
req!iired be given afterwards, but given only to those who
had obtaii;,ed commissions, only to be forfeited in case of
misconduct.
Mr. DEEDES did not eett how there could be any hard-
ship in requiring young men whet were to obtain commis-
sions without purchase to remain a year in a place where
of all others they were most likely to receive an education
and training which would fit them to discharge the duties
of the profession for which they were destined. ,
Mr. AYRTON reminded the housethat the system pro.
posed to be tried had been tested with a view to the ad-
mission of persons to the civil service in India. It had been
given up because it was found inconvenient and unjust.
If the plan of the noble lord the member for King's Lynn
was adopted, all the objections to the system would, he
thought, be removed. Education should be free, and there
shotißl be no compulsion as to the place where it was to be
imparted. Injustice was done by the proposition of the Go-
vernment to the various educational establishments threeigh
Old the kingdom, and also to the young men who would
have to come to this country from Ireland and Scotland on
the chance of passing, but with the certainty that two-thirds
of the entire numbs" would be rejected. Their families
would thus be made miserable, and they would themselves
be prejudiced by being
specially ;batted for a profession
which they could not attain.
Lord PALMERSTON mid it had been contended that
young men should be allowed to get their general education
where they liked. So, in fact, they were. What was re-
quired of them was to remain at Sandhurst for one year, in
order to receive a special education. A young man on being
nominated to Sandhurst was examined,to ascertain whether,
at one of the eniversities, at school, or et home, he had re-
ceived that general education which was considered neces-
sary as re foundation for the military instruction which it
,was requisite he should receive, and which it -was obvious
could best he given him et a nifollitriPliefe, (Hear, hear.)
How could it be expected that a person desirous of making
the army his profession could at the Universitice of Cam-
bridge, Oxford, or Dublin, acquire that knowledge of mili-
tary discipline it was indispensable he should possess ?
There seemed to be some confusion during the debate be-
tween the terms general knowledge and military knowledge.
It had been said that a different system answered with re-
gard to civil and scientific appointments. No doubt it did,
and for this reason, that the information requisite for these
appointments could be as well, or even better, acquired at
universities or schools than at military seminaries. (Hear,
hear.) What had been said during the discussion by mili-
tary men was not reasonable, namely. that a knowledge of
the duties required of a young man when he obtained his
commission could best be obtained at an establishment like
Sandhurst, where he should practise those duties which he
would have to discharge when he joined the army. (Hear,
hear.)
The amendment was then withdrawn.
Sir S. M. PETO moved the omission of the item 111,000
for the survey of Great Britain, upon the. ground that no
decision should be come to upon the 25-inch scale till the
committee upon the subject had presented its report.
Sir G. C. LEWIS observed that fora longtime past there
been wasted
the upon onwh it.
ichaft (Hear,er
had always been inquiries pending upon the question of the
ordnance survey, and he believed a great deal of money had
inquiry,At thesametime
this Parliament
muchhear
seemed to have agreed to. .

Sir S. M. PETO only wished to have an opportunity of
deciding the question upon its merits upon the report of
the committee. If the house had already decided, where
was the use of the committee ? The question was whether
they were to spend £1,500,000 upon a great plan which
might or might not be the best, but upon the merits of
which inquiry was still pending.
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER thought
they
mi
might
the hon. gentleman did not understand precisely the effect
of the present vote or the purposes to which it was intended
wtoorbee
mapepmblieedrs.
ofN etbitehecremhmisitrtieeght h •
therefored
,
and
not be fully aware of the points at issue in the committee.
They were, however, now going forward with the survey
friend
t
upon a large scale for a certain portion of the country, and
that portion had been in hand a considerable time, but it
did not embrace the whole of England. It embraced Scot-
land and six northern counties, and if he understood the
question to which the hon. gentleman referred as likely to
be illustrated by the report of the committee, it was whether
the 25-inch scale should extend to the whole of England.
That the vote had nothing to do with. That was a question
which he was as anxious as the hon. member should receive
the fullest discussion, but the present vote was only in-
tended to carry forward works in progress, and not for any
extension of the works.

Mr. WYLD_ remarked that the hon. gentleman had a
precedent for the course which he proposed to take, for in
1859 the committee of supply postponed the survey vote
because the commission upon the subject had not made its
report. There was really involved in the vote under dis-
cussion the whole question of the scale of the ordnance
survey of England.
The committee then divided.
For the amendment 43
Against it
The vote was then agreed to.
REVENUE DEPARTMENTS.—ESTIMATES.
£750,000, salaries and expenses of the customs depart-
ment.
Sir F. BARING, who was most imperfectly heard, was
understood to ask for the return' of the department which
had been furnished to the audit board, in compliance with
the suggestions of a committee.
Mr. PEEL said that the audit board mka taking steps to
comply with the suggestions of the committee in question.
The vote was agreed to.
£1,382,274, inland revenue.
£2,084,608, post-office.
£535,834, superannuation of tho three departments.
The above votes were severally as to without discus-
sion, and the house resumed.

OFFICERS COMMISSIONS BILL.

On the order of the day for the third reading of this bill,

brought in
iEnNthNisEbiSllS,Ystastaeiddtht ha
ate
tHwoams
oef
ISi
tetcl reeitma rpyo,
twa
ce
en,
but
he (Mr. Hennessy) thought it of great importance. He be-
lieved that the Queen had power under the royal warren
to do all that this bill proposed. This bill, therefore, vast
not necessary, and it was an invasion of the royal preroga-
tive. For some years the practice of the Queen affixing
the sign manual to commissions had fallen into abeyance,
and they were told that when the Queen had signed what
was called the submission list, and that list appeared in
the Gazette, the commission from that time took effect. This
was the first time that a bill
rom of this kind ,had been
brought in without a message f the crewn. The last
time sueh a bill was brought in was in 1830, but previous to
its being brought in a message was sent from the crown,
stating that in consequence of illness the king was unable
to sign his name. Au address was then presented from
both houses, and a bill was afterwards passed. In 1719,
when the then King George I. was going to Hanover, the
question arose as to the signing of commissions in his ab-
sence, and the difficulty was got over by a royal warrant.
authorising persons named therein to sign commissionsf
Why should they now be discussing a bill the object o
which was to give her Majesty a power which she had often
already exercised, and which her predecessors had con-
stantly used. Cases might arise wherein it might bo ex-
ceedingly inconvenient to wait till an Act of Parliament
could be passed, but in which, but for the precedent which
this bill would establish, a royal warrant might have suf-
ficed. lie begged, therefore, to move that the bill be re-
committed, and that it be an instruction to the committee
to provide against any infringement of the royal preroga-
tive, and to secure the temporary duration of the Act.
Sir G. LEWIS would not say that the hon. gentleman
was " Ipsis Ilibernicis Hibernior," but he was more roy-
alist than the Queen, for ho had set himself to defend her
Majesty's prerogative against her Majesty's Government.
(Laughter.) There was nothing in the bill whatever to en-
danger the rights of the Crown. So far as he (the right hon.
baronet) knew no military commission was complete unless
it had received the sign manual. Naval commissions, it
was true,
ralty ; but it had been held by Lord Ellenborough at nisi
were merely signed by the Lords of the Admi-
prius, and was settled law, that it was necessaryi for an
officer in the army to produce his commission, in order to
prove his military character; and that the production of the
Gazette would nut be sufficient. No doubt where there was
the sign manual the counter signature of a responsible
minister was also necessary, but that rule did not apply
to
military commissions alone. There had been a whole
series of legislation ou this subject, and if it had been com-
petent to tho Crown to dispense with the signature of the
Crown to commissions it would have been exer-
cised. The original rule WAS all that commissions were
str,:perlod at the, death of the sovereign; and in the reign
of William 111. an act was passed prolonging commi,lsions
for six mentlig tiller the demise of the sovereign.
That enactment showed that the prerogative of the crown
did not extend beyond the reign of the sovereign,
and it was necessary to have recourse to the legislature.
The Act
passed
on member.
memakbeebisr referred,
was Pa
waheeourgtebleVki,utgo wwhasich theuna hble
to
signa-
ture, sad the power then conferred on the Secretary of State
odf
was not confined to commissions. An act of the Ist Vict.
was passed, reciting that all commissions must be under the
sign manual ;and if the lion. gentl n wore
right this act
would have been wholly Wma
superfluous. He trusted that ex-
planation. would be
satisfactory.
(Hear.) The opinion of
the hon. gentleman was contradicted by a long series of
precedents, and the Government would have been justly