The Sun.
London, England, 1853-06-07 00:00:00

SCOTCH SCHOOLMASTERS.

In reply to Mr. HUME,
Lord PALMERSTON stated that the claims of the
Scotch schoolmasters to increased pay were now under
the consideration of the Government.
TURKEY AND RUSSIA. _ _

Mr. LAYARD gave notice that on the 10th instant
he should call the attention of the house to the menacing
attitude which Russia had assumed towards Turkey.

MILITARY REWARDS.

------____ _
Mr. RICH wished to ask the Secretary at War if he
contemplated extending to the army such beneficial pro-
visions for the encouragement of enlistment, and for the
formation of an efficient reserve, by a system of rewards,
and by a rising scale of pensions after ten years' good
service, as have by a recent order in Council been con-

ferred on the navy.
Mr. S. HERBERT said, at the present moment,
there was no cause for offering additional inducements
for enlistment into the army, while, with regard to the
establishment of a reserved force, it would not be expe-
dient to take such a step at present.
MILITIA COMMISSIONS.
. .

Col. LINDSAY wished to ask the Secretary of State
for the Home Department a question relative to the
abolition of the fees charged upon militia commissions.
He wished to know whether it was intended to abolish
these fees altogether, or to modify them if they were
continued ?
Lord PALMERSTON said he had recommended a
moderate scale of fees to the lord-lieutenants of counties.
In the case of commissions upon the rank of captain,
the fee would be 1/. is., and above that 2/. 2s.
Col. LINDSAY said, in Middlesex and Essex the fees
were considerably beyond that scale.
Lord PALMERSTON had no hesitation in stating
that those fees were grossly exorbitant, and if he were the
lord-lieutenant of the county, he would not permit
them to be taken. (A laugh.)
Mr. T. M. GIBSON wished to ask the noble lord
another question on the subject of the militia. He had
been informed that it had become the practice jri some

counties to appoint clergymen to the office of Deputy-
Lieutenant, and he should be glad to know if, on public
occasions, such rev. gentlemen would be required to
appear in military uniform or in clerical costume .
(Cheers and laughter.)
Lord PALMERSTON had heard of the Church mili-
tant, but he heard of no such case as that referred to by
the right hon. gentleman. (Hear, hear.)
THE DISPUTE IN THE CABINET.
Mr. MOORE, seeing the noble lord the member for
the city of London in his place, wished to ask
him a question, of which, for want of time, he had
been unable to give the noble lord notice. The
question he wished to put had reference to a corres-
pondence which had appeared in some of the morning
papers of to-day. It would be remembered that, on the
31st of last month, the noble lord made a speech in the
house which excited some surprise at the time, and
which appeared to have excited some surprise in the
minds of some members in the cabinet. A correspon-
dence had taken place on 'the subject between Mr.
Monsell and Lord Aberdeen, but there was an import-
ant discrepancy in one of the letters published by the
Times and that printed by the Morning Chronicle. In
the former it was stated that the views of the noble lord on
the subject referred to were "not shared in by any of
his (Lord Aberdeen's) colleagues," but in the latter the
words were, " was not shared by many of my col-
leagues." Now he wished to ask the noble lord which
was the correct copy of of Lord Aberdeen's letter, that
which appeared in the Times, or that which was
given by the Morning Chronicle? and if it was
not the whole but only a majority of the Cabinet who
did dot share in the noble lord's views, would the noble
lord be good enough to state who the members of the
Government were that differed with him? (Oh, oh, and
laughter.) He wished also to ask the noble lord whether
it was to be understood that only the votes given by the
noble lord had the sanction of the other members
of the Government, but that the views stated by him
might be repudiated by the whole in a majority of the
Government. (Hear, hear, and laughter.)

Lord J. RUSSELL said, sir, with respect to the first
question which the honourable member has asked me,
I have to state that I have been informed by my
noble friend Lord Aberdeen that there is an important
misprint in the letter which is given in the Times. The
misprint consists in stating that the views referred to
were not shared by any, whereas it should have
been that the views were not shared by many of
my noble friend's colleagues. (Hear, hear.) The
letter, therefore, given in the Morning Chronicle, is the
correct one. (Hear.) So much for the first question
which the l►on. gentleman has asked me ; while, with
regard to the second namely, as to who are the
members of the Government who do not share my
opinion, I beg to state that I am wholly unable
to answer the honourable gentleman. (Hear, hear.)
I will only say further, in answer to the last question of
the hon. gentleman, that Lord Melbourne always used
to say that it was quite sufficient that the members of a
Government should agree to the course to be pursued,
without its being at all necessary that they should agree
to all the reasons assigned by each for the course to
be taken. (Hear, hear, and laughter.)