The Sun.
London, England, 1847-05-19 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT
HOUSE OF LORDS, May 18.
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat upon the Wool-
sack at five o'clock.
MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE OF COMMONS.
Messengers from the House of Commons brought up
several Bills, which were ordered to lie on the table.
motion of th
COUNTY BUILDINGS BILL.
This Bill was read a second time.
DRAINAGE e
Earl OFe
T S. LANDSGBEIRLML
On the
ANS,
this
BROUGHPAA
24C TORY ILetcßdaLp
Bill was read a second time.
Lord
etition from Mac-
clesfield, in favour of the Ten Hours Bill. Also a peti-
tion from Inverness, against the Police Bill;
and a petition from the Standing Committees of
the three denominations, the Presbyterians, the Inde-
pendents, and the Baptists of London, against the
Government scheme of education.
HEALTH OF TOWNS BILL.
The NOBLE LORD also presented a petition from the
printers of London, in favour of the Health of Towns
Bill, and made some observations with respect to the
exemption of the City from the operation of the Bill.
Lord CAMPBELL said that the tone of the Noble
Lord on this, and his tone on the other, side of Temple-
bar was very different.—(Laughter.) There was some-
thing in the atmosphere of this House which induced
the Noble Lord to declaim with respect to the Corpo-
ration of London in terms of censure, and there was
something in the atmosphere of the other side of Temple-
bar to induce him to speak in the most eloquent terms in
their praise. —(Much laughter.)
Lord BROUGHAM said that of all the misrepre-
sentations ever uttered by the Noble Lord—(Laughter)
—of all the misstatements ever made even by him—
(Laughter)—this was without exception the farthest
removed from truth.—(Laughter.)
POOR REMOVAL BILL.
The Earl of WICKLOW presented a petition from
the poor-law guardians of Londonderry against the
Poor Removal Act for Ireland and Scotland. The
petitioners complained, and, as he thought justly, of the
power that was given by that Bill to remove paupers to
any of the eight places named in the Bill.
Earl FITZ WILLIAM begged to give notice, that on
the third reading of the Poor Removal (Ireland) Bill,
he would move a clause to the effect that this Bill should
be of a temporary character.
ARMY SERVICE BILL.
On the order of the day for going into Committee on
this Bill being read,
The Marquis of LONDONDERRY rose to move that
the Bill be committed this day six months. He expressed
his opinion on this Bill at a time when he moved for
certain information, but it so happened that he was
necessarily absent at the second reading. He was sur-
prised that on that occasian the Noble Earl should
have taken so much notice of his speec' , when
a speech much more able had been made
upon the subject by a Noble Lord on the same bench
with him. He (the Marquis of Londonderry) asked the
Noble Earl whether he could support all these changes
by the opinion of able officers in the army. He had
brought none of these forward. The great majority of
the army—nine-tenths of the officers—were opposed to
it. But the Noble Earl, far from answering the speech
of the Noble Earl, had employed his eloquence on more
popular subjects—the minor improvements that had been
effected in the army.
The Earl of CARDIGAN said it was with great pain
he opposed the present measure, supported, as it was,
by the authority of the Noble Duke. But that sanction
had been given to it with such qualifications and in such
a modified manner as to lessen very materially the value
which he would be otherwise inclined to attach to that
authority. The measure might do very well for any
European army, but for the British army, dispersed as
it was, over every quarter of the globe, he did not con-
sider it would be found at all applicable, and if it were
carried into effect there must be very great changes in-
troduced with regard to those in the colonies. He
believed that with regard to the pension, that two-
pence was an addition to the original sixpence, and
he thought it but justice to the soldier that
he.. should obtain a fair reward for his services.
He thought there should be some change in the present
system. He thought that the two periods of service
should be altered to fourteen years aim seven years. That
would enable those who entered the service to retire at
a proper period of life.
Earl GREY said that he did not understand the Noble
Marquis, or the Noble Earl, who had spoken that even-
ing, and intended to oppose going into Committee on
that Bill. He would, therefore, mention only one fact
which bore strictly on the question before the House.
An officer in her Majesty's service, who had been pro-
moted from the ranks, when he heard of this Bill
warmly approved of it, for, as he stated, he had been " a
man" for seven years.
After a few words from Lord Ellenborough, Vis-
count Combermere, and the Marquis of Londonderry,
the House went into Committee on the Bill.
On clause 1 being proposed,
The Earl of LUCAN moved to substitute twelve
years in the infantry for ten, and fourteen for twelve
years in the cavalry and artillery. He considered the
term fixed by the Bill, as it at present stood, was too
short, granting the soldier his discharge just at the
period when he was best adapted for the service. The
period which he proposed was, he believed, the very
period originally intended by the Right Hon. Gentleman
the Secretary-at-War. The only argument which he
had ever heard urged in favour of the provisions of the
Bill was. that it should popularise the service. He was
at a loss to know what they meant by popularising the
service. Had they not tried to popularise the sea vice ?
By means of large bounty and larger pensions, but it
failed ? 14-1 them look at the year 1807. In
that year they had 19,144 men in the army ;
but in 1846 they (Invio ied actually 1,600 more
than they did in 1807. This sho, ed that the service
was popular. The same might be derived from the
number of deserters. He would not detain their Lord-
ships, but he begged to assure them 'hat he was actuated
by no party spirit. He was tco much attached to the
army as a service to be so actuated in speaking on such
a measure.
Earl GREY said the speech of the Noble Earl was
not a speech in favour of a particular amendment, but
against the whole Bill. As their Lordships had already
affirmed the principle in the Bill, he would not, in con•
sideratioa of their Lordships' time, do more than ad-
dress himself to the amendment of the Noble Earl. The
Noble Lord, after speaking against tha whole principle
of limited service, concluded by eying that he was in
favour of it. And why ? Because it would enable them
to get rid of those who were vicious in a regiment,
When he (Earl Grey) moved the second reading of this
Bill, he did say so much ; he considered this to be a
most desirable' advantage to every regiment. But
limited service carried this other advantage with it, that
a man, when he left the service at the end of his enlist-
ment, would not be useless for any other employment.
If they were to adopt the present Bill at all, he could
not consent to the Noble Earl's amendment. lie would
rather that the Bill was re j,cted altogether than incor-
porate it in the measure, as it would cause the principle
of unlimited enlistment to be tried under every disad-
vantage. If the principle was to be fairly tested, the
Bill must be carried through in its integrity, ir.stead of
its provisions being frittered away.
Viscount COMBERNIERE, as an old soldier, must
support the amendment proposed by the Noble Lord
(Earl Lucan). lie would DA their Lordships what would
become of that nondescript person, a discharged soldier,
who would thus at the end of ten years be thrown out of
the service ? He would be cast, with his wife and chil-
dren, a burden on the community, and the greatest evils
would ensue.
The Duke of WELLINGTON said that on a former
occasion he had fully stated his views on the principle of
the Bill, and why he considered it would be for the
benefit of the service. lie did not apprehend any diffi-
culty in retaining the service of the men at the end of the
ten years.
The increase of their pay would be an effeo-
nal means of securing them in the future.
He advised
their Lordships to agree to the Bill as it had come up
from the other House, and recommended by her Ma-
jesty's Government. He did not think the Noble Earl
(Lucan) had made out a case for the alteration to twelve
years. He considered ten years would be as effectual
in retaining the soldiers in the army at the end of the
period of their service. The law had hitherto autho-
rised the raising of men for six, seven, fourteen, and
twenty years, as well as for unlimited service, and it,
had been found to operate well.—(Hear, hear.) He sem
therefore, no reason whatever for the adoption of luhe
present amendment.
Lord STANLEY thought the Noble and Gallant Duke lad
misunderstood the purport of the amendment proposed. His
object was precisely the same as the Noble and Gallant Duke,
and so. he believed, was the object of the clause proposed by
the Noble Lord (Earl Lucan); and the sole question they bad
to consider was, the best means of securing the service of :he
soldiers after they bad been the proposed ten 7argint the s
they be able under this i.
vice. The simple question for them to consider_ was,
should
as tat present stood, to retain
years' service
the old soldier at the expiration of ten. t
was that he
d not, and therefore
He apprehended
and his Noble Friends who acted in concert with him
Now, he hoped
were so anxious to introduce this amendment.
their
Lordships would adopt the amendment, and thereby offer
some inducement • to the old and efficient soldier to remain
in,
the army after
a long term of servitude.
Strangers were then ordered to withdraw, and the Com-
nidee divided, when there appeared—
For the Amendment.
Against it

................. 30
........... 38

Majoritya
ioved :guaainmstenitc.i.m.
en ''
' iidin.r.ovi—g 8
The
that
the soldier
ed to decide upon re-mlistment at
of LUCAN
be a ikm
any time during the last twelve
Earl
should
months of
servitude.
Earl GREY saw no objection to the
the time was limited to six instead ofamendment, provided
twelve months.
Lord STANLEY thought if the suggestion of the Noble
Earl opposite were adopted, a distincti im ought
between troops engaged on home and foreign
nsery toice. be drawn
Earl GREY said it would be be, ter to let the clause stand in
its per ant form, and toadd .the •
a proviso to carry out view of
the Noble Lord who had just sat down.
The clause so amended wa- then agreed to.
The Earl of ELLENIIOItOUG 1I pr.)posed an amendment
to the third clause, to the effect that any person whatever to
whom the Secretary at War might issue his wartatit, should
have the power to enlist sold ers into her Majesty's service-
Earl GREY had no objection to the amendment, which was
agreed to.
The Earl of ELLENBOBOUGH proposed another clause
after clause 4th —" That if after the expiration of such first or
second term of limited service, or of such term of prolonged
service, any soldier entitled to his discharge, being g on a
'fo-
reign station, shall not be willing to re-engage or to continue
in her Majesty's service, or in the service of the East India
Company, the commanding officer of the regiment in which
he may be serving shall, as in the case of soldiers invalided,
take the usual measures, with all convenient dispatch, for the
conveyance of such soldiers to England, and on the arrival of
such soldier in England, he shall be finally discharged.
provided always that during such time as may elapse
between the expiration of such term of service as aforesaid and
his final discharge. In England, such soldier shall remain
subject to all the provisions of the Army Act, which may then
be in force for punishing mutiny and desertion as fully as be
may have been subject thereto before the expiration of such
terms of service ; provided also, that if, at the expiration of