The Sun.
London, England, 1856-02-23 00:00:00

stand many things in the statement of the hon. gentleman.
He had net explained the duties of the new War Department,
and he (Colonel Dunne) thought that no one in the house
now knew more about the arrangements of the Commissariat
than ou entering it. He wanted explanations on the lower
parts of the War Department. The hon. gentleman had
talked of the new order of merit. He himself would rather
lia.Ve seen a lower order of the Bath, but that was for her
Majesty to judge. It was not st tted that any board was ap-
pointed for the inspection of army clothing. In old times
this was done by a general board of officers—at present no
military man was responsible for the army clothing, and until
this was the case there would still be the absurdities in army
••clothing that had been so much talked about.
The vote was then agreed to, as was the supplementary
vote of 62,30111. for,wages.
Ou the question that 987,1851. be granted for stores,
Col. KNOX wished to know what was the meaning of the
appearance of an item of 250,4 001. for encampments? This
-item had appeared in previous estimates. Was it a repetition,
or was it for additional expenses ?

Mr. MONSELL said that the vote was necessary to provide
additional accommodation for the troops—it was for this pur-
pose proposed to establish encampments in different parts of
the country, which was the object of the sum required.

Col. C. LEGH had some objection to state to the ereetion
of huts in the north of Ireland, and wished to know if he
should have another opportunity of stating that objection /
Mr.. MONSELL was afraid that there would be no other
opportunity, as the expense was already incurred.
Col. C. LEGH would thou say that he considered the erec-
tion of these huts, which were fragile and inconvenient, highly
injudicious. The same expense would have provided addi-
tional accommodation in barracks of permanent brickwork,
and have been'much more useful to the army. The whole of
the north of Ireland was being covered with huts, which
might be burned down and destroyed at any time.
Mr. MONSELL said that the Government could not wait
the time necessary for building new barrack accommodation.
They were obliged to dO what was to be clone with the least
delay. He admitted that it would have been much better if
the accommodation could have been provided in a permanent
manner, but the Government had no option.
Col. TAYLOR thought that iron huts, which had been pro-
posed, woald have answered the purpose, and would have
been more durable. Perhaps the expense was the objection,
he should be glad of information on this head.
Mr. WILLIAMS complained of the loose manner in "Ne t
they were voting away money for barreks without due inquiry.
Ho saw several expensive propositions for warming the bar-
racks with steam or hot water, which he thought quite useless.
Colonel NORTH said that the bon. member always
made objection to every proposition for the increase of tne
army.
Mr. MILES wished to know if the hon. member had read
his hiitory, and been told how barracks had been knocked
down from a false economy. If they were to have good
soldiers they must keep them warm.
Mr. MONSELL, in reference to the question asked him re-
specting iron huts, said that the expense of each hut would
have been 61. 7s. 6d. ; but the objection to them was on the
score of their unhealthiness. In reference to what had been
last said, he qa:to agreed in the false economy which had
pulled down. valuable barracks and sold the materials for
trifle.

The vote was agreed to.
2,3j8/. for defraying the charges of the scientific commit'
ten at Woolwich was agreed to.

The next vote was for 246,716 men, including the officers
and non-commissioned officers in the East India territories.
Colonel NORTH called attention to the fact, that old
colonels of the army were anxious to know if brevets were to
cease, and that these men were not to have any hope of a
brevet taking place that would give them that rank they had
naturally looked forward to during the whole of their long
life. He much approved of the order. of valour, and as there
were many officers in the army of small means he hoped the
Government would remit them the fees usually payable bf
those who received the Order of the Bath.

Colonel DUNNE moved that tho committee report pro-
gress. . _

In reply to a question from Mr. WILLIAMS,
Lord PALMERSTON said he wished a vote of sufficient
men to cover the Mutiny Act, and such an amount of money
as would cover three months' pay. After that it would be
competent to the committee to discuss the items.
Mr. MILES dissented from such a course as that proposal
of voting three months' pay on account, having disposed of
the supplemental votes.
Lord PALMERSTON said that on Friday he would go
into the remainder of the votes ; and as it was against the
feeling of the committee to voto tho three months' pay on
account, he would not force it, but move it again on FridaY
next.

The vote for the men was agreed to.
The house then resumed.
The Delamere Forest Bill went through committee, and
was ordered to be read a third time on Monday next.
The Turnpike Trusts Arrangement Bill, after a short dis-
cussion, was road a third time.
The Commons Inclosure Bill was also read a third time.
The third reading of the Drainage Advances Acts Amend-
ment Billovas postponed till Monday.
OATHS OF ABJURATION.

Mi. M. GIBSON moved to bring in his bill in reference to
this question.
Mr. WALPOLE said he admitted that the oath of abjurs:
tion contained provisions which, from the lapse of time, ha
become obsolete, and which it seemed advisable should be
abolished ; but ho wished it to be borne in mind that be
conceived the oith in question contained principles that
ought to be retained in any new oath that might be substi-
tuted for it. At the present time three oaths were takes bl.
members of Parliament—the oath of allegiance, the oath 0
supremacy, and the oath .of abjuration; and if they looked
carefully into them, they would find that they contained three
distinct principles—first, simply allegiance to the Queen;
secondly, the supremacy—a clear and undivided allegiance"
not only an allegiance to the Queen, but that no foreign
prince, prelate, or potentate bath, or ought to have, jurisdic-
tion or authority in this realm ; and thirdly, the allegiance,
according to a particular line of succession, and an important
principle involving the foundation of the Protestant principle,.
so far as it was contained in an oath. He should be sorry to
see in any oaths that might be prescribed to members of that
house these three principles omitted.
Leave was given to bring in the bill, which was at a subse-
quent period brought in and read a first time, and ordered
to be read a second time on Wednesday, the 9th April.
Tito house then adjourned at twenty-five minutes to one
o'clock.