The Sun.
London, England, 1856-03-04 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMEN

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(YEBTERDAY.)
( Continued front our third Edition of last Night.)
INCUMBENTS OF PARISHES.
General BUCKLEY moved fora return of parishes
that are united under the same incumbent; stating
whether there is a residence in both parishes, or only
Where the incumbent resides ; the population of each
parish ; and whether there is a resident curate in the
parish in which the rector or vicar does not reside.—
Agreed to.
CIVIL SERVICE SUPERANNUATION.
Mr. MA.CARTNEY moved for a return of the com-
parative amount of superannuation, distinguished from
compensations upon reductions of office, to persons
who had entered into the public service previous to
the 4th day of Aug., 1829 (in continuation of Parliamen-
tary paper, No. 110, of session 1853), up to and ending
the lit day of Jan., 1856, the totals of the several co-
milieus of the said return to be placed at the head of this
return ; also a return of abatements made from the
salaries of all persons who have entered the public ser-
vice since the 4th day of Aug., 1829 (in continnation of
Parliamentary Paper, No. 108 of session 1853), up to
and ending the Ist day of Jan., 1855, the totals of the
several columns of the said return to be placed at the
head of this return.—Agreed to.
HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENTS.
Mr. M. SMITH asked the Secretary of State for the
Home Department whether it was the intention of her
Majesty's Government to introduce any bill during the
present session of Pariiatnent for the purpose of estab-
lishing district surveyors, instead of the present paro-
chial system, which, in many instances, was merely an
auxiliary poor rate, and very inefficient for effecting its
proposed purpose?
Sir G. GREY said he did not quite understand the
question of the lion. member. He presumed he alluded
to the Highway Bill. He had often introduced bills to
improve highways, and they had invariably arrived at
a certain stage, but then they were defeated. He did
not despair of eventually improving the system, but at
the present time he had no intention of introducing any
bill on the subject. _ _

THE AUSTRALIAN MAILS.
Viscount GODERICH asked the Secretary of the
Treasury whether the requirements contained in the
Treasury minute relating to the steam communication
with the Australian c )lonies, that the mail vessels shall
touch at King George's Sound both on the outward and
homeward passages, will he enforced in all the three
routes specified in that minute ?
Mr. WILSON said he should best answer the ques-
tion by reading the first passage in the coetract that
had been issued for the conveyance of the mails to Aus-
tralia. The hon. gentleman then read the passage, in
which it was clearly stated that the mails should all
touch at St. George's Sound, both in the outward and
homeward passage.
THE LICENSING SYSTEM.
Mr. T. DUNCOM.BE asked the Secretary of State
for the Horne Department if it was the intention of the
Government to introduce a bill this session with refer-
ence to the licensing system, as recommended by the
committee of last session ?
Sir G. GREY said it was not the intention of the
Government to do so at present.
THE DEBATE OF FRIDAY EVENING,—PER-
' SONAL EXPLANATIONS.
On the order of the day fur the House to go into Com-
mittee of Supply beiteg read,
Sir D. L. EVANS rose and said—Mr. Speaker, I must
ask the indulgence of yourself and of the house for a
short time while I make a few observations with re-
ference to same remarks which I made in the course of
the debate on Friday evening. (Hear.) The right hon.
gentleman the member for the University of • Oxford
(Mr. Gladstone) reproved me and others—l am sorry to
say not altogether without cause—for hiving engaged in
what he characterised as a random discussion. To the
random character of that discussion I am afraid I con-
tributed my full share. There were two officers whose
names were not introduced by the UndenSecretary for
War (Mr. F. Yee:) who were incidentally referred to by
me. The first was a junior officer, Major Dowbiggin.
I am sorry that I made any reference to him, for although
the conduct of persons in my own position must be open
td criticism I think that young officers should not be
interfered with without very great reason. Since Friday
evening a friend of mine end a relation of this young offi-
cer hat sect me a letter regarding him, which was most
gratifying to me. From thet I find that on the 22d June,
when' at the head of 200 men, Major Dowbiggin greatly
distinguiUted himself by his gallant conduct ie repelling
an attack of the Russian troops. On that account lam ex-
tremely glad that he obtained the promotion which, front
what I read in this letter—a letter more genuine than
even a public despatch—l am convinced that he awl
merited. So far am I from wishing to injure his profes-
sional prospects, and so convinced um I of his merit on

the occasion referred to in this letter, that if I see his
Elam e in the Gazette again it will atlerd me great pleasure.
(Bear.) The right ht.u. gentleman (Mr. Gladstone) also
referred to the introduction (.f Geu. Simpson's name.
There is no man who has been more highly spoken of in
his private capacity than has Gen. Simpson.. I have not
the honour of his acquaintance, but I never heard a
syllable to his disadvantage. When I read the newspaper
on Saturday morning I saw that I had used expressions
which I regretted exceedingly, and I entirely admit the
justice of the reproof of the right hon. gentleman. I there-
fore beg to retract every word which might seem to
reflect on General Simpson's private character. With
regard to his conduct as a general officer, there is, how-
ever, no man in the British army who has a better right
to speak than I have, because I think there is no officer
whose conduct has been more commented upon, and
that rather severely, than my own. Teem was another

name upon which, in defending myself against the state-
ment roads by the Under-Secretary for War, I am afraid
that f tcuclie,l without that profound deference and
respect which I undoubtedly entertain for him who bears
it. I refer to the name of his Royal Highness the
Duke of Cambridge. Sir, it was my lot during the
campaign in the East to be generally either supported
by or cooperating with his Royal Highness, and
it is impossible for any man to be treated with
greater kindness and condescension than I received
from him. It was also rimy good fortune generally to
concur with him in his opinions, and I could give strik-
ing instances of his excellent perception and judgment.
Therefere, Sir, feeling for his Royal Highness so deep a
respect, arid, if I may be allowed to say so, so sincere a
regard, it would afflict me very much if anything which
I have said, or the manner in which I have said it,
should in the slightest degree be wanting in the profound
respect in which his high qualities, both personal and
professional, entitle him. I hope, therefore, that on these
points I may be exonerated from blame. The name of
Col. Gordon was introduced by the Under-Secretary for
War, and with respect to that officer the hoe. member
for Beverley (Mr. Gordon) arli?ressed the house in reply.
The hou. member for Beverley addressed himself to the
question in regard to his relative in so generous and
courteous a wanner es to excite in me a feeling of com-
punction for the way in which I had spoken upon the
subject. I can only say that I sincerely hope he will for-
give rue fur any wound which I may have inflict el upon
his feelings. Perhaps, bad I had more presence of rainct
I should have expressed this hope at the moment.
Another relative of Col. Gordon, the noble member for
Tyrone (Lord C. Hamilton), also addressed the house. He
spoke upon the ,übject with Inure esergy, sad used one
expression of whien I felt forced to complain to him.
He replied to me in the most handsome, kind, and com-
plimentary manner, and I am bound to express to him
my acknowledgments for that reply. He certainly, in
maintaining his argument, used other strong expressions,
hut I ate en conscious that I myself frequently require
tolerance and consideration for loss of temper and too
strong expressions, especially when personal feelings are
culisted in the discussion, that of these I will not com-
plain. The priucipal complaint against me on Friday
evening, however, was that I was prejudicing Colonel
Gordon in reference to his examination before the board
of general officers. It did not occur to me at the time
that this interpretation might be fairly put upon it. It
is matter of regret to me that I should have done
anything that might have that effect—(hear, hear)—
but I hope that the members of the board are above
being affected by any heated or extreme observations
I may make. I also stated to the noble lord that I
had my grievances, which would at a future tune
appear. I deprecate these discussions at present,
and wish we had observed the rule laid down by the
right boo. baronet the member for Droitwich (Sir J.
Pakington) ; but I think that, when the time shall come
for the revival of this controversy, I shall be able to show
that I also have my little grievances upon this subject.
I had not the slightest notice from anybody that evi-
-1 dence bad been, taken against the four generals, and only
learnt it entirely by accident. However, I venture to
think that, should an opportunity for a complete explas
nation occur, it will he seen that, if I have offended
the distinguished house to which the noble lord (Lord C.
Hamilton) and his relative on thisiside (Mr. Gordon) be-
long, I also have some ground of complaint against that
distinguished house. Having thus expressed my regret in
terms as strong as I can find words toframe, let me refer
to an observation made by the noble lord (Lord C.Hamil-
ton) towards the conclusion of his speech. That observa-
tion was to the effect that I had, after the battle of Inker-
man, made a proposition to Lord Raglan, end that Lord
Raglan bad replied to me,"What, do you propose to aban-
don the cannon and the French!" My reply to that was,
that no such expression was ever used by Lord Raglan.
(Hear.) I did make a proposition to him, and I stated
from memory what took place. On the following morn-
ing a friend of mine called upon me and said, " I read
what you said upon that subject last night. Perhaps you
may have forgotten it, but I have read a letter of yours
written immediately after the battle, which was shown
to me by your wife, in which are precisely the words you
used last night in the house." I had totally forgotten it,
but I now have that letter in my pocket. It is quite at
the disposal of any one who wishes to peruse it ; but it
contains some observations in regard to our allies which
at present it would be improper to publish. The friends
of Lord Raglan or any other hon. gentleman are, how.
ever, perfectly at liberty to read it. It contains no sea.
tence which would affect me if it were published at
Charingscross. All these things, every opinion expressed
by a general officer, will be made public ; and I have no
doubt that if we are all equally explicit, many of us
however we may appear as soldiers, will turn out to have
been very bad prophets. The letter to which I have re-
ferred is dated the Bth of November, 1854, and contains
the following passage :
" General Canrobert and Lord Raglan were soon pre•
sent, directing the , troops. The former was slightly
wounded in the arm ; nothing to speak of."
Shortly after the battle.
" Lord Raglan, on hearing that I was present, sent