The Sun.
London, England, 1860-07-03 00:00:00

, it was not accepted. On Thursday several papers, protests,
memoranda, and resolutions of the council were placed in
his hands, but in the opinion of his colleagues and himself
they were in such form that they could not be received.
He was still rea ly to write a letter to the council laying
the matter before them in such a shape that they could
enter a protest against it. Another point on which he had
been attacked was for bringing forward any small measure.
That certainly was not an objection which he had expected.
It was said there ought to be no act of Parliament on the
subject, but he wished to take the opinion of the house on
the subject, and for that purpose ho had introduced the bill.
They might have done this of themselves, but for the pos-
sible chance of putting a charge upon the revenues of
India. Those were, so far as he recollected, the main points
that had been alluded to. If all belonged to the Queen's
army there would bo no class that would be looked down
uu
pp
eo
nn ,aa nn fe
equality. t h e
Tfi rhs
et time haep
pmeui
las tt
ms
eanytealvil,weiciludldhebefilpleudt
up from the same staff of persons from whom the staff in
this country was chosen. The efficiency of the army would
be promoted by the change, and there would be a saving of
nearly £200,000. Ho was asked whether the officers of the
irregular corps were to be appointed in India ? The answer
was in the affirmative. He believed there would be a suffi-
cient supply of officers from the line. It could only be
tested by experience, but he entertained no doubt on the
subject. (Cries of " Divide.") On introducing the mea-
sure he had stated very fully his opinion upon the merits
of the question. He had not in the slightest degree changed
that opinion, and he would only say he hoped there would
be no further delay in coming to a decision on the question.
Mr. A. MILLS rose amidst loud calls for a division.
His object in opposing the measure was not to endanger
the Indian. empire. The hon. gentleman had now promised
to produce the protests and other papers. He would not
further impede the progress of pubLe business.
Sir C. WOOD explained he had not promised to produce
any papers, but if the council for India gave him the oppor-
tunity he would do so.

Mr. HORSMAN hoped that the motion for the adjourn-
ment would be withdrawn after the pledge just given by
the right hon. gentleman.

The SPEAKER explained that, in the absence of the
hon. member for Westminster (Sir De Lacy Evans), the
motion far the adjournment of the debate could not be
withdrawn, but it could be negatived.
The motion was then negatived, and the house divided
upon the original motion, when there appeared—
For the second reading
For the amendment
Majority for the second reading ..-229
SUPPLY.

- - -
Mr. MASSEY brought up the report, which was agreed
to.

COUNTY PRISONS (IRELAND) BILL.
The order of the day for the committal of this bill was
discharged.

REFRESHMENT AND WINE LICENCES
(IRELAND) BILL.

The committee on this bill was postponed till Thursday
next.

POOR LAW BOARD CONTINUANCE BILL.

On the motion for the second reading of this bill,
Mr. C. P. VILLIERS said the hon. gentleman the mem-
ber for Manchester proposed to oppose this bill, but if he
did so at all he should do so in committee. Some measure
must be passed this year, as the act would expire at the end
of the year.

Mr. HADFIELD said he should like to have a long
delay in order that the country might have a full and fair
opportunity of expressing its opinion upon the subject, par-
ticularly as to the powers of the board, which were con-
sidered by many as too extensive, inconvenient, and incom-
patible with the difference between the times in which those
powers were first conferred and the time in which we now
live.

Sir H. WILLOUGHBY thought the Poor-law Board
ought to have just time enough allowed it to wind up its
affairs. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) It was a machinery
which was at once both inquisitorial and expensive.
Mr. E. JAMES said he would move that the bill be read
a second time that day six months unless a fair opportunity
was given to discuss the matter fully.
Colonel GILPIN said there were many useless officials
connected with the Poor-law Board whose services might
and ought to be dispensed with.
The bill was then read a second time.
On the motion that the Militia Bill be read a second