The Sun.
London, England, 1860-06-13 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS-(YESTERDAY.)
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack al
five o'clock.

PRIVATE .BUSINESS.

Brandon's Estate ; Hereford, Hay and Brecon Railway ;
Wexford Free Bridge ; Blyth Harbour and Dock ; Wat-
ford and Rickmanworth Railway, Dorset Central Railway
(extension of time) Epping Railways (Dunmow Extension)
bills were read a second time.

The Consett District Water, and the London, Brighton,
and South-Coast Railway (Amendment) Bills were read a
third time and passed.

DOCK YARD LABOURERS.

Viscount DUNGANNON gave notice that on the 22d
of June he should ask whether there was any truth in the
report that on a recent occasion a number of dockyard la-
bourers presented themselves at the Thames Police-court,
representing they could get better wages at Cherbourg
than they could in this country, and therefore asking for
passports to France with a view of obtaining employment
there.

MASTER AND OPERATIVES BILL.
This bill was read a first time.
LIGHT WEIGHT RACING BILL.

Earl DERBY presented a petition from the Jockey
Club disapproving of this bill. He would reserve to him-
self his objections to the bill, Until he had heard on what
grounds the noble lord introduced the measure.
Lord REDESDALE then moved that the bill be read a
second time. Having referred to the petition presented by
the noble earl, he said he should like to know whether the
objection of the Jockey Club was to the principle of the bill or
to the minimum he had fixed, viz., 6 stone. He had waited
for a long time to ascertain whether the Jockey Club would
take the subject up with a view of effecting some improve-
ment in the system, but that not having been done he
felt it his duty to proceed with this bill. Its principle
was to raise the average weights carried by race horses at
the present time, and to prevent the gambling incidental to
what were known as light weight handicaps. Its system
was greatly on the increase, and ought to be immediately
put a stop to. To illustrate this, he referred to
• the race for the Chester, Cup. Twenty-five horses
started for this race, of which only five carried more
than seven stone. The highest weight carried was nine
stone. Eight horses carried six stone, and the rest
carried very light weights indeed. Many of their
lordships familiar with horse-racing would see the evil of
this, and he thought they would agree that some legis-
lative enactment was really necessary. He had received
numerous letters expressing hopes that his bill would pass,
and amongst these memorialists a number of trainers, who
pointed out the dangers of the present system, many boys
being put upon horses, by which their lives were
endangered. He could not think that it was thought
desirable that such a system should longer exist,
and he only asked their lordships for one moment
to reflect upon the cruelty and danger of putting a mere
child who, with bridle and saddle, weighed but 4st. 41b. on
a powerful horse, what control could such a person have
over such an animal. Another objection to the employment
of boys, was the, ad influences they were subjected to. The
next point to which he would diredt the attention of the
house was, that the more the light weight handicap
system came into practice there was a sensible deterioration
in the breed of racehorses, and, added to this, the gambling
that was permitted, he might really say encouraged, by the
legislature, on the ground that racing improved the breed
of horses. He could not agree with such opinions; on the con-
trary, he thought that which tended to create gambling was
bad, and certainly could not be deemed worthy Of support.
The Jockey Club could have dealt with the subject if they
chose, but as they had not done so he thought their lord-
ships would be of opinion that something must be done. The
bill had been five months before the house, and as there
had been meeting after meeting of the Jockey Club and no
notice whatever had been taken of it, he waa justified in
proceeding with it, especially as it was approved of by
such eminent trainers as John Scott, Rogers, Sly, Bartho-
lomew, Taylor, Boyde, and others.
The Duke of BEAUFORT opposed the bill. He said
it was nearly the unanimous opinion of the JockerClub
that the bill would act injuriously towards a great number
of people, and do no good to racing.

The Earl of WINCHILSEA was understood to oppose
the bill, and to protest against the charges brought by Lord
Redesdale against the supporters of the turf. He was con-
vinced that the breed of horses was improved by the use of
light weights. The bill fixed a minimum, but not a
maximum weight. If the bill were to pass, the same boys
would ride as were now employed, merely carrying extra
dead weight. (Laughter.) At present two horses would
fetch £B,OOO or £9,0,.0; was that a sign of the depreciation
of the breed ? (Hear.) When all the world was looking
to the sportsmen of England to give them lessons in the
art, this bill would be the greatest rebuff they have ever
received since the days of Charles I. He objected to the
bill as interfering with the arrangements of private gentle-
men, and the sooner their lordships rejected it the better.
The Marquis of CLANRICA.RDE thanked the noble
lord for bringing this bill forward, and sincerely hoped that
it would pass on grounds of humanity. He viewed with
distrust any restrictions on the rights of labour, but in many
cases they were necessary. The children employed as light
weights were subject to continual accidents, merely to mi-
nister to the pleasure of certain individuals. (Hear.) The
great studs of the country did not belong to those who ran
light handicap races; our best horses were those that had
plenty of bone and sinew. He objected to horses being run
so young ; they ought to be reserved till they were stronger.
The late Lord Jersey had never run his horses till they
were old enough to run for the Derby. It would be a good
thing to put an end to two-year-old races. He hoped that
the bill would pass, on the grounds of humanity. A fearful
accident had occurred to a child of sst. weight at the late
Hampton races.

Earl GRANVILLE said this was no question of party;
the arguments of the different speakers had been rather in
analogy with the different kinds of racing which they ad-
vocated. He thought that the measure which had been
introduced into the house involved details which were
scarcely a fit subject for the discussion of their lordships in
Parliament. One of the arguments which had been
adduced in its favour was that it would tend to improve
the breed of racehorses. But he believed that the Jockey.
Club were opposed to the principle of the bill. He under-
stood the Jockey Club had no legal power or right of legis-
lation on this subject. (Hear, hear.) They were the
landlords of part of Newmarket Heath, and there,
therefore, they were enabled to enforce certain regula •
tions. At other races they had no power whatever, and
it was only by consent that their regulations were adopted.
But did they consist of so exclusive a class—were they a
body of men so bound up in their particular amusements
that they were unable to form an unbiassed judgment on
this question ? Me had examined the list of the Jockey Club
and found that it consisted of 54 members. Some of them
were members of agricultural societies ; some were cavalry
and yeomanry officers ; 10 of them were masters of fox-
hounds ;20 of them were privy councillors—(a laugh)—and
of these privy councillors, two had been Postmasters-Gene-
ral, two Viceroys of Ireland, seven had been Cabinet Mini-
sters, and two of them had been Prime Ministers twice in
their respective lives. (Laughter.) The members who com-
posed this body were backed up in their views by a large
body of the owners of racehorses, and he thought their opi-
nions on this question were entitled to great weight. There
were, however, two grounds upon which he thought it
would not be desirable for their lordships to take legislative
action on this question. First, as to the argument of huma-
nity towards the boys employed in racing, he thought mat
much stress could be laid upon that. It was perfectly im-
possible to compare their case with that of great masses of
the population employed in mines and factories, in which
boys of tender years were formerly engaged for many hours
a day. Their,lordships might as well legislate against boys
going out birds' nesting---(a laugh)—or provide that no boy
should be allowed to go into the river till he had learned
to swim. (A laugh.) Their lordships might be amused,
but he could assure them that upon one occasion when he
(Earl Granville) wished to bathe in the river Danube, he
found that he was obliged to exhibit himself in a small
pool--(great laughter)—in the presence of two gentle-
men in uniform, before he was allowed to lAthe in the
river. Their lordships would not be prepared to adopt any
such regulations as that. Then it had been said that
gambling and other great Malpractices were connected
with the present system. But did their lordships really
suppose that this bill would prevent gambling ? The idea
was perfectly futile. If young men could not be pre-
vented from acquiring habits of gambling by an act of par •
liament, it surely was far better not to attempt to pass a
measure on the ground of its being directed against these
possible frauds and nefarious practices. As to the breed of
horses, he totally
disbelieved in the alleged deterioration in
the breed of horses in this country. (Hear, hoar.) As the
noble duke had alluded to the subject, perhaps the house
would not think it unbecoming in hint
(Earl Granville) to
allude to a conversation which he had had that day with a
large dealer in horses and jobmaster. It was clearly the
interest of a man in his position to make out that there
was great difficulty in getting good horses. But according
to the statements of this dealer, although there was an un-
usual demand for a certain class of showy horses with high
stepping action,
.yet he said, if he were asked his opinion
whether he could find less horses than formerly of great
strength and good breed for ordinary purposes, he certainly
thought, notwithstanding the drain from foreign countries
that they were more abundant than ever. It was true that
the foreman of this dealer, upon being asked a similar
question, said that the complaints about the want of horses
were universal ; but then, upon further questioning, he
added that he never knew a time when the same remark
was not made. (A. laugh.) One hundred and twenty years
ago the same fears seemed to have prevailed about the
frightful deterioration of horses. But that rumour when
examined, turned out to be without foundation, and he
thought that the present would be ford to be equally un-
substantial. For these reasons he was not inclined to sup-
port the measure of the noble lord. He thought it desir-
able that the Jockey Club should examine this subject
rather than their lordships. He thought that there was
too great a desire to legislate upon every trivial question.
(Hear, hear.) There was an old maxim, c. De minimis

non eurat lex," which he thought might be freely transla-
ted, "Do not legislate for feather weights." (Hear.)
The Earl of DERBY said that there certainly was some-
thing in this subject which rendered it very' dissimilar
to those usually discussed by their lordships. :Most
of their lordships must have received great amusement
from some of the speeches which had been delivered, and
many of their lordships must have derived instruction also.
But he hoped their lordships would not consider it ungra-
cious of him if he added, after that amount of amusement
and instruction which they had received, that upon a sub •
ject of this nature their lordships were hardly as a body
competent to judge, even although they had such a large
attendance from the right rev. bench. [This allusion to
the large number of spiritual peers who were present was
received with much laughter.] One of the objects which
the noble lord stated that he had in view was to prevent
deterioration in the breed of horses of highest weight and
speed. Upon this point he (the Earl of Derby) thought he
could show that his noble friend's bill did not tend to pro-
duce the effects he desired ; and unless he made out some
very strong case of necessity, he agreed with the noble lord
opposite (Granville) that it was very undesirable that their
lordships should legislate on the subject. No doubt if a
real grievance or abuse had to be put down, there would be
an advantage in that and the other House of Parliament
interfering even in matters of this description. The noble
lord had spoken of the great amount of gambling, more
especially produced by handicapping. He so far agreed
with his noble friend that he very much regretted the great
amount of handicapping which had taken place of late
years. He regretted that; but at the same time he saw
that in the present state of the turf, and certainly extended
as it was throughout the country, it was quite impossible
to carry on racing without an infusion of the handicap
element, and a very large amount of harmless amusement
would be lost if handicapping were done away with alto-
gether. On the other hand, he did not deny that handi-
caps did afford considerable facilities for malpractices and
abuses. But he thought these abuses did not depend upon
the greater or less amount of weight ; they depended on
the principle of the handicap itself, the object of the handi-
cappers being to deceive others as to the quality of their
horses and their power of carrying weight. The noble
lord having referred to the statistics of the turf as show-
ing that horses were run upon much shorter training
than they were years ago, it might interest the noble lord
to hear the comparison which he (the Earl of Derby) had
made between the different ages of horses which were run
upon the turf in the years 1829 and 1859. The list he had
consulted, it was true, contained only the number of horses
which won in the former year, and the whale number which
ran in the latter, but from these numbers a comparison
might easily be made. In the year 1829, of two-year• olds
the number which won was 55, the number of three-year-
old horses which won was 394, and of all ages above three
years 179, making a total of 528. Thus the proportion of
two-year-olds which won in 1829 to three-year-olds was as
2 to 7 ; the proportion of two-year-olds to the whole num-
ber above three years was as 1 to 91, and the proportion of
three-year-olds to horses above three years was about 5 to
7. In 1859 the whole number of horses that ran was 1,666
of different ages ; of these SSB were two years old, 504
three years old, and there were 594 of all ages above three
years. Thus the proportion of two-year-old horses to
three-year-olds, which in 1829 was as 2 to 7, in 1859 was
as Bto 7 ; and the proportion of three. year-olds to older
horses, which in 1829 was nearly as 5 to 7, in 1859 was less
than Ito 3. He mentioned these facts to show that if
horses were not kept to training for the purpose of being in
a handicap, when handicaps were in a much less propor-
tion than they were now, there was a much larger propor-
tion of young horses formerly than there was at present.
His noble friend objected that these handicaps tended to
discourage good horses and to give great advantages to bad
and inferior horses; and the very character of a handicap
was that you must frame your handicap so as to give a
moderate three-year-old as fair a chance of winning as a
superior four or six-year-old. For that purpose you must
have a range of from 41 to 5 stone. It you began with an
amount of 7 stone—though his noble friend had now re-
duced it to six—the consequence would be that in all han-
dicaps the superior old horses would have to carry 11 and
12 stone, and the handicap run would be left to inferior
horses, which would have the advantage of being ridden by
jockeys instead of boys. The good horses would then be
absolutely excluded from handicaps, whilst at"present they
had a fair chance. But when his noble friend said that
horses that could not caary six stone ought not to be kept
in training, and were good for nothing, he was mistaken,
for he (the Earl of Derby) could mention horses that with
six stone on their backs could not live at a racing pace for
three minutes, but which were quite competent to carry his
noble friend across country for hours up to any hounds in
England. It was impossible in all cases to have lasting
qualities combined with enormous effort in point of
speed. It did:not, however, follow in the slightest degree
that because a horse could not carry six stone in a mile-
and-a-half race, and live, that he belonged to an inferior
class, and that he was incapable of being useful for racing
purposes. When the noble lord said it was more difficult
to get hunters now than formerly, he must remember that
hunting was a different thing to what it formerly was.
Perhaps the noble lord would like to go out at six o'clock
in the morning on a long slow dreary drag before he found
his fox, and ride at six or seven miles an hour for the re •
mainder of the day. Doubtless for that purpose our racing
horses were not precisely the animals—(" hear, hear," and
a laugh)—but he (the Earl of Derby) believed that if you
wanted animals combining bone and blood, action and
speed, sinew and endurance—the character of the English
horse never stood higher than it did at present in every
part of the world. (Hear, hear.) If his noble friend wished
to do away with light weights and gambling on the turf,
he should also do away with light weights as they applied
to steeplechasing. He (the Earl of Derby) never saw but
one in his life, and he never wished to see one again. In
that case there were heavy weights,, long courses, and old
horses. The lightest weight put up was Bst. 71b. ; yet he
ventured to say that, with regard to the character of the
race, the amount of gambling, and of danger to horses and
men, and the number of serious accidents, there was no
comparison between flat races and steeplechases. He did
not mean to deny that there were evils inseparable from
handicaps, but those evils did not depend upon light or
heavy weights, but upon the character of the handicappers.
He (the Earl of Derby) professed his belief that for the in-
terest of the turf he thought their lordships' intervention
might be more advantageously used than in raising the
weights as the noble lord proposed. What would be better
would be the absolute prohibition of all two-year-old races.
(Cheers.) There was one reason why he thought it desir-
able that all weights should be somewhat higher than they
were at present. It was not on account of the danger to
the little boys, but on account-of the great difficulty there
was in procuring jockeys to ride old horses under the pre-
sent light weight system. As soon as a jockey arrived at
Bst. 71b., he had comparatively few opportunities of rid •
ing, and the great amount of riding was monopolised by
the boys, who .ranged from 6st. 51b. to 7st. 101 b: When
a jockey got to Bst. 51b. or Bst. 71b., the labour he had
in bringing himself down to the required racing weight
hadtcost the life of many a respectable man. He might
here state that this subject was under the serious con-
sideration of the Jockey Club, and a notice bad been
given for the next meeting to consider the subject of
raising the weights for the Derby and other races from
Bst 71b to Bst 101 b, and a proposition was also under consi-
deration, and it had his cordial concurrence, for raising
weights on handicaps from a minimum of sst 71b. There
were many boys who could ride as well as any men, and
who in the bustle of a race would be perfectly masters of
their horses under circumstances where his ;noble friend
would find himself very considerably in a fix: (Hear.) The
prevention of gambling and the improvement of horses were
no doubt desirable, but he did not think they could be
touched or promoted by this measure. He did not think
the noble lord had established such a case as to induce their
lordships to legislate on the subject when all legislation was
a failure. He thought that after the general opinion ex-
pressed by their lordships, the noble lord would do well to
withdraw the bill without giving them the trouble to divide.
Lord REDESDALE offered to their lordships a few
words in reply before he followed the course which had been
recommended by the noble earl. After what had fallen from
the noble earl, and after the declarations which had been
made by so many eminent members of the Jockey Club, he
would not press the bill. But as the noble earl talked of
the older jockeys growing nervous, he would only read a
sentence from a letter which he had received from a prac-
tical man. The writer asked who had ever heard of a reder
in the Derby being nervous ? and the reason was that
there were in that race no children employed as jockeys.
(Hear.)
The bill was then withdrawn.
The Duchy of Cornwall Limitation of Actions Bill went
throhgh committee.

The Union of Benefices Bill was re committed, and seve-
ral verbal alterations agreed on.
The other orders of the day were disposed of, and their
lordships adjourned at ten o'clock.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.--(YESTERDAY.)
The SPEAKER took the chair at twelve o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The Hay Railway Bill was read a third time and passed.
The Caithness Roads Bill, and Manchester and Melford
Railway Bills were considered, and ordered for third
reading.

For the amendment
Against it
Majority
The clause was then agreed to.
On clause 11,
The LORD ADVOCATE moved to add "Provide
thAt nothing in this act contained shall authorise the com
missionera, or any other creditor in any of the said annui-
ties, to interfere in any way with the administration, disposal,
or control of the property, funds, revenues, or income by
this act assigned or disponed in security of the said annuities
so long as the same shall be regularly paid ; but the rights
in security hereby constituted shall only become operative
and available in the event of failure in the payment of the
said annuities."
The amendment was not pressed, and the clause was
agreed to.
Some other clauses were agreed to, and the chairman was
ordered to report progress.
The house then suspended the sitting.
The house resumed at six o'clock.
NEAPOLITAN AFFAIRS,—BOMBARDMENT OF
PALERMO.
Mr. H. B. SHERIDAN asked the First Lord of the
Treasury whether it was the intention of her Majesty's
Government to increase our naval forces in the Sicilian
waters, in order the better to afford aid and shelter to such
persons as might claim protection from the English flag;
whether it was intended to communicate to the court of
Naples the abhorrence of her Majesty's Government of such
acts as the recent bombardment of Palermo ; whether it
was intended to accompany such communication with a re-
commendation to conduct the war in future upon the rules
recognised in civilised warfare ; and whether it was the in-
tention of her Majesty's Government to protest against,
and, if necessary, vigorously to endeavour to avert, the in-
terference of any non-Italian power in the struggle now
pending between the King of Naples and his subjects.
Lord PALMERSTON—Sir, in answer to the first of
these questions I have to state that my noble friend at the
head of the foreign department has requested the Admi-
ralty to station one ship at Marsala, one at Messina, and
one at Palermo, and four ships of war are to be stationed in
the Bay of Naples, and all for the purpose of affording shel-
ter to such persons as may claim protection from the Bri-
tish flag. I should hope that distribution will be sufficient
and satisfactory. (Hear.) With regard to the second ques-
tion, we understand that the Government of Naples has
sent diplomatic agents to Paris and London, who may very
shortly—within two days—be expected to arrive here for
the purpose of making some communications to the two
governments of France and England. I trust the house
will not for a moment doubt that in communications which
may be made to that envoy we shall express those feelings
which her Majesty's Government, in common with every
one in this country, feel in regard to the barbarity com-
mitted at Palermo—barbarities which are really disgraceful
to the present age and civilisation of Europe. (Hear,
hear.) With regard to any expectations that such repre-
sentations may have any beneficial effect upon the future
conduct of the Government of Naples I cannot venture to
lead the house to entertain any sanguine hopes. The Go-
vernment is far more likely to follow the course adopted in
the case of the sacking of Perugia and the massacres which
there took place, viz., the promotion of the officers who
committed the atrocities. Those officers, naval and mili-
tary, who conducted the operations received promotion from
the Papal Government, and it is far more likely that the
officers recently employed will not receive punishment, but
that they will receive tokens of reward from the royal Go-
vernment of Naples. (Hear.) With regard to the last
question, we know that the Neapolitan Government has ap-
plied for assistance to its foreign allies—that is, to guaran-
tee the possession of the Two Sicilies to the King of Naples.
Austria has positively and peremptorily refused to interfere
at all in the affairs of Naples. (Cheers.) We have every
reason to believe that the determination of the French Go-
vernment is similar to that of Austria—(cheers)—and I
need not say what the feeling of the British Government
must be upon conduct of the kind. It is the fault and for-
I tune of Governments like those of Rome and Naples when,
by the atrocities they have committed, their subjects have
revolted and have been driven into desperation, that they
have appealed to all friendly powers for assistance to re-
move and put an end to the authors and instigators of the
revolution. Those Governments forget that they them-
selves are really the original authors and instigators of these
revolutionary elements—(hear)—and that if their prayer
were granted and steps taken to accomplish what they de-
sire, unless, what is very unlikely, they should alter their
own course, the first and most effectual step would be their
own removal. (Laughter and cheers.)
THE MILITIA.
Lord BURGHLEY asked the Secretary of State for War
whether a militiaman absenting himself without leave
did, in addition to the loss of his day's pay, necessarily
forfeit a portion of his liounty, and if such \vas the case,
whether it might not be advisable to modify this portion of
the Militia Act, so that the interference with the bounty
should be left to the discretion of the commanding officers
of the several regiments.
Mr. S. HERBERT said if a militiaman absented himself
the whole of the time he lost the whole of his bounty, but
if only for a portion of the time it was left to the discretion
of a board of officers whether he should lose a portion or

53

the whole. He did not think it necessary to make the alte-
rations which the noble lord had suggested.
ELECTION COMMITTEES.
Mr. WARNER asked the First Lord of the Treasury
whether it was intended to introduce any measure for amend-
ing the constitution or procedure of election committees ?
Sir G. C. LEWIS said he might state that the expediency
of altering the constitution of election committees had been
considered at some length by the committee appeinted to in-
quire into the Corrupt Practices Act, and a great deal of
evidence had been taken upon the subject, and which was
now upon the table of the house. The result was that they
did not recommend any alteration in the constitution of such
committees, and therefore he was not prepared to state that
the Government had any intention to propose a bill to that
effect. But it would be necessary to deal with the act to pre-
vent corrupt practices with a view of renewing it this ses-
sion.

COLONIAL MILITARY EXPENDITURE.
Mr. CHILDERS asked the Secretary of State for War
whether Government would propose to refer to a select
committee the subject of colonial military expenditure.
Mr. S. HERBERT said he thought the Government
would be able to deal with the question without referring
it to a select committee of the house.
HIGHLEIGH PREBENDAL GRAMMAR SCHOOL.
Mr. FREELAND asked the Secretary of State for the
Home Department when the return from the Rev. Thomas
Brown with reference to the Highleigh Prebendal Gram mar
School, for which an address was ordered on the 9th day of
February last, would be presented.
Sir G. C. LEWIS said, in consequence of the address to
her Majesty for a return, a communication was addressed
to Mr. Brown soon after the address was presented, but no
notice had been taken by Mr. Brown of the letter of the Sec-
retary of State. No doubt there was an intentional omission
to notice the letter, and therefore no further application
would be made to the rev, gentleman. (Laughter.)
MILITARY ATTACHES TO FOREIGN COURTS.
Mr. 0. STANLEY asked whether it was true that Col.
Hamilton had been appointed Military Attache to the Court
of Prussia, and whether it was the intention of the Govern-
ment to appoint military attach6s to the other Courts of
Europe.
Lord PALMERSTON said he would answer those ques-
tions. The Government of F.rance had appointed military
attach6s to all their.missions at the principal Courts of
Europe, and the British Government had long had a military
officer at Paris. It had been thought expedient to appoint
an officer to the mission at Berlin. But he could not state
to what extent his noble friend at the head of the Foreign-
office intended to carry out these appointments. (Hear.)
Sir J. PAKINGTON wished to ask the noble lord
whether the Government of France had lately attached a
naval officer toits mission in this country, and if so whether
the British Government intended to send a naval officer to
Paris.

Lord PALMERSTON said the Government of France
had recently attached a naval officer to its mission in this
country, but he did not know whether his noble friend would
appoint a naval officer to reside at Paris.
THE CENSUS BILL.
Sir C. DOUGLAS asked whether it was intended to go
on with the Census Bill to-morrow, and whether the Go-
vernment were prepared to give up the clause so much ob-
jected to.
Sir G. C. LEWIS said as to going on with the bill to-
morrow, that would depend upon what time was previously
occupied. He could not, therefore, state whether it would
be in his power to bring on the bill, but his wish was to do
so. With regard to the provisions of the bill to which
the hon. baronet had alluded, he had already stated his
readiness to withdraw the p:_nalty which he had proposed
to introduce for the purpose of obtaining information
respecting the religious profession of each individual. He
would be ready to withdraw it in committee. He must
take exception to one remark which had been made, that it
was intended by the Government to ask for the religious
opinions of each individual ; that was not proposed to be
done, but to ask for the religious profession of each person.
THE INDIAN ARMY.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said he wished to repeat a ques-
tion put the other evening, viz., whether the question re-
specting the Indian army had been referred for the delibe-
ration of the whole Indian Council, and if so whether they
had expressed any opinion upon the course proposed, and
whether they dissented or approved of the course taken by
the Government.
Sir C. WOOD said he was glad his hon. friend had given
him an opportunity of restating the answer which he gave on
a former evening to an hon. and gallant member ; but
amongst the numerous questions put and answers given he
was not surprised that there had been some inaccuracy in the
reports. He was desirous that his answer should be known,
for the satisfaction of those who felt an interest in India.
It was quite true that the reports of the commission ap-
pointed for the better organisation of the Indian army were
referred to the Indian Council, and their report had been
made, and was now upon the table of the house. He did not
take the opinion of the Council of India collectively upon the
report, but as he stated the other night he was in constant
communication, during the autumn, with the members of
the Indian Government upon the report respecting the or-
ganisation of the army. But while the question was pending
b fore the Cabinet he did not think it desirable to take the
opinions, collectively or individually, of the Indian Council.
No action could have been taken on that opinion had the
epinion of the Government been different. He (Sir C.
Wood) stated at the Indian Council what the decision of
the Government had been in case they might wish to express
any dissent, but the members thought it too late, and they
declined. He still thought that they might fairly and pro-
perly have done so, and that he gave them the proper oppor-
tunity. They informed him that their opinion was against
the amalgamation of the armies, but that nevertheless they
would exercise all zeal in carrying out the intentions of the
Government.