The Sun.
London, England, 1860-08-08 00:00:00

MILITIA BALLOT BILL.

On tho motion for bringing up the report of amendments
on this bill,

Earl 'DE GREY referred at some length to a clause
which had been introduced into the bill in the other
house, which exempted men above the age of 30 years
from the operation of the militia ballot. Between 30 and
35, men generally sought and obtained permanent employ,
and masters would be very disinclined to make engage-
ments from the fact that the men were liable to be
called away from their employment by the operations of
the militia ballot. The population increased so rapidly
that there was no fear of any inconvenience by agreeing to
such a provision.
After a few remarks from the Earl of DERRY and Earl
GRANYILLE, the report with the amendments was re-
ceived.

GAME CERTIFICATES BILL.
This bill was read a third time and passed.
RIFLE VOLUNTEER CORPS BILL.

Earl DE GREY moved the following resolution : " That
as the means of acquiring proper training and efficiency in. the
use of the rifle will be denied to the members of many
volunteer corps, and the raising of new corps
discouraged, unless practising grounds can be se-
cured forthwith, the want of which has been
already felt in many places, and for the obtaining
of which increased facilities are greatly required, the cir-
cumstances which require legislation on this subject appear
to this house to be of such real urgency as to render the
immediate consideration of the same necessary.
I he resolution, after a short discussion, was agreed to.
NAVAL DISCIPLINE BILL.

On the order of the day for the third reading of this bill

The Earl of HARDWICKE said this bill was intended
no doubt to ameliorate the condition of seamen. Imprison-
ment was substituted for corporal punishment. Punish-
ment was not to be inflicted without inquiry by officers ap-
pointed by the captain. This would make a great change
in the discipline of the navy. The first thin the Admi-
ralty would have to do would be to regulate the mode of
procedure of these new courts. Evidence would have to be
taken before the court, and the captain was to know nothing
of it till it was reported to him, and he was then to have
the power to award such punishment as he thought fit.
The whole of the government of the ship would be in that
tribunal, and he did not approve of that alteration. The
power of the captain would be much impaired. He thought
also that in small ships, such as gunboats, they would have
great difficulty in setting up such a tribunal as this bill
contemplated. There were some clauses of the bill which
were very valuable, and especially one which rendered sea-
men amenable to punishment for misconduct on shore, just
the same as if they were on board ship. Upon the whole
he thought the bill might be of some advantage.
The Duke of SOMERSET said the great principle of the
bill was that offenders were to be tried by a court of offs
cars, and power was given to the Admiralty to do th
which they had continually done. They had modified the
decisions of courts martial, when appeals had been made,
and that power was now given to them more directly.

believed this bill would effect a great improvement in naval
discipline, and that this improvement would induce seamen
in the merchant service, who were now kept back by the
fear of corporal punishment, to join the navy. By this bill
no man would be punished till after full inquiry before a
court-martial, and after full opportunity had been given
for arriving at a calm judgment.

The bill was then read a third time.
The Senior Member of Council (India) Bill was read a
third time.

The Admiralty Jurisdiction Bill was read a third time.
The Weights and Measures (Ireland) Bill was read a
third time.

The Superannuation Act (1859) Amendment Bill was
read a third time.
Earl GRANVILLE moved the resolution of urgency
for the second reading of the Census of Scotland Bill, which
was agreed to, as also was that of the Corrupt Practices at
Elections Act (18.54) Continuance Bill.
BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

The Earl of DERBY wished to ask the noble earl the
President of the Council whether he intended to proceed
with the two bills which now stood for a second reading, the
Ecclesiastical Commission Bill and the Poor Relief (Ire-
land) Bill ; and he also wished the noble earl to state which
of the remaining bills now in progress, or awaiting their
second reading, were those which her Majesty's Govern-
ment considered to be of such importance or necessity that
they would move the resolution of urgency for their being
read a second time. With regard to the Ecclesiastical Com-
mission Bill, he would not express any opinion as to the de-
sirableness of sanctioning that bill, since the clauses to which
the Government had seemed to attach considerable import-
ance had been rejected in the House of Commons. With re-
gard to the Poor -law Bill for Ireland, there could be no ques-
tion that a bill ought to be passed, in order to prevent the ex-
piration of the powers of the Irish Poor-law Board, but it did
not follow that extensive alterations should be made in the
existing law, and he hoped the noble earl would be satisfied
with a mere continuance bill, and withdraw those clauses,
for which no immediate urgency could be alleged. There
were a considerable number of 'bills still in progress in the
other House of Parliament, which had not reached their
lordships' house, and it must be a very strong case indeed
which could justify the house in departing from their usual
regulation, so as to adMit the second reading of those bills,
so long after the period which had been fixed as the latest
day on which the second reading of bills Should take place.
In the case of bills which were necessary for settling the
financial arrangements of the country no such objection
would be raised, and indeed the rule did not apply to such
bills; but no others, except those of extreme importance,
should be made the subjects of a resolution of urgency. It
was desirable that, both in their lordships' house and in the
other- house of parliament, there should be a clear under-
standing as to what bills were to be taken up at the end of
the session, for he had seen much time wasted in the House
of Commons at this late period, on bills which were still at
a very early stage, and for which no plea of urgency could
be ach nittetif they were now to be sent up to their lord-

ships' house. Such a bill, for instance, as the Metropolis

Local Management Bill, which affected many important
interacts, was one which ought not to be pressed on their
lord ships without allowing a fair time for its discussion.
• The re was another bill which, he understood, was likely to
pass the House of Commons that evening, and to which he
belie vcd the Government, as he himself did, attached great
importance. He thought the subject of that bill was one of
extre me urgency, though he was not quite satisfied with
the n lode in which the Government had dealt with it; he

wear st the bill relative to the constitution of the European
forces ain India. That was a bill for which, under any cir-
stanct the Government had a right to call for the consi-
deratis )n of the house.

Ear I GItANVILLE, who was scarcely audible in the re-
porter: ;' gallery, replied that the two bills to which the
noble i earl had particularly alluded, as standing for a second
readin g on Thursday next, were the Irish Poor-law Con-
tinuan .cc Bill and the Ecclesiastical Commission Bill,which
he Wo- 4141 ask their. .lordships to consider on that day. He
also in tended to ask their consideration for the Friendly
Societies Bill, and the East India Stock Transfer Bill. Of
the LI sndlord and Tenant Bill he knew nothing at present,
nor of 'some of the other kills which were still in the other
how;e of Parliament. He need not now give a list of the
bills connected with money which would come before their
lordships before the close of the session. There was the
bill to provide for the proposed fortifications, the defences
of tle re alm, which he trusted their lordships would
early take Into their consideration, as well as the European
Pore tes.in India . Bill, to which the nobje earl had referred.
The Land Improvement (Ireland) Bill was also to be
bromglit on, with a view to settling the questions which had
beet L af,itated so long ; besides which there was the bill re-
lath ig to Roman Catholic Charities, the Industrial Schools
Bill , and the Metropolis Local Management Bill. In gene-
. , I's their lordi3hips' house was 'placed in. rather a difficult
tra'rt,tl?n, When 'a question was raised as to the effect of their
or ti_ttein. k rule to limit the latest time for the second reading
effeclt
wbiottalsato the 27th July. ' On the—present occasion the
fore the eta
of be to fix the latest period five or six weeks be-
very little vmbthe !session ; at least he might say there was
ability
in less than a
mo of the session being brought to a close
they were rigitilyntth after the perio d thus fixed. If, now,
ll,outta of. Coraraeleat77 out the sounding rule, while the
tcottionued. sittirg such a number of
..hour.a every.day te,
they would place thD.t through ilte bets-iiness of the session,
therefore therttlita an Awkward position ,
and he hoped,
nom, to breaking
rbrlorclehips would so use
that regulation as not to risk its pi_down under the
civet irnstanceE. With regard
land) Bill, and the• modifigatfons stizgest,"iir'lo: Relief (Ire-
not admit .the
jest) 's Goverament thought it dfOirp.ble that the it,ihnesrhoMa-
Teeding of such a bill certain
•be le ft, in - its j present state; . and. he could
'vitt ciple that on the second
'Of ino'clatisbs ()light to be •einittett became they were
notn
matters of urgency.: .
' . 'TIM. Marquiti of CLANRICARDE :said that an irnpor_
tau'pliitiple was. involved in' f fioie 'clatisw of the Irish
P .
. .. ,
ctarplaw Bill which ought I)o.4glcca 0 without due

consideration. He did not understand what was to be done
with the two bills relating to the finances of India.
Lord DENMAN asked whether the Refreshment Houses
and Wine Licenses Bill was to come on next Monday. He

intended to oppose it.
After a few words from the Earl of CHICHESTER re-
specting the Ecclesiastical Commission Bill.
Lord REDESDALE said it appeared that the noble earl
(Granville) would treat every single bill now before Parlia-
ment as an urgency bill, and the argument he ueed for so
doing was that the session was likely to last a considerable
time longer than usual. But the standing rule was adopted
in order that noble lords might be able to form some sort of
opinion as to the time when their attendance in Parliament
would no longer be required. If the Government was
unable now to carry through the business of the country so
as to conclude the session at the usual time, that was no ar-

gument against the standing resolution of the house. II
ought to be laid down that with every bill as it came up
notice of the intention to proceed with it should be given at
the earliest possible time. The Poor Relief (Ireland) Bill
came up to that house on Friday week. He thought such
important alterations ought not to be made in a continuance
bill, but embodied in a separate measure. The noble lord
said there were several other bills which could not be looked
upon as urgent ; the Gunpowder Bill, which altered the
whole code of laws respecting gunpowder, ought not to be
pushed forward unless it were apprehended that the Go-
vernment or any of her Majesty's subjects might otherwise
be blown up ; the Savings Banks and Friendly Societies
Investment Bill, an extremely objectionable measure; the
Land Improvement (Ireland). Bill, which should not be
passed at the fag end of the session, when most of the Irish
peers were absent ; the Metropolis Local Management Bill,
promoted solely by the Board of Works, the provisions of
which even the Home Secretary had declared he did not
understand. With regard to the Fortifications Bill, no
doubt the fact of the Government asking for the vote of so
large a sum for the defence of the country 'showed they
considered that bill to be one of urgency, and it would most
likely be received by their lordships without any objection.
But as to the other bills he had mentioned no grounds
existed, as far as he knew, for forcing them on the conside-
ration of their lordships at the end of the session ; and he
must protest against measures being treated as urgent
simply because the session had been somewhat prolonged,
and a chance presented itself of , passing them hastily
through Parliament.
Lord DUNGANNON said it was clearly understood by
the Irish members in the other house, before they left for
Ireland, that the Poor-law (Ireland) Bill would be simply
' a continuance bill, but much to their astonishment two im-
portant new clauses had since been added,. one of which
was likely to have a very mischievous tendency. He thought
that was an unjustifiable proceeding, especially at such an
advanced period of the session, when so few Irish members
were in the house.
Lord WODEHOUSE explained that the Government
originally introduced a general measure with regard to the
Poor-law in Ireland, but' finding there was no time for its
consideration in the present session, they withdrew it, and
brought in a simple continuance bill. One of the clauses
to which the noble lord objected was inserted on the motion
of Mr. Hennessy, and the other was supported by Mr. Mon-
sell, with, as he believed, the general concurrence of Irish
members.
Lord STANLEY of ALDERLEY contended that when
a continuance bill was introduced, it ought to be a conti-
nuance bill and nothing more, and that no new clauses
should be added. He considered that the standing order
providing that ho bill should be read a second time in their
lordships' house after the 27th of July had worked benefi-
cially, but it ought to receive a liberal interpretation, and
he should be sorry if, when the session was prolonged, they
refused to entertain measures of urgency and importance
after that period. (Hear.)
Lord LYVEDEN wished to know whether it was the
intention of the Government to introduce a bill this.session
to relieve the finances of India ?
Lord REDESDALE observed that he should offer no
objection to proceeding with such a measure, as it would
probably be one of urgency.
After a few words from the LORD CHANCELLOR, the sub-
ject dropped.
Their lordsbips then adjourned.
at

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(YESTERDAY.)
The SPEAKER was in attendance at twelve o'clock, but
did not take the chair until 25 minutes past, the house not
having been formed before,
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

Lord De Freyne's Estate Bill was read a third time and
passed.
ROMAN CATHOLIC CHARITIES BILL.

The house went into committee on this bill, resuming at
clause 5.

Mr. SELWYN said that he was happy to say that the
differences in reference to the bill wore reduced to a very

simple point. He defended himself from a charge made
against him by the hon. member for Dundalk (Sir G.
Bowyer) of having dealt unfairly in regard to his oppo-
sition to the bill, by stating that the measure was brought
on at a time when it could not be fully discussed. He
contended that the law had been strained by this
bill in favour of Roman Catholics, and in the first
place it was required by those who opposed the
bill, that Roman Catholic charities should be placed on the
same footing as any other charities. Having referred to
the law prohibiting bequests of money for saying masses
for deceased persons, or other superstitious purposes, he

said by this clause that law was evaded. For instance, he
would take the case of a bequest of £50,000 tc a specific
charity, for which only £10,600 would be sufficient,
the trustees would be empowered to apply the

£40,000 remaining to those superstitious purposes
which had been introduced by the existing law. He sug-
gested for the sake of the charity itself, and with a view to
avoid it being subjected to expense, that an application in
such a case should be made to the charity commissioners
to deal with the remaining fund, as was provided for with
respect to Protestant charities. His third objection was,
that under the provisions of this bill this measure would b.
injurious to the public interests as regarded bequests, as
England should be free from any foreign influence.
Ile maintained that it would be most dangerous to the
public interest if in this matter any foreign jurisdiction or
interference would be permitted, and if the clauses were
not altered in the points to which he alluded he must op-
pose the present clause.
After a few words from Sir G. C. LEWIS, the clause
was negatived without a division, with the understanding
that it would be brought up with the report in an amended
form. The remaining clauses were agreed to.
The ATTORNEY-GENERAL moved, to substitute for

clause 1, the following :—No gift or disposition made or to
be made for any legal charitable purpose cennected with the
Roman Catholie religion shall be, either as to the whole or
any part, unlawful or void by reason of any purpose, re-
quest, or direction, which may be deemed in law supersti-
tions or unlawful, being made part of or united with such
gift or disposition, but the whole of the property comprised
in such gift or disposition shall be applied exclusively for
such legal charitable purpose.
Sir G. BO WYER moved the following addition—" Pro-
vided, that no such last mentioned trust, condition, or re-
quest shall in any other respect be rendered valid or legal,
or invalid or illegal, or be otherwise affected by this Act."
He took that opportunity of stating with respect to clause
i that the object of the bill was not to make any difference
between the law as relates to Roman Catholic charities
and Protestant charities. By this measure Roman Ca-
tholics would be obliged to observe the provisions of what

was called Lord Hardwicke's Act, in the same way as Pro-
testants were compelled to do. Roman Catholic charities
were subject to disabilities from which Protestant charities
were exempt, and as soon as these were removed, as it was
proposed to do by the bill, and Roman Catholics placed in
the same position with reference to those charities as Pro-
testants, that was all that would be required.
In reply to Mr. ADDERLEY and Mr. MALINS,

Sir G. BOWYER said that the result of this clause
would be quite different to what the hon. members opposite
apprehended. In the case of a Roman Catholic testator leav-
ing £lO,OOO for a school or the maintenance of a church, and
£20,000 for masses for his soul, the latter would be invalid
under this clause. No such case as that to which he al-

luded occurred, because bequests were not made simply
for the saying of masses for the soul of the donor,
but were given for the maintenance of a church or
a school or some other similar object, and merely a request
was made by the testator that prayers for his soul should
be said. This clause had the full concurrence of the
Roman Catholic body, and if rejected considerable difficul-
ties would be experienced.
Mr. HENLEY contended that, as he read, the clause
made legal bequests for superstitious uses.
After some further discussion,

• Sir G. LEWIS said that the bill had been discussed
hitherto at late hours, and the house being impatient, it
was not received with the best humour. Ho considered
that clause 2 of the bill introduced last year, which gave
powers to the Charity commissioners and the Court of
Chancery to deal with Roman Catholic charities, should
be adopted, and he would move its substitution for that of
the present resolution.
The resolution 6f the Attorney-General was negatived,
and the amendment of Sir G. Lewis was agreed to.
The preamble was then agreed to, and the house resumed.
NDUSTRIAL SCHOOLS ACT (1557) AMEND-

MENT BILL.

The house went into committee on this bill.
On the let clause,

Mr. ADDERLEY objected that the scope of the
bill was to take the control of those schools out of
the educational department and vest it in the

Home-office. He objected also that it was proposed
to class pauper children who were in those schools with
thoSe confined in reformatories.
Sir G. LEWIS said that though the bill was introduced
at a late period of the year, it contained only one clause,
and relating to only -'one point, and when it was first
brought forward he had made an explanation of its object
which led to aZelakfe. The bill originated in a proposition
from the Privy Cotindil to the Howe-office to transfer these
schools to the latter. These schools were of a penal charac-
ter, and similar to the reformatory schools which were
under the control of the. Home-office, who were only de-
sirous of consulting what they considered the public
benefit.

Mr• RIDLEY conteavd that as those schools wen) fur

tended for vagrant children, there was no similarity between

hem and reformatory schools.

Sir S. NORTHCOTE supported the bill, and contended
:hat it was most desirable to transfer the control of these

schools from a body who were incompetent to one that was I
quite efficient to manage them.
Mr. LO WE said that in reality these schools were of a
penal nature, and therefore would be more properly trans-
ferred to a department that had to deal with criminals than
be allowed to remain under the control of a department
which was purely of an educational character.
Mr. MONSELL opposed the bill. He considered that
reS the children in these schools were convicted of no other
offence than vagrancy, they should not be placed in the
same position as those who were confined in reformatories.

Mr. HENLEY regarded these industrious schools as a
branch of the reformatory system, and therefore that they
would be more efficiently worked by the Home-office than
a merely educational body.
Mr. BLACK bore testimony to the benefits of these
schools in Edinburgh, and deprecated their being united
with institutions of a criminal character, which might have
the effect of tainting with crime those who in these schools
might be trained up to be good citizens.
Lord E. HOWARD thought the distinction between
poverty and crime should be rendered as wide as possible,
and he hoped the Government would ponder carefully be-
fore making tho proposed change.
After some further discussion the clause was agreed to.
The sitting was suspended at 20 minutes to 3 o'clock.
The house resumed at 6 o'clock.

There were four questions on the paper, but they were all
postponed in consequence of the absence of the Ministers
to whom they were to be addressed.
EUROPEAN FORCES (INDIA) BILL.

Sir C. WOOD moved the third reading of this bill.

Mr. DODSON called attention 'to the somewhat remark
able fact, that until a very recent period Lord Clyde and a
number of those who were now in favour of the present
measure, had supported the maintenance of a local force in
India. 'Lord Canning, Lord Dalhousie, and Lord Ellenbo-
rough, three of the past Governors of India, had also been
in favour of a local army. Even the right hon. gentleman
the Secretary for India had changed his opinion in the same
way, but the reason for that sudden change he had not yet
explained. The right hon. gentleman said the mutiny had
led him to change his opinion, but then as lately as August
last he had expressed himself in favour of a local army, al-
though the mutiny had then been longknown. With regard
to the bill itself, he thought the patronage proposed to be
given to the Horse Guards was far too extensive. Last year
the value of the commissions at the disposal of the Horse
Guards was no less than £1,271,250, and now it was pro-
posed to add to it all the patronage of the Indian service.
He did not mean to say the Horse Guards was more cor-
rupt than any other body of the same kind, but he felt that
it would not be for the benefit of the public that the Horse
Guards should possess the large patronage they did by the
present bill. Even if the amalgamation of the Indian and
British armies were desirable, the time proposed for that
amalgamation was ill chosen. He admitted that this was an
Imperial question; but then they ought not to look upon
India as a mere military colony like Algeria. No, we ought
to regard India as an important branch of our dominions,
from which we could obtain tea and cotton and sugar, and
such like articles, for the advantage of the mother country
and the benefit of India.
Mr. VANSIT TART said that he looked upon the Royal
troops as being the cause of our success in the recent mu-
tiny in India. The hon. gentleman then read an extract
from a letter from Major-Gen. Williams, to show that Delhi
was taken by the Royal troops, and that Lucknow was
saved by those troops.
Sir H. WILLOUGHB Y said that both the local and
Royal troops behaved well in the unfortunate mutiny which
took place in India. Although the bill before the house was
a short one, it was also a very important measure. The bill
was different now from what it was when first brought be-
fore the house, and that was chiefly owing to the amend-
ment carried by his right hon. friend the member for Ox-
ford (Mr. Henley), by which the rights, privileges, and
promotions of the local army in India were to be continued
to them. Now he wanted to know how the amalgamation
here indicated was to be carried out, and how the finances
of India were to' be made use of in the matter. He begged
also to notice the observations made l?y the right hon. gen •
tleman the Secretary of State for India (Sir C. Wood). Ho
alluded to the remark made by the right hon. gentleman,
viz., that the council did not like to part with their power.
This expression had given offence to the council, and he
hoped the right hon. gentleman would take an opportunity
of giving an explanation on the subject. The hon. gentle-
man then said that they had greatly increased the debt and
obligations of India, and if they were to look upon this as
an imperial question, it was very possible the natives of
India might so regard it, by declining to meet the taxation
to be imposed to carry out this new arrangement for getting
rid of the local army. It was a matter of astonishment that
Lord Clyde could have published a letter stating that the
officers of the Indian army were dissatisfied, without having
that which he did not profess to have, unquestionable infor-
mation and authority, on the point. Surely the object of the
House of Commons should be to do all that they possibly
could to induce the men of that local army to remain at their
posts and discharge their duty. (Hear, hear.) The bill,
notwithstanding its great defects, and the weighty objec-
tions entertained against it, had, he admitted, done some
good in leading to the consideration and recognition by
the Home Government of the claims and services of the
distinguished officers of the local army in India.. His opi-
nion was, in conclusion, that the house should insist upon
one-third of her Majesty's army in India being composed
of a local force, a combination and arrangement which he
was satisfied would not only have the effect of averting
danger, but of giving satisfaction. (Hear, hear.)
Sir E. COLEBROOK E thought the question as to the
composition of the Indian army was one upon which the
intelligent portion of the Indians might fairly be consulted.
With regard to the officers who would be affected by the
proposed change, he did not see, notwithstanding the gua-
rantees which the Government alleged they were prepared
to give, that the results would be satisfadtory to them.
They had seen the army of Bengal fall into a state of col-
lapse, and that that of Bombay had also become seriously
affected; and he thought that great jealousy was likely to
result from the proposed change in its operation. They
had seen, for instance, that severe criticisms had already
been indulged in at the expense and to the' prejudice of the
officers of the Sepoy army. They had heard that Lord
Clyde had expressed an opinion that officers of that army
were not qualified to command the troops of her Majesty's
regular army. Now, he must say that, in his opinion, it
was not judicious in the Commander-in-Chief to so express
himself, (Hear.) The officers and men of both services
should be fairly and impartially treated, and properly con-
sidered. The Duke of Wellington, who was an authority
upon this subject, expressed himself in a different manner,
and, in giving his opinion, said whether the local European
troops be amalgamated with her Majesty's regular army or
not, no change should take place in the form of the Indian
Government. He (Sir E. Colebrooke) looked upon the
local European army as a most important force. They
were all young men, and were, from being .acclimatised,
more healthy than the men in her Majesty's regular regi-
ments. • Then, again, he did not see any marked difference
between the soldiers of the local European force and the
regiments of the line; and if there were any, it was cer •
tainly in favour of the men of the local European force.
They enlisted for the service in India, and, becoming
attached to the country, they had not that longing
for home that regiments of the line naturally had, and
they had in their favour, also, the recommendation of being
thoroughly acquainted with the country. He considered
them a most important force, and that great danger was 'to
be apprehended from the Governmsont scheme submitted to
the house for disbanding them as a distinct force, and amal-
gamating them with her Majesty's regiments of the line.
(Hear, hear.) The question to be considered was, did the

European forces in India combine for anyunlawful purpose.
He contended they did not do so, and that Lord Clyde him-
self exonerated them. Such charges ought not to be lightly
made in this house, because those against whom they were
Anode felt them most keenly. It was a grave matter to ac-
cuse 25,000 men of treason, when there was no ground what •
ever for such an accusation. He implored the house not to
pass the bill if they valued their Indian empire.
Sir J. ELPHINSTONE charged the right hon. gentle-
man the Secretary of State for India with keeping back or
suppressing papers connected with the bill, and he should
therefore move that it be read a third time that day six
months. Why were they compelled to keep an army of
80,000 men when the finances of India could not afford it?
They sent a gentleman to that country who, by the finan-
cial system he introduced, displeased all classes, and would
do no good. An income tax was brought forward, but he
wished to be informed how it was collected. That very
morning they had news which ought to point out t• them
the danger of tampering with native troops. He maintained
that the expenses which the bill would entail on India
would be enormous. It was only the other day that the
women and children of two regiments sent out to join their
husbands and fathers, cost the country £22,000.
Mr. J. B. SMITH seconded the motion, and observed
that there was some mystery about this bill, especially as
the Government bad so suddenly changed their minds. He
believed the principal reason was the alleged mutiny of the
European forces. He thought it a measure of hasty legis-
lation, and if authorities were to be relied on, he believed
the opinion of such a man as. Lord Ellenborough deserving
of every consideration, even though• opposed to Lord

Cl 3 des. Ho had no doubt that if it had been brought for-
ward at an early period of the session, it never could have

passed.
Mr. T. G. BARING contended that because a bill was
brought in at the end of June instead of May, it was no
reason why it should be rejected. It was amply discussed
in all its stages, and When there was a very full attendance
of hon. members. It was not the fact that the opinions of
the members of council on this subject were not before the
house, lithe dissents of the members of the Council of
India were not submitted to the house before the second
reading of the bill, the fault was their own, and not that of
the'S:cretary of State for India. There was no truth What-
ever in the statement that the authority of the Governor-
General of India would be diminished by this bill. There
was neatjng in the measure which took away one iota of
patronage in the ptaff appointments from the Governor-
General of India. On tile subject of expense they hail the
Authority of an eminent actuary that tlae N31011.11P of the ac-