The Sun.
London, England, 1857-08-15 00:00:00

IMPERIAL PARLIAMENT.

HOUSE OF LORDS—YESTERDAY.)
The LORD CHANCELLOR took his seat on the woolsack
at 5 o'clock.
resented a petition from a
Lord ST. LEONA.RDS p
that
person complaining
1833 was still undeciaelt which was instituted in
ta a suit
The LORD CHANCELLOR said he was at present
unacquainted with the suit referred to, but he would
snake inquiry into the subject. The noble and learned
lord remarked that suits were very frequently allowed
to sleep without the suitors taking steps to bring them
before the court.
Lord ST. LEONARDS, after a few observations on
the above petition, called attention to the present de-
fective state of the law of domicile.
Lord CAMPBELL said that legislation was much
required on this subject. He had been studying the law
of domicile for the last 40 years, and he did not even
now know at present where he was domiciled.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said the difficulty was
with respect to the question of fact not of law. The
subject was a very difficult one, and would require much
consideration.
THE EMBODIMENT OF THE MILITIA.
Lord ELLENBOROUGH said it was to be regretted
that the short time allowed for asking questions
should be occupied with a debate on the law of
domicile. (Hear, hear.) The question he wished to
ask was one of the greatest interest, and therefore he
thought that be had better avail himself of the present
moment to ask the noble lord the Secretary for War
what application he intended to make of the very inade-
quate sum of 200,0001. for the embodiment of the
militia 1 He of course had no means of getting
official information, but he bad taken trouble
to get correct information on the subject he was
about to bring under the consideration of their
lordships' house. He assumed that 18 battalions bad
either been sent or had been ordered to India ' • that
the five regiments that had been sent to China
had had their destination changed, that the five
regiments which stood next for foreign service bad been
warned, that two regiments would leave the Cape
and proceed to India, and that the 37th Regi-
ment would be sent thither from Ceylon. At present
there were 22 battalions in India, and consequently when
the reinforcements were all sentout there would be 52 bat-
talions of infantry, a larger force than was in the Crimea.
But when we had 50 battalions in the Crimea, what was
our position at home ? We were reduced to 11 batta-
lions, but at the same time we had an effective militia
force of 66,000. Seventeen regiments were employed in the
Mediterranean garrison, and he assumed that the force
of these regiments amounted to 11,000. We had
now at home eleven battalions, and it was
understood that three other regiments had been ordered
home. We should, therefore, have twenty-one battalions
at home, while during the Crimean war we had but 11.
He thought the 200,0001, would only enable the
Government to embody 9,000 men for six months, and
therefore taking into consideration the loss of the ser-
vice of 55,000 militiamen there would altogether be a
loss of the services of 38,000 less of armed men in the
country than we had during the Crimean war. He looked '
upon the present war as of more importance than
that which occurred in the Crimea. Considering
the nature of the climate of India and the casualties
which always took place in operating against
an enemy, he was of opinion that this country would
require to raise 15,360 recruits annually to main-
tain the force in India in an efficient state.
He himself thought that the whole of the militia
should be embodied, and he was informed that the only
additional expense would be half a million sterling.
Lord PAN MURE said it was contemplated to em-
ploy the 200,0001. for the embodiment of 10,000 of the
militia between this and March 25. Ii it should become
necessary to embody the whole of the militia, circum-
stances would occur which would render it necessary to
summon Parliament. It was contemplated to employ
the militia in aid of garrisons which had been left by the
troops sent to India. He did not wish to underrate the
evils that had occurred in India, but he did not share in
the alarm which was experienced. They had despatched,
or would despach, almost immediately, armies of all
arms to the amount of 31,000 men, which would include
no recruits, but all formed troops, and would arrive at
the season when operations could be immediate, cen-
stant, and without delay. He concurr d in the necessity
of keeping up the complements of regiments at home
and abroad, and agreed that 15, 000 men per annum would
be required for India. Allowing 5,000 for the same Fur-
pose at home, that would make 20,000 men a-year ; but
he thought it would quite destroy the spirit of the mili is
if they were to be told that the only thing it was good
for was, to form a sort of recruiting depot. The militia
was for the defence of the country at home, and if every
soldier had been drafted from this country in the late
war, the militia would have sufficed for the defence of
the country. Ho did not think that any nation was
likely from jealousy wantonly to seek a quarrel with us
because we had our hands fell in India ; but if, by any
of those circumstances which the wisdom and prescience
of nations cannot forsee, we should be involved in war,
Parliament would be called together, and he had no fear
that we should not be able to provide for our national
defence. Recruiting was going on very actively, and as
the harvest would shortly be over, he had no doubt that
numbers would then flock to our standard. Without re-
corting to Cravernmotib head pc.,oor, if
necessary, to resort to the ballot for the militia—
which they would not do unless that it became abso-
lutely necessary. The ballot was practically a poll tax,
which in many cases amounted to 501., that sum being
frequently paid for a substitute. In respect to the news
from India, he reminded them that rumours which were
sometimes spread frequently turned out to be unfounded.
Lord CLANRICARDE said we were not at war.
We were interfering in a riot. We had got a mutiny,
and our first duty was to quell that mutiny.
Lord GRANVILLE said the difficulty of the ques-
tion would not be removed by legislation. He thought
the news was as favourable as could be expected. Bom-
bay and Madras remained firm.
After a few words from Lord CLA.NRICARDE, the
subject dropped.
The Lunatics (Scotland) Bill was read a third time
and passed.
The Burial Act was reconsidered as to amendments.
The Bankruptcy and Insolvency Bills were read a
third time.
The amendments in the Married Women Reversion-
ary Interest Bill were agreed to.
The New Z ;eland Bills were read a third time and
passed.
The Ecclesiastical Commission Bill was read a second
time, and the House adjourned.

HOUSE OF COMMONS.—(YEsTEnDAY.)
The SPEAKER took the chair at 12 o'clock.
PRIVATE BUSINESS.

The Lords' amendments to the Mayor's Court of the
City of London Bill and the Newry and Enniskillen
Railway Bid were considered and agreed to.
DIVORCE AND ?MATRIMONIAL CAUSES BILL.
The house went into committee on this bill, resuming
the considevat;on of clause 25.
Lord JOHN MANNERS moved to insert the words,
or of adultery preceded or followed by the commission
of a crime for which the husband ie sentenced to penal
servitude."
Sir G. GREY complained that no notice had been
given of the amendment, which involved an entirely new
principle, which there had been no time to consider.
Under these circumstances he trusted that the committee
would not sanw.ion the amendment.
Mr. HENLEY thought that what the noble lord in-
tended to convey was that desertion being now admitted
one of the adjuncts of adultery for which divorce might
be granted, absence under the sentence of a Court, con-
joined with the same circumstances of adultery, should
also be taken as a ground for divorce. The words
would, no doubt, require very careful and close conside-
ration. For example, if a woman had condoned the
offence of adultery on the part of the husband, she ought
not to possess the right to set up the case afresh.
Mr. GLADSTONE concurred with the Home Secre-
tary that the noble lord should take time to consider the
matter, and that if he thought a discussion upon the
question advisable, it should take place upon the re-
port. _ _ _

Lord LOVAINE thought that divorces should be
granted in cases of adultery followed by hopeless lunacy.
He recommended the noble lord to postpone his amend-
ment for further consideration.
Mr. HOPE opposed the amendment, and cited the
law of Sweden in confirmation of the undesirability of
giving legal effect to such a provision as that recom-
mended by the noble lord.
Mr. HEATFICOTE supported the clause.
Mr. MALINS thought that there should be no
divorce unless there was an actual abandonment with
intention, in consequence ofadulterous connection. He
could not support the amendment, even if it were post-
poned for future contideration.
Mr. DE VERE considered that the bill was not only
not founded upon religious sanctions, but that, on
the
obligation, t.
Lwas entirely at variance with all religious
,otl•ytth regard to the amendment of the noble
lord, he
Lord ',T.
llid a. feeli it his duty to oppose it.
NERS said he had no time to give
notice of the clause
by placing it on the paper. The
government were
members
to press the bill night
and day, that meStau
t er. )
beyond their noses. 4had not time to look an inch
Mr. NE WDEGATE
thesesled that the bill was un-
wortky of the learning 01
be its authors.
who were supposed to
After some further discussion the amendment ro-
posed by Lord John Manners was withdrawn,
Mr. STAPLE FON moved an a.tnendnaerp
t
o the effect
that when a woman had obtained a decree
ga
husband for the restitution of conjugal rightsa,aZtt'eenr
adultery was committed by the husband, that should be
a sufficient ground of divorce a vinculo,
Sir G. GREY opposed the amendment, of which, he '
said, he did not see the force, and eventually it was
withdrawn.
No other amendments being proposed, the question
was put that clause 25 should stand part of the
question.
Mr. GLADSTONE intimated that although he would
not himself move its omission, he should be prepared to
support any other member who might do so, in order
that the opinion of the house upon the principlo of the
bill might be once more recorded. He then vindicated
the conduct of the opponents of the bill from the charge
of obstruction, and expressed his hope that, as the most
difficult clause of the bill had been got over, more
rapid progress might be made with the remainder until
they got to clause 53, which they would all wish to have
settled.
Lord PALIVIERSTON accepted the declaration just
made with great pleasure, and disclaimed all wish to
06, hurry the bill iuiproperly through its stages.
Atter some remarks fr om Lord John Russell, Mr. Na'