The Sun.
London, England, 1859-07-12 00:00:00

TIIE SAILORS' BOUNTY.

Sir J. PAKINGTON said that before the house went
into committee, he wished to put a question to his noble
friend with regard to the announcement he made respect-
ing the retrospective extension of the bounty to seamen
in her Majesty's navy. He heard the announcement with
surprise on Friday night, and subsequent reflection had not
at all diminished the doubt and, he would add, the disap-
pointment. with which he heard that announcment. His
noble friend had not given the reasons which induced the
Government to make this change. He was the more sur-
prised at this, as on the veil, Friday the noble had given
this adVieeethente4n isented an order in
_council to carry
out the change, so that they must have known the reasons
which iuduced.them. to make it,
' The SPE AK ER.sard, that the house always allowed con-
siderable indulgence to speakers on the question of the
Speaker leaving the chair ; but he thought the right hon.
gentleman was passing beyond the line in replying in the
house to a debate which took place in committee.
Sir J. PAKINGTON said he should bow to any rule
which the Speaker laid down ; and he should sit down by
asking his noble friend what he thought would be the finan-
cial result of the change.
Lord C. PAGET said the best proof he could give to the
house that he did explain to some extent the reasons which
induced the Government to extend the bounty was that the
right hon.ourahle gentleman, in a speech of some. length,
had been answering the reasons he had given. (Laughter.)
The right hon. gentlentati asked why he had not entered
into more details. The fact was, he was not in a position to
enter into all the details he could have wished on that occa-
sion. He was in possession of the decision of the cabinet,
but the order in council was not in 'his hands at the time,
and he was anxious not to state anything to the house
which could le4 to a Mistake. (Hear.) He regretted that
the right lion: gentleman had not adopted the advice he
gave hire' to postpone his question till he brought in the
estimates, which he should do in afew days. At the present
time it was impossible for him to state the exact amount,
as it would depend on the men accepting this county on
certain conditions. Some might accept and some might re-
fuse it. It was.therefore impossible to say at present what
the exact.amortut was. He trusted that he would be ex,
cused, under these circumstances, from entering further
into the matter on that occasion, as the house would have
an opportenity of discussing it when the estimate was
before them. (Cheers.) •
THE ARMY.
Colonel DICKSON wished to ask the late Secretary for
War, whether he had noticed a letter in the Times of the
Bth inste signed- au " Officer Commanding a Regiment,"
and dated Portsmouth; and whether in the statement
which he made of our forces at home on the evening of the
sth inSte he included marines ashore, recruits in readiness
for India. enrolled pension, rs, and Irish police ?
General PEEL thought iWvas a great misfortune that
the time of the house sitoulr be occupied iu answering
questions arising eat of alionymous publicatiwie. For his
part, he alWaye treated let tars of that sort with the greatest
possible contempt. (Hear, hear.) He was however,
that the question bad- been asked, as it was desirabhi that
the country should know the eXilet state of the army. In
answer to the hon. member for Surrey, a few evenings ago,
he had stated the disposable force as 110,000 men.; m that
he had not .included .the marines, or the enrolled pensioners
although he believed they were fit for much better service
than the writer stated, nor had he included the Irish con-
stabulary, or the recruits for India. He held in his hand
the last return showing the state of the British army on
the Ist of June. It appears the numbers on that'day were—
Cavalry, 11,393 ;' Foot Guards. 6,184 ; infantry, 50,032;
Horse Artillery, 1,719 ; Foot Artillery, 12,669 ; Royal En-
gineers, 1,854; Military Train, 1,861; Medical Staff Corps,

375 ; and embodied militia, 23,218 ; total, 109,640 ; or, ei-
eluding tb e embodied militia, 86,422. The officer, who stated
he commanded a regiment (a fact which he very much
doubted) described the artillery as being in a disgraceful
state. What was the fact ? The number in this country was
14,500, and besides that, there were 5,000 militia artillery;
and he had the authority of the Commander-in-Chief and
Adjutant-General for stating that the force was in a state
of superior efficiency. In addition to the 180 guns attached
to the batteries there were 110 guns in store fully equipped
with their ammunition waggons, so that he was justified in
saying that the artillery was in a far more efficient state
than it had been for many years past. (Hear.)