The Sun.
London, England, 1861-07-26 00:00:00

ence to the China vote. He held that of the excess 0fL200,000

in the China vote, which he should have to ask the house
for in committee, there was a sum of £120,000 which Lord
Herbert could have had no knowledge of when h,t made his

statement in March, 1860. The right hon. gentleman said

there would be an excess of £500,000, but, in fact, the sum
he had mentioned was the true one, and he held there was

no possible question that the calculation of Lord Herbert
was in the main entirely correct, and that the right hon.

gentleman's calculations were wrong. They had no right
to take the five votes referred to by the right hon. gentle-

man, but the whole of the votes for the army, and the at-
tack made upon Lord Herbert would, after referring to the
statements made by him last year, be found to be without

foundation. There had been no concealment of any accounts

from the house, but he regretted if the returns made to the
house were not in accordance with the views of the right

hon. and gallant gentleman. Without going into details as
to the number of men required for the army this year, he

was convinced that the 1,500 men in excess of the estimates
would soon be absorbed, there being no recruiting for the
line this year. On the whole, therefore, he believed the

sums voted by the house would cover all the expenditure of
the army during the present financial year.
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY said that during the financial
year 1859 .60 the house voted. 122,655 men for the army,
and in the course of that year a much larger number was
kept, and yet no application was made to the house for the
pay and allowances of the extra men. Did the house intend
to give up their right to control the standing army of the
country ? Was it true that in March, 1860, there were
more than 9,000 men kept than voted by the house ? He
trusted the house would have a clear answer, because very
important constitutional questions were involved.
Sir S. NORTHCOTE said the time was inconvenient
for going into these accounts in detail, as they would all
come before the Committee on Public Accounts in the next
session of Parliament, when they would be fully gone into.
But he thought that upon the whole the calculations of his
right hon. friend the member for Huntingdon (Gen. Peel),
in March, 1860, were more correct than the statement of
Lord Herbert. What they complained of was that the Go-
vernment did not state to thehouse the grounds upon which
they required the vote of credit in 1860. They should re-
member that the army estimates of last year were dealt with
in a peculiar manner by the Secretary for War, and such as
to puzzle those who took an interest in them, and desired to
make calculations in regard to them. It was the duty of
the House of Commons to criticise the mistakes of the Go-
vernment, and to visit them with a want of confidence un-

less they could be satisfactorily explained. (Hear.)
Sir J. SHELLEY thought the house ought to fee
obliged to the right hon. gentleman the member for Hun•
tingdon in bringing this matter forward, for it was clear
that these accounts ought to be examined into in detail. It
was not the first time that such accounts had been mystified,
and if a committee were moved for he should give the mo-
tion his support.
Mr. HENLEY thought the house agreed in tendering
thanks to the right hon. gentleman for bringing the subject
forward, and he could not help observing that the replies
of the Government were not so satisfactory as might be de-
sired. (Hear, hear.) He objected to the statements made
to the house by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and there
could be no doubt that if he had had to propose the imposi-
tion of a tax instead of taking one off his powers of vision
would have been exercised in a very different manner.
(Hear, hear.) The substance of the right hon, gentleman's
obseryations to-day was, that he could not pretend to go
into these details, as they belonged to the heads of the de-
partments. The only certain thing about the matter was,
that they were called upon to vote this large sum in excess
of the expenditure of the year.
Colonel DUNNE wanted to know why a sum of money
was asked of the house for recruiting when it had been
stoppod ; and he should be glad to know why the larger
number of men in the army than voted by the house were
being paid, and out of what fund.
Col. SYKES said there were 80,000 European troops in
India, and of these there were 19,000 in excess of the pro-
posed number. Why then should the Government send
out 3,000 men for the artillery in India, when they could
have obtained volunteers from the 19,000 men not required
in the line in India ?
Mr. HOPE said he would detain the house for a short
time only, while he asked the Government not to expend
the sum of £15,000 voted for increasing the Royal Military
College at Sandurst to hold 500 cadets until the house had
had time to consider the details of the plan, in pursuance
of which it was proposed to make such increase. The con-
duct of the Government had been most extraordinary in re
spect to this vote, and it certainly appeared to him that good
faith had not been kept by the hon. gentleman the Under
Secretary for War. He believed opinions were unanimous
against the system of passing all officers into the army
through one college, and in fact at college young men were
not so well instructed, however able the professors, as they
were in the performance of regimental duties. Every young
man would have to enter the college at 17, and by the rules
of the army he must enter the army between the
ages of 18 and 20. He thought it unwise at this moment to
limit the sources from which they obtained their officers, and
the rules now in force would have that effect. He begged
to move the address of which he had given notice in refer-
ence to this subject.
Sir J. GRAHAM rose to order. He thought it was not
competent now, on going into committee of supply, to make

such a motion.
The SPEAKER said he had not thought it right to inter-
fere during the time the hon. gentleman was speaking ; but
as the matter had been noticed, he should rule that the mo-
tion could not be made. 'fhe vote had been confirmed by
the house, and it could not be restricted in any way.
Mr. HOPE said if he was out of order he would withdraw
his motion.
Mr. B. OSBORNE thought the hon. gentleman opposite
was deserving the thanks of the house for calling attention
to this subject. The Government were about to totally
change the education of cadets for the army without having
any plan before them, without the house knowing anything
of the matter, and in the absence of the Prime Minister and
the Secretary for War.
In reply to Mr. HENLEY,
The SPEAKER said any votes objected to must be con-
sidered in committee, and not upon going into committee.
Mr. DILLWYN thought, if the house was prevented
from discussing this matter now, they ought not in future
to allow votes to be taken at so late an hour as half-past 1
in the morning.
Mr. BARING explained that the vote in reference to this
college was not taken at half-past 1 o'clock.
1 Mr. AYRTON moved the adjournment of the debate, in
order that the Under-Secretary of State for War might give
further explanation to the house.
Colonel KNOX complained of the conduct, of the hon.
gentleman (Mr. Baring) in the csurse he had c aken in refe-
rence to this vote. They were going to Germanise the Bri-
tish army, and he hoped the Government would take steps
1 that the question should be brought before the house on a
future day.
The SPEAKER said the house could not take into ac-
count the majority by which a vote was carried and the
lateness of the hour, but he did not desire to stop discussion

on any vote.
Mr. T. G. BARING denied there had been any breach
of faith on the subject on his part. The hon. member who
opposed the vote did not accept his proposition, and there-
fore he was not bound by it. He would agree that the new
system at Sandhurst should not be brought into operation
before Midsummer next.
Mr. HOPE—Would the hon. gentleman state that the
money should not te expended ?
Mr. HENLEY observed that the vote should be struck
out of the Appropriation Bill, and he would suggest to the
hon. member for Windsor to be in his place. (Laughter.)
The house then went into a committee of supply—Mr.
MASSEY in the chair.
On the vote of £75,000 to defray the charges required for
civil contingencies,

e (111111
ir.
eWa
fleLr Le
alrAry.l‘ilnSg saide he objected
ntaon
tthe sum of Irlosmo
Holyhead to Kingstown; and also to the sum of £512 16s.
Lord o-bLj Ireland
for the expenses of the patent in granting a barony to Lord
Brougham's heir, formerly a Master in Chancery.
Sir 3. GRAHAM said this vote generally *vas a peculiar
one, and if the house agreed to the recommendation of the
Select Committee on Public Moneys, no sum would be
asked for in future without in the first place the house hav-
ing an opportunity of discussing the matter. He regretted
to see several items which were in the vote for civil contin-

gencies. _—
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER did not
think the matter was in a satisfactory position; and h
glad the committee upstairs had objected to this oiee was
raist
was a matter on which Government required the assistance
member
eber called upon
to consider.
of the house, in order that a reform might be effected.
After further discussion,
might
dis),clurs.sDevl
eSrßy.iktEemLlofsathide
ivnohteiswohpicinhiotnheay we any em
Sir H. WILLOUGHBY- said, as one of the committee,
he understood that that was their intention in the report
which they made to the house.
Sir J. GRAHAM suggested that the hon. member for
Lambeth should withdraw his motion and let the committee
discuss the whole of the items which composed this vote.
Mr. 'WILLIAMS consented to withdraw his motion.
Mr. B. OSBORNE then moved to reduce the vote by
4500. There were several items to which he had very
great objection, particularly those in reference to the ex-
penses incurred for colonial bishops, and for the commission
of the fine arts in connection with that building. For that
commission a sumof-X968 4s. Bd. was asked, but he thought
they would be dear at the odd 4s. Bd. (Laughter.) The
hon. member was proceeding with his speech, and quoting
the inscription " Si monumentum requiris —" when he
was, amidst great laughter, called to order, ten minutes to
four having arrived, the time at which, by the rules of the
house, the chairman must report progress.
The house resumed.
Mr. HENLEY asked what business would be taken by
the Government in the evening ? •
The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER said his
right hon. friend would, at six o'clock, make a statement in
reference to the East India Loan, and after that was dis-
posed of he would propose to go into a committee of supply.
Mr. OSBORNE asked when he would have an opportu-
nity of finishing his quotation with " circumspice."
The CHANCELLOR, of the EXCHEQUER said the